The English concord in ansvver to Becane's English iarre: together with a reply to Becan's Examen of the English Concord. By Richard Harris, Dr. in Diuinitie.

D^r. HARRIS Reply.

TO an vnlearned Iesuit, plaine vulgar things seeme Paradoxes. Date the Iesuit deny, that Clergie men haue power to make lawes for putting to death of Hereticks, and against such & such erroncous obstinate persons as hereticks? and dare he affirme, that Clergy men may giue the sentence of death, or shed the bloud of any heretick; sith by their triuiall, and vulgarly known popish Canon, they may not sit vpon the bench when the sentence of death is pronoūced by the ciuil Iudges? That most certain rule of his Lawyers, is most plainly false. viz. That whoso∣euer hath power to make a penall law, hath power to punish: vnlesse the meaning be of power to punish, by commaunding such Officers to punish, vnto whom the inflicting of such punishment appertaineth. In which sense, our King also may be said to excommu∣nicate, or absolue: that is, to cōmand Bishops to excō∣municate, or absolue men, according to the lawes pro∣uided in that behalfe. Yea, further, the Kings writ of prohibition, absolueth that subiect of his, which is wrongfully excommunicated by Ecclesiasticall cen∣sure. And this is not to straighten, but to enlarge (much more then the Iesuit would haue it) his Maie∣sties supreme power heerein.

Who knowes not, that Christian Kings and Empe∣perours haue made Ecclesiasticall lawes, by vertue

whereof, such and such Priests, should be suspended, depriued, degraded; and others chosen, and instituted into their Benefices? and yet it pertained not to those Emperours to suspend, depriue, degrade, choose or institute the same, in their own persons. And that this rule holdeth not in ciuil matters, was shewed before.