I. WE come now to the last thing whereof there is controversy moved, namely the power of supreme jurisdiction, which for distinction’s sake we call the power of ecclesiastical dominion.
It was not thought fit in the Jews’ commonwealth, that the exercise of supremacy ecclesiastical should be denied unto him, to whom the exercise of chiefty civil did appertain; and therefore their kings were invested with 1both. This power they gave unto Simon2, when they consented that he should be “their prince,” not only “to set men over the3 works, and 4over the country, and 4over the weapons, 4and over the fortresses,” but also “to provide for the holy things;” “and that he should be obeyed of every man, and that 5all the writings in the country should be made in his name, and that it should not be lawful for any of the people or priests to withstand his words, or to call any congregation in the country without him6.”
And if it be haply7 surmised, that thus much was given unto8 Simon, as being both prince and high priest; which otherwise, being only9 their civil governor, he could not lawfully have enjoyed: we must note, that all this is no more than the ancient kings of that people had, being kings and not priests. By this power David, Asa, Jehosaphat, Ezekias10, Josias, and the rest, made those laws and orders which the11 Sacred History speaketh of, concerning matter12 of mere religion, the affairs13 of the temple, and service of God. Finally, had it not been by the virtue of this power, how should it possibly have come to pass, that the piety or impiety of the king14 did always accordingly change the public face of religion, which thing15 the priests16 by themselves never did, neither17 could at any time18 hinder from being done? Had the priests alone been possessed of19 all power in spiritual affairs, how should any law20 concerning matter of religion have been made but only by them? In them it had been, and not in the king, to change the face of religion at any time. The altering of religion, the making of ecclesiastical laws, with other the like actions belonging unto the power of dominion, are still termed the deeds of the king; to shew that in him was placed 21supremacy of power even22 in this kind over all, and that unto their high23 priests the same was never committed, saving only at such times as their24 priests were also kings or25 princes over them.