having in p. 284. of his Iust Vindication of the Church of England spoke of the Trent Council saith We have seen heretofore how the French Embassador in the Name of the King and Church of France protested against it and until this day though they do not oppose it but acquiesce to avoid such disadvantages as must ensue thereupon yet they never did admit it Let no Man say that they rejected the Determinations thereof only in point of Discipline not of Doctrine For the same Canonical Obedience is equally due to an acknowledged General Council in point of Discipline as in point of Doctrine Monsieur Iurieu in his Historical Reflections on Councils and particularly on that of Trent which were Translated into English and Printed in the year 1684. Saith that the French Kings their Parliaments and Bishops dislike several things in the Decrees of the Council of Trent and mentions as the Reasons why the Council of Trent is not received in France these following 1. That the Council hath done and suffered many things that suppose and confirm a Superiority of the Pope over Councils 2. It hath confirmed the Papal encroachments upon ordinary's by exemption of Chapters and priviledges of Regulars who are both withdrawn from Episcopal Jurisdiction 3. That it hath not restored to the Bishops certain Functions appertaining to their Office and taken from them otherwise than to execute them as delegates of the See of Rome 4. That it hath infringed the priviledges of Bishops of being Judged by their Metrapolitan and Bishops of Provinces by permitting a removal of great Causes to Rome and giving Power to the Pope to Name Commissioners to Judge the Accused Bishop 5. That it hath declared that neither Princes Magistrates nor People are to be consulted in Setling and placing of Bishops 6. That it hath Empowered Bishops to proceed in their Jurisdictions by Civil pains by Imprisonment and by Seisures of the Temporalties 7. That it hath made Bishops the Executors of all Donations for Pious uses 8. That it hath given them a Superintendency over Hospitals Colledges and Fraternities with power of disposing their Goods notwithstanding that these matters had been always managed by Lay Men. 9. That it hath ordained that Bps. shall have the examining of all Notaries Royal and Imperial with power to Deprive or Suspend notwithstanding any Opposition or Appeal 10. That it hath given power to Bishops with consent of two Members of their Chapter and of two of their Clergy to take and retrench part of the Revenue of the Hospitals and to take away feudal Tithes belonging to Lay-Men 11. That it hath made Bishops the Masters of Foundations of Piety as Churches Chappels and Hospitals so as that those who have the Care and Government of them are obliged to be accountable to the Bishops 12. That in confirming Ecclesiastical Exemptions it hath wholy ascribed to the Pope and Spiritual Judges all power of Judging the Causes of Accused Bishops as if Soveraign Princes had lost the right they had over their Subjects as soon as they became Ecclesiasticks 13. That it hath empower'd the Ordinaries and Judges Ecclesiastick in Quality of Delegates of the Holy See to enquire of the Right and Possession of Lay-Patronages and to quash and annul them if they were not of great necessity and well founded 14. That in Prohibiting Duels it had declared that such Emperor or Prince as should shew favour to Duels should therefore be Excommunicated and Deprived of the Seignory of the place holding of the Church where the Duel was fought 15. that it hath permitted the Mendicant Fryars to possess Immoveables 16. That it hath ordained an Establishment of Judges it calls Apostoles in all Dioceses with Power to Judge of Spiritual and Ecclesiastical Matters in prejudice of the Ordinary 17. That it hath declared that Matrimonial Causes are of the Churches Jurisdiction 18. That it hath enjoyn'd Kings and Princes to leave Ecclesiasticks the free and entire possession of the jurisdiction granted them by the Holy Canons and General Councils that is to say usurped by the Clergy over the Civil Power These are the Principal Points Disputed in France These that tend to the Diminution of the Authority and Priviledges of Bishops to enlarge the Roman power are Rejected by the Bishops And those that would extend the power of Bishops to the Prejudice of the Civil Authority are Rejected by the Parliaments Between both this Council as enacting contrary to the Rights and Liberties of the Gallican Church was never at all received in France so as to obtain the force of a Law He then shews that the Popes Superiority over Councils is a point of Doctrine and was decided in the Council of Trent And yet that the Gallican Church believes the contrary I know it will be said saith he that the Council of Trent hath not decided that the Pope is Superior to Councils Men may talk as they please but things for all that will continue as they are It is true that among the Decrees and Canons of the Council there is none that saith in express Terms that the Pope is Superior to Councils and can be judged by none But the effect of such Decision is apparent in all the Acts and through the whole Conduct of this Council And he afterward saith that the Clause of proponentibus legatis was a plain Decision of the Popes Superiority over the Council But to these 18 Reasons of Mr. Iurieu about the Reception of the Trent Council in France being neither practicable nor practised I might add that according to what my Lord Primate Bramhal observes in another place of that Book of his I Cited before the Obedience promised to the Bishop of Rome as Successor to St. Peter and Vicar of Iesus Christ pursuant to the Trent Council may seem to quadrate but ill with the liberty of the Gallican Church to set up a Patriarch For in p. 194. of that Book he mentions that in Cardinal Richelieu's Days it was well known what Books were freely Printed in France and publickly sold upon pont neuf of the lawfulness of Erecting a new or rather restoring an old proper Patriarchate in France as one of the liberties of the Gallican Church And thereupon saith It was well for the Roman Court that they became more propitious to the French Affairs And if we consider how in the 22 d. Session of the Council of Trent Chapter the 11 th all Kings and Emperors are Anathematized who hinder any Ecclesiasticks from the Enjoyment of any of their feudal Rights or other profits and that it might well be supposed that the Course and Vicissitudes of time would put Roman Catholick Princes on somewhat of that Nature and which so eminently influenced the French King in the Munster Treaty none need wonder at the Trent Councils not being received in France There was a Book called a Review of the Council of Trent written by a Learned Roman-Catholick and Printed A. 1600. and Translated by Dr
imponantur ne cleri vel mona sententiam sanguinis eo ti eo lib. de exces praelatorum ex literis vel aliter dicas quod ille tex non loquitur de haere sed de idolatris ista crimina sunt diversa ut ex superioribus patet Aliter etiam potest dici quod loquitur quando omnes de civitate inficerentur illo crimine si non omnes illud tamen tempore illo licite fiebat stante praecepto Dei qui Dominus est vitae mortis pro quo bonus tex in d. c. si non licet in c. gaudemus de divor ubi de homicidio Sansonis fit mentio Ad alia vero jura quae inducit Archidia videlicet c. legi respondetur quod Authoritate dei illa facta fuerunt qui interius Authoritatem occidendi inspirabat ut in d. c. si non licet ad c. vos dicendum est quod loquitur quum Authoritate judicis illa fiunt ut patet in fine ejusdem tex ubi dicit diligentissimi rectores c. ad c. excommunicamus § Catholici dicas quod intelligitur quum in casu licito bellum contra eos moveretur accedente Authoritate superioris qui hanc concedere posset alias autem sequeretur absurdum quod pro actu illicito reprobato Papa concederet indulgentias quae tantum pro opere Charitatis sunt indulgendae juxta no. per Doctores c. qd autem de paenis remissionibus Pro quo est tex eo tit cum ex eodem tenet S. Tho. 4. sententiarum distin 20. Stabit in hoc conclusio quod si civitas labatur in haeresim tunc demum possit exuri destrui non aliter Hanc sententiam firmat Bar. in l. aut facta § Nonunquam F. F. de paen in crimine haeresis in crimine laesae Majestatis alias ubicunque filius pnnitur propter delictum patris sic fuit factum de Carthagine quae propter Rebellionem passa est aratrum ut ff quibus med usufruct amit l. si ususfructus Dicit etiam se vidisse sententiam definitivam imperatoris Henrici quam dedit contra civitatem Brixiae quae fuit sibi Rebellis in quâ dicebat illam civitatem esse subijciendam aratro quam paenam postea ex Misericordiâ relaxavit quae sententia definitiva est lex ut l. ij ff de lege in l. fi C. eo de re judica c. in causis et ita fecit Papa Bonifacius qui propter delicta quorundam Templariorum totam ordinem eorum destruxit quia erant Heretici Hanc autem sententiam nullus inferior a principe ferre poterit nec sine principis authoritate hoc fieri potest secundum quod latè prosequitur Bart. in extravagan quoniam et idem sensit uno verbo Sal. in l. 1. c. de sed in fine Sed quum dicemus civitatem committere haeresim ut modo praemisso puniatur dicas quod si omnes essent haeretici vel major pars ut in l. quod major ff admunicipa et hoc tenet Bar. in d. extravagant quum in simili materia et requiritur quod conveniant â—ut universitas ad hoc faciendum utpote communicato consilio alias dicerentur singuli facere et non universitas juxta nota per glo l. sed si ex dolo § 1. ff de dolo et l. aliud § refertur ff de Reg. jur neque per hoc credas quod paena corporali puniantur innocentes pro nocentibus quod manifeste patet per ea quo Bar. no. in d. § Nonunquam et Saly in d. l. 1. C. de sediti Sed Iuxta praedicta quaero an punita universitate de Haeresi modo praemisso censeantur singulares puniti ad hoc ut amplius puniri nequeant Ad hoc respondeo quod singulares non eo minus puniri poterunt si culpabiles in hoc delicto reperiantur quia qd debet universitas non debent singuli et é contra ff quod cujusque univer l. sicut § 1. ff de Reg. jur aliud § refert facit ff quod vi aut clam l. semper § si in Sedulchro Ad hanc decisionem faciunt no. per Ioan. Mo. et Io. And. in c. faelicis de pen. li. 6. in fi et per Bart. in d. l. aut facta § nonunquam Without troubling my self to make a formal Translation of this place of Gundissalvus I shall for the benefit of Common Readers set down the Substance of it in English omitting the References to most of the quotations out of Lawyers which to the unlearned in the Laws might seem uncouth and which the Learned may Consult as they please in the Latin Transcript viz. The Summary or Contents 1. Whether a whole City may be Burn'd with fire or otherwise destroyed in which are some Hereticks This is discussed at large to the end of the question 2. When a City may be said to be guilty of Heresie so that it may be wholly destroy'd 3. The Community being punished for Heresie whether every particular Person may seem to be so punished as that he may not be liable to any further punishment Question the 24th In the 24 th place I enquire whether a whole City may be burn'd or otherwise destroyed in which are some Hereticks And the gloss on the Canon Si audieris argues that 't is so by the Text. And Iohannes Laurentius seem to be of opinion that any Person whatsoever may do it But other Authorities are brought for the contrary c. And Archidiaconus saith that the Church doth grant the general power of Exterminating Hereticks And by the Authorities Cited the power for so doing is not only directed to Princes And likewise the Indulgence is granted to the Cruce signati for the exterminating Hereticks But as to the killing and despoiling of such it is safe that it be done by the Edict of the Prince or the Church Lest any should seem to fight rather out of Lust or Revenge than out of Justice or Obedience the which Raynerius doth also assert and likewise Goffredus and Hostiensis Iohannes Andreas goes in the same Track who subjoyns that the Declaration of a Judg on the Crime of Heresie ought necessarily to precede to the effect that execution be so done But those things seem to me under favour to be too crudely and indigestly spoken And in so great a question where the danger of so many is treated of and especially where the innocent are punished for the guilty the Subject is to be Writ of more gravely and more profoundly and ones pen was to have been more temper'd Wherefore I would say that though some of a City are Hereticks yet while the City it self hath not incurr'd the guilt of Heresie and so that that Crime cannot be ascribed to the Body of the City it may not therefore be burn'd or otherwise destroyed For this is not found ordered by any
Divine Worship on Men as much as your Description doth And the Venetians particularly opposing the Popes Interloping in their Jurisdiction that other thing referred to in your Description is sufficiently known But if by your Description of Popery you intend only to give us a Dictionary of your Sense of the word generally as used by you and that you intend by the Extermination of Popery the Banishing only of those Principles of it that are Irreligionary out of Mens Minds namely the Principles that tend to the Popes Spiritual and Temporal Vsurpations I am not to quarrel with your expressing your own meaning But as I Judge several Roman-Catholick Writers using the Term Popery to intend thereby the Religion of the Church of Rome as for example the Author of the Compendium saying what I before referred to that nothing but Popery or at least its Principles can make the Monarchy of England again emerge or lasting yet as to which a Divine Sentence was in the Mouth of the King when in his Gracious Expressions in Council concerning the Church of England he Judged otherwise and said I know the Principles of that Church are for Monarchy c. and meaning by Popery what was called la Catholicitè I shall say that according to the common acception of the Word Popery were I to explain what I usually mean by it I would declare that I mean not only the Power of the Bishop of Rome but of any General Councils in Imposing Creeds and Doctrines c. on me And I desiring to have all Religionary Errors banished out of my understanding and Loving my Neighbour as my self will desire they may be so out of his and particularly if after he knoweth he is bought with a price he shall think it lawful for him to be a Servant of Men And will not only weigh the Commands and Decrees of any Bishop But of any General Council whatsoever And if in Matters that Import my Salvation I find them contrary to the Bible with a Salvo to the Reverence I owe to all Lawful General Councils I will desire them to excuse me from obeying them Were it not for what you have so well in p. 48. said that the Protestant Religion not making the intention of the Preist essential to the Sacrament of the Eucharist is more strongly assertive of the Real presence there than the Popish Hypothesis and for that great and excellent Notion of yours in your Discourse viz. That Papists and others being bought with a Price that therefore they ought not to be the Servants of Men and my Judging that according to what I have mentioned out of Dr Iackson that you would separate your self from any Church that imposed any thing Magisterially on Mens Faiths I might think that perhaps had you lived in the Reign of Henry the 8 th you would not have separated from the Ecclesia Anglicana as then by Law Established And therefore when by your warm Expressions in p. 47. after you have said that the Protestation that the Protestant Religion requires is such a continual one as is Reiterated upon every fresh Act and Attempt of the Papal Religion upon ours and whereby it would impose Creeds and Doctrines on us contrary to the Liberty of the Church of England as now by Law Established You tell us that We are to shew no Mercy to these Principles of Popery that disquiet the World and on the several occasions offered protest against the Damages that both our King and Country may have from the Rage of Popery I may tell you that this PROTESTANCY amounts to no more than what we read of in the Review of the Council of Trent where in Book 1. and 12 th Chapter the Author refers to the French King by his Embassadors causing a PROTESTATION to be made against the Council of Trent and as appeared by the Oration there made by Mr. Arnold de Ferriers the 22 d. of September 1563. where among other things having mentioned many grievances he saith that according to the Commands of the most Christian King they were constrained CONCILIO INTERCEDERE VT NVNC INTERCEDEBANT by the same Token that that Book relates how thereupon a certain Prelate of the Council of Trent not well understanding the Propriety of the Word Intercedere which the Tribunes were wont of Old to use when thay made their Oppositions and Hinderances asked his Neighbour PRO QVO ORAT REX CHRISTIANISSIMVS But of the French Kings Embassadors protesting not only against Grievances in the Council of Trent but against it self as a Grievance and of some occasions thereof it will come in my way to speak hereafter Nor was there ever any Instrument or Paper Writ with more sharpness of Anger and Scorn in the way of Defiance against Papismus or Popery than H. the 8 ths Protestation against the Council of Trent and yet inclusive too of another Protestation I mean of his Adherence to the Faith then called Catholick That long Protestation calls the Pope by the Name of Bishop of Rome and saith surely except God take away our right Wits not only his Authority shall be driven out for ever but his NAME also shall be forgotten in England Nor did ever any Protestant Writer in Queen Elizabeths or King Iames the First 's time or in our late Fermentation so zealously press the Exterminating of the Papal Power as Henry the 8ths Proclamation about the Abolishing the same Triumph at its being here done And where he saith We have by Good and Wholsom Laws and Statutes made for this purpose EXâ—IRPED ABOLISHED Separated and Secluded out of this our Realm the Abuses of the Bishop of Rome his Authority and Iurisdiction of long time Vsurped c. And the King there Orders all manner of Prayers Oraisons Rubricks Canons of Mass-Books and all other Books in the Churches wherein the Bishop of Rome is NAMED or his Presumptuous and proud Pomp and Authority preferred utterly to be Abolished Eradicate and Razed out and his NAME and Memory to be never more except to his Contumely and Reproach remembred but perpetually suppressed and obscured The Act of 28 of Henry the 8 th before spoken of called an Act for Extinguishing the Authority of the Bishop of Rome was here referred to and which Act and other Acts of Parliament Establishing the Kings Supremacy and Excluding the Pope for ever I mentioned as revived in Queen Elizabeths time after their being repeal'd in Queen Mary's I need not observe to you how this present French King hath likewise lately shewn a very Commendable Zeal for the Exterminating the Vsurpations of the Papal Power in the Business of the Regalia and that the Case of that Kings Power is much altered for the better since D' Ossat Writ to Villeroy from Rome with so much Joy for his having found out an expedient as to the difference between Henry the 4 th and the Pope about the granting to one a Church Dignity in France Namely to have the Words put
AGREED VNTO 6th That that which was made by the Clergy for the Publication of the Council of Trent without the Authority of the King be Repaired and Amended and all such things formerly done in the Estate be Reformed AGREED VNTO Yet if any one wants further Confirmation from Authorities about the Trent Council not having been received in France I may send him to the Synopsis of â—ouncils Writ by Dr. Prideaux sometime Regius Professor of Divinity at Oxford and afterward Bishop of Worcester where the Bishop Writing Chap. 5. and p. 29. of the Trent Council saith This Council cryed up by so many Acclamations and so Solemnly Confirmed by the Seal of of the Fisher the French admitted not But after all this said of the Council of Trent's not having been Published and Received in France if either by the Government or Clergy or Laity there any of the Religionary or Doctrinal points of Faith contained in that Council are inwardly believed and openly professed I leave them and all Mankind to the Exercise of the Liberty wherewith christ hath made them free and will suppose that if after all the Old Protestations of the Government against that Council Roman-Catholicks in France having found the Doctrinal Points of their Faith that were Stated and Determined by former General Councils to be more fully and clearly made out in the Tridentine one did prosess the belief of the same and did refer to that Council when they would give an exteriour Account or Reason of their Faith and did think themselves obliged for the supporting the Vnity of the Roman-Catholick Church to profess the same Doctrinal Points with these Countries where that Council had been received and published I will make this Charitable Construction that they did and do intend no more Diminution of the Regal Rights and Liberties of the Gallican Church thereby than the Nations of Europe did intend a Diminution of their Freedom by receiving any part of the Civil Law of Rome and still continuing the Use and Authority of the same in their Commerce and in the Interpretation of their publick pactions and of the Ius gentium Nor than the Romans did intend to lessen the Rights of their Government by taking their Law of the twelve Tables from Athens nor their Maritime Law from Rhodes and no more than our Roman-Catholick Ancestors did intend a Subjugating of our Laws to the Popes Canon Law against several parts of which they openly protested by the receiving of some other parts of it they thought agreeable to the good of Church and State or than the Government at present intends any Recognition of Foraign Power by any parts of the Civil or Canon Law being still incorporated in our Laws and continuing here to be a part of the Lex terrae QVOAD certain causes Ecclesiastical or Maritime And indeed it must be acknowledged to be for the Honour of the Trent Council that in France and some other Countries where it hath not been received and published its Doctrinal Definitions have yet got ground in the Belief of many Roman-Catholicks on the supposed Merits of the things themselves therein contained and as it hath been for the Reputation of some things in the Civil or Canon Law that on their being thought reasonable our Laws have Adopted them as their own But as with all due Tenderness to all my fellow Christians in France or elsewhere whether Lay or Clerical I forbear to Censure or Reproach them in my most Secret Thoughts for Embracing the Belief of any such Tenets as may be called Religionary though taken up from Trent by them after they have used all the due means for the finding out Truth in the same and do most earnestly pray that God who hath been pleased in Scripture to express his Divine Philanthrophy by the Discreet Love of a Father and the Tender Love of a Mother would bestow the same Blessings on them that I wish for my self and my most near and dear Relations so I should have been glad to have found the like Spirit of Charity Breathing in the Acts of the French clergy with Relation to their Christian Brethren differing from them in points Religionary instead of pronouncing their breach made with them to be founded only on Calumnies after the Pastoral Advertisement of that Clergy to them in the year 1682 and instead of affording them their Compassion for not being able in the three following Years to receive that Faith of that Trent Council which I account from the year 1564. the time of its Confirmation to this Day not to have been Published or Received in that Kingdom and whose Publication may be said to be there yet but as it were in abbeyance and instead of further charging them as Calumniators because of the things Writ against the Romanists by our Whitaker and Downham a hardship I have observed complain'd of in some late Writings of the French Protestants But the great Royal goodness of our Gracious King and the fervent Zeal and Charity of the present Divines of England have made them an amends for what they suffered on the account of those our former great Clergy-Men Yet must it be acknowledged that in one point that Clergy in their Petition to the King doth the Huguenots this Justice as to say the pretended Reformed how great so-ever their Blindness is are not arrived to that height of Folly as to maintain their lawful practice of the Crimes of Imputations and Calumny And I am glad that since the 2 d. of March 1679. so much occasion hath been given by the Popes Condemning the Tenets of the Iesuits about the Doctrine of CALVMNY and their Sicarious Principles for the not charging them on the Church of Rome as approved by it as formerly But on the account of the Horrid Calumnies against Fathers and Councils still continued in the Decrets of the Canon Law and forged with as much Falshood as any could have been by the French Clergy observed in the Case of the pretended Reform'd as I have particularly enough shewn in the Case of Cyprian I may well urge it as an Argumentumad hominem that neither the Pope nor French Clergy should have been Authors of too much Severity to those Reformed on the pretence of their Calumniating the Doctrine of their Church And have been careful not to charge on the Catholicitè as the Term is the Falshood of Gratian and the lachesse of the Popes that so long suffer'd so much Trompery in him to pass for Law And were I at Rome now while the Pope is so worthily busy'd in strengthening the preparations against the Turk in this Conjuncture would not divert him from the same by importuning him to make a better Canon Law for his Flock Nor do I charge on the Gallican Church or State what I have mentioned out of Boerius a President of Parliament there If they hoped by the publication of their Book in France to effect a Reconciliation of Churches there or the Translators of it
of the DEPOSING Power than any thing said by their Writers hath been and no doubt but when any more such close Attacks shall be made upon them by our Writers as have been since his Majesties Reign to charge the Allowance of the Deposing Power on their Church they will not neglect to Crave Aid from what you have said in that your Historical Account of that Peace I assure you it was no easie Task to give so Critical and so Impartial an account of the factum of that Peace as you have done and so much for the Advantage of the Papists and whereby you have Merited much more from them than their Favorite of our Church Dr. Heylin did by Writing of the Outrages that accompanyed the Reformation And your occasional rectifying the Mistake of a considerable Writer of the Church of Rome and of such another of the Church of England here in the Negotiation of that peace hath shewed the Niceness and Difficulty of stating it exactly as you have done The Author of the Novelles de la Republique des Lettres for the Month of November last past giving an account of Dr. Burnets 2d Part of the Hist. of the Reformation being Beyond-Sea lately Printed in French doth there in p. 1250 give the World a fresh view of the Horrour of the Lateran Council by rendring our Queen Mary as prompted by that Council to the Persecution of her Protestant Subjects But you having in your Discourse with the Exquisite Artifice of Oratory mentioned some Passages in her Reign not commonly known and that on the Foundation you lay'd so low in the Rubbish of her Reign you might with more Advantage support the whole Super structure of your Judging that any Roman Catholick Prince that should inherit the Throne here would perfectly Decline her politicks and likewise in your Preface particularly fortified the Minds of People against the Fears and Jealousies of such a Prince that might be Occasioned by the Lateran Council did very seasonably thereby advance the measures of Loyalty and Mens more chearful adherence to the Lineal Succession And the Truth is that among the many Pamphlets Writ with most Artifice and ill apply'd Learning ad faciendum populum and to pervert them to the Exclusion I observing the Lateran Council so much insisted on cannot but Judge your undeceiving them in that point to have been the more necessary The Pamphlet you shew'd me in 4 to Pr for Ianeway in the year 1681. and called A Moderate Decision of the Point of Succession humbly proposed to the consideration of the Parliament doth harp much on that Council And another Pamphlet Printed in the same year for the same Person and called The Case of Protestants in England under a Popish Prince c. did there among the many Quotations out of the Canon Law and Canonists councils and Popish Divines and School-Men making for its purpose in p. 5. and 27. trouble us with the Lateran Council and mentions Bellarmines calling it the Papists great and most Famous Council Your having in your Discussion so succesfully combated the obligatoriness of that Council upon Papists was of great use for the unblundering many nominal Protestants as your term is in their fancying it so necessary for the quiet of Christendom that Princes and their Subjects should agree in the Belief of the Speculative points of Religion as your expressions are and whereupon you promise the Age your publication of the fact of the Munster Peace and its Consequences and which promise you have in your Preface so well and fully perform'd The Author of the Answer to the Book call'd A Papist Misrepresented doth refer to Lessius his Discussio decreti magni Concil Lateran and saying that the Churches Authority would not be maintain'd without the Deposing Power and in p. 104. making the Councils of Lateran under Alex. 3. and Innocent 3. to be general ones And in the Reflections on the Answer nothing is mentioned to deny it But your having in your Discussion cited Cardinal Peron for having so strenuously asserted that Councils being a general one and yet not thinking it Obligatory for the Exterminating the Persons of Hereticks from France where their number was so great and your having cited Cardinal D' Ossat partly to the same effect and further shewing this their Doctrine Incarnate in the Lives of so many Roman-Catholick Crown'd Heads and their Empires after all the dismal effects that the contrary practices produced and that the Voice of Nature did in the Storm their Country 's were in and when it was so necessary to have many Hands speak it as plainly concerning Heretical Subjects continuing with them as St. Pauls words were to the Centurion and to the Soldiers viz. except these abide in the Ship ye cannot be saved and your shewing that pursuant to the Munster Peace they did abide in the Ship and thereby saved themselves and it was time by you very nobly spent in your helping Men to See how far Nature had by its powerful Hands effectually delivered People from their Fears of the Lateran Council and which time was to much better purpose spent than that of some Roman-Catholick Apologists for any harsh thing Decreed by General Councils and saying that they are not declared as Doctrinal points and that the Decrees relating only to Discipline and Government come short of being Articles of Faith as the Author of the Reply to the Reflections upon the answer to a Papist Misrepresented and Represented oâ—â—erves and as to which he there further in p. 54. quotes the Vindication of Dr. Sherlocks Sermon for saying that to Decree what shall be done includes a Virtual Definition of that Doctrine on which that Decree is founded But such little Arts the great Cardinal you mentioned forbore to use in the point of the Lateran Council And 't is not Art but Nature that can satisfie the Curious in this inquisitive Age and by the great prospect of Nature you have shew'd Men appearing in the Munster-Peace they will be naturally untaught their Fears of that Council now they know its Sting is pluck'd out what ever humming about their Ears it may still make by the help of any Writers The Learned Author of the Seasonable Discourse in his other Book of the difference between the Church and Court of Rome consider'd in p. 21. speaking of the Lateran Council and how his Roman-Catholick Antagonist had Cited one Iohn Bishop who in a Book Written in the time of Queen Elizabeth affirmed that the Constitution of the Lateran Council on which the whole Authority of Absolving Subjects from their Allegiance and Deposing Princes is founded is no other than a Decree of Pope Innocent the 3 d and was never admitted in England Yea that the said Council was no Council at all nor any thing at all there Decreed by the Fathers doth in the following Pages substantially Confute his Adversary and sets up the Authority of Cardinal Peron and of the Council of Trent against
of the Bodleian Library and of which Library he was the Head-keeper And in that Office very Diligent and Careful and was a Person of great Learning and Probity The Knowledge of this Rescript of that Vniversity and likewise of the other of Cambridge is necessary to all who will be Masters of the Knowledge of the History of those times For the Author of a Book in Quarto Printed in Oxford in the year 1645. called the Parliaments power in Laws for Religion having there in p. 4. said that the third and Final Act for the Popes Ejection was an Act of Parliament 28. H. 8th c. 10. entituled an Act extinguishing the Authority of the Bishop of Rome Saith it was usher'd in by the Determination first and after by the practice of all the Clergy for in the Year 1534. which was two years before the passing of this Act the King had sent this Proposition to be agitated in both Vniversities and in the greatest and most famous Monastery's of the Kingdom That is to say An aliquid authoritatis in hoc Regno Angliae Pontifici Romano de Jure competat plusquam alii cuicunque Episcopo extero By whom it was Determined Negatively that the Bishop of Rome had no more power of Right in the Kingdom of England than any other Foraign Bishop which being Testified and return'd under their Hands and Seals respectively the Originals whereof are still remaining in the Library of Sir Robert Cotton was a good preamble to the Bishops and the rest of the Clergy Assembled in their Convocation to conclude the like And so accordingly they did and made an Instrument thereof Subscribed by the Hands of all the Bishops and others of the Clergy and who afterward confirm'd the same by their Corporal Oaths The Copies of which Oaths and Instruments you shall find in Foxes Acts and Monuments vol. 2. fol. 1203. and 1211. of the Edition of John Day An. 1570. And this was semblably the ground of a following Statute 35. H. 8. c. 1. Wherein another Oath was devised and ratified to be imposed upon the Subject for the more clear asserting of the Kings Supremacy and the utter exclusion of the Popes for ever Which Statutes though they were all Repeal'd by one Act of Parliament 1st and 2d of Phillip and Mary C. 8. Yet they were brought in force again 1 Eliz c. 1. My Lord Herbert in his History of Henry the 8 th under the year 1534. and the 26 th year of his Reign p. 408. telling us that it was Enacted that the King by his Heirs and Successors Kings of England should be Accepted and Reputed the Supream Head on Earth of the Church of Eng. called Ecclesia Anglicana c. saith that that Act though much for the manutention of the Regal Authority seem'd not yet to be suddenly approved by our King nor before he had consulted with his Counsel c. and with his Bishops who having discussed the point in their Convocations declared that the Pope had no Iurisdiction warranted to him by Gods Word in this Kingdom which also was seconded by the Vniversities and by the Subscriptions of the several Colledges and Religious Houses c. Most certainly Hen. the 8 th's gaining this point that the Bp. of Rome hath no more power here by Gods Word than any other Foraign Bishop was of great and necessary use in order to the effectual withstanding the Papal Usurpations and was re verâ the gaining of a Pass and for which end he made use of intellectual Detachments from his Vniversities And suitably to the Wisdom of our Ancestors here in Henry 8 ths time any Popish Prince abroad who intends effectually to Combat the Papal Usurpations must first gain that Pass For the effect of the common sayings in Natural Philosophy that Natura non conjungit extrema nisi per media and that Natura non facit Saltum must likewise obtain in Politicks when the Nature of things is operating there toward a Reformation of Church or State And this weighty Rescript of the Vniversity of Oxford not being Printed in Dr. Burnets excellent Historical Books of the Reformation nor yet in Fox his Martyrology and now Published here as set down in English by Dr. Iames may perhaps serve usefully to illuminate the World abroad about the way of its Transitus from Popery But here I shall observe that though I find in Mr. Fox his Acts and Monuments Printed in 3 Volumes in London for the Company of Stationers An. 1641. the Iudgment of the Vniversity of Cambridge is there set down in p. 338. and relates to the same year with the Oxford Rescript namely the year 1534. yet it doth not there appear to be a Rescript to King Henry 8 th by way of return to a Letter from his Majesty and it begins thus Vniversis sanctae Matris Ecclesiae filijs ad quos praesentes literae perventurae sunt Caetus omnis Regentium non Regentium Academiae Cantabrigiensis salutem in omnium Salvatore Iesu Christo. Cum de Romani Pontificis potestate c. And then follows the Translation of the whole in English and which makes about half of that page 338 and wherein the same Judgment for substance is given with that of the Oxford Rescripts That the Bishop of Rome hath no more State Authority and Iurisdiction given him of God in the Scriptures over this Realm of England than any other extern Bishop hath That Instrument hath not there the Date of any Month to it as the Oxford Rescript hath But in the Body of the Instrument 't is mentioned that the Iudgment of that Vniversity was therein required though not by whom and towards the Conclusion of it 't is Styled an Answer in the Name of that Vniversity and 't is probable that the Iudgment of that Vniversity might have been required by some of the Ministers of King Henry 8 th and by his Order whereas the Oxford Rescript mentioned his Majesties having himself required the Iudgment of that Vniversity in that point What I have here mentioned of the Iudgment of our two Vniversities gives me occasion to take notice of an Oversight of my Lord Herbert in this place of his History by me Cited For he in this p. 408. makes the Vniversities Determining that the Pope had no Iurisdiction warranted to him by Gods Word in this Kingdom whereas he should have Represented their Sense of his not having more here than any other Foraign Bishop And thus you truly express the Sense of their Judgment in this Case when you say p. 70 th of your Book that the Popes Cards were by the Clergy that plaid his Game thrown up as to all claim of more power here by the Word of God than every other Foraign Bishop had And both our Vniversities sent their Iudgments about the same thing to the K. which methinks might make our Papists approach a little nearer to us without any fear of Infection For we allow the Bishop of Rome
Parliament I mentioned of 28 of H. 8 th viz. An Act for Extinguishing the Authority of the Bishop of Rome and as to whose Authority we are told by More 463. that all the power of the Pope was not by the 25 of H. 8th given to the King but was extinct in Holy wells Case for any Writers without the Heat and Light of much clear Learned Argumentation to rekindle that extinguished ignis alienus a strange fire of Foreign power in our Beliefs will I may modestly say be a strange Attempt and not to be Effected by any Rhetorical Representer But here I cannot forbear observing that the Author of the Papist Misrepresented c. doth in his Reflections upon the Answer to his Book in p. 13. refering to Dr. Hickes his Iovian call him a Worthy Divine and Cite him for saying that in Case a Popish Julian indeed should Reign over us he should believe him uncapable of Repentance and upon that Supposition should be tempted to pray for his Destruction and then in seeming Charity to the Church of England deny that because the Doctor used those Words it is honest hence to blacken the Church of England with this Disloyal Principle as if she allowed her Members though not to fight against yet to pray for the Destruction of such a Prince The Doctor whose great Learning and Pains taken in doing right to the Succession you have so particularly Represented in your Preface and whereupon if we reflect on the little or nothing ex professo writ by any Romanists against the Exclusion it will be no Complement to â—ay that he hath therein laboured more abundantly than THEY all might if it had pleased this Representer have been deservedly referred to by him with a higher Character And if in any expressions warmer than ordinary against the principles of Popery he had erred by any little Transports in any of his Books he sufficiently Merited from any Roman Catholick Criticks their mildest Representation of them And it had been but Justice in the Representer to have Cited the former part of the Doctors Sentence viz. and if it should please God to plague the Church with such a Spightful Enemy of Christ c. And if he had done so it would have invited the Reader to look back to what the Doctor had written from the 140 th page to the passage which he Cites and then his Reflection would have come to nothing By what I have heard of the Doctors Loyalty I believe him to be one who with Effectual Fervent Prayers doth Importune Heaven for his Majesties long and prosperous Reign and doth his Duty of praising God for his Majesties being so far a Nursing Father to the Church of England And I have that opinion of the largeness of his Christian Charity and Justice that he is ready to retaliate with the Representer in not blackning the whole Church of Rome with the principles lately held by some Iesuits and others Casuists referred to in the Popes Decree of March 2 d. 1679. in § 13 14 15. by the 1 st of which it is rendred no Mortal Sin to be troubled for the Life of another so it be done with due Moderaton and by the second it is made Lawful to desire the Death of ones Father by an absolute desire and by the 3 d. Lawful for a Son to rejoyce at the same and perpetrated by a Son in Drunkenness I suppose you could not but take notice how that Answerer of the Papist Mis-represented c. reflects on the unlucky instance there in Caiaphas and saying was not Caiaphas himself the Man who proposed the taking away the Life of Christ at that time was he assisted in that Councel Did not he determine afterward Christ to be guilty of Blasphemy and therefore worthy of Death For you have well observed the ill Luck that the Famous Hosius as he is called by you had in this case of Caiaphas as to which Dr. Crackanthorp exclaims against Hosius O Hominem Sacrilegum ac Blasphemum Illene reus Mortis qui innocens innoxius vitam dedit An Blasphemus etiam Ea judicij pars You may in Bishop Iewels Apology find this blot of Hosius hit where speaking of the Pope p. 151 152. of the London Edition in the â—ear 1581. he saith Petrus quidem á Soto ejus astipulator HOSIVS nihil dubitant affirmare concilium illud ipsum in quo Christus Iesus adjudicatus est morti habuisse spiritum propheticum spiritum sanctum spiritum veritatis Nec falsum aut vanum fuisse quod Episcopi illi dixerunt Nos habemus Legem secundum legem debet mori illos judicasse Sic enim scribit HOSIVS judicij veritatem omninóque justum fuisse illud decretum quo ab illis pronuciatum est Christum dignum esse qui moreretur Mirum verò est non posse istos pro se dicere propugnare causam suam nisi uná etiam Annae Cajaphaeque pratrocinentur Nam qui illud ipsum concilium in quo filius Dei ad crucem ignominiosissime condemnatus est legitimum dicent fuisse ac probum quod tandem illi concilium decernent esse vitiosum Tamen qualia sunt istorum concilia ferè omnia necesse illis fuit ut ista de Cajaphae Annaeque concilio pronunciarent c. He there had Cited in the Margin Hosius contra Brentium lib. 2. But if so great a Divine as Hosius who was a Polonian Bishop and Cardinal of Rome and one of the Popes Legates in the Councel of Trent did thus err in this point the mistake of an other therein who was of an inferior Character is not to be much wondered at However as I am an Honourer of Learned Men I Derogate not from the Talents of Wit and Learning shewn in his Book and do suppose that somewhat of the Moderation he shews therein may be attributed to the Candour of that Church he was first Educated in And am sorry that he should find any Cause in his Papist Misrepresented Chapter 31. Of wicked Principles and Practices to say take but a view of the Horrid practices She i. e. the Church of Rome hath been engaged in of late years consider the French and Irish Massacres the Murder of Hen. the 3 d. and 4 th Kings of France the Holy League the Gunpowder Treason the Cruelty of Queen Mary the Firing of London the late Plot in the year 1678. to Subvert the Government and destroy his Majesty the Death of Sir Edmund Godfrey c. And then tell me whether that Church which hath been the Author and Promoter of such Barbarous Designs ought to be esteemed Holy c. and let never so many pretences be made yet 't is evident that all these Execrable practices have been done according to the known Principles of this Holy Church and that her greatest Patrons the most Learned of her Divines her most Eminent Bishops her Prelates Cardinals and even the Popes themselves have been
Law Nay the Laws are evident to the contrary Namely that Sins ought only to reach to their Authors To the Laws that are brought to the contrary the Answer is clear and to the Canon Si audieris by which the gloss doth found it self much may be said As first that that was a Precept of the Old Judicial Law as appears clearly For 't is found in the 13 th of Deuteronomy And commands of that kind ceased to oblige under the new Law unless the institution thereof had been renewed Nor do we read of any such new Institution For Cyprian to whom that Text in the Decrets is ascribed had not the power of issuing out the General Laws for as much as he was not Bishop of Rome nor especially in a Case wherein order is given concerning Burning and Death as appears in the Text c. Or otherwise you may say that that Text doth not speak of Hereticks but of Idolaters and those Crimes are different as appears out of what hath been before said And again otherwise it may be said that it speaks so when all Persons of a City were infected with that Crime And if they were not all infected yet that was lawful at that time while there was a Command of God for it who is the Lord of Life and Death and for which there is a good Text where mention is made of Sampson's Homicide But to the other Laws which Archidiaconus urgeth 't is answered that those things were done by Gods Authority who did inwardly inspire the Authority of killing c. and it is to be said that he speaks when these things were done by the Authority of the Judge as appears in the end of the Text c. And as to somewhat else Cited you may say that 't is understood when in a lawful Case War was waged against them and there was added also to that the Authority of a Superior who could grant it Otherwise this Absurdity would follow that for an Act unlawful and disallowed the Pope might grant Indulgences which are only to be granted for a work of Charity According to what is named by the Doctors c. and for which the Text makes for as much as Saint Thomas holds out of the same 4. Sententiarum distinc 20. The Result of the whole will rest here that if a City doth fall into Heresie then it may be burn'd and destroy'd and not otherwise Bartolus Confirms this Resolution in the Case of Heresie and of Treason and in all other Cases where the Son is punished for the offence of the Father And thus it was done in the Case of Carthage which for its Rebellion was ploughed up as appears in the Pandects He saith likewise that he saw the Definitive Sentence of Henry the Emperor which he gave against the City of Brixia that Rebelled against him wherein he mentioned that the City was to be ploughed up The which punishment he afterward out of his Mercy released c. And thus Boniface did who by reason of the faults of some of the Templars destroyed their whole order because they were Hereticks But none inferior to a Prince can give this Sentence nor can it be done without the Authority of a Prince according to what Bartolus doth at large pursue And Salycet was of the same Opinion But when shall we say that a City commits Heresie so that it may be punished in the manner aforesaid I Answer then if they were all Hereticks or the Major part And it is requisite that they should meet together as a Community to commit this Crime Namely by joynt Councels Otherwise single Persons would be said to do it and not the Community c. Nor would I have you believe by this that the Innocent are punished with Corporal Punishment for the guilty which appears manifestly from what is said by Bartolus c. But accrding to the premisses the question is Whether the Community being punished for Heresie every single Person be deem'd to be punished so as that he may be judged to be severally punished for it and so ought not to be punished further To this I Answer that Persons singly may nevertheless be punished if they are found guilty of this Crime because what the Community doth owe Persons do not singly and so on the contrary c. For this Decision those things do serve that are noted by Ioannes and the Moderns and by Bartolus If any one would know what figure Gundissalvus makes in the account of the Learned Papal World you may tell him that I suppose that Tractate of his against Heretical pravity was Printed long before it was bound up with the Tractatus Criminales before mentioned For that by one whom I Employed to Consult the TRACTATES in 17 Volums in the Edition of Lions in the Year 1544. I am informed that that Work of Gundissalvus is there in the Second Volume fol. 267. the which alone would shew him to be a considerable Author and in the course of my Cursory View of some Civil Law Books writ of matters of State I have read him respectfully cited by Magerus de Advocatiâ Armatâ cap. 8. and p. 205. and by Klockius in his Book De Contributionibus And as an Indication of his not being valued as a singular or Heterodox Author by Passerus who published the Criminal Tractates aforesaid you may find somwhat of the Famous Boerius his Tractatus de Seditiosis published in the same Volume viz. char 57. n 18. asserted to the same purpose But none need wonder at Gundissalvus giving his opinion as he did when he tells us that Iohannes Andreas and Laurentius two Famous Canonists seemed to be of opinion that an Heretical City might be destroyed by any one and without the Judgment of the Church particularly ordering it Yet here in this place I have Cited out of Gundissalvus it is worthy of observation that some passages may render him appearing no Slave to Implicit Faith or one as I may say that roweth in the Popes Galleys His Judging of the Case as he did with so much Horror was very Commendable in him as was likewise his reproof of the Cannonists by him Cited and his saying that ones pen was to have been more tempered and his differing from the measures of the Text and Gloss about the Canon Si audieris and the Interpretation of the 13 th of Deuteronomy and answering the objection thence taken and from the Authority of Cyprian seems to have in it something of the Noble Berean But after all he doth in reality shew himself an arrant Canonist and with other Canonists by him cited he founds the Papal power of destroying Heretical Cities on the Popes being a kind of Prince or fifth Monarch over the World and on Heresie being a rebellion against him And that where the Major part of a City are Hereticks the most moderate of the Canonists think the destruction of it is lawful if there be the Judgment of the Church that is
into the Popes Bull thus viz. pro quo Christianissimus Rex scripsit instead of quem Rex Christianissimus nominavit I doubt not but your Curiosity hath led you to see a Copy of the Letter writ to the French King on the 10 th of Iuly 1680. by the Arch Bishops and Bishops and other Ecclesiasticks of France appointed by the Clergy there about the last Breve of this Pope upon the Subject of the Regale in which Letter they take notice how THIS POPE required him not to subject any of their Churches to the right of the Regale and threatned him that he would make use of his Authority if his Majesty did not Submit to the Paternal Remonstrances he had often made and repeated to him about that point and they there pass as YOVR Protestants so far as to make a PROTESTATION as their word is against the Papal Vsurpation designed by THIS POPE And moreover YOVR sober party of the IESVITS have in France adhered to the King against the Pope in this Contest about the Regale But how severe the same Arch-Bishops and Bishops in France who made that PROTESTATION have since been in their ADDRESS against the True Protestants there who have been averse from the Religionary part of Popery as you call it I suppose you cannot be ignorant For undoubtedly the Acts of the general Assembly of the French Clergy in the year 1685. Concerning Religion together with their Complaint against the Calumnies and Injuries which the pretended reformed have and do every day publish in their Books and Sermons against the Doctrine of the Church presented to the King by the Clergy in a Body July the 14 th 1685. Cannot have escaped your view the same having been since printed in London Translated into English and as I suppose by some of the Roman Catholick Religion and will not trouble my self to guess for what intent of the Publisher I have looked it over and leave it to our Divines to consider whether it deserves any Answer I observed in it one Reference to Peter du Moulins Nouveaute de Papisme of the Edition of Sedan about Protestants rendring the Papists Idolatrous as invocating Saints which was an Instance of the freedom allowed Protestants in that Realm in Writing and Publishing Books against the Religion of Popery as by Law Established in France a liberty that the Publisher of that Translation hath likewise sufficiently taken in publishing it here without Licence and whereby he hath brought our Famous Whitaker and Downham Rainolds and Ames into the Range of Calumniators and Publishers of Calumny's against the Church of Rome Though the Course of my Studies hath lain much more among Law-Books than in those of Polemical Divinity yet the time I have spent on the latter hath enabled me to observe one very Inauspicious passage under the first Article and the Column of the Calumny of the pretended Reform'd about it and where the French Clergy accuse them of Calumny for saying That with the Hereticks mentioned by St. Irenaeus Roman Catholicks reject the Holy Scriptures that with the Montanists they accuse it of Imperfection that they Contemn it and afterward that the Roman Catholicks call the Scripture a Dumb Rule a Stumbling Stone a Nose of Wax a Two edged Sword And for that purpose having begun with accusing our Whitaker and Downham as Calumniators and refer'd to their works to prove it they afterward quote the Thesaurus Disputationum Theologicarum in Academiâ Sedanensi c. de summo controvers Iudice Tom. 1. p. 26. Onerant pontificij Scripturam plaustro convitiorum vocando eam Regulam Mutam lapidem scandali nasum cereum gladium ancipitem But without any undue Reflections on that Clergy I think it might have been more worthy of their great Learning and Hatred of CALVMNY and their Tenderness for the Honour of the Scripture and their Obligation to handle Theological Controversie with the fairest and softest hands they could and in short more worthy of the Honour of the Church of Rome if they had quoted Turrian cont Sadel p. 99. Canus lib. 3. Loc. Theol. Cap. 2. Sect. â—ec vero Ecchius in ench tit de ecclesiâ Hosius lib. 3. de Auth. Sac. Script Sect. fingamus p. 148. as I find them Cited by our Dr. Crackanthorp under his De loc arguendi ab Authoritate that you have referred to and whom you have Celebrated for being just in his quotations and who there speaking of Papists slighting the Scripture thus quotes these Authors viz. HI Scripturam vocant gladium Delphicum Nasum cereum ad sensum quemvis flexibilem quae non nisi ecclesiae suae authoritate authentica sit de quâ posse pio sensu dici volunt eam si destituatur ecclesiae authoritate non plus valere quam Aesopi fabulas And had further Cited some index expurgatorius for censuring the profaneness of those expressions in Roman Catholick Authors and one of whom was a Legate in the Council of Trent and another a Divine sent to that Council by the Pope There is another Eminent Father of our Church whose Writings the French Clergy might if they pleas'd have quoted for the same purpose they did those of Whitaker and Downham and that is Iewel in his Apology who in p. 106 107 108. saith Itaque Sacrosanctas Scripturas quas Servator noster Iesus Christus non tantúm in omni sermon usurpavit sed etiam ad extremum sanguine suo consignavit quo populum ab illis tanquam à re periculosâ noxiâ minore negotio abigant solent literam frigidam incertam inutilem mutam occidentem mortuam appellare Quod nobis quidem perinde videtur esse ac si eas omnino nullas esse dicerent Sed addunt etiam simile quoddam non aptissimum Eas esse quodammodo nasum cereum posse fingi flectique in omnes modos omnium instituto inservire An PONTIFEX ista à SUIS dici nescit Aut tales se habere patronos non intelligit Audiat ergo quà m sanctè quamque piè de hac re scribat Hosius quidam polonus ut ipse de se testatur Episcopus certe homo disertus non indoctus acerrimus ac fortissimus propugnator ejus causae Mirabitâ—â— opinor hominem pium de illis vocibus quas sciret proâ—ectas ab ore Dei vel tam impiè sentire potuisse vel tam contumeliosè scribere ita praesertim ut eam sententiam non fuam unius propriam videri vellet sed istorum communem omnium Nos inquit ipsas scripturas quarum tot jam non diversas modo sed etiam contrarias interpretationes afferri videmus facessere jubebimus Deum loquenâ—em potius audiemus quà m ut ad EGENA ista ELEMENTA nos convertamus in illis Salutem nostram constituamus Non oportet legis Scripturae peritum esse sed à Deo doctum vanus est labor qui scripturis impenditur Scriptura enum creatura est
Canon Law giving the Pope a power to receive Appeals from the Dominions of Soveraign Princes and States Mastertius in his Book de justitiâ Legum Romanarum in the Summaries of his 20 th Chapter sets it down That 1. Ridetur Pontifex ab ipsâ Romanâ Curiâ 2. Credentes Constitutioni Pontificis a Regibus liberisque populis laesae Majestatis damnantur 3. Iterum dissentit a Pontifice Romana Curia 4. Mira pontificis caecitas notatur 5. Intellectus L. à proconsulibus 19. Cod de appellat 6. Ius Canonicum malè damnat in expensas tantum appellantem perperam Under which he saith Infelix fuit Romanus Praesul in Cap. 7. Cap. de priore 31. Cap. Ad audientiam 34. Cap. dilecti 52. Ext. de appellat quibus constituit adversus L. Imper. in princip D. de appellat licere pulsatae parti relictis medijs pontificalem cognitionem invocare nam ipsa Romana Curia id Iuris tanquam omnem bonum ordinem invertens ex merâ dissentiendi libidine promanans explosit neque procedit Canonistarum glossema quo videtur id constituisse pontifex ob specialem suae sedis praerogativam quâ fidelium omnium competens est Iudex Cap. si duobus 7. ibi D. D. ext de appellat Concil Trident. sess 24. Cap. 20. de reformat Nam cum id falsum sit totius Christiani Orbis Reges liberique populi laesae Majestatis reos agunt qui vel immediatè vel ab ipsorum sententiâ ad pontificem praesumunt appellare Eodem candore defert appellationi rei minimae iterum reluctante Romanâ Curiâ requirente ut litis aestimatio sit ut minimum coronatorum decem Praesec in praxi Episcop p. 2. Cap. 4. Art 15. N. 8. Mechlinensi 50. Flor. D. Zypaeus de Iure Pontif. novo tit de appellat N. 8. Mihi videtur quod pontifex de industria se voluerit risui propinare nam hic defert appellationi rei minimae suprà relictis mediis implorationi Pontificialis auditorij evocando Belgam aut Anglum in Causâ aliquorum obolorum ad urbem Romanam experiundi sui Iuris gratiâ But there is another use we may now well make of the publication of this Rescript of the Vniversity of Oxon and that is to observe how awkwardly and unseasonably the Author of The Papist Misrepresented and Represented hath thought fit to Represent the Pope as now deducing a Claim to a Higher Power here by the Word of God than what our Roman-Catholick Universities allowed him in Henry the 8 th's time For in his 18 th Chapter he tells us That the Papist believes that there is a Pastor Governor and Head of Christs Church under Christ to wit the Pope or Bishop of Rome who is the Successor of St. Peter to whom Christ committed the Care of his Flock c. and now believing the Pope to enjoy his Dignity he looks on himself obliged to shew him the Respect Submission and Obedience which is due to his place And afterward in this manner is he ready to behave himself towards his CHIEF PASTOR with all Reverence and Submission never scrupling to receive his Decrees and Definitions such as are issued forth by his Authority with all their due Circumstances and according to Law in the concern of the whole Flock His Answerer doth well reply to him in that point and with a Candour suitable to the Pacifick State of the Realm you have predicted under any Prince of the Roman-Catholick Communion say viz. How doth it appear that Christ ever made St. Peter Head of the Church or committed his Flock to him in contradistinction to the Rest of the Apostles This is so far from being evident by Scripture that the Learned Men of their Church are ashamed of the places commonly produced for it c. And afterward saith ' We need not insist on the Proof of this since the late mentioned Authors of the Roman Communion have taken so great pains not only to prove the Popes Supremacy to be an Encroachment and Usurpation in the Church but that the laying it aside is necessary to the Peace and Unity of it And until the Divine Institution of the Papal Supremacy be proved it is to no purpose to debate what manner of Assistance is promised to the Pope in his Decrees It was I think an undertaking that none but a very Sanguine Man could suppose fesable to engage us to believe in this Age that the Pope was by Divine Right Head of our Church under Christ. I say in this Age so generally Learned and when a Layman furnished but with an ordinary Library can shew that the Churches of the Brittish Islands England Scotland and Ireland as my Lord Primate Bramhal shews in Chap. 5. of his Iust Vindication of the Church of England by the Constitution of the Apostles and by the Solemn Sentence of the Catholick Church are exempted from all Foreign Iurisdiction and that if it be objected that the Bishop of Rome was ever our Patriarch that all Patriarchal Jurisdiction is of Human Institution and by the Statute of 35 C. 1. it was declared that the Holy Church of England was founded in the State of PRELACY not of Papacy within the Realm of Eng. not without it by the Kings and Peers thereof not by the Popes and when in the time of our late Civil Wars the Presbyterian and Independent Divines had by their Claims of Ius Divinum for their Models of Church-Government so much exercised the understanding of the People in general that at the time of his late Majesties Restoration restoring to our Church the best Constituted Government in the World many of our Virtuosi and Latitudinarians could not be brought expresly to own its excellence on an Universal Ius Divinum praeceptivum and would say that in any Church Government that by Divine Right would bind all Churches there must be not only praxis but institutio apostolica The Pryers into the Rabbinical Learning of the Iews have not been forced more to observe their Criticising on the Divinity of the Fire which burn'd the Sacrifices on the Brazen Altar as coming from Heaven both when the Tabernacle was erected and when the Temple was built and making the fire in the first Temple to be Divino-Divinus altogether Holy and the fire in the second Temple to be Divino-Humanus Human Holy as being kindled as our fire though still kept in as the fire of the first Temple was and the third fire that Nadab and Abihu offered to be Humanus and likewise called by them alienus as strange fire then the Readers of the late Controvertists of the Ius Divinum of several Forms of Church-Government among us have been forced to take notice of their nicety in distinguishing it And now after the Bishop of Rome had before Henry the 8 th's time made the figure of the fire Divino Humanus and whose Authority was then Extinguished for so the Style runs of the Act of
Langbain and Printed at Oxon 1638. The Author is believed by Rivet in his Answer to Coeffeteau and by Langbain to be William Ranclin Dr. of Laws fiscal Advocate in the Court of Aydes at Oua in Henry the 4 ths time and after-terward Attorney General in the Soveraign Court of Aydes at Montpellier In ch 1. p. 11. of the Translated Book he tells us that being at Court he saw many earnest Suits Exhibited to the French King in behalf of the Pope for the receiving that Council and such as had been made to the preceding Kings but which they would never grant nor allow the publication of what they conceived so dangerous to Church and State And in ch 2. he gives us several Instances which were made to the late Kings for receiving the Council of Trent Charles the 9th was moved by the Embassadors of Pope Pius the 4th the Emperor and King of the Romans the King of Spain the Prince of Piemont soon after the year 1563. to Publish that Council The King said he would have the Advice of his Lords But it was Determined by them that he should not hearken to their Requests That in the year 1572. when Cardinal Alexandrino knew the Popes Nephew came out of Spain into France with Commission to reinforce the Suit to Henry the 3d. both the Pope and the Clergy urged him to publish it but nothing was done The Request was renewed by the Clergy at Blois and especially by Peter Espinoc Archbishop of Lions in the year 1576 but without any effect The Request was renewed by the Assembly of France Assembled at Melun in Iuly 1579. The Speaker was Arnalt Bishop of Bazas Nicholas Angelier Bishop of Brien made the like Instance to the same King Oct. 3. 1579. and again July 17. 1582. Renald of Beaune Arch-Bishop of Bourges and Primate of Aquitaine Delegate for the Clergy made the same Request at Fountain-Bleau but all in vain In the beginning of A. 1583. A Nuntio came from the Pope into France to Henry the 3d. but could not stir him from his purpose and in a Letter to the King of Navarre Henry 4. who afterward Succeeded him he protests that it was never in his thoughts to admit of it November the 19th 1585. the aforesaid Bishop Nicholas Angelier renews this Request very earnestly to the King and another Assault is made on him October 14. 1585. by the Bishop and Earl of Nayan who in his Speech is very Confident that the Council of Trent was guided by the Holy Ghost He adds though it was not received yet several things in that Council especially what concern'd the Clergy were inserted in the Canons of some of their Provincial Councils held in France at Rohan 1581 at Bourges 1584. at Tours 1585. and at Aix in Provence the same year One of the Kings Lieutenants General for the Administration of Iustice in an Assembly of the States particularly An. 1588. makes a Suit to the King to publish the Council but to no purpose Nay more The King did not receive so much as those very Decrees of the Council which were no way Repugnant to the Gallican Liberties However Suppressing the Name of the Council they Decreed the very same things at Blois An. 1579. But after all that this Author hath mentioned of the Parliament at Blois Decreeing the same things in the year 1579. that were agreeable to the Canons of the Council of Trent and of the fruitless Request of the Arch-Bishop of Bourges in 1582. and of others afterwards for the Reception of that Council I cannot but call to mind that Thuanus Hist. Tom. 4. lib. 94. p. 388. Edit An. 1620. tells us that in the year 1589. the same Arch-Bishop of Bourges in a Convention of the â— Estates did among other things propose ut Concilio Tridentino tradita disciplina ab omnibus recipiatur But nothing was done and the Speech of the Arch-Bishop and some others made in that Convention are by Thuanus called Orationes intempestivae And I might add that the Author of the Inventoire General des affaires de France from the Death of Henry the 4 th to the year 1620. tells us that in the year 1615 on the 19 th of February the Clergy Deputed the Bishop of Beauvais to pray the third Estate to agree to the publishing the Council of Trent And that Monsieur le President Miron in the Name of the 3d. Estate Replyed that they could not at present receive that Council The which agrees with what I have before alledged contrary to the Measures of Cressy and as doth likewise the Popes issuing out a Breve to the Cardinal of Ioyeux An 1605. and mentioned in the Memoirs p. 391. after the Histoire du Cardinal Duc de Ioyeux par le Sieur Aubery Advocat en Parlement aux Conseils du Roy Printed at Paris An. 1654. and in which Breve the Pope desires that Cardinals earnest endeavours for the introducing the Constitutions of the Council of Trent into France and acknowledgeth the Difficulty of that Work but withal addeth that he confideth in the Cardinals Industry as to the Labouring that point and saith that he had Writ to Hen. the 4 th about it And p. 931. there is another Breve of the Pope to that Cardinal A. 1615. which beginneth thus Venerab Frater noster Salut apostol benedict Planè dicere possumus expectavimus pacem ecce turbatio Superioribus namque diebus spem non levem conceperamus fore ut SSti Concilij Tridentini decreta in Galliâ reciperentur dum animum nostrum varietate multitudine pastoralium Sollicitudinum penè oppressum Sublevare hoc Solatio curabamus repentè ad nos allatum est quod 4 to Nonas â—ebr in publico conventu isthic attentatum fuerit in detrimentum supremae Authoritatis hujus SStae Apostolicae sedis c. And where he afterward complains to this effect that the King i. e. H. 4. had several times abused him with promises and pretensions that he would publish the Council of Trent but that nothing came of it If then any one will yet say that the French Clergy not being able in the year 1615 to engage the 3 d. Estate to agree to the Publishing the Trent Council did then Publish it themselves I shall leave him to consider both the Nature and the Event of such an Invasion of the Regal Rights and shall further acquaint him that according to the saying of De facto factum potest de facto tolli he may if he pleaseth consult the Publication of the Peace Relating to the French King and the Prince of Conde first Prince of the Blood Published in the Town of Loudun the 14 th of May A. 1616. and where he will find the 5 th and th 6. Articles to be as followeth viz. 5th That the Authority of the French church be observed and no allowance or Permission be granted for any Encroachment upon the Rights Franchises and Liberties of the same