This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Early English Books Online Text Creation Partnership. Searching, reading, printing, or downloading EEBO-TCP texts is reserved for the authorized users of these project partner institutions. Permission must be granted for subsequent distribution, in print or electronically, of this text, in whole or in part. Please contact project staff at eebotcp-info@umich.edu for further information or permissions.
IT is very true, that both the oath of Supremacie, and the oath of Allegiance, are contained in the Kings Apologie: but this is a very false, & plainlie a Iesuiticall lye, that in both those oathes, viz. the oath of Allegiance, The subiects are required, publiquely and openlie to professe and acknowledge, that King Iames is the
supreme Gouernour, and Lord of all England, not onely in politique and temporall matters, but in spirituall & Ecclesi∣asticall also: and that neither the Pope, nor any other for∣rainer, hath any power, or inrisdiction, in, or oner the Church of England.
Heere I begin with the I••suit, taking him napping in a grosse falsification of the oath of Allegiance: for there is no such thing contained therein. Which is al∣so testified by his excellent Maiestie, in his Preface Mo∣nitory, pag. 11.
Vt certioribus iudicijs per ditam horum cō∣uitiatorū malitiam deprehendere pos sit is, &c. That with more certaine and assured tokens, you may espy the despe∣rate malice of these raylers (as the Pope Paul 5, Cardinall Bellarmine, and Becane) who impudently affirme, that this Oath was deuised to entrap, and beguile, the conscien∣ces of improuident Papists, in matters of faith; I will de∣clare the vvhole passage of the matter in few vvords. As soone as this for me of the Oath of Allegiance vvas conceined, the lower house of Parliament, thought good to insert that clause, vvhereby all power should bee taken from the Pope to excommunicate the King. But I present∣ly caused the same to be razed out; to the end, that it might appeare, that this Oath had no other force or respect, then that the Popes excommunication, should be no iust or law∣full cause vnto my subiects, by secret or open practises, to attempt any thing against my person, or my kingdome; because I thought that this sentence of excommunication, of a spirituall censure, was by vniust vsurpation of Popes, made a secular pretence, and so exorbitant beyond all bounds. With so great care and studie I did auoide, that nothing should be contained in this Oath, but that profes∣sion sion of ciuill allegiance, and temp or all obedience, vvhich
nature it selfe prescribeth to all them, vvhich are borne vnder any kingdom, adding onely a firme promise, wher∣by I demaund of my subiects, ayde, and assistance against the breach of due allegiance, and fidelitie. Wherefore, I faw it appertained to the cause, that I should make an A∣pologie for this Oath: vvherein I haue taken vpon mee to proue, that nothing is contained heerein, but that vvhich concerneth meere ciuill and temporall obedience, such as is due to all soueraigne Princes.
And againe, in the 53. page of the Apology,
Iura∣mentum primatus excogitatum est ad discrimen facien∣dum, &c. The Oath of supremacy was deuised, to dis∣cerne and put a difference betwixt the Papists, and those of our religion: but the Oath of Allegiance was inuented to distingutsh betwixt the Papists, vvho hold obedience & fidelitie to the King in things ciuill, from those that were indiutdually affected to the Gun-powder treason.
Concerning your glorious Martyrs (as you stile Bi∣shoppe Fisher, and Sir Thomas More) you might haue learned out of Tortura Torti, pag. 360. how the wor∣thy Bishop of Ely, stoppeth Tortus his mouth, saying: Dixerat Apologiae author, &c. The Author of the Apolo∣gie said, that it was not any spirituall Primacy, but a carnall matrimony, that brought the supposed Martyr dome to Sir Thomas More, and the Bishop of Rochester: and this he spake not amisse. But then replyed Tortus: Then it vvas a carnall matrimany, that caused holy S. Iohn Baptist to suffer martyrdome, when he freely reproued King Herods mariage. With this example Tortus woundeth himselfe. For tell mee, O Tortus, vvhat was that mariage? vvas it not with his brothers wife? vvas not this the vvord that: cost the Baptist his life? It is not lawful for thee to haue
thy brothers wife. But what was the cause of the death of More, and Fisher? was it not cleane contrary? It is lawful for thee, to haue thy brothers wife; it is not lawful for thee to put her away. So that if Saint Iohn, Christs fore∣runner, died vniustly, they died most iustly: and if hee vvere a Martyr, (as he was) then vvere they some other thing: vvhich I will not tell you. For he dyed, that the King should not keepe his brothers vvife: but these dyed, that the King should not put away his brothers vvife. Hee told King Herod, it vvas not lawfull: they told King Henry, it was lawfull, and hee must not doe otherwise. Could Tortus a∣ny vvaies marre their martyr dome more deepely? So far the Bishop of Ely.
And giue mee leaue to adde something more. O glorious Martyrs! who had rather consent together to die, then to confesse the royall supremacy of Kings, established in the Scriptures, vsed and practised by all the most commended Christian Kings; and withall; to establish the Papall Primacy, which Christ himselfe ex∣presly forbad: which the Fathers of the Councell of Ephesus called the smoake of worldly power; and they of Carthage, with all care, and diligence, admonished the Church to beware of, as Typhum saeculi, the arrogan∣cie of this present vvorld.
Concerning that notorious fact of Pope Paul the fift, and Bellarmine, (which heere the Iesuit remem∣breth) full of inhumanitie, impietie, and audacious∣nesse; that excellently learned man, Ma. Causabon, in his Epistle to Front Ducaeus, hath taught him, pag. 167. thus: De fidelitatis iuramento, cui occasionem praebuit pul∣ueraria coniuratio, &c. Concerning that Oath of Allegi∣ance, first occasioned by the Gun-powder treason, I maruell
vvhy the English Papists so much complaine. They haue much more cause to complaine of Cardinall Bellarmine, & some fevv others, vvho hardened the hart of Pope Paul the fift to yeeld vnto them, (vvho at the first vvith stood them: for I speake not rashly, but haue good Authours for my assurance) that all the Catholicks in England should heere perish, rather then a matter so iust and equall should be permitted. For, vvhat can be more equall, then that subiects should promise fidelity to their Soueraigne? especi∣ally after a treason so barbarous, and notable, for crueltie? The King in the Common-wealth, is the same that a house∣holder is in his priuate house: and doe you thinke that such a man were well advised, to keepe in his family any ser∣uaunts, of whose fidelity he was not perswaded? or rather, whose disposution hee greatly suspecteth? I thinke no bodie, that is not mad, would grant such a thing. Wherfore, either King Iames hath lesse power in his Kingdome, then a house∣holder in his house, or else these complaints about the sub∣iects Oath of Allegiance, are all vniust, and friuolous. For in good sooth, I haue met with many Papists, both in France and England, and I haue also read the writings of many, vvho deeme this Oath not onely most iust, but also most ho∣lie. Wherefore, many of your side, & some of them Priests, yea, the Arch-priest Black well, haue taken the same with∣out all scruple of conscience, not against their wills: and by their publique writings, learnedly and truly (though sharp∣ly against the Pope and the Iesuits) haue perswaded others to doe the like; (such are Maister Sheldon, and Maister Warmington.) But yet there are some, vvith whom the Popes Bulls, and Bellarmines Letters, preuaile more then the law of God, the law of nature, & of all Nations, or the examples of vvise men. And if the Law run vpon these,
vvhat place is there left for complaint? And you your selues, which call this a persecution of Catholicks, cannot tell, for vvhat cause, and by vvhat example of antiquitie, you so tearme it. It was neuer done, nor heard of, that Chri∣stian people said they suffered persecution, if they vvere commaunded to sweare Allegiance to their Soueraigne. But wee read the contrary in the Councells; vvhere they are ac∣cursed that breake faith to their Kings, vvhich they had voxed to them, for the preseruation of the slate of their Countrey, and of their King. And you know, the fourth Councell of Toledo, declareth all such excōmunicat from the Church.
Heere is worke for the Iesuit, let him satisfie these things: and in the meane time let him vnderstand, that that Catholique faith is accursed with all maledictions, as inhumane, impious, sacrilegious, Antichristian, & diabolicall: whereof this is one Article: That Christi∣an people ought not to sweare allegiance to their lawfull So∣ueraigne: to weet, that, which, as hath been declared, the law of God, the law of nature, and the Canons of Councells haue ordained, as most equall, and most ho∣ly. Orelse thus, (to speake after Becans manner) That, for Christian people to sweare allegiance to their lavvfull Prince, is to deny the Catholick faith. And this reason, be∣ing very sound, all good Catholicks admit, saith Becane: but in truth, this reason, as very rotten, is onely admit∣ted by Antichristian Catholicks: but we Protestants, the onely true, and proper orthodoxall, or right be∣lieuing Catholicks, will neuer admit it.
And I (saith the Iesuit) will adioyne two other reasons, on the behalfe of Catholicks, against the Oath of Suprema∣cie, which by the Aduersary cannot bee reiected. Hee
should rather haue said thus; And I, for the destruction of my friends, the Romish Catholicks, will adioyne two o∣ther reasons, vvhich may be most iustly refused, & explo∣ded by all our Aduersaries, the Protestants.
But hath Martin the Iesuit heere forgotten him∣selfe? were not the reasons of Pope Paul, and Bellar∣mine, lately alledged, expresly brought against the oath of Allegiance, which onely was in controuersie; and will he now dispute against the oath of Suprema∣cie, which is distinct and seuerall from the Oath in question? Martin therefore should rather say thus; I haue determined for the ruine of Catholicks in England, to adioyne two reasons more, nothing differing from the former. Well then, let vs heare these two prettie rea∣sons: his first reason is this;
1. It is manifestly false, or at least doubtfull, that the King is Primate, or supreme Head of the Church, who must be obeyed both in all temporall and Ecclesiasticall matters, as hee that hath 1. an Ecclesiasticall Primacy. 2. an Eccle∣siasticall Iuris diction: first, to call Councells by his ovvne authoritie: and secondly to create, and depose Bishops, (for euery meane person may conferre a benefice, and no mortall man may be supreme Iudge in controuersies of faith: there∣fore these two last rehearsed, are no branches of Eccle∣siasticall Supremacy). Therefore (concludeth the Iesuit) this Oath must not be taken.
I answer: The Antecedent of this reason is most false: For all Protestants in England, acknowledge it to be certainly true, & none doubteth thereof: name∣ly, that the King of England, is the onely supreme Go∣nernor, or (as the Papists expound it) Primate and su∣preme Head of the Church of England: vvhom wee
must obey in all causes, both Ecclesiasticall and ciuill; as him, that hath the gouernment ouer all Ecclesiasti∣call persons, and in all spirituall causes: or (as they ex∣pound it) which hath the Ecclesiasticall Primacy, or Iu∣risdiction Ecclesiasticall; and therefore hath power to call Councells, and to create and depose Bishops. All our men, with one consent, thinke, speake, and swear this. And so the Iesuits first reason, with small adoe, and no labour, is put to flight.
But yet the Iesuit vrgeth the matter more articulate∣ly, saying; That the oath of the Kings supremacie, hath so many parts in it, as are thought to be distinct offices of the Kings supremacy: and thereupon, culleth out one of them, which hee deemeth most absurd, writing thus: I A. B. doe sweare in my conscience, that I will be faithfull and obedient vnto the King, as often, or vvhensoeuer hee shall by his owne proper authority, create Bishops, whom hee will, and againe depose from their of fice, vvhom hee will, &c.
Whom he vvill? Nay, that is the proper speech of popish Antichrists, Stat proratione voluntas:* 1.1 My will standeth for a law. But Christian Princes say thus; Idpossumus quodiure possumus: Wee can doe nothing but that which we can doe by law and right.
Therefore, any Christian subiect, and by name Dr. Tooker, may sweare in this manner: I A. B. doe sweare in my conscience, that I will be faithfull and obedient to the King, as often, or whensoeuer he shall by his own proper au∣thority, depose Bishops for iust causes, as Salomon did A∣biathar.
But let Martin Becane put on the thoughts of an ho∣nest and sober man awhile, and tell me, Whether the
oath of Supremacy containe so many parts, as are sup∣posed to be the offices or functions of the Primacie? He saith, putantur, as are thought, or supposed; vvhat of any triobular or meane Writer of the English, or Romane partie? Fie, fie, who can abide this? Nay ra∣ther, the oath of the Kings Supremacy, comprehen∣deth no more, then those offices of the royall Supre∣macy, which is manifest that the Kings of Israel in ho∣ly Scripture executed with commendation: and so doth the Kings Maiestie write, in the same expresse tearmes. All which offices are articularly, and exactly set downe by him in his Apology, pag. 127. 128. And by the Bishop of Ely, in his Tortura Tort. pa. 377. 378. collected out of, & confirmed by the vvord of God.
But heere I would desire the Iesuit to tell me, vvhe∣ther the oath of the Popes Supremacy containe as ma∣ny parts, as are the offices and functions of the said Supremacie, thought to be, by the Iesuits, Canonists, Popes Parasits, & Popes themselues? Then the Pope of Rome, must be Vniuersall Primate and Bishop,a 1.2 De∣necessitate salutis; of the necessity of saluation.b 1.3 The Ordi∣nary of all men.c 1.4 Whose diocesse is the vvhole vvorld.d 1.5 Who, beeing invested Pope, ruleth the Citie, & the world.e 1.6 Who possesseth all the rights of all inferior Churches.f 1.7 Of vvhose fulnesse all Bishops receine.g 1.8 Who may not be iud∣ged, either by Kings, or the vvhole Clergie, or the vvhole vvorld.h 1.9 Who in no case, for any crime vvhatsoeuer, may be deposed, either by the vvhole Church, or by a Councell, or by the whole vvorld.i 1.10 All vvhose actions (though
as euill in themselues, as theft and adultery) we must so in∣terprete, as done by diuine inspiration. So that,k 1.11 it vvere a kinde of sacriledge to call the Popes fact into question, who is free from all humane lawes. Whose deeds, although euill in themselues, are to be excused; as the murthers of Sam∣son; the thefts of the Iewes in Egypt; and the adulterie of Iacob.l 1.12 Whom to accuse, is to sinne against the holy Ghost, which shall neuer be forgiuen, in this vvorld, nor in the world to come: as freed from the law of man. Then is the Pope of Rome, not as a meerem 1.13 man, but Christ.n 1.14 The Bridegroome of the vvhole Church. So as (by Panormi∣tan, De Elect. cap. licet) the Pope and Christ make but one Consistory.o 1.15 Hee is alone the vvhole Church.p 1.16 A vice-God.q 1.17 Our Lord God the Pope.r 1.18 A God.s 1.19 More then GOD. t Hauing diuine power, to whom all power is giuen in heauen and in earth.u 1.20 Who, (sinne onely excepted) can doe all that God can doe.x 1.21 He shall be aboue generall Coun∣cells.y 1.22 Purgat••ry.z 1.23 The whole Church.aa 1.24 The Scripture.bb 1.25 Angels.cc 1.26 All power.dd 1.27 All things.ee 1.28 So as hee can dispute against the law of nature.ff 1.29 Against the law of God.gg 1.30 Against the new Testament.hh 1.31 And all the commaunde∣ments of the old and new Testament.ii 1.32 So as he can doe as much as God can doe. And I will yet deale more articu∣lately and plainly.kk 1.33 Hee shall be Lord in temporal things thorough the vvhole world, directly, & indirectly.ll 1.34 The King of Kings, and Lord of Lords.mm 1.35 Beeing aboue all Emperours, as his vassalls.nn 1.36 Hauing of his owne both
swords.oo 1.37 Beeing set ouer Nations, and Kingdoms, to de∣stroy, to pluck vp, build and plant.pp 1.38 From whom alone, all Emperours hold their Empires.qq 1.39 In vvhose power it is to giue them, or take them from vvhom hee vvill.rr 1.40 Who treadeth the necks of Kings vnder his feet.ss 1.41 And to con∣clude, vvho crowneth Kings with his feet: and vvith his feet againe spurneth the Crowne to the ground.tt 1.42 Beeing seuentie times seuen, greater then the greatest Kings. I will yet expresle the matter more articulately.uu 1.43 Hee shall be so absolute a Iudge of all Controuersies, that if hee shall say the right hand is the left, or the left hand the right: his saying is to bee belieued. And this is the opinion of Bellarmine,xx 1.44 If the Pope should commaund vice, and for∣bid vertue: the Church were bound to belieue, that vertue were euill, and vice were good. And they giue this rea∣son thereof;yy 1.45 The fulnesse of the Popes power, excelleth all Positiue lawes.zz 1.46 and it sufficeth that the Popes will goe for a law; whereby he can make righteousnes of vnrighte∣ousnesse.
And heereupon Philelphus, Decad. 6. Hecast. 9. beau∣tifully describeth the Pope as Antichrist, saying;
Non Scytha, non Turcus, non quiterrore Damascum, Aegyptumue tenet, sed maximus ille Sacerdos, E medio templi nostrum emersurus in axem, Antichristus erit, quise canit ore colendum, Pro christo, cuius refer at nomenque, vicemque.
Which I English thus;
No Tartar grim, or Turk, or feared Saladine, Shall be that Antichrist; but that high Priest, That midst the Temple sits: adored with dread dinine, Who beares the name, & Vicar is of Christ.
I might be infinite in numbring the seuerall offices, which are thought to be the offices of the Romane Pri∣macie: out of which I wil frame this, after Becans ma∣ner. I A. B. doe publiquely testifie, and sweare in my con∣science, that I will be faithfull and obedient to the Bishop of Rome, as often or whensoeuer hee shall by his owne proper authority, directly in temporall causes, create Emperours vvhom hee will, or by the same power, depose vvhom hee vvill.
If this part onely of the Popes Supremacy, should be exacted of all the Iesuits, what, doe you thinke, would bee done? Would all, thinke you, yea they which adhere vnto the Pope, sweare this? Let them sweare that would, as Baronius, Triumphus, Carerius, and almost all the Canonists, and many other famous Popish Writers. Yet, I amsure, that Bellarmine, and Becane, if they be constant men, will neuer sweare. For thus writeth Bellarmine, Papa not habet vllam merè tem∣poralem iurisdictionem directè iure diuino, lib. de Pont. Rom. 5. cap. 4. The Pope hath no meere temporall iuris∣diction directly by the law of God. And Becane in his Re∣furation, pag. 18. Acprimum non disceptamus de pri∣matu in temporalibus, illum quisque Rex insuo regno le∣gitimè habeat: Wee dispute not of the Primacy in temporall causes, let euery King in his kingdome, lawfully possesse the same.
What then? Is this so sure a ground with Bellarmine and Becane, that they firmely determine to lose their liues, like many glorious Martyrs in this kingdome, rather then to admit the Popes supremacie, & abiure the Kings? For this is thought to be one of the prime offices of the Popes supremacy, That the Pope is Lord of
the whole world, directly in all temporall causes. But, this is vtterly false in the conscience of Becane and Bellar∣mine. Or whether, partly, for preseruation of externall peace and gouernment, which these menesteeme more then their faith and religion: or, partly, that one of them may be made Pope, the other a Cardinall, which good for∣tune may befall them heereafter; will they sweare a∣gainst their owne conscience vnto the Popes suprema∣cie, with all functions which are thought to be parts thereof, and thereof shall be branded as Carerius hath marked them, to be impious Polititians of our time, deser∣uing rather the name of Hareticks, then of Catholicks? Of whom may Pope Paul the fist truly affirme, That he hath found more truth in sauage & wilderobbers, then in these kinde of men, (viz. the Iesuits) which teach & practice the Art of Equiuocation, euen in their so∣lemne swearing. And thus much for the first reason: which I am sure is enough, (if not too much) for Bel∣larmine, and Becane also.
His second reason is this: King Iames dooth often protest, that he claimeth no more right or iurisdiction ouer the Church, then did the Kings in the old Testament long a∣goe. But the Kings in the old Testament, could not compell their subiects to sweare such an oath as this is; I A. B. doe openly testifie, and in my conscience declare, that Ieroboam is the onely supreme Gouernor of this king∣dome of Israel, as well in spirituall, as temporall matters: And that no forrainer hath, or ought to haue any iurisdicti∣on, power, superiority, or authority in this kingdom. Ergo, King Iames, &c.
And, a little after, hee explicateth his Minor pro∣position thus: After King Salomon, there vvere two
distinct kingdoms, Iuda and Israel, and there vvere two Kings, vvhereof both had their successors. There vvere Priests and Leuites in both, who vvere chiefely ruled by the high Priest, who liued in Ierusalem. And yet Iero∣boam could not lawfully say to his Priests and Leuites, you shall not obey that High Priest resident in Iuda: you are exempt from his iurisdiction, &c. So Becane.
I answer: Can any man endure, either in a Diuine so great ignorance, or such malice in a Iesuit? As though the Kings Maiestie did euer belieue, write, or so much as dreame, either, that all those things which the wic∣ked Kings of Israel, (of whom Ieroboam was ring-lea∣der) did practice impiously in Ecclesiasticall matters: or that, all that iurisdiction which those vngodly kings did challenge ouer the Church, doth belong to the King supremacy.
Of Ieroboam thus speaketh holy writ, 1. Kings, 12.28.
The King made two golden Calues, and said vnto the Israelites, It is too much for you to goe vp to Ierusalem: Behold the Gods that brought you vp out of the Land of Egypt. And hee put one of them in Bethel, and the other in Dan. Also, hee made a house of the high places, and made bim Priests of the lowest of the people, vvho were not of the sonnes of Leui. And Ieroboam made a feast, in the fifteenth day of the eight Moneth, like vnto the feast that is in Iudah, and sacrificed on the Altar. So did hee in Bethel, and offered vnto the Calues that hee had made. And hee constituted in Bethel, the Priests of the high places which hee had made.
And you may read in the 13. chapter,
That beeing rebuked by a Prophet for this matter, yet hee departed not from his euill way, but turned himselfe, and made him
Priests of the high places, de saece populi, of the dregs of the people; and vvhosoeuer pleased him, hee consecrated him, and made him a Priest of the high places.
And againe, 2. Chron. II. chap. 13. verse,
And the Priests and the Leuites that vvere in all Israel, resor∣ted to him out of all their coasts, (meaning Roboam, the sonne of Salomon.) For the Leuites left their suburbs, & their possessions; and came to Iudah, and to Ierusalem: for Ieroboam and his sonnes had cast them out from mi∣nistring in the Priests office before the Lord.
But thus writeth the King, and his learned Inter∣pretour, the Bishoppe of Ely, in Tort. Tort. pag. 381. Quodcunque in rebus religionis reges Israel fecerunt, nec sine laude fecerunt, id vt et Regi Iacobo, faciendi ius sit atque potestas. Whatsoeuer the Kings of Israel did vvith commendation, in the maters of Religion; the same power and iurisdiction now hath King Iames.
Let this therefore be the Proposition, or first part of the second reason, which Becane himselfe acknow∣ledgeth in his Refuration, cap. 8. pag. 124: and then I will assume the Minor.
But the Kings of Israel, not without commendation, by their royall authoritie, in matters of Religion, 1. Haue enacted lawes. 2. Delegated of their subiects to iudge of such lawes. 3. Haue bound all their subiects, both Clergie men, and Lay-men, by oath of Allegiance. 4. Haue pumshed the transgressors of such lawes. 5. Haue called as∣semblies or Councells. 6. Haue ruled all estates; as the Heads of the Tribe of Leui, as vvell as of the other Tribes: and vvere as much Kings of the Clergie, as of the Laitie. 7. If any Abiathar, or High Priest, vvexed proud, they bridled him by their censure; and, if there were cause, de∣posed
Abiathar from the High Priesthood. 8. They aboli∣shed all strange worship: as, when they razed the high pla∣ces, brake in peeces the golden Calues, and the brasen Ser∣pent, &c. To conclude, they gaue order for things indiffe∣rent, which appertained to the outward splendour, & com∣linesse of the house of G O D: And by their authoritie cut off idle and curious questions in religion, vvhich were wont to be the mother and breeder of schismes: as the Scriptures expresly witnesse; whereof you may read in Tort. Tor∣ti, pag. 381.382.
Therefore I will conclude, that King Iames hath the same power, and iurisdiction; and therfore may binde his subiects by an oath: I A. B. doe openly testifie and de∣clare in my conscience, that King Iames is the oneli•• su∣preme Gouernour of this Realme, and of this Church of England, &c. (as was Dauid, and Salomon, of the Church of Israel, and Asa, Ezekias, and Iosias, of the Church of Iuda); and that no forrainer hath, or ought to haue, any iurisdiction, power, &c. within this Kingdome, (as they had none in Iuda) and so may lawfully say to the Priests subiects, Obey not the high Priest, which dwel∣leth in any forraine kingdome: but obey me alone, as the one∣ly supreme Gouernour of this Church. You are all exempt from his power and iurisdiction. For so Dauid, Salomon, Asa, Ezekias, and Iosias, might lawfully commaund their Priests & Leuits: and therefore so may King Iames commaund his Clergie.
These things (thou maiest perceiue learned Rea∣der) are collected out of the pure fountaines of sacred Scriptures, and so conclude our cause solidly, and be∣yond all exception. But Becane his Sillogisme is a mon∣stor in Logick, running vpon some feet, & yet halteth.
For King Iames speaketh of godly & religious Kings, (and not schismaticall) either of all Israel, or onely of Iuda: and of their Ecclesiasticall gouernment, the very patterne and exemplary primacy, commended vnto Christian Kings in the Scriptures. But Martin the Sophister, that is, the Iesuit, assumeth impious & schis∣maticall Kings of Israel, rent from Iuda; among whō, neuer any one is remembred in scripture to haue hand∣led Ecclesiasticall matters with commendation.
And heere I intreat the ingenuous Reader, to ob∣serue the Iesuiticall and serpentine subtilty of Becane; who, to decciue his Catholiques, passeth by all the god∣ly Kings of Iuda, and onely bringeth Ieroboam on the st••ge, a schismaticall King, the first head of that iniqui∣tic, and the ring-leader of all them that are branded with notes of infamy in the holy booke, as 1. King. 15.29. And Baasa strooke all the house of Icroboam, hee left no soule aliue: because of the sinnes where-with Icro∣boam sinned, and made Israel to sinne.
And 2. Chron. 13.5. Ought you not to know, that the Lord God of israel, hath giuen the Kingdome ouer Israel, to Dauid for euer, euen to him, and to his sonnes, by a Coue∣nant of Salt? And Icroboam the sonne of Nebat, the seruant of Salomon, the sonne of Dauid, is risen vp, and bath rebelled against his Lord, &c. Loe, this is that most impious, rebellious, and schismaticall Ieroboam; vvhich must comfort, and confirme the Romish Catho∣liques.
But seeing our Iesuit is conuersant among schismes and schismatiques, let him assume, and make his in∣stance, those three Antipopes, who troubled the world about the time of the Councel of Constance. Or
let him take any one of them, and tell me, 1. Who was then the Primate of the Church? 2. Who was then the su∣preme head of the Church? 3. Who had then the Ecclesia∣sticall Primacy? 4. Who did then exercise the supreme Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction? 5. Who could then, by his owne authority, call a generall Councell, and sit therein Pre∣sident? 6. Who had power to conserre that fat benefice of the Papacy it selfe? 7. Who could then create Popes, and depose the Antipopes? 8. Who was then the supreme Iudge of all Controuersies; especially of papall, or po∣pish questions?
But I will yet presse the Iesuit more necrely. What if the French (so called) Catholique Church, should create to it selfe a Patriarch, & leaue the See of Rome; seeing the Pope Paul the fist, claimeth temporall iu∣risdiction ouer the King of Fraunce? What if other Kings, both Protestants, & all those which call them∣selues Catholiques, seeing the Pope claimeth iurisdic∣tion ouer all, in a common cause that so much concer∣neth their Crownes and royall dignities, should ioyne hands and harts, and establish a Patriarch in their se∣uerall Kingdoms, who should 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, take and exercise the same iurisdiction that the old Roman Patri∣arch had, & did practice in his Prouince? which thing (making so much for establishing and confirming the outward peace, and Ecclesiasticall politie of the Christian world) is much desired,* 1.47 and hoped for at the next ge∣nerall Councell: as wee read in old time, that the Em∣perour of Constantinople, by his law, did in all things e∣quall the iurisdiction of the Bishoppe of Constantinople, with the power of the Bishop of Rome. Quam legem euertere nunquam potuit Papa omnia conatus, Imperator is
patrocinio tutam: Which law maintained by the patronage of the Emperour, the Pope could neuer repeale, although he assaied all meanes for the same. Liberat. cap. 13.
And may not then (I pray you sir) those Kings lawfully say to their Priests; Doe not obey the Bishop of Rome: but obey this Patriarch alone? You are exempt from all Romish power and iurisdiction?
If the Iesuit doubt heereof, let him repaire to Ger∣son (De Auferebilitate Papae) that stiffe Patron of the Romane Religion, and hee will teach him thus much. Iohannes de Parisys also, in his Treatise De Pot. Reg. & Papal. cap. 13. writeth thus: Bonifacius obtinuit a Phoca, &c. Pope Boniface obtained of Phocas, that the Church of Rome should be called the Head of all Churches. Whereby we may gather such another argument, That it apper∣taineth to the Emperour, to transferre the Primacy of the Church, and to order Ecclesiasticad affaires.
According also with the decrce of the Councell of Chalcedon, cap. 28: or, as it is related by Carranza, Sess. 16. Sedi veter is Romae patres merito dederunt Pri∣matum, quódilla ciuitas caeter is imperaret. And cap. 12. Quascunque ciuitates per literas regis Metropolitico ho∣nor arunt nomine. The old Fathers did worthily giue the Primacy to the See of old Rome, because it then ruled ouer all the residue, and all Cities vvere honoured with the title of Metropolitan by the Kings Letters Pattents.
But now at length, I will particularly answere to the obiections of Becane. 1. There were not Priests and Leuites in both the Kingdoms of Iuda; and Israel, as hath appeared out of the expresse words of the Scripture. 2. Ieroboam might lawfully say vnto his Priests, which were not Leuites, but of the lowest of
the people, and by him made and consecrated; You are exempt from the iurisdiction of the High Priest, vvhich is at Ierusalem. 3. If King Iames so often protest, That his Primacy is defined within those bounds and limits, wherein the godly Kings v••der the old Testament contained theirs; Then it followeth, that the Primacie of Kings is both godly and certaine, founded on holy Scriptures, and not doubtfull, or false, (as this falsary Martin affir∣meth) nor containeth so many parts, as are thought to be the offices thereof, by Hainric, Thomson, Burhil, Dr. Tooker, or any other Protestant. Secondly, that King Iames may lawfully, and by right, compell his subiects to the Oath of Supremacie. Thirdly, that Pope Paul the fist, Bellarmine; and Becane, resisted King Iames impi∣ously, and against all humanitie, by seeking to avert his subiects from their allegiance, & from taking both the one, and the other, so iust and godly an oath; Af∣ter the same manner, as Elymas did resist the Apostles, seeking to turn away the Proconsul frō the faith. Act. 13.8.
Hauing thus satisfied the questions of Becane to the full, and more then was needfull, dispelling their clow∣die mists, and breaking the snares of these Spyders webs; and so made vp into a perfect Concord and har∣mony, all the supposed English Iarres about the Kings supremacy; There now remaineth nothing but the Ie∣suits Epilogue, or Conclusion: which by changing on∣ly the persons, and tearmes, I may most aptly and iust∣ly returne vpon the Papists in this manner.
Extrauag. de trans. Episc. quan∣to.
in Concil. Constanti∣c••s. paral. Vspergen.
Extra de Appel. vt de∣bitus glossa.
Harding in Iewel, Def. par. 5. cap. 6. diuis. 4.
Lib. 1. Ce∣remon.
Francis. Zabarella.
Durand. de Ordin, et ministris.
Hard. Iew. part. 5. ca. 6. D. 7.
Pet. de Palu. de potest. Pap. art. 4.
Ioh. de. Parisijs de potest. Regia & Pap. 9. q. 3. Nemo.
Di. 40. ••ō nos. glossa.
Concil. Tom. 1. in purga. Sixti. 9. q. 3. cūta.
De Elect. et. elect. fun∣damenta in glossa. Et Clē. ••n pro∣oemio in glossa.
Hard. Iew. pag. 2. cap. 3. Di. 2.
Herue. de. pot. Pap. ca. 23.
Felin. de const. statut. canon.
Ext. Ioh. 22. cumint. nonnullos. gloss.
Dist. 96. sa∣tis culdenter.
Fran. Zaba. Hard. Iew. p. 5. c. 6. D. 6.
Extra de transl. Epis. ca. Quanto Hostiensis.
Paschalis Papa De E∣lect. et elect. potest. ca. Significasti.
Angel. Paris. Hard. Iew. p. 5. c. 6. Diuis. 14.
Pet. de Palud. de po••est. Pap. art. 4.
Nic. Cu••an
Extra de const. stat Canon Felinus
Cōc••tl. Lat. sub Leone sessio.
De Maior. vnam Sanctam.
15. Q 6. Authori••••te in glossa.
16. Q 1. Quicun{que} in glossa.
Panor. de diuortij
Summa Angel. dict. Papa.
De transl••t. Epis. Quanto Hostiensis.
Ioh. de Paris. de Pot. Reg. & Pap. Auentinus l. 6.
De Maior. Solitae Anto. de Ros••l.
Dist. 98. Si Imper. in gloss. Extra de fo••o cō∣petent. ca. Licet.
De Maior. vnam sanctam.
Auent. in Adriano 4. Anno 1154.
Hard. Iew. p. 5. c. 6. D. 8.
Auent. in Adrian 4.
Carion de Alexand. 3.
Caelestinus Papa. Vide Rogetū Ce∣str••nsem; et Houenden.
De Maior. Solitae. gl
Lyra in D••ut. c. 17.
De Pont. Po. li. 4. c. 5.
Panor. de Constit. c. 1.
De transl. Epis. Quan∣to glossa. Hostiensis ibidem.
Cod. de sa∣cra. sa: Eccl. l. omni In∣no.