Page 751
Neyther do you héere replie to my Answere, for I tolde you that Christ came to be iudged, not to iudge in matters of lands and possessions: I tolde you likewise that this example of Christ perteyneth no more to Bishops than it dothe to Kings, and therefore can no fitlyer be by you applied agaynst Bishops, than by the Anabaptistes agaynst Christian Magistrates. To all this in effect you haue sayde nothing. Your owne collection is soone answered. Fyrst, no man giueth to Bishops authoritie to iudge in matters of inheritance, for suche controuersies are to be decided by lawe, whiche hath other Iudges appoynted for it. Secondly, Christ spake this to declare that his kingdome was not of this worlde, but of the worlde to come, not earthly, but heauenly, not temporall, but eternall: and therefore he spake it touching his owne person onely, and not as a rule perteyning to other Christians. as the Anabaptists feyne. Thirdly, the authoritie in ciuill matters that is committed to ministers in* 1.1 this Churche, is committed vnto them by the Prince, for the better gouernment of the Churche, and the fuller satisfying of their duetie, consisting for the moste parte onely in punishing and correcting sinne. And lastly, it is not made a thing incident to the ministerie, or as parte of that office, but it is added as profitable, conuenient, and necessarie for the present state of the Churche, and fuller accomplishing of the ministers duetie.
I haue tolde you in my Answere to the Admonition, that this example of Christ dothe no more perteyne vnto Bishops, than to other Christians (whiche béeing true and vnconfuted by you) then dothe it followe that the Anabaptistes maye aswell al∣leage it agaynst other Christians, as you maye doe agaynst Bishops or Ministers.
The learned mans interpretation dothe well agrée with my cause: for Christ refu∣sed it, bicause he came to be iudged, and to suffer death, for the redemption of the world, which is the vocation that this learned man speaketh of, and is onely proper to Christ. I denie not but that M. Caluine may apply this texte to that purpose, but M. Caluine dothe expounde him selfe, writing vpon this same place, when he saythe, that euery man must respect his owne vocation, & quid illi sit aptum, and what is meete for it. Nowe the ciuill authoritie that Ecclesiasticall persons haue in this Churche, is meete for theer vocation: And therefore M. Caluine speaketh nothing agaynst it. In the same booke & chapter, he alleageth these words of Bernarde▪ whiche he writeth to Pope Eugenius of this matter: Ergo in criminibus non in possessionibus potestas vestra. &c. VVherefore your power is in offences, not in possessions. And this conclusion he brin∣geth in vpon the wordes of S. Luke chapter. 12.
I would not, as I sayde before, haue Bishops Iudges in controuersies of enheri∣tance,* 1.2 I doe not affirme that they may in the right of their ministerie, chalenge any ciuill authoritie, as the Bishop of Rome dothe. But forasmuche as the authoritie is in Criminibus, in offences, as Bernarde sayth, therfore if it please the Prince to giue it them, they may lawfully execute so muche authoritie ciuill, as shall further and helpe them in suppressing sinne. And this is agaynst nothing that M. Caluine hathe sayde. For M. Caluine and other learned wryters of this age, doe vse this place of S. Luke and suche like, agaynst the vsurpation of Romishe Bishops, chalenging suche au∣thoritie in ciuill matters as due vnto them, Iure diuino, and so placing them selues in Princes offices, dyd estéeme all their duetie towardes the Churche to consist there∣in, and dyd nothing else perteyning to the office of a Bishop. As for the authoritie that our Bishops haue in suche matters, I thinke that neyther M. Caluine, nor any other godly man can disallowe of it.