15. CHAP. XIII. Of a Magistrate, and of the difference between Civil and Ecclesiastical power.

15. CHAP. XIII. Of a Magistrate, and of the difference between Civil and Ecclesiastical power.

CHAP. XIII. Of a Magistrate, and of the difference between Civil and Ecclesiastical power.

N ow it remaineth that I entreat of a Magistrate, who in my judgment may thus be described: Namely, A person chosen by the institution of God, to keep the laws as touching outward discipline, in punishing of transgressors with punishment of the body, and to defend and make much of the good. There are undoubtedly many persons elected by the institution of God, which are not Magistrates: such be the Ministers of Churches, which nevertheless are keepers of the word of God and of his law, but not only as touching outward discipline. Because it is the office of ministers, through the word of God to pierce even to the inward motions of the mind: because the holy Ghost joineth his power, both to the right preaching of his word, and also to the sacraments which are ministered in the Church. But the Magistrate only exerciseth outward discipline and punishment upon transgressors. The minister in the name of God, bindeth the guilty and unpenitent, and in his name excludeth them from the kingdom of heaven, as long as they shall so remain. The Magistrate punisheth with outward punishments, and when need requireth, useth the sword. Both of them

nourish the godly, but diversely. The Magistrate advanceth them with honors, riches and dignities. The minister comforteth them with the promises of God and with the sacraments. Wherefore the Magistrate is appointed to the end that the laws should be diligently kept, the guilty punished, and the good holpen and fostered. And certainly the law is a dumb Magistrate: and again, the Magistrate, is a living and speaking law, and is also the Minister of God (as Paul saith) to their praise which do well: and on the other side he beareth the sword against the wicked as a judge and revenger of God. Neither tend these things to any other end than to the safety of men.

2. Howbeit the form of Magistrates is not of one sort but manifold: as Monarchia, [the government of one] Aristocrasia [the rule of many good men,] and Politia [politic government.] Or else Tyrannis, [where one rules for his own commodity,] Oligarchia, [where a few be in authority,] and Democratia, [when the people bear the sway.] The descriptions and natures of which forms Plato, Aristotle, and other Philosophers, have elegantly described. Of all these manners of government the best is to be desired. And all men to whom it pertaineth ought to provide, that a good or tolerable estate, degenerate not into an evil one. But if it happen at any time that Tyrants or wicked princes obtain the governance, that must be suffered as much as the word of God giveth leave. The Jews were by violence oppressed of the Babylonians: whom nevertheless, God admonished that they should obey, and to pray for the King although he were a Tyrant, and possessed the kingdom of the Hebrews most wrongfully. Caesar also held

Jewry by Tyranny, and yet Christ said: Give that which is Caesar's unto Caesar, and the things that are of God unto God. The Apostles also have taught that we must obey princes and pray for them. Nero was a most

shameful beast, to whom notwithstanding the Apostle in his Epistle to the Romans showeth that obedience ought to be given, not only for fear but also for conscience sake. Phocas attained to the Empire of Rome, by evil practices, and most cruelly slew Maurice his prince, and also his children, whom nevertheless the Romans acknowledged for their Emperor: and Gregory the first, read unto the people his commandments and writings. But and if thou shalt demand what form of a public-wealth the Jews had, it may easily be known. At the beginning they had Aristocrasia [where the best sort ruled.] For God approved the counsel of Jethro, which was, that there should be chosen out wise men and courageous, and such as feared God which should govern the public-wealth, as it is written in Exodus and Deuteronomy. Yea and God himself with his spirit did so inspire these 70 men (whom he had commanded to be chosen as helpers of Moses in the government,) as they also prophesied. On this wise were the Israelites governed, although afterward they were ruled by a king.

3. But this must not be omitted that princes in the holy scriptures are not only called Deacons, or Ministers of God, but also Pastors: Of whom

Ezekiel complaineth for many causes, for that they cruelly and perversely fed the people of God. Homer also calleth his Agamemnon the pastor of the people. For they ought not to bear rule as thieves or hirelings, to fleece and to oppress, but to keep, nourish, and feed like Pastors. They are also called

Fathers, wherefore the Senators among the Romans were called Patres conscripti, that is, appointed Fathers. Neither was there a greater or more ancient honor in the Commonwealth, than to be called, The father of the Country. Yea also a Magistrate by the law of God is comprehended under this commandment, Honor thy father and thy mother. Princes then owe unto their subjects a fatherly love, and they ought always to remember that they

are not rulers over beasts, but over men, and that themselves also are men: who yet should be far better and more excellent, than those whom they govern, otherwise they are not fit to govern them. For we make not a sheep the chief ruler over sheep, but the Bellwether, and then the shepherd. And even as a shepherd excelleth the sheep, so ought they to whom the office of a Magistrate is committed, to excel the people. Now must we consider by whom Magistrates are ordained. That is sometime done by the consent of the Senate, sometime by the voices of the people, or by the will of the soldiers, or else by succession of inheritance. Howbeit these are but instruments. But the proper cause of Magistrates is God himself, which may be proved by many reasons. First there is by God kindled a certain light in the hearts of men, whereby they understand that they cannot live together without a guide: and from thence sprung the office of a Magistrate. The law of God also commandeth to obey Magistrates. And before the law given by Moses, as it is written in Genesis, God ordained that he which sheddeth man's blood, his blood also should be shed, not rashly in deed or by every man (for that were very absurd). We may then gather by those words, that a Magistrate was plainly instituted by God, that he should punish man-killers.

Paul also writeth that, all powers whatsoever they be, are ordained of God.

And Christ answered unto Pilate, Thou shouldest have no power against me, except it had been given thee from above. By these testimonies and reasons it is proved, that God is the true and proper cause of Magistrates.

4. But here some cavil saying: If all Magistrates be of God, then must all things be rightly governed: But in governing of public-wealths we see that many things are done naughtily and perversely. Doubtless, under Nero,

Domitian, Commodus, Caracalla, and Heliogabolus, good laws were despised, good men killed, and discipline of the City was utterly corrupted.

But if the Magistrate were of God, such things had never happened. This reason neither can nor ought anything to move us, because the office is to be separated from the person. And certainly it may be that he which hath the office may be a naughty and wicked man, when as nevertheless the authority itself is good and very profitable. For there is nothing so good, but that men by their naughtiness may use it ill. Wherefore it is no marvel, if there have been kings and Emperors which sometime have abused the power given them, which notwithstanding they were not so able to corrupt, but that men by it received many good things and commodities, as I have before showed. By the testimony of Daniel, it is most manifest that Magistrates are of God: For (saith he) he giveth and translateth kingdoms at his own pleasure. Furthermore, we see that the Monarch hath sometime been in the East, sometime in the South, afterward in the West, and sometimes in the North: and that otherwhile there have been good princes, otherwhile evil: sometimes have reigned noble men, and sometime men of obscure kindred. And we perceive, it oftentimes happeneth that riches or power further not to the obtainment or holding of a kingdom, and to think that these things are done by chance without the providence of God, it is most absurd.

5. Some Astronomer perhaps will say, that these changes or alterations are brought in by the stars: But Daniel, the Minister of truth, saith that it is God which changeth times. For even as he hath in the year appointed the seasons of times, so as it pleaseth him doth he sometimes establish princes, and sometime taketh them away. He cast down Saul, and he also promoted

David. And he foretold that he would so do, least it might have seemed to happen rashly or by chance. Yea and kingdoms and public-wealths, may be called certain workhouses, or shoppes of the will of God. For that is done in

them which God himself hath decreed to be done, although princes oftentimes understand it not. God called the Medes and the Assyrians, to afflict the Israelites: and those when it seemed good unto him he expelled and took away. He raised up the Persians against the Chaldeans, and the Grecians against the Persians, and lastly the Romans against all other nations. Who divided the kingdom of the Hebrews into Judah and Israel?

God verily did it. Ahias the Silonite did foretell that it should so come to pass, and said that the word was come forth from the Lord that it should so be. Who overthrew Ahab? Who caused Jehu to be anointed, but only God?

But there are certain tyrants, which destroy public-wealths. I grant it, but our wickedness and sins deserve it. For there be oftentimes so grievous sins, and so many that they cannot be corrected by the ordinary Magistrate, and by a gentle and quiet government of things. And therefore God doth then provide Tyrants to afflict the people: And yet for the most part he tempereth and qualifieth his punishment in placing among them good and godly princes. After the fall of Nero, he set up Vespasian: After Domitian he sent

Nerva and Trajan: After Commodus, Pertinax and Severus: After Heliogabalus, Alexander. But they which say: the wicked acts of Tyrants are not of God, yet do those things spread abroad into kingdoms and Empires:

Therefore Empires and kingdoms are not of God: they I say make a false Syllogism A secundum quid, ad simpliciter: that is, from that which is in some respect, unto that which is absolute. Neither is this a perfect conclusion. Certain things in a Magistrate are not of God, therefore the Magistrate himself is not of God. Or else they reason ill from Accidents:

For vices and wicked acts happen to public powers, but are not joined unto them by themselves, or by their own nature. But some man will doubt: If the Magistrate be an Ethnic and also a Tyrant, whether it be lawful for a

godly man to use his help and aid. What else? Paul appealed unto Caesar a most wicked Tyrant. But it may seem, he did against his own precepts. For in his first Epistle to the Corinthians, he reprehended those Christians which pleaded causes at the judgment places of the Ethnics. He justly reproved the Corinthians because there were Christians among them which might in the Church have decided their causes: Neither was it convenient that Christians should contend with Christians at the judgment places of the ungodly. But Paul when he appealed unto Caesar, had not to do with Christians, but with the Jews and president of Rome. Wherefore seeing he had not a faithful

Magistrate, neither could it otherwise be done, and his life also was sought, he did not ill in craving the tuition and help of the common Magistrate, although he were an Ethnic. For even as we use the Sun and Moon, so also is it lawful to use the public and ordinary Magistrate, what manner of man soever he be.

6. The Christian Church did even so, when as yet there were no Christian Emperors. For Paulus Samosatenus was condemned as a heretic, and being a Bishop was cast from his dignity. But because he would not go out of the house which belonged to the bishop, there was suit made unto Aurelianus the Emperor, and aid obtained at his hands, who compelled him to deliver his house unto the new Bishop. Who can say that the Church herein sinned, because it used the public Magistrate, though he were an Infidel? But let us return from whence we digressed, and let us constantly believe that the Magistrate is of God, though oftentimes (our sins deserving the same) many things are by him done wickedly and unjustly. Howbeit Hosea the Prophet seemeth yet to be against us when he saith: They have reigned but not by me. But we must understand that Hosea entreated of tyrants which neither regarded laws, neither nourished the good nor took away the evil from

among the people, and therefore they reigned not by God, but by their own lusts. They regarded their own affections, and not the law of God. Further they invaded kingdoms, being stirred up by their own lusts, and driven by their own ambition: not as they which felt the calling of God unto a kingdom. Neither did they take authority upon them, with a will to obey

God, but to satisfy their own ambition. This was not to reign by God. But that they were not promoted to the kingdom by the will of God, that is contrary well near to the whole scripture. For God called Nebuchadnezzar his servant, because he would use his labor to afflict the Israelites, whereas notwithstanding, it might have been said that he reigned not by God, because he fought against the Jews for his own pleasure sake, and not of a zeal to fulfill the will of God. So that the saying of Hosea the Prophet is nothing against us, but that we may believe that the Magistrate is of God, and that we ought to obey him. Paul saith, Let every soul be subject to the higher powers. The same is written to Titus. And in the first Epistle of Peter the 2nd chapter. And Paul to Timothy addeth, That we should pray for them.

But the Papists and they which will be called Ecclesiastical men, will not give ear hereunto: For they cry, that they are exempted from public and ordinary powers, whereas yet the Apostle used no exception, when he said,

Let every soul be subject to the higher powers: Again, He which resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God. Yea and Chrysostom also upon that place, saith, that the Apostles, Prophets, Evangelists, and Monks are comprehended under that Law. And Chrysostom wrote these things of Ecclesiastical persons: whenas nevertheless he himself was Bishop of Constantinople, and we had then Christian Emperors.

7. But it is a world to hear the arguments which these false ecclesiastical men use. In the Extravagants De Maioritate & Obedientia, in the chapter

Unam Sanctam, Boniface the eighth whom they write to have entered in as a Fox, reigned like a Lion, and died like a dog, saith that there be two swords in the Church. And least he should seem to speak it rashly, he citeth these words out of the 22nd Chapter of Luke: When I sent you without bag or scrip, did ye at any time want anything? They said unto him, No. Christ added: But now I say unto you, let every man take his scrip and wallet, and he which hath none let him sell his coat, and buy a sword. They said unto him, behold here are two swords. Christ answered, it is sufficient. Boniface saith: Two swords are sufficient for the Church: namely, the spiritual sword, and the temporal. Wherefore they which say that Peter had not an outward sword, do seem not to understand the words of Christ, wherein he said unto

Peter: Put up thy sword into thy sheath. Thy sword (saith he) and not another man's. For he had a sword of his own, although he were bidden to put it up. But there must needs be some order kept in these swords: seeing what powers so ever be, they be ordained by God. And there would be a great confusion, if, two swords being in the Church, the one should not be governed by the other. So then the Temporal sword ought to be governed by the spiritual. And to make this Argument more plain: The Church (saith he) hath two swords, but it useth not them after one and the selfsame manner.

For it exerciseth the spiritual sword, but the temporal sword ought to be drawn only at the beck and sufferance of the Church. This is so obscure, that it may in a manner seem to be a riddle. Howbeit this is his meaning, that the sword of the Emperor ought to be drawn only at the will and pleasure of the Pope: That when he commandeth, he must strike: and by sufferance, that is, he must go foreward in striking, so long as he listeth and will suffer it. These things therefore must be in order: and the order is, that the temporal sword be reduced unto God by the spiritual. For as saith that

Dionysius, (who is thought to be the Areopagite, whereas he is another) All inferior things are referred to the chiefest, but yet by a mean. Wherefore

(saith he) the temporal sword must be drawn at the Popes beck, that so it may be referred unto God. Thus we see it to be done at this day: For so often as the most holy father doth hold up his finger to make war against the Lutherans, he will have the Emperor forthwith to obey. And if any prince will not with competent submission obey him, straight way, legates are sent up and down, that all other Kings and Princes should bend themselves to his beck, and to vex and withstand him that will not obey him.

8. Boniface addeth moreover, that he himself is above all Kings and Princes. For principality is to be esteemed according to the dignity of the things which be exercised by it. We (saith he) exercise spiritual things, and they temporal: their sword therefore is inferior to ours, and they unto us. He addeth also another reason: They pay unto us tenths, but tenths are paid by the inferior unto the superior: wherefore seeing kings and Princes pay tenths, they testify that their lands and revenues belong to the Church, and that they are subject unto it. Besides this, he which blesseth, is greater than he which is blessed: but Bishops consecrate and anoint Kings. The Gloss addeth, that of Kings, only the right shoulder is anointed, but Bishops have their heads anointed. Kings are anointed with Oil, but Bishops with Chrism:

So then we must needs confess that Kings are inferior to Bishops.

Furthermore Kings receive their crown and scepter of Bishops. For who (saith he) invested Saul, and who David, but Samuel? Who anointed Jehu, but a Prophet sent by Helizeus? The thing also which is exercised by Bishops is greater, than that whereabout Kings are occupied. For Christ said unto Peter: Whatsoever thou shalt bind in earth, shall be bound in heaven.

This power is greater than all human power. And God said unto Jeremiah: I

will set thee over nations and kingdoms, that thou mayest root out and destroy, scatter and plant, therefore we are greater than all the power of Kings, and are exempted from their Law: So that the profane and lay powers of Emperors and Kings must be judged by Ecclesiastical persons, and ought by us to be appointed, and may by us be overthrown. For unto whom it belongeth to build, to the same it pertaineth to destroy: Therefore the spiritual Magistrate ought to judge of the Civil Magistrate. But if the spiritual offend in anything, of whom ought he to be judged? The lesser

(saith he) ought to be judged of the greater. Then of whom shall the Pope which is the highest of all be judged? Of no man (saith he) except God only: because he that is spiritual, is judged of no man, but he judgeth all things. Hath he not trimly erected his tyranny? He calleth only himself spiritual. The Glosser although he were otherwise gross enough, yet could he not be so much a block, but that he saw these things to be spoken very absurdly. how (saith he) is the Pope spiritual, if he be impure and wicked?

He expoundeth himself by this distinction: There is (saith he) one manner of spiritualty of the person, and another of the state: Then, if there be some spiritual person, he may reprove all men by a brotherly admonition, but he ought to be reprehended of no man: for that he being spiritual committeth nothing amiss. But otherwhile some person which is not spiritual in life and manners, ought nevertheless to be called spiritual because of his degree: as are many Bishops and Popes. Wherefore we must call the bishop of Rome, whatsoever he be, spiritual and most holy. Howbeit, what else is this, but to teach us to lie, and that if they will have a shameful harlot, yet they must be called most holy? Boniface at the last concludeth that all emperors and Kings must be subject to his power only. And he addeth a reason: unless we will together with the Manichee's appoint two beginnings. Which ought not

to be done: for Moses said not, In the beginnings, but in the beginning God created heaven and earth: wherefore (saith he) we define, determine, and pronounce, that all men ought of the necessity of salvation, to obey the Pope, as the chiefest power. And thus (trimly forsooth) he concludeth that all ecclesiastical persons are exempt from the civil Magistrate.

9. Before I come to confute this boasting more than Thrasonical, I think it expedient to speak of two manner of powers: namely, of the Ecclesiastical power and Civil power. In that it is said that the ecclesiastical power is preferred, above all Civil function, it is somewhat that they say, so it be rightly and aptly understood. All Ecclesiastical power is established by the word of God, so as without it, it is none at all. But the word of God is a common rule, whereby all things ought to be directed and tempered. For it teacheth in what manner the outward sword and public-wealth ought to be governed: And generally also it showeth how all things ought to be done of all men. So Ambrose when as Theodosius the Emperor raged too cruelly and without all consideration against the Thessalonians, persuaded him, that in all punishment of death, there should be 30 days space after the sentence given, least the Magistrate should do those things in a rage and fury, whereof although he afterward repented him, yet they might not be any more remedied. So, many Bishops oftentimes in things most weighty, used their authority, and many times either put away cruel wars, or else pacified them, and even while wars were in hand preached Sermons out of the word of God. So that the Ecclesiastical power after this manner comprehendeth all things, because out of the word of God it findeth how to give counsel in all things. For there is nothing in the whole world whereunto the word of God extendeth not itself. Wherefore they are far deceived, which use to cry, what hath a preacher to do with the public-wealth? What hath he to do with

wars? What with Pothecaries? What with Cooks? But let them tell me: when the Minister of the word perceiveth the law of God to be violated in these things, why should he not reprehend them by the word of God? Why should he not admonish them? Why should he not exhort them to cease from sin? Doubtless it is his part to correct sinners, not in deed with the sword or punishing by the purse, not by imprisonment, not by banishment, but after his own manner, that is, by the might and power of the word of God. Again, the Political power is extended to all things which pertain to political power. But after what manner? Shall civil power require good motions of the mind and inward repentance? It cannot cause these things: yet it must wish they were had, and use those means whereby they may be had. For it ought to have a care that Bishops, pastors, and teachers in the Church, do teach purely, reprehend fatherly, and by the word of God administer the Sacraments. This in deed the Magistrate doth not by himself, but he ought to have a regard that those may be in a readiness which should do them well. Wherefore either power extendeth most amply, and comprehendeth all things, but not after one and the self-same manner. And the rule of either of them is to be taken out of the word of God, the which doth plainly appear to be in the Church.

10. Again, there are two subjections, one is political and civil, whereunto all men are subject: who if they offend in anything against the laws, do look at the just Magistrates hand for imprisonment, punishment by the purse, banishment, death, and external punishment: nevertheless if they do well, honors, rewards, dignities, and praise. In this sort the civil power is not subject unto the Ministry of the word, because it cannot in this manner be punished. The other subjection is spiritual, that is, of faith and of obedience.

For straightway, as soon as men hear of their duty out of the word of God,

and that either this thing or that is to be done, or this or that to be avoided, they give place, believe and obey, because they perceive that it is the word of God which is spoken. And these are the ends of either power. And so must be understood that saying of Valentinian the Emperor, out of the Tripartite history: which we also have in the distinction 63rd, the chapter

Valentinianus. Choose (saith he) such a Bishop unto whom we which govern the Empire, may sincerely put under our necks, and use his admonitions as it were medicines, &c. By which words is understood that it belongeth to the Ecclesiastical power, to admonish out of the word of God for salvation. Albeit the same Emperor or afterward erred: For when he had appointed Ambrose Pretor of the City of Millaine, the people did choose him to be Bishop: which when the Emperor knew, he gave thanks unto God after this manner: I had appointed him ruler over the bodies of men, but thou wouldest have him ruler over the souls &c. Valentinian did not rightly put a difference between offices: why so? Ought Bishops to have a care only over souls, and not over bodies also? What if they give themselves unto Gluttony or drunkenness, or live licentiously touching outward behavior? Must they not reprove these things? Yes truly must they, neither must Princes have only a care over the bodies of men, and neglect their souls. For we do not imagine that a Prince is a Neatherd or Swineherd, to whom is committed a care only of the flesh, belly, and skin of his subjects, yea rather he must provide that they may live virtuously and godly. But what if Christian princes, when they are by the word of God admonished of public and most grievous sins, will not hear, neither amend that which they have naughtily committed? What I say shall the Bishop do in this case?

Ambrose excommunicated Theodosius the Emperor, when he exercised so grievous tyranny against the Thessalonians.

Innocentius also

excommunicated Archadius, when he had exiled John Chrysostom, which freely and truly admonished him, as we have it in the distinct. 96, chap.

Duo sunt, and in the distinct. 18, in the chap. Quoniam quidem. And they be the words of the 6th Synod, where it is decreed that every year there should be had two Synods. And if that princes would hinder them, let them be excommunicated.

11. But what do I make mention of these latter things? Let us read Eusebius in the 6th book, the 34th chapter: where he saith that Philip the Emperor, who lived in the time of Origen was the first Christian prince, and that he would have been present together with the faithful on Easter Even, and have communicated with them in prayers: but the bishop, because he was a wicked and naughty liver, rejected him among them that were put to penance, that he should make open confession before the Church and confess his sins, otherwise he could by no means be admitted unto the Communion. This did the Bishop of that time against the Emperor, and chief Monarch of the whole world. Wherefore, the civil power ought to be subject to the word of God which is preached by the Ministers. But in like manner the Ecclesiastical power is subject unto the civil, when the Ministers behave themselves ill, either in things human, or things

Ecclesiastical. For these powers are after a sort interchangeable, and sundry ways are occupied about the selfsame things, and mutually help one another, even as Aristotle unto Theodectes calleth Rhetoric and Logic interchangeable arts, because either of them are occupied in the selfsame things, after a sundry manner. The Ecclesiastical power, is subject unto the Magistrate, not by a spiritual subjection but by a political. For as touching the Sacraments and Sermons, it is not subject unto it, because the Magistrate may not alter the word of God, or the Sacraments which the

Minister useth. Neither can he compel the Pastors and teachers of the Church to teach otherwise, or in any other sort to administer the Sacraments, than is prescribed by the word of God. Howbeit Ministers, in that they be men and Citizens, are without all doubt subject together with their lands, riches, and possessions unto the Magistrate. So Christ paid tribute, so also did the Apostles and the whole primitive Church there being most holy men. Their manners also are subject unto the Censures and judgments of the Magistrates.

12. We say moreover that Ministers are subject unto the Magistrate, not only as touching those things which I have rehearsed, but also (as I before signified) concerning their function. Because, if they teach not right, neither administer the Sacraments orderly, it is the office of the Magistrate to compel them to an order, and to see that they teach not corruptly, and that they mingle not fables, nor yet abuse the Sacraments, or deliver them otherwise than the Lord hath commanded. Also if they live naughtily and wickedly, they shall put them forth of the holy Ministry. This did Solomon, who deposed Abiathar, and put Sadock in his place, as it is written in the first book of kings the 2nd chapter: And in the New Testament. Justinian displaced Silverius and Vigilius. And this I doubt not, but was done sometime by other princes. But how justly, I will not presently declare. This one thing I will say, that it was lawful in the causes now alleged. But some man will say that I speak now of the fact and not of the right: yea but I speak also of the right. For the king ought to have with him the law of God written because he is ordained a keeper, not only of the first table, but also of the latter. So then he which offendeth in any of them both, ran in danger of his power. But although a king may remove an unprofitable and hurtful

Bishop, yet cannot a Bishop (on the other side) depose a king if he have

offended. John in deed reproved Herod, but he displaced him not of his kingdom. Ambrose and Innocentius excommunicated Emperors, but they proceeded no further. Yea and Christ called Herod a Wolf, but he took not away his kingdom from him, and he paid tribute unto Tiberius a most wicked prince. Neither was he at any time author to any man to shake off his yoke. Wherefore let Popes take heed: by what right they remove at their own pleasure kings and Emperors out of their places. This did neither any of the Prophets, nor the Apostles, nor yet Christ. The popes boast that they have great power: but if the same be any it consisteth wholly in the word of God. Let them teach, preach, and admonish, if they will exercise their power, otherwise the civil and temporal power, which they so much boast of is far from the Ecclesiastical Ministers. Briefly, as there is found no king nor Emperor so great that is not subject to the word of God, which is preached by the Ministers: so on the other side is there no Bishop, which having offended, but ought to be reproved by the civil Magistrate. What difference soever there be, the same (as I have said) is wholly as touching the manner of reproving. This the Ministers of the Church do by the word, and Princes by outward punishments. But our false Ecclesiastics will be princes and reign, and yet Christ would be no king. And when he was sought for to the end he should be made a king, he utterly refused it, yea rather he plainly confessed, that his kingdom is not of this world. He said also unto the Apostles: Princes of the nations do bear rule over them, but ye shall not so do. Peter also whose successors these men profess themselves to be, warneth Ministers that they should not exercise dominion over the Clergy: But these men will have prisons, soldiers, and swords, and stir up wars as they list themselves.

13. Perhaps they will object unto us the Assamonites out of the Old Testament, who for a certainty were both kings and Priests, and confounded both the powers. That History indeed is written in the books of the Machabites. But we must see whether they did it rightly or else wickedly and ambitiously. Doubtless I think they did it not orderly: for God by his word, had many times adjudged the Kingdom to be given unto the Tribe of Judah, even unto the time of Messias. And contrarily he commanded the Levites that they should possess no lands, and much less to occupy a kingdom among their brethren. But if a man had rather say, that they did this by a certain secret revelation and hidden judgment of God, he shall not further the cause of these men; seeing that which is done after this manner must not be drawn to an example: For I think rather that they offend in so doing. Certainly they did well, when they delivered their country from tyranny: but that being performed, they ought not to have taken the kingdom upon them: and God declared plainly that the same Act of theirs displeased him. For as we gather out of Josephus, that house afterward was never void of troubles. They further object unto us, that Peter slue Ananias and Sapphira, and that Paul strake Elimas the sorcerer with blindness. This is true in deed, but they did these things by the word of God, not by violence, not by the sword, neither by help of an executioner. Let these men do the same things by the word, and we will regard them. Why do they not hear Paul unto Timothy: Let no man going on God's warfare, wrap himself in cares of this life? If they will go on warfare for God, why do they in such sort hinder themselves with worldly business? Have they so much leisure from their own affairs as they can have a care over other men's? Let them answer plainly: would they at this day abide that any king should attempt to teach the Gospel or administer the Sacraments? They would not suffer it.

Neither did God himself also suffer it. But he strake Ozeas with Leprosy when he would have burnt incense unto God. Why then do they invade the bounds of other men? These functions ought to be separated, because either of them requireth a whole man apart by himself: yea rather there hath scarcely been found any one man, at any time, which could rightly execute either of them, so hard is the execution of them both. Howbeit both of them do one help another: for the politick Prince giveth judgment: and the Ecclesiastical in deed doth not give judgment, but he teacheth how judgment ought to be given. Have not respect (saith he) of persons in judgment. Afflict not the poor and stranger, receive no bribes, and so forth.

So on the other side, the civil Magistrate preacheth not, neither administereth the sacraments. But unless these things be rightly ordered, he ought to punish the Ministers. And to be brief, there are two things to be considered of us in this comparison. In the Civil Magistrate is to be considered both the power and also the man which beareth and exerciseth the power. He in respect that he is a Christian man is subject to the word of God: and in respect that he beareth authority and governeth, he ought also to be subject unto the same word of God; seeing out of the same he ought to seek rules to govern and bear rule. In the Minister of the Church also is to be considered both the ministry itself, and also the person which executeth it. As touching the person, the minister is subject unto the Civil power. For both he is a Citizen, and he also payeth tribute as other men do, and is under the correction of manners. But as concerning the Ministry, he is also subject some way unto the Magistrate. For if either he teach or administer the sacraments against the word of God, he must be reprehended by the Civil

Magistrate. And yet must he not seek for rules and reasons of his function at

the same Magistrates hand, but out of the word of God. By this distinction we may easily understand the differences and agreement of either power.

14. Now resteth that we come to that Thraso Boniface, to confute his Arguments. First out of that saying which the Apostles answered, Behold here are two swords, and Christ added, It is sufficient: he gathereth that the Church hath two powers and both of them committed unto him. To this I answer, that it is possible, that sometimes there may be two swords in the Church, but they have not always been therein, neither perhaps shall ever hereafter be. What outward sword had the Church in the time of Christ and of the Apostles and Martyrs? But yet now (they will say) it hath: I grant, because Kings and Emperors are Christians which in old time were Ethnics.

The Church also hath husbandry, trade of merchandise, the art of building, and other such like. For they which exercise these things, are members of the Church: but that cometh to pass as the Schoolmen speak accidentally: since there may be a Church though it had none of these things. So now because there are princes in the Church, it is said to have an outward sword.

But because princes in our time are a part of the Church, it doeth not therefore follow that the sword of Princes is the sword of Ministers: even as although there be in the Church husbandry and the trade of merchandise, and also the Art of building, it cannot thereby be gathered, that Ministers are husbandmen, merchants, and Carpenters.

15. Now come I to the place of the Evangelists: The Apostles say, that they wanted nothing when they were sent without wallet and scrip: unto whom Christ said: Let everyone take unto him his scrip and wallet, and he which hath none, let him sell his coat and buy a sword. What would Christ signify by these words? Nothing else truly but to show that the state and condition of times afterward, should be far otherwise, then it had been

before. Hitherto saith he (while I was with you,) ye felt no grief, neither wanted you anything. But now harder times are at hand, now shall ye have need of coats, scrips and swords. By these words he declared that he should depart from them, and that he would send them into the whole world to teach and preach the Gospel in which Ministry, they should meet with so many adversities, that they should think themselves to have need of swords.

It is a figurative speech, whereby is understood one thing by another, as is that in Genesis when the Lord said, that he repented that he had made man.

For God is not in very deed touched with repentance, but he doth that, which men repenting have used to do: that is, he changeth the fact. And in very deed he then by the flood destroyed mankind which he had created. So now he instructed not his Disciples to fight with the sword, but only by a certain circumlocution describeth the condition of the time to come. And even as a long robe oftentimes signifieth tranquility and peace, so in this place a sword noteth troublesome and unquiet times. After this manner

Chrysostom interpreteth these words when he expoundeth this place of Paul, Salute Prisca and Aquila. The Lord (saith he) hath not broken the law, which before he made, saying: And he which striketh thee on the one cheek, turn unto him the other. Bless those that curse you: pray for them that persecute you. How then doth he command his disciples to buy themselves swords? He meant no such thing (saith Chrysostom:) For it is a figurative kind of speech, whereby he signified, that he should be taken away from them, and that they should be afflicted with many calamities. These words are not so to be taken as they appear at the first sight. In another place,

Christ also saith: That which ye have heard in the ear, preach upon the house tops. And yet we never read, that the Apostles stood upon the house tops when they preached unto the people: Neither in very deed had it been

decent, that leaving the appointed place and the Temple, they should have spoken from the house top. The sense was, that those things which they heard privately, they should speak openly and manifestly. The Lord also said: Destroy this temple, and in three days I will restore it: Which also is spoken figuratively: For he commanded not to overthrow the Temple of Solomon (as the Evangelist himself interpreteth, but he understood that which he spake as touching the temple of his own body, wherein (as Paul said) dwelled all the godhead bodily. But to return to the matter: That Luke so meant, Chrysostom proveth by these things which follow: to wit, that it might be fulfilled of the son of man which was spoken of him: And he was counted with the wicked. But the Apostles understood not Christ: for he thought that they had treated simply, and spoken (as the words sounded) of an outward sword: And so did Boniface wholly interpret the same. And in that Christ addeth: It is enough, he understood that two swords are sufficient in the Church, so as there ought none to be neither more nor fewer. But Chrysostom understandeth it far otherwise. For when Christ perceived that the Apostles understood him not, he by that answer declared that he would let that matter pass. And indeed so is a Schoolmaster wont to say unto a Child, which yet understandeth not that which is taught him: It is well. Otherwise undoubtedly two swords were not sufficient against all the adversaries of Christ. Moreover there should have needed Corselets and shields. Chrysostom therefore concludeth that the speech was figurative and spoken in a parable. Furthermore if the exposition of Boniface be received, we must think, that the Church in the time of the Apostles, should have had two swords, which is most far from the truth.

16. Howbeit let us come to that which Christ said unto Peter, Put up thy sword into thy sheath. Thy sword (saith Boniface) not another man's sword.

Now what gathereth he by these words? Although Peter have his sword, yet if he be commanded to put it up, how can he have it drawn: or to what end hath he a sword, if he may not use it? But perhaps Boniface will answer: I have needed a sword, but I use it not, otherwise than by the hand of another.

Or, I use not mine own sword, but the sword of the Emperor and of other Princes. For they ought to draw the sword at the assignment and sufferance of the Church. I would gladly demand, whether Christ, when he bad Peter to put up his sword, meant this, that he should indeed use it, as he listed and would himself, but yet by the labor of another man. Assuredly that which a man doth by another, he seemeth to do it himself. If a man, by money or gifts, get one to kill his enemy, although he do it not with his own hand, yet nevertheless he should be a murderer: otherwise Princes do not with their own hand kill the guilty, but command the hangman to do the execution.

There is in this answer of Boniface a deceit of Equivocation. For we demand whether an Ecclesiastical Minister may bear the office of a Magistrate, and use a civil sword: and they remit us to the sword of Peter, a man otherwise private. But Bernard in his 4th book de Consid. unto

Eugenius, seemeth thus to interpret the two swords. I grant that Bernard hath some such like things, but yet not the same altogether. Howbeit we must remember in what time Bernard lived, he lived at that time when things were corrupted in the Church. And if a man read those his books de

Consideratione, he shall see that he grievously complaineth of the corruption of his times. Eugenius was by the Romans excluded the City, and perhaps he devised how to restore himself. Wherefore Bernard exhorted him to preach the Gospel, that he would deal against the Romans, rather with the word and with sermons than by the sword. Eugenius said: What meanest thou? Wouldest thou have me to feed Serpents and Dragons, and

Beasts? Yea (saith Bernard) assail them, howbeit with the word, not with the sword. And in another place he saith: If thou wilt have both swords, thou shalt lose both. Neither are we to think, that Eugenius would by himself have fought: but peradventure he assayed to move war by others: from which purpose Bernard dissuaded him. And thus much of him.

17. But that which Boniface added, that those swords of the Church ought to be ordered (namely that the one should be subject to the other, which he proveth by this saying of Paul: Those powers which be ordained, be ordained of God) manifestly testifieth how he wresteth the scriptures. For this word ordinatae that is, ordered, is in Greek written τεταγμέναι, which is nothing else than instituted or appointed. Notwithstanding, put the case it be so as Boniface hath expounded it, what manner of order I beseech you shall this be? Certainly such as the minister should teach, and that the civil power should hear and believe. But this toucheth not the Pope, which teacheth not at all. The lowest things (saith Dionysius) are by means reduced to the highest. Wherefore Boniface concludeth, that the external sword is brought unto God by the spiritual sword. In very deed I will easily grant, that the sword of the spirit which is the word of God, is the mean whereby the other sword, namely, the external ought to be tempered and directed unto God. But why doeth not the Pope retain this mean? Why useth he not the word? Why teacheth he not? Why preacheth he not? Princes which go astray, are not by him reduced into the right way: nay rather on the contrary part, the Pope and Bishops of the Church are sometimes rebuked, and justly reproved of Princes. Doubtless Aaron being high Priest, fell grievously in making the golden calf, and obeying the foolishness of the people. Moses blamed him grievously who as it appeareth, was a civil magistrate. For toward the end of Deuteronomy, he is called a king. And

when the priests abused the money which was offered for the reparations of the Temple, who remedied that but only Joash the king? I will not speak of David and Solomon, and others which distinguished the lots of the Priests, and orders of the Levites. And I will not now prove these things by anymore examples, seeing they are manifest enough by themselves. Wherefore I grant that the civil power may be corrected by the ministers through preaching of the word of God. But the Pope useth not this kind of government, but rather an incredible tyranny. They boast moreover, that they themselves are greater in dignity, for that they exercise spiritual and heavenly things: whereas Princes are occupied only about earthly and civil matters. Be it so: For we deny not but that ministers are occupied, about things greater and more divine than magistrates are. But doeth the Pope alone minister them? Nay rather, he never doeth it at all. Wherefore if the dignity of the ministry depend of those things, then will it follow, that many

Bishops and Priests do in dignity far excel the Pope which never preacheth, and to few or none administereth the Sacraments.

18. Let us come to the Tithes, by the payment of which Boniface laboreth to prove, that all Princes are subject unto him. This argument seemeth to have some show, because at the first appearance it agreeth, with the 7th chapter of the Epistle to the Hebrews, where Paul proveth the dignity of Christ to be greater than the dignity of the priesthood of the Levites. For thus he gathereth: Abraham paid tenths unto Melchizedek, at which time

Levi was not yet, but was at that time in the loins of Abraham, and so was tithed in him. And he which payeth Tithes unto another, confesseth himself by the same thing to be his inferior. Christ was priest according to the order of Melchizedek. whereupon the Apostle concludeth that the Levitical priesthood was much inferior unto the priesthood of Christ. I have opened

the fountain from whence Boniface derived his Argument. The place is very dark and needeth explication: And moreover Boniface doth not aptly apply it to his purpose. First we must understand that Tithes in the old time pertained unto Ceremonies, and that as well in Melchizedek, as in the Levites: Because in either Priesthood, they were referred unto Christ. And either Priesthood was in very deed a figure of Christ. For even as the Levitical priest entered once every year into the most holy place, and that never without blood: So Christ by his own blood, entered once into the Tabernacle, that is into heaven. And again: Melchizedek, for that he had neither Father nor Mother, resembled Christ, who in respect that he is God had no mother, and in respect that he is man wanted a Father. But what signified the tenths in either priesthood? Truly they signified nothing else, but that it behooved the old fathers to acknowledge that whatsoever they had, came from Christ. By that ceremony, the people worshipped Christ himself. And if a man will compare Melchizedek and the Priesthood of Levi together, although both of them seem to be a shadow of Christ, yet shall he perceive that he is more expressly and manifestly signified by Melchizedek, as the Epistle to the Hebrews testifieth. Boniface saith: We receive the Tithes of all lay men. Ye take them in deed, but now that Christ is come, the paying of Tithes is no more a ceremony, as it was before the coming of Christ, when by Tithes men worshipped Christ which was to come in the flesh, and confessed, that they ought unto him, both themselves, and all that they had. After the very which manner they paid the first fruits of all that they had. Nevertheless our men in these days receive Tithes: but by what law? Truly not by the ceremonial law, but by a moral Law: since it is requisite that the Minister should be sustained by the people: For the laborer is worthy of his reward: And he which serveth the Gospel ought to live by

it. So then, whether stipends be paid unto Ministers out of lands or out of houses, either in ready money or in Tithes, it maketh no matter, so that they be not maintained dishonestly but honestly. In deed these rewards in some places do retain the old manner of Tithes. Howbeit in many places they are not called Tithes, but stipends or wages. And doubtless they be rather rewards which are due to the labors of Ministers than Tithes.

19. And as concerning the Argument propounded, we must understand, that such rewards and stipends are things indifferent: for they are sometimes paid unto inferiors, and sometimes to superiors. For tributes, which are given unto kings and princes, are their stipends which we give unto them, partly to nourish and sustain them, and partly to confess that we are subject unto them: and lastly that they may have wherewithal to defend both us and the commonwealth. And sometime inferiors also do receive stipends. For princes pay them unto soldiers: and yet can we not therefore say, that the soldiers are greater than kings and princes. Notwithstanding I would not be thought, that I speak these things to diminish the dignity of the Ecclesiastical Ministry, but that it may be understood that these men's

Arguments are very trifling. Neither doubt I to affirm that the Church itself which payeth the stipend unto the Minister, is greater than the Minister. So that if we speak of Tithes as they are at this day given unto Ministers, it followeth not that they should be greater which pay them. But in that kings and Emperors are consecrated and anointed of Bishops, and in that they receive the crown and sword of them, it nothing helpeth their cause. For if we speak of the civil power, that is not given by the Bishop but by God. But this is there done, to the intent that after the king or Emperor is chosen of God in such manner as is agreeable, prayers should be made for him in the assembly of the Church, that God may confirm and strengthen his heart that

he may increase godliness in him, and pour into him the fear of his name, prosper his counsels, and so make happy his actions, that they may prove profitable unto the Church and unto the public-wealth. And the Bishop, while these things are in doing, is the mouth of the Church, and goeth before it in expressing the prayer. And this anointing was derived of an old ceremony and custom of the Jews. And that the king receiveth not his power of the Bishop, but of God, even their own decrees do testify. In the distinct. 96, in the chap. Si Imperator, Gelasius saith, that the Emperor hath the privileges of his power at the hand of God. What doth Boniface then arrogantly challenge to himself? Even that which belongeth unto God only.

For as Paul saith: All power is of God. In the Code, De Iure veteri enucleando, Law the first, Justinian declareth that his power was given him by the Majesty of God. And the gloss in the Extravagants De majoritate & obedientia, in the Chapter Unam sanctam, towards the end saith, that power is given unto kings by God only: and that therefore they do indeed receive the crown of the Bishop and the sword from the Altar.

20. But let us more nearly examine the Argument of Boniface: I (saith he) give power unto Emperors: Therefore I am greater than Emperors. Let this most blessed Thraso answer me: Who consecrated him when he was chosen

Pope? Truly the bishop Hostiensis: Let us therefore conclude that the bishop Hostiensis, is greater than the Pope. And if that follow not, then is also the Argument of Boniface weak, because, (as I have showed) it is laid upon a rotten foundation. For it is not the bishops that give power unto kings.

Moreover have there not been many Emperors which were never consecrated by bishops, and yet notwithstanding were Emperors no whit the less? Neither were the old Grecian Emperors so anointed. It is therefore a new invention. But what if I prove that the chief bishop was sometime

consecrated by the civil Magistrate? Undoubtedly Moses consecrated Aaron though nevertheless (as hath been said) Moses was a civil prince. So that Boniface laboreth in vain about his consecration, because he gathereth nothing thereby. He boasted moreover of the keys: We (saith he) have the power of binding and loosing. But the power of the keys consisteth herein, that ye should preach the word of God truly. For he which believeth the Gospel, is loosed; and he which believeth not, is bound. But when ye neither preach nor teach, neither can ye bind nor lose. And farther this subjection which we have granted is spiritual: namely of faith and of obedience: and not civil and with dominion. Afterward was Jeremiah objected, unto whom the Lord said: I have appointed thee over nations and kingdoms, &c. First I demand here what kings Jeremiah directed, or from whom he took away their Empire, and what new kings he ordained? There can be none showed. Therefore what do these words signify: I set thee over nations and kingdoms? Nothing else than that by the spirit of prophesy, and word of God, he should foretell what kingdoms God would overthrow because of sin, and what new ones he would institute. Why do not the Popes so exercise their power? Let them set before kings and princes of the earth the threatening's of God, and let them in this manner be over nations and kingdoms. Could Jeremiah be called the cause of the overthrow of kingdoms? He was not properly the efficient cause, but only a certain occasion. For when he had admonished the king of Judah, and he believed him not, the prophet by his preaching was some occasion, that he should be condemned and overthrown. So Paul saith: To some we are a savor of life unto life, and to other the savor of death unto death. When as yet the Apostle properly killed no man, but his preaching after a sort brought death unto those which would not believe. It is God therefore that pulleth down

and overthroweth, planteth, and scattereth: neither disdaineth he sometimes to call us his fellow-workers.

21. Boniface goeth on: The lay power ought to be judged by the Ecclesiastical. But by what kind of judgment? Verily by this, that in the Church is set forth the wrath of God against sinners, and that they be admonished and corrected by the holy scriptures. Nevertheless that Bishops may expel kings and put them out of their kingdoms, where is that permitted? From whence have they it? What charters will they bring for it?

Again that is most intolerable which he saith: namely that the Pope can be judged of no man. And yet John the 23rd was in the Council of Constance deposed, and not only by God, but also by men. Thus do these men make and repeat Canons, and the same they allow and disallow, as often as they think good. Yea and Emperors have sometimes thrust out and put down

Popes as it is before said. Paul to the Galatians saith, If an Angel from heaven preach any other Gospel, let him be accursed. If the Pope (which may be and in times past hath been) obtrude wicked opinions, who shall pronounce him accursed? Shall he in no wise be judged of any man? The Church (no doubt) shall give sentence upon him, and the Magistrate, (for that he is the principal part of the Church) shall not only judge together therewith, but shall also execute the sentence. Further it belongeth to the Magistrate to provide, that the goods of the Church be not given to the enemies of godliness. So as if Bishops become enemies of the Church, a faithful Magistrate ought not to suffer the goods of the Church to be wasted by them. The Canonists have this oftentimes in their mouth, that for the office sake is given the benefit. Therefore when they do not their office, ought the Magistrate to suffer them to enjoy their benefices? But let us hear how Boniface proveth that he can be judged of no man. Because, He that is

spiritual (saith he) judgeth all things, but he himself is judged of no man. A goodly and well applied Argument I promise you. But let us see what kind of judgment Paul writeth of in that place. Verily he speaketh not of the common kind of judgment, whereby men are either put to death, or put out of their room, he entreateth there only of the understanding of things divine, and which avail unto salvation. These things (I say) belong properly unto the judgment of the spiritual man. But as touching judgment seat and knowledge of civil laws, Paul never thought of them [in that place] which is easily perceived by his words: We receive (saith he) not the spirit of this world, but the spirit which is of God. If thou wilt demand for what use the spirit is given us: He answereth: To the end, we should know those things that are given us of God. And because the spirit of this world cannot give judgment of things that be divine, it is added: The natural man perceiveth not those things which be of the spirit of God. The spiritual man judgeth all things. What? Doeth he judge also civil and public causes? No not so: but he judgeth those things which belong to the salvation of men: he himself is judged of no man. Assuredly, both Peter and Paul, were judged by the civil power, unto which Paul appealed, that he might be judged there: and yet were they spiritual. But that place must thus be understood: He that is spiritual in that he is such as one, cannot in things divine and such as pertain to salvation, be rightly judged of any man, which is not endued with the same spirit that he is of. The wicked sort and worldlings, account him oftentimes for a seditious, impure, and infamous fellow: But only God and his spirit looketh upon the hearts. Lastly Boniface concludeth, that there is one chief power only, and that belongeth to the Pope, least we should with the Manichees seem to make many beginnings. And he addeth: that God in the beginning, and not in the beginnings created the world. We also detest

the Manichees and affirm, that there is one only beginning, and pronounce one only fountain, and offspring of all powers, namely, God and his word, without which there can be no power either civil or Ecclesiastical. For the foundation of either of them dependeth of the word of God, and so we make but one beginning and not two. Further if Boniface will urge these words in Genesis: In the beginning God created, &c. there ought to be but one only king in the world. For when Paul said: One Lord, one Faith, one Baptism, he added not: One Pope.

22. At the length our Thraso cometh so far, as he excludeth them from the hope of salvation, which acknowledge not the Pope for the chief head and Prince of the Church. But when there were two or three Popes all at one time, which thing both happened, and also endured for the full space of 60 years, it must needs be that those which at that time were of Boniface his opinion, should confess themselves then to be Manichees, and to have established two beginnings. Again, what think they of the Grecians, of the Persians and Christians which dwell in the East part, seeing they acknowledge not the Pope, who nevertheless read the scriptures, believe in our Lord Jesus Christ, and both are, and also are called Christians? All those

Boniface excludeth from the hope of salvation. This is the ambition and unspeakable tyranny of the Popes. When we object unto the Papists these words of Paul: Let every soul submit itself to the higher powers, they answer: That every soul ought to be subject unto the higher power, but yet to their own, not to other men's power: otherwise it were need that Frenchmen should be subject to the Spaniards, and the Spaniards to the Germans, which because it is absurd, it is concluded, that every man ought to obey his own Magistrate. But now the Clergy acknowledge the Bishops for their head, and that they should be subject unto them: And the Bishops

acknowledge the Archbishops and Primates, and they lastly the Pope. After this manner (say they) we obey the Pope and satisfy Paul. What have we to do with Kings, and the civil Magistrate? Howbeit this is nothing else than shamefully to abuse the words of the Apostle. Do they not see that they divide the public-wealth into two bodies, which ought to be but one body only? For when they divide the kingdom of the Clergy from the kingdom of the Laity, they make in one kingdom two peoples, and set over either people his Magistrate: and thereby it cometh to pass that the Clergy which be

Frenchmen, seem not to be Frenchmen, and the Germans seem not to be Germans, and this maketh not conjunction but division. Besides this, of what power (I beseech you) speaketh Paul? Verily not of Bishops or Archbishops, but of that power which beareth the sword. He doth not without a cause (saith he) bear the sword. He speaketh of the power to whom tribute is paid. For (saith he) even for this cause ye pay tribute. But Bishops neither bear sword, nor yet require tributes of the people.

Wherefore Paul speaketh not of them. And though that in Germany Bishops have the sword, and gather tributes and customs, they do not that in respect that they be Bishops, but in that by accident they have the civil power joined to them, how rightly, let themselves see to it. But it is manifest that Paul spake of the civil power, unto which he commanded that every soul should obey. Neither is the interpretation of Origen probable, wherein he affirmeth that Paul said: Every soul, and not every spirit: Because (saith he) the spiritual man is moved with no affections, neither possesseth anything in the world, therefore he is not subject at all to outward power. And so Paul commandeth every soul, that is every living man to obey the civil power.

But what? Was not Christ spiritual? Who was more spiritual? And yet he acknowledged the superior power, and paid tribute. What say you to the

Apostles, were not they spiritual? And yet never exempted themselves from the civil power: nay rather, they obeyed it, and taught others to obey the same also.

23. But let us see further what answer our Boniface men make. They say that they have not this power ordinarily, and by the right of their function, but granted them by the privileges and gifts of Princes. And why (say they) is it not lawful for us to enjoy the privileges and liberality of Princes?

Notwithstanding we ought here to have a regard not what princes have don, but what they ought to have done. God without doubt hath made subject every soul to the higher power it was never lawful for any Prince to break that law. Neither doeth human reason see better than the providence of God what should become of the affairs of mankind. And the event itself hath sufficiently declared, how much that remissness of Princes hath profited.

For after that Bishops and false Ecclesiastics got themselves once from the subjection of the civil power, they straightway became far worse than they were before, and made the people which were committed to their charge nothing the better. Wherefore let them cease to say that Emperors and Kings have given them these things: let them rather hear the word of God, wherein they are commanded to obey Princes. But they have not only withdrawn themselves from obedience towards princes, but have also claimed to themselves an immunity or freedom. And an immunity is a liberty from doing of homages, and bearing of civil burdens. And among burdens, are numbered tributes and customs. Tributes are those which are paid of lands and possessions. Customs are those which are paid of merchandise, and of those things, which are either carried out or brought in. These things Ulpian calleth the Sinews of the commonwealth, as without which it cannot either consist or be governed. By what right therefore and reason have these men

withdrawn themselves from the public utility? With what face do they boast of such liberality of Princes, which neither Christ, nor the Apostles, nor the Prophets used? And although they have this (as they say) by the gifts of Kings and Emperors, yet must they take heed that it be not hurtful unto the Citizens, and while they themselves be eased, others be above measure burdened. And yet are they not by privileges and laws of Princes exempted from all burdens. In deed they are freed from personal burdens: and that not without great reason, which even the Ethnic Princes saw also. In the digests

De vacatione & excusatione munerum, in the law Praetor, Ulpianus saith:

If a man have gotten a benefice, and cannot without hurt of conscience be absent from it, he is acquitted. And Constantine the Emperor, in the Code

De Episcopis & Clericis, law the first and second, exempteth them from personal and vile burdens. Personal burdens are those which are accomplished by the industry of the mind, and labor of the body. Vile burdens are these: as to burn lime, to dignity sand, to keep the Conduits, to heat the bath, and such other like sort: from these burdens they are worthily exempted, because the ministry, by vile exercises would grow unto contempt. And they are made free from personal burdens, because when they should give their minds to holy things, they ought not to be withdrawn to other things. Princes therefore have rightly granted these things to Ecclesiastical men, that they should not be absent from the study of Religion, and because they should not be contemned of the common people.

24. But what if a man claim himself to be a minister, only by his apparel and garments, and doeth nothing in the Church, should this immunity also be granted unto him? No undoubtedly. Yea Justinian in the Code De

Episcopis & Clericis, in the law Generaliter Sancimus, saith, that he meaneth only of those, which diligently give themselves to holy things, and

not of Vagabonds and Idle persons which only brag of the name of the ministry. Moreover Ministers are not loosed from ordinary charges although they be exempted from extraordinary burdens. Ordinary burdens be those which are always imposed by the commandment of the laws: extraordinary are those, which be exacted only for some present necessity, and afterward cease. So that if Ecclesiastical men have manors or lands as other Citizens have, they ought to pay for them. For the Church when it receiveth possessions, it taketh them together with their burdens. But they are free from extraordinary tributes, because in the old time Ecclesiastical men were poor, and besides necessary food and apparel had nothing remaining unto them, or if perhaps there remained anything, all the same whatsoever it were was bestowed upon the poor, but now it is clean contrary: for both they abound in riches, and they bestow very little upon the poor. And yet if any great necessity happened, they were also constrained to pay extraordinary charges: as if there were any high ways to be amended, and any bridges to be made, or any ships to be built for transporting of an army as appeareth in the Code, by the laws of Emperors. Neither doeth brotherly charity suffer, that when other are burdened, they should lie still idle in wealth and riches: neither is it to be abidden, that they should be eased and others charged.

25. Yet the Pope in his decretals (De Immunitate Ecclesiae, in the chapter Non minus, where the words of the Lateran Council are cited, and in the chapter, Adversus consules) will have the ecclesiastical men to be utterly exempted. And Boniface the 8th, in 6, De immunitate Ecclesiarum, in the chapter Clericis Laicos, permitteth them not to pay anything: yea and he excommunicateth the Prince, which taketh tribute of a Minister of the Church, and also the minister himself which payeth it. This law as being too

cruel, Benedictus the 11th after a sort mitigateth in the Extravagants De immunitate Ecclesiae, in the chapter Quod Olim. Yet he permitteth not the Prince to do anything without asking Counsel of the Bishop of Rome. For he indeed doth not excommunicate those Princes which receive tribute of ecclesiastical men, but only those which exact it of them. Seeing he permitteth not, that Princes should exact anything in their own right, which yet he sometimes permitteth in case of necessity: as in danger of Religion and life: so that first there be had the consent of the Bishop and clergy, and afterward also the Pope to allow of the fact. So long then hath he decreed that they must tarry. So these men exempt themselves from the obedience and tributes of Princes and Kings: which (as I have before said out of Ulpian) are the strength and sinews of the commonwealth. When I think upon these things, I call to remembrance a profitable saying of Dioclesian: of whom, when a Philosopher had desired an immunity, This request (said he) disagreeeth with thy profession. Thou (said he) professest, that thou wilt overcome thy affections, but thou showest that thou art overcome of avarice. So these men profess themselves to be spiritual, but in a spiritual man there is nothing more required than charity, which counselleth us not to live franchised and securely, when others are oppressed with cares and burdens. Aquinas bringeth a place of Genesis, to show the Priests are exempted from tributes, not indeed by the law of God, but by a law made by Princes, and yet nevertheless agreeing with the law of nature. For Pharaoh King of Egypt provided, that the Priests should not pay the fifth part of their fruit for tribute, when as nevertheless so much was exacted of all the Egyptians. Wherefore he concludeth that Priests are exempted. This place is diligently to be considered. First let us note that the Egyptian

Priests had their daily living out of the treasury of the King. They had

provision given them to live by. Afterward it came to pass, that when the hunger waxed great, all the Egyptians sold their lands unto the King, therewith to buy corn to satisfy hunger. But when that famine was past, the King restored the lands unto the owners: yet upon this condition, that every year, they should pay him the fifth part; but of the lands of the Priests, there was no fifth part paid. And no marvel: because they sold not their lands unto the king, seeing they were maintained at the common charge. Yet it is to be thought, that they paid so much tribute of their lands, as they were wont to pay before the famine. Neither undoubtedly can any other thing be gathered out of that place, except that Priests ought to be maintained of the common cost. And in that they paid not the fifth part, that happened for another cause, as we have now declared.

26. They allege also the 7th chapter of Esdras, where Artaxerxes provided that when he had laid a tribute upon the Jews, there should be nothing levied upon the Levites in the name of a tribute. But this is not to be marveled at, seeing the Levites had no lands to pay tribute of: in as much as to them pertained only the oblations, first-fruits and tenths, for which cause they were released of tributes. Also Julius Caesar in his Book of the French wars saith that the Druids which were the French Priests, paid no tributes.

But Pliny in his 16th book and 44th chapter writeth that the Druids had no lands. And yet are not these things spoken to this end, that I would not think it lawful for Magistrates, to deal somewhat gently with Ministers, and to bear somewhat with them: because they must always apply themselves to holy things, and study for nothing else. Whereby it cometh to pass that they cannot increase their substance: yea rather they very oftentimes suffer great loss, neither have they their substance but during their life. Only this I disallow, that they claim unto themselves immunity both real and personal,

that they utterly refuse both ordinary and extraordinary charges, and that by tyranny or contrary to the authority of the word of God: and for that the Pope will not suffer Princes to exact tributes of Bishops and Ecclesiastical men after their own mind: and because they will not yield them if they be required. The word of God hath otherwise commanded, when it saith: Let every soul be subject to the higher power. And therefore (saith he) ye pay tributes. None is exempted, neither would Christ himself be exempted.

Chrysostom upon that place of Paul: It may (saith he) seem grievous unto Christians, for that they being the Children of God, and appointed for the Kingdom of heaven, are subject unto the Princes of this world: But he answereth: While we are in this life, our dignity is hidden. For it appeareth not what we shall be. Wherefore whilst we live here, let it not be grievous unto us to do reverence to Magistrates, to give them the way, and to honor them, these things are full decent and well beseemeth saints. Now that we are regenerate by the word and the Spirit, it might seem that we need no Magistrate. Whereupon the Jews, because they were the people of God, took it very grievously, that sometime the Babylonians reigned over them, sometime the Persians, sometime the Grecians, sometimes the Romans, and other nations which were strangers from God. The Anabaptists and Libertines cry, that it is a thing unworthy for a Christian to suffer a Magistrate over him. The clergy of the Pope also have shaken off this yoke from themselves. But the Apostles, which foresaw that this would come to pass, did oftentimes urge that the civil power should be obeyed. Which precept is two ways transgressed: One is when men say, that they will not obey the Magistrate and do seditiously take arms against him. The other way is, when they circumvent him by subtlety and guile, so as he cannot execute his office. For in Courts there be such, as flatter in the ear of

Princes, dispraise and praise whom they list, accuse the good instead of the evil, and commend the evil for good. So according to their mind some are made governors over countries, and other some are displaced. Wherefore

Dioclesian said: A good, wise and wary Emperor is oftentimes set to sale by his subjects. The Prince is at home in his palace, they that are familiar with him accuse and defend before him whom they will. Yea and among the Romans, the Senators were many times circumvented. The course of justice, is by many deceits hindered: neither doeth it much force, whether it be done by violence or by guile, because the public-wealth is hurt both ways, and the institution of God contemned. And thus far as touching these things.

27. Neither must we here pass over that, which hath been often said that the Magistrate must not be obeyed, if he command anything against the word of God. For when he so doth, he is no Magistrate. Because (as Paul saith) He is the Minister of God to good: So as if he command things contrary to the word of God, in that behalf, he is not his Minister. But thou wilt say, that sometime grievous, troublesome, and difficult things are commanded, which nevertheless are not against the word of God. What is to be done in these cases? We must obey. For we are commanded to obey our

Masters though they be severe, so that they command nothing against the word of God: which if they do, we must answer them with the sentence of Peter, who saith: We ought rather to obey God than men. Nebuchadnezzar would have his Image worshipped: The faithful Hebrews answered: Thy

Image O king we will not worship. Antiochus commanded the Hebrew woman, to eat swine's flesh: but she chose to die together with her seven sons, rather than to commit anything against the law of God. Also the Martyrs both in the old time, and also in our time, suffered most extreme

punishments and most cruel deaths, because they would not sin against the Law of God. Eusebius Caesariensis writeth that Constantius the father of Constantine feigned upon a time as though he would put out all the Christians, which would stand to their Religion, out of their honors and offices. But they which were godly in deed, freely gave over their dignity, and chose rather to leave their honors, than to depart from Christ. But this turned to their good: for the Emperor embraced them: And those which had denied Christ for to keep their dignities, he utterly removed from his person; saying, that they also would not be faithful unto him, which were unfaithful to God. Afterward Constantius, the son of Constantine being an Arian, went about to draw the faithful Bishops to his heresy. But they chose rather to be banished than to follow that wicked purpose of the Emperor.

Afterward Julian the Apostate opened the Temples of the Idols, and labored to drive the Christians to the Ethnic Religion and worshipping: yet such as were godly in deed, held the Religion of Christ, more dear and near unto them than their life. Yea and Achilles in Homer saith: I will obey princes, but yet so they command things honest and just. And these things not only belong to subjects but also to inferior Magistrates. For what if the superior prince command the inferior Magistrates to receive the Mass in their Cities, undoubtedly they ought not to obey. If a man will say: he is the superior power, and therefore ought to be obeyed: I will answer, in things that be civil and human let them obey, as much as behooveth, but in no wise against God. We must always run unto that principle: Propter quod vnumquodque est tale, id ipsum est magis tale. That is to say: That whereby a thing is such as it is, is the more such itself. And therefore if we obey the Magistrate, for God's cause, much more must God himself be obeyed. So

then the inferior Magistrate ought not in such cases, to have a regard what the superior power chargeth, but what God himself hath commanded.

28. There be some which say, that before we depart from the obedience of the Magistrates as touching Religion, we must expect the consent of the Church. They which thus speak let them consider, that Christ never so commanded: every man for himself, is wholly bound to the law of God, whether others consent or dissent. If the goodman of a house have many servants which he commandeth to do his work in the country, but some of them when their Master is absent will loiter, ought the rest therefore to be idle, because some consent not to their common business? Did Paul when he was called to preach Christ, tarry for the consent of his other brethren?

No truly. But as he writeth to the Galatians. When it had pleased God to reveal unto me his son, that I should preach him among the gentiles, I did not straightway ask counsel of flesh and blood, neither went I to the Apostles which were before me, but I went into Arabia. Wherefore he tarried not for the consent of other, but straightway obeyed his calling. So also ought we to do: after that God hath opened unto us his truth, we must not tarry. Indeed, if the thing be doubtful and dark, we must tarry for a consent. But our cause is manifest, and without all obscureness. Which if we will omit till a consent be had, the thing itself is lost and good occasions broken off. Tiberius would have brought Christ into the number of the God's, howbeit he thought that the consent of the Senate should be had. But the Senate would not, and by that means it came to pass, that, while consent was expected Christ could not be counted among the God's: whereas

Tiberius had been able to bring it to pass by himself. But I pray you let them tell us, for whose consent will they tarry? For the Bishops consent?

But they no doubt will never consent, since they are sworn enemies of the truth.

29. Now let us return unto the inferior Magistrates of whom we spake before. We must remember what God hath commanded children concerning their parents. Honor thy father and thy mother. By which words undoubtedly, is commanded honor and obedience towards higher powers.

For they have the place of parents, towards the inferior Magistrates. But let us see what Christ hath pronounced as touching this matter. He that loveth

(saith he) father or mother more than me, is not worthy of me. The same without doubt must we think of the Magistrate, which is the father of the country. We must obey him, but yet not above the Lord. Yea if he command anything against him, he is both to be hated and also denied. Neither is it lawful for any man to profess himself to be a Christian, which will not dissent from the superior Magistrate in those things which be against the word of God. This were to have a will to serve two Masters, and to halt on both sides. If God be God, let us follow him, and that not by halves, but wholly. But it is to be feared (say they) least while we are against the superior power, we bring danger to the public-wealth. To this I will answer, contrary to that which Demades in the old time answered unto the Athenians. Cassander the Macedonian which succeeded Alexander the Great, entreated with the Athenians, that they would worship Alexander for a God. They stayed thereat: But Cassander seemed that unless they would consent, he would make war upon them. Wherefore Demades spake thus unto the people: That it was to be feared, that while they retained heaven they should lose the earth. So do I answer these men, only changing the words: That it is to be feared least while they overmuch regard and defend the commonwealth, they lose heaven. For although the superior power, do

fume and threaten, we must valiantly deal in a good cause. Seeing that God must be worshipped sincerely and godly, although all Magistrates and all the world were against us: And therefore if that superior power command anything against the law of God, it must not be obeyed. So did Nabaoth the Jezraelite behave himself, he would not grant unto Ahab his vineyard, which was his inheritance: neither had he therein any other respect, than that the law of God should remain inviolate: wherein it was commanded that the tribes and families of the Israelites, (as touching possessions) should remain distinct and separate. So by reason thereof, it was not lawful for Nabaoth to alienate his inheritance forever. Yet a man being far indebted, might have sold his inheritance till the year of Jubilee, but after that year, it returned to the old possessor again. God would by this means, that the inheritances of the Israelites should not be confounded. Wherefore

Nabaoth, would not sell his ancient inheritance, least the law of God should be broken. Him also ought the Magistrates to follow, and not to give place in their Cities and dominions, unto most impure Masses, and papistical

Idolatry. The Jews when they were oppressed by the Macedonians, did rather choose to suffer anything than that the Image of Jupiter Olympius should abide in the Temple of God. And when the Romans bare rule over them, how great sedition and tumult stirred they up, rather than they would suffer the silver Eagle, or the Image of Caligula to be set up in the holy place? Yea and Valentinian the Emperor, being an Arian (as both Eusebius writeth, and also Ambrose in his Epistles) would have had the Church of Millaine delivered unto him, there to have celebrated together with his heretics prayers and holy services. But Ambrose would not give place, but rather abode day and night in the Temple, together with the people, than that the Emperor should find it void, and so to possess it. If the Hebrews

would not have the Temple of God polluted with Idols, and Ambrose suffered not the Church to be contaminated with heretics, why do faithful

Magistrates suffer their Temples to be defiled with Idolatry, and unclean services of the Papists?

30. They say that these things belong nothing at all unto them, and that these temples are not in their power. What then? If murder should be committed in those temples, or that any should there conspire against the public-wealth, would they there leave murderers and conspirators unpunished? And would they say, that these wicked crimes belong nothing unto them? Would they willingly and wittingly suffer these things? I think not, if they were wise, and would have the commonweal safely provided for. If a man should object unto them: This Temple is not yours, neither maketh it any matter unto you what is there done: yes (would they then answer) seeing it is in our City, even for that very cause it pertaineth sufficiently unto us. But wicked acts, far more grievous than murders and conspiracies, are there committed: I mean Idolatry, sacrilege, and blasphemy. And shall a Magistrate which will be called a Christian think that these things belong nothing unto him? But (say they) the superior power hath commanded them to be done. To this I have before answered at large. Now this will I add, that if the same power should go about to destroy the City, or to take away or diminish the privileges, they would never suffer it: they would rather proclaim wars. Yet notwithstanding these things, which are far more grievous and cruel, are openly and manifestly done and suffered. And which is most grievous of all: those things are there suffered, where the Gospel of Christ hath many years been received.

31. Now there resteth (because the Magistrate oftentimes excuseth himself, in saying that Ecclesiastical causes belong not unto him) to declare

that to be untrue. Although it be manifest enough by those things that I have already spoken, yet for the more easy understanding, I think it good to add thus much. First I say that the Magistrate is the keeper of the law of God, which containeth not only the latter Table but also the first: Wherefore the Magistrate is a keeper as well of the one as of the other. I add also that which Augustine saith: that not only private men, but also kings, ought to serve the Lord. For in the Psalm it is written: The people came together, and kings to serve the Lord. And in another place: And now O kings understand, be learned ye that judge the earth, serve the Lord in fear &c. A private man saith Augustine serveth the Lord, if he confess his name, and live uprightly:

But this is not sufficient for a king and Magistrate, seeing he ought so by his authority and power to serve the Lord, that he punish those that be his enemies: which unless he do, he seemeth to consent unto blasphemers and heretics. For the king when he seeth these men and suffereth them, is as much in fault as if he should join himself with them, and maintain their wickedness. Nebuchadnezzar, as soon as ever he knew God, made a decree, that whosoever spake blasphemy against the God of Daniel, should die. The like decree made Darius afterward. So likewise our Magistrates ought wholly to take away all Idolatries, blasphemies, and superstitions, so soon as ever they shall find them out. The Ethnic princes never thought that the care of Religion appertained not unto their power. Why was Socrates condemned at Athens? I demand not now, how rightly or justly (for as it is thought in a manner of all men Anitus and Melitus lied against him.) This I speak for that he was for no other cause condemned, but for Religion: as though he taught new God's and led away the youth from the ancient and received worshipping of the God's: and he was by a profane Magistrate condemned. Wherefore the Athenians thought that the preservation and care

of Religion belonged to their Magistrate. The law of God commanded, that the blasphemer should be put to death, not I think by every private man or by the priests, but by the Magistrate. The Ethnic Emperors also in those first times did for no other cause rage against the Christians, but because they thought that the state of Religion belonged unto their judgment seat. And assuredly as touching this opinion, they were not deceived. For none (as Chrysostom saith) either Apostle or Prophet, reproved the people, either

Jews or Ethnics, because they had a care of Religion: but they were deceived in the very knowledge as touching Religion, because they defended their own as true, and condemned the Christian as ungodly and blasphemous. Constantine and Theodosius and many other godly princes are commended, because they took away Idols, and either closed up, or else overthrew their Temples. Howbeit they did not these things in any other respect than that they thought the charge of Religion to belong unto them: otherwise they should have been busy fellows, and should have put their

Sickle into another man's harvest. The Donatists took this in very ill part, and grievously complained thereof in Augustine's time, because the Catholic Bishops required aid of the civil Magistrate against them. But Augustine confuted them by the self-same Argument which I have a little before rehearsed: And addeth this moreover: why did ye accuse Caecilianus

Bishop of Carthage, before Constantine, if it be wicked for an Emperor to determine concerning Religion?

32. Furthermore there is gathered by those things which the same Father wrote against Petilianus, and against Parmenianus, and also in many other

Epistles, how that the Donatists accused Caecilianus, as it is said, before Constantine the Emperor: who first referred the cause to Melchiades bishop of Rome. And when by him they were overcome, they again appealed to the

Emperor: neither rejected he their appellation from him, but committed the matter to the Bishop of Orleans, by whom they were again condemned.

Neither rested they so: but they appealed again to the Emperor, who heard them, decided their cause, condemned them, and by his sentence quitted

Caecilianus. Where are they now, which so often and so impudently cry, that there is no appealing from the Pope, and that the causes of Religion belong not to the Civil Magistrate? To whom in the old time belonged the right of calling general Councils, pertained it not unto Emperors? As for the Council of Nice, the Council of Constantinople, of Ephesus, and of Chalcedon, Emperors called them. Leo the first of that name, prayed the Emperor to call a Council in Italy, because he suspected the Grecians about the error of Eutyches, and yet could he not obtain it. And the Bishops were called together to Chalcedonia, whereat the Emperor was also present, as was Constantine at the Council of Nice. Neither do I think that they were there present, to sit idle and to do nothing, but rather to set forth unto the Bishops what they should do, and to provoke them to define rightly.

Theodoretus telleth that Constantine admonished the fathers to determine all things by the scriptures of the Evangelists, Apostles, Prophets, and scriptures inspired from God. Justinian also in the Code, wrote many

Ecclesiastical laws of Bishops, of Priests and other such like. Yea and Augustine himself hath taught that the Magistrate ought after the same manner to punish Idolaters and Heretics, with the same punishment that he punisheth adulterers withal: for so much as they commit whoredom against God in mind: which is much more heinous, than to commit whoredom in body. And look by what law murderers are put to death, by the same also ought Idolaters and Heretics be punished, for that by them are killed not the bodies, but the souls: Although the common people are stirred up only

against Homicides, because it seeth the blood of the slain bodies, but seeth not the death of the souls. Surely it is profitable that the Magistrate should take this care upon him, and by his authority compel men to come to the Sermons, and to hear the word of God: for by that means it cometh to pass, that through often hearing, those things begin to please which before displeased. As the histories teach God hath oftentimes made godly Princes famous through most noble victories which have had a care of these things.

33. Besides it cannot be denied, but that it is the Magistrates duty, to defend those Cities, and public-wealths over which they are governors, and to provide that they take no harm. Seeing then Idolatry is the cause of captivity, plague, famine, and overthrowing of public-wealths, shall it not belong unto the Magistrate to repress it, and to preserve both the true and sound Religion? Lastly Paul teacheth fathers to instruct their children in discipline and in the fear of God: But a good Magistrate is the father of the country, wherefore by the rule of the Apostle he ought to provide that subjects be instructed as common children. Nevertheless Kings and Princes which say that these things pertain not to them, do in the meantime, let, give, and sell Bishoprics, Abbeys, and benefices to whom they think good: neither think they that this belongeth not to their office: only they think that they ought not to take knowledge of matters of Religion, and they neglect to provide that they whom they promote to most ample dignities, should execute their office rightly. This therefore only remaineth for them, even that God himself will at length judge of these things, and revenge their negligence.

↑ Back to top