A04468:4222
A defence of the Apology of the Church of England containing an answer to…A defence of the Apologie of the Churche of Englande conteininge an answeare to…
A defence of the Apology of the Church of England containing an answer to a certain book lately set forth by M. Harding, and entitled, A confutation of &c. By John Jewel Bishop of Salisbury.A defence of the Apologie of the Churche of Englande conteininge an answeare to a certaine booke lately set foorthe by M. Hardinge, and entituled, A confutation of &c. By Iohn Iewel Bishop of Sarisburie.
Imprinted at London : In Fleetestreate, at the sign of the Elephant, by Henry Wykes, Anno 1567. 27. OctobrisImprinted at London : In Fleetestreate, at the signe of the Elephante, by Henry VVykes, Anno 1567. 27. Octobris
Part 6 › The Apology, Cap. 9. Division 1. & 2.Part 6 › The Apologie, Cap. 9. Diuision 1. & 2.
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
The Apology, Cap. 9. Division 1. & 2.
The Apologie, Cap. 9. Diuision 1. & 2.
Nevertheless we can bear patiently, and quietly our own private wrongs. But wherefore do they shut out Christian Kings, and good Princes from their Convocation? Why do they so uncourteously, or with such spite leave them out, and as though they were not, either Christian men, or else could not judge, will not have them made acquainted with the causes of Christian Religion, nor understand the state of their own Churches?
Neuerthelesse wee can beare patiently, and quietly our owne priuate wronges. But wherefore doo thei shutte out Christian Kinges, and good Princes from their Conuocation? Why doo they so vncourteously, or with suche spite leaue them out, and as though they were not, either Christian menne, or els coulde not iudge, wil not haue them made acquainted with the causes of Christian Religion, nor vnderstande the state of their owne Churches?
Or, if the said Kings, and Princes happen to intermeddle in such matters, and take upon them to do, that they may do, that they be commanded to do, and ought of duty to do, and the same things, that, we know, both David, and Solomon, and other good Princes have done, that is, if they, whiles the Pope, and his Prelates siugge, & sleep, or else mischievously withstand them, do bridle the Priests sensuality, and drive them to do their duty, and keep them still to it: If they do overthrow Idols, if they take away Superstition, and set up again the true worshipping of God, why do they by and by make an outcry upon them, that such Princes trouble all, and press by violence into an other bodies office, and do therein wickedly, and malapertly? What Scripture hath at any time forbidden a Christian Prince to be made privy to such causes? Who, but themselves alone, made ever any such Law?