Page 64
Chap. I. seconde Diuision.
And it is the common opinion of all writers, that these words of Christe doe not condemne superioritie, Lordeship, or any suche like authoritie, but the ambitious desire of the same, and the tyrannicall vsage therof.
Agaynst this is sayde, that the places doe nothing else but condemne ambitious desire, and ty∣rannicall vsage of authoritie, and doth not barre the ministers of these things.* 1.1
Then belyke all those godly and learned men, whiche haue vsed these places to proue that the Pope, whiche professeth himselfe to be an Ecclesiastical person, ought not to haue the ciuil sword, nor to vsurpe vnto himselfe suche glorious pompe, haue abused them. For you teache hym, howe he shoulde answere, that there is nothing forbidden but ambition and tyrannie, and in dede this is the answere of all the Papistes to that obiection.
Those godlie and learned men whiche haue vsed these places agaynste the Pope,* 1.2 haue rightly vsed them, and if it had pleased you, you might haue vnderstode, that in the verie next leafe folowing I say: that these places may be aptly allea∣ged against the pryde, tyrannie & ambition of the Bishop of Rome, which seeketh tyrannically to rule, and not to profit, but not against the laufull authoritie in any state of men. They therefore alledge it truly,* 1.3 and yet you vntruly expounde it, for the Popes dominion is suche, as is in this place forbidden, that is vsurped and tyrannicall, bicause he hath not onely entred into the spirituall kingdome of Christe, and sought to reigne in mennes consciences, but also pulleth from Princes the power of earthly dominion, saying that he hath that im∣mediatly from God, and the Emperours and Princes immediatly from him. And so doe the learned expounde this place, and it is their answere to the obiection of the Anabaptistes. I fully agrée with my L. of Salisburie his allegation of this place, for Bishops may not be kings, nor haue any such ciuill dominion, as the Pope clay∣meth and vsurpeth.