The dovvnefall of poperie proposed by way of a new challenge to all English Iesuits and Iesuited or Italianized papists: daring them all iointly, and euery one of them seuerally, to make answere thereunto if they can, or haue any truth on their side; knowing for a truth that otherwise all the world will crie with open mouths, fie vpon them, and their patched hotch-potch religion.

THE FIRST ARTICLE, of the falsely so supposed soueraignetie of the Bishop of Rome. (Book 1)

YOu Papists tell vs, that your Pope, the Bishop of Rome, is aboue all powers and po∣tentates on earth, that he can depose kings and em∣perours from their royall thrones, and translate their empires and regalities at his good will and pleasure. But this doctrine is false, absurd, and nothing els but a meere fable: and consequently, late Romish religion consisteth of meere falshoods, fa∣bles, and flat leasings.

The proposition, the Iesuit Bellarmine that late Romish Cardinall,* 1.1 setteth downe in these words: Si ergo princeps aliquis ex oue aut ariete fiat lupus, id est, ex Christiano fiat haere∣ticus, poterit pastor ecclesiae eum arcere per excommunicationem, & simul iubere populo, ne eum sequantur, ac proinde priuare eum do∣minio in subditos.

If therefore any prince, of a sheepe or ramme become a wolfe, that is to say, of a Christian be made an heretick; then the pastors of the Church (the Pope forsooth) may

driue him away by excommunication, and withall com∣maund the people not to obey him, and therfore depriue him of his dominion ouer his subiects. Thus we see, that when any prince is not, or ceaseth to be a Papist, for that (with this Iesuiticall Cardinall and all others of his brood) is to be an hereticke; then the Pope forsooth may de∣pose such a prince from his royall scepter, and absolue his subiects from their alleageance to him. This is the common doctrine of all Iesuited papists, as I haue proued in my anatomie of Popish tyrannie.

The assumption is prooued by the flat testimonie of their famous Pope Gregorie the great,* 1.2 in these words: Ego quidem iussioni subiectus, eandem legem per diuersas terrarum partes transmittifeci; & quia lex ipsa omnipotenti deo minime con∣cordat, ecce, per suggestionis meae paginam, serenissimis dominis nunciaui; vtrobique ergo quae debui exolui, qui & imperatori obe∣dientiam praebui, & pro deo quod sensi, minimè tacui.

I being your subiect, and at your commaund, haue caused the same law to be sent through diuerse parts of the land; and because the law it selfe doth not accord to Gods will, behold, I haue signified so much vnto your ma∣iesties by my epistle; and so I haue discharged my dutie in both respects, as who haue rendered mine obedience to the emperour, and haue not concealed what I thought in Gods behalfe.

These are the words of Gregorius, who was himselfe bi∣shop of Rome anno 603. and liued aboue six hundred yeares after Christ; for which time the Popes liued in du∣tifull obedience vnder the emperours, as is euident by his expresse words alreadie alleaged: For first, Pope Grego∣rie freely and willingly acknowledgeth the emperour to be his soueraigne lord.

Secondly, he confesseth himselfe to be the empe∣rours subiect.

Thirdly, he graunteth that he oweth loyall obedi∣ence to the emperour, and for that respect he thought himselfe bound in conscience to publish the emperours

law, though in some part it seemed to disagree with Gods will; and that (forsooth) least he should be found guil∣tie of disloyaltie toward his prince.

Fourthly, this alleageance he acknowledged to the emperour Mauritius, who liued more than six hundred yeares after Christs sacred incarnation. During which tearme of years, the bishops of Rome, now called Popes, liued in subiection to the emperours of Rome, as other bishops doe this day to their lawfull kings.

S. Ambrose freeth kings from all lawes made by man,* 1.3 these are his expresse words: Rex vtique erat, nullis ipse legi∣bus tenebatur humanis. Neque enim reges vllis ad poenam vocantur legibus, tuti imperij potestate. Homini ergo non peccauit, cui non tenebatur obnoxius.

He was indeed a king, he was subiect to no law of man: for kings being freed by royall prerogatiues of im∣periall power, are not punishable by the lawes of man. He therefore sinned not to man, to whom he was not sub∣iect. S. Hierome teacheth the same doctrine,* 1.4 if his words be well marked.

Enthimius hath these words, Cum sim vex,* 1.5 & te solum com∣missorum à me scelerum iudicem habeam, tibi soli peccasse videor, hoc est, tibi soli iudici subijcior. Coeterorum enim omnium ego domi∣nus sum, & ob potentiam meam licere mihi videntur, quaecunque libuerint.

Seeing I am a king, and haue thee only my iudge ouer my sinnes, I seeme to sinne onely to thee; that is, I am subject onely to thee, as to my iudge. For I am lord ouer all others, and in regard of my power and maiestie, what∣soeuer pleaseth me, seemeth to be lawfull for me.

The Popish ordinarie glosse singeth the same song,* 1.6 these are the expresse words: Rex omnibus superior, tantum à deo puniendus est.

The king is aboue all, and he can be punished of none but of God alone.

Nicolaus Lyranus,* 1.7 a man of great reckoning with the papists, teacheth the same doctrine with the rest. These

are his expresse words; Tibi soli peccaui, scilicet tanquam iu∣dici & punire potenti. Peccauerat enim contra Vriam, & alios occasi∣one huius interfectos. Tamen quia erat rex, non habebat iudicem superiorem qui posset eum punire, nisi deum.

To thee onely haue I sinned; that is to say, to thee on∣ly, as to my iudge, and to him that can punish me. For he had now sinned against Vrias and others, whom he caused to be murthered by that occasion: yet because he was a king, he had no superior iudge that could punish or con∣troule him, saue God alone.

Thomas Aquinas,* 1.8 being as it were halfe a god with the Papists, teacheth the selfesame doctrine, with Lyra and the rest. But I hasten to the verdict of a Cardinall of Rome.

Hugo Cardinalis hath these expresse words;* 1.9 Tibi soli, quia non est super me alius quam tu, qui possit punire. Ego enim sum rex, & non est aliquis praeter te super me.

To thee onely, saith Cardinall Hugo,* 1.10 because there is not any aboue me but thy selfe alone, that hath power to punish me: for I am a king, and so besides thee, there is none aboue me.

Thus gentle reader, it is cleere and euident, as well by the flat testimonie of the auntient fathers, as also of most famous and renowned Popish writers; that the Pope or Bishop of Rome is so farre from hauing power to depose kings and emperours, that he himselfe ought to be subiect to them, and hath no authoritie at all to pu∣nish them. VVhat can be more plainely spoken? what testimonies can be more manifest? what doctrine can be clearer? for if none but God be superior to the king, if none but God can iudge the king, if none but God can punish the king, (all which both auntient fathers and the Popes owne deare doctors affirme) then doubt∣lesse cannot the Pope depose the king; then can he not absolue his subiects from their alleageance; then can he not translate empires and kingdomes, and bestow the same at his owne pleasure. The good kings, Iosue, Dauid,

Salomon, Iosaphat, Ezechias, and Iosias, knew right well, that they had authoritie aboue all the priests, and there∣fore tooke vpon them, not onely to commaund and controll them, but also to depose and thrust them from their places and functions, yea euen the high priests themselues, when their deserts did so require. VVhich thing is prooued at large in my golden ballance of triall. Yet here for better satisfaction of the vulgar people, I will propound a common obiection, that much troubleth many of them; and that done, frame a plaine and sincere solution to the same.

The Obiection.

The empire was translated by the Popes authoritie, and the emperours after their election are this day con∣firmed by the Pope: yea, many emperors haue acknow∣ledged the Popes soueraignetie ouer them, in so much as they haue fallen downe prostrate, and kissed his holy feet.

The Answere.

I answere, that many absurd things haue beene affir∣med by Popish parasites, for the aduancement of the primacie, as Franciscus à Victoria, a famous Popish schoole doctor, and Spanish frier, sometime professour of Theo∣logie in the Vniuersitie of Salmantica,* 1.11 doth testifie in these words; Sed gloss atores iuris hoc dominium dederunt papae, cum ipsi essent pauperes rebus & doctrina.

But the glossers of the Popes law (saith this great do∣ctor and zealous papist, for the truth it selfe enforced him to vtter the truth) gaue this dominion (and these lordly titles) vnto the Pope, when themselues were blind bay∣ards and beggerly fellowes.

Thus writeth their owne Popish Frier, affirming that ignorance and pouertie were the beginning of all lordly poperie: and no maruell; for by reason of their pouertie

they flattered and sought to please the Pope, and by reason of their ignorance, they set abroach many things which they did not vnderstand.

Iohannes Gerson, a famous papist likewise, and sometime chancelour of Paris, reporteth much like stuffe, and more lordly titles, ascribed to the Pope by his popish pa∣rasites.* 1.12 These are his expresse words; Sicut Christo collata estomnis potestas in coelo & in terra, sic eam Christus, omnem Petro suis{que} successoribus dereliquit. Sequitur; sicut non est potestas nisi à deo, sic nec aliqua temporalis vel ecclesiastica, imperialis vel rega∣lis, nisi à Papa; in cuius foemore scripsit Christus, rex regum, do∣minus dominantium; de cuius potestate disputare, instar sacrilegij est; cui ne{que} quisquam dicere potest, cur ita facis.

As all power was giuen to Christ in heauen and on earth, so Christ left all the same power to Peter, and to his successours (the Bishops of Rome.) As there is no power but of God, so is there neither any temporall or ecclesia∣sticall, neither imperiall nor regall, but of the Pope; in whose thigh Christ hath written, the king of kings and lord of lords; of whose power to dispute, is as it were sa∣criledge; to whome no man may say, VVhy doest thou so?

These are the words of this great learned doctor, who though he were a zealous papist, yet could he not con∣ceale these Antichristian blasphemies within his breast. Neuerthelesse Pope Boniface, or (if ye will) Pope maliface, did not only acknowledge them, but with great pleasure practised the same, as witnesseth the said Gerson in these words; Hanc existimationem habuisse visus est Bonifacius octa∣uus in quadam decretali; putatur ab alijs,* 1.13 depositio vnius regis fran∣ciae per papam Zachariam hic esse fundata; tanquam papa sit, qui transferre possit reges & regna.

Pope Boniface the eight seemeth in a certaine decretall to haue had this opinion of his owne authoritie. Others thinke, that the deposition of (Childericus) the French king by Pope Zacharie, was grounded in this (Antichristi∣an and godlesse conceit;) as if forsooth the Pope were

he, that could depose princes, and translate their king∣domes.

By these authorities it is cleare, that the late Bishops of Rome haue taken vpon them, not onely to depose kings, and to translate their kingdomes; but withall haue challenged more than humane and royall power, euen that power which is due and proper to God alone. So as we haue not so much to consider what hath beene done, as what ought of right to be done. I will therefore for perspicuitie sake proceed by way of gradation, and set downe the very steps of the ladder, by which the late bi∣shops of Rome, did climbe vp to their vsurped tyrannicall primacie.

1 The first step, was the departure of the emperour Constantinus from Rome to Constantinople, at what time (as the Popes parasites tell vs) the emperour gaue large gifts to the Pope, euen his whole power, dominion, and territories, both in Rome, Italie, and all the VVest parts: for thus is it written by Gratian in the Popes own decrees: Constantinus imperator coronam & omnem regiam dignitatem,* 1.14 in vrbe Romana, & in Italia, & in partibus occidentalibus Apostolico concessit. Sequitur, decreuimus ita{que} & hoc, vt ipse & successores eius diademate, viz. corona quam ex capite nostro illi concessimus ex auro purissime & gemmis pretiosis, vti debeat pro honore B. Petri. Constantine the emperour gaue the Pope his crowne and all royall dignitie in the citie of Rome, and in Italie, and in all the VVest parts. It followeth a little after in the next Cannon. VVe therefore haue made also this decree, that the Pope and his successours shall for the honour of S. Peter, weare the crown of pure gold and pretious stones, which we haue giuen him from off our owne head. Thus saith the decree. But Laurentius Valla, Raphael Voluteranus, Paulus Catthalanus,* 1.15 Nicolaus Cusanus, and many other popish writers, repute the same as a fable. Yea our Iesuit Bellar∣mine seemeth to doubt thereof, and of other like suppo∣sed donations, and therefore hath he inuented a soue∣raign remedie for the same. These are his expresse words:

Extant Romae authentica instrumenta harum & similium donatio∣num. Sed etiamsi nihil horum extaret, abunde sufficeret prescriptio 800. annorum. Nam etiam regna & imperia per latrocinium ac∣quisita, tandem longo tempore flunt legitima.

There be extant at Rome authenticall instruments of these and the like gifts. But if there were no such thing, yet would prescription of 800 yeares be sufficient: for euen kingdomes & empires gotten by robberie, through continuance of time become lawfull. Thus writeth our Iesuit, who hath left nothing vnsaid, that can be said for poperie.

The second step, was the fall of the empire in the VVest. For after the diuision of the empire, it begun dai∣ly to decline, and was vtterly dissolued in Augustulus, in the yeare 471.* 1.16 of whom was made this epigram; Augu∣stus romanum imperium condidit,* 1.17 Augustulus labefactauit. Au∣gustus set vp the empire, but Augustulus pulled it downe. For after Orestes his father was slaine (who was neuer em∣perour but a captain vnder Nepos) the said Augustulus gaue vp the diademe, and betooke himselfe to a priuat life. From this time the empire in the VVest was vacant about 330 yeares. By meanes whereof, the Popes power did dai∣ly increase by little and little, and from step to step.

The Vissigothes ruled in Spaine, the Abienes in Guian and Gascoyn, the Frenchmen in the residue of France, the Vandales in Affricke, the Saxones in Brit∣taine, the Ostrogothes in Hungarie, the Herules and Tur∣dilings in Italie and in the citie of Rome: onely the name of the empire, remained with Zenon in the East. About the yeare 536.* 1.18 Totilas king of the Gothes by force of armes and famine subdued well neere all Italie, and after long siege tooke the citie of Rome, and spoyled it with sword and fire, ouerthrowing the wals and towers euen to the ground, and vntill Carolus magnus the Abiens and Barbari∣ans possessed all Italie.

The third step was the voluntarie charter which Constantine the emperour of Constantinople made to

Pope Benedict the second; viz. that whomsoeuer the cler∣gie, people, and the Romane souldiours should chuse to be Bishop,* 1.19 all men should beleeue him to be the true vi∣car of Christ, without any tarrying for any authoritie of the emperour of Constantinople, or the deputie of Italie, as the custome and maner was euer before that day. Thus writeth Platina,* 1.20 who was the Popes owne deere vassale. This was a very gallant step: for as you see here, the Popes for the space almost of seuen hundred yeares, viz. vntill this Bennet in the yeare 684.* 1.21 acknowledged the em∣perours for their superiours and lords, without whose let∣ters pattents they could haue no iurisdiction, nor be re∣puted the true Bishops of Rome: but now the Bishops of Rome by priuiledge graunted from this emperour, wre∣sted their neckes from the emperours subiection. Let these words of Platina be well remembred; because he being a famous papist, must needs be of good credit a∣gainst them.* 1.22 I let passe the petite step, when the emperor Phocas made Rome the head of all churches, which for all that, is of some moment.

The fourth step, was the great amitie betweene Za∣charie then Bishop of Rome, and Pipine gouernour of France vnder Childerich the king: for Pipine purposing to defeat his lord and soueraigne of the kingdome, and to inuest himselfe therein, sent his embassadours to Zacharie then Bishop of Rome, and his bounden friend, to de∣maund this question of him, viz. VVhether he were more worthy to be king, which was king only by name and na∣turall succession; or els he, who bare the whole burthen of the kingdome alone, & yet lacked the dignitie of a king? The Pope vnderstanding the parable right well, and re∣specting his owne future aduancement likely to ensue thereupon, answered roundly (I will not say clerkely, but like a right doctor of the Romish rout) that it was more rightfull forsooth, that he which tooke the charge of all things, should be called king.* 1.23 Vpon this iudgement so clerkely yeelded, Pipine forthwith presumed to depose

Childerich, and made himselfe king: that done, saintlesse (not sackles) Zacharie the Bishop of Rome (that antichrists forerunner might be known)* 1.24 assoiled Pipine and the other Frenchmen of their oath of allegeance and fealtie made to Childerich, and confirmed Pipine the traitor in the king∣dome of France. This was indeed a step, not of Iacobs lad∣der, nor of Scala coeli, but of Scala inferni, Scala Antichristi, and of the ladder of the master deuill of hell. Yet is not our Iesuit and Cardinall Bellarmine (the mouth of all pa∣pists,* 1.25 and of the Pope himselfe) ashamed to publish the same as a ground of the popish religion. For these are his owne words: Childericum deposuit Zacharias, & in eius locum Pipinum Caroli magni patrem creari iussit. Cuius causa fuit, quia propter socordiam Childerici, & religioni & regno in Gallia extrema ruina imminere videbatur.

Pope Zacharie deposed Childericke, and commaunded to place and inuest Pipine, father to Charles the great, in his throne: the cause whereof was this; because forsooth through the slouthfull and negligent gouernment of Childericus, the kingdome and religion in Fraunce seemed to be in great danger. This is the deepe diuinitie of the Pope and his clergie, by which we may learne many wor∣thie lessons.

1 First, that the Pope may set vp and pull downe kings at his pleasure by Iesuiticall doctrine and late Ro∣mish religion.

2 Secondly, that the Pope and Iesuites are the grand∣masters and architects of seditions, rebellions, and most bloudie treasons.

3 Thirdly, that it is very true which the secular priests haue written, concerning the traiterous proceedings of Iesuits and Iesuited papists.

4 Fourthly, that the Pope commaunded to depose the Soueraigne, and to inthronize the subiect in his place.

5 Fiftly, that all this was done, because forsooth the king did not rule after the Popes fansie and pleasure. Hereupon I inferre this necessarie correlarie; viz. that it

behooueth Christian kings to be vigilant, and in due time to expell all traiterous papists out of their domini∣ons. And if the Bishop of Rome shall send any seditious popeling into their kingdomes and territories, with his thunderbolts, buls, and excommunications; then to deale with the messengers,* 1.26 as king Philip the faire dealt with pope Boniface his nuncioes in France; whom he commit∣ted to prison, and caused the Popes buls to be burnt in the fire. And as Charles the sixt, when Bennet the 13. did interdict his realme,* 1.27 sitting in the throne of iustice in his high court of parliament the 21 of May, in the yeere 1408. gaue sentence, that the bull should be rent in pie∣ces, and that Gonsalue and Conseleux the bearer thereof should be set vpon a pillorie, and publickely traduced in the pulpit. The storie is set downe at large by the French papists, in their booke intituled the Iesuites catechisme, and the same is recorded in my anatomie of Popish tyrannie.

The fift step was the decay of the empire in the East about the yeere 756.* 1.28 For when Aistulphus, or (as some write) Aristulphus king of the Lombards, besieged the ci∣tie of Rome for the space of three whole moneths, exa∣cting an huge tribute of the Romanes; then Pope Ste∣phanus the second, made suite to Pipinus king of France to stand their good master, and to defend the citie from the furie of the Lombards. King Pipine willing to gratifie his good friend the Bishop of Rome, came with a mightie armie against Aistulphus, and besieged him in Pauie; and then and there constrained him to appeale to his mercie, and to yeeld vp the exerchate of Rauenna and Pentapo∣lis into his hands.* 1.29 This being effected, king Pipine (whom Pope Zacharie of a traitour had made king, as is alreadie prooued) gave vp the gouernment of Italie into the Popes hands. And the king had reason so to doe: for as we know, one good turne requires another. So now the lieutenants of the emperours of Constantinople, ended their whole power in Italie, who aforetime had their seats

at Rauenna: and now was he taken out of the way, who (as the Apostle telleth vs) did hinder the comming of An∣tichrist:* 1.30 for Pope Stephen in way of gratitude confirmed the inheritance royall of the kingdome of France to the said Pipine and to his posteritie for euer. Here began a new progenie of the kings of France: for Childericus was the last king of the stocke of Meroneus, who was the first king Christian of France. This truth is apparant by the testi∣monie of many renowned Chronographers, it cannot be denied.

The sixt step,* 1.31 was the translation of the Romane empire from the Greeks to the Frenchmen or Germans, in the person of magnificall Charles, as the Iesuit Bellarmine tearmeth him. The truth is this, as popish Chronogra∣phers doe record and testifie to the world; viz. That when the Romanes had driuen from among them, Pope Leo the third, he appealed to Charles then king of France, who came to Rome, and examined the matter: and in the end appeased the Romanes, and restored the Pope to his place and dignitie againe. For this good worke and kind fauour of the king, the Pope, and people of Rome, hauing now a long time in mind and affection, reuolted from the emperour of Constantinople; and seeing a fit opportunitie offered to accomplish their long wished de∣sires, did with vniforme consent and ioyfull acclamation proclaime Charles the great, the emperour of Rome, gi∣uing him the imperiall names of Caesar and Augustus, and setting the royall diademe vpon his head by the hands of Pope Leo. And for the better credit of mine assertion, I will here recount the very words of Sigebertus, a famous Chronographer and popish monke,* 1.32 who therefore must needs be of credit with the Pope and all his popelings. Thus doth he write: Romani qui ab imperatore Constantinopo∣litano iam diu animo desciuerant, nunc accepta occasionis opportuni∣tate, quia mulier excaecato imperatore Constantino filio suo eis impe∣rabat, vno omnium consensu Carolo regi imperatorias laudes accla∣mant, eumque per manum Leonis papae coronant, Caesarem & Au∣gustum

appellant; Pipinum verò filium eius regem Italiae ordina∣tum collandant.

The Romanes, who a long time had in mind and affe∣ction reuolted from the emperour of Constantinople, see∣ing now a fit occasion offered them, because a woman did gouerne them, her sonne the emperour Constantine being made blind, did all with one consent found out imperiall and royall acclamations to king Charles, calling him Caesar and Augustus, and crowning him by the hand of Leo the Pope: yea they collaud his son Pipine made king of Italie.

Out of these words I wish the Reader, to obserue these important points with me.

1 First, that 800. yeeres after Christs sacred birth, the Bishops of Rome were subiect to the emperour, as their owne deere monke Sigebert telleth them; and as you haue heard already, Pope Gregorie acknowledged his fealtie to Mauritius the emperour, in the yeere 603.

2 Secondly, that the Pope and people of Rome en∣deuoured a long time, to shake off the yoke of obedience to the emperour, and in the yeere 801 put the same in execution.

3 Thirdly, that the translation of the empire implied flat treason, in the Pope and all his Romish Popelings. For as Fryer Sigebert telleth vs, they surrendred vp the right of their soueraigne to an other man: and hence commeth it, that the Iesuiticall Cardinall Bellarmine ap∣pealeth to the law of perscription, affirming titles gotten by robberie to be lawfull by that meanes. And indeede by stealth and robberie, it may well beseeme a Iesuite, to iustifie popish late start vp regalitie.

4 Fourthly, that the Bishop of Rome is not the true and lawfull king of Italie: for the papists doe not agree in their assertions, touching this counterfeit regalitie of their popes. Bl••ndus and Platina write, that Pippine gaue the exerchate of Rauenna and Pentapolis to Gregorie; Regino referreth the donation to Steuen; and Sigebert saith here, that Pippine in the yeere 801 had it in his owne pos∣session

still. Yea, the same Sigebert saith further, that in the yeere 812 the emperour Charles imposed the imperi∣all crowne vpon the head of his sonne Lewis, and made Bernard sonne of Pippine the king of Italie. But doubtlesse if Pippine were king of Italie in the yeere 801 and Bernard king thereof in the yeere 812, I see not how the pope was then,* 1.33 or that is now, any king at all. And therefore wee may credite Bellarmine at leisure, when he telleth vs out of Ado, that king Pippine gaue Reuenna and all Pentapolis to Saint Peter and Saint Paul: but it is well, that S. Paul is become coheire with Saint Peter. For by his meanes, o∣ther bishops must haue as great a share, as the Bishops of Rome: there the reader must not forget, what frier Sige∣bert telleth vs of Charles the great,* 1.34 after that he was in∣thronized in the empire. These are his expresse wordes; Carolus imperator &c. Charles the emperour, when the em∣perours of Constantinople had indignation against him, for the name of emperour giuen him by the Romanes; suffered them with great patience and magnanimitie: And because he was afraid of their mightie power, with often ambassades hee procured them to bee his deare friends: yet our Iesuite Bellarmine would haue vs to be∣leeue, that the emperours of Constantinople did freelie graunt, that the Pope and the Romanes had full right to translate the empire; but their owne deare friend (as we see heere,) affirmeth the contrary for a truth. Yea, both Bl••ndus and Platina affirme very constantly,* 1.35 that Charles did agree first with the empresse Irene, and afterwith the emperour Nicephorus, that he with their fauours might rule ouer the VVest.

The seuenth step, was the constitution of the ele∣ctors of the future emperour.* 1.36 For Gregorie the fift being a Germane borne, and a neere kinsman to Otho the empe∣rour at that time, did by his fauour and free graunt, ap∣point seuen electors of the empire for euer.* 1.37 viz. the arch∣bishop of Mentz, the archbishop of Treuerse, the arch∣bishop of Colen, the marques of Brandenburgh, the coun∣tie

Palatine, the duke of Saxonie, and the king of Bohe∣mia. This goodly constitution was enacted by the Pope and emperour,* 1.38 (being both of them not onely Germanes but also kinsmen) that the empire might be established in their posteritie, and their blood thereby aduanced for euer.

The eight and highest step of this ladder, did reach vp euen to the highest heauen, and to the very throne of our Lord Iesus. For the Pope hauing now enlarged his soueraigntie, by little and little, from steppe to steppe; was neither abased nor afraid to challenge the authoritie and royall right,* 1.39 of both swordes throughout the christian world: for he made a flat decree for the confirmation thereof, as is euident by the extrauagant of Boniface the eight, (vnam sanctam, de maioritate & obedienta) set downe in the sixt booke of the decretals.* 1.40 And as Gratianus repor∣teth, Pope Nicholas taught the same doctrine: these are the expresse wordes, Christus beato Petro aeternae vitae claui∣gero, terreni simul & caelestis imperij iura commisit.

Christ committed to Saint Peter that beareth the keyes of eternall life, the right both of earthly and heauenly empire. And the glosse, which the Popes parasites haue annexed to this decree,* 1.41 hath these very wordes; Argu∣mentum quod Papa habet vtrun{que} gladium, & spiritualem & tem∣poralem. An argument, that the Pope hath both the swords, aswell the spirituall as the temporall. And in the marginall note, it is there set downe, Papa habens vtrun{que} gladium transtulit imperium: the Pope hauing both swords, translated the empire. And appendix Fuldensis vnfoldeth this cursed decree, in these most plaine tearmes:

Hic Papa (Bonifacius 8.) constitutionem fecerat,* 1.42 in quae se do∣minum spiritualem & temporalem in vniuerso mundo asserebat. Vn∣de requisiuit Philippum regem Franciae, vt a se regnum suum cognos∣ceret, quod rex facere contempsit.

This Pope (he speaketh of Boniface the eight) made a constitution, in which he affirmed himselfe, to be both spirituall and temporall lord in the whole world. VVher∣vpon

he would haue had Philip king of France, to haue acknowledged his kingdome from him: which thing the king scorned to doe.

Since this ladder was thus framed, the Bishops of Rome haue tyrannized aboue measure in the world, and ta∣king vpon them that authoritie which pertaineth to god alone, they haue disposed of kings and kingdomes, tran∣slated royall diademes, tyrannized ouer mens soules, and troden all sacred soueraigntie vnder foot. For, that po∣pish canons ascribe plaine diuine titles to the Pope, it can not possibly be denied, because in the Popes owne de∣cretals,* 1.43 I find these expresse wordes; Sic (Papa) dicitur habere caeleste•• arbitrium, & ideo etiam naturam rerum immutat, substantiam vnius rei applicando alij; & de nihilo potest aliquid fa∣cere. So the Pope is said to haue celestiall arbitrement, and therefore doth he alter the nature of things, apply∣ing the substantiall parts of one thing to an other; and so can make of nothing something. Thus the papists write of their Pope, and he is well pleased therewith. And yet the truth is, that as man can in some cases at some time make one thing of an other; so in all cases at all times, to make some thing of nothing, is proper to God alone.

The Popes parasites write thus of his power in gene∣rall;* 1.44 Sicut non est potestas nisia deo, sic nec aliqua temporalis vel ecclesiastica, imperialis vel regalis, nisi à Papa; in cuius foemore scripsit Christus, rex regum, dominus dominantium. Like as there is no power but of God, so is there neither any temporall nor ecclesiasticall, neither imperiall nor regall, but of the Pope; in whose thigh Christ hath written, the King of kings, and Lord of lords. Loe here gentle reader, two things are proper to God alone; the one, to be King of kings, and Lord of lords; the other, to be the author of all power: both which you see here ascribed to the Pope.

The Pope himselfe from his owne pen,* 1.45 Gregorie the ninth, deliuereth vs this doctrine, Ad firmamentum coeli, hoc est, vniuers alis ecclesiae, fecit deus duo magna luminaria, id est, duas

instituit dignitates, quae sunt pontificalis authoritas, & regalis potestas sequitur; vt quanta est inter solem & lunam, tanta inter pontifices & reges differentia cognoscatur. To the firmament of heauen, that is, of the vniuersall church, God made two lights, pontificall authoritie, and power royall: that we may know there is asmuch difference between Popes and kings, as there is betweene the sunne & the moone. The glosse setteth downe precisely,* 1.46 how farre a king is inferiour to a Pope, that is, to any bishop of Rome, in these words; Restat, vt pontificalis dignitas, quadragesies sep∣ties sit maior regali dignitate. It remaineth, that the dignitie of the Pope, is fourtie times seuen times greater than the power of the king.

Now touching the kissing of the Popes feete, I an∣swere that some Christian kings and emperours vpon a blind zeale not grounded in knowledge, humbling them∣selues to the Bishop of Rome, and yeelding vp their so∣ueraigne rights to him, opened the window to all anti∣christian tyrannie. For in short time after, (as is alreadie prooued) the Romish bishops became so lordly and inso∣lent, that they tooke vpon them to depose the emperors, to translate their empires, and to dispose at their plea∣sures of their royall scepters and regalities. Much more might be said in this matter, but for that the Pope hath made it sacriledge to dispute of this, I will here onely tell thee gentle reader,* 1.47 what the Popes deere frier Sigebertus hath written of his holines. These are his expresse words; Vt pace omnium honorum dixerim, haec sola nouitas, non dicam haere∣sis, nondum in mundo emerserat, vt sacerdotes illius, qui regnarefa∣cit hypocritā propter peccata populi, doceant populum quod malis re∣gibus nullam debeant subiectionem, & licet ei sacramentum fideli∣tatis fecerint, nullam tamen debeant fidelitatem, nec periuri dican∣tur, qui contra regem senserint; imo qui regi pa••••erit, pro excommu∣nicato habeatur; qui contra regem fecerit, noxa iniustitiae & per∣iuris absoluatur. To speake by the fauour of all good men, this sole noueltie, I wil not say heresie, was not yet known in the world; that his priests who maketh an hypocrite

to reigne for the sinnes of the people, should teach the people, that they owe no subiection to wicked kings; and that although they haue taken the oth of fealtie, yet doe they owe them no allegeance, neither are they per∣iured that thinke ill against the king: yea, he that obey∣eth the king, is this day reputed an excommunicate per∣son; and he that taketh part against the king, is absolued from the crime of iniustice and periurie.

This is our very case (gentle reader) this day in Eng∣land, so liuely painted out in best beseeming coulours, as if the writer had bene liuing euen now amongst vs. So then, wee haue to obserue here for our instruction, That the Popes owne monkes and friers haue thought as ill of the Popes dealings in former times, as we thinke of his procedings in these latter dayes: As also, That po∣pish religon hath alwaies bene condemned,* 1.48 euen of great learned papists that liued in the Popes Church. VVhere∣of none can be ignorant, that will seriously peruse my bookes of Motiues and Suruey. And this shall suffice for the first article: to which (if their hearts doe not faint them, or their consciences condemne them) the papists will frame some answere vn∣doubtedly.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Bellarm. lib. 5. de Rom. pont. ca. 7. col. 824.
• * 1.2

  Gregor. lib. 2. epist. 61. cap. 100
• * 1.3

  Ambros. de apologia Dauid, cap. 10. pag. 386.
• * 1.4

  Hieron. tom. 1. fol. 63. d.
• * 1.5

  Enthi. in Psal. 50.
• * 1.6

  Glossa ordin. in Ps. 50.
• * 1.7

  Lyranus in Ps. 50.
• * 1.8

  Aquin. 1. 2. q. 96. ar. 5. ad. 3.
• * 1.9

  Hugo Card. in Ps. 50.
• * 1.10

  See S. Cyprians opinion in the sixt article fol∣lowing, in the first propositi∣on and second reason; and note it well, because it is of great impor∣tance.
• * 1.11

  Victor. de potest, eccles. relect. 1. sect. 6. p. 39.
• * 1.12

  Gerson de potest. eccles. consid. 12 part. 3.
• * 1.13

  Gerson vbi su∣pra.
• * 1.14

  Dist. 96. can. Constantinus.
• * 1.15

  Bellarm. lib. 5. de rom. pont. cap. 9.
• * 1.16

  A. D. 471.
• * 1.17

  Ar. Pontac. Burdeg. pag. 93.
• * 1.18

  A. D. 536.
• * 1.19

  A. D. 684
• * 1.20

  Platina in vita Benedicti secūdi.
• * 1.21

  Vide Ar. Pontac. fol. 111. a.
• * 1.22

  A. D. 607.
• * 1.23

  A. D. 751.
• * 1.24

  Geraes. 28. v. 12.
• * 1.25

  Bellar. lib. 5. de Rom pont. cap. 8.
• * 1.26

  A. D. 1294.
• * 1.27

  A. D. 1408.
• * 1.28

  A. D. 756.
• * 1.29

  Manus manum fricat.
• * 1.30

  2. Thess. 2.
• * 1.31

  Bellar. tom. 3. col. 827.
• * 1.32

  A. D. 801.
• * 1.33

  A. D. 727.
• * 1.34

  A. D. 805.
• * 1.35

  Vide Ar. Pon∣iac. fol. 122.
• * 1.36

  Vide Phillip. Bergemens. p. 277.
• * 1.37

  Antoninus 3. par. tit. 22. cap. 5. §. 13.
• * 1.38

  A. D. 994.
• * 1.39

  A. D. 1294.
• * 1.40

  Dest. 22. can. omnes.
• * 1.41

  Gloss. F. caelestis.
• * 1.42

  Appendix Ful∣densis.
• * 1.43

  Gloss. lib. 1. de∣cret. tit. 7. cap. 3.
• * 1.44

  Gersō. de potest. eccl••s. consider. 12. part. 3.
• * 1.45

  Greg. 9. libr. 1. decr. tit. 33. cap. 6.
• * 1.46

  Gloss. ibid.
• * 1.47

  Sigebert. in an∣no, 1088.
• * 1.48

  Answere ô pa∣pists if you can: if not, repent for shame.