Intercession of Friends Sighs and Tears of Priests be the Authority of the Pope let him in God's name use it still And as in the Calling so in the Subscription of the Council you may further see his Authority Because saith Leo (g) Leo Epist. 56. to the Emperour I must by all means obey your Sacred and Religious Will I have set down my Consent in writing to those Constitutions Here you see it is plain Councils were called by Princes at the Pope's Petition and subscribed at their Command Therefore when Ruffinus (h) Doce quis eum jusserit Imperator convocariâ—è Hieron in Apologia contra Ruffinum alledged the Canon of a Council against Saint Hierom his Answer was Shew what Emperour commanded this Council to be called I will shut up this Point with Socrates his words who giving a reason why in his Church-Story he made so often mention of Emperours saith (i) Propterea quòd ex illo tempore quo Constantini esse ceperunt negotia Ecclesiae ex eorum nutu pondere visa sunt atque adeò maxima Concilia de eorum sententia convocata faerunt adhuc convocantuâ— Socrat. lib. 5. in Prooemio Since Emperours became like Constantine Fathers of the Church the Causes of the Church have depended upon their ill and therefore the greatest Councils have been and yet are called by their Authority The third work of Supremacy is Promulgatio Legum Promulgation of Church-Laws and Edicts expedient for Ecclesiastical Government And this was performed by Kings and Emperours not Pope's as Church-Stories are pregnant Proofs Constantine made many Laws concerning Confessours and Martyrs Christians and Heathens Eusebius (k) Euseb De vita Constantini lib. 2. cap. 20 21 24 44. mentioneth two Laws one that abolished Idolatry Images Sacrifices and Divinations another concerning building and enlarging of Churches at the Emperour's Charge Theodosius made a Law against the Arrians occasioned thus Amphilochius Bishop of Iconium having been a long Suitour in vain used this Stratagem saluting the Emperour slighted his Son Arcadius newly Created Caesar which the Father interpreting as a Contempt of his Son grew angry till Amphilochius discovering himself said (l) Theodoret. lib. 5. cap. 5. Art thou offended Emperour that I reverence not thy Son And thinkest thou that God is not offended with the Arrians that blaspheme his Son The Emperour overcome with these words Legem scribit made a Law against the Assemblies of the Arrians I will not enter particulars but refer you to the Titles (m) De summa Trinitate side Catholica De sacro sanctis Ecclesiis De Episcopis Clericis De Haereticis c. of the Civil Law which were promulgated by Justinian Theodosius Valentinian Honorius Arcadius and other Godly and Religious Emperours There is a Collection of Ecclesiastical Laws made by Charls the Emperour Lodovick and Lotharius gathered by (n) Ansegmus Anno 827. Ansegmus Of Charls his Laws there be an hundred sixtie eight of the Laws of Lewis and Lotharius an hundred fiftie seven In the Preface the Emperour Charls professeth (o) Quapropter nostros missos ad vos direximus qui ex nostri nominis authoritate una vobiscum corrigerent quae corrigenda essent that he hath directed his Commissioners here you see Princes Commissioners and Visitours are antient that shall joyn with others to redress those things which need Reformation according to his Canonical Constitutions in his name and by virtue of hiâ— authoritie Gregory the First (o) Gregor Epist Bishop of Rome wrote a submissive Letter to Mauritius the Emperour and another to Theodorus his Physician to intreat the revocation of a Law invented by Julian and that in a very humble Stile (p) Vtrolique ergo quod debui exolvi qui Imperatori obedientiaÌ„ praebuiâ— pro Deo quod sensi non tacui Gregor Epist 61. lib. 2. Ego quidem jussioni vestrae subjectus I your Servant and subject to your command have sent this Law to many parts of the World and now I write my opinion to your Majestie in both I have done my duty I have performed mine obedience to the Emperour and I have not concealed what I thought fit for God's cause And Saint Augustine saith (q) Hoc jubent Imperatores quod Christus jubet quia cùm bonum jubent nemo jubet nisi per eos Christus August Epist 166. of this power of Laws When Emperours command that which is good it is Christ and no man else that commandeth by them The fourth work of Supremacie is receiving of Appeals giving Decisions Restitutions and Deprivations and other punishments of Bishops for Causes Ecclesiastical which in Primitive Times fell to the judicature of Princes not Popes for when Donatus (r) Vide Optatum libr. 1. August Epist 162 166. had procured Cecilianus to be condemned by seventy African Bishops and had set up another Bishop in his See of Carthage he appealed to Constantine the Emperour and desired him to assigne him Judges Constantine by Commission extant in Eusebius (s) Eusebius lib. 1. cap. 5. delegated and authorised Meltiades Bishop of Rome to hear the cause who gave Sentence for Cecilianus upon a second Appeal (t) Euseb lib. 10. cap. 5. Constantine made a second Delegacy to Chrestus Bishop of Syracuse who likewise gave Sentence with Cecilianus upon the third Appeal Constantine appointed Elianus a Civil Magistrate to examine Felix who acquitted Felix also Then the Emperour called both Parties before him and gave final Sentence for Cecilianus and made a severe Law against the Donatists In which Passage I pray you observe First that Meltiades not as supreme Judg of all Controversies but as delegated by Constantine did judg of Cecilianus his Cause and Saint Augustine (u) August Epist. 162. defended him from usurpation upon the seventie African Bishops because the Emperour not Saint Peter appointed it Next the Bishop of Syracuse did judg the same Cause after Meltiades without any wrong to the See of Rome no man in that Age found fault with it And Thirdly It is apparent that Constantine was superiour to Meltiades and both made him his Delegate and Judge of his Sentence and Judgement which Saint Augustine (x) Vltimum Judicium ultra quod Causa pertransire non potest Augustin contra Parmenian lib. 1. cap. 6. calleth the last Judgement beyond which the Cause could not pass (y) Socrates lib. 5. cap. 10. Theodosius calling a Council of all Opinions where Nactarius and Agilius made the Confession 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Consubstantiality Demophilus delivered up the Arrian Faith Eunomius the Eunomian Faith Eleusius the Macedonian Faith Then the Emperour alone separated from all Company saith (z) Tum solus separatus precatur Deum Socrates suprá Socrates made his Prayers to God to direct him in the Truth and then he read the several Faiths and condemned and rent all the rest that rent and divided
Laws Minist It is true your modern Court Parasites have fawned upon the Pope with such Blandishments of fulness of power yet as Baldus saith this plenitudo potestatis est plenitudo tempestatis fulness of power is fulness of tempest or disorder And your own barbarous Gloss confesses (m) Imperator in Temporaelibus habet potestatem a solo Deo imperium fuit antequam Apostolus esset Extravag De Majoritate Obedientia The Emperour in temporal things hath his authority not from the Pope but from God onely and the Emperour was before the Apostles were The Emperour Ludovicus the Fourth asserted his own right thus (n) Mea potestas non pendet a Papa sed a Deo immediaté vanum quod dici solet Papam non habere superiorem Paralipomena Uspergensia in Ludovico iv My power hath no dependance of the Pope but immediately of God alone and it is a vain tale that they say The Pope hath no superiour Johannes Major your own Colleague saith (o) Bonifacius Octavus multùm apparenter definivit quòd Romanus Pontifex est supra Reges in Temporalibus quod tamen oculatissimi Theologi dicunt esse falsum Johannes Major 4. Sent. 20. q. 2. Pope Boniface the Eight hath defined many things with great shew of reason that even in temporal causes the Pope is above Princes but I may tell you saith he the wisest Divines say it is false And your Romish Ceremoniary you so confide in declares to the world Ante Carolum Magnum neminem Imperii Romani coronam ex manu Romani Pontificis Romae suscepisse That before the Emperour Charles the Great that is for the space of eight hundred years after Christ no man ever received the Crown of the Romane Empire at Rome by the hands of the Bishop of Rome Therefore Bernard though an Abbot living in the mists of Popery tells Pope Eugenius without mincing (p) Esto ut alia quacunque ratione tibi vendices non tamen Apostolico jure nec illud tibi dare quod non habuit Petrus potuit Bernardus De Consideratione ad Eugenium lib. 2. Be it he may claim this pretended right by some other means yet by Apostolical right he cannot claim it neither could Peter give him that right he never had Gent. But to your Testimonies which I approve be pleased to add some reasons why the Pope hath not any authority to discharge any of the people of these Nations from their obedience to the chief Magistrate Minist The reasons are two First (q) Colimus Imperatorem ut à Deo secundum quicquid est a Deo cousecutum solo Deo minorem Tertull. ad Scapulam The chief Magistrate receiveth his authority onely of God and may acknowledge none above him within his Territories but God Secondly The Ty or Obligation whereby people are obliged in Duty to the chief Magistrate is perpetual indissoluble and may not lawfully be broken The former will be pertinent to this Article the latter will fall in in the next And that not only primitive Fathers and Protestants but even moderate Papists maintain this Doctrine appears by those (r) Primò Rex statum suum non nisi à Deo gladio suo debet recognoscere Secundò Rex solum Deum mortalem verò neminem in regno suo superiorem agnoscit Tertiò Papa non potest nec Regem nec regnum ejus supponere Interdicto seu Sacris interdicere nec subditis relaxare Sacramentum fidelitatis ei debitae propter quamcunque causam occasionem Alphonsus de Vargas pag. 123. three Articles agreed upon by the French Parliament at Paris and subscribed unto by the Sorbonists and other Divines First That the King or chief Magistrate ought to hold his state of none but God and his Sword Secondly He acknowledges onely God but no mortal man superiour in his Kingdom Thirdly That the Pope cannot interdict or excommunicate the King or his Kingdom or absolve his Subjects from the Oath of Allegiance for any cause or pretext whatsoever Gent. Make good your former reason which you say pertains to this Article That the chief Magistrate receiveth his authority onely of God and may acknowledg none above him within his Territories but God Minist The latter Branch of this Proposition That the chief Magistrate may acknowledge none above him within his Tertories but God alone is partly proved already but that all scruple may be removed I will add two Texts of Scripture more with the Fathers descant upon them and then proceed The former 2 Sam. xii ii where the Prophet Nathan having convinced David of his murder and adultery and using this Preface Haec dicit Dominus Thus saith the Lord onely as Leo (s) Haec dicit Dominus monuit Regem Davidem ut per poenitentiam peccata sua expiaret non tulit in eum sententiam quae tanquam Adulter Homicida juxta Legem morti addiceretur Leo Quartus 2. q. 7. cap. Non si competenter saith admonished him to expiate his sins by repentance but passed no sentence upon him that as a murderer or adulterer according to the Law he might be put to death Hence we may collect if Nathan a Prophet extraordinarily commissioned by God was not impowered to sentence David the chief Magistrate or stir up his Subjects against him much less may a Roman Prelate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 put his sickle into another's harvest and out of his Diocess molest Princes Potentates and States Gent. Perhaps Nathan who was an extraordinary Prophet had an extraordinary dispensation to spare David who was an extraordinary Prince Minist No the other Text I shall produce relating to the same History overthrows that which is Psalm li. 4. Tibi soli peccavi Against thee thee onely saith David unto God have I sinned St. Ambrose gives the reason (t) Rex utique erat nullis ipse legibus tenebatur humanis neque enim Reges ullis ad poenam vocantur legibus tuti imporii potestate homini ergo non peccavit cui non tenebatur obnoxius Ambros in Apolog Davidis cap. 4. lib. 2. ep 7. He was saith he a King or supreme Regent and so subject to no Law of man for Princes beeing freed by Royal Prerogatives of Imperial power are not punishable by humane Laws he therefore sinned not to man to whom he was not subject With him agrees Euthymius in these words (u) Cùm sim Rex te solum commissorum à me scelerum judicem habeam tibi soli peccasse videor hoc est tibi soli judici subjicior caeterorum enim omnium ego Dominus sum ob potentiam meam licere mihi videtur quaecunque libuerit Euthym. in Psalm li. Seeing I am a King and have thee onely my Judg over my sins I seem to sin onely to thee that is I am subject onely to thee as to my Judg for I am Lord over all others and in regard of my power
and Majesty whatsoever pleaseth me seemeth to be lawful for me Lyranus his Note is concentrick with the former (x) Lyranus in Psal li. Tibi soli peccavi scilicet tanquam Judici punire potenti peccaverat enim contra Uriam alios occasione hujus interfectos tamen quia erat Rex non habebat Judicem superiorem qui posset eum punire nisi Deum To thee onely have I sinned that is to say To thee onely as to my Judg and to him that can punish me for he had now sinned against Vrias and others whom he caused to be murdered by that occasion yet because he was a King or supreme Magistrate he had no superiour Judg that could punish or controll him save God alone With these accord Saint Hierom Arnobius Cassiodorus Beda Didymus Cyril and Nicetas Gent. Perhaps all the Antients brought in their verdict that none of his Subjects were competent Judges to punish or controll him this makes nothing against the Pope's jurisdiction Minist It makes against all alike especially any pretended authority above Supreme Magistrates which even your Ordinary Gloss upon this Psalm confesses saying (y) Rex omnibus superior tantùm à Deo puniendus est Glossa Ordinaria in Psalm li. The King or Regent is above all and he can be punished by none but by God alone If that suffice not hear a Romane Cardinal to thee onely saith (z) Tibi soli quia non est super me alius quà m tu qui possit punire ego enim sum Rex non est aliquis praeter te super me Hugo Cardinalis in Psal li. Hugo because there is not any above me but thy self alone that hath power to punish me for I am a King and so besides thee is none above me And if my Sophister with Bellarmine shall say There was none above Kings under the Law but now his Holyness of Rome is above Emperours and Dynasts under the Gospel Gregory himself a Roman Pope shall decide the controversie for thus he writes to the Emperour (a) Ego quidem jussioni vestrae subjectus eandem legem per diversas terraruÌ„ partes transmitti feci quia lex ipsa omnipotenti Deo minime concordat Ecce per suggestionis nicae paginam serenissimis Dominis nuntiavi Vtroâ—â—… ergo quod debui exsolvi qui Imperatori obedientiam praebui pro Deo quod sersi minimè tacui Gregor lib. 2. Epist 61. cap. 100. I being your subject and at your command have caused the same Law to be sent through divers parts of the Land and because the Law it self doth not accord to God's will behold I have signified so much unto Your Majesty by my Epistle and so I have discharged my duty in both respects as having rendred mine Obedience to the Emperour and have not concealed what I thought in God's cause Gent. Nothing is more clear then this yet Pope Adrian thus advanced himself above the Emperour Frederick By means of us saith (b) Imperator per nos imperat unde habet imperium nisi à nobis ecce in potestate nostra est ut demus illud cui volumus Aventinus lib. 9. pag 616. he the Emperour hath his Diadem for whence hath he his Empire but of us behold it is in our power to bestow the Empire upon whom we list Minist Emperours Kings and all Chief Magistrates by what title soever they be called receive their authority onely of God not of any Roman Priest which is the former branch of the Proposition I engaged to prove It is I saith (c) Psalm lxxxii 6. God not any Creature that have said Ye are Gods It is he (d) Daniel iv 32. the most High that ruleth in the Kingdoms of men and giveth them to whomsoever he will (e) Job xxxvi 7. It is his omnipotent hand as the Vulgar Edition hath it qui Reges collocat in solio places Kings upon their Throne (f) Proverbs viii 15. by whom Kings reign and Princes decree Justice He that said by Nathan to David (g) 2 Sam. xii 7. I have anointed thee King over Israel He by whom Solomon confesseth he was (h) 1 Kings ii 24. established and set on the Throne of David his Father In whose name the Prophet Ahias said to Jeroboam (i) 1 Kings xi 31. I will give unto thee ten Tribes who challenges (k) Psalm xxi 3. Crowns (l) Psalm lxxxix 20. Anoynting Scepters and (m) 2 Paral. 9. 8. Thrones as his peculiar and stiles them (n) 2 Sam. xiv 17. Angels of God and (o) Psalm lxxxii 6. Sons of the most High whom he empowers Gent. But it is said (p) 1 Sam. xi 15. All the people went to Gilgal and there they made Saul King before the Lord And (q) 2 Sam. ii 4. The men of Judah and Elders of Israel anoynted David over Judah and Israel how then received they their authority from God Minist (r) 2 Sam. v. 3. The Elders of Judah and Israel anoynted David not as Masters of the substance but of the ceremony not making him but declaring him to be King whom by (s) 1 Sam. xvi special command God had designed before And Saul was first anoynted by the Lord (t) 1 Sam. x. 1. Captain over his inheritance chosen immediately of him by lots as Matthias (u) Acts i. 26. was so that he had all his jura regalia from God not the people who are also said to have (x) 1 Sam. xi 15. made Saul King because they approved the election made of God and admitted him into the (y) Constituere Regem est Verbum tertiae Conjugationis quod cùm esserat duplicem actionem propriè significat facere tenare regnate est regiam exercere potestatem quasi diceret Fecerunt ut regiam potestatem exerceret Jesuita Pineda De rebus Solomonis possession and administration of the Kingdom whom the Sons of Belial impiously by contempt had rejected For the Jews had a special command Deut. xvii 15. to set him King over them whom the LORD their God should choose And as in spiritual things (z) 1 Cor. iii. 7. Paul may plant Apollos water yet it is God that gives the whole encrease So it is his sole act to set on high whom he pleases though the votes and suffrages of the people may be subservient and obediential instruments Gent. But Government and Principality sometimes descends by Succession or are conferred upon victorious Commanders as Trophies of their Conquests lawfully atchieved how then are they immediately conferred of God Minist Order of Succession and victorious event of lawful war are onely qualifications preparative or concomitant to the Investiture of Government but are not the principal or conjunct cause of it as heat cold moysture dryness with the Crasis or Temperature that crises of the mixture of them are dispositions prerequisite in an organized humane body to the receiving of the
Knights whereupon the Nation was Interdicted the King excommunicated and not absolved without corporal penance And though Pope's Bulls were rampant in times of weak Princes or those that were embroyled with civil Wars as King John and Henry the Third yet those that were magnanimous and victoriously successful shaked them off with contempt as Edward the Third who in the fourtieth year of his reign (g) The King commanded that Peter's pence should no more be gathered or paid to Rome Saint Peter's pence is the King's alms observe not the Pope's due and all that had twenty penyworth of goods should pay that peny at Lammas Stow Chron. pag. 461. commanded that Peter Pence should be no more collected or paid to Rome Lastly The ejection of Papal jurisdiction out of England was disgraceful for (h) Stow Chron. pag. 1003. in the twenty sixth year of the reign of Henry the Eight it was enacted by Parliament at Westminster that the Pope with all his authority should be clean banished out of this Realm and that he should be no more called Pope which title he i Gesta Abbat Sancti Albini Regist. Monast Sancti Albini John Bale Onuphrius Giraldus Cambrensis borrowed of Jupiter but Bishop of Rome and that the King should be reputed and taken as supreme moderatour of the Church of England having full authority to reforme all errours heresies and abuses thereof with the appendage of First-fruits Tenths all spiritual Dignities and Promotions annexed to his Royal Dignity Gent. Can you vindicate this from extraordinary rigour That the Pope's jurisdiction confessedly possessed and enjoyed so many Centuries should be wholly ejected in one day out of all these Nations especially Ireland the regiment whereof was conferred upon (k) Sanderus in Secta Anglicana Henry the Second by Pope Adrian the Fourth conditionally to hold it of him Minist That the Pope could give that which he never had is a Paradox both in Logick and Politicks Lunatick Thrasilaus (l) Athenaeus claimed all the Athenian Ships The Cham of Tartary challenges to be Master both of substance and ceremonies to the whole Universe Therefore haing dined himself he causeth a Trumpet to be sounded that all other Princes through the World may dine Henry Plantagenet (m) The Kings c. with other Princes and Bishop submitting themselves and theirs to the King of England and his successours building him a great Palace at Dublin where he held his Christmas Stow Chron. pag. 207. compleated that conquest over Ireland which was begun by Strongbow Earl of Strigule not holding it of the Pope as the Jesuit Sanders pretends but of God and his sword for (n) Giraldus Cambrensis Radulph Cogshall Gervasius Dorob the King of Conach Devuntius King of Cork Morice King of Meâ—thâ— he King of Vriel Duvenald King of Ossery Duvenald King of Limerick with other Princes and Bishops submitted themselves unto him and his Successours not by virtue of the Pope's Charter but his prevailing army Gent. But I am not yet satisfied how the Pope could be lawfully dispossessed of that which he had so long possessed Minist The Pope's pretended jurisdiction is claimed either by Divine right or humane according to both claims even by the Principles of your own Scholemen and Canonists he was lawfully dispossessed Gent. How was he lawfully dispossessed if his jurisdiction was claimed by divine right that seems improbable Minist Supposing but not granting that Anti-Christian Principle that the Pope's universal jurisdiction was by divine right your own Sancta Clara confesses (o) Substractio ab obedientia non sedis Apostolicae seu authoritatis annexae illi sedi quantum est ad actum primum seu signatum sed solum quantum ad actum exercitum id est in quantum exercetur à tali persona cui pro tempore commissa est sedes illa Franciscus De Sancta Clara. pag. 335. that Substraction or withdrawing from obedience annex'd to the Apostolick See according to the actus exercitus as it is so qualified or is exercised by such a power to wit Heretical or Tyrannical is lawful And for proof of this he quotes Gerson once Chancellour of Paris who affirms (p) Hoc etiam practicum est per quoscunque Reges Principes qui sese substraxerunt abobedientia eorum quos isti vel illi judicabant esse Summos Pontifices quae tamen substractiones approbatae sunt per sacrum Constantiense Concilium quaedam expresse quaedam implicitè vel aequivalenter Gerson that It was practised by all Kings and Princes who withdrew themselves from the obedience of those whom they acknowledged to be Popes which withdrawings nevertheless were approved by the holy Council of Constance some expresly some impliedly and equivalently (q) Conclusum est per Concilium Turonense Principem posse ab obedientia Papae sese subducere ac subtrahere pro tuitione tantum ac defensione jurium suorum temporalium Concilium Turonense as also a Synod of Turon in France wherein it was concluded that a Prince may withdraw himself from obedience of the Pope for safeguard and defence of his temporal rights And if a Prince may withdraw from obedience for defence of his temporal rights how authentick a commission had our Princes when both temporal and spiritual rights were at the Stake The Church notoriously corrupted both in Doctrine and Manners Rome that Apocalyptical Babylon and the Romish Hierarchy Anti-Christian as is formerly evidenced Gent. You have made this clearer then I imagined if Princes and Nations may withdraw themselves from Papal obedience even supposing their jurisdiction were by divine right much more if the claim be but from humane grounds conquest consent pact prescription or the like Minist You say right for it will follow a majore ad minus from the greater to the less but the Pope's claim of jurisdiction in England was from none of these but was insinuated by subtilty continued by usurpation and enforced by tyranny For Harpsfield doth unanswerably demonstrate (r) Legibus autem nostruÌ„ fuisse concessum jus nominandi providendi de Beneficiis testatur post alios Harpsfield Saculo 14. fuisse etiam aliam consuetudinem immemorialem ex privilegio ortam causas Clericorum cognoscendi patet ex decisione Rotae 304. Sancta Clara pag. 330. Supreme Magistrates of this nation in all Ages to have enjoyed the right of nomination and provision of Benefices and taking cognisance of the causes of the Clergy Which even Suarez proves to be their just interest by divine and natural right seeing (s) Cui conceditur regnum necessariò omnia censentur concessa sine quibus regnum gubernari non potest regnum vero gubernari non posset nisi Principes hac potestate potirentur etiam in Clericos Suarez lib. 3. De primatu Summi Pontisicis Wheresover God collates a Kingdom he collates also all things necessary for the managerie thereof and without which government cannot be duely
Oath of his fidelity which he hath engaged for the State of his Country and Nation or preservation of the safety of his Prince or shall attempt the death of his Sovereign or devest him of his Regal Power or by Tyrannical power usurp the Supremacy let him be Anathematized in the Sight of God the Father and Angels and be excommunicated from the Catholick Church which he hath prophaned Gent. What gather you from hence Minist I gather four things First That there hath been such an Oath exacted in former times Secondly That Oath very much resembles this of Abjuration Thirdly That that Oath was approved off and confirmed by several Councils Fourthly That the Violaters of that Oath were anathematized by the Ecclesiastical and otherwise severely handled by the Secular Power as the Stories of those times relate more at large Gent. But the Contents of that Oath was legal this illegal which ought not to be taken and being taken obliges not Our Canonists teach us that (k) Isiodore Can. 74. Votum non debet esse iniquitatis vinculum Vnjust Vows are not binding Minist That is the second thing I engaged to prove that The matter of this Oath is just and lawful which I will make good in every Circumstance if you will be pleased to recite it Gent. I have not the Copy of the Oath by me neither can I repeat it verbatim though my memory as I have too signal an occasion is retentive of the whole Substance of it Minist I shall repeat it for you having for mine own and others Satisfaction digested it into twelve Articles which in order run thus Article I. I A. B. do abjure and renounce the Pope 's Supremacy and authority over the Catholick Church in general and over my self in particular II. And I do believe the Church of Rome is not the true Church III. And that there is not any Transubstantiation in the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper or in the Elements of Bread and Wine after Consecration thereof by any Person whatsoever IV. And I do also believe that there is not any Purgatory V. And that the Consecrated Hoast Crucifixes or Images ought not to be worshipped neither that any Worship is due to any of them VI. And I also believe that Salvation cannot be merited by Works VII And I do sincerely testifie and declare that the Pope neither of himself nor by any Authority of the Church or See of Rome or by any other means with any other hath Power or Authority to depose the chief Magistrate of these Nations or to dispose of any the Countries or Territories thereunto belonging or to authorize any foreign Prince or State to invade or annoy him or them VIII I do sincerely testifie and declare that the Pope hath not any authority to discharge any of the people of these Nations from their obedience to the chief Magistrate or to give licence or leave to any of the said people to bear Arms raise tumults or to offer any violence or hurt to the Persons of the said chief Magistrates or to the State or government of these Nations or to any of the people thereof IX And I do further swear that I do from my hear abhorr detest and abjure their damnable Doctrine and Position that Princes Rulers or Governours which be excommunicated or deprived by the Pope may by virtue of such excommunion or deprivation be killed murdered or deposed from their Rule or Government or any outrage or violence done unto them by the people that are under them or by any other whatsoever upon such pretense X. And I do further swear that I do believe that the Pope or Bishop of Rome hath no authority power or Jurisdiction whatsoever within England Scotland and Ireland or any or either of them or the Dominion or Territories belonging to them or any or either of them XI And all Doctrines in affirmation of the said Points I do abjure and renounce without equivocation mental reservation or secret Evasion whatsoever taking the words by me spoken according to the common and usual meaning of them XII And I do believe no power derived from the Pope or Church of Rome or any other person can absolve me from this my Oath and I do renounce all Pardons and Dispensations to the contrary SO HELP ME GOD. (l) Duo sunt in unoquoque Juramento praecipâ—è advertenda alterum materia sive res illa in quae juratur alterum forma sive modus jurandi Dr. Andrews There are two things especially considerable in this as in every Oath First The res or matter that is sworn or abjured Secondly The modus or manner of abjuration The former is comprised in the ten first Articles the latter in the close or two last I shall God willing give you Satisfaction in order beginning with the first which is this The First Article I A. B. do abjure and renounce the Pope 's Supremacy and Authority over the Catholick Church in general and over my self in particular Gent. How can I or any Catholick abjure the Pope's Supremacy over the Church in general or my self in particular Seing 't is an Article of our Creed (m) Symboli Tridentini Articulus primus and my Conscience tells me that which it did Sir Thomas More (n) Surius Commentar at his Tryal that having studied the point at least seven years I finde that the Truth thereof is sounded upon Fathers Councils Scriptures and Traditions with Prescription since the Apostles which demonstrates it to be of Divine Institution Minist You will fall short in all these and upon impartial Survey finde the Rise and Spring of it to be from novel Usurpation The Pythagoreans were so accustomed to Numbers that they fancyed the Ingredience of them in every Composure Your seven years study with Doway and Lovain's Education hath so moulded your imaginations that it hears no Melody but like that of Sappho's (o) Herodotus in the Woods (p) Clemens in Prooemio in Glossa Dominus Deus Papa your Pope's Supremacy Whence you make Scriptures and Fathers like Procrustes (q) Plutarch in vita Thesei his Bed what comes short you rack and stretch it to your meaning what is too large you curtail it by amputation Gent. I read Scriptures and Fathers with that Traveller's indifferency that Epictetus (r) Aulus Gellius Noct. Attiâ— requires in all that would finde the Truth and therein I discover First The Necessity of one Head to be constituted over the Catholick Church Secondly That St. Peter was that Visible Head and had Supremacy over the whole Flock of Christ and the rest of the Apostles Thirdly That he fixed his Seat at Rome and delegated his plenitudinem potestatis fullness of power to the Bishops his Successours there Fourthly That all Bishops of Rome have enjoyed it since Minist Not one of these Positions is true but comes from that spirit of lyes as shall appear in order First there is no necessitie of
ab aliis tanquam à majoribus sed contuli cum illis tanquam cum amicis paribus Glossa Ordinaria ad Galat. 2. I learned not of Peter and others as of my betters but I had Conference with them as with my equals and Friends So that this Distinction of extraordinary and ordinary Jurisdiction which gives Saint Peter a special Legislative Power is Scriptureless and a mere Popish Chimera Gent. Though there be no ground for it in Scripture yet it may be demonstrated from Tradition of the Church as the Cause from the Effect that St. Peter had this Power and delegated it to his Successours who without interruption have enjoyed it since Nil dat quod non habet as our Gerson once Chancellour of Paris avers saying (n) Sicut Christo collata est omnis potestas in coelo in terra sic eam Christus omnem Petro suisque Sucessoribus dereliquit Gerson De potestate Ecclesiae Consid 12. part 3. As all Power in Heaven and in Earth is collated upon Christ so Christ hath delegated it to Peter and his Successours Minist This is that third thing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Haereticum a notorious falsitie which Franciscus a Victoria a Friar of your own and once Professour of Divinity in the Vniversitie of Salmantica confesses saying (o) Victor De potestate Ecclesiae Relect. 1. Sect. 1. 1. pag. 39. Glossatores Juris hoc Dominium dederunt Papae cum ipsi essent pauperes rebus doctrina The Glossers of the Canon-Law not Saint Peter gave the Pope this Dominion when they themselves were poor in estate and Petits in Learning Which Pope Zosimus (p) Zosimus in Concili Africano himself was conscious of when in that long contention with the Bishops of Africa touching his Supremacie he alleged not one word out of the Scriptures but only the Council of Nice which he himself had falsified And Meltiades (q) Meltiades in Epistola Ad Episcopos Hispaniae writing hereof to the Bishops of Spain claims it only by Custom not by Donation of Peter or Divine Right The Spring and Rise whereof Philip Mornay (r) Historia Papatus quibus gradibus ad id Fastigii enisus sit Philippus Mornaius Plessiacus in his Mystery of Iniquity or History of the Popedom discovers and is a Truth so clear that it extorts this Confession from Bellarmine (s) Bellarmin lib. 5. De Romano Pontifice cap. 9. Etiamsi nihil horum extaret abunde sufficeret praescriptio 800. Annorum nam etiam regna imperia per latrocinium acquisita tandem longo tempore fiunt legitima Though the Prescription of eight hundred years be sufficient for even Kingdoms and Empires gotten by robbery through continuance of time become lawfull Gent. This is a shrewd confession of so Learned a Cardinal and gives our cause a deadly blow There are four things wherein Supremacie consists First Reformation of the Church Secondly Calling of Councils and Synods Thirdly Promulgation of Church-Laws and Edicts Fourthly Receiving of Appeals and giving Decisions Have not Bishops of Rome exercised all these since the Apostles times According to Gerson (t) Sicut non est potestas nisi à Deo sic nec aliqua temporalis vel Ecclesiastica Imperialis vel Regalis nisi à Papa in cujus femore scripsit Christus REX REGUM DOMINUS DOMINANTIUM Gerson De potestate Ecclesiae Consider 12. part 3. As there is no Power but of God so neither any Temporal or Ecclesiastical Imperial or Regal Jurisdiction but of the Pope in whose Thigh Christ hath writ KING OF KINGS LORD OF LORDS Minist You shall finde upon Examination for all Gerson's Blasphemy that not one of these was exercised by the Bishops of Rome in the Primitive Times First Reformation of the Church by abolishing Idolatry Superstition and Heresie and placing of true Religion was practised by Constantine and all the godly Emperours his Successours The Emperour saith Eusebius (u) Tanquam communù Episcopus à Deo constitutus Eusebius De vita Constantini lil 1. cap 37. put down Idolatry established Christian Religion composed differences of Bishops suppressed Heresies and Schisms heard Causes of Religion and judged them in his own Person made Laws Decrees Edicts and Orders for Religion and all this as a common Bishop or Over-seer ordained of God This in special Constantine engaged to perform against the Fomenters of Arrianism and Fautours of Arrian Bishops saying (x) Pestium illarum audacia ministri Dei hoc est meá executione coercebitur Theodoret. lib. 1. cap. 19. The Boldness of such Bishops and others shall be brought in order by the execution of God's Minister that is my self And the sixth Toletan Council speaking of Chintillanus the King saith (y) Concil Toletan vi cap. 14. Nefas est in dubium deducere ejus potestatem cui omnium gubernatio superno constat delegata judicio It is an heinous Offence to call his Power not the Pope's into Question to whom it is apparent that the Government of all is delegated by the Divine Decree Secondly Calling of Councils and Synods was by the Authority of Emperours not Bishops of Rome As the four first General Councils were called by four Emperours The Nicene Council against Arrius by Constantine The Council of Constantinople against Macedonius by Theodosius the Elder The Council of Ephesus against Nestorius by Theodosius the Younger The Council of Chalcedon against Eutyches by Martian The Council of Sardis by Constans and Constantine And many more for many Centuries after Christ and that not as Bellarmine (z) Bellarm. De Cenciliis lib. 1. cap. 13. saith Authoritate Rapae By the Pope 's Authority which appears in that Leo Bishop of Rome made Supplication (a) Supplicationi nostrae dignetur Imperator annuâ—â—c Leo. Epist 9. to Theodosius that he would call a Council in Italy but the Emperour called it at Ephesus and the Bishops of Italy could not come in time so that Eutyches his Heresie was there countenanced by means of Dioscorus Bishop of Alexandria Then Leo made a second Supplication (b) Leo Epist 24. and alledged the Tears of all the Clergy for to obtain a Council it Italy Then he solicited the Emperess Pulcheria (c) Leo Epist 26. to further his Supplicaon to the Emperour he wrote (d) Leo Epist 23. to the Nobles Clergy and People of Constantinople to join with him in Supplication to the Emperour yet could not obtain it in the time of Theodosius When Martian succeeded by the favour of Pulcheria a Council was called not in Italy but at Chalcedon Then Leo made a fresh Suit (e) Leo Epist 43. that the Emperour would command the Bishops of the Council that the Faith of the Nicene Council might stand in full force unaltered which the Emperour did at his Request and the Emperour's Oration (f) Oratio Martiani in Concilio Chalcedoneusi to that purpose is extant Now if Supplication
had he thus tartly to inveigh against introduction of Images Minist He might and we have sufficient reason First The Canon of the Old Testament is diametrically opposite to Image-Worship Exod. xx 5. Levit. xxvi 1. Deut. v. 9. Psal cvi 9. Isai xxviii Micha v. 13. that the best-learned among your Romish Rabbies are forced to confess it was prohibited to the Jews The Angelical Doctour saith (u) Prohibitum est in veteri Lege nè Imagines flerent ad adorandum Aquin 3. Sent. Dist 9. q. 2. The making of Images to be worshipped was interdicted in the Old Law The same is affirmed by (x) Alexand. Hales pa. 3. q. 30. m. 3. Art 3. Alexander Hales (y) Albert. 3. Dist 9. Art 4. Albertus (z) Bonavent 3. Dist 9. Bonaventure Marsilius Gerson Abulensis and vouched by the modern Schole-men to wit Soto Corduba Cabrera Palacius Tapia Oleaster amongst whom the Jesuit Vasques shall bring up the Rear who declares That (a) Lege veteri non fuisse vetitam omnem similitudinem aut effigiem quomodocunque sed omnem cultum adorationem ipsius atque adeo quoque omnem Imagmem seu effigiem modo accommodato adorationi erectam aut constitutam Vasques De Ador. lib. 2. Dis 4. cap. 6. In the Old Law every Image and Portraicture was not forbidden but every Worship and Adoration of Images and therefore every similitude or representation erected or constituted by way of application to Adoration was prohibited Secondly The Brazen Serpent was a figure of Christ John iii. 14. was formed by God's Commandment Numb xxi 9. yet the worship thereof being as Vasques (b) Vasques De Ador. lib. 2. Dis 4. cap. 5. saith cultus qualem etiam imaginibus deferre nos consuevimus no other then such as Romists use towards their Images was unlawful 2 Kings xviii 4. Thirdly The Scriptures of the New Testament neither expresly nor by consequence maintain the worship of Images neither is there in all the Apostles Doctrine any abrogation of the negative Precept delivered to the Jews concerning the worship of Images and therefore the same Law is (c) Morale simpliciter quod omni tempore ab omnibus servandum est Alexand. Hales 4. q. Art 1. moral and obligeth Christians as it did the Jews Fourthly The worshipping of Images was not practised or held lawful by the Primitive Fathers as Cassander (d) Quantum veteres initio Ecclesiae ab omni veneratione Imaginum abhorruerunt declarat unus Origenes adversus Celsum Cassand Consult De Imag. Simulachr gathers out of Origen against Celsus and Gregory the Great six hundred years after Christ condemned the same for writing to a Bishop he useth this Suasive (e) Gregor lib. 7. Epist 109. lib. 9. Epist 9. Tua fraternitas ab earum adoratu populum prohibere debuit Your Brother-hood ought to hinder the people from worshipping of them and adorare imagines omnibus modis devita avoid the worshipping of Images by all means The Council of Frankford seven hundred ninety and fourscore years after Christ opposed the Definition of the second Nicene Synod concerning worshipping of Images as Ado saith (f) Ado Chron. atatis 6. fol. 181. Pseudo-Synodus quam septimam Graeci appellant pro Imaginibus adorandis abdicata penitus The false Synod which the Greeks call the seventh for worshipping of Images was wholly disclaimed And our Historian (g) Carolus Rex Francorum misit librum Synodalem ad Britanniam in quo libro multa inconvenientia verae fidei contraria maximè imagines debere adorari quod omnino Ecclesia Dei execratur Roger Hoveden Annal. part 1. pag. 232. col 2. Roger Hoveden though a Papist informs us that Charles the French King sent a Book of the Synod to Britain in which Book many Inconveniences and contrary to the true faith were asserted especially that Images ought to be adored which saith he the Church of God altogether execrates And this was done even with the authority of the Pope for saith Cassander (h) Cassander Consult De Imagin Cum Legati Romani Pontificis interfuerunt c. When the Legates of the Bishop of Rome were present by uniform consent of Fathers that Synod the second Nicene so far as it judged Images to be adored was condemned as contrariant not onely to Scriptures and the antient tradition of Fathers but also to the custom of the Roman Church Agobardus the Bishop of Lyons who lived as Ado saith about the year 815 in his Book De Picturis Imaginibus avers that (i) Nullus antiquorum Catholicorum unquam eas colendas vel adorandas existimavit nemo se fallat quicunque aliquam picturam vel fusilem adorat statuam non exhibet cultum Deo c. Agobard Bibliothec Patr. edit Colon Tom. 19. p. 598. None of the antient Catholicks thought that Images were to be worshipped or adored and delivering his own judgement he saith Nemo se fallat c. Let no man beguil himself whosoever worshippeth any Picture or carved Statue neither honoureth God himself nor Angels or Saints but Idols Fifthly Many modern Pontificians have condemned the worship of Images according as the same was practised by the vulgar and maintained by Aquinas and other prime Scholemen Holcoth saith (k) Holcoth in dibr Sap. cap. 13. pag. 524. Nulla adoratio debetur Imagini nec licet aliquam Imaginem adorare No adoration is due to an Image neither is it lawful to worship any Image Cassander writeth in this manner (l) Sanioribus Scholasticis displicet sententia Thomae qui censeat imaginem eadem adoratione colendam qua res ipsa colitur c. Cassand Consult De Pictur The Opinion of Thomas Aquinas who holdeth that Images are to be worshipped as their samplers is disliked by sounder Scholemen and they affirm that it is not very safe unless it be qualified with favourable interpretation among these is Durand and Holcoth Gabriel Biel reports the Opinion of them to be more sound which say that an Image neither as considered in it self materially nor yet according to the nature of a sign or Image is to be worshipped Peresius Ajala saith m All Scholemen n Omnes ferè Scholastici in hoc sunt quôd imago Christi Sanctorum adorari debent c. neque Scripturam neque traditionem Ecclesia neque communem sensum Sanctorum neque Concilii generalis determinationem aliquam adducunt Peres De Trad. part 3. De Imag. in a manner hold that the Images of Christ and the Images of Saints are to be worshipped with the same adoration that their samplers but they produce so far as I have seen no sound proof of this Doctrine to wit neither Scripture nor Tradition of the Church nor consent of Fathers nor the determination of a general Council nor any other effectual reason sufficient to perswade believers Gent. But we finde that the Crucifix or the sign of the Cross was in great
are many more besides them that hold this negative to wit The Pope by virtue of his office hath not any power or authority to depose Princes or to dispose of their crowns or lives for any cause crime end or good whatsoever So that I think I may safely conclude That which is contrary to Scripture antient Fathers the Annals and Gests of our own Nation hath been attended with signal judgments (n) Qui Summi Pontificis omne de re qualibet judicium temerè ac sine delectu defendunt eos sedis Apostolicae authoritatem labefactare non sovere non firmare Cand. lib. 5. Quaest 5. and is disclaimed by moderate Papals themselves ought to be abjured But such is the Popish pretended power to depose the chief Magistrate c. Therefore it ought to be abjured But we shall have this more fully discussed in the next Article which is The Eighth Article I do sincerely testifie and declare That the Pope hath not any authority to discharge any of the people of these Nations from their obedience to the chief Magistrate or to give licence or leave to any of the said people to bear Arms raise Tumults or to offer any violence or hurt to the persons of the said chief Magistrates or to the state or government of these Nations or to any of the people thereof Minist BY reason of cruel Positions and practises of Jesuits in the year one thousand five hundred eighty two it was made high Treason (a) Si non vis esse obnoxius Caesari noli habere qu◠sunt mundi si habes divitias obnoxius es Caesari Ambros in Lucam lib. 9. cap. 20. to disswade any Subject from (b) Dices Quid mihi Regi quid tibi ergo possessioni per jura Regum possessiones possidentur August in Johan Allegiance to their Prince and from the Religion that was established in England This Article intends the Abjuration of that which was then enacted as treasonable Gen. What difference is there betwixt this Article and the former it is not obvious to me easily to distinguish between them Minist They are principally differenced in this that the former Article excluded the Pope's authority to excite any forein power to annoy depose the chief Magistrate of these Nations or to dispose of his Territories This disclaims the Pope's power to arm Subjects against their Sovereign or being disobliged by him from their obedience to move commotions seditions or rebellions Gent. Doth the Pope arrogate by his pleni-potentiary power to stir up any forein Prince against another and collate their Dominions upon them Minist Yes (c) Papa Johannes nonus conspiratione facta cum Gallorum Regibus à Germanis Imperii Majestatem studebat transferre in Carolum Calvum deinde in Ludovicum Balbum ejus filium sed Imperium per vim retinuerunt Germani Carion Chronic. pag. 179. Pope John the Ninth atempted though in vain to translate the Romane Empire from the Germans to the French and first collated the Diadem upon Carolus Calvus and afterwards upon Ludovicus Balbus his Son Kings of France He encouraged at the last (d) Sicut Zacharias transtulit imperium á Graecis ad Teutonicos ita nos possumus illud transferre ab Alemannis ad Graecos Carion Chronic. pag. 179. Lewis Son to the French King to raise arms against John King of England In the beginning of Queen Elizabeth's Reign Paul the Fourth being Pope Sebastianus Martignius could hardly be perswaded from entring England with a thousand foot and some horse afterwards he stirred up the Duke D'Alva against her and promised if need were to go himself in person against England and engage the goods of the Apostolick See It were too tedious to relate the Stories of the Scottish Queen the Duke of Norfolk Stucklie James Boncompagno Bastard-son to Gregory the Thirteenth Squire Babington Parry Lopez Tyrone the intended Invasion in Eighty eight by Pererius Guzmannus Duke of Medina the Gun-powder-Treason to invade or embroil this Nation as Bishop Carlton (e) Thankful Remembrance of God's Mercies by G. Carleton Bishop of Chichester hath faithfully discovered at large to whose Book I refer you Gent. I perceive by these Histories (f) Ecce in potestate nostra est ut demus illud cut volumus propterea constituti sumus à Deo super Gentes regna ut destruamus evellamus aedificemus plantemus Dictum Adriani Frederico Aventinus in Adriano iv 1154. Popes have been Incendiaries to stir up one Prince against another for advantage of their Romane Jurisdiction have they been as busy to unrivet the obediential tye of people to the chief Magistrate Minist Yes you cannot but have heard of their pragmaticalness also herein that Cornelius Agrippa one of your own saith (g) Cornelius Agrippa De vanitate Scientiarum cap 6. ex Camatensi Legati Romanorum Pontificum sic debacchantur in Provinciis ac si ad flagellandam Ecclesiam Satan egressus sit a facie Domini The Pope's Legates keep such Revels and Rackets in Kingdoms and Countries as if Satan were sent abroad from the face of the Lord to scourge the Church Witness that (h) Ipsam pratenso regni jure nec non omni quocunque dominio dignitate privilegióque privatam praecipimus interdicimus universis singulis Proceribus subditis populis nè illi ejusque monitis mandatis legibus audeant obedire qui secùs egerint eos simili Anathematis sententia innodamus Bulla Pii Quinti Bull of Pius Quintus fastened by that Ardelio Felton upon the Bishop of London's Palace-Gate wherein he makes it known that he had deprived Queen Elizabeth from the right she pretended to have in her Kingdoms and also from all and every her authority dignity and privilege charging and forbidding all and singular Nobles Subjects and people that they adventure not to obey her her Monitions Commands or Laws upon pain of his Grand Anathema or Curse Gent. They pretend great reason for this for (i) In Concilio Lateranen si sub Leone Decimo Sess 10. Stephanus Bishop of Patrica in our Laterane Council said In Papa est omnis potestas supra omnes potestates tam eoeli quam terrae All power is in the Pope above all powers as well of heaven as of earth and in the Ceremoniary it is written (k) Ceremoniat lib. 1. cap. 2. Moderatio Imperii Romani pertinet ad Papam Dei vices gerentem in terris tanquam ad eum per quem Reges regnant The Government of the Romane Empire belongeth unto the Pope being God's Vicar on earth as unto him by whom Kings rule Johannes Andreas compares the Pope to the Sun and the Emperour to the Moon and by Mathematical Proportion makes him seventy seven times greater then the greatest Prince Abbot Panormitan saith (l) Plenitudo potestatis sisperat omnem legem positivam Panormitan Extravag De constitut cap. 1. His. fulness of power passeth all positive
disclaim the lawfulness of it avouching that (h) In vita Sylvestri Johannes de Parisiis cap. 22. In donatione illa audita est vox Angelorum in aere dicentium Hodie venenum effusum est in Ecclesiam At the time of the confirming and passing of this Donation there was a voice of Angels heard in the Air This day poyson is poured upon the Church Gent. Enough of this tell me in order the other Romish Principles upon which Papal Transcendency leans Minist The second is That His triple-Crowned Sovereignty hath a direct power to depose and instate Princes and that Romish Catholicks are obliged to assist the Pope in the execution of his sentence of decrowning chief Magistrates and translating their Crowns Which is falsely fathered upon Pope Zacharie the First but indeed is no elder then Pope Gregory the Seventh a brand of Hell and it was ripened by many of his Successours and fomented by sundry Parasites and Assassines of Rome and by (i) Carerius De potestate Romani Pontificis lib. 2. cap. 3. Boskier Legat. Aposiol con 14. pag. 35. Baron Annal. Tom. 11. many Moderns as Marta Simancha Baronius Bosius Carerius Paulus Cararia defended of which Gratian gives an instance (k) Zacharias Regem Francorum non tam pro suis imquitatibus quà m pro co quòd tantae potestati erat mutilis à regno deposuit Gratian. caus 15. quaest 6. cap. Atius Pope Zachary deposed the King of France not so much for any Delinquency of his but that he was not competently qualified to manage such a power Gent. The novelty of this with other reasons you have formerly given speaks sufficiently the unlawfulness of it what is the next Minist The third is pendulous with shew of limitation and mitigation to wit The Pope hath an indirect power limited and circumscribed by many cautions provisions in deposing Princes This is maintained by (l) Bellarmin De Pontif. lib. 5. cap. 1. 6. 7. 8. Gretser Defens Bellarm De Pontif. Victoria De potest Eccles quaest 2. Cajetan Apol. cap. 13. Bellarmin and may seem for manner of speaking to be more moderate then the former but in weight and consequence is equally false and pernicious for it hath the same effects yielding authority to Popes to depose Princes when the same appeareth to themselves reasonable and for the benefit of the Roman cause Then saith (m) Si quid tale accidat Spiritualis potestas potest ac delet coërcere Temporalem omni ratione ac viâ quae ad id necessaria vidibitur Bellarm. De Romano Pontifice cap. 6. Bellarmine the Spiritual power may and ought to curb the Temporal by all means and ways which may seem conducible to that end It armeth also Subjects to rebellion and enemies to mischief and it provideth that regal or supreme Magistracy shall depend upon Papal discretion and devotion Thus the cunning Jesuite brings water in the one hand and fire in the other saying (n) Quantum ad personas non potest Papa ut Papa ordinariè temporales Principes deponere etiam justa de causa eo modo quo deponit Episcopos id est tanquam ordinarius Judex tamen potest mutare regna uni auferre atque alteri conferre tanquam summus Princeps Spiritualis si id necessarium sit ad animarum salutem Bellarm. De Rom. Pontif. lib. 5. capp 6 7. As to the persons the Pope as Pope cannot ordinarily depose temporal Princes though the cause be just after that manner as he deposeth Bishops that is as an ordinary Judge yet he can change Kingdoms and take from one and collate upon another as the Chief Spiritual Prince if it shall be requisite for the health of Souls But the most malignant venom is yet behind in the sting for saith he quod Christiani olim non deposuerunt Neronem Dioclesianum Julianum Apostatam Valentem Arrianum similes id fuerat quia deerant vires Temporales Christianis That Christians formerly deposed not Nero and Dioclesian and Julian the Apostate and Valens the Arrian and such the reason was because Christians wanted temporal forces To these three pestilential Principles all the Romish Doctrine that relates to deposing or annoying of Princes may be reduced Gent. Are these Doctrines generally maintained by Catholicks or an aspersion fastened upon them for some few or who are they that foment them Minist That they are not maintained by all I have hinted to you already and shall haply more fully hereafter If the Disease be not hectical but of a few that asperse the rest you may more rationally abjure them which is the scope I aim at but you shall finde that the maintainers and fomenters of them are neither few nor inconsiderable I 'le instance in two or three By a drop you may discern the saltness of the Ocean Baronius saith (o) Non eos homicidas arbitramur qui adversus excommunicatos zelo Catholicae matris ardentes eorum quoslibet trucidasse contigerit Baron Annal. Tom. 11. Anno 1089. We judge not them murderers who enflamed with a zeal of their Catholick Mother against excommunicated persons shall chance to kill any of them Alvares Pelagius saith that (p) Apud illum reside◠Regalis sive Imperialis dignitatis plenitudo cui de jure competit imperium transferre Sicut nullus fidelis dubitat quòd Christus fuerit Rex Sacerdos Rex coeli terrae c. sic nullus Catholicus dubitare debet quin summus Vicarius Generalis in terris pariter utramque habet potestatem imò uon longè abesset ab Haeresi contrarium affirmare Alvares Pelagius De planctu Ecclesia lib. 1. Art 37. With the Pope resides the fulness both of Regal and Imperial dignity who hath lawful power to translate Empires And as no Believer doubts that Christ was both King and Priest King of Heaven and Earth so no Catholick ought to doubt that the chief Vicar General upon earth hath both powers Spiritual and Temporal it would not much fall short of Heresie to affirm the contrary Bosius saith (q) Bosius De Ecclesiae signis lib. 7. cap. 4. In quo elucescit authoritas Papae qui potest justis de causis vel sine culpa ab aliis in alios jura maxima qualia sunt imperia summa decreto suo transferre Herein appeareth the authority of the Pope that he can for just causes or when there is no fault transfer by his greatest interests as chief Empires Augustine ab Ancona saith (r) August ab Ancona Sum. de Eccles Quaest 1. Art 1. Immediata potestas jurisdictionis omnium Spiritualium Temporalium est solum in Papa All power of Spiritual and Temporal jurisdiction is onely in the Pope It seems to me a prodigious Tenet to hold The Pope hath power to depose and translate Empires for no fault as well as for condigne causes But what are the principal causes they assign Minist Bosius
administrated but government cannot be duely administrated unless Princes have a power in reformation of the Church to be exercised even over the Clergy which was wholly obstructed while the Pope dispenced his exorbitant and apocryphal jurisdiction till the Supreme Magistrates by the consent of the three orders of the Kingdom were necessitated to reassume that s (t) Cajetanus De potestate Papae cap. 27. tyrannidi resistendi potestatem quam jure naturali gentium habent etiam in rebus Ecclesiasticis power of resisting Tyranny which Cajetan confesseth they have even in Ecclesiastical affairs both by the Law of Nature and Law of Nations Gent. Seeing then in your sense the Bishop of Rome is an Vsurper tell me what you conceive he holds by divine right what canonically or by humane indulgence lawfully conferred what by tyranny and usurpation for this discussion will give great light to the point in hand Minist I will digest this into Propositions which are all or the most of them demonstrated in the foregoing discourse First That all the Apostles were equal according to that saying of Saint Cyprian (u) Hoc erant caetari Apostoli quod fuit Petrus pari consortio praediti bonoris potestatis Cyprian De simplicitate Praelatorum The rest of the Apostles were the same that Saint Peter was all endowed with the same fellowship and power Secondly It cannot be proved by Scripture that Peter was ever at Rome Thirdly The Bishop of Rome succeeded neither Peter nor any of the Twelve in the Apostolick Charge Fourthly The Bishop of Rome was primatively but equal with other Bishops Fifthly Bishops are essentially distinguished from Presbyters but at the most in original power to ordain and exercise of spiritual Jurisdiction indeterminately which is Saint Hierom's determination (x) In divinis instituendis quid potest Episcopus facere quod non Presbyter excepta ordinatione Hieron What can a Bishop do in divinis instituendis in instituting or executing of divine things which a Presbyter may not do except (y) Otherwise in distinction of order and Jurisdiction Irenaeus justly calls Episcopacy Traditionem Apostolicam toti mundo manifestam Ordination Sixthly The Bishop of Rome's Jurisdiction at the first was indefinitely over Christians in or about Rome Seventhly It was by the Indulgence of Constantine that the Romane Diocess was further extended which St. Hierom at the least meant in that Curb (z) Noverint Episcopi se magis consuetudine quà m dispositionis Dominicae veritate Presbyteris esse majores Hieron in Epist ad Titum Let Bishops understand that they be greater then Presbyters more by Custom and prescription then by verity of divine Ordinance Eightly (a) More by custom extensivè not denying Superiority of order and jurisdiction intensivé It was humane Councils not any divine Authority that distinguished the Church into Patriarchates conferring that of the West upon the Bishop of Rome which Aeneas Sylvius afterwards Pope confesseth (b) Ante Concilium Nicenum quisque sibi vivebat parvus respectus habebatur ad Ecclesiam Romanam Aeneas Sylvius Epist 188. little respect was had to Rome before the Council of Nice Ninthly It was by humane Institution that for Vnity and Peace sake the Bishop of Rome had Priority of Order in General Councils Tenthly His claim of universal Jurisdiction was usurped and unlawful So St. Hierom (c) Si authoritas quaeritur orbis major est urbe ubicunque fuerit Episcopus sive Romae sive Eugubii sive Constantinopoli sive Rhegii ejusdem est meriti ejusdem Sacerdotii Hieron ad Euagrium If we seek for authority the world is bigger then the City of Rome wheresoever there is a Bishop whether he be at Rome or at Eugubium or at Constantinople or at Rhegium he is of like worth of like Priesthood Gregory the First disclaimed the Title of Vniversal Bishop in himself saying (d) Nemo praedecessorum meorum hoc profano vocabulo usus est Greg. lib. 4. Epist 38. None of his Predecessours used such a profane Term and checks the Bishop of Constantinople for it saying (e) Quid tu Christo universalis Ecclesiae capiti in extremi judicii dicturus es examine qui cuncta ejus membra tibimet conaris Vniversalis appellatione supponere Gregor lib. 4. Epist 38. What answer wilt thou make unto Christ who is indeed the Head of the Vniversal Church at the trial of the last judgment that thou goest about under the Name of Vniversal Bishop to subdue all his Members unto thee Eleventhly The Pope had no jurisdiction in this Nation for the first six Centuries Twelfthly Austin and his fellow-Monks were the first Seminaries of it who introduced it by blood and superstition Lastly (f) Bonifacius Tertius magna contentione obtinuit à Phaca Caesare ut sanciretur Romanus Pontifex Oecumenicus summus Episcopus totius Ecclesiae Christinae Ab eo tempore nunquam desierunt Romani Pontifices conari pro dignitate potentia sua augenda Carion Chron. pag. 161. It is justly excluded out of these Nations as inconsistent with civil Government and destructive to the peace of Church and State Gent. All this seems to be probable and you have given such evident Demonstration of the particulars that I know not what to reply Minist Then I may safely conclude That which hath no ground in Scriptures Fathers or antient Councils was not known for six hundred years after the Incarnation was introduced with blood and superstition and maintained with Tyranny and is inconsistent with civil Government and destructive to peace of Church and State ought to be abjured But such is the Pope's pretended jurisdiction in these Nations Therefore it ought to be abjured The Eleventh Article And all Doctrines in affirmation of the said Points I do abjure and renounce without Equivocation mental reservation or secret evasion whatsoever taking the words by me spoken according to the common and usual meaning of them Gent. WHat new matter presents it self to be abjured in this Article all Doctrines in affirmation of the Points in question were renounced before Minist The ten former Articles as was premised in the beginning comprised the rem or matter to be sworn or abjured The two last contain the modum or manner of abjuration being undistinguishably the same with that of the Oath of Supremacy which concluded thus (a) Haec omnia planè ac sincerè agnosco juro juxta expressa verba pera me hic prolata juxta planum communem sensum intellectum eorundem verborum absque ulla aequivocatione aut mentali evasione aut tacita reservatione quacunque Andreros I acknowledge and swear all these things plainly and sincerely according to the express words by me here uttered and according to the plain and common meaning and understanding of the same words without any equivocation or mental reservation or secret evasion whatsoever Gent. I beseech you therefore give me
Christ said to Peter thrice Feed my Flock in relation to his threefold Denyal that he that abjured him thrice might be adjured to Fidelity in his Pastoral Charge by this Advice repeated thrice He said it in the Presence of the Apostles that they that were scandalized with his fall might be confirmed by his Establishment and make use of the Instruction which also concerned themselves (b) Haec velut ad Petrū dicta sunt omnium communia Orig. in Matthaeum Tract 1. These words being spoken as it were unto Peter are common to all the Apostles saith Origen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not onely in St. Matthew and Homer but in Plato (c) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Plato lib. 1. De Legibus who also useth the same words signifieth to rule but is as Budeus saith Pastorum more gubernare curare gregem To rule and take care of the Flock Pastour-like As the Father of Hippo emblazons it (d) Non te pascere cogita sed oves meas sicut meas pasce non sicut tuas gloriam meam in illis quaere non tuam Dominium meum non tuum lucra mea non tua August in Johannem Tract 123. Think not to feed thy self feed my Sheep feed them as my Sheep not as thine own seek mine Honour in them seek not thine seek my Dominion and not thine seek my Gains and not thine own No man ever denyed this Feeding this ruling of the Flock to St. Peter nor did Peter himself ever deny it to any other Pastour but said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Feed or if you will for it is the same word rule the Flock of God which is among you 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (e) 1. Pet. v. 2 3. taking the Oversight thereof not by constraint but willingly not for filthy Lucre but of a ready mind neither as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 over-ruling or being Popes over God's Heritage but being Ensamples to the Flock Where you see St. Peter yields that to every Pastor which Christ yields to him But says Boniface Christ said to St. Peter Feed my Sheep Therefore he committed all his Flock to him What sequel more then in this Peter said to all Pastours Feed the Flock Therefore he committed the whole Flock to all Pastours Bishop Jewel (f) Defence of the Apologic of the Church of England page 92. Bishop Jewel challenges the Romanists to produce the Authority of one antient learned Father that ever made this Collection but ne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quidem yet we deny not but St. Peter had Commission to feed and rule the whole Church but it was a joint Commission with the rest of the Apostles upon whom Christ breathed alike saying (g) John xx 22. 23. Receive the Holy Ghost whose Sins ye remit they are remitted and whose Sins ye retain they are retained gave them mission and commission alike in the same extent and latitude (h) Matthew xxviii 19. Go teach all Nations c. Whereupon St. Hierom (i) Hierom. Contra Jovinianum lib. 1. saith All the Apostles received the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven and the Stability of the Church was built equally upon them all Gent. But though I should be forced to relinquish my hold from these Texts and the antient Commentaries and Glosses thereupon yet it is undeniable that the Fathers give St. Peter Primacy over the rest of the Apostles for St. Chrysostom (k) Chrysost in Matthaeum Homil. 83. Homil 87. Homil. 55. calls him Verticem Apostolorum the Head of the Apostles the Head and Pastour of the Church the Master of the World Ruler over all the World Minist So doth the same St. Chrysostom (l) Chrysost ad Rom. Homil. 18. call Elias Caput Prophetarum the Head of the Prophets yet had not Elias Primacy over Moses and all his Collegues He gives Paul (m) Nullus Paulum antecedit de ea re nemo omnium dubitat Chrysost de laudibus Pauli Chrysost in Genesin Homil. 7. in Genesin Homil. 11. Preheminence over all the rest over the World Paulus Magister Orbis Paul the Master of the World And from Generalities condescends to induction of particulars (n) Paulo tribuitur cura omnium Ecclesiarum non unius vel duarum vel trium sed omnium quae sunt in toto orbe Chrysost in Johan Homil. 11. in Act. 53. Paulo tribuitur cura omnium Ecclesiarum non unius vel duarum vel trium Vnto Paul the charge of all Churches is given not of one or two or three Churches but of all the Churches that be in the world Gregory (o) Gregor 1 Reg. lib. 1. cap. 4. a Roman Prelate himself stiles Paul caput Nationum the Head of Nations Eleutherius (p) Epistola Eleutherii ad Episcopos Galliae Stow Chronic. another Bishop of Rome writing to the Bishops of France says Vniversalis a Christo vobis commissa est Ecclesia The Vniversal Church is committed to you by Christ Chrysostom (q) Chrysost in Epist ad Phil. Homil. 13. calls the Women of Philippi caput Ecclesiae the Head of the Church and salutes Theodosius the Emperour (r) Chrysost ad populum Antiochen Homil. 2. with this Encomium Summitas caput omnium supra terram hominum the Height and Head of all men upon Earth Yet neither had St. Paul nor the Gaulish Bishops nor the Women of Philippi nor Theodosius the Emperour Primacy over the Apostles or Superintendency over the whole Church Gent. But St. Ambrose saith (s) Ambros in locum cap. 24. Christus Petrum amoris sui veluti Vicarium reliquit Christ left St. Peter as the Vicar of his love which Attribute and Elogy is not given to any of the Apostles Minist He saith not expressly his Vicar but as his Vicar which Tertullian being Judge is the Holy Ghost's peculiar who speaking of Christ saith (t) Misit vicariam vim Spiritus Sancti qui credentes agat Tertull. De praescriptione adversùs Haereticos He sitting at the Right Hand of God the Father instead of himself sent the power of the Holy Ghost as his Vicar to direct them that believe But if St. Peter in a borrowed Sence may be termed Christ's Vicar the Stile is but the same Eleutherius of Rome gave Lucius first King of Britain And that Eusebius gives not onely the Apostles but all Ministers saying (u) Eusebius Episcopus Romanus Epist 3. 2. Cor. 5. Caput Ecclesiae Christus est Christi autem Vicarii Sacerdotes sunt qui vice Christi legatione funguntur in Ecclesia Christ is the Head of the Church and his Vicars are the Priests that do their Embassage in the Church in place of Christ Now the Collection would be wilde Eleutherius stiles King Lucius and Eusebius calls all Priests Christ's Vicars Therefore Lucius had and all Priests have Supremacy over the whole Church But I beseech you if it should be granted that Peter was Christ's Vicar in some peculiar
Sense supposito sed non dato what makes it for the Pope's Supremacy and Authority over the Catholick Church in general which is the Question Gent. It makes in this That Peter fixed his See at Rome and delegated his Plenipotentiary Power to the Bishops his Successours there that what Power he had he left it in Fee and hereditary to them Minist You speak much in little for this is (x) 2 Thess ii 7 8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the mystery of that wicked one wherein is touched (y) Doctour Sclater upon Thessal pag. 94. First Temerarium a rash avouchment that Peter fixed his Episcopal See at Rome Secondly Erroneum a palpable mistake that he could delegate his Apostolick Power to Successours Thirdly Haereticum a notorious falsity little less then Fundamental that he actually invested the Bishop of Rome with his Apostolick Power derivative to all Posterity Gent. Will you deny that Peter fixed his Episcopal See at Rome when the Fathers so frequently call Rome the Seat of St. Peter Minist (z) Gildas pag. 2. Epist De excidio Britanniae So Gildas the Wise calls Britain St. Peter's Seat telling the British Priests Quod sedem Petri Apostoli inverecundis pedibus usurpassent that They had usurped the Apostle St. Peter 's Seat with unreverent Feet I hope you will not conclude hence that St. Peter fixed his Episcopal See in Britain which is as genuine Logick as the former That Peter was ever so much as at Rome you have neither Scripture Proof nor Presumption (a) Vellenus printed by Illyricus Vellenus with many others proves the contrary Consider but these Reasons impartially Whereas Peter is said to come to Rome the (b) Secundo anno Claudii Petrus Apostolus Romā venit qui annos aliquot anteà Antiochiae praedicaverat hic initium sumit Romana Ecclesia Carion Chronic. lib. 3. pag. 122. second year of Claudius and to reside there twenty five years which is till the last of Nero why doth St. Paul writing his Epistle to the Romans the last year of Claudius or first of Nero make no mention of Peter saying Rom. 1. 5 6. that They were called of Jesus by his Apostleship amongst all Nations Secondly In the last Chapter he greets and salutes near thirty eminent Saints at Rome with their Families and names not Peter which had been an irreverent oversight if he had been resident as Primate there Thirdly Claudius banished all Jews from Rome Peter was a (c) Galat. ii 7 8. Jew Fourthly (d) August in Epist ad Galat. cap. ii The Gospel of Circumcision that is to preach to the Jews wheresoever scattered was committed unto Peter but the Romans were Gentiles Vncircumcised Lastly The Antients that averr Peter's residence so many years at Rome contradict the Stories of the Acts of the Apostles and amongst themselves vary speaking the confused Language of Babel But admit Peter was at Rome will it follow he was fixed as Bishop there Gent. Doth not St. Augustine give a lineal Succession from Damasus who was Bishop at Rome in his time till St. Peter And Doctour Pocklington (e) Pocklington Sunday no Sabbath one of your own glories that he can derive his Pedigree from Augustine the Monk Bishop of Canterbury and from thence ascend the Scale of Primitive Succession till St. Peter Minist Not from Saint Peter as Bishop of Rome but as an Apostle who with his Collegues or Fellow-Apostles ordained Elders and Bishops of their times they succeeding Pastours and Teachers to the world's end Thus the Apostles divided the earth amongst them Saint Paul ordained Timothy at Ephesus Titus at Crete Saint John Polycarp at Smyrna and other Bishops of Asia Saint Bartholomew had his Successours in India Saint James in Spain yet Paul was no Bishop of Ephesus or Crete John of Asia Bartholomew of India or James of Spain The Apostleship was an Extraordinary Office which expired in the Twelve and was incommunicable to Posterity and would have been disparaged by Confinement to a particular Charge Thus Irenaeus (f) Irenaeus lib. 3. cap. Contra Haereses It is easie saith He for all men to see that will see the Truth the antient Traditions of the Apostles in the Church through the whole World and we can reckon those that were ordained Bishops of the Apostles themselves and their Successours also even until our selves Gent. (g) Confutation of the Apology of the Church of England Harding against Jewel page 95. Apostolick Power was twofold either extraordinary common to Saint Peter with the rest of the Apostles this expired in them and was incommunicable to Successours or ordinary which was Saint Peter's peculiar Privilege and this he bequeathed to his Successours Bishops of Rome Minist This is that Erroneum palpable Mistake maintained by Petrus de Palude who said (h) Nullus Apostolorum praeter Petrum factus est à Christo Episcopus alii Apostoli nullam potestatem jurisdictionis à Christo receperunt specialiter post Christi Ascensum fuit collata eis à Petro. Petrus de Palude De potestato Apostolorum Art 2. That None of all the Apostles save onely Peter was Bishop by Christ and that The rest of the Apostles received no Power of Jurisdiction at Christ 's hand but that specially after Christ 's Ascension it was given unto them by Peter Blasphemy worthy of tearing of Garments as highly prejudicial to Christ's Prerogative and contradictory to Scripture as Paul declares Gal. 1. 1. Paul an Apostle not of men neither by man but by Jesus Christ and God the Father Whereupon Saint Chrysostom (i) Paulus nihil opus habebat Petro nec illius egebat voce sed honore par erat illi nihil hic enim dicam ampliùs Chrysoft in Epist ad Galat. cap. 1. Comments thus Paul had no want of Peter nor had any need of his Suffrage or Allowance but in honour was his equal here I will say no more meaning he was in some Sense his Superiour And Saint Augustine (k) August in Epist ad Gal. cap. 2. makes Peter without any distinction Fellow and equal with the other Apostles avouching that Christus sine Personarum acceptione hoc dedit Paulo ut ministraret Gentibus quod etiam Petro dederat ut ministraret Judaeis Christ without any respect of Persons gave the same Authority to Paul to minister among the Gentiles that he gave to Peter to minister among the Jews Whence is gatherable that rather Saint Paul who writ to the Romans preached at Rome lived and dyed there should have had this ordinary Delegation if any then Saint Peter who was designed the Minister of Circumcision which he himself knew well when he said (l) Galat. ii 9. James Cephas that is Peter and John who seemed to be Pillars gave to me and Barnabas the right Hand 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Fellowship that is aequalitatis of equality saith the Gloss and further (m) Non didici