My reason why it may not be gouerned vnder a Christian Prince, as it maye* 1.1 vnder a tyrant, is this: God hath giuen the chiefe authoritie in the gouernmente of his church to the Christian magistrate, which could not so be if your Seignorie might as wel retein their authoritie vnder a Christian Prince, and in the time of peace, as vnder a tyrant, and in the tyme of persecution. For tell me I pray you what au∣thoritie ecclesiasticall remayneth to the ciuill Magistrate, where this Seignorie is established? But that the Reader may vnderstande this not to be my iudgement a∣lone, but the iudgement also of famous learned men, & the practise of w〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ll reformed churches. I thought good in this place before I proceed any further, to report the opi∣nions of Musculus and Gualter, touchyng this matter. Musculus in his common pla∣ces, titulo de Magistratibus, affirmeth, that notwithstanding in the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 tyme, the* 1.2 churches were ruled by Seniors, yet they may not so be vnder christian rulers and Magistrates, who haue authoritie not in ciuill matters only, but in ecclesiastical al∣so. His wordes I haue recited before. M. Gualter in his cōmentaries vpon. 1. Cor. 5.* 1.3 doth at large entreat of this matter: whose wordes bicause they haue pith in them, and proceede from him which is both learned and godlie, and of great experience, I will reher〈1 line〉〈1 line〉e them as I finde them.
There are also others which although they haue true christian princes, and want no la∣wes wherby licentious maners are corrected, yet they say they nede an ecclesiastical senate,* 1.4 which might punish euery man, and haue authoritie also ouer Princes, that it might seclude them fr〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 the Lords supper (if they haue giuē any publike offence) & not to admitte them againe vnto the felowship of the Church, but vpon their allowāce after publike satisfactiō.