A COUNTERBLAST TO M. HORNS VAIN BLAST AGAINST M. Fekenham. Wherein is set forth: A full Reply to M. horns Answer, and to every part thereof made, against the Declaration of my L. Abbot of Westminster, M. Fekenham, touching, The Oath of the Supremacy. By perusing whereof shall appear, besides the holy Scriptures, as it were a Chronicle of the Continual Practice of Christ's Church in all ages and Countries, from the time of Constantin the Great, until our days: Proving the Popes and bishops Supremacy in Ecclesiastical causes: and Disproving the Prince's Supremacy in the same Causes. By Thomas Stapleton Student in Divinity. Athanas. in Epist. ad solita. vitam agentes. pag. 459. When was it heard from the creation of the world, that the judgement of the Church should take his authority from the Emperor? Or when was that taken for any judgement? Ambr. lib. 5. epist. 32. In good sooth, if we call to mind either the whole course of Holy Scripture, or the practice of the ancient times passed, who is it that can deny, but that in matter of faith, in matter, I say, of faith, Bishops are wont to judge over Christian Emperors, not Emperors over Bishops? LOVANII, Apud Joannem Foulerum. An. 1567. Cum privil REgiae Maiestatis Gratia Speciali Concessum est Thomae Stapletono Anglo, librum inscriptum, A Counterblaste to M. Horns Vain Blast etc. per aliquem Typographorum admissorum tutò & liberè imprimendum curare, & publicè distrahere, nullo prohibente. Datum Bruxellis .27. Maij Anno. 1567. Subsig. Pratz. TO M. ROBERT HORN, THOMAS STAPLETON WISHETH Grace from God, and true repentance of all Heresies. IF the natural wisdom and foresight, M. Horn, described of our Saviour in the Gospel by a parable, had been in you, at what time you first set pen to paper, to treat of the Oath of Supremacy: you would not, I suppose, so rashly have attempted an enterprise of such importance. The Parable saith. Luc. 14. Who is it among you, that minding to build a Castle, sitteth not down first and reckoneth with himself the charges requisite thereunto, to see if he be able to bring it to pass, lest that having laid the foundation, and then not able to make an end, all that see him, begin to laugh him to scorn, saying, behold: this man began to build, but he hath not been able to make an end? The matter you have taken in hand to prove, is of such and so great importance, as no matter more now in Controversy. It is the Castle of your profession. The key of your doctrine. The principal fort of all your Religion. It is the pillar of your Authority. The fountain of your jurisdiction. The anchorhold of all your proceedings. Without the right of this Supreme Government by you here defended, your cause is betrayed, your doctrine dissolveth, your whole Religion goeth to wrack. The want of this Right shaketh your Authority, stoppeth your jurisdiction, and is the utter shipwreck of all your proceedings. Again, it toucheth (you say) the prerogative of the Prince. It is the only matter which Catholics stand in, by parliament enacted, by book Oath required, upon great penalty refused. Other matters in controversy whatsoever, are not so pressed. Thirdly, you have taken upon you to persuade so great a matter, first to a right learned and reverent Father, in private conference: and next to all the realm of England, by publishing this your Answer, as you call it. The weightier the matter is, and the more confidently you have taken it upon you, the more is it looked for, and reason would, that you did it substantially, learnedly, and truly: and before you had entered to so great a work, to have made your reckoning, how you might bring it to perfection. But now what have you done? Have you not so wrought, that all your fair building being clean overthrown, men begin (as the Gospel saith) to laugh you to scorn, saying: Behold, this man began a great matter, but being not able to finish it, he is fain to break of? You will say: These be but words of course, and a certain triumph before the Victory. Have I not grounded this work of mine upon the foundation of holy Scriptures? Have I not posted it up with the mighty strong pillars, of the most learned Fathers? Have I not furnished it with a jolly variety of Stories deducted from all the most Christian Emperors, Kings and Princes of more than these twelve hundred years? Have I not fenced it with invincible ramparts of most holy Counsels both general and national? And last of all, have I not removed all such scruples and stays of conscience, as though it were, brambles and briars out of the way, to make the passage to so fair a Fort, pleasant, easy, and commodious? You have in deed M. Horn, in outward show, and countenance set a gay glorious and glistering face upon the matter: A face I say, of holy Scriptures, of Fathers, of the Canon, the Civil, and the law of the Realm, of many Emperors, Kings and Princes (for proof of a continual practice of the like supremacy now by Oath to the Q. Highness attributed) in the ancient Churches of England, France, Germany, Spain, Italy, Grece, Armenia, Moscovia, Aethyopia: Aug. de civit. Dei li. 21. cap. 5. jul. Solinus ca 48. Cornel. Tacit. li. 8. Aegesippus lib. 4. But all is but a Face in deed, and a naked show, without Substance of Truth and matter. It is like, to the Apples and grapes and other fruits of the country of Sodom and Gomorre, which growing to a full ripeness and quantity in sight, seem to the eye very fair and pleasant: but when a man cometh to pluck of them and to taste, he shall find them unnatural and pestilent, and to smoder and smoke away, and to resolve into ashes. Such is the effect of your whole book: It beareth a countenance of truth, of reason, of learning. But coming to the trial and examination of it, I find a pestilent rank of most shameful Untruths, an unsavoury and vain kind of reasoning, and last of all, the whole to resolve into gross Ignorance. For proof hereof, I will shortly lay forth, an abridgement of your whole demeanour. M. Horns Grammar. And wherewith shall I better begin, than with the beginning and foundation of all sciences, and that is, with grammar itself? Whereof I never heard or read in any man, bearing the vocation that you pretend, either more gross ignorance, or which is more likely and much worse, more shameful and malicious corruption. You English Conuenit: Answer Fol. 42. col. 1. Reply Fol. 180. col. 1. Answer Fol. 53. col. 2: Reply Fol. 217. Answer Fol. 79. col. 1. Reply Fol. 322. col. 2. Answer Folly 83 col 1. Reply Fol. 350. col. 2. which is, it is meet and convenient, into, it ought: which is the English of oportet, not of, convenit. You English Recensendam, to be examined and confirmed, where it signifieth only, to be read or rehearsed. Item where your Author hath Privilegia irrogare, that is, To give privileges, you translate it quite contrary: To take away Privileges. Again in the same Author, pro quavis causa: which is, for every cause: you translate it, for any cause, as if it were, pro qualibet or quacumque causa. All which foul shifts of how much importance they were, I refer you to the leaves of this book, here noted unto you in the margin, together with the leaves of your own book. Many like gay grammatical practices might yet be showed. An. 1566. Comp. Anglic. Mar. 18. See more of this in this Reply, fol. 480. b. Yea in your late Visitation at Oxford, exercised by your chancellor and son in Law (as beside all law you call him, having married your bastard, not your lawful daughter) in all the copies of articles that your said chancellor proposed to be subscribed, are these words: Regina supremus Gubernator Ecclesiae Anglicanae: for Suprema gubernatrix: And so remaineth that clause to this hour unreformed. So that, if it were nothing, but for false Latin, a scholar might honestly refuse to subscribe to such an Article. Now what shall I say of your logic and exact kind of reasoning? As there is nothing in a writer more requisite, M. Horn● Logic. that meaneth truly, so the more you have broken the rules thereof, the more is your shame, and the less ought the credit of your whole Book to be. I need not descend to the particulars, your perpetual manner of writing being such, as your whole discourse seemeth nothing else but a misshapen lump of lewd and lose arguments. For this being the matter which you have taken in hand to prove by the examples of other Princes, and by the practice of councils, that the Say Magistrates are Supreme Governors in all Ecclesiastical causes, this universal proposition being that which should be concluded, your premises are always mere particulars: your proofs proceed ever of some one fact or matter Ecclesiastical, but never of all: And yet those matters that you bring, being partly no Ecclesiastical matters at all, partly untruly fathered upon the lay Magistrate. So that, as ever you fail in truth of matter, so you never make good form of argument. And you can tell yourself: (they be your own words) that young Logicians know, Answer. fol. 108. a. this is an evil consequent, that concludeth upon one or diverse particulars affirmatively an universal. This evil consequent M. Horn, is the only consequent that you make in all your book, where you play the Opponents part. Answer. fol. 4. fol. 100 fol. 105. For the which I refer you and the Reader to the three first books of this Reply. With the like good logic you lay forth false definitions and false divisions of your own Invention. M. Horns rhetoric As for your Rhetoric, you work your matters so handsomely and so persuasively, that there is not almost any one Scripture, any story, any Council, any Father, any Author that you allege, which maketh not directly against your purpose, and beareth withal an express and evident testimony for the Pope's Supremacy, not only otherwher, but even in the very same place and allegation that you allege and ground yourself upon. And this chanceth not once or twice, but in a manner customably, as by perusing this Reply, you shall soon perceive. And therefore I will not specially note it here unto you, as a rare or seldom thing. Neither will I thank you for bringing to our hands so good stuff to prove our principal purpose by, but say herein unto you, as S. Augustin said in the like case of the Donatists, alleging the works of Optatus, by the which they were ever confounded, and the Catholics cause marvelously furthered. Nec tamen ipsis, Aug. count Dona. post Collation. cap. 34. sed Deo potius hinc agimus gratias: ut enim illa omnia vel loquendo, vel legendo pro causa nostra promerent, atque propalarent, veritas eos torsit, non charitas invitavit. Neither do we yet thank them for their so doing, but rather God. For that they should bring forth and utter either by talk, or by alleging, all those things for our matter, the Truth forced them, not any Charity invited them. And truly so M. Horn, that by your own Authors you are ever confounded, the Truth of our cause forceth you, as not being able to allege any Author that maketh not for us, not any good will to our cause or to us moved you. Again what a new Cicero, or Demosthenes are you, that lay forth to M. Fekenham, as a good and a persuasible motive, to induce him to take the Oath of the Prince's Primacy, the former erroneous doings of certain Reverend Fathers, whereof they have so far repent, that for refusal of this Oath they have suffered deprivation, and have and do suffer imprisonment, and are ready beside, by God's assistance, patiently to suffer, whatsoever Gods providence hath graciously provided for them? Whereunto both they and other have good cause much the more to be encouraged, considering that after all this struggling and wrestling against the Truth by you and your fellows M. jewel and the rest, the Truth is daily more and more opened, illustred, and confirmed. And your contrary doctrine is or aught to be disgraced and brought in utter discredit, with such as do but indifferently weigh the most wretched and miserable handling of the holy Fathers and Councils before by M. jewel, as all England knoweth, and now by you Master Horn, which are not much inferior to him in that point of legerdemain. For as in his most lying Reply against D. Harding, so in this your Answer to M. Fekenhams treatise, there is neither Scripture, nor Council, nor doctor, nor any thing else that cometh through your hands, which you do not miserably mangle, corrupt, and pervert: and that by a number of dishonest and shameful shifts: which particularly to specify would be to long and tedious. M. Horns miserable perverting of his authors. But to say somewhat for an example, the principal part of all your shifting standeth in a certain marvelous kind of a new and a false Arithmetic, sometime by Addition, sometime by diminution and Detraction. By addition. Thus to make your matter of the Princes Supreme government in all ecclesiastical causes more probable, 1. Answer fo. 20. b. Reply fo. 88 b. you interlace twice these words (as one that had the cure and authority over all) and again, in the same leaf (as one that had authority over them) which you find not in your Authors. 2. Answer fo. 22. ●. Reply. fo. 98. b. Thus you shuffle in this pretty syllable (All) to Socrates, and again to Theodoretus. 3. Answer fol. 24. b. Reply. fol. 107. b. So you springle in these words (by his supreme authority) to your narration out of the said Theodoretus. 4. Answer fol. 26. a. Reply fol. 115 b. And by and by to your narration out of Sozomenus, these words (and the Bishops could not remove him.) 5. Answer Fol. 26 b Reply Fol. 116. b So you add to Liberatus this word (depose: 6. Answer fo 30. a. Reply Fol. 128. b ) And to the Acts of the Chalcedon Council, these words, 7. Answer Fol. 32. b Reply. Fol. 144 a (which otherwise must be deposed.) And to the Acts of the sixth General Council these words (to examine and confirm. 8. Answer fol. 53. b. Reply. fo. 216. b. You thrust into the narration of Antoninus and Marius, 9 Answer fol. 81. a Reply fol. 334. a ) that which they say not: and to the narration of Quintinus Heduus five full lines, that are not in your author touching Pope john the .22. and many other like things otherwhere. 10. Answer fol. 89. b Reply fol. 378, b And yet I can not tell, whether your perversity be more in your false multiplication, By Diminution. or in your false diminution. 1. Answer fol 19 b Reply fol. 33. a In framing the state of the question by the statutes of the realm, you leave out the beginning and the end of the Statute. You leave out of Marcians oration two or three words, that make most against you. 2. Answer fol. 33. a Reply fo. 147. a You pare away from the sentence that yourself rehearseth out of the fourth Roman council, 3. Answer Fol. 36. Reply Fol. 162. the tail of it immediately following your own words: that is, Totam causam Dei judicio reseruantes, quite overthrowing your new supremacy. 4. Answer fo. 37. b. Reply Fol. 167. a. In like manner from the narration of the ambassadry of Pope john, you conceal the necessary circumstances of the same: as you do from many otber narrations, the which being truly set in, do utterly destroy all your untrue assertions. 5. Answer Fo. 4●. a. Reply. fo. Fol. 179. b After this sort to these words of justinian the Emperor (these things we have determined) you chop in of your own (by sentence) and withal chop away that which immediately followeth, sanctorum Patrum Canones secuti. In this manner whereas throughout your book, one of your great matters to prove Emperors and Kings supreme heads of the Church, 6. Answer fol 74. & fo 78. a Reply. fo. Fol. 282. a. &. 306. a. is the investuring of bishops (which yet nevertheless is but an impertinent matter) you tell us still of this investuring, and make a great busy needless stir about it, but that the said Emperor or King, as for example Charlemagne, Otho the first, and other received that privilege from the See of Rome, and again that other Emperors and Kings, as for example, th'emperor Henry the .5. in Germany, and in England King Henry the first, yielded afterward, and gave over the said investuring, which things appear aswell by other Authors, as by your own that yourself allegeth, you pass them over with great silence. For if you had told these and such like stories of the investuring of Bishops truly and fully, than had your new supremacy been quite destroyed. 7. Answer fo. 80 b. Reply fo. 330. a. For the said cause, whereas you tell, us that Philip the French king swore the Pope to certain conditions, you altogether dissemble, what those conditions were. 8. Answer fo. 106. a. Reply. fo. 448. a. For the same cause, you leave out of your Author Io. Anth. Delphinus in the middle of the sentence, a line or two: Lest that if you had sincerely set in those words, they would have overthrown your fond, foolish and heretical paradox, that the Authority to excommunicate appertaineth neither to Bishop, nor Priest. Well, to set a side (lest we be to tedious) all other places of like corruption (which plentifuly abunde every where in your answer) we will only touch, of a great number, two or three, appertaining to our own domestical stories. You will prove to us, that King Henry the first was supreme head of the Church of Englanda: nd why trow you? Forsooth because the spiritual condescended, in a Council at London, that the King's officers should punish Priests for whoredom. Is not this I pray you an importante and a mighty argument, to prove the King's supremacy by, which rather directly proveth the clergies supremacy, of whom the King had this authority? And yet such are your accustomable arguments, as may soon appear to the reader. But this is not the thing we now seek for: 9 Answer fol. 77. a Reply fo. 199, a but to know, what kind of whoredom it was, that the Priests should be punished for. Lo this, though you allege. 7. marginal authors, durst you not once touch. For if you had, you had withal proved your own whoredom, and such as is much worse than was theirs. 10. Answer fol. 89. b Reply fo. 380, a Again you labour to prove by Browghton a temporal Lawyer, that by the Law of the realm, the King was then taken for supreme head of the Church, for that all are under the King, and the King is under God only, but you most shamefully dissemble, that the said Browghton speaketh but of the King's authority in temporal things: and that in the place by yourself alleged, he saith, that as Emperors and Kings are the chief rulers for temporal things: so for spiritual things the Pope, is the chief ruler, and under him, archbishops, Bishops and other. But of all other Lies, this that we shall now show is one most captain, and notable. Of all stories by you most miserably and wretchedly pinched, pared, and dismembered, the story of our first and noble Christian King Lucius, is most shamefully contaminated, depraved, and deformed. The consent of all stories as well Domestical as external, yea as well of Catholics as of heretics (as far as I can yet by diligent search, possibly find) is, that the said King Lucius was christened by the help, advice, and instruction of Pope Eleutherius. But you M. Horn bear such a spiteful and malicious heart to the Pope, and to the See of Rome, that contrary to the narration of all other, yea of your own dear brother Bale (the chief antiquary of English Protestants) you avouch, that he and his subjects were baptised, and that he reform the Heathnishe religion, and did other things, 11. Answer fol. 93. b Reply fol. 397, that you rehearse out of Polidore, without any Authority, knowledge or consent of the Pope. And yet beside all other, your own author Polidorus, sayeth, that he was christened, and the profane worshipping of the false Gods was banished, and other things done by the admonition, help, and advice of the said Pope Eleutherius Ambassadors. And therefore you rehearsing Polidorus words of the said King Lucius most falsely and lewdly, do cut away from Polidorus his sentence (by yourself recited) all that ever Polidorus writeth of Pope Eleutherius and his Legates. I trust Master Horn, that, when any indifferent Reader hath well considered, these and such other like parts, that every where you play in this your Answer, and withal, the cankered and malicious heart that you bear to the Apostolical See of Rome, which most evidently bursteth out in the handling of the foresaid story of Lucius, he shall find good cause to take you as you are, false and malicious, and not to trust the report of such a partial writer, yea of such an evident falsary. Answer fol. 47. a. & fol. 55. But it is no news for a man of your coat, to be partial in Pope's matters, or to call the Pope himself the child of perdition, or to term his lawful doings, Horrible practices, as you do. Answer fol. 101. b. Reply. fol. 435. a. & 436. b. But to avouch him to be a more periculous enemy to Christ, than the Turk, and that Popery is much more idolatrous, then Turkery, I think you are the first English protestant, that ever wrote so Turkishly. Such Turkish treachery might better have been borne in the lavishing language of your hot spurred Ministers in pulpit, then in the advised writing of a prelate of the Garter in print. With the like discretion you call blessed S. Augustin, of whom we Englishmen first received our Christendom, in contempt and derision, Answer fol. 58. & 59 the Pope's Apostle, maligning in him the name of the Apostle of England, and calling him beside, together with the blessed Apostle of Germany and Martyr, Bonifacius, blind guides and blind buzzards. But who so bold as blind bayard? or who can see less in other men, than such as can see nothing in themselves? And what do you else herein, but like a furious Ajax, thinking to deface the Pope, fall a whipping and railing at his sheep, (such sheep, I say as Christ committed to Peter, whose successor the Pope is) as Ajax in his fury whipped the sheep of Ulysses, thinking he had whipped Ulysses himself? But as the fury of Ajax reached not to Ulysses' person, but only increased his own misery and madness: so your Turkish talk M. Horn, blemisheth not the See Apostolic, or hurteth it the value of one rush, but only expresseth the Turkish spirit that lurketh within you. Therefore bluster and blow, fume and frete, rave and rail, as loudly as lewdly, as bestly as boldly, do what you can, you must hear, as the Donatists heard of S. Augustine: Ipsa est Sedes, August. in Psal. count part Dona. Tom. 7. quam superbae non vincunt inferorum portae. That See of Peter, is the See, which the proud gates of hell do not overcome. The more you kick against that Rock, the more your break your shin. You bluster not so boisterously against the Pope, as you lie most lewdly upon the right reverent, and learned Father M. Fekenham, whose person you impugn, for lack of just matter, with most slanderous Reproaches. Answer fol. 2. a. As where you say of him, that the Catholics had ever a fear of his revolting, that, Fol. 7. & fol. 104. fol. 3. b. he seemed in a manner resolved and satisfied in this matter, that, his doings should be a preparation of rebellion to the queens majesties person, and that, Fol. 6. a. he wisheth the Pope should reign in her place, that he maketh his belly his God, that he promised to recant in King Edwards days, and last of all, Fol. 7. b. Fol. 128. a. that he changed in Religion ix times, yea xix times. These be such slanderous Reproaches M. Horn, and the person whom you burden them withal, so far from all suspicion of any such foul matter, among all such as these many years have known him and his behaviour, that if you were sued hereof upon an Action of the case, as you well deserve no less, considering of what vocation and true deserved reputation he is, whom thus vilainouslye you slander, you would I fear be driven at the jest, to do that at Paul's Cross, which about Waltham matters (you know them est yourself) the Regestre of Hampshiere was driven at that place to do. So should the gospel be fulfilled, Mr th'. 7. Look with what measure you have measured to other, with the same it shall be measured again to you. And so should Lex talionis in you well and worthily take place. As it doth by God's ꝓuidence fall out upon you, in that you tell your Reader in great sadness, Reply fo. 5●. that M. Fek. is a great Donatist. For by that occasion you shall find yourself and your fellows M. Horn most rightly and truly proved Donatists: and M.F. to be as far from that lewd sect, as you are from a true Catholic. But of all your other slanderous lies heaped most wrongfully upon M.F. this one which to omit the rest, I will only now note, is most ridiculous. You bluster exceedingly, and are in a vehement rage with Master Fekenham. Answer fol. 128. col. 2. & 129 col. 1. Reply. Fol. 5.7. You say that if his friends would but a little examine his false dealing with the Fathers, they would no longer believe him, but suspect him as a deep dissembler, or rather abhor him as an open slanderer and belier of the Ancient Fathers. And to exemplify this grievous accusation, you tell him in that place, that he manifestly mangleth, altereth, perverteth, and corrupteth a saying of S. Augustin. A man would here suppose M. Horn, that you had some great and just occasion, thus grievously to charge such a man as M. Fekenham is, and that in print, where all the world may read it and consider it. What is the place then? Thus it is. M. Fekenham allegeth S. Augustine saying thus. Istis cede, & mihi cedes: yield to these, and you shall yield to me. You say S. Augustine hath no such words, but thus. Istis cede, & me non caedes. Yield to these, and thou shalt not strike or whip me. Now put the case, it were as you say. Doth this Alteration or change deserve such a grievous Accusation? You confess yourself in the same place, and do say to M. Fekenham: And yet this corrupting of the sentence maketh it serve no whit the more for your purpose. And is then M. Fekenham to be abhorred of his friends for an open slanderer and belier of the Ancient Fathers, when he so altereth them, that yet they make nothing for him? Who seeth not, that in case. M. Fekenham had altered the words of S. Augustin, yet seeing he got nothing by the exchange, nor used them to any guile or deceiving of his Reader, he little deserved such a grievous Accusation. Fol. 527. & sequent. But now so it is, as I have in this Reply more amply declared, that the words by Master Fekenham alleged, are the true words of S. Augustin according to four several prints that I have seen: two of Paris, one of Basil, an other of Lions. And the words as you would have them read Master Horn, are in none of those prints at all in the text of S. Augustine. Only in the later print of Paris. An. 1555. those words by you avouched stand in the margin as a divers reading, and the words by M. Fekenham avouched stand in the text, as they do in all other prints beside, for the true text of S. Augustin. And who seeth not now, that all this was but a quarrel picked, without desert? And you M. Horn to have showed yourself a most ridiculous wrangler? But God's name be blessed. The dealing of Catholic writers is so upright, that such small occasions must be picked, and upon such trifles your Rhetoric must be bestowed: else against their dealing you have nothing to say. With the like felicity your brother jewel in his late Sermon the .15. of june last at Paul's Cross, laid full stoutly and confidently to D. Harding'S charge, for alleging the Decades of Sabellicus: saying with great bravery, but with exceeding folly, that Sabellicus never written Decades, but only Aeneades: Whereas yet all that ever have seen Sabellicus, do know; that he wrote of his Rapsodia, Aeneades: and of Venice matters, Decades: which book with the very page of the book D. Harding truly alleged. Whereby it is evident, that M. jewel either is extreme reckless and utterly careless what he preacheth or printeth, or at the least is at a full point to lie on, as he hath begun, whatsoever come of it. Of the which mind also it seemeth yourself are M. Horn. For (to omit other specialties, as of a Fol. 127 120. & 123. Reply 451. a. framing arguments upon M. Fekenhams discourse, which he never framed, nor the discourse beareth, of b Answer fo. 96.97.105. et 207 Reply. 411. b. 416 a. 447. a. 451. b. your contradictions, whereby you show the unstablemesse of your own judgement, with such like) your Answer is so freighted and stuffed with falsehoods, your Untruths do so swarm and muster all a long your book, that for the quantity of your Treatise, you are comparable to M. jewel. Your Untruths amount to the number of six hundred fourscore and odd. They be so notorious and so many, that it pitieth me in your behalf, to remember them. But the places be evident and cry Corruption, and may by no shift be denied. If my curiosyty in noting them displease you, let the uttering of them first displease yourself, and then you will the less be displeased with me. You know, M. jewel hath led us this dance. Be not angry M. Horn, if we follow the round. Moderate your pen better. Report your Authors more sincerely. Translate your allegations more truly. Say down the whole sentences without concealing of such matter as overthroweth your purpose: Say no more than you find in the Stories. Slander not your betters. Deal more advisedly and uprightly. So shall your Untruths be the fewer an other time. But so will your cause, I assure you M. Horn, come forth stark naked, feeble, and miserable. The beauty and force of your Cause consisteth and dependeth altogether of lies and untruths. If you join obstinacy to folly, as Master jewel doth, so shamefully in open Sermon justifying himself, but not clering himself of any one of so many hundred Untruths justly and rightly laid to his charge: then as I said before, I may justly say, that you are at a point to lie, whatsoever come of it. Like as a protestant of late days being pressed of a Catholic for extreme lying, and not being able to clear himself, said plainly and bluntly: Quamdiu potero, Vide Remundum Rufum. in Duplicatione cont. Patronun Molinaei. Fol. 76. clades adferan, Latebunt quamdiu poterunt. Valebunt apud vulgus ista mendacia. Well. I will deface them (meaning the Catholics) and do some mischief to them as long as I am able. My lies shall lie hid, as long as may be. And at the lest the common people shall fall in a liking with them. If you be at this point, then knowing where to have you, we know also what to make of you, and for such to esteem you. A false Prophet, and a lying Master, such as S. Peter spoke of, bringing in wicked and damnable sects. 2 Pet. 2. God give them grace, which are deceived by you, so well to know you, as we that do examine your writings, have good Cause to know you. This your Answer M. Horn (as I understand) you have presented to divers of the queens Mayest. most Honourable Council, intending thereby not only to discredit Master Fekenham, and to increase his trouble, but also to bring into displeasure, all other the Queen's Highness Catholic subjects: of which full many, only for conscience sake, have refused, and do yet refuse the Oath that you here most ignorantly defend. For this purpose also at the very end of your book, you refer as it were the whole matter to the most Honorables saying. To Conclude, by the premises it may appear to the Honourable as by a taste, what sincerity there is in you. Thus much you say for discrediting of M. Fekenham. You add a grievous Accusation against all the Catholic subjects of England, saying. And lastly your quarrelling by spreading this book, was and is to impugn and bark against the Q. Mayest. Lawful and due Authority, which you and your complices daily labour to subvert: which matter I refer to be further considered by the grave wisdom of the most Honourable. And with this poisoned and cankered Reproach you end your whole book: giving your Reader to understand that the very end and scope of your book was to engraff in the Noble hearts of the most Honorables a great misliking and heavy displeasure, not only of and against M. Fek. already in trouble, but also of and against the whole number of Catholics: who have always continued and showed themselves the queens Mayest. most loyal and obedient subjects, and have deserved no such Reproach at your hands M. Horn. You have therefore M. Horn, in this Reply, a just and a full defence, partly * See the 3. Chapter of the .1. book. against your most slanderous accusation, but chief and especially of the whole Cause and Question in Controversy. As you did to M. Fekenhams Treatise, so I to your Answer have replied through out. I have not omitted any one part or parcel of your whole book. As I have here printed again the whole, to increase of charges, so have I answered the whole, to edifying of the Reader. If by this Reply you find yourself satisfied, and are content to yield to the Truth, so evidently and abundantly opened unto you, than both I and all other Catholics will both better trust you, and give God thanks for you. But if after the perusing of this Reply, you shall think you are not fully and in every point confuted: I wish that the most Honourable, to whom so confidently you commend your own doings, would command you, to prove it so to the world by a full Rejoindre. A full Rejoindre I say, and perfect, to all and every part of this Reply, as I have here replied to all and every part of your Answer: not omitting any one example, of Council, Prince, or Country by you alleged. And that you put in my whole Answer, not omitting any one line or sentence, either of the text, or of the margin. If the Truth be on your side, you have no cause to stick hereat. You will seem to want no learning. Abylytieto bear the charges we are sure you want not. Go through therefore as you have begun, with this fair building of yours, if you think your foundation good, or the cause which you ground upon sure. Go through I say, that it may appear you have given M. F. good cause to remove his scruples, and to be persuaded at your hands. Else if you now draw back, and think by silence to drown the matter, first for your fair piece of work, so shamefully broken of, men will laugh you to scorn, as the gospel by the parable told you: Then all men may know, that your great vaunts of your Waltham talk and reasoning, are but words of course to save your poor honour, I should say, honestly. Thirdly, that M. Fekenhans scruples are most learned and invincible reasons. And last of all, that the Oath which you so earnestly persuade him to take, can of noman be taken without manifest Perjury. Whereof ensueth, that you most horribly offend Gods Divine Majesty, which do burden men's consciences with such evident perjury. The worst that I wish you M. Horn, is, that you retract your heinous heresies, and prove a true Christian. And thus for this time I take my leave of you. Vale & Resipisce. Thomas Stapleton. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. THE PREFACE TO THE READER. IT had been much to be wished (gentle Reader) that the right reverent and learned Father my L. Abbot of Westminster, M. Feckenham, whom M. Horns Book most toucheth, might himself (as he is most able, and as I suppose, as well willing) have answered it also. But seeing his state is such, that he presently can not do it, I being by some of my friends requested to travail in the matter, was at the first not very willing thereto: as for diverse other causes, namely for that in very deed I was full purposed, having so largely provoked such sharp adversaries, especially M. jewel, for a season to rest, and to stand at my own defence, if any would charge me: so chief for these two causes. First, for that many things in this book pertain to certain private doings betwixt M. Feckenham and M. Horn, of the which I had no skill. secondly, for that a number of such private matters touching the state of the Realm occurred, as to them without farther advise, I could not thoroughly shape any answer. Howbeit afterward it so happened, that by such as I have good cause to credit, there came to my knowledge such Instructions, as well for the one as for the other, that I was the better willing to employ some study and pains in this behalf. Not for that I think myself better able than other, but for that I would not it should seem, that there lacked any good will in me, either to satisfy the honest desire of my friends, or to help and relieve such, as by such kind of books are already pitifully inveigled and deceived: or to stay other yet standing, that this book be not at any time, for lack of good advertisement, a stumbling stock unto them. I have therefore by such helps, as is above said, added my poor labour thereto, and with some diligence in the rest, shaped to the whole book, a whole and a full Reply. Wherein I rather fear, I have said to much, then to little. But I thought good in a matter of such Importance, to be rather tedious to make all perfit, then short and compendious, to leave ought unperfect. Before than that thou shalt enter (good Reader) into the Reply itself, it shall be well, to take some advertisement, with a certain view by a short and summary comprehension, of the whole matter. Whereby both to the Controversy in hand thou shalt come better instructed: and, what in the whole work is to be looked for, thou shalt be advertised. M. Horns Answer, as he calleth it, resteth in two parts: In the first and chiefest he playeth the Opponent, laying forth out of the holy Scriptures both old and new, out of Councils both General and national, out of Histories and Chronicles of all Countries, running his race from Constantine the great, down to Maximilian great grandfather to the Emperor that now liveth, taking by the way the kings of France, of Spain, and of our own Country of England since the Conquest, all that ever he could find by his own study and help of his friends, partly for proof of the like government of Princes in Ecclesiastical causes, as the Oath attributeth now to the Crown of England partly also for disprove of the Pope's Supremacy, which the Oath also principally intendeth to exclude. In the second and later part he playeth the defendant, taking upon him to answer and to satisfy, certain of M. Feckenhams Arguments and scruples of conscience, whereby he is moved not to take the Oath. How well he hath played both his parts, the perusal of this Reply will declare. The doings of each part, upon what occasion they rose, thou shalt understand in our Answer to M. horns Preface. For the more lightsome and clear Intelligence of the whole that is and shall be said to and fro, I have divided the whole Process into four books: keeping the same order and course, that Master horns Answer did lead me unto. To the first part of the Answer, wherein he layeth forth his proofs for defence of the Oath, I Reply in three Books. Comprising in the first book, his Objections out of Holy Scripture: In the Second, his Objections out of the first six hundred years. In the third, his Objections out of the later 900. years, until our own days. Each book I have divided into several Chapters, as occasion served. In the second and third books, where we enter the course of times, I have noted at the top of each page, in one side the year of the Lord, on the other side, the name of the Pope, Prince, or Council, or other Principal matter in that place debated: to th'intent (Gentle Reader) that at the first sight even by turning of a leaf thou mightest know, both where thou art, and what is a doing: both the Age and time (which exceedingly lighteneth the matter) and also the Pope, Prince or Council of that tyme. In these three books, what I have particularly done, if thou list shortly to see, at the end of the third book thou shalt find a brief Recapitulation of the whole. To the second part of M. horns Answer, I have replied in the fourth Book. By perusing whereof it shall well appear, both what strong and invincible Arguments. M. Fekenham right learnedly proposed, as most just causes of his said Refusal: and also what silly shifts and miserable escapes M. Horn hath devised, to maintain that obstinately, which he on's conceived erroneously. Especially this thou shalt find in such places of the fourth book, where thou seest over the Head of the leaves in this letter, The Oath: The Oath: Now good Reader, as thou tenderest thy own Salvation, and hopest to be a saved soul, in the joyful and everlasting bliss of Heaven, so consider and weigh well with thyself, the importance of this matter in hand. First Religion without Authority, is no Religion: Aug. de util. credendi cap. 9 For no true Religion (saith S. Augustine) can by any means be received without some weighty force of authority. Then if this Religion, whereby thou hopest to be saved, have no Authority to ground itself upon, what hope of Salvation remaining in this Religion canst thou conceive? If it have any Authority, it hath the Authority of the Prince, by whose Supreme Government it is enacted, erected and forced upon thee. Other Authority it hath none. If then that Supreme Government be not dew to the Say Prince, but to the Spiritual Magistrate, and to one chief Magistrate among the whole Spiritualty, thou seest thy Religion is but a bare name of Religion and no Religion in deed. Again, if this Supreme Government be not rightly attributed to the Say Magistrate, in what state are they, which by book oath do swear that it ought so to be, yea and that in their Conscience they are so persuaded? Is not Perjury, and especially a wilful Continuance in the same, a most horrible and damnable crime in the sight of God? And doth not God's vengeance watch over them, which sleep in Perjury? Malac. 3. Ero testis velox. I will be a Quick witness to Perjured persons, saith God by the Prophet Malachi. Now if that Supreme Government may duly and rightly appertain to our Liege Sovereign, or be any Principal part of a Princes Royal power, as Master Horn stoutly, but fondly avoucheth, or of his dutiful service to God, which never Prince in the Realm of England before the days of king Henry the .8. used or claimed, which never Emperor, King, or Prince whatsoever without the Realm of England, yet to this present hour had, Reply Fol. 22. & Fol. 508. or attempted to have, which the chief Masters of the Religion now Authorised in England do mislike, reprove, and condemn, namely Martin Luther, john Calvin, Philip Melanchthon, and the Magdeburgenses, as in place convenient I have showed: which also in no time or Age, sense Princes were first christened, in no land or Country, in no Council General or National, was ever witnessed practised, or allowed: last of all, which directly fighteth with Christ's Commission, given to the Apostles, and their Successors in the Gospel, and standeth direct contrary to an Article of our Crede, if such Supreme government, I say, may be lawful and good, then is the Oath lawful, and may with good Conscience be taken. But if these be such Absurdities, as every man of any mean consideration seeth and abhorreth: then may not the Oath of any man that hath a Conscience be taken, neither can this Supreme Government be possibly defended for good and lawful. That all these Absurdites and many yet more, which to avoid prolixity I here omit, do hereof depend, this Reply, gentle Reader, abundantly proveth. The Primacy of the Bishop of Rome, against the which the Oath directly tendeth, (as M. Horn avoucheth) is evidently here proved, not only in our dear Country of England, as well before the Conquest as sithence, but also in all other Christened Countries, not only of all the West Church, as of Italy, Spain, France, Germany and the rest, but of the East Church also, yea among the Aethyopians and Armenians. And that by the witnesses of such Authors, as M. Horn himself hath builded his proofs upon for the contrary. The practice of the .8. first General Councils, and of many National Councils beside, in Spain, France, and germany, hath pronounced evidently for the Popes and bishops Supremacy, and nothing for the Princes in matters Ecclesiastical. It is now thy part, Christian Reader, not to shut thy eyes, against the Truth, so clearly shining before thy face. Against the which Truth, because M. Horns whole Answer, is but as it were a Vain Blast, the Confutation of that Answer, to avoid confusion of Replies, whereof so many and divers have of late come forth, I have termed for distinction sake, a Counterblaste. And now, gentle Reader, most earnestly I beseech thee, of all other Articles, that be this day over all Christendom controversious, through the great temerity of self-willed heretics raised up, most diligently to labour and travail in this of the Supremacy: As being such, that to say the Truth, in effect all other depend upon. Of Protestants some be Lutherans, some Zwinglians, some anabaptists, some Trinitaries, and some be of other sects. But as they all being otherwise at mutual and mortal enmity among themselves, conspire against the Primacy of the See Apostolic: so a good Resolution once had in this point, stayeth and settleth the Conscience, as with a sure and strong Anchor, from the insurgies and tempests of the foresaid rabblement, and of all other sects, and schisms. Contrary wise, they that be once circumvented and deceived in this Article, are carried and tossed, with the raging waves and bloods of every error and heresy, without stay or settling, even in their own errors. I report me to the Grecians, who forsaking the unity of the Roman Church, and being first Arrians, defying the Pope, Sozo. lib. 3. cap. 8. Socrat. li. 2. cap. 15. as it may appear by the letters of Eusebius the great Arrian and his fellows to julius then Pope, fell after to be Macedonians, Nestorians, Eutychians, Monothelites, Iconomaches, with divers other great Heresies, each Heresy breeding great numbers of sects, and all conspiring against the See Apostolic, until at the last proceeding from heresy to heresy (divers Reconciliations with the Roman See coming between, which stayed a long time God's high vengeance that ensued) they fell to Turkish Captivity, in which (o lamentable case) they remain to this day. I report me to the Africans, who falling from the unity of the Roman See, Opta. li. 2. first in the Donatists despising the judgement of Pope Melchiades in the very first springe of their heresy (where then it might have been stopped, if they had given ear to their chief Pastor) then falling to be Pelagians, Victor de persecut. Vandal. and soon after Arrians, by the conquest of the Wandalles, became in time Infidels, as to this day they continue. I report me last of all, to these Heresies of the north, the Bohemians first, In parva Confessio. de coena Domini. and now Luther, and his scholars. Which within few years, their Master yet living and flourisshing, went so far from him, that he pronounced them in open writing, Heretics, and Archeheretiques. And yet they now (I mean the Sacramentaries) whom Luther so defied, bear the greatest sway of all other sects. What the end of these Heresies will be (except we abandonne them in time) Hungary and Lifelande may be a lesson unto us: Staphylus in apollo. part. 3. which by Luther's heresy, are both fallen away, as from the Roman Church, so from the Roman Empire, the one into the Turks hands, the other into the Moscovites. But to leave foreign Countries for trial, what it is to separat ourselves from the See Apostolic, our own domestical affairs may serve us for a sufficient example. At what time king Henry the 8. first banished the Pope's Authority out of England, as the king and the Parliament thought, (though erroneously) that this doing imported no schism nor heresy, so they thought likewise, in such sort to provide, that the people should not fall into the other errors of the new Lutheran or Sacramentary religion, which then the king and the Parliament no less abhorred, than they did Turkery. But what was the issue, all the world knoweth, and England, the more pity, grievously feeleth. For immediately books came so thick abroad, as well of the Lutheran, as of the Zwinglian sect, and the people fell so fast to a contentation and liking with them, that the king was fain to make divers straight laws, and Acts of Parliament for the repressing of heresy, Acts and Monuments. fol. 553. yea and to forbid the common people the reading of the Bible. And he sat in his own person in judgement, upon Lamberte the Sacramentary. Neither the Lutherans and Zwinglians only swarmed in the realm, but the anabaptists also, twelve of the said anabaptists being burned about one tyme. Now though king Henrye altered no matter of faith, saving this Primacy only, but kept constantly the Catholic faith otherwise, and though suppressing the Abbeys, he would not suffer religious men, that had vowed chastity, to marry: yet after his death, and in the minority of his son king Edward, all the laws that he had made touching matters of religion (saving against the supremacy) were repelled and abolished. And a new religion was through out the realm set forth. To the which though the Religion now used be much conformable, yet is there in many things much diversity. As among other, for the marriage of Priests: for the which they had some colour in king Edward's days by Act of Parliament. Now they have both the Church law, and the law of the Realm against them, and which more is, the very law of God, Psalm. 75 that saith, Vovete & reddite. Make your vow, and perform it. And S. Paul saith, Habentes damnationem, quia primam fidem irritam fecerunt. 1. Tim. 5. Incurring damnation, because they have broken their first promise. Again, in the first year of our gracious Queen, the Act of Parliament, for making and consecrating of bishops, made the .28. of king Henrye was revived. And yet the bishops were ordered not according to the act, but according to an act made in king Edward his days, and repelled by Queen mary and not revived the said first year. And if they will say, that that defect is now supplied, let them yet remember that they are but parliament and no Church bishops, and so no Catholic bishops, as being ordered in such manner and fashion, as no Catholic Church ever used. But this is most to be considered and to be lamented of all things, that whereas no Act of Parliament can give any sufficient warrant, to discharge a man from the Catholic faith, and whereas it was aswell in king Henry's days by Act of Parliament, as ever before, through out all Churches of Christendom, sithence, we were christened, taken for plain and open heresy, to deny the real presence of Christ's body in the Sacrament of the altar (for maintaining of the which heresy there is no act of Parliament God be thanked, neither of king Edward's time, nor in the time of our gracious sovereign Lady and Queen that now is) yet do these men teach and preach and by writing defend and maintain the said great and abominable heresy, with many other, for the which they can show no warrant of any temporal or spiritual law, that ever hath been made in England. No country in Christendom acknowledgeth the prince for supreme head beside England. Lutherus, Contra Art. Lovauienses. Tom. 2. Magdeb. in praefat. Cent. 7. Calvinus. in Osee. 1. et Amos. 7 jacob. Acontius Stratagem. Satanae. lib. 3. See the leaf. 15. Andreas Modre. de Ecclesia lib. 2. c. 10. All this have I spoken to show it is most true, that I have said, that there will never be redress of error and heresy, or any stay, where men are once gone from the unity of the See Apostolic, which is the wellspring and fountain of all unity in the Catholic faith. And touching this question of the Supremacy, that we have in hand, if we well consider it, we shall find, that we do not agree, either with the other Protestants, or with ourselves. For in this point, that we make the Prince the supreme head of the Church, we neither agree with Luther himself, or his scholars, which deny this primacy: nor with Calvin and his scholars the Sacramentaries. Calvin saith: They were blasphemers, that called King Henry head of the Church: One of his scholars, jacobus Acontius, in a book dedicated to the Queen's Mai. blameth openly the civil magistrate, that maketh himself the judge of controversies, or by the advise of other commandeth this doctrine to be published, that to be suppressed. Now some of Caluins' scholars, and our own countrymen have taken forth such a lesson, that they have avouched in their books printed and published to the world, that a woman can neither be head of the Church, nor of any Realm at all. Again, many of the Protestants though they will not, the Pope should have the chief government (because they like not his true doctrine) yet they think it meet and convenient, that there be some one person ecclesiastical, that may have this supreme government for matters of the Church. It is also to be considered, that the words of the Oath now tendered, for the maintaining of the Prince's Supremacy, are other, than they were in King Henry's, or King Edward's days: with a certain addition of greatest importance, and such as to a civil Prince, specially to the person of a woman can in no wise be with any convenient sense applied: I mean of these words, Supreme Governor aswell in all spiritual or ecclesiastical things or causes, as temporal. Such large and ample words were in neither of the foresaid King's times put into the Oath. And yet had they been more tolerable in their persons (for that men be capable of spiritual government, from the which a woman is expressly by nature, and by scripture excluded) than they are now. These words are such, I say, as can not with any colourable pretext be excused. Neither is it enough to say (as the Injunctions do) that the queens Majesty intendeth not to take more upon her, than King Henry her father, or King Edward her brother did, what so ever that were, more or less: but it must be also considered, what she or her Successors may take upon her or them by the largeness of these words (for an Injunction can not limit an Act of Parliament:) and whether there be any either Scripture or other good doctrine ecclesiastical, sufficient to satisfy their consciences, that refuse especially this Oath. Which doth not only, as it did before, exclude the Apostolical See, and all General Councils also, as (though not in plain words, yet in effect) in excluding the ecclesiastical Authority of all foreign persons and Prelates: but doth further adjoin the foresaid new addition less probable, and less tolerable, then was any other part of the former Oath. And therefore certain Protestants of some name and reputation being tendered this Oath by commission, have refused it. Yea and how well trow you, is this supreme government liked of those Ministers, which withstand the queens injunctions touching the order of seemly Apparel, & c? Thus ye perceive, that as we are gone from the constant and settled doctrine of the Church, touching this primacy, so we agree not, no not among ourselves, either in other points, or in this very Article of the Supremacy. Neither shall we ever find any cause of good and sufficient contentation, or constancy in doctrine, until we return thither, from whence we first departed, that is, to the See Apostolic. Which of all other people our Nation hath ever most reverenced and honoured, and aught of all other most so to do: As from whence both the Britain's and Saxons received first the Christian faith. This return God of his mercy grant us, when it shall be his blessed pleasure: Amen. In Louvain, the last of September. An. 1567. Thomas Stapleton. ¶ An Advertisement to the learned Reader. TOuching certain Authors alleged in this Reply, about matters of our own Country, it is to be understanded, that of certain written Copies not yet printed which we have used, as of Henricus Huntingtonensis, and Gulielmus Neubrigensis, or Noveoburgensis, or Neoburgensis many things are in the said Copies, which seem not to be written of them, but of Some others. As in the Copy of Henricus Huntingtonensis, certain things are found, which seem not to be written of him, but to have been gathered out of his works, and to have been written by some other: whom we conjecture to be Simeon Dunelmensis. Also in the Copy of our Neubrigensis many things are added both at the beginning and at the end, which seem not to have been written by Neubrigensis himself, but by some other. And that which is added at the beginning, was written as we understand now of one Alphredus Beverlacensis, who lived under king Steven: The additions which do follow, who wrote we yet know not, except it were Roger Hoveden. This I warn thee of, gentle Reader, to th'intent that if hereafter the foresaid Copies come forth in print (as this very year Neubrigensis did) and that the printed Copies have more or less than we report out of the written Copies, thou may not suspect any falsehood or forgery in us, but understanding the case as we have said, mayest take our dealing to be, as it is, true and sincere. I herefore having conferred the printed Neubrigensis, with the written Copy, and finding some difference: as oft as that which I allege out of Neubrigensis, is in the printed Copy, so oft I have noted in the Margin, the book and Chapter of that Copy. And when that I allege, is in the written, not printed Copy, I note in the Margin: Neubrig. M.S. for: Manuscriptus. Again in quoting the leaves of the Tomes of councils, I have always in manner followed the former Copies printed at colen in three Tomes: Anno. 1551. Only toward the end of this book I have followed the last edition of this present year, quoting the leaves according to that Edition, and then for perspicuites sake I hau● added in the Margin. Edit. Postr. Vale. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. AN ANSWER TO THE PREFACE. THE PREFACE OF M. HORN. It is now an whole year passed, since I heard of a book secretly scattered abroad by M. Fekenham among his friends: And in April last, I came by a Copy thereof. When I had read the book, and perceived both the matter and the manner of the man's doings therein: I saw his proofs so slender: and his manner of dealing so shameless: that I stood in doubt what to do, whether to discover the man by writing, or to shake him of with silence. If I had not seen a further meaning in his setting forth and publishing the book (.1.) 1. The first untruth slanderous concerning M. Fekenhams meaning. then he durst plainly utter, or then his cunning could by any means answer unto: or then, that I with a good conscience mought have neglected: I would have passed it over with silence, as a piece of work not worthy of answer. But seeing the (.2.) 2. His chief▪ end was far otherwise, as shall appear. chief end and principal purpose intended, as may be justly gathered in publishing the book, was, to ingraft in the minds of the subjects, a misliking of the Queen's Majesty, as though she usurped a power and authority in Ecclesiastical matters, whereto she hath no right: to slander the whole Realm, as though it were stranged and directly against the Catholic Church, renouncing and refusing to have Communion therewith: And under my name to deface the ministers of Christ's Church: I could not choose, whiles I would wilfully neglect my duty to her Majesty, show myself overmuch unkind unto my native Country, and altogether become careless of the Church Ministry, but take pen in hand, and shape him a full and plain answer, without any curiosity. T. Stapleton. IT is to be known (gentle Reader as I assuredly understand) that the reverent Father, my L. Abbot of Westmynster, M. Fekenham being prisoner in the Tower, and supposing that the oath of the supremacy then passed in the Parliament holden at Westmynster in the fift year of the Queen's majesties reign, should forth with (as it was probable) be tendered him and others, gathered as it were in a schedule, certain reasons and causes, why he thought he could not with safe conscience, receive the said oath. Minding to offer the said schedule, to the Commissioners if any came. The said schedule M. Fekenham delivered to M. Horn at Waltham, a manor place of the Bishop of Winchester in Hamshier, he being at that time there the said M. Horns prisoner, by the committie of the Queen her highness honourable Council: and that upon this occasion. In M. Fekenhams abode at Waltham, there was daily conference in matters of Religion, namely of the principal points of this Treatise, between him and M. Horn, as himself confesseth. In the which space, he required M. Fekenham, sundry and divers times, that he would by writing, open unto him the stays of his conscience, touching the oath of the Queen's highness Supremacy, being the whole matter and cause of his trouble, with no small promises, that he should sustain no kind of harm or injury thereby: And in fine, if there came no further fruit or benefit thereof unto him, the whole matter should be safely folded up, and left in the same estate where they began. The cause why M. Feckenham delivered his little Treatise to M. Horn. Whereupon M. Fekenham, thinking verily all things by him promised, to be as truly meant as spoken, made deliverance to M. Horn of a small Treatise, devised by him before his coming forth of the Tower, entitled: The Answer made by M. john Fekenham, Priest and Prisoner in the Tower, to the Queen's highness Commissioners, touching the oath of the Supremacy. With this declaration also, made unto the said Master Horn, that upon the passing of the said statute, he thought to have delivered the said Treatise, to the Commissioners (if any came) as the stay of his conscience, concerning the refusal of the foresaid oath: And forasmuch as they came not, he being as before is said, urged and pressed by the said M. Horn to open unto him by writing, the causes forcing him to breath, and stay upon the taking of the foresaid oath made deliverance of the very same Treatise devised in the Tower, with the foresaid Title and declaration. Which Treatise being afterward increased as well by M. horns Answers, as by M. Fekenhams Replies thereunto made: after his return back again to the Tower, he sent one copy to the right honourable the L. earl of Leicester and one other to Sir William Sicily Knight and Secretary unto the Queen's highness, (with the same title that the printed book containeth) both of them being delivered by M. Lieutenant of the Tower. This schedule or little Treatise M. Horn calleth a book▪ Fol. 1. pag. 2. yea and that made with the help of the rest: that he might seem after two years and more to have done a worthy and a notable act in answering six poor leaves (for thereabout in M. horns book amounteth the quantity of M. Fekenhams Treatise) and to have made a great conquest upon M. Fekenham and his fellows: worthy for this great martial prows to be, if all other things fail, a Prelate of the Garter. This his Treatise was he forced to deliver to the right Honorables, Why M. F. caused the same to be delivered to some of the Council. as before for his necessary purgation concerning such false accusations and slanders, as Master Horn had made and raised upon him, as shall hereafter in more convenient place be specified. Wherefore this being done as ye have heard so plainly, so simply, and upon such cause showeth that M. Fekenham had no such meaning, as M. Horn here falsely surmiseth. As one, who had his principal and chief regard, how to satisfy his own, and not other men's consciences, how to save himself from slanders and untrue accusations, and not to work with other men by persuasion. Wherefore this is an untrue and a false surmise of M. Horn: as are the other two here also, in saying that M. Feckenham meant otherwise, than he durst plainly utter, or by his cunning could answer unto. M. Horn. The 2. Division. Wherein I follow the order of M. Fekenhams book: I make the proofs according to his request: and besides my proofs forth of the Scriptures, the ancient Doctors, the General Counsels and national: I make proof by the continual practice of the Church (.3) The third untruth. you never prove the like government Namely in all Ecclesiastical things and causes. in like government as the Queen's Majesty taketh upon her, and that by such Authors, for a great sort of them, as are the more to be credited in this matter, for that they were most earnest fautors of the Romish sea, infected as the times were, with much superstition, and did attribute unto the see of Rome, and so to the whole Clergy so much authority in Church matters, as they might, and much more than they ought to have done. Stapleton. I will not charge M Horn, that his meaning is to engraff in the minds of the subjects, a misliking of the Queen's Majesty, as though she usurped a power and authority in Ecclesiastical matters, whereto she hath no right, as he chargeth M. Fekenham withal: unless perchance he were of Council with the holy brotherhood of Geneva for the Book, whereof we shall hereafter speak that spoileth the Queen's Majesty of all her authority as well temporal as spiritual and unless he hath in open sermon at Winchester maintained, contrary to the queens ecclesiastical injunctions, such as would not reform their disordered apparel and that, after he had put his hand (as one of the Queen's commissioners) to the redress of the said disorder. And unless he hath and doth maintain many things beside, yea and contrary to the laws and orders of the realm late set forth concerning matters ecclesiastical, as it is well known and to be proved he hath done as well in the defending of the Minister of Durley, near the Manor of Bishops Waltham refusing the said order, as otherwise. But this may I boldy say, and I doubt nothing to prove it, that in all his book, there is not as much as one word of scripture, one Doctor, one council general or provincial not the practice of any one country through out the world counted Catholic, that maketh for such kind of regiment, as M. Horn avoucheth, nor any one manner of proof that hath any weight or pith in the world to persuade, I will not say, M. Fekenham but any other of much less wit, learning and experience. I say M. Horn cometh not one's nigh the principal matter and question wherein M. Feckenham would and of right aught to be resolved. I say further in case we remove and sequester all other proofs on our side, that M. Horn shall by the very same fathers, counsels, and other authorities by him self producted so be overthrown in the chief and capital question (unto the which he cometh not nigh as a man might say, by one thousand miles) that his own company may have just cause to fear least this noble blast so valiantly and skilfully blown out of M. horns trumpet shall engender in the hearts of all indifferent and discrete Readers, much cause to mistrust, more than they did before the whole matter, that M. Horn hath taken in hand to justify. Wherefore as it is meet in all matters so is it here also convenient and necessary to have before thine eyes, good Reader, the state and principal question controversed between the parties standing in variance: And then diligently to see, how the proofs are of each party applied, for the confirming of their assertions. The principal questions concerning Ecclesiastical regiment, which M. Horn doth not on● touch. There are therefore in this cause many things to be considered. first that Christ left one to rule his whole Church in his stead from time to time unto the end of the world. Secondly that this one was Saint Peter the Apostle, and now are the bishops of Rome his successors. Thirdly that albeit the Bishop of Rome had no such universal government over the whole, yet that he is and ever was, the patriarch of England and of the whole west Church, and so hath as much to do here as any other patriarch in his patriarkshippe. Then that all were it, that he had nothing to intermeddle with us nor as Pope, nor as patriarch, yet can not this supremacy of a civil prince be justified: whereof he is not capable especially a woman, but it must remain in some spiritual man. Beside this the Catholics say, No such regiment as M. Horn defendeth among all the sects saving in England. that as there was never any such presidente heretofore in the Catholic Church: so at this present there is no such (except in England) neither among the Lutherans, the Zwinglians, the Swenckfeldians or anabaptists, nor any other sect that at this day reigneth or rageth in the world. None of these I say agnize their civil prince, as supreme governor in all causes spiritual and temporal: Last of all I say and M. Fekenham will also say that even M. Horn himself in this his answer retreyteth so far back from this assertion of supreme government in all causes spiritual and temporal, M. Horn himself denieth this supremacy in all causes ecclesiastical. which is the state and key of the whole question, that he plucketh from the prince the chief and principal matters and causes ecclesiastical, as we shall here after plainly show by his own words. The premises then being true, and of hour side abundantly proved, and better to be proved, as occasion shall serve, as nothing can effectually be brought against them, so M Horn, as ye shall evidently perceive in the process, stragleth quite from all these points, besetting himself, all his study and endeavour, to prove that which neither greatly hindereth our cause, nor much bettereth his: and for the which neither master Fekenham nor any other Catholic will greatly contend with him: which is when all is done, that Princes may meddle and deal with causes ecclesiastical. Which as it is in some meaning true, so doth it nothing reach home to the point most to have been debated upon. And so is much labour vainly and idlelye employed, with tedious and infinite talk and babbling, all from the purpose, and out of the matter, which ought specially to have been justified. And therefore this is but an impudent facing and bragging to say, that he hath proved the like regiment that we deny, by the Fathers, by the Counsels, and by the continual practice of the Church. Now it is worthy to see the jolly policy of this man, and how even and correspondent it is to his fellow protestants. The uneven dealing of the protestants. M. jewel restraineth the Catholics to .600. years as it were by an extraordinary and new found prescription of his own, embarringe all Later proofs. Yet he himself in the mean time runneth at large, almost one thousand years Later, shrynkinge hither and thither, taking tag and rag, heretic and Catholic, for the fortifying of his false assertions. This wise trade this man keepeth also, and to resolve M. Fekenham, and settle his conscience, he specially stayeth himself upon Platina, Nauclerus, Abbas Vrspergensis, Sabellicus, Aeneas pius, Volaterranus, Fabian, Polichronicon, Petrus Bertrandus, Benno the Cardinal, Durandus, P. Aemilius, Martinus poenitentiarius, Polidorus Virgilius. And such like as he himself declareth otherwhere and in this place also confesseth. Now all be it the Catholics refuse no Catholic writer, nor in this matter have cause so to do, yet in a matter of such importance, which beside the loss of all temporal relief and beside bodily death importeth also everlasting damnation to the Catholics, (if the case stand, as M. Horn and his fellows bear us in hand) reason would he should have fetched the substance of his proofs much higher, yea within the .600. years whereunto they strain and bind us: The which the Catholics have already performed against M. jewel, not in the substance of the matter only, but even in the justifying of the precise words, wherein M. jewel hath framed to himself by a foolish wiliness, or wily foolishness, the state of the question I mean for the words of head of the Church, and universal bishop. And what if M Fekenham now Sir would revel with you with like rhetoric, and require of you to prove by the father's writing within the said .600. years these express words: A challenge to M. Horn. Supreme head, or governor in all causes spiritual and temporal, to have been given and attributed to any civil Magistrate? Again that the temporal men without, yea and against the consent of the whole clergy, altered the state of religion called and used for Catholic throughout the whole corpse of Christendom one thousand years before with such other articles, as concern the regiment Ecclesiastical that ye, in this your book defend? Ye have not, no nor ye can not, prove any such matter either by express words or by any good induction or consequent in the first and former Fathers. And yet somewhat were it, if the Later Fathers might help you. But what an impudent face, as hard as any horn or stone have ye beside your mere folly, to make the world believe, that the authors aforesaid allowed such kind of regiment of civil Princes, as the Catholics now deny? Which assertion is so certainly and notoriously false, that M. Horn himself can not, nor doth not deny, but that his own authors, M Horns tale incredible, were most earnest fautors of the See of Rome. And how then may it once be thought by any wise man that they should allow the doings of such that forsake and abandon all manner of authority of that See, further than is the comen authority of all other Bishops, yea and make the Bishop of that Se● to whom the said authors attribute so large and ample authority and prerogative as may be, and whom they agnize as supreme judge in matters of faith, a very antichrist? These things be incredible, these things (as the proverb is) hang together like germans lips: and so shall ye, good Readers, M. Horns late brag. see the matter most evidently fall out. And therefore, M. Horn, where you have of late openly sitting at a table in London (as I am credibly informed) bragged, that ye have quite confuted the Papists with their own papistical Doctors, how true this is, I trust it shall by this answer plainly appear. M. Horn. The 3. Division. Their judgements and sentences shall appear in reading by the form of letter: for leving forth the Latin to avoid tediousness, 4. The 4 untruth For he wrongfully allegeth both the words and meaning of his Authors. I have put into English the Authors minds and sentences, and caused them, for the most part, to be Printed in Latin letters, that the English reader may know and decern the Authors sayings from mine. If this that I have done, work that effect in the English Reader, which he ought to seek, and I d● wish, I have won that I wrought for: but otherwise, let men say and judge what they list, I have discharged my conscience and showed the truth. Anno Domini. 1565. Feb. 25. Rob. Wynchester. Stapleton. A great untruth. For M. Horn doth not faithfully, but most corruptly and falsely allege the authors words, and useth his own in stead of theirs: and to such as he truly rehearseth, he giveth an unmeet and an improbable sense of his own making, as we shall particularly notify, when the case requireth. THE FIRST BOOK, CONTAINING MANY PRIVATE doings OF M. Fekenham, the State of the Question, answer to M. horns oppositions out of holy scriptures both old and new, with a declaration, who are the right Donatists, Protestants or Papists. M. Fekenham. The declaration of such scruples and stays o●●●●science, touching the Oath of Supremacy, as 〈◊〉 ●●kenham by writing did deliver unto the L. Bisceop of Winchester, with his resolutions made thereunto. M. Horn. The property of him that meaneth to declare rightly any matter done, is to set forth the truth without malice, to observe the due circumstances of the matter, persons, and times: and to use simple plainness without guileful ambiguities (5.) The 5. untruth in wrongfully charging M. Fekenham for the Title of his treatise. This Title is so replenished with untrue report, and ambiguous sleights, without the note of any necessary circumstance, that there is not almost one true word therein: whereby you give at the first a taste to the indifferent reader, what he must look for in the sequel. You pretend, and would have your friends to think, that the first four chief points set forth in your book, were devised by you, put in writing, and so delivered unto me, as the matter and ground whereupon, the conference to be had betwixt me and you should stand: And that I made thereunto none other but such resolutions, as it hath pleased you (.6.) The 6. untruth, the resolutions are truly reported, as shall appear. untruly to report. In the first part, you convey an untruth under a coulorable and ambiguous meaning, in these words, as M. john Feke●hā by writing did deliver unto the L.B. of Winchester. In tother part (.7.) The 7 untruth Slanderous. you make an untrue report without any colour at all. I do grant and will not deny, that you deliured to me a book: which, I thank God, I have to show, whereby to disprove you. The same will declare the time when, the place where, the occasion wherefore, the persons to whom the book was written, and what is the matter in general therein contained: Whereunto must be added, at what time the same was delivered unto me, upon what occasion, and to what ●nde. All which circumstances you omit in your book published, lest you should have bewrayed yourself, and have appeared in your own likeness. Stapleton. The First Chapter concerning the Title of M. Fekenhams declaration. THIS was an happy hap for M. Horn, that it happened M. Feckenham with the omitting of such slender circumstances to minister to him matter of such trifling talk, wherein otherwise M. Horn should have had nothing to have said. For here is he very exact and precise in circumstances to be kept, with all dew observation, in a by matter, which whether it be true or false, doth nothing either prejudicate or touch the principal question, that is, whether the resolutions were made before Master Fekenham delivered up his matter in writing, or after. For this being true, that these resolutions were made to take away the scruples and stays of M. Fekenhams conscience, which scruples rose and pricked his conscience by and through such reasons and causes first uttered by talk and after by writing alleged: wherein, I pray you, hath M. Fekenham offended you M. Horn, so grievously, that therefore he should be noted of so untrue report, that there is not almost one true word in the title of his treatise: that he should be noted of ambiguous sleights, yea and of malice to in prefixing the said title to his Treatise? And that he should convey untruth under coulorable and ambiguous meaning, as not observing the circumstance of time, place, and person. What inconvenience is it, I pray you, though M. Fekenham wrote in the Tower, that which he delivered to M. Horn at Waltham? What inconvenience followeth, I pray you, if he minded first to deliver the same to his examiners in the Tower, or else where, as occasion should serve? Is this sufficient to disprove him, to condemn him, to slander him of surmised untruth? It is rather to be thought of such as are not malicious, to be plain dealing: not to dissemble with you, but even as he had penned the writing before, so without any alteration to deliver it. Who nevertheless, afterward, having occasion to exhibit and present the same writing to others, did simply without guile or deceit, signify it to be delivered unto you at Waltham. And was it not so? Deny it, if you can. Every Child, by this may see, how fond and foolish this your cavil is. But what is all this to the matter and thing now in hand? It is, as yourself confess, but a circumstance. How well M. ●orne keepeth his own rule of circumstances. But M. Horn now himself keepeth so little his own rules and precepts of circumstance, that beside the miserable and wretched perverting and depraving of his own authors he doth so often and so maliciously omit and conceal the due circumstances of things by him reported (necessary for the full illustration and opening of the whole and entiere matter) that concerning this fault which he unjustly and triflingly objecteth to M. Fekenham, In what point the title of M. Fek. Treatise may be counted faulty. he may most justly have the prick and price, as they say. But now that I remember, and advise myself a little better, I suppose I can not altogether excuse M. Fekenham for this title, but must raze out thereof four words, and in steed of Lord bishop of Winchester, set in M. Robert Horn: M. Fekenham dissembling and winking at the common error, whereby in the estimation of many, ye are both called and taken for the Bishop of Winchester: whereas in deed ye are but an usurper, and an intruder, as called thereto by no lawful and ordinary vocation, nor canonical consecration, of his great modesty and civility, willing the less to exasperate you and others, thowghe he well knew ye were no right bishop, yet after the usual sort calleth and termeth you Lord bishop of Winchester. But I must be so bold by your leave, as plainly and bluntelye to go to work with you (as I have done before with M. grindal and M. jewel your pewefellowes) and to remove from you this glorious glittering peacocks tail, and to call a fig a fig, and a horn a horn: and to say (and that most truly) that ye are no Lord bishop of Winchester, nor else where, but only M. Robert Horn. For albeit the Prince may make a Lord at her gracious pleasure whom she liketh, yet can she not make you Lord bishop of Winchester, considering ye are not Lord but in respect of some Baronage and temporalties belonging and annexed to the See of Winchester. But you usurping the See, as you are no Bishop, so for the consideration aforesaid, ye are no Lord, nor Prelate of the Garter. For ye can be no Prelate of the Garter, M. Horn no Bis●h nor Prelate of the Garter. being no Prelate at all: that being a prerogative appropriate to the Prelate and Bishop of Winchester. Now that you are no true bishop, it is evident by that your vocation is direct contrary to the Canons and Constitutions of the Catholic Church, and to the universal custom and manner heretofore used and practised not only in England, but in all other Catholic Countries and Churches delivered to us from hand to hand, from age to age, even from the first graffing and planting of the faith, especially in England. For the which I refer me, to all authentic and ancient records, as well of England as of other Nations, concerning the ordinary succession of bishops, namely in the foresayed See of Winchester. For there was not, no not one in that See, that did not acknowledge the supremacy of the See of Rome, and that was not confirmed by the same, until the late time of Master Poynet: who otherwise also was but an usurper, the true Bishop then living, and by no lawful and Ecclesiastical order removed or deprived. Ye are therefore the first bishop of this sewte and race, and so consequently, M. Horn the first B. of his race in the See of Winchester. In the Fortress of our first faith annexed to Ven. Bede. par. 2 cap. 1.3. & 8. The Protestants wonderfully troubled about the question of the continual succession of Bishops. no bishop at all: as not able to show, to whom ye did ordinarily succeed, or any good and accustomable either vocation, or consecration. Which point being necessarily required in a Bishop, and in your Apostles Luther and Calvin, and other lacking, (as I have otherwhere sufficiently proved, though you by deep silence think it more wisdom utterly to dissemble, than once to answer) they being therewith pressed, were so meshed and bewrapped therein, that they could not in this world wit what to say thereto, answering this and that, they witted near what, nor at what point to hold them. Yea Beza was feign in the last assembly at Poisy, with silence to confess the invincible truth. But let it so be that your vocation was good and sound, yet have you disabled yourself to occupy that room, and either ought not to be admitted, or forthwith ought ye to be removed, for that ye are yoked (or as ye pretend) married: and as well for the maintenance thereof as of many other abominable errors (in case you stand obstinately in them) no doubt an Heretic. That ye live in pretenced Matrimony with your Madge all the world knoweth, colouring your fleshly pleasures under the name of an honourable Sacrament, by this your incest wretchedly profaned and vilained Ye keep now your said Madge, in the face of all the world without shame, which in King Henry's days ye kept in hucker mucker and lusky lanes as many other did of your sort: especially M. Cranmer that occupied the See of Canterbury: who carried about with him his pretty coney in a chest full of holes, that his nobs might take the air. Lechery turned into the name of wedlock You will perchance stand in defence of your pretenced marriage, and also of your other heresies, and say they are no heresies at all, and turn lechery into wedlock, as some of your sort have of late days turned, upon good friday, a Pig into a Pike, putting the said pig in the water and saying: go in pig, and come out pike. But then I refer you to the old Canons of the Fathers, to the writings especially of S. Augustine, of Epiphanius, of Philaster and other, that among other heresies, recite some of those that you openly and your fellows maintain. If ye will reject the poor Catholics, M. Horn and his fellows accounted heretics by the Apology of England. Apologia Lati. in. 8. pag 33. S. Augustine and Epiphanius also, yet I trust you will not be against your own famous Apology, which saith that Epiphanius numbereth fourscore Heresies (of the which it is one, for a man after the order of priesthood to marry) and S. Augustine a greater number and so concludeth you and the residue to be heretics. If ye will deny ye maintain any of those heresies, your preachings, your teachings and writings bear full and open testimony against you. What then have you to justify your cause? You will happily forsake and abandon S. Augustine's authority withal the old Canons and Counsels, and fly under the defence of your brickle bulwark of Acts of Parliament. O poor and silly help: o miserable shift that our faith should hang upon an act of parliament, contrary as well to all acts of Parliament ever holden in England before, as to the Canons and Fathers of the Catholic Church. A strange and a wonderful matter to hear in a Christian common wealth, that matters of faith are Parliament cases. That civil and profane matters, be converted into holy and Ecclesiastical matters. Yea and that worse is, that Lay men that are of the fold only, not shepherds at all, Religion ●●ered in ●ngland ●gainst the 〈◊〉 of the whole Clergy. and therefore bound to learn of their Catholic bishops and Pastors, may alter the whole Catholic Religion, maugre the heads of all the Bishops and the whole Convocation. This is to trouble all things: this is, as it were, to confound together heaven and earth. But yet let us see the providence of God: These men, M. Horn can not defend and maintain his heresies nor himself to be a Bishop by any law of the Realm. See the Apology of Staphilus Folly 81. that relinquishing the Church, would hang only upon a Parliament, are quite forsaken, yea even there where they looked for their best help. For I pray you, what warrant is there by act of Parliament to deny the Real presence of Christ's body in the holy Eucharistia? Is it not for any Parliament as well heresy now, as it was in Queen Maries, King Henry's, or any other kings days? What can be showed to the contrary? Doth not Luther your first Apostle and his scholars, defy you therefore, as detestable Heretics? Now concerning Transubstantiation and adoration, is it not well known, think you, that in King Edward's days, there was a preaty legerdemain played, and a leaf put in at the printing, which was never proposed in the parliament? What parliament have your Preachers to deny free will, and the necessity of baptizing children? Again I pray you, is there any Act to confirm your unlawful marriage? Doth not in this point the Canonical Law stand in force, as well now, as in King Henry's days? And so doth it not follow, that ye are no true Bishop? Beside, is it not notorious, that ye and your Colleages, were not ordained no not according to the prescript, I will not say of the Church, but even of the very statutes? How then can ye challenge to yourself the name of the Lord bishop of Winchester? Whereof both the Municipal and Ecclesiastical Law doth worthily spoil you? Wherefore as I said, let us dash out these words, and then no reasonable man shall have any great cause to quarrel against the Title of M. Fekenhams Treatise. The .2. Division. M. Horn. The book by you delivered unto me, touching the Oath, was written in the Tower of London (as you yourself confessed, and the true title thereof, doth plainly testify) in the time of the Parliament holden Anno quinto of the Q. Majesty Ianua. 12. at which time you little thought to have sojourned with me the winter following, and much less meant, to deliver me the scruples and stays of your conscience in writing, to be resolved at my hands. And although you would have it seem, by that you have published abroad, that the cause why you wrote, was to be resolved my hand: yet the truth is (as you yourself reported) that you and your Tower fellows, hearing that the Statute moved for the assurance of the Queen's royal power, would pass and be establissed, did conceive that immediately after the same Session, Commissioners should be sent unto you, to exact the Oath. Whereupon you to be in some readiness, to withstand and refuse the duty of a good subject, (.8.) The .8. untruth, slanderous. not without help of the rest (as may be gathered) devised the matter contained in the book, committed the same to writing, and purposed to have delivered it for your answer touching the Oath of the Supremacy to the Commissioners, if they had come This may appear by the Title of that book that you first delivered to me, which is word for word as followeth. The answer made by M. john Fekenham Priest, and prisoner in the Tower, to the queens highness Commissioners, touching the Oath of the Supremacy. In this Title there is no mention of scruples and stays delivered to the bishop of Winchester, but of answer to the Queen's Commissioners. I am not once named in the ●itle, ne yet in the look deliu●●●● to me: neither is there one word as spoken to me: although in the 〈…〉 abroad, you turn all as spoken to me. ●n your book published a●e 〈…〉 kinds of speeches: 〈◊〉 in d●●de the w●orste kinds of speeches In all that book● of M Feck. To the L. Bishop of Winchest●. When you● L. shallbe able etc. I shall join this issue with your L. etc. But it is far otherwise in your book delivered to me, namely. To the Queen's highness commissioners. When ye the Queen's highness commissioners shallbe able etc. I shall join this issue with you, that when any one of you, the Queen's highness commissioners, etc. From October, at what time you were sent to me, unto the end of januarie, there was daily conference betwixt us in matters of Religion, but chief touching the four points, which you term scruples and stays of conscience, and that by word of mouth, and not by any writing. In all which points, ye were (.9.) The 9 untruth. M. Feckenham was never so answered. so answered, that ye had nothing to object, but seemed resolved, and in a manner fully satisfied. Whereupon, I made afterwards relation (of (.10.) the 10. untruth. Incredible. good meaning towards you) to certain honourable persons of the good hope I had conceived of your conformity. At which time, a certain friend of yours standing by, and hearing what I had declared then to the honourable in your commedation, did shortly after (.11.) The .11. untruth. There was no such report made. report the same unto you, which as it seemed, you did so much mislike (doubting that your confederates should understand of your revolt (.12.) The .12. untruth. slanderous which they ever feared, having experience of your shrinking from them at (.13.) The .13. untruth. notoriously slanderous. Westminster in the conference there, the first year of the Q. Majesty) that after that time I found you always much more repugnant, and contrary to that wherein ye before times seemed in manner thoroughly resolved: And also to go from that you before agreed unto. By reason whereof, when in debating betwixt us, you using many shifts, amongst other, did continually quarrel in Sophistication of words, I did will you, to the end we might certainly go forward in the points material, that you would write your Positions or Assertions, in form of Propositions: which I could not cause you to do in any wise, but ye would still stand uncertainelye in granting and denying at your pleasure: yea, although I for the better agreement to be had, did draw such in form of Assertion, and gave them in writtng unto you, as I gathered of your own mouth to be your opinion: yet would ye in no wise stand too, and rest in any one certainly, but used still your accustomed wrangling and wandering at large. Which your behaviour so much misliked me, that I could not but earnestly charge you with inconstancy, in that ye would sometimes deny, that ye before had granted: and also grant, that ye before denied. Then being so much pressed herewith, and perceiving that your froward quarreling with the plain words of the Statute, could no longer cover your evil meaning, at the length you did require, that I would put in writing the words of the Oath, with the sense or interpretation added thereunto, as you considering thereupon, might devise the form of your Propositions, whereupon we might afterward debate. By this it may appear, both how untrue it is, that you hitherto had delivered unto m●e any such scruples of yours in writing, as you pretend in the Title (for then I needed not to have sought any Propositions of your Assertions) and also how untrue that is, that the interpretation of the Oath which I wrote at your request, before I ever saw any writing of yours, was to answer your scruples and stays delivered to me in writing. The second Chapter: declaring by the way, the order of the late disputations at Westmynster. HERE is no matter effectual, but that may seem already by our former answer sufficiently discharged: saving that it serveth to accumulate and increase the heap of M. Horns untruths, as that this schedule should be made not without the help of the rest. How prove you that M Horn? As it may be gathered, ye say. yea, but why have you so soon forgotten your late lesson? Where be your circumstances that enforced you so to gather? why were they not according to your own rule specified? Again ye say, M. Fekenham was so answered at your hands, that he had nothing to object but seemed to be resolved, and in a manner satisfied Sir, we call upon you yet on's again to remember your former rule, with the which ye so straightly and vainly charged M. Fekenham. But yet here ye seam to be somewhat better advised, mollifying the matter with these words in a manner satisfied: other wise it had passed all good manner and honesty to, so untruly to make that report the contrary being so well known, that he never yielded unto you in any one point of religion, neither in court nor yet in manor, nor else where. Then have we an heap of other untruths packed up together: As that M. Horn should have a good meaning towards M. Fekenham, making of him within six lines after an untrue and a slanderous report as to revolt from the religion by him received and professed at baptism, to revolt from the faith of Christ's Catholic Church▪ to revolt from all the most blessed Sacraments, and from the unity of the said Church, and thereby to become as stark a schismatic and an heretic as M. Horn himself is: Was this M Horn, your good and friendly meaning towards M. Fekenham? He thanketh you for nawght he will none of it: he hath espied you: ye proffer him to much wrong Of like sort is your other saying of M. Fekenhams friend that should stand by, when you made relation of the hope ye had of M. Fekenhams conformity, and that M. Feckenham upon your report to him by his, friend should be more repugnant than he was before. This seemeth to be made of your own head, to furnish your own forged tale withal: Which if it had been true, why did you not according to your own rule set forth the truth thereof, observing the dew circumstances of the matter, person, time, and place? But this incomparably passeth and far exceedeth all your other foresaid untruths, that ye say M. Fekenham should so shrink from his confederates (as you term them more maliciously than truly) in the conference made at Westminster, that they should ever since conceive a fear of his constancy in religion. I beseach you good Sir, in what one point of religion, did he shrink from his company in that conference at Westminster? Was the matter wherein he dissented from them any other than this? That, whereas both they and he also had agreed upon a book touching the questions then in controversy between you and then, the right honourable Lord keaper of the great seal, commanded them in the Queen her highness name to begin and to read their book first, which they refused to do, and yet he for his part thought it not good to disobey the queens highness commandment therein and thereupon offered himself to begin the disputation, and the Lord keeper would not permit him so to do, what an offence I beseech you hath M. Fekenham committed herein, so great as worthy a dash with your pen? What shrynkinge in religion call you this, when in the defence thereof he did so openly proffer himself to put forth the first argument? The book that was set forth of the said conference for the disgracing and depressing of the catholics, doth yet give some commendation to M. Fekenham for the cause above said and nothing toucheth him with any suspicion of inconstancy, or mambring in religion, as ye most unjustly do: This is your own fine and singular invention. And now here onhis again we must pluck you by the horns, and call you home to your own rule, and demand of you: Sir how know you that his Tower fellows have conceived such a fear of him? What proof are ye now able to make thereof? Ye have spoken the words: ye have written them: ye have set them forth in print to the view and sight of the world. And that I trow of a very good meaning towards M. Feckenham. Yea forsooth. Who seeth it not, and withal what an honourable prelate you are thus to stuff and farce your book, with an heap of such oversights and open untruths? I might now pass forth to the residue of M. horns book saving that the mention of the conference at Westmynster and the book thereof made, occasioneth me a little to speak thereof, for that I perceive many are slandered thereby, surmifing the catholics gave over, for that they were not able to defend and maintain their side: But these men shall understand that the very cause was, that they might not be suffered to reply to their adversaries, but were commanded strait to a new question the first undetermined, and nothing by them answered by reason their replication was cut of. I speak nothing of the uneven dealing and handling of the matter, Concerning the conference at Westmynster in the first year of the queens majesties Reign. as that the catholics being in possession of the truth from time to time in the Church continued and observed were yet notwithstanding disuantaged and put to the proof with much more injury, then if a man that had an hundred years and more quietly enjoyed his Lands, should suddenly be disturbed and dispossessed thereof, unless he could prove his possession, to him that had no right or interest to claim the same. Which I say not, for that the catholics had not, or did not show sufficient evidence, but for the manner of the ordering and dealing therein, the catholics being very much straited for shortness of time: beside that it was a fruytlesse and a superfluose enterprise: For in so many great and weighty matters, as now stand in controversy and debate, to what end and purpose was it to debate upon these 3. matters only, whether the service may be in the mother tongue: whether any one realm may alter and change the rites and ceremonies in the Church and make new: The questions disorderly put out. whether the mass be a sacrifice propitiatory seeing that the first, and the second question, be no questions of faith, and the .3. dependeth upon the questions of transubstantiation, and the real presence, which ought first to have been discussed and then this, as accessary thereunto? Again, what president or example can be showed of such kind of disputation to be made before the Say men as judges? At Monster by reason of Disputations, in one year the Lutherans thrust out the catholics, the Anabaptists the Lutherans Sleiden lib. 10. The clergies suit to the parliament surely how dangerous this matter is, beside many fold records of Antiquity, the miserable examples of our time do sufficiently testify: especially at Monster in Germany. Where by these means the Lutherans thrust out the catholics, and where even by the very same trade, ere the year went about, the Lutherans themselves were thrust out by the anabaptists. And then within a while after followed the pitiful tragedy played there by the said Anabaptists the worthy fruit of such disputations. Now albeit these disputations were nothing needful at all, and much less for that in the parliament time, when this conference was had, the whole clergy (whose judgement should have been in this case of chieffest importance) uniformly agreed, aswell upon the real presence as transubstantiation and the sacrifice also, with the supremacy of the Pope, and made their humble petitionn (as became their vocation) that the ancient religion might not be altered in the parliament, although they could never obtain that their petition might there be read, yet if they would needs have gone forward with their disputations, The Catholics not suffered to reply. reason had been, that they should have begun with the chief and principal points, and not with the dependent and accessary members, or matters nothing touching faith: and withal to have suffered the catholics, to have replied to their adversaries, which they could not be suffered to do, lest their adversaries weakness should (as it would have done in deed, and now daily doth, God be praised) evidently and openly have b●ne deciphered and disclosed. Wherein whether the catholics were indifferently dealt withal, The Catholics required in Aphrica the Pope's legate to be present in disputations with the Arians. Vict. lib. 2. de perseq-Vandal. I report me to all indifferent men. Surely among all other things concerning the supremacy of the prince in causes Ecclesiastical, the denial whereof is more extremely punished by the law, than any other matter of religion now in controversy, there would have been much more mature deliberation, especially considering that above ten hundred years past, in disputations of matters of faith, whereto the Catholics were provoked in Aphrica, the said Catholics required, that at the said disputations should be present the Legates of the See of Rome, as the chief and principal See of Christendom. But let us now return to M. Horn. M. Horn. The .3. Division. pag. 3. a. After this in February following, certain persons of worship resorted to my hou●e▪ partly to see me, and partly to hear somewhat betwixt me and you. And after that we had reasoned in certain points touching Religion, wherein ye seemed openly to have little matter to stand in, but rather did yield to the most in substance that I had said: never the less being after withdrawn in some of their companies, although ye did seem openly to consent and agree with me in that I had said: Yet (said you) the matter itself is grounded here (pointing to your breast) that shall never go out. Which being told me, I did vehemently then challenge you for your double dealing, and colourable behaviour: saying, that I thought you did not that you did, of any conscience at all: and therefore counted it but lost labour further to travail with such a one as had neither conscience nor constancy. But you, to show that ye did all of conscience, showed me both what ye had suffered for the same in divers manners, and also how the same was grounded in you long before. For proof whereof, ye offered to show me a book of yours, that ye had devised in the Tower, and the same shortly after did deliver unto me, not as your scruples and doubts to be resolved at my hand, wherein ye seemed in our conference before had (.14.) The .14. Untruth. That M. Feckenham should give up his Treatise in writing after he was resolved by M. Horn. resolved: but only to declare, that the matter had been long before settled in you, and this was the only and mere occasion of the delivery of the said book unto me, entitled as is before declared, and not otherwise. But as you have cast a mist before the eyes of the readers, under the speech of a delivery in writing, without noting of any circumstance that might make the matter clear, wherein you show yourself to have no good meaning: even so have you set forth resolutions of your own devise under my name, because you are ashamed to utter mine, whereunto you yielded, and were not able to answer. Stapleton. How unlike a tale this is, that M. Feckenham should either be resolved by M. Horn, or being resolved, should then give up his matter in writing for none other cause than M. Horn reporteth, I durst make any indifferent man judge, yea a number of M. Horns own sect: there is no appearance, there is no colour in this matter. And therefore I will be so bold, as to add this to his other untruths: where unto I might set an other more notable strait ways ensuing, In the answer to the resolutions, the 440, leaf. that M. Fekenham should set forth resolutions of his own devise under M. horns name, saving that I leave it to a place more appropriate, where the matter shall be more conveniently and more fully discussed. The 4. Division. Pag. 3. b. M. Fekenham. For as much as one chief purpose and intent of this Oath is, for a more saulfgard to be had of the queens royal person, and of her highness most quiet and prosperous reign: I do here presently therefore offer myself to receive corporal Oath upon the Evangelists, that I do verily think and am so persuaded in my conscience, that the Queen's highness is th'only suprem governor of this realm, and of all other her highness Dominions and Countries according as thexpress words are in the beginning of the said Oath. And further I shall presently swear, that her highness hath under God, the sovereignty and rule over all manner of persons borne within these her highness realms of what estate (either Ecclesiastical or Temporal) so ever they be. M. Horn. How so ever by words you would seem to tender her majesties saulfty, quietness, and prosperous reign, your (.15.) The 15. untruth vilainou● and slanderous. M Feckenham by all his deeds hath always showed himself a most obedient subject. deeds declare your meaning to be clean contrary. What saulfty mean you to her person, when you bereave the same of a principal part of the royal power? what quietness seek you to her person, when one chief purpose and intent of your book published, is to stay and bring her subjects to an heretical misliking of her royal power, which is a preparation to rebellion against her person? How much prosperity you wish to her majesties reign appeareth, when that with (.16.) The 16. untruth Devilish and spritish. deep sighs and groans you look daily for a change thereof, and (.17.) The 17.18. and 19 untruth blasphemous horrible and villainous For neither is the pope any heretic, neither do catholics make him their God: Neither wish t●ei him to reign in the queens place, that is, to have temporal jurisdiction as the queens Ma●. hath. tharche Heretic of Rome, your (.18.) God in earth, to (.19.) reign in her place. The third Chapter declaring the rebellion of Protestant's against their princes in diverse Countries abroad, and the seditious writings of English Protestant's at Geneva and otherwhere. THere have been many Kings in this realm before our time, that have reigned virtuously, quietly, prosperously, most honourably, and most victoriously, which never dreamt of this kind of supremacy: and yet men of such knowledge that they could soon espy, wherein their authority was impaired, and of such courage and stoutness that they would not suffer at the Pope's hands, or at any other, any thing done derogatory to their Royal power. And albeit the catholics wish to the queens majesty, as quiet, as prosperous, as long, and as honourable an empire to the honour of God, as ever had prince in the world, and are as well affected to her highness, as ever were good subjects to their noble princes aforesaid: yet can they not find in their hearts to take the Oath: not for any such sinister affection as M. Horn most maliciously ascribeth unto them, but only for conscience sake, grounded upon the Canons and laws of the holy Church, and the continual practice of all Christian and Catholic realms, finally upon holy Scripture, Act. 5. namely that saying of S. Peter. Oportet obedire Deo, magis quàm hominibus. God must be obeyed more than men: So far from all rebellion against her highness person, and from such scythes and groans, as Master Horn most wickedly surmiseth (wherein he showeth by the way his own and other his complices affection toward the princes not affected in religion as they be) that they daily most heartily pray for her highness preservation: So far of I say, that as they have already for God and his Catholic faith, suffered themself to be spoiled of all worldly estate, content also if God shall so appoint, to be spoiled also of their life, so is there none of them, whereof diverse have faithfully and fruitfully served their Prince and Country, that is not willing for the preservation of the Prince and his country, to employ, if the case so require, wit, body, and life also. And for my part, I pray God heartily the trial would once come. But this is an old practice, first of the Painimes, and jews, then of the heretics, Act. 24. Vict de per seq. Vand. An old practice of Infidels, jews, and heretics. Sedition the pecuiiar fruit● of heresy. falsely to object to the Christians and Catholics, privy conspiracies and sedition, the more to exasperate the Princes against them. And when truth faileth, then with the Prince's authority and laws to fear them. Surely, this man bloweth his horn a wrong, with charging the Catholics with sedition, which is the very badge and peculiar fruit of all their evangelical brood. I let pass the Donatists, and their horrible tragedies: I let pass the Boheames with their blind Captain both in Body and soul, Zischa (a meet Captain for such a caitiff company) with their detestable uproars, sedition, and mighty army against their Prince and Country: I let pass how cruelly they handled the Catholics, Vide walled doct. fidei. tom 2. Doctrinali, & Documento. 1 casting .12. of their chief Doctors and Preachers, into a kill of hot burning lime: and how pitifully they murdered a noble Catholic Knight: first burning his feet, than his legs, than his knees, than his thighs, to force him to consent to their wicked doctrine, which when he courageously and valiantly refused, they consumed with fire the residue of his body. Aene. Pius in Praefaet. De orig. Bohemiae. Nauclerus generat. 49. pag. 48●. I let pass the traitorous poisoning of that noble young Prince Ladislaus the King of Boheme and Hungary, at the time of his marriage in Praga, by the means of Georgius Pogebratius a great Hussyte, for that the said Ladislaus at his first entry into his Town of Praga, gave but heavy looks to the Hussian Ministers, but lighting of his Horse embraced most lovingly the Catholic Priests, saying: Hos Dei Ministros agnosco. These I acknowledge for the ministers of God. And to come nearer to our own home, Polidore. lib. 22. Hist. Ang. I let pass the great conspiracies of Sir Roger Acton and Sir john Oldecastle with their complices against King Henry the fift. I refer me only (to be short) to the tragical enormities yet fresh in remembrance, of Luther's Scholars in Germany, in Dennemarke, in Swethelande, and in our Country in the time of Queen Marie: of the calvinists in France, in Scotland, and presently in these low Countries, of Brabant, holland, Flanders, and Lukelande: Last of all, of the anabaptists in the City of Monster in Westphalia. For these three noble Sects issued of that poisoned root of Luther and his strompette Cate, have each of them according to their ability, given forth such evident arguments of their obedience (forsooth) to their Soveraines, that all the forenamed Countries, do well not only remember the same, but feel yet presently the smart thereof. In Germany the Lutherans both the commons under Thomas Muntzer their Captain against their Nobles, and the Nobles themselves against their Emperor, notoriously rebelled, and that under pretence of Religion. Sleidan. lib 4. in sine. Idem. li. 17. &. 19 The murder in one summer of fifty thousand men of the commonalty at the least (as Sleidan reporteth) and the famous captivity of the Duke of Saxony and the Landgrave of Hesse under Charles the fift (the late most renowned Emperor) who both stood in field against him, will never suffer those bloody practices to be forgotten. The insurrection of the people in Dennemarke against their Nobles, and of the Nobles in Swethelande against their Prince (as witnesseth that learned councillor of the late most Catholic Emperor Ferdinandus, In Apolog. heart. 3. Fridericus Staphylus) are known to all the world with the success thereof. The open rebellion of Sir Thomas Wyatt in the reign of Queen Marie (covering his heresy with a Spanish cloak) Charing Cross and Tower hill will never forget. In France the Zwinglians not only by traitorous force bereaving the Prince of Piedmont of his: Town of Geneva, and fixing there ever since the wicked Tabernacle of their loitering heresies, but also even under the King that now liveth (as with my eyes I have myself there beholded) first by unlawful assemblies against open Proclamations, and after by open rebellion without measure of bloodshed, by taking up of the King's rents in Gasconie and the Province, by possessing by violence his principal towns, Rhone, Orleans, Lions, and such other, by murdering most traitorously his General Captain the noble Duke of Guise, have showed their godly obedience to their Sovereign Princes. For the better and more large deciphering of all these tragical feats wrought by the calvinists in the Realm of France, I refer you, Master Horn, to an Oration made of this matter expressly, and pronounced here in Louvain, and translated eloquently and printed in our English tongue. What loyal subjects the calvinists in Scotland, have showed themselves toward their Queen and Sovereign, Knokes and his band, the flight of the Nobles, and the murdering also of her most dear Secretary, even within her graces hearing, with other bloody practices, yet hot and fresh, beareth open witness before all the world. It is evident, that beside and against the Prince's authority, your Religion (M. Horn) hath taken place there. Of the late rebellion in Flanders. To come to the outrageous enormities of the low Countries here, what tongue can express, what pen can deciphre sufficiently the extremity thereof? These men living under a most Catholic, most clement, and most mighty Prince, (the loyalty of their profession is such) they neither reverence his Religion, nor consider his clemency, nor fear his power: but contrary to his open edicts and proclamations, abusing his rare clemency in remitting unto them the rigour of the Inquisition, proceed daily to overturn the Religion by him defended, to provoke his just indignation, and to contemn his Princely power. For, a grant being made of the mollification thereof for a season, until the King's pleasure were farther known: at the humble suit of certain Gentlemen, put up to the Lady Regent the .5. of April, in the year .1566. which grant also was expressly made, In Resp. Ducissae. 6. Aprilis. upon condition that nothing should be innovated in matters of Religion in the mean while, these men yet, having an inch granted them, took an elle, and the rod being cast aside, fell straight to more unthriftiness than before. For soon after flocked down into these low Countries, a number of rennegate preachers, some out of Geneva and France, some out of Germany, some Sacramentaries, some Lutherans, and some Anabaptists. Who lacking not their upholders and stays fell to open preaching, first in Flaunders and then next in Antwerp, the .24. of june of the said year .1566. After at Tournay, and Valencenes, in Holland and Brabant, in all Towns well near, except only this noble University of Louvain: which (God only be praised therefore) hath continued in all these garboils, troubles, and disorders, not only free from all spoils of their Churches and chapels, yea and of all Monasteries round about, as few towns beside have done, namely Brussels, Bruges, Lyle, Mounts in Henaut, Arras, Douay, and no town else of importance (as far as I can remember) but also hath remained free from all schismatical sermons in or about the town. Which of no great town in all Brabant and Flanders beside can be said. God only be praised therefore, for whose only glory I writ it. For as this town and university, was above all other towns in all this. Land most spited and threatened of these rebellious Protestants (by reason of the Doctors and inquisitors here, whose rigour they pretended as a cause of their malice) so was it by God's singular mercy, from their special malice, most singularly preserved. To him only be the glory and honour thereof. Else man's policy was no less, and the power of resistance was greater in other towns then in this. But God, I trust, hath showed his singular mercy upon this place, to stop the gaping Ravens mouths, Pulchrum est coruos deludere hiantes. the heretical brood as well of this land as otherwhere, which thirsted after the blood of the learned Doctors, and Catholic Students of this place. To return to our matter, the sermons beginning at Antwerp, (without the town walls) at the first few, at the second, and third preachings and so forth, great numbers assembled. The more half always as gazers on, and harkeners for news, then zealous Gospelers as they call themselves. The number then both of the audience and preachers increasing, a proclamation came from the court, and was published in Antwerp the uj of julie, that none of town should repair to such foreign preachings upon a pain. This was so well obeyed, that to the Kings own Proclamation, printed and fastened upon the South door of S. Mary's Church in Antwerp, it was in the very paper of the Proclamation underwritten by a brother of your Gospel M. Horn, Sirs: To morrow ye shall have a Sermon at such a place and time. As who would say: a fig for this edict, and as the traitorous brethren in Antwerp have not sticked openly to say: * An unmannerly talk meet for so cleanly a Gospel. Schij●e op die Cunning, We will have the word, what so ever our King say or command to the contrary. How think you M. Horn? Do these men acknowledge their Prince Supreme Governor in all Spiritual causes? But let us go on. To let pass the continuance of their preachings without the walls, which dured about six or seven weeks, the Prince of Orange governor of the town, labouring in the mean season a great while but in vain, to cause them to surcease from their assemblies, until the kings pleasure with the accord of the General States were known, Recueil de chooses advenues en Anuers. An. 1566. they not admitting any such delay or expectation (as themselves in a french Pamphlet by them published in print, without the name of the Author or place of the printing, do confess, foreseeing (as they said) that no good would come thereof, and therefore obeying the Magistrate as much as them listed) found the means to bring their assemblies into the town itself, so far without the Kings or the Regent's authority, as if they had had no King at all out of the land, nor Regent in the land. But the means which they found to bring this feat to pass, was singular and notable. Whereas the .19. of August the Prince of Orange departed from Antwerp to Brussels to the court, that being then in the Octaves of the Assumption of our Lady, a special solemnity in the chief Church of Antwerp town, By what means the new prechīg● entered first the town of Antwerp. the brethren both for the governors absence emboldened, and in despite of that solemnity more enkendeled, the twenty of August being Tuesday toward evening, at the Antemne time between v. and uj of the clock, began first by certain boys to play their Pageant, mocking and striking by way of derision, the Image of our Lady then especially visited and honoured for the honourable memorial of her glorious Assumption. At this light behaviour of the boys some stir being made, as well by the catholics then in the Church, as by the faction of the Caluinists there also then assembled, the Catholics fearing a greater inconvenience, began to departed the Church, and the brethren at the rumour thereof increased very much. Hereupon incontinently the Margrave of the town, the chief Officer in the governors absence, being soon advertised by the Catholics of some tumult like to arise, drew in all haste to the Church. But the brethren by this time were become Lords of the Church, and had shut the doors against the Margrave. Notwithstanding at length the Margrave going from door to door got in, and approaching to the assembly of the Caluinists, willed and commanded them in the King's name whose Officer he was, to departed the Church, and not to interrupt God's service as they had begun. They answered, they came also to do God service, and to sing a few Psalms in his honour, that being a place most convenient therefore. Many words passing between the Margrave and them, their number being great and increasing still, the Margrave departed the Church, nothing prevailing neither by fair words nor by foul. The Magistrate being thus rejected (as unable in deed to withstand the faction of the Rebels, as it appeared well even that night) the holy brotherhood went to their druggery. First they song Psalms, pretending that only to be the cause of their meeting there at that time. At their Psalmody rushed in great numbers of people, some to see and be gone again, some to remain and accompany them. I was myself present at the beginning of this Tragedy (coming by chance to the town that afternone) and I saw after the Margrave was gone out of the Church, and their Psalmody begun, not past (I verily suppose) threescore persons assembled. Marry there rushed in continually great numbers of such as tarried still with them. All this was before six of the clock. From that time forward, their melody soon ended, they proceeded to sacrilege, to breaking of Images, to throwing down of Altars, of Organs, and of all kind of Tabernacles, as well in that Church, as in all other Churches, Monasteries and chapels of Antwerp, to stealing of Chalices, to spoiling of Copes, to breaking up of seats, to robbing of the Church Wardens boxes as well for the Church as for the poor. And herein, I will report that which I saw with mine eyes. In saint james Church, the spoil there being not so outrageous, as in other Churches, all the settles, benches and seats, made about the Church pillars and Altars for folk to sit and kneel in, were in manner left whole, one only excepted, placed at the west end of the Church, in the which were divers little scobbes and boxes of gatherings for the poor. These scobbes lo, only, were broken up, and the contents visited: for to them was their chief devotion: All the rest remained whole, and unspoiled. To be short, all that night (which to him that had been present thereat, as I then was, might well seem Nox Siciliana) the Zealous brotherhood so followed the chase, that they left not one Church in Antwerp great or small, where they hunted not up good game, and carried away flesh good store. Chalices, patens and cruets of gold and of silver, copes and vestments of silk and of velvet, fine linen and course, none came amiss: They took all in good part, and took no more than they found. What shall I speak of the very libraries spoiled and burned, namely of the grey friars, and of the Abbye of S. Michael? To describe particularly the horrible and outrageous sacrileges of that night, an eternal document of the ghospellike zeal, of this sacred brotherhood, would require a full treatise of itself. Only this much I have shorthly touched, that you may see and palpably feel M. Horn, if any common sense remain in you, what obedient subjects your brethren are, which with in .24. miles of their Prince's Court, which contrary to the express admonition of the Magistrate then present, contrary to all law, reason, right, or conscience, under pretence forsooth of your gospels zeal (the zeal truly of Christ's gospel, was never such) feared not in great numbers to commit such open robbery, theft, felony, sacrilege, and treason. But let us proceed. This Noble Strategeme was a way to bring their preachings within the town walls: for now they had I trow, well deserved of the town, and were right worthy of all favour and liberty. Therefore the Thursday after, they preached openly in our lady Church, and the Saturday in in the Burge Church, and required to have places in all the Churches to preach. But at the first two, and then four, and at last all the catholics Churches being forbidden them, they obtained yet certain places in the new town to build them new Churches: which they did with great speed. The Caluinists builded four, and the Lutherans two. This much ground they got, by one nights work. But was it possible, that such a beastly beginning, should have either long continuance, or any good ending? We shall see by the issue. In this month of August not in Antwerp only, but in Gant, Ypres, Valencene and divers other towns in Flanders, Hartoghembuske, Lyre, and other in Brabant, in diverse towns also of Holland, in some in Zealand, and throughout well near all these low countries, Churches were rob and spoiled, though in few so outrageously or so universally as in the town of Antwerp. The storm of this sudden spoils being somewhat assuaged and stopped by policy and speedy resistance, yet the new preachings took place about all towns: only Louvain as I have said excepted. this being the only maiden town of any importance in all Brabant and Flanders, for being free both within and many a mile about, no less from all schismatical preachings, then from all sacrilegious spoils. God only, as I have said, be praised therefore. But to proceed, soon after these sacrileges, they fell to open rebellion. For when all went not forward as it liked the Ministers, by their persuasions, towns began to rebel, and to shut their gates against the King's soldiers, which to have justice done upon Church robbers, and to stay farther enormities the Prince commanded to be admitted. Such were Tournay, Valencens, Hartoghenbaske, and Hassels in Lukeland. But Tournay being soon recovered, and the protestantical rebels subdued Valemcens held out even to the battery of the walls: before which time all catholics being driven out of the town that openly would show themselves for such, all monasteries being overthrown, the churches being turned into barns or storehouses for their corn, the brethren of Antwerp envying at the jolly liberty and audacity of the Valemceners, attempted divers times to obtain the like in their town also. Witnesses hereof, the tumult made about the grey friars Church the 19 of September, the Prince of Orange being present scant able to stay it. The spoil renewed in S. Mary's Church in the month of Novembre, whereof six the next day were hanged by the Conte Hochstrat then the Prince of Orange his deputy. The burning of a great part of the grey friars Church and cloister in the first Sunday of Lent. And last of all the open, manifest, and notorious rebellion made by the caluinists in Antwerp, the 13. of March last when they possessed the artillery of the town, planted their ordinance in the great mayor, a street so called, stood there in arms against their Prince, required openly the keys of the gates, and of the town house, the banishment of all religious persons and priests, and briefly as the cry then went about the streets, des Coopmans' goet, en Papen bloet: the goods of the Merchants and the blood of the Priests. These I say are manifest, clear and evident witnesses that the calvinists of Antwerp attempted no less rebellion, than the town of Valemcens practised in deed. But of this Notorious attempt and of the whole manner, end and beginning thereof toward the end of this book I shall more largely speak, to the which place I remit the Reader. Now what a great and sudden overthrow God hath given to all these traitorous attempts of ghospelling protestāns, and how they have wrought therein their own destruction (for had they not attempted the dominion itself, their heresies (we fear) would longer have been winked at, and perhaps not repressed at all) how first the caluinists in Antwerp were by main force of the catholics, (the Lutherans joining in that feat with them, constrained to lay down their weapons, and to cry, Viue●e Roy, God save the king, how soon after upon palmesonday the town of Valencenes was taken by the king's Captains, how strait after Easter the preachers were driven to depart Antwerp, and all other towns and Cities of these low Countries, how their new Churches are made a prey to the king's soldiers, briefly how all is restored to the old face and countenance as nigh as in so short a time may be, how wonderfully, mercifully, and miraculously God hath wrought herein, neither my rude pen is able worthily to express it, neither my small experience can sufficiently report it. I leave it therefore to a better time and occasion, of some other more exactly and worthily to be chronicled. This is lo M. Horn, the obedience of the calvinists in these low countries here, as we hear daily with our ears and see with our eyes. And truly experience hath to well showed, that Protestant's obey, until they have power to resist. When their faction is the stronger side, as they resist both Prelates and Popes, so they lay at both Kings and Keysars. And to this the law of their Gospel enforceth them, as their own Ministers persuade them. So by the persuasion of Theodore Beza (Caluins' holy successor now at Geneva) the villain Poltrot slew the Duke of Guise, his Prince's Captain General. By the Authority of Hermannus a known runagate now in England, and a famous preacher here, as before in Italy for open bawdry no less infamous, the town of Hassels in Lukelande rebelled. By the encouragement and setting on of the Ministers (who for the time were the chief Magistrates there) the town of Tournay for a season also rebelled, and sent out aid to the rebels of Valemcens, who sped according to their deserts, being to the number of ij. M. or there about intercepted by the king's soldiers and slain within the twelve days at Christmas last. And it is well known, namely by the first execution made after the taking of Valencenes, about witsontyde last that the Ministers themselves were the chief Authors of the long and obstinate rebellion of that town. Such supreme gowerment of the Prince over causes Ecclesiastical your dear brethren here (M. Horn) the calvinists do acknowledge and practise. Which that it renew not to a farther rebellion, we for the peace of God's Church, and for our own safety do pray, and you for saving your poor honesty, had need to pray. Except your heart also be with them (M. Horn) though your pen condemn them. Now for the purgation of the catholics, The Catholics no seditious subjects. against whom this man so falsely and maliciously bloweth his horn, it may seam a good and a convenient proof, of their quietness and obedience, that all this .8. years and more there hath not been in the realm, no not one that I can hear of, that hath been convicted, of any disloyalty, for word or dead, concerning the Prince's civil regiment: which they all wish were as large and ample, and as honourable as ever was our noble countreymans' the great Constantine's. And albeit I know quòd non sit tutum scribere contra eos, qui possunt praescribere, why the catholics should be borne withal. Yet for matters of conscience and religion (wherein only we stand) we poor Catholics moste humbly upon our knees desire her highness, that we may with most lowly submission crave and require, to be borne withal, if we can not upon the sudden, and without sure and substantial grounds abandon that faith, that we were baptised in, and (as we are assured) all our ancestors, and all her Majesties own most noble progenitors, yea her own most noble father King Henry the eight, yea that faith, which he in a clerkly book hath most pithily defended, and thereby achieved to him and his, and transported as by hereditary succession, The Queen's title Defender of the faith. the worthy title and style yet remaining in her highness, of the defender of the faith. Other disobedience then in these matters, (if there be any thing in us worthy that name) wherein as I have said our first and principal obedience must wait upon God, and his Catholic Church, I trust her highness hath not, nor shall not find in any true Catholic. Let us now turn on the other side, and consider the fruits of M. Horn his evangelical brethren and their obedience, The obedience of the evangelical brethren in causes Ecclesiastical. that by words would seam to recognize the queens Majesty as supreme governor in all causes ecclestical. Who are those then, I pray you M. Horn, that repine at the queens majesties injunctions and ordinances, for the decente and comely apparel meet for such as occupy the room of the clergy? Whence came those .16. Ministers to Paris, and what Ministers were they, but roundecappe Ministers of England, flaying the realm for disobedience? Who wrote and printed a book at Rhone against the Queen's majesties express commandment of priestly apparel? Was it not Minister Barthelet, that published before the infamous libel against the universal Church of God, both that now is and ever hath been? As fond now and peevish against his own congregation, as he was wicked before and blasphemous against the whole Church of God? Who are they that have preached with a chain of gold about their necks in stead of a tippet? Who are those that preach even in her highness presence, that the Crucifix her grace hath in her chappelle is the Idol with the red face? Who are those I pray you, that writ: Sint sanè & ipsi magistratus membra & parts, Magdeb. pref. cent. 7 & cives Ecclesiae Dei●imo ut ex toto cord sint, omnes precari decet. Flagrent quoque ipsi zelo pietatis: sed non sint Capita Ecclesiae, quia ipsis non competit iste primatus. Let the magistrates also be members and parts, and citizens of the Church of God, The Lutheraan in Germany deny this supremacy. yea and that they may be so, it behoveth us all with all our heart to pray, let them be fervent in the godly zeal of religion, but they may not be heads of the Church in no case: for this Supremacy doth not appertain to them. These are no Papists, I trow Master Horn, but your own dear brethren of Magdeburge, in their new story ecclesiastical: by the which they would have all the world directed, yea in that story, whereof one parcel Illiricus and his fellows have dedicated to the queens Majesty: Cent. ●. that bear the world hand, they are the true and zealous scholars of Luther. In case ye think their testimony not to have weight enough, then hearken to your and their Apostle Luther, who writeth, that it is not the office of Kings and princes to confirm, Contra artic. Lou. Tom. 2. no not the true doctrine, but to be subject and serve the same. Perhaps ye will refuse and reject both the Magdeburgenses and Luther to, as your mortal enemies, (you being a sacramentary) and such as take you and your fellows for stark heretics. A hard and a strange case, that now Luther can take no place among a number of the evangelical brethren. Andrea's Modrevius de Ecclesia lib. 2. c. 10. What say you then to Andrea's Modreuiu●? Surely one of the best learned of all your sect. How like you then him that saith, there ought to be some one to be taken for the chief and Supreme head in the whole Church in all causes ecclesiastical. Well, I suppose you will challenge him to as a Lutheran. If it must needs be so, I trust M. Calvin your greatest Apostle shall bear some sway with you. I know ye are not ignorant that he calleth those blasphemers, The Zwinglians deny this supremacy. Calvin c. 7. Amos. that did call king Henry the eight Supreme head of the Church of England: and handleth the king him self with such villainy, and with so spiteful words, as he never handled the Pope more spitefully, and all for this title of Supremacy, which is the key of this your noble book. Can ye now blame the Catholics M. Horn, if they deny this supremacy, which the heads of your own religion, aswell Lutherans, as Zwinglians do deny and refuse? A new sect in Engl●nd contrary to all the world beside, as well papists as protestants. They may be called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: Laicocephali: as ye would say. Lay-heads, or Laiehead makers. O what a strange kind of religion is this in England, that not only the Catholics, but the very patriarchs of the new evangelical brotherhod do reject and condemn? Perchance ye will say. Well, for all this there is no English man of this opinion. Marry that were wonderful, that if as we be sequestered and as it were shut up from other countries by the great Ocean sea that doth enuyron us, so we should be shut up from the doctrine as well of the catholics, as also the Protestants of other contreis': and that with us the Lutherans and Zwinglians should find no friends to accompany them, in this as well, as in other points. But content yourself M. Horn, and think you if ye do not already, that either yourself, or many other of your brethren like the queens supremacy never a deal in heart, what so ever ye pretend and dissemble in words. Think ye that Calvin is so slenderly friended in England, his books being in such high price and estimation there? No, no, it is not so to be thought. The contrary is to well known: especially the thing being not only openly preached, by one of your most fervent brethren there in England, even since the Queen's majesties reign: but also before openly and sharply written against, by your brethren of Geneva. Especially one Anthony Gilbie. Whose words I will as well for my discharge in this matter, somewhat at large recite, as also to show his judgement, of the whole Religion as well under King Henry, as King Edward, and so consequently of the said Religion under our gracious Queen Elizabeth, now used and revived: that all the world may see that to be true, that I said of the Supremacy, as also that the fervent brethren, be not yet come to any fix or stable Religion, and that they take this to be but simple as yet, and unperfit. In the time (saith he) of King Henry the eight, Antony Gilbie in his admonition to England and Scotland to call them to repentance. Imprinted at Geneva by john Cri●pine. 1558. p, 69 when by tindal, Frith, Bilney, and other his faithful servants, God called England to dress his vinyeard, many promised full fair, whom I could name, but what fruit followed? Nothing but bitter grapes, yea briars and brambles, the wormwood of avarice, the gall of cruelty, the poison of filthy fornication flowing from head to foot, the contempt of God, and open defence of the cake Idol, by open proclamation to be read in the Churches in steed of God's Scriptures. Thus was there no reformation, but a deformation, in the time of the * See how religiosly the Protestants speak of their Princes, Tyrant and lecherous monster. The bore I grant was busy, wrooting and digging in the earth, and all his pigs that followed him, but they sought only for the pleasant fruits, that they winded with their long snouts: and for their own bellies sake, they wrooted up many weeds: but they turned the ground so, mingling good and bad together, sweet and sour, medicine and poison, they made, I say, such confusion of Religion and Laws, that no good thing could grow, but by great miracle, under such Gardeners. And no marvel, if it be rightly considered. For this Boar raged against God, against the Devil, against Christ, and against antichrist, as the some that he cast out against Luther, the racing out of the name of the Pope. And yet allowing his laws, and his murder of many Christian soldiers, and of many Papists, do declare and evidently testify unto us, especially the burning of Barnes, Jerome, and Garrette their faithful preachers of the truth, and hanging the same day for maintenance of the Pope, Poel, Abel, and Fetherstone, doth clearly paint his beastliness, that he cared for no Religion. This monstruous boar for all this, must needs be called the Head of the Church in pain of treason, displacing Christ our only head, who ought alone to have this title. Wherefore in this point, O England, ye were no better than the romish antichrist, who by the same title maketh himself a God, and sitteth in men's consciences, banisheth the word of God, as did your King Henry, whom ye so magnify. For in his best time nothing was heard but the King's Book, the Kings proceedings, the King's Homilies, in the Churches, where God's word only should have been preached. So made you your King a God, believing nothing but that he allowed. I will not for shame name how he turned to his wont: I will not write your other wickedness of those times, your murders without measure, adulteries and incests of your King, and his Lords, and Commons. etc. Lo Master Horn, how well your Protestant fellow of the best race, even from Geneva, liketh this Supremacy by plain words, saying: that this title which you so stoutly in all this your book avouch, displaceth Christ, who ought and that only to enjoy it. And whereas ye moste untruly say here, that we make the Pope our God in earth: Master Gilbie saith, that you make your Prince a God, in attributing to her this wrong title, wherein Christ will have no compartener: Surely, we make no God of the Pope, and sometimes perhaps, no good man neither. And yet we reverence him for his office and authority, that Christ so amply and honourably gave him for preservation of unity and quietness in his Church. Your wisdom with like truth also appeareth in that you call the Pope the Archeretike of Rome, naming no man. And so your words so liberally and wanton cast out, do as well comprehend S. Peter, S. Clement, and other holy Martyrs, and Bishops there, as any other. I promise you a well blown blast and handsomely handled. With like fineness you call him Archeretike, that is the supreme judge over all Heretics and heresies too, and that hath already judged you and your patriarchs for Archeritikes. I wiss as well might the felon at the bar in Westmynster hall to save his life, if it might be, call the judge the strongest thief of all: and doubtless (had he a Prince on his side) his plea were as good as yours is: Now where ye say, we would have the Pope to reign here in the queens place, proceedeth from your like truth and wisdom. For albeit the Pope's authority was ever chief for matters eccleastical, yet was there never any so much a noddy, to say and believe the Pope reigned here: The Pope and the King being ever two distinct persons, far different the one from the other, in several functions and administrations: and yet well concurrant and coincident together without anya imminution of the one or the others authority. Well, ye will perhaps say, that albeit M. Gilbie misliketh this title in the Prince, yet he liketh well the religion, especially such as now is, and such as was in King Edward's days which is all one. hearken than I pray you, what his censure and judgement is thereof. I will name (saith he) no particular things because I reverence those days (meaning of King Edward) saving only the kill of both the King's uncles and the prisonment of Hoper for Pope's garments. Ibidem. Fol. 70. Gilbies' judgement concerning the religion that now is. God grant you all repentant hearts. For no order or state did any part of his duty in those days: but to speak of the best, whereof you use to boast, your Religion was but an English Matins patched forth of the Pope's Portesse: many things were in your great book superstitious and foolish. All were driven to a prescript service like the Papists, that they should think their duties discharged, if the number were said, of Psalms and Chapters. finally, their could no discipline be brought into the Church, nor correction of manners. I trust now, M. Horn, that you will somewhat the more bear with the Catholics, if they can not well bear the service and title which your companions so ill liketh. Yet because ye are so hard master to M. Fekenham and his fellows, to have their doing a preparation to rebellion against the queens person, for defending Ecclesiastical authority, which nothing toucheth her person or crown (as without the which it hath most honourably continued and flourished many hundred years, and shall by God's grace continue full well and full long again, when it shall please God) let this title and jurisdiction Ecclesiastical go, which all good Princes have ever foregone as nothing to them apertaining. Let us come to the very temporal authority, and let us consider who make any preparation of rebellion, the Catholics or the Protestants. Who are they, I pray you, that have set forth devices of their own for the succession of the crown without the Prince's knowledge? Surely no Catholics, but the very Protestants themselves. Who blewe the first blast of the trumpet I pray you? Who are those that have set forth in open printed books in the English tongue, that neither Queen Marie, nor this our gracious Queen were lawful inheritors of the Crown? And finally that it is against the Law of God and nature, that any woman should inherit any principality or Kingdom? No Catholic I warrant you, but your holy brethren, so fervent in the word of the Lord. Yea among other M. john Knox the new Apostle of scotland: john Knokes in his appellation and his exortation to the nobility of Scotland Fol. 77. Imprinted at Geneva An 1558. In his appellation to the Nobility the .36. leaf. It is not birth only (saith he) or propinquity of blood that maketh a King lawfully to reign above the people professing jesus Christ, and his eternal verity, but in his election must the ordinance which God hath established in the election of inferior judges, be observed. Lo this Apostle excludeth all succession as well of men, as women: and will have the Kingdom to go by election, that in case there be found any Prince that fancieth not this new Apostle, that then he may be lawfully deposed, and a new brother in his room placed. And therefore I fear not (saith he) to affirm, that it had been the duty of the Nobility, judges, Rulers, and people of England, not only to have resisted, and against standed Marie that jesabel, whom they call their Queen, but also to have punished her to death, with all the sort of her Idolatrous Priests, together with all such as should have assisted her. Ye shall now hear the verdict of an other good man: Christopher Goodman how Superiors ought to be obeyed and imprinted at Geneva by john Crispin. 15●8. c. 5. fol. 54. a zealous brother of Caluins' school. I know (saith he) ye will say, the Crown is not entailed to the heirs Males only, but appertaineth as well to the daughters. And therefore by the laws of the Realm ye could not otherwise do. But if it be true, yet miserable is the answer of such, as had so long time professed the Gospel, and the lively word of God: If it had been made of Pagans and Heathens which knew not God by his word, it might better have been borne withal: but among them that bore the name of God's people, with whom his laws should have chief authority, this answer is not tolerable. And afterward. If she had been no bastard, but the kings daughter as lawfully begotten as was her Sister that godly Lady and meek lamb, void of all Spanisshe pride and strange blood, yet in the sickness and at the death of our lawful Prince of Godly memory King Edward the sixth, that should not have been your first counsel or question: who should be your Queen, but first and principally, who had been most meetest among your brethren, to have had the government over you, and the whole government of the Realm to rule them carefully in the fear of God. After this he showeth his mind more expressly. A woman (saith he) to reign, Cap 8. fol. 96. God's law forbiddeth, and nature abhorreth, whose reign was never counted lawful, by the word of God, but an express sign of God's wrath: and a notable plague for the sins of the people: As was the reign of jesabel, and ungodly Athalia: especial instruments of Satan, and whips to his people of Israel. I do here omit a Sermon made by one of your Prelates, M. Sands that both Queen Marie and our gracious Queen Elizabeth were bastards. And they say that yourself (Master Horn) did the same at Durham. How like ye this, Master Horn? Is this a preparation of rebellion against the Queen's person, or no? Ye will perchance to extenuate the matter, say it is the private doing of one or two, disannulled by the rest. Nay Sir, ye shall not so scape: I say this was the comen consent and judgement of all your holy brethren of Geneva, as well English as other, yea of Master Calvin himself, as it may be gathered by Master Whitingham his Preface, to the said book of Master Goodman. M. Whitingam in the Preface. Master Christopher Goodman (sayeth he) conferred his Articles and chief Propositions with the best learned in these parties, who approved them, he consented to enlarge the said Sermon, and so to print it as a token of his duty and good affection toward the Church of God. And then if it were thought good to the judgement of the godly, to translate the same into other languages, that the profit thereof might be more universal. Lo good M. Horn, a sermon made at Geneva to all the English brethren, not only to deprive the Queen of her title of the Supremacy in causes Ecclesiastical, but even in temporal too, and from all government: the matter being communicated beside to the best learned there. And then M. Calvin and M. Beza too, I trow, gave their verdict to this noble and clerkly work. And so it seemeth to import the consent of all the gehennical (I should have said) the Genevical Church. And who are those now that rule all the roast in England but this good brotherhod? Men no doubt well worthy, for whose sakes the catholics should be thus hardly handled and to whom the Q. Majesty is (who doubteth) deeply bound, and they worthy to be so well cherished at her hands, as they are. These good brethren by their new broached Divinity have found a pretty devise, at their pleasure not only to depose the Queen's Majesty and the Queen of Scotland: but also the greatest part of all other Princes, such I mean as be women, or have holden their government by their descent from women. As did in our Country since the conquest Henry the second, the son of Maude th'empress, daughter to King Henry the first. As did philipp, Charles the late emperors Father, hold Burgundy, and Charles himself the Kingdom of Spain. I here omit now Petronilla the Prince of the Arragones', Maude of Mantua, both jones of Naples, Margaret of Norwey, and other women Princes else where, as in Navarre, and in Lorraine. But what speak I of women only, when Knox, as I have showed, will have all Realms to go by election, and not by succession? So that now whereas the Catholics, yea the starkest Papist of all (as these men term them) can be well content, yea with all their hearts to affirm, that the queens Majesty may enjoy not only this Realm, but even the whole Empire, and wish no less (if it pleased God) to her highness, and find no fault, but only with that title, that is not competent for her highness, and without the which she may reign as nobly, as amply, as honourably, as ever did Prince in England, or else where, which never affected any such title: these men, who pretend to the world, to profess a wondered sincere observation toward God and their Prince, do not only spoil her of that title, but of all her right and interest to England, France, Ireland, or else where: making her incapable of all manner civil regiment. Which I trust the queens Majesty ones well considering, will graciously bear with the catholics that do not envy her the one or the other title: but only desire that their consciences may not be strained for the one of them. Which they upon great grounds, and as they verily think, without any impairing of her worldly estate can not by oath assuredly avouch: which thing they trust they may do, without any just suspicion of sedition or rebellion. Wherewith M. Horn most unjustly chargeth them: the said note and blame most justly (for the causes by me rehearsed) redounding upon his own good brethren. Which thing as he can not truly lay to any Catholic: so of all men lest to master Fekenham. Whereof I trust, A most true defence for M Fekenham. certain right honorables, as the Lord earl of Leicester, the Lord earl of bedford, yea the queens Majesty herself will defend and purge him against M. Horns most false accusation. Of whose doings in Queen Mary's days, the said right honorables with the right honourable my Lord Earl of warwick can, and will (I trust) also report being then prisoners, and he by the queens appointment sent unto them. M. Secretary Cycil also can testify of his doings touching Sir john Cheke knight, whose life, lands, and goods by his travail and humble suit were saved. His hope is, that the queens highness his sovereign good Lady will thus much report of him, how in the beginning of her highness trouble, her highness then being imprisoned in the court at Westmynster, and before her committee to the tower, his good hap was to preach a sermon before Queen Mary, and her honourable counsel in the Court, where he moved her Highness and them also to mercy, and to have consideration of the queens highness that now is, then in trouble and newly entered in prison. What displeasure he sustained therefore, I do here omit to express. But this I certainly know, that he hath reported, and hath most humbly thanked almighty God and her highness: that her highness had the same in remembrance, at the first and first and last talk, that ever he had with her, in her palace at westminster not long before her highness Coronation: I trust these are sufficient personages for M. Fekenhams purgation and discharge against your false accusation. Well I beseech almighty God, that Master Fekenham may now at the length after seven years imprisonment, be made partaker of such deeds and doings, as he then showed unto other men: And now let us proceed on, to the residue of your book. The .5. Division. M. Horn. If I knew you not right well, I should marvel, that you shame not to affirm, saying: I do here presently therefore offer myself to receive a corporal Oath: and further I shall presently swear etc. Seeing that you never made to me any motion of such an offer, neither did I at anytime require you to take any Oath. You think and are so persuaded in conscience (if a man may trust you) that the queens highness is the only supreme governor of this Realm, and of all her dominions and countries, and hath under God, the sovereignty and rule over all manner of persons, borne within her dominions of what estate either Ecclesiastical or Temporal so ever they be. Whereunto I add this consequent which doth necessarily follow, Ergo: Your holy father the Pope is not (as you think in your conscience) the supreme governor over her highness dominions, nor hath the sovereignty or rule under God over any persons borne within the same. The queens majesty must needs herein take you but for a dissembling flatterer, in that you will seem sometime in general speech, to attribute unto her the only Supremacy under God, over her dominions and subjects which you mean not, for within a while after in plain words you deny the same. And your holy Father will give you his curse, for that being his sworn Advocate, at the first entry into the plea, you give from him the whole title of his unjust claim, to wit, the supreme governance over the queens highness dominions and people. You must now therefore make some shift, and call to remembrance one sleight or other by some distinction, whereby to avoid your holy Father's curse, that you may continue under his blessing. You will expound your meaning by restraining the supreme government of the Queen's majesty only in causes Temporal, and not in causes or things Ecclesiastical. But th●s distinction cometh to late, and will do you no ease, for that in both these kinds of causes you have already granted unto her the only supreme government: and that as you verily think, persuaded in conscience: whereupon you offer to receive a corporal Oath upon the Evangelists. And this your grant passed from you by these words: Over all manner persons borne within her dominions of what estate either Ecclesiastical or Temporal so ever they be: In this that you grant unto her highness thouly supreme rule over the Lay and Ecclesiastical persons: you have also concluded therewith in all causes both Ecclesiastical and Temporal, which is plainly and firmly proved by this argument following. A supreme governor or ruler is one, who hath to oversee, guide, care, provide, order and direct the things under his government and rule, to that end, and in (.20.) The 20. untruth For not in actions belonging properly to the things governed, but belonging properly to the governor and to his end those actions which are appointed and do properly belong to the subject or thing governed. So that in every government and rule there are three things necessarily concurrant: the Governor, the Subject, or matter governed, and the object or matter whereabout and wherein the government is occupied and doth consist. But the queens highness, by your own confession, is the only supreme governor over all manner persons Ecclesiastical borne within her dominions: Ergo: Her highness thonly supreme governor over such persons hath to oversee, guide, care, provide, order, and direct them to that end and in those actions which are appointed and do (21.) The 21. untruth proved to be so by M. Horn himself▪ as it shall strait appear. properly belong to Ecclesiastical persons. And so by good consequent you have renounced all foreign government. For this exclusive, Only, doth shut out all other from supreme government over Ecclesiastical persons: and also ye do (.22) The 22. untruth M. Fekenham affirmed no such thing affirm the queens majesty to be supreme governor in those actions which are appointed, and that do properly belong to Ecclesiastical persons, which are no other but things or causes Ecclesiastical. The 4. Chapter: how princes be supreme governors over all ecclesiastical persons (their subjects) and yet not in all Ecclesiastical matters. HEre is first a worshipful reason, and cause to marvel at M. Fekenham, that he should by writing presently offer himself to receive an oath, because, he never made mention of any such Oath before, neither any such was at any time of him required. surely, this is as great a cause to wonder at, as to see a goose go barefoot. But now will he play the worthy Logician and M. Fekenham, will he nil he, shallbe driven by fine force of a Logical definition to grant the Queen to be supreme head in all causes ecclesiastical, for that he granteth her to be supreme head of all persons both ecclesiastical and temporal. Because (saith he) the supreme governor or ruler is he, that ordereth and directeth all actions belonging and appointed to the subjects: and thereby inferreth, that the queens Majesty is supreme and only governor even in those actions that belong to ecclesiastical persons, which are causes ecclesiastical. But as good skill as this man hath in Logic, (which is correspondent to his divinity) he hath brought us forth a faulty and a vicious definition. The definition of a Supreme Governor. For a Supreme governor is he, that hath the chief government of the thing governed, not in those Actions that may any way properly belong to the Subject or thing governed (as M. Horn saith) but in those Actions that belong to the end, whereunto the governor tendeth. Which may well be, although he have not the chief government in all the actions of the thing governed: but in such actions as properly appertain to him as a subject to that governor. For in one man many rulers may and do daily concur, which in some sense may every one be called his Supreme governors. As if he be a servant, the master: and if he be a son in that respect the Father: and if his father and master dwell in a city, the Mayor also, is his Fathers and masters, and so his chief governor to, for things concerning the civil government of the city. And of all these the prince chief and supreme governor, as they be subjects. Otherwise the prince doth not intermeddle with the father's office, in dutifulness dew unto him by his son, nor with the master, for that government, he hath upon his servant: How the prince is the Supreme head and governor of all people. no more then with the scholemayster for the government of his scholars, and their actions, or the master of the ship for the actions and doings of the mariners, otherwise then any of these offend the positive Laws of the realm: and so hath the prince to do with him as his subject, or when he shall have need to use them for the comen wealth, wherein as subjects and members of the said comen wealth they must to him obey. Much like it is with the Spiritual men, which be also members of the said comen wealth, and therefore in that respect subject to the prince and his laws: and so is it true, that the prince is supreme governor, of all persons aswell spiritual as temporal: but that therefore he should also be Supreme governor in all their actions, will no more follow than of the actions of them before rehearsed: Yea much less. For the better understanding whereof it is to be known, that before the coming of Christ, Kings were there many, but Christian Kings none. Many comen wealths were there, but no Christian comen wealth, th'end of the temporal government. nor yet godly common wealth properly to speak, saving among the jews, but civil and politic. The end and final respect of the which civil commenwelth was and is, under the regiment of some one, or more persons to whom the multitude committeh themself to be ordered and ruled by, to preserve themselves from all inward and outward injuries, oppressions and enemies: and further to provide not only for their safety and quietness, but for their wealth and abundance, and prosperous maintenance also. To this end tendeth and reacheth, and no further the civil government: and to the preservation, tuition and furtherance of this end, chief serveth the Prince, as the principal and most honourable person of the whole state, which thing is common as well to the heathenish, as to the Christian government. But over and beside, yea and above this, is there an other government instituted and ordained by Christ, in a spiritual and a mystical body, of such as he graciously calleth to be of his kingdom, which is the kingdom of the faithful, The end of the spiritual government. and so consequently of heaven, whereunto Christian faith doth conduct us. In the which spiritual body, commonly called Christ's Catholic Church, there are other heads and rulers then civil Princes: as Vicars, Persons, Bishops, archbishops, patriarchs, and over them all the Pope. Whose government chiefly serveth for the furtherance and increase of this spiritual Kingdom, as the civil Princes do for the temporal. Now as the soul of man incomparably passeth the body: so doth this kingdom the other, and the rulers of these, the rulers of the other: And as the body is subject to the soul, so is the civil kingdom to the spiritual. To the which kingdom as well Princes as other are engrafted by baptism, and become subjects to the same by spiritual generation, as we become subjects to our Princes, by course and order of nativity which is a terrestrial generation. Further now, as every man is naturally bound, to defend, maintain, increase, adorn, and amplify, his natural country: so is every man bound, and much more to employ himself to his possibility, toward the tuition, and defence, furtherance and amplification of this spiritual kingdom, and most of all Princes themselves, Why Princes are most bound to aid the spiritual power. as such which have received of God more large help and faculty toward the same, by reason of their great authority and temporal sword, to join the same, as the case requireth with the spiritual sword. And so all good Princes do and have done, aiding and assisting the Church decrees, made for the repression of vice and errors, and for the maintenance of virtue and true religion, not as supreme Governors themselves in all causes spiritual and temporal: but as faithful Advocates in aiding and assisting the spiritual power: that it may the sooner and more effectually take place. For this supreme government can he not have, unless he were himself a spiritual man, no more than can a man be a master of a ship that never was mariner: a Mayor that never was Citizen. His principal government resteth in civil matters, and in that respect, as I have said, he is supreme Governor of all persons in his Realm, but not of all their actions, but in such sense as I have specified, and least of all of the actions of Spiritual men, especially of those that are most appropriate to them, which can not be, unless he were himself a Spiritual man. Wherefore we have here two Untruths: the one in an untrue definition, the other in saying that the Prince is the supreme governor in all causes spiritual, yea even in those that be most peculiarly belonging to spiritual men, beside a plain contradiction of M. Horn directly overthrowing his own assertion here. Fol. 96.97 The bishoply rule and government of God's Church (saith M. Horn) consisteth in these three points: to feed the Church with God's word▪ to minister Christ's Sacraments, and to bind and lose. To govern the Church▪ saith he, after this sort, belongeth to the only office of Bishops and Church ministers, and not to Kings, Queens, and Princes. The like he hath after ward. Now than these being by his own confession the actions that properly belong to ecclesiastical persons, and the princes by his said confession having nothing to do therewith: how is it then true that the prince is the only supreme head and governor in causes ecclesiastical, ye in those that do properly belong to persons ecclesiastical? Or by what colour may it be defended, that this saying is not plain contradictory and repugnant, M. Horn contrary to himself. to this Later saying which we have alleged, and whereof we shall speak more largely when we come to the said place? Thus ye see, M. Horn walketh like a barefoted man upon thorns, not knowing where to tread. The .6. Division. Pag. 5. a. M. Fekenham. And of my part I shall swear to observe and perform my obedience and subjection with no less loyalty and faithfulness unto her highness, than I did before unto Queen Mary, her highness Sister of famous memory, unto whom I was a sworn Chaplain and most bounden. M. Horn. Like an (.23.) The 23 untruth slanderous For M. Feckenham so did, not as an unfaithful subject: but as a repentant Catholic. unfaithful subject contrary to your Oath made to King Henry, and continued all the reign of King Edward, you helped to spoil Queen Mary of famous memory of a (24.) The 24. untruth. This is no part at all of the Princes royal power principal part of her royal power, right and dignity which she at the beginning of her reign had, enjoyed, and put in ure The same obedience and subjection, with the like loyalty and faithfulness, ye will swear to observe and perform to Queen Elizabeth: but she thanketh you for nought, she will none of it, she hath espied you, and thinketh, ye proffer her to much wrong. Stapleton. M. Horn would have a man onhis bemired, to wallow there stil. Neither is it sin to break an unlawful oath, but rather to continue in the same, as wicked King Herod did: Now if M. Horn can once by any means prove this government to be a principal part, or any part at all of the Queen's royal power, I dare undertake that not only M. Fekenham, but many more, that now refuse, shall most gladly take the said Oath. He were surely no good subject, that would wissh her highness any wrong: neither can the maintenance of the Catholic faith whereof she beareth the title of a defender, be counted any injury to her highness. Nether is it to be thought but if there had been any wrong or injury herein done to the Crown, some Christian Prince or other in the world would have ere this, ones in this thousand years and more, espied it, and reform it too. M. Fekenham. The .7. Division. Pag. 5 a. And touching the rest of the Oath, whereunto I am required presently to swear, viz. That I do utterly testify and declare in my conscience, that the Queen's highness is the only supreme Governor of this Realm, as well in all Spiritual or Ecclesiastical things or causes, as Temporal: I shall then of my part be in like readiness, to receive the same, when your L. shallbe able to make declaration unto me, how and by what means, I may swear thereunto, without committing of a very plain and manifest perjury: which of my part to be committed, it is damnable sin, and against the express word of God written, levit. Cap. 9 Non periurabis in nomine meo, nec pollues nomen Dei tui. And of your part to provoke me or require the same, it is no less damnable offence. S. Augustine in witness thereof saith: Ille qui hominem provocat ad iurationem, etc. He who doth provoke an other man to swear, and knoweth that he shall forswear himself, he is worse than a murderer: because the murderer slayeth but the body, and he slayeth the soul, and that not one soul, but two, as the soul of him whom he provoketh to perjury, and his own soul also by ministering the occasion thereof. And the points of this Oath whereunto I can not presently swear without most plain and manifest perjury, are these four following. M. Horn. Mutato nomine, de te fabula narratur. As in that which goeth before, you covertly uttered many untruths, although sometime ye stoumble on the truth against your will: so in the rest you fall to plain and manifest untruths: lest men should not perceive what you are. You were never required by me to swear, and therefore this is an impudent kind of dealing, to say: whereunto I am presently required to swear, etc. I had none authority nor commission to require the Oath of you, neither might I tender it unto you without peril to my self: you being committed unto me by the most honourable Council, without whose order I could attempt no such matter. You have already showed in plain matter, although not in plainness of speech, and that as you think, and are persuaded in conscience, that her highness is the supreme governor, so well in causes Ecclesiastical as temporal. For having supremacy over the Ecclesiastical person, the same being not otherwise person Ecclesiastical, but in respect of Ecclesiastical functions, things and causes annexed and properly belonging to Ecclesiastical persons: she hath the Supremacy over the person in Ecclesiastical functions, things and causes, these being the only matter or object whereabout or wherein the rule over an Ecclesiastical person is occupied and doth consist. This seemeth to be your glory amongst your friends, that you make me an offer, to receive this part of the Oath, when I shall be able to declare by what means you may swear without committing plain and manifest perjury: * If your ability be no better than here appeareth, it is none all all. Mine ability herein shall appear in mine answer to your four points: God make you as ready to perform for duties sake, as ye will seem ready to offer, wherebily to purchase to yourself a glorious estimation. But wherefore did you not make this offer unto me, either by word or writing all the time of your abode with me? You pla●e now after your return into (.25.) The .25. untruth. The Tower is not M. Fekenhans hold: For it holdeth him, not he it. your hold, as you did after the Parliament before you came out of the Tower to me. When you saw the end of the Parliament, and understood right well that the Oath was not like to be tendered unto you, than sent you copies of the book devised for the answer touching the Oath, abroad to your friends, to declare your constancy and readiness, to refuse the Oath, whereby they might be the rather induced, to continue their good opinion conceived of you, and also pay your charges weekly in the Tower sent unto you (.26.) The .26. untruth. The queens highness words in the Tower, can testify the contrary. every saturday by your servant, who wrote and delivered the copies abroad, as you told me yourself. Now you are returned again into the Tower, and perceiving that your friends (as you gave them just cause) have some (.27.) 27. A heap of slanderous and railing untrute. mistrust of your revolt and wavering inconstancy, whereby your estimation and fame, with their service to your God the belly is decayed, you have devised to set abroad the self same book again that you did before, and to the self same end, altering or changing nothing at all, saving that you have given it a new name and Title, and seem as in this place, as though ye spoke to me by these words: when your L. etc. When as in very deed, there was never any such word spoken or written to me: and in the book you delivered to me, your speech is directed to the Commissioners, and not to me in these words, When ye the queens highness commissioners shallbe able, etc. The fifth Chapter of other private doings between M. Fekenham and M. Horn. YEt once again M. Horn taketh in hand M. Fekenhans grant which may well be granted, and by his great cunning and skilfulness, will thereof infer as before, that, that may not be granted. But now he spiteth in his hand and taketh faster hold, as he thinketh, and seeing the lightness of his former reason, would now give greater weight to it with a new fetch, but yet as light and as weak as the other, and employing manifest contradiction as before, and to be answered as before. For albeit a man is not called an Ecclesiastical person, but in respect of some Church cause and function, which we freely grant to M. Horn, yet is he never a whit the nearer of his purpose, How a spiritual man is underneath the Prince and how he is not, unless he can prove that there were also no other respect, why he should be under the Prince, but for causes Ecclesiastical. For as we have said, he is a subject also as other lay men are, and a member beside of the civil common wealth, in consideration whereof the Prince hath to do with him, and not properly as he is a Spiritual man, though both respects be concurrant in one person and he be named of the worthier. As if M. Robert Horn were a lay man and a Painter the Queen properly hath not to do with him as a Painter (unless it were for some law or order concerning Painters) but as Robert Horn her highness subject, and borne under her obeisance. So should the Queen have also to do with you, yea in case ye were the true Bishop of Winchester, but not properly as Bishop, or for your Bishoply function, for the which ye are immediately under your archbishop and the Pope, but considering you as a subject otherwise, or as Bishop either touching your temporalties and no farther. For the which the true Bishops also do to their Prince their Homage. But what should I further reason with this man, which (as I have said) hath removed the Prince from all superiority concerning the mere Bishoply or Priestly function, and so with a notable contradiction hath full worshipfully concluded against himself, eased M. Fekenham also for taking any oath, that the Queen is supreme head in all causes temporal and spiritual? Here remaineth now for the residue nothing greatly to be answered, but only to show how M. Horn doth accumulate a huge heap of untruths, as in noting in M. Feckenham an impudent kind of dealing: for writing: whereunto I am presently required to swear: which may be truly verified, seeing as M. Horn himself confesseth it was so written in that copy that should have been delivered to the commissioners at such time as they should have presently tendered M. Fekenham the oath: and in the same form and fashion delivered to M. Horn: An heap● of untruths wherewith M. Fekenham is falsely charged. and nothing altered in the later copy but that this word commissioners is turned into the Lord bishop of Winchester: neither doth M. Fekenham say whereunto I am required presently to swear of your L. as he saith afterward: when your L. shallbe able etc. And therefore there is no manner of impudence or untruth in the matter at all: how so ever it be, this matter is nothing appertaining to the state of the principal question, and of small importance, nothing deserving to be noted as an impudent dealing, but rather this kind of speech agreeth with M. Horns dealing here following, who speaketh of M. Feckenham, without any regard so loosely and lewdly as to say, he maketh his belly his God, that his friends mistrusted his revolting and wavering inconstancy, that he sent forth copies of the book (as M. Horn termeth the schedule) when he saw the oath should not be tendered him, and such like. Where are now in this your false tale, the dew circumstances that ye nedelessely required of M. Feckenham most necessary here to have been observed of you? surely the rest is as true, as that ye writ of his servant, and of his charges weakly defrayde by his friends, and brought in by his servant which is (as far as I can understand) stark false. Why do ye not I pray you, in these and your other blind, fond, foolish, and false guesses and surmises make your tale more apparante and cowlorable, clothing it with some convenient and due circumstances, that ye do so much harp upon against M. Fekenham? Ye be now again blindly and lewdly harping upon his revolt, to slander and deface him. Ye say he sent out his copies when he understood right well, that the oath was not like to be tendered him. How prove ye it good Sir? He and other catholics made their certain account that after the end of the parliament, the oath should have been offered them: what was the cause it was not exacted, I certainly know not: were it for the great plague that immediately reigned and raged at London (I pray God it were no plague to punish the strange proceedings in that parliament against his holy Church, and to put us in remembrance of a greater plague imminente and hanging over us, in this or in an other world unless we repent) or were it, by special order, goodness, and mercy of the queens Majesty, I can not tell. But this well I wot, After God's plague M. Horn began his plague. no gramercy to you sir, who so sore thirsted and longed for the catholics blood. And therefore as soon as Gods plague ceased, thought to have yourself plagued the catholics, exacting the Oath of M. Doctor Bonner, Bishop of London. But lo here now began your, and your fellows the protestant bishops wonderful plague and scourge, that through your own seeking and calling this man to the oath, the matter so marvelously fell out, that ye and your fellows, as ye were no church bishops whose authority ye had forsaken and defied: so you were also no parliament bishops. Upon the which (a pitiful case) your state, your honour, your worship, and bishoply authority, yea faith and all now resteth and dependeth. A marvelous providence of God, that while ye could not be content to spoil the true bishops of their worldly estate and honour, but must needs have their poor life and all, you yourself were found to be no bishops, no not by the very statutes of the realm. But let these things now pass, and hearken we to Master horns blast. The 8. Division. Pag. 6. b. M. Fekenham. First is, that I must by a book Oath utterly testify, that the Queen's highness is the only supreme governor of this realm, and that aswell in all Spiritual or Ecclesiastical things or causes, as Temporal. But to testify any thing upon a book Oath, no man may possibly therein avoid perjury, except he do first know the thing which he doth testify, and whereof he beareth witness and giveth testimony. And touching this knowledge, that the Queen's majesty, is the only supreme governor aswell in Spiritual or Ecclesiastical causes as in Temporal, besides that I have no such knowledge, I know no way nor mean whereby I should have any knowledge thereof. And therefore of my part to testify the same upon a book Oath, being without (as I am in deed) all knowledge, I cannot without committing of plain and manifest perjury. And herein I shall join this issue with your L. that when your L. shallbe able, either by such order of government, as our Saviour Christ left behind him in his Gospel and new testament, either by the writing of such learned Doctors both Old and new, which have from age to age witnessed the order of Ecclesiastical government in Christ's Church, either by the general Counsels, wherein the right order of Ecclesiastical government in Christ's Church, hath been most faithfully declared and showed from time to time: or else by the continual practice of the like Ecclesiastical government, in some one Church or part of all Christendom. When your Lordship shall be able by any of these four means, to make proof unto me, that any Emperor, or Empress, King, or Queen, may claim or take upon them any such government, in spiritual or ecclesiastical causes, I shall herein yield, and with most humble thanks reckon myself well satisfied, and shall take upon me the knowledge thereof, and be ready to testify the same upon a book Oath. M. Horn. The reason or argument that moveth you, not to testify upon a book Oath the Q. Supremacy in causes ecclesiastical, is this: No man may testify by Oath that thing whereof he is ignorant and knoweth nothing, without committing perjury. But you neither know that the Q. highness is the only supreme governor aswell in causes Ecclesiastical▪ as Temporal: neither yet know you any way or mean whereby to have any knowledge thereof. Therefore to testify the same upon a book Oath, you can not without committing of plain and manifest perjury. For answer to the Minor or second Proposition of this argument: Although I might plainly deny, that you are without all knowledge, and utterly ignorant both of the matter and the way or mean, how to come by knowledge thereof, and so put you to your proof, wherein I know, you must needs fail: yet will I not so answer by plain negative, Thom. Aquin. quaest. 1. de malo. but by distinction or division of ignorance. And so for your better excuse, declare in what sort you are ignorant and without all knowledge. There are three kinds of ignorantes, the one of simplicity, the other of wilfulness, and the third of malice. Of the first sort you cannot be, for you have had long time, good opportunity, much occasion, and many ways whereby to come to the knowledge hereof. Yea, you have known and professed openly by deed and word the knowledge hereof many years together. For you did (28.) The 28. untruth For no man can know that which is not true. know, acknowledge, and confess, this supreme authority in causes Ecclesiastical to be in King Henry the eight and his heirs, when your Abbay of Eueshan, by common consent of you and the other Monks there under your covent seal was of your own good wills without compulsion surrendered into his hands, and you, by his authority, reformed, forsook your * A rabblement of untruth foolish vow, and many (.29.) The 29. untruth Slanderous and reproachful. horrible errors, and superstitions of Monkery, and became a secular Priest, and Chaplain to D. Bell, and afterward to D. Bonner, and so during the life of King Henry the eight, did agnize, profess and teach openly in your sermons the king's Supremacy in causes Ecclesiastical. This knowledge remained steadfastly in you all the time of king Edward also. For although you were in the Tower in his time, that was not for any doubt you made of his Supremacy, for that you still agnized: but for other points of religion (.30.) The .30. untruth, This was not the cause of his enprisonment, as shall appear. touching the ministration of the Sacraments, whereunto you also agreed at the last, & promised to profess & preach the same in open auditory wheresoever you should be appointed (.31.) The .31. untruth slanderous he was not delivered upon any promise of recantation, but to be disputed withal, Whereupon a right worshipful gentleman procured your deliverance forth of the Tower, and so were you at liberty, never mencioning any doubt in this matter: but agnizing the Prince's supremacy in causes ecclesiastical. Wherefore I may safely say, that the ignorance and want of knowledge which you pretend in your Minor Proposition, is not of Simplicity, and therefore must needs be of wilfulness, or malice, or mixed of both. The way and mean whereby to have this ignorance removed, you assign with this issue, that when I prove unto you, by any of the four means, that any Emperor, or empress, King or Queen may take upon them any such government in spiritual or ecclesiastical causes, them you will yield, take upon you the knowledge thereof, and be ready to testify the same by book Oath. Truly, I have often and many times proved this same that you require, and by the self same means in such sort unto you, that you had (.32.) nothing to say to the contrary. And yet nevertheless you continue still in your wilful and malicious ignorance, The 32. untruth mere slanderous, as may well appear by this your book. Sapien. 1. which causeth me to fear that this sentence of the holy ghost will be verified in you: In malevolam animam non introibit sapientia. Yet I will once again prove after your desire, even as it were by putting you in remembrance of those things which by occasions in conference, I often and many times reported unto you, whereof I know you are not simply ignorant. The 6. Chapter, defending M. Fekenham and others of wilful and malicious ignorance for not taking the Oath. NOw are M. Fekenham and M. Horn come to couple and join together in the principal matter. M. Fekenham first saith, he neither knoweth this kind of supremacy that M. Horn avoucheth, nor yet any way how to achieve or obtain to any such knowledge. M. Horn saith he might well put M. Fekenham to his proof that he is not ignorant. But by the way, I trow of some meritorious supererogation, or as one fearing no ieberdy, he adventureth the proof himself that M. Fekenham is not ignorant of this supremacy, and further to bind M. Fekenham the deaper to him for his exceeding kindness, The gentle and loving ha●te of M. Horn. will show for M. Fekenhams better excuse (o gentle and loving heart) that M. Fekenham is not ignorant of simplicity, but of wilfulness and plain malice. As touching this threefold ignorance, by M. Horn alleged out of the books of S. Thomas, Tho. aqui. de malo quast. 3. as I will not stick with him for that distinction, so unless he can prove by S. Thomas or otherwise that the ignorance of this surmised supremacy, includeth wilfulness or malice in M. Fekenham or any such like parson, the distinction may be true, but the cause never a deal furthered. surely if there were any ignorance in this point, it were such as S. Thomas and other call invincicle ignorance, by no study or diligence able to be put away, and therefore pardonable. But now the very author brought forth by M. Horn so fully and effectually dischargeth M. Fekenham of all three, and chargeth M. Horn with the worst of them three, that is wilfulness and malice, as he shall win small worship, by alleging of S. Thomas. In Opusc. contra errores Graecorum. Ostenditur etiam, quòd subesse Romano Pontifici sit de necessitate salutis. For S. Thomas saith plainly, that we are obliged and bound upon pain of everlasting damnation, to believe that the Pope is the only supreme head of the whole Church. And least M. Horn may reject his authority (which he can not well do using it himself) as a late Latin writer, and to much affectioned to the Pope, S. Thomas proveth his assertion by cyril and Maximus two notable and ancient writers among the Grecians. Wherefore it followeth, that neither M. Fekenham nor M. Horn, nor any other Christian man can know the contrary: being such an evident and a dangerous falsehood, as importeth eternal damnation. Nay, saith M. Horn, how can M. Feckenham pretend ignorance herein, when aswell in King Henry, as King Edward his days, he set forth in his open sermons this supremacy? And so do you now, good M. Horn, and yet none more ignorant, and farther from knowledge than you. For notwithstanding all your great brags and this your clerkly book, ye know not nor ever shall know, but that the Pope is the supreme head of the Church. Well ye may (as ye do) most falsely, and to your poor wretched soul, as well in this as in other points, most dangerously, No man can know an untruth. believe the contrary, but know it you can not unless it were true. For knowledge is only of true things, and as the philosopher saith: scire est per causas cognoscere: And ye do no more know it, than the other matter that ye here also affirm of M. Feckenham, that he promised to profess and preach in open auditory in King Edward's days, certain points, touching the ministration of the Sacraments, contrary to his former opinion: And upon such promise was discharged out of the tower: which yet ye know not to be true, for it is stark false. And I pray you how fortuned it, that his promiss so made to recant was never required of him, being the only thing that was sowght for at his hands? The cause of his imprisonment then, as I understand by such as well knoweth the whole matter, was not about the ministration of the Sacraments, but touching the matter of justification, by only faith and the fast of Lent: like as it doth appear in the Archbishop of Caunterburies' records, The cause of M. Fekenhams imprisonment in K. Edwards days. he being therefore in a solemn session held at Lambeth hall convented before M. Cranmer, than archbishop of Caunterbury, and other commissioners appointed for that matter. By the examination of the which records, you shall be convinced of your untruth and error therein as in all the rest, I dowbt not by God's help. And touching the right worshipful gentleman ye mean of, that is Sir Philip Hobbey, which did as ye say, upon M. Fekenhams promise and submission procure his deliverance out of the tower: As it is very true he did so: So it is false and untrue, that he did the same upon any promise of recantation or of preaching in open auditory, before made of his part. But the very intent of the borrowing of M. Feckenham for a time out of the tower, like as he said himself, was, that he should dispute, reason, and have conference, with certain learned men touching matters of religion then in controversy: And according thereunto, the first day of disputation, was betwixt them and him, at the right honourable my Lord earl of Bedford's house then lodged over the gate at the Savoy. Disputatious had with M. Feckenham. The second day was at the house of Sir William Cicill Knight, Secretary to the queens highness, at Westminster in the canon rue. The third day was at the white Friars, in the house of Sir john Cheke Knight. In all the which conferences and disputations with many learned men, he was, the truth to confess, much made of, and most gently used. And this disputation so begun at London, did finish in Worcester shire, where, he was borne and had also a Benefice, by the mean whereof, and by the special appointment of Sir philipp Hobbie, he came before M. Hooper, then taken as Bishop of Worcester: where he charging M. Fekenham in the kings highness name to answer him, he kept four several and solemn disputations with him, beginning in his visitation at Parshor, and so finished the same in the Cathedral Church at Worcester. Where amongs many other, he found M. jewel, who was one of his apponents. The said M. Hoper was so answered by M. Fekenham, that there was good cause why he should be satisfied, and M. Fekenham dismissed from his trouble. As he had cause also to be satisfied by the answers of M. Henry jolife Deane of Bristol, Vide disputa: venerabilium sacerdotum, & Antuerp. impress. 1564. and M. Robert johnson: as may appear by their answers now extant in print. But the final end of all the foresaid disputations with M. Feckenham, was that by the foresaid Sir philipp Hobbey he was sent back again to the Tower, and there remained prisoner until the first year of Queen Marie. And here now may you perceive and see, M. Horn, how ye are overtaken, and with how many good witnesses in your untruth, concerning M. Fekenhams dimissing out of the Tower. A rabblement of your untruths here I will not, nor time will serve to discuss: as that Monasteries were surrendered with the Monk's goodwill, which for the most part might sing volens nolo: that their vows were foolish, and that they had many horrible errors. Marry one thing you say, that M. Fekenham, I think, will not deny, that he set forth this Supremacy, in his open sermons, in King Henry's days: which was not upon knowledge (as you without all good knowledge do gather) for knowledge can not match with untruth: but upon very ignorance, and lack of true knowledge and due consideration of the matter, being not so well known to the best learned of the Realm then, as it is now, to every man being but of mean learning. For this good, lo at the least, heresy worketh in the church, that it maketh the truth to be more certainly known, and more firmly and steadfastly afterward kept. So (as S. Austin saith) the matter of the B. Trinity was never well discussed, August. in Psal. 54. supper versum: Divisi sunt praeira. etc. until Arrians barked against it: The Sacrament of penance was never thoroughly handled, until the novatians began to withstand it. Neither the cause of Baptism was well discussed until the rebaptising Donatists arose and troubled the Church. And even so this matter of the Pope's Supremacy, and of the Princes, was at the first even to very learned men a strange matter, but is now to meanly learned, a well known and beaten matter. Sir Thomas More, whose incomparable virtue and learning, all the Christian world hath in high estimation, and whose wit Erasmus judged to have been such as England nor had, neither shall have, the like: and who for this quarrel which we now have in hand suffered death, for the preservation of the unity of Christ's Church, which was never, nor shallbe preserved, but under this one head: as good a man, and as great a clerk, and as blessed a Martyr as he was, See Sir Thomas More in a letter written to Sir Thomas Cromwell fol. 1426. & 1427. Sir Tho. Moor's first opinion of the Pope's primacy: albeit he ever well thought of this Primacy, and that it was at the least wise instituted by the corpse of Christendom for great urgent causes for avoiding of schisms: yet that this primacy was immediately institute of God (which thing all catholics now, specially such as have travailed in these late controverses do believe) he did not many years believe, until (as he writeth himself) he read in the matter those things that the King's highness had written in his most famous book against the heresies of Martin Luther: among other things he writeth thus. Surely after that I had read his grace's book therein, and so many other things as I have seen in that point by the continuance of this seven years sins and more, I have found in effect the substance of all the holy Doctors, The Pope's primacy instituted by God. fro S. Ignatius Disciple of S. john unto our own days both Latins and Greeks, so consonant and agreeing in that point, and the thing by such general Gouncels so confirmed also, that in good faith I never neither read nor heard any thing of such effect on the other side, that ever could lead me to think that my conscience were well discharged, but rather in right great peril, if I should follow the other side, and deny the primacy to be provided by God. It is the less marvel therefore, if at the first, for lack of mature and deep consideration, many good & well learned men otherwise, being not resolved whether this Primacy were immediately instituted by God, and so thinking the less danger to relent to the King's title, especially so terrible a law enacted against the deniers of the same, were and among them also Master Fekenham, carried away with the violence of this common storm and tempest. And at the first many of the convocation granted to agnize the King's supremacy, but quatenus de iure divino, that is, as far as they might by God's law. Which is now known clearly to stand against it. Though the Primacy were no● ordained of God, yet could it not be rejected by any one Realm. And although the Pope's Primacy were not grounded directly upon God's word, but ordained of the Church, yet could it not be abrogated, by the private consent of any one or few Realms: no more than the City of London can justly abrogate an act of Parliament. But whereas ye insult upon M. Fekenham, for that he was once entangled and wrapped in this common error, and would thereof enforce upon him a knowledge of the said error, and would have him persevere in the same: and once again to fall quite over the ears into the dirty dung of filthy schism and heresy, ye work with him both unskilfully and ungodly. And if good counsel might find any place in your hard stony heart, I would pray to God to mollify it, and that ye would with M. Fekenham heartily repent, and for this your great offence, schism, and heresy, as I doubt not he doth and hath done, follow S. Peter, who after he had denied Christ: Luc. 22. Exivit & flevit amarè, Went out and wept full bitterly. For surely whereas ye imagine that ye have in your conference proved the matter to M. Feckenham, so that he had nothing to say to the contrary, it is nothing but a loud lewd lie upon him: and that easily appeareth, seeing that after all this your long travail, wherein ye have to the most uttered all your skill, ye are so far from full answering his scruples and stays, M. Feckenham more confirmed than he was before, even by M. horns book. that they seem plainly to be unanswerable, and you yourself quite overborne and overthrown, and that by your own arguments and inductions, as we shall hereafter evidently declare. So that now M. Fekenham may seem to have good cause much more than before, to rest in the said stays and scruples. I may not here let pass M. Horn that you call this saying: In malevolam animam non introibit sapientia, Sap. 1. a sentence of the holy Ghost. That it is no less, we gladly confess it. But how dare you so pronounce of that saying, being written in the book of wisdom? That book, you wots well, your brethren of Geneva account for no Canonical Scripture at all, such as only are the sentences of the holy Ghost (to speak absolutely and properly) but in the notes before that book, and certain other which they call Apocrypha, do call them only, In the Genevian Bible● printed at Geneva An. 1562, books proceeding of godly men, not otherwise of force, but as they agree with the Canonical Scriptures, or rather are grounded thereon. In which sense not only those books, but the writings also of the Fathers, yea and of all other men, may be by your sentence, the sentence of the holy Ghost. And Brentius likewise in his Prolegomenis, Vide Hosium x Brent. li. 3 agreeth with the Genevian notes against M. Horn. Thus these fellows jar always among themselves, and in all their doctrines, fall into such points of discord, that in place of uniform tuning, they ruffle us up a black Sanctus, as the Proverb is: Quo teneam vultus mutantem Prothea nodo? The .9. Division. Pag 8. a. M. Horn. You require a proof hereof, that an Emperor or Empress, King or Queen, may claim or take upon them any such government (meaning as the Queen's Majesty our Sovereign doth now challenge and take upon her) in Spiritual or Ecclesiastical causes. (.33.) The .33. untruth. employing a contradiction to your former answer made to M. Fek. as shall appear. For answer I say, they ought to take upon them such government, therefore they may lawfully do it. The former part is found true by the whole discourse of the holy Scriptures both of the old and new Testament: by the testimony of the Doctors in Christ's Church: by the General Counsels: and by the practice of Christ's Catholic Church throughout all Christendom. The .7. Chapter opening a plain Contradiction of M. Horns. Master Fekenham, as well at his abode with you, as sins his return to the Tower, at such time as he enjoyed the free liberty thereof, hath as I certainly understand, declared to some of his friends, that in your conference with him for a resolute answer to all the said scruples expressed in all the four points, ye did much lament, that the right meaning of the Oath, The first answer of M. Horn to M. Fekenham. had not been in season opened and declared unto him. When the only lack of the right understanding thereof, hath been the cause of such stays. Whereas the Queens Ma. meaning in that Oath is far otherwise, than the express words are, as they lie verbatim: like as it doth well appear by her highness interpretation made thereof in her injunctions. Of the which matter we shall be occasioned to entreat more at large hereafter. But now after two years breathing ye frame an other answer quite jarring from the first, affirming that the Queen must take upon her such kind of regiment, M. Horns second answer contrary to the first. without any mollifying or restraint. And this ye will, as ye say, avouch by Scriptures, Fathers, Counsels, and the continual practice of the Church. Both your said answers being so contrary one to the other, what certain and sure knowledge may M. Fekenham, by right reason take and gather thereof to his contentation and satisfaction of his mind in these matters, when by such diversity of answers, what other thing else may he justly think, than thus with himself? That if you after so many and so fair promises, failed to open the very truth unto him, in your first answer: what better assurance should he conceive, of your truth in this your second answer? For if by dissimulation the truth of the matter was covertly hid from him in the first answer, what better truth may he boldly look for in this your second answer: they being not both one, but variable and diverse? S. Gregory Nazianzene saith: Verun quod est, unum est: Truth is simple and uniform. mendatium autem est multiplex.. The thing, saith he, which is true, is always one, and like unto itself, whereas the lie, the cloaked and counterfeit thing is in itself variable and divers. By the which rule here given, by so learned & grave a Father: I am here in the beginning put to knowledge by the variety of your answers, that they cannot be both true. But if the one be true, the other must be false: and thereof such a distrust justly gathered, that I may conclude none of them both to be true, but both of them to be deceivable and false. For the proof and trial of this my conclusion, I refer me to your scriptures, Fathers, Counsels, practise of the Church, that ye would seem to rest upon: whereby nevertheless you yourself shall take a shameful foil and fall. Wherefore go on a God's name and bring forth your evidences. The .10. Division. Pag. ●. a. The holy Scriptures describing the conditions, and properties in a King, amongst other doth command, that he have by him the book of the la, (.34.) The .34. and (.35.) .35. untruth in false translating, and leaving out a part of the sentence material. and do diligently occupy himself in reading thereof, to the end he may thereby learn to fear the Lord his God (that is, to have the fear of God planted within himself in his own heart) to keep all the words, and to accomplish in deed all the ordinances, or (as the old translation hath it) all the ceremonies by Cod commanded (that is) to govern in such sort (.36.) The .36. untruth. T●e gloss. ordinar. hath no such thing. That he cause by his princely authority, his subjects also to become Israelites. To wit, men that see, know, and understand the will of God. Redressing the perversues of such as swerver from God's ordinances or ceremonies. Whereupon it is, that God doth command the Magistrate, that he make (37) The .37. Untruth. The place of the Deuteronomy flatly belied. diligent examination of the doctrine taught by any, and that he do sharply punish both the teachers of false and superstitious religion, with the followers, and also remove quite out of the way all manner of evil. The .9. Chapter, concerning the King's duty expressed in the Deuteronomie. GO on I say in God's name, M. Horn, and prosecute your plea stoutly: God send you good speed. And so he doth, even such as ye, and the honesty of your cause deserve. And at the very first entry of your plea causeth you, and your clerkly and honest dealing, forth with to your high commendation so to appear, that even the first authority that ye handle of all the holy Scripture plainly discovereth you, and causeth you to be espied: and openeth as well your fidelity, as the weakness of your whole cause: the which even with your own first blast is quite overblown. Your infidelity appeareth in the curtalling of your text, and leaving out the words, that immediately go before, those that ye allege: beside your unskilfulness (if it be not done rather of perversity and malice) concurrant with your infidelity. M. horns unskilfulness Your unskilfulness which is the least matter, standeth in that ye say the King is commanded to have by him the book of the Law. Your text saith not so Sir, but Describet sibi Deuteronomium legis huius in volumine. Deut. 17. He shall write out this second Law in a book: In the great Bible dedicated to King Edward the 6 printed 1549. As Edmund Beck, a man of your sect, truly hath translated. Well, let the King read in God's name, not only that book, but all the whole Bible beside: It is a worthy and a commendable study for him. But let him beware, that this sweet honey be not turned into poison to him, and least under this pleasant bait of God's word, he be suddenly choked with the topical and pestiferous translation: wherewith ye have rather perverted, then translated the Bible printed at Geneva, and in other places: and with your false dangerous damnable gloss, where with you have corrupted and watered the same, and made it as it were of pleasant wine most sour vinegar. The only remedy and help to eschew and avoid this danger is, to take this book and other holy writings faithfully translated at the priests hands, as they from time to time have received them, and after such order as your own text appointeth, saying: When he is set upon the seat of his kingdom, he shall write him out this second Law in a book, taking a copy of the Priests, of the levitical tribe. Which later words ye have, because they make directly against you, quite left out. And then immediately followeth how he shall busily read the said book and so forth. If this order had of Late years been kept, and that Princes and other had taken the Bible as it is, and ever hath been, of the priests of the Catholic Church (orderly and lawfully succeeding one the other, as the Levites did) read, tawght, and expounded, as well in Greek and Hebrew, as in Latin, these errors and heresies should never have taken so deep a root, as they have now cawght. Neither is this place only meant, that the King should take the bare lettre, but rather the exposition withal of the said Priests. For what were the King the better or any man else, for the bare lettre, if he had not also as ordinary a way for his direction, in the understanding, as he had provided him, for to receive a true and an incorrupted copy? Both, the books of scripture and th'exposition must be taken at the priests hands. Where of we may see the practice in all ages in the Catholic Church: whereof this place is the very shadow and figure. For as the Protestants themselves are forced by plain words to confess, that they know not the true word or book of God, but by the Church: which from time to time delivered these books: even so by all reason and learning, they should also confess, that the Church can no more be deceived in delivering the sense of the said word, then in delivering the word itself. Which seeing they will not confess (for then were we forthwith at a point and end with all their errors and heresies) they must needs continue in the same. And so while every man in the exposition of scriptures followeth his own head be it never so worldly wise or circumspect, yet his own proper and peculiar, separated from the common advise and judgement of the whole Church: errors and heresies have and do daily grow, and will never cease more and more to increase and multiply, unless we take forth the lesson I have showed you, into this huge and infinite number, where with the world is now most miserably overwhelmed. Whereof the best remedy were, the exact observation of this place, that ye have so wilily and slightly slipped over. But most of all an other sentence in the very said chapter, and even the next to this ye allege, that the King as soon as he is chosen, another sentence in the said chapter by M. Horn alleged that over throweth all his boast shall bestow his study upon the reading of the Deuteronomy. Where Moses saith, that in doubtful causes the people should have their recourse to the said priests, and to the judge for the time being, meaning the high priest, of whom they should learn the truth: and are commanded to do accordingly, even under pain of death. Which place well weighed and considered, serveth to declare that I have said, that the King and others should receive not only the letter which (as S. Paul saith) doth kill, but the true and sincere meaning withal: wherein standeth the life of the letter, as the life of man with in his body, yea the eternal life (whereof by following lewd lying expositions of holy write, we are spoiled) at the priests hands. All which things serve directly for the primacy of them and not of Princes. Now therefore go on M. Horn, and being at your first encountering overblown and discomfited even with your own blast, think well whether it is likely that ye shall hereafter bring against your adversary any thing, whereby he should, as ye have falsely slandered him, in a manner yield, and be resolved on your side. For as for the next place, it enforceth no supremacy. We freely grant you, Deut. 13. that princes may sharply punish teachers of false and superstitious religion and idolatry (being thereof by the Priests instructed) which is the matter of your text. But then take head to yourself, Master Horn. For I say to you, that ye, and your fellows teach false and superstitious religion, Heresy is Idolatry. Vinc. Lyr. adversus profane. novit. Hieron. Zach. c. 13 isaiah c. 2. & 8. Augu. de vera religion. c. 38. many and detestable heresies, and so withal plain Idolatry. For heresy is called a very Idol, aswell by scripture, as in the exposition of the holy and learned fathers. And then are ye no simple idolater, but one that maintaineth a number of heresies: with no less offence towards God, than was the offence of the jews that your place speaketh of, when they set up afterward, their idols. And so have ye given sentence against yourself and have told the Magistrate his office. Neither think you that ye may illude your punishment, by the cowlour of the late statutes of the realm, which though in many things, serve for your wordelye indemnity: yet that ye may keep your Madge and bisshoprike withal, and may not be punished for the obstinate defence of such filthy marriage, and especially for the denying of the real presence in the blessed Sacrament of the altar, and for many other things that your sort daily write and preach, I trow it will be hard for you to bring forth any act of parliament, or any other convenient and sufficient plea. And as I grant this authority to punish, to the civil prince: so (that this inferreth a superiority in all causes aswell ecclesiastical as temporal) I flatly deny: and most of all that ye have proved your assertion, that princes ought to take upon them such pretenced regiment, whereof the very place by you induced, showeth as I have said, the plain contrary. Now that you bring out of Glosa ordinaria, that the Prince is commanded by his Princely authority, to cause his subjects to become Israëlites, it may perhaps be in some ordinary Gloze of Geneva his Notes, Bales, or some such like, but as for the old ordinary Latin Gloze, I am right sure (M. Horn) it hath no such thing. This therefore may well stand for an other untruth. As also that which immediately you allege out of Deuteron. 13. For in all that chapter or any other of that book, there is no such word to be found as you talk of. And thus with a full mess of Notorious untruths, you have furnished the first service brought yet to the table, concerning the principal matter. How be it perhaps though this be very course, yet you have fine dishes and dayntycates coming after. Let us then proceed. The .11. Division. Pag. 8. b. M. Horn. The best and most Godly Princes that ever governed God's people, did perceive and rightly understand this to be Gods will, that they ought to have an especial * Regard and chief rule: Care and Suprem government are ij. diverse things. regard and care for the ordering and setting forth of God's true Religion, and therefore used great diligence with fervent zeal to perform and accomplish the same. Moses' was the supreme governor over God's people (and was (.38.) The 38. untruth. For Moses was the chief priest, as shall be proved. not chief Priest or Bishop, for that was Aaron) whose authority, zeal, and care in appointing and ordering Religion amongst God's people, prescribing to all the people, yea to Aaron and the Levites, what, and after what sort, they should execute their functions, correcting and chastening the transgressors, is manifestly set forth in his book called the Pentateuche. The 9 Chapter: concerning the example of Moses. Master Horn willing to seam orderly to proceed, first bringeth in, Moses what scripture commandeth Princes to do, and then what they did. But as his scripture touching the commandment by him alleged nothing reacheth home to his pretenced purpose, but rather infringeth and plainly marreth the same as I have said, and fully standeth on our side: So I doubt nothing it will far with his examples, as of Moses, joshua, David, Solomon, josaphat, Ezechias, josias, and that they all come to short, and are to weak to justify his assertion. But here am I shrewdly encumbered, and in a great doubt what to do. For I could make a short but a true answer, that these examples are fully answered already, by M. Doctor Harding, and M. Dorman: All M. horns examples out of the old testament answered already by M. Doct. Harding and M. Dorman. and refer thee thither to thine and mine ease (gentle reader) and to the sparing, not only of pen, ynk, and paper, but of the time also, which of all things is most precious. But then I fear me, would step forth, if not M. Horn (a good simple plain man in his dealings) yet some other jolly, fine, fresh, pregnant, witty fellow, yea and bring me to the straits which way so ever I did tread. If I should as I said, send the reader to them, than should I hear, a fool, a dolt, an ass that can say nothing of his own. Then should the cause be slandered also, as so poor and weak, that it could bear no large and ample treatise, yea with all, that their answers were such, as I was ashamed of them, and therefore wilylye and wisely forbeared them, with many such other triumphant trieflinge toys. Again if I should repeat or inculcate their answers, than would Master Nowell or some other rush in upon me with his ruffling rhetoric that he useth against Master Dorman and Master Doctor harding with a precise account and calculation what either Master Dorman or Master Doctor harding borrowed of Hosius: or either of them two of the other. And what I have now borrowed of them both, or of either of them. And I should be likewise insulted upon, and our cause, as feeble and very weak, Psalm. 98 Hieron in iovinianum lib. 1. Greg Nazian. in oration. de Moyse & Aaron. & in orat. habita in praesentia fratris Basilij, etc. Philo judeus de vita Moysi lib. 3. Exod 24 Ibidem. Exod. 29. & 35. slandered also. But on the one side least any of the good brethren should surmise upon my silence any such distrust, I will compendiously as the matter shall require abridge their answers: and that Master Horn shall think that our stuff is not all spent, I shall on the other side for a surplusage, adjoin some other things to hour opponent accommodate. So that I trust either answer shallbe sufficient to achieve our purpose against Master Horn. Then for Moses I say with Master Doctor harding, and Saint augustine, that he was a priest aswell as a Prince, I say the same with Master Dorman, with Philo judeus, with Saint Hierom, and with Saint Hieroms' Master Gregory Nazianzene. And so consequently Master Horn, that Moses' example serveth not your turn (unless ye will king Henry the eight, and his son king Edward, yea and our gracious Queen to be a priest to) but rather quite overturneth your assertion. And think you Master Horn, that the queens authority doth jump agree, with the authority of Moses in causes ecclesiastical? Then may she preach to the people as Moses did. Then may she offer sacrifices as Moses did. Then may she consecrated Priests, as Moses did consecrated Aaron and others. Deut. 34. Then may it be said of the imposition of her hands as was said of Moses. josua the son of Nun was full of the spirit of wisdom: for Moses had put his hand upon him. It must needs therefore follow, that Moses was a priest, and that a high priest, which ye here full pevishly deny. I say now further with M. Dorman, that put the case, Moses were no priest, yet this example frameth not so smoothly and closely to your purpose as ye ween. For Moses was a prophet, and that such a prophet, as the like was not again. give me now Master Horn Princes Prophets, give me Princes, and Law makers by special order and appointment ordained of God, to whose words God certainly would have given as great authority, as he would and commanded to be given to Moses: and then perchance I will say, that ye say somewhat well to the purpose. Again Moses was such a special Prophet, and so singularly chosen of God to be heard and obeyed in all things, that he is in the holy scripture evidently compared to Christ himself: compared, I say, even in the office of teaching and instructing. Moses' in the Deuteronom foretelling the jews of a Messiah to come, saith: Deut. 18. The Lord thy God will raise thee up a Prophet from among thy own nation and of thy brethren such a one as myself, him thou shalt hear. And this so spoken of Moses in the old Law, is in the new testament avouched and repeated, first by S. Peter the chief Apostle, and next by S. Stephen the first Martyr, Act. 3. et 7. and applied to Christ. If then Christ must so be heard and obeyed of us, as was Moses of the jews, no doubt as Christ is a King, a Prophet, a Priest and a Bishop to us, so was Moses to them a Prince, a Prophet, a Priest and a Bishop. As Christ is of us to be heard and obeyed as well in all matters Ecclesiastical as Temporal (for no temporal Law can have force against the Law of Christ among Christian men) so was Moses to be heard and obeyed of the jews in matters and causes as well temporal as spiritual. For why? The Scripture is plain. Act. 7. Tanquam me ipsum audietis. You shall hear that Prophet even as myself. Show us M. Horn any Prince in the new testament so conditioned and endued, and then make your argument on God's name. Verily any Prince that now is (namely in Ecclesiastical government) compared with Moses is as the poet saith, Impar congressus Achilli, Troilus. And the lawyer saith, Men must judge by Law and not by examples Legibus, non exemplis judicatur. We must judge according to the precise rule of the Law, and not by examples: Extraordinary doings enforce no ordinary prescription or rule. The ordinary rule of Priests judgements without whies and whates, and such other trifling importune instances, as ye are wont to make against it, by the law of Moses and by your own chapter before alleged in dowbtful cases, must absolutely upon pain of death be obeyed. By this rule of the Law you must measure all the examples following, of Kings and Princes under this Law. You must square your examples, to the rule and not the rule to the examples, unless ye will make of the Law of God Lesbiam regulam, and both unskilfully and unorderly work therewith. And this one answer might well serve for all the Kings doings now following: Saving I will particularly descend to every one, and for every one say somewhat. Here I wish to encounter with M. Nowell for his shifts that he maketh to maintain the matter by Moses and the residue, but because it is M. Dormans' special and peculiar matter, I will leave it unto him, and be also in the residue, as brief as I may. M. Horn. The .12. Division. Pag. 8. b. After the death of Moses, the people as yet not entered and settled in the promised land, the charge of chief government over God's people both in causes temporal and (.39.) The .39. untruth. joshua had not the Supreme government in causes Ecclesiastical, but Eleazarus had it Ecclesiastical, was committed to joshua, and not to Eleasar, for to him belonged (.40.) The .40. untruth. For beside: In all things to be done of joshua, Eleazar should instruct him. joshua. 3.4 5 6.8.23.24. only the ministration of the things belonging to the Priestly office. And to joshua the Prince belonged the oversight both over the priests and people, to govern, guide, order, appoint and direct each estate, in all things that appertained to each of their callings. Of the one ye seem to have no doubt at all: the other is as plain. For at the appointment of joshua, the Priests removed the Ark of covenant and placed the same. He did interpret unto the people the spiritual meaning of the twelve stones, which they had taken by God's commandment forth of jordan, to be as Sacraments or signs. He circumcised the children of Israel at the second time of the great and solemn Circumcision. He calleth the Priests, commandeth some of them to take up the Lord's Ark: other seven of them to blow seven trumpets before the Ark, and appointeth to them the order of proceeding. He builded an Altar unto the Lord God of Israel, according to the Law of God: be sacrificeth thereon, burnt sacrifices and burnt offerings: He wrote there upon the stones, the Deuteronomie of Moses: He read all the blessings and cursings as they are set forth in the book of the Law: And he read all what so ever Moses had commanded before all the congregation of israel, etc. Last of all joshua, to show that causes of Religion did specially belong to his charge and care, maketh a long and a vehement Oration unto the Israelits, wherein he exhorteth them to cleave unto the Lord with a sure faith, a constant hope and a perfect love, obeying and serving him with such service as he hath appointed in his Law. And doth zealously and with great threats dissuade them from all kind of Idolatry and false Religion. The .10. Chapter concerning the example of joshua. Stapleton. joshua no Supreme Governor in all Ecclesiastical causes. Num 27 THE Apology allegeth as well the example of Moses, as of joshua his doings with the residue by M. Horn here alleged. M. D. Harding showeth that allegation to import no chief rule in spiritual matters, as in deed it doth not. Which chief rule, did rest in the Priest Eleazarus, at whose voice and word joshua was commanded, M. Nowell put to his shifts by M. Dorman. to go forth, and come in, a place deeply dissembled by the Author of the Apology. For the avoiding whereof M. Nowell is put to many shifts: first to gloze, that this place concerning Eleazarus, may be restrained for going and coming to and fro the wars, which as it is true, so immediately before, it is generally written, Num. 27. Pro hoc si quid agendum erit, Eleazar sacerdos consulet Dominum For him (meaning joshua) Eleazar shall ask counsel of God when any thing is to be done. In which words we see evidently, that joshua what so ever he did, touching the governing of the people in Ecclesiastical matters, he did nothing of himself, but was in all such matters instructed of Eleazarus the high Priest: whose part therefore it was always to ask counsel of God, when joshua had any thing to do. And though this place should be restrained to warfare only, yet the authority given before by express words of the law, to the high Priest, whose judgement is commanded in great doubts to be sought and also followed, doth never the less take place. joshua. 3 4.5.6.8.23.24 And thereupon followeth that all the testimonies of holy Scripture, brought forth by M. Nowell, and before him by M. Horn, can not, as they do not in deed, induce supremacy in causes Ecclesiastical. But th'execution of the high Priests or laws commandment, which in deed we grant to appertain to the Prince. And here I will not quarrel with M. Nowell, either for quoting .33.34. for .23.24. and not reform, as he doth with M. Dorman for as small a matter, as for the misquoting of S. Cyprian: or for treading M. horns steps, and borrowing his allegations, which not withstanding is a great observation with him as a worthy matter (ye may be assured) against M. Dorman and M. D. Harding. This is but a childish and boyish rhetoric, not so convenient, I wiss, for M. Nowell the schoolmaster, as for the boys his scholars, whose propriety is to accuse their fellows of borrowing, and to borrow themselves like truants. But for the doing of joshua, I will further note, that then the Priests took up the Ark of covenant, and went before the people. joshua. 13. But I pray you M. Horn, how was this observed of late years, when the lay men durst adventure to take the guiding of the Ark, and go before the Priests, and not suffer the Priests to go before them? And durst alter the state of Christian religion, against the will and mind of the Bishops and the whole Clergy then at their convocation assembled? Well, let this pass for this present. I say no further for joshua his doings, saving that otherwise also they are not to be drawn into an ordinary rule, Num. 17. for that the Spirit of God was certainly in him: and for that he had part of Moses glory, and the people commanded to hear him. And those things that he did (whereof M. Nowell and Master Horn would infer a Sovereignty in causes Spiritual) he did them by the express commandment of God. And from such Princes to all Princes indifferently to gather the like pre-eminence in all points, were no sure and sound gathering and collection. Else if you will have your examples to prove and confirm, then as joshua circumcided, so let the Prince baptize, and as joshua sacrificed upon an Altar, so let the Prince in Cope and Surplice celebrate your holy Communion. Which two things as peculiar offices of Bishops and Priests, M. Nowell excludeth flatly all Princes from, Folly 23. & 24. yea and saith, they ought to be untouched of Prince or other person. Thus again either ye jumble and jar one from an other, or else your Argument falleth down right. Choose which of both ye will. 2 Sam 5. M. Horn. The .13. Division. Pag 9 a. David whom God appointed to be the pastor (that is, the King over Israel) to feed his people, did understand that to this pastoral office of a King, did belong of duty, not only a charge to provide that the people might be governed with justice, and live in civil honesty, peace, and tranquillity, public and private: but also to have a special regard and care to see them fed with true doctrine, and to be fostered up in the Religion appointed by God himself in his law. And therefore immediately after he was with some quietness settled in his royal seat, the first thing that he began to reform and restore to the right order, as a thing that appertained especially to his princely charge and care, was God's religion and service, which had been decayed and neglected long before in the time of King Saul. For the better performance whereof, as the Supreme governor over all the estates both of the laity and of the Clergy (.41.) The .41. untruth. David was not Supreme governor in all manner causes, but suffered the Levites in Church matters to live under the rule of their high Priest. 1. Par. 13.15.16. David in all these matters, determimined no doctrine, nor altered any religion against the priests wills of his own Supreme authority. in all manner of causes: after consultation had with his chief Counsellors, he calleth the Priests and Levites, and commandeth, appointeth, and directeth them in all manner of things and causes, appertaining to their ecclesiastical functions and offices. He prepareth a seemly place for the Ark in his own City. He goeth with great solemnity to fetch the Ark of the Lord. He commandeth Sad●c and Abiathar the Priests, and the chief among the Levites, to sanctify themselves with their brethren, and than to carry the Ark upon their shoulders unto the place appointed He comptrolleth them that the Ark was not carried before on their shoulders according to the la: and therefore layeth to their charge the breach that was made by the death of Vsa. He commandeth also the chief of the Levites, to appoint among their brethren, Musicians to play on divers kinds of instruments, and to make melody with joyfulness. He sacrificeth burnt and peace offerings. He blessed the people in the name of the Lord. He appointeth certain of the Levites, to minister continually before the Ark of the Lord, to rehearse his great benefits, to the honour and praise of the Lord god of Israel. And for that present time he made a psalm of god's praise, and appointed Asaph and his brethren to praise god therewith. He ordained the priests, Levites, singers, and porters, and in some he appointed and ordered all the officers and offices, required to be in the house of the Lord, for the setting forth of his service and religion. The .11. Chapter concerning the example of David. BOTH M. Dorman and M. Doctor Harding affirm that the proceed of King David are nothing prejudicial to the Ecclesiastical authority: David. in redressing of disorders before committed, or doing such things as are here rehearsed. No more, than the reformation of Religion made by Queen Marie, as M. D. Harding noteth, which ye wots well, employeth in her no such supremacy. Beside that, it is to be considered, as M. D. Harding toucheth, that he passed other Princes herein, because he had the gift of prophecy. So that neither those things that the Apology showeth of David, or those that ye and M. Nowell add thereunto, for the fortification of the said superiority, can by any means induce it. The scripture in the said place by you and M. Nowell alleged, saith that David did work juxta omnia quae scripta sunt in lege Domini: 1 Par. 16. according to all things written in the law of God. Whereunto I add a notable saying of the scripture, in the said book by you alleged, concerning David's doings by you brought forth touching the Priests and Levites: ut ingrediantur domum Dei iuxtaritum suum sub manu Aaron Patris eorum, sicut praeceperat Dominus deus Israel. King David's appointment was, 1. Par. 24. that the Levites and Priests should enter in to the house of God, there to serve under the government. Of whom, I pray you? Not of King David, but under the Spiritual government of their spiritual father Aaron and his successors. The governor of them then, was Eleazarus. Where we have to note: first, that David appointed here to the Levites nothing of himself: but sicut praeceperat Dominus Deus Israel: as the Lord God of Israel had before appointed. secondly, that King David did make appointment unto them, of no strange or new order to be taken in Religion, but that they should serve God in the Temple, juxta ritum suum: after their own usage, custom and manner, before time used. Thirdly and last, King David's appointment was, that they should serve in the house of God sub manu Aaron patris eorum, as under the spiritual government of their Father Aaron, and his successors the high Priests. The which words of the scripture do so well and clearly express, that King David did not take upon him any spiritual government in the house of God (namely such as you attribute to the Queens Ma. to alter Religion▪ etc.) that I can not but very much muse and marvel, why ye should allege King David, for any example or proof in this matter. But most of all, that ye dare allege the death of Oza. Which is so directly against our lay men, that have not only put their hands, to sustain and stay the fall of the Ark (as Oza did, for which attempt notwithstanding he was punished with present death) but have also of their own private authority altered and changed the great and weighty points of Christ's Catholic Religion: and in a manner have quite transformed and overthrown the same, and so have as a man may say, broken the very Ark itself all to fitters. Let them not doubt, but that (except they heartily repent) they shall be plagued worse than Oza was, if not in this world, yet more horribly in the world to come. As for that you allege of David, that he made Psalms, ordained Priests, Levites, fingers, and porters etc. think you, he did all this and the rest of his own authority, because he was King of the people? So you would your Reader to believe. But the holy Ghost telleth us plainly that David did all this, 2. Par. 29. because God had so commanded by the hands of his Prophets. And thus you see, that by the declaration of the Prophets, Gods Ministers then, as Priests are now, the King did all those Ecclesiastical matters, and not by his Princely authority. Again the like you might have alleged of Carolus Magnus: Naveler. Generate 29. pag 51 &. 52. Krantz. lib. 2. c 9 that he corrected most diligently the order of reading and singing in the Church, that he brought first into France Cantum Gregorianum, the order of singing left by S. Gregory at Rome, and appointed singers therefore, and when they did not well placed other in their rooms, and many other such like matters of the Church, wherein that godly Emperor much busied himself, Ivo Carnot. lib. 5. Nec ulterius liceat retractari per appellationis negotium, quod episcoporum judicio reciditur. and yet exercised no supreme government over the clergy, but was of all other Princes, most far from it: as it may easily appear to him that will read in the Decrees, Dist. 19 In memoriam▪ where he protesteth obedience to the See of Rome, yea though an importable charge should be laid upon him by that holy See. Also in the Decrees. xj. q. j which Ivo also allegeth, where he reneweth out of the Code of Theodosius a law binding all his subjects, of all nations, Provinces, and Countries of what so ever quality or condition they were, and in all manner causes, if the defendante require an Ecclesiastical judgement, it be not lawful from the bishops sentence to appeal any higher. And surely no Prince more recognized their dutiful obedience to the Spiritual Magistrate, in spiritual causes, than such as were most ready and careful to aid, further, and to their power direct all Spiritual matters. All this therefore proveth well, that Godly Princes do further and set forth God's Religion, by means seemly to their vocation. But here is no manner inkling, that Princes do or did ever bear the supreme government in all Ecclesiastical matters, to decide and determine, to alter and change, to set up and pluck down what Religion liked them, by their Princely authority, and mere Sovereignty. M. Horn. The .14. Division. Pag. 9 a. Solomon (.42.) The .42. untruth. For Solomon of his own authority (as your argument runneth) deposed not Abiathar: but executed only the sentence, pronounced before by Samuel God's minister. deposed Abiathar the high Priest, and placed Sadoc in his room And he builded the Temple, placed the Ark in the place appointed for the same. Hallowed or dedicated the Temple, offered sacrifices, blessed the people, directed the Priests, Levites, and other Church officers in their functions, according to the order before taken by his Father David. And neither the Priests nor Levites, swerved in any thing (.43.) The .43. untruth. Those words are not in the scripture alleged. pertaining to their office) from that, that the King commanded them. The .12. Chapter concerning the example of King Solomon. THE weight of this objection resteth in the deposition of Abiathar the high Priest. Which thing M. Dorman and M. D. Harding say employeth no more superiority, then if a man should say Q. Marie deposed M. Cranmer, and yet was not she the chief, but an accessory instrument for the furtherance of th'execution. But Lord how M. Nowell here bestirreth himself? He fumeth and fretteth with M. Dorman, who shall cool him well enough I dowbt not. In the mean while, I will ask M. Horn and M. Nowell to, one question. M. Horn saith a little before, that joshua sacrificed burnt sacrifices and burnt offerings, that King David sacrificed burnt and peace offerings, that Solomon offered sacrifices. Were trow ye joshua, David, and Solomon priests? If so, then how bring you their examples to prove any thing for kings and Queens that are no priests? If not, than this phrase is verified, in that they caused the priests (to whom the matter pertained) to offer sacrifices. And so whereas M. Horn saith of joshua, that he sacrificed burnt sacrifices which is agreeable to the Latin: Obtuli● holocausta, Nowell fol. 166. col. 1. M. Nowell saith he commanded sacrifice to be offered. And why then I pray you M. Nowell, may not this phrase also be taken after the said sort, that Solomon deposed Abiathar, in procuring him by some ordinary way to be deposed for his treason? As M. Crammer might have been, though he were both deposed and burnt for his heresy. But now M. Horn, M. Horn overthrown concerning the deposition of Abiathar by the very next line of his own text guilefully by him omitted 3. Reg. c. 2 that Solomon was but a minister and an executor herein, the very words immediately following (the which because they serve plain against your purpose, you craftily dissembled) do testify. Which are these. And so Solomon put away Abiathar, from being priest unto the Lord, to fulfil the words of the Lord which he spoke over the house of Hely in Silo. And thus was Solomon but the minister and executor of God's sentence published before by Samuel the Levite. Beside that the deposing of Abiathar doth not employ that Solomon was the chief ruler in all causes Ecclesiastical, which is the butt that ye must shoot at, and then must ye provide an other bow, for this will not shoot home. Where you say farther that neither the Priests nor Levites swerved in any thing (pertaining to their office) from that the King commanded them, you have swerved very lewdly from the text of holy Scripture, and have added to it those words (pertaining to their office) more than is expressed in the Scriptures, and have printed them in a distinct letter, as the express words of the Scripture. With such homely shifts an evil cause must be furthered. M. Horn. The 15. Division. Pag. 10. a. josaphat hath no small commendation in the Scriptures, for that he so studiously used his (.44.) The 44. untruth. The Scripture termeth not any such Princely Authority. 2 Par. 17. Gloss. o●d. princely authority in the reformation of Religion, and matters appertaining, thereunto. He removed at the first beginning of his reign all manner of false Religion, and what so ever might because of offence to the faithful. He sent forth through his kingdom visitors, both of his Princes, and also of the Priests and Levites, with the book of the Law of the Lord, to the end they should instruct, and teach the people, and reform all manner abuses in ecclesiastical causes according to that book. After a while he made a progress in his own person throughout all his country, and * Not by his own laws enacting a religion, which preachers should swear unto. 2. Par. 19 by his preachers reduced and brought again his people from superstition, and false religion unto the Lord the God of their fathers. He appointed in every town throughout his kingdom, as it were justices of the peace, such as feared the Lord, and abhorred false religion, to decide controversies in civil causes: and in like sort he appointed and ordained the high Priests with other Priests, Levites, and of the chief rulers among the Israelits, to be at Jerusalem to decide, and * Yea the Priests judged, not the King. judge controversies of great weight, that should a●ise about matters of religion and the Law. He did command and prescribe (45.) The 45. untruth. Thereappereth not in Scripture any such prescription made uno the chief Priests 2. Par. 20. unto the chief Priests and Levites, what form and order they should observe in the ecclesiastical causes and controversies of religion, that were not so difficult and weighty. And when any token of God's displeasure appeared, either by wars or other calamity, he gave order to his subjects for common prayer, and enjoined to them public fast, with earnest preaching of repentance, and seeking after the will of the Lord to obey and follow the same. The 13. Chapter concerning the example of King josaphat. YOU allege for the supreme government of King josaphat in spiritual matters (as the Apology doth) the 2. of Paralip. the 17. Chapter. And as M.D. Harding and M. Dorman have written, so say I, that ye are they, which frequent private hills, altars, and dark groves, that the Scripture speaketh of. Wherein you have set up your Idols, that is, your abominable heresies. We also confess, that there is nothing written in holy Scripture of josaphat touching his Care and diligence about the directing of ecclesiastical matters, but that godly Christian Princes may at this day do the same, doing it in such sort as josaphat did. That is: to refourm religion by the Priests, not to enact a new religion which the priests of force shall swear unto. Item to suffer the Priests to judge in controversies of religion, not to make the decision of such things, a parliament matter. Iten not to prescribe a new form and order in ecclesiastical causes, but to see that according to the laws of the Church before made, the religion be set forth, as josaphat procured the observation of the old religion appointed in the law of Moses. Briefly that he do all this as an Advocate, defender, and Son of the Church, with the Authority and advise of the Clergy (so josaphat furthered religion not otherwise:) not as a Supreme absolute Governor, contrary to the uniform consent of the whole Clergy in full convocation, yea and of all the Bishops at once. Thus the example of josaphat fitteth well Christian Princes. But it is a world to see, how wretchedly and shamefully Master Horn hath handled in this place the Holy Scriptures. First, promising very sadly in his preface, to cause his Authors sentences for the part to be printed in Latin letters, here coursing over three several chapters of the 2. of Paralip. he setteth not down any one part or word of the whole text in any Latin or distinct letter, but handleth the Scriptures, as pleaseth him, false translating, mangling them, and belying them beyond all shame. He telleth us of the King's visitors, of a progress made in his own person, throughout all his country and of justices of the peace: whereas the texts alleged have no such words at al. Verily such a tale he telleth us, that his ridiculous dealing herein (were it not in God's cause, where the indignity of his demeanour is to be detested) were worthily to be laughed at. But from fond counterfeiting, he proceedeth to flat lying. For where he saith that josaphat commanded and prescribed unto the chief Priests, what form and order they should observe in the Ecclesiastical causes and controversies of religion etc. This is a lewd and a horrible lie, flatly belying Gods holy word, them which, in one that goeth for a bishop, what can be done more abominable? No No, M. Horn, it was for great causes, that thus wickedly you concealed the text of holy Scriptures, which you knew, being faithfully set down in your book, had utterly confounded you, and your whole matter now in hand. For thus lo, saith and reporteth the holy Scripture of King josaphat, touching his dealing with persons rather than with matters ecclesiastical. In jerusalem also josaphat appointed levites and Priests, 2. Par. 19 8. and the chief of the families of Israel, that they should judge the judgement and cause of God to the inhabitants thereof. How josaphat appointed the Levites and priests to these Ecclesiastical functions, it shall appear in the next Chapter by the example of Ezechias. Let us now forth with the Scripture. And josaphat commanded them saying: Thus you shall do in the fear of the Lord faithfully and with a perfect heart. But how? Did josaphat here prescribe to the Priests any form or order which they should observe in controversies of Religion, as M. Horn saith he did, to make folk ween that Religion proceeded then by way of Commission from the Prince only? Nothing less. For thus it followeth immediately in the text. Every cause that shall come unto you, of your brethren dwelling in their Cities, between kindred and kindred, wheresoever there is any question of the law, of the commandment, of ceremonies, of justifications, show unto them, that they sin not against God etc. Here is no form or order prescribed, to observe in controversies of Religion: but here is a general commandment of the King to the Priests and Levites, that they should do now their duty and vocation faithfully and perfectly, as they had done before in the days of Asa and Abias' his Father and grandfather: like as many good and godly Princes among the Christians also have charged their bishops, and clergy to see diligently unto their flocks and charges. And therefore josaphat charging here in this wise the Priests and Levites, doth it not with threats of his high displeasure, or by force of any his own Injunctions, but only saith: So then doing, you shall not sin or offend. The which very manner of speech, Christian Emperors and Kings have eftsoons used in the like case, as we shall hereafter in the third book by examples declare. But to make a short end of this matter even out of this very Chapter, if you had M. Horn, laid forth, but the very next sentence and saying of King josaphat, immediately following, you should have seen there, so plain a separation and distinction of the spiritual and secular power (which in this place you labour to confound) as a man can not wish any plainer or more effectual. In his quae ad Deum pertinent, praesidebit. For thus saith king josaphat. Amarias' the priest and your bishop shall have the government of such things, as appertain to God. And Zabadias' shall be over such works as appertain to the King's office. Lo the King's office, and divine matters are of distinct functions. Exod. 4. & 18. Over God's matters is the priest, not as the King's commissioner, but as the priests always were after the example of Moses: But over the King's works is the King's Officier. And mark well M. Horn this point. Zabadias' is set over such works as belong to the King's office. But such works, are no manner things pertaining to the Service of God. For over them Amarias' the priest is precedent. Ergo the Kings office consisteth not about things pertaining to God, but is a distinct function concerning the common weal. Ergo if the King intermeddle in God's matters, M Horn confounded by his own book and Chapter. especially if he take upon him the supreme government thereof, even over the priests themselves to whom that charge is committed, he passeth the bonds of his office, he breaketh the order appointed by God, and is become an open enemy to God's holy ordinance. This place therefore, you deeply dissembled and omitted M. Horn, lest you should have discovered your own nakedness, and have brought to light the utter confusion of you and your wretched doctrine. Except for a shift, you will press us with the most wretched and traitorous translation of this place in your common english bibles, printed in the year 1562. Which for praesidebit, shall govern, do turn, is among you. For your new Genevian bibles, which you take (I doubt not) for the more corrected, do translate with us: shallbe chief over you. M. Horn. The 16. Division. Pag. 10. b. Ezechias the king of juda, hath this testimony of the holy Ghost, 4. Reg. 18. that the like governor had not been, neither should be after him amongst the kings of ●uda. For he cleaved unto the Lord, and swerved not from the precepts which the Lord gave by Moses. And to express, that the office, ●ule, and government of a godly king consisteth, and is occupied according to God's ordinance and precept, first of all in matters of Religion, and causes Ecclesiastical, the holy Ghost doth commend this king for his diligent care in refourming religion. He took quite away (saith the holy ghost) all manner of Idolatry, superstition, and false religion, yea, even in the first year of his reign, and the first month he opened the doors of God's house: 2. Par. 29. He calleth as it were to a Synod the Priests, and Levites, he maketh unto them a long and pithy oration, declaring the horrible disorders and abuses that hath been in religion, the causes, and what evils followed to the whole realm thereupon: He declareth his full determination to restore and reform religion according to Gods will. He commandeth them therefore, that they laying aside all errors, ignorance, and negligence, do the parts of faithful ministers. The Priests and Levites assembled together, did sanctify themselves, and did purge the house of the Lord from all uncleanness of false religion, at the commandment of the King (.46.) The 46. untruth. Those words (concerning things of the Lord) are no words of the text, but falsely added to holy Scripture. concerning things of the Lord. That done, they came unto the King, and made to him an account and report what they had done, The King assembleth the chief rulers of the City, goeth to the Temple, be commandeth the Priests and Levites, to make oblation and sacrifice for whole Israel. He appoints the Levites after their order in the house of the Lord, ●o their musical instruments, and of the Priests to play on Shawms, according as David had disposed the order (47.) The 47, untruth. Holy Scripture falsified, and may ●ed. as it shall appear. 2. Par. 30. by the counsel of the Prophets. He and the Prince commandeth the Levites to praise the Lord with that Psalm that David made for the like purpose. He appointed a very solemn keeping and ministering of the passover, whereunto be exhorteth all the Israelites, and to turn from their idolatry and false religion unto the Lord God of Israel. He made solemn prayer for the people. The king with comfortable words encouraged the Levites that were zealous, and had right judgement of the Lord, to offer sacrifices of thanks giving, and to praise the Lord the God of their Fathers, and assigned the Priests and Levites to minister, and give thanks, according to their offices in their courses and turns. And for the better continuance of God's true Religion, he caused a sufficient and liberal provision to be made from the people, for the Priests and Levites, that they might wholly, cheerfully, and constantly, serve the Lord in their vocation. These doings of the King Ezechias touching matters of Religion, and the reformation thereof, saith the holy ghost, was his acceptable service of the Lord, dutiful both to God and his people. The 14. Chapter concerning the doings of Ezechias. HEre is nothing brought in by you, or before by the Apology (as M. Dorman, and M. Doctor Harding do well answer) that forceth the surmised sovereignty in King Ezechias, but that his power and authority, was ready and serviceable (as it ought to be in all Princes) for the execution of things spiritual before determined, and not by him as supreme head newly established: So in the place by you cited it is written that he did, 4. Reg. 18. that which was good before the Lord according to all things that David his Father had done. So that as David did all such matters, because the Prophets of God had so declared they should be done, so is Ezechias following his Father David understanded to have done, not enacting any religion of his own, but setting forth that, which Gods Ministers had published. Likewise in your other place, 2. Par. 29 according to the Kings and God's commandment. So other where, 2. Par. 31. he did that which was good and right before his Lord God, and he sowght God, with all his heart, after the Law and commandment, in all the works of the house of God. And as yourself show, 2. Par. 29. he appointed the Levites according as David had disposed the order: And you add by the council of the Prophets, as though David had first done it by the advise or counsel only of the Prophets, and by his own authority. But the Scripture saith: Ezechias did thus according as David had disposed, because it was the commandment of God by the hand of his Prophets. So that in all that Ezechias or before josaphat did, they did but as David had done before: That is, they executed God's commandment declared by the Prophets. This is far from enacting a new Religion by force of Supreme Authority, contrary to the commandment of God declared by the Bishops and Priests, the only Ministers of God now in spiritual matters, as Prophets were then in the like. M. Horn. The .17. Division pag. 11 a. josias had the like care for religion, and used in the same sort his princely authority, in reforming all abuses (48) The .48. untruth. Boldly avouched, but no way proved. in all manner causes Ecclesiastical These Godly Kings claimed and took upon them the supreme government over the Ecclesiastical persons of all degrees, and did rule, govern, and direct them in all their functions, and (.49.) The 49. untruth. as before, but somewhat more impudent. in all manner causes belonging to Religion, and received thou witness of their doings, to wit, that they did acceptable service, and nothing but that which was right in God's sight. Therefore it followeth well by good consequent, that Kings or Queens may claim and take upon them such government in things or causes Ecclesiastical. For that is right, saith the holy Ghost; they should than do wrong if they did it not. The .15. Chapter of the doings of josias, with a conclusion of all the former examples. Stapleton. KING josias travailed full godly in suppressing Idolatry by his Kingly authority. josias What then? So do good Catholic Princes also, to pluck down the Idols that ye and your brethren have of late set up: and yet none of them, take themselves for supreme heads in all causes Spiritual. And ye have hitherto brought nothing effectual to prove that the Kings of Israel did so: wherefore your conclusion, that they did rule, govern, and direct the Ecclesiastical persons in all their functions, and in all manner causes of religion, is an open and a notorious lie: and the contrary is by us avouched and sufficiently proved by the authority of the old Testament, whereupon ye have hitherto rested and settled yourself. It is here declared, that M. Horn cometh nothing nigh the principal question. But now that ye in all your examples draw nothing nigh the mark, but run at random, and shoot all at rovers, is most evident to him that hath before his eye, the very state of the question: which must be especially ever regarded of such as mind not to loosely and altogether unfruitfully employ their labour, and lose both their own and their Readers labour. I pray you then good M. Horn bring forth that King that did not agnize one supreme head and chief judge in all causes Ecclesiastical among the jews, I mean the high Priest, wherein lieth all our chief question. Ye have not yet done it, nor never shall do it. And if ye could show any, it were not worth the showing. For ye should not show it in any good King, as being an open breach of God's law given to him by Moses: as these your doings are an open breach of Christ and his church's law, given to us in the new Testament. Again what precedent have ye showed of any good King among the jews, that with his laity, altered and abandoned, the usual religion a thousand years and upward customably from age to age received and embraced: and that, the High Priest and the whole Clergy resisting and gainsaying all such alterations? If ye have not showed this, ye have strayed far from the mark. What evidence have ye brought forth to show that in the old Law, any King exacted of the Clergy in verbo sacerdotij, that they should make none Ecclesiastical law without his consent, as King Henry did of the Clergy of England? And so to make the Civil Magistrate the Supreme judge for the final determination of causes Ecclesiastical? What can ye bring forth out of the old Testament to aid and relieve your doings, who have abandoned not only the Pope, but General Counsels also: and that by plain act of Parliament? General Counsels abandoned out of England by act of Parliament. I say this partly for a certain clause of the Act of Parliament, that for the determination of any thing to be adjudged to be heresy, resteth only in the authority of the Canonical Scriptures, and in the first four General Counsels, and other Counsels general, wherein any thing is declared heresy by express words of scripture. By which rule it will be hard to convince many froward obstinate heretics to be heretics: yea of such as even by the said four first, and many other Counsels general are condemned for heretics. Partly, and most of all, I say it, for an other clause in the act of Parliament, enacting that no foreign Prince Spiritual or temporal shall have any authority or Superiority in this realm, in any Spiritual cause. And then I pray you, if any General Council be made to reform our misbelief, if we will not receive it, who shall force us? And so ye see we be at liberty, to receive or not receive any general Council. And yet might the Pope reform us well enough for any thing before rehearsed (for the Pope's authority ecclesiastical is no more foreign to this realm, than the Catholic faith is foreign) saving that he is by express words of the statute otherwise excluded. Now what can ye show that mere lay men should enjoy ecclesiastical livings, as usually they do among you? What good induction can ye bring from the doings of the Kings of the old Law to justify, that Princes now may make Bishops by letters patents, and that for such and so long time as should please them, as either for term of years, months, weeks, or days? What good motive can ye gather by their regiment, that they did visit Bishops and Priests, and by their laws restrained them to exercise any jurisdiction over their flocks, to visit their flocks, to reform them, to order or correct them without their especial authority and commission thereunto? Yea to restrain them by an inhibition from preaching, Note. which ye confess to be the peculiar function of the Clergy, exempted from all superiority of the Prince? What? Think ye that ye can persuade us also, that Bishops and Priests paid their first fruits and tenths to their Princes, yea and that both in one year, as they did for a while in King Henry his days? Gen. 47. Verily joseph would not suffer the very heathen Priests (which only had the bare names of Priests) to pay either tithes or fines to Pharaoh their Prince. Yea rather he found them in time of famine upon the common store. Are ye able (suppose ye) to name us any one King, that wrote himself Supreme head of the jewish Church, and that in all causes as well Spiritual as Temporal: and that caused an Oath to the Priests and people (the Nobility only exempted) to be tendered, that they in conscience did so believe? and that in a woman Prince too, yea and that under pain of praemunire and plain treason too? O M. Horn, your manifold untruths are disciphired and unbuckled, ye are espied, ye are espied, I say, well enough, that ye come not by a thousand yards and more nigh the mark. Your bow is to weak, your arms to feeble, to shoot with any your commendation at this mark: yea if ye were as good an archer, as were that famous Robin Hood, or Little john. Well shift your bow, or at the least wise your string. Let the old Testament go, and proceed to your other proofs, wherein we will now see if ye can shoot any straighter. For hitherto ye have shotten all awry, and as a man may say, like a blind man. See now to yourself from henseforth that ye open your eyes, and that ye have a good eye and a good aim to the mark we have set before you. If not, be ye assured we will make no courtesy eftsoons to put you in remembrance. For hitherto ye have nothing proved that Princes ought, which ye promised to prove, or that they may take upon them such government, as I have laid before you, and such as ye must in every part justify, if either ye will M. Fekenham shall take the Oath, or that ye intend to prove yourself a true man of your word. M. Horn. The .18. Division. pag. 11. b. You suppose, that ye have escaped the force of all these and such like godly Kings (which do marvelously shake your hold) and that they may not be alleged against you, neither any testimony out of the old testament, for that ye have restrained the proof for your contentation, to such order of government as Christ hath assigned in the Ghospel, to be in the time of the new testament, wherein you have sought a subtle shift. For whiles ye seek to cloak your error under the shadow of Christ's Ghospel▪ you bewray your secret heresies, turning yourself naked to be seen of all men, and your cause notwithstanding, lest in the state it was before, nothing helped by this your poor shift of restraint. So that where your friends took you before but only for a Papist: now have you showed yourself to them plainly herein to be a (.50.) The .50. untruth. Most slanderous. M. Horn himself and his fellows are in many points Donatists, as shall appear. Donatist also. When the Donatists troubled the peace of Christ's Catholic Church, and divided themselves from the unity thereof, as nor● you do: The godly Fathers travailed to confute their heresies by the Scriptures, both of the old and new testament: and also craved aid and assistance of the Magistrates and Rulers to reform them, to reduce them to the unity of the Church, and to repress their heresies, with their authority and godly laws made for that purpose, to whom it belonged of duty, and whose especial service to Christ is, to see, care, and provide, that their subjects be governed, defended, and maintained in the true and sincere religion of Christ, without all errors, superstitions and heresies, as S. Augustine proveth at large in his Epistle against Vincentius a Rogatist, in his Epistle to Bonifacius, and in his book against Petilian, and Gaudentius letters. Against this Catholic Doctrine, your ancestors the Donatists, arise up and defend themselves with this colour or pretence, that they be of the Catholic faith, and that their church is the Catholic church: (Which shift for their defence against God's truth, the Popish sectaries do use in this our time, being (.51.) The 51. untruth. Answer the Fortress M. Horn, annexed to S. Bede, if you dare to defend this most sensible and most gross lie. August. Epist. 43. & 50. Lib. 2. cont. lit. Pet. ca 92 Lib 2. con. Ep. 2. Gaud. ca 2●. no more of the one, or of the other, than were the Donatists and such like, of whom they learned to cover their horrible heresies under the same fair cloak) that the secular Princes have not to meddle in matters of religion or causes ecclesiastial. That God committed not the teaching of his people to Kings, but to Prophets Christ sent not soldiers but fishers, to bring in and further his religion, that there is no example of such order, found in the Gospel or new Testament, whereby it may appear, that to secular Princes it belongeth to have care in matters of religion. And that (as it seemeth by that S Augustine by prevention objecteth against them) they subtly refused all proofs or examples avouched out of the Old testament (as ye craftily do also, in binding me only to the New testament) which S. Augustine calleth: an odious and wicked guile of the Donatists. Let your friends now, whom ye will seem to please so much, when you beguile them most of all, weigh with advisement, what was the erroneous opinion touching the authority of Princes in causes Ecclesiastical of the Donatists (as it is here rightly gathered forth of S. Augustine) and let them consider wisely these foul shifts they make for their defence: And then compare your opinion and guileful defences thereof to theirs and they must needs clap you on the back, and say to you Patrisas, (if there be any upright right judgement in them) deeming you so like your grandsire Donatus, as though he had spit you out of his own mouth. The .16. Chapter declaring in how many points Protestants are Donatists: and by the way of M. Fox's Martyrs. Stapleton. HITHERTO, good Reader, M. Horn although untruly, yet hath he somewhat orderlike proceeded. But in that which followeth until we come to the .20. leaf, beside most impudent and shameless lies, M. Horns disorderly Treatise. wherewith he would deface M. Fekenham, he prosecuteth his matter so confusely and unorderly, leaping in and out, I can not tell how, nor whither: that I verily think that his wits were not his own, being perchance encumbered with some his domestical affairs at home, that he could not gather them together, or that he the less passed, what an hodge potche he made of his doings, thinking which is like, that his fellows Protestants would take all things in good gree, knowing that poor M. Fekenham was shut up close enough, from all answering. And thinking that no Catholic else would take upon him to answer to his lewd book. I had thought M. Horn, that from the old Testament, ye would have gone to the new Testament: and would have laboured to have established your matters thereby. Belike the world goeth very hard with you in that behalf, that ye do not so: saving that here and there ye jumble in a testimony or two, I can not tell how, but how unhandsomly and from the purpose, yea against your own self, that I wots well, and ye shall anon hear of it also. In the mean while it is worth the labour well to consider the excellent pregnant wit and great skill of this man, who hath in the former Treatise of M. Fekenham espied out (which surely the wisest, and best learned of all the world I trow, beside M. Horn, would never have espied, such a special grace the man hath given him of his master the Devil of mere malice, joined with like folly) that M. Fekenham is an Heretic, and a Donatist. But yet M. Fekenham is somewhat beholding to him, that he saith M. Fekenham hath bewrayed his secret heresies. Wherein he saith for the one part most truly. For if there be any heresy at all in this matter surmised upon him, as certainly there is none, it is so secret and privy, that Argus himself, with all his eyes shall never espy it: no nor M. Horn himself, let him pry never so narrowly: whereas on the other side, M. Horn and his fellows, and his Masters Luther's and Caluins' heresies, are no secret nor simple heresies, but so manifold and so open, that they have no way or shift to save their good name and honesty, blotted and blemished for ever (without repentance) for the obstinate maintenance of the same. Where of many were, many hundred years since, condemned, partly by the holy Fathers, partly by General Counsels. You say M. Fekenham hath secret heresies, and that Donatus is his great grandsire, and the Donatists the Catholics ancestors: but how truly, you shall understand anon. In the mean while good Sir, may it please you favourably to hear you and your masters honourable pedigree; and of their worthy fears and prows. You have heard of them before perhaps, M. Horns and his fellows ancestors. and that by me. But such things as may edify the Catholic, and can never be answered by the Heretic, Decies repetita placebunt. How say you then to the great heretic Aerius the Arrian, August. et Epiphae. de haeres. that said there was no difference between priest and Bishop, between him that fasted and that did not fast, and that the sacrifice for the dead was fruitless? How say you to jovinian, that denied virginity to have any excellency above matrimony, or any special reward at God's hands? Hier. con. jovinian. Ambro. li. 10. epi. 18 Ambros. serm. 91. Euth. in Panopl. tit. 33. To the Arrians that denied the miracles done at the saints tombs to be true miracles, and that the martyrs can not cast out the devils and relieve them that be possessed? To the Bogomyles that said the devils sat at the saints tombs and did wonders there, to illude and deceive the people, to cause the people to worship them? To Berengarius condemned in divers counsels, first for denying of the real presence in the sacrament of the altar, and then for denying the transubstantiation? To the Paulicians, Euth. Zigab. in Panop. tit. 21 Hiero. cont. Vig. jonas episcopus Aurelian. count. Claudium. Euth. in Panop. tit. 22. August li. 1. count 2. epis. Pela. ad Bonif. cap. 13. Cyril li 6. cont. julia. that said these words of Christ, Take, eat, this is my body, are not to be understanded of his body, or the bread and wine used at the celebration of our Lords maundy, but of the holy scriptures, which the Priests should take at Christ's hand, and deliver and distribute to the people? To Claudius and Vigilantius, that denied the invocation of saints, and inveighed against the blessed relics, and the use of Lights and other ceremonies in the Church? To the Massalians and other heretics, saying that concupiscence as a sin remaineth in us after holy baptism? And because ye shall not say I suppress, conceal, or obscure, the chief and most notable persons of your ancestry: how say you to the emperors Philippicus, Leo, Constantinus, condemned with their adherentes by the .7. general council at Nice, that vilayned by defacing, breaking and burning, the Images of all the holy hallows of Christ, and Christ's too? To whom for your more honour and glory I adjoin the Emperor julianus the Apostata. Who as ye do in your books and pulpits, Cyril lib. 6 contra julianum. Aug. lib. 2 x 2. epi. Pelag. c. 4. Calvin in his Institutions, cap. 18. in fine: Argentorati Impress. An. 1545 cried out upon the Christians. O ye wretched men, that worship the wood of the cross, setting up the figure of it upon your forehead and doors: you therefore that are of the wiseste sort are worthy to be hated, and the residue to be pitied, that treading after your steps come to such a kind of Wretchedness. To the Pelagians, affirming that children not baptised shallbe saved? And yet are your masters in this point worse than the Pelagians, as well for that some of them have said, that some Infant's though unbaptized shallbe damned, and some other though unbaptized shall be saved: And some of them especially Calvin and other Sacramentaries say, that they shall come without Baptism to the Kingdom of heaven: which the Pelagians durst not say, but that they should have the life everlasting, putting a difference, but pevishly, betwixt those two. And if ye think the race of your worthy generation is not fetched high enough, Epiph. & Philast. de haeres. we will mount higher, and as high as may be, even to Simon Magus himself. Of whom Martion and Manicheus, Clemens li. 3. recog. Iraeneus. li 1. ca 20. and after long and honourable succession your patriarchs Luter and Calvin have learned their goodly doctrine against free will. Yea to touch the very foundation and well spring of this your new gospel, which altogether is grounded upon justification without good works, in that also ye draw very nigh to the said Simon Magus. In the discourse annexed to Staphilus. fol. 161. & sequent. I forbear at this time to speak of the residue of your noble progenitors, having in other places (as I noted before) spoken largely of the same. This shall suffice, at this present, to make open to all the world, that they are no petit or secret heresies that ye and your fellows maintain. Come forth once, and clear yourself of this only objection, if you can, being so often pressed therewith. If you maintain old condemned heresies, what are you less than heretics yourselves? If you maintain them not, or if they be not old heresies which you maintain, clear yourself if you be able. I assure you M. Horn, you and all your fellows will never be able to avoid this one only objection. And therefore you and all your fellows must needs remain stark heretics, and for such to be abhorred and abandonned (except you repent) of all good Christians. Protestants be Donatists Now as I have proved you and your companions open and notable heretics, so shall I strait way purge M. Fekenham to be no Donatist, or any heretic otherwise, for any thing yet by you laid to his charge. But now Master Horn beware yourself, least this unjust accusation against Master Fekenham and the Catholics whom ye compare to the Donatists causeless, 1. The dissension of the Donatists. August. de haeres. & in Psal. 36 & lib. 4. contra Cresc. c. 6. most justly and truly redound upon your and your fellows heads. Beware I say. For I suppose I will lay more pregnante matter in this behalf to your and their charge, than ye have or possible can do to Master Fekenham or any other Catholic, whereof I dare make any indifferent Reader judge. If I should dilate and amplify this matter at large, it would rise to a pretty volume: but I will purposely abridge it, and give the Reader as it were but a taste. 2. Aug. lib. 2 contra julian. & lib 3. contra Cresco. c. 66. & lib. 2. contra advers. Leg. c 12. They were all called first Donatists: but as the first fell from the Church Catholic: so fell they also afterward from their own Church and master, into an horrible division, of the Maximianistes, Circumcellions, Rogatistes, Circenses and others. A lively pattern of the sects sprung from your Apostle Luther, as in their pedigree in the Apology of Staphylus every man may see. The Donatists would sometime crack and brag of their multitude, and bring it as an argument that the truth was on their side, as doth your Apology. Which being restrained by the emperors Laws, and daily diminishing, than they cried, the truth resteth with the few elected and chosen parsons: then cried they: O little flock fear not, as ye did, when ye were as yet but in corners, rotten barns, and Luskye lanes. 3. Aug. epis. 204. & count. Cresc. The Donatists when they could not justify their own doctrine, nor disprove the catholics doctrine, leaving the doctrine, fell to railing, against the vicious life of the catholics. In this point, who be Donatists, I refer me to Luther's and Caluins' books, especially to M. jewel, and to your own Apology. 4. Aug. lib. 1. evang. quaest. 4. cap. 38. The Donatists refuse the known Church. The Donatists refused the open known Catholic Church, and said the Church remained only in those that were of their side in certain corners of Africa. And sing not ye the like song, preferring your Geneva and Wittenberg, before the whole Catholic Church beside? The Donatists corrupted the Father's books wonderfully, and were so impudent in alleging them, that in their public conference at Carthage, they pressed much upon Optatus words, and laid him forth as an author making for them, 5. Vide Aug. in breviculo Collatine diei 3. & in lib. post Coll. ca 31. See M. Dawes in his 13. book. who yet wrote expressly against them, and in all his writings condemned them. Is not this I pray you the usual practice of your Apostles Luther and Calvin, of M. jewel, and your own to, in this book? as I trust we have and shall make it most evident. And here let M. Dawes bear you company to, in the crafty and false handling of his own dear brothers Sleydans' story, where he leaveth out Alexander Farnesius oration to the Emperor, wherein he showeth the Protestants dissensions. The Donatists to get some credit to their doctrine pretended many false visions and miracles, and they thowght that God spoke to Donatus from heaven: And doth not M. Fox in his dunghill of stinking martyrs prettily follow them therein trow you? 6. August. in joannem Tractat. 13 An. 1558. Hath not the like practice been attempted of late in Hungary, to authorize the new gospel by pretending to restore life to an holy brother feigning himself to be dead, and by the great providence of God, found to be dead in deed? in l. theut. ad Senatum Germa. In lib. de miss. Angul. Did not your Apostle Luther boast himself of his visions and revelations? Which how celestial they were doth soon appear, for that him self writeth, that the devil appeared unto him in the night, and disputed with him against private mass: by whose mighty and weighty reasons Luther being overthrown yielded, and incontinently wrote against private mass as ye call it. 7. They prefer a national council before the general. Aug. lib. 2 de baptis. cap. 9 8. August. de agone Christi c. 29. The Author of the harborowe. 9 Did not the Donatists prefer, and more exsteme one national erroneous council in Aphrica, than the great and general council at Nice? keep not ye also this trade preferring your forged Convocation libel before the General Council of Trident? The Donatists said that all the world was in an apostasy at the coming of their apostle Donatus: And is not Luther the same man to you, that Donatus was to them? doth not one of your greatest clerks there with you now write, that Wyclyff begat hus, Husse begot Luther: and then addeth a shameful blasphemous note, this is the second nativity of Christ? The Donatists being charged and pressed by the catholics to show the beginning and continuance of their doctrine, and the ordinary succession of their Bishops, were so encumbered, that they could never make any convenient answer. And are not ye I pray you, with your fellows protestant bishops, fast, in the same mire? If not, answer then to my third demand in the Fortress annexed to S. Bede. Opt. lib. 2. part. 2 cap. 1. fol. 94. Aug. lib. 2 cont. Petil. ca 92. Optatus lib. 2. In his Reply against M. D. Harding. The Donatists finding fault with Constantine, Theodosius, and other Catholic princes, ran for secure to julianus the renegade and highly commended him. And doth not M. jewel, I pray you, take for his precedent against the Pope's primacy Constantius the Arrian, against Images Philippicus, Leo, Constantinus and such like detestable heretics by general counsels condemned? Do not yourself play the like part in the Emperor Emanuel, as ye call him, and in other as we shall hereafter declare? Now who are, I pray you, Donatists, for the defacing and overthrowing of Altars, for vilaining the holy Chrism, and the holy Sacrament of the altar? Which they cast unto dogs: which straightways by the ordinance of God, Optatus. lib. 2.6. & 7. The Donatists cruelty to the catholics Optatus. Lib. 6. Aug. contra Dona. post Collatine. c. 31. fell upon them, and being therein God's ministers, made them feel the smart of their impiety. It were a tragical narration, to open the great and incredible cruelty that the Donatists used toward the catholics, and especially their horrible ravishment of religious nuns. And yet were they nothing so outrageous, as your Hugonots have been of late in France, and the beggarly Guets here in Flanders, namely about Tournaye. The Donatists said of the catholics: Illi portant multorum Imperatorum sacra. Nos sola portamus evangelia. They bring us many of the emperors letters, we bring the only gospels. And is not this the voice of all Protestants whatsoever? Only Scripture, only the gospel, only the word of God? And for the first part, what is more common in the mouths of the German Lutherans, of the French calvinists, and now of the flemish Guets, than this complaint, that we press them with the emperors Diets, with the King's proclamations, and with the Prince's placarts? To the which they obey as much as the Donatists, when they have power to resist. Well, we will now leave of all other conference and comparisons, and tarry a little in one more. The Donatists counted Martyrs. August. epist. 68 The Donatists though they were most wicked Murderers of others and of themselves also, killing themselves most wretchedly without any other outward violence done to them: yet were they taken of their confederates for Martyrs. Of whom thus writeth S. Augustin. Vivebant ut Latrones, moriebantur ut Circumcelliones, honorabantur ut Martyrs. M. Foxes stinking Martyrs: Euseb. li. 5 cap. 18. Niceph. li. 6. c. 32 Aug. con. epist. Mani. ca 8. Sir john Oldcastel Sir Roger Acton. Anno. 2. Henrici. 5 cap. 5. Polidor. Harding. Fabian. Haul. Cooper. Eleanour Cobham. They lived like robbers by the high way, they died like Circumcellions (meaning they slew themselves) they were honoured as Martyrs. And now where learned M. Fox the trade to make his holy canonisation, in his devilish dirty dunghill of his fowl heretical and traitorous Martyrs, but of those and such like schoolmasters? As of the Montanists, that worshipped one Alexander for a worshipful martyr, though he suffered for no matter of religion, but for mischievous murder. And of the Manichees, that kept the day wherein their master Manes was put to death, more solemnly, than Easter day. Have ye not then in M. Fox, Sir john Oldcastle, and Sir Roger Acton canonized for holy martyrs, though they died for high treason? yea their names all to be painted, dashed, and flourished in the calendar with read letters, I think because we should keep their day a double feast? Whose and their confederates condemnation for conspiring against the King, the nobility, and their country, appeareth aswell by act of parliament then made, as by the full testimony of all our English Chronicles. Is not dame Elleanour Cobham a stout confessor in this mad martyrloge? whose banishment was not for religion, Sir Roger Only. Magaret lordeman. The witch of Aey. but for conspiring King Henry the sixts death by wytchrafte and sorcery, by the help and assistance of M. Roger Bolinbroke, and Margaret jordeman, commonly called the Witch of Aey? The which two were openly executed for the same. But now is it worth the hearing to know, how handsomely M. Fox hath conceived his matters: wherein he playeth in deed the wily Fox and springleth with his false wily tail, his filthy stale not into the dogs, but into his reader's eyes. And as the Fox, as some hunters say, when he is sore driven, will craftily mount from the earth and keep himself a while upon the either of a hedge, only to cause the hounds that draw after him to lose the scent of the tract: even so for all the world hath our Fox played with his reader. But I trust I shall trace him, and smell him out well enough. First then, though M. Fox's authority be very large and ample in this his canonisation, and such as never any Pope durst take upon him, yea and though he hath authority to make martyrs, See Harding, Fabian, Hall Cooper, grafton, the addition of Polichronicon. yet I doubt whether he hath authority to make Knights to: for this Sir Roger only is neither a Sir, but of M. Foxes making, nor only neither: But M. Roger Bolinbroke only: put to death for the treason before specified, as not only his own authors Fabian and Harding, whom he doth allege for the story of Dame Elleanour, but all other also do testify. Truth it is that Harding writing in English meeter and speaking of this M. Bolinbroke endeth one of his staves with this word Only, which is there to signify no name, but to better and sweat the meeter, and is as much to say, as chief and principally, meaning that Master Roger was the principal worker in this necromancy. The metres of Harding are these. He waxed then strange each day unto the King, For cause she was foreiudged for sorcery, Harding. in Hen. 6 c. 232. For enchantments that she was in working Against the Church and the King cursedly, By help of one M. Roger, only. Which last word, some ignorant or Protestant Printer hath made only. And then hath M. Fox added a Sir, and a Martyr too, and adorned him with no common ink, to set forth and beutify his Martyr withal. And so of M. Roger Bolinbroke, sorcerer and traitor, by a cunning Metamorphosis he hath made, Sir Roger Only Knight and Martyr. Well, will ye yet see further the crafty doubling of a Fox, walking on the either of the hedge? Consider then that, for Margaret jordaman that notable witch (lest if he had named her and M. Bolinbroke by their own names, he had marred all the roast) he placeth an other woman, that by his own rule died forty years after. See M. Fox's Martyr, the 371. leaf. Alanus Copus. dialog. 6. cap. 16. Hune Debnam. King. Marsh. And yet can he not hit upon her name neither, but is feign to call her, in steed of jone Bowghton, the mother of the Lady Young, who in deed is one of his stinking heretical and foolish Martyrs. For she craked full stoutly that there was no fire, that could consume or hurt her. I could here name a rabblement of like holy Martyrs, as Richard Hune, that hung himself: King, Debnam, and Marsh, hanged for sacrilege. Beside a number of such notorious and detestable heretics, that M. Fox himself will not I trow, as great an heretic as he is, deny them to be heretics. As Peter a German being an Anabaptist: as Anthony Person an Heretic of the sect of the Paulicians, of whom we have spoken. D. Wesalian. As D. Wesalian, that denied the holy Ghost to proceed from the Father and the son. And to conclude this matter, of the notable heretic Cowbridge, burnt at Oxford. Who expounded these words of Christ, Take eat this is my body that shallbe betrayed for you. Cowbridge. thus: Take, eat, this is my body, in the which the people shallbe deceived. Who also affirmed that the name of Christ was a foul name, and therefore razed it out of his books, wheresoever he found it. And would read for jesus Christ: jesus, jesus, saying that Christ was the deceiver of the world, and that all were damned in hell, that believed in the name of Christ. We will now with this blessed Martyr of M. Fox's canonisation end this talk with the whole conference, leaving it to the indifferent Reader to consider whether the Catholics, or the Protestants, draw nearer to the Donatists. Let us then proceed forth, and consider upon what good motives, ye charge M. Fekenham to be a Donatiste, which are, to say the truth, none other but falsehood and folly. But, as ye surmise, the one is, because he craftily and by a subtle shift refuseth the proofs of the old Testament, as the Donatists did. The other, because he with the said Donatists should avouch, that secular Princes have not to meddle in matters of Religion, or causes Ecclesiastical: nor to punish any man for such causes. Surely for your first motive so fine and subtle a blast of an horn, a man shall not lightly find again among all the horners in England I suppose. But yet by your leave Sir, your horn hath a foul flaw. When M Fekenham offereth to yield, if ye can prove this regiment either by the order that Christ left behind him in the new Testament, either by the Doctors, either by Counsels, or else by the continual practice of any one Church, think you M. Horn that this is not a large and an ample offer? I will not say, that this is subtile shift, but rather a very blind, bytle blonte shift of yours, to charge him with any refusal of the old Testament, either openly or covertly. There is not so much as any conjecture apparent, to gather this upon, yea the old Testament is not by this offer, as ye blindly and blontly guess, excluded, but verily included. For if the new Testament, which rehearseth many things out of the old, have any thing out of the old Testament, that make for this regiment: if any Doctor, old or new, if any Council have any thing out of the old Testament that serve for this regiment, then is Master Fekenham concluded, yea by his own grant. For so the Doctor or Council hath it, he is satisfied according to his demand. Whereby it followeth, that he doth not refuse, but rather allow and affirm the proofs of the old Testament. And surely wise men use not greatly to show that, that maketh against them, but most for them. Wherefore it is incredible, that Master Fekenham should on's imagine any such syfting or shyfting as ye dream of, having won his purpose against you even by the very old Testament as we have declared. And therefore it is spoken but in your dream, when ye say, ye have thereby with marvelous force shaken M. Fekenhams hold: which surely is so forcible, as will not beat down a very paper wall. And marvel were it, if ye should so batter his hold, when that these your great cannons come not nigh his hold by one thousand miles. Again this accusation is incredible. For M. Fekenham himself is so far of from this suspicion, that he himself, bringeth in against you many and good testimonies of the old Law. (as fol. 109. and 123.) by the force whereof only he may be thought to have shaken and overthrown to, your rotten weak hold underpropped with your great Sampsons' posts as mighty as bulrushes. But I perceive by your good Logic, your Law, and like Divinity, silence maketh a denial, and because M. Fekenham maketh no mention in this place of the matter to be proved by the old Testament, therefore he subtly refuseth the proofs thereof. But ye should rather me thinketh induce the contrary, and that he consenteth to you for the old Testament: Quia qui tacet, consentire videtur: (as the old saying is) For he that holdeth his peace, seemeth to consent: and so ye might have better forced upon him that all was yours, presupposing that ye had proved the matter by the old Testament. But you will needs drive your reason an other way. Let us see then, what we Catholics can say to you for your Apology by the like drift. You and your Colleages, seeing yourselves charged with many heresies, to wipe away that blot if it be possible, and for your better purgation, take upon you, to show your whole, full, and entire belief. And thereupon you recite the Articles of the common Crede. But now good Sir, I ask you a question: What if by chance you had omitted any one of them, would ye gladly be measured by this rule, ye measure M. Fekenham by? Would ye be content, that the Catholics should lay to your charge, that ye subtly refuse that article, that you have forslowen to rehearse? If ye would not, them must I say to you with Christ: Quod tibi non vis fieri, alteri non facias. Do you not to an other, that ye would not have done to yourself. If you say, that ye are content to stand to the very same law, as if ye be a reasonable and a constant man you must needs say: Lo then good Sir, you have concluded yourself and all your companions plain heretics, for the refusal of the Article, The Apology of England in reciting the common Crede leaveth out these words Conceived of the holy Ghost. Tom 1. Concil. pa. 752. M. Horn and his fellowe● by M. Horn his rule are Apollinarians, and Eutychians. Conceived of the holy Ghost, which ye omit in the rehearsal of your Creed, which Article I am assured, ye find not there. Then further, seeing that the Archeheretique Eutiches, and before him Appollinarius in the reciting of the common Creed ran in a manner the same race, you following them at the heels, as fast as may be, pretermitting also these words: Incarnatus est de Spiritu sancto: here might we even by your own rule and example, cry out upon you all as Apollinarians and Eutychians, and that with more colourable matter, than you have, either to make Master Fekenham a Donatiste, or that your Apology hath to make the worthy and learned Cardinal Hosius a Zuenckfeldian. Wherein your Rhetoric is all together as good, as is this yours here against Master Fekenham. Neither do we greatly pass, how the Donatists in this point demeaned themselves, and whether they openly or privily shunned proofs brought and deduced out of the old Testament. In deed the Manichees denied the authority of the books of the old Law and Testament: which I read not of the Donatists. Lib. 2. contr. Petil ca 92. Yea in the very same book and chapter by you alleged, Petilian himself, taketh his proof against the Catholics out of the old Testament, which you know could serve him in little stead, if he himself did reject such kind of evidences. This now shall suffice for this branch, to purge M. Fekenham that he is no Donatist, or Heretic otherwise. Concerning the other, beside your falsehood, your great folly doth also show it sesfe too, as well as in the other, to imagine him to be a Donatist, and to think or say as you say they did, that civil magistrates have not to do with religion, nor may not punish the transgressors of the same. M. Feckenham saith no such thing, and I suppose he thinketh no such thing: and further I dare be as bold to say, that there is not so much as a light conjecture to be grounded thereof by any of M. Fekenhans words, unless M. Horn become suddenly so subtle, that he thinketh no difference to say: the Prince should not punish an honest true man, in stead of a thief, and to say he should not punish a thief. Or to say, there is no difference betwixt allthings and nothing. For though M. Feckenham and all other catholics do deny the civil Princes supreme government in all causes ecclesiastical, yet doth not M. Feckenham or any Catholic deny but that civil Princes may deal in some matters ecclesiastical as advocates and defenders of the church, namely in punishing of heretics by sharp laws, unto the which laws, heretics are by the Church first given up and delivered by open excommunication and condemnation. As for S. Augustine's testimonies they nothing touch M. Fekenham, and therefore we will say nothing to them, but keep our accustomable tale with you, and beside all other score up as an untruth that ye say here also, that the Papists are no part of the Catholic Church, no more than the Donatists. M. Horn. The .19. Division. pag. 12. b. But for that S. Augustine's judgement and mine in this controversy is all one, as your opinion herein differeth nothing at all from the Donatists: I will use no other confirmation of my proofs alleged out of the old testament, for the reproof of your guilful restraint, than Christ's Catholic Church, uttered by that Catholic Doctor S. Augustine, against all the sects of Donatists, whether they be Gaudentians, Petilians, Rogatists, * you should have said Protestants. who in so many points (as hath been showed) resemble the Donatists. Papists, or any other petit sects sprung out of his loins what name so ever they have. S. Austin against Gaudentius, his second Epistle affirmeth, saying: I have (saith he) already heretofore made it manifest, Lib. 2. cap. 26. that it apertained to the king's charge, that the Ninivites should pacify Gods wrath, which the Prophet had denounced unto them. The kings which are of Christ's Church, do judge most rightly, that it appertaineth unto their cure that you (Donatists) rebel not without punishment against the same, etc. God doth inspire into kings that they should procure the commandment of the Lord, to be performed or kept in their kingdom. For they to whom it is said: and now ye kings understand, be ye learned ye judges of the earth, serve the Lord in fear: do perceive that their autoriti ought so to serve the lord, that such as will not obei his will should be punished of that authority, etc. Yea saith the same S. Aug. Let the kings of the earth serve Christ, even in making laws for Christ. meaning for the furtherance of Christ's religion. Epist. 48. How then doth kings (saith S. Aug. to Bonifacius, Epist. 50. against the Donatists) serve the Lord with reverence, but in forbidding and punishing with a religious severity, such things as are done against the Lords commandments? For a king serveth one way in that he is a man, an other way, in respect that he is a king. Because in respect that he is but a man, he serveth the Lord in living faithfully: but in that he is also a king, he serveth in making laws of convenient force to command just things, and to forbid the contrary, etc. In this therefore kings serve the Lord, when they do those things to serve him, which they could not do were they not kings. etc. But after that this begun to be fulfilled which is written: and all the kings of the earth shall worship him, all the nations shall serve him, what man being in his right wits, may say to Kings: Care not you in your Kingdoms, who defendeth or oppugneth the Church of your Lord? Let it not appertain, or be any part of your care, who is religious in your kingdom, or a wicked depraver of Religion. This was the judgement of S. Aug. or rather of Christ's Catholic Church, uttered by him against the Donatists, touching the service, authority, power, and care, that Kings have or aught to have in causes spiritual or ecclesiastical, the which is also the judgement of Christ's catholic church, now in these days and defended, by the true ministers of the same Catholic Church, against all Popish Donatists: with the force of God's holy word, both of the old and new Testament, even as S. Augustine did before. Who to prove and confirm this his assertion to be true against the Donatists, did avouch many more examples, than I have cited out of the old Testament: as of the King of Ninive, Epist. 48. of Darius, Nabuchodonozor, and others: affirming that the histories and other testimonies, cited out of the old Testament, are partly figures, and partly prophecies, of the power, duty, and service that Kings should owe and perform in like sort, to the furtherance of Christ's Religion in the time of the new Testament. The Donatists in the defence of their heresy, restrained S. Augustine, to the example and testimony, of such like order of Prince's Service in matters of Religion, to be found in the Scriptures of the new Testament: meaning that it could not be found in any order that Christ left behind him, as you also fantasied when you written the same in your book following, yea, going even cheek by cheek with them. But S. Austin maketh answer to you all for him and me both: Who, rehearsing the acts of the godly Kings of the old Testament, Epist. 41 taketh this for a thing not to be denied, to wit, That the ancient acts of the godly kings mentioned in the Prophetical books, were figures of the like facts to be done by the godly Princes in the time of the new Testament. And although there was not in the time of the Apostles, nor long time after, Epist. 50. any Kings or Princes, that put the same ordinance of Christ in practice, all being infidels for the most part: Yet the service of kings was figured (as S. Augustine saith) in Nabuchodonozor and others, to be put in practice, Epist. 41. when this of .71. Psalms should be fulfilled: and all the kings of the earth shall worship Christ, and all nations shall serve him, etc. As yet in the Apostles time, this prophecy (saith he) was not fulfilled: and now ye Kings understand, be learned ye that judge the earth, and serve the Lord in fear with reverence. Lib. 2. cont. lit. Petil. c. 92 Dan. 3. When the Christian Emperors and Princes (saith this Catholic Father) shall hear that Nabuchodonozor, after he had seen the marvelous power of almighty God, in saving the three young men, from the violence of the fire, walking therein without hurt, was so astonished at the miracle, that he himself being before this but a cruel idolater, began forthwith upon this wondrous sight, to understand and serve the Lord with reverent fear: Do not they understand, that th●●e things, are therefore written and recited in the Christian assemblies, that these should be examples to themselves of faith in God, to the furtherance of Religion? These Christian rulers, therefore minding according to the admonition of the Psalm, to understand, to be learned, and to serve the Lord with reverent fear, do very attentively give ear, and mark what Nabuchodonozor after said: for he, saith the Prophet, made a decree or statute, for all the people that were under his obeissance: that who so ever should after the publication thereof, speak any blasphemy against the almighty, they should suffer death, and their goods be confiscate. Now if the Christian Emperors, and Kings, do know, that Nabuchodonozor made this decree against the blasphemers of God, surely they cast in their minds, what they are bound to decree in their kingdoms, to wit, that the self same God, and his Sacraments, be not lightly set by and contemned. Thus far S. Augustin: By whose judgement, * Note, that now S. Augustins judgement is also the judgement of the Catholic Church. being also the judgement of the catholic Church, it is manifest, that the order, rule, and government, in Ecclesiastical causes, practised by the Kings of the old Testament, being figures and prophecies, of the like government, and service, to be in the Kings under the new Testament, is the order of government, that Christ left behind him in the Ghospel and new Testament: and so directly confuteth your (.52.) The 52. untruth M. Feckenham holdeth no such opinion. erroneous opinion. Stapleton. Lo, now have we more testimonies of S. Augustine to prove that, for the which he hath alleged many things out of S. Augustin already and the which no man denieth. For what else proveth all this out of S. Augustine, both now and before alleged, but that Christian Princes ought to make laws and constitutions (even as M. Horn himself expoundeth it fol. 12. b.) for the furtherance of Christ's Religion? This thing no Catholic denieth. And for my part M. Horn, that you may not think I have now been first so advised upon sight of your book, I have forced that argument with many Examples of Godly Emperors and Princes in my dedicatory Epistle to the queens Majesty, before the translated history of venerable Bede. Briefly all S. Augustins words force nothing else but that Christian Princes may make laws to punish heretics (for that in deed was the very occasion why S. Augustin wrote all this) and ought to fortify the decrees of the Priests with the execution of the secular power, when obstinate heretics will not otherwise obey. Thus it serveth our turn very well. But now that Master Horn may not utterly lose all his labour herein, let us see, how these matters do truly and trimly serve against his dear brethren, and M. Foxes holy Martyrs to. We say with S. Augustin, that Princes may punish wicked depravers of religion. Li. 2. cont. Petilianun cap. 92. & Epist. 48.50. And we further say, that ye are those. We say with saint Augustine, that Christian Princes may make a decree yea of death: as did Nabuchodonosor against the blasphemers of God, and carefully provide, that God and his sacraments be not lightly contained. We say ye are as great blasphemers, as ever Christ's Church had: we say ye be they, that have contemned Christ's Sacraments, making of seven two, and using those two after such sort, Princes and church laws made against the protestans that the old proverb may (the more pity) in a manner take place, as good never a whit, as never the better. We say further that not only the general Council of Trent, but that the whole Church hath condemned your opinions, by general and national Councils many hundred years since. And that Christian Emperors, Christian Princes, as well in other countries, as in England, especially the noble and worthy King Henrye the fift, have made many sharp laws, yea of death against heresies. We do not, nor never did disallow these their doings, as repugnant either to the old or new Testament. Why then call you for this respect the catholics, Popish Donatists? But will ye know Master Horn, who be in this point in very deed the Doltish devilish Donatists? Hearken on well, and ye shall hear. Who be the true Donatists for saying princes may not punish transgressors in causes of religion. Episto. 50. Bonifacio Comiti. Fontanus li. 1. in histor. no. temp. Vide epist. Aug. 48. in edit. Basil. & annotationem marginalem ibidem. Sir Thomas Hitton priest M. Foxes martyr. A great Lie of M. Fox. The Donatists as S. augustine reporteth, said: It was free, to believe, or not to believe, and that faith should not be forced. Was not this I pray you the common song of the Luterans in Germany, and England at their beginning? Was not this your Apostles Luther's opinion, that no man should be compelled to the faith? And as there are many dissensions, divisions, schisms betwixt you the Sacramentaries, and the Lutherans: so are you divided also in this point. For your M. Calvin writeth, that a man may lawfully and by God's law be put to death for heresy, as he practised himself also, burning servetus the Arrian at Geneva. But all Luther's scholars in Germany are not so forward. Yea some of your holy martyrs avouch, that the King can make no law to punish any manner of crime by death, and that all such laws are contrary to the Gospel. This was the opinion of Sir Thomas Hytton priest, and yet is he a blessed martyr in M. Fox his holy Calendar, and we must keep his feast the x. of March by M. Foxe. Yet in a book of prayers set forth by the brotherhod anon upon his death, he is appointed to the .23. of February, and so either M. Fox or they miss the mark. Except the one day be of his Martyrdom, and the other of his Translation. And whereas M. Fox saith, that there remaineth nothing of the said Sir Thomas in writing but only his name, (which is a lie, and more to by a syllable) and that I hear say he is busy to set forth a fresh in print yet on's again, his huge monstrous martyrloge, I will do so much for him, as minister him plenty of good stuff I warrant you, to set forth and adorn at his next edition, this worthy champion withal. I do therefore remit M. Fox, to Sir Thomas Moor's books. S. Thomas More in his preface to Tyndal the 344. leaf. etc. There lo is matter enough for M. Fox, and to much to: for even by your own confession he is no secret but an open damnable heretic, and a Donatist: and so I trow no martyr, but yet good enough, and as good as the residue of this worthy Calendar. But now hath M. Fox a far greater business in hand, for he must scrape out S. john Oldcastel knight, S. john Oldcastle knight of the same opinion with S. Thomas Hytton priest. being not only a traitor, but a detestable Donatiste also. Now all the weight resteth to prove this substantially to you and to M. Fox, and to stop all your froward quarrelings and accustomable elusions against our proofs. Well, I will bring you (as I think) a substantial and and an inevitable proof, that is M. Fox himself, and no worse man. For lo thus he writeth of this worthy champion, and that even in his own huge martyrologue, who doubteth but to the great exalting and amplification of his noble work, and of his noble holy Martyr? The tenth article, saith M. Fox, Fox in his English martyrol. the 139. leaf. Col. 2. M. Feckenham purged by M. Horn himself of that he layeth to him. that manslawghter either by war, or by any pretended law of justice, for any temporal cause, or spiritual revelation, is expressly contrary to the new Testament, which is the law of graceful of mercy. This worthy article, with a .11. other of like sewte and sort, in a book of reformation (beilke very like to Captain Keets tree of reformation in Norfolk) was exhibited in open parliament, if we believe M. Fox. Now you see M. Horn, where and upon whom ye may truly utter and bestow all this needless treatise of yours against M. Feckenham. And therefore we may now proceed to the remnant of your book, saving that this in no wise must be overhipped, that even by your own words here ye purge M. Feckenham, from this crime, ye laid unto him even now, for refusing proofs taken out of the old testament. For if, Rom. 1. as ye say, the order and government that Christ left behind in the Gospel and new testament, is the order, rule, and government in Ecclesiastical causes practised by the Kings of the old Testament, then will it follow, that M. Fekenham yielding to the government of the new, doth not exclude, but rather comprehend the government of the old Testament also, both being especially, as ye say, alone. M. Horn. The 20. Division. Pag. 14. a. Now I will conclude on this sort, that which I affirmed: namely that Kings, and Princes, aught to take upon them government in Ecclesiastical causes. What government, orde, and dutifulness, so ever belonging to any, God hath figured and promised before hand by his Prophets, in the holy Scriptures of the old Testament, to be performed by Christ, and those of his kingdom: that is the government, order, and dutifulness, set forth, and required in the Gospel, or new testament. But that faithful Emperors, Kings, and Rulers, aught of duty, as belonging to their office, to claim and take upon them * Not such Supreme government as the Oath prescribeth. the government, authority, power, care, and service, of God their Lord, in matters of Religion, or * Not in all causes ecclesiastical. causes Ecclesiastical, was an order and dutifulness for them: prefigured and fore promised of God by his Prophets, in the Scriptures of the old Testament, as (.53.) The 53. untruth. S. Augustin hath witnessed no such large and Supreme government, as you attribute now to princes. S. Augustine hath sufficiently witnessed: Ergo. Christian Emperors, Kings, and Rulers, owe of duty, as belonging to their office, to claim, and take upon them, the government, authority, power, care, and service of their Lord, * You conclude not in all things and causes, and therefore you conclude nothing against us. in matters of Religion: or Spiritual, or Ecclesiastical causes, is the government, order, and dutifulness, set forth, and required, in the Gospel or new Testament. This that hath been already said, might satisfy any man that erreth of simple ignorance. But for that your wilfulness is such, that you (.54.) The 54. untruth. Slaunderours. delight only in wrangling against the truth, appear it to you never so plain, and that no weight of good proofs, can press you, you are so slippery, I will load you with heaps, even of such proofs, as ye will seem desirous to have. The holy Ghost describing by the Prophet Esay, what shallbe the state of Christ's Church in the time of the new testament, 2. Cor. 6. yea now in these our day, (for this our time is the time that the Prophet speaketh of, as S. Paul witnesseth to the Corinthians) addeth many comfortable promises, and amongst other maketh this to Christ's Catholic Church, to wit, Kings shallbe Nourishing Fathers, Esa. 49. and Queens shallbe thy nurses. Nourishing Fathers saith the gloze interlined, Lyra in Esa. c. 49. In lact verbi. In the milk of the word, meaning God's word. Lyra addeth: This prophecy is manifestly fulfilled in many Kings and Queens, who receiving the Catholic Faith, did feed the poor faithful ones, etc. And this reverence to be done by Kings (saith Lyra) was fulfilled in the time of Constantine and other Christian Kings. Certainly, Constantin the Emperor, showed himself to understand his own duty of nourishing Christ's Church appointed by God in his Prophecy: All this of Constantine is granted and maketh nothing for you. Euse. li. .3. de vita Constant. Lib. 2. for he like a good, tender, and faithful Nurse father, did keep, defend, maintain, uphold, and feed the poor faithful ones of Christ: he bore them being as it were almost wearied and forhayed with the great persecutions of God's enemies, and marvelously shaken with the controversies and contentions amongst themselves, even as a nurse Father in his own bosom: he procured that they should be fed with the sweet milk of God's word. Yea, he himself with his public proclamations, did exhort and allure his subjects to the Christian Faith. As Eusebius doth report in many places, writing the life of Constantine, He caused the Idolatrous religion to be suppressed, and utterly banished, and the true knowledge and Religion of Christ, to be brought in and planted among his people. He made many wholesome laws, and Godly constitutions, wherewith he restrained the people with threats, forbidding them the Sacrificing to Idols: to seek after the Devilish and superstitious sooth sayings: to set up (55.) The 55. untruth. They were Idols, not Images, that Constantin forbade his subjects to set up. Lib 4. de vit. Const. Lib. 1. Images: that they should not make any privy Sacrifices: and to be brief, he reformed all manner of abuses, about God's service, and provided that the Church should be fed with God's word. Yea, his diligent care in furthering and setting forth the true knowledge of Christ, wherewith he fed the people, was so watcheful, that Eusebius doth affirm him to be appointed of God, as it were the common or Universal Bishop: And so Constantine took himself to be: Lib. 4. and therefore said to the bishops assembled together with him at a feast, that God had appointed him to be a Bishop. But of this most honourable Bishop and nourshing father, more shallbe said hereafter, as of other also such like. The .17. Chapter opening the weakness of M. horns Conclusion, and of other his proofs out of holy Scripture. Stapleton. NOw ye may conclude, that there is some regiment that Princes may take upon them in causes ecclesiastical: but if ye mean of such regiment as ye pretend, you make your reckoning without your host as a man may say: and conclude before ye have brought forth any proof, that they ought or may take upon them such government. For though I grant you all your examples ye have alleged, and that the doings of the old Testament were figures of the new, and the saying of Isaiah, that Kings should be Nowrishinge Fathers to the Church: and all things else that ye here allege, yet all will not reach home, no not Constantine's the great his example. Who being an Ethnic became a Christian, and to the uttermost of his power, set forth Christ's religion in all the Empire. what then? your conclusion of supreme regiment, will not necessarily follow thereof. And when Eusebius calleth him, as it were, a common or universal bishop, I suppose ye mean not, that he was a bishop in deed. For yourself confess, that princes and Bishops offices are far distincted and dissevered, M. Horn doth curtal Eusebius sentence. and that the one ought not to break in to the office of the other. And if ye did so mean, Eusebius himself would soon confound you, if ye rehearse Constantine's whole sentence, that he spoke to the bishops. For thus he saith to the bishops. Vos quidem eorum quae intus sunt in Ecclesia agenda, ego verò eorum quae extra sunt Episcopus à Deo sum constitutus. Euse. lib. 4 de vitae Constant. You are bishops saith he, of those things that are to be done within the Church: I am bishop of outward things. Which answer of his may satisfy any reasonable man, for all that ye bring in here of Constantine, or all that ye shall afterward bring in: which declareth him no supreme judge or chief determinour of causes Ecclesiastical, but rather the contrary: and that he was the overseer in civil matters. And the most that may be enferred thereof, is that he had the procuration and execution of Church matters: which I am assured all catholics will grant. But now whereas ye charge M. Fekenham partly with subtle, partly with fowl shifts: this is in you surely, no subtile but a blonte and a fowl shameless shift, to shift the Idols into the Image of Christ and his saints: and whereas Constantine put down the paynims Idols, to make the simple believe, that the reformation which he made, was such as your reformation or rather deformation is. For to leave other things, to say that Constantine forbade to set up Images, Euseb lib. 3. de vita Constant. is an open and a shameless lie: for he set up the Cross of Christ, that is so owtragiously and blasphemously vylayned by you every where, in the stead of the idols, he decked and adorned the Churches every where with holy Images, Nice. con. act. 2. Pa. 429. Col. 2. the remembrance of Christ's incarnation, and for the worship of his saints, thereby to set forth the truth, and the worship of God, and to convert all nations from Idolatry and devilish deceit. M. Horn. The Division 21. Pag. 15. Our saviour Christ meant not to forbid or destroy, touching the rule, service, and charged of Princes in Church causes, that which was figured in the law, or prophesied by the Prophets. Mat. ●. For he came to fulfil or accomplish the law and the Prophets, by removing the shadow and figure, and establishing the body and substance to be seen, and to appear clearly without any mist or dark cover: yea, as the power and authority of Princes was appointed in the Law and Prophets, as it is proved, to stretch itself, not only to civil causes, but also to the oversight, maintenance, setting forth, and furtherance of Religion and matters Ecclesiastical: Mat. 21. Even so Christ our Saviour (.56) The .56. untruth. This place of S. Matth. maketh nothing for the Princes supreme government in Ecclesiastical things. Matth. 22 confirmed this their authority, commanding all men to attribute and give unto Caesar that which belongeth unto him admonishing notwithstanding all Princes and people, that Caesar's authority is not infinite, or without limits (for such authority belongeth only to the King of all Kings▪) but bounded and circumscribed within the bounds assigned in God's word, and so will I my word; to be understanded, when so ever I speak of the power of Princes. Stapleton. M. Horn goeth yet nedelessely forward to prove that Christ did not destroy the rule of Princes in Church causes, figured in the old Law, and now at length catcheth he one testimony out of the new Testament to prove his saying: which is, give unto Caesar, that belongeth unto him. Which place nothing at all serveth his turn, but rather destroyeth, I will not say any figure of the old Testament, but M. Horns foolish figurative Divinity. For it is so far of (that of this place M. Horn may make any ground, for the Ecclesiastical authority of Princes) that it doth not as much as infer, that we ought to pay so much as tribute to our Princes, but only that we may pay it. For the question was framed of the captious jews, not whether they ought, but whether they might lawfully pay any tribute to Caesar. Which was then an external and an infidel Prince. For if M. Horn will say those words import a precise necessity, he shall have much a do to excuse the Italians, Frenchmen, Spaniards, and our Nation, which many hundred years have paid no tribute to Caesar. But I pray you M. Horn, why have you defalked and curtailed Christ's answer? Why have you not set forth his whole and entire sentence: The place of Mat. 22. maketh rather quite against M. Horn. Fol. 20. give to Caesar that belongeth to Caesar, and to God that belongeth to God? which later clause I am assured, doth much more take away a supreme regiment in all causes Ecclesiastical, then necessarily by force of any words bind us to pay, yea any tribute to our Prince. And will ye see how it happeneth, that Hosius a great learned and a godly Bishop of Spain, as M. Horn himself calleth him, even by this very place proveth against the Emperor Constantius, and telleth it him to his face, that he had nothing to do with matters Ecclesiastical? Whose words we shall have an occasion hereafter to rehearse. Yea S. Ambrose also useth the same authority to repress the like usurped authority of Valentinian the younger. Amb li. 5. Ep. 32. This ill hap hath M. Horn even with his first authority of the new Testament, extraordinary, and impertinently I can not tell how chopped in, to cause the leaves of his book, and his lies, to make the more monster and show. But now, whereas this place serveth nothing for any authority Ecclesiastical in the Prince, and least of all for his pre-eminent and peerless authority in all causes Ecclesiastical, as M. Horn fancieth, Yet lest any man (being borne down with the great weight of so mighty a proof) should think the Prince's power infinite, M. Horn to amend this inconvenience, of his great gentleness, thought good to prevent this mischief, and to admonish the Reader thereof: and that his meaning is not by this place to geave him an infinite authority, or without limits, but such only as is bounded and circumscribed within the bounds of God's word: and lest ye should mistake him, he would himself so to be understanded. Which is for all this solemnity, but a foolish and a frivolous admonition, without any cause or ground: and grounded only upon M. Horns fantistical imagination, and not upon Christ, as he surmiseth. Who willeth that to be given to Caesar that is Caesar's, and to God that is Gods: but determineth and expresseth nothing, that is to be given to Caesar, but only payment of money. And yet if we consider, as I have said, what was the question demanded, it doth not determine that neither: though the thing itself be most true. How be it this admonition serveth Master Horn and his brethren for many and necessary purposes, to rule and master their Princes by, at their pleasure: that as often as their doings like them not, they may freely disobey, and say it is not▪ Gods word, whereof the interpretation they refer to themselves. And so far it serveth some of them, and the most zealous of them, that now their Prince, though Supreme governor and judge in all causes Ecclesiastical, may not by God's word, appoint them as much as a Surplice or Cope to be worn in the Church, or Priestlike and decent apparel to be worn of them otherwise. Yea some of them, of whom we have already spoken, have found a way, and that by God's word, to depose the queens Majesty from all manner of jurisdiction as well temporal as spiritual: and that by God's holy word. Whereof these men make a very Welshemans' hose, to say the truth, and among other, M. Horn himself, for all his solemn admonition. For we plainly say, that this kind of supremacy, is directly against God's holy word. M. Horn. The .22. Division. pag. 15. b. And this to be Christ's order and meaning, that the Kings of the Nations should be the supreme governors over their people, not only us temporal, but also in Spiritual or Ecclesiastical causes (.57.) The .57. untruth. The apostles never declared any such matter. 1. Pet. 2. Rom. 13. the blessed Apostles Peter and Paul, do plainly declare. The supremacy of Princes they set forth, when they command every soul (that is, every man, whether he be, as Chrysostom saith, an Apostle, Evangelist, Prophet, Priest, Monk, or of what so ever calling he be) to be subject and obey the higher powers, as Kings, and their Lieutenants, or governors under them. And they declare that this supreme government is occupied and exercised in, or about the praising, furthering, and advancing of virtue or virtuous actions, and contrary wise in correcting, staying, and repressing all manner of vice or vicious actions, Epist. 125. which are the proper object or matter hereof. Thus doth Basilius take the meaning of the Apostles, saying: This seemeth to me to be the office of a Prince, to aid virtue, and to impugn vice. Neither S. Paul, neither the best learned among the ancient Fathers, did restrain this power of Princes, only to virtues and vices, bidden or forbidden, in the second table of God's commandments, wherein are contained the duties one man oweth to an other: But also did plainly declare themselves to mean, that the authority of Princes ought to stretch itself to the maintenance, praise and furtherance of the virtues of the first table, and the suppression of the contrary, wherein only consisteth the true Religion, and spiritual Service, that is due from man to God. S Paul in his Epistle to Timothe, 1. Tim. 2. teacheth the Ephesians, that Kings and Rulers are constituted of God, for these two purposes: that their people may live a peaceable life, thourough their government and ministery both in godliness, which is (as S. (.58.) The .58. untruth. S. Aug. miss understanded. Lib 14. De Trin. cap 1 Lib. 5. the civit dei cap. 14. Augustine interpreth it) the true and chief or proper worship of God: and also in honesty or seemliness: in which two words (Godliness and Honesty) he contained what so ever is commanded either in the first or second Table. S. Augustine also showeth this to be his mind, when describing the true virtues, which shall cause princes to be blessed, now in Hope, and afterwards in deed, addeth this as one especial condition, required by reason of their charged and calling. If that (saith he) they make their power which they have a servant unto God's Majesty, to enlarge most wide his worship, Service, or Religion. To this purpose also, serve all those testimonies, which I have cited before out of S. Aug. against the Donatists: who in his book. Grad. 6. Rom. 13. Lib 2. cap. 83. De. 12. abusive num gradibus, teacheth that a Prince or Ruler must labour to be had in awe of his subjects, for the severity against the traunsgressours of God's Law. Not meaning only the transgressors of the second table in temporal matters: But also against the offenders of the first table in (.59.) The .59. untruth. S. Aug. meaneth not to teach such government of Princes in Ecclesiastical matters, as you teach, but only to punish heretics by laws, & by the same to maintain the Catholic faith decreed of the Clergy, not by the Civil Magistrate Lib. 2. cont 2 Epist. Gaud c. 11 Spiritual or Ecclesiastical causes or matters. Which his meaning he declareth plainly in another place, where he avoucheth the saying of S. Paul: The Prince beareth not the sword in vain, to prove therewith against Petilian the Donatist, that the power or authority of Princes, which the Apostle speaketh of in that sentence, is given unto them to make sharp Laws, to further true Religion, and to suppress Heresies and Schisms: and therefore in the same place, he calleth the Catholic Church, that hath such Princes to govern to this effect: A Church made strong, whole, or fastened together with Catholic princes: meaning that the Church is weak, rent, and parted in sunder, where Catholic Governors are not, to maintain the unity thereof in Church matters, by their authority and power. Gaudentius the Donatist, found himself aggrieved that Emperors should entremeddle, and use their power in matters of religion: affirming, that this was to restrain men of that freedom that God had set men on. That this was a great injury to God, if he meaning his religion) should be defended by men. And that this was nothing else, but to esteem God to be one, that is not able to revenge the injuries done against himself. S. Augustine doth answer and refute his objections, with the authority of S. Paul's saying to the Romans: Let every soul be subject to the higher powers, etc. For he is God's minister, to take vengeance on him that doth evil: interpreting the mind of the Apostle to be, that the authority and power of Princes, hath to deal in Ecclesiastical causes, so (60) The 60. untruth. S. Augustine never wrote so. well as in Temporal. And therefore saith to Gaudentius, and to you all: Blot out these sayings (of S. Paul. 13. Rom.) if you can, or if you can not, then set nought by them, as ye do. Retain a most wicked meaning of all these sayings (of the Apostle) least you lose your freedom in judging: or else truly for that as men, ye are ashamed to do before men, cry out if you dare: Let murderers be punished, let adulterers be punished, let all other faults, Where is there in all this M. Horn, that the Princes hath to deal in Ecclesiastical causes, so well as in temporal? be they never so heinous or full of mischief be punished (by the Magistrate) we will that only wicked faults against religion be exempt from punishment by the laws of kings or rulers. etc. hearken to the Apostles, and thou shalt have a great advantage that the kingly power cannot hurt thee, do well, and so shalt thou have praise of the same power, etc. That thing that ye do, is not only not good, but it is a great evil, to wit, to cut in sunder the unity and peace of Christ, to rebel against the promises of the Gospel, and to bear the Christian arms or badges, as in a civil war, against the true and high King of the Christians. The .18. chapter declaring how Princes have to govern in cases of the first Tables answering to certain places out of the Canonical Epistles of the Apostles. Stapleton. HERE is nothing M. Horn, that importeth your surmised supremacy. The effect of your process is, Princes have authority to maintain, praise and further the virtues of the first table, and to suppress the contrary, wherein only consists the true Religion and spiritual Service that is due from man to God. And that he hath authority herein, not only in the virtues or vices bidden, or forbidden in the second table of God's commandments, wherein are contained the duties one man oweth to an other. This is granted M. Horn, both of the Hosius. lib. 2. & Soto count Brentium. Melanch. in lo. come. Cap. de magistr. Civilib. catholics, and of the soberer sort of Protestants (for Carolostadius, Pelargus, Struthius, with the whole rabble of th' Anabaptists deny it) that Princes have authority both to further the observation, and to punish the breach of God's commandments as well in the first table as in the second, that is, as well in such actions as concern our duty to God himself, as in the duty of one man to an other. But all this is (as not only the Catholic writers, but Melanchthon himself and Calvin, do expound) quod ad externam disciplinam attinet, Melanch. ut suprà. as much as appertaineth to external discipline: and the Magistrate is the keeper and defender of both tables (saith Melanchthon) but again he addeth: quod ad externos mores attinet, as much as belongeth to external manners, behaviour, and demeanour. For in the first table are contained many offences and breaches, of the which the Prince can not judge, and much less are by him punishable. As are all such crimes, which properly belong to the Court of Conscience. To wit, misbelief in God, mistrust in his mercy, contempt of his commandments, presumption of ourselves, incredulity, and such like: which all are offences against the first table, that is, against the love we own to God. Contrariwise, true belief, confidence in God, the fear of God, and such like, are the virtues of the first table. And of these Melanchthon truly saith: Haec sunt vera opera primae tabulae, In Apolologia Confess. Art. 18. These are the true works of the first table. The punishing, correcting, or judging of these appertain nothing to the authority of the Prince, or to any his laws: but only are judged, corrected and punished by the spiritual sword of excommunication, of binding of sins, and embarring the use of the holy Sacraments, by the order and authority of the Priest only and spiritual Magistrate. Which thing is evident not only by the confession, doctrine, and continual practice of the Catholic Church, but also by the very writings of such as have departed out of the Church, and will seem most to extol the authority of Princes, yea of yourself M. Horn, as we shall see hereafter. Again whereas, the chief virtue of the first table is to believe in God, to know him, and to have the true faith of him and in him, in external regiment (as to punish open blasphemy, to make laws against heretics, to honour and maintain the true service of God) Princess especially Christians, aught to further, aid, and maintain the same: But to judge of it, and to determine, which is the true faith in God, how and after what manner he ought to be served, what doctrine ought to be published in that behalf, the Prince hath no authority or power at all. Therefore Melanchthon, In locis come. ubi supra. who in his Common places, will have Princes to look unto the true doctrine, to correct the Churches (when Bishops fail of their duty) yea and to consider the doctrine itself: yet afterward he so writeth of this matter, that either he recanteth as better advised, or else writeth plain contrary to himself. For thus he saith of the Civil Magistrates: In examine ordinandorum. Non condant dogmata in Ecclesia, nec instituant cultus: ut fecit Nabuchodonozor. Et recens in scripto, cui titulus est Interim, potestas politica extra metas egressa est. Suidas in ●eontio. Sicut Imperatori Constantio dixit Episcopus Leontius. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Non sunt confundendae functiones etc. Let them make no doctrines in the Church: neither appoint any worshipping of God, as did Nabuchodonosor. And even of late in that writing which is entitled, the Interim, the Civil power hath passed her bounds and limits. As ones Bishop Leontius said to Constantius the Emperor: Thou being set to govern in one matter, takest upon thee an other matter. The functions (of both magistrates) are not to be confounded. In these words you see M. Horn, Melanchthon taketh away all authority from Princes in judging or determining of doctrine: and will not have the functions of both Magistrates Spiritual and temporal to be confounded. Nowell fol. 33. Yea M. Nowell himself with a great stomach biddeth us show, where they deny, that godly and learned Priests might according to God's word judge of the sincerity of doctrine. As though when the Prince and his successors are made supreme governors without any limitation, it fall not often out, that the bishop, be he never so learned or godly, shall not once be admitted to judge of true doctrine, except the doctrine please the Prince: As though there had not been a statute made, declaring and enacting the queens Ma. yea and her highness successors (without exception or limitation of godly and ungodly, and yet I trow no bishops) to be the Supreme Governor in all things and causes as well spiritual as temporal. As though you M. Horn, had not written, that in both the tables, the Prince hath authority, to erect and correct, to farther, and restrain, to allow and punish the virtues and vices thereto appertaining. As though the governor in all causes, is not also a judge in all causes. Or as though it were not commonly so taken and understanded of a thousand in England which have taken that Oath to their great damnation, but if they repent. You therefore M. Horn, which talk so confusely and generally of the Prince's Authority in both tables, do yet say nothing nor prove nothing this general and absolute Authority in all things and causes, as lustily without exception the Oath expresseth. And therefore you bring in deed nothing to prove your principal purpose, to the which all your proofs should be directed. Again where you allege S. Augustin, that the word Godliness mentioned in S. Paul to Timothe should mean, the true, chief, or proper worship of God (as though Prince's having charge thereof, should also have authority to appoint such worship, when yet S. Paul speaketh there of no such or of any authority at all in Princes, but only that by their peaceable government we might with the more quiet attend to God's service) you do herein untruly report S. Augustine, or at the lest mistake him. August. lib. 14. cap. 1. De Trinit. 1. Tim. 2. For the word (godliness) which S. Augustine will have so to mean, is that which the Greeks call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, God's service or religion, as himself there expresseth: but the word of the Apostle to Timothee, is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, godliness. So aptly and truly you allege your doctors. But will you know M. Horn, why th'Apostles both S. Peter and S. Paul so earnestly taught at that time obedience to Princes? This was the cause. In the beginning of the church some Christians were of this opinion: that, for that they were Christian men, 1. Pet. 2. Rom. 13. they were exempted from the laws of the Infidel Princes: and were not bound to pay them any tribute, or otherwise to obey them. To repress and reform this wrong judgement of theirs, the Apostles Peter and Paul by you named, diligently employed themselves. Whose sayings can not imply your pretenced government: unless you will say, that Nero the wicked and heathennish Emperor was in his time the supreme head of all the church of Christ, throughout the empire, aswell in causes spiritual as temporal. And yet in temporal and civil matters I grant you, we ought to be subject, not only to Christians, but even to infidels also, being our princes: without any exception, of Apostle, evangelist, prophet, priesthood is above a kingdom priest or monk, as ye allege out of S. Chrysostom. As contrary wise the Christian prince himself, is for ecclesiastical and spiritual causes, subject to his spiritual ruler. Which Chrysostom himself, of all men doth best declare. Alij sunt termini etc. The bounds of a kingdom, and of priesthood (saith Chrysostom) are not all one: This kingdom passeth the other: This king is not known, by visible things, neither hath his estimation, either for precious stones he glistereth withal, or for his gay golden, glistering apparel. The other king hath the ordering of those worldly things: the authority of priesthood cometh from heaven: what so ever thou shalt bind upon earth, Chrysost. homil. 4. de eo quod scripsit Esa. shallbe bound in heaven. To the king those things that are here in the world are committed, but to me celestial things are committed: when I say to me, I understand to a priest. And anon after he saith: Regi corpora etc. The bodies are committed to the King, the souls to the Priest: the King pardoneth the faults of the body, the priest pardoneth the faults of the soul. The King forcethe, the priest exhorteth: the one by necessity, the other by giving counsel: the one hath visible armour, the other spiritual. He warreth against the barbarous, I war against the Devil. This principality is the greater. And therefore the King doth put his head under the priests hands, and every where in the old scripture priests did anoint the Kings. Among all other books of the said Chrysostom, his book de Sacerdotio is freighted, with a number of like and more notable sentences for the priest's superiority above the Prince. Now then M. Horn, I frame you such an argument. The Priest is the Princes superior in some causes ecclesiastical, Evidently proved by S. Chrysost the Prince not to be the Superior in causes ecclesiastical. Ergo the Prince is not the Priests superior in all causes ecclesiastical. The Antecedent is clearly proved out of the words of Chrysost. before alleged. Thus. The Priest is superior to the prince in remission of sins by Chrysostom: but remission of sins is a cause ecclesiastical or spiritual. Ergo the Priest is the Princes superior in some cause ecclesiastical or spiritual. Which being most true, what thing can you conclude of all ye have or shall say to win your purpose, or that ye here presently say? that the Prince hath the care aswell of the first, as of the second table of the commandments: and that S. Paul willeth us to pray for the Princes, 1. Tim. 2. that we may live a peaceable life in godliness and honesty. In the which place he speaketh of the heathennishe princes, as appeareth by that which followeth, to pray for them that they may be converted to the faith: Or of all ye bring in out of S. Augustin either against the Donatists (whereof we have already said enough) or that Princes must make their power a servant to God's Majesty to enlarge his worship, service and religion. Now as all this frameth full yllfavoredly to conclude your principle: ●. Augustin returned upon M. Horn and his fellows. Lib. 2. cont. 2. epistol. Gaudentij cap. 11. so I say that if S. Augustine were alive, he might truly and would say unto you, as he said unto Gaudentius: and as yourself allege against yourself and your brethren. That thing that ye do, is not only not good, but it is a great evil: to wit, to cut in sunder the unity and peace of Christ, to rebel against the promises of the gospel: or to bear the Christian arms or badges as in a civil war, against the true, and the high King of the Christians: he would say, if he were alive unto you, that as the Donatists, did not deny Christ the head, but Christ the body, that is his Catholic Church, so do you. He would say, that as the Donatists sect was condemned by Constantin, Honorius, and other Emperors, the high Kings of the Christians: so are your heresies condemned not only by the Catholic Church, but also by the worthy and most renowned King Henry the fift: and other Kings, as well in England as else where: also by the high Kings of the Christians, that is themperors as well of our time, as many hundred years since. And therefore ye are they, that cut in sunder the unity and peace of Christ's Church, and rebel against the promises of the Gospel. M. Horn. The 22. Division. Pag. 17. a. Chrysostom showeth this reason, why S. Paul doth attribute this title of a minister worthily unto the Kings, or civil Magistrates: because that through fraying of the wicked men, and commending the good, he prepareth the minds of many to be made more appliable to the doctrine of the word. Eusebius alluding to the sentence of S. Paul, where he calleth the civil Magistrate, God's minister, and understanding that Ministry of the ciui● Magistrate to be about Religion, and Ecclesiastical causes, so (.61.) The 61. untruth. Eusebius never understood any such Ministry of the Civil Magistrate. Lib. 1. De vit. Const. Lib. 2. De vit. Const. well as Temporal, doth call Constantine the Emperor: The great light, and most shrill preacher, or setter forth of true godliness: The one and only God (saith he) hath appointed Constantine to be his minister, and the teacher of Godliness to all countries. And this same Constantin, like a faithful and good minister: did thoroughly set forth this: and he did confess himself manifestly to be the servant and minister of the high King. He preached with his imperial decrees or proclamations his God, even to the bounds of the whole world. Yea Constantine himself affirmeth, as Eusebius reporteth: That by his ministry he did put away and overthrow all the evils that pressed the world, meaning all superstition, Idolatry, and false Religion. In so much (saith this Godly Emperor) that there withal I both called again mankind, taught by my ministry, to the Religion of the most holy Law (meaning the word of God) and also caused, that the most blessed faith should increase and grow under a better governor (meaning than had been before) for (saith he) I would not be unthankful to neglect namely the best ministry, which is the thanks I own (unto God) of duty. This most Christian Emperor did rightly consider, as he had been truly taught of the most Christian Bishops of that time, that as the Princes have in charge the ministry and government in (.62.) The 62. untruth. Impudent and shame less. Concluded, but no whit proved. all manner causes either Temporal or Spiritual: even so, the chiefest or best part of their Service or Ministry to consist in the well ordering of Church matters, and their diligent rule and care therein, to be the most thankful, acceptable, and dutiful Service that they can do or owe unto God. The .19. Chapter. Answering to the sayings of Eusebius and Nicephorus touching Constantin and Emanuel Emperors. Stapleton. I See you not M. Horn come as yet near the matter. I see not yet, that Constantin changed Religion, plucked down altars, deposed bishops, etc. But that he was diligent in defending the old and former faith of the Christians. If S. Paul call the civil magistrate a minister, because through fear he constraineth the wicked to embrace the godly doctrine, as by your saying S. Chrysostom construeth it, we are well content therewith. And withal, that the best ministry and service of the great Constantin rested in the setting forth of Christ's true religion: and that he preached the same with his Imperial decrees and proclamations, as ye out of Eusebius recite. Neither this that ye here allege out of place, nor all the residue which ye rehearse of this Constantin (with whose doings ye furnish hereafter six full leaves) can import this superiority, as we shall there more at large specify. In the mean season, I say it is a stark and most impudent lie, that ye say without any proof, Constantin was taught of the bishops, that Princes have the government in all manner causes, either temporal or spiritual. You conclude after your manner, facingly and desperately without any proof or half proof in the world. M. Horn. The Division .24. Pag. 17. b, For this (.63.) The 63. untruth, a● shall appear cause also Nicephorus in his Preface before his Ecclesiastical history, doth compare (.64.) The 64. untruth: in putting Emanuel for Andronicus. Emanuel Paleologus the Emperor, to Constantin, for that he did so nearly imitate his dutifulness in ruling, procuring, and reforming religion to the pureness thereof: Which among all virtues, belonging to an Emperor, is most seemly for the imperial dignity, and doth express it most truly, as Nicephorus saith: who maketh protestation, that he saith nothing in the commendation of this Emperor, for favour or to flatter, but as it was true in deed in him. And so rehearseth his (.65) The 65. untruth. For this Emperor was a stark heretic. noble virtues exercised in discharge of his imperial duty towards God in Church matters, saying to the Emperor, who hath glorified God more, and showed more fervent zeal towards him in pure religion, without feigning, than thou hast done? who hath with such fervent zeal fought after the most sincere faith much endangered, or cleansed again the holy Table? when thou sawest our true religion brought into peril with new devices brought in by conterfaict and naughty doctrines, thou didst defend it most painfully and wisely. The (66.) Prince's supremacy in repairing Religion decayed. The 66. untruth fond and foolish as shall appear. Thou didst show thyself, to be the mighty supreme, and very holy anchor and stay in so horrible wavering and error, in matters beginning to faint, and to perish as it were with shipwrak. Thou art the guide of the profession of our faith. Thou hast restored the Catholic and Universal Church, being troubled with new matters or opinions, to the old state. Thou hast banished from the Church all unlawful and impure doctrine. Thou hast cleansed again with the word of truth, the temple from choppers and changers of the divine doctrine, and from heretical depravers thereof. Thou hast been set on fire with a godly zeal for the divine Table. Thou hast established the doctrine: thou hast made Constitutions for the same. Thou hast entrenched the true religion with mighty defences. That which was pulled down, thou hast made up again, and haste made the same whole and sound again, with a convenient knitting together of all the parts and members (to be short, thou haste, saith Nicephorus to the Emperor) established true Religion and godliness with spiritual buttresses, namely the doctrine and rules of the ancient Father's. Stapleton. Where ye say, for this cause also etc. This is no cause at all: but it is untrue, as of the other Emperor Constantinus: and much more untrue, as ye shall good reader strait way understand. But first we will dissipate and discuss the mist that M. Horn hath cast before thine eyes: and wherein himself walketh either ignorantly, or maliciously, or both. Ye shall then understand, that among many other errors and heresies wherewith the Grecians were infected and poisoned, they held, contrary to the Catholic faith, that the holy ghost did not proceed, from the father and the son, The Grecians at the Council of Lions, acknowledged the Pope's Primacy Blond. dec. 2. lib. 8. joan. Bap. Egn. Rom. Prin. li 2. Nice. Gregor. li. 4. & 5. Pachimerus lib. 5. five notable lies concerning Images in the book of homilies. but from the father only. In which heresy they dwelled many an hundred year. At the length about 300. years passed the Emperor of Grece called Michael Paleologus came to the general Council kept at Lions. Where the Grecians with the Latin Church accorded, aswell in that point, as for the Pope's supremacy, both in other matters, and concerning the devoluing of matters from Grece to Rome by way of appeal. This Michael being dead the Grecians revolted to their old heresy against the holy ghost: and for the malicious spite they had, against the Catholic faith, their Bishops would not suffer him to be buried. The author of the homely agaist Idolatry, as it is entitled, calleth this Emperor wrongfully Theodorum Lascarim, and saith most ignorantly and falsely, that he was deprived of his Empire, because in the Council of Lions he relented, and set up images in Grece. Whereas he was not put from his Empire, but from his royal burial, as I have said, neither any word was moved in the said council of Images, nor any Images of new by him were set up, which had customably continued in the Greek Church many hundred years before: and so reverently afterward continued even till Constantinople was taken by the great Turk. And yet this good antiquary and chronographer will needs have the Grecians, about a .700. years together with a most notorious lie, to have been Iconomaches, that is, Image breakers. Much other foolish blasphemous babbling is contained in that Homily. Yea many other shameless lies are there, to disgrace, deface, and destroy, the Image of Christ and his Saints: especially one. Whereas he saith, that the Emperor Valens and Theodosius made a Proclamation, that no man should paint or carve the Cross of Christ. And thereupon gaily and iolilye triumpheth upon the Catholics. Li. 1. Cod. justiniani tit 8. alias 11. M jewel also hath two of the same five. In his Reply to the Article of Images. Nicephor. Greg. li. 6. Three notable untruth of M. Horn, in this one story. Volaterran. li. 23 sabel. & Blondus. Lib. 8. dec. 2. Whereas the Proclamation neither is, nor was, to restrain all use of the Cross, but that it should not be painted or carved upon the ground. Which these good Emperors, not Valens (for he was the valiant captain and defender of the Arrians) but Valentinianus and Theodosius, did of a great godly reverence they had to the Cross enact. And yet, as gross, as foul, and as loud lying a fetch as this is, M. jewel walketh even in the very same steps, putting Valens, for Valentinian: and alleging this Edict, as general against all Images of the Crosse. And yet these Homilies (the holy learned Homilies of the old Fathers, namely of Venerable Bede, our learned Country man, whose Homilies were read in our Country, in the Church Service, above .800. years past, as also in France and other where, rejected) are read in M. Horns and other his brethren's Diocese: and are with M. Horn very good stuff: as good perdie, as M. Horns own book: and as clerkly, and faithfully handled, as ye shall see plainly by the very self matter we have in hand. Andronicus the elder, son to this Michael, whom M. Horn calleth ignorantly Emanuel. (for this Emanuel was not the son of this Andronicus but of Caloioamnes, son to Andronicus the younger, to whom our Andronicus was granfather) after his father's death summoned a council of the Grecians, wherein he and they annulled and revoked that his Father had done at the Council at Lions, namely concerning the proceeding of the holy Ghost. And for the which Nicephorus M. Horns Author, being also carried away with the common error, as with an huge raging tempest, doth so highly advance this Andronicus. And so withal ye see upon how good a man, and upon how good a cause M. Horn buildeth his new supremacy to pluck down the Pope's old supremacy. For the infringing whereof the wicked working of wretched heretics is with him, here and else where, as we shall in place convenient show, a goodly and godly presidente, as it is also with M. jewel for to maintain the very same quarrel, as I have at large in my Return against his fourth Article declared. But now M. Horn, what if these heretical doings do nothing relieve your cause, nor necessarily induce the chief Superiority in all causes, and perchance in no cause Ecclesiastical, concerning the final discussing and determination of the same? Verily without any perchance, it is most plainly and certainly true it doth not. For even in this schismatical Council, and heretical synagogue, the Bishops played the chief part, O what a crafty Coper and smooth joiner is M. Horn? and they gave the final though a wrong and a wicked judgement. Who also showed their superiority, though ungodly upon this man's Father, in that they would not suffer him to be interred Princelike: themselves much more worthy to have been cast after their decease, to the dogs and ravens, upon a dirty dunghill. What honour have ye got, for all your crafty cooping or cunning and smooth joining, for all your combining, and as I may say incorporating a number of Nicephorus sentences together, of the which yet some are one, Vide Praefationem. Nicephor in histo. suam ecclesiasticam. some are two leaves a sunder, and the first placed after the second and the second before the first, and yet not whole sentences neither, but pieces and patches of sentences, here and there culled out, and by you very smoothly joined in one continual narration, in such sort that a man would think that the whole lay orderly in Nicephorus, and were not so artificially by you or your delegates patched up, what honour, have you, I say, won by this, or by the whole thing itself? Little or nothing, furthering your cause, and yet otherwise plain schismatical and heretical. For the which your handsome holy dealing, the author of the foresaid Homily, and you, yea and M. jewel too, are worthy exceeding thanks. But M. Horn will not so lose his long allegation out of Nicephorus. He hath placed a Note in his Margin, sufficient (I trow) to conclude his principal purpose. And that is this. The Prince's Supremacy in repairing religion decayed. This is in deed a jolly marginal note. But where findeth M. Horn the same in his text? Forsooth of this, that Nicephorus calleth th'Emperor, the mighty supreme, and very holy Anchor, and stay in so horrible wavering, etc. Of the word Supreme ancher, he concludeth a Supremacy. But o more than childish folly! could that crafty Cooper of this allegation, inform you no better M. Horn? Was he no better seen in Grammar, or in the profession of a schoolmaster, than thus foully and fond to miss the true interpretation of the latin word? For what other is suprema anchora in good english, them the last ancher, the last refuge, the extreme hold and stay to rest upon? As suprema verba, do signify the last words of a man in his last will: as Summa dies, the last day, Supremum indicium, the last judgement, with a number of the like phrases, so Suprema Anchora, is the last Anchor, signifying the last hold and stay, as in the peril of tempest, the last refuge is to cast Ancher. In such a sense, Nicephorus called his Emperor the last, the mighty, and the holy Anchor or stay in so horrible wavering and error: signifying that now by him they were stayed from the storm of schism, as from a storm in the sea, by casting the Ancher, the ship is stayed. But by the Metaphor of an Anchor, to conclude a Supremacy: is as wise, as by the Metaphor of a Cow to conclude a saddle. For as well doth a saddle fit a Cow, as the quality of an Anchor resemble a Supremacy. But by such beggarly shifts a barren cause must be upholded. First all is said by the way of Amplification to extol the Emperor (as in the same sentence he calleth him the sixth Element, Firmamentum sextum & sempiteruum. reaching above Aristotle's fift body, over the four elements with such like). Then all is but a Metaphor, which were it true, proveth not nor concludeth, but expresseth and lighteneth a truth. Thirdly the Metaphor is ill translated, and last of all, worse applied. Now whereas in the beginning of your matter, the substance of your proofs hereafter standing in stories, ye have demeaned yourself, so clerkly and skilfully here, the Reader may hereof have a taste: and by the way of prevention and anticipation, have also a certain prejudicial understanding, what he shall look for at your hands in the residue. Wherefore God be thanked, that at the beginning hath so deciphired you, whereby we may so much the more, yea the bolder without any fear of all your antiquity hereafter to be showed, cheerfully proceed on. M. Horn. The .25. Division. pag. 18. a. These and such like Christian Emperors, are not thus much commended of the Ecclesiastical writers, 1. Tim. 2. for their notable doings in the maintenance and furtherance of Religion, as for doings not necessarily appertaining to their office or calling: but for that they were examples, spectacles, and glasses for others, wherein to behold what they are bound unto by the word of God, and what their subjects may look for at their hands, as matter of charge and duty, both to God and his people. Which S. Paul doth plainly express, where he exhorteth the Christians to make earnest and continual prayer for Kings, and for such as are in authority, to this end and purpose, that by their rule, ministery, and service, not only peace and tranquillity, but also godliness and religion, should be (.67.) The .67. untruth. No such words in S. Paul furthered and continued among men: attributing the furtherance and continuance of religion, and godliness, to the Magistrates, as an especial fruit and effect of their duty and service to God and his people. Chrysostom expounding this place of the Apostle, doth interpret his meaning to be understanded, of the outward peace and tranquillity furthered, maintained, and defended by the Magistrates, but chiefly of the inward peace of the mind and conscience, which can not be attained without pure religion, as contrary wise, godliness can not be had without peace and tranquillity of mind and conscience. * This wouldd be noted, how ye rack S. Paul. He nameth not Religion at all. He doth not attribute religion to the rule and government of the civil Magistrate, but peace and tranquillity only in godliness. This would be noted with good advisement, that S. Paul himself showeth plainly prosperity, amongst God's people, and true religion, to be the benefits and fruits in general, that by God's ordinance springeth from the rule and government of Kings and Magistrates, unto the weal of the people. The which two, although divers in themselves, yet are so combined and knit together, and as it were incorporated in this one office of the Magistrate, that the nourishing of the one, is the feeding of the other, the decay of the one, destroyeth or (at the least) deadly weakeneth them both. So that one can not be in perfect and good estate without the other. The which knot and fastening together of religion, and prosperity in common weals, the most Christian and godly Emperors Theodosius and Valentinianus, did wisely (.68.) The .68. untruth. They saw no such confounding of the two functions spiritual and temporal as you imagine. Ciril. Ep. 17. to .4. see, as it appeareth by this that they written unto cyril, saiying: The surety of our common weal, dependeth upon God's Religion, and there is great kindred and society betwixt these tweine, for they cleave together, and the one groweth with the increase of the other, in such sort, that true Religion helped with the endeavour of justice, and the common weal helped of them both, flourisheth. Seeing therefore, that we are constituted of God to be the kings, and are the knitting together or jointure of Godliness and prosperity in the subjects, we keep the society of these tweine, never to be sundered: and so far forth as by our foresight, we procure peace unto our subjects, we minister unto the augmenting of the common weal: but as we might say, being servants to our subjects in all things, that they may live godly, and be of a religious conversation as it becometh godly ones, we garnish the common weal with honour, having care as it is convenient for them both (for it can not be, that diligently providing for the one, we should not care, in like sort also for the other) But we travail earnestly in this thing above the rest, that the Ecclesiastical state may remain sure, both in such sort, as is seemly for God's honour, and fit for our times, that it may continue in tranquillity by common consent without variance, that it may be quiet through agreement in Ecclesiastical matters, that the godly Religion may be preserved unreprovable, and that the life of such as are chosen into the Clergy, and the great Priesthood may be clear from all fault. Stapleton. And shall we now M. Horn, your antecedent matter being so nought, greatly fear, the consequent and conclusion ye will hereof infer? Nay pardie. For lo strait way, even in the first line, ye bewray either your great ignorance, or your like malice. Not for calling this Emperor as ye did before Emanuel (let that go as a venial sin) but for calling him Christian Emperor, and willing him to be an example, a spectacle, a glass for others, as one that (as ye said before) reformed Religion to the pureness thereof: which saying in such a parsonage as ye counterfeit, can not be but a deadly and a mortal sin. Surely M. Fox of all men is deeply beholding unto you: for if this be pure religion, them may he be the bolder, after your solemn sentence once given, bearing the state of one of the chief Prelates in the realm: and of a Prelate of the garter withal: to keep still his holy day, that he hath dedicated to the memory of his blessed Martyr, M. D. Wesalian, of whom we spoke before. And yet I ween it will prove no great festival day, for that he was an heretic otherwise also. Well I leave this at your leisure, better to be debated upon between you and M. Fox. In the mean while to return to the matter of your dealing, whereof I spoke: if ye knew not the state and truth of your emperors doings, ye are a very poor silly Clerk, far from the knowledge of the late reverend fathers, Bishop White, and Bishop Gardiner: and how meet to occupy such a room, The great ignorance or malice of M. Horn. I leave it to others their discrete and upright judgements. And now Sir, if this be pure religion, as ye say, then have ye one heresy more, than any of your fellows, as far as I know, hath: unless perhaps M. Fox will not suffer you to walk all post alone. M Horns rhetorik upon himself returned. And then that I may a little roll in your railing rhetoric, wherein ye unjustly roar out against M. Fekenham, may I not for much better cause and ground, say to you, than ye did to him, to make him a Donatist: M. Horn let your friends now weigh with advisement, what was the erroneous opinion of the Grecians against the holy Ghost: and let them compare your opinion and guilful defences thereof to theirs. And they must needs clap you on the back, and say to you Patrisas (if there be any upright judgement in them) Deming you so like your great graunsiers the Grecians, as though they had spit you out of their mouth. Now for your conclusion, that you bring in upon this Emperors and Constantine's example, it is needless and far from the matter. Whereby by the place of S. Paul, before rehearsed, 1 Tim. 2. Chrysost. ibidem. cyril. li. 1. Epist. 17. Tom. 4. and now eftsoon by you resumed, by Chrysostom in his expositions of the said place, and by Cyrillus you would have us seriously admonished, that prosperity of the common wealth and true religion, springeth from the good regiment of Magistrates, which we deny not, and that the decay of religion destroyeth or deadly weakeneth the other: which is also true, as the utter ruin of the Empire of Grece proceeding from the manifold heresies, especially that, whereof we have discoursed, doth to well and to plainly testify. And therefore I would wish you and M. Fox, A good advertisement for M. Horn to consider the cause of the destruction of Constantinople. josephus de bello jud. & Hegesippus. In the year of our Lord 1453. with others, but you two above all others, with good advisement to note, that as the wicked jews that crucified Christ about the holy time of Easter, were at the very same time, or thereabout, besieged of the Romans, and shortly after brought to such desolation, and to such miserable wretched state, as in a manner is incredible, saving that beside the foreseeing and foresaiing thereof by Christ, there is extant at this day a true and faithful report: Even so, your darlings the Grecians, whose error, but not alone, but accompanied with some other, that you at this day stoutly defend, yet especially rested in this heresy against the holy Ghost, that ye term with an unclean and an impure mouth, pure religion, were in their chief city of Constantinople, in the time of Constantinus son to john, nephew to Andronicus your Emanuels' father, even about Whitsuntide (at which time the Catholic Church in true and sincere faith concerning the holy Ghost, keepeth a solemn festival day of the holy Ghost) suddenly by the wicked Turks besieged, and shortly after the city and the whole Greek empire came into the Turks hands and possession. Wherein God seemeth as before to the jews, so afterward to the Grecians, as it were with pointing and notyfying it with his finger to show and to notify to all the world, the cause of the final destruction, as well of the one, as of the other people. But what speak I of Grece? Heresies the destructions of common weals. we need not run to so far years or countries. The case toucheth us much nearer: The realm of Boheame, and of late years of France and scotland, the noble country of Germany, with some other that I need not name, be to to lively and pregnant examples, of this your true, but neadlesse and impertinente admonition. For the which notwithstanding seeing ye deal so freely and liberally, I thowght good also to return you an other: I suppose not neadlesse or impertinente for you, and such other as do praise and commend so highly this Andronicus doings. And now might I here break of from this and go further forth, saving that I can not suffer you, to blear the reader's eyes, as although the emperors Theodosius, The pope's supremacy proved by the Emperor Valentinian alleged by M. Horn. Tom. 1 council fo. 731 col. 1. and Valentinianus sayings or doings should serve any thing for your pretenced primacy: We (saith Valentinian to the Emperor Theodosius) ought to defend the faith which we received of our ancestors with all competent devotion: and in this our time preserve unblemished the worthy reverence dew to the blessed Apostle Peter. So, that the most blessed bishop of the city of Rome, to whom antiquity, hath given the principality of priesthood above all other, may (O most blessed father and honourable Emperor) have place and liberty, to give judgement in such matters as concerneth faith and priests. And for this cause the bishop of Constantinople, hath according to the solemn order of councils, by his libel appealed unto him. And this is written M. Horn to Theodosius himself, by a common letter of Valentinian, and the Empresses Placidia and Eudoxia. Dict. fol. 731. co. 2. Which Placidia writeth also a particular letter to her said son Theodosius, and altogether in the same sense. hearken good M. Horn, and give good advertisement: I walk not, and wander as ye do, here alleging this Emperor, in an obscure generality, whereof can not be enforced any certain particularity of the principal Question: I go to work with you plainly, truely and particularly: I show you by your own Emperor and by plain words, the Pope's supremacy and the practice withal of appeals from Constantinople to Rome: that it is the less to be marveled at, if Michael in the foresaid council at Lions condescended to the same. And your Andronicus with his Grecians the less to be borne withal for breaking and revoking the said Emperors good and lawful doings. Neither is it to be thought, that Theodosius thowght otherwise of this primacy. But because ye hereafter wring and wrest him to serve your turn, I will set him over to that as a more commodious place to debate his doings therein. M. Horn. The .26. Division. Pag. 19 a. Hitherto I have proved plainly by the holy Scriptures, and by some such Doctors, as from age to age, have witnessed, th'order of ecclesiastical government in the Church of Christ: yea by the confession, testimony, and example of some of the most godly Emperors themselves, that such (.69.) The 69. untruth. Such like government you have not, nor ever shall be able to prove. like government in Church causes, as the Queen's majesty taketh upon her, doth of duty belong unto the civil Magistrates and Rulers, and therefore they may yea, they ought to claim and take upon them the same. Now remaineth that I prove this same by the continual practice of the like government in some one part of Christendom, and by the general counsels, wherein (as ye affirm) the right order of Ecclesiastical government in Christ his Church, hath been most faithfully declared and showed from time to tyme. Stapleton. Hitherto you have not brought any one thing to the substantial prouf of your purpose worth a good straw: neither scripture, nor Doctor, nor Emperor. Among your four emperors by you named ye have juggled in one that was a stark heretic, but as subtilely, as ye thought ye had handled the matter, ye have not so craftily conveyed your galls, but that ye are espied. Yet for one thing are ye here to be commended, that now ye would seam to frame as a certain fixed state of the matter to be debated upon, and to the which ye would seem to direct your proofs, that ye will bring. And therein you deal with us better, than hitherto ye have done seeming to seek by dark generalities, as it were corners, to lusk and lurk in. Neither yet here walk ye so plainly and truly as ye would seem: but in great darkness with a sconce of dim light, that the readers should not have the clear view and sight of the right way ye should walk in, whom with this your dark sconce ye lead far awry. For thus you frame us the state of the Question. M. Horn. The 27. Division. Pag. 19 b. The government that the Queen's majesty taketh most justly upon her in Ecclesiastical causes, is the guiding, caring, providing, ordering, directing, and aiding, the Ecclesiastical state within her dominions, to the furtherance, maintenance, and setting forth of true religion, unity, and quietness of Christ's Church, overseeing, visiting, reforming, restraining, amending, and correcting, all manner persons, with all manner errors, superstitions, Heresies, Schisms, abuses, offences, contempts, and enormities, in or about Christ's Religion whatsoever. This same authority, rule, and government, was practised in the Catholic Church, by the most Christian Kings and Emperors, approved, confirmed, and commended by the best counsels, both general and national. The .20. Chapter: Declaring the state of the Question between M. Horn and Feckenham, touching the Oath. Stapleton. HEre is a state framed of you (M. Horn) but far square from the Question in hand. For the Question is not now between M. Fekenham and you, whether the Prince may visit, reform, and correct all manner of persons, for all manner of heresies and schisms, and offences in Christian Religion, which perchance in some sense might somewhat be borne withal, if ye mean by this visitation and reformation the outward execution of the Church laws and decrees, confirmed by the civil magistrate, roborated with his edicts, and executed with his sword. For in such sort many Emperors and Princes, have fortified, and strengthened the decrees of bishops made in Counsels both general and national, as we shall in the process see. ●he state of the Question And this in Christian Princes is not denied, but commended. But the Question is here now, whether the Prince or lay Magistrate, may of himself, and of his own princely Authority, without any higher Ecclesiastical power in the Church, within or without the Realm visit, reform and correct, and have all manner of government and Authority in all things and causes ecclesiastical, or no. As whether the Prince may by his own supreme Authority, depose and set up bishops and Priests, make Injunctions of doctrine, prescribe order of God's service, enact matters of religion, approve and disprove Articles of the faith, take order for administration of Sacraments, command or put to silence preachers, determine doctrine, excommunicate and absolve with such like, which all are causes ecclesiastical, and all appertaining not to the inferior ministry, (which you grant to Priests and bishops only) but to the supreme jurisdiction and government, which you do annex to the Prince only. This I say, is the state of the Question, now present. For the present Question between you and M. Fekenham is grounded upon the Oath comprised in the Statute: which Statute emplieth and concludeth all these particulars. For concealing whereof, you have M. Horn in the framing of your ground according to the Statute, M Horn● dissembling falsehood. omitted clean the ij. clauses of the Statute, following. The one at the beginning, where the Statute saith. That no foreign person shall have any manner of Authority in any spiritual cause within the Realm. By which words is flatly excluded all the Authority of the whole body of the Catholic Church without the Realm: As in a place more convenient, toward the end of the last book, it shall by God's grace be evidently proved. The other clause you omit at the end of the said Statute, which is this. That all manner Superiorities, that have or may lawfully be exercised, for the visitation of persons Ecclesiastical, and correcting all manner of errors, heresies, and offences, shall be for ever united to the Crown of the Realm of England. Wherein is employed, that if (which God forbid) a Turk, or any heretic whatsoever should come to the Crown of England, by virtue of this Statute and of the Oath, all manner superiority in visiting and correcting Ecclesiastical persons in all manner matters, should be united to him. Yea and every subject should swear, that in his conscience he believeth so. This kind of regiment therefore so large and ample I am right well assured, ye have not proved, nor ever shall be able to prove in the ancient Church, while ye live. When I say, this kind of regiment, I walk not in confuse, and general words as ye do, but I restrain myself to the foresaid particulars now rehearsed, and to that plat form, that I have already drawn to your hand, and unto the which Master Fekenham must pray you to refer and apply your evidences. Otherwise, as he hath, so may he or any man else, the chief points of all being as yet on your side unproved, still refuse the Oath. For the which doings neither you, nor any man else, can justly be grieved with him. A reasonable defence of the Catholics for refusing the Oath As neither with us M. Horn ought you or any man else be grieved for declaring the Truth in this point, as if we were discontented subjects, or repining against the obedience we own to our Gracious Prince and our Country. For beside that we ought absolutely more obey God then man, and prefer the Truth (which our Saviour himself protested to be, encouraging all the faithful to profess the Truth, and giving them to wit, that in defending that, they defended Christ himself) before all other worldly respects whatsoever, beside all this I say, whosoever will but indifferently consider the matter, shall see, that M. Horn himself, in specifying here at large the queens Mai. government, by the Statute intended, doth no less in effect abridge the same, by dissembling silence, than the Catholics do by open and plain contradiction. For whereas the Statute and the Oath (to the which all must swear) expresseth A supreme government in all things and causes, without exception, Master Horn taking upon him to specify the particulars of this general decree, and amplifying that little which he giveth to the queens Majesty, with copy of words, full statutelyke, he leaveth yet out, and by that leaving out, taketh from the meaning of the Statute the principal cause ecclesiastical, and most necessary, meet, and convenient for a Supreme Governor Ecclesiastical. What is that, you ask. Forsooth: judgement, determining and approving of doctrine, which is true and good, and which is otherwise. For what is more necessary in the Church, then that the Supreme governor thereof, should have power in all doubts and controversies to decide the Truth, and to make end of questioning? This in the Statute by Master horns silence is not comprised. And yet who doubteth, that of all things and causes Ecclesiastical, this is absolutely the chiefest? Yea and who seeth not, that by the virtue of this Statute, the queens Majesty hath judged, determined, and enacted a new Religion contrary to the judgement of all the Bishops and clergy (in the Convocation represented) of her highness dominions? Yea and that by virtue of the same Authority, in the last parliament the book of Articles presented and put up there by the consent of the whole convocation of the new pretended clergy of the Realm, and (one or ij. only excepted) of all the pretended Bishops also, was yet rejected and not suffered to pass? Again, preaching the word, administration of the Sacraments, binding and losing, are they not things and causes mere Spiritual and Ecclesiastical? And how then are they here by you omitted, Master Horn? Or how make you the Supreme government in all causes to rest in the queens Majesty, if these causes have no place there? Which is now better (I appeal to all good consciences) plainly to maintain the Truth, then dissemblingly to uphold a falsehood? Plainly to refuse the Oath so generally conceived, then generally to swear to it, being not generally meaned? But now let us see how M. Horn will direct his proofs to the scope appointed. THE SECOND BOOK, DISPROVING THE PRETENCED Practice of Ecclesiastical government in Emperors and Princes of the first .600. years after Christ. Constantine the great. M. Horn. The .28. Division. pag. 19 b. Constantinus (of whose careful government in Church causes, I have spoken somewhat before) took upon him, and did exercise the (70.) The .70. untruth. Constantine in repressing Idolatry. etc. exercised no Supreme government in Ecclesiastical matters. Euse. li. 2 &. 3. De vita Constant. supreme rule and government in repressing all manner Idolatry and false Religion, in reforming and promoting the true religion, and in restraining and correcting all manner errors, schisms, heresies, and other enormities, in or about religion, and was moved hereunto of duty, even by God's word, as he himself reporteth in a vehement prayer, that he maketh unto God, saying: I have taken upon me and have brought to pass healthful things (meaning reformation of Religion.) being persuaded (thereunto) by thy word. And publishing to all Churches, after the Council at Nice, what was there done: he professeth that in his judgement, the chiefest end and purpose of his Imperial government, aught to be the preservation of true religion, and godly quietness in all Churches. I have judged (saith this godly Emperor) this aught before all other things to be the end or purpose, (whereunto I should address my power and authority in government) that the unity of faith, pure love, and agreement of religion towards the almighty God, might be kept, and maintained amongst all Congregations of the Catholic Church. The first Chapter. Of Constantine the Great, and of his divers dealing in matters Ecclesiastical. Stapleton. NOW M. Horn beginneth to walk, though not more truly, yet more orderly than before. Now will he bring invincible proofs, taken from the Counsels General and National, from the Emperors, from Kings, and finally from the continual practice of Christendom. In deed he beginneth here with Constantinus the Emperor, and runneth on from Emperor to Emperor, A brief rehearsal of M. horns discourse in his proofs against. M. Feck. with a continual race, even to the late Maximilian, Grandfather and next predecessor to Charles the fift. Then have we about a ten Kings of Spain, and about twelve of France, and as many of England also: and that sins the Conquest: with divers other Kings and Princes: yea he hath in his side, as he saith, Moscovia, Graecia, Armenia, and Aethiopia. As for Counsels, what General, what Provincial, he hath made a great monster of them, and hath them all ready to serve him as he braggeth, at the least one half hundred. Beside all these, he is armed and fenced even with the Pope's Canon laws, and with a number of Popes themselves. For the residue of his Authors, they are in great plenty. But I can not tell for what policy, whereas they drive the catholics to six hundred years, and pin up their proofs within those bounds, this man by some special prerogative, by like; and for some deep consideration unknown to me, and perchance to himself too, buildeth most upon those that were after the six hundred years, yea a great number of them by one six hundred years later. And with these proofs he cometh now continually forth on, whole 70. leaves. But now alas how shall poor M. Fekenham abide the brunt of such a strong and a mighty force? It seemeth he must needs be borne quite over. And surely so he should be, M. Horn cometh nothing nigh the mark. if they could once hit him. But thanked be God there is one hundred miles between him and their strokes: And as far doth M. Horn straggle from the very matter he taketh in hand to prove. Wherefore, good Reader, I pray the have good eye and regard to the thing that ought to be proved by M. Horn and then shalt thou plainly see that M. Feckenham is out of all danger of this terrible army, as that cometh nothing nigh to him by many a fair mile. The discussing of Constantine's doings. Let us now in God's name begin with Constantine who cometh first to hand, whose doings, good Reader, by M. Horn here alleged, for thy more ease, and for the better understanding of M. Horns whole drift, I will orderly digest, and shortly dispose by certain Articles. The first than is (for answer to this present point) that Constantine repressed idolatry, and false superstition of the paynim: but this proveth no principality such as our plat form requireth. And of this we have also said somewhat before. M. Horn. The .29. Division. fol. 20. a. He did not only abolish all superstitions and false religions, which had been amongst the Gentiles, but also he repressed (.71.) The .71. untruth. Constantine repressed not heresies by his Supreme authority, but by a Superior authoriti of Bishops, condemning before such heresies. Eus. li. 3. De vita Constant. Li. 1. c. 19 Lib. 4. De vit Const. by his authority, laws, and decrees, all such heresies as sprung up amongst the Christians, sharply reproving and correcting, the authors or mainteinours of heretical doctrines, as the No●atians, Valentinians, Paulianes, and Cataphrigians, as Eusebius saith of him. And Theodoretus doth recite a part of an Epistle, that Constantine written unto the Nicomedians, wherein the Emperor hath this saying: If we have chaste bishops of right opinion, of courteous behaviour, we rejoice. But if any be inflamed rashly and unadvisedly, to continued the memory and commendation of those pestilent Heresies, his fool hardy presumption, shall forthwith be corrected and kept under by my correction, which am Gods minister. Constantinus also gave Injunctions to the chief minister of the churches, that they should make special supplication to God for him. He enjoineth all his subjects, that they should keep holy certain days dedicated to Christ, and the Saturday. He gave a law unto the rulers of the Nations, that they should celebrate the Sunday in like sort after the appointment of the Emperor. And so the days dedicated to the memory of Martyrs and other festival times, etc. And all such things (saith Eusebius) were done according to the ordinance of the Emperor. He commanded Eusebius the Bishop, to draw certain Instructions and lessons, as it were Homilies, forth of the holy Scriptures, that they might be read in the Churches. Which was done incontinente, according to the emperors commandment. Stapleton. Constantine, saith M. Horn, by his laws repressed the novatians, Valentinians, and other heretics. And so would he repress you and your heresies too, if he were now living (as no Bishops) continuing the memory and commendation of pestilent heresies, that I may truly use your own phrase: neither for all that should he be any supreme head of the Church. If Constantine, of his own authority had first of all men, the matter of those heretics standing in controversy, determined the same, and pronounced them as a judge, to be heretics, than had ye said somewhat to the purpose. But now he found them by the Bishops and the Church declared (before he was borne) for heretics: So therefore he took them, and so therefore he made sharp laws against them. M. Horns proofs returned against him. So that this place proveth only Constantine to have put in execution the decree of the Bishops: and so it serveth very well against you for the Supremacy of the Bishops in such matters. As doth the next also for the holy days ye allege dedicated to Christ, as Sunday and other: For these holy days the Emperor did not first ordain, but they were ordained to his hand of the Church, before he was Christened. Namely the Sunday, as it may appear by the Council of Nice itself. Can. vlt. And he like a good Prince was careful by his Imperial authority, to confirm the same, that the people drawn from worldly business, to the desire of heavenly things, might fruitfully observe them. So that not only the Sunday, for the honour of Christ's Resurrection, but also many other days were dedicated to the memory of the Martyrs of whom ye speak, before Constantine's time, as appeareth well by S. Cyprian, Tertullian, and Origen. And think ye, Euseb. li. 4 ca 15. Cyp. li. 3. ep. 6. & li. 4. ep. 5. Tert. de coron milit. Orig. in illud Mat. vox in Ramae. Praying for the dead and to Saints was in Constantine's time. Euse. li. 4. De vitae Constant. cap. 71. Euseb. lib. eodem. cap. 60. if Constanstantine were now alive, that he would well bear to see the ancient Martyr's festival days abolished? or that his ears would not glow for shame to hear, that it were a superstitious thing, to pray for all Christian souls, his own soul being prayed for as soon as he was dead, by the good and devout people? which (as Eusebius writeth) did therein to him an acceptable service: Also to hear, that it were plain Idolatry, to pray to any Saint in heaven, himself building a noble and a sumptuous Church in the honour of the Apostles, thinking thereby to do a thing that should be profitable and wholesome for his soul: Vt precibus, quae eo loci ad honorem Apostolorum futurae essent, dignus haberetur. That he might be made (saith Eusebius) a worthy partaker of such prayers as should be there made for the honour of the said Apostles? But Sir, I pray you, let me demand of you a question. If Constantine were so godly a Prince as ye make him to be, how chanced it, he commanded to keep holy the saturday? When and where I pray ye, throughout all Christendom can you show by all that ever you have read, that it was kept an ordinary holiday? I am sure it was never so kept. And great marvel it is to me, that the satturday, being even in the very Apostles time, and by them translated into the Sunday, in the honour of Christ's glorious resurrection, and lest we should seem to be jewish, and Constantine himself, being so earnest against them that kept the Easter day after the old fashion of the jews, should so suddenly become himself so jewish. This might have been a fit constitution to be made of some of the jews, that to precisely and superstitiously also kept that day: as the jew did in England, at Tewkisbury. Who falling upon the Saturday (as Fabian writeth) into a privy, Of the jew of Tewkesburie See Fabian the .43. year of Henry the third. would not for reverence of his Sabbath day, be plucked out. Whereof hearing the Earl of Gloucester, and thinking to do as much reverence to the Sunday, kept him there till the monday at which season he was found dead. It had been, I say, a fit ordinance to have been made of some jew, very unfit for so good and virtuous a Prince as was Constantine. Yet notwithstanding I am the better content to pass this over, and find no great fault with you, but with Musculus, whose translation beside his notable false corruption, is but very secondary. But forasmuch as the common copies of the Greek, seem not very sincere in this place, Euseb. De vita Const. lib. 4. c. 18 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. etc. I will not very much charge you neither. And yet I can not altogether discharge him, or you, if ye think so ignorantly and grossly as ye have written, that Contantine commanded the Saturday to be held as an holiday. And because I am entered into this matter, I shall show thee mine advise, good Reader, and that I suppose, for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 should be readen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, adding one jota, and so may there be made a good sense thus: Wherefore he admonished all that were under the Roman Empire, that they should upon such days as were dedicated to our Saviour, rest and keep them holy, as the Saturday was wont to be kept holy. In remembrance as it seemeth me, of those things that our saviour did upon those days. Well let us go now to the next, and that is, that Constantine commanded Homilies to be drawn out. So did Charles the main too, and yet no man took him, for supreme head therein. And would God that your homely homilies, had none other nor worse doctrine, than those that the said Charles procured to be made: Or the Homilies of our country man the venerable Bede made a little before Charles his time, and yet extant, and in the Catholic church authorized. I pray God your Homilies may be made once conformable to the doctrine of their Homilies. The .30. Division. Fol. 21. b. When the Emperor heard of the great schism moved betwixt Arius and Alexander the Bishop of Alexandria, wherewith the Church was piteously tormented, and as it were rend in sunder, he (.72.) The .72. untruth, joined with folly Suprem government in all causes followeth very courselye of sending letters to appease contention. Socrat. li. 1 cap. 7. Sozom. li. 1. c. 16. Eus. li. 3. de vita Constant. took upon him, as one that had the care and authority over all, to send Hosius a great learned and godly Bishop of Spain, to take order, and to appease the contention, writing to Alexander and to Arius a grave and also a sharp letter, charging Alexander with vanity, Arius with want of circumspection, showing them both, that it was unseemly for the one to move such a question, and for the other to answer therein, and undiscreetly done of them both. And therefore commanded them to cease of from such contentious disputations, to agree betwixt themselves, and to lay aside from thenceforth such vain and trifling questions. He pacified also the schism at Antioch begun about the choosing of their Bishop, to whom for that purpose he sent honourable Ambassadors with his letters to a great number of Bishops that than were at Antioch about that business, and to the people, exhorting them to quietness, and teaching them (saith Eusebius) to study after godliness, in a decent manner, declaring unto the bishops, as (73) The 73. untruth. This fact showeth no authority over the Bishops in matters Ecclesiastical. one that had authority over them, even in such matters, what things appertained and were seemly for them to do in such cases, and noteth unto them a direction, which they should follow. And after he had (saith Eusebius) given such things in commandment unto the Bishops or chief ministers of the Churches, he exhorted them that they would do all things to the praise and furtherance of God's word. Stapleton Here are two things: The one that Constantine sendeth his letters to Arius and the B. of Alexandria, to pacify and appease the contention begun with Arius. The other that he laboured to pacify an other schism at Antioch, about the choosing of the B. of Antioch. Neither of these draw any thing nigh to the new primacy ye would establish. And such letters might any other good zealous man have sent to them, being no Emperor. And as for elections in those days, not only the Emperor, but the people also had some interest therein. Wherefore here is no colour of your supremacy. And therefore to help forward the matter, and to undershore and underprop your ruinous building withal, ye interlace of your own authority these words (as one that had the care and authority over all) which your author Socrates hath not, and likewise (as one that had authority over them) which Eusebius hath not. And here by the way, I would ask of you, for each matter a question. If these of Alexander and Arius, were vain and triefling questions, as ye allege, why do ye call Arius his error, an horrible heresy? And why say ye their dissension was about a necessary article of the Faith? Pag. 22. col. 2. I move it for this, that hereby we may understand, as well the great necessity of General Counsels, as the Supreme government of causes Ecclesiastical, to have remained in the Bishops there assembled. Why Constantine calleth those matters triefling questions which afterwards he took for heresy. For Constantine that took not at the beginning, these questions to be of so great importance, after the determination of the Council, took Arius to be a very obstinate heretic: and his heresy to be an horrible heresy, as ye call it. Concerning the second, as we grant the Prince had to do with election, and yet not properly with election, but with the allowing and approbation of Spiritual men's election: so I demand of you, what interest the people hath in either election or approbation now in England? A New strange manner of election now in England. Again I demand, whether in the ancient Church the Prince might (as he may in England) not only nominate a person to be elected of the Dean and Chapter, but if they do not elect within certain days, miserably to wrap them in a praemunire? I make most sure account ye shall never be able, to show this. See then that even in your election, which is beside and out of our chief matter, ye are quite out from the like regiment ye pretend to prove. M. Horn. The .31. Division. Pag. 21. b. This supreme (.74.) The 74. untruth. No such supreme authority is either by S. Augustin or Eusebius expressed as shall appear. Aug. epist. 50. et 48 Euseb. lib. 10 cap. 5. authority of the Emperor in Church causes is most lively expressed by S. Augustine and Eusebius, where they make mention of the horrible Schism, stirred by the Donatists, against Cecilianus bishop of Carthage: whose election and ordering to be Bishop of Carthage, Donatus and others of his companions misliked, and therefore made a Schism in that Church. The question in controversy was, whether Cecilianus being ordered Bishop, having the imposition of hands by Felix, were lawfully consecrated and ordered or not this controversy made a lamentable trouble amongst the Churches in afric. At the length, the Donatists accused Cecilian unto the Emperor: desired the Emperor to appoint some Delegates to judge of this controversy. And for that all the Churches in afric were banded, either to the one partly, or the other, and for that France was free from this contention, they require judges to be appointed by his authority from amongst the French bishops. The Emperor much grieved, that the Church was thus torn in sunder with this schism, doth appoint Melciades Bishop of Rome, and Marcus to be his (.75.) The 75. untruth. Eusebius hath no such words of delegates or commissaries, but allegeth for his so doing: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the most holy law that is, the law of the Church, which had ordained bishops to be judges in Church matters. delegates and commissaries in this controversy with certain other bishops of France, Melciades colleages or fellow Bishops, whom the Emperor had commanded to be there with them for that purpose. These commissioners with certain other bishops according to the emperors commandment met at Rome, and after due examination had, do condemn the Donatists, and pronounce Cecilianus cause to be good. From this sentence of the bishop of Rome, and other bishops his colleages being the emperors delegates, the Donatists appeal unto the Emperor, not only accusing Cecilianus, but also Melciades the bishop of Rome, and other Commissaries. Wherefore the Emperor causeth a Synod to be had at Arelatum, committing the cause to the bishop thereof and other bishops assembled there by his commandment, to be herd and discussed. Whereunto he calleth Crestus the bishop of Syracuse a City in Sicily by his letters. Wherein he declareth in (.76.) The 76. Untruth. Constantin in those letters hath no such thing either in plain terms or obscure. Only he expresseth a desire to have the contention ended. plain terms, that it belongeth to his imperial cure, to see these controversies in Church causes to be determined and ended. Augu. epistol. 166. Donatus and his companions, being condemned also by these bishops, in the Synod at Arelatum, and Cecilianus cleared, do again appeal unto the Emperor from their sentence, beseeching him to take the hearing and discussing of the controversy. Who calleth both the parties together before himself at milan, and after he had heard the whole matter, and what was to be said on both sides, * This he did. But this he repent after. Augu epistol. 162. Epist. 166. he gave final sentence with Cecilianus, condemning the Donatists. Who after all these things thus done, as S. Augustin saith, made a very sharp Law against the Donatists, the which also his Sons after him commanded to be observed. The .2. Chapter of Constantine's dealing in the appeals and suits of the Donatists. Stapleton. OF all that M. Horn bringeth of Constantine's doings, or of any others this place seemeth most conformable, (not to that wherein we join issue with him: which are a number of points, as I have declared: in the proof whereof in case M. Horn be defective in any one, M. Fekenham is at liberty from receiving the pretenced oath: Of Constantine's judgement in the cause of Cecilian. ) but to that one point only, that not the Bishop or Pope himself, but the civil magistrate is, supreme judge in causes ecclesiastical. And yet if M. Horn could effectually prove this, he should quite himself like a clerk. In deed your master M Calvin, M. jewel, and others runneth to this example as to a strong hold, which I trow nevertheless will prove anon as strong as a rotten read. Artic. 4. fol. 105. & sequent. As also to any indifferent Reader it may sufficiently appear, that hath or will read our Return upon M. jewels lying Reply, where this whole matter is answered at full. Yet let us once again lay forth the matter. Constantine, say you, in a matter ecclesiastical devolved to him by an appeal appointed as his Delegate the Pope himself, yea after the Pope's sentence he appointed, upon a new appeal certain other Bisshhops. The appellants being also aggrieved with this sentence, craved aid at Constantitins own hands, who gave the final sentence against them. surely these were froward quarrelling men, what so ever they were. But what manner of men were they M. Horn? Forsooth as ye truly say, the Donatists, the most perverse and obstinate heretics that ever the Church suffered. Is this then, think you, a sure ground to build your supremacy upon? surely as sure, and as sound, as was your Emperor Emanuel, as ye call him. Beside this, M. Horn buildeth his supremacy upon the doings of Donatists where is the long tedious song, ye song of late against M. Fekenham to prove him a Donastiste? Ye see here the Donatists themselves against the authority of temporal princes in Church matters, which before ye denied: and so may M. Feckenham clear himself, that he is no Donatiste. Ye had done well, M. F. purged by M. Horn himself to be no Donatist. if ye had eased your reader and yourself most of all, with an handsome word or two interlaced, for the avoiding of this contradiction. Well belike it was by some voluntary oblivion forslone. I will therefore take the pains to supply this defect of yours. I say therefore that both is true. For when it served their purpose, and as long as they had any hope of any relief for their wicked heresies, they ran to the Emperors, yea to julian the Apostata, setting him forth with no small commendations, for aid and help. And so did they now. The marvelous in constancy of the Donatists But afterward when both this Constantin and other Emperors made sharp laws against than, then the world was changed, then sang they a new song: that it was not sit or seamely for the princes to busy themselves in Church matters. Yea so impudent and inconstant they were, that thowg●e themselves first brought the matter against Cecilian to the emperors audience, yet did they blame innocent Cecilian for their own fact, as a breaker of the Ecclesiastical order. And are not your masters and companions I beseech you the true scholars of the Donatists in this behalf, as I have before showed? And who are they, tell me by your truth, that after sentence given against them by the Pope, by provincial and general counsels, yea by the Emperors themselves, do persist and endure in their wicked heresies, and that more wilfully than ever did the obstinate Donatists? Are they not of your own whole and holy generation? Well seeing we have now delivered you from contradiction, we may proceed to the matter itself. Ye say Constantine gave sentence even after the Pope. Yea but we say again (supposing this example true) that one swallow bringeth not the spring time with him. The precedent of one Emperor (for ye prove not the like in all your book of any other) can not enforce a general rule, nor make a continual practice of the Church: which is your special scope ever by you to be regarded. And ye should have regarded here (if ye have any regard at all) the circumstances of the matter. The circumstances of Constantine's judgement in ●eciliās cause weighed The Donatists were waxed very thick and great in Aphrik, yea to the number almost of .300. bishops. Their bands, their faction were so great, their cruelty upon the catholics was so enormous, their obstinate desperation was such, fearing no man, nor no punishment, yea most wickedly murdering their own selves in great multitudes, that the godly and wise prince Constantin, to mollify their fury, and by gentleness and yielding to them to win them, fared with them, as many good princes far and bear with the people being in their rage, granting them many things, otherwise not to be granted, for the shonning of a greater mischief: And even so did this good prince condescend to the Donatists, partly committing this cause after the Pope's Sentence to other bishops, partly taking it into his own hands: (both which was more than he ought to have done, as we shall anon see.) For all this he did not as one that took himself (as ye dream, and as (the more pity) appeals go in our country at the Arches and other where) for the lawful and ordinary judge in causes Ecclesiastical. Which thing wisely and godly considering Melchiades the Pope with other bishops, to recover the Donatists, and to take away all manner of quarelings from them, and to restore the Church to her former unity, so miserably and pitifully by them rented and torn a sunder, did patiently bear with Constantyne: As a wise man would do with the Mariners, Why sometime both civil laws and Ecclesiastical are winked and dissembled at. if in a great huge tempest, they go somewhat out of their common course, to save their ship, themselves, and all the other. And as in the politic body: so in the spiritual body: the magistrates relent and wink at many things in such hurly burly: and the laws and canons, which otherwise should take their force, be for such a time, nothing or sleightlye exacted. Nice Conc. Can. ●. For example, the canons of Nice forbid, that at one time two bishops should be with like authority in one see. Now to go no further than our own Melchiades, and your Donatists: After the said Melchiades had condemned the Donatists, he offered them, if they would repent and incorporate themselves again to the unity of the Catholic Church from the which, by a shameful schism they had dismembered themselves, not only his letters that they call communicatory, by the which they should be counted through out the world Catholics: but also, whereas by reason of this horrible division, Aug. epist. 50. et 162 in many places, were in one see two bishops, the one a Catholic, the other a Donatiste, that he should be confirmed, that was first ordained: and that the other should be provided of an other bisshoprike. And here by the way you see Melchiades and not Constantine's supremacy. A notable story concerning the Aphrican bishops. August. de gestis cum Emerito. Yea, which is more notable the case standing in Aphrik, that as I said in many places two bishops sat in one see together, of three hundred Catholic bishops assembled in a Council in the said afric, they were all, saving two, (and yet those two relented afterward too) content to give over their bisshopricks, to the said Donatists, if they would return to the Church. And yet the Nicene canons were to the contrary. Now I pray you M. Horn, if ye had been then as Melchiades was, what would your wisdom have done? would you have stepped forth and have said to Constantine, that he usurped an other man's office? that he had nothing to do in those matters? and that the matter being on's heard by him, it could not be devolved into any other cowrte? and so not only have exasperated the indurate and obstinate Donatists, but also the good and godly prince, lately converted to the faith, and by this admonition although true, yet out of season hazard all? Nay, Nay, ye will say, for all this Melchiades was but a mere delegate to Constantin, who lawfully and orderly proceeded in this case as hour prince doth now in like: and that this is but my pretty shift, and ye will put me to my proofs. But I had thowght you yourself would have proved him a mere delegate, (seeing you speak it so peremptorely) and that nothing was done here extraordinarily. But I see well you will always object as your brethren do not caring what hath been answered to the objection already, like as simple logicioners in schools, when their argument is prevented, have no shift to invent an other, or to reply upon the former solution, but do sadly repeat the same. To you therefore M. Horn, as before to M. jewel, I answer. The places by yourself alleged and quoted do confound you, and that in two places, brought out of S. Augustine. For first in one of the epistles that ye allege, It is proved by two places alleged by M. Horn that Constantine was no lawful judge in Cecilians cause. Augu. epistol. 48. Augu. epistol. 162. S. augustine doth reprove and rebuke the Donatists, for that they brought the matter to the emperors consistory: and saith they should have first of all brought the matter to the bishops beyond the seas (he meaneth specially the Pope) and saith further that Constantin himself, did more orderly, when he refused to hear the matter. Then in an other epistle also by you cited, he sayeth, that the principality of the Apostolic Chair hath evermore been enforce in the Roman Church. And now further concerning this appellation, he saith that there was no need why that the matter should have been heard again, after judgement given by Melchiades. But yet Constantine procured the matter to be heard again at Arles, relenting (saith S. Augustin) to the Donatists obstinacy, and labouring by all means to restrain their great outrageous impudence. Now concerning Constantin, that he even for the considerations aforesaid, heard their cause himself: S. Augustin saith, of him, that he minded to ask pardon thereof of the holy bishops. Whereby most evidently appeareth, that all this his doing was extraordinary, and not to be drawn into an usual example: or to be prejudicial to the Ecclesiastical power, and much like to the sufferance of Queen Mary, who for a time suffered herself to be written and called the supreme head, though she misliked the title, and at the day of her Coronation openly reproved the preacher for calling her so. And our gracious Queen now useth not that title by those precise words. And I would fain know of you M. Horn, if ye be so cunning, why the name only is shifted, the thing remaining one and the very self same as before. Thanks now be given unto God, that hath so mercifully wrowght with us, that he hath caused you, in the chiefest matter that seemeth of your side in all your book, by your own author, your own places voluntarily by you, and for you laid forth, to destroy your own doctrine, and utterly to overthrow yourself. Perchance you are now angry with yourself, for this mishap and oversight, and will not stick shortly (as some of you begin already prettily) to reject even S. Augustin himself, as a suspect man, and partial in Church and bishoply matters, himself being a bishop also. This rhetoric I fear me will one day burst out against him, and other as good and as ancient as he: as it buddeth handsomely already. And if it chance so to do, we will provide for ourselves: and in this point, furnish ourselves, with such a witness as I think for shame you dare not deny, and yet for very shame his testimony against you, ye may not abide. That is Constantine himself: who said to the Donatists, and so withal to you their scholars in this point for this their appellation. Opta. li. 1. M Horns primacy condemned by Constantine himself. O rabida furoris audatia: sicut in causis gentilium solet, appellationem interposuerunt. O furious and mad boldness they appeal unto me, as they were paynims and and heathens. How like you this M. Horn? Where is now your like regiment, when Constantine himself, for this your desperate raging appeals, maketh you not much better than a Pagan and an Heathen? Who shall clap you on the back now, and say Patrisas? Who is he now that is so like the Donatists, as though he had spit him out of his mouth? How like M. Horn is to the Donatists. M. Horn in the .12. folio. What would he have said, and how would he have cried out if he lived now, or rather how would he have pitied Brittany his own native Country (as our Chronicles report) for this kind of regiment, beside all other to many causes of pity and sorrow, to behold? Now for a surplusage M. Horn, to end this your greatest matter withal, so oft, so facingly, and so fond alleged of all your brethren, I must tell you, ye put not the case altogether right: Ye abuse your Readers. The principal matter was not, whether Cecilian was lawfully consecrated, this was but a coincident, and a matter dependent. The principal matter was, whether Felix (of whom Cecilian was in deed ordained) were a traitor, Traditor. as they then called such as in the time of persecution, delivered to the hands of the Infidels, the holy Bible to be burnt. This was Questio facti, non juris: as the Lawyers say. And such as a lay man may hear well enough. The other was coincident and accessory. And in such cases the Lawyers say, Alciat. l. non plures Cod. de sacros. ecclesiis. that a lay man may at least wise incidently hear and determine a cause Ecclesiastical. These and many other things more, that might here be said, do mollify and extenuate Constantine's fault, if there were any: and how so ever it be, this is ones sure, that your own authorities do quite overbear you, and prove the Pope's Primacy. M. Horn. The .32. Division. pag. 21. b. Athanasius also that most godly Bishop, being over much wronged in the Council at tire, did fly and appeal from the judgement of that (77.) The 77. Untruth. This was no appeal of Athanasius, as shall appear. Socr. li. 1. cap 34. Theod li. 2 cap. 28 Synod unto Constantine the Emperor, delaring unto him his griefs, beseeching him to take the hearing of the matter before himself: which the Emperor assented unto, writing unto the Synod assembled at ●yre, commanding them without delay to come unto his Court, and the●e to declare before me (saith this most Christian Emperor) whom ye shall not deny to be Gods sincere minister, how sincerely and rightly ye have judged in your Synod. When this Synod was assembled at tire, the Catholic Bishops of Egypt, written unto the honourable Flavius Dionysius whom the Emperor had made his Lieutenant, to see all things well ordered in that Council, and did desire him, that he would reserve the examination and (78) The .78. untruth. That was no Synod at all, but Nego●ium Imperatorium, An Imperial or courtly trial, ●s Athanasius calleth it▪ judgement to the emperor himself: yea they do adjure him, that he do not meddle with their matter, but refer the judgement thereof to the Emperor, who they knew well, would judge rightly according (.79.) The .79 untruth. No such words in Athanasius. Athanas. Apol. 2. ●o●. 91. & ●3. to the right order of the Church. The third Chapter: Of Constantine's Dealing in the cause of Athanasius. Stapleton. THIS objection of Athanasius his appeal (as you call it) to Constantine, is a common objection to all your brethren, and hath been used namely of M. jewel in his lying Reply in the fourth Article more then ones. For the which (if I listed to follow the fond vain of M. Nowell) I might call you M. Horn, a silly borrower of your fellows Arguments, etc. But to leave that peevish toy to boys, of whom M. Nowell in the time of his Scholemaistershippe may well seem to have learned it, and to answer briefly the whole matter, first I refer you to my former answer made to M. jew. in my Return, etc. in the fourth Article. And now for a surplusage, I say with Athanasius himself (who knew this whole matter better I trow, than you or M. jewel) that this which you call a Council and a Synod at tire, from the judgement of which Synod you say Athanasius appealed unto Constantine, referring the whole matter to his hearing, this, I say, was no Synod or Council at all. For of this very assembly of the Arrian Bishops at tire, where they accused Athanasius before the honourable Flavius Dionysius, the emperors Lieutenant there, of grievous crimes, as of killing Arsenius, who then yet lived, and of a fact of his Priest Macharius, for overthrowing of an Altar, and breaking of a Chalice, of this assembly, I say, thus doth a holy Synod of Catholic Bishops and Priests gathered together at Alexandria, out of Egypt, Thebais, Lybia, and Pentapolis, pronounce and affirm, as Athanasius in his second Apology (the book by yourself here alleged) recordeth. Praecla●i Euseb●ani, quo veritatem scriptáque sua obliterent, Athanas. in Apo●. ● nomen Synodi suis actis praetexunt, quumres ipsa negotium Imperatorium non Synodale haberi debeat. Quip ubi Comes praesideat, & milites Episcopos suo satellitio cingant, & Imperatoria edicta quos ipsi volunt coire compellant. These jolly Eusebians (these were Arrians) to the intent they may blot out the truth, and their own writings, do pretend to their own doings the name of a Synod, whereas the matter itself ought to be counted an Imperial matter, not the matter of any Council or Synod. Lo Master Horn, you with the Arrians, will have this to be a Synod: but we with the Catholic bishops of Egypt, Thebais, Lybia, and Pentapolis, and with Athanasius himself, deny flattelye it was any Synod at all, but only Negocium imperatorium, a matter Imperial, a civil matter, a lay or temporal controversy. I trust we with the Catholic Bishops, and namely with Athanasius, shall have more credit herein, than you M. Horn, and Master jewel, with the Arrians. But why do those Catholic Bishops deny this matter to be any synodal or council matter? Quip ubi. etc. As in which matter (say they) the County, the emperors Lieutenant, was precedent, and soldiers closed the Bishops round about, and the emperors proclamations compelled such to meet as them listed. Behold M. Horn, for this very cause that the Emperor and his Lieutenant bore the chief rule, therefore I say, did those Catholic Bishops account this matter to be no Synod at al. See I pray you M. Horn: Homo homini quantum interest, stulto intelligens. See how far square and extreme different your opinion is from the judgement of the Catholic Fathers and Bishops so many * Above 12. hundret years. hundred years past. You M. Horn and your fellows, will have all Synods and Counsels to be called, ordered, directed, M. Horn clean contrary to the Catholic Bishops of the Primitive Church governed, confirmed, approved and wholly governed of the Prince and his officers. And without the Prince's authority, commission, order, direction, confirmation, and royal assent, you will have no Synods or Councils of Bishops to avail, or to have force. Contrariwise, these Catholic Bishops in the East Church, do for this very cause reprove and reject the Assembly of certain Bishops, for no Synod at all, because all was there done by the authority, order, direction, and power of the Prince's Lieutenant. And they do make a plain distinction between Negotium Imperiale, and Synodale, between an Imperial matter, and a synodal matter: as who should say, If the Emperor bear all the stroke, it is no Synod, nor so to be called. Therefore these Catholic Fathers say again, in the same place within few lines after: Si velut Episcopi sese judices volebant esse, Athanasius ibidem. quid opus erat vel Comite, vel militibus, aut edictis ad coeundum imperialibus? If these fellows would be themselves judges as Bishops, what needed them to have either the County, or the soldiers, or any Imperial Edicts to make them assemble? As who would say: In the Bishoply judgement, in the Synod of bishops, it is not meet either to be summoned by the Prince, or to have his Lieutenant present, or to have his guard of Soldiers. These matters become the temporal Court, and the Civil Consistory, where by force of subjection, laws do proceed. They become not the Synods of Bishops, where with quiet of mind, with godly deliberation, freely and frankly, without fear or partiality, God's matters ought to be treated, discussed, and concluded. Therefore again these Catholic Fathers do say of this Arrian Conventicle at Tyrus: Qua fronte talem conventum, Athanasius ibid. Synodum appellare audent, cui Comes praesedit? With what face dare they call such an assembly, by the name of a Synod, over the which the County was precedent? And yet will you M. Horn, that the civil Magistrate shall be the precedent and Supreme governor, in and over all Synods? May not a man now clap you on the back, and say, Patrisas, Arrianisas? And that you are as like to the cursed Arrians, as if Arrius himself had spit you out of his mouth? Those Fathers cry yet again unto you and say: Ibidem. Quae species ibi Synodi, ubi vel caedes, vel exilium, si Caesari placuisset, constituebatur? What face of any Synod was there, where at the emperors pleasure, either death or banishment was decreed? This conventicle therefore at Tyrus was no Synod. Neither could therefore Athanasius appeal from any Synod to the Emperor. But that which Athanasius then did, and which you untruly call an Appeal from the Synod, was only a complaint to the godly Emperor Constantine, against the unjust violences of the honourable (as you call him) Flavius Dionysius: wherein also those Catholic Fathers above mentioned, shall witness with me against you. For thus they writ: Quum nihil culpae in comministro nostro Athanasio reperirent, Comésque summa vi imminens plura contra Athanasium moliretur, Episcopus comitis violentiam fugiens, ad religiosissimum. Imperatorem ascendit, depre●ās & iniquitatem hominis & adversariorum calumnias, p●stulāsque ut legitima Episcoporum Synodus indiceretur▪ aut ipse audiret suam defensionem. Whereas they could find no fault in our fellow Priest Athanasius, and the county by force and violence wrought many things against Athanasius, the Bishop declining the violence of the County, went up to the most religious Emperor, complaining both of the injurious dealing of the Lieutenant, and of the slanders of his Adversaries, and requiring that a lawful Synod of Bishops might be called, or else that th'emperor would hear him to speak for himself. What manner of Appeal Athanasius made to Constantine the Emperor. By these words we see, that Athanasius appealed not from any Synodical sentence of bishops to the Emperor, as a Superior judge in Synodical matters, but from the violence and injuries of the Lieutenant, to his Lord and Master, the Emperor himself for to have justice and audience, not in any mate● of Religion or controversy of the faith, but in a matter of felony laid to his charge, as the murder of a man, and an outrage committed by one of his Priests in a Church. For the which his adversaries sought his death. And yet when they came before the Emperor, they changed their action, and pleaded no more upon the murder, which was found to be so evident a lie (Arsenius being brought forth alive, before the bench, when they accused Athanasius of his death) neither upon the Chalice broken, that being also a very ridiculous and a plain forged matter, but they pleaded a new action of stopping the passage of corn from Alexandria to Constantinople, and accused him as an enemy to the Imperial court and City. For prouf whereof, the Arrians brought in false witnesses, and perjures. Athanas. Apol. 2. pag. 384. Socrates lib. 1. c. 27 Theodor. li. 1. ca 32 But yet the Emperor (as they writ) moved with pity, satis habebat pro morte exilium irrogare: thought it enough in stead of death, to banish him. Which he did at the importune suit and clamours of the Arrian bishops, for quietness and unities sake in the church. But afterward in his death bed the Emperor repenting him, commanded Athanasius to be restored to his bishopric again, though Eusebius the Arrian then present, laboured much to the contrary. In all this, there was no Ecclesiastical or spiritual matter, but mere Civil matters in hand. Neither was it any Ecclesiastical matter, that the Catholic Bishops of Egypt as you allege M. Horn) desired and adjured Flavius Dionysius the foresaid County to reserve the examination and judgement of, to the Emperor himself. But the matter was such as we have before rehearsed, matters and actions mere Civil. Namely they adjured that injurious and partial Magistrate, the foresaid County, not to proceed farther against their patriarch, than so grievoslie attainted, but to refer the whole matter to the most Religious Emperor, where they doubted not to find more favour. Apud quem (say they) licebit & iura Ecclesiae, & nostra proponere. Vide Apol. 2. Athan. sol. 427. Impress. Bas●l. An. 1564. Before whom we may put forth both the rights of the Church, and our own. Meaning that by his clemency, they might be suffered to proceed in that matter among themselves orderly as the right of the Church and of the Canons required: not (as M. Horn falsely translateth it) that the Emperor would judge according to the right order of the Church. There are no such words in the letters of the Catholic Bishops of Egypt alleged by M. Horn. Otherwise, to seek any judgement of Church matters, at the emperors hands, be you bold M. Horn, Sozom. lib. 3. c. 8. Tripart. li. 4. c. 15. Athanas. Apol. 2. Athanas. in epist. ad solitar. viagentes. pag. 459. no man knew better than Athanasius himself, that he could not do it. For it is Athanasius, M. Horn, that being restored, as I have said, by Constantine's last will and Testament, and after again the second time banished under the Arrian Emperor Constantius, by the means also of those Arrian Bishops, appealed to Pope julius, as his competent and ordinary judge, and was by him restored to his Bishopric, together with many other Bishops of the East, Paulus of Constantinople, Asclepas of Gaza, Marcellus of Ancyra, Lucius of Adrianople, with many other, Athanasius and M. Horn of a clean contrary judgement. appealing then likewise to Pope julius. It is Athanasius that saith: When was it heard from the creation of the world, that the judgement of the Church should take his authority from the Emperor? And what could that learned Father say more directly against you and your whole book M. Horn? Verily either that most learned and ancient Father, whom the most famous Fathers of all Christendom have always from time to time reverenced and honoured as a most glorious light and a singular pillar of God's Church, either that most excellent Bishop, I say, in whose praise even out of the testimonies only of the best writers a just Treatise might be gathered, did foully err and miss of the truth: either you M. Horn, and your fellows are in a great error, and do defend an exceeding absurdity, damnable both to you and all that follow you, forswearing yourselves by book Oath, when ye swear, that in conscience you believe, which you ought not once so much as to think. For see yet what this Notable Bishop pronounceth against you. It is Athanasius that saith it. If this be the judgement of bishops, Athanasius ubi supra: pagina eadem Fol. 3 b. what hath the Emperor to do with it? Else if Caesar's threats conclude these matters, to what purpose have men the Names of bishops? Contrary wise say you, M. Horn. It is a principal part of the Princes royal power, to have the supreme government in all manner causes Ecclesiastical or Spiritual. O Barbarous heresy from the creation of the world never heard of before. O Antichristian presumption. I say, Antichristian presumption: I learn of that most constant bishop Athanasius so to say. For it is he that saith these words. What hath Constantius omitted, that is not the part of an Antichrist? Or what can he, when he cometh, Athanasius in epist. ut supra pag. 470. do more? Or how shall not Antichrist at his coming find a ready way prepared for him of this Emperor to deceive men? For now again in stead of the Ecclesiastical judgement, he appointeth his palace to be the bench for Ecclesiastical causes to be heard at. Seque earum litium summum principem et Authorem facit. And he maketh himself the Supreme governor and chief doer of those controversies: he speaketh of ecclesiastical. Now M. Horn, not our Gracious Sovereign, of her own desire taketh upon her such government: but you most miserable clawebackes, In decernendo prīcipem se facere episcoporum: & praesidere judicijs ecclesiasticis and wretched flatterers do force her Grace to take that Title, the taking and practising whereof by the assured verdict of this most learned Father, is a plain Antichristian presumption. For lo what he saith yet again in the same page. Who is it, that seeing the Emperor to make himself the Prince of bishops in decreeing of matters, and to be precedent over Eccleclesiasticall judgements may not worthily say, that this Emperor is the very abomination of the desolation, which was foretold by Daniel? See and behold M. Horn, what a most horrible absurdity you labour in your book to persuade: See to what an extreme inconvenience you force men's consciences, when you tender them the Oath, comprising the same and more, which here Athanasius accounteth the practice of Antichrist. Se last of all what traitors you are to God and your Prince, which have persuaded her most Gracious highness to take upon her such kind of government which is a preparation to Antichrist, and resembleth the abomination of desolation foretold by Daniel. And thus much your own Author Athanasius. You see how well he speaketh for you. Socrat. li. ● Cap. 28. Now that you allege out of Socrates that Constantin threatened Athanasius he should be brought, whether he would or no, it anaunceth nothing the Authority of Constantine in Ecclesiastical matters. For so much many a Prince doth to him, that lawfully called to a Council will not come, at the Church's commandment. Wherein he is rather a Ministerial than a principal doer. Neither doth the place by you alleged out of Socrates, prove that Constantine examined and judged the doings of the whole Council, but only whether they had proceeded against Athanasius of enmity or malice: And as Socrates there writeth, Socrat. li. 1. cap. 34. Constantin said, the suit of Athanasius was, that in his presence he might (being driven thereto by necessity) complain of such injuries as he had suffered. And it appeareth by Theodoretus by you alleged in the said first book, that the determination and definition of these matters rested in the Bishops, the execution in the Prince. For the labour of Constantine with Athanasius then was, only that he would appear before a Synod of bishops, which had accused him diversly before the Emperor, and of those bishops be tried. Which the Emperor did, as Theodoret writeth, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Theod. lib. 1. cap. 28. believing the accusers of Athanasius as Priests, and thinking their accusations to be true. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. For he was utterly ignorant of their deceits and craftily dealings, saith Theodoret. Thus he judged not himself over Athanasius, but only procured, that to keep peace in the Church, the bishops might assemble together, and try their own matter among themselves. M. Horn. The .33. Division. Pag. 22. a. There were no Church mattiers, or Ecclesiastical causes, wherein the continual practice of the Church of Christ, in this emperors time, yea and many hundredth years after, did not attribute the (.80.) The 80. untruth: boldly avouched, but no way proved. supreme rule, order, and authority unto Emperors and Kings, upon whom (.81.) The 81. untruth. Socrates' belied, as shall appear. In proaem. lib. 5. Lib. 1. De vit. Const. all Church mattiers did depend, as witnesseth Socrates, who showeth this reason of that he doth throughout his Ecclesiastical History mention so much the Emperors. Because that of the Emperors (saith he) after they began to be Christians, the Church matters do depend, yea the greatest Counsels have been, and are called together, according to their appointment. Eusebius commendeth the great bountifulness of Constantine towards all estates, But, (saith he) this Emperor had a singular care over God's Church, for as one appointed of God to be a common or universal Bishop, he called Synods or convocations of God's ministers together into one place, that thereby he might appease the contentious strivings that were among them in sundry places. He disdained not to be present with them in their Synods, and to sit in the midst of them, as it had been a meaner parsonage, commending and approving those that bent themselves of good meaning to godly unity, and showed himself to mislike on the other side, and to set nought by such, as were of contrary disposition. Stapleton. The general assertion that M. Horn here avoucheth, that in constantines time, the continual practice of the Church attributed in all Ecclesiastical causes the supreme rule to Emperors, is but a great untruth boldly avouched, but no manner of way yet proved, as hath been declared, nor hereafter to be proved, as it shall by God's grace appear. Again that he saith: All Church matters did depend of the Emperors, and for witness thereof allegeth Socrates, is an other no less untruth also. For this pretty syllable, All, is altogether M. Horns, and not Socrates, Socrates' ● prooemio lib. ●. prettily by him shifted in, to help forward a naughty matter. The very text alleged by M. Horn, hath not that word, nor speaketh not so generally. But it is no rare matter with men of M. horns brotherhood, to overreach their Authors, and therefore the less to be wondered at, Art. 4. Fol. 139. though not the less to be borne with. And to this place of Socrates I have before answered in my Return against M. jewel. That which followeth out of Eusebius, proveth M. Horns purpose never a deal. Except M. Horn think some weight to lie in those words, where the Emperor is called a Common or Universal Bishop: as though. we should gather thereby, that the Emperor was then, as the Pope is now, and hath always been. Except these words help M. horns primacy, nothing is there that will help it, read and consider the place who listeth. But as for these words what sense they bear, no man better than Constantine himself by the report of the same Eusebius also, can tell us. Constantin in deed was called of Eusebius as a common bishop, that is, as a common overseer, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Lib. 1. ca 37. de vita Constant. by reason of his passing zeal and singular diligence in furthering Gods true Religion. But that he exercised therein no such supreme government as M. Horn fancyeth, neither made himself bishop of bishops, but stayed himself within the limits and bounds of his own jurisdiction, it appeareth manifestly by these his words spoken to a great number of bishops, as Eusebius recordeth it in his own hearing to have been said. I am also, saith the Emperor, a bishop. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Lib. 4. ca 24. de vit. Constant. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. But you are bishops (or overseers) of those things that are within the Church. But I being by God set over those things that are without the Church, am also as it were a bishop, or overseer. Mark well these words M. Horn. Your allegation avoucheth not the Emperor absolutely to be a bishop: but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Appointed of God as a certain common bishop. that is, resembling for his great zeal to God's Church, the very office and person of a bishop. But here the Emperor distinctly expresseth the tru● bishops office and vocation to be different from his own office and calling. He confesseth, I say, expressly, that the bishops are appointed of God to be the Rulers overseers and directors of those things that are within the Church, that is, that do concern the government of spiritual causes, and matters mere ecclesiastical. But himself he acknowledgeth to be ordained of God over those things that are without the Church, as of worldly and civil matters over the which he being the Emperor was the supreme governor, and in that respect he thought he might after a sort call himself also a bishop, which soundeth, an Overseer, Ruler, and Guider of such things as are to his charge committed. And verily after the pattern and example of this Noble first Christian Emperor, first I say that openly professed and defended the same, it may well be thought, the words spoken to Christian Princes at their Coronation time, have been conceived and used. The which also, that the Reader may see how distinct and different in deed the vocations are of Princes and Bishops, and yet how in some sort they both are bishops, that is Overseers of God's people, as Constantine professed him self to be, I will here insert the very words usually rehearsed to Princes at their coronation time by the bishops anointing them. Vide Pontificale impressum Venetiis An. 1520. These are the words. Accipe Coronam regni tui, quae licet ab indignis, episcoporum tamen manibus, capiti tuo imponitur, In nomine Patris, & filii, & Spiritus Sancti: Quam sanctitatis gloriam, & honorem, & opus fortitudinis intelligas significare, & per hanc te participem ministerij nostri non ignores. Ita ut sicut nos in interioribus pastors, restoresque animarum intelligimur, ita & tu contra omnes adversitates, ecclesiae Christi defensor assistas, regnique tibi à Deo dati: etc. Take the Crown of your kingdom, which is put upon your head by the hands of bishops, though unworthy, in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. The which Crown you must understand, doth signify the glory and honour of Godliness, and the work of Fortitude: By this also understand, that you are partakener of our Ministry. So that, as we are known to be the pastors and governors of men's souls in matters internal, so you also should assist as a defender of the Church of Christ, and of the kingdom given to you by God, against all adversities. You see here M. Horn, that as in the words of king josaphat in the old law, and of Constantin the first Christian Emperor, so to this day in the Coronation of all Christian Princes there is made a plain distinction between the Emperors or Prince's Office, and the Office, charge and commission of a bishop, commission I say committed to him not of the Prince, but of God. And dare you then to confounded them? Or dare you for shame M. Horn make the world believe, that Constantin bore himself for a Supreme Governor in all causes ecclesiastical or spiritual, when he himself in plain words confesseth, that of spiritual or Ecclesiastical matters the bishops are of God (not of him) appointed the Rulers and overseers, but he hath of God committed unto him the Charge and rule of those matters that are out of the Church, that are in deed no Church matters, but matters of policy, matters of civil government, matters of this world, and concerning this present life only? M. Horn. The 34. Division. Pag. 22. a. The Ecclesiastical histories make mention of many Synods or councils, called or assembled at the appointment and order of this Emperor. But the most famous and notable, was the Nicene Council: about the which, consider and mark, what was the occasion, by whose authority it was summoned and called together, and what was the doings of the Emperor from the beginning unto the dissolution thereof: and ye shall see plainly as in a Glass, that by the order and practise of the Catholic Church, notified in the order of this general Council, the (.82) The 82. untruth. That will never appear in the order of this Council. supreme government in Ecclesiastical causes, is in the Emperor and and civil Magistrates, and your (83.) The 83. untruth. Not M. Fekenhā● but M. horns opinion is clearly condemned by the agreement of these 318. Father's. opinion condemned by the uniform agreement of .318. of the most Catholic Bishops in the world, commending, and allowing for most godly, what so ever the Emperor did in, or about this council. The occasion of this famous and most godly council, was the great dissension kindled, partly about a necessary Article of our belief, partly about a ceremony of the Church. Arrius incensed with ambitious envy, against Alexander his bishop at alexandria, who disputed in one of his lessons or treatises, more subtilely of the divinity then advisedly, as the Emperor layeth to his charged, quarrelled Sophistically against him, and maintained an horrible Heresis. Besides this, the Churches were also divided amongst themselves, about the order or ceremony of keeping the Easter-Day The Emperor sent Hosius with his letters, as I said before, into the east parties to appease the furious dissension about both these matters, and to reconcile the parties dissenting. But when this dutiful service of the Emperor, took not that effect which he wished and hoped for, then as Sozomenus writeth, he summoned a council to be holden at Nice in Bythinia, Lib. 1. c. 17 and written to all the chief Ministers of the Churches every where, (.84.) The 84. untruth There appeareth in Sozomene no such Imperial commandment, but only that he called them to meet at a day. Lib. 1 c. 7. Lib. 3. De vit. Const. Lib. 8. c. 14 Theod. lib. 1. cap. 9 commanding them that they should not fail to be there at the day appointed. The self same also doth Theodoretus affirm, both touching the occasion, and also the summons made by the Emperor. Eusebius also writing the life of Constantine, showeth with what carefulness, the godly Emperor endeavoured to quench these fires. And when the Emperor (saith Eusebius) saw that be prevailed nothing by sending of Hosius with his letters, Considering this matter with himself, said, that this war against the obscure enemy troubling the Church, must be vanquished by an other (meaning himself.) Therefore, as the captains of God's army, towards his voayge, he gathered together a Synod ecumenical, and he called the Bishops together by his honourable letters, and that they should hasten themselves from every place. These things, touching the occasion and cal●ing of this general counsel by the Emperor, are affirmed to be true also, by Nicephorus the Ecclesiastical historian. Yea, the whole counsel in their letters, to the church's in Egypt, and the East parts, do testify the same Synod, to be called by the Emperor, saying: The great and holy Synod, was gathered together at Nice, by the grace of God, and the most religious Emperor Constantine, etc. The .4. Chapter. Of Constantin the Emperor his dealing in the Nicene Council, and with Arius after the Council. Stapleton. Master Horn here entereth to a great matter, and maketh large promises both to prove his principal purpose effectually, and to confound M. Fekenham manifestly. But he will I trow, when he hath all said, be as far from them both, as if he had held his peace. First to prove a Supreme government in Constantin, he telleth us that Constantine summoned the great Council at Nice in Bythinia: but if he had set in out of Ruffinus, Ruf. lib. 1. cap. 1. hist. ecclesiast. Ex Sacerdotum Sententia: by the will, mind, and consent of the Priests, that is, of the bishops: then had he marred all his matter: and therefore wilily he left it out. If he had added also out of Theodoret (whom he allegeth to prove that the Emperor summoned this Council) why and wherefore the Emperor would be present at the Council himself this imagined Primacy that Master Horn so deeply dreameth of, would have appeared a very dream in deed. Theodoretus lib. 1. ca 7. hist. ecclesiast. The Emperor was present (saith Theodoret) both desirous to behold the Number of the Bishops, and also coveting to procure unity among them. These and such like causes do the Ecclesiastical histories allege. But for any supreme government that the Emperor should practise there, as namely that his Royal assent was necessary to confirm the Council, or that without it Arius had not been condemned, and that he judged the heresy or any such matter, as you now M. Horn do attribute to the Prince, having your whole religion only by the Prince's Authority enacted and confirmed, for any such matter I say, neither in this Council nor in any other do the Ancient histories record so much as one word. Your new Religion M. Horn, hath set up a new kind of government such as all the Christian world never knew nor heard of before. Now that you say, the occasion of this famous and most godly Council, was the dissension partly about a necessary Article of our belief, partly about a ceremony of the Church, which ceremony you say after, was, of keeping the Easterdaye, if it be so as you say (as it is most truly) what say you to your own Apology that saith, that the usual keeping of Easter day is, a matter of small weight, and to your great Antiquary Bale, that saith it is but a ceremony of Hypocrites? In Centu. De script. ecclesiast. surely Constantin made a greater account of this uniform observation then so, seeing that it was the second chief cause that caused him to summon this famous, and most godly Council▪ as yourself calleth it. Seeing also that he maketh them not much better than jews that privately in his time kept Easter day otherwise, than Rome, Euseb. li. 3 cap. 18. de vit. Const. Africa, Italy, Egypt, Spaigne, France, Grece, Britanny, and many other great countries that he himself reakoneth up. And here by the way falleth out in M. jewel a lie or two, saying that our Country .700. years together kept their Paschal day with the Grecians otherwise then we do now. Ye see I have abridged .300. years and a half at the least. For Constantin wrote these words strait after the Nicene Council ended, which was kept in the year of our Lord .328. M. Horn. The .35 Division. Pag. 23. a. The Bishops (as I said before) when they thought themselves, or their Church injuried by others, were want to appeal and fly unto the Emperor, as the (.85.) The 85. untruth, ever avouched, but never proved. supreme governor in all matters, and causes Temporal, or Spiritual, the which appeareth most plain, to be the practice of the Church by these Bishops called unto the Nicene counsel. For when they came to Nice, supposing themselves to have now good opportunity, being nigh unto the Emperor, to revenge their * Being private quarrels, they could be ●o ecclesiastical matters touching religion, which is ever common. Sozom. li. 1. cap. 17. Li. 1. ca 8. private quarrels, and to have redress at the emperors hands, of such injuries as they thought themselves to sustain at others bishops hands, each of them gave unto the Emperor, a Libel of accusations, signifying what wrongs he had sustained of his fellow bishops, and prayed aid and redress by his judgement. The Emperor forcing that these private quarelings, if they were not by some policy, and wise devise sequestered, and laid aside, would much hinder the common cause, took deliberation, appointing a day, against the which they should be in a readiness, and commanded them to prepare and bring unto him all their libels and quarreling accusations, one against an other: (Mark by the way, the craft and practice of Satan, to stay and overthrow good purposes, that even the godly fathers and Bishops, wanted not their great infirmities, preferring their own private trifles, before the weighty causes of God's Church. And the wisdom, zeal, and humbleness, of his most Christian Emperor, who so little esteemed his own honour, and authority, that he would rather seem to be inferior, or for the time no more than equal with his subjects, to the end, he might by his humbling of himself, advance and exalt God's glory, to the edifying and quietness of his Church.) The day came (which was the day before the first Session should be in the council, as Socrates saith) the Bishops did not sleep their own matters, but had their bills in a readiness, and delivered them unto the Emperor. This vigilant noursefather unto God's Church, had cared and devised so diligently for the common cause, as the Bishops had done for their private quarrels: and therefore, when he had received their Libels, very (.86.) The 86. untruth. He did it religiously, not politicly. politiquelye, saith: The 87. 88 and 89. untruths. Sozomenes text in three places falsified. Sozom. li. 1. cap. 17. Theod. lib. 1 cap. 7. (because he would irritate none of them for that time,) That the day of general judgement should be a fit time for these accusations. and Christ the judge, than would judge all men: As for me (.87.) it is not lawful to take upon me (. 8●.) the judgement of (.89.) such Priests, accused, and accusing one an other. Whereunto, nevertheless, he added this privy nip, to pinch them withal. For of all other things (saith he) this is least seemly, that Bishops should show themselves such, as aught to be judged of others. And so caused the Libels to be cast into the fire, giving them an earnest exhortation to peace and quietness. Stapleton. It is a world to see the singular logic, and deep reasoning of M. Horn, that can of such slender premises infer such mighty conclusions. For the Emperor to be the Supreme Governor in all matters or causes temporal or spiritual, it appeareth most plain (saith he) to be the practice of the Church by these Bishops c●lled unto the Nicene Council. Answer first M. Horn. How could this possibly be a practice of the Church, that never before was used in the Church? Except you will say, that even heathen princes may be your Supreme governors in all causes Ecclesiastical. You know before this Constantine there was never Christian Emperor, to whom bishops might put up their complaints as to their Supreme governor, only Philip excepted. Who is never read, ever to have meddled with the least matter or cause Ecclesiastical, but lived rather like a close Christian, being afeard to displease the Roman Legions, who then were in manner all heathens, and who (as the world than went) bore all the stroke in electing of the Emperor, and in the continuance also of him. Contrariwise, Euseb. lib. 6. cap. 27. that he was subject to the Bishops, it appeareth well by the doing of Pope Fabian, shutting him out at an Easter time, from the number of communicants, because he sticked to confess his sins, as other Christians did. Answer therefore first to this, how you avouch that for a practice which was or could never be used? Well let this go for an other untruth. Now let us hear how ioylely you will prove, that the 318. Fathers of the Nicene Council, do condemn M. Fekenhams opinion, which before you promised to do. The cause is to your seeming, that certain Bishops accused one the other before the Emperor Constantine. But how can this be a good motive for you M. Horn, to pronounce him therefore a Supreme Governor in all causes temporal and spiritual, seeing it doth not appear what those causes were, which the bishops did put up unto him? They might be, and so it is most likely they were, causes temporal. Verily yourself confesseth, they were private quarrels: and so no matter of faith and religion, (of which can grow no private quarrels, but common controversies) but as it may seem, it was some private contention between neighbour and neighbour (for at that time every town had bis bishops, yea many mean Villages also) concerning the limits and bounds of their possessions, or ●uch like matter, which is a matter plain temporal. Beside this they were not all at dissension but certain, and perchance very few: how is then M. Fekenham condemned by 318. Bishops of Nice? I see you will play small game, rather than ye will sit out. I will now bring you for M. Fekenham and for the Pope's supremacy, no such trieflinge toys and foolish gheasses: but a substantial author Athanasius himself, that reciteth out of Pope julius epistle, that this famous and most godly synod decreed: Athanas. Apol. 2. that no bishop should be deposed, unless the Pope were first thereof advertised: and that nothing ought to be determined in Council, but that he should be thereof made privy before. But why do I crave aid against you of this Council, seeing your own example plainly destroyeth your imagined Primacy, in that Constantine answereth to these quarrelling bishops, that it was not lawful for him to be their judge? M. Horn convicted by his own example of Constantine's doings. Which sentence of his being so plain, you more grossly then truly or politykely would elude, as although Constantin meant no such matter, but politykely spoke this because he would not irritate them, or least by private quarrels the weighty cause of the faith in hand should be hindered. Such gay gloss that destroy the text, may you by your extravagant Authority make at your pleasure. But the sentence of Sozomene only laid forth, shall both discover your bastard gloze, and open also your untrue handling of his text. For Constantine refusing to judge of the bishops complaints, calling them first (as Ruffinus at large rehearseth) Gods, Ruffin. lib. 1. c. 2. hist. suae ecclesiast. Sozom. li. 1. cap. 17 and such as ought to judge over him, not to be judged of him, or of any men at all, but of God only, he addeth and saith as Sozomenus your alleged Author reporteth. As for me, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, being a man (which words you guilfully left out) it is not lawful to take upon me 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, such judgement not the judgement: as you absolutely but untruly turn it: For strait he expoundeth what manner of judgement it is not lawful for him to take upon him: adding immediately 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when priests are parties plaintiffs and defendants, not of such priests &c. as you, Three untruths of M Horn. in translating of one greek sentence. Ruffin. lib. 1. cap. 2. now the third time in one sentence, most lewdly and liyengly do translate it. These words therefore of Constantine, thus spoken to the bishops, were not politicly (as you gloze Master Horn) but religiously and reverently devised, as to whom in plain words he said: Deus vos constituit Sacerdotes, & potestatem vobis dedit de nobis quoque judicandi, & ideo à vobis rectè iudicamur. Vos autem non potestis ab hominibus judicari. God hath appointed you Priests: And hath given you power, to judge over us also: And therefore we are orderly judged of you. But you can not be judged of men. Here by the way, Master Horn: The best, the noblest, and the wisest Emperor that ever Christendom had, confesseth the bishops his superioures and judges: Show you where ever any wise or good Bishop so flatly agnized the Emperor his superior or judge in matters of Religion. Now that this fact of Constantine proceeded not of policy, but of reverence: behold, how this example was interpreted afterward above a thousand years past, both of Emperors and of Bishops. Concil. Chalcedo. Act. 1. Martianus that virtuous Emperor protested openly in the Council of Chalcedon, that he was present there, after the example of Constantine, not to show his power, but to confirm his faith. And Saint Gregory putting Mauritius the Emperor (who in a chafe had called him fool) in mind of the duty he owed to God's ministers, rippeth up to him particularly this very fact of Constantine, refusing to judge upon the bishops complaints etc. and addeth in the end as an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, these words. Gregor. li. 4. epist. 31 In qua tamen sententia pie Domine, sibi magis ex humilitate, quàm illis aliquid praestitit ex reverentia impensa. In which sentence yet (my good Lord) Constantyne more profited himself by humility, than he did the bishops, by the reverence he showed them. It was saith Saint Gregory, Reverentia impensa, a reverence showed to the bishops, that Constantine would not judge over their complaints: It was politikelye done, saith. M. Horn. Such a politic prelate hath Winchester diocese of him. Verily of that notable See with such prelate's lately beautified, and now of this man so contaminated, we may say as Cicero said of Pompey the great his palace possessed of Anthony that Infamous ribald. O domus antiqua, q̄ dispari Domino dominaris? In Phil. 2. For with the like sincerity do you through the whole book proceed, sometime flatly belying, sometime nipping their sentences, Euseb. lib. 3. De vita Constant. but well near continually concealing the circumstances and whole effect of your alleged Authors, as we shall in the process see. M. Horn. The .36. Division. Pag. 23. b The next day after, they assembled at the emperors palace, he commanded them to go into the Council house, to consult of the matter, (the council house was within Themperors palace, trimly furnished with seats, aptly ordered for such purpose, as it were in rows.) They entered in, and waited without any doings, till the coming of the Emperor, whose seat was of gold, placed at the first beginning of the rows: (.90.) The 90. untruth in concealing the truth of the story as shall appear. who being entered and placed in his seat, maketh an oration unto them, declaring the contentions sprung up amongst themselves, to be the occasion wherefore he called them together: and the end is (saith he) that this disease might be healed through my ministry. After this he maketh an earnest exhortation, moving them to quietness, forgiving one an other; for Christ commandeth (saith he) that who will receive pardon at his hand, shall also forgive his brethren. After this most grave exhortation to unity, and concord, in truth, he giveth them (.91.) The 91. untruth. Theodoret hath no such thing. leave to consult of the matters in hand, prescribeth unto them a (.92.) The 92. untruth. The Emperor prescribed no rule to the bishops. rule, whereby they must measure, try, and discuss these, and (.93.) The 93. untruth. The syllable, All, foisted in, more than his Author hath. Socr. lib. 1. cap. 8. Theod. lib. 1 cap. 7. all other such disputations, and controversies, in matters of religion, to wit, Sanctissimi spiritus doctrinam praescriptam, The doctrine of the most holy spirit before written. For (saith he) the books of the Evangelists, and of the Apostles and also the Prophecies of the old Prophets, do evidently teach us of God's meaning. Wherefore laying a side all discord of enemity, let us take the explications of our questions, out of the sayings of the holy Ghost. When the parties waxed warm in the disputations, and the contention, somewhat sharp, than the Emperor, as a wise moderator, and ruler, would discourage none, but mildly calmed such as he saw over hasty with mild words, cooling their heat: and commended such as reasoned deeply with gravity. Stapleton. In all this talk is nought else but a heap of untruths, and vain gheasses, nothing to the principal purpose material: which will well appear in a more open declaration of that, which you have patchedly and obscurely showed, as it were, a far of to your Reader, concealing (as your manner is) all that any thing concerneth the Bishop's authority in those matters. First than you tell us out of Eusebius, that Constantine in the Council of Nice, sat in a seat of gold, placed at the first beginning of the rows. Euseb. li. 3 cap. 10. de vita Constant. Theodor. li. 1. c. 7. But you leave out Modica, a small seat, or as Theodoret also calleth it, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: sitting in the midst in a low seat: You conceal also that which Eusebius your alleged author in that very place addeth: Non prius in ea sedit, quàm annu●ssent Episcopi: He sat not down before the Bishops had given him leave. For so importeth the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: used by Eusebius and Theodoret also. Which declareth very well the Bishop's superiority in the Council, where matters of faith were to be treated. Now where you add out of Theodoret, that the Emperor should give the Bishops leave to consult. etc. Theodoret in the place alleged hath no such words. You imagine, by like, the Bishops had of the Emperor such a licence as your English Statutes require. That the Convocation shall make no Ecclesiastical law without the King's consent. No, No. Constantine demeaned not himself so stately. You have heard what his behaviour was, and shall hear yet farther, by your next untruth, which is this. You say, th'emperor prescribed them a rule whereby they should measure, try, and discuss, these and all other such disputations, etc. But you say it untruly. For immediately after the words by you alleged, to show thereby the emperors rule and prescription, Theodoret addeth: These things and such like he uttered, as a natural loving child, to the Priests, as to his Fathers. If Children prescribe rules to their Fathers when they give them good counsel, than did also Constantine here prescribe a rule to the Bishops. But if so to say, is more than childish, consider M. Horn how like a babe ye have reasoned against the authority of such blessed Fathers, the Fathers of that most holy and learned Council. Verily S. Ambrose, who knew, I trow, better what was done in the Nicene Council then M. Horn doth, and is of somewhat more credit too, reporteth far otherwise of Constantine's doings, then M. Horn counterfeiteth. Thus he saith: Ambros. Lib 5. Epist. 32. And I pray you M. Horn, mark his saying well. Si conferendun de fide, saderdotum debet esse ista collatio: sicut factum est sub Constantino Augustae memoriae principe, qui nullas leges antè praemisit, sed liberum ded●t judicium sacerdotibus. If conference must be had of the faith, this conference ought to be kept of Priests: as it was done in the time of Constantine a Prince of noble memory: who (when controversy of the faith sprung up) did not before prescribe any laws, but left to the Priests the free judgement and determination Yet saith M. Horn, that Constantine prescribed to the Bishops, a rule whereby they should measure, try and discuss the controversy in hand. Wherein observe diligently (gentle Reader) that S. Ambrose is direct contrary to M. Horn, not only touching this particular fact of Constantine (the one saying tha● he prescribed before hand no laws at all, but left to the Bishops the trial of the controversy free, the other avouching that he prescribed a rule to try and discuss the matter by) but also touching the whole estate of the question between M. Horn and M. Fekenham here. For S. Ambrose will have the conference and trial of the faith to appertain to Priests chief and only. For these words he spoke against the young Valentinian, who being seduced in his minority, as our late Sovereign King Edward was, would have the matter of faith to be tried in Palace before him and his bench, as matters of faith are now in the Parliament concluded. Contrariwise M. Horn will have the supreme judgement of matters of faith to rest in the Prince, and all things measured by that rule and square that the Prince prescribeth. You see how the judgement of the Ancient Fathers, accordeth with the opinion of upstart Protestants. But will you know, M. Horn, what Constantine intendeth in that his exhortation made to the bishops? He findeth fault, and worthily, with such as were faulty for their division and dissension in Religion, and doth refer them to holy Scripture, that doth evidently instruct us of God's mind. But (wherein your liegerdemaine bursteth out) you shuffle in of your own this syllable All. a pretty knack, I promise you, to sweet your answer withal. It is true, that we must measure and discuss our controversies by Scripture, Traditions are to be regarded, where Scripture faileth. and never resolve against Scripture: So where there is no plain Scripture, there the Apostolical traditions, the decrees or General Councils, the authority of the universal Church make a good plea. And these Nicene Fathers added unto the common Creed this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: expressing lively the unity of Christ's Divinity in one substance with the Father, though the word appear not in scripture, and though the Arrians would never receive or allow it. Eutiches the Archeheretique denying that Christ had two natures, was wont to ask of the Catholics: In what scripture lie the two natures? To whom Mamas the Catholic Bishop answered, where find you Homoousion in the Scripture? Vide Act. 1 Chalced. Concil. pa. 776. col. 1. Well saith Eutiches, in case it be not in the holy scripture, it is found in the exposition of the holy Fathers. Then replied Mamas: Even as Homoousion is not found in the scripture, but in the Father's exposition and interpretation: So is it with these words two natures of Christ, which words are not in Scripture, but in the Fathers. Ye may hereby perceive, M. Horn, that ye must not sequester and sunder the Scripture, from the common allowed exposition of the Fathers: nor give judgement in all causes by bare scripture only, as ye would make us believe, but take the faith and faithful exposition of the Fathers withal. In like sort objected the Eunomians against Gregory Nazianzen for the Godhead of the holy Ghost. Gregor. Nazian. lib. 5. De Theolog. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉? From whence bring you us forth this strange and unwritten God? But Gregory Nazianzen answereth them, and you withal, M. Horn. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The love of the letter, is a cloak to them of their wickedness. Thus you see, M. Horn, how well Patrisas, and how like you are to your progenitors and ancestors, ancient heretics, Arrians, Eutychians, and Eunomians. Is this the ground, M. Horn, that moved you among other Articles proposed to the fellows of the new College in Oxford, to make this one also, unto the which they should swear, Art. 1. An. 1566. Angl. 18. Mart. or rather forswear: that out of holy Scripture all controversies might sufficiently be convinced? I wish here, if I speak not to late, to that godly foundation, to the which being (though unworthy) a member sometime thereof, I ought of duty to wish the best, rather to forsake (as many, God be praised, have done) the comfortable benefit of that society, then by absolute subscribing to such a dangerous Article, a snare in deed against many Articles of our Faith, to fall to the approving of your heresies, and so to forsake the Catholic society of all Christendom, and of that Church wherein our Godly founder (bishop Wicame of famous memory) lived and died. Thus much by the way. To return to you M. Horn, a vehement persecutor of that young company, I tell you again, to make your matters more apparent, The Apology hath shifted this syllable, Al, into a sentence of S. Hierons'. ye have slily shifted in this pretty syllable, All. The like part hath the Author of your Apology played with S. Jerome, turning him to their purpose and yours here against Traditions, saying: Omnia ea quae absque testimonio scripturarum, quasi tradita ab Apostolis asseruntur, percutiuntur gladio Dei. All things (say they) which without the testimonies of Scriptures are holden, as delivered from the Apostles, be throughly smitten down by the sword of God's word. Where to frame the sentence to his and your mind, ye have by like authority, set in this syllable All, also. M. Horn. The .37. Division. pag. 24. b. Euseb. li. ● De vita Constant. Socr. li. 1. cap. 8. Socr. li. 1. cap. 9 Theod. li. 1 ca 13. When they had agreed of the chief points, wherefore they were assembled, the Emperor himself calleth forth Acesius a bishop at Constantinople, of the novatians religion, and (.94.) The .94. untruth. For he had but private talk with him, no open examination. examineth him openly, touching these Articles, whereunto the whole Council had agreed and subscribed. He writeth his letters to the Church at Alexandria, where the controversy touching the Divinity of Christ began, declaring, that he himself together with the bishops in the Council, had taken upon him (.95.) The .95. Untruth. For Constantine did not this as the judge over Doctrine, or as Supreme governor, but as desiring above measure to serve the church with the Bishops▪ as he protesteth in the same sentence saiing: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which words you nip of from the middle of the sentence. the searching forth of the truth, and therefore assureth them, that all things were diligently examined, to avoid all ambiguity and doubtfulness: wherefore he exhorteth and willeth them all, that no man make any doubt or delays, but that cheerfully they return again into the most true way. He writeth an other to all bishops, and people where so ever, wherein he commandeth▪ that no writing of Arius, or monument containing Arius doctrine, be kept openly or secretly, but be burnt under pain of death. After that all the matters were conclunded, and signed with their hands subscription, the Emperor dissolveth the Council, and licenseth every one of them to return home to his own bishopric, with this exhortation, that they continue in unity of faith: that they preserve peace and concord amongst themselves, that from thence forth they abide no more in contentions: Sozomen. li. 5. c. 25. and last of all, after he had made a long oration unto them, touching these matters, he commandeth them, that they make prayer continually for him, his children, and the whole Empire. Stapleton. Socra. li. 1 cap. 10. There is no matter here greatly to be stayed upon. The matter of Acesius proveth little your purpose. unless perchance, ye think that Constantine examined Acesius of his faith, King Henry's sitting upon Lambert. and heard his cause, as King Henry did Lambert the sacramentaries cause, sitting upon him as Supreme head, and pronouncing by his Vicegerent Cromwell, final sentence against him. For the which sentence M. Fox wonderfully revealeth with the King, and revileth him too: which discourse if any man be desirous to see, I remit him to M. Foxes mad martyrologue. The .553. leaf Socr. lib. 1. cap. 10. Niceph. li. 8. ca 20 The talk of Constantine with Acesius the Novatian was only private, as both Socrates and Nicephorus do report it. Open examination no Writer mentioneth. It is Master horns untruth. His Proclamation that no man should keep Arius books under pain of death, doth not justify this supremacy by you imagined. This was but an outward execution of civil punishment in the assisting of the Nicene Decrees. Now, touching that you tell us, how Constantine licensed the Fathers to depart, if he said: Gramercy most reverend Fathers, for your great pains and travail, now may you in God's name, resort to your cures and flock, God speed you, God prosper your journey: Theod. li 1. ca 14. And if he bore their charges too, that were poor bishops, as he did, in case he would not suffer them to departed till all matters were throughly and finally discussed, What then? What supremacy maketh all this? Or how is this any thing like to the Supremacy now sworn unto? M. Horn. The .38. Division pag. 24. b. Arius counterfeiting a false and a feigned confession of belief, like an hypocrite▪ pretending to the Emperor, that it was agreeable to the faith of the Nicene Council humbly beseeching the Emperor, that he would unit and restore him to the (.96.) The .96. Untruth. The very words of Arius falsified. mother Church, and therefore having friends in the emperors Court (as such shall never want fautors about the best Princes) was brought into his presence, whom the Emperor himself examined diligently, and perceiving no disagreement (as he thought) from the agreement made in Nicene Council (.97.) The .97. Untruth. No such words in Theodoret, or in any other of the ecclesiastical Historians Socr lib. 1 cap. ●8. absolved and restored him again, whereunto Athanasius, who knew Arius thoroughly, would not agree, and being accused therefore unto th'emperor, was charged by letters from him, that he should receive Arius, with these threats, that if he would not, he would (.98.) The 98. Untruth. No such thing neither in Socrates nor in Theodoret, for any matter of Arius. Theod. li. 1. ca 27. depose them from his bishopric, and commit him to an other place. The Arrians heaped up many and horrible accusations and slanders upon Athanasius, whereupon the Emperor doth summon a Council at tire, and sendeth commandment by his letters ●o Athanasius, that without all excuse, he should appear there, for otherwise he should be brought whether he would or no. He writeth to the Council his letters, wherein he declareth the causes why he called that Council. He showed what he would have and what they ought to do, and prescribeth unto them the form and rule whereby they should judge and determine in that Synod. Athanasius appeared, appealed, fled to the Emperor, and declared the injuries offered against him in that Council. The Emperor took upon him the hearing of the cause, Soc. lib. 1. cap. 34. sent his letters to the whole Synod, commanding them without all excuse or delay, to appear before him in his palace, and there to show how uprightly and how sincerely they had judged in their Synod, as I have showed (.99.) (.99.) A heap of untruths as before in the .32. Division and third chapter. before. Wherein observe diligently, that the Emperor taketh upon him, and no fault found therewith, to examine and judge of the doings of the whole Council. Thus far of Constantine and his doings, in the execution of his ministery, and especially in performing that part, which he called his best part, that is his government, and rule, in Ecclesiastical matters, wherein it is manifest, that by the practice of the Catholic Church for his time approved and commended by all the Catholic Priests and Bishops, in the Nicene Council, the supreme government, authority, and rule, in (,100.) The .100. untruth. Facing and impudent, generally avouched but not in one particular proved. all manner causes both Ecclesiastical and Temporal, were claimed and exercised by the Emperor, as to whom of right, such like power and authority, belonged and appertained. Stapleton. Behold now an other Argument of M. horns imagined Supremacy. Arius hypocritically dissembling his heresy, and pretending his faith to be agreeable to the Nicene faith, humbly beseecheth Constantine, to unite and restore him to the Mother Church. And so he was absolved and restored. Theodor. li. 1. c. 14. Truly here had ye hit M. Feckenham home in deed, had there been any such thing in your Author, as in deed, there is not, nor can be, unless Constantine had been also a Priest. In deed he released him from exile, being before circumvented by a crafty Epistle of his and Euzoius together, Ruff. lib. 1. cap. 11. Tripart. li. 3. ca 6. which in words seemed to agree with the Nicene Council, but in meaning far disagreed. If ye call this, uniting to the Mother Church, your Mother hath a fair Child, and a cunning Clercke of you: And yet were ye much more cunning, if ye could find any such disordinate and foolish false phrases in any man's pen saving your own. Neither can I tell in the world, where to find, or where ye found this peevish heretical fond phrase, unless it were of Arius himself, of whom ye seem to take it. And yet durst not he, as stark an heretic as he was, Hist. trip. lib. 3. ca 6 Sozomen. li 2. c. 27. to hazard so far as ye have done. In deed in his crafty and subtle letter, so ambitiously and colourably penned, that Constantine supposed, it agreed very well with the very definition of the Nicene Council, in the end thereof, M. Horn hath no Author but Arius to help him. M. Horn uresteth even Arius words. he made suit unto Constantine to be received again into the Catholic Communion, in these words, speaking for himself and Euzoius his mate: Quapropter rogamus untri nos per pacificam & Dei cultricem pietatem tuam matri nostrae Ecclesiae iubeatis. Wherefore we beseech your honour being a peaceable Prince, and a true worshipper of God to command that we may be united to our Mother the Church. Ye see, good Reader, if M. Horn hath any Author, who, Sozom. lib. 2. c 27 and of how good credit he is: even no better than Arius himself. And yet in this point is M. Horn worse than he, It is proved by Constantine himself that it was the bishops part and not his to restore Arius and other heretics to the Church. and corrupteth and wresteth not only the Catholic writers, but Arius words too. For Arius doth not desire Constantine to restore him, as M. Horn feigneth, but to give out his commandment; that he might be restored: and by whom was that, M. Horn, but by the Bishops? And this thing Constantine himself well understood, and therefore though glad to see them (as he thought) to have changed their mind, yet (not presuming (as Sozomen writeth) to receive them into the Communion of the Church, before the judgement and allowance of meet men according to the Law of the church) he sent them to the Bishops assembled then (for an other matter) in Council at Jerusalem, that they should examine his and his companions faith: Et clementem super eis sententiam proferrent: Trip. lib. 3. cap. 6. Sozo. ubi supra. Ruff. li. 1. eccles. suae hist. ca 11. Trip & Sozo. ubi supra. Trip li. 3. cap. 10 Ruff. li. 1. cap. 11. Theodore. li. 1. ca 14. Trip. li. 3. ca 10. Socrates li. 1. ca 38. and that they should give a merciful judgement upon them, if they did truly repent. Ruffian also writeth agreeable unto this adding, so that Alexander the Bishop did thereto assent. Eusebius and other dissembling Catholic bishops, which were in heart Arians still (as it did afterward appear) forthwith (in the Council) received Arius into their communion. But when he came to Alexandria, he could not there be received. The Catholic bishop Alexander of Alexandria yet living, would not admit him. Then remaining there a long time as excommunicated he desired (saith Theodoret) to be by some means restored again, and began to counterfeit the Catholic. But when Alexander his bishop and Athanasius his successor could not be so circumvented, he attempted once again the emperors favour. And so by the means of Eusebius of Nicomedia an Arrian bishop in heart, he was brought to the Court at Constantinople, and to the emperors speech, the second time after his banishment. Where the Emperor desirous to try him, asked Arrius, if he agreed with the Nicene Council, upon which request he offered to the Emperor a supplication and a form of the Catholic confession, pretending to swear to that, but deceiving the prince with a contrary faith in his bosom, and swearing to the faith in his bosom. By these means th'emperor dismissed him And thereupon the faction of Eusebius went forthwith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, with their accustomed violence (saith Theodoret) to Alexander the B. of Constantinople, Theodor. lib. 1. cap. 24. Socrat. li. 2. cap. 29. and required him to receive him into Communion. The Bishop utterly refused to do it notwithstanding the Courtiers request or Prince's pleasure: because (saith Alexander) being by a whole Council condemned, he can not be restored. The faction of Eusebius threatened Alexander, Theodor. ut supra. Ruff. li 1. eccles. hist. ca 13. tripart. li. 3. cap. 10. Socrat. li. 1. cap. 38. that if he would not by fair means restore him, they would force him thereto by foul means, saying: As against your will we have made him come to the emperors speech, so to morrow against your will, we will make you to receive him into your Church. To this point therefore, the matter was now brought, that Eusebius with his faction conducted by force Arius to the Cathedral Church at Constantinople there by violence to Church him: But lo, as they were going with all their heretical band to the church to play this part, God showed his mighty hand, even as he did upon the Egyptians in the read sea, specified in the old Testament, or upon judas in the new. For in the way Arius was driven to seek a place to ease nature: The notable death of Arius. where suddenly he avoided with his excrements his very bowels and entrails: and in that filthy place gave over his foul filthy stinking soul. A meet carpet for such a squire. And this is, lo, the mother Church whereunto Arius was restored and united. For other restitution by the true Catholic Bishops, whose office it was as ye have heard, to restore him, had he none. And now with this miserable and wretched end of this arch-heretic Arius, will I also end the doings of Constantine the great, wherein I have so far forth proceeded, as M. Horn hath ministered occasion. As for the Council of Tyrus, whereof here again mention is reiterated, I have spoken both in this book, and also against M. jewel, as is before noted. And now may I boldly unfold your conclusion, M. Horn, where you say that the Nicen bishops agnized this kind of regiment in the great Constantine▪ and say quite contrary, they agnized no such regiment which also I have proved against you even by your own examples of Constantine, and the Nicen Fathers, especially of Athanasius, present at the said Council. M. Horn. The .39. Division. pag. 25. b. Constantine's sons, claimed and took upon them, the same authority, that their Fathers had done before them: and as Zozomen (.101.) The .101. Untruth. Sozomen belied. They made laws against the Idolaters but not laws ecclesiastical. Theod. li. 2. cap. 1. reporteth of them, did not only uphold and maintain, the ordinances made by their father Constantine, in Church matters, but did also make new of their own as occasion served, and the necessity of the time required. Constantinus, after the death of his father, restored Athanasius (whom his father had (.102.) deposed) to his bishopric again, writing honourable and loving letters to the Church of Alexandria, for his restitution. Constantius deposed Liberius, the bishop of Rome, for that he would not consent to the condemnation of Athanasius, in whose place Foelix was chosen, whom also the Emperor deposed for the like cause, and restored again Liberius unto his bisshoprik, who being moved with th' Emperor's kindness (as some write) or rather being overcome with ambition (.103.) The .103. Untruth. Liberius never became an Arrian. Socr. li. 2. ca 36.37. became an Arrian. The .202. Untruth. For Constantine the great did not depose Athanasius. sabel. Platin. This Emperor deposed divers bishops, appointing other in their places. He called a Synod at milan, as Socrates witnesseth, saying: The Emperor commanded by his Edict, that there should be a Synod holden at milan. There came to this Council above .300. bishops out of the West Countries. After this, he minded to call a general Council of all the East and West bishops to one place, which could not conveniently be brought to pass, by reason of the great distance of the places, and therefore he commanded the Council to be kept in two places, at Ariminum in Italy, and at Nicomedia in Bythinia. The .5. Chapter. What Ecclesiastical government the Sons of Constantine the Great practised. Stapleton. IF Constantine's Sons claimed the same authority that their Father had in causes Ecclesiastical, then were they no supreme judges, no more than their Father was, who was none as I have said and showed. Yet saith M. Horn, They not only maintained their Father's ordinances in Church matters, but also made new of their own, But all this is but a loud and a lewd lie. Which (to be short) shall soon appear in the words of Zozomene (M. Horns Author) who in the book and chapter quoted by M. Horn writeth thus: Li. 3. c. 17. The Princes also (he meaneth Constantine's Sons) concurred to to the increase of these things (he speaketh of increasing the Christian faith) * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. showing their good affection to the Churches no less than their Father: and honouring the Clergy, their servants, and their domesticals, with singular promotions and immunites. Both confirming their Father's laws, and making also of their own, against such as went about to sacrifice, to worship idols, or by any other means fell to the Greeks or Heathens superstitions. Lo, M. Horn, hear what your Author saith. As before Constantine promulged laws against Idolatry, and honoured the Church of Christ, and the ministers thereof, so did his Sons after him. As for Church matters, as Constantine the Father, made no laws or decrees thereto apertaining, no more did his Sons. It is but your impudent untruth. Three untruths of M Horns in four lines. Tripart. lib. 3. ca 2. Now touching the first and eldest son of Constantine, called also Constantine, we have here of him as many lies as lines. First in that M. Horn saith, that his Father deposed Athanasius, who was deposed by the Bishops, and not by Constantine, for he banished him, but depose him, he neither did, nor could. The second, that this Constantine restored him to his bishopric again: wherein he belieth (and so maketh the third lie) his Author Theodoret, Theod. lib. 2. ca 1. M. Horn now. God be thanked hath found his supreme head in constantius the Arrian Emperor who speaketh of none other restitution, but that he released him from exile and banishment: which ye wot is no Bishoply, but a Princely function and office. But now we may be of good comfort. For having born out this brunt, I trust we shall shift well enough for all the residue. For now, lo, we have an Emperor, that as far as I can see, took upon him in deed, in many things M. horns supremacy. Which may be proved by Athanasius, Hosius, Hilarius, and Leontius Bishops of the very same time: But praise be to God, Athanasius ad solitartam vitam agentes, ubi & literae Hosij recitantur ad Constantium. Hilarius in lib. contra Constantium. What like the catholics then living had of it. What Hosius said to him for this supremacy. Vide Suidam in Leontio. What Leontius said to him for this supremacy. that the same men (all notable lights of the Catholic Church) which declared that he used this authority, do withal declare their great misliking thereof: and make him (so● of them) a plain forerunner of Antichrist: as I have before declared out of Athanasius. Meddle not Sir Emperor (saith Hosius) with matters of the Church, neither command us in such things, but rather learn them at our hands: God hath betaken and committed to thee, th' Empire, and to us, hath, he committed Church matters. And Leontius B. of Tripoli, at what time this Constantius being present at a Synod of Bishops was very busy in talk to set forth certain constitutions, saith boldly unto him: Sir Imaruail with myself why that ye leaving your own, busy yourself with other men's affairs: the common wealth and warlike matters are committed to your charge: the which your charge you foreslow, sitting among the Bishops and m●king laws concerning matters Ecclesiastical, wherein ye have nothing to do. And if this man deposed Bishops, as ye say, then have ye found a fair well-favoured precedent to ground your primacy upon. How well favoured a prensident he is, and how worthy to be followed, if ye list to see, M. Horn, ye may learn of M. Nowell who saw farther in this matter a great deal, than your prelatship. He hath laid forth no less than .13. Articles against this your supreme governor (M. Horn) to prove that he was for his busy government in deed a very Antichrist. Thus you jar andiumble again one against an other, and can never agree in your tales. As for that he called the Council at Ariminum, and else where, that induceth no such primacy as I have and shall better hereafter declare, namely when I come to your own author the Card. Nowell fol. 114. Cusanus: In the meanseson, ye have ministered to me a good matter to justify the Pope's primacy. For behold Damasus broke and disannulled all that was done at Ariminum (saith Theodoret) because his consent wanted thereto. And here that Council which the Emperor by his supreme government (as M. Horn fancieth) summoned, Theod. li. 2. cap. 22. the Pope as a Superior governor to this supreme governor, quite disannulled, which made S. Ambrose to say: Ambros. li 5. ep. 32. Meritò Concilium illud exhorreo. I do for good cause abhor that Council. For which cause also, it is to this day of no authority at all. Thus all M. Horns examples run roundly against him, and quite overturn his purpose. For why? How can possibly a false cause be truly defended? That you say, Liberius the Pope of Rome became an Arrian is a slanderous Untruth. It is your brethren's common objection, and hath so oft been soluted by the catholics, that your part had been now (bearing yourself for a learned Prelate) not to resume such rusty reasons, but to reply against the catholics answers and solutions, if ye were able. The worst that ever Liberius did (to make any suspicion in him) is, that after banishment he was restored, Athanas. ad solit. vitam agent. Tripart. li. 5. ca 17 and yielded to Constantius. But Athanasius saith expressly, that the same his yielding was not to the Arrian heresy, but to the deposing of him from his Bisshoprik. And that was all that the Emperor required of Liberius, as it may appear by the learned and stout communication had between this Liberius and the Emperor in Rome, as Theodoret at large recordeth. And to this he was driven by force of tormtens, saith Athanasius. Now for him to become an Arrian is voluntarily to teach, to believe, or to allow the Arrian heresy. Are they all, trow you, Caluinists in England which for fear of displeasure, of banishment, or of loss of goods, do practise the order of the Caluinists supper or Communion? As they are no right Catholics, so are they not properly calvinists or Heretics. They are neither hot nor cold. God will therefore (but if they repent) spew them out of his mouth. As for Liberius, S. a epist. 74 Basil, and b heres. 75 Epiphanius, S. c epist. 165 Augustine, d lib. 2. Optatus, and S. e lib. 3. de Virgin. Ambrose do speak honourably and reverently of him, and do reckon him among the new of the Roman Bishops: which they would never have done, if (as M Horn saith) he had been, become an Arrian, It seemeth M. Horn is of alliance with M. jewel. So hard it is for him to tell a true tale. Theod l. 4 cap 5.6.7. Princes by Synods (104) do ordain and condemn Bishops. Now to the next. M. Horn. The .40. Division. Pag. 26. a. Valentinianus the Emperor, after the death of Auxentius, an Arrian bishop of Milan, calleth a Synod of bishops at milan to consult about the ordering of a new bishop. He prescribeth unto them in a grave or ation, in what manner a man qualified aught to be, who should take upon him the office of a bishop. The .104. Untruth. A marginal note of that which cannot be found in the Text. They pass to the election, the people were divided, till at the last they all cry with one consent, to have Ambrose, whom although he did refuse, the Emperor commanded to be baptised, and to be consecrated bishop. He called an other Synod in Illirico, to appease the dissensions in Asia and Phrigia, about certain necessary Articles of the Christian faith: and did not only confirm the true faith by his (.105.) The .105. Untruth. joined with a great folly. royal assent, but made also many godly and sharp Laws, as well for the maintenance of the truth in doctrine, as also (.106.) The .106. Untruth. Boldly avouched, but no way proved. touching many other causes, or matters Ecclesiastical. The sixth Chapter: Of Valentinian the Emperor. Stapleton. VAlentinian the Emperor cometh in good time. I mean, not to prove your Primacy, M. Horn, but quite to overthrow the same. For this is he that made an express Law, that in Ecclesiastical matters, only Ecclesiastical men should judge. S. Ambrose witnesseth it expressly in an epistle he wrote to young Valentinian, this man's son. The form of the law was this. In causa fidei vel ecclesiastici alicutus ordinis eum judicare debere, Ambr. lib. 5. epist. 32 qui nec munere impar sit, nec iure dissimilis. Haec enim verba rescripti sunt, Hoc est sacerdotes de sacerdotibus voluit judicare. That in the cause of faith, or of any ecclesiastical order, he should judge, that was neither by office unequal, neither in right unlike. Those are the words of the Rescript. That is, he will have Priests to judge over Priests. Thus S. Ambrose plainly and expressly in one sentence quite overturneth all M. horns supremacy. Yea so far was this Emperor from all government over Priests in matters ecclesiastical, that even in matters civil or temporal, he would not suffer priests to be called to the civil court. For thus it followeth immediately in S. Ambrose. Quinetiam si aliâs quoque argueretur episcopus, & morum esset examinanda causa, Ibidem. etiam hanc voluit ad episcopale judicium pertinere. Yea farther, if a bishop were otherwise accused, and some matter of behaviour or outward demeanour were to be examined, that matter also he would to belong to the judgement of Bishops. Behold, gentle Reader, what a supreme governor in all causes both spiritual and temporal over priests and Bishops M. Horn hath brought forth. Verily such a one, as in very civil causes refuseth government over them. But this is he that commanded Ambrose to be consecrated bishop of Millayn● (saith M. Horn) and in that election prescribed to the bishops in a grave oration, what a qualified man a bishop ought to be etc. What then M. Horn? was he therefore supreme governor in all causes ecclesiastical? Yea or in this very cause was he, think you, the supreme governor? If you had told us some part of that grave oration, somewhat therein perhaps would have appeared either for your purpose, or against it. Now, a grave oration he made, you say, but what that grave talk was, or wherein it consisted, you tell us not. Verily a grave oration it was in deed, and such as with the gravity thereof, utterly overbeareth the light presumption of your surmised supremacy. For this among other things he said to those bishops gravely in deed. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 etc. Theod. lib. 4. c. 5. Such a man therefore do you place in this bishoply throne, that we also which direct the Empire, may gladly submit our heads to him, and reverence (as a medicinable remedy) the rebukes that he shall make over us: for men we are, and must needs fall sometime. So, M. Horn, would this Emperor have a bishop qualified (and so was in deed this Ambrose then chosen passingly qualified) that he should tell and admonish boldly the Prince of his faults, and the Prince should as gladly and willingly obey him, yea and submit his head unto him, not be the supreme Head over him: as you most miserable clawbacks (unworthy of all priestly pre-eminence) would force modest princes unto. This was the grave lesson he gave to the bishops (as Constantin before to the Fathers of Nice) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: as a natural loving child, Theod. li. 1. cap. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to the Priests as to his Fathers: not to them as his servants or subjects in that respect. You say farther (but you say untruly, to be always like yourself) that this Emperor confirmed the true faith (decreed in a Synod in Illyrico) by his royal assent. As though your Reader should strait conceive, that as the queens Majesty confirmeth the Acts of parliament with her highness royal assent, and is therefore in deed the Supreme and undoubted Head over the whole parliament, so this Emperor was over that Synod. But Theodoretus (your Author alleged) saith no such thing. Only he saith. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Theod. lib. 4. cap. 7. Those things that had been decreed and established by the bishops, he sent abroad to those that doubted thereof. Other confirmation than this, is not in your Author or any otherwhere mentioned. And this was plain ministerial execution of the decrees, no royal confirmation of them. M. Horn. The 41. Division. Pag. 26. a. Theodosius, was nothing inferior to Constantine the great, neither in zeal, care, or furtherance, of Christ's Religion. He bent his whole power, and authority, to the utter overthrow of superstition, and false Religion, somewhat crept in again, in the times of julianus, and Valens, the wicked Emperors. And for the sure continuance of Religion reformed, he made many godly Laws, he defended the (.107) The 107. untruth. Flavianus in that matter between the Emperor and the bishops of the west proved a perjured person. godly bishop of Antioch Flavianus, against the bishop of Rome, and other bishops of the west, who did (.108.) The 108. untruth mere slanderous. falsely accuse him of many crimes: and at the length, by his careful endeavour in Church matters, and his (.109.) The 109. untruth. There appeared no such Supremacy over Church matters in Theosius. Supreme authority therein, this most faytful Emperor, sayeth Theodoretus, set peace and quietness amongst the Bishops, and in the Churches. He called a convocation of the Bishops, to the end that by common consent, all should agree in unity of doctrine confessed by the Nicen council, to reconcile the Macedonians unto the catholic Church, and to elect and order a Bishop in the sea of Constantinople, which was than vacant. When the two first points could not be brought to pass, as the Emperor wished, they went in hand with the third, to consult amongst themselves touching a fit Bishop for Constantinople. The Emperor, to whose judgement many of the Synod consented, thought Gregory of Nazianzene, most fit to be Bishop: but he did (.111.) The 111. untruth, For he was for a time the bishop there, as shall appear. utterly refuse that that charge. The 110. untruth. All this was but one Council, though they are told (to make a show of Supremacy in th'emperor) as if they were .3. several Counsels. Than the Emperor commandeth them, to make diligent inquisition for some godly man, Sozom. li. 7 c. 6.7.8 that might be appointed to that room. But when the Bishops could not agree, upon any one, the Emperor commandeth them to bring to him the names of all such, as every one of them thought most apt to be Bishop, written in a paper together. He reserved to himself (saith Sozomenus) to choose whom he liked best. When he had red over once or twice, the sedule of names, which was brought unto him, after good deliberation had with himself, he chose Nectarius although as yet he was not christened: and the Bishops marveling at his judgement in the choice, (.112.) The 112. untruth. The bishops might (if they had listed) most lawfully have removed him. could not remove him. And so was Nectarius baptised, and made bishop of Constantinople: who proved so godly a bishop, that all men deemed this election to be made by Themperor, not without some miraculous inspiration of the holy ghost. This Emperor perceiving, the Church had been long time molested, and drawn into parts by the Arianisme, and like to be more grievously torn in sunder with the heresy of Macedonius, a B. of Constantinople, and knowing that his supreme government, and empire, was given him of God to maintain the common peace of the Church, and confirmation of the true faith, summoneth a Synod at Constantinople, in the third year of his reign (which is the second great and general council of the four notable and famous ecumenical counsels) and when all the bishops whom he had cited, were assembled, he cometh into the council house amongst them, he made unto them a grave exhortation, to consult diligently, like grave Fathers of the matters propounded unto them. The Macedonians depart out of the City, the Catholic Fathers agree, conclude a truth, and send the canons of their conclusion to the Emperor (.113.) The 113. untruth. For not to be so confirmed as M●●ior. fancieth. That is, by the way of Supreme government etc. to be confirmed, writing unto him in these words: The holy counsel of bishops assembled at Constantinople to Theodosius Emperor, the most reverent observer of Godliness, Religion, and love towards God: We give God thanks, who hath appointed your Imperial government for the common tranquillity of his Churches, and to establish the sound faith. Scythe the time of our assembly at Constantinople by your godly commandment, we have renewed concord amongst ourselves, and have prescribed certain Canons or rules, which we have annexed unto this our writing: we beseech therefore your clemency to command the Decree of the Counsel to be established by the letters of your holiness, and that ye will confirm it, and as you have honoured the Church by the letters wherewith you called us together: even so, that you will strengthen also the final conclusion of the Decrees with your own sentence and seal. After this he calleth an other (.114.) The 114. untruth. This was no other, nor no Council at al. Council of bishops to Constantinople of what Religion so ever, Sozom. li. 5. cap. 10. thinking that if they might assemble together in his presence, and before him confer touching the matters of Religion, wherein they disagreed, that they might be reconciled, and brought to unity of Faith. He consulteth with Nectarius, and sitteth down in the Council house amongst them all, and examineth those that were in Heresy, in such sort, that the Heretics were not only asionied at his questions, but also began to fall out amongst themselves, some liking, some misliking the emperors purpose▪ This done, he commandeth each sect, The 115. untruth in reasoning. For all this proveth no whit any spiritual Supremacy in Theodosius, to declare their faith in writing, and to bring it unto him: he appointeth to them a day, whereat they came as the Emperor commanded, and delivered unto him the forms of their faith in writing: when the Emperor had the sedules in his hands, he maketh an earnest prayer unto God, for the assistance of his holy spirit, that he may discern the truth, and judge rightly. And after he had red them all, he condemneth the heresies of the Arians and Eunomians, renting their sedules in sunder, and alloweth only, and confirmeth the faith of the Homousians, and so the Heretics departed ashamed and dashed out of countenance. The .7. Chapter: Of Theodosius the first, and his dealing in causes Ecclesiastical. Stapleton. THis Theodosius had no greater care to further true religion, than ye have to slander and hinder it: A heap of lies gathered together in the one story of Theosius. and that by notable lying, as it will, all other things set a part appear, by the heap of lies, that in this story of this one Emperor, ye gather here together. And first that ye call Flavian the godly bishop of Antioch: For albeit, he stood very stoutly in the defence of the Catholic faith and suffered much for it, yet in that respect for the which, he is here by you alleged, he was not godly. As one that came to his bishopric, against the canons and contrary to the oath taken, that he would never take upon him to be bishop of Antioch, Paulinus living: and ministering by this means an occasion of a great schism to the Church, which continued many years. And for this cause the Arabians, the Cyprians, the Egyptians with Theophilus patriarch of Alexandria, and the west Church, with Pope Damasus, Socra. lib. 5. cap. 15. Theo. li. 5 cap. 23. Sozo. li. 7. cap. 11. Vide Amb. epist. 78. tripart. li. 9 cap. 26. & 44. Siricius, and Anastasius, would not receive him into their communion. Neither could he be settled quietly, and received as Bishop, until he had reconciled himself to the Pope, and that his fault was by him forgiven. For the which purpose he sent to Rome a solemn ambassade: And so it appeareth, that the .2. line after ye adjoin a fresh lie, that the bishop of Rome did falsely accuse him of many crimes, who laid to him, no less crimes, than all the world did beside, which was perjury, and schism. Then as though ye would drop lies, or lie for the whetstone, ye add that by his supreme authority he set peace and quietness in the Church for this matter, shuffling in by your supreme lying authority these words supreme authority, Theod. lib. 5. cap. 23. The pope's primacy proved even by M. Horns own story. Reconciliation to the pope▪ which neither your author Theodoretus hath, nor any other: yea directly contrary to the declaration of Theodoretus, who in the very chapter by you alleged reciteth the ambassade I speak of, which is a good argument of the Pope's Supremacy: and may be added to other examples of M. Doctor Hardings, and of mine in my Return etc. against M. jewel in the matter of reconciliation. For as favourable as th'emperor was to him, and for all the emperors supremacy: the Emperor himself commanded him to go to Rome, to be reconciled, he being one of the four patriarchs. And Flavianus was fain also, to desire Theophilus' bishop of Alexandria to send some body to Pope Damasus, to pacify and mollify his anger, and to pardon him: who sent Isidorus for that purpose. And as I have said, Flavianus himself afterward sent Acatius and others his ambassadors. Which Acatius pacified the schisms that had continued .17. years, and restored, as your own author Theodoretus saith, peace to the Church, pacem (saith he) Ecclesiis restituit. Which words though Theodoretus, doth speak of th'emperor Theodo▪ yet he speaketh the like of Acatius which ye guilefully apply to Theodosius only, and as falsely conclude thereof, that Theodosius therefore should be supreme head of the Church. For so by that reason Acatius should also be supreme head of the Church. Now followeth M. Horns narration of certain counsels held under this Theodosius, so disorderly, so confusely, so unperfectly, and so lyingly handled, as a man may well wonder at it. He maketh of two counsels kept at Constantinople three: whereas the .1. and .2. is all one (being the second famous general council) and properly to call a council the third is none, but rather a conference or talk. The first Council, which he telleth us of, was called (he saith) to elect and order a bishop in the sea of Constantinople. Socra lib 5. cap. 6. Theod. lib. 5. cap. 8. Gre. Niss. in vita Greg. Nazianzen. Nicep. lib. 12. cap. 11. Which (in case he can prove them distincted Counsels) was done in the Council general, and in the second as he placeth it and not in the first. As also the election and ordination of Nectarius. He saith that Gregory Nazianzene was never bishop of Constantinople, but did utterly refuse it. Whereas after he had taught there .12. years, to the great edifying of the Catholics against the Arians, not enjoying the name of a Bishop all this while, he was at the length, set in his bishoply see, by the worthy Meletius bishop of Antioch, and by the whole number of the bishops assembled at the general cuncell. Though in deed he did not long enjoy it, but voluntarily, and much against this good emperors mind, gave it over, to avoid a schism, that grew upon his election. For whom Nectarius (that M. Horn speaketh of) was chosen, Sozom. li. 7. cap. 8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Theod. lib. 5. cap. 9 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. being at that time unbaptized. And so chosen by the Emperor, as M. Horn saith, that the Bishops though they marveled at the emperors judgement, yet they could not remove him. Wherein ye may note two untruths, the one that M. Horn would gather Theodosius supremacy by this election. Of the which election or rather naming (for the Emperor only pricked him) I have already answered in my Return against M. jewel, and said there more at large. And the bishops, with common consent of the whole Synod, do pronounce him and create him bishop, as also intheir letters to Pope Damasus they profess. The other that the Bishops could not remove him. Yes M. Horn that they might, Can. apos. 79. Can. Nic. ●. La●d can. 3. Aurel 2. can. 1. 1. Tim. 3. aswell by the Apostolical, the Nicene, and other canons of the Church, as by the very plain holy scripture, and by S. Paul by express words forbidding it, for that he was Neophytus. surely of you that would seam to be so zealous a keeper of the sincere word of God, and so well a scriptured man, this is nothing scripturelye spoken: And therefore this your saying must needs make up the heap. Yea and therefore they might lawfully have infringed and annichilated this election: saving that, they bore with this good gracious Emperor, that tendered Christ's Church and faith so tenderly, even as Melchiades before rehearsed bore with the good Constantin. Here may we now add this also to the heap, that ye would infer this Soveraynety in Theodosius, because the Fathers of this general Council desired him to confirm their decrees and canons. Which is a mighty great copious argument with you throughout your book, all in few words easy to be answered and avoided. For this kind of confirmation is not, nor ever was required, why and to what end the Emperors confirm the laws of the Church. as though their ordinances were void and frustrate without it: as all that ye now do, have done, or shall do in your synods and convocations without the ratification of the queens Majesty. Which thing for decrees of the Church, ye do not, ye have not, nor ever shall be able to prove. But to this end, were the Emperors required to confirm Counsels that the willing and toward people might have the better liking in them, and be the more alured carefully and exactly to observe them, upon the good liking of their prince: And withal that the froward and malignante people, that make no great account of the censures of the Church, because it doth not presently touch the body, or any temporal loss, might for fear of civil and temporal punishment, be brought the sooner to keep and observe them. And this little short, but so true an answer, as ye shall never with all your cunning honestly shift it of, may suffice to evacuate and empty a great part of your book resting in this point. But to show in this place, one's for all, How Emperors have and may deal in General Counsels. how emperors have dealt and may deal in General Counsels, either for calling them, or for confirming them, or for their demeanour in them, I will put certain points or Articles, and note thereby what the practice of the Church hath been in this behalf: to th'intent that the Reader may know, what it is that we defend, and what had been your part to have proved, least walking always in generalities, we spend words without fruit, and bring the cause to no certain issue. And this I profess to take of one of your own special authors M. Horn, the Cardinal of Cusa, out of whom you allege afterward a long process, Horn fo. 85. col. 1. c. as one that made wholly for you. And in very deed he speaketh as much for the Emperor, and for his prerogative in ordering of general Counsels, as he could possibly find by the continual practice of the Church from Constantine's time down to his, which was to the late Council of Basil under Sigismunde the Emperor, in the year. 14.32. Cusanus lib. 3. c. 9 de Concordia Catholica. Lib. 9 epi. 54. The first point them is, that Kings and Princes, aught to be careful and diligent that Synods and Counsels may be had, as the especial advocates of the Church, and as of greatest power to procure quiet paisible passage to Counsels, abiding there and returning home again. Example in an admonition of S. Gregory to Theodorike the French King, exhorting to see a Synod called in his realm for the repressing of Simony. Cusan li. 3. cap. 10. The second point is, that to such Synods Princes ought to come with all meekness, reverence and humility, and with gentle exhortations. Examples are Riccharedus, Sisenandus, and Chintillanus Kings of Spain, as we shall hereafter more largely declare, in certain of the Toletane Counsels. Cap. 13. The third point is, that as Kings and Princes for their own provinces do call provincial Synods, so the Emperorus for the whole corpse of Christendom do call General Counsels. Non ꝙ coactiuè sed exhortatoriè colligere debeat. Not that by force or constraint, but by way of exhortation he ought to call them. Examples are the Council of Aquileia under S. Ambrose: the 4. General Council under Pope Leo: the sixth under Agatho: the 7. under Adrian the first with the rest, as of each in their places we shall declare. The fourth: that the Emperor in case of a general schism, ought first to certify the Pope of the necessity of a Council, and require his consent to have it in some certain place assembled. So did Valentinian and Martian the Emperors to Pope Leo for the Chalcedon. In epist. praeambu. Cha●c. council. In 6. Syn. Act. 1. So did Constantin the 4. to Pope Agatho for the sixth general Council. The fift point is, that the Pope summoneth and calleth all general Counsels, far otherwise than do the Emperors. For the Pope as the chiefest, and as having power to command over all other bishops for the principality of his priesthood, Cap. 15. by the power committed to him over the universal Church, hath to command all faithful Christians, especially bishops and priests to assemble and meet in Council. But the Emperor exhorteth and inviteth bishops, but commandeth the lay, to a Council. And the Canons do command, Tripart. hist. lib. 4. cap. 9 & 19 that without the Authority of the bishop of Rome no Council can be held. Not so in the Emperor. For the Ephesin conventicle was disannulled, because Leo his legates were rejected, though Theodosius the younger, did confirm it and allow it. So the great Council of Ariminum was condemned, because Pope Damasus sent not thither, though Constantius th'emperor summoned it and allowed it. And the great Council of Sardica prevailed, Athanaes'. Apolog. 2. because by Pope julius it was called and allowed, though Constantius then Emperor resisted it and refused it. And thus much for the first beginnings of the Council. Now in the Council itself, what is the Prince's part, and what the bishops, it shall appear. Let them the sixth point be, that at the Council being, the Prince's office and care ought to be, to provide that altumult and disorder be avoided and to remove such as are to be removed▪ Cap. 14. So did the judges in the Chalcedon Council, remove Dioscorus from the bench, and admit Theodoret, the one by pope Leo condemned, the other reconciled. So when the parties waxed warm, they did their best to bring them to a calm. So did also Constantin in his own person in the first Nicene Council, as M. Horn hath himself alleged, and as Eusebius reporteth. Fol. 24. a. Lib. 3. De vit. Const Cap. 13. Cap. 17. Seventhly the Lay Magistrates or Princes: being placed in the Council in the rooms of Emperors and kings, Non habent vocem Synodicam, sed solum audire debent: have no voice as a part of the Synod, but only are there to hear. This practice is clear in all the Counsels, as it shall appear in the particulars hereafter. The judges therefore and Princes delegates mentioned in the Chalcedon and other Counsels, are in the Counsels, much after a sort, as the Speaker in our Parliaments. To open and set forth to the Council all matters to be treated upon. To appoint (by the advise of the Council) the next meeting, to break of the present session, to promulge the Counsels Sentence: and such like matters as belong to more orderly and quiet proceeding in all things. Cap. 18. Eightly the force and Vigour of the Sentence in Council dependeth only of the Bishops, which make the Council, & non ex Imperiali commissione, and not of the emperors Commission, whose Authority is inferior to the Synod, saith Cusanus. And so the Continual practice will prove. Ibidem. Ninthly the Emperor, the Princes, and their Orators do subscribe as witnesses of that is done: but as judging and determining, only the bishops in all Counsels have subscribed. Cap. 22. Tenthly for the end and consummation of all Counsels, the Emperors and Princes ought to provide, that such things as are decreed and determined by the holy Counsels, may be observed, and by laws and penalties they ought to force their subjects to the observation thereof. But to confirm by way of Ecclesiastical Authority and Supremacy, it hath ever belonged only to the bishops of Rome, as by the continual practice of the Church it hath and shall yet better appear. In this sense, and as I have already said, Emperors have confirmed, and by their edicts established the Counsels, laws, and decrees of the Church. And thus you see M. Horn particularly and plainly what we attribute to Emperors and Civil Princes in the calling, ordering and confirming of Counsels, and what we deny most justly unto them. If you prove that which we grant, you show yourself a slender scholar, and a weak adversary, that will take upon you to confute that practice, the limits and conditions where of you know not, which is altogether to fight in darkness or with your own shadow. If you can prove that which we deny, let the truth go on your side. But you neither have in this book, neither shall ever be able to prove it. To avoid therefore hereafter the superfluity of unfruitful talk, as well for mine, as for the Readers ease, in all your like objections of emperors calling and confirming of Counsels, I will refer you to the answers and distinctions presently made. To return now to Theodosius, and to you M. Horn, we have one untruth more to charge you withal: for that you would establish this peerless and Supreme Authority in Theodosius, because he having received in writing the faith as well of the Catholics, as of the Eunomians, Arians, and other heretics, after the reading of them, rented all the shedules, saving that which was delivered by the catholics, whereupon the heretics departed ashamed and dashed out of countenance. Whom he had, as ye also write, before examined of their faith, and that after such sort, that they were not only astonied, but began to fall out amongs themselves, some liking, some misliking the emperors purpose. But alas good M. Horn, why are ye yourself, now as ye seam to me so suddenly dashed out of countenance? Yea and which is marvel in so hard a metal, me thinketh somewhat ashamed to, and wonderfully astonished withal. Why man? Pluck up your heart, and be of good courage. You will perchance say I board with you, and am set upon my merry pins. I would to God the matter were such as it might be better laughed at, then pitied. And that it might serve more for Democrytus, The one of them ever lawhed, the other ever wept than Heraclitus, and yet to say the truth, there is cause and to much for them both. Perchance now some man will think I do but jest when I speak of shame: I would God it were or might on's be truly said of you, it were a goodly sparkle of grace growing. Well I put of that to other men's judgement. But that ye are dashed out of countenance, yea that ye are wonderfully astonished, M. Horn no less astonished in the telling of this story than the Arians and other heretics than were when the thing was done. and that even for the same cause, and after the same manner as the Arians and other heretics than were, I dare say it, and prove it to. For if the Arians were ashamed and dashed out of countenance, upon these doings of Theodosius only, how much more are you ashamed and dashed out of countenance, whose heresies are condemned, by so many Kings and catholic Emperors? Or if ye say ye are not ashamed, then must I reply, o shameless fellow, and more impudent than the Arians. I now add, that ye are more astonished than the Arrians and other heretics with this fact of Theodosius, and therefore full slyly and wylilye, what was the doings of the Emperor ye have overhipped, which if ye had put in, would have served, aswell against you, as it did against them. And therefore the memory of it so astonished you, that ye durst not for shame name the matter, and yet for folly could ye not forbear to patch it in, as a special matter advancing your supremacy. For first, Why M. Horn hath left out the principal matter of his own story. Tanquam cavis bibens in Nil●. How Theodosius the Emperor dashed the Heretics out of countenance. Socrat. li. 5. cap. 10. The Heretics fell at division before Theodosius, whe● upon he teareth their sheduls of their faith which they offered. as Theodosius did not allow, the open disputations of the Arians, Macedonians, Eunomians, which were very ready to the same, so if he had been living of late, he would not (and even for the same cause he disallowed the other) allowed your late westminster disputations: being more meet to lead the common people out of the truth, then to confirm them in truth, whereof we have already somewhat touched. But now I pray you M. Horn tell us what was the emperors purpose that some heretyks liked, some misliked? wherein as it were the dog drinking in Nilus, as the old perverbe is, for fear of stinging ye dare not tarry. Well because ye are astonished at the memory of it, I will tell it for you. The Emperor demanded of the heads of the sect, whether they did allow and receive, the fathers of the Church, that wrote before the division began: Yea mary, say they, what else? we reverence and honour them as our masters: for fear (saith the story) lest if they had said otherwise, the people would wonderfully have misliked their doings: well said. sayeth the Emperor. Are ye then content, for this matters controversed to stand to their sayings and testimony? Here they began the one to stare upon the other, and wist near what in the world to answer, and finally fell out as yourself write, amongs themselves. Now let the Emperor call the Anabaptists, the Zwinglians, the Lutherans, and demand of them, the same question, would not the matter so fall out think you? Yea hath it not already so fallen out, and daily so falleth out more and more against you and your brethren, to your great shame? And think you, that if Theodosius were living now, he would not deal with your Bills, as he dealt with theirs? Would he not tear a sunder the shedules, of all your false faithless faith? Yes that he would assuredly. The grievous remembrance of this did, so astone you, that it caused you, thus to leave the matter itself, that was by some liked, and by some misliked, and to tell a liking or misliking of I can not tell what. Ye may see the full answer of this, in the Confutation of the Apology fol. 31. Cod. Omnis utriusque sexus. The Pope's Primacy proved by the doings of Theodosius, and the Counsels by M Horn alleged. Vide Ton. 1. Concil. in Concil. Aquil. pag. 397. col. 1. b Now how so ever ye have maimed the narration of the story, and making the best ye can of the matter for your purpose, primacy can ye make none of it. For the doing of Theodosius reacheth not to the determination of any thing in question already not determined, but to the execution of the Nicene Council: commanding by express decree, that all should obey the faith of Damasus Pope of Rome, and of Peter patriarch of Alexandria, both defenders of the Nicene Council. Let me now a while after all this your miserable wresting and writhing, and liberal lying to, deal shortly and simply with you: and see whether I can pick out any thing of Theodosius and these counsels doings for the Pope's primacy. Why then? Is it not Theodosius that referreth the decision of Ecclesiastical causes to the Bishops? Was it not he, of whom S. Ambrose said: Ecce quod Christianus constituit Imperator. Noluit iniuriam facere sacerdotibus. Ipsos interpretes constituit sacerdotes. Behold what the Christian Emperor hath appointed. He would not do injury to the Priests. He hath appointed the Priests themselves to examine the matter? Was it not this Theodosius the great, M. Horn? Yes surely it was he. Was it not Theodosius, to whom Saint Ambrose enjoined penance, which he most humbly obeyed? Where was Theodosius Ecclesiastical supremacy then? Is it not Damasus the Pope, Tripart. li. 9 ca 30. that calleth these Bishops assembled at Constantinople, even to Rome, there to aid and assist him in keeping of a Council? What? Said they to him, Sir we have nothing to do with you, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. ye are a foreign Bishop to us of the East? Nay nay, they confess that he called them as his members (then must he needs be the head) to the Council at Rome. Yea they confess, that by his letters they came to the Council at Constantinople: they declare their good will and readiness to come to Rome too: Theod. li. 5. cap. 9 but for their excuse they allege many reasonable causes, none of those that the Protestants allege at this day. And finally in the name of the whole, they send certain of their Bishops thither. Now further, do not these Father's decree at this their general Council, Can. 5. that the Church of Constantinople, should be the first and chief of all other after Rome? Do they not then therein acknowledge the Pope's Primacy? It is written, M. Horn: Ecclesiast. cap. 2. Sapientis oculi in capite eius, stultus in tenebris ambulat. The eyes of a wise man are in his head always open, and in a readiness to direct him in his way: whereas the foolish man walketh in darkness, being uncertain and unsure which way to take or to go. Now whether your eyes priing and seeking forth this story of Theodosius were opened or shut, I leave the judgement to the indifferent Reader: But this dare I firmly avouch, that these things which I have now last rehearsed, beside other, that I willingly omit, draw much nearer to make the Pope supreme head of the Church, than any thing ye have brought forth, for the doings of Theodosius, to make him Supreme Head. Which when ye have all said and done be nothing agreeable to the articles in question between us, concerning our prince's regiment. And therefore if the matter were much stronger of your side, touching Theodosius, yet did ye nothing touch that ye ought to touch. M. Horn. The .42. Division. pag. 27. b. Theodosius left his two sons Emperors; of the which I will say but little: yet wherein it may moste (.116.) The .116. untruth That will never appear. manifestly appear, that the supreme government in causes Ecclesiastical belonged to the Emperors. Archadius the Emperor, when Nectarius the bishop of Constantinople was dead, and so the sea vacant (.117.) The 117. untruth. Such certification appeareth not in the story. was certified thereof he causeth john Chrysostom to be called from Antioch: he commandeth the other bishops collected into a Synod, that they admonish Chrysostom of God's graces, and what belongeth to such a charged, and that they choose and order him to be the bishop of Constantinople. In which doing, (saith Theodoretus) the Emperor declared what careful endeavour, he had about the holy (.118.) The 118. untruth. False translation, as shall appear. Li. 5. ca 27 Church matters. But this supreme authority, to care, appoint, and procure worthy and good Pastors or bishops, when the seas were vacant, appeareth more plainly in Honorius the Emperor, brother to Archadius, whom the bishop of Rome himself in his decrees, and his Glosars on the same, confess and acknowledge to have the oversight, rule and government in the elections and ordering of bishops, yea (119.) The 119. untruth. No such rule, or government confessed by the Bishop of Rome. Luithprand. over the bishop of Rome himself. After the death of Pope Sozimus, were two Pope's chosen at ones in a great Schism, the one Bonifacius primus, the other Eulalius, whereof when the Emperor Honorius, had notice being at milan, he caused them both to be banished Rome: But after seven months, Bonifacius was by the emperors commandment, called again and confirmed (.120.) The 120. untruth. He was then to the temporalties of the bishopric restored, but he was the true Pope before. by his authority in the Apostolical sea. This Bonifacius being now settled in the Papacy, by humble suit to the Emperor, provideth a remedy against such mischiefs in time to come. The case was this, saith the Glosator, Boniface the first, did beseech Honorius the Emperor to make a Law, whereby it might appear, what were to be done, when two Popes were chosen at ones by the undiscreetness of the electors, contending amongst themselves. Dist. 79. Si duo. Honorius did than constitute, that neither of those twain should be Pope, but that in a new Election a third should be chosen by common consent. If two (saith the Emperor in his Law made at the humble suit of Bonifacius) by chance against right be chosen, through the undiscreet contention of the electors: we permit neither of them to be Priest or Pope: but we judge him to remain in the Apostolic sea, whom the divine judgement, and the common consent doth appoint from amongst the Clergy in a new Election. Upon this word, Gratian. dist. 63. where the Emperor saith (we permit) the Glosar saith, and so the Emperor doth not only abrogate the claim of both those that be chosen in the contention, but doth make them both for that time unable, and doth decree an other to be taken out of the Clergy for that time. Again the Glosar interpreting this (the divine judgement) saith: this is the meaning that the emperors will and election must stand, the Clergy and the whole people accepting with thankful mind whom the Emperor doth choose. For the Emperors were called in those days holy, and their rescriptes and judgements Divine. Here you see by the (.121) The 121. untruth. Carolus Molineus is none of the Pope's Glosars. Pope's decrees and Glosars, that the Emperor had the supreme rule and government in Church causes, and this was the (.122.) The 122. untruth, utterly unproved continual practice of the Church for the most part, yea even the bishops of Rome before they were ordered and consecrated, had their election ratified and confirmed by the Emperors, their Lieutenant, or other Princes. The .8. Chapter. Of the Sons of Theodosius, Honorius and Archadius. Stapleton. Now follow in rew Theodosius his sons: Archadius and Honorius, of whom M. Horn sayeth he will say but little, belike, because he hath said to much of their father already, and more than he can justify, or for that he will make us a short tale, but yet a sweet. And wherein it shall most manifestly appear, that the supreme government in causes ecclesiastical belonged to the Emperors. Al Archadius doings here stand in appointing S. john Chrysostom to be bishop of Constantinople, a most worthy man who dowbteth? The election of S. john Chrysostom by Archadius maketh him no supreme head. Tripart. lib. 10. c. 3. Socrates. lib. 6. c. 2. And I would to God as this his first dealing with Chrysostom was to his worthy praise: so he had not by his after dealing blotted and blemished the same. As for this election, first Archadius did it not of his own Supreme authority, but the fame of john Chrysostom being great, and after some debate about the election, Intra modicum tempus communi decreto omnium clericorum, & laicorum Imperator Archadius evocavit eum. Within a little while (saith Socrates) by the common decree and agreement of all the Clergy and of all the lay, the Emperor Archadius sent for him from Antioch to Constantinople, and so by the common decree of all estates (as the order of election than was) he was elected bishop, not by the emperors supreme and absolute authority, as M. Horn fancyeth. Then Theodoret though he tell not so much, yet doth he not attribute the matter to the Emperor: as a part of his government. Which that it might some ways appear, M. Horn thought good to spice a little the text with the powder of his false translation, that yet so it might somewhat relys in the Readers conceit for his surmised primacy. For Theodoret saith not, that in this doing, the Emperor declared what careful endeavour he had about the holy Church matters, but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the care that he had about Gods or godly matters. Which care is commendable as in all men, Theod. li. 5. c. 27 so in princes especially, for the greater good they are able to do. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Circa res divinas. But such care of God's matters emporteth no government in such matters. As neither the care of Church matters importeth jurisdiction: Though yet that soundeth nearer to jurisdiction then the care and zeal about godly matters. And therefore M. Horn thought good with this little poor help of false translation, a little to itch forward his miserale and barren cause. And that we should the more favourably wink at his liegerdemain, he phraseth it, the holy Church matters. Speaking very holily and reverently, that we might not suspect him of forgery. Whereas in the original text of his author, there is no word, of either Church▪ or holy Church. Last of all, though we granted him (which we neither will nor may, considering the whole story, as Socrates describeth it) that Archadius himself appointed john Chrysostom to be Bishop, yet maketh it not any jot to prove any Supremacy in him, either in all, or in any cause ecclesiastical. Unless we will have every lay patron that presenteth his Priest to a benefice, to be supreme head also: or measure the matter by the greatness and weight of the patrimony and living, M. horns primacy overthrown by his own example. Gorgius Alexand. in vita Io. Chrysost. and not by the weight of reason. But now M. Horn, in an ill time for yourself, and for your supremacy, have ye here put me in remembrance of this Archadius, and S. john Chrysostom. If you would purposely have sought a mean to have given yourself a great and a shameful fall, that all that behold you, might laugh you all to scorn: ye could not have found lightly any where else a better occasion. For this Archadius being Emperor of the East, as Honorius was in the West, was excommunicated of Pope Innocentius for banishing of the said S. Chrysostom being most wrongfully deposed by his enemies, by the procurement of Archadius his wife. Now Sir I beseech you tell me who is supreme head, Archadius th' Emperor excommunicated by the Pope. the Emperor, or he that excommunicateth th'Emperor, especially being under an other patriarch and resident so far of, as Constantinople is from Rome? The next narration seeing it toucheth nothing, but matters of election, requireth no great answer: namely seeing M. Horn himself, hath made a sufficient answer against himself. For if th'emperor made a law touching th'election of Popes, at the Popes own desire, belike here was no great Supremacy: even no more than the Pope was content either to give him, or to suffer at his hand. Neither the banishing of both Popes from Rome, especially in a schism, as this was, by M. Horn here specified, causeth any spiritual jurisdiction, the matter itself being mere temporal, as the matter of the election being (in this case) only begun, not brought to perfection. Beside this, here is no president of our elections in England. For here is both the Emperors, the clergies, and the people's consent in the Bishoppelye election. I would now pass over to the next matter, saving M. Horn here cometh in with his Glosatour and Glosar after such a cunning sort, lawlike, and gloselike, that it would not be to hastily leapt over. first he allegeth the Glosatour, as he calleth him, and that I am assured, is meant, and so to be proved of him that is the common expositor of the Canon Law, as appeareth by Master Horns own allegations. But that he bringeth out of his Glosar, I am assured, is not to be found in him that he calleth Glosatour. And so have we an other extraordinary gloze by M. Horn now first authorized. A new gloze of the Canon law, now first authorised by M. Horn. But perchance ye will marvel, good Reader, especially ye that are exercised and travailed in the Canon Law, that M. Horn should have so deep and rare knowledge in the gloss of the Canon law, that perchance this question might appose the best Doctor in the arches, unless it were M. D. Ackworth M. Horns son in law, who perchance by his father's special commission, though perhaps M. Horn never read the glosar himself, hath authorized us a new glosar. And now me thinketh your ears itch to hear what glosar this should be. It had been well done for M. Horn to have eased his Reader and me to in so doubtful a matter. But seeing we have found him out at the length out he shall, and all the world shall now know him, and shall know M. Horn much the better by and for him. Therefore to be short, it is Carolus Molineus a frenchman, whose gloze is as far as I can yet learn, scarce seven years old, or thereabout, Vide editionem juris canonici in. 4, Lugduni cum glos. 1559. scarcely past his infancy, and would hardly be allowed to speak, unless M. Horn had bisshopped it. Wherefore I see no cause, but that I may according to my manner, score up this to. But yet if M. Horn will needs have him a Glosar (with the which perchance I will not greatly stick, especially in that sense, as merely we call a Glosar in our tongue, that is a vain liar) and think he may truly so call him, I will not much contend with him. For if he scape scoring up for calling him Glosar here, surely he shall by no means scape for calling him the Pope's Glosar the tenth line immediately following. For Mollineus is so the Pope's Glosar, that he loveth the Pope, and alloweth his authority, even as well as M. Horn himself: as appeareth as well by his notes adjoined to the old interpreter of the Canon law, new and fresh set out, as by his other works extant in print, condemned among other inhibited books by the late General Council. And who would have thought that M. Horn had such wise, wily, witty, fresh fetches? I perceive a ragged Colt may yet prove a good Horse. M. Horn. The .43. Division. pag. 28. b. Sabellicus speaking of the contentious entrance of Damasus the first into the Papacy, which was not without great bloodshed, as Volateranus saith, doth note the ambition of the Prelates, to be the cause of such contention about their atteininge of such rooms. For now (saith he) the ambitious desire of honour, had by little and little, begun to enter into the minds of the bishops. The which was proved over true, not only in the elections of the Bishops of old Rome, but also in many Bishops of other Cities, especially of new Rome. These diseases in the Church ministers, and the disorders thereout springing: the Emperors from time to time studied to cure and reform: wherefore Theodosius and Valentinianus when they saw, the great hooving and shoovinge at Constantinople, Liberat. cap. 4. Socr. lib. 7. cap 29. about the election of a Bishop after the death of Sisinius some speaking to prefer Philippus, other some Proclus, both being ministers of that Church, did provide a remedy for this mischief, to wit, they themselves (.123.) The 123. untruth. No such decree appeareth: neither in Liberatus nor in Socrates. made a decree, that none of that Church should be Bishop there, but some stranger from an other Church, and so the Emperors sent to Antioch for Nestorius, who as yet was thought both for his doctrine and life, to be a sit pastor for the flock, and made him Bishop of Constantinople. Stapleton. This man is now again in hand with the emperors ordinance concerning the election of the Bishop of Constantinople: but by the way, or being as he is in deed, all out of his way and matter to, he toucheth what slaughter there was at Rome, when Damasus was made Pope, and so runneth back again out of the way, and out of his matter: which he might full well have let alone, saving that he would show his great familiarity and affinity with julian the Pelagian. M. Horn followeth julian the Pelagian. Aug. lib. c con. julian. De constituendo Episcopo dissensionem populi Romani insultabundus obiectas. Volat. Ant lib. 22. pag. 499. multi mortales ex utraque part interfecti. Sabel. ennead. 9 li. 9 Vi & armis certatum, competitore superato. et c Ad Dam. Damasus Primacy recognized by S. Hierom Who for lack of good matter to justify his own, and to infringe the Catholic doctrine, fell to control the Catholics for their manners, and namely for this dissension at the creation of Damasus. Of which cotention, Sabellicus, saith M. Horn, speaketh: and Volaterranus sayeth it was not without much bloodshed. As though Sabellicus said not also, that the matter was tried with strokes. But where to find or seek it in either of them, M. Horn leaveth us to the wide world. But what is this, M. Horn, against Damasus Primacy, who was also a true and a good godly learned Bishop: whom S. Jerome for all this contention, recognized as head of the Church, and as great a Clerk as he was, yet being in doubt by reason of diverse sects about Antiochia in Syria, with what persons to communicate, most humbly requireth of him to know, with whom he should communicate, and with whom he should not communicate? What is then your argument, M. Horn? Is it this? Damasus entered into the See of Rome by force and bloodshed: Ergo, the Emperor at that time was Supreme governor in all causes Ecclesiastical. Verily either this is your argument, or else you make here none at all: but only tell forth a story to no purpose, except it be to deface the holy Apostolic See of Rome, which in deed serveth ever your purpose both in books and in pulpits. What so ever it be you have in hand beside, the Pope may not be forgotten. Now that you tell us of a decree made (by th'emperors Theodosius and Valentinianus) that none of the Church of Constantinople should be bishop there, but some stranger from an other Church, you tell us a mere untruth: Your alleged Authors Socrates and Liberatus speak no one word of any such Decree. Liberatus cap. 4. in Breviario. Socrates' li 7 ca 29 Niceph. li. 14. c. 34 35. The words of Liberatus (who translated in manner the words of Socrates) are these: Sisinius being departed, it seemed good to the Emperors, to appoint none of the Church of Constantinople to be bishop there, but to send for some stranger from Antioch in Syria (from whence they had a little before john Chrysostom) and to make him Bishop. And this word for word hath also Socrates, but he addeth more: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Because of the vain triflers and busy heads that were of that Church. Of any Decree that the Emperor should make, none of them both do mention. But at that time only the case then in Constantinople so standing, and their luck before being so good in john Chrysostom, who from a stranger became their bishop, it pleased the Emperors so to do. And all this they did by way of provision for the Church quiet, not by way of absolute authority or any forcible Decree, as M. Horn fableth and over reacheth his Authors. M. Horn. The .44. Division. pag. 28. b. As Constantinus and Theodosius the elder, even so Theodosius the second a very (.124.) The 124 Untruth Theodos. in these doings by you alleged, was ungodly godly Emperor, having and practising the (.125.) The 125 untruth. Utterly unproved supreme government in Ecclesiastical causes, seeing the horrible Heresies sprung up and dividing the Church, but specially by Nestorius, did (126) The .126. Untruth. For not by his authority. by his authority call the third general council at Ephesus, named the first Ephesine council, giving straight (.127.) The 127. Untruth. He gave no such Commandment. commandment to all Bishops wheresoever, that they should not fail to appear at the time appointed, and further used the same power and authority, in the ordering and governing thereof by his (.128.) The .128. Untruth The Council resisted and refused the ordering of this Lieutenant john. Cyril. ep. 22. Ton 4. Liberat. cap. 6. All this was a lewd fact which never can to effect, and whereof they all repented after, yet M. Horn buildeth upon it. Lieutenant joannes Comes Sacrensis, that other Godly Emperors had been accustomed to use before him▪ according to the continual practice of the Church, as it is plainly set forth in the book of general Councils. In this council there happened so grievous contention betwixt Cyrillus Bishop of Alexandria, and john Bishop of Antioch, both being otherwise godly and learned men, that the council was divided thereby into two parts: the occasion of this Schism was partly, that Cyrillus and certain other with him had proceeded to the condemnation of Nestorius, before that joannes with his company could come, and partly for that joannes of Antioch suspected Cyrillus of certain Heresies, misdeeming that Ciril had made the more haste to confirm them before his coming. He therefore with his associates complaineth, and layeth to cyril's charged, that he did not tarry according to the commandment of the Emperor for the coming of the Bishops of other Provinces, which were called thither from all parts, by the commandment of the Emperor: That when the noble Earl Candidianus commanded him by writing, and without writing, that he should presume no such matter, but that he and those that were with him, should abide the coming of the other Bishops, nevertheless he proceeded: that he and his company were the authors of dissension and discord in the Church▪ and that they had given the occasion, that the rules of the Fathers, and the decrees of the Emperors were broken▪ and trodden under foot: wherefore they judge cyril of Alexandria, with Memnon bishop of Ephesus, to be deposed from their bisshopriks, and Ecclesiastical ministry: and the other their associates to be excommunicate. The which their doings they signify to the Emperor Theodosius by their Synodical letters, to understand his pleasure, in (.129.) The 129. untruth. The story hath no such words. allowing or disallowing of their Synodical acts. After this came the bishop of Rome's legates, before whom in the council Cyrillus and Memnon offered up their libels, deposing a contestation against john and his party to have them cited, and render the cause of their deposition. The bishop of Rome's legates, with the consent of the council, on that part, sendeth for joannes and his parties, who returneth this answer: Neither send you to us, nor we to you, because we look for an answer * So did always schismatics, such as these were. from the Prince touching you. Therefore saith Liberatus: Cyril and Memnon, seeking to revenge themselves, did condemn john and all those that stood with him, who suffered many displeasures at Ephesus thorough the pride of these twain. The Emperor sendeth to the whole Council his answer in writing, on this sort: We allow the condemnation of Nestorius, Cyrillus, and Memnon: the other acts and condemnations, which you have made, we disallow, observing the Christian faith, and uprightness which we have received of our fathers and progenitors. Liberat. cap. 8. etc. Certain of the Bishops did satisfy the Emperor (.130.) The .130. untruth. These words nipped of in the middle. Because the great and general council doing all things regularly, hath condemned Nestorius. By which appeareth, the Council gave sentence over the heretic, not th'emperor. whom he commanded to enter into the Church, and to ordain an other Bishop for Constantinople in the place of Nestorius. These things thus done, the Emperor dissolved the Council, and commanded the Bishops to departed every man to his own country. Within a while after, the Emperor perceiving the dissension betwixt cyril and john to continue, which he thought was not to be suffered: called Maximianus, and many other Bishops that were then at Constantinople, with whom he consulted, how this schism of the Churches might be taken away. Whose advise had, the Emperor sent a noble man, Aristolaus with his letters to cyril and john, commanding them to come to an agreement and unity betwixt themselves, otherwise he would (.131.) The .131. untruth, the word depose, is not in Liberatus. depose and banish them both. Whereupon followed a reconciliation between the two bishops, and much quietness to the Churches. The .9. Chapter. Of Theodosius the Second: and of the Ephesine Council, the third General. Stapleton. HERE followeth now an other Emperor Supreme head of the Church, as well for calling of the first General Council at Ephesus, as also, for ordering and governing of it by his Lieutenant. If M. Horn do or can show any decree or determination in matter of faith, or any other Ecclesiastical matter made by Theodosius or his deputy, than were it somewhat. He showeth no such thing, nor can show any such matter. All this ordering and governing, is concerning the external and outward matters, and to see all things done quietly and orderly: and by civil punishment to correct such as disobey the Council. All the which are no matters of spiritual government. Let us then consider the particularities. The calling of the Ephesine Council by this Emperor Theodosius (which yet was at the request of Cyrillus the Patriarch of Alexandria, Niceph. li. 14. c. 33 not by the Emperors own authority) M. Horn setteth forth in these words: giving straight commandment to all Bishops wheresoever, that they should not fail to appear. As though the Emperor had so peremptorily cited them, and summoned them both, as Princes and Civil Magistrates do cite their subjects for civil matters. Whereas the history of Nicephorus by him alleged, giveth forth no token of such peremptory commandment, but rather of the contrary. For the Emperor in his letters whereby he summoned them, Niceph. li. 14. c. 34 addeth this reason or threat to them that would draw back. Qui enim vocatus non alacriter accurrit, non bonae is conscientiae esse apparet. For whosoever being called, hasteneth not, verily he appeareth to have an evil conscience. In which words he rather chargeth their conscience before God, than their loyal obedience to him: as josaphat did to the Priests and Levites of the old Law, as before hath been showed. 2. Paral. 19 Neither useth any other threat or force of commandment to express so much as an ynckling of that glorious supremacy that M. Horn would so feign find out. Again, Vide Cyril. Epist. 22. Tom. 4. the ordering and governing (as you call it) of the Council, by joannes Comes the emperors Lieutenant, was such as Cyrillus and all the Catholic Bishops of that Council, complained of. first, because he made no true relation to the Emperor, what was in the Council done. Then because he laboured to have john of Antioch with his confederates, reduced to the Communion of the holy Council having broken the Canons: To the which request, the Council resisted plainly, saying: It is not possible to force us hereto, except both that which they have done against the Canons, be disannulled: and also they become humble suppliants to the Council, as such which have offended. When john the Lieutenant could not win his purpose this way, by force of authority, which those Bishops acknowledged none at all, for any matter Synodical to be concluded, or decreed, he went about by a sleight to compass them. He desired them, to give him in writing a confession of their faith: and I, said he, will cause the other to subscribe thereunto, and so to agree with you. This he did (saith the Council) that after he might make his vaunt, and say. I have brought these bishops to an atonement, Conciliavi eos ad amicitiam humanis inter se offensis dissidentes. Non exponimus nos contumeliae. being at variance among themselves, upon worldly displeasures. And the Council espying this, replied again, they would not give the world occasion of reproach and shame. And as for the confession of their faith which he required, they answered. We be not called hither as heretics, but we are come hither to restore the faith that hath been despised, which also we do restore. And as for the Emperor, he hath no need now to learn his faith he knoweth it well enough, and he hath been baptized in it. Thus we see the ordering and governing, which M. Horns cause dependeth upon, of this Lieutenant and Emperor too, was a mere tyrannical violence, not such as other godly emperors accustomed to use before him as M. Horn avoucheth. So did not Constantine in the Nicene Council. Nor Theodosius this man's Grandfather in the Council of Aquileia. cyril. ubi suprà. But this was such a tyrannical government, that Cyrillus and the whole Synod writeth thereof thus. We be all in great vexation, being kept in with the guards of soldiers, yea having them by our beds side when we sleep: specially we, saith Cyrillus. And the whole Council beside, is much wearied and vexed, and many are dead. Many other also, having spent all, do now sell their necessaries. This, lo, was the honourable government of M. Horns supreme head. M. Horn groundeth his primacy upon the doings of john a Schismatical Bishop. By force of arms to extort a consent. Such a governor would the great Turk be, or the soldan, if he ruled again. But such rough patterns please very well this rough and rude Prelate. Similes habent labra lactucas. Whereas therefore he calleth this Emperor Theodosius, a very godly Emperor, seeing he calleth him not godly in this place, but in respect of his actions hereafter to be by him rehearsed, which are very lewd and nought, as it hath and shall yet better appear, it is a plain untruth, Donec poenitentiam agatis, et anathematisetis, haeretica capitula quae à Cyrillo Alexandrino episcopo exposita sunt contra Euangelicam & catholicam doctrinam Liberatus. cap. 6. what so ever he were in other things. And therefore either he should have forborn so to call him, at the least in this place, or should have found some better matter for him to have practised his Supremacy upon. For all Master horns declaration resteth in this, that he defended john the Bishop of Antiochia, and a few of his confederates, the fautors of Nestorius, in this Council condemned. Who made Cyrillus and the residue of the Ephesine Fathers (two hundred in number) heretics, and called their doings heretical, as evidently appeareth by the self same Author and chapter, that M. Horn taketh for his help and aid. But to sweet this unsavoury declaration withal, he calleth this John a godly man: and wandering here and there in by circumstances, leaveth out this, lest the godly Reader might soon suspect this primacy, standing upon no better ground. Yet will M. Horn say, that Theodosius practised this Supremacy here. First by the Earl Candidianus his Deputy, The causes why M. Horn taketh Theodosius for Supreme head. who on the emperors behalf inhibited Cyril and the other, that they should not proceed till the coming of john the patriarch of Antiochia. Then, that after the said john had condemned Cyril and Memnon, and deposed them from their Bishopriks', the Emperor confirmed john's sentence. Thirdly that seeing the dissension betwixt Cyril and john to grow more and more, commanded them to agree, otherwise he would depose and banish them both. Last of all, that john being cited to answer before the Pope's Legate, would not come, but said, he looked for the Prince's answer. The said causes answered. But these things neither severally nor jointly are of any force. First, Candidianus doings, as ye see, go no further then to the external moderation, disposition, and order of the Counsels doings. Which, as we have before said, is one point of the emperors dealing in Councils, as the Church's best Son, not as Supreme governor thereof. Secondarily, the Emperor deposed not cyril, but the schismatical assemble of john and his consociates to the number of .34. as Liberatus writeth: Cap. 6. and that contrary to the mind of all the residue, whose sentence though wrongfully given, Theodosius sinistrally affected and seduced, doth confirm. Wherein he is no principal worker, but an executor of the sentence. Thirdly, the Emperor threatened no deposition or deprivation, but banishment only, which is no Spiritual but Civil punishment, and so impertinente to our matter. Therefore where you add, he would depose them to ye are but a Glosar. Liberatus cap. 8. And as good a glosar for the Pope as your brother Molineus. For Liberatus your author, hath no such word. Only he saith. He threatened to send them both to Nicomedia in banishment. Last of all, john being such a man, and so upholden by the Emperor, what marvel if he would not appear before the Pope's Legate, Proofs for the Pope's primacy taken out of the Ephesine Council and M. Horns own author. Prosper in Chronic. Euang●li. 1. cap. 4. Nicep. lib. 14. cap. 34 Con. ●lorses. 5. et 8. Chal. sin. Act 4. pagina. 871. ●●le●●ine confessed the president of the Ephsine council by two Emperors. Pro Mar. vide act. 3 Conc. Chal. of whom he thought he should be condemned? There is no felon by his good will, that would appear at the King's bench, but would refuse it, if he might be assisted therein. And yet it is an ordinary and a lawful cowrt, that not withstanding: and should be, though an hundred such should refuse it. Well Sir: Now that ye have spent and empted your proofs for the upholding of Theodosius primacy, wherein ye work like one that taking upon him to guide other in the night, would put out the candle or torch and conduct them by a lantern, let us for our side see, if we can fetch any better light aswell from other, as even from your own Author, and from the doings of your own council and your own Emperor, for the bishops and the pope's ecclesiastical primacy. I say then that the head and presidente of this council was Celestinus the Pope: and in his stead the foresaid Ciril, and not the Emperor or his deputy. Upon this as a certain truth all the ecclesiastical writers aswell Latins as Greek, uniformly agree, yea the whole council it self of Ephesus agniseth this Celestine as their president and head, as appeareth by the next general council of Chalcedo shortly following, and in the Ephesin counsels letters to the Emperor Theodosius himself: and to the Emperor Valentinian. And lest ye should think, the spiritual men, and the counsels encroached to much upon the emperors jurisdiction, and did them injury, as ye, your Apology, M. jewel, and your other brethren complain, lo Themperor Marcianus, and the Emperor justinian in their open proclamations do plainly profess, that Pope Celestine by his deputy Cyril, was precedent of that Council. Pro justi edict. eius tom. 2. council. M. Horns primacy destroyed by his own author. I trow M. Horn this is no lantern light shut up in a dark dim Horn, but good torch light, or rather the fair bright light of the son itself. In case all this will not serve the turn, we will draw somewhat nearer, even to your own author, your own Emperor, yea your own words to, and by them prove our intent: and then I trust ye will be fully satisfied. Who is he then Master Horn, that writeth: Multos in hoc mundo reges esse, & non esse unum, sicut Papa est super Ecclesiam mundi totius. There are many Kings in the world, and no one King of the whole: as the Pope only is the governor over the Church throughout the whole world: Surely it is your own author Liberatus. And hereby appeareth well M. jewels great error, Liberatus in breviar. cap. 22. tom. 2. con, pag. 119. M. jewels error. In his Reply fol. 254. M. Horn noteth not the author and chapter of his declaration and why? evag. lib. 1. cap. 4. and M. nowels to, affirming stoutly and assuredly, that one man can no more have the rule of the whole Church, them of the whole world. Liberatus a writer about xi c. years past, reporteth that assertion, spoken of a holy bishop to the Emperor justinian, and yet accounted therefore neither foolish nor wicked. You began your narration with the dissension of Cyrillus and john's, but your memory or your truth failed you, when ye left out the author of whom ye took it and the chapter. Perchance ye were here astonished, as the heretics were before Theodosius. For even in this place your author showeth, that Coelestin was the precedent of this council, by his deputy cyril: to whom he gave instructions and informations by letters, how he should demean him self with Nestorius, and prescribeth him a certain order for his doings. And therefore Cyril himself, at what time he should pronounce final sentence of deprivation against Nestorius, saith he was forced thereto by Coelestinus letters. In the giving of which sentence, Cyrillus gave sentence against Nestorius by Celestinus. Cyril. epi. 11. &. 12. Tom. 4. Cyril. epi. 17. Proved against M Horn by Theodosius himself that themperor is not supreme head in matters ecclesiastical. M. Horns own example also of Candidinianus turned against him. Cap. satis evidenter distin. 96. neither th'emperor, nor his Lieutenant, had any thing to do, either in allowing or disallowing: and that will I prove unto you even by your own supreme head Theodosius writing to Cyrillus, ut perturbatio quae ex controversiis istis accidit, secundum ecclesiasticos canones dissoluatur, that the which them was for controversies of religion, might be pacified and quieted according to the ecclesiastical canons. Now by the ecclesiastical canon the ending and determination of matters spiritual appertaineth to the clergy, and not to the laity. Now also both to answer you, and to take some handfast against you of such things, yourself have alleged: will ye know M. Horn whether the doings of the earl Candidianus themperors deputy, reached to the discussion or determination of any matter ecclesiastical, or no? I say, no. And for my saying to be confirmed I appeal to your own supreme head Theodosius, and plead for myself, the very commission, that he gave to Candidianus. Deputatus est Candidianus magnificus Comes transire usque ad sanctissimam synodum vestram, ac in nullo quidem quae facienda sunt de pijs dogmatibus quaestiones communicare. Illicitum namque est, eum qui non sit ex ordine sanctissimorum episcoporum ecclesiasticis immiscere tractatibus. I have sent, saith th'emperor Theodosius, the noble earl Candidinianus, as my deputy unto your holy Synod, giving him in charge, not to meddle in any point touching questions to be moved about godly doctrine and Religion. For it is unlawful for him, which is not of the order of holy bishops, to intermeddle with Ecclesiastical matters. But yet ye say, john and his fellows would not appear before the Pope's Legates: A true man ye are in this point. It was so in deed, wherein his doings were as good as yours and your fellows protestant bishops, This john refused to come before the Pope's Legates and the Council by as good right, as M Horn and his fellows refused the Council of Trent. Liberatus cap. 6. M. Horns supremacy destroyed by his own author and chapter. which being and that with a large safe conduct, called to the late Council of Trent, durst not, ye knew your cause so good, show your face in such an ordinary and learned consistory. Ye knew ye were no more able, to show good cause why ye have deposed the Catholic bishops, than could your john, why he deposed Cyrillus and Memnon. And therefore he being called to give a reckoning of those his doings before Pope Celestins Legates, who were then precedent themselves (for cyril and Memnon then both put up their complaints to the Pope's Legates, them newly come from Rome to Constantinople) and before the whole Council of Bishops, durst not appear. But lo now out of your own place and chapter, an other open proof against you, for the Popes, and the ecclesiastical primacy. For not withstanding all that ever your Emperor and supreme head did, and for all his allowing of john's wicked proceeding: the Pope's Legates and the Council with a more Supreme Authority resumed the matter into their hands: to whom also cyril and Memnon bishops of Ephesus unjustly deposed, offered their bills of complaint: whereupon john was cited to appear. who played the night owlespart, not able to abide the clear light of the Pope's authority, and of so honourable a Council. And so have ye concerning this Ephesine Council spoken altogether, as we say, ad Ephesios', and very poor aid are ye like to take at this Counsels hands. Nay, ye are quyt overborem and overtilted therewith. As it shall yet more at large appear to him that will vouchsafe to read, that I have written of this matter against M. jewel, Art. 4. fo. 837. et. 138 in my Return of untruths. M. Horn. The 45. Division. Pag. 30. a. Eutyches stirred up much trouble in these days: wherefore he was cited to appear before Flavianus Bishop of Constantinople, and other Bishops assembled in a Synod, to answer unto his heresies: who would * He was an heretic I warrant you, that would not appear before his bishop, but fled to the Prince. Liberat. cap. 11. not appear but fled unto the Emperor Theodosius, and declareth unto him his grief. The Emperor sendeth unto the Synod with Eutiches, one of his chief officers Florentius, with this mandate: Because we study carefully for the peace of God's Church, and for the Catholic Faith, and will by God's grace have the right Faith kept, which was set forth by the Nicene Council, and confirmed by the Fathers at Ephesus, when Nestorius was condemned: we will therefore there be no offence committed about the aforenamed Catholic Faith, and because we know the honourable Florentius, to be a faithful and an approved man in the right faith, we will that he shallbe present in your Synod, because the conference is of the Faith. He was there asistaunt unto the Fathers and (.132.) The .132. untruth. Florentius used no examination at al. examined Eutyches openly in the Synod, (.133.) The 133. untruth. He never asked him but one question. diverse times of his faith, and finally said unto him: He that (saith Florentius) doth not confess in Christ two natures, doth not believe aright: and (.134.) The .134. untruth. Not so. that is not by Florentius, but by the Council he was condemned, and deposed. so was Eutyches excommunicate, deposed, and condemned. Eutyches rested not here, but obtained that the Emperor did command a new Synod to be had at Constantinople, wherein to examine the acts of the former, whether that all things touching the proceeding against Eutyches, were done orderly and rightly, or no. He appointeth besides Florentius, diverse (.135.) The 135. untruth, Nicephorus hath no such thing. other of his nobles to be in this council, to see the doings thereof. But when Eutyches could not win his purpose in neither of these Synods, he procureth by friendship of the Empress Eudoxia and others, that the Emperor should call a Synod again at Ephesus: to the which Synod the Emperor prescribeth a form of proceeding. This Synod was a wicked conventicle, wherein the truth was defaced and Heresy approved, the Emperor being seduced by Chrysaphius, one of the privy chamber, and in most favour with him. The .10. Chapter, of Eutyches the Archeretike. Stapleton. AS Eutyches that false monk did, so do ye fly from your ordinary judges to such as be no judges in the matter. Neither the presence of Florentius, or any other the emperors deputy in the council, maketh the Emperor, as I have said and showed before, a supreme head. And in as much as the Emperor saith, that because the conference is of saith, he would his deputy to be present: that is granted (when matters of faith are debated) not only to Emperors, Dist. 96. Vbinam. Chal. Act. 3. pa. 838. Cabil. can. 6. Millevit. Cap. 19 but to all Christian men. But hereof it may be inferred that in Counsels assembled for discipline ecclesiastical, and not for faith, th'emperor and his deputy have nothing to do: which infringeth the greatest part of your supremacy. And which is plain both by the rules, and by the practice of the Church expressed in the Counsels of Chalcedon, of Cabylon, and of Millevitum. Now as we grant the emperors deputy may be present in the Council, where matters of faith are in debate: so how he is present, and to what end, and that he hath no authority to determine and decide the controversies, we have already proved by Theodosius himself. To stop belike this gap, ye imagine Florentius to play the judges part, as to examine Eutyches openly in the Synod of his faith, and how he believed. Examination Florentius used none, but as any lay man beside might have done, he demanded what he believed: which demanding is not to determine, what and how he ought to believe. Again where you add, diverse times of his faith, this is an other untruth. For Florentius in all that Synod never asked him but one question (which you here allege) and that after the Synod had now condemned him. But I suppose ye would fasten the judges part upon him, because he said to Eutyches, he that doth not confess in Christ two natures, doth not believe a right. This might any other man have said to, and this is but a simple sentence. And as simple as it is, ye thought not very simply, but doubly and craftily, yea altogether falsely, minding to bear the ignorant reader in hand as though this had been the final sentence. And therefore ye say, and so was Eutyches excommunicated, deposed, and condemned. But by whom, I pray you, Master Horn? By Florentius, or Flavianus in the Council? And when and how, I pray you? Did not the Council before these words of Florentius, demand of Eutyches his faith? Liberatus cap. 11. Yea, did not they tell him? Thou must confess this, and curse all doctrine contrary to this faith? Now when Eutyches would not, and said, as ye say in many things, he would not, because the holy scripture had no such matter, than did the Council curse him: And after this curse Florentius spoke the words by you rehearsed. afterward was he cursed again, and deprived of his priestly honour, not by Florenrius, but by his own bishop Flavianus, as it is contained in the chapter by you quoted. Yea that more is, a plain place withal of the Pope's primacy to. For both Flavianus sent this his Sentemce to Rome, and Eutyches thus condemned, complained by his letters upon Flavianus, and appealed, to Pope Leo. But Eutyches rested not here: The Pope's primacy proved by M, Horns own author and chapter. (saith M. Horn) In deed in Eutyches we have a pattern of you and your fellows, that will be ruled by no law or order of the Church. This Eutyches being first three several times cited by his own bishop and patriarch Flavianus, would not appear before him, but by the means of one Chrysaphius his god child, a buskyn gentleman about the emperors privy chamber, brought the matter to the Prince. Then a provincial Synod being called by the Emperor, and Eutyches condemned, he appealed from the Emperor to Pope Leo. Being by him also condemned, he would not yet yield. No in the general Council of Chalcedon being thrice summoned by the whole Council of 630. bishops, his pride and obstinacy was such, that he would not appear, nor being there with full consent condemned, would yet yield thereunto. And all because the two natures of Christ in one person (which he denied) was not expressly found in the Scriptures. In all these (except his only appealing to Rome) he showed himself as right an heretic, as any that now liveth. But this is a wondered folly, or rather madness in you to proceed on, and to allege farther matter of Theodosius doings for calling other Counsels in the maintenance of Entyches at Constantinople and Ephesus, Leo epist. 51. ad. Pulcheriam. and by and by to declare, that the said synod of Ephesus, was a wicked conventicle, as it was in deed, and as Leo calleth it, Non judicium, sed latrocinium. No judgement, but a tyrannical violence, and all things there done against Flavianus, afterward reversed by Pope Leo: a most certain argument of his supremacy. And yet ye call your Emperor, a godly Emperor, neither showing of his repentance, nor of any his good doings. Thus ye see how pitifully every way ye are cast in your own turn. M. Horn. 46. Division. Pag. 30. b. Leo the first, Bishop of Rome a learned and a godly bishop, although not without all, faults, maketh hum●le supplication vn●o Theodosius the Emperor, and unto Pulcheria: that there might be a general Council called in Italy, to abolish the wicked error in Faith, confirmed by the violence of Dioscorus. The self same Bishop of Rome with many bishops kneeling on their knees, did most humbly beseech in like sort Valentinianus the emperor, that he would vouchesaulfe to entreat and exhort Theodosius the Emperor to call an other Synod, Liberat. cap. 12. to revoke those evil acts and judgements, which Dioscorus had caused to be done in the condemnation of Flavianus Bishop of Constantinople and others. In which examples it is manifest, that the bishops of Rome did (.136.) The .136. untruth. The Popes never acknouleaged any such matter, and Leo lest of all other, acknowledge the supreme government, direction and authority in calling of Counsels, which is (.137.) The .137 untruth. It is no ecclesiastical cause at all, as the Emperors use it. one of the greatest amongst the ecclesiastical causes or matters, to be in the Emperors, and Princes, and not in themselves. The .11. Chapter. Of Pope Leo the great, and first of that name. Stapleton. IT is well and clerkly noted of you M. Horn, that Leo, being a godly and a learned bishop was not yet without all faults It was well spied of you, least men should think he was borne without original sin (which I dowbt whether you will grant to Christ's mother) or take him for Christ himself. For who, I beseech you, is without all faults? But what a holy, virtuous and godly man this Leo was, I let pass to speak (though very much might be said therein) because the good or evil life of a Pope or any other man is not material to the doctrine which he teacheth, or to the matter we have now in hand. But verily for his right faith, true doctrine, and found belief (for the which you seem to tax him) I will with ij. short sayings only of ij. general Counsels shortly note to the Reader, both what an absolute doctor this Leo was, and what a malapert controller you are. The Chalcedon Council of 630. bishops do expressly and plainly profess their judgement of this blessed father Leo (in their solemn subscription) in these words. Nos summè orthodoxum esse sanctissimum patrem nostrum Archiepiscopum Leonem perfectissimè novimus. Act. 4. pa. 871. col. ●. Tom. 1. Con. We most perfectly know, that our most holy father Leo the archbishop, is of right judgement in religion, in the highest degree. Lo M. Horn those fathers so many and so learned with one consent do say: Not that they think or believe, but that they know: and that not superficially or slenderly, but perfectissimè most perfitly, most exactly, most assuredly: And what know they so surely? Forsooth that their most holy father Leo is Orthodoxus, a right believer, a true Catholic, a sound teacher of God's people. And not only so, after a common or mean sort, but Summè Orthodoxum: Catholic and right believing in the highest degree: without any blot or blemish in that respect. After such a Sentence, so protested and pronounced, of such, so many, so learned, and so ancient fathers above unleven hundred years paste, in such and so solemn an assembly for the absolute and undoubted commendation of that excellent prelate, whence creep you, with your lewd surmise, or with what face dare you deface him? With the like constant and absolute commendation (without any surmised exception at all) in an other general Council, Concil. Constant. 5. Act. 1. pag. 74. Tom. 2. Concil. the next after this, he is called by the common voice of the East Bishops, Illuminator & Columna Ecclesiae. A giver of light, and a pillar of the Church. You come to late, M. Horn, to blot or to blemish the reverent memory of so blessed, so learned and so much commended a father. His light so shineth that no horn can dim it. His doctrine is so strong, that no surmise can weaken it. The more you kick at this pillar, the more you break your shin. The more you deface him, the greater is your own shame. Therefore as your glozing here was causeless, so surely your meaning is gracelesie. Verily such as if ye had expressed it, would forthwith have disgraced and quite overthrown your false conclusion immediately following, freighted almost with as many lies as lines. For touching his suit to the Emperor to have a Council called, you must understand M. Horn, that the bare calling of councils such as Emperors have used, is not one of the greatest among Ecclesiastical causes, nor, to speak properly, any matter Ecclesiastical at all, but a provision by the way of exhortation for the bishops to meet in some convenient place without breach of the civil order, which forbiddeth Illicita collegia: that is, Tit. de Illicitis collegijs. unlawful assemblies, as the same should for such be accounted if th'emperor had not allowed them: And not only th'emperor, but any other prince being lord of the territory or soil, where the bishops would assemble. In deed the discussion and determination of matters of faith in Councils may well be said to belong to the great and weighty causes of the Church, but this belongeth not to lay princes: and this not withstanding, Leo is so far of from acknowledging this supreme government and authority in calling of counsels, that if I be not deceived, ye yourself do know and believe the contrary, and therefore durst not speak what ye thought, but under such dark and mystical talk. For I pray you, M. Horn, what is the fault ye find in Leo, worthy to be thus touched by you unless it be, that he most plainly and seriously avoucheth this supreme authority to rest in the see of Rome? And then far well your goodly conclusion. What other secret faults, by your so quick prying eagles eye, ye have in him espied, I wots not. But your brethren of the best and learned sort, find, as far as I can find, none other fault than this that I have said: which is no fault at al. And therefore in your shrewd and unhappy meaning, though not in your express penning, it is a very untruth. Yet if ye well pretend ignorance, and make men believe ye know no such thing in Leo, but that your conclusion is true, and taketh place as well in him as other bishops, then will I load and press you, Prouf● out of ●eo for the pope's primacy. See his 3 sermon where he calleth S. Pet. head of the Church. Epist. 82. vel aliâs 84. ad Anastasium cap. 11. Tom. 1. council. pag. 700. Ad unam Petrisedem unersalis ecclesiae cura conflueret. Ibidem. Vt pro solicitudine quam universae ecclesiae ex divina institutione dependimus: episto. 87. ad episcopos Aphrican. with such good and evident proofs, fetched no farther then from Leo himself, that ye shall be fain, if ye have any grace to acknowledge the truth. For whether ye regard his doings or his sayings, both are in this point most notable. S. Peter's primacy he doth every where confess. As appeareth in many of his sermons, and in his other works. For Leo saith: Quoniam & inter Apostolos, in similitudine honoris fuit quaedam discretio potestatis: & quum omnium par esset electio, uni tamen datum est, ut caeteris praeemineret. Whereas all the Apostles were of like honour (he meaneth in Apostleship and priesthood) yet was there difference of power amongs them, and where as all were of like elected, yet was it given to one to be peerless above the other. Wherein he meaneth Saint Peter. Leo saith, that where other Bishops have their several and appointed care, the care of the universal Church cometh to the only see of S. Peter. Leo saith, that even by Gods own ordinance, he taketh care, for the whole Church. And Leo saith, Vt ab ipso quasi quodam capite, dona sua velut in omne corpus diffunderet, ut expertemse ministerij intelligeret esse divini, qui ausus fuisset a Petri soliditate recedere: hunc enim in consortium individuae unitatis assumptum, id quod ipse erat, voluit nominari, Leo epist. 87. ad epis. Vicnnen. provinciae: tom. 2. conc. f●l. 705. Extra de elect & electi potest c. fundamenta. jewel Pag. 311. A wretched corruption made of Pope Leo his words by M. Iewe●. V●de dict. c. fundamenta in. 6. & dist. 19 ca ●●a Dominus: in editio. jugd. 1559 dicendo. Tu es Petrus & super hanc Petram etc. that from S. Peter the Apostle as from the head God poureth all his gifts into the body, and that God took him into the fellowship of the indivisible unity. The meaning whereof Leo himself expoundeth, saying, that he shall not be partaker of God's mystery that departeth from Peter's sowndenes: and for that Christ who is called in scriptures the rock, gave the same name to Peter. And here it shall not be much out of the way to note, that M. jewel reciting this place, doth not only dissemble that this is written of the godly and learned man Leo: but also fathereth it upon Pope Bonifacius, who writeth it to, but as ye see, not originally. And most lyingly for unitatis putteth in trinitatis: as though Leo and Bonifacius should make S. Peter one of the three parsons of the blessed Trinity. Being in this point, the pope's glosar, as good as Molineus, or M. Horn himself. Which Molineus in this place gloseth apace, but not for the pope, but as much as he can against him. And yet for this matter much better than M. jewel, reading aswell here as otherwhere in the canon law: unitatis, & non trinitatis. This now by the way, to show you, that there be more pope's glosars, than Molineus, and withal, one of M. jewels pretty knacks, worthy to be added for an after reckoning to such as M. D. Harding, D. Sanders, and I have most rightfully charged him with. Let us now return to Leo, and see whether as in words he did amplify this supreme authority: so in his doings he practised it, or no. Who is he then, Dict. epist. 87. Dedimus literas ad fratres & coepiscopos Tarraco. Cartha. Lusitanoes atque Gallicos eisque concilium Synodi generalis indiximus. epistola. 93 ad ●urbiū. cap. 17. Vicem curae nostrae proficiscenti à nobis fratri & consacerdoti nostro Potentio delegantes▪ epistola 87. ad episcopos Aphrican. Dilectioni tuae vicem mei moderaminis delegavi, epistol. 82. To. 1. Con. pa. 742. Vicem ipse meam contra temporis nostri haereticos delegavi, atque propter ecclesiarum pacisque custodiam, ut a comitatu vestro non abesset, exegi. epist. 55. ●om. 1. Council pag. 674 In ipso Leon. 57 Consensiones Episcoporum sanctorum cano●um apud Nicaean conditarun regulis repugnantes, in irritum mettimus, & per authoritatem beati Petri Apostoli generali prorsus definitione cassamus. Ad Pulcheriam epist. 55. Tom. 1. council. pag. 672. Epistola 47. & 49. that reverseth the unlawful doings of bishop Hilarius at France? Leo. Who is he, that calleth to a general Council the bishops of Tarracone, Lusitania, France and Car●hage? Leo. Who is it that appointeth his deputy Potentius to hear and reform matters Ecclesiastical in afric? Leo. Who is he that doth appoint Anastasius the bishop of Thessalonica, to be his deputy and vicegerent for matters Ecclesiastical in those quarters? Leo. Who is he that restored to his bishopric the learned Theodoretus bishop of Cyrus' dwelling far of in the east, unjustly deposed of Maximus his own patriarch, and of Dioscorus? Leo. Who is he that sendeth his deputy julian to the Emperor Marcian to remain in his cowrte, and to supply his office, in such things as should be done, against heretics in those quarters? Leo. Who is he that did annichilate and reverse by the authority of S. Peter the Apostle, the doings of a number of bishops at Constantinople, before the Bis●hoppe of Alexandria and other patriarchs contrary to the canons of Nice? Leo. Who is he that sendeth his Legates to be presidents in the great Council at Chalcedo? Leo. Which himself signifieth in his letters aswell to the whole Council as to th'emperor Marcian. Epist. 59 & 61. Act. 3. Chal. conc. Epist. 33.40 ●4. 55 Epist. ●8. Leo epist. 47. Who is he that confirmed the Decrees of the Council of Chalcedo, being thereto required, as well by the whole Council, as by th'emperor Marcian? Leo. Who is he that confirmed Anatholius and Proterius the ij. chief patriarchs in the east, one of Constantinople the other of Alexandria? Leo. And who is he that in summoning the Council of Chalcedon, yielded not otherwise to the emperors appointment for the place, but with an express exception, saying? The honour and right of the See of S. Peter the most blessed Apostle, reserved▪ Leo. Wherein he expressly signified, that the Summoning of the Council of right appertained to his Apostolic See. What say you to all this, Master Horn? How well doth, Pope Leo, acknowledge your supremacy? For shame leave of on's these lying conclusions. Hard it will be I trow, it seemeth to be so natural an humour in men of your religion. But yet nothing is hard to the willing, and to him that will heartily seek for grace at God's hand. The which I pray him of his mercy send you: And learn I pray you to find fault with yourself, as ye have great cause, rather than with this good virtuous bishop, It is in the 477. untruth. In our Returns Art. 4. folio 142. faultless I dare say for such matters, as ye take for great faults in him. But to end this matter, I must commend you for one thing, for ye have scaped one scoring that your fellow M. jewel did not scape: for writing that Leo did kneel with other bishops, which the words of his author Liberatus by you here truly rehearsed, do not import. M. Horn. The .47. Division. Pag. 3●. a. Nice. lib. 15. cap. 12. Leo epist. 44. Marcianus, a godly Emperor, and very studious about the Christian Religion, succeeded Theodosius, who besides that of himself, he was much careful to suppress all heresies, and to reform the Churches, restoring Religion to purity without error, was also hastened hereunto by the earnest suit of Leo bishop of Rome: who in diverse and sundry epistles, declaring unto him in most humble wise, the miserable state of the Church, doth beseech him, that he would vouchsaulfe to call a general council. Many other bishops make the same sui●e unto the Emperor, and to the same end complaining unto him, Act. 1. of the miserable destruction, and horrible disorders, in Church causes. An example and pattern of their supplications, whereby (138.) The .138. untruth. Neither by Leo his epistle neither by the bishops supplication any such thing doth appear. may appear, that they acknowledged the Emperor to be their Supreme governor, also in Ecclesiastical causes, or matters, is set forth in the Chalcedon council, in the supplication of Eusebius, the bishop of Dorelaum; unto the Emperor: who maketh humble supplication as he saith, for himself, and for the true or right faith. we fly unto your godliness (saith this bishop unto the Emperor) because both we and the Christian faith, have suffered much wrong against all reason: humbly craving justice, and for that Dioscorus hath done many, and that no small offences, both against the faith of Christ and us: prostrate, we beseech your clemency, that you will command him to answer to the matters, we shall object against him: (.139.) The .139. untruth. In nipping of a clause in the midst, utterly overthrowing M. Horns principal purpose. wherein we will prove him to be out of the catholic faith, defending heresies replete with impiety. Wherefore we beseech you to direct your holy and honourable commandment, to the holy and universal council of the most religious Bishops, to examen the cause betwixt us, and Dioscorus, and to make relation of all things, that are done, to be (.140.) The .140 untruth False translation. In epist. praeamb. judged as shall seem good to your clemency. The Emperor protesting that they ought to preserve the furtherance of the right faith and Christian Religion, before all other affairs of the common wealth: sendeth their letters of summons to all bishops, commanding them to repair to Nice, a city in Bithinya, there to consult and conclude, an unity and concord, in religion, and matters pertaining thereunto, that hereafter all altercation and doubtfulness be taken clean away, and an wholesome truth in Religion established, adding (.141.) The .141. untruth Marcian used no such threats. Vide epist. preamb. Conc. Chal. Tom. 1. Con. pag. 734. col. 2. threats, and punishment to them that would refuse to come at the time appointed. When th'assembly was made at Nice of all the bishops, and that the Emperors could not come thither, to be present in the Synod personally, which they had promised and did much covet, they write unto the whole Synod, willing them to remove from Nice unto Chalcedon without delay: where they assembled at the Emperors (.142.) The 142. untr. At his exhortation, not commandment. commandment, to the number of .630. bishops. The, 12. Chapter. Of the Emperor Martian, and of his calling the Council of Chalcedon. Stapleton. M. Horn is now harping again upon his old string of calling of Councils: and would establish Marcianus ecclesiastical primacy thereby. But either his eyes, his luck, or his matter was not good, to hap upon no better place than he doth, which doth bear him quite over, and setteth forth pope Leo his primacy sending his ambassadors and vicegerents to Constantinople to reform heresies, and to pardon and reconcile such heretical bishops as were poenitente: Ep. 42. & 44. alias 44. & 46. Tom. 1. Conc. dicta epist. 42 alibi est. 44. unto whom he adjoineth as his delegate, even the Bishop and patriarch of Constantinople. And declareth this his doings in his letters as well to the Emperor himself: as to Anatolius the patriarch. Now, what if pope Leo requireth a council at the emperors hands? what doth this blemish his authority, more than if the Pope now should require the Emperor, the french and Spanish kings, and other princes, as he did of late, to send their bishops to the council? Verily that the Emperor so should do, it was of all times most necessary in Marcian his time: the .3. patriarchs of Alexandra, Antiochia, and Jerusalem, with a great number of Bishops in the East, taking then the arch-heretic Eutyches part, against the good and godly Catholic bishop Flavianus, whom Dioscorus with his faction murdered. Was it not then high time to seek all aid and help, Generale Concilium ex praecepto Christianorum principum, & ex consensu Apostolicae sedis placuit congregari. Epist. 59 alias. 61. ad luxe nalem. ●om. 1. Concil. pag. 676. So●ra. li. 1. cap. 8. counsels 〈◊〉 not be kept without the con●ent of the Pope. Beatissimi Petri iure atque honore serva to. Ep. 45. alias. 47. Ton. 1. Conc. pag. 663. col. 2. a. both spiritual and temporal? Or is it any diminution to the spiritual power, when the temporal power doth help and assist it? Or think you, would this pernicious pestilent fellow Dioscorus, and his faction any thing have regarded Pope Leo his ecclesiastical authority, which before had so notoriously transgressed both God's laws and man's laws, unless the good Emperor had joined his assistance unto it? And this may be answered for the calling of many other general Counsels by the Emperors: especially of the first seven hundred years after Christ, when the patriarchs themselves were arch-heretics, and the matters not like easily to be redressed by the Church authority only. Yet neither did any Catholic Prince call, or could call a Council without or against the Pope's will and consent. If ye think not so, as in deed ye do not, then think you far a wrong: And the godly and learned Bishop Leo, as you call him, is able, if you be capable and willing toward any reformation, soon to reform your wrong judgement. Who declareth expressly, that even the Council of Chalcedo was summoned, by the commandment of the Emperors, with the consent of the See Apostolic. Surely it was a rule and a Canon in the Church, above .12. hundred years now past, that no Council could be kept (as Socrates witnesseth) without the authority of the Bishop of Rome: And that by a special prerogative and privilege of that See. This prerogative Leo also doth signify, speaking of this Emperor Marcian, who called the Chalcedon Council, but yet, saith he, without any hindrance or prejudice of S. Peter's right and honour, that is by and with his consent, being S. Peter's successor, in the Apostolic See of Rome. I marvel much, that ye frame this supremacy of Marcian by the supplication of the Bishop Eusebius, desiring the Emperor to procure by his letters that he council would hear his cause against Dioscorus, which serveth rather for the Counsels primacy. The removing also of the Council from Nicaea to Chalcedo, doth serve to as little purpose. Vide Tom. 1. Concil. pag. 735. & 736. For the cause of the transposing was, for that Leo by his ambassadors had signified, that the Bishops would not assemble, unless th'emperor would be there personally, for fear of sedition and tumult of Eutyches disciples. It was therefore translated to Chalcedo, being nigh to Constantinople, that the Emperor might be there the more commodiously. And so that which was done by the good Emperor to assure and honour th'ecclesiastical authority, ye turn it to the hindrance and derogation of it. But in the supplication of Eusebius which you have put so at large in your book, it is a world to see how untruly you have dealt, partly with nipping of sentences in the midst, partly with false translation. First you leave out at the very beginning of the Bishop's supplication, wherein he shortly declareth the whole effect of his request, saying: Act. 1. Conc. Chal. pag. 741. The intent and purpose of your clemency is to provide for all your subjects, and to help all that are injuriously oppressed, but especially such as bear the office of Priesthood. By this beginning it appeareth, the Bishop requested only the emperors external and civil power for redress and help against injuries. And because this should not so appear, you thought good to leave it quite out. Again in the process, where the said bishop saith: Prostrate we beseech your clemency that ye will command Dioscorus to answer to the matters we shall object against him. It fololoweth which you leave out, the evidences of his doings against us being read in this Council, by which words the bishop required the Council to be his judge, not the Emperor: and lest that should appear you leave it out: At the end where the latin hath, perferre ad scientiam vestrae pietatis omnia quae geruntur, you turn it: to make relation of all thin-that are done, to be judged: where you have put in these words (to be judged) of your own lying liberality, more than your latin hath: and all to persuade, that the bishop requested here the Emperor to be the judge between Dioscorus and him. Which (if ye had put in the whole words of your Author) would have easily appeared nothing so, but rather the contrary: as by the places by you omitted, and now by me expressed, the circumspect Reader may soon perceive. Thus like as your doctrine, so is your manner of writing, false, unperfect, and untrue. Again in all this tale, Master Horn, though you tell us at large how the Emperors Marcian and Valentinian sent their letters of Summons to all bishops commanding them, In epist. Praeamb. Concil. Chalked. Tom. 1. Pag. 733.734. & 735. col. 2 etc. Yea, adding threattes and punishments to those that refused to come at appointment, Yet you tell us nothing that the Emperor first wrote unto Pope Leo, and obtained his consent and Authority. And then that in his letters of Summones to all Bishops, certified them expressly of the Pope's pleasure, and last of all that the Pope's Legates required the Emperors to be present personally at the Council, or else they would not come there themselves. All this you let pass. In deed it maketh not for you. But it showeth against you and for us, very well and plainly, that the supreme summon and citing of the bishops to that general Council, In epist. praeamb. ubi supra. yea and the Emperors own presence there, proceeded directly and principally from the Pope and his Legates. It declareth well the Pope's supremacy in that affair, as we shall in many other more points decipher unto you anon more at large. Neither doth the Emperor use in his letters of Summon, the words of commandment, but saith: Venire dignemini. vouchsafe ye to come. And again. Adhortamur. we exhort you to come. This was the practice of Emperors (as I have noted before out of Cusanus) by the way of exhortation to call Counsels: not by forcible commandment, by threats and punishment, as you untruly report. M. Horn. The .48. Division. pag. 31. b. The Emperor assigneth judges and (143.) The .143. Untruth. They were no rulers such as M. Horn sancieth. Act. 1. The cause of discord was that they taught not quod veritas aut doctrina patrum requirit: that which truth or the Father's doctrine requireth. This you omit. For why? It showed your owned case. rulers in the Synod about .24. of the chiefest of his Nobles and Senators. After all the Bishops and the judges were assembled in the council house, which was in S. Euphemies Church: the Emperor Martianus, with Pulcheria, entereth in amongst them, and maketh an Oration unto the whole Council, to this effect. First he declareth, what zeal and care he hath for the maintenance and furtherance of true Religion: Then he showeth, that partly the vanity, partly the avarice of the teachers, had caused the * discord and error in Religion: He addeth the cause wherefore he charged them with this travail: And last of all he (.144.) The 144. Untruth. The Emperor prescribed no form at all for determining of matters in controversy. prescribeth a form, after which they must determine the matters in controversy. This done, the judges sat down in their places, and the bishops arrow, some on the right hand, and others on the left hand. And when that Dioscorus was accused, and the judges willed him to use his lawful defence, there began to be amongst the bishops hot schools, wanting some modesty, wherefore the judges at the first stayed them with mild words. Willing them to avoid confusion: but being earnest, they overshot the modesty of so grave men: wherefore the honourable judges and Senate of the Laity, appointed by the Emperor, did reprove them saying: These popular acclamations, neither becometh bishops, neither yet help the parties: be ye quiet therefore, and suffer all things to be rehearsed and heard in order with quietness. When the judges and Senate, had duly examined the causes, they gave (.145.) The .145. Untruth. notorious. The judges deposed not Dioscorus, but the Council. sentence to depose Dioscorus and others: So that this their judgement seemed good to the Emperor, to whom they referred the whole matter. The .13. Chapter. Of the Chalcedon Council, and how the Emperor with his deputies dealt therein. Stapleton. WE are now in order come to the Council of Chalcedo, the acts whereof being very long and tedious, the leaves in the great volume rising to the number of one hundred and more, M. Horn hath here and there pried out good matter as he thinketh, to depress the Pope's primacy withal. Wherein he so handleth himself, that he seemeth to me for many causes never to have read the acts, but to have taken things as they came to his hands, ministered by his friends, or by his Latin Masters. Ones, The answer concerning the Council of Chalcedo this is sure, that for some of his allegations, a man may poor in the book, till his eyes dasel again, and his head ache, ere he shall find them, and in such prolixity of the matter, when he hath found them, and well weighed them: a man would think, The Ephesine and the Chalcedon Council showed in a dark horn. that M. Horn had either lost his wits, or else were himself a sleep, when he wrote those arguments: or else which is worst of all, that he was past all shame and grace. For as ye saw, good Readers, the Ephesine so shall ye now see the Council of Chalcedo, by no clear candle or torch, but all in a dark horn. Wherein he playeth like a false wily merchant, that will not show his wares, but in a dark shop. But by God's help I shall bring his naughty merchandise into the bright shining light, that all men may openly at the eye see all the lewdness of it. And to begin, with the first action of the said Council, and to follow M. horns steps with a little tracing, there sterteth up at the first (I will speak with the least) a brace of lies, beside other vain and impertinent talk. See the .1. ●ome of council the 736. leaf and 737. col. 2. & 1. Of his judges, whereby he would have the Reader to think, that these noble men were judges in the decision and determination of matters ecclesiastical, he cometh altogether to short, as ye shall anon understand. And therefore this shall be the first lie. The second lie is that he saith. The Emperor prescribed a form, after which they must determine the matters in controversy. For in all the Acts of that Council, there appeareth no such form or prescription made. It is usual with M. Horn, in every Council to report such a prescription. But as he hath often said it, so hath he not once proved it, or showed it by any one Authority, but his own, which is a singular authority, See the 831. leaf. col▪ 2. to lie as lewedly (almost) as M. jewel. Yet to blear the Readers eye, and to seam handsomely to furnish his matter by some precedent and example, he layeth forth for his proof, that these judges gave sentence to depose Dioscorus the patriarch of Alexandria, and others. This is altogether false. For first they were no competent and ordinary judges being mere lay men, 4. Causes to prove that Dioscorus was not deposed by them. especially in causes ecclesiastical to depose a Bishop. secondly, putting the case, they had been lawful and ordinary judges, yet was it no final and judicial sentence. For a final sentence must decide and determine the matter, by an absolute condemnation or absolution: which was not done here, this pretenced sentence being as yourself write, conditional: So that this their judgement seemed good to the Emperor, to whom they referred the whole matter. And here by the way falleth out an other untruth: Videtur nobis justum esse. See the 847. leaf col. 2. for the Nobles themselves do not call this saying a judgement, but say, it seemeth unto us just. Which words by law import no final judgement. Fourthly and last, this was no judgement, neither was Dioscorus deposed here in this action (for in the beginning of the next action, the judges confess, that sentence was not yet given upon Dioscorus.) but in the third action: and that not by these judges, as ye call them, but by Pope Leo his deputies, and the residue of the Bishops without any referring of the matter to th'Emperor as the judges do here. Martians oration returned upon M. Horn. The rest ye talk of in this place is of no weight: and if it weigheth any thing, it weieth against you, as Marcians oration, which tendeth to this, that in new questions and dissensions of religion, we must have a special regard to the doctrine, teaching and writing of the former fathers and counsels: which rule and form of judgement prescribed by him you quit left out, as a rule in deed, importing a plain destruction of your new gospel. See the 740. leaf col. 1. Now if the making of an oration by a lay man employeth any authority, voice, or iuriseiction in the Council, than were many lay men (the ambassadors for their Princes, that made orations there, yea and found many faults to in the Church, and desired the reformation of them) members and judges of the late Council of Trent, which is notoriously false: and so is that also that ye writ of the noble men at Chalcedo. And whereas they found fault with the populare acclamations of the Bishops, which of a great zeal to the catholic faith cried out against Dioscorus and other that deposed the godly Bishop Flavianus, and that they would not receive Theodoretus, nor hear such matters as he had to propose, because he for the time, held against Cyrillus and other Catholics: and that these noble men endeavoured to set an order and quietness among them, doth plainly show, M. Horn● argument for the exclamation returned upon himself. See the 743. leaf. col. 1. wherein these noble men's office did rest: as nothing touching the definition of any matter spiritual, but to provide that all things might be done with order, indifferency and quietness. For if a man consider, what disorder, tumult, cruelty, yea and murder too, fell in the second Ephesin Council, which customably is rather called a Conventicle, and a conspiracy, for the maintenance whereof, ye make Theodosius a very godly Emperor, and how that Dioscorus and his confederates, would not suffer the Catholic Bishop's Notaries, as the manner was, to write the acts there done: but thrusted them out, and put in Notaries of his own at his pleasure, how he came to the other notaries and broke their writings and fingers to: See the 750. leaf. 1. &. 2. col See the 847. leaf col. 2. how that he forced the bishops to subscribe to a blank: that is, in clean paper, wherein nothing was written: how that, Dioscorus would not suffer the epistle of Leo the Pope sent to the Council to be read: and finally, how that he slew the blessed Bishop Flavianus: he that, I say, considereth and well weigheth the premises, and that a great numbered of those schismatical bishops were also with Dioscorus at Chalcedo, shall soon perceive, what need there was of these noble men's assistance, & that they might well have to do there, though not in ruling and judging any spiritual matter, yet in the indifferent ruling and direction of the Catholic bishops external doings, and to see that all things might proceed with quietness and without partiality. Which answer once made, will serve also for many other General Counsels. But what a wicked Cham are you, M. Horn, that reveal to the common people in your vulgar books, the faults and disorders of your most holy and reverent Fathers, the Fathers of so famous, and so learned a Council? Verily Constantine the Great, that noble Emperor, Niceph. li 8 ca 16 would cast his Imperial garment (he said) to hide a bishops fault, if by chance he should see any. And becometh it your vocation, bearing the room of a Bishop yourself, to tell the people of the bishops hot schools, of their want of modesty, and of overshoting themselves? You a Bishop of God's Church? Nay your spirit showeth itself more bucherly than Bishoply, and as meet to carry a rake as a Rochet. M. Horn. The .49. Division. pag. 32. a. Act. 2. In the next action, the judges and Senate after rehearsal made, what was done before, do propound unto the Synod, what matters were now to be consulted of, and willeth them to make a pure exposition of the faith, and that without any sinister affection, declaring that the Emperor and they, did firmly keep and believe, according to the faith received in the Nicen Council: whereunto the Bishops also accord, and saith, that noman maketh, or may attempt to make any other exposition. Certain of the Synod desired to hear the Symbol of the Nicen Council recited, which the Senate and judges granted unto them. Stapleton. By this also it may easily be seen, wherein the duty and office of these Civil Magistrates did stand. videl. to see the Bishop's requests, of reading this book or that book, this evidence or that evidence, put in execution. And so it maketh rather against M. Horn then with him. M. Horn. The .50. Division. Pag. 32. a. After that it was agreed upon by the whole Synod, that Dioscorus should be deposed, Act. 3, 630. bishops. (.146.) confess the Prince's supremacy in Ecclesiastical causes. The .146, Untruth. most ridiculous, a● shall appear. the Synod writeth unto the emperors Valentinianus and Martianus, saying in this form: Grievous diseases needeth both a strong medicine and a wise Physician: For this cause therefore, the Lord over all hath appointed your godliness as the best and chief Physician over the diseases of the whole world, that you should heal them with fit medicines. And you most Christian Emperors, receiving commandment from God above other men, have given competent diligence for the churches, framing a medicine of concord unto the Bishops (.147.) The .147. Untruth. In concealing the next sentence following opening the whole matter. This, thus in way of Preface said, they declare what they have done touching Dioscorus, they show the cause and reasons that moved them thereunto: both that the Emperor should consider his wickedness, and also the sincerity of their sentence. Stapleton. Now lo M. Fekenham must needs yield and give over. For even the whole Council, to the number of .630. Bishops doth confess (saith M. Horn) the prince's supremacy in causes ecclesiastical (it is well, it is not yet in all causes Ecclesiastical) And therefore this note is fastened in the Margente, as it were with a tenpeny nail, and yet all not worth a heedless pin. For I beseech you, Master Horn, how can this notable conclusion of yours take any anchor hold of any sayings of the Council by you here alleged? How far and how deeply your sharp sight can pierce, I know not. But for my part I must confess myself so blind, that I can see no cause in the world why ye should furnish your margin with such a jolly note. Well, I perceive every man can not see through a millstone: But yet either my sight and my brain to, faileth me, or all this great proof standeth in this, that the Council calleth the Emperors, the best and chief physicians over the diseases of the world, for framing a medicine of concord to the Bishops: By my trowth, it is well and worshipfully concluded, and ye were worthy at the least, to be made a apothecary for your labour. Saving that it is to be feared, if ye should proceed on the body, as ye do now with the soul, ye would kill many a poor man's body, with your old rotten drugs, as ye do now kill many a soul with your pestiferous poisoned drawght of heretical potions, they take at your hands. But now to answer to you, and to your so far fet physic: A Copy of M. jewels rhetoric in his Reply, the 225. page. I pray you M. Horn, why do ye cut of the tail of your own tale? Why do ye not suffer the fathers to speak their whole mind? And to ruffle a little in M. jewels rhetorycke, what? were the fathers stayed with the choygnecoughe, and forced to break of their matter and tale in the midst? Mark well gentle reader, and thou shall see the whole Council of .630. bishops set to school, and kept in awe, and not suffered to utter one word more, than M. Horn will give them leave. For the next words that immediately follow in the same matter are these. Act. 3. fol. 861. col. 1. Pontificibus concordiae medicinam machinantes: undique enim nos congregantes omne commodastis auxilium, quatenus factae interimantur discordiae & paternae fidei doctrina roboretur. For you (say the fathers to the Emperors) assembling us from all places, have helped all that may be, to pacify and kill these divisions and dissensions, and that the faith and doctrine of our fathers may be strengthened. What word is here M. Horn, that any thing toucheth your purpose? Here is nothing, but that the council was assembled by their good help, which as I have often declared, serveth not your turn to make them supreme heads. Now because through their means the Council came together, in the which a quietness was set in religion, the Council calleth them physicians, why the fathers call the Emperors the chief Physicians. yea and the chief: as they were chief in deed, in respect of their civil authority wherewythe they did assist the Council, and did help by this ministery of theirs, not by any judicial sentence, or other Ecclesiastical act (which ye shall never show) to quiet and pacify the great dissensions then reigning and raging. And so were they physicians in deed, but the outward not the inward physicians. The fathers were the inward physicians. They made the very potion, for the disease. And because we are on's entered into the talk of physicians, they were the very physicians of the soul. The scripture saith of the king: regem honorificate: honour the king, 1, Pet. 2. Ecclesiast. 38. 1. Timo. 5. Heb. 13. Ecclesi. 4. it saith also of the physician: honora medicum. Honour the physician. But what sayeth it of the priest? The priests, sayeth S. Paul, that govern well are worthy of double honour: again, obey your rulers (meaning the Ecclesiastical rulers) for they watch to give a reckoning for your souls. And the Ecclesiasticus sayeth, humble thy soul to the pressed. So that ye may see M. Horn, the priests to be the true and highest physicians, as far passing and exceeding the other physicians, as the soul passeth and exceedeth the body: and then must the spiritual primacy needs remain in them. And that do these judges here even in this Action, expressly protest and confess against you. For they say touching the point of doctrine then in question. Quod placuit reverendo Concilio de sancta fide, ipsum nos doceat. Let the Reverend Council itself teach us and inform us, what is their pleasure touching the holy faith: You see here, they took no suprem government in this cause ecclesiastical, in determining, I say, the true faith: (as you will make Princes believe they may and aught to do) they yet being the emperors deputies, but learned humbly of the holy Council, what their determination in such matters was. Thus at the length your great mighty ●ost, is thwyghted to a pudding prick. Neither shall ye be able of all these .630. bishops to bring one, that maintained your pretenced supremacy. And when he proveth it to you good reader by these 630. bishops, or by any one of them I dare say M. Fekenham will take the oath, and so will I to. For it is as true, as the nobles gave sentence to depose Dioscorus and others. Who is not, as yet deposed and that will I prove by M. Horn himself: who saith, that in this action the whole synod agreed, M. Horn contrary to himself in on leaf. that Dioscorus should be deposed: and so full prettily doth he call back that he said not fifteen lines before: and proveth himself, against himself, that their saying was no sentence. M. Horn. 51. Division. Pag. 32. b. In the fourth Action, when the rehearsal of all things passed before was done, the judges and Senate asketh if all the Bishops agree: whereunto they answered yea, yea. The Synod had requested the judges and the Senate, to make suit to the Emperor for five Bishops, which otherwise (.148.) The .148. untruth. There is no such must in all the Council. must be deposed, as was Dioscorus, which they did, and made this relation unto the Synod: That the Emperor, perceiving the humble suit of the Synod, doth licence them to determine touching the five, what they thought good: admonishing them notwithstanding, to give good heed what they did: for that they must make an account to God of their doings. Stapleton. M. Horn would fain fasten some ecclesiastical judgement, upon these lay men, as the deposition of certain bishops: which he shall find, when he can find that they deposed Dioscorus. It is plain, saith M. Horn, for the whole council maketh humble suit, to the Emperor, to licence them to determine touching five bishops, which otherwise Must be deposed, as Dioscorus was. Ha good M. Horn, have ye found now at the length, a must? That is well and in high time espied out of you, or else all these your great doings must lie in the mire. But I believe when we have all done, we shall find no must, but a plain mist, that ye like a wily shrew, have cast before the eyes of the simple readers, to blind them withal. If I say not true, them like a true man of your word point with your finger, the leaf and line where, in all the acts of this council your must lieth. I am assured, that neither in the 4. action whereby ye now plead, nor in the .1. action, whereby ye have already pleaded (which both places spoke of those five bishops) is any muttering in the world of your musting. Truth it is that in the first action, these senators, thowght it reasonable, that Dioscorus and these five bishops, being the ringleaders of that wicked conventicle at Ephesus, should be deposed, but not by the way of any final or judicial sentence, as ye fable. But as they thowght them worthy to be deprived, so neither did they deprive them, nor thought themselves or the Emperor meet parsons to deprive them, but the council. A sancto concilio secundum regulas, ab episcopali dignitate fieri alienos. Pag. 831. col. 2. And therefore immediately followeth that they should be put, from all their bishoply dignity. But by whom M. Horn? A sancto Concilio: by the holy council. And how I pray you? secundùm regulas. according to the canons. Then here standeth the case. The Emperor, and not without cause, was in this mind, that as they might and ought by the Canons to have been deprived, so that execution should have been done accordingly: for example sake, as it was allredye done upon Dioscorus. And yet leaving the final determination (as otherwise he could not choose, if he would follow the Canons by his deputies alleged) to the Bishops. And this is the Licence ye falsely speak of. The true meaning of the place by M. Horn alleged. Anno. 25. Hen. 8. c. 19 Sententiae vestrae permisit deliberare de Thalassio & quae vobis placuerint. Fol. 872. col. 2. Liberatus. in Brevia. cap. 13. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Quia consenserant in subscriptione epistolae Leonis, etc. For properly licence it was none, neither doth the latin word enforce it, but that he permitted and suffered them to do therein their pleasure: which words do not necessarily declare his ordinary authority to let them (as the Prince may let your Convocation Decrees by act of Parliament) but only the giving over and yielding to the Fathers, in that matter, from his own mind and sentence, which he thought good and reasonable. The Fathers on the other side, thought not best to exact the rigour and extremity of the Canons, but seeing these five were heartily penitent, and had subscribed to the Epistle of Leo, which before they refused, and for fear of a great schism, as Liberatus noteth, that happily might by this rigorous dealing ensue, took the milder way, and suffered them to remain in their dignity, and in the Council with them. See now M. Horn, if this be not rather a mist then a must, a dark mist, I say, meet for thieves as Homer saith, and not meet, as he saith, nor acceptable to the shepherd. How unmeet then for you M. Horn, that taketh upn you to be the shepherd and pastor of so many thousand souls, that should keep your flock, from all such hurtful mists of false doctrine? Yea to feed them with the same, and to make him believe, and that by the authority of this honourable Council, that ye feed them well, and that ye must so feed them. And yet, lo, like a blind Prophet ye have said truer than ye witted of: saying they must be deposed as Dioscorus was. For Dioscorus was not deposed at all, by those whom ye fable to have given sentence. Again see what falleth out otherwise against you. For if the lay judges deposed in the first action Dioscorus, Dicta pa. 931. col. 2. Videtur nobis secundum quod Deo placitum est, justum esse si placuerit divinissimo & pijssimo Domino nostro, eidem poenae Dioscorum reverend. episcopum Alexandria, & Iwenalem reverend, episcopum Hie●os. & Thalassium etc. they deposed also these five. For all cometh under one trade and course of words. And thus every way ye walk in a mist, wandering pitifully to and fro, ye can not tell whither. M. Horn .52. Division. Pag. 32. b. In the fifth Action, the judges willed the Synod, to read those things, which were agreed upon touching the Faith: whereabout began a great contention, one part of them allowing, an other sort disallowing that was red amongst them. The judges seeing the exclamations and confusion that was amongst them, appointeth a Comitty, choosing forth of sundry parts a certain number to go aside with the judges, to make a resolution. When they prevailed nothing, they threatened the whole Synod, that they would signify these (.149.) The 149. untruth. The word disordered, lewdly added to the text, to make colour of reproach. disordered clamours unto the Emperor, which they did. The Emperor immediately of his (.150.) The .150. untruth. Not by any his supreme authority but at the bishops choice and pleasure, as shall appear. Supreme authority, appointed the order of Committees, which the judges had devised before: giving them in commandment, that going aside by themselves, they should consult and conclude a truth in Faith, with such plainness, that there might no more doubts arise thereof, whereunto all should agree. The Synod obeyed, and followed the emperors direction, and the Committees with the judges goeth a side into a secret place, maketh conference, concludeth, and cometh again into the Synod, and reciteth their determination▪ whereunto the whole Synod gave their consent, and so the judges commandeth, that this their definition should be showed unto the Emperor. Stapleton. Ye show nothing that either the Emperor or his deputies, made any definition of the faith. Now then if the Fathers could not agree, th'emperor did well to find out some means by committees to bring them to agreement, which is no spiritual matter. And so ye come not nigh to that ye should have proved by a great deal. But let us a little consider the manner of these Committees, the cause and the end thereof: and we shall see M. Horn quite overthrown with his own sway, and a most evident argument of the Pope's supremacy. At the beginning of the fift Action a form of the faith being openly read, all the Bishops cried, praeter Romanos & aliquos Orientales, beside the Romans and some of the East: Concil. Chalced. Act. 5. pa. 879. col. 2 Definitio omnibus placet. The determination pleaseth al. Upon this when they could not agree the Pope's Legate stood up, and said. If these men agree not to the letters of the Apostolic and most blessedman Pope Leo, command it that we have them copied out that we may return home, and there keep a Council. The cause of the Committees made in the v. Action. For this lo was the cause of all that garboil. Dioscorus with Eutyches were already condemned: the Nestorians in like manner. And the form of faith after a sort was agreed upon, but not in such sort as in the Pope's letters it was conceived. And against the form of the Pope's letters all the bishops of Egypt, of Asia, of Illiricum, Ponthus and Thracia, very hotly resisted, affirming that the definition was otherwise perfect enough. Which the Romans and certain of the east Bisshppes as earnestly denied. Hereupon the judges to make the matter come to an agreement, made first a Committee in this sort: that of all the foresaid provinces, three should be chosen, and they together with the Romans and six of the east bishops should confer a part. But this order being misliked, and the greater number of bishops still crying to have it pass, as it was first conceived, not passing upon the form conceived in the Pope's letters, the judges asked those that so cried, Pag. 880. col. 1. whether they allowed the letters of Pope Leo, or no? When they answered, Yea: and that they had already subscribed thereunto, the judges inferred. Let then that be added to the definition which is in those letters comprised. The Bishops of Egypt and other crying always to the contrary, the debate was signified to the Emperor. The Emperor sent back again, that they should take the order of Committye appointed, or if that liked them not, Si vobis hoc non placet, singuli fidem svam etc. Si autem neque hoc velit vestra sanctitas, cognoscite quia in partibus Occidentalibus fieri habet synodus, eó quòd etc. than they should make an other Committye by their metropolitans, and every man declare his mind, that so the matter might come to an end. But (saith the Emperor) if your Holiness will none of this neither, then know you certainly, that you shall come to a Council in the west parts, seeing you will not here agree. And this also was that the Pope's Legates before required. And the bishops of Illyricum as excusing themselves, cried. Qui contradicunt, Romam ambulent. These which do not agree, let them walk to Rome. Had Master Horn and his fellows been in that case, they would have cried: what have we to do with Rome, or with that foreign Prelate, the Pope? But the bishops and Fathers of those days knew a better obedience to the See Apostolic. And therefore in the end the Pope's Legates with a few other of the east, prevailed against all the rest of Egypt and Asia, of Illyricum, Pontus and Thracia: and indited the form of their definition of the faith, according to the tenor of Pope Leo his letters, inserting his very words to their definition. Otherwise as the Emperor and the Pope's Legates before threatened, they should all have trotted to Rome, and there have finished the Council. Such was the Authority and pre-eminence of that Apostolic See of Rome, and so well declared in this fift Action out of which M. Horn concealing the whole issue, order, and cause of the debate, thought only by a simple commyttye, to prove his Supreme Government in the prince. Thou seest now gentle Reader, that by the prince his own confession, by the Legates protestation, and by the end and issue of the whole Action, the Superiority rested in the Church of Rome, and in a Council to be had there, in case they would not presently agree. So hard it is for Master Horn to bring any one Authority, that maketh not directly against him, and manifestly for us. M. Horn. The .53. Division. Pag. 33. a. The Emperor cometh into the Synod place, in his own person, with Pulcheria, his nobles, and Senators▪ and maketh unto the Synod an oration, of this effect. He careth for nothing so much, as to have all men rightly persuaded in the true Christian faith: He declareth the occasions, * It was because he would 〈◊〉 Doctrinin Patrum. The doctrine of Fathers: wi●h you leave out. why he summoned the Synod: He commandeth that no man be so hardy, hereafter to hold opinion, or dispute of the Christian faith, otherwise than was decreed in the first Nicene council, he chargeth them therefore, that all partaking, contention, and covetousness laid apart the only truth may appear to all men. He declareth his coming into the Synod, to be for none other cause, than (.151.) The 151. untruth, in dissembling a great part of the Sentence. to confirm the faith, and to remove from the people in time to come, all dissension in Religion. And last of all, he protesteth his whole care, and study, that all people may be brought into an unity, and uniform agreement in pure religion, by true and holy doctrine. The chief Notary humbly asketh of the Emperor, if it will please him to hear their * Ergo. it was before defined w●●hout the emperor royal assent. definition red: The Emperor willeth that it should be recited openly: he inquireth of them all, if every man consented thereunto: they answer, that it is agreed upon by all their consents. Whereunto they add many acclamations, commending the worthiness of his Imperial government, concluding: By the O worthy Emperor, the right faith is confirmed, heresies banished, peace restored, and the Church reformed. After these acclamations, the Emperor doth openly declare unto the Synod a * For execution of the Council. statute, which he maketh to cut of and put away from thenceforth, all manner occasion of contention about the true faith, and holy Religion. The whole Synod desireth the Emperor, to dissolve the council, and to (.152.) The 152. untruth. No such words in the Acted give them leave to depart: whereunto the Emperor would not consent, but (.153.) The 153. untruth, as before commandeth that none of them departed. Stapleton. Here is nothing, whereupon ye should frame any conclusion of Supremacy. Concerning Marcians oration we have spoken somewhat before: and now ye give us more occasion, especially to note your true and accustomable faith, in the true rehearsal of your Author. For if ye had not here maimed and mangled your own allegation, ye had made yourself a full answer, for all this your bible babble, to prove the emperors supremacy, for that they called or were present in the Counsels. We (saith this noble Emperor) are come into this present Council, How and why Princes are present in Counsels. not to take upon us or to practise any power therein, but to strengthen and confirm the faith, therein following the example of the religious prince Constantine. By which words he declareth, that the emperors authority and power taketh no place in the Council, to determine or define any thing (which neither is found of the doings of Constantine, or this Marcian, or of any other good Prince) but only by civil penalties, to confirm and strengthen the decrees, as did Constantine, and as this Emperor did also, as appeareth by his words spoken to the Synod, Fol. 893. col. 2. in this sixth action by you recited. These words of Marcian ye have cut from the residue of the sentence: lest otherwise it should have by Marcian himself appeared that ye were but a glosar, a Pope's glosar I say, as your brother Mollineus is: when ye wrote of the five Bishops, Multum quidem estis itinere fatigati, laborem perferentes. veruntamen sustinete tres adhuc aut quatuor dies. Et presentitibus magnificentiss. nostris iudicib. quaecumque vultis movete, competens aedepturi solatium. Nullus vestrum antequam perfecti termini ex omnib. proferā●ur à S. concilio discedat. Fol. 894. col. 1. that otherwise must have been deposed. Concerning the staying of the Fathers, that would have departed, which ye enforce as a thing material, if ye had not followed your accustomable guise of dismembering your Author, ye should have found a small matter. Ye have (saith Marcian to the Fathers) been much wearied by your journey: and have taken great pains. Yet bear you, and stay you for iij. or four days longer: And our honourable judges being present, move you what matter your heart desireth, and ye shall not fail of convenient comfort. But let no man departed, till all things be fully finished. What leave is there asked here to departed, or what commandment is made to stay and tarry? No, no, M. Horn: Princes were not then so Imperial over Bishops, as your dissolute heresies have caused of late some to be. M. Horn. The .54. Division. pag. 33. b. Bassianus, of late the Bishop at Ephesus, complaineth unto the Emperor, to direct his letters to the Synod, to have his cause heard. The Emperor commandeth the Synod to hear the matter. The judges commandeth Stephanus Bishop of Ephesus, to make answer unto Bassianus his complaint. After due examination had by the judges, openly in the Synod in this controversy, the judges asked of the Synod, what they judged to be done. The Bishops adjudged Bassianus to be restored. But the judges appointed by the Emperor, would not (.154.) The .154 Untruth. They neither allowed nor disallowed any sentence of the Council, but showed only their advise and mind. allow that sentence, but deemed neither of them both worthy to occupy that bishopric, and that there should be a third chosen, and admitted to that see, to the which (155) The .155. Untruth. It was no judgement at all. judgement the whole synod did accord. After the end of this Council, the Emperor doth confirm the determination thereof by his public Decree. Stapleton. M. Horn will not leave his laical judgement so: (being marvelous propense and inclined that way) belike because, he is become by the Canons a lay man himself, through his unlawful marriage: and therefore yet once again, they by their judgement, if we will credit M. Horn, do reverse the judgement of the whole Synod, in the cause of Bassianus and Stephanus. In deed, if M. Horn could prove, that the whole council had first given sentence, here had been somewhat for him with some good countenance, to have set forth and furnished his new primacy withal. But now neither the whole Synod gave yet judgement in the cause, neither was it any judgement given by the lay men, more than was before against Dioscorus. For lo, M. Horn, they say, nobis videtur, it seemeth to us. But will ye see it is no sentence? Then I pray you mark well what followeth. Act. 11. pag 915. col. ● Totum autem concilio sancto relinquimus quatenus sententiam quae in haec causa fuerit visa, depromat. After they had told their mind and opinion, they add and say: But we leave the whole matter to the Council, to give what sentence, it shall please them in this matter. Ye will say, yet the whole Council followed the advise of the judges. Then it appeareth it was but an advise, no sentence that they gave forth before. Else it were marvel, if so suddenly they went from their own determination. But will ye see, how wisely this matter is handled of M. Horn? If the first was a resolute and a final sentence of the whole Council, what authority had the lay men to infringe it? Or how can ye say they did infringe it, when they left afterward the whole determination thereof to the Council? Thus ye see every way, that the more ye strive and struggle in this matter, and with this council, the more ye mesh and entangle yourself. But perchance as ye see, or may see if ye be not blind, that ye are in the pit or fast in the mire: so ye see not how to get out. And ye will say, as ye say and truly to, that the judges asked the Synod, In talibus sanct. Conc. contingit frequenter, unum ex praesentibus reverend, episcopis aliquid dicere, & quod ab uno dictum est, tamquam ab oimbus simul dicatur, & subscribatur & intelligatur. hoc ab exordio subsecutum est in tantum ut uno dicente. scribamus, sancta Synodus dixit. Act. 1. pa. 791. col. 2. what was to be done, and that they adjudged Bassianus to be restored. I grant ye Sir: ye play now the true reporter: but either ye do not, or will not understand that which ye report. For ye shall find a rule, and that even in this Synod, that sometime it is written (by the Notary) the Synod saith, when the whole Synod sayeth not, but some of the Synod. And ye being so well travailed by yourself, or your friends in this Synod, should have considered this rule, necessary to bring you out of the pit of error ye are fallen in. Well perchance, as ye lack no courage, ye will not so give over, and will say the matter fareth not so here: and when it is said The judges asked the Synod, * the true understanding of the place by M. Horn alleged. it must be taken for the whole Synod. Now you put me to my shift in deed: But I trust to shift which you well enough. What say ye them to Liberatus, by you oft reheresed, that sayeth as I say, that the whole Synod did not agree, that Bassianus should be restored, but part of the Synod: and therefore the matter was put over to an other meeting, at which meeting the whole Synod uniformly agreed, that aswell Bassianus as Stephanus should be removed? In case this answer will not content you I will I am assured, if any most reasonable answer will content you, set you over to such witnesses, as yourself hitherto have best liked and sought all your help and aid for your supremacy at their hands: I mean your judges and senators the emperors deputies. For whereas ye allege the matter, as finally determined in the .11. action, the very same matter was resumed in the .12. action. Because (say they) that after our oft moving the matter to you, and requiring, that ye would give sentence concerning the bishopric of the holy Church of Ephesus, Gloriosissimi judices dixerunt. Quoniam sepe nobis interloquentibus & pescentibus proferri sententiam de episcopatu sancta Ecclesiae in Epheso constituto, perfecta responsio non est data, Venerabile etc. Act. 12 pa. 916. col. 3. there is no perfect and resolute answer made: Let the holy gospel etc. I trust by this time M. Horn, ye will wisely give over this matter of Bassianus and of all the residue of this Council, that ye have unjustly pleaded upon: and require of us to believe you no better, than ye can show cause. unless ye will have us upon your bare word to credit you. which I think wise men, will not be to hasty to do, except ye can show some as good commission, as the Apostles had. For the bringing forth whereof, we are content to give you a good long day. As for this council whereupon ye would seem your proofs should rest, ye have not showed it to us by any good and clear light, but as ye have done before, the Nicen and Ephesine, very obscurely and unperfectly. The .14. Chapter. Containing evident proofs out of the Chalcedon Council, for the Popes and bishop's Supremacy, in causes ecclesiastical. NOw good Reader thowghe M. Horn be sufficiently already answered for the solutions of his arguments, as we need not greatly to stay here longer, yet if we can show you no fairer nor clearer light, for the illustration and confirmation of our assertion, and that even from this council, then M. Horn hath done for his: than for my part, I shall yield to M. Horn, and so I suppose M. Feckenham will to. Wherefore following M. Horns trace and steps we will run over the Acts of the said Council, though wondered long and tedious, and compendiously gather some material thing for our side. Act. 1. pa. 737. col. 1. b Paschasio & Lucentio reverend. Episcopis, & Bonifacio religiosiss. presbytero tenentibus locum sanctiss. et reverendiss. ●rchiepis. almae urbis Romae Leonis Anatolio etc. Act. 1. pa 741. co. 1. Turrian Quia Synodum facere ausus est sine authoritate Romanae sedis: quod numquam ritè factum est, nec fieri licuit Rome head of all Churches. Act. 1. p. 740. co 2 c Romam ●cclesiarum omnium caput. Act. 1. pag. 741. col. 1. a. First then to begin with the first Session, it is most certain, that the Pope's Legates, be named and placed before all other Bishops and Patriarches, though one of them was but a Priest and no Bishop. Here shall ye find the wicked B. of Alexandria called to an account for maintaining the doings of a Council, whereunto the B. of Rome gave no consent or authority, which (as it is avouched there) was never lawful to do. Here shall ye find and hear Rome called the Head of all Churches. Here shall ye find that Pope Leo gave commandment to his Legates, that they should not suffer Dioscorus to sit among th'other Bishops, but to stand as a person accused, and defendant, and so the Legates told the Senators, and that in case they would suffer the matter to go other wise, that they should be excommunicated: and thereupon he was commanded to sit in the middle a part from the rest. Here shall ye find that the learned Bishop of Cyrus Theodoretus, deposed by Dioscorus and Maximus his own patriarch, was received and placed among the bishops, Euag: lib. 2. ca 16. Dioscorus commanded by Leo to stā●, and not to be placed among the bishops. Universal Bishop. because Leo had restored him. Here shall ye find that nor lay men, nor Priests, have voice in the Council, but Bishops only. Here it appeareth why the Civil Magistrate is present in the Council: not to geave sentence, or to Act. 1. pa. 742. a. Recipiens locum a Sanctiss. episcopo inclytae urbis Romae. The Pope restoreth Thedoretus the bishop. Act. 1. pa. 775. col. 1. a. Petrus Presbyt. dixit. Non est meum subscribere, episcoporum tantum est. It appertaineth to bishops only to subscribe in Council. bear the greatest sway there in matters Ecclesiastical, as M. Horn imagineth: but, as it appeareth by Theodosius the emperors commission given to the Earl Elpidius, to see there be no tumult, Nullum fieri tumultum permittere, sed si quem videretis conturbationibus & tumultui studentem, ad les●ionē sanctae fidei, hunc cusiodiae mancipare, & ad nostram perferre notitiam & causam quidem ordine provenire, interest autem judicio, et operam dare celerens & circumspectam probationem à sancta Synodo fieri. Act. 1. pa. 744. b. and in case he see any troublesome or tumultuous person, to the hurt and hindrance of the Catholic faith, to imprison him, and to certify th'emperor of him, to see the matters proceed orderly, to be present at the judgement giving and to procure that the Council speedily and circumspectly prove their matters. In this Session ye shall find that not only Flavianus, that godly Bishop and patriarch of Constantinople wrongfully deposed by Dioscorus, appealed to Rome, but that Eutyches also that Archeheretique, justly condemned by Flavianus, for his relief, pretended an appellation made to Leo by himself. In the second Session Leo his Epistle was read, the Council crieth out, Why lay men are present in Counsels. Petrus per Leonem locutus est. Peter hath spoken out of Leos mouth. But of all, the third Session is so freighted with ample and plain testimonies for the Ecclesiastical Primacy, Act. 1. p. 790. col. 1. c. & 823. col. 2. that I must rather seek to restrain and moderate them, then to amplify or enlarge them. In this third Session, Appeals to Rome from Constantinople. Pope Leo is called the universal archbishop, the universal patriarch, the Bisshopee of the universal Church, Act. 2. pag. 834 col. 1. b. the Pope of the universal Church the Catholic or universal Pope. And now must M. jewel, if he be a true man of his word, yield and subscribe: Peter speaketh in Leo. being answered even Universal Bishop, Act. 3. pa. 839 col. 2. b. 840. col. 2. b. Universal Patriarch. pa. 842 col. 2. b. 844. col. 2. a. universalis Ecclesia Papae. 858. col. 1. b. Catholicum Papam Leonem. pa. 835. col. 2 a. by the very precise words and terms of his own, though pevishlye and foolishly proposed, question: The pope universal bishop. M. jewel must subscribe. Act. 3. pag. 847. col. 2. b. etc. The pope's legates give ●en●ence against Dioscorus the Patriarch of Alexandria. Leo per nos & per praesentem Synodum, unà cum ●er beatiss. & omni laud digno beato Petro Apostolo, qui est petra & crepido catholicae ecclesiae, & ille qui est rectae fidei fundamentum, nudavit eu● tam episcopatus dignitate quam etiam ab omni sacerdotali alienavit ministerio. In this session the Pope's Legates pronounce sentence against Dioscorus, the patriarch of Alexandria, and do, by the Authority of Leo and S. Peter, (who is called there, the Rock and the top cliff of the Catholic Church) deprive him of all priestly ministry and bishoply dignity, for that he communicated with Eutyches being by a Council condemned, for that he presumed to excommunicate Pope Leo, and being thrice per●mptorely summoned to the Council would not come. And how are ye now M. Horn and your fellows to be countted bishops, that refuse, the authority of the general Council of Trent, and durst no more show your face there, then durst Dioscorus at Chalcedo? And can no better defend the deposition of the Catholic Bishops in England, then could Dioscorus, the deposition of Flavianus at Ephesus? And to say the truth, ye can much less defend yourself. And where is now your act of parliament, that annichilatteh and maketh void all Ecclesiastical Authority, saving of such persons as are inhabitants, within the realm? Dioscorus was a fool that could find no such defence for himself: Our protestant bishops are in the same case as Dioscorus was. or else he needed not to have passed a button for the Council of Chalcedo: Unless happily we think we have a special privilege, and as we be environed, and as it were walled up, from the world by the great Ocean sea, as the poet writeth of us: Et penitus toto divisos orb Britannos: so we may take ourselves to be exempted and closed up from the faith and religion of all Catholic people in the world. Act. 3. pa. 858. col. 1. b. 835. col. 2. b. Paschasius vice beatissimi Leonis presidens suscripsi, dict. pag. 858. The pope's legate precedent of the Council. Act. 3. pag. 867. col. 1. b. Vocis beati petri orbi constitutus interpres. The council confesses ●eo to be their head and ruler. Quibus tu quidem, sicut membris caput praeeras, in his qui tuum tenebant ordinem benevolentiam praeseferens. Imperatores verò ad ornandum decentissimè praesidebant, sicut Zorozabel & jesus Ecclesiae Hierusalem aedificationem renovare circa dogmata adni●ētes. Act. 3. in relatione synodi ad Leonem pa. 867. col. 1. Act. 2. pag. 867. col 2. a. Cui vineae custodia a saluatore commissa est. Act. 3. pag. ●68 col. 2. a. Rogamus igitur & ●uis decretis nostrum honora iudic●um, et sicut nos cu●i●i in bon●s adiecimus consonantiam, sic et firmit as tua filijs (quod dece●) adim●leat, et mox Omnem volis gestorum vim insinuavimus ad comprobationem nostrae sinceritatis et ad eorum quae à nobis gesta sunt, firmitatem et consonantiam. But let us go forth with hour matter: Ye shall then find in this third session, that the Pope's Legate was president of the Council for Leo, and subscribed before all other. In this session the whole Council calleth Leo the interpreter of S. Peter's voice to all people. In this session the whole Council sayeth that Leo, them far of at Rome, was precedent and ruler of the Council, as the Head is ruler of the body. And that themperors were precedents there most decently, to adorn and set forth the same, endeavouring to renew the building of the Church of Jerusalem concerning matters of faith, as did Zorobabel and jesus in the old law. And this place only were sufficient, to answer your whole book, and to show either your ignorance or froward quarreling in making such a stir and business, for Prince's authority in Counsels. In this session the whole synod saith, that the keeping of the vineyard (that is of the whole Church) was committed of God to L●o. In this session the whole Council, thowghe Leo his Legates were present, and confirmed all things that there passed touching matters of faith, doth yet nevertheless pray Leo himself also to confirm their decrees. And here might the Author of your Apology Master Horn, if it pleased him, as merely have jested and scoffed against these .630. Fathers, as he doth against the Fathers of the late Council at Trent, for the clause: salva Apostolicae sedis authoritate: Here might be demanded of these .630. Fathers, what they needed in this case, the matter being resolved upon by the whole Council, yea by his own deputies to, to send to Rome to Pope Leo, to have their decrees yet further confirmed? Here also might be demanded of those 630. The childish toys of the Englis he Apology. Fathers, whether it were not a mere folly to think the holy ghost posted to Rome: that if he staggered or stayed in any matter, Themperor Marcian desireth Leo to confirm the father's decrees. Epist. 59 & 60. he might there take Council, of an other holy ghost better learned, with such other childish or rather jewish toys. Neither the Council only, but Marcian also the Emperor prayed Leo, to confirm that which there was concluded of the faith. In this session the Senators (that ye would needs have to be the chief judges) desire they may be taught of the fathers of this Council such things as appertain to the faith, The Senators require to be taught of the fathers. as of them that should give a reckoning aswell for their souls, Scientesigitur quia, & Deo rationem reddituri estis tam pro animabus singuli vestri, quam & pro nostris omnibus qui & doceri, quae ad religionem pertinent, rectè desideramus. Act. 3. pag. 832. col. 2. a. Eu●ebius the bishop beseecheth the Council he may be restored to his bishopric. Et dum adhuc in memoria retinetis, quae antea inter nos & praesatum Dioscorum acta sunt, decernite omnia quae adversus nos gesta sunt viribus career: & nihil nobis ea monumenta quae iniustè contra nos facta sunt nocere. Habere verò nos & sacerdotalem dignitatem etc. Quod impetrantes incessanter gratias agamus vestrae sanctitati. as for their own souls. Now where as ye catch as it were a certain ankerhold of the supplication of Eusebius of Dorileum: consider I beseech you his supplication to the Council too, and weigh them both with the balance of indifferent judgement. I pray and most humbly beseech your holiness holy father: (saith he) to have mercy on us. And while the things passed betwixt Dioscorus and me, be it in fresh remembrance, decree you all those doings to be void, Act. 3. pag. 836. col. 1. a. The authority to give sentence of deposition or excommunication given ●o the bishops by God. and that those things which wrongfully passed against us, may not be prejudicial or hurtful to us, and that we may be restored to our bishoply dignity again: which if we obtain, we shall for ever give thanks to your holiness. In this session ye shall find, that it was no final or resolutory sentence that the Senators gave against Dioscorus, joannes episcop. Germaniciae ad Dioscorun Senatus adversus tuam reverentiam promulgavit sententiam si hoc placuisset sanctissimis episcopis quibus hanc inferre à Domino Deo creditum est. but a declaration of their mind and resolution: the full authority notwithstanding remaining in the Bishops to whom (and not to the Senatorus) God had given authority to give such kind of sentences. Further now, though I have already sufficiently showed the insufficiency and feebleness of that your weak collection: yet because ye have so honourably adorned your margin, with no less than 630. Father's confessing your supremacy, and all for that they call th'emperor the best and chief physician: Act. 3. pag. 846. col. 1. c. I will be so bold, although but a poor and a secondary physician, to say somewhat more to your great and far fetched, neither good theological, nor good physical argument, and to return your wise physical reason upon your own head by the very same fathers, and the very same place that yourself allege. For even in the same page, it followeth, M. Horns mighty great physical note returned upon his own head. that perchance Dioscorus might bave obtained pardon, of those his so great and excessive enormities if being as the case required throughly penitent he had sowght for a medicine at the hands of the Council. Et sortè super tantis ac talibus iniquitatibus veniam adipisci potuisset, si per dignam poenitentiam adscisceret medicinam ab hoc universali Concilio. Vide & sequentia, Act 3. pag. 861. col. 1. c. But because he endured in obstinacy, he was cut away by deposition and excommunication from the Church, as a rotten and pestiferous member, to save and preserve the residue of the body. Behold master Horn, the fathers are now the physicians that might have cured Dioscorus (if he had been curable) of his disease: Marcian confesseth the fathers to be the physicians. Tandem remedia culpabilis erroris inventa sunt. & mox: Sacerdotes quid observari in religione debeat, perspicua definitione docuerunt. Act. 3. pag. 863. col. 1. c. These fathers inquire of faith by Pope Leo his authority. Fidem diligenter inquirit authoritate beatiss. Leonis. Act. 3. pag. 865. col. 2. a. Sancta & magna synodo habente regularem potestatem. Act. 3. pag. 865. col. 2. a. The Emperors by their law can not condemn them whose belief the council alloweth. ??? Quia non possunt sacerdotes constitutione damnari, quos synodicum ornat super conseruanda religione judicium. Act. 3. pag. 865. b. Act. 4. pag. 872. col. 1. c. Qui a vobis damnatus est ignorant divo Vertice, & nobis. Dioscorus condemned without th'emperors knowledge or his deputies. Act. 3. pa. 837. co. 1. b Obse●ro ut judices nunc sint praesen●es. Quando quaedam regularia examinantur, neque judices neque aliquos laicosinteresse oportet. Act 3. pag. 838. col. 2. c. evag. li. 2. c. 16. Niceph. li. 15. cap. 30. Lay men ought not to be in the council when matters of reformation are in hand Propter fidem non est damnatus Dioscorus. Act. 5. pa. 880. col. 1. a. D●oscorus was not condemned for matters of faith. ??? The bishops that did not agree, be threatened to be sent to Rome. Act. 5. p. 880. col. 2. a Qui contradicunt, Romam ambulent. The fathers give up the sentence, not the Emperor or his agentes. Act. 5 pag. 882. Desinimus igitur. etc. Si episcopi fuerint, alienos ab episcopatu, & clericos à clero: si verò monachi aut laici fuerint, anathematizari. Act. 5. pag. 885. universalis Synodus discordiam, quae adversus rectam & catholicam fidem exorta est, expelli fecit. etc. Act. 6. pa. 889. co. 1. c The form of the Pope's Legates subscription. Paschasinus episcopus vice domini mei beatiss. atque Apostolici universalis Ecclesiae Papae urbis Romae Leonis Synodo praesidens statui, consensi, & subscripsi. Wherein standeth Marcian the Emperor's confirmation. pag. 893. col. 2. a. The Pope confirmeth the election of the Bishop of Antioch. Sanctus ac beatiss. Papa Episcopatum Maximi Episcopi Antiochenae Ecclesiae confirmavit. Act. 7. p. 896. c. 1. a. Rome ever had the primacy. Roma semper habuit primatum. Act. 10. pa. 910. c. 1. Act. 12. pag. 916. Act. 16. pa. 938. co. 1. c The Pope an invincible champion against all errors. unde nobis impenetrabile in omni errore propugnatorem Deus providit Roma. Ecclesiae Papam. Act. 16. p. 940. c. 2. a. Act. 16. p. 938. c. 1. c. The Pope would not allow the decree of the Council concerning the advancing of the patriarch of Constanti. Leo. ep. 59 & 61. add Iwenalem & alios episcop. Chalced. Synodi. Leo. ep. 71. ad Anat. and notwithstanding he was the captain of that mischievous conventicle at Ephesus, he might if he had sowght for it accordingly, have found perchance favour, not at the Emperors, but at the counsels hands, and neither been deposed nor excommunicated. Yea the Emperor Marcian himself confesseth, that these fathers found out a remedy for those naughty errors. And how I pray you? Because they made a plain and an open determination, what was to be observed concerning faith and religion. Thus at the length your gay and fresh, your mighty and notable note of .630. Father's confessing your physical supremacy is not worth one pipte nut. In this session ye shall find, that this most famous Council did diligently inquire upon matters of faith: By whose authority M. Horn think you? By the Emperors? Nay. But by the authority of the most blessed Leo: as the emperors Valentinian and Marcian themselves confess. I trust now also ye will the better believe these .630. Fathers, saying to Dioscorus, that they had the regular and ordinary authority against him. What say you now, for yourself and your fellows? How will ye maintain the unlawful deposing of the Catholic bishops, and other in the realm by by your civil and parliament authority, seeing that the emperors Valentinian and Marcian write, that those Bishops can not by th'emperors law be condemned, whom the ecclesiastical Council commendeth for true religion? Many things else are to be said out of this Session, but I will break of, and shortly run over the residue: noting this only for the .4. Session, that it is there declared, that Dioscorus was deprived and excommunicated to, by the Pope's Legates and the Council: the emperors deputies, which in all other Sessions were present, being then absent, and without themperors or their knowledge. Which giveth a check mate to all your supremacy, and to all your book withal: yea and that with a silly pawn of one only line. This is so declared as I say, in the fourth session: but the sentence passed against Dioscorus in the third session, Dioscorus not daring to show his face, and requiring, that th'emperors vicegerents might be there present: to whom answer was made, that when matters of correction and reformation are in hand, as these were (for Dioscorus was not condemned for heresy and matters of faith, but for his disobedience against the pope, the council, and the canons) neither the judges, nor any lay men ought to be present. Which answer M. Horn, for all your heving and sheving, against the ecclesiastical reformation, giveth an other pawn mate also in one short sentence, to a great part of your book, and to all such ecclesiastical visitation as is given to the prince, by act of parliament. In the fift session a little variance fell among the Fathers for the framing of the final sentence: whereupon the Senators said, that if they did not agree, a Council should be kept in the west parties: meaning at Rome. The Bishops of Illyricum cried (as I have before showed) they that do not agree, let them trudge to Rome. In this session when they were all afterwards agreed, the final and resolute sentence of the matter in controversy, with a denunciation of deposition and curse against such as should repine against it, is pronounced by the Bishops, without any voice or consent of th'emperor, or of his agents. In the sixth session was present Marcian th'emperor with the noble and virtuous Empress Pulcheria, to whom Aetius the archdeacon of Constantinople declared, that now the discord lately risen among the people in matters of faith, was pacified by the holy Council: and then read to him their final determination and sentence. Unto the which sentence were annexed the subscripions of all the Bishops: And first of the Pope's vicegerent, after the form of these words. I Bishop Paschasine Precedent of the Council, in the stead of my most blessed Lord; and the Apostolical Pope of the universal Church, of the City of Rome, Leo, have determined, consented and subscribed. Then follow the subscriptions of his two colleages, one of them being no bishop: after whom Anatolius the Patriarch of Constantinople, and so other patriarchs and bishops. Marcian seeing the full and uniform consent of all these .630. bishops, doth allow and confirm their decree, and strengtheneth it with a civil and political punishment appointed against the transgressors. And in this properly resteth the Prince's office and authority, in affairs ecclesiastical. In the seventh session it is declared, that the election of Maximus bishop of Antioch was confirmed by Pope Leo. In the tenth Action, it is openly avouched, quia missi Apostolici semper in Synodis prius loqui & confirmare soliti sunt. That the Pope's legates were always wont in Counsels to speak first and to confirm first. In the twelfth Action the controversy about the Bishop of Ephesus was ended by the Council, not by th'emperors deputies, as it hath been showed. In the .16. and last Session, it is said, that Rome ever had the primacy: The whole council sayeth to th'emperor, that God had provided for them an invincible champion against all errors, meaning of Pope Leo. In this session a great part of the fathers thowghe contrary to the Nicene decrees, advanced the patriarch of Constantinople, to gratify th'emperor making his chief abode there, above the patriarches of Alexandria, Antiochia, and Jerusalem. But the Pope's Legates would not thereto agree, no nor Leo himself: though the whole Council besought him: but confirmed all other things that the Council had determined upon: and caused Anatolius the patriarch of Constantinople, to surcease from this his ambitious claim: and to confess his fault. Last of all in a letter of Paschasinus one of the Pope's Legates in that Council touching the condemnation of Dioscorus, this pope Leo is expressly called, Caput universalis Ecclesiae. Head of the universal Church. Many other things might be gathered for this purpose, Tom 1. Conc. pag. 945 Gregor. lib. 4. epist. 38, Cap. 14. as well out of the Acts of this Council as otherwhere, especially that S. Gregory writeth that of this holy Council, his predecessors were called Universal Bisshppes. M. Horn. The .55. Division. Pag 33. b. This Synod being finished, the Emperor banished Dioscorus into the City of Gangrene. Which thing done: The nobles of the City (saith Liberat●s) assembled together to choose one, both for life and learning, worthy of the bishopric: for this wa● (.156.) The .156. untruth Nipping of the Author alleged, as shall appea●e. Lib. c. 15. commanded by the emperors Decrees. At the length P●oteriu● v●●s ●ade Bishop: against whom the seditious people raised one ●imotheus Hellu●us, or Aelurus, who in conclusion, murdered Proterius. The catholic Bissoppes, which maintained the Chalcedon council, made humble supplication unto Leo the Emperor, both to revenge the death of Proterius, and also (.157) The .157. untruth. Not to depose, but, ut expelleretur to expel to banish to depose Timotheus Hellurus, as one not Lawfully instituted in the Bishopric on the contrary part, other Bishops make supplication v●to h●m, in the defence of Timotheus, and against the Chalcedon council. When Leo the Emperor had considered the matter of both their supplications, for good and godly considerations he written his letters to the Bishops of every city, declaring both these causes, and willing them to send him (.158) The .158. untruth false translation. Consulens quid fi●ri oporteret Ask counsel what he should do. Cap. 16 their advise, what was best to be done: from whom he received answer, that the Chalcedon Council is to be maintained even unto ●eath: whereupon the Emperor writeth to S●ila his Lieutenant of Alexandria, that he should maintain the Chalce●on Council. Stila did as the Emperor commanded: he expelled Timotheus Hellurus, and (.159.) The 159. untruth Liberatus saith that an other was placed, decree to populi, which you leave out. placed an other in his room, named Timotheus S●lefacialius, or Albus, who lived quietly all ●he reign of Leo, and Zeno, the Emperors, till Basilicus got the Empire, who restored Timotheus the Heretic: But when Zeno recovered the Empire, this Timotheus poisoned himself, in whose place the Heretics chose one Peter Mogge. After that Zeno the Emperor knew of the crafty dealing of the heretics, he written to his Lieutenant Anthemius, that he should deprive Peter Mogge, and restore Timotheus to the bishopric, and further, that he should punish those, that were the authors to install Peter Mogge. Anthemius receiving the emperors' mandate, did depose Peter Mogge, as one that was but a counterfeit made bissop, contrary to the laws of the Catholic Church, and restored Timotheus Salefacialius, who being restored, sent certain of his Clergy to the Emperor to render him thanks. The .15. Chapter, of Leo and Zeno Emperors. Stapleton. THis collection standeth in the banishing of Dioscorus, and in the election and deposing of bishops: Proterius was chosen universorum sententia, by the verdict of all the Citizens of Alexandria, Liberat. cap. 14. as the manner of choosing then was, both before and after. The emperors commandment was not the only cause thereof, but the commandment of the Council, for execution whereof the Emperor gave forth his letters, also. For concealing whereof in your first allegation out of Liberatus, you leave out the word, Et: Also, where Liberatus saith: For this was also commanded by the emperors edicts. The word Also, you leave out, to make your Reader believe, that the only Absolute commandment of the Emperor was the cause, that Proterius was ordered bishop in the place of Dioscorus. Whereas th'emperors edict came forth, partly for avoiding of tumults, which the heretical adherents of Dioscorus were likely to raise: And which they raised in deed, strait after the death of Marcian th'emperor, and removing Proterius made Timotheus to sit in his place: partly for executing the Chalcedon Counsels Decree, which was that a new bishop should straight way be ordered at Alexandria in the room of Dioscorus, Act. 4. whom they had deposed. Now Timotheus was an open heretic, standing against the Council of Chalcedo, and a murderer withal of his lawful bishop Proterius, and therefore no great account to be made of the emperors doings towards him he being no bishop at all in deed. Now where the Emperor commanded an other to be put in his place, it had been well done, if ye had placed also (as your author doth) the whole words and doings of th'emperor: which was, dict ca 15. that Stila his deputy should set in Turrian other. But when M. Horn? when all the Bissops had answered that the Council of Chalcedo was to be maintained even to death: And that the foresayed Timotheus was unworthy to be called either Bishop or Chaistian man. And how M. Horn? Decreto populi. With the consent of the people: which kind of choosing Bishops was then no new thing in the Church, but Ambros. li. ●. Epist. 32. Con. Ant. can. 16. Con. Sard cap. 1. used both before and after. As for the banisshing of Dioscorus (being before deposed of the Council) I think yourself will confess it to be no spiritual matter. M. Horn. The .56. Division. pag. 34. a. After this Timotheus, joannes de Talaida was chosen, whereof when Acatius Bishop of Constantinople heard, he being offended with john, for that he had not sent unto him synodical letters, to signify of his election, as the manner was,) he joined himself with the fautors of Peter Mogge, and accused john unto the Emperor, as one not sound in Religion, nor fit for the bishopric. Peter Mogge espying this opportunity, dissembleth an unity and reconciliation, and by his friends, winneth Acatius, who breaketh the matter to th'emperor, and persuadeth him to depose joannes de Talaida, and to restore Peter Mogge: so that the same Peter would first receive and profess the Henoticon, that is, the confession of the unity in faith, Lib. ca 18. which the Prince had set forth, whereof this is the effect. Zeno the Emperor, to all Bishops and people, throughout Alexandry, and Egypt, Lybia, and Pentapolis: For somuch as we know that the right and true faith alone, is the beginning, continuance, strength, and invincible shield of our Empire: we labour night and day in prayer, study, and with Laws to increase, the Catholic, The prince's supremacy in (.160.) all causes. and Apostolic Church by that faith. All people next after God, shall bow down their necks under our power. Seeing therefore, that the pure faith, doth on this wise preserve us, and the Roman common wealth, many godly fathers have humbly beseeched us, The .160. untruth joined with folly. No such Supremacy can be gathered of the text. to cause an unity to be had in the holy Church, that the members displaced and separated through the malice of the enemy, may be coupled and knit together. And after this, declaring his faith, to agree which the Nicen council, and those that condemned Nestorius, and Eutiches, (he saith) we curse those that think the contrary. After which curse, declaring all the articles of his faith, he concludeth with an earnest exhortation unto the unity of faith. The Emperor, saith Liberatus, supposing that joannes de Thalaida, had not meant rightly of the Chalcedon council, but had done all things feignedly, written his letters by the persuasion of Acatius, to Pergamius & Apolonius his Lieutenants, to (.161.) The .161. vntr●th. Not to depose, but, ●t pellerent, to drive out and to banish. depose john, and enstal Peter Mogge. john, being thus thrust out, repaired to the B. of Antioch, with whose letters of commendation, he went to Simpliciꝰ bishop of Rome, and desired him to write in his behalf unto Acatius bishop of Constantinople, who did so, and within a while after, died. Stapleton. The like drift as before, followeth now also, and therefore the less need of any long or exquisite answer. Saving that a few things are to be considered, aswell for the weighing of M. horns reasons, as for such matters, as make for the pope's primacy even in those stories that M. Horn rehearseth. As, .1. Sigeb. in Chron. Pantal. that pope Simplicius of whom M. Horn maketh mention excommunicated Peter the Bishop of Alexandria here mentioned benig an Eutychian. Again that Acatius bishop of Constantinople, here also recited by M. Horn, was also excommunicated by pope Felix. What? .2. Isidor. in Faelicem. To. 2. Conc. Sig. Pant. saith M. Horn, a button for your pope's curse. If that be a matter ecclesiastical, our Emperors have cursed aswell, as your pope's: Even our Emperor Zeno that we are now in hand withal. Say you me so M. Horn? Then show me I beseech you, by what authority? For no man (you say yourself afterward) hath authority to excommunicate, but only the Church and those who receive authority thereunto by commission from the Church. pag. ●05. col. 2. Thus you say even in this book. Bring forth then the emperors commission: Otherwise think not, we will cry sanctus sanctus to all ye shall say. And if you bring forth the commission, then are you undone, and all your primacy. For if the Emperor hath his commission from the Church, than belike the Church is above him. unless as ye have found a new divinity, so ye can find a new law, whereby he that taketh the commission shall be above him that giveth it. This curse then M. Horn was no ecclesiastical curse: no more surely than if you should, if Mistress Madge played the shrew with you, What manner of curse Zeno the emperors curse was. be shrew and curse to, her shrews heart. It was a zealous detestation of heretics, as if a good catholic man should now say, cursed be all wicked Sacramentaries. And whom I pray you did he curse? Any, trow ye that was not accursed before? No, but chief Nestorius and Eutyches: which were before by general Counsels excommunicated. Yet for all that we have our margin dashed with a fresh jolly note, that the prince's supremacy is in all causes. I pray God send you M. Horn as much worship of it, as ye had of your other late like marginal flourish out of the Chalcedon Council. Yet let us see what proofs ye lay forth: Why? say you: Was not Zeno required to cause an unity in the church. Ye marry was he, and so was Constantine and Marcian to. Yea Marcian for that, was called the chief physician to. But we need not put you any more in remembrance hereof, least ye take to much pride of it. Yea but zeno sayeth, that after God all people shall bow their necks to his power. It is so in deed M. Horn. But unless ye can prove, that he said to his spiritual power (which he said not, Hostium generationes conterentur. oens autem incuruabunt post Deum svam potestati nostrae ceruicem. Libe. c. 18 Gentes hostiles conterentur, atque extinguentur, & oens collae sua imperio secundum Deum nostro submittent. Nice. lib. 16. c. 12. Libe. c. 18 Libe. c. 18 Nice. lib. 6. cap. 15. To. 1. conc. pag. 961. col. 2. nor meant not) a good argument (the more pity) hath quite broken his neck. Neither yet doth Zeno speak of the necks of any his subjects, but (as it seemeth) of such nations as were his enemies. And assuredly such words all pagan emperors use. And yet they are not, I trow, therefore supreme governors in all causes spiritual. Now it would require some tract of time, fully to open either how M. Horn hath confounded, maimed, and mangled his authors narration, or to show that these things even in the true narration of the stories, that he rehearseth, make fully against him, and for the Pope's primacy. For this joannes Talaida (saith Liberatus) appealed to Pope Simplicius even as Athanasius did. Simplicius writeth to Acatius, who answereth: that he did all this without the Pope's consent, by the emperors commandment for the preservation of the unity in the Church. To whom Simplicius replied, that he ought not to communicate with Petrus Moggus for that he agreed to the emperors order and proclamation: unless he would embrace the decrees of the Council of Chalcedo. Thus letters going to and fro, Simplicius died and Felix succeedeth: who doth both deprive him from his bishopric, and excommunicateth him, for taking part with the said Petrus Moggus. After the death of Acatius, succeedeth Flavianus, who would not suffer himself to be installed without the Pope's consent. Within short time, Euphemius was patriarch of Constantinople: who received synodical letters from this Pope. These and many other things else might here be said, even out of the chapter upon which Master Horn himself pleadeth, which we pass over. But for the Prince's Supremacy in causes Ecclesiastical, what hath M. Horn in all this division? His marginal Note lieth in the dust. What hath he beside? He saith. The Emperor by his Lieutenants deposed john Talaida, the patriarch of Antioch. But this is untrue. The Emperor in deed commanded his Lieutenants, Liberatus Cap. 18. ut pellerent eum: to expulse and drive him out from his bishopric, but to depose him, that is to make him now no Bishop at all, that lay not in the emperors power. He did (as merely of himself a wise prelate said in King Edward's days, being then in the Tower for the Catholic faith) but take away the Rick, john remained bishop stil. And that with this john Talaida so it was, appeareth well by Liberatus your own Author, M. Horn. For this john Talaida (saith Liberatus) appealing from the emperors violence to Pope Simplicius, habens episcopi dignitatem, remansit Romae, remained at Rome, having still the dignity of a bishop, who also afterward had the Rick also. For the Pope endued him with the bishopric of Nola in Campania. Now as Emperors and Princes have power (though not lawful) to expelle, and deprive men of the Church from their temporal dignities, and possessions: so to deprive a man of the Church from his office of ministry, to depose a bishop or a priest from his spiritual jurisdiction and Authority (which deposition only is a cause ecclesiastical) to the Church only from whom such Authority came, it belongeth. Prince's deprivations, are no ecclesiastical depositions Take this answer ones for all M. Horn, you which untruly report, that Princes deposed bishops. M. Horn. The .57. Division. Pag. 35. a. This Pope Simplicius considering the great contentions that were accustomably about the election of Popes, did provide by decree, that no Pope should hereafter be chosen without the authority of the Prince, which decree, although it be not extant, yet it is manifest enough, by the Epistle of King Odoacer put into the Acts of the third Synod, that Simmachus the Pope did keep at Rome, wherein the King doth not only avouch, the decree of Simplicius, but also addeth: We marvel, that without us any thing was accounted, seeing that whiles our Priest (meaning the bishop of Rome Simplicius) was on live: nothing ought to have been taken in hand without us. The .16. Chapter of Simplicius, Felix .3. and Symmachus Popes of Rome. Stapleton. IF Pope Simplicius by decree, gave the Prince Authority to confirm the chosen Pope, what helpeth this your supremacy? Nay doth it not much impair the same? For then all the Prince's Authority in this behalf dependeth of the Pope's decree as of a Superior law. And so he is subject both to the law, and to the lawmaker. And yet this is all that in this Division hath any manner inkling to iuduce the Prince's Supremacy in any cause ecclesiastical. But if M. Horn would have looked but a little further and upon the first line of the next leaf, he mought have found in the said Synod, that the see of Rome hath the priestly primacy over all the whole world. And that Counsels must be confirmed by that see, with such other like matter. For whereas this King Odoacer, beside the decree touching the choosing of the Pope (which as yourself say he made at the Pope's request) made also an other concerning not alienating Church goods, the whole Synod rejected and condemned it, for these two causes expressly. First (saith Eulalius a bishop of Sicily, whose sentence (the other bishops saying the same) the whole Synod followed) because against the rules of the Fathers, this Decree appeareth to be made of lay-men, though religious and godly, In Synod. Rom. 3. sub Symmacho. Tom. 1. Conc. pag. 1004. col 2. to whom that any authority was ever given over Ecclesiastical goods, it is not read. secondly it is not declared to be confirmed with the subscription of any bishop of the Apostolic See. Now whereas, the holy Fathers * In the Nicene Council, Can. 4. & 6. have decreed, that if the Priests of any whatsoever province (keeping a Council within their own lymities) shall attempt any thing without the authority of their Metropolitan or their bishop, it should be void and of none effect, how much more that which is known to have been presumed in the See Apostolic, the Bishop thereof not present ( * Qui prae rogativa beati Apostoli Petri per universum orbem primatum obtinens sacerdotij, statutis synodalibus consuevit tribuere firmitatem. which bishop by the prerogative of the blessed Apostle Peter, having through the whole world the Primacy of priesthood, hath been wont to confirm the Decrees of Counsels) presumed I say, of lay-men, though certain bishops agreeing unto it (who yet could not preiudicat their Prelate of whom it is known they were consecrated) is undoubtedly void and of no effect, neither any way to be accounted among Ecclesiastical decrees? Thus far that Synod by yourself alleged M. Horn. God reward you for giving us such good instructions against yourself. Or if it came not of you, but of your friend, let him have the thanks therefore. But if it so falleth out against your wills both, yet God be praised, that as by sin he worketh sometime a greater amendment, and turneth horrible temptations into a more comfortable calmness then before the storm came, so also by your unhappy meaning hath yet brought us to a happy information of such doctrine as utterly overthroweth your heresy. For here you see M. Horn, not only the lay Magistrate, yea the King himself, yea though he were religious and godly, utterly excluded from all authority in causes Ecclesiastical (whereby your fantastical Primacy vanisheth clean away) but also that the Pope (whom you call a foreign power) hath the Primacy, the chiefty and supreme pre-eminence of priesthood, not only in Rome or the Roman Province, but (saith this Synod by yourself clerckly alleged) per universum orbem, throughout the whole world, and then if you be a part of the world, he is your Primate too. Thus much saith this Synod: and thereby utterly overthroweth the whole effect of the Oath, in both those parts for the which the Catholics refuse to swear unto it. Verily if ye go on as you have hitherto, you will surely be espied for a prevaricator, that is, for a double faced Proctor, secretly instructing your client's adversary, but in face protesting to plead against him. For better instructions, no hired advocate could have given us, than you the Counterpleader have ministered unto us. M. Horn. The .58. Division. pag. 35. a. Next after Simplicius was Foelix the third chosen, Act. 1. who after his confirmation, sent many letters as well to the Emperor, as to Acatius bishop of Constantinople, about the matter betwixt john and Peter, but when he could not prevail in his suit, he made john bishop of Nola in Campania. One of the letters that Pope Foelix written unto Zenon the Emperor about this matter, is put into the fift Synod of Constantinople: wherein the Pope after the salutation, doth most humbly beseech the Emperor, to take his humble suit in good part. He showeth that the holy (.162.) The 162: Untruth. These words Apostolic and Catholic, left out. Church maketh this suit, that he will vouchsafe to maintain the unity of the Church, that he will destroy Heresies, that breaketh the bond of unity, that he will expel Peter Mogge both out of the City, and also from Church regiment: that he would not suffer Peter being deposed, Vide Tom. 2. Conc. pa. 13. in epist. Felicis ad Petrum. Haec legat sancta Dei Apostolica et Catholica eccles. ut ab ipsa propter praedictas causas depositum ad communionem non suscipias, sed per divinas apices vestrae serenitatis ab Antiochiae confinio propelli●e, pro ipso aunt constituite unum operib. sacerdotium ornantem etc. Tom 2. Conc. Act. 1. Synod 5. pag. 19 b. to be admitted to the Communion of the Church: but that by his honourable letters, he would banish him out of the bounds of Antioch. And (saith this Bishop of Rome Foelix unto the Emperor) In his place appoint you one that shall beautify the priesthood by his works. Stapleton. You proceed still to bring authorities against yourself. This Peter was deposed I confess: But by whom, M. Horn? Not by the Emperor, but even by Pope Foelix as appeareth but one leaf before the place which yourself allege. And in case it was to painful for you to turn back a leaf or two before, yet might you have vouchsafed to have read the next lines before your own allegation. In the which Foelix signifieth, that he was so deposed, and therefore requesteth th'emperor to expel him, and to place some other meet man for him: which thing Popes do at this day, requiring Catholic Princes to remove heretical Bishops, and to place good in their room, neither yet therefore are, or ever were Princes accounted, enacted, or entitled, Supreme governors in all causes Ecclesiastical. Your new Religion, hath invented this new Title. This Pope Foelix also excommunicated Acatius of Constantinople, for bearing with this Peter Mogge, as witnesseth Liberatus. Whereby appeareth clearly the Pope's Primacy over the ij. chief patriarchs of the East Church of Constantinople and Antioch. And you again are with your own examples clean overthrown. M. Horn. The .59. Division. pag. 35. b. Anastasius the Emperor (.163.) The .163. Untruth. As before. deposed Macedonius bishop of Constantinople, as one that falsified the gospels, as Liberatus saith. Stapleton. If this Macedonius falsified the Ghospel, he was I ween, worthy to be deposed. But your Author useth not this word Deposed, but he saith, he was expulsed. Which might be, being, by an ordinary and an usual course, Liberatus cap. 19 by the Bishop's first deposed. But because the matter is not clear on your side, and if it were, it did not greatly enforce: by reason Anastasius himself was a wicked heretical Emperor, and so no great good deduction to be made from his doings: I let it pass. M. Horn. The .60. Division. pag. 35. b. About the election of Symachus, Platina mentioneth what great division and sedition arose, in so much that the parties were feign to agree, to have a Council holden for the determination of the matter. And there was a Council appointed at Ravenna (saith Sabellicus) to the end that the controversy might be decided according to right, before the king Theodoriche: before whom, the matter was so discussed, that at the last, this Pope Symachus was confirmed. Nevertheless this fire was not thus so quite quenched, but that four years after, it blazed out sorer again. Whereat the king (saith Platina) being displeased, sent Peter the bishop of Altine to Rome, to enjoy the See, and both the other to be (.164.) The 164: Untruth. Platina saith not so, but ut pulso utroque sedem teneret. deposed. Whereupon an other Synod was called of 120. Bishops, wherein (saith Sabellicus) the Pope himself defended his own cause so stoutly, and cunningly, and confuted (saith Platina) all the objections laid against him, that by the verdict of them all, he was acquitted, and all the fault laid to Laurence and Peter. Stapleton. What may be said for the doings of Princes in the election of the Clergy, and how your examples agree not with our practice, I have already said somewhat: and that I say to this too. But in the Division following, we shall say to this more particularly. M. Horn. The .61. Division. pag. 35. b. But to th'intent it may the better appear what was the King's authority about these matters, mark the fourth Roman Synod, holden in the time of this Symachus, and about the same matter of his, which although it be mangled and confusedly set forth in the Book of General Counsels, because (as it may seem) that they (.165.) The .165. Untruth. slanderous and malicious would not have the whole truth of this dissension appaare: yet will it show much, that the Princes had (.166.) The .166. Untruth. That council will show they had very small. no small intermeddling, and authority in Synods and Church matters. This Synod was summoned to be kept in Rome by the (.167.) The .167. Untruth. The King himself in the council declareth, that not by his commandment, but by the Pope's letters, this Synod was summoned. commandment of the most honourable King Theodoriche. He declareth that many and grievous complaints, were brought unto him against Symachus bishop of Rome. Symachus cometh into the Synod to answer for himself, giveth thanks to the King for calling the Synod, requireth that he may be restored to such things as he had lost by the suggestion of his enemies, and to his former state, and then to come to the cause, and to answer the accusers. The more part in the Synod, thought this his demand reasonable: Decernere tamen aliquid Synodus sine regia notitia non Praesumpsit. Yet the Synod presumed not to decree any thing without the King's knowledge. Neither came it to pass as they wished: for the King commanded Symachus the bishop of Rome, to answer his adversaries before he should resume any thing. And (.168.) The .168. Untruth. Not so. But because as the Council protested, it pertained not to him or to any man's else. so the King committed the whole debating and judging of the matter to the Synod, which concludeth the sentence with these words: Wherefore according to the Kings will or commandment, who hath committed this cause to us, we reform or restore unto him (to Symachus) what right so ever he ought to have within the City of Rome, or without. Stapleton. Here hath M. Horn an other fetch to prove Princes to have the chief interest in matters ecclesiastical: as for the depositions of Bishops, yea of the Pope himself. And first he is angry, that this matter in the book of Counsels is so mangled and confusedly set forth. But it is an other thorn than this that pricketh him, that he will not disclose to all the world. For to say the truth, he seeth in his own conscience, that of all Councils, M. Horn complaineth, but dareth not show where the thoro pricketh him. the self same Council that he here allegeth, doth so set forth the Pope's Primacy, that the grievous remembrance thereof, causeth him to speak, he can not tell what. Verily, if M. Horn had stepped forth but one foot further, and turned his eye upon the next leaf, there should he have found a clercklie work made by Eunodius in the defence of the Council, that he is in hand withal. There should he have found most evident authorities for the Pope's Supremacy upon all states temporal and spiritual. He should also find the same book to be confirmed by. CC. and xxx Bishops assembled at Rome in a Synod. Leave of therefore, M. Horn this complaint, and complain of that, Tom. 1, Conc. pa. 1009. that grieveth you in deed, and that is not of confusion, but of the confession ye find there of all the Bishops concerning the Ecclesiastical pre-eminence, lying so open and thick, like a great block in your way, that ye could not pass over to these your allegations that you have here patched in, but that you must needs stumble and break your shins thereat: which grieveth you full sore. But let us now see, what good and wholesome herbs, ye being so cunning a gardener, have gathered out of this garden, that as ye think lieth so unhansomlie and sluttishly. Ye say first that this Council was called by the commandment of the right honourable King Theodoriche. Make him as honourable as ye wil But other than an Arrian shall ye not make of him. If ye knew he was an Arrian, Martinus Pol. Sabellicus your honour might have been better bestowed else where. If ye knew it not, then is your reading to small, I trow, to furnish such a book as this is. And yet to say the truth, small reading will serve the turn too. Ye say he called a Council: So he did. But how did he call it? Forsooth with the consent of the Pope Symachus, though the Council were called against him. For when the Bishops had told the King, that the Pope himself ought to call Counsels, Tom. 1. Conc. pa. 1007. col. 1. by a singular privilege due to the See of Rome, because to that See, first the merit and principality of S. Peter, and after the authority of Counsels, singulorum in Ecclesijs tradidit potestatem, gave power over every thing in the Churches, the King made answer, that the Pope had declared his consent to it by his letters. Yea and the Bishops not satisfied with the Kings so saying, required a sight of the Pope's letters: which the King showed unto them out of hand. The Pope also himself being present, licenced the Bishops to examine his own matter. And a little after: Affectu purgationis suae culmen humiliate. For desire of purging himself he humbleth his high authority or dignity. Yet M. Horn addeth: the Synod presumed not to decree any thing without the King's knowledge. If they had said they ought not, then had ye said somewhat. But presume not, and may not, are two things far a sunder. Though yet in one sense in deed they might not, nor ought not to have proceeded with the King's consent, or without, against the Pope, who hath no judge in this world but God only: Neither can he be judged by his inferiors. Nec aliquid ad se praeter reverentiam de Ecclesiasticis negotijs pertinere. pa. 1007. col. 2 And so these Bishops told the King to his face. And finally the King referreth the whole matter to the Synod, and plainly protesteth, that it was the Counsels part to prescribe what ought to be done in so weighty a matter. As for me (saith the King) I have nothing to do with Ecclesiastical matters, but to honour and reverence them, I commit to you, to hear or not to hear this matter, as ye shall think it most profitable, so that the Christians in the City of Rome, might be set in peace. And to this point, lo, is all M. horns supremacy driven. The Bishops proceeding to sentence, do declare that Pope Symachus was not to be judged by any man: neither bound to answer his accusers, but to be committed to God's judgement. And the reason the Council giveth. That it appertaineth not to the sheep, but to the pastor, unde secundum principalia praecepta, quae nostrae hoc tribuunt potestati, ei quicquid ecclesiastici intra sacram urbem vel foris juris est, reformamus totamque causam Dei iuditio reseruantes, universos hortamur. etc. Pa. 1008. col. 2. to foresee and provide for the snares of the wolf. And then follow the words that you rehearse, which are no judicial sentence, but only a declaration that he should be taken for the true Bishop as before. But to meddle with the cause, and to discuss it judicially, they would not, because as they said, by the Canons they could not. And therefore immediately in the same sentence, that ye have in such hast broken of in the middle, it followeth: We do reserve the whole cause to the judgement of God. Set this to the former part by you recited, being a parcel of the said sentence, as ye must needs do, and then have ye spun a fair thread: yourself proving that thing, which of all things ye and your fellows deny. That is, that the Pope can be judged of no man. And so have ye now made him the Supreme Head of the whole Church: and have given yourself such a fowl fall, that all the world will laugh you to scorn, to see you find fault with this Council, as mangled and confusedly set forth, which so plainly and pithelye confoundeth to your great shame and confusion, all that ever ye have brought, or shall in this book bring against the Pope's primacy. So also it well appeareth, that if there were in the world nothing else to be pleaded upon but your own Council and sentence, by you here mangled and confusedly alleged, M. Fekenham might upon very good ground refuse the oath: and ye be compelled also, if not to take the oath for the Pope's Primacy, being of so squeamish a conscience, yet not to refuse his authority by your own Author and text so plainly avouched. M. Horn. The .62. Division pag. 36. a. As it is and shall be most manifestly proved and testified by the ecumenical or general Counsels, wherein the order of Ecclesiastical government in Christ's Church hath been most faithfully declared, and showed from time to time (as yourself affirm) that such like government as the queens Majesty doth claim and take upon her in Ecclesiastical causes was practised (.169.) The .169. Untruth. Such like government was never practised by any Catholic Emperor. continually by the Emperors: and approved, praised; and highly commended by (.170.) The .170. Untruth. Not by one good Bishop, or godly Father. thousands of the best bishops and most godly fathers that have been in Christ's Church from time to time: even so shall I prove by your own book of General Counsels (.171) The .171. untruth slanderous. mangled, maimed, and set forth by Papish Donatists themselves, and other such like Church writers, that this kind, and such like government, as the queens Majesty doth use in Church causes, was by continual practice, not in some one only Church or part of Christendom (whereof you crave proof, as though not possible to be showed) but in the notablest Kingdoms of all Christendom, as (.172.) The .172. Untruth. Neither in France nor in Spain shall you ever show it. France and Spain, put in ure: whereby your wilful and malicious ignorance shallbe made so plain, that it shallbe palpable to them whose eyes ye have so bleared, that they cannot see the truth. The .17. Chapter of Clodoveus, Childebert, Theodobert, and Gunthranus, Kings of France. Stapleton. Master Horn now taketh his journey from Rome and the East Church (where he hath made his abode a great while) to France and to Spain: hoping there to find out his new found Supreamacye. Yea he saith: He hath and will prove it by thousands of the best Bishops. Vndoudtedly, as he hath already found it out by the .318. Bishops at Nice, by the 200. bishops at Ephesus, and by the 630. bishops at Chalcedo: (who stand each one in open field against him) so will he find it in France and in spain also. If he had said he would have found it in the new found lands beyond spain among the infidels there, that in deed had been a meet place for his new found Supremacy. Verily in any Christened country by him yet named or to be named in this book, he neither hath nor shall find any one Council or bishop, Prince or Province, to agnize or witness this absolute Supremacy that M. Horn so deeply dreameth of. And that let the Conference of both our labours try: M. horns answer, and this Reply: As also who hath bleared the Readers eyes, M. Horn, or Master Fekenham. M. Horn. The 63. Division. pag. 36. b. Clodoveus about this time the first Christian King of France, baptised by Remigius, and taught the Christian faith: perceiving that through the troublesome times of wars, the Church discipline had been neglected and much corruption crept in, doth for reformation hereof call a national council or Synod at Aurelia, and commandeth the bishops to assemble there together, to consult of such necessary matters as were fit, and as he delivered unto them to consult of. The bishops do according as the King (.173.) The .173. untruth. The bishops were not so at the King's commandment as M. Horn fancieth. commandeth, they assemble, they commend the King's zeal, and great care for the Catholic faith, and Religion, they conclude according to the King's mind, and doth (.174.) The 174. untruth. Notorious, as shall appear. refer their decrees to the judgement of the King, whom they confess to have (.175.) The 175. untruth. For not in approving doctrine, as M Horn here craftily would infer. the superiority, to be approved by his assent. Clodoveus also called a Synod named Concilium Cabiloneum, and commanded the bishops to consider if any thing were amiss in the discipline of the Church, and to consult for the reformation thereof: and this (saith the bishops) he did of zeal to Religion and true faith. Other four Synods were summoned afterward in the same City at sundry times, by the commandment of the King, named Childebert, moved of the love and care, As Clodoveus and Childebert here, so Charles the French King that now liveth called a Synod at Poyssy by Paris of late years. And yet is he not of his subjects taken for the supreme Governor in all causes Ecclesiastical. Aurelia 1. Tom. 1. Conc. pa. 1046. a. Turonense 2. Can. 22 he had for the holy faith, and furtherance of Christian Religion, to the same effect and purpose that the first was summoned for. This King Childebert, caused a Synod of Bishops to assemble at Paris, and commanded them to take order for the reformation of that Church, and also to declare whom they thought to be a provident Pastor, to take the care over the Lords flock, the Bishop Saphoracus, being deposed for his just demerits. Stapleton. M. Horn so telleth his tale here, as if this King Clodoveus had had the Bishops at his commandment to keep Counsels and convocations at his pleasure: yea and that they referred their Decrees to his judgement. But now so it is in deed, that neither the Prince proceeded herein by way of mere commandment, neither the bishops referred to him any such judgement over their determinated Sentence. For proof of the first: both the bishops in this very Council at Orleans do say to the King, that they have deliberated upon these matters secundùm vestrae voluntatis consultationem according to the consultation kept by your will, and the bishops of an other Council holden after this at Toures in France also do say of this Synod, quam invictissimus Rex Clodoveus fieri supplicavit, which the mighty King Clodoveus made suit to be called. But because as the lawyers do note, the will of a Prince, and the will of a father, do not differ from their commandment, therefore that Council which the King by suit and supplication obtained to be called, Aurelian. 1. in principio. is yet termed to be done praecepto & iussione, by commandment of the bishops themselves at the Council. For proof of the second, I bring you the words of the Council, which you in telling your tale, thought good to leave out. The bishops do say unto the Prince. Definitione respondimus etc. Ibidem. We have by determining answered to the intent, that if those things which we have decreed, be approved right also by your judgement, the Sentence of so many bishops, may confirm and strengthen the Authority of such a consent, as of the King and great steward to be observed. In which words they refer not the Definition to his judgement, but do show that if his consent do concur, than his Authority is confirmed by the verdict of Bishops so great and so many. But ye say they confess him to have the superiority: And those words ye couch craftily among the rest, To. 1. conci. pa. 1046. col. 1. M. Horn to prove his supremacy allegeth a bishop deposed for less fornication than himself useth. Vide Tom. 2. Concil. pag. 149. col 1. & Conc. Aurel. 5. can. 4. pag. 1. to make your Reader think, that the King had the Superiority in approving doctrine. But this is an untruth. They call him in deed Regem, ac Dominum maiorem, their King or great Stuard. Which is in respect of temporal things, and of his worldly principality, not of any Superiority in allowing or disallowing their Synodical decrees. And I pray you good Sir, was Saphoracus deposed by the King, or by the Bishops? and was he as you say deposed for his just demerits? It had been well done to have told us, why he deserved to be deposed. But I suppose either ye know it not, or else ye will not be known thereof like a wily shrew. Forsurelye as far as I can gather, it was for that, he being a bishop used the company of his wife which he married before he was priest, contrary to the old canons, and a late order taken in the Council at Orlyans. If it be so, in what case be you with your madge: pretending her to be your lawful wife, yea and that after your taking of holy orders. M. Horn. The .64. Division. pag. 37. a. A Prince's charge. Theodobertus' King of France, calleth a Synod at Auerna in France, for the restoring and establishing the Church discipline. Gunthranus the King, called a Synod, named Matisconens .2. to reform the Ecclesiastical discipline, and to confirm certain orders, and ceremonies in the Church, which he declareth plainly in the Edict, that he setteth forth for that purpose. Wherein he declareth his vigilant and studious carefulness, to have his people trained and brought up, under the fear of God, in true Religion, and godly discipline, for otherwise (saith this Christian King) to whom God hath committed (.176.) The 176. untruth. Crafy connayaunce as shall appear. A bishops jurisdiction. this charge, shall not escape his vengeance. He showeth the bishops that their office is to (.177.) The .177 untruth. A part of the Sentence nipped quit of, in the midst. teach, comfort, exhort, to reprove, rebuke, and correct, by preaching the word of God. He commandeth the elders of the Church, and also others of authority, in the common weal, to judge and punish, that they assist the bishops, and sharply punish by bodily punishment, such as will not amend by the rebuke and correction of the word, and Church discipline. And concludeth, that he hath caused the Decrees in the Council, touching discipline, and certain ceremonies to be defined, the which he doth publish and confirm, by the authority of this Edict. Stapleton. We have now two Kings more of France: But in both these to prove your purpose, you have nothing. King Guntranus himself confesseth in the place by you alleged: that God hath committed to the Priests the office of a fatherly authority: Tom. 2. Concil. fol. 179. And showeth to what end the Princes meddle with matters of religion. that is, that the sword may amend such persons as the preachers word can not amend. And it is worthy to be considered, that among other decrees that this Council made, and the King confirmed, it was ordained, that the Say man where so ever he met a priest should show him reverence and honour. Conc. Matiscon. 2. can. 15. And in case the Priest went a foot and the Say man rid, the Say man should a light, and so reverence him, as now the Christians are compelled to do in Turkey to the Turks. And so I trow this Council maketh not all together for your purpose and supposed Primacy. Only it maketh to increase the number of your untruths. For whereas you first talk of the Princes vigilant and studious carefulness, to see the people brought up in true religion and godly discipline, you add as the Prince's words. Otherwise I, to whom God hath committed this charge, shall not escape his vengeance. In making the Prince to say, this charge, you would make your Reader think, the Prince acknowledged a Charge over true Religion etc. And therefore you put in the margin, to beautify your book withal, A prince's charge. But the Prince speaketh of no such charge, as shall anon appear. And when you add to this, that the Prince showed the bishops, that their office is to teach, etc. there you leave out, absque nostrae admonitione, without our admonishment, by which appeareth, the Bishops knew their office, though the Prince held his peace: and that it depended not of the Princes supreme government, as you would have folk to think. These couple of untruths shall now evidently appear by the whole words of the King, as they were in order by him uttered, which you have confusely set out, putting the later part before the first, and the first last, adding in one place, and nipping in an other, thus to blind and blear your Readers eyes, whom plainly you ought to instruct. For these are the words of King Guntranus to the bishops of Mascon. Matiscon. 2. Tom. 2. Conc. pag. 179. Although without our admonition, to you (holy bishops) specially belongeth the matter of preaching, yet we think verily you are partakeners of other men's sins, if you correct not with daily rebuking the faults of your children, but pass them over in silence. For neither we, to whom God hath committed the kingdom, can escape his vengeance if we be not hofull of the people subject unto us. In these words orderly laid out as the King spoke them, thou seest gentle Reader, first that the King talketh not of this charge, Platina. as M. Horn untruly reporteth him, meaning a charge over religion, for the King expressly speaketh of the charge of his kingdom: declaring, that as he, for negligence in his charge, so the bishops for negligence in their charge, shall both increase the wrath of God. Also that without his admonition (which words M. Horn nipped quite of in the midst) the bishop hath to preach, to rebuke, to punish and correct the transgressors of God's law. Such patched proofs M. Horn bringeth to prick up the poppet of his strange fantastical primacy. M. Horn. The .65. Division. pag. 37. b. After the death of Anastasius th'emperor, justinus reigned alone a right catholic Prince, who immediately sent messengers unto the bishop of Rome, who should both confirm the authority of the sea, and also should provide peace for all churches, so much as might be, with which doings of th'emperor, Hormisda the bishop of Rome, being moved, sent unto th'emperor, with consent of Theodoricus, Legates (178) The 178. untruth. A part of the Sentence broken of prejudicial. The pope is the kings Ambassador. the pope's humble suit to th'emperor, (179.) for the Arian heretics. The 179. untruth slanderous. Martinus Penitentiarius telleth the cause of this legacy was, to entreat th'emperor to restore those bishops, which the wicked Anastasius had deposed. This godly emperor justinus (saith Martin) did make a la, that the Churches of the heretics, should be consecrated to the Catholic religion, but this Decree was made in john the next Pope's days. The which edict when the King Theodoriche, being an Arian (saith the same Martin) and King of Italy, herd, he sent Pope john (saith Sabellicus) with others in embassage unto th'emperor, to purchase liberty for the Arians. justinus received these Ambassadors honourably, saith Platina, and th'emperor at the length overcome with the humble suit of the Pope, which was sauced with tears, granted to him and his associates, that the Arians should be restored, and suffered to live after their orders. In this history, this is not unworthy the noting, that the Pope did not only show his obedience and (180) The 180. untruth. This fact proveth no subjection on the pope's part. subjection to the godly Emperor, but also that the secular Princes, ordained (181.) The .181. untruth. The la of justinus was no Ecclesiastical law at al. Laws ecclesiastical, with the which the Pope could not dispense. For all this business arose about the decree, which th'emperor had made in an (182.) The 182. untruth, as before. ecclesiastical cause or matter. If the Pope's authority in these causes, had been above the Emperors, he needed not with such lowliness, and so many tears to have besought the Emperor to have revoked his decree and edict. The 18. Chapter. Of justinus th'emperor, and john the Pope. Stapleton. NOw hath M. Horn for this turn left France, and is returned to th'emperors again: but so that he had been as good, to have kept him self in France stil. For though he decketh his margin with, the Pope is the King's Ambassador: M Horns confuse narration. and again. The Pope's humble suit for the Arrian heretics (which yet is a stark lie as we shall anon declare) yet by that time the whole tale is told (whereof this man maketh a confuse narration) neither he nor his cause shall win any worship or honesty thereby. I will therefore open unto you gentle reader the whole story, truly and faithfully, and that by his own authors Platina, Sabellicus, and Martinus. The story truly and fully opened. This Anastasius was a wicked Emperor, as M. Horn here confesseth. And yet two leaves before, he made a precedent of his doings for deposing of bishops. He defended john the patriarch of Constantinople a great heretic who by his assistance most injuriously and spitefuly handled the Legates that Pope Hormisda sent to him, Sabellic. Plat. in Homisd. 1. exhorting him to forsake and renounce his heresy. The said heretic Emperor Anastasius sent answer by the Legates to Pope Hormisda, that it was th'emperors part and office to command, and not the Popes, and that he must also obey th'emperor. Surely a fair example for your new supremacy. After the death of this Anastasius stricken with lightning from heaven for his wicked heresy and * As Platina well noteth. Qui Apostolicae sedi debitam venerationem etc. Sa●e●. en. 8 li. 2. pag. 454. disobedience succeedeth this justin, a right Catholic prince by M. Horns own words and confession, who incontinently sent to Rome his ambassadors, which should show due reverence of faith to the see Apostolic. Or as Platina in other words writeth: qui sedis Apostolicae authoritatem confirmarent. That should confirm the authority of the Apostolic See. And what was that I pray you M. Horn, but to confirm the Pope's primacy, M. Horns own story confirmeth the Pope's Primacy. so little set by before of the wicked Anastasius, and the heretical bishop john of Constantinople? And therefore gramercy that forsaking France ye have brought us even to Constantinople, and to the Emperor there: sending his ambassador to Rome, to recognize the Pope's most high authority. You tell us yet farther, that the Pope Hormisda sent Legates to justinus. And there you break of suddenly. But what followed? Forsooth immediately it followeth in the very same sentence: Platina in Hormisda. 1. which justinus received honourably the Pope's Legates sending forth to meet them, the more to honour than a great multitude of Monks and of other Catholic and worshipful men, the whole clergy of Constantinople, and john their bishop congratulating also. At whose coming, the Emperor thrust out of the City and the Churches, the schismatics called Acatians (of their Author Acatius) whom Pope Felix had excommunicated. Now go forth, God's blessing of your heart, God send us many more such adversaries: And to say the truth, M. jewel and your fellows are not much worse to us. But yet go forward, for I hope we shall be more deeply bound to this good Catholic Emperor anon: and to you to, for bringing to our hand without our farther traivail, such good and effectual matter for the Pope's superiority. This godly Emperor made a law, say you, that the Churches of heretics should be consecrated to the Catholic Religion. What did he M. Horn? Happy are ye, that he is fair dead and buried many years ago, for fear lest if he were now living, your temples and synagogues would be shortly shut up, as they are now in Antwerp, and in all Flanders here, God be praised. But who telleth this? Forsooth say you Martinus Poenitentiarius. But lo, how wisely this tale is told, as though both Sabellicus and Platina the Authors of your narration did not write the like. King Theodoricke took not in good part, but even to the very heart, these doings of justine. And why M. Horn: M. Horn calleth Theodorike now an Arrian, which before he calleth most honourable. Because (as ye say now like a true man) he was an Arrian. Say ye so M. Horn? Doth the wind wag on that side now? For Theodoricus was, not two leaves before, The most honourable King Theodoriche, and the Supreme Head of the Church of Rome to. But who saith M. Horn, that he was an Arrian? Forsooth say ye, Martin: and forsooth say I, the matter is ones again fitly and clerkly handled. For not only Martin, but Platina and Sabellicus, from whom ye fetch your story, writ it also. This Theodorike sendeth his Ambassadors to justine, yea he sendeth Pope john himself, who with most humble suit sauced (as you writ) with tears, entreateth the Emperor, that the Churches might be restored to the Arrians. The Pope was then belike an Arrian himself. Surely the simple Reader, can gather none other thing by you, especially the same being dashed in the margin to. Ye have not done well to tell half the tale, and to tell it so suspitiouslye. What the Pope's ●uit was to ●ustinus the Emperor The cause then of his earnest suit was, that otherwise Theodorike threatened, to shut up all the Catholic Churches in Italy, and under his dominion. Yea your Author Martinus writeth, that he menaced to kill all the Catholics in Italy: whom he calleth Christianos'. This was the cause of his earnest suit, not for the favour he bore to the Arrians, but for the favour he bore to the Catholics and their Churches. justinus received those Ambassadors, as you truly say, honourably. And as Sabellicus writeth, the Emperor was not only crowned of Pope john, but at his first coming most humbly and reverently fell at his feet before him and honoured him. But justinus did not so honourably entertain him at Constantinople, Excepit justinus pontificem vententem multa veneratione, dimissusque ad eius pedes adoravit. but Theodorike at his return did deal with him as homely, casting him into prison at Ravenna, where what for hunger, what for loathsome filthiness of the prison, shortly after he died a Martyr. About which time or a little after, he slew the honourable Senators, Symachus and Boetius. Which thing all your three Historiographers do write. Where ye will us to note that, not only the Pope showed his obedience and subjection to the godly Emperor, but also that the secular Princes ordained laws ecclesiastical, etc. Your double note will prove but a double untruth. For the Pope in this supplication obeyed not the godly Emperor justine, but the Arrian King Theodorike: Neither was it obedience of duty, Martinus Pol. col. 98 Plat. in joan. 1. Niceph. lib. 17. cap. 9 but a submission of charity: partly to qualify the fury of the Arrian tyrant, partly to save harmless the whole number of Catholics in Italy, which by th'emperors edict should consequently have been destroyed. Again this decree of justine was no ecclesiastical matter, concerning any alteration of religion, any deposing of Bishops, any order of Church discipline or such like, but only a decree for banishing of Arrian heretics, and of overthrowing their Synagogs': which manner of decree being of denounced heretics, belongeth properly to the civil Magistrate, and is an external or temporal matter, no spiritual or ecclesiastical cause, namely such as we join issue with you. King Philip hath banished heretics out of this land and hath commanded their Synagogues to be overthrown. But he is not therefore taken for Supreme governor in all causes, or in any cause ecclesiastical: Neither do or ever did his subjects swear to any such Title. M. Horn. The .66. Division. pag. 38. a. Within a while after this ●hon, was Agapetus Pope, whom Theodatus the King, sent on his embassage unto the Emperor justinianus, to make a suit or treaty in his behalf. When the Emperor had entertained this Ambassador with much honour, and granted that he came for, touching Theodatus, he earnestly both with fair words and soul, assailed this Pope, to bring him to become an Eutychian: the which when he could not win at his hands, being delighted with his free speech and constancy, he so liked him, that he forthwith (.183.) The .183. Untruth. For Pope Agapetus deposed Anthymus and placed Menna in his room not justinian. deposed Anthemius bishop of Constantinople, because he was an Eutychian, and placed Menna a Catholic man, in his room. Agapetus died in his legacy, in whose room was Syluerius made Pope, by the means, or rather, as Sabellicus saith, by the commandment of the King Theodatus, the which until this time, was wont to be done by the authority of the Emperors (saith Sabellicus) for the revenge whereof justinianus was kindled to make wars against Theodatus. Syluerius was shortly after quarreled withal by the Emp●resse, through the means of Vigilius, who sought to be in his room, and was by the Emperors (184) The .184. Untruth. By violence banished, not by authority deposed. authority deposed. The which act although it were altogether unjust, yet it declareth the authority that the Prince had over the Pope: who like a good Bishop, as he would not for any threats do contrary to his conscience and office: so like an (185) The .185. Untruth. Ridiculous. obedient subject, he acknowledged the Prince's authority: being sent for, came: being accused, was ready with humbleness to have excused and purged himself: and when he could not be admitted thereunto, he suffered himself (186) The .186. Untruth. As shall appear. obediently to be spoiled of the Bissoplike apparel, to be displaced out of his office, and to be clothed in a Monastical garement. The same measure that Vigilius did give unto Syluerius, he himself being Pope in his place, received shortly after, with an augmentation, for he was in like sort within a while (187) The 187. Untruth. By violence he was banished, not by authority deposed. See our Return. Art 3. pag. 77. deposed by the emperors authority, because he would not keep the promise which he had made unto the Empress, and was in most cruel wise dealt with all: which cruelty was the rather showed to him by the means and procurement (as Sabellicus noteth) of Pelagius, whom Vigilius had placed to be his Suffragan in his absence. The .19. Chapter. Of justinian the Emperor, and diverse Popes and bishops under him. Stapleton. ALL this standeth in two points. First, that an other Pope, Agapetus by name, was again sent in embassage of Theodatus the King. But this (as Liberatus writeth) was a tyrannical force, Libera●us cap. 21. made both to the Pope, and to the whole Senate of Rome. These Arrian and barbarous Gothian Kings are no fit examples of government due to godly Catholic Princes. And their utter destruction followed immediately after, under Belisarius justinian's Captain. Such blessed precedents M. Horn hath found out, to build his imagined Supremacy upon. The next point is, in the deposing of two Popes by the Emperor justinian, wherein we need by so much the less to enlarge our answer, for that M. Horn freely and frankly of himself confesseth that they were unjustly deposed. Again, that you say, the Pope suffered himself obediently to be spoiled etc. If your tale were true, that were you know, Tom. 2. Conc. in vitae Siluerij. Platina in Siluerio. Liratus. c. 22 but an homely obedience: but now he suffered not that spoil as you imagine, obediently: but was brought to that point by a very craft and train, as in Platina and Liberatus it may be seen. This therefore may pass for an other of M. Horns untruths. So hard it is for such Protestant Prelates to tell a true tale. With the like truth you writ, that the Pope like an obedient subject, acknowledged the Prince's authority. And why? Because forsooth he suffered himself to be cloistered up by force of Belisarius (or rather his wife) the emperors Captain. If such patience parforce prove a subjection, then is the true man an obedient subject also to the thief, when he yieldeth him up his purse in the high way to save his life. But we say if there had been just cause to depose them: yet neither th'emperor, nor the Council could lawfully have deposed them. And because good Reader, If ye will see more of these two Popes, see the confutation of the Apology. Act. 1. Constant. 5. sin. to. 2. Con. p. 71. c. 2. b. Definite sanctissimi ipum alienum esse, & nudum ab omni epis. dign. atque efficacia. Ibid. p. 67. col. 2. a. Agapetus Anthimum condennavit ●t omni dign. sacerd. & officio nudavitet omni episcopat. & orthodoxonoine. justin. in authent. in constit. count. Anth. Vide 5. Synodum Const. Act. 1. pa. 67. col. 1. b. Et Liber. c. 21. To. 2. Conci in vita Vigilij. Liberatus. Cap. 22. thou shalt have a short and a ready proof, and that framed to thy hand already by M. Horn, I remit thee to the fourth Roman Council, whereupon M. Horn lately pleaded, and to the very same sentence that M. Horn did himself allege. But yet by the way I must score up as an untruth, that justinian deposed Anthimus. For it was not justinian, but Pope Agapetus that gave sentence of deposition against him: nor he was not deposed at that time, but before. In deed justinian executed the sentence, and thrust him out of Constantinople, and banished him, though th'empress took part with him. For fiirst we find, that Agapetus was desired by a supplication of divers of the East, to depose him. We have also in the acts of the .5. general Council declared, that Agapetus did depose him. In case these testimonies will not serve, ye shall hear justinian himself, that shall tell you that it was not he, but Agapetus that deposed Anthimus. Quenadmodum nuper factum esse scimus circa Anthymun, qui quidem deiectus est de sede huins urbis à sancto & gloriosae memoriae Agapeto sanctiss Rom. Ecclesiae pontifice. Even, saith justinian, as we know it happened of late to Anthimus, who was displaced from the see of this imperial city by Agapetus of holy and glorious memory, bishop of the holy Church of Rome. Neither was Vigilius deposed by the Emperors authority, as M, Horn fableth, but for not yielding to the Eutychian Empress, justinian's wife, he was by a train brought to Constantinople and so banished. And all this was done rather by the wicked Empress, then by justinian: who (as Liberatus writeth) restored again both Silverius (though by the means of Belisarius he was carried away again into banishment) and Vigilius also, though he died by the way in Sicilia. This Empress was Turrian Eutychian heretic. Such examples only make for M. Horn M. Horn. The .67. Division. pag. 38. b. About this time, Epiphanius Bishop of Constantinople, as Liberatus, sayih, died, in whose roune the Empress placed Anthymus. About which time, was great strife between Gaianus and Theodosius, for the bishopric of Alexandria, and within two months, saith Liberatus, the Empress Theodora sent Narses a noble man, to install Theodosius, and to banissh Gaianus: Theodosius being banished, the sea was vacant: whereunto Paulus (who came to Constantinople to plead his cause before the Emperor, against certain stubborn monks) was appointed, and he received, saith Liberatus, (.188.) The .188. untruth. The words of Liberatus foully malmed in the midst. authority of the Emperor, to remove heretics, and to ordain in their places men of right faith. This Paulus was shortly after accused of murder, whereupon the Emperor sent Pelagius the Pope's proctor, lying at Constantinople, joining unto him certain other bissops (.189.) The .189. Untruth not with commission, but to do it by their means, without whom (by order of the canons) he could never have done it. with commission to depose Paulus from the bissoplike office, which they did: and they ordered for him Zoilus, whom afterward the Emperor deposed, and ordered Apollo, who is now the Bishop of Alexandria (saith Liberatus). Certain Monks met with Pelagius in his return from Gaza (where Paulus was deposed) towards Constantinople, bringing certain articles, gathered out of Origenes works, minding to make suit unto the Emperor, that both Origen and those articles, might be condemned, whom Pelagius for malice he bore to. Theodorus bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia, an earnest fautor of Origen, did further all that he might. Pelagius therefore doth earnestly entreat th'emperor, that h● would command that to be doen which the Monks sued for: to wit, that Origen with those articles should be damned. The which suit th'emperor granted. being glad (.190.) The .190. Untruth. False translation. Gaudens se etc. Being glad, that himself gave judgement etc. The Author thereby, noteth the emperors ambitiousnes. to give judgement upon such matters, and so by his commandment, the sentence of the great curse against Origen, and those articles were drawn forth in writing and subscribed with their hands, and so sent to Vigilius the bishop of Rome, to Zoilus bissop of Alexandria, Euphemius of Antioch, and Peter bishop of Jerusalem. These Bishops receiving this sentence of the curse (.191.) pronounced by th'emperors commandment, and subscribing thereunto: Origen was condemned being dead, who before long ago on live was condemned. Stapleton. Here is a mingle mangle I can not tell whereof, and a tale told of a tub, for any reason or certain scope that I see in it. Here have we now, that th'emperors wife placeth and setteth in bishops to. For it was Theodora the Eutychian Empress that placed and displaced the bishops here named: saving Paulus which was made by Pelagius the Pope's Legate at Constantinople: The .191. Untruth, These words pronounced by the Emperor's commandment, are not in Liberatus Lib. c. 20. &. 23 Accepit abimpera. potestatem super ordinationem Ducum ac tribunorum ut remove ret haereticos, & pro eye orthodoxos ordinaret. Lib. c. 23. which thing M. Horn concealeth. But I marvel by what warrant that Empress did all this. I dare say not by M. Knox's and his fellows, of whom I have spoken. And what bishop, think you, that she setteth in? No better surely then herself: that is, Anthimus the captain of the heretics of that time. But this gear goeth handsomely in and out, all things I warrant you in dew order and proportion: even in as good, as the matter is good itself. For now M. Horn, after he hath declared, that Anthimus was deposed from his bishopric, is returned to show how he was first ordered and made bishop. We have then a tale told, to no purpose in the world, of Paulus the bishop and a murderer, deposed, and well and orderly to, I trow by Pelagius the Pope's proctor, and so how M. Horn frameth his primacy hereof, God woteth, I wot not in all the world. For as for justinian's commission to depose bishops, if M. Horn mean of such as King Edward gave in England of late, it is M. horns commission and not justinian's. Neither hath his author any such thing. But only that th'emperor gave the bishop authority, to appoint Captains and other of the emperors officers, to help forward the execution. Nay saith M. Horn, the worst is behind. For justinian th'emperor gave his judgement upon Origenes and cursed him to. Here in deed somewhat might have been said saving that we have said somewhat already of such manner of cursing, and saving that M. Horn of his great courtesy hath eased us, and hath made (I trow against his will, but nothing against his skill) a full answer for us: saying that Origenes was long before this time, yea yet lyvinge condemned. Then was there here no new sentence or determination made by justinian, but a confirmation of the old: and no more matter of supremacy, then if a man should beshrew Luther's cursed heart for his new broached heresies, and curse them and him to: his heresies being many hundred years before condemned, and cursed by many a good virtuous clerk, and by many general and other Counsels to Neither did justinian give any sentence of curse against Origen himself, Cap. 23. but as Liberatus saith; at his commandment or procuring the chief Patriarches, of Rome, of Alexandria, of Antioch, and of Jerusalem did it and so by the ordinary judges in this case, not by the emperors only or absolute commandment he was condemned. And we find in the acts of the .5. general Council, Action. 4. Con. 5. Constan. ca 11. Origen condemned with Arius, Macedonius, Euthyches and other. M. Horn. The .68. Division. pag. 3●. a. When Theodorus bishop, of Caesarea in Cappadocia heard of this condemnation, to be revenged he laboured earnestly with the Emperor, to condemn Theodorus Mopsuestenus a famous adversary of Origen, the which he brought to pass by overmuch fraud, abusing the Emperor to the great slander and offence of the Church. Thus in all these Ecclesiastical causes, it appeareth the Emperor had the (.192). The .192. untruth. The bishops not the Emperor had the chief intermeddling, as it hath well appeared. chief intermeddling, who although at the last was beguiled by the false bishops: yet it is worthy the noting by whom this offence in the Church came, which appeareth by that, that followeth: I believe that this is manifest to all men (saith Liberatus) that this offence entered into the Church by Pelagius the Deacon, and Theodorus the Bishop, the which even Theodorus himself, did openly publish with clamours: crying, that he and Pelagius were worthy to be brent quick, by whom this offence entered into the world. Stapleton. M. Horn now will bring us a pretty conclusion and prove us, because bishops be at dissension and abuse the Prince assisting now the one part, now the other that the prince is supreme head. Evil successe●, o● princes intermeddling in causes ecclesiastical. Whereof will rather very well follow this conclusion. Experience showeth that princes the more they intermeddled in causes of religion, the more they troubled the Church, the more they were themselves abused, and also misused others: Therefore princes are no meet persons to be supreme heads in such causes. Examples hereof are plenty. Constantin the great persuaded by the Donatists most importunate suit, August. Epist. 166. waded so far over the borders of his own vocation, that (as S. Augustin writeth) à sanctis antistibus veniam erat petiturus, Tripar. l. 3. c. 8. &. 12. it came to the point he should ask pardon of the holy bishops. The same Emperor by the suit of the Arrians meddled so far with bishop's matters, that he banished the most innocent, most godly, and most learned bishop Athanasius: whereof in his deathebed he repented, willing him by testament to be restored. Theodosius the first, Niceph. li. 12. c. 24. persuaded with the smooth tongue of Flavianus the unlawful and perjured bishop of Antioch did take his part wrongfully against the west bishops and the greatest part of Christendom: wwhereof we have before spoken. Theodosius the second, defended the Ephesine conventicle against Pope Leo, seduced by Dioscorus and Eutyches, Con. Chalc. Act. 1. & 10. or rather abused by one of his privy chamber Chrysaphius an Eunuch: and winked at the m●●dering of holy Flavianus, whom the Chalcedon Council calleth Martyr. Lib. ca 18. Zenon the Emperor deceived by Acatius of Constantinople, banished john Talayda the Catholic patriarch of Alexandria, who appealed from the Emperor to Pope Simplicius. And now in like manner this Emperor justinian while he was over busy in ecclesiastical matters, as one that took great delight (so noteth Liberatus) to give judgement in such matters, Cap. 23. &. 24. Concil. Chalc. Act. 10. in fine. being deceived by Theodorus of the sect of Acephali, condemned Theodorus Mopsuestenus and Ibas two most catholic bishops, and highly praised in the Chalcedon Council, whereof sprung up in the Church a most lamentable tragedy for the space of many years as all writers do pitifully report. Niceph. lib. 17. ca 29.30. & 31. This same justinian also banished the good bishop of Constantinople Eutychius for not suffering him to alter Religion. But he restored him again in his deathbed, as Constantine did Athanasius. He would have banished also Anastasius an other catholic bishop of Antioch, because he would not yield to his heresy of Aphthartodocitae. Such examples ought rather to teach Princes not to intermeddle with matters above their vocation (truly as much as the soul passeth the body) then to give them any presidents of supreme government, yea IN ALL CAUSES, as Master Horn and his fellows, as long as Princes favour them would give unto them. M. Horn. The .69. Division. pag. 39 a. This Pelagius as yet was but Suffragan or proctor for the Pope, who afterwards in the absence of Pope Vigilius his master, crept into his See, in the midst of the broils that Totylas King of the Goths made in italy, when also he came to Rome. In the which History is to be noted the Popes (.193.) The .193. Untruth. This was no subjection in ecclesiastical matters, but Rome being then conquered by Totylas, Pelagius vithall the City submitted themselves. subjection to Totylas, whom humbly on his knees he acknowleaged, to be his Lord, appointed thereto of God, and himself as all the rest to be his servant. Note also how the King sent him ambassador, what charge, and that by Oath, of his voyage, of his message, and of his return, the King straightly gave unto him: how buxomelie in all these things he obeyed: How last of all toward the Emperor (being commanded by him to tell his message) he fell down to his feet, and with tears both to him and to his Nobles, he ceased not to make most lamentable and humble supplication, till without speed, but not without (.194.) The .194. Untruth. Slanderous as shall appear. reproach, he had leave to return home. But lest you should take these things, to set forth that Princes had only their jurisdiction over the Ecclesiastical personnes, and that in matters Temporal, and not in causes Ecclesiastical, mark what is written by the Historians. Platina amongst the Decrees of this Pope Pelagius, telleth (and the same witnesseth Sabellicu●) that Narses the emperors other deputy, joyntelye with Pelagius did decree, that none by ambition should be admitted to any of the holy Orders. Pelagius moreover writeth unto Narses, The .195. Untruth. For the Decree of Narses was no ecclesiastical matter but an execution of the church Canons made before. desiring him of his aid against all the bishops of Liguria, Venetiae, and Histria, which would not obey him, putting their aff●aunce in the authority of the first Council of Constantinople. In which Epistle amongst other things he writeth on this wise: Your honour must remember what God wrought by you at that time, when as Totyla the tyrant possessing Histriam and Venetias: the French also wasting all things, and you would not nevertheless * This proveth naught else but that (as Pelagius the first hath ordained) the secular word helped, when the spiritual could not prevail. suffer a Bis●hoppe of Milan to be made, until he had sent word from thence to the most mild Prince (meaning the Emperor) and had received answer again from him by writing what should be done, and so both he that was ordained bishop, and he that was to be ordained, were brought to Ravenna at the appointment of your high authority. Not long after, Pelagius. 2. because he was chosen In●ussu Principis, without the emperors commandment, and could not send unto him by reason the town was besieged, and the huge rising of the waters stopped the passage: as soon as he might being elected Pope, he sent Gregory to crave the Em●erours pardon▪ and to obtain his good will. For in those days (saith Platina) the Clergy did nothing in the Pope's election except the election had been allowed by the Emperor. Stapleton. M. Horn telleth us a tale after his old wont, that is without head or tail, to abuse his ignorant reader with a confuse heap of disordered and false words. Pelagius was sent by the Romans to King Totilas to entreat of peace, and that he would for a time cease from war, and give them truce. Saying that if in the mean while they had no succour, Sabellic. Aeneld. 8. lib. 4. they would yield the city of Rome to him. Pelagius could win none other answer at his hands, bu● that they should beat down the walls, receive his army, and stand to his courtesy and mercy. Totilas being afterward in possession of the City▪ concerning pope Pelagius set Ambassador to th'emperor. and fearing wars from the Emperor justinian, sent Pelagius to justinian, to travail with him for peace: sending him withal word, that in case he would invade italy, he would destroy Rome, and pluck it down fast to the ground. Totilas took an oath of Pelagius and his other ambassadors to do his message faithfully, and to return again their ambassade exploited. Pelagius most pitefullye and with many tears layeth before justinian the miserable state and the utter destruction and desolation of Rome impedente, unless he would forbear war with Totilas: yea he and his fellows fell upon their knees most humbly beseeching him to have compassion of the city. But in fine justinian would not relent. Whereupon soon after their return, Rome was set all on fire by Totylas, and no living creature, man, woman, nor child suffered there to inhabit. Pry now M. Horn and pick out here what ye can to establish your primacy: your folly is to open to be in this matter with many words refuted. Here is no one matter Ecclesiastical, and that ye see well enough: and therefore yourself as fast as ye can wou●de steal away from it, and prove your matter otherwise. But Sir ye shall not so steal away, but beside the note of extreme folly, to busy yourself and your Readers with that, which yourself can not deny, nothing to touch spiritual matters, but that ye shall carry with you a lie or two. Else tell us why you will have us to note the Pope's subjection to Totylas, Platina in Pelagio. 1. sabel. Aenead. 8 lib. 4. seeing that neither Pelagius was then Pope, Vigilius yet living at Constantinople, neither was he any other way subject, then as to a Tyrant. For Totilas (who for his rage and cruelties was called Flagellum Dei, the Scourge of God) at that time took Rome, and entered with the conquest. Pelagius did that homage to him, to obtain mercy for his poor citizens. And when Totylas seeing him coming toward him, said: What meaneth this o Pelagius? comest thou to me as a suppliant? Pelagius answered, saying. Yea Sir I come to you, seeing God hath made you my Lord. But have mercy, I beseech you, upon ●our servants, have mercy upon the poor Captive City. And this lo was the subjection of Pelagius made to Totylas, which you wish to be noted M. Horn, as though it made any thing for the Pope's subjection in spiritual matters. Tell us also why ye writ, that he departed with reproach. What reproach had he at justinian's hand? Your author Sabellicus showeth of none. But see the man's foolish wiliness. In deed Sabellicus writeth that Pelagius was noted as a favourer of Anthimus: but then saith he withal, that Pelagius did detest it of all things to seem to favour him. Well, to supply this defect of his superfluous lying talk of Pelagius be bringeth forth a decree against simony, made by Pelagius and Narses th'Emperors deputy. This is no matter of faith, M. Horn, no, nor no new decree of manners, but such as had been decreed long before. And therefore but an execution of the old Canons: which Narses might meddle withal well enough. There is then to make up the matter yet once again a declaration concerning the interest of the Emperor in the election of Bishops and Popes too: whereunto at this time we need not greatly to say any thing: so much hath been said hereof before. M. Horn. The .70. Division. pag. 40. a. About the time of Pelagius the first his Papacy, was there a Council holden at Towers in France, by the licence and consent of Arithbertus the King, for the reformation of the Church discipline, wherein appeareth, that the King's authority was (.196.) The .196. Untruth. In that Council there is no such thing. necessarily required to confirm and strengthen the discipline. For where they decree of the maids or widows, that shall not be married, without the consent of the parents, which is an especial matter Ecclesiastical, they declare (.197.) The .197. Untruth. They declare that the due observation thereof (not the strength) depended upon those Prince's good laws. the strength thereof to depend upon the commandment of the Prince. Not only (say they) the Kings, Childebert and Clotharius of honourable memory, kept and preserved the constitution of the laws touching this matter, the which now the King Charibert their successor hath confirmed or strengthened by his precept. Stapleton. Now is Master Horn revolted to France again, but not to tarry there long. For suddenly he returneth again to Constantinople. His short tale consisteth in two lies. First when he saith the King's authority was necessarily required to confirm the discipline of the Church. For that neither is in the Council, neither can be gathered out of it. The second is, that the Council declareth that the strength of their Decree, being a special matter Ecclesiastical dependeth upon the commandment of the Prince. For the Council declareth only, that those good Kings of France kept the Constitution of the Church in that behalf: Tripart. li. 7. ca 4. and forced by law the due observation thereof. Like as jovinian the Emperor, made it death by law, to defile a Virgin or Nun. Though that sin before, was by the Church condemned. All this doth but multiply words. It proveth nothing your imagined supremacy. Marry if you will know M. Horn, what this Council by yourself alleged, maketh for the Pope's Supremacy, I will not let to tell it you. The Fathers of the Council do say: Conc. Turon. 2 can. 21. What Priest is he that dare be so bold, as to do contrary to such Decrees as come from the See Apostolic? And a little after. And whose authority may take place, if it be not theirs, whom the Apostolic See sendeth and maketh his deputies or Referendaries? Our Fathers have ever kept that, which their authority commanded. Thus you fight well for us, but nothing for yourself. M. Horn. The .71. Division. pag. 40. a. The Emperor justinianus calleth the bishops of all Churches unto a General Council at Constantinople, the which is called the fift ecumenical Synod, to repress the insolence of certain Heretics, who taught and maintained Heresies and Schisms, to the great disquieting of the Church against the doctrine established in the four forenamed General Councils. In the time of this Council Menna, evag. li. 4. ca 38. the bishop of Constantinople departed out of this life, in whose room the Emperor placed Eutychius. The Emperor governeth and directeth all things in this Council, Niceph. li. 17. ca 27. as the Emperors before him had done in the other General Synods, as appeareth by the writing, which he sent unto the bishops, wherein he showeth, that the right believing godly Emperors his ancestors did always labour, to cut of the heresies sprung up in their time, by calling together into Synod the most religious Bishops, All this is granted, but M. horns Primacy never a whit thereby furthered. and to preserve the holy Church in peace: and the right faith to be sincerely preached and taught. He allegeth the'xamples of Constantinus Magnus, Theodosius the elder, Theodosius the younger, and Martianus the Emperors: who (saith he) called the former general Councils, were present themselves in their own persons, did aid and help the true confessors, and took great travail upon them, that the right faith should prevail, and be preached. Our forenamed ancestors of godly memory (saith he) did strengthen and confirm by their laws, those things which were decided in every of those Councils, and did expulse the Heretics, which went about to gainsay the determination of the four forenamed General Councils, and to unquiet the Churches. He protesteth, that from his first entrance, he made these beginnings and foundation of his Imperial government, to wit, the unity in faith agreeable to the four General Councils, amongst the Church ministers, from the East to the West: the restraigning of schisms and contentions stirred up, by the fautors of Eutyches and Nestorius, against the Chalcedon Council: the satisfying of many that gainsaied the holy Chalcedon Council, and the expulsion of others, that persevered in their errors, out of the holy Churches and monasteries: To the end that concord and peace of the holy Churches and their Priests, being firmly kept, one, and the self same faith, which the four holy Synods did confess, might be preached throughout God's holy Churches, He declareth how he had consulted with them by his letters and messengers about these matters, and how they declared their judgements unto him by their writings: not withstanding seeing certain Heretics continue in their heresies: Therefore I have called you (saith he) to the royal City (meaning Constantinople) exhorting you being assembled together, to declare once again your minds touching these matters. He showeth that he opened these controversies to Vigilius the Pope, at his being with him at Constantinople: And we asked him (saith he) his opinion herein: and he, not once nor twice, but oftentimes in writing, and without writing, did curse the three wicked articles, etc. We commanded him also by our judges, and by some of you, The Emperor (198) commandeth the Pope to come to the synod. The .198. Untruth. For not in that sense as M. Horn imagineth. vilz to enforce thereby a Supreme government. to come unto the Synod with you, and to debate these three Articles together with you, to the end that an agreeable form of the right faith might be set forth: and that we asked both of him and you in writing touching this matter: that either as wicked articles, they might be condemned of all: or else, if he thought them right, he should show his mind openly: But he answered unto us: that he would do severely by himself concerning these three points, and deliver it unto us. He declareth his own judgement and belief, to be agreeable with the faith set forth in the four General Councils. He prescribeth unto them the special matters, that they should debate and decide in this Synod: whereof the final end is (saith he) That the truth in every thing may be confirmed, and wicked opinions condemned. And at the last, he concludeth with an earnest and godly exhortation, to seek God's glory only, to declare their judgements agreeable to the holy Gospel, touching the matters he propoundeth, and to do that with convenient speed. Dat. 3. Nonas Maia's, Constantinopoli. Stapleton. Here M. Horn, as he hath other Emperors and Princes, so would he now bear justinian in hand also, that he is and aught to be the Supreme head and governor in all causes even Ecclesiastical and Spiritual. But justinian, if you will hearken to his laws and Constitutions, will tell you flatly that such a head agreeth not with his shoulders. He will not be made such a monster at your hands. You shall find him as very a Papist for the Pope's Supremacy, as ever was any Emperor before him, or sense him. For who I pray you was it, M Horn, that by open proclamations and laws for ever to continue enacted, that the holy Ecclesiastical Canons of the four first Counsels shall have the strength and force of an imperial law? justinian's testimonies for the Pope's primacy. Const. 131 ex transl. hall Sancimus, ut sancti ecclesiastici canon's, qui●a sanctis. 4. Concilijs, Niceno, Constant. Ephes. & Chalcedon. expositi sunt, vicem legum obtine ant. Praedictorum enim sanctorum Conciliorum decreta perinde ut sacras scripturas suscipimus▪ & canon's ut leges custodimus. Ac propterea sancimus, ut secundum eorum definitiones sanctiss. veteris Ro. Papae, primu● omni sacerd. sit. Summi pontificatus apicem apud Romam esse nemo est qui dubitet. Lib. 1. Cod. justin. de summae Trinitate. Ideóque oens sacerdotes universi orientalis traectus et subijcere et unire sedi vest. Sanctitatis properavimus. & mox. Nec enim patimur quicquam quod ad ecclesiarum statum pertinet, quàmuis manifestum & indubitatum sit quod movetur, ut non ent vestrae innotescat Sanct. quae Caput est oim sanctarum ecclinarun. Secundum eorum definitiones etc. ut suprà const. 131. Sancimus sacras sequentes regulas etc. const. 5. Secundum divinas regulas sancimus sacras per omnia sequentes regulas. const. 6. Was it not justinian? Who is it that embraceth the decrees of those holy councils, even as he doth the holy and sacred scriptures? And keepeth their Canons as he doth the imperial laws? Who but justinian? Who enacted also, that according to the definition of those four Counsels, the Pope of Rome shall be taken for the chief of all Priests? justinian. Who in an express law declared, that no man doubteth, but that the principality of the highest bishopric resteth in Rome? justinian. Who declared to Pope john, that he studied and laboured, how to bring to subjection, and to an unity with the See of Rome all the priests of the east? justinian. Who told him, that there shall be nothing moved pertaining to the state of the Church, be it never so open and certain, but that he would signify it to his Holiness, being head of all holy Churches? justinian. Who declared, that in all his laws and doings for matters ecclesiastical, he followed the holy Canons made by the Fathers? justinian. Who published this law that, when any matter ecclesiastical is moved, his lay officers should not intermeddle, but suffer the Bissoppes to end it according to the Canons? This self same justinian. What great impudence then is it for you to obtrude him this title of supreme governor, which so many of his express laws do so evidently abhor? What shame, infamy and dishonour should it be for him, to accept any such title, the Canons of the holy Catholic Church, Sequentes igitur ea quae sacris definita sunt Canonib. Con. 123. Si ecclesiasticum negotium sit, nullam communionem habento civiles magistratus cum ea disceptatione, sed religiosiss. episcopi se cundum sacros canones negotio finem īponū●●. Const. 109. Haereticos & illi dixerunt, et nos dicimus, quicumque membrum sanctae Dei catholicae & apostolicae ecclesiae non sunt. in qua & omnes sanctissimi totius habitati orbis paetriarchae tam Romae occidentalis, quam huius regiae urbis, & Alexandria & Theopolis & H●erosolymorū, & oens sub ijs constituti episcopi uno ore Apostolicam fidem & traditionem praedicant. Qui igitur incontaminata coinone, in Catholica ecclesia Dei amantiss. huius sacerdotib. non participant, opt. iure vocamus haereticos. and his own laws, standing so plainly to the contrary? What? would you have him an heretic, as you are? Hath not he in his Laws pronounced him to be an heretic, that doth not communicate in faith with the holy Church, especially with the Pope of Rome and the four patriarchs? Hath he not also in his said laws showed, that the Pope of Rome hath the primacy over all priests, by the first four general Councils, unto the which the Pope and all other patriarchs have agreed? Obtrude not therefore this presumptuous Title to this Emperor, who of all other most shunned it. Bring forth M. Horn, what ecclesiastical Constitutions and decrees you will or can, made of this Emperor justinian. All will not serve your purpose one jot. This only of the diligent Reader being remembered, that all such laws he referred to the Pope's judgement: that he made not one of his own, but followed in them all, the former Canons and holy Fathers. Last of all that he enacteth expressly, that in ecclesiastical matters, lay Magistrates shall not intermeddle, but that bishops shall end all such matters according to the Canons. These three things being well remembered and borne away, now tell on M. Horn, and bring what you can of justinian's Constitutions in ecclesiastical matters. The effect of all your Arguments in this Division, resteth upon this point, that justinian made Laws for matters ecclesiastical, which thing I need not further answer then I have done. Saving partly, that this lie of M. horns would not be overpassed: wherein he imagineth all things here spoken to be done in the fift general Council at Constantinople: whereas a great part of them were done in an other Council at Constantinople under this Emperor, which M. Horn doth here unskilfully confound. Partly also to show yet once again, that justinian himself doth so expound his doings, Constit. 42 in Novel. Quam sententiam tam. etsi per se valentem, multò tamen adhuc valentiorem, reddit maiestas imperatoria, quae regia hac urbe ipsum expellit. How themperors be said to strengthen the laws of the Church. Tom. 2. Concil. pag. 21. that M. Horn can not well wrest them to his purpose. For justinian saith. We following the holy fathers etc. and so forth: as we by many places of justinian have declared before. Again speaking of things decreed in the Synod against Zoaras. Your sentence, saith he, being of power by it self, our imperial majesty hath made it yet much stronger, which doth expulse him out of this imperial City. Lo M. Horn the decree of the Synod is strong, though the Emperor never confirm it, and where is then become your imperial primacy? Now farther you hear to what purpose the princes assist: that is for the furtherance of the execution. The bishops had deposed Zoaras, but they by their power could not thrust him out of the City and banish him. This must be done by the civil power, and this did justinian, and by that made the Counsels law the stronger. And so ye now hear of justinian himself, what is the meaning of that which you here and so often allege, that Princes strenghthen the laws of the Church. And to show that the Supreme government, which is the final Sentence and judgement rested in the bishops, not in the Emperor, in the first Action Theodorus the emperors Officer, bringeth in the playntif Bishops of Syria, and saith to the Synod. Vt in his interpellantes, vos ipsis finem imponatis. To the intent that you considering these supplications, may make an end of them. And in the same Action the Emperor himself again affirmeth, that: Act. 1. pag. 61. As oft as the Sentence of the Priests hath deposed any from their holy rooms, as unworthy of priesthood, so oft the Empire was of the same mind, and made the same order or constitution with the Authority of the priests. Where you see M. Horn, that the deposing of Priests or Bishops, proceeded first from the Authority, Sentence and judgement of the Priests: And was afterward put in execution by the Imperial laws. That is, to say all shortly. The bishops deposed. The Prince banished. For by death in those days Princes proceeded not against the clergy though deposed and condemned in general Council. I might now go forward for any thing of weight remaining: saving that your marginal note, that the Emperor commandeth the Pope to come to Council, stayeth me a little, as making some good appearance for you. Ye say he commanded the Pope, but if ye had proved withal, that he had such authority to command, than would the matter run better on your side: or that ye could show that at this commandment he came to the Council, which ye are not able to show. But yet am I able to show he came not. So that this induceth rather the Pope's primacy, especially considering, In praeam. epist Conc. Chalced. that he was at Constantinople, even when the Council was kept. Marcian also sent his letters to Pope Leo to come to Chalcedo, and yet he came not, but sent his deputies thither for him. M. Horn. The .72. Division. Pag. 41 b. The (.199.) The 199. untruth. There is no such Title. Title prefixed to the first general Council, summoned by the commandment of justinian, telleth in effect generally, both the matter and also who had the chief authority in the ordering thereof: for it is entitled: The divine ordinance and constitution of justinian the Emperor against Anthymus, severus, Petrus, and Zoaras, Mennas' the universal archbishop and patriarch of Constantinople, was present in this Council, who had adjoined unto him, placed on his right hand, certain Bishops, coadiutours, named and (.200.) The 200. untruth. Flat and open, as it shall appear. appointed by the commandment of the Emperor, sent out of Italy from the sea of Rome. When they were set thus in Council, Themperor sent Theodorus one of the masters of the Requests, or his Secretary, a wise man, unto the Synod: Bishops, abbots, and many other of the clergy, with their bills of supplications, which they had put up unto th'emperor, for redress of certain matters Ecclesiastical. Theodorus maketh relation unto the Synod hereof, delivereth the Bills of supplication to be considered on: presenteth the parties to the Synod, and showeth that this is th'emperors pleasure, that they should (.201.) The 201. untruth. Not to dispatch (that word is not in the Council) but finem imponere, to make an end of by final Sentence. The prince the highest potentate next to God (202) in all causes. The .202. untruth. You over reach your Author. In all causes, is more than your Author said. God reserveth to the prince the fullness of direction in (.203.) Ecclesiastical causes. The 203. untruth, as before. For of Ecclesiastical causes, the Author speaketh not, but of banishing heretics. dispatch and end these matters. Paulus the bishop of Apamea, in his bill of supplication, offered to the most godly Emperor in the name of all his, acknowledgeth him to be the highest Potentate in the world next unto God: who hath magnified his Empire, and thrown his adversaris under him: because he maintaineth the only and pure faith: offereth unto God pure leaven, that is to say, true doctrine as incense, and burneth the chaff (meaning false religion) with unquenchable fire. And after the declaration of their Faith talking of the Eutychian or counterfeit catholic, He desireth th'emperor, to whom God hath reserved the full authority to direct, to cut him from the Church, and to expulse him out of his Dominions. In like sort the religious men, and the Monasteries of Secunda Syria, do offer up a book of supplication unto the Emperor, beseeching him that he will command the archbishop Mennas, precedent of the council, to receive their book, and to (.204.) The .204. untruth. False translation: for not, to consider, but Canonice finem accipere to conclude etc. The 205. untruth. A part of the sentence nipped of, quite overthrowing M. horns purpose. consider of it according to the Ecclesiastical Canons. The Emperor maketh a la and constitution, to ratify and confirm the judgement of the Synod against Anthymus, and other heretics: wherein also he decreeth touching many other ecclesiastical matters or causes: as, No man to Rebaptize: to profane the holy Communion: to call Conventicles: to dispute further in those matters concluded on: to publish or set forth the Heretical books: to communicate with them. And so knitteth up all, with this conclusion. We have decreed these things for the common peace of the most holy Churches: Tom. 2. council. pa. 20 Act. 1. Constan. pa. 20 Prima ergo est sententia quae in Constantinopoli contra Anthimum lata est, secunda autem sententiae quae in Constant. fuit contra Severum Petrum & Zoaram. Terita constitutio est ordinaria. Quarta autem actio in Hierosolymis, et haec omnia in 4. mensibꝰ facta & sancitae fuerunt. these things have we determined by sentence. (.205.) Stapleton. You go on M. Horn, ever like to yourself, and to your brother M. jewel. For as at the first, you begin with a great untruth, so you proceed on with a great many more. I mean not that ye call the first for the fift, let the printer bear this, but for the residue ye must take it upon your own shoulders. As first where ye speak of the title: there is no such title prefixed before the Council: there is such a sentence in deed. But that it is a title prefixed before the Council, as though this ordination were made before the Council, and so should tell both the matters and who had the chief authority in the ordering thereof, this is no simple lie. But ever ye shoot to far, or come to short home. After those words by you rehearsed it followeth (which you leave out) ad Petrum Archiepiscopum Hierosolimorun: To Peter archbishop of Jerusalem, to whom justinian did send this constitution, not before the Council, but the Council being ended. The order of these sentences, as it is declared in the acts of the Council was this. First there was a sentence given at Constantinople against Anthymus. Then was there an other sentence given there against Severus, Petrus, and Zoaras. Then was the constitution of justinian (whereof ye speak) made and sent to the bishop of Jerusalem, which kept there also a Council and condemned Anthimus. And all this was done in four months. And therefore it can not be the true title of this Council. And much less tell the matter and who had chief authority there. But every man is not so cunning as you, to make men ween, that the egg was a chick before the hen had hatched. Yet for one thing I here commend you, for telling us that the Pope's Legates in this Council were set in the right hand of the patriarch Menas, which I suppose maketh somewhat for the Pope's primacy. But that you add, they were named and appointed by the commandment of the Emperor, I can not commend you. For it is untruly said. They were the Popes own Legates and deputies, of his own naming and appointing, not of the Emperors. For it followeth in the same Constitution of justinian, Tom. 2. Conc. pa. 20. b. touching these Legates: Omnibus quidem ex Italica regione ab Apostolica sede nuper missis. All being lately sent out of Italy from the See Apostolic. In like manner where you say, Theodorus a Master of the Requests to the Emperor, (as you call him) delivered to the Synod the Bills of supplication to be considered on, such consideration you find not in the words of Theodorus: but this you find him say to the Synod. V● in his interpellantes, vos ipsis finem imponatis. To th'intent that by your means in these matters they may be ended and concluded. This the emperors officer required of the Synod: that they would make an end of the complaints laid in by certain bishops and Monks. And this you conceal, and alter clean to a simple consideration, as though the Council should have considered, and then the Emperor concluded. And therefore yet once again in this very Division, Tom. 2. Conc. pa. 23. col. 1. you tell us of a book of supplication made by the Monasteries of Secunda Syria, to the Emperor, that Menna the precedent of the Council should receive their book and consider of it according to the Ecclesiastical Canons. The words of your Author are: Quae in ipso insita sunt Canonicè finem accipere convenientibus ad ipsum etc. that the contents of their book of supplication, be ended and determined Cononically (not considered only) and that by the accord (not of Menna only, whom only you name, being the bishop of Constantinople) but, of the most holy Romans and the holy Synod. Thus your false doctrine can not appear (when it cometh to trial) but laden always with farthels of untruths. But now I trow we shall quickly lose this advantage. For straight ye bring us forth a bishop that calleth the Emperor the highest potentate in the world next unto God, maintaining the only and pure faith: offering unto God pure leaven of true doctrine, as incense, and burning the chaff (meaning, as ye say, false religion) with unquenchable fire. And think you M Horn, that if justinian now lived, he would take your doctrine for pure fine flower, and not rather for stinking musty chaff or bran? Well you have heard his judgement in part already. As for your bsshop if he had said, in all causes, as you make him to say in the margin, he had said well toward your purpose, but nothing toward the truth. And therefore ye having espied the former words not to come jump to your purpose, ye undershore them with an other saying of the said bishop, who speaking of an heretic, desireth the Emperor to whom God had reserved the full authority to direct, to cut him from the Church, and to expulse him out of his dominions. Ye are not for all this much the nearer: for wherein the good bishop meant the full direction, he himself showeth: that is, in cutting away of heretics, and expulsing them out of his dominions. And therefore your goodly marginal note that, God reserveth to the Prince the fullness of direction in causes Ecclesiastical quaileth, and is not worth a rush: Neither is it to be collected by the express words of the bishop: and if it were, saving for your shrewd meaning and mistaking, it were not greatly material. For it might stand right well, meaning of the full and final direction, which is the execution. Ye now lay forth many ecclesiastical constitutions: and among other, Const 42. Haec decrevimus sanctorum patrum canones secuti. ●om. 2. C●c. pa. 62 Haec sentēt●auimus, sequentes sanctorum patrum dogmata. that no man shall dispute further in matters of religion on's concluded (where are your Westmynster disputations then?) and that th'emperor had decreed all those things by sentence, for the common peace of the Church. Ye say the truth, but not all the truth, for ye have most falsely, following your accustomable humour, left out iij. or iiij. words straight ways following. We have (saith justinian) determined these things following the decrees of the holy fathers. Which words do set yourself and your primacy to, quit beside the saddle. And thus, as th'emperors conclusion, that knitteth up all, knitteth up our conclusion to, for the ecclesiastical primacy, and unfoldeth all your false conclusions in this your false book: So, if ye take and join the very beginning of the said constitution to the winding up of it, the matter willbe much clearer: and so clear that justinians constitution that yourself do bring forth, Conc. Constant. 5. Act. 1. To. 2. pag. 61. may serve for a sufficient answer to all your book: concerning princes intermeddling in causes Ecclesiastical. We do (saith justinian) no strange thing, or such as themperors have not been accustomed unto before, in making this present Law: (meaning against Anthimus, Tom. 2. Conc. Synod. 5. Act. 1. pag. 61. col. 2. a Rem non insolitam im●erio & nos facientes ad praesentem veni nus legem. Quoties enim sacerdotum sententia quosdam indignos sacerdotio de sacris sedibus deposuit, quem admodum Nestorium, Eutychen, Arrium, Macedonium & Eun●mium, ac quosdam alios ad iniquitatem non minores illis: toties imperium eiusdem sententia & ordinationis cum sacerdotum authoritate fuit: sic que divina & humana pariter concurrentia, unam consonantiam rectis sententiis fecere: quemadmodum & nuper factum esse contrae Anthymum scimus, qui quidem deiectus est de sede huius regiae urbis a sanctae & gloriosae memoriae Agapeto, sanctis. Ecclesiae antiquae Romae pontifice, eò quòd etc. Severus, and Zoaras) for as often as the bishops by their sentence have deposed and displaced out of their holysees and dignities any unworthy parsons, as Nestorius, Eutyches, Arius, Macedonius, and Eunomius, and certain other as naughty as they were: themperors following their sentence and authority decreed the same: So that ecclesiastical and temporal authority concurring together, made one agreement in right judgement. Even as we know it happened of Late touching Anthimus, who was thrust out of the see of this imperial city by Agapetus of holy and glorious memory, the bishop of the most holy Church of old Rome. M. Horn. The .73. Division. pag. 42. a Nothing may be done in Church matters, without the prince's authority. All things being thus done, by the commandment of the Emperor, in the first Action, and so forth, in the second, third, and fourth, after many acclamations, the Precedent of the Council Mennas, concludeth: saying to the Synod: That they are not ignorant of the zeal and mind, of the Godly Emperor, towards the right Faith, and that nothing of those that are moved in the Church (.206.) The .206. untruth double both in the text and in the margin: standing in false translation. Nihil eorum quae in sanctissima ecclesia moventur convenit fieri. To. 2. council. p. 78. co. 2 ought to be done without his will and commandment. Stapleton. Now go ye M. Horn clerkly to work. For if ye can roundly and handsomely prove this, ye may perchance set a new head upon justinian's shoulders: which yet would be but an ugle and a monstrous sight. But this is neither clerkly, nor truly done of you; to turn Convenit, it is meet, seemly, or convenient: into oportet, it must or aught. I marvel ye bearing the state of a bishop, have so little faith and honesty: or dwelling so nigh Winchester school, so little sight in the grammar. Mennas' had condemned Anthimus: the Bishops and other cried, that forwith he should condemn severus, Petrus, and Zoaras: as he did a while after. To whom Mennas answered, that it was meet to consult with th'emperor first. which is very true: for his great zeal to the faith, and for that he had the execution of the sentence, this is like your other knack before, that Dioscorus and other must be deposed. Nos sicut scit vostra charitas, apostolicam sedem sequimur & obedimus: & ipsius commun●catores, communicatores habemus, & condemnatos ab ipsa & nos condemnamus. Act. 4. pag. 87. And surely I would have marveled if Mennas had taken justinian for the supreme head who within four lines after declareth the Pope to be the supreme head: and that he did follow and obey him in all things, and communicated with them, that did communicate with him: and condemned those whom he did condemn. Who also gave Anthimus the heretic a time of repentance appointed by Pope Agapetus, and proceeded in Sentence against him, according to the prescription of the Pope, Cyrillus Epist. 10. & 11. & Coelest. epi. 12. inter epist. Cyril. as Cyrillus proceeded against Nestorius in the Ephesine Council, according to the limitation of Pope Celestinus. M. Horn. The .74. Division. pag. 42. a. Such is the authority of Princes in matters Ecclesiastical, that the Godly ancient Fathers did not only confess, that nothing moved in Church matters (.207.) The 207. untruth. The godly Fathers never confessed so. ought to be done without their authority, but also did submit themselves willingly with humble obedience, to the direction of the Godly Emperors, by their laws (.208.) The 208. untruth. Notorious and impudent: often avouched, but never proved. Cod. lib. 1. tit. 17. in all matters or causes Ecclesiastical, which they would not have done▪ if they had thought, that Princes ought not to have governed in Ecclesiastical causes. The same zealous Emperor doth declare, that the authority of the Prince's laws doth rightly dispose and keep in good order, both spiritual and temporal matters, and driveth away all iniquity: wherefore he did not only gather together as it were into one heap, tha laws that he himself had made, and other Emperors before him, touching civil or temporal matters: but also many of those laws and constitutions, which (.209.) The 209. untruth Not which his Ancestors, but which the Apostles and fathers of the Church had made before. his ancestors had made in Ecclesiastical causes: Yea, there was nothing pertaining to the Church government, which he did not provide for, order and direct by his laws and Constitutions: Nou. Con 3. Themperors ecclesiastical Laws. wherein may evidently appear the authority of Princes, not only over the persons, but also in the causes Ecclesiastical. He made a common and general law to all the patriarchs, touching the ordering of bishops, and all other of the Clergy, and Church Ministers: prescribing the number of them to be such, as the revenues of the Churches may well sustain: affirming that the care over the Churches, and other religious houses, pertain to his oversight: And doth further inhibit, that the ministers do pass forth of one Church to an other, without the licence of the Emperor or the bishop: the which ordinance he gave also to those that were in Monasteries. He (.210.) The .210. Untruth. Not he, but the Canons of the Church before gave that authority. He only putteth the matter by his law in execution Const. 5. giveth authority to the patriarch or bishop, to refuse and reject, although great suit by men of much authority be made. He prescribeth in what sort and to what end the Church goods should be bestowed, and threateneth the appointed pains to the bishop and the other ministers, if they transgress this his Constitution. He prescribeth in what sort the bishop shall dedicate a Monastery: be giveth rules and forms of examination, and trial of those that shallbe admitted into a Monastery, before they be professed: in what sort and orders they shall live together: He (.211.) The .211. untruth. Not he, but the Church prescribed that order and rule. Const. 6. prescribeth an order and rule, whereby to choose and ordain the Abbot: He requireth in a Monastical person, divinorum eloquiorum eruditionem, & conversationis integritatem: Learning in God's word, and integrity of life. And last of all, he chargeth the archbishops, bishops, and other church Ministers, with the publisshing and observing of this his constitution: Yea his Temporal officers and judges also, threatening to them both, that if they do not see this his Law executed and take the effect, they shall not escape condign punishment. He protesteth, that Emperors ought not to be careful for nothing so much, as to have the ministry faithful towards God, and of honest behaviour towards the world, which he saith, vill easily be brought to pass, if the holy rules which the Apostles gave, and the holy Fathers kept, and made plain, be observed and put in ure. Therefore, saith he, we following in all things the sacred rules (meaning of the Apostles) do ordain and decree, etc. and so maketh a constitution and law, touching the qualities and conditions, that one to be chosen and ordered a Bishop ought to have, and prescribeth a form of trial and examination of the party, before he be ordered: adding that if any be ordered a Bishop, not * M. Horn is not so qualified. for he hath (he saith) a wife Ergo M. Horn by his own law, yea of the Apostles making, must lose his Bisshoprik. Const. 57 qualified according to this constitution, both he that ordereth, and he that is ordered, shall * lose their bishoprics. He addeth furthermore, that if he come to his bishopric by gifts or rewards, or if he be absent from his bishopric above a time limited, without the commandment of the Emperor, that he shall incur the same penalties. The like orders and rules he prescribeth in the same constitution for Deacons, Diaconisses, Subdeacons, and Readers: commanding the patriarchs, archbishops and bishops to promulgate this constitution, and to see it observed under a pain. He affirmeth that this hath been an ancient Law, and doth by his authority, renew and confirm the same: that no man have private Chapels in their houses, wherein to celebrate the divine mysteries: whereunto he addeth this warning unto Mennas the archbishop, that if he knew any such to be, and do not forbid and reform that abuse, but suffer this constitution of the Emperor to be neglected and broken, he himself shall forfeit to the Emperor fifty pounds of gold. Const. 58. Also that the ministers keep continual residence on their benefices: otherwise the Bishop to place others in their rooms, and they never to be restored. Stapleton. We shall now have a long rehearsal, full three leaves, of many Ecclesiastical Laws, made by justinian the Emperor. But who would think that M. Horn were either so foolish to make such a stir for that no man denieth, and the which nothing proveth his cause, or to rehearse such constitutions of justinian, that partly overthroweth his Primacy, partly displaceth him from all bishoply and priestly office? But what shall a man say to them that be past all shame, and have no regard what they say or do preach or write? Or how is this world bewitched, thus patiently to suffer, such men's sermons and books, Const. 6. Hoc aunt futurum esse credimus, si sacrarum regularum obseruatio custodiatur quam justi laudandi et adorandi inspectores et ministri Dei tradiderunt apost et sancti patres custodierunt et explanarunt. Sancimus igitur sacras per oina sequentes regulas. etc. aut in virginitate degens à principto, aut uxorem habens ex virginitate ad eum venientem, et non viduam. & mox: de caeter● aunt nulli permittentes àa positione legis uxorem habentitalem imponi ordinationem. Ibidem. yea and to give them high credit to? Tell me then and blush not M. Horn, whether ye be not one of them, that for lack of such qualities, as justinian, according to the holy rules and Canons ye spoke of, requireth in a Bishop, must lose your rhetoric, and those also that ordained you? Is not this one of the qualities, that a bishop should have no manner of wife when he is ordered? Yea that his wife that he had before he was ordered Priest or Bishop, must have been a virgin and no widow at the time of marriage? Is not this one of the holy rules, which the Apostles gave, and the holy Fathers kept and made plain, which justinian would have observed and put in ure? Now again for Priest, Deacon, or Subdeacon that marrieth after he is ordered, doth not justinian even in your own constitution say, that he must forth: with be spoiled of all Ecclesiastical function and office, and become a lay man? Look now well about you Master Horn, and about your fellows protestant bishops, and tell me, if this rule take place, whether ye can show among them all, Sacro Statim cadat ordine, et deinceps idiota sit. any one bishop? And so by the marvelous handy work of God, ye are neither parliament nor Church Bishops. What do ye tell me of justinian's constitutions touching Monks and monasteries, There is not a Protestant Bishop in England by the constitution that M. Horn himself allegeth. and of the rules and forms that he prescribed to them? He sayeth in deed, that he hath a special care to see the monastical rules and forms according to the will of the holy Canon's observed. He saith that through the pure and devout prayers of religious men, all things do prosper in the common wealth, both in peace and in war. How well M. Horns doctrine agreeth with justinians for the monastical life. If than justinian threateneth punishment, as ye truly say, both to spiritual and temporal magistrates for not publishing and causing his Constitutions made for religious men to be observed: how sharply and roughly would he deal with you, your fellows, and masters, that by your preachings have caused so many monasteries to be so pityfully overthrown? How should you escape condign punishment, think you, that make no better of these justinian's, and not his, but rather the holy Fathers, rules concerning the monastical life, then to call the said holy life a foolish vow, an horrible error, and a monkish superstition? M. Horn. The .75. Division. pag. 43. b. When this Emperor understood, by the complaints that were brought unto him against the Clergy, Monks and certain Bishops, that their lives were not framed according to the holy Canons, and that many of them were so ignorant, that they knew not the prayer of the holy oblation and sacred Baptism: Perceiving further, that the occasion hereof was partly, by reason that the Synods were not kept according to the order appointed, partly for that the Bishops, Priests, Deacons, and the residue of the Clergy, were ordered, both without due examination of the right faith, and also without testimony of honest conversation: Protesting that as he is mindful to see the civil Laws firmly kept, even so he ought (of duty) to be more careful about the observation of the Sacred rules and divine Laws, and in no wise to suffer them to be violated and broken. He reneweth the constitutions for the Clergy, touching Church causes, saying. * This answereth all your process, M. Horn, The Emperor foloveth the canons The Canons were made of Bishops in Counsels and Synods. Ergo he followeth the Bishops. If he follow them he goeth not before them, He doth not direct them prescribe to them, or govern them, but is directed prescribed, and governed of them. Following therefore those things, that are defined in the sacred Canons, we make a Pragmatical or most full and effectual Law, whereby we ordain that so often as it shallbe needful, to make a Bishop. etc. And so goeth forward in prescribing the form of his election, examination, and approbation. And shutteth up the Law about the ordering of a Bishop with this clause: If any shallbe ordered a Bishop against this former appointed order, both he that is ordered and he also that hath presumed to order against this form, shall be deposed. He decreeth also by Proviso, what order shall be kept, if it chance that there be any occasion or matter laid to the charge of him that is to be ordered, either Bishop, Priest, Deacon, Clergy man, or else Abbot of any Monastery. But above all things sayeth he, we enact this to be observed, that no man be ordered Bishop by gifts or rewards: for both the giver, taker, and the broker, if he be a Church man, shallbe deprived of his benefice, or clerical dignity, and if he be a Lay man, that either taketh reward, or is a worker in the matter between the parties, we command that he pay double to be given to the Church. He giveth licence nevertheless, that where there hath been something given, by him that is ordered bishop, of custom, or for enstallation, that they may take it: so that it exceed not the some prescribed by him in this Law. We command therefore that the holy archbishops, namely of the elder Rome, of Constantinople, Alexandria, Theopolis, and Jerusalem, if they have a custom to give the Bishops and Clerks, at their ordering under twenty pounds in gold: they give only so much as the custom alloweth: But if there were more given before this Law, we command that there be no more given then twenty pounds. And so he setteth a rate to all other Ecclesiastical persons in their degrees, and according to the ability of their Churches, concluding thus: Surely if any presume by any means to take more than we have appointed, either in name of customs, or enstallations, we command that he restore threefold so much to his Church, of whom he took it. He doth utterly forbid bishops and Monks, to take upon them gardianship: nevertheless, he licenseth Priests, Diacons, and Subdeacons, to take the same on them in certain cases. He commandeth two Synods to be kept in every Province yearly. He prescribeth what, and in what order, matters shallbe examined, and discussed in them. Besides these, he enjoineth, and doth command all Bishops, and Priests, to celebrate the prayers in the ministration of the lords supper, and in baptism, not after a whispering or whyst manner, but with a clear voice, as thereby the minds of the hearers, may be stirred up with more devotion in praising the Lord God. He proveth by the testimony of S. Paul, that it ought so to be. He concludeth, that if the religious bishops, neglect any of these things, they shall not escape punishment by his order. And for the better observing of this constitution, he commandeth the rulers of the provinces under him, if they see these things neglected, to urge the bishops, to call Synods, and to accomplissh all things, which he hath commanded by this Law to be done by Synods. But if the Rulers see notwithstanding, that the bishops be slothful and slack to do these things, then to signify thereof to himself, that he may correct their negligence: for otherwise he will extremely punish the Rulers themselves. Besides these, saith this Emperor, we forbidden and enjoin the Religious bishops, Priests, Deacons, Subdeacons, Readers, and every other Clergy man, of what degree or order so ever he be, that they play not at the table plays (as cards, Con. 133. dice, and such like plays, used upon a table) nor associate or gaze upon the players at such plays, nor to be gazers at ay other open sights: if any offend against this decree, we command that he be prohibited from all sacred ministry for the space of three years, and to be thrust into a monastery. After these Constitutions made for the government of the secular Clergy (as you term it) in causes ecclesiastical, the Emperor descendeth to make statutes, ordinances and rules for monastical persons (commonly called Religious) declaring, that there is no manner of thing, The prince hath supreme government over all people (.213.) in all manner causes. which is not thoroughly to be searched by the authority of the Emperor, who hath (saith he) received from God the common government and principality over all men. And (.212.) The .212. Untruth. These laws show no such principality. to show further that this principality is over the persons, so well in Ecclesiastical causes as Temporal, he prescribeth orders and rules for them, and committeth to the abbots and bishops (jurisdiction) to see these rules kept, concluding that so well the Magistrates, The .213. Untruth. Impudent. That set in the margin, which is not in the text. as Ecclesiastical persons, ought to keep incorrupted all things which concern godliness: but above all other the Emperor, who ought to neglect no manner of thing pertaining to godliness. I omit many other Laws and Constitutions, that not only this Emperor, but also the Emperors before him made, touching matters and causes Ecclesiastical, and do remit you unto the Code, and the Authentikes, where you may see that all manner of causes Ecclesiastical, were overseen, (.214.) The .214. untruth. That can not be found either in the Code, or in thauthen. August. Epist. 48. Const. 133. Solitaria vita atque in ea contemplatio, res planè sacra est, et quae suapte natura animas ad Deum adducat. Neque ijs tantum, qui eam incolunt, sed etiam omnibus alijs puritate sua & apud Deum interpellatione competentem de se utilitatem praebeat. unde & olin ears Imperatoribus studio fuit habita, & nos non pauca de dignit. & honestate eorum legibus complexi sumus. Sequimur enim sacros in hoc canon's et sanctos patres qui hoc comprehenderunt legibus. quamdoquiden nihil non pervium ad inquisitionem maiestati èxistit imperatoriae, quae communem in oens homines moderationem et principatum à Deo percepit. ordered and directed by the Emperors, and so they did the dutiful service of Kings to Christ, In that (as S. Augustine saith) they made laws for Christ. Stapleton. All this gear runneth after one race, and altogether standeth in the execution of the ecclesiastical Laws. Neither is there any thing here to be stayed upon, but for that he hath furnished his margin with his accustomable note, that the prince hath the supreme government over all persons in all manner causes. Which as it is largely and liberally spoken: so is his text to narrow to bear any such wide talk. Yea and rather proveth the contrary, if he take the next line before with him, and stoppeth also his fellows blasphemous railyng, against the holy monastical life. The solitary and the contemplative life (saith justinian) is certainly an holy thing, and such a thing as by her own nature conducteth souls to God: neither is it fruitful to them only that lead that life, but through her purity and prayers to God giveth a sufficient help to other also. Wherefore themperors in former times, took care of this matter, and we also in our Laws have set forth many things touching the dignity and virtue of religious men. For we do follow in this the holy canons and the holy fathers who have drawn out certain orders and Laws for these matters. For there is no thing that th'emperors majesty doth not thoroughly search. Which hath received from God a common government and principality over all men. Now this place as ye see, serveth expressly for the Church's principality, whose holy Canons, and holy Father's th'emperor, as he sayeth, doth follow. By which words appeareth, Sequimur sacros Canon's & sanctos patres. he made no one Constitution of his own Authority. And therefore hath M. Horn craftily shifted in this word Authority which is not in the Latin: as though the emperors Authority were the chief ground of these Constitutions, whereas it is but the second, and depending only upon former Canons and writings of holy Fathers. Yet hath this jolly glosser placed in his margin a suprem government and principality in all manner causes. Which is not to be found any where in the text, but is a gloze of his own making. Wherein me thinketh, M. Horn fareth as certain Melancholic passionated do: whose imagination is so strong, that if they begin earnestly to imagine as present, either the sight or voice of any one that they exceedingly either love or fear, by force of their imagination, do talk with themselves, or cry out suddenly, as though in very deed, not in imagination only the thing desired or feared, were actually present. Verily so M. Horn, being exceeding passionated to find out this supreme government in all causes, by force of his imagination, putteth it in his margin, as though the text told it him, when the text talketh no such matter unto him, but is utterly dumb in that point and hush. This passion hath uttered itself in M. Horn not now only, but many times before also, as the diligent Reader may easily remember. Brach. 1.2. M. Horn. The .76. Division. pag. 45. a. Arriamiru King of Spain, (215) The .215. Untruth. He commanded not in M. horns sense. That is, as supreme governor but as the Council itself saith, as Pijssimus filius noster: Our most godly Son. commanded two Conucels to be celebrated in a City called Brachara, the one in the second year of his reign, the other the third year, wherein were certain rules made or rather renewed touching matters of faith, touching Constitutions of the Church, and for the duties and diligence of the Clergy, in their offices. Wambanus King of Spain (.216.) The .216. Untruth. No such thing in the Council, nor that Wambanus called it at all seeing the great disorders in the Church, not only in the discipline, but also in the matters of Faith, and about the Administration of the Sacraments, calleth a Synod at Brachara, named council. Brachar. 3. for the reformation of the errors and disorders about the Sacraments and Church discipline. The .20. Chapter. Of Ariamirus, Wambanus, and Richaredus Kings of Spain, and of Pelagius .2. and S. Gregory. 1. Popes. Stapleton. NOW are we gone from France and Constantinople to, and are come to Spain, and to the Counsels called of King Ariamirus and King Wambanus. But the Fathers at these Counsels tell M. Horn for his first greeting and welcome, that they acknowledged the authority of the See of Rome: and therefore being some controversies in matters ecclesiastical among them, they did direct themselves by the instructions and admonitions sent from the See Apostolic. Vide Brac. 1. tom. 2. Conc. pag. 216. et 217 Can. 18. &. 23. M. Horn. The .77. Division. pag. 45. b. About this time after the death of Pelagius .2. the Clergy and the people elected Gregory .1. called afterwards the great. But the custom was (saith Sabellicus) which is declared in an other place, that the Emperors should ratify by their consent, th'election of him that is chosen Pope. And to stay th'Emperors approbation (saith Platina) he sent his messengers with his letters, to beseech th'emperor Mauritius that he would not suffer th'election of the people and Clergy to take effect in the choice of him. etc. So much did this good man (saith Sabellicus) seeking after heavenvly things, contemn earthly and refused that honour, for the which other did contend so ambitiously. But the Emperor being desirous to plant so good a man in that place, would not condescend to his request, but (.217.) The .217. Untruth. That is not in Sabellicus. sent his Ambassadors, to ratify and confirm the election. Stapleton. This authority toucheth nothing but th'election of the Pope wont to be confirmed by the Emperor for order and quietness sake. And that but of custom only (for the custom was saith Sabellicus) not of any Supreme government of the Prince in that hehalf, as though without it, the election were not good. Yet I commend M. Horn that, he rehearseth so much good commendation of Pope Gregory, that sent hither our Apostle S. Augustine. But I marue●l how he can be so good a man, and the religion that came from him to England no better than superstiton and plain Idolatry, as M. Horn and his fellows do daily preach and write. And ye shall hear a non that he goeth as craftily as he can, and as far as he durst to obscure and disgrace him. M. Horn. The .78. Division. pag. 45. b. Richaredus King of Spain, rightly taught and instructed in the Christian faith, by the godly and Catholic bishop Leander Bishop of Hispalis, did not only bring to pass, that the whole nation, should forsake the Arrianisme and receive true faith, but also did carefully study how to continue his people in the true Religion by his means newelye received. And therefore commanded all the Bishops within his Dominions to assemble together at Toletum, in the fourth year of his reign, and there to consult about staying and confirming of his people in true faith and religion of Christ by godly discipline. When the bishops were assembled in the Convocation house, at the King's commandment: the King cometh in amongst them, he maketh a short, but a pithy and most Christian oration unto the whole Synod: Wherein he showeth, that the cause wherefore he called them together into the Synod, was To repair and make a (.218.) The .218. Untruth. False translation. instaurare formam, is not to make a new form, but to repair the old. new form of Church discipline, by common consultation in Synod, which had been letted long time before by the heretical Arianisme, the which stay and let of the Arrian● Heresies, it hath pleased God (saith he) to remove and put away by my means. He willeth them to be joyful and glad, that the ancient manner to make Ecclesiastical constitutions for the well ordering of the Church, is now through God's providence reduced and brought again to the bounds of the Fathers by his honourable industry. And last of all, he doth admonish and exhort them before they begin their consultation, to sast and pray unto the Almighty, that he will vouchsaulfe to open and show unto them a true order of discipline, which that age knew not, the senses of the Clergy were so much benumbed, with long forgetfulness. Whereupon there was a three days fast appointed. That done, the Synod assembleth, the King cometh in, and fitteth amongst them: he delivereth in writing to be openly read amongst them the confession of his faith, in which he protesteth, with what endeavour and care, being their King, he ought not only to study for himself, to be rightly given to serve and please God with a right Faith in true Religion: but also to provide for his subjects, that they be thoroughly instructed in the Christian faith. He affirmeth and thereto taketh them to witness, that the Lord hath stirred him up, The dutiful care of a Prince about religion. inflamed with the heat of Faith: both to remove and put away the furious and obstinate Heresies and Schisms, and also by his vigilant endeavour and care to call and bring home again the people unto the confession of the true faith, and the Communion of the Catholic Church. further alluding to the place of S. Paul, where he saith, that through his ministry in the Gospel, he offereth up the Gentiles unto God, to be an acceptable Sacrifice: he saith to the Bishops, That he offereth by their ministry, this noble people, as an holy and acceptable Sacrifice to God. And last of all with the rehearsal of his Faith, he declareth unto the bishops, That as it hath pleased God by his care and industry to win this people to the Faith, and unite them to the Catholic Church: so he chargeth them, now to see them stayed and confirmed by their diligent teaching and instructing them in the truth. After this Confession was read, and that he himself, and also his Queen Badda, had confirmed and testified the same with their hands subscription: the whole Synod gave thanks to God with many and sundry acclamations, saying: That the Catholic King Richaredus is to be crowned of God with an everlasting crown, for he is the gatherer together of new people in the Church. This King truly ought to have the Apostolic reward, reward, who hath performed the Apostolic office. This done, after the Noble men and Bishops of Spain, whom the worthy King had converted, and brought to the amity of faith, in the Communion of Christ's Church, had also given their confession openly, and testified the same with subscription: the King willing the Synod to go in hand to repair and establissh some Ecclesiastical discipline, saith to the Synod, alluding to S. Paul's saying to the Ephesians to this effect: That the care of a king ought to stretch forth itself, and not to cease till he have brought (.219.) The .219. Untruth. No such words in that sentence the subjects to a full knowledge and perfect age in Christ: and as (220) The .220. Untruth. The kings whole words foully maimed and mangled, as shall appear. A Princes special care for his subjects a king ought to bend all his power and authority to repress the insolence of the evil, and to nourish the common peace and tranquillity: Even to ought he much more to study, labour, and be careful, not only to bring his subjects from errors and false religion, but also to see them instructed, taught, and trained up in the truth of the clear light, and for this purpose he doth there decree of (221) The .221. Untruth. No such words in the Council. his own authority, commanding the Bishops to see it observed, that at every Communion time before the receipt of the same, all the people with a loud voice together, do recite distinctly the Simbol or creed, set forth by the (222) The .222. Untruth It was not of the Nicene Council, but of the Constantinople Council. Nicem council. When the Synod had consulted about the discipline, and had agreed upon such rules and orders, as was thought most meet for that time and church, and the King had considered of them, he doth by his assent and (223) The .223. Untruth. For not by authority of Supreme government (as M Horn driveth it) but only for the execution of it in his Dominions. authority, confirm and ratify the same, and first subscribeth to them, and then after him all the Synod. This zealous care and careful study of this and the other above named princes, providing, ruling, governing, and by their Princely power and authority, directing their whole Clergy, in causes or matters Ecclesiastical, was never disallowed, or misliked of the ancient Fathers, nor of the bishops of Rome, till now in these later days, the insatiable ambition of the clergy, and the overmuch negligence and wantoness of the Princes, with the gross ignorance of the whole laity, gave your holy father (224) The 224. Untruth. Slanderous and blasphemous. Lib. Epist. 7. Epist. 126. The Pope at that time commended the Prince's government in causes Ecclesiasiastical. the child of perdition, the full sway to make perfect the mystery of iniquity: yea, it may appete by an Epistle that Gregorius surnamed great, B. of Rome, writeth unto this worthy King Richaredus, that the B. of Rome did much commend this careful (225) The .225. Untruth. S. Gregory speaketh not there of any government at all. The (226) Prince calleth Counsels and governeth ecclesiastical causes without any doings of the Pope therein. government of Princes in causes of religion. For he most highly commendeth the doings of this most Christian King. He affirmeth that he is ashamed of himself, and of his own slackness, The .226. Untruth. avouched in the margin, but not a whit proved in the Text. when he doth consider the travail of Kings in gathering of souls to the celestial gain. Yea what shall I (saith this B. of Rome to the King) answer at the dreadful doom when your excellency shall lead after your sel● flocks of faithful ones, which you have brought unto the true faith by careful and continual preaching, etc. Although I have meddled and done nothing at all with you, doing this (227) The .227. Untruth. S. Gregory's words exceedingly over reached. altogether without me, yet am I partaker of the joy with you. Neither doth Gregory blame this King as one meddling in Church causes, wherein he is not Ruler: but he praiseth God for him, that he maketh godly constitutions against the unfaithfulness of miscreants: and for no worldly respect will be persuaded to see them violated. Stapleton. We are now upon the sudden returned into Spain: But wonderful it is to consider, how M. Horn misordereth and mistelleth his whole matter, and enforceth as well other where, as here also by Richaredus, that which can not be enforced: that is, to make him a Supreme head in all causes Ecclesiastical. Ye say M. Horn, he called a Synod to repair and make a new form of the Church discipline. But I say you have falsely translated the word, instaurare, which is not to make a new thing, but to renew an old: which differeth very much. For by the example of the first, Queen Marie repaired and renewed the Catholic Religion. By the report of the second, you made in deed a new form of matters in King Edward's days, never used before in Christ's Church. You say also he removed from Spain the Arrians heresies. I grant you: he did so. But think you M. Horn, Tom. 2. Conc. p. 168 col. 1. b. if he now lived, and were prince of our Country, he would have nothing to say to you and your fellows, as well as he had to the Arrians? Nay. He and his Council hath said something to you and against you already, Pag. 168. Ante communicationem Corporis Christi. Pag. 169. Secundum formam concilij Constantinop. S●mbolū fidei recitetur. Et mox. Et ad christi corpus et sanguinem praelibandun, pectora populorum fide purificata accedant. Deijs symbolis vide tom. 2. Concil. pag. 392. as we shall anon see. You say: he commanded the Bishops that at every communion time, before the receipt of the same, the people with a loud voice together should recite distinctly the Symbol or Crede set forth by the Nicene Council. It happeneth well, that the Nicene Council was added. I was afeard, lest ye would have gone about to prove, the people to have song then, some such Genevical Psalms as now the brotherhod most esteemeth: Whereunto ye have here made a pretty foundation, calling that after your Genevical sort, the Communion, which the Fathers call the body and blood of Christ: and the King himself calleth the communicating of the body and blood of Christ. Now here by the way I must admonish you, that it was not the Nicene Crede (as ye writ) made at Constantinople that was appointed to be rehearsed of the people. The which is fuller than the Nicene, for avoiding of certain heresies: fuller I say, as concerning Christ conceived and incarnated of the holy ghost (which thing I can not tell how or why your Apology, as I have said, hath left out) with some other like. This Council than hath said somewhat to you for your translation, and much more for your wicked and heretical meaning, to convey from the blessed Sacrament, the real presence of Christ's very body. But now M. Horn take you and your Madge good heed, and mark you well, whether ye and your sect be not of the Arrians generation, which being Priests, contrary to the Canons of the Church, which they as mightily contemned as ye do, kept company with their wives, but yet with such as they lawfully married, before they were ordered Priests. The Protestants follow the Arrians in their carnal lechery. Can. 5. Tolet. 3. c. 1 Who returning to the Catholic faith from their Arianisme, would feign have lusked in their lechery, as they did before being Arians. Which disorder this Council reformeth. The same Council also commandeth, that the decrees of all Counsels, yea and the decretal Epistles of the holy Bishops of Rome, should remain in their full strength. Because forsooth by Arrians they had before been violated and neglected, M. Horns Madge must be sold for a slave by this Council which M. Horn himself allegeth. Illi vero canonicè, multeres quidem ab Episcopis venundentur. et pretium ipsum pauperibus irrogetur. Canon. 5. as they are at this day by you and your fellows utterly despised and contemned. So like ever are young heretics to the old. unum nôr is, omnes nôr is. And this is M. Horn, one part of the repairing, and the making (as you call it) of a new form of the Church discipline, ye spoke of. But for the matter itself, ye are all in a mummery, and dare not rub the galled horse on the back for fear of wincing. Now all in an ill time have ye put us in remembrance of this Council: for you must be Canonically punished, and Mistress Madge must be sold of the bishops, and the price must be given to the poor. I would be sorry she should hear of this gear: and to what pitiful case ye have brought her by your own Council. Mark now your margin as fast and as solemnly as ye will with the note: The dutiful care of a Prince about Religion: with the note of a Princes special c●re for his subjects, and with such like. I do not envy you such notes. In case now, notwithstanding ye are so curstly handled of King Richaredus and his Council, ye be content of your gentle and suffering nature, to bear it all well: and will for all this still go forward to set forth his Primacy, be it so. What can ye say therein further? I perceive than ye make great and deep account that he subscribed before the Council, A great difference betwixt the subscription of themperors and of the Bishops. Sext. Syn. Const. act. 17. &. 18. Georgius miserant Deo, etc. Definens, subscripsi. Subscriptio pijss. & christ. dilecti Const. imperat. Legimus et consentimus. act 18 Vt patet in dict. tom. 2 Concil. & Isidor. videl. Aera. 627. Hoc est. an. 589 Beda. li. 1. cap. 23. in Hist. gent. Angl. whereof I make as little: considering here was no new matter defined by him or the Fathers, but a confirmation and a ratification made of the first four Counsels. Which the King strengtheneth by all means he could, yea with the subscription of his own hand, because the other Kings his predecessors had been Arians. Otherwise in the first .7. General Councils, I find no subscription of the Emperors, but only in the sixth, proceeding from the said cause that this doth, that is, for that his predecessors were heretics, of the heresy of the Monothelites: but not proceeding altogether in the same order. For the Emperor there subscribeth after all the Bishops, saying only: We have read the Decree and do consent. But the Bishop of Constantinople saith: I George by the mercy of God Bishop of Constantinople to my definitive sentence, have subscribed: after the same sort other Bishops also set to their hands. And this was because the matter was there finally determined against the Monothelites. In case this subscription will not serve the matter, M. Horn hath an other help at hand: yea he hath S. Gregory himself, that (as he saith) commendeth Richaredus for his government in causes Ecclesiastical: and this is set in the margin as a weighty matter, with an other forthwith as weighty, that this Richaredus called Counsels, and governed Ecclesiastical causes, without any doing of Pope Gregory therein. But by your leave, both your notes are both foolish and false. Foolish I say, for how should Pope Gregory be a doer with him, being at that time no Pope, the council being kept in the time of Pelagius .2. S. Gregory's predecessor, in the year .589. as it appeareth by th● account of Isidorus living about that time: and S. Gregory was made Pope in the year .592. by the account of S. Bede. False, I say: for Richaredus called not Councils, but one only Council: yea and false again. For there was no government Ecclesiastical in Richaredus doings. Neither is there any such word in the whole Council by M. Horn alleged, nor any thing that may by good consequence induce such government. I say then further, ye do most impudently, in going about to make your Readers believe, that Richaredus and other Princes after him, were taken for Supreme heads of the Church, till now in these later days: and most blasphemously in calling the Pope, for this matter, the child of perdition. As well might you for this cause have called Gregory so too. Who is surnamed, as ye here write, the Great. But God wotteth, and the more pity, not very great with you and your fellows. Of all books, his writings bear most full and plain testimony, for the Pope's singular pre-eminence: which thing is in an other place by me largely proved, that though the matter here seemeth to require somewhat to be said, I need not say any thing, See the 4. Article the 9 pag. and certain following. but only remit the Reader to that place where he shall find that S. Gregory practised this Supreme authority, as well in Spain, as other where, throughout the whole Christened world. But what saith S. Gregory? Forsooth that the King Richaredus by his careful and continual preaching, brought Arrians into the true faith. S. Gregory saith well. And yet you will not (I trow) say: The Prince himself preached in pulpit to the Arrians. What then? Verily that which he did by his Clergy, and to the which he was a godly promoter, that he is said to do himself. As to preach, to convert heretics, to decree this or that, and briefly to govern in causes Ecclesiastical. All which the Prince in his own person or of his own authority, never doth. But by his furtherance such things being done, he is said sometimes (as here of Saint Gregory) to do them himself. M. Horn goeth about craftily to disgrace and slander Saint Gregory. We might now pass to the next matter, saving that as ye without any good occasion or bettering of your cause, bring in that Richaredus woorked these things without Pope Gregory: So it may be feared, ye have a worse meaning, and that ye do this altogether craftily to blemish and deface Saint Gregory with the ignorant Reader. Else tell me to what purpose writ ye, that Saint Gregory was ashamed of himself, Greg. li. 7. Ep. 126. and his own slackness? Why bring you in these words of saint Gregory, What shall I answer at the dreadful doom, when your excellency shall lead with you flocks of faithful ones, which ye have brought into the true faith, by careful and continual preachings? I must then either to reform your ignorance (if ye knew it not before) or to prevent your reader's circumvention by your wily handling of the matter, like to be perchance miscarried: if ye knew it before, Greg. li. 6. Epist. 37. admonish you and him, that this is spoken of S. Gregory in deed, but as proceeding from a marvelous humility and lowliness. The worthy doings of S. Gregory. In like manner as he wrote to Saint Augustine our Apostle in the commendation of his doings, wherein yet undoubtedly he was a great doer himself many ways, as by the History of Bede clearly appeareth Otherwise though Richaredus doings be most glorious and worthy of perpetual renown, Nauclerus Generate 21. pa. 752 yet shall S. Gregory match him or pass him. Neither shall he altogether be void of his worthy commendation, concerning his care for the reforming of Spain, and repressing of heresies there, either by his authority, or by his learned works. Verily Platina witnesseth, that by the means of this Gregory, the Goths returned to the unite of the Catholic faith. Plat. in Greg. 1. Which appeareth not at that time any otherwhere, then in Spain Hearken farther what Nauclerus one that you oft rehearse in this your book, writeth of him: In super Beatus Gregorius, etc. Beside this Saint Gregory compelled the Ligurians, the Venetians, the Iberians, which had confessed their schism, by their libel to receive the Decrees of the Council of Chalcedo: and so brought them to the unity of the Church. He reduced them from idolatry, partly by punnisshment, partly by preaching, the Brucians', the people of Sardinia, and the husbandmen of Campania. By the good and mighty authority of his writings, and by Ambassadors sent in convenient time, he sequestered from the body of the Church, the Donatiste Heretics in Africa, the Manichees in Sicily, the Arrians in Spain, the Agnoites in Alexandria. Only the Heresy of the Neophites in France, rising by simoniacal bribes, as it were by so many roots, was spread far and wide: against the which he valiantly fought, labouring mightily against it, to the Queen Brunechildis, and to the French Kings Theodoricus, and Theodobertus, till at the length a General Council being summoned, he obtained to have it utterly banned and accursed. This saith Nauclerus of other Countries. Now what need I speak of our Realm, the matter being so notorious, that by his good means, by his study and carefulness, we were brought from most miserable idolatry to the faith of Christ? And therefore as our Venerable Countryman Bede writeth, we may well and ought to call him our Apostle. S. Gregory our Apostle. Lib. 2. c. 1. Rectè nostrum appellare possumus & debemus Apostolum. Quia cum, etc. For, saith he, whereas he had the chief bishopric in all the world, and was the chief Ruler of the Churches, that long before were converted to the faith, he procured our Nation, that before that time was the Idols slave, to be the Church of Christ. So that we may well use that saying taken from the Apostle. All were it, that he were not an Apostle to other, yet is he our Apostle. We are the seal of his Apostlesship in our Lord God. It appeareth that S. Gregory had to do in Ireland also by his Ecclesiastical authority. Greg. lib. 2 cap. 36. Thus much have I here spoken of S. Gregory, either necessarily, or (as I suppose) not altogether without good cause: Surely not without most deep heart grief, to consider how far we are gone from the learning, virtue, and faith, which we now almost one thousand years past, received at this Blessed man's hands. Which altogether, with our new Apostle M. Horn here, is nothing but Gross ignorance. And this blessed and true Apostle of our English Nation, no better than the child of perdition. That is, as he meaneth in deed, a plain antichrist. I pray God, one's open the eyes of our Country, to see who is in deed the true Antichrist, and who are his messengers and forerunners, thereby carefully and Christianly to shun as well the one as the other. Christ is the Truth itself, as himself hath said. Who then is more near antichrist, than the teacher of Untruths? And what a huge number hath M. Horn heaped us up in that, hitherto hath been answered, being little more than the third part of his book? Yea in this very Division how do they muster? Some of them have already been touched. But now to the rest more at large, let us over run the Division shortly again. First besides his false translation, putting for repairing the order of Ecclesiastical discipline, M. Horns Untruths laid forth. to make a new form thereof, as though that King altered the old Religion of his realm, and placed a new never used before in Christ's Church, as M. Horn and his fellows have done in our Country, beside this petty sleight, and divers other before noted, he hath so maimed and mangled the words of King Richaredus (wherein the whole pith of this Division resteth) to make some appearance of his pretenced Primacy, that it would loath a man to see it, and weary a man to express it. Namely in the text where his Note standeth of a Princes special care for his subjects. Tom. 2. Conc. pag. 167. col. 2. The whole words of the King are these: The care of a King ought so far to be extended and directed, until it be found to receive the full measure of age and knowledge. For as in worldly things the King's power passeth in glory, so ought his care to be the greater for the wealth of his subjects. But now (most holy Priests) we bestow not only our diligence in those matters whereby our subjects may be governed and live most peaceably, but also by the help of Christ, we extend ourselves to think of heavenly matters, and we labour to know how to make our people faithful. And verily if we ought to bend all our power to order men's manners, and with Princely power to repress the insolency of the evil, if we ought to give all aid for the increase of peace and quiet, much more we ought to study, to desire and think upon godly things, to look after high matters, and to show to our people being now brought from error, the truth of clear light. For so he doth which trusteth to be rewarded of God with abundant reward. For so he doth, which above that is committed unto him doth add more, seeing to such it is said, Luc. 10. what so ever thou spendest more, I, when I come again, will recompense thee. This is the whole and full talk of Richaredus the king to the Council touching his dutiful care about religion. Compare this, gentle Reader, with the broken and mangled narration of M. horn, and thou shalt see to the eye his lewd pelting and pelting lewdness. Thou shalt see, that the king protested his care in gods matters to be (not his dew charge and vocation, as a king) but an addition above that which was committed wnto him, and to be a work of supererogation, and that he extended himself of zeal above that, which his duty and office required. All which M. Horn left out, because he knew it did quite overthrow his purpose. He saith again of king Richaredus, that he decreed in the Council of his own Authority, commanding the bishops to see it observed: which words also he hath caused to be printed in a distinct lettre, as the words of his Author alleged. Concil. Tolet. 3. Cap 2. Tom. 2. pag. 169. Col. 1. But they are his own words, and do proceed of his own Authority, not to be found in the whole process of the King's Oration to the Council, or in the Council itself. But contrariwise the Council expressly saith of this Decree: Consultu pijssimi & gloriosissimi Richaredi Regis constituit Synodus. The Synod hath appointed or decreed by the advise of the most godly and glorious King Richaredus. The Synod M. Horn, made that Decree by the advise of the King. Vide Gregor. lib. 7. epist. 126. The king made it not by his own authority commanding. etc. as you very Imperiously do talk. Again where you say that S. Gregory did much commend the careful government of Princes in causes of Religion, S. Gregory speaketh not of any such government at all. It is an other of your Untruths. Last of all, where Saint Gregory sayeth of humility, as we have before declared, to the king: Et si vobiscum nihil egimus: Although we have done nothing with you: You to amplify the matter, enlarge your translation with a very lying liberality, thus. Although I have meddled and done nothing at all with you, doing this altogether without me. For these words, meddle, at all, and doing this altogether without me, is altogether without and beyond your Latin of Saint Gregory. Whom you overreach exceeding much: Making him not so much as to meddle with the Kings doings, and that the king did altogether without him: Which yet (if Nauclerus your common alleged Author be true of his word) did very much with the King, Nauclerus ubi supra: & Platina. and furthered many ways the converting of the Arrians in Spain to the Catholic faith. But so it is. As in all your proofs you overreach mightily the force of your examples, concluding Supreme government in all causes, when the Argument proceedeth of no government at all, but of execution, and so forth, even so in your translations (wherein yet you look singularly to be credited, scarce once in ten leaves, bringing one sentence of Latin) you over reach marvelously your original Authorities. Such is your untrue and false dealing, not only here, but in a manner throughout your whole book. And now to end this second book, with a flourish of Master jewels Rhetoric, to sweet your mouth at the end Master Horn, that so with the more courage we may proceed (after a pause upon this) to the third and fourth, let me spur you a question. M. jewel ●n his Rely. pa. 91 What M. Horn? Is it not possible your doctrine may stand without lies? So many Untruths in so little room, without the shame of the world, without the fear of God? Where did Christ ever command you to make, your Prince the supreme governor in all causes? By what Commission, by what words? Or if Christ did not, who ever else commanded you so to do? What law? What Decree, what Decretal, what Legantine, what Provincial? But what a wonderful case is this? The Supreme government of Princes in all causes Ecclesiastical, that we must needs swear unto by book oath, yea and that we must needs believe in conscience, to be so ancient, so universal, so Catholic, so clear, so glorious, can not now be found, neither in the old Law, nor in the new, nor by any one example of the first 600. years. THE third BOOK: DISPROVING THE PRETENCED PRACTICE OF Ecclesiastical government in Emperors and Kings as well of our own Country of England, as of France and Spain, in these later .900. years from the time of Phocas to Maximilian next predecessor to Charles the. V of famous memory. M. Horn. The .79. Division. Fol. 47. b. Next after Sabinianus, an obscure Pope, enemy and successor to this Gregory, succeeded Bonifacius. 3. Who although he durst not in plain dealing deny, or take from the Emperors, the authority and jurisdiction in the Pope's election, and other Church matters: yet he was the first that (.228.) The .228. untruth. Slanderous. Sabel. Plat. Paul. Dia. Volater. Naucler. Martinus. opened the gap thereunto: for as Sabel. testifieth, with whom agree all other writers, for the most part: This Bonifacius immediately upon the entrance into his Papacy, dealt with Phocas, to win that the Church of Rome, might (.229.) The .229. untruth. Not to be Head, but to be so called. be head of all other Churches, the which he hardly obtained, because the Grecians did challenge that prerogative for Constantinople. After he had obtained this glorious and ambitious title, of the bloody tyrant Phocas, and that with (.230.) The .230. untruth Slanderous. no small bribes: like unto one that having a beam in his own eye, went about to pull the mote out of his brothers, he made a decree, that every one should be accursed, that prepared to himself a way into the Papacy, or any other Ecclesiastical dignity, with friendship or bribery. Also that the bishops in every city, should be chosen by the people and Clergy: and that the election should be good, so that the Prince of the City did approve the party by them chosen, and the Pope adding his authority thereto, had once said, volumus & jubemus: we will and command. But saith sabel, both these decrees are abolished. The first Chapter. Of Phocas the Emperor, and of Bonifacius the .3. Pope. Stapleton. HAVING now good reader, passed the first six hundred years, and having answered to M. horns arguments, for such proofs as he pretendeth to serve him, for things done within those .600. years: I am in a great doubt and stay with myself, what order to take for the residue of mine answer. We have gone over little more than one half, of that part of M. horns book, wherein he taketh upon him to be the challenger, and an apponente: and if we weigh the number of years, in the which M. Horn taketh his large race and course, they yet remain almost a thousand to those that be already passed. If we measure the leaves, almost the one half rest behind to the number of .42. Beside the remnant of his book, wherein he plaith the defendants part. I speak thus much for this consideration. If I should largely and copiously answer the residue, as I have begun, and fully unfold his fond follies, confuting every point, the book would wax to big and huge. On the other side, if I should lightly and breiflye pass it over, perchance M. Horn would brag and say he were not, no nor could be answered. But yet bethinking myself well upon the matter, the compendious way seemeth to me at this time best. Wherein I could be so short and compendious, that with one line, I should sufficiently discharge myself for the whole answer, in saying shortly, but truly, that there is not, no not one only authority apt and fit to conclude his purpose. I could also shift him of an other way: and because M. jewel with other his fellows groundeth himself upon it, as a good and a peremptory exception, I might boldly say, M. Horn, all your proofs after Gregory come to late: your .600. years are empted, spent, and gone. Again I might and truly, seeing that his pretenced proofs, of the first six hundred years are so faint and weak, yea seeing that he is quite borne down, with his own authors, in the same book, chapter, leaf, and sometime line to, that himself allegeth: say, that either it is most likely, that he cannot bring any good or substantial matter, for the latter 900. years, or what so ever it be, it must yield and give place, to the Fathers of the first six hundred years. And with this answer might we, contemning and neglecting all his long ragmans' roll, that hereafter followeth, set upon him an other while, and see how valiantly he will defend his own head. Which God wot he will full fayntelye do. Well I will not be so precise, The order to be taken here after in answering the residue of M. horns book. as to let it alone altogether, but I shall take the mean, and as I think, the most allowable way: neither answering all at length, and stitch by stitch with diligence, as I have hitherto used, nor leaving all, but taking some advised choice. Wherefore if hereafter he bring any accustomed or stolen merchandise, it shall pass: but if any fine fresh, far sought, and far bowght merchandise come, we will give him the looking on, and now and then cope with him to. Go to then M. Horn, take your weapon in your hand again, and bestir yourself with it, edgling, or foining with the best advantage ye can. Ye say then Bonifacius the third opened the gap to take away from th'emperor the authority and jurisdiction of the pope's election: Ye say it, but ye do not, nor can prove it. Ye say that he won of Phocas, that Rome might be head of all Churches, meaning thereby, as appeareth well by that which followeth, and by M. jewel and your other fellows, that it was not taken so before. Plat. in Bonifa. 3. Whereof I have already proved the contrary by the Council of Chalcedo: by Victor, yea the Emperors Valentinian and justinian: and otherwise to. Adoi● Chroni. Beda de sex Aera. Martinus Polonus. Paulus Diaconus. But this you report untruly. For the Pope's suit was not, that his See might be the head of all Churches, but that the see of S. Peter which is the head of all Churches, might be so called and taken of all men. And the reason is added by Ado, Paulus Diaconus, Beda, Martinus, and others, because the Se● of Constantinople, wrote herself at that time the Chief of all others. This new attempt, caused the Pope to make this suit. Not that either it should be so (for so it had been without the emperors authority) or that than it was first called so. Ye say he wan this glorious and ambitious title with no small bribes. Ye say it, but ye neither prove it, nor can prove it. And sure I am, that none of your authors ye name in the margin, Sabel. Acnea. 8. l 6. Platina, in Boni. 2. Paul. Dia. de gestis Longobar. li. 4. c. 11. Naucler. Gener. 21. Martinus Polon. Volateranus. saith so. Neither do I yet see, whereupon ye should ground yourself, unless it be upon your strange grammar, turning Magna contentione, with great contention, or with much ado, into no small bribes: as ye did lately convenit, into oportet. And for this that ye call this a glorious and ambitious title, obtained by this Bonifacius: truth it is, that as this title was ever due to the Church of Rome, and confessed as I have said, by Counsels, Emperors and other long before the time of this Phocas or Bonifacius, so neither this pope, nor any other of his successors usurped or used it, as a title. These be your manifold falsehoods M. Horn, lapped up in so few lines. After your lewd untruths, followeth a copy of your singular wit. For to what end, with what wisdom, or with what benefit of your cause recite you two decrees of this Bonifacius? I will give you leave to breath on the matter, M Horns folly. least upon the sudden you might be apalled with the question. The best answer, I ween, you could make, would be to say, that hereby appeareth the Ambition of pope Bonifacius, 3. And then to prove that Ambition in him, by these decrees, I think, it would trouble you much more. For in the one he expressly decreeth against Ambition, in the other he alloweth the consent of lay princes in a bishops election. But it is well, that as Sabel. saith: Both these decrees are abolished. Whereof it will follow, if that be true, that if the decrees were good, and made for you, than yet they continued not, but were abolished. If they were nought, and made against the pope, yet the fault was soon amended. Thus how so ever it fall out, you see how wisely and to what great purpose you have alleged those decrees. M. Horn. The .80. Division. Fol. 48. a. Now began this matter to brew by little and little, first he obtained to (.231.) The 231. untruth, as before. be the chief over all the Bishops, then to cover vice with virtue, and to hide his ambition, he condemned all ambition in labouring Spiritual promotion, and in the election of Bishops, where the confirmation before was in the Emperors: because the Emperor gave him an Iliche, he took an ell, because he had given him a foot, he would thrust in the whole body, and turn the right owner out, For (.232.) The 232. untruth. Themperor by that decree is not left out, leving out the Emperor, he putteth in the Princes of the Cities, from whom he might as easily afterwards take away, as for a show he gave falsely that unto them, that was none of his to give: granting unto them the allowance of the election: but to himself the authority of ratifying, or infringing the same, choose them whether they would allow it or no. And to show what authority he would reserve to himself, borrowing of the tyrant, speaking in the singular number. Sic volo, sic jubeo, so will I, so do I command: for the more magnificence in the plural number, he princely lappeth up all the matter with volumus & jubemus, we will and command: Which words, like the Law of the Medes and Persians, that may not be revoked, if they once pass through the * Now M. Horn doth his kind. Sabel. Pope's holy lips, must needs stand, allow or not allow, who so list, with full authority the matter is quite dashed. But thanks be to God for all this (the decree is abolished) followeth immediately. For (.233.) The .233. untruth. 4 pope's came between and 25. years. shortly after, Isacius the emperors Lieutenant in Italy, did confirm and ratify the election of Severinus the first of that name, for saith Platina. The election of the Pope made by the Clergy and people in those days, * It was so, vi, non iure, by force not by right. was but a vain thing, unless the Emperor, or his Lieutenant had confirmed the same. Stapleton. Whereas ye say this Bonifacius left out the Emperor (who had the confirmation of them before) in his decree concerning the election of Bishops and put in the princes of the city, and gave falsely that to them, which was none of his to give: if ye mark the words of the decree well, the Emperor is not left out, but left in as good case as he was before. unless ye think the Emperor is prince of no city: or that all cities were at this time under the Emperor, whereas even in our Europa, the Emperor had nothing to do, in England, France, Germany Spain, no nor in many places of Italy. And I must put you in remembrance, Fol. 38. that before this time, when justinian was Emperor, king Theodatus did confirm the election of pope Agapetus, as you rehearse out of Sabellicus. Neither did the pope as of himself, and of new give any authority to princes in election more than they had before. But by his decree renewed the old order of election of bishops. Which was wont to pass, by the consent of the clergy, prince, and people, with the pope's confirmation afterward: Therefore ye say untruly surmising that the decree of Bonifacius, was in this point immediately abolished. Verily your example of Isacius the emperors Lieutenant little serveth your purpose, who shortly after, you say, Bonifa. 4. Theodat. Bonifa. 5. Honor. 1. confirmed and ratified the election of Pope Severinus. For first between this confirming of Severinus, and the death of this Bonifacius, four Popes came between, and well near .30. years. Again as touching this ratifying and confirmation that Isacius the emperors Lieutenant practised, will you see how orderly it proceeded? Verily by mere violence, by spoiling the treasure of the Church of S. john Lateranes. At the distribution of which treasure afterward so orderly obtained by the Emperor Heraclius, the Saracens fell out with the Christians, Sabellicus Aenead. 8. lib. 6. pag. 535. (because they had no part thereof with the Greek and roman Soldiers) forsook the emperors service, got from the Empire Damascus, all Egypt, and at length Persia itself, and embraced Mahomet then living and his doctrine, which since hath so plagued all Christendom. So well prospered the doings of this Isacius: and such wholesome examples M. Horn hath picked out to furnish his imagined supremacy withal. M. Horn. The .81. Division. pag. 48. a Sisenandus the king of Spain, Tol. 4. calleth forth of all parts of his dominions the Bishops to a City in Spain, called Toletum. The purpose and manner of the kings doings in that council, the Bishops themselves set forth, first as they affirm: They assemble together by the precepts and commandment of the king, to consult of certain orders of discipline for the Church, to reform the abuses that were crept in about the Sacraments and the manners of the Clergy. The king with his nobles, cometh into the council house: He exhorteth them to careful diligence, that thereby all errors and abuses, may be wypt a way clear out of the Churches in spain. They follow the kings (.234.) The .234. untruth. The king followed their direction, not they the Kings in causes ecclesiastical. direction, and agree upon many wholesome rules. When they have concluded, they beseech the king to continue his regim●t, to govern his people with justice and godliness. And when the King had given his assent to the rulers of discipline, which they had (.235.) The .235 untruth. Not simply agreed upon, but fully and finally had decreed and determined. Tol. 5. Tol. 6. Desinitis itaque etc. Tol. 7. agreed upon, they subscribed the same with their own hands. The like Synod Chintillanus king of Spain, did convocate at Toletum, for certain ceremonies, orders, and discipline, which was confirmed by his precept and (.236.) The 236. untruth. By the bishops decree not by the kings decree. Decreto nostro sancimus. decree, in the first year of his reign. And an other also by the same king, and in the same place, and for the like purpose, was called and kept the second year of his reign. Chinasuindus' King of Spain, no less careful for Church matters and Religion, than his predecessors, (.237.) The .237. untruth. For not by his Supreme Authority, Study Serenissimi Regis By the favour and endeavour etc. Tol. 8. appointeth his bishops to assemble at Toletum in convocation, and there to consult for the stablishing of the faith, and Church discipline, which they did. Reccessiunthus King of Spain, commanded his Bishops to assemble at Toletum, in the first year of his reign, and there appointed a Synod, wherein besides the Bishops and abbots, there sat a great company of the noble men of Spain. The King himself came in amongst them, he maketh a grave and very godly exhortation unto the whole Synod, he professed how careful he is, that his subjects should be rightly instructed in the true faith, and Religion. He propoundeth the form of an * In that Oath, there was, I warrant you, no Supreme government etc. Oath which the clergy and others of his subjects were * By the virtue of a Canon made in Tolet. 7. wont to receive, for the assurance of the King's saulfty. He exhorteth them to ordain sufficiently for the maintenance of godliness and justice. He moveth his nobles that they will (.238.) The .238. untruth. Not to assist, but in all points to obey and follow the ordinances of the Synod. assist and further the good and godly ordinances of the Synod. He promiseth that he will by his princely authority, ratify and maintain what so ever they shall decree, to the furtherance of true Godliness, and Religion. The Synod maketh ordinances: the clergy, and nobility there assembled subscribeth them: and the King confirmeth the same with his (.239.) The 239. untruth. No such matter in the Council. Tol. 9 Tol. 10. royal assent and authority. He called two other Synods in the same place for such like purpose, in the seventh and eight years of his reign. The 2. Chapter: Of other kings of Spain, and of the Toletane Counsels holden in their reigns. Stapleton. WE are yet on's again come to Spain: and we have now seven counsels summoned there, by these four kings, that M. Horn here nameth. But surely there is nothing, whereby to fasten this primacy upon them. But here are many plain and open things, that do so blemish and spot M. Horn, and his Madge and their children with a most shameful reproach of perpetual infamy, as these counsels here by him alleged, may seem to remain in this his book like the salt Stone, wherinto Loathes wife was turned: that is, Tol. 4. ca 40. as a perpetual monument of his shame and dishonesty for ever. For where is the clerical crown that these fathers require, in M. horns head? What a number of decrees appear in these councils by M. Horn rehearsed against the filthy fornication and marriage of such persons both men and women as had professed chastity? Tol. 6. c. 6. Tol. 8. c. 4. & 5. & 7 Tol. 9 c. 10 Tol. 10. c. 5. For the which Potamius the bishop of Bracarie is deposed: as was before Saphoracus (whom as ye heard, M. Horn brought in for an example of his proof) in France. And here have you, that not only Mistress Madge shall be a slave, but her children to, thus incestuously begotten, shall be made bond men. I pray you then what do all these councils so muster here: unless it be to represent to us, and to all that shall read and see M. horns book hereafter, that he can allege no councils, but such as make against him? For behold how many things these councils decree, of which M. Horn, and his pewfelowes observe never a white. Else where are the hallowed tapers to be used in the vigils decreed in those Counsels? Tol. 4. ca 8 Tol. 7. ca 3 Tol. 10. c. 5 Where is the Mass so expressly in those councils mentioned? Where is the order and discipline decreed there against renegade nuns? But to let these things pass, what hath M. Horn, in all those Counsels to justify his primacy by? Verily in the first Council by him alleged Sisenandus the king entering in to the Synod, Tol. 4. in praefat. began his talk to the bishops, Coram sacerdotibus Dei humi prostratus, dying flat groveling on the ground before the priests of God. And in all that Council he only exhorted the bishops to make some decrees for reformation of the Church. In the second Council by him alleged, where he saith the Synod was confirmed by the prince's commandment and decree, the words of the Council writ expressly the contrary. Tol. 5. in. praefat. For the bishops there of their conclusion in that Synod do say. Ex praecepto eius, & decreto nostro sancimus. This we ordain by the kings precept, and our decree. It is their decree M. Horn not the princes. And so in the next Council following, Tol. 6. c. 2. this Synod is called, the bishop's constitution or decree: not the kings. In the third Council by you alleged, the bishops confess they were there assembled, Tol. 6. in praefat. Regis salutaribus hortamentis absque impedimento: by the wholesome exhortations of the king without let, signifying that by the kings means they were quietly assembled, Tol. 7. in praefat. and nothing else. As also in the next Council following they say Study serenissimi Regis & caet by the endeavour or favour of our most gracious king. Nay in the next Council by you alleged the king and his nobles confess themselves subjects to the bishops in such matters. Tol. 8. in praefat. The king speaking to the bishops saith. En Reverendi patres excelsiori mihi venerationis honore sublimes, coram vobis advenio etc. Behold Reverend fathers, high to me in a more higher degree of honour, I come before you etc. And touching his nobles (of whom, as M. Horn noteth, there sat in the Synod a great Company) he chargeth them, Ibidem. ut nihil à consensu praesentium patrum sanctorúmque virorum aliorsum mentis ducant obtutum: that in no point they should direct their intention from the consent of the fathers and holy men there present. In which words you see M. Horn, his nobles were not there to govern, to direct, or to overrule the bishops: but rather to be governed directed, and instructed of the bishops. And then as I said, what is there in all these councils that may any ways further this vehement imagination of your supremacy? And how much is there that overturneth the same, and establisheth the Clergies supremacy, in such causes to them appertaining? For beside all this, Tol. 8. c. 4. lo what the Fathers in this very Council do yet farther protest. They say, that Christ is the head, and the bishops the eyes. They say, that they being of the highest do rule by the highness of their order: and do govern the multitude of people, Nam dùm secundum Carnis assumptae mysterium, Ecclesiae suae fuerit dignatus caput existere Christus, meritò in membris eius intentio Episcoporum, officia peragere cernitur oculorum. Ipsi enim de sublimioribus, celsitudine ordinis regunt & disponunt subiectas multitudines plebium. Tol. 8. ca 4. under their subjection. And thereupon they say that bishops among other their virtues, must excel in keeping of chastity. And they further do declare, that such as be faulty therein, shallbe thrust out of their bishoprics. Yet one thing there is, that seemeth colowrablye to serve Master Horn, that is, that the nobility also subscribeth. Which should seam to employ a voice and a consent. Unto the which our former answer may serve well enough, that the Bishops decreed and ruled, not the Nobles. Again this may serve, Vide Conc 5 & Con. 8. that here in all these Counsels, was no new matter of faith determined: but most of all this I am assured will serve, to say that many things were in those Counsels, enacted for the assurance and succession of the Prince and of other civil and politic matters, to the which noble men may subscribe well enough. M. Horn. The .82. Division. Fol. 49. a. Distin. 631. cap. 21. Vitalianus being chosen Pope, sent his messengers with Synodical letters (according to the custom, saith Gratian) to signify unto the Emperor of his election. In this Pope's time (saith the Pontifical) came Constantinus the Emperor to Rome, whom this Pope with his clergy, The .242. untruth Slanderous. met six miles out of the City, and did humbly receive him. It is wonderful to consider (although the Historians, being Papists for the most part, (.240.) cover the matter so much as may be) what practices the Popes used to catch (.241.) The 241. untruth. The Emperors never had it. from the Emperors to themselves, the superiority in governing of Church matters: when they saw, that by stout and brave presumption, their ambitious appetites could not be satisfied, they turned over an other leaf, and covering their (.242.) The 242. untruth Slanderous and Railing. ambitious meaning with a patched cloak of humility and lowliness, they wan much of that, which with pride and presumption they had so often before this time attempted in vain. With this wily lowliness, Donus the next saving one to Vitalianus, (.243.) The .243. untruth. He brought it not, but restored it etc. As shall appear. brought under his obedience the archbishop of Ravenna. There had been an old and (.244.) The 244. untruth Notorious and facing. continual dissension betwixt the archbishop of Rome, and the archbishop of Ravenna, for the superiority: The Ravennates accounting their sea (.245.) The .245. untruth. Their first strife was not about the Superiority: but about Tria capitula. Pontifical. equal in dignity, and to owe none obedience to the sea of Rome, for they were not subject thereunto: To finish this matter, and to win the superiority, Donus first practised with Reparatus the archbishop of Ravenna, to give over unto him the superiority, Anno. 620. and become his obedientiary, and that (as it may appear by the sequel) without the consent of his Church. After the death of Reparatus, which was within a while, Theodorus a familiar friend to Agatho the Pope, and a stout man, (whom (.246.) The 246. untruth. It was not that Theodorus, but an other, as shall appear. Agatho did honour with his Legacy unto the sixth general Council at Constantinople) because his Clergy would not wait on him on Christmas day, solemnly (.247.) The 247 untruth as shall appear. conducting him unto the Church as the manner had been, did give over the title, and made his sea subject to the Pope for envy and despite of his Clergy, (saith Sabellicus) wherewith the Ravennates were not content, but being overcome by the authority of the Emperor Constantin, who much favoured Agatho, they bore it as patiently as they might. And Leo the second, successor to Agatho, made an end hereof, (.248.) The 248 untruth gross and impudent, as shall appear. causing the Emperor justinian to show great (.249.) The 249. untruth. It was because they would maintain their old disobedience. cruelty unto the whole City of Ravenna, and to Felix their Bishop, because they would have (.250.) The 250. untruth. It was Constantin not justinian. recovered their old liberty. And so this Pope Leo by the commandment and power of the Emperor justinian, brought Ravenna under his obeisance, as the Pontifical reporteth. These Popes through their feigned humility and obedience unto the Emperors, which was but duty, wan both much favour and aid at the Emperor's hands, to achieve their purpose much desired. The .3. Chapter: of Vitalianus, Donus and Leo the .2. Bishops of Rome: and how the Church of Ravenna was reconciled to the See Apostolic. Stapleton. WHy Master Horn? Put case the Pope signifieth his election to the Emperor? Put case the Popes were sometime stout and brave? And sometime again covered their ambitious meaning with a patched cloak of humility and lowelines? what if the Church of Ravenna after long rebellion became an obedientiarie to the apostolic see of Rome? sabel. en. 8. lib. 6. Ravennas ecclesiae ad officium revocata est. Platina ad Donum, hoc decus refert. Platina. Praeterea tantum doctrina & sanctitate valuit, ut Ravennatem Ecclesiam à Romana ●am pridem segregatam. etc. This is the effect and contents almost of one whole leaf. What then I say? Knit up I pray you, your conclusion. Ergo a Prince of a Realm is supreme head in all causes ecclesiastical and temporal. Well and clerckly knit up by my sheath. But Lord what a sort of falsehoods and follies are knit up together, in this your wise collection? As concerning the stoutness and cloaked humility of the Popes, your authors the Pontifical and Sabellicus write no such thing, but commend Vitalian, Idem in Leone. 2. Contudit superbiam praesulum Ravennatum, quod Agatho inchoaverat. Instituit enim ne electio cleri Ravennatis valeret, nisi eadem Romanae sedis authoritate confirmata fuisset. Antea verò Hyparchorum potentia freti, divina atque humanae omnia pro arbitrio animi miscebant, nemini obtemperantes, quasi Rom. pontificibus pares. Tom. 2. Concil. fol. 280. col. 1. a. Donus, Agatho, Leo, for very good Popes, yea and for this their doing concerning the Church of Ravenna. Other writers commend these Popes also, for good and virtuous men. But I perceive they are no mean or common persons that must serve for witnesses in your honourable consistory, your exceptions are so precise and peremptory. Yet I beseech you sir, in case ye will reject all other, let the Emperor Constantin himself serve the turn for this Vitalian. Who, at what time the bishops of the east being Monothelites, would not suffer Vitalians name to be rehearsed according to the custom in the Church at Constantinople, did withstand them. And why, think, you M. Horn? for any feigned holiness? No, no, but propter collatam nobis charitatem ab eodem Vitaliano dum superesset in motione tyrannorum nostrorum. For his charity employed upon us, saith the Emperor, while he lived, in the removing and thrusting out, of those that played the tyrants against us. Why do ye not bring forth your authors, to prove them dissemblers and Hypocrites? but you shall prove this, when you prove your other saying, that there had been an old and a continual dissension between these two Churches, Vide Gregorium li. 2. epist. 54 indict. 11. ad ●oan. Epis. Raven. Li. 4. epi. 54. ad Martianun epi. Raven. Epist. Io. Ravennat. ad Grego. li. 10. epi. 55. Quae universali ecclesiae iura sua transmittit. Ravennati ecclesiae quae peculiariter vestra est. and that the Ravennates were not subject to the see of Rome. This is well to be proved, that they ought to have been subject to the see of Rome, not only by a common and an universal subjection, as to the see of all Churches: But as to their patriarchal see withal. It is also aswell to be proved, that in S. Gregory's time, who died but .72. years before Donus was made pope, the archbishops of Ravenna, acknowledged the superiority of the Church of Rome: as appeareth by sundry epistles of S. Gregory: and received their pall from thence, a most certain token of subjection: matters also being removed from thence to the pope's consistory, yea the bishop of Ravenna confessing that Rome was the holy See, that sent to the universal Church, her laws, and prayeth S. Gregory not only to preserve to the Church of Ravenna which peculiarly was under Rome, her old privileges: but also, to bestow greater privileges upon her. Wherein appeareth your great untruth, and folly withal: in that you say, there had been an old and continual dissension betwixt the archbishop of Rome and the archbishop of Ravenna for the superiority. Now you see the dissension was not continual, nor very old, it being so * But 72. years before. Tom. 2. Cō p. 279. b. late subject to the See of Rome in the time of S. Gregory. Herein appeareth also an other of your untruths, where you allege out of the pontifical, that Pope Leo brought Ravenna under his obeisance. For the pontifical saith. Restituta est Ecclesia Rauennas sub ordinatione Sedis Apostolicae. The Church of Ravenna was restored or brought home again under the ordering of the See Apostolic. In which words (if you had truly reported them) would easily have appeared that the rebellious child was then brought home again to obedience, not that then first it was brought under subjection, as you untruly and ignorantly surmise. You say also as ignorantly or as untruly, that Theodorus the Archebishope of Ravenna who submitted his Church to Pope Agatho, was a familiar friend to Agatho, and was of him honoured with his legacy to the sixth general Council of Constantinople, intending thereby to make your reader think he did it of friendship or flattery, and not of duty. But your conceits have deceived you. For the legate of pope Agatho in that Council, so familiar a friend of his, and so much by him honoured, was one Theodorus, presbyter Ravennas, a priest of Ravenna: as both in the life of Agatho, Tom. 2. Conc. pa. 277. a. & 282. b. and in the very Council itself evidently appeareth. Neither could that priest be afterward the same bishope that so submitted himself, for that submission was before the Council, as in the life of Agatho it appeareth. So learnedly and truly, M. Horn in his talk proceedeth. With like truth M. Horn telleth, that Theodorus made his see of Ravenna subject to Rome, because his clergy did not so solemnly conduct him to Church upon Christmas day, as the manner had been. Would not a man here suppose, that this was a very solemn prelate, that forlacke of his solemnyty, Naucler. Gener. 23. pag. 771. Omnis Clerus eum destituit. would forsake his whole clergy? But it is not possible for these lying superintendentes to tell their tales truly. The story is this. Theodorus the archbishop of Ravenna (saith Nauclerus) minding upon Christmas day before the son rising to say Mass in S. Apollinaris Church, was forsaken of all his clergy. And until it was toward noon they came not at him: at what time by the means of the Exarchus, they brought him to Church. The cause of this enmyty that the Clergy bore to him was, as Nauclerus writeth, for that he was a great alms man, and liberal of the Church goods, and also very busy to keep his Clergy in good order. For this cause they hated him, and in so solemn a day utterly forsook him: Which is more, I trow M. Horn, than not so solemnly to conduct him as the manner was. To lack the ordinary solemnity, and to be clean destitute are two things. And there is a difference, you know, between staring and stark blind. I think yourself M. Horn as holy and as mortified as you be, would be very loath to show yourself in S. Swithens Choir at Winchester upon a Christmas day all alone, without any one of your Ministers as silly as they are. Again where you say that Leo the second made an end hereof causing th'emperor justinian to show great cruelty etc. This is a very gross lie. For Leo the second was Pope only in Constantins time father to this justinian. 2. And the cruelty that justinian showed to the whole City of Ravenna was after the death of this Leo. 2. at the least twenty years, under Constantine the Pope, at the later end of justinians reign, being restored then from banishment, but yet continuing in all his former cruelties. And as Nauclerus writeth, Naucler. Generate 24. p. 779 he changed never a whit his former life, only excepted, that (after his banishment) he ever showed Reverence to the See Apostolic, otherwise then before (his banishment) he was wont to do. And therefore hearing that Felix the bishop of Ravenna disobeyed the Pope, he commanded his Lieutenant in Sicily to punish them: which he did in deed very cruelly and barbarously. But that he did of his own accord, not by the causing (as you ignorantly affirm) of Leo the .2. Who was dead at the least .20. years before, nor by the causing of Constantine the Pope then, for aught that appeareth in the Stories. And therefore where you conclude, that Pope Leo by the commandment and power of justinian brought Ravenna under his obeissance, as the Pontifical reporteth, you bely the Pontifical and the whole story of that time to to ignorantly. The Pontifical in deed saith: Percurrente divale iussione etc. By the commandment of the Emperor sent abroad, the Church of Ravenna was restored etc. But justinian it nameth not. It meaneth Constantine the Emperor who strait after the .6. Council ended, promulged that edict, Leo the .2. being then Pope. Such a long and tedious matter it is to open M. horns untruths. M. Horn. The .83. Division. pag. 50. a. But Benedictus the second, who succeeded next to Leo the second, went in this point beyond all his predecessors, for Constantin being moved with his (.251.) The .251. untruth. Sanctitate permotus: moved with his holiness faith Platina: and Sabellicus also. humanity, piety, and favourableness towards all men, when he sent to th'emperor for his confirmation: th'emperor sent, saith Platina, a decree, that from henceforth, look whom the Clergy, the people, and the Roman army, should choose to be Pope, all men, without delay, should believe him to be Christ's true vicar, abiding for no confirmation by th'emperor, or his Lieutenant as it had been wont to be doen. etc. For that was wont to be allowed in the Pope's creation, that was confirmed by the Prince himself or his vicegerent in Italy. Here first of all it appeareth (if this story be true) how this interest of the Prince in this Ecclesiastical matter thus continuing (.252.) The .252. untruth. No longer then from Pelagius the first, and that by his decree. long time, although many ways assailed, and many attempts made by the Popes, to shake it of, was at the length through their flattery (which their Parasites call humility) given unto them of th'emperors, to whom it appertained. But whether this story be true or not, or if it were given, how it was given, or how long the gifts took place, or how it was taken away and returned to the former right, may well be called into question, for there is good (.253.) The .253. untruth. No good token can beshewed tokens to show, that it was not given in this sort. For these two Popes who sat in the Papal seat (.254.) The .254. untruth. benedictus 2. sat one year and .10. Months. Pantaleon. but .10. months a piece or there about, were in (.255.) The .255. untruth. Bened. 2. was in as much favour, as Agatho, with this Emperor no such favour with Themperor, as was their predecessor Agatho, who made great suit unto th'emperor for such like things, and obtained his suit, but with a special Proviso for the reservation of this authority still to remain unto themperors, as witnesseth the Pontifical and Gratian. He received from the Emperor letters (say they) according to his petition, whereby the some of moeny was released that was wont to be given (to the Emperor) for the Pope's Consecration: but so that if there happen after his death any election, the bishop elect be not consecrated before the election be signified to the Emperor by the general decree (he meaneth the Synodical letters) according to the ancient custom, that the ordering of the Pope may go forward, by the emperors knowledge or consent and commandment. The Glossar upon Gratian noteth upon these words: Which sum was wont to be given: For every Bishop was wont to give something to th'emperor at his election. But did not th'emperor commit Simony in releasing this right under this condition, that his consent should be required in the election? answer, no: because both these belonged to him of right before, wherefore he might now remit the one. But as I said, let it be true, that Constantin gave over this jurisdiction, but Volateranus addeth to this suspected donation, this clause, found true by experience, which donation (saith he) was not long after observed. And in deed it was kept so small a while, (.256.) The 256. untruth. A false and a fond illation, as shall appear, that within one year after or little more, when the electors after long altercation, had agreed on Conon: Theodorus themperors Lieutenant (as saith Sabellicus) gave his assent: and Platina showeth the same, although not so plainly. So that by this also it appeareth, that if still it appertained to th'emperors Lieutenant, to give his assent to the Pope's election, that than this gift is (.257.) The .257. untruth. Slanderous to all Historiographers: sabel. Naucler. Volater. Platina and the rest. either feigned of the Papists (and that the rather under the name of Constantinus, to blear therewith the ignorauntes' eyes, as though it were the grant of Constantine the great, as they do about Images with (.258.) The 258. untruth. peevish and stark foolish. the name of the Nicene Council) or by like the gift was not so authentically ratified, as it was unadvisedly promised: but how so ever it was, it held not long: the Pope himself solemnly with the consent and decree of a whole Council, resigning all the foresaid grant unto the Emperors for evermore. The .4. Chapter. of Benedictus the .2. Pope, and Constantine the .5. Emperor. Stapleton. I Can not tell whether this matter is by M. Horn more untruely, or more unwisely handled. The Emperor Constantin moved with the great virtue of Benedictus the .2. gave over to him, saith Platina, his accustomable right, in the confirmation of the Pope's election. Nay saith M. Horn, Trithem. de ecclesi. scriptorib. This was through their flattery, which their parasites call humility. Then by you Platina was the Pope's flatterer. Verily such a flatterer he was, that for his free speaking against the Pope he was imprisoned. And it is not likely that he which was so free with the Pope then living, would flatter with the Popes that were dead. You add farther to prove th'emperor did not give up the Pope's confirmation. For it is not (say you) any thing likely: Proper arguments not worth the answering. The pope supreme head by the place M. Horn himself bringeth in. for Pope Agatho could not obtain it, and it was kept but a small time: and the Pope himself with the consent of a Council not long after resigned it: Have ye done M. Horn? then I pray lap up your as wise a conclusion, as before. Ergo the Queen of England is the supreme head. But now what say you to this M. Horn, that Constantin agnized the Pope for the true vicar of Christ? Doth not Platina write this, whose words yourself rehearse? Let the Pope's confirmation weigh as it may weigh: which maketh neither with nor against this supremacy. Do not these three words, Christ's true vicar, weigh down, and beat all in pieces, your silly poor light reasons of your confirmation? Brought in I can not tell how, and all out of season, and nothing pertaining to the kings of England. Who never had any thing to intermeddle, for the ratifying of the pope's election. But what an extreme impudence is this? Or who but very evil himself, can suspect so vilely, and draw all things to the worst? If the pope be humble, them he is (with M. Horn) an hypocrite and a flatterer. If he be stout, he is a tyrant, ambitious, and proud. Contrary wise if the Emperor be cruel (as we shall see anon of Harry 4. and Friderike the first) than he doth but his right: If he do his duty, as this Constantinnowe, Theodosius, Valentinian, Marcian and justinian before, then they are deceived with flattery. Woe be to you that call evil good, and good evil. For as before we said, Vitalianus, Donus, Agatho, Volater. Anthrop. lib. 22. Sabel. Aenead. 8. lib. 6. Fol. 49. a Leo 2. were all commended of all writers, so is this Benedictus 2. highly praised not only of Platina, but of Sabellicus and Volaterane, both for his learning and for his holiness. And in respect of those qualities (say they) Constantine sent the decree that M. Horn is so grieved withal. Yet all this to M. Horn is hypocrisy. And the Historians, he saith, were papists for the most part. It is true they were so: not only for the most part, but altogether hitherto. For what other historians, what other Counsels, what other Church can you show since Christ's time, then of very papists? If you refuse the papists historians, you must hold your peace, and let all this discourse pass, from Constantine the first, down to Maximilian next predecessor to Charles the fift. You must begin only since Luther's time: Which yet for very shame you have clean omitted, not speaking one word, of Charles the fift or of Ferdinand his brother the late most renowned Emperors, or of any their government in causes ecclesiastical: whose examples yet you might as well have brought, as of any other Catholic Emperor sense Constantine's time, the first. But that in these, men's eyes and ears yet living, and knowing certainly the contrary, would have condemned you: In the other being out of the memory of men yet living, you thought you might by such homely shifts as you have made with patched false and forged narrations, work yet somewhat with the unlearned Reader, which trusteth you better than he knoweth you. If this be not true, tell me the cause Master Horn, why coming down to Maximilian Charles his next predecessor, and to Lewis the french king next before Francis the first, you come not lower to Charles himself, and to king Francis of France? Why I pray you, but for the reason above said? Well. If you had come lower, you might in deed have found protestant historians for your own tooth. But now, coveting to have a colour of Antiquity for your doings, you are driven to allege only papist historians, papist councils, papist doctors, papist Emperors. Briefly all your Authorities, testimonies and allegations, none other but of papists. Yea the Scriptures themselves of whom have you them, but of papists? No marvel therefore if you are so continually by your own Authorities beaten down. In the mean season, what historians, what Counsels, what Doctors, have you in any time of all the Church, to speak any one poor word for your imagined supremacy? No, no, M. Horn. Either you that now live are not the Church of Christ, or else Christ hath had no Church, these thousand years and upward. Either you must condemn so many ages before you, or they must condemn you. Would God our dear Country would once consider this one reason, and worthily regard the same. To return to you, Master Horn, what moveth you to say, that the electors after long altercation agreed on Conon, and Theodorus the emperors Lyeutenant gave his assent, inferring thereof, that the Pope's election still appertained to the emperors Lieutenant, and to his assent? Your tale is mingled with untruth, and your consequent hangeth loosely. For first altercation in the election of Conon there was none. Sabellicus your own alleged Author saith. In nullo unquam Pontifice creando maior extitit Ordinum consensus: There was never more agreement of all degrees in the creating of any pope, then in this Conon. Sabel. Aenead 8. l. 6 And as for the emperors Lieutenants assent, he addeth. Praestitit & Theodorus Exarchus suum assensum. Theodorus also the Lieutenant gave his assent: which he inferreth, not as you do, to show that the Lieutenant's assent was either of right or necessity required, but to declare, that this pope without any altercation, for his singular virtues in deed, was chosen with the consent of all men, yea of the Lieutenant himself. And thus your whole and only proof faileth, whereby you would persuade us, that the decree of Constantine the Emperor was so soon after abolished, or else not at all made, but (as you most pevishly talk) feigned of the Papist historians: being yet all such, as wrote before Luther was borne, and therefore by no reason in the world likely to be counterfayters either for our vantage, or for your disadvantage. Else by the same reason you may reject all histories and Counsels and doctors to (because they all make directly against you and your doctrine, not only in this, but in all other your heresies) and say, that the papists have feigned stories, devised Counsels, forged old doctors, yea and counterfeited the Scriptures also, which I pray God, you calvinists of England do not one's attempt to avouch, as the Swencfeldians have already begun. M. Horn. The .84. Division. Fol. 51. a. But I return again to Agatho, who (as I said) being in great favour with Constantine the Emperor, Determined (saith Platina) to have a council to decide the error of the Monothelites. But (.259.) The .259. untruth. Not for that cause but because he could not otherwise have had the emperors aid and assistance. Const. 6. because he could not himself by his own authority, call a general council, for that belonged to the Emperor, who in that time was busy in the wars against the Saracens: He waited (saith Platina) for the return of the Emperor. This Constantinus surnamed Pogonatus, about the year of the Lord 680. calleth the Bishops out of all coasts unto a general Council: in his letters of Summons to Donus (but committed to Agatho Bishop of Rome, Donus being dead) he admonisheth him of the contention betwixt the sea of Rome and Constantinople, he exhorteth him to lay aside all strife, fervency, and malice, and to agree in the truth with other, adding this reason: For God loveth the truth, and as Chrysostom saith: He that willbe the chief amongst all, he must be minister unto all (by which reason made by the Emperor, it may seem, that the pride of those two seats, striving (.260.) The .260. untruth. A false. lewd, and malicious surmise, as shall appear. The Bishop of Rome, at the Emperors (261) commandment in Eccl. matters. Act. 1. for superiority and supremacy, was a great nourishment of the Schism, which was chief in outward show only for doctrine.) He protesteth that he will show himself indifferent, without parciallitye to any part or faction., only seeking, as god hath appointed him, to keep the Faith that he had received wholly and without blot. He exhorteth and commandeth the Bishop of Rome, not to be an hindrance, but to further this Council with sending such as are fit for such purpose. The bishop of Rome obeyeth the Emperors (.261.) The .261. untruth. Notorious The Emperor plainly denieth and disclaimeth such authority of commanding the bishops. commandment. And the like letters the Emperor sendeth to George Bishop of Constantinople, and others. The Emperor sat in the council himself, as Precedent and moderator of all that action: having on his right hand a great company of his Nobles, and of his Bishops on his left hand. And when the holy gospels was brought forth, and laid before them, as the (.262.) The .262. untruth. The Council hath no such words. judges, whose sentence they ought to follow, as it was also wont to be done in the forenamed Counsels: The deputies for the bishop of Rome stand up, and speak unto the Emperor in most humble wise calling him most benign Lord, affirming, the Apostolic seat of Rome to be * It was then true, in Temporal matters. subject unto him, as the servant unto the Master: and beseeching him that he will command those that took part with the bishop of Constantinople, which had in times passed brought in new kinds of speech, and erroneous opinions, to show from whence they received, their new devised Heresies. The Emperor commandeth Macarius' archbishop of Antioch, and his side to answer for themselves. And after diverse requests made by him to the Emperor, and granted by the Emperor unto him, the Emperor commandeth the Synod to stay for that time. The .5. Chapter. Of the sixth General Council holden at Constantinople under Pope Agatho. Stapleton. Master Horn, as he sayeth, returneth again to Agatho, wherein he doth well: for this hath been an extravagant and an impertinent discourse. But he returneth withal to his accustomable dealing: saying that pope Agatho of his own authority could not call a council. Which neither his author Platina sayeth, nor any other, nor he himself proveth. He could M. Horn have called a Council, (and so he did call at Rome at this very time a great Council of an. 1●5. bishops, our contreyman S. Wilfryde archbishop of York and the Apostle of Sussex being one of them) without the Emperor, and such as this Emperor himself confesseth to be a general Council. Beda lib. 5. ca 20. Conc. 6. Act. 4. pa. 306. Constantinꝰ omnibus sanctissi. universalis Synodi Apostolica sedis concilium repraesentantib. Ibidem. Act. 18. fo. 409. col. 2. a. The cause why Pope Agatho joined with th'emperor for the Council to be had. M. Horns reasons out of the 6. General Council for his Primacy. Tom. 2. Concil. fol. 280. col. 2. a. But because, the schism of the Monothelites was deeply settled in Grece, and was fast and deeply rooted by continuance of .46. years, not only in the bishops of the chief sees, as Constantinople, Alexandria, Antiochia, and others, but also in the Emperors withal: full godly and wisely, that the Council might be more effectual and fruitful, he thowght good to work with the advice and assistance of the Emperor: and so he did: And this his godly policy had his prosperous success accordingly. Master Horn will now recite to us his collections out of this Council called, the .6. General Council, that he hath gathered, (but how well and fytlye to prove his matter, ye shall anon understand) for the confirmation of his new erected primacy. And first he glanceth at the See of Rome, surmising that because the Emperor exhorted the Pope to unity, the pride of Rome and of Constantinople striving for superiority and supremacy was a great nourishment of the Schism. This is a lewd and a false surmise. For the Emperor in that place expressly telleth (by the report of the Greek patriarchs) the cause of that strife to be, quòd verba quaedam novitatis intromissa sunt, that certain new doctrine was brought into the Church. And will Master Horn have his unproved surmise, to weigh down the emperors plain confession? The malice you talk of Master Horn, is in yourself▪ It was not in Pope Agatho. The Emperor protesteth, you say, to keep the faith that he had received wholly and without blot. Would God all Christian Princes had done so. You had had then Master Horn, no place in our country to preach and set forth your damnable heresies. You say farther: The Bishop of Rome obeyed the emperors commandment. And this also you note very solemnly in your Margin. But both your text and your margin, by your leave, lieth. For the Emperor in his letters to the Pope (wherein he invited him to this Council) saith plainly. Ibidem. Inuitare & rogare possumus ad omnem commendationem & unitatem omnium Christianorum, necessitatem verò inferre nullatenus volumus. Well we may move you and pray you to fall to an unity, but force you by no means will we. Where then is this forcible commandment that you imagine? You would feign have the Emperors very Imperial, over Popes and bishops: You would, as Auxentius the Arrian Bishop did, Amb. li. 5. epist. 32. Suidas in Leontio. Laicis ius sacerdotale substernere, bring under the Say Princes foot, the Priestly right and Authority. You would have them, as the Arrians persuaded Constantius, 〈◊〉 being set to govern one thing, to take upon them an other thing. This with your predecessors heretical bishops, your prelatship also would Emperors should take upon them. But they expressly refuse so to do: they protest the contrary: they abhor such lewd clawebackes. You add farther, that in the Council, the holy Gospels was brought forth and laid before them, as the judges. This is a flat untruth. The Council hath no such words, I mean that the Gospels were judges. No doubt but by the gospels the Council did judge and determine the controversies, and had always those holy books before them, as also a Sign of the Cross and other relics, De Concord. Cathol. li. 2. cap. 6. 1. Cor. 4. as Cusanus writeth. But a judge must speak and pronounce a Sentence. Such is not the Scripture, but such are they that be (as the Apostle saith) Dispensatores mysteriorum Christi, the dispensers of the mysteries of Christ, the ordered teachers of his word, the successors of his Apostles. But you to make folk ween, that Scripture alone were the only judge, as though the book could speak and give sentence itself, without a Teacher or Pastor, stick not, to falsify and missereporte the holy Council, seeing by true dealing you can prove nothing. Act. 5. fol. 301. But it maketh perhaps for you, that the Pope's Legates, call the Emperor most benign Lord, and affirm the Apostolic see of Rome to be subject to him. But they do not, I am assured, add, in all spiritual matters. And so are ye nothing the near to your purpose: and as the Pope's Legates call him Lord, so pope Agatho calleth him his son. And that which the Legates said of the See Apostolic, the same Pope Agatho in his letters said of the City of Rome, Act. 4. Concil. 6. Constant. pag. 289. a. Gregor. li. 2. epi. 20. li. 3. epi 16. Instit. lib. 4. cap. 11. calling it seruilem Principatus sui urbem: A City subject to his government. And it may be well thought, the Legates spoke in no other sense, than did their Lord and Master. But as for such phrases S. Gregory spoke as humbly and as basely to the Emperor Mauritius (which Calvin also hath noted) as ever any Pope before him, or after him did to any whatsoever Emperor. He called Mauritius his good Lord, and himself, his unworthy servant. But yet (as I have at large proved against M. jewel) he practised in Ecclesiastical causes an universal Supremacy throughout all Christendom. And now beside, that I have said, in as much as the Pope's .3. Legates, two being priests, and one but a Deacon, The Pope's Legates are first named, and do speak first in the Council. How the Emperor is precedent of the Council. be, as well in the rehearsal of the Bishop's names, as in the placing of the Bishops, first named, and do first speak in this action, I think I may make thereof also a better collection for the Pope's Primacy, than you have made against it. Whereas you say the Emperor was precedent of the Council, I grant you in that sense, as I have before declared: and that is, concerning thexternal order, moderation, and direction of things to be done and heard quietly and without parciality in the synod: but not for any supremacy in giving sentence, against their wills, as th'emperor himself even now declared. M. Horn. The .85. Division. Fol. 51 b. Act. 2. In the next session after the self same order observed, as in the first, Paulus th'emperors Secretary began to put the Council in remembrance of the former days proceeding. The Emperor commandeth the Acts of the Chalcedon Council to be brought forth and red. At length when a manifest place was alleged out of Leo the Pope, the Emperor himself (.263.) The .263. untruth. For it was no disputation, but a simple interrogation. disputed with Macarius on the understanding thereof. The Secretary having offered the books of the fift Council, the Emperor commandeth the Notary to read them. The Notary began to read, and within a while the Pope's Legates rising up, cried out this Book of the fift Synod is falsified, and there alleged a reason thereof, wherewith themmperor and the judges being moved, began to look more narrowly to the book, and espying at the last, that three quaternions was thrust into the beginning, th'emperor commanded it should not be red. Note here, that the Pope's Legates were but (264) The .264. untruth. This doth not prove them plaintiff parties, as it shall appear. Act. 3. the plaintify parties in this Council, and not the judges thereof, the which more plainly followeth: either parties striving upon a like corrupt place. The Emperor commanded the Synod and the judges (which were lay-men) to peruse the Synodical books, and (.265.) The 265. untruth. The lay judges were not commaunde● to determine any matter. Const. im. dixit. Sed unam operationem non intelligis, eum dixis se●et mox: & quomo do intelligis Dei virilem operationem? fol. 285. c. 2. a. act. 2. to determine the matter, which they did. George the archbishop of Constantinople most humbly beseecheth the Emperor that he will cause the letters which Agatho the Pope, and his Synod sent unto the Emperor to be red ones again: the Emperor granteth his request. Stapleton. In these two sessions ye can pyck no matter of any substance to help you withal: no, not of th'emperors disputation. And God wot, this was but a sleight and a cold disputation, to demand two things of Macarius, and that by interrogation only. I trow ye shall find, but vj. or seven. lines before, a better place for the pope's supremacy: where it is said, that pope Leo his epistle was taken of the Chalcedon Council as the foundation of the catholic faith, being conformable to the confession, of the blessed S. Peter the prince of the Apostles. But you bid us, note here that the pope's legates were but the plaintiff parties in this Council, and not the judges thereof. Your reason is, because they first spoke and accused the forgery committed in a copy of the fift Council. If you had marked the practice of other councils before, M. Horn, you would not though hired thereto, have made this Note to your Reader. For so is it in deed, that the pope's legates, by the way of prerogative in all councils, semperprius loqui & confirmare soliti sunt, were always wont to speak first. So did they in the Chalcedon Council first speak against Dioscorus, and removed him from the bench where other bishops sat, Chalc. Con. Act. 10. p. 910. making him to sit in the midst, where the defendants place was. And one of the pope's Legates then so earnestly speaking and requiring to have him removed, the emperors deputies said unto him. Si judicis obtines personam, non ut accusator d●bes prosequi. If you bear the person of a judge, Ibidem Act. 1. p. 741. a you ought not to plead as an Accuser. In which words the judges did not infer (as M. Horn here doth,) that the Pope's Legate was no judge, because he accused as a party plaintiff, but rather because he was a judge (bearing the Pope's person) he wished him to forbear accusing. But the pope's Legates, as they were always the judges to decree and subscribe before all other bishops against heresies, so were they ready to accuse and betray the Demeanours of Heretics before all others. For why? As in the Chalcedon Council it is written. Missi Apostolici semper in Synodis prius loqui & confirmare soliti sunt. Act. 10. ut supra. The pope's Legates were always wont to speak formest in Counsels, and to confirm before all others. And by this the prerogative of the See Apostolic was expressed. And as in the Chalcedon Council the pope's Legates were the first that spoke against Dioscorus, and yet were also the first that gave sentence against him (as I have before proved) so in this Council, as the pope's Legates spoke first against the false and forged evidences, so they were the first (as we shall anon see) that condemned the forgers thereof, Macarius with his fellows. And yet to speak properly, The pope's Legates were not plaintiff parties either here, or in the Chalcedon council. the pope's Legates neither here nor in the matter of Dioscorus, were parties plaintiffs. For as there they only, required to have the sentence of pope Leo executed, touching Dioscorus his place in the Council, so here they only required the evidence to be tried, suspecting it as forged, as it was in deed found to be. And this they required, not as plaintiff parties, but to have execution. which execution was in the ordering of the Emperor or his deputies. For look what the chief bishops, or the whole Council required, that the Prince or his deputies (the judges) did see executed quietly and orderly. Cusanus lib. 3. de Concord. Cathol. c. 17. & 18. Wherein consisted their whole authority and travail, as we have before showed out of Cusanus. But to judge and determine belonged only to the bishops. M. Horn. The .84. Division. pag. 52. a. In the next session the order and form observed as in the first, the Emperor commanded first of all Pope Agatho his letters to be red: in the which letters is manifestly confessed by the Pope himself: so well the Emperors (.266.) The. 266. untruth. The contrary, which is the Pope's primacy is there clearly confessed. The prince is Christ's Vicar in earth, in causes (.267.) Ecclesiastical by the pope's confession Act. 1. supreme government in Ecclesiastical causes, as the Pope's obedience and subjection unto him in the same. For in the beginning, he declareth what pleasure and comfort he conceived of this, that the Emperor sought so carefully, that the sincere Faith of Christ should prevail in all Churches: that he used such mildness and clemency, therein following the example of Christ, in admonishing him and his, to give an account of their Faith, which they preached: that being emboldened with these comfortable letters of the Emperor, he performed his ready obedience in accomplishing the Emperors praeceptes effectually. That he made inquisition for satisfying of his obedience (to the Emperor) for apt men to be sent to the Council: the which thing, saith the Pope to the Emperor, the studious obedience of our service, would have performed sooner, had it not been letted, by the great circuit of the Province, and long distances of place. He protesteth that he sendeth his Legates according to the emperors commandment, not of any sinister meaning, The .267. untruth. Not in causes Ecclesiastical, but for execution of the laws ecclesiastical. but for the obedience sake (to the Emperor) which (saith he) we own of duty. He maketh a confession of his faith, concerning the controversy, adding the testimonies of many ancient fathers. And he doth protest, that he with his Synod of the Western Bishops, believeth that God reserved the Emperor to this time for this purpose. That he (the Emperor) occupying the place and zeal of our Lord jesus Christ himself here in earth, should give just judgement or sentence, on the behalf of the evangelical and Apostolical truth. Stapleton. What exceeding and intolerable impudence is this, to be so bold as to bring forth Pope Agatho his letters, against the Pope's supremacy? If a man would purposely and diligently seek ample and large proofs for the confirmation of th● same, he shall not lightly find them more plentiful and more effectual, then in this epistle, read and allowed of the whole Council. Act. 4. pag. 290. col. 2. a. Cuius (Petri videlicet) adnitente praesidio haec apostolica eius ecclesia, numquam à via veritatis, in qua libet erroris part deflexa est. Cuius authoritate utpote apostolorum omnium principis semper omnis caetholica Christi ecclesia, et universales synodi fideliter amplectentes, in cunctis secutae sunt. Omnesque venerabiles patres apostolicam eius doctrinam amplexi: haeretici aunt falsis criminationibus ac derogationun odijs insecuti. By the help (saith Pope Agatho) of S. Peter, this Apostolic Church never swerved from the truth into any error. Whose authority as chief of all the apostles all the Catholic Church of Christ, all general Counsels faithfully embracing, did always follow in all things. Whose apostolic doctrine all the reverend fathers embraced: and the heretics, with false accusations, most spitefully deface and persecute. Of like authorities ye shall find great store, aswell in this session, as else where in * Pag. 300. col. 2. a. & pa. 303. co. 1 a. & pag. 304. col. 2. c. this Council. Yea the whole Council confess, that S. Peter was with them by his successor Agatho, and that S. Peter spoke by Agatho his mouth. And if this will not suffice, th'emperor himself confesseth the like. By these and the like testimonies it is clear, that the Emperor himself, took the fathers to be the judges, in this controversy, and most of all the Pope. To the which saying, it is nothing repugnant, that Pope Agatho, according to the emperors Letters, did diligently and obediently as well send his own deputies to the Council, as procured that other were also sent thither. Yes, saith M. Horn: In those letters is manifestly confessed by the Pope himself, as well the emperors supreme government in Ecclesiastical causes, as the Pope's obedience and subjection in the same. This is largely spoken M. Horn. O that your proofs were as clear, as your asseverations are bold. Then were you in deed a ioylye writer. But M. jewel can tell you, that bold asseveration maketh no proof. For how I pray you show you this out of the Popes own letters? You tell us many things, that the Pope sent his legates, caused also other bishops to repair to the Council, and would have caused more to come, if great lets had not hindered him. And all this you say, to perform his ready obedience, for satisfying of his obedience, the studious obedience of his service, and yet ones again, for the obedience sake which he owed of duty. Here is I trow obedience on the Pope's part, enough and enough. But here is not yet in ecclesiastical causes: Here is not yet the emperors supreme government. Here is not, subjection in the same, that is, in Ecclesiastical causes. Then M. Horn hath affirmed four things, and proved but one. And hath he, trow we, proved that? Verily as well, as he hath proved the rest, of the which he hath spoken never a word. For what obedience was this that the Pope so many times speaketh of? Was it any other, then that at the emperors earnest request he sent his legates, and summoned the bishops to the Council? Yes, will M. Horn say: It was upon the emperors commandment, that he so did, and not at his simple request. Then remember I pray you the emperors words before alleged, in which he protesteth, that he can only invite and pray the Po●e to come to a Council, and that force him he would not. And if the Emperors own words suffice not, then as you have brought the Pope against himself, so I pray you M. Horn, hear him speak now for himself. And that in the self same letters where he talketh so much of Obedience, which you liked in him very well. I assure you M. Horn you shall hear him so speak for himself, that if he had by spirit of prophecy foreseen this lewd objection that you have made, he could scant in plainer terms or more effectually have answered you, than now he hath by the way of prevention confuted you. For behold what he saith of the emperors calling him and moving him to assemble this Council. He saith. Nequaquam tam pia lateret intentio audientium, Concil. 6. Constant. Act. 4. pa. 288. col. 2. b. humanáue suspicio perterreretur, aestimantium potestate nos esse compulsos, & non plena serenitate ad satisfaciendum etc. commonitos, Divales apices patefecerunt ac satisfaciunt, quos gratia spiritus sancti, imperialis linguae calamo, de puro cordis thesauro dictavit, Commonentis, non opprimentis, satisfaci●ntis, non perterrentis, non affligentis, sed exhortantis, & ad ea quae Dei sunt secundum Deum invitantis. Lest any that hear hereof, should be ignorant of this godly intention, or the suspicion of man should fear, thinking (as M. Horn here doth) that we were forced by authority, and not very gently exhorted to answer & caet. the Imperial letters have declared and do declare, written and directed from his majesties pure heart, through the grace of the holy Ghost, wherein he warneth, not oppresseth, he requireth, not threateneth, not forceth, but exhorteth, and to Godly things according to God inviteth. Lo M. Horn, you are I trow sufficiently answered, if any thing can suffice you. The Emperor forced not the Pope by way of commandment, or supreme government (as you always imagine) but exhorted him. He proceeded not by way of oppression or threats, as by virtue of his allegiance or in pain of displeasure, but by gentle admonitions and requests. So did all the good Emperors before proceed with bishops in ecclesiastical matters: Constantin the first, Theodosius the first and second, Valentinian the first, Marcian, justinian, and now this Constantin the fift: not as with their subjects or vassals in that respect, but rather as with their Fathers, their pastors and by God appointed Overseers. The obedience than that pope Agatho so much and so oft protested, proceeded of his own humility, not of the emperors supremacy: of great discretion, not of dew subjection namely in Ecclesiastical causes. For seeing the Emperor in his letters so meek, so gracious and so lowly, he could do no less (and the better man he was, the more he did) but show himself again lowly and humble also. But when Emperors would tyrannically take upon them in Church matters, there lacked not Catholic bishops, as stout and bold then, as the pope was humble now. So were to Constantius that heretical tyrant Liberius of Rome, Hosius of Spain, and Leontius of the East. So was to Valentinian the younger S. Ambrose, to Theodosius the second, Leo the first, to the Emperor Anastasius pope Gelasius, to Mauritius S. Gregory. But M. Horn, if this do fail, hath yet ready at hand an other fresh, jolly coulorable shift: that the Emperor, even by Agathos own confession, occupied the place and zeal of our Lord jesus Christ in earth, to give just judgement and sentence, in the behalf of the truth. Now are we driven to the hard wall in deed. This gear runneth roundly. And if I should now, thowghe truly, interpret, and mollify this sentence according to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and the mind of the speaker than would you so urge and press 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the bare letter, that I should have much a do to rid my hands of you. But God be thanked, Act. 4. pa. 301. c. 1. c. Vt eius fidei causam (sicut aeꝗtas exigit, & sanctorum patrum sacrarunque quinque synodorum decrevit instructio) exequi dignemini, et redemptoris iniuriam defidei suae contemptoribus per eius praesidium vlciscamimin●. Vide sequentia. who hath so provided that Agatho himself, doth so plainly declare his own meaning, and your false handling of the matter, even in the very next sentence immediately following: that all the world may evidently see, that for all your holy evangelical pretences, and cloaked cowlours, ye seek not the truth: but to trifle, to toy, and contentiouslie to confound all things. For it followeth. That ye would voutchsauf (saith Pope Agatho to the Emperor) to execute the cause of Christ's faith according to equity, and the instructions of the holy fathers, and the five general councils, and by God's help to revenge his injury, upon such as condemn his faith. And this saying of Agatho M. Horn, may well serve for a full and a sufficient answer to all your book, for princes intermeddling in Counsels, and for making laws concerning matters ecclesiastical. You see by this place their government is no other, but to aid and assist for putting in execution the decrees of Counsels, and the holy Father's Instructions. Wherefore ye may put up your jolly note wherewith ye would seam to furnish and beautify your matter and margin here, in your purse: and the less it be seen, the better for you, for any good, that ever your cause shall take by it. M. Horn. The .87. Division. pag. ●2 b. In the next session, the Emperor sitteth as (268.) The .268. untruth. He was not precedent nor Moderator, after M. horns sense. Precedent, and Moderator, accompanied with many of his nobles, sitting about him. On his right hand sat Georgius the archbishop of Constantinople, called new Rome, and those that were with him: on the other side, upon th'emperors left hand, sat the Legates of the archbishop Agatho of old Rome, these two as (.269.) The .269. untruth. The pope's Legates were no agent parties. agent parties. When they were thus set, the emperors Secretary brought forth the gospels, putteth the Emperor in mind, what was done the session before, and desireth his majesty to cause Macarius and his party, to bring out likewise their testimonies, as the Legates from Agatho of old Rome had done, for their party. The Emperor commandeth, Macarius' obeith, and desireth that his books may be red: the Emperor commandeth they should so be. Stapleton. M. Horn here noteth the sitting of the Pope's Legates on the left hand, and the Bishop of Constantinople on the right hand: which either maketh nothing, for the abasing of the Legates authority, either, that doth not so abase them, as doth that I have said advance them, that they are rehearsed, both in the naming and placing as well in this very place, as throughout all this Council, before all other bishops: beside the prerogatives, which we have and shall declare they had in this Council. And M. Horn must remember that in the fift general Council they had the right hand: Fol. 41. col. 2. as himself confesseth. Neither was the Emperor Precedent in this Council, neither the bishops, the Agent parties, as M. Horn here untruly saith, but when the Sentence came to be pronounced, Supra lib. 2. Cap. 7. the Bishops alone gave it without th'emperor. A moderator in deed in external order and quiet to be kept, th'emperor was, not only in this, but in all other Counsels, as I have showed before out of Cusanus, but not in giving solutions to the reasons propounded, or in giving final sentence in matter of doctrine, as the word Moderator in the schools soundeth, Act. 7. The .270. untruth. This proveth it not, as shall appear. and as M. Horn would have it here to be understanded. M. Horn. The .88. Division. pag. 52. b. After the showing of the allegations on both sides, the Legates of old Rome, desire the Emperor that they may know, if the adversaries agree on the tenor of their two foresaid suggestions. The adversaries beseech th'emperor, that they might have the copies of them: th'emperor commandeth, that without delay their request should be fulfilled. The books were brought forth and sealed with the seals of the judges, and either of the parties. This again (.270.) proveth that the Pope's Legates were none of the judges, but one of the parties. And so in the eight, ninth, and tenth action, the same order of doing is observed in like sort, as before, in such wise that no one in the Synod, neither the whole Synod, doth (.271.) The .271. untruth. For they gave Iudgeme● against the heretic without him, any thing without licence, and the direction of the Emperor, the precedent and chief ruler in all those causes. Stapleton. M. Horn is now harping upon the same string that he was harping upon before, twice in the former leaf: that the Pope's Legates were no judges, but parties and plantives. In the one of the former places, he giveth no cause, but will have us believe him upon his bare word. Here and in the other, he giveth us a cause, that nothing concludeth, for him, but rather against him. The Monothelits, to make their matter bear some good countenance, brought forth freshly many authorities of Athanasius, and other fathers on their side. The Pope's Legates espying, the chopping and changing, the cutting and hewing, the maiming and mangling of those testimonies▪ descried this falsehood to the Council. Upon this an exact search, conference, and comparison was made of other books in themperousemperors and patriarches of Constantinople library, and the extractes as well of those books, as of such as the Pope's Legates had delivered, were brought forth to the Council, to avoid suspicion of all sinistrous working, sealed with the judges seals. So that the fathers and the Legates gave the judgement (as it afterward appeareth) that the books were corrupted. The judges to their charge took, that by the notary the books should be indifferently and uprightly viewed and examined, and the true testimonies to be brought to the Council. I marvel Master Horn, that this so good an argument escaped you in the Chalcedon Council: wherein likewise, the Legates first of all began to speak and work against Dioscorus, and caused him to be displaced of sitting among other bishops, Missi apostolici semper in synodis prius loqui, et confirmare soliti sunt. Chalc. syno. act. 10 fo. 910. c. 1 and to sit in the midst as a defendante. And yet they were his judges, and they only pronounced the final sentence against him: to the which the whole Council condescended. Ye are then far wide M. Horn, from the cause, why the Legates so intermeddled. The cause then was, not as ye either ignorantly or maliciously pretend, for that they were parties: but for this, that the pope's Legates were wont ever in councils to speak first, and to confirm first▪ as I have not much before largely declared. To that place for a fuller answer hereto I remit the Reader. M. Horn. The .89. Division. pag. 53. a. In the end of the eleventh Action, The Emperor assigneth certain of his noble counsellors, to be the directors in the Synod, for that he was to be occupied in other weighty affairs of the common weal. Hitherto we see how themmperor in his own person with his lay Princes also, was the (272) The .272. untruth. He was not the judge in matters there concluded, ergo not supreme governor. supreme governor, was the Precedent, overseer, commander, ratifier, and director, of all things done in the Council. The Pope's Legates and all the whole Council, humbly yielding all these things unto him (.273.) The .273. untruth. They yielded no such thing but reserved to themselves the final Sentence and judgement. M. Horns post ●as●, Act. 11. fo. 350. c. 2. c. alone. The residue of the acts, or any thing therein done, was likewise his deed, by his deputies, although he himself in person, was not present. Stapleton. Why good Sir? why make you such post haste? What are you so soon at the end of the .11. action? Where is the beginning and the middle? where is the .6. Action? Where are the .8. the .9. and the .10. Action? I see your haste is great: what will you leap over the hedge, ere ye come at it? And I might be so bold, I would fain demand of you the cause of your hasty posting. Perhaps there is some eye sore here, or some thing that your stomach can not bear. What? grieveth it you to hear, that our Lady was pure from all manner sin? Castitatem Maria sanctae ab omni cōtagioue liberatae et corporis, & animae & intellectus. Act. 8. folio. 313. jubetemitti in dyptichiss sanctarum ecclesiarum nomen sanctae memoriae Vitaeliani papae Romae. Act. 8. fol. 315. Conjectures why M Horn hath made this post haste. Or doth it appal you to hear the patriarch of Constantinople, and all the bishops his obediensaries, with the bishops that were under the patriarch of Antioch, after they had heard readen the letters sent from pope Agatho and his Council at Rome, and advisedly considered them, which (as I have told you) were stuffed with authorities concerning the pope's primacy, to yield to the truth, and after .46. years to forsake and abandon their great schism and false heresy? Doth it dasel and amaze you to hear the patriarch of Constantinople to confess to the whole Council, that if the name of Pope Vitalianus were received again into their dypticha, which they had razed out, that those which had sundered and sequestered themselves from the Catholic Church, would forthwith return thither again, whereunto the Emperor and all the Council by▪ and by agreed, and thereupon the Council made many gratulatory exclamations? And is there any other way to stay and redress this huge schism in England or else where, but even to put in our Church books the Pope's name, and to embrace again his Authority? Or do ye take it to the heart M. Horn to see here the pleading of Macarius the heretic (which is also M. jewels and your ordinary fashion) as pleading upon the doings of heretical Bishops and Emperors grounding himself upon a number of patriarchs of Constantinople, of Antioch, and divers other bishops with their councils, yea upon the Emperor his father and his great grandfather, teachings and proclamations, quite rejected and refused? Or is it a corsy unto you, that the heretical writings of Macarius as soon as they began to be read, were strait condemned of the bishops, not looking for the emperors pleasure therein, though he himself was then present thereat? Act. 11. p. 362. Act. 10. Act. 8 fol. 321. col. 1. c Sancta synodus dixit. Ecce & hoc testimonium sancti patris peremisti. Non congruit orthodoxis ita circumtruncatas sanctorum patrum voces destora re●haereticorū potius proprium hoc est. An humble and a reasonable request to the queens Majesty and her council. Or is there yet any other lurking sore privily pinching your stomach? Namely that ye see to your great grief, that the fathers give us an assured mark to know you and M. jewel by, what ye are, by your wretched wresting and wrething, and miserable chopping and paring the ancient father's writings: wherein ye are the true scholars of these Monothelites, whose practices are descried in the .6. the .8. the .9. the .10. and the .11. sessions? The allegations of the Pope's Legates, being found truly, faithfully, and seemly done. I trow it nipped you at the very heart root, when ye read (in case ye ever read it, and have not trusted rather other men's eyes then your own) the Synod to say, to that cursed and unhappy Macarius, that it was the property of an heretic, to nip and break of, to mangle and maim, the father's testimonies. And thereupon he being oft taken with the manner, and now confessing the same, was forthwith deprived, and his bishoply attierment plucked from his back. And I would to God, it might please the queens Majesty, and her honourable council to play the Supreme heads as this good Emperor Constantinus and his judges did, and to make an indifferent search and view: whether the catholics in their late books, or M. jewel. M. Horn, and other their fellows, play the Macarians or no: and thereupon (even as M. Horn said th'emperor Constantine did) to give just judgement and sentence. Which is a ready and a sound way for the quailing and appeasing of this huge schism. And without the which, books will excessively grow on each part, and rather to increase of contention, than to any full pacification. And for my part the fault being found (as I doubt nothing it will be) and confessed thereupon on their part with an hearty renunciation, of all schism and heresy, I would not wish their riches to be plucked from them: but that they should remain in as good worldly estate as they now are in. This is all the hurt I wish them. But now M. Horn to return to the matter, ye see that this was but a poor judgement, and a poor silly supremacy, that ye give to your Emperor and his nobles. Wherein in effect while ye would seem to advance and exalt them, ye make their office not much better, than the registers and notaries office. Which office though it be honest and worshipful to perchance, yet I doubt whether it be honourable: as not many years past one of your fellows and protestant prelates said to one that thowed his Register. I tell thee: my regesters' office, is an honourable office. Well, M. jewel. let it be honourable to: I suppose for all that, it shall not make him supreme head of the Church withal. And so hath M. Horns argument a great foil. M. Horn. The .90. Division. Fol. 53. a. The bishops and Clergy, which were of the Province of Antioch, when Macarius was deposed by the judgement of the Synod, do make supplication unto the judges, the emperors deputies and counsellors, that they will be means unto the Emperor to appoint them an other Archbishop in the place of Macarius now deposed. Stapleton. And will ye play me the Macarian still M. Horn? Good reader consider of M. Horns dealings, even in this council, that I have and shall declare, whether M. Horn doth not altogether resemble Macarius shameful practice in his allegations. One of your reasons then M. Horn, to prove Constantine's supremacy by, is, that the Antiochians sewed to th'emperor to appoint an other archbishop in the place of Macarius. The appointment of an archbishop employeth no supremacy: diverse Kings of England have appointed bishops and archbishops in their Realm: And yet none ever took upon them either the name or Authority of a Supreme Governor in all causes Ecclesiastical, until in this our miserable time, heretics by authority of Princes, to establish their heresies, have spoiled Gods Ministers, and the Church of her dew Authority and government And I have told you before M. Horn, that this Constantin himself hath disclaimed your supremacy, of supreme judgement in causes ecclesiastical. Whereof also the very next matter, immediately rehearsed before the thing you allege, is a good and a sufficient proof. I will therefore demand a question of you. Ye see, Macarius is deposed, and that, as you confess here yourself, by the judgement of the Synod. Might now th'emperor keep him still and that lawfully in his bisshoprik, if he had so would, or no? If ye say he might not, then is he no Supreme Head. Except ye will say, he was lawfully deposed as an heretic: and therefore th'emperor could not keep him in. This also as yet maketh against your supremacy. For then the judgement of the bishops is above th'emperors power. But I will further ask you, whether if Macarius had been heartily penitent, and had recanted his heresy to, th'emperor might then have kept him in? Now take heed ye be not brought to the straits, which way so ever ye wind yourself. If ye say he may (as ye must, if ye will have th'emperor Supreme Governor in all causes ecclesiastical) then is the whole Council against you, Act. 12. subfinem. utterly denying him all hope of restitution, though the judges at th'emperors commandment, being moved with mercy, proposed this question to the Synod. If ye say he may not: The bishops' primacy proved by the said place that M. Horn allegeth. then do ye yourself spoil th'emperor of his Primacy. Thus ye perceive every way ye are in the briars, being convicted by the very place by yourself proposed. M. Horn. The .91. Division. Fol. 53. a. The judges make them answer, that it was the emperors pleasure, that they should determine amongst themselves, whom they would have, and bring their decree unto the Emperor. At the last the whole Synod do offer their definition subscribed with their hands to the Emperor, beseeching him to (.274.) The 274. untruth, wilful and Notorious as shall appear. examen and confirm the same. The Emperor within a while saith: we have red this definition, and give our consent thereunto. The Emperor asked of the whole Synod, if this definition be concluded by uniform consent of all the Bishops, the Synod answered: We all believe so, we be all of this mind, God send th'emperor many years: Thou hast made all heretics to fly, by thy means all Churches are in peace, accursed be all Heretics. In the which curse, the whole Synod curseth Honorius Pope of Rome with the great curse, whom the Synod nameth in .17. Action, one of the chiefest of these Heretics, who are here cursed. The Emperor protesteth, that his zeal to conserve the Christian faith undefiled (.275.) The .275. untruth in leaving out words material. Wherein consists the office of Bishops. was the only cause of calling this Synod. He showeth what was their parts therein, to wit, to weigh considerately by God's holy Scriptures, to put away all novelty of speech or assertion, added to the pure Christian faith, in these latter days by some of wicked opinion, and to deliver unto the Church this faith most pure and clean. (.276.) The .276. untruth, in nipping of the chiefest part of the Sentence. The princes most acceptable service to God. They make a commendatory oration unto th'emperor with much joyfulness declaring, that this his fact about this Synod in procuring to his subjects true godliness, and to all the Church a quiet state, was the most comely thing, the most acceptable service, the most liberal oblation or sacrifice, that any Emperor might or could make unto God. And declaring the humble obedience to his precept or summons of the Bishop of Rome, who sent his Legates, (.277.) The .277. untruth. That appeareth not in the Council, neither was that the cause of his absence. being sick himself, and of themselves being present in their own persons, they do most humbly beseech him to set his seal unto their doings, to ratify the same with the Imperial writ, and to make edicts and constitutions (.278.) The .278. untruth. Ex more, after the manner, left out. wherewith to confirm the Acts of this Council, that all controversy in time to come, may be utterly taken away. All which the Emperor granted unto them, adding his curse, as they had done before, so well against all the other Heretics, as also against Honorius late Pope of Rome, a companion, fautour, and confirmer, (saith he) of the others heresies in all points. After this, the Emperor directeth his letters to the Synod at Rome of the Western bishops, wherein he commendeth their diligence about the confuting of the heresies. He describeth the miserable estate the Church was in, by means of the Heresies: for, saith he, the inventors of Heresies are made the chief bishops, they preached unto the people contention in stead of peace, they sowed in the Church for●wes, cockle for wheat, and all Church matters were troubled, and clean out of order. And because these things were thus disordered, and impiety consumed Godliness, we set forward thither, whereunto, it becomed us to direct our going (meaning to seek by all means the redress of these disorders in Church matters) we labour with earnestness for the pure faith, we attend upon Godliness, and we have our special care about the Ecclesiastical state. In consideration whereof, we called the bishops out of far distant places to this Synod, to set a Godly peace and Quietness in the Church matters etc. To this epistle of the Emperor, Leo the second bishop of Rome, maketh answer (for Agatho was dead) buy letters, whereof this is the effect. I give thanks unto the King of Kings, who hath bestowed on you an earthly Kingdom, in such wise, that he hath given you therewith a mind to seek much more after heavenly things. Your piety is the fruit of mercy, but your authority is the keeper of Discipline: by that the Prince's mind is joined to god: But buy this the subjects receive reformation of disorders. kings ought to have so much care to reform and correct naughtiness amongst their subjects, as to triumph over their enemies: for in so doing they make their authority subject to serve him, buy whose gift and protection they reign. Wherefore seeing that the holy mother the Church, which is the Body of Christ, enjoyeth by means of you her sincere and principal child, an invincible soundness. Therefore it is written of you, most merciful Prince, and of that same holy Church dispersed throughout all the world, isaiah. 49. Psal. 98. Kings shallbe thy noursinge fathers, and in like sort it is written, the honour of the King loveth judgement: in that you set much more by heavenly than by earthly things, and do prefer without comparison the right faith, before all worldly cares: what other do you herein, than make right judgement bond and serviceable to God's honour and religion, and to offer unto his divine Majesty, an oblation and burnt Sacrifice, The pope accursed for heresy by the sentence of the emperor, the synod and the bishop of Rome. of sweet savour upon the altar of your heart? God inspire, increase and replenish your princely heart, with the light of the Catholic doctrine, whereby the clouds of the heretical pravity, may be driven away. I received most joyfully the Synodical acts, with your letters of highest authority, by the Legates your humble servants, which were sent unto the Council, from my predecessor Agatho, at your commandment. Wherefore with thanks giving I cry unto the Lord: O Lord save our most Christian King, and hear him in the day he calleth upon thee: By whose godly travail the Apostolic godly doctrine or Religion, shineth through the world, and the horrible darkness of heretical malice is vanished away. For through your travail, God assisting the same, that mischief which the wicked craft of the Devil had brought in, is overthrown: the benefit of the Christian Faith, that Christ gave to the salvation of man, hath won the over hand. The holy and great General Council, which of late hath been congregate at Constantinople buy your (.279.) The 279. untruth. No such words in the Latin text. order and precept: wherein for the service and ministery sake that ye own to God, you had the chief rule and government, hath in all points followed the doctrine of the Apostles, and approved Fathers. * Here is left out: that the See Apostolic. Beati Petri autoritate confirmat confirmeth with the Authority of S. Peter, the 6. General Council. I do detest therefore and curse all Heretics, yea Honorius also late Bishop of this sea, who laboured profanely to betray and subvert the immaculate faith. O holy Church, the mother of the faithful, arise, put of thy mourning weed, and cloth thyself with joyful apparel, behold thy Son the most constant Constantine, of all Princes thy defender, thy helpe● (be not afraid) hath girded himself with the sword of God's word, wherewith he divideth the miscreants from the Faithful: hath armed himself in the coat armour of Faith, and for his helmet the hope of Salvation. This new David and Constantine, hath vanquished the great Goliath thy boasting enemy, the very Prince and chieftayne of all mischief and errors the Devil: and by his careful travail the right faith hath recovered her brightness, and shineth through the whole world. Stapleton. In all this one leaf and an half, and more there is nothing material but that may be avoided by my former answer. And as touching Pope Honorius we might yield, that for his own person he was an heretic, and accursed to, by the sentence of th'emperor, the synod, and the bishop of Rome. I mean either that the pope is not the head of the Church: Concerning pope Honorius that M. Horn maketh an heretic .218. patres in 5. synodo Romana. Nisi à fide exorbitaverit. or that the Queen of England is supreme head there. Neither of these, shall he be able to prove by any collection that he can bring of Honorius his heresy while he liveth. If he say, I have already declared out of the Council at Rome, in the time of king Theodoricus, that the Council it self could not judge the Pope: I will grant it him, and will never step back from it. But than you must Master Horn, take of the fathers there assembled, the understanding withal: that is, unless he serve and stray from the faith. Ye will now happily reply a-againe, and say: how shall then the pope (whom ye make the universal bishop of the whole church) direct the said church in a true and a sound faith, himself being an heretic? Or how can it be, but the whole or the greater part of the church, shall with the head miscarry also? Or how is it true, that we heard at your hands even now, that the church of Rome was never carried away with any error in faith? Or how is it true, that ye said, that Peter had a privilege not only for himself, but for his successors also (which ye make the pope's) not only not to err themselves, but also to confirm their brethren, and to remove all error from them? We answer that in case the Pope by his open law and decree made with the consent of his brethren in Synod or consistory, promulged to be observed through christendomme, do set forth any heresy, that your replies are good and effectual. But such a decree ye have not showed, nor ever shall show. For, from making any such law the blessed hand of God doth uphold, and ever hath upholden, the pope's for his promise sake. Promise, I say, made to S. Peter, not for his own private person, but for the safeguard of the church, which otherwise must needs have a great wrack in the faith, if the Rock and head thereof should publicly decree heresy. In case therefore the pope be privately a close heretics to himself, or to other to, without any open setting forth or proclaiming his error by a common law (as Honorius was, if he were an heretic) he is not properly to be called an heretic as he is a Pope, nor the church of Rome can be said to have erred. Neither the other inconveniences will ensue that ye brought forth. But verily what soever Honorius in his own person was, yet certain it is, that the See of Rome both in his time and ever after, was always clear of this heresy, yea and was a continual persecutor thereof. For both in the time of Honorius himself, Pyrrhus the patriarch of Constantinople was banished by the Emperor Heraelius into Africa at the suit of the Church of Rome (as Platina, Plat. in honour. 1. Sabel Acnead. 8. lib. 6. Tom. 2. Concil. in gest. Theodori. pag. 228. Sabellicus and other do testify) for this heresy: and also in the time of Theodorus the Pope within three years or there about after the decease of Honorius, this Pyrrhus came out of afric to Rome, recanted there his Heresy, and was by the Pope therefore reconciled: though afterward again ad proprium impietatis vomitum repedavit. He returned to the vomytte of his impiety. This Pope also Theodorus wrote to Paulus of Constantinople a defender also of this heresy, warning and rebuking him thereof. All this was before the time of this general Council and of Pope Agatho. And therefore notwithstanding the private error of Honorius, which he never taught or preached publicly, but only in letters coming forth in his name after his death, was surmised to be such, yet Pope Agatho in his letters (red and allowed of the whole Council) most truly said, that his Predecessors kept always sound and unviolated the faith, Act. 4. Concil. 6. Const. pa. 291. c. 1. a. etc. and did also in this very Heresy labour continually with the bishops of Constantinople (Pyrrhus, Paulus, Petrus, and Sergius) to have it suppressed and extinguished. So that as I said, though we grant, that Honorius was an Heretic for his own private opinion, yet that he or his Church ever decreed or publicly allowed that Heresy, it can never truly be granted. And yet it seemeth very strange, that if Honorius were an Heretic, that Pope Agatho neither in his letters read in the whole Council, Act. 4. pag 209.300. & 304. where learnedly and particularly he confuteth and reciteth all the bishops that held that heresy, neither yet in the letters of the Roman Synod of one hundred and five and twenty bishops red also in the Council naming again particularly the bishops of that heresy, in neither of them, I say, should once name Honorius. For neither could he be ignorant thereof, neither could his dissimulation have cloaked the matter, but rather have much hazarded his credit and estimation, both with the Emperor, and with the whole Council. It is marvel also, that Zonara's a Greek Writer, Vide zonaran. Tom. 3 pag. 74. reakoning up of purpose all the Heretical Bishops condemned in this sixth General Council, nameth not yet at all, Honorius the Pope of Rome. Farther it is very likely, that if he were so known an Heretic, Venerable Bede living so shortly after that time, and recording in his Ecclesiastical History, diverse of this Pope's letters directed to our Country, should somewhere touch this matter, or should not at the least so authentically recite his doings and writings, as he doth of other Popes before him, and after him. verily in his letters recorded in saint Bede, Beda li. 2. hist. gentis Angl. cap. 17.18. & 19 he commendeth highly the books and works of saint Gregory the first his Predecessor, in the which his heresy (if he held any such) is, as by other Catholic Fathers rejected. But of this matter I have also spoken against Master jewel: to the which this that I have here said, and that to this may be added. The Conclusion both here and there is that Honorius as Pope never decreed nor allowed this heresy or any other, Art. 4. fol. 112. & 113. nor was not as Pope condemned. And how it is to be understanded, that the Pope may err, and yet the Church of Rome not err, because it is by M. Rastell sufficiently declared against M. jewel, M. Rastel in his third book against M. jewel. fol. 144. and .145. to that place I refer also the Reader. All things in all places must not be said to the unfruitful weariness both of the writer, and of the Reader. Whereas now M. Horn enforceth his pretenced supremacy, for that the Synod offered to the Emperor their definition subscribed with their hands, beseeching him to examine and confirm the same, mark him good Reader, and eye him well. For in these three words, subscription, examination, Two legerdemanes of M. Horns: one meet for a Macarian, tho. there for a gay grammarian. and confirmation, lie couched two untruths besides two legerdemains: One meet for a Macarian, the other for a jolly fresh Grammarian. Your text M. Horn where it maketh mention of this subscription, neither speaketh of examination, nor yet of confirmation. And as for confirmation, we could bear it well enough, saving I know ye have a shrewd meaning, that would not well be borne withal. And therefore for ones, we will be so bold to put you to your proof, and desire you to show in this place any word of confirmation. I know he did confirm and ratify this council, as it appeareth otherwher. But with such a confirmation as the fathers could not use: that is, banisshing the gainsayers putting them out of his protection. But now to your examination. Act. 18. fol. 409. Col. 1. c. Why M. Horn? After the Pope at Rome in his own person with a .125. Bishops, and after that his Legates with 289. Bishops at Constantinople, have resolutely and definitively determined the matter against the Monothelites, hang all these doings upon a new examination and approbation of the Emperor, that if he like them not, than all is dashed? Then have the Fathers spun a fair thread. Then have ye now at length after long searching and hunting in the acts of this Synod, beaten out somewhat for your purpose in deed. Go on therefore M. Horn. Prove this, and then let your Emperor, a God's name, have set on his head, not only his Imperial, but the Pope's triple crown too. Show your cards then, M. Horn: The whole Synod say you, offereth their defininiton subscribed with their hands to themperor, beseeching him to examine and confirm the same. Well said: But now in what part of the Council lie these words? In so notable a matter and conclusion as this is, why do ye not send your Reader to the leaf or to the action at least? And why is not this conclusion with a jolly note, dashed into your margin? Surely the occasion being so good, and the matter so important, there must needs be some great stay, that among so many jolly Notes, this only is omitted. Hanc definitionem prae manibus deferimus vestro serenitatis proposito recensendam. Acti. 18. Fol. 398. Col. 2. Wot ye then what it is, good Readers? Forsooth a wondered stay in deed. For I assure you there are no such words in the Council. He hath all this while outfaced us with a card of ten. There is none other, but this, that Theodore the Deacon told th'Emperor: that he had at hand ready the Counsels definition, to be read to him at his highness will and pleasure. Whereupon th'emperor by and by answered: Let it be read. And when it was read, th'emperor asked the Council, whether they were all agreed to the definition them read, which when they had all protested, by many acclamations, th'emperor subscribed also thereunto, not examining or trying it in any manner at all, but plainly protesting, that he was ready to obey as well all the former Counsels as that, and for their parts they should answer before God in the last judgement, whether they had said well or evil. Now whether recensendan doth signify to be examined, or to be recited and rehearsed, there is no more to do, M. Horn, but to call a fair quest of Grammarians, your own nigh neighbours at Winchester school. And if they give sentence for you, them let the Emperor, as I have said, wear the Pope's threefold Crown. Act. 18. pag. 401. Now for your other Macarian practice: ye have dissembled, as well the Bishop's subscription, which was as I have showed, judicially done, definiendo, the Pope's Legates subscribing first: as also th'emperors, which was only consentiendo: by consenting: and put to after all the Bishops had subscribed. There is yet an other Macarian feat played here by M. Horn worth the noting both for a trial of his honesty and for the Readers edifying. He hath made two special notes in his margin: the one, wherein consisteth the office of Bishops. The other: The princes most acceptable service to God. Two good notes in deed and well worth the noting, if they be uprightly noted. The office of Bishops is, as M. Horn allegeth, to deliver unto the Church the faith of Christ most pure and clean. Act. 18. pag. 401. Col. 2. c. But how, he telleth not. His feat is quite to nip of the words immediately following, which are these. (Sicut praedictum est) Quatenus secundum sancta & universalia quinque Concilia & statuta sanctorum venerabilium patrum, ita eam nos custodiamus usque in mortem. To th'intent that (as we have before said, saith the Emperor) we also may keep the faith, even to death according to the five holy and general Counsels, and according to the decrees of the holy reverent Fathers. If you had put this clause to the office of Bishops, M. Horn, as the Emperor did, all England should have seen that you and your fellows were no Bishops, who so lightly and so impudently condemn the doctrine of the holy fathers, and do allow but four general Counsels, as your brethren here in Antwerp do allow but three. But it went against your conscience, Edward. 6. Ann. 1. Tilet. in Confutaet. Confes. Minist. Antwerp. pag 15. b. Act. 18. ut supra. to tell that, which should condemn your conscience. Likewise in the prince's service to God, you say: the Emperor protested his zeal, to conserve the Christian faith undefiled: but you leave out again, what he saith immediately after: secundùm doctrinam atque traditionem quae tradita est nobis tam per evangelium, quámque per sanctos Apostolos, & statuta sanctorum quinque universalium Conciliorum, sanctorúmque probabilium patrum. According to the doctrine and tradition delivered unto us aswell by the Gospel, as by the holy Apostles, and by the decrees of the five holy General Counsels, and of the holy approved fathers. If you had told this part of the prince's duty, and had given the Emperor leave to tell out his whole tale, the Reader should soon have espied, what damnable wretches you are, that persuade Princes to profess the Gospel only with out regard of former Counsels, and of the traditions of the holy fathers. And then your two marginal notes, either would not at all been noted, or at least to your utter shame have been readen. Other your nippinges and curtallinges of your places might here be noted. As that in the Counsels request to the Emperor, for ratifying their determination with his edict, you leave out ex more after the manner, whereby is insinuated a customable practice of Emperors (as we saw before in justinian) to procure by edicts and proclamations the execution of Counsels. Act. 18. pa. 404. Supra: lib. 2. cap. 19 As also in your long allegation of pope Leo his letters (which all we grant unto you, and you never the nearer) we might note at the least half a dozen such nippinges and manglinge of the text. But I think, M. Horn (all that hath been said being well considered) you look for no great triumph, for this field: But are content to blow the retreat. Be it so then. M. Horn. The .92. Division. pag. 55. a. Bamba King of Spain commanded a Synod to be had at Toletum in the fourth year of his reign: the occasion was this. There had been no Synod by the space of .18. years before, as it is said in the preface to this Council, by means whereof the word of God was despised, the Church disciplicine neglected, all Godly order distourbed, and the Church toast and tumbled, as a ship without a rower and stern, (meaning a King to call them together in Synod). By the careful zeal of this King, being called together they consult how to reform errores about Faith, corruption of discipline, and other disorders against godliness and Religion. And at the end they do give great thanks unto the noble and virtuous King, by whose ordinance and careful endeavour, they were (.280). The .280. untruth The word commauded, is not in the text. Aggregati sumus. vide tom. 2 pag. 270. col. 2. Tol. 12. commanded to this consultation: who as they affirm of him, coming as a new repairer of the Ecclesiastical discipline in these times, not only intended to restore the orders of the Councils before this time omitted, but also hath decreed and appointed, yearly Synods to be kept hereafter. Eringius king of Spain commandeth the bishops and other of his Clergy, to assemble together at Toletum in one Synod the first year of his reign. Tol. 13. And called an other to the same place, the fourth year of his reign: to consult about reformation of the Church discipline. When the Bishops, and the residue of the Clergy were assembled in their convocation, at the commandment of the king: he himself with many of his nobility and counsellors, cometh in to them: he declareth the cause wherefore he summoned this Synod: he showeth the miseries the whole country hath sustained, and the plagues: he declareth the cause, to be God's wrath kindled by means of the contempt of God's word and commandment: And he exhorteth them that they will with Godly zeal, study ●o purge the land from pravity, by preaching, and exercise of Godly discipline, and that zealously. He doth exhort his Nobles, that were there present, that they also would care diligently for the futherance hereof: he delivereth unto the Synod a book, containing the principal matter whereof they should consult. And last of all, he promiseth by his hand subscription, that he will confirm and ratify what the clergy and nobility shall conclude, touching these articles, for the furtherance of godliness and Church Discipline. Egita, King of Spain, (.281.) The 281. untruth. Of these .3. Counsels or of any ratifiing thereof by the king's authority or Royal assent in the Tomes of the Counsels there appeareth nothing. caused in his time also three Councils to be had and celebrated at Toletum, for the preservation of Religion, with the Church Discipline in sincerity and purity: who also confirmed and ratified the same with his Royal assent and authority. The .6. Chapter. Of three Kings of Spain, and of the three later Toletane Counsels kept in their reigns. Stapleton. ALM. horns force is now suddenly removed from Constantinople to Spain, where he now bloweth a alarm again. But God be thanked for all this great fight, there is little hurt done. Yea after all this tossing and turmoiling, and after all his great stir and broil against the pope and the clergy, he is upon the sudden become such an entiere and so well affectioned friend to them, that (but I trow unwares, and therefore worthy the less thank) he transporteth the supreme authority as well in temporal as spiritual matters from the king to the clergy. For I beseech you M. Horn, are not divers of the matters specified in the twelfth and thirteenth Council at Toledo plain Civil and Temporal? As concerning the confirmation of King Ernigius royal Authority succeeding to King Bamba being shorn a Monk? Tolet. 12. Vide Tom. 2. Concil. Fol. 417. &. Tolet. 13. fol. 425 Votorum meorum studia vestris judicijs dirimenda committens. pa. 425. & 417. His votorum meorum in sinuationib. quaest ut fortia paternitatis vestrae adiutoria prorogetis. Luce enim clarius constat, quod aggregatio sancta pontificum quicquid censuerit obseruamdun per donum spiritus sancti, omnino est ad aeternitatem praefixum. Tol. 13. fol. 426. c. 1. b M. Horn unawares maketh the Clergy Supreme judges in Civil causes. Concerning the release and exoneration of the people from certain grievous payementes and exactions? Concerning also the goods of certain Traitors with such like? Doth not the King pray the Prelates to discuss his requests with their judgements? Do not they confirm his royal Authority with their Synodical Decree? Doth not the King in his book offered to the Council say, that he most humbly and devoutly lieth prostrate before their reverent assembly? Coram caetus vestri reverentia humilis devotusque prosternor? Doth he not desire them concerning his other civil ordinances, to put to their strong and helping hand? Doth he not plainly say, that what so ever the holy assembly of Bishops decreeth to be observed, is by the gift of the holy Ghost established for ever? Let me now, Gentle Reader, play Master Horn his part, and make for me his accustomable conclusion. The King requireth of the Clergy the confirmation of his Decrees and ordinances, as well concerning matters of Faith and Religion, as concerning Civil matters: Ergo the Clergy hath the superiority in both. And with this Argument, doth Master Horn lap up here his Spannishe matters. Saving that he telleth us of three other Counsels holden at Toletum under Egita their King, which in all the volumes of the Counsels appear not, this under Eringius, the .13. in number being the last: and therefore till he tell us, where those Councils may be found, seeing he hath so often belied the known Histories, I will make no courtesy to note this for an Untruth also, this being a matter so utterly unknown. And now farewell Spain for this time. For Master Horn hath many other mighty, large, and far Countries to bring under his conquest and Supremacy: as well truly, as he hath already conquered Spain: which will be to lose the field and all his matter, glad to escape with body and soul: with small triumph, and shame enough. Go to then Master Horn, and take your journey when and whither it pleaseth you. You will wish, I trow, when you have all said and done, that you had tarried at home and let this great enterprise alone. M. Horn. The .93. Division. pag. 55. b. Although about this time the Popes devised (282) The .282. Untruth. Horrible and Slanderous. horrible practices, whereby to win themselves from under the over sight and comptrolment of the Emperor or any other, and to have the only and Supreme authority in themselves over all, as (.283.) The .283. Untruth▪ as before is proved they had already obtained to their Church the Supreme Title, to be Head of other Churches: Yet the Emperors had not altogether surrendered from themselves to the Popes, their Authority and jurisdictions in Church matters. For when the Church was grievously vexed with the controversy about Images, there were diverse great Synods or Councils called for the decidinge of that troublesome matter by the Emperors: and at the last, that which is called the Seventh General or Ecumenical Council was called and summoned to be holden at Nice in Bythinia, by Constantine and Irene the Empress his Mother, who was the Supreme worker and Governor (although but an (.284.) The .284. Untruth. mere Slanderous. ignorant and very superstitious woman, I will say no worse) in this matter. For her Son was but about ten years old, as Zonaras affirmeth, and she had the whole rule, although he bore the name. After the death of Paul, the Emperor appointed Tarasius the Secretary to be patriarch at Constantinople, the people liked well thereof. But Tarasius the emperors Secretary refused the office, and would not take it upon him, till the Emperor had promised to call a general Council, to quiet the (.285.) The .285. untruth false translation, ut Eccles●ae uniantur. To unite the Churches which were in a schism. brawls in the Church about Images. The Emperor writeth to the patriarch of old Rome, and to the other patriarchs, willing them to send their Legates, unto a Council to be holden at Nice in Bythinia. The Bishops assemble at Nice by the commandment and decree of the Emperor, as they confess in diverse places of this Council. When the Bishops were set in Council, and many Lay persons of the nobility with them: and the holy gospels were brought forth, as the manner was (although the holy Gospels were not made (.286.) The .286. untruth As much in this Council as in any other. judges in this council, as they ought to have been, and were in all the forenamed general Counsels) Tarasius commendeth the vigilant care and fervent zeal of the Emperors, about Church matters: for ordering and pacifying whereof, they have called, saith he, this council. The Emperor sendeth unto he Synod, certain counsellors with the emperors letters patents, to this effect. Constantinus and Irene, to the bishops assembled in the second Nicene Synod, by God's grace our favour and the commandment of our Imperial authority. He showeth that it appertaineth to the imperial office, to maintain the peace, concord, and unity, of the whole Roman Empire, but especially to preserve the estate of God's holy Churches, with all possible care and council. For this cause, he hath with pain gathered this council together: giveth licence also and liberty to every man without all fear, to utter his mind and judgement frankly: to the end the truth may the better appear. He showeth the order he observed, in making Tarasius Bishop: He prescribeth unto the bishops what is their office, and what they should do: propounding unto them the holy gospels, as the right and (287.) The .287. Untruth He said not so. only true rule they should follow. After this be mentioneth letters brought from the Bishop of Rome by his Legates, the which he commandeth to be openly red in the council: and so appointeth also other things that they should read. There was (.288.) The .288. untruth. The definition of the faith was made without the emperors Authority. nothing attempted or done in this council, without the authority of the Emperors, as in all the former general counsels. And so at the end, the whole Council put up a supplication to the Emperor, for the (.289.) ratifying of all their doings. The which when the Emperor had heard openly recited and read unto them, they forthwith allowed, signed, and sealed. The .7. Coapter. Of the .7. General Council holden at Nice. Stapleton. fie on all shameless impudency. M. Horns exceeding impudenci for alleging for him the. 7. General Council. Qui venerandas imagines idola appellant, anathema. Act. 4. fol. 535. et act 7. fol. 603. Fol. 15. M. Horn is by this Council declared an Heretic. Doth it not shame you M. Horn once to name this .7. General Council, which doth so plainly accurse you and your fellows, for your detestable sayings, writings, and doings, against the holy Images, and against all such as call them Idols, as ye do in this your book? If the authority of this Council furnished with the presence of .350. Bishops, established with the consent of the Pope, and the four other patriarchs, and ever since of all Catholic people both in the Latin and Greek Church highly reverenced, may take no force, I know not what law ecclesiastical may or aught to take force. If you and your fellows be no heretics (and it were but for this point only) according to the rule and prescription, before by me out of the Emperor justinian's writings rehearsed, who is, was, or ever shall be, an heretic? And can ye then for very shame meddle with the Council, yea to crave aid of this Council to help you to erect your new papality? Out upon this your exceeding shameless demeanour. Yet were your impudency, the more to be borne withal, if beside the matter of Images, there were not also, most open and evident testimony of the Pope's Supremacy in this Synod. Certainly as in the Council of Chalcedo, after Pope Leos letters were read, and in the sixth General Council, after Agathos letters were read: all the fathers received and allowed, and highly reverenced the said letters, and were directed by them, touching matters of faith then being controversed: Even so it fared also here. The letters that Pope Adrianus sent to th'emperor, and to the patriarch of Constantinople touching the Reverend Images being proponed and read to these Fathers, they did most uniformly, and most joyfully condescend to the contents of them: And in full testimony thereof, Act. 2. each one set to his hand and subscription. The said Adrian writeth to Tarasius the patriarch of Constantinople, that onlesse, he had well known Tarasius good sincere zeal, and catholic faith touching Images, and the six general counsels, that he would never have consented to the calling of any Council. Nequaquam ad Synodum conuocādā consentiremus. Dict. act. 2. fol. 483. Col. 2. b. Ibidem fol. 485. Col. Tripart. lib. 4. cap. 9 Theodoret. lib. 2. cap. 22. Whereby ye see M. Horn that the Pope hath such a voice negative, in summoning and ratifying of Counsels, that if he only had drawn back, it had been no lawful Council: According as the old Canon alleged in the ecclesiastical story commandeth, that without the Pope's Authorityte no Council ought to be kept, and according as for that only cause divers counsels were abolished, as the Antiochian in the East, and the Ariminense in the West. And the said Pope Adrian saith to Tarasius. unde & ipse Beatus Petrus Apostolus Dei jussu Ecclesiam pascens nihil omnino praetermisit sed ubique principatum obtinuit & obtinet: cui etiam & nostrae beatae & Apostolicae sedi, quae est omnium Ecclesiarum Dei caput, velim beata vestra sanctitas ex sincera mente & toto cord agglutinetur. saint Peter feeding the Church by God's commandment hath omitted nothing at all, but ever hath had the principality, and now hath: to whom and to our blessed and apostolic see, which is the Head of all God's Churches, I would wish your blessed holiness with sincere mind, and withal your heart to join yourself. The Emperor himself saith, that the council was called by synodical letters sent from the most holy patriarch. And a little after, by whose exhortation and in a manner commandment we have called you together, Cuius hortatu & veluti jussu vos congregavimus. ●ct. 1. fol: 463. saith th'emperor to the bishops. The Pope's Legates are named first and subscribe first: The Pope's letters were read first of all in the Council: And that (Tarasius himself confesseth) Praerogativa quadam. For a certain prerogative dew to the Pope. Other places also of like agreableness ye shall find here. These be the letters M. Horn, that ye speak of, which as ye say th'emperor commanded to be read openly. Wherewith, that ye dare for shame of th'world ones to meddle, as also to talk of the story of Paulus and Tarasius, I can not but most wonderfully marvel at. This Paulus was patriarch of Constantinople immediately before Tarasius, Tom. 2. Conc. fol. 608. and voluntarily renounced the same office, and became a monk, minding to do some penance the residue of his life, for that he had set forth the wicked doings and decrees of themperors against the images. Zonara's Tom. 3. & Tom. 2. Concil. fol. 464. The Emperor was very desirous to place Tarasius in his room, but he was as unwilling to receive that dignity. And when the Emperor urged and pressed him vehemently: he answered. How can I take upon me to be Bishop of this see, being sundered from the residue of Christ's Church▪ and wrapped in excommunication. Ecclesiae à reliquis ecclesiis awlsae & anathemati subiectae. Zonar. ibidem. Is not this then prettily and gaily done of M. Horn, to take this council as a trumpet in his hand, to blow and proclaim himself to all the world an heretic? Plead on apace M. Horn, as ye have done, and you shall purchase yourself at length great glory: as great as ever had he that burnt the temple of Diana, to win to himself a perpetual memory. To the which your glorious title for the increase and amplifying of the same, let your Untruths, which are here thick and threefold be also adjoined. That the Popes about this time devised horrible practices, to have to themselves only the supreme authority: M. Horns untruths. that Irene Constantine's Mother was an ignorant and a superstitious woman: that the matters in the .7. General Council were not judged according to the Gospels: that there was nothing attempted or done in this Council without the authority of the Emperor. In all this I hear very bold asseverations, but as for proofs, I find none: And none will be found when M. Horn hath done bis best, this year, nor the next neither. M. Horn. The .94. Division. pag. 57 a. Gregorius .3. sent into France for succour to Charles martel, yielding and (.290.) The .290. Untruth. joined with a Slander. surrendering up unto him, that which the Pope had so long sought, by all subtle and mischievous means, to spoil the Emperor and the Princes of. The .192. Untruth. captain and notorious, io●ned with extreme folly, and gross ignorance. This same Gregory the third (saith Martinus Poenitentiarius) When Rome was besieged by the king of Lombardy, sent by ship unto Charles martel, Pipines' father, the Keys (.291.) The .291. Untruth. False translation as shall appear. of S. Peter's confession, beseeching him to deliver the Church of Rome from the lombards. By the keys of S. Peter's confession, he meaneth (.292.) all the pre-eminence, dignity, and jurisdiction, that the Pope's claim to themselves (more and besides that, which all other church ministers have) over and above all manner persons Ecclesiastical or Temporal, as given of Christ only to S. Peter, for his confession, and so from him to the Popes of Rome by lineal succession. seeing that this Pope who was passingly well learned, both in divine and profane learning, and no less godly, stout, and constant (if you will believe Platina) (.293.) The .293. Untruth. He yieldeth no jurisdiction at all in ecclesiast. matters to the lay Prince. yieldeth and committeth all this jurisdiction and claim that he hath, over all persons Ecclesiastical and Temporal, so well in causes Ecclesiastical as Temporal, unto Charles martel a lay Prince, and great Master of France: it appeareth that Princes may lawfully have the rule, government, and charge, in Church matters. The heirs and successors of this Charles martel, did keep these keys from rusting. They exercised the same jurisdiction and government in Ecclesiastical causes, that the Emperors and Kings had done, from the time of Constantine the great, until their time, which was almost .400. years. For Carolomanus (.294.) The .294. untruth. He uvas brother to Pepin, and son to Charles martel. son to King Pepin, and nephew to Charles Martel, no less Princelike than Christianly, exercised this his (.295.) The .295. untruth. Carolomanus exercised no Supreme authority in ecclesiastical causes Synod. Francica. Supreme authority in Ecclesiastical causes, and made notable reformation of the Ecclesiastical state. He summoned a Council of his Clergy, both bishops and Priests .742. year from the incarnation of Christ: wherein also he himself sat with many of his nobles and counsellors. He showeth the cause why he called this Synod. That they should give advise (saith he) how the Law of God and the Church religion (meaning the order and discipline) may be restored again, which in the time of my predecessors, being broken in sunder, fell clean away. Also by what means the Christian people may attain to the salvation of their souls, and perish not, being deceived by false priests. He declareth what ordinances and decrers were made (.296.) The .296. untruth. Not by his, but by the bishop's Authority. by his authoriy in that Synod. We did ordain Bishops through the Cities (saith he) by the council of the Priests, and my nobles, and did constitute Bonifacius to be the archbishop over them (.297.) The .297. untruth. Which is the Pope's Legate, left out. Naucler. We have also decreed a Synod to ●e ca●●e● together every year, that the decrees of the Canons, and the Laws of the Church, may be repaired in our presence, and the Christian Religion amended. etc. That the money whereof the Churches have been defrauded, be restored. We have degraded the false Priests, Deacons, and Clerks, being adulterers, and fornicators, and have driven them to penance. We have utterly forbidden, all manner hunting and hawking to the Clergy. We decree also, that every priest dwelling in the diocese, be subject unto his own bishop, and that always in Lent, he make an account and shhew to the bishop the manner and order of his ministry, touching baptism, the Catholic faith, prayers and the order of Masses. And whansoever the bishop shall go his circuit to confirm the people, the priest shallbe ready to receive him with collection and help of the people. That the priest seek for new Chrism always on Maundy thursday at the bishop's hand, that the bishop may be a witness of his chaste life, of his faith and doctrine. We decree further, that no unknown bishop or Priest, be admitted into the Church ministry, before he be allowed buy the Synod. He maketh many such like, for the reformation of the Clergy, in what sort they shallbe punished, if they commit whoredom, and likewise against sorcery, witchcraft, divinations, incantations, and all kind of profane superstitions. If there were no more examples of any Church history, but this (298) The .298. untruth. For all that Carolomanus here did, was done by the Commission of Pope Zacha●ias. of Caloroman, it would suffice to make plain that to the Prince's authority appertaineth, to make Laws, and to the clergy to ge●● him counsel out of God's word, how to frame the discipline, to the edifying of God's Church. The .8. Chapter: Of Charles martel, and of the keys of S. Peter's Confession. Stapleton. M. Horns great prows. AS far as I can see, all M. Horns noble prows and great conquests have been and shall be upon the land. By the which he hath brought and will bring (if ye will believe him) under his new Papacy many great and noble countries: yea Moscovia and Aethiopia to. But happy it is, that he is not yet come to the Late new found Lands: where the new Christian people do as fast, and as reverently embrace the Pope's authority, as we, after we have been Christian men now these thousand years, do reject it, and that with most shameful villainy. But as I said, I find no martial acts of M Horns, upon the sea, but this only, which is so notable and wonderful, All the Pope's authority sent away by sea in a ship. that this one way serve for all. For Lo he carrieth all the Pope's authority away in a ship, to France: sent thither by the Pope himself, as himself saith. For as much as he sent to Carolus Martellus, the keys of Saint Peter's confession. So that now the Pope hath, being thereto forced by Master Horn, belike in some terrible combat upon the seas with sending these keys, so spoiled himself of all his jurisdiction, that he hath no more left, then have all other Ministers of the Church, and every other poor silly Sir john. This is Master Horn, a jolly triumphant victory, as ever I read or heard of: and these be as wonderful keys. Some great and strong wonders have I read, done by keys. Miracles done by keys. As in italy, that such as be bitten with mad dogs have been cured by the Church door key of Saint Bellins' Church: who being a blessed man, Coelius Rhodiginus Lect. antiq. lib. 17. cap. 28. Gregor. li. 6. epist. 23. died all to torn with dogs. And this is written of a great learned man of late memory, borne about those quarters. I have read also, of marvelous great miracles done by keys, that had touched the holy relics of Saint Peter at Rome: written by Saint Gregory, our Apostle, as a thing most certainly and notoriously to him and to others known. But yet Master Horn these your keys seam to me incomparably to pass all other: And for the strangeness of the matter, and for my better instruction, I would full fain be resolved at your hands but of two dowbtes that trouble and encumber me. First seeing that this Pope, as Master Horn reciteth out of P●●●ina, passingly well learned both in divine and profane learning, and no less godly, stout, and constant, hath yielded over to a lay Prince (by sending to him in a ship Saint Peter's keys) all his jurisdiction and claim, M. Horns marvelous exposition of Saint Peter's keys. that he had over all causes Ecclesiastical or temporal, yet for all this good Master Horn, in this so weighty a matter, I would crave at your hands a little of your good help to satisfy my mind, yea and your wise discrete reader's mind to. For I having but a dull insight in such matters, for my part, see no great wisdom, virtue, or learning, and less stoutness in Gregory for these his doings. Your authors in this story, are here, Martinus and Platina. If we shall by them measure his wisdom and stoutness, and other qualities whithal: Martinus. Synodum pene .1000. episcoporum Romae celebrando venerationem sanctarum imaginum confirmat, atque violatores generali sententia anathematizavit. it was partly, for that by his great carefulness he procured, that Rome being oppressed by the king of Lombardie, was releyved: partly and that most of all for that by a council holden at Rome almost of one thousand bishops, he condemned and accursed the wicked Emperor of Constantinople Leo, for defacing again after the 7. General Council (being persuaded thereto by an heretical monk) the holy images, as your author Martinus in Gregory's story writeth: And Platina saith, that he both excommunicated th'emperor Leo, and by sentence declared him to be no Emperor. And so not whithstanding the keys of S. Peter were sent away by ship, he reserved to himself one of S. Peter's keys, and a little more authority than ye were ware of, yea so much, that he hath given you a sore blow in the face which his key, and declared, you and your fellows, and your great Emperor to, Zonaras: Tom. 3. very arrant heretyks. I must now on's again be so bold as to trouble your wisdom: with an other as necessary a question, and that is: by what authority ye avouch, that these keys were nothing else, but the pope's supreme authority and jurisdiction? Your authors Martinus and Platina say no such thing: M. Horn showeth no author for his jolly exposition. No nor any other, that I could ever chance upon. If this be your own new fresh invention, then have you a jolly pregnante wit, and ye have deceived aswell others, as the late reverent father, M. Bayne, late bishop of Lichfeld and Coventrie, his expectation, sometime your reader in Cambridge, that was wont to call you quovis connu duriorem: that is, harder than any Horn. But I pray you good Sir is your authority invoydable? Must we neads sing sanctus, sanctus, sanctus, to all your sayings? and say of you as Pythagoras' scholars were wont to say: ipse dixi●: and reason no further? Let poor blunt fellows be so bold upon you for one's, to hear from you some better authority than your own naked word for this noble exposition. Namely seeing that your book is not authorized, by the queens commissioners, as some others are. M. Horns book is not set forth by the queens authority. And though it were, yet might we crave so much at your hands, seeing that you avouch that, which (for all your pretty exposition) was not done by this Gregory, nor could possible be done, unless he had been as frantycke as ever was mad colyns of Bethelem. Nor I trow, any man would make or believe any such fond declarations, but such as have lost their five wits. And therefore I say, of all your shameful lies, this may be crowned for a notorious, a captain and an Imperial Lie. For will you see gentle Readers, What were the keys that were sent to Charles Martel what were in deed these miraculous keys that M. Horn hath with such a strange Metamorphosis turned into all the pre-eminence, dignity, and jurisdlction that the Pope hath above other Church Ministers? Verily not in all the xiv. books of Ouides Metamorphosis can there be found, a more fabulous, more ridiculous, or more unsavoury and unsensible change, though he talk there of full many, as of men and women changed into birds, into stones, into beasts, into stars, and into I can not tell what, than is this one most singular and rare invented Metamorphosis of M. Horns exact devise. And truly M. Horn you having such a number of good versyfiers to your neighbours, in the famous and well ordered school of Winchester, it should be an eternal monument of your singular wit, if you did procure this your excellent Metamorphosis to be put also in verses, and to be adjoined to the other of Ouides, for the rarite and singularnesse thereof. Such as I trow all Europe, yea all the wide world again will not be able to show the like. Well: In the mean season that the worthy memory hereof may not utterly be extinguished, I will shortly and rudely shadow it out, leaving to more excellent wits, and cunning workmen (of which you shall not want M. Horn, if you earnestly procure them) to set it forth in his colours. First than it is to be understanded gentle Readers, that both before the time of this Gregory .3. and in his time, and after his time, the tomb, chapel or monument where S. Peter's body lay in Rome, was called of the roman writers Confessio B. Petri. S. Peter's Confession. Witness hereof before the time of Gregory. the .3. is the Pontifical of Damasus, as Georgius Cassander hath noted out of Petrus Vrbevetanus. Georg. Cassander in Ordine Romano. Thus Cassander writeth upon the word Confessio. Frequens est haec vox in Pontificali Damasi. Ante Confessionem S. Petri, de qua P. Vrb. Confessio, inquit, Capsa vel sepulchrum, vel potius corpus B. Petri conditum sub altari. P. Vrb. in scholijs in vitas Pont. Damasi. This word Confessio, saith Cassander is often found in the Pontifical of Damasus. Before S. Peter's Confession. Whereof Petrus V●beuetanus saith. By S. Peter's Confession is meant, t●e Cophyn or tomb, or rather the body of S. Peter laid under the Altar. This was a phrase to express that place, where the memory of S. Peter and of his most blessed Confession confessing there Christ, and dying there a glorious Martyr for Christ was by the blessed Relic of his body there present, honoured and continued. In the life of Gregory .3. it is written of a Synod of .93. bishops holden in S. Peter's Chapel at Rome: Tom. 2. Conc. pa. 434. col. 2. c Ibidem pag. 445. c. 2. Coram sacrosancta Confessione Sacratissimi corporis B. Petri residentibus & caet. The bishop's sitting before the holy Confession of the most blessed body of S. Peter. And with the like phrase it is written of Zacharias his successor, that he offered up before the Confession of S. Peter many jewels and much treasure. Such phrases are rife in the 2. Tom of the Counsels, and in the writers of those ages. This being first known, let us now consider the allegation of M. Horn. He saith Gregory .3. sent by ship to Charles martel, the keys of S. Peter's Confession. His Author is Martinus poenitentiarius, one of the penitentiaries at Rome. The latin of Martinus is this. claves ex Confession B. Petri Apostoli accipiens, direxit navali itinere. Here M. Horn hath clerkly turned: claves ex Confession B. Petri, The keys of S. Peter's Confession. The latin of this English, were. claves Confessionis, not claves ex Confession. As if I should say, claves ex Ecclesia direxit. It were not well Englished I trow. He sent the keys of the Church. But: He sent keys from the Church: Which might be other keys pardie, than the Church keys. And so is it in this place. Pope Gregory the third sent to Charles martel, keys from the Confession of S. Peter. But not: the keys of S. Peter's confession. The keys of S. Peter's Confession were claves Regni coelorum: the keys of the kingdom of heaven, which Christ gave to Peter, and to only Peter. And the which were not I trow material keys, such as might be sent away, either by sea, or by land. But keys from S. Peter's Confession were keys from the body of S. Peter: keys which had touched that holy relic, and which by that touch was made itself a Relic. How prove we this, you say? Forsooth very plainly and evidently by a witness well near a thousand years old, by one of the four Doctors of the Church, by our Apostle, learned S. Gregory the first. Gregorius Secundino servo Dei incluso lib. 7. epistol. 53. Indict. 2. Such keys from S. Peter's confession to be sent to devout persons for holy Relics, was in his time and long before his time an usual matter. S. Gregory writing to Secundinus an Anachoret (as it seemeth) among other relics, as an Image of our Saviour, of our Lady, and of S. Peter and Paul, and a Cross also, mentioneth also this kind of Relic, saying. Clavim etiam pro benedictione à sanctissimo Corpore Petri Apostolorum principis etc. We send you also by this bearer, a key for a benediction from the most holy body of Peter the Prince of the Apostles. A key from the body, was a key that had touched the body, or the place where the body was interred. And will M. Horn now say, that S. Gregory sent away to this poor Anchoret his whole pre-eminence, dignity, and jurisdiction & c? Or because he sent also to one Theodorus a Physician of Constantinople, Lib. 6. epist. 25. Clavem à sacratissimo Petri Corpore, a key from the most holy body of S. Peter, thinketh M. Horn, that this Physician had, All the Pope's pre-eminence and jurisdiction given him? Or because in like manner he sent to Theotistas' and Andrea's, two noble men about the Emperor, for a benediction of Saint Peter, Clavem à sacratissimo eius corpore, Lib. eodem. epist. 23. a key from his most holy body, were they also promoted with all the Pope's pre-eminence, dignity and jurisdiction, as you affirm Charles martel was here of Pope Gregory .3. for having such a Relic sent him by ship? S. Gregory said, he sent those keys for a Benediction, not for a jurisdiction. He sent it to the Anchoret, ut per ipsum a maligno defenderetur, cuius signo munitum se crederet. Lib. 7. epistol. 53. That by him from the devil he might be defended, by whose token or remembrance he thought himself guarded. Lib. 6. epistol. 25. He sent it to Theodorus the Phisicyan, with a piece of S. Peter's chain enclosed, ut quod illius collum ligavit ad martyrum, vestrum ab omnibus peccatis soluat. that the same which had tied S. Peter's neck to martyrdom, may lose yours (saith S. Gregory to the Physician) from all sins, meaning from the pains of sins. Lib. eodem epist. 23. He sent it to the two Noble men, ut per quam omnipotens Deus superbientem & perfidum hominem peremit, per eam vos (qui eum timetis & diligitis) & praesentem salutem & aeternam habere valeatis. To th'intent that as by that key God ( * Of this Miracle, Vide Greg. loco citate miraculously) show a proud and wretched man, so by it you (saith he to them) which fear God and love God, may have also both present safeguard and everlasting. This was M. Horn the pope's meanings and intentes in sending to devout persons, to Noble men, and to princes, such relics of keys from the Confession, that is from the body or chapel of S. Peter. And thus whereas M. Horn, by his wonderful inventive wit had made a strange metamorphosis, of a Relic from S. Peter's body, into all the pre-eminence dignity and jurisdiction of the Pope above other Church Ministers, they are now again by a happy revolution, God be thanked, returned to their former shape, and appear as they did before, in their own natural likeness. And that with more truth a great deal, than Lucian's Ass having trotted many years over downs and dales, came at length by eating of red roses to be Lucian himself again as it was before, and as they say, it was never other. But if M. Horn notwithstanding all this, will yet uphold his strange metamorphosis, and delight himself still therein, the rather because S. Gregory in all those places speaketh but of a key, and not of keys, as Gregory the .3. is said to have sent to Charles martel: then lo M. Horn for your full satisfaction in this point, yet an other place of S. Gregory, wherein he sendeth even keys also. Writing to Columbus a bishop of Numidia, at the end of his letters he sayeth. Lib. 2. epist. 47. Indict. 11. Etiam claves beati Petri in quibus de cathenis ipsius inclusum est, tibi pro benedictione transmisi. I have sent you also by this bearer the keys of S. Peter, in which there is of his chains enclosed for a benediction. Lo M. Horn here are sent to a bishop of Numidia not the keys from or of S. Peter's Confession (which you see are but keys of or from his tomb or body) as to Charles martel only were sent, but the very keys of S. Peter himself. But what? Had that bishop therefore all the pope's pre-eminence and jurisdiction sent him? Nay this notwithstanding, what jurisdiction and supreme government this very pope practised over Numidia and all Africa to, both in these very letters partly appeareth, and more largely it may appear, if you uóuchesafe M. Horn to read that little only which in this matter I have said to your pewefelowe M. jewel, Art. 4. fol. 10. & 11. in my last Return of untruths upon his most lying Reply. And here you hear S. Gregory say he sent him, these keys, pro benedictione: For a benediction, not for a jurisdiction. For a holy Relic: not for a supreme dignity. For a devout remembrance, not for a princely pre-eminence: As you most fondly and ignorantly do pronounce. Yea and this you so follow and pursue from hence forward, as the very ground and foundation of all the Supreme government, which you would so fain fasten upon princes heads, a thing of them never yet so much as desired or dreamt of. For lo upon this jolly ground you build and say. The heirs and successors of this Charles martel, did keep these keys from rusting. Verily I think in deed both he and his godly successors, used that Relic and many other devoutly, and did not suffer it to rust about them. A point for this relic, say you. I say: They exercised the same jurisdiction and government in Ecclesiastical causes, that the Emperors and kings had done from the time of Constantine & caet. Verily and so think I to. But you see now Master Horn, at lest every discrete Reader seeth, that from the time of Constantin hitherto, never Prince but heretics, as Constantius and Anastasius with a few such, governed in causes Ecclesiastical. Namely in all things and causes, as you by Oath make folk to swear, I should say, forswear. But as touching this Charles martel, and Carolomanus his son (whom you call his nephew, and king Pipins' son) and their government in Ecclesiastical causes, government they had none, nor exercised none. You tell us of such a thing, but you prove no such thing. The whole dealing of Gregory the .3. with Charles Martel and of pope Zachary with Carolomannus his son, was only that they should take the Church of Rome in to their protection, (being then the most mighty princes in this part of Christendom) seeing the Emperors of Constantinople had by heresy (as Leo then the Iconomache) and other cruelties, rather forsaken it and oppressed it, than succoured it, and defended it. And therefore of this fact of Gregory the .3. Sabellicus a most diligent chronicler, Sabellicus Aenead. 8. lib. 8. writeth thus. Tum primùm Romanae urbis Apostolicaeque sedis tutela, quae ad Constantinopolitanos principes (si quid gravius accidisset) omnia sua desideria conferre consuevisset, Gallorum est Regum facta. Then began the French princes to take upon them the protection of the City of Rome and of the See Apostolic, which had been wont (before) to refer all their griefs to the Emperors of Constantinople, if any weightyer matter had befallen. And again. Suscepit nihil gravatè pientissimun patrocinium Carolus Pontificis rogatu. Charles at the request of the pope took upon him willingly that most charitable or godly protection. And this lo was that which Pope Gregory by sending keys from S. Peter's Confession to Charles Martel, did seek and few for at his hands. M. Horn shooteth far wide to imagine herein all the pope's jurisdiction, dignity and pre-eminence to be sent away by ship into France. Nauclerus Generate: 25. p. 793. co. 1. And as for Carolomanus, of whose supreme government M. Horn fableth here so much, within .4. years after this great authority exercised, went to Rome, offered him self to the pope, and was shorn in for a Monk. And what or wherein consisted his authority? He summoned a Council you say, and many decrees were made there by his authority. Yea but why tell you not that pope Zacharias at the request of Bonifacius, gave to him and to this Carolomanus, a special Commission by his letters to call this Synod, and to decree therein such things as Bonifacius should think behoveful for that time? Why in your very narration do you even in the midst of your allegation where you talk of this Bonifacius, leave out quite, and nip of these words: Qui est missus S. Petri. Who is the Pope's Legate? Why deal you not truly, and why tell you not all? Forsooth because truth is none in you, and all maketh against you. In Nauclerus you may see and read at large the Pope's Commission to Bonifacius and to the Prince for keeping this Synod, and for ordering the same. Nauc. pa 790. & 791. Yet you tell all for the Emperor, as though the Pope had done nothing. O wilful malice, and malicious wilfulness. M. Horn is not content to be blind himself. He will also make his readers blind. And because he loveth not the truth, or the truth loveth not him, therefore he would his Reader should learn the falsehood and be as false as himself is. But again what impudence is this, to bring Carolomanus doings, by the which even in your own narration, the holy Chrism, the mass, and other orders of the Church, that ye have abolished, are confirmed? Mass confirmed, and M. Horn degraded by Carolomanus his supreme head. and your whoredom with M. Madge, is punished by derogation, penance, and otherwise even by your own supreme head, Corolomanus? Which did not degrade any priest actually himself, or caused any to be degraded, by his supreme authority (as ye seam by a false sense to infer) but caused them by the ordinary means, and according to the rules and canons to be degraded. Who also made himself no Church laws, as M. Horn here untruly noteth, but did all by the authority of Pope Zacharias, who (as I have said, Nauclerus generat. 25. pa. 79. and as in Nauclere it appeareth) gave Commission to Bonifacius the Bishop to keep a Synod in the Dominion of this Carolomanus, in which Synod all these Church laws were made. All which evidently proveth the Pope's Primacy at that time, not the Princes. M. Horn. The .95. Division. pag. 58. a. About this time was one Bonifacius not Pope, but as they call him the great Apostle of the Germanies, the like for all the world to our Apostle here in England, Augustinus Anglorum Apostolus: Either of them (.299.) The .299. untruth. Slanderous and vylainouse. might be called, the Pope's Apostles, whose great champions they were. And even such Ecclesiastical matters as our Apostle treateth of, hath this Apostle in his Epistles to the Pope, as this. He asketh his holiness when fat bacon should be eaten: The Pope answereth, when it is well smoke dried or resty, and then sodden. Likewise he asketh whether we shall eat Daws, Crows, Hares, and wild Horses: The Pope biddeth him to beware of them in any wise. Also he asketh him how, if Horses have the falling sickness, what we shall do to them: The Pope answereth, hurl them into a ditch. He asketh what we shall do with Beasts bitten with a mad dog, the Pope biddeth him keep them close, or hurl them into a pit. He asketh if one Nun may wash an others feet, as men may: the Pope answereth, yea, on God's name. Also he asketh, how many Crosses, and where abouts (.300.) The .300. untruth. His question was otherwise, as shall appear. in his body, a man should make them. These and a great many such like, are the Popes and his Apostles, Ecclesiastical matters. But leaving these trifles, note that in those Ecclesiastical matters, which he did to any purpose, the lay Princes had the intermeddling, as appeareth (.301.) The .301. untruth. The contrary by that epistle appeareth. by the Pope Zacharias Epistle to this Boniface. It is no marvel though this King Charoloman, as also Charles the great, and other noble Princes, after their time established by their authority in Synods many superstitions, and (.302.) The .302. untruth. The church was not then idolatrous. idolatrous observances, as of Masses, Chrysmes, and such like abuses, being moved with the zeal, that all Princes ought to have, but wanting the pure knowledge that good and faithful bishops should have instructed them withal: seeing such (.303.) The .303. untruth. Slanderous and contrary to your own sayings after. blind buzzards as this Boniface, had the teaching of them, who like blind guides, led them in the bottomless pit of all superstitions and false religion. The .9. Chapter: Of S. Boniface the Apostle of Germany, and of S. Augustin our Apostle. Stapleton. HEre is interlaced a lying slanderous patch all from the principal matter, against our apostle S. Augustyn, and S. Boniface an English man, Beda in martyrologio. and a blessed Martyr slain in Phrisia by the infidels, commonly called the Apostle of Germanye. But what a Ghospel is this, that can not come in credit, but by most slanderous villainy, and that against S. Augustin, whom we may thank and S. Gregory that sent him, that we are Christian men? S. Gregory commendeth him for learned and virtuous, and setteth forth the miracles wonderfully wrought by him in our Country. And think you now M. Horn, that you with all your lewd, lying railing, or M. jewel either, can stain and blemish that blessed man's memory? No, no: ye rather amplify and advance his glorious renown, and prove yourselves most wretched and detestable liars: as I have sufficiently of late declared in my Return upon M. jewels Reply. Art. 3. fol 124. & sequentibus. They need not M. Horn your commendation, which in such a person as ye are, were rather their discommendation. For the ill man's discommendation is to a good man a very commendation: as contrary wise to be commended of an ill man, is no true praise, but rather a a disgracing and a dispraise. Therefore where ye call these blessed men, and other bishops of this time blind bussards, and say that in Charles the great, and other Princes then, lacked pure knowledge, ye declare yourself what ye are, M. Horns contradiction to himself. a very blind hob about the house, neither able to keep yourself from lying, nor yet from contradiction. For M. Horn I would to God, either yourself, or a great sort of your fellows Protestant bishops, had beside his virtue, the learning of Charles the great, Charles the great learned in the Latin and Greek tongues. being well seen aswell in the Greek as the Latin tongue. And see now how well your tale hangeth together. For the very leaf before Gregory the .3. was passingly well learned, both in divine and profane learning, and no less godly. And the fourth leaf after, yourself bring forth Alcuinus an Englishman of great learning, as ye say, that saith, as ye writ, that God incomparably honoured and exalted Charles the great, above his ancestors with wisdom to govern and teach his subjects with a godly carefulness. Which wisdom stood, as yourself declare, in ordering matters Ecclesiastical. Vide Pont. in vitae Zachar. And Pope Zacharias that ye here speak of, was well also seen in the Greek tongue: Into the which he translated out of Latin S. Gregory's dialogs. And now what a blind buzzard are you, that plead upon this Zacharias epistles to Bonifacius to prove this Charlemains supremacy, wherein the Pope's primacy is evidently and openly declared, (as I have before showed) if ye were of this ignorant: or what an impudent and a malicious person are you, if ye wittingly and willingly allege that for you, which is most strong against you? For this Council that ye ground yourself upon, De synodo autem congregata apud Francorum provinciam mediantibus Pipino & Carolomano, excellentissimis filiis nostris juxta syllabarum nostrarum commonitionem, per agente vices nosiras tua santitate qualiter egistis cognovimus, & omnipotenti Deo nostro gratias egimus, qui eorum corda confirmavit, ut in hoc pio opere adiutores existerent, et omnia optimè et canonicè peregisti, tam de falsis Episcopis et fornicarijs et schismaticis, quamque etiam et c. was called in deed by Pipyn and Caroloman, but according as the Pope had given them Commission in his letters: And this Bonifacius was the Pope's Legate there: For concealing whereof, you left out: Qui est missus S. Petri: Who is the Pope's legate. And the Princes were but aiders and assisters unto him. And Boniface proceeding very well and canonically deposed the false, the adulterous, and the schismatical priests. Which so irketh M. Horn at the very heart, remembering that if himself were well and canonically handled, he should bear a much lower sail, then to bear either any Bisshoplye or priestly office, that faring like a mad man, he speaketh he wots near what: and even there, where with his eagle eyes he findeth fault with other men's blindness, he showeth himself, most blind buzzard of al. For he may as well find fault with Moses Law, and by the supreme authority of his new Papacy, he may laugh to scorn Moses to, as well as Bonifacius, and call him blind buzzard also, for his mad laws forbidding the eating of the Camel, the Hare, the Swine, the Eagle, the goshawk, the Crow, the Raven, the Owl, the carmorant, Zacha: ad Bonifac. Tom. 2. Concil. fol. 450. Col. 2. and such like. He might also as well make himself pastime and jest merely at the Canons of the sixth General Council, that he so lately spoke of, forbidding the eating of puddings and things suffocated. Why M. Horn is so outragius against S. Bonifacius. levit. 11. And perchance the question of beasts bitten with mad dogs hath more matter in it, then M. Horn doth yet withal his Philosophy consider, Men waxed mad with eating of swine flesh bitten with a mad dog. Lycosthen. de Prodigijs. Anno. 1535. In Wirtenbergensi. ducatu. etc. or that some of his good brethren in Germanye have of late considered, feeling as it were, the smart of this their ignorance, which feeding upon swine's flesh, bitten of a mad dog, waxed as mad as the dog, and falling one upon an other, most pitifully bit and tore one the others flesh. As for the question concerning the nun, M. Horn hath no great cause to mislike. Now in case Bonifacius had demanded of Pope Zacharie, whether a lewd, lecherous, false Friar, might lurk and lusk in bed with a Nun, and then cloak their incest under the name of holy wedlock, and that Pope Zacharie had given as honourable an answer, as his late Apostle friar Luther, hath done, aswell by his books, as by his damnable doings: then lo, had Bonifacius been the true and sincere Apostle of jesus Christ. And then should he have been M. horns Idol. Tom. 2. Concil. fol. 452. Col. 2 Nam et hoc flagitasti à nobis sanctissime frater, in sacri canonis praedicatione, quot in locis cruces fieri debeant. Fol. 453. Col. 2. c. Neither did Bonifacius demand these matters because he was ignorant, or in any great doubt: but to work more surely. And the Pope in his answer, telleth him, that he was well seen in all holy scripture. As for the question how many crosses a man should make in his body, is not Bonifacius, but your question. For the question was, of crosses to be made, in saying the holy canon of the mass. The name of the which holy canon ye can no more abide, than the devil the sign of the holy cross: of whom ye have learned, thus to mangle your allegations, and to cast away both crossing and canon withal. M. Horn. The .96. Division. pag. 58. a. Adrianus the first, Pope, being much vexed through his own (.304.) The .304. untruth. Slanderous. furious pride, by Desiderius king of Lombardy, sendeth to Carolus Magnus, and requireth him of his aid against the lombards, promising to make him (.305.) The .305. untruth. It appeareth not so in any history. Dist. 634. therefore Emperor of Rome: Charles cometh, vanquisheth Desiderius, and so passeth into Rome, whom the Pope received with great honour; giving to him in part of recompense, the title of most Christian king, and further to augment his benevolence towards Charles, desired him to send for his Bishops into France, to celebrate a Synod at Rome: where in were gathered together of Bishops, abbots, and other Prelates, about .154. In which council also Carolus himself was present, as saith Martinus. Gratianus maketh report hereof out of the Church history on this wise. Charles after he had vanquished Desiderius, came to Rome, and appointed a Synod to be held there with Adrian the Pope. Adrian with the whole Synod, delivered unto Charles, the right and power to elect the Pope, and to dispose the Apostolic sea. They granted also unto him, the dignity of the ancient blood of Rome. Werby he was made a Patrician, and so capable of the imperial dignity. Furthermore he decreed that th'Archbishops and bishops in every province should receive their investiture of him: so that none should be consecrated, unless he were commended and investured Bishop of the King. woe so ever would do contrary to this decree, should be accursed, and except he repented, his goods also should be confiscate. Platina addeth, Charles, and the Pope, the Romans and the French swear the one to the other, to keep a perpetual amity, and that those should be enemies to them both, that annoyed the one. The 10. Chapter. Of Charlemagne, and of Adrian, and Leo Bishops of Rome. Stapleton. THat Adrian was vexed by king Desiderius through his own furious pride, Magnitudine animi, consilio, doctrina, et sanctitate vitae, cum quovis optimo pontifice comporari potest. who was a very virtuous learned man, is nothing but your follishe furious lying, as also that he promised to Charles to make him Emperor, if he would aid and help him: No history saith so, except M. horns pen be an history. Now what doth it further your cause, that this Charles had the right and power to elect the Pope, and the investuring of Bishops, seeing he held it not of his own right and title, but by a special and a gracious grant of the Pope and his Synod, as yourself allege? Nay verily this one example clearly destroyeth all your imagined Supremacy, and all that you shall bring hereafter of the emperors claim for the election and investuring of Bishops. For the diligent Reader remembering this, that the first Original and Authority hereof sprung not of the Imperial right or power, but of the Pope's special grant made to charlemain the first Emperor of the west after the translation thereof, must also see, that all that you bring hereafter of th'Emperors claim in this behalf, proveth no Primacy in the Prince, but rather in the Pope, from whom the Authority of that fact proceeded, by which fact you would prove a primacy. Horn. The .97. Division. pag. 59 a. Not long after, Charles, perceiving the Churches to be much molested and drawn in ● parts, with the Heresy of Foelix, calleth a council of all the Bishops under his dominions in Italy, France, and Germany, to consult and conclude a truth, and to bring the Churches to an unity therein, as he himself affirmeth in his Epistle written to Elepandus' Bishop of Tolet, and the other Bishops of Spain: We have commanded (saith Charles) a synodal council to be had of devout Fathers from all the Churches throughout our signiouries, to the end that with one accord it might be decreed, what is to be believed touching the opinion we know that you have brought in with new assertions, such as the holy Catholic Church in old time never heard of. Sabellicus also maketh mention of this Synod which was convocated to Frankeforth: ad Caroli edictum: at the commandment of Charles. Stapleton. This gear serveth for nothing but to prove that Carolus called a council: and here M. Horn sayeth Sabellicus also maketh mention of this Synod convocated to Frankford. Your also M. Horn, sabel. Aen. 8. li. 8 damnata est haeresis de abolendis imaginib. is altogether superfluous, seeing that ye named no other author before, that spoke of this Synod, for Sabellicus is here post alone. Well, let it be Charles that called the Synod, but why do ye not tell us, what was done there, as doth Platina, and your own author Sabellicus also, declaring that such iconomaches and image breakers as ye are, Platina. Theophilatius & Stephanus Episcopi insignes, Adriani nomine synodum Francorum Germanorumque Episcoporum habuere: in qua, & caet. were there condemned for heretyks? why do ye not tell us also, who were chief in that Council: which were Theophilatius and Stephanus Pope Adrians' Legates? And here appeareth the wretched dealing of the author of your apology, for his double lie, aswell in that he would by this Synod prove, that a general council, may be abolished by a national as for saying, this Council did abolish the Seventh General Council, whereas it confirmed the said General Council, with a like Decree. A double untruth of the Englih Apology about this Synod. And with this the strongest part of your Apology lieth in the dust. For whereas the chief and principal part of it is to deface the Council of Trent: and to show that by private authority of one nation, the public and common authority of a General Council might be well enough abrogated: he could find no colour of proof but this your Council of Frankford, which now as ye hear, doth not infirm, but ratify and confirm the .2. Nicene Council. As made for the honouring, and not for the vilaining of holy Images. M. Horn. The .98. Division. pag. 59 a. Carolus Magnus calleth by his commandment the bishops of France to a Synod at Arelatum, appointeth the archbishops of Arelatum and Narbon to be chief there. They declare to the Synod assembled, that Carolus Magnus of fervent zeal and love towards Christ, doth vigilauntlye care to establish good orders in God's Church: and therefore exhort them in his name, that they diligently instruct the people with godly doctrine, and examples of life. When this Synod had consulted and agreed of such matters as they thought fit for that time, They decree that their doings should be presented unto Carolus Magnus, beseeching him, that where any defects are in their Decrees, that he supply the same by his wisdom. If any thing be otherwise then well, that he will amend it by his judgement. And that which is well, that he will (.306.) The .306. Untruth. Not so in the Council. But uteius adiutorio perficiatur. That by his help it might be ended or brought to pass. Not ratified by his Authority. ratify, aid, and assist by his authority. By his commandment also was an other Synod celebrated at Cabellinum, whereunto he called many bishops and Abbots: who as they confess in the Preface, did consult and collect many matters, thought fit and necessary for that time: the which they agreed nevertheless to be allowed, and confirmed, amended, or (.307.) The .307. Untruth. Of allowing or dissalowinge, the Council speaketh not. dissalowed. As this Council referreth all the Ecclesiastical matters to the (308) The .308. Untruth. In misreporting the Council. judgement, correction, disallowing or confirming, of the Prince: so amongst other matters this is to be noted, that it prohibiteth the covetousness and cautels, wherewith the Clergy enriched them selves, persuading the simple people to give their lands, and goods to the Church for their soul's health. The Fathers in this Synod complain, Can. 6. Can. 25. that the ancient Church order of excommunication, doing penance, and reconciliation, is quite out of use: Therefore they agree to crave the Princes (.309.) The .309. Untruth. They craved the Prince's help, that the Canons might be put in execution. order, after what sort be that doth commit a public offence, may be punished by public penance. This Council also enueigheth against, and (.309.) condemneth gadding on pilgrimage in Church ministers, Lay men, great men, Can. 45. and beggars: all which abuses (saith the Synod) after what sort they may be amended, the Prince's mind must be known. The .310. Untruth. Notorious. It condemneth certain abuses thereabout, it condemneth not the use itself. The same Charles calleth an other Council at Maguntia. In the beginning of their Preface to the Council, they salute Charles: the most Christian Emperor, the Author of true Religion, and maintenour of God's holy Church. etc. Showing unto him, that they his most humble servants are come thither according to his commandment: The Prince is the Governor of the Church appointed of God (.311.) in ecclesiastical causes. that they give god thanks: Quia sanctae Ecclesiae suae pium ac devotum in seruitio suo concessit habere rectorem. Because he hath given unto his holy Church a governor godly, and devout in his service: The .311. Untruth. Avouched in the Margin, but not to be found in the Text. who in his times opening the fountain of godly wisdom, doth continually feed Christ's sheep, with holy food, and instructeth them with Divine knowledge, far passing through his holy wisdom, in most devout endeavour the other Kings of the earth, etc. And after they have appointed in what order, they divide the states in the Council: the Bishops and secular Priests by themselves, the abbots and religious by themselves, and the Say Nobility, and justices by themselves, assigning due honour, to every person: it followeth in their petition to the Prince, They desire his assistance, aid and confirmation, of such Articles as they have agreed upon, so that he judge them worthy: beseeching him, to cause that to be amended, which is found worthy of amendment. In like sort did the Synod congregated at Rheims (.312.) The .312. Untruth. By the order of wulfarius archbishop there: left out of the Text. by Charles, more priscorum Imperatorun, as the ancient Emperors were wont to do, and divers other, which he in his time called. I would have you to note, besides the authority of this Noble Prince Charles the Great, in these Church matters (which was none other, but the self same, that other Princes from Constantine the Great had and used) that the holy Council of Moguntia, doth acknowledge and confess (313) The .313. Untruth. In plain speech no such thing appeareth. in plain speech, him to be the ruler of the Church (in these Ecclesiastical causes) and further that in all these counsels, next to the confession of their faith to God, without making any mention of the Pope, they pray, and command prayer to be made for the prince. Imputatur quibusdansratrib. eo ꝙ avaritiae culpa hominibus ꝑsuadeant ut abrenunciantes seculo res suas ecclesiae conferant: quod penitus ab omnium men tyb. eradicandun est. Can. 6. et Can. 7 Stapleton. The calling of Counsels either by this Carolus, or by others, as I have oft said, proveth no Supremacy: neither his confirmation of the Counsels, and so much the less, for that he did it at the Father's desire, as yourself confess. But now, Good Reader, take heed of M. Horn, for he would stilie make the believe, that this Charles, with his Council of Bishops, should forbid lands and goods to be given to the Church of any man for his soul's health, and to be prayed for, after his death, which is not so. In deed the Council forbiddeth, that men shall not be enticed, and persuaded to enter into Religion; and to give their goods to the Church only upon covetousness. Animarum etenim solatium inquirere sacerdos, non lucra terrena debet. Quoniam fideles ad res suas dandas non sunt cogendi, nec circumueniendi. Oblatio namque spontanea esse debet: juxta illud quod ait Scriptura. Voluntariè sacrificabo tibi. For a priest (saith the Council) should seek the health of souls, and not worldly gains, and Christians are not either to be forced, or to be craftily circunuented to give away their goods. For it ought to be a willing offering according as it is written: I will willingly offer sacrifice to thee. and in the next canon it is said: hoc verò quod quisque Deo justè & rationabiliter de rebus suis offered, Ecclesia tenere debet. What so ever any man hath offered unto God justly and reasonably, Can. 39 that must the Church keep still. Now for prayers for the dead, there is a special Canon made, in this Council that in every Mass there should be prayer made for such as be departed out of this world: Prayers for the dead. And it is declared out of S. augustine, that this was the gwise and fashion of the ancient Church. The like sleight M. Horn useth touching pilgrimage: the which his own canon highly commendeth, thowghe bookful wisely and discreetly it preventeth and reformeth some abuses. Wherefore ye shall hear the whole canon. I will shift no word, but only from latin into the english. Can. 44. In the former canon the council forbade, that priests should go on pilgrimage without the consent of their Bishop to Rome or to Towers a town in France: where at the tomb and relics of blessed S. Martin innumerable miracles were done and wrowght: as among other Gregorius Turonensis Bishop there and a faithful reporter, not by uncertain hearsay, but by present eyesight, most fully declareth. The which holy relics the hugonotes of late in France have with most villainy dishonoured and consumed. After which inhibition it followeth. Pilgrimage. Ca 45. For say the Fathers, some men, which unadvisedly under the cowlour of prayer, go in pilgrimage to Rome, to Towers and other places, do err very much. There are priests and Deacons and other of the Clergy, which living dissolutely think themselves to be purged of their sins, In eo purgari se à peccatis putant, et ministeri● suo fu●gi deberi, si. etc. Note here well how the church of this age, decreed openly against abuses, and winked not at them, as Protestants would make folk believe. Hieron. in Epist. ad Paulinum. Tom. 1. and to do their office, if they once come to the foresaid places. There are nevertheless lay men which think they have freely sinned, or may freely sin, because they frequent these places, to make their prayers in. There be some Noble men, which to scrape and procure money under the pretence of their pilgrimage to Rome or to Towers, oppress many poor men, and that which they do upon covetousness only, they pretend to do, for prayers sake, and for the visiting of holy places. There are poor men which do this, for no other intent, but to procure to themselves a greater occasion to beg. Of this number are they, that wandering hither and thither, feign nevertheless that they go thither: or that are so foolisshe, that they think, they are by the bare view of holy places, purged of their sins: not considering that saying of S. Jerome. It is not praise worthy to h●ue seen Jerusalem, but to have lived virtuously at Jerusalem. Of all which things let us look for the judgement of our Emperor, how they may be amended. But those who have confessed themselves to their parrissh Priests, and have of them taken counsel how to do penance, if employing themselves to prayer, and alms giving, and to the reforming of their life and manners, they desire to go on Pilgrimage to Rome or else where, are of almen to be commended for their devotion. The Fathers also desire the Emperors help and assistance, not his Order, as you untruly report, for public penance: Beside, if it had pleased you, ye might have cast in also a word or two more. Can. 25. Vt secundum ordinem Canonum pro merito suo excommunicetur. That according to the order of the Canons, he may according to his deserts be excommunicated. And now, good Reader judge thou, how truly, how wisely, or how to his purpose this gear is brought forth of M. Horn: and what a singular good grace this man hath, so well to plead against himself and his fellows, for the Catholics. And now would I be in hand with Leo, saving that Master Horns Marginal Note, seemeth to take me by the hand, and to stay me a while: And yet we will forth with shake him of, and desire Master Horn to oversee his text ones again, and to square his Note to his Text, and not his text after his perverse and preposterous order, to his note. I say then, M. Horn, ye have no words, nor matter in your text to call Carolus Magnus Governor in Ecclesiastical causes, and because, beside your Note Marginal, ye note the matter also so fast in your text, which is not in the Father's text, saying: the Fathers say in plain speech, that he was ruler of the Church in Ecclesiastical causes, I will note as fast as you, and that is your one false lying in your text, and the other in the margin. Unless ye may by some new Grammar and like Divinity; prove that, in seruitio suo, in his service, is Englished also, In ecclesiastical matters, You tell us farther M. Horn, that in this Council of Ments, the States were divided. The bishops and secular Priests by themselves. The abbots and Religious by themselves. But you tell us not, wherein every State was occupied and busied in that Council. That in deed made not for you. in Concilio Moguntiaco. Tom. 2. Conc. p. 630 The Council than saith: In prima turma consederunt Episcopi, etc. In the first rue sat the Bishops with their Notaries, reading and debating upon the holy Ghospel, the Canons of the Church, divers works of the holy Fathers, and namely the Pastoral of S. Gregory: searching and determining thereby, that which belonged to wholesome doctrine, and to the state of the Church. In the second rew sat the Bishops and approved Monks, having before them the rule of S. Benet, and seeking thereby to better the life of Monks to increase their godly conversation. In the third rew sat the Say Nobility and judges. But what to do M. Horn? To conclude of matters of Religion, as the lay burgesses and Gentlemen do in our Parliaments? No, no: Neque nos, 1. Cor. 11. neque Ecclesia Dei talem consuetudinem habemus. Neither we, nor the Church of God have any such custom or manner. But there they sat In mundanis legibus decertantes. etc. Debating in worldly laws, searching out justice for the people, examining diligently the causes of all that came, and determining justice by all means that they could. Thus were the States in that Council divided, under that Noble Emperor Charlemagne. And what could this Note help you, M. Horn, or relieve you, except it were that you would give a privy nip to the order of late Parliaments, where the lay not only of the Nobility, but even of the Commons (whose sentences in treaty of Religion, never sense Christ suffered, were ever heard or admitted) do talk, dispute, yea and conclude of Religion, and that in the highest and most secret mysteries thereof, to the consequent of a General alteration. You would no doubt, as gladdelie as Catholics, have the treaty and decision of such matters in your own hands only (as in deed all Protestauntes beside you, Calvin, Melanchthon, the Magdeburgenses with the rest do expressly teach, as I have both in this book, and otherwhere declared) But this is the difference. You are miserable clawbacks, and as Calvin writeth, to extol the Civil Magistrate, you spoil the Church of her dew authority. Institut. lib. 4. Cap. 11. But the Catholics think it not meet to flatter in Religion: But to give that, which is Caesar's, to Cesar: and that which is Gods, to God. Excepete we should say, that now you will have Religion decided in parliament, and when, Math. 22. the Prince shall otherwise be affected, you will not have it so decided: and that your Religion is Ambulatoria: a wandering and a walking Religion, teaching one thing to day and an other to morrow. As in deed very properly and truly George the Noble duke of Saxony said of the Lutherans at Wittenberg, when yet your Religion was scant out of her swaddling clouts. What the faith of my neighbours of wittenberg is now this year, I know. But what it will be the next year, I know not. Yet you desire M. Feckenham to note here an other thing, besides the authority of this Noble Prince Charles the great (for so you call him) which (you say) was none other but the self same, that other Princes from Constantin the great had and used: which in deed is very true: for they had none, ne used none, as hath been proved, and yet I marvel, where is then become the privilege of S. Peter's keys sent to Charles martel this man's grandfather, if he had, as you say, none other but the self same authority that other Princes from Constantin had. If it was lost so soon, then how is it true, that you said before, the heirs and successors of Charles martel kept these keys form rusting. If it was not lost, how had he no more than other which had S. Peter's keys more than other had? But now to your note. You will M. Feckenham to note, that the holy Council of Moguntia (I am glad you call it holy, for them you will not, I trow mislike with the division of the States there, that I told you of even now, neither with the Rule of S. Benet's Order, in that holy Council straightly exacted) doth acknowledge and confess in plain speech him, (that is, Charles the great) to be the Ruler of the Church in these ecclesiastical causes. Now show these last words (in these ecclesiastical causes) in any parcel or place of the whole Council, in plain speech, as you say, and then M. Feckenham I dare say, will thank you for your Note, and for my part I will say, you are a true man of your word. Which hitherto, I assure you, I have little cause to say, or to think. Your lying is almost comparable to M. jewels. Marry you are not in deed as yet so far in the lash, as he is. But if you come ones to Replying, as he hath done, you will be a Pinner I doubt not, as well as he, and tell your untruths by the thousands. For assure yourself M. Horn: as vera veris conveniunt, so an untrue and false doctrine can never possibly be maintained, without horrible lying, and main numbers of untruths. M. Horn. The .99. Division. pag. 60. a. Pope Leo .3. as the French Chronicles, and Nauclerus witnesseth, sent forthwith after he was made Pope Peter's keys, the Banner of the City, and many other gifts unto Charles: requiring him, that he would cause the people of Rome to become subject unto the Pope, and that by Oath. Charles minding to gratify and pleasure Pope Leo (there (.314.) The .314. untruth. A lewd and a false surmise was a cause wherefore) sent an Abbot on this business, and assured the people of Rome to the Pope by oath. This Leo (his straight (.315.) The .315. untruth, he was a most mild and m●ke man. dealings with the romans was so hateful unto them) was brought shortly into much danger of his life, but far more of his honesty, Certain of Rome came to Charles to accuse this Pope: Charles putteth of the examination of the matter till an other time, promising that he would within a while come to Rome himself: which he did; after he had finished his wars. He was honourably received of the Pope. sabel. The eight day after his coming into Rome, he commanded all the people, and the Clergy to be called together into S. Peter's church: appointing to here and examine the Pope, Platina. sabel. touching that he was accused of, in the open assembly. When the Clergy and the people, were assembled, the King examineth them of the Pope's life and conversation: and the whole company (.316.) The .316. untruth. The bishops only were asked their minds. being willed to say their minds: answer that the manner hath been, that the Popes should be judged of no man, but of themselves. Charles being moved with so (.317.) The .317. untruth. Charles took not the answer in such part. sore & grievous an answer, gave over further examination. Leo the Pope (saith Platina) who did earnestly desire that kind of judgement (to give sentence be (318.) The .318. untruth. Platina meaned not so. meaneth in his own cause) went up into the pulpit, and holding the Gospels in his hands, affirmed by his Oath, that he was guiltless of all those matters wherewith he was charged. Whereunto Sabellicus addeth, the Popes own testimony of himself, was so weighty, as if it had been given on him by other: so much availeth a man's own good report made of himself in due season, (.319.) The .319. untruth. Sabellicus had no such meaning. for want of good neighbours. This matter, if it were as the Pope's flatterers write, thus subtilely compassed: although Martinus saith flatly, that he was driven to purge himself of certain crimes laid to his charged: yet not withstanding, the king took (.320.) The .320. untruth. He took it not upon him, but was required of the Pope himself to do it. upon him, both to examine the matter, and to determine therein: and, as appeareth, took their answer no less (.321.) The .321. Untruth. Not able to be proved. insufficient, than grievous: although he winked at it: because he looked (.322.) The .322. Untruth. Lewd and slanderous. for a greater pleasure to be showed him again in consecrating him Emperor, promised long before: which this Pope performed, and solemnly with great acclamations of the people, crowned him Emperor of Rome: For saith Platina: The Pope did this to show some thank fullness again to him, who had well * Yea: in manifold battles, not in that judgement. deserved of the Church. Stapleton. This process standeth in the accusation of Pope Leo the .3. that certain Romans made against him to Charles, bearing with it such a wonderful strength for the establishing of the Pope's Supremacy, that M. Horn may seem, to play all by collusion, and to betray his own cause. Regino in chronic. Captum excaecaverunt, ac linguam eius radicitus absciderunt. Sed Deus omnipotens reddidit ei visum & loquelam. Mart. Penitent. For now hath he by his own story, advanced the Pope so (as he did also before in alleging the Roman Council in the time of Pope Simmachus) that he may be judged of no man. For all the clergy and people of Rome make answer to Charles himself, that no man can judge the Pope. This writeth M. Horn out of Platina and Sabellicus: and other writers be of the same likeness and agreableness in writing with them. How then M. Horn? Where is now your primacy become? I trust now at the length ye will discharge M. Fekenham from this oath. What say you to your own voluntary allegation, that no man forced you unto, but the mighty truth: to the bewraying of your false cause and your great folly? Yet least his said folly and prevarication should be to open, he will say somewhat to it, (because he may seam to work thowghe not as miraculously, yet as wonderfully as ever did this Leo: who, his tongue being cut of by the root, as some men write, could speak nevertheless) and though his fowl lying mouth against the Pope's primacy be stopped by his own true declaration, yet will he speak, not to any his own honour, as Leo did, but to his utter confusion and shame. Forsooth sayeth M. Horn, Charles took this answer no less insufficient, then grievous. Well said, and in time M. Horn, saving that it is most untrue: and for the which as ye lay forth no proof, so shall ye never be able to prove it. And yet, if ye could prove it, ye should do none other thing then that which ye do so solemnly in the rest of your book to prove that which being proved, doth yet nothing relieve your cause. And think you, Carolus his testimony (out of Charles his book as M. Calvin and M. jewel say) for the Pope's Primacy. Li. 1. Car. ca 6. M. Horn, that we are so bare and naked from many good proofs, but that we may and can roundly and readily disprove your fond foolish lie? Yea and by that book, by the which your Apostle Calvin, and your great jewel of England, will (though not to their great worship) defeat the Second General Council of Nice? The Church of Rome (saith he) is preferred before all other Apostolical Sees, not by the Decrees of Synods, but by the authority of our Lord himself, saying thou art Peter: and so forth. And saith farther, that he doth most desire to obey the wholesome exhortations of Pope Adrian: and that Italy, France, and Germany, The foresaid book overthroweth M. jewel in his Reply and in the Apology. do in all things follow the See of Peter. And now wots ye what, M. Horn? Forsooth this his answer proveth M. jewel, as well in the Apology (or who so ever be the Author) as in his Reply to M. D. Harding, to have overthrown not the Nicene Council (wherein this adrian's Legates bore the chief sway) as they did also in the Council at Frankfoorde, as I have showed, but his own peevish and fantastical imagination, that this Charles should at Frankford disallow the said Nicene Synod. But I trow ye be as weary and as much ashamed ere this time, of this counterfeit Charles book: wherein by the foolish and fond handling of the iconomache, the cause of the Catholic Church is confirmed, as your fellows willbe shortly of this your book: The Pope's Primacy proved by the true Charles. that I doubt not to all that be not sinistrallie affectioned, shall serve, rather for the confirmation, than abrogation, of the Pope's Primacy. And because, as I say, I suppose ye will yourselves shortly disclaim this peevish book, I will send you to Carolus himself, in his Ecclesiastical decrees, collected by Abbot Ansegisus, whom ye authorize in the next leaf. Vide Constitut. Caroli ex Ansegiso collectas, impressas in 8. An. 1545. Parisiis. Tom. 1. Concil. pa. 196 Where ye shall find this plain decree. Neque praesul summus a quoquam iudicabitur. No man shall judge the pope: which was also decreed in the time of the great Constantyne and pope Sylvester: yea before that time the like was said in a council of Marcelline pope and Martyr, as I have otherwhere showed. Now then thowghe there was no cause why Charles should be grieved with this, that the whole Clergy and people well liked and for the which there were old ancient precedents: yet to go forth, and to smooth this tale withal, and to show why Charles should quietly bear this grief, which was soon born, being none at all: The new Gospel can not stand but by defacing of all antiquity. he addeth an other lie, whereof we have already somewhat spoken: And that is, because the Pope promised him long before, to make him Emperor. Yea good M. Horn sone said of you, but not so soon proved. For neither your author Platina saith so, nor any other that I have hitherto read. Phy on your wretched dealing, and wretched cause that ye maintain, that can not be upholden, Platin. Homo certè mitis in genij, ut omnes diligeret, neminem odio haberet, tardus ad iram, promptus ad misericordiam. but with the defacing and dishonouring not only of the clergy, but of this worthy and (as yourself call him) this Noble Prince Charles withal. I would fain proceed to the next matter, but that your other untruths must or I go, be also discovered: as that you say, without any proof, yea against good proof to be laid to the contrary, that this pope Leo for his straight dealings was hateful to the Romans: which your authors Sabellicus and Platina say not, but the quite contrary. For Platina among his other manifold and notable virtues telleth, that he was a man, of mild nature, so that he loved all men, hated no man: slow to wrath, ready to take mercy and pity of other. And Sabellicus of this very matter sayeth thus. Coniuratorum odium in Pontificem inde ortum ferunt, Sabel. Aenead. 8. 〈◊〉. 8. quòd illi liberius vivere assueti, far nequivissent gravem Pontificis Censuram. It is said the hatred of such as conspired against him, sprung hereof, that they accustomed to live more licentiously, could not abide the Grave Rebukes and Censures of the pope. Now further, M. Horn being not able to deny, but that aswell Carolus, as all other gave over for any judgement they would or could give against Leo, he falleth to quarreling with Leo, for that, for the which he ought to have commended him. The matter standing thus, and no man stepping forth lawfully to prove any thing against Leo, Rhegino in chronic. Cum nullus probator, aut testis legitimus appateret. this good man, thowghe no man did or could force him to it, yet knowing his own innocency, took an open oath upon the holy gospel, that he was guiltless from such matters, as were objected against him. And here M. Horn being pleasantly disposed sayeth (as out of Platina.) Leo did earnestly desire that kind of judgement: and addeth by his own lying liberality, that Platina mente, that Leo was desirous to give sentence in his own cause. Whereas Platina meant that Leo, was desirous, upon the assured trust, of his own integrity, that the matter might have been judged: and so worthy of commendation, that he would submit his cause to judgement, where he needed not, as Symachus and Sixtus did before. And so are Platina his words, qui id judicium maximè expetebat, Nauclerus generat. 28. Impress. Coloniae. 1564. to be understanded. And perchance in some copies, id, is not seen. Nauclerus which seemeth here as in many other places to follow Platina, and to rehearse his words, and whom M. Horn doth here also allege, saith. qui judicium maximè expetebat. Which did most earnestly desire to be judged. Which judgement not proceeding, he did as much as lay in him, that is, to purge himself by his oath. Now where Sabellicus speaketh of this purgation in the commendation of Leo, saying, that a man's own report much availeth made in dew season, M. Horn addeth this his pretty gloze, for want of good neighbours. Yet I pray you good M. Horn take not the matter so grievously against Pope Leo: The pope did more for his purgation then hath one of our protestant prelates. But remember that Leo being pope did more than a protestant Prelate, (whom ye know full well) of late did, being perchance more than a suspicion, that a wrong cock had trodden Cockerelles hen. And yet the said prelate was not put to his purgation, and much less himself offered to swear for his own honesty. I meddle not with the justifying of the matter one way or other: Some men say that stripes may cause young striplings to say, tongue thoue liest: but not truly to the eye, Eye thou liest, which can not lie in that, which is his object. But let this go. I say it, for none other cause, but only that ye have not M. Horn so great cause to take the matter so hot, against Leo. S. Peter's keys sent on's again to france, and yet the pope remaining pope still. In Chron. claves confessionis sancti Petri & vexillum dixerit. And now to make up this matter, gentle reader, of Leo, this Leo also sendeth Saint Peter's keys, yea and the banner of the city to, to Charles as M. Horn telleth us, yea the keys of S. Peter's confession as Rhegino telleth us, and yet for all that, he remained Bishop, archbishop, patriarch, and Pope to: yea and supreme head of the Church by M. Horns own tale to. But remember yourself better M. Horn. You said even now, they were sent away by Gregory the .3. to Charles martel, into France by ship. How then came the Pope by them again? Or how did the successors and heyeres of Charles martel keep those keys from rusting, if his own Nephew Charles the great, lost them, and was fain to have them again by a new deed of gift? Or hath every Pope a new pair of keys from Christ to bestow as they list? Then the gift could be but for term of life. And then where be the heirs and successors of Charles martel, which kept not you say those keys from rusting? O M. Horn. Oportet mendacem esse memorem. A liar must have a good memory. Or will you say that this Pope Leo sent to Charles these keys, as a gift to signify, Sabellicus that the city was at his commandment, as Bellisarius after he had recovered Rome from Totilas, of whom we spoke of before sent the keys of the city to justinian th'emperor: Rhegino in Chron. claves civitatis cum vexillo detulerunt. and as some men writ even about this time, this Charles received the keys of the city of Jerusalem, with the banner of the said city? Yet all this will not work the great strange miracle of supremacy that your keys have wrought. M. Horn. The .100. Division. Fol. 61. a. Ansegisus Abbas gathereth together the decrees, that this Charles and his son Lodovicus had made in their times for the reformation of the Church causes: Amongst other these: The Canonical Scriptures * Under the name of holy scriptures only to be red in the Churches: For the office of Bishops in diligent preaching, and that only out of the holy Scriptures: that the communion should be received three times in the year: The abrogating and taking away a great number of holy days besides Sundays: and that children before ripe years should not be thrust into religious houses: and that no man should be ꝓfessed a Monk, except licence were first asked and obtained of the King. He decreed also, and straightly commanded that Monks being Priests, joan. A●entinus. should study diligently, should write rightly, should teach children in their abbeys, and in bishops houses. That Priests should eschew covetousness, gluttony, alehouses or taverns, secular or profane business, familiarity of women under pain of deprivation or degradation. H● provided to have, and placed fit pastors for the bishoprics and cures to feed the people. He ordained learned Schoolmasters for the youth, and made devout abbots to rule those that were enclosed in Cloisters, saith Nauclerus, As it is said of King * See our answer before to King David. ●o. 48 David, 1. Par. 16. that he set in order the Priests, Levites, singers and porters, and ordered all the offices and officers required to be in the house of the Lord, for the setting forth of his service and Religion: Even so this noble Charles left no officer belonging to God's Church, no not so much as the singer, porter or Sexton, unapointed and taught his office and duty, as Nauclerus telleth. Besides the authority of this noble Prince in (.323.) The .323. untruth. Boldly avouched, but never proved. governing and directing all Church matters, his zeal and care therefore (in such sort as the knowledge of that (.324.) The .324. untruth. Blasphemous against the promises of Christ to remain alway with his Church. M. Horn nameth no Author of this long allegation, lest he should be taken in trips, and his untruths be discovered, as before. superstitious time would suffer) is plainly showed in an injunction, that he gave to all estates both of the Laity and Clergy to this effect. I Charles, by the grace of God King and governor of the Kingdom of France, a devout and humble maintainour, and aider of the Church: To all estates both of the Laity and the clergy, wis he salvation in Christ. Considering the exceeding goodness of God towards us, and our people, I think it very necessary we render thanks unto him, not only in heart and word, but also in continual exercise, and practise of well doing, to his glory: to the end that he, who hath hitherto bestowed so great honour upon this Kingdom, may vouchesaulfe to preserve us and our people with his protection. Wherefore it hath seemed good for us, to move you, o ye pastors of Christ's Churches, leaders of his flock, and the bright lights of the world: that ye will travail, with vigilant care and diligent admonition to guide God's people through the pastors of eternal life, etc. Bringing the stray sheep into the fold lest the wolf devour them, etc. Therefore they are with earnest zeal to be admonished and exhorted, yea to be compelled to keep themselves in a sure faith, and reasonable continuance, within and under the rules of the Fathers. In the which work and travail know ye right well, that our industry shall work with you: For which cause also we have addressed our messengers unto you, who with you by our authority, shall amend and correct those things that are to be amended. And therefore also have we added such Canonical constitutions, as seemed to us most necessary. Let no man judge this to be presumption in us, that we take upon us to amend, that is amiss, to cut of that is superfluous. For we read in the books of Kings, how the holy King josias travailed, going the circuits of his Kingdom or visiting, correcting and admonishing his people, to reduce the whole Kingdom unto the true Religion and Service of God. I speak not this as to make myself equal to him in holiness: but for that we ought always to follow the examples of the holy Kings: and so much as we can, we are bound of necessity, to bring the people to follow virtuous life to the praise and glory of our Lord jesus Christ, etc. And anon after amongst the rules that he prescribeth unto them this followeth: Our answer before to the Constitutions of justinian, may serve here to these laws of Charlemagne. Both in like manner professed their obedience in all such matters to the See of Rome. First of all, that all the bishops and Priests, read diligently the Catholic Faith, and preach the same to all the people. For this is the first precept of God the Lord in his Law: Hear o Israel, etc. It belongeth to your offices o ye pastors and guides of God's Churches, to send forth through your Dioceses, Priests to preach unto the people, and to see that they preach rightly and honestly. That ye do not suffer new things, not Canonical, of their own mind forged, and not after the holy Scriptures, to be preached unto the people. Yea, you your own selves preach profitable, honest and true things, which do lead unto eternal life. And instruct you others also that they do the same. first of all every preacher must preach in general, that they believe the Father, the Son, and the holy Ghost to be an omnipotent God, etc. And so learnedly proceedeth through all the articles of our Faith, after which becometh to the conversation of life, etc. And we do therefore more diligently enjoin unto you this thing, because we know, that in the latter days shall come false teachers, as the Lord himself hath forewarned, and the Apostle Paul to Timothe doth witness. Therefore beloved let us furnish ourselves in heart and mind, with the knowledge of the truth, that we may be able to withstand the adversaries to truth, and that through God's grace, God's word may increase, pass through and be multiplied, to the profit of God's holy Church, the Salvation of our souls, and the glory of the name of our Lord jesus Christ. Peace to the preachers, grace to the obedient hearers, and glory to our Lord jesus Christ. Amen. Stapleton. Many Laws Ecclesiastical are here brought forth, set forth by this Charles, with his great care, that reached even to the singer, porter or sexton: whereunto ye might add, that he made an order, that no man should minister in the Church in his usual apparel: Naucler. gener. 28. and that he himself frequented the Church erlye and late, yea at night prayer to. But this addition perchance would not all the best have liked your Genevicall ministers. Then layeth he me forth, an injunction of this Charles in matters Ecclesiastical. But consider his style Master Horn. What is it? Supreme governor or head of the Church in all matters and things Ecclesiastical? No, but a devout and an humble maintainer of the Church. Consider again the order of his doings Master Horn, which are to set forth injunctions, to keep the clergy within and under the rules of the Fathers. But from whence trow we, took Master Horn all this long allegation of Charles his Constitutions? He placeth toward the end of his allegation, in the margin, joan. Aventinus, out of whom it may seem he took that later part. But as for the former part thereof (whence so ever M. Horn hath fetched it) it is found in deed among the Constitutions of Charles set forth xx. years paste. But there it is set though as a Constitution of Charles, yet not as his own proper law or statute, Vide epitomen Constitut. Carol. in. 8. An. 1545 but expressly alleged out of the African Council. For so used godly Princes to establish the Canons of the Church, with their own Constitutions and laws. And in that Council whence Charles took this Constitution, where it is said that Scriptures only should be read in the Churches, it is added, Under the name of Scriptures. And it is farther added. We will also that in the yearly feasts of Martyrs, Concil. Carthag. 3. Can. 47 their passions be read. Which things M. Horn here, but M. jewel a great deal more shamefully quite omitted in his Reply to D. Cole: falsely to make folk believe, Vide Dist. 19 In memoriam, & in decretis. 11. q. 1. Volumus ut omnes. See before fol. 48. that in the Church only Scriptures should be read. But what need I now seek further answer, when M. Horn of his own goodness, hath answered himself, as ye have heard, good reader, sufficiently already? And I have before noted of this Charles and of his submission to bishops, and namely to the bishop of Rome so far, that no Emperor I trow was ever a greater papist than he was, or farther from this Antichristian supremacy that M. Horn and his fellows teach. For no less is it termed to be of Athanasius that learned father, as I have before declared. M. Horn. The .101. Division. pag. 62. a. This noble Prince was moved to take upon him this government in ecclesiastical matters and causes, not of presumption, but by the word of God, for the discharged of his princely duty, as he had learned the same both in the examples of godly kings commended therefore of the holy ghost, and also by the instructions of the best learned teachers of his time, whereof he had great store and especially Alcuinus an Englisheman of great learning, who was his chief Schoolmaster and teacher: whom, as Martinus telleth, Charles made Abbot of Towers. Amongst other many and notable volumes, thou Alcuinus writeth one, entitled De Fide sanctae & individuae Trinitatis, which as most meet for him to know, he dedicateth to Charles the Emperor. He beginneth his epistle dedicatory, after the salutation and superscription, thus: seeing that the Imperial dignity ordained of God, seemeth to be exalted for none other thing, Alcuinus. than to govern and profit the people, Therefore God doth give unto them that are chosen to that dignity power and wisdom: Power to suppress the proud, and to defend the humble against the evil disposed: wisdom to govern and teach the subjects with a godly carefulness. With these two gifts O holy Emperor, God's favour hath honoured and exalted you incomparably above your ancestors of the same name and authority, etc. What than? what must your carefulness most devoutly dedicated to God bring forth in the time of peace the wars being finished, when as the people hasteneth to assemble together, at the proclamation of your commandment (he meaneth that he expresseth afterwards, by this assembly or concourse, the council that was now in hand assembled, as he saith, Imperiali praecepto: by the emperors precept.) And waiteth attentively before the throne of your grace, what you will command to every person by your authority: what I say aught you to do? but to determine with all dignity just things, which being ratified to set them forth by commandment, and to give holy admonitions, that every man may return home merry and glad, with the precept of eternal Salvation, etc. And lest I should seem not to help and further your preaching of the Faith, I have directed and dedicated this book unto you, thinking no gift so convenient and worthy to be presented unto you: seeing that all men know this most plainly, that the Prince of the people ought of necessity to know all things, and to * By other not in his own person. And so in all the rest. preach those things that please God: neither belongeth it to any man to know better or more things, than to an Emperor, whose doctrine ought to profit all the subjects etc. All the faithful hath great cause to rejoice of your godliness seeing that you have the priestly power (as it is meet so to be) in the preaching of the word of God, perfect knowledge in the Catholic faith, and a most holy devotion to the salvation of men. The prince hath a priestly power to set forth God's word. This doctrine of Alcuinus, which no doubt, was the doctrine of all the catholic and learned fathers in that time, confirmeth well the doings of Charles and other Princes, in calling councils, in making decrees, in giving Injunctions to Ecclesiastical persons, and in ruling and governing them in (.325.) The .325. untruth. ever avouched, but never proved. all Ecclesiastical things and causes. If the government of this most Christian Prince in Ecclesiastical matters be well considered, it shall well appear, that this Charles the great, whom the Popes do extol as an other great Constantine, and patron unto them (as he was in deed, by enriching the Church with great revenues and riches) was no whit greater for his martial and Princelike affairs in the politic governance, than for his godly ordering and disposing the Church causes: although that in some things he is to be borne with, considering the (.326.) The .326. untruth. Slanderous and a plain contradiction. blindness and superstition of the time. Stapleton. The contents of these matters stand in the high commendation, of this Charles: which can not be commended enough, and whom the council kept at men's, commendeth even as M. Horn reporteth, for his godly wisdom in continual feeding of Christ's sheep with holy food, Al Charles commendation serveth for nothing but for M. horns discommendation. and instructing them with divine knowledge, far passing thorough his holy wisdom, the other kings of the earth. A wise man would now marvel, to what end M. Horn hath heaped these and all his other praises of this Emperor who truly can not be praised to much: but the truer and greater his praise is, the more discommendation to M. Horn and to his book, being direct contrary to the doings and belief of Charles, and this matter so certainly true, that Master Horn himself can not deny it. Beside, here appeareth a contradiction the which Master Horn shall never shift away charging him before for want of pure knowledge: whereof yet he doth nothing else but purge him almost four leaves following together: Fol. 58. col. 2. as one having a priestly power, to preach the word of God, and having perfect knowledge in the catholic faith. And saying that all the catholic and learned fathers of that time confirm well the doings of Charles, which he himself doth here impugn, for Masses, Chrism, and other points of catholic religion. Consider these things, good reader well, and then judge with indifferency, who be the blind buzzards, that M. Horn spoke of. Your note in the margin may be suffered well enough, being agreeable to your text: unless it be, that sometime good things be the worse for coming to ill men's hands. The priestly power that Alcuinus meaneth resteth in this point, that as the priests in their Synods and preachings set forth the true faith, so do good princes set forth the same by their proclamations. For you will not I trow say, that the Emperor himself preached in pulpit with gown and surplice, or with cope and Rotchet, as you poor souls are driven full against your wills to do. And so for all your note and shrewd meaning, Charles is as far of from his supremacy as ever he was before. Yea I will now prove, Naucler. generat. 28. & 11. q. 1. c. volumus. ubi allegatur liber Theodosij. after the usual sort of M. horns reasoning against the catholics, that bishops at this time, yea in the time of great Theodosius to, were supreme heads aswell in causes temporal as spiritual: For (by the decree of Charles, and Theodosius) it was Lawful for all men in all suits to appeal to the bishops, without any appeal to be made from their sentence and decree. But of this we have spoken before more at large. Yet you tell us again here after your manner that this Charles ruled and governed ecclesiastical persons in all Ecclesiastical things and causes. This you conclude stil. But this clause, saying or assertion could never yet appear in any text by you alleged. And here I might ruffle with you in M. jewels Rhetoric for this clause, Supreme government in all Ecclesiastical things and causes: as he doth against D. Harding for the bare terms of Private Mass, universal Bishop, head of the Church, jewel in his Reply pag. 302. etc. and say to you. If Emperors and other Princes were supreme Governors in deed in all Ecclesiastical causes, so allowed and taken in the whole world, why were they never expressly and plainly named so? was there no man in the world for the space of a thousand years and more from the time of Constantine to Maximilian, able to express this name or Title? It had been the simpler and plainer dealing for M. Horn to have said. This Title can not yet be found, Idem pa. 306. and so to have taken a longer day. And again. This title of supreme Governor in all Ecclesiastical causes is the very thing that we deny, and that M. Horn hath taken in hand to prove, and boldly avoucheth, that he hath already plainly showed it, and yet not in one of his allegations it can be found. As though he would say, all the old fathers of the Church both Greeks and Latins wanted words and eloquence, and either they could not, or they durst not call the supreme Governor by his own peculiar name. And again thus. From the time of Constantine the great to this Charles, there have been of Christian Emperors above .30. and beside a great number of Christian Kings in Spain, in France, yea and in our Country to, for their Constancy in faith, for their virtues and knowledge far exceeding the rest that have been sithence: (at least wise by your judgements which condemn these later ages) The number of them being so great, their virtues so noble, their power so mighty, it is marvel M. Horn should not be able to show that any one of them all in so long time, was so much as once Called, Entitled, Idem pag. 308. Saluted or proclaimed, The supreme Governor in all causes Ecclesiastical. And last of al. This supreme Government, to the which we must needs swear by book oath, so Ancient, so universal, so Catholic, so glorious can not be found neither in the Roman Empire, neither in all the east Church, nor in France, nor in Spain, nor in England, but must be sought out, in broken sayings of this and that man, and that by conjecture only. This I might, as I said, in M. jewels Rhetoric ruffle a little with you. But because, as his challenge itself (I believe) so far misliketh you, that you wish his tongue had been tied to a pillery, when he uttered it at Paul's Cross, so this his Rhetoric also pleaseth you, I trow, never a whit. Therefore not to trouble you, I am content to leave it. Only I desire the Reader to mark, that ever you conclude, pronounce and affirm in your own words, Supreme Government in all Ecclesiastical causes, but in your allegations and Authorities being so thick, and so long, you can not for your life so much as once find it. And so Christian men are sworn to that, which never since Christ was borne, was ever read, seen, or heard of, in any Council or Doctor, Bishop or Father, Emperor or Prince, Country or City whatsoever. But to return to you Master Horn, whom I had almost forgotten, I will note one most fond contradiction in you, and so pass to the next Division. You say this Prince Charles the great, Pag. 63. is in some things to be borne with, considering the blindness and superstition of the tyme. And yet you say in less than twenty lines before: This doctrine of Alcuinus (who was this Charles his Chaplain) was no doubt the doctrine of all the Catholic and learned fathers in that tyme. Now good sir. Pag. eadem. If there were Catholic and learned fathers in that time, and the doctrine of Alcuinus was the doctrine of them, he also being th'emperors chaplain, and daily instructor in God's matters, why fear you in th'emperor a corruption of the blindness and superstition of the time? Or what blindness and superstition is there in the time, when Catholic and learned father's flourish in the time? Except you will say, that to be Catholic and learned, is also a blindness and superstition: and that heretics only do see or the unlearned only have the pure worship of God? But so it is. That time condemneth this tyme. That Religion condemneth yours. And therefore you must needs either call them blind, or confess yourself blind, which you can not possibly do, why protestants can not see the truth. because you are blind in deed. And why? Forsooth because ever, when you look up toward the former ages, you put upon your eyes a pair of spotted spectacles: so that all that you see through those spectacles, seemeth also spotted, fowl, and evil favoured unto you. And these spectacles are, The contempt of the Church traditions. A pride of your own knowledge in God's word: A loathsomeness of austere and hard life to bear your * Matth. 10. & 16. Marc. 8. Luc. 9 own cross with Christ. A preiudicat opinion of preferring Calvin, Melanchton and Luther before all the Catholic and learned fathers, for so you call them, of that age. With such like. If you would once put of these foul spotted spectacles, M. Horn, them would you never call the time of Catholic and learned fathers, a time of blindness and superstition, but then would you see clearly, your own blindness and superstition. Which with all my heart, I pray God you may once do ere your die. M. Horn. The .102. Division. pag. 63. a. Although herein lodovicus Charles his son were somewhat inferior to his father: Yet notwithstanding, he (.327.) The .327. untruth. He gave them over, as shall appear. reserved these Ecclesiastical causes to himself, and with no less care be ordered the same, although in some things, being a very mild Prince, he winked and bare over much with the (.328.) The .328. untruth. Slanderous. ambition of the Popes. Shortly after, when as the foresaid Leo was departed, was Stephen next elected Pope, and without the confirmation of th'emperor, took the Papacy upon him. All the histories agree, that he came shortly after into France to th'emperor, but wherefore, most of them leave uncertain. Platina thinketh to avoid the hursey burley in the City that was after the death of Leo. Sabellicus thinketh themperors' coronation to be the cause. Nauclerus saith, he went in his own person unto th'emperor Lodovik (.329.) The .329. untruth. Ad vitandas seditiones left out in the midst. about, or for the Church matters, which (330) The .330. untruth. It proveth not any such matter. proveth that th'emperor had chief authority in ordering the Church business. But our English Chronicles, as * These some writers dare not show their faces nor tell out their names. some writers affirm, do plainly declare, that his coming into France, was to make an excuse of his unlawful consecration, against the decrees made to Charles by his predecessors, Adrian and Leo, fearing therefore the sequel of the matter he first sent his Legates before him to be a preparative to his purgation, and afterwards came himself to crave his pardon. And the rather to please th'emperor, brought a most beautiful crown of gold for him, and another for the Empress (331) The .331. untruth. This whereof followeth not out of Nauclerus. Dist. 63. whereof followed, as Naucle. saith: Oina quae petiit à pio Imperatore obtinuit, he obtained whatsoever he asked of the godly emperor. Now when Stephen had dispatched all his matters, he returned home: and shortly after, an other ecclesiastical cause happened, for within a while the bishop of Reatina died, and there was an other chosen. And when the sea of Reatina (saith Nauclerus) was void, the Pope would not consecrate the elect Bishop, unless he had first licence thereto of themperor. The circumstances of this story, make the matter more plain. The earl Guido, had written unto Pope Stephen to consecrate that bishop: who the Clergy and the people had elect: but the Pope durst not enterprise the matter, till he were certified of themperors' pleasure, and thereupon writeth again unto th'earl the tenor whereof followeth, after Gratianus report: I have red your letters, wherein you require me to consecrate the newly elect Bishop of Reatin, chosen by the consent of the Clergy and people, lest the Church should be long destitute of a proper pastor. I am sorry for the death of the other: but I have deferred the consecration of this, for that he brought not with him, th'emperors licence (ut mos est) as the manner is. I have not satisfied your mind herein, lest that the Emperor should be displeased at my doing. Therefore I require you (for otherwise I ought not to meddle) to purchase the emperors licence directed unto me by his letters, ut prisca consuetudo dictat, as the ancient custom doth will, and then I will accomplish your desire. I pray you take not this my doing in evil part. Whereof it is manifest enough (saith Nauclerus) that of the Emperors at that time, the Bishops had their investitures: although Anto, doth gloss otherwise, saying that perhaps, this elect bishop was belonging to the Court, who ought not to be ordered. Not only the texts of many decrees in this distinction, doth confirm this to be true, Dist. 63. but also Gratian himself, and the glossars, do in many places affirm, that this was the ancient custom, and constitution in the Church, that the election● of the Bishops of Rome, and of other Bishops also, should be presented to the Emperors and Princes, before they might be consecrated. The .11. Chapter▪ Of Lewis the first, of Steven .1. Paschalis .1. Eugenius .1. and Gregory the .4. Popes of Rome. Stapleton. Lvdovicus son to Charles the great, confirmed the pope's election, and had the investitures of bishops. Be it so M. Horn, if ye will: what then? Have you forgotten, that all that authority was given to his father Charles the great, by Adrian the pope, and that he held that only of the Pope's gift? Again, many hundred years together ere this time, France, Italy, Spain, England and many other countries were under thempire of Rome. Would ye therefore infer your argument, from that time to our time, and make those countries now subject to the Empire, because they were then? If ye do, little thank shall ye have for your labour: And truly the argument holdeth aswell in the one, as in the other: And when all is done, your cause of supremacy standeth as it did before. Yet is the fine and clerkly handling of the matter by M. Horn, to be withal considered: who like a wanton spanell, running from his game at riot, hunteth to find the cause, why Pope Stephen (whom the stories call an Angelical and a blessed man) came to this Emperor into France. Nauclerus generat. 28. In Areopagiticis Hildivini pag. 60 He is so called of the Emperor Lodovic himself. He telleth three causes, out of three certain and known Authors: and then telleth us, that Nauclerus sayeth, he came for Church matters, and so full handsomely concludeth thereby, that the Emperor had the chief Authority therein: which is as good an argument, as if a man would prove, the woman to whom King Saul came and consulted with for certain his affairs, to have been above the King. Your Author Nauclerus doth specify what these causes were: that is, to entreat th'emperor, for his enemies, and for the Romans, that had done such injury to Pope Leo, Nauclerus generat. 28. pag. 53. of whom ye have spoken, and to pardon other that were in diverse prisons in France, for the great owtragiouse offences done against the Church. The good Emperor satisfied his desire: and so he returned to Rome, and those also which were banished with him. Also he saith he went to the Emperor ad vitandas seditiones: to avoid the tumults that were rising in the City, which clause M. Horn nipped quite of in the midst of his allegation. Belike M. Horn himself, thought not good to rest in that argument, and therefore he seeketh a new, and that is that the Pope came to excuse himself, of his unlawful consecration, done without the consent of th'emperor: And to make his way, brought a most beautiful crown of gold, one for him, and an other for the Empress, whereof followed as Nauclerus saith that he obtained, what so ever he asked of the godly Emperor. But Master Horn how your whereof followeth, it would trouble a wiseman, yea yourself to tell. For to say the truth it can not follow. Nauclerus maketh mention, as I have said what his demands were, but of no such crown. Neither your other Authors Sabellicus and Platina. Volat ant. Lib. 22. But as well Platina as Volaterranus saith the Emperor delivered to the Pope at his return, a weighty and a massy Cross of gold, that he gave to saint Peter's Church. Now Sir, do so much for me again, or rather for yourself, to prove yourself a true man and somewhat to better your own tale, to tell us but one Author by name good or bad, that writeth, as ye say, concerning the two Crowns, the Pope brought with him, and of his purgation and pardon that he should crave of the Emperor. What M. Horn may do hereafter, The pretty proofs that M. Horn useth. good Reader, let himself well consider. But I pray thee in the mean season consider, that he allegeth no better matter than this, that our english Chronicles (Bale belike, or some such honest man) and again, as some writers affirm do plainly say so. Now though the credit of our English Histories, in this case be very slender: yet ye see, good Reader, how he playeth and dallieth with you, neither daring to name any Original Chronicler, nor any other that doth name the said Chronicler. But maketh his proof only upon some says, and hear says. M. Horn. The .103. Division. pag. 64. a. Immediatl●e after the death of Stephen Paschalis .1. was chosen Pope: He being encouraged▪ by all (.332.) The .332. Untruth. No liklihode in the world can be gathered hereof out of any good history. likelihood, by his Predecessors like entrance, thinking to entreat the Emperor so easily as Stephen had done. And boldened with a late made Canon by Stephen, suffered himself to be installed and consecrate without the emperors investuring, leave and authority: Nevertheless being better advised (mistrusting his presumptuous and disobedient fact would displease the Emperor, as it did in deed) he sent by and by his Legates to the Emperor to excuse himself, and layeth all the fault on the people and clergy. Th'emperor accepting this excuse for that time warneth the people and Clergy of Rome, that they take good heed, that they do no more offend against his Majesty, but that hereafter they do warily observe and keep the old orders and constitutions. He calleth this attempt (.333.) The .333. Untruth. He doth not so call it, nor did not so take it. plain treason. This Emperor called a Council at Frankfurt, he bestowed spiritual promotions, and (.334.) The .334. Untruth. He was first chosen of the clergy: Which M Horn hath left out. instituted his brother Drogo, the chief Minister or Bishop at Mettes. In the mean while die●h Pope Paschalis, next to whom followed Eugenius, but elected not without contention, and lived but a while: after whom succeeded Valentinus, who lived in the Papacy but forty days. Next unto him was chosen Gregory the fourth, who was of so great modesty, saith Platina, that being elected Pope of the Clergy and people of Rome, he would not take upon him the office, before he had his confirmation of th' emperors Ambassadors, whom th' Emperor had sent to Rome for that purpose, and to examine diligently that election. And Lodovicus th' Emperor, did not this of pride, but that he would not lose the privileges and rights of th'Empire. Note all these things well, the Pope on the one part, when he was chosen without any contention, yet would he not be consecrate without th' Emperor's confirmation: otherwise he thought it an unmodest part. Th' Emperor on the other side, not only sendeth his Ambassadors to confirm, but or ever they confirm him, to examine, and diligently to discuss, after what sort he came in, and whether he were elected lawfully or no. And this he did, not of a pride (say they) much less of any usurpation, but because he would not lose or diminissh the right herein, that belonged to the Imperial (.335.) The .335. Untruth. It was no right, of Imperial Majesty, but of the Apostolic authority. Mayest. Here, say they, he did it of purpose, because he would not lose his right, and not his only, but the right of the Empire. But lest it should seem he did tyrannously herein, and oppressed the church, or infringed her liberties, it followeth almost word for word, in both these writers Platina and Nauclerus. For he was a mild, merciful, and most gentle Prince of nature, and one that did always maintain the right and dignity of the Church. Lo how great clemency this is counted in him, and the defence of the dignities and rights of the Church: the which afterwards, and now of the Popes, is counted To do it now▪ as this Lews did then it is counted no tyranny at all. the greatest tyranny and oppression of the Church that can be. But further to approve this deed of Lodovic, the foresaid authors recite many Canons, Decrees, and Constitutions, that this Emperor made in Ecclesiastical causes and things: and especially for the reformation of the disordered behaviours of the Bishops and Clergy In so much that Platina comparing the dissoluteness of the church men in his time, crieth out * We wish the same: for them your heresies should soon have an end would God, O Lodovic, thou were alive in these our times, for now the Church wanteth thy most holy ordinances, and thy discipline. The self same Lodovicus (saith Platina) called a Council of many bishops at Aquisgrane, to God's honour, and the profit of the Church dignity. The Prelates in the Preface to this Synod, do declare, what was the care and authority of this godly Emperor in this Synod. They affirm that the most Christian Emperor, had called an holy and General Congregation or Council at Aquisgrane: He began therein thoroughly to handle the matter, with wisdom void of curiosity: he counseled, yea warned the Holy Synod assembled, what was needful to be done, touching certain chief Ministers of the Churches: He warned them further, to draw out of the holy Canons, and the sayings of the holy fathers, a form of institution for the simple sort of ministers, whereby they might the more easily learn to walk in their duties without offence. The Synod giveth God thanks, that he had preferred so holy, wise, and devout a Prince, to have thee (.336.) The .336. untruth. False translation as shall appear. charge and oversight of his Church, and the Churches needful business or matters. The Synod, according to the king's advertisement, furthered also with his help otherwise, collecteth a form of Institution, wherein is contained at large, after what sort the Prelates ought to fra●e their lives, rule, or govern the people committed to their cures, etc. This done, they bring (337) The .337. untruth. missereporting. coram prolatam laudibus efferunt. to the Prince their form of Institution, which they had devised. This Emperor called an other Council at Ticinum in Italy for the causes hereafter expressed. The matters or causes which the honourable Emperor Ludovicus did command his bishops to consider of, are these: touching the state of his kingdom: of the conversation of the Bishops, Priests, and other Churchmen: of the doctrine and preaching to the people: of writing out of Books: of restoring of Churches: of ordering the people, and hospitals for strangers: of Monasteries both for men and women. (.338.) The .338. Untruth. According to the rule of S. Benet, left out. What so ever is out of order in these forenamed states, either through the negligence of the guides, or the slothfulness of the inferiors, I am (said he) very much desirous to know, and I covet to amend or reform them, according to God's will, and your holy advise, in such sort that neither I be found reprovable in God's sight, neither you nor the people incur Gods wrathful indignation for these things, how this may be searched, found out, and brought to perfection, that I commit to be entreated by you, and so to be declared unto me. The lesser matters also, which in general touch all, but in especial, some, and need refourmation: I will that ye make inquiry of them, and make relation unto me thereof: as for example, if the rulers in the Countries neglect or sell justice, if they be takers or oppressors of the Churches, widows, Orphans, or of the poor. If they come to the Sermons. If they do reverence and obey duly their Priests. If they presume to take in hand any new opinions or arguments that may hurt the people. etc. The bishops after they had consulted upon these matters, do make relation unto the Emperor, what they had done: showing to him, that they had found some of the bishops and chief Ministers faulty, and humbly pray the Emperor on their behalf, that he will of his goodness grant those, some space to amend their faults. They complain to the Emperor of Bishops and Priests for lack of Preaching, and that Noble men, and Gentlemen, come not unto those (.339.) The .339. Untruth. Of few Sermons no complaint is made. few sermons that be. And so then recite many other enormities, as about Tithes, Incest, and such like, especially in religious persons, who for the most part are (.340.) The .340. Untruth A tale falsely told and out of order. cleane out of order. And to bring these to their former order and state resteth (say they) in your disposition. Thus doth this King take upon him, and thus do the bishops yield unto him the (.341.) The .341. Untruth. No government at all named or yielded in Ecclesiastical things. government, as well of Ecclesiastical, as Temporal causes and things. On this wise did Lodovicus always exercise himself: in so much that for his careful government in Church matters he was surnamed Pius, the Godly,, as his Father beforehim, was called Magnus, the Great. Stapleton. The principal tenor of the matters here contained, standeth in the confirmation of the Pope's election, in calling councils, and confirming laws ecclesiastical. To all the which we need no far fetched or new solution, especially seeing M. Horn himself, furthereth it so well, as declaring that all things were done according to the holy Canons, and sayings of the holy Fathers: and that many of these matters touched the politic government of the realm. Yet let M. Fekenham now beware. For M. Horn proveth it high treason in the people and clergy, for that Paschalis was made Pope without th'emperors consent. And so lo, at the length here is some face of antiquity, for our new acts of parliament. Well found out, and like a good lawyer M. Horn. Yet I beseech you tell us, which words of all that you rehearse employ plain treason. Ne amplius simili exemplo imperatoria laederetur maiestas. I am assured there are none, unless it be these. that they do no more offend against his majesty▪ as yourself rehearse out of Sabellicus. And if ye call this treason, and make no better proof, I think neither good grammarian, nor any good lawyer will take your part. For thowghe in latin laedere maiestatem, be sometime taken for treason, yet it is not always, neither can it be englished treason, but upon the circumstances, which declare the act to be treason. And how will this cruel exposition stand I pray you with your own declaration, in this leaf also: that this Ludovicus was a mild merciful, and most gentle prince? Beside this, it is not like he took this matter so heavily, for that even as Platina your author here writeth out of Anastasius bibliothecarius, a worthy author and living about this time, this Emperor released to this Pope Paschalis his right that he had in the election of Bishops, given before to Charles by Adrian the Pope. And here upon might I aswell conclude after your base and yet accustomable reasoning, Nauclerus generat. 28. pag. 55. et dist. 6●. Ego Ludovicus. that the Princes of England should have nothing to do, with the election of bishops. Yet, if there be no remedy, let it be high treason to agnize the Pope's election without the emperors confirmation. What is this to the prince of england, that hath nothing to do therewith, or to M. Fekenham, seeing if all be true, yet it maketh nothing for the emperors supremacy, or against the Pope's supremacy? A new kind of treason wherein a man may lose his head and take no hurt. The denial whereof in deed (the more pity) is taken for treason with us, but yet thanks be to God, such kind of treason, as a man may lose his head and take no hurt by it, but much good: and that is to be a very true and a blessed martyr. But now touching the particular doings of this Emperor Ludovike, you tell us he bestowed Spiritual promotions (and you tell us but of one only) and instituted his brother Drogo the Chief Minister or Bishop at Mettes. And here you leave out, Canonicam vitam agentem, clero eiusdem Ecclesiae consentiente ac eligente, he instituted him being a man that lead a regular life, the clergy also of that Church both confenting and choosing him. Nauclerus. pag. 55. Gener. 28. This you leave out to make the world believe the Emperor bestowed Spiritual promotions, of his own supreme Authority absolutely. And here you tell us of a right belonging to the Imperial majesty, in confirming of the Pope. And yet you forget, Fol. 63. b. that in the very leaf before you confess, this was made by decrees of Adrian and Leo Popes to Charles, this man's Father. And then was it not a right of Imperial Majesty, but a Privilege from the Apostolic authority. As for the Clemency of this Prince so much commended, it was not as you imagine for any supreme government, but for his most fatherly defending, aiding and succouring of the Church. Namely in that most learned Council holden under him at Aquisgrane, of which presently you do talk very much, prying out for some clause that might make for your suprem government. And at last, finding none, with a little false translation, you make the Synod to say of th'emperor, that he had the charge and oversight of Christ's Church. Which all in Latin is but this one word Procuratorem, Tom. 2. Conc. pag. 639. Eius videlicet liberalissima largitione Copian librorum etc. A defender, a succourer, a maintainour, not a Supreme Governor with charge and oversight. You add also the Synod was furthered with his help otherwise, itching forth a little and a little, feign to find somewhat, and it will not be. For all that furthering (that you so closely cover) was nothing else, but that to his great charges, he furnished the Council with a goodly store of books, and great plenty of the Father's writings. Out of which they collected a form of institution, etc. Not the Emperor. A non after you talk of Monasteries for men and women: but you leave out: Secundùm regulam S. Benedicti. According to the Rule of S. Benet. Your unruly Religion could not bear so much as the Remembrance of that holy Rule. And all that you tell of the Emperor's words to the Bishops in the Council of Tjoinun, In Con. Ticin. pag. 705. pag. 706. Col. 2. the Council calleth it only Commonitorium an advertisement or admonition. No charge or Commission. You note to the Reader certain enormities recited in this Gouncel. But wot you what those enormities were? Forsooth these. That the lay nobility, quia ad electionis consortium admittuntur, Archipraesbyteris suis dominari praesumunt, & quos tanquam patres venerari debuerunt, velut subditos contennunt. Because they are admitted to have a part in the Election, they presume to over rule their chief priests. And whom they ought to reverence as Fathers, they contemn as subjects. These were the enormities there recited M. Horn. And do not you defend this very enormity, even in this very place, and by this very Council? When will you leave to bring authorities against yourself? As touching the matter of Incest, the Synod requireth of the Emperor that to bring such offenders to open penance, Ibid. Vt publicae possint poenitentiae subiugari. Comitum eius auxilio fulciantur, they may be upholded with the help of his officers. Lo they require the emperors help for execution. And yet you conclude after your manner. Thus doth the king take upon him, and thus do the Bishops yield unto him the Government as well of Ecclesiastical as Temporal causes and things. And this you conclude a government, which in all your premises was not so much as named. Your Conclusion is always full and mighty. But your proofs are void and faint. M. Horn. The .104. Division. pag. 66. a. Pope Leo .4. writeth his humble letters unto Lotharius on the behalf of one Colonus, who was chosen to be Bishop of Reatina, but he might not consecrate him without the emperors licence first obtained thereunto, and therefore prayeth the Emperor of his favour towards Colonus: Vt vestra licentia accepta, ibidem, Deo adiuuante, eum consecrare valeamus Episcopum: That having your licence, we may have authority by God's help to consecrate him Bishop there. Upon this word, Licence, The Glosser noteth, the consent of the Prince to be required after the election be made. (.342.) The .342. untruth. You take not the whole gloze. The next line maketh clean against you. sabel. Platina. next to Leo, saving the (.343.) The .343. untruth. Pope jone, Pope None. woman Pope johan, was Benedictus .3. chosen, who was ratified and confirmed by the emperors authority: who sent his Ambassadors to Rome for that purpose. This Pope is commended for his great godline: But he was over godly to li●e long in that sea; nevertheless he was not so godly as the most of his successors were altogether ungodly, as your (.344.) The .344. untruth. None writ so, but Bale and such other, which be your writers, not ours, Apocal. 9 own writers make report. And to note this change the better: Nauclerus telleth of divers wonders: how the Devil appeared in an ugly shape, and hurled stones at men as they went by: set men together by the ears: bewrayed thieves, and Priests of their lemans, and such like: How it reigned blood three days and three nights: How great grasshoppers with six wings, and six feet, and two teeth harder than any stone, covered the ground, and destroyed the fruits: not altogether unlike those grasshoppers, that S. john noteth in his Revelation, to come from the bottomless pit, after the star was fallen. After this followed a great pestilence: Which wonders, if they be true, be not unworthy the noting considering the change that followed. For hitherto still from time to time, although some Popes did privily attempt the contrary, yet the Emperors (.345.) The .345. Untruth: For none, but Charlemagne and Lewis the .1 who at the length gave it over also, always kept the confirmation of the Pope, the investuring of bishops, and the ordering of many (.346.) The .346. Untruth. M. Horn can show none other. other Ecclesiastical matters, till the next Pope began openly to repine at the matter, and his successor after him to curse, and some of those that followed, fell from chiding and cursing, to plain fight for the same. In the which combat, though with much a do, at length they wrong themselves from under the Emperors (.347.) The .347. Untruth. They were never under their obedience in Ecclesiastical matters, obedience: Yet always even hitherto, Princes have had no little interest in Ecclesiastical causes, as hereafter shall appear. The .12. Chapter. Of. Leo .4. Benedictus .3. Nicolaus. 1. Adrian .2: Martinus .2. Adrian .3. and of the .8. General Council under Basilius the Emperor. Stapleton. WE go on still with the Pope's confirmation: a matter, as ye know, needless, and such as might be spared, saving that M. Horn must take a foil even of his own allegation and Glosar. Who, as he saith, the Prince's consent, is required after the election, so he addeth: Nisi aliud suade at scandalum, vel praescripta consuetudo. unless, saith he, some offence, or a prescribed custom move us to think otherwise. Then is M. Horn in hand with Benedictus the .3. next Pope to the woman Pope johan: who was confirmed by the Emperor. But here M. Horn, a man may doubt of this point, whether this Benedictus was next to Pope johan. For if there was never such Pope johan, then could not he be next to her. And that it is rather a fable then a story, for all your great business, your Apology, and others, make therein, Confut at Apolog. fol. 164. I think it hath been already sufficiently proved. Neither need you to make so much wondering at the matter. Except ye list to wonder at yourselves, which do place the Pope's Supreme authority in Princes, be they men, or women: Yea and children to. And in so few years you have had all three. man.. Child. And Woman. The less marvel had it been, if in so many hundred years, we had had one woman pope, which yet as I said, is utterly false: as it hath been sufficiently proved. But touching this confirmation of pope's and investuring of bishops, which Adrian and Leo granted to Charles the great, which Ludovicus his son gave over again, which other princes coveted to have after in their own hands again, and which was denied them, Gratian who hath collected the examples of both sides, giveth forth a true and an evident reason, as well why to the one it was first granted, as also why to the other afterward it was most justly denied. Of the first he sayeth. Dist. 63. The elections of Popes and of other bishops to be referred to Princes and Emperors, both Custom and law hath taught us, for the dissensions of schismatics and heretics, against whom the Church hath been defended oftentimes with the laws of faithful Emperors. The election therefore of the Clergy was presented to the Princes, to the intent that, it being by their authority strengthened, no heretic or schismatic should dare to gainsay it. And also to the end that the Princes themselves as devout children should agree upon him, whom they saw to be chosen for their Father, that in all things they might aid and assist him. As it was in the example of Valentinian th'emperor, and S. Ambrose. I, saith the Emperor, will be thy aid and defence, as it becometh my degree. And hereupon Pope Steven (of whom M. Horn talked even now) made a Decree that without the emperors Legates were present, no bishops already chosen should be consecrated. And by reason of this Decree, the Bishops of Reatina could not be consecrated, as M. Horn even now alleged. But (saith Gratian) because the Emperors, passing sometime their bonds, would not be of the number of consenters and agreers to th'election, but would be the first that should choose, yea and put out to, oftentimes also falling to be as false as heretics, assayed to break the unity of the Catholic Church their Mother, therefore the decrees of the holy Fathers have proceeded against them, that they should no more meddle with the election of bishops, and that whosoever obtained any Church by their voice, should be excommunicated. And as Ezechias took away the brazen serpent, which Moses did set up, because it was now abused: so the constitutions of our forefathers are sometime changed by the Authority of the posterity, when such Constitutions mere positive are abused. Then Gratian bringeth in divers other decrees against the Confirmation of Emperors, as of Gregory the .4. pope: of Lewis the first Charles his son, Henry the first, and Otho the first Emperors: who all gave over by open decrees this privilege granted first of pope's upon good considerations, and after repealed upon as good by the same authority. And thus you see, M. Horn, by your own Authors, and by good reason (if ye have grace to consider it) you are sufficiently answered for confirmation of Popes, and investuring of Bishops: a common matter in your book, and yet as you see now, a matter of no weight in the world. After this, M. Horn is in hand with the raining of blood three days, and with many other wonders of this time: yea with the Devil himself that bewrayed Priests lemans, which they kept in corners secret, that now M. Horn and his fellows, are not ashamed to keep openly, and have learned a further lesson than Priests of that age knew, that a Friar and a Nun may lawfully wed: whereat the Devil himself perchance doth as much wonder, as Master Horn here doth wonder at the devils strange doings. M. Horns wonderful wisdom. which yet are not so strange, nor so much to be wondered at, as perchance your great wisdom is to be wondered at, to imagine that all these things chanced, for that th'emperor had not as he was wont to have, the confirmation of the Pope's election, and the ordering of matters Ecclesiastical. M. Horn. The .105. Division. pag. 66. b. After Benedictus, was Nicolas chosen, whom the Emperor himself being present, did confirm, as witnesseth Nauclerus: At the same time, was the Emperor Lodovicus .2. at Rome, who confirmed the Pope's election. The same also sayeth Martin, to the which Volateran addeth of the Emperor and the Pope: De communi consilio ambo cuncta gerebant. Al● things were done by common counsel or consent of both, the Emperor and the Pope. And lest it might be thought he meaneth not as well Ecclesiastical as Temporal matters: Sabellicus maketh the matter more plain, affirming that the Emperor and the Pope had secret conference together many days, and had consultation both touching the matters pertaining to Christian Religion, and also of the state of italy. And a little after talking of the Pope: The Pope decreed by the consent of Lodovicus, that from thence forth, no Prince, no not the Emperor himself, should be present in the council with the clergy. unless it were when the principal points of faith were treated of. Hitherto in all these Ecclesiastical causes, the Emperor hath the doing, as (.348.) The .348. untruth. For never so well as the Pope had. well or more than the Pope. But this last decree, that by the allowance of the Emperor, the Pope made, exempteth Temporal Princes: from Ecclesiastical matters in their councils, though in the most principal matters Ecclesiastical, concerning faith, it leaveth to them their (.349.) The .349. untruth. In matters of faith the Emperors had no interests of government. interests. Stapleton. M Horn himself, to help our matters forward bringeth forth a decree made by the pope with th'emperors consent, that lay princes should not be present in Counsels, unless it were when the principal points of religion be treated of: at the which he wondereth as of a thing unheard of. And yet he did, or mought have found as much in the acts of the Council of Chalcedo. Act. 3. fol. 838. Yea, he might have seen also that by the same decree, as well the people, as the prince might be present, and as much interest had the one thereyn, as the other. For, as the same Pope Nicolas said, Dist. 96. ubinam. giving a reason why the prince may be present, when matters of faith are debated, Faith is common to all, and pertaineth as well to the laity, as to the Clergy, yea to all Christian men without exception. Yet all was not gone from them, sayeth M. Horn: for they had their interests still (he sayeth) in the principal matters ecclesiastical, concerning faith. But what interest I pray you, tell us? Was it to determine or define any thing, or that all determinations were void and frustrate without them? Nay, but only that they might be present, either to keep quiet and order, or else (as Constantin and Marcian protested) ad confirmandam fidem, to strengthen their own faith: or last of all, to execute the Sentence and determinations of bishops. And so were their Ambassadors present, in the late General Council at Trent: And the Emperor and Kings were wished themselves to be there. M. Horn. The .106. Division. pag. 67. a. Martinus the second got into the Papacy malis artibus by naughty means saith Platina, and as is noted in the margin, it was in this Pope's time, that first of all the creation of the Popes was made without the emperors authority: But this Pope died so shortly, as he came in naughtily. After whom Adrian the third, like unto his predecessor, the second of that name (who by cunning sleight practised to (.350.) The .350. untruth. Slanderous, as shall appear. defraud the Emperor of his authority) espying opportunity by reason, that Charles the emperor, as Sabellicus saith, was far of, busied in the wars, doth promote this matter to be decreed by the Senate and the people, and this he did immediately after he was made Bishop, and persuadeth them, that they do not hereafter wait for the emperors approbation, and confirmation, in appointing their Bishop, but that they should keep to themselves, their own freedom. The which thing also Nicolaus the first, with others attempted, but could not bring it to pass, as Platina reporteth. Who also writeth, that the Romans had conceived an hope of great liberty in the haughty courage of this Pope, being a Roman borne. But to their great grief, he within a while was taken from them. Stapleton. M. Horn hath soon done with Nicolaus the first, and is from him leapen to Martinus the second. Between which two were, yet two other Popes, Adrian the second, and john the .9. the time also of their regiment, being more than twenty years: and under whom, especially under Nicolaus the first, and Adrian the second as great matters passed touching our present purpose, as under any Popes else of many years before or after. For under this Nicolaus the first and Adrian the second, the .8. general Council was kept at Constantinople, under Basilius then Emperor in the East parts: All which matter M. Horn, being in other Counsels both General and national so diligent a chronicler, hath utterly drowned in silence. And yet he might iwis have found as much apparent matter for his purpose there, as in any other Council hitherto mentioned. For Basilius the Emperor called also this Council, as other Emperors before him did, and M. Horn might have furnished his book with some jolly talk of this Emperor also made to the bishops at the beginning of the Council, touching his care and endeavour about ecclesiastical matters. But there was a pad in the straw, I warrant you, that made M. Horn aghast, and not so bold as ones to come near it. Cusanus lib. 3. cap. 19 de Concordia Catholica. Ignorant thereof he could not be, having seen Cusanus de Concordia Catholica, out of whom he allegeth in this his book a large place, and that in the same book, and but five chapters above the place, where Cusanus rehearseth out of this viii. General Council, diverse and long processes, to show of purpose how the Emperor Basilius dealt and demeaned himself in that Council. Ignorant therefore, Fol. 85. ex li. 3. cap. 13 I say, of this matter he could not be, nor lay for his excuse, that the Acts of this council are not commonly set forth in the former Tomes of the Councils. Except M. Horn allege such books and chapters as he never saw nor read, In Tom. 3. fol. 531. Colon impr. An. present. and so uttereth his doctrine upon heresaye and report of others. Shortly therefore to touch this General Council also, seeing that of all other in manner both general and national somewhat hath been said, and seeing now this Council is also set forth in the last edition of the Tomes, I will in few words declare both the Pope's Primacy in the East Church then to have been confessed, and the Say Princes Primacy in Ecclesiastical matters to have been none at all. First, whereas Michael the Emperor of the East parts, a man given to all licentiousness and riot, had thrust out the godly Bishop Ignatius from the See of Constantinople, Zonara's lib. 3. by the persuasion of Bardas', whom for incest that bishop had excommunicated, and placed in his room one of his Courtyars, and otherwise an heretic, Photius by name, whom Pantaleon calleth Phocas, other Photinus: Nicolaus the first, than Pope of Rome after legacies to and fro, excommunicated Photius, and Michael the Emperor for not restoring again Ignatius to his See. Tom. 2. Conc. pa. 746. There is extant a most learned and notable letter of this Nicolaus to Michael the Emperor, where learnedly and copiously he discourseth what obedience and reverence Catholic Emperors have showed to the Bishops of Rome, and how none but heretics and schismatics have disobeyed the same. And whereas this Emperor Michael had (as he saith) Commanded the Pope to send his Legates to Constantinople about that matter, a phrase which you M. Horn make very much of, this Pope learnedly and truly answereth him, that Catholic and good Emperors were not wont to command their bishops and Pastors, especially the bishops of the See Apostolic, but with Reverence exhort and desire them to such things as they required: which he proveth by the examples of a. Dist 97. Victor. Honorius, b. In epist. praeambu. Conc. Chal. Valentinian and Marcian, c. Cod. de Sum Trin. Nos reddentes. justinian, d. Conc. 6. Const. Constantin the .4. and e Conc. 7. Nice. Constantin the fift in their letters to Bonifacius the first, to Leo the first, to john the first, to Donus, and to Agatho Popes of Rome. In all which their letters they use the words. Petimus, hortamur, invitamus & rogamus, we beseech, we exhort, we invite, and desire you: with all gentleness and Reverence, such as the Apostle commandeth all men to show to their Overseers, that watch for their souls, and shall give account for the same. Heb. 13. Also whereas this Emperor had by a Council of his bishops banished and removed Ignatius, the Pope first sent his Legates to examine the matter a fresh, and to refer to the Pope unto whom the See of Constantinople of right appertained: wherein the Legates passing their Commission overcome by flattery and ambition in the Court of Constantinople, confirmed Photius by their consent. But the Pope not consenting thereto, he cited both Ignatius and Pontius to Rome, as julius cited Athanasius, Tripart. li. 4. cap. 6. and Eusebius with his complices, and required the Emperor Michael, that by his good aid and favour they might appear. In the same letter also he declareth how in deed among the ethnics, the Emperor was also summus Pontifex, the high bishop. But (saith Nicolaus) Cùm ad verum ventum est eundem regem atque pontificem, Tom. 2. Conci. pa. 764. ultra sibi nec Imperator iura pontificatus arripuit, nec pontifex nomen Imperatorium usurpavit. When Christ the true King and bishop came, than neither the Emperor took any more upon him the high bishops right or Authority, neither the high bishop usurped any more the Imperial title. After this by the example of Constantin the great, calling the bishop's Gods, and not to be judged of any man, of Theodosius the younger, charging his Lieutenant Candidianus in the Ephesine Council, not to meddle with any matter or question of doctrine (as hath before been alleged) and of Maximus that blessed Martyr (whom Constans the heretical Emperor nephew to Heraclius had put to death) he proveth that themperorus judgement over bishops, is not, nor ought not to be of any force. Zonara's lib. 3. pag. 71. And therefore concludeth that Ignatius being deposed by the Imperial sentence only was not at all deposed, but remained as true bishop as before. Thus dealt Nicolaus the first with Michael the Greek Emperor, not usurping any new authority to himself, but following herein the examples of most holy and ancient bishops before him, and requiring no more of the Emperor than his most godly and Noble progenitors other Catholic Emperors had done. All this could have no place in Master horns chronicle, either because he had not read so far, or else because his sleights would have been to gross, to have picked hereof any colourable matter for his imagined supremacy. Under Adrian the second next successor to this Nicolaus, Vide Sanctiones ecclesiasticas collectas a Franc. joverio. Impress. Par. An. 1555. and under Basilius the Emperor next to Michael was holden at Constantinople about this matter of Ignatius and Photius principally, the .8. general Council by the account of the Latins. In this Council the Legates of Adrian, Donatus and Stephen bishops and Marinus a Deacon were precedent, as in all other general Councils before. In the first Action the Pope's letters to the Emperor were read, wherein he condemneth the former Synod under Michael, and willeth that all the monimentes and records thereof be burnt. In the beginning also of this Synod the Emperor Basilius, made an Oration to the Synod, Cusanus lib. 3. cap. 19 De declaring with what Zeal and love to the unity of God his Church, he had called them together, exhorting them in many words to concord and agreement. Confessing also that they, Potestatem Synodici judicij divinitus acceperunt, Concord. Cathol. & Tom. 3. Council pag 539. edit. postr. have received from God (not by any his commission) the power and authority to judge in Synods. He addeth farther, that though he doubted not but that they were altogether such as zealed the truth, and followed righteousness, yet (saith he) to th'intent that it may appear that our Imperial majesty, secundùm datam sibi potestatis mensuram, in ecclesiasticis negotijs nihil tacuisse, eorum quae debent atque conveniunt: hath not in ecclesiastical matters, concealed any thing of that which is dew and convenient, according to the measure of power given unto her, deposcimus religionem vestram etc. We beseech your religion or godliness to overcome now all affection of partialyte and hatred, and to resemble as much as is possible, the immutable, and unchangeable nature of God, who never respecteth the person etc. In this Oration of the Emperor three things I would you should note and bear well away M. Horn. First that the bishops (by his confession) have power from God to judge and determine in Counsels. Their power and authority herein proceedeth not of the Prince's commission, as a supreme governor next unto God above the bishops in ecclesiastical matters, but from God himself, saith this Emperor. Secondly that themmperours' power is a limited power, not the chief, Supreme, and the highest in all manner causes and things. Thirdly how it is limited: Forsooth not to command or prescribe to the bishops what they shall do, decree or determine in ecclesiastical matters, but to exhort them to concord and unity in the same. In the second Action, diverse of the Photians offering up their libels of repentance to the Synod, not to th'emperor or his deputies, were by the Synod with imposition of hands reconciled. In the third and fourth Actions divers letters were read as well of Michael and Basilius Emperors to the Popes, Nicolaus and Adrian, as also of the Popes to them again touching the condemnation of Photius intruded by Michael, and the restoring again of Ignatius. In the fift Action Photius was brought in, and the pope's letters containing his condemnation read before him, unto the which the whole Synod cried. Recipimus haec omnia etc. We receive all these things, because they are agreeable to reason and to the ecclesiastical rules and laws. In that action also the Pope's legates are called the precedents of the Council. In the sixth Action the Photians appearing again, and being moved as well of the whole Synod, as of the Emperor, to repentance, they yet persevered obstinately in their schism: Whereupon the Emperor gave them seven days of deliberation, after which time, if they were not in the mean while reconciled, he bade them appear again, saying. Ventura sexta feria in sancta & universali Synodo state omnes, & quicquid definierit universa Synodus, fiet. The next Friday, be you here present in the holy and universal Synod: and whatsoever the universal Synod shall define or conclude, that shall be done, where again you see the Emperor judgeth not in the matters then in hand, Cusanus li. 3. c. 24. but the Council. Yea he saith plainly, that the restoring of Ignatius, was not his doing, or his devise. But that long before, the most holy and most blessed pope Nicolaus examining the matter thoroughly, decreed by Synod, that he should be restored to the right of his See again, and together with the holy roman Church, pronounced Anathema to all such that should resist that decree and sentence. And we knowing this before, saith the Emperor, fearing to have the judgement of the Curse promulged: Obsecundare Synodico judicio Romanae ecclesiae necessarium duximus, & huius rei gratia reddidimus ei proprium thronum. We have thought it necessary to obey the Synodical judgement of the Church of Rome, and for that cause we have restored unto him his own See. Of such authority was the Sentence of the Church of Rome, with the Emperor of the East Church in those days. In the same action he saith yet farther. Hoc solum nostrum est si volverit quis nominare crimina. Alia verò omnia Canonibus & his, quibus imperium Synodi creditum est, tradimus. This only is our part to do: if any man will bring forth any crimes, or make any accusation, to see it put up to the Council, etc. But all other things we leave to the Canons, and to them to whom the Rule of the Synod is committed, that is to bishops, as we heard him before say unto them. Thus much in that Action. In the seventh Action Photius appearing again, Marinus one of the legates commanded his staff to be taken from him, because it was a token of his bisshoplye estate and dignity. Libro. 3. c. 20. H●rtatoriè alloquitur vos Imperator. In this Action (as Cusanus recordeth) Bahanis the Emperors Lieutenant had much talk with the Photyans, Hortatoriè, by the way of exhortation, moving them to unity and repentance. The only shift of the Photyans was to say, that the legates of the patriarchs there present, did not their commission, but condemned them contrary to the patriarchs own wills and judgements. Upon this the Emperor offered them, that whosoever would stand by that surmise, should by his provision be sent to the patriarchs themselves, as to Rome, to antioch, and to Jerusalem, and learn of them the truth. But they refused to do so. At the length the Emperor seeing them obstinate and full of words to no purpose, said to them. Omnes novimus, quòd laici estis, & non adduximus vos latrare, & sine ordine facere verba. We know all, that you are but lay men. And we brought you not hither to bark, and to talk out of order. But the Emperor (saith Cusanus) called them therefore lay men, because they were all ordered of Photius who himself was no bishop: Such are you and all your fellows M. Horn, no bishops at all, but mere lay persons, ordered of none at all that was himself ordered. And whereas one of the Photians Eulapius by name, began to talk with the Emperor, the legates of the See Apostolic said. Eulapius is condemned and excommunicated of the See Apostolic: and therefore the Emperor ought not to talk with him. Then the Emperor said. I have oftentimes and much desired, that they might not perish: And therefore I called them hither: but if they will not return to the Church, whatsoever the patriarchs shall judge of them, they shall, will they, nill they, stand unto it. For no man can reject the power that is given to them (he meaneth the high bishops) of Christ our God and Saviour. Thus again you see Master Horn how all the judgement resteth in the bishops, jubet Imperator ut loquamini: sed videntes judices convicia vestra, nec audire vos volunt. and how the sentence of the See Apostolic prevaileth, and how buxomely (to use your own word) and obediently the Emperor yieldeth thereunto, not intermeddling farther than to procure that all parts may be heard, that tumult may be avoided, and that the judges (for so were the bishops called in this Action) may quietly proceed to Sentence, and last of all that same Sentence may be put in execution, notwithstanding the indurat malice of obstinate heretics. In the .8. Action all the schismatical conventicles of the Photians are condemned, and the records thereof burned. In that Action also divers Image breakers came to the Synod, and were reconciled: That sect also was again accursed In the last Action the Canons were read, at the Pope's Legates commandment, Dist. 63. Nullus. to the number of .27. In the .22. Canon it is decreed, that no secular Prince intermeddle with the election or choice of any patriarch, Metropolitan, or Bishop whatsoever, which also is inserted by Gratian into the decrees. Finally the Council being ended, Basilius the Emperor maketh a long and a notable Oration to the Synod, Cusanus lib. 3. c. 23. expressing the dew zeal and duty of an Emperor in all Synods and Counsels. He avoucheth plainly, that to secular and lay men, Non est datum secundùm Canonem dicendi quicquam penitus de Ecclesiasticis causis: opus enim hoc pontificum & sacerdotum est. It is not granted by the Rule of the Church to speak any thing at all (in Council) of Ecclesiastical matters. For this is the work, saith he, of Bishops and Priests. And after, commending the bishops for their great pains and travail in that Council, he speaketh to the lay nobility then present thus. De vobis autem Laicis, etc. But as touching you that are of the lay sort, as well you that bear offices, as that be private men, I have no more to say unto you, but that it is not lawful for you by any means to move talk of Ecclesiastical matters, neither to resist in any point against the integrity of the Church, or to gaynesaie the universal Synod. For to search and seek out these matters, it belongeth to Bishops and Priests, which bear the office of governors, which have the power to sanctify, to bind and to loose, which have obtained the keys of the Church and of heaven. It belongeth not to us, which ought to be fed, which have need to be sanctified, to be bound, and to be loosed from band. For of whatsoever Religion, or wisdom the lay man be, yea though he be endued with all internal virtues, as long as he is a lay man, he shall not cease to be called a sheep. Again, a bishop howsoever unreverent he be, and naked of all virtue, as long as he is a bishop, and preacheth duly the word of Truth, he suffereth not the loss of his pastoral vocation and dignity. What then have we to do, standing yet in the room of sheep? The shepherds have the power to discuss the subtlety of words, and to seek and compass such things, as are above us. We must therefore in fear and sincere faith hearken unto them, and reverence their countenances, as being the Ministers of Almighty God, and bearing his form, and not to seek any more than that which belongeth to our degree and vocation. Thus far the Emperor Basilius in the end and Conclusion of the eight general Council, and much more in this sense, which were here to long to inserte. I blame you not now Master Horn, that you so overhipped this whole General Council, and the doings of those two Popes Nicolaus and Adrian .2. You saw perhaps or had heard say, that it made clearly against you. And yet as I said before, apparently you might have culled out broken narrations for your purpose as well out of this General Council, as out of the other .7. But seeing you took such pains to note th'emperors demeanour in the former .7. I thought it a point of courtesy Master Horn, to requytte you again with this one general Council, for so many by you alleged, to your very small purpose, as every indifferent Reader seeth. Whether this be not to our purpose, I dare make yourself judge. And now I wonder what shift you will make to avoid the Authority of this general Council, or of this Emperor Basilius. Well. You may at your good leisure think and devise upon it. I will now return to your text. You say Martinus the second (whom other more truly call Marinus) got into the Papacy by naughty means: What maketh that to prove your supremacy in the lay Magistrate? It is noted, you say, in the margin of Platina that it was in this Pope's time, that first of all the creation of the Popes was made without the emperors authority. You should have told us withal in what print of Platina that note is found. I have seen Platina both of the colen print, and of the Venyce print set forth with the Notes of Onuphrius, and yet I find no such Note in the margin. It is by like the Note of some your brotherhood in some copy printed at basil: And then is it of as good Authority, as Master Horns own book is: which is God wot, but course. Whose so e'er note it be, Dist. 63. Cum longè Princeps non advocatur ad electionem faciendam, sed ad consensum electioni adhibendam. a false note it is. For as of a hundred and ten bishops of Rome, before this Marinus, scarce the fourth part of them was confirmed of the Emperors, so the Emperors before this time never created Popes, but only consented to the creation or election made by the clergy, and confirmed the same, for quiet sake, and for the preservation of unity, as I have before showed. Adrians' decree that the people of Rome should wait no more for the emperors confirmation, was no defraudinge of th'emperors right, as you untrulye report, but a renewing of the old liberties and privileges dew to the Church by the order of Canons and Counsels, and the which never came to the Emperors, but by the Pope's own grants and decrees (namely of Adrian the first and Leo .3. as hath before appeared) and therefore by them again revocable without injury done to the Prince, when the weal of the Church so required. As it was at this time, the French Emperors busied with wars against the Sarracens, and not so careful of the Ecclesiastical peace (upon respect whereof that Confirmation of the Pope was granted them) as were their predecessors. Which negligence so increased, that in few years after as we shall anon see, they not only left of the protection of the See Apostolic, but lost also the Empire, Cusanus lib. 3. c. 3. it being transferred to the Germans in Otho the first, whom also some German writers (namely Cusanus) do account for the first Emperor of the West, after the decay and breach of the East Empire. M. Horn. The .107. Division. Fol. 67. b. The next Pope Stephen had an obscure time, saving that Charles therein called a Council at colen, and after him Arnulphus the Emperor, other two: the one at Moguntia, the other at Triburum. The .13. Chapter: Of the last Emperors of Charlemaynes race, and of the Popes of Rome of that age. Stapleton. HEre follow two Counsels under Arnulphus the Emperor, the one at Moguntia the other at Triburum. But what? Is there in that Counsels nothing for you M. Horn? Why? There is in the Council of Moguntia a whole Chapter entitled: Quid sit propriè ministerium Regis. What is properly the office of a king. And in a Chapter so specially debating of your matter in hand, could you find nothing that made for you? Cap. 3. vide Tom. 2. Concil. pa. gin. 780. Then let us see whether there be any thing for us. The Council in that Chapter saith. The office of a king specially is, to govern the people of God, and to rule with equity and justice, and to provide that peace and concord may be kept. And how? In ecclesiastical matters? We shall hear. For (saith the Council) he ought before all things to be a defender of the Churches (I thought the Council would have said, Supreme Governor) and of the servants of God, of widows, and Orphans, And so forth. Lo. M. Horn. The office of the prince is to defend the Church of God, not to govern it, not to alter and change the Religion, not to make Church laws etc. In all this chapter look when you will, you shall not find one word for the Princes supreme Government, or any manner of Government at all in matters ecclesiastical. And yet this being as you say in the beginning of this book, A principal part of the Princes Royal power, Fol. 3. b. the Council of purpose treating in this Chapter only of the prince's office and power, it is more than maruayl that the matter should in such deep silence so be wrapped up, that no word or half word thereof could appear. Verily in the next chapter following it is commanded and decreed, Cap. 4. that the Churches and things to them belonging should apperteyn to bishops: without any word of the Princes supreme Government in things of the Church. M. Horn. The .108. Division. Fol. 67. b. Of these Popes and those that followed, as Formosus, Stephanus, Romanus, Benedictus, Leo, Christophorus, Sergius, and a great company more, the Historians give but an homely testimony, and Nauclerus saith, that to satisfy their voluptuous lusts, they did maliciously malice one another, as most cruel Tyrants, and he added this reason. Cum non extarent qui eorum vitia coercerent, because there was none to correct and chasten them for their evil doings. For so long as the Princes exercised their (351) The .351. untruth. slanderously surmised, but not able by any good Author to be proved. authority in overseeing carefully the Church matters, and the ministers, so well the Popes, as other Bishops, there grew no such intolerable disorders, neither were there such monsters (for so Nauclerus, termeth these Popes) that continued any space: But were by the Prince's authority suppressed, and therefore Nauclerus citeth out of Platina, and affirmeth it to be true, that the cause of these monstrous Rebels in the Church was: Quòd Resp. ignavos & desides principes habeat. Because the common wealth had improfitable and slothful Princes. Thus these writer's burdeine and charge the Princes with the disorders and enormities in Christ's Church, wherein they do them wrong, if they thought not, that it appertained to the Princely auritie to * This we grant: But this cometh nothing near to the purpose, and scope prefixed. oversee, care, and provide for the good order of Christ's Church: and to redress, punish, and remove the inordinate evils therein. Stapleton. M. Horn now rusheth in with a bedroll of certain naughty pope's, down from Formosus to john the .13. Among whom I marvel why you reckon Benedictus, Gener. 31. pag. 72. of whom Nauclerus writeth thus. Huius Benedicti laus est, quòd intam corruptis moribus graviter & constanter vitam duxisse feratur. The commendation of this Benedictus is, that in so corrupt manners of men, he is said to have lived with gravity and Constancy. And namely for his great humanity and clemency he was chosen. But much more I marvel that among so many bad you speak never a word of the good, namely of Anastasius of whom it is written. Nihil habuit quo reprehendi posset. Pag. 74. He was a man that could be charged with nothing. Pag. 74. of Leo the .6. which nihil tyrannicum prae se tulit, rei divinae consulens, showed no tyranny in his behaviour, attending upon God's service. Of Steven the 7. whose life was full of gentleness and Religion. Pag. 80. Ibidem. Pag. 85. Of Leo .7. and Steven the .8. both commended Popes. Of Martin the .3. who followed also the gentle demeanour of Steven. Of Agapetus who is written to have been vir innocens & Reip. Christianae feruens amator, Saxo gran. lib. 9 An innocent man and a fervent tenderer of the Christian common wealth. Of whom also the king of Denmark received the faith. All these good and virtuous Popes in great affliction of wicked persons in those days (for lack in deed of justice in good Emperors) lived, and ruled the Church between this Formosus and john the .13. or .12. more than twenty years. But. M. Horn like a fowl sow that nouseleth in the dunghill and careth not for the fair flowers in the garden, nouseleth himself among the evil bishops, and can not abide to speak one poor word for the good. And therefore as Memmius objected to Cato his night's drunkenness, for whom Cicero answereth, why tellest thou not also of his days dicing? he being in deed all the day in the affairs of the Common wealth, so for the bedrol of your evil Pope's Formosus, Plutarch in Catone Vticensi. and the rest, I ask you why you tell us not also of Anastasius, of Leo the .6. and .7. of Stevyn the .7. and .8. of Martin the .3. and of Agapetus, but that you had rather be Memmius than Cicero, rather a rash comptroller than a discrete reporter? M. Horn. The .109. Division. pag. 68 a. Yea, Sabellicus so wondereth at these tragical examples of the Bishops of this time, and their horrible oblivion of Godly Religion, that he (.352.) The .352. untruth: Sabellicus falsified, as shall appear. ascribeth the good and godly moderation that was in the Bishops, and the dutiful execution of their office, from Charles the great, till the end of the French Empire, which was an whole age: to be not so much of themselves, and their own good wills, as of the awe and fear they had of the Princes, kings, and Emperors, who were their guardians. And therefore concludeth, that it may be truly said, that this was the calamity of France, Italy, and of the Church of Rome: Quòd in ea gente desitum esset imperari: because there was (.353.) The .353. untruth. False translation. no king nor Emperor to bear rule, (354.) The .354. untruth. Sab. meaneth no such thing. meaning that although there were kings and Emperors, yea● did they not execute their Princely office and authority, in overseeing, correcting and reforming the Church matters, and her ministers, and therefore the state was miserable. In this confusion were all things, but especially in the Church of Rome, till God stirred up the wise and mighty Prince Otho the first, whose zeal, stoutness and travail in reforming Religion and the disordered Church, no tongue is able to express saith Nauclerus. Stapleton. You make Sabellicus to say a great deal more than ever he said, or intended to say. For he doth not certainly ascribe any such cause, as you pretend, but only he saith. Non immeritò quis suspicaretur. A man may and not without a cause suspect. But what M. Horn? That Popes kept evil rule, and were given to all lewdness, because the Emperors did not oversee them? So you would have folk to think, sabel. Aenead. 9 lib. 1. and therefore you make Sabellicus to conclude, that this was the calamity of France, Italy and of the Church of Rome quòd in ea gente desitum esset imperari, because there was no king nor Emperor to bear rule. But false translation maketh no proof. Know you not M. Horn, what In ea gente, doth signify in english? Or if we may not find fault with your grammar, why slacked your honesty so far, as to leave the english thereof quite out? What, was there a pad in the straw? Sabellicus then saith, the cause of all that calamity was, because there was no king nor Emperor to bear rule, in ea gente, in that stock or line of Charles the great, whose posterity had hitherto lineally reigned, down to Arnulphus the last mentioned Emperor, and the last in deed (by the opinion of most historians) of Charles his lineal descent. After whom in deed the Church was in great trouble and disorder, for the space of .50. or .60. years. But how? Did the evil Pope's cause that disorder? So would M. Horn following herein the steps of bawdy Bale, that we should think. But as I have noted before, in the compass of that .50. years, there were divers good, and virtuous Popes, ruling the Church more than twenty of those .50. years. And the cause of all that disorder was not the only evil life of certain Popes, but much more, the licentious lewdness of the Italians, and especially the Romans at that time, who in deed for lack of justice on the emperors parts (which is the thing that Sabellicus complaineth of) lived enormously and licentiously, making Kings among themselves, and not only oppressing one an other, but also most vilely and cruelly handling their bishops being good and virtuous. Of whom Stephen the .8. a Pope of much holiness at that very time, Naucler. generat. 32. pa. 85. Martinus Pol. was of his citizens so shamefully mangled and disfigured, that he was fain of a long time for very shame to keep within doors, and so lived three years in great vexation and trouble. The cause of all this trouble in the Church at this time, if you list shortly to know (gentle Readers) Sabellicus agreeing herein with the other historians will clearly tell you. He saith. Quantum Francorum pietate etc. Look how much Rome and all Italy breathed (as it were) from along continuance of miseries, Aenead. ●. lib. 1. by the godliness and bountifulness of the French Princes (Charles and his issue) one whole age (almost a .100. years) so much fell it back again in to all kind of calamity, by the space of almost .60. years through civil Sedition. This calamyty began, from the last year of Adrian the .3. and ended in the time of john the .12. And will you see whereof sprang this calamity? M. Horn imagineth, it was because the Princes did not practise their Ecclesiastical government over Popes. But Sabellicus a better historian then M. Horn, addeth immediately upon his former words, this Cause. (Ex qua iniuria videtur mihi orta tanta rerum mutatio, quanta in humanis rebus facta est) Enimuero, praeter Normannos etc. Verily beside the Normans which wasted France (of which outrage, that great change of things then made in the world, seemeth to me to have sprounge) the Huns also people of Scythia, being bold upon the troubles of France, coming down into Slauony, did conquer the lands of Gepides and Auari, people then in those quarters so called. The overrunning them of foreign nations, and the Civil Seditions through out all Italy caused this great calamyty that the historyans of this time complain so much of. Which the more increased, for that the Emperors of that time, Arnulphus, Conradus, Henry the first, yea and Otho himself until the later end of his Empire, partly would not, partly could not repress the tyrants in Italy, and other where. In all which hurley burleys, In tam corruptis moribus Nauclerus generat. 32. ubique isaiah 24. in all which breaches of good order, licentiousness of life, and corruption of the world, if the heads also themselves, the chief bishops, sometimes fell to disorder and lewdness of life, it is the less to be marveled of him that will consider the course of God's providence in this world, who suffereth for the sins of the people, ut sicut populus, sic sit & sacerdos. That like as the people, so should also the Priest be: who saith also in like enormities of the world: Osc. 4. Dabo pueros principes eorum. Esaiae 3. Et effaeminati dominabuntur eyes. 2. Reg. 24 I will give them children for their Princes, meaning not only children in age, but children in wisdom, children in strength, and children in virtue. Of which also expressly we read, that the wrath of God waxed hot against israel, and stirred up David to say to joab. Go and number Israel and juda. Of the which great vanity and oversight of that King, the plague fell upon the people, and not upon the King. So God plagueth the wickedness of subjects with the sins of their Rulers, and giveth oftentimes to a froward flock, a cursed shepherd. This consideration of God's providence in that corrupt time (not of corrupt faith (as you babble) but of corrupt manners) had more becomed a man of your vocation, M. Horn, and a Divine, than such false and lewd surmises as you have uttered. Which you could never so have cloaked, if you had opened the whole history and circumstances of the case to your Readers. But this you will never do, say we what we wil Your ragged religion must be patched up with such broken clouts of imperfect narrations. M. Horn. The .110. Division. pag. 68 a. At this time was john .13. Pope, a man replete and laden with all disshonestie and villainy, against (.355.) The: 355. untruth. For these parties were not sent to Otho against Pope john, but from him, and for him. whom two of the chiefest amongst the Clergy (the one was a Cardinal saith Luithprandus, the other, master of the Rolls) made complaint unto Ottho, most humbly beseeching him, to have some compassion on the Church, which if it were not speedily reformed, must needs come to utter decay. After whom came the bishop of Milan, and so one after an other, a great many more, making the same suit unto Ottho: who being moved of his own zeal to God's glory, but now inflamed by the lamentable supplications of these bishops. Rex pijssimus, saith Luithprandus; Non quae sua sunt, sed quae jesu Christi cogitans: The most Religious King having careful cogitations, not for his own things, but for jesus Christ's matters, addressed himself with all convenient speed into Italy, to reform Rome from whence all the mischief sprang. When the Pope understood of his coming, he prepared to receive him in most honourable wise, and with such humility behaved himself towards the Emperor, and showed such fair face of repentance, that the well meaning Emperor, thought he had meant as he pretended, and swore the Pope to obedience and loyalty against Berengarius and Adalbertus, as Luithprandus writeth, and so returned into his country. This Luithprandus is the more to be credited, for that he was living a famous writer, and (.356.) The .356. Untruth: This Luithprand▪ was no Cardinal. Luithpr. untruth. Deacon Cardinal, even in the same time. The Pope immediately against both Oath and honesty (.357.) The .357. his Author over reached. practised with Adalbertus, to depose this godly Emperor, and promised him by Oath his aid. The reason or cause why john the Pope should hate this most godly Emperor, who had delivered him out of the hands of Adelbert his enemy, and wherefore the Devil should hate God his creature, seemeth not to be unlike. For the Emperor, as we have had good experience, understandeth things pertaining to God, he worketh, he loveth them, he maintaineth with main and might the Ecclesiastical and Temporal matters, he decketh them with manners, and amendeth them by laws: but john the Pope is against all these things. The Emperor seeketh by diverse ways to reconcile this Pope, and to bring him from his filthy life, to some honesty, and regard of his office. When by no persuasions he can win him, he determineth to depose him, and (.358.) The .358. Untruth. That council was not called to depose him. for that purpose, he calleth a Council of the bishops of Italy, to the end he may seek the refourmation, which he mindeth, and saw to be overmuch needful by their advise. Pope john, (.359.) The .359. untruth. He was run away before the Synod was any thing toward▪ seeing himself to be tried by a Synod, runneth away, when all the people saw their Pope was run away from them, they swore fidelity to th'Emperor, promising by their Oaths, that they would never hereafter elect or make any Pope without the consent of the Emperor. Within three days after, there was a great assembly in S. Peter's Church at the requests of the Bishops and people: In which Council sat the Emperor, with many archbishops and others: to whom the godly Emperor propoundeth the cause of their assemble, exhorteth them to do all things with upright judgement: and the Bishops, deacons, Clergy, and all the people make solemn protestation, and obtestation of their just and upright dealing in the cause propounded. And because the chief matter touched the Pope that was run away: the holy Synod said, if it seem so good to the godly Emperor, let letters be sent to the Pope, and city him to come and purge himself. The letters were directed in this form: Otho by God's grace Emperor, with the archbishops of Liguria, Tuscia, Saxonia, and France, send greeting in the Lord to john the Pope: We coming to Rome for our Service to God, and inquiring the cause of your absence from your Church, were informed by the Bishops, Cardinals, Priests, Deacons, and the whole people, of such shameful doings by you, as we are ashamed to rehearse: whereof these are part they charge you with: The .360. untruth. A part of the sentence left out. Murder, perjury, sacrilege, incest with twain of your own sisters: that in your banquetes (which is horrible to be rehearsed) ye drink wine in the love of the Devil: in your play at dice, you crave the help of jupiter, Venus, and other Devils: The .361. untruth. These words in the midst nipped quite of. To whone the election of your Bishop belongeth. wherefore we pray you to repair unto us yourself. To this, the Pope writeth this answer. I hear say ye will make an other Pope, which if ye attempt, I excommunicate you all, that ye may have no licence or power to order any, etc. To this short answer the Emperor, with the Synod replieth, telling him that they had written, to let him understand of the crimes wherewith he was charged, and that he had sent them such an * Such si M. Horns answer to M. Feckenham in a great part answer as rather became the folly of a child, than the gravity of a Bishop: as for the power of binding and losing, they say, he once had as judas had, to whom it was said: Quaecunque ligaveritis super terram. etc. What so ever ye bind on earth, shallbe bound in Heaven, etc. But now he hath no more power against the Emperor and the Synod, The .362. untruth. Luithprandus showeth no such thing. than judas had when he went about to betray Christ his Master. These letters were sent unto him by two Cardinals, who returned, not finding him: and therefore the Synod proceedeth to his deposition: They beseech the Emperor to remove Monstrum illud, that Monster, and to place some worthy bishop in his room. Tune Imperator, placet inquit, quod dicitis: Your request pleaseth me, saith the Emperor (360.). The Clergy and the people (saith Nauclerus) doth make humble supplication unto the Emperor, to provide for them a worthy Bishop: to whom the Emperor answereth: Choose you yourselves one, (361.) whom, having God before your eyes, ye may judge worthy, and I will confirm him: The Emperor had no sooner spoken this (saith Luithprandus) than they all with one assent named Leo: The Emperor gave his consent: Et Ottho Imperator, Leonem creat Pontificem, and Ottho the Emperor created Leo Pope (as Sabellicus and Platina saith) Here Luithprand, tell●th at large, how after this creation of Leo, the Emperor (.362.) dissolved the Synod, and what mischief the monstrous Pope john wrought afterwards. For by his friends in Rome, Pope Leo was driven away. And after this Monster was dead, the Romans elected Benedictus in his place, and requireth the Emperor who was than at Spolet, to confirm him: the Emperor would not, but compelled them to receive Leo again. And here the Emperor summoned again a new Synod wherein he (.363.) The .363. untruth pregnant. For neither the Emperor deposed Benedictus, but Pope Leo himself, neither doth Platina, Nauclere or sabel: make any mention of Synod called by th'emperor thereabout. Dist. 63. sat himself, for the Canonical deposition of Benedictus. notwithstanding this, saith Nauclerus, Leo being weary of the inconstancy of the Romans, did constitute by their consent in the Synod holden at Rome, that the whole authority of choosing the Bishop, should remain in the Emperor, at it is rehearsed in the decrees in these words: Being in the Synod at Rome in the Church of the holy Saviour: like as Adrianus Bishop of Rome granted to Charles the great, the dignity of patricianship, the ordering of the Apostolical sea, and the investuring of Bishops; So I also Leo Bishop of Rome, servant of God's servants, with the consent of all the Clergy and people of Rome, do constitute, confirm, and corroborate, and by our Apostolical authority, we do grant and give unto the Lord Ottho, the first King of Dutchmen, and to his successors in this kingdom of Italy for ever, the authority to elect after us, and to ordain the Bishop of (.364.) The .364. untruth. Summae soedis Apostolicae. Of the highest Apostolic See: leeft out. Rome: and so archbishops, and Bishops, that they receive of him, as they ought the investuring and consecration (.365.) excepting those, whom the Emperor hath granted to the pope's and Archebisshops': The .365. untruth. unde debent: from whence it appertaineth, left out: And that no man hereafter of what dignity or religion so ever, have power to elect one, to the dignity of consuls blood, or to be bishop of the (.366.) The .366. untruth. Summae: the highest. lef out again. Apostolic See, or to make any other bishop, without th'emperors consent. And if any be chosen bishop without he be commended, and invested by the King, that in no wise he be consecrated, under pain of excommunication. As Sabellicus noteth this for a renowned matter, that the right of creating the Pope, was now restored to the Imperial dignity: even so Nauclerus affirmeth, this godly Imperour Otho, to be borne in totius Ecclesiae consolationem, for the consolation of the whole Church. The .14. Chapter: Of Otho the first, Emperor: Of john the .12. and Leo the .8. Popes of Romae. Stapleton. THis declaration runneth all upon the deposition of the naughty Pope john the .13. or as most men call him, the .12. in a synod at Rome the Emperor Otho being then present. But unless M. Horn can show, that this Emperor took himself for supreme head in all causes ecclesiastical and temporal, and utterly renounced all the Pope's supreamacye, the case standing that this Pope were a most wicked man (which we freely confess) and most unworthy of that see, yet is M. Horn far of from iustifiing the matter. Wherein even by his own author and story, he should have been utterly overthrown, if he had made thereof a true and a faithful report: which ye shall now hear, by us, and that by his own chronographer, so that ye shall have good cause to be astonished to see the most shameful and impudent dealing of this man. First then he beginneth with a notorious lie. For neither this Cardinal, whom Luithprandus calleth johannem, nor the Master of the rolls, whom he calleth Aronem, Vide Nauclerum generat. 33. pag. 89. & sequent. Summus Pontifex et universalis papa. Luithprandus lib. 6. rerum per Europam gestarum cap. 6. Naucler. generat. 32. pag. 85 Vide Trithemium. in scrip. & Chronograph. Pantaleonis. Luithprandi Ticinensis Ecclesiae levitae re●um ab Europae Imperator. gestarum historiae liber 1. etc. nor the Bishop of Milan and others here named were sent to complain upon Pope john, to Otho: but sent to him by john the Pope himself, which john, his author Luithprandus calleth the high Bishop and the universal Pope, who most humbly beseacheth him, that he would vouchsaufe for the love of God, and the holy Apostle Petre and Paul, as he would wish them to forgive him his sins, to deliver him and the Church of Rome to him committed, from the tyranny of Berengarius and Adelbertus. whereupon th'emperor gathered an army and coming to Italy with all speed, expulsed from the Kingdom of Italy the said tyrants: so, that it seamed evident that he was aided and assisted by the most holy Apostles Peter and Paul, and (which is to be noted) he was afterward anointed and crowned Emperor of the said john though so vicious a man, and swore also obedience unto him, as Nauclerus writeth. Farther he did not only restore him, those things whereof he was spoiled, but honoured him also with great rewards, aswell in gold and silver, as in precious stones. And he took an oath of the Pope upon the most precious body of S. Peter, that he should never aid or assist the said Berengarius and Adelbertus. M. Horn here needless enforceth the credit of his author, as then living, yea and anaunceth him to be a famous writer and a Deacon Cardinal, whereas he was, as far as my book showeth, and as far as Trithemius, and Pantaleon report of him, no Deacon Cardinal at Rome, but a deacon of the church of Ticinun, otherwise called Pavia in Italy: unless perchance he was such a Cardinal as the Cardinals are among the petty canons of Paul's in London. With like truth ye say M. Horn, ij. lines after, that the pope practised with Adelbertus, to depose the Emperor, but your author speaketh not so much, but only that the Pope promised the foresaid Adelbertus to help him against the emperors power. Affirmans se illum contra imperatoris potentiam adiuturum. Dict. ca 6. Then tell ye, in a smaller and distinct letter, truly enough, but altogether confusely, of john's doings, writing out of your author, as we have good experience, but who were that we, ye show not, nor to whom the words were spoken. Ye say, that the Emperor called a Council in Italy to depose him, that your author sayeth not, M. Horns confuse writing. but that, after three days, th'emperor had been at Rome, the pope and Adelbertus being fled from thence, there was a great assembly in S. Peter's Church, rogantibus tam Romanis episcopis quàm plebe, at the desire as well of the Italian bishops as of the people: In the which council were present beside the Bishops many noble men. And the Pope ran not away, because of this Council (as you untruly report) but iij. days after that he was fled with Adelbertus, the Council was called: and that not to depose him, but to call him to his answer: as appeareth by the Emperors own oration. Who after that Benedictus had rehearsed diverse of these horrible owtragies that ye specify: th'emperor and the council sent for him to purge himself. In the which letters sent by the Emperor ye dissemble many things and dismember them, Cap. 9 Quod nos Ecclesiae vestrae vestrique defensores etc. as the title of th'emperors letters which was: Summo Pontifici & universali papae johanni Otho. etc. To the high Bishop and the universal Pope, our Lord john, Otho, and so forth. And by and by. We asked the cause of your absence, and why ye would not see us, your, and your Church's defensor. And again. Oramus itaque paternitatem vestram obnixè venire atque hijs omnibus vos purgare non dissimuletis. Si forte vim temerariae multitudinis formidatis, juramento vobis affirmamus nihil fieri praeter Sanctorum Canonum sanctionem. We most earnestly pray your fatherhood, that ye do not foreslow to come and to purge yourself. If ye fear any violence of the rude and rash people, we promise you upon our Oath, that nothing shall be done contrary to the Decrees of the holy Canons. After this, ye rehearse the Pope's short answer, which yet as short as it is, doth wonderfully trouble you, and ye dare not fully recite it. I hea say (saith this john) ye will make an other Pope, which if ye attempt, I excommunicate you all, that ye may have no licence or power to order any, or to say Mass. It is true that ye say afterward, that the Council desired the Emperor, that the said john might be removed, and that the Emperor so answered. Yet ye leave out part of his answer. And that is: and that some other might be found who should rule the holy and universal See. How and in what sort the Emperor had to do with the Pope's deposition. Cap. 11. Neither did they desire of the Emperor any thing else, but his assistance in the removing of him. Neither properly to speak, otherwise then by consenting and assisting, did th'emperor create pope Leo. As appeareth by your author, saying: that all said with one voice, Leonem nobis in pastorem eligimus, ut sit summus & universalis Papa Romanae ecclesiae. We do elect Leo to be our pastor, and the high and universal Pope of the Roman Church, and do refuse john the renegade for his wicked behaviour. The which thing being thrice by all cried out, he was carried to the palace of Lateran: Annuente imperatore with th'emperors consent, and then to S. Peter's Church, to be consecrated: and then they swore they would be faithful, unto him. And in this election the people also had their consent aswell as the Emperor. And so can ye not make this election to be a plat form, for your elections now in England. Sperans imperator cum paucis se Romae degere posse, ne consumeretur populus Romanus ob multitudinem exercitus, multis ut redirent licentiam dedit. Quumque hoc johannes qui deietus est, papa cognosceret etc. Your next untruth in this narration is, that ye say, that Luithprandus showeth, how the Emperor dissolved the Council. For he speaketh no word of the dissolving of the council, but that he gave licence to many of his soldiers to depart: upon which occasion Pope john maketh a new hurly-burly. And Benedictus of whom ye speak, that was set up in john's place, after john's death by the Romans was thrust out and Leo restored again. The which Benedictus was not deposed by th'emperor, Cap. 11. Nauclere generat. 33. pag. 90. Platina in Bened. 5. & in Leone. 8. Benedictum sanctae et Apostolicae sedis Romanae invasorem omni Pontificatus & presbiteratus iure privamus: ob elaecmosinam verò Domini imperatoris etc. cuius opera in sedem debitam restituti sumus, diaconatus eum ordinem habere permittimus, & non iam Romae sed in exilium destinanamus. Luithpran. Cap 11. in the council ye speak of: Neyhter did the Emperor summon any Council for his deposition, but only by fine force constrained the Romans to admit Leo, and to swear unto him, as both Nauclere and Platina do write, of whom you take your matter: But it was the Pope himself, who gave sentence against him, deposed him and deprived him as well from his usurped papacy, as from all bishoply and priestly dignity: yea and banished him also from Rome. Yet at the emperors request, who effusis lachrymis rogavit Synodum, with tears requested the Synod for some mercy for him: the pope suffered him to remain in the order of a deacon, but yet to live in banishment, not at Rome. And this declaration, which ye have so slily and craftily passed over, is a most evident argument against your false assertion in this your book, yea and showeth that it is not the Emperor, as ye imagine, but the clergy and the pope chief that hath the supreme authority in the deposing of bishops. Whereas ye say further, that this Leo with his Synod, gave to Otho the creation of the Popes, Vide Dist. 63. In Synodo. and the consecration of archbishops and Bishops: you belie the Decree. For it granteth not to the Emperor the whole creation, and consecration, but only the investuring of bishops: and that the pope's election should not be taken as effectual with out th'emperors consent. Therefore in the midst of your allegation, you nip quite of after the word, Consecration, unde debent: From whence they ought: whereby is declared that as the investuring and confirming is granted to the Emperor, so the Consecration is referred to that order according to which before by the Canons it ought to be. And therefore the Decree at the end saith: If any be chosen Bishop of the Clergy and the people, except he be commended and invested by the King of Italy, let him not be consecrated. By which words it is evident, that both the choice and the Consecration or ordering of Bishops and archbishops is reserved to the Clergy and people. But thereto is required the commendation, investuring, and confirmation of the Emperor: which, as I have before showed at large, impaireth no jot the Pope's Primacy, but rather confirmeth it: as a thing due to the Emperor rather, by the gift and confirmation Apostolical, then otherwise: and due unto him for order and quietness sake, not as any part of his Princely power. M. Horn The .111. Division. pag. 70. a. When this godlyPrince was dead, whilst his son Ottho .2. was busied in the wars against the Sarazens: and after him his Son Ottho .3. was yet in nonage, the Popes began to wax so evil, and the state of Christ's Church to decay as much as ever it did before: So dangerous a matter it is, to want godly Princes to govern God's Church, and to oversee the Ministers thereof. Stapleton. It is well you call Otho the first a godly prince. For than I trust all that we have so largely showed concerning his obedience to the See of Rome, yea to that Pope john, so naughty a man as (thanked be God) never in our remembrance the like by many parts lived, you will M. Horn allow for good and godly. Which if you do, we shall soon be at a point touching this matter between you and M. Fekenham: and will (I hope) recant and subscribe yourself. M. jewel perhaps will bear you company. All that you add of the evil pope's in the time of Otho the .2. and in the nonage of Otho .3. is but a slanderous lie. For as there were in that time some evil pope's, Nauclerus generat. 33. so were there also right good, as Donus the .2. and Benedictus .7. who ruled the Church .8. years. And the other were not so bad as M. Horn maketh them, but by the reason of factions were much molested, and traitorously used, not for want of the prince's government in causes ecclesiastical, but for lack in deed of the Prince's justice in orders temporal. For to see external justice ministered is a matter temporal, not ecclesiastical. Which for the reasons by M. Horn alleged ceased in deed for a time in Italy, the emperors being always in manner absent. So necessary it was to reduce that Country to several Signories, as it now liveth in, and hath these many years in great quiet lived. M. Horn The .112. Division. pag. 70. b. About this time Hugh Capet the French king, looked better to his Clergy in France, and calling a Council at Rheims of all the Prelates of France, (.367.) The 367. untruth. The king deposed him not, but the Council: and Arnulphus was restored by the Pope: and Gilbert deposed again. deposed Arnulphus, whom Charles had made Bishop there, and made Gilbert the Philosopher Bishop, whom afterwards Otto .3. made archbishop of Ravenna. After Hugh, Robert his son succeeded, a Prince very well learned, and a diligent labourer about divine or Church matters, which is the proper part of a right king, saith Sabellicus. When Ottho .3. (surnamed for his excellent virtues in that (.368.) The .368. untruth. Slanderous to that age. vicious age, Mirabilia mundi, the marvels of the world) heard of the great misorder in Rome, for the reformation thereof he came into Italy: but or ever he entered into Rome, Pope john .17. died, and there fell no contention (saith Nauclerus) in the Pope's Election, because the Prince (.369.) The .369. untruth. False translation. jussit obtinuitque. He commanded and obtained that his kinsman should be named Pope. Platina appointed by his commandment, Bruno to be pronounced Pope, who was called Gregory .5. So soon as the Emperor departed from Italy, the Romans thrust out Gregory, and placed one Placentinus, whom they call john .18. The Emperor hearing hereof, came to Rome, hanged up the Consul, and put out john's eyes, and restored Gregory into his sea again. I marvel that the historians (saith Platina) do reckon this john amongst the pope's, which undoubtedly was in his Papacy a thief, and a robber, for he entered not in by the door, as of right he should have done. For he came in by a faction, corrupting with money and large gifts Crescentius the Consul, a most covetous wretch, and no less ambitious. Whereby, the sharp judgement of the Emperor, is declared to be but upright justice. So (370) The .370. untruth. This so that followeth not, as it shall appear. that Platina making Gregory to be the true Pope, and to have entered in by the door, of whom he saith. Ottonis .3. authoritate pontifex creature, he is created Pope by themmperors' authority, and declaring the other that came in without themmperors' consent to be a thief and a robber: seemeth to be of this opinion (although to (.371.) The .371. Untruth: Platina was no flatterer, but a free writer. flatter the Popes withal, he durst not so plainly open his mind) that without the Pope he create with the emperors confirmation and authority, he is but a thief and a robber. Ne●t unto him, saith Nauclerus, was Sylvester the second placed, by the emperors appointment. (.372.) The .372. Untruth. False translation. Ex Imperatoris sententia, According to the emperors will. Who being a (.373.) The .373. Untruth. Slanderous. Sylvester was no conjuror. conjuror, had sold his soul to the Devil for this promotion. Nevertheless he was, saith he, so witty, so learned, and seemed so holy, that he not only deceived th' Emperor that made him Pope, but all the world beside. In which Otho the Emperor remaining at Rome, did deliberate after what sort, and by what means he might reform, not only the Empire, but also handling (.374.) The .374. untruth, Ecclesiastical matters, Naucl. nameth not: Ecclesiastical matters how he might reform the Laws of the Church, and bring them into the ancient estate. Such was the careful travel of the Godly Princes▪ in governing not only in Temporal, but also in Ecclesiastical things and causes. Benedictus the ninth, sold the Papacy to Gregory the sixth. Sylvester the third, thrust in amongst them by friendship and bribery. To this case was the Papacy brought now (saith Platina) that only he that was most mighty in ambition and bribery, obtained this dignity: there was no room for good men. Henricus the third, surnamed Pius, came to Rome to thrust out these three monsters, saith, Sabellicus, and to bring this to pass in better order, he calleth a Synod, wherein he (.375.) The .375. untruth. Sabellicus falsified, as shall appear. deposeth these three monstrous beasts, and doth create Clement the second. The which done, he sweareth the Romans, that they shall never after be present at the election of any Pope, unless they be (.376.) The .376. untruth., Sabellicus saith not so. compelled thereunto by the Emperor. But after the emperors departure from the city: Stephan perceiving the people to grudge somewhat at Clementes election, despatched him out of the way with a medicine for a Pope. Venenum illi miscuit, he poisoned him (saith Sabellicus,) and immediately after his death, entruded himself into the Papacy, without consent, either of the Emperor, people or priest, and called himself Damasus .2. But within a while he died also. In the meantime the Romans sent to the Emperor, beseeching him to appoint them some good man to be their Bishop. who made Bauno Pope, and was named Leo .9. The .15. Chapter. of Hugh Capet the French King: Otho. 3. Emperor: and of Gregory .5. and Silvester .2. Popes. Stapleton. AMong all other Popes M. Horn, you could not allege any worse to your purpose, Plat. in Greg. 5. Volat. lib. 22. Anthrop. than this Gregory the .5. For if we shall believe Platina, Sabellicus, Volaterane, Carion and the other common writers: it is this Gregory that instituted the .7. electors in Germany, and the whole order and direction, with his Oath also, to the Pope. As touching Arnulphus the Bishop of Rheims deposed by a Council there called (as you say) by Hugh Capet the French King, and Gilbert put in his place, Naucl. generat. 34. pag. 96. it is true you say: but you tell not all. For afterwards (as Nauclerus reporteth) because Arnulphus could not be deposed, without the authority of the bishop of Rome, M. Gilbert was deposed again, and Arnulphus restored. Whereupon Gilbert fled to Otho, and was in a certain time after made Bishop of Ravenna. This is the whole story M. Horn, and this declareth the Pope's authority, above your Supreme Governor, Hugh Capet the French King. Nauclerus Ibidem. Where you add, that King Robert son to Hugh Capet, was a diligent labourer about Divine or Church matters, if you had told forth, wherein, as your Author doth, saying: Composuit enim multas prosas & hymnos. For he made many proses and hymns, to be song in the Church, your tale had been to small purpose: except to make songs for the Church, do prove a man Supreme Governor in all Church causes or things. And then you have more supreme governors then one▪ not only in England, but in London, yea and in the Court too, I trow. Of john the .18. and Gregory the .5. we shall say more anon. But now whether Sylvester the .2. were a conjuror or no, to your matter it maketh never a whit, and there is more to be said to the contrary, which neadelesse we need not now to allege, than ye shall perchance, M. Horn● inconstant or ignodealing touching Sylvester the .2. this whole twelve months well answer unto. But I would now feign ask you M. Horn, who is this Silvester? What was his name before I pray you? Forsooth, gentle Reader, this Silvester is he, by whose election to be B. of Rheims, M. Horn in the last page, would prove the French king to be Supreme head of the Church: And then to set forth the King's Supremacy, he was Gilbert the Philosopher, and now for to depress the Pope's Supremacy, being made Pope himself, by M. horns charm, is turned from a Philosopher to a conjuror. But to leave all other conjectures, and especially that it is not likely, that he sold as ye say, his soul to the Devil for that promotion: seeing, that by the report of your own Author Sabellicus, it is said that he instructed in learning not only the French king, but the Emperor also, and therefore was in some great likelihood of preferment, without any Magical art to be practised for the same, I say that yourself unwarely have answered yourself, in calling him a Philosopher. For being so very few in the West part in those days skilful in Philosophy and in the mathematicals, Silvester was no conjuror. Theodorichus de Nyem in lib de privilege. & jurib. Imperij. In volume. de imper. et eccles. potest. pag. 832. impr. Basil. An. 1566. if any were such, the common people took him by and by, for a Necromancer and a conjuror. And Theodorichus de Nyem, an Author by yourself allegead (Page .83. a) witnesseth the same, saying that this Sylvester was cunning in liberal Sciences, and a noble Philosopher and Mathematical. I have seen (saith he) certain of his books most suttill in Philosophy. And for his such excellent learning, multi Romani ipsum odio habebant, dicentes, quòd Magus esset, nec non magicam artem exerceret. Many of the Romans hated him, saying that he was a conjuror and used witchcraft. Upon such vain rumours you also call him a conjuror M. Horn, uttering therein as much good skill, as you do good will. But how so ever it be, ye should not by your supreme authority, yet to the bewraying either of your notable unskilfulness (as not knowing the said Sluyester, to be the party ye speak of immediately before) or of your notable perversity and ill dealing, so suddenly have turned him from a philosopher into a conjuror. Dist. 63. Tibi Domino johanni papae, ego rex Otho etc. In Romae nullum placitum aut ordinationem faciam de omnibus quae ad te, aut ad Romanos pertinent sine tuo consilio, et quicquid deterra S. Petri ad nostram potestatem pervenerit tibi reddam, & cuicunque &c. Wherein yet if ye will strive and wrangle, to prove, that for all this gift, Otho acknowledged the pope's supreme authority, I remit you M. Horn, and your reader, to the very said distinction yourself allege. Where ye shall find, that this Otho or his grandfather, Otho the first, did by the usual oath of themperors ever sithence given, agnize the pope for the supreme head of the Church. So your own story plainly and fully opened, giveth against you a plain and a full testimony also, aswell of your most unhonest and false dealing in the handling of this story, as of your most false, and yet most accustomable assertion, that the supremacy of all causes ecclesiastical remained in themperors and not in the pope's. And as for Sylvester himself, how he repented at the end, and what a miraculous token God gave of his good state, after his death, the learned Reader may see in a. Gen. 34. Naucler b. Aen. 9 lib. 2. sabel. and c. In Syl. Artic. 4. pag. 114. Naucl. gener. 33. Arnulphun Rhemorun Pontificem synodo episcoporum habita ab urbe deiectum, in vincula coniecit. Rhemis Gilbertum Philosophun posuit episcopum: Romani tamen pontificis edicto, Arnulphus, revocato Gilberto restitutus est, etc. Platina, as I have otherwhere touched it against M. jewel. You rehearse here yet a number of pope's in the creation or deposition of whom, th'emperor seemed to have somewhat to do. But altogether as we have often showed, impertinently and otherwise lyingly, and against yourself also directly brought in. And to begin M. Horn even with your first example of Arnulphus, I pray you, where find you in your author that the king deposed him? Your author sayeth no such matter, but that, the king did cast him in prison, being first deposed by a synod of bishops. Yet he made ye will say, Gilberte the philosopher bishop for him: and afterward Otho the .3. made him archbishop of Ravenna. Ye might have added and pope to, as your author doth, if ye had meant to deal plainly, and especially that the said Gilbertus by pope john's authority, was thrust out, and Arnulphus restored again (as you heard before). Ye do now partly (as before) belly Platina, and partly guess blindly, as thowghe Platina durst not (to flatter the pope's withal) plainly open his mind: and as although he should be of this mind, Platina in joh. 18. Cresceniij Romani consulis potentia fretus quem pecunia corrupissecreditum est: et mox. Miror ergo historicos joannem ipsum inter pontifices numerasse, cùm vivente ad huc pontifice Gregorio sedem occupasset. that he that cometh into the papacy without th'emperors consent is but a thief, and a robber. Which is as true as before ye made him therefore a traitor. For Platina giveth forth no such meaning. But showeth two causes why this john came not in by the door. The one, that he came in by bribery. The other, that he usurped the see being not as yet vacant, Gregory whom ye writ of, as yet living, and being the lawful pope chosen by the voice of the clergy, and by the consent of th'emperor, and all the people of Rome. After all this ye say, that Henry the .3. deposed three pope's (whom you call three monstrous beasts, of such a beastly spirit you are) and yet you lie in so saying. For th'emperor by supreme authority deposed none. But only for quietness sake (as Sabel. writeth) coegit se dignitate abdicare. Forced them all to depose themselves. which by force no marvel if he did. But by right neither he nor any man living could have deposed any pope. They may be induced either by reason or by force to depose themselves. Farther you say, this Emperor swore the Romans that they should never be present at the pope's election, unless they were compelled by th'emperor. It had been well done if ye had told us who writeth so, and withal, by what warrant th'emperor could exclude the people from their consent which hitherto they gave in the choosing of the pope's. Sabellicus your Author, writeth of no such compulsion. But that they should not so do, without his permission, Sabel. Aene. 9 li. 2. and the reason he addeh. Vt dignitas maneret illi inoffensa, cavereturque in posterum pontificibus. that pope Clement then chosen might continue quietly, and that also for the quiet of other pope's to come he might provide. All which he did as a godly defender, not as a Supreme Governor of the Church. Now if a man would stand with you altogether and say ye bely Stephanus, and certain other pope's, of such as ye have here named, Vide Hermannum contractum in chronicis. Lambert. Schasnab. in histor. Germa. Othonem Frising. li. 6. cap. 33. I think he should not say far from the truth. But yet because ye have some authors on your side, I will not greatly charge your for this matter. You tell us in th'end of this process, that the Emperor made Bauno pope, and was named Leo .9. But I tell you now. M. Horn, that the Emperors making was after unmade, and this Bauno made pope by the Clergy in Rome. For where as this Bauno chosen first of th'emperor, came out of Germany to Rome, all in his Pontificalibus as already pope, Hugo that famous and learned Abbot of Cluniacum, and Hildebrand (who after was pope Gregory .7.) met him in the way and showed him: that th'emperor had no right to choose the pope, that the same right belonged to the Clergy and City of Rome, that he should lay down his bishoply attire, sabel. Aened. 9 lib. 2. Naucler. gener. 35. pag 120. Platina in Leo .9. come to Rome as a private man, and then if he were thought meet, by the lawful consent of the clergy and city, to be chosen. Their counsel he followed, openly detesting his former rashness, that at the emperors only choice he had taken upon him that high office. Thus afterward in Rome he was lawfully chosen, there he was made pope, and named Leo .9. not by the Emperor only, as M. Horn only telleth. And this all historians in manner do witness. M. Horn. The .113. Division. Fol. 71. b. After this Leo, whom Hildebrand rid out of the way, saith Benno Cardinalis, was Victor the second made Pope, by the emperors authority or privilege. Shortly after, this Godly Emperor died being greatly praised, Platina Ab. Vrspu. and surnamed, Pius Henricus, for his dealing in the reformation of Church matters. This Emperor had called two Counsels, the one at Constance, wherein he was himself present, and after that another at Moguntia, wherein both the Emperor and the Pope, sat in Synod. This Pope saith Nauclerns, came into Germany about the Church matters, and ordered all things therein (saith Abbas Vrspur.) by the advise and counsel of themperor and other secular Princes, and the bishops. And as this Emperor had yet this interest in the Councel●, and in the creation of the Pope himself, so had he the placing and displacing, allowing and disallowing, in other spiritual promotions, as at large appeareth in Naucler. Stephen .9. was chosen Pope after that Victor had drunken of (.377.) The .377. untruth. Slanderous: Sabell●c. Hildebrands' cup. But this Sthphen lived not long: for saith Benno If any other than Hildebrand were chosen Pope, Gerardus Brazutus, Hildebrands' familiar friend would soon dispatch him out of the way with poison. Alexander .2. was chosen without themperors' authority or knowledge, with whose election the whole Clergy of Lombardy was much offended, and refused to owe unto him any obedience, beseeching th'emperor that he would give them licence to choose one of their own: persuading him (378) The 378. untruth. they add By the la of Nicolas the last pope before: which you untruly have left out that there ought none to be elect without the consent of the king of Italy. After they had licence, they chose Cadolus the bishop of Parma, whom all the Clergy of Lombardy obeyed as their lawful Pope. The Cardinals (saith Benno) knowing well Hildebrands ambition, did win with much suit themperors' favour and aid to their new elected Pope Cadolus: the which did so deeply pierce the ha●t of Hildebrand, that he became a deadly enemy to th'emperor for ever after contrary to the faithful duty that he had sworn unto him. Hard hold there was betwixt these two (.379.) The .379. untruth. For one of them was not pope. Pope's so well with strokes as with words: they both gathered great armies, and with their armies came into the field in their own persons, and fought two cruel and bloody battles, and so ruled the (380) The .380. untruth. Slanderous against the whole Church of that age. Schismatical Church with Paul's (word, Peter's keys, being fast locked from them both in Christ's Church: till th'emperor sent Otto the archbishop of colein, giving him full authority, as he should see cause, to set in order the Church matters. When Otto came to Rome with this large commission, he did sharply reprove Alexander at the first, Platina. Because he had taken upon him the Papacy without th'emperors commandment, and contrary to that order, which the Law itself, and the long custom also hath prescribed. Whose words Nauclerus telleth thus: How cometh this to pass (saith he) my brother Alexander, that contrary to the manner of old time hitherto observed, and against the law prescribed to the Roman bishops many years ago, thou hast taken upon thee the Roman Papacy without the commandment of the King, and my Lord Henry: and so beginning from Charles the great, he nameth many Princes, by whose authority the Popes were either chosen, confirmed, or had their election ratified: and when Le was going forward in his oration, Hildebrand Tharchdeacon taketh the tale (.381.) The .381. untruth Slanderous, as shall appear. out of his mouth, saying in great heat: O archbishop Otto, th'emperors and Kings, had never any right at all, or rule in the election of the Roman Bishops. Tharchbisshop gave place to Master archdeacon (.382.) The: 382. untruth. For much more was said, b●fore he gave place. by and by: For Hildebrand knew well enough, saith (.383.) The .383. untruth. sabel. falsified, as shall appear. Sabellicus Sabellicus, that Otto would relent easily, and agree with him. In such sort also have other godly Princes been (.384.) The .384. untruth. mere slanderous. beguiled, trusting over much popish Prelates with their embassages. Wihin a while after when th'emperor heard of these doings, he sent straight to Pope Alexander, to gather together the Prelates, promising that he himself would come to the council to (.385.) The .385. untruth. Sabellicus falsified, as shall appear. set an order in the Church matters, that all things might be done in his own presence, who used Alexander very gently and friendly wherewith the Pope afterwards was so moved, and saw how he himself had been abused by Hildebrands instigations against so gentle a Prince, that he was greatly sorry, that he had attempted to be pope without his assent. Whereupon saith Benno, when Alexander understood, that he was elected and installed by fraud and craft of Hildebrand, and other themperors' enemies, in his sermon to the people, he plainly declared, that he would not sit in the Apostolic sea, without the licence and favour of th'emperor: and further said openly in the pulpit, that he would send forthwith, his letters unto the Emperor for this purpose, so greatly he repented him of his usurpation without the emperors authority. Hildebrande, who had long awaited and (.386.) The .386. untruth. mere slanderous. practised to be Pope, impatient of any longer tarriance, immediately after the death of Alexander, got to be made Pope, and was called Gregory the seventh, of whose election Abbas Vrspurgens. saith▪ next to Alexander succeeded Hildebrande, under whom the Roman common weal and the whole Church, was endangered and brought in a great peril with new errors and schisms, such as have not been heard of: who climbed up to this high dignity without the consent of the Prince, and therefore there be that affirm him to have usurped the Papacy, by tyranny, and not Canonically instituted, for which cause also many did refuse him to be Pope. In this election, Hildebrande (.387.) The .387. untruth. The clergy of Rome, not he, made all the haste. made post haste, for fear ●e had come short of his purpose. In so much that Nauclerus saith, before the exequys of Alexander were finished, the Clergy and people that came to the burial, cried out, that S. Peter had chosen Master archdeacon Hildebrande to be Pope, whereupon the Cardinals went a side and elected Hildebrande. But Benno, who was a Cardinal at Rome the same time, † A lewd lying tale contrary to all other writers Sabel. Platina, Nauclere, Marianus, Anselmus and other. saith, that the self same evening and hour, when Alexander died, Hildebrande was installed by his soldiers, without the assent of either Priest or people: fearing lest delay would breed peril: to whose election not one of the Cardinals did subscribe: in so much that Hildebrande said to an Abbot, that came short to the election, brother Abbot ye have tarried over long: to whom the Abbot answered, and thou Hildebrand hast made over much haste, in that thou hast usurped the Apostolic sea against the Canons, thy Master the Pope being not yet buried. By which post hast, importune clamours, and violent election, it is easy to see, how Platina and those that follow him, do no less (388) The .388. untruth. slanderous in preferring the condened fable of one man before all approved histories. lie than flatter in praising this Pope, and setting forth so comely a form of his election. Navel. protesteth and promiseth in the telling of this Pope's life to keep an indifferency and fidelity, in the report of the Chronicles: and first reporteth the state of the Church under this Pope word for word as I have rehearsed out of Abbas V●spurg. (.389.) The .389. untruth. in concealing: For strait N●uclere addeth. Other and in manner all writers report the plain contrary. Naucl●r. and to declare his further uprightness in the matter, he telleth what he found written in a fine style amongst the Saxon histories: that the Bishops of France moved the Prince not to suffer this election, which was made without his consent, for if he did, it might work to him much and grievous danger: the Prince perceiving this suggestion to be true, sent immediately his Ambassadors to Rome, to demand the cause wherefore they presumed without the kings licence, against the custom of their ancestors, to ordain a Pope: and further to command the new elected Pope, to forsake that dignity unlawfully come by, unless they would make a reasonable satisfaction. These Ambassadors were honourably received, and when they had declared their message, the Pope himself, maketh them this answer: He taketh God to witness, that he never coveted this high dignity, but that he was chosen, and thrust violently thereunto by the Romans, who would not suffer him in any wise to refuse it: notwithstanding they could by no means persuade him, to take the Papacy upon him, and to be consecrated Pope, till he were surely certified, that both the King and also the Princes of Germany, had given their assent. When the King was certified of this answer, he was content and willingly gave commandment, that he should be ordered Pope. He also reciteth out of Blondus, and other writers, That the King gave his consent unto the Pope's election, sending the Bishop of Verselles, the Chancellor of Italy, to confirm the election by his authority, as the manner had been, the which thing also, Platina (saith he) seemeth to affirm. afterwards the Emperor called a (.390.) The .390. untruth. It was no Council, but a schismatical conventicle. Aventinus. Council, which he held (as Sabellicus saith) at Worms, whereat were all the Bishops of France and Germany, except the Saxons. The Churchmen of Rome sent their epistles, with grievous complaints against Hildebrand unto this Council: In quibus Hildebrandum ambitus & periurij accersunt, eundemque plaeraque avarè, superbeque facere, conqueruntur: hocque reiecto, alium pastorem postulant: Wherein they accuse Hildebrande, of ambition and perjury, complainning that he doth many things proudly and covetously, and therefore desire, that he may be deposed, and an other pastor appointed them. The (.391.) The .391. untruth. Ridiculous. Fathers in this Council make a Decree for to depose Hildebrande, reciting therein many his grievous and horrible crimes, that moved them thereto: And not only the Bishops of Germany and France, but also the bishops of Italy, assembled together at Ticinum, a city in Lombardy now called Pavia, did subscribe this Decree. This Synod being thus finished, the Emperor (saith Aventinus) written two letters, the one to Hildebrand, the other to the people and priests of Rome, wherein he commandeth Hildebrande, according to the Decree of the Council, to return to his private life and estate▪ and the Romans to forsake Hildebrande, and to choose to themselves a Pastor, according to the manner of their ancestors. Who so listeth to read these Epistles, and the seditious (.392.) The 392. untruth. Railing. traitorous, and tragical feats and practices of the Pope against the Emperor, both before, and especially after this Decree, he may see them in Orth winus Gratius, in Nauclerus, Aventinus, Sabellicus, and Platina. The .16. Chapter. Of Henry the .4. and of Gregory .7. other-wised called Hildebrande, Pope. Stapleton. A man might make a short and a true answer withal, to all this long tale, and say that it is altogether extravagant, and impertinente or rather directly concluding for the Pope's Primacy. For thowghe Henry the fourth, would not acknowledge Hildebrande, as pope, yet he acknowledged an other, whom himself had set up, yea and the said Hildebrande to at the length to be the supreme head of Christ's Church: as we shall anon declare. So that now we might pass over, all these heinous accusations against this pope called Gregory the .7. as out of your matter, saving that I think good to give notice to the reader, that yet nevertheless ye shall never be able to justify them, as surmised and feigned by your author Benno and other his enemies, Marianus Scotus saying of Hildebrande. whom he had justly excommunicated and deposed for their naughtiness, upholden and maintained by Henry th'emperor being himself also justly excommunicated. Marianus Scotus living about the same time, saith, that this Gregory, was accused of Henry's fautors of many false crimes, and maketh the councils kept against him no better, than a conspiracy against God and his vicar, Lib. 3. aeta te. 6. Conspirantes convenerant in unum adversus Dominum & adversus vicarium eius papam Gregorium. William of Malmes buries saying of the same. Hildebrand had the gift of prophecy Lib. 3. de hist. Anglicana. Hildebrand taken for the true pope by the godly and Learned bishop Anselmus Vide epist. Anselmi apud Abbatem. pope Gregory. Hour country man william of Malmesburie sayeth, that he had the sprite of prophecy, and telleth as a certain and sure verity, by relation of him that heard it out of the mouth of the famous Abbot of Cluniacum, called Hugo, that this Hildebrand being but yet archdeacon and the Pope's Legate in France, having a bishop before him whom he did wonderfully suspect for simony committed, but yet not convinced by sufficient proof, commanded him to pronounce for his purgation: Gloria patri; & filio, & spiritui sancto. The bishop pronounced rowndlie, Gloria patri & filio. But for his life he could not then, nor all his life after, pronounce spiritui sancto. This Hugo reported further, that Hildebrand foretold him of a great plague and pestilence ere it came: and told him also of certain of his privy thoughts. It pleaseth you to make Platina but a liar and a flatterer, for that he taketh this Gregory to be the true pope, and to have been most wrongfully thrust out by the Emperor. Ye seam rather to incline to Abbess Vrspergensis and Nauclerus, who both yet make against you. For you shall find in Abbess that Anselmus bishop of Luca a man as he writeth, of an excellent eloquence, wit, and Learning, and by whom God wrought miracles, aswell in his life time, as afterward, did ever acknowledge him for the true pope, and the other suborned by the Emperor, to be but an usurper. And so he wrote to the false pope in plain words. What say you them to your own author Nauclerus, that, as ye say, protesteth and promiseth in telling this pope's life to keep an indifferency and a fidelity in the report of the chronicles? Opera Sigeberti Archiepiscopi Mogunt. Wormaciae conventus indicitur. In conventum eum & Hugo Cardinalis venit, tragedian quandam apud principes de scelesta papae vita commentus falsò protulit. Naucler. gener. 36. The crimes laid to Hildebrand were falsely laid to him, by the confession of M. Horns own author whom he maketh to be indifferent. Gener. 37. Abbas urspergen. Guiliel. Malmesb. li. 3. de hist. Anglicae. Blondus. Naucler. Gener. 36. Pope Hilbrand purgeth himself by receiving the blessed Sacrament. Doth not he condemn as feigned and false forged lies, such things as ye here allege? doth he not, though he saith Sigebertus and some other writ to the contrary, say that the doings of this Gregory were honest, and proceeded from a zealous faith? The like say I of your Counsels held in Italy. Whose folly and falsehood evidently bursted out aswell otherwise, as in calling this Gregory the disciple of Berengariꝰ: and one that brought in doubt the Catholic and apostolical faith, of the body and blood of Christ. This was a most notorious lie: for Hildebrandus being as yet but archdeacon, and notwithstanding the Pope's Legate, as I have said, in France brought this Berengariꝰ to a recantation: first at Towers in France, and afterward at Rome also, himself being then pope. Yea hinsef, th'emperor being present, after he had said Mass, taking the body of Christ into his hand, said to th'emperor. Sir I have benaccused of you and your adherents of diverse crimes, whereof if I be guilty, I pray God, after I have received his body (which I intend presently to receive for my purgation) to streke me with sudden death. Vpopn this this pope received part of the holy host, and would that themperor should have done the like for his purgation, but he refused so to do. And now take head to yourself and to your fellows M. Horn, lest by your own Council of Pavia, one of the most grievous and most horrible crimes, falsely laid to Pope Gregory, be not most truly laid to you, and your adherents being the very true disciple of the heretic Berengarius and men that bring in doubt, yea that accurse and condemn the Catholic and Apostolical faith. Whose condemnation made by Pope Gregory, with his decree that he made against your concubines, doth I trow much more grieve you, than doth this matter of th'emperor, A conjecture why M. Horn is so much offended with Hildebrand. or any wrong ye pretend, by this Pope, to have been done to him. Now is your cloaked dissimulation also in the handling of this story to be considered, that dare not open the very cause of all this dissension between the pope and th'emperor, and the event thereof. Which dissension rose, for that th'emperor would not remove such simoniacal bishops, The cause of the dissension between themperor and pope Hildebrand. Naucler, gener. 36. as he kept about him, being excommunicated by Alexander the .2. Gregory's predecessor. And that himself would not forbear to sell bisshopriks and other spiritual livings. Whereof Gregory, as soon as ever he was elected, admonished him, saying: that being confirmed by th'emperor he would in no wise suffer and bear with his doings: and therefore willed him, either to procure that some other man should be made Pope, or to amend those things, that were amiss. This notwithstanding, the Emperor did confirm him: but being afterward seduced, by such as Gregory had excommunicated and deposed, and irritated by the Pope's letters, being therein commanded to purge himself of such crimes as he was charged withal, conspired against him, with his adherente bishops assembled (as ye writ) at Worms: and declared him to be no Pope. The Pope again accurseth all that wicked conventicle with the Emperor, and deposeth him from his imperial dignity: discharging all his subjects of all such loyalty as they owed by oath unto him. afterward also this Pope excommunicated the Emperor and all his adherentes. The same year (saith Nauclerus) the Princes and the greater part of the people, began to alienat their minds from him: By reason whereof a great diet was kept of the Allemayn Princes at Openham. Naucler. gener. 36. pag. 135. At the which th'emperor was forced by the princes of Germany (which said if he went not, and reconciled himself to the pope, they would execute the Pope's sentence against him) to take his journey to the Pope, and coming to Canossom where the Pope was, he put of all his royal attierment, and bore footed three days together, in a cold and hard sharp winter most humbly craved pardon of the Pope: and at the length was by the pope, from the sentence of excommunication upon certain conditions absolved. Which conditions being by him broken, began as hot a stir as ever was before: So far forth that this Gregory was forced to fly from Rome, A just judgement of God against Henrye the .4. Henry the 4. appealeth to the pope. Rom. pontificem, sanctam & ●niuersalē sedem Romanam appellamus. In literis ad Henricum filium. for fear of his power, to Salernum, where shortly after he died. Now good reader will ye see the just judgement of God: and therein withal a full answer to Master Horns impertinent process? After Gregory's death, this Emperor was taken prisoner of his own son, and forced to resign and give over all his royal and imperial dignity, which rebelled against him, as he rebelled against his spiritual father pope Gregory. And as fast as he wrote letters before to depose Hildebrande (as ye writ) wherein never the less he refused not absolutely the pope, but Hildebrand (whom he took not for pope) which thing I desire the Reader diligently to note, so being in this distress in his letters aswell to his son Henry (which was Henry the 5.) as in his letters to the bishops and nobility of Germany (which letters ye deeply dissemble) he appealeth to the pope, and to the holy and universal see of Rome. Go on now M. Horn, and tell us hardly, Rogamus vos per authoritatem Ro. ecclesiae, cui nos committimus & honorem regni ne etc. Apud quem si interpellatio vestra, nullaque alia interuentio ad presens prodesse peterit, appellamus R. p. & sanctam universalem R. sedem & ecclesiam. In literis ad episcopos et principes. and lie one as fast as ye will upon this Hildebrandus: that he poisoned: first Leo the .9. then Victor the .2. and after him Stenen the .9. But surely either ye are a great liar, or Hildebrande was not his crafts master, for all that ye make him so cunning in the art of poisoning. For where after Stephen, there were two other Popes: benedict the tenth, and Nicolaus the .2. and after them Alexander the .2. ye omitting those two, do tell us forthwith of Alexander the 2. and how that this Gregory, who had long awaited and practised to be Pope, immediately after the death of Alexander gate himself to be made pope. And I am assured ye can tell us no better reason why he should poison, the other first three Popes, than the other latter three. Neither can ye tell us any probable reason why he should poison any one, or seek by this ungodly way to come to that see, which as yet being but archdeacon seemeth even by your tale, to have been of such credit among the Romans, as was lightly no other. As one that in so weighty a cause by the will and consent of the Cardinals answered to Otho themperors Ambassador, wisely and soberly, and not as ye fable, taking the tale out of his mouth in great heat. As it pleaseth you also to fable, that the archbishop Otho, gave place to M. archdeacon by and by. And thereupon full like yourself ye rush in against popish prelate's, as ye call them, who have beguiled godly Princes, that trusted them overmuch. Whereas Otho was fain to yield to Hildebrande of fine force of reason, Platina in Alexan. 2. Naucler. gener. 36. and to such examples of the ancient Church as he brought forth. For after the words by you alleged, that Emperors or Kings never had right in the election of Popes, he said farther. And if any thing was attempted by violence, or otherwise then well, it was afterward by the Censures of the fathers redressed. And so beginning (saith Nauclere) from the first Emperors, he continued so long, until Anno (whom you call Otto th'archbishop) answered, that he was satisfised. This was no hot talk as you babble, but a learned communication, sober and discreet. I pray you now further, to what end or purpose serveth this narration concerning Alexander the .2. seeing that your Antipope Cadolus was deposed, and th'emperor fain to crave pardon for him: Naucler. dict. Gene. and seeing the bishops of Lombardy were reconciled to this Alexander at a council held at Mantua, the Emperor also ratifying Alexander's election? Go on M. Horn and tell us that Platina and others do lie (and that Benno one contrary to all others, and an Author in this matter expressly condemned only saith truth,) and flatter in praising this pope, and in setting forth a comely form of his election: which, what it was ye dare not show, lest it should to much disgrace your uncomely elections, and most of all your false assertions against the Pope's Primacy. Gregory, The same writeth Sabellicus Aenead. 9 lib. 3. and Nauclere gener. 36. pag. 133. saith Platina, was chosen with the consent of all good men. The words of the election are noted to be of this sort and tenor. We the Cardinals, the clergy, the acolites, the subdeacons, the priests of the Church of Rome, in the presence of the bishops and abbots, and of many other, aswell of the clergy as of the laity this day being the xxij. day of April in S. Peter Church, called ad Vincula, The form of Hildebrands' election. the year of our Lord God .1072. do elect, to be true vicar of Christ Archdeacon Hildebrand: a man of great learning, virtue, wisdom, justice, constancy, religion, a modest, a sober, and a chaste man: one that governeth his house hold well, full of hospitality toward the poor, being brought up and taught, even from his youth to his age in the lap of his holy mother the Church: whom we will to be ruler of Christ's Church, even with that authority, with the which Peter did once rule it by God's commandment. If this be a comely form, of election, as in deed it is, and as yourself term it, them hath this comely form, answered all your false and deform arguments made against this Pope or his primacy. Yet to touch a few of your many fold untruths, which do so swarm in this your narration, I am forced to prolong a little more my answer. You report as of Sabellicus, that Hildebrande knew well enough, that Otto would relent easily. But you should know well enough that sabel. hath no such words. Only he saith. Aenead. 9 lib. 3. Facilè tenuit ut Otho sibi assen tiretur. He obtained easily, that Otho should agree unto him. And that was by his learned persuasion, not by any covert collusion, as you do lewdly imagine. Again you say, th'emperor promised he would come to the Council, to set an order in Church matters, printing those words in a latin letter as the words of Sabel. Now there are no such words in your Author Sabellicus of th'emperor. But only that he desired the pope to call a Council, for setting of order in Church matters, and that he would come. Vt se present omnia fierent. sabel. ut supra. that all things might be done in his presence. The pith of your argument lay in those words: and therefore those words you falsely fathered upon Sabellicus. You allege a long tale out of Benno against Hildebrande, as that after that Council ended, Alexander had perceived he was ●nstalled by fraud and craft of Hildebrand, but how true that tale is, it appeareth by that Alexander after this Synod ended, Sabel. Aenead. 9 lib. 3. Naucl. generat. 36. sent Hildebrande in to Apulia with an Army, to recover to the Church of Rome such places as the Normans had taken away, the which Hildebrand brought to pass. For had Alexander perceived such fraud and craft in Hildebrande as you and Benno do surmise, he would not I trow so soon after have put him in such trust and credit, in so weighty and important a matter. And this being reported by sabel. Nauclerus, and other common writers, it is easy to judge what a liar your Benno is, In Indice lib. inhib. and how worthily this very book of his de vita Hildebrandi is by general Council forbidden and condemned. That which you allege out of Abbas Vrspergensis against Hildebrand, Naucler. gener. 36. is word for word recited in Nauclerus (whom you allege as one that protesteth and promiseth to keep an indifferency and fidelity in telling of this Pope's life) but he addeth immediately: Alij & ferè omnes prorsus contrarium referunt. Other writers and in manner all do report the clean contrary: that is, all for the commendation of Hildebrand. But this you without all indifferency or fidelity thought good to leave out, and against in manner all writers to cleave to one Abbot. Marianus in since suae chronogr. sabel. & Naucler. ubi supra. Of whom when you tell that many refused this Hildebrand to be Pope, Marianus Scotus which lived in that very age, Nauclerus, Sabellicus and Platina will tell you, that those Many, were none but Simmoniaci & fornicarij. The Simoniacal and the fornicators. Such as by bribery creeped in to Ecclesiastical promotions, and such as being Priests kept whores and concubines, which you now call wives. M. Horn, to save your Madges poor honesty. Naucler. gener. 36. pag. 133. Where you tell us out of Nauclerus, that the bishops of France moved the Prince not to suffer the election of Hildebrande etc. You should have done well to have told us out of Nauclerus the cause why these bishops so did. Verily Nauclerus even in the midst of the sentence which you allege, saith of those bishops: Grandi scrupulo permoti ne vir vehementis & acris ingenij atque fidei districtius eos pro negligentijs suis quandoque discuteret. They sent to the Emperor, being sore afraid, left this Hildebrand being a man of a vehement and sharp disposition and faith, would at length more roughly and sharply examine them for their negligences: Lo, Master Horn the love of licentiousness, and the fear of discipline for their deserts, moved those French Bishops to sew thus to the Emperor against that Pope. But you will never tell all, because (as I have said and must often say) all maketh against you. You conclude with a peal of most slanderous and railing lies, sending us to certain epistles wherein we shall find, you say, the seditious, traitorous, and tragical feats and practices of this Pope against the Emperor etc. For in Nauclerus, Sabellicus, Marianus Scotus, Volaterrane and Platina, I am right sure there appeareth no such cankered matter as you rave of, except such as they report upon false rumours. But if you will see on the contrary part, what a godly and learned man he was, how sharp an enemy to vice, namely to simony and Bauderye (for the which he procured himself so much enmity) You may read Master Horn, not only Nauclerus, sabel, and Platina with Volaterane, Blondus, Antoninus and other late writers, but also Marianus Scotus, William of Malmesbury our countryman, Anselmus that notable Bishop of Luca, who lived all in the time of that tragedy, and you shall find him in all points a most excellent Bishop and a most godly man. The French Bishops for Simony, the German Bishops for both Simony and whoredom, the Emperor Henrye the fourth for his filthy lucre in simoniacal practices, caused all the troubles of that age the most vertuose Pope, always proceeding against those vices with the force of the spiritual sword. For the which at the hour of his death he said. Nauclerus generat. 37. pag. 144. Dilexi justitiam: & odi iniquitatem: propterea morior in exilio. I have loved righteousness: and I have hated iniquity. Therefore I die in banishment. M. Horn. The . 1●4▪ Division. pag. 74. a. Henry the .5. came into Italy to end the controversy and discord, that was betwixt him and the Pope, for this (.393.) The .393. untruth Not for this Supreme ●urisdiction in all Eccles. causes which M Horn would prove, but only for investuring of Bishops. jurisdiction, and to make such composition as might bring quietness both to the Church and the Empire: But Paschalis the Pope did not much like of his coming, as the Italian writers witness. The Emperor sendeth to the Pope, the Pope again to him: certain covenants were agreed upon, and confirmed by oath, and assured by pledges on both the parties. But the Pope could not, or would not, keep promise with the Emperor, for that his Bishops did withstand, and in no wise would stand to the agreement: wereuppon followed great tumult and a bloody fray. The Emperor (.394.) The 394. untruth. The Emperor broke his covenants first, not the Pope, as shall appear. saying they for their parts, would not stand to the covenants, which were confirmed so strongly by oath, and hostages, as might be, would not in like wise be bound to his. Shortly after Easter following, there was a friendly peace concluded betwixt the Emperor and the Pope, who crowned Henry .5. Emperor, delivering unto him with his holy hand such privileges as his ancestors were want to enjoy, and confirmed the same to him, never to be taken from him under the pain of the great Curse. After this the Emperor took an Oath of all the inhabitants in every City thorough Italy, for their faithful obedience to him, and the faithful keeping of of this his prerogative, and privilege in (.395.) The .395 untruth. The oath of the Italians mentioned in Nauclerus hath no one word of any ecclesiastical thing or cause. Ecclesiastical things or causes. The .17. Chapter Of Henry the .5. Lotharius and Conradus, Emperors. Stapleton. GO on as I said M. Horn lustily, and tell your tale truly and fully: and then as we have had you hitherto, so shall we have you still a very gentle and a tractable adversay. What? Were there such controversies, discords and frays betwixt the Pope and Henry the fift? Then belike it is no very probable tale, A fowl● lie of the Apology of England. that your Apology writeth, that by the Pope's procuring this Henry took his Father prisoner, as it is in deed a foul and gross lie. Yet at the length I perceive there was a friendly peace concluded (as ye say) and the Pope with his holy hand delivered to him such privileges as his ancestors were wont to enjoy. I am glad M. Horn that the pope hath any thing holy in him. It is strange me thinketh to hear at your hands of the Pope's holy hand: namely seeing your author Nauclerus, speaketh of his hand only, without any other addition. Dato sibi per manum Apostolici privilegio inuestitu●ae ecclesiasticae. Nauclerus gener. 38. In Lateranensi conventu. sabel. Aenead. 9 l●b. 4. Belike there is come upon you some sudden devotion towards the Pope's holiness. But lo, I see now the cause of your devotion. The Pope's hand is holy with you now, when he being forced and constrained, delivereth up such privileges, as with his heart he did not deliver: and therefore did afterward in a Council of Bishops revoke all these doings. Which your author in the next leaf (as also Sabellicus at large) doth declare: and what stir and business the Emperor made for it, swearing first to the Pope, that he would use no violence, and that he would cause all the Bishops of Germany, which had been made by simony, to be deposed. Who yet afterward broke both parts of his O●he. Took the Pope out of Rome with him as prisoner, because he would not confirm his symoniacal Bishops: And after long vexation of the Pope, and spoils of the Roman territory, extorted at the length by fine force his consent thereto: which yet (after the Emperor being departed) he revoked (as I said) in a full Council. And this perjury and violence of this Emperor, the Italian Emperors do witness also. Briefly all came to this conclusion, that Paschalis being dead, the Emperor shortly after, renounced to the Pope Calistus the .2. all this investuring of Bishops, and left to the clergy the free election without the prince's confirmation: which was all that Paschalis granted to this Emperor. For the grant of Paschalis (as it is recorded in Nauclere) referreth itself, to the former grants of his predecessors made to Catholic Emperors. And farther he specifieth his grant thus. That he have privilege to give the staff and the ring to all Bishops and abbots of his dominions, Gener. 38. Pag. 183. &. 191. being first freely chosen without violence or simony: and to be afterward consecrated or ordered of the bishop to whom they belong. But all this was (as I have said) both revoked of Pope Paschalis, and given over of Henry the fift. M. Horns dissembling of his author's narration. But I pray you tell me, was your holy hand so unlusty and heavy, that ye could or rather would not, set in this also, being a parcel of your author's narration, and the final conclusion of this great controversy? Which as it was then troublesome to the church many years: so it is troublesome also to your Reader, as occupying a great part of your book, but no part of your principal matter, and yet as little material as it is, in fine all against you. And therefore ye shake the full declaration of the matter from your holy hands, as a man would shake away a snake for fear of stinging. M. Horn. The .115. Division. pag. 74. b. The next Emperor to Henry, was Lotharius, who so laboured with the Pope to retain the investuring of Ecclesiastical persons, and besides that, he so travailed in other Ecclesiastical causes, so (.396.) The .396. Untruth. Not so well by a great deal. Otto. Frisingen. well as Temporal, that saith Vrspurg. Huius laus est à vindicata religione & legibus: The praise of this Prince is, in that he reformed Religion and the Laws. Next to whom, was Conradus the Emperor, to whom the Romans written supplications, to come and challenge his right in these matters, to reduce the form of the Empire, to the old state which it was in, in Constantine and justinian's days, and to deliver them from the (.397.) The .397. untruth. Lewd and gross as shall appear. Naucler. tyranny of the Pope. To whom also the Pope written humble supplications, to take his cause into his protection against the Magistrates of Rome, which took upon them to reduce the Pope, to the old order and state of thee (.398.) The .398. Untruth. Not of the ancient Bishops, but of the old heathen Priests. ancient bishops of Rome. Stapleton. Let the Emperor Lotharius labour to retain the investuring of Bishops (which as ye heard, Henry the .5. resigned before to Calistus) let him if ye will needs use that word, reform the civil laws and religion to: the meaning whereof is no more, but that he restored the civil Law (the use thereof being discontinued many years) and restored Pope Innocentius the .2 to his See being thrust out by an Antipope (whereof he was called Fidelis Ecclesiae advocatus, a faithful defender of the Church). Yet why do you utter such gross lies, M. Horn telling your Reader, that the Romans besought th'Emperor to deliver them from the tyranny of the Pope? Neither Otho Fringensis, nor Nauclerus, who rehearseth his words have any such thing. The Romans at that time would be lusty a God's name, and reduce their state to the old magnificence of the victorious Romans, being proud of a little victory which they had against the Tiburtines. And therefore the Pope complained to the Emperor of their tyranny, not they of the Pope's tyranny. Yea they thrusted out the Emperors Praefectus, and placed in his room their own Patricius. And so would shake of as well the Emperor, as the Pope. Forth then with the story. Let Pope Lucius .2. make humble supplication, to the Emperor Conradus, against the Magistrates of Rome, concerning the civil regiment of Rome, Naucl. gener. 39 and their subjection to the Pope in temporalities (for that was the matter and no other, and yet were they feign shortly after to submit themselves to Eugenius .3. the next Pope) Let all this be as you tell it not perspicuously, but covertly, as though the Romans than would have been Schismatics, as you are now, and denied his Authority in Spiritual causes, as you do now, let all this, as I say, be granted unto you: But then I pray you set your conclusion to it, that therefore the Prince is Supreme Governor in all causes Ecclesiastical, and then shall every child soon conclude with you, that your Conclusion, concludeth nothing to the purpose. For all the strife and contention here, was partly about Temporal and Civil regiment, partly not against the Pope's Authority, absolutely, but against such or such a Pope: which thing I would have you well to note Master Horn, not here only, but in all these and other quarrelings of Emperors against Popes. That they never repined against the Pope's Authority, as the Pope, but they repined against this man or that man, whom they would not agnize for the Pope, but some other by themselves elected. M. Horn. The .116. Division. pag. 74. b. Next to whom, followed the Godly and zealous Emperor Fredrick the first, who (.399.) The .399. Untruth. Horrible and notorious▪ as shall appear. seeing the horrible vices of the Romissh Church, commanded that no Legate of the Church of Rome, should be suffered to enter into Germany, without he were called or hired of the Emperor: nor would suffer that any man under the name of appellation, should go unto the Court of Rome. After the death of Adrian the fowrth, Nauclerus. Vrspurg. Sabellicus. the Cardinals fell out amongst themselves for the Election of a new Pope: some striving to have Rowlande, other some contending to have Octavian a man, (saith Abbat.. Vrspur.) in all points honest and religious. hereupon sprang an horrible schism and great discord. Roland sent his Legates to the Emperor Fredericus .1. and desired him that he would (.400.) The 400. Untruth. False translation. ut seditionem tolleret. That he would take away the sedition, not take up the matter to his own arbitrement. Vspurg. take up and end this contention by his authority. The Emperor commandeth them both to come unto him at Ticinum, where forthwith he summoned a Council to be holden about this matter, (.401.) The .401. Untruth. He minded no such matter as shall appear. minding to examine both their causes, and by searching to try whose cause was the most honest. Roland (.402.) The .402. Untruth. He was gone to this William before he written to Fredrick, by Nauclerus. being afraid to have the matter come to this trial, getteth to William of Sicilia, the emperors mortal enemy, and within twelve days putteth on his Cope, and nameth himself Alexander: for he purposed (belike) to make a conquest of the matter. He alleged his election to be good out of all doubt, and that he sent for the emperors aid, and not for his arbitrement: and therefore thought not good to bring his case into doubtful question. The 403. Untruth. That appeareth not in Platina or Nauclerus. The Emperor being offended with him, for that he would not obey his appointment, sent two Bishops to cite him, to come unto the Council by the name of Cardinal, and not Pope: But Roland refused, confuting their citation with this Maxim or Principle, Romanum Pontificem à nemine judicari debere: The Pope ought not to be judged of any man. But when these Legates from the Emperor came to Octavian, he strait ways obeyed, and they brought him to Papia (.404.). The .404 untruth. In omitting the next sentence wherein the Pope's Primacy over the Emperor is manifestly declared. Vspurg. saith, that Roland was oftentimes monished to come, and did contemn all those monitions. The Emperor faite in the Council, (as Radevicus Frifingensis, who written his acts, witnesseth ●ad made an oration unto the Bishops, wherein he declareth, and that by the example of his ancestors Constantinus, Theodosius, justinianus, and of later time of Carolus Magnus, and other, that the power and authority to call Councils, where the Church is troubled with any schisms, or other perilous distourbance, belongeth to the Emperor: Notwithstanding he committed the desining of the controversy to their wisdom and (.405) The .405. untruth. For he had none to give in that behalf. gave them thereunto authority. The Council debateth the cause, and consulteth with men learned in the Law, and so concludeth, that octavians election was good, and adjudgeth him to be the right Bishop of Rome. When they had thus tried out the matter, Fredericus the Emperor saith Platina) Confirmat Octavianum Pontificem. Confirmed Octavian Pope. (.406.) The .406. untruth. In leving out that which followeth P●● vrbem equo insidentem deducitet de more adorat which showeth plainly the Emperour● inferiournes, not primacy. The Emperor within a while after, sent Octavianus, new confirmed Pope, towards Rome, who died in the journey. After whose death, the Emperor called an other council at Wirtzberge (as Aventinus writeth) wherein were a great number of archbishops, and other Bishops, and also many of the nobles and states of the Empire. In this Council a statute or Decree was made by common consent. That from hence forth none should be Pope, unless he were created by the consent of the Emperor, according as the custom had been of long and ancient time. This worthy Emperor, whom the Chronicles call Christianissimum, moste Christian, for his zeal towards God's Church, endeavoured not without great peril to himself and his estate, to retain the jurisdiction due to the Princes, and thereby to reform the horrible disorders that were grown so high, that they overwhelmed the Church, as in like sort divers other emperors end Kings, both before and after, had attempted, but in vain: for the wealth pride, the fierce power, and (.407.) The .407 untruth. Railing ribaldry traitorous treachery of the Pope and his Prelates was so mighty, violent, and subtle, that there was no earthly power able to withstand or match with them. And therefore Erasmus counteth the Popes of this time, and those that followed, to be the Vicars and successors of julius Caesar, of Alexander the Great, of Croesus the rich, and of Xerxes the mighty: rather than of Christ, the only * If the only, them how is the Prince governor? Or if the Prince notwithstandingis, whi may not also the Pope be? Emperor and governor of the Church. bernard calleth Eugenius .3. in his great pomp, and pride, rather the successor of Constantinus the high Emperor, then of Peter the humble Apostle, and Abbas Vrspurg, who lived at this time, when the Popes had spoiled the emperor, and other Princes welnighe of (.408.) The .408. and .409. untruth both ●launderours, never able to be proved. all jurisdiction, ruling all by their own decretals, now about this time set forth (.409.) as they listed, maketh a lamentable complaint of the horrible pride and covetousness of the (.410.) The .410. untruth. For he speaketh only of the clergi of Rome. whole clergy, and concludeth with these words: Gaude matter nostra Roma, etc. Rejoice O our mother Rome, because the seluses of the hidden treasures in the earth are opened, that rivers and heaps of money may flow unto thee in great abundance. Be glad of the iniquity of the sons of men, because money is given to thee for the recompense of so great evils. Be merry and jocund for discords sake, which is thy helper because she is rushte out of the infernal pit, that plentiful rewards of money might be heaped upon thee: thou hast that which thou hast always thirsted after: sing pleasant ballads, for through men's maliciousness, not by thy Godliness, thou hast overcome the world. The .18. Chapter: Of Fredrick Barbarossa, and of Alexander. the .3. Stapleton. Master Horn good Reader, as he hath hitherto, so doth he still play Cacus part. T. Livius. Lib. 1. Dec. 1. This Cacus stole Hercules' Oxen, and because he would not have them espied where they were by the tract, he drew them into his cave by the tails backward. Which thing Hercules seeing, did nothing mistrust they should be there, M. Horn playeth Cacus his part, that stole Hercules Oxen. but yet as he passed by with the drove of his beasts, the beasts that were in the den lacking their company, began as the manner is to bellowe, whereby all this theft was descried. This book of M. Horns is the very den of Cacus, into the which by a pretty sleight, he conveyeth in his stories and other proofs, as a man may say, by the tail backward, that is not keeping the right and customable way and order in making true and faithful allegations, but craftily and perversely cutting and chopping away some part of them: which partly lying in this his Cacus den, and as it were bellowing for his company, bewrayeth all M. Horns sly dealings. So have ye hitherto found it, and so shall ye still, good Reader, find it, and lo we have at hand a ready proof Fredrick saith M. Horn, seeing the horrible vices of the Romis●h Church, commaund●d that no Legate of the Church of Rome, should come into Germany, etc. First, Master Horn, what horrible vices of the Romissh Church, were those you speak of? It is verily, naught else, t●en a horrible lie of your schismatical mouth. The beginning of the sentence, of the which you have taken the tail only, is this. Adrian the .4. our Countryman, and Fredrick the first, were fallen at great variance. Naucler. gener, 39 pag. 215. The Pope complained (saith Nauclerus your own Author) that living between the sword of the Romans and William of Sicily, he was forsaken of the Emperor, contrary to his great promises, and so vexed for the emperors sake, that he could not rest at Rome. The Emperor on the other side, pretended many things, and namely the crowning of William the King of Sicilia, jamque ad id usque processum est, ut Imperator nullum Rom. Ecclesiae legatum, etc. And now the matter broke out so far, that the Emperor commanded that no Legate and so forth, as in Master horns Allegation. You see now, good Readers, it was no horrible vices of the Romissh Church as this horrible lying spirit of M. Horn prateth, but a private quarrel between this Emperor and that Pope, that occasioned the Emperor to forbid appellations to Rome, etc. You see how this Cacus hath drawn Nauclerus his words by the tail into the lurking den of his lying Conclusion. And that their fellows now drawing near to the others company, the former joined with the later, have evidently betrayed the notable theft of this lying and theevinge Cacus. But Master Horn, supposing the Emperor upon such respect had so done, tell us, is the doings of this one Emperor, so prejudicial to our cause, and so authorized above all exception or plea, that because he did so, we must straightways confess he did well and lawfully? Me think it were reason ye should prove this withal. Well let this go, we will not charge you at this time so straightly. Yet this question I must needs ask you: Whether this was so done because he thought the Pope or See of Rome had no authority, or for some private grudge and quarrel not against the See and Pope, but against this Pope. If ye will say (as ye must needs say this quarrel was but a private and a personal quarrel, then is the ordinary authority as yet nothing acrased hereby, but your Argument is then much acrased. If ye will say, he denied, as ye now do, all manner of authority of the See of Rome, then must I answer you: It is not so. For he was crowned of this Pope called Adrianus Quartus, an English man: and submitted himself after to Alexander the third, as we shall anon see. And further I must answer you, that you are the very Cacus we spoke of, and that these stolen allegations from Nauclerus do bellow wanting their company, and do descry all your thievish conveyance as we have before declared. Now next hath M. Horn found a Roland for an Oliver: a dissension betwixt Roulande and Octavian for the Papacy. For the appeasing whereof, this Fredrick called a Council, and at length the matter being heard, confirmed Octavian, who was called Victor the .3. as the other was called Alexander the .3. which name ministereth matter of merry pastime to M. Horn to solace himself withal, as though Alexander named himself so, for that he purposed (belike) to make a conquest of the matter. And here is dashed in the margin, to set forth and beutify his narration withal, first, Vrspergensis, then Nauclerus, then Sabellicus, than Platina, then Nauclerus again, then beside Radevicus Frisingensis in his next, Platina, and then Vrspergensis again. As though he took distinct and several matter from each one. Frederic. Octavianun Pontificem confirmat, eumque albo equo in sidentem per vrbem Ticinensem ducit, & de mo●e adorat. Platina in Alex .3. Tunc Episc. ad pedes so Octaviani prosternunt. Imperator quoque id ipsum fecit, ut ab eo indulgentiam acciperent, & sibi obedientiam sacerent. Vspurg. Quem Imperator in Concilio Papam declaratum adoravit, & equum eius de more per urbem deduxit. Whereas in a manner all they run one way: and whereof I am most assured, all against M. Horns own Primacy: part of their testimonies being cut of from each of them, and so carried craftily by M. Horn into his Cacus cave, bewrayeth all M. Horns theft. Will ye prove the like regiment, M. Horn, by Fredrick his doings, that ye now maintain? Go to then, and see ye prove it us substantially. He refused ye say Pope Roland: yet he received Pope Octavian, and confirmed him too, as ye say, yea and led him about the City of Pavia sitting upon a white Horse, and then adored him too, as I with Platina and Nauclerus say, or as Vspurgensis saith, fell flat before his feet, to receive pardon, and to become his obediensarie. All which ye say not, and therefore, I hear Hercules stolen oxen bellowe out of Cacus den. Why Master Horn can your ears patiently abide all this? And is your Octavian for all this, as ye writ, a man in all points honest and religious? Some thing I perceive there was, that he is made a Saint after his death, Naucler. giver 39 and that as it is said, there were many miracles done at his Tomb in Luca, where he was buried before the Image of Nicodemus. Can your stomach digest all this Master Horn? And can you suffer your Supreme head, like a slave to kiss the Pope's feet, and to become the Master of his Horse? Can ye suffer Miracles at the Pope's tomb, and yet notwithstanding shall he be a man in all points honest and religious? How chance we have not at the least for your comfort one pretty nip, and to tell us that he called him self Victor, for that he intended to be a victorious Conqueror, as he was in deed upon your Supreme head the Emperor Fredrick? Surely I marvel why ye should so favourably incline to this false Antipope, rather than to the true Pope in deed, which was Roland, who as Platina writeth, was elected of 22. Cardinal's: and your Octavian but of .3. only. And therefore was he, and Frederik that maintained him, and not Roland, the occasion of the horrible schism ye speak of. And this Roland was ever and is taken for the true Pope, yea and was so taken at length by your Fredrick also coming to him to Venice, and kissing his holy feet (for seeing ye have made the Pope's hand holy, Supra in the .114. Division. I will be so bold to make his feet holy too) and ratifying and allowing him by that humility, to be the Supreme head of Christ's Church. And so at the length (for all your jesting) Alexander hath made as great a conquest upon your false lying book, and new set up Primacy, as ever did the great Alexander upon King Darius. But lo, now ye and your companions, that can bear with Victor's conquest, can not bear, the matter being all one, the like in Alexander. Wherein I see no reason, but that perchance ye take Victor to be of your nigh cozenage, for that he was, as ye are, a great schismatic. And therefore though Friderike did suffer at the hands, yea and at the feet to of Victor, A fable of the Apology and M. Fox touching this Alexander treading on th'emperors neck. as he did at Alexander's, yet roareth out your Apology against him, that he put ill favouredly and monstruouslie this emperors neck under his feet. Which seemeth to be but a fable of such as be partial writers, and wedded to their affections, to slander the Pope withal, as Carrion and such other are that writ it: Although some catholyks perchance, report the same as doth Nauclerus, but with an addition. vel ut Blondus scribit, post quàm Pontificis pedes imperator exosculatus est, ad altare maius ambo principes se amplexati & exosculati sunt. So that Nauclerus, Nauclerus. Gener. 40. In his mad Martyrolog. Non tibi inquit, sed Petro, cui successores, pa●eo. Naucler. dict. gener. 40. which thowghe catholic, yet much inclinable as the Germans commonly are to the emperors part, seemeth rather to like the narration of Blondus, that th'emperor did no other than the usual honour in kissing the Pope's feet. And if the tale of th'Apology were true (which M. Fox doth also with a jolly gay picture set forth) though it make not for the commendation of the Pope's moderation and humility, yet it maketh for his supreme authority. I obey sayeth the Emperor, not to thee, but to Peter whom thou dost succeed. But to th'intent that you M. Horn with the Apology and M. Fox, who always like bestly swine do nousell in the dung, and vent up the worst that may be found against Popes and prelate's, may have a just occasion (if any Charity be in you) to commend the great moderation of this Pope Alexander 3. you may remember, that this is he to whom being in extreme misery through the oppression of the Almaigne Army, spoiling and wasting all about Rome, Naucler. gener. 39 pag. 225. Emanuel then Emperor in the East, sent ambassadors, promising both a great host against the Almaigne Emperor Friderike, and also a union of the Grecians with the Roman Church, if he would suffer the Roman Empire, so long divided (from the time of charlemain) to come again to one head and Empire: to whom also (being then in banishment) the said Emperor sent a second embassy, with great quantity of money, promising to reduce the whole East Church under the subjection of the West, all Grece under Rome, if he would restore to the Emperor of Constantinople the Crown of the West Empire, from the which Fredrick seemed now rightly and worthily to be deprived. To all which this Pope (notwithstanding the great miseries he stood presently in, and was daily like to suffer through the power of this Fredrick) answered. Se nolle id in unum coniungere, Pag. 226. quod olim de industria maiores sui disiunxissent. That he would not join that into one, which his Forefathers of old time had of purpose divided. You will not I trow deny M. Horn (all circumstances duly considered) but that this was a very great and rare moderation of this Pope Alexander 3. more worthy to be set forth in figures and pictures to the posteryty for sober and virtuous, than that fact of him which Master Fox hath so blazed out, for proud and hasty. Except your Charyties be such (as verily it seemeth to be) that you take more delight in vice then in virtue, and had rather hear one lewd fact of a Pope, than twenty good. If it be so with you, than is there no charity with you. For charity, as S. Paul describeth it, Thinketh not evil, 1. Cor. 13. Protestants lack true charity. rejoiceth not upon iniquity, but rejoiceth with verity. It suffereth all things, it believeth all things, it hopeth all things, it beareth all things contrariwise, you not only think, but report always the worst: you rejoice and take great pleasure upon the iniquity of such as you ought most of all men to reverence: you are sorry to have the verity and truth told you. You suffer and bear nothing in the Church: But for the evil life of a few you forsake the Communion and society of the whole. You believe as much as pleaseth you, and you hope accordingly. And thus much by the way ones for all, touching your great ambition and desire to speak evil of the Popes, and to report the worst you can do of them: which you in this book M. Horn have done so plentifully and exactly through this whole process, Non ut iudicaret eos, aut causam sedis Apostolicae, sed ut à prudentibus viris addisceret, cui electo obedire potius deberet. ●rsperg. of the Princes practise in Ecclesiastical government, as if the evil life of some Popes were a direct and sufficient argument to prove all Princes Supreme Governors in all things and causes Ecclesiastical. I could now show you other authorities and places out of your own authors concerning this story, of Friderike the first making directly against you, and wherein ye have played the Cacus. As where ye write by the authority of Vrspergensis, that the Emperor sent for both these Popes to come to him, minding to examine both their causes. For it followeth by and by: not to judge them, or the cause of the Apostolic see: but that he might learn of wise men, to whether of them he should rather obey. And is not this think you M. Horn, so craftily to cut of, and steal away this sentence from your reader, a preatye pageant of Cacus? Namely seeing your author Nauclerus writeth also the like? Gener. 39 And seeing ye demean yourself so unhonestly, and unclerkly in the principal matter, M. Horn● extraordinary process and lewd ●ayling. who will now care for your extraordinary and foolish false excursions, against the wealthy pride, the fierce power, the traitorous treachery of Popes at that time? Or for Erasmus comparing the Popes to the successors of julius Caesar? Or for Vrspergensis owteries, against their covetousness, and not against the Pope's authority? As for S. bernard, who, you say found fault with the pomp and pride of Eugenius. 3. how clearly he pronounceth (that not withstanding) for the Pope's Primacy, I refer you (to be short) to the Confutation of your lying Apology. All this impertinent railing rhetoric, Confu. fol. 210. we freely leave over unto you, to rail and roll yourself therein, till your tongue be weary again, if ye will, for any thing that shall let you. Only as I have often said, I desire the Reader to mark, that as well this, as other emperors, were not at variance with the See Apostolic itself, or set against the Pope's Authority absolutely, but were at variance, with such a pope and such, and were set against this man's or that man's election, not renouncing the Pope, but renouncing this man or that man, as not the true and right Pope. M. Horn. The .117. Division. pag. 76. a. About this time, the King of Cicilia and Apulia, had a dispensation from the Pope for money, Otto Frigingensis. to Inuesture archbishops with staff or crosier, ring, pall, mitre, sandals or slippers: and that the Pope might send into his dominions no Legate, unless the king should send for him. Stapleton. Did the Kings of Sicilia procure a dispensation as ye say M. Horn from the Pope to investure bishops and to receive no Legate? Vid. de hoc Nau. gen. 41 p. 287. & 288. Who was then the supreme head I pray you, the Pope that gave the dispensation, or the King that procured it? Ye see, good readers, how saverlye and handsomely this man, after his old guise, concludeth, against himself. M. Horn. The .118. Division. pag. 76. a. Of (.411.) the doings of the Kings of this Realm, in Eccles. matters, before the Conquest look in the book De postestate Regia set out by the Prelates, 26. Hen. 8. Our English Chronicles make report, that the Kings of this Realm, had not altogether left of their dealing in Church matters, but continued in part their jurisdiction about Ecclesiastical causes, although not without some trouble. * Polychron. Polychro. Fabian. Polychro. Fabian. The Pope's Legate came into England, and made a Council by the assent of King William the Conqueror. And after that in an (.412.) The .412 untruth. For all this was but one Council. other Council at Winchester, * Polychron. Polychro. Fabian. Polychro. Fabian. were put down many Bishops, Abbatts, and priors by the procurement of the King. The King gave to Lanfrauke the Archbisshoprike of Cantorb. and on our Lady day the Assumption made him Archebisshope. On whit Sunday, he gave the Archbisshoprike of York, unto Thomas a Canon of Bayon. When Thomas should have been consecrated of Lanfranke, there fell a strife betwixt them, about the liberties of the Church of York. The controversy being about Church matters, was brought and referred to the Kings (.413.) The .413. untruth. Fabian saith not so: neither by the story appeareth so. judgement, and Thomas by the kings commandment, was feign to come to Lanfrank to be sacred. And afterwards, when there grew greater contention betwixt these twain about Church matters, the Bishop of Rome remitted the matter to be determined before the King, and the Bishops of England, and so at Windesour before King William and the Clergy the cause was treated. Polychron. Also an other cause was moved before the King of the misorder of Thurstan, Fabian. Polychron. whom the King had made Abbot of Glastonbury, by whose judgement the Abbot was changed, and turned to his own Abbay in Normandye. but the Monks (.414.) The .414. untruth. They were spread into divers houses, saith Fabian, which you leave out. scattered about by the King's hest. After this the King bestowed many bishoprics on his Chaplains, as London, Norwich, Chester, Coventry, etc. And ruled both temporalty and the spiritualty at his own will: saith Polychronicon: He took noman fro the Pope in his land, Polychron. (he meaneth that the King would suffer no Legate to enter into the land from the Pope) but he came and pleased him: he suffered no Council made in his own country without his own leave: Also he would nothing suffer in such a council, but as he would assent. So (.415.) The .415 untruth. This, So that, followeth not, as shall appear. that in giving, or translating of spiritual promotions, in giving his assent to Counsels, and suffering nothing to pass without his consent, in hearing and determining Ecclesiastical causes, in restraining the Pope's liberty, without his special licence, and in ruling the spiritualty at his own will: King William showeth plain, that he (.416.) The .416. untruth. He never took him self, for such. took himself for the supreme governor within this Realm in all manner of causes, so well Ecclesiastical as Temporal. The .19. Chapter: Of England before the Conquest, Of William the Conqueror, Rufus his Son, and Henry the first, Kings of England. Stapleton. GOod readers, I do most heartily beseech you, even as ye tender either the truth, or the salvation of your souls, to have a good and a special regard to M. horns narration now following. For now at the length is M. Horn come from his long and unfruitful wandering in Spain, France, Italy, Germany, and other countries, to our own native country. Now, where as the late doings in our Country are such, as we have sequestered ourselves from the common and usual obedience, that all other countries concerning authority in matters ecclesiastical ever gave, with a singular and peerless pre-eminence to the see of Rome, and do yet sequester, the more pity, ourselves daily more and more, making none account of other good prince's doings and precedents in this behalf, and pretending partly in the acts of parliament, Consider the substantial handling of the matter by M. Horn for England. partly in the new english books, and daily sermons, that this is no new or strange example in England, to exclude the Pope from all manner spiritual jurisdiction to be exercised and practised there by him: it behoved our protestants, especially M. Horn in this his book, that what so ever his proofs were for other countries, yet for some convenient proof of the old practice concerning his new primacy in England, to have wrowght his matters so substantially, that at least wise, for our own Country, he should have brought forth good ancient and authentic matter. And will ye now see the wise and even dealing of these protestant prelates? Where they pin up all our proofs, within vj. hundred years after Christ: M. Horn for the first thousand years showeth no example of his primacy practised then in Britanny Fol. 93. Col. 2. and what so ever we bring after, their jewel telleth us full merely we come to late, M. Horn in this matter of supremacy most weighty to the poor catholics, the denying thereof being more grievously punished by laws, than any other matter now lying in controversy between the catholyks and protestants in England: M. Horn I say, for this his own country, which as approved Chroniclers report, and as himself after allegeth, did first of all the Roman provinces, publicly embrace Christ's religion: for one thousand years, standeth mute. And belike thinking that William Conqueror had conquered aswell all the old catholic faith in England, as the Land and people, fancieth a double conquest, one upon the goods and bodies, the other upon the souls and faith of the English men. But what shall I now say to this noble and worthy Champion? shall I drive him a little back, M. Horn beginneth his new primacy with william Conqueror, as thow●h he had conquered both the land and the faith withal. with M. jewels peremptory challenge and tell him, that he cometh to late by almost five hundred years? Or shall I deal more freely and liberally with him, then M. jewel doth which us, and bid him take the best help he can for himself? Verily M. Horn had need I did so: And yet all will be to little for his purpose: aswell for that after the conquest he hath no sufficient prouf, for his pretenced supremacy, as for that, what proof so ever he bringeth, it must yield and give place to the first thousand years, which bear full testimony for the Pope's primacy lawfully practised in our realm before the conquest. It were now a matter for to fill a large volume withal, to run a long by these thousand years, and to show what proof we have for the pope's primacy before the conquest. My answer would wax to big and to prolix if I should so do. But I will only put the good reader in remembrance of a matter or two: I must therefore pluck M. Horn back from William's conquest and desire him to remember an other, and a better, proofs for the pope's supremacy in Brittany before the Saxons tyme. Beda hist. Ang. lib. 1. cap. 4. and more ancient conquest with all, in Britanny, than Williams was, yea about ix. hundred years before: when this Ilelande of Brittany was first delivered from the tyrannical yoke, and miserable bondage of devilish idolatry: But by whom M. Horn? Suerlie by pope Eleutherius, to whom king Lucius sent letters desiring him, that by his commandment he might be christened. Fugatius and Damiànus (whose holy relics are thought to be now in Wales, and whose holy remembrance churches there dedicated to God in their name, Obsecrans, ut per eius mandatum Christianus efficeretur King Lucius and the realm Christened birth pope's legate●. Ireneus li. 3 ca 3. Ad hanc enim propter potentiorem principalitatem necesse est omne convenire Ecclesiam, hoc est, eos qui sunt undique fideles, in qua semper ab hijs qui sunt undique conseruata est ea, quae est ab Apostolis traditio. Beda li. cap. 13. ●rosper in Chronic. do to this day keep and preserve as it were fresh and immortal) sent to England by the said Eleutherius, did most godly and wonderfully work this great conquest. If I should now ask M. Horn, what Lucius meant to send so far for instructors and teachers of the Christian faith, namely France being at hand: where about this time the Christian Churches were adorned with many learned Bishops and Martyrs: though he would perchance seek many a pretty shift, to shift away this demand, yet should he never make any good and sufficient answer, until he confessed the Pope's primacy, to be the very cause to send so far of. The which the blessed Martyr of God and great learned Bishop of Lions in France Ireneus writing in the time of our first Apostle Eleutherius doth confess, writing: That all Churches must agree with the Church of Rome, for that the said Church hath the greater principality, and for that the traditions of the Apostles have ever been kept there. In case now the pope had nothing to do in matters ecclesiastical within this Ileland in the time of the old Britain's, why did pope Celestinus appoint to the Scots, their first Bishop Palladius as Prosper writeth a notable Chronicler of that age? Why did he also send into this Ileland S. Germaine Bishop of Antisiodorum, to bring by the Apostolical Authority the britains from the heresy of the Pelagians, as the said Prosper witnesseth? Let us now come to the time of the Saxons converted by S. Augustine: And then shall we find so many, and so full testimonies both of the pope's primacy, and of the prince's subjection, as I trow M. Horn himself, Pope Celestinus practised his supremacy in the Saxons tyme. as impudent as he is, can not, nor will not deny them. Which I do overpass, by reason they are readily to be found in our worthy countryman S. Bede, lately set forth by me in the English tongue, and in the Fortress also adjoined to the same story, I will now add this only, that from the time wherein Beda endeth his story, to the conquest of the foresaid William, The Pope's supremacy in England since the Saxons time. Beda. lib. 1 ca 29. li, 3. ca 14.22. & 25. li. 2. c. 4. & 19 there appeareth in our domestical stories a perpetual and continual practice of the said primacy in this realm by the pope's, as well in those books as be extant in print, as in other: As in Asserius Menevens. that continueth the story from the death of Bede, to the year of our Lord: 914. in Henricus Huntingtoniensis, Gulielmus Malmesburiensis, Alphredus Beverlacensis, Rogerus Hovedenus, Florilegium, sive Mattheus Westmonasteriensis, Chronica johannis Londoniensis, and many other yet not printed (that I have not seen) and which are hard to be seen, by reason of the great spoil of such kind of books of late made, in the suppressing of monasteries and colleges. Fortress. par 2. c. 8. A complaint for defacing of Libraries The which suppression, and it were for nothing else, but for the loss of so many worthy Chroniclers, can not be to much lamented, the loss being incomparably greater, than the loss of any prince's treasure. The case is now to be pitied, for that the very Library of the University of Oxford hath felt the rage of this spiteful spoil, not so much as one book at this hour there remaining. This is one of the worthy fruits of your new gospel M. Horn. As appeareth also by the late uproars in these low Countries where by the Gueses, not only the Monasteries, but the Libraries also (namely of the grey friars in Antwerp) be most shamefully defaced, King Alured: or Alphred the founder of the university of Oxford. A school of the Saxons at Rome. An. Dom. 880. Asserius Menevensis. Gul. Noveoburgens. M.S. Henr. Hungtington. joannes Scotus. Idem Henricus. King Alured was anointed king of England at Rome. Asserius. Quo tempore Leo Papa .4. Apostolicae sedi praeerat, qui praefatum infantem Alphredun confirmavit, et in filium adoptionis sibi accepit, & oleo unctum consecravit in Regem. Vide deflorationes Alphredi Beverlacensis. A Patre suo Adelulpho Roman mittitur. & a papa Leone. 4 in Regem inungitur. Of S. wulstane bishop of worceter. the books burnt to ashes, and the old monuments destroyed. The naming of Oxford, bringeth to my remembrance the noble and worthy founder of the university there, I mean King alured. In whose time there was at Rome a special school or college, for English men, privileged and exempted from all tax and tollages, by pope Martin the .2. at the desire of this King. Who sent to him for a gift a piece of the holy cross. This King being learned himself loved entirely learned men, especially joannes Scotus, that translated out of the Greek tongue the works of Dionysius Areopagita: whoons he used most familiarly. This alured, being but yet young, was sent by the King Edeluulphus his father to Rome accompanied with many noble men, where pope Leo the .4. did confirm him, and took him as his son by adoption, and did also anoint and consecrate him King of England. The manifold practice of the said primacy continued from this King's time, even to the time, and in the time of blessed S. Edward, the immediate predecessor of William, saving harold who reigned not one full year. In the twenty year of the said King Edward, the blessed man Wulstanus, that was before a monk and prior there, was consecrated bishop of Worceter. A man of such notable virtue, and such austerity of life, as he resembled the old virtuous and renowned religious men. As one that among all other his notable qualities, continued so in praying, studying and fasting, that sometimes in four days and four nights he never slept: and that little rest which he took, was upon a form in the Church, using none other bolsterre, but his book, wherein he prayed or studied. This man, I say, was made bishop, and confirmed by the pope's Legates being then in the realm before the conquest. He was confirmed by the pope's legates before the conquest. Henry Huntingto. Our author doth not write this of uncertain hearsay, but of certain knowledge, as a man of that age, and one, that as it seemeth, had seen this blessed man, and talked with him. To discourse upon other particularities as upon the continual appeal to Rome, upon wills, charteres, and such other writings sent from Rome, to avoid tediousness I do purposely forbear. But I will now notify to the good reader two things only. First that from the time of the good King Offa (in the year of our Lord .760.) who gave after the example of Inas not long before him, Idem Henr. Hunting. Polid. l. 4. The continual practice of the Pope's Primacy in the realm of England before the conquest in paying the Peter pence, and receiving the pall. to the Pope as to the Vicar of S. Peter, the Peter pence, even to the conquest the payment of the said Peter pence hath continued: and they were from time to time levied, the Kings taking good diligent order, for the sure payment of the same. Secondly that from the time of S. Augustine, the first archbishop among the Saxons, both he and all other archbishops even to the conquest received their pall from Rome: an infallible token of their subjection to the Pope, as Peter's successor, upon whose holy tomb, the pall is first laid, and after taken of, and sent to the archbishop. As these two tokens of subjection continued from time to time, to the conquest: so they continued also without any interruption, (unless it were very seldom, and for a little space by reason of some private controversy, betwixt the Pope and the King) even from thence to our fresh memory, beside many notable things otherwise in this realm since the conquest, continually practised, that serve for the declaration and confirmation of the said primacy. Perchance M. Horn will say to me, Sir, though I specify nothing before the conquest to justify the prince's supremacy, yet in the margin of my book, I do remit the reader, to a book made in King Henry the .8. days. De potestate Regia. Wherein he may see, what doings the Kings of England had in this realm before the conquest, for matters Ecclesiastical. A pretty and a clerklie remission in deed, to send your reader for one thousand of years together, in the which ye should have laid out before him, your best and principal proofs, to seek out a book, he wotteth not where, and which, when it is at length found, shall prove your matter, no more substantially, than ye have done hitherto yourself. And therefore because ye work by signs and proffers only and marginal notes, I will remit both you and my reader to a * The .411. untruth, for there is not as much as one example of this new primacy brought forth in that book concerning England. And therefore this is a marginal lie of M. Horns. And so are ye now welcome to England M. Horn withal your jolly company, that is with .400. untruths and more cleaving fast to your side beside many a trim folly otherwise, marginal note also, for your and his full answer. Now then, let us go forward in God's name, and see whether King William conquered, both the land and the Catholic faith all at ones. Let us consider if this King and the realm did not then acknowledge the Pope's Supremacy, as much, and as reverently as any Christian prince doth now living. I say nothing of the oath he took the day of his coronation, promising by oath to Aldrede archbishop of York that crowned him, at S. Peter's altar in Westminster, before the clergy, and the people, that he would defend the holy Churches and their governors. But tell your readers good M. Horn I beseech you, why that King William, contrary to the ancient order, used ever before and since, was not crowned of Stigandus then living and being Archbishop of Canterbury, W. conquerors oath. In addit. ad. Noveoburg. M.S. promittens se velle sanctas Dei Ecclesias, ac rectores defendere. but of the bishop of York. If ye can not or will not for very shame to betray your cause tell you reader, then will I do so much for you. Forsooth, the cause was, that the Pope laid to his charge, that he had not received his pall canonically. The said Stigandus was deposed shortly after in a Council holden at Winchester in the presence of two Idem Noveobur. M.S. Pallium canonicè non suscepisti. Fabian. par. 7. cap. 220. The cause why the Archbishop Stigandus was deposed. Cardinals sent from Pope Alexander the .2. and that (as Fabian writeth) for three causes. The first for that he had holden wrongfully the bisshoprik, while Robert the Archbishop was living. The second for that he had received the pall of Benett bishop of Rome, the fifth of that name. The third for that he occupied the said pall without licence and leeful authority of the court of Rome. Guil. Malmesb. Stigandun perperam & falsò Archiepiscopum, per Card. Rom. & Armenfridun episcopum Sedunensem deponi passus est. Polychronic. lib. 7. cap. 1. Your author Polychronicon writeth in the like effect. Neubrigensis also newly printed, toucheth the deposition of this Stigandus by the Pope's Legate in England, and reporteth that the Pope's Legate Canonically deposed him. What liking have you now M. Horn of King Willians supremacy? Happy are you with your fellows, the protestant bishops, and your two archbishops, that the said William is not now king. For if he were, ye see cause sufficient, Neub. lib. 1. cap. 1. why ye all should be deprived, aswell as Stigandꝰ. And yet there is one other thing worse than this, and that is schism and heresy. M. Horn and his fellows are to be deposed, if he allow W. conquerors supremacy. Who would ever have thought good reader, that the Pope should ever have found M. Horn himself, so good a proctor, for the Papacy, against him self and his fellows? For lo, this brazen face which shortly for this his incredible impudence, will be much more famous, than freer Bacons brazen head, of the which the scholars of Oxford were wont to talk so much, doth not blush, M Horns impudency. to tell thee, good reader, to his own confusion of the Pope's Legates, and the Council kept at Winchester: And all this is ye wot well to show, that King William was supreme head in all causes as well temporal as spiritual. Then doth he plead on forth full lustily for the Pope: for King William heareth a certain Ecclesiastical matter being in controversy, and depending in the Pope's cowrte between the archbishop of York and the archbishop of Caunterbury: the which cause the Pope had remitted to be determined by the King and the bishops. Gul. Malmesb. Ex praecepto Alexandri. 11. ventilata est causa etc. Adfuit Hubertus Legatus Papae. Fabian. cap. 222. Polich. lib. 7. cap. 3. Guiliel. de Pontifi. Guil. Huntingt. Well said M. Horn, and like the Pope's faithful proctor. For hereof followeth that the Pope was the supreme head and judge of the cause: And the King the Pope's Commissioner, by whose commandment, the cause was sent over to be heard in England. And yet was Hubertus the Pope's Legate present at the end this notwithstanding. M. Horn would now belike make us believe, that King William also thrusted out abbots and supressed Monasteries, when it pleased him. For he telleth us, that by the King's judgement abbot Thurstan was changed, and his monks scattered abroad: but he had forgot to set in also, that his author, and others say: that it was for slaying of certain of his monks, and wounding of certain other. The monks also had hurt many of his men. And your author of the Pollichronicon telleth, that these monks were scattered abroad by the king's hest, by divers bisshopriks and abbays: which latter words ye leave out. As also you do in your Author Fabian, who saith not, they were scattered about, as you report, as though they had been scattered out of their coats, as of late days they were, but he saith: they were spread abroad into divers houses through England: so that they changed but their house, not their Religion. And so this was no spiritual matter that the king did, neither gave he herein any judgement in any spiritual cause. Now if all other arguments and evidences failed us, to show that king William took not himself for supreme governor in all manner causes, as you most untruly and fond avouch, we might well prove it against you by the story of Lanfranke, whom king William, Notable places of Lanfrancus for the pope's primacy. Lanfran. contra Berengar: de sacramento Et hoc impio ore garristi quod garrista nemo loquitur: non haereticus, non schismaticus. non falsus aliquis Christianus. fol. 2. as ye confess, made archbishop of Canterbury. Though according to your old manner ye dissemble aswell the deprivation of Stigandus, in whose place the king set Lanfranke, as that Lanfranke received his pall from Rome, and acknowledged not the king, but the pope for supreme head of the Church. Which thing doth manifestly appear, in his learned book he wrote against your great grandsire Berengarius. Who, as ye do now, denied then the transubstantiation and the real presence of Christ's body in the Sacrament: and called the Church of Rome, which had condemned his heresy, as ye use to do, the Church of the malignante, the council of vanity, the see of Satan. To whom Lanfrancus answereth, that there was never any heretic, any schismatyke, any false Christian, that before him had so wickedly babbled against that see. And saith yet farther in an other place of the said book, Quotquot a primordio Christianae Ecclesiae, Christiani nominis dignitate gloriati sunt, etsi aliqui relicto veritatis tramite per devia erroris incedere maluerunt, sedem tamen sancti Petri Apostoli magnificè honoraverunt, nullamque adversus eam huiusmodi blasphemiam, vel dicere, vel scribere praesumpserunt. Whosoever from the beginning of Christ's Church, Fol. 13. Beati patres concorditer astruxerunt, haericum esse hoēm omnem, qui à Romana & universali Ecclesia in sidei doctrina discordat, in edit. Lo nan. in 8. An. 1551. were honoured with the name of Christian men, though some forsaking the Truth, have gone astray, yet they honoured much the See of Peter, neither presumed at any time either to speak or to write any such blasphemy. He saith also, that the blessed Fathers do uniformly affirm that man to be an heretic, that doth dissent from the Roman and universal Church in matter of faith. But what need I lay forth to thee good Reader, Lanfranks learned books, or to go from the matter we have in hand ministered to us by M. Horn, concerning this matter sent to be determined before the King? Such as have or can get either Polychronicon or Fabian, I would wish them to see the very place: and than will they marvel, that M. Horn would for shame bring in this matter against the Pope's primacy: for the confirmation whereof ye shall find in Lanfranks reasoning before the King for his right upon the church of York something worth the noting for the Pope's primacy. Beside this he writeth that Lanfrank was a man of singular virtue, constancy, and gravity, whose help and counsel for his affairs, the King chief used. And therefore your conclusion that ye infer, of such premises as ye have specified, which as I have showed, do not impugn, but establish the pope's primacy, is a very fond, foolish and false conclusion. It appeareth well both by Fabian and by Polychronicon, that he would sometime like a conqueror for his own lucre and safety, both displace the English prelates, as he did the Knights and Nobles of the realm, to place his own Normans in their room: and also have a piece many times of his own mind contrary to the precise order of the Canons and laws ecclesiastical. And this not only Fabian and Polychonicon, but before them both William of Malmesbury doth also witness. Such faults therefore of William Conqueror and of others, that your author and other report in discommendation, serve you notwithstanding (such beggarly shifts you are forced to use) for good arguments and substantial bulwarks, Lib. De pontiff. Angli. to build your new supremacy upon. And now might I or any wise man much marvel, to consider how that ye have laden and freighted this one page of your book with no less than .6. quotations of the Polychronicon, and yet not one of them serving for, but rather against you: yea each one overthrowing your purpose. And therefore because ye would be the less espied, as throughout your whole discourse, so here ye neither name book nor chapter of your author. Beside that it is untrue that ye writ, as out of Polychronicon, that the pope's Legates kept a Council before which was kept at Winchester. For he speaketh of none other but of that, Polychr. li. 7. ca 1. where Stigandus, that we spoke of, was degraded, and afterward kept streighly in prison by William Conqueror. And the Bishops and abbots ye speak of, were not deposed by the King, but as yourself write, Fabian. cap. 220. by the king's means and procurement. Which was (as Fabian reporteth) all to the intent he might prefer Normans to the rule of the Church, as he had preferred his Knights to the rule of the temporalty: that he might stand in the more surety of the land. M. Horn. The .119. Division. pag. 77. a. In like manner did his son William Rufus, who made Anselm Bishop of York and afterwards translated him to Cantorbury. But within a while strife and contention fell between him and Anselm, Fabian. for Anselm might not call his Synods, nor correct the bishops but as the king would: the king also challenged the investiture of bishops. This king also forbade the paying of any money or tribute to Rome: as saith Polychronicon. The like inhibition made Henry the first, and (417.) The .417. untruth. He made holy Church free sayeth Fabyan. Fabyan. gave Ecclesiastical promotions, Matth. Par. as his ancestors had done: wherefore Anselme fell out with the king, and would not consecrate such Prelates, as he being a Lay man had made: but the archbishop of York (.418.) The 418 untruth. For the pleasure of the King left out. did consecrate them, and therefore Anselme (.419.) The .419. untruth. he fled not to Rome but was sent thither by the king. fled the Realm. In an other council at London, the spiritual condescended, that the kings officers, should punish Priests for whoredom. The cause of this decree, as it seemeth, was, that a Cardinal named joannes Cremensis, that came to redress the matter, after he had enueighed against the vice, was himself the same night taken tardy. In the which council also (saith Polydore) the king provided many things to be enacted which should greatly help to lead a Godly and blessed life. Simeon Dunelmensis Hen. Huntingtonus Roge. Hovedenus. Matt. Paris. Mat. Westmonast. After this the king called an other Council at Sarisbury, Summoning thither so well the chief of the Clergy, as the people, and swore them unto him, and unto William his son. Whereupon Polydorus taketh occasion to speak of the order of our parliament, though it have a French name, yet in deed to be a council of the Clergy, Polidorus. Polidorus. Nauclerus. Abbas Vrsp. and the laity, whereof the Prince hath a full ratifying or enfringing voice. And not only (saith he) this king did make bishops and abbots (which he calleth) holy rites, Laws of religion, and Church ceremonies (as other likewise call it ecclesiastical business) but the Princes of every nation, began every where to claim this right unto themselves of naming and denouncing of Bishops, the which to this day they hold fast with tooth and nail, Also Martinus here noteth. Until this time, and from thence (.420.) The .420. untruth. flatly belying Martinus. even till our days, the king of Hungary maketh and investureth according to his pleasure, Bishops and other Ecclesiastical persons within his Dominions. Stapleton. Concerning William Rufus King. Ye shall now good reader see a more evident testimony of M. Horns marvelous new logic and divinity, whereof I spoke even now. M. Horn buildeth his new primacy upon the doings of ill princes. Eusebius de vitae Const. lib. 1. prope finem. For is not this a worthy and a clerkly conclusion? The wicked king Rufus would not suffer the blessed and learned archbishop of Caunterbury Anselme, to call his Synods and correct the Bishops: he challenged the investiture of Bishops: he would pay no tribute to Rome. Ergo the Queen of England is supreme head of the Church of England. The looseness and fondness of this argument, every child may soon espy. By this argument he may set the Pope's crown upon the head of the wicked and heathen Prince especially the tyrant Licinius, with whom Eusebius comparing the good and Christian Emperor Constantine compartner with him in the empire, and not in his wickedness, writeth thus. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. First then he watched and observed the Priests of God, that were under his government, and whereas they had nothing offended him, he by curious and subtile working, devised pretenced matter to trouble and vex● them. The agreableness between Rufus, and the tyrant Licinius, for staying of ecclesiastical counsels. When he could find no just matter to accuse them withal, he made a proclamation that the Bishops for * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. etc. no manner of matter should assemble together, and that it should not be lawful to any of them to repair to their neighbour's Churches, * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. etc. or to call any Synod, or place to consult and debate, upon such things, as appertained to the commodity of the Church. This was his drift, by the which he sowght their destruction. For either the Bishops were in danger to be punished▪ if they transgressed his law, or if they kept the law, they broke the order and custom of the Church. For they could not advise themselves in any weighty matters but in a Synod. And this wicked man hated of God gave this commandment, that he might work quite contrary to the doings of good Constantyne, whom God loved. For he, such was his reverence to God, such was his study and endeavour to have peace and agreement, assembled God's priests together. M. Horn like the spider and the fly. The worthiness of Bishop Anse●me. Guilford Maelmesb. in lib. de Pontif. Henri●. Hunting. in Histor. Angl. T●e causes of dissension between King ●ufus and Anselmus Edmerus. de vita Ansel. li. 2 Regem pro Ecclesiarum quae de die in diem destruebantur relevatione pro Christianae l●gis quae in multis violabatur renovatione, pro diuersorum morum qui omni ordine hominum quotidie nimis corrumpebantur, correctione coepit interpellare. Th'other contrariwise went about to dissolve those things that were well ordained and to break peace and agreement. Thus far Eusebius of the heathen tyrant Licinius. Ye play therefore M. Horn like a very spider, that gathereth nothing but poison out of sweet herbs, and so do you out of good chronicles. Ye are like to the fly that loveth to dwell in the horse dung. I would to God your Reader M. Horn, would either advisedly weigh, what an ill King this William Rufus was, by the most agreeable consent of all writers: and what strange and wondered tokens were seen in his time, and how he ended his life being slain by the glaunsing of an Arrow, as he was a hunting: or the excellent learning, constancy and virtue of the B. Anselmus: and the great miracles, that God wrought by him, as well before, as after his death, set forth by the best Historiographers of that time: especially of Henry Huntingdon, William of Malmesbury, and one Edmerus. Who hath made two special Treatises, the one concerning Anselmus doings, with this king and king Henry, the other concerning his private life. The which I would wish the gentle Reader, to read, to know the better the worthiness of this man, and withal, the state of the controversy betwixt him and the two kings: William Rufus, and Henry Which in effect concerning William Rufus rested in that the said William, would not at the admonition of this good man as well leave of other faults, as also the investuring of Bishops, the pilling of the spiritualty and temporalty, and the selling of bisshopriks, which was bought and sold as plainly as other merchandise: as M. horns Author Fabian, beside others doth declare: The beginning of the King's displeasure against Bishop Anselme, rose principally for that he would not according to his expectation give him in the way of thanks, Edmer. lib 2. a thousand pounds for making him archbishop of Caunterbury. And yet as nought as this king was, he never denied the Pope to be Supreme Head or judge of the Church, no nor the payment of the tribute called Rome shot: but for a time pretending he knew not who was the true Pope (the church of Rome then being troubled with schism) and he seeming for the time to favour rather the false, than the true Pope, which was Urban. Whom, this notwithstanding, he acknowledged for the true Pope: Edmer. dict. lib. 2. Attamen posthaec et Vrbanum per Walterum Albanensem episcopum, qui pallium à Roma Anselmo Cantuariam detulit pro Papa suscepit et principum suorum consilio actus in amicitiam suam virum recepit. and received Walter the Pope's legate that brought the pall for Anselme, and received Anselme also into his friendship. Henry of Huntingdon writeth, that the king himself sent for the pall, the which being brought to Caunterburie, and set upon the Altar, was for the honour of S. Peter kissed of all men most humbly kneeling. We have now showed how and after what fashion the king forbade the tribute to be paid to Rome: the which, I marvel why ye tell it rather out of Polichronicon, than Fabian, which saith it as well as the residue ye allege. But not for any of his good deeds. Henric. Hunting. Cap. 225. For describing the death of this William, he telleth, that the day when he died, he held in his hands the three Bisshopriks' of Caunterbury, of Winchester, and of Salisbury, and divers abbeys, of the which he let some to farm. Also he restrained the money that of old time was paid to Rome, called Rome shot. All which is told of Fabian and the other Chroniclers, to show what a covetous man he was, and injurious to the Church, not to show any practice of due and lawful Authority thereby. Yet this serveth notwithstanding M. horns purpose very well. What M. Horn? Will you have our Princes now like to William Rufus, and his Father the Conqueror to tax and pill both the Spiritualty and Temporalty of their realm, as they out of measure did? For so both Polichronicon and Fabian report (which you conceal) that notwithstanding the stay of this tribute to Rome, yet did this William pill and shave his people with tribute, and misuse them with divers other disorders. Or as Fabian saith, He peeled the spirituality and Temporalty with unreasonable tasks and tributes. Concerning king Henry the first. Such a one you bring forth as a worthy example of your new Supremacy, and yet can ye not fasten it upon him neither. Edmer. lib. 2. De vita Anselmi. Post ea omnia regavit Anselmum rex, quatenus ipsemet Romam iret. Henr. Hungt. Rogatus à Rege perrexit Romam. Idem Henric. Hungt. Anno. 1107. statuit ut numquam per donationem baculi pastoralis vel amnuli, quisquam de episcopatu vel abbatia ●er regem vel quamlibet laicam manum in Anglia investiretur. ●ex antecessorun suorum usu relicto, ●ec personas quae in regimen Ecclesiarum sumebantur per se eligit, nec eas per dationem virgae pastoralis quibus praeficie batur, investivit. Edmer. lib. 2. de vita Anselmi. But much less shall ye fasten it upon king Henry following who (though he were for a time displeased with Anselme, for that he would neither consecrate those Bishops, nor communicate with them whom the King had investured, and because the Pope had so commanded, the matter yet standing in controversy) did not fly, as ye writ, but at the King's desire went to Rome, to see if he could mollify the Pope: And afterward the king was perfectly reconciled to him: and the King made an ordinance and a decree, that from that time forward, nor Bishop, nor Abbot should be investured by the king or any other lay man, by the pastoral staff and the ring. This writeth Henry archdeacon of Huntingdon, a writer then living. The like also Edmerius Anselmes' companion in his exile writeth. And that the king was very glad, that he had made peace and accord with Anselme. And had great hope, that he should the sooner subdue Normandy. Even as it chanced: for he had a notable victory, and took prisoners his brother Robert and other Princes that assisted Robert. The which thing he certified Anselme of by his letters sent to him into England: and all men of those days imputed his victory to the agreament made with Anselme. Tell me now in good faith M. Horn, who was the Supreme Head, the king that yielded to the Pope for investuring, inter Idem. or the Pope that would never yield to him, nor the Emperor Henry the .4. neither, in this matter, Omnes qui haec gesta tunc temporis audiere, ea meritis concordiae quam rex cum Ansel. fecerat ascripsere Fabian. cap. 227. but did excommunicate the Emperor: and king Henry was feign to forsake him and his doings, though he were himself a mighty Prince and the emperors Father in law, by Maude the Empress his daughter. I now also perceive that a Horn will not lightly blush, M. Horn showeth himself worthy to be punished for whoredom by his own story. for if it could, ye would never for shame have told your Reader, of these Priests that were punished for whoredom, for saving of your own and Mistress Madges poor honesty. And yet your whoredom infinitely exceedeth theirs. For they were punished for keeping company with their concubines or their wives whom they had lawfully married before they were ordered. But you after Priesthood do marry, which never was allowed, but ever condemned as well in the Greek Church as in the Latin. And now deck your margin as thick as ye will, with Fabian, Simeon Dunelmens'. Rogerus Hovedenus, Henricus Huntingtonus, Matheus Parisiens'. Matheus Westmonasteriens. and Polidorus, and blow out, as it were out of your own horn, your own dishonesty and shame as long as ye will: and see what supremacy ye shall build upon such a fickle and filthy foundation. Fabian. Simeon Dunelmens'. & Rogerus Hoved. Rex tenuit Concilium magnum apud Lōdonū de uxoribus sacerdotum prohibem lis, etc. Concessere namque regi justitiam de uxoribus sacerdotum, & improvidi habiti sunt: accepit enim rex pecuniam infinitam de presbyteris & redemit eos. Similia habet, & Henr. Huntingdon. Verily your own authors do witness, that this king kept a great Council at London, where among all other Decrees (saith Fabian) one was, that priests should forego their wives. And if the pope's Legate was taken as ye writ, in whoredom (who yet, as Mattheus Westmonast. writeth, was no priest but a corrector of priests, and thereby excused his fault) what doth that relieve your cause, or wherein doth it save your honesty? For the king did not punish these fornicators, but by the clergies consent. Wherein they were by their rash grant overseen and circumvented For the King took a great mass of money of the parsons that were faulty, and so dismissed them. Ye tell us now out of Polidore, that the parliament is in deed a Council of the clergy and the laity. Lib. 11. The order of the parliament about the conquest. Parliamentum est ex 3. gradibus sive generibus: scilicet ex procuratoribus cleri, militibus communitatis, civibus & Burgensibus, qui repraesentant totam communitatem Angliae. Quia quilibet magnatum est ●bi pro propria persona & non pro alia. If ye mean an Ecclesiastical council, than Polydore neither saith it, nor meaneth it. For as he maketh the parliament an assemble for politic matters, to the which the prelate's also come as Barons: so for matters ecclesiastical he appointeth specialle the convocation. Truth it is, that before the conquest and in William conquerors time to (as appeareth by old records, written as it seemeth about the conquest) the proctors of the clergy sat in the Lower house. And the said records do show that the Parliament properly standeth and consisteth in .3. degrees: that is, of the proctors of the clergy, of the knights of the sheer, and of the burgesses and Citizens. For they represent the people and commonalty of the realm. As for the noble men, bishops and other be there, for their own persons, and not for other: if we shall believe the said ancient records. Now though these many years, for matters politic the convocation have had nothing to do, yet as of● as any payment is to be made, it taketh no place by virtue of Parliament against the Clergy, unless the Clergy do consent. If this be true in money matters, and if in ancient time the Clergy had to do in civil matters also (the which prerogative, belik, they left voluntarily, that they might the better attend their own spiritual vocation) what an account ought of all good reason to be made of the late parliament, M. Horns wisdom in reasoning against himself. wherein mere Lay men have turned upside-down the state of the Catholic faith against the full minds of the Clergy, I leave it to every wiseman well to consider. But as I began to say, If Polidore meaneth not the parliament to be a Council of Spiritual matters, to what purpose, Polidorus lib. 11. Admonebat ne sanctos ritus, neuè religionis iura, et ceremonias verteret pollueretque. or with what great wisdom have ye alleged him: or that he calleth the making of Bishops and abbots, holy rites, laws of religion, and church ceremonies: seeing that the King gave over the electing of bishops, and seeing that your Author doth show, that Anselme rebuked the King therefore? Now to those matters of England M. Horn addeth a great Untruth of the King of Hungary, telling us out of Martinus, that the King of Hungary, until this time, (which is the year of grace. 1110.) and from thence even till our days maketh and investureth according to his pleasure, bishops etc. This I say is a great and flat untruth. For Martinus here saith plainly the contrary, thus. At this time the King of Hungary (saith Martinus) writing many advertisements to the Pope by his letters, gave over the investuring of Bishops and of other prelates, Martinus Polonus in, Pascha li. 2. Renunciavit investituris Episcoporum & aliorum praelatorum. which until that time the kings of Hungary were wont to make. These are the true words of Martinus in this place. Now what passing impudence is this of M, Horns? That which his Author telleth for the Pope's primacy, this man wresteth it to the Princes. And therefore whereas Martinus telleth only, that until that time kings of Hungary invested the Bishops, and addeth farther that at the same time the king of Hungary gave over the same into the Pope's hands, M. Horn both lewdly concealeth that, and also of his own, most impudently and shamelessly addeth, and from thence even till our days: which Martinus not only avoucheth not, but telleth also plainly the contrary: to wit, that, at that time the king gave over all such matters. Farther to make the matter sound more princely, you make Martinus say, that the king of Hungary invested Bishops, according to his pleasure. Which words (according to his pleasure) are not in Martinus at all, but it is a point of your descant, upon his plain, and a fit of your own voluntary, at your pleasure. In deed this sounded pleasantly in M. horns ears, that by this example he might also go for a Bishop, made at the Prince's pleasure, and to be removed again at her highness pleasure. But you heard before by the form of Paschalis his grant made to Henry the .4. that though the Prince have the investuring and confirming of Bishops granted him, yet it was never so granted to Princes, that their only pleasure sufficed to make a man a true Bishop. For first, whom the Prince invested and confirmed, Vide Nauclerum generat. 38. pag. 183. he should be, liberè praeter violentiam & simoniam electus, chosen freely without violence or simony on the Prince's part. Which great faults, both the Emperors of Germany, and the kings of our land, such as had the investuring of Bishops in their own hands, namely Henry the .4. Emperor, and William Rufus of England, most grievously and daily committed. secondarily though he were invested and confirmed of the Prince, Dist. 63. in Synod. yet post investituram Canonicè Consecrationem accipiant ab episcopo ad quem pertinuerint, after the investuring let them (saith Paschalis) be consecrated of the Bishop to whom they belong. So likewise, Leo .8. in his grant made to Otho. the .1. giving to the Emperor the investuring of Bishops, addeth, Et consecrationem unde debent, and to be consecrated, where they ought to be. Which words unde debent, where they ought, you for the nonse left out in your alleging of this grant made to Otho, to th'intent that your investuring of the Prince, Fol. 7●. Fac. 1. being without any consecration at all of your Metropolitan (him self poor man, being no Bishop neither) might seem to be good and sufficient, and to have example of antiquity. For that purpose also ye make Martinus here to say, that the king of Hungary made Bishops according to his pleasure. But you see now it is not the Princes only pleasure that maketh a Bishop, but there must be both free election, without either forcing the Clergy to a choice, or forcing the chosen to filthy bribery, and also there must follow a due consecration, which in you, and all your fellows do lack. And therefore are in deed (by the way to conclude it) no true bishops, neither by the law of the Church, as you see, An. 2●. Henric. 8. cap. 14. An. 1. Elizab. cap. 1. neither yet by the laws of the Realm, for want of due Consecration, expressly required by an Act of Parliament, renewed in this Queen's days in Suffragan bishops, much more in you. M. Horn. The .120. Division. pag. 74. b. And he●e sithen I am entered into the noting of the practices of other Countries in this behalf: I might not only note the doings about (.421.) The .421. Untruth. not about this time, by 150. years at the least. this time of Fredrick King of Cicill, and james the King of Spain his brother, in reformation of Religion in their dominions, as appeareth in their Epistles written by Arnoldus de nova Villa, but also make a digression to the state of other parts in Christendom, as of the churches of Grece, of Armenia, of moscovia, etc. that acknowledged not any, but (.422.) The 422. Untruth. They of Armenia never acknowledged their Prince for such. only their Princes to be their supreme governors in all things next to Christ: as especially also to note that most ancient part of Christendom southward in Aethiopia, containing .62. kingdoms under the ruling of him whom we misname Presbyter joannes, as who say he were a Priest, and head Bishop over those christian Realms, having such a power with them, as the Popes (423) The 423. Untruth. Slanderus. usurpation hath challenged here in Europe, to be an head or universal Priest and king. If we may believe Sabellicus, who saith that he hath both often talked with the Merchants, that have their traffic there, and hath also díuers times inquired the matter by an interpreter of the inhabitants there borne, they all say that his name is neither Presbyter joannes, nor Pretto janes', but say they, his name is Gyan, that is, mighty, and they marvel greatly what the Italians mean, to call him by the name of priesthood. But this they say, that all the suits or requests even of their great Bishops, are brought before the king himself: and that all their benefices or Spiritual promotions be obtained at his hands (.424.) The .424. untruth, most lewd in nipping away the words following in the same sentence. So that there being, as Sabellicus telleth further, an exceeding great number of chief Prelates or metropolitans, and under every one Prelate at the least twenty Bishops, all their suits and causes Ecclesiastical, being brought unto him, and he the maker of all these Prelates, Bishops, and other Ecclesiastical persons, he is called over them all, Clergy or Lay, in all causes Ecclesiastical or thtemporal, Gyan the mighty, that is, the supreme Ruler and Governor, and even so hath (.425.) The .425. untruth. Never able to be justified. continued sithen those parts were first Christened, (as they say) of Thomas Dydimus, the Apostle, until our tyme. But this by the way, now from them to return to our own country. The .20. Chapter. Of the Armenians, and of the Aethiopians in Preto janes' land. Stapleton. A MAN would think that Master Horn was with some strange spiritual meditation ravished, M. Horn by a spiritual ravishment, is suddenly carried from England to Moscovia Aethiopia, etc. when he interlaced this digression, worthy belike deeply to be considered, being here, I can not tell whether more impertinently, or more falsely, between the doings of king Henry and king Stephen that immediately succeeded him, full wisely wrenched and writhed in. For he is now upon the sudden, as a man rapt up and carried away not only into Spain, but into Greece, Armenia, Moscovia, yea and Aethiopia too. And then is he as suddenly in England again. About a four hundred years past, he was very busy, and to busy too, for his own honesty with Spain: now after this long taciturnity belike he hath espied out there, some notable matter for his purpose: And what is it think ye good Reader? Forsooth he cometh in, as it were in a Mummery, and sendeth us to Arnoldus de Villa Nova, and telleth us that we shall learn by him of the doing of Fredrick king of Sicily, and james king of Spain, in their Epistles written by the said Arnoldus. But what this Arnoldus was, Heretic or Catholic, what his books were, and where, and when they were printed, and where a man shall find any thing of him, he telleth us nothing. Your brother Gesnerus, M. Horn, in his Bibliotheca maketh mention of Arnoldus a Physician, and numbereth his books. But of these epistles there is no word: and marvel it is, that such a notable work should escape his hands. surely with much a do I suppose, I have chanced upon him, what in your brother Illiricus and what in your other friend Gaspar Hedio that addeth Paralipomena, to Abbess Vrsper gensis, I have by them some feeling of this your great ghostly ravishment, and feel at my fingers ends that your Arnoldus (if he were no better than Illiricus maketh him) was your own dear brother, that is an Heretic aswell as yourself: and also that in the vehemency of this your impertinente mad meditation you are carried away, Vide Paralip. Vrsperg. & Matheum Flaccium Illiricum in catalogo testium veritatis. one hundred and fifty years at the least, from the time ye should have orderly prosecuted, and as many miles from the matter it self. For this Arnoldus is noted to have written like a blind and a lewd lying prophet, about the time of Clement the fift, which was made Pope about the year of our Lord .1306. This Arnoldus then taking upon him to be a prophet, sayeth that Antichrist should come within .34. years of his blind prophesying. Now here for his part M. Horn also playeth the lying prophet, Imo quod deterius est videtur nobis quod pro nihilo habeant Ecclesiam Romanam, quia nulli appellationi ad eam factae deferunt. and telleth us of wonderful epistles that his author wrote, one hundred years before he was borne: Which epistles though they be very high and mystical, yet there seemeth to be no great point of heresy in them. And what so ever reformation these kings went about, the epistles seem to give a plain testimony, for the Pope's primacy, and to find fault with certain religious persons that they despised the Church of Rome, and did disallow appeals to that See. Yea where he telleth us with a great mighty assertion, and sayeth. Quòd concluditur infallibiliter, quòd Antichristus apparebit in mundo ab hoc anno Domini .1354. infra immediatè sequentes 34. annos, that is, that it is an infallible conclusion, that Antechriste shall appear in the world, within four and thirty years immediately following after the year of our Lord .1354. He saith withal, that within the said 34 the saracens should be destroyed, and the jews should be converted, & jurisdictionem summi Pontificis per universum orbem dilatari: and that the authority of the Pope, should be spread through out all the world. Well, how so ever it be, Arnoldus de Villa nova seemeth not greatly to further M. Horns primacy. And it seemeth to me that by ignorance he taketh one Arnoldus for an other. Bernard. Epist. Platina in Had. 4 Sabel. En. 9 lib. 9 In deed there was one Arnoldus Brixianus about this time, condemned for an heretic by Eugenius the .3. as S. bernard, Platina and Sabellicus do write. Your Brother Bale sayeth, that he was condemned, for that he said the clergy might use no temporal jurisdiction. And so this Arnoldus might have served your turn for the time, and somewhat for the matter to after your accustomable reasoning, if the authority of heretics may serve the turn. But let Arnoldus and Spain to go for this tyme. for M. Horn hath other great countries, that about this time taketh his part: as Grecia, Armenia, Moscovia and Aethiopia to, which acknouledge their Princes only to be their supreme governors in all things next unto God, which ye must believe without any proof: belike because it is showed to M. Horn in this his Spiritual revelation. For otherwise I am assured he shall never justify this most untrue saying. And though perchance some of these countries did not at this time, show to the see of Rome such obedience, as they ought to have done, especially the Grecians, and Moscovites, that follow the religion and order of the greek Church: yet neither doth M. Horn prove, nor ever shall be able to prove that the Churches of these countries gave any such authority to their princes: but that they ever took, for spiritual causes their patriarch and other Bishops for the supreme heads, in all matters spiritual. Marvel now it is, that M. Horn can not look upon the Grecians and Armenians, but with one blind eye bleared with affection to heresy and hatred to the Pope. Otherwise if he would look upon them with the better and indifferent eye, there were more cause why he should regard aswell the ancient Greek Church which acknowledged the Pope's Supreamacye: as also the later acknowledging the same, in the general council at Lions: whereof we have spoken, and also afterward in the general Council at Ferraria and from thence translated to Florence. Where also the Armenians were joined with the Roman Church. But not then first. For * Anno. 1145. Nauclerus Generate 39 pag. 231. Volater. Geograph. lib. 10. Otho Frising. three hundred years before that, about .10. years before the death of Henry the first in. S. Bernardes' time, the Armenians submitted themselves to Eugenius .3. sending their chief Metropolitan who had under him more than a thousand Bishops to the See of Rome, who travailing in journey of a year and a half came to Viterbun, scarce ij. days journey from Rome, where the Pope lay them, of whom they were received, and instructed in all such things as they sought at his hands, touching the order of the blessed sacrifice, the observation of festival days and certain other points, wherein they varied from the rest of Christendom, of which errors they are of * Conc. Nicen. 2. Cap. 32. Theophil. in joan. 19 Niceph. li. 18. cap. 52. & 53. old writers much and often noted. And this their submission to the Church of Rome, fell before the time that M. Horn now talketh of, affirming but falsely (as his manner is) that the people of Armenia, acknowledged none but only their princes to be their supreme gournours. Neither needed you yet M. Horn to have looked so far. For if your envious eye might have abidden our own late time, and the late council of Trent, ye should have found that the Armenians sent ambassadors to the Pope recognizing his supremacy, and desiring the confirmation of their patriarch of Antiochia. Ye should have found, that Abdisa the patriarch of the Assyrians inhabiting nigh to the famous flood of Tigris came to Rome, with no small either travel or danger of his life, to be confirmed of Pius Quartus the last pope of blessed memory: who also promised as well for himself, as for those that were under his spiritual government, that he and they would faithfully and constantly keep such decrees, as should be set forth by the said Council of Trent. Perchance ye will the less pass for the Armenians, seeing you have on your side, as ye say, about this time the great prince of the Aethiopians having no less than 62. Kingdoms under his Dominion, the same country being the most ancient part of Christendom southward. And because yourself have forsaken your priesthodde, (take heed I pray you, that ye have not withal forsaken your Christendom) ye are not contented with the Italians, and other that call him Priest John, as though he were a priest and head Bishop over those Christian realms, having such a power with them, as the pope's usurpation (as ye term it) hath challenged here in Europe, to be an head or universal priest or King. And ye would rather he should be called as Sabellicus telleth, the mighty Gyan So called (as ye by a mighty lying exposition of your own falsely declare) because he is the supreme ruler and governor of all causes aswell ecclesiastical as temporal. But here first, seeing ye pretend yourself to be so good an Antiquary, I would gladly know, what monuments ye have of the Aethiopical religion about this time? It had been meet ye had laid forth your Author for your discharge. Surely I believe ye have seen none at all of such antiquity, and I dare boldly avouch, ye neither have nor shall see any, whereby ye may justly gather, that the Aethiopians take their king for their Supreme head in all causes Ecclesiastical and Temporal. We have to the contrary, the confession of the Bishop, Raba Rago, his king's Ambassador, to the king of Portugal, Domianus à Goes de Aethiopum moribus. Pontificem Romanum tanquam primum Episcopum & pastorem ovium Christi agnosco. Nostri certè ab exordio primitivae Ecclesiae Rom. Pontificem ut primum Episc. agnoverunt, cui etiam hodierno die ut Christi Vicario paeremus. Anno. Dom. 1524. Propterea dico ego humiliter ad terram flexis genibus, quòd tu pater meus es, & ego filius tuus. Procul dubio sanctitas vestra Dei est Vicarius. that he made .33. years now past. saying that he doth acknowledge the bishop of Rome, as the chief bishop and pastor of Christ's sheep. We have his confession, wherein he declareth, that the Aethiopians, even from the beginning of the Church did acknowledge the B. of Rome for the first and chief Bishop: and so at that day did obey him as Christ's Vicar. What speak I of his Orator's confession? We have the kings own confession made to the Pope, wherein he calleth him Caput oinun Pōtifi●ū the head of all bishops: he saith to the Pope, Aequum est, ut omnes obedientiam tibi praestent, sicuti sancti Apostoli praecipiunt. It is meet that all men obey him, even as th'Apostles command. He saith most humbly kneeling on the ground, that the Pope is his Father, and he his son: he saith again, Your holiness without all doubt is God's Vicar. And think ye now, M. Horn, that ye shall like a mighty Giant, conquer all your Readers, and make them such bonnd slaves to your ignorance and folly, that because Sabellicus sayeth, he is called Mighty Cyan, therefore ye may so mightily lie, as to conclude thereby, for that he hath the collection of the Spiritual livings, that he is therefore the supreme governor in all causes? Not so M. Horn. Sabel. ene.. 10. lib. 8. But now shall your great falsehood be discovered; and lying spirit be conjured. For behold even immediately after the words by you alleged out of Sabellicus that all benefices and spiritual promotions are obtained at the King's hands, it followeth, I say immediately: Quod Rom. Pontifex Regum Maiestati dederit: The which thing the Bishop of Rome hath given to the King's Majesty. Which words of your author you have most lewdly nipped quite of. Such à Macarian you are, and so like to M. jewel your pewefellowe. Neither doth he speak of any order of religion, about that age, so many hundred years paste, as ye pretend, but of his and our late tyme. And so thus are you M. Horn after this your long and fruitless journey, wherein as wayfaring men in long journeys are wont to do, Mat. Par. Polychro. ye have gathered store of wonderful lies to delight your hearers, that have not travailed so far, withal: welcome home again from moscovia and Aethiopia, into England. M. Horn. The .121. Division. pag. 78. a. In England also, King Stephan (.426.) The .426. untruth. Polychronicon saith no such thing. Mat. Par. Fabian. reserved to himself, the investitures of the Prelates, as likewise after him did Henry the second, that made Thomas Becket archbishop of Canterbury, who thereat was sworn to the King, and to his Laws, and to his Son. In the ninth year of his reign, this king called a Parliament at Northampton, where he intended reformation of many privileges that the Clergy had, amongst these, was one: that although one of the Clergy had committed felony, murder, or treason, yet might not the King put him to death as he did the Say men. The which thing with many other, the king thought to redress in the said Parliament. Thomas Becket resisted him, but he might not prevail against the king (427). The .427. untruth. This for followeth not here, but of an other matter long after. Se● Fabian. cap. 237. For well near all the Bishops of England were against him. In the .17. year of his reign, the king made a journey into Ireland, where with great travail, he subdued the Irish, and after with the help of the Primate of Armach, Fabian. he reformed the manners of the people and dwellers in that country, and that in three things especially: First, in ruling and ordering of the Church by the Curates, and how they should order their divine Service, and minister the Sacrament of matrimony as it was in England, and other Christian Regions. The second was, how that the Lay people should behave themselves towards their Curates, and in what wise they should pay and offer to God their tithes. The third was, for making of their testaments. The .21. Chapter. Of King Stephen, King Henry the .2. and S. Thomas of Caunterbury. Stapleton. Master Horn hath a marvelous grace to dwell still in such matters as nothing relieve his cause: that is in the investuring of bishops. the which neither the queens Majesty, or her graces noble progenitors in our time have challenged, nor yet any other prince in England these many hundred years. Neither is it likely that King Stephen reserved the investitures to himself, aswell for that his immediate predecessor King Henry, after so long stir about them, gave them over, as that the Pope had so lately excommunicated all such Princes. Polychronicon, which work ye cite, William of Malmesbury saith no such thing. Verily King Stephen, for a perpetual confirming of the clergies immunites, made this solemn oath, as it is recorded in William of Malmesbury. Ego Stephanus Dei gratia etc. I Stephen by the grace of God, by the assent of the clergy, and of the people, chosen to be King of England, and consecrated thereunto of William the archbishop of Caunterbury and Legat of the Church of Rome, confirmed also afterward of Innocentius the bishop of Rome, in the regard and love of God, I grant the Church of God to be free, and do confirm the due reverence unto her. I promise I will do nothing in the Church, or in ecclesiastical matters by simony, neither suffer any thing to be so done. I affirm and confirm the justice, the power and the ordering of Ecclesiastical persons, and of all clerks, and their matters to be in the hands of the bishops. I do enact and grant the promotions of the Churches with their privileges confirmed, and the customs thereof after the old manner kept, to continued and remain inviolated. And while such Churches shall be void of their proper pastors, that both the Churches and all the possessions thereof, be in the hand and custody of the Clerks or of honest men, until such time, as a Pastor be substituted according to the Canons. Thus far William of Malmesbury. Now that king Henry the .2. should reserve the said investitures to himself: (which your author Polichronicon saith not) and that the blessed Saint and Martyr S. Thomas (whom ye call Thomas Becket) was sworn to the same: this tale verily hath no manner of appearance or colour. This was none of the articles for the which the king and S. Thomas contended so much: the which articles appear in the life of S. Thomas. Giraldus Cambrensis The King keepeth Counsels in Ireland by the Pope's consent. King Henry conquered Ireland by the Pope's consent▪ That in deed which ye recite is one of them: but how ye may prove your new supremacy thereby, that were hard, for the wisest man in a country to tell: Yea much rather it serveth to the contrary, and proveth the Pope's supremacy, who disallowed the said article with many other, the King also being at length fain to yield therein. The like I say of the Kings doings in Ireland whereof ye writ, which things, as even by your own confession he did by the help of the primate of Armach: so Giraldus Cambrensis, one that writeth of the kins doings there, and one that was sent thither by the king, saith he kept many counsels there, but by the pope's will and consent. And Polidorus saith that the King obtained the title of Irelond by the Pope's authority. Guilielmus Newburgensis writeth much like of William Conqueror, Poli. li. 13. In addit. ad Neubur. M. S. praemonstrato prius Apostolico Papae iure quod in regno Angliae habebat, licentiaque haereditatem conquirendi impetrata, that before he invaded England, he did intimate his right and interest to the Pope, and obtained of him licence to achieve and conquer his inheritance. King william the conqueror moved his right first to the Pope ere he conquered England. Here perchance will many of your sect marvel, why ye have either named S. Thomas, or passed over the story so sleightlye: and will think, that ye are but a dissembler and a traitor to their cause, or at the least a very faint patron for them, especially seeing M. Fox hath ministered you so much good matter, prosecuting the matter xj leaves and more. Your own friends will say your allegations are but simple and cold, The doings of King Henry against S. Thomas declared by M. Foxe. and in a manner altogether extravagant, and that ye might have found in M. Fox, other manner of stuff, as a number of King Henry the second his constitutions and ordinances plain derogatory to many of the Pope's Laws: yea plain commandment, that no man should appeal to Rome, and that Peter pence should be no more paid to the Apostolical see: or that, if any man should be found to bring in any interdict or curse against the Realm of England, he should be apprehended without delay for a traitor, and so executed. And finally, that no manner decree or commandment proceeding from the authority of the Pope should be received. You shall there find, will they say, concerning the said Thomas his parson and doings that he was no Martyr, but a very rebel and traitor, and that all his contention stood not upon matters of faith, religion, true doctrine or sincere discipline, but upon worldly things: as possessions, liberties, exemptions, superiorities and such like. In deed these and such other like things we find in M. Fox: but he storieth these things with as good faith and troth, as he doth all his other. And here I would gladly for a while leave M. Horn, and take him in hand, and shape him a full answer. But in as much as this would require a long process, and for that this my answer already waxeth long, I will forbear the diligent and exact discussion of the whole: and will open so much only to the unlearned reader, as may serve him for the true knowledge of the matter, and for the discovering of M. Foxes crafty and untrue dealing: and withal for a full answer, to these frivolous and false arguments producted by M. Horn. And here first, not S. Thomas, but the King's stoutness and sternness seemeth to be reprehended, that would needs have an absolute answer of him, and would not be contented with so reasonable an answer as he made, Saluo ordine meo: saving my order. No nor afterward with this exception, Saluo honore Dei, saving the honour of God. S. Thomas can not justly be accused of stoutness and stubbournes. This modification or moderation may serve to any indifferent man, that advisedly considereth the king's articles proposed to S. Thomas, such as might excuse him from all stoutness and stubbornness; that M. Fox and his adversaries lay to him. I intent not now to enter into any serious or deep examination of the said articles▪ but this I will say, that it is against all the old canons of the Church, yea and against reason to, that an Archbishop should be judged of his suffragans, as S. Thomas was. Again to omit other articles, there is one, that is quite contrary to the Apostolical doctrine, to the canons of Nice, and other most ancient general counsels: finally to the catholic doctrine of Christ's universal Church. that is, for appeals to be made from the Archdeacon to the bishop, from the bishop to the Archbishop: Ca 8. de appellatio. Si emerserint ab Archidiacono, debent procedere ad episcopum: et ad epis. ad archie, et si Archiepis. defuerit in justitia exhibenda, postremò ad regem est pervemendun, ut praecepto ipsius in curia Archiepiscopi controversia terminetur, ita quod non debent vlterius procedere absque assensu regis. In quadrilogo de vita B. Thomae. lib. 5. Vide dict quadrilogun lib. 5. impress. parisijs in 4. An. 1495. in principio. Vide foxun fol. 48. Cap. 7. Nullus qui de rege teneat in capite, vel aliquis domesticorum ministrorum eius ex communicetur etc. nisi prius rex etc. and in case there be any defect of justice there, the matter to be brought to the king, and by his commandment to be ended in the Archbishop's cowrt, without any further proceeding, without the kings consent, whereby not only the pope's supreme authority, but the authority also of all general counsels, the which are the ordinary and necessary remedies in many cases, did stand then in the king of England his grace only, to be accepted, or to be rejected. M. Fox reciteth the king's constitutions: but as he leaveth out this and many other, and rehearseth but six of them: so in those six he maketh three manifest and open lies. For where he saith the said decrees by him recited were condemned by the Pope, there were but three of them condemned, that is the .1. the .3. and the .4. The other three the pope did suffer and tolerat. Again what a decree was this, that none that held of the king in capite, no nor any of his servants should be excommunicated, unless the king were first consulted? I trow M. Horn himself, and his fellows, neither keep this precise order, nor will allow it. Well, M. Fox full prettily leaveth out this constitution, what cause moveth him I can not tell. Think ye now M. Fox, that for those and such like, S. Thomas had not good cause, to mollify the matter with saluo ordine meo, & saluo honore Dei, and when that would not be accepted, to gainsay altogether, and to appeal to the sea of Rome? Ye will say this notwithstanding, they were no matters of faith or religion, or true doctrine, and that he is therefore far from the cause and title of a martyr. In deed it was if not wisely, yet wilily, and like a crafty Fox done of you to scrape him out of your blessed calendar. For in good faith place can he have none there, unless all your late stinking martyrs give place, and yield. which are the devils, and not God's martyrs, and it were for none other thing, but for the denial of the Pope's supremacy. The which supremacy is a necessary doctrine, to be held of every Christian man (where unvincible ignorance is not) upon pain of dammation, and everlasting separation from the Catholic Church, and the members of the same. Beside this, A man may be a martyr, though it be for no cause of faith or religion. Niceph. li. hist. eccles. 13. cap. 1. Telemachius the martyr. Theod. l. 5. cap. 26. Tr. l. 10. c. 2 Niceph. li. 13. cap. 4. cum sequent. Sigeb. in chronic. a. 697 et 698. Videelegantem disputationem an Alphegus sit martyr inter Lanfranc. Cantur. & Anselmum postea Cant. Archiepiscop. apud Edinerum lib. 1. de vita Anselmi. Vide Guliel. Malmesb. de Pontif. lib. 1. there are many taken for blessed martyrs in the Church, that died not for the faith or for doctrine being them in any controversy, but for justice and truth sake, and for their virtuous dealing: as is the good monk Telemachius, that seeing at Rome two swordplayers, the on of them ready to destroy, and kill the other, upon a great zeal, came to them, and thought to have parted them, and so was slain of them himself. whereupon th'emperor Honorius reckoned him among the martyrs, and made a law, that there should be no more such kind of play exercised in Rome. The cause also of S. john Chrisostoms' trouble proceeded not directly from matter of faith or doctrine, but for reproving thempresseempress Eudoxia. I omit S. Quillian and S. Lambert both taken for martyrs, and slain for rebuking adultery. And to come nearer to our own country and to S. Thomas time, S. Alphegius archbishop of Canterbury, a little before the Conquest, that suffered himself to be slain of the Danes, rather than he would pill and poll his tenants, to levy an excessive somme of money, that the Danes required for his redemption. Of whose virtue God since hath given great testimony, aswell by diverse other miracles, as by preserving his body so long uncorrupted. But the chief and most ancient presidente of all in the new testament is S. john the baptist, who died for the like liberty and freedom of speech, as S. Quillian. and S. Lamberte did. To these we may set Isaiah and the other prophets of the old testament: Howbeyt as I said in S. Thomas his cause, is a necessary doctrine also employed, what a testimony God hath given to the world for S. Thomas doings. that was either directly or indirectly blemisshed, by these ordinances of the king, concerning the Pope's Supremacy. Now what madness were it for me, or any other to seek by words to set forth this blessed man's qualities and martyrdom, when that God himself, hath by so wonderful and strange, yea by so certain and notorious miracles, aswell in the life of his servant as afterward, given to the world such a testimony for him, as all the devils in hell, In Quadrilogo. li. 2. c. 16. Vox de coelo elapsa sic contestata est. In dicto quadril. li. 3. c. vlt. Nam & in loco passionnis eius & ubi ante maius altare pernoctavit humandus, & ubi tandem sepultus est. etc. and their disciples in earth may rather gnash their angry teeth, and envy at, then by any good means deny and deface it. True shall it be also, that S. Thomas heard long ere he returned into England, by a celestial and heavenly voice. O Thoma, Thoma, Ecclesia mea gloriabitur in sanguine tuo. O Thomas, Thomas, my Church shall glory in thy blood. And true it is, that was written incontinently after his death, that at the place of his passion, and where he is buried, paralitici curantur, caeci vident, surdi audiunt, loquuntur muti, claudi ambulant, evadunt febricantes, arrepti à daemonio liberantur, & à variis morbis sanantur aegroti, blasphemi à demonio arrepti confunduntur: & quod à diebus patrum nostrorum non est auditum▪ mortui surgunt. Palsies are cured, the blind see, the deaf hear, the dumb speak, the lame walk, the agues are healed, and such as are possessed of the Devil are delivered, and divers diseases helped, and blasphemers being taken and possessed of the devil confounded: and finally (as our said author, not so much an ear as an eye witness, saith) that which hath not been heard of, in our father's days, dead men are relieved again. The earl of flanders and the French king came to Canterbury in pilgrimage to S. Thomas In quadrilogo lib. 4. cap. 4. Obtulit munera, vinum videlicet et aurum: aureum scilicet calicem, & vini centum modios, perpetuo ad natalitium diem martyris singulis amnis celebrādū in latitia. These and many other miracles shown aswell in England as out of England, were so notable and famous, that shortly after S. Thomas his martyrdom, not only the Earl of Flaunders, but the French King also came to Cantorburie in pilgrimage, to pray at this blessed Martyrs tomb. The king of France offered there a chalice of gold, and his grant in writing for a certain quantity of wine, yearly to be delivered to the monks there to be merry withal at the solempnitye or feast of this blessed Martyr. But what shall we say to king Henry himself? what thowght he trow ye of this blessed man's doings and death? This part of the story of all other is most notable. Polidorus. in Hen 2. Quadrilogus. li. 4. cap. 5. The king's grief for S. Thomas. The king being in Normandy, and hearing that S. Thomas was slain took the matter so heavily, that for forty days, he kept himself solitary in great mourning and lamentation, in great abstinence, setting a side all the affairs of his great and large dominions, for grief and sorrow: And forthwith sent his ambassadors to the Pope to purge himself of the said murder. whereupon certain Legates were sent to him, before whom upon his oath he said, that he neither commanded, nor willed that the archbishop should be slain, and added that he was never so sorry for the death of his own father or mother. Yet did he not deny, but by unadvised words, he gave the murderers an occasion of their fowl enterprise. Penance enjoined to the king by the pope's Legates. Wherefore he submitted himself to the Legates to enjoin him penance as they should think good. Then was it among other things enjoined him, that he should break and revoke the foresaid statutes and ordinances, for the which all this trouble rose: all the which conditions the king by his oath promised to observe. This done the king's son also promised on his part, to see these covenants kept. But yet see the just judgement of God. As this king rebelled against his spiritual father S. Thomas, The king's sons rebel to him their carnal father as he rebelled against his spiritual father, the pope and S. Thomas. and his spiritual mother the Church, so did his son and heir, with his two other sons, Richard and john, rebel against him, confederating themselves with other the kings subjects, and with the French and Scottish kings. The king was brought to this distress, that he wist not in the world, what to say, or what to do: and being destitute of man's help ran to God's help, and to the help of his blessed martyr S. Thomas, at whose greater miracles done at Canterbury all the world did wonder. Wherefore forsaking Normandy where he was in more safety, sailed into England, Quadrip. histo. vitae D. Thom. lib. 4. c. 6. cum sequent. and coming toward Canterbury, before he entered the city, putting of all his princely appparell, like a new king David, being presecuted of his Absalon, for his sins, as David went out of the city barefoted, so this new David being barefooted, and all his body naked, 2. Re. c. 17. josephus li. 2. c. 12. de Antiq. judaeo. His marvelous voluntary penance In dicta quadripa. & in Gul. Malmesb. saving that he was covered with a poor and a vile cote upon the bare, being now himself fearful and trembling, whom before so many nations feared and trembled, with much sighing and groaning went to the Martyr's tomb, where he continued all that day, and the night following watchful and fasting: where he commended himself to the blessed martyrs prayers. Neither was he deceived of his good devotion and expectation: as we shall anon declare. Before the said tomb, he took discipline with a rod of every monk, and for his love and devotion to the martyr, he renounced the foresaid ill statutes and customs for ever, and only said he would keep such as were reasonable and good. Gulielmus Neuburgensis, whom M. Fox bringeth in to deface and disgrace this blessed martyr, if it might be, and yet not daring, to tell either of other things, written by other, or that I shall now tell you out of the said Neuburgensis, sayeth, that the said night, there was avoyce that said to a good and a blessed monk at Canterbury being a sleep: Neuburg. lib. 2. c. 34. Impr. Cap. 19 M.S. Viro reverendissimo Rogero scilicet Abbate Bellelandensi referent cognovi, quod etc. Polidorus. in Henr. 2. Dict. lib. 4. ca 8. in quadripart, & in Neuburg. cap. 19 Ipsa namque die, eadem etiam diei hora qua missae interfuerat, rex Scotorum captus est: etc. A marvelous victory that God gave the king the same hour he heard mass at Canterbury. The king ascribeth his victory to God and S Thomas. Rex autem totum ascripsit Domino, & glorioso martyri Ib. cui certiss. erat ascr have ye not seen (sayeth the voice) the king's great and wonderful humility? Be thou assured, that shortly th'end of his affairs shall declare how well God liketh the same. My author saith, that he heard this from the mouth of a reverend Abbate, who being the same time in Kente, heard it from a credible and a faithful reporter. The next morning the king heard mass, before the tomb of the martyr, and so departed. The very same day yea the very same hour that the king heard mass there, undoubtedly by the miraculous working of God, the scottish king without battle scattered from the rest of his Army, and after few strokes given was taken prisoner, and afterward by little and little all his enemies, aswell beyond as by hither the seas were quieted and pacified. All the which prosperous fortune the king did ascribe to God, and to his glorious martyr S. Thomas, to whom most certainly, it was to be ascribed. Let M. Fox now and his fellows to, rail at this blessed man as long as they will. Let him scrape him out of his calendar, and put in for him heretics, thieves, and traitors, and let him now if he can for very shame, call this man a traitor, and cause his name to be abolished out of the Church boks, what a madness is it to make S. Thomas after so many hundred years a traitor? as it hath been of late years. Let them toss and turmoil as long, and as buselie as they will. They shall but show their extreme wickedness and madness, blasphemously to call him traitor, whom the king himself (to whom the offence was done, if any were done) worshipped as God's holy martyr: they shall but strive against the stream, or rather against God himself, that hath given through out all the world such a glorious testimony for him: and for the confirmation of the catholic doctrine of his Church, namely for the pope's supremacy. Which answer I will also to serve against M. Horn concerning all his allegations here touching the doings of the king with this blessed Martyr. M. Horn. The .122. Division. pag. 78. b. In Germany, succeeded unto Fredrick, Henry, and next unto him Philip, both of them (.428.) The .428. Untruth. Avouched, but unproved investuring Bishops, and suffering no Legates from Rome to come into Apulia, nor Sicilia, according to the aforesaid composition. The .22. Chapter: Of Henry the .6. Philip, and Otho the .4. Emperors. Ann 1230. Abb. Vrsp. in vita Henr. 5. Gul. ●irius de bell sac. li. 1. ca 13. Otho ●ris. li. 7. ca 16. Radulph. Pisanus in vita Calixti. 2. Stapleton. THat Henry and his brother Philip did investure bishops, it is not likely, and the matter would be better proved, then by your bare word Namely seeing that Henry the .5. made a full conclusion with Calixtus the second (as we have before showed) that the clergy should have the election of their bishops. By the which agreement the contention that had continued about a fifty years for that matter was pacified. And whereas ye refer yourself to the aforesaid composition, that they would suffer no Legates to come into Apulia and Sicilia, the pope is much bound to you, for thereby ye prove his supremacy: As from whom that Composition by way of dispensation proceeded, Diuis. 117. Naucl. gener. 41. pa. 287. &. 288. Nauclerus as yourself before avouched, and as in Nauclerus it well appeareth. M. Horn. The .123. Division. pag. 78. b. Next to whame succeeded Otto, surnamed of the Clergy the defender of justice▪ for where as the manner of Princes was (saith Abbas Vrspurgens.) cheerfully and readily to give benefices or Churches, to those that did first ask them, he would not so do: but he gave all the benefices that fell, as well Ecclesiastical as Secular, to those with whom he was acquainted etc. This Emperor came into Italy, claimed and (.429.) The .429. untruth. This Otho recovered it not, but lost the Empire himself. recovered all the right of the Empire, that the Pope (430.) The .430. untruth slanderous. It was no usurpation but lawful possession. usurped under the name of S. Peter's Patrimony, and called a (.431.) The .431. and .432. as shall appear. Synod at Norinberge about this matter, and touching the (.432.) Pope's authority. Stapleton. Ye have not as I said won so much credit, being so often taken in open lies that we may trust you upon your word. Tell us therefore I pray you what chronicler calleth this Otho the defender of justice, and then tell us, by what good logic your for will follow. For methink it is but a silly slender for to say, he was defender of justice, for that he bestowed spiritual livings upon none but such as he knew. unless ye did prove withal that he knew none but honest men. But will you see what Nauclerus your own Author writeth hereof? He saith of this Otho: This man was praised of many religious persons and of the clergy, for a defender of justice: Nauclerus gener. 41. pag. 273. when yet he was altogether a dissembler. Nam omnia beneficia tam Ecclesiastica quàm secularia, familiaribus suis quos secum ex Saxonia & Anglia duxerat, contulit. For he bestowed all promotions as well Ecclesiastical as temporal upon his near acquaintance such as he brought with him out of Saxony and out of England. Platina in Inno. 3. Vide Naucler. gene. 41. p. 274.5.6. &. 7. Conuentum principum suae partis celebravit Norimbergae. Lo M. Horn, this (For he bestowed) which you bring to prove a supreme government, Nauclerus reporteth to prove a partial regiment. That he telleth to his shame, you draw it to his honour. Again what patron of justice call you him, that wrongfully took from the Church of Rome her old and rightful possessions, and was therefore excommunicated and deposed, of Innocentius .3. and Frederik .2. made Emperor in his place. And that, notwithstanding the diet of Otho his faction, holden at Norimberg: which you untruly call a Synod. Neither was it there debated of the Pope's Authority in Ecclesiastical matters (which is our present matter) but only whether the Pope might depose the Emperor: which is not now any part of our matter in hand. M. Horn. The .124. Division. pag. 78. b. Polych. Fabian. In England as Henry his father had done before him: so followed King Richard in giving Ecclesiastical promotions, in calling counsels, and ordering other Ecclesiastical matters: yea▪ even in his absence, being in Syria, by one that represented his person therein the B. of Ely, who called and made a council at westminster, as the king's procurator, and the Pope's Legate, and (.432.) The .432. untruth. No such words in Fabian. spoke by the King's power. But in this matter, king john did more than any of his predecessors, which purchased him much hatred with the Pope and his Monks. The .23. Chapter: Of King Richard the first, and King john, Kings of England. Stapleton. NOw M. Horn is returned from Appulia, Sicilia, Germany, and Italy into England again. And why think you? Forsooth to prove himself like a good and faithful proctor to the Pope, that the Pope was the supreme head of the Church of England. Else let him wisely show why he telleth, that the bishop of Elie was the Pope's Legate? But chief why he bringeth in, or is not ashamed to lay forth for his supremacy King john: and to say that he did more in this matter, than any of his predecessors? Ye say truth M. Horn, he did in deed, and being excommunicated of the Pope, for his misorder and outrageous doings against the Church, and the whole land interdicted, he gave over to the Pope, his crown and kingdom: and received it again at the Pope's hands. And because this matter should not be kept in silence (which wisdom perchance and policy to, would have had so kept) Master Fox blazeth out the matter at large, Acts and monuments fol. 65. and layeth forth before all men, the copy of the letter obligatory concerning the yielding up of the crown into the Pope's hands, and of certain money yearly to be paid. I will not, nor need not travail in the curious trial, and examination of the circumstances of the cause: but this only will I say to M. Fox and to you M. Horn, that if ye proceed on as ye begin, ye are worthy to have a reward at the Pope's hand: either for that ye are but a dissembling counterfeit protestant, and the Pope's privy friend: or if ye be angry with that, so wise and skilful a reasoner, that ye speak ye wot near what: And while ye go about to set the Pope's crown on the queens head, ye take her crown and set it on the Pope's head. So that it little serveth you to tell us, that King john purchased him much hatred with the Pope and the Monks. Ye might have put in, and with all the nobility and commons to, yea moste of all, with God and good men to. But this is your, and your fellows trade, especially Master Foxes, in the setting forth of this kings story, to lie extremely, to bring thereby the clergy into hatred and envy: as in this story among other things he hath done, A great untruth of M. Fox concerning the poisoning of king john. touching the poisoning of this King by a monk of Swinstead abbey. And perchance ye M. Horn meant some like matter, when ye speak of the monks that hated him. But because I can not certainly lay this to you, I will let you go for a while, and be a little in hand with M. Fox, and open unto thee (good Reader) that thou mayst the better understand his substantial dealing and handling of stories, and the better beware of his gay glorious painted lies, what is the common consent of our best chroniclers in this point. another untruth, for the chronicles do not commonly say so. First then, this is a manifest lie, that ye say M. Fox, the chroniclers most agree in this, that he was poisoned by the monk at Swinstead. Which thing I could easily prove, by reciting specially, what every author writeth concerning the manner of his death: But M. Fox himself hath, we thank him, provided that we need not travail so far: for lo, he bringeth in Polidorus, saying he died of sorrow and heaviness of heart: M. Fox himself unwares confuteth his own fable of the poisoning of king john. Radulphus Niger, saying he died, of surfeiting in the night: Roger Hoveden, saying he died of a bloody flux: Matheus Parisiensis, saying that by heaviness of mind, he fell into a fervent ague, at the abbey of Swinstead, which he increased with surfeiting, and naughty diet: by eating peaches and drinking of new Ciser, or sydar. Then add ye farther Master Fox that some say he died of a cold sweat: some of eating apples: some of eating pears: and some of eating plums. So have ye here good reader, four chroniclers by name, and at the least four other unnamed, that make no mention of any poison. Now could I bring the Polichronicon, and Fabian which reciting the said Polychronicon, saith that the King died of the flux. Here also could I bring in, that those that writ of his poisoning, writ very diversly nothing agreeing with your author in the kind of poison. And also that they rehearse it rather as a common tale, then for any assured story or truth. Many other things could I bring in, but what needeth it, when we have by his own tale store enough of witnesses against him? Yet will I add one more, but such a one, as aught to be to M. Fox in stead of a great sort: that one I say, of whom by all that I can judge (for he hath not vouchsafed ones to name him) M. Fox hath taken all his declaration, The Author of whom M. Fox taketh the residue of his story concerning King john maketh against him. Ex Chronic. joan. Londinensis. concerning the election of Stephen Langton, and of all the great business that issued thereof: yea the writing obligatory, touching the resigning of the crown into the Pope's hands. Which lieth in our author word for word, as M. Foxe hath translated it. This our author showeth, that as the King was going northward, the ground opened and swallowed up his carts and carriage, that it could never be recovered. Whereupon the King fell into a great grief and heaviness, and fetched many sighs from the very bottom of his heart. And being at Swinstead surfeated with peaches and other fruit, and there fell sick. And so being sick departed, and being not able to continue on horseback, came in an horselytter to Leadforde castle: and afterward to Newemarket, where perceiving himself to be passed all cure and remedy, he sent for the Abbatte of Crokestone that was skilful in physic. of whom he was confessed, and received the Sacrament of the holy Eucharistia. And by and by he endeth this story of King john, saying that because this king was hated of many, partly for the death of his nephew Arthur, partly for his adultery, partly for his tyranny, partly for the tribute, by the which he brought England into a perpetual bondage, partly for the wars that his doings stirred up, he was scarcely worthy to be bemoaned and lamented for, of any man. Here have we now M. Fox five authors by name, and more ancient than your Caxton, and of an other judgement, touching this kings death, than your Caxton is: beside four some says at the least. M. Fox's ground of poysoninge king john standeth upon a lying book having no name of the author. And now let us weigh with a word or two the credit of this your own Author. I pass over, that ye call it the chronicle of William Caxton, he being neither the maker, neither the translator, saving he hath adjoined out of Polichronicon the description of England and Ireland, of Trevisa his translation, and added as they say, certain other things to his unknown Author. Belike ye thowght to win some credit to your author clothing him with the name of this Caxton, a man of late remembrance, because he hath no name of his own. And so a meet work for you, in the dark to lurk and lie withal, and in deed unworthy to have the name of the chronicles of England, What a lying book this fructus temporum is that M. Fox groundeth himself upon. or to be called Fructus temporum: being as unfruytful as any book that was made many a .100. years. unless we may call him being barren of all good truth and choice of good matter, fit for a story of any credit, or fruitful, being only fruitful and plentiful of wondered untruths, and open lewd lies. I report me (for his truth to his fable of the xxxiij. Daughters of king Diocletian king of Syria, that after they had slain their husbands, stole away by ship into our Ileland of Britanny which was then unhabited and unpeopled, and afterward being conceived by devils brought forth giants which inhabited the land, until the coming of Brute that slew them. part. 1. And that our Ilelande was called Albion of the eldest daughter Albine: as afterward Britamnie by the name of the foresaid Brute. Again of king Arthure, that being not able to keep the possession of his own realm from the Saxons, carried an army of one hundred thousand and more into far countries, having under his conduct a number of kings, and there slew the Emperor of Rome, and discomfited his huge army, wherein were above .5. or .6. hundred thousand armed men. Make now M. Fox the citizens of Rochester believe, part. 5. that in the old time, by the prayer of S. augustine, their forefathers were borne with tails: or any wise man to believe, that king Ethelbertus joining with his friend Elfride the king of Northumberland (who yet was an heathen, the other being christened) levied an army, and set upon the Britain's, because they would not receive and obey the said S. Augustine. Make us, if you can believe this, with the vain fabler Galfride (a sad Author with your fellow jewel) against the approved history of venerable Bede, Vide praefationem Guilielm. Newbrigensis de Galfrid● impress. and of all other sense his time. Make us, I say, M. Fox, by any good or probable demonstration, believe this and an hundred such other fables, for the which your Fructus temporum, is unfruitful to his wise and discrete reader: and then tell us and spare not, of this monk of Swinstead. Otherwise he were a very swyneshead that would be lightly and rashly persuaded, by such swinish fables. Paint and picture them as fast and fair as ye will to make fools fain withal: I say not this because I will excuse him, or any other ill monk, of their naughty doings. I do require but convenient proof namely of you M. Fox, and your fellows, that are so precise with the Catholics for their proofs. And when ye have all proved, ye prove nothing to the purpose. For the ill doings of some naughty packs, can neither deface the truth of the Catholic doctrine, nor yet spot the honesty of other not consenting. And as there is no likelihood the King to be after this sort poisoned: so is it more incredible, that this Monk had Masses continually song for his soul: and of all, most incredible, that it should be confirmed by their general Chapter. No, no, M. Fox, think not to carry away the matter so. Think not that all that read your foolish, lewd lying martyrologue will strait ways without further trial and examination, take all for the Gospel. And see how God hath provided against your false lying fable a good and a convenient remedy for them that will not willingly be carried away like fools and beasts, another great ununtruth. of M. Foxes: for his author hath no word of this confirmation. See this book printed by winkin de word● 2502. for the discredit of this your fable. For seeing that yourself hath here most impudently added that which is not at all in your author, that is, concerning the confirmation of the general chapter: who will hereafter credit you or regard your writings: or who will not think, that your unnamed and unfruitful author hath either upon to light credit set in this fable in his unfruitful book, or by like impudency as ye have feigned the general chapters confirmation, hath feigned it, or taken of some that feigned it, this whole foolish fond fable? Go now on M. Horn: plead on, as you have begun, and bring more such examples, I pray you. M. Horn. The .125. Division. pag. 79. a. In this while The French King held a Council at Cenomannia in Turon. And after him King jews did celebrate a solemn Council at Paris, whereat was present the Pope's legates. Stapleton. Plead on I say M. Horn, and tell your reader that king jews was supreme head, because in a council that he kept at Paris the Pope's legate was present. Whereby it rather followeth that it was kept, by the Pope's supreme authority, not by the kings. M. Horn The .126. Division. pag. 79. a. In which time was Fredrick the .2. Emperor, out of doubt, saith Aventinus, an other Charles the great, and without all controversy most profitable for the Christian common wealth: which not only held the privileges aforesaid in Apulia and Sicilia, but in all his dominions, and about this matter, (.433.) The .433. untruth. mere Slanderous. tamed divers Popes, called and kept diverse councils, aswell by his Sons, as by himself: and ordained certain (.434.) The .434. untruth. Not ecclesiastical Laws as shall appear. Ecclesiastical laws against diverse Heretics, condenninge their heresies and appointing how they should be ordered: ordaining likewise many privileges for Ecclesiastical persons. The .24. Chapter. Of Fredrick the .2. Emperor of that name. THE more and the deaper ye praise this Frederik, the more and the deaper ye meshe and wrap yourself in your own shame and grievous condemnation And much are we the catholics bounden to the unspeakable goodness of God, that whereas ye and your fellows most presumptuously and obstinately, either reject all such proofs and demonstrations as the catholics lay for them against you, or most fryvolously go about to frustrate and elude them, hath now so entangled you with your own allegation, your own Emperor, by you so highly commended, that whereas ye say, he tamed divers Popes: we say, he never so tamed Pope, as he was tamed himself of the Pope, and as he tameth you, and maketh you not so much a tame fool, as that so foolishly and fondly set up your new Papacy by his authority: but a very mad and an horrible heretic. I pray thee now Good Reader, give a good and an attentive ear. M. Horn telleth of laws made by the Emperor how heretics should be ordered, but the order he showeth not. Did then this Emperor, as ye say Master Horn, and therein truly, make laws (though not truly Ecclesiastical Laws) against diverse Heretics, condemning the heresies, and appointing how they should be ordered? If ye had told your Reader, the names of the Heretics, or their heresies, and the manner appointed how they should be ordered, ye might have eased me of some labour, but to your own little ease or contentation: as proclaiming yourself by express words as ye do nevertheless covertly lurking in this your Cacus den, an open and a notorious, for a number of most wretched and damnable errors, The Heretics that Fredrick condemned, were condemned before in the great general council at Lions: and a most wretched heretic. And here first though I have granted you, that he made laws against Heretics: yet will I not grant you, that they were (as ye term them) Ecclesiastical laws. For such (properly to speak) are made of Ecclesiastical persons, in whom the Authority of allowing or condemning for matters Ecclesiastical resteth. These Laws of Fredrick were rather executorie of the Laws Ecclesiastical, than laws mere Ecclesiastical. For the Heretics and heresies by Fredrick condemned, were before condemned by the Bishops and Popes, An. 1215. Platina In Innoc. tertio. In Chronographia especially by the great learned Bishop Innocentius the third, in the most famous General Council kept at Lateran in Rome. At the which beside the Pope, were present, the patriarchs of Constantinople and Jerusalem, three score and ten Metropolitan, and four hundred other Bishops, 12. abbots, and .800. priors conventuals: in the whole, as your brother Pantaleon writeth, a thousand and .300. Prelates: with the Ambassadors of both the Emperors, Vide Decret. Grego. tit. de heretic. c. excommunicamus. 2. as well of the West, as of the East: Yea as also of the Kings of Jerusalem, France, Spain, England, Cyprus and other Countries. In this Council were condemned a number of heretics, A rascal rabblement of monstrous heretics names. calling themselves Catharos, Patarenos, Pauperes de Lugduno, Passaginos, Tossepinos, Arnoldistas, Speronistas, and with other strange names. joan. Gers. part. 4. Ibidem titulo de summa Trinit. cap. 2. Reprobamus etiam & condemnamus perversissimum dogmae impij Almarici, cuius mentem pater mendacij sic excoecavit ut eius doctrina, non tam haeretica, quàm insana sit censenda. Vide epistolas Petri de vineis Cancellarij Frederic. 2. li. 1. ca 25.26. et. 27. Et novel. Fred. insertas Cod. justinian. There was also condemned the wicked Almaricus: whose mind the Father of lies had so blinded, that his doctrine was to be counted not heretical only, but mad also and furious. This council was kept, this Fredericus being Emperor, who in this point following th'emperors justinian and Charles the Great (and so far I grant it true, that ye say he was an other Charles the Great) as they before had done, confirmed the laws Ecclesiastical, with civil and politic ordinances. And as they condemned the heretics, first by the Church condemned: so doth Fredericus too: as Patarenos, Speronistas, Leonistas, Arrianistas, Circuncisos, Passaginos, joseppinos, Carracenses, Albanenses, Francisco's, Bamnaroles, Comistas, Waldenses, Burgaros, Commillos, Barrinos', Ottolevos, & de aqua nigra, and finally, omnes haereticos utriusque sexus: All heretics of both kind, as well men as women. Yet is there great difference, The difference between the laws of Fredrick and the Council. Dict. cap. 2. de summa trinitate. Et c. excommunicamus. 1. &. 2. de heretic. between the foresaid Ecclesiastical, and Imperial laws. The Ecclesiastical persons, after long and mature consideration and examination of opinions and doctrine of the foresaid persons, do find their doctrine, a false and an heretical doctrine, and therefore do condemn them as heretics: they do curse and excommunicate them, and if they be persons Ecclesiastical, do deprive and degrade them, and so leave them to the secular power. The said Council ordaineth, that none shall preach without the Popes or the bishops licence, The manner how heretics should be ordered, set forth as well out of the foresaid Council, as out of Fredrick his laws. Dict. c. 25. cum sequentibus. and that all secular officers shall take an oath to do their endeavour to purge their country of heretics, and if need be, to be compelled thereto by excommunication. And that all suspect persons shall purge themselves, at the discretion of their ordinary under pain of excommunication, in the which if they wilfully continue one year, then to be taken for heretics. These and many other things the Council ordained in this behalf. The which decrees the Emperor Fredrick confirmeth by his Imperial edict, adding perpetual infamy, exile, banishment, death, and the disheryting of their heirs: and that he shall not be taken for any officer or Magistrate, and that all his judgements and sentences shall be void that will not take the oath aforesaid. He commandeth the houses of heretics and of their fautors and abettors to be plucked down, never to be builded again. He declareth them to be intestable: that is, neither able to make testament of their own nor to be capable of any benefit, out of any other man's testimony: and that to the second generation, they shall bear no public office. And this is the manner, M. Horn, of the ordering of Heretics, that ye speak of, appointed by your new supreme Head the Emperor Fredrick. And so ye see withal, how you and your fellows were to be ordered, if he now lived. What? Me think ye begin, M. Horn, to wax angry and to chaufe with me, for telling you of such a rabblement of strange monstrous heretical names: And that ye have nothing to do with these heretics, being such as ye never heard of, no, not so much as their names before. Well, for the names, I will not perchance stick with you, but for the wicked opinions, M. Horn in telling that Frederik condemned heretics, proclaimeth himself an Heretic. Almaricus his heresies. In Chronolog. Almaricus Gallus, imagines, altaria, & sanctorum invocationem, idololaetrian censet: transubstantiationem altaris negat. Idem aliquot errores docens comburitur Parisijs. Bern. de Luxemburg in cattle. Bernard. epist. 195. that they maintained, they are of nearer cozenage to you, than ye were ware of, when ye wrote of Fredericus Ecclesiastical laws against heretics, Ergo, heretics they were by your own sentence. Whereunto I adjoin: Ergo, you are an heretic, as upholding a number of their erroneous opinions: for the which they were condemned as well by Fredrick, as by the foresaid general Council. And first to begin with Almaricus, Did not his errors stand in the refusing of Images, Altars, the invocation of saints, the transubstantiation of the holy Eucharistia, even as your brother Pantaleon writeth, saying (which is marvel) that he was burned at Paris for teaching of errors? A man may think they were errors in deed, that Pantaleon will once confess to be errors. For the other aforesaid, he taketh not for errors, but for true doctrine. What errors were they then? One was, that if Adam and Eve had continued in state of grace, they should never have had children by any carnal copulation, but otherwise: Yea that there should have been no difference between the Male and the Female kind. Secondly, he said, that the blessed Saints in heaven do not see the essence of God. Which error he learned of Petrus Abailardus, against whom S. barnard writeth: and of Arnoldus Brixiensis, of whom as I suppose, Arnoldistae, of whom we spoke of, be called. Thirdly, he said, that the body of Christ is no otherwise in the Sacrament of the Altar, then in other bread, and all other things. Fourthly he said, there was no hell. Fifthly, he denied the resurrection of the flesh. And yet is this Almaricus a worthy bishop, and an holy Martyr, in Master Foxes mad martyrologue. Neither can he find any matter why he was condemned, Almaricus is M. Foxes holy Martyr. Vide Foxun fol. 70. but for teaching and holding against Images, which if it were true, as it is false, yet were he but a stark stinking Martyr. I will now unfold and rip up the heresies of some other condemned by Fredrick, that Master Horn may see his own judgement, Articles of the convocation offered of late to the parliament given against him and his fellows (especially against their heretical Articles agreed upon in their Schismatical Convocation, and now after four years, offered to the Parliament to be confirmed and ratified) given, I say, not only by the most famous General Council aforesaid, but also by his own Supreme Head, the Emperor Fredrick, and by his own words and confession. And here it shall be sufficient to set before you, the Waldenses only. For as a good fellow once said, which had provided a feast furnished with many dishes, to his friend marveling at such plenty, but all was but swine's flesh, which he had by his jolly cokerie dressed in such diversity: So all this rascal rabblement of these huge monstrous names and sects, are in effect nothing but the swinish sect of the Waldenses: otherwise called the poor brethren of Lions, taking there, their original of one Waldo, their unlearned and blind presumptuous guide. Which had in diverse Countries diverse names, whereof some ye have heard: and were commonly called in England, as appeareth by our Acts of parliament and Chronicles, and in some other Countries also, Lollards. Will ye then know, what their Religion and order was in Church matters? I remit the Latin and learned Reader to Aeneas Silvius, and to Paulus Aemilius: and the English Reader to Master Fox himself. Who at large to deck and beautify his holy Canonisation setteth their errors and heresies forth to his Reader. In historiae Bohemiae ca 35. P. Aemil. li. 6. Hist. Franc. Fol. 42. cum sequent. All our new Gospel springeth from the foolish fond Friar Waldo, and his sect condemned by the foresaid Council and by Frederik. Of whom the Arnoldists are called. Vide catalogum Illirici. pag. 465. et in appendice pag. 15. impress. Argentin. 1562. And to be short, there shall ye find, that our holy English Convocation borrowed their damnable Articles, whereof we have spoken, of them, and the whole order beside, of this their gay Gospelling Church. Of this sect sprang among other, the Albanenses, which otherwise are called Albigenses, of the people called Albij in the County of toulouse in France, the which we have before rehearsed. Now the Arnoldistae can not be the scholars and disciples of Arnoldus de Villa nova, being at this time and long after unborn and so it seemeth that they are so called of Arnoldus Brixiensis, and withal, that as well Master Horn, as his Master Illiricus (from whom he fetched these Epistles of Arnoldus de Villa nova) are out of the way. Master Horn for imagining this Arnoldus to have lived, about the time of King Henry the first. And Illiricus for imagining Arnoldistas, to be named of Arnoldus de Villa nova, and to be condemned before he was borne. Himself confessing, that he lived about such time as we before have declared. Master Fox also as great an Antiquary as he is, as far as I can learn, confoundeth these two Arnoldus: and maketh a great stir for the advancing of his new Ghospel of this Arnoldus de villa nova, being a false lying Prophet▪ as I have before showed you. And it may be proved both by him and by Illyricus, that he was an Heretic, if he maintained such errors as they specify: whereof nothing doth appear in the foresaid Epistles. And therefore I suppose, if any of them both maintained these errors, Arnoldus Brixensis Vide de hoc Arnoldo. Plat. in Adriane. 4. Sabel. Aenea. 8. li. 9 Bernard. epi. 195. it was this Arnoldus Brixiensis. Who for these errors of the Waldenses (as it may seem) with his disciples is excommunicated by the general council, as I told you before. Now for the other sect of the Albanenses or Albigenses, The horrible errors of the Albigenses. springing of the loins of the holy brother Waldo, beside the common and usual errors, of the Waldenses, they condenned matrimony, Paulus Aemilius. li. 6. hist. Franc. Ecclesiam nostram caetum infernorum vocitabant, matrimonia damnabant, promiscuons concubitus, eosque nefarios sanctos ducebant. and lived like brute beasts in most filthy and beastly bytchery. Who not withstanding multiplied in such sort, and so desperately suffered all kind of punishment, and death to, for the maintaining of their heresies, that they were set upon and destroyed with an army. And yet are they precious martyrs with M. Fox, though himself confess, that the chroniclers make them no better than Turks and infidels: and would fain (for the honesty of his new gospel and his new canonisation) that men should think it were not so, M. Fox would fain have us believe these Albigenses to be martyrs. Frid. Dict. epist. 27. Patarenorum complices & qui ut alios à paena possint eximere, de se velut impronidi non formidant. why these heretics called themselves Patarenos. Epiphanius. lib. 3. Tom. 2. Heres. 8. contrary to all the Chroniclers upon his own bare word, as one that doth not, nor ever shallbe able to show any thing worthy of any credit, to the contrary. The desperate rage of these wild wood Waldenses was such, as I have said, that they did not shun, but rather covitte death, to make their sect in the eyes of the world more commendable, (as M. Foxes holy martyrs have of late done in England, and else where) and for this cause both the council and th'emperor calleth them Patarenos. For they so called themselves, as in the old time the Messalian heretics called themselves, for the like cause Martyrianos, as men glorying, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. that for their sect and heresy had suffered martyrdomme. Now let Master fox make an account of his holy martyrs, and see how many he can find, that have not maintained the said errors, of these Albigenses, Paterans', or Waldenses: and he shall find his holy catalogue altogether void and empted. So that the old martyrs may take their old place in the Calendar again. And because Master Fox doth so highly esteem these men: and so lightly regardeth what so ever either the foresaid most famous and learned council, or the late council of Trent hath said or done against the doctrine of his holy Martyrs: and will not believe the catholics, when they truly call them furious and mad martyrs, let him at the least believe this Emperor Friderike, a new great Charles, as Master Horn sayeth, and let him in few words, hear a round and a full answer to all his ugly and mad martyrologue. Vide Petram de vinea Lib. 1. Epist. 26. A short answer to all M. Foxes mad martyrolog, by th'emperor frideryke M. Horns supreme head. He then speaking of the sect of the foolish frontyke and wood Waldo sayeth: In exemplum martyrum qui pro fide catholica. etc. They call themselves (sayeth Fridericus) as thowghe they followed the example of the Martyrs, which died for the catholic faith, Paterans', as men prompt and ready to suffer death: howbeit these wretched Paterans', having no holy belief of the eternal deity, in this their own wickedness offend three together. that is, God, their neighbour, and themselves. God I say, whiles they do not know the faith, that they should have in God, nor his counsel. They deceive their neighbours, whiles under the pretence of spiritual and ghostly feeding, they feed them with pleasant wicked heresy. But they are most cruel to themselves, whiles, beside the loss of their souls, as men making no account of life, but rashly seeking death, The Paterans' desperate dealings. take a pleasure to bring their bodies to most painful death, the which they might by true knowledge, and by a sound and strong faith avoid, and which is a most grievous thing to be spoken, they that remain a live be nothing afraid by their example. We can not stay and refrain ourselves, but that we must pluck out our sword, and take worthy vengeance upon such: being enemies to God, to themselves, and to other: persecuting them, so much the more earnestly, by how much the more, they are judged to spread abroad and to practise their wicked superstition nigh to Rome which is the head of all Churches. Rome the head of all churches by Fridericus confession against the Paterans'. Thus far Friderike the Emperor. Let now Master Fox take this as a fit and worthy condemnation of all his stinking martyrs. And take you this also Master Horn, and digest it well: and then tell me at your good leisure, when ye are better advised, what ye have won by this your supreme head, or by what colour, ye can make him Supreme Head that confesseth the Church of Rome to be the Head of all Churches: who also felt the practice of the Pope's supremacy aswell by excommunication as by deprivation from his empire, Platina. sabel. Naucler. & alij. that followed the said excommunication: the electors proceeding to a new election at the Pope's commandment. As for Frideryke himself for matters spiritual he acknowledged the Pope's supremacy, as ye have heard, and as it appeareth in Petrus de vinea his Chancellor, that wrote his epistles, though he thowght the Pope did but usurp upon certain possessions, which Friderike (notwithstanding his former oath made to the contrary) did afterward challenge. The matter of S. Peter's patrimony, I will not meddle withal, as not greatly necessary for our purpose: the which when the Church of Rome lacked, yet did not the Pope lack his supremacy, neither should lack the said supremacy, thowghe he should lack the said patrimony hereafter, or though his Bishopric were not endued with one foot of land. For it is no worldly power or temporal pre-eminence, that hath set up the Pope's primacy, or that the Pope's primacy consisteth in, but it is a Supreme Authority over all Christ's flock, such as to his predecessor S. Peter, Christ himself gave here on the earth, such as by general Counsels is confirmed and acknowledged, and such as the continual practice from age to age without intermission doth invincibly convince. And for this Supreme government over Christ's flock in Spiritual matters neither this Friderike neither any other Christian Emperor whatsoever (except it were Constantius the Arrian) ever strived or contended for with the Bishops of Rome. To conclude therefore, this only for this time I say, that your dealing with this Emperor, Master Horn, is to intolerable, thus to misuse your readers, and not to be ashamed so confidently to allege this Emperor, for the confirmation of your new supremacy. Now, think you that Aventinus a man of our age, and as far as I can judge a Lutheran, and most certainly very much affectionated to th'emperors against the Popes, is of such credit, that because he sayeth it, therefore we must believe him: that this Friderike was an other Charles the great, and most profitable for the Christian common wealth? Howbeit let this also pass. For the praise or dispraise of this Emperor to our principal matter, which is, whether the Queen be supreme head and judge of all causes ecclesiastical, is but impertinent. And therefore we shall now proceed to the residue. M. Horn. The .127. Division. pag. 79. a. Fabian. In which time Henry the .3. king of England held a solemn Council, in the which both by the sentence of the King and of the Princes, not a few privileges, were (.435.) The .435. Untruth. Captain and notorious. Polidore saith the clean contrary. taken away from the order of priesthood, at what time the Pope's Legate required a (.436.) The .436. and .437. Untruth. For it was a tenth, no tribute, and it was granted, not denied. tribute of all the Glergie, but it was (.437.) denied him. Robert Grosthead (whom ye call Saint Robert) wrote unto the Pope, a sharp Epistle, because he grieved the Church of England with tasks and paiementes against reason: of which when he saw no redress, he with other Prelates of the land, complained unto the King, of the waist of the goods and patrimony of the Church, by the Pope's near kinsmen and other alien Bishops, whom the king avoided out of the Realm. To whom also the Emperor Fredrick written, that it was a shame for him to suffer any longer his Realm to be oppressed with the Pope's tyranny. The .25. Chapter. Of King Henry the third. Stapleton. Concerning King Henry the .3. KING Henry the .3. took away many privileges from the order of priesthood, the clergy denied a tribute to the Pope's Legate, Roberte grostheade writeth, sharply against the Pope's exactions, Fredrick the Emperor writeth to the King, that he should not suffer his Realm to be oppressed with the Pope's tyranny. M. Horns impertinent Arguments. Ergo, M. Fekenham must take an oath that the Queen is Supreme Head. If these and such like arguments conclude, Master Horn, then may you be bold to blow your Horn, and triumphantly to rejoice like a Conqueror. But now what if the matter of your argumentation be as ill, or worse than the form of it? Ye ought to prove that in this king's days the like regiment was for matters Ecclesiastical as is now, and that the king took upon him all supremacy Ecclesiastical. The contrary whereof is so evident, by all our Chroniclers, M. Horn seeketh by matters, leaving the principal as the Donatists did. and by the authors yourself allege, and otherwise in this short declaration of king Henry the .3. ye do so frivolously trifle, and exceedingly lie, as ye have done and will do in the rest, that I must, beside all other matters by me before rehearsed concerning the Donatists, say of you, as S. Augustine said of them. He said of the Donatists, that in their reasoning with the catholics before Marcellinus. August. contra Dona. post collat. cap. 34. ●om. 7. In Collat. Carth. Conc. Dicebatses mirari Donatistas habe●e inco●pore sanguinem, qui nunquam erubes●erent toties in manifesto mendatio deprehensi. Nimium patienter pertulit homines per inania vagantes, & tam multa superflua dicentes, & ad eadem toties conficta redeuntes, ut gesta tantis voluminibus onerata pene omnes pigeret evoluere, etc. He suffered with over much patience, those fellows wandering about trifles, and so full of superfluous talk, and returning so oft to the self same matters feigned and forged, that the Acts of that conference, were so laden with such huge volumes, that it would weary any man to read them over, and by the reading to know, how the matter was debated. Yea their extraordinary vagaries were so thick and so many, that Marcellinus was fain (as Franciscus Balduinus noteth) almost 600. times by his sentence interlocutory to cut of their frivolous elusions. We have now nead of such an other Marcellinus, to be styckler an arbitrer between you and M. Feckenham. Again the said S. Augustine said of the Donatists (as Baldwine noteth) that he did marvel if the Donatists had any blood in their body, that being so often taken in manifest and open lies, yet never blushed. I say then to you M. Horn that this king was not the supreme head but the pope, who practised his supremacy in this kings days, as much as any pope hath done in this realm in our time, or sithen this king Henries tyme. In addit. ad Neub. M. S. Polichronic. Fabian. Was not the Prior of Canterbury deposed by the Pope? Were not a number of the clergy that held with the Barons against the king deprived of their Ecclesiastical livings, and fain to send to Rome for their absolution? Was not the archbishop of Canterbury's election annichilated and frustrated by the pope? Polichr. et ●o Lond. Polichro. In addit. ad Neub. M. S. & Polichr. Did not the Archbishop of Canterbury Edmond go to Rome for the dispatch of his Ecclesiastical affairs? Were not S. Hew of Lincoln and the foresaid S. Edmonde, S. Richard bishop of Chichester, and S. Thomas of Canterbury by the pope's authority translated in this king's time? Was not the king himself with Pandulphus the pope's Legate present at the said translation at Canterbury? wherein the pope practised his supremacy in England in King's Henry's time. Polidor. lib. 16. Did not Octobonus the pope's legate make certain constitutions ecclesiastical, which are every where to be had in print? Did not the king himself procure the Pope's curse upon the Barons that rebelled against him? Was not the Pope the judge in controversy depending between the king and the archbishop of Canterbury? Did not the king himself procure to be absolved and discharged of his oath by the Pope, as supreme judge in matters spiritual? Did not this king send his bishops to the great council holden at Laterane whereof we have spoken, aswell as other princes did? Did not this king help with his money the Pope against th'emperor Fredrick, thowghe he were allied unto him? And shall all this superiority quail only for such bare and frivolous matter, as you lay forth? But what if it be not only frivolouse M. Horn, but stark false? I marvel surely if this king took away any privileges from the Clergy. Why M. Horn? What king was it think you, that gave the privileges for the clergy and the commons, yea and the nobylity to, contained in magna charta, Magna Charta. but this king? Who caused the bishops of this realm being arrayed in their Pontificalibus solemnly to accurse, Privileges granted to Paul's Church in London by the king. Polidorus lib. 16. Pro sua pietate & gratia irrogavit Paulino collegio sacerdotum, ea omnia libertalis privilegia, quibus civitas Londinens. uteretur, frueretur, quae ne indedamnun ullum faceret, dedit ex suo libras septem, quas etiam nunc vicecomites urbani ex arbitrio regio, quot annis capiunt Polidorus lib. 16. jam ade●at annus salutis humanae. 1226. & nonus, cum regnare cepit Henricus: quo anno concilium principum est habitum: in eo concilio de regis pariter ac principum sententia, non parum multa privilegia ordini sacerdotali, atque reliquo populo irrogata sunt multaeque leges, quas reges qui secuti sunt ita approbarunt, ut inde bona pars juris collecta sit, quemadmodum in eo extat libello qui inscribitur magna Charta, & alterae 〈…〉 in Westmynster hall (the king himself and his nobility being present) the infringers of the same, but this king Henry the .3? Who gave unto the Church of Paul's in London, such privileges as the city of London had, and lest the city of London should take any damage thereby, gave to the city out of his chequer an yearly rent of seven pounds ever sins usually paid, but this king Henry? Lo M. Horn: you hear of great privileges graciously granted and given to the clergy. But what privileges, or when any were taken away from them I can not yet find. No, saith M. Horn, can ye not find it? Why, do ye not then take a little pains, to read my author Polidor to whom I do remit my reader? Yes M. Horn that pains have I taken, and that shall ye full well understand. I will rehearse your own allegation in your authors own words. Now was (saith he) the .1226. year of our Lord God, and the .9. year of kings Henry's reign come. In the which year, there was an assemble of nobility. In this assemble by the consent of the king and the nobility many liberties and privileges were given to the order of priesthood, and to the commons, and many ordinances were made which the kings that followed, did so allow, that a good part of the Law, is gathered thereof: as appeareth in the great Charter, and in the Charter of the forest. How say you M. Horn, is there any more blood left in your body, A most notorious and captain lie, wherein Master Horn is convicted by the place himself allegeth. than was in the Donatists, of whom S. Augustin complaineth? what a Macarian pageant have ye here played? What? Think you, as Cyrces' turned Ulysses company into hogs, that ye may so enchant all your readers, by this your supreme lying supremacy, that they shall be so swinish, as to believe you in this point, or in any other being here taken with the manner, and as the civilians say 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉? What colourable shift can ye now pretend, to save your poor honesty? Is not this the very place, that your ●elfe translate out of Polidorus? Doth it not say the quite contrary to that, for the which ye allege it? The matter is so open, that I will refuse no arbitrers, no, not your own Protestant fellows. It is beside the matter of the story wherein your own author condemneth you, a law matter: Call me therefore a quest of Lawyers. Let them tell you, whether Henry the .3. in this council, we must call a quest of Lawyers and grammarians for M. Horn. took away the Charter, or made and granted the Charter. If perchance ye will appeal from them to the Grammarians, and say that irrogare privilegia, is to take away privileges (which in deed is your extreme miserable refuge against all truth and the words, and meaning of your author) I am content ye chose a quest of them: neither therein will I use any peremptory challenge, M, Horns shameful ignorance in the grammar and latin tongue. but am content to stand to the judgement of your nigh neighbours in the famous school of Winchester, or if ye will, of M. Cooper the dictionary maker, better acquainted with these matters, than perchance yourself are. But see M. Horn how as according to the old saying: unum malum non venit solum. So with you unum mendacium non venit solum. But that as though there were a game set up for lying, ye add for the with an other lie. Ye say there was a tribute demanded of all the clergy by the Legate: but it was denied him. Your author saith, he demanded the tenth of the clergy, to maintain war against the Saracens: and it was soon granted him. Your author reciteth also, after the mind of some writers, that in a convocation, Ottho the Pope's Legate, demanded a certain yearly payment, which was denied him, but he doth improve those that so write. And so withal it is not a single but a double, or rather a triple untruth, that ye writ concerning this tribute. For this demand if it were made, was not made, at that time (as you say) when that Council, that ye call the solemn Council was held and wherein the great Charter was granted, and where, as ye most falsely say, it was disannulled, but in a convocation at an other tyme. Now putting the case there were any such payment denied, doth that spoil the pope of his supremacy? By as good reason ye may conclude, if any thing be denied the King, that he demandeth in the parliament, that therefore he is no King. This former answer may serve you also for that ye allege concerning Robert groshead: saving that I may add this withal, that he were a very Groshead in deed, that would believe you, either when ye say to M. Fekenham (whom ye call S. Robert) seeing M. Fekenham speaketh no word of this Robert, no more than he doth of Robin goodfellow: or that this story should make against the Pope's primacy, seeing that your own author Fabian saith, that this Robert being accursed of the Pope Innocentius, appealed from his court to Christ's own cowrte. A manifest argument of the pope's supremacy. As for frederik the Emperors episte to King Henry: what so ever he writeth against the Pope ye would be loath I suppose, M. Horn allegeth Friderikes epistle, but little for his own ease, if it were fully executed towards himself. it should take place in England. For then farewell your goodly Manors, as Waltham, Farnhan and such other. Neither were your gentleman Usher like to ride before you barehead, but both he and you to go a foot, or rather yourself to go barefooted all alone. Io. Lond. in Chroni. Iste Fridericus in proposito habuit ecclesiam ad supremam paupertatem redigere. Vide apud eumdem: partem epist, eius ad Henric. 3. M. Horn. The .128. Division. pag. 79. a. Antoninus. Lews the French King, called S. Lews, who as Antoninus saith, was so instructed, even from his infancy, in all the wisdom of divine and good orders, that there was not found his like, that kept the law of the high God, etc. made a law against those that blasphemed the name of the Lord: adjoining a penalty of a hot iron to be printed in the transgressors forehead. Append. Math. Parisiens'. Also in the year of the Lord .1228. He made a Law against the Pope's frauds, concerning the preventions and reservations of the revenues, and dignities Ecclesiastical, complaining that the Pope had pulled from him, the collations of all Spiritual promotions: ordaining that from hence forth the election of Bishops, Prelates and all other whatsoever, should be free, forcible, and effectual to the electors patrons and collatours of them. Also the same year he set forth an other Law against Simony: complaining of the bieing and selling of ecclesiastical dignities. Fabian. He made also certain godly Laws against whoredom and Fornication. last of all in the year of the Lord .1268. he set forth the Law, Append. Math. Parisiens'. commonly called Pragmatica Sanctio, wherein in amongst other Ecclesiastical matters against the Pope's pollinges he saith thus: Item, in no case we will that exactions or grievous burdens of money, being laid on the Church of our Kingdom by the Court of Rome, whereby our Kingdom is miserably impoverished, be levied or gathered: nor any hereafter to be laid, except only for a reasonable, godly and most urgent cause of necessity, that can not be avoided: and that the same be done by our express (.438.) The .438. and 439. untruths. One in false translating, the other in unfaithful nipping. biding, and commandment of our own accord. (.439.) The .26. Chapter: Of S. Lewis the French King. Of Manfred, and Charles King of Sicilia and Apulia. Stapleton. jews his Law, against those that blasphemed the name of God, maketh not him supreme head of the Church. Ye mowght have put in, Antoninus. part. 3. tit. 19 cap. 9 Nomen domini vel Virginis gloriosae. as your author doth, those also, that blaspheme the name of his blessed mother. But the mention of this would have grieved some of your sect that have compared our Lady to a saffron bag, making her no better than other women. And what if you or your confederates had lived then, that say, it is Idolatry to pray to her, and to pray her, to pray for us to her son jesus Christ: should not ye have had, suppose you, great cause to fear the print of the hot iron, ye speak of? As for the collations of spiritual promotions, this Lewis bestowed none such as his predecessors by especial licences and privileges had granted unto them from the bishops of Rome. And that as I have oft said, proveth no superiority of government in Ecclesiastical matters, except by the same reason you will make every Patron of a benefice to be supreme governor in all Ecclesiastical matters to his own Vicar and Curate. The embarringe of Exactions from the Court of Rome, is nothing derogatory from the Spiritual power or jurisdiction of the Church of Rome. For they are not utterly embarred, but the excess of them is denied: and in any reasonable, godly, or urgent cause of necessity they are granted, as yourself allege. But to better a little your bad cause, you have with a double untruth ended your allegation. For where the King saith, Nisi de spontaneo expresso consensu nostro, not without our voluntary and express consent, you turn it, by our express bidding and commandment, and that it might seem to hang of the King's pleasure only, you leave out, & ipsarum Ecclesiarum regni nostri: and of the Churches of our kingdom. But what need we lose more time in making more ample answer, annals de France. Fabian. Nau●lere. seeing it is most certain, that this King and his realm acknowleadged the Pope's supremacy, as much then as ever since even to this day? For where was your new great Charles Friderike the second deposed from his Empire, by Pope Innocentius the fourth, but at Lions in France? And in whose Kings days, but of this Lewis? Who defended many years together the Popes of Rome, Innocentius the .4. Alexander the .4. Vrbanus the .4. and Clement the .4. against the Emperor Fredrick (who therefore by treason went about to destroy him) but this Kings Lewis? Who warred himself in person against the Sarracens at Thunys, at Clement the Pope's request, but this Lewis? Who also before that, making his voyage into the holy land against the soldan took benediction and absolution of Pope Innocentius the .4. lying them at the Abbye of Cluny in France, but this Lewis? And did not the said Clement make by his Authority Charles this Lewis his brother, King of Sicilia and Apulia? And will you make us now believe M. Horn, that this King was such a Supreme Governor, as you imagine Princes ought to be, or that in his time the Pope's Supremacy was accounted a foreign power in France, as it is with you in England? No. No. M. Horn. Seek what age and what Country you will, you shall never find it while you live. M. Horn The .129. Division. pag. 79. b. Conradus, Conradinus and Manfredus, (.440.) The 440. untruth. For they lost them. still kept the privilege of the foresaid Ecclesiastical matters in Sicilia and Apulia. Shortly after this time Charles the King of Sicilia and Apulia, had (.441.) The .441. untruth, as shall appear. all or most of the doing in the elelection and making of diverse Popes, as of Martin .4. Celestyn .5. Boniface .8. etc. Stapleton. To these matters of Sicily I have already more then one's answered, and do now say again, Nauclerus gener. 41. pag. 288. Vide chronicon additum ad P. Aemil. historiam. Plat. in Nicolao. 4. Cardinals ad concordiam & electionem pontificis adhortatus est. Idem in Caelestino. 5. Instant Carolo Rege, & Latino Cardinale pontifex creature. that this privilege consisted only in investuring of bishops granted by Alexander the .3. and after reclaimed by Innocentius the .3. Whereby it well appeareth, that this allegation maketh rather with the Pope's Primacy, then against it: but most of all in this place. For Pope Alexander the .4. declared this Manfredus the Roman Churches enemy, as he was in deed, and a traitor also both to Conradus, his brother, and to Conradinus his nephew, both inheritors to that kingdom, both whom he went about to poison. By reason of which outrages, he was as I said denounced enemy to the Church of Rome by Alexander the .4. and shortly after, Charles King Lewis his brother, was made King of Sicily by Clemens the .4. paying to the Pope a tribute, and holding of him by faith and homage. Such Supreme heads were your Conradus, Conradinus and Manfredus. As for Charles (who only by the Pope's Authority came to that dignity, as I have said) it is not true, that he (as you say, had all or most of the doing, in the election, or making of diverse Popes For the Cardinals only had the whole doing. Truth it is, that a strife and contention rising among the Cardinals, for the election, and many of them being inclined to serve Charles expectation, they elected those which he best liked of. But what can all this make to prove the Prince Supreme Governor in all ecclesiastical causes? yea or in any ecclesiastical cause at all? Naucler. gener. 42. pag. 313. et 314. Idem gener. 43. Prince's even now adays find some like favour sometimes at the election of Popes. But think you therefore they are taken of their subjects for Supreme Governors & c? You may be ashamed M. Horn, that your reasons be no better. Polych. Fabian. Polyd. M. Horn. The .130. Division. pag. 79. b. Edward the first, King of England, about this time made the Statute of Northampton: So that after that time, no man should give, neither sell, nor bequeath, neither change, neither buy title, assign lands, tenements, neither rents to no man of Religion, without the King's leave: which act, sense that time, hath been more straightly enacted and devised with many additions, thereunto augmented or annexed. The which Law, saith Polidore, he made (.442.) The 442. untruth. Polidore saith not so. because he was Religionis studiosissimus, etc. most studious of Religion, and most sharp enemy to the insolency of the Priests. The .27. Chapter. Of King Edward the first, of England. Stapleton. Leave once Master Horn to prove that, wherein no man doth stand with you: and prove us, that either King Edward by this fact was the Supreme Head of the Church: Concerning King Edward the first. or that the Pope's Primacy, was not aswell acknowledged in England in those days, as it hath been in our days. None of your marginal Authors, avouch any such thing. Neither shall ye ever be able to prove it. Your authors, Polid. Polychro. Fabian. and many other, have plentiful matter to the contrary, especially the Chronicle of johannes Londonensis, which seemeth to have lived about that time: and seemeth among all other, to have written of him very exactly. Let us see then whether King Edward took himself, or the Pope for the Supreme Head of the Church. This King after his Father's death returning from the holy Land, in his journey visited Pope Gregory the tenth, and obtained of him an excommunication against one Guido de monte forti, for a slaughter he had committed. Io. Lond. An. 1272. Two years after was the famous Council holden at Lions, at the which was present the Emperor Michael Paleologus, of whom we have somewhat spoken. And trow ye Master Horn, that at such time as the Grecians, which had long renounced the Pope's authority, returned to their old obedience again, that the realm of England withdrew itself from the old and accustomable obedience? Or trow ye that the true and worthy Bishops of England refused that Council, as ye and your fellows, counterfeit and parliament bishops only, have of late refused the Council of Trent? No, no. Our author showeth by a verse commonly then used, that it was frequented of all sort. Gregorius denus colligit omne genus. joan. land. An. 1272. &. 1274. Neubu. in addi. M.S. dict. anno. 1274. Io. Lond. 1278. Idem Anno. 1294. & 1298. And the additions to Newburgensis (which endeth his story, as the said john doth with this King) saith, that plures episcopi convenerunt de universis terris, de Anglia ibidem aderant archiepiscopi Cantuar. & Ebor. et caeteri episcopi Angliae ferè universi, there came thither many bishops from all quarters: and from England the archbishops of Canterbury and York, and in a manner all the other bishops of the realm. In this kings time, the Pope did infringe and annichilate the election of the King's chancellor being Bishop of bath and Welles, chosen by the monks: and placed in the Archebisshoprike of Caunterbury john Pecham. In this King's time the year of our Lord .1294. the prior of Caunterburie was cited to Rome, and in the year .1298. appeal was made to the Pope, for a controversy touching the election of a new Bishop of Elie. Three years after the bishop of Chester was constrained to appear personally at Rome, and to answer to certain crimes wherewith he was charged. Idem Anno 1301. & 1303. Within two years after, was there an other appeal after the death of the bishop of London, touching the election of the new bishop. Yea the authority of the Pope was in high estimation, not only for spiritual, but even for temporal matters also. Idem An. 1286. The kings mother professed herself a religious woman, whose dowry notwithstanding was reserved unto her, and confirmed by the Pope. For the great and weighty matters, and affairs standing in controversy and contention between this King Edward, See in what estimation the Pope's doings were with the King and the realm even for temporal matter●. Idem An. 1298. Idem An. 1300. Vide Neu. in addit. M.S. anno 1291. Idem Io. Londinen. and the French King, the Pope was made arbiter and umpire, who made an agreement and an arbitrament: which being sent under his seal, was read in open parliament at Westmynster, and was well liked of all. The King and the nobility sendeth in the year of our Lord. 1300. letters to the Pope sealed with an hundred seals, declaring the right of the crown of England upon Scotland: and they desire the Pope to defend their right, and that he would not give a light ear to the false suggestions of the Scots. There are extant at this day, the letters of john Baliole and other Scots agnizing the said superiority, sent to this King Edward. In the foresaid year .1300. the King confirmed the great Charter, and the Charter of the Forest, and the archbishop of Caunterburie with the other bishops pronounced a solemn curse upon all such as would break the said liberties. This King was encumbered with diverse and long wars, aswell with France as scotland, and therefore was fain to charge the clergy and laity with many payments. But in as much, as Pope Bonifacius considering the wonderful and intolerable exactions daily laid upon the clergy, of their princes, had ordained in the council at Lions, Pol. li. 17. Vide 6. lib. decret. li. 3. ca 3. de immunit. Eccles. Idem joan. an. 1296. Idem an. 1296.1297 & 1300. Idem an. 1300. Neu. in addit. M. S. an. 1291. & 1292. M. Horns extravagant argument. Concerning Mortmain. that from thence forth the clergy should pay no tribute or tax, without the knowledge and consent of the see of Rome, Robert Archbishop of Canterbury, being demanded a tribute for himself and his clergy, stood in the matter not without his great business and trouble. And at the length upon appellation the matter came to the Pope's hearing. The king had afterward by the Pope's consent diverse payments of the clergy. Many other things could I lay forth for the pope's primacy practised at this time in England. And is now M. Horn, one only Act of Parliament, made against Mortmain, of such force with you, that it is able to pluck from the Pope his triple Crown, and set it upon the kings head? If Mortmain had been so straightly seen unto, some hundred years before, ye should have found your revenues, I suppose, very slender and poor. But ye being as good a Lawyer as ye be, either divine, or Chronicler, think belike yourself to be out of the gonneshotte, and that Mortmain reacheth only to men of religion. And it seemeth, so he and his mate may be well provided for, M. Horn forceth little, how little other have, and whether they have aught or nought. surely M. Horn it seemeth to me strange that you being a man of the Church, and knowing that the Clergy hath upon the great trust that good men have had of their upprightnes and virtue, been endued with great possessions (which in deed should be and commonly have been employed upon the needy according to the mind of the doners) should find fault, with Mortmain, and with that, which good and well disposed men have voluntarily offered to the Church, to be well and charitably bestowed. But I perceive why ye are an enemy to Mortmain. For now have you and your Madge live catle of your own, for the which you have more care to provide, then for any Mortmain for your successors in the see. But as I was about to tell you, ye must understand, that the statute of Mortmain doth not reach to religious men only, The statute of mortmain doth not touch religious men only. but to bishops and other spiritual men, yea to lay men also: And was made aswell for the commodity of spiritualty as temporalty: to save aswell to the one, as to tother their wards, eschetes, and other commodities that by mortifying of Lands, are wont to follow. Well, as little understanding as master Horn hath of Mortmain, and as far as it is from his principal matter, yet will he, tell us also out of Polidore a cause of this Law of Mortmain: And then as he is wont, he telleth us a cause fantasied of himself. Truth it is, that Polidore sayeth, that the king made this Law to repress the riot and excess of the Clergy, Polidor. Prudentia summa, religionis studiosissimus, insolentiae sacerdotum enimicus acerrimus, quam ex opibus tum primis proficisci putabat: quamobrem legem ad manum mortuam perpetuasse fertur, ut ita eorum luxuries coerceretur. but Polidore was a stranger, and unskilful in the Laws of our realm: and therefore he did not fully understand the matter, thinking (as M. Horn doth) that Mortmain touched the clergy only: and yet he saith it not precisely, but (ut fertur) as it is said. It is true also, that, he sayeth this king was most studious of religion, but that he sayeth this in respect of Mortmain, can not be induced, and is nothing but M. Horns vain guess, and lewd untruth. M. Horn. The .131. Division. pag. 80. a. At this time Philip le Beau the French king, begun his reign, brought up in the study of divinity, under Aegidius the Roman divine, by (.423.) The 423. untruth: he gave him no admonition to reform religion. Anton. Naucler. Blond. whose admonitions and also of other divines, the King being instructed in his duty, above all other things, Pau. Aem. endeavoured himself about the reformation of Religion, and ordering of Ecclesiastical matters. whereupon looking to the state of the Clergy, he (.424.) The .424. untruth. He deposed him not, but deprived him of his temporalties, and that unjustly. Aemilius. Nauclerus. deposed a certain Bishop for Heresy, and gave his rhetoric to an other, and beside, claimed the investiture of all other Bishops in his dominions: and calling Councils at home in his own Realm, would suffer none of his Clergy to go to the Popes (.425.) Councils. He caused the Popes (.426.) Bulls to be burned. He commanded the Popes (.427.) Legates to avoid his realm. He commanded, that no money should be carried out of the Realm to the Pope. He set forth a Law, that no man should go to Rome out of his kingdom. He called a Council at Paris, and caused to be gathered thither all the Prelates and Barons of France: to justify his doings. He showed unto them why he took upon him to call a Council. He enueighed against the Pope for heresy, Simony, Homicide, Pride, Ambition. etc. and that of right he ought therefore to be deposed. He demandeth of the Council, unto whom they be lawfully sworn, and of whom they have received their dignities? They all answer, that they are all the beneficiaries of him alone, and that mindful of their Faith, and the kings estate, they would suffer death, for his glory, power and saulfegard. thereupon he setteth forth a pragmatical sanction or forcible law to diminish the dignity of the Pope. The .425.426. and 427. untruths. by art of multiplication, a● shall appear. Platina. Naucler. Antonin. sabel. Naucler. Sabellic. Aemyl. Append. Vrspurg. Antonin. Naucler. Antonin. Many other Ecclesiastical Laws he made, against the jews, against the Templars, against adultery, etc. He (.428.) The .428. untruth. He made him not, but made intercession to have him made. made also Clement the fifth Pope, and swor him to certain conditions before hand: by whose importune means also, the General council of Vienna was held. In which Council he laboured to have Pope Boniface condemned for an Heretic, affirming that he would prove him so. But the matter was (.429.) The .429. untruth. It was not taken up, but decreed plain against the king. taken up, and to satisfy the king, it was decreed, that all the processes of Bonifacius against the king, were unjust, and the kings doings in any point against the Pope should not be prejudicial to him, or to his heyers. The .28. Chapter: of Philip le Beau the French king. Concerning Philip the French king. Stapleton. A man would think, that now at length M. Horn had found some good and effectual matter, for his new primacy. He layeth on such load against the Pope aswell in his text, as in his jolly rank and rue of his marginal authors, that now at the least M. Fekenham must yield and subscribe. But yet for all this M. Horn I must be plain with you and tell you, that if ye had showed your reader the whole and entiere story, out of any one of all your own authors, for all ye have so clerkly and cunningly ordered and placed them: M. Horns jolly rank with Paulus Aemilius, then with Antoninus, Nauclerus, Blondus, then with Platina, and after this with Nauclerus, Antoninus, Sabellicus, and forwith with Nauclerus again, with Sabellicus, with Aemilius: and after all this with Appendix Vrspergensis, and eftsone with Antoninus, Nauclerus, and finally with Antoninus again, the whole primacy, should (as it doth in deed notwithstanding) have remained with the Pope, and not with your Philippe le Beau, make him as beau, and as fair as ye can. Your soldiers be very thick and warlyk placed, but they stryk never a stroke for you, but that that is all against you. Neither will I here (for it needeth not) intermeddle with the justice of the cause of either side: Let the fault light, where it should light: and let this Bonifacius be as bad as ye make him (thowghe your author Paulus Aemilius a most worthy Chronicler, Paul. Aemilius. li. 8 by the common verdict of all learned writers) and advancing France as high as he may, with the safeguard of truth and verity, thinketh rather the epistles written between the king and the Pope, wherein each one chargeth the other with many faults to be counterfeit, then true and authentical. M. Horn choppeth and pareth the ●uctour● by him alleged. Cyprian: de simplicit Prae●a. sive de unitate Ecclesiae. Corruptores evangelii atque interpretes falsi extrema ponunt & superiora pratereunt, partim memores, & partim subdolè corrumpentes: ut ipsi ab Ecclesia scissi sunt▪ ita capituli unius sententiam scindunt. For these matters I will not at this time touch you: but for your notable, and yet accustomable infidelity in the wretched and miserable mangling and maiming of your own authors I must needs say somewhat unto you. Ye do them in this report of stories, as yourself and your companions do, and as your ancestors the old heretics were wont to do in alleging of scripture and the Fathers: that is, in chopping and paring of what it pleaseth you, and as ye are cut of yourselves from the Church: so dismember you also your authors allegations, even as S. Cyprian many years sythence, hath described and painted you forth. first than is there any one of all your authors, that (as ye most wickedly do) goeth about by this story, either to make this king Supreme Head of the french Church, or to deface and disannul the Pope's Primacy? No truly. unless perchance it be the author, that added to Vrspergensis, I mean your own dear brother Gaspar Hedio, his addition aswell agreeing, for matters of faith, with his first author Vrspergensis, as the legs and loins of an horse, will agree with the head, shoulders, and upper part of a man's body. Yea, beside his heresy, he is to young to be alleged for author authentical. To be short, the dealing of this king, proveth nothing the like regiment that now is in our realm (which is your peculiar matter, and the only matter M. Fekenham resteth upon) and so for all your great stir, with burning the Pope's Bulls and commanding the Pope's Legates to avoid the realm, ye go fair and far from the matter. For where you say, he would suffer none of his clergy to go to the Pope's counsels, that was but of one only Council called against himself. Item where you say, He caused the Pope's bulls to be burned, Vide Naucler. generat. 44. pag. 361. P. Aemil. lib. 8. Commemorat Bonifacij in se, Franciamque novi exempli decretum: sed eum pontificem maximam non esse, eaque de re cognosc●nda sacrosanctan sede● suo antistite tunc viduam appellare. Naucler. gener. 44. Diversis sententijs elegerunt Episc. Bur. rege inter cedente. first not he, but Familiares Regis, the King's friends and courtiers did it, and yet it was but one bull neither, and that of the kingsses own excommunication. Again, where you say, he commanded the Pope's Legates to avoid the realm: It was but one Legate, about that one matter that he so commanded. With these many untruths by the Art of Multiplication, you entre your plea. Touching the matter itself, the King's grudge, was but a private and a personal grudge and enmity, against Bonifacius: no lasting or perpetual renunciation of the whole Papal authority, as it is evident by the discourse of all your own Authors. And therefore Bonifacius being dead, who accursed the King, and interdicted the Realm, both he and the Realm were released from curse and interdiction by Benedictus, successor to this Bonifacius. Yea Bonifacius yet living, this King most plainly agnized the authority of the See of Rome, appealing from this Bonifacius▪ whom he took not for the right Pope, but an usurper, and an intruder, to the See Apostolical, vacant (as he thought) and to the next successor. Ye hear Master Horn, notwithstanding the great enmity between the King and Pope Bonifacius, that he appealeth to the See of Rome, being as he thought vacant: and that he is, as I have said▪ absolved from the sentence of excommunication by Bonifacius his successor, which altogether ye omit. But yet ye tell us of Pope Clement the fift, made as ye say, pope by this King. But here you overreach your Author, and water him with your old lying gloze. Nauclerus neither saith, nor could truly say, that the king made him pope, but saith he was made Pope by his intercession: Neither your Author Antoninus saith it. Ye say, he swore this pope to certain conditions. Why do ye not name them M. Horn? Forsooth because in the naming of them, Antoninus in historia part. 3. ●it. 21. c. 1 M. Horns own story proveth most fully the Pope's supremacy. Naucler. gener. 44. Contrarium declaravit scilicet ipsum fuisse catholicum & indubitatum pontificem. Ant. par. 3. tit. 21. c. 3. Concilium nullo modo consentire voluit sed contrarium declaravit, scilicet ipsum f●isse catholicum. & indubitatum pontificem. the form, state, and condition of this your new primacy in your fair Philip would be full ill-favouredly acrased and deformed. Among other there were these three: Prima est, ut me perfectè reconcilies Ecclesiae sacrosanctae, relaxando & veniam dando de adiutorio dato in captura Bonifacij Papae Secundum est, ut censuras excommunicationis amoveas contra me & meos sequ●ces prolatas. Tertium est, quòd mihi concedas omnes decimas regni per quinquennium in reparationem expensarum multarum in bello inito contra Flandrenses. First, that ye will perfectly reconcile me to the Church: and release and forgive me, for that by my means Pope Boniface was taken prisoner. Secondly that you will revoke the sentence of excommunication, given against me and my confederates. Thirdly, that you will grant me for five years the tenth of all my realm, to relieve me for the great charges and expenses, defrayed in my wars against the Flemings. These conditions the king required the Pope to assure him of by Oath. Then would M. Horn feign have Pope Boniface taken for an heretic, and saith that King Philip would have had it so declared by the Council holden at Vienna. But the matter was taken up, M. Horn saith, and to satisfy the King, it was declared, that Pope Bonifacius doings should not be prejudicial to him and his heirs. And why have ye M. Horn either wilily omitted, the matters for the which the pope was conditionated withal: or have so fond told us against yourself, of this Council at Vienna? Why, but to confirm the pope's primacy, and to declare yourself also a liar in saying the matter was taken up, etc. For the Council assembled of .300. Bishops, beside other prelates, would in no wise agree to the king's request, but declared the contrary: to wit, that Bonifacius was a catholic, and an undoubted Bishop: as your own authors Antoninus and Nauclerus specify. Yea Nauclere addeth. Quo rex cogebatur contentus esse. With the which determination of the Council, the king was constrained to be contented. At the coronation of the foresaid Clement were present, not only this Philip the French king, Ant. part. 3. tit. 21. ca 1. Nauclerus dict gener. 4● Paul. Aemilius. Naucler. volume. 3. pag. 361. Blond. Celebraverat prouinciale Concilium etc. Ad sedem Apostolicam in se mitiorem aquioremque appellaverat. Ant. part. 3 tit. 2. c. 8. ss. 20. Naucler. gener. 44 but the king of Arragone, and as some writ, the king of England also. Yet hath M. Horn one other proof▪ to prove Philip head of the Church, for that he deposed a Bishop for heresy, and for that he claimed the investiture of Bishops. As for the investitures let them go for this time: we have said enough, I suppose, of that matter. And as for deposing of a bishop, he deposed him not but under pretence of heresy (saith Nauclere) he deprived him of all his temporaltyes, and of his Bishopric. But why do ye not M. Horn recite the whole sentence of your authors Antoninus and Nauclerus? For as for Blondus, writing nothing of this matter, that is of of the deposing of any Bishop, or of the claiming of the investitures, for the which you seem to allege him, ye do but blindly allege, and may blot him out again: saving that ye may truly put in, that in the Council which king Philip called in France he appealed (as I have told you) to th'apostolic See of Rome. But why do ye not, as I said, show the whole and entiere sentence of your authors, fully to adorn your primacy withal? which is, that he took a certain Bishop, laying to his charge that he was a Pateran heretic, spoiling him of his bishopric and of all his goods: and that he spoiled also and rob the Bishopprykes being vacant, and that he would have had the investitures of the Bishops? Now if it were so, that king Philip deposed a Bishop for heresy, yet should you M. Horn of all men take smallest relief thereby. For if Philip your supreme head were now living, M. Horn declared once again an heretic by his own King Philip. and you under his dominion, he might also deprive you and your fellows for heresy: being as I have before showed, very Paterans'. And now you that make so little of General counsels and stay yourself and your religion upon the judgements of lay princes, have heard your condennation not only from the notable General Council at Lions, but from your new Charles the Emperor Fredrick, and from your fair King Philip. Mark the work of God. This, this, Good Reader, is the very handy work of God, that these men should be cast in their own turn, and give sentence against themselves. And as hot, as earnest, and as wily as they are, in the first enterprise of their matters, yet in the pursuit of their ungracious purpose, to cause them to declare to all the world their small circumspection providence, and less faith and honesty. Many other things might be here brought, for further answer to M. Horn, as that he saith that this King by the Council of Aegidius the Roman Divine, went about the reformation (as M. Horn calleth it) of matters Ecclesiastical, and that Paulus Aemilius should be his Author therein, which is a double untruth. For neither is it true, that Aegidius was any counsellor or aider to reform the Church, or rather deform it, after the order of M. horns Religion: nor Aemilius saith it. Again, Sabellicus is either twice placed in M. horns Margin wrong, or he allegeth Sabellicus altogether wrongfully. But this may go for a small oversight. M. Horn The .132. Division. pag. 80. b. About the time of this Council at Vienna, the famous scholman Durandus setteth forth a book: wherein as he reckoneth up diverse great enormities in Church matters: so for the reformation of them, he always joineth the King and secular Princes, and the Prelates, and to this purpose citeth the form of the ancient Councils and many times enueigheth against and complaineth upon the usurped (.430.) The .430. untruth. For not in spiritual matters, which is now the Question. authority of the Roman Bishop, warning men to beware, how they yield unto him: and prescribeth a rule for the Princes and the Prelates to reform all these enormities, not by custom were it never so ancient, but by the word of God. Stapleton. Answer me M. Horn directly, and precisely, whether Durandus, in any work of his, taketh the lay prince for the head of the Church. If ye say, he doth not: to what purpose do ye allege him? If ye say he doth, than his books shall soon convince you. And what book is it I pray you, that ye speak of? Why do ye not name it? Why do you tell us of a book, no man can tell what? The book there is entitled de modo concilij celebrandi, which he made at the commandment of the foresaid Clement. Wherein thowghe he spoke many things for the reformation of the cowrte of Rome, yet that aswell in that book, as in all his other he taketh the Pope for the supreme head of the whole Church, Vide eundem librum titul. 2. & 27. & alibi passim. is so notorious, that a man may judge, all your care is to say something against the Pope, without any care how or what ye say. And that ye far much like a mad dog that runneth forth, and snatcheth at all that ever cometh nigh him. Durandus de divinis officijs lib. 2. cap. 1. Num. 17. And to give you one place for all M. Horn, that you may no longer stagger in this matter, behold what this famous Scholeman (as you call him) Durandus saith of the Pope's primacy. Illius ●raelatus Papa, etc. The prelate of the whole Church is called Papa, that is to say, the father of Fathers: universal, because he beareth the principal rule over the whole Church: Apostolical, because he occupieth the room of the Prince of the Apostles: chief Bishop, because he is the Head of all Bishops etc. Lo M. Horn what a jolly Author you have alleged against M. Fekenham. Verily such an adversary were worth at all times not only the hearing, but also the hiring. But alas what toll is there so weak, that you poor souls in such a desperate cause, will refuse to strike withal? You must say somewhat. It standeth upon your honours: and when all is said, it were for your honesties better unsaid. M. Horn The .133. Division. pag. ●0. b. About this time also the Emperor Henry the .7. came into Italy with great power to reduce the Empire to the old estate and glory of the ancient Emperors in (431.) The .431. untruth. For not in the behalf of ecclesiastical government. this behalf. And on the day of his coronation at Rome, according to the manner of other Roman Emperors, he set forth a Law, or new authentic of the most high Trinity, and the Catholic faith. Stapleton. What matter is this M. Horn, to enforce M. Fekenham to deny the pope's primacy? Will you never leave your trifling and frivolous dealing? If ye will say any thing to your purpose, ye must show, that he took not the pope, but himself only and his successors for supreme heads of the Church, and that in all things and causes, which ye shall never be able to do while ye live, neither in this, nor in any other Emperor, King or prince what so ever. M. Horn. The .134. Division. pag 80. b. next to Henry .7. was Lews .4. Emperor: who had no less but rather greater conflicts with the Popes in his time (.432.) The .432: untruth. The conflict was far otherwise, as shall appear. about the reformation of abuses, than any had before him: the Pope now claiming for an (433) The .433. untruth, as shall appear. Ecclesiastical matter, the confirming of the Emperor, as before the Emperors were wont to confirm the Popes. About which question, the Emperor sent and called many learned Clerks in (.434) The .434. untruth. Poets, not divines. Divinity, in the Civil and Canon Law, from Italy, France, Germany, Paris, and Bononia, which all answered, that the (435) The .435. untruth. No such thing in his Author. Pope's attempts were erroneous, and derogating from the simplicity of the Christian religion. Whereupon the Emperor willed them to search out the matter diligently, and to dispute upon it, and to gather into books their minds therein, which diverse did, as Marsilius Patavinus, Ockam, Dantes, petrarch, etc. By whom when the Emperor understood the Pope's usurpation, he came to Rome, called a Council, and (.436.) The .436. Untruth. For he did it De facto, not De iure. deposed the Pope, and placed an other in his room: In which Council, the Romans desired to have their old order in the Pope's election ratified by the Emperor, to be renewed. This Emperor called also a very great Council at Frankeforth, where besides the Spiritual and Secular princes of Germany, the King of (.437.) The .437. Untruth. None of his Marginal Authors say so. England, and the King of Beam, were present, where by the greater and sounder part, the Pope's aforesaid usurpation was abolished. Which sentence the Emperor confirmed, and published writing thereof, that his authority dependeth not of the pope, but of God immediately, and that it is a vain thing that is wont to be said, the pope hath no superior (.438.) The .438. Untruth. In concealing his Authors meaning. The Acts of this (.439.) The .439. Untruth. Nauclere belied, and falsified, a● shall appear. Council against the Pope's process were ratified by the Emperor, as appeareth by his letters patents thereupon, beginning thus. Lodovic the fourth, by the grace of God, etc. To all patriarchs, archbishops, Bishops, and priest●●, etc. And ending thus. Wherefore by the Council and consent of the prelate's and prince's, etc. We denounce and determine, that all such processes be of no force or moment, and straightly charge and command to all that live in our Empire, of what estate or condition so ever they be, that they presume not to observe the said sentences and curses of the pope's interdiction, etc. another Council he called afterwards at the same place, about the same matter: because Pope Clement called it heresy, To say that the Emperor had authority to depose the pope, which heresy as principal, he laid (.440.) The .440 Untruth. It was not the first that was laid etc. first to the emperors charge. Item (.441.) The 441. and .442. Vntruth● Pope Clement twice flatly belied as shall appear. that the Emperor affirmed, that Christ and his Apostles were but poor. Item, the .3. heresy, that he made and deposed Bishops. Item that he neglected the Pope's interdightment, etc. Iten that he (.442) joined certain in marriage in degrees forbidden (he meaneth forbidden by the Pope's laws) and devorceth them that were married in the face of the Church. Which in deed was nothing else▪ but that amongst other Ecclesiastical laws that the Emperor set forth, were some for marriages and devorcements contrary to the Pope's decrees. The .29. Chapter. Of Lewis the .4. Emperor. Stapleton. WE have need Master Horn of a new judge Marcelline, M. Horn● impertinent Arguments. that may by his interlocutory sentence, bring you, as he did the Donatists from your wild wide wandering, home again to your matter. Let it be (for the time if ye will needs so have it) that the emperors Authority doth not depend of the Pope, yea and that Pope john the .22. was also for his own private person an Heretic. And then I beseech you add your wise conclusion. Ergo Master Feckenham must take a corporal Oath, that the Queen is Supreme Head of the Church of England. Now on the other side, if we can prove against you, that even this your own Supreme Head, Lewis, for spiritual and Ecclesiastical matters, agnized the Popes and the General Councils Authority, to be Superior to the Authority of the Emperor and of all other Princes, and that they all must be obedient and submit them selves thereunto, then shall Master Fekenham conclude with you an other manner of Ergo, and that is, that ye and your confederates, are no Bishops, as made contrary to the laws and ordinances of the Pope, and as well of the late General Council at Trent, as of other General Counsels: yea that ye are no good Christians, but plain Heretics, for refusing the Pope and the said General Councils authority. For the proof of our assertion, that this Emperor, albeit he stood against the Pope, avouching himself for a true and a full Emperor, thowghe he were not confirmed by the Pope (which was the very state of the original controversy betwixt him and the Pope) and thowghe he procured Pope john (as much as lay in him) to be deposed, and placed an other in his room, believed yet (this notwithstanding) that the Pope for spiritual and faith matters was the Head of the Church (which thing is the only matter standing in debate between you and M. Feckenhan) for proof I say of this we will not stray far of, but fetch it, only of your own authors here named: who confess that he appealed, to the very same Pope john, Antoninus part .3. tit. 21. cap. 5. ff. 8. Appellavit ad ipsum Papam malè informatum, benè informandum et etiam ad concilium generale. Nauclerus Gener 45. Naucler. ibidem. Platina. Creatus itaque Pseudopontifex ac Nicolaus .5. appellatus ab imperatore & ijs qui cum eo aderant, ut verus Christi vicarius consalutatur. Naucler. ibidem. ill informed, when he should be afterward better informed: and withal to a general council. But what need we seek aid at Antoninus and Nauclerus hands, when we have it, so ready at your own hands? For yourself say, that he placed an other Pope in john's stead. Ergo he acknowledged a Pope still: and as your author saith, ut verum Christi vicarium, as the true vicar of Christ. Neither did your Emperor diminish or blemish the Pope's authority in any point, saving that he said, he might appeal from him to the general council, and that th'emperor was not inferior or subject to him for temporal jurisdiction. But with you and your band, neither Pope, nor general council taketh place. Now then, that ye are cast even by your own emperor, we might well let go the residue of your superfluous talk, saving that it is worth the marking to see your true, honest, and wise handling of it. Your first oversight and untruth than is, that ye writ, that the Pope claimed the confirmation of th'emperor as an ecclesiastical matter. In deed he claimed the same, and so right well he might do: as no new thing by him invented, but brought to him from hand to hand, from successor, to successor, by the race and continuance of many hundred years. And yet if we speak properly, it is no matter ecclesiastical no more than the patrimony of S. Peter, Concerning the confirmation of th'emperor by the Pope. consisting in temporal lands was a matter ecclesiastical and yet both dew to the Pope. The one by the gift of diverse good princes: the other, either by prescription of time out of mind, or by special order taken by the pope's at such time, as the pope made Charles the great, Emperor of the West: or when he translated th'empire into Germany, and ordained .7. Prince's there to have the election of th'Emperor, or for some other good reason, that if need be, may be yet further alleged and better enforced, than that all your wit and cunning shall ever be able, well to avoid. Nay say ye, th'emperor had great learned men on his side, expert in divinity, and in the civil and canon law. But when ye come to number them, ye find none, but the poets Dantes, and Petrarcha, Ockan the schoolman, M. Horn proveth his new primacy by poets. M. Horns own author condemneth his witnesses. Volater. in Anthropologia. and the great heretic, Marsilius Patavinus. And shall these men M. Horn countervail, or overweighe the practice of the church ever since used to the contrary, and confirmed by the great consent of the catholic writers, and diverse general councils withal? Ye writ as out of Antoninus, or Marius, in a several and latin letter that the Pope's attempts were erroneous, and derogating from the simplicity of the Christian religion. But such words I find as yet in neither of them, nor in any other of your authors, here named. And your author Antoninus saith, that in this point, both Dantes and Ockam with other do err: and that the monarchy of the Empire is subject to the Church even in matters temporal. Antoni. part. 3. titul 21. ca 5. ss. 2. And whereas your sect will have no mean place, for any Christians, but heaven or hell, your Dantes (as Antoninus telleth) hath found a mean place, beside heaven and hell, for Socrates, Aristotle, Cicero, Homer and such like. surely Dantes, Bartolus in lege prima ff. de requirendis reis. Marsilius Patavinus. Vide Hierarchiam Pighij. De jurisdict. Imper. & ecclesiast. Basil. impres. Anno 1566. The proper heresy of England. for his other opinion touching th'emperors subjection is counted not much better than an heretic. As for Marsilius Patavinus, he hath been aswell long ago, as also of late, largely and learnedly answered. But as for these writers, Marsilius Patavinus, Ockam, Dantes, and petrarch, with diverse others, part of whom your brethren of Basil have patched up together, in a great volume, as they labour all to prove the Emperor above the Pope in temporal jurisdiction and government, wherein yet they erred (as we have said) so none of them all do labour to prove the Emperor supreme governor in spiritual and ecclesiastical causes, (as you the first founders of this heresy do say and swear to,) but do leave that to the Bishops, yea and some of them to the Pope to. And therefore all were it true, that they wrote in the favour of Lewis the .4. then Emperor, yet were you never the nearer of your purpose by one jot. This is M. Horn, your own proper and singular heresy of England to make the Prince supreme governor in causes ecclesiastical. You only are Laicocephali, that is such as make the lay Magistrates, your heads in spiritual matters. Ye add then more force to your matter by a great council kept at Frankford, whereat the king of Beam and of England also were present, of which with other things is set forth by a special and a latin letter, as the precise words of Marius, or of the addition adjoined to Vrspergensis. But neither they, nor any other of your marginal authors speak of the king of England. And when ye have all don, and who so ever was there, it was but a schismatical conventicle, and yet much better, than your late convocations. If the articles of your said convocations had come to their hands, no doubt, they had been condemned, for a great part of them, for most blasphemous heresies. Well: The Emperor saith (say you) that his authority dependeth not of the Pope, but of God immediately, and that it is a vain thing, that is wont to be said, the Pope hath no superior: if ye could prove this Emperor an Evangelist, or this Council a lawful General Council, we would give some ear to you. And if th'emperors authority depend so immediately of God, show us gods commandment, given rather to the Germans, then to the French or English men, to choose an Emperor. Most of the other prince's Christian in Europa hold by succession, and not by election. And if ye can show us any other cause of the diversity, but the Pope's only ordinance, then shall ye quite yourself like a clerk. If ye can not show other cause, then shall ye never be able to show us good cause, why the Pope should not claim the confirmation. Yet is it, sayeth M. Horn, M. Horn leaveth out of his authors words. Vide dict. Paralip. & Naucler. pag. 384. & 385. vo●lum. 3. a vain thing to say the Pope hath no superior: but it is more vainly and fondly done of you M. Horn, to the descrying of your false dealing and to the destruction of your Primacy, to bring forth this saying. For your said council recogniseth the Pope, as superior in all causes ecclesiastical. And where it sayeth, it hath a superior, why do ye not tell us, as your authors do, who is his superior? Is it the Emperor ween you, or any temporal Prince, as ye would make your unlearned reader believe? No, no. Your council meant, and so both your authors plainly declare, that it was the general council, to the which th'emperor had appealed. Where you add, the Acts of this Council were ratified by the emperors letters patents, and do bring in thereupon as the emperors letters against the Pope's processes, you beguile your Reader, and bely your Author Nauclerus. For those letters patents, this Emperor gave forth, not as ratifying the Acts of that Council (as you say) but De concilio quorundam fratrum Minorum sub sigillo suo: upon the advise of certain Minorits, under his own seal. And again: vocata solenni curia: At the keeping of a solemn Court. Of the Acts of that Council, Nauclere speaketh not in this place, neither reporteth these letters patents to have proceeded thereof. Thus of Prince's Courts, ye make great Counsels, and of the advise of certain Friars, you frame to your Reader the consent of many bishops. By such pelting shifts, a barren cause must be relieved. But now are ye yet again in hand with an other Council at Frankford by this Emperor: and with certain heresies that Pope Clement laid to this emperors charge. It would make a wise man to wonder, to consider, to what end and purpose this stuff is here so thrust in. Neither cause can I as yet conjecture any, unless I should impute it, to Mistress' folly, or to dame heresy, or to both: or to the special ordinance of God, that suffereth this man for the malice he beareth to the Catholic Church to wax so blind, that he speaketh, An heap of Untruths. Naucler. ubi ut supra. Paralip. Vrspergen. he wotteth not what, and seeth not; when he speaketh most against himself, nor the matter that he would gladly defend. For beside as many lies as be almost lines (as that he telleth of an heresy first laid to the emperors charge, which was not the first, as ye shall understand anon: Item, that the Pope said he was an heretic, because he said Christ and his Apostles were poor, wherein he doth exceedingly lie upon pope Clement: Item that th'emperor set forth laws Ecclesiastical, concerning marriages and devorcements, which his Authors say not, Naucler. gener. 45. pag. 390. Prima haeresis. Ipse enim (inquit Clemens) asseruit determinat. de pauper tate Christi et apostolorum per joan. 22. factam, esse haereticam: et iuravit se credere contrarium. Item asseruit. etc. M. Horn Emperor is an heretic. Vide extravagantem Io. 22. cum inter de verb. signif. nor is otherwise true) beside all this he declareth his Emperor to be a very heretic, and himself also, or at the least to be but a very foolish fond man. I will therefore for the better understanding of the matter, first rehearse you his author's words, and then add to it some further declaration meet for the purpose. The first heresy (saith Nauclerus) was that the Emperor affirmed, that the Decree made by Pope john the .22. touching the poverty of Christ and his Apostles, was heretical, swearing that he believed the contrary. He avouched moreover that it appertained to the Emperor, to make or depose Popes. Furthermore being cited to answer in a cause of heresy, and being accursed for his contumacy, he hath continued almost these ten years in the said curse. He retained also in his company, one john of Landenio an Archeheretik. He maketh bishops, he breaketh the interdict, and doth expel them out of their benefices that will not break it. He severeth matrimonies, contracted in the face of the Church: and joineth persons together in the degrees forbidden. He meaneth perchance (sayeth Nauclere) that he married his son Lewis to the Countess of Tyroles, her husband john, the king of Beams son, yet living: saying that he was impotent: and further, she was married to this Lewis being within the degrees prohibited. Clement addeth beside, that he hath set up an Idol in the Church, and an Antipope, and hath de facto, deposed the Pope. These are Nauclere, M. Horn his authors precise words: the which I pray thee good reader to confer with M. horns gloze, and then shall ye see the man's honesty and fidelity in reporting his Authors. This Emperor than was not accounted an heretic because he said Christ and his Apostles were poor, neither is this condemned for heresy, by the foresaid john the .22. but to say Christ and his Apostles had nothing in common or in private, Vide histo●iam Ant. part. 3. tit. 21. c. 5. ss. 1. which was the heresy of those that are called Fratricelli, or Pauperes de Lugduno: most chiefly of all men set forth by a Friar called Michaël de Cesena, and our Countryman Friar Ockam, and Marsilius Patavinus, and by this your Emperor jews of Bavarie and by Petrus de Corbario the Antipope, that ye say was placed in pope john's room: Is Concilio in Italia habito Io. 22. haereticum declaraverat, defendens jesum eiusque discipulos adeo pauperes fuisse, ut nihil neque in coni, neque privatim habuissent. Quod in Concil. Anemonensi refutatum est. Io. Marius de schism. et Concil. part. 2. c. 21 who keeping a Conventicle in Italy, condemned pope john for an Heretic, as your Author Marius declareth: So that this faction in this wise on every side banded, grew to a very great schism. And many so fond and obstinately dwelled in this opininion, that they died as obstinately and wretchedly for it. And yet these men as I have said, are not only holy brethren, but holy Martyrs too, with Master Fox. And now good Master Horn, tell us your judgement in the matter. Is it Heresy, or is it no heresy, to defend this opinion obstinately? If ye say it is heresy▪ Cardinal. Flor. in Clement. exivi. ss. proinde de verb. signif. Mad Martyrs. then do ye confess your new Head of the Church, with his new Idol and Antipope, an Heretic: and do show yourself a great slanderous liar against pope john: and a very fond mad man, thus to fight against yourself, and your own cause. If ye do stoutly deny this to be heresy, as ye seem, by the order of your declaration to deny it, as well as the rest, then show you yourself no simple schismatic, nor simple Heretic, and so ye are at the least messhed here in four heresies. To set some fast footing in the discussion of these matters, and seriously to weigh and examine every thing, would ask some larger talk, them we may now (unless we would be to to tedious to our reader) well spare. But yet for the two principal matters, seeing you make so light of Pope john and the Church's Authority, I will convince you, and sufficiently to, I hope: and by such a witness as your own Emperor, of all other men in the world did most esteem and reverence, yea and kissed his foot to. Perchance Master Horn ye long to hear of this man? truly he is none other, but your emperors darling, The repentance of the Antipope se●te up against Pope john. and idol the Antipope. I mean Petrus de Corbario. Who at length, (called no doubt thereto by the special grace of God,) better advising himself of his doings, and weighing them better with himself, after mature and serious discussing of them, in fine found himself no Pope, but a miserable and a wretched intruder, in the sea of S. Peter: and a damnable disturber of the peace and unity of Christ's Church, and to say all at ones, a grievous schismatic, and an heinous heretic. Wherefore finding the worm of conscience, biting and gnawing his heart, he fell to great sorrow and lamentation, and forthwith being then at a city in Italy called Pisa, before the archbishop of the said city, and the bishop of Luke, and many other honourable persons aswell of the clergy as of the laity, voluntarily and willingly, showed how penitent he was for his grievous enormities, and before them and certain notaries, for a full testimony of his true repentance, gave over his usurped primacy, and plainly confessed, that he had been a schismatic and an heretic: and he did put himself into the hands and mercy of the right Pope john the .22. And wrote unto him resident then at Avignon in France, his most humble submission: in the which he declareth, that as himself was but an usurper of the Apostolic▪ See: So your Lewis of Bavarie, was no lawful Emperor, but an usurper. He declareth further that both he and the said jews, maintained divers heresies, and namely two of these that ye here specify, concerning the poverty of Christ, and the making and the deposing of the Pope. The which he doth by special words freely and voluntarily, forsake, renounce, and abjure. And promiseth that he would ever after believe, Specialiter cognosco, me tenere & credere quòd ad Imperatorem non pertinet, deponere nec instituere Papam, prout etc. as the said john, and the holy Church of Rome believed. Will ye now see good Reader the wonderful working of God, that hath brought to Master Horn his own Pope, to condemn him and his new Head of the Church Lewis, for Arrante heretics? Yea to make a short answer to all Master horns book, and to call it heresy, that Master Horn doth so stoutly defend, in saying that the Emperor should be above the Pope, and to have authority to make or depose the Pope? And thus ye hear, (Master Horn) that contrary to your saying Pope john neither was deposed, nor could be deposed by your Emperor. I marvel now seeing that it is a true and sound doctrine by your new heads teaching, Vide Robertum Arbor●●ēsem Episcopum impressum Parisiis in 8. Anno. 15.46. Master horns Emperor, and himself declared an heretic by his own Antipope. All Master horns book shortly confuted by the said Antipope. that Christ and the Apostles had nothing of their own, that your and your fellows consciences (who pretend that ye would have the Church that now is, reform to the pattern of the primitive and Apostolical Church) are so large, that ye are nothing pinched at conscience, in keeping your godly and great possessions. The .30. Chapter: Of God's judgement upon such Emperors, as seem most to have practised M. Horns Primacy. Stapleton. BUT now M. Horn, sith we are come by course of times and ages to the last Emperor, that notoriously rebelled against the Apostolic See of Rome (for since this Lewis the .4. they have all been obedient Children to that See, especially in all causes spiritual or Ecclesiastical, even to the right Catholic Emperor Maximilian that now reigneth) I will put you briefly in mind, to what ends all these disobedient Emperors came. Trusting that this consideration of God's judgement shall be neither to you bearing yourself for a bishop in God's Church unpleasant, neither for me (my vocation considered) unmeet, neither to the Christian Reader unfruitful. To be short therefore, Ammianus Marcel. li. 22. Constan●ius the Arrian Emperor which banished Pope Liberius, and played in deed the part of your supreme governor, died obscurely and miserably whiles he persecuted julyan his own Cousin. Valens an other Arrian Emperor, Idem lib. 31. and playing Rex over all Catholic Bishops in the East, being overcome in field of the Goths, was burned to ashes in a poor cottage, with divers of his nobles about him, which▪ was never read of any Christian Emperor sense, or before. Valentinian the younger who called his bishop, Hierony. ad Heliodorum. To. 1. Ambr. lib. 5. epist. 32. Eutropius lib. 3. S. Ambrose to appear before his consistory, and there to answer in matters of faith, his end was to be killed of his own servants, and shamefully hanged. Anastasius the Eutychian Emperor, and excommunicated of Pope Gelasius, was strooken to death with fire from heaven, and Mauritius an unmerciful persecuter of blessed Pope Gregory, and a busy Prince over his Bishops seeing first his wife and children murdered before his face, was murdered at last himself of a base Souldiare Phocas. Blondus li. 3. decad 1. Paulus Diaconus, lib. 18. Zon●ras Tomo. 3. Zonara's Ibidem. Constans nephew to Heraclius, banished the most holy Pope Martinus: but seeing himself for that and such like wicked deeds (saith Zonara's) hateful to his subjects, he left Constantinople, and lived in Sicilia, where at a bathing he was slain. Michael, son to Theophilus, a notorious enemy to the See Apostolic, namely to Nicolaus the first, going drunk to bed, was miserably slain by his bed's side, forsaken of all his friends. And thus much of the Greek Emperors and of the East Church, only Valentinian excepted. Nauclerus volume. 3. Generate. 37. pag. 171 &. 173. The first of all the german Emperors that notoriously disobeyed the See of Rome, and that was therefore by the Pope excommunicated openly, was Henry the .4. whom Gregory the seventh (otherwise called Hildebrand) excommunicated. His end was, as it hath before been declared, that being first deposed of his own son, after much resistance, and misery, appealing, but to late, to the See of Rome, seeing himself forsaken almost of all the states of the Empire, in affliction and extreme persecution died. Idem. Generate 40. pag. 251. Sabellicus Aenead. 9 lib. 5. Friderik the first called Barbarossa, a man that many years persecuted the Church of Rome, and therefore worthily excommunicated of Alexander .3. to whom also he was forced at length to submit himself, though against his will, afterward in Cicilia, being strong and merry, suddenly bathing himself in a river he was lost. Naucler. Gene. 41. pag. 271. Philip an Emperor made against the consent of Pope Innocentius .3. and a persecuter therefore of the Pope, in the town of Bromberge reposing himself after dinner in his privy chamber, was slain of the County Palatyne. Otho the fourth deposed and excommunicated of the Pope for his enormous cruelties and injuries committed in many places of Italy, Pag. 275. & 280. sabel. Ae. 9 lib. 6. Nauc. Genera. 42. pag. 309. Sab. Aen. 9 lib. 6. was of Philipe the French king assaulted in these low countries, and put to flight, and shortly after in Saxony died as a private man. Fredrick the second, a prince brought up in the Court of Rome, and set in the Empire by the procurement of pope Innocentius the .3. became yet afterward a most cruel and tyrannical persecutor not only of that See, but of all the Clergy under his dominions. This man being excommunicated of Innocentius .4. was poisoned in Apulia as some writ, or strangled, as other writ, by his bastard son Manfredus. Not only this Emperor himself, but all his stock after him perished, by violent deaths or imprisonment. Naucler. pag. 313. His son and heir Conradus being excommunicated also of Innocentius .4. for the great outrages and oppressions by him committed against the Church, by the means also of the said Manfredus, was poisoned in Apulia. This Manfredus coming by these traitorous means to the kingdoms of Apulia and Sicilia, Idem. Gen. 42. p. 32●. and afflicting the Church of Rome, as his father and brother had done, was excommunicated by Alexander the .4. and after of Charles the French kings broother, whom Vrbanus the fourth made king of Sicilia and Apulia, Sabel. Ae. 9 lib. 7. Naucler. pag. 323. he was vanquished and slain in the field. Conradinus son to Conradus, and claiming after, his father's Titles, was of this Charles also vanquished and put to death. Entius likewise an other son of Friderike the .2. and one that had long and many years in his father's wars, Naucler. pag. 324. dict. Gen. 42. done great mischief to the See of Rome, was at length taken in battle of the Bononyans, and committed to perpetual prison. Thus all the stock of this Fredrick the .2. who had so grievously persecuted the Church of Rome, was in few years utterly extinguished. Which thing all historians do worthily note, though some more sharply them other: yet all herein agreeing, that for their deserts God plagued them so notoriously in this world. Naucl. Gener. 45. pag. 379.388. et 393. Lewis the fourth, the last Emperor by master Horn alleged, being excommunicated twice of the See of Rome, first of john the .22. and after of Clement the .6. under whom and in whose favour those poets and orators, Petrarcha and Dantes, Marsilius, and Ockam the schoolman wrote against the Pope's temporalties, as he was a hunting, was taken with a sudden palsy, fell from his horse, and died. Such ends had they in this life, that most practised the supreme government by M. Horn here defended. And his best examples and proofs, to prove his strange primacy, have been drawn from the doings of these forenamed Emperors. And verily like as in the old law, Saul, Achab, Ioram, Ochozias, joas, Amasias, Ozias, and Achas, kings of juda and Israel died all by violent and miserable deaths, for disobeying the prophets and priests of God, 1. Reg. 31. 3. Reg. 22 4. Reg. 9 2. Paral. 24.25.26 Samuel, Elias, Elizeus, Micheas and isaiah, and as their such deaths were manifest arguments of God's indignation, and recounted for such in holy scripture: so these forenamed Emperors, and princes in Christ's Church Constantius, Mauritius, Valens, Anastasius, Constans, Michael, Henry the fourth, Friderike Barbarossa, Philip, Otho .4. Friderike the second, Conradus, Conradinus, Manfredus, and Lewis the .4. having such violent and miserable ends, upon their notorious disobedience to Christ's vicars in earth, the bishops of the See Apostolic Liberius, Gelasius, S. Gregory the first, Martinus the first, Nicolaus the first, Gregory the .7. Alexander .3. Innocentius the .3. and .4. Alexander the .4. john the. ●2. and Clement the .6. are unto us professing the faith of this Church, undoubted arguments of Gods just indignation and plague in their behalfs, and may well serve for wholesome presidents to other Christian princes, not to attempt the like. But now to return to M. Horn, and to tread, as he leadeth us, have out of Germany, into France, an other while. M Horn. The .135. Division. pag 81. b. In France king Charles (.443.) The .443. untruth. He granted them. Pet. Bertran. denied the Pope the tenths of his Clergy. But Philip de Valois that followed, Aemylius. reform and took away many late upstart Ecclesiastical abuses in the Clergy, and Prelates in his Realm: of the which, diverse complaints being made unto the king, he ca●led a council at Paris, and summoned thither the bishops, as appeareth by his letters wherein he complaineth, that they have enchroched from him and his officers a great many of rights: bringing in their novelties not due, and unwonted grieves under the pretence of Ecclesiastical causes: whereby they have broken the concord of the Clergy and the Laity, and therefore willing to provide so much as he can by God's help, an healthful remedy: He requireth, and nevertheless commandeth them to appear before him at Paris personally. etc. The Prelates appearing at the day assigned, before the king in his palace, archbishops, bishops, and making reverence to the kings majesty, being set down with his council, and certain Barons assisting him, a certain knight of the kings council, spoke publicly for the king in the presence of them all, taking for his theme this text. give that unto Caesar that belongeth to Caesar, and that unto God that is due unto God. etc. The kings admonition being made, a great many complaints were put up unto the king by his nobles and officers, against the Clergies usurpation, in meddling with contracts of marriages, in their privileges of clerks: In citations to their Courts, in their excommunications, in wills, and hereditaments, in calling of provincial councils, in making synodal Decrees, and statutes, in meddling with realties, in peremptory writes, in examinations of men's believes, in enjoining of money penances, In shaving of children, and unlawful persons making them Clerks, in whoordome and fornication, in widow's goods, in bloodshed in the churchyard, in inventories, etc. and in a great many more matters, which ye call Spiritual or Ecclesiastical causes: the French king proving (.444.) The .444. untruth. For the French king ne said ne proved no such matter. them to be (as in deed they were no other) but temporal: nevertheless not standing much about the name, nor taking them all away, from their jurisdiction, he only said, he would reform them. Nevertheless, for certain days there was much disputing to and f●o, whether they belonged to the king to reform or no, till the king by his foresaid procurator gave them the kings determinat answer, declaring unto them, how that they ought not to be troubled, because the kings intention was, to keep those rights and customs of the Church, and Prelates which were good and reasonable, but by reason of their faults, the judgement which were good and reasonable, appertained not unto them to determine, but to the king. Because the Decree, Novit etc. saith, that the king of France in matters de Facto, hath not his superior etc. Whereupon he concluded, that the king would hear all the informations: And those Customs of the which he should be fully informed, that they were good and reasonable, he would make only to be observed. In (.445.) The .445. untruth. For this was not the Conclusion, as shall appear. Aemylius conclusion the Prelates made such importune labour, that the foresaid attorney answered them for the king, that if the Prelate's themselves would amend those things, that were to be amended and corrected, the king would abide till the feast of the Nativity next to come: within the said term, he would innovate nothing: but if within the said term, the Prelates had not amended those things that were to be amended and corrected, that then the king would put to such remedy, as should be acceptable to God and the people. Which in conclusion the king was feign to do, by a sharp and severe (.446.) The .446 untruth. P. Aemylius mentioneth no such law▪ but plainly the contrary. Law, when he saw how the Prelate's dallied him of, with fair words, and (.447.) The .447 untruth. Not therefore, P. Aemylius foully abused. therefore he himself, Composuit rem sacerdotum, did set in order the matters of the Priests. The .31. Chapter. Of Charles the .4. and Philip de Valois sixth of that name, kings of France. Stapleton. WEll fished, and caught a frog. All this long tale is told for Composuit rem sacerdotum. But to touch the particulars, P. Aemilius li. 8. in Carolo Pulchro. Carolus Rex & virtutis & clementiae laudem, fructumque ad eum diem tulit, exin adversourmore, quòd sacri in Ludovicum Baeuarū belli nomine decimas de sacerdotibus Francispetentipontific. Max. johanni cum primum denegasset, pactione deinde expugnatus, concessisset ut in part ipse veniret, & caet. what wise reason is this, or what reason at all is it, to make the Queen of England supreme head of the Church, because Charles the French king denied the pope the tenths of the Clergy? Verily his author saith, the king did impair his estimation, that men had of his virtue before by this very fact of his. Yea and yet he saith withal, that afterward he did condescend to the pope's request. Now what meaneth M. Horn, to allege that for prouf of dew government, which his author's report, for proof of undue regiment? Meaneth he that all the world should laugh him to scorn? That which followeth of Peter Bertrand, and eftson of Paulus Aemilius, is M. Horns own: making them, to speak not their minds, but what liketh him, telling us first an obscure, dark, false tale, out of the said Bertrand: but I trust we shall draw him out into the fair open light, and pluck from him Petrus Bertrand and Paulus Aemilius with whose viso, he would fain cover the ugly face of his impudent and shameless lies. Why M. Horn? hath not the Clergy to do with matters of contracts of marriage, excommunications, wills, and with the examination of men's beliefs, with making synodical decrees, and such like matters? Wherefore then do ye not shake of from you the intermeddling with these matters? Well I perceive saying and doing are two things: and neither shall Ludovicus the Emperor, though he affirmed that the Clergy should follow Christ and his Apostles in poverty, make you to disclaim your goodly lands and patrimony: nor Philip Valesius the French king make you to disclaim your jurisdiction. The gain is to sweet. Perhaps ye will answer, that I strain you to far, and that ye do not deny, Vide libellum Petri Bertrandi episc. He dupus. & Cardinalis adversus Pe●rum de Cunerijs super facto prae●a●o●ū ecclesiae gallis●naean. 1●29. Hinc l●bel. reperies adiunctum cum Qua d●il●g. de vita Be. Thom Paris. Anno. 1495. A short declarati● of the matter in hand. but that the Clergy may use the jurisdiction of the foresaid matters, but not as Church or ecclesiastical matters, but as plain temporal matters, for the French king proved they were so in deed. Neither the king proved it, nor your author saith it, nor any other. The shameless dealing of this man is such, that he seemeth to seek nothing else, but to overwhelm the world with words, little regarding to speak, not only great and many untruths, but even such as without further trial and straining him no more, but with his own authors, are incontinently opened and descried. To answer fully, and at large to all his endless and importune babbling, aswell here as otherwhere would be to to tedious a thing. And for this matter, in as much as Petrus Bertrand is in print, I will send the learned reader, that is desirous; to see the depth of this matter, to the original book: and will now touch so much only, as shallbe sufficient for the unlettered reader, to see and consider M. Horns unfaithful and wretched dealing. Petrus C●●erius being one of the kings privy council proponed to the Clergy before the king, and the nobility .76. articles: and went about to prove, that the prelate's and the Clergy, for so many points had usurped upon the kings jurisdiction. He avouched also, that temporal and spiritual things, are divided and sundered, and that the one appertained to the king only, the other to the clergy only. The archbishop of Sans, answered to this Petrus, and proved by the old and the new testament, by the civil and canon Law, and by the custom of France time out of mind used, and by several grants and privileges, received from the king's predecessors, that spiritual and temporal jurisdiction were not so preci●elie distincted, but that one person might occupy both. After him the same day seven night, in the presence of the king stood up Petrus Bertrandus a bishop of the people in France then called Hedui, who are now Burgonions, and enforced the same matter, adding a full answer, aswell to the decree Novit, alleged here by M. Horn out of the said Petrus Cunerius, as unto all his .76. articles. A great number of the said articles, touch matters plain and mere temporal, and yet such as the clergy did and might meddle withal, partly by Law, partly by special privilege, and partly by custom. There were certain faults and abuses found in the prelate's officers, Petr. Bertrandus. the which the prelate's answered, that if they had known them before, they would not have suffered them: and promised to foresee for the time to come, for the earnest amending and redressinge of them. For the redressing whereof the king gave them a time until Christmas following. Now M. Horn would make thee believe, good reader, that because the prelates dallied and things were not reformed accordingly, the king by a sharp and a severe law did amend and correct them. But this is your own Law, good master Horn, and no Law at all of King Philippe: made by you, I say, with as good authority and truth, as the damnable articles were made, in your late convocation. How so ever it be, here is nothing amended but abuses: which to be amended no good man will I ween be angry withal. But what say you now master Horn to the whole ecclesiastical jurisdiction that the French clergy practised? What became of it? Did the king take it away, or no? Why are ye tongue tied M. Horn to tell the truth, that so freely and liberally, yea and lewdly to, lie against the truth? Well: seeing that ye can not win it at Master Horns hands good reader, Petrus Bertrandus. ye shall hear it otherwise. The effect and final resolution then of this debate was, that the king made answer to the foresaid bishop of Sans, demanding his resolute answer, in the behalf of the whole clergy: that the prelate's should fear nothing, and that they should not lose one jot in his time: but that he would defend them in their right and customs: neither would he give to other an example to impugn the Church. Whereupon the bishop in the name of the whole clergy gave to the king most humble thanks. M. Horns shameless dealing. How say you good reader, hath this man any more shame than hath a very Horn? And dareth he to look hereafter any honest man in the face? Yet he will say that Paulus Aemilius saith, that the King was fain to make this sharp and severe Law. Why? Can Paulus Aemylius, tell better what was done, than your other author Bertrande, being present and playing the chief part in this play, and setting it forth to the world, to your perpetual ignominy, with his own pen? Well: tell us then, what Paulus sayeth. Marry say you, Paulus reporteth that composuit rem sacerdotum: he did set in order the matters of the Priests. But who speaketh of your sharp and severe Law? Will not componere rem sacerdotum: agree with all that I have told out of Bertrand himself? Is now componere rem sacerdotum: to be englished, to make a sharp and a severe law? surely this is a pretty exposition, and a try me trick of your new grammar. Your Author Aemilius useth his word composuit, valdè, aptè, & compositè, very aptly and fytlie. But you M. Horn with your gay and fresh interpretation do nothing else, but Lectori fallacias componere, deceive and be guile your reader, or to speak more fytely to our purpose, ye do nothing else but Legem Philippi nomine componere. counterfeit a law in Philip'S name: Paulus Aemilius. Lib. 8. in Philip. 6. Valesio, supplicationibus ac gratijs numini ac sanctis martyribus haebitis rem sacerdotum composuit. Praetores regij etc. The matter truly declared out of ●. Aemilius M. Horns author. whereof your author Aemilius speaketh nothing. For Aemilius declaring a notable victory that this King had over his enemies, saith: that the victory obtained, and after that he had made his prayers and given thanks therefore to God and to his blessed Martyrs, composuit rem Sacerdotum: he set in order the priests matters. Then doth he shortly specify, that the foresaid Petrus Cunerius complained upon the clergy for the hearing of many matters, that appertained to the kings secular cowrte: and that the foresaid Bertrandus made him answer, declaring among other things, that their best Kings in France, the most florisshing and the most notable were ever the greatest patrons and defenders of the clergies liberties: and that the other that impugned the same, came to a miserable and wretched end. He saith further, that the Kings answer being from day to day prolonged, the said Bertrandus with a number of the prelate's upon S. Thomas of Canterbury's day, went to the King, admonishing him that S. Thomas in the defence of the Church liberties upon that day, spent his blood and life. The King at the length answered that he would rather increase, than impair the Churches right. P. Aemilius dict. lib. 8. Tum Rex, iura, inquit, ecclesiarum auxerim potius quàm imminutae velin. Gratias universi egere, Rex Catholici nomen promeruit. Whereupon all rendered unto him thanks: and the King purchased himself thereby the name of a Catholic King. Ye hear, good reader, an other manner of exposition of ●om●osuit remsace●dotum, by theauthour himself, then is M. Horns gay lying gloze made in his thievish Cacus den. And therefore with these words, wherewith Aemilius beginneth his narration, M. Horn endeth the narration, to put some countenance upon his false and counterfeit Law. The clergy than enjoyed still their liberties and jurisdiction, which ordinarily they had before, either by Law, or by custom and privilege, though as I said many causes were but temporal. All the which temporal causes, the said Petrus Cunerius, by the way of consultation only and reasoning, declared by some coulorable arguments, to belong to the King's cowrte only. But for excommunications, synodical decrees, examinations of men's beliefs, and such like he maketh them not as ye babble temporal matters, nor abridgeth the clergies jurisdiction therein, but only reproveth certain abuses therein committed, forth which and for the other the clergy promised a reformation. Let us now see your policy, and to what benefit of your cause ye do so lie? imagine (if ye will) that all were true, and for ones we will take you for Philip the French King: and your Law made in your Cacus den, to be in as good force as if it had been made in open parliament in France. What issue join you thereof? M. Horns impertinent arguments. what due and ordinate consequent is this: the French King maketh a severe law against the clergy, usurping his jurisdiction: Ergo the Pope is no Pope: or, ergo the King of England, is the Pope of England? Again, if all are temporal matters, how standeth it with your doctrine, especially of this book, that ye and your fellows, should busy yourself therewith? Neither will it ease you to say, that ye do it by the Prince's commission: for Cunerius, upon whom ye ground all this your talk driveth his reason to this end, M. Horn look well to your commission. that spiritual men be not capable of temporal jurisdiction, and therefore this commission will not serve you. And if ye hold by commission, take head your commission be well and substantially made. But of this commission, we shall have more occasion to speak hereafter. M. Horn. The .136. Division. pag. 82. b. Paral. Vrsp. Fabian. Caxton. Polyd. Nauclerus. In England at this time many abuses about Ecclesiastical causes, were reformed, (although the Pope and his Clergy, did earnestly (.448.) The .448. untruth Slanderous. maintain them) by King Edward the .3. who written his (.449.) The .449. untruth. For those letters prove the Pope's Supremacy. letters to the Pope, admonishing him to leave of his disordered doings, and when that would not serve, he redressed them by act of parliament, and (as Nauclerus saith) he commanded that from thence forth, no body should (.450.) The .450. untruth. Nauclere falsely reported. bring into the Realm any kind of the Pope's letters, under the pain of drowning, and expelled all persons out of his kingdom, that were by the Pope promoted to any benefice. The .32. Chapter: Of Edward the .3. King of England. Stapleton. THis argument also is right futely to the precedent, Concerning King Edward● the .3. as resting upon the reforming of abuses, in matters Ecclesiastical. But I pray you tell us no more M. Horn of reforming of abuses, if you will any way further your present cause, except you tell us withal, and prove it to, that in such reformation, the whole clergy, and the temporalty, took the King and not the Pope to be the supreme head Governor, and director thereof, and of all other Ecclesiastical causes also. Verily your own authors show plainly the contrary. And the Pope's authority was at this time taken to be of such weight and force, Polid. li. 19 that the great league made between our King and the French King was confirmed by the Pope. Ye will perhaps reply and say, the Pope's whole Authority was abolished, a commandment being given upon pain of drowning, no man should bring into the realm any kind of letters from the Pope. Ye will tell us also, of certain letters, that the King sent to the Pope admonisshing him, to leave his disordered doings: and when that would not serve, he redressed them by act of Parliament. Why do ye not M. Horn lay forth the tenor of those letters, which as yet I find not in any of your marginal authors? Belike there lieth some thing hid that ye would be loath your reader should know, lest it bewray your weak and feeble argument, as it doth in deed. Neither that only, but directly proveth the Pope's primacy. Did this King, ween you M. Horn, call the Pope Antichrist as ye do? Or wrote he himself supreme head of the Church of England? Or did he abolish the pope's authority in England? hearken than I pray you, even to the beginning of his letters. Sanctissimo in Christo Patri Domino Clementi divina providentia sacrosanctae Romanae ac universalis Ecclesiae summo pontifici, Edwardus eadēm gratia rex Francorum & Angliae, & dux Hiberniae devot a pedum oscula beatorum To the most holy father in Christ the Lord Clement by God's providence the high bishop of the holy and universal Church of Rome, Edward by the same grace King of France and England, and Duke of Ireland, offereth devoutly to kiss his holy feet. Pensatae etiam devotionis plenitudine, quam domus nostra regia & clerus ac populus dicti regni praestiterunt hactenus in obedientia dictae sedis. He calleth the Pope, Successorem Apostolorum Principis, the successor of the prince of the Apostles: he desireth the pope to consider the great devotion and obedience, that the King, the Clergy, and the people had showed hitherto to the Sea of Rome. He saith, ut nos & nostri, qui personam vestram sanctiss. & sanctam Rom. Ecclesiam dominari cupimus, ut debemus, etc. that he and all his, did desire even as their duty was, that his holy person and the holy Church of Rome, might govern and rule. Now M. Horn unless upon some sudden and new devotion ye intend to have the pope bear rule in England again, and will also offer yourself, if need be, to kiss the Pope's foot to, which thing this great and mighty Prince was not ashamed to say, tell us no more for shame of these letters. Neither tell us of disorders reform now almost two hundred years ago: to make thereby an unseasonable and fond argument to abolish all the Pope's authority in our Days. The effect then of those letters were, to pray, and that most humbly, the Pope, that he would not by reservations, collations, and provisions of Archbishoprykes, Bishoprykes, Abbeys, Priories, and other dignities and benefices, bestow any ecclesiastical livings in England upon strangers and aliens. Anno. 25. & 38. The which thing hath been ever since straightly seen to, and there were two Acts of parliament made in this kings days, against the said provisions. And yet did the pope's ordinary and lawful authority in matters and causes ecclesiastical remain whole and entiere as before. Neither do I find, nor take it to be true, that such persons as were promoted by the Pope, were expelled the realm. Nor did the statute take place against such, as had taken before the enacting of the same, corporal possession. As for Nauclere, it is no marvel if he being a stranger doth not write so exactly of our matters. And no doubt he is deceived in writing, that the king forbade any letters to be brought from the Pope. But what say I, he is deceived? Nay, you, that should know English matters better than he, especially such as by pen ye set abroad into the face of the world, are deceived, and not Nauclerus. Yea rather ye have wilfully perverted Nauclerus, and drawn his sentence, as Cacus did Hercules' oxen, backward into your Cacus den: and to beguile and deceive your sim●le reader, Naucler. Gener. 46. pag. 397. a Omnes in regno suo per papam p●omotos ad beneficia expulit, & subpena. submersionis praecepit ne quis inibi literas Apostolicas exequeretur, quascunque etc. and to bring him, into a fools paradise, therein fond to rejoice with you, as though this King abolished all the Pope's authority and jurisdiction. For though Nauclerus his words be general, yet they may be well understanded and restrained to such letters as contained any such collation or provision inhibited by the statute. But you, lest this should be espied, have altered the form and order of your authors words, placing that first, that he placed last. As before contrariwise, ye placed in Paulus Aemilius that last, which he placed first. Then have ye falsely translated your author to wry him to your wrongful purpose. He expelled sayeth Nauclerus) all persons promoted to any benefice in his realm by the Pope, commanding under pain of drowning, that no man should execute there, the Pope's letters what so ever they were. Your author speaketh not of bringing letters, into the Realm: (those are your own words falsely fathered upon him: but of execution. And therefore the general words following (what so ever) are to be restrained to the execution of the Pope's letters, contrary to the order taken, against the said provisions, and of none other. Which statute doth no more take away the Pope's ecclesiastical and ordinary authority, Polidor. an. Edovar 3.50. The chronicles of England printed in fleet street 1502. without the authors name. The additions of Caxton to polichro. Cap. 4. than this kings royal authority was taken away, because the Parliament upon reasonable causes denied him a certain payment that he there demanded. And yet if I should follow your vain and humour in your new rhetoric, I might thereby aswell infer, that the people took him for no king as you by as good arguments infer the abolishing of the Pope's authority. Now as touching these provisions, they were not altogether abolished against the Pope's will. For this matter, was long in debate between the Pope and the king, and at length it was agreed by the Pope, that he would not practise any more such provisions. And on the kings part, it was agreed, that archbishops and Bishops should be chosen by the Chapter of the cathedral Church without any interruption or impediment of the king. Polid. The said Chronicles printed in flet street. As appeareth aswell in the said epistle sent by the king to the Pope as by our chroniclers. M. Horn. The .137. Division. pag. 82. b. Next to Lews was Charles the .4. chosen Emperor, who held a council at Mentze with the Prelates and Princes, in the year of the Lord 1359. wherein he much reproved the Pope's Legate for his disorders, and commanded the Archbishop of Mentze to reform his Clergy, and the disorders amongst them, for otherwise he would see to it himself. (.451.) The .451. untruth. For leaving out, how he would see unto it. The Pope's Legate seeing how the Emperor took upon him, gate him to his ship, and sailed to Colayn as one that fled away. With (.452.) The .452. untruth. None of his Authors say so. which doings, the Emperor became very famous, for he was a man of great works. Who did lighten the kingdomme of Bohem●, both with the setting forth of Religion, and with the discipline of Laws, and good manners. The .33. Chapter. Of Charles the .4. Emperor. And of Nilus the Bishop of Thessalonica. Stapleton. THis man runneth on his race still, to prove the Emperor Charles the .4. also the Supreme head of the Church, because he reproved the Pope's Legate, and other of the Clergy for disorders. Go once to the matter, M. Horn, and prove to M. Feckenham, that Charles took either himself to be head of the Church, or the Pope not to be the Head. Was not this Charles crowned by Pope Innocentius his Legate? Did not this Charles geave the usual oath that Emperors make to the Pope? And did he not at the Pope's commandment void out of Italy, strait after his coronation? If ye deny it, ye shall find it in your own Author Gener. 46. pag. 401. a Nauclerus. If ye grant it, being the principal, why do ye so trifle in other things, that touch not the principal matter standing in variance between you and M. Fekenham? These are but fond floorishes of your rude rhetoric. M. Horns doings resembled to a dead snake. And I may resemble your doings well to a dead snake: whose tail and hinder parts, the head being cut of, and the snake slain, do notwithstanding for a while move and stir, yea and make a resemblance of life. Even so, the head of your serpentine and poisoned argumentation against the Pope's primacy, being at all times by the true and faithful declaration of the said Primacy, against your false arguing, as it were with a sharp sword cut of: yet make ye by telling us of reformation, and such buy matters a countenance and resemblance of some truth, or as it were of some life in your matter ye take in hand to prove. And truly your buy matters to, are commonly brought in very maliciously, ignorantly, erroneously, and foolishly, as well otherwhere, as even here also. For to leave then other things, what folly is it for you to prove by this story the like regiment in this emperors time, as is now in England (for if ye prove not this, Naucler. dict. gen. 46. & paral. Vrsp. D. Legate, papa misit vos ad Germaniam in qua magnam pecuniam corraditis sed in clero nihil reformatis. The pope's Primacy proved by the place M: Horn allegeth. Vide Naucler. p. 401 col. 1. gen. 46. Staphil. in Apologia absoluta fol. 77. Surius in comment. brevi rerum gest. fo. 216 ye prove nothing to the purpose) confessing yourself, that the Pope's Legate was present in the Council with th'Emperor? And well ye wots ye have no Pope's Legate in your convocation. But what was the disorder M. Horn, in the Pope's Legate? Because he will not tell it you, good Reader, ye shall now hear it at my hands. Sir, saith the Emperor to the Legate, the Pope hath sent you into Germany, where you gather a great mass of money, but reformation in the Clergy ye make none. At which words the Legate being guilty to himself, went away. Now what infer you hereof, M. Horn? Do not these words necessarily import the Pope's Primacy in Germany? And that the reformation of the Clergy was at the Pope's ordering, not at the Emperors? Is not therefore M. Feckenham much bound unto you, that he hath of you so tractable and gentle an Adversary? But the archbishop of Mentz also (you say) is commanded to reform his Clergy. I answer. If ye had told the cause withal, ye had surely deformed all your Genevical Clergy. The occasion was, for that one Cuno a Canon of his Church, there present, went in a cap or hood, more lay like and soldier like, then Priestlik. What think you then this Emperor would have said to your brother Smidelinus the pastor of Gepping, that preached openly before a great assembly of the nobility in Germany, in his masters livery girded with a wodknife by his side? Or to the late Caluinist Ministers in Antwerp, of whom some preached in cloaks and rapiers by their sides? What liking would he have had in your brethren's late book made in the defence of their Genevical apparel, and for the unfolding of the Pope's attierment, as they call it? And therefore the queens most excellent Ma. hath done very well herself to see to these disorders, as ye said themmperor would see to it himself. He said so in deed. But how? To do it by his authority? Naucler. g●ner. 46. pag. 403. Quos cum voluntate Papae in honestos convertemus usus. The Pope's Primacy yet on's again proved by M. Horns own story. In paral.. Vrsperg. The falsehood of Gaspar Hedio. No. But commanding the archbishop to see to the reformation of his Clergy in their apparel, their shoes, their hear, and otherwise. And withal he said, if the disordered persons would not redress their abuses, than should they lose the profits and issues of their benefices: the which the Emperor would employ with the Pope's consent to better uses. And so have you of your accustomable liberality and goodness, brought to our hand one Argument more for the Pope's superiority. This hath your Author Nauclerus. And as for your brother Gaspar Hedio, though he rehearse all the residue, word by word, in a manner, out of Nauclerus, yet these three poor words, cum voluntate Papae, weighed so heavy against your new primacy, that he could not carry them with him. And you to be sure, tell us that the Emperor said he would see to it him self. But how he would see to it, that would you not your Reader should see, lest he should see withal, not your Charles, but the Pope's primacy. This your dissimulation is bad enough. But when ye add, with the which doings th'emperor became very famous: I suppose your unhonest dealing throughout all your book practised, will make you famous to, and yet to your no great commendation, but to your great shame and infamy. Your Authors say not, nor can well say, he was famous for these doings. And then come ye in as wisely, with your, for he was a wise man, ctc. Nauclerus saith in deed, he was a renowned Emperor, not for the causes by you above rehearsed: but for some other that he afterward reciteth: and nothing serving your, with the which doings, etc. The doings that made this Charles the 4. so famous (if ye list to know, M. Horn) were that with his great charges and bountifulness he erected the university of Praga in Boheme, that he founded many Monasteries, Naeucler. gener. 46. pag. 403. that he brought the body of S. Vitus to Praga, and such like: Which you had as little lust to recite, as you have to follow. Only you say he was famous for setting forth of Religion. A man would think that knew you, that he was a setter forth of your religion forsooth. But if you had told us (as your Author telleth you) that he builded Monasteries, and translated Saints bodies: Every child should have seen, that this setting forth of Religion in Charles▪ was no such suprem government as you should prove to M. Fekenham, but was (to say all in few words) a setting forth of Papistry. See you not, M. Horn, what a fair thread you have spun? M. Horn. The .138. Division. pag. 83. a. At this time wrote * Nilus was a Schismatik of late years, of as good Authority as Friar Luther. Nilus the Bishop of Thessalonica, declaring the (.453.) The .453. Untruth. Nil● saith no such thing. only cause of the division between the Greek and the Latin Church to be, for that the Pope would not suffer free and General Counsels to be called by the Emperors, according to the ancient custom: and that his authority is not by the law of God, but by the positive Laws of Princes, granted only, because that than Rome was the greatest City in the world, and hath no prerogative of Christ or Peter, more than any other Bisshoprique. Stapleton. A fair pleasurely, for one schismatic to plead upon the Authority of an other Schismatic. As if you would say M. Horn: Ask my fellow, if I be a thief. For both the Author Nilus, and the first setter forth thereof, Concerning Nilus. Flaccus Illyricus, are known and notorious, the one a Schismatic, the other an heretic. And therefore what so ever ye here bring out of Nilus' books, it weigheth no more, then if you brought Illyricus himself, or Luther his Master. Leo Epistola 84. Sicut praedecessores mei praede cessoribus tuis, ita etiam ego dilectioni tuae, priorum secutus exemplum vicem mei mode raminis delegavi, ut curam quam universis ecclesiis principaliter ex divina institutione debemus etc. adiwares, & longinquis ab Apostolica sede provincijs, praesentiam, quodammodo nostrae visitationis impenderes. And to say the truth, it is nothing but an heap of untruths: not only on your Authors part, but on yours also, overreaching him shamefully, as I shall anon declare. But as for your author, if he would have considered no more but his own predecessors the Archbisshoppes of Thessalonica, he should have found, that they almost one thousand years before, had an other and a better judgement of the Pope's authority: and were at that time the pope's Legates for the east parts: as well appeareth by Pope Leo his epistles, to Anastasius Bishop there. And that the Pope had the principal charge of all churches, by Gods own ordinance: contrary to the saying of your schismatical author of so late years. And yet as bad as he is, he doth little relieve you. For he granteth the Pope to be patriarch of the West Church. And so is he, (though he were not the Chief absolutelye) yet our patriarch and chief Bishop: and therefore chiefly to be consulted in all great and weighty ecclesiastical affairs. Again though he be bad enough, yet is he the worse for coming into your fingers. For where you make him to say, the only cause of division between the Greek and the latin Church was, for that the Pope will not suffer free and general councils to be called by the Emperors etc. There is no such thing in Nilus (I have of purpose perused him over neither in the Greek nor in the Translation of Flaccus Illiricus. It is your own Captain and Notorious untruth. M. Horn. The .139. Division. pag. 83. a. King Richard the .2. called a Council at Westminster (saith Polydore) wherein it was thought good to the King and the Princes for the weal of his realm of England, if a part of the Pope's authority were bounded within the limits of the Ocean sea, (he meaneth that it were driven out of the Isle of Britain) (.454.) The .454 untruth. A sentence left out quite in the midst opening the whole matter. wherefore it was decreed, that hereafter it should be lawful to no man, to try (.455.) The .455. untruth. False translation. any cause before the Bishop of Rome: nor that any man be publicly pronounced wicked or enemy of Religion, that is to wit, as the common people term it, be excommunicate by his authority: nor that if any man have any such commandment from him, they execute the same. The penalty ordained to those that violate this law, was, that losing all his goods, he should be cast into perpetual prison. The .34. Chapter: Of Richard the second, King of England. Stapleton. HEre lo, M. Horn at length straineth us very sore. For now all suits to Rome are quite cut of. Neither can the Pope send any excommunication into England. What may we then say to help ourselves? Shall I let the matter go, and let it shift for it self as it may, and reason against the man and not the matter, and tell M. Horn, lest he wax to proud and want on, for this great triumphaunte and victorious argument, that if a man that is excommunicated, is (as he expoundeth it) a wicked man, and a enemy of religion, that himself and his fellows had need to look well about them, being accursed, not only by many Pope's (which now M. Horn careth not a rush for) but by many national and general councils also? Or shall I tell him that, suit to Rome for excommunication, is but one branch or arm of the Pope's authority? And that the residue of his authority stood in strength and force still? And so that he proveth not the like regiment that now is, in the which, the whole papal authority is utterly banished? Or shall I say, that God punished the king for his attempt and as he took away the Pope's authority: so he lost all his own very shortly after: and lost both crown and kingdom miserably? Or shall I say this law died with the king, and was never after until our days put in ure? Or shall I say that, thowghe all the Pope's authority were banished by this statute out of England, M. Horns new supremacy will not thereof follow, but that the supremacy in matters ecclesiastical, Vide. c. Iten quia, etc. Nullus de Heretic. in constit. provincial. remained in the Bishops, especially in Thomas Arondell Archbishop of Canterbury, who kept councils and synods: and determined matters ecclesiastical without the kings consent thereunto, by whose provincial constitution Master Horn and his fellows are declared excommunicate parsons and heretics for the heretical doctrine, An appeal against M. Horn to a quest of temporal lawyers. that he and they maintain contrary to the catholic faith? Or shall I yet one's again appeal not to Rome, (least M. Horn charge me with a terrible praemunire) but even to some domestical judge, and I greatly pass not, if it be to a quest, of lawyers of his best friends, to be tried by them, if they can find any such law in the Statutes of our Realm? An other to a quest of grammarians. Again shall I appeal to an other quest, even of his own nigh neighbours in Winchester school, to be tried by them, if I falsely accuse M. Horn, of a most untruth and false translation? The .3. to quest of logitioners. Or shall I appeal to his dear friends the Logitioners at Oxford or Cambridge, and be tried by them, if I say not true, saying now and avouching to M. Horns own face, that his own allegation out of Polidore, directly proveth the Pope's Primacy, and especially the customable and ordinary suits to Rome? I will then hold myself at this stay: and I will join with him for these three points. First then I avouch, that there is no such presidente to be showed among the statutes of our realm: and further that never any such was made in the time of this king. Secondly I affirm, that M. Horn hath either of deep and gross ignorance, or of cankered malice, maimed or mangled his authors narration, and depraved and perverted his manifest meaning, by a false and counterfeit translation. The words of Polidore are these. Poli. li. 20 Concilium habitum est ad Westmonasterium: eo in Concilio regi pariter atque principibus visum est è republica sua Anglicana fore, si pars aliqua imperij Romani Pontificis Oceano terminaretur, quod multi quotidie vexarentur ob causas quas Romae non facilè cognosci posse putabant. Quapropter sancitum est, ut nulli mortalium deinceps liceret pro quavis causa agere apud Romanum Pontificem, ut quispiam in Anglia eius authoritate, impius religionisque hostis publicè declararetur, hoc est, excommunicaretur, quemadmodum vulgò dicitur: néue exequi tale mandatum, si quod ab illo haberet. Sincerely translated thus they stand. A Council (sayeth he) was called at Westmynster, wherein it was thowght good to the king and his Princes, for their common weal in England, if a part of the Pope's authority were bounded within the limits of the Ocean sea: * These words, because, etc. M. Horn quite left out. because many were daily troubled and vexed for causes, which they thowght, could not be well heard at Rome. Wherefore it was decreed, that it should be lawful for no man to sue to the Pope * Pro quavis causa. for every cause, to have any man in England by his authority publicly pronounced a wicked man and an enemy of religion: that is (as the people commonly term it) to be excommunicated. And that, if any man have any such commandment, he do not execute it. The statute than doth not embarre, as ye most shamefully pretend, all suits to Rome, nor all excommunications, from the Pope: but only that it should not be lawful to sue to Rome, and procure excommunications, indifferently as well in temporal as in spiritual matters: as it seemeth many did then. And this doth nothing acrase the Pope's ordinary authority. Now that this is the meaning, your Author himself sufficiently declareth. First when he speaketh but of a part of the Pope's authority: then when he showeth that men sued to Rome for such causes, as were thought could not be heard there: which must needs be temporal causes. And therefore ye overhipped one whole line and more, M. H●rne omitteth a whole line that openeth the whole matter against him. in your translation, thinking by this sleight so craftily to convey into your thievish Cacus den, this sentence, that no man should espy you. And for this purpose where your Author writeth, pro quavis causa agere, that is, to sue for every cause, Ye translate, to try any cause. As though it were all one to say. I forbid you to sue to Rome for every cause, and to say: I forbid you to sue to Rome for any cause. And as though your Author Polidore had written: pro quacunque causa agere, to try any cause at al. The statute therefore doth not cut of all suits, but some suits: that is, for such matters as were temporal, or thought so to be. Whereupon it will follow, that for all spiritual matters the Pope's jurisdiction remained untouched, and nothing blemished. For these words of the statute, that men should not sue in every cause to Rome, employ some causes, for the which they might sue to Rome. And so for all your gay Grammar and ruffling Rhetoric, the Pope's authority is confirmed by this statute, which ye bring against it. And this King Richard confirmed it, and was ready to maintain it not by words only, but by the sword also. And therefore caused to be gathered fifteen thousand footmen, and two thousand horsemen, King Richard's army gathered for the defence of the Pope. Poli. dict. lib. 20. M. Horn● army against the Pope. and sent them out of the realm to defend Pope Urban against his enemy and Antipope Clement. You on the other side, in this your victorious book, have brought a jolly sort of soldiers to the field, to fight against the Pope, but when all is well seen and examined, ye do nothing but muster lies together against the Pope, as he did men, to fight for the Pope. A far of, and upon the sudden, an unskilful man would think, ye had a jolly and a well set army: but let him come nigh and make a good view, and then he shall find nothing but a sort of scar crows pricked up in man's apparel. M. Horn The .140. Division. pag. 13. a. The Church of Rome at this time was marvelously torn in sunder with an horrible Schism, which continued about forty years, having at ones three heads, calling themselves Popes, De schiss. lib. 3. ca 7 every one of them in most despiteful wise, calling the other antichrist, schismatic, Heretic, tyrant, thief, traitor, the son of perdition, sower of Cockle, the child of belial, etc. diverse learned men of that time inveighed against them all three, as Henricus de Hassia, joan. Gerson, Theodorych Nyem, Secretary before this, to Pope Boniface, who proveth at large by (.456.) The .456. Untruth. touching Theododorich Nyem, as shall appear. Pius Pa. 2. Platina. Sabel. good reasons, by the word of God, and by the Pope's Decrees, that the refourmation of these horrible disorders in the Chuche, belong to the Emperor, and the Secular Princes. Sigismunde the noble Emperor, understanding his duty herein, amongst other his notable Acts, called a Council together at Constantia, and brought again to unity the Church divided in three parts: which Council (saith Nauclerus) began by the emperors commandment and industry, in the year. 1414. To the which Council came Pope john before themmperors coming, thinking to have (457) The .457. Untruth. Slanderous. outfaced the Council with his pretenced authority, till the Emperor came: who giving to all men in the Council free liberty to speak their minds, a great company of horrible vices, were laid strait way to his charged To the which when he was not able to answer he was (.458.) The .458. Untruth, He was deposed by the Council, not by the Emperor. deposed, and the other two Popes also, and an other (459) The .459. Untruth He was chosen of the Cardinals and bishops only, not by th'emperor. Vide Naucler. gen. 48. pag. 442. co. 2 chosen chiefly by the Emperon●s means, called Martin the fift. After these things finished, they entered into communication of a reformation both of the Clergy and the laity, to which purpose the Emperor had devised a book of Constitutions, and also willed certain learned Fathers there, but specially the bishop of Camera, a Cardinal there present, to devise what faults they could find, and how they should be redressed, not sparing any degree, neither of the Prelates, nor of the Princes themselves. Which the bishop did, and compiled a little book or Libel entitled: A Libel for reformation of the Church gathered together by Peter de Aliaco, etc. And offered to the Church rulers, gathered together in constance Council, by the commandment of the Emperor Sigismunde. & cet. In this * In this Libel the pope's primacy is clearly confessed as it shall appear. Libel of refourmation, after he hath touched the notable enormities in the Pope, in the Court of Rome, in the Cardinals, in the Prelates, in Religious persons, and in Priests: in exactions, in Canons, and decretals, in collations of benefices, in fastings, in the Divine Service, in Pictures, in making festival days, in making Saints, in reading their legends in the Church, in hallowing Temples, in worshipping Relics, in calling Councils, in making Religious soldiers, in reforming Universities, in studying liberal Sciences, and knowledge of the tongues, in repairing Libraries, and in promoting the learned: After all these things, being (.460.) * The .460 Untruth: Repairing of Libraries is no Ecclesiastical matter. Ecclesiastical matters or causes, he concludeth with the duties of Princes for the looking to the reformation of these matters, or any other that needeth amendment. The sixth (saith he) and the last consideration shall be of the reforming of the state of the Lay Christians, and chiefly the Princes, of whose manners dependeth the behaviour of the people, & cet. Let them see also, that they repel all evil customs contrary to the law of God, and the law of man in their subjects, by the Council of Divines and other wise men. Also let them see, that they pull up by the roots, and destroy more diligently than they have done, Magical Arts and other superstitions condemned by the law of God, and all errors and heresies contrary to the Faith. Item that they watch and care earnestly for the exalting of the Faith, and the honour of God's service, and the reforming of the Church, that they labour and travail diligently for the reformation of althose things which are mentioned afore, or here following, or any other things profitable, & caet. When this book was thus compiled, it was offered up to the Council (saith Orthwiws) that the most Christian Emperor Sigismunde had called together, not so much for the agreement of the Church, as for hope of a general reformation of their manners: hoping verily, that the Prelates would put to their helping hands, but the Roman craft beguiling the German simplicity: the new made pope featly flouted the well meaning Emperor, saying that he would think on this matter at laisure, & caet. Thus was Sigismunde the Emperor misused, which otherwise might seem to have been borne to have restored Christianity to the world again. The frustrating of this refourmation, was on the other side, no less grievous unto the French King, Naucler. that both before the time of the Council, and in the Council while, had greatly travailed in taking away the Pope's ex●ctions, and other Ecclesiastical abuses, wherewith his Realm was wonderfully oppressed: as appeareth in the Oration that the French Kings Ambassadors made in this Council, written by Nicol. de Clemangijs, and set forth in Othwynus Gratius farthel of notable things. After this Council, was an other holden at Basil, whither came the Princes of Spain, France, Hungary, and Germany: which doings of the Princes made pope Eugenius so to fear, that he (.461.) The .461. Untruth. He translated the Council in deed, not only thought so to do. thought to translat the Council to Bononia. But the Emperor and other princes, and the prelate's which were at basil, not only not obeyed him, but twice or thrice admonished him to come thither. This ●●pe was in this Council (.462.) The .462. Untruth. For he continued Pope after that Council, as long as he lived. deposed in the .34. session. Of this Council, the Emperor Sigismonde was the chief, and protector, and in his absence appointed the Duke of Bavaria in his room. He caused the Bohemes to come to this Council. And when he heard of those matters in Religion, which were generally agreed upon, he allowed them, and commanded them to be observed. The .35. Chapter. Of Sigismond and Friderike the .3. Emperors. Stapleton. Master Horn, for god's sake remember yourself, and what ye have taken in hand, to prove to M. Feckenham, that is, that the Queen of England ought to be supreme head of the Church of England, and not the Pope. Remember I pray you how weighty this is to M. Fekenham as for the which, beside this his long imprisonment, he standeth in danger of loss of life also. Go once rowndly to your matter and bring him some fit and convenient proof to persuade him withal. M. Horns to impertinente proofs for so weighty a matter. Ye run on a three leaves following, with the doings of the emperors Sigismonde, Friderike, and Maximilian, and then at length after all your busy rufle and great turmoil against the Pope, ye come to king Henry the .8. and to our own days. Now how little the doings of these Emperors prove their supremacy in all causes ecclesiastical, Concerning th'emperor Sigismundus. every child may see. And to begin with Sigismond: we hear of you, that in the time of the great and main schism, he called a council at Constantia, where three Popes were deposed, and that then Martin the .5. was (●he●st●r by the Emperor's means) chosen. We hear of a book of reformation offered to th'emperor, for the abuses of some matters ecclesiastical. But in all that book there is not one word either against the Catholic faith, or for M. horns heresies. Only he rehearseth up certain abuses, which he would have amended. And as for our matter now in hand, he saith expressly that the Church of Rome beareth the principality or chief rule in Christ's Church: derived principally from God's ordinance, Vide Petrum de aliaco: impres. basil. in 8. an. 1551. and secondarily from the Counsels. What doth this relieve you M. Horn? We hear farther, that th'emperor and other princes would not suffer the pope to translate the Council of Basile to an other place: and finally that the pope Eugenius was deposed in the foresaid Council at Basile. But what serveth all this for your purpose? Yea what shameless impudency is this for you, thus to vaunt yourself, M. Horn● gospel condemned in the council at Constantia by him alleged. Tom. 4. Concil. pa. 104. Edit. vlt. upon the doings of these two counsels, that condemn your great Apostle Wiccliffe for an horrible heretic, and so consequently all your Genevical doctrine now practised in England? And ye must remember, that not th'emperor, but the Council deposed these pope's, that is, the bishops. You do find their sentence definityve, in the .34. Session of the Council of basil by yourself alleged. But for the sentence definitive of th'emperor, for these depositions, or any matter of religion, ye shall not find. Ergo the bishops were the heads, and not th'emperor. And so are ye nothing the nearer for the deposition of Eugenius. Who yet, Concerning the pretenced deposition of pope Eugenius. jewel, in his Reply pag. 289. c this deposition notwithstanding, continued pope still (as M. jewel himself witnesseth against you M. Horn) and the duke of Savoy (of whom ye make mention in your next argument) elected in Eugenius his place, by the said council, was fain to renounce his papacy, as yourself confess. And notwithstanding so many and so great princes, that ye name withstood the translation of it, yet was the council of basil translated to Ferraria first, and then to Florence: where the greek Emperor and the Grecians were reconciled to the unity of the Church, and among other things, acknowledged the Pope's Primacy. So that ye have now lost all your goodly schismatical arguments that ye have in this your book brought out of Nilus and otherwise for the Grecians rebellion against the said primacy. Vide Theodorichi● de Nyem Norimberg. impr. An. 1532. De schiss. lib. 3 ca 7. But what do you tell us here of Theodorike Nyem, and of his great and large proofs, that the reformation of the Church belonged to the Emperors? In deed prove he would such a matter. But as for him, both his manner of writing is so course, and his proofs so weak, that you were ashamed to bring any one of them into the face of the open Court. And in very deed, it is but a great untruth of yours so to report of him. Namely out of that book and Chapter which you allege. For there he bringeth neither good reason, nor any part of the word of God (both which you avouch him to bring, and that at large) but only one sentence of a decree, and the example of king Theodorike, in the matter of pope Symachus: which matter (as I have before proved) maketh expressly for the pope's primacy. Such a discrete writer you have picked out to help forward so bad a matter. But to let this man pass, I will now ask you whether th'emperor took pope Martinus for the head of the whole Church, Naucl. Gener. 48. pag. 442. Ante pontificem prostratus cum summa veneratione eius pedes osculatus est. or no? If ye say he did, as the force of truth will compel you, then to what end have ye so busied yourself with the doings of this Emperor? If ye say he did not, them will I send you to your own author Nauclerus of whom ye shall hear, that not th'emperor, but the Cardinal's elected Martinus: and that th'emperor as soon as he was elected, fell flat and prostrate before him, and with much reverence kissed his feet. Now again if as ye say, he allowed, and commanded such things as the council agreed upon in matters of religion to be observed (this agreement being as it was in deed against your new religion) what do ye, but blow your own condemnation, making it as strong as may be against your own self? How Emperors have confirmed counsels, I have often declared. M. Horn bloweth out his own condennation. This therefore I let pass, as a stolen argument, according to promise. But now let me be so bold, as once to appose you M. Horn. Who was (I pray you) at this time, supreme head of the Church in England? Did king Henry the .5. take himself (trow ye) to be this head? I suppose ye dare not say it for shame. And if ye dare, them dare I be so bold to tell you, it is a most notorious lie: and withal that in case it were so, yet did he even about the same time that Wiccleff and his scholars were condemned in the Council of Constantia, Anno. 2. Henr. 5. cap. 7. condemn them as fast by act of parliament in England. And it was (I may say to you) high time. For your good brethren had conspired to adnulle, destroy, and subvert not only the Christian faith, and the law of God, and holy Church within the realm: but also to destroy the king, The statute made against heresies in the time of king Henry the .5. and all manner of estates of the realm aswell spiritual as temporal: and all manner of policy, and finally the laws of the land. As it is more at large comprised in an act of parliament, made at that time. In the which it was ordained, and established, that: first the Chancellor, Treasurer, justices of the one bench and of the other, justices of peace, Sheriffs, mayor's bailiffs of cities and towns, and all other officers having the governance of people, or that at any time afterward should have the said governance, should take an oath in taking of their charge to put their whole power and diligence to put out, cease and destroy all manner of errors and heresies, commonly then called Lollardries, within the place where they exercised their offices. And thus neither abroad, nor at home, can ye find any good matter, for the defence of your new primacy, and your damnable heresies. M. Horn. The .141. Division. pag. 84. b. Nauclerus. After the death of Sigismonde, Fredrick the Emperor caused the Duke of Savoy, The .463. untruth. In reasoning. For this Fredrick, took the Pope for Supreme head of the Church, as his predecessor did. that was made Pope, to renounce his Papacy, and commanded by his Decree, the Prelates gathered at basil, to dissolve the Council by a certain day. This Emperor called a Council at Mentze, to make an end, and utterly to take away the Schism of the Church, and to deliver it from more grievous dangers. He writeth to the French King thereof, declaring how this Schism did so oppress his mind, and fervently solicit him, that as well for his love to Religion, as for his office called of God, to be the * Chief, Advocate, Not Supreme Governor. chief advocate of the Church, he did not only run with diligence to secure it, but stirred up all kings and Princes, that with a pure sincerity, delighted in the name of Christ, to run with him in this so necessary and healthful a work, and to this purpose, he declareth how, he hath appointed to all his princes and prelate's an assembly at Mentze, whereat he intendeth to be personally present, and therefore desireth the French king also to be there in his own person, or at the least that he would send his Orators thither, instructed distinctly with all ways and means, by the which the Church might be quiet from the calamities ready to fall on her. Pope Eugenius sent to the French king, to desire him to take a way his (.464.) The .464 untruth. As before For the makers of this pragmatical law acknowleaged the pope's primacy. pragmatical Law. To whom the king answered, that he would have it kept inviolately. Then the Pope desidered the king neither to admit ●● basil council, nor yet the council at Mentze, that was called: to the which the king answered, that he would take advise. Stapleton. Here is small or no matter for M. Horns new Primacy, and that he here rehearseth maketh rather against him, then with him. For though M. Horn said in the last argument, that pope Eugenius was deposed, yet is he now pope still, and tother set in his place, feign to give over: And though the princes would not obey Eugenius, for the dissolving of the Council of Basile: yet now it is dissolved by the Emperor Friderike also. And what answer so ever the French King made to Eugenius, touching the said Basile Council, the Council is no further allowed in the Catholic Church, than Eugenius and his successor Nicolaus did allow the same. And (as ye show yourself) th'emperor Friderike saith, that by his office he was called of God, to be the chief Advocate of the Church. He saith not, the chief head of the Church, the which honour he did attribute, not to himself, but to the Pope only, of whom he was crowned, as his predecessors were. These also are but stolen wares, and much worn. And for such I let them pass. As for the French King and his pragmatical sanction, which Charles his predecessor had made, and which he at the request of Pope Eugenius, would not revoke: it contained no such matter, as you M. Horn do attribute to princes now, neither was that government like to that which you now defend. This pragmatical sanction stood most about money matters: It denied to the Court of Rome, the great payements which went out of France, about Reservations, collations, expectations, and commendoes of bishoprics, prebends and benefices. Great and long contention there was between certain Kings of France, as Charles the vij and the eight Joys xj and twelve Francis the first, and certain Popes, as this Eugenius, Lib. 5. c. 2. sacr. eccles. minist. Pius .2. Sixtus .4. Innocentius .8. Alexander .6. julius the .2. and Leo the .10. as Duarenus a vehement writer for the French Kings advantage mentioneth. But notwithstanding all these matters, the Pope's supreme Authority in matters of Faith and ecclesiastical jurisdiction was not denied. For witness hereof I bring you the words of the Court of Paris, uttered among the Articles which they proposed to the King, about this matter, Vide Duarenum. de sacris eccles. minist. lib. 5. cap. 12. & in append. pro libert. eccles. Ga. defence. as Duarenus himself recordeth them. In the number .19. thus they say. Ante omnia protestatur Curia etc. Before all things the Court protesteth, that it mindeth not to deerogate any thing from the holiness, dignity, honour, and Authority of the Pope and the holy Apostolic See. But rather it is ready to show and exhibit, all honour, reverence and obedience, that every godly and faithful person ought to show to the chief Pastor of the Church. And if any thing fall out, worthy of amendment, it refuseth not to submit themselves to the determination of the Church, which can not err. C. A recta .24. q. 1. By which allegation they protest to mean the Church of Rome. For so in that place we read out of the Ancient decretal epistle of Pope Lucius .1. How then do you prove M. Horn by this example the like government in the Church causes, as you now attribute to the Q. Mai. and as you take upon you here to prove? Grant M. Horn to the See Apostolic now, as the Court of Paris granted them, and then look how and with what conscience you may take the Oath, which now you defend, or by what reason you can move M. Feckenham thereunto. Par. Vrsp. I would have you once bring some example, that made not plain against you, and your whole book. M. Horn. The .142. Division. pag. 85. a. Pius the second, sent his Legate the Cardinal of Cusa, into the countries of Sigismond Duke of Austria, which Legate, when he would have ordained certain (.465.) The .465. untruth. His Author mentioneth no Ecclesiastical Constitutions Ecclesiastical constitutions according to the Pope's Law: Sigismonde the Duke, would not suffer that such a custom should come into Germany. Aeneas Silvius, who after he was made Pope, was called Pius the second, was of this mind before he was Pope, that secular Princes might call counsels, yea, (.466.) The 466. untruth. Aeneas Syl. never said so. maugre the Pope's head, and therefore commendeth that devise of Charles the French king which (saith he) is both a saulf and a short way to still this mischief. He meaneth to take away the Schism and to restore unity to the Church. Of the same (.467.) The .467. untruth. Cusanus was of a far other mind as shall appear. Li. 3. ca 13 mind also was ●is Cardinal de Cusa, as appeareth in his book, Epist. 54. add Cancel. Imperat. De Concordia Catholica, saying. By that which is a foresaid, it is gathered, that the holy Emperors always, made the Synodical congregations of universal counsels of the whole Church: and even so I myself, having sought thoroughly the Acts of all the universal counsels, even till the eight council inclusive, celebrated in the time of Basil, I have found it to be true: and so also in the same eight Synod in the fift Act thereof, we read, that the most reverend priest Elias and Syncellus, of the throne of Jerusalem in the hearing of all, spoke thus: Know you that in the times past, they were the Emperors, which gathered together Synods from out of the whole world, and they collected their deputies, to the disposing of such manner causes: Par. Vrsp. Cum venisset ad ecclesiam svam Brixiensem in alpibus deque illa disponere voluisset pro veteri pontificum iure, non passus est Sigismundus dux Austriae, ut ea in Germanian tenderetur consuetudo, quòd Romani Cardinales ecclesias Germania haberent in commendis. Whose steps therefore our Emperor following, being also a worshipper of God, hath made this universal Synod. Thus said he there, and I have also red in the little gloss of Anastasius (the library-keper of the Apostolical sea, who translated the same Synod out of Greek) upon the same, saying: that the Emperors were want to gather universal Synods from all the world, etc. The .36. Chapter. Of Aeneas Silvius, who was after, Pope Pius .2. and of Cardinal Cusanus. Stapleton. YOu run still at riot M. Horn, bringing in your matters extaordinarily and impertinently, and yet adjoined with one lie beside. For your author speaketh not of the ordaining of any ecclesiastical constitution, by the Pope's Legate, but that themperor would not suffer him to receive the profits of the Church he had in commendo, neither any such custom to be brought into germany. Ye are then in hand ones again that Princes may call Councils. But when ye tell us this out of Aeneas Silvius, and tell us withal, that before he was pope, he was of that mind, that secular princes might call Councils: if he were not also of that mind being pope, why tell you this tale against yourself? Bulla retractationun Pij. 2. Venetijs an. 1564. unà cum Cardilio. Lovanij. an. 65. Paris. an. eodem. Had you read M. Horn that notable letter of Recantation, which this Aeneas Silvius in his riper years and later days (after the example of S. Augustin retracting in like manner divers things) sent to the Vniversytie of colen, set forth few years passed in divers editions, you would not for very shame (if any shame be in you) once have mentioned the testimony of this man. In that bull of retractation (forcing as he saith himself the objection that would be made) he retracteth and revoketh this error which in his youth at the Council at basil he had learned, that the Council was above the Pope. In which he declareth at large by what means, by whose advise and counsel, he was first persuaded so to think, how also he was again brought back from that error, and among other means by the persuasion of that most learned Cardinal julianus sancti Angeli, who first at basil was for the Council against pope Eugenius, but after (as after him all other) reconciled himself to the pope, was his legate in the Council of Florence, (where most learnedly he confuted the Greeks, and reduced them all (only Marcus of Ephesus excepted) to the Catholic doctrine of the holy Ghost, and to the unity of the Roman Church) and last of all served him in embassy against the Turk. He proveth by Scripture, by natural Reason, by Authority of the Doctors, that Peter and his successors are the Supreme Vicairs of Christ, that the Church to whom Christ gave his * Pacen meam do vobis, Pacem relinquo vobis. peace, must of necessity have that kind of regiment, by which peace may most be maintained and preserved, which only is the state of Monarchy, where one Head governeth the whole body, and last, by S. Hierom, and S. Bernard that the bishop of Rome S. Peter's Successor, is that one Head. After all which he concludeth. Haec nos de Romani Pontificis Authoritate & potestate sentimus, cui & congregare Concilia generalia & dissoluere datum est: qui etsi filius est propter regenerationem, propter dignitatem tamen pater habetur, & sicut propter regenerationis causam venerari debet Ecclesiam tanquam Matrem, ita & propter praelationis causam praeest ei ut pastor gregi, princeps populo, Rector familiae. This is our judgement of the Authority and power of the Bishop of Rome. To whom it belongeth both to summon general Councils, and to dissolve them. Who though he be a child of the Church for his regeneration and new birth therein (by baptism) yet he is for his dignity and office her Father. And as he ought to Reverence the Church as his Mother, because he was borne of her: so he ruleth the Church also, as a Pastor the flock, as a Prince his people, and as a master his family, because he is made the Ruler of her. Again in his very last words of that retractation thus he speaketh to the University of colen. Haec nostra sententia est filii. Haec credimus & profitemur: haec iam senes & in Apostolatus apice constituti pro veritate asserimus: si quae vel vobis vel aliis conscripsimus aliquando, quae huic doctrinae repugnent, illa tanquam erronea & iwenilis animi parum pensata judicia revocamus atque omnino respuimus. This is (my sons) our judgement. This we believe and profess. This we now affirm in our old age, and placed in the Apostolic top. If at any time we have written any thing either to you or to any other, contrary to this doctrine, all those things we now revoke and utterly repeal for erroneous, and light opinions of youthely affection. Lo M. Horn. For your Aeneas: we answer you with Pius: for your young, unkilful and less advised, we answer you by the old, Neque unquam sacros imbuimus ordines, ni si post veritatem cognitam Basiliensi coecitate relicta. the more learned, and the better advised: for your private and lay man (for he had yet taken no holy orders when he returned to the obedience of Pope Eugenius) we answer you with the Bishop and the chief of all Bishops. You must remember M. Horn, that always: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Next to Aeneas Syluius cometh the Cardin. de Cusa, one that maketh as much for M. Horn as a rope doth for a thief. Have you seen M. Horn that Cardinal's book, which you allege de Concordia Catholica? If not, then beshrew your friend that told you of him? If yes, them tell us I pray you, how like you him, and his conclusions in that work? How like you his conclusion in the .2. book, Cusanus de Concordia Cath. li. 2. Cap. 4. proved by the clear practice of the Chalcedon and the Ephesin Council, fidem Romanae Ecclesiae in nulla Synodo universali retractari posse? That the faith of the Church of Rome can be revoked in no universal Synod or Council general? For then what wretches are you, and how contrary to the Fathers of the first general Counsels, and of the first .400. years, which have in your pelting private convocations revoked and condemned in so many and weighty points the faith of the Church of Rome? How like you, that he telleth how in the old first general Counsels, not only the holy gospels, but also lignum S. Crucis & aliae reliquiae, a piece of wood of the holy Cross, Cap. 6. and other relics were laid forth in the middle? How like you that he saith. Cap. 9 Ecclesiastici Canon's non possunt nisi per ecelesiasticam congregationem (quae Synodus vel coetus dicitur) statui? Canons or rules touching Church matters cannot be determined but by Turrian ecclesiastical assembly, which is called a Synod or company, no doubt but of ecclesiastical persons? For if this be true (as Cusanus there by the practice and Canons of the Church proveth it most true) then hath Cusanus utterly overthrown your new primacy, and in one line given you an other pawn mate to your whole book. For here lo are plainly excluded all Princes and other lay magistrates whatsoever, who are pardy no ecclesiastical persons. How like you that he pronounceth assuredly and constantly, saying. Cap. 13. Papam esse rectorem naviculae S. Petri & universalis Ecclesiae, nemo etiam dubitat. That the Pope is the ruler of S. Peter's ship, and of the universal Church no man verily doubteth. But how say you M. Horn? doubt you, or doubt you not? How like you again where he affirmeth and proveth the same substantially, as when he saith. Cap. 15. Et verum est etc. And true it is that no judgement of any Synod is available, where the authority of the See Apostolic concurreth not? where be then your London convocations? But how proveth he this? the reason he giveth. Quia semper appellari potest etc. Because it may always be appealed, from the judgement of that Synod to the See Apostolic. So we read (saith he) of the patriarchs of Constantinople, Flavianus, Ignatius, and other: so of Athanasius, of Alexandria and other we read that they appealed (from Synods of Bishops) to the See Apostolic. So also Chrysostom from a Synod of the Egyptian bishops appealed to Innocentiꝰ the Pope. So Theodoretus from the Ephesin conventicle and his own patriarch Maximus of Antioch, appealed to Pope Leo, as I have other where against M. jewel declared: How like you this doctrine of Cusanus M. Horn? As also where he saith again expressly. Cap. eodem. Fateor de constitutionibus fidem tangentibus verum esse, quòd si Sedis Apostolicae Autoritas non interueniat, ratae non sint, imò & ipsius Pontificis consensus interuenire debet, cum sit princeps in episcopatu fidei. I confess it is true of Constitutions concerning faith, that if the Authority of the See Apostolic do want, they are of no value, yea the consent of the Pope himself ought to concur in such case, because he beareth the chief rule, in the bishoply charge of faith. Which last words Cusanus had learned of the emperors Valentinian and Marcian in their letters to pope Leo, Vide praeambulares Epistol. Conc. Cham Tom. 1. pag. 733 above a xi hundred years past. How like you now M. Horn, tell me of good fellowship, this Cardinal of Cusa, out of whom so sadly you allege such a long process? How so ever you like it, it is of us, and of every diligent Reader, very well to be liked, and diligently to be noted: I mean these testimonies of Cusanus, not because he sayeth it, but because he proveth it so by the old practice of the primitive Church. But especially it is to be noted, that this Cusanus writing this book De Concordia Catholica, about the time of the Council of basil, and writing it expressly not for the pope, but against the pope, for the Authority of the Council above the pope, Cardillus disput. 1. fol. 19 Decanus Sancti Florini Confluentiae. Lib. 2. ca ultimo. Nihil de meis conceptibus adeòfirmun assero, quin peritioribus dicam potius acquiescendum. and for the authority of the Emperor as much as he could, yet by the very force of the truth, which in deed learnedly and painfully he searched out, he was constrained to say and conclude for the pope's Authority, as we have before recited largely and amply, though not in deed so fully and absolutely, as both he and Aeneas Silvius afterward did, by revokinge their former errors, in their riper ages. For this Cusanus when he wrote this, was not yet Cardinal, but only the dean of a Church in Covelence. And in all his positions where he speaketh against the Common opinion of learned men touching the pope's primacy, above the general Council (for otherwise he never denied it) he submitteth himself to better judgement, and speaketh under correction. Now to draw nearer to your allegation M. Horn, concerning the emperors Authority in calling of Counsels, if you take Cusanus with his whole meaning therein, you shall find small relief for your desperate cause. If you admit not his whole meaning, nor will not tarry his tale out, M. jewel will tell you M. Horn: that is no good manner. And he will tell you of a law that sayeth. It is against reason that one man should in part allow the will of the dead, jewel in his reply. Art. 4. pag. 290. (so far forth as it maketh for him) and in part overthrow it, where it seemeth to make against him. Let us then hear the whole meaning of Cusanus, concerning the Authority that Emperors have in calling, assisting and confirming of Councils, even in that book where he sayeth all he can for the Emperors. Verily master Horn in all that book he never calleth the Emperor supreme governor in all matters, no not in any matter Ecclesiastical. He sayeth the Emperor is truly called Aduocatus universalis Ecclesiae, Cusanus de Con. Ca lib. 3. c. 7. the Advocate or protector of the universal Church. And wherein, he declareth out of the .8. General Council. For, saith he, as the authority to define and determine those things that belong to the right and universal faith of Christ is committed of God to Priests: so to govern, to confirm, and to preserve those things that are of God by the Priests ordained, it is committed to the holy Empire. And this he granteth to the Emperor only, not to other several princes and kings, because he speaketh only herein of matters touching the universal faith of the Church. Wherein also he so far preferreth the pope before the Emperor, that he sayeth. Si papa qui in Episcopatu fidei principatum gerit, electum in fide errare inveniret, declarare posset, Ibidem. eum non esse Imperatorem. If the pope who beareth the principality in the bishoply charge of Faith, Chalc. Act. 3. fol. 838. should find the Emperor elected, to err in the faith, he might pronounce him no Emperor. In the next chapter he proveth very well out of the Chalcedon Council, the councils of Millevitum and of Cabylon, that in matters properly ecclesiastical belonging to bishops and clerks, Chalced. Act. 3. fol. 838. Cabilon. Conc. ca 6. Millevit. cap. 19 Cusan. l. 3. Cap. 10. Emperors and princes ought not to intermeddle. Now touching the intermeddling of Emperors and princes with Councils, first he showeth by the examples of Riccharedus Chintillanus and Sysenandus kings of Spain in three several Councils of Toletum (which also we have before showed) with what meekness, reverence and humility princes ought to come to councils. And whereas in many Synods, matters also of the common wealth were debated, he declareth by the practice of Ancient time, that In Synodicis congregationibus etc. Cap. 12. In synodal assemblies (of particular provinces) the office of the king is to meet there, to exhort and to strengthen to obey and to execute the ecclesiastical constitutions, such as belong to faith or to the worshipping of God. But in such constitutions as belong to the public state (of the common wealth) he must together with the bishops define and determine. In all which he overthroweth clearly your position M. Horn, as you see. And here after this in the next chapter immediately followeth the place by you alleged: Lib. 3. c. 13 By that which is aforesaid it is gathered, that Emperors made always the Synodal congregations of universal Counsels of the whole world etc. For this he speaketh only of General Counsels, adding immediately in the same sentence, which sentence you quite cut of from the end: Locales verò nunquam eos legitur collegisse. But provincial Synods it is never read that Emperors called. And in the next Sentence he concludeth how he called the general Councils. Non quòd coactiuè sed exhortatiuè, colligere debeat. Not that the Emperor should call or gather those Counsels by the way of force or commandment but by the way of exhortation and advise. And this he exemplifieth very well by the Council of Aquileia whereat S. Ambrose was present. Unto the which the bishops were so called by the emperors Gratian, Tom. 1. Conc. pag. 395. Valentinian, and Theodosius (as in their epistle the Council agniseth) ut episcopis honorificentia reseruata, nemo de esset volens, nemo cogeretur invitus: that dew reverence being reserved to the bishops, none was absent that listed to come, nor none was forced that listed not to come. Now the reason why the Emperor may call only General Counsels, none provincial, Cusanus addeth. For (saith he) when any general dangers of faith do occur, or any other thing that universally troubleth the Church of Christ, then ought the Emperor himself to attend, as a preserver both of the faith and of the peace: and then he ought first of all to signify to the bishop of Rome the necessity of a Council: and require his consent for assembling a Council in some certain place. As the emperors Martian and Valentinian did to pope Leo for the Chalcedon Council. Inuitantes atque rogantes: Inuitinge him and desiring him. In praeamb. Conc. Cham pa. 733. In epist ad Agathonen As Constantin the .4. did to pope Agatho for the .6. general Council at Constantinople, writing thus unto him. Adhortamur vestram paternam Beatitudinem, We exhort your fatherly blessedness, using all words of gentle entreaty, and none of forcible commandment as we have before largely declared. To be short, Lib. 3. ca 14. in fine. Cusanus concludeth all this Imperial calling of Councils in these words. Ista sunt & cat. These are the things that belong to the Emperor, touching the beginning of a Council, that is, to assemble it with exhortation, and with safeguard, with all liberty, with good custody, all partialytie taken away, and all necessity of commandment. Now if you will know, what difference there is between the calling of the Pope, and the calling of the Emperor, to a Council, Cusanus declareth that also shortly by the practice of the first Counsels thus. Papa ut primus etc. The Pope calleth a General Council (for of such he speaketh) as the chief, Cap. 15. and as having a power to command, through the principality of his priesthood over all bishops, touching that assembly which concerneth the universal state of the Church, in the which he beareth the chief charge. By the which power committed unto him, he may command the faithful to assemble, chief all priests subject unto him. But the Emperor exhorteth or counseleth the Bishops, and commandeth the Say. Thus much your own Author Cusanus (M. Horn) concerning the emperors Authority in calling of Counsels. I suppose if you take his whole meaning, your cause will be but weakly relieved by him. And I think you wish now, you had never alleged him. M. Horn The .143. Division. pag. 85. b. Next unto Fredrick was M●ximilian Emperor, to whom the Princes of Germany put up certain grievances in Ecclesiastical matters, that anoied the Empire, in number .10. Against Bulls, Privileges, Elections, reservations, expectatives, Annates, unfit pastors, pardons, tithes, and the spiritual courts &c. beseeching him, to have some redress herein. Who being moved with the admonitions, advisements and exhortations of the learned Clergy, and the godly Princes, at the length called a Council at Triers and Colayn, for the redress of these and other enormities, in the year of the Lord: 1512. which was the fourth year of the most renowned King of England, King Henry the eight. Para. Vrsp. In this Council amongst other things because there was a suspicion of a Schism breeding, and of greavaunces in the Church, it was necessarily decreed, that the Emperor and Princes electors, with other Princes and states of the Empire, should look about them, and well consult by what means, these grieves might be taken away most commodiously, and the Schism removed, and evil things reform to edification. It was decreed also against blasphemers, to pay either a some of money limited, or to suffer death. And that all men should know this decree, it was thought good to the Princes, and states of the Empire, that all Preachers and persons, should at all high feasts preach unto the people thereof faithfully. This being done. Maximilian set forth a decree for the taking away of the foresaid Ecclesiastical grievances: wherein he declareth, Orth. Grat. that though of clemency he have suffered the Pope and the Clergy herein, as did his Father Frederik: Yet not withstanding sith that by his liberality, the worship and service of God hath fallen to decay, it appertaineth unto his duty, whom God hath chosen unto the Imperial Throne of Rome, that amongst all other most great businesses of peace and wars, that he also look about him vigilantly, that the Church perish not, that Regilion decay not, that the worship of the service of God, be not diminished etc. In consideration whereof, he provideth, that a man having in any City a Canonship or Vicarshippe, enjoy not any prebend of an other Church in the same City, etc. Making other decrees against suing in the Ecclesiastical Courts for benefices, for defence of Lay men's Patronages, for pensions against bulls, and cloaked Simony etc. After this, the (.468.) The 468. untruth The Emperor did not conclude to have that conventicle Emperor and Lewis the French King, concluded together to call a (.469) The 469. untruth. It was a private conventicle, no general Council. general Council at Pisa: to the which also agreed a great part of the Pope's Cardinals. Many (saith (.470.) The 470. untruth. No such thing to be found in Sabellicus. Sabellicus) began to abhor the Pope's Courts, saying, that all things were defiled with filthy lucre, with monstrous and wicked lusts, with poisonings, Sacrilegies, murders, and Symoniacal fairs, and that Pope julius himself was a Symoniake, a drunkard, a beast, a worldling, and unworthily occupied the place, to the destruction of Christendom, and that there was no remedy, but a General Council to be called, to help these mischiefs, to the which his Cardinals accordng to his oath, desired him, but they could not obtain it of him. Maximilian the Emperor, being the Author of it, with jews the French King (because the histories do bear record, that in times past the Emperors of Rome had wont to appoint Counsels) they appoint a Council to be held at Pyse. The .37. Chapter. Of Maximilian the Emperor: Great Granfather to Maximilian the Emperor which now liveth. Stapleton. THough Maximilian the Emperor redressed certain grievaunces, that the Churches of Germany suffered through paiements to the Roman Court, as did the French Kings about the same time, yet did he not thereby challenge the Pope's Supremacy, but most reverently obeyed the same, as did (this notwithstanding) the French Kings also, as I have before declared. Which (to omit all other arguments) appeareth well by his demeanour, at his later days, in the first starting up of your Apostle, I should say Apostata Martin Luther: and also by the protestation of his next successor Charles the fift of famous memory, protesting openly at his first diet holden in Germany at Worms, Vide Pontanun lib. 2. Rerun memorab. pag. 52. that he would follow the approved Religion of his most Noble progenitors of the house of Austria, of whom this Maximilian was his Grandfather. Whose Religion and devotion to the See of Rome from time to time, his nephew Charles in that assembly extolleth and setteth forth as a most honourable and worthy example. Which in him how great it was, if nothing else, yet your deep silence in this place, of so noble an Emperor, under whom such importante concurrents befell geave us well to understand. For had there been in him the least inkling in the world of any inclining to your factious sect, he should not thus have escaped the famous Chronicle of this your infamous Libel. And yet verily as well you might have brought him, and Ferdinand his brother, yea and our late gracious Sovereign Queen Marie too, for example of government in Ecclesiastical causes, as you have brought Maximilian his predecessor, and a number of other Emperors before. As for the General Council, that you say Maximilian and Lewis the French King, called at Pyse, it was never taken for any General Council, nor Council at all, but a schismatical assembly procured against Pope julius by a few Cardinals, whom he had deprived of their Ecclesiastical honour. And it was called only by the means of the French King in despite of Pope julius, for making league with the Venetians, and for moving Genua to rebel against him. As for Maximilian, he doubted in deed a while (being for the said league offended with the Pope) which way to take, Pietr● Messia in vita di Massimiliano. but seeing the matter grow to a Schism, he razed that Conventicle, being removed from Pisa to Milan, and agreed with Pope julius. By whom also, and by Leo the .10. his successor, this Conventicle was dissanulled in a General Council holden at Laterane in Rome. To the which Council at length, as well the Schismatical Cardinals, as all other Princes, condescended. And thus ever, if there be any thing defectuous or faulty, that you make much of, and that maketh for you: but if the fault be reformed, and things done orderly, that you will none of, for that is against you. As for that you tell us out of Sabellicus, That many began to abhor the Pope's Courts, etc. not telling us withal, where in Sabellicus that should appear, his works being so large, it seemeth to be a manifest Untruth. For neither in his Aenead. 11. lib. 2. where by the course of time it should be found, neither in Rebus Venetis, nor any otherwhere can I yet find it. And therefore until you tell us, where that shameful accusation was laid in, and by whom, we do justly answer you, that it savoureth shrewdly of a lie. And yet if all were true, what prove you else, but that then the Pope was an evil man, and his Court licentiously ordered? Whereof if you infer, M. Horn, that therefore the Prince in England must be Supreme Governor, then on the contrary side we may reason thus. The Pope that now liveth, is a man of miraculous holiness, of excellent learning, and no ways reprehensible: His Court also is diligently reformed, and most godly ordered (as all that now know Rome, can and do witness) Ergo the Queens Majesty now, nor no other Prince, can or aught to be supreme Governor in all causes Ecclesiastical. M. Horn. The .144. Division. pag. 86 b. Maximilian the Emperor, Lews the French Kinke, and other Princes beyond the seas, were not more carefully bend, and moved by their learned men to reform by their authority the abuses about (.471.) The 471. untruth. For not about Church matters, but about matters of the court of Rome. Church matters, than was King Henry the eight, at the same time King of England, of most famous memory, who following the humble suits and petitions of his learned Clergy, agreeing thereupon by uniform consent in their Convocation, took upon him that authority and government in all matters or causes Ecclesiastical, which they assured him to belong unto his estate, both by the word of God, and by the ancient Laws of the Church: and therefore promised, in verbo sacerdotij, by their priesthood, not to do any thing in their Counsels without his assent, etc. And this Clergy was not only of Divines, but also of the wisest, most expert and best learned in the Civil and Canon Laws, that was then or hath been sense, as D. Tonstall bishop of Duresme, D. Stokesley Bishop of London, D. Gardiner Bishop of Wynton. D. Thirlebie bishop of Westminster, and after of Norwich, and your old Master D. Bonner, who succeeded Stok●sley, in the See of London, and many others: by whose advise and consent, there was at that time also a learned book made and published, De vera differentia Regiae potestatis & Ecclesiasticae, which I doubt not, but ye have seen long sithen. Neither was this a (.472.) The 472. untruth. It was a mere novelty. new devise of theirs to please the King withal, or their opinion only, but it was and is the judgement of the most learned (473) The 473. untruth. No civilians nor canonists are of th● judgement, which M. Horn here defendeth. Const. 152 23. q. ●. civilians and Canonists, that when the Clergy are faulty or negligent, it appertaineth to th'Emperor to call general councils for the reformation of the Church causes, as Philippus Deciu● a famous Lawyer affirmeth. And the Glossator upon this Canon Principes, affirmeth, that the princes have jurisdiction in divers sorts within the Church over the Clergy, when they be stubborn, ambitious, subverters of the faith, falsaries, makers of Schisms, contemners of excommunication: yea also wherein so ever, the Ecclesiastical power faileth or is to weak, as in this Decree. He meaneth where the power of the Church by the word of doctrine prevaileth not, therein must the Prince's authority and jurisdiction take order, for that is the plain prouis● in the decree. The words of the decree are as follow. The secular princes have (.474.) The .474 Untruth: False translation. Nonnunquam sometimes. oftentimes within the Church the highest authority that they may fence by that power, the Ecclesiastical discipline. But with in the Church the power (of princes) should not be necessary, saving that, that thing which the priests are not able to do, by the word of doctrine, the power (of the prince) may * There is diverse readings imperet or impetret. command, or obtain that, by the terror of discipline: The heavenly kingdom doth oftentimes prevail or go forward by the earthly Kingdom, that those which being within the Church, do against the faith and discipline, may be brought under by the rigour of princes: and that the power of the princes, may lay upon the necks of the proud, that same discipline, which the profit of the Church is not able to exercise: and that he bestow the force of his authority, The Princes shall give an account to God, for the Church, and the discipline thereof whereby to deserve worship. Let the Princes of the world well know, that they of duty shall render an account to God for the Church, Which they have taken of Christ to preserve. For weather the peace and discipline of the Church be increased by faithful princes, or it be loosed: He doth exact of them an account, Who hath delivered his Church to be committed to their power. The .38. Chapter. Of king Henry the .8. our late sovereign. Stapleton. Concerning the doings of king Henry the .8. WE are at length, by the course of time which M. Horn hath prosecuted, devolved to hour own days, and to the doings of king Henry the eight for the confirmation whereof, he hath fetched from all parts of the world so long, so many, and yet all impertinente arguments. Belike now for his farewell, and to make us up a plausible conclusion, he will look more narrowly, and more substantially to the handling of his proofs, and will perhaps like a good orator in the winding up of his matter leave in the reader's hearts by some good and effectual probation, a vehement impression and persuasion of his surmised primacy. He hath perchance reserved the best dish to the last, and like a good expert captain, will set his strongest reasons and authorities, tanquam triarios milites, The order of M. horns proofs. in the rearward. And so surely it seemeth he will do in making up his matters with five authorities that is, of one Divine, and four Lawyers. The divine being a Spaniard: and of his lawyers three being strangers, two Italians, and one french man, all being civillians of late time: The fourth being our contryman and a temporal lawyer of our realm. For the Divine and our countryman the lawyer, he sti●keth not to break his array and course of time, the one living about .900. years, the other four hundred years sithence. Let us then consider his proofs, and whether he doth not, according to his accustomable wont rather featly flout him, then bring his reader, any matter to the purpose. You will now prove to us M. Horn, that king Henry was taken and called the Supreme Head of the Church of England, and that lawfully. And why so, I pray you? Concerning the convocations promiss, to make no constitution without the king's consent. Fol. 95. Marry say ye because the convocation promised him by their priesthood they would do nothing in their councils without his consent. Why M. Horn, take you this promise to be of so great weight? Doth the consideration and estimation of priesthood weigh so deeply with you now? Ye will not be of this mind long. For ere ye have done, ye will tell M. Fekenham, that there was none of them all priests: and that there is but one only priest which is Christ. Yet will ye say, a promise they made. Truth it is: but unless ye can prove the promise honest and lawful (which we utterly deny) then this promise will not relieve you. And, this is but one branch of the unlawful supremacy that king Henry practised: therefore thowghe this doing were tolerable and probable to, yet unless ye went to a further proof, ye shall win little at M. Fekenhams hands. I am content to pass over the residue of his usurped supremacy for this time I demand of you then, what one thing ye have hitherto brought for to persuade any reasonable man, for this one point: that is, that the Bishops can determine nothing in their synods to be forcible, unless the Prince agree also to it? surely no one thing. That Bishops vountarily desired their good and catholic Princes to join with them, M. Horn hath not proved in all his book that such consent is necessary. yea and submitted sometimes the judgement of their doings, of their great humility, to some notable Princes, ye have showed: and withal that in some cases it is convenient so to be done. But ye can full ill wind up your conclusion upon this. Which ye foreseeing, did show us a trick of your new thetorike and fine grammar, turning convenit into opo●tet: making it is convenient, and it must be so, all one. Ye will belike take better handfast now. But will ye now see his sure handfast good Reader? surely the first is not very fast, as when he telleth us out of Decius, and out of the gloze of the Canon law, M. Horn● Sampsons' post will fall on his own head. that princes may call counsels, and that in some cases they have jurisdiction in Church matters: wherein we have already said enough. And how slenderly and loosely this gear hangeth with his assertion, it is open to the eye. I trow he sticketh faster to his divine, them to his lawyer, and therefore he bringeth in Isidorus extraordinary .900. years almost out of his race and course. Here, here (as it seemeth) is his anchor hold, and for this cause aswell the whole allegation is here producted, as also one peace of the same, set in the first page of his whole book, as a sure mark to direct the reader by: and as it were a Sampsons' post for M. Horn, to build his book upon. But take good head M. Horn it be not a true Sampsons' post, and that it bring not the whole house upon your own head, as it doth in deed. Concerning Isidorus. Whereunto good reader, seeing M. Horn hath chosen this as a notable allegation to be eyed on, setting the same in two notable places, I would wish thee also to give a good eye thereunto, and to see, if it can any way possible make for him. I say then M. Horn, that this allegation goeth no further, then that the Prince, by his civil and worldly power should assist and maintain the Church and her doctrine. And that this allegation directly and rowndly proveth the contrary of that, for the which ye do allege it, that is, that it proveth the ecclesiastical authority, and not the civil, to be chief and principal, in causes ecclesiastical. And that in effect the whole tendeth to nothing else but that, as I said, Vide destructorium uttiorum impress. Norinberg. 1496. part. 6. cap. 40. Qui eorum potestati suam Ecclesiam tradidit defendendam. the Princes should defend the Church. I will not stand here in ripping up of words with you, or in the diversity of reading, and that some old copies have: who hath committed his Church to be defended of their power: and that your (hath delivered to be committed) seemeth to stand in your translation unhansomly. I will say nothing, that credere and committere: is all one in Latin. Let this go, I find no fault with you, for translation, but for ill application. If ye had brought this authority to prove, that the prince should defend the Church (for the which end and respect it was written) I would say nothing to you. But when ye will blear our eyes and make us so blind, that we should imagine, by this saying of Isidore, 23. q. 5. c. Principes. Principes seculi nonnunquam intra Ecclesiam potestati. adeptae culmina tenent. that the king is Supreme Head of the Church, or that his assent is necessary to the Synods of Bishops and councils, I will say to you, that the contrary, will be much better gathered of this allegation. The very first words wonderfully acrase your new primacy, and somewhat also your honesty, perversely translating, nonnunquam: which is, sometime, or now and then, into oftentimes. But let it be, for nonnunquam, sepe: let them oftentimes have the highest authority in the Church. Unless they have it still, they can not be called the Supreme Heads in all causes ecclesiastical. And so these very words make a good argument against your primacy. Vt per eandem potestatem ecclesiasticam disciplinam muniant. Caterun intra ecclesiam potestates necessariae non essent nisi ut quod non prevalent sacerdotes efficere per doctrinae sermonem, potestas hoc imperet per disciplinae terrorem. Et mox. Vt qui intra ecclesiam positi contra fidem & disciplinam agunt, rigore principum cō●arantur. But now M. Horn, what is the cause, why they have this high authority either sometimes, or oftentimes? Isidore straytwayes showeth the cause: that they may (as yourself translate) fence by their power the ecclesiastical discipline. Ye hear them the scope, and final purpose of this allegation, for Prince's authority in matters ecclesiastical, that is to defend the Church. And therefore as I said, it is more sutely, to read, tradidit defendendam, then tradidit committendan. And for this cause the Emperors call themselves not capita Ecclesiae, not the heads of the Church, sed advocatos Ecclesiae, but the advocates of the Church, as yourself tell of th'emperor Friderike. Go we now forth with Isidorus: But first I ask of you M. Horn, that make the Princes to be heads of the Church, and to have so much to do, in matters ecclesiastical, that the Bishops can decree nothing that should be available without their special ratification (for the setting forth of the which doctrine ye are content, for this time that priests shallbe priests, and may swear by their priesthood, and not by their aldermanship or eldership) whether such authority in Princes be absolutely necessary to the Church or no? If ye say no, then conclude you against yourself and your whole book. If ye say yea, then conclude you against the truth, and against your author, who sayeth, that such authority of Princes in the Church is not necessary, but for to punish those that contemn the word of doctrine, the faith, and discipline of the Church. Of whom have we received M. Horn the word of doctrine, the faith and discipline of the Church? Of the Apostles, and their successors the Bishops, or of the Princes? I suppose ye will not say of Princes. Then must ye grant that for these matters the primacy resteth in the clergy, of whom the Prince's themselves, have received their faith: and to whom in matters of faith, and for the discipline of the Church they must also obey: and as case requireth, set forth the doctrine of word with their temporal sword. Which if they do not, but suffer through their slackness, the faith and discipline of the Church to be loosed, God, M. Horn● book in a manner answered by his own allegation. who hath committed his Church to be defended by their power will exact an account of them, as your author Isidore writeth and yourself do allege. So that now we see even by your own allegation in whom the superiority of Church matters, remaineth: that is, in the clergy: And that Princes are not the heads but the aiders, assisters, and advocates of the Church with their temporal authority. And to this end, all that ever ye have brought in this your book concerning the intermeddling of Princes in church affairs, can only be referred. And this your own allegation is aswell a sufficient answer to all your arguments hitherto laid forth for the prince's supremacy, as a good justification of the Clergies primacy. Wherefore if you hearken but to your own allegation, and will stand to the same as you will your Readers to do, placing it (as I have said) in the fore front of your book, you must needs stand also to the next parcel following making clearly for the Clergies superiority in Ecclesiastical causes. These words I mean, Isidorus. that within the Church the power (of Princes) should not be necessary saving that, that thing, which the Priests are not able to do by the word of doctrine, the power (of the prince) may command by terror of discipline. And I doubt nothing, but that we are able well and surely to prove as well by his other books, as by his gathering of all the Counsels together, into one volume yet extant, that Isidorus thought of the Pope's Primacy then, as Catholics do now. For an evident proof whereof, behold what this Ancient and learned Bishop Isidorus writeth. He saith: Synodorum congregandarum authoritas Apostolicae sedi commissa est. Isidorus in praefat. Conciliorum. Neque ullam Synodum generalem ratam esse credimus aut legimus, quae non fuerit eius authoritate congregata vel fulcita. Hoc Authoritas testatur Canonica, hoc Ecclesiastica historia comprobat, hoc Sancti Patres confirmant. The Authority of assembling councils, is committed to the See Apostolic. Neither do we believe or read any General Council to be ratified, which was not either assembled or confirmed with her Authority. This to be so, the Authority of Canons doth witness. Trip. li. 4. cap. 9 &. 19 This the ecclesiastical history proveth. This the holy Fathers confirm. Lo you see. M. Horn, what the judgement of Isidorus was above .900. years past, how jump it agreeth with the assertion of Catholics now, and how directly it overthroweth yours. This therefore being so sure a Principle on our part, and so clearly proved: bethink yourself now, M. Horn, how your new Primacy will be proved by this allegation. Touching that you say, This Clergy (in King Henry's days) was not only of Divines, but also of the wisest, most expert, and best learned in the Civil and Canon Laws, that was or hath been sense, as D. Tonstal, D. Stokesley, D. Gardiner, D. Thirlbie, and D. Bonner, by the evident falsehood which you practise in alleging these witnesses, a man may judge with what fidelity you have handled the rest, throughout your whole book. Who is ignorant, that not one of these reverent Fathers did sincerely think that to be true, which you here impute unto them? For whereas all upright judgement should come of a man's own free choice, not stained or spotted either with the hope of private lucre and honour, or with the fear of great loss, the one of those two things which of all other, most forcibly carrieth men away, from professing their own conscience, did stop those men from saying and uttering that, which otherwise they would most gladly have uttered: sithence as they were put in hope of all promotion, if they agreed with the Kings will (of which they made, I judge, the less account) so disagreeing from the same, they were certain to lose both goods and life, and also their good name, in the show of the world, as who should have been put to death by the name of Traitors, which is the thing that all true subjects do chiefly abhor. Yet you know in such sort suffered a great many, notable both for learning and virtue, as D. Fisher Bishop of Rochester, Sir Thomas More, a great number of the Carthusians, beside diverse other of all estates. You know also, the matter, than was not so sifted and tried by learning, as it hath been since. And we know, they were the secret snakes of your adders brood, that induced the King to that mind, not any of the Doctors here by you named, who all against their wills, condescended thereunto. How then are they brought forth for witnesses of your heresies, who for fear of death said as you do, and that no longer than the foresaid impediment lay in their way? For when the state of the world was otherwise that without fear of death they might utter their mind freely: who knoweth not, that all they who lived to see those days of freedom, in all their words and deeds, protested that the Pope, and not the King, was head of the Church under Christ? Never heard you (M. Horn) that when your own brethren, being arrived before D. Gardiner the bishop of Winchester, and then chancellor of England, had said, they learned their disobedience unto the Pope, D. Gardiner B. of Winchester. out of his book, De vera obedientia, etc. then he answered that if they had been good Scholars, they would have followed their Master in his best, and not in his worst doings. Again, if they had erred through his Authority, when he was not so well learned and grounded, they should much more repent and recant through his Authority, being now better learned through longer study, and better grounded through longer experience. And this Doctor Gardiner, when he was most of your side, in this one matter, yet he was so suspected of the King for secret conference with the Pope, by letters to be sent by a stranger in the time of his embassy on this side of the Seas, that (as Master Fox reporteth) for this very cause, Acts and monuments. pag. 824. col. 1. & 816. King Henry in all General Pardons granted after that time, did evermore except, all treasons committed beyond the Seas, which was meant for the bishops cause: This is that Doctor Gardiner who at Paul's Cross, in a most Honourable and full Audience, witnessed not only his own repentance for his former naughty doings, but also that King Henry sought diverse times to have reconciled himself again, to the See of Rome, as who knew, that he had unlawfully departed from the unity thereof, and had made himself the Supreme Head of the Church of England, altogether unjustly. This is that Doctor Gardiner▪ who lying in his deathebedde, caused the Passion of Christ to be readen unto him, and when he heard it readen, that Peter after the denying of his Master, went out and wept bitterly, he causing the Reader to stay, wept himself full bitterly, and said: Ego exivi, sed non dum flevi amarè: I have gone out, but as yet, I have not wept bytterlie. And is now Doctor Gardiner a fit witness for your secular Supremacy M. Horn? Marcellinus the Pope being afeard of death did sacrifice unto Idols: And the same Marcellinus repenting his unjust fear, Tom. 1. Concil. in vita Marcellini. did afterward sacrifice his own body and soul for the love of Christ, suffering martyrdom for his sake. Will you now prove Idols to be better than Christ, by the fact of Marcellinus? Or shall not the last judgement stand rather than the first? What mean you then to allege the judgements of Doctor Gardiner, Doctor Thirlbey, Doctor Tonstall, and Doctor Bonner, sith you know that all those changed their minds upon better advise? Or why died Doctor Tonstalle, in prison? Or why lie the other learned godly Bishops yet in prison, if they are of your mind? But if you know that they dissent utterly from you, and yet do pretend to bring their Authority for you, this fact declareth, that you are not only a fond wrangler, but also a wicked falsary: and that you know as well Saint Augustine whom you alleged before so largely, and all the Counsels and princes with all other Authors by you producted, are none otherwise of your mind, then are Doctor Thirlebie, and Doctor Bonner, whom you so impudently make to speak as Proctors in your cause, albeit they are ready to shed their blood against this your opinion. Once in manner the whole clergy of the Realm sinned most grievously, by preferring the secular and earthly kingdom, before the Magistrates of the heavenvly kingdom. But that sin of theirs all those now abhor, and have before abhorred, to whom God gave grace to see the filthiness and the absurdty thereof. And surely until the rest both of the clergy and of the laity, do heartily repent for that most filthy and absurd deed, wherein they withdrew the Supremacy from S. Peter's successors, and gave it to the successors of julius Caesar, until I say they repent for it, and reform that mind of theirs, as much as lieth in them, they can never be made partakers of the kingdom of heaven: But only they shall inherit the kingdom of the earth, in whose Supremacy they put their confidence. You Master Horn, have in deed great cause to make much of this earthly Supremacy. For had not the clergy and temporalty given that to king Henry .8. you and your heresies could have had no place now in the throne of that Bishopprike, which was ordained not for Robert and his Madge, but for chaste prelate's, and such as should prefer the soul before the body, the kingdom of heaven before the kingdom of the earth, Peter before Nero, Christ before Antichrist. For so I doubt not to say, with the great Clerk, and most holy Bishop Athanasius, See before. fol. ●7. that a Christian king or Emperor, setting himself above bishops, the officers of Christ, in matters of the faith, is a very Antichrist. Which Antichristian fact in deed hath been the first gate and entry for all those heresies to enter▪ which the Prince himself then most abhorred, and against the which both he had lately before made a learned book, and did publish after (but in vain) for a stay thereof, the six Articles. In vain, I say: for the order of dew government once taken away, the knot of unity once undone, the head being cut of, how could it otherwise be, but false doctrine should take place, a separation from the corpse of Christendom should ensue, and our Country a part of the body fall to decay in such matters, as belonged to the Head, to order, direct and reform? This horrible sin Master Horn would make a virtue. But all ages, all Counsels, all Princes, yea the holy Scriptures are directly against him, and do all witness for the Pope and Bishops against the Prince and lay Magistrate, that to them not to these, belongeth by right, by reason, by practice, the Supreme and chief government in all causes and matters mere Ecclesiastical and spiritual. M. Horn. The .145. Division. pag. 87. a. To this (.475.) The 475. untruth. For this Petrus writeh for the Pope's Supremacy, not for the Princes in Ecclesiastical matters. effect also writeth Petrus Ferrariensis, In form. lib. quo agitur ex subst. in verbo ex suo corpore. a notable learned man in the Laws, saying: Thou ignorant man, thou oughtest to know that the Empire (the Emperor) once in times past, had both the swords, to wit, both the Temporal and Spiritual, in so much that the Emperors then bestowed (.476.) The .476. untruth. Not possible, to be true. all the ecclesiastical benefices through the (477) The .477. untruth. False translation, as shall appear In form. respons. con. ad verb. tanquam publ. ex come. n. 10. whole world, and more, they did choose the Pope, as it is in C. Adrianus Dist. 63. And the same Petrus in an other place, saith thus: Mark after what sort and how many ways those Clergymen, do snare the Lay, and enlarge their own jurisdiction: but alas miserable Emperors and secular princes, which do suffer this and other things: you both make yourselves slaves to the bishops, and ye see the world usurped by them infinite ways, and yet ye study not for remedy, because ye give no heed to wisdom and knoweleadge. Stapleton. IF your law be not better than your divinity, we need not much to fear our matter: And so much the less, if that be true, that a good merry fellow, and unto you not unknown, reading your book of late said, that he durst lay a good wager, that if ye were upon the sudden well opposed, ye were not able to read the quotations, by yourself in the margin alleged out of this Petrus: and withal, that ye never read that, which ye allege out of Quintinus, M. Horns impertinent arguments. or if ye did, ye do not understand it, or at the least ye do most wickedly pervert it. But let this go, as merely spoken: for though ye never read the author, nor can readily at the first (perchance) read your own quotations, the whole matter being by some of your friends and nearest affinity brought ripe and ready to your hand, we shall be well content from whence so ever it come, so it come at length to any purpose and effect, whereof I for my part have little hope. For what if in the old time the Emperors confirmed pope's? What if the clergy usurp and intrude in many things upon the secular prince's jurisdiction? If ye may hereof make a sequel, that either the king of England is supreme head of the Church: or that, the unlawful promiss made by the bishops by their priesthood (which ye esteem as much as if they had sworn by Robin hood his bow) doth bind them, Practica johannis Petri Fer. In forma inter. fieud. cum reo, convento in act. real. as a lawful promiss, I will say, ye are suddenly become a notable lawyer, and worthy to be retained of council in great affairs. I am assured of one thing, that how so ever ye like him in this point, yet for other points of this his book, that you allege, you like him never adeale: As, for the invocation of Saints: yea for the Pope's Primacy, by the which he saith: A perjured man which otherwise is rejected) may be by the Pope's dispensation admitted to bear witness: and that a clerk irregular can not be absolved, but by the Pope. In forma juramenti testium. Numer 7. Which followeth the very place by you alleged, with many such like, not making very much to your liking. Now what if I should say unto you, that you and your author to, if he saith so, say untruly, Informa responsi ●ei conventi ad verbum tamquam publicè excommunicatum numero 11 affirming the Emperor to have both the temporal and spiritual sword? And what if I should say that there is no more truth in that assertion, than in the other, that he bestowed all the benefices through the whole world? For your chapter Adrianus, that you allege, speaketh of the Emperor Charles the great who was not Emperor of the whole world, nor of half Europa neither, and therefore he could not bestow the benefices of the whole world. If ye will say, Dict. cap. Adrianus dist. 63. that your author saith truly, and ye have translated truly, for the text is per singulas provincial: I grant you it is so: but yet is it unskilfully and ignorantly translated: for ye should have said, through out every province, or country subject to the Roman empire. For the Romans did call all countries, that they had conquered (Italy excepted) provinces, and the people Provinciales. I say nothing now, that this chapter rather enforceth than destroyeth the pope's primacy. For Charles had neither authority to bestow the Ecclesiastical benefices, nor to choose the Pope: but as he being a mere stranger before, took th'empire at the pope's hand, so did he take also this special privilege and prerogative. M. Horn. The .146. Division. pag. 87. b. Like as Petrus Ferrariensis attributeth both the sword, that is, both the spiritual and the temporal jurisdiction to the Emperor: So (.478.) The .478. untruth. For he reproveth Ferrariensis. Io. Quintinus Heduus a famous professor of the la in Paris, and one that attributeth so much to the Pope as may be, and much more than aught to be, saith that: In solo Principe omnis est potestas: in the Prince (.479.) The .479. untruth. He is of a plain contrary mind. In repetit. lect. de Christ. Civitatis Aristocratia. alone is all power, and thereto (480.) The .480. untruth. He avoucheth not Speculator. avoucheth this saying of Speculator, De iurisdict. omnium judicum: Quod quicquid est in regno, id esse intelligitur de jurisdictione Regis: that whatsoever is in a kingdom, that is understanded, to be under the jurisdiction of the king. To which (.481.) The .481. untruth. He citeth not Lotharius to that purpose purpose he citeth an ancient learned one in the Law whose name was Lotharius, who, saith he, did say: That the Prince is the fountain or wellspring of all jurisdiction and protesteth also himself to be of the (.482.) The .482. untruth. Lotharius is not of the same mind. same mind. The .39. Chapter. Solutions to Arguments taken out of Quintinus Heduus, a Doctor of Paris. Stapleton. Concerning Quinti●us Heduus. LET us now take heed: for M. Horn wonderfully lassheth on, with Io. Quintinus Heduus, and runneth his race with him two full leaves together. And yet for all this stir, and heaping Law upon Law, we might grant him, all that ever he bringeth in, without any prejudice of our cause: and would so do in deed, saving that the handling of the matter by M. Horn is such as requireth of us a special specification. Neither can I tell, of all the dishonest and shameful pageants that he hath hitherto played, whether there be any comparable to this. M. Horn miserably mis●seth his re●der with the alleging of Quintinus. I can not tell whether his folly or his impudence be the greater: but that both exceed, I am right well assured. And yet I trow he ought not to bear all the blame, but may part stake with his collector, who hath abused his ignorance, as himself doth abuse his reader's ignorance. The answer would grow long and big, if I should fully as the case requireth, rip up, and open all things, and then at large confute them, which at this time I intend not: but in using as much brevity as I may, to lay before thee good reader, and to decipher the fashion and manner of his dealing. Wherein even as Medea, fleinge from her natural father, and running away with a stranger, with whom she fell in love: her father pursuing her, and she fearing to be taken, slew her young brother scattering his limbs in the way, M. Horn for his wretched handling of Quintinus compared to Medea. thereby to stay, what with sorrow, and what with long seeking for his sons body, her father's journey: even so M. Horn running away from the catholic Church his mother, with dame heresy, with whose filthy love he is ravished, to stay the reader that would trace him, and his heresies, for the authors he allegeth, doth so miserably tear them in pieces, and dismember them, that it would pity any good Christian man's heart to see it, as much as it pitied king Oëta father to Medea to see that miserable and lamentable sight: and very busy will it be for him to find out the whole corpse of the sentences, so wretchedly cut and hewed by M. Horn: and here and there in these two leaves so miserably dispersed. What was the opinion of Lotharius, of whom M. Horn speaketh, and how it is to be understanded. We will notwithstanding trace him as we may. Then the better to understand his first allegation, ye shall understand that there is a kind of jurisdiction which is called of the civilians merum imperium that is, power of life and death: which whether it resteth in the prince only, or in other inferior magistrates, the Lawyers do not all agree. Lotharius settled all in the prince: to that opinion Quintinus also inclineth. But than maketh Quintinus an objection. Why sayeth he, How is it true, that the prince only hath this mere empire or jurisdiction, seeing that we affirm, Quasi Principum nomine pontifices non intelligantur. Dist. 35 c. 4. Nos honorum civilium duntaxat extrae Ecclesiam populariumque dignitatum regem tenere fastigium intelligimus etc. the Church to have it also? Whereunto he answereth, that under the name of Princes, are contained the high Priests: from the which our Acts of parliament do not all disagree, calling bishops the * Eduardi. 3. An. 15. cap. 3. clerks peers of the land. Peers of the realm. When we say, saith he, with Lotharius, that the King is the fountain of all jurisdiction, we mean as Lotharius doth, not of the Church, but of the civil magistrates, under the King. The said Quintinus saith, Gladium pontifex utrumque gestat, exercet alterum Rex solus, quem pontifex etiam desertus a suis, in hosts licitè stringit. The Pope hath both the sword, that is, both temporal and spiritual jurisdiction, yet the King alone, useth the one of them, that is the temporal: the which the Pope may notwithstanding, if he be forsaken of his own, use also. But as I was about to tell you out of Quintinus, he saith: Probavimus Ecclesiam Deo militantem se noluisse temerè negotijs secularibus implicare, temporalemque jurisdictionem principibus sponte reliquisse, Why Speculator saith, all that is in the realm to be of the King's jurisdiction tamque libenter, tamque animo prompto & facili, ut regum propria videatur. Id circo scriptum est à Speculatore, quòd quicquid est in regno, id esse intelligitur de jurisdictione regis. We have proved, that the militant Church doth not but upon good cause intermeddle with secular affairs: yea rather giveth over to Princes the temporal jurisdiction so gladly and so willingly, that it seemeth to appertain to the Princes only. Ecclesia utrumque gladium tenet, utramque pariter habet jurisdictionem. And therefore Speculatour writeth, that what so ever is in a Kingdom, that is understanded to be of the kings jurisdiction. And for this some were persuaded, that the spiritual and temporal jurisdiction stood so contrary one to the other, that one man might not exercise both. But Quintinus himself misliketh this opinion, and saith, even in the said place, Novimus utrumque gladium soli Ecclesiae datum. hoc est, ecclesiae pontificem habere ius & potestatem in spiritualia simul & in omnia temporalia, atque ex ijs decernere & statuere ex causa posse, cuius decretis standum. Gibere deformem. Flagitiosissimus quidam. & postea: tam infenso nebulone. where he speaketh of Speculator, that the Church only, and not the Princes secular, hath both sword, and both jurisdictions. And upon this occasion he doth vehemently inveigh against Petrus de Cugnerio of whom we have spoken, that did so stiffly stand against the French clergy for their temporal jurisdiction: and provoked the King Philip Valesius, as much as in him lay, to pluck it away from the clergy. He calleth him a misshapen parson in body, a most wicked man, and to say all in one, a very knave. And though his name were then terrible, and though he would seem for his great wisdom to carry all the realm upon his shoulders, yet was he ever after, but a lawghing stock to men: and because he durst not for shame after this great challenge, show himself abroad, as he was wont to do, for M. Peter de Cugnerio, Quintinus declareth M. Horn to be a li●● in the story of king Philip valesius before rehearsed. he was called in their tongue M. Pierre de coiner: as a man would say, M Peter that lurketh in corners. But will ye now hear M. Horn this your own author Quin●inus how he expoundeth composuit rem sacerdotum, that is, how the King set in order the matters of the priests? Will ye hear also, what sharp Law he made against them, as you avouch that he did? He saith of the king. Pronunciavit Ecclesiam, Meus. Sep. 1. An 1●29 ●yue st●t untruths of M. ●orn in less t●en 15 lines. & feuda, & ●emporalia quaeque bona propria sibi possidere posse atque in illa jurisdictionem habere He gave sentence and pronounced, that the Church might possess fealtes and other temporal things, and have jurisdiction therein. So much for our first entrance into Quintinus. Wherein beside the shame that ye must take, for your worshipful gloze upon composuit rem sacerdotum, first ye see, that he improveth Ferrariensis and such like, as attribute to the Emperor the spiritual and temporal sword. Then that he is of a quite contrary mind, to that, that ye would by a sentence here and there ill favouredly, and disorderly patched in, enforce upon, as although he should think, that all jurisdiction should come of the Prince. Thirdly it is untrue that he avoucheth Speculatours saying: He avoucheth as ye have heard the contrary. four it is untrue, that he bringeth in Lotharius, to confirm that, which Speculatour said. For he entreateth of Lotharius, before he allegeth Speculator, and doth not allege Lotharius for that purpose ye speak of. Fiftly and last, Lotharius is not as ye pretend of this mind, that all jurisdiction cometh of the secular Prince. For Lotharius meaneth not of the clergies jurisdiction, which cometh not of the Prince, but of the jurisdiction of Say men, which all together dependeth of the Prince. M. Horn. The .147. Division. pag. 87. b. And writing of the King's power in Eccle. (.483.) The .483. untruth. In that place he proveth the clergies power, not the Princes in ecclesiastical matters. matters or causes, he citeth this Canon Quando vult Deus forth of the decrees, whereupon he as it were commenteth: saying, Thus is the reason wherefore, it is lawful for the Prince, some while to determine those things which concern the Church, lest the honesty of the mother (he meaneth the Church) should in any thing be violated, or lest her tranquilly should be troubled, specially of them, to whom she is committed (meaning the Church Ministers). Stapleton. Duabus regulis concludan: prior est semper in fidei & peccati materia, ius Ecclesiasticum attendendum est, & in fore civili, tumque cessat omne juris imperatorij mandatum & aboletur. Leave once M. Horn, this peevish pinching and paring, this miserable maiming and marring of your authors. Your author M. Horn, giveth two rules: the first for the authority and matters of the Church saying that, in matter of faith and sin, the law of the Church is ever to be observed, and thereto all princes laws must yield: which rule he proveth at large. And thus you see your own author standeth against you, for one of the chief matters of your book, wherein ye will, in all matters to be determined by the Church, that the prince's consent is to be had. c. Quando vult Deus. 23. q. 4. The .2. rule, is touching the prince: wherein he saith, that it appertaineth to the kings and princes of the world, to desire that the Church their mother, of whom they are spiritually born, be in their time in rest and quietness. And this is the reason, and so forth as yourself rehearse. What can ye gather of this, that is said, that sometime the princes may determine of things touching the Church: seeing as ye have heard before, this determination toucheth not faith or sin, nor can be used of them generally, but sometimes for the quietness of the Church? M. Horn. The .148. Division. pag. 87. b. If there be any other thing, this chief is an Ecclesiastical matter, namely to call or convocate Councils (saith Quintinus) But this is the opinion, saith he, of many learned men, that the Emperor may convocate a general Council, so often, and for any cause, when the pope and the Cardinals be noted of any suspicion, and do foreslow and cease, either for lack of skill: or peradventure of some evil meaning, or of both, or else when there is any schism. Constantinus, saith he, called the first Nicene council, the other † How● far all this is true, it hath at large been showed in the second book three general Counsels, Gratianus, Theodosius, and Martianus themperors called by their edict. justinianus called the fift general council at Constantinople: themperor Constantine .4. did convocat the sixth general Council against the Monothelytes. The authority of the king Theodorike commanded the Bishops and priests forth of divers provinces to assemble together at Rome, for the purgation of Pope Symachus the first. Carolus Magnus, as it is in our histories, commanded five Counsels to be celebrated for the Ecclesiastical state, to wit, Moguntinum, Remense, Cabilonense, Arelatense, and Turonense. The Pope calleth the Bishops to Rome, or to some other place: the King doth forbid them to go, or he commandeth them to come to his Court or (.484.) The .484. untruth. His Author speaketh not of two Counsels. Council: The king i● to be obeyed in (485.) Ecclesiastical causes, and not the Pope. the bishops must obey the kings precept, not only in this case, but in any other matter what so ever besides sin: for he that doth not observe his bounden fidelity to the king: whether he be a bishop, The .485. untruth. Quintinus avouched no such thing. Priest, or Deacon, is to be thrown forth of his degree or place. For the proof whereof he citeth many Canons out of the decrees, and concludeth thus: to be brief, this is mine opinion: when the king calleth together the Prelates to a Council, and to reform the state of the Church, they are bound to obey, yea although the Pope (.486.) The .486. untruth. That is meant in feudis & regalibus: which you have quite left, out of Quintinus. forbid it. Stapleton. This is our old matter of calling of Counsels by princes: wherein you see you author maketh no general or absolute rule as you do, but for certain times and considerations: for the which I will not greatly stand with you, seeing that your author confesseth that which we most stand for, and ye stand most against: that the prince in such counsels, hath not the superiority, Interest tamen volo reges tantum & non praeesse, talibus sacerdotum conventibus. but the clergy. For he saith: I will that princes be present at such Councils, but not precedent. And therefore Quintinus will not be advocate, for the bishops, that by their priesthood promised, that they would enact nothing in their synods without the king's consent. Yet have ye one pretty knack more in Quintinus to prove the king supreme head, and not the pope. For if the king on the one side, and the pope on the other side call the bishops to a Council, the bishops must obey the king, and not the pope: and not only in this thing, but in all other things what so ever beside sin. Happy is it, that ye have put in, beside sin: for this putteth you quite beside your cushion, as they say, and beside your matter and purpose. For this is sin, yea and one of the most horrible kinds of sin, that is a schism, for any prince or any other to hold a council, contrary to the council summoned by a lawful Pope. Such never had any good success as the ecclesiastical stories every where report. And as Aaron's rod devoured the rods of jamnes and Mambres, and other sorcerers in Egypt: Num. 17. and as his rod only among all the rods of the schismatical and murmuring people of Israel, did give forth young slips, All schismatical counsels at fain at the length to yield to the pope's councils. and branches: and for a memorial was reserved in the tabernacle: Even so, those councils, that the pope gathered or allowed, have devoured and abolished all other unlawful and schismatical conventicles. They only flourish, and be in estimation, and are and shallbe for ever preserved in the tabernacle of Christ's catholic Church. I will not walk in the large field of this matter that here lieth open: The French kings doings only, whereof ye talk, shall be a sufficient confirmation for our side, and such stories only as yourself have brought forth for the strengthening as ye thought, of your purpose: As the council of Rheims that the king Hugo Capet assembled deposing there, as ye writ, the bishop Arnulphus. What was the issue M. Horn? Fol. 70. Io. Marius de schism. &. council. differ. par. 2. cap. 6. Did not Benedictus the .7. summon an other council even in the very same city, and restored Arnulphus again? Was not all, that your fair king Philip attempted against the pope Bonifacius in his counsels in France brought to nought by a council summoned by the Pope as we have before declared? we have also showed how that the Lateran council abolished the Pisane conventicle, that jews the French king, and others maintained as yourself write. Wherefore if your author had thus written, neither his time is so ancient, nor his authority so great, but that a man might have said, that he was wonderfully deceived. But it is not he, but you that with your false sleight and crafty conveyance deceive your readers. Your author speaketh not, of two councils, the one summoned by the pope, the other by the king: but speaketh of bishops, that held by fealty and homage lands of the king. And then saith, that quoad feuda & regalia: concerning these fealties and royalties, Idem Quintinus. Aristocrat. fo. 135. Paris. 1552. Quatenus ad feuda & regalia pertinet, per glosam ca reprehensibile. 23. qu. 8. the king is above the bishops, as he is above all his other vassals. And therefore if the pope on the one side, send for a bishop, and the king on the other side, send for him: concerning his fealty and homage matters, he ought to go to the king: otherwise he should rather obey the pope than the king, as appeareth (saith Quintine) in the gloze, to the which he referreth himself. These words feuda and regalia, have ye slily slipped over; as though Quintinus had avouched the bishop's subjection in Ecclesiastical matters. You could not otherwise have decked your margin, with your gay and fresh lying note: that the king is to be obeyed in Ecclesiastical causes, and not the Pope. And so are ye now suddenly become so spiritual and so good an ecclesiastical man, M. Horn leaveth out that which serveth for the opening of the whole matter. that feuda and regalia: are become matters ecclesiastical. Which is as true, as ye may be rightfully called an ecclesiastical man, having a Madge of your own to keep your back warm in the cold winter nights: and by as good reason ye may call her an ecclesiastical woman to. M. Horn. The .149. Division. pag. 88 a. The people doth amend or reform the negligence of the Pastor Can. vlt. dist. 65. Ergo, the Prince also may do the same. If the Bishop will not, or do forslow to hear and to decide the controversies of his Clergy: the Bishop being slow or tarrying over long, nothing doth hinder or stay (saith the Canon) to ask Episcopale judicium, the bishoply judgement of the Emperor. If it happen that the Priests be not diligent about the Altar offices: if concerning the temple, neglecting the Sacrifices, they hasten into king's places▪ run to wrestling places, do profane themselves in brothels houses, and if they convert that which the faithful have offered, to the pleasures of themselves, and of theirs: wherefore shall not the Princes, whom the Catholic Faith hath begotten, and taught in the bosom of the Church, call again, and take upon themselves the care of this matter? and so proveth at large by many examples out of the Histories, and the Laws, that this care and charge in Ecclesiastical (.487.) The .487. untruth. This charged is not in Ecclesiastical matters, but about Ecclesiastical persons in temporal matters, as for external order to be kept, and in execution of the Church Canons, requiring the Prince's aid etc. matters and causes belongeth to the Princes, unto the which examples, he addeth this: In our Father's time (saith he) King jews .11. made a constitution, that archbishops, Bishops, abbots, and who so ever had dignities in the Church, or had the cure of other benefices, should within five months, resort to their Churches, and should not remove any more from thence, diligently there labouring in divine matters, and sacrifices for the faulfty of the king and his kingdom, and that under a great pain of losing all their goods and lands. Here Quintinus doth grievously complain of the dissolute and most * Who more corrupt, than your new Clergy now of handicraft Ministers? corrupt manners of the Clergy, whereto he addeth, saying: Wherefore than should not Princes compel this lewd idle kind of men to do their duties? Stapleton. May the people M. Horn amend and reform the negligence of the pastor? And that by the Pope's Law to? M. Horn● impertinent allegations. Then belike the headless people of Germany, and your headless brethren that of late have made such ruffle, in these low countries here, shall find some good defence for their doings, to save the rest from the gibbet or from the sack, which have not yet passed that way. Then may it seem a small matter that the lay people have by a late Act of parliament transformed and altered the old religion against the mind of all the Bishops and the whole convocation. But your author saith. Ecclesiae nihil est licentius, Democratia. There is in the world, nothing more pernicious to the Church of God, then is such unbridled liberty of the people, Dist. 62. Docendus. which must be taught and not followed: as he allegeth out of Pope Celestin, and that but two distinctions, before that distinction, which yourself allege. And what great reformation is it M. Horn, that your distinction speaketh of? surely none other, but that, if it chance all the bishops of one country to die, Dist. 65. Sî fortè. saving one, and if he be negligent in procuring the election and substitution of some other in their places, that the people may go to the bishops of the country next adjoining, and cause them to ordain some new bishops. We are also content that if the bishops or others be negligent, the prince may compel them to do their duty. But then look well to yourself. For who is more negligent about the Altars, How handsomely M. H. pleadeth against himself. and worthy to be punished therefore, them they that throw down Altars? Who neglect the sacrifices but you that deny the sacrifice and the presence of Christ in the Sacrament? Who be those but you and your fellows, that convert to the pleasures of themselves and theirs, that which the faithful hath offered to Christ in laying out the Church goods upon yourself, which should have no part to them, being become by your marriage a lay man: and in the maintaining and purchasing for your unlawful wives children? Now who be they that profane themselves in brothel houses, let the old constitutions of the Church tel us. A man would little think, that ye would ever have pleaded so against your own self. But what can you bring, (I would fain know,) that is not against you, in so bad a cause? M. Horn. The .150. Division. pag. 88 b. If you delight in antiquities (saith he) no man doth doubt, L. Quicunque: de Epis. et Cler. but that in the primative Church, the Princes did judge both of the Ecclesiastical persons and causes: and did oftentimes make good Laws for the truth against falsehood. Arcadius and Honorius religious Princes do (.488.) The .488. untruth. The place alleged showeth of no bishops deposed by these Emperors. depose a troublesome Bishop both from his rhetoric, sea, and name. The .13. first titles of the first book of justinians Code, collected out of the Constitutions of divers Emperors, do plainly entreat and judge of those things which appertain to the Bishoply cure. For what pertaineth more to the office of a Bishop, than Faith? then Baptism? then the high Trinity? than the conversation of Monks? the ordaining of Clergymen and Bishops? and than many like laws, which doubtless do concern our Religion, and Church. But the Novel Constitutions of th'emperor justinian are full of such Laws. And lest peradventure some man might suspect, that this was tyranny, or the oppression of the Church, john the Pope doth salute this Emperor, the most Clement Son learned in the Ecclesiastical disciplines, and the most Christian amongst Princes. Epist. inter claras. De summa Trin. C. Childebertus the King of France, did (.489.) The .489. untruth. The King did not exact any thinng. exact of Pelagius .2. the confession of his faith and religion: the which the Pope both speedily and willingly did perform C. Sat agendum. 25. q. 1. When I was in Calabria, saith Quintinus, by chance I found a fragment of a certain book in lombardy letters, having this inscription: Capitula Caroli. Then followeth an epistle beginning thus: I Charles by the grace of God, and of his mercy, the King and governor of the kingdom of France, a devout defender of God's holy Church, and humble helper thereof. To all the orders of the Ecclesiastical power, or the dignities of the secular power: greeting: And so reciteth all those Ecclesiastical Laws and constitutions, which I have written before in Charles the great. To all which (saith Quintinus) as it were in manner of a conclusion, are these words put to: I will compel all men to live according to the Canons and rules of the Fathers. jews the Emperor, this Charles Son, kept a Synod wherein he forbade all Churchmen, sumptuousness or excess in apparel, vanities of jewels, and overmuch pomp. Anno Christi .830. He also set forth a book, touching the manner and order of living for the Churchmen. I doubt not, (saith Quintinnus) but the Church should use, and should be bound to such laws. (meaning, as Princes (.490.) The .490. untruth. He meaneth not so, but such as being made in former Canons, the Princes confirm and promulge by their laws also. make in Ecclesiastical matters) Pope Leo .3. (saith he) being accused by Campulus and Paschalis, did purge himself before Charles the great, being at Rome, and as yet not Emperor. Can. Auditum. 2. q. 4. Leo .4. offereth himself to be reformed or amended, if he have done any thing amiss by the judgement of jews the French King, being Emperor. Can. Nos si incompetenter. 2. q. 7. Menna whom Gregory the great calleth most reverend brother and fellow Bishop, being now already purged before Gregory, is (.491) The .491. untruth. For concealinge, who commanded him, which was the Pope himself. commanded a fresh to purge himself of the crime objected, before Bruchin●ld the Queen of France Ca Menna. 2. q. 4. In which question also it is red, that Pope Sixtus .3. did purge himself before the Emperor Valentinian. Can. Mandastis. So (.492.) The .492. untruth. This is not in Quintinus, printed at Lions. An 1549. also john .22. Bishop of Rome was compelled by means of the Divines of Paris, to recant before the French King Philippe, The Pope an (493.) heretic compelled to recant before the French King. The .493. untruth Slanderous not without triumph, the which Io. Gerson telleth in a Sermon. De Pasc. The Pope's Heresy was, that he thought, the Christian Souls not to be received into glory before the resurrection of the Bodies. Cresconius a noble man in Sicilia, had authority or power given him of Pelagius the Pope, over the Bishops in that Province, oppressing the Clergy with vexations. Can. Illud. 10. q. 3. The which Canon of the law, The .494: untruth. great, in false reasoning. For none of all these examples do prove the pope's Primacy. the Glossar doth interpret to be written to a secular Prince. in Ca Clericum nullus .11. q. 3. The abbots, Bishops, and the Popes themselves, in some time paste, were chosen by the kings provision. Cap. Adrianus .63. dist. And in the same Canon. Hinc est etiam .16. q. 1. Gregorius wrote unto the Duke's Rodolph, and Bertulph, that they should in no wise receive priests defiled with whoredom or Simony, but that they should forbid them from the holy ministries. § Verum .32. dist. in which place the interpreters do note, that Laymen sometimes may suspend Cleargymen from their office, by the Pope's commandment: yea also they may excommunicate, which is worthy of memory. Hitherto Quintinus a learned lawyer and a great maintainer of the Pope's jurisdiction, hath declared his opinion, and that agreeable to the Popes own Laws, that Princes may take upon them to govern in Ecclesiastical (.495.) The .495. untruth. That hath not been proved, out of Quintinus in such sense as the Act attributeth to the Prince: L. quicunque de Episcopis et clericis. Quicunque residē●ibus sacerdotibus, fuerit episcopali loco & no mine detrusus, si aliquid contra quie ten publicam moliri etc. matters or causes. Stapleton. All this process following tendeth to prove, that princes have a government in causes and matters ecclesiastical. We might perchance stand with M. Horn for the word government, which I suppose can not be justified by any thing he shall bring forth, but we will not. For we need not greatly stick with him for the term, we will rather consider the thing it self. First than ye enter M. Horn with an untruth, or two. For properly to speak, neither were any princes, that you here rehearse, judges in causes ecclesiastical, although they had therein a certain intermeddling: neither doth the law ye speak of, tell of any Bishops deposed by the emperors Arcadius and Honorius: but this▪ only that if any Bishop be deposed by his fellow Bishops, assembled together in council, how he shallbe ordered, if he be found afterward to attempt any thing against the common wealth. Concerning the doings of the Emperor justinian in matters ecclesiastical: Dicta ep. inter claras de suma Trininitate. Vt non vestrae innotescat sanctitati, quia caput est omnium sanctarum ecclesiarum. Dict. ca Satagendun. 25. q. 1. Satagendun est, ut pro auferendo suspicionis scandalo. Considenter à nobis postulavit (ut decuit) quatenus. etc. Dict. c. Nos si incompetenter. 2. q. 7. & ibi in glos. we have spoken at large already. And if he were, as ye term him most Christian amongst princes, and learned in the ecclesiastical disciplines: why do you not believe him calling Pope john, that ye here speak of, head of the Church, and that in the very place by you alleged? What governance in matters ecclesiastical, I pray you was it in King Childebertus, if Pope Pelagius, to avoid slander, and suspicion, that he should not think well of the Chalcedon Council, sent to the said King at his request the tenor of his faith and belief? Therefore you do abuse your Reader, and abuse also the word, exact: which signifieth to constrain or compel. And that did not the King, but only did require or demand. Touching the Emperor Charles, it is I suppose sufficiently answered alrerdye. And if nothing were answered, that yourself now allege may serve for a good answer. For he maketh no new rules or Constitutions in Church matters, but establissheth and reneweth the old, and saith: He will compel all men to live according to the rules and Canons of the Fathers. Neither doth he call himself head or governor of the Church, but a devout defender, and an humble helper. But when he speaketh of his worldly kingdom, he calleth himself, the governor of the kingdom of France. We need now answer no further for Lewis the Emperor, Charles the great his son, than we have already answered: neither touching Leo the .3. If ye say, that the Emperor was judge in the cause of Leo the .4. I grant you, but not by any ordinary authority, but because he submitted himself and his cause to the emperors judgement, as it appeareth by his own text and the gloze. And it is a rule of the Civil Law, Lib. 14. Est receptum, etc. ff. de iurisdic. omnium judicum. that if any man of higher Authority, will submit himself and his cause to his inferior, that in such a case he may be his judge. But now at length, it seemeth you have found a lay person, yea a woman, head of the Church: and that a reverend Bishop was commanded to purge himself before her. Why do ye not tell us also who commanded him? Causa. 2. quest 4. cap. Mennam. It was not Brunichildis the French Queen, but Pope Gregory that commanded him. And when, I pray you? Reverti illum, purgatum absolutunque permisimus. Surely when he had purged himself before at Rome, before Pope Gregory. And why was he, I pray you, sent to the Queen? Surely for no great need, but for to cause his innocency, Vide marginalem glosam ibidem. to be more evidently and clearly known. Here by the way, I would ask M. Horn, what authority Gregory had to call this French Bishop to Rome? Dict. c. mandastis. ibidem. Quod audience Valentinianus Augustus nostra authoritate Synodum congregari jussit: & mox. Licet evadere aliter satis potuissem, suspitionem tamen fugiens coram omnibus me purgavi. Sed non alijs qui noluerint, aut sponte hoc non elegerint, faciendi formam dans. Hath he not trow ye, by his own example, proved the Pope's Primacy? And hath he not done the like in the matter of Pope Sixtus? Verily his text saith: that the Council which the Emperor Valentinian commanded to be holden, and before the which the Pope Sixtus purged himself, was assembled by the said Pope Sixtus authority, and that he needed not to have made his purgation, but made it voluntarily to avoid suspicion, not binding his successors to follow this example, but to be free and at their own liberty. But this matter I leave to be handeld more at large by Master Dorman against Master Nowell, who maketh (to his seeming) gay sport therewith. Then followeth in M. Horn the recantation of Pope john whereof his Author Quintinus speaketh never a word, and yet is it here placed in the middle of Quintinus matters, and in a distinct letter. In exemplar. Lugdun. An. 1549. in volume 14. And this patch as it discloseth the gross error of the English Apology, and of M. jewel in his Reply imputing to this Pope, that he denied the immortality of souls: so it proveth nothing in the world the lay Prince's primacy, no nor any heresy in Pope john neither. For if he maintained any such error, A gross error of M. jewel. pag. 275. it was before he was Pope. And in case he thought so after he was advanced to the See Apostolical (which can not be proved) yet he did not command it to be publicly believed, by any definitive sentence or open decree. And therefore as gaily as ye have garnished your margin: with the Pope an Heretic compelled to recant before the French King, neither you, nor your Apology, nor M. jewel, shall take any great worship thereby: but you must all three (if M. jewel and the Author of the Apology be two) recant, as well as he, and bear him company. The Apology and M. jewel, for slandering him with a wrong and a far more grievous error, than he ever held. You, as well for reporting this out of Quintinus (who saith it not) as for your impertinent and foolish plea, pleading thereby for your new secular primacy. Which will as well follow of this story, as it is true that Pope john denied the immortality of souls. The residue that followeth, partly we have answered, as touching Cap. Adrianus .63. Distinct. Partly it may be answered in few words: and that is, that it maketh all directly for the Pope's Primacy as from whom the lay men that M. Horn speaketh of, had all their authority, as appeareth by his own examples. If he would have proved any thing concludingly for his purpose, he should have concluded, that the Pope took his authority of the lay men. Now proving the contrary himself, he ministereth good matter against himself. M. Horn. The .151. Division. pag. 89 b. Braughton lib. 1. cap. de Papa. Archiepiscopis & alijs praelat. Besides these lawyers, this was the common opinion of the chiefest writers of the common Law of this realm, as appeareth (.496.) The 496. untruth: The contrary appeareth plainly by Braughton, as it shall be declared. by Braughton in these words: Sunt & sub rege etc. Under the King are both freemen and bondmen, and they be subject to his power, and are all under him, and he is a certain thing or creature that is under none but only under God. And again in the Chapter the title whereof is this. Rex non habet parem, etc. The King hath no peer or equal in his Kingdom: The King (saith he) in his Kingdom hath no equal, for so might he lose his precept or authority of commanding, sith that an equal hath no rule or commandment over his equal: as for the King himself ought not to be under man, but under God, and under the law, because the Law maketh a King. Let the King therefore attribute that unto the Law, that the Law attributeth unto him, The 487. untruth. A part of the sentence opening, and answering the whole objection nipped quite of. to wit, dominion and power. For he is not a King in whom will and not the law doth rule, and that he ought to be under the Law, Cùm sit Dei Vicarius, sith he is the Vicar of God, it appeareth evidently by the likeness of jesus Christ, whose vicegerent he is in earth: and within a little after he concludeth thus: Igitur non debet maior esse eo in regno suo (.497.) Therefore there ought to be none greater than he in his kingdom. The .40. Chapter. Concerning Braughton, Master Horns last Author. Stapleton. Happy is it, that M. Horn writeth in English, and to English men, and not in Latin. For surely as our Country hath shut out the Pope's authority, yea and all manner of ecclesiastical authority, that it shall not pass the Ocean sea toward it: So may all other nations much better exclude the authority of a temporal lawyer of our realm that it pass not the said Ocean sea toward them. But because our Christian belief (the more pity) is become of late nothing else but a Parliament matter, and a matter of common law: and seeing we have estranged ourself from the old common catholic faith into a late upstart, and into a private and national faith of our own, and yet for some colour will pretend, it was at least the ancient faith of this realm, I will make none exception against M. horns plea, but will join issue, and cope with him even with our own law, and with his own author. And that M Horn shall not say I deal with him hardly and pinchingly, but freely and liberally: I do here offer to be tried, not by the Pope (for fear of a praemunire) but by the judges of the kings bench: and by all other the Queens May. judges, yea by all the lawyers of the realm to, that by the common law of the realm in Braughtons' time the king was not taken for the head of the Church, but the Pope. And if M. Horn may prove the contrary to my assertion, by Braughton, then dare I offer in M. Fekenhams name, that he shall take the oath: and if he will not, I, for myself dare promise so much, and will perform it: and shallbe content withal, that M. Horn for this his high invention, shall be made sergeant of the quo if also. Why saith Master Horn, what mean you to say so? Do not I plainly allege by Braughton his words, that the king is under none, but only under God? That the king hath no peer or equal? That there ought to be none greater in his kingdom then the king? Yea to conclude, that he is the Vicar of God? Are not these Braughtons' words? Do I misreherse them, sayeth Master Horn? And what will ye have then more, will he say? Forsooth Master Horn we look for, but three little words more, that is, that ye prove us out of Brawghton, that the king is the greatest in his realm, and the Vicar of all, not in matters civil, which we willingly grant you, but for matters ecclesiastical. Whereof ye have not yet out of Braughton brought so much as one word. And so have you for all this jolly fetch, fetched in nothing to your purpose, but have fished all this while in Braughton all in vain. Yet is there one thing more we look for, that is, to have an honester man, and of better, How wretchedly M. Horn allegeth Brauhgton. and more upright dealing and conscience, than ye are of, to report Braughton. And then we have some hope, that as you can prove nothing by him, for your new primacy: So shall we prove even by your own author, that by the common law of the realm, the Pope was then the chief head of all Christ's Church. And me think, thowghe in your text there is nothing but the duskish, dark, hornelight of an unfaithful and blind allegation, that yet in your margin, there appeareth a glistering day star, and that the son is at hand to open and disclose to the world by the bright beams and most clear light of the catholic faith, shining in your own author, either your exceeding malice, or your most palpable gross, and dark ignorance. Wherewith for your deserts and spitiful heart to the catholic faith, God hath plagued you no less than he did the Egyptians. Why M. Horn? Hath Braughton them a Title de Papa, Archiepiscopis, & alijs prelatis: of the Pope, Archbishops and other prelates. What? Is there nothing in him but a bare and naked title? What sayeth Braughton in his text? Doth he say that the Pope hath nothing to do, but in his own diocese, and no more than other Bishops have? Doth he say, that he is not the head, and the superior of all other bishops? Or doth he say, as ye say, that all Ecclesiastical jurisdiction cometh from the King only? Or doth he say, that the King is above the the Pope, and head of the Church himself? Wel. Ye have seen the star light in the margin: Now shall ye see also, Braughton lib. 1. Homines quidam sunt excellentes & prelati & alijs principantur. Dominus Papa in rebus spiritualibus, quae pertinent ad sacerdotium & sub eo archiepiscopi, Episcopi, & alij praelati inferiores. Item in temporalibus Imperatores, reges, etc. to the utter destruction of your new primacy, and to your great dishonesty, for this your detestable dealing, the bright day light. Ye tell us out of Braughton, that all, aswell freemen as bondmen, are subject to the King his power. You tell us, the King hath no Peer: what of all this? Tell me withal for what the title of the Pope and Archebishope serveth? Verily it serveth to direct us to your own confusion and shame. Ye told us even in the other page of this leaf, that King Childebertus exacted of Pope Pelagius the confession of his faith, which he voluntarily offered. But surely the confession of this matter, will not come from you freely and voluntarily, but it must be exacted from you, and brought from you by the very violence of the most strong and forcible truth. Let us then hear Braughtons' own words. He saith: There is a difference and distinction between person and person. For some there are, that be in excellency and prelacy, and be rulers above other. As in spiritual matters and those that appertain to priesthood, our Lord the Pope, and under him Archebishopes, and bishops, and other inferior Prelates. In temporal matters also Emperors, Kings, and Princes, for such things as appertain to the kingdom: and under them Dukes, Earls, Barons and such other. Again he writeth thus in an other place: Sunt enim causae spirituales etc. There are, saith he, spiritual causes, in the which the secular judged hath no cognition, Eodem libro neither can put them to execution, because he hath no punishment for them. For in these causes, the judgement appertaineth to the ecclesiastical judges who hath the governance and defence of priesthood. There be also Secular causes, the knowledge and judgement whereof appertaineth to Kings and Princes, who defend the Kingdom, Ergo non debet maior esse in regno suo in exhibitioneiuris. and with the which the Clergy should not intermeddle: seeing that the jurisdictions of them are sundered and distincted: unless it be when one sword must help the other. I trust by this Master Horn ye do, or may understand, what is meant, when Braughton calleth the King, the Vicar of God: and saith, there ought to be none greater than the King in his kingdom. Which rule would have been plainer, if ye had added the three words following: In exhibitione juris. That is, in ministering of every man right and justice: which is altogether ministered in mere profane and civil matters under and by the kings Authority, and which words are by you nipped quite of very ministerlyke. We will yet add the third Authority out of Braughton, because it doth not only make against this new upstart Supremacy, but answereth also as well to the old Cugnerius, as to our new Cugnerius (M. Horn) his fond arguments against the spiritual iurisction. Braughton then after that he hath showed, Libro 4. that there is one jurisdiction, that is called ordinary, and an other of delegates, and holding by commission, and that as well in the temporal as spiritual Court: and that these two jurisdictions be distincted, and that the judges of each sort, should take heed, that they do not intrude upon the other: he telleth us of some particularities, of matters appertaining to the Church jurisdiction. First that none of the clergy may be called before a secular judge, Matters appertaining to the spiritual jurisdiction. for any matter touching the ecclesiastical court, or for any spiritual matter, or such as be annexed and coherent. As when penance is to be enjoined for any sin or trespase, wherein the ecclesiastical judge hath the cognition, and not the king: for it doth not appertain to the king or to the temporal judge to enjoin penance. Neither can they judge of matters coherent and annexed to spiritual things: as of tithes and such other: as, concerning movables bequeathed in a man's testament, nor in a cause of matrimony. Nor if a man promise money for marriage as (he saith) he hath before declared. For in all these things the clerk may bring the cause from the temporal to the ecclesiastical judge. And so have we found M. Horn by the common law in Braughtons' time the Pope's supremacy in England, and not that only, Braughton and Quintinus be against Petrus Cugnerius that M. Horn before alleged. Prius fol. 82. but also, that aswell Braughton as Quintinus be hard against you and your Petrus Cugnerius for the minishing and defacing of the spiritual jurisdiction: and for your untruth in avowching that the meddling with contracts of marriages, enjoining of penance, and such like, are nothing but temporal matters pertaining to the kings jurisdiction. And thus in fine, to be short, where your proofs should be strongest, there are they most acrased and feeble: and your four lawyers, with your Divine, prove nothing to your purpose, but all against it. M. Horn. The .152. Division. pag. 90. a. Thus have I sufficiently (.498.) The .498. untruth. You have proved nothing less. proved, that the Emperors and Kings, aught, have, and may claim, and take upon them such government, in Spiritual and Ecclesiastical causes and matters, as the Queen's Majesty now doth. In confirmation whereof I have been more large, than otherwise I would, but that the proof hereof doth reprove, and fully answer the principal matter of your whole book: and therefore I may use more briefness in that which followeth. I have made proof unto you, sufficient to remove (.499.) The 499. untruth. You have proved nothing sufficient to satisfy M. Feckenham, or any mean man. your ignorance, both of the matter, and the way whereby to know, confessed by you in your Minor Proposition. And this have I done by the self-same means, that you require in your issue. I have made proof of the Supreme government in Ecclesiastical causes, to belong unto Kings and Princes, by the express (.500.) The 500 Untruth. you have showed no such commandment. commandment of God, where he did first describe and set forth, the duty and office of Kings. I have made the same more plain and manifest, by the (.501.) The 501. untruth. None of your examples have served your turn. examples of the most holy governors amongst God's people, as Moses, josua, David, Solomon, josaphat, Ezechias, josias, the King of Ninive, Darius, and Nabugodonosor: who expressed this to be the true meaning of God his commandment, by their practice hereof, so highly commended even by the holy Ghost: whereunto I have added certain prophecies, forth of David and isaiah: whereby it is manifestly proved, that the holy ghost doth look for, exact, and challenge, this service and (.502.) The 502. untruth. Your prophecies have proved no such Supreme Government. Supreme government in church causes, at prince's hands. I have declared that the Catholic church of Christ, did accept, and repute these histories of the old Testament, to be figures and prophecies, of the like government and service, to be required of the Kings, in the time of the new Testament: I have confirmed the same by the manifest Scriptures, of the (.503.) The 503. untruhe. No Scripture of the new Testament hath proved the like government etc. new Testament: Whereunto I have adioygned the testimonies of (.504.) The 504. untruth. Your Ancient Doctors stand plain against you. ancient Doctors, with certain examples of most godly emperors, who being so taught by the most Catholic Fathers of Christ's church, did rightly judge, that the vigilant care, oversight, and ordering of church causes, was the chiefest and best part of their ministry, and service unto the Lord. I have showed plainly, by the order of supreme government in church causes, practised, set forth, and allowed, in the greatest and best Counsels, both (.505.) The 505. untruth. The practice of all Councils both General and national hath witnessed the pope's, not the Prince's Primacy. General and national: that the same order of Government, hath been claimed and put in use by the Emperors, and allowed, and much commended by the whole number of the Catholic Bishops. I have made plain proof hereof, by the continual practice of the (.506.) The 506: untruth. Ye have not proved the like government by any one king or prince. like Ecclesiastical government, claimed and used by the kings and Princes, even until the time that you yourself did allow, confess, and preach the same many years together: All which to your more contentation herein, I have proved by those Historiographers, that written not only before the time of Martin Luther, lest ye might suspect them of partiality against you: but also such in deed, as were for the most part (.507.) The .507. Untruth Partial they could not be for your part, being the adversari, was not then extant. partial on your side, or rather wholly addict and mancipate to your holy Father: as Platina, Nauclerus, Abbas Vrspurgensis, Sabellicus, Aeneas Silvius, Volateranus, Fabian, Polychronicon, Petrus Bertrandus, Benno Cardinalis, Durandus, Paulus Aemilius, Martinus Poenitentiarius, Pontificale, Damasus, Polydorus Virgilius, etc. all your friends, and whom you may trust. I warraunty you, on their word, being the Popes sworn Vassals, his Chapplaines, his Cardinals, his Chamberlains, his Secretaries, his Library keepers, his Penitentiaries, his Legates, his Peterpence gatherers, his sworn Monks and abbots, as well as you, and some of them Popes themselves, which, your friends say, can (.508.) The .508. Untruth. No Catholic denieth, but the Pope can lie and swear to, as bad as any other neither lie, nor err from the truth. And besides all these, the four points of your issue, according to your request, proved at large, for the better reducing of you from wilful and malicious ignorance, to know and acknowledge the invincible truth hereof: I have added to your petition, a fift point, which you term a work of Supererogation. For, to confirm my proofs withal, I have producted for witnesses, your best learned, although otherwise Papishe, Civilian and Canon lawyers, who have deposed directly on my (.509.) The .509. Untruth. Most impudent. They have all deposed on our side clean against you, and do yet to this day, some of them stand against you. side against you: Namely Doctor Tunstall, D. Stokesley. D. Gardiner, D. Bonner, D. Thirlbie, D. Decius, the Glossaries upon the Law, D. Petrus Ferrariensis, D. Io. Quintinus: to whom I might add the civilians and canonists that were in or toward the Arches in the last end of King Henry, and all the time of King Edward, with all the Doctors and Proctors of or towards the Arches at (.510.) The .510. untruth. Slanderous to the learned of the Arche● this time. Wherefore you will now, I trust, yield herein, and reckon yourself well satisfied, take upon you the knowledge hereof, and to be ready to testify the same upon a book oath, for so have you promised. The conclusion of the three books going before, with a brief recapitulation of that which hath been said. Stapleton. Now doth M. Horn blow out of his jolly Horn, a glorious and triumphant blast, to signify to all the world, what a renowned conquest he hath made upon poor M. Fekenham. He setteth forth his army to the view of the world, whereby he sayeth he hath obtained this famous victory: furnished with a number of most holy governors amongst God's people, before the coming of Christ, as Moses, joshua, David, the king of Ninive, Darius, and Nabuchodonosor: furnished with the manifest scriptures of the new testament, and the examples of the most godly Emperors, with general and national councils, with the continual practice of the Church, with the Pope's sworn vassals, his chaplains, his cardinals, his chamberlains, his secretaries, his library keepers, his penitentiaries, his legates, his peterpence gatherers, his sworn monks and abbots, yea to confirm up his proofs withal, with the testimony of Doctor Gardiner, D. Tonstal, D. Bonner, and D. Thirlbie. And therefore he trusteth that M. Fekenham will now at length, yield and reckon himself well satisfied, and take the oath of the supremacy. This is a Royal and a triumphant conquest in deed, Master Horn, if it be as you vaunt. But yet, I would much sooner believe it, if I heard any indifferent man besides yourself, say as much. For thowghe, as I hear say, you could handle your club, your buckler, and your waster well and cunningly, when ye were in Cambridge, whereof ye will not stick as it is reported, now and then to talk, when ye are disposed to brag of your yowthly parts there played, yet to say the truth, in this combat with M. Fekenham I see no such manliness in you. Neither have ye played so closely, but that a man may easily reach you a rap upon the head, arms, or shoulders, and cause you there to cratch and claw with your fingers, where it ytcheth not. Yea ye are beaten quite out of the field, with your own proofs and weapons. And as for M. Fekhenhan ye have not fastened upon him as much as one blow. What speak I of a blow? No not so much as a good philip. And therefore whereas ye so bravely brag, and so triumphauntlie vaunt, that all is yours, when in deed ye have lost all, I think good to put you in remembrance of the great wise man that Atheneus writeth of: Lib. 12. who as often as any ship came to the haven with merchandise, would run thither with all haste, and welcome the mariners with great joy and gratulation, rejoicing exceedingly and thanking God that had sent home his Merchandise, so sauflie, and so prosperously. For the poor man (such was his wisdom) being owner of no part, thought all to be his. I say, it fareth even so with you, M. Horn. Of all the good Emperors, Kings, Fathers and Councils by you rehearsed, cry you as much and as long as ye will, that they are all yours, yet there is not so much as one, yours. Ye have not brought so much as one authority directly or indirectly concluding your purpose. Else show me, but one of all the foresaid Authors that saith that the Pope hath no authority either in England or in other countries out of Italy. Show me one that saith either plain words, or in equivalent, that the Prince is Supreme head in all causes ecclesiastical. Yea show me one, that avoucheth the Prince to be the Supreme governor in any one cause mere ecclesiastical. And think you now in the folding up of your conclusion, to persuade your Readers, that ye have them all on your side? Or blush you not to vaunt, that you have proved your assertion, even by those that yourself confess were wholly addicted and mancipated to the Pope? And what can more evidently descry and betray your exceeding folly, and passing impudency, See M. Horns marvelous Rhetoric. then doth this most strange and monstrous Paradox? But who would have thought, that of all men in the world, your Rhetoric would serve you to bring in the most Reverend Fathers in God by you named, as good motives to persuade M. Fekenham to take this oath, which for the refusing of the very same oath, were thrust out of their Bishoprics, and cast into prison, where yet they remain, such as yet live? This point of rhetorical persuasion, neither Demosthenes, nor Cicero (I trow) could ever attain unto. Seeing then all your Rhetoric consisteth in lying, and your triumphant conclusion is folded up with a brown dozen of several untruths, allowing you thirteen to the dozen, I will assay M. Horn with more truth and simplicity, briefly to unfold, for the Readers better remembrance, and for your comfort, the contents of these three books, wherein you have played the Opponent, and have laid forth the best evidences that you could, for proof of your strange and unheard paradox of Princes Supreme Government in all ecclesiastical causes. I have therefore not only disproved your proofs all along from the first to the last, but I have also proved the contrary, that to priests, not to princes appertaineth the chief government in causes Ecclesiastical. In the first book, your scripture of the Deuteronom, Cap. 8. commandeth the king to take of the priests, not only the book of the law, but also the exposition thereof. To your examples of Moses, Cap. 9.10.11.12.13.14. & 15. of joshua, of David, of Solomon, of josaphat, of Ezechias and of josias, I have so answered, that it hath evidently appeared the Supreme government in spiritual matters to have rested in the high Bishops, Priests, and Prophets: not in them: Moses only excepted, who was a Priest also, not only a Prince of the people. Your idle objections out of S. Augustin, and of the Donatists examples, have nothing relieved you, but only have been occasion to make open your extreme folly, and to reveal your cozenage with old heretics to all the world. Your Emanuel hath utterly shamed you: and your disorderly talk of Constantin hath nothing furthered you. Your texts of the new Testament, have been to to fond and foolishly alleged, to set up that kind of government which Christ and the Apostles never spoke word of. Last of all whereas you blindly uttered, the state of the Question, as one that loved darkness and shunned the light, where only Truth is to be found: I have opened the same more particularly, and discovered withal your double Untruth about the tenor of the Oath. Thus much in the first book, beside many private matters between M. Feckenham and you: wherein you have been taken in manifest forgeryes, lies▪ and slanders. Besides also a Note of your brethernes obedience to their Supreme Governors as well in other Countries▪ Cap. 3. Fol. 16. b. as in these low Countries, here, and of their late good rule kept, of which I suppose, both you and your cause shall take small relief and less honesty. In the second book I have not only disproved all your pretenced proofs of Princes supreme government in all causes ecclesiastical, but I have in them all directly proved the pope's primacy withal. In the four first Chapters. I have I say showed the practice of the former .600. years, namely from Constantin the great down to Phocas, to stand clearly for the pope's primacy, I have showed that Constantin in all his dealings in the Nicene Council against the Donatists, in the matter of Athanasius, with the Arrian bishops, and with Arrius himself, never practised this Supreme government, which you so fond uphold: but in all matters Ecclesiastical yielded the government thereof unto Bishops. I have showed, Cap. 5. that the Sons of Constantin the great practised no Supreme government at all in any ecclesiastical cause, much less in all causes. Your next example Valentinian the elder, Cap. 6. is so far from all government of the lay prince in Ecclesiastical causes, that he decreed the plain contrary, yea and made it lawful in civil matters to appeal to the bishoply judgement. Theodosius the great hath been proved to be no fit example of your lay supremacy in causes ecclesiastical: Cap. 7. But in his example the Pope's Primacy is clearly proved, namely by a Reconciliation made of Flavianus the intruded patriarch of Antioch to pope Damasus, and also by the letters of the General Council holden at Constantinople under this Theodosius. In that place also I have showed by ten several articles, what and how far Emperors may and have dealt in General Councils. In the examples of Archadius and Honorius, Cap. 8. fo. 122. etc. sons to this Theodosius, as their pretended Primacy is proved to be none, so the primacy of Innocentius, them pope, is clearly proved, as one that for the injust deposition of john Chrisostom excommunicated themperor Archadius, the upholder thereof. Also of Damasus then pope, by the suit of S. Hierom, made unto him. Cap. 9 fo. 127. &. se. In the example of Theodosius the second, and the practice of the Ephesine Council the third General, M. horns purpose is overthrown, and the pope's primacy is by clear practice testified, as well by the said Council, as also by M. Horns own Authors, Liberatus and Cyrillus. Cap. 10. The doings in the cause of Eutyches, brought forth, by M. Horn to prove the princes Supreme government in all Ecclesiastical causes, do prove clearly the pope's primacy, even in the very Author and chapter by master Horn alleged. Cap. 11. Pope Leo strained by M. Horn to speak somewhat for the Prince's Supremacy in matters Ecclesiastical, hath spoken and done so much to prove the primacy of the See of Rome, that if M. Horn will stand to his own Author, he is utterly confounded and forced to agnize the pope's primacy without all manner of doubt. Cap. 12. By the example also of Martian the Emperor, for calling of the Chalcedon Council, nextly alleged, M. Horns purpose is no whit furthered, but Pope Leo his primacy evidently proved. Cap. 13. By the Acts also of the said Council, the pope's and the bishops Supreme jurisdiction in all ecclesiastical matters to be treated, examined, judged and defined, through out the whole Council appeareth, and M. horns purpose remaineth utterly unproved. Cap. 14. I have farther out of the said Chalcedon Council, being the fourth General, and so one of the four allowed in our Country by Act of parliament in the reign of the Queen's Mai. present, Elizab. An. 1. gathered evident and sundry arguments for proof of the Popes and bishop's Supremacy in causes ecclesiastical. And here I require M. Horn, or any man's else whatsoever to show, how it is possible without manifest contradiction, to allow the Authority of this fourth General Council, and to banish the Pope's Authority, which this whole Council agnized, or to give to the Prince Supreme Authority in all ecclesiastical causes, the same by this Council resting in the bishops only, not in the Prince at all. In hath consequently been showed against M. Horn, Cap. 15. that his examples of Leo and Zeno Emperors have proved nothing less than his imagined Supremacy. His next examples of three pope's Simplicius, Cap. 16. Felix .3. and Symachus, have all proved so manifest testimonies for their own Supremacy, even out of the books and places by M. Horn alleged, that in this matter he seemeth a plain prevaricator, and one secretly defending the cause, which he seemeth openly to impugn. Now in France M. Horn, Cap. 17. your luck hath been no better, than before in the East Church and in Italy it was. Your arguments in this behalf have been to to pelting and miserable. But the bishop's jurisdiction in all those matters hath been as evident. Your story of justinus the elder (nextly by you alleged, Cap. 18. but confusedly and out of measure mangled) being wholly laid forth, hath plainly proved the pope's Supremacy, and nothing at all the princes. justinian your next exaample, Cap. 19 and largely by you prosecuted, hath never a whit proved your matter, but for the Pope's absolute Supremacy hath diverse ways pronounced, not only in his behaviour in the fift General Council, but in his Edicts and Constitutions, which you for yourself so thick have alleged. Fol. 171. In that place also I have noted by diverse examples, what evil success Church matters have had, Fol. 174. when Princes most intermeddled. There also by the way a Council in France by M. Horn alleged, hath openly pronounced for the pope's universal Supremacy. Cap. 20. Your last examples taken out of Spain have nothing relieved your bad cause, but have given evident witness for the Bishop's Supremacy in ecclesiastical causes. And thus far have you waded in the first .600. years after Christ, without any one proof for your new Laical Supremacy. But for the pope's and Bishop's Supremacy in matters of the Church, the Continual practice of that first age and that in all Countries hath clearly pronounced, as hath been at large showed. In the third book, as the race your run is the longer, and triple to that ye ran in before, so is our cause the stronger, and yours the feebler, or rather the wretcheder, that in the compass of .900. years, that of so many Emperors, kings and princes, of so many Counsels both General and National, of so diverse parts of the Christened world, all the East part, Italy, France, Spain, Germany, and our own Country of England, yea of the Moscovites, Armenians and Aethyopians to, of all these I say not one Prince, Council or Country maketh for you, and not one prince, Council, or Country maketh against us, but all have agnized the pope's primacy, and not one in the world of so many hundred years, have agnized or so much as heard of, much less sworn unto, the Prince's Supreme government in all Ecclesiastical causes. Your first proof belieth flatly the See of Rome, Cap. 1. and proveth nothing by any doing of Phocas the Emperor, the Supremacy that you would prove. The Kings of Spain and the Toletane Councils have made nothing for you, Cap. 2. but have clearly confounded you, not only in the principal matters in hand, but also in divers other matters by your lewd heresies denied. Your patched proofs and swarming untruths in your next narration touching certain Popes of Rome, Cap. 3. and of the Church of Ravenna, have discovered the miserable weakness of your bad cause, and nothing relieved you: the Pope's Primacy by your own examples notwithstanding established. Your fond surmise against the Decree of Constantin .5. Emperor, for the prerogative of the See Apostolic, Cap. 4. as it nothing furthered your matter in hand, if it had not been made, so it showed well the misery of your cause, that to make your paradox to bear some credit, you were fain to discredit all the Historians and writers of that matter, calling them Papists, the Pope's Parasites, and fayners of that which they wrote. The practice of Ecclesiastical government used in the sixth general Council, next by you alleged, Cap. 5. confirmeth both in word and deed the Pope's Primacy and the bishops Supreme jurisdiction in matters Ecclesiastical, and giveth forth no manner inkling of your imagined Supremacy. In which only matter beside twenty untruths by you uttered there about, you are as much confounded as in any other Council or Country before, notwithstanding your great objection of Pope Honorius, to the which I have there sufficiently answered. Cap. 6. Your talk of the three Kings of Spain next ensuring, and of the three Toletane councils kept in their reigns, doth so little disprove the Supreme jurisdiction of Bishops in Ecclesiastical causes, that it maketh them Supreme judges even in civil causes. So wide you are ever from proving your purpose. Cap. 7. The .7. General Council by you shortly noted, doth amply and abundantly confirm the Pope's Primacy, and nothing in the world helpeth your purpose. Cap. 8. Charles Martel and Carolomanus his son exercised no whit of your imagined Supremacy, but have confessed both clearly the Pope's Primacy, by their doings, even in the matters by yourself treated. Your most ignorant and ridiculous exposition made of the keys of S. Peter's Confession sent to this Charles, and your extreme fond argument deducted thereof, hath utterly shamed you, if any shame be in you. Cap. 9 Your slanderous reproaches against S. Augustine our Apostle, and S. Boniface the Apostle of Germany, and holy Martyr, have redounded to your own shame and folly, your cause thereby nothing in the world furthered: No, if it had been all true, which you had reported of them. Cap. 10. Charlemagne for all his calling of Councils, confirming of the same, and publishing of Church Laws, practised not yet any like government in Ecclesiastical causes, as you have defended, no nor any government at all, but was lead and governed himself in all such things of the Fathers and bishops then living, especially of the See of Rome. The whole Order also of the Councils by you alleged, hath plainly condemned the profane manner of determining causes Ecclesiastical now used by mere lay men, at the warrant of such as you are. But for the Pope's primacy none more clear than this Charlemagne, both in his doings, Vide fol. 240. b. & 244. b. Iten fol. 48. Cap. 11. as in the cause of Pope Leo the .3. and in his sayings, as in the book so much by you and your fellows alleged, and in the decrees it appeareth. Lewis the first, son to this Charlemagne practised no part of your supremacy, but the Popes at that time, had as full use thereof, as any Popes before or sithence, the confirmation of the Pope, before elected and chosen, Cap. 12. notwithstanding, of the which matter in that place I have answered you sufficiently. There also you have Master Horn out of the Notable Epistle of Nicolaus .1. to Michael the Emperor, and by the practice of the .8. General Council at large declared unto you, both the Pope's primacy in all Spiritual matters, and the Emperor or Prince's subjection in the same, by the Confession of the Emperor himself Basilius of Constantinople present in that Council. Arnulphus his example hath nothing helped you: Cap. 13. The bedroll of certain evil Popes by you brought in, only declareth your malice to God's vicars, and furthereth nothing your bad cause. Your surmise adjoined of the cause of the calamities at that time, hath argued your great folly, and ignorance of the stories, except we shall say, that malice made you blind. Otho the first showed such obedience to the See of Rome, Cap. 14. yea to the naughty Pope john the .12. that he is no fit example for the like government in Princes as you maintain, but for the like obedience to the See Apostolic, as Catholic Princes and Emperors have always showed, you could not have brought a more notable or excellent example: and that proved out of the Authors by yourself alleged. Cap. 15. Hugh Capet the French King, and Otho the .3. Emperor have even in the matters by yourself treated, been proved obedient and subject to the See Apostolic, without any colour of the like government as you would fasten upon them. Cap. 16. Your great matter of Henry the .4. and Pope Hildebrand hath concluded flat against you, with a great number of your lewd untruths in that behalf discovered and confuted. The Pope's Primacy, in no matter more, abundantly and clearly proved. Cap. 17. The matter of investuring bishops (your chief matter to prove the Prince's Supremacy in all Ecclesiastical causes) in Henry .5. Lotharius and Conradus, Emperors, hath proved your purpose no deal at all, namely Henry .5. resigning up all such pretenced right to pope Calixtus the .2. But in all these matters, how beastly you have belied the stories, I have I trust, sufficiently declared. Cap. 18. Fredrick Barbarossa speaketh no word for your barbarous paradox: he obeyed no less than other Emperors the See of Rome, yea and at the last submitted himself to the Pope, whom before he persecuted, not as true Pope, but as he thought, an intruded Pope. He never made question whether he ought to obey the See Apostolic, or no, but only he doubted who was the true elected Pope, and took part with the worst side. The question now in our days is far unlike: And so are your proofs M. Horn far and extreme wide from the purpose in hand. Now for matters of our own Country, Cap. 19 and for Ecclesiastical government practised therein, you are so overtaken as in no Country more. It hath well appeared, by that I have at large said, and proved, that long and many years before the Conquest (at which time you only begin your course) as well in Brytannie before the Saxons coming, as in England (after of them it was so called) the Pope's Primacy was clearly confessed and practised, even as it is at this day among the Catholics every where. As for the government of William the Conqueror, of William Rufus his son, and of king Henry the first, it hath been proved so far unlike to that which you pretend of right to appertain to the Crown of England, yea to all princes whatsoever, that the Pope's Supreme government in spiritual matters, is by their examples, yea even by the testimony of your own Authors, so expressly proved, and so strongly established, that a man may well wonder, what wit, honesty or discretion you had, ones to touch the remembrance of them for proof of so bad a cause. Your patched adiuncte of the kings of Hungary, hath appeared a great untruth on your part, and nothing for your purpose: except lies can prove your purpose. That which followeth of the Armenians and of the Aethyopians, Cap. 20. proveth also most evidently the Pope's Supremacy in those Countries: but proveth no whit your singular paradoxical primacy. Verily so singular, that in no one part of the universal world it can be found. The doings of King Stephen and king Henry the .2. Cap. 21. have proved the pope's Supremacy in our Country, but that kind of Supremacy as you imagine, they make no proof of in the world. The martyrdom of. S. Thomas by the way also is defended against your and M. Foxes lewd lying about that matter. Cap. 22. Henry the .6. Philip, and Otho the .4. Emperors of Rome, have been no fit examples for the like government now in England: and your silly arguments in that behalf have been to to childish and feeble. Cap. 23. Your proofs of king Richard the first, and of king john have appeared mere ridiculous. Only by occasion thereof, the lewd lying of M. Fox hath been partly discovered, touching king john. Your matters of France about that time have proved the pope's primacy, not the Princes. Cap. 24. By the discourse of Friderike the .2. his doings, as your principal cause hath taken a great foil, so a main number of other your heresies, by your own Authors and your own Supreme head condemned, have given a great crack to all your Religion beside. Cap. 25. The time of king Henry the .3. condemneth altogether the primacy in your book defended, and pronounceth clearly for the Pope's Supremacy, by sundry and open practices, as Appeals to Rome, depositions of prelate's by the pope, making of Ecclesiastical laws by his Legate, and such other. And for your part in that place, you have uttered your great ignorance even in the latin tongue. Cap. 26. At that time also S. Lewis the French king agnized no less the pope's primacy in France: and therefore can be no fit example of such Supreme government, as by Oath M. Feckenham is required to swear unto. The like also appeareth by the state of Apulia and Sicilia in those days. As for king Edward the first, king of England, Cap. 27. the Pope's primacy in his time was so well agnized in the realm of England, that even in temporal matters his Authority took place. Your fond surmise of the Statute of Mortemayne, hath exemplified your lewd lying, and increased the number of your maniefolde untruths: It hath not exemplified your pretended primacy, neither any thing furthered you, for proof of your matter. Philip le Beau, as beau and fair as he was, Cap. 28. yet hath he been nor fair nor fit example for the Supremacy that so much ye seek for, and can not yet find. His doings have nothing derogated from the pope's Supremacy. But he, as his progenitors, lived and died in the obedience of the See Apostolic in all Spiritual and Ecclesiastical matters. Durandus your own Author hath clean overthrown you: and your great Council of Vienna, yea your own fair Philippe hath pronounced you an heretic. Lewis of Bavary, as much as you babble of him, Cap. 29. hath nothing relieved you: Neither yet his poets petrarch and Dantes: All that great strife was about the pope's temporal primacy, not of his spiritual superiorytie, which never yet king Christened denied, until these late days in our own Country, by the means of such Apostatas as you are. You have heard also in that place M. Horn by the enumeration of all such Emperors, Cap. 30. that notoriously have rebelled against the See Apostolic, what Gods judgement hath been over them, and to what evil ends they came through God's vengeance. Cap. 31. Philip of Valois, for all your Composuit rem sacerdotum, yet maketh he nothing for your purpose, but both in your own very matter he concluded against you, and otherwise with mere spiritual jurisdictions, he never intermeddled, nor claimed the use thereof from the Spiritual Magistrate. Your own Authors, and witnesses, Paulus Aemylius and Petrus Bertrandus have deposed, against you, and your own king Philippe hath condemned you. Cap. 32. &. 34. King Edward the .3. and Richard the .2. of England, for all that you report of them, out of Nauclere and Polidore, have nothwithstandinge pronounced clearly for the Pope's Primacy: and declared withal both you and your fellows, to be no true members of the Church, that they lived in, but to be plain Apostatas and schismatics from the same. Cap. 33.35.36. & 38. In like manner Charles the .4. Sigismunde, Friderike the .3. and Maximilian the first, all most Catholic Emperors have taken great wrong at your hands, being made to say and do, that which they never said ne did: Yea and for the which, if they lived again, they would order you, as they did the Hussyttes, and Wicleffistes your progenitors in their days. Cap. 37. Aeneas Silvius and Cusanus, your two especial Authors have so pronounced against you, that no man I trow, except he had a face of horn, would for very shame have brought them into the open Court. But (as the proverb is) look how you have brewed, so must you bake. But what shall I say to your last witnesses, Cap. 39 &. 40. the Catholic bishops and Doctors of our own Country, to D. Quintinus of Paris, and Petrus of Ferraria, last of all to Philippus Decius the lawyer, and Brawghton our Countryman? what extreme uncourtesy, I may well say impudence, hath it been on your part, so violently and desperately to draw them to the bar, where you were right sure, to be condemned by their verdict, but that you thought you might frame their tales for them, and that no man would comptrol your extreme lying, of the which in my Preface I will say more? Thus you have it truly and shortly repeated unto you M. Horn, both what you have not done, and what I have done. I require you before all the world (if you intend to Reply,) to answer to every particular as I have done, and so to prove yourself an honest man. THE FOURTH BOOK: CONTAINING A FULL CONFUTATION OF M. horns answers, made to M. Fekenhams Reasons, for not taking the Oath of the supremacy. The .153. Division. pag. 91. b. M. Fekenham. The second point. The second chief point is, that I must upon a book oath, not only testify, but also declare in my conscience, that the Queen's Highness, is the only Supreme governor of this realm, aswell in all Spiritual or Ecclesiastical things or causes, as Temporal. But upon a book oath to make any such declaration in conscience, it may not possible be without perjury, before that a man's conscience be persuaded thereunto: therefore (my conscience being not as yet persuaded thereunto) I can not presently without most plain and manifest perjury, receive this Oath. M. Horn. As there is no difference in matter betwixt these two Propositions, I Testify in conscience, and I Declare in conscience, although to seem subtle, you (.511.) The .511. untruth. M. Fekenham maketh not this difference, but a far diverse, as shall appear. would have the simple conceive, by way of amplification much diversity: Even so this which ye call the Second chief point, varieth (.512.) The .512. untruth. It varieth very much. no whit in matter from the first, and therefore my former answer serveth to them both, if ye will needs make two in show, of that in very deed is but one. The first Chapter: Containing M. Fekenhams first reason, taken out of the Acts of the Apostles: And by the way of King Lucius. Stapleton. HITHERTO hath M. Horn, twenty full leaves and more enlarged his proofs touching the confirmation of his new ecclesiastical superiority. Hitherto he hath assayed with all force to beat down to the ground the Pope's Primacy, which yet notwithstanding all this terrible assault standeth as strong and as sure as ever it did before. Yea I trust stronger and surer withal those, that but indifferently have perused and weighed our two former labours. Now then an other while M. Horn will play the lustily defendant: M. Horn now beginneth to play the defendants part. wherein he seemeth to make as light of all M. Fekenhans arguments, and to take them to be of no more strength than is the weight of a feather. But seeing he hath already taken so many foils, and so many wounds, and seemeth with his own weapons, to have by rash hardiness well beaten himself, in setting upon his adversary: hard will it be for him, to bear of such blows, as his adversary will bestow upon him. Neither think good reader, that he shall ever soil other men's reasons that can not sound or soothly confirm his own. Yet let us try how he will shift for himself. And now see, how even at the first entrance, he playeth fowl play and wrangleth. For M. Fekenham doth not make difference betwixt to testify in conscience, and to declare in conscience, as Master Horn sayeth, he doth: but betwixt to take an oath that the Queen's Majesty is supreme Head in all causes, and to declare the same in conscience, which are two things. For a man may and many do (the more pity) take an oath for fear love, or reward, quite contrary to their conscience. And that we need not to seek far for an example, even in this matter of Supremacy, which we now are in hand withal. Though therefore a man may be persuaded as many (the more pity) are, through pretence of obedience, through fear of displeasure, or through the love of worldly promotions, riches, or pleasure, to take the oath: yet to declare the same in conscience no man can possibly (as Master Fekenham most truly reasoneth) without manifest perjury, except his conscience be persuaded thereunto. Now to persuade the conscience, requireth either a sudden revelation, or miraculous inspiration from God (which is not to be presumed without some evident sign thereof) or else a tract of time, to be instructed, informed and taught that which we never learned before. M. Fekenham therefore and all such as fear God, who have learned in the gospel to forsake father and mother, wife and children, goods and lands and all that in this world is dear, for Christ's sake, that is, for every truth concerning Christian Religion, such I say neither being inspired from God by sudden revelation, neither by any of your preachings, or writings being yet informed or instructed, can not possibly though a thousand acts of parliament should command it, declare in their conscience, declare I say in their very conscience and heart thought, that they believe verily such supreme government in the Prince, as the act expresseth and intendeth. Men may be persuaded to take the oath, which is an external fact, by external respects of force, fear, or frailty: but persuaded to declare the oath in his conscience, no man can be without an internal persuasion of heart and mind: Contrary to this internal persuasion and consent (which no power of Princes, no force of acts, no law or statut worldly can ever make) who so ever declareth externally by book oath, and word of mouth, that he so thinketh, he incurreth manifestly the horrible crime of perjury, and that of double perjury: which God will never suffer unrevenged without hearty repentance. To this most strong and invincible reason, M. Horn answereth not a word, but maketh his Reader believe that M. Fekenham putteth a difference between testifying in conscience, and declaring in conscience. Which he doth not, but thus. Between testifying by book oath, and declaring in conscience, he putteth a true difference, as we have said largely. Now how well M. Horn hath pleaded to persuade M. Fekenhams conscience, thou seest good Reader, if thou have diligently read and conferred his proofs, and our confutation. I doubt not, but many Catholic men will be persuaded (in conscience at least) never to take the oath, which you so singularly contrary to all Christendom beside, do defend. M. Fekenham. And for the persuasion of my conscience in this matter, I shall again join this issue with your L. That if your L. or any other learned man of this whole Realm, shallbe able to prove, that our Saviour Christ in his Ghospel and Testament, did commit the supreme government of all spiritual and ecclesiastical causes in his Church, not unto his Apostles, being Bishops and Priests, but to Emperors and Empresses, Kings and Queens, being for the whole time of Christ's abode here upon the earth, idolaters and Infideles, and so continued for the space of .300. years after the ascension of Christ: Constantine the first Emperor that did ioign his sword to the maintenance of God his word. Act. 2. Constantine the Emperor being the very first Christian King, that we read of: when your L. shallbe able to prove this, either by sentence or half sentence, word or half word of Christ's Ghospel and last Testament: Then I shall yield in this second point, and with most humble thanks, think myself well satisfied in conscience. And when your L. shallbe able to prove, that these words spoken of the Apostle Paul at Miletum, unto the Bishops of Ephesus: Attendite vobis & universo gregi, in quo posuit vos Spiritus Sanctus Episcopos regere Ecclesiam Dei, quam acquisivit sanguine suo: Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and unto the whole flock of Christ, whereof the holy Ghost hath appointed or made you Bishops, to govern and rule the Church of God, which he hath purchased with his blood. When your L. shallbe able to prove, that these words do not make full and perfect declaration, that the holy Ghost had so appointed all spiritual government of Christ's flock unto Bishops and Priests: But that kings, Queens or princes may have some part of spiritual government with them, or rather take the supremacy and chief part of spiritual government from them: I shall then yield, and think myself in conscience well satisfied, touching the saying of S. Paul. M. Horn. The .154. Division. pag. 9 b. That our Saviour Christ hath committed, the Supreme government in all Spiritual or Ecclesiastical causes, to the Magistrates and Princes, is already proved, by perfect words add whole (.513.) The .513. Untruth. Not one sentence hath been brought to prove that. sentences of Christ's Gospel, and last Testament: and therefore if your stay hitherto, hath been of conscience unpersuaded through want of knowledge, and not of perverse opinion, maintained with the vain desire of glory and reputation, you must needs yield, and be well satisfied in conscience. You avouch this (.514.) The .514. Untruth. M. Fekanhan avoucheth it not for such, as it shall appear. Argument as invincible. The Emperors and Empresses, Kings, and Queens, were for the whole time of Christ's abode here upon the earth, idolaters, and infidels, and so continued by the space of .300. years after the Ascension of Christ: Constantinus the Emperor being the very first Christian King that we read of: Ergo, our Saviour Christ did not commit the Supreme government in Spiritual or Ecclesiastical causes to Emperors, Kings, and Princes. This Argument holdeth good, neither in matter, nor yet in form. There was in the time of Christ's abode here upon earth, if we may believe Eusebius, and Nicephorus the Ecclesiastical historians, a King in Edessa, whose name was Agbarus. This King believed in Christ, as Eusebius reporteth, although as yet weakelie. In his Epistle which he written unto Christ, he saluteth Christ, to be jesus the good Saviour: he thinketh by the miraculous works which he hath heard done by Christ, that he is either God himself, or else God's son: and he offereth unto Christ such fruits of thankfulness, as so young and tender a faith might for the time, bring forth. And Christ in his rescript unto Agbarus, affirmeth that he was no infidel, or idolater, saying: Beatus es quòd in me credidisti, cùm non videris me: Agbare thou art blessed, because thou hast believed in me, when thou hast not seen me. Besides this your own self, have affirmed oftentimes, and so doth your * A Protestanticall slander. Popissh tales declare, that the three wise men, that came forth of the East, to worsship the new borne King of the jews, were Kings, and lie buried in the great doom at Collain, as the Colonists make men to believe, called yet amongst the vulgar Papists, the three Kings of Collain. If there be any credit to be given to the narration of Eusebius and Nicephorus touching Agbarus King of Edessa, and to the commonly received opinion of your Popissh church, concerning the three Kings of Colain, these four, were Kings in the time of Christ's abode here in earth, and yet not idolaters nor infidels, all the whole time of Christ's abode here, but faithful woorsshippers of Christ: Whereby the former part of the matter in the Antecedent of your Argument is disproved. Neither is that true, which you put in the second part, that the Emperors and Kings continued idolaters for the space of .300. years after Christ's Ascension: For although for the most part, during that space, they were such, yet was there in that time some Godly Princes that were otherwise given. Li. 6. c. 34 Eusebius in his Ecclesiastical History, maketh mention of one Philippus, a most Christian Emperor, of whom, and his son also, being Emperor with him, Abbas Vrspurgensis witnesseth, that they were the first of all the Roman Emperors, that became Christians, who also declared by their (.515.) The 515. untruth. In dissembling what deeds and works those were. Li. 1. de vit. Const. deeds and works (as Abbas saith) that they had in them the fear of God, and the most perfect Christian faith. Constantinus also the Emperor, Father to Constantine the great, did most diligently of all others, seek after God's favour, as Eusebius writeth of him. He did provide by his government, that his subjects did not only enjoy great peace and quietness, but also a pleasant conversation in holiness and devotion towards God: idolaters and dissemblers in Religion, he banished out of his Court: and such as confessed God's truth, he retained and iugded most worthy to be about an Emperor, commanding such to have the guard, both of his person and dominion. He served and worshipped the only true God. He condemned the multitude of Gods that the wicked had. He fortified his house with the prayers of holy and faithful men, and he did so consecrate his Court and Palace, unto the service of God, that his household company, was a congregation or Church of God within his palace, having Gods ministers, and what soever is requisite for a Christian congregation. Polidorus in his History of England, Lib. 2. affirmeth also of this Emperor, that he studied above all other things to increase the Christian Religion, who after his death was reckoned in the number of saints. To these few add Lucius a king of our own country, who although he was not in might comparable to Constantine the mighty Emperor, yet in zeal towards God, in abolishing idolatry and false religion, in winning and drawing his subjects by all means to the Christian faith, in maintaining and defending the sincere Christianity to the uttermost of his power, he was equal with Constantine, and in this point did excel him, that he long before Constantine broke the Ice, gave the onset, and shaped a pattern for Constantine to follow, whereby to work that in other parts, which he had achieved within his own dominion. This noble king, of very love to true Religion (.516.) The 516: untruth. Polidorus text vilely mangled, as shall appear. as Polidore testified of him, Procured himself and his subjects to be baptized, caused his nation to be the first of all other provinces, that received the Gospel publicly, did draw his people to the knowledge of the true God, banished at ones all manner of profane worshipping of Gods, and commanded it to be left. Converted the temples of the idolaters, to be Churches for the Christians. And to be short, he employed and did bestow all his service and power most willingly to the furtherance and increase of the Christian Religion, which he planted most sincerely throughout his country: and so left it at his death, almost an hundredth years before Constantine was Emperor: and therefore untruly said of you, that Constantine was the very first Christian king, that joined his sword to the maintenance of God's word. Scythe this king Lucius, so long before Constantine, did not only these things, that Polidore ascribeth unto him, but also did them of his own authority, without any (.517) The 517. untruth. of all other most notorious, and contrary to all historians whatsoever. knowledge or consent of the Pope. Nor Eleutherius then Bishop of Rome, to whom afterwards king Lucius did write, to see some of Caesar's and the Roman Laws, was any thing offended with the kings doings, but greatly (.518.) The .518. untruth. The epistle following reporteth no such thing. commending him therein, counseled him not to stand upon the Roman laws, which, saith the Pope, might be reprehended: but as he began without them, so to go on, and draw Laws (.519.) The .519. untruth. No such thing in the pope's pretenced letters. alonely out of the Scripture, which afterwards more at large, the Saxon kings, as, (520.) The .520. untruth. King june, never drew out such laws. june and Aluredus did. The epistle of Pope Eleutherius to king Lucius is as followeth, Petistis à nobis etc. You have desired of us, that the Roman Laws, and the Laws of Caesar, might be sent over to you, the which ye would have used in (your) kingdom of Brytanny. We may at all times reprove the Roman Laws, and the Laws of Caesar, the law of God we can not. For ye have received of late (by the divine mercy) in your kingdom of Britanny, the Law and faith of Christ. Ye have with you in (your) kingdom, both the old and new testament: take out of them the Law (by the grace of God) through the council of your kingdom, and by it (through God's sufferance) shall ye rule (your) kingdom of Brittany, for you are the Vicar of God in (your) kingdom, according to the Prophet King: The earth is the Lords, and all that therein is, the compass of the world, and they that dwell therein. And again, according to the Prophet king: Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity, wherefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows. And again according to the Prophet King: give the King thy judgement O God, and thy righteousness unto the kings Son. For it is not: give the judgement and righteousness of Caesar, for the Christian nations and people of (your) kingdom, are the kings sons, which dwell and consist in your kingdom, under your protection and peace, according to the Gospel, even as the hen gathereth together her chickens under her wings. The nations indeed of the kingdom of Britain, and people are yours, and whom being divided, you ought to gather together, to concord and peace, and to the faith, and to the Law of Christ, and to the holy Church, to revoke, cherish, maintain protect, rule, and always defend them, both from the injurious persons and malicious, and from his enemies. Woe be to the kingdom whose King is a child, and whose Princes banquet early, a King I name not for his small and tender age, but for folly and wickedness, and madness, according to the Prophet King: blood thirsty and deceitful men, shall not live out half their days. By banqueting, we understand gluttony, through gluttony riotousness, through riotousness all filthy and evil things, according to King Solomon: wisdom shall not enter into a froward soul, nor dwell in the body, that is subdued unto sin. A king is named of ruling, and not of a kingdom, so long as thou rulest well, thou shalt be king, which unless thou do, the name of a King shall not consist in thee, and thou shalt lose the name of a King, which God forbidden. Almighty God give unto you, so to rule your kingdom of Brittany, that ye may reign with him for ever, whose Vicar ye are in the kingdom aforesaid. Who with the Father etc. Stapleton. M Fekenham will now show three causes, Three causes that stays M. Fekenham, frō● taking the Oath. why he can not be persuaded in conscience to take the oath. The first is, for that Christ appointed to his Apostles and their successors being bishops and priests, and supremacy of spiritual government, and not to Princes, being in Christ's time, and so continuing idolaters and infidels, to the time of Constantin the great. He proveth his assertion by S. Paul: The first. Attendite vobis & universo gregi, in quo posuit vos spiritus sanctus episcopos regere ecclesiam Dei, quam acquisivit sanguine su●. speaking thus to the clergy. Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and unto the whole flock of Christ, whereof the holy ghost hath appointed or made you bishops, to govern and rule the church of God, which he had purchased with his own blood. Here again M. Horn wrangleth with M. Feckenham, and wresteth his saying, yea and belieth him to, as though he should avouch as an invincible argument, that which he speaketh of the infidel Princes: which is not his principal argument, but incidently brought in, the pith of the argument resting in the authority of S. Paul before specified. And therefore although Abgarus with the three Magi, that came to honour Christ's birth, with the Emperor Philippus, and king Lucius were Christened, yet is M. Fekenhans argument framed upon the authority of S. Paul's words little acrased or feebled: M. Horn imagineth that to be M. Fekenhams principal argument that is not. unless M. Horn can prove (which he doth not, nor can not) that these, and other Christian princes before Constantine had the supremacy of all causes ecclesiastical. For the kind and manner of their government in spiritual matters M. Horn allegeth nothing: and to say the truth nothing can be alleged. And very little also will be found for any matter ecclesiastical, that may seem to touch their persons. And yet that little that we find in stories maketh altogether, aswell against some other part of M. Horns new religion as against this new Supremacy. Christ's Image sent to Abgarus. As Christ's Image printed in a linen cloth, by Christ's own hand and sent to this Abgarus: by the which many years afterward the City of Edessa was miraculously preserved being besieged by Chosroes the king of the Persians. Niceph. l,. 17. c. 16 Which Image also was afterward brought to Constantinople with much reverence and honour, and thereby many great miracles wrought, as the Emperor of Constantinople Constantine doth write, Vide Metaphrast. who was present when the Image was brought thither. Of the first Christian Emperor. Philip. That little also that we have recorded, in stories of the Emperor Philip and his son, maketh altogether against your new religion, and especially against your new primacy: which is the matter that presently we have to deal withal. Show your Reader, I beseech you, M. Horn, what was that wherein by their works and deeds they declared (as you say) that they had in them the fear of God, and the most Christian faith. How corruptly and wretchedly M. Horn handleth the story of th'emperor Philip. Come on good M. Horn, and declare us this. Surely, good Reader, there was never bear that came to the stake with worse will, than Master Horn will come nigh this point. For if he come once nigh to it, he shall forthwith declare himself, void and empty of the Catholic faith, for the denying of the Popes and clergies Supremacy (well to be proved even by this story) and void also of all fear of God, for the wretched hewing and mangling of his Author, Euseb. lib. 6. cap. 25. histor. ecclesiast. Abbas Vrspergen. and for leaving out that, for the which they are commended, for their faith and fear of God. The cause then, why Eusebius, and after him Vrspurgensis, so writeth, is, for that this Philip and his son, being in the Church upon Easter eve, and minding to be present at the Sacrifice, and to communicate: Fabian the Pope would not suffer them unless they would first confess their faults, and stand among the penitents. Whereunto they obeyed most gladly, declaring (even as M. Horn writeth) by their deeds and works that they had in them the fear of God, and the most perfect Christian faith. Where is now in you M. Horn the fear of God? Yea where is your Christian faith? Besides confession of sins and a place of penitentes, this story hath also a testimony of the sacrifice of the Church, and of the Popes and Clergies supremacy over the Prince, The cause that moved M. Horn so to handle this story which you so stoutly deny, making the Prince Supreme in all causes without exception. And therefore without all faith, and fear of God, ye have stolen away all this, and conveyed it from the sight of your Reader, into your dark Cacus den. The like pageant, yea and exceedingly much worse, play you with the story of our most noble, and first Christian King Lucius. Beda li. 1. eccles. hist, ca 4. misit ad eum Lucius Britamnorun Rex epistolam obsecrans, ut per eius mandatum efficeretur christianus. Idem prorsus Damasus in Pontificali. For here ye do not only by a sly sluttish silence dissemble the doings of Pope Eleutherius, as ye did before of Pope Fabian, but impudentelye avouch, that King Lucius did all those things mentioned by Polidore, of which the Christening of his whole Nation is the chief, and so consequently, that he was Christened without any knowledge or consent of Pope Eleutherius. Bring forth, M. Horn, but one Author in Greek, Latin, or English, good or bad new or old, Catholic or Heretic, (unless perchance you may show some one of your late brethren, that writ so, and yet after long search I can find none such) that writeth as ye writ: and then am I content though this be of all other a most evident, and a notoriouselie, to remit it you at our next reckoning, which yet for the better keeping of your account, I must not now let pass unscored. I never before read it, no I never read any chronicler new or old, Galf. Monumetens. Epistolas Eleuthe●io Papae direxi●, petens ut ab eo christianitatem reciperet. Li. 1. ca 4. Galfr. Monum. etc. Asse●ius Meveuens. in annalibus Angl. unless it be some of your late brethren, or such Catholics as write but very compendiously, and as it were abridgmentes of things, which doth not expressly write that king Lucius sent to Rome to Pope Eleutherius, that he might be by his advice and authority Christened: but the negative thereof I never as I say read, nor shall I trow find any so mad, and so malicious a writer, as ye are, to write it again. I refer you for our own countrymen, to Beda. Who writeth, that king Lucius wrote an epistle to pope Eleutherius, that by his commandment he might be christened. I refer you, to our british chronicler, translated by Geffrie of Monmoth: and to one other of our own country, that wrote about .700. years sithence in like effect. I refer me to Henry of Hungtington, to William of Malmesbury, to Alphredus Beverlacensis, to johannes Londonensis, to Polychronicon, to the chronicles of England, Cent. 1. de script. Brit. Eluanun & Meduinun ad Eleutherium Ro. Pontificem misit, cum quibus ille suos legatos remisit Fugatium ac Damianus, qui novis ritib. ac selenni episcoporum dispositione eam formarent Ecclesiam. Grafton in the abridgement of the chronicles of England. Naucler. gener. 6. Sabel. enead. 7. li. 5. Io. Laz. in epit. hist. univers Ado in Chro. Tom. 1. Concil: pag. 191. edit. vlt. that M. Fox calleth Caxtons chronicles. And to a number of other of our own country, which partly I have seen, partly I have not seen. And to come to our own time, to Bale your chief antiquary: and to Grafton writing thus. This Lucy sent loving letters to Eleutherius then Bishop of Rome, desiring him to send some devout and learned man, by whose instruction both he and his people might be taught the faith and religion of Christ. It were now superfluous, to overlade my answer or the Reader, with the external and Latin writers: as Nauclerus, Sabellicus, Platina, johannes Laziardus, Abbas Vrspergensis, Ado, but especially Damasus in vita Eleutherij: and a number of the like, which agree with our own chronicles. Some perchance will think, that Master Horn would never be so impudent, as to gainsay all these writers and chroniclers, and that as he fetcheth all his narration touching Lucius out of Polidorus: so he hath at the least for this point Polidorus on his side. If it were so, though it were a foolish and a fond shift, yet were it somewhat colourable, to shift from himself, so notable a lie. But Polidorus writeth conformably to all other. And as it is true that Master Horn borroweth all the residue of Polidorus: so most wretchedly he dismembreth from the residue of Polidorus narration, Polidorus lib. 2. Iste anno salutis humanae 182. regni vero 13. verae religionis amore ductus cum Eleutherio Romano Pontifice egit, ut se ac suos ad Christianorum numerum coelesti sonte perfusos adiungeret. Missi sunt eò Fugatius ac Damianus viri pietate singulari hij regem cum tota domo populoque universo baptisarunt, sublatoque etc. all that toucheth Pope Eleutherius. Lucius (sayeth Polidore) in the year of our Lord .182. and the year of his reign .13. of very true love to religion, sent letters to Eleutherius the Pope to procure that he and his people might be made Christians. Fugatius and Damianus men of singular virtue were sent thither: which did baptize the king with all his court, and people. All this hath M. Horn broken and cut of from the middle of the sentence, and thereby hath mangled and torn the same as miserably, as ever did Medea her child, for that he well saw, it made notably for the Pope's primacy. Which you shall well perceive, if you do deaplye consider the cause, that moved the King to send so far as to Rome. See good reader the sincere and honest dealing of M. Horn. A consideration of the cause that moved Lucius to send to Rome. A man would at the first sight think the doings of the king very strange, namely considering that about this time lived in France the great clerk and Bishop Ireneus with many other famous men, whose aid he might have craved for his necessary instruction in the Christian faith. Neither did he lack at home, of his own subjects that could well (as it seemeth) have served his turn. And yet no doubt, this good king had a good and substantial ground for his doings. It is then to be considered, that anon after the death of Christ and so ever after until Lucius time, there were among the Christians, a number of heretics, which as they bore the name of Christians, so by their heresies they lost the benefit of their Christendom: as the Simonians (the scholars of Simon Magus) Menandrians, the Saturninians, the Basilidians, the Nicolaites, the heretics called Gnostici, for the excellent knowledge they pretended to have above other men: the Cherinthians, the Cerdonians, the Phrygians, the montanists, and Marcionites with diverse other. Each sect contending their own false faith to be the true, Niceph. li. 4. c. 19 and the only Christian faith: yea many of them were taken for Prophets, as Montanus and others. Many suffered death for Christ with those that were catholic, and that with great patience. Among them was a priest called Metrodorus a Marcionite. Idem li. 3. cap. 36. Of the which sect even in Lucius time, a great number suffered in the persecution raised against the Christians. Whereof the sect craked very much, Euseb. li. 5. cap. 16. and made thereof a great argument, that they were in the true faith: and a much better argument, then doth Master Fox for his mad martyrs, that died most wilfully for plain and open heresy. Lucius then understanding of this, had good cause to be careful by whom he received his Christendom, lest chancing upon some false shrew, and taking him for his instructor, he might rather change one error, for an other, than put it clean away: and for an idolater become a false Christian. The want of this good choice of instructors, was the cause why Valens the Emperor became an Arrian and such an horrible bloodsucker of the catholics. This also was the cause that the Goths and Vandals, were Arrians. Who most cruelly afflicted and martyred thousands of Christians. What was then the surest way for Lucius to avoid this danger? Dowbtles the very same that he took, that is, to send to the Church of Rome, which never erred in faith, and which was the principal Church, and with the which all other Churches must agree, by reason of the chief principality of that Church, as Ireneus that blessed bishop and Martyr wrote, even in the time of this Lucius? This principality I say hath so troubled M. Horn, that he durst not truly report his own author, yea so amazed him, that falling suddenly in a rage, hath framed us such an open and malicious lie, that who so ever will hereafter trust him, is well worthy to be beguiled. And will ye, yet see an other as great a madness of this man? As he most shamefully denieth these doings of Lucius with Pope Eleutherius, against the uniform consent of all historiographers, so hath he found letters of Lucius, with Eleutherius answer, Concerning Pope Eleutherius letters to king Lucius. whereof no one of all the foresaid chroniclers maketh mention, nor any other, that I can yet learn of, containing matter altogether unprobable and unlikely, and therefore meet, after this fowrtene hundred years now at length to come out of Trophonius and Cacus blind den, and be set in M horns book as a notable matter of antiquity to furnish and beautify his new supremacy withal. He layeth us forth an epistle of Eleutherius: but out of what author he hath taken it, or in what library we shall find it, he will not tell us. The best Author, I ween, that he can allege for it, will be some records of parchment in the Guild Halle. But then M. jewel will answer you for me, jewel. pag 86. in his reply. M. Horn: A calves skin is no sufficient warrant of truth. Lies have been written in letters of gold. Well, make the best of it, and justify it as you may. As our cause can take no prejudice by it: So you shall take much shame by it, if not for the matter itself, yet at the least for three or four pretty lies that you adjoin, to company this notable Epistle. For first, there was never any Saxon king that made any notable Laws called june. There was one called Inas, and he in deed with king Aluredus or Alphredus, ordained many Laws, but that they should be such Scripture laws as Master Horn saith, drawn alonely out of the Scripture, it is Master Horns vain dream. And in case they had so great regard to scripture only, and measured and squared their laws and doings by scripture, belike M. Horn will begin to have some better liking of Religious men, and of the Pope's primacy also. For it was this king Inas, that * Nauclerus putat hunc fuisse Edeluulphum Alphredi patrem. Generate. 29. pag. 61. Alibi vocat eum Adulphun. Gener. 41, pag. 280 Henricus Hunting Asserius Menevens. Pol. li. 4. Pag. 89. gave the Peter pence first to Rome, and renouncing his Realm went to Rome and professed himself a Monk. Both which things undoubtedly, by M. Horn, he must needs find in Scripture. It is this Alphredus, that was anointed and crowned King at Rome, as we have told before, and therefore is called the Pope's son adoptive. Now whereas ye bring this Epistle to prove, that the king was christened without the Pope's consent, and that the Pope was nothing offended with the kings doings, but greatly commended him therein: neither the one nor the other, can be proved by this Epistle. This is a meet and convenient gloze for such a worthy epistle: In the which also there is no probability in the world. For as other Countries, that were subdued by the Romans, especially such as were reduced into a form of a Province, and had their rulers and lieutenants from Rome (as Britain had) received the Roman and Civil Law, so is it to be thought of Britain. Lib. 2. Dedit leges et Romana quae dam instituta utendae introduxit. Vide Cornel. tacit. in vitae Agricolae. And Polidorus writeth, that Agricola (th'Emperor Vespasians deputy) gave to the Britain's certain Roman laws and orders, to be used and practised by them. Neither is it likely, but that before this time, there was some copy of the Roman laws in Britain, the young Noble men of the Realm being much given to be eloquent in the Roman tongue, wherein Agricola did prefer them before the Galls or French men, and being brought up in Rome especially Coilus, king Lucius father spending all his youth there: So that Lucius had no need to send to Pope Eleutherius for Caesar's laws. And if he had need, it is more likely he would have sent to some other then to Eleutherius, who with other blessed Popes at that time, meddled (God wots) little with Caesar's Civil laws, or with any other laws of Pagan Princes. But of all other things, Eleutherus answer is most unlikely. For who would think him so unwise and so unskilful, that he would appoint the old and the new Testament only as sufficient to govern and rule a common wealth by? Which thing was never yet practised in any Christian country, nor can possibly be practised: the old law, being all in a manner abolished, and the new Testament consisting of such principles of the Christian faith as be immutable, and not variable: whereas politic laws have been, are, and ever shallbe and so must be, according to many incidents alterable and variable. This epistle then, be it true, or be it a counterfeit doth as yet serve M. Horn to no great purpose: but for any thing we have brought out of this Epistle, M. Horn perchance will not himself greatly pass of it. There is an other privy treasure hidden here, for the which, I suppose this Epistle is chief brought forth, and that is to prove even by the Pope Eleutherius himself, How and wherein King Lucius was God's Vicar. that the King and not the Pope is the supreme head in all causes Ecclesiastical. For Eleutherius saith, that Lucius was Vicar of God in his Kingdom. This, this is the mark that M. Horn all this while hath shot at: this is the cause, that this Epistle, that hath so many hundred years lain dead, is now revived by M. Horn. Yea for this clause, this Epistle was solemnly alleged in open parliament against the Pope's Primacy. And seeing that your new Divinity now, is nothing but English and Parliament Divinity: I will remit you once again, M. Horn, to your own Braughton, who useth the same words. Which must needs be (as by him appeareth) taken, that the King is God's Vicar in his Kingdom, that is, in the temporal administration of Civil, and not for Spiritual matters. And therefore, this Epistle doth as well serve M. Horn to prove the Prince's Primacy by, In his Reply fol. 19 This Epistle, be it a true or a false epistle, neither maketh for M. Horn nor for M. jewel as it serveth M. jewel to prove that the service must be in the English tongue: which is as true as that other where he saith, that Lucius sent to Rome to Eleutherius, for his advice touching the ordering of his Church. Wherein if M. jewel mean, that he sent to Rome before he was Christened, then have ye one witness more against you. But if he meaneth, as it seemeth he doth, by his discourse of these letters that you specify, part whereof he also reciteth and among other things, that the King is God's Vicar: then is he also deceived. For in these letters king Lucius doth not ask his advise in any Church matters, but requireth only to have Caesar's laws sent him, appeareth by the tenor and purport of the said Epistle. So that I perceive, this Epistle is an Instrument to set forth the new Ghospel many ways: but for such a Ghospel such a proof is very meet. We will therefore now pass forth to the residue of your answer, where you go about to disprove M. Fekenham, saying that Constantine the great was the first Christian king. The force and weight of his argument (as I said) doth not stand upon this, Concerning M. Fekenhans saying that Constantin the great was the first Christian king. whether there were any Christian kings before Constantinus the great. This is but a by matter, and yet ye dwell upon it, and handle the matter seriously, as though all lay in the dust, if there were any king Christened before Constantine. But herein ye do but trifle with M. Fekenham: who saith not simply or absolutely that Constantin was the first Christian king, but the first that joined his sword to the maintenance of God's word: as in making sharp Laws against idolaters and heretics: and in making sharp war against Maxentius and Licinius, that persecuted the Christians, Niceph. li. 2. cap. 7. Mihi verò oppidum quoddam est modicum quidem, nec admodum celebre: utrique tamen nostrum per commodum. Tobiae. 4. Sicut beato job, insultabant reges. which things are not read of any king before him. Again if there were any other Christian princes, they were very few, and of small dominion and rule. As Abgarus, who seemeth by his own letters to Christ, to have been lord, but of one small and obscure town: As the .3. wise men that are called kings, to advance the honour of Christ's nativity, and are thought to have been either kings or Lords in Arabia minore. which may perchance be called kings, aswell as those were called in holy scripture, which did scorn and check holy job. If there were any of greater renown and dominion, as king Lucius, Philip th'emperor, Constantius, Constantinus father, yet because either they did not join their sword to the maintenance of God's word, or for that their successors were paynims and Infidels: as it chanced to the said Lucius and Philip, there is the less account made of them. How so ever it be, M. Feckenham ought not to be reprehended in this, Solus aevo universo regenitus imperator atque sacris initiatus est in Christo. Lib. 4. De vita Const. ex transl. joan. Portesijs. Lact. de falsa relig. cap. 1. Amb. de obitu Theodosij. Aug. ep. 50 having good authors that wrote so before him: namely Eusebius, Lactantius, and S. Ambrose, who all call Constantinus the first Emperor that from the beginning of the world was christened. Which thing belike they writ, for the causes, by us rehearsed, or some like. Yea he hath S. Augustin to confess so much as he did, as M. Horn himself will anon tell us. But yet see good reader the wise and politic handling of the matter by M. Horn. He goeth about to disprove M. Fekenham, for saying there were no Christian princes in Christ's time, and for his relief, bringeth me forth Abgarus and the three wise men, but so as he seemeth to take it, but for a fable. And therefore he saith, if we may believe Eusebius and Nicephorus: again, if there be any credit to be given to the popish Church concerning the .3. kings: and doth nothing understand, that the more he defaceth their kingdoms, the more he defaceth his own answer, and strengtheneth his adversaries argument. M Horn. The .155. Division. pag. 94. b. Thus it is made manifest, that both your argument faileth in truth of (.521.) The .521. untruth. It is true in matter, as hath been proved. matter, and you yourself were beguiled through ignorance, by (.522.) The 522. untruth, mere slanderous. Epist. 50. want of reading. But put the case that your antecedent were true, yet is it a faulty fallax made à dicto secundùm quid, ad simpliciter, and the consequent followeth not, for that there is more contained in the conclusion, than the antecedent doth comprehend, which is such an evil favoured form of argument, that young students in the schools would be ashamed thereof. The Donatists made the like objection against the catholic fathers, whereto S. Augustine maketh answer. The state of the Apostles time, is otherwise to be thought of, than this time, all things must be done in their time: In the Apostles time, this prophecy was yet in fulfilling: Psalm. 2. wherefore do the Heathen rage, and the people muse upon vain things? The kings of the earth set themselves, and the Princes consult together against the Lord and his Christ. As yet that was not in hand which is spoken a little after in the same psalm: and now ye kings understand, be learned ye judges on the earth, serve the Lord in fear, and joy in him with reverence. Therefore seeing that as yet in the Apostles time, kings served not the Lord, but still did devise vain things against God and his Christ, that all the foresayings of the Prophet might be fulfilled, than truly impieties could not be inhibited by princess' Laws, but rather be maintained. For such was the order of the times, that both the jews should kill the preachers of Christ, thinking to do God good service therein, as Christ had forspoken: and also the gentiles should rage's against the Christians, that the martyrs might win the victory through patience. But after that this began to be fulfilled which is written: Psalm. 71. And all the kings of the earth shall worship him, and all the nations shall serve him: what man, unless he be not well in his wits, will say that Kings ought not to have a special regard for the Church of Christ, and all manner godliness amongst their subjects? Stapleton. We have declared, that M. Fekenham his saying of Constantinus the great, and the first Christian king may be born in a right good sense, and also that he speaketh therein agreeable to most ancient and learned writers. And if he were deceived, as ye writ, by ignorance and want of reading (which is of your part a mere slanderous lie) the pith yet of his argument standing upon the saying of S. Paul, is nothing thereby blemished. M. Fekenhams argument falsely compared with the Donatists argument. And of all men you may worse lay ignorance to his charge, that have uttered in this very part and parcel of your answer not only so much gross ignorance, but so exceeding and cankered malice, especially in the story of king Lucius. And here also yet once again to compare M. Fekenham with the Donatists for framing an argument from the use and examples of the Apostles, and of the primitive Church: wherein beside your malice, you bewray your own unskilfulness. For this redoundeth altogether upon you, and your own fellows. For wherein resteth all your eloquence against the Catholic Church, but that it is not conformable now to Christ's, and the Apostles time, and to the primitive Church? Namely touching invocation of Saints, suffrages for the dead: touching adoration and elevation of the blessed Eucharistia, the mingling of water and wine, receiving under one kind, sole receiving, and a number of the like? Yea and before that any Prince would say or do for you, you could M. Horn with your fellows play the Donatists in deed, and inveigh against the temporalties of Bishops, against their lordly train and revenues, because forsooth the Apostles were poor, and used no such ioylyte. But now who more jolly then M. Horn himself, or who more lordly than your Lordships are? In his first reproof. Fol. 74. b. & 75 a Mark good reader that to reason from the order of the Apostles to our time, is now with M. Horn an ill favoured form of arguing. Again what is more usual with M. Nowell (a man, I trow, of a rare Spirit) then to make this time the time of the primitive Church: that we be the Pharisees, and they forsooth the Apostles. That now we may not prescribe with Antiquity, Traditions, or Consent of our Elders, against them, because the Scribes and Pharisees, prescribed so against Christ and his Apostles. What then? Is Luther their Messiah, and Calvin their Paul? But to return to our matter: Though already the catholics have sufficiently answered to all these reasons, yet now have we gotten at your hands an answer, for this and all the like: that to argue from the Apostles time, to our time, is a fallax à dicto secundum quid ad simpliciter: that it is an ill favoured form of argument, that young studientes in the schools would be ashamed of: and to be short, that it is a reason of the Donatists answered and confuted by S. Augustine. It is already M. Horn sufficiently by us declared, that the Donatists cause, and S. Augustine's answer to them hath no manner affinity with M. Fekenham his reason. They denied, that princes had any thing at all to do in matters of the Church, or in punishing those that break the Ecclesiastical laws. M. Fekenham denieth not, but that Princes may lawfully punish heretics by laws: He confesseth also, that Princes may well and commendably meddle as ministers, aiders, and as assisters by their temporal sword, for the furtherance and maintenance of Ecclesiastical matters, but not to rule and prescribe, as the chief governors of all causes Ecclesiastical: I must tell you again M. Horn: There is great difference between staring and stark blind. And as busy as ye are now again with the Donatists, ye lacked a little salt of discretion in alleging of this place of S. Augustine. For this confirmeth M. Fekenhams former saying, M. Fekenhams saying confirmed by M. Horns own allegation. that in Christ's and the Apostles time there were no Christian Princes. In the Apostles time, saith S. Augustine, as yourself report his words, Kings served not the Lord, but did devise vain things, against God and his Christ. And here might a man now, that would follow your vain and humour, encounter with S. Augustine, and object unto him, King Abgarus, and the three Kings, that came to honour Christ's nativity, and such other. But though they had been greater Kings than they were, and that there had been some few other lords or Kings to, that did serve Christ: yet would no wise man for the cause by me before rehearsed, quarrel with S. Augustine. For a general rule, is not by one exception or two, notably blemisshed or impaired. Such kind of phrases are to be found aswell otherwhere, Vt describeretur universus orbis. Luc. 1. Murmuravit omnis congregatio filiorum Israel. Exo. c. 16. as in holy scripture. As where it saith, that the whole world was described by the Emperor Augustus. And yet is it well known, that he had nothing to do, with a great part of the world. It is written also, that all the people of Israel did murmur: and yet all did not murmur. Such kind of phrases are verified of the greater, or the more notable part. M. Horn. The .156. Division. pag. 95. a. You frame an other reason upon S. Paul's words unto the bishops of Ephesus: whereby to prove, that all government in spiritual or ecclesiastical causes, belongeth to Bishops and Priests, and not to Princes, and Civil Magistrates, thus you argue: The holy ghost appointed all spiritual government of Christ's flock unto Bishops and Priests, as the words spoken by S. Paul, do make full and perfect declaration: Ergo, Kings, Queens, and Princes, may not claim or take upon them any part of Spiritual government, much less take the supremacy, and chief part of spiritual government from them. For answer, I deny this argument, for it is a naughty and deceitful (.523.) The .523. untruth. It is a good argument, no Sophistication at al. Sophistication, called, Fallacia aequivocationis. There is equivocation in this word (Priests) and so in these words to govern and rule the Church of God. This word Priest, hath divers significations which are to be observed: lest the simple readers be confirmed or brought into error through the equivocation therein. The Scripture speaketh of a priesthood after the order of Aaron: after which order you will not confess Apostles, and the Bishops their successors to be Priests, an other kind of Priesthood is, after the other of Melchisedech, Heb. 7. and Christ only without any successor in that priesthood, was the alone Priest of that order. The third kind is an holy and princely Priesthood, of the which order not only the Apostles and their true successors, but also Kings, Queens, Princes and all manner of faithful Christians are Priests. There is in common opinion amongst the Papists, a fourth kind, which is a massing and sacrificing priesthood: after which order, Christ's Apostles, and the true ministers of his Church were (524.) The .524. untruth. A plain heresy. never priests: for that order belongeth only to the Apostolical Clergy of the romish Antichrist. If your meaning therefore be, that Christ left any kind of government or rule of his Church to Bishops and Priests, after this popish order, your opinion is (.525.) The .525. untruth. It is a Catholic and and universal opinion of the Church. heretical, and your assertion utterly false. Therefore where I shall afterwards in my speaking call the ministers of Christ's Church, Priests, I give you to understand, that I do therein but follow the usual, and accustomed kind of speech which is (.526.) The .526. untruth. Notorious, as it shall appear out of S. Augustine. impropre although in long use. Likewise to govern and rule the Chureh of God: is of two kinds and sorts, the one is by the supreme authority and power of the (.527.) The .527. untruth. The power of the sword ruled the jews Synogoge, not Christ's Church. sword, to guide, care, provide, direct and aid God's Church, to further, maintain and setfoorth the true Religion, unity and quietness of God's Church: and to oversee, visit, reform, restrain, amend and correct all manner persons, with all manner errors, superstitions, heresies, schisms, abuses, offfences, contempts and enormities in or about God's Church. Which government and rule appertaineth only to Kings, Queens, and Princes, and not to the Apostles, Bishops and Priests: whereof S. Paul speaketh nothing at all in this sentence by you alleged to the Bishops of Ephesus. The other sort is to feed the flock of Christ with the Spiritual food of God's word, which is the (.528.) The .528. untruth. Not that only, but also to correct, to rebuke, and to reform. only rule and government that belongeth to the Apostles, Bishops and Ministers of Christ's Church, and of none other manner rule speaketh S. Paul to the bishops of Ephesus, which he maketh most plain, both by the express words of the sentence avouched, and also by the whole circumstance of the same place. The word that S. Paul useth, doth properly signify to feed, as the sheapeherd feedeth his sheep, and by a figurative speech to guide, govern or rule: and therefore if you would have dealt (529) The .529. untruth. He dealt plainly, and translated truly. plainly, and have uttered S. Paul's meaning according to his proper speech, where you say, To govern and rule, doubling the words as it were to amplify the matter, that the truth might less appear, you ought to have said, to feed the Church of God. for that is the Apostles (530) The 530. untruth. For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the Apostles word, signifieth as properly to rule as to feed. proper saying, and so the old translator of Chrysostom doth translate it upon the Epistle to the Ephesians, and also expounding this same place of the Acts of the Apostles, ut pascatis Ecclesiam, Cap. 4. Act. 24. to feed the Church. S. Peter making the like exhortation, to this of S. Paul, to the Bishops dispersed, useth that self same word, saying: Pascite, quantum in vobis est, gregem Christi: Feed so much as you may, the flock of Christ. Christ himself also teaching Peter, and all other Bishops, what manner of rule and government, joan. 21. as properly given them by God's word, they should have in the Church, doth express it, with the self same word, saying: Pasce agnos meos, feed my Lambs. To rule and govern the L. household faithfully and prudently, Math. 24. Christ expoundeth to be nothing else in general, than to give meat unto his family in due season. Neither did our saviour Christ give (.531.) The .531. untruth. For he gave in other places other power and authority: Namely in his last Supper, Luc. 22. and also after his Ascension by the holy Ghost instructing them and their successors for ever. joan. 14. &. 16. Math. 28. other power, authority or commission unto his Apostles, and so to all other Bishops as properly belonging and only to the Bishoply office, than this: As my Father sent me, so I send you, receive the holy ghost, whose sins ye remit, they are remitted, whose sins ye retain, they are retained, go therefore, and teach all nations, Baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Ghost: teaching them to observe all things, that I have commanded you. So that the Bishoply rule and government of God's Church, consists (.532.) The .532. untruth. It consisteth not in these .3. points only, but in many more: as hath been showed. in these three points, to feed the Church with God's word, to minister Christ's Sacraments, and to bind and lose: all which three parts, Christ comprehendeth under this one saying: to give meat to the Lords family in due season. And S. Paul in these words, to feed the Church of God. The circumstance of the sentence which you alleged forth of the Acts, doth also show in the example of Paul himself, who was inferior to none of the Apostles, and Church ministers in any point, that he claimed or took upon him none other rule or government, than (.533.) The .533. untruth. For S. Paul beside, excommunicated offenders, as. 1. Tim. 1. ordained bishops, as Tite and Timothee, made orders in the Church. 1. Cor. 21. & caet. of feeding God's Church with the spiritual food of the Gospel. He setteth forth the execution of his own office, and by that example moveth the Bishops of Ephesus to the like, saying: I have served the Lord with all humbleness of mind: I have left nothing undone, that might be profitable to you: but I have declared and taught you openly and privily the repentance and faith in God, and jesus Christ. I received an office of ministry from the Lord jesus, to testify the gospel of God's grace, and to preach the Kingdom of God. I have hidden nothing of God's council from you. Take heed therefore to yourselves, and to Christ's flock (as I have done) whereof the holy Ghost hath appointed you bishops (as he did me) to feed the Church of God (as you know and see that I have done). This that you call to govern and rule, was with Paul to * A● though humility and government could not stand together, and agree both in one person. serve with lowliness, to minister with watchfulness: to preach, teach and testify the Ghospel, and the kingdom of God publicly and privately, and to show, to the flock all the Council of God, touching their salvation, keeping nothing thereof from them. To govern the Church of God after this sort belongeth to the only office of Bishops and Church ministers, and not to Kings, Queens and Princes: who (.534.) The .534. untruth. for by ●ou they may take all upon them, ergo this also. may not, neither do, claim or take upon them, this kind of spiritual government and rule, or any part thereof with the bishops, neither do they take the supremacy and chief part of this spiritual government from the Church ministers. As contrary wise the Church ministers, ought not to claim and take upon them the supremacy of government, as the (.535.) The .535. untruth, mere slanderous. Papists of long time have done from Kings, Queens, and Princes. Stapleton. M. Horn hath hitherto (goodreader) proceeded altogether historically, aswell in bringing forth his poor silly proofs against M. Fekenham, as in his first answer to M. Fekenham, by the story of King Lucius and others: but now will he show you a copy of his high divinity, and of his great divine knowledge, in the soluting of theological arguments. M. Fekenham proveth by S. Paul, Concerning this word, Priest. that they are Bishops and Priests, and not the Princes that govern Christ's Church. Nay saith M. Horn here, this is a naughty, a double and a deceitful sophistication: in the word priest, and in the word to govern: and he is angry with M. Fekenham for the term of priests, and will needs have ministers placed for them. But how chanceth it M. Horn, that ye put not in also, for bishops, superintendents? Shall the inferior clergy change their papistical name, and will you reserve to yourself still the name of Bishops, because it is more lordelyke? It is a wonderful thing to consider the practice of these protestants: To make a way to their new divinity, they first began to alter the usual names, changing confession into knowledge, penance into repentance, Church into congregation, Image into idol, with many such like. So to make a way, to induce men to believe, that Order is no Sacrament, and that there is no sacrifice in the Church, they could not, nor can abide the name of priests. Tyndal was much troubled in the framing of some other word for it. First he translated for priests, seniors: but his folly being therein well espied, he translated afterward for seniors, elders. Which word (elder) doth no more signify a priest, than it signifieth an elderstycke. M. Horn though he be well contented with the word elders, as ye shall hereafter understand, yet here he will have them called Ministers: and giveth us plainly to understand, that though he use the unproper term of priests, yet he meaneth ministers, as though every Priest be not a Minister (although every Minister be not a priest) and so very often called in the holy scripture. Exod. 28. joelis. 1. Vlulate Ministri altaris. Heir. 33. Sacerdotes Ministri mei. As where it speaketh of those which do sacrifice in the clergy, it calleth them indifferently priests or ministers And therefore Moses saith, of the sons of Aaron that were priests: Quando appropinquant altari, ut ministrent in sanctuario. When they draw near to the altar to minister in the sanctuary. joel calleth the priests, ministers of the altars. In Hieremy God saith, that priests are his ministers. S. Paul saith, Omnis quidem sacerdos praesto est quotidie ministrans, & easden semper offerens hostias, Heb. 10. every priest is ready daily to minister, ever offering the same hosts. And in the new testament, where it is written, ministrantibus illis, & ieiunantibus, as they ministered to our Lord and fasted, Act. 13. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the said word, (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) may well be translated, as they made sacrifice: according to Erasmus his iudegment. If then ministers serve the altar aswell as priests, what hath M. Horn gained, by the shifting of the word priests into ministers? surely this is a wondered shifting gospel, that can not stand but by shifting: and that must needs shift away this word priest, which hath been usually frequented and continued, not only among us in England, sythence the time we were first christened, but among other nations, as Dutchmen, high Almains, Frenchmen, Italians, and Spaniards, as it appeareth unto them that be skilful in these tongues. But to call the Ministers of Christ's Church, by the name of Priests, is a kind of speech (saith M. Horn) impropre, though long in use: and for such he protesteth to use it, as oft as he useth the word, Priest, in that sense. The proper priesthods he avoucheth to be only three. Of Aaron: of Melchisedech: and of that other Order, which is common to all Christians, men and women. But o Lord, what a blind buzzard hath malice and pride made you M. Horn? Think you it an opinion among the common Papists only (as you say) to avouch a fourth kind of sacrificing priesthood? What think you then of S. Augustin that learned Father of Christ's Church? Was he a Papist to? Or was he one also of the Apostolical clergy of the Romish Antichrist? hearken I pray you what his judgement is herein. He saith, Augu lib. 20. de Civitate Dei cap. 10. that in the Apoc. 20. and in S. Peter (1. Pet. 2.) where the princely priesthood common to all Christian men is spoken of: Non utique de solis episcopis & presbyteris dictum est, qui propriè iam vocantur in Ecclesia sacerdotes, sed sicut oens etc. It is spoken not of Bishops and Priests alone, which now in the Church are properly called Priests: but as we call all (the faithful) Christians, because of the mystical ointment, so we call all the faithful Priests, because they are the members of one Priest, that is, Christ. Here you see M. Horn, that it is an opinion not only among the common Papists, but with S. Augustin also that there are yet in the Church, beside that Princely Priesthood that you spoke of, bishops and priests, and that properly so called. And dareth your impudent mouth, avouch that kind of speech impropre, which S. Augustin avoucheth to be properly so called, and that in the Church of Christ to? Go M. Horn, and tell your friends this tale. For your friend, I assure you, he had need to be, more than his own, which will believe you in this most impudent and most unchristian assertion. A priesthood there is M. Horn, and that a proper priesthood of bishops and priests in the Church of Christ, beside that of Aaron in the old law, or of Melchisedech in Christ's only person, or of this princely priesthood common to all Christians: who are no more properly priests, than they are Princes, and whose common priesthood no more excludeth the proper priesthood of Bishops and priests in the Church, them doth their kingdom (for kings in like manner all Christians are called in the places of holy Scripture lastly noted) exclude the proper kingdom, of Emperors, kings, and other Princes. To confute yet farther this Antichristian solution and to prove that this proper priesthood is a sacrificing priesthood, would require some convenient tract of time, and more than we can conveniently now spare for avoiding of tediousness. But what need we seek far, for a solution, or tarry long therein, seeing as cunning as M. Horn is, himself hath in his own solution proved the sacrifice of the mass? For to go no farther M. Horn, than your own chapter and allegation, I reason thus. Christ continueth a priest according to the order of Melchisedech for ever: the sacrifice of which order he showed in his last Supper. Ergo there is and ever shall be that sacrifice of our true Meschisedech, which he offered in his last Supper, which is the sacrifice of the mass in the Church. Ergo it is untrue, that Christ hath no ministerial priesthood or Sacrifice in the Church. Hebr. 7. For as Christ offered in his last supper his own body: so all priests do offer, Oecumenius sentence of the said sacrifice. Sacerdos in aeternum. Psal. 19 Tu es sacerdos in aeternum secundum ordinem Melchisedech. Consider M. jewels answer to the said Oecumenius. and shall offer for ever the same body in the holy mass. And for this cause is Christ called a priest for ever, in the chapter by you rehearsed, and in the psalms. I bring not, M. Horn, this argument, nor frame it, of myself: it is Oecumenius (M. Horn) an ancient and a notable Graecian that so writeth, and therein uttereth not his own mind only, but the mind of Chrysostomus, and other fathers, yea and of the whole Greek Church. Here perhaps M. Horn will take some hold, and answer that M. jewel hath answered sufficiently to Oecumenius in his Reply to M. D. harding. What kind of answer it is and how substantial, it will well appear, when the Rejoinder shall come to this Article touching the sacrifice. And yet I suppose men that be not to much and to sinistrally wedded to their own fantasies, may see good cause, by such other answers as are made to part of his reply, what to judge of the whole. In the mean season mark good reader, what kind of answer he maketh to rid himself from this authority of Oecumenius. I will omit all other, and touch one point only of his answer, M. jewels hypocrital dissimulation. whereby thou mayst have a taste of the whole. First then I pray you call to remembrance, what a scoffing and wondringe he maketh at the name and authority of Leontius, alleged by M. D. Harding with: what is this Leontius that wrote this story? or who ever heard of his name before? with much other gay glorious rhetoric. In his reply fo 75. But who is it M. jewel but Leontius that ye so hardly reason against for adorate scabellum pedum eius, jewel fol. 503. Vid. 2. Conc. Nicenum, actio. 4. Non. 1. ut in jewel. pag. 517. adore ye the footstool of his feat? Now how can ye make such me●uel at him, and demand when he was, and what he was: seeing yourself impugn him among other that be alleged in the 2. Nicene Council? Namely seeing in the very same leaf, wherein is contained the argument ye do impugn, it appeareth also, what he was, and when he was: that is, such a notable father and learned bishop, out of your quarreling exception of your .600. years, that he hath escaped, and is above all your solemn and peremptory challenges. Truly good reader this is a strange metamorphosis and a sudden ravishment of M. jewel. For as much as he wondereth at Leontius name in his Reply against private mass, as hardly, and as stoutly as he reasoneth against him in his reply against the adoration of Saints Images: yet he is fallen into so great familiarity and liking with him, that in his Reply against the sacrifice, to deface Oecumenius, he is content to authorize him for a good and a sufficient writer. And because Oecumenius telleth us, that Christ is and shall be sacrificed by the priests, Fol. 580. Nos Christiani propemodum quid sit ara, & quid sit victima, nescimus. and his holy body to the worlds end shallbe offered up in the holy mass, M. jewel to avoid this, saith: what sacrifice or altar meaneth, we being Christian people, in a manner can not tell. which are the words of the said Leontius. But yet according to M. jewels old wont falsely translated, and most falsely and impudently applied to that, which the author never meant. And that this holy handling of the matter may not lightly be espied, he allegeth the .2. Nicene council, being very long and tedious: and neither leaf nor action of it named, neither dareth on's for shame to name Leontius the author of the sentence. Now Leontius doth not mean of the altar that Christian men use to the honour of God, or of the sacrifice of Christ's blessed body (which is the matter that Oecumenius proveth, and aught to be disproved by M. jewel) but of the altars dedicated to the devils, Nicenae. 2. synodi Act. 4. fol. 517. col. 2. Pudore sufsundantur judaei qui proprios reges et alienos adorantes, nos Christianos tamquam idololatras irrident. Nos aunt Christiani, oimbus in civitatib. & regionib. indies et in horas singulas contra idola stamus armati contra idola psallimus, contra idola & preces fundimus. Et qua tamdem front judaei nos vocant idololatras? Vbi nunc sunt quae olim ab istis oblatae sunt idolis boun, ovium & filiorum quoque victimae? ubi sacrificiorum fumi? ubi arae et perfusiones sanguinum? Nos verò Christiani propemodum quid sit ara, quid sit victima ignoramus. and of the detestable sacrifice that the infidels did make thereupon, as ye shall understand by his own words. These jews (saith Leontius) may be ashamed, that worshipping their own kings, and the kings of other people, do scorn and scoff at us Christians, as though we were idolaters. For we in every city and country every day and hour do stand armed against idols: we sing Psalms against idols, we make our prayers against them. And then how can they for shame call us idolaters? where are now the oxen, the sheep, yea their own children, that the jews were wont to offer in sacrifice to their Idols? Where are the smoking sacrifices? where are the altars, and the shedding of blood? surely we Christians can not in a manner tell, what is an altar, or what is the sacrifice (of beasts) for that is properly victima, and of that Leontius speaketh. Thus writeth this ancient learned bishop about a thousand years paste, against the jews, that called Christian men idolaters, for worshipping of images. And the like answer we catholyks may make against these our new jews. And so at the length Leontius, that M. jewel hath so wondered at, hath confuted with his short answer all his, and M. Calfields, and such other their blasphemous talk against the catholyks for worshipping of the image of Christ and his Saints: and hath bewrayed M. jewels abominable shift made to answer Oecumenius, under the viso of this coulorable authority. And now may all men as much wonder at M. jewels doings, as he doth at Leontius name: And I am deceived if ever there were any poor owl so gazed and wondered at of the birds, as men will hereafter wonder at M. jewel, for these wretched and miserable shifts. Thus then the argument of Oecumenius (M. Horn) contrary to your Antichristian blasphemy against the sacrifice of the mass standeth untouched and unblemished, M. Horn. denying the sacrifice, maketh a plain way for antichrist. Daniel. 12. Quum ablatum fuerit iuge sacrificium. Aug. de civit. Dei. lib. 20. ca 23. &. 29. Prosper de divinis pro niss. & praedict. dimid. temp. cap. 13. Hier. in dict. cap. 12. Primas. in apoc. li. 3. cap. 11. Greg. l 32. in job. 14. An answer to M. Horn for M. Fekenhans translating of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pascere vel regere. for any thing that M. jewel hath or can say, or any other of all your sect. The sacrificing priesthood M. Horn for all your spite shall continue, and shall not utterly fail until the time of Anticrist. Then shall it fail in deed for three years and an half, according to the prophecy of Daniel, and the sayings of the fathers, namely of S. Augustin, Prosper, Primasius, S. Hieron, and S. Gregory. Wherefore it is not the Pope, but yourself M. Horn, that with this your full unchristian doctrine, and devilish divinity, in soluting M. Fekenhams argument, prepareth a ready way for Antichrist. There is now an other equivocation espied by M. Horn in the word to govern and rule: and that there are two kinds of sorts to govern and to rule the Church of Cod, the one by the supreme authority and power of the sword, belonging only to princes: the other by feeding the flock, with the word of God, by ministering Sacraments, and by binding and losing, belonging only to bishops and Church ministers. Which kind of spiritual government, princes may not neither do claim. And therefore M. Horn saith that M. Feckenham did not deal plainly in translating to govern and rule the Church, for that S. Paul's word doth properly signify to feed, as the shepherd feedeth his sheep: 2. Reg. 5. T● pasces ●opulum meum Israel: & iveris dux super Israeel. Cui precept ut pasceret populum meum ca 7. Psalm. 77 pavit eos in innocentia cordis sui. neither doth it signify to govern and rule but by a figurative speech. By this reason M. Horn might aswell prove, that Agamemnon was no king, nor ruler, whom Homer calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a pastor or shepherd: or David to be no king or ruler, whom the scripture so calleth also. Thou shalt, saith the scripture, feed my people of Israel, thou shalt be captain over Israel. Again: whom I have commanded to feed my people. And in an other place. He feed them in the innocency of his heart, with many like phrases occurrent in the scripture. M. Fekenham therefore dealt plainly, when he translated to govern and rule: even as Erasmus doth translate it out of the Greek which hath, regere, & non pasc●re: that is, to rule, and not to feed. And your brother Edmund Beke that translated the Bible, printed at London in the year .1549. though he turn bishops into overseers, and church into congregation, yet he translateth these words here, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. to rule the congregation. So doth also the English translation of the new testament p●inted at zuric●●n .1550. In his Reply. pag. 239. By likelihod M. Horn thinketh, that there is no true rule or government but where the sword beareth rule: wherein he thinketh as well, and reasoneth as substantially, as doth M. jewel, avouching that S. Peter was not head of the Church, because he took up his lodging with a poor tanner. Ye think to grossly and basely M. Horn of the Church's authority. The Church hath his rule and government, yea his sword to, which may aswell and as truly be verified in the Church regiment as in the civil regiment. Yea the Church regiment is incomparably the higher, and by so much as the excellency of the soul is above the body. Neither doth this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is to feed, as the shepherd feedeth his sheep, derogate any thing of the Ecclesiastical dignity, but rather doth increase and amplify it. The pastoral office of the field shepperd, The shepherds office resembleth most properly the bishops Office. doth most lively signify, set out, and express to us the office, the greatness, and the excellency of this pastoral charge. The Ecclesiastical pastor having as great an account to make to his Master Christ, for his spiritual flock, that is, the souls of the people committed to him, as hath the field shepherd for his sheep. This is the spiritual jacob watching carefully day and night, both in cold and heat upon his flock, Genes. 31. that must make good to his master what so ever by theft is imbecile, or by wild beasts devoured. The shepherd M. Horn doth not only feed his sheep, and carefully chooseth out such ground and pastor, as is most convenient and wholesome for them: but besides that, sondreth the whole and sound, from the infected and rotten: he greaceth and tarreth them, he bindeth, he cutteth them, he hath a staff with a hook to draw them in when they stray: he hath a staff to beat away the wolf: he hath a fold to close and shut them up safe from the incursions of the wolf, and other ravening beasts. And what doth all this, but resemble and express unto us the pastoral office of Bishops and prelate's? Who ought to tell the people what is good and bad, what is truth, what is falsehood, what is heresy, what is catholic faith but these pastors? Where was then this lesson of late, when lay men only by act of parliament took upon them to teach the whole clergy? Did not then less men, than kings, Queens, and Princes (who may not, you say now, claim or take upon them this kind of spiritual government and rule, to feed the Church with God's word) take upon them to feed all the realm with such doctrine as it pleased the parliament to allow, the parliament I say of lay men only, not one Bishop among them, you being neither by the law of God (which no realm can alter) neither yet by the law of the realm any Bishops at all: but only the queens Commissioners, in matters of the Church? And what can be more unseemly and more unnatural, than thus the sheep to feed the shepherd, and not the shepherd to feed the sheep? O what times, o what manners are these? To proceed, what higher Authority can there be in the world, them by baptism to make a Christian soul? then by pronuncing the solemn words appointed by Christ to cause to be present the body and blood of Christ? And that same to minister to the devout and well disposed people when so ever they call for it? What rule and regiment is comparable to the rule and regiment of the ecclesiastical shepherd, in the taking or excluding any out of his spiritual fold: that is, in binding and losing, Chrysostoms' sayings touching the spiritual government. in forgiving or retaining of sins, in making out excommunication, or in the releasing of the same upon dew repentance▪ hearken, hearken good M. Horn, what that noble prelate Chrysostomus writeth of this government. Etenim qui terram incolunt. etc. There is (sayeth Chrisostomus) a power given to them that dwell and be conuersante in the earth, to dispense and dispose heavenvly things, which power God would not give neither to angels nor archangels. Lib. 3. de dignitate Sac●rdotij For it was not spoken to them, what so ever ye bind in earth shallbe bound in heaven: and what so ever ye lose in earth shallbe loosed in heaven. The worldly Princes have also an authority to bind: but only touching the body: but these bonds of the priests bind the soul also, and do reach even as far as heaven. So that what so ever the priests do beneth● (in the world) the same God doth ratify above (in heaven) and the Lord doth confirm his servants sentence. And he saith anon after. If the king doth honour any of his subjects, so far, that he giveth him authority to imprison, or release out of prison whom he will, this fellow shallbe counted most fortunable, and a most happy man. But the priest, hath received from God a much greater power: and by so much the greater, as heaven excelleth the earth, or the soul the body. And by and by. It is a madness (saith he) to despise this principality, without the which we can not be partakers of our salvation, or of such good things as are promised us. For if no man can enter into the kingdom of heaven, unless he be regenerated by water and the holy Ghost: Ibidem. li. 6. and he that doth not eat the flesh of our Lord and drink his blood is berefie of everlasting life: Porrò illum ipsum oportet tantò omnibs rebus illis pnstare ꝓ quib. intercedit, quamtò parem ut subditos praefectus excellat. Cum aunt ille & spiritum Sanctum invocaverit, sacrificiunque illud horrore ac reverentia plenissimun perfecerit, communi omnium manibus assidue pertractato, quaero ex te. & cat. and all these things are not done, but by their holy hands, I say by the hands of the Priests: How may it be, that without their help, a man may either shun hell fire, or obtain the reward of the crown reserved in heaven? Again he writeth, that the priest is the ambassador from all the world to desire God to be merciful, not only for the sins of the living, but for the dead also. And anon after speaking of the sacrifice of the Mass, that you deny, and showing what excellency in virtue the bishop or priest ought to have above other: he saith, that he must in allthings excel other for whom he maketh this intercession to God, so far as it is meet that the ruler pass and exced the subject. For (saith he) when the priest hath called for the holy Ghost, and hath made the sacrifice, which we ought most to reverence, and to tremble and fear at, handling continually our common Lord: I demand among what states shall we place him? How great integrity shall we look for at his hands? How great holiness and devotion? Consider what those hands ought to be, that shall minister such things? Consider what tongue he ought to have, Locus altari vicinus in illius honorem, ꝗ imolatur angelorum choris plenus est. Id quod credere abunde licet vel ex tanto illo sacrificio quod tum peragitur. that shall speak such words? Consider finally that his soul ought to be of all other most pure and holy, that shall receive so great, and so worthy a spirit. At that time (he meaneth of the consecration of the blessed sacrifice) the angels are present with the priest, and all the orders of the heavenvly powers do make a shout: the place that is nigh to the altar, is for the honour of him, that is sacrificed, replenished with the companies of angels. Which a man may well believe, by reason of so great a sacrifice as is then made. Thus much have I showed you M. Horn out of that most learned light of the Greek. Church, joannes Chrisostomus, aswell to cause you to understand your detestable heresy against the priesthood of the new testament, as that the priests have a dignity, and a singular excellent regiment, above secular Princes. They have their spiritual sword, that two edged sword I say, that cutteth both body and soul, and by excommunication (if the party repent not) casteth both into the deep dungeon of hell. And shall all this be counted no rule nor regiment M. Horn, being in deed the chief and the principal regiment of all other? It is, it is M. Horn the highest government of all other, and of greatest charge, and importance. And much better may it be said to this evangelical pastor, that was said to Agamennon. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Iliad. ●. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. It is not meet for him, all the night long to sleep. that hath so much people, and such a charge to keep. Yea, ye are forced yourself M. Horn to confess it a spiritual government and rule. Whereby of necessity followeth the overturning and overthrowing of your lay supremacy. For these being the chief matters or things Ecclesiastical, as yourself can not deny, and the Prince having nothing to do with them, as you also confess, it can not be possible, that the Prince should have the Supremacy in all causes or things Ecclesiastical. The Prince's supremacy overthrown by that that M. Horn himself granteth. And so neither M. Fekenham nor any man else may take this oath for fear of evident and open perjury. And of all madness, this is a madness, and a most open contradiction to remove these things from the Prince, as ye do, and yet to attribute to him without any exception the supremacy in all things or causes Ecclesiastical: Yea and to urge men by other to confess the same. Which kind of arguing is as wise as if a man would affirm, God to be the maker of all things, the giver of all things, the preserver of all things, and yet by and by to say: God can not give the effect of grace to external Sacraments, God can not preserve his own blessed Mother from all actual or original sin. Whereof will follow, that God in deed is not omnipotent or almighty: those things being taken away from him, wherein chiefly his almighty power consisteth. For in such miraculous operations, surmounting far all power of men, God most properly showeth himself a God. As in such acts and causes Ecclesiastical (as binding and losing, preaching the word, ministering the Sacraments, etc.) consisteth specially and most properly the rule and government Ecclesiastical. We need not therefore wrestle with you herein any farther, M. Horn, seeing you can so preatily give yourself a notable fall. Yet one thing would I feign know more of you, M. Horn, if I may be so bold, and learn, what you mean now at the length to come in with the supreme Authority and power of the sword. What mean you, I say, to define unto us, the one kind and sort of governing the Church of God, in these words: by the supreme Authority and power of the sword to guide, care, provide, direct, and aid God's Church, & c? In all your book hitherto, of such supreme Authority and power of the sword, you never spoke word. How chanceth it then, the sword cometh in now? Doth the supreme government of the Church of God consist in the power of the sword? Then how was the Church of God governed .300. years and more before the time of Constantine the Emperor, who was the very first (as hath been showed) that by the power of the sword, I say, by the power of the sword, guided, cared, provided, directed and aided God's Church? Did the Church of Christ want a Supreme governor all those .300. years and more? Again, do the Laws of the Church take force by the power of the sword? You with M. Nowell, and with the Act of Parliament, do take away from the clergy the power and Authority to make Church Laws, and Constitutions: and you say and swear to, that no Convocation or Council of Bishops, shall or may have force or Authority to decree any Constitution Ecclesiastical, without the Prince's consent, licence, and supreme authority. For this purpose also you have alleged the practice of so many Counsels both General and National, to make proof that by the supreme Authority of Emperors and Kings, Canons and laws of the Church have been enacted and decreed, not by the Bishops and Counsels itself. Wherein how shamefully you have misreported the whole practice of the Church, I have sufficiently showed in the second and third Books. But in all your so long process you never yet openly said, that by the power of the sword such Canons and Laws took place. And come you now to say, that all this proceeded of the power of the sword? Where is then now become the liberty of the Gospel, that your grandsire Luther, and all your protestant progenitors of Germany do in all their writings so much extol, maintain, and defend against the Secular sword of Civil Magistrates? Again you M. Horn, that do force the Scholars of Oxford to swear by book Oath, that Scripture only is sufficient to convince every truth, and to destroy all heresies, you that will believe nothing, but that as plain Scripture avoucheth unto you, tell us, I pray you, where find you in all Scripture, that the Supreme Authority to govern the Church of God, is by the power of the sword? What? Did not the Apostles govern the Church of Christ all the time of their abode here in earth? And when or where I pray you, used they the power of the Sword? Or because they used not that power, were they not therefore the supreme Governors? Had they not a power and jurisdiction Ecclesiastical? De correptione & gratia. c. 3 Saint Augustine affirmeth: Doctores Ecclesiarum Apostoliomnia faciebant: & praecipiebant quae fierent, & corripiebant si non fierent, & orabant ut fierent. The teachers of the Churches, the Apostles did all things. They commanded things to be done, they rebuked and used discipline if things were not done. And they prayed, that things might be done. This declareth that a government and jurisdiction they used beside the bare preaching of the word. But this government (saith M. Horn) was not by the power of the sword, which belongeth only to Kings and Princes. Learn now then M. Horn, that the Church of Christ hath a power above the sword, and that as the jewish Synagogue was ruled with the sword, the transgressors of the law being punished by death, so the Church of Christ is ruled by the Spiritual keys committed to the Apostles and their successors, and the transgressors of the Church laws are punished with the spiritual sword of that jurisdiction. S. Augustine saith: De fide & operibus Cap. 2. Cùm in Ecclesiae disciplina visibilis fuerat gladius cessaturus Phinees the Priest slew the adulterers with the sword: which truly was signified to be done in this time with degradations and excommunications, when as in the Church discipline, the visible sword should cease. Lo, M. Horn. The visible sword is no part of the Church discipline now. It was among the jews a great part of their discipline. Mark that it was no part of the Church discipline. I do not deny, as the Donatists did, that because in the Apostles time, Princes used not the sword upon Heretics, and disobedient Christians therefore they should not now use it. But I say the Prince's sword is no part of the Church discipline. I say with S. Augustine, this visible sword in the Church discipline ceaseth. If the Prince use the sword, it is no Ecclesiastical government, nor it is not the supreme government. The Bishop hath a far superior government, De correp. & gratia Cap. 15. and a more terrible sword to strike withal. Of the which S. Augustine saith: Ipsa quae damnatio nominatur, quam fecit episcopale judicium, qua poena in Ecclesia nulla maior est, potest. etc. That punishment which is called condemnation, which is made by the judgement of the bishop, than the which punishment there is in the Church no greater, may yet (if it please God) turn to a wholesome correption. And again of the Church discipline he sayeth, where by the Church (not by any Prince) the stubborn and disobedient offender is pronounced an Ethnic and a publicayne, Gravius est, quàn si gladio feriretur, si stammis absumeretur, si feris subrigeretur. This is a more grievous punishment, Con●ra ●duersur. legis & prophetarum. lib. 1. Cap. 17. then if he were stricken with the sword, then if he were spent up in flames of fire, then if he were rend with wild beasts. You see then the Church hath a greater power to punish withal, than the prince's sword. And to prove unto you evidently, that the Prince's sword can be no part of Ecclesiastical or Spiritual government, I will wish you to mark but this one reason. The Church's power, jurisdiction, and government, extendeth to the soul, overseeth, guideth, and ruleth the soul of man, not the body or any thing appertaining to the body. But the Prince's sword can not reach to the soul of man. Ergo the Princes sword can not be any fit mean to govern as the Church doth, or to bear the Supreme government in Church matters. The Mayor or first Proposition is clear and confessed not only of all Divines, but of all Christian men that know what the Church and the soul meaneth. The Minor is also clear, if by nothing else, Luc. 12. yet by this only place of the Gospel where our Saviour saith: Fear not them that kill the body, & post haec non habent amplius quid faciant: and then have no more to do. As much to say: whose sword can not reach to the soul. Or as an other Evangelist writeth: Which can not kill the soul. And what is more repugnant to reason, Math. 10. c. 28 then to teach, that the Prince his sword which can not hurt the soul, should be the supreme governor of the Church, all whose power is over the soul? Whereof I reason thus. The Prince can not punish the soul of man: Ergo he hath no jurisdiction over it. Item he can not relieve it, or release it, being in the bounds and distress either of infidelity, or of sin: Ergo he can not be the supreme guider, and governor of it. Only the bishops and Priests, do punish the soul by excommunication and binding of sins. Only the bishops and Priests (I say Master Horn, those that are properly called Priests) can release, absolve, Augustin. ut suprà. and make free the soul of man from the bounds and fetters of infidelity and sin: Ergo they only have the true and proper government over the soul: If over the soul, Ergo in all Spiritual or Ecclesiastical causes which all tend to the soul health and to the only government of the same. I grant for preservation of external quiet, unity and peace in the Church, the Prince's sword walketh and punisheth the body of men in the church. But this is no Church discipline (in the which as S. Austin teacheth the visible sword ceaseth) this is no Church government, De fide & operibus Cap. 2. described unto us in the Gospel, and practised of the Church Ministers of all ages and times. But this is a Civil government, aiding, not governing the Church in times of extreme frowardness and obstinacy of Heretics and missebelevers. This doth (as all other worldly things do) serve the Church of God, as the body serveth the soul, for execution of Church laws, for repressing of schisms and seditions, and for the maintenance also of dew obedience in those men, whose frailty or malice is such, that they more fear the temporal sword, than the spiritual, and are moved more with external damages, then with Ecclesiastical censures, briefly such as fear more the torment of the body, than the loss of their souls. And standeth it now with your truth and honesty to say, that the supreme government of the Church, standeth in the power of the sword? But why (as I said before) say you it now at the length, which before you never said, but rather so extolled the princes supreme government, that you made him an accurser of heretics, a maker of Church laws and constitutions, Act. 20. De civit. Dei li. 20. cap. 10. a principal confirmer of all Councils, yea and a preacher of God's words to? And never spoke word of the sword, but covertly concealed that point until now? Why M. Horn, but because the evidence of holy Scripture alleged by M. Feckenham forced you thereunto? The place I say of the Acts, where S. Paul confesseth, that the bishops and priests (properly so called, M Horn, as S. Augustine telleth you) were appointed of the holy Ghost to feed and to rule the church, forced you to this plain distinction, and to grant now which you never granted before, a certain rule and government to Bishops and priests, which princes have nothing to do withal, plain contradictory to your former assertions, and to the Oath which you defend, attributing supreme government to the Princes in all manner causes ecclesiastical or spiritual without exception. This also forced you to limit the Prince's government with the power of the sword, which in Church matters (as hath been proved) is now no power at all (though among the jews it were) and which also, if it were a power, is not yet the supreme power, seeing the Bishops and Priests have a far greater and higher power to exercise and to practise upon the souls of men, over which the Church properly, chief and only ruleth and governeth, not over the body, otherwise than the necessary conjunction of both implieth the one with th'other. God's name be blessed. The truth hath forced you to open your own falsehood, and the absurdity of your assertion, See the force of truth. which you would so fain have concealed. The truth also hath driven you to grant that rule and government now to Bishops and Priests, which hitherto in your book, and which also by the tenor of the Oath by you defended, is attributed to the Prince only, and clean taken away from the Bishops and Priests: Yea and to avouch, that Princes neither may, nor do claim any such rule upon them, when yet by you and by the Oath, they both may and aught to claim no less than all together, without any exception or limitation in the world. Wherefore (as I said before) we need to wrestle no farther with you, seeing you can so roundly give yourself so notable a fall, and cast yourself so properly in your own turn. And to avoid tediousness, I am driven here to break of, desirous otherwise to open diverse your other and great absurdities in this Division. Now some of them I will note in your margin among your manifold untruths, and content myself at this present, with that which hath been said. The .157. Division. pag. 97. a. M. Fekenham. And when your L. shallbe able to prove, that these words of the Apostle Paul, and by him written in his Epistle unto the Hebrews: Obedite praepositis vestris, Heb. 13. & subiacete eye: ipsi enim pervigilant, quasi rationem pro animabus vestris reddituri, ut cum gaudio hoc faciant, et non gementes. Do ye obey your spiritual governors, and submit yourselves unto them, for they watch, as men which must give account for your souls: that they may do it with joy & not with grief. When your L. shallbe able to prove, that these words were not written of the Apostle Paul, aswell for all Christian Emperors, Kings and Queens, as for the inferior sort of people, than shall I in like manner yield touching that text of Paul, and think myself very well satisfied. M. Horn. No man hath or doth deny, that the Church ministers hath to govern the flock by preaching, and feeding with the word, which is the rule or government, that Paul speaketh of in this place also: whereto all princes are and aught to be subject and obedient. For this subjection and obedience, to the word of the Ghospel, taught, and preached by the Bishops, sitting in Christ's chair, which is the whole (.536.) The .536. untruth As before in the 531, 532. and 533. untruths. rule and government they have or aught to claim, as proper to their calling, is commanded so well to princes, as to the inferior sort of the people, as you say truly, although your cause is no deal helped, nor my assertion any (.537.) The 537. untruth. Your assertion is thereby utterly improved and overthrown, for then the prince is not supreme governor in all causes. whit proved thereby. The .2. Chapter, of M. Fekenhams second reason, for not taking the Oath: grounded upon S. Paul Heb. 13. Stapleton. THE second authority that M. Fekenham bringeth is out of S. Paul Obey your (spiritual) governors, M. Feckenhams .2. reason. Hebre. 13. and submit yourselves unto them, for they watch as men, that must give an account for your souls. In which words th'Apostle, as he teacheth the sheep to obey, so he teacheth the pastors vigilare & clawm ac gubernacula tenere, saith Theodoretus, In Comm. Ibidem. to watch and to rule the stern. For answer to this, M. Horn is yet ones again revolted to his feeding, and would fain feed us forth with a foolish fly flaw, as thowghe this were meant no further, than that spiritual men may feed the people and Prince to, with the word of God: whereunto all aswell the Princes as people are bound to obey. And this, he saith, is the whole rule and government that they can properly claim. Nay Master Horn, not so, let them have some more government, and at the least, so much as yourself granted them even in the last leaf before: that is, to minister Sacraments, and to bind and lose. Will ye so soon abridge your late liberality? What if the people Master Horn, or the Prince either will set light by the preachers word, and will amend never a deal the more, for all his preaching, but waxeth worse and worse, especially in open and notorious faults? Is there no further remedy, but to suffer all things to run on? 1. Reg. 2. Is the Bishop think you now excused? Why had then Ely such a grievous punishment for his unruly children? He told them their faults, he told them that all the people spoke ill of them. But yet both he and his had a terrible punishment, quòd non corripuerit eos. Because he did not rebuke them: yet did he rebuke them. Vide Dionysium. 1. reg. 2. But for that he did not rebuke them so vehemently and so earnestly as he should have done: and as S. Jerome sayeth, coercuit & corripuit eos, sed lenitate seu mansuetudiue paternali, non severitate & authoritate Pontificali. He did correct and rebuke them, but meekly and gently as fathers are wont, not severely, nor with such authority as he being the bishop should have done. Then if gentle or sharp words will not serve, the evangelical pastor must take the staff in his hand, and break the obstinate and stubborn heart with a terrible blow of excommunication, he must sequester this scabbed sheep from the residue of the flock. For as S. Augustin saith, Augustin. epist. 50. An non pertinet ad diligentiam pastoralem, ent illas oves quae etc. à grege aberraverint, si resistere volverint, flagellorun terrorib. vel etiam doloribus revocare? Doth it not appertain to the pastoral diligence, to call back such sheep, as do go astray, and if they resist, to call them back with terror of the rod, yea and with stripes too? 1. Cor. 4. &. 5. And this is the rod S. Paul speaketh of, and threateneth the Corinthians withal. This is the rod with the which he beat the fornicator there. This rod many bishops used against Princes and Emperors. This rod Marcians Father being a Bishop, Epiphan. haeres. 42. li. 1. tom. 3 used against his own son for deflowering a Virgin. To this spiritual Authority the offender, what so ever he be, prince or other, is subject: and therefore this proveth evidently the Ecclesiastical Supremacy to rest in the Clergy, and not in the Prince, which must obey as well as the other. And therefore it is not true that ye say, that M. Fekenhams cause is no deal helped by this place, nor your assertion any thing improved. But let us step one step farther with you M. Horn, upon the ground of your present liberalytye, lest as you have begun, you pinch us yet farther, and take away all together from Bishops and Priests. Subjection, you say, and obedience to the word of God taught and preached by the Bishops etc. is commanded so well to Princes, as to the inferior sort of the people. If so M. Horn, how did a lay parliament utterly disobey the doctrine of all their Bishops, and enact a new contrary to theirs? What obedience was there in that parliament, so expressly required here by S. Paul, and so dew even of Princes themselves, as you confess, to their Bishops? Will you say the Bishops than preached not God's word? And who shall judge that? Shall a lay parliament judge it? Is that the obedience dew to Bishops? In case all the Bishops of a realm erred, is there not a general Council to be sought unto? Are there not other Bishops of other Countries to be counseled? Is not all the Church one body? In matters of faith shall we sever ourselves from our Fathers and brethren (the whole corpse of Christendom beside) by the virtue of an Act passed by lay men only? No bishops, no Clerk admitted to speak, and say his mind? O lamentable case. God forgive our dear Country this most heinous trespass. Then the which I fear our Realm committed not a more grievous (except the first breach in King Henry's days) these many hundred years. Yet one step farther. The Prince must obey and be fed at the bishops hand: you confess. What is that? Is it not, he must learn how to believe, and how to serve God? Is it not the pastoral office, as S Augustin teacheth, Augustin. de verbis Dom. sec. joan. serm. 34. Ezech. 34. to open the springs that are hidden, and to give pure and sound water to the thirsty sheep? Is not the shepherds office, to strengthen that is weak, to heal that is sick, to bind that is broken, to bring home again that is cast away to seek that is lost, and so forth, as the Prophet Ezechiel, describeth? And what is all this, but to teach, to correct, to instruct, to reform and amend all such things as are amiss, either in faith or in good life? If so, then in case the realm went a stray, should not they redress us, which were pastors and shepherds in Christ's Church? If our own shepherds did amiss, was there in all Christendom no true Bishops beside, no faithful pastor, In lib. de pastoribus Cap. 10.11. & 13. no right shepherd? Verily S. Augustine teacheth at large, that it is not possible, that the shepherds should miss of the true doctrine. What soever their life or manners be. But put the case so, that we may come to an issue. Must then the Prince fede us, altar our Religion, set up a new, stop the shepherds mouths, play the shepherd himself. Is this, M. Horn, the obedience that you teach Princes to show to their shepherds? God forgive them that herein have offended, and God (in whose hands the hearts of Princes are) inspire with his blessed grace the noble heart of our most gracious Sovereign the queens Majesty, that her highness may see and consider this horrible and deadly inconvenience to the which your most wicked and blasphemous doctrine hath induced her grace. You are the wolf, M. Horn. And therefore no marvel if you procure to tie the shepherd fast, and to mousell the dogs. The .158. Division. Pag. 97. b. M. Fekenham. 1. Cor. 14. And when your L. shall be able to prove, that these words of Paul: Mulieres in Ecclesijs taceant, etc. Let the women keep silence in the Church: for it is not permitted unto them there to speak: but let them live under obedience, like as the Law of God appointeth them, and if they be desirous to learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home, for it is a shameful and rebukeful thing, for a woman to speak in the Church of Christ. When your L. shallbe able to prove, that these words of Paul, were not as well spoken of Queens, Duchess', and of noble Women, as of the mean and inferior sort of Women: like as these words of almighty God, spoken in the plague and punishment first unto our mother Eve for her offence: and secondarily by her unto all women without exception. vidz. Multiplicabo aerumnas, Gen. 3. etc. I shall increase thy dolours, sorrows and conceiving, and in pain and travail, thou shalt bring forth thy children, & thou shalt live under the authority & power of thy husband and he shall have the government and dominion over thee. When your L. shall be able to prove, any exception to be made either in these words spoken in the old law, by the mouth of God: either in the words before spoken of the Apostle Paul in the new: than I shall in like manner yield, and with most humble thanks, think myself very well satisfied in conscience, not only touching all the afore alleged testimonies, but also in this second chief point. M. Horn. I do grant the words of the holy Scriptures in both these places to be spoken to all states of women without exception. But what make they for your purpose, how do they conclude and confirm your cause? Women must be silent in the Church, and are not permitted to speak: That is, as your own Doctor Nicolaus de Lyra expoundeth it, women must not teach and preach the doctrine in the Church, neither dispute openly: Therefore our Saviour Christ did not commit to Kings, Queens, and Princes, the Authority to have and take upon them (.538.) The .538. untruth. M Feckenham reasoneth not so. But thus. Therefore women can not take upon them the Supreme government in all causes etc. any part of government in Ecclesiastical causes. As (.539.) The .539. untruth, The argument is nothing like. though a young Novice of your monkish order should have argued: Nuns must keep silence, and may not speak in the cloisture, nor yet at Dinner, time in the fraytrie: therefore your deceiver the Pope did not commit Authority to his provincials, abbots, Priores, and Prioresses, to have and take upon them the government under himself in monkish and Nunnishe causes and matters? What man would have thought Master Feckenham to have had so (.540.) The .540 untruth. This argument is made with good and great consideration, as shall appear. little consideration, although unlearned, as to vouch the silence of women in the Church, for a reason to improve the Authority of Princes in Church causes? The .3. Chapter. Of M. Fekenhams third reason taken out of S. Paul also .1. Cor. 14. Stapleton. M. Feckenhams 3. reason. 1. Cor. 14. Master Feckenham his third reason is, that women are not permitted to speak in the Church, and therefore they can not be the heads of the Church. To this M. Horn answereth: first that this place of S. Paul must be understanded of teaching, preaching, and disputing: and that therefore it will not follow thereof, that they may not take upon them any government in Ecclesiastical causes. And then being merrily disposed, he saith this Argument is much like, as if a young Novice should reason thus. nuns must keep silence in the Cloisture: therefore the Prioresses have not the government in Nunnish causes and matters. Concerning the first part of his answer, I say that the argument is good and sufficient. For if teaching, preaching, and disputing in matters of religion, be causes and matters ecclesiastical: and if women be imbarred from this, then is there a sufficient cause, why M. Fekenham may not take this oath, that a woman is supreme head in all causes spiritual and ecclesiastical: Namely to erect and enact a new and proper religion throughout her realm by the virtue of her own proper and supreme government. For to this end, M. Horn, is the oath tendered. It is to evident. It can not be dissembled. Again, the said place of S. Paul is of the order and manner of expounding of scripture, as it appeareth by the text. If then S. Paul forbiddeth a woman to expound scripture: how can a woman take upon her, to be the chief judge of all those that expound the scripture? I mean in that very office of expounding Scripture, in decreeing, determining, and enacting, what religion, what belief, what doctrine shall take place. And such she must needs be, if she be a supreme head. Such do you and your fellows make her. Such authority you M. Horn, throughout all this book, attribute to your new supreme heads, Emperors and Kings by you alleged. You make them to preach, to teach, and to prescribe to the Bishops in their Counsels, what and how they shall do in their ecclesiastical matters. If then by you a supreme Governor in ecclesiastical matters, must be so qualified, as to be present in Counsels of Bishops, to prescribe rules for the Bishops to follow, to determine what they shall do, and to confirm by royal assent the decrees of bishops, yea and to make themselves, decrees and constitutions ecclesiastical, but a woman by S. Paul, may not once speak in the Church, that is, in the Congregation or assembly of the faithful, and by you a woman may not preach, teach, or dispute: undoubtedly both by S. Paul, and by your own confession, a woman can not be a supreme Governor, such as the Oath forceth men to swear. I say, supreme governor in all ecclesiastical causes. No nor in so many causes by a great deal, as you pretend in this your book, other Kings and Princes to have practised supreme government in. Consider now, M. Horn, how it may stand with S. Paul's doctrine, that a woman may be a supreme governor in all ecclesiastical causes: namely such as you in this book, would make your Reader believe, that all Emperors, Kings and Princes hitherto have been. Now put the case (as we saw it viii. years past) that in a doubtful matter of doctrine and religion to be tried by scripture, the whole number of bishops agree upon some determinate and resolute exposition with their Clergy, and would by an Ecclesiastical law of Convocation or Council set forth the same? Al their resolution and determination is not worth a rush by your Oath and by your manner of talk in this book, if the Prince do not allow and confirm the same. And how this will stand with S. Paul in this chapter, tell us I pray you: presupposing (as the statute requireth) that the Princes allowing though she be a woman, is necessary. And now are ye come to th●s point, and driven thereto by the force of this place, to say: that the place doth not prove, but a woman may have some government in ecclesiastical causes: As though the Question were now of some government only, and not of Supreme and absolute Government in all manner things and causes ecclesiastical. If therefore this place do prove, that a woman hath not the Supreme and absolute government in all causes ecclesiastical, but that in some, and them the chiefest, she must hold her peace, as it doth evidently, and ye can not deny it: then is M. Fekenham free from taking the oath of the supremacy, and then hath S. Paul utterly confuted that Oath, and your whole book withal. This I say also, as by the way, that if this chapter must be taken, for teaching, preaching and disputing, as M. Horn saith and truly, that M. jewel went far wide from S. Paul's meaning, when he applied it to the common service of the Church, whereof it is no more meant, than of the common talk in taverns. As for M. Horns second merry mad objection, no man is so mad to make such an argument but himself. And therefore he may as long, and as jollily as he will, triumph with himself in his own folly. Yet I would wish M. Horn to speak well of Nuns, were it but for his grandsire Luther's sake, and the heavenvly conjunction of him and a Nun together: Which unhappy conjunction of that Vulcan and Venus, engendered the unhappy brood of M. Horn and his fellows. But that this foolish fond argument is nothing like to M. Fekenhans argument, it may easily be proceived, by that we have already and sufficiently said. M. Fekenham. The .159. Division. pag. 98. a. The third chief point is, that I must not only swear upon the Evangelists, that no foreign person, state or potentate, hath or aught to have any power or authority Ecclesiastical or Spiritual within this Realm: but also by virtue of the same Oath, I must renounce all foreign power and authorities, which for a Christian man to do, is directly against these two Articles of our Crede: Credo sanctam ecclesiam Catholican: I do believe the holy catholic church. Credo Sanctorum communionem: I do believe the communion of saints. And that there is a participation and communion amongst all the believers of Christ's Church, which of the Apostle Paul are called Saints. Adiuro vos per Dominum ut legatur haec Epistola omnibus sanctis fratribus. And herein I do join this issue with your L. that when your L. shallbe able to prove by Scripture, Doctor, General Council, or by the continual practice of any one Church, or part of all Christendom, that by the first Article, I believe the holy Catholic Church, is meant only that there is a Catholic Church of Christ, and not so that by the same article every Christian man is bound to be subject and obedient to the Catholic Church, like as every member ought to have obedience unto the whole mystical body of Christ. And further when you shall be able to prove by the second Article: I do believe the Communion of Saints, is not so meant, that a Christian man ought to believe such atonement, such a participation and communion, to be amongst all believers and members of Christ's Catholic Church in doctrine, in faith, in Religion, and Sacraments, but that it is lawful for us of this Realm therein to dissent from the Catholic Church of Christ dispersed in all other Realms: and that by a corporal Oath it is lawful for us to renounce, and refuse to have communion with the Catholic Church so dispersed, because it is a foreign authority and power out of this Realm: when soever your L. shallbe able to prove this by Scripture, Doctor, General Council: or yet by continual practice of any one Church, or part of all Christendom: Than shall I in like manner, yield in this third point, and with most humble thanks, shall think myself very well satisfied therein. M. Horn. This third chief point is (.541.) The .541. untruth. It containeth an argument, that M Horn shall never assoil. nothing else, but a misshapened lump of words: containing first an argument grounded upon a kind of Opposition, that no wise or learned man ever red of, but is newelie forged and hammered out of your own brain: Then, an issue, to have me prove that thing, which being rightly understanded, no Christian doth doubt of, or will deny. And last of all, an huge heap of flat and manifest (.542.) The 542. untruth. Slanderous and injurious Lies against the whole Realm, to set a good face upon an evil favoured cause, which can find no help or ease by plain and simple truth. The weighty burden, that you are laden with and can not bear, is that you must by Oath renounce all foreign power and authority: the cause that maketh you faint and feeble, is, that it is directly against two Artiles of our Creed: So that your feeble reason is grounded after your simple skill upon the place, ab oppositis & pugnantibus. Before I answer to the argument, I will put the Reader in remembrance of the division which you make, chopping and changing one (.543.) The .543. untruth. For they, are 2. divers articles, not one. Clemens in compend. de fide. Article in twain, to make some show of an heinous matter. Surely it were overmuch detestable, if you were moved to swear but against one article of our Creed, as ye were never moved by me, either to or fro, to swear any thing at all. There be three symbols or Creeds, which have been allowed and received of Christ's Catholic Church. The symbol of the Apostles, of the Nicen Council, and of Athanasius. The Apostolical is so called, because it was collected (as some say) by the twelve Apostles, and therefore containeth (as the commonly received opinion is in Christ's Church) according to the number of the twelve Apostles, but twelve Articles, which are called in the usual speech of the Catholic Christians, the twelve Articles of our Creed or belief. If this, I believe the communion of saints, be a several Article from this, I believe the holy Catholic Church, as you do fantasy, than there must needs be at the least thirteen Articles of the Creed, contrary to thee (.544.) The .544. untruth. The common opinion of learned men reckoneth more than 12. Articles. universally received opinion of the Catholic Church. You were wont to stay yourself much upon the custom of the Catholic Church, and would urge stiffly although not so truly the universally received opinion of the Catholic Church, as a matter that might not be rejected, or denied: and how chanceth it now, that you are become such a changeling, that clean (.545.) The .545. untruth. As before contrary to the use of the Catholic Church, which acknowledged but twelve, you will make thirteen Articles of the Creed at the least? Besides th●s, the Catholic Church in the time of Cyprian and Augustine, and before also, did not reckon or judge these to be two several Articles, but did count them one article, concluding these words, the communion of Saints, in this sentence, I believe a Catholic Church of Christ, reciting the Symbol without rehearsal or mentioning, the communion of Saints, as it is plainly set forth by S. Cyprian and Augustine, in their expositions of the Apostolical Creed. The matter meant by the communion of Saints, is uttered in these words: I believe the holy Catholic Church of Christ. Whereunto hath been added sense these ancient Father's t●mes, as it may seem by the way of explication, communion of Saints, to express in plainness of speech, that Christ's Catholic Church, is nothing else, but a fellowship, and communion of faithful ones, which are saints. Now let us see how to swear, as this third chief point of the Oath setteth forth, is directly against this article of our Creed, I believe the holy Catholic Church, the communion of Saints. All true subjects ought and must renounce and forsake all foreign jurisdictions, powers, superioririe, pre-eminences, and authorities of every foreign Prince, and prelate, state, or potentat. This is the proposition of that part of the Oath: to the which adjoin this proposition, all true subjects ought and must believe, an holy Catholic church of Christ, the communion of saints. Espy now what opposition is betwixt these two propositions, that they may not both match together, and be verified in one true and faithful subject. The one, say you, is directly against the other. Then say I, there is a direct opposition and repugnancy betwixt them, by due examination we shall find out the opposition. Try the parts of these propositions severally without the verb that coupleth them together, and you shall not find any opposion, either contrary relative, privative, or disparat: join them together with the verb that coupleth, and being propositions, they are not one against the other contrary, subcontrary, subaltern, nor (546.) The .546. untruth. They are plain contradictory one to an other, as shall appear. contradictory, and therefore untruly, and not less unskilfully babbled of you, that the one is directly against the other, when a young scholar that hath red but the rudiments of his Logik, could have seen and judged, that there is in them no opposition or repugnancy at al. To renounce and forsake (.547.) The .547. untruth. joined with impiety. The catholic Church, that you by oath renounce, is the Church of Christ, not of antichrist Antichrist and his church by oath or knowledge and to believe in Christ and rightfully by all manner of ways, standeth neither directly nor in directly one against the other, but are matched together and agreeth jump one with the other. Surely your eyes were not matches, neither were your wits at home, when you spied out this repugnancy, if you had not published this learned piece of work, your friends should never have known, what an huge heap of cunning and knowledge, The definition of the catholic Churche* unperfect as shall appear. is hidden in that little head of yours. The demand in your issue is easily proved by the description or definition of Christ's true Catholic church. The catholic Church of Christ, is a multitude, society, and communion of saints and faithful ones, that have been, shallbe, and are now one live in the earth, how and wheresoever they be divided and dispersed in time and place, the which multitude of saints, have a participation in communion amongst themselves of all good things, given, granted, and growing from god through Christ, of spirit, faith, sacraments, prayer, remission of sins, and heavenvly bliss, and are united to Christ their head by faith, and fastened together amongst themselves, as members of one body with the bond of love. To this catholic Church, every Christian man is bound to be subject and obedient as a member ought, and may be subject and obedient to the body. And we do teach and confess in this Church such an atonement, participation, and communion, among all the members in doctrine, faith, Religion, and Sacraments, that neither this, nor any other Realm, may lawfully dissent from this Church, or renounce and refuse to have communion therewith, as God be praised we of this realm do now show ourselves by all Christian means, never more at any time, to (.548.) The .548. untruth. You have no agreement, consent, or unite of doctrine among yourselves. agree and consent in the unity of this Catholic Church, in necessary doctrine, right faith, true Religion, and the right use of Christ's Sacraments. The foul (.549.) The .549. untruth mere slanderous. lies that you heap together, wherewith shamefully to defoil your own nest and native country, needeth none other confutation, than only to make than plain to be seen and judged of all men, that the Realm may be sorry, that ever it nestled so unnatural and filthy a bird, and your friends ashamed of so malicious and impudent a Liar. This is a lewd (.550.) The 550. untruth. M. Feckenham said not so of the Realm. Lie, that this Realm dissenteth from the Catholic Church in the forenamed points. This is a (.551.) The 551. untruth. It is right true that in effect you do so, as it shall appear. shameful Lie, that by corporal oath or any other ways, we renounce and refuse to have communion with the Catholic Church of Christ. And this is a monstruous (.552.) The .552. untruth. For M. Fekenham said not, that it is so, but that by Oath you make it so, which is true, as it shall be proved. Lie that the catholic Church is a foreign authority and power out of this Realm. Who was ever so mad, as once to think, or so doltish as to speak any thing against the Catholic Church, but specially to forsake it, and that because it is a foreign power and authority. The Oath maketh no mention in any one word, of the Catholic Church, it speaketh of (.553.) The .553. untruth. Notorious. The Oath speaketh of Every foreign Prelate, not of a foreign prelate. You are now ashamed yourself of the Oath, M. Horn, a foreign Prince, Prelate, and Potentate, and so of the foreign Power and authority of such a foreign state. Whereupon M. Feckenham concludeth as it were by Revelation, in a Monkishe dream, without rhyme or reason, that therefore the catholic Church is forsaken, as though there were no difference betwixt a foreign Prince, or prelate and the Catholic Church: or that the Catholic Church might be called a foreign Power, or a forine authority to a Christian Realm. This is such a new kind of Divinity is was never heard or red of in any writer, no not in the Legend of Golden Lies. The .4. Chapter, defending M. Feckenhams third chief point, and proving evidently, that the Oath destroyeth two Articles of our Crede. And by occasion, of the protestants dissension in these low countries he●e. Stapleton. The 3. chief point. THE effect of M. Fekenhams third point, resteth in this, that he cannot vouchsafe to take the oath, for that it is against two articles of the faith: I believe the holy catholic Church and: I believe the communion of Saints. For the which argument M. Horn setteth upon him with great force both of divinity and logic. He marveleth, that M. Feckenham contrary to th'opinion universally received of all the catholic Church maketh of xii. xiii. articles of the creed: making the communion of saints an article of the faith, which was none in the time of S. Cyprian and S. Augustine. Then like a lusty logicioner he avoucheth, that there is no way any contradiction to the catholic faith, in taking an oath, for the renouncing of all foreign power. Last of all he setteth forth a definition of the catholic church. surely M. Fekenham had need beware now least M. Horn prove him an heretic, for he can not be far from heresy, that maintaineth an opinion contrary to the universal church. But because ye charge him so hardly M. Horn, we must see well to the matter, and we must consider somewhat exactly, whether there be no more articles than xii. to be believed. And here though ye bear the countenance of a great Bishop, I must be so bold to bring you to your catechism, and to sever every thing into his own proper kind. The first article than is, I believe in God. The .2. I believe in God the Father, The .3. that he is omnipotent: The .4. that he is the creator of heaven and earth: The .5. I believe in jesus Christ: The .6 I believe he was conceived of the holy ghost The .7. That he was borne of the virgin Marie: The .8. That he suff●ed under Pontius Pilatus: and the .9 that he descended into hell. The .10. that he rose from death the .3. day. The .11 that he ascended into heaven: and the .12. that he shall come to judge the quick and the dead: Here have ye already twelve articles: the denial of any one of them being open heresy. And then immediately have we yet certain articles more. As: I believe in the holy ghost, I believe the catholic church, the communion of saints, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the flesh, and the life everlasting. Deny me, In hoc communiter concordant Theologi & canonistae. Gull. Linwood in constit. provinc. de summae trinit ca 1. §. item alij. D. Thom. 2.2. q. 1. Arti 8. Host. & Io. And. in rub. de sum. trinitate. Ruffinus in symbolo. if ye dare M. Horn any one of these to be an article of our faith contained by express words in the common creed. I say nothing here of many other articles that ye are aswell bound to believe as these. As that Christ is consubstantial to the Father, that he hath two natures, and two wills, and that the holy Ghost proceedeth from the Father and the son, with such like. The opinion of many learned men in the church is, M. Horn, that there be fowrtene articles of the faith, wherein aswell the divines as the canonists do commonly agree. And to omit other countries, the bishops of England in their synods have determined and taken order by diverse constitutions provincial, that aswell the articles of the faith according to this number, as the .10. commandments should be quarterly expounded, and declared to the people by their curates in the vulgar tongue. Truth it is, that they are commonly called the .12. articles of the faith, not because they are precisely but xii. But because it is thowght that the Apostles before they were dispersed abroad in the world to preach, made each one a parcel of the common creed. And for that cause, they are usually called the .12. articles. Or for that they be reducible to .12. principal articles, to the which some do reduce them, or to .14. as they are usually reduced in the Schools. In this sort the Article of the communion of Saints, may be comprehended in the Article of the holy Catholic Church. Under the which, as ye say, S. Cyprian and S. Austin do comprehend it. Yet in this point ye are deceived, that ye suppose the exposition of the Crede to be made by S. Cyprian. For it is not his exposition, but Ruffinus or some others: as the thing itself showeth most evidently. Touching the .2. point, we fear nothing your Logic, nor your high cunning: whereby ye tell us of an opposition contrary, relative, privative, and disparative: and of Propositions contrary, M. Horn depraveth M. Fekenhans argument. subcontrary, subaltern, and contradictory. Less Logic might have served, M. Horn: for ye do not soil M. Fekenhams, but your own Argument. And then is it an easy matter for a man, framing an argument of his own, to frame also what solution it pleaseth him. But let us take M. Fekenhams true argument, and we shall find a plain contradictory (which is the extremest of all oppositions) between the tenor of the Oath, and between this Article of our Crede, that M Fekenham here toucheth. This is (you say yourself here M. Horn) the proposition of that part of the oath. All true subjects ought and must forsake all foreign jurisdictions, powers, superiority, praeeminences and authorities of every foreign Prince, and Prelate, state or Potentate. The proposition of M. Feckenham, The oath contrary to an Article of our creed is, that to believe the holy Catholic Church, is as much to say, as to be subject and obedient to the Catholic Church. But the Catholic Church comprehendeth all the corpse of Christendom, as well without the realm as within the realm, subject and obedient to one head the Pope of Rome. And this Pope of Rome is to you a foreign Prelate, Power and Potentate, as yourself doth afterward expound it: Ergo by virtue of the oath, you force all the queens subjects to renounce and forsake all the corpse of Christendom without the realm: which is, as I have said, the extreme contradictory to this, All true subjects ought and must believe, obey, and be subject to the whole corpse of Christendom, as well without the Realm as within. You answer. The Oath maketh no mention in any one word of the Catholic Church. But I reply: In that you exclude all foreign power and authority, you exclude also the Catholic Church, which is no less foreign to you, than is the Pope, to whom that Church is subject, as the body to the head. You say, the Oath speaketh of a foreign Prince, Prelate, and Potentate, and so of the foreign power and authority of such a foreign state, but I reply: First that you belie the Oath. For the Oath speaketh, not, of a foreign Prince, Prelate and Potentate, but of every foreign Prince, Prelate and potentate, as but the second leaf before, yourself describeth this part of the Oath. And so expressly you renounce, as all Princes so all Prelates of Christ's Church, which is the whole Catholic Church. And so the Oath is plain contradictory to this Article: I believe the Catholic Church. Secondarily, I reply, that the foreign authority of such a foreign state is (in your sense) the whole Church's authority subject to the Pope of Rome. And so ones again, by the report of your Oath in renouncing all foreign authority, you renounce all the Church's authority without the realm of England: as much to say, you renounce to believe and obey the Catholic church. And as much to say, you protest by oath, to believe and obey, only the church within the realm of England. Consider now, good Reader, whether this third part of the oath, be not mere contradictory in effect, to this article of our Crede, I believe the Catholic Church: supposing that we must not only believe, but also obey and be subject to the Catholic Church. Which is the Argument that M. Fekenham proposeth, and is the demand in M. Fekenhams issue. To the which M Horn answereth never a whit. But frameth a nother opposition such as in deed might well become a dremer in his dream. Again, between this Article of our Crede: another contradiction between the Oath, and an article of our Creed. I believe the Communion of Saints (and your oath) I renounce all foreign jurisdictions, power, superiority, pre-eminence, of every foreign Prince and Prelate: is a plain and extreme contradiction. For as to renounce every foreign Prince, bindeth all the subjects of England, to obey only the prince of that land, and no prince out of the land, in all temporal causes and things: which part of the Oath no Papist in England ever refused to take (and which for my part, M. Barlow of Chichester can bear me witness, I refused not, but expressly offered myself to take, at what time upon refusal of the other part, he deprived me (as much as lay in him) of my prebend in that church) so to renounce every foreign Prelate (as the oath expressly speaketh) bindeth all the subjects of England to obey only the Prelates of that land, and not to obey any Prelate without the land what soever he be, in any spiritual or Ecclesiastical cause. Which is as every man may see, the extreme contradictory to this Article of our Crede. I believe the Communion of Saints. Whereby is meant, as M Feckenham reasoneth (and M. Horn denieth not, nor can with any shame deny) that every Christian man ought to believe a perfect atonement, participation, and communion to be amongst all believers and members of Christ's Catholic Church in doctrine, in faith, in religion, and sacraments. He confesseth also, that it is not lawful for us of the realm of England therein to dissent, from the Catholic Church of Christ dispersed in all other Realms. This is a most true and invincible opposition between the Oath and the article or part of our Crede: most truly and learnedly set forth by M. Feck. lewdly dissembled and no whit answered by M. Horn. Wat it is to renounce the authority of every foreign prelate. Now though you and your fellows M. Horn, will seem to expound by the authority of every foreign Prelate, the authority of the Pope only, yet who seeth not, what an heap of absurdities do follow thereof? For first, is the Pope every foreign Prelate? or if he be not, why swear you against every foreign Prelate? Secondly is every foreign Prelate, the Pope? then have we I trow more Popes than one. Thirdly, why should you rather mean by a foreign Prelate the B. of Rome in Italy, than the B. of milan in Lombardy, the B. of Toledo in Spain, the B. of Lisbona in Portugal, the B. of Paris in France, the B. of Ments in Germany, or any other bishope in these low Countries here, in Sicily, in Polonia, in Prussia, or any other where, without the Realm of England? Or what is there in the B. of Rome, to make him foreign, which is not also in all the forenamed bishops, yea, in all catholic bishops beside those of the realm of England? Fourthly, when you renounce every foreign Prelate▪ You do plainly renounce all Prelates whatsoever without the realm of England: and so you renounce all society, communion and fellowship of saints, that is of faithful folk in the Church of Christ. Fiftly albeit the oath, had expressly named or intended to renounce the pope only, yet in so doing they had renounced all Catholic bishops beside. And that not only, because all Catholic bishops are subject to the Pope, as to their head (whereby renouncing the Head, you renounce also the body under that Head) but also, because the faith, the doctrine, and the religion of the Pope of Rome is no other, than the faith doctrine and religion of all other Catholic bishops. Neither is the faith of other Catholic bishops any other faith, than the Pops faith is. Therefore who renounceth by oath the Pope of Rome for a foreign Prelate, and his faith and doctrine for foreign, he renounceth also by oath, the faith and doctrine of all other Catholic bishops without the Realm of England for foreign. Sixtly in renouncing, all power and Authority of every foreign Prelate, you renounce the Lutheran and Sacramentary Superintendents, of Geneva, of Zurich, of Basil, of Wittenberg and of all other protestant prelates without the realm of England, no less than the Catholic bishops in Germany, or any other where. And so stand you post alone in matters of religion, not to be informed, instructed, or corrected in any doubtful matter, or peril of schism. As though you had a warrant from the holy Ghost, neither to fail in the faith, nor at any time to have Princes that may fail. For all this you annex and unite to the Crown of England for ever. Seventhly and last in excluding and renouncing every foreign Prelate, and all power, Authority and jurisdiction of every foreign Prelate, you exclude and renounce the whole body of the Church without the realm, which consists most properly and most effectually of the bishops and prelates the heads thereof. And as in temporal jurisdiction, the oath bindeth all the subjects of the Realm of England to obey the only kings and Queens of that Realm (which we do grant also most gladly) so that if all princes in the world, would join together and conclude a kind of regiment, appoint laws and enact statutes for the better ordering and directing of the common wealth, the subjects of England by virtue of this oath are bound to renounce all such power, except our own prince would allow them and condescend thereunto (which thing is reasonable enough, for all country's need not to be governed in external matters after one sort, nor at all times a like, the state thereof being changeable and mutable) even so in spiritual or Ecclesiastical jurisdiction, the oath so expressly renounceth all power and Authority of foreign prelates, that if all prelates and bishops of the world beside, would meet together or otherwise agree in one truth, order, or law ecclesiastical (which hath often been done and may always be done in general Counsels) the subjects of England are bound under pain of perjury and of a praemunire to renounce all such orders, laws, and decrees or concluded Truths: which is shortly to say, to renounce and forswear all obedience to the General Counsels, that is, the whole corpse of Christendom represented therein, except it shall please the prince and prelates of our Country to agree to the same. Which is to make our prince, and our prelates either as superiors to all other princes and Countries, or at the lest as alienats and strangers from the whole body of Christendom beside, as though we had a proper Christ, a proper Gospel, and looked for a proper heaven, in the which other christened Nations should find no place. And what is this else, but by book Oath flatly to renounce the Catholic Church, and the communion of Saints, both which in our Crede we profess to believe? These be (M. Horn) the horrible absurdities that doth necessarily follow of this part of the Oath: And whereas M. Horn saith, it were over much detestable if M. Fecknam were moved to swear, but against one article of our Crede, M. Horn must needs confess this oath to be over much detestable, whereby not only M. Fekenham, but many other are moved and forced to swear against an especial article of our Crede: to wit, Against our obedience to the catholic Church. The effect of the Oath, and the sense of that Article, being clean contrary one to the other. The which, that it may to the unlearned Reader more plainly appear, in this Table following I have opened the whole contrariety. THE TABLE The Article of our Crede. I believe the Catholic Church. Hereof ariseth this proposition, as M. Fekenham by a similitude setteth it forth, and M. Horn alloweth it. fol. 100 b. All Englishmen being Christians ought to admit, and receive, profess, and obey the Authority of the Catholic Church, that is, of the bishops of all Christendom (of whom the greatest part are foreign prelates to our Realm) in matters of faith and doctrine touching the same. The contrary hereof is. No Englishmen though Christians, may admit, profess or obey any Authority of any foreign prelate without the Realm of England. The tenor of one part of the Oath, as M. Horn reporteth it: pag. 99 b. All true subjects ought and must renounce and forsake all foreign jurisdictions, powers, superiority, pre-eminences and Authorities of every foreign prince and prelate, state or potentat. The equivalent of this part of the Oath is. No true subject of England (though Christian) ought or may admit and receive any foreign Authority, power or jurisdiction, of any foreign prelate. Thus then, the equivalent proposition of the Oath, matcheth jump with the contrary of the Article, and standeth clean opposite to the equivalent of the Article. Thus. The equivalent proposition of the Article of our Crede, is. The equivalent of the Oath, is. All Englishmen being Christians ought to admit and receive the authority of foreign prelates, (the most part of Christendom being to us foreign) in matters of faith and Doctrine touching the same by them authorized. Contrary. No Englishmen though Christians ought or may admit and receive any foreign Authority of any foreign prelate. Subaltern. CONTRADICTORY. CONTRADICTORY. Subaltern. Some Englishmen being Christians ought to admit and receive the Authority of foreign prelates etc. Subcontrary. Some Englishmen being Christians ought not to receive and admit, but to renounce and forsake all foreign authority of all foreign prelates etc. By this it appeareth, that the equivalent of the Oath is clean contrary to the plain sense of the Article of Our Crede, set forth by M. Fekenham in the similitude of the members and the body: and in the same similitude confessed of M. Horn for good. By this also it appeareth, that a true subject taking the Oath (meaning as he sweareth, which if he do not, he forsweareth himself) and a true Christian professing his Crede can not possibly stand together, but are direct contrary one to the other. The one professing obedience to the body of the Church (consisting for the most and chiefest part of foreign bishops) as every member must obey the whole body: the other renouncing flatly all Authority of all foreign prelate's, as in deed no member of that Catholic body, but as a schismatical part cut of from the whole. Then will it to our great confusion of us be verified which S. Augustine saith. Turpis omnis pars est, Confes. lib. 3. Cap. 8. suo universo non congruens. Filthy and shameful is that part, which agreeth not with his whole. And which is not only shameful, but most pernicious and dangerous of all, what place shall then all General Councils have with us? Quorumest in Ecclesia saluberrima Authoritas: Epist. 118. ad janua. whose Authority in the Church is most wholesome, saith S. Augustin? verily the Christian inhabitants of our Country, more than a thousand years paste had learned an other lesson. For whereas the Pelagian heretics had infected the britains with their pestiferous heresy, Beda. lib. 1. cap. 17. the britains themselves being (as venerable Bede recordeth) neither willing to receive their lewd doctrine, neither able to refute their wily and wicked persuasions: devised this wholesome Council, to seek for aid of the bishops of France, against their spiritual enemies whereupon two learned bishops of France Germanus and Lupus were sent into Brittany, to redress and repress those heresies. If those Catholic Brittanies had taken such an oath, as M. Horn here doth justify: they should I trow have incurred perjury or treason, to seek redress in matters of religion at the hands of those foreign bishops. Likewise when Melitus the first bishop of London travailed out of England to Rome, Bed. lib. 2. cap. 4. Idem lib. eodem ca 19 to counsel Pope Boniface of matters touching the direction of the English Church: when also the Clergy of scotland, being troubled with the Pelagian heresy and schismatical observation of Easter, sent to Rome for redress, Master Horn must be driven to say, either that those bishops committed perjury and treason against their Princes, or else that in those days no such oath was tendered, nor no such regiment practised on Prince's parts, as this oath commandeth. Farther, if it be necessary, reasonable, or requisite, that all true subiestes must renounce the jurisdiction and Authority of every foreign prelate: How far was S. Augustine overseen, which so often times, so earnestly, and so expressly chargeth the Donatists, with the Authority, power and jurisdiction of foreign prelate's beyond the seas out of Africa? He saith of them, touching the accusation of Cecilianus their bishop, Epist. 48. ad Vincentium. Cont. Dona. post collationem. ca 4 Quem primò utique apud collegas transmarinos convincere debuerant. They ought first of all to have convinced him before his fellow Bishops beyond the seas. He saith farther, that in case Cecilian had been guilty, they ought not therefore to separate themselves from the Churches beyond the seas, of Ephesus, of Smirna, of Laodicea, and of other Countries. He saith, the whole Church of Christ is but one body: And they that separate themselves from that body, ut eorum communio non sit cum toto, quacumque diffunditur, Lib. de unitat. Ecclesiae. c. 4. sed in aliqua part separata inveniatur, manifestum est, eos non esse in Ecclesia Catholica, so that they communicate not with the whole (body) wheresoever it be spread abroad, but be found to be separated in some part thereof, it is manifest, that they be not in the Catholic Church. I say now M. Horn: if by virtue of this oath every true subject must renounce every foreign prelate: then did S. Augustine much wrong to the Donatists, to require them to convince their adversary before the Bishops beyond the seas, which doth import an Authority of all those foreign bishops over the Africans alone: them was he to blame to charge them with separation from foreign prelate's of Ephesus, Smirna, and Laodicea, and other Countries. Last of all, then was he far wide to pronounce them for men clean out of the Catholic Church, which severed themselves from the society of any part thereof. Then also might the Donatist (had he learned so far forth his lesson as you have) both easied himself of much travel out of Africa into Italy and France, and also might soon have stopped S. Augustine's mouth, saying: What have we to do with foreign prelate's beyond the seas, what need we care for their Authority, jurisdiction, society, and communion? We are true subjects of Africa. We renounce all foreign power, jurisdiction and Authority. And truly I see no cause, but with as good reason and conscience, all subjects of all realms may and aught to renounce by oath the power and Authority of all foreign prelates or bishops out of their land and Country, as we of England must and ought so to do out of ours. Which if it be once granted, enacted and agreed upon in all other realms, as it is in ours: what end will there be of schisms and dissension in the Church? What hope of unity can be conceived? Or how can ever unity be long maintained? What communion, what society, what fellowship can there be among Christian people? What Authority shall general Counsels have, which consist in manner altogether in foreign prelate's and bishop's, if this oath be accounted good? In the first, second, third, fourth, fift, sixth, Act. 4. pag. 304. &. 306. To. 2. Concil. seventh and eight general Council of Christendom we read not of any one Braityne or English bishop to have been present there. In the 6. general Counsels pope Agatho confessed that Theodorus the Archbishop of Caunterbury was called thither, and long looked for. But for his great charge at home, in those beginnings of the English Church he came not. Wilfrid of York was at Rome, but not at Constantinople where that general Council was holden. What then? shall our Church of England renounce the authority of all those general Counsels as the Authority of foreign prelates by virtue of this Oath? What can be more detestable or abominable? But they which conceived and endited first this third part of the Oath, of renouncing all authority of every foreign prelate, had they not (trow you M. Horn) a direct ey to general Counsels, and did they not by that clause closely disburden and discharge the whole realm of all obedience to general councils, namely to the general Council of Trent that then was assembled? And if they intended not so much, see you not then, how unadvisedly, how dangerously, and to how great a prejudice that part of the Oath was conceived and endited? Aga●ne if so much was not intended, how cometh it to pass, that in the injunctions where the Oath is drawn (as much as may be) to a gentle exposition, this part is not so interpreted, as it might not seem to exclude the Authority of general Counsels: then the which there is in the Church no higher or more Supreme Authority, except the Pope himself, that is the undoubted Head thereof. M Feckenham cleared. By this that hath been said appeareth M. Horn, how falsely and slanderously you charge M. Feckenham with three several lies l●wde, shameful, and monstrous. For first it is no lewd lie, but a foul and lewd heresy of yours, that you have erected a new faith, a new Religion, and a new use of Sacraments, not only to all the Church throughout the world before your days, but also from your fellow protestāns the Lutherans, the Osiandrins and the Anabaptists. If you take this for a slander, clear yourself of your horrible heresies and schisms in the table of Staphylus. It is no shameful lie, but a shameful and worse than a detestable case, that by this corporal oath you have forced many a soul to renounce and refuse in effect, though not in plain words (the devil himself would not be so bold, at lest at the beginning) these two Articles or points of our faith, I believe the Catholic Church, and, I believe the Communion of Saints. It is no monstrous lie, but a most monstrous and pitiful case that, you by oath renouncing the power and Authority of every foreign prelate in plain English, have made the Catholic Church which consists of all foreign prelates and bishops out of England, not of English bishops only, in plain English a mere foreign power and Authority out of England. For if every foreign prelate be renounced, is not all power and Authority of the Church which dependeth only of Prelates and Bishops, accounted also foreign, and for very foreign renounced? It is so. It is so, Master Horn. The Oath runneth largely and expressly. You can not, you may not, you shall not (God giving us his grace) blear our eyes with vain talk, or make us to say we see not, that which we see, we hear, we feel, we understand. You saw, you saw yourself M. Horn, A foul shift used by M. Horn. that the words of the Oath being taken as they lie verbatim (as you say they must) did expressly renounce the Catholic Church. And therefore (Mark well gentle Reader) You M. Horn thinking and labouring to remove this opinion from the Reader (for though you think in very deed, that nor Church nor prelate, but only the express lively word of God must be heard and obeyed, yet you dare not as yet for very shame to express that detestable mind of yours, the lusty brave Challenge of Master jewel offering to yield to any one sentence or any one old doctor withdrawing you perhaps not a little therefro) do tell him that the Oath maketh no mention in any one word of the Catholic Church, but it speaketh (say you) of a foreign Prince and Prelate etc. Wherein to avoid the manifest absurdity, you flatly belie the Oath. For the Oath speaketh not (M. Horn) of a foreign Prince and Prelate etc. But the Oath expressly saith, of every foreign Prince and Prelat etc. Now when it renounceth the power of every foreign Prelate, it renounceth the power of all Catholic Bishops without the realm of England, which all are foreign Prelates to the realm of England, whereupon in deed M. Fekenham concludeth, not as it were by revelation in a monkish dream without rhyme or reason (as that gross head of yours most vilely raileth against such a sober and discrete prelate) but with good reason and plain evidence, that therefore the Catholic Church is by Oath renounced. Not as though there were no difference between a foreign Prince or Prelate, and the Catholic Church (as you full pevishly make Master Fekenham to reason) but because there is no difference between every foreign Prelate (as the Oath speaketh) and the Catholic Church. Seing (as I have often said) the Catholyk Church consisteth of every foreign Prelate, without the realm of England, much more than of all the prelate's within the realm of England. Yea though every foreign prelate without the realm of England, may and have in many General councils prescribed over all the bishops of England, yet all the Bishops of England neither have or may at any time prescribe over every foreign Prelate without the realm of England. This oath therefore excludeth plainly the Authority of the Catholic Church, and fighteth directly against all good reason and order. M. Horns definition of the Church. M. Horns Church compared to the schismatical temple of Samaria. josephus de bello In daico li. 7. ca 30. & de Antiq. lib. 11. ca ultimo. joan. 4. Deut. 12. &. 2. paral.. 7. josephus antiq l. 11. cap. vlt. Now the definition or description of the catholic Church, such as ye bring, is much like to a shoe, that serveth every foot: or to a Welshmans hose, that serveth every leg. Simon Magus, Martion, Hebion, Manicheus, Photinus, Arrius, Nestorius, and all other sects that ever were, will grant to this your definition, and will thereby challenge the Church to their sect only, as ye do to yours. But herein your synagogue resembleth the false and schismatical temple that Onias made in Egypt: and Sanaballites in Samaria in the mount of Garizim, whereof the gospel of S. john speaketh, though it doth not so expressly name it. And though God had specially appointed the temple of Jerusalem to be his true and holy temple, and would all sacrifices to be offered there: yet the Samaritans took their temple to be the true and the only temple where God would be honoured in: And said that all offerings and sacrifices should be made there, and not at Jerusalem. The jews (saith josephus) when they had unlawfully married, when they had transgressed and violated the sabot day, or eaten meats, or done other things, contrary to the Law, fearing punishment for the same, would fly to the Samaritans, and to the false bishop there, and complain to him, that they were wrongfully vexed, at Jerusalem, and so did join with the said schismatical faction at the temple of Garizim. And, there was (saith josephus) continual strife, and contention between the jews and the Samaritans, Lib. 12. ca 1. Ant. each part with much stir and business, preferring and advancing their own temple, yea the matter went so far, and the Samaritans waxed so hot and fervent at the length, that they offered themselves to die in the quarrel and defence of their hill and temple. And this controversy, Idem lib. 13. ca 6. Ant. bursting out at Alexandria into a sedition, was tried (by the common consent of both parties) by the king Ptolomeus Philomitor. Each of them making this offer, that, that party should suffer death, whose proofs should be found defective and insufficient: the issue of the whole contention was, that the king pronounced and gave sentence for the jews: because they proved the continual succession of their bishops at Jerusalem from the beginning, and that the kings of Asia had ever honoured, and with great rewards enriched that temple as God's true temple. whereupon the proctors of the Samaritans were by the kings commandment put to death, whom notwithstanding the Samaritans took for as blessed martyrs, as M. Foxe taketh, any of his ragged rabblement in his new holy martyrologe. This schismatical synagogue is the very pattern of your Church M. Horn. Sentence hath been given against your synagogue, by many good and catholic kings, by many general councils. And it is a most evident, yea and a blasphemous lie against the Saints in heaven, to say as ye do, that all the Saints and faithful Christians, that be or hath been, are of your Church. What so ever viso ye put upon your Church, when we once come to the chief point, to know the Church by, and by the which the temple of Jerusalem was justified: I mean the continual succession without any interruption of bishops in the sea of Rome, and in all other openly known to be catholic Churches, maintaining that faith, that ye namely in this book impugn: than it will easily appear, what your Church is, and how unperfit your definition is, that lacketh one infallible mark, whereby ye may soon dissever the false from the true Church, to wit, the known succession of bishops from age to age, in all places of the Christened world, all which the word, Catholic, importeth: and the which therefore you have omitted, because you are not in deed of the Catholic Church: and because those marks, of universalyte, of antiquity, and of a known succession do utterly want, in that you call your Church. Else if you have those marks, and we have not, procure, I pray you M. Horn, that some one of your brethren (I provoke them all in this matter) do answer, if he can, to the Fortress of our first faith, by me set forth, and annexed to the history of venerable Bede. Let any one of them all disprove the reasons there brought, out of the Psalms, the prophets, and of the Ghospel, if he can, whereby it is clearly proved, that that Church only (which you call papistry) must be the true Church of Christ. I speak not this, upon any confidence of my own doings, which I do sincerely acknowledge to be very simple and base, but upon the confidence of the cause: which I do assuredly know in this point to be so strong, that all the heretical assaults you shall make against it, shall never be able to shake it. Thus of that. Now, whereas the Catholic Church requireth, as M. Fek. showeth a communion of Saints, in one doctrine, one faith of Sacraments and other things: the lack of this communion and participation of this one faith doth bewray what your Church is: which sore fain would ye salve, but with how evident and how notorious a lie, ye force not. For what passing and shameful impudence is it for you, to vaunt yourself and your new Ghospel to be at an atonement and agreement in religion: seeing that it is so evident to all the world, that the Lutherans and the zwinglians be at the dagger's point with their hot contention in the sacramentary matter? If the Church now of England be Catholic, then is the Saxonicall and Germanical Church heretical. As contrariwise if Luther's Church be catholic, then is your Church heretical. How can ye brag as ye do, that you now agree and consent in the unity of this Catholyk faith in necessary doctrine at home so much, you say, as never at any time more, seeing that so late one of your own protestant bishops, in open parliament stood against your book of articles lately set forth as agreed upon in your convocation? And seeing the said book, offered up to be confirmed by parliament was rejected? But what a perpetual shame is it to you M. Horn, and all your holy brotherhood, that yet to this hour the tragedy of your horrible dissension lasteth, even in the first foundation of your ragged Gospel in these low Countries here of Brabant and Flaundres? If you know not the case, News out of Flaundre● for M. Horn and his brethren. I will shortly certify you the news. In the town of Antwerp your brethren the Sacramentaries of Geneva had their churches fairly built. The Lutherans also had their churches. This was evident to the eye. Our own countrymen the merchants there can bear me witness. Is this an agreement M. Horn, that you must each have your Churches a part, your several preachers, your parted congregations? that one must be called the Martinistes Church (of Martin Luther so called) the other must be called the Caluinists Church, of Calvin of Geneva? But forth. It came to the point in Antwerp, that the calvinists took arms against their Prince, the xiij of March last being thursday. A worthy monyment of their holy profession. For will you know the cause why? Forsooth because the same day in the forenoon, certain of their brethren to the number of 200. and upward were slain in the field beside a number drowned in the river, and taken alive, nigh to Antwerp by a power of the Lady Regent, which said brethren with a great number more had made a profession (which also for certain days they had put in practice) to range about the Country, and to ease all Churches and Churchmen of their goods, marry yet of conscience, not injuring any lay man. The quick justice done upon such open robbers and thieves, the holy brethren of your sect not abiding, foreseeing that if such pageants were long played, their parts were like to follow, moved them immediately as I said to take arms against their Prince in Antwerp, to require the kays of the gates, the Churches of the Catholics to be disposed at their pleasure, the expulsion of all religious persons and priests etc. All which things were granted unto them by the governor of the town, upon a days deliberation, that all things might be done quietly: And they thus for the space of two nights and one day ruled all the roast in Antwerp. What outrages in that small season they committed, namely upon the poor grey friars, whose known virtues irked them most above all other orders, I let pass. The Saturday being the ten of March in the morning, when your brethren the Sacramentaries M. Horn, continuing still in Arms, and gaping hourly for the satisfying of their greedy appetite, thought presently to become Lords of so rich a town, they saw suddenly in Arms, bravely and strongly appointed against them, not only the Catholic merchants, Italians, spaniards, Portugals, Burgunyons and Antwerpians themselves, but also they saw M. Horn to their great grief the very Martinistes or Lutherans (between whom and you, you pretend always such agreement) in Arms also against them. And that morning lo M. Horn was the last joyful hour that your Sacramentary brethren saw in that town. For immediately finding themselves to weak, they were feign to yield up the artillery which upon the sudden two days before they had seasoned upon, and in stead of their beggarly and traitorous cry of which all Antwerp before did ring, in stead I say of Vive le Geus, to cry, full sore against their hearts: Vive le Roy. God save the king. From that day forward your brethren went backward. Valemcene the first and chief rebelling town within ix. days after was taken. The preachers within xiv. days after that, both Sacramentary and Lutheran have voided the town, yea the whole country. God be praised. But this I tell you M. Horn, that you may note, how the Lutherans themselves stood in Arms against the calvinists: Protestant's against Protestants, yea in the quarrel of protestanticall prows. In like manner, in the year .1561. in April, the Senate of Francford being Lutherans, Vide Franciscum Philippun, & Surium. banished out of their town the renegat calvinists of France. In the same year, the inhabitans of Breme being calvinists drove out the Lutherans. If all this will not serve to prove a clear and plain dissension in matters of religion against you, them behold an other argument invincible M. Horn. Your brethren the Sacramentaries in Antwerp have published in print a Confession of their false faith. The Lutherans or Martinists have printed also an other of theirs. Both are confuted by the Catholic Doctors of this University. The first by Franciscus Sonnius B. of Hartoghenbusch. The other by judocus Tiletanus, a learned professor of Divinity here. The Lutherans pretend to be called by the Magistrates of Antwerp. The Caluinists for lack of such authority, have printed their Confession Cum gratia & privilegio Altissimi. With grace and privilege of the highest. And this lo, was I trow a more Special Privilege, then M. jewels was, though he printed his Reply to, With Special Privilege. But such Privileges of he highest, every rascal heretic can pretend, no less than the Sacramentaries. And this is a high Divinity, the publishing whereof passeth all Prince's Privileges, and must be set from the highest himself. belike these men would seem to be called as S. Paul was, Galat. 1. Non ab hominibus, neque per hominem, sed per jesum Christum, Not of men, nor by man, but by jesus Christ, even with a voice from heaven. O peevish pride and most fond presumption. But to the matter. The Lutherans or Martiniste Ministers of Antwerp in their Confession have one whole Chapter Contra errorem Sacramentariorum: Against the error of the Sacramentar●es. It is the seventeenth in number. In that Chapter they prove the Real presence, and the Consecration of the Mysteries, and they labour to confute the fond objections of the Sacramentaries (used also very sadly of M. jewel in his Reply) against the Real presence, In Confut. Ministrorum Antwerp. fol. 92. &. 93, touching the tropical sense of Christ's words (which they deny utterly) and touching the ascension of Christ into heaven, which they prove (though by an other error of their own, as Tiletanus at large declareth) that the same article maketh nothing against the Real or Corporal presence of Christ in the Sacrament. Briefly the Lutherans do thus pronounce of your brethren the Sacramentaries Communion M. Horn, Vide Tiletani praesat. ad Senatum Antwerp. which you do make so holy a matter. The Lutheran Ministers of Antwerp in their printed Confession, say thus: Caluinistarum Leiturgia non uno sacrilegio vitiata, contaminataque est, eoque (proh dolour) passim innumeras animas aeterno exitio involuit. The Communion of the Caluinists is defiled and contaminated with divers Sacrilegies: and therefore (alas) it enwrappeth every where infinite numbers of souls into eternal damnation. Lo, M. Horn, what agreement in Religion there is between you Protestaunts. Your holy Communion of England is condemned for sacrilegious, and damnable of your own brethren the scholars of Martin Luther, whom your Apology commendeth for a most excellent man, and one sent of God to lighten his Church. All that frequent your holy Communion, Master Horn, are damned, say the Lutherans of Antwerp. brag no more, Master Horn, of your agreement. Your horrible dissension glistereth so clear, crieth so loud, and blustereth so great, that as long as we have eyes to see, ears to hear, and hands to feel, we can not choose but behold it in the face, we must needs hear the voice of it, and our senses must of necessity palpably feel it. And the sight, the voice and the sense thereof, convinceth unto us with an unvincible Argument, 1. Cor. 14. that your whole Religion is a clear heresy, as proceeding from the Devil the spirit of dissension, not from God, who is the God of unity, peace and concord. The .160. Division. Pag. 101. a. M. Fekenham. The fourth and last point is, that I must swear to the observation of this oath, not only to the queens highness and our sovereign Lady that now is, but also unto her heyers and successors Kings and Queens of this Realm. And because every Christian man ought to be careful to avoid perjury therein, I would right gladly know, that if any her highness successors should by the refusal of the said title of Supremacy, bind her subjects by the like statute law unto the clean contrary (experience whereof was of late made here in this Realm, that it is yet fresh in the memories of all men) In this case I would right gladly know, what authority is able to dispense again with this Oath. And if there be none at all, than the subjects of this Realm in this case are bound, and that by book Oath, to live in a continual disobedience to the laws of their sovereign Lord or Lady, King or Queen: the case whereof is very lamentable. And christian charity would, that it should be foreseen and provided for. And for mine own part (being further touched herein, than I have yet expressed) my very trust and hope is, that the charity of this our new reformed Church here in this realm, shall not be found so cold and short, as in providing so sharp laws and pains of death to force men to take this oath, of the queens Highness supremacy, but that it will provide also such means and ways, whereby the subjects may receive the same with safe conscience, and without all perjury. And in so doing, I shall most willingly submit myself, and receive also that part of the Oath. And shall further thereupon set forth the queens highness Supremacy with all Titles and Prerogatives, both by pen and word of mouth, and that with as desirous heart and glad will, as any subject that is this day living in her highness Realm. So that of the premises ye may well understand, that there is in me no other cause of stay, touching the later part of this Oath, then very conscience. And that I would before right gladly know (touching these forenamed points) how I might swear unto them, and not commit perjury therein. M. Ho●ne. As every Christian man ought to be careful to avoid Perjury both in this and all other matters: even so wise men may well know, what you mean by the conditional case ye put, of the refusal by her highness Successors of this Title: whereto the holy Ghost maketh you this plain answer: Spes Hypocritae peribit: The Hypocrites hope shall perish. You sprinkle this doubtful case with a powder of late experience, ●vhiche seasoneth your matter, De facto, non de jure. For it is not lawful for any Christian prince to refuse (.554.) The .554. untruth. It is not lawful for any Prince to take it. this Supremacy, which is the best part of his princely Ministry, and service unto God. Neither may be more bi●de his subjects by law to become sworens to the Pope and Popery, than to the (●55.) The .555. untruth. Horrible and Protestant like. great ●urke and turkerie. For that the Pope is a more perilous (.556.) The .556. untruth. Extreme slanderous, as all the world knoweth yea M. Horn himself, enemy unto Christ, than the turk: and Popery much more Idolatrous, than turkery. And therefore there is no humane Authority, that can dispense with the violation of this lawful Oath, made of duty unto the Christian Princes. This is a lamentable case I grant, that subjects should live in continual disobedience to the laws of the prince, whether it hap for that the laws be so ungodly, that a christian subject may not with good conscience obey them (experience whereof was of late made here in this Realm.) Or for that the stubborness of the subject maintained with a wicked, and yet a vain hope. be so stiff, that wilfully he liveth in a continual disobedience to the Godly laws of his soveragine, whereof experience is made now at this time in you, and a few others of your (.557.) The .557. untruth. The company of catholics is no conspiracy. conspiracy There is good cause, why ye should have your very trust and hope (as you say ye have, how ungratiousely soeverye think) assured of the charity of our church newly reform after the rule of god's word, whereat ye Popish * modestia vestra (M Horn) nota sit omnibus hominibus swine grunt and groin. For you, in your own self, have perfect experience, that the supreme governor under Christ of this realm, following the example of her heavenvly father, doth bountifully, of her goodness, with much more patience, and long suffering allure you to dutiful repentance. And hath further provided sundry means and ways, whereby to remove your wilful ignorance, and to endue you with sufficient knowledge of the truth, how ye might with self conscience receive this dutiful Oath of a true subject, without all perjury. The .5. Chapter. Of M. Fekenhams fourth chief point. Stapleton. IN this Division you lie and rail blasphemously and horribly, even as if Satan had presently entered into you, and prompted unto you at your back, both such cankered matter as your poisoned heart hath conceived, and also such foul terms, as your spritish pen hath indited. M. Feckenham demanded of you a very reasonable demand, that is, in case he or other should now take this new found Oath, and that it should so chance, that any of the Prince's successors should bind his subjects by the like statute law, to the clean contrary, how they might be dispensed withal. To this, you M. Horn, in stead of some good reason, fall to detestable railing: and ye say that the 2. oath must in no wise be given, for that the Pope is a more perilous enemy unto Christ, than the Turk, and Popery is more idolatrous, then Turkery. Of the which blasphemous answer (if it be true) it must by a necessary consequent follow, that not only all the catholic princes that now live, but that all the other that either lived in England sense it was first christened by S. Augustin our Apostle, or else where in christendom for this .15. hundred years, with all their people, be and have been idolaters, and worse than Turks. For by Popery M. Horn meaneth the Pope's religion: which is none other now, than it was when England was first christened, as appeareth by the history of Venerable Bede▪ and by the Fortress annexed thereunto. Yea then it was 15. hundred years passed. All the which time all Christian and catholic nations, were ever joined with the sea of Rome in one faith and religion. A heavy and a sorrowful thing it is to hear out of the mowth of one that beareth himself for a prelate of the see of Winchester, The Turk is much bound to M. Horn and, to his M. Luther and other his fellows. Art. 34. Vide Rofens. Vide dubitantium Lindain pag. 322. ex Manlio. ●om. 3 in loc. Com. pag. 195. such spitiful words for the which he may be full well a prelate of the Alcoran. How be it as horrible as this talk is, it is no unwont talk to the best of this new gospelling generation. For even the Apostle of them Luther maketh more account of the Turk, then of many Christian princes: and for a while he both preached and wrote, that it was not lawful for Christians to keep any war with him. Namely that to war against the Turks, was to resist God, visiting our iniquities by them. It is one of his Articles that he defendeth against the Church of Rome. And it is written that the Turk hearing of these his doings, and into what division he had brought Christendom, liked it very well: and inquiring of his age, when he heard he was fifty years old, I would, ꝙ the Turk he were younger, the time should perhaps one's come, when Luther should find me his good Lord: which when Luther heard of, he blessed himself and said: God save me from such a good Lord. Yea even to this day Luther hath many scholars that dehorteth Christian men to resist the Turks, especially Claudius Monerius one of the late holy martyrs of this new gospeling Church: who misliketh all the Christian men's defence, Vide Crispinum in historia pseudomartyrun lib. 5. in Claudio Monerio. that they make to withstand the Turk, and saith, that the knights of the Rhodes are nothing but a graf that the heavenly Father never graffed, and therefore ought to be plucked up by the root. Let no man now marvel, if the Turks prosper so against the Christians, seeing that he hath such friends at home here among ourselves. Whereof you M. Horn are not one of the least, but a very Goliath, and much worse than he, so desperately and so arrogantly defying and reviling the host of the living God, that is the whole catholic church, much more villainously and traitorously, than the said wicked Philistian did. For he was a sworn and professed enemy to the people of God: and therefore therein he did but his kind. But you professing yourself not only a friend, but also a Captain of the Christian army, (the place that you occupy, considered), do bear thereunto, a devilish and a Philistian heart, as your Turkish, not Christian pen hath uttered. And yet if ye had proved any thing all this while in your answer, to the derogation of the Pope's authority, or of the religion, that he maintaineth, men's ears would less have glowed, to hear you talk so Turkishlie. We have in deed great bravery in talk, and horrible words, without any substantial proof of the matter ye take in hand. Yea, ye are rather overborne and beaten down with a number of your own allegations and authorities. As for the place of job ye allege, that the hypocrites hope shall perish, doth no more touch M. Fekenham and his fellows, than it did touch the blessed man job. Baldad did untruly charge him with it, and ye do as baldly, and as untruly charge now the catholics therewith. The catholics have almost one thousand of years quietly possessed and enjoyed their faith in our realm that ye pevishely and proudly call Popery. The religion that ye profess hath not as yet, continued there under any one Prince ten years together. Miracles ye work none, though many wonders ye work, for your procedings are altogether to be wondered at. Neither the life of your sect is so virtuous, nor the learning so great, that either wise men, and such as have the fear of God in them, may suddenly be drawn from their ancient Catholic faith: or that ye may so bind Princes now living and all their successors, by such a Turkish answer to a reasonable demand, as they may not in any wise maintain that faith, that notoriously and commonly was maintained in England almost a thousand years, ere ye were borne. M. Feckenhans most reasonable demand therefore remaineth unanswered, and the foul absurdyte, which he objecteth unavoided, appeareth well (as it is in deed) by your silence unavoidable. ●he .161. Division. pag. 102. a. M. Fekenham. Here followeth the Resolutions of the are foresaid Scruples, made by my L. Bishop of Winchester. For a resolute answer to all the said Scruples, expressed in the forenamed points, his L. said, that he did much lament, that the right meaning of the Oath; had not been in season opened and declared unto me, when the only lack of the right understanding thereof, hath been the cause of such stays and distourbance of conscience. Whereas the Q. majesties meaning in that Oath, is far otherwise, than the express words are, as they lie verbatim, like as it doth well appear by her highness interpretation made thereof in the Injunctions. Thereunto my objection was, that undoubtedly her Highness did fully mean and mind to claim and take all spiritual government upon her: for besides the express words of the Oath, whereunto all men be bound to swear verbatim as they lie, without all change and alteration making of any word or sense thereof, her Highness (in the interpretation set forth in her Injunctions) doth by very plain words, claim the same spiritual government here in this realm of the Church of England, that her highness father King Henry, and her brother king Edward did enjoy and claim before her: in the which injunctions, and in the late act of parliament also her highness doth claim no more spiritual government nor no less, but so much in every point, as they had without all exception. For answer his L. did still continue in the denial thereof, and that her highness meaning was not to take so much of Spiritual authority and power upon her, as they did: with affirmation, that he did most certainly and assuredly know her highness mind therein. Then for some issue to be had of this matter, seeing that the meaning of the Oath, is not as the express words do purport: And seeing that his L. did so well understand her highness meaning therein, and thereby the very right sense thereof, I besought him, that his L. would take some pains for truths sake to pen the same: whereupon his L. did pen and write the interpretation of the said Oath as hereafter followeth. I.A.B. do utterly testify and declare in my conscience, that the Q. Highness is the only Supreme governor of this Realm, and of all other her highness dominions and countries, as well in all spiritual or ecclesiastical things or causes, as temporal. That is, to have the sovereignty and rule over all manner persons, borne within her Realms, dominions and countries, of what estate either Ecclesiastical or temporal so ever they be. And to have authority and power to visit the Ecclesiastical estate, and persons, to reform, order, and correct the same: and all manner errors, heresies, schisms, abuses, offences, contempts, and enormities. Yet nevertheless in no wise meaning, that the Kings and Queens of this Realm, possessors of this crown, may challenge authority or power of ministery of divine offices, as to preach the word of God, to minister Sacraments or rites of the Church appointed by Christ to the office of Church ministers, to excommunicate, or to bind, or lose. Of the which four points, three belong only to the Ecclesiastical ministers, the fourth is common to them with the congregation, namely to excommunicate. And that no foreign Prince, Person, Prelat, State or Potentate, hath or aught to have any jurisdiction, Power, Superiority, pre-eminence, or authority ecclesiastical or Spiritual, within this realm. And therefore I do utterly renounce all foreign jurisdictions, powers, superiorities, pre-eminences, and authorities: That is, as no Secular or Lay Prince, other than the King or queens possessors of the Crown of this Realm, of what Title or dignity so ever they be, hath or ought to have, any Authority, sovereignty, or power, over this Realm, over the Prince or Subjects thereof. Even so no manner of foreign Prelate or person Ecclesiastical, of what title, name, so ever they be, neither the See of Rome, neither any other See, hath or aught to have, use, enjoy, or exercise, any manner of power, jurisdiction, authority, superiority, pre-eminence, or privilege spiritual or ecclesiastical within this realm, or within any the queens highness dominions or Countries. And therefore, all such foreign power utterly is to be renounced, and I do promise, etc. ut sequitur in forma juramenti. M. Horn. These that ye term Resolutions, are none of (.558.) The .558. Untruth. Shameful. For they are your very own as it shall appear. mine, they are like him that forged them, false, feigned, and malicious. They be your own, either ye could not, or ye were ashamed to adjoin my answer to your silly objections, and therefore ye feigned me to utter for resolutions, your own pevissh cavillations. This report is false, that I should affirm the Queen's majesties meaning in that Oath to be far otherwise then the express words are as they lie verbatim. This my constant assertion, that her highness mind and meaning is, to take so much, and no more of spiritual authority and power upon her, than King Henry, and king Edward enjoyed and did justly claim, you untruly feign to be your objection. And that I should affirm of most certain and sure knowledge, her majesties mind or the very right sense of the Oath, to be otherwise than it is plainly set forth, is a malicious slander, whereof I will fetch no better proof, than the testimony of your mouth. Ye confess that the interpretation following, was penned and written by me, to declare the very right sense and meaning of the Oath, wherein ye have acquitted me, and condemned yourself, of a manifest untruth. For the right sense and meaning declared in the interpretation that I made, and you have set forth, doth (.559.) The .559. Untruth. your interpretation agreeth with your resolutions, the interpretation excepting certain jurisdiction in causes Ecclesiastical from the Prince, whereof doth follow, that (as the resolution's report) the Oath must not be taken, as it lieth Verbatim. plainly show the clean contrary, if you mark it well, to all that you here set forth in my name, under the title of my resolutions to your scruples. Furthermore, in the preface to your forenamed points, ye have declared by word and writing, that I did require you presently to swear and by oath to acknowledge her highness to be the only supreme governor in all spiritual or ecclesiastical things or causes. If this be true that you have said, it is manifest by your own confession, that I declared her maisties' meaning in that Oath, to be none otherwise than the express words are, as they lie verbatim. For when I show her meaning to be, that ye should acknowledge in her highness, the only supremacy, I do declare plainly, that she meaneth to exclude, * So all general councils are excluded. all other men from having any supremacy: for this exclusive only, can not have any other sense or meaning. And when I add this supremacy to be in all spiritual causes or things, I show an universal comprehension to be meant without exception. For if ye * Why them do ye exclude out of the Oath preaching. Ministering of sacraments binding, and losing. etc except or take away any thing, it is not al. And you yourself took my meaning to be thus. For ye challenge me in your second chief point, and call for proof hereof at my hand, which ye would not do, if it were not mine assertion and meaning. For why should I be driven to prove that which I affirm not, or meant not. Besides these in your whole travail following, ye labour to improve this (as you say) mine assertion, to wit, that all spiritual jurisdiction dependeth upon the positive la of Princes: If this be mine assertion, as ye affirm it is, and therefore bend all your force to improve it, ye witness with me (.560.) The .560. untruth. Not against himself. For first you said so: but in your resolutions, and interpretation of the Oath you say the contrary. And so in both places you are truly charged. against yourself, that I declared her majesties meaning, was to take neither more nor less authority, and jurisdiction, unto herself, than king Henry and King Edward had, for they had no more than al. And if her Majesty take any less, she hath not al. Touching therefore these false, feigned, and slanderous resolutions, as they are by you most untruly forged: even so, whether this be likely, that in a years space well nigh, I would not in all our daily conference, make (.561.) The, 561. untruth. M. Fekenham denieth it not, in any his words above rehearsed. one reason or argument, out of the Scriptures or other authority, in the maintenance of mine assertion: and to resolve you in the same, I refer to the judgement of all the Papists in the Realm, that know both me and you. Again, though ye do deny that I so did, and therefore do report none, there be many both worshipful and of good credit, yea and some of your own dear friends also, that are witnesses of our talk, and can tell what reasons I have made unto you, both out of the Scriptures, and other authorities and proofs out of the Church histories, such as ye could not avoid, but were forced to (.562.) The .562. untruth, M. Feckenham never yielded to any your proofs, reasons, or Au●horites. yield unto. And whether I should so do● or not, I might refer me unto the testimony of your own mouth, both than and sithen spoken to diverse, that can witness the same, that ye affirmed this (although untruely) that you never found any, that so much overpressed you, as I did, which your saying, although most untrue, yet it showeth, that somewhat I said to confirm mine assertion, and to confute yours. The sixth Chapter, concerning the Resolutions that M. Horn gave to M. Fekenham, to the .4. forenamed points. Stapleton. THIS process following standeth upon certain resolutions of M. Horns, as M. Feckenham saith. But M. Horn denieth them. And therefore being quaestio facti as they call it, and the doubt resting upon private talk, that passed between them: I can give no certain judgement: but must refer it, to the discrete consideration of the indifferent reader. Yet so much as I know, I will say, and that is, that I understand by such as have had at several times communication with the said M. Feckenham, and among other things, of this conference, heard M. Feckenham say, that touching these resolutions, he hath them of M. Daniel, them secretary to M. Horn, his hand writing, ready to be showed at all times. If it be so, it is likely, that M. Daniel can and will testify the truth, in case he should be required: of whose hand writing M Feckenham saith he hath also certain other things copied out. But yet because, the event of things to come are uncertain, let us imagine an unlikely case, that is, that M. Daniel will deny these foresaid writings to be of his hand: and that then M. Horn will much more sharply and vehemently cry out against these resolutions, than he doth now, that they are none of his, but like to him that forged them, false, feigned and malicious, with much other like matter that he layeth forth for his defence now. surely then though M. Fekenham were like to have thereby no great prejudice in the principal matter, (for whether these resolutions be true or false, the principal point is neither greatly bettered, nor much hindered by them) yet should M. Feckenham perchance greatly impair his honesty and good name thereby. Let us then as I said, think upon the worst, and whether that M. Fekenham as he hath, (as ye have heard,) much good defence for the principal point, so he may in this distress, find any good relief, for the defending and saving upright of his honesty. Ye will perchance good reader now think, that M. Feckenham is in a very hard and straight case: and that it were a great difficulty to find any apparent or honest help for him. And yet for all this there is good and great help at hand. For I will be so bold myself for one's, to take upon myself to make a sufficient proof, that these resolutions are not M. Fekenhams, but M. Horns own. And if his secretary will not serve, I will bring forth one other witness that shallbe somewhat nearer him, and that M. Horn can not, nor shall, for all the shifts that ever he shall make, refuse: and that is Master Horn himself, and no worse man. For though I be not very privy and certain what passed betwixt M. Horn and M. Fekenham at Waltham: yet of the contents of this his printed answer to M Fekenham I am assured, and so consequently that these are his resolutions, confessed more than once or twice, by his own mouth and pen. Consider therefore good reader, the state of the question touching these resolutions. Is it any other, then that as M. Fekenham avoucheth, M. Horn told him, for a resolute answer, that the queens Mai. meaning in the oath is far otherwise, than the express words are in the statute, as they lie verbatim? And that things are therefore with some gentle understanding to be interpreted, and mollified? And therefore, that though the words of the statute be general and precise, that she only is the supreme governor of the realm aswell in all spiritual or ecclesiastical things or causes, as temporal: Yet in no wise the meaning is that the kings or Queens may challenge authority or power of ministery of divine offices, as to preach the word of God, to minister Sacraments, to excommunicate, to bind or lose? To this effect come M. horns resolutions in the interpretation of the Oath, made by him at M. Feckenhams request as M. Fekenham saith. But M. Horn doth flatly deny, that ever he made any such moderation or mollification, and layeth forth many reasons to persuade the Reader, that M. Fekenham hath slandered him. He saith the right sense of the oath, is none other than it is plainly set forth. he saith: that the supremacy is only in the queens highness: for this exclusive (only) can not have any other sense, or meaning. He saith moreover, when I add this supremacy to be in all spiritual causes or things, I show an universal comprehension to be meant without exception, for if ye except or take away any thing, it is not all. Are not these your own words M. Horn? do not then so general and peremptory words of the statute, especially your precise exposition adjoined thereunto, expressly give unto the queens Mai. not only a simple and parted authority, but the chiefest, the principaleste, and a general or universal authority in all things and causes whatsoever, as to preach, to minister the sacraments, and to lose and bind, aswell as in other matters? Is it not evident, that these are things spiritual and ecclesiastical? Do ye not attribute without exception, as we have declared, by your own words the supremacy to the Queen in all causes and things spiritual? How then can it be possible, but that by a necessary consequent, ye do also attribute, to her the supremacy in the causes Ecclesiastical before rehearsed? And think you then M. Horn, that M. Feckenham and his fellows may take the oath with safe conscience? And think you, that though the pope had no authority in the realm, the queens Mai. might have so large and ample authority, the holy scripture being so plain to the contrary? Is it not likely therefore, that in your conference with M. Fekenham, ye did foresee this mischief, and therefore (though ye deny it here so stiffly) that ye gave him in deed such resolutions as be here specified? surely it is a thing most probable. For ye make the very same resolutions to him even in this your answer also. For do ye not expressly say a few leaves before, Fol. 96. &. 97. that princes neither do, nor may claim to preach the word of God, to minister the Sacraments, or to bind and lose? Do ye not say, Fol. 107. &. 108. that this is a spiritual government and rule, belonging only to the bishops and Church rulers? Do ye not confess within 4. leaves following the like? And that bishops have the spiritual jurisdistion over their flock, by the express word of God: and that thereby Princes have not all manner of spiritual government? Is not this agreeable to the resolutions that M. Fekenham saith he received at your hands? Again M. Fenkenham addeth, that in your said resolutions, ye say that the authority to excommunicate is not properly pertaining to Princes, but appertaineth to the whole congregation aswell as to them. Fol. 105.107. Do ye not confess, I pray you, the same twice in your answer immediately following after this? Why say you then, that these resolutions are feigned by M. Fekenham? Why should any man think that M. Fekenham should falsely charge you with these resolutions in private conference, that yourself in your own book, do so plainly and openly avouch? Why should not men think also such other things as ye here charge M. Fekenham withal to be untrue, seeing that ye do so falsely accuse M. Feken. for framing resolutions, in your name, that are your own in very deed? Or why should any man trust you in these great and weighty matters, which ye handle, that ye speak, ye can not tell what, bursting out into such open and fowl contradictions, as it would astone any wise man to consider them: A contradiction irreconcilable in M. Horn. attributing to the queens May. the supremacy in all spiritual causes or things without exception, and yet yourself, excepting diverse things spiritual, and giving the supremacy of them to the clergy? I would fain know of you that so lately ruffled so freshly with your opposition contrary, relative, privative, and disparatyve, and with your propositions contrary, subcontrary, subaltern and contradictory: if a man man may find a more fowl contradiction than this I now lay before you out of your own book. You say first fol. 104. b. in fine. When I add this supremacy to be in all spiritual causes, or things, I show an universal comprehension without exception For if ye except or take away any thing it is not all. Hereof, ariseth this universal affirmative. All spiritual causes without exception are under the supreme Gowerment of Princes. Item you say: fol 96. b. To feed the Church with God's word, to minister Christ's Sacraments, and to bind and lose (fol. 97. a.) Kings, Queens, and Princes may not, neither do claim or take upon them, this kind of spiritual government, and rule, or any part thereof etc. Hereof ariseth this particular negative. Some spiritual causes are not under the Supreme Government of Princes. Now let us consider, in what kind of opposition, these your two propositions do repugn. Thus stand the oppositions. All spiritual causes without exception are under the Supreme Government of Princes. Contrary. No spiritual causes at all are under the Supreme government of Princes. Subaltern. CONTRADICTORY. CONTRADICTORY. Subaltern. Some spiritual causes are under the Supreme government of Princes. Subcontrary. Some spiritual causes are not under the supreme government of Princes. By this it appeareth, that your two propositions do stand in the extremest kind of all oppositions: which is: Contradiction. And though this be a poor silly, and an insufficient shift, to make such resolutions, yet is it the best ye may now find to qualify and mitigate the general words of the statute. Which in deed are so general and peremptory, that they may in no wise be borne without some qualification. Which is now so notorious, that there is a qualification made in the queens May. injunctions, that men should not take the general clause so largely, as to collect thereby, that the Kings or Queens of our realm may challenge authority and power of ministery in the divine offices in the Church. Which doth agree with your resolutions: and therefore there is no cause in the world, why ye should deny them to be yours, and say that they be falsely and slanderously feigned upon you by M. Feckenham: uttering his own peevish cavillations, as ye say under the name of your resolutions. Now though this be a necessary interpretation and moderation, yet this doth not take away the scruple that remaineth, staying M. Feckenham and other to, in taking the said oath: for that this interpretation, Note. is not made by act of parliament, as the statute was. Neither doth the Act or Statute refer itself to any such Injunctions to be made, for the qualification or restraining of any thing in the Act or in any branch thereof contained, no more than it doth to M. Horns book. Neither hath any Injunction by the law of our Realm any force to restrain, weaken or mollify the rigour or generality of an Act of parliament. And in case it had, yet there remain many other as great scruples. Namely, that swearing to all causes, the principal causes are excepted, and so he that sweareth forsweareth, and beside, that all ecclesiastical authority, aswell of the sea of Rome, as of all general counsels, is evidently abolished, by the said statut. And in as much as general Counsels, do bear and represent the parson of the whole Church, whereof the Pope is head, no Christian man ought to receive such oath, employing the denial of the authority of the Pope the head, and of the whole body of the Church beside. The .162. Division. pag. 104. b. M. Fekenham. Hereunto I did make this objection following. These words of the first part of the oath, I.A.B. do utterly testify and declare (in my conscience) that the Q. Highness is the only supreme governor of this Realm, as well in all Spiritual or Ecclesiastical things or causes, as Temporal (besides the particulars expressed in your L. interpretation made thereof) they do by express words of the act give unto the Queen's highness, all manner of jurisdictions, privileges, and pre-eminences in any wise touching and concerning any Spiritual or Ecclesiastical jurisdiction within the Realm, with an express debar, and flat denial made of all Spiritual jurisdiction unto the Bishops thereof, to be exercised over their flocks and cures, without her highness Special commission to be granted thereunto: Act. 20. joan. 20. Math. 16. Act. 8. They having by the express word of God, commission of Spiritual government over them. Commission to lose and bind their sins. Commission to shut and open the gates of heaven to them. Commission to give unto them the holy ghost by the imposition of their hands. And they having by the express word of God such a dangerous cure and charge over their souls, that God hath threatened to require the blood of such as shall perish at their hands. Heb. 13. Ezech. Notwithstanding, these and many such other like commissions granted unto them for the more better discharge of their cure, and that by the mouth of God they may not exercise any jurisdiction over them, they may not visit them, they may not reform them, they may not order nor correct them, without a further commission from the Q. highness. surely my good L. these things are so strange unto me, and so contrary to all that I have read, that I am not able to satisfy my conscience therein. Your L. answer was, that for as much as all Spiritual jurisdiction, and authority to make Laws and to judge the people in courts Ecclesiastical, to visit them, to reform them, to order and correct them, doth depend only upon the positive Laws of Kings and Princes, and not upon the Law of God, therefore neither did the Apostles of Christ, neither the Bishops and their successors may exercise any jurisdiction upon the people of God, judge them, visit them, reform, order and correct them without authority and commission of the King and Prince. M. Horn. It is very true, that after ye had quarreled much in sundry things touching words and terms expressed in the Act of Parliament, and in the interpretation of the Oath: Ye did nevertheless finally agree in the whole matter thereof, finding only doubt in one point of mine assertion, namely touching jurisdiction Spiritual or Ecclesiastical, all which you affirmed, contrary to mine assertion, to be committed by Christ to Bishops and priests, as p●oprely appertaining to their office and calling without further commission or authority from Princes or any other power. The distinction that I made of Ecclesiastical jurisdiction, I will first repeat, and than put mine answer to your arguments. Spiritual jurisdiction is divided into two sorts, joan. Antonius Delft. lib. 2. the one is called cohibitive, the other not cohibitive. That which is called not cohibitive, is that jurisdiction or power that is exercised and worketh in the inward and (.563.) The .563. untruth. preaching and Ministration of Sacraments▪ pertain not to the secret Court of Conscience. secret court of conscience: that is (.564.) The .564. untruth. Neither preaching of the Gospel, nor ministration of the Sacrament● is referred to jurisdiction not cohibitive, by his Author alleged. the preaching of the Gospel, ministration of the Sacraments, and the absolving and reteininge of sins by the word of God in the public ministry. This therefore they call not cohibitive, because in the Court of conscience, no man is bound or loosed unwillingly or against his will. To exercise this kind of jurisdiction, neither Kings nor civil Magistrates, neither any other person may challenged or take upon him, unless he be lawfully called thereunto. jurisdiction cohibitive hath (.565.) The .565. untruth. For there is no such division of the cohibitive jurisdiction. two parts, the one consisteth in the exercise of excommunication, and circumstances thereunto required by Christ's institution: the which power or jurisdiction belongeth to the Church only, and (.566.) The .566. untruth. For excommunication properly belongeth to bishops. not to the Prince, Bishop or Priest: for no man hath authority to excommunicate, but only the Church, and those who receive authority thereunto by commission from the Church. The other kind of Cohibitive jurisdiction is a power or authority, that consisteth and is exercised, in foro causarum, in the court of causes, and appertaineth ad externum & publicum forum, to the external and public Court, and is defined to be, saith Antonius, an authority or power to declare the Law, give sentence and to judge in all controversies (pertaining to the Court) what is every man's right, and in sum, to do those things, that justice doth require according to the Laws. joannes Quintinus defineth jurisdiction, to the same effect, but openeth the nature thereof more plainly, saying, jurisdiction is an office and authority, to declare the Law, that is, to administer justice and equity, and to govern the people with right and Laws. when I name an office (saith he) I mean that jurisdiction hath in itself a necessity to declare the Law: for office is that which every man is bound to do: to declare the law, is, to exercise judgements, whereupon cometh jurisdiction (be meaneth, that jurisdiction hath the name and is so called of exercising judgements) judgements are exercised only of them that have jurisdiction, that is, power to judge. jurisdiction consisteth only in the contentions or debating of matters in Court or judgements. This authority to judge doth descend now from the (.567.) The .567. untruth. Quintinus speaketh there of temporal jurisdiction, not of Ecclesiastical. Prince alone, in whom only is all power. By virtue of (.568.) The .568 untruth. Antonius' falsified. He speaketh not of this jurisdiction, that is, of that which cometh from the prince only. this jurisdiction (saith Antonius) the Church ministers according to their offices rightly enjoined unto them, may lawfully visit, inquire of men's manners, punish the faulty, send forth apparitours or sommoners, city the sturdy and stubborn, repress their malepartnes, call and summon meet persons to the Synod provincial or general, confirm the matters decreed in the Synod or Council (.569.) The .569. untruth. A great deal left out in the middle▪ plainly confutinge M. Horns purpose, pardon faults, change or mitigate the penance enjoined for confessed faults, condemn Heretics and their writings, examine all men's writings who so ever, before they be set forth or published, and after due examination, judge whether they contain sound or pestilent doctrine, ordain Decrees, Laws, ceremonies and rites, constitute bishops and other Church ministers, also depose degrade, make them irregular and unable to have holy orders, determine illegitimation in persons for marriage, bestow Ecclesiastical benefices, and exact tithes and annates. These and many other things may be lawfully done by those that have the power of this Cohybitive jurisdiction, which is not (. saith he.) properly signified by the name of the keys: for although it may be named (in some respect) a Church key: yet it differeth very much from the keys of the first Court, that is, of the Court of Conscience. For the use of those keys, that are occupied in the Court of conscience, belongeth only to the evangelical Priests. But this jurisdiction may lawfully be exercised of those that are not ministers of the word and Sacraments, and are not Priests. As the two former parts of Ecclesiastical jurisdiction have their virtue, power, and institution of Christ immediately, even so this third part, which is said to consist in foro causarum, with those things which may be used or exercised by virtue thereof, doth depend upon the (.570.) The .570. untruth. Your own Author, Antonius calleth this Opinion Impium errorem: a wicked error. positive Laws of Christian Magistrates, or where, such wanteth, upon the positive rules and orders of that Church, where such orders must be practised, and not immediately upon the Law of God. The .7. Chapter. How M. Horn restraineth the Oath to one kind of jurisdiction, thereby to avoid M. Fekenhams unvincible Argument taken out of God's word. Stapleton. Among other objections that M. Fekenham made against the supremacy in the conference at Waltham, this was one. That Bishops had their warrant and commission for their exercise of their spiritual function and office by the express word of God: therefore he could not with quiet conscience allow the oath, that giveth the Prince supremacy in all causes spiritual, with all privileges, and pre-eminences in any wise touching any spiritual jurisdiction. He misliketh, An answer to Io. Anto. Delphinus. Io. Antonius Delde potesta. Eccles. Venet. 1552. in. 8. that Bishops having such commission by God's word, may not visit and reform their cures without a further commission from the Queen's highness. M. Horn thinketh to wipe all this away with a distinction borrowed, as he saith, of one joannes Antonius Delphinus. If any Catholic (good reader) should have brought a testimony out of this Author against M. Horn, it should have been with great contempt refused and rejected by and by. But now seeing M. Horn himself hath authorized him: I trust he will allow him to be alleged for our side also. And then shall M. Horn take small comfort of any distinction, to be found in him: being one that avoucheth the pope's supremacy, as much as any man, yea above all general Councils. Yet M. Horn thinketh so to bewytche his reader, as it were with certain magical incantations, that he should believe this Anthony to be of his opinion. We will therefore for the better disclosing of M. horns juggling, gather so much out of Antonius, as we must necessarily do, for the illustration of this matter. Two powers in the Church: the first of order or of the keys: the second of jurisdiction. This Antonius divideth (as other schoolmen do) all authority Ecclesiastical, into the power of order, and into the power of jurisdiction. The first power as he declareth, doth rest in the interpreting of the sacred Scripture, in the consecrating of the body and blood of Christ, in ministering of Sacraments, in giving holy orders, and beside other things in coupling of parsons together by marriage sacramentally. The power of jurisdiction he defineth as M. Morn doth, and doth divide it into cohibitive, and Not cohibitive: as M. Horn doth. But for the residue, M. Horn playeth the Medea, as he did before with Quintinus. And beside maketh such expositions, as neither his author hath, nor otherwise are true. And as skilful a Logician as he pretendeth himself: he neither followeth the order of his author, nor yet the true order and trade of the rules of Logik: that is, first to define, and then to divide. But perverteth and confoundeth, aswell the order as the truth of all things. Well we will walk also a little disorderly, to trace M. Horn in his own steps. Fol. 105. a. The iurisdistion not cohibitive (saith M. Horn) is that jurisdiction or power, that is exercised, and worketh in the inward and secret court of conscience, Lib. 2. pa. 76. that is, the preaching of the Ghospel, ministration of the Sacraments, and the absolving or retaining of sins by the word of God in the public ministry. This saith M. Horn, Lib. 2. pa. 36. b. & 37. a. but not his author: who referreth to the not cohibitive jurisdiction, only absolution in the secret Court of conscience. Who saith also, that preaching and expounding of holy scripture, with the ministration of sacraments is no part of jurisdiction ecclesiastical, but belongeth to the keys of order. Neither doth your author call preaching and ministering of Sacramens, the secret cowrt of conscience, nor he can justly do it: being a thing openly done, seen, and heard: Io. Anth. Delft. lib. 2. pag. 76. b. Quamuis praelati superioris voluntate quis parochiali sacerdoti subijciatur, tamen nisi ipse ultro subijciat seipsum: numquam poterit absolui à peccatis. In secretissimo eninforo conscientiae nemo absoluitur invitus. but he so calleth private confession only (because it is done privately and secretly, between the party and the confessor). And this no man doth unwillingly: for though a man may by commandment of his bishop be allotted to a certain parish and curate: yet unless he do submit himself to his parrochial priest, and open unto him his sins, he can never be loosed by him. To confess the which privy and secret faults he can not be forced, but by his own conscience. And unless he confess than, he can not be absolved. To this confession than it appertaineth, that is said: no man is bound or loosed unwillingly (which you for the tender love ye bear to private confession do altogether dissemble) and not to preaching or ministering of Sacraments, as ye seem to say. Which preaching and ministering of Sacraments do not appertain to thee, not cohibitive jurisdiction, as absolution doth, but to the power or kaye of order, which (properly to speak) is no jurisdiction at al. The which as M. Horn doth confound: so doth he imagine of his own fantastical brain, that the jurisdiction cohibitive hath two parts: the one standing in excommunication, belonging neither to king, nor bishop, but to such as have commission from the Church: the other in hearing of causes in the external and public cowrte. All this is but an heap of follies and lies. For first, his Author, doth not so divide cohibitive jurisdiction: as it doth evidently appear in him, and we shall anon more plainly open it. Again is not excommunication given and pronounced in public and external cowrt upon the hearing of causes there? Why do ye then sever, and dismember excommunication from the hearing of causes ecclesiastical? Now that excommunication should neither properly appertain to the prince, nor to bishops, but to the whole Church and congregation, is a fond, foolish and frantyk imagination of M. Horn, as even also his Author Antonius in this very book largely proveth. M. Horn in danger of a praemunire. And as it is not far from heresy: so perchance it is not far from a praemunire. What mean you Master Horn by this Church? The whole Church can not assemble together. And if you mean a general council, which in deed representeth the whole Church: when shall we have any man excommunicated? For of such councils very few, sith the Christian faith was first received, have been assembled. And yet as few as they are, diverse of them have already excommunicated such heresies as ye maintain. If ye mean of the particular Church where the party shall be denounced excommunicate, then must we have both men, women, and children solemnly summoned to assemble when any excommunication is made. For they be aswell parts of the Church, M. Horns doctrine maketh frustrate all the excommunications made in England these .8. years. as the wisest and the eldest parson of the parish. And as every part of your answer in this point employeth a great folly: so the greatest of all is, to see you after this sort to handle your matters, that ye have now by this your wise reason frustrated and made void all the excommunications, that have been made any day this .8. years, and more either by yourself, your officers, or by the arches, or any other Ecclesiastical cowrte in England. And now may the poor honest and catholic woman of Winchester, that upon false excommunication (if your own doctrine be true) hath been kept so many years in the Marshalsea, go home and serve you with a writ upon an action of false inprisonment: either else show us good M. Horn your commission, to excommunicate, that you have received from the Church or congregation. Commission ye have none from the queens highness: (for as you say, she hath no such power herself) from the congregation you have none: (from the which two you derive all cohibitive jurisdiction) and from the Pope, ye neither have, nor will have any. From whence fetch ye then your cohibitive jurisdiction to excommunicate? Now as I said take ye heed, least to your great folly be annexed also a dangerous praemunire. As for M. Fekenham, if he deny this and other Ecclesiastical jurisdiction to depend upon the prince only, he doth constantly, and agreeably to himself, and to a catholic man: but you neither agree with the catholic, nor with your statute Law, nor with your own self. The catholics say, that this jurisdiction cometh not originally from the prince, but being in the Church, when few or no princes were christened: the princes when they first received the faith, finding this jurisdiction in the Church, so left it, and did rather increase and amplify it, than in any part diminish the same. The statute saith, that the prince is supreme head in all causes ecclesiastical: by the statute also all jurisdiction ecclesiastical is united and annexed to the crown of the realm. Ye say, another irreconcilable contradiction in M. Horn. the statute must be taken as the words lie Verbatim, without any exception. What then in the world, may be thought more contrary or repugnant, either to the words of the statute or your own, then when ye say. For Noman hath Authority to excommunicate but only the Church? Which is to say: This power of excommunication belongeth to the Church only, and not to the Prince, adding also, as a reason: the prince hath no authority to excommunicate? Is not this also a manifest derogation and impairing of the prerogative royal touching matters Ecclesiastical, to imbar the Prince all authority of excommunication? May not M. Fekenham here return well upon you, your own words? What sauftie mean ye to her person, Fol. 3. co. 2. when ye bereave the same, of a principal part of her royal power? What quietness s●ke you to her parson, when ye go about to bring the subjects to a misliking of her royal power: which is a preparation of rebellion against her parson? Now what cozenage this opinion, if ye obstinately maintain it, hath with heresy, the holy scripture may witness. 1. Cor. 15. What commission had S. Paul of the Church, 1. Cor. 4. when he excommunicated the fowl fornicator at Corinthe? What is the rod that he threateneth the Corinthians withal, 1. Tim. 1. 1. Cor. 6. but this excommunication? By what commission of the Church did he either excommunicate Himeneus, and Alexander, or denounce Anathema to him that loved not our Lord jesus Christ? What commission had S. Peter, Actorum. 5. Nicephor. lib. 13. cap. 34. Idem lib. 12. Cap. 41. when Ananias and Saphira by him excommunicated died forthwith? What commission had all the Bishops sithence, namely Innocentius the Pope, that excommunicated th'emperor Arcadius? And S. Ambrose that excommunicated the Emperor Theodosius? with a thousand other, that denounced excommunication without any such false imagined commission? After your division, fantastically by you framed, ye come to the definition of Cohibitive jurisdiction: wherein ye do not so much miss of your author's words, as of his open meaning, comprehending under this general definition aswell excommunication, as any other matter. Neither are you content to tell us Delphinus definition, but of your large liberality, you add, an other neadlesse out of Quintinus: but so, that after your wont, ye infarse of your own, that all authority to judge descendeth from the prince alone. Which thing Quintinus saith not of Ecclesiastical, but of temporal jurisdiction, as we have declared before. And therefore, when ye infer by virtue of this jurisdiction, saith Antonius, See how M Horn playeth the Cacu● to take away the authority of excommunication from the Prince. the Church ministers, etc. meaning by the jurisdiction coming from the Prince only, ye lewdly lie, aswell upon Antonius, as Quintinus. For neither of them saith so, but both the quite contrary. Whereof doth follow, that all that, which ye rehearse immediately as out of Quitinus nothing furthereth your pretenced supremacy. And in case it did, as ye have hitherto played the peevish and thievish Cacus with your authors, to blemish the Popes: Idem lib. 2. pag. 84. Determinata in concilio confirmare, excommunicare, excommunicatos, cum ut decet resipiscunt ecclesiae reconciliare, casus reseruare, reseruatos casus relaxare, dare indulgentias, penas quae pro peccatis infliguntur, commutare. so now play you the like pageant to blemish the Prince's jurisdiction. For in the middle of your own allegation, ye have pared away certain words, touching the foresaid excommunication. In your author M. Horn after thief words, to confirm matters determined, in the synod or council, followeth, to excommunicate, and to reconcile to the Church excommunicate parsons duly repenting, to reserve cases, and to release cases reserved, to give pardons, to change and mitigate, and so forth, as in your allegation is contained. After this ye say, that this cohibitive jurisdiction may be exercised by such as are no priests. I grant you: but what is that for your purpose? For as your Author sayeth so, even so he sayeth, that at the least he must have the clerical tonsure or crown, without the which, though he were a religious professed man, he could not exercise this jurisdiction. Idem. Quamuis potestas Ecclesiasticae spiritualisque jurisdictionis conveniat praebeaturque non sacerdotibus: non tamen puris Laicis neque religiosis corona clericali carentibus. Pag. 85. And this is a good and a sufficient argument (if you will stand to your own Author Antonius Delphinus) why neither you, nor your fellows may lawfully practise any spiritual jurisdiction. Farther the very next Chapter in this Antonius, of whom M. Horn hath alleged so much, consisteth only in proving, that this second cohibitive jurisdiction is in the Church, by God's ordonance, not by the Commission of Emperors. And this he proveth expressly against such as M. Horn himself is. I mean against the scholars of Luther, against the present protestants of our days: calling their opinion and M. horns assertion here: Impium errorem. A wicked error. And thought Master Horn to prove by the same Antonius in the next Chapter before, that the second cohibitive jurisdiction depended of Prince's Commission, which in the Chapter following he doth of set purpose confute? O what is Impudence, if this be not? M. Horn. The .163. Division. pag. 106. You took upon you to prove, that this (.571.) The .571. untruth. M. Fekenhams objection is of the first kind, not of the second kind. second kind of Cohibitive jurisdiction with the appurtenances thereof: as I have rehearsed, was appointed by the express word of God immediately to bishops and Priests, without further commission of Princes or other power, which I denied. Now let us consider the force of your proofs, and see how they conclude your cause. First ye say, that the words of the first part of the Oath, do by express words of the Act, give unto the Q. highness all manner of jurisdictions, privileges and pre-eminences in any wise touching and concerning any Spiritual or Ecclesiastical jurisdiction within the realm, with an express debar and flat denial made of all Spiritual jurisdiction unto the Bishops thereof to be exercised over their flocks and cures without her highness special commission, to be granted thereunto: they having by the express word of God, commission of spiritual government over them. Your (.572.) The .572. untruth. Slanderous. M. Feckenham reported the effect of the Oath truly. evil dealing with the words of the Act of the Oath, expresseth an unkindly meaning to the Prince and the state: for that either the Act or the Oath debarreth or denieth expressly or convertly the to Bishops of this realm to exercise over their flocks and cures, without her highness special commission granted thereto, any spiritual jurisdiction assigned to a Bishop by the word of God, is altogether (.573.) The .573. untruth. For that is most true, as it shall appear. untrue. The Statute giveth, or rather restoreth to the Prince jurisdiction and Authority to inquire after what sort, the Ecclesiastical state and persons behave themselves in their cures and charges, to reform and corecte the disorders, negligencies, and enormities nisinge amongst them to the hindrance of their Office in their cures and charges, and in sum to order and provide, that they do execute their Office according to their calling in their cures and charges. This is not to debar or deny them the exercise of their office without a special licence. Neither do the (.574.) The .574. untruth. The express words of the Statute do give to the prince, power to Authorize men to use all manner of jurisdictions, as it is here reported, absolutely. Ergo it giveth to the Prince the jurisdictions also express words of the statut give to the prince all manner of jurisdictions in such absolute wise, as you report, in any wise, and any spiritual jurisdiction within the realm. For these terms, all manner, in any wise, and any spiritual jurisdiction, which you enforce so much, are not found in the gift or restitutition of spiritual jurisdiction made by the act unto the Prince: but in that part where the Act giveth afterwards power and authority to the Prince to execute the jurisdiction, now * Mark: If this jurisdiction be united to the crown which the Prince in all manner doth assign, name, and authorize other to execute, why said you before, that the Statute gave not to the prince all manner of jurisdictions? united and annexed to the Crown, by meet delegates, to be assigned, named▪ and authorized by commission or letters patents under the great Seal of england. If ye will hereof infer, that because the princes have by virtue of the act, full power and authority to name, assign, and authorize any person whom they shall think meet to exercise, use, occupy, and execute under them, all manner of jurisdictions, privileges and pre-eminences in any wise, touching or concerning any spiritual or ecclesiastical jurisdiction within their dominions or countries: Therefore all manner jurisdiction is in the prince to be exercised, used, occupied, and executed by them, for otherwise you will say, the princes cannot give and commit to others, that which they have not received and is not in themselves. Your argument is easily answered in few words: it is a foul (.575.) The .575. untruth. It is no sophistication at all: you prove no such thing. Sophistication, à secundum quid ad simpliciter. These words of the act, all manner, in any wise, are (.576.) The .576. untruth. For they are not restrained in any part of the Act. restrained and bounded, within the limits of the gift: where you of purpose, to beguile the simple withal, do let them run at large, and set them forth as mère and simple universals without any limits at al. The Act giveth or restoreth to the prince jurisdictions, privileges, superiorities, and pre-eminencies, spiritual and ecclesiastical, but it (.577.) The .577. untruth. This limitation went before, it is not added after those general words here noted. See the Act itself. Again it is in effect no limitation at all, as shall appear. addeth this limitation such as by any spiritual or ecclesiastical power or authority hath heretofore been, or may lawfully be exercised or used: And for that these words (as by any spiritual or ecclesiastical power or authority hath heretofore been, or lawfully be exercised and used) may be maliciously stretched by awrangling Papist, and might seem to some, that have good meaning also, to give over large a scope, the matter or object wherein, or where about, those spiritual or ecclesiastical jurisdictions, privileges, superiorities, and pre-eminences, are exercised, used and do consist, is limited and added in these (.578.) The .578. untruth. These words make no limitation of ecclesiastical jurisdiction authorized by the prince, neither do appertain thereunto. express words (for the visitation of the ecclesiastical state and people, and for reformation, order and correction of the same, and of all manner errors, heresies, schisms, abuses, offences, contempts, and enormities) which words of limitation in the gift, as they give not to the prince, the exercise of that jurisdiction that consists and worketh in the inward and secret court of conscience, by the preaching of the word and ministration of the Sacraments, which belongeth only and alone to the Bishops, neither do they authorize the prince to use that jurisdiction that belongeth properly to the whole church: even so do they give rightly unto the prince to exercise all manner jurisdictions privileges, superiorities, and pre-eminences in any wise touching, and concerning any spiritual or ecclesiastical jurisdiction, (.579.) The .579. untruth. This is a false addition not expressed in the Act, but rather denied by the generality thereof. contained under the second kind of cohibitive jurisdiction: for that may the Prince lawfully exercise and use, and doth not belong unto the Bishops, otherwise then by (.580.) The .580. untruth. To say so, is imp●us error. A wicked error, by Antonius Delphinus M. Horns Author. commission, and authority of positive Laws. This limitation of jurisdiction set forth by express words in the Act, you know right well: ye were also at sundry times put in mind thereof, and you were well assured, that your alleging the words of the Act so darkly, confusedly, and (.581.) The .581. untruth. Slanderous. The words of the Act were by M. Fekenham plainly and truly set forth. untruly, could never further your cause amongst the wise: and yet would you needs publissh them in this sort to the people, whereby at the least, to make both the Prince and the la odious unto the simple subjects. The Bishops have by the express word of God, commission of spiritual governmet over their flock that is, to feed the flock of Christ, committed to their charge, with God's holy word, as I have declared before. ●hey have commission to absolve the faithfully penitent, and to retain or bind the impenitent: that is, to (.582.) The .582. untruth. joined with an heresy, as shall appear. declare and assure both the one and the other, by the word of the Ghospel, of God's judgement toward them. What will ye infer hereof? Will ye conclude therefore, they have all manner of Spiritual government o●●urisdictiō over them? Young Logicians know this is an * Such an evil consequent you have used throughout your book, of certain dealings concluding supreme government in all causes. ill consequent, that concludeth upon one or divers particulars affirmatively an universal. Thus (.583.) The .583. Untruth. M Fekenham argueth not so. ye argue, Bishops by the express word of God, have commission to preach to their cures, to remit or retain sins: Ergo, they have commission by the express word of God, to Summon Counsels, or Synods general or provincial, to visit: that is, judicially sitting in judgement, to inquire of men's manners, and forinsically to punish or correct and to decide the controversies amongst the people: touching contracts of matrimony, whoredom tithes, slanders, etc. And to ordain Decrees, Laws, Ceremonies, Rites, etc. If this conclusion follow consequently upon your antecedent, them doth it overthrow the doctrine of your Romissh divinity, which granteth not to the Bishops immediately from God this power, without a special commission from the Pope, in whom only, as the * Then S. Bernardis a Papist who saith so Epist. 238. Solus ipse Rom. Pont. plenitudinem habet potestatis. Papists say, is fullness of jurisdiction and power. But if this conclusion follow not consequently upon the antecedent, as a man more than half blind may plainly see it doth not: them have ye concluded (584) The .584. Untruth. For M. Fek. thereby concludeth that by such commission being given to bishops immediately from God in some spiritual causes, the Princes authorizing for all manner of spiritual causes to be used and exercised, is wrongfully given by the Act. nothing at all by Christ's divinity, that may further the matter ye have taken in hand to prove. You falsely report the scriptures, in this that you say: the Bishops have commission by the express word of God to give unto their flocks and cures, the holy Ghost by imposition of their hands. For the place which ●e quote for that purpose, expresseth no such commission, neither (.585.) The 585. untruth, joined with an heresy. any other place of the holy scriptures. The Bishops have so dangerous a cure and charged over the souls committed unto them, that God will require the blood of those that perish (through their negligence) at their hands: and therefore hath given them sufficient commission for the discharge of their cures. It were therefore an * Here M. Horn condemneth the doings in king Edward's days, and now also for an horrible absurdity, as shall appear. horrible absurdity, if they might not exercise any jurisdiction over them: if they might not visit, reform, order and correct them, by that commission without a further commission from the Q. highness. But do ye not perceive, which the most simple may see, whereof also ye often were admonished by me, your warbling sleight, and Sophistical quarelling in equivocation of words and terms? As there are two (.586.) The .586 untruth. unproved as before. sorts of jurisdiction whereof the one not Cohibitive, properly belongeth to the Bishop which he may and aught to exercise over his flock, without any other commission than of Christ: so to visit, reform, order and correct, are of two sorts: the one a † A new term for a new doctrine. Scripturely visitation, reformation and correction by the only word of God, which the Bishops may and aught to exercise in time, and out of time, with all possible watchefulnes and diligence without any further † This is against the Act. For no jurisdiction what soever can be used, or exercised in England without the Prince's special commission. commission. The other kind of visitation, reformation and correction, is forinsecal or courtly, which I comprehend under the second kind of Cohibitive jurisdiction, and this the Bishop may not exercise without a further commission from the Prince. wherefore it is over foul an absurdity in you to infer, that the Bishops may not exercise any jurisdiction, visitation, reformation or correction, because they may not use this Forinsecal, or courtly without the Prince's commission. Stapleton. M. Horn after that he hath been so bold with Delphinus, to frame his arguments and wrest then at his own pleasure: he is as bold with M. Fekenhams arguments also. M. Feckenham argueth thus. Spiritual government is given to Bishops by God's special word, namely to lose and bind, to shut up heaven gates, Act 20. joan. 20. Math. 26. Act. 8. and to give the holy ghost. Ergo the Prince is not the supreme governor in all causes spiritual according to the words of the statute: Ergo all manner spiritual jurisdiction is not to be authorized of the Prince, as the Act expressly and most generally avoucheth: Ergo it is not true, that they may not visit or reform their flock without the Prince's commission. This arguments being good and sound, M. Horn frameth arguments of his own and then layeth them forth as M. Fekenhans arguments. M. Horn leapeth me in, and saith: that M. Fekenham took upon him to prove the second kind of cohibitive jurisdiction to be, by the express word of God immediately appointed to bishops and priests, without further commission of Princes. And this argument he doth more solenly repeat again in the .2. leaf following and goeth about to soil it, being his own, and not M. Fekenhans argument. For think you M. Horn, that M. Fekenham hath or will allow your first and second cohibitive jurisdiction? His examples are of the power of order, or of the keys: and of that, that you call the first Cohibitive jurisdiction. Why then do you so falsely charge him, leaving out the first two, and the very principal parts? M. Horn taketh upon him to restrain the general words of the statute to take away from the Prince the Authority of excommunication. Let us now hear what ye say further to him. You accuse his evil dealing with the words of the act, expressing an unkindly meaning to the prince and the state. Yea say, that though the statute doth give, or rather restore to the Prince, all manner of jurisdictions, or pre-eminences touching any Ecclesiastical jurisdiction: yet the words must not be taken so generally, but must be referred and limited to, and with other words of the said statute, that is, for the visitation, reformation, and correction of the ecclesiastical state, and of all manner of errors and heresies. By the which words of limitation the Prince as you infer of it, is as well restrained from doing any thing in the public ministery, by preaching or ministering Sacraments: as from that jurisdiction that standeth in excommunication, and hath only thereby the second kind of cohibitive jurisdiction. Surely here is a marueilouse and a wonderful interpretation. M. Horn urgeth M. Feckenham to swear, that he believeth in conscience, See the absurdity of M. Horn in expounding the Oath. that the Prince is Supreme Governor in all causes Ecclesiastical: He addeth as ye have heard, that those words must be taken without limitation or exception: and yet himself excepteth the chief things or causes ecclesiastical. Whereby a man may much better conclude and swear to the contrary: that is, that the Prince is not Supreme Governor in all Spiritual causes. Surely to imagine, and to defend the Prince to be supreme ruler in all causes, and yet to abridge his authority in so many causes, is much like, as if one should say and affirm of some man, that he is a king: but yet he is able to command no man to prison, for any offence: he is a king, but if there be any war, he can command no man to serve him: he is a king, but yet if there be any business, stir, or disorder in the people, he neither can punish them, nor make out any decree or proclamation against his rebels. Of the which premises (they being true) it will follow, that in deed he is no king. But surely, M. Horn me think (as I have said) that ye adventure very far and dangerously, when in the other part touching jurisdiction, ye restrain and limit the statute that giveth the authorizing of all manner of jurisdiction to the Prince, yea amnexeth, and uniteth the same to the Crown: to the second cohibitive only. And what kind of visitation or reformation shall the Prince make by his ecclesiastical authority, if you take away the authority to excommunicate, which all ecclesiastical visitors have, and ever had: and which also expressly belongeth to the second kind of cohibitive jurisdiction which you make to depend of only princes by your own author Antonius, as I have before showed. Consider M. Horn whether M. Feckenham may not justly say to you, that you deal very ill with the words of the act, and you express an unkindly meaning to the Prince and the state: Well: if there be no remedy, but that by your interpretation direct contrary to all reason and the manifest words of the statute, the statute itself may be so eluded: and that ye may by your own absolute authority spoil your supreme head of one chief point and power ecclesiastical, yea of the very cohibitive jurisdiction, which you would seem to grant him with this your pretty and newly coined distinction, which prince like ye would have to be as it were good and currant money: I mean of your two kinds of cohibitive jurisdiction, which I suppose shall neither be found in any good Divine, nor in any book of the temporal law in all England, yet would I fain hear from you of some good and convenient proof, why the second cohibitive, as ye call it, remaineth in the prince only, more than the first. Or why if that remain, excommunication being a part thereof remaineth not in the Prince also? I would know farther when ever this jurisdiction was taken away from the Princes, that it must now be restored again. Verily that which they never had, could never be taken away. And much less can it be restored than, which by no right ever belonged to them. For show M. Horn, if you can with all your study and conference with your friends but one example of any Catholic Prince, either in England, or in all the world beside, that gave the bishops any commission, for the second cohibitive jurisdiction: as ye call it specified in those examples that yourself rehearse out of Antonius. I will give you one whole twelve months, Edward. 6. Dei great. etc. Reverend. Thomae Cant Archiepisc. etc. Quando quidem omnis & juris di●endi authoritas, atque etiam iurisdictio omnimoda, tam illa quae Ecclesiastica dicitur, ꝗ secularis, à regia potestate velut à supremo cap. etc. Dat. 7. die. mens. Feb. An. 1546. & Regni nostri primo. Ibidem. Ad ordinandum igitur quoscumque intra diocoesin tuam Cantuar. ac ad omnes etiam sacros & presbyterari●s ordines ꝓmovendun present atosque etiam ad beneficia eccles. etc. Ib●dem. Per praesentes ad nostrum dunt axat beneplacitum duraturas cum cuiuslibet congruae & Ecclesiasticae coertionis potestate. Per literas datas. 4. Maij. An. 1547. ad eunden Tho. Cantur. Per alias litter. datas dict 4. Maii. An. 1548.28. Junii. Acts and Monuments Fol. 771. M. Horn, to bring forth but one such example. I never read, I never heard of any such commission. Only in the late days of king Edward the sixth his time, I find such commissions, by the which all Archbishops, Bishops, and other Ecclesiastical persons did then exercise all their Ecclesiastical jurisdiction. There I find, though untruly, that all jurisdiction as well Secular as Spiritual, sprang from the King as Supreme head of all men. By the said commission among other things the Bishops took their authority, not only to hear Ecelesiastical causes judicially, but even to give holy orders also: as appeareth by the tenor of the same. They received also by virtue of the commission all manner of power Ecclesiastical: and all this no longer then during the King's pleasure. And therefore within three months afterward, all Bishops and Archbishops were inhibited to exercise any Ecclesiastical jurisdiction, until the visitation, appointed by the king were ended. There was also an other inhibition made, that no Bishop nor any other Ecclesiastical person should preach any sermon, until such time as they were specially thereto licenced by the king. And have you not read or heard, M. Horn, that in the second year of king Edward the .6. letters were sent from the L. Protector to the Bishop of Winchester, D. Gardiner, commanding him in the king's behalf, and charging him by the authority of the same, to abstain in his sermon from treating of any matter in controversy concerning the Sacrament of the Altar, and the Mass, and only to bestow his speech in the expert explication of the articles prescribed unto him, & c? An. 15●0. Decem. 15. Acts and monuments. Fol. 777. Know you not, that two years after that the said Bishop being examined before the king's Commissioners at Lambeth, the tenth article there laid against him was, that being by the King commanded and inhibited to treat of any matter in controversy concerning the Mass, or the Sacrament of the Altar, did contrary to the said commandment and inhibition declare divers his judgements and opinions in the same? Ibidem. Fol. 867. And that in his final pretended deprivation, made at Lambeth the 14. of February, this (as it is there called) disobedience against the kings commandment, is expressly laid against him? Did not the king here take upon him the very first cohibitive jurisdiction, as you call it? Did he not abridge Christ's commission, given immediately to bishops, and limit the exercise thereof to his own pleasure and commandment? Again were there not injunctions given by the said king Edward, to the bishop of London D. Bonner, Acts and Monuments. Fol. 693. & 720. with Articles thereto annexed for him to preach upon? And did not his great examination and deprivation ensue thereof? Look in your fellow Fox, and you shall find the whole set out at large. If therefore by the Oath now tendered, the Queen's highness meaning is, to take upon her, Horn Fol. 103. b. & 104. a. so much and no more of spiritual authority and power, than king Henry and king Edward enjoyed and did justly claim, for they had no more than all, which you avouch to be your constant assertion, and the true meaning of the Oath, see you not, that by the oath even the Authority of preaching God's word, which Authority and commission Bishops have immediately from God, dependeth yet of a further commission from the Prince, which you call an horrible absurdity? See you not also, that the bishops had all manner of ecclesiastical punishment given them by the prince's commission, Fol. 108. b without any such commission made as you imagine touching excommunication? Thus have you taken away the very Scripturely visitation, Reformation, and Correction, (as you call it) from the Bishops and from their commission given to them by the word of God, and have made it to depend upon a further commission of the Queen's Highness pleasure: For that by letters patents she may and hath inhibited for a season the Bishops of her realm to preach the word of God, as her brother king Edward before did. And this you call M. Horn, An horrible absurdity, as it is in deed most horrible: and yet such as you see by virtue of the Oath our Princes both may and have practised. Whereof the whole alteration of religion hath proceeded in England. Woe to them that induced good Godly Princes thereunto. For in deed hereof hath proceeded the whole alteration of religion in our country. And hereof it followeth, that religion in our country shall never be settled, or of long continuance, except Princes always of one mind and judgement do Reign. Hereof it followeth, that we shall never join in Faith and Doctrine with other christened Realms and with the whole universal Church except our hap be, to have a prince so affected, as other Christian princes are. Hereof it followeth, that though our Prince be Catholic, yet this Authority standing, our Faith is not authorized by God's word and the church, but by God's word and the Prince, that is, by God's word so expounded and preached, as the prince shall command and prescribe it. Briefly hereof followeth, that the faith of England is no faith at all builded upon the authority of God and his Ministers, who have charge of our souls, but is an obedience only of a temporal law, and an opinion changeable and alterable according to the laws of the Realm. These are in deed most horrible absurdities, and most direct against the unity of the Church, which above all things ought to be tendered, and without the which there is no salvation. This destroyeth the obedience of faith, and setteth up only a philosophical persuasion of matters of Religion. This clean defaceth all true Religion, and induceth in place thereof a civil policy. To conclude, this maketh a plain and direct way to all heresies. For if ever (which God forbid) any Prince of our land should be affected to any heresy, as of Arrianisme, or any such like, the supreme Authority of the prince remaining as the Oath granteth, and as king Edward practised, should not all the Bishops either be forced to preach that heresy, or to lose their bishoprics, other placed in their rooms which to please the Prince, and to climb to hònor, would be quick enough to farther the proceedings? Any man of mean consideration may see these inconveniences, and many more than these, which of purpose I leave to speak of. To return therefore to you, M. Horn, whether you and your fellow Bishops have special commission from the queens Ma. for the exercise of your jurisdiction, I know not: But I am most credibly informed ye have none. And as for excommunication, ye will have none of her: neither will ye acknowledge any such authority in her. And therefore ye had need to look well to yourself, and what answer ye will make, if ye be ones called to an account, either for this kind of doctrine, so derogatory to the statutes, and the Queens M. prerogative, that ye would seem to maintain: either for the practice of your jurisdiction without any sufficient Commission. Remember now among other things, Take heed M Horn of perjury. M. Horn, whether this dealing be agreeable to your Oath, by the which ye promised, that to your power ye would assist and defend all jurisdictions, privileges, pre-eminences, and authorities, granted or belonging to the queens Highness, her heirs or successors: or united and annexed to the imperial Crown of the realm. Ye may think upon this at your good leisure. Remember also how you will stand to this your saying: that the express words of the Statute do not give to the Prince all manner of jurisdictions. The Act saith so expressly in these words. And that your Highness, etc. shall have full power and authority by virtue of this Act, etc. to assign, name, and authorize, when and as often as, etc. And for such and so long time as it shall please your Highness, etc. such persons, etc. as your Majesty etc. shall think meet to exercise, use, occupy, etc. all manner of jurisdictions, privileges, and praeeminences, in any wise touching or concerning any Spiritual or Ecclesiastical jurisdiction within these your Realms, etc. and to visit, reform, redress, order, correct, and amend all such errors, heresies, schisms, abuses, offences, contempts, and enormities whatsoever, which by any manner Spiritual or Ecclesiastical power, authority or jurisdiction, can or may lawfully be reformed, ordered, redressed, etc. Here in these words you see, M. Horn: full power and authority is given to the Prince, to authorize any man at his or her pleasure to execute or exercise ALL manner of JURISDICTIONS: in any wise concerning any SPIRITVAL JURISDICTION: Item to redress and correct all enormities whatsoever, which by any manner Spiritual or Ecclesiastical power, AUTHORITY or jurisdiction, can or may lawfully be redressed and corrected. Here, M. Horn, is no exception of cohibitive, or not cohibitive jurisdiction. Dare you then to restrain the Act of Parliament, to the only second kind of Cohibitive jurisdiction, a kind of jurisdiction by yourself invented? But mark how you have confounded yourself. You deny these general terms to be found in the gift of Spiritual jurisdiction made by the Act: But, you say, it is afterward found. And where afterward? Forsooth say you, In that part where the Act afterward giveth power to the Prince to execute the jurisdiction, NOW UNITED and annexed to the CROWN, by meet delegates to be assigned, etc. Mark well what you have said. You avouch the same jurisdiction which is by the Prince to be assigned, and authorized in all manner, etc. as before you have heard, the same so General and universal jurisdiction, I say, you avouch to be united and annexed to the Crown. If that, so general jurisdiction (as hath been said) be united unto the Crown, why deny you, that the express words of the Statute do give to the Prince all manner of jurisdictions. Are you not contrary to yourself? The Prince hath power to execute all manner jurisdiction by meet delegates by him assigned by your own confession, and the plain words of the Act. The same jurisdiction so by the Prince to be executed, is united to the Crown, you say: Ergo all manner of jurisdictions are united to the Crown: you say. It is united to the Crown: Ergo it is given to the Prince. Thus by your own words you are confounded, and proved untruly and wrongfully to reprove M Fekenham for missereporting the Oath in that thing, which both the Tenor of the Oath hath, and your own confession agniseth. You think this general gift may be avoided by the limitation, that you say, is added. But you report the Oath untruly. That limitation is not added to these general words: For it goeth before these general words in a former branch of this Statute. And yourself confess, that these general words are set after the gift or restitution of spiritual jurisdiction made to the Prince, in the which that limitation as you say, is found. And how can them, I pray you, that which went before, be a limitation of that which came after? Who seeth not your extreme folly herein, and the miserable shifts that you are driven unto? Now, you confessing the same general and universal jurisdiction of which by virtue of th'act, the Prince hath the assigning and authorizing, to be united to the crown, which is to be in the Prince, and reproving M. Feckenham for so saying, do find fault also with his reason, why he should so say, and do call his reason or argument a foul sophistication. His reason, as yourself reporteth it, is this. Princes have not themselves all manner of ecclesiastical jurisdictions: ergo they can not give and commit the same to others. That they have not all manner of jurisdictions yourself denieth: for they have say you only the forinsecal and Courtly jurisdiction, or as you call it the second cohibitive jurisdiction: and not any spiritual jurisdiction touching the secret Court of Conscience. Thus the Antecedent you grant, being forced thereto by the Scriptures by M. Feckenham alleged. Why deny you then the Consequent? You pretend for your denial, a limitation to be made in the Act, of those general words, all manner, in any wise, and any spiritual jurisdiction: but that is now found to be but a fable, by reason that this limitation goeth before in an other branch of the Act, and these general words do follow afterward, as yourself also confess. But to make a limitation, before the thing to be limited is spoken of, is against all order and course of writing, or reason. Yet your urge this to your Reader, again and again: saying: that the matter or object wherein or whereabout these spiritual jurisdictions (to be by the Prince assigned) are exercised, is limited and added in these express words (for the visitation etc.) which words are not added to the general gift of assigning and authorizing all manner etc. For they go before that general gift, neither do or can they limit that generality going (as I have oft said) before it. I desire the Reader for better trial hereof to consider and peruse the Act itself. Thus then this limitation that you pretend being but a mere forged and feigned matter, the argument of M. Feckenham standeth sure: and you yourself worthy of small thank, even at their hands which devised that branch of the Act, for restraining and limiting the general power and jurisdiction given to the prince, to the only forinsecal and Courtly jurisdiction, which you call the second kind of cohibitive jurisdiction. You see by that which hath been said, the Act giveth to the prince all together without exception. This shift therefore failing you, you frame to M. Fecknam such an argument, as he never made, but such as you have in deed throughout your book full many made: I mean upon one or divers particulars to conclude affirmatively an universal: which you say, is an evil consequent. For what other have all your proofs or conclusions been through out your book hitherto, them these? Such a prince called a Council: or investured Bishops, or deposed Bishops, or made constitutions ecclesiastical: ergo such and such a prince were the supreme Governors in all ecclesiastical causes: I say not, you have proved they did so, absolutely by their own Princely authority: You have miss in all your proofs as well appeareth to any indifferent Reader and peruser of both our writings: But I say, in case you had proved your Antecedents good, was not this always your Consequent? I say upon one or divers particulars to conclude affirmatively an universal? For what one Emperor or Prince among so many, so long a succession, and in so divers countries, have you brought forth, by whose example by sufficient enumeration of all parts▪ you might logiquely and reasonably conclude the affirmative universal, that is, the Supreme government in all spiritual or ecclesiastical things or causes. You have not M. Horn, brought any one such. Show but one, and I will allow you in all. And come you now to charge M. Fekenham with this foul and evil consequent? What? Thought you so by prevention to blame M. Feckenham, that you might escape thereby the blame yourself? or thought you we should have forgotten to charge you herewith, except yourself by charging an other, had put us in mind thereof? Upon this imagined Conclusion of M. Feckenhams you induce a dilemma, that whether the Conclusion follow or not follow, yet he shall always remain in some absurdity. But we say, that as he never made that consequent, so also that it followeth not. Then say you. If the Conclusion follow not consequently upon the Antecedent▪ than have ye concluded nothing at all by Christ's divinity, that may further the matter ye have taken in hand to prove. To the which I answer: That M. Feckenham hereby fully concludeth his principal purpose. For, Commission of Spiritual government being given (as he reasoneth, and you expressly confess) to Bishops immediately from God, by Christ himself true God, not only in some, but even in the principal spiritual causes, as to feed the Church with true doctrine, to preach the word, to bind and loose, to minister the Sacraments, it followeth evidently, that the Prince is not the Supreme Governor in all Spiritual causes: And that the Act hath wrongfully given to the Prince the full authorizing for all manner of spiritual causes in any wise concerning any Spiritual or Ecclesiastical jurisdiction to be used and exercised by persons, when and as often, and for such and so long time, as it shall please the Prince to authorize them: It followeth, I say, that the Act hath wrongfully given all this to the Princes authorizing, seeing that God himself hath already given it to the Apostles and their successors, Bishops and Priests in his Church, without any commission or authorisation for any prince of the earth whatsoever. God hath (your self say, M. Horn) given to the bishops sufficient commission for the discharge of their cures: It were therefore (you say) an horrible absurdity, if they might not exercise any jurisdiction over them, by that commission, without a further commission from the queens highness. But both by the practice in king Edward's days (at what time by the King's letters patents, bishops had a special commission to minister the Sacraments, and to preach the word, from the Prince, and at the Prince's pleasure, as it hath before been declared) and also by the plain Act in the queens M. days now reigning, bishops can not exercise, use, or execute any Spiritual jurisdiction, without the authorizing, naming, and assigning of the Prince, yea and that no oftener, nor no longer, than it shall please the Prince to Authorize them (so that being a Bishop to day, to morrow (by the Act) he shall be none, if it please the Prince to dissauthorise him, or discharge him) Ergo, by Master Horns own confession and plain constant assertion, both in King Edward's days and now in the Act, an horrible absurdity, is committed. You have said M. Horn a great deal more against the Act, than ever M. Feckenham said. Bear therefore with him and us I pray you, if to avoid such an horrible absurdity, both he and we refuse the Oath of this act. Some reason, I perceive, M. Samson and D. Humphrey of Oxford had, when they refused this oath, being tendered unto them by a Commission. They saw it was in deed a most horrible absurdity, so to weaken God's authority, that it must yet not of congruity, but of necessity and by force of law be bolstered as of itself insufficient, with the Princes authorizing and letters patents. The saw it was a great impiety, that bishops and Pastors by God's law ordained to such offices, should not oftener exercise their offices, nor no longer remain in the said offices, than it should please the Prince for the time to Authorize them and allow them. Therefore these men themselves, no doubt true subjects to the queens highness, and well willers to her Mayest. Person, refused yet this Oath, as is above said. But what a conclusion is this M. Horn, how fowl an absurdity is it, to take the Oath of supreme government in all spiritual things or causes, in which Oath also you say, nothing may be excepted: Fol. 104. for if you except any, it is not all (these are your own words) and yet to make now a limitation and to except so many and so principal causes ecclesiastical, in the which (as you say also) the Prince hath no government at all, but only the Bishops, as having sufficient commission herein from God himself? Whereas if there were in deed any limitation by the Act expressed or intended, (as there is not in deed any at all in the authorizing of meet persons to execute all manner of spiritual jurisdictions) it were yet open and manifest perjury to swear to a supreme government in all causes without exception. What if you, and your fellows intend not, or mean not all manner spiritual causes? Can this excuse them which swear to all, from manifest perjury? How many have received the Oath, which never understood word of any such limitation? If you mean in deed a limitation M. Horn, procure them that the limitation be put to the Oath expressly, that men may swear to no more than is intended. Else if you entangle men's souls in open perjury, under a covert limitation, assure yourself, you and all other the procurers hereof shall answer full dearly to God for all the souls that hereby have perished. And assure yourself, that, Malach. 5 as the holy ghost infallibly threateneth, he will come as a quick witness against all perjured and forsworn persons. Neither yet doth the limitation, excuse them from perjury, which swear Princes to be supreme governors in some spiritual causes, who are in deed no governors at all in such causes, nor ever had by the law of God, any spiritual charge or jurisdiction committed unto them. But yet if this limitation were annexed, the perjury were the less, and the dealing were more plain, though not therefore good. In the mean while you which force men to swear to all ecclesiastical causes, and yet will except so many ecclesiastical causes, how unreasonably and how absurdly do you write? But of these your contradictory assertions I have before spoken. If I should here ask M. Horn▪ what authority the parliament had, to give to the Prince, all or any jurisdiction at all in matters mere spiritual, that parliament especially consisting only of the lay, the bishops and the whole Convocation withstanding that gift with all their power, I believe it would trouble him or any wise man else to give any good reason therefore, the obedience of a Christian man to the Catholic Church (which all Christians in their Crede do profess) presupposed. If I should farther ask M. Horn again how he can go for a bishop, and write himself (as he doth in his book) the B. of Winchester, being called to that function only by the letters patents of the Prince, without due Consecration, 2. Tim. 1. or imposition of hands by any Bishop or bishops living, which imposition of hands S. Paul evidently practised upon Timothe, and the universal Church hath always used, as the only and proper means to order a bishop of the Church, I am well assured, neither he nor all his fellows, being all unordered prelates shall ever be able to make any sufficient or reasonable answer, (answering as Christian Catholic men) whereby it may appear, that they may go for right bishops of Christ's Church: but that they must remain as they were before, or mere lay men, or simple priests. Last of all take you yourself in deed M. Horn for a bishop? If so, them may you preach the word, minister the sacraments, bind and lose, upon the commission given you by God in holy scripture, without any further commission of the prince. If you may so do, them put the case, the Q. Mai. that now is, or any other king or Queen of England hereafter should forbid you to preach the word, to minister the sacraments, or to execute any other part of the bishoply function▪ and by commmission appoint some other to that function? Will you obey, or will you not? If yea, them do you forsake your duty and charge committed unto you by God. If not, then by virtue of this Act, you incur the penalty thereof. To this question answer M. Horn if you be able: and make, if you can, Christ's commission, the holy Scriptures and this Act to agree both together, that the keeping of the one, import not the breach of tother. But this shall you never be able to do while you live, standing to that, which in this your book you have confessed. Thus you see every way, how in your own sayings you are entrapped, overtaken, and confounded. And so must it needs fall out with every man that with any truth or ꝓbability, laboureth to maintain an untruth or absurdity. As for your forged and presumptuous limitation upon the words of th'Act, and abridging of the Q. Ma. autoriti therein expressed, I leave that matter further to be considered by the grave wisdom of the most Honorables. Here remain yet some untruths by you avouched, that would be confuted, which because the answer already waxeth prolix and long, I will but touch. The holy Gospel saith, whose sins ye retain shallbe retained: whose sins ye lose in earth, their sins shallbe loosed in heaven. Contrary to the plain words of the gospel you will have no actual binding or losing by the priest in deed, but a declaration and an assurance, that they are loosed, or bound: contrary I say not only to the words of the gospel, but also to the doctrine, and practise of the universal Church: where the priest hath ever said to the penitent: Ego absoluote etc. I absolve thee: and saith not, I declare and assure thee that thou art absolved. This is a plain heresy, Vide Ambros. de Penitent. lib. 1. c. 2. not much unlike to the novatians, whom S. Ambrose confuteth: saving that their heresy is not so large as is yours. For they, but in certain crimes denied power of losing in the church, referring that power in such cases only to God. You deny to be in the church any power at all, either of binding or of losing, referring all the power to God only, and not considering how God is to be praised, qui talem potestatem dedit hoimb. Who gave such power to men. Math. 9 Which the common jews had yet the grace to consider in the high Bishop and chief priest, Christ jesus our Saviour. An other of your heretical untruths in this place also is, that you deny the sacrament of confirmation: and that the holy ghost is not given by the imposition of the bishops hands. Math. 9 We read in S Luke, that Christ at his ascension, Lucae. 24. promised the holy ghost to them, which was performed upon whitsunday. Act. 19 And what was that but their confirmation? We read, that S. Paul after he had baptised certain parsons (in the which baptism no doubt they received the holy ghost) he put his hands upon them, and they thereby received the holy ghost. And this was their confirmation. Act. 8. The like is written in the place here by M. Fekenham alleged, of the Apostles Peter and john, that put their hands upon those that before were baptised, by Philip the Deacon, and they thereupon received the holy ghost. The which did in the primitive Church work in the Christians with invisible grace and visible miracles, at the time of their confirmation: as it now worketh by invisible grace only, with a strengthening and confirming of the ghostly and spiritual gifts before received: Vide caput Spiritus sanctus, et cap. de ijs verò etc. ut Episcopi de consecratione. whereof the Sacrament hath his name. And therefore the bishops commission for giving, by the imposition of their hands, the holy ghost, may be justified aswell by the former authorities of scripture, as by the authority, practice, and doctrine of the Church, that believeth, that the holy ghost is given for the increase of all spiritual strength in confirmation. The .164. Division. pag. 109. a. M. Fekenham. Whereunto I do adjoin this objection following. First for the time of the old law, which as Paul said was a very figure of the new, Moses, Aaron, Eleazarus, being Priests, they had by the very express word of God, this jurisdiction over the people of God, Exod. 24. Exod. 29. as to sit in judgement upon them, and that not only in Ecclesiastical, Num. 27. but also in Politic and civil matters and causes: they did visit them, they did reform them, they did order, correct, and punish them, so oft as cause required, and without all commission of any civil Magistrate, Governor, King or Prince. Besides that for the whole time of the old Law, there was an express Law made, where by all Civil Magistrates and judges were commanded in all doubtful matters, to repair to the Bishops and Priests, and to stay upon their determinations and judgements, without declining on the right hand or the left. And if that any man should disobey the determination once given of the Priest, Morietur homo ille: like as it appeareth. Deut. 17. M. Horn. This adjunct will not serve your turn, for it is not possible to stretch it without bursting, to join with that you must conclude. You begin, to join your work together with a saying of S. Paul, which he (.587.) The .587. Untruth. For S. Paul saith so, as shall appear. never said, you should have noted the place where S. Paul saith, that the old Law was a very figure of the new. There is no such saying: S. Paul saith to the Heb. that the Law hath the shadow of good things to come, etc. where he speaketh not (.588.) The .588. untruth. That is spoken of S Paul generally of the whole law. generally of the whole Law, but of the ceremonial part and Sacrifices, which were shadows of Christ and his Sacrifice, and not of the bishops jurisdiction after Christ, under the Law of the Gospel. Thus aptly also do your allegations out of thold testament serve your purpose: for one of the three, to wit .29 of Exod. hath no word of this jurisdiction: only it showeth the manner of consecrating the Priest, and the ceremonies the● about. In the .24. of Exodus it is said, that when Moses went up into the Mount, he said unto the Elders; Tarry us here until we return unto you. Lyra. Behold Aaron and Her, are here with you: if any man have aught to do, let him come unto them, that is, if any matter of controversy arise in mine absence, let Aaron and Her, have the hearing and deciding of it, as I should have, if I were present. By this place Aaron had no authority given unto him, but for a time in the absence of Moses, by commission from Moses, the chief ruler and governor of God's people, and that not alone, but having Her one of the Elders, an Ancient and a wise man joined in commission with him. This allegation maketh directly (.589.) The .589. untruth. It maketh not a whit against M. Fekenhams conclusion Aaron than being not yet Priest at all. against your conclusion: for it showeth that Aaron had this Authority but by commission from Moses the Prince of the people. In the third place, Num. 27. where God showed unto Moses, that joshua should govern the people after him, it is said: that joshua should stand before Eleazar the Priest, who shall ask Council for him by the judgement of Urim before the Lord, and at his word they shall go out and in, both he and the people of Israel: that is, when joshua standeth in doubt what to do for the better government of the people, either in the time of peace or war, he shall understand Gods will therein by the high Priest, to whom the Lord will miraculously declare his will and pleasure by the light or shining of the Urim and Thumin, and according to Gods will showed in the Urim, to the high priest, and by him to joshua, he must direct and order his going in and out: Ergo, say you. The Bishops and Priests now in the time of the Gospel, have jurisdiction by the express word of God, to keep Courts, to call Counsels, to make Laws, and forinsecallie to visit, reform, order, and correct their flocks and cures. The most simple can judge of this (.590.) The .590. untruth. For the sequel is good, as it shall appear. sequel. After like sort it is written Deut. 17. That when hard and doubtful cases come before the judges or inferior Magistrates, which cannot easily be tried or found out by them: than the inferior Magistrates shall go to the high Priest, and to the chief judge at Jerusalem for the time being, who shall show what is to be done: whose sentence and judgement must not be disobeyed, under the pain of death. Do you not aptly conclude, think you, that the bishops in the time of the Gospel ought to have this Courtly jurisdiction, because the high Priest, and the (.591.) The .591. untruth. The word temporal lewdly added to holy scripture. Temporal judge, did determine doubtful cases in the time of the old Testament? For the Priest alone did not determine all causes, as you seem to allege the texe, The .8. Chapter: Containing a Confutation of M. horns answer to the Objections of M. Fekenham laid out of the old law. Stapleton. IF a man that hath an adversary and such as he will and must fight withal, M. Horn useth no fair play with his adversary. may first by some pretty device find the means, that his adversary may be cast in prison, and when he shall come to the combat, may appoint him also his weapon, or by a sleight convey away his adversaries good weapon, and in stead thereof, give him some feeble, weak, and rotten staff to fight with, then may this crafty false soldier, soon be a conqueror. It seemeth now to me, that M. Horn, that pretendeth himself to be the prelate of the honourable order of the Garter, doth much dishonour himself, and showeth to great cowardness, offering M. Fekenham in this combat, to much wrong: first procuring by sinister accusations, that he was restrained of his liberty, and then afterward in this his answer, giving M. Feckenham by a pretty legerdemain as it were a poor slender and week weapon, for his invasive armure: who otherwise had provided for himself very well: I mean of such arguments as M. Fekenham hath made, which M. Horn taketh upon him to soil and confute: after what sort ye have partly seen, and shall forthwith have further experience. M. Fekenham then argueth after this sort. In the old Law which, as S. Paul saith, is a very figure of the new, Moses, Aaron, and Eleazarus, being priests had the chief judgement of matters Ecclesiastical without any commission from the civil magistrate: Again, all aswell civil magistrates and judges as other were commanded upon pain of death, to obey the determination of the priest in doubtful matters. Ergo the lay Prince is not the supreme head or judge in all spiritual and ecclesiastical causes. Ergo, the bishops may visit and correct their flock without any commission of the Prince. This is good reader M. Fekenham his good and strong invasive weapon. Ye shall now see, how M. Horn● doth slily and craftily imbecile and steal away this armure from him, and giveth him as it were a bulrush in his hand, and then steppeth forth, like a new Gohath against little David. And first, ye may note what a profound divine he is, that maketh it a strange thing to hear that S. Paul should take the old Testament for a very figure of the new. And yet this is so sure, Tha thE old testament is a figure of the new. Heb. 10. and so sound a principle, and so easy to be proved by all the new Testament: and so thoroughly and conformably confessed, as well of the catholics as protestants, that I marvel what Master Horn meaneth thus to wrangle. Nay, saith Master Horn, yet S. Paul saith not so: he saith in deed, that the law, hath the shadow of good things to come: but that pertaineth only to Christ's sacrifice, whereof the old laws sacrifices were shadows, and not to the bishops jurisdiction under the gospel. Why Master Horn, is there none other place in S. Paul, that may serve M. Fekenhams turn think you, 1. Cor. 9 Non obligabis os bo u● trituranti numquid debobu● cura est Deo? nam propter nos utique scriptum est. but this? You know M. Fekenham quoted not this place which you allege, nor any other, but being a matter so known and confessed, left it unquoted. Therefore if S. Paul say so, either here, or otherwhere, M. Fekenhans saying standeth for true. What say you then to S. Paul, that saith, that which was written in the old law, thou shalt not mussel the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn, to have been written for us: and thereby proveth, that ●he lay men should temporally relieve their spiritual pastors? Doth he not here take the old law for a very figure of the new? Again doth not S. Paul say, that Agar and the mount of Sina did represent the old Law, Ad Galath. 4. and Ishmael the Jewish Synogoge: as Sara and Jerusalem do represent the gospel, and Isaac the Church of Christ? which is our mother: as Saint Paul there saith. Doth not S. Paul there bid the Church of the Gentiles, that was before Christ barren and idolatrous to rejoice, for that she should pass the jews and the synagogue in all virtue, and in number of people? And doth not he further say, that as Ishmael persecuted Isaac: so should the false jews, the infidels and heretics persecute the true Church of Christ? And who is this Ishmael, if ye be not? that do not only persecute the Catholics, but villanously slander the whole Churches as Turkish and idolatrous, and as void and barren of all true religion? Doth not the said S. Paul writ also, that our Fathers were all underneath a cloud, and, that all passed the sea, 1. Cor. 10. Haec in figura facta sunt nostri, & mox. Haec oina contigerunt illis in figura. and that all were baptised by Moses in the cloud, and in the sea, and that they all did eat one spiritual meat? Doth not he also plainly say, that these things chanced to them in a figure? Here, here is the figure Master Horn, not of the carnal sacrifices only signifying the sacrifice of Christ: but of two of our greatest Sacraments, yea and if there be no more in number than ye and your fellows say, of all our sacraments. Here S. Paul saith plainly, that those things that chanced to the Israelites passing the read sea, and eating Manna, were shadows and figures for us: that is, the read sea of our baptism: the Manna and the water that flowed out of the Rock, of our Manna: that is, of the body and blood of Christ that the Christians receive in the blessed Eucharistia. As S. Ambrose, S. Augustine and the other fathers do most fully and amply declare. Here might I by this figure infer many things against your detestable doctrine and blasphemy blown out against our heavenly Manna, in the foresaid sacrament: but we will not go from our matter. Many like places of S. Paul I do here omit, which may justify M. Fekenhams saying, of the which it pleaseth you to pick out that one, that seemeth to you weakest, and yet it is as strong or stronger than any other. For though S. Paul doth speak in that place, of the sacrifice of Christ, that was shadowed by the carnal sacrifices of the jews, and goeth about to prove, that by the sacrifice of the Law sin was not taken away, but by the only sacrifice of Christ: Ad. Herald 10. Vmbran enim habens lex futurorum bonorum, non ipsam imaginem rerum. Greg. Nazianz. in ●rat. De S. Pascha. Pascha legal figura figurae erat. etc. 1. Cor 13. Adhuc in enigmate Illic facie ad faciem. yet the reason that he layeth forth for the maintenance of his assertion, can not be restrained to the carnal sacrifices only, but is a general rule to argue from the old Testament to the new: that is, that the old Testament was but a shadow: the new testament is the very express image of the celestical and heavenly things. And therefore Dionysius Areopagita, Gregory Nazianzene and others say, that the Church of Christ, standeth as it were in the middle between the state of the synagogue of the jews, and the state that shall be in heaven: whereupon it will follow that as those things, that be done in the Church presently, are a figure of those things that we shall see in heaven (as S. Paul calling our present state (in enigmate) teacheth) so those things that chanced in the synagogue were a figure of those things, that now are done in Christ's Church. And as our present state, walking by faith, is yet but in enigmate, in a dark representation, but afterward we shall see the glory of God fancy ad faciem, face to face, as S. Paul teacheth: so the state of the old law was according to the Apostle also, Paedagogia ad Christum, an Introduction to Christ, In orat. de S. Pascha. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. and as Gregory Nazianzen calleth it, Vallum quoddam inter Deum & idola medium, a certain trench or wall set indifferently between God and Idols, so as we should pass from that to God, as from the sampler to the verity, from the figure to the thing, and from the shadow to the body. And therefore among other things frequented in the Church, the ecclesiastical Hierarchia, or supremacy, as it is a lively, and an express image of one God, in heaven, above so many and infinite numbers of holy spirits: so no doubt, it hath his shadow in the old testament. And what other was he that M. Feckenham here speaketh of, but the high priest M. Horn? And was not he the supreme judge of all matters ecclesiastical? In all which causes lay there not an appeal, from all other priests iudegments in doubtful cases, to him keeping his residence in Jerusalem: even as the course of all appeals, in such matters runneth now from all parts to the pope, remaining in Rome? This is evident by the place that master Fekenham citeth: where it is written, Deut. 17. Qui autem superbierit nolens obedire sacerdotis imperio, ex decreto judicis morietur homo ille. that if any man stubbornelye and proudly disobeyed the priests commandment, that he should by the commandment of the judge be put to death. The practice of this supreme judge in causes Ecclesiastical may be easily justified, by many examples of the old testament, namely by the doings of the good king josaphat: who in the state of the law being the figure, renewed those things infringed and broken then by the idolatrous and heretical jews, the true image whereof, so long kept and reverenced among the Christians, is now broken by you and such as you are. This josaphat placed at Jerusalem the levites and priests and the chief of the families of Israel to hear such causes 2. Par. 19 as should be devolved thither from all other quarters, touching any question of the Law of God (concerning matters of belief) touching commandments (pertaining to the precepts moral) touching ceremonies, and touching justifications, that is, judicial precepts, given for the keeping and observation of justice. In all these the Levites, and priests, and the chief of the families were the judges: Amarias' aunt sacerdos & pontifex vester in his quae ad Deum pertinent praefidebit. Amarias' the high priest being chief over them all in these and such other matters pertaining to God and to religion. Thus lo at length ye see the shadow and figure Master Horn, in the old law meet together, not only for the sacrifice of Christ, but for the high and chief priest also, that should be among the Christians above all other states spiritual or temporal in all the world●. Neither can ye now, either deny this plain and evident figure, or deny, that there is any good sequel of argument to be derived from the figure of the old Law, to the new testament. And verily (to leave all other things that may be thereto justly said) you of all men can lest disallow this kind of collection and arguing, which to justify your new Laical primacy have used the said argument yourself. Neither do I build so much upon the figure, nor make so great account of it, as I do of the drift and force of very reason, that must drive us to condescend to the order of the Church, and doth extort our confession in this point. There is a greater necessity to have one high priest among the Christians than the jews had. Which reason is, that God loveth his Church, aswell as he did the jews synagogue, and hath as lovingly, as plentifully, and as effectually provided for the good government of the same, as he did for the synagogue. And therefore to pacify Divisions, schisms, and heresies, he hath provided us one spiritual Cowrte, to decide, and utterly to determine all controversies, rising upon matters of religion, as he provided for the jews. And so much the more, among Christians then among the jews, for that the Christians, being of so many and divers nations, tongues, wits, manners, and fashions, many controversies for faith and religion, and of more weight and moment, will also arise and springe up, then ever rose among the jews being but one only Nation. Especially the Apostle foretelling us, that heresies must arise. 1. Cor. 11. And if there be not one certain judge appointed, to whom all nations must indifferently obey, it must needs be, that Christendom shall continue in a continual broil and ruffle of sects and heresies. Which also have in our time so terribly and hugely increased, by nothing more, then that we give no ear to this one judge: and that we do not, as our forefathers have done, stay ourselves, and depend upon this the highest cowrte of all Christendom. Ye see now good reader both the figure, and the reason of the figure: what sayeth now M. Horn to it? M. Horn setteth forth his own arguments as though they were M. Fekenhams. Full prettily I warrant you: and that is, that Master Fekenham doth not aptly conclude, that the bishops in the time of the Gospel ought to have jurisdiction by the express word of God, to keep cowrts, to call councils, to make Laws, to visit, and to reform & caet. because the high priest, and the temporal judge, did determine doubtful cases, in the time of the old testament: for the priest alone did not determine all causes, as M. Fekenham seemeth to allege the text. Here may you plainly see, that Master Fekenham can not use his own armure, but such only as Master Horn will grant him. For neither M. Fekenham speaketh of the temporal judge, nor his text, be it Latin, Greek or Hebrew. They all speak of a judge, but nothing is there to signify this word temporal. This word is shamefully infarsed by Master Horn, to uphold his temporal supremacy, by this place most grievously battered. The judge and the high Priest is all one, as doth appear by the letter, and by the doing of King josaphat, which was conformable to the commandment of Moses, where as Amarias' is appointed the chief for spiritual matters, as Zabadias' was for those things that pertained to the kings office. Which may be well understanded for the bodily punishment of those that disobeyed the high priest, and to put them to death, if the case required, according to the Law. And in that sense it may be taken perchance for a temporal judge. This notwithstanding it agreeth well enough, with the high priest to. 1. Reg. 4. 1. Mach. 14 For that diverse times aswell before there were any Kings as afterward, the high priest had the chief regiment, both temporal and Ecclesiastical: but though he had not ever the temporal, yet had he ever the Ecclesiastical supremacy: And therefore it is written of the Prophet Malachi, Mala. 2. that the lips of the priests shall preserve knowledge, and they shall seek the law at his mouth. And it is here written, Deute. 17. who so ever disobeyeth the priest, shall die. He saith not, who so ever diosobeyeth the temporal judge. For the high Priest is the judge: Cypr. lib. 1. epist. 3. Quibus honor tantus de Dei dignatione conceditur, ut quisquis sacerdoti eius, & ad tempus hic iudicanti non obtemperaret, statim necaretur. all one person, and not two. And so S. Cyprian with the other fathers taketh place. When I speak of the high priest, I exclude not other of the clergy, with whom the Pope, in all grave and weighty causes useth to consult, and of congruence ought so to do, and so it was in the old Law. Neither M. Fekenham, as ye charge him, saith so, but layeth forth the text as it is, saying, that he that disobeyeth the priest, shall die for it. Now the high priest being this authorized, and Moses, Aaron, and Eleazarus being successively the high priests, it must needs follow, that they had the chief superiority for matters ecclesiastical, needing no further authority, then that they had by the express word of God, for the executing of their office, whether it were in giving sentence, and making decrees Ecclesiastical, or in visiting and reforming the priests, and Levites that were underneath them: which if ye can show they did not, nor could do, but by the civil magistrates authority, we shall then give you some ear. But ye prove it not, nor ever shall be able to prove this paradox. And therefore we pass not, whether it be true or no, that in the .29. of Exodus, there is never a word of jurisdiction. It is sufficient, that Master Fekenham prove Aaron to have been the high priest, as he was in deed, and so it appeareth there. Where now ye would return against M. Fekenham the .24. of Exodus, ye have forgotten yourself. For at that time Aaron was not yet made high priest, but afterward he was so made, as appeareth in the 3. chapter after: Videlicet cap. 28. Vide Exod. 24. &. 28. And therefore he might have a commission to hear causes in Moses absence well enough: Moses being then both the prince, and the high priest also, and he, as is said, being yet no priest at al. For your answer to the .3. place by M. Feckenham alleged, we might pass it, saving that by your coming in with Urim and Thunim you have much helped M. Feckenham his argument, and cut yourself with your Thunim quite over the thume. For though these outward miraculous signs, do not now appear in our high priest, yet the thing that was signified by Urim and Thunim set in the breastplate of the high priest, that is, light and perfection, as some expound it, or as our common translation hath, doctrine and verity: remain now in our high priest aswell as they did them remain in the high priest of the old Testament, yea and much more. And therefore the true doctrine is to be fetched at the high priests or bishops hands, in all doubts and perplexities of religion, and consequently all laws, decrees, and ordinances, made for the observation of his sentence and determination, are to be observed. To what purpose were it for priests to declare and determine the truth, if they might not by some forcible Law compel men to the keeping of the same, which is now chief practised in the Church by excommunications, as appeareth by general, and by other Counsels? The like hereof the jews had in thrusting the disobedient and rebellious persons out of the synagogue. Io. cap. 9 &. 12. Now to imagine such an unprobable and an unlikely paradox, that bishops having commission from God to feed the people, to teach them, and instruct them, and having a charge of their souls, for the which they shall make to God an account, may not visit and reform their flock by examinations, judgements and trials forinsecal, also by excommunication, deprivation, or such like ecclesiastical punishments, without a new commission from the Prince, and to bring nor reason, nor authority, nor Scripture, nor Doctor, nor council, nor example in Christ's Church at any time practised for the confirmation of it, but only a decree of lay men, contrary to their own Pastors and bishops: it is such a kind of persuasion, as well may be forcible, to the hand and the mouth, to extort from them an outward consent for fear of displeasure, but to the heart and conscience of a Christian man professing obedience to Christ and his dear Spouse the Church and performing the same, it shall never be able to pierce unto. As for the Sequel of M. Feckenhans argument, whereof you say, the most simple can judge, as though it were but a simple sequel, to infer upon the Bishop's authority in the old law, the jurisdictions of the bishops in the new Testament, or upon the example of Eleazar to infer forinsecal, as you call it, jurisdiction in bishops, it appeareth by that hath been said, both that the deduction from the old law to the new is right good and such as yourself most plentifully have used in the first part of your book: yea so far, that you charge M. Fekn. (though untruly) for a Donatist, for seeming to avoid such kind of proof: and also it appeareth that a vain thing it were for bishops now (after the example of Eleazarus) to have the directing, feeding, and ordering of God's people, if they had not withal power and authority to call back such as go a stray, to punish the offenders, to visit their cures, to reform disorders, to make laws for order to be kept &c. in vain I say, seeing that the one without the other neither was at any time available, neither can by any reason possibly be available. M. Fekenham. The .165. Division. pag. 110. a. The second, in the new Testament: like as our Saviour Christ did commit and leave the whole Spiritual government, of his people and Church unto his Apostles, and to the bishops and Priests, and the successors of them. So they did practise all Spiritual government over them, they did execute and give judgement in the Church of Christ: they did reform, order, and correct all disorder therein, and that without all commission, aid, or authority of any Temporal Magistrate, King, or Prince, for the space of three hundredth years in the primative Church of Christ, Lib. 1. hist. Tripa c. 9 unto the time of Constantine, he being the first Christian King and Emperor, which did join his sword to the maintenance of God's word. M. Horn. Like as the Apostles had in commission power from Christ our Saviour, to whom all power was given both in heaven and in earth: so faithfully they executed the authority and charge committed unto them, not seeking their own honour by usurpation, but the glory of Christ by the abasing themselves even unto the death. Their commission registered by S. Matthew appeareth in these words. Go and teach all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the father, and of the son, and of the holy ghost, teaching them to keep all things, which I have commanded you. How faithfully they exercised this authority according to the commission, S. Luke showeth in his Chronicle, called the Acts of the Apostles, and setteth forth one notable example hereof in Paul's oration, made to the Elders of Ephesus, called to Miletum. He taketh them to witness, that he kept nothing back from them, that might be for their profit, but showed them all the council of God. It is much (592) The .592 untruth. No marvel at all. For all God's Council that Paul showed, is not expressly mentioned in the Scripture. It is a most fond collection. marvel that Paul showed all God's council unto them and yet made no mention of any Forinsecal, jurisdiction as given them by the commission of God's word. The godly Bishops that succeeded the Apostles for many years after, followed the doctrine and examples of the Apostles, yet (.593.) The 593. untruth The Apostles exercised such jurisdiction with out any commission, but from God. never exercising jurisdiction Forinsecal, neither judging, reforming, ordering, or correcting, otherwise than buy preaching, publicly or privately without especial consent and commission of their Churches, during the time they had no Christian Prince or Magistrate. Constantinus, as I have said, was not the first Christian King: But he was the very first Emperor, as your own writers do witness, that (.594.) The .594. untruth. The bishops exercised all kind of jurisdiction ecclesiast. before Constantine was borne. gave Bishops authority to judge and exercise jurisdiction over their Clergy, and that gave to the Bishop of Rome power and (.595.) The .595. untruth. Constantin gave to the Pope no such Authority, but furthered the execution thereof. authority over other Bishops, as judges have the King over them, Dist. 86. and that gave to him power and jurisdiction over all other Churches, if that Donation be not forged which Gratian citeth. And Petrus Bertrandus a Bishop, a Cardinal, and one of your best learned in the Canon and Civil laws, in his treatise De origine iurisdictionum, affirmeth, that Theodosius and Carolus Magnus, did (596) The .596. untruth. For this grant touched not the ecclesiastical ordinary jurisdiction of Bishops. grant unto the Church all judgements. For the proof whereof, he avoucheth diverse decrees, and (.597.) The .597. untruth. Bertrandus affirmeth the plain contrary. addeth, That such grants were afterwards abrogated. The .9. Chapter: Of Spiritual jurisdiction exercised by bishops without Prince's commissions, and before Constantine's time. Stapleton. Master Fekenham bringeth now forth certain authorities of the new testament, for the justifying of his purpose, as that Christ committed to his Apostles, Act. 20. and to their successors the whole spiritual government, and that they did practise and exercise the same .300. years together without any manner of commission from Princes, even to the time of Constantin the great. M. Horn thinketh it a sufficient answer with stout asseveration void of all manner of probation, to avouch that they had a commission, he dareth not say now of their Princes (being all, or almost all infidels) but of their Churches. Yea well and soon said M. Horn: but if ye would withal have laid before your reader, but one author old or new, good or bad (unless perchance ye may bring some of your own fellows) and but one example for these .300. years, we would the better have born with you. Now ye tell us the Apostles did preach and baptize, and other such extraordinary matters, leaving the thing unproved, wherein lieth all the question between you and M. Feckenham. Your assertion is altogether incredible, M. Horns assertion incredible. and a very peevish fantastical imagination, that no man of the clergy or laity these 300. years was excommunicated, for any manner of offence, no priest was forbid to minister the Sacraments, or deposed for his defaults, by his bishop, but by a special commission of the prince, or whole Church. Ye may aswell pull down the tower of London M. Horn with your little finger, as ye shall be able to prove this fond assertion. But yet before Constantinus the great his time, ye think yourself cock sure. Let us then see how sure ye are, even of this your only example. Verily I suppose, that no man living, unless he hath a brazen face, would for shame of the world thus demean himself, Vide const. Apostol. Clementis in Tom. 1. Council vlt. editionis. in so grave and weighty matters, and link so many Lies together, as lines, as you do in this your false narration that now followeth. Constantine, you say, was the very first emperor, that gave bishop's authority to judge and exercise jurisdiction over their clergy. What Emperor then, I beseech you, granted to the Apostles authority, to make such Laws, and constitutions Ecclesiastical as be now extant, which have in them divers pains and penalties, as excommunication, and deprivation against the transgressors? Eus. eccle. hist. li. 5. c. 23. lib. 7. cap. 26. & 28. lib. 6. cap. 43. Socra. lib. 2. cap. 43. Niceph. li. 4. cap. 22. By what Emperors or other lay man's warrant, did the bishops keep so many Councils, as we find they kept, before this Constantine's time? Namely the .2. Synods kept against Paulus Samosatenus in Antioch, the Council of Carthage in Africa under S. Cyprian, the councils of Gangra against Eustachius, of Ancyra against the Manichees, of Neocesarea against the Archontici, the Counsels also under Victor the pope at Rome, under Narcissus at Jerusalem, under Palmas in Pontus, under Ireneus in France, under Bacchylus at Corinthe, under Fabianus also and Cornelius at Rome, and divers other bishops in other Countries, all before the days of the first Council of Nice under Constantin, all without any Commission from Princes of this world, all grounded upon their own supreme government and jurisdiction given unto them by th'express word of God. Euse. li. 4. ca 11. & li. 7. ca 26. Chryso in orat contra gent. quòd unus sit Deus. Euse. eccl. hist. li. 7. cap. 26. Euseb. lib. 5. cap. 28. Idem. & eodem lib cap. 25. What warrant had they for the ecclesiastical decrees by them there ordained? By what princes or lay man's commission, were Valentinus, Paulus Samosatenus, and the whole rabblement of forenamed heretics condemned and excommunicated? By what commission did the blessed bishop of Antiochia, and martyr Babylas, forbidden th'emperor, that he should not enter into the Church among the Christians? If the bishops had nothing to do, but to preach and minister Sacraments, and no jurisdiction in hearing of causes, before the time of this Constantine, what did the bishops of Alexandria with a solemn judgement seat, appointed within the Church there for the bishops of that sea? What warrant had Pope Victor, for th'excommunicating of the blasphemous heretic Theodotus? Yea what authority had he to excommunicate the bishops of Asia so far from him? What warrant had Fabianus the pope, of whom we have spoken to appoint th'emperor as we have said, to stand among the penitents as a parson excommunicated? By what commission made the blessed Pope and martyr Antherus certain laws ecclesiastical, Euseb. lib. 6. cap. 25. Vide decr. epist. Antheri. and among, other touching the translations of bishops? But here M. jewel will help you at a pinch like a trusty friend, and with a new shi●te will plead upon the state inficial, denying utterly the old decretal epistles, and among other this: and will stand upon no foggy or false ground, as he saith M.D. Harding doth, jewel in his reply. pag. 223. but set his fast foting upon a sure and an infallible reason, against Antherus epistle making mention of the bishops Felix, and Eusebius that were not borne all the time Antherus lived. But what if they were borne before him, where is all this your great hold then? Vide Sab. Aenead. 7. lib. 7. If I should allege Sabellicus, though he be a very good Chronicler, and well allowed, or any other Latin man, to make this epistle authentical, perchance ye would cry out against him and say that he were partial, and a papist to. I will therefore provide you a Grecian, and a late Grecian to, whom ye shall have no cause to refuse as suspected, Niceph. li. 14. c. 39 and that is Nicephorus, by whom it may well appear that the Grecians took this Decree for authentical. In him also, shall ye find express mention of the said Eusebius and Felix. Ye shall also there find a notable place of the authority of the sea of Rome that ye impugn, that such translations must be authorized by the pope's assent and confirmation. Seeing then Nicephorus is no papist, why ye call him one of our own writers I know not, being no Latin man, but a Grecian, and infected also with their schism: and yet not withstanding in all other things catholic, and full against your new heresies. And for that respect I am content to take him for one of our writers. And now would I see, what vantage ye can take at his hand, for the prouf of your fowl false paradox. If ye will prove any thing for the relief of your paradox, ye must prove, that no Christian bishops under the Roman empire, had authority to judge or exercise any jurisdiction over their clergy, but such as they had by commission and grant from Constantinus. Let us then hear Nicephorus himself, that every man may see, that ye can not possible stretch him without bursting, to join with that, which you ought to conclude. Qua verò imperator Constantinus obseruantia erga professionem fidei nostrae fuerit, Niceph li. 7. cap. 46. abundè illud quoque testatur, quòd clericos omnes constitutione lata immunes liberosque esse permisit: iudiciumque & jurisdictionem in eos Episcopis si quidem civilium judicum cognitionem declinare vellent, mandavit: & quod episcopi iudicassent, id robur & authoritatem sententiae omnino habere debere decrevit. Firma quoque & immutabilia esse voluit, quae in synodis constituta essent, & quae ab episcopis iudicata forent, ut ea â magistratibus rempublicam administrantibus, militarique quae sub eis essent manu executioni mandarentur, atque ad rem collata perficerentur constituit. This thing also (saith Nicephorus) doth abundantly testify, What manner of jurisdiction constantin gave to the bishops. what honour and reverence he did bear toward our faith, that he ordained by a law of his making, that all, that were of the Clergy should be free and exempted from paying tribute: and that in case they would refuse the judgement of the temporal magistrates, that the Bishops should have the jurisdiction upon them, and give sentence in the cause. And that the said episcopal judgement should have full strength and authority. He ordained also, that those things that were decreed in a synod of bishops, should stand strong and immutable, and that the bishoply judgement, should be put in execution by his civil magistrates, with the help of such soldiers, as they had underneath them. Stretch this now M. Horn, to your conclusion, if ye can without bursting. We have here a Law of Constantine, that those that be of the Clergy, may choose whether they will answer for any matter, what so ever it be before a lay man. They may if they will cause the matter to be devolved to the Bishop: but here is never a word of Ecclesiastical matters. In such Constantine giveth the bishops no jurisdiction, for they had it before. Neither is there here any one word, that the Bishops should neither summon Councils, nor make ecclesiastical Laws without the Prince's consent. Here is a plain ordinance that the lay Magistrates shall see, that the Synodical Decrees shall be put in execution. Whereby contrary to the conclusion that ye maintain through out this your answer, it well appeareth, that the Prince's part is only to see, that the Ecclesiastical decrees made by the Bishops be kept and put in ure, and not to have any necessary consent, in the allowing, or disallowing of them. Which appeareth also most evidently in Eusebius writing of this Constantine in this sort: Euseb. li. 4 cap. 27. De vita Constant. Quae ab Episcopis in publicis conventibus editae erant regulae, sua consignabat & confirmabat authoritate: He signed and confirmed with his Authority, such Canons or rules, as the bishops in their assemblies had decreed. But how? As though without his royal assent, the Canons should have been void, and of no Authority, as you would make folk believe? No, but (as the same Eusebius writeth in the same place) Ne reliquarum gentium principibus liceret, quae ab eis decreta essent, abrogate: to the intent that it should not be lawful for Princes of other Nations, to abrogate or refuse the Bishop's Decrees. And the reason he addeth immediately: Cuiusuis enim judicis sententiae Sacerdotum Dei judicium anteponendum esse. For the Emperor esteemed that the judgement and determination of the Priests of God, was to be preferred before the Sentence of any other what so ever judge. What kind of jurisdiction Theodosius and Carolus Magnus gave the Bishops. This man therefore M. Horn (to tell you it ones again) can be no fit example of the like government now by you maintained in the queens highness person, and all other the inheritors of the Realm of England. Now as Constantine did set the Clergy at their liberty, whether they would answer in any secular court: So the noble Emperor Theodosius set as well all the laity as the Clergy, at the like liberty, and ordained, Vide. c. quicumque etc. volumus. 11. q. Quicunque litem habens sive petitor fuerit (alias siue reus) vel d● cursis temporum curriculis, sive cum negotium peroratur, sive cum iam coeperit promi sententia: si judicium elegerit sacrosanctae sedis a●tistitis, ilico sine aliqua dubitatione, etiam si pars alia refragatur, ad episcoporum judicium, cum sermone litigantium dirigatur. Petrus Bertrandus in libello de iurisdictione ecclesiasticae. Sed dices quòd ista lex est abrogata ut videtur tangere glosa ibidem, sed hoc non valet, quia licet ista lex non fuerit in corpore juris redacta, tamen propter hoc non est abrogata. imò. etc. consider how handsomely M, Horn allegeth Bertrandus. Vide. Horn. fol. 82. that the plaintiff in any cause, any time before the sentence, might break of, from his ordinary judge, and bring the matter whether the defendant would or no, to the Episcopal audience. The which ordinance, the Great Charles about .400. years after renewed to be inviolably observed of all his subjects, as well the Romans and the frenchmen, as the almains, the bavarians, the Saxons, the Turingians, the Frisons, the Galls, the Britanes, the Lombard's, the Gascons, the Beneventanes, the Goths, and the Spaniards. As ye do with Constantinus Magnus, so do ye with Theodosius Magnus, and with Carolus Magnus' constitutions: bringing them forth out of your blind Cacus den, to dasel and blear the Readers withal: as though the Bishops held their ordinary jurisdiction Ecclesiastical, by these decrees only, which do nothing thereunto appertain, but show a marvelous privilege given to them to hear and determine also all temporal matters brought before them. And if these grants were afterward abrogated, yet was that no abrogation to the jurisdiction, that is properly the ecclesiastical jurisdiction: and your author doth not say, that such grants were afterwards abrogated, but doth reason against them that said they were abrogated. Neither is his book entitled De origine iurisdictionun, but de iurisdictione Ecclesiastica. And was this Petrus Bertrandus then as you say, a Bishop, a Cardinal and one of our best learned men in the Canon and Civil Laws? surely then may your Petrus Cugne●ius, though ye advance him as a worthy knight, go hide his head in a corner. For against him and his foolish fond arguing against the ecclesiastical liberty is all his book written, as I have before declared. Consider how handsomely M. Horn allegeth Bertrandus. Wherefore all this your tale that the bishops held their jurisdiction over their clergy by Constantine his ghifte, is as true, as your other adiuncte: that he gave the Bishops of Rome power and authority over other Bishops and over all churches. He might well as he did in deed, reverently agnize, Vide Horn Fol. 82. and by his Imperial authority confirm and corroborate the usual authority of the Pope's holiness: but that the original of this authority, as ye imagine, came from him, is a great untruth. The Pope's authority that M. Horn denieth, confessed by infidels. For even before his time, and after, not only the Christians, but the very infidels, such as were acquainted with the manners and fashions of the Christians did well know, that the Bishop of Rome was counted the chief bishop among them al. And for this cause Ammianus Marcellinus an heathenish chronicler writeth, that though Athanasius the good bishop were by a council of Arrian bishops condemned, Ammian. Marc. rerum Rom. lib. 15. Euseb. lib. 7. c. 26. yet that notwithstanding, Constantius son to this Constantinus, and an Arrian, and his plain open enemy, was earnestly in hand with Pope Liberius also to confirm their sentence, and was by him banished, because he would not condescend to th'emperors request. Again before the time of this Constantinus, Paulus Samosatenus bishop of Antiochia being deprived by a council of bishops, and an other appointed by the said council in his stead, kept still possession, nothing regarding either the sentence of deprivation or of excommunication. The Emperor Aurelianus being certified of this matter gave commandment, that he whom so ever the bishop of Rome, with the bishops of Italy should acknowledge for the bishop of Antiochia, should be taken and accepted for the true bishop. And so was Paulus by this emperors commandment, though he were a very infidel, thrust out, Vide libellum eius adiunctum epistolis Leonis 1. impress. Col. in fo. cap. 13. and an other set in. What proof have ye now, M. Horn, that the Pope hath his authority from Constantine? Surely Gentle Reader, none other but the Donation of Constantine, which he himself doth not believe to be true: and therefore doth qualify it with these words, if it be not forged. Which being so, why doth your wisdom then, Augustin. Stenchus Eugubin. M. Horn allege it? Neither will I here, though Leo the 9 doth constantly testify, that he saw and had himself the original of this donation laid by Constantinus own hand upon the body of S. Peter, though Eugubinus answereth to all Laurence Valla his objections against this donation: yea though Balsamon a Grecian, In Nomocanon, Ph●tij. titulo. 8. Distinct. 96. c. Constantinus. Quoniam ubi principatus Sacerdotum & Christianae religionis caput ab imperatore coelesti constitutum est, justum non est, ut illic imperator terrenus habeat potestatem. and an open enemy to the Pope, allegeth this Donation as authentical: I will not yet, I say, resolve any thing for the one, or the other side: I will take it as I find it, and take you withal, as I find you, and that is a plain open liar. For howsoever the Donation be, the Pope took not his Supremacy of this Donation, but had it before, of an higher Emperor, and that is, of Christ himself. Which the foresaid donation doth also openly testify, but not in the .86. as ye falsely quote it, but in the .96. distinction. M. Fekenham. The .166. Division. Pag. 111. a. At the first Council holden at Jerusalem, for the reformation of the controversy that was than at Antioch, touching Circumcision, and the observation of Moses Law, decree was made there by the Apostles and Priests, unto the believers at Antioch, that they should abstain from these four chief and necessary things, viz. ab immolatis simulachrorum, Act. 15. à sanguine & suffocato, à fornication, a quib. custodientes vos, bene agetis. The which first council was there assembled by the Apostles of Christ. The Decrees and Laws, were made there by them: The controversy at Antioch, was by them reform, ordered, and corrected without all commission of any temporal Magistrate, King, or Prince. M. Horn. God be thanked, that S. Luke maketh to us a sufficient report of this council, who maketh no mention of any (.598.) The .598. untruth. For the Apostles and the Elders, named of S. Luke were priests. Priest there present, as you untruly report, unless ye will think he meant the order of Priests, when he named the faction of the Pharisees. Whether the Apostles called this council or not: or that the Congregation being assembled together in their ordinary sort, for prayer, preaching, and breaking of bread, Paulus and Barnabas, with the others, sent to Jerusalem, did declare the cause of their message before the whole Church, which is more likely, I will not determine, because S. Luke maketh no mention thereof. But if it be true, that ye affirm, that the Apostles called or assembled this Council, than was it not the authority or Act of one Apostle alone. Besides this, if the Apostles called this council, they called the laity so well as the Clergy to the council: yea, as may seem probable, more of the laity than of the Clergy. The decrees were not made by the Apostles (.599.) The .599. untruth. M. Feckenhan said not of the Apostles alone, but by the Apostles and priests, which is true. alone, as you falsely feign. For S. Luke saith, the decree was made by the Apostles, Elders, and the (.600.) The .600. untruth. S. Luke saith no such thing of the whole congregation. whole Congregation. The Apostles, I grant, as was most convenient with the Elders had the debating, arguing and discussing of the question in controversy. They declared out of the holy Scriptures, what was the truth: And I doubt not but they declared to the Church, what they thought most convenient to be determined: But the determination and decree, was by the common consent, both of the Apostles, Elders, and (.601.) The .601. untruth. The people had not to do with determination of it. people. Therefore this controversy was reform, ordered, and corrected, not by the authority of the Apostles alone, without the Elders, neither they together did it without the assent of the Church, and so this allegation maketh no (.602.) The .602. untruth. For it proveth, jurisdiction in the clergy, and power to make ecclesiastical laws, without conmission from the Prince. Act. 15. Concerning the decree of the Apostles made at Jerusalem. deal for your purpose, but rather clean against it. Stapleton. There followeth now an other reason out of the new testament, brought forth by M. Fekenham. The effect whereof is, that the Apostles and other priests, both assembled in council, and reform wrong opinions among the Christians, setting abroad their decrees without any conmission of any civil magistrate: which is quite contrary to the absurd opinion maintained by M. Horn: who is feign therefore to wince hither and thither, and wotteth not well where to rest himself for a resolute answer. First he quarreleth with the word, Priests, and to no purpose: Concerning this word priest. the argument remaining sound and whole, be they to be called Priests, or be they to be called Elders. For though before the word, Ministers, did like M. Horn well, yet the word Elders liketh him here better. Priests he is assured there were none among the Apostles, in this council, unless they were the Pharisees. And so with his pleasant pharisaical mirth, he maketh the Apostles themselves Pharisees. For Priests it is certain they were, Prebstre. Prete. Priester. Priest. as I have declared before. Now for the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, (which word the Latin and our tongue, and almost all other tongues in Europa, namely the French, the Italian, the Spaynishe, the high and low dutch, yea and all other as far as I can yet learn, do express by a like word derived from the Greek) though it signify an elder in age, by the proper signification of the Greek word, yet in scripture it signifieth that office and dignity in a man that we call Priesthood: that is, such an Elder as is a Priest withal. And yet not always to be so called for his age, as appeareth by Timothee who was but young. Truth it is, that this word in Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, sometime signifieth the inferior in dignity, and him that is under the Bishop, and sometime the Bishop. As sometime this word Apostolus, signifieth none of the twelve Apostles, but a Bishop: and so is the one and the other confounded in Scripture. Whereof Theodoretus is an undoubted witness. For thus he writeth: Theodoret. in commentar. in epi. 1. Tim. 3. & Phil. 2. Eosdem olim vocabant presbyteros & Episcopos, eos autem qui nunc vocantur Episcopi, nominabant Apostolos. Procedente autem tempore nomen quidem Apostolorum reliquerunt ijs qui verè erant Apostoli: Episcopatus autem appellationem imposuerunt ijs, qui olim appellabantur Apostoli. Ita Philippensium Apostolus erat Epaphroditus, Ita Cretensium Titus, Asianorum Timotheus. Hom. 36. in 1. cor. 4. In the old time (he meaneth the Primitive Church, as with the like term Chrysostom doth) men called Priests and Bishops all one. But those which are now called Bishops, they called Apostles. Afterward in process of time, they left the names of Apostles, to those which were in deed Apostles. And bishops they called those, which in old time were called Apostles. So Epaphroditus was the Apostle of the Philippenses, so Titus of the people of Creta, and Timothe of the Asians. Thus then, those which were in deed Bishops, being in the Apostles time called Priests, verily in this place also of the Acts, by these words Priests, may very well be taken not only simple Priests, but even those that were Bishops too. And then hath M. Horn lost all the grace of his Pharisaical jesting. But now is the man in a great muse with himself, whether he may grant to M. Fekenham, that this Council was called by the Apostles: though of his modesty (which is here to be wondered at, it showeth itself so seldom) he will not determine the matter. And then doth he full sadly imagine, as a thing most likely, that the Apostles Paulus and Barnabas came to Jerusalem jump at that time, that the Apostles and the congregation were assembled already together to common prayer. And by as good likelihood they made post haste to present them ere the congregation broke up, lest they should have lost their journey for lack of authority in the Apostles to call a Council: or tarry at least until the next time, that they assembled for prayer. And why, I pray you, might they not as well call a Council, as assemble together for other causes? And why do you so fond ground your likeliness upon that, which hath no likelihood? And why do ye thus wrangle, seeing S. Luke himself showeth plainly the cause of their meeting? Act. 15. Conueneruntque Apostoli & seniores videre de verbo hoc. The Apostles and the Priests assembled together to consider of this matter. Then have we an other snarling, that this was not the act of one Apostle alone. Neither doth the Pope alone (for that belike is the matter ye so closely shoot at) make any decree, but either by a council, or with the advise of his Cardinals and others. Which in all weighty matters no doubt he doth, though he after all, as the head, give the Sentence. At length yet M. Horn taking a better heart unto himself, goeth roundly to the matter, and resolveth us, that this Decree was made not by the Apostles only, and the priests, but by the whole Congregation there present, as S. Luke saith. Then is there good cause to believe him, M. Horn. I hear you say, that Saint Luke saith, the decree was made by the Apostles, Elders, and the whole Congregation. But as yet I hear not S. Luke say so, Act. 15. nor ever shall hear him so say. S. Luke saith, first, that the Apostles and Priests gathered themselves together to consult upon the matter. He saith, that S. Peter spoke first his mind, and S. james being Bishop there▪ Ibidem. 14. confirmed his sayings. S. Luke also calleth these decrees, the decrees of the Apostles and Priests, speaking no word of the whole congregation. And when the contention for keeping Moses Law waxed hot at Antiochia, the Church there sent Paulus and Barnabas and others to Jerusalem, but not to the whole congregation, Ibidem. 2. but to the Apostles and Priests. Truth it is, that it appeareth also in S. Luke, that by common consent of the Apostles of the Priests, and of the whole congregation, judas and Barsabas were elected to accompany S. Paul and Barnabas in their journey to Antiochia, and to present to the Christians there▪ the Decrees of the Council: but that the decree was made by the whole congregation, that doth not appear: but only that they did, as meet it was, reverently consent, embrace, and receive it: as the Catholic Princes and all their people that be Catholic, do allow, embrace, and reverence the late Synod holden at Trent, where were present the Ambassadors of all the said Catholic Princes, and yet had they there no absolute voice or consent, touching the definition of the questions there debated and determined. Nay, not the lay men only, but the very Priests themselves, have no necessary consent, which standeth in the Bishops only, as the whole practice of the church showeth from the Apostles time. To .1. Conc. Act. 1. pa. 745. vel postr. edit. tom. 3. pag. 19 Act. 1. pa. 775. & pag. 47. Tom. 2. edit. postr. Therefore in the fourth General Council of Chalcedon the Bishops cried. Synodus Episcoporum est, non clericorum. A Synod or Council consisteth of Bishops, not of the (inferior) clergy. And again in the same Council: Petrus a priest protested no less, saying: Non est meum subscribere, Episcoporum tantùm est. It is not my part to subscribe, it belongeth only to Bishops. Thus subscription, (wherein necessary consent is expressed) is confessed to pertain to bishops only, not to Priests. And therefore it is very likely, that these that you call Elders, were not single priests, but bishops also. Wherein as I will not contend, so though it were true, that the whole congregation gave their voice, yet the supremacy in the said and other matters remained not in them, but in the Apostles▪ as may well appear by this very place, to him that will but read and consider the text of S. Luke. M. Fekenham. The .167. Division. pag. 111. b. The Apostles also hearing at Jerusalem, Act. 8. that Samaria had received the word of God, they did send Peter and john, to visit them to confirm them in faith, and that they might receive the holy Ghost by the imposition of their hands. Paul and Barnabas did agree betwixt themselves, to visit all those Cities and brethren, which they had converted to the faith. Act. 15. The words of the Scripture are these: Dixit ad Barnabam Paulus, revertentens, visitemus fratres per universas Civitates, in quibus praedicavimus verbum Domini, quomodo se habeant. In the which visitation, the Apostle Paul: Electo Sila perambulabat Syriam & Ciliciam, confirmans Ecclesias, praecipiens custodire praecepta Apostolorum & Seniorum. By the which words it right well appeareth, how the Apostles and Priests at Jerusalem, over and beside the Gospel which they taught, they did make certain Decrees, Laws, and ordinances, the which the Apostle Paul in his visitation, 1. Cor. 11. gave commandment to the Syrians, and Silicians, to observe and keep. What Laws and orders did the Apostle make and appoint unto the Corinthians, that men should neither pray nor preach in the Church with their heads covered? What reformation and order did he make and appoint unto them, for the more honourable receiving of the Sacrament, and that partly by writing, and partly by word of mouth, saying: Caetera, cùm venero, disponam, and in his second Epistle to the Thessalonians, he saith, Fratres state, & tenete traditiones quas didicistis, sive per sermonem, sive per Epistolam nostram. 1. Cor. 13. What orders and Decrees did the Apostle Paul make, touching praying and preaching unto the people in tongues unknown, and that all women should keep silence in the Church and Congregation? These and many such other like Laws, orders, and Decrees, were made for the reformation of the people in the Church of Christ, by Christ's Apostles, by Bishops and priests, as the successors of them, and that without all commission of any Temporal Magistrate, Emperor, King, or Prince, Constantinus being the first Christian Emperor, like as I have said. M. Horn. Your whole drift in this part is, to prove that Bishops and Priests may visit, give the holy Ghost, by the imposition of their hands: and make laws orders, and decrees to their flocks and cures. Your proof consisteth in the example of the Apostles, and this is your argument: The Apostles visited, gave the holy Ghost, and made Laws, orders, and decrees, unto their flocks and cures, Ergo, Bishops and Priests, have authority and may make Laws, visit and give the holy Ghost to their flocks and cures. The insufficiency of this consequent, doth easily appear, to those that do consider the state and condition of the Apostleship, and compare therewith the office of a Bishop or Priest. The Apostles did, might, and could do, many things that Bishops and Priests, neither may, nor can do. The matter is more plain than that needeth any proof. But as the sequel faileth in form, so let us consider the matter, whereupon ye ground the sequel, that your friends may see what foul shifts ye are driven to make, for the maintenance of an unjust claim. That the Apostles did visit their cures and flocks, you prove by two places of the Acts: in the first place, ye (.603.) The .603. untruth. For the scriptures report so much in effect. feign the Scriptures to say, that it saith not: for in the eight of the Acts, there is no mention made of any visitation: the other place speaketh only of a (.604.) The .604. untruth. The acts speak of no such visitation. Scripturely visitation, and nothing at all of your forinsecal or Canon Law visitation. The Canon Laws visitation, is to be exercised by a great number of such persons, as the Scripture (.605.) The .605. untruth, as it shall appear. knoweth not. And the matter whereabout that visitation is occupied for the most part, is directly (.606.) The .606. untruth, slanderous boldly avouched, but no way proved. against the Scriptures. The persons that may lawfully visit in your Canon Law visitation, are Popes, Legates from the side: Legates sent and borne, Legates and messengers of the Apostolic sea, patriarchs, archbishops, Bishops, Archdeacon's, Deans, Archepriestes, abbots, and other inferior persons having jurisdiction. All archbishops which are Legates borne, have authority to visit their provinces by double right, to wit, by right Legatine, and by right Metropolitan, and so they may visit twice in the year. All these visitors must begin their visitation with a solemn Mass of the holy ghost. The Bishop and every ordinary visitor, must begin his visitation at his Cathedral Church and Chapter. He must come into the Church where he visiteth, and first kneel down and pray devoutly, chiefly directing his eyes and mind to the place wherein the honourable sacrament of Christ's Body is hidden and kept. The matters of the Canon Law visitation are in part these. The visitor ought to view diligently, whether the place where the Sacrament is kept, be clean, well garnished and close, for the Eucharist, and the holy Chrism ought to be kept shut under lock and key. He must see, that there be great lights of wax to give light in that place, Then must he visit the place of the holy reliquys, and of Baptism. And search diligently what manner of place it is, and whenther it be kept shut. Besides this he must visit the Altars and little chapels, and must with his eyes view the whole Church whether it be cleanly and clean. Then he must visit the vessels and Church vestiments, whether they be clean, and kept in a clean place, as they ought to be, and whether the vestiments be overmuch worn and broken, and in case the visitor shall find such vestiments unclean, rent, and consumed with occupying, he must burn them in the fire, and cause the ashes to be buried in some place, whereby there is no passage. But in any wise let him not suffer (saith Socius) purses or such like things to worldly use to be made of the copes or tunicles. Last of all, let him survey the houses and possessions belonging to the Church. The Bishop doth visit also, to bishop enfantes, and to consecrated or hollow Churches. The visitor also shall inquire and examine, whether any man know or believe, or that the fame is, that the Sexton, the Treasurer, or the Vesture keeper, hath well and saufly kept, the vessels, vestiments, and other things or ornaments of the Church, as Mass books, Grails, Antiphoners, Legends, and other things appointed to divine Service, and whether any thing movable, or unmovable, be diminished, and by whom, wherefore, when, and after what sort, whether they be diligently present at the Dirigees for the dead. And whether the vesture keeper or Sexton, keep warely and cleanly the Church, the Eucharist, the Relics, the Fount, the Churchyards, and such other things. And he shall examine the Priests in the country in saying of their Masses. But let every visitor understand (saith mine Author) that same the greatest question or controversy which was betwixt three rural persons or Priests: whereof two of them strove about the words of Consecration, the one affirming, that the words are to be pronounced thus: Hoc est corpus meus: the other, Hoc est corpus (I think he should have said corpum) meum. These two chose a third Priest, who was taken to be better learned, to be arbiter, and to decide this high question: whose answer was, that he himself stood ever doubtful in this question: and therefore in steed of these words of consecration, did always use to say one Pater noster. Furthermore the visitor must inquire, whether the laity make their confession once in the year, and receive the eucharist at Easter. And whether they be slow, or deny to pay their tithes and fruits. The archbishop must in visiting any of his suffragans, exactly inquire and examine the Canons and Clerks of the Cathedral Church, whether they know, believe, or that the fame is, that the Bishop hath covered or borne with some men's faults for money, or other temporal commodity. Can you find in the Scriptures any one of these visitors, or any one of these weighty matters inquired of, by Peter, john, Paul, Sylas, Barnabas, or by any of the Apostles in their Visitations, which were Scripturely visitations? No surely, it is not possible: For these Idolatrous (.607.) The .607. Untruth. slanderous as before. vanities, are manifestly repugnant to the Holy Scriptures. Amongst all the rabble of these Canon Law visitors, ye can not find in the Scriptures, not so much as the bare Title of (.608.) The .608. Untruth. The titles of diverse of them are to be found there. one of them, unless it be of a bishop: which name applied to the man, as the Scriptures describeth the man, that is called to that office, can no (.609.) The .609. Untruth. The Bishops of the Canon law, are such as the Scripture describeth. Lib. 50. Tit. 4. De muner. & honour. more agree with a Cannon Law bishop, then with the Civil Law bishop, whose office was, as it is set forth in the Digests, to have the rule and oversight of all manner of victuals in the Cities, as it were the chief Clerk of the markets. As the matter of the Apostles visitations standeth directly (.610.) The .610. Untruth. Ever repeated, but never proved. against the greatest part of the matter whereabout your Popish or Canon Law visitation is exercised: Even so the holy Scripture that you avouch, for the giving of the holy Ghost, maketh (.611.) The .611 Untruth. For it proveth an ordinary power in bishops about the Sacrament of confirmation, which they exercised without any commission from the Prince. nothing at all to prove your purpose. For Saint Luke in that place speaketh (.612.) The 612. Untruth. For he speaketh both of the ordinary use of that Sacrament, and of the extraordinary gift of Miracles, not of an ordinary power, that should remain in the ministers of the Church for ever, but of a special gift to work miracles, and to give that power to others, which should continue but for the time whiles Christ's Church was to be erected, and the word to be sounded through the world: And therefore Chrysostom saith: That this gift pertained only to the Apostles. For (saith he) the Conuertes in Samaria had received before Peter and john came, the spirit of Remission of Sins: But the spirit of Miracles, that is, the gift of tongues, healing, propheciing, and such like, which are the gifts of the holy Ghost, and therefore are called the Holy Ghost, they had not as yet received. There were many that by the power of God's Spirit could work miracles, but to geave this power to others, none could do but the Apostles. For that was proper and only in them. Mark now the sequel of your allegation for proof of your purpose: Thus (.613.) The 613. Untruth. For M. Fekenham argueth not so. It is your own Argument. you argue: the Apostles gave by the imposition of their hands, to the Samaritans, the gifts of Healing, Prophesying, of Tongues, etc. Therefore every Bishop and Priest hath power to give the same gifts to their flocks and cures. There was never none so blind or so ignorantly brought up in your cures, belonging to the Abbey of Westminster, but that did well perceive, that neither your Bishops, abbots, or Priests, had or could do any such feat. They like Apes, imitated the outward sign or ceremony, but the inward grace they wanted. Stapleton. In this part M. Fekenham prosecuteth his proof out of the new Testament, alleging for his purpose many places thereof. As of Peter and john that went into Samaria to visit the Christians there, to confirm them in faith, and to give them the holy Ghost by the imposition of their hands. Of Paulus and Barnabas that visited many countries, commanding the Christians there to keep the commandments of the Apostles and priests: with certain orders and laws made by S. Paul. But all this M. Horn thinketh may be wiped away with one general answer of an insufficient consequency: for that the Apostles did and could do many things that bishops and priests neither may, nor can do now: I will not strive with you M. Horn what the Apostles did in other things, but if they practised any jurisdiction in making of Laws, in visiting, Vide fol. 105. col. ●. in princip. & fol. 110. col. 2. in fine. in reforming without the commission of any Laical authority: then is M. Fekenhans argument good and sufficient. Then have we the practice of the Apostles and primative Church against this your new Paradox. Then hath M. Feckenham wrapped you up also and meshed you in a fowl contradiction, as one that affirmeth the quite contrary diverse times before. Double authority in the Apostles, ordinary and extra ordinary. And yet because ye shall not carry and steal away the matter so, but be more fully answered, I say there was an ordinary, and there was also an extraordinary authority in the Apostles. The ordinary authority of the Apostles (in the which we are now) remaineth at this day and shall remain for ever in the Church, in the bishops their successors. The extraordinary authority either died with them, or at lest can not be usually pleaded upon. The like argument as ye make here, against the authority and jurisdiction of bishops, Luc. 221. M. jewel in his reply against M. D. Harding. M. jewel and your fellows make against the Pope, that though S. Peter were head of the whole Church and was assured by the promiss of Christ that prayed for him, that his faith should not fail, yet can not all his successors the Popes challenge the same being a special prerogative graciously given to him. But here we must understand, that Peter was privileged for his own person, and he was privileged also, in respect, of the common weal of the whole Church. And therefore if we respect S. Peter's person, the person of his successor is not so privileged, but he may fall and err in his own private opinion and judgement. But if we respect the whole Church, whereof he hath the rule, than we say he can not err in any decree or order that he shall publicly make for any matter of faith: Lest by this his open error the whole Church fall also into the same. The providence of God (which a Divine should always have an eye unto) suffereth not such an inconvenience in his Church. Again, the Apostles had personal privileges of more ample grace, than their successors have. And therefore by these words, what so ever, ye shall bind upon the earth etc. And by those other, as my father sent me, so I send you: they had authority each of them to preach throughout the whole world and in whatsoever part thereof: and in this respect they were equal with S. Peter: but their successors at Alexandria, Antiochia, and Ephesus do not succeed to them, nor enjoy this extraordinary power of preaching and teaching through out the world, and every part thereof, but the ordinary only and usual power within their own Diocese or Patriarchship. The said extraordinary authority remaining with the pope's only as the successors of S. Peter: who was head of the Apostles (not in the Apostleship for in that all the Apostles were equal) but in bishoply jurisdiction. After like sort the Apostles had a certain peerless authority to speak in divers tongues, to prophesy, to revive the dead, to heal the sick, to cast out devils, and to do many other miracles. This power doth not descend to all their successors ordinately, but now and then to some certain, to whom it pleaseth God, to dispense these gracious gifts unto. As he hath done to many a blessed bishop sith the apostles time, and to many other even in our days, as to the blessed Fathers of the society of jesus, in converting the new found Indians from paganism to the faith of Christ, and as also to our holy Father the Pope that now liveth (as we are most certainly informed) God hath abundantly given this heavenvly gift of working miracles. But we are out of this case: we reason of an usual and ordinary power that the apostles successors must needs have, and have as well as they, for the necessary government of his Church. As to preach to the flock of Christ, to govern and to direct them, Matt. 28. Marc. 16. Act. 20. Math. 18. Act. 16. 2. Tim. 4. 1. Thess. 5. 1. Tim. 5. by good orders and laws, to reform the offenders, to excommunicate the disobedient to improve, rebuke, or exhort with all long suffering, and good doctrine, to visit them, to correct the unquiet, to comfort the feeble minded, to forbear and receive the weak, and to have a continual patience in all men: By imposition of hands to give holy orders in the sacrament of confirmation (as Peter and john the apostles did when they visited Samaria) with many other things belonging ordinarily to all bishops. Act. 8. Nay saith M. Horn, there is no mention made of visitation in the eight of the Acts. What shall we trifle concerning the word visitation, if it be not there, in case the thing itself be there? Verily if the very word have any force with you M. Horn, you have it plain in the next allegation of M. Feckenham out of the .15. of the Acts: where S. Paul said to Barnabas, Let us visit our brethren, etc. aet. But I pray you tell us, Act. 15. why were Peter and john sent into Samaria, but to confirm the Samaritans, and to give the Sacrament of confirmation to those that were lately baptised? This Sacrament of Confirmation is one of the principal things, the which the bishops do use in their visitation. Here M. Horn runneth to his old shift yet on's again, and saith here was no sacrament given, neither any holy Ghost at al. But the spirit of miracles, as the gift of tongues, of healing, prophesying, and such like, which are the gifts of the holy ghost, and therefore called the holy Ghost. And then doth M. Horn jest at this sequel. The Apostles gave these gifts. Ergo every priest and bishop may give them now. And then he addeth for his pleasure, that there was never any monk in the Abbay of Westminster so ignorantly brought up, but knew well enough, that the bishops could do no such feat. Truth it is, that they received the holy Ghost, and these outward gifts withal at their confirmation. The holy ghost is given in confirmation. And as the Apostles only by the imposition of hands gave these gifts, as ye confess: so Confirmation to this day pertaineth to the bishops only, that represent the Apostles. Now that confirmation is no sacrament, or that the holy ghost is not thereby given, Hiero. count Lucifer. Si hoc loco quaeras, qui in Ecclesia baptizatus, nisi per manus episcopi non accipiat spiritum sanctum: disce hanc obseruationem ex ●a authoritate descendere, quod post ascensum Domini spiritus S. ad Apostolos des●endit, & multis in locis idem factitatum reperimus. August. Contra literas Petiliani. lib. 2. Cap. 104. neither Chrysostomus whom ye recite, nor any other ancient author avoucheth. And that those that were baptised were afterward confirmed by the bishop, and received the holy Ghost, when there were no visible signs, S. Jerome plainly testifieth. And S. Augustine confesseth, it is a Sacrament, as Baptism is. Of this holy Ghost that is given without any outward miracles, speaketh M. Fekenham, and no one word of miracles. Wherefore this misshapen argument that ye bring forth, is yours, and not his. To the overthrow of of the which foolish fond argument I answer, that there was never none so blind or ignorantly brought up in the monastery of Westminster, that could not well perceive, that this is a very il favoured kind of reasoning, and such as was never used among the Catholics. As for his answer to M. Fekenham touching the second allegation, out of the .15. of the Acts, is such as is meet for such a gospeling prelate: that is, to leave reasoning, and to fall to railing, and so to elude his Readers expectation, and the argument: that he is not, nor ever shallbe able to answer. Yet like a cunning Divine and a very skilful visitor, M. Horn● extraordinary railing process. he teacheth us, that there are two visitations, the one a scripturely, the other a forinsecal or a canon law visitation. Then have we a long lesson out of one Socius, he should have said Socinus, what persons may visit, and what matters they ought to inquire upon in their visitation. And in effect he doth nothing else in all this his extravagant declaration, but mock, and mow: and like the devils jack anapes potteth at the good rites, customs and usages of the Catholic Church, and at the blessed sacrament to. And solaceth himself pleasantly, and maketh jolly sport at poor Sir john lack Latin: that could not tell whether he should say Corpum meum, or Corpus meus. At length he concludeth full solemnly, that neither the persons that exercise the canonical visitation, nor the matters there inquired of, can be found in scripture, no not the bare title of any of these visitors, unless it be a bishop. And yet these canon Law bishops, he will not have called bishops neither: unless it be, for that they may be civil Law Bishops: that is asmuch to say, Li. 50. tit. 4. de muneribus & honoribus. Act. 15. as clerks of the market. How think you good readers? Is not Master Fekenham his argument grounded upon the plain scriptures and doings of S. Paul, which did visit the Christians, and commanded them to keep the Laws and ordinances that the Apostles had made, without any laical commission, very scripturely and prelatelyke of this great scriptured man soluted? Think you, that this man hath any reverence to God, any regard either to his matter, or to his Reader? Or think you, that this man lacketh not as much wit, as he doth virtue, learning, religion, and true devotion, that with his malice to put out one eye of the Catholics, putteth out both his own eyes? and that can tell no fault of the Catholics, but that the same redoundeth double or triple against himself and his affinity? Among all the rabble (as M. Horn termeth them) of the canon Law visitors, he can not find as much as the bare title of any of them in scripture. Seeing this man is so precise and peremptory in his terms, we will see whether we can find any of them either in express terms, or at the least in equivalent. 2. Cor. 5. Ephes. 6. In deed this word Papa is not found there, but his equivalent Pater is found there. Legates we find store, though not with such precise terms as ye adjoin, as speaking of Legates sent and borne. The word patriarch is oft in scripture: bishops we find, Deacons we find, priests we find. Therefore this is but a gross and a rude Rhetoric, to find fault with the name of archbishop, archdeacon, and Archpriest, which signifieth no more than the chief of the bishops, deacons or Priests. But in case you will no better bear with Legates borne, and archbishops, you shall quite bear away both the audience, and the Arches, and the Court of prerogative, and the Archbisshoprik withal of Canterbury. As for Deans, who are called in Latin Decani, yea and abbots to, for Abba and Abbas is all one, we find in scripture. And I pray you what persons be the chief visitors now in England, but such as bear the names, that ye say, can not be found in scripture, as archbishops, Bishops, Archdeacon's, and Deans? And you M. Horn that have been such a solemn visitor, first for the Queens M. and then in your own pretenced Diocese, and in the University of Oxford, think you that a man may find your name or the name, of your visitourship in any place of the Bible? And if we may not find it there, then by your own rule, when ye come next in visitation to Oxford, the scholars may find some pretty exception against you. Thus you see good readers, I am fain to play the child, with this childish Prelate. whether their visitations now are all scripturely. 1. Tim. 5. Habentes damnationem quiae primam fidem irritam fecerunt. See the injunctions Let us now leave the names and go to the matter of your visitation that ye keep now a days. Shall we find nothing there but scripturely matters? I pray you tell me then good M. Horn, in what scripture ye find it, I will not say, that a monk, a nun, a priest or bishop may marry (for I am sure scripture is against it, condemning the frailest kind of women for marrying after their vow) but in what scripture find you it, that (in case their marriage be lawful) the priest or deacon shall not marry, without the advice or allowance had upon good examination by the bishop of the same diocese, and two justices of the peace of the said shear? And that the marriages of bishops must be allowed by the Metropolitan, and the Queen's highness commissioners? Why? Are ye, that should be the Fathers of the realm now come to this point, that for lack of your discretion, ye must be made wards and have your gardons? They that be under their father's rule, by civil Law can not marry without their Father's consent: but by the same Law a bishop is fortwith exempted and acquitted from all jurisdiction, that his Father had before upon him. But ye contrary wise are brought under the jurisdiction of every mean gentleman: and abridged of that liberty of marriage, that every poor plowghman hath. And yet is this (as absurd as it is) an Injunction belonging to your new Laical visitation. It were a matter for a just volume, if I should here prosecute your other scripturely matters, that ye have set forth in your visitations: especially in your late visitation by your dear Chancellor and son exercised at the New College in Oxford: who proposed there to be subscribed a rabblement of blaspemouse and heretical articles, a number of them being as scripturely matters, as this proposition, is either scripturelyke or grammarlyke: False Latin in master Horns articles proposed to be subscribed in his visitation at Oxford Regina est unicus & supremus gubernator regni in causis Ecclesiasticis & temporalibus. But of this your clerkly grammar we have had much experience in this your answer. amend: Amend for shame your barbarous Latin, and put in unica & suprema gubernatrix, if ye will needs maintain the proposition: which yet doth not so much contrary the rules of grammar, as it doth the rules of Christian religion. And bear with poor Sir john, and his corpus meus, which is as good Latin (Sir Robert) as your Reginae gubernator unicus, & caet. And be not so hard as ye are in your injunctions, to exclude from all cure or spiritual function, such as of late Days were made priests otherwise utterly unlearned as ye say, but that they could read to say matins and mass. For if ye be so strait laced to your ministers, ye are like to leave but a few: and to have the most part of your cures unfurnished, and serve the parish Churches yourself. For a great part, yea and a notable number of your ministers can not read Latin. And therefore M. Nowell, being in his last book against M. Dorman, in the same vain that you here are M. Horn, and set in a pelting chafe, with an invincible place out of S. Ambrose, ruffling in his lusty rhetoric, against poor Sir john's, as you do here, durst not yet to call them Sir john lack latins, Nowell fol 86. fac. 2. but full providently called them, Sir john lack learning. Because forsooth he saw full well, that his fellow Ministers were Sir john lack latins, as well as poor priests. Marry yet perhaps in his conceit, they lacked not learning, because they can read in the English bible. Therefore he thought it the surest to call ignorant priests, Sir john lack learning, not Sir john lack latins. This point of wisdom you may M. Horn learn hereafter of M. Nowell, to save the honesty of your Sir john lack latins, swarming now as thick in England as ever they did before. Yea such preachers fill the most part of your pulpits, and the ears and hearts of the people with much heresy, A ministering preacher that could not read his licence given him to preach and setteth them at a lewd licentious liberty to speak what they will, and do what they list. And here it cometh to my mind, that was credibly told me touching one of these your ministering preachers, that not many years sithence came to a parish within the Diocese of Winchester to preach: And being demanded his Licence did exhibit it, but being required before the people to read it, could not: whereupon the people fell into such a laughter, that our preacher had no great lust, to show his cunning there, but full slily shrunk away from them, and stole away with his clerkly sermon that he thought to have made there. See what clerkly and godly curates, are now in England. And wherein I pray you resteth a great part of your new clergy, but in butchers, Cooks, Catchpoules, and Cobblers, Dyer's, and daubers, felons carrying their mark in their hand in stead of a shaven crown, fisher men, gunner's, harpers, Innekepers, merchants and Mariners, Netmakers, Matt. 4. potters, potycaries, and porters of Belins-gate, pynners', peddlers, ruffling ruffians, saddlers, sheermen, and shepherds, tanner's, tilers, tinkers, trumpeters, weavers, whery men & caet. Demand of these fresh clerks M. Horn at your next visitation, whether it must be read corpus meum, or corpus meus, And see, whether any of them can resolve his fellows better, than the priest, you speak of did, that being himself doubtful, used (as you say) his Pater noster, in stead of the words of consecration. Will they not trow you, make answer, as a Minister in M. jewels diocese did? who in a visitation being opposed for trial of his latin tongue, what case was Decen●er, answered, that he thanked God highly, that he had never learned that Romish and Papistical latin tongue? But what Latin shall a man look for at such men's hands? yea or what honesty either? To describe the dissolute and naughty vicious life, of your ministers, would fill up a book of a good quantity, and the hearer's ears with to much loathsomeness. I could here rip up a number of detestable parts, The trūpetou● minister at Otterborne. and some of them played in your pretenced Diocese: especially of William Webbe the trumpetour and minister of Otterborne nigh to Winchester: who having a gospeling yokemate of his own, tawghte a young maiden in the Church to sing the holy Genevical psalms, and as he corrupted her soul with wicked heresy, so he defiled her body with such lewd lechery, that he was feign to flee the parish for shame. And yet as I here say he is become at London an holy minister again. I will forbear to lad your honest ears (good reader) with any more such dishonest and sluttish stories, whereof we have, the more pity, to much plenty. These and such like are the wicked king Hieroboams' ministers, the which falling from the true Church of Jerusalem into idolatry, as you and your fellows are fallen into heresy (which is also in scripture called idolatry) made the lowest of the people, 3. Reg. 12. Fecit prophana in excelsis, et sacerdotes de extremis populi qui non erant de filijs Levi. and such as were not of the tribe of Levy peculiarly and only by God appointed, his priests. Was not, I beseech you M. Horn, the disorder of these and other, both in their living and preaching such, that the queens Majesty of her gracious goodness, caused a number of Licences given them to preach, to be called in again? For all that ye have so oft visited, get you out once again in visitation M. Horn and amend your own people, and your own self principally, according to the rules of the holy scripture, and then call your visitation a scripturely visitation, and the other among the Catholyks nothing but a forinsecal and a canonical visitation. surely it is a marvelous Gospel, that ye have of late broached, which besides most detestable heresies, importeth such a breach and dissolution of all honest and virtuous living, that your own Apostle Luther was fain to call upon the Duke of Saxony, to make visitation upon visitation for reformation. Luth. super postil. 1. Domin. adventus. And fain to cry out, that his new Ghospellinge children were worse than ever they were under the pope: yea ten times worse than the Sodomites. Therefore talk as holily as ye will, of your scripturely visitations, the truth is, they are as direct contrary to scripture, In what sense a man may call their visitations in England scripturely visitations or preachings as darkness is to light, and they are the very nurseries of all heresies and licentious living. And shortly, but withal truly to conclude, how scripturely they are, I say ye can no better justify your visitations and other your doings by scripture, than the devil himself could justify his allegation: bringing forth scripture, not to the poor simple and unlettered people as you do, Matt. 4. but to Christ himself: willing him to cast himself down from the pinnacle of the temple, with scriptum est enim, for it is written: saith the devil. And what is the scope of all your doings and preachings to the people, but mitte te deorsum? Cast thyself headlong down from the high tower of the lightsome catholic faith into the low dark Dungeon, of all devilish heresy? From the high mount of a virtuous and an austere life, in to the low vale of all licentious and dissolute behaviour? What is all your preaching, but down, down, down with holy bread, holy water, with all the holy ceremonies in baptism, and in the other sacraments, with fasting, with night prayer, with all prayer to be made for hour fathers or friends souls, or to the blessed Virgin Mary, and to all other hallows, with all Altars, O detestable impiety. with mass, yea and with the blessed body of Christ in the Sacrament: which hath been most villainously defiled not only by blasphemous books and sermons, but most wickedly taken from the altar, The error against the real presence of Christ in the sacrament, is for any law made to the contrary to be taken for heresy as it was want to be. and most horribly yea and that in our most famous University, conculced with the wicked feet of one of your Ghospellinge preachers? And by what warrant, ye may set forth in your so scripturely visitations this your heretical doctrine against the real presence of Christ's body in the Sacrament I know not. The plain and open words of scripture lie manifestly against you with, hoc est corpus meum: General councils have determined against you: Private counsels, and amongs other our constitutions provincial, determine against you: and remain yet in force, even by the laws of the Realm, being by no Act of parliament taken away. But contrary wise such as unreverently speak against it, An. ●. Ed. 6. cap 1. & An. 1. Eli. cap. 1. are by Act of parliament adjudged to imprisonment, and to a fine to be made at the Prince's pleasure. Briefly the faith of the whole Church standeth against you. Yea M. Cheney one of your own protestant Bishops in open parliament of late days stood against you. Your synodical and heretical articles, by the which ye would have this, and other heresies confirmed, are rejected. Yea Luther himself full solemnly proclaimeth you all heretics. How can it then be, that your and your fellows visitations, in the which ye have set forth such a false doctrine repugnant to all these, shallbe yet called a scripturely visitation? No, no M. Horn, for all your peacocks tail glistering with goodly and scripturely talk, we perceive your filthy heresy well enough, when we look upon your fowl feet. Away, away with these painted words, wherewith men will not always be made fools: nor will take your visitations to be scripturely, as is this, that ye here allege, made by the blessed Apostles. Which thing though I can not, nor will deny: A man may find as good matter against the decrees of the Apostles as Luther findeth against the general councils. yet if I should take upon me the evangelical person of M. jewel, or of your Apostle Martin Luther, or your own either, methinks the Gentiles might aswell have found fault with the Apostles decree made and set forth by them afterward in their visitations: as your said Apostle doth against the Council of Trent and others, or as ye do against the blessed bishop and Martyr Bonifacius, for whom we have already answered. They might have said: ye restrain our evangelical liberty, and yet ye bring not one word of scripture to confirm your decree withal. For though S. james brought forth a testimony out of the Prophet Amos, yet it toucheth nothing the matter there concluded. Then might they have said, why Sirs, what mean you, will ye have us to be jewish again, in forbearing of puddings and things strangled? Why do ye forbid us to eat of such meats, as are offered to the idols? We do well know, that they are no Gods, and the meat is never a whit the worse: and our Master Christ hath taught us, that it is not that, that entereth by the mouth, but that, that goeth from the mouth that contamineth and defileth the man. This and much more out of the principles of Luther's gospel they might have said to the Apostles: and as truly as Luther and your fellows allege these and the like things, against the Laws of the Church, against unwritten verities, against fasting days, and otherwise. Or as ye allege the like to de●ace our holy virtuous countryman Bonifacius and Augustinus. Prius foe. 58 But it is high time to break of our scripturely visitatis, and to set upon other matters. M. Horn. The .168. Division. pag. 114. a. Touching the third part of your proof, whereby ye conclude, that bishops and Priests make Laws, orders, and decrees, to their flocks and cures, because the Apostles so did, as you say: Although I need make none other answer, then to deny your argument, which you can by no art (. 6●4.) The .614. untruth. The argument i● right good, as it hath in the former division appeared. maintain, the insufficiency whereof is manifest, to those that have but a little skill, either in Logic or Divinity: Yet I will briefly consider the places, whereupon you ground this misshapen sequel, that the unskilful may see, how little they make for your purpose. After that S. Paul had founded the Church of Corinthe, and had brought them to Christ through the preaching of the Gospel, there sprang up amongst them in his absence many vices and offences, contrary to the Doctrine he had taught, and the Godly admonitions, that he had given unto them: wherefore being advertised thereof, he written his Epistle unto that Church, wherein he reproveth their faults, partly in general, and partly in spectal: And in the end of the tenth Chapter, concludeth with this General admonition, that All things be done without offence, and to the Glory of God. In the xi Chapter, he reproveth certain faults in especial, committed by them in their public assemblies, and Church meetings; contrary to this general admonition, and contrary to that he had taught them in special, touching their honest and comely behaviour in their public prayer, preaching, and communicating in Christ's Sacraments, which of all other things ought chief to be so done, as thereby God may be glorified, and all offences eschewed. To this end S. Paul had taught the Corinth's, that in these public and holy exercises, it is most seemly, that men prophecy and pray hare headed: Contrariwise women, not without their heads covered. Many observed this comeliness in prayer and prophesying, as Paul had taught them: Others contentiously did withstand and gainsay the same, as an order that Paul had devised, and brought in of his own devise, besides God's word, as you also (.615.) The .615. untruth. For M. Fekenham said not the matters done at Corinthe to have been done beside the Ghospel, but the decrees of the Apostles so to have been done. Imagine that Paul made this order besides the Gospel, of his own authority, wherewith to bind the Corinth's. To answer both the contentious Philosophers, than amongst the Corinth's, and the superstitious Papists, now in (.616.) The .616. untruth. for neither the Corinth's nor the Catholics now, objected in like sort. like sort molestinge the Christians, S. Paul proveth, that this comeliness is grounded upon God's ordinance, and not a Law newly devised of his own authority besides the Gospel. This is his proof, the man by God's ordinance hath the superiority, and the woman must be in subjection. God hath appointed for them both, signs and tokens of this dominion and subjection, He hath ordained, that man in token of superiority, should have hi● head uncovered: as contrariwise the woman, in token of subjection, to have her head covered. Therefore, if man lay away that sign and token of dominion which God hath ordained for him to use, and taketh upon him the sign and badge of subjection, he dishonoureth God his head, and breaketh his ordinance. And so the woman, if she leave of the coverture of her head which God had given to her, to be worn as a token and badge of her subjection, and taketh upon her the sign of superiority, she dishonoureth her head, and breaketh God's ordinance. S. Paul addeth an other reason, whereby he proveth, that this was no Law made by him to the Corinth's. Nature, saith he, hath taught you this comely order. If this were a Law and Decree of nature, it was not S. Paul's devise besides God's word. S. Ambrose upon this place saith, that S. Paul spoke these words, according to (.617.) The .617. untruth. S. Ambrose saith not: of God's law: but secundum legem, according to the law: and he meaneth the old law Leuit. 19 not the la of the Gospel. God's Law, which forbiddeth (saith he) the man to wear his hear. Chrysostom affirmeth this to be an ordinance of nature. But, saith he, when I speak of nature, I mean of God, who is the author of nature. So that it is manifest by S. Paul's own proofs in defence of that he had taught, and by the witness of S. Ambrose and Chrysostom, that the man to be bareheaded, and the woman covered, was (.618.) The .618. untruth. It was S. Paul's la, though God's law also, as shall appear. not a Law, order and decree, made by S. Paul to the Corinth's, as you untruly fable, but God's ordinance, made plain, set forth, and taught by him, that all things might be done in the Church in comely order, to God's glory. Of like sort was the reformation and order: whereof you speak about the more worthy receiving the lords Supper. The Apostle maketh thereabout no new Law, order, or decree, besides (.619.) The .619. untruth. If you mean the written gospel, as you seem to do, and as you must do, if you reason well. the Gospel, but reproveth the Corinthians, for that they did not about the receit thereof, observe the law of the Gospel: He blameth them in general, that their Church assemblies were not to the increase, but rather to the decrease of virtue in themselves: He reproveth them that in stead of brothlery love, unity, and concord, there was Contempt, Schism, and dissension amongst them: He rebuketh them, for that they made that Supper Private, which the Lord himself had made, and instituted to be common: He reprehendeth them for Drunkenness, and that with the contempt of the poor: And he sharply shaketh them up, for that they abuse the Church, contemning the right use thereof. Is not this Christ's Law, that the people should increase in virtue? Is not this Christ's commandment, that the Christians should live in brotherly love, unity, and concord? Is not this Christ's Institution, that his Supper should be common, and not private? Doth not Christ's la condemn drunkards, and contempt of the poor? And is not this God's decree, that his house should not be profaned or abused? If these be Gods ordinances, as you can not deny them to be, than are they (.620.) The .620. untruth. For they are both God's ordinances and S. Paul's to, as shall appear. not Paul's laws, orders, or decrees, neither by writing or word of mouth: otherwise than that Paul was God's mouth and scribe, to utter, not his own laws besides the Gospel, but God's ordinances comprehended within his Gospel. So that whether being present, he taught them by word, or being absent by writing, he neither writ nor spoke, other than he had * yea by inspiration of the holy Ghost. not of any written Gospel. received of the Lord. He promised, say you, to dispose other things at his coming. It is true, but not otherwise then he did these above mentioned. He exhorteth, say you, the Thessalonians, to abide in the traditions, which they had learned by word or by writing. Ye say truth: but he doth not thereby bind them to this, as to a law, order, or decree, made by him besides the Gospel: but he monisheth them, as S. Ambrose expoundeth his meaning. To stand fast, continue, and persevere in the tradition of the Gospel. So that the traditions he speaketh of, are not other than the Doctrine of the (.621.) The .621. Untruth. The Traditions that S. Paul speaketh of, are other than the written Gospel, and that you mean. gospel. I marvel not, that ye (.622.) The .622. Untruth. Missequoting is no missereporting. misreport saint Paul, saying that he made orders and decrees, touching praying and preaching unto the people in tongues unknown, and that all women should keep silence in the Church and congregation, for it may seem, ye never read the place, but took it, as you heard it reported. If you had read the place, you might have seen with your own eyes, that S. Paul speaketh no whit of that matter in the thirteenth, as ye untruly avouch: and in the fourteenth you should have perceived, that he in plain speech proveth you a liar: For that he (.623.) The .623. Untruth. He denieth them not to be his own, because they were the Lord's commaundement●. Both d● stand well together, as shall appear. denieth that these were his orders or decrees, affirming them to be the Lords commandments, and so doth Theophilact. Gloss. ordinar. and Lyra witness also with Paul, testifying that these were his words and meaning. These places thus rightly considered, it may easily appear● unto the most unskilful, how little (.624.) The .624. Untruth. For M. Fekenham● purpose was so much holpen hereby, that you never durst come nigh his Argument. your purpose is helpen by them, and that these grounds do sail you: So that your whole shift being sifted, is found naught, both in matter and form. M. Horn. Three other places remain of M. Fekenhans allegation. The first, but the .3. in order, that men should pray and prophecy (that is, 2. Thes. 2. Concerning certain decrees and orders made by S. Paul alleged by M. Fekenham. preach or expound scripture) their heads uncovered: and that the women should pray with their heads covered. The second is of such orders as the Apostle Paul ordained touching the holy Sacrament of the Eucharistia. The third, that he ordained many things aswell by writing, as without writing, and in all this seaking for no commission at any lay man's hand. To the two first M. Horn saith, that they were no laws of Paul's made by his authority besides the gospel to bind the Corinthians as M. Fekenham imagineth, but they were Gods own ordinance. For God had so ordained to signify the superiority in the man, and subjection in the woman: and it was the very law of nature. And for the .2. point he did ordain no new thing, but did set forth only Gods own laws: and that is, that his supper should be common, and not private. In condemning also according to God's law drunckerds, and the contempt of the poor and such as against God's decree profaned or abused his house. And S. Paul himself denieth, that these were his orders or decrees, but saith they were the Lords commandments. And to the third he saith, that whether S. Paul taught by writing or by word, he taught nothing, but that he received of the Lord: neither for any promise he made to dispose things at his ●●mming, did he dispose any thing otherwise then he receivid of the Lord. For all this your solemn answer, ye have soluted M. Fekenhams argument never a whit: which doth not contend in this place, whether this ordinance may be called properly Paul's or God's ordinance, or whether they were beside the gospel or no, or what kind of traditions they were that Paul taught. The argument resteth in this, that these laws, orders, and decrees, were set forth, published and divulged, yea put in execution by visitations, and otherwise without any warrant of civil prince. Neither doth M. Feckenham say, that these ordinances were made besides the gospel, and delivered to the Corinthians, as ye say he imagineth. Yourself M. Horn do but dream this: for those words of M. Feckenham, of decrees made beside the gospel are referred to the laws made by the Apostles in their synod, not to the orders appointed to the Corinthians. And to those decrees of the Apostles you have answered never a word, but with a short untrue answer, of a scripturelike and an unscripturelyke visitation, and a long bible babble against the order of such visitation as the Catholic Church useth, you have trained your Reader with idle talk, M. Horn being not able to answer M. Fekenhans 2. allegation, dissembleth it altogether. nothing to the purpose. By a like craft ye make it the third point in M. Fekenham that, which he speaketh of laws and orders made by the Apostles, where it was his second allegation as yet by you unanswered, but altogether under the viso of a scripturely visitation, dissembled. For there ye saw full well ye were so met withal, and so strained, that ye had no starting hole, unless ye would say, that it was God's law in the new testament, that Christian men should eat neither puddings, nor any thing strangled: which ye thought belike to be a great inconvenience, and therefore full closely, and in great hucker mucker, ye passed it over. And yet might ye have freshly reasoned the matter thereto, if your stomach would have served you with telling us: visum est spiritui sancto & nobis. I● seemeth to the holy Ghost and to us. And is not this God's law then also good M. Horn? This gear I perceive your weak stomach could not well digest. For if it could, and you withal could digest orderly, plainly, and truly any good answer, ye should have at length answered yourself: and should have found it as true, that the ordinances concerning the head covered or uncovered, Act. 15. & 16. and concerning the blessed Sacrament, be and may as well be called the ordinances or commandments of S. Paul, as the other are called praecepta Apostolorum: the commandments of the Apostles. And what should we reason long in this matter, 1. Cor. 11. seeing that S. Paul himself calleth these praecepta mea: my precepts, or commandments? And sicut tradidi vobis, 1. Cor. 16. 1. Thess. 4 Scitis quae praeceptae dederim vobis. as I have delivered unto you? And doth not S. Paul say plainly, that he ordained to the Churches of Galatia Collets or gatherings of Alms to be made every Sunday? And saith he not of himself, that he gave precepts to the Thessalonians? Which yet he writeth not in his epistles, but referreth them to their former knowledge of delivered doctrine by word of mouth. Otherwise if ye will so precisely urge the matter, we must now no longer call the old law, the law of Moses: we must no longer name the prophecies of Hieremie, judic. 7. gladius domini & Gedeonis. Crediderunt domino, et servo eius Mosi. joan. 7. Ezechiel, or Daniel: no more the gospel of S. Math. S. Luke, S. Mark, or S. john we must no longer say, the sword of God and of Gedeon: nor the people believed God and his servant Moses. But, God be thanked, these things will stand together well enough with a good construction, and by a divers relation. Neither are they more contrary, than when Christ said: my doctrine, is not my doctrine: but my Fathers that sent me. If we consider the principal author of these laws, them are they Gods ordinances, and not Paul's or the Apostles: by whose gracious inspiration and suggestion they were made. S. Paul and the Apostles were but ministers: A distinction to be noted, of God his laws, and the Church's laws. and in that respect they may be called their laws: even as the ministers by their ministry do truly forgive and remit sin. We must yet further consider here two things. The first, that some laws there be of the Church, that are properly called Gods laws: as these that the Apostles set forth in holy scripture, which Christ himself taught them: as concerning baptism, the holy Eucharistia, and some other things. Some other laws there are that the Apostles set forth, but not such as they received at Christ's own hands, and by his mouth, but by his holy spirit after his ascension: which are for that cause called Christ's and God's laws: as for that the Apostles had all their authority to make such laws of him, A difference between the Apostles ordinances, and those that properly are called Gods ordinances. they are called also the laws of the Apostles. Namely these that were made in the first council at Jerusalem, the which M. Feckenham allegeth for his purpose. And betwixt these two, there is a great difference. For Christ gave by himself few precepts, and and of those matters only that were necessary for our salvation: And therefore they may by no humane authority be infringed or abolished. But the precepts of the Apostles touching the governance of the Church, though no man can by private authority break them, yet may they, and are, August. 118. ad januar. Et ideo non praecepit quo deinceps ordine sumeretur, ut Apostolis per quos Ecclesias dispositurus erat, seruaret hunc honorem. many of them, by the authority of the Church abolished. Namely such as were made for certain and special respects, and not to continue for ever but for a time. As was the decree of the Apostles made at Jerusalem touching the eating of puddings and things strangled. So we see the Sabbath day turned into the sunday. So we see, that though Christ celebrated his holy maundy of the blessed Eucharistia at night and gave it to his disciples after supper, and in both kinds, yet the Church useth it fasting, and for lay men under one kind. For though Christ commanded us to receive, which no man can dispense withal, yet for the manner and fashion (saith S. Augustin) he commanded nothing, but reserved that honour to the Apostles, by whom he intended to direct the Churches. Who therefore also took order for it, especially S. Paul among the Corinthians according as he promised. Ibidem. unde intelligi datur (quia multum erat, ut in epistolae totum illum agendi ordinem insinuaret, quem universa per orbem servat Ecclesia) ab ipso ordinatum esse, quod nulla morum diversitate variatur. M Fekenham speaketh of one thing, and M H reasoneth against an other thing. I will dispose other things when I come. Which is the place M. Fekenham groundeth himself upon against you. And thereupon S. Augustine thinketh, that which is uniformly and generally used throughout Christendom, touching the order in the administration of this Sacrament, to have been ordained by S. Paul, which he could not so conveniently prescribe and appoint in his Epistle. So that ye see, that though it be true, these orders and laws may be called Gods ordinances and laws, yet they are and may also well be called, the laws and ordinances of the Apostles. And thus M. Fekenhams Argument standeth as before, in his full force every way. And all your talk concerning the Lord's supper, is quite from the purpose. You tell us, that all was God's Law that S. Paul appointed in the said Epistle to the Corinthians. Which if it were so, yet ye reason not against M. Fekenham, who speaketh not of those things that he took order for in his Epistle, but of those things that he took order for at his coming. Whereof he said: Caetera cùm venero, disponam, Other things I will set in order when I come. Which as they were done without writing (as many things also that he delivered by tradition to the Thessalonians, as M. Fekenham rehearseth out of S. Paul) so were they done against your fond conclusion, that is, without any other warrant of any lay persons. Neither is the ordinance of praying and preaching, the head uncovered, properly God's law: for than had it been indispensible: And then had you and your fellows, that preach with your cap on your heads, need to think upon some good answer, for the violating of Gods Law. And women come to the Church to be married with their heads open, which might not be suffered, if it were directly against God's law. And though S. Paul giveth this reason of superiority, and subection, because (as it seemeth) it was a custom or manner proper to the jews, yet both among the Romans and other Gentiles, in S. Paul's time, and also throughout all Christendom at this day, the opening and discovering of the head, is a token of subjection, and of dutiful honour to our Magistrates and other Superiors. Wherefore, if we consider the Scripture well we shall find, that S. Paul and the Apostles gave many precepts in their Epistles, of which in the written Gospel, nothing is mentioned or ordained. And so your Lutheran Conclusion will appear stark false and dangerous, where you say: Vide Heptacolon. L. Campestri contra Luther. Apologiam. An. 1523. That Paul gave not his own laws beside the Ghospel, but God's ordinances comprehended within his Gospel. And again, That Paul whether being present, he taught them by word, or being absent, by writing, he neither wrote nor spoke other than he had received of the Lord. And last of all, So that the traditions that Paul speaketh of, are not other than the Doctrine of the Gospel. This is, M. Horn (as I said) a Lutheran and a dangerous conclusion. For by this rule you would frustrate all the laws of the Church (as Luther your Grandsire did) which are not expressly comprehended in the written Gospel. For this being put, that the very Apostles made no laws or ordinances, but such as they found before recorded in the Gospel, than (say you) by what authority can the Prelates of the Church at any time hereafter take upon them to make such laws, as are not expressed in the Gospel? To meet therefore with this wicked sequel, and to detect your lewd conclusion, I will shortly touch a few more examples of such laws and ordinances as th'Apostles made and not recorded, made, or ordained otherwise in the Gospel. 1. Cor. 5. First, S. Paul to the Corinth's, forbiddeth them to eat with dronckards, with robbers, with fornicators, with the covetous, and with idolaters. In the Gospel no such restraint appeareth. Nay rather we see there Christ himself, did eat with publicans and sinners. Lu. 5. &. 7 Again to the Galathians he crieth out: Gal 5. Behold I Paul say unto you: If ye be circumcided, Christ profiteth you nothing. What Gospel teacheth Paul so to say? What Gospel doth condemn circumcision? Nay rather, saith not Christ in the Gospel, Mat. 5. Philip. 3. Coloss. 2. 1. Tim. 3. Tit. 2. I came not to undo the law, but to fulfil it? And yet not here only, but to the Philippenses most earnestly he chargeth them to cast of the yoke of the law. The like he doth to the Colossians, teaching them to make no more account of their Neomeniae and Sabbata. Now for the precept that S. Paul giveth to Timothe, that a Bishop should be the man of one wife: What Gospel prescribeth it, or commandeth it? To Titus also, the laws that he giveth to young women, to widows, and to old women? Are not all these and many more (which for brevities sake I omit) mere constitutions and laws of th'apostles, without any word made thereof in the Gospel? And what else intended Christ, I pray you, M. Horn, when he said to his Apostles a little before his Passion, joan. 16. &. 14. I have many things yet to say unto you: but you are not able to bear them now. Howbeit when the Spirit of Truth shall come, he will teach you all Truth, then that by the spirit of Truth, the holy Ghost, they should learn and teach many Truths, which in the Gospel (where only the doctrine and doings of Christ are recorded) they had not learned? And this holy Spirit he promised should remain not with them only for their abode here in earth, but with the Church for ever. To give us to understand, that as they, so their Successors in the Church from time to time should be taught of the holy ghost, and teach us again all manner of Truth. Whereof unvincibly followeth, not only that they taught and do teach many more things than Christ in the gospel taught, but also that those their doctrines and teachings (as proceeding from the holy Ghost the Spirit of Truth) are infallible, sound and right wholesome, and of us therefore undoubtedly to be obeyed and believed. Whereby is overthrown M. Horn your most damnable and wicked conclusion, affirming the Apostles to have made no laws of their own besides the gospel, but only such as were God's ordinances comprehended in the gospel. For now we see both by examples of their doings, and by unuincible reason out of the gospel, that they made laws of their own besides the gospel, and might both lawfully and assuredly so do, they being always prompted of the holy Ghost therein, and their laws therefore being not theirs only, but bearing also the force and value of God's laws, so far, as is before declared. Farther by this it appeareth, that as the Apostles then, so their successors now and always heretofore had and have full and sufficient authority to make ecclesiastical laws or decrees over all their flocks from Christ himself without any jot of Commission from the lay Prince, or any other lay Magistrate. And so your principal conclusion goeth once again flat down to the ground. The .169. Division. pag. 116. b. M. Fekenham. The which noble Emperor Constantinus, for the repression of the Arians errors and heresies, he did at the request of Sylvester then Bishop of Rome, call the first Council at Nice: where he had to the Bishops there assembled these words? ●ibro. 10. dist. Eccl. cap. 2. Cùm vos Deus Sacerdotes constituerit, potestatem tradidit judicandi de nobis. Et ideo nos à vobis recte iudicamur. Vos autem, cùm nobis à Deo, dij dati sitis, Lib. 7. hist. Trip. ca 12 ab hominibus judicari non potestis. etc. Valentinianus Imperator eùm ille rogatus esset ab Episcopis Hellesponti Bythiniae, ut inter esset consilio, respondit: Mihi quidem cùm unus de populo sim, Theod. li. 5. hist. Eccles. ca 18. fas non est talia perserutari, verum sacerdotes quibus haec cura est, apud semetipsos congregentur, ubi volverit. Theodosio Imperatori Ambrosius ingressu intra cancellos templi inter dixit, inquiens: Interiora ô Imperator sacerdotibus solis patent. etc. Cull egit ob id gratias Imperator, asserens se didicisse diserimen inter Imperatorem & Sacerdotem. M. Horn. It is manifest, that Constantin called the first Nicene Council, but very unlikely, that he did it at the request of Sylvester, because this Council was (.625.) The .625. untruth. It was in the time of Sylvester, as shall appear. Nicep. lib. 8. ca 14. Sozom. lib. 1. ca 17. Lib. 2. to .2. Herald 68 Lib. 1. cap. 1. not in the time of Sylvester, but whiles julius was bishop of Rome, who by reason of his great age could not be there present in his own person, and therefore sent in his stead Vitus and Vincentius, as the Ecclesiastical histories report, and Epiphanius affirmeth, that Constantine called this Council at the earnest suit of Alexander Bishop of Alexandria, whereto Ruffinus addeth, many other of the Clergy also. But if it be true as ye say, that th'emperor called the Council at the request of the Pope, than both those Papists are (626) The .626. untruth slanderous. For both stand well together, as shall appear. Liars, which affirm that the Pope called this Council, and your cause by your own confession is much hindered: for if the Emperor called the Council, and that at the request of Sylvester the Pope, as ye say, or at the earnest suit of Alexander, and other godly Bishops, as Epiphanius and Ruffinus affirm: It appeareth plainly, that both the Pope and the other Catholic Bishops, did thereby acknowledge the (.627.) The .627. untruth. As it shall appear out of Cusanus M. Horns own Author. supreme power and authority, to summon and call Counsels, which is a (.628.) The .628. untruth. It is no part of ecclesiastical jurisdistion, as the Emperou● doth it. principal part of your purpose, and of the Ecclesiastical jurisdiction cohibitive, to be in th'emperor, and not in themselves: for otherwise they might, and would have done it, by virtue of their own office, without any suit made to the Emperor, to execute that which belonged unto themselves. Themperor refused to judge the quarrelling accusations of the bishops assembled at the Nicen Council, one quarrelling and accusing an other, and referred the judgement of them to Christ. This was his modesty, Policy, and prudent foresight, lest by sifting those private quarrels, he might have hindered the common cause, as I have said before, and is plainly to be (.629.) The .629. untruth. No such thing can be gathered of those Authors. gathered of Ruffinus and Nicephorus; and (.630.) The .630. untruth. For if he thought not so, as he said, it was no Policy, but a sin. Lib. 1. cap. 2. Lib. 8. cap. 16. Euseb. lib. 3. De vita Constant. not for that he thought his authority might not stretch so far as to judge the Priests and their matters, as ye would have it to seem: for as he himself protesteth, this above all other things, to be the chief scope and end of his Imperial authority; namely that the Catholic Church be preserved in unity of faith, sincerity of love, concord in godly Religion, and that the diseases therein, as Schisms, Heresies, etc. might be healed by his ministry: even so forsook he no occasion or mean, whereby to work forth this effect of his ministry and office, whether it were at some time by relenting and remitting somewhat of his authority, or by exercising the same to the utmost, in all matters, Sozom. lib. 1. cap. 4. and over all persons. He thought it the best for this time by (.631.) The .631. untruth. He relented nothing but showed his due Reverence. relenting to bear with the weakness of those fathes, thereby the better to encourage than to stand fast, and jointly against the common enemy, for the furtherance of the truth. But afterwad, when the Council or Synod was assembled at tire by his commmaundemet, and that Athanasius had made complaint unto him of the unjust dealing of that council to deface the truth, th'emperor did exercise the full authority of his ministry, and called all the Bishops unto him, to this end, that he by his (632) The 632. untruth. Facing, as hath before been showed in the .2. book cap. 3. supreme authority, might examine their doings, and judge of the whole Council, whether they had judged uprightly, and deal● sincerely or not. This he did at the suit of the most godly bishop Athanas●us, who would not have attributed this (.633.) The .633. untruth. Athanasius attributed no such Authority, to the Emperor, but of all men, denied it most unto him. See before. fol. 94. and so forth. authority to the Emperor, if it had not appertained to his jurisdiction to have judged the bishops and their doings▪ whither would the Catholic Fathers of that time, have suffered this and many other such like doings of this most Christian Emperor, to have passed without some admonition or misliking, if they had not acknowledged the authority in him to be lawful. He commanded the Bishops every where, to assemble at his appointment, where, and when he would. He sharply reproveth Alexander Bishop of Alexandria, and Arius, for the contention stirred up by them. He (634) The .634. untruth. The Pope and the bishops judged it, not the'mperor, but with thei● leave. See before Fol. ●1. judged Cecilianus Bishop of Carthage, to be lawfully consecrated, and ordered, and condemned the Donatists. And these bishops assembled at the Nicen Council by his commandment▪ of whom ye speak, acknowledged the Emperor to have authority to judge them and their causes, (.635.) The 635. untruth. this or else, followeth not. Many are sometimes called to judge between parties, who yet have no Authority over the parties. or else they had done foolishly, to offer their bills of complaint unto him, whom they thought had no authority or might not judge and determine them. But in case it were true, that the Prince might not judge the Priests nor their causes, what conclude you thereof? You can not conclude your purpose, for this is no more a good consequent: Constantinus would not could lawfully judge the Priests assembled at Nicen Council: Ergo, (.636.) The .636. untruth. This Ergo, is your own, not M. Fekenhams. Bishops and Priests may call counsels make Laws, orders, and decrees, to their flock and cures, and exercise all manner jurisdiction cohibitive. Then this, York standeth but three miles from Pocklington, Ergo, your pocket is full of plums. The .10. Chapter. Containing a defence of three examples brought forth by M. Fekenham, touching three Emperors, Constantin the great, Valentian the first, and Theodosius the first. Stapleton. ALthough that, which M. Feckenham hath already laid forth out of holy scripture, be sufficient to show and prove, that the superiority in all causes ecclesiastical, doth not rest in lay princes, but in the spiritual rulers, yet will he now add and adjoin thereunto, such a forcible argument, that shall beat down to the ground M. Horns new Laical supremacy. M. Horn with all his wit and cunning goeth about to advance his new supremacy, and to depress and abolish the other, as contrary to scriptures, and injurious to the Emperors, and princes. Now to stop his lying mouth M. Fekenham bringeth forth three of the worthiest Emperors that ever were, and all three living when Christian religion most flourished, that by plain words confess the clergies superiority in this behalf: that is, Constantine the great; Valentinian the first, and Theodosius the great. Constantine acknowledgeth the clergies superiority. This Constantine at the request of Silvester the pope called the first general council, at Nice, where diverse bishops being at contention for certain matters, offered their complaints to him. To whom Constantine answered, that where as God had made them priests, he had given them authority to judge over him. And therefore they might well be his judges. Ex. Ruff. lib. 10. eccles. hist. cap. 2. But ye (saith he) may be judged of no man. Good Lord, how far discrepant is the judgement of this our noble country man (as our Chroniclers call him) and most worthy Emperor from the judgement of M. Horn and his fellows? He disclaimeth flatly this new superiority: Yet you now after one thousand and almost three hundred years, by preaching and writing, yea by praemunire, and the sword do maintain the same. This answer presseth M. Horn very sore, and therefore, he seeketh every corner to hide his head in, and yet he can find no good or quiet resting place. And first he would fain take some hold in a by matter, which is, that Constantin did not call the council at Silvester his request: because the council was not in the time of Silvester, but of julius. I deny your argument M. Horn. For it must needs be, that the bishops, repairing to Nice from all quarters of Christendom, should have a convenient time to come thither: Li. ●. c. 26. And Nicephorus writeth, that the same Council dured three years and more. And then may it well stand, that Sylvester died either after the summoning, and before the full assemble of the bishops, or at least before the end, that so some part of it might fall in the time of julius, notwithstanding that Marcus came between, who sat in the See little more than two years. Neither doth your authors by you cited, deny that it was called at Syluesters request, nor any other of the ancient writers, that ever I read. But I say further unto you, that as Constantine did call it at his request, so did he himself call this council: the one by his spiritual, the other by his temporal authority: which in all good prince's time, Li. 3. c. 15. doth ever serve the other. The one (as your own Author Cusanus teacheth) by force of Authority and commandment over all bishops, over whom he is the head: The other by way of exhortation, Vide foe. 118 of temporal aid and succour, as I have before at large recited his words. But to leave Cusanus, Synodus sexta in sermone acclamatorio ad Imperatorem. Act. 18. fo. 403. co. 1. Arrius divisor atque partitor Trinitatis insurgebat, & continuò Constantinus semper Augustus, & Silvester laudabilis, magnam atque insignen in Nicaea Synodum congregabant. for proof that Sylvester called this Council, I am able to bring against you, at the least two or rather three hundred witnesses, and the worst of them shall be a bishop, and so ancient withal, that none of them lived this .800. years. Perchance ye think that I do but jest with you: No truly M. Horn, I mean plain faith, without any figure of rhetoric, or such lying figures as ye are well acquainted withal. hearken you then, what the sixth general council (where were present about .300. bishop's) saith to their Emperor Constantine being then present there. Arrius (say they) which divided, Eusebius. in Chro●. Damas. in Pontif. Isidorus tom. 1. Concil. in praefat. Nic. Conc. Platina in Siluestro. Rhegino in Chron. Pantaleon in Chronograph. Photius Patriarch. Const. de 7. Conc. Oecum. ad Michaelen Bulg. Principem. and sundered the Trinity, arose and by and by themperor Constantine and the praise worthy Sylvester, did assemble at Nice a great and a notable Synod. See M. Horn. Where ye will not suffer M. Feckenham, saying Constantine called the council at the request of Sylvester, ye must now be content to suffer him, when he telleth you, that he did call it himself also. Beside the undoubted testimony of these so many and Ancient Fathers, we have the witness of Chroniclers, as of Eusebius, Damasus, Isidorus, Photius, Platina, Regino, Pantaleon, and divers other. And so withal is your second shift, shifted away: whereby ye would make your reader believe, that the pope and the other bishops did acknowledge Constantins supremacy, in calling of Counsels, being as ye say, the principal part of jurisdiction Ecclesiastical cohibitive. For as this is untrue, that the bare calling of a council is any such principal part, as we have before declared: so it is untrue also, Vide fol. 118. lib. 1. that ye say, that the pope called not this council. These strings being very weak, and therefore soon broken as ye see, he setteth out the third, and that is weakest and worst of all: And all this string hangeth upon a foolish sinful civylity and policy, that Master Horn imagineth full fond in this worthy prince Constantine. As thowghe he spoke those words, for his modesty only, and for a policy and a prudent forsighte: lest by siftinge those private quarrels, he might have hindered the common cause: and not for that he thought his authority might not stretch so far as to judge the priests. And therefore though he politykely relented at this time, yet afterward at the council at Tyrus he showed himself as supreme judge in causes Ecclesiastical. It is wont to be said M. Horn, Malèdicta glosa quae destruit textum. cursed is that gloze that destroyeth the text. surely ye are very imprudently overseen in this your answer? For all this is but a peevish and a wretched policy: wherewith you dishonour this noble monarch. And ye have forgotten the rules aswell of divinity as of policy. For as it is policy, sometime to dissemble a truth, so to tell an untruth, is at all time a sin, yea though the truth be offensive to no man, but officiable and profitable to many. As S. Augustin doth at large discourse the matter. Aug. ad Consentium de mandatio Tom. 4 Now if the Emperor be the priests judge: then doth Constantins saying contain a plain lie. Seeing that before he expressly confessed them to be his judges, and said farther, that they could be judged of no man. We leave this policy therefore and prudent foresight, to your generation, as unmeet either for Constantine, or for any other a much meaner catholic man. The policy of our new evangelical school This kind of policy a man may find in great store in M. jewels Reply, and in this your answer. This is the very practice of your new evangelical school. You seem to be persuaded, to make no account of lying, so that your lewd cause may be furthered. But though you be nought yourselves, you must not so judge of others. Verily Constantin spoke as he thought and the very truth. And he confessed as plainly, that they were his judges: As you saw before in his own words. For he said to the bishops plainly. That they could be judged of no man. Neither is it to be gathered by Ruffinus and Nicephorus, as ye pretend, that he thought not so as he spoke, Ruffinus. li. 1. ca 2. Nice. li. 8. cap. 16. or spoke those words, for that only, that the common cause should not be hindered, which might and should have gone forward, though he had not spoken these words. In deed he burned their bills of complaints, and so cut away their private quarreling, lest it should have been any hindrance to the principal matter, that was then to be discussed and debated upon. And in case the complaints had been such, as Constantin might have heard and determined, he might have reserved them until the end of the Council: and then have heard them without any prejudice or stay of the common matters. Now what kind of matters these were, for the which the Bishops did contend, it doth not appear. If they were temporal, then whether Constantine might hear them, or might not, it maketh nothing for his Ecclesiastical supremacy. If they were spiritual matters, then are we sure, he might not hear, as the chief and principal judge. Private quarrels they were as yourself confess, and therefore by all likelihood of temporal matters: wherein for all that, themperor thought himself no meet or convenient judge, upon priests. And that well appeareth to be his mind, by that we have said before, that he made a law, whereby all priests convented before any temporal judge, might refuse him, Cap. 4. fo. 103. et. 104. and require the matter to be heard of the bishop. But of this matter see our answer before in the Second book. Ye are now busy again with the Council of Tyrus, with Caecilianus, and such other matters, to prove Constantin the supreme head. Whereunto seeing we have * Lib. 2. cap. 2. & 3. fol. 90. & sequentib. Item. fol. 94. et seq. already sufficiently answered, we will not encumber the Reader again with them in this place: And need so much the less, that ye seem to faint and give over your hold, and your fond gloze against the plain text: and by putting the case it were true, which is true in deed: seek yet an other corner to creep in, and say that though Constantin would not or could not lawfully judge the Priests, yet it will not follow, that bishops may call Counsels, make laws, and exercise all manner of jurisdiction cohibitive. Ye say truly M. Horn, it will not follow in deed. Neither M. Fekenham driveth any such reason. It is sufficient, that they may exercise any cohibitive jurisdiction without the prince's commission, which you have hitherto denied: affirming, that they can not do it without the Princes warrant: nor the Prince himself touching the first cohibitive jurisdiction, as ye have divided it. But if they be judges, them must it needs follow, that they have some jurisdiction cohibitive. For as the law saith. jurisdictio sine modica correctione nulla est. De officio eius, cui mandata est jurisdictio: Mandatam. jurisdiction without some compulsion is no jurisdiction. Again if Constantinus were not the supreme judge, nor could be: them are not other Emperors or Princes, judges any thing more, than he was, and so hath M. F. by this justified his assertion. This argument therefore that ye mislike, is not M. Fekenhans, but your own. Who shall let you to like or mislike your own reasons at your pleasure. And therefore, for answer to this your peevish argument, I say, it followeth no better, than if a man should say. York standeth but three miles from Pocklington: Ergo your pocket is full of plums. And so have you full wisely stopped not M.F. but your own mouth with an handful of your own plums. If Priests be judges, they have not thereby all manner of jurisdiction cohitive: for them should they have all temporal jurisdiction aswell as spiritual. But yet for such causes as they be lawful judges in, they may make laws and orders judicially, and may have, yea and must have all ecclesiastical jurisdiction, for the execution of their judgement. M. Horn. The .170. Division. pag. 118. a. Of the like form also are the consequents, that ye make upon the histories of the emperors Valentinian and Theodosius. And as you can not fasten your purpose by any good sequel upon these histories, so that history tha● ye allege of Valentinian, maketh much (.637.) The .637. untruth. For that history maketh much for M. Feck. purpose, as shall appear. Lib. 6. cap. 7. Lib. 4. cap. 2. again your purpose. Firs● it is uncertain and may be doubted, whether this answer that ye affirm to be Valentinians, were his or Valens the emperors words, for as Sozomenus one of the Tripartit Ecclesiastical historians, affirmeth this suit to be made by Catholic Bishops of Hellespontus and Bythinia, unto Valentinian, and that this was his answer to their petition. Even so Socrates an other of the same tripartit historians affirmeth, that this suit was made by the Macedonians, unto Valens the Emperor, who granted them their petition, the rather supposing, that the matter should have been determined in that Council, after the minds of Eudoxius and Acatius. And it i● not from the purpose to note which of these Emperors caused this Council to be called, for the one of them, Valentinian was a Catholic Emperor, the other Valens, an Arian. Secondly you do (.638.) The .638. untruth slanderous. M. Feckenham reporteth the story truly. falsely report the story for the Bishops of Hellespontꝰ and Bythinia, did not make suit unto Themperor Valentinian, that he would be present in the council: but by their messenger, did humbly beseech him, that he would command all the Bishops, as Nicephorus reporteth it, or that he would suffer and give leave unto the bishops to have a Synod or Council, which they held after licence obtained at Lampsacum, as Socrates and Sozomenus, the Tripartite Historians, make relation. Thirdly, the Emperor doth (.639.) The .639. untruth. He doth simply deny it, as shall appear. not simply refuse or deny the search and diligent enquyrie of these matters, as things nothing appertaining to his office, or not lawful for him to inquire of: as ye would have it seem, but excuseth himself by his earnest business and want of leisure, saying, It is not lawful: (.640.) The .640. untruth. He meant not so, as it plainly appeareth by Sozomenus, Paulus Diac. and Cassiodore. (meaning that his leisure, from the weighty matters of the common weal, and just opportunity, would not easily now suffer him) to travail in those causes, and therefore referreth the exact sifting of those things to them, whose offices and charge, was properly to be occupied in those matters. That this is the true purport of his words in his right sense and meaning appeareth plainly by the (.641.) The .641. untruth. by the Circumstances no such thing appeareth. due circumstances set forth in the story, and also by Nicephorus an Ecclesiastical historian, who rightly understood his meaning, and reporteth it in these words: Mihi negotijs occupato, & reipcutis distento res eiusmodi inquirere, non facile est. Lib. 11. cap. 3. It is no light or easy matter for me, that am now occupied with businesses, and filled so full as I may be, with the cares of the common weal, to inquire or search such matters. Last of all, whether t●e Catholic Bishops of Helespontus and Bythinia, required the emperors presence in the Council, as ye affirm, or they required therewith his labour and travail in the debating or searching the truth of matter, which may seem at the first by the bare words of his answer: or they desired only licence of him and permission to assemble together in Synod or Council, to determine and decree with the truth, against the Arianismes, which the most and best part of the Historians agree unto. Their suit and humble petition, maketh plainly against your presumptuous assertion, in that they acknowledged (.642.) The .642. untruth. They acknowledged nor thereby any such jurisdiction, but they craved his aid and assistance for quiet and order sake. thereby the jurisdiction to call Counsels, to be in the Emperor; and not in Bishops or Priests, without special leave, licence, and commission from the Prince. For if the power and jurisdiction to call Counsels, had been in themselves without the emperors commission, what needed them to have craved licence of the Emperor? And if it had not been lawful for the Emperor to have been present in the Council, and to have dealt in the diligent search and debating of matters in Religion, than these Catholic bishops did wickedly, who as you (.643.) The .643. untruth. M Fekenham saith not, they required th'emperor to deal in debating such matters, but only to be present. say, moved him thereunto. Stapleton. A confutation of M. Horns answer to Valentinians story The next story is, of Valentinian th'emperor, whom the catholics required, that he would vouchsauf to be present among them in their Council. Who made them answer, that it was not lawful for him being a lay man, to search out such matters. But ye that are priests (saith he) and that have the care of these matters, Hist. trip. li. 7. c. 12. may at your pleasure assemble yourself where ye will. To this allegation Master Horn answereth. First, that it is not certain, whether the suit was made to Valentinian, or to Valens his brother, which was an Arrian. Secondly he saith, that M. Feckenham doth falsely report the story: for that the bishops did not make suit to him to be present, but that he would command the bishops, Nicephor. lib. 11. c. 3. as Nicephorus reporteth it, or suffer, or give leave to the bishops to have a synod, as Socrates and Sozomenus make relation. Thirdly that th'emperor doth not simply deny, that the search of these matters appertain to his office, but excuseth himself, by his earnest business and want of leisure: as Nicephorus, who rightly understood his meaning, reporteth. Last of all, what so ever the suit was, they acknowledged the jurisdiction to call councils to be in the Emperor: or else what needed they to have craved licence of the Emperor? Your first, and second solution M. Horn, though they were true, will little relieve you. And yet aswell in the one, as in the other M. Fekenham reporteth no more than the very words of his Author, Trip. li. 7. cap. 12. Sozo. lib. 6. cap. 7. Pau. Dia. in addit: ad Eutropium. Niceph. li. 11 cap. 13. Euagrius lib. 1. ca 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. that wrote the Tripartite history. First that the catholyks sent to Valentinian, and not the Macedonians to Valens. This saith the Tripartite alleged by M. Fekenham: this saith Sozomenus: this saith Paulus Diaconus, this saith Nicephorus with others. As for Socrates, though he writ otherwise, yet his credit is the less, both for that he is known, to have missereported other things, namely about the matters of Athanasius and Arrius, contrary to all other writers, and also for that he is noted of ignorance by Euagrius an other Ecclesiastical writer, about the story of the Ephesine Council: So little cause you had to charge M. Fekenham of misreporting, yourself forsaking the consent of so many, to follow one against all the rest, when M. Fekenham followed the consent of the most and the best writers. As for the second point, the said tripartite hath even as M. Fekenham doth allege it, Tripart. ca 12. li. 7. Vt dignaretur ad dogmatis emendationem interest. Paul. Diac. quatenus dignaretur ad dogmatis emendationem interest. and so hath Paulus Diaconus too: that is, that it would please him to be present, that wrong opinions might be reform. For the .3. point also M. Feckenham swerveth nothing from the said tripartite. Nay saith M. Horn, the dew circumstance set forth in the story, and Nicephorus who rightly understood the emperors meaning declare, that when he said it was not Lawful for him, he meant: it was no light or easy matter for him being occupied with business and care of the comen wealth, Paul. Diaconus. Mthi cum subiecto populo de huiusmodi negotijs curiosè agere fas non est. ut ergo videtur vobis sacerdotibus, facite. to search such matters. But how prove you, that Nicephorus a very late writer should understand his meaning better, than Paulus Diaconus that lived at least four hundred years before Nicephorus, that writeth thus? It is not lawful for me, and my people curiously to meddle with such matters. Wherefore do ye that priests, as ye shall think good. Why should we think, that Nicephorus should be more privy of th'emperors right meaning, Tripart. lib. 7. ca 12. Mihi cum unus de populo sim, fas non est. & caet. than was Epiphanius the translator of the Tripartite, writing at least .600. years before Nicephorus was born? Yea why should we think that Nicephorus should see more deeply the meaning of th'emperor, Sozom. li. 6. cap. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. them the original author himself Sozomene, that lived about the said emperors time? Who writeth, that th'emperor Valentinian answered. It is not lawful for me, being a lay man, to be curious in the searching of these matters. Let the bishops, to whose charge these matters appertain, assemble themselves, at what place they list. Neither can the circumstance of the story of Valentinian as ye imagine, lead a man to your sense. Eutrop. Cui & nos qui gubernamus imperium, sincerè capita nostra submittamus, & eius monita dum tanquam homines deliquerimus necessariò veluti curantis medicamenta suscipiamus. Tripart. li. 7. ca 8. Theodor. li. 4 ca 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Eutropius ibidem. Gratias tibi ago D●mine, quia huic vir● ego quidem co●mmisi corpora, tu autem animas. For whether we consider this answer, or the answer he made at the election of S. Ambrose, we shall find all to be of one sort. Chose ye, saith th'emperor to the bishops, such a bishop, for Milan, to whom we that govern the empire, may sincerely submit our head: and whose admonitions we, when by any frailty, as men are wont, we trespass, may of necessity receive as of the physicians medicine. And when the bishops would have set over the choice and the appointment of the new bishop to him, because he was a wise and a godly Prince: Nay saith he: This enterprise or work passeth our vocation or degree. For ye that are endued with the grace of God, and shine brightly with that light, may much better make this election. The Emperor also understanding, that S. Ambrose was chosen, said: I thank thee my Lord God, that it hath pleased thee, to commit men's souls, to him (meaning S. Ambrose) to whom I committed men's bodies. For before S. Ambrose was chosen bishop of Milan, he was the governor of those quarters under the Emperor. But to put the matter out of doubt, let us hearken to S. Ambrose, and to that, that he sayeth of this Emperor. This emperors son the young Valentinian sent for S. Ambrose to come to his consistory: and there to reason and dispute before him, and other as judges, Ambros. lib. 5. epistola. 32. against the Arrian bishop Auxencius. To whom S. Ambrose answered: Sir: your father did not only say it in words, but ordained by a law, that in matters touching faith, or ecclesiastical order, he ought to be judge, that is neither unequal in office, nor unlike in right. For these are the words of his rescript or Law: that is, that priests should be judges upon priests. Yea if a priest were otherwise accused, and that he were to be examined of his manners and life, he would that the bishops should be judges. Wherefore his own law may best serve, for the interpretation of his answer made to the bishops of Hellespontus. And this with the other premises declare evidently, th'emperors meaning, and that he thought it did not properly belong to him, but to the bishops, to intermeddle with the affairs Ecclesiastical. Neither doth Nicephorus any thing hinder our purpose. For that, that he saith, will well stand with Sozomenus. And it is probable the Emperor said both. And as it is in holy scripture, that one place supplieth the defect of the other: so is it also in chroniclers. And that perchance ye saw yourself, and therefore ye run to your accustomable reason, as it were to your Bulwark, that the princes had authority to call counsels, and not the bishops: for else (say you) what needed them to have craved Licence of th'emperor? Wherein I answer, they needed his aid for opportunity of time and place. And as at all times the bishops have wrought in calling of Counsels with the prince's assistance, so at this time, (the Arrians and other heretics bearing such a sway in the world) it was great wisdom, to attempt no council without notice given to the prince, and his consent had thereunto. Namely considering what persecutions the Catholics of late had suffered under the Arrian Emperor Constantius, and that their decrees could not be effectually executed against rebellious heretyks, who contemned excommunication, and all other Ecclesiastical jurisdiction, neither they themselves could safely and quietly assemble together, without the special aid of the Prince. M. Horn. The .171. Division. pag. 119. a. Although ye (.644.) The .644. untruth. The story is by M. Fekenham truly reported; untruly report the story of Theodosius the Emperor, and Ambrose the bishop of Milan, yet can you not by any means wrested it, to serve your purpose (.645.) The .645. Untruth. It serveth the purpose many ways, as shall appear. any whit at all. For if it were true, that Ambrose forbade Theodosius the Emperor the entrance into the Chauncellior that the Emperor had said to him, that he had learned the difference betwixt an Emperor and a Priest, yet can you not conclude thereof: therefore Bishops and Priests have power and authority to make Laws, Orders, and Decrees to their flocks and cures, and to exercise the second kind of Cohibitive jurisdiction over them. Theodosius, as the Author writeth, Theod. lib. 5. c. 18. came into the Chancel to offer his oblation, whereat S. Ambrose found no fault: But when he stayed there still to receive the holy Mysteries, Mark here, Gentle Reader, how M. Horn telleth only the Story, and so stealeth away without any answer in the world. S. Ambrose sent him word to go forth and abide with the other of the Church, for that place was only for the Priests: For which monition the Emperor was returned to Constantinople, and came on a time into the inward place or Chancel to offer his oblation, and went forth again so soon as he had offered, Nectarius the Bishop demanded of him, wherefore he tarried not still within, meaning to receive the holy mysteries: To whom the Emperor maketh answer, saying: I have scarcely learned the difference betwixt an Emperor and a Priest. Stapleton. The third story is of th'emperor Theodosius the Great, A confutation of M. Horns answer to the story of Theodosius. whom S. Ambrose forbade to enter into the Chancel, saying: The inner parts of the Church, o Emperor, lie open for Priests only, etc. whom the Emperor thanked for this admonition, saying: that he had now learned a difference betwixt an Emperor and a Priest. First M. Horn findeth this fault with Master Fekenham, Theod. lib. 5. c. 18. that he untruly reporteth the Story of Theodosius: then in case this were a true report, that it can not be by any means wrested to serve M. Fekenhams purpose any whit at all. For if it were true, yet could he not conclude, that because S. Ambrose forbade Theodosius thentrance into the Chancel, that bishops have power to make Laws and decrees, to their flocks and cure, and to exercise the second cohibitive jurisdiction. I now perceive, that Horace saying is true. Brevis esse laboro: Obscurus fio. Whiles men seek brevity, they fall into obscurity. So perchance M. Horn might have said, and truly to M. Fekenham. But that he saith, that M. Fekenham maketh a misreport of the story, that he sayeth very plainly, but as falsely. And therefore both to supply this defect, and shape M. Horn a plain and a full answer, I will a little more open this story. The story of Theodosius the Emperor and S. Ambrose, opened. The people at Thessalonica in a sedition and an uproar slew certain of the magistrates, whereupon Theodosius, though otherwise a good and a very temperate man in all his doings, being entered into a great rage and choler, commanded the people of that City to be destroyed by his army: which in a furiousness without any consideration slew such as by chance they first met withal: were they Citizens, strangers, or foreigners, were they guilty, Niceph. li. 12. cap. 40 & 41. Theod. lib. 5. cap. 18. or were they unguilty. After a certain time it chanced, that this Emperor came to Milan, and being there, after his custom repairing to the Church, S. Ambrose met him, and forbade him to enter: most vehemently reproving him for the said shawghter: ask, how he could find in his conscience, eyher to lift up his hands to God, defiled with such a foul murder, or with the same to receive the holy body of Christ, or to receive with his mouth the precious blood of Christ, by whose furious and ragnge commandment so much blood had been shed? Wherefore he would, that the Emperor should turn home again, and that he should patiently suffer the bond, Of the penance of this Emperor enjoined him by S. Ambrose. the which God had with his heavenly sentence allowed, meaning this sentence of excommunication. The Emperor as one brought up in God's Laws, obeyed him, and with weapinge tears departed: where he continued eight months, and never came all this while to the Church, nor received the sacrament of Christ's body. The solemn feast of Christmas being now come, he was in great heaviness and sorrow: Mihi porro non modò id tangere licet, verum etiam coelum ipsum clausum est. Neque enim divini illius oraculi non memini quod disertis verbis statuit: quaecunque a sacerdotibus Dei ligata fuerint in terris, ea etiam in coelis certa esse ligata. to consider that every poor beggar might go to the Church, and he only was shut out. And full bitterly complained and moaned with himself, that he was excluded, not only from the Church, but from heaven also. For he did well remember, that Christ said plainly, that what so ever was bound in earth of God's Priests, should be bound also in heaven. At length after he had sent Ruffinus a noble man, to entreat with S. Ambrose, he went himself, neither yet would presume to enter, until S. Ambrose had absolved him, and loosed his bonds: Te autem oro, ut vincula mea soluas. Et mox Tuae vero, ò vir divine id est operae, indicare mihi & temperare sacrae medicinae remedia. which he did most humbly and penitently crave at his hands, offering himself to receive such farther penance, as S. Ambrose should enjoin him. Whereupon S. Ambrose enjoined him (for his penance) to make a Law, that such capital sentences and judgements as should seam to be made extaordinarily, and contrary to the common order and custom of themperors, should not be put in execution, till .30. days after the sentence. That in this mean while, the Prince might, if need were, better advise himself, either for the moderation or the abolishing of his commandment. Which law was presently made and subscribed with Theodosius hands, and doth at this day remain to be seen in the Code. Vide Cod. Theod. li. 9 tit. 40. lib. 13 In Cod. justin. lib. 9 tit. de poenis: Si vindicari. The Emperor being at length reconciled, and suffered to enter into the church, went up into the chancel to offer, and there remained, willing to receive the Sacrament of Christ's body, as the Emperors were wont to do. But S. Ambrose sent to him a deacon to warn him to departed into the body of the church: for that the inward temple was a place for the priests only. And thereupon he departed, and thanked S Ambrose. And coming afterward to Constantinople, when he had done his offering in the chancel, would not tarry, but departed into the body of the Church: Niceph. li. 12. ca 41. Vix aliquando tanden (inquit) quod discrimen sit inter imperatorem & sacrorum antistitem, cognovi: vix veritatis doctorem inveni. though Nectarius the patriarch there, were not content with it and willed him to remain still: to whom he answered. I have scarcely now at length learned the difference betwixt an Emperor, and a priest. By this story, first ye understand, what a cavillor, and what a quarreler M. Horn is: to charge M. Fekenham with the untrue report of this story. For as for the first, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. truth it is. S. Ambrose did not find fault, that he should enter into the chancel, neither M. Fekenham saith so. But saying, he forbade him to enter, and adding no more but these words, the inward parts, be for the Priests, & caetera this & caetera. declareth, that M Feckenham meant not of the bare ingress, but of the ingress and tarrying withal, according to the story: to the which he doth refer himself with this & caetera. And therefore as there is no cause, why he should untruly report it, making nothing for his purpose, nor against you: so considering the manner of his utterance, it is truly reported: and ye Master Horn show yourself but a wrangler. For the .2. point, though in deed Theodoretus saith as you rehearse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is, scarcely, or hardly: yet the leaving out of those two syllables, is not any way beneficial to M. Fekenham, or prejudicial to your cause, or worthy to be noted for any untruth. For it is very true, that Theodosius had learned a difference betwixt th'emperor and the priests, though scarcely and hardly, and in long time. Now we have proved M. Fekenham an honest man, and cleared him, we give you warning to see to yourself, and that you provide aswell for yourself and your honesty, which ye shall never do. Remember I pray you, Vide supra fol. 119. b. &. 120. a. The story of, Theodosius maketh against many points of M. Horne● doctrine. what advantage, or what great honesty ye took before, for the alleging of Theodosius doings. Take heed I say, lest his story yet once again put you to as much shame. I will not tarry upon other incident though great matters. As that this story giveth a sure record and testimony against your synagogues, or rather Barns (.1.) aswell for the plucking down of the chancel, and making no difference between the Priests and the lay men's place (.2.) as also for taking away the oblation and presence of the blessed body and blood of Christ, testified by this story. In the which oblation, the chief office of the Priest remaineth: and for the which, as being one principal cause, in the ancient and primitive Church the Churches were not barns or cockpittes, as yours are now, but seemly and orderly distincted, with the Chancel to the Priests only: and with the body of the Church, peculiarly appointed to the people. This I say, I will now leave largely to discourse upon (.3.) and also that this Story destroyeth your other heresy, that Priests do not remit sins, but declare only sins to be remitted. For Theodosius confessed, that by the sentence of this Bishop, he was excluded not only from the Church, but from heaven also. I will now discourse only, whether this story be aptly brought forth (.4.) for M. Fekenhams purpose, which ye deny. But he that doth not see most evidently, that this Story proveth S. Ambrose, for causes Ecclesiastical to have been the head of the Church of Milan, and not the Emperor, he will never see any truth, as long as he liveth, and is like to him that in a fair sunny day stoppeth his eyes with his hands at midnoone, and then crieth out that they are fools, that say it is day light. No, no, every man may easily see by this Story, that the tenor of your oath can not possibly be justified: whereby men are urged to swear, that the Prince is supreme head not in one or two, but in ALL causes or things ECCLESIASTICAL. Surely an untrue and an horrible proposition. The which S. Ambrose, if he now lived, rather than he would confess, he would be dismembered with wild horses. This is to open, and to evident an absurdity, and though ye will not, or dare not confess it with plain words, M. Horns starting holes, when he is pressed mere. yet as we have declared, it may be well gathered yourself do not like it. And therefore ye craftily wind yourself from that, as much as ye may possibly, and find many starting holes: as in the former leaf, That out of Constantinus Story it may not be gathered, that bishops have all manner of Cohibitive jurisdiction. And here: that it can not be proved by this Story of Theodosius, that they have the second Cohibitive jurisdiction. But in case out of both it may be gathered (as it is in deed necessarily gathered) that the Prince is not supreme Head in all matters Ecclesiastical: then is Master Fekenham free from taking the Oath, as being such, as neither he, nor any good man may with safe conscience receive. Now further, what if of this Story, it shallbe proved most evidently, that Bishops have not only the .2. Cohibitive, but the first Cohibitive too, as ye call it? And that it is so, I set fast footing, and join issue with you. And first, for your first Cohibitive jurisdiction, as ye call it, in which by you is comprehended excommunication, which ye see here practised without any Prince's commission, yea upon the Prince himself. And as no man ever read or heard, that S. Ambrose had any other commission, either from Prince or from his Church, to excommunicate Theodosius, and that as it is not likely, that the whole Church and Congregation of Milan would agree to the excommunication of the Emperor: or that they had any such authority: So a man may doubt, whether there were any one lay man or Priest, that was of such courage, as herein to join with S. Ambrose in so dangerous, but yet a worthy enterprise. Surely S. Ambrose had none other commission, than all other Bishops then, or sithence have had. None other, I say, than he had, when he excommunicated a servant of the Earl Stillico, Paulinus in vita Ambrosij. for forging of false letters. Which excommunication wrought so wondrously, that he waxed mad, and was possessed of the Devil, that began all to tear him. None other then he had, when he excommunicated also Maximus the tyrant: Ibidem. not without great danger of his life. Niceph. li. 12. cap. 41 Vinculum quod Deus coelitus sub calculo comprobavit, suscipe. None other I say, then that, that he received of God, when he was made bishop. This jurisdiction than did S. Ambrose exercise by his supreme Ecclesiastical authority, upon the highest Monarch of all the world. This did he by his episcopal office, Ambros lib. 5. epistola 28. ad ipsum Theodosium. Ita me Deus ab omnibus tribulationibus liber●t, quia non ab homine neque per hominem, sed apertè mihi interd●ctum adverti: Dum enim essem sollicitus, ipsa nocte qua proficisci parabam, venisse quidem visus es, sed mihi sacrificium offerre non licuit. and yet not without a plain celestial revelation to encourage him thereto, and to confirm him, as himself declareth. Herein his doings were agreeable to his teachings. For he taught with all other Catholics, that this excommunication pertaineth to the bishops and not to the multitude. The Bishop's office is (saith he) if it maybe to heal cankered and foystered sores, and if that may not be, to cut the pernicious and rotten parts quite of. It is then a most true principle, that Bishops need to look for none other warrant to excommunicate any man, that deserveth excommunication: no nor the Prince neither, putting the case as ye falsely do, that he is the head of the Church. And therefore either you must take from him this unnatural and monstrous head, Officiorum lib. 2 ca 27. Sic Episcopi affectus boni est, ut optet sanare infirmos, serpentia auferre vulnera: adurere aliqua non abscindere, postremò quod sanari non potest, cum dolore abscindere. by which ye set two heads upon one body, or ye must grant him authority to excommunicate to. Marvel it is to me, if this your preaching and teaching be so true and sure as ye make it, that the learned men about Theodosius could not espy it. O that ye had been at his elbow to have inspired him which a little of your new divinity: ye might have wonderfully eased his woeful heart, and perchance if you might have proved your doctrine, have worn for your labour the Pope's triple crown by Theodosius good help, for such good service in so great distress. What a sort of dolts had Theodosius being so mighty a Prince about him: that none of them could tell him, that he needed not to pass a button for S. Ambroses' excommunication, unless he saw it withal sealed by the whole congregation? If Theodosius had learned this lesson he would have shifted well enough for him self, nor needed not to have pined away so many months with continual mourning and lamentation. But surely if ye had told him so M. Horn, he would have taken you as ye are, that is, for a liar, and an heretic. He was as I have said, brought up in the knowledge of God's law, and knew full well, Niceph. li. 14. cap. 3. Adeò religiosus Theodosius fuit, vitanque suam accuratissimè ad divinas leges composuit. that he was lawfully excommunicated, by S. Ambrose. The which he did much fear, pronounced not by a Bishop only, that hath thereto ordinary, but (such was his devotion and his life so conformable to God's laws) of other that had none authority at al. And therefore being on a time excommunicated, of a froward monk, having none authority thereto: he would neither eat, nor drink until he were assoiled of him: yea though th'Archbishop himself of Constantinople offered to assoil him. We will now come to the 2. cohibitive, as ye call it, and to the authority of making laws and decrees, evidently to be proved by this story. For from whence cometh this order and manner to distinct the chancel from the body of the Church, and to place the priests in the one, and the laity in the other: but from the Bishops, without any commission of the Prince or people? The which order and law ye see, that S Ambrose appointed to the Prince himself: which he ever afterward kept, though before he used the contrary. Again doth not S. Ambrose prescribe to Theodosius for his penance, a certain law and order to be set forth by him, by his proclamation? Thirdly is it not a Law made of the Bishops and council without any commission of Princes or people, Conc. Milevit. c. 19 that a sentence once given, or order taken in matters Ecclesiastical, none of the Clergy should appeal upon pain of deprivation to any civil Prince? And that we go not from the story and time of Theodosius and S. Ambrose: Ton. 1. conc. in council. Aquil. did not S. Ambrose with the whole Council kept at Aquileia depose Palladius, for that he, among other things, would have had certain noble men to have been associate to sit in judgement with the Bishops in the time of Theodosius? Art. 4. fol. 108. Of the which I have spoken more largely in my Return, etc. against M. jewel. Thus ye perceive good Reader, how aptly and fitly M. Fekenham hath accommodated to his purpose, the stories of these three Emperors, and to what poor shifts Master Horn is driven for the maintenance of his evil cause, that he hath taken in hand to defend. Thus you see also, how to this story of S. Ambrose and Theodosius M. Horn hath answered no one word, but making a short recital thereof, stealeth fair away, without any answer at all. M. Fekenham. The .172. Division. pag. 119. a. Cal. Institut. cap. 8. M. john Caluine, entreating of the Histories betwixt these Emperors Valentinian, Theodosius, and S. Ambrose, after a long process wherein he maketh good proof, that all spiritual jurisdiction doth appertain unto the Church, and not unto the Empire, he hath these words following: Qui ut magistratum ornent, Ecclesiam spoliant hac potestate, non modo falsa interpretatione Christi sententiam corrumpunt, sed sanctos omnes Episcopos, qui tam multi à tempore Apostolorum extiterunt, non leviter damnant. Quod honorem officiumque Magistratus falso praetextu sibi usurpaverint. Now they do spoil the Church of that authority, thereby to adorn temporal Magistrates, not only by corrupting Christ his appointment and meaning therein: But also they lightly condemn and set at nought all those holy Bishops, which in so great number have continued from the time of the Apostles hitherto, which honour and office of Spiritual government they have (saith john Calvin) usurped and taken upon them by a false pretext and title made thereof. And again john Calvin saith: Cal. in. 7. ca Amos. Qui in initio tantopere extulerunt Henricum regem Angliae, certe fuerunt homines inconsiderati. Dederunt illi summam omnium potestatem. Et hoc me semper graviter vulneravit, erant enim blasphemi, cum vocarent ipsum summum caput Ecclesiae sub Christo. They which in the beginning did so much extol Henry King of England, and which did give unto him the highest authority in the Church, they were men which lacked circumspection, and of small consideration: which thing (saith john Calvin) did at all times offend me very much, for they did commit blasphemy, and were blasphemers, when they did call him the supreme Head of the Church. M. Horn. The collector of your common places did (.646.) The 646. Untruth, M. Fekenham was not beguiled, but you. beguile you, which you would have perceived, if you had read Master Caluine with your own eyes. He entreateth (.647.) The 647. untruth. He doth entreat, a● shall appear. not in that place of the Histories betwixt the emperors Valentinianus, Theodosius, and saint Ambrose. He confuteth the opinion of such as think the jurisdiction that Christ gave unto his Church, to be but for a time, whilst the Magistrates were as yet unfaithful, and proveth that the jurisdiction of the Church, was given of Christ to remain till his second coming, and belongeth only to the Church, and not to the Prince (.648.) The .648. Untruth. excommunication belongeth to the bishop by Christ's commission without any further commission from the Church, as it hath before been declared. Bishop, or, Priest, without special commission from the Church. The which Ecclesiastical jurisdiction, * you do so in deed, but none else beside you. I comprehended under the first kind of cohibitive jurisdiction. You do M. Calvin not double, but quadruple, yea much more wrong about the citing of his sentence▪ for as ye have untruly reported the circumstance of his sentence, so have you hackte from the beginning thereof one material word, part of it you have obscurely tanslated, the other part falsely, and by altering his words and sense, ye have belied him, slandered the ancient bishops, and have avouched M. Calvin (if those were his words and meaning, which you in your translation Father upon him) directly against yourself: which you meant not, for ye thought (as I suppose) you had so cunningly handled him, that he should have served your turn. If this your evil dealing with M. Calvin, proceeded of ignorance, for that his Latin was to fine for your gross understanding, ye are somewhat to be borne withal: but if you have thus dealt of purpose, than your malice is over great, ye show yourself shameless to deal so unhonestly, and that in the sight of all men. After that M. Calvin hath proved, that our saviour Christ gave the discipline of excommunication unto the Church, to be exercised continually by the same: to the censure whereof all estates ought to submit themselves, for if he be an Emperor, he is within, or under, and not above the Church, He concludeth with this sentence: Quare illi qui ut Magistratum ornent etc. Wherefore they which to adorn the Magistrate, do spoil the Church of this power (to exercise the discipline of excommunication) do not only corrupt Christ's sentence with a false interpretation: but do also, not lightly condemn all the holy bishops, which were so many from the Apostles time: for so much as they (all the holy bishops) have usurped to themselves the honour and office of the (civil) Magistrate under a false pretence or colour. The first word of the sentence which knitteth the same, as a conclusion to that, that goeth before, ye have left out. How darkly ye have translated the first part of the period, may appear by conference of your translation with the Authors words. The last part ye have falsely translated, turning the Conjunction into a pronoun relative, and translating this word Magistratus (whereby Calvin meaneth the civil Magistrate) by these words, spiritual government, and so have clean altered both the words and (.649.) The .649. untruth. The fence is not altered. sense of M. Calvin, and yet shame not to bely him, saying (john Calvin saith) which he saith (.650.) The .650: untruth. For he saith it by the way of an objection. not. But it is M. Fekenham that saith, and so belieth Calvin, and (.651.) The 651. untruth. M. Fekenham slandereth not the Fathers. slandereth the ancient bishops, as though they (for to them this, they, hath relation) had taken upon them the office of the Magistrate: as they had done in deed, if all manner correction and judgement had belonged to the Magistrate, and none at all to the Church, by whose commission they exercised this jurisdiction. If this were M. Calvin's saying, as ye translate him, that they (all the holy Bishops from the Apostles time) have usurped and taken upon them the honour and office of Spiritual government, by a false pretext and title made thereof, then have you alleged M. Calvin against yourself, for this sentence, if it were true (.652.) The .652. untruth. It overthroweth not M. Fekenhans purpose, but confirmeth it. overthroweth your purpose, nothing more. The .11. Chapter. How john Caluine alleged by M. Fekenham, plainly condemneth M. Horns assertion. Stapleton. IN all this Division, M. Horn, Vide Calui institut. editas in folio. Anno 1551. li. 4. cap. 11. fol. 451. you continue like to yourself, false and untrue. For first where you tell M. Feckenham that the collector of his common places beguiled him, which he should have perceived, if he had read Calvin with his own eyes: I answer he was not deceived by his collector, but you are deceived by your Collector. For Calvin entreating of jurisdiction Ecclesiastical in the same Chapter, Cap. 11. fol. 447. Sed accidit saepenumero ut sit negligentior magistratus imò nonnunquam fortè ut sit ipsemet castigandus: quòd & Theodosio Casari contigit. Cap. 12. fol. 454. Sic Theodosius ab Ambrosio ob caedem Thassolanicae perpetrae tam iure communionis privatus, etc. in which the words recited by M. Feckenham are contained, allegeth out of S. Ambrose his Epistle to the Emperor Valentinian, that the foresaid Emperor Valentinian enacted by plain Law as we have showed, that in matters of Faith, Bishops should be judges. And in the said Chapter, and in the next also, Caluine showeth that S. Ambrose would not suffer Theodosius to communicate with other. True it is therefore that (as M. Feckenham saith) Caluine in that place entreateth of these Histories betwixt S. Ambrose, and the emperors Theodosius and Valentinian: and you for denying it, have increased the huge number of your notorious untruths. Go we now to the allegation it self. M. Horn complaineth, that the first word of the sentence which knitteth the same as a conclusion to that that goeth before, is quite lafte out by M. Fekenham. And yet when all is done, it is but a poor Quare, that is, wherefore: which may be left owte without any prejudice of the sentence in the world: and being put in, neither helpeth M. Fekenham, nor hindereth M. Horn. In the English translation. fol. 402. Read then good reader thus: wherefore they that do spoil, and so forth. And then make an account what is won or what is lost by addition or subtraction of this Quare. Yet is the first part of the period (saith M. Horn) darkly translated. In deed the first word, How, how it cometh in I know not, and it seemeth to be a little oversight of the author or some fault of the scribe easy to be remedied, and is to be translated, thus: they that do spoil. etc. and afterward, do not only corrupt, but do also not lightly condemn, and so forth: the sense always notwithstanding coming to one. And as for the conjunction turned into a pronoun: if ye read damnant quòd honorem etc. which is but a small alteration: the matter is soon amended. And all this is little or nothing prejudicial to the whole sentence. But I perceive for lack of substantial answer, ye are driven thus to rip up syllables and to hunt after terms. As for the translating of the word Magistratus, (whereby ye say Calvin meaneth the civil magistrate) into the word spiritual government: whereby Master Fekenham (as ye say) hath altered the words and sense of Calvin, for the words which is a matter but of small weight, I will not greatly stick with you: but for the altering of the sense, I find little or none alteration. For seeing that Calvin doth answer them, that maintained all jurisdiction and punishment to appertain to the civil magistrate, and none to the church, and bringeth in for an absurdity against them, that they that so think, must condemn all the holy Bishops, for taking upon them the office and honour of a Magistrate, by a false pretext and title, in as much as this honour and office, that old Bishops took upon them, was the authority of excommunication, which is one principal power of spiritual government, there can be no notable or prejudicial alteration of the sense itself, which every way cometh to one issue. And therefore it is true enough, that john Calvin saith as by way of an objection, that which M. Feckenham avoucheth him to say: And there is no lie therein at all, as ye imagine: Neither are the Fathers slandered by M. Fekenham, as ye cavil: but if any slander be in this point, See Hosiu●. In his book, Of the express word of God. Foll. 47. M. Calving sentence alleged by M. Fekenham condemneth our act of parliament. In the english translation. Fol. 402. pag. 1. Calvin is the Father of the slander, whose words or the very sense of them M. Fekenham reporteth. And for the same cause they do nothing overthrow M. Fekenhams purpose, being not originally of him proposed, but out of Calvin as an absurdity against certain, that do challenge all jurisdiction to the civil Magistrate. And therefore you in attributing these words to M. Feckenham, as his peculiar words, play with him as your Apology doth with Cardinal Hosius: imputing to him the heresy of the Swenkefeldians, that he reciteth not by his own words, but by their own words. I say then these words make nothing against M. Fekenham, but plainly against the oath, that ye maintain, and against your act of parliament, that uniteth all jurisdiction ecclesiastical to the Crown, and against M. Horn that maintaineth the said statute. Against whom now I make this argument borrowed of his own Apostle john Calvin. They, which to honour the Magistrate, do spoil the Church of this power (meaning of excommunication) do not only with false exposition corrupt the sentence of Christ, but also do not sclenderly condemn so many holy Bishops, which have been from the time of the Apostles: that they have by false pretence usurped the honour and office of the Magistrate. But our acts of parliament give all manner of ecclesiastical power and jurisdiction to the Prince. Ergo, our laws condemn all the holy Fathers and bishops: and do falsely interpret Christ's sentence. What part of this argument can ye deny? Printed in London An. 1562. The mayor is your Apostle Caluins, even according to your own english Translation, seen and allowed according to the order appointed in the queens majesties Injunctions so that you can by no means quarrel against it. The minor is notorious by the very tenor of the oath, to the which so many have sworem, or rather forsworn. Wherefore the conclusion must needs follow. The parliament giveth to the prince the Supreme Government in all ecclesiastical causes, and the authorizing of all manner ecclesiastical jurisdiction. You and your Master Calvin, do restrain this generality. For excommunication you say, belongeth neither to Prince nor Bishops, but to the church. Now seeing you have for this your opinion no better author, than john Calvin, one of the archeheretiks of our time, whether his authority, though it be very large and ample with you, and your brethren, will serve for the interpretation of the statute, in the king's bench, I refer that, to other that have to do therein. M. Calvin and M. Horn condemn aswell old holy Bishops, as the late act of parliament. On the other side, sure I am it will not serve, when ye come before the ecclesiastical bench of Christ's catholic church, nor of the Lutheran Church, no nor serve your M. Calvin neither. And this his and your interpretation, doth plainly condemn the late laws of our realm, and giveth M. Fekenham and all other a good and sufficient occasion to refuse the oath appointed by the statute, as condemning so many holy Bishops for exercising that jurisdiction, that appertained not to them, but to the Prince. To the Prince I say, by you M. Horn, who do give to the Prince all manner of jurisdiction contained in the second kind of cohibitive jurisdiction, in the which second kind excommunication is expressly contained by your own Author Antonius Delphinus: though you in reciting his words, have nipped quite away from the midst the words expressing the same, See fol. .448. to beguile thereby your Reader, and to make him believe, that Antonius was your Author herein. It is not then M. Fekenham, but your Master John Calvin, and yourself also, that condemn all the holy bishops, yea S. Paul and the other Apostles to, which exercised this jurisdiction and all other jurisdiction in ecclesiastical matters, without any warrant from the Prince, or the Church. Namely the blessed bishop S. Ambrose for excommunicating of Theodosius. And so all your false accusations wherewith ye charge M. Feckenham, redound truly upon yourself. Where you say, that calvin's Latin was to fine for M. Fekenhams gross understanding. what a sine Latin man yourself are, I refer the Reader to this your own book, Fol. 480. and to your articles lately set forth at Oxford. The places I have before specified, and therefore needless here to be recited again. M. Horn. The .173. Division. pag. 120 b. And again john Calvin writing upon Amos the Prophet, is by you alleged to (.653) The 653. untruth. For it sereuth much more for our purpose, as shall appear. as little purpose: For be it that they which attributed to King Henry of famous memory, so much authority (which grieved Calvin) were men not well advised in so doing, and that they were blasphemous, that called him the supreme head of the church (ye know who they were that first gave to him that title and authority) yet your (.654.) The .654. untruth. This is not M. Fekenhans conclusion conclusion followeth not hereof. Therefore Bishops and priests have authority to make laws, orders, and decrees, etc. to their flocks and cures, no more than of his former saying. Christ gave to his Church this authority to excommunicate, to bind and to louse: Therefore Bishops and Priests may make laws, orders, and decrees, to their flocks and cures. Stapleton. Calvin saith in plain words, It is blasphemy to call the Prince of England supreme head of the Church. He saith also. They that so much extolled King Henry at the beginning, soothly they wanted due consideration. This is your second and better Apostle M. Horn, that hath brought your first Apostle Luther almost out of conceit. This is he M. Horn, whose books the sacramentaries, esteem as the second gospel. This is he M. Horn, that beareth such a sway in your congregation and convocation now, that ye direct all your proceedings by his Genevical instructions and examples. This is he, whose institutions against Christ, and the true divine religion, are in such price with you, that there be few of your Protestant fellow Bishops that will admit any man, to any cure, that hath not read them, or will not promise to read them. The catholics deny your new supremacy: the Lutherans also deny it: Calvin calleth it blasphemous. How can then any Catholic man persuade his conscience to take this oath? M. Horn is not able to answer to M. Feck. touching Calvin that saith it is blasphemy to call the Prince head of the Church. And what say you now at length to this authority M. Horn? Mary saith he: I say, that though it be true, yet it will no more follow thereof that Bishops may make laws, orders, and decrees, then of his former saying: that Christ gave to the Church authority to excommunicate, to bind, and to lose. In deed ye say truth for the one, it is but a slender argument: The Civil Magistrate is head of the Church: Ergo, bishops may make Laws: and Master Fekenham was never yet so ill advised and so overseen, as to frame such mad arguments. This argument cometh fresh and new hammered out of your own forge. But for the other part, if a man would reason thus, Bishops have power to bind and to loose: Ergo they have power to make laws, orders and decrees etc. he should not reason amiss: seeing that by the judgement of the learned, under the power of binding and losing, the power of making laws is contained. Which also very reason forceth. For who have more skill to make laws and orders for directing of men's consciences, than such whose whole study and office consisteth in instructing and reforming men's consciences? But Master Fekenham doth not reason so, but thus. It is blasphemy to call the Prince head of the Church: Ergo Master Fekenham can not with safe conscience take the oath of the supremacy, and that the Prince is the supreme head. Again the Prince hath no authority or jurisdiction to bind or lose, or to excommunicate: Ergo, M. Fekenham can not be persuaded to swear to that statute that annexeth and uniteth all jurisdiction to the Prince, and to swear that the Prince is supreme governor in all causes Ecclesiastical. These be no childish matters M. Horn. Leave of this your fond and childish dealings, and make us a direct answer to the arguments as M. Fekenham proposeth them to you: and soil them well and sufficiently, and then find fault with him, if ye will, for refusing the oath. But then am I sure, ye will not be over hasty upon him, but will give him a breathing time for this seven years at the least, and for your life to. For as long as your name is Robert Horn ye shall never be able to soil them. Neither think you, that in matters of such importance, wise men and such as have the fear of God before their eyes, will be carried away from the Catholic faith with such kind of answers. The words of john Calvin, be manifest, and can not be avoided. He saith. Erant blasphemi, cum vocarent ipsum Summum caput Ecclesiae sub Christo. They were blasphemous, when they called him (he meaneth king Henry .8.) the Supreme head of the Church under Christ. ●aluin in ●mos c. 7. ●ol. 292. And who were those that Calvin calleth here blasphemous? You would M. Horn your Reader should think, that he meaned the Papists, for you refer that matter to M. Fekenhams knowledge, saying to him, You know who they were, & caet. as though they were of M. Fekenhams friends, that is to say, Catholics, as he by God's grace is. And so full wisely babbleth M. Nowell in his second reproof against M. Dorman. Fol. 127. But that Calvin meaneth herein plainly and out of all doubt the Protestants and his own dear brethren, it is most evident by his words immediately following, which are these. Hoc certè fuit nimium: sed tamen sepultum hoc maneat, quia peccârunt inconsiderato zelo. surely this was to much. But let it lie buried, for that they offended by inconsiderate zeal. Tell me now of good fellowship M. Horn, were they M. Feckenhams friends, or yours, were they Catholics, or Protestants, that Calvin here so gently excuseth, wishing the matter to be forgotten, and attributing it rather to want of dew consideration, and to zeal, then to wilful malice, or sinful ignorance? Evident it is he spoke of his brethren protestants of England, and for their sakes he wisheth the matter might be forgotten. With the like passion of pity, in his commentaries upon S. Paul to the Corinthians, when he cometh to there words alleged there of the Apostle. Hoc est corpus meum: This is my body, remembering the jolly consent of his brethren about that matter, he saith. Non recensebo infaelices pugnas, quae de sensu istorum verborum, Calvin: in comment. in 1. Cor. 11. Ecclesiam nostro tempore exercuerunt. utinam potius liceat perpetua oblivione eorum memoriam obruere. I will not reaken up, the unhappy combats, that have exercised the Church in our time, about the sense of these words. I would rather they might once utterly be forgotten. And by and by he rejecteth the opinion of Carolostadius, calling it insul●um commentum, a doltish devise. I say then of Calvin: the bemoaning of the matter, betrayeth his meaning. It is not his manner pardie, to bemoan the Papists. Protestants then needs must they be, whom Calvin there calleth blasphemous. But here note good Reader what shifts these fellows have, when they are pressed to see the truth. M. Nowell layeth all the fault to false reporters, and as Calvin pitied him and his fellows for inconsiderate zeal, so he pitieth Calvin again for inconsiderate believing of false reporters. Fol. 127. But what a foolish pity this was, on M. Nowells part, and how unsavourly he soluteth this objection, I leave it to M. Dorman, who will I doubt not, sufficiently discover his exceeding folly herein. Thus then M. Nowell. But what shift hath M. Horn? Forsooth bookful wilily and closely he stealeth clean away, from the matter itself, framing to M. Feckenham an argument, which the basest Logicioner of a hundred would be ashamed lo utter. And thus with folly on the one side, and craft on the other side, wilfulness overcometh, heresy continueth, and the objection is unanswered. Yet to press it a little more, for such as have eyes, and shut them not against the light, you shall understand, that john Calvin was offended not only with his brethren of England, but also with those of Germany, yea and of his own neighbours about him, for attributing to Princes the spiritual government, which M. Horn avoucheth, Fol. 14. to be the principal part of the Princes royal power. In the book and leaf before noted he saith. Sed interea sunt homines inconsiderati, qui faciunt illos nimis spirituales. Calvin ubi suprà. Et hoc vitium passim regnat in Germania. In his etiam regionibus nimium grassatur. Et nunc sentimus quales fructus nascantur, ex illa radice, quòd scilicet principes et quicunque potiuntur imperio, putent se ita spirituales esse, ut nullum sit amplius Ecclesiasticum Regimen. Et hoc sacrilegium apud eos grassatur, quia non possunt metiri suum officium certis & legitimis finibus: sed non putant posse se regnare, nisi aboleant omnem Ecclesiae authoritatem, & sint summi judices tam in doctrina, quàm in toto spirituali regimine. But in the mean while there are unadvised persons, which do make them (he meaneth Lay Princes) to spiritual. And this oversight raineth most in Germany. In these Countries also it proceedeth overmuch. And now we feel what fruits springe up of that root: verily, that Princes and all such as do bear rule, think themselves now so spiritual, that there is no more any Ecclesiastical government. And this sacrilege taketh place among them, because they can not measure their office, within certain and lawful bounds. But are persuaded, that their kingdom is nothing, except they abolish all Authority of the Church, and become themselves the Supreme judges, as well in doctrine, as in all kind of Spiritual government. Hitherto john Calvin. If M. Feckenham or any Catholic subject of England had said or written so much, Fol. 106. b you would have charged him M. Horn with an unkind meaning to the Prince and to the State, yea and say, Fol. 4. b. &. 5. a. that he bereaveth and spolyeth the Prince of the principal part of her royal power. But now that Calvin saith it, a man by you not only esteemed, but authorised also so far as is above said, what say you to it M. Horn, or what can you possibly devise to say? He calleth it plain sacrilege, that princes can not measure and limit their power, but that they must become the supreme judges in all Ecclesiastical government. And do not you M. Horn defend, that princes not only may, but ought also to be the Supreme Governors in all Ecclesiastical causes? All, I say, nay you say yourself, without exception. Fol. 104. a For if (say you) ye except or take away any thing, it is not all. You then M. Horn that avouch so sternly, that the Prince must have all supreme government, in matters Ecclesiastical, answer to your Master, to your Apostle, and to your Idol john Calvin of Geneva, and satisfy his complaint, complaining and lamenting, that Princes will be the Supreme judges, as well in doctrine, as in all kind of Spiritual government. Answer to the zealous Lutherans, and the famous liars of Magdeburge: who in their preface upon the 7. Century, complain also full bitterly, that the lay Magistrates will be heads of the Church, will determine doctrine, In praefat. Centur. 7. and appoint to the Ministers of God what they shall preach and teach, and what form of Religion they shall follow. And is not all your preaching and teaching, and the whole form and manner of all your Religion now in England, enacted, established and set up by act of parliament, by the lay magistrates only, An. 1. Eliz. the Ministers of God, all the bishops and the inferior clergy in the Convocation house utterly, but in vain, reclaiming against it? Speak, speak Master Morn: Is not all that you do in matters of Religion, obtruded to Priests and Ministers by force of the temporal Law? Answer then to Calvin's complaint. Answer to your brethren of Germany. Yea, answer to Philippe Melanchthon the pillar and ankerhold of the civil Lutherans, who saith also, that in the Interim made in Germany, Potestas politica extrametas egressa est. Melanchthon in examine ordinandorun. Luth. contra articulos Lovan. Tom. 2. The Civil power passed her bounds: and addeth. Non sunt confundendae functiones. The functions of both Magistrates are not to be confounded. Yea answer to Luther himself the great grandsire of all your pedigree. He saith plainly. Non est Regum aut Principum etiam veram doctrinam confirmare, sed ei subijci & servire. It belongeth not to Kings or Princes, so much as to confirm the true doctrine, but to be subject and to obey it. See you not here, how far Luther is from giving the supreme government in all Ecclesiastical causes to Princes? Answer then to these M. Horn. These are no Papists. They are your own dear brethren: Or if they are not, defy them, that we way know, of what sect and company you are. What? will you in matters of Religion stand post alone? Will you so rend and tear a sunder the whole Coat of Christ, the unity of his dear spouse the Church, that you alone of England, contrary, not only to all the Catholic Church, but also contrary, to the chief M. of Geneva john Calvin, contrary to the Chief Masters of the Zealous Lutherans Illiricus and his fellows, contrrary to the Chief M. of the Civil Lutherans Philip Melanchton, yea and contrary to the father of them all Martin Luther, briefly contrary to all sorts and sects of Protestants, you will alone, you only, I say, and alone, defend this most Barbarous Paradox, of Prince's supreme government in all Ecclesiastical causes, all, as you say without exception? Sirs. If you list so to stand alone against all, and by Oath to hale men to your singular Paradox, not only to say with you, but also to swear that they think so in conscience, get you also a Heaven alone, get you a God alone, get you a Paradise alone. Undoubtedly and as verily as God is God, seeing in the eternal bliss, of all other felicities peace and love must needs be one, either you in this world must draw to a peace and love with all other Christians, or you must not look to have part of that bliss with other Christians, except you alone think, you may exclude all other: and that all the world is blind, you only seeing the light, and that all shall go to hell, you only to heaven. O M. Horn. These absurdites be to gross and palpable. If any Christianity be in men, yea in yourself, you and they must needs see it. If you see it, shut not your eyes against it. Be not like the stone hearted jews, that seeing would not see, and hearing would not hear the Saviour and light of the world. To conclude: Mark and bear away these two points only. First, that in this so weighty a matter, to the which only of all matters in controversy, men are forced to swear by book oath, you are contrary not only to all the Catholic Church, but also even to all manner of protestants whatsoever, be they calvinists, Zealous Lutherans, or Civil Lutherans: and therefore you defend herein a proper and singular heresy of your own. Next, consider and think upon it well M. Horn, that before the days of King Henry the .8. there was never King or Prince whatsoever, not only in our own Country of England, but also in no other place or country of the world, that at any time either practised the government, or used such a Title, or required of his subjects such an Oath, as you defend. And is it not great marvel, that in the course of so many hundred years sense that Princes have been christened, and in the compass of so many Countries, lands, and dominions, no one Emperor, King, or Prince can be showed, to have used, or practised the like government by you so forcibly maintained? Yea, to touch you nearer, is it not a great wonder, that whereas a long time before the days of King Henry the .8. there was a statute made, The Statut of Praerogativae Regis. called Praerogativae Regis, containing the prerogatives, privileges and pre-eminences due to the King's Royal person and to the Crown of the Realm, that I say in that statute so especially and distinctly comprising them, no manner word should appear of his supreme Government in all Ecclesiastical causes, which you M. Horn do avouch to be a principal part of the Princes Royal power? If it be as you say, a principal part of the Princes Royal power, how chanceth it, that so principal a part was not so much as touched in so special a statut of the Prince's prerogatives and pre-eminences? Shall we think for your sake that the whole Realm was at that time so injurious to the King and the Crown, as to defraud and spoil the Prince of the principal part of his Royal power? Or that the King himself that then was of so small courage, that he would dissemble and wink thereat, or last of all, that none of all the posterity sense would once in so long a time complain thereof? Again at what time King Henry the .8. had by Act of parliament this Title of Supreme head of the Church granted unto him, how chanceth it, that none then in all the Realm was found, to challenge by the said Statut of Praerogativae Regis, this principal part (as you call it) of the Princes royal power, or at the jest, if no plain challenge could be made thereof, to make yet some probable deduction of some parcel or branch of the said Statut, that to the King of old time such right appertained? Or if it never before appertained, how can it be a principal part of the Princes Royal power? What? wanted all other Princes before our days the principal part of their royal power? And was there no absolute Prince in the Realm of England before the days of King Henry the .8. We will not M. Horn, be so injurious to the Noble progenitors of the queens May. as to say or think they were not absolute and most Royal Princes. They were so, and by their Noble Acts as well abroad as at home, showed themselves to be so. They wanted no part of their Royal power, and yet this Title or prerogative they never had. This hath been your own devise. And why? Why the Oath was devised. Forsooth to erect your new Religion by Authority of the Prince, which you knew by the Church's Authority could never have been erected. And so to provide for one particular case, you have made it M. Horn a general rule, that all Princes ought and must be Supreme governors in all ecclesiastical causes. Which if it be so, then why is not King Philip here, and King Charles in France such Supreme Governors? Or if they be, with what conscience, do your brethren the Guets here, and the Huguenots there disobey their Supreme governors, yea and take arms against their Prince's Religion? What? Be you protestants brethren in Christ, Note the Absurdity. and yet in Religion be you not brethren? Or if you be brethren in religion also, how doth one brother make his Prince supreme Governor in all Ecclesiastical causes without any exception or qualification of the Prince's person, and the other brother deny his Prince to be such Supreme governor, yea and by arms goeth about to exterminat his Prince's laws in matters ecclesiastical? Solute all those doubts, and avoid all these absurdities M. Horn, and then require us to give ear to your book, and to swear to your Oath. The .174. Division. fol. 121. a. M. Fekenham Athan. in epist. ad solitariam vitam agentes. Hosius Episcopus Cordubensis, qui Synodo Nicenae primae interfuit, sic habet, sicut testatur D. Athanasius adversus Constantium Imp. Si istud est judicium Episcoporum, quid commune cum eo habet Imperator? Sin contrà, ista minis Caesaris conflantur, quid opus est hominibus titulo Episcopis? Quando à condito aevo auditum? quando judicium Ecclesiae authoritatem suam ab Imperatore accepit? aut quando unquam pro judicio agnitum? Plurimae antehac Synodi fuerunt, multa judicia Ecclesiae habita sunt. Sed neque patres istiusmodi res principi persuadere conati sunt, nec princeps se in rebus Ecclesiasticis curiosum praebuit: nunc autem nowm quoddam spectaculum ab Ariana heresi editur. Conuenerunt enim Haeretici & Constantius Imperator, ut ille quidem sub praetextu Episcoporum, sua potestate adversus eos quos vult utatur. M. Horn. As it is very true, that Hosius bishop of Corduba in Spain, was in the first council of Nice, so is it as untrue, that these be his words, which you have cited in his name, for they be the sayings of Athanasius, and not of Hosius. Wherein ye have done Athanasius threefold wrong, first to attribute his writings to an other, then also to cause him therein to bear false witness (.655.) The .655. untruth. Athanasius beareth no witness against himself but against you. against himself, and thirdly, in that ye have left out the first word of his sentence, which is a material word, and bringeth in this his saying, as a reason of that which goeth before. Athanasius findeth himself grieved, that both he and many other Godly Bishops for the truth itself, suffered much cruelty, and were wrongfully condemned, not according to the order of the Ecclesiastical judgement, but by the cruel threats of the Emperor Constantius being an Arrian and a fierce maintainer of the Arianisme. Who notwithstanding subtly covered his ungodly dealing under the pretence of a judgement or sentence passed by Bishops in Synod or convocation, which he called Episcopale judicium, a bishoply judgement. But saith Athanasius, Constantius can not so hide himself, seeing that there is at hand that can plainly bewray his wiliness. for if this be the judgement of bishops, what hath the Emperor to do therewith? But if on the contrary side these things be brought to pass through Caesar's threats, what needeth men, that have but the name of Bisshoopes, etc. There are two things necessarily to be considered, for to understand rightly the true meaning of Athanasius in this place by you alleged: first what was required to that which he calleth the judgement belonging to bishops, or the bishoply judgement. Than what was the doings of Constantius, pretending a judgement of Bis●hoppes. Liberius the Bishop of Rome, as Athanasius reporteth in this same Epistle requireth in a Synod ecclesiastical, that it be free from fear, far from the palace, where neither the Emperor is present, neither the Earl or captain th●usteth in himself, nor yet the judge doth threaten. He meaneth, that it be free from fear, threats, and without this, that the Emperor or Rulers, do limit or * Mark that M. Horn misliketh now, that Emperors should prescribe to bishops. Yet his examples before tended most to prove they did so: and the Oath importeth, that Princes may prescribe etc. prescribe to the Bishops what they should judge. This appeareth more plainly by S. Ambrose, who also speaketh of the like matter, yea under the same Prince, saying: Constantinus set forth no Laws before hand, but gave free judgement to the Priests. The self same also did Constantius (in the beginning of his regine) but that which he well begun, was otherwise ended. For the Bishops at the first had written the sincere faith, but when as certain men will judge of the faith within the Palace, he meaneth after the opinion of the Courtiers and * Then S. Ambrose meaneth against you, as Athanasius did before. prescription of the Prince, otherwise it was not unlawful to judge of matters, concerning faith within the Prince's Palace, the Prince also being present, for the first Nicen council was held within the emperors palace, and he himself was present amongst them: They brought this to pass, that those judgements of the Bishops were changed by Circumscriptions. Then is required in a Synod (saith he) that the only fear of God, and the institutions of the Apostles, do suffice to all things. Next, that the right faith be approved, and Heresies, with the maintainers thereof, be cast out of the council, and than to judge of the persons that are accused of any fault. So that the bishoply session or judgement, must have freedom, must judge by the only word of God, must have the Bishops that do judge to be of the right faith, and must first examine the Religion and faith of the party accused, and then his faith. Constantius, who notwithstanding that he did pretend a bissoply judgement used none of these observances, but the clean contrary, for as Athanasius complaineth in this Epistle, th'emperor wrought all together with treats, menassing the Bishops, other to subscribe against Athanasius, or to depart from their Churches: Who so gaynsaid the subscription, received to reward, either death or exile. He without any ꝑsuasion with reasons compelleth all men by force and violence, in so much as many Bishops afterwards excused themselves, that they did not subscribe of their own voluntary, but were compelled by force. Whereas (saith he) the faith is not to be set forth with swords or darts, or by warlike force, but by counseling and persuading. He in the stead of God's word, used his own will, appointing and prescribing what should be determined, answering the godly bishops, who objected against his unorderly doings, the Ecclesiastical Canon, at quod ego volo pro Canone sit. Let my will stand for the Canon: Pretending a judgement of Bishops, he doth what so ever liketh himself. Whereas Hosius saith, cited by Athanasius in this Epistle: Themperor ought to learn these things of the Bishops, and not to command or teach them what to judge in this kind of judgement, for the Prince should not show himself so busy or curious in Ecclesiastical things, that his will and pleasure should rule or guide them, in stead of God's word, and the godly Canons of the fathers. Constantius would have no other bishops but Arians, which were no bishops in deed, as Athanasius saith, and much less apt to judge of the matter, touching a principal article of our faith, or of the faithful bishop Athanasius: and taking his heresy as an undoubted truth, that might not be called into question, he sought by all means, to have Athanasius condemned, and all bishops to refuse his communion, and to communicate with the Arians. These disorderly dealings of th'emperor, Athanasius condemneth, as directly against the order of Ecclesiastical session or Synod, how so ever he pretended under the colour of the bishoply judgement, to abuse his own power and authority after his own lust against whom he would. You would have it seem to the ignorant, that Athanasius mind in this place were to deny, that Princes should (.656.) The .656. untruth. Not to meddle, but to bear the Supreme Rule in synods: That Athanasius denieth. And that your doings do maintain. Li. 2. c. 15 meddle or deal in Ecclesiastical things or causes, which is far from his meaning: for he himself with many other godly bishops, as I have showed before, did acknowledge the Prince's authority herein, and in this same epistle he himself confesseth this emperors authority to call counsels, and citeth Hosius also, who inclineth to that purpose, both of them confessing, that Constans and Constantinus Themperors, did call all the bishops to the council, which he calleth Sardicense consilium: about the accusations and crimes laid in against Athanasius. And Theodoretus affirmeth, that this Emperor Constantius called a Synod at Milan about such like matter, at whose calling the faithful bishops assembled, parents regio edicto, obeying the kings Summons: which they would not have done, if it had been * No man saith, it is unlawful to have any doings, but to have all government as, the Oath pronounceth. unlawful for him to have had any doings about councils. But when he abused his authority in the council, as though his power had been absolute, without limits or bounds, willing them, yea compelling them, to do after his will against good consciencience, they would not obey him. Quin etiam palam praesentem regem coarguebant impij & iniusti imperij, but did openly reprove the King for his wicked and unjust rule or commandment: whereby is manifest, that Athanasius, speaketh (.657.) The .657. untruth. Athanasius reproveth utterly the Prince's Authority in Ecclesiastical causes. not against the Prince's authority in Ecclesiastical matters, but against his tyranny, and the abusing of that authority, which God hath given him, wherewith to minister unto Gods will, and not to rule after his own lust: they commend the authority, but they reprove the disorderly abuse thereof. Now let us see how this saying of Athanasius helpeth your cause. Constantius the Emperor dealt unorderly and after his own lust against Athanasius and others, pretending nevertheless the judgement of Bishops, which Athanasius misliketh, as is plain in this place avouched: Ergo, bishops and Priests may make laws, decrees, orders, and exercise the second kind of Cohibitive jurisdiction over their flocks and cures, without commission from the Prince or other authority: I doubt not but ye see such fault in this sequel that ye (.658.) The .658. untruth. It is your own sequel, not M. Fekenhams. are, or at least ye ought, to be ashamed thereof. The .12. Chap. Containing a Confutation of M. horns answer, made to the words of Athanasius. Stapleton. HEre is now one other allegation by M. Fekenham proposed out of Athanasius. Hosius the Bishop of Corduba (saith M. Fekenham) who was present at the first Nicene Council, hath these words, as Athanasius writing against the Emperor Constantius doth testify. Athanasius in Epist. ad solitariam vitam agentes. If this be a judgement of Bishops, what hath the Emperor to do there with? But one the contrary part, if these things be wrought by the threats and menaces of Emperor: what need is there of any men beside, to bear the Bare Title of bishops? When from the beginning of the world hath it been heard of, that the judgement of the Church took his authority of the Emperor? Or when hath this at any time been agnized for a judgement? Many synods have been before this time: many Counsels hath the Church holden: but the time is yet to come, Athan. in epist. ad solit. vitam agentes. that either the fathers went about to persuade the Prince any such matter, or the Prince showed himself to be curious in matters of the Church. But now we have a spectacle never seen before: brought in by Arrius heresy. The heretics and the Emperor Constantius are assembled, that he may under the colour and title of Bishops, use his power, against whom it pleaseth him. M. Horn to this allegation answereth, that M. Fekenham doth Athanasius threefold wrong. etc. To the first wrong I reply, that putting the case that these are not Hosius his words, but Athanasius: M. Fekenhams matter is nothing thereby hindered, but rather furthered: considering the excellent authority, that Athanasius hath and ever had in the Church. And Hosius hath even in the said epistle of Athanasius, and but one leaf before, a much like sentence, proceeding of a courageous and a godly boldness. Meddle not you Sir Emperor (saith he to the foresaid Constantius) with matters Ecclesiastical, neither command us in this part, but rather learn these things of us. God hath committed to you the Empire, and to us those things that appertain to the Church. And therefore, Ath. indict. epist. ad solit. even as he that maligneth and spiteth your Empire, doth contrary God's ordinance: so take ye head, lest ye in meddling with matters of the Church, do not run into some great offence. Whereas (for the second wrong done to Athanasius) you say, that M. Fekenham hath left one material word out of Athanasius, ye have turned that word, to one half hundred words, with a needless declaration the space of one whole leaf at the least. And yet you never come nigh the matter. Beside (such is your wisdom) ye allege in this your extraordinary gloze an epistle of S. Ambrose, which doth so confirm M. Fekenhams present allegation, Quando audisti clementiss. imperat. in causa fidei laicos de Episcopo iudicasse? Et mox. Certè si vel scripturarum seriem divinarum, vel vetera tempora retractemus, quis est qui abnuat in causa fidei, in causa inquam fidei, Episcopos solere de imperatoribus, non imperatores, de Episcopis judicare? and is so agreeable to Athanasius, and so disagreeable to the chief principle of all this your book, that I marvel that ever ye would once name it, unless ye never read it yourself, but trusted the collector of your common places. For the law of Valentinian, whereof we spoke before, is in that epistle, to the young Valentian. When ever heard you (saith he) that in a cause of faith lay men gave judgement upon a Bishop? If we will peruse and overlook, either the order of holy write, or the Ancient time: who is there that will deny, that in matter of Faith, I say, saith S. Ambrose, in matter of faith, but that the Bishops are wont to judge upon the Emperors, and not the Emperors upon the Bishops? He saith again afterward: If there be any conference to be had touching the faith, Et postea. Si conferendum est de fide, sacerdotum debet esse ista collatio. it must be had among the Priests. And how this doctrine of S. Ambrose which is the doctrine of the catholic Church, and most conformable to the saying of Athanasius, agreeth either with your late act of parliament, whereby the catholic bishops were deposed, or with the doctrine of your book, every man may see. Yea S. Ambrose saith yet farther, that the Emperor Valentinian, whose son (being induced thereto by the Arrian bishop Auxentius) would needs call the bishop before his bench, and judge over him, made an express law, that: In matter of faith, Ambros. lib. 5. epi. 32. Ibidem. or of any ecclesiastical order, he should judge, that were neither by office unequal, neither by right unlike. That is as S. Ambrose himself expoundeth it. Sacerdotes de Sacerdotibus voluit judicare. He would have Priests to judge over Priests. And not only in matters ecclesiastical or of faith, but saith S. Ambrose: Si aliâs argueretur Episcopus, & morum esset examinanda causa, etiam hanc voluit ad Episcopale judicium pertinere. If otherwise also a Bishop were accused, and a question touching manners were to be examined, this question also that Emperor would have to belong to the trial and judgement of Bishops. Here you have, that it belongeth not to Princes to be judges upon priests either in matters of faith, either in matters touching living and manners: which doth utterly destroy all your new primacy, and your late act of Parliament, deposing the right Bishops, as I have said. And we are well content that councils should be free from all fear, and that Princes should not appoint or prescribe to Bishops, how they should judge, as ye declare out of Athanasius and S. Ambrose. Let this be as much material as ye will to a bishoply judgement. But I pray you, is there nothing else, What material thing M. Horn hath left out touching this story of the deposition of Athanasius. that Athanasius saith is material to the same? Yes truly. One of these material things was, that this Council was made void and annichilated, for that julius the Pope did not consent to it, as the canons of the Church require: which command, Socrat. lib. 2. cap. 8. & 17. Sozom. lib. 3. cap. 8.10. & 11. Trip. lib. 4. cap. 9.15 & 19 that neither council be kept, nor Bishops condemned without the Authority of the Bishop of Rome. And therefore julius did rebuke the Arrians, that they did not first of all require his advice, which they knew was the Custom they should, and take their definition from Rome. Athanas. in Apolog. 2. contra Arrianos. Oportuit secundum canonem, & non ist● modo judicium fieri: oportuit scribere nobis omnibus, ut ita ab omnibus quod justum esset decerneretur. & mox. An ignari estis hanc consuetudinem esse ut primum nobis s●ribatur, ut hinc quod justum est, definiri possit? Quapropter si ist uc huiusmodi suspitio in episcopum concepta fuerit, id huc ad nostram Ecclesiam referri oportuit. This Pope also did restore Athanasius again to his bishopric, as your author Athanasius himself declareth out of the said julius epistle to the Arrians. See Master Horn what a material thing ye have left out, so material I say, that it maketh all your synods, and all your deprivations of the catholic Bishops void: as were the doings of the Arrians against Athanasius. Now as you have left out these material things: so have ye brought forth no material thing in the world to avoid Athanasius authority. And therefore for lack of sound and sufficient answer, ye are driven to make penish arguments of your own, and then to father them upon M. Fekenham saying to him. I doubt not, but that ye see such fault in your fond sequel, that ye are, or at the least wise ought to be, ashamed thereof. But the Sequel of M. Feckenham is this. He saith to you with Athanasius: when was it heard from the creation of the world, that the judgement of the Church should take his authority of the Prince? When was this agnized for a judgement? And so forth. If the Prince be supreme head in all causes ecclesiastical, Mark M. Fekenhams inevitable argument. if all jurisdiction ecclesiastical, be united and annexed to the crown: if the synodical decrees of Bishops be nothing worth without the kings express consent: if catholic Bishops be deposed by the Prince's commission: if lay men only may alter the old ancient religion (all which things with other like are now done and practised in England) then doth the Church judgement in England, take his authority of the prince and lay men. And then may we well, and full pitifully cry out, when was there any such thing from the creation of the world heard of before? This this, is M. Fekenhams argument M. Horn: this is his just and godly scruple that stayeth him, that he runneth not headlong to the devil, in taking an unlawful oath, against his conscience: settled upon no light, but upon the weighty grounds, of holy scripture, of general counsels, of the holy and blessed fathers, finally of the custom and belief of the whole catholic Church: and namely among all other of this authority brought out of Athanasius: Athanas. apol. 2. contra Arri. Qua fronte conventum synodi appellare audent, cui Comes pr●sedit? who also in an other place saith, that the Arrians assembles could not be called synods, wherein the emperors deputy was precedent. Wherefore it is a most open an impudent lie that ye say, that M. Fekenham causeth Athanasius to bear false witness against himself: how prove you this, good Sir? By this, say you, that it is evident by Athanasius and Hosius to, that Princes have to meddle and deal in causes or things ecclesiastical, namely in calling of councils, for by this Constantius and his brother Constans the Sardicense council was summoned. A worthy solution pardie for you, and a wonderful contradiction for Athanasius. Ye show us, that they called this council: but that there was any thing spoken or done in that council by Athanasius (who was there present) or other, that should cause Athanasius to be contrary to himself, ye show nothing. Shall I then answer you, as M. jewel answereth M. D. Harding, naming this council, In his reply Fol. 240. but referring the Reader to the council itself? This council, saith M. jewel is brought in, all in a mummery, saying nothing. And then he addeth: yet forasmuch as these men think it good policy to huddle up their matters in the dark, it will not be amiss, A pretty mummery of M jewel and M. Horn concerning the Sardicense council. to rip them abroad, and bring them forth to light. And yet for all this great bravery and brag, he leaveth the matter of this council as he found it, and speaketh no more of it, one way or other. Me think M. Horn, that you tread much after his steps. Ye name the council, but ye tell us not one material word for your purpose out of it. I will therefore furnish that, that lacketh in M. jewel and you: especially seeing the matter is such as toucheth the deposing of Athanasius, that is, our present matter, and withal, all this your present Treatise and answer to M. Fekenham. I say then first: the conditions that ye require in a bishoply judgement were here exactly observed. This council was far and free from all fear, far from the palace. Here were present no Counties with soldiers as it was wont to be in the Arrians synods, to extort the consent of the Bishops. Whereupon the Arrian bishops, who were called to this council, Ath. indict. epistol. ad solit. vitam agentes. and came thither in great number, seeing this, and seeing Athanasius present (whom they had unjustly deposed) yea and ready to answer them, and to disprove their wrongful doings, and finding their own consciencs withal guilty, had no more heart to abide the trial of this free Synod, than you and your other Protestant brethren had to appear in the Council of Trent. And therefore full prettily shrunk and stole away. Theodor. li. 2. ca 8. Niceph. li. 9 c. 12. Id quod Constans sic petierat Constantius autem assenserat. The order of this Council was a very Synodical and an Episcopal judgement. Neither Emperor was present, nor any deputy for him, that I have yet read of, though at the request of Constans the Catholic Emperor, and by the assent of Constantius the Arrian, that council was assembled. Neither was there either in the time of the council, or afterward the council being ended, any consent or confirmation required of the Emperor: and yet were there a great number of bishops excommunicated and deposed to. The sentence of Pope julius, which, in a council at Rome a little before, restored Athanasius and other bishops by the Arrians in the east unjustly thrust out, Vide epist. Concil. Sard. in Theodor. li. 2 ca 8. Tripart. li. 4. c. 24. Athanas. in epist. ad solit. vitam agentes. Cano. 4.5 7.8. & 13. was executed. Many laws, orders, and decrees touching matters ecclesiastical were in this council ordained. Namely for deposing of bishops, and placing others in their rooms, in all which it was decreed, that if a bishop deposed by his fellow Bishops at home (for Princes deposed none in those days, though banish and expel they did) would appeal to the Bishop of Rome, that then the Bishops who had deposed the party appealing should send informations to the Pope, and that if he thought good, the matter should be tried a fresh, otherwise the former judgement to take effect. For final decision also of such appellations made to Rome, it was in this general council decreed, that the Pope might, either appoint commissioners to sit upon the matter, in the Court from whence the Appeal came, or if he thought so meet▪ to send legates from his own Consistory to decide the matter. In like manner it was there decreed, that bishops s●ould not haunt the emperors palace, except for certain godly suits there mentioned, or invited ●hi●her of the Emperor himself. Also of bishops not to be made, but such as had continued in the inferior orders, certain years, etc. it was in that council decreed. All which and divers other ecclesiastical matters that council determined, without any superior Authority from the prince. And so to conclude, this one Council that ye bring in, This council was holden. An. 350. but in a mummery, your false visor being taken from your face, openeth what ye are, and answereth fully all this your book: as well for the principal matter, that the Pope is the supreme head, and that bishops may appeal to him from all quarters, as that the Prince hath no necessary voice in Councils. Again, that as well the first as the second cohibitive jurisdiction (as you divide them) belongeth to the bishops. last of all your great principle, M. Horn and Caluins' opinion confuted by the practice of Sardicē●● Council. Vide Ath●nas. ibidem. that you and your M. Calvin so strongly build upon, that no excommunication ought to be made without the consent of the congregation, where the party that is or shallbe excommunicated dwelleth, is utterly destroyed For Theodorus, Narcissus, Achatius, Stephanus, Vrsacius, Valens, Menaphontes, and Georgiu●, Arrian bishops, were in this council deposed, and excommunicated, without any consent or foreknowledge of the congregation where they dwelled. And as this was done in this council against these men: So was the like done in other councils against many other heretics. Wherefore this is a most absurd proposition of Calvin, that M. Horn his scholar so hardly maintaineth. The story of this council is at large declared by Athanasius himself, and most strongly confirmeth that his former saying, that it is no Council of bishops which hath his authority of the Prince. Neither can M. Horn make light of this Council as well for the foresaid cause, as for that it was populous and frequented by a great number of Bishops of thirty and five Provinces there present, Cano. 21. Omnis synodus dixit: universa quae constituta sunt Catholica ecclesia in universo orb diffusa custodiat. of the which our Britannia was one, and as well Catholic for faith, as ancient for time, and such a one as their Decrees bind the whole Church. And the whole Synod sayeth: Let all the Catholic Church dispersed through out the world, keep and observe all that we have ordained. And thus much have I said, to fill up your empty box of the Sardicense Council, that you and M. jewel play the jolly mummers withal. The .175. Division. pag. 123. a. M. Fekenham. Hier. 1. almighty God saith by his Prophet Hieremie, which was both a Prophet and a Priest. Ecce dedi verba mea in ore tuo: Ecce constitui te super gentes & super regna, ut evellas & destruas, & disperdas, & dissipes, & aedifices, Greg. Nazian. de Hier. dict. oratioe 18. ad subditos timore perculsos, & imperatorem irasentem. & plants. Gregorius Nzianzenus sermonede dictis Hieremiae ad julianum Imperatorem: putas ne patimini ut verum vobiscum agam, suscipitis ne libertatem verbi, & libenter accipitis, quod lex Christi sacerdotali vos nostrae subiecit potestati, atque justis tribunalibus subdit? Dedit enim nobis potestatem, dedit principatum multò perfectiorem principatibus vestris, aut nunquid justum videtur, si cedat spiritus carni, si à terrenis coelestia superentur, si divinis praeferantur humana? Sed patienter quaeso accipite libertatem nostram. Scio te ovem esse gregis mei, scio te intra sacra altaria cum veneratione subijci manibus sacerdotis, etc. Ezech. 34 And by this Prophet Ezechiel almighty God saith: Vae Pastoribus Israel, quod infirmum fuit, non consolidastis, quod aegrotum, non sanastis: quod confractum non alligastis: quod abiectum, non reduxistis: quod perierat, non quaesistis. Into the which maledictions and curses, the Bishops and Priests must needs incur, if they have no jurisdiction over their flock, if they may not visit them, if they may not reform them, if they may not order and correct them, at all times as they shall see cause. Chrysostomus Homil. 5. de verbis Esaiae, Chrysost. Hom. 5. de verb. Esa. ubi Sacerdotem astruit esse medium inter Deum & Hominem, nullumque honorem in terris illius honori posse conferri. And therefore here to conclude this my objection unto your L. answer, I shall here finish the same, saying with the blessed Martyr Ignatius, S john the Evangelists disciple. Quòd nemo praeter Episcopum aliquid agat eorum quae ad Ecclesiam pertinent. Ign. epist. 7. ad Smyrnens. And so to adjoin hereunto the saying of S. Augustine, who in speaking Contra julianum, ait de Doctoribus Ecclesiae: quod credunt, credo: quod tenent, teneo: quod docent, doceo: quod praedicant, praedico: istis cede, & mihi cedes. etc. M. Horn In all this part there is not (.659.) The .659 untruth. Most impudent, as shall appear. one sentence, that can be drawn by any force to help your cause. It sufficed you, to heap up a sort of testimonies together, to make a show, although nothing to the purpose. Yea the words spoken to the Prophet Hieremie maketh plainly (.660.) The .660. untruth. After the same manner, as before. against you. For they show, that the ministers, in God's Church, have authority to pluck up by the roots, and to destroy evils and the kingdom of Satan, to plant good things, and to edify the Church, as the gloze interlined hath it, or all manner wicked and false doctrine, and what so ever the heavenly Father hath not planted, as the gloze ordinary expoundeth it. But the means whereby this jurisdiction and authority is exercised, is (.661.) The .661. untruth. The jurisdiction of church Ministers is not limited in these words limited and appointed in these words: Behold I have put my words in thy mouth, saith God to Hieremy. So that other jurisdiction over people and kingdoms, than the preaching of God's word Hieremy had not. Hieremyes' mouth is touched, saith the gloze ordinary, and the lords words are given (to him) that he should receive boldness to preach. Of this boldness to preach the word of God, speaketh Gregory Nazianzen. in the place by you alleged. After he had comforted his hearers, he turneth his speech to the Princes, and such as were in authority, must we spare you (saith he) because of your power, as though we feared, or were ashamed of the liberty given us of Christ? Christ's law hath made you subject to my power, and to my judgement seat. He speaketh of a spiritual subjection by faith, and obedience to the minister, exhorting, comforting, and edifying to eternal life by the word of God. And he addeth more expressly, what manner of rule or empire he challengeth, namely such as bringeth the flesh to be subject to the spirit, such as maketh earthly things subject to Heavenly. joan. 10. And the subjection he requireth is none other, than such as the spiritual sheep oweth to the spiritual pastor, whose rule and subjection Christ uttereth in this sentence: My sheep hear my voice and follow me. I know saith Nazianzene to the Emperor, that thou art a sheep of my flock, and thereupon he concludeth that he must, boldly preach the word to the Emperor, and that he on the other side is subject thereto and aught to obey. And * This is so in deed but not this only. this is the proper jurisdiction that belongeth to the Bishops and Priests, the which if they exercise with all possible diligence and faithfulness, they shall escape the curses that the Prophet Ezechiel menasseth: As contrariwise if they use never so princely your popish, or rather pompous Canon Law jurisdiction, which consisteth in † Be not your Consistories Courtly and pompous M. Horn? Remember yourself, I pray you. Courtly consistories, and Forinsecal judgements, far disagreeing from the right jurisdiction of true and Christianlike Prelates, they shall not in the end escape the deserved maledictions, and curses threatened to such by the Prophet Ezechiel. The .13. Chapter. Of M. Feckenhams last Authorities alleged out of holy Scripture, and out of certain doctors, for proof of the bishops jurisdiction in matters Ecclesiastical. Stapleton. THIS part of M. Fekenhams objection (being the very last, containeth vj. authorities: two taken out of the holy scripture, four out of the holy Fathers, Gregory Nazianzene, Chrysostom, Ignatius and S. Augustine. But in all this saith M. Horn, there is no one sentence, that may be drawn by any force to help M. Feckenham his cause. This is a short and a bold asseveration M. Horn: let us then see by the examination and discussing of your answer, whether that M. Fekenhams allegation be no stronger than ye imagine. Thus saith them God to the Prophet Hieremie. Heir. c. 1. Behold, I have put my words in thy mowth: behold this day have I set thee, over the nations and over kingdoms to pluck up, to root out, to destroy, and to throw down, to build, and to plant. And Ezechiel the prophet crieth out. Woe be unto the shepherds of Israel. The weak have ye not strengthened, the sick have ye not healed, neither have ye bound up the broken, Ezech. 34. nor brought again that which was driven away: neither have ye sowght that which was lost. Gregory Naziangene speaketh unto the Emperor in this sort. Will ye suffer me to deal truly with you? Will ye receive the liberty of God's word, will ye gladly take it, that Gods law doth subject you to our priestly power, and to our lawful judgement seats? For certainly God hath given unto us a power he hath given us a principality, much more perfect than is yours. Or doth it seem to agree with justice, that the spirit should yield to the flesh, that earthly things should overcome heavenly things, and that worldly things shoulbe be preferred to godly things? I know that ye are a sheep of my flock: I know that at the holy altars, ye do submit yourself under the priests hands with reverence. These three authorities M. Horn would remove out of the way with one simple solution: that neither Hieremie, nor Ezechiel, nor Gregory Nazianzene spoke of any other jurisdiction, then of boldly preaching God's word, to the which the Emperor is subject and ought to obey. And this is the proper jurisdiction that belongeth to Bishops, which if they diligently exercise, they need not fear Ezechiel his curses. But o Lord God, what manner of answer is this? Namely for one that taketh upon him, to be himself a pastor and a prelate of the Church? Is there no other M. Horn but preaching prelacy in Christ's Church? It is to be wished, that men would give so good, and so attentive ear to their spiritual pastors, that by their earnest preaching they would reform themselves. But what if after many and earnest admonitions, the party be never a whit the better, but rather endured, either to continue his vicious living, or his pestilent and ungodly teaching? Shall not the pastor proceed to excommunication? Or if the party be a spiritual man, to deposition and deprivation? Or think ye, that all men do amend by words only? Or think ye, that the pastor is excused, if he proceed no farther? No, no M. Horn, your doctrine is insensible, absurd and most repugnant to all the examples and practices that we find in the Church from Christ's time to our own, that I ever read or heard of and most evidently confounded by our prophet Hieremie. In whose words we have a lively pattern of the bishoply office, practised by S. Paul and the Apostles, by general and national councils: and by an infinite number of holy learned and ancient Bishops: 1. Cor. 4. &. 5. Galath. 5. utinam abscindantur qui vos conturbant. 2. Cor. 10. by S. Paul in the Corinthian, and in Alexander and Himeneus, of whom we have spoken before. I would to God, saith S. Paul, they that disquiet you, were quite cut of. Hear M. Horn, what he saith of this authority. Arma militiae nostrae non carnalia sunt, sed potentia Dei ad destructionem munitionum, consilia destruentes, & omnem altitudinem extollentem se adversus scientiam Dei, et in captivitatem redigentes omnem intellectum in obsequium Christi, & in promptu habentes ulcisci omnem inobedientian. The weapons of our warfare (saith he) are not carnal, but mighty through God, to cast down holds, casting down the imaginations and every high thing, that is exalted against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thowght to the obedience of Christ: and having ready vengeance against all disobedience. You see how conformable S. Paul's saying is to the saying of the prophet. Whose sayings ye can not by any good interpretation restrain to preaching only. Which thing as it is evident in S. Paul, Hierem. 1. may also be gathered out of the words of Hieremie. For immediately after the words alleged by M. Fekenham, these words follow. After this, the word of the Lord came unto me, saying: Hieremie, what seest thou? 1. Cor. 4. Quid vultis? in virga veniam ad vos, an in charitate & spiritu mansuentudinis? And I said, I see a rod of an almond tree as Theodosio translateth, or as the 70. have I see a staff made of a nut tree: or as our common translation hath, I see a waking rod. This is the pastoral rod or staff M. Horn, that prelate's do, and have ever used in excommunicating and deposing persons incorrigible. This is the rod that S. Paul threatened the Corinthians withal. What? saith he, will ye that I shall come unto you with a rod, or in love, and in the spirit of meekness? The bark of the almond is bitter, but the fruit is most pleasant. So the pastoral rod, though for the time it seemeth painful and grievous, yet to them, that thereby amend themselves, it bringeth afterward great comfort. And therefore it is written: Psalm 22 Virga tua & baculus tuus, ipsa me consolata sunt. 1. Cor. 5. In interitum carnis, ut spiritus saluus sit in die Domini nostri jesu Christi. Hierem. 1. Ollam succensam ego video. Thy rod and thy staff have comforted me. And S. Paul saith, he excommunicated the fornicator at Corinth, to the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit might be saved in the day of our Lord jesus. Which benefit they shall enjoy, that, by this pastoral rod, may be brought to true penance, and to the earnest amendment of their wickedness. As contrary wise they that by this rod will not be reform, but remain still with Pharaoh wiful, obstinate, and hard hearted, shall really feal that, that the Prophet Hieremy saw by a vision, incontinently after he had seen the rod: that is, a seething pot, prepared to boil them in hell, that neither by preaching, nor by pastoral staff will fall to earnest repentance. And not they only, but such Pastors also, as either for negligence or fear foreslow to do their duty: whether it be in the exercising of the pastoral word, or else of the pastoral sword: and such chief as take away from them, and deny them their pastoral sword. Which heresy tendeth to the utter destruction of all ecclesticall power and discipline: which power is (as all other things of the new testament are) very plainly shadowed, by the old Testament: Namely by these words of God spoken by Hieremy, representing the parson of the Christian Pastor: expressed, as it were, by the office of an husbandman or gardener: or as ezechiel expresseth his duty, by the office of a Shepherd. As the husbandman doth not only dung and fat his ground: as the gardener doth not only water his garden, but both of them rooteth out unprofitable herbs, weeds, and roots: And as the shepherd doth not only bring his flock to good and wholesome pastors, but hath his tar, to tar them, his staff to beat away the ravenous beasts and birds, his knife to lance them, and his place to sever and shut up the infected from the sound and whole: Even so it is not enough for the spiritual gardener, as it were by God's word to water the hard stony hearts of the sinners, and with the same as it were to fat the lean and barren heart of man: but he must also, when the case so requireth, weed out of Christ's garden, the wilful, and the obstinate: as it were brambles, briars, and thistles choking the good ground, and plant in their place other good graffs. And must not only with his tongue, as it were with his barking dog, but with his pastoral staff also drive away the wolf from the flock: partly by excommunication, partly by deprivation. And he must in this part remember, that Christ had his whip also, to whip and scourge them out of the temple that profaned the same. The spiritual pastor hath beside preaching, authority also to bind and lose the sins of his flock: so that if he lose them, Christ loseth them: if he bindeth them, Christ also bindeth them. Of this and of the like authority meaneth Gregory Nazianzene, and not of bare preaching. This is the power that he speaketh of, this is the lawful judgement seat of the church, this is a principality above all worldly prince's power. These so ample words go further M. Horn, then preaching, unless men preach also, with their hands aswell as with their mouths. For Nazianzen writeth, that the Emperor with reverence submitteth himself under the priests hands at the holy altars. What? Are altars holy? What an holy deed have ye then and your fellows done M. Horn, that have thrown down all altars, which have continued even sithence we were first christened? Contra gentiles quod unus Deus. And by having of the which Chrysostomus proveth, that our Ilelande of Brittany had received Christ and his Gospel? Whereupon it will follow, that in taking away of them, ye have taken away Christ's faith withal: as in deed ye have for a great part of the same: as appeareth by your daily doings and your wicked articles in your synagogue of late unlawfully agreed upon: especially touching the real presence of Christ's body in the Sacrament. For the unbloody offering of the which to our inestimable comfort the altars do serve in Christ's Catholic Church. To the receiving whereof no man can be admitted but by the spiritual Pastor, no not the Emperor himself, whom as well as the poorest man, he may exclude from the same, if he think it expedient. As appeareth by the story of the Emperor Theodosius, by us rehearsed: which is the thing that Nazianzene also doth here though obscurely signify: as also absolution to be received by the hands of the spiritual Pastor. To enjoy the which the greatest Prince in the world submitteth his head under the pastors hands, as appeareth by our author here, Pro Amb. vide Niceph. li. 12. ca 41. Pro Aug. hom. 49. ex. 50. homilijs. Tom. 10. and by other ancient Fathers, namely S. Ambrose and S. Augustin. Wherefore ye do very fond to make this great and high judgement seat nothing but preaching. And yet if it were so, M. Fekenhams allegation taketh place, and is sufficient to acquit and discharge him from the oath. For what principality so ever it be, that our author speaketh of, assured we are it is an ecclesiastical authority or principality. We are again aswell assured, as it here appeareth, and ye grant it also, that this power excelleth any temporal principality. Ergo, we may infer, that the prince is not supreme head in all causes or things ecclesiastical. M. Horn. The .176. Division. pag. 124. b. Chrysostom in the homily by you cited condemning the presumptuousness of the King Ozias, in enterprising to offer incense, which belonged by God's commandment only to the Priest, doth compare the object or matter of both their ministries together, affirming, that the Priestly dignity respecting the matter whereabout it is exercised, which is heavenly and spiritual, doth far exceed the other, for the * If the matter of the Princely Ministry is but earthly and outward, as you he●e confess, how can the Prince have supreme government in matters heavenly and spiritual, as the principal matter of his royal power? matter thereof is but earthly and outward. His words maketh his meaning plain: The kingly throne (saith he) hath the administration of earthly things and hath not beyond this power, any further authority. But the throne of the Priest is placed in heaven, and he hath authority to pronounce of heavenvly businesses, who saith these things? the King of heaven himself: what so every louse on earth, shallbe loosed in heaven also, what may be compared with this honour? Heaven taketh of the earth principal authority to judge. For the judge sitteth in the earth: the Lord (Christ) followeth the servant, and what so ever this (servant) judgeth in the inferior (parts) that same he (Christ) approveth in Heaven. Therefore the Priest standeth a mean or mediator betwixt God and man's nature, bringing unto us the benefits that come from thence (from Heaven) etc. These words of Chrysostom if they have not an † Why slip you so then away M. Horn, and give yourself no indifferent interpretation upon his words? indifferent interpreter, that will make his words by just circumstance to serve his meaning, and not to bind his meaning to his bare words, will make Heaven to (.662.) The .662. untruth. For his words import no such inconvenience, as shall appear. receive authority of the earth: will prove Christ to be inferior to the Priest, and the Priest to have the mediation betwixt God and man, by means whereof we may receive the Graces that cometh from Heaven, which mediation belongeth (.667.) The .667. untruth. For so much mediation belongeth also to the Priest through Christ. only to Christ. Stapleton. I commend you M. Horn: This is one of the honestest parts that you have played in all your answer. You have truly set forth Chrysostom's words and at large for the former part: I would have wished that ye should have set in also three or four lines more that immediately do follow: well I will supply the residue, lest ye wax to proud of this little praise. Therefore the Priest, saith Chrysostomus, standeth a mean or a mediator betwixt God and man's nature, bringing to us the benefits that come fronthence (from heaven) and cayring our petitions thither, reconciling our Lord when he is angry to both natures, and delivering us, when we offend out of his hands. And therefore God hath subjecteth the kings head under the Priest's hands, So S. Paul reasoneth Heb. 7. teaching us, that this Prince (the Priest) is greater than he. For why? that, that is the inferior taketh blessing of that which is the better. So far Chrysostomus. As ye began liberally and freely, in supplying the former part of the sentence of Chrysostomus: So I marvel, that ye break of so soon, and went not through with it. But yet I have the less marvel, considering that this was not done by chance or casualty, but of a set, and a shrewd wily purpose. For if ye had set out at large the whole as we have done, ye had destroyed your own pelting gloze wherewith ye glossed Gregory Nazianzene. For Chrysostom writing how the King submitteth his head to the priest, even as Gregory did, and that the priests authority is above the king's authority, meaneth of an other matter than preaching, as it evidently appeareth by his words: and so may he serve against your foolish device for a good interpreter, of Gregory Nazianzene. Whom as I may well take for a good interpreter: So I marvel, what he shall be, that ye will take for an indifferent intetpretor of Chrysostom's sentence. For by your judgement an indifferent interpreter needs must we have, to make his words and his meaning agree: and yet yourself steel close away without any further answer, or any interpretation at all given, different or indifferent. The sentence as Chrysost. uttereth it, your week stomach can in no wise digest. And all the world hitherto this xi hundred years and more, God be thanked, hath digested it well enough till now of late your new Apostles Luther and Caluin, can neither abide Chrysostom, that saith, and most truly, Matt. 16. that the priest is a mediator between God and us, nor Christ himself, who faith to the priest: whose sins ye bind upon earth, shallbe bound in heaven also. Here we must needs have these new Apostles as indifferent interpreters, against Chrysostom and Christ him self: lest that Christ's office, to whom this mediation belongeth only, be taken away, by the priest, yea lest Christ be made inferior to the priest. surely if there were such danger in the matter, it were high time to look well upon Chrysostom: neither if this surmise were true, should he be called by my judgement any more the golden mouth Chrysostom. 4. Reg. 5. But (God be thanked) there is much more fear than neadeth. Yea all this is but an hypocritical fear and sanctimony, such as the wicked King of Israel pretended, when he tore and cut his apparel reading the King of Syria his letters, that sent to him Naaman, that he might be cured of his Leprosy. But the Prophet He liseus was never a whit offended with those letters. And as Heliseus was a mediator between God and Naaman for the curing of his bodily leprosy: so is the priest a mediator between God and his people for the curing of their spiritual leprosy in their soul: without any prejudice or blemish to Christ's mediation. For Christ is the only mediator, as both God and man, that is, as a meritorius and effectual mediation, valuable through itself: the priest or prophet is mediator as man only: How Christ and how the Priest is a mediator. that is, as a minister and means only instrumental, not effectual: called and chosen to such office by Grace especial, not of him self, but through his commission only effectual or valuable. And so is Moses, so are others also, called in scripture mediators. I would now know of this scrupulous consciensed man concerning the other point, whether, in case a prince did appoint any one man in his realm, to give out his pardon in his name to such as were offenders, and that no man should once look to enjoy any pardon, but having recourse to this his deputy: I say I would know, whether by this the prince should be counted inferior to his subject. But what mean I, to defend that renowned ancient Father and his golden mouth, against the foolish blast of so lewd an horners mouth? What need I seek any defence for the words alleged by M. Fekenham, when that, M. Horn is quite overblown with his own blast: telling us by his own allegation, yea truly, and out of the said Chrysostom, that the king hath the administration of earthly things, and beside this power hath no further authority. The matter also of his Ministry, saith M. Horn, is but earthly and outward. Ergo say I for M. Fekenham, the king is not supreme head in all causes Ecclesiastical, or spiritual. What say I in all causes? Nay not in one cause mere spiritual or Ecclesiastical: as having nothing to do in any such, but in worldly and earthly causes only. And thus ye see, how well these two fathers, Gregory Nazianzene, and john Chrysostom the two great pillars of the Greek Church, may be easily drawn without any great force, to help M. Fekenhams cause. Here now by the way, may be noted, that M. Horn, for all his great reading, and for all the want of reading that he findeth in M. Fekenham, hath wonderfully overshot himself, and hath by his oversight lost a jolly triumphant matter that he might have had, to have triumphed upon M. Fekenham. He might have said, I pray you M. Fekenham: was julian the wicked Apostata a sheep of Christ's flock, being a renegade, a paynim, and a most cruel persecutor of the Christians? What? Did he show any reverence to the holy altars? Did he reverently submit his head under the priests hands? This and much like rhetorik might M. Horn if either his reading, or his remembrance would have served, have here uttered against M. Fekenham. And to say the truth M. Horn, I must yield and confess, that ye have found one companion now, yea one Emperor I say, that neither reverenced altars, nor the priests hands, no more than ye do now. And therefore in deed lo, this objection, if it had come in time, would have dressed M. Fekenham. But I trust, seeing the fault is found and amended to your hand, that ye will find no great matter against him: neither could greatly before, being as it seemeth his scribes fault, putting in julianum, for Valentem. The .177. Division. fol. 125. a. Now sith in all these objections hitherto, ye have brought forth (.668.) The .668. untruth. most impudent, as by that hath been said, well appeareth. nothing at all, that either made not against yourself, or that maketh any whit for you, it is more than time ye draw to Conclusion, and because no good Conclusion, can follow of evil premises, ye were driven to conclude, and finish up your objection with the like patching, wresting and (.669.) The .669. untruth. Slanderous. falsifying your Authors, as ye did before: and therefore in the Conclusion, like to him, that having no right to any, claimed all, to obtain somewhat at the least: Even so you, to prove that your Bishops, and priests have all jurisdiction Ecclesiastical, allege a piece of a sentence out of Ignatius, which barely by itself recited, giveth not only all that unto the bishop, but all things belonging to the Church beside, and that no man may do any thing, not so much as tol a bell to service or sweep the Church, but only the Bishop must do all (.670.) The .670. untruth. Ridiculous. alone. Which conclusion some of your complices would so little allow, as those whom ye would overburden, and ye yourself might go play you, as one that had nought to do, in any thing pertaining to the Church. But to help the matter, and to make Ignatius words plain without absurdity, you must take with you the residue of the sentence that followeth, which ye leave out, of The Sacrament of thanksgiving, and (.671.) The .671. untruth. False translation. Celebrating the Divine Service, and then it shall easily appear, that Ignatius talketh of such doings of a bishop, as in deed declare his function and office, and yet furthereth no whit the Conclusion of your objection. Stapleton. Ignatius ad Smyrnenses. The conclusion of M. Fekenhams objections being knit up with a sentence of Ignatius, that is, that no man should do any thing in matters ecclesiastical without the bishop's consent: M. Horn answereh, that he is fain to finish up his conclusion with patching, wresting, and falsifying his Authors. He saith, that M. Fekenham is like to one, that having no right to any, claimeth all, to obtain somewhat at the least. and being set in his merry mode, he returneth Ignatius sentence by the which M. Fekenham would challenge as he saith all jurisdiction to bishops, so prettily and pleasantly upon him, that himself might go play, as one that had nothing to do in any thing pertaining to the Church, no not so much as to tol a bell to service, or sweep the Church, but that the bishop must do it all alone. And then sadly falling to a grave exposition of Ignatius, and to take away all absurdity, he biddeth M. Fekenham to take the residue of the sentence with him, that he left out, of the Sacrament of thanks giving, and celebrating the divine service: and then he saith it shall easily appear, that Ignatius furthereth nothing M. Fekenhams conclusion. I like it well M. Horn, that you, such a feat mynser and minisher, such a Macarian parer and pincher of your Authors sentences, and narrations through out your whole book, do now call for the whole sentence of Ignatius at M. Fekenhams hands. Your request is so reasonable, that it may not be denied you. Nay you must needs have it, and your reader to, and it were for no more, but to show him of your good gracious dealing: who even there, where you find fault with M. Fekenham, for not taking the residue of the sentence with him, do yourself fond abuse your reader and Ignatius withal, not daring on's to recite the whole sentence following. For if you had, you should have stopped therewith your own fowl blasphemous mouth, against the massing and sacrificing priesthood, Prius f. 95 as you call it. And your reader should have seen, that you might aswell call Ignatius one of the Apostolical clergy of the Romish Antichrist, for this point, as those that you commonly call papists. And seeing you charge (but most untruly) M. Fekenham, for patching, wresting, and falsifying, to furnish up his conclusion withal, let us see how worshipfully and how sowndly you conclude your own answer. M. Fekenham telleth you of a general rule, out of Ignatius, reciting his words truly, though shortly. You leaving out that which Ignatius saith in deed, In the preface. fol. 5. in this book▪ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. bring us forth that which he sayeth not. For seeing you set forth your interpretation with a distinct letter, these words must be taken, as your authors words, and not as your own, according to your promise made at the beginning. Now there are no such words in the Latin translation, as you rehearse, as the formal words of Ignatius. In deed he nameth Eucharistia, but the word Sacrament he hath not, neither these words celebrating the divine service. Neither do you truly express the Greek sentence. We grant you nevertheless, that it is a sacrament of thanks giving: but now we speak not whether it may be so called, but whether your author so calleth it. Again I ask you, what is the thing there that is so excellent and thanks worthy, that the whole is called * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. a thanks giving? surely it is so called, because there is present in the said blessed Sacrament, the real body and blood of Christ, left to his Church to be offered for a remembrance of his death: and to be most reverently to our great and spiritual comfort received, as oft as we are thereunto godly disposed, and worthily prepared. This is the precious dish that Christ feedeth his Church withal. Plutarch. in M. Antonio. It is written, that Cleopatra the Queen of Aegyt exceeded in sumptuous feasting, and that she put an excellent pearl, and resolved it with vinegar, and then drank it up. There be that do value the price of the said pearl at fifty thousand pounds of our money. But it is an other manner of dish, and of much higher price that Christ hath left us, for this our spiritual banquet, even his own most precious and blessed body: the same I say that died upon the Cross for us. Great cause have we then to render most humbly to our gracious good Lord our most bounden and dewtifull thanks for such a feast. And most just cause have we M. Horn, to curse your M. Calvin, and all your sacramentary sect, and your late damnable articles, that like most wicked stewards have conveyed away this best dish, and do feed God's people, with a piece of bare bread, in stead of Christ's most precious body, Vide Theodoret. impatibilis Dial. 3. Eucharistias & oblationes non admittunt, quòd non confiteantur, Eucharistian esse carnem seruatoris nostri jesu Christi, quae pro peccati, nostris passa est, quam pater sua benignitate suscitavit. bereaving Christ's Church of this most comfortable meat. But herein ye follow your father's Calvin, Zwinglius, Wicleff, Berengarius, and such other that the devil stirred up against this blessed Sacrament: yea anon after the Apostles time, and in the time of Ignatius. For he doth write of such heretics as would not (by the report also of Theodoretus) admit, the Eucharistia, and the sacrifice: for that they did not confess the Eucharistia to be the flesh of our Saviour jesus Christ, the which did suffer, for our sins, and which the father by his goodness did resuscitate. See M. Horn the cause why we may well call this Sacrament, the Sacrament of Eucharistia, that is, of thanks giving, because there is present the body of Christ, and offered to. The body of Christ being really present in the sacrament, and the oblation that the Church maketh of the same, ye can not abide M. Horn. Ignatius in this place by M. Fekenham recited, maketh express mention of the mass, and of this oblation, and as it were expounding the words by M. Fekenham rehearsed, saith, that it is not lawful neither to offer, nor to make sacrifice, nor to celebrate mass without the bishop. Propterea non licet sine episcopo neque offer, neque sacrificium immolare, neque missas celebrare. The like he speaketh other where: do nothing, saith he to Heron the Deacon, without the bishops, for they are priests: they do baptize, they do offer sacrifice, they give holy orders, they put their hands upon men, thou dost minister to them, as S. Stephen did at Jerusalem to james, and to the priests. Ad Heronem. Nihil sine episcopis agas. Sacerdotes enim sunt, tu verò minister sacerdotum, illi baptizant, sacra faciunt, ordinant, manus imponunt, tu verò eis ministras, ut Hie●osolymis S. Stephanus jacobo, & praesbyteris. But M. Horn full truly, and full like himself, telleth us a tale of the Sacrament of thanks giving, and celebrating the divine service: and then, that this place doth not one whit further M. Fekenhams conclusion. But as we have concluded you even by Ignatius himself a double heretic, both for the spoiling us of the presence of Christ's body, and of the oblation of the same: so shall we conclude you a liar, in that you deny, that this place maketh any thing for M. Fekenham. For lo: thus he argueth. M. Fekenhams argument deducted out of Ignatius. The priests themselves in matters Ecclesiastical, should do nothing belonging to their office without the will and consent of the bishops. Ergo much less the lay men or prince, which are no spiritual men, should meddle in matters Ecclesiastical, especially they should not change the old religion, they should not abolish the blessed Sacraments, the prince should not call himself supreme head of the Church, the parliament should not annex all spiritual jurisdiction to the crown at least without the consent of the bishops. What say I without the consent? Nay against the full and conformable assent of all the catholic bishops, and the whole convocation, offering their most humble petition, and supplication to the parliament, that there might be no such alteration. And yet the parliament Law of one realm for the alteration of religion, if all the bishops had consented, were not a sufficient discharge in conscience. When ye can well soil this argument M. Horn, than I suppose ye shall find M. Fekenham somewhat conformable to your request, in the taking of the oath. Again M. Feckenham prayeth you, to take the whole sentence with you: and to take the pains but to read vj. or seven. lines further, and to consider what you shall find there. That is: that no man is more honourable in the Church, than the bishop, and that we must honour him first, and the king after him. Of the which sort of sentences his epistles are full, directly impugning your new pretenced supremacy: And now ye need nothing to fear that, which ye tell us for a great inconueinence, that if Ignatius sentence be not well and wisely weighed, the bishop must both toll the bell to service, and sweep the Church all lone. This is but a poor office for a bishop, and all this high fetch needed nothing, saving that, after this your long and painful travail taken to confute so clerkly, these few objections of M. Feken. ye thought good to refresh and quicken your weary spirits, with this your merry sporting. And yet take ye heed, that it turn not upon yourself M. Horn in very good earnest. For of this once I am assured, that if ye measure the matter by the old canons of the ancient Church, you that maintain so many heinous heresies, if you may have any office at all in the Church, you can have no better, than to toll the bell to service, and sweep the Church, or such like. And yet I doubt, whether you may have as much as that office, being for these your heresies with bell, book, and candle accursed, and by the Church bosom, that is, by the sentence of excommunication so clean sweeped out of the Church, that as I said, I doubt whether by the old canons ye may meddle with the basest office of all pertaining to the Church. And yet for any ill will I bear to your person, in case ye were a good and a catholic man, I could for my part be content, that ye enjoyed your bishopric still, and that as amply as did any of the most Catholic prelates before you. M. Horn. The .178. Division. pag. 125. b. So that your Conclusion being yet as insufficient as the rest, you are fain● to adjoin an other piece thereunto: Wherein although ye show how evil aioygner you be, to adjoin those two pieces of sentences together in one Conclusion, that are of clean sundry matters, yet in one point ye have made them both agree, that as ye wrested the one, so ye not only wrist, but flatly (.672.) The .672. untruth. Flat false, as shall appear. falsify the other, and yet neither of them both stand you in any stead to help your objection, much less to conclude the same. For first, how doth this follow: S. Augustine saith (say you) of the Doctors of the Church: That they believe, I believe: that they hold, I hold: that they teach, I teach: that they preach, I preach: yield to them, and thou shalt yield to me (.673.) The .673. untruth. This is not M Fekenhams Ergo: but your own Ergo, bishops and Priests have power and authority to make laws, orders, and Decrees, and to use all cohibitive jurisdiction over their flocks and cure. Now if your friends, that have believed hitherto as you believe, have held, as you hold, taught as you teach, preached as you preach, and believing the upright dealing and conscience, that you pretend, have yielded unto you herein, do but a little examine your (.674.) The .674. untruth. Slanderous. false dealing wit● those Fathers, whom you would seem so wholly to follow, I think they would no longer believe you, hold with you, nor yield unto you, but suspect you as a deep dissembler, or rather abhor you, as an open slanderer and belyer, not only of me, but of the ancient Fathers themselves. For first I would learn of you, where S. Augustine hath those words, in all his six books against julian, Istis cede, & mihi cedes, if he have them, show where: if he have them not, then how ye follow S. Augustine? How dare you impudently say, ye preach and teach that he did, when ye manifestly (.675.) The 675. untruth. Most impudent and outrageously slanderous, at it shall appear. mangle, altar, pervert, and corrupt the saying that he did teach. In deed for fashions sake ye cite a piece of S. Augustins sentence, that they believe I believe, etc. but for that which followeth: istis cede, & me non caedes: yield to them, and thou shalt not strike or whip me: you (.676.) The .676. untruth. All copies have those words. M. Fekenham hath not put them in. have put in these words, istis cede, & mihi non cedes, yield to them, and thou shalt yield to me: and yet this corrupting of the sentence maketh it serve no whit the more for your purpose, but uttereth your falsehood: that belike will not spare to corrupt that which maketh flat against you, that thus use to corrupt this, which maketh neither to nor fro with you, nor against me. But as S. Augustine writing in the same matter against julian, a Disciple of Pelagius, an (.677.) The .677. untruth. Pelagius was no English Monk. English Monk, dealing with S. Augustine, as ye have done with me, said to julian: so say, I to you. Ye feign me to say that I say not, to conclude that I conclude not, Lib 3. to grant that I grant not, and you conclude to yourself that which I deny, Lib. 5. etc. In deed you have laboured more to find out those reasons which ye might better utter against yourself, than against me. But in such a cause ye should not need to take such pains, if you had any shame in you. S. Augustin in these books against (678) The .678. and .679. untruths. For S. Augustine in the said books is plain for the Pope's Primacy, not for the Princes. julian, as in his other against the (679) Donatists, (as I have declared before) did attribute unto themperors and Princes, the Bishops and Priests, such Ecclesiastical jurisdiction as I have done. Of the same mind that he was herein, were also (680) The .680. untruth. None of those Fathers were of that mind. those Fathers, that he oyteth. Wherefore you will now I trust, according to your promise, yield and relent: If not to me for stubborn heart: yet according to your conclusion to S. Augustine, and the ancient Fathers, to believe herein that they believe, to hold that they hold, to teach that they teach, to preach that they preach, and no more to wring, maim, slander and bely them. And than both I and all other faithful Christians will both better believe you, and give God thanks for you. Stapleton. M. Fekenham concluding his objections with Ignatius adjoineth a general protestation of his faith taken out of blessed S. Augustin his books against the heretic julianus. Thus. That they believe, I believe: that they hold, I hold: that they teach, I teach: that they preach, I preach: yield to them and thou shalt yield to me. Here doth M. Horn so revel against M. Feckenham, as he hath not done the like in all his answer. First he denieth, that of this place of S. Augustine may any good sequel be gathered, that Bishops may make laws, or use all cohibitive jurisdiction. Then as having now M. Fekenham in such a fowl evident fault, as by no pretext may be covered, he thinketh that for this false dealing, his own friends will take him, for a deep dissembler, yea rather will abhor him as an open slanderer and belier of the fathers, as a manifest mangler, alterer, perverter, and corrupter of S. Augustine. For in stead of istis cede, & me non caedes, yield to them, and thou shalt strike or whip me, he hath put in: istis cede, & mihi cedes. Yield to them, and thou shalt yield to me. And then saith further, that belike M. Fekenham will not stick to corrupt that which maketh flat against him, that thus useth to corrupt that, which maketh neither to nor fro, with himself, nor against himself. After this he rolleth in S. Augustine's sentences, and layeth them forth against M. Feckenham, for this his evil dealing with him, as S. Augustin doth against Pelagius a Britain monk. Finally as though now the battle were won, and a full conquest made upon poor. M. Fekenham, he calleth upon him to yield and relent. Marry sir this is a terrible blast in deed blown out of Master horns mouth for his farewell: This is such a blustering tempest stirred up by our new Aeolus, that (as it seemeth) M. Fekenham must needs be overblown with the vehemency of it. But we will yet seek out, and see the very foundation, and the original cause of all this broil. By all likelihodde M. Fekenham hath found some good appearance of great advantage in corrupting these words of S. Augustin. For no man lightly is so doltish, to use such foul and sluttish shifts, without some comfort and hope to further his matter by. According to the old saying Cui bono. Nay saith M. Horn: The corrupting of the sentence serveth no whit the more for M. Fekenhans purpose. No doth it not M. Horn? and would M. Feckenham deal so fond by open falsehood to stain his honesty and for whip me, translate, yield to me, without any benefit of his cause? surely then were he worthy (aswell as I love him) to be twice whipped, once for falsehood, and on's more for folly. Therefore this your accusation even by your own tale, and by Cui bono, is utterly incredible. And yet if he had so falsely and so foolishly demeaned himself, seeing it toucheth no part of the substance of the question that lieth betwixt you and him: you play with him if not a foolish, yet to vehement an orator: and have sauced your oratory with over much gall and egernes. And for all your blowing and blustering, your great hill bringeth forth nothing, but a poor Aesop's mouse. Yet say you, this is a naughty part of him, so manifestly to mangle and to corrupt S. Augustin. Perchance good reader thou dost now look for an answer, and how M. Fekenham may save his honesty, against this mighty accusation. And surely what answer I may best make, I can not readily tell: but this will I tell you in the mean season, that such as use to play their part very well otherwise, yet sometimes at the very last cast, for some foolish disorder they are hissed and clapped out by the multitude. With what shooting them, and clapping aught this wainscot faced man, to be driven, as it were from this stage, that having throughout his book played so many foul and villainous parts, for his valet and Plaudite, playeth as evil or a worse part, than he hath played in all the residue of his book? There be no more examples of S. Augustins works printed, that I have seen, but four: the first printed at Basil, the second and third at Paris, the fourth at Lions: and all these have istis cede, & mihi cedes. Yield to them, An. 1528. in fol. An. 1541. &. 1555. in fol. An. 1563. in 8. Lib primo cont. jul. Cap. 2. in medio capitis. tom. 7. and thou shalt yield to me. Only the later edition of Paris readeth in the text as M. F. readeth, but putteth in the margin, as a diverse reading, & me non caedes, as M. Horn full pevishly and wretchedly would make folk believe it should only be read. What detestable impudence then is this, for M. Horn, to cry out upon M. F. being a poor prisoner, after this outrageous sort, and for the allegation of this place, so sternly and fiercely to vaunt, saying: How dare ye impudently say; ye preach and teach that he did, when ye manifestly mangle, altar, pervert, and corrupt the saying that he did teach? And to ask of him where Saint Augustine hath these words in all his six books against julian, istis cede, & mihi cedes? The truth is, though as I said, all these copies have these words in this order, yet by forgetfulness M. Fekenham hath not set in the book. And will ye see, how well the matter is amended by M. Horn? After all this ruffling and blustering he himself, having all copies against him, nameth not, either any of these six books, or any place, where any book of S. Augustine's should be printed, that should have any such text of such tenor as he doth allege. And yet doth M. Horn (as ye have heard) as though it were right true, yea and a sin against the holy Ghost, all to revile M. Fekenham: and leaveth not there: but that, which S. Augustine most truly objected to Pelagius, doth he most untruly object against M. Fekenham: even as truly, as that the said Pelagius was an English monk, who was dead and buried, before the Saxons entered Britanny. For Pelagius died in the time (at the least of Theodosius the second) and the Saxons entered the realm in the time of Marcianus, as witnesseth S. Bede. And before Britanny was commonly called England, Pelagius was dead at the least one hundred years. Beda. li. ●. cap. 15. Polid. li. 3. But before it was christened, more than a hundred and a half. But now concerning the matter it self, whether the Counsels, the fathers, both old and now that you M. Horn have alleged, and especially S. Augustine may not truly say to you, that he said to Pelagius: I refer it to the indifferent reader. surely there is none of them all (as may easily appear to the diligent reader) but may justly say to you. M. Horn, ye feign me to say that, I say not: to conclude, that I conclude not: Aug. li. 3. contra ●ul. to grant that I grant not: and you conclude to yourself that, which, I deny. Again. In deed ye have laboured more to find out those reasons, which ye might better utter against yourself, Lib. 5. than against me. But in such a case, ye should not need to take such pains if you had shame in you. Whether I say truly or no in this, I refer thee, good Reader, to my whole answer, and those that will see it compendiously proved, to my preface, and to the Conclusion of the third book. And here would I feign break of my confutation of M. horns answer, to S. Augustine's testimony, saving that he doth otherwise so exceedingly bely S. Augustine here, that I may in no wise altogether pass over this shameless demeanour. You say then M. Horn, that S. Augustin aswell in his books against julian, as in his books against the Donatists, is of your mind touching the ecclesiastical supremacy in Princes, as ye say ye have declared. And that the Fathers whom S. Augustine citeth against julian, are of the same mind also. Show me then good M. Horn, but one authority out of S. Augustine, or any one of the Fathers, whom he rehearseth, which are Cyprianus, Ireneus, Basilius, Hilarius, Lib. 1. contra julianum. Ambrose, Hieronymus, and Pope Innocentius with others, either that the Pope hath not the superiority in matters Ecclesiastical, or that Princes have the same. All that hitherto ye have brought out of S. Augustine, with whose sayings ye have filled up some leaves, reacheth no farther, than that Princes may by their laws punish such, as be disobedient to the Church laws: for the which thing no man doth contend with you. But we would fain see you once draw to the question it self, and to show some open place of S. Augustine, either for the Princes or against the Pope's supremacy: wherein seeing ye have done nothing, Places out of S. Augustine for the pope's primacy. we will assay what we call say for the Pope's primacy by S. Augustine. To avoid tediousness we will rehearse but a few testimonies, and such only, as we have taken out of his books against the said Donatists, Quis nescit, illum Apostolatus principatum cu●li●et Episcopatui praeferendun? De Bapt. contra Donat. lib. 2. cap. 1. Epistola. 165. Numerate vel ab ipsa sede Petri: ipsa est petra, quam non vincunt superbae inferorum portae. In Psalm. contra partem Donati. Epistola. 157. ad Optatum. Ab innocentio & Sozimo toto orb Christiano damnati. Epistola. 90.91.92. & 93. Dicta epistola. 91. Patres non humana sed divina decreuere sententia, ut quicquid de disiunctis, remotisque provincijs ageretur, non prius ducerent finiendum, nisi ad huius sedis notitiam perveniret, ubi tota huius authoritate, justa quae fuerit pronunciatio firmaretur. and Pelagians. Who is it then M. Horn, but S. Augustine that writing against the Donatists, saith that the principality of S. Peter's Apostleship is to be preferred, before any other bishopric? Who is it but S. Augustine, that useth to bring against the Donatists, the authority of the sea of Rome as a singular and a principal authority? Who is it but S. Augustine, that writing against the said Donatists sayeth, the sea of Peter, is the rock that the proud gates of hell do not overcome? Let us now come a little to the Pelagians. Their captain Pelagius, and an other arch-heretic of their sect called Caelestius, were condemned by Pope Innocentius and Sozimus, through out at the Christian world. They were also condemned in afric by the bishops there. Yet S. Augustine writeth not, that they were condemned by them through out all the world, as he doth of the said two Popes: because the sentence of the African Bishops bound the africans only: the Pope's sentence bound the whole world. And therefore the said Bishops, after they had condemned those heretics, desired Pope Innocentius to confirm their sentence: which thing Innocentius did, as appeareth by his answer to the foresaid Bishops, yet extant in S. Augustine's works. Which letters give a very ample testimony for the Pope's supreamacye: and showeth among other things, that it was a rule kept through out all the world, that in grave▪ and weighty matters ecclesiastical, and for the determination of matters of faith, Et Epistola. 93. Diligenter ergo et congruè Apostolico consulitis honori, ●onori inquam, illius, quem praeter illa quae sunt extrinseca, solicitudo manet omnium Ecclesiarum, super anxijs rebus quae sit tenenda sententia, antiquae scilicet regulae formam secuti, quam toto semper ab orb mecum nostis esse seruatam. August. contra. 2. Epist. Pelag. lib. 1. cap. 1. Quamuis ipse in eo praeemineas celsiore fas●igio speculae pastoralis. Haec ergo ad tuam potissimum dirigere sanctitatem nentam discenda quàm examinanda, & num forsan aliquid displicuerit emendanda constitui. Lib. ●. Et si posterior tempore prior loco. August. dict. lib. 1. nothing was wont to be done without the Pope's consent and authority. Again S. Augustine writing against the said Pelagians, sendeth his books to Pope Bonifacius, to examine and amend them, if any thing misliked him: and saith: that the said Bonifacius had the pre-eminence in the pastoral watchtowre. S. Augustine also in this book against julian the Pelagian, numbering up a number of holy and ancient Bishops, as Ireneus, Cyprianus, Hilarius, and others, saith: that Pope Innocentius though he were later in time, yet was he before them, for his place and dignity. He doth urge and press very much the said julian with the authority of the Apostolical sea and of the said Innocentius. Yea and that for an heresy, that your Apostle Calvin, and our good new brethren in England, both in their preachings and teachings do maintain: that is, that children though they be not baptized, shall yet that notwithstanding, enjoy the everlasting life. These testimonies do fully declare S. Augustine's mind, touching the Pope's Supremacy, quite repugnant to the doctrine of this your book. Whereby it appeareth, that ye little regard, how and after what sort, ye do allege him: and that ye do not allege him, for any good matter ye find in him, but only to make an outward show and appearance, to the unlearned and unskilful people, to beguile them with smooth talk, and fair words. The .179. Division. pag. 126. b. M. Fekenham. After long expectation, and many promises, his L. final answer to the said objections, was as hereafter followeth. For as much as I do perceive, that you are not to be resolved in this matter, I shall here stay and proceed no further with you in the same: and like as you have been, so you shallbe unto me most heartily welcome: You shall lack nothing that is in my house to pleasure you: And from henceforth I shall leave to have any further talk or conference with you in these controversies of Religion. And for all such talk and writing as hath passed already between us, I shall perform this my promise, both first and last made unto you, that you shallbe well assured, not to suffer any hurt or damage thereby. M. Horn. You delivered this objection unto me in writing, betwixt Easter and Whitsontyde, about the end of April: within two days following, when I had red the same, I told you, that in the collection of your common places, you were much abused, for that you had mistaken them, and observed no just circumstances of the authorities, whereby to have known the authors meaning: And so we continued in debating and reasoning, from time to time, about this matter of jurisdiction, and others, until the beginning of September following, before which time, your obstinacy grew so much, that I was forced, through your unorderly behaviour, to restrain you of your licentious talk, and sequester you from conference with any, having so much before abused yourself, and especially in mine absence, and I was the rather moved so to d●o, for that I perceived all that I did, was but in vain: as at diverse times and often, I repeated that unto you, obstinately bent to the contrary, meaning by such stoutness to recover your credit, which through your inconstancy was so impaired amongst your friends. I said, at your first coming, and many times after, you being sent by the Honourable Council, that you were welcome, which by good proof, although utterly without any your good desert, ye found true. I did say, that I would leave to have any further talk or conference with you, touching matters of Religion, or any other: but you should have showed the time and place, where, and when these words were spoken: I spoke them the Sunday at after dinner, when in your gallary, I did reprove you of your disorders, and therefore restraigned you of such liberty, as before ye had enjoyed. The promise made unto you, not to utter that which ye should say by way of reasoning, in prieudize of the Q. majesties Laws, I have hitherto, and yet do firmly keep to you, as you can not justly charged me with the contrary, in any particular point, and so you have sustained no hurt or damage thereby. M. Fekenham. The performing of his promise was as hereafter followeth. First there was a rumour dispersed abroad very shortly after by his servants, that I had subscribed to certain articles, ten in number. Second, there was by his servants a further rumour raised, of my recantation, time and place appointed thereof to be at the Parish Church of Waltham, where his L. did then manure and abide. thirdly, his L. did at his open table, and in the presence of many, charged me with the change of my Religion nine times, and being put in further remembrance by one M. Denny who was a Sogener with him, his L. said, that I had altered and changed my Religion, not only nine times, but nineteen times, and that I was of no Religion. Fourth, his L. did permit the said M. Denny at his open table to to much to abuse me. Where the said M. Dennie did openly and before many, charged me with these three crimes following. First, with incontinency of life, thus saying: That if I had not as many children, as he, he did know, that I had deserved to have so many. Second, with gluttony, affirming that I was an Epicure. Third and last, with hypocrisy, and that I was a great dissembler and an hypocrite. The said M. Dennie being a man to me wholly unknown. His L. did show himself openly to be so well pleased with these his slanderous words, that he ministered just occasion for me to think, that his L. had procured the said M. Dennie thereunto. Fifth, by so much the more I had good cause to think so, for that his L. did immediately thereupon, viz. within one hour after, in fortifying the said talk, command me to close imprisonment. Sixth and last, after that he had kept me six weeks in close imprisonment, by his L. complaint I am now at this present prisoner in the Tower, much contrary to his promise before made. The premises being true (like as they are all most true) being to openly committed, and before to many witnesses to be denied: your Honour may easily judge, with what wisdom, discretion, and charity I have bene used, I being a poor man, the Q. majesties prisoner, and to his L. committed (I dare boldly affirm) to be well used. It was very strange to me, to see such behaviour openly showed at the table of such a man. Surely for mine own part, I was never so used, neither openly nor privately at any man's table before in my whole life. My humble suit therefore unto your Honour is, that proof and trial may he had of my truth herein, and what my deservings hath been for the whole time of mine abode there. In due search and examination hereof I doubt not but there shall fall out matter betwixt us, either of much simplicity and truth, or else of great craft and falsehood: either of honest, virtuous and godly, or else dishonest, vicious and ungodly usage▪ and either of much light, learning, and knowledge, or else of very gross ignorance, and palpable darkness: let it fall and light on the which side it shall hap, upon the trial and examination made, I doubt not, but that your Honour shall have a full show and a sufficient proof made, of every thing that hath passed between us. There may be denial made for a shift and some short time: but for any long time it may not possibly endure, every thing being so openly committed and done, so diverse and many being of knowledge and witness thereof. M. Horn To this challenge of promise breach, in these six points: Truly I know not of any rumour spread of you, by any of my servants, or otherwise that ye subscribed to any Articles, no yet ever heard any thing hereof, before I saw the same report in your book published: And if any such rumour were spread by any my servants or other, you should have named him, that he might receive condign punishment therefore. second, as to the further rumour of your Recantation, I say likewise I understood nothing but by your own report in your book, and therefore referring the Author to be punished accordingly, I think the punishment ought to light upon yourself. Thirdly, as to my charged of your changing in Religion ix times, ye xix times, I said so, and that (.681.) The .681. untruth, most evident and Slanderous. truly upon proof of your unconstant affirming and denying, not so few times, as I had good experience oft in you, and can have witness in the same. Fourthly, touching your abusing by M. Denny, ye misreport the Gentleman, as to any thing that ever was spoken before me. But if any such were, it was as I heard say at my return home (for I was abroad in preaching when such scoffing talk was betwixt you) by occasion of some talk ministered on your part to M. Denny, partly by way of merry talk betwixt you twain, and partly stirred up by your unseemly words, and yet none of all these in my hearing. But in the last day, when I restraigned your liberty, you did so much before me at my table provoke the said gentleman by calling him Epicure, for that he fasted not as ye said, that I, fearing least M. Denny like a young man should give some evil words again, willed him to say nothing, for that I myself would answer the matter for him: Mine answer was, that I marveled why you would call him Epicure: for if you so thought, because he did eat flesh, and never fish, I said, he might (.682.) The .682. untruth. joined with a gross error. so welfast with flesh, as with fish: but if it were for that he used not abstinency, I said in that M. Denny did more than you: for where you had every day in the week your (.683.) The .683. untruth slanderous, as all that know M. Feckenham can witness. three meals, friday and other, the gentleman was contented three days in a week, with one meal a day, and never did eat above two. And as it is untrue, that either M. Denny was a man to you utterly unknouhen, being conversant together in one house a quarter of a year before, and in familiar company, yea sought many times by you to play at the bowls, to walk in the park, and to be merry together: so is it also untrue, that I heard you so abused as I could or did like therein, and so untruly do you surmise, that I should procure M. Denny, by any means to abuse you, as ye malitiousely conceive of me. fifthly, as to the restraint of your liberty, which you call close imprisonment, to have been for these talks betwixt M. Denny and you, within one hour after: You know right well, that your restraint was not upon that occasion, but upon your seemly behaviour about other matters, whereof ye make no mention, lest you should have proved yourself a Liar. After I had in few words calmed the storm that seemed would arise betwixt M. Dennie and you, I entered into talk with you in matters of Religion, as I was want to do daily before. The talk was of venial and mortal sin: you have not forgotten the occasion, I am sure: for if you have in your remembrance the Monkish (.684.) jebusites, you call them jesuits, The .648. untruth, slanderous and jewish. you may remember, that a cross that came from them, gave the occasion of the talk in that matter. I proved that no (.685.) The .685. untruth. heretical: sin is so venial as it could be remitted by any ceremony: yea, there is no sin but the same (.686.) The .686. untruth, in like manner plain heretical. of itself is mortal, and yet venial to be purged by the merits of Christ only: and that all sins, were they never so mortal, were nevertheless venial, saving all only the sin against the holy Ghost, which is irremissible. For this my saying, and other points which I condemned, ye sell into such a rage, that ye not only railed against the Bishop of Sarisburie saying; he was utterly unlearned, and that he should never be able to answer M. hardings book, but also openly called me almost in plain terms Heretic, and said, my doctrine which I preached (yet ye would never hear me) was erroneous, filthy, and blasphemous: so filthily your blasphemous mouth, could rail against (.687.) The .687. untruth, Your doctrine hath no affinity with God's truth. God's truth. Whereupon, I, to stay you, said alonely that those were unmannerly words to be spoken at mine own table: and therefore would as than say no more openly unto you there, but told you that after dinner I would show you more of my mind, betwixt you and me. And so shortly after dinner, I came up to you and there calling you into the Gallery of my house, adjoining to your chamber, I put you in remembrance of that which I had before oftentimes admonished you, of your outrageous talk in mine absence, used oftentimes openly at my table, whereof I had sundry times given you warning, for that the same might breed peril to yourself, blame to me, and offence to others. And because I found still the continuance of that your misorder: yea, to be much more vehement many times in mine absence than in my presence: Therefore I willed you thenceforth to abstain from conferring with any man in any wise at all, adding that you should have to your chamber, all things necessary, and what meat you would competently appoint for your own diet, which ye had accordingly. And although I did restrain you from coming to my table, or to go so much at large as you had done: yet had you no other keeper than you had before, which was your own man: you had a fair Gallery adjoining to your chamber, opening to my park, your servant a chamber by himself, next to yours, ye had Leads fair and large, on the which ye might walk, and have prospect both over the Parks, Gardens, and Orchards. And therewith thrice in the weak at the least, whiles I lay at Waltham, with one by me appointed, you walked abroad into the Parks, Garden, and Orchard: and this you call your close imprisonment. Sixthly, touching my complaint to the most honourable of you, whereby you were remitted prisoner again to the Tower, what the same was, their honours can well declare, if their pleasure so be: being sure that I have not broken promise with you hitherto, in uttering your opinion against the Laws of the Realm, as I have before said, which ye showed at any time in the private conference. And so ye have not any cause to challenge me in that behalf. To conclude, by the premises it may appear to the honourable as by a taste, what sincerity there is in you. Again, that this your quarreling and (.688.) The .688. untruth. M. Fekenham hath in no point belied you in his schedule spread abroad, but will stand to all that is contained therein. belying me by spreading this book, was and is chiefly, to recover your credit with those of your faction: who as I have said, had conceived doubt of your revolt, and to confirm them in their grounded (.689.) The .689. untruth. The Catholic faith is no error. error, and herewith to bring me and other such as I am, into obloquy and hatred. And lastly, to impugn and bark against the Q. Majesties (.690.) The .690. untruth slanderous. Neither M. Fekenham. Nor other Catholics do impugn the queens Lawful Authority, but only such as is now proved to be unlawfully attributed to her Highness, by such as you are. Lawful and due authority, which you and your complices daily labour to subvert: which matter I refer to be further considered, by the grave wisdom of the most honourable. FINIS. The .14. Chapter, of certain private matters between M. Fekenham and M. Horn. And of certain especial heresies avouched by M. Horn, whereby to conclude, he concludeth himself a plain heretic. Stapleton. THis being the last part of all, standeth most upon mutual accusations: M. Fekenham finding himself grieved, that he should be missused at M. horns table, and there to be noted of incontinency, gluttony, and hypocrisy: that rumours should be spread abroad by M. horns servants of his subscription and recantation: and finally that contrary to M. Horns promise made to him, that he should suffer no damage or hurt for any words passed betwixt them, he was first restrained of his liberty accustomable by M. Horn, and kept there close prisoner vj. weeks: and afterward by his procurement remitted to the Tower. M. Horn on the other side denieth, that ever he was privy to any such rumour, and complaineth as fast upon M. Fekenham, and his disorder, as calling M. Deny Epicure at his own table, and for openly calling himself almost in plain terms heretic. He putteth M. Fekenham in remembrance of certain talk passed between them: as that a man may fast aswell with flesh, as with fish: of mortal and deadly sin, and other matters. As for the restraint of his liberty, he saith it came upon his own disorder: and that in complaining upon him to the Council, he broke no promiss with him. These matters then being such as privately passed between them, I being one that neither was then present, nor yet sithence fully understanding any certainty of them, must leave this to M. Fekenhams own defence, when the time shall serve. Saving that so much, I can say, that I have been credibly informed, that M. Fekenham doth deny, as well that he misused M. Deny, as such other things as M. Horn chargeth him withal, and is ready to stand to, and to justify all such things as are contained in this his schedule if he may be suffered. And surely among other things, to them that knew his order and diet, either before his coming to prison, either in the tower, when he had the liberty of the same, whereas I am credibly informed, he never made three meals, it can not seem credible and likely, that he should at Waltham as M. Horn saith, make three meals, aswell friday as other days. One thing I am sure of M. Horn, he took no part of your fleshly breakfasts and suppers, that ye have had in good store in your house upon the fridays and other fasting days. Which example to be showed in your house, being a man of such vocation and countenance, against the Laws of the Church and the realm, how it may be allowed, I leave it to the consideration of others. For I suppose neither yourself, nor Mistress Madge, with all your other fleshly company, are fallen into such weakness, feebleness and consumption, nor are of so timerouse and scrupulous a conscience, that either ye need, or will tarry for a Licence: I will not say to be sought at Rome, but nearer hand, at London. And what need this prelate of any other Licence, that can so prettily licence himself to fast with flesh aswell as with fish? For a man may (saith he) fast aswell with flesh as with fish. Well spoken, and like a good Turk or jew: For at a good Christians mouth I never heard that rule, nor ever read it before. In the primitive Church men fasted in great numbers, both from fish and flesh: but this prelate lest the generation of his spiritual children, should be to much hindered, by eating cold fish, hath found a new divinity, whereby we may fast with a fat pig or capon upon good friday, lest for faintness we fall under the cross as Christ did. I say, this is a new divinity. For from the Apostles time hitherto Lent hath ever been fasted, aswell in our realm, as in all Christendom beside. Whereof now almost xiii. hundred years sithence, our most noble countryman and Emperor Constantinus, giveth us a full godly testimony, aswell for our Ileland of Britain, as for Rome, all Italy, Egypt, Eus. l. 3. de vita Const. France, Lybia, all Grece, all the countries called Asiana and Pontica Regio, Cilicia, and for all the Churches of the East, West, South, and North: And this lent fast was from flesh at the jest, as it appeareth evidently, Li. 3. Tom. 2. haeres. 75. Laod. Can. 50. Hier. contra jovin. Epiph. ubi supra. both by Epiphanius above xj. hundred years past, and by a Council of Laodicea, held about that time. Yea they were counted plain heretics, that contemned the Lente and other fasting days: As the Aerians, jovinians, and such other. And now have we a subtle insoluble, that there is no sin, but that the same of itself is mortal sin, and yet there is no mortal sin, but that the same is venial. For he saith, he proved to M. Fekenham, that there is no sin so venial, as it could be remitted by any ceremony, yea there is no sin, but the same of itself is mortal, and yet venial, to be purged by the merits of Christ only: and that all sins, were they never so mortal, were nevertheless venial, saving all only the sin against the holy Ghost, which is irremissible. surely this is a notable conclusion to lap up your worthy book withal. Wherein for all your subtlety, are as many errors and heresies, as are lines. And would God ye would have showed as withal, what godly Father ye have for your Author, in these your absurd and false propositionis. Well, well, as much as ye crack, that ye proved this gear to M. Feckenham, I must tell you, M. Horn is ashamed to show his doctor. wickliff. li. 3. cap. 1. trialog. Solan peccatum finalis impoenitentiae, quod est peccatum in spiritum sanctum, propriè est mortale. ye have not yet proved, nor ever shall prove it as long as ye live. And ye dare not for shame, show the author of your doctrine: who is no better than the Archeheretyke wickliff. Who sayeth there is no sin properly to be called mortal, but the lack of final repentance, which is the sin against the holy Ghost. Or if ye have any better author, we would gladly see him: and would gladly at your good leisure better understand, how ye could either rid yourself from many fowl errors, or from a fowl contradiction, in these your so few lines. For first where you say, that no sin is so venial, as it could be remitted by any ceremony: if you understood what venial sin were, a man of your vocation would be ashamed so to say. And therefore I will first open your second error upon the which this former is grounded. Which is this. There is (you say) no sin, but the same of itself is mortal, and yet venial, to be purged by the merits of Christ only. Is this your divinity M. Bishop? Now forsooth a worthy divine you show yourself, and more meet to be a parish clerk in Kingy street in Winchester, than a bishop of that famous See. For how say you M. Horn? Is every mortal sin also venial? D. Thomas 1.2. q. 72. Art. 5. And is every sin of itself mortal? Let us then see what is mortal sin, and what is venial. Mortal sin is committed, when we do any thing against God's law, or against the love we own to him, or to our neighbour for his sake, with an aversion or turning away from God himself. Mortal sin. Which Act forsaking the everlasting goodness, and converting ourselves to the unlawful use of his temporal creatures, is a deadly sin, that is such as deserveth by the law and justice of God, everlasting death. Of such mortal sins excluding from the kingdom of God, you have in S. Paul diverse enumerations, both to th● Corinthians, 1. Cor. 6. Galat. 5. and to the Galathians: which how they may be made venial you shall never show: but how they may be made no sins at all that is, how they may be utterly forgotten and forgiven, Vide Concil. Trident. Sess. 6. ca 7. & Session. 14. cap. 3. it is easy to show: forsooth by the merits of Christ's passion, as a meritoribus cause: by the mercy and justice of God, as by a formal and efficient cause, our own repentance going before according to the sacrament of penance with all the parts thereof, as by a necessary disposition of the matter apt to receive this effect, which is Reconciliation with God after our fall. Venial sin. Venial sin is a disordinate affection or passion disordering our dew love to God and our due obedience to his law, either by frailty of light motions and incitations (against the which we fight not so strongly as we should, neither watch so warily as we ought) or by natural infirmity of the old corrupted Adam, or by excusable ignorance of the particular facts, in all which we forsake not God, nor our love to him and to our neighbour, but are for the time rather letted and hindered, then averted or removed from our love and duty to God. This sin is called venial or pardonable, for that the Act thereof excludeth us not from the kingdom of heaven, neither maketh us deadly guilty in God's sight. And the reason is, because such motions of frailty, and such light negligences (without the which this life is not lead) are but a smodering heat of the old fire of original sin clean quenched in the water of baptim: Quenched I say, for any guiltiness thereof to remain, but not quenched utterly for the operation and working thereof. The old Adam worketh still in us, and rebelleth against the spirit (notwithstanding he was drowned in Baptism) but the spirit of the new man in Christ resisteth, and fighteth daily against him. In which fight and combat the best men are sometime venially overcomed, though not deadly, as most men are. This is the clear doctrine of S. Augustin, and of all the learned Fathers by him alleged in his second Book against julian the Pelagian: Of S. Ambrose, S. Cyprian, S. Chrysostom, S. Hierom, Gregory Nazianzene S. Hilary, S. Basil, S. Ireneus, with certain other, by him, as I said, alleged against julian the Pelagian. And to be short with you herein M. Horn, behold one direct and clear sentence of S. Austin, conformable to all those holy Fathers and Doctors, in which he shortly and clearly confuteth your most ignorant confusion of venial sin and of mortal: saying that every sin of itself is mortal. For after he had alleged all the forenamed doctors, and last of all in this place S. Ambrose, concerning the remnants of original sin in us, which by your doctrine and Melanchthons', is deadly and mortal sin, thus he concludeth himself. Ecce quantam nos pugnam etc. Lib. 2. contra jul. Pelag. To. 7. Fol. 213 ●. in Fol. Paris. Anno. 55. Behold what a great fight or combat, this valiant soldier of Christ, and faithful doctor of his Church (he meaneth S. Amb.) showeth us to have with sins already dead and slain: (he meaneth original sin in baptism) for how is (that) sin dead seeing that it worketh many things in us, when we strive against it? What many things are these, but fond and hurtful desires, which draw the consenters unto them into destruction: which yet to suffer and not to yield unto, is a combat, a conflict and a battle? Now between whom is this battle▪ but between good and evil: not between nature and nature (as the Manichees imagined) but between nature and sin: sin, I say, already dead, but yet to be buried, that is, whollly to be healed. How then say we, this sin is dead in baptism (as also this man saith, S. Ambrose) and how do we yet confess, that it dwelleth in our membres, and worketh in us many desires, we striving still against it (as also this Ambrose confesseth) but because this sin in respect of the guiltiness thereof, wherein (before baptism) we were fast tied, is dead, and yet being dead rebelleth, until by perfect burial it be quite healed. And yet this sin is not now (after baptism) in such sort called sin, as that it made us guilty (before God) but because by the guiltiness of Adam it was made (sin) and because also by rebelling it draweth us to sin, except the grace of God by jesus Christ our Lord do help us, that this dead sin do not so rebel, that by overcoming us it wax again alive, and reign (in our mortal body). In this battle fight and toiling, as long as this life is a tentation upon the earth, * Non ide● sine peccato non sumus. we are not therefore in sin, Sed in quibus ab illo rebellante, etsi non laetaliter, sed venialiter, tamen vincimur, in his contrahimus, unde quotidie dicamus. dimit nobis debita nostra. because this which in such sort is called sin, worketh in our membres, contrarying the law of (our) mind, as long as we consent not unto it in the unlawful desires and motions of it. For as touching ourselves, we should remain, always without sin (until this evil were (utterly) healed) if we did never consent to the evil. But in such things as by the rebellion of this evil, we are overcomed in, though not deadly, but venially, yet overcomed, in such things I say, we contract or get that whereby we must daily say: Lord forgive us our trespasses. As (for example) married folk, when for pleaesure only they exceed the measure necessary for generation. As also continent and chaste persons, when they stay in such thoughts with some delectation, not yet determining the wicked deed, * ve● gerentes decernentis. or bearing (the wicked deed) of him that doth determine it, but not averting so diligently as they ought the intention of their mind from such thoughts, nor yet riddinge themselves so soon from the thoughts (being once fallen into them) as they ought. Thus far S. Augustin. These two examples he giveth of venial sin. And for these venial sins we must say daily (saith he) Lord forgive us our Trespasses. According to this doctrine he teacheth in an other place, where he writeth thus. The sons of God as long as they live in this mortal life, In Enchi●idio cap. 64. Rom. 8. they fight with their mortality. And though it be truly said of them: As many as are lead with the Spirit of God, those are the sons of God, yet they are so stirred with the Spirit of God and do so profit to Godward as the sons of God, that yet as the sons of men, Sap. 9 Crimen. Peccatum. especially by reason of their corruptible body molesting them, they fall back to themselves ward, with certain human motions, and therefore do sin. There is a great difference, as we have largely said. For though every Crime (by which term he calleth mortal sin) be a sin, 1. joan. 1. yet every sin is not a Crime. As much to say, every venial sin is not mortal or deadly. Therefore we say in deed, that the life of holy men, as long as they live in this mortality, may be found without Crime, or deadly sin. But (venial) sin if we say we have not, we deceive ourselves (as the holy Apostle saith) and Truth is not in us. Here again S. Augustin maketh a clear difference between the crime or deadly sin, which maketh us the sons of wrath, and between the venial sin, with the which we continue yet the sons of God: and the which holy men in this life never lack. But God forbid that holy men should never lack deadly and mortal sin: which upon M. horns doctrine (that every sin of itself is mortal) must needs follow. No. No M. Horn, your lewd spirit and the holy Spirit of the learned fathers are far wide a sunder. This you learned of Melanchthon, and he of Luther, the very sink of all your filthy heresies. But how learnedly and pithily this fond and lewd doctrine of Melanchthon, Luther's, and yours was confuted by Doctor Eckius, in the open disputation between him and Melanchthon at Worms, you may M. Horn (for you make no dainty, I think, to read heresy books) see and read to your great confusion even in the very works of Melanchthon printed at Wittenberg. Tom 4. in acts wor maciensibus. Fol. 650▪ & sequent. Pag. 656. in fine. Anno. 1564. Where also you shall find a Notable place of S. Augustine corrupted first by Luther, and then by Melanchthon, so clearly detected and pressed of Doctor Eckius, that Melanchthon was fain in that honourable Assembly openly to recant, and to say. Quod ad me attinet, agnosco male citatum esse. As for my own part, I confess it was wrongfully alleged. The place was this. Where S. Augustine wrote: That Concupiscence was taken away by baptism, non ut non fit, sed ut non imputetur, not that it should be no more in man after baptism, but that after baptism it should no more be imputed unto us, if by deliberate consent we yielded not thereto: Luther and Melanchton mad S. Augustin to say. That sin was taken away by baptism, not that it continued not still in man, but that it should no more be imputed to man. By which feat and sleight, by turning Concupiscence into sin, they proved both their Imputative righteousness, as that man was never just, good, and holy, but only was accepted for such, though he remained still a sinner and had sin always in him, and also that the same sin was in him a deadly and mortal sin. Which is the thing that M. Horn here affirmeth, avouching that every sin of it self is mortal. Which (to make an end hereof shortly) is as much to say, as every sickness infirmity or disease is of itself death. For as the body liveth by the soul, so the soul liveth by God. As the body dieth, when the soul is separated from it, so the soul dieth, when God is gone from it. Which matter S. Augustin most excellently handleth in his notable work de Civitate Dei. Lib. 13. cap. 23. & 24. Lib. 14. Cap. 4. & 9 As therefore not every disordered affection of the body killeth it out of hand, but the body is long and much vexed with diseases and infirmities before it die, yea and as long as the disease reacheth not to the heart or root of vital humour where hence the life springeth, as long as that principle of life is whole and sound, the body liveth and dieth not: so not every conversion of the soul to the creatures, breedeth a separation of the soul from the Creator: but the soul fighteth against the flesh, and though in that fight it take a blow, yea and a wound to now and then, yet the soul recovereth itself and yieldeth not wholly to the flesh, or to any other creature, but cleaveth still to God his Creator, loveth him still, keepeth his law, and so falleth not deadly, neither sinneth mortally, until it give over to vice, and forsaketh God. Which evil men do, without any fight or combat at al. But good men either not at all, or very seldom and after great fight: and then are they no more good men or the children of God, but are now become the children of wrath, so to perish everlastingly, except they repent. This is a great and a clear distinction between mortal sin and venial sin. Now where you add, that though every sin be of it self mortal, yet it is also venial to be purged by the merits of Christ only, if you take venial for pardonable or remissible, we grant, every sin be it never so mortal, is in such a sense venial the sin against the holy Ghost, which is final impenitence, alonely excepted. But if you take venial, as it is an opposite to mortal, as M. Feckenham took it, when he avouched that by a godly ceremony venial sins may be remitted, and as you must take it, if you will contrary M. Fekenhams assertion, then are you in an other foul error. For as the venial sin is not mortal (as I have proved) so neither is any mortal sin venial, as long as it is mortal. This confounding of degrees in sin, to make all mortal, is a Stoical and Barbarous paradox, opening the gate to all dissoluteness and licentiousness: not only contrary to truth and learning, but contrary to good life and good manners. And it seemeth to agree jump with Luther's paradox, wherein he taught and defended, That a good work, be it never so well done, is according to the mercy of God a venial sin and according to the judgement of God a mortal sin. Roffensis contra Articul. Lutheri. Art. 31. & 32. Vide & Concil. Trident. Sess. 6. Can. 25. Which strange paradox of that fond friar being learnedly and pithily confuted of our learned and holy countryman the blessed Bishop of Rochester Doctor fisher, I remit the learned Readers to that place: where also they shall find this distinction of mortal and venial sin, clearly prosecuted against the wicked doctrine of Luther there, and against the peevish assertion of M. Horn here. Where you add, by the merits of Christ only, if you mean as by the principal effect, and by the virtue whereof only all other works of men are available and meritorious, I grant you say well. But if you say mortal sin is purged by the merits of Christ only, excluding by the word only, all repentance, contrition of heart, confession of the mouth, and satisfaction of our own parts to our ability, I note it for an other foul error and wicked heresy of Luther your grandsire, whereby to extol the merits of Christ, you do full pevishly exclude all work of man, which yet the Scriptures expressly require to concur with the merits of Christ, not as of themselves simply available, but as by the merit of Christ's passion, available: and as the works of the holy Ghost, given unto us by Charity poured into our hearts, good and meritorious. Remember M. Horn what Christ said to the Pharisees. Rom 5. Oportebat ista facere, & illa non intermittere. Luca. 11. You ought to do these things, and not to omit the other things. Put altogether M. Horn. Christ's merits purchase heaven to mankind: It is most true. And yet it purchaseth not heaven to the Infidel, to the jew; to the heretic, or to the wicked Christian. Galat. 5. But only to such as have faith that worketh by charity, which charity comprehendeth all manner of good works. You affirm beside against M. Fekenham that no venial sin can be remitted by any ceremony. For a short answer to this point (because largely this matter is treated by M. Allen in his last book of the power of priesthood etc.) hear what S. Augustin saith in his Enchiridio, within few chapters after the words lastly recited, In Euchi●idio c. 71. Delet omnino haec oratio minima & quotidia●a peccata. Cap. 72. where he made a distinction between crimen and peccatum. Thus he saith. De quotidianis autem brevibus levibúsque peccatis, sine quibus haec vita non ducitur, quotidiana oratio fidelium satisfacit. As concerning the daily, short, and light sins, without the which no man liveth, the daily prayer of the faithful doth satisfy. By the daily prayer he meaneth the Pater noster, as in the same chapter he expoundeth himself. Again in the next chapter he teacheth, that by all kinds of alms deeds (under alms deeds comprehending all good works) such venial sins are forgiven: Thus he saith after a long enumeration of good works. Multa itaque genera sunt eleemosynarun, quae cum facimus, adiwamur ut dimittantur nobis nostra peccata. There are therefore many kinds of alms deeds, which when we do, we are holpen to have our sins forgiven unto us. Now why are the saying of our daily prayer, and the doing of alms deeds, thought of this learned Father to redeem these smaller sins, but because as such sins are not committed with a total aversion from God the creator (for so were they mortal, not venial) but by a frail conversion to the creature, so again every good motion to God ward again, expressed by some such virtuous act, D. Thomas par. 3. q. 87. Art. 3. redeemeth in the sight of God the former declining from God. This reverent motion to Godward as it is expressed by S. Augustin here for examples sake, in saying the Pater noster, and in doing of alms deeds, so by the judgement of the Church, which no true Christian man ought to mistrust, the same is also expressed, in kneeling, in knocking the breast, in kissing of holy reliks, or in any holy ceremony, done for the honour of God and of his Saints, which redoundeth to him, for whose sake they are honoured. By this M. Horn you may shortly understand, in what sense the catholics affirm, that by a holy ceremony venial sins may be taken away. And thus the Cross that came from the jesuits to M. Feken. came in a good hour. As by the occasion whereof, you have discovered unto you some of your lurking heresies, and the Catholic faith is somewhat opened (more perhaps than you would it were) to all such as have grace to hearken thereunto. Your farther assertion that all mortal sins are also venial, save only the sin against the holy Ghost, is the new scoured heresy of wickliff, as is before touched. But see you not, that when ye say there is no mortal sin, but the sin against the holy Ghost, how contrary you are to yourself, saying that all sins are mortal, and yet again affirming there is no mortal sin at all, but one? Whereby ye go very near to the Pelagians heresy, taking away original sin. For if there be no mortal sin, but the sin against the holy Ghost (that is, lack of repentance, as Wicleff declareth) then did not Adam commit any mortal sin: for he died penitently. Vide Aug. contra jul. per totum. And then, if he committed no deadly sin in the transgression of God's commandment: he could not transfunde original sin that should kill his posterity, which was a branch of the Pelagian heresy. Neither will it help you to say, that there is no sin, saving lack of repentance, but is purged by the merits of Christ. For the question is not, when we speak of venial and mortal sin, how it may be taken away or forgiven, but what pain and penalty each of his own nature deserveth. Venial sin deserveth no other pain, then temporal pain. Mortal sin deserveth everlasting pain. But here is no place, exactly to discuss these matters. And I have said this only, to show, what a sort of errors and heresies ye wrap up with the closing of your book: and that if it were but for these only, M. Fekenham might have called you, and that justly in plain terms (without any almost) an heretic. As for M. jewel, if M. Fekenham said (as ye say he said) that he should never be able to answer M. Doctor Harding'S book, he said nothing but truth: which doth well appear to any indifferent Reader, by the labours of those that have confuted already the stronger, the greater, and the more important parts of his Reply: and have already descried about one thousand of manifest errors and lies in him. To what number then, think you, will they muster, if a whole confutation of all the remnant should come forth? Here would now somewhat be said to your answer, concerning the rumour of M. Fekenhams subscription and recantation: and I suppose if I knew the whole circumstance of the matter, I might easily confute all your answer therein. And yet as strange as ye make yourself to that rumour or any knowledge thereof, a man may well gather, and go no further than your own book, that yourself ministered great occasion of such rumours: as telling him so often in your answer, of the fear of revolt that his friends had in him: with the which also you end your answer. Fol. 2. In telling of him, that he seemed to be resolved, Fol. 130. and in a manner fully satisfied at your hands. And that ye made relation thereof to certain honourable persons: and finally, Fol. 128. that yourself do plainly here confess, that ye said, that M. Fekenham had changed his Religion nine times, yea nintene times. But these matters I will leave: as also your unkind and ungentle dealing with him: and your complaints against him, contrary to your promiss: and will now only put your Reader in remembramce, of the jesuits, whom ye call monkish jebusites, and pray him withal well to consider the order and trade of their lives, and doctrine, yea the glorious issue that hath and daily doth follow thereof, comparing them with the doings and doctrine of you and your fellows. And then I doubt not, but he will think, that this is nothing but vile and wicked railing in you, to call them jebusites, The jesuits. and that in comparison to you, and your gospeling brethren, they may be counted living angels. If the profession of a religious and a monastical life deserve in them this contumely and reproach at your hands, then may ye call S. Basil, S. Jerome, S. Augustine, S. Chrysostom, S. Gregory our Apostle, with Ruffinus, Epiphanius, Paulinus, Cassianus, and a number of other ancient and godly Fathers jebusites to. And see ye not M. Horn, how this your blasphemy doth not redound to those Father's only, but even to our Saviour Christ jesus himself, whose name they bear, See more of this in the Fortress annexed to Vener. Bede. Fol. 73. & seq. and whose steps they most diligently and most earnestly do follow, aswell by a virtuous austere life, as by painful preaching? Which their travail our Saviour jesus hath so prospered and blessed, that your new Apostle Luther hath not brought so many Christian souls by his poisoned heresy to destruction and damnation in Europa: as they have brought paynims, Mores, and Turks many a thousand mile from Europa, from Paganism to the catholic faith, from the which we have departed and run away headlong. Mark the providence of God. Neither can I either to much think upon, or to much, praise the wonderful providence of God in this behalf. For even as a thousand years sithence, the Christian Empire, and faith began to decay in Asia and Africa by cursed Mahomete, caused the decayed faith, again to springe and take root in the west part of the world: as namely among us in England, and afterward among the Germans, the Bulgarians, the Polonians, the Hungarians, the Danes, the Prussians, part. 1. Cap. 16. fol. 71. & sequen. the Lituanians, and among a number of other nations, as I have in the Fortress annexed to the history of Bede declared: so now in the latter days the Empire of Constantinople becoming Turkish, and in our days a great part of our own Europa, being (the more pity) carried away with errors and heresies, God hath of his wonderful mercy and goodness, in man's remembrance, opened and revealed to us, as it were a new world, of the which ne●ther by writing nor otherwise, we ever heard any thing before. And which is a cause of deeper and more ample thanks, he hath by his providence so ordained, that the said countries beside in Asia and Aph●ica are become of plain and open idolaters, of moor and Saracens, very good Christians: and that chiefly by the great help and travail, of these blessed and virtuous jesuits, whom you so lewdly call jebusites. By whom also God hath showed such wonders and miracles, as the hearing or reading of them, were to any good Christian heart of all things most comfortable. And surely if a man would deeply and thoroughly weigh and consider the greatness of this benefit, he might well doubt, whether after the creation of the world and the redemption of mankind by the passion of Christ, there be any one benefit or work of God, more wonderful than this: or whether there be any one state or vocation in Christ's Church, after the Apostles, more worthy laud and praise then these, that you so villainously call jebusites. So filthily your blasphemous mouth can rail against God's truth. No no, M. Horn, these be no jebusites. The jebusites be the cursed seed of Cham, cursed of Noah their father for dishonouring of him. Genes. 9 Ye, ye are the jebusites, that the celestial father with his own mouth, hath cursed for making his Spouse your mother an idolatrous strumpet and harlot. Whom the blessed jesuits, as good gracious children, honour and reverence Who worthily bear that name also, their works being correspondent to their name, which doth signify a Saviour. For they, by their preaching have saved, and brought from damnation many an hundred thousand of souls, to the everlasting bliss of heaven, the which God of his goodness and mercy grant unto us. Amen. FINIS. Laus Deo, qui dedit velle, & dedit perficere. A TABLE OF THE PRINCIPAL MATTERS AND PERSONS IN THIS book debated, or otherwise contained. The figure noteth the leaf. a. and. b. the first and second side. A. ABgarus. 396. b. &. 401. a. Abuses reformed in Council, 800. years past. 237. a. The absurdity of the Act touching the Oath 424 &. 425. Item. 457. & 458. Adrianus the first, Pope. 234. a. Adrian the 4. 286. b. Aeneas Silvius. 356. &. 357. Aethyopians. 304. b. 305. a. Agapetus, Pope. 169. Agatho, Pope. 209. &. 210. Albigenses. 318 a. &. b. Alcuinus. 231. b. Alexander the 3. 287. a. &. b. 288. a. &. b. Almaricus a French heretic. 317. a. Alphegius bishop of Caunterbury. 308. a. Alteration of Religion in England. 453. b. Aluredus or Alphredus a king of the Saxons. 292. b. Ambrose for the Clergies Primacy in matters Ecclesiastical. 105. b. The story between S. Ambrose and Theodosius at large. 497. b. &. 498. a. Andronicus Emperor, whom M. Horn calleth Emanuel. 77. &. 78. Anselmus a Notable bishop. 297. b. Anthymus the heretical patriarch of Constantinople deposed by Pope Agapetus. 169. Antwerpian Lutherans allow but thee General Counsels. 220. a. In arms against the calvinists, and in open writing condemning them. 433. &. 434. a. A notable story of the African bishops. 91. b. Disputations of the africans. 13. a. The Apology of England accounteth marriage of priests heresy. 8. b. The Apology clippeth the Crede. 63. a. It falsifieth S. Hierom. 107. a. The childish toys of the Apology. 151. b A double untruth of the Apology about the Synod of Frankford. 235. a. A foul lie of the Apology. 282. a. A fable of the same. 287. b. Double Authority in the Apostles, ordinary and extraordinary. 477. a. &. b. The Apostles ordinances. 487. a. Appeals to Rome from Constantinople. 150. a. Apulia. 289. b. 310. b. &. 311. a. Arcadius the Emperor. 122. b. Arius. 109. &. 110. Armenians. 303. b. &. 304. a. Arnoldus Brixiensis. 303. a. 318. a. &. b. Arnoldus de villa Nova. 302. &. 303. Articles of our Crede. 423. Athanasius calleth the judgement of Princes in matters Ecclesiastical a point of Antichrist. 97. What Appeal he made to Constantine. 95. His judgement touching the Prince's Primacy. 94.95.96. Item. 512. b. 513. &. 514. S. Augustin for the Pope's Supremacy abundantly. 529. &. 530. S. Augustin our Apostle. 232. a. Altars. 520. a. &. b. B. BAsilius the Emperor. 258.259.260. &. 261. Benedictus the second. 203. a. Bishops in old time made with the consent of the people. 155. b. How princes depose bishops. 157. Bishops only have voice and do subscribe in Counsels. 149. b. &. 474. a. Bishops deposed for M. Horns whoredom. 164. a. &. 197. a. Bishops confirmed of the Pope in England before the Conquest. 293. a. Bishops. See Inuesturinge. The bishops office resembled by the shepherds. 409. b. bishops forbidden to preach, and limited what to preach, in king Edward's the sixth his days. 452. b. 453. a. &. b. Spiritual jurisdiction committed to Bishops by Christ, and so practised with out any commission from the Prince. 467. & sequentib. jurisdiction given to bishops by Constantin. 469. a. By Theodosius and Carolus Magnus. 469. b. &. 470. a. The bishops Superiority acknoweleadged by Constantin. 491. a. & seq. By Valentinian. 495. & seq. By Theodosius the elder. 497. & seq. The cruelty of the Bohemheretikes. 5 a Bonifacius the third. 194. Bonifacius the Apostle of the Germans. 230. b. 232. & seq. Braughton. 380. & sequentib. C. Calvin calleth the Prince's Supremacy, blasphemy. 22. b. His sentence condemneth the Oath. 504. b. 506. b. &. 507. Caluinists and Lutherans at mortal enmity. 432.433.434. Carolomanus. 230. a. &. b. Catholics no seditious subjects. 21. a. Their defence for refusing the Oath. 83. b. A Challenge to M. Horn. 4. b. Chalcedon Council .137. and fifteen leaves following. The cause of Committees made in the Chalcedon Council. 145. b. Charles Martel. 226. & seq. Charles the Great. 48.232. b. 234. b. and 13. leaves following. Charles the .4. Emperor. 347. & seq. Magna Charta. 322. a. Chrysostom touching the Spiritual government. 74 410.521. &. 522. Two powers in the Church. 445. a Clodoveus of France. 164. Of the Clergies yielding to king Henry the eight. 367. &. 368. Confessio S. Petri: what it meaneth in old writers: 227 b. 228. a. &. b. The Sacrament of Confirmation. 476. b. Confirmation of Popes resigned by Lewis the first, Emperor. 251. b. &. 252. a. Granted first to Charlemagne by the Pope. 252. a. Of that matter, see. 254. a. & b. Conon Pope. 204. Conradus Emperor. 283. b. Constantin the Great. 68.85.86. & seq. 99 a. 401. a. 469. a. 491. & seq. The Circumstance of Constantins judgement in Cecilians cause. 90. b. Constantin no lawful judge in the same cause. 92. a. He abhorreth the Primacy in ecclesiastical causes. 92. How constantin refused to judge in Bishop's matters. 103. a. & 491. a. & b. Constantin the .5. Emperor. 200. a. The destruction of Constantinople. 80 b. Constantius the Arrian Emperor reproved. 111. b. Articles of the late Convocation. 317. b. Of the Convocations promise made to king Henry the eight. 364. Words used at the Coronation of Princes. 9●. b. Councils. see Emperors. Councils kept before Princes were Christened. 467. b. &. 468. a. General Counsels abandoned by Act of Parliament. 54. a. & 426 a. General Counsels not to be kept without the Pope's Consent. 137. b. The sixth General Council. 205. & seq. The seventh General Council. 223. a. The eight General Council. 257. et seq. Cusanu●. 117. &. 118. Item. 357.358. &. 359. D. David. 47. &. 48. Dantes a foul heretic. 334. a. & b Dioscorus patriarch of Alexandria deposed by Pope Leo. 150. b. Condemned in Council without the emperors knowledge. 153. a. The fruit of disputations with heretics. 12. b. The protestants in divers points resemble the Donatists. 58 & 59 The appeals of the Donatists. 50. a. The donation of Constantine. 471. a. Durandus. 331. b. E. The keeping of Easter day. 101. b. The principal questions concerning ecclesiastical regiment. 3. b. King Edward the first. 326. & 327. King Edward the third. 344. & seq. Pope Eleutherius the Apostle of the Britain's. 397. a & sequent. Of his letters to king Lucius. 399. a. & b. To what end Emperors confirm the laws of the Church. 117 a. How they have and may deal in General Councils. 117 &. 118. Confirmation of Emperors by the Pope 334 a. Examples of Emperors that have repined against the See Apostolic. 3●8. 330. &. 340. England only defendeth the Prince's Supremacy. 3. b. 22. b. 134. b. Religion altered in England against the will of the whole Clergy. 9 a. A new manner of election in England. 88 b. The Ephesine Council. 12●. & sequent. Eugenius the .4. Pope. 353 a. A place of Eusebius corrected. 87 b. Eutiches the Archeretike. 131. b. &. 132 a Excommunication belongeth to the Office of Bishops. 152. a. 447. a. &. b. 500 a. &. b. The excommunication of Theodosius. 498. a. Ezechias. 52. b. F. FAsting. 535. Why M. Feckenham delivered his Treatise to M. Horn. 1. b. Why he delivered the same to some of the Council. 2. a. A true defence of M Feckenham. 27. a. The cause of his enprisonment in king Edward's days. 36. b. Disputations had with M. Feckenhan. 37. a. His reasons falsely compared with the Donatists. 403. a. M Fekenham cleared. 429. b. 527. &. 528. His Arguments inevitable 506. &. seq. Item. 515. b. Ferrariensis. 369. b. &, 370. a. Rebellion in Flaunders. 17 18 19.20.21.432. & seq. Fox's false Martyrs. 60.61.317. b. 318. b. 326. b. Fox's lewd lies of S. Thomas of Caunterburie. 306. b. 307 a. &. b. Fox's falsehood. 310. a. His folly. 312. Fox's lewd lies about the story of king john. 312. b. 314 b. Fox confuted by his own Authors. 312. b. 313. a. His fructus temporum. 313. b. A short answer to all Fox's martirologe by Fredrick M. Horns supreme head. 319. a. A Synod in Frankeforde against image-breakers. 234. b. Fredrick Barbarossa. 285. & seq. Fredrick the second. 315. & sequent. Fredrick the third. 355. & seq. Rebellion of French protestants. 16. a. G. GAlfride of Monemouth a vain fabler. 314 a. D. Gardiner Bishop of Winchester. 367. b. The falsehood of Gaspar Hedio. 347. b. The rebellion of German Protestants. 15. b. The electors of Germany appointed by Pope Gregory the fift. 271. b. Gilbie against the Supremacy of king Henry the eight. 23. His judgement against the new Religion. 24. b. Good man against Obedience to Superiors. 25. b. The end of temporal Government. 29. a. of spiritual Government. 29. b. The Grecians acknowleadg the Pope's Primacy. 76. b. The worthy doings of S. Gregory. 189. &. 190. Gregory Nazianzene for the Clergies superiority. 518. a. &. b. 520. H. HEnrie the .3. Emperor. 273. b. 274. a Henry the 4. 278. & seq. Henry the fift. 282. & seq. Henry the first, king of England. 298. b. 299. &. 300. Henry the second. 306. a. His penance. 309. a. Henry the third. 321. & seq. Henry the fift. 354. a. Henry the eight. 364. & seq. Sedition the peculiar fruit of heresy. 15. a. The good that heresy worketh to the Church. 37. b. Heresy is Idolatry. 42. a. Heresies the destructions of common weals. 81. a. A number of old condemned heresies renewed by protestāns. 57.316. a. & b Hildebrand Pope. 275. & sequent. Hildebrand had the Spirit of Prophecy. 277. a. The form of hi● Election. 279. b. Five gross lies in the book of Homilies touching Images. 76. b. &. 77. a. Honorius Pope. 217. &. 218. M. Horns idle wandering from the purpose. 4. a. 53. b. 85. b. 289. a. 321. a. 333. a. His tale incredible. 5. a. &. 467. b. His late brag. 5. a. The good that heresy worketh to the Church. 37. b. Heresy is Idolatry. 42. a. Heresies the destructions of common weals. 81. a. A number of old condemned heresies renewed by Protestants. 57.316. a. &. b Hildebrand Pope. 275. & seq. Hildebrand had the Spirit of Prophecy. 277. a. The form of his Election. 279. b. Five gross lies in the book of Homilies touching Images. 76. b. & 77. a Honorius Pope. 217. &. 218. M. Horns idle wanderinge from the purpose. 4. a. 53. b. 85. b. 289, a. 321. a. 33●. His tale incredible. 5. a. & 467. b. His late brag. 5. a. M. Horn no bishop at all 7. b. 9 a. & 301. a. M. Horn contrary to himself. 30.39. b. 143. b. 232. a. 247. a. &. b. 442. a. 447. a 539. a. M. horns unskilfulness. 40. b. M. Horn confuted by the Chapters and places that himself allegeth. 41. b. 49. a. 51. b. 103. a. 123. b. 129. b. 130. a. & b. 132. a. 140. b. 141. a. 152. a. 158. a. &. b. 259. b. 161. b. 162. a. 164. a. 166. b. 174.282. a. &. b. 184. a. 202. b. 215. a. 221. b. 223. a. 231. a. 238. a. 273. a. 277. b. 286. b. 288. b. 294. a. 299. a. 322. b. 323. b. 330.331 b. 334. a. 337. b. 342. a. 343. b. 347. a. & b. 353. a. 354. a. 356.357. b. 364. b. 375. b. 378 a. 403. a. 411. b. M. Horns lose kind of reasoning. 202. b. 249. b. 325. a. & b. 327. a. 333. a. 343. b. 352. b. 369. b. 375. a. M. Horns post haste. 212. b. 213. a Two legerdemains of M. Horn. 218. b His great prows. 225. b His wonderful Metamorphosis of S. Peter's Keys. 226. & sequent. His rare wisdom. 255. a. 300. a His confuse writing. 268. b His inconstant dealing. 280. a His dissembling of his Authors narration. 282. b. 315. b M. Horn playeth Cacus part, nipping his authors. 285. a. 286. a. 288. b 329. a. 330. b. 335. a. 345. b. 350. a. 371. a. &. b. 374. b. 380. a. 396. b. 398. a. 448. a. 514. a. M. horns Impudency. 294. b. M. Horn buildeth upon the doings of evil Princes. 397. a. 311. b. 362. a. M. Horns shameful Ignorance in grammar. 322. b. M. Horn declared an heretic by his own Supreme heads. 317. a. 331. a. By his own Antipope. 337. b. His marvelous Rhetoric. 384. a M. Horns false Latin. 480. b. M. Horn depraveth M. Fekenhams arguments. 396. a. 402.423. b. 451. a. 461. a. 464. a. 487. b. M. Horn driven to straits. 414. b. 415. a. 486. a. 506. a. M. Horns foul shift. 430. a. He maketh frustrate all Excommunications in England these 8. years. 446. b. He limiteth the Statute. 451. a. & b. His starting holes. 499. b. M. horns Untruths arise to the Number of six hundred, four score and ten. Per totum. Hugh Capet the French king. 272. a. Hungary. 300. b. 301. a. I The jew of Tewkesburie. 87. b. An after reckoning of certain of M. jewels untruths. 77. a▪ 129. b. 135. a. 244. b. 378. b. 400. b. 407. b. 468. a. &. b M. jewels Register. 214. a. A Copy of M. jewels Rhetoric. 142. b 192. b. 246. b. 399. b. M. jewel overthrown by his own Charles. 240. b. M. jewels hypocrisy. 407. a. 515. a. The jesuits. 533. a. &. b. Ignatius for the bishops Superiority. 525. a. &. b. Image breakers condemned. 223. a. 234. b. 260. b. Inuesturing of bishops, how it came to Prince's hands, and how it was taken from them. 254. a. &. b. Given up by Henry the .5. 282. b. Granted by the Pope. 389. b. 325. a. Given over in Hungary. 300. b. john the Pope, a Martyr. 167. b. john the .22. Pope. 336. a. &. b. King john. 312. & seq. josaphat. 50. &. 51. josias. 53. a. joshua. 45. b. Isacius th'emperor Heraclius his Lieutenant. 196. a. Isidorus against the Prince's Supreme Government. 365. &. seq. justinus the elder. 166. &. 167. justinian the first. 169. and .14. leaves after. justinian the second. 201. a. &. b. K. S. Peter's keys. 226. a. & sequentib. 242. a. Miracles done by keys. 226. a. What the keys were, that were sent to Charles martel. 227. a. Knokes against the lineal succession of Princes. 25. ● L. LAnfrancus of Caunterburie. 295. a▪ Lay men in reformation of Ecclesiastical matters may not b● present. 131. b. 153. a. Why they are present in Councils. 150. a. 255. b. In what order they sit in Councils. 237. b. 238. a. God's laws and the Church laws. 486. b. &. 487. a. Legates, see Pope. Leo the Great. 133. Proofs for the Pope's primacy out of Leo. 134. b. 135. &. 136. Leo the .3. Pope. 240.241.242. Leo the .9. Pope. 274 a. Lewis the first Emperor. 249. Lewis the fourth, Emperor. 333.334. & seq. S. Lewis of France. 324. a. &. b. Liberius no Arrian. 112. a. A complaint for defacing of Libraries. 292. a. Licinius the tyrant. 297. a. Lotharius Emperor. 283. a. King Lucius of Britanny. 397. & seq. How king Lucius was God's vicar. 400. b. Luther condemneth the Prince's Supremacy in Ecclesiastical causes. 22 a. 508. Lutherans and calvinists at mutual dissension. 432.433.434. M. The Madgeburgenses deny Princes to be heads of the Church. 22. a. Manfredus. 325 a. Marsilius Patauinu● an heretic. 334. a. & b. Martian the Emperor. 140. b. 147. a. 251. b. 152. b. martyrdom without any cause of faith. 308. a. Maximilian the first. 362. How Christ and how the Priest is a Mediator. 522. a. &. b. Melanchthon will not have Princes to judge of doctrine. 72. b. Sir Thomas Moor's Opinion of the Pope's Primacy. 38. a. Mortal sin. 536 a. The statute of Mortmain. 327. a. & b. Moses' was a Priest▪ 43. b. N. The Nicene Council. 101. & sequentib. Called by Silvester. 491. b. &. 492. a. Nicolaus the first Pope. 257. Nilus of Thessalonica. 384. a. & b. M. Nowell put to his shifts by M. Dorman. 45. b. Master Nowels boyish Rhetoric. 46. a. M. Nowels manner of reasoning reproved of M. Horn. 402. b. Master Nowels wit commended. 481. Master Nowels unsavoury solution. 507. a. O. OEcumenius for the Sacrifice. 407. Orders and decrees made by S. Paul beside the written gospel. 485. b. 486. a. 488. b. Origine cursed. 170. a. & b. The Oath. 423. and seven leaves following. The Oath contrary to an Article of our Crede. 423. b. 24. a. & sequent. 427. The Oath again. 451.452. and many leaves following. Item fol. 509▪ and .510. Otho the first. 268. & sequent. Otho the fourth. 311. a. &. b. Oxford made an university. 292. b. P. Papist Historians. 203. a. & b. The order of the Parliament about the Conquest. 299. b. Pastors. 409. a. &. b. 417. a. Paterani. 318. b. 319. b. Pelagius no english Monk. 528. b. Penance enjoined to Theodosius. 498. a. & b. Peterpence paid in England. 293. a. Petrus de Corbario. 336. b. 337. a. Petrus Cunerius. 341. b. 342. a. Petrus Bertrandus. 342. a. et b. Petrus de Aliaco. 353. a. Philip le beau, the French King. 329. & sequent. Philip de Valois. 341. & sequent. Philip the first Christian Emperor. 39●. b. & sequent. Phocas. 194.195. Pilgrimage in Charlemaine's time. 236. b. Pilgrimage to S. Thomas of Caunterbury. 309. a. Prayer for the dead and to Saints in Constantine's time. 87. a▪ Prayer for the dead in Charlemaine's time. 236. b. priests have Authority to expound the Scripture. 41. a. Priesthood above a kingdom. 73. b. 74. a. Of the word Priest and Priesthood. 405. & seq. 472. a &. b. Prince's Supreme Government in Ecclesiastical causes condemned of all sorts of Protestants out of England. 21. b. 22. a. &. b. 208. a. How Princes do govern in cases of the first Table. 71. b. 72. a. Evil success of Prince's intermeddling in causes ecclesiastical. 171. How Princes do strengthen the Laws of the Church. 176. b. 179. b. Privileges granted to Paul's Church in London. 322. a. The uneven dealing of Protestants. 4. a. Protestants confounded about the matter of succession. 8. a. Protestants like to Arrians. 188. a. Why Protestants can not see the Truth. 247. b. The Protestants Church compared to the schismatical temple of Samaria. 430. b. 431. a. Polidore foully falsified by M. Horn. 350. a. &. b. Pope. The Pope's Primacy instituted by God. 38. a. 320. a. Acknowleadged by the late Grecians. 76. b. Confessed by the Emperor Valentinian. 81. a▪ By Theodosius the first. 115. b. 120. b. By the second General Council. 121. a. By S. Hierom. 125. a. Proved out of the third General Council. 129.130. Proved out of the fourth General Council. 149.150.152.153.154. a. Proved out of Synodus Romana, by M. Horn Authorised. 158.159.162. Confessed by justinus the Elder. 166. By justinian the Emperor. 175.176. Proved by the Council of Braccara in Spain, 185, a. By the sixth. General Council. 209. a. By the seventh General Council, 223. b. By the book of Carolus that Calvin and Master jewel allegeth. 240. b. By the true Charles. 241. a. By the eight General Council. 259. a. By Basilius the Emperor of Grece. 259. b. By Otho the first. 268. a. & b. 273. a. By Hugh Capet the French King. 272. a. By Fredrick Barbarossa, 286. b. agnized in Britanny before the Saxons. 291. a. &. b. 397. a. &. b. In England before the conquest. 292. &. 293. By William Conqueror. 294.306. b. By Lanfrancus. 295. By the Armenians. 303. b. 304. a. By the Aethyopians. 304. b. 305. a. By King Steven. 306, a. By King Henry the .2. 306.309 a. By Fredrick the second. 319. b. Practised in England in king Henry the third his time. 321. b. In France by S. Lewis. 324. b. In England by king Edward the first. 326. a. & b. By Philip the French King. 330 a. & b. By Durandus M. horns Author. 331. b. By King Edward the third. 344. b. 345. a. By Charles the .4. Emperor. 346. b. 347. a. & b. By King Richard the second. 350.351. a. By Petrus de Aliaco M. Horns Author. 353. a. By Sigismunde the Emperor. 353. b. By the Court of Paris. 355. b. By Aeneas Silvius and Cusanus M. Horns own Authors. 357.358. By Isidorus. 366. b. By Braughton M. Horns lawyer. 380. b. By Infidels. 470. b. By the Sardicense Council. 515. b. By S. Augustine abundantly. 529.530. More of Pope, see in Councils. A note of good Popes among some bad. 263.270. a & b. The Pope's Legates in Councils. 129.151.178. b. 207. a. 208. a. 211. b. 212. a. & b. 224.231. a. 232. b. 234. b. 258. a. How Emperors had to do with the deposition of Popes. 269. God's judgement upon such Princes as have most repined against the Pope. 338.339. All the Pope's authority sent away by ship. 225. b. Q. An humble Request to the Queens' Majesty 213. b. Quintinus Heduus. 371. & sequent. R. The Church of Ravenna reconciled to the See of Rome. 199. b. 200. a. To deny the Real presence in the B. Sacrament, heresy by the laws of the Realm as much now, as ever before. 482. b. 483. a. Rebellion of Protestants in Boheme. 15. a. In Germany. 25. b. In France. 16. a. In England. Ibidem. In scotland. Ibidem. In Flaunders. 17.18.19.20.21.432. & seq. Relics from Rome. 228.229. A brief Recapitulation of the former three books. 384. & sequent. M. horns Resolutions. 440. a. & b. King Richard the second. 349. & seq. Robert Grosthead. 323. a. Rome ever had the Primacy. 154. a. Rome Head of all Churches. 194. a. & b. 319. a. More of Rome, see in Pope. The cause of the Roman calamities .600. years past. .264.265. Why Lucius sent to Rome for preachers. 398. a. & b. S. SAcrifice denied maketh away for Antichrist. 408. b. Solomon. 49. Sardicense Council. 515.516 Scottish protestants rebellious. 16. Severinus Pope. 196. Sicilian Princes. 289. b. 310. b 325. a. Sigismunde Emperor. 353. & seq. Silvester called the Nicene Council. 491. b. 492. a. Silvester the 2. was no conjuror. 280. a. & b. Socrates a missereporter in some things. 495. a. Sozomene three times falsified in one sentence by M. Horn. 103. b. Spain. 185. & sequent. 197. & sequentib. 221. & seq. Matters appertaining to the Spiritual jurisdiction. 381. b. The Statute of Praerogativae Regis. 509. b King Steven. 305. b. Steven the 7. and 8. Popes. 263. b. 264. b. Supreme Government in Princes misliked of all protestants out of England. 21. b. 22. a. &. b. 508. The definition of a Supreme Governor. 28. b. How the Prince is Supreme head over all persons. 29. a. 32. b. The power of the Prince's sword. 412.413. The sword of the Church. 413. a. &. b. T. TElemachus martyr. 308. The old Testamenta figure of the new. 461. b. 462. a. Theodosius the first. 115.116. & sequen. 497. & seque. Theodosius the second. 127.128.129.130. a. Theodorike the Arrian king of Italy. 167. Theodorus of Ravenna. 200. b. 201. a. Theodorus of Caunterbury. 429. a. Theodorus Exarchus. 204. a. S. Thomas of Caunterburie. 307.308.309.310. The Toletane Counsels condemn M. horns Primacy, and divers other his heresies. 197.198. Totilas the Tyrant. 172. b. 173. a.. Traditions unwriten to be regarged. 106. The force of Truth. 415. a. The Turk much beholding to Protestants. 436. a. & b. V Valentinian the Emperor. 113. & seq. 495. & sequent. Venial sin. 536.537.538. Visitations in England, whether they are altogether Scripturelie. 480. a. 482. a. False Latin in M. horns visitation at Oxford. 480. b. The Pope universal bishop. 150. a. Vitalianus Pope. 199. a. & b. Untruths of M. Horn six hundred four score and ten. Per totum. W. WAldo the heretic. 318. Web of Otterborne. 481. b. Westminster disputations. 12. a. Whitingames preface commending Goodman's traitorous Libel. 26. a. Wilfrid of York. 4●9. a. William Conqueror. 293.294 295.296. William Rufus. 297.298. Wulstanus Bishop of worceter. 292. b Z. Zacharias Pope. 230. b. 231. a. 232. b. 233. a. Zenon Emperor. 155.156. Faults escaped in the Printing. Leaf side line Fault Correction. 15. 1. In the Margin Aene. Pius Aeneas Silvius. 32. 1. In the Margin words wards 40. 2. 1. The .9. The .8. 43. 2. In the Margin Psal. 98. August. in Psal. 98. 68 2. 25. the for the 75. 2. 2. Emanuel Andronicus. 105. 1. 32. In the Margin put: An. 25. Hen. 8. cap. 19 109. 2. 27. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 149 2. 31. In the Margin. Universal Bishop. Put it out. * Specially to be corrected 152. 1. 1. it yet 194. 1. 19 neither though 20. with diligence Yet not with such diligence 206. 1. 24. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, The whole sentence in some Copies is quite left unprinted, which is this, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 227 2. In the Margin. Romano Missae Romanae. 232. 1. In the Margin Beda in martyrologio. In martyrologio Bedae, seu in additionibus ad idem. 234. 1. In the margin. To the allegation, set. Platina in Adriano. 1. 241. 1. 31. In the Margin dixerit: direxit. 246 1. 23. his this 262 1. 5. busied being busied 282. 2. 7. emperors writers. 249 2. In the margin. Guil. Hunting. Henr. Hungtingt. 303 1. In the margin. Epist. Epist. 195. 310 1. 31. In the Margin ascrib. ascribendum. 321. 1. 27. an and 355. 1. In the margin. c. 2. cap. 12. Ibidem In the margin. 487. 497. 429 2. 8. not contrary not. 380. 1. In the top of the page 1550. 1150. 492 2. In the margin. mandatio. mendacio.