phil. Yes, that you did, at my laste examination, by that token I answered your Lordship by MarginaliaAmbros. 5. Epist. 30. Eodem contra Auxentium,saint Ambrose, that the church is congregated by the word, and not by mans lawe. wherfore I adde nowe further of this sayeng, quod qui fidem repudiat, et legem obiicit, iniustus est, quia iustus ex fide viuit.  

That he which refuseth the woord, & obiecteth the law, is an vniust man, because the iust shall liue by fayth. And moreouer (my Lord) the title which your Lordship alledgeth out of the law, maketh it not vnlawfull to dispute of al the articles of the faith, but of the Trinitye.

[Back to Top]

Boner. Thou lyest, is is not so. And I wyll shewe you by the booke how ignoraunt he is.

And with that he went with al hast to his study, and fet his booke, and openlye red the text, and the title of the law, and charged me with suche woordes, as semed to make for hys purpose, saying: how sayest thou to this?

phil. My Lord, I saye as I sayde before, that the law meaneth of the catholike faith, determined in the councel of Calcedonia,  

wher the articles of the crede wer onely concluded vpō.

Boner. Thou art the veriest beast that euer I heard. I must needes speake it, thou cōpellest me therevnto.

Phil. Your Lordship may speake your pleasure of me. But what is thys to the purpose, which your lordship is so earnest in? you know that our faith is not grounded vpon the ciuyll law. Therefore it is not material to me what so euer the law saith.

Boner. By what law wylt thou bee iudged? wilt thou be iudged by the common law?

phil. No my Lorde, our fayth dependeth not vpon the lawes of man.

S. Asse. He wyll be iudged by no law, but as he list him selfe.

Worc. The cōmon lawes are but abstractes of the scriptures and doctours.

phil. What so euer you do make them, they are no grounde of my fayth, by the whiche I ought to be iudged.

Boner. I must nedes procede against thee to morow.

phil. If your Lordship so do, I will haue Exceptionem fori.  

For you are not my cōpetent Iudge.

Boner. By what law canst thou refuse me to be thy Iudge?

phil. By the ciuil law, De competente Iudice.

Boner. Ther is no suche title in the lawe. In what boke is it, as cūning a lawier as you be?

phil. My Lord, I take vpon me no great cunning in the law. but you driue me to my shifts  

for my defēse. And I am sure, if I had þ^e bokes of the law, I were able to shew what I say.

Boner What? De competente Iudice? I wyll go fet thee my bookes. There is a title in dede De offisiis Iudicis ordinarii.

phil: Verely that is the same Competente Iudice which I haue alledged. With that he ran to his studye, and brought the whole course of the law betwene his hands, which (as it might appeare) he had wel occupied, by the dust they were enbrued withall.

Boner. There be the bookes: finde it now (if thou canst) and I wyll promise thee to release thee out of prison.

phil. My Lorde, I stande not here to reason matters of the ciuil lawe (although I am not altogether ignoraunt of the same) for that I haue beene a Student in the same syxe or seuen yeares: but to aunswer to the articles of faith, with the which you may lawfullye burthen me. And where as you go aboute vnlawfully to proceede, I challenge according to my knowledge the benefit of þ^e law in my defēse.

[Back to Top]

Boner. Why, thou wilt answer directlye to nothing thou art charged with all. Therefore say not hereafter but you might haue bene satisfied here by learned men, if you would haue declared your mynde.

phil. My Lord, I haue declared my mynd vnto you, and to other of the Bishops, at my last being before you, desiringe you to be satisfied but of one thing, whereunto I haue referred al other controuersies. The which if your lordships now, or other learned men can simplye resolue mee of, I am as contented to be reformable in al thinges, as you shal require. The which is to proue that the Churche of Rome (whereof you are) is the catholike church.

[Back to Top]

Couen. Why. do you not beleue your crede, Credo ecclesiam Catholicam?  

phil. Yes that I do: but I cannot vnderstand Rome (wherewith al you nowe burden vs) to be the same, neither lyke to it.

S. Asse. It is most euident, that S. Peter did build þ^e catholike church at Rome. And Christ said: Tu es Petrus, et super hanc petram ædificabo ecclesiam meam.  

Moreouer the succession of Bishops in the sea of Rome can bee proued from time to time, as it can be of none other place so wel, which is a manifest probation of the catholike churche, as diuers Doctours do wryte.

[Back to Top]

phil. That you would haue to be vndouted, is most vncertayn, and that by the authortie which you allege of Christ, sayinge vnto Peter: thou art Peter, and vpon this rocke I wil buylde my churche, onles you canne proue the rocke to signifye Rome, as you woulde make my falsly beleue. And although you can proue the succession of byshops from Peter, yet this is not sufficient to proue Rome to be the Catholicke churche: onles you can proue the succession of Peters fayth, wherevpon the catholike churche is buylded, to haue continued in his successoures at Rome, and at this present to remayne,

[Back to Top]