PREVIOUS CHAPTER - NEXT CHAPTER - HELP     

BOOK PERTAINING TO THE LAST THREE HUNDRED YEARS FROM THE LOOSING OUT OF SATAN A PREFACE TO THE READER.

ACCORDING to the five sundry diversities and alterations of the church, so have I divided hitherto the order of this present church-story into five principal parts, every part containing three hundred years; so that now coming to the last three hundred years (that is, to the last times of the church, counting from the time of Wickliff), forasmuch as in the compass of the said last three hundred years are contained great troubles and perturbations of the church, with the marvellous reformation of the same through the wondrous operation of the Almighty; all which things cannot be comprehended in one book: I have therefore disposed the said latter three hundred years into divers books, beginning now with the sixth book, at the reign of king Henry VI. In which book, beside the grievous and sundry persecutions raised up by Antichrist, to be noted, herein is also to be observed, that whereas it hath of long time been received and thought of the common people, that this religion now generally used hath sprung up and risen but of late, even by the space (as many do think) of twenty or thirty years, for the avoiding of which fond and vain opinion it may now manifestly appear, not only by the Acts and Monuments heretofore passed, but also by the histories hereafter following, how this profession of Christ’s religion hath been spread abroad in England of old and ancient time, not only for the space of these two hundred late years, from the time of Wickliff, but hath continually from time to time sparkled abroad, although the flames thereof have never so perfectly burst out, as they have done within these hundred years and more; as by these histories here collected and gathered out of registers, especially of the diocese of Norwich, shall manifestly appear: wherein may be seen what men, and how many, both men and women, within the said diocese of Norwich there have been, who have defended the same cause of doctrine which now is received by us in the church. Which persons, although then they were not so strongly armed in their cause and quarrel as of late years they have been, yet were they warriors in Christ’s church, and fought to their power in the same cause. And although they gave back through tyranny, yet judge thou the best, good reader! and refer the cause thereof to God, who revealeth all things according to his determinate will and appointed time.

HENRY THE SIXTH. THIS young prince, being under the age of one year, after the death of his father succeeded in his reign 504 and kingdom of England, A.D. 1422, and in the eighth year was crowned at Westminster; and in the second year after was crowned also at Paris (Henry bishop of Winchester, cardinal, being present on both occasions), and reigned thirty-eight years; and then was deposed by Edward IV., as hereafter, Christ willing, shall be declared in his time. (Ex Scala Mundi.)

WILLIAM TAILOR, PRIEST. *There 4 hath been no region or country more fertile or fruitful for martyrs, than our only region of England. Whether it happeneth or cometh by the singular gift or privilege of God’s divine grace, or else through the barbarous and foolish cruelty of such as at that time ruled and governed the church, it is uncertain. Oxford at the present was, as it had been, a continual spring of christian knowledge and learning, from whence, as out of the Trojan horse, there hath come forth so many invincible witnesses of Christ and his truth, who, with singular learning, and with their blood, have not only deserved praise of such as were in their days, but also of all such as shall come after.* In the first year of this king’s reign was burned the constant witnessbearer and ‘testis’ of Christ’s doctrine, William Tailor, a priest, * 4 master of arts, being a favorer of Wickliff,* under Henry Chiehesley, archbishop of Canterbury.

Of this William Tailor 505 I read, 5 that in the days of Thomas Arundel he was first apprehended, and excommunicated. Afterward, in the, days of Henry Chichesley, he presented himself to the convocation on Monday, February 12th, A.D. 1421, and craved absolution, offering to abjure. To which they consented. And thus the said William Tailor, 506 appointed to appear the next Wednesday at Lambeth before the archbishop, to take his absolution from his long excommunication during the time of Thomas Arundel, appeared accordingly; when he, laying aside his ‘armilausa’ (that is, his cloak), 507 and his cap, and stripped unto his doublet, kneeled at the feet of the archbishop. Who then standing up, and having a rod in his hand, began the psalm ‘Miserere,’ etc., his chaplains answering every second verse. After that, was said the Lord’s prayer, and the collect, ‘Deus cui proprium,’ etc., with certain other prayers. And thus was William Tailor for that time absolved, being enjoined notwithstanding to appear at the next convocation, whensoever it should be, before the said archbishop, or his successor that should follow him.

The next convocation 508 met May 5th, A.D. 1421 (which was two years before his burning), at which the said William Tailor appeared again before the archbishop on Saturday, May 24th, being brought by the bishop of Worcester, being complained of to have taught at Bristol these articles following: — First , That whosoever hangeth any writing about his neck, taketh away the honor due only to God, and giveth it to the devil.

Secondly , That Christ himself is not to be worshipped so far as regardeth his manhood.

Thirdly , That the saints in heaven are not to be worshipped by the people.

Upon these articles the said William Tailor being examined, denied that he did preach or hold them in way of defending them, but only did commune and talk upon the same, especially upon the second and third articles, only in way of reasoning and for argument’s sake. And to justify his opinion to be true in that which he did hold, he brought out of his bosom a paper or libel written, wherein were contained certain articles, with the testimonies of the doctors alleged, and exhibited the same unto the archbishop. Who then being bid to stand aside, the archbishop, consulting together with the bishops and other prelates what was to be done in the matter, delivered the writings unto Master John Castle, and John Rikynghale, the two chancellors of Oxford and Cambridge, and to John Langdon, monk of Canterbury; who, advising with themselves and with other divines about the articles and allegations, on the Monday following presented the said articles of William Tailor to the archbishop and prelates, as erroneous and heretical. Whereupon William Tailor, being called before them, in conclusion was contented to revoke the same, and for his penance, was by them condemned to perpetual prison.

Notwithstanding, on his showing signs of penitence, through favor they were contented that he should be released from his carceral endurance, in case he would put in sufficient surety in the king’s chancery, and swear that he would never hold or favor any such opinions hereafter. And so taking an oath of him, the archbishop committed him to the custody of the bishop of Worcester, to whom power and authority were permitted to release him, upon the conditions aforesaid.

In the mean time 509 there passed certain writings between him and one Thomas Smith, priest at Bristol, in which William Tailor replied against the said Thomas concerning the question of worshipping of saints. Upon the occasion of which reply being brought to the hands of the bishop of Worcester, William Tailor began anew to be troubled, and was brought again before the public convocation of the clergy by the said bishop of Worcester, to answer unto his writings. This was A.D. 1423, 510 the eleventh day of February; unto the which convocation the said William being presented, his writings were read to him; which he would not, nor could not, deny to be of his own hand-writing. The tenor and effect of whose writings only tended to prove, that every petition and prayer for any supernatural gift ought to be directed to God alone, and to no creature.

Albeit, in this his writing, he did not utterly deny that it was lawful in any respect to pray to saints (and bringeth for the same Thomas Aquinas), but only in respect of that worship, which is called ‘cultus latriae:’ 6 and he further so prosecuted his mind herein, that he seemed little or nothing to differ from the superstition of the papists, as most plainly appeareth by his own words, saying, “Nunquam tamen negavi, ant negare intendo, merita ant sanctorum suffragia tam beatorum quam viantium, tam vivis quam mortuis ad hoc dispositis, quantum possunt, suffragari vel proficere; quia hoc est elicibile ex Scriptura, quae non fallit, et ex consona ratione,” etc. And, moreover, he inferred the example of Moses, who prayed unto God, alleging the merits of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, who were dead, etc.

And furthermore, passing from the testimony of Jerome, he alleged that of St. Austin, who of Stephen saith, 511 “Quod nunc multo magis exaudietur pro veneratoribus suis, quam tune exauditus est pro lapidatoribus.” 7 And at length he came to this conclusion, proving by St. Austin in this manner: “Ne igitur, cum impiis et idololatris in Veteri Testamento, in circuitu ambulemus, nunquam deveniendo ad centrum, sanum est quod faciamus secundum consilium Apostoli sic dicentis, ‘Accedamus cure fiducia ad thronum gratiae ejus, ut misericordiam consequamur, et gratiam inveniamus in auxilio opportuno,’“ etc. 8 That is, “And therefore, lest we run about in circles with the wicked, and with the idolaters of the Old Testament, and never come to the center, therefore it is good that we follow the counsel of the apostle, saying, ‘Let us resort with boldness unto the throne of his grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace in time of opportune help,’” etc.

Thus much out of the aforesaid writings of William Tailor I have excerped, to the intent that the indifferent reader, using his judgment herein, may see how little matter was in this, wherefore he should be condemned by the papists. And yet notwithstanding, the same writing, being delivered by the archbishop on Saturday, February 20th, to the four orders of friars of London to be examined, was found erroneous and heretical in these points:

I. That every prayer which is a petition of some supernatural gift or free gift, is to be directed only to God.

II. Item, That prayer is to be directed to God alone.

III. Item, To pray to any creature is to commit idolatry.

IV. Item, That prayer is to be directed to God, not in respect of his manhood but of his Godhead only. 512 So that although all these opinions agreed in one, yet, to make up a number, every order of the four sorts of friars thought to find out some matter to offer up to the archbishop against him, lest one order should seem more cunning or pregnant, in finding out more than could another; or else perchance lest any of them should seem to favor the party, in bringing nothing against him, as the rest had done.

When the Thursday was come, 513 which was the twenty-fifth day of February, upon the which day the four orders were appointed to declare their censure upon the articles in the chapter-house of Paul’s, first appeared friar John Tille, for the Black friars; then friar Thomas Winchelsey, for the friars Minor; then friar John Low, for the Augustines; and after him friar Thomas Ashwel, for the Carmelites; each friar for his order severally bringing his heresy, as is above specified.

Thus the verdict of these four orders being given up to the arch-bishop, and severally each order coming in with his heresy, which was the twentyfifth day of February; hereupon cometh down a writ from the king, directed to the lord-mayor and sheriffs of London, ‘De haeretico comburendo,’ dated the first day of March, the first year of his reign, the copy whereof remaineth in the Records of the Tower, beginning thus: ‘Rex majori et vice comitibus.’ Whereupon the said William Tailor was condemned as a relapse, first to be degraded, and afterwards to be burned; and so was committed to the secular power: who then being had to Smithfield, with christian constancy, after long imprisonment, there did consummate his martyrdom, the first day of March, 1423.

The manner of his degrading 514 was all one with the degrading of John Huss before; for the papists use but one form for all men. First, degrading them from priesthood, by taking from them the chalice and patin, and the casule and stole; from deaconship, by taking from them the gospel-book, and the dalmatic and stole; from sub-deaconship, by taking from them the epistle-book, and the dalmatic and maniple; from acolyteship, by taking from them the cruet and taper-holder; from an exorcist, by taking away the book of exorcisms; from the sextonship, by taking away the church keys, and the albe and amice; and likewise from bene’t, by taking away the surplice and first tonsure, etc. All which they orderly accomplished upon this godly martyr, before his burning.

JOHN FLORENCE, A TURNER.

John Florence, a turner, dwelling in Shelton, in the diocese of Norwich, was attached for that he held and taught these heresies (as they called them) here under-written, contrary to the determination of the church of Rome:

Imprimis , That the pope and cardinals have no power to make or constitute any laws. Item, That there is no day to be kept holy, but only the Sunday, which God hath hallowed. Item, That men ought to fast no other time, but the ‘Quatuor temporum.’ Item, That images are not to be worshipped; neither that the people ought to set up any lights before them in the churches; neither to go on pilgrimage; neither to offer for the dead, nor with women that are purified. Item, That curates should not take the tithes of their parishioners, 9 but that such tithes should be divided amongst the poor parishioners. Item, That all such as swear by their life or power, shall be damned, except they repent.

On Wednesday, August 2d, A.D. 1424, the said John Florence personally appeared before William Bernham, chancellor to William 10 bishop of Norwich, where he, proceeding against him, objected the first article touching the power of the pope and cardinals; to which article the said John Florence answered in this manner: “If the pope live uprightly, as Peter lived, he hath power to make laws; otherwise I believe he hath no power.” But being afterward threatened by the judge, he acknowledged that he had erred, and submitted himself to the correction of the church, and was abjured; taking an oath that from that time forward he should not hold, teach, preach, or willingly defend, any error or heresy contrary to the determination of the church of Rome; neither maintain, help, nor aid, any that shall teach or hold any such errors or heresies, either privily or apertly. And for his offense in this behalf done, he was enjoined this penance following: Three Sundays, in a solemn procession, in the cathedral church of Norwich, he should be disciplined before all the people. 11 The like also should be done about his parish-church of Shelton, three other several Sundays, he being bare-headed, barefooted, and bare-necked, after the manner of a public penitentiary; his body being covered with a canvass-shirt and canvass-breeches; carrying in his hand a taper of a pound weight: and that done, he was dismissed.

RICHARD BELWARD, AND OTHERS.

Richard Belward, of Ersham, in the diocese of Norwich,was accused for holding and teaching these errors and opinions here under written, contrary to the determination of the church of Rome.

Imprimis , That ecclesiastical ministers and ordinaries 12 have no power to excommunicate, neither can excommunicate. And albeit that a bishop do excommunicate any man, God doth absolve him. Item, That he held the erroneous opinions and conclusions which sir John Oldcastle held when he was in prison, and affirmed that sir John Oldcastle was a true catitalic man, and falsely condemned, and put to death without any reasonable cause. Item, That such as go on pilgrimage, offering to images made of wood and stone, are excommunicated, because they ought to offer to the quick, and not to the dead; and that the ecclesiastical ministers (that is to say, the curates,) do sell God upon Easter-day, when they receive offerings of such as should communicate, before they do minister the sacrament unto them. Item, That he counselled divers women, that they should not offer in the church for the dead, neither with women that were purified. Item, That he blamed divers of his neighbors that refused his doctrine, saying unto them, ‘Truly ye are fools that deny to learn the doctrine of my sect; for your neighbors who are of my sect, are able to confound and vanquish all others that are of your sect.’ Item, That the saints who are in heaven ought in no case to be prayed unto, but only God. Item, That the said Richard keepeth schools of Lollardy in the English tongue, in the town of Dychingham, and a certain parchment-maker bringeth him all the books containing that doctrine from London.

On the fifth of July, 1424, the said Richard Belward, was brought before John, bishop of Norwich, sitting in place of judgment, where the aforesaid articles were objected against the said Richard, which he there denied; whereupon the bishop appointed him another day to purge himself, the Monday next after the feast of St. Margaret: upon which day, being the twenty-fourth of July, in the year aforesaid, he appeared again before the bishop, and brought with him nine of his neighbors to purge him upon those articles, and there did solemnly purge himself. And afterwards, forasmuch as the said bishop suspected the said Richard Belward greatly of Lollardy, he commanded him there, presently, to swear upon the evangelists, that from that day forward he would not wittingly preach, teach, or defend, any error or heresy contrary to the church of Rome, neither aid, assist, favor, nor maintain, privily or apertly, any manner of person or persons, who should hold or maintain the said errors or heresies.

In the presence of Master William Bernham, John Wadden, Robert Serle, and John Berne, esquire, and other of his neighbors who came unto his purgation.

In like manner John Goddesel, of Dychingham, parchment-maker, was detected and accused upon the same articles, and thereupon brought before the bishop, where he, denying them, purged himself by his neighbors, as Richard Belward before had done, being sworn also in like manner as he was; and so was dismissed and set at liberty until A.D. 1428, when he was again apprehended and accused, and abjured, as shall be more at large declared in the history, when we come to that year. Sir Hugh Pie also, chaplain of Ludney in the diocese of Norwich, was likewise accused and brought before the bishop of Norwich on the fifth of July, A.D. 1424, for holding these opinions following:

That the people ought not to go on pilgrimage. Item, That the people ought not to give alms, but only unto such as beg at their doors. Item, That the image of the cross and other images are not to be worshipped; and that the said Hugh had cast the cross of Bromehold into the fire to be burned, which he took from one John Welgate of Ludney.

Which articles, as is aforesaid, being objected against him, he utterly denied; whereupon he had a day appointed to purge himself by the witness of three lay-men, and three priests. That so done, he was sworn as the other before, and so dismissed.

After this, A.D. 1428, king Henry VI. sent down most cruel letters of commission unto John Exeter and Jacolet Germain, keeper of the castle of Colchester, for the apprehending of sir William White, priest, and others suspected of heresies, the tenor whereof hereafter ensueth.

THE COPY OF THE KING’S LETTERS DIRECTED TO JOHN EXETER AND JACOLET GERMAIN, Keeper of the Castle of Colchester, for the apprehending of Sir William White, Priest, and other Lollards, as they called them.

Henry, by the grace of God, king of England and of France, lord of Ireland, to his well-beloved John Exeter, and Jacolet Germain, keeper of the castle of Colchester, health:

Ye shall understand that we, fully trusting to your fidelity and circumspections, have appointed you jointly and severally to take and arrest William White, priest, and Thomas, late chaplain of Setling, in the county of Norfolk, and William Northampton, priest, and all others, whatsoever they be, that are suspected of heresy or Lollardy, wheresoever they may be found within the liberties or without, and straightway, being so taken, to send them unto our next gaol or prison, until such time as we shall have taken other order for their delivery: and therefore we straightly command, you, that ye diligently attend about the premises, and fulfill the same in form aforesaid. Also we charge and command all and singular justices of the peace, mayors, sheriffs, bailiffs, constables, and all other our faithful officers, by the tenor of these presents, that they do assist, aid, and counsel you and every of you, in the execution of the premises, as it shall be comely for them. In witness whereof we have caused these our letters patent to be made.

Witness myself at Westminster, the sixth of July, the sixth of our reign.

By virtue of which commission we find in old monuments, that within short space after, John Exeter, who was appointed one of the commissioners, attached six persons in the town of Bungay, in the diocese of Norwich; and committed them to William Day and William Roe, constables of the town of Bungay, to be sent within ten days following, under safe custody, unto the castle of Norwich; whose names, through the antiquity of the monument, were so defaced, that we could not attain to the perfect knowledge of them all; only three names partly remained in the worn book to be read, which were these: John Waddon, of Tenterden, in the county of Kent; Bartholomew, monk of Ersham, in the county of Norfolk; Corneleader, a married man; William Skuts.

These three were in the custody of the duke of Norfolk, at his castle of Framlingham.

Beside these, we also find in the said old monuments within the diocese of Norfolk and Suffolk, especially in the towns of Beccles, Ersham, and Ludney, a great number both of men and women to have been vexed and cast into prison; and, after their abjuration, brought to open shame in churches and markets, by the bishop of the said diocese, called William, and his chancellor, William Bernham, John Exeter being the registrar therein; so that within the space of three or four years (that is, from the year 1428, unto the year 1481), about the number of one hundred and twenty men and women were examined, and sustained great vexation for the profession of the christian faith; of whom some were only taken upon suspicion, for eating of meats prohibited upon vigil-days, who, upon their purga-tion made, escaped more easily away, and with less punishment; whose names here follow subscribed.

A CATALOGUE OF GOOD MEN AND WOMEN THAT WERE TAKEN AND EXAMINED UPON SUSPICION OF HERESY. 1. Robert Skirving, of Harlstone. 2. William Skirving. 3. John Terry, of Ersham. 4. John Abtre, of Ersham. 5. John Middleton, of Halvergate. 6. John Wayde, of Ersham. 7. Richard Clark, of Sething. 8. Thomas White,of Berlingham. 9. Master Robert Beert, of Berry. 10. Richard Page, of Clipsly.

The others were more cruelly handled, and some of them were put to death and burned; among whom we do specially find mention made of these three: Father Abraham, of Colchester; William White, priest; John Waddon, priest.

The residue (or a great number of good men and women were forced to abjure), sustaining such cruel penance as pleased the said bishop and his chancellor then to lay upon them. The names of whom, both men and women, here follow together in this brief catalogue to be seen.

NAMES John Beverley. John Wardon. John Baker.

John Middleton John Kynget. Margery Backster John Skilley. John Godhold. Thomas Albeck.

John Pierce. Nicholas Canon, of Eye. Thomas Pie John Mendham. John Middleton. Thomas Chatris.

Thomas Wade William Tador. Katherine Davy Sir Hugh Pie, priest. Bartholomew Tatcher.

Thomas James.

John Fouling. Bertram Cornmonger. Thomas Swerden.

Alanus Andrew. William Wright. William Everden.

William Tailor. Avis, the wife of Thomas Moon, and Richard Fletcher, of Beckles. her daughter.

Nicholas Belward. Thomas Grenemere. John Clark William Bate. William Scherming. William Osbourne John Rene, of Beckles.

Baldwin Cooper, of Beckles.

John Pert, Master Moon’s servant.

Robert Brigs. John Finch. John Wropham.

Thomas Moon. Isabel Chaplain, of Martham William Masse, of Ersham.

JohnGoodwin, of Ersham Henry Latchcold, of Ersham.

Henry Boode, of Ersham.

Richard Horne, of Ersham John Belward, sen., of Ersham John Belward, jun., of Ersham John Spire, of Bungay.

Rob. Cole, of Turning The herd of Shepemedow Isabel Davy, of Costes.

Sibyl, wife of John Godesel, of Dicham John Pyry, of Bartham John Baker. Margery Wright Thomas Burrel, and his wife.

John Pert Edmund Archer. The clerk of Ludney Richard Clark, of Sething.

Katherine, wife of William Wright.

William Coilin, of Southcreke.

Richard King, of Windham Thomas Plowman.

John Fellis.

Thomas Love, of Rokeland.

Richard Knobbing, of Beckles.

John Eldon, of Beckles.

William Hardy.

William Bate. John Weston. Katherine Hobs John Daw. Robert Grigs, of Martham William Calls, priest Thomas Pert; priest.

John Cupper, vicar ofTunstal Jacob Bodhome,and Margaret, his wife.

John Manning, of Marton.

John Culling, of Beemster.

Richard Fletcher, of Beckles, and Matilda, his wife.

John Elden, of Beckles.

Robert Canel, priest.

Nicholas Drey.

William Hardy, of Mund-ham.

John Poleyne.

These before-named persons, and soldiers of Christ, being much beaten with the cares and troubles of those days, although they were constrained to relent and abjure (that is, to protest otherwise with their tongues, than their hearts did think), partly through correction, and partly through infirmity, being as yet but newly-trained soldiers in God’s field, yet for the good will they bare unto the truth, although with their tongues they durst not express it, we have thought good that their names should not be suppressed, as well for other sundry causes, as especially for this: either to stop the mouths of malignant adversaries, or to answer to their ignorance, who, following rather blind affection, than the true knowledge of times and antiquities, for lack of knowledge blame that they know not, accusing the true doctrine of the word of God for novelty, and carping at the teachers thereof for new-broached brethren; who, if they did as well foresee times past, as they be unwilling to follow times now present, they should understand as well by these stories as by others before, how this doctrine of the grace of God, lacking no antiquity, hath, from time to time, continually sought to burst out, and in some places hath prevailed, although in most places, through the tyranny and malice of men, Christ’s proceedings have been suppressed and kept under from rising, so much as men’s power and strength, joined with craft and subtlety, could labor to keep down the same; as here by these good men of Norfolk and Suffolk may well appear, For if the knowledge and good-towardness of those good men had had the like liberty of time, with the help of like authority, as we have now, and. had not been restrained, through the iniquity of time and tyranny of prelates, it had well appeared how old this doctrine would have been, which now they contemn and reject for the newness thereof: neither needed Bonner to have asked of Thomas Hawks, and such others, where their church was forty years ago; inasmuch as for forty years ago, and more, within the county of Norfolk and Suffolk, was then found such plenty of the same profession and like doctrine which we now profess.

And thus much.for the number and names of these persons.

Now as touching their articles which they did maintain and defend: First, this is to be considered, as I find it in the registers, such society and agreement of doctrine to be amongst them, that in their assertions and articles there was almost no difference. The doctrine of the one was the doctrine of all the others. What their articles were, partly is showed in the leaf before; and partly here followeth to be declared more at large.

Although it is to be thought concerning these articles, that many of them either were falsely objected against them, or not truly reported of the notaries (according as the common manner is of these adversaries, where the matter is good, there to make heresy, and of a little occasion to stir up great matter of slander, as they did before by the articles of John Wickliff and John Huss, and others): so, in like manner, it seemeth they did in the articles of these men, either mistaking that which they said, or misunderstanding that which they meant, especially in these two articles concerning baptism and paying of tithes. For where they, speaking against the ceremonial and superflous traditions then used in baptism, as salt, oil, spittle, taper, light, chrisms, exorcising of the water, with such other like, accounted them as no material thing in the holy institution of baptism; the notaries, slanderously depraving this their assertion, to make it more odious to the ears of the people, so gave out the article, as though they should hold, that the sacrament of baptism, used in the church by water, is but a light matter, and of small effect.

Again, in speaking against the christening which the midwives use in private houses, against the opinion of such as think such children to be damned who depart before they come to their baptism, they are falsely reported, as though they should say: That christian people be sufficiently baptized in the blood of Christ, and need no water; and that infants be sufficiently baptized, if their parents be baptized before them. Which thing is so contrary to the manifest Word, that it is not to be thought that any are so ignorant of the gospel, that they ever would, or did, affirm the same.

Moreover they thought or said peradventure, That in certain cases tithes might be withholden from wicked priests sometimes, and be conferred to better uses; to the behoof of the poor. Therefore they are falsely slandered, as saying and affirming, that no tithes are to be given to the ministers and curates of the churches.

And likewise for matrimony, wherein they are reported to hold and affirm, as though it consisted only in the mutual consent betwixt the man and the woman, needing no other solemnizing in the public church; and all because (as it is likely) they denied it to be a sacrament.

Other articles were objected against them, as these which hereafter follow:

That auricular confession is not to be made unto a priest, but unto God only; because no priest hath any power to absolve a sinner from his sin. Item, That no priest hath power to make the body of Christ in the sacrament of the altar, but that, after the sacramental words, there remaineth pure material bread as before. Item, That every true christian man is a priest to God. Item, That no man is bound, under pain of damnation, unto Lent, or any other days prohibited by the church of Rome. Item, That the pope is Antichrist, and his prelates the disciples of Antichrist, and that the pope hath no power to bind and loose upon earth. Item, That it is lawful for every Christian to do any bodily work (sin only excepted) upon holy-days. Item, That it is lawful for priests to have wives. Item, That the excommunications and ecclesiastical censures given out by the prelates, are not to be regarded. Item, That it is not lawful to swear in private cases. Item, That men ought not to go on pilgrimage. Item, That there is no honor to be given to the images of the crucifix, of our lady, or any other saint. Item, That the holy water, hallowed in the church by the priest, is not holier or of more virtue than other running or well-water, because the Lord blessed all waters in their first creation. Item, That the death of Thomas Becket was neither holy nor meritorious. Item, That relics, as dead men’s bones, ought neither to be worshipped nor digged out of their graves, nor set up in shrines. Item, That prayers made in all places are acceptable unto God. Item, That men ought not to pray to any saint, but only to God. Item, That the bells and ringing in the church, were ordained for no other purpose, than to fill the priests’ purses. Item, That it is no sin to withstand the ecclesiastical precepts. Item, That the catholic church is only the congregation of the elect. These were the articles which were generally objected against them all, wherein they did so agree in one uniform faith, that whatsoever one did hold, all the others did maintain, and hold the same. By which their consent and doctrine it appeareth, that they all received it of some one instructor, who was William White; who being a scholar and follower of John Wickliff, resorted afterwards into this country of Norfolk, and there instructed these men in the light of the gospel. And now, as we have declared the names and articles of these good men, so it remaineth somewhat to speak of their troubles (how they were handled), beginning first with William White.

WILLIAM WHITE, PRIEST This William White, being a follower of John Wickliff, 16 and a priest, not after the common sort of priests, but rather to be reputed amongst the number of them of whom the wise man speaketh, [Ecclus, 18] ‘He was as the morning star in the midst of a cloud,’ etc.; this man was well learned, upright, and a well-spoken priest. He gave over his priesthood and benefice, and took unto him a godly young woman to his wife, named Joan; notwithstanding he did not therefore cease or leave from his former office and duty, but continually labored to the glory and praise of the spouse of Christ, by reading, writing, and preaching. The principal points of his doctrine were these, which he was forced to recant at Canterbury:

That men should seek for the forgiveness of their sins only at the hands of God.

That the wicked living of the pope and his holiness, is nothing else but a devilish estate and heavy yoke of Antichrist, and therefore he is an enemy unto Christ’s truth.

That men ought not to worship images, or other idolatrous paintings.

That men ought not to worship the holy men who are dead.

That the Romish church is the fig-tree which the Lord Christ hath accursed, because it hath brought forth no fruit of the true belief.

That such as wear cowls, or be anointed or shorn, are the lanceknights and soldiers of Lucifer; and that they all, because their lamps are not burning, shall be shut out, when the Lord Christ shall come.

Upon which articles he, being attached at Canterbury under the archbishop Henry Chichesley, A.D. 1424, there, for a certain space, stoutly and manfully witnessed the truth which he had preached. But like as there he lost his courage and strength, so afterwards he became again much more stout and strong in Jesus Christ, and confessed his own error and offense.

For after this, going into Norfolk with his said wife Joan, and there occupying himself busily in teaching and converting the people unto the true doctrine of Christ, at last, by means of the king’s letters sent down for that intent and purpose, he was apprehended and taken, and brought before William bishop of Norwich, by whom he was convicted, and condemned of thirty articles, and there was burned in Norwich, in the month of September, A.D. 1428.

This William White and his wife had their chief abode with one Thomas Moon of Ludney. 516 He was of so devout and holy a life, that all the people had him in great reverence, and desired him to pray for them; insomuch that one Margaret Wright confessed, that if any saints were to be prayed to, she would rather pray to him than any other. When he was come unto the stake, thinking to open his mouth to speak unto the people, to exhort and confirm them in the verity, one of the bishop’s servants struck him on the mouth, thereby to force him to keep silence. And thus this good man, receiving the crown of martyrdom, ended this mortal life to the great dolor and grief of all the good men of Norfolk; whose said wife Joan, following her husband’s footsteps according to her power, teaching and sowing abroad the same doctrine, confirmed many men in God’s truth; wherefore she suffered much trouble and punishment the same year at the hands of the said bishop.

About the same time also were burned Father Abraham, of Colchester, and John Waddon, priest, for the like articles.

Concerning those who abjured, how and by whom they were examined, what depositions came in against them, and what was the order and manner of the penance enjoined them, here it might be set out at large; but, for avoiding of prolixity, it shall be sufficient briefly to touch certain of the principals, whereby the better understanding may be given to the reader, after what manner and order all the others were treated.

First, amongst those who were arrested and caused to abjure in this year before specified (1428), were Thomas Pie and John Mendham of Aidborough; who, being convicted upon divers of the articles beforementioned, were enjoined penance to be done in their own parish church, as by the bishop’s letter, directed to the dean of Rhodenhall, and to the parish priest of Aidborough, doth more at large appear; the tenor whereof here ensueth:

COPY OF THE LETTER OF THE BISHOP OF NORWICH, RESPECTING THOMAS PIE AND JOHN MENDHAM.

William, by the divine permission bishop of Norwich, to our wellbeloved sons in Christ, the dean of Rhodenhall of our diocese, and to the parish priest of the parish church of Aidborough of the same our diocese, health, grace, and benediction. Forsomuch as we, according to our office, lawfully proceeding to the correction and amendment of the souls of Thomas Pie and John Mendham of Aidborough of the diocese aforesaid, because they have holden, believed, and affirmed divers and many errors and heresies, contrary to the determination of the holy church of Rome and the universal church. and to the catholic faith, have enjoined the said Thomas and John, appearing before us personally, and confessing before us judicially that they have bolden, believed, and affirmed divers and many errors and heresies, this penance hereunder written for their offenses, to be done and fulfilled in manner, form, and time, hereunder written, according as justice doth require—that is to say, six fustigations [or displings, or whippings] about the parish church of Aidborough aforesaid before the solemn procession six several Sundays, and three whippings [or displings] about the market-place of Harlstone of our said diocese three principal market-days; bare neck, head, legs, and feet; their bodies being covered only with their shirts and breeches; either of them carrying a taper in his hand of a pound weight, as well round about the church, as about the market-place, in every of the foresaid appointed days; which tapers, the last Sunday after the penance finished, we will that the said John and Thomas do humbly and devoutly offer unto the high altar of the parish church of Aidborough at the time of the offertory of the high mass the same day, and that either of them, going about the market-place aforesaid, shall make four several pauses or stays, and, at every of those same pauses, humbly and devoutly receive at our hands three whippes [or displings]—Therefore we straitly charge and command you, and either of you, jointly and severally, by virtue of your obedience, that every Sunday and market-day after the receipt of our present commandment, you do effectually admonish and bring forth the said Thomas Pie and John Mendham to begin and accomplish their said penance; and so successively to finish the same in manner and form afore-appointed. But if they will not obey your monitions, or rather our commandments in this behalf, and begin and finish their said penance effectually, you or one of you shall cite them peremptorily, that they, or either of them, appear before us, or our commissary, in the chapel of our palace at Norwich, the twelfth day after the citation so made, if it be a court day, or else the next court day following, to declare if they or any of them have any cause why they should not be excommunicated for their manifest offense in this behalf committed, according to the form and order of law, and further, to receive such punishment, as justice shall provide in that behalf. And what you have done in the premises, whether the said Thomas and John have obeyed your admonitions, and performed the same penance or no, we will that you or one of you, who have received our said commandment for the execution thereof, do distinctly certify us between this and the last day of November next coming.

Dated at our palace of Norwich, under our commissary’s seal, the eighth day of October, Anno 1428.

This, gentle reader! was, for the most part, the order of their whole penance, howbeit some were oftentimes more cruelly handled; and after their penance they were banished out of the diocese, and others were more straitly used by longer imprisonment, whereof we will briefly rehearse one or two for example.

JOHN BEVERLY, ALAIS BATTILD, A LABORER.

John Beverly, alias Battild, a laborer, was attached by the vicar of Southcreke, the parish priest of Waterden, and a lawyer, and so delivered unto Master William Bernham, the bishop’s commissary, who sent him to the castle of Norwich, there to be kept in irons: where afterwards, being brought before the commissary, and having nothing proved against him, he took an oath, that every year afterwards he would confess his sins once a year to his curate, and receive the sacrament at Easter, as other Christians did. And for his offense he was enjoined, that upon the Friday and Saturday next after he should fast on bread and water, and upon the Saturday be whipped 17 from the palace of Norwich, going round about by Tomblands, 517 and by St. Michael’s church, by Cottlerew, and about the market, having in his hand a wax-candle of two-pence, to offer to the image of the Trinity after he had done his penance. And, forasmuch as he confessed that he had eaten flesh upon Easter-day, and was not shriven in all Lent, nor received upon Easter-day, the judge enjoined him that he should fast Tuesday, Wednesday, and Friday, in Whitsun-week, having but one meal a day of fish and other white meats; and, after this penance so done, he should depart out of the diocese, and never come there any more.

JOHN SKILLEY OF FLIXTOM, MILLER AND OTHERS.

John Skilley of Flixton, miller, being apprehended and brought before the bishop of Norwich on the 14th of March, A.D. 1428, for holding and maintaining the articles above-written, was thereupon convicted and forced to abjure; and after this abjuration solemnly made (which here, to avoid tediousness, we omit), he had a most sharp sentence of penance pronounced against him, the effect whereof, being briefly collected, was this: that forasmuch as the said Skilley was convicted by his own confession, for holding and maintaining the articles before-written, and for receiving certain good and godly men into his house, as sir William White, priest, and John Wadden, whom they called famous, notorious, and damnable heretics, and had now abjured the same, being first absolved from the sentence of excommunication which he had incurred by means of his opinions, he was enjoined for penance seven years’ imprisonment in the monastery of Langley, in the diocese of Norwich. And forasmuch as in times past he used upon the Fridays to eat flesh, he was enjoined to fast on bread and water every Friday for the space of seven years to come; and that by the space of two years next immediately after the seven years expired, on every Wednesday in the beginning of Lent, and on every Maunday-Thursday, he should appear before the bishop, or his successor or commissary for the time being, in the cathedral church of Norwich, together with the other penitentiaries, to do open penance for his offenses.

Besides these there were divers others of the same company, who the same year were forced to like abjuration and penance. And so, to proceed to the next year following, which was A.D. 1429, there ensueth a great number in the same register, who were examined, and did penance in like sort, to the number of sixteen or seventeen; in the number of whom was John Baker, otherwise called Usher Tunstal, who, for having a book with the Pater-Noster, the Ave, and the Creed, in English, and for certain other articles of fasting, confession, and invocation, contrary to the determination of the Romish church, after much vexation for the same, was caused to abjure and sustain such penance, as the others before him had done.

THE STORY OF MARGERY BACKSTER AND OTHERS.

Another was Margery Backster, wife of Wiliam Backster, wright, in Marham, the same year accused; against whom one Joan, wife of Cliffland, was brought in by the bishop, and compelled to depose, and was made to bring in, in form following:

First, That the said Margery Backster did inform this deponent, that she should in no case swear; saying to her in English: ‘Dame, beware of the bee, for every bee will sting; and therefore take heed you swear not, neither by God, neither by our lady, neither by any other saint; and if ye do contrary, the bee will sting your tongue and venom your soul.’ Item, This deponent being demanded by the said Margery, what she did every day at church; she answered, that she kneeled, down and said five Pater-Nosters, in worship of the crucifix, and as many Ave Marias in worship of our lady. Whom Margery rebuked, saying, ‘You do evil to kneel or pray to such images in the churches, for God dwelleth not in such churches, neither shall he come down out of heaven; and he will give you no more reward for such prayer, than a candle lighted and set under the cover of the font, will give light by night to those who are in the church:’ saying, moreover, in English: ‘Lewd wrights of stocks hew and form such crosses and images, and, after that, lewd painters gleer them with colors. And if you desire so much to see the true cross of Christ, I will show it you at home in your own house.’ Which this deponent being desirous to see, the said Margery, stretching out her arms abroad, said to this deponent: ‘This is the true cross of Christ, and this cross thou oughtest and mayest every day behold and worship in thine own house; and therefore it is but vain to run to the church, to worship dead crosses and images.’ Item, This deponent, being demanded by the said Margery how she believed touching the sacrament of the altar, said that she believed the sacrament of the altar, after the consecration, to be the very body of Christ in form of bread. To whom Margery said: ‘Your belief is nought. For if every such sacrament were God, and the very body of Christ, there should be an infinite number of gods, because that a thousand priests, and more, do every day make a thousand such gods, and afterwards eat them, and void them out again in places, where, if you will seek them, you may find many such gods. And, therefore, know for certainty, that by the grace of God it shall never be my god, because it is falsely and deceitfully ordained by the priests in the church, to induce the simple people to idolatry; for it is only material bread.’

Moreover, The said Margery said to this deponent, that Thomas of Canterbury, whom the people called Saint Thomas, was a false traitor, and damned in hell, because he injuriously endowed the churches with possessions, and raised up many heresies in the church, which seduce the simple people; and, therefore, if God be blessed, the said Thomas is accursed; and those false priests that say that he suffered his death patiently before the altar, do lie; for as a false cowardly traitor, he was slain in the church door, as he was flying away.

Moreover, this deponent saith, that the said Margery told her, that the cursed pope, cardinals, archbishop, and bishops, and especially the bishop of Norwich, and others, that support and maintain heresies and idolatry, reigning and ruling over the people, shall shortly have the very same or worse mischief fall upon them, than that cursed man, Thomas of Canterbury, had. For they falsely and cursedly deceive the people with their false mammetries and laws, to extort money from the simple folk, to sustain their pride, riot, and idleness. And know assuredly that the vengeance of God will speedily come upon them, who have most cruelly slain the children of God, Father Abraham, and William White, a true preacher of the law of God, and John Wadden, with many other godly men; which vengeance had come upon the said Caiaphas, the bishop of Norwich,. and his ministers, who are members of the devil, before this time, if the pope had not sent over these false pardons unto those parties, which the said Caiaphas had falsely obtained, to induce the people to make procession for the,state of them and of the church; which pardons brought the simple people to, cursed idolatry. Item, The said Margery said to this deponent, that every faithful man or woman is not bound to fast in Lent, or on other days appointed for fasting by the church; and that every man may lawfully eat flesh and all other meats upon the said days and times; and that it were better to eat the fragments left upon Thursday at night on the fasting days, than to go to the market to bring themselves in debt to buy fish; and that pope Silvester made the Lent. Item, The said Margery said to this deponent, that William White was falsely condemned for a heretic, and that he was a good and holy man;. and that he willed her to follow him to the place of execution, where she saw that when he would have opened his mouth to speak unto the people to instruct them, a devil, (one of bishop Caiaphas’s servants), struck him on the lips, and stopped his mouth, that he could in no case declare the will of God. Item, This deponent saith, that the said Margery taught her, that she should not go on pilgrimage, neither to our lady of Walsingham, nor to any other saint or place.

Also this deponent saith, that, the said Margery desired her, that she and Joan her maid would come secretly, in the night, to her chamber, and there she should hear her husband read the law of Christ unto them, which law was written in a book that her husband was wont to read to her by night: and that her husband is well learned in the christian verity.

Also that the same Margery had talked with a woman named Joan West, and that the said woman is in a good way of salvation.

Also that the said Margery said to this deponent, ‘Joan,it appeareth by your countenance,, that you intend to disclose this that I have said unto you;’ and this deponent sware that she would never disclose it, without the said Margery gave her occasion. Then said Margery unto this deponent: ‘If thou do accuse me unto the bishop, I will do unto thee, as I did once unto certain friar, a Carmelite of Yarmouth, who was the best learned friar in all the country.’ Then this deponent desired to know what she had done to the friar. Unto whom Margery answered, that she had talked with the said friar, rebuking him because he did beg, saying, that it was no alms to give him any good thing, except he would leave his habit, and go to the plough, and so he should please God more, than following the life of some of those friars. Then the friar required of the said Margery, whether she could teach him or tell him any thing else. Then the said Margery (as she affirmed to this deponent) declared to this friar the gospel, in English; and then the friar departed from her. After this the said friar accused the said Margery of heresy; and she, understanding that the friar had accused her, accused the friar again, that he would have seduced her; and because she would not consent unto him, the friar had accused her of heresy. And, moreover, she said, that her husband would have killed the friar there-for; and so the friar, for fear, held his peace, and went his way for shame.

This Margery also said, that she had oftentimes been feignedly confessed to the dean of the fields, because he should think her to be a woman of good life; and therefore he gave the said Margery oftentimes money. Then this deponent asked her whether she had confessed her sins to a priest or not. And she answered, that she had never offended any priest, and therefore she would never confess herself to any priest, neither obey him; because they have no power to absolve any man from his sins, for that they offend daily more grievously than other men; and therefore that men ought to confess themselves only unto God, and to no priest. Item, That the said Margery said to this deponent, that the people did worship devils who fell from heaven with Lucifer; which devils, in their fall to the earth, entered into the images which stand in the churches, and have long lurked and dwell in them; so that the people, worshipping those images, commit idolatry. Item, She said moreover to this deponent, that holy bread and holy water were but trifles of no effect or force; and that the bells are to be cast out of the church, and that they are excommunicated who first ordained them.

Moreover, that she should not be burned, although she were convicted of Lollardy, for that she had a charter of salvation in her body.

Also the said deponent saith, that Agnes Berthem, her servant, being sent to the house of the said Margery the Saturday after Ash-Wednesday, the said Margery not being within, found a brass pot standing over the fire, with a piece of bacon and oatmeal seething in it; as the said Agnes reported to this deponent.

There were also, besides this deponent, divers others sworn and examined upon the said Margery, as John Grimley and Agnes Berthem, servants to William Cliffland, who all together confirmed the former depositions.

Thus much we have thought good to note, as concerning Margery Backster, which we have gathered out of the old monuments and registers.

But what became of her after this her accusation, because we find no mention made in the said registers, we are not able to declare.

THE SAME YEAR ALSO WERE THE LIKE DEPOSITIONS MADE BY ONE WILLIAM WRIGHT AGAINST DIVERS GOOD MEN, AS HERE FOLLOWETH.

First, This deponent saith, that William Taylor told John Pity of Ludney, in the house of John Bungay of Beghton, in the presence of John Bungay, Robert Grigges, wright, of Martham, and John Usher, that all the good men of Martham who were favorers and helpers to that good man William White, are evil troubled now-adays; and that the said William White was a good and holy doctor; and that the best doctor after him was William Everden, who wrought with the said William Taylor of Ludney, by the space of one month; and that the first Sunday of the same month, the said William Everden did sit all day upon the table at work, saying to the said William Taylor, that he would not go to church to show himself a scribe or a pharisee; and the second Sunday he put on gentlemen’s apparel, and went to Norwich, to hearken how the bishop and his ministers used the poor Christians there in prison.

Also the said William Wright deposed, that William Taylor of Ludney was one of the sect, and went to London with sir Hugh Pie, and had conversation oftentimes with sir William White, having often conference upon the Lollards’ doctrine. Item, That Anise, wife of Thomas Moon, is of the same sect, and favored them, and receiveth them often; and also the daughter of Thomas Moon is partly of the same sect, and can read English. Item, That Richard Fletcher, of Beckles, is a most perfect doctor in that sect, and can very well and perfectly expound the holy Scriptures, and hath a book of the new law in English, which was first sir Hugh Pie’s. Item, That Nicholas Belward, son of John Belward, dwelling in the parish of Southelem, is one of the same sect, and hath a New Testament which he bought at London for four marks and fortypence, and taught the said William Wright and Margery his wife, and wrought with them continually by the space of one year, and studied diligently upon the said New Testament. Item, That Thomas Gremner, turner, of Dychingham, is perfect in that sect and law.

John Clark the younger, of Burgh, had the bedding and apparel of William Everden in his custody, after the return of William White from Burgh, and is of the same sect. Item, William Bate, tailor, of Sethlug, and his wife, and his son, who can read English very well, are of the same sect. Item, William Skirving, of Sething, received Joan, the wife of William White, into his house, being brought thither by William Everden, after their departure from Martham. Item, William Osbourn of Sethlug, John Reve, glover, and Bawdwin Cooper of Beckles, are of the same sect. Item, John Pert, late servant of Thomas Moon, is of the same sect, and can read well, and did read in the presence of William White, and was the first that brought sir Hugh Pie into the company of the Lollards, who assembled oftentimes together at the house of the said Thomas Moon, and there conferred upon their doctrine. Item, sir Hugh Pie bequeathed to Alice, servant to William White, a new Testament, which they then called the book of the new law, and was in the custody of Oswald Godfrey of Colchester.

John Perker, mercer, of a village by Ipswich, is a famous doctor of that sect. Also he said, that Father Abraham of Colchester is a good man. Item, The said William Wright deposeth, that it is read in the prophecies amongst the Lollards, that the sect of the Lollards shall be in a manner destroyed; notwithstanding at length the Lollards shall prevail and have the victory against all their enemies. Also he said, that Tucke knoweth all of that sect in Suffolk, Norfolk, and Essex.

Besides these, there were many others the same year troubled, whose names being before expressed in the table of Norfolk-men, here, for brevity’s sake, we omit further to treat of, passing over to the next year following, which was 1430. John Burrel, servant to Thomas Moon of Ludney, in the diocese of Norwich, was apprehended and arrested for heresy the ninth day of December, in this year of our Lord 1430, and examined by Master William Bernham, the bishop’s commissary, upon the articles before-mentioned, and divers others hereafter following objected against him.

Imprimis , That the catholic church is the soul of every good christian man. Item, That no man is bound to fast the Lent, or other fasting days, appointed by the church, for they were not appointed by God, but ordained by the priests; and that every man may eat flesh or fish upon the same days, indifferently, according to his own will, and every Friday is a free day to eat both flesh and fish indifferently. Item, That pilgrimage ought not to be made, but only unto the poor. Item, That it is not lawful to swear, but in case of life and death. Item, That masses and prayers for the dead are but vain, for the souls of the dead are either in heaven or hell; and there is none other place of purgatory but this world.

Upon which articles he, being convicted, was forced to abjure, and suffered like penance as the others before had done.

Thomas Moon of Ludney was apprehended and attached for suspicion of heresy, against whom were objected by the bishop the articles before written, but especially this article: that he had familiarity and communication with divers heretics, and had received, comforted, supported, and maintained divers of them, as sir William White, sir Hugh Pie, Thomas Pert, and William Callis, priests, with many more; upon which articles he, being convicted before the bishop, was forced to abjure; and received the like penance, in like manner as before.

In like manner, Robert Grigges, of Martham, was brought before the bishop the seventeenth day of February, in the year aforesaid,for holding and affirming the aforesaid articles, but especially these hereafter following.

That the sacrament of confirmation, ministered by the bishop, doth avail nothing to salvation.

That it is no sin to withstand the ordinances of the church of Rome.

That holy bread and holy water are but trifles, and that the bread and water are the worse for the conjurations and characters which the priests make over them.

Upon which articles he, being convicted, was forced to abjure, and received penance in manner and form as the others had done before him. The like also (albeit somewhat more sharp) happened unto John Finch of Colchester, the twentieth day of September, who, albeit he was of the diocese of London, being suspected of heresy, was attached at Ipswich in the diocese of Norwich, and brought before the bishop there, before whom he, being convicted of the like articles, as all the others before him, was enjoined penance, namely, three disciplinings at solemn procession about the cathedral church of Norwich three several Sundays; and three disciplinings about the market-place of Norwich three principal marketdays; his head, neck, and feet, being bare, and his body covered only with a short shirt or vesture; having in his hands a taper of wax of a pound weight, which, the next Sunday after his penance, he should offer to the Trinity; and that for the space of three years after, every Ash-Wednesday and Maunday-Thursday, he should appear in the cathedral church at Norwich, before the bishop or his vicegerent, to do open penance among the other penitentiaries for his offenses.

There were, besides these men whom we have here rehearsed, divers and many others, who, both for the concordance of the matter, and also because their articles and punishments were all one, we have thought good at this time to pass over; especially forasmuch as their names be before recited in the catalogue.

RICHARD HOBEDEN, MARTYR.

About the same time, even the same year 1430, shortly after the solemn coronation of king Henry VI., a certain man named Richard Hoveden, a wool-winder, and citizen of London, received also the crown of martyrdom; which man, when he could by no persuasions be withdrawn or plucked back from the opinions of Wickliff, was, by the rulers of the church, condemned for heresy, and as Fabian writeth, burned, hard by the Tower of London.

NICHOLAS CANON, OF EYE Now to proceed in our story of Norfolk and Suffolk, in following the order of years, we find that in the year of our Lord 1431, one Nicholas Canon, of Eye, was brought before the bishop of Norwich for suspicion of heresy, with certain witnesses sworn to depose against him touching his manners and conversation; which witnesses appointing one William Christopher to speak in the name of them all, he deposed, in manner and form following:

DEPOSITIONS AGAINST NICHOLAS CANON.

First, That on Easter-day, when all the parishioners went about the church of Eye solemnly in procession, as the manner was, the said Nicholas Canon, as it were mocking and deriding the other parishioners, went about the church the contrary way, and met the procession.—This article he confessed, and affirmed that he thought he did well in so doing. Item, The said Nicholas asked of Master John Colman of Eye, this question: Master Colman, what think you of the sacrament of the altar?’ To whom the said Colman answered: ‘Nicholas, I think that the sacrament of the altar is very God and very man, the very flesh and very blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, under the form of bread and wine.’ Unto whom Nicholas in derision said: ‘Truly, if the sacrament of the altar be very God and very man, and the very body and blood of our Lord Jesu Christ, then may very God and very man be put in a small room; as when it is in the priest’s mouth, that receiveth it at mass. And why may not we simple men as well eat flesh upon Fridays, and all other prohibited days, as the priest to eat the flesh, and drink the blood of our Lord every day indifferently?’—Which article the said Nicholas denied that he spake unto Master Colman, but unto a monk of Hockesney: and, furthermore, he thought he had spoken well in that behalf. Item, That on Corpus Christi day, at the elevation of high mass, when all the parishioners and other strangers kneeled down, holding up their hands, and doing reverence unto the sacrament, the said Nicholas went behind a pillar of the church, and turning his face from the high altar, mocked them that did reverence unto the sacrament.—This article he also acknowledging, affirmed that he believed himself to do well in so doing. Item, When his mother would have the said Nicholas to lift up his right hand, and to cross himself from the crafts and assaults of the devil, forasmuch as he deferred the doing thereof; his mother took up his right hand and crossed him, saying, ‘In nomine Patris, Filii, et Spiritus Sancti. Amen.’ Which so ended, the said Nicholas, immediately deriding his mother’ s blessing, took up his right hand of his own accord, and blessed him otherwise; as his adversaries report of him.—This article the said Nicholas acknowledged to be true. Item, That upon Allhallows-day, at the time of the elevation of high mass, when many of the parishioners of Eye lighted many torches, and carried them up to the high altar, kneeling down there in reverence and honor of the sacrament, the said Nicholas, carrying a torch, went up hard to the high altar, and standing behind the priest’s back saying mass, at the time of the elevation, stood upright upon his feet, turning his back to the priest, and his face towards the people, and would do no reverence unto the sacrament.—This article he acknowledged, affirming that he thought he had done well in that behalf.

All which articles the bishop’s commissary caused to be copied out word for word, and to be sent unto Master William Worsted, prior of the cathedral church of Norwich, and to other doctors of divinity, of the order of begging-friars, that they might deliberate upon them, and show their minds between that and Thursday next following; on which Thursday, being the last of November in the year abovesaid, the said Nicholas was again examined before Master Bernham and divers others, upon two other articles which he had confessed unto John Exeter, notary, and Thomas Gerusten, bachelor of divinity, and others. Whereof the first article was this:

That the said Nicholas Canon, being of perfect mind and remembrance, confessed that he doubted whether, in the sacrament of the altar, there were the very body of Christ or no.—This article he confessed before the commissary to be true. Item, That he, being of perfect mind and remembrance, believed that a man ought not to confess his sins to a priest.—This article he also confessed that he doubted upon.

Now remaineth to declare what these doctors aforesaid concluded upon the articles; whose answer unto the same was this:

First of all, as touching the first article, they said that the article in the same terms as it was propounded, is not simply a heresy, but an error. Item, As touching the second article, the doctors agree as in the first. Item, As touching the third article, they affirm that it is a heresy.

Unto the fourth article, they answered as unto the first and second. Item, The doctors affirm the fifth article to be a heresy. Item, As touching the sixth article, the doctors conclude, that if the said Nicholas, being of perfect mind and remembrance, did doubt whether the sacrament of the altar were the very perfect body of Christ or no, then the article is simply a heresy.

Whereupon the said commissary declared and pronounced the said Nicholas, upon the determination of the said doctors, to be a heretic; and thereupon forced the said Nicholas to abjure all the said articles. That done, he enjoined the said Nicholas penance for his offenses: three displings about the cloister of the cathedral church of Norwich, before a solemn procession, bare-headed and bare-foot, carrying a taper of half a pound in his hand, going after the manner aforesaid, like a mere penitentiary: which his penance the judge commanded should be respited until the coming of the bishop into his diocese, and that in the mean time he should be kept in prison; to the end that he should not infect the flock with his venom and poison of errors and heresies.

Thus we have briefly discoursed unto you the great trouble and afflictions which happened in Norfolk and Suffolk by the space of those four years before mentioned, having drawn out briefly, for every year, certain notable examples sufficient for the declaration of all the rest, forasmuch as their opinions being nothing different, their penance and punishment did also nothing differ, otherwise than by those particular examples may be plainly seen.

THOMAS BAGLEY, PRIEST And now to proceed as we have begun with our former stories, generally we find in Fabian’s Chronicles, that in the same year of our Lord, 1431, Thomas Bagley, a priest, vicar of Monenden beside Malden, being a valiant disciple and adherent of Wickliff, was condemned by the bishops of heresy at London, about the middle of Lent, and was degraded and burned in Smithfield.

PAUL CRAW A BOHEMAIN, MARTYR.

The same year also was Paul Craw, a Bohemian, taken at St. Andrew’s by the bishop Henry, and delivered over to the secular power to be burnt, for holding opinions contrary unto the church of Rome, touching the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper, the worshipping of saints, auricular confession, with other of Wickliff’s opinions. THE STORY OF THOMAS OF RENNES, 518 A FRENCHMAN AND CARMELITE FRIAR, BURNT IN ITALY FOR THE PROFESSION OF CHRIST. We have declared before, how this cruel storm of persecution which first began with us in England, after it had long raged here against many good and godly men, brake out and passed into Bohemia; and after, within a short time, the fire of this persecution, increasing by little and little, invaded Scotland; and from thence now with greater force and violence this furious devouring flame hath entered Italy, and suffereth not any part of the world to be free from the murder and slaughter of most good and godly men. It happened about this time that one Thomas of Rennes, a friar of that sect which taketh its name of the Mount Carmel, by chance came with the Venetian ambassadors into Italy. This man, although he was of that sort and sect, which instead of Christians are called Carmelites, yet was he of a far other religion, and understood the word of God, judging that God ought to be worshipped neither in that mount, nor at Jerusalem only, but in spirit and truth. This man, being a true Carmelite, and favoring with his whole heart that new sweet must, 21 of Jesus Christ, with earnest study and desire seeking after a christian integrity of life, prepared himself first to go into Italy, trusting that he should find there, or else in no place, some, by whose good life and living he might be edified and instructed. For where ought more abundance of virtue and good living to be, than in that place which is counted to be the fort and fountain of all religion? And how could it otherwise be, but that where so great holiness is professed; whereupon all men’s eyes are bent as upon a stage; where St. Peter’s seat is, and is thought to be the ruler and governor of all the church, all things should flourish and abound worthy of so great expectation in that place?

This holy man, having these things before his eyes, and considering the same with himself, forsook his own country and city, and went unto Rome, conceiving a firm and sure hope, that by the example of so many notable and worthy men, he should greatly profit in godliness and learning; but the success of the matter did utterly frustrate his hope, for all things were clean contrary. Whatsoever he saw, was nothing else but mere dissimulation and hypocrisy. Instead of gold, he found nothing but coals; and, to say the truth, he found nothing else, there, but gold and silver; for instead of heavenly gifts, there reigned amongst them the pomp and pride of the world; in place of godliness, riot; instead of learning and study, slothfulness and superstition. Tyranny and haughtiness of mind had possessed the place of apostolic simplicity; so that now there remained no more any place or liberty for a man to learn that which he knew not, or to teach that which he perfectly understood. Finally, all things were turned bottom upwards; all things happened unto him contrary to his expectation, wheresoever he went. But nothing so much offended this good man’s mind, as the intolerable ambition and pompous pride in them, whom example of humility should especially commend and praise to the whole world. And albeit that he saw here nothing which did accord and agree with the rule of the apostles, yet these things did so much pass all measure and patience, that he could by no means refrain his tongue, in so great abuse and corruption of the church, seeing such ambitious pride in their buildings, in their apparel, in their palaces, in their dainty fare, in their great trains of servants, in their horse and armor; and, finally, in all things pertaining unto them. Which things by how much they did vary from the prescribed rule of the gospel, so much the more was this good man forced to speak: albeit he did well understand how little he should prevail by speaking; for, if admonition would profit any thing at all, the books of Wickliff and divers others were not wanting. The famous testimonies of John Huss, and of Jerome of Prague, and their blood shed for the same, were yet present before their eyes; at whose most effectual exhortations, they were so little corrected and amended, that they seemed twice more cruel than they were before. Yet all this could not fear this good man Thomas, but that in so necessary and wholesome an office he would spend his life, if need should be. So by this means, he who came to be a scholar unto others, was now forced to be their teacher. And he, who determined to follow other men’s lives and manners, had now, contrariwise, set before them his life to be marked and followed: for he lived so amongst them, that his life might be a rule unto them all; and so taught, as he might also be their schoolmaster. For, even as Paul hath foreshowed unto such as desired to live godly in Christ, that they should suffer persecution, such like reward happened unto this man. He gave unto them the fruit of godliness, which they should follow: they again set upon his head the diadem of martyrdom. He showed them the way to salvation; and they, for the benefit of life, rewarded him with death: and whereas no rewards had been worthy for his great labors and travails, they, with most extreme ignominy, persecuted him even unto the fire. For when, by continual preaching, he had gotten great envy and hatred, the rulers began to consult together by what means they might circumvent this man’s life.

Here they had recourse to their accustomed remedies; for it was a peculiar and continual custom amongst the prelates of the church, that if any man did displease them, or if his talk was not according to their mind, or by any means hurtful, or a hinderance to their lucre and gain, by and by they framed out articles of some heresy, which they charged him withal. And like as every living thing hath his peculiar and proper weapon to defend himself from harm, as nature hath armed the boar with his tusks, the hedgehog with his prickles, the lion is feared for his claws, the dog for his biting, the bull fighteth with his horns, neither doth the ass lack his hoofs to strike withal: even so this is the only armor of the bishops, to strangle a man with heresy, if he once go about to mutter against their will and ambition; which thing may be easily perceived and seen in this most holy man, besides a great number of others. Who, when now he began to wax grievous unto them, and could no longer be suffered, what did they?

Straightways flee to their own policies, and, as they had done with Huss, and Jerome of Prague, even so went they about to practice against this man. They overwhelm him with suspicion, they seek to entangle him with questions, they examine him in judgment, they compile articles against him, and lay heresy to his charge; they condemn him as a heretic, and being so condemned, they destroy and kill him. This is their godliness; this is the peaceable order of those Carmelites, whose religion is to wear no sword nor shield, notwithstanding they bear in their hearts malice, rancor, vengeance, poison, craft, and deceit, sharper than any sword. With how great care and policy is it provided by law, that none of these clergymen should fight with sword in the streets? when in judgment; and accusations (where it is not lawful for a man to oppress his brother) there is no murderer, who hath more ready vengeance, or that doth more vilely esteem his brother’s soul than they. They shed no blood themselves; they strike not, nor kill; but they deliver them over unto others, to be slain. What difference is there, I pray you, but that they are the authors, and the others are but the ministers of the cruel fact? They kill no man as murderers do. How then? Although not after the same sort, yet they do it by another mean.

The articles which they falsely gathered against this man, are affirmed by some to be these:- That the church lacketh reformation, and that it shall be punished and reformed.

That infidels, Jews, Turks, and Moors, shall be converted unto Christ in the latter days.

That abominations are used at Rome.

That the unjust excommunication of the pope is not to be feared; and those who do not observe the same, do not sin or offend.

But 23 yet there lacked a minister for these articles, albeit he could not long be wanting at Rome, where all things are to be sold, even men’s souls. For this office and ministry there was no man thought more meet than William of Rouen, cardinal of St. Martin’s in the Mount, vice-chancellor of the court of Rome. Eugene at that time was pope,, who had a little before succeeded pope Martin above-mentioned; before the which Eugene this godly Frenchman of Rennes was brought, and from thence sent to prison; and again, after his imprisonment, and divers and sundry grievous torments, he was brought before the, judges. The wolf sat in judgment; the lamb was accused. Why? because he had troubled the spring. But here need not many words. This good man Thomas, not being able to resist the malice of these mighty potentates, had offended enough, and was easily convicted and condemned to be burned: but in such sort, as first of all he should be deprived of all such degrees as he had taken to priesthood; for it is counted an unlawful thing, that a priest should be punished with profane punishment, when, notwithstanding, it is lawful enough for priests to put any layman to death, be he never so guiltless. How religiously and earnestly do they foresee that the majesty of the priestly dignity should not in any case be hurt? But how little care have they that their consciences be not hurt with false judgments, and oppressing the guiltless? Wherefore, before he should come unto punishment, this good man Thomas must be degraded. The order and manner of this popish degrading is partly touched upon in the story of William Taylor.

After it had pleased the bishops to degrade this man from the degrees wherewith before they had consecrated him, and thought not that sufficient, by and by, afterwards, they deprived him of his life also, and burned him, four years after he came to Rome 24 A.D. 1436.

These 25 degrees, because ye shall not be ignorant, are not such as may be counted among the differences whereby we are known from others; neither among the ‘propers’ which are always agreeable unto us, but among those common accidents, which we both may have, and may be taken away from us at the will and pleasure of the bishops. For thus we are taught by such as write of philosophy, that there is an apt and easy motion from the habit to deprivation, but, contrariwise, from privation unto the habit there is no return. Wherefore, gentle reader, it is not to be marvelled at, why that he, being now become a layman, should die, who lived, being a priest. But this thou mayest more marvel at, what folly and madness was in those men’s minds, who, through such acts and doings, would set themselves forth to be a mocking-stock unto all the whole world, and, not only to be derided of men, but to be abominable and accursed before God.* And thus, through the cruelty of these most tyrannous prelates, this blessed martyr died. Albeit it is not to be thought that he died, but made a loss of this body, for a greater gain of salvation before the just judgment of God.

Neither is it to be doubted but that he liveth eternally in heaven, under the altar, with them whose blood the Lord will revenge, peradventure too soon for some of them whom the earth hath here so long holden unpunished.

As this Thomas above mentioned suffered at Rome, so were divers others, in other places about Germany, executed near about the same time, after the burning of John Huss; as Henry Grundfelder, priest, of Ratisbon, A.D. 1420; also Henry Radtgeber, priest, in the same city, A.D. 1423; John Draendorfe, of noble birth, and a priest, was burned at Worms, A.D. 1424; Peter Thoraw, at Spires, A.D. 1426; Matthew Hager also suffered at Berlin in Germany, not long after. After the death of pope Martin, who reigned fourteen years, succeeded Eugene IV., about A.D. 1481. Of whom Antoninus thus writeth, that he was much given to wars, as his conflicts and fighting with the Romans may declare; also the battles between the Venetians and the Florentines.

This pope began first to celebrate the council of Basil, which council Martin, his predecessor, had before intended, according to the institution of the council of Constance. Notwithstanding the said Eugene, perceiving afterwards this council of Basil not to favor him and his doings, and fearing some detriment to come to him by the same, afterwards labored, by all subtle practice, to dissolve and interrupt the said council, and from Basil to translate it first to Ferrara, then to Florence, more near to his own see of Rome. Concerning which council of Basil, forasmuch as we have begun here to make mention, it shall be no great digression out of the way to discourse something thereof (the Lord so permitting) more at large, so much as, for the principal matters thereof, shall seem sufficient or necessary to be known.

THE ORDER AND MANNER OF THE COUNCIL OF BASIL, WITH A BRIEF RECAPITULATION OF THE PRINCIPAL MATTERS DECREED AND CONCLUDED THEREIN, With a full Discourse of the Disputation holden amongst the Bishops, upon Eight Conclusions proponed in the same Council; collected and translated out of the Two Books of Aeneas Sylvius, who was there present, and at that time a meetly good man, and afterward was made Cardinal and Pope, called Pins the Second. In the thirty-ninth session of the council of Constance, as is before mentioned, 29 it was decreed and provided concerning the order and times of such general councils as should hereafter follow. The first that should next ensue, to be kept the fifth year after the said council of Constance; the second to be holden the seventh year again after that; and so orderly all others to follow successively from ten years to ten years. Wherefore, according to this decree, followed a general council five years after the council of Constance, celebrated and holden at Sienna, under Pope Martin, A.D. 1423; but it soon broke up. After the which council the term of seven years being expired, another council was holden at Basil A.D. 1431; the which council is noted to have been the most troublesome, and to have endured longer than any other council before-time celebrated and holden in the church. This council continued almost the space of twelve years; wherein it was concluded, as before in the council of Constance, that the general councils were above the pope, and both of these two councils did attribute the chief authority in decreeing and determining unto a general council; which is the cause that the contrary part doth derogate so much from the authority of both these councils.

When pope Martin V. had appointed Julian, cardinal-deacon of St. Angelo, his legate, to celebrate and hold a general council at Basil for the reformation of the church and rooting out of heresies, within short space after pope Martin died ( A.D. 1431); in whose seat Eugene IV. succeeded, who confirmed unto the said cardinal Julian the same authority which his predecessor before had given him. Unto this council of Basil, being begun, came the emperor Sigismund, who, during his lifetime, with his presence and authority did protect and defend the said synod. After the emperor’s death, pope Eugene, altering his former mind and purpose, would transfer the council 523 unto Bologna, and thereby hinder the success of the council of Basil. And first he held a contrary council at Ferrara, and afterward at Florence: for, after the death of the emperor Sigismund, there were no princes nor noblemen that had any care or regard of the council. Eugene, the pope, pretended causes as touching the: Greeks who should come unto the council, and the uniting of their church unto the West church, the which Greeks would in no wise pass the Alps: also as touching his own incommodity, that he could not come unto Basil, being so long a journey; and that all his men might have easy access unto Bologna; and that amongst the Germans (who in their own country are so intractable) nothing can be attempted for their reformation: whereupon he cited cardinal Julian and the fathers of the council unto Bologna, under great penalty. They again cited the pope, that either he should come himself unto the council or send ambassadors, under the like penalty. For this cause the ambassadors of Albert, king of the Romans, and of the other princes of Germany, with the orators of the council of Basil, and the cardinal Julian, assembled together, first at Nuremberg, to appease the dissension between the council and the pope; and when they could determine nothing there, they agreed to assemble again at Frankfort, on the calends of March; for it was thought that the electors of the empire might best assemble and meet in that place. In the mean time the emperor’s ambassadors, and the ambassadors of the electors, went unto Basil, and having conference with the ambassadors of the other princes who were there, and sending for the cardinal of St. Peter (an excellent man, who at that time tarried at Constance, to see the end and issue of things), they did earnestly exhort the fathers of the council, that they would embrace and receive the means of concord which they would offer. The request of the princes was, that the fathers would translate the council, and go unto another place; the which only thing pope Eugene seemed always to seek and desire, that thereby he might either divide the fathers of the council, or take away their liberty.

Notwithstanding, this sacred synod thought good neither to deny the princes’ request, nor to grant that which pope Eugene required. During this doubt, the emperor’s ambassadors, the bishops of Passau and Augsburg, with John Eich, a famous lawyer, repaired to the emperor, but first (being much required and stirred thereunto) appointed noble and valiant baron called Conrad de Winsperg, by the royal commandment, to be protector and defender of the council and the Fathers. Whereby, as the enemies perceived the emperor’s mind to be alienate from the pope, so the fathers of the council understood his good-will towards them; forsomuch as he would not have sent them a protector, if he had not judged it a lawful council, neither again would he have judged it to be a council at Basil, if he had given credit to pope Eugene. But the assembly that should have been holden at Frankfort, by reason of a great pestilence which broke out there, was translated unto Mentz. The ambassadors of the princes also thought good to go thither, if they might find any means of unity, whereby;hey might unite and knit the pope again unto the council.

The assembly was very famous, for there were present the archbishops of Mentz, Cologne, and Treyes, electors of the sacred empire, and the ambassadors of all the other electors. Notwithstanding, the archbishop of Cologne was the chief favorer of the council in this assembly, who, with all his labor and diligence, went about to bring the matter unto a good end.

Rabanus, the archbishop of Treyes, showed himself somewhat more rough. The sacred synod also thought good to send thither their ambassadors, and appointed out the patriarch of Aquileia, the bishop of Vich, and the bishop of Argos; 30 John de Segovia, and Thomas de Corsellis, divines; with divers lawyers. There was no man there present, who would name himself the ambassador of Eugene; albeit there were many of his favorers and friends come thither, both from the council and also from Florence, who, albeit they had sworn to the contrary, yet favored they more Eugene than the council, whose sect William, a lawyer of Constance, afterwards called the grisled sect. 31 But the chief Hercules of all the Eugenians was Nicholas Cusanus, a man singularly well learned, and of great experience. After divers consultations had, the electors of the empire, and the ambassadors of the other princes of Germany, thought good to give out commandment throughout their whole nation and country, that the decrees of the council of Basil should be received and observed.

Whilst these things were thus debated at Mentz, there sprang a certain very doubtful question amongst the divines who remained at Basil, whether or not Eugene might be called a heretic, who had so rebelliously contemned the commandments of the church. Hereupon they gathered themselves together, disputing among themselves by the space, of six days in the forenoons and afternoons, some affirming the proposition, and others holding the negative part. Upon this their disputation there arose three several opinions, some affirming that he was a heretic; other some not only a heretic, but also a relapse; the third sort would neither grant him to be heretic, nor a relapse. Amongst these divines, the chief and principal both in learning and authority were the bishop of Ebrun, 32 ambassador of the most noble king of Castile, and a certain Scottish abbot; 525 who, as two most valiant champions, subdued all their enemies, so that all the rest did either consent unto their arguments, or give place unto them; so that their determination took place, and Eugene was pronounced both a heretic and a relapse. Eight conclusions were there determined and allowed amongst the divines, which they called ‘verities,’ the copy whereof they did divulgate throughout all Christendom.

When the ambassadors of the council were returned from Mentz, and certain report was made of the allowing of their decrees, the fathers of the council thought good to discuss the conclusions of the divines more at large. Whereupon, by the commandment of the deputations, all the masters and doctors of civil and canon law were called together, with the prelates, into the chapter-house of the great church, there openly to dispute and discuss Eugene’s heresy: which thing sore grieved the archbishop of Milan, fearing lest this disputation should work the deprivation of Eugene, the which, as he said, he had always opposed for fear of schism. Wherefore he ceased not, by all manner of ways, to labor to stop and trouble the matter, exhorting them that were absent by his letters, and encouraging those that were present by his words, to the defense of Eugene. But, at the last, there was a great assembly in the chapter-house, some coming thither to dispute, and other some to hear. This disputation continued six days, both forenoon and afternoon. Cardinal Louis, archbishop of Aries, as being neutral on the question, was appointed moderator and arbiter of the whole disputation; who, beside many other notable virtues, was both valiant and constant. Nicholas Amici, who was a proctor of the faith, 526 a famous man amongst the divines of Paris, was to demand of every man what his opinion was. John Dienlefist, public notary, was to write down every man’s sentence and judgment. The conclusions of the divines, which were the ground and foundation of their disputation, were these here following:

THE CONCLUSIONS OF THE DISPUTATION.

I. It is a verity of the catholic faith, that a sacred general council hath power over the pope, and any other person.

II. The pope cannot by his own authority, either dissolve, translate, or prorogue a general council lawfully congregate, without the consent of the council itself: and this is of like verity.

III. He who doth obstinately resist these verities, is to be counted a heretic.

IV. Pope Eugene IV. resisted these verities, when at the first he attempted by the plenitude of his apostolic power to dissolve or to translate the council of Basil.

V. Eugene, being admonished by the sacred council, did revoke the errors repugnant to these verities.

VI. The dissolution or translation of the council, attempted the second time by Eugene, is against the aforesaid verities, and containeth an inexcusable error touching the faith.

VII. Eugene, in going about to dissolve and translate the council again, is fallen into his before-revoked errors.

VIII. Eugene, being warned by the synod that he should revoke the dissolution or translation the second time attempted, persevering in his rebellion after that his contumacy was declared, and erecting a council at Ferrara, showeth himself thereby obstinate.

These were the conclusions which were read in the chapter-house before the fathers of the council: upon the which when they were desired to speak their minds, they almost all confirmed and allowed them.

Notwithstanding, the archbishop of Palermo, commonly called Panormitane, 33 disputed much against them, as did the bishop of Burgos, and the king of Arragon’s almoner. Yet did they not gainsay the three first conclusions, but only those wherein pope Eugene was touched. This Panormitane, as he was subtle, so did he subtlely dispute against the last conclusions, endeavoring to show that Eugene was not relapsed; and had great contention with the bishop of Argos, John de Segovia, and Francis de Foix, divines.

THE ARGUMENT OF PANORMITANE FOR THE POPE.

He divided articles of faith into three sorts; those strictly such, as those in the Creed; general, as the declarations made by the church; most general of all, as in those things which arise of the premises: affirming that Eugene did by no means violate his faith in his first dissolution that he made, because it is not contained in the Creed, neither yet in the determinations of the church, that the pope cannot dissolve any councils; and that it seemed not unto him to rise of determinations before made, but rather of the decrees of the council of Constance. And further, that this, as a case omitted, is reserved for the pope to be discussed, forsomuch as in the chapter beginning ‘Frequens’ it appeareth that the place where the council should be kept ought to be chosen by the pope, the council allowing the same, and nothing at all is spoken on this matter. And if, peradventure, Eugene had offended in the first dissolution, notwithstanding, he ought to be holden excused, because he did it in conjunction with the council of cardinals, who represented the church of Rome; whose authority he affirmed to be such, that the judgment thereof should be preferred before all the world, a doctrine supported (he said) by a singular gloss. Neither was the sacred council found to have ever proceeded against Eugene as a heretic; and that was an evident sign that the council had not thought him to have swerved from the faith. Neither did it have any weight with him what was said concerning his adhesion, and his errors revoked; for that he himself had read the whole text of the adhesion, and that the pope did not therein revoke the dissolution as contrary unto the faith, but as breeding offense. Also that the last dissolution had nothing of the sort in it, forsomuch as that likewise was made with the advice of the cardinals, and for the uniting of the Greeks, and that he might not be compelled in a criminal cause to answer by his proctor, when he, being letted by sickness, could not come personally. And so, forasmuch as by the first dissolution Eugene had fallen into no error of faith, he could not be persuaded that he was to be called a relapse, forsomuch as neither in the first, neither yet in the second, dissolution did he violate the faith.

This oration of Panormitane was by all praised rather than allowed.

Notwithstanding this effect it wrought, that afterward the word “relapse” was taken out of the conclusions, and instead thereof the word “prolapse” put in. Neither durst Panormitane himself altogether excuse Eugene of heresy, but defended the first dissolution more than the second: yet departed he not without answer; for John de Segovia, an expert divine, rising up, answered him reverently and courteously, as was comely toward so great a prelate.

THE ANSWER OF JOHN DE SEGOVIA.

He said, he granted that which Panormitane had spoken touching the division of articles of faith into three sorts, and that it made for his purpose. For if those things are to be holden for articles of faith, said he, which may be gathered of the determinations of the church, it was manifest that the conclusions in question redounded and came of the determinations of the church, that is to say, of the council of Constance; for if therein the pope were made subject unto a general council, who is it that will say that the pope hath power over a council which is above him, and that Eugene ought to remain pope? because he could not dissolve a council which is above him, without the consent thereof: which article undoubtedly he hath violated and broken. And if any man will say that in the first dissolution this article was not violated because there was no declaration as yet made thereof, let him who so thinketh understand, that the bishop of Rome ought not only to know the plain and manifest, but also the secret and hidden things of the faith; for he, being the vicar of Christ, and the head of all others, hath to instruct and teach all men. But if so be he get out of that dilemma, he shall still be convicted, bemuse he persisted in the dissolution long after the declaration of the council was made, neither did consent unto the determination of the church; and therefore, if peradventure he did not err in the faith in dissolving of the council, yet did he err in persevering in the same, as manifestly appeareth by the saying of Clement, oftentimes alleged by Panormitane, wherein it is said, ‘That he who liveth rebelliously, and neglecteth to do good, is rather a member of the devil than of Christ, and rather an infidel than a believer;’ 34 so that Eugene, as disobeying the church, may not unreasonably be called an infidel.

Neither is it true that the pope hath not offended in a matter of faith; forasmuch as, both in that answer which beginneth ‘Cogitanti,’ and also in the answer which beginneth ‘Sperant.’ made unto the pope’s ambassadors, these words are manifest: ‘This article concerneth faith, and we had rather die, than cowardly give place.’ By the which saying it was evident that the council sufficiently admonished the pope that he went against the faith; and therefore it seemed that afterward, when Eugene by the act of adhesion revoked the dissolution, he also revoked an error of faith contained in the same. The offense also, whereof mention was made, had arisen because of an error in faith: for some said that the pope is under the council, other some denied it, and this diversity of doctrine brought offense. Also in the pope’s adhesion it was expressly declared, that the pope did revoke the assertions made in his name against the authority of the council And albeit in such revocations the style and order of judgments were not observed, notwithstanding, it sufficed what was usually done when a council proceeded against a pope, in which case the only thing requisite was, that truth be observed: neither was a council subject to any positive law, that it must observe the judicial terms or style.

Also he said that he utterly contemned that same singular gloss which did prefer the church of Rome before all the world: that it was well called singular, which decreed such foolish and fond things, and was unworthy to be followed of any man; and that he did much marvel at Panormitane, and other doctors of those days, who, whilst they went about to extol the authority of the glosses, do abase the same by adding their singularities thereto; for that gloss is singular, which is alone. But who would not more esteem a gloss which should throughout breathe the same doctrine and speak consistently with itself, than one which only in one place should assert any thing, which may seem without doubt to be an error.

But as regarded the point of doctrine in this case, St. Jerome, a most sound doctor, was contrary to this gloss, who ‘doubteth nothing at all, but that the world, as touching authority, is greater than the City itself,’ that is to say, Rome.

Segovius could not finish this his oration without interruption; for Panormitane oftentimes interrupting him, went about to confute now this assertion, and now that. Whereupon the bishop of Argos rising up, a man not only eloquent, but also of a stout courage, troubled Panormitane in his reasons and arguments, and put him from his purpose. In truth they proceeded so far, that they passed the bounds of disputation, and did not abstain from opprobrious taunts. The bishop of Argos indeed afterward begged pardon, though perhaps the least in error of the two; but inferiors must succumb.

The bishop of Argos having chanced to say, that the bishop of Rome was the servant of the church, Panormitane could not suffer that; insomuch that he so forgot himself that day, and his knowledge (which otherwise was very great) did so fail him, that he was not ashamed to affirm, that the pope was lord of the church. Whom Segovius answered thus:

Mark, said he, O Panormitane, what thou sayest; for that is the most honorable title of the bishop of Rome, whereby he calleth himself ‘the servant of the servants of God.’ Which title is gathered from what Christ said unto his disciples, when they demanded of him which of them was the greatest: you know he answered them, ‘The princes of the nations have lordship over them; but you shall not do so,’ etc.; wherein he did utterly prohibit lordship. And Peter, who was the first vicar of Christ, said: ‘Feed the flock of God which is committed unto you, providing for them not by compulsion, but willingly:’ and immediately after he saith, ‘not as lords over the clergy.’ But if Christ the Son of God came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, how then can his vicar have any lordship, or be called ‘lord,’ as you, Panormitane, insist? forsomuch ‘as the disciple is not above his master, nor the servant above his lord.’ And the Lord himself saith; ‘Be ye not called masters, forsomuch as one is your master, that is Christ; and he who is the greatest among you, shall be your servant.’

Panormitane being somewhat disquieted with this answer, the council brake up and departed.

The next day there was a general congregation, and they returned all again unto the chapter-house after dinner, where the archbishop of Lyons, his king’s orator, being required to speak his mind, after he had by divers and sundry reasons proved Eugene to be a heretic, he bitterly complained, strongly censuring the negligence and weakness of those that had preferred such a man unto the papacy, and so moved all their hearts who were present, that they all, as well as himself, did bewail the calamities of the universal church.

Then the bishop of Burgos, one of the orators for Spain, divided the conclusions into two parts, calling some general, and other some personal, and disputed very excellently as touching the three first conclusions; affirming, that he did not doubt their truth, save that the addition, which made mention of the faith, seemed to him to be doubtful. But upon this point he dwelt much, namely, that the council was above the pope; which, after he had sufficiently proved both by divine and human law, he taught also by natural reason, alleging Aristotle for witness, who saith that in every well ordered kingdom it should especially be provided, that the whole realm should be of more power than the king; and that if it happened contrary, it were not to be called a kingdom, but a tyranny. So likewise did he think of the church, that it ought to be of more power than the prince thereof, that is to say, the pope. Which his oration he uttered so eloquently and pleasantly, so learnedly and truly, that all men hung on his lips, and (what is not very usual) desired rather to have him continue his oration, than to make an end thereof.

But when he entered into the other conclusions and tried to impugn them, he seemed to have lost himself, and to be no more the same man that he was; for neither was there the same eloquence in his words, nor weight in argument, nor cheerfulness of countenance; so that if he could have seen himself, he would peradventure greatly have marvelled at himself. Every man before might well perceive a certain power and force of truth,35 which ministered copy 36 of matter and words unto him, so long as he spake in her defense: but when he began once to speak against her, she took away even his natural power of speech from him. 37 Notwithstanding, Panormitane and the bishop of Burgos showed this example of modesty, that albeit they would not confess or grant the last conclusions to be verities of faith, yet they would not that any man should follow or lean unto their opinion, seeing they were but mean divines; but rather unto the opinions of the divines. But the king of Arragon’s almoner, being a subtle and crafty man, did not directly dispute upon the conclusions, but picking out here and there certain arguments, sought to perplex the council.

Against these the Scottish abbot, a man of an excellent wit, disputed very much; also Thomas de Corsellis, a famous divine, than whom no one more stoutly defended the decrees of the sacred council, through a certain extreme bashfuhless always keeping his eyes on the ground, did largely and luminously dispute in defense of the conclusions.

THE CHIEF ARGUMENTS OF THE DISPUTATION, AS SUMMED UP BY AENEAS SYLVIUS.

But now, to avoid tediousness, I will only proceed to declare the arguments whereby the conclusions were finally confirmed, not referring at all to the five last conclusions, which concern the person of Eugene, but only to the three first. According, then, to probable arguments which I gathered out of the disputation of the fathers—In the first conclusion is the greatest force, and it is the first; to be discussed: touching which, two things are to be inquired and examined; the one, whether a general council have authority over the pope, the other, whether the catholic faith command it to be believed. As touching that the pope is subject to a general council, it is excellently well proved, by the reason before alleged by the bishop of Burgos For the pope is in the church, as a king in his kingdom; and for a king to be of more authority than Ins kingdom, it; were too absurd: ergo, neither ought the pope to be above the church. For like as oftentimes kings, who do wickedly govern the commonwealth, and exercise cruelty, are deprived of their kingdoms; even so it is not to be doubted, but that the bishops of Rome may be deposed by the church, that is to say, by the general councils.

Neither do I herein allow those who attribute such ample and large authority unto kings, that they will not have them bound under any laws; for such as so do say, be but flatterers, who do talk otherwise than they think. For albeit that they do say, that the moderation of the law is alway in the prince’s power; 38 that do I thus understand, that when reason shall persuade, he ought to digress from the rigor of the law. For he is called a king, who careth and provideth for the commonwealth, taketh pleasure in the commodity and profit of his subjects, and in all his doings hath respect to the commodity of those over whom he ruleth; which if he do not, he is not to be counted a king, but a tyrant, whose property it is, only to seek his own profit; for in this point a king differeth from a tyrant, that the one seeketh the commodity and profit of those whom he ruleth, and the other only his own; the which to make more manifest, the cause is also to be alleged wherefore kings were ordained.

At the beginning (as Cicero in his Offices saith) it is certain, that there was a certain time when the people lived without kings. But afterwards, when lands and possessions began to be divided according to the custom of every nation, then were kings ordained for no other cause, but only to exercise justice. For when, at the beginning, the common people were oppressed by rich and mighty men, they ran by-and-by to some good and virtuous man, who should defend the poor from injury, and ordain laws whereby the rich and poor might dwell together. But when as yet, under the rule of kings, the poor were oftentimes oppressed, laws were ordained and instituted, which should judge neither for hatred nor favor, and give like ear unto the poor as unto the rich. Whereby we do understand and know, not only the people, but also the king to be subject to the laws. And if we do see a king to contemn and despise the laws, violently rob and spoil his subjects, defile virgins, dishonor matrons, and do all things licentiously and temerariously; do not the nobles of the kingdom assemble together, deposing him from his kingdom, and set up another in his place, who shall swear to rule and govern uprightly, and be obedient unto the laws?

Verily, as reason doth persuade, even so doth the use thereof also teach us. It seemeth also agreeable unto reason, that the same should be done in the church, that is to say, in the council, which is done in any kingdom. And so is this sufficiently apparent, which we have before said, that the pope is subject unto the council.

But now, to pass unto the arguments of divinity, the foundation of the matter which we do treat upon, is the words of our Savior Jesus Christ in divers places, but especially where he speaketh unto Peter: ‘Tu es Petrus, et super hanc petram aedificabo ecclesiam meam, et portae inferi non praevalebunt adversus eam;’ that is, ‘Thou art Peter, and upon this rock will I build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.’ Upon which words it seemeth good to begin this disputation, forsomuch as some were wont to allege these words, to extol the authority of the bishop of Rome. But (as it shall by-and-by appear) the words of Christ had another sense and meaning than divers of them do think.; for he saith, ‘And the gates of hell shall not prevail against, it’. Verily this is a great promise, and these words of the Lord are of great importance. For what greater word could there have been spoken, than that the gates of hell should not prevail against the church? These gates of hell, as St. Jerome saith, do signify sins.

Wherefore, if sins cannot prevail against the church, neither can any malign spirits prevail against the same, which have no power at all over mankind, but only through sin. And for that cause, whereas it is said in Job, that there is no power upon the earth that may be compared unto the power of the malign spirit; thereby it followeth, that the power of the church is above all other power.

We may, also, upon the same saying, reason after another sort: forsomuch as the gates of hell, that is to say, sins, cannot prevail against the church, the church thereby is declared to be without sin; the which cannot be spoken of the pope, who is a mortal man, forsomuch as it is written, ‘Seven times in the day the just man doth offend.’ If the church be without spot because it cannot be defiled with sin, who is it that will prefer a sinful man before an undefiled church? Neither let us give ear unto those who will not refer these words of Christ unto the church, where he saith, ‘Oravi pro to Petre, ut non deficiat fides tua;’ that is to say, ‘Peter! I have prayed for thee, that thy faith should not fail thee.’ For, as St.

Augustine saith in the exposition of the Psalms: ‘Certain things are spoken as though they seemed properly to pertain unto the apostle Peter, notwithstanding they have no evident sense, but when they are referred unto the church, the person whereof he is understood figuratively to represent’. Whereupon in another place, in the questions of the New and Old Testament, upon the words, ‘Rogavi pro to Petre;’ ‘I have prayed for thee, Peter!’ what is doubted? Did he pray for Peter, and did he not pray for James and John, besides the rest? It is manifest, that under the name of Peter all others are contained. For in another place of St. John, he saith: ‘I pray for them whom thou hast given me, and I will that wheresoever I am, they shall be also with me.’ Whereupon we do oftentimes by the name of Peter understand the church, which we do nothing at all doubt to be done in this place; otherwise the truth could not consist, forsomuch as within a while after, the faith of Peter failed for a time, by the denial of Christ; but the faith of the church, whose person Peter did represent, did always persevere inviolate.

As touching the bishops of Rome, if time would suffer us, we could rehearse many examples, how that they either have been heretics, or replenished with other vices. Neither are we ignorant, how Marcellinus, at the emperor’s commandment, did sacrifice unto idols, and that another (which is more horrible) did attain unto the papacy by a devilish fraud and deceit. 39 Notwithstanding, the testimony of Paul to the Hebrews shall suffice us at this time, who saith that ‘every bishop is compassed in with infirmity,’ that is to say, with wickedness and sin. Also the testimonies of Christ himself do approve that the church remaineth always without sin; for in Matthew he saith, ‘I am with you even unto the end of the world.’ Which words were not only spoken to the apostles (for they continued not unto the end of the world), but also unto their successors; neither would Christ then signify that he was God, dispersed throughout all the world, as he is also perceived to be amongst sinners, but would declare a certain gift of grace through his assistance, whereby he would preserve the holy church, consisting amongst his apostles and their successors, always immaculate and undefiled.

And again in another place, ‘I,’ saith he, ‘will pray, and he shall give you another comforter, that he may remain with you for ever, even the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because the world seeth him not, neither knoweth him; but you shall know him, because he shall remain with you.’ Which words being spoken unto the disciples of Jesus, are also understood to be spoken unto their successors, and so consequently unto the church. And if the Spirit of truth be continually in the church, no man can deny but that the church ought to continue undefiled. By the same authority also that Christ is called the spouse of the church, who seeth not but that the church is undefiled? ‘For the husband and the wife,’ as the apostle saith, ‘are two in one flesh,’ and, as he doth also add, ‘no man hateth his own flesh.’ Thereby it cometh to pass, that Christ cannot hate the church, forsomuch as she is his spouse, and one flesh with him, and no man can hate himself; ergo, the church doth not sin; for if it did sin, it should be hated, for sinners the Lord doth hate. Which authorities being gathered together, we ought with the apostle to confess that the church of God hath neither spot nor wrinkle. 40 Also writing unto Timothy, he affirmeth the church to be the pillar and foundation of the truth; whereupon, in this song of the spouse, it is said: ‘My friend, thou art altogether fair and beautiful, neither is there any spot in thee.’

These words, peradventure, may abash some, that I do go about to prove the church to be without sin. “For as the church doth contain all men who are called Christians, who also do agree and come together in one belief of faith, and participation of the sacraments, I do fear lest some men will think, that I do. affirm all men to be without sin; which is so far from my meaning, that I do verily think the contrary to be most true. For I suppose, that there is no man in the church, being clothed in this mortal flesh, without sin. Neither do these things vary or dissent among themselves; for the church hath this gift, that albeit every part and member thereof may sin, yet the whole body cannot sin. For there be always good men in the church, who, albeit they be subject unto human fragility, notwithstanding they have so perfect a gift of sincere and pure virtue, that, subduing all carnal desires and affections, they keep themselves a pleasant and acceptable sacrifice unto God.

Neither do I consent or agree unto the opinion of divers, who affirm that the Virgin Mary only persevered in faith at the Lord’s passion. Whereupon divers have not been ashamed to say, that the faith was so debilitated and weakened, that it seemed to be returned to one only old woman; whose opinion, or rather madness, St. Paul seemeth openly to reject, writing thus unto the Romans: ‘Do ye not know,’ saith he, ‘what the Scripture writeth of Elias, how incessantly he called upon God against the children of Israel, saying, O Lord, they have slain thy prophets, and digged down thine altars, and I alone am left, and they seek after my soul: but what answer received he of God? I have left unto myself yet seven thousand men, which have not bowed their knees unto Baal.’

What other thing doth this answer of God declare, than that it is a foolish opinion of those who think the church of God to be brought unto so small a number? We ought to believe the words of Christ, which are altogether repugnant unto those men, who affirm, that the Virgin only did persevere in faith. For Jesus said unto his Father: ‘O holy Father! save them in thy name whom thou hast given me, that they may be one as we are one. When I was with them, I kept them in thy name: I have kept them that thou gavest unto me, and none of them perished, but only the son of perdition:’ And, ‘I do not desire that thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that thou shouldest preserve them from evil.’

Behold, Christ prayeth that his disciples should not fall, but should be preserved from evil, although they were still living in the world; and he, so praying, without doubt is heard; for he saith in another place: ‘I know that thou hearest me.’ But how is he heard, if all those for whom he prayeth, swerved at the time of his passion? As for example, by what means did Christ, hanging upon the Cross, commend his dearly beloved mother unto John, if so be he were either then swerved, or should by-and-by after have swerved from the faith? Moreover, did not the centurion by-andby cry out and say: ‘Truly this is the Son of God?’ The Jews also, who at that time were far distant from Jerusalem, might both be called faithful, and also be saved by their faith; seeing that (as the apostle saith) men are bound unto the gospel (even when they swerve from it), after it is once known and revealed unto them. But let us leave these men, and speak of that which is more likely, and let us judge that there hath been, and is, a great number of good men in the church; and by them, as by the more worthy part, let us name the church holy and immaculate, which doth comprehend as well the evil as the good. For the church is compared unto a net which is cast into the sea, and gathereth together all kind of fishes [Matthew 20].

And again, it is compared unto a king, which made a marriage for his son, and sent forth his servants to call those which were bidden unto the wedding, and they gathered together good and evil, as many as they could find. Wherefore their opinion is erroneous, who, affirm, that only good men be comprehended in the church; which, if it were true, it would confound all things, neither could we understand or know where the church were. But forsomuch as the Scripture saith: ‘No man knoweth whether he be worthy of love or hatred,’ 42 their opinion is more to be allowed and truer, who include all the faithful in the church; of whom, although a great part be given to voluptuousness and avarice, yet some, notwithstanding, are clean from deadly sin; which part, as it is the most worthy, it giveth the name unto the church, to be called most holy; which is so often done, that we are commanded to sing in our creed, ‘unam sanctam, catholicam, et apostolicam ecclesiam,’ that is to say, ‘one holy catholic and apostolic church;’ which article the synod of Constantinople added unto the rest. Wherefore (to return to our former purpose) if the church be holy, it is also without sin. This word ‘sanctum,’ (as Macrobius, alleging Trebatius, affirmeth), sometimes signifieth ‘holy,’ and sometimes religious, and sometimes clean and uncorrupt. And after the same manner, we call the church holy, which the apostle Peter calleth immaculate, as we read in the famous epistle of Clement.

To this end also tendeth that which is spoken by St. Paul, that ‘Christ is the Head of the church;’ for if the whole church should sin, she should not agree with her Head, Christ, who is in no point defiled. This also Christ himself would signify unto us in Matthew, when he commendeth the house which was builded upon the strong rock, against which, neither the winds, neither the storms, could prevail ‘The house of God,’ saith the apostle, ‘which is the church, is builded upon the strong Rock,’ ‘which Rock,’ as the apostle declareth, ‘is Christ.’ Who then is so unshamefaced, that he will affirm the church, which is founded upon Christ, to be subject to sin? and will not rather cry out with the prophet and say, ‘Domine dilexi decorem domus tuae; that is to say, ‘O Lord. I have loved the beauty of thy house.’ Whereupon wrote John Chrysostome this golden sentence; ‘The church never ceaseth to be assaulted, never ceaseth to be laid in wait for; but in the name of Christ it hath always the upper hand, and overcometh. And albeit others do lie in wait for it, or that the floods do beat against it, yet the foundation which is laid upon the Rock is not shaken.’ St.

Hilary also saith: ‘That it is the property of the church to vanquish when it is hurt, to understand When it is reproved, to be in safety when it is forsaken, and to obtain victory when it seemeth almost overcome.’ Thus, by many reasons and testimonies it is proved that the church doth not err; which is not spoken or affirmed of the bishops of Rome, so that this reason doth make the pope subject unto the church; for it is convenient, that the less perfect be subject unto the more perfect. There be also many other testimonies and reasons, whereof we will now speak more at large.

If authority be sought for, St. Jerome saith (for I willingly occupy myself in his sentences, as in a most fertile field), ‘the world is greater than a city.’ What then, I pray you, Jerome! is the pope mighty because he is the head of the church of Rome? His authority is great; notwithstanding the universal church is greater, which doth not only comprehend one city, but also the whole world. Hereupon it followeth, that if the church be the mother of all the faithful, then she hath the bishop of Rome for her son; otherwise, as St. Augustine saith, ‘he can never have God for his Father, who will not acknowledge the church for his mother;’ which thing Anacletus understanding, called the universal church his mother, as the writers of the canons do know. And Calixtus saith, ‘As a Son he came to do the will of his Father; so we do the will of our mother, which is the church.’ Whereby it appeareth, that by how much the son is inferior to the mother, by so much the church is superior, or above, the bishop of Rome.

Also we have said before, that the church was the spouse of Christ, and the pope we know to be a vicar; but no man doth so ordain a vicar, that he maketh his spouse subject unto him, but that the spouse is always thought to be of more authority than the vicar; forsomuch as she is one body with her husband, but the vicar is not so. Neither will I here pass over the words of St. Paul unto the Romans: ‘Let every soul,’ saith he, ‘be subject unto the higher powers.’ Neither doth he herein except the pope. For albeit that he be above all other men, yet it seemeth necessary that he should be subject to the church. Neither let him think himself hereby exempt, because it was said unto Peter by Christ: ‘Whatsoever thou bindest,’ etc. In this place, as we will hereafter declare, he represented the person of the church, for we find it spoken afterwards unto him: ‘Quodcunque ligaveritis super terrain, ligature erit in coelis;’ that is, ‘Whatsoever ye shall bind upon earth, shall be also bound in heaven.’ And furthermore, if all power be given of Christ, as the apostle writeth unto the Corinthians, it is given for the edifying of the church, and not for the destruction thereof; why then may not the church correct the pope, if he abuse the keys, and bring all things to ruin?

Add hereunto also another argument. A man in this life is less than the angels, for we read in Matthew of John Baptist that he which is least in thekingdom of heaven is greater than he.

Notwithstanding Christ saith, in another place, that amongst the children of women, there was not a greater than John Baptist. But to proceed. Men are forced, by the example of Zacharias, to give credit unto angels, lest, through their misbelief, they be stricken blind as he was. What more? the bishop of Rome is a man: ergo, he is less than the angels, and is bound to give credit to the angels. But the angels learn of the church, and do reverently accord unto her doctrine, as the apostle writeth unto the Ephesians; ergo, the pope is bound to do the same, who is less than the angels, and less than the church; whose authority is such, that worthily it is compared by St Augustine unto the sun, that like as the sun, by his light doth surmount all other lights, so the church is above all other authority and power. Whereupon St. Augustine writeth thus: ‘I would not believe the gospel,’ saith he, ‘if the authority of the church did not move me thereunto:’ which is not in any place found to be spoken of the bishop of Rome, who, representing the church, and being minister thereof, is not to be thought greater or equal to his Lord and Master. Notwithstanding, the words of our Savior Christ do especially prove the bishop of Rome to be subject to the church; as we will hereafter declare. For he, sending Peter to preach unto the church, said, ‘Go, and say unto the church.’ To the confirmation of whose authority these words do also pertain; ‘He that heareth you, heareth me;’ which words are not only spoken unto the apostles, but also unto their successors, and unto the whole church.

Whereupon it followeth, that if the pope do not hearken and give ear unto the church, he doth not give ear unto Christ, and consequently he is to be counted as an ethnic and publican. For, as St. Augustine affirmeth, when the church doth excommunicate, he who is so excommunicated is bound in heaven, and when the church looseth, he is loosed. Likewise, if he be a heretic who taketh away the supremacy of the church of Rome, as the decrees of the council of Constance do determine, how much more is he to be counted a heretic, who taketh away the authority from the universal church, wherein the church of Rome and all others are contained? 43 Wherefore, it is now evident, that it is the opinion of all men before our days (if it may be called an opinion, which is confirmed by grave authors), that the pope is subject unto the universal church. But this is called into question, whether he ought also to be judged of a general council. For there are some, who (whether it be for desire of vain glory, or that, through their flattery, they look for some great reward) have begun to teach new and strange doctrines, and to exempt the bishop of Rome from the jurisdiction of a general council. Ambition hath blinded them, whereof not only this present schism, but also all other schisms, even unto this day, have had their original. For as in times past, the greedy desire and ambition of the papacy brought in that pestiferous beast, which through Arius then first crept out of hell into the church; even so they do especially nourish and maintain this present heresy who are not ashamed to beg. 44 Of which number, some cry out and say, the works of the subjects ought to be judged by the pope, but the pope to be reserved only unto the judgment of God. Others say, that no man ought to judge the high and principal seat, and that it can be judged neither by the emperor, nor by the clergy, nor by any king or people. Others affirm, that the Lord hath reserved to himself the deposition of the chief bishop. Others are not ashamed to affirm, that the bishop of Rome, although he carry souls in never so great number unto hell, yet he is not subject to any correction or rebuke.

And because these their words are easily resolved, they run straightways unto the gospel, and interpret the words of Christ, not according to the sense and meaning of the Holy Ghost, but according to their own will and disposition. They do greatly esteem and regard this which was spoken unto Peter, ‘Tu vocaberis Cephas;’ that is, ‘Thou shalt be called Cephas:’ by which word they make him the head of the church. Also, ‘I will give thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt bind upon the earth,’ etc. ‘I have prayed for thee, Peter, that thy faith should not fail.’ And again, ‘Feed my sheep;’ ‘Cast thy net into the deep;’ ‘Be not afraid, for from henceforth thou shalt be a fisher of men:’ Also that Christ commanded Peter, as the prince of the apostles, to pay toll for them both; and that Peter drew the net unto the land full of great fishes; and that only Peter drew his sword for the defense of Christ. All which places these men do greatly extol, altogether neglecting the expositions of the fathers, which if (as reason were) they would consider, they should manifestly perceive by the authorities aforesaid, that the pope is not above them, when they are gathered together in council, but when they are separated and divided. But these things being passed over, forsomuch as answer shall appear by that which hereafter shall follow, we will now declare what was reasoned of by the learned men upon this question. But first we would have it known, that all men who are of any name or estimation, do agree that the pope is subject to a council; and, for the proof thereof, they repeat, in a manner,, all those things which were before spoken of the church; for they suppose all that which is spoken of the church, to serve for a general council. And first of all they allege this saying of the gospel, ‘Dic ecclesiae,’ ‘Tell it unto the church,’ in which place it is convenient to understand, that Christ spake unto Peter, instructing him what he should do as touching the correction of his brother. He saith, ‘If thy brother offend or sin against thee, rebuke him between thee and him alone.

If he give ear unto thee, thou hast won thy brother; but if he do not give ear unto thee, take with thee one or two, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses all truth may stand: if then he will not give ear unto thee, ‘Dic ecclesiae,’ ‘Tell it unto the church.’ What shall we understand by the church in that place? Shall we say that it is the multitude of the faithful, dispersed throughout the whole world? ‘My yoke is pleasant,’ saith the Lord, ‘and my burden is light.’ But how is it light, if Christ command us to do that which is impossible to be done? for how could Peter speak unto the church which was dispersed, or seek out every Christian scattered in every town or city? But the meaning of these words is far otherwise, and they must be otherwise interpreted; for which cause, it is necessary that we remember the double person which Peter represented, as the person of the chief Pontiff, and a private man. The sense and meaning of his words are so evident and plain of themselves, that they need no supplement or alteration. We must first mark and see what this word ‘ecclesia’ signifieth, which we do find to be but only twice spoken of by Christ; once in this place, and again when he said unto Peter, ‘Tu es Petrus, et super hanc petram aedificabo ecclesiam meam;’ that is, ‘Thou art Peter, and upon this rock will I build my church.’ Wherefore the church signifieth the convocation or congregation of the multitude. ‘Dic ecclesiae, ‘Tell it unto the church;’ that is to say, ‘Tell it unto the congregation of the faithful;’ which, forsomuch as they are not accustomed to come together but in a general council, this interpretation shall seem very good: ‘Dic ecclesiae,’ ‘Tell it unto the church,’ that is to say, ‘Dic generali concilio,’ ‘Tell it unto a general council.’

In this case I would gladly hear if there be any man who doth think these words to Be more properly expressed of any prelate, than of a council, when they must put one man for the multitude; which if it be admitted in the Scriptures, we shall from henceforth find no firm or stable thing therein? But if any man do marvel at our interpretation, let him search the old writers, and he shall find that this is no new or strange interpretation, but the interpretation of the holy fathers and old doctors, who have first illuminated and given light unto the church; as pope Gregory witnesseth (a man worthy of remembrance, both for the holiness of his life, and his singular learning), whose words to the bishop of Constantinople (as found in his Register) are these: ‘And we,’ saith he, ‘against whom so great an offense is committed through temerarious boldness, do observe and keep that which, the Truth doth command, us, saying, Si peccaverit in to frater; that is, If thy brother do offend against thee, etc.’ And afterwards he addeth moreover, ‘If my rebukes and corrections be despised, it remaineth that I do seek help of the church.’ Which words do manifestly take the term church for a general council. Neither did Gregory say, that he would seek help of the church that is dispersed abroad in every place, but of that which is gathered together, that is to say, a general council; for that which is dispersed abroad cannot be used, except it be gathered together. Also pope Nicholas, reproving Lotharius the king for advoutry, said, ‘If thou dost not amend the same, take heed that we tell it not unto the holy church.’ In which saying pope Nicholas did not say, that he would go throughout the world to certify every one, man by man; but that he would call the church together, that is to say, a general council, and there would publish and declare the offense of Lotharius, that he who had contemned the pope’s commandments, should fear the reverence of the general council.

I could recite an infinite number of witnesses for the same purpose, who all tend unto one end, but this one testimony of the council of Constance shall suffice for them all; *for in that place where sentence is given against Peter de Luna, these words are mentioned: ‘Eaque in generali concilio locum habere dicuntur;’ that is to say, ‘These things are said to have place in the general council’: by which words we understand,* that not only the pope, in the correction of his brother, is remitted unto the council, when he cannot correct him of himself; but also when any thing is done as touching the correction of the pope himself, the matter ought to be referred to the council. Whereby our interpretation appeareth to be most true, which doth expound the church to us of a general council. Hereupon, in the Acts of the Apostles, the congregations which were then holden were called the church. Also in the council of Nice, and in other councils, when any man should be excommunicated, always, in a manner, this sentence was adjoined: ‘Hunc excommunicat catholica et apostolica ecclesia;’ that is, ‘The catholic and apostolic church doth excommunicate this man.’ And hereupon that title is given unto the councils, whereby we do say, that a general council doth represent the universal church.

Wherefore the laws and decrees of the council are called the laws of the church, for that the church doth not set forth any laws in any other place, but in a general council; except we will call the pope’s constitutions the laws of the church, which cannot be properly said but of a council: whereas, albeit all those who are of the church do not assemble and come together, yet the most part of them are accustomed to be there present, and in those who come, the whole power of the church doth consist. Whereupon we read in the Acts of the Apostles, ‘It pleased the apostles and elders with all the church.’ For albeit that all the faithful were not there present (because a great number of them remained at Antioch), yet, notwithstanding, it was called the whole church, because the whole power of the church consisted in the council. Thus, for this present, it is sufficient that we understand by the church, a general council.

And now to return unto our purpose, let us hear what our Savior saith unto Peter; ‘If thy brother do offend against thee;’ unto this text following, ‘Tell it unto the church;’ and let us understand a council by the church. Which is greater in this place, he who is sent unto the council, or the council whereunto Peter is sent? The Verity doth remit the bishop of Rome unto a general council. And why so? verily because the bishop of Rome should not disdain to acknowledge some power in earth to be above him, which he should consult withal in matters of importance, and agree unto the determinations thereof. Whereupon Peter is also called by another name, ‘Simon;’ which, as Rabanus in his homilies writeth, is interpreted in the Hebrew tongue, ‘obedient:’ that all men might understand obedience to be necessary even in the bishop of Rome.

The authority of the council of Constance might suffice us in this point; but we think it good to stay a little upon this matter, and to leave no place open for our adversaries; who, while they go about to maintain the unsatiable wilfullness of one man, preferring a private wealth before a common commodity, it is incredible how great errors they do stir up. Against which, besides many others, Zacharias bishop of Chalcedon, a man both famous and eloquent, did earnestly strive; who, in the great and sacred synod of Chalcedon, when the sentence of the bishop of Rome was objected unto him, that the canon of pope Nicholas and other patriarchs was above the council, he replied against it. And Zosimus, the pope, saith thus, as touching the decrees of a general council: ‘The authority of this see cannot make or alter any thing contrary to the decrees of the fathers.” Neither doth he here speak of the decrees of the fathers who are dispersed abroad in cities or wildernesses, for they do not bind the Pope; but of those which are made and published by the fathers in a general council: for the more manifest declaration whereof, the words of pope Leo, the most eloquent of all the bishops of Rome, are here to be annexed, who wrote unto Anatholius, that the decrees of the council of Nice were in no part to be violate and broken: thereby (as it were) excluding himself and the chief patriarch.

The authority also of Damasus upon this sentence is more manifest, writing unto Aurelius the archbishop, as Isidorus declareth in the Book of Councils; whose worthy saying, as touching the authority of the synod, is this: ‘They who are not compelled of necessity, but of their own will either frowardly do any thing, or presume to do any thing, or willingly consent unto those who would do any thing, contrary and against the sacred canons, they are worthily thought and judged to blaspheme the Holy Ghost.’ Of the which blasphemy whether Gabriel, who calleth himself Eugene, be presently partaker, let them judge, who have heard him say, ‘That, it is so far from his office and duty to obey general councils, that he doth then best merit and deserve, when he contemneth the decrees of the council.’ Damasus addeth yet moreover, ‘For this purpose,’ saith he, ‘the ride of the sacred canons, which are consecrated by the Spirit of God and the reverence of the whole world, is faithfully to be known and understand of us, and diligently looked upon, that by no means, without a necessity which cannot be eschewed (which God forbid), we do transgress the decrees of the holy fathers.’ Notwithstanding, we daily see in all the pope’s bulls and letters these words, ‘Non obstante,’ that is to say, ‘notwithstanding;’ which no other necessity hath brought in, than only insatiable desire of gathering of money. But let them take heed to these things, who be the authors thereof.

But now, to return again unto Damasus; mention is made in the epistles of Ambrose, archbishop of Milan, of a certain epistle, which is said to be written by Damasus unto the judges deputed by the council of Capua, where he declareth that it is not his office to meddle with any matter wherein a council had been beforehand.

By which saying he doth manifestly reprove all those who affirm and say, that the bishop of Rome is above the council: the which if it were true, Damasus might have taken into his hands the cause of Bonosius, the bishop, to determine, which was before begun by the council; but forsomuch as the council is above the pope, Damasus knew himself to be prohibited. Whereupon Hilary also, acknowledging a synod to be above him, would have his decrees confirmed by the council. Also the famous doctor, St. Augustine, in his epistle which he did write unto Glorius, and Eleusius, and Felix the grammarian, declareth the case. Cecilianus, the bishop, was accused by Donatus, with others. Melchiades, the pope, with certain other bishops, absolved Cecilian, and confirmed him in his bishopric. They, being moved with those doings, made a schism in the parts of Africa; St. Augustine reproveth them, who having another remedy against the sentence of the pope, did raise a schism, and doth inveigh against them in this manner: ‘Behold, let us think those bishops who gave judgment at Rome, not to have been good judges: there remained yet the judgment of the universal church, where, the cause might, have been pleaded even with the judges themselves; so that if they were convicted not to have given just judgment, their sentence might have been broken.’ Whereby it appeareth, that not only the sentence of the pope alone, but also that of the pope with his bishops joined with him, might be made frustrate by a council; for the full judgment of the universal church is not found elsewhere but in a general council. Nor let it move any man, that St. Augustine seemeth here only to speak of bishops; for if the text of his epistle be read over, he shall find the bishop of Rome to be comprehended amongst the other bishops. It was also prohibited by the councils of Africa, that the bishops of Rome should receive or hear the appeals of any who did appeal from a council; which altogether declareth the superiority of a council.

And this appeareth more plainly in the Acts of the Apostles, chap. 11, where Peter is rebuked by the congregation of the apostles, because he went in unto Cornelius, a heathen man, as if it had not been lawful for him to attempt any greater matter without the knowledge of the congregation: and yet it was said unto him, as well as others, ‘Ite et baptizate,’ &o. ‘Go and baptize.’ But this seemeth to make more unto the purpose, which St. Paul writeth unto the Galatians, where he saith, that he ‘resisted Peter even unto his face, because he did not walk according to the verity of the gospel,’ Galatians 2. Which words, if they be well understand, signify none other thing by ‘the verity of the gospel,’ than the canon of the council decreed amongst the apostles: for the disciples being gathered together, had so determined it. Whereupon St. Paul doth show, that Peter ought to have obeyed the general council.

But now, to finish this disputation, we will here adjoin the determination of the council of Constance, which council aforesaid, willing to cut off all ambiguity and doubts, and to provide a certain order of living, declared by a solemn decree, that all men, of what estate or condition soever they were, yea, although that they were popes themselves, be bound under the obedience and ordinances of the sacred general councils. And although there be a certain restraint, where it is said, ‘In such things as pertain unto the faith, the extirpation of schism, and the reformation of the church, as well in the head as in the members;’ notwithstanding, this amplificative clause, which is adjoined, is to be noted, ‘Et in pertinentibus ad ea;’ that is to say, ‘With all the appurtenants.’

Which addition is so large, that it containeth all things in it which may be imagined or thought. For the Lord said thus unto his apostles, ‘Go ye forth and teach all people.’ He did not say in three points only, but teach them ‘to observe and keep all things, whatsoever I have commanded you.’ And in another place he saith, not this or that, but ‘whatsoever’ ye shall bind, etc., which all together are alleged for the authority of the church and general councils. For the exaltation whereof these places also come in: ‘He that heareth you, heareth me.’ And again, ‘It is given unto you to know the mysteries of God.’ Also, ‘Where two or three be gathered in my name,’ etc. Again, ‘Whatsoever ye shall ask,’ etc. ‘O holy Father! keep them whom thou hast given me,’ etc. And, ‘I am with you even unto the end of the world.’ Also out of St. Paul these places are gathered: ‘We are helpers of God,’ etc. Which hath made us apt ministers of the New Testament,’ etc. ‘And he appointed some apostles, and some prophets,’ etc. In all which places, both Christ and the apostle spake of the authority of many, and all of them are alleged for the authority of the universal church.

But forsomuch as that church, being dispersed and scattered abroad, cannot decree or ordain any thing, therefore, of necessity it is to be said, that the chief and principal authority of the church doth reside in general councils, while they are assembled together.

And therefore it was observed in the primitive church, that difficult and weighty matters were not intreated upon, but only in general councils and congregations. The same is also found to be observed afterward; for, when the churches were divided in opinion, general councils were holden. And in the council of Nice we do find the heresy of Arius condemned; in the council of Constantinople, the heresy of Macedonius; in the council of Ephesus, the heresy of Nestorius; in the council of Chalcedon, the heresy of Eutyches was also condemned; forsomuch as they thought the judgment of the bishop of Rome not to suffice to so great and weighty matters; and also they thought the sentence of the council to be of greater force and efficacy than the sentence of the pope, forsomuch as be might err as a man. But the council, wherein so many men were gathered together, being guided by the Holy Ghost, could not err. Also it is a very excellent saying of Martianus, the emperor, which serveth for that purpose, whose words are these: ‘Truly he is to be counted a wicked and sacrilegious person, who, after the sentence of so many good and holy men, will stick to withdraw any part of his opinion. For it is a point of mere mad hess, at the noontime and fair daylight to seek for a feigned light; for he who having found the truth, seeketh to discuss any thing further, seeketh but after vanities and lies.’

Now I think it is evident enough unto all men, that the bishop of Rome is under the council. Notwithstanding some do yet still doubt, whether he may also be deposed by the council or not; for, albeit it be proved that he is under the council, yet, for all that, will they not grant that he may be also deposed by the council.

Wherefore, it shall be no digressing at all from our purpose, somewhat to say upon that matter; and, first of all, to speak of these railers who are yet so earnest for the defense of the bishop of Rome, who, being vanquished in one battle, still renew another, and contend rather of obstinacy than of ignorance. They would have here recited again that which we have before spoken, as touching the pre-eminence of the bishop of Rome, or the patriarch. And, as there are many of them more full of words than eloquence, they stay much on this point, where Christ said unto Peter, ‘Tibi dabo claves regni coelorum;’ ‘I will give thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth shall be bound in heaven;’ as though by those words he should be made head over the others. And again, they do amplify it by this, ‘Pasce oves meas,’ ‘Feed my sheep,’ which they do not find to be spoken to any other of the apostles. And, because it is said that Peter was the chief and the mouth of the apostles, therefore they judge it well spoken, that no man shall judge the chief and principal see; being all of this opinion with Boniface, who said, that the pope ought to be judged for no cause, except he be perceived or known to swerve from the faith, although he do carry innumerable people with him headlong into hell, there to be perpetually tormented; as though he could not open the kingdom of heaven to others, if any other could shut it against him; neither that he could feed others, if he himself lacked pasture.

But we count these, as things of no force or difficulty. For St.

Augustine, in the sermon on the nativity of Peter and Paul, saith in this wise: ‘Our Lord Jesus Christ, before his passion, chose his disciples, as ye know, whom he called brethren. Amongst those Peter alone, almost in every place, represented the person of the church. And therefore it was said unto him, Tibi dabo claves regni coelorum; that is to say, Unto thee will I give the keys of the kingdom of heaven. These keys did he not receive, as one man, but, as one, he received them for the church. And in another place, where he writeth of the christian agony, he saith; ‘The keys of the kingdom of heaven were given unto the church, when they were given unto Peter. And when it was spoken unto him, Amas me?

Pasce oves meas; that is to say, Lovest thou me? Feed my sheep; it was spoken unto them all.’ And St. Ambrose, in the beginning of his Pastoral, saith: ‘Which sheep and which flock the blessed apostle St. Peter took no charge of alone, but together with us, and we altogether with him.’ By which words the foundation and principal arguments of those flatterers are utterly subverted and overthrown; for, if Peter represented the person of the church, we ought not to ascribe the force of these words unto Peter, but unto the church. Neither do I see how that can stand which Boniface doth affirm, for it is far distant from the truth, except it be understand otherwise than it is spoken.

But it may, peradventure, seem a great thing unto some, that the bishop of Rome is said to be the head of the militant church; for, as in the body of man, physicians do never give counsel to cut off the head for any manner of sickness and disease, although it be ever so full of ulcers, or infected; so, in this mystical body of the church the head ought always to be kept: and, albeit it be ever so wicked, yet it is to be suffered and borne withal. But now convert this argument. If it were possible, in the body of man, when one head is taken away, to find another to put in its place, as we see it may be done in the church; should not heads then be oftentimes changed for divers diseases? Moreover, if we will thus reason, that the head of the church should be, in respect of his body, as the head of man in respect of the body of man; then doth it necessarily follow, that the head being dead, the body must also die, as is manifest in the body of man. So should it grow into an absurdity to confess, that the pope being dead, the church also should be dead; which how far it dissenteth from the truth, it is most manifest. Therefore, whatsoever other men say, I am not of opinion with them who affirm the bishop of Rome to be head of the church, except, peradventure, they do make him the ministerial head: for we do read that Christ is the head of the church, and not the pope; and that he is the true head, immutable, perpetual, and everlasting; and the church is his body, whereof the pope himself is also a member, and the vicar of Christ; not to the destruction, but to the maintenance and edifying of the same body of Christ. Wherefore, if he be found a damnable destroyer of the church, he may be deposed and cast out, because he doth not that he was ordained to do; 46 and we ought, as pope Leo saith, to be mindful of the commandment given us in the gospel; that if our eye, our foot, or our right hand do offend us, it should be cut off from the body. For the Lord saith in another place, ‘Every tree which bringeth not forth fruit, shall be cut down and cast into the fire.’ And in another place also it is said unto us, ‘Take away all evil and wickedness from among you.’ It is very just and true which is written in the epistle of Clement unto James the brother of our Lord, that he who will be saved, ought to be separate from them who will not be saved. But, for the more manifest declaration hereof, we must have recourse to that which is spoken by the Lord in the gospel of John; ‘I am the true vine,’ saith the Lord, ‘and my Father is the husbandman, and ye are the branches; every branch therefore that bringeth not forth fruit in me, my Father will cut off.’ These words were spoken unto the apostles, among whom also Peter was present, whom the Lord would have cut off, if he brought not forth his fruit. Also St. Jerome, upon these words of Matthew, ‘Unsavoury salt is profitable for nothing, but to be cast forth and trodden of swine,’ thereupon in the person of Peter and Paul saith thus: ‘It is no easy matter to stand in the place of Peter and Paul, and to keep the chair of them who reign with Christ. This unsavoury salt (that is to say, a foolish prelate, 47 unsavoury in preaching, and foolish in offending) is good for nothing but to be cast forth, that is to say, deposed, and to be trodden of swine, that is, of wicked spirits, which have dominion over the wicked and naughty prelates, as their own flock and herd.’ Behold this testimony of Jerome is plain and evident; ‘Let him be cast out,’ saith he. He expoundeth and speaketh this of the prelate who usurpeth the place of Peter, and so consequently of the bishop of Rome, who, being unsavoury in preaching, and foolish in offending, ought to be deposed (as Jerome affirmeth) from his degree and dignity. 48 Neither, as some do dream, is he to be deposed for heresy only. Isidore, in the Book of Councils, rehearseth a certain epistle of Clement, the successor of Peter, written unto James the apostle, where the said Clement, repeating the words of Peter unto himself, saith thus: ‘If thou be occupied with worldly cares, thou shalt both deceive thyself, and those who shall give ear unto thee; for thou canst not fully distribute unto every man those things which pertain unto salvation: whereby it shall come to pass, that thou, for not teaching those things which pertain unto human salvation, shalt be deposed, and thy disciples shall perish through ignorance.’ Notwithstanding, in another place, instead of this word ‘deposed,’ it is found, ‘thou shalt be punished; which two words, if they be well understand, do not much differ, for deposition is oftentimes used in the place of punishment.

But peradventure some will here object, that this epistle is not to be judged Clement’s, because it is said to be written unto James, who, as the Historia Scholastica 49 affirmeth, was dead before Peter was put to death. But Clement might think that James was alive, when he wrote; who were far distant asunder, and tidings of the Christians came not easily unto Rome. Moreover, there is mention made of this epistle in divers places of the decretals as most true, and therefore it shall be nothing from the purpose to rehearse other sayings out of the same epistle; where he saith, ‘That he who liveth rebelliously, and refuseth both to learn and to do good, is rather a member of the devil than of Christ, and doth show himself rather to be an infidel than a faithful Christian.’ Upon which words, the gloss which Panormitane calleth singular and doth much approve 50 saith, that if the crime or offense of the bishop of Rome be notorious, whereby the church is offended, if he be incorrigible, he may be accused thereof. If then he may be accused, ergo, also, he may be punished, and, according to the exigency of the fault, deposed; otherwise he should be accused in vain.

Now is there no more any place of defense left for our adversaries, but that the pope may be deposed; which argument being now brought to an end, notwithstanding it is not yet evident whether he may be deposed by the council or no; which we now take in hand to discourse. And, first of all, the adversaries will grant this unto us; that the bishop of Rome may be deposed by the church, forasmuch as the pope being the vicar of the church, no man doubteth but that a lord may put out his vicar at his will and pleasure: neither is it to be doubted but that the pope is more truly called the vicar of the church than of Christ. But, if the church may depose the pope, ergo, the council also may do the same.* For, as it is before declared, the universal church doth ordain or decree, nothing, but when. it is congregated or gathered together in general councils. Then, albeit they be not all present, it is suffficient that they be all called, whom reason requireth to have present.

But here, of one doubt riseth also another; for, whereas the church doth comprehend, as well the laity, as the clergy, a question seemeth, to be demanded why only the clergy do hold the councils, or that the laity are not present and have a voice in the councils.

Some one also may suppose that which, is spoken, ‘the church cannot err,’ to be referred unto both states, and both kinds of men and women, that, albeit the clergy do err, the laity might remain firm and constant. And again, if the men happen to err, some women might remain in the faith; but it is erroneous so to think.

For we ought to consider the church to be understood two manner of ways: the one, which containeth both the laity and the clergy; the other, which containeth the clergy alone. And to this second church it pertaineth to teach, purge, illuminate, direct, correct, feed, and to make perfect, the first part. Wherefore we do affirm the universal church, which comprehendeth all faithful Christians, to have all manner of authority and power granted unto it: and therefore, that the bishop of Rome is subject thereunto, and may be deposed, cast out, and excommunicated, if he do not rule and govern well.

Wherefore, whensoever the faithful Christians are gathered together in the Holy Ghost, to celebrate a council, albeit they be not all there present, yet, because they are lawfully called, the fullness of the power doth consist no more in the pope, but in the council: and immediately as the council is begun, it is straightways above, the pope. Wherefore thus we conclude, that whatsoever is granted or permitted to the universal church, the same is also granted unto a general council.

Whereupon, if the universal church (as no man can deny) may depose the pope, a general council may also do the same. 52 Also the gloss, which Panormitane in his writing doth so greatly commend, hath this sentence, ‘That a general council is judge over the pope in all cases.’ Likewise the most sacred synod of Constantinople, which is allowed of all men, doth appoint the bishops of Rome to be under the judgment of a council; and the council to judge and determine, of every doubtful matter, or question that doth arise, concerning the bishop of Rome. Neither let it move any man that this word ‘deposition’ is not mentioned; for it is said ‘of every doubtful matter or question:’ for, if the synod do judge of every doubt, ergo, it shall also judge whether the pope shall be deposed or not; for that may also come in doubt.

And because we will not seek examples far off, John 23, whom all the world did reverence as pope, was deposed of his papacy by the council of Constance: neither yet was he condemned for any heresy; but, because he did offend the church by his manifold crimes, the sacred synod thought good to depose him; and ever since, continually, the church hath proceeded by like example, that their opinion might cease, who affirm that the pope cannot be deposed, but only for heresy.

But here is yet one thing not to be omitted, that certain men do affirm the general councils to be of no effect, except the pope do call and appoint them, and his authority remain with them.

Whereupon they say, that Dioscorus did rebuke Paschasius the bishop of Sicily, and legate of pope Leo, because that he did enterprise, without the authority of the apostolic see, to call a council at Ephesus. They also allege another testimony of the synod of Chalcedon; where, when mention was made of the council of Ephesus, all the bishops cried out, saying, ‘We ought not to call it a council, because it was neither gathered by the apostolic authority, nor rightly kept.’ By which authorities, they who say that the councils cannot be holden without the consent of the pope, do think themselves marvellously armed. Whose sentence and opinion, if it take place and prevail as they desire, it shall bring with it the great ruin and decay of the church. For what remedy shall we find, if a wicked pope do disturb the whole church, destroy souls, seduce the people by his evil example; if, finally, he preach contrary unto the faith, and fill the people full of heresies, shall we provide. no stay or stop for him? shall we suffer all things to run to ruin and decay with him? Who would think that the bishop of Rome would congregate a council for his own correction or deposition? for as men are prone unto sin, so would they also sin without punishment. But when I do peruse ancient histories, and the Acts of the Apostles, I do not find this order, that councils should be gathered only at the will of the pope; for the first council of all, after Matthias was substituted in the place of Judas, was not congregated at the commandment of Peter, but at the commandment of Christ, who commanded the apostles that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but look for the promise of the Father.

The second council, as touching the election of the deacons, Peter alone did not congregate, but the twelve apostles; for it is written, ‘The twelve apostles, calling together the multitude,’ etc.

The third council, which was holden as touching the taking away of circumcision and other ceremonies of the law, was gathered together by a general inspiration: for it is written, ‘The apostles and elders came together,’ etc.

The fourth council, where certain things contained in the law are permitted, seemeth to have been gathered by James. And so, discoursing throughout all, there can nothing be found in the primitive church, whereby it should appear that the authority of congregating of councils should pertain only unto bishops of Rome. Neither afterwards in the time of Constantine the Great, and other emperors, was the consent of the bishops of Rome greatly required to the congregating of councils; and therefore the synod of Chalcedon speaketh thus of itself: ‘The sacred and universal synod gathered together at Chalcedon, the chief city of the province of Bithynia, according to the grace of God, and the sanctions of the most godly and christian emperors, Valentinian and Martian.’ The synod doth not make any mention here of the bishop of Rome, although his consent were there. Wherefore, if the pope would resist, and would have no council congregated, yet, if the greater part of the prelates do judge it necessary to have a council, the council may be congregated whether the pope will or no. *For when the prelates be generally inspired, the judgment of one man must needs give place, although he be the successor of Peter.

Neither do I perceive it to have been always observed, that there should be no council holden without the authority of the pope.* For the council holden at Pisa, was not congregate by the authority and consent of any pope, when Gregory did condemn it, and Benedict cursed it. The same also may be said of the council of Constance, which was assembled by the authority of pope John, who in respect of the Spaniards was no true pope. And, if the council of Pisa were no true council, pope John was no true pope; whereupon his consent to the congregating of the council of Constance was of no effect. Moreover, it is more than folly to affirm, that when the pope hath once given his consent, if it should be called back, the council should then cease, for then it is no more in his power to revoke his consent. And of necessity he must be obedient unto the council whereof he is a member, and give place unto the greater part: and if he separate himself from the consent of the greater part, and depart from the unity of the church, he maketh himself a schismatic.

Now, to come unto the second conclusion: if it be true, as it is indeed, that the pope is under the council, how can the pope then dissolve, alter, and transport the council, against the will of the same? for with what countenance can we say, that the inferior hath power over the superior? How can the synod correct the pope, if the pope may dissolve the synod contrary to the will thereof?

Admit the pope be libidinous, covetous, a sower of war and discord, and a most mortal enemy unto the church and the name of Christ, how can the council reprove him, if he have authority to dissolve the council? For as soon as ever the bishop of Rome shall understand, that in the council they do treat or talk of his correction or punishment, straightways he will seek remedy by dissolving the council. For, as Macrobins saith, he that hath liberty to do more than is fit or necessary, will oftentimes do more than is lawful. If so be that the bishop of Rome may exempt himself from correction by dissolving or transporting the council, it followeth that the council is not above him. Therefore we must either deny that which is before said, that the pope is under, the council, or else deny that the pope hath power to dissolve the council, contrary to the will and determination of the council.

And, as the first conclusion is most true, so are all other conclusions false, which seem to impugn the same. Wherefore the second conclusion of the divines is also manifest, albeit some do admit it in certain cases, and, in others, exclude it again. For, if we do admit, that for certain causes the pope may dissolve the council contrary to the will and determination thereof, that is to say, to make the pope judge of the council, it were clean contrary unto the first conclusion.

Now it is proved that the council is above the pope, and cannot be dissolved by the pope without consent thereof. Now we must further see, whether it be an article of our faith to believe it; which matter hath respect unto the third conclusion. For there have been many, who, albeit they did confess these two conclusions to be true, yet they doubted whether it were a verity of the catholic faith or no. Therefore this second part must be confirmed, and we must see whether it be an article of faith that the pope be under the council; which being proved, it shall also appear to be an article of faith, that the pope cannot dissolve the council without the consent thereof: which consequent none of the contrary part hath refuted. First of all therefore we must inquire what faith itself is, that we may thereby the better understand what pertaineth thereunto.

Faith, as the divines do define it, is a firm and steadfast cleaving unto things believed on the authority of him that speaketh. If then we believe, as is aforesaid, that the pope of Rome is under the council, some authority doth move us thereunto: so is there faith in him that believeth it. But the question is not whether it be an article of faith only, but whether it be an article of the catholic faith. Wherefore we must again inquire, what the catholic faith is.

This word Catholic is a Greek word, and signifieth Universal. The catholic faith, that is to say, the universal faith, is not so called because every man holdeth it, but because every man ought to believe it. For all men do not believe that God is incarnate, but every man ought so to believe. And albeit many be against this faith, yet doth it not cease to be universal. For what writeth the apostle unto the Romans? ‘If some of them have not believed, doth their misbelief make the faith of God vain? God forbid. Verily God is true, but every man is a liar.’ Romans 3. Therefore to believe that the pope is under the council, is a point of the catholic faith, although some think the contrary: for we are bound to believe it, forsomuch as it is taken out of the gospel. For we are not bound only to believe those things that are noted to us in the Creed, but also all those things that are contained in the holy Scriptures, whereof we may not deny one iota. And those things which we allege for the superiority of a general council, are gathered out of the sayings of our Savior Jesus Christ, and the epistles of Saint Paul: ergo, we are all bound to believe it. And to prove that these things are taken out of the gospel, the council of Constance doth witness, which groundeth its authority upon these words, ‘Dic ecclesiae;’ that is to say, ‘Tell it unto the church;’ and, ‘Where two or three are gathered together in my name,’ etc.; and, ‘Whatsoever ye shall bind,’ etc., with other such like texts. *And 54 Saint Austin saith: ‘Quod evangelio non crederet, ni autoritas ecclesiae se commoveret;’ that is to say, that he would not give any credit unto the gospel, except the authority of the church did move him thereunto: in this place, naming the church for the general council. For the church, which was dispersed in every place, did not ordain the receiving of the Gospels and Scriptures; but the church which was congregated and gathered together in the general council. And, thereby, it may come to pass, that, like as the council did bind us to the believing of them, so may it also set forth other things unto us, to be believed.* Whereupon pope Martin V., being yet at Constance, under the license of the council sent out his bulls, which do reckon up the articles, whereupon they ought to be examined who had fallen into any heresy; amongst which articles he putteth this article:— Whether he doth believe a sacred general council to have power immediately from God, and that the ordinances thereof are to be received of all faithful Christians; which if any man would deny, he should be counted a heretic. Wherefore, when the sacred synod of Constance doth set forth this verity, as touching the superiority of a general council, what should let, but that we also should confess the same to be a verity of the catholic faith? For the catholic church, being congregate at Constance, received that faith; that is to say, believed it by the authority of him who spake it; that is, Christ and his saints.

To this purpose also serve very well the words of the synod of Chalcedon, written in this manner:—“It is not lawful to name him ‘bishop,’ that is condemned by the whole synod. The determination pleaseth all men. This is the faith of the fathers. He that holdeth any opinion contrary unto this, is a heretic. And again, it is a rule, that it is not lawful to appeal from the elect and chosen synod. He that holdeth any opinion contrary to this, is a heretic.”

Mark the manifest witness of this most sacred synod, which said, that he is a heretic, who holdeth any opinion contrary unto the council. But he is no heretic, except he refuse the catholic faith: ergo, it was the catholic faith to believe that it was not lawful to appeal from the sacred council. But how was the same any point of the catholic faith? Verily, forsomuch as the sacred synod, perusing over the holy Scriptures, hath received this conclusion out of the words of Christ and other holy fathers. And, like as the synod of Chalcedon took their conclusions out of the holy Scriptures, so likewise did the council of Constance this which we now reason upon. And like as the one is an article of the catholic faith, so is the other also. And he who holdeth any opinion contrary to either or both, is a heretic.

Furthermore they seem unto me to dream and dote, who, confessing them to be verities, will not confess them to be verities of faith. For if they be verities, I pray you whereof are they verities? Truly not of grammar, much less of logic; and from astronomy and physic they are far distant: neither is there any other man but a divine, that will grant this verity, whom Scripture doth force unto it of necessity, if he do believe Christ, or his apostles. Therefore this is a verity of the catholic faith, which all men ought to embrace; and he who obstinately resisteth against the same, is to be judged a heretic, as the third conclusion doth affirm.

Neither let any man think it hard or cruel, that he should be called a heretic, who goeth about to derogate any thing from the power of a general council, which is confirmed by so many testimonies and authorities, *when he also is counted a heretic, who taketh away the supremacy from the church of Rome, which is one of the Greeks’ heresies that are condemned.* Also Panormitane allegeth St. Jerome, saying, ‘He who understandeth the Scripture otherwise than the sense of the Holy Ghost doth require, albeit he do not depart from the church, may be called a heretic.’

Whereupon it followeth, that he, who, upon the words of Christ, saying unto Peter, ‘Die ecclesiae,’ i.e. ‘Tell it unto the church,’ doth not understand by ‘the church’ a general council, understandeth it otherwise than the sense of the Holy Ghost doth require, and thereby may be noted as a heretic. And that the sense of the Holy Ghost is otherwise than he doth judge it, the council of Constance doth declare’, the which interpreting those words ‘Dic ecclesiae,’ that is, ‘Tell it unto the church,’ spoken by the Holy Ghost, understandeth them to be spoken of a general council.

For these and many other weighty reasons the three aforesaid conclusions seemed true unto the divines, and through them they also allowed the residue. Now have we sufficiently said, as touching that which was before promised; neither do I think any man now can be in doubt about the three first conclusions.

Now, to return again unto our story; it is our purpose to declare those things which happened after the conclusion of the divines; for many of them are worthy of remembrance, and may haply be profitable unto posterity. *When 55 the matter was allowed by the divines, it came to the examination of the deputations, 532 whereof three, without much ado, consented with the divines. The fourth, which was named the Common deputation, admitting the three first conclusions, seemed to hesitate about the residue. George, bishop of Vich, was a great stop to this matter; who, being newly returned from Mentz, and not being present at the disputation holden at the chapter-house, could not be persuaded, that Eugene could without a new convocation be declared a heretic. Amedeus, archbishop of Lyons, favored him very much; not for his opinion (for he had openly, in the disputation of the chapter-house, declared Eugene a heretic and relapse), but because he feared that the deposition of the pope would be the next step.

There were, in this deputation, many who not only now, but always had favored Eugene’s part. This deputation, lest, according to the old custom of the council, the matter should be concluded by three deputations, did suspend all deliberation; for by that suspension they brought a greater stop and let than they should have done by denying, and so protracted the matter a long time. For this cause messengers were sent from the other deputations, through whose exhortation the Common deputation did revoke their suspension upon the three conclusions. And now Friday was come, on which day they were accustomed to have a general congregation, and a final conclusion of their business.* Meanwhile, the archbishop of Milan and Panormitane, 533 with the residue of their fellow ambassadors of the king of Arragon and the duke of Milan, armed themselves with all their power to let the matter, exhorting all men of their faction to withstand it with stout and valiant stomachs; *and 55A by their letters and messengers they called back others, who were gone away for fear of the plague. The cardinal of Tarragona, who then sojourned at Soleure, was sent for; likewise was Louis, the prothonotary of Rome, who was gone unto the baths, not so much for his health’s sake, as to avoid being compelled to defend Eugene contrary to his real mind. There were many of the bishops of the Arragons sent for beside, who all came back again the day before the congregation should be holden, excepting the cardinal, who returned after the congregation.

As soon as the time was come for the congregation to begin, the ambassadors of the princes were present, and, as though they had before conspired together, all unanimously agreed to hinder the conclusion as much as in them lay.* And first of all, the bishop of Burgos, a man distinguished for wisdom and eloquence, exhorted them to defer the conclusion, and to tarry for the other ambassadors of the princes, who would shortly return from Mentz.

After him Panormitane, a man of singular talent and learning, and chief ambassador of his king, with a grave and rhetorical oration spake, in a manner, as followeth.

THE ORATION OF PANORMITANE. 55B I have, said he, had a commandment by the prophet, to cry without ceasing; which prophet said, ‘Cry out, cease not, lift up thy voice as a trumpet.’ If that in any matter at any time before it were proper to cry, this matter specially, which was now in hand, lacked crying and roaring out, when the state of the universal church was treated upon, either to be preserved, or utterly overthrown; and that he had cried so much in this manner, that he doubted not but the saying of David was fulfilled in him, where he saith,—‘Laboravi clamans, raucae sunt factae fauces meae;’—‘I have labored, crying out, that my jaws are become hoarse.’

Notwithstanding, that he would, both now and as often as need should require, without ceasing still cry out, and especially now in this most difficult and weighty matter; wherein he required the sacred council gently to hear both him, and the ambassadors of other princes; adding, moreover, four things to be considered, in all requests made of any man; which he also required the fathers now presently to mark and consider: who it is that maketh the request? what is required? why it should be required? and what effect would come by the request either granted or denied? As touching the first point he said; the most noble kings and excellent princes with their prelates, were of great power. And then he reckoned up the king of Castile, the king of Arragon, the duke of Milan, and the bishops of the same princes; rehearsing also the merits and good deeds of the said kings, and also of the duke of Milan. But when he came to make mention of the prelates, he could not refrain himself, but began to wax somewhat hot, saying, that the greatest number of prelates were on his part. For if the bishops and abbots were counted, it were not to be doubted but the greatest part of them would have this present matter deferred; and, forsomuch as the whole power of the council doth consist in the bishops, it is not to be suffered, that they being neglected and contemned, that should be concluded, which pleased the greater part of the inferiors. For the keys, said he, were given to the apostles, and to their successors, who are the bishops: also that there are three kinds of synods, episcopal, provincial, and general, and none of all these without bishops. Wherefore the manner and order of the present council seemed indecent, where things were not weighed according as men excel in dignity, but by most voices: notwithstanding, according to the most famous epistle of Clement, the bishops were the pillars and keys of heaven, and the inferiors had no determining voice, but only a consultative voice with them. Wherefore there would be a great offense in this behalf, if a matter of faith should be determined without the bishops; in which matter not only the bishops, but also the secular princes ought to be admitted. And, forsomuch as they, in the name of their princes, desired to be admitted to the examination of this present matter, and would examine the matter more fully, he complained greatly how unworthy a thing it was, that they should be contemned or despised.

After many things spoken to this end and effect, he passed over to the second part of his oration, declaring what it was that he required; not gold, nor silver, neither precious stones, neither provinces nor kingdoms, neither a thing hard to be done; but only that the delay of the sacred council was required, and that the fathers, would stay in the process against the pope, and. in the conclusion and determination of matters which were then in hand.

Neither should the delay be long, but only until the return of the ambassadors from Mentz, who, he knew well, would return very shortly. That this was but a small matter, and needed but small entreaty, because there was no danger in it. And also it should seem injurious, not to tarry for the ambassadors of the princes who were then at Mentz, when they were not absent for their own private commodity, but about the affairs of the commonwealth, and the commodity of peace; neither had he forgotten, that at their departure they had desired, that during their absence there should, be nothing renewed concerning the matters of Eugene.

Then, immediately adjoining the third part of his oration, wherefore this delay was required, he concluded, that it was not required for the private commodity of any one man, but for the common weal; not to perturb or trouble any thing, but for the better examination of the matter, that all things might pass with peace and quietness; and that the matter might be so much the more firm and stable, by how much it is ratified and allowed by the consent of many. And so he proceeded, to the last part of his argument, requiring the fathers that they would consider, and weigh in their minds, the effect that would follow, if they should grant or deny this request. ‘For,’ saith he, ‘if ye shall deny this small petition of the princes, they all will he aggrieved therewith, and take this repulse in ill part. They will say, they are contemned of you, neither will they be obedient unto you, or receive your decrees. In vain shall ye make laws, except the princes do execute them, and all your decrees shall be but vain: yet would I think this to be borne withal, if I did not fear greater matters to ensue. What if they should join themselves with Eugene, who desireth to spoil you, not only of your livings, but also of your lives? Alas! what slaughter and murder do the eyes of my mind behold and see!

Would to God my opinion were but vain! But if you do grant and consent unto their petitions, they will think themselves bound unto you; they will receive and embrace your decrees, and whatsoever you shall require of them shall be obtained. They will forsake your adversary; they will speak evil of him and abhor him; but you they will commend and praise; you they will reverence; unto you they will wholly submit themselves; and then shall follow that most excellent fruit of reformation and tranquillity of the church.’ And thus he required the matter to be respited on all parts. At the last he said, That except the ambassadors of the princes were heard, he had a protestation written, which he would command to be read before them all.

When Panormitane had made an end of his oration, Louis, the prothonotary of Rome, rose up, a man of such singular wit and memory, that he was thought not to be inferior unto any of the famous men of olden time; for he had always in memory whatsoever he had heard or read, and never forgat any thing that he had seen; * and when he was arguing, 534 he did not merely quote laws by their first words, as other lawyers do, but repeated the law itself as fluently as if he had been reading it from a book.* THE ORATION OF LOUIS THE PROTHONOTARY.

This man, first commending Panormitane, said, That he came but the day before from the baths, and that it seemed unto him a strange thing which was now brought in question; wherein he desired to hear other men’s minds, and also to be heard of others; and that those prelates who were at Mentz should be tarried for, to be present at the discussing of this matter, in the name and behalf of their princes, which prelates were men of great estimation, and the orators of most mighty princes.

He allowed, also, the saying of Panormitane, touching the voices of the inferiors, and said that it seemed not to him to be against the truth, that only bishops should have a determining voice in councils. And, albeit some in this disputation did think that which is written in Acts 15 to be their fort or defense; notwithstanding, he was nothing moved therewith, nor took it to be of any force or moment, albeit it was said, ‘It seemed good unto the Holy Ghost and to us,’ where both the apostles and the elders were gathered together; whereby it appeared, that the others had a deciding voice with the apostles. For he said, that there was no argument to be gathered of the acts of the Apostles, whose examples were more to be marvelled at than to be imitated; and that it doth not appear there, that the apostles called the elders of duty, but it is only declared that they were there present; whereupon nothing could be inferred; and that it seemed unto him, that the inferiors in the council of Basil would be admitted to determine with the bishops but of grace and favor only, because the bishops may communicate their authority unto others; *notwithstanding, in these matters which are graces, if one say the contrary, nothing can be done.* He alleged for testimony the bishop of Cuenca, a man of great authority, who would not suffer any incorporation or fellowship of the meaner sort, and therefore neither any inferior, not even himself (who as yet was not made bishop), to have any deciding voice in the council. Wherefore, forsomuch as the matter was weighty which was now in hand, and that the bishops spake against it, he begged the council that, making a virtue of necessity, 535 they would stay for the ambassadors of the princes coming from Mentz.

His oration 55C was so much the more grievous, in that many were touched with his words: what gave special offense was, that he said the apostles were not to be imitated; for that, all men did impugn as a blasphemy. But here a man may marvel, that a man of such excellency alleged no more or better matter. But it was not the man’s memory which was in fault: the fact is, he did not speak heartily in this matter, and desired nothing so much, as not to obtain that which he entreated for. *After 56 him the bishops of Catants and Boss, 57 who were also the king’s ambassadors, spoke in a few words in favor of the opinion of Panormitane. At that time the archbishop of Milan, a man of prompt and ready wit and learning, who was there alone ambassador for the duke of Milan (for the bishop of Albenga, and Francis Barbavaria, were not yet returned from Mentz); he, being a follower of St. Jerome, alleging many authorities out of the said doctor, exhorted earnestly to have the matter deferred, abhorring all haste, which, he said, was enemy unto the council, and by his countenance and gesture declaring himself to be greatly against the present proceedings. At the last he said, that except he were fully heard, he would make protestation in the name of himself and all his countrymen. After him followed the bishops of Tortosa and Girona, and a divine of Segorbe, abbot-elect of Mount Arragon, 536 and some other men of that rank, who altogether approved the sentence and determination of Panormitane. The bishop of Parma agreed with the archbishop of Milan; also the king’s almoner, who afterward, flying from Basil because of the plague unto Zoffingen, died in a town of the Switzers, between Lucerne and Basil. These, with Martinus de Vera, another ambassador of the king of Arragon, did confirm and stay themselves upon the saying of their fellow Panormitane. Then the other Arragons and Catalonians, wishing to speak every one for himself, said that they did all agree to the desire of their king. The matter seemed to be craftily contrived, that they should spend the time and defer the conclusion. When a great number had spoken their minds, and a long succession of Catalonians had made an end,* Louis, the cardinal Arelatensis, a man of marvellous constancy and born for the governance of general councils, gathered together the words of all the orators; and turning himself first to the Castilians, he spake much of their devotion to the sacred council; in like wise he spake of the Catalonians and Lombards: afterward, he, entering upon the matter, spake in this wise:

THE ORATION OF THE CARDINAL ARELATENSIS.

Most reverend fathers! this is now no new or strange business, nor begun today or yesterday. For it is now many weeks ago since the conclusions were disputed upon amongst the divines, and sent unto Mentz, and into all other parts of the world. After this they were disputed upon six successive days in the chapter-house of this church, and fully discussed, and after that, not without great delay, approved by the deputations; and as the truth seeketh no corners, so all things were done publicly and openly, neither can any man pretend ignorance; neither were the prelates or princes passed over, for we invited all that were then at Basil, and exhorted them all to be present. And forsomuch as mention is made of the most noble king of Castile, who is ignorant that the king’s own orators were there present, the bishops of Burgos and Ebrun, men of singular learning and eloquence? And you also Panormitane yourself, who here represent the person of the most famous king of Arragon, were twice present yourself in the chapter-house, and disputed twice most subtilely, and twice declared your mind, what you thought in that matter. Why do you desire more delay! Also out of the territory of the duke of Milan there was present the archbishop of Milan, who albeit he be no ambassador, yet how famous a prelate he is, you are not ignorant.

When he had spoken these words, the archbishop of Milan, being somewhat moved, said unto him, “My lord cardinal, you supply the room of a president no more than I do the place of the duke’s orator;” and began to taunt him with many words. But the cardinal (as he was a most patient man, and would not be provoked to anger by any means), said as followeth:

THE ORATION OF THE CARDINAL ARCHBISHOP OF ARLES CONTINUED.

That is just what I wanted. For if the archbishop be an ambassador, then hath the duke no cause to complain, who had his orator present at the discussing of those matters. I pass over other, princes, because they do not complain. Notwithstanding, the most christian king of France had there the archbishop of Lyons, a grave and sober man, as his ambassador at the disputation. As for other princes, I see no cause why they should be tarried for, who, knowing the council to be congregated for such matters as pertain unto faith, do not think it absurd that the doubtful matters of faith should be determined in the council; whereat, if they had wished to be present, they would have come or this.

Besides 58 that, it is not true what Panormitane saith, that secular princes ought to be admitted to any matter of faith, if he understand their coming to be in order to determine. And, albeit that Martianus the emperor doth say, ‘Nos ad fidem confirmandam volumus interesse synodo;’ that is, ‘We will be present at the council for the confirmation of the faith;’ which words Panormitane doth so often allege, yet that must be added, which he himself doth add, that we may have the perfect understanding of his words, for he saith; ‘Nos ad fidem confirmandam, non potentiam exercendam, volumus interesse synodo;’ that is, ‘we will be present at the council, not to exercise our power and authority, but for the confirmation of the faith;’ speaking it to this intent, that, thereby he might specially take away all fear from those, who thought that his presence would frustrate the council: which thing if our princes now-a-days would do, the matter were at an end. But our princes in these days, when by reason of their absence they cannot themselves threaten, yet will they put men in fear by their ambassadors. But God will look upon such doings.* Why this matter should need so much discussing as some will have, I do not understand; for if I rightly remember, Panormitane and also Louis have oftentimes affirmed in this place even the very same thing which the conclusions signify. And if any of them now will go about to gainsay it, it will happen unto them as it did unto Didimus,* than whom, as Quintilian saith, ‘No man at any time wrote more,’* to whom, when on a time he repugned against a certain history as vain and frivolous, his own book was delivered unto him, wherein the same was written: so likewise these two men, 59 although they be excellently learned, and eloquent, yet may they be confuted by their own writings. Besides this, there are synodal epistles and decrees of this council, which are full of such conclusions. What is it then whereupon any difficulty can be raised? what is it that may be impugned? Shall we now bring that again in doubt, which hath so often been declared, affirmed, and decreed? ‘But,’ say they, ‘the princes and ambassadors are absent, who are bishops, by whose presence the decrees should be of more authority.’ Well, not only are they absent who are gone to Mentz, but almost an infinite number of others, dispersed throughout the whole world, whom if we should tarry to look for, nothing at any time should be decreed. They are all called unto the council; they might have come if they would. To those that are present power is given, and they ought to debate these matters. If any man will say, that they who are absent are about the affairs of the commonwealth, truly we sent them not thither, but they went rather against the will of the council, than with the consent thereof.

And admit that they had been sent by the council, yet were not our power so much restrained but that we might reform the church, for, otherwise, there should never any thing be done in the council; forsomuch as always some are sent out by the council, and some are always to be looked and tarried for; and therefore we must either do nothing at all, or send out no prelates from the council.

Whereas he said that prelates, and especially bishops, are contemned, that is most far from the truth, for they have the chief and first places. They speak first, and give their voices first of all, unto all things; and, if so be they do speak learnedly and truly, all the inferiors, without any gainsaying, do soon follow their mind.

Neither, peradventure, shall it seem dissonant from the truth, to say, that there was never any synod which did more amplify the power and authority of bishops, than this. For what have the bishops been in our days, but only shadows? Might they not well have been called shepherds without the sheep? What had they more than their mitre and their staff, when they could determine nothing over their subjects? Verily, in the primitive church, the bishops had the greatest power and authority; 60 but now is it come to that point that they do only exceed the common sort of priests in their habit and revenues. But we have restored them again to their old estate; we have reduced the collation of benefices again unto them; we have restored unto them the confirmation of elections; we have brought again into their hands the causes of the subjects to be heard, and have made them bishops who were none before. What cause is there then, that the bishops should say they are contemned of the council, or what injurious thing have we at any time done unto them?

But Panormitane saith, that forsomuch as most bishops are on his part, and few against him, the conclusion is not to be determined by the multitude of the inferiors. But let Panormitane remember himself, that this is no new kind of proceeding. This order of proceeding the council ordained from the beginning, neither hath it been changed at any time since. And this order, Panormitane! in times past hath pleased you well enough, when the multitude did follow your mind. 61 But now, because they do not follow your mind, they do displease you. But the decrees of the council are not so mutable as the wills of men. Know ye, moreover, that the very same bishops who do consent with you in word, do not consent with you in mind, neither speak the same secretly, which they now do openly. They do fear that which you told them at home in their country, that except they would follow your mind they should displease the king. They fear the power of the prince, and to be spoiled of their temporalties; neither have they free liberty to speak as is requisite in councils. Albeit, if they were true bishops, and true pastors of souls, they would not doubt to put their lives in venture for their sheep, neither be afraid to shed their blood for their mother the church.

But at this present (the more is the pity) it is rare to find a prelate in this world, who doth not prefer his temporalities before his spiritualties; with the love whereof they are so withdrawn, that they study rather to please princes than God; and confess God in corners, but princes they will openly confess. Of whom the Lord speaketh in his Gospel; ‘Every one,’ saith he, ‘that confesseth me before men, I will confess him before my Father which is in heaven.’ 62 And, contrariwise, the Lord will not confess him before his Father who is afeard to confess the Lord before men. Neither is that true which Panormitane saith, that most bishops are on his part; for here are many bishops’ proctors whom he doth not reckon, because they are not of his opinion. Neither is the dignity of the fathers to be respected in the council, as he saith, but only reason; nor any thing more to be looked for than the truth; neither will I, for my part, prefer a lie of any bishop, be he never so rich, before a verity or truth of a poor priest. Neither ought a bishop to disdain, if he be rude or unlearned, that the multitude doth not follow him, or that the voice of a poor learned and eloquent priest should be preferred before his. For wisdom dwelleth oftener under a bare and ragged cloak than in rich ornaments and apparel.

Wherefore, I pray you, my lord bishops! do not so much contemn your inferiors; for the first who died for Christ, who also opened unto all others the way of martyrdom, was no bishop but only a Levite. As for that which Ludovicus and Panormitane do allege, touching the voices of bishops, I know not where they have it; wherefore I desire them that they would tell me where they have found it. But if we repeat the examples of old councils, we shall find that the inferiors were always present with the bishops. And, albeit Ludovicus do forbid us the examples of the apostles, I stay myself most upon their doings: for what is more comely for us to follow, than the doctrine and customs of the primitive church? 63 It is said, therefore, in the fifteenth chapter of the Acts of the Apostles, ‘It seemed good unto the Holy Ghost, and to us;’ which words, ‘to us,’ are referred unto them who are before named, the apostles and elders. Neither this word, ‘it seemed good,’ signifieth in this place consultation, but decision and determination; whereby it appeareth that others beside the bishops had determining voices.

In another place also of the Acts, when the apostles should treat upon a weighty matter, they durst not determine by themselves, but the twelve called together the multitude.

Here Ludovicus saith, that it doth not appear the apostles called others of necessity.—But I say unto him, how knowest thou, that they did not call them of necessity? But, forsomuch as both parts are uncertain, nothing doth prohibit us to follow the apostles. For, seeing that all things are written for our learning, it appeareth that the apostles would give us example, that in weighty matters we should admit our inferiors. And, therefore, in all councils which were celebrated and holden afterwards, we find that priests were also present; as in the council of Nice, which of all other was most famous, Athanasius, being then but only a priest, withstood the Arians and infringed their arguments, albeit there were also other priests. And, albeit mention be made of three hundred and twentytwo bishops, yet it is not denied but that the inferiors were there, whom I think to be omitted for this cause, for that they were almost innumerable; for, as you know well enough, the denomination for the most part is taken of the most worthy.

In the synod of Chalcedon, which was counted one of the four principal synods, it is said that there were there present six hundred priests; which name is common both unto bishops and presbyters. In other councils the names both of bishops and priests are omitted, and mention is made of fathers only, which hath the same signification that this word ‘elders’ hath in the Acts of the Apostles. We have also a testimony of ecclesiastical history, how that there was a council gathered at Rome of sixty bishops, and as many priests and deacons, against the Novarians, who called themselves Cathari. Also, when Paul 64 the bishop of Antioch, in the time of Galienus the emperor, preached that Christ was a man of common nature, the council assembled against him in Antioch; whereunto there came bishops out of Cesarea, Cappadocia, out of Pontus, Asia, and from Jerusalem, and many other bishops, priests, and deacons; and it is said, that for that matter the council was often holden. And at the last, in the same place, under Aurelius the emperor, Paul was condemned by all christian churches which were under heaven; neither was there any man who did more confound the said Paul, than Malchion, a priest of Antioch, who taught rhetoric in Antioch. *But 65 to what purpose do I stand so long in this matter? these are the words of the fifth council holden at Toledo: 537 ‘After all the bishops be entered in and set, let the priests be called, who are allowed by the cause to enter in. Let no deacon put in himself amongst them, but let such as are allowed enter in afterwards, whom the order of council requireth to be present. And then the bishops being set round in a ring together, let the priests sit behind them, except such as the metropolitan shall choose to sit with him, who, also, may judge and determine any thing together with him.’ There is no man who will affirm this to have been but only a provincial council. For the council speaking of itself, saith: ‘quoniam generale concilium agimus,’ ‘forsomuch as we do hold a general council.’ And there were also present sixty bishops out of Spain, and France. But, peradventure, the words of the council of Chalcedon do move Panormitane and Ludovicus; where the bishops, speaking of a certain congregation, which deposed Flavianus and certain others, said: ‘the soldiers did depose them rather than we; for whatsoever we did, we were compelled by fear to do it, and the clergy themselves subscribed first;’ wherefore they cried out that ‘it was a synod of bishops and not of clerks;’ the which words, if they be well understand, do not exclude the inferiors.

For two things the bishops complained of: the one, that they had no liberty in Constantinople; and the other, that the clergy subscribed first: both which were evil examples. Wherefore, if it be said that it was not a council, only called a synod of bishops, and not of clerks, yet this did not exclude all the inferiors, but only such as had taken Benet and Collet; 66 whom we also do exclude, observing the order, which the council of Toledo commanded to be appointed; twelve men for the examination of such as should be incorporated in the council. Moreover, it is not said in that place, these are the words of the council, but of some of the bishops who spake there, as Panormitane and Ludovicus do here.* But, to make no long digression from the matter, we have most evident testimonies for the defense of inferiors; for the chief and principal Aristotle amongst all the divines, St. Augustine, upon the words of Matthew, where Christ saith to Peter, ‘I will give thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven,’ saith, That by those words the judicial power was given not only unto Peter, but also to the other apostles, and to the whole church, the bishops and priests. If, then, priests have a judicial power in the church, what should let that they have not also a determining voice in the councils? The famous doctor, St. Jerome, doth also agree with St. Augustine, whose words are these upon the Epistle of Paul unto Titus: ‘Before difference was made in religion by the instigation of the devil, or that it was spoken amongst the people, ‘I hold of Paul, I of Apollos, and I of Cephas,’ the churches were governed by the common consent and council of the priests; for a priest is the very same that a bishop is.’ Wherefore all bishops ought to understand, that they are of greater power than priests rather by custom, than by the dispensation of the truth of God, and that they ought to rule the church together. Also the said Jerome, in his epistle unto Damasus upon the ecclesiastical degrees, saith: ‘The Lord is represented in the bishops, and the apostles in the priests. And this we do also gather out of Paul unto Titus, who maketh so much concordance between bishops and priests, that oftentimes he calleth priests bishops; whereby it doth evidently appear, that priests are not to be excluded from the conventions of bishops, and determinations of matters. Albeit, as St. Jerome writeth that bishops are only by custom preferred before priests, it may be that a contrary custom may take away that custom. For if priests ought to rule the church together with the bishops, it is evident that it also pertaineth unto them to decide and determine the doubtful matters of the church. Wherefore the testimony of St. Paul is evident; for as he, writing unto the Ephesians, saith, ‘If Christ instituted his apostles, prophets, pastors, and teachers to the work of the ministry, for the edifying of his church, until such time as we should meet him, for this purpose, that there should be no doubt in the diversity of doctrine: who doubteth then, but that the governance of the church is committed unto others together with the apostles? Let these our champions now hold their peace, and seem to be no wiser than they ought to be. The memorial of the council of Constance is yet fresh in memory, where divers of us were present, and I myself also, who was neither cardinal nor bishop, but only a doctor; where I did see, without any manner of doubt or difficulty, the inferiors to be admitted with the bishops, to the deciding of hard and doubtful matters. Neither ought we to be ashamed to follow the example of that most sacred and great council, which also followed the examples of the council of Pisa, and the great council at Lateran, wherein it is not to be doubted, but that the priests did jointly judge together with the bishops.

Moreover, if abbots, as we do see it observed in all councils, have a determining voice, who, notwithstanding, were not instituted by Christ, why should not priests have the same, whose order Christ ordained by his apostles? Here- upon also, if only bishops should have a determining voice, nothing else should be done but what pleased the Italian nation, the which alone doth exceed all other nations, or at the least is equal with them, in number of bishops.

And howsoever it be, I judge it in this behalf to be a work of God, that the inferiors should be admitted to the determinations; for God hath now revealed that unto little ones, which he hath hidden from the wise.

Behold you do see the zeal, constancy, uprightness, and magnanimity of these inferiors. Where should the council now be, if only bishops and cardinals should have their voice? Where should the authority of the councils be? Where should the catholic faith be? Where should the decrees and reformation be? For all things have now a long time been under the will of Eugene, and he had now obtained his wicked and naughty purpose, except these inferiors, whom ye now contemn, had withstand him. These are they who have contemned the privation made by Eugene. These, I say, are they who have not regarded his threatenings, spoil and persecution. These are they who, being taken, imprisoned, and tormented, have not feared to defend the truth of the council; yea, even these are they, who, albeit they were by Eugene delivered over a prey, yet would they still continue in the sacred council, and feared not to suffer war, famine, and most cruel pestilence. 67 And, finally, what thing is it, that these men have not willingly suffered for the right and equity of the council? You might have heard this inferior sort, even in the midst of their tribulations, with a loud voice cry out and say, ‘Albeit that all men become obedient unto that subverter of the church, Eugene, and that every man do depart from the verity of the faith and constitutions of the fathers, consenting unto the commandments of Eugene, yet we and our brethren will be constant, and doubt not to die for the truth and traditions of the holy fathers;’ the which indeed they have done.

Neither could they be feared with threatenings, or altered with any spoils, neither could any fear or hope turn them from their most blessed purpose. And to speak somewhat of mine own order, whether any cardinals have done the like or no, that judge you.

As for the bishops, whom Panormitane alone would have to determine, you see how few of them are on our part; and even those who are here present, are not able by virtue to overcome iniquity: they fear the terrene power, and commit offense with their haste. *Have ye not heard this day the voices of the prelates?* etc. Have ye not heard how they all said, they would consent unto the king’s will and pleasure? But these inferiors are they who have had truth, righteousness, and God himself, before their eyes, and they are greatly to be commended for showing themselves such men unto the church of God. But why do I defend the cause of these inferiors, when some will also exclude those bishops, who are but bishops by name and title and have no possession of the church, from our company, not understanding that while they go about to put back those men, they do condemn Peter and the other apostles, who, as it is evident, were long without any great flock; neither was Rome unto Peter, nor Jerusalem unto James, at any time wholly obedient; for at that time no great number of people, but a small flock believed in Christ.

For, I pray you, what is that we should require of these bishops?

They have no flock; but that is not their fault. They have no revenues; but money maketh not a bishop; and, as the Lord saith, ‘Beati pauperes spiritu,’ that is, ‘Blessed are the poor in spirit.’

Neither were there any rich bishops in the primitive church;’neither did the ancient council reject Dionysius, bishop of Milan, Eusebius, bishop of Vercelli, or Hilary, bishop of Poictiers, although they were never so poor, and banished without a flock.

But, if we will grant the truth, the poor are more apt to give judgment, than the rich; because riches bring fear, and their poverty causeth liberty. For the poor men do not fear tyranny as our rich men do, who, being given over unto all kind of vanities, idleness, and sloth, will rather deny Christ, than lack their accustomed pleasures; whom not their flock, but their revenues make bishops, delighting so much in riches, that they judge all poor men unhappy.

But, as Cicero saith, ‘Nothing can happen better unto a wise man, than mediocrity of substance.’ Whereupon it is written in the gospel, ‘It is easier for a camel to pass through a needle’s eye, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of heaven.’

But now, to return to a more full declaration of Panormitane’s words, I determine to pass over two points which he propounded in the beginning of his oration, that is,‘Qui petant,’ and ‘cur petant;’ that is, ‘Who make the petition, and for what cause they make their petition.’ We grant that they are great men, and men of power, and, as he doth affirm, that they have deserved good of the church; neither do I doubt but that they are moved thereunto with a sincere affection. But whether it be a small matter that is required, or that the same effects would rise thereupon which he spake of, it is now to be inquired. ‘A delay,’ saith he, ‘is required; a delay for a few days; a small matter; a matter of no importance; a matter easy to be granted.’ Notwithstanding, let Panormitane here mark well, that he requireth a delay in a matter of faith. The verities are already declared: they be already discussed and determined. If now there should be but a little delay, it would grow to a long delay; for oftentimes the delay of one moment, is the loss of a whole year: hereof we have many examples. Hannibal, when he had obtained his victory at Cannae, if he had gone straight unto Rome, by all men’s judgments he had taken the city. But forsomuch as he did defer it until the next day, the Romans having recovered their force again, he was shut out, and deserved to hear this opprobry: ‘Vincere scis Hanibal, uti victoria nescis.’ ‘Hannibal! thou knowest victory to get, But how to use it, thou know’st not yet.’ Likewise the Gauls, 539 after they had taken Rome and besieged the Capitol, while they greedily sought to have great sums of money, and delayed the time in making of their truce, Camillus, coming upon them, did most shamefully drive them out again. But what need I to rehearse old stories, when our own examples are sufficient for us? Ye know yourselves, how often these delays have been hurtful unto you, and how often the delay of a few days hath grown to a long tract of time. For now this is the eighth year that you have spent in delays; and you have seen, that always, of one delay, another hath sprung and risen. Wherefore, I do require that Panormitane should consider, that the conclusion being this day disturbed, we know not whether it will be brought, to pass hereafter again or no; many impediments or lets may arise and spring. Neither doth Panormitane say, that this delay being obtained, he would afterwards consent with his fellows unto the conclusions,—for he denieth that he hath any commandment thereunto; and (which is more to be considered) he saith that the ambassadors, at their return from Mentz, may bring such news, whereby these conclusions may be omitted: as though any thing were more excellent than the truth. This thing doth manifestly declare, that they do not seek delays for the better examination of the matter, but to impugn the conclusions the more strongly.

Nor do I agree with Panormitane, as touching the effects which, he said, should arise either of the denial, or granting of the requests; for I see no cause why the princes should greatly require any delay. There are no letters of any prince come unto us touching such request, neither is there any man lately come from them, neither is it greatly material unto them, but that the matters of faith should be determined. But this is a most pernicious conclusion which Panormitane hath made, and not to be looked for at the hands of those most godly princes; where he saith, if we do please them, they will take our part. If, contrariwise, they will decline unto Eugene, and wholly resist and rebel against us. This is a marvellous word, and a wonderful conclusion, altogether unworthy to be spoken of such a man. The decrees of the council of Constance are, that all manner of men, of what state or condition soever they be, are bound to the ordinances and decrees of general councils. But Panormitane’s words do not tend to that effect, for he would not have the princes obedient unto the council, but the council to be obedient unto the princes.

Alas! most reverend fathers, alas! what times and days, what manners and conditions are these! 68 Into what misery are we now brought! How shall we at any time bring to pass, that the pope, being Christ’s vicar, and (as they say) another Christ on earth, should be subject unto the council of the Christians, if the council itself ought to obey worldly princes? But I pray you look for no such things at the princes’ hands. Do not believe that they will forsake their mother the church. Do not think them so far alienate from the truth, that they would have justice suppressed.

The conclusions whereupon the controversy is, are most true, most holy, most allowable. If the princes do refuse them, they will not resist against us, but against the holy Scriptures, yea, and against Christ himself: the which you ought neither to believe, neither was it comely for Panormitane so to say. Panormitane! (by your license be it spoken) you have uttered most cruel words, neither do you seem to go about any other matter than to inculcate terror and fear into the minds of the fathers; for you have rehearsed great perils and dangers, except we submit ourselves unto the princes.

But you, most reverend fathers! shall not be afeard of them that kill the body but the soul cannot kill, neither shall ye forsake the truth, although you should shed your blood for the same. 69 Neither ought we to be any whit more slack in the quarrel of our mother church, and the catholic faith, than those most holy martyrs, who have established the church with their blood. For why should it be any grievous matter unto us to suffer for Christ, who, for our sakes, hath suffered such cruel and grievous death? who, when he was the immortal God, void of all passions, took upon him the shape of a mortal man, and feared not, for our redemption, to suffer torments upon the cross. Set before your eyes, Peter the prince of the apostles, also Paul, Andrew, James, and Bartholomew, and (not to speak only of bishops) mark what Stephen, Laurence, Sebastian, and Fabian did. Some were hanged, some beheaded, some stoned to death, others burned, and others, tormented with most cruel and grievous torments, suffered for Christ’s sake. 70 I pray you, for God’s sake, let us follow the example of these men. If we will be bishops and succeed in honor, let us not fear martyrdom. Alas! what effeminate hearts have we; alas! what a faint hearted people are we. They, in times past, by the contempt of death, converted the whole world, which was full of Gentility and idolatry; and we, through our sluggishness and desire of life, do bring the christian religion out of the whole world into one corner; and I fear greatly, lest the little also which is left we shall lose through our cowardliness, if, by following Panormitane’s mind, we do commit the whole governance and defense of the church unto the princes. But now play the stout and valiant men in this time of tribulation, and fear not to suffer death for the church, which Curtius feared not to do for the city of Rome; which Menoeceus for Thebes, and Codrus for Athens, willingly took upon them.

Not only the martyrs, but also the Gentiles might move and stir us to cast off all the fear of the death. What is to be said of Theramenes the Athenian? with how joyful heart and mind, and pleasant countenance, did he drink the poison? What say you unto Socrates, that most excellent philosopher? Did he either weep or sigh, when he supped up the poison? They hoped for that which we are most certain of: not by dying to die, but to change this present life for a better. Truly we ought to be ashamed, being admonished by so many examples, instructed with so great learning, yea and redeemed with the precious blood of Christ, so greatly to fear death.

Cato writeth not of one or two men, but of whole legions, which have cheerfully and courageously gone unto those places from whence they knew they should not return. With like courage did the Lacedemonians give themselves to death at Thermopylae, of whom Simonides writeth thus: ‘Dic hospes, Spartanos te hic vidisse jacentes, Dum sanctis patriae legibus obsequimur. ‘Report thou, stranger! the Spartans here to lie, Whiles that their country’s laws they obeyed willingly.’ Neither judge the contrary, but that the Lacedemonians went even of purpose unto death; unto whom their captain Leonidas said, ‘O ye Lacedemonians! go forward courageously, for this day we shall sup together with the infernal gods.’ But I, most reverend fathers! do not invite you unto the infernals, as he did his Lacedemonians, but unto the celestial and everlasting joys of paradise, if that you can suffer death for the truth’s sake, and patiently abide the threatenings of these princes, if there be any threatenings at all. I call you unto that eternal glory, where there is no alteration of state, nothing decayeth or fadeth; where all good things do perpetually abound; where no man wanteth, no man envieth another, no man stealeth from another, no man violently taketh from another, no man banisheth, no man murdereth; and, finally, no man dieth. Where all men are blessed and happy, all are of one mind and one accord, all are immortal, all are of like estate; and what all men have, every man hath, and what every man hath, all men have. Which things if we well consider, we shall truly answer Panormitane, as Theodore of Cyrene 540 is said to have answered Lysimachus the king, when he threatened to hang him, who said: ‘I pray you threaten these horrible things unto your courtiers; as for Theodore, it maketh no matter whether he rot above the ground, or under the ground.’ So likewise let us answer unto the princes, if there be any that do threaten us, and let us not fear their torments.

What doth a longer life prevail to help us? No man hath lived too short a time, who hath obtained the perfect gift of virtue. And, if the death which a man suffereth in the quarrel of his country, seemeth not only to be glorious amongst the rhetoricians, but also happy and blessed; what shall we say for these deaths which are sustained for the country of all countries, the church? Truly, most reverend fathers! it is too much that our adversaries do persuade themselves of you, for they judge you fearful, sluggish, and fainthearted; and, therefore, they do object princes unto you, because they think that you will not suffer hunger, thirst, exile, in the quarrel and defense of the church. But I think you will esteem it no hard matter, for the obtaining of everlasting life, to do the same which ship-men do for the obtaining of transitory riches: to put themselves in danger of the sea and wind, and suffer most cruel storms. The hunters lie abroad in the nights in the snow, in the hills and woods, and are tormented with cold; yet have they none other reward, but some wild beast of no value or price. I pray you what ought you then to do, whose reward shall be paradise? I am ashamed of your ignavy, when I read that women, yea even young maidens, have violently obtained heaven through their martyrdom, and we are made afraid only with the name of death. This river Rhine, which runneth alongst the city, in times past hath carried eleven thousand virgins unto martyrdom. 71 In India, as Cicero writeth, when any man is dead, his wives (for there they have many wives) come into contention who should be burned with him; and she whom he loved best, having vanquished the others (all the rest joyfully following her), is cast into the fire with the dead carcase of her husband, and burned. The other, who are overcome, depart full of heaviness and sorrow, wishing rather to have died than live.

The which courage we now taking upon us for Christ’s sake, will answer Panormitane even as the Lacedemonians answered Philip, who, when by his letters he threatened them that he would stop all that which they went about, they asked him whether he would also stop them from dying! Therefore, as you are excellent men, so use your virtue, which is always free, and remaineth always invincible.

For you do know that power is given of the Lord, and strength from the Most High; who will take account of your works, and examine your thoughts; unto whom ye should be careful to render a good account, judging rightly, and keeping the law of righteousness, and in all things walking according to the will of God, and not according to the will of men.

And whereas the ambassadors of Eugene do openly preach and declare a new doctrine, extolling the bishop of Rome above the universal church: to the end that ignorant souls be not snared, ye shall not cease or leave to publish the three first conclusions; following the example of the apostle Paul, who would in no point give place unto Peter, when he walked not according to the gospel.

As for the other matters which do only respect the person of Eugene (because Panormitane and the other ambassadors of the princes shall not say that we do pass our bounds), ye shall defer them for this present.

When cardinal Arelatensis had made an end of his oration, * 72 there was at first a dead silence, 541 all fixing their eyes on him for admiration: gradually they began to praise, some his memory, some his doctrine; other some saying, that he was without exception the best of presidents, seeing he both knew how to confute objections, and, as it became a president, kept his temper under taunts and reproaches. But the Catalonians, when they saw that all delay was denied them, sought by great noise and brawling to hinder the conclusion of the twelve men from being read, and used all their endeavor that the protest which Panormitane had drawn up, should be read before the conclusion.

This matter was not done without violence, *for the president’s commandments were not regarded, neither was the accustomed order observed; for* on every part there was noise, crying out, and brawling; sometimes they spake unto Panormitane, sometimes unto Louis; no man was suffered to speak, but in haste; the bishops brawled with bishops, and the inferiors with their fellows; and all was contention and debate. Which when Louis, the patriarch of Aquileia, perceived (a man of no less courage and stomach, than of nobility and birth, for he was a duke), for the zeal that he bare unto the universal church, turning himself unto Panormitane and Louis, the prothonotary, he said, “Do not think the matter shall so pass; you know not yet the manners of the Germans; for if you go forward on this fashion, it will not be allowed you to depart this country without broken heads.” With which words Panormitane, Louis, and the archbishop of Milan, being struck, as it were, with lightning from heaven, rose up, and said, “Is our liberty taken from us? What meaneth it that the patriarch doth threaten us, that our heads should be broken?” And, turning themselves unto John, earl of Diernstein, who then supplied the protector’s place, they demanded of him, whether he would defend the council, and maintain them all in their liberty, or no?

The members, also, of the town senate were present, to provide that no offense should rise; for the citizens always observed the custom of being present in all affairs which they supposed would breed dissension; and took every precaution, that no tumults should rise, otherwise than with words: and they are a people of such wisdom and strict principle, that no man unto this day could have any cause to complain against them for having violated their promise. Wherefore, if at any time any citizens have deserved well at the hands of the church, surely this praise is to be given unto the Basilians. These men, together with John, earl of Diernstein, being present in the assembly of the fathers, intimated that their liberty should be maintained. The earl (albeit he was moved at the strangeness of the matter, for he would not have thought so great contentions could have risen amongst wise men) answered by his interpreter, That they should all be of good cheer, for the emperor’s safe-conduct should be observed and kept even to the uttermost; neither should the patriarch, nor any other, be so hardy once to violate the liberty, or take away the assurance, granted by the emperor. Notwithstanding, he desired the patriarch that he would call back his words again, and not speak any more in such sort. But that famous father, in all his affairs and business declaring the nobility of his stock, being nothing at all moved or troubled, committed the explanation of his real meaning to John Bachenstein, auditor of the chamber, a man both grave and eloquent, whose assistance the council had used in divers ambassades; who affirmed that it was not the patriarch’s intention to threaten any man, or disturb the liberty of the council, but to move the fathers unto constancy, that they should be mindful of the reformation which they had promised unto the whole world, and not say one thing today, and another to-morrow; for, if they would so do, it were to be feared, lest the laity, seeing themselves deluded, and despairing of reformation, should rise against the clergy. Therefore he did admonish the fathers to foresee and provide for the peril, that they should not depart from the council without anything being determined or done; and, finally, he desired pardon, if in his words he had offended either against the council, Panormitane, or any other man. Whereby he proved the truth of that which is commonly said, “That Humility is the sister of Nobility:” both which did very excellently appear in this man. Yet, for all this, could not the humility of the patriarch stop or stay their noise or cries; for, as often as mention was made of reading the ‘Concordatum,’ great noise and rumors were still made to stop the same.

Then Amedeus, archbishop of Lyons, and primate of all France, a man of great reverence and authority, being touched with zeal for the faith, which he saw there to be stopped and suppressed, said:

THE ORATION OF AMEDEUS, ARCHBISHOP OF LYONS.

Most reverend fathers! I have now a great occasion to speak, for it is now seven years or more that I have been amongst you, yet have I never seen any thing like unto a miracle, as now; but now I do behold stupendous signs of miracles: for is it no small matter that the lame do walk, the dumb do speak, and that poor men preach the gospel? Whereupon, I pray you, cometh this sudden change? how happeneth it that those who lay lurking at home, are now suddenly started up? who hath given hearing to the deaf, and speech to the dumb? who hath taught the poor to preach the gospel? I do see here a new sort of prelates come in, who, unto this present, have kept silence, but now begin to speak. Is not this like a miracle? I would to God, however, they came to defend the truth, and not to impugn justice.

But this is more to be marvelled at than any miracle, that I do see the best learned men of all impugn our conclusions, which are certain and most true, and were in times past allowed by the very persons who now reprove them. We have not yet forgotten, how that Louis, the prothonotary, preached these verities at Louvaine and at Cologne, and brought them from thence, confirmed with the authorities of those universities. 73 But, albeit he be now changed, yet is the truth in no point altered. And, therefore, I desire and beseech you all, that ye will not give ear unto these men, who, albeit they are most excellently learned, yet have not that constancy in them, which doth adorn all other virtues.

When he had ended his oration, Louis, the prothonotary, rising up, said, “It is most true that I brought those verities; but you do call them verities of faith, the which addition seemeth to me rather doubtful.” When he had spoken these words, cardinal Arelatensis required that the ‘Concordatum’ of the twelve men should be read, and many whispered him in the ear, that he should go forward, and not alter his purpose.

Then Panormitane, as soon as the ‘Concordatum’ began to be read, rising up with his colleagues and the Arragons, cried out with a loud voice, saying, “You fathers do contemn our requests, you contemn kings and princes, and despise prelates; but take heed lest, whiles that ye despise all men, you be not despised of all men. You would conclude, but it is not your part to conclude. We are the greater part of the prelates; we make the council; and it is our part to conclude; and I, in the name of the prelates do conclude, that the matter is to be deferred.” At this word there sprang as great a noise in the council, as is accustomed to be heard in battle with the sound of trumpets and noise of horsemen, when two armies join; some execrating that which Panormitane had done, other some allowing the same; so that diversity of minds made divers contentions.

Then Nicholas Amici, 543 the divine of Paris, in virtue of his office, said, “Panormitane! I appeal from this your conclusion, to the judgment of the council here present; neither do I affirm any thing to be ratified which you have done; as I am ready to prove, if it shall seem good.”

The adverse part seemed now to be in the better place, for they had already concluded. The other part had neither concluded, neither was it seen how they could conclude amongst so great cries and uproars.

Notwithstanding, amongst all this troublous noise, John de Segovia, the eminent divine of the university of Salamanca, gained an audience, for the whole council was desirous to hear him; wherefore all men, as soon as he rose up, kept silence, and he, perceiving that they were desirous to hear him speak, began in this sort:

THE ORATION OF SEGOVIUS.

Most reverend fathers! the zeal and love of the house of God forceth me now to speak: and I would to God that I had been either blind this day, not to have seen those things which have happened, or that I had been deaf, that I should not have heard those words which have been spoken. Who is there so stony or hardhearted, that he can abstain from tears, when the authority of the church is so impaired, liberty taken away both from us and the council, and that there is no place given unto truth? O sweet Jesu! why hast thou so forsaken thy spouse! Behold and look upon thy people, and help us, if our requests are just! We come hither to provide for the necessity of the church; we ask nothing for ourselves, and our desire is only that truth might appear.

We trusted now to have concluded upon the verities, which have been already allowed in the sacred deputations. The orators of the princes present, and require the conclusions to be deferred. But we be not unmindful of those things which Ambrose wrote unto the emperor Valentinian, in this manner: ‘If we peruse the declarations of the holy Scripture and the sentiments of past ages, who is it that will deny but that in a matter of faith (I say, in a matter of faith), the bishops ought to judge upon christian emperors, and not emperors upon bishops?’ We cannot admit their petition, and that for the most urgent reasons. Notwithstanding, we heard them patiently and willingly, whiles that they did speak, even so long as they would. But now, if any on our part would speak, by-and-by he is interrupted, troubled, and letted. What honesty is this? what modesty or gravity? Is it lawful so to do in a council? What hath now become of the decree of the council of Toledo? 544 Where are our decrees, which do not only prohibit tumults, but also the least talking together? They say, it is because we contemn them; but it is they, who not only contemn the council, but also resist the same.

The patriarch spake but one small word against them, and that of no evil intent or purpose, and by-and-by they complained that their liberty was broken: but they, when they do enforce the council, when they forbid the president to speak, and will not suffer the ordinances to he read, do not judge that they at all go contrary to the liberty of the council. They say, they are the council themselves, and yet they entreat the council. These things do not I understand; for if they be the council, why do they entreat themselves? If they be not the council, why do they not suffer the council to speak? Why do they not look for an answer of him to whom they make their petitions? Truly this is too much violence, and, certes, our patience is also too much, to suffer such excess even in the face of the church. *We 74 are they, from whom the liberty is taken.

But they say, that the inferiors ought not to judge any thing, and that we ought not to transact any matter with a minority of bishops on our side, albeit we be the majority of the council. The which if it were true, many of your own decrees should be of no force, and specially that which ye have promulgated as touching provincial and episcopal synods; which since it did not please the prelates, the cardinal of St. Angelo, then president (with scarcely five bishops and the majority of the inferiors on his side), did conclude, albeit that many bishops were against him; which decree, notwithstanding, you do account of great force and strength: the like also hath happened almost in all decrees, which do bridle the pomp or ambition of the bishops. Moreover, ye have for example, that on the arrival of Alexander, abbot of Vezelai, 545 who was the first that came to this place, the council commenced, when there was no bishop as yet come, as Eugene doth confess in his act of adhesion: wherefore that which these men say, is to no other purpose, but only utterly to subvert the council. But that point is sufficiently answered by the cardinal Arelatensis. Notwithstanding this one thing I would desire to obtain at the bishops’ hands; that if they would have us grant that they succeed the apostles and have the keys of the kingdom of heaven, that they would themselves grant that which is spoken by the apostle: That Christ, when he ascended into heaven, did institute some apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, some pastors and teachers, to the work of the ministry and the edification of his church. And, as the bishops do succeed the apostles, so we divines do succeed the doctors, and the presbyters the pastors; and all other in their degrees: and our Savior would have his church governed jointly by them all.

Wherefore, it seemeth vain, that which these men speak, as touching the excluding of the inferiors.* But this doth most of all grieve me, and this do I most marvel at, that Panormitane, a man of singular wit and learning, did conclude without any discussing of the deputations, and without the examination of the twelve men, and any scrutiny or order; which, except mine eyes had beheld and seen, I would scarcely believe, if any other man had reported it unto me of him. Neither do I yet know whether I can credit my own testimony, the matter seemeth so horrible; for I do not see by what authority his conclusion doth stand, except it be by the authority of his king, who, he saith, ‘will have it so.’ But you, most reverend fathers! take heed that ye bring in no such custom; for so it shall come to pass, that in all matters, a few froward prelates shall have one,to conclude for them. 75 For 76 it is more dangerous than the pernicious decree which ye are wont to call ‘Parvum,’ which the legates of the apostolic see, and others their accomplices, did propound in the deputations, having a certain number of votes, knowing who were with them, and who would be against them. But this is done in confusion, which, if it pass unpunished, it will cause greater offense than that did; and it shall come to pass that, in all matters, a few froward prelates shall have one to conclude for them. Ye know, moreover, that it is only the president’s part to conclude; and that, but in one case only, the conclusion devolveth unto another, that is, when those who are presidents will not conclude according to the will of three or four deputations, or the concordance of twelve men; which, whether it have now happened, you yourselves do see, and Panormitane himself, who hath made the conclusion, very well knoweth?

And, albeit Panormitane hath proved (as he thinketh) by strong reasons, that the verities ought to be deferred, yet, notwithstanding, I do require you, most reverend fathers! to follow the example of the apostle, who, as Arelatensis hath very well declared, would not give place for one hour unto Peter, when he swerved from the truth of the gospel. The faith is speedily to be relieved and holpen; neither doth any thing sustain more danger by delays, than faith doth. For all heresies, except they be rooted out at the first, when they are full grown, are hard to take away.

Wherefore, I desire you speedily to help:— “Ferte cito auxilium, date vela, impellite remos. i.e. ‘Speedily help and aid, hoise up your sails, and launch out your oars.’ Why should we tarry looking for either the prelates or the princes? *There 77 is none other power or authority to be sought for, where the Divine Majesty is present. They of Eugene’s sect preach heresies in every place:yet is there no man who sayeth unto them, that they should stay or leave off. But against you, who do intend to publish and set forth the truth, a thousand do murmur that you should hold your peace; which is a great sign and token of your soundness.

It is reported, that in times past Benedict, a holy monk, did visit a certain monastery of holy men, and did see there an infinite number of devils contending with the holy fathers, and striving to perturb their good works. By-and-by he saw one devil alone, all sad and heavy, going unto a fair, where were a great many people buying and selling; whereat Benedict greatly marvelling, that the holy place, appointed for prayer, should be so full of devils, and the place that was occupied only with sin and perjury should be kept but with one devil, adjured him to tell him the cause thereof. The devil answered, that the holy place needed more the assaults of devils, than that place where men sinned of their own wills; for there, there was no great need of devilish deceit.

The like thereof seemeth unto me to be happened unto the Eugenians.* You are now in conflict; I only desire that you would hasten unto the victory. Regard not the threatenings of those princes, neither the opprobries of those contumelious persons: ‘For you are blessed,’ saith the Lord, ‘when men curse you and persecute you, speaking all evil against you, making lies and slanders upon you for my sake; rejoice and be glad, for great is your reward in heaven.’ Why is it, I pray you, that the princes are made such a formidable objection? Is not our Lord God able to take us out of the furnace of hot burning fire, and deliver us out of the hands of those princes? I beseech you, most reverend fathers and loving brethren, have no less hope in Jesu Christ, than Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego had, who feared not that old king Nebuchadnezzar; and let the princes know, That the most highest ruleth over the kingdoms of men, and giveth them unto whom he pleaseth. 78 God beholdeth all things from above. He is, I say, in the midst amongst us.—Wherefore are ye then afraid? Be of good courage, and show yourselves as a strong wall for the church of God. Suffer not the faith to perish under your hands. The Almighty God is present with you. He is present that will defend you. Fear not those who seek only to kill the body. Do justice and equity, and be assured that he will not deliver you over into the hands of the backbiter and slanderer. Again I say unto you, show yourselves valiant and stout; defend your mother the church! And unto thee, O thou president! I say, that thou oughtest rather to please God than man; for if thou depart hence without a final conclusion, know assuredly that thou shalt render account in the strict judgment of God.

And thus, without any more words, he sat down in his place. In the mean time, many grave and ancient men had exhorted Panormitane that he should give over his conclusion. The bishop of Burgos was very instant and earnest with him, that he should make unity and concord amongst the fathers, and went about to make peace amongst all men. But neither were the fathers of the council disposed to depart without a conclusion; neither was Panormitane minded to alter his intent and purpose. *During 79 this contention, the archbishop of Lyons, having gotten opportunity to be heard, said that Panormitane’s conclusion was of no force, neither needed any revocation, because it was of no force; notwithstanding, he thought a delay would be profitable, if peradventure that, as the bishop of Burgos had said, a concord might be arranged amongst the fathers. His oration was not very acceptable unto Panormitane’s companions, who as soon as they heard their conclusion to be nothing regarded, they contrariwise affirmed, that it was of force, and that they made the council: whereupon there was so great a noise and cry, that nothing could be heard that was read. On that day there was great terror and fear of all good men, lest that the adversaries should prevail, more than the council. The matter seemed to be in great danger, lest the adversaries, persevering in their obstinacy, should prolong their talk until night; which thing alone they seemed to go about, that thereby they might have the victory that day: but God did help his church, and would not suffer that Eugene should more prevail in the council than the council itself.* All things were disturbed, neither did the prelates sit in their seats, as they were accustomed, but as every man’s affection led him. Some went to the cardinal Arelatensis, some unto Panormitane, and exhorted them as if they had been princes or rulers of armies. *Now 80 it drew toward night, and the bishop of Lausanne, a wise and circumspect man, and Nicholas bishop of Grossetto, a man who had the welfare of the council at heart more than his own, went unto the cardinal Arelatensis, threatening him, in ease he should rise without a final conclusion. Also Francis de Foix, and Andrew Escobar, commonly called ‘the Spaniard,’ 546 divines of the Franciscan order, were ever and anon whispering in the ears of the cardinal, and would suffer him to take no pause; also Laurence de Rocella was importunate upon him, saying, “Why stoppest thou, now, president? where is thy mind? where are thy wits? what fearest thou? what dreamest thou?” * But he, knowing the matter to be in danger, and that there was no ready way to make a conclusion, thought to use some policy to appease the tumult. “Most reverend fathers!” said he, “we have received new letters out of France, which declare unto me marvellous things; there are incredible mischiefs sprung up there, which, if you will kindly give me audience, I will declare unto you.” By this means there was a sudden silence throughout the whole council, and by this marvellous policy he made all men attentive to hear. When he saw he had free liberty to speak, 547 he revealed the contents of the said letters, whether real or pretended, and, with all the address of an orator, came by little and little to the principal point, saying, That Eugene’s messengers filled all France, preaching a new doctrine, and extolling the authority of the bishop of Rome above general councils; against whom except speedy remedy were found, it would come to pass that many would give credit unto them: and, therefore, the sacred council ought of necessity to provide remedy, and of necessity to conclude upon the verities which were examined, that thereby the temerity of the Eugenians might be repressed; which verities, albeit they were eight in number, yet was it not the fathers’ intent to conclude upon them all, but only upon the three first: “even as I also,” saith he, “here do conclude, in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost.”

When he had finished his oration, with a cheerful and merry countenance rising up, he departed, greatly commended and praised of all his partakers: some of them kissed him, and some of them kissed the skirts of his garments. A great number followed him, and greatly commended his wisdom, that, being a Frenchman born, he had that day vanquished the Italians, who were men of consummate tact. Howbeit this was all men’s opinion, that it was done rather by the operation of the Holy Ghost, than by the cardinal’s own power. The other of the contrary faction, as men bereft of their minds, hanging down their heads, departed every man to his lodging. They went not together, neither saluted one another, so that their countenances declared unto every man that they were defeated. Something more also is reported of Panormitane, that when he came to his lodging, and was gone unto his chamber, he complained with himself upon his king, who had compelled him to strive against the truth, and put him in danger of losing both his soul and good name; and that in the midst of his tears and complaints he fell asleep, and did eat no meat until late in the evening, for very sorrow for that he had neither ignorantly, neither willingly, impugned the truth.

After this there was great consultation amongst the Eugenians, what were best to be done in this matter. *The 81 same day the cardinal of Tarragona returned to Basil, a man of excellent wisdom and learning, who, at the time the bands of Armagnac came, had gone away 549 a distance of two days’ journey, and, forsomuch as he could not be present at the general congregation, the Catalonians and Lombards went straightway to him, devising and counselling many things with him.* Some thought good to depart and leave the council, other some thought it meeter to tarry, and withal endeavor to prevent any thing further being done against Eugene: and this opinion they adopted.

The next day, being Saturday, the twenty-fifth day of April, 550 the archbishop of Lyons and the bishop of Burgos, calling together the prelates in the chapter-house of the great church, began many things as touching peace. The bishop of Burgos advised, that there should be deputations appointed that day, unto whom the archbishop of Lyons should give power to make an agreement. Unto whom answer was made, as they thought—very roughly, but as others judged—gently, but notwithstanding justly and truly; for the fathers of the council said, There could be no concord before the adversaries confessed their fault, and asked pardon there-for.

On the day following, being Sunday, the said bishop of Burgos, with the Lombards and Catalonians, went unto the Germans, and from thence unto the senate of the city, urging them much, if possible, to prevent a schism.

The Germans, as I did afterward understand, declared they should abide by what the deputations should determine. The senate of the city (as they were men of great wisdom, who would do nothing without diligent counsel and deliberation) answered: That the matter belonged not unto them, but unto the council, the fathers whereof were most wise men, and were not ignorant what pertained unto the christian faith; and if there were any danger to ward against, it should be declared unto the council, and not to the senate. For they believed that the elders of the council, if they were premonished, would foresee that there should no hurt happen: as for the senate of the city, it was their duty only to defend the fathers, and to preserve the public faith of the city.—With this answer the bishop of Burgos departed.

In the mean time the fathers of the council had drawn out a form of a decree upon the former conclusions, and had had the same approved in the sacred deputations; only the Common deputation thought the decree might be improved. 551 By this time the princes’ orators had all returned from the assembly at Mentz, and, taking counsel amongst themselves, had determined to hinder the decree. On Saturday, the ninth day of May, there was a general convocation holden, whereunto all men resorted, either part addressing itself to the conflict.

The princes’ ambassadors were called by the bishop of Lubeck and Conrad de Winsperg, the protector, into the quire, and there kept; where they intreated of a unity, and by what means it might be had. And there they tarried longer than one would have thought; which circumstance, unexpectedly, gave a happy issue to the whole business. For, the form of the decree must needs be concluded that day: wherefore, as soon as cardinal Arelatensis perceived the congregation to be full, and that the twelve men had agreed, and that all were waiting in silent expectation, he thought good not to delay, for fear of tumult; but commanded by-and-by the public concordances to be read, wherein this was also contained, that the cardinal Arelatensis might appoint a session whensoever he would.

Which being read, he, being desired by the promoters, concluded in the usual manner, the ambassadors of the princes being yet in the quire; who as soon as they understood how the matter was disposed of, being very much vexed, they brake off their talk, imputing all the blame to the bishop of Lubeck, as though he of purpose had kept them in the quire and had spun out the talk. Whereupon, they, entering into the congregation, filled the church full of complaints.

First of all, however, the bishop of Lubeck complained both in his own name and in the name of the protector and of all, as touching the conclusion, and required that the council should revoke the same. If that might be granted, he promised to intreat a peace, and to be a protector between the council and the ambassadors of the princes. But the archbishop of Tours said, That it seemed unto him, that every man should have free liberty to speak against that law which was to be promulgated, until the session; since then the canons would be consecrated and receive their force, when the bishops in their copes, after the reading of the decree in the session, had answered thereto ‘Placet:’ otherwise, the demand which was made by the promoters in the session was but vain. And for that the conclusions were not yet allowed in the session, therefore, he said that he might, without rebuke, speak somewhat as touching the same; and that it was a great and hard matter, and not to be knit up in such a short time, and that he had but just then obtained any knowledge of them; whereas he, being an archbishop, ought to have a perfect knowledge of the matter, that at his return home, he might inform the king, and also instruct those who were under him; and that he and his fellows wished, before any session should be, both to hear and be heard of others. Neither did it seem proper to him, that the session should be holden, before report were made of those things which the ambassadors of the princes had done at Mentz, which would peradventure be such as might alter the minds of the fathers.

Then the bishop of Cuenca, ambassador of the king of Castile, who was also lately returned from Mentz, a man of great understanding, but lacking utterance, grievously complained that the prelates were contemned. “Neither had it been,” said he, “any great matter if they had been tarried for; who had been to Mentz, not without great danger and expense, not for their own pleasure, but of necessity.” And afterward, smiling, he said: “How mad am I, that would have the prelates to be tarried for until they returned from Mentz, when they are not tarried for, whiles they can come out of the quire of the church! Do therefore as ye list. If there rise any offense or mischief hereupon, neither are we, the ambassadors of Castile, to be blamed, neither can any man, of right, impute any thing to our most noble king.”

Here were it long to repeat, with what rebukes and taunts they inveighed against the cardinal Arelatensis; but especially the archbishop of Milan railed most cruelly upon him, saying, That he fostered and maintained a rabble of copists and paedagogues, 552 82 and that he had concluded in matters of faith with them; calling him also another Catiline, with whom all desperate and naughty persons took refuge: that he was their prince, and ruled the church with them; and that he would not give ear unto the ambassadors of the most noble princes, or to the most famous prelates, in this most weighty matter. The bishop of Albenga, likewise, a man of great nobility, descended of the emperor’s blood, albeit he never had his mind alienate before from the council, yet, lest he should seem to dissent from the other ambassadors of the princes, made the like complaint touching the contempt of the prelates. After this it came unto Panormitane to speak, who, as he had a greater vehemency in speaking, so also he did declare a more angry stomach and mind; for, in the beginning of his oration, he seemed not to go about, according to the precept of orators, to get the good-will of the hearers, but rather their hatred. For he said, “Our Savior showed four signs in the gospel, whereby we should know the good from the reprobate; for, ‘He which is of God,’ saith he, ‘heareth the words of God; but ye hear not the words of God, because ye are not of God;’ and again, ‘He that doth evil hateth the light;’ and, in another place also, ‘By their fruits ye shall know them;’ and ‘A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit.’ All which sayings he wrested against the fathers of the council, that they would not hear the words of God, that is to say, the words of peace which the ambassadors had spoken; that they fled from the light, concluding privily and in the absence of the ambassadors; and that, in their deputation, they had not kept the holy day, 83 but had concluded thereupon; also that they had the upper hand in the aforesaid conclusion, not by reason, but by deceit. As touching fruits, he said, That the fathers themselves should meditate and consider how that, if their fruits were not good, they also themselves were not good; and that he did see another council at hand, where he feared lest these conclusions should be revoked, as the fruit of an evil tree; and, therefore, that they ought not so suddenly to proceed in so weighty matters; and that he would be yet more fully heard before the session, as well in his own name, because he was an archbishop, as in the name of his prince, who reigned not over one kingdom alone, but over many. Also he said, That he, heretofore, by his words, deeds, and writings, had extolled the authority of the council; and that he feared, lest, by these means, the authority thereof should be subverted. Finally, he begged pardon if he offended the fathers of the council, forsomuch as very sorrow and grief forced him to speak so.

Then the abbot of Vezelai would have made answer to those things which Panormitane had touched, concerning his deputation; but Arelatensis thought good that all the contrary part should speak first, amongst whom, last of all, Louis, the prothonotary, the Homer of lawyers, rose up. And albeit that he spake unwillingly, yet when he had begun, he could not restrain his words. And whiles he went about to seem learned and eloquent, he utterly forgat to be good. He said, That the council ought to take heed, not to intreat any matter of faith against the will of the prelates, lest any offense should follow; for that some would say, it were a matter of no force or effect. For, albeit that Christ chose twelve apostles and seventy disciples, notwithstanding, in the setting forth of the Creed only the apostles were present; thereby, as it were, giving example that matters of faith did pertain only unto the apostles, and so consequently unto bishops: neither that they ought hastily to proceed in a matter of faith, which ought to be clearly distinct, forsomuch as Peter affirmeth the trial of faith to be much more precious than gold, which is tried by the fire: and, if the bishops be contemned, who are called the pillars and keys of heaven, the faith cannot seem to be well proved or examined. But at length he confessed that the inferiors might determine with the bishops, but denied that the least part of the bishops with the most part of the inferiors might determine any thing. From thence passing to the matter of faith, he said, That the verities in question would be articles of faith, if they were verities of faith. And, forsomuch as every man was bound to believe articles of faith, therefore all would be bound to believe those verities, and therefore he wished to be better instructed and taught in that matter which he was to believe as an article of faith; neither would it be comely for the council to deny him his request, which, according to the rule of the apostle, ought to be ready to give account unto every man who shall ask a reason of the faith which it holdeth.

After every man had made an end of speaking, the cardinal Arelatensis, collecting himself, made an oration, wherein he answered now the one, and now the other. And, first of all, he commended the desires of the imperial ambassadors, who offered to intreat a peace and unity; but neither necessity required, nor honesty, he said, would suffer, that what had been concluded should be revoked. He answered also, That the petition of the ambassadors of France was most just, in that they required to be instructed touching the faith; and that the council would grant their request, and send unto them certain divines, who should instruct them at home at their lodgings. But the matter was already concluded, and could no more be brought into question; that the session was only holden, rather to beautify the matter, than to confirm the same. And, as touching that which the bishop of Cuenca so greatly complained of, he did not much marvel; for he could not know the process of the matter, when he was absent; who, being better instructed, he supposed would speak no more any such words, forsomuch as a just man would require no unjust thing. Also, that there was no harm in his protestation; and that he would not have it imputed either unto him, or unto his king, if any offense should rise upon the conclusions. Notwithstanding, it was not to be feared, that any evil would spring of good works. But, unto the archbishop of Milan he would answer nothing, because he saw him so moved and troubled, for fear of multiplying more grievous and heinous words. As for Panormitane, he reserved him unto the last; but unto Louis the prothonotary, who desired to be instructed, he said, He willed him to be satisfied with the words which were spoken unto the archbishop of Tours.

Notwithstanding, he left not that untouched which Louis had spoken concerning the Apostles’ Creed: “For, albeit that in the setting forth of the Creed the apostles be only named, yet it doth not follow,” saith he, “that they only were present at the setting forth thereof: for it happeneth oftentimes, that princes are commended and praised as chief authors and doers of things, when, notwithstanding, they had other helpers; as it appeareth in battles, which although they are fought with the force of all the soldiers, yet the victory thereof is imputed but unto a few. As in these our days they do ascribe all things which the army doth either fortunately or wisely, unto Nicolas of Picenum, that most excellent captain, who hath obtained so many famous victories; albeit that, oftentimes, others have been the inventors of the policy, and workers of the feat. And, therefore, Louis ought to know and understand, that not only are they articles of faith which are contained in the Creed, but also all other determinations made by general councils touching faith. ‘Neither is he ignorant, that there be some articles of that Creed which we now use in the church, that were not put in by the apostles, but afterward by general councils; as that part, wherein mention is made of the procession of the Holy Ghost, which the council of Lyons did add; in which council, also, it is not to be doubted, but that the inferiors did decide together with the bishops.” But, forsomuch as he had sufficiently declared that matter in the congregation before passed, he would dwell no longer thereupon: but coming unto Panormitane, he rehearsed his words, “Qui ex Deo est, verba Dei audit;” “He that is of God, heareth God’s words;” which was well cited out of the gospel, he said, but not well applied unto the council; for he firmly believed what the ancient fathers supposed, viz. that the Holy Ghost was present in councils; and that, therefore, the words of the councils were the words of the Holy Ghost, which if any man did reject, he denied himself to be of God. Neither did the council “hate the light,” seeing it did all things publicly and openly, and that its congregations were open unto all men; neither did it, as some conventicles of the adversaries, admit some, and exclude others. Moreover, the thing which was now in hand began to be intreated of two months ago; and, first, the conclusions were largely disputed upon in the divinity schools, and afterward sent unto Mentz and other parts of the world. After all this (the cardinal proceeded) the fathers were called into the chapter-house of the great church, to the number of a hundred-and-twenty; amongst whom Panormitane, who now complaineth, was also present, and, according to his custom, did learnedly and subtilely dispute, and had liberty to speak what he would. Likewise again in the deputations every man spake his mind freely; and in that deputation where Panormitane was, the matter was three days discussed. After this the twelve men did agree upon it, and the general congregation did conclude it: neither had there been, at any time, any thing more ripely or diligently handled; every thing, too, had been done openly, without any fraud or deceit. And as for the deputation having sat upon a holy day, there was no harm in that; neither was it any new or strange thing, forsomuch as they had often holden their sessions on Sundays and other holy days, when the matter required haste, and especially forsomuch as a matter of faith hath no holy days. And further he said, That he did not conclude craftily and deceitfully in the congregation aforesaid, as Panormitane had asserted, but publicly and openly, at the request of the promoters: neither had any man any just cause to complain of him, forsomuch as when he was made president, he was sworn, that always, when the four or only three deputations did agree, he would conclude thereupon. 84 And, forsomuch as he had already concluded in divers causes touching the pope, he saw no cause why he should not conclude in a matter of faith; for that he was a cardinal, and did wear his red hat as a token, that he should even shed his blood in the defense of the faith. 85 Neither had he done any thing now against the pope, for that, omitting the five conclusions touching Eugene, he had concluded only on the three general ones; which except he had done, the fathers who had chosen him their president in confidence of his honor and integrity would have just cause of complaint against him, if they should now be forsaken by him in this most important cause of faith. And, turning himself unto the multitude, he desired the fathers to be of good comfort, forsomuch as he would never forsake them, yea, although he should suffer death; for he had given his faith and fidelity unto the council, which he would observe and keep; neither should any man’s threats or entreaties put him from his purpose: that he would be always ready to do whatsoever the council should command him, and never by any means leave the commandments of the deputations unperformed. As touching that Panormitane had extolled the authority of the council, 553 he said, that he was greatly to be thanked. But yet, he ought to understand and know the authority of the council to be such as could not be increased by any man’s praises, or be diminished by any man’s opprobry or slander.

These things thus premised, he commanded the form of the decree to be read.

Then Panormitane, and those who took his part, would needs have a certain protestation to be first read, and for some time there was nothing but uproar on all sides. Notwithstanding, at last Arelatensis prevailed, and the form of the decree was read unto this word ‘Decernimus;’ that is to say, ‘We decree.’ Then Panormitane, rising up, would not suffer it to be heard any further: and the bishop of Catania cried out, saying, That it was uncomely that Arelatensis, with a few 554 other bishops (and those mostly titulars) should conclude the matter. The like did also all those who favored Panormitane. The cardinal of Tarragona, also (who until that time had holden his peace), did grievously rebuke his party, for that, as if they had been asleep or dreaming, they did not read the protestation; and commanded by-and-by one of his familiars to read it. But, like as the adversaries before did disturb the reading of the concordances, so would not the fathers of the council now give place to the reading of the protestation. Which when the bishop of Albenga did consider, he commanded the writing to be brought unto him for to read, and as he began to speak, suddenly Arelatensis rose up, with a great number of the fathers, to depart; which thing pleased the cardinal of Tarragona and Panormitane very well, for they hoped that they alone, with their adherents, should remain in the church. They exhorted Arelatensis to revoke the conclusion, and to make another.

There was in the congregation, in his place, one George, the prothonotary of Bardaxina, sitting somewhat beneath his uncle, the cardinal of Tarragona; a man but young of age, but grave in wisdom, and noble in humanity, who, as soon as he saw the cardinal Arelatensis rise, determined also to depart, and when his uncle called him, commanding him to tarry, he said,” God forbid, father, that I should tarry in your conventicle, or do any thing contrary to the oath which I have taken.” By which words he declared his excellent virtue and nobility, and admonished our men who remained, what course they ought to follow. His voice was the voice of the Holy Ghost, and no words can be conceived more in season. For if he had not spoken that word, the fathers of the council had, peradventure, departed, and gone their way; and the others remaining in the church had made another conclusion, which they would have affirmed to have been of force, because they would say the last conclusion was to be received. But many, being warned by the words of the prothonotary, and calling to remembrance the like chance of other councils before, called back again the multitude who were departing, and cried out upon the cardinal and the patriarch to sit down again, and that they should not leave the church free and quiet for their adversaries. Whereupon, suddenly, all the whole multitude sat down, and the gates were shut again.

In the mean time Matthew, the bishop of Albenga, read the protestation to none else but to himself, for it could not be heard for noise; which being ended, the Lombards and the Catalonians confirmed the, protestation.

When the cardinal of Tarragona said, That he did, agree to their dissension, they marvelled at that saying; and when some smiled and laughed at him, “What,” said he, “ye fools! do ye mock me? do not the ambassadors of my king dissent from you? why do you marvel then, if I do say I consent unto their dissension?” And with these words he, and almost all the Arragons, Lombards, and Castilians, 556 departed; all the others tarried still.

And albeit it was somewhat late (for it was past two in the afternoon), Arelatensis, seeing the congregation quiet, commanded the affairs of private persons to be read, as the manner is; which being ended, he commanded also the public affairs to be read, and willed the conclusions and the form of the decree to be read again. There remained in the congregation the ambassadors of the empire and, of France, talking together of their affairs. Notwithstanding, the archbishop of Tours heard mention made of the conclusions, and turning himself to the bishop of Lubeck, said, “Lo! the matters of faith are now in hand again; let us go hence, I pray you, that we be not an offense unto others, or that we be not said to dissent from the other ambassadors.” To whom the bishop of Lubeck answered, “Tarry, father! tarry here; are not the conclusions most true? Why are you afraid to be here for the truth?” These words were not heard by many, for they spake them softly between themselves.

NotwithstandingI86 heard them, for I, sitting at their feet, did diligently observe what they said. Arelatensis, after all things were read which he thought necessary, at the request of the promoters 555 concluded; and so, making an end, dismissed the congregation. Thus the cardinal twice (as we have seen) concluded, with great difficulty, forsomuch as neither the matter, nor the form, could be concluded without dissension; and either conclusion was miraculous, 87 and past all men’s hope; but was obtained by the industry of Arelatensis, or rather by the special gift of the Holy Ghost. *And 88 therefore it is reported that Panormitane afterwards, going out of the church, turning himself unto his