Marginaliareader, how the proposition aforesayd is to be vnderstanded, and addeth that the goods of the clergie is not vtterly to be taken away, but in case they do abuse the same. ces or seculer Lordes should take away the goods from the cleargie when they woulde, or howe they woulde, and conuert them to what vse they list. But our whole intent is, diligently to search out whether this article, as touching the taking away of temporallities from the cleargie may haue in it any true sence, whereby it may be defended without reproofe. MarginaliaThe 17. article proued by 44. arguments. Wherefore this article being the 17. in the nombre of the 45. is propounded vnder thys fourme. The Lordes temporall may at their owne will and pleasure, take away the temporal goodes from the cleargy, if they doe offend, and therein continue: It is thus prooued. The kings of the old Testament toke away the temporall goods at Gods commandement from the cleargie. That is to say from the priestes offending. Therefore the kings also of the new Testament, at Gods c?mandement, may do the like, When as the priests of the new law do offend. The consequent dependeth vpon a similitude. And the antecedent is euident. First it is prooued by Salomon in the 3. of the kings 2. chapter. Which Salomon deposed Abiathar the hygh priest, because hee had toke part with Adonias, the brother of Salomon, to make him king, without the aduice either of Dauid, or of Salomon him selfe which ought to raigne: And set vp Sadoc the priest in the place of Abiathar, because he had not consented with Abiathar vnto Adonias, as it is writt? in the 3. boke of kings 1. chapter. Where it is sayde, Adonias the sonne of Agithe, exalted himselfe, saying: I will raigne, and made vnto him selfe chariotes and horsemen, and 40. men which should runne before him: neyther did his father rebuke him at any time, saying: Wherefore hast thou don this? For he was very comely being second sonne, next to Absolon, and his talke was with Ioab the sonne of Saruia and Abiathar the priest, which toke part with Adonias. But Sadoc the priest, and Banaias the sonne of Ioiada and Nathan the Prophet, and Semei, and Serethi, and Felethi, and all the power of Dauids hose, were not on Adonias part.

This was the cause of the deposing of Abiathar, because hee toke part with Adonia, that he shuld be king against Salomon the eldest sonne of king Dauid; wherefore it is wrytten in the thirde boke and second chapiter of the kings: the king sayd vnto Abiathat the priest, goe your wayes vnto Anatoth thine owne fielde; for thou art a man of death; but this day I will not slay thee, because thou hast caried the Arke of the Lorde before my father Dauid, and diddest labour in all things wherein my father laboured. Then did Salomon cast out Abiathar, that hee should be no more the priest of the Lord, that the word of the Lord might be fulfilled which he spake vpon the house of Hely in Sylo.

Beholde the most prudent king Salomon, according to the wisdome which was geuen him of God, did exercise hys power vpon the sayd priests, putting him out of his priesthode, & letting in his place Sadoc the priest: this was a greater matter th? to take away the temporalities. If then in the law of Christ whych nowe raigneth ouer vs, a byshop, should likewise rebell against the true heire of the kingdome, willing to sette vp another or king; why shoulde not the king or his heire, haue power in like case, to take away the temporalities from him so offending?

Marginalia2. Nabuchodonozor. Item, it is also euident by the king Nabuchodonozor whych had power geuen him of God, to lead away the children of Israel with their priests and Leuites, into the captiuity of Babylon, as it is wrytten 4. booke of the kings 25. chapter.

Marginalia3. Iosias. Item it is red in the 4. boke of kings and 12. chapter. How that Iosias the most godly king of Iuda according to the wisd? which God had granted him, toke away all the consecrate vessels, which Iosaphat, Ioram, and Ochosias, his forefathers kings of Iuda had consecrated, and those which hee himselfe had offered, and all the treasure that could be found in the temple of the Lord, and in the kings pallace, and sent it vnto Azahel king of Syria, & he departed from Ierusalem. Marke how this most holy king exercised hys power not onely in taking away the temporalities of the priests, but also those things which were consecrate in the temple of the Lord, to procure vnto the common wealth, the benefite of peace.

Marginalia4. Ezechias. Item, in the 4. boke and 18. chapter of the kings, it is wrytten howe that the holy king Ezechias tooke all the treasure that was found in the house of the Lord, and in the kings treasurie, & brake downe the pillers of the temple of the Lorde, and all the plates of gold which he himselfe had fastned therupon, and gaue them vnto the king of the Assyrians; yet was hee not rebuked of the Lorde therefore, as hee was for his other sinnes, as it appeareth in the 2. boke of Paral. 32. chapter, for so much then as in time of necessity all things ought to be in common vnto Christians, it foloweth then that the seculere Lordes in case of necessitie, in many other common cases, may lawfully take away the mooueable goodes from the cleargie, when they do offend.

Item, it is also read in the 12. of Mathewe, that the disciples of Iesus for to slake their hunger vpon the Saboth day, pulled the eares of corne, and did eate them, and the Pharisies rebuked them therefore, vnto whome Christ aunswered. Marginalia5. Dauid. Haue ye not read what Dauid did, when hee was hungry, and those that were wyth him, howe he entred into the house of the Lord, and did eate the shew breades, which it was not lawfull for hym, neither for them thatwere with hym to eate, but only for the priests. This story is written in the 1 boke of the kings and 21. chapter. And the commandement in the 12. of Deuteronomie. MarginaliaCase of necessitite.Whereby it appeareth that it is lawfull in time of necessitie to vse any thing, bee it neuer so much consecrate. Otherwise children by geuing their moueables to the consecration of any temple, should not be bound to helpe their parents, which is contrary and against the Gospel of S. Mathew in the 16. chapter: whereas our Sauiour sharply rebuked the Pharisies, that for their owne traditions they did transgresse the commaundement of God.

Marginalia6. Titus and Vespasian. Item, Titus and Vespasian seculer princes had power geuen them of God 24. yeares after the Lordes Ascension to take away the temporallities from the priestes whych had offended agaynst the Lordes holy one. And thereby also bereft them of their liues, and it seemeth vnto many they did, and might worthely doe the same according to Gods good wil and pleasure. Then forsomuch as our priests in these dayes may transgresse and offend as much, and rather more against the Lordes annoynted, it followeth that by the pleasure of God, the seculer Lordes, may likewise punyshe them for their offence.

Marginalia7. The example of Christ paying of tribute. Our sauiour being king of kings, and high bishop wyth hys disciples did geue tribute vnto Cesar, as it appeareth Mathewe 17. and commaunded the Scribes and Pharisies to geue the lyke vnto Cesar Mat. 22. Whereby hee gaue example vnto all priestes that shoulde come after hym to render tribute vnto their kinges; whereupon blessed S. Ambrose MarginaliaS. Ambrose minde. in his 4 boke vppon these wordes in the 5. of Luke, (cast out your nettes) wryteth thus. There is an other kinde of fishing amongst the Apostles, after which manner the Lord commanded Peter only to fish, saying, cast out thy hoke, and that fish which c?meth first vp, take hym. And then vnto to purpose he sayth. It is truely a great & spirituall document, wherby all Christian menne are taught, that they ought to be subiecte vnto the higher powers, and that no man ought to thinke that the lawes of a king here on earth are to broke&nmacron. For if the sonne of God did pay tribute, who art thou so great a man, that thinkest thou oughtest not to pay tribute? He payed tribute which had no possessions: and thou which daily seekest after the luker of the world, why doest thou not acknowledge the obedience and duetie of the worlde? Why doest thou thorowe the arrogancie of thy minde exault they selfe aboue the worlde, when as thorowe thine owne miserable couetousnesse, thou art subiect vnto the worlde? Thus writeth S. Ambrose, and it is put in the 11 quest. 1. Magnum quidem. He also wryteth vppon these wordes in the 20 of Luke, shewe me a pennie, whose Image it hathe; MarginaliaChrist commanded tribute to be pay vnto themperour.if Christ had not the Image of Cesar, why did hee pay any tribute? He gaue it not of hys owne, but rendred vnto the worlde that which was the worldes: And if thou wilt not be in daunger of Cesar, possesse not those things which are the worldes, for if thou hast richesse, thou art in daunger of Cesar.

Wherefore if thou wilt owe nothing vnto any earthly king. forsake all those things, and followe Christ. If then all ecclesiasticall ministers, hauing richesse, ought to be vnder the subiection of kings, and geue vnto them tribute: It foloweth that kings may lawfully by the authoritye which is geuen them, take away theyr temporallities from them.

MarginaliaPaule appealed to themperour. Here vpon S. Paule acknowledging him selfe to be vnder the iurisdiction of the Emperour, appealed vnto Cesar, as it appeareth Actes 25.

I stand sayth he, at Cesars iudgement seat, there I ought to be iudged MarginaliaS. Ambrose there in the viij. distin. Whereupon in the 8: distinction, chapter quo iure. S. Ambrose alleageth, that all things are lawfull vnto the Emperour, & al things vnder his power. For the confirmation wherof, it is said Daniel second chapter, MarginaliaDaniel. 2.the God of heauen hath geuen vnto thee a kingdome, strength, Empire, and glory, and all places, wherein the children of men do dwell; and hath geuen into thy power, the beastes of the field, and fowles of the aire, and set all things vnder thy subiection.

Marginalia9. Also in the 11. question and 1. He sayeth, if the Emperour require tribute, we do not denie that the landes of the Church shall pay tribute, if the Emperour haue neede of our landes, hee hath power to chalenge them, let him take them, if hee will, I doe not geue them vnto the Emperour, neither doe I denie them. Thys wryteth S. Ambrose, expresly declaring that the seculare Lorde hath power at hys pleasure to take away the lands of the Church; and so consequently the seculer Lords haue power at their owne pleasures to take away the temporal goodes from the Ecclesiasticall ministers, when they doe offend.

Marginalia10. S. Augustine. Item S. Augustine wryteth, if thou sayest, what haue we to do wyth the Emperour. But nowe as I sayde, wee speake of mannes lawe. The Apostle would be obedient vnto the kings, and honor them, saying. Reuerence your kings: and doe not say what haue I to doe with the king? What haste thou then to doe wyth possessions. By the kings law the possessions are possessed, thou hast said, what haue I to doe with the king: but doe not say, what hath thy possessions to doe wyth the king? For then haste thou renounced the lawes of menne, whereby thou diddest possesse thy landes.