A detection of sundrie foule errours, lies, sclaunders, corruptions, and other false dealinges, touching doctrine, and other matters vttered and practized by M.Iewel, in a booke lately by him set foorth entituled, a defence of the apologie. &c. By Thomas Harding doctor of diuinitie.

Iewel. Pag. 637.

That a Prince, or magistrate maie not lavvfully calae Prieste before him to his ovvne seate of Iudgement, or that many Catholique, and godly Princes haue not so done, and done it lavvfully, it is most vntrue.

Harding.

I haue tolde you M. Iewel,* 1.1 that the duetie of Ciuil Princes consisteth in Ciuil maters, and euer said, that Bishoppes ought to be obedient to Princes in suche cases, whither so euer they cal them. And if they make any temporal Decree, the Bishoppe, who hath temporal goodes vnder the Prince, must obey without grudge,* 1.2 or gaine saying, so farre as the Decree standeth with the ho∣nour of God. But that in Ecclesiastical causes, and maters of Faith, mere temporal Princes haue any authoritie of them selues to cal Bishoppes and Priestes to their Seates of Iudgement, or euer did it lawfully: we vtterly denie.* 1.3 S. Ambrose said to the Emperour Valentinian: Nec quis∣quàm contumacem iudicare me debet, quum hoc asseram, quod augustae memoriae patertuus non solùm sermone respon∣dit, sed etiam legibus suis sanxit, in causa fidei, vel ecclesia∣stici alicuius ordinis, eum iudicare debere, qui nec mu∣nere impar sit, nec iure dissimilis: Haec enim verba Rescripti sunt. Hoc est, Sacerdotes de Sacerdotibus voluit iudicare.

Quinetiam si aliâs quoque arguerelar Episcopus, & morum

esset examinanda causa, etiam hanc voluit ad Episcopule iudi∣cium pertinere. Neither any man ought to iudge me as stubborne, seing I affirme that, whiche your father of most renoumed memorie not onely answered in worde, but also established by his lawes: that in a case of faith, or any ecclesiastical order, he ought to be iudge, that is nei∣ther vnequal in office, nor vnlike in right, or authoritie: For these are the wordes of the Rescripte. That is, he would Priestes to be iudges of Priestes. And also, if o∣therwise a Bishop were reproued, and a cause concer∣ning behauiour and manners were to be examined, he would this cause (of manners) also to apperteine to the Bishoppes iudgement.

Vpon these wordes of Theodosius, alleged, and allo∣wed by S. Ambrose,* 1.4 thus I reason with you M. Iewel. He can not be iudge of Bishoppes and Priestes, nor cal them to his seate of Iudgement in Ecclesiastical causes, and maters of Faithe that is vnequal in office, or vnlike in right and authoritie. But the Prince is vnequal to the Bishop in office, and vnlike vnto him in right and autho∣ritie: (For he hath no right nor authoritie to sacrifice, to preache, to binde, to loose, to excommunicate, and mini∣ster Sacramentes) Therefore the Prince can not be iudge of Bishoppes, and Priestes, nor cal them to his seate of Iudgement in any ecclesiastical cause, or mater of Faith.

Againe, no man hath authoritie ouer his superiour: But the Bishop, in maters of Faithe, and Ecclesiastical causes, is superiour to euery Prince: Therefore in those causes the Prince hath no authoritie ouer the Bishop. And if he haue no authoritie ouer him, he can not cal him to his seate of iudgement.

Furthermore, were it true, that the Prince were equal with the Bishop in Ecclesiastical causes, and matters of faith, yet could he not cal him to his seate of iudgement,* 1.5 quia par in parem non habet potestatem, bicause the equal hath no authoritie, or power ouer his equal. But to see M. Iewels arte in facing out this mater, let vs consider the authorities, that he bringeth to proue his purpose. And bicause he blaseth this saying in the toppe of his margent with great letters.* 1.6 A Bishop conuented before the Magi∣strate, let vs first define, what it is to be conuented before a Magistrate.

The lawiers saie, Conuenire, est aliquem in ius vocare, To conuent a man, is to cal him into the lawe: and so Conueniri coram magistratu, est in ius vocari à magistratu, to be conuented before a magistrate, is to be called into the lawe by the magistrate. To cal a man into the lawe, is a iudicial acte, proceding of superiour authoritie in him that is iudge, both of the partie so called, and also of the cause, wherefore he is called. As if the Maior of London would conuent any of the Citizens, he must both haue iurisdiction ouer that Citizen, and also authoritie to iudge in that cause, for whiche the Citizen shal be conuented. But no ciuil magistrate hath authoritie by vertue of his temporal office, to be iudge our Bishoppes in ecclesiasti∣cal causes, as it is before proued, and shal hereafter ap∣peare: Therefore no temporal magistrate can conuent any Bishoppe, or Priest before him, in any Ecclesiastical cause. But let vs heare M. Iewel.* 1.7

Notes

• * 1.1

  Confut. Fol. 299. ae.
• * 1.2

  Confut. Fol. 302. ae
• * 1.3

  Ambro∣sius. lib. 5. Epist. 32. Priestes only ought to be iudges ouer Priestes by Theo∣sius.
• * 1.4

  An argu¦ment, pro¦uing that a Ciuile Magistrat maie not be iudge oner Priestes in causes ecclesia∣stical, and matters of Faith.
• * 1.5

  ff. ad S. Trebel. L. ille. § Tē∣pestiuum.
• * 1.6

  VVhat it is to be conuēted before a Magi∣strate. Spiegelius in verbo conuenire.
• * 1.7

  Cod. de Episcopis et clericis. L. Nullus.