ciuil dominion, as in the conclusion before. And so I hold, that God, first by his ordinate power cannot geue to any person ciuil dominion here for euer: MarginaliaExposition of the secōd conclusion. Secondly, by his absolute power it is not probable for hym so to doe. For so much as he cānot euer detaine his spouse in perpetual prison of thys life, nor alwayes deferre the finall beatitude of hys Church.

3. To the third conclusion. Many wrytings or chartes inuented by men, as touching perpetual hereditage ciuile, be vnpossible.

The verity of this conclusion is incident. For we must not canonize all maner of Charts, what soeuer, as Catholicke, or vniuersal: for then it were not lawful by any meanes to take away or sequester thyngs geuen by Charte or charter, when any doth vniustly occupye the same. And so, if that stand confirmed and ratified by the fayth of the Churche, great occasion thereby should be ministred to men so chartered, to trust to their temporall chartes, and so might grow thereby much libertie and licence to sinne. For like as by what supposition euery truth is necessary: so by the same supposition, euery false thyng is possible, as it is playne by the testimony of Scripture, & of holy Doctours speakyng of necessitie of thynges to come.

MarginaliaIn gratia gratisicante finaliter. 4. Euery man beyng in grace iustifying finally, hath not onely right vnto the thyng, but also for his tyme hath right in deede, ouer all the good thyngs of God.

The veritie hereof is euidēt, by holy Scripture, Math. 24. Where veritie promiseth to euery mā entryng into his ioy: verely (sayth he) I tell you, he shall set & place him ouer all the goodes he hath. MarginaliaNote here he speaketh onely of the right of things in the country to come: and not in this exile. For the right and title belōgyng to the cōmunion of Saintes, in their countrey (he meaneth in the kingdome of heauen) Fundatur obiectiuè super vniuersitatem bonorum Dei: That is, Hath his relation, as vnto his obiect, to all the goodes and possession of God.

5. A man can but onely ministratoriously, geue any temporall dominion or gift perpetuall, as well to his owne naturall sonne, as to his sonne by imitation.

It is euidēt. For euery mā ought to recognise himselfe in all his workes and doyngs, as an humble seruaunt, and minister of God. As the wordes of Scripture doth teach vs. Let a man so esteeme of vs as the ministers of Christ. Yea so Christ himself did teach his chief Apostles to minister, but in their countrey the Saints shall geue vnto their felow brethren the dominion of their goodes vt pater de suis corporibus & bonis eis inferioribus in natura accordyng to the wordes of Luke. 6. They shall geue you and put into your bosomes a good measure and perfect, well filled and heaped vp, and runnyng ouer.

6. If God be, temporall Lordes may lawfully and meritoriously take away the goodes of fortune from the Church when they do offend, habitualiter.

This conclusion is correlatiue with the first Article of our fayth: I beleue in God the father almighty. &c. Where I vnderstand this word (may) in this conclusion after the maner of autentique Scripture, which sayth & graunteth: that God is able, of these stones to rayse vp children to Abraham, for otherwise all Christian Princes were heretiques. For this conclusiō, thus stādeth the reason: If God be, he is omnipotēt: & if he be almighty, he is able to commaunde the Lordes temporall so to do: & if he way so commaunde, thē may they lawfully so take away such goods. &c. And so by the vertue of the same principle, Christian Princes haue practised the sayd sentence vpon the Church mē heretofore, as did William Rufus. &c. But God forbid that any should beleue hereby my intention to haue bene, that secular Lords may lawfully take away what goodes soeuer and by what meanes soeuer, by their owne naked authority at theyr pleasure: but only by the authority of the church may so do, in cases and forme limited by the law.

7. We know that it is not possible that the vicare of Christ is able by his pure Bulles. &c.

This is manifest by the Catholique faith, for asmuch as the church doth fully beleue that the abling of any mā, ought first to procede and come of God: wherfore, no man being Christ his vicar, hath any power in this matter, but onely as vicar in the name of the Lord so far forth as he is enabled of the Lord, to notify vnto the church whom God hath enabled. Wherfore if any mā do any thing not as vicar in the name of the Lord, whom he ought to forethinke to be his author and head: It is a presumption of Lucifer, for so much as Christ by his Apostle sayth.. 1. Cor. 3. all our hability or sufficiency cōmeth of God. And so consequently, it commeth not purely by the ministerie of hys Vicarship, that he is inabled, but the ablenesse or vnablenesse of him being the Vicar of Christ, commeth to hym an other way from aboue.

8. A man can not be excommunicate to his hurt or vndoing, except he be excommunicate first and principally, of himselfe.

It is euident, forasmuch as all such excommunication ought to procede & begin originally of his owne sin which is damnified: Wherupon Augustine sayth De verbis Domini, Sermone 51. Doe not thou conculcate thy selfe, and man ouercōmeth thee not. And moreouer the faith of the church doth teach, quòd nulla ei nocebit aduersitas, si nulla dominetur iniquitas, that is to say. No aduersitie shall hurt, if no iniquitie haue the vpper hand. And yet notwithstanding, euery excommunication for many causes is also to be feared, although that the excommunication of the Churche to the humble man being excommunicated, be not damnable but wholesome.

9. No man ought but in Gods cause alone to excommunicate, suspende &c.

It is cleare, for asmuch as euery iust cause is the cause of God, whose respect ought chiefly to be wayed and pondered. Yea the loue of the person excommunicate ought to surmount the zeale of reuengement, and the desire of all temporall goodes whatsoeuer, for otherwise he that doeth excommunicate, doth damnify himselfe. To this 9. conclusion notwithstanding it is congruent, that a Prelate may excommunicate in the cause also of man, so that his principal respect in so doing be had to þ^e iniury done to his God, as appeareth 13. quæst. 4 Inter querelas.

10. No curse or excommunication can binde simply, but in case it be geuen out against the aduersary of Christes lawe.

And it appeareth thus, because that God doth bynde simply euery one that is bound, who cannot excommunicate but onely for trāsgression of his law. Whereunto it is consonant notwithstāding, that the censure of the Church doth not binde simply, but secondarely in the case and respect, as it is denounced against the aduersary of the members of the Church.

11. There is no example of Christ which geueth power to hys disciples to excommunicate any subiecte (especially for denying of any temporalties) but contrary.

Which is thus declared by the fayth, whereby we beleue that God is to be beloued aboue all thynges, and our neighbour and enemy are to be beloued aboue all tēporall goodes of this world necessaryly, for the law of God cannot be contrary vnto it selfe.

12. The disciples of Christ haue no power by any ciuill coaction, to exact temporall things by their censures.

This appeareth by the fayth of the Scripture. Luke 23. Where Christ did forbid hys Apostles ciuilly to raigne or to beare any lordship. The kings (sayth he) of the Gentiles beare rule ouer them, but you not so. And after thys sense it is expounded of S. Bernarde, of S. Chrysostome, and other holy men: which conclusion notwithstanding, yet may they exact temporal things by ecclesistical cēsures incidently, if case be that it appertaine to the reuengement of their God.

13. It is not possible by the absolute power of God, that if the Pope or any other Christian doe pretend to binde or loose at their pleasure, by what means soeuer, that thereby hee doeth so binde and loose.

The contrary of this cōclusion will destroy the whole Catholicke fayth, importyng no lesse but him to be a blasphemer whiche so vsurpeth such absolute power of the Lord. And yet by this conclusion I entend not to derogate from the power of the Pope or of any other Prelate of the Churche, but that he may by the vertue of the head so bynde and lose. But doe vnderstand the conditionall of this negatiue (to be impossible) after this sense: that it cannot bee that the Pope or any other Prelate of the Church can pretend by himselfe to bynde or lose (how and after what maner he lyst himselfe) except in such sorte, that hee doe in deede so bynde and lose before God as he doth pretend to doe.

14. We ought to beleue, that the vicare of Christ doeth at suche times onely binde and loose, when as hee worketh conformably by the lawe, and ordinaunce of Christ &c.

The reason thereof is thys, because otherwise it is vnlawfull for hym so to do, except he should do it in the vertue of that law, and so consequently, vnlesse it be cōformable to the law and ordinaunce of Christ.

15. To this conclusion, this ought vniuersally to be beleeued, that euery Priest rightly and duely ordered, hath power according to hys vocation. &c.MarginaliaThe power of all priests toward God equall.

¶ The reason heereof is this, because þ^t the order of priesthode in his owne nature and substance, receaueth no such degrees, either of more, or of lesse. MarginaliaOrdo sacerdotales non suscapst mains & minus.And yet notw^tstanding, the power of inferiour Priests, in these daies be vpon due consideration restrained, MarginaliaPotestas ordinis.and some times againe in time of extreme necessity released. MarginaliaPotestas regimisis.And thus according to the Doctours, a Prelate hath a double power, to wit, the power of order, & the power of iurisdictiō or regimēt. And according