Selected quad for the lemma: authority_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
authority_n council_n pope_n power_n 4,584 5 5.4437 4 true
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A62533 The friar disciplind, or, Animadversions on Friar Peter Walsh his new remonstrant religion : the articles whereof are to be seen in the following page : taken out of his history and vindication of the loyal formulary ... / the author Robert Wilson. Talbot, Peter, 1620-1680. 1674 (1674) Wing T116; ESTC R24115 96,556 164

There are 14 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

applauded works which som of them haue printed to assert the truth of Faith Perhaps they do not think him worth their confuting Though I am not particularly concern'd yet seing his book hath so much barbarous railing and heretical nonsense that it is a nuisance to ciuility as well as to Christianity I will shake his fundamental principles to the end the world may not be further abused by them nor by the stories of a virulent pen that vents nothing but heresies against the Church rebellion against Soueraigns enuy against his superiors malice against his equals calumnies against his aduersaries and commendations of himself THE FRIAR DISCIPLIN'D OR ANIMADVERSIONS ON FRIAR PETER WALSH HIS NEW REMONSTRANT RELIGION MR. WALSH I DECLARE to you and all the world that my exceptions against your Religion and Romonstrance are not against the supreme temporal power of Soueraign Princes which I do belieue and shall assert as much as any Catholik Diuine My exceptions are against not only a Spiritual supremacy you attribute to Kings and deny to the Bishop of Rome but also against many new vnheard of errors and in first place against that rash and heretical Tenet of yours viz. * Friar Walsh in his Dedicatory to the Catholiks of the three Kingdoms pag. 13. That all the Roman Catholik Bishops of the world are either Traytors to their Kings or periur'd to the Pope because they take before their consecration an Oath which hath bin taken in the Church many hundred years by all Bishops Item That for the space of these 600. years past the Popes and writers of the Roman Catholik Church for the most part a Idem Ibid. haue maintain'd enormous principles and practises which haue bin cryed down continually by most zealous and godly Prelats and Doctors as not only false wicked impious lxretical vnchristian but as absolutely tyrannical and destructiue of all Gouernment lawes property peace c. 2. That since the owning of such intollerable maxims and wicked actions or the not disowning them are not amongst the marks of a Roman Catholik in general but only b Idem pag. 14. of a certain sect or faction whom som calls Papalins others Puritan Papists and others Popish Recusants the Protestants could not but obserue how since the Oath of supremacy though fram'd only by Roman Catholik Bishops Abots and Doctors of the english nation and defended by the principal of the same occasioned the first separation or schism amongst the subiects of England and Ireland the far greater part of such as continued in the Communion of the Roman Church did seem also to adhere to the foresaid dangerous doctrins and practises i. e. to all the pretences and actings of the Roman Court for as much as they generaly refus'd to disown them either by that Oath of supremacy or by other That it is vnreasonable to think and incredible to belieue c Pag. 14. n. 10. that so many iudicious Princes Parliaments and conuocations who had themselues gon so far and ventured so much as they did only because they would not suffer themselues or the Protestant people gouern'd by them to be imposed on against their own reason in matters of Diuine belief Rites c. should at the same time be so concern'd to impose on others in the like as to enact laws of so many grieuous punishments yea of death itself in som cases c. That we haue no cause to wonder at the Protestants a Pap. 16. n. 10. iealousy of us when they see all the three seueral Tests hitherto made use of for trying the iudgment or affection of Roman Catholiks in these Kingdoms in relation to the Papal pretences of one side and the royal rights of the other I mean the Oath of supremacy first the Oath of Allegiance next and last of all that which I call the Loyal Formulary or the Irish Remonstrance of the year 1661. euen all three one after another to haue bin with so much rashness and willfullness and so much vehemency and obstinacy declined opposed traduced and reiected amongst them albeit no other authority or power not euen by the Oath of supremacy itself be attributed to the King saue only ciuil or that of the sword nor any spiritual or Ecclesiastical power be denied therin to the Pope saue only that which the general Councel of Ephesus vnder Theodosius the yonger in the case of the Cyprian Bi●hops and the next Oecumenical Synod of Calcedon vnder the good Emperor Martianus in the case of Anatolius Patriarch of Constantinople and the 217. Bishops of Afrik whereof Saint Augustin was one both in their Canons and letters too in the case of Apiarius denyed vnto the Roman Bishops of their time See the same Friar pag. 24. 25. 1. part of the first Treatise saying that the sense wher in the sons of the Church of England take the Oath of supremacy is very Catholik● and that they allow a politik not spiritual headship to the King and that only in temporal causes or matters not in spiritual not euen in those which are by extrinsecal denomination only called Ecclesiastical or spiritual If this be so Bishop Fisher Sir Thomas Moor and all the learned english men who sufferd for refusing the Oath were great fools and were ignorant both in the english language and in Diuinity But if this be so Mr. Walsh why is it not declared by publik authority can you be so stupid and barbarous as to think that the King and Parliament of England would be so vnmercifull as to permit so much noble and honest blood to be spilt upon a mistake so easily rectified if they or the Church of England vnderstand the Oath of supremacy as you say they do Jn the 19 page of your Dedicatory you set down the Oath which all Bishops and Archbishops take before their Consecration or Pallium and though it be very ancient and accepted of by all not only Prelats but Princes yet you say pag. 20. they who take it Must be periur'd to the Pope if they proue faithfull to the King Whether so or no to God Iudge you I am sure if they were not Traytors in taking the foresaid Oath to his Holiness they were at least Renouncers of their Allegiance to his Majesty and of their obedience also to the Catholik Church And because you could not but foresee that Catholiks and rational men would not bee their own Guides in a matter of so great importance as the determining the rights of Popes and Princes nor so rash as to iudge the whole Catholik Church or all the Bishops therof were Traytors Tyrants Cheats Vsurpers and Heretiks you endeauor to diuert the Catholik Layty from their duty of consulting the sea Apostolik in this main point of Religion by endeauoring to raise in the same Layty a diffidence of all who aduise so pious and prudent an address you telling the Catholiks of the three Kingdoms pag. 22. n. 18. of your Dedicatory That in the
one an other so well that you combin'd to cheat the Kings Subiects of money and to establish the Remonstrant Church by virtue of the same imposture and forged Commission wherby your visitators and Collectors raised good summs for the Commissary Apostolyks occasions and expence This common persuasion seems to be well grounded 1. You could not be ignorant the Commissary was an Impostor because he had no other Commission to shew for his authority ouer all the Clergy of Ireland both secular and regular but a copy of the pretended Original and that so litle authentik that to gain it credit you got the vnwary Bi●hop of Ardagh to confirm it as a true one 2. the Commissary had no instructions a thing vnusual and vnheard of in any person authorised with such an employment But this defect you supplyed by drawing instructions for his visitators which are extant of your own hands writing all which tended to the establishment of your Remonstrant Church And these instructions written with your own hand Mr. Walst shall be produced whensoeuer you please So that if you did not forge the Commission you drew for the Commissarys Instructions 3. You knew very well it was not a likely thing that the Court of Rome would giue so ample a power to an ordinary Friar ouer Bishops and all regular Superiors 4. When the It suits made difficulty to submit to your Impostor Commissary standing vpon the Priuileges of their Order you reprehended them seuerely and gaue God thanks that your-self was so deuoted to the Pope as not to dispute his Commissaries authority when they who by a peculiar vow are tyed to obey his Holiness were refractory and vpon this you and by your example the rest kneeld down crauing the Impostor Commissaries benediction and owning his authority 5. He was wholy directed by you still in your company he was your old acquaintance and of your own Order How is it then possible so remarkable an imposture as this could be conceald from a man so curious and corcern'd as you were in this intrigue Be not so filly Mr. Walsh as to fancy you can impose vpon the world that you went not halfs in a cheate your-self ma●ag'd from first to last You haue no reason to say that during this time the poor Remonstrants had nothing to ballance all their sufferings but the bare sati sactten of conscience to be slighted by their friends and persecuted by their Fnnemies for proses●ing and perso●ming their duty to the King according to the law of God Mr. Walsh call you suffering to haue a Commissary cum plenitudine potestatis at your command To see your deerest Remonstrants made his Visitators and Collectors taxing and raising moneys and that with Censures and Excommunications against such as refused or delayd punctual payment Call you suffering to see these your spiritual Children return home to you with money in their purses and treat you and your Commissary very splendidly at the sign of the Harp and Croun in Dublin almost euery night with good Cheer dancing and Danes or Irish Cronans especialy that famous Macquillemone which was stiled in a letter to Rome Cantio barbara aggrestu and call'd by the Soldiors of the Guards in Dublin hearing it euery night at midnight Friar Walsh and Friar N. singing of Psalmes Call you suffering to see your graue Remonstrants dance Giggs and Countrey dances to recreat your-self and the Commissary who was as ready and nimble at it as any of his Collectors but indeed it s said you danc't with a better grace than any of the Company Call you suffering that your Remonstrants in their visitations and exactions of money were so well horst as to run races and that your Saint N. should excommunicat and pursue the honest Priest Philip Draycot and cry ●●●d the N. because he would not submit to his authority and tax Call you suffering that the rest of your Collectors should do the like and make you and the Commissary merry with telling stories of the frights they put the simple people into and of the summs they extorted from them None durst complain of these exactions the Collectors pretending your power and fauor with the gouernment was so great as to wink at these your most illegal proceedings These were your sufferings and persecutions Mr. Walsh But you know persecution if not suffered for iustice is not meritorious You say your Remonstrant Church suffered this great persecution for professing and performing their duty to the King according to the law of God I pray is it a duty to the King according to the law of God to impose vpon and leuy from his Subiects money by the Popes authority either counterfeit or real We Anti-Remonstrants maintain the Pope hath no such power nor authority Your Remonstrants maintain he hath as appears by your Excommunications and suspensions yet extant Js this your duty to the King Is this according to the law of God Is this a bare satisfaction of conscience for professing and performing your duty Complain not then Mr. Walsh that you and your Remonstrant Church was slighted by the King by the Council by the Parliaments and Lords Lieutenants They clearly perceiued ye were but a company of Cheats that pretended loyalty and practised treason to be for the King and ruin'd his Subjects by the Popes pretended authority Besides Mr. Walsh you cheated my Lord Duke of Ormond as well in the beginning as in the whole progress of your Remonstrance You made his grace belieue that you were commissioned and had power to present that Formulary to his Majesty and to him in the name of the Clergy of Ireland both secular and regular and yet the power you had was but from very few and that power was in order to obtain for the Clergy the benefit of the peace 1648. as appeareth by their instrument pag. 5. of your History wherof one atticle is there should not be tendred any other oath or Formulary of Allegiance to them but one which is set down in the same articles to which your Remonstrance is manifestly opposit Moreouer you confess pag. 6. that you were soundly check't by his Grace as you expected for daring to reteine such an instrument from such men that is men as to the generality and chief of them formerly and lately too so caractered as they were for being in their indignations and carriage very much disaffected to his Majesties interests and very obnoxious to the Laws You see Mr. Walsh what thankes such buisy Friars as you get for intermedling in aflairs whether Ministers of state and the people concern'd will or no. On the other side you cheated the Irish Clergy and Gentry making the Clergy belieue they should haue liberty to exercise their functions and the Gentry that they should be restored to their estates if they sign'd your Remonstrance I pray Mr. Wash how many of the 95. noblemen and Gentlemen that subscribed are restored to their Estates by your Remonstrance name at
last place hauing your eyes thus prepared all these things being considered you may cleerly see thorough that other sly artifice of those self same interested man wherby they would persuade at least to so much filial renerence to the great Father of Christendom as to acquaint him first wich your present condition send him a Copy of the publik instrument you intend to fix vpon with the reasons also inducing you therunto pray his approbation therof in order to your signing it and then expect a while his paternal aduice and benediction before you make any further progress You may at the very first hearing of this proposal plainly discouer say you their design to be no other than by such indiscreet means of cunning delayes vnder pretence of filial reuerence forsooth to hinder you for euer from professing at least to any purpose * Ibid. pag. 22. i. e. in a sufficient manner or by any sufficient Formulary that loyal obedience you owe to his Maiesty and to the lawes of your Countrey in all affairs of meer temporal concern This you can not but iudge to be their drift vnless per aduenture you think them to be realy so frantik as to persuade themselues that from Iulius Cesar or his successor Octauian after the one or the other had by arms and slaughter tyrannicaly seized the Commonwealth any one could expect a free and voluntary restitution of the people to their ancient liberty or which is it I mean and is the more unlikely of the two That from Clement the tenth now sitting in the Chair at Rome or from his next or from any other successor now after six hundred years of continual vsurpation in matters of highest nature and now also after the liues of about fourscore Popes one succeeding an other since Hildebrand or Gregory 7. his papacy and since the deposition of the Emperor Henry 4. by him in the year of Christ 1077. any one should expect by a paper petition or paper Adress to obtain the restoring or manumitting of the Christian world Kingdoms states and Churches to their natiue Rights and freedom or that indeed it could be other than ridiculous folly and madness to expect this J haue quoted your own words Mr. Walsh to the end all indifferent persons may see I do not insure you in the account I giue of your religion and doctrin which I intend to confute reducing is to your twelue fundamental Tenets Jn this first Animaduersion I will treate of two See Friar Walsh his twelue Tenets or articles in the 6. Animaduersion 1. That the Oath of Supremacy hath bin rashly and obstinatly declined opposed and traduced by Roman Catholiks because it attributes to the King only ciuil authority and power and denies to the Pope no spiritual or Ecclesiastical saue only that which the two general Councells of Ephesus and Calcedon as also that of Afrik of 217 Bishops whereof S. Augustin was one denied to the Bishops of Rome 2. That the Popes and Bishops of the Roman Catholik Church for these last 600. years haue taught and practised enormous principles which godly men haue continualy cried down as wicked impious heretical and tyrannical and that the vsual Oath which all Catholik Bishops haue taken at their consecration for many hundred years is not consistent with the loyalty all Christians owe to their temporal Soueraigns ANIMADVERSION I. Whether the Oath of supremacy attributes only ciuil authority to the King and denies no spiritual or Ecclesiastical power or authority to the Pope THE best way to decide this controuersy is to set down the words of the Oath which are I. A. B. do utterly testify and declare in my conscience that the King's Majesty is the only supream Gouernor of this Realm and of all other his Maiesties Dominions and Countries as well in all spiritual or Ecclesiastical things or causes as Temporal and that no forain Prince Person Prelate state or Potentate hath or ought to haue any iurisdiction power superiority preheminence or authority Ecclesiastical or spiritual within this Realm and therfore I do utterly renounce and forsake all forain iurisdictions powers superiorities and authorities c. so help me God and the contents of this Book Mr. Walsh giue me leaue to ask you whether you euer read this Oath and if you did whether you are sure you vnderstand English or whether better than English-men do for the common opinion is that euery nation vnderstands its own language better than strangers Mr. Walsh all Englishmen vnderstand by the word spiritual a quite different thing from temporal as you may see in Thomas Thomasius his Dictionary If this be so I feare you will hardly persuade Englishmen that they do not vnderstand english at least as well as you or any other Irish man Now to the point Doth not the Oath in cleer terms auerre that the King is the only supreme Gouernor of England and of all other his Dominions as well in all Spiritual or Ecclesiastical things or causes as temporal Is temporal and spiritual the same or do these words signify the same Jf not how can you proue or pretend that no spiritual authority or power is giuen the King or denyed the Pope by this Oath of Supremacy I pray obserue if the King be the only supream Gouernor of his Dominions in all spiritual and Ecclesiastical causes or things hath he not all the spiritual power and authority in his own Dominions And if the Pope be a sorrain Prince Person or Prelate and no forrain Prince Person or Prelate hath or ought to haue any Ecclesiastical or spiritual iurisdiction power Superiority preheminence or authority within his Majesties Kingdomes how can the Pope haue any spiritual power or authority in the same J doubt very much whether your marginal note directing to I know not what admonition after the Iniunctions of * Pag. 16. of his Dedicatory to the Catholiks Q. Elizabeth and vpon the 37. article of the Church of England will bring you or the oath off so cleerly as you fancy By that Admonition after the iniunctions of Q. Elizabeth is pretended the Church of England did not attribute to the Queen power to exercise any spiritual function as that of consecrating Priests and Bishops or ministring the Sacraments Suppose this interpretation which came I must tell you som what too late were not known to be a pittifull shift to stop the mouthes of those who laught at the weakness of the Bishops in allowing and at the vanity of the Queen in assuming the spiritual supremacy of the Church suppose I say the Queen could not ordain Priests and Bishops because herself was neither Priest nor Bishop doth that hinder from hauing in herself and giuing to others spiritual iurifdiction to ordain and minister the Sacraments what think you of lay Princes and persons that are Bishops elect Haue they not spiritual iurisdiction and can they not giue it to others Though Q. Elizabeth was incapable of such spiritual iurisdiction because
person or persons are the words of the Act and the title of the same which declares the substance and scope therof is All acts made by any person since 1. Eliz. for the consecrating inuesting c. of any Archbishop or Bishop shall be good The making of Bishops and giuing them spiritual iurisdiction only by the Kings letters patents was the primitiue doctrin and spirit of the english Reformation as appears by an Act of Parliament an 1. Eduard 6. entituled an Act for the election of Bishops and what scales and stiles they and other spiritual persons exercising iurisdiction Ecclesiastical shall vse In which Act saith D. Heylin the famous prelatik protestant writer it is ordain'd that Bishops should be made by the Kings letters patents and not by the election of the Dean and Chapters and that all their processes and writings should be made in the Kings name only with the Bishops Teste added to and seald with his seal c. it was plain and euident saith the aforesaid Doctor that the intent of the Contriuers was by degrees to weaken the authority of the Episcopal Order by forcing them from their strong hold of Diuine institution and making them no other than the Kings Ministers only his Ecclesiastical Sheriffs as a man might say I belieue a man may say so still according to the Statuts 1. and 8 Eliz. what say you Mr. Walsh will you yet say that the Oath of Supremacy acknowledges no spiritual authority in the King I am sure it ownes none in the Bishops bur that which they receiue from his Majesty and themselues own it in their Act or Oath of homage that they receiue all their iurisdiction as well spiritual and ecclesiastical as temporal wholy and solely from the King Are not you a litle out of countenance Mr. Walsh to see your confident assertion so manifestly contradicted by the Oath it self by the Statuts by D. Heylin and the Bishops themselues A NIMADVERSION 2. Whether the general Councells of Ephesus and Chalcedon as also the Prouincial of Afrik of 217. Bishops allowed as much to the Emperor and no more spiritual authority to the Pope than the Oath of Supremacy doth BUT in the name of God Mr. Walsh how com you to quote for the lawfullness of the Eglish Oath of Supremacy the general Councells of Ephesus and Chaltedon as also the Prouincial of Afrik with S. Augustin was not Nestorius and his heresy as also that of Pelagius condemn'd in that Councell of Ephesus by Pope Celestinus spiritual authority residing in his Legat Cyrillus of Alexandria Doth not S. Prosper say that all the Eastern Churches were purg'd of two plagues by Celestinus when the most glorious defender of the Catholik Faith Cyrillus Bishop of Alexandria was helpt by the Apostolik sword Did the Emperor Theodosius the yonger pretend to any spiritual iurisdiction or authority in that Councel He sent indeed his Domestik Candidianus to it not to act therin as the Emperor himself writes to the Synod but with an express caution and condition that he should not haue any thing to do with matters of Faith because saith he it is not lawfull for one that is not a Bishop to intermedle in Ecclesiastical buisness or consultations Why then was Candidianus sent by Theodosius the Emperor Mark well Mr. Walsh the reason That he might remoue buisy Monks and others from Ephesus because it is not lawfull saith he for such people to hinder by any tumult the examination of holy Tenets c. I feare most men will be apt to iudge that you are more concern'd in these words and reason of Theodosius than you are aware of T' is a wicked world Mr. Walsh we can not bridle ill tongues men will talke idely let vs be neuer so circumspect I hope you do not buisy yourself in these matters of the Church without your Superiors approbation or commission from the Bishops to whom such matters apertain properly And yet I know not what muttering there is that if any you had it s recall'd long since because you acted quite contrary to it Yourself doth confess page 5. of your first Treatise that your commission was to procure for Ecclesiastiks the benefit of the peace of 48. wherof the principal article or end was freedom of conscience and that a Vt saltem procuret nobis eas conditiones fauores gratias quae in articulis Pacis Reconciliationis An. 1648. compositae ratae confirmatae inter Excell●ntissimum Dominum Marchionem Ormoniae Confederatos Catholicos pactae promissae nobis fuerunt These are words of the Commission giuen to Friar Walsh by those few that employd him as you may see pag. 5. of his r. part 1. Treatise The same Friar sets down pag. 49. of his Appendix in the 8. article of the peace 1648. this enfuing Oath as the only to be exacted of Catholiks I. A. B. do truly acknowledge profess testify and declare in my conscience before God and the world That our Soueraign Lord King Charles is lawfull and rightfull King of this Realm and of other his Majesties Dominions and Countries and I will bear Faith and true Alleigance to his Majesty his Heirs and successors and him and them will defend to the vttermost of my power against all Conspiracies and attempts whatsoeuer which shall be made against his or their Crown and Dignity and do my best endeauor to disclose and make known to his Majesty his 〈◊〉 and successors or to the Lord Deputy or other his Majesties Chief Gouernor or Go●ernors for the time being all Treasons or Trayterous Conpi●acies which I shall know or heare to be intended against his Majesty or any of them and I do make this Recognition and a knowledgment heartily willingly and truly vpon the true Fa●●h of a Christian So help me God c. the Roman Catholiks should not be required to take any oathes but one specified in the 8. article of the same peace How came you then to act as their Procurator quite contrary to this and to your commission Realy Mr. Walsh if this be true you are wors than the buisy Monks of Ephesus At least you are very vnfortunat in your allegations of Councells they alwayes seem to make against yourself You bring against the Popes spiritual supremacy the example of the Emperor Martianus in the case of Anatolius and make the 28. Canon of the Councel of Calcedon the ground of your obiection wheras you know in your conscience if you know or read any thing that there are admitted but 27. Canons of the Councell of Calcedon and Theodoret who was present at it testifieth there were no more the clandestin Decree which Anatolius and som Greeks made and foisted into the Canons is reiected as ridiculous and forged as you may see at large in learned Cardinal Perons answer to King Iames lib. 1. cap. 34.2 That though the 28. were admitted as a genuine Canon yet what is that to your purpose against the
other than to put the lawfull Proprietor in possession Mr Walsh see how heretical and destructiue your doctrin is Suppose a thing which hath happened and may happen very often Suppose I say an vsurper or Rebell will not go to confession or if he doth will not restore the vsurp't Kingdom or Prouince to his lawfull Soueraign according to his Confessarius his command Hervpon the Bishops of that Kingdom or Prouince according to their duty excommunicat the Tyrant or Rebell for his publik sin and contumacy in keeping out of his Kingdom the lawfull King He contemns their Censures Let me ask you this question Do the Bishops sin in raising of their own accord and as Bishops an Army against the Tyrant or Rebell only to put their lawfull King in possession Answer M. Walsh Do they sin I say in doing this duty would the Pope sin if as Pope he had don the same would Innocen● 10. haue sin'd if he helpt to raise an Army in defence of the late King or for the restauration of the present against that vsurper Cromuell would other Pope● haue sinn'd in doing the same in prosecution of thei● Spiritual Censures in case these had not seru'd thei● turn against the Barons when they excommunicated them for their rebellion against King Iohn or King Henry the third Is the whole Catholik Church guilt● of heresy and impiety for maintaining this doctrin● Speake out Mr. Walsh or at least retract for sham● this wicked destructiue principle and accuse not th● Church of God as asserting in itself a power preiudi●cial to Soueraigns that power I say which hath bi● so often applied and of its own nature is so appli●ab● to their safety and seruice Do not follow Blacklows he retical principles whom you page 43. 1. p. term● learned Priest of the Roman Communion though much for most of his bookes censur'd at Rome They are censured all and censured as Arch heretical And one of them obedience and Gouernment is censur'd for this very doctrin of yours viz. That Subiects sin if they endeauor to restore their disposest and exiled lawfull Soueraign And this Blaklow after all this you and the Blakloistes call a learned Catholik Priest Do you imagin that any Catholik or protestant Soueraign will permit you or a Chapter and Clergy that hold such an Author to be a Catholik and of eminent learning to liue in their Dominions and instruct their Subiects Retire retire to your Conuent good Father Walsh obey your Superiors retract your heretical doctrin so inconsistent with the safety of lawfull Soueraigns submit to the corporal punishment your General will inflict vpon you when you are absolued from so many spiritual Censures you haue incurr'd buisy your-self no longer with Church or state affairs seing you are not sit for either and are so ignorant that pretending to fauor the Soueraignty of Princes you make it vnlawfull for Bishops to ferue them and accuse the Church of heresy for claiming a power to correct with corporal punishments you and such Friars as you are ANIMAD 5. Whether the Roman Catholik Church hath fallen into heresy or hatherr'd enormously these last 600. years for contradicting Friar Peter Walsh his doctrin of a spiritual supremary in temporal Soueraigns and whether all the Roman Catholik Bishops of all the world haue bin for the same 600. years or as least are in this last Century either Traytors to their Soueraigns or periur'd to the Pope for taking the ancient and vsual eath before Episcopal Consecration IT S euident Mr. Walsh by your own words quoted in the first and second Animaduersion that one of the enormous errors wherwith you charge the Church of God for these last 600. years is that the 80. Popes the innumerable writers and all the Bishops therof deny'd to temporal Soueraigns that Supremacy which is attributed in the English oath of Supremacy and a Legislatiue power of making lawes in ecclesiastical matters euen of Faith We haue also quoted these your words of the page 40. n. 3. in your Preface to the Reader If the truth were known it would be found that Baronius and the rest following him were willing to make vse of any malicious vngrounded fictions whatsoeuer against Instinian the Emperor c. by reason his Lawes in ecclesiastical matters euen those of Faith are a perpetual eysore to them because these Lawes are a precedent to all other good Princes to gouern their own respectine Churches in the like manner without any regard of Bulla Coenae or of so many other vain allegations of those men that would make the world belieue it vnlawfull for Secular Princes to make ecclesiastical lawes by their own sole authority for the gouernment of the Church c. To reform therfore this so long erroneus Church and to restore to Secular Princes that spiritual iurisdiction which is giuen them in the oath of Supremacy or a legislatiue power of making ecclesiastical lawes euen in matters of Faith by their own sole authority you Friar Walsh haue found out a Remonstrance wherin all this power and right is asserted and as you say ought to be taken by all loyall Subiects especialy the Bishops who renounce their allegiance by this ensuing oath to the Pope before their consecration which you set down in latin and I translate into inglish The Oath wherby according to Friar Walsh all Bishops are made Traytors pag. 19 Dedic IN. Elect of the Church N. from this hour forward will be faithfull and obedient to S. Peter the Apostle and to the holy Roman Church and to our Lord Pope N. as also to his Successors I will not be in counsel consent or fact that they may loose life or limb or be imprisoned or violent hands laid vpon them in any manner or any iniury don to them vpon any color whatsoeuer The Counsell wherwith they will trust me by themselues their Nuncios or letters I will not reueal to their preiudice The Roman Papacy and royalties of Saint Peter I shall help to retain and defend Saluo meo Ordine against all men I will treat honourably the Legat of the see Apostolik as he passeth by and returns and shall help him in his necessities I shall endeauor to conserue defend increase and promote the rights honors priuileges and authority of the holy Roman Church of our Lord the Pope and of his Successors I will not be in counsell fact or treaty wherin are plotted any sinister or preiudicial things against the Lord Pope or the Roman Church And if I know of any such plots against them I will endeauor to hinder them to the best of my power as also discouer them as soon as I can to the Pope himself or to som other that may giue him notice therof I shall obserue and cause to be obserued to the vttermost of my power the rules of the holy Fathers the Decrees Ordinations or dispositions reseruations prouisions and Apostolik Mandats I shall impugn and prosecute to my power Heretiks
or reprehension in his History against Constantin You will needs haue it that Constantin by his own sole authority banish'd and restored Bishops and Priests amongst others you instance both S. Athanasius a The case of Athanasius and Arius and the heretik Arius You impart to vs pag. 347. this general obseruation You shall neuer find that any Councel especialy this of Nice forc'd or gaue sentence of forcing corporaly a Bishop from his see and Citty and haling him into banishment but only a bare spiritual sentence or declaration of his being now deposed from such authority as the Church gaue him formerly And on the other side you shall euer see So the the print must be corrected putting Neuer for Euer it was the Prince alone that by his own royal power onely sont Bishops to exile Nay and this too not seldom without any preuious sentence of deposition by other Bishops as also that not seldom also the sole exile of a Bishop from his see by the only sentence of the Secular Prince was by the Church held for a sufficient deposition of such a Bishop and that the Clergy proceeded to election and consecration of an other when the Prince desir'd it as holding the see absolutely vacant Mr. Wash General rules and obseruations ought to be well considered before they be prescrib'd because there are few which admit not of som exceptions But yours is so totaly false that you can not name as much as one partioular to giue the least colour of probability b Mr. Walsh his general rule failing in euery particular to your vniuersal proposition I challenge you to name any one Catholik Emperor or Soueraign that banished or deposed any Catholik Bishop or Priest by his own sole authority or before they had bin deposed by the Pope or other Bishops Your instance of S. Athanasius and Arius are ridiculous Was S. Athanasius banished by Constantin before the Tyrian Synod such as it was had deposed him and banisht him also from Alexandria Were not the Arian Bishops deposed and banisht also by sentence of the Nicen Councel as well as Arius himself Jts true the sentence was not put in execution because they submitted and subscribed to the Councells Creed But yet you see how Socrates and others tell you that though Arius submitted yet the Councel reserued vpon him that part of his sentence which banisht him from his home Alexandria Was this no coerciue corporal punishment inflicted by a spiritual power or by Bishops as Bishops How ignorantly or disingeniously then do you reprehend Baronius in this particular pag. 347. That great Annalist as you call him knew very well how to distinguish twixt a meer ecclesiastical or meerly spiritual sentence of deposition and a ciuil imperial sentence of exile Constantins sentence of exile against Arius was long after this of the Councel and was but a continuation or confirmation of it as Baronius tells you Neither did Constantin recall Arius from his banishment vntill he thought he was canonicaly pardon'd or cleer'd and restored by the Synod of Hierusalem But why name you not at least the Bishop whose exile by the sole temporal authority was iudged by the Church for a sufficient deposition of such a Bishop Now Mr. Walsh I will giue you a general rule or obseruation against which you can not find any exception and it is that the general practise of the Church is eo ipso that a Clergyman is declared an heretik and therfore deposed or degraded in that declaration or sentence is inuolued and vnderstood exile imprisonment or whatsoeuer corporal punishment the lawes prescribe This appears by the ancient Canons of Councells and true practise of the Church and yourself grant it by what you quote pag. 348. out of the Councel of Calcedon Act. 4. Si autem permanserit turbas faciens seditiones Ecclesiae per extraneam potestatem tanquam seditionem debere corripi If a Churchman will continue to make tumults and seditions in the Church he ought to be punisht as a seditious man by the secular power Reflect Mr. Walsh vpon yourself and consider whether according to this generall rule of the Church you ought not be punished by the secular power as a seditious man You continue still your seditious doctrin You would fain set the Church and state by the eares and incense temporal Soueraigns against their spiri●ual Fathers and Pastors God gaue the temporal sword to Princes that they may protect his Church and that is the principal end of their power and hitherto most of the Christian Soueraigns haue employd their power and sword that way therfore it s neither necessary nor decent that Churchmen should take the sword out of their hands or manage it against heretiks and Preachers of sedition That 's don to their hand But indeed rather then such an heretik and seditious fellow as you should pass without correction the lay Brothers of your Order if they had you in any of S. Francis his Conuents would imprison and whip you soundly and that I dare say without offending any one of those temporal Soueraigns you flatter and would fain persnade that if such a seditious Friar as you be corporaly punished by your spiritual Superiors they are in danger of loosing their Kingdoms And as we grant that the temporal sword is more properly in the hands of temporal Soueraigns than of the Clergy so we deny not but that it hath bin a constant custom in the Church to let Treason and murther be tryed and iudged by the Princes themselues to take away the occasion of ialousies Treason being against the Princes person and murther so horrid a crime that the Church thinks not fit any way to excuse or exempt Clerks who commit them from the cognizance and sentence of Secular Courts This is the reason why S. Athanasius when he was fasly accused both of treason and murther to Constantin was content to leaue the cognizance of those crimes to his Officer Dalmatius as were also the Catholik Egyptian Bishops whose words you quote pag. 348. But you thought it not for your purpose to quote Constantins own words after that Athanasius had presented himself before him The pious Emperor writ to the Bishops of the Prouince of Alexandria as Athanasius a Athan. Apol. 2. Theod. lib. 1. c. 17. himself and Theodoret testify these words Vestri autem est non mei iudicij de ea re cognoscere It belongs to your iudgment not to mine to take cognizance of that matter But the matter was treasonable for Athanasius was accused to haue sent a quantity of gold to abett the rebellion of Philemenus against the Emperor Mr. Walsh you are accused both of treason and murther Why do you not imitat S. Athanasius and cleer yourself of both Why do you not present yourself before the King b All applied to Mr. Walsh himself or his Lieutenant in Ireland and say Sir I am charged with a barbarous murther of
she was a woman yet her successors can not be excepted against vpon that score But speak seriously Mr. Walsh do you think it was in the power of those who explain'd the Oath of supremacy if any did explain it to alter the common known signification of words and giue them a quite contrary in matters of religion Sacraments and Oaths If it were there would be no religion in the world no Faith either human or Diuine How could you therfore imagin the Conuocation or euen the Parliament of England did or can alter the signification of words in an Oath wherin a man professeth his Religion or an important point therof Can any power vpon earth declare this form of baptism valid I Baptise thee in the name of the mother and sister and Brother by pretending forsooth that by an Admonition of the Conuocation or any earthly authority the word Mother signifies Father sister son Brother Holy Ghost Do you fancy Mr. Walsh that any iudicious protestant or any Parliament man in England will belieue you if you should tell him that his child is well-baptis'd by such a form and explanation Jf you wil read the Statuts 1. Eliz. 1. 8. Eliz 1. You will find that the Kings of Englands supremacy is so spiritual and sublime that there needs no changing the signification of the word spiritual into temporal and that a King of England if he should think fit may according to the principles of the Protesta●e religion establih'd by the lawes of the land giue power by letters patents to any of his lay subiects to consecrate Bishops and Priests which is more than the Pope can do for he must a point a Bishop to ordain Priests and Bishops That the Kings of England may giue by their letters patents power to any of their lay subiects to consecrat Bishops and Priests is very cleer in the aforesaid statuts For by two of them there is giuen to the Queen's Highness her Heirs and Successors c. full power and authority by letters patents vnder the great seal of England from time to time to assigne name and authorise such person or persons at she and they shall think meet and conuenient to exercise vse enjoy and execute vnder her Highness all manner of iurisdictions priuileges preheminences and authorities in any wise touching or concerning any spiritual or Ecclesiastical power or iurisdiction within this Realm or any other her Majesties Dominions or Countreyes Now Priestood being nothing but a spiritual power to consecrat Christ's body and bloud and forgiue sins and Episcopacy including besides the same a spiritual power to consecrat and ordain Priests and Bishops who can doubt but that by vertue of these words and Statuts the Queen might and her successors may by their letters patents and great seal giue power to any of their lay subiects to make a protestant Bishop or Priest seing by those letters patents any person that is a subiect receiueth full power to exercise vse execute enioy c. all manner of iurisdictions preheminences and authorities in any wise touching or concerning any spiritual or Ecclesiastical power c. This is no vain speculation Mr. Walsh but a known practise grounded vpon the 25. article of 39. of the english Protestant Religion it being declared therby that no visible sign or ceremony and by consequence no imposition of Episcopal hands hath bin ordain'd of God for any of these fiue commonly call'd Sacraments wherof holy Orders or Episcopal consecration is one And therfore it s no meruail the Parliament declared 8. Eliz. 1. that the first protestant Bishops were should be true Bishops though it could not be proued that any Bishops euer laid hands vpon them The Story is known In the beginning of Q. Elizabeths reign it was questioned whether the Protestant Bishops were true or real Bishops the Catholik Bishops who refused to consecrat any of them maintain'd they were not because they had not any protestant who was a true Bishop to consecrat them hauing nothing to shew for the Episcopal caracter but the Queens letters parents and therfore the Catholik writers prouokt them in print to name the Bishop who ordain'd or consecrated them as themselues pretended but fiue or six years before This appears in * D Stapleton in his Counter blast against Horn fol. 79. 301. and in his return of vntruths gaianst Iewel fol. 130. D. Stapleton Dr. Harding and other bookes against Iewel edit 1565. 1563. fol. 57. 59. All the world perceiuing at that time how none of the two protestant writers who vndertook to answer Iewel and Horn could name any that consecrated Parker of whose consecration depended that of all the rest nor produce any Registers therof as Harding in express terms demanded it was thought necessary for supplying this shamefull silence and repressing the insolency of the popish Aduersaries to declare the ground wherupon the protestants claim'd to be true Bishops and to be both legaly and validly consecrated Then was made the Statut 8. Elizab. 1. which begins Forasmuch as diuers questions by ouermuch boldness of speech and talk hath lately grown vpon the making and consecrating of Archbishops and Bishops within this Realm c. And though D. Bramhall late Protestant Archbishop of Armagh and others in their bookes do endeauor to diuert the protestant layty from reflecting vpon the consequences which euidently follow from this Act of Parliament as fauoring more the Kings supremacy and spiritual iurisdiction than true Episcopacy and pretend that this Statut doth not giue his Majesty power to make Priests and Bishops hy letters patents and that euen Harding and Stapleion excepted not against the validity but against the legality of the first protestant Bishops consecration and caracter yet the words of this Statut as also of those Catholik Authors admit of no such interpretation The Statuts words are very cleer so are those of the Catholik writers whose design was not to proue that Parker Iewel Horn c. were not protestant Bishops but that they were not true Bishops or Bishops at all They knew very well that they were legal protestant Bishops because they knew they had the Queens letters patents issued forth to the person or persons whether Bishops or not that matters nothing as cleerly appears in the Statuts 1. Eliz. 1. and 8. Eliz. 1. And therfore D. Harding tells Iewel he doubts not but that he may shew him the Queens letters patents for his Episcopacy and by consequence that he was a protestant Bishop adding withall that he was no true Bishop because sayes he the Queen may giue the lands but not the caracter of a Bishop To proue then that they were both legaly and vasidly protestant Bishops the Parliament insisting vpon the purest protestant principles thought it sufficient to declare and make out that they were consecrated by virtue of the Queens letters patents and by som of h●r Majesties subjects whether lay or Ecclesiastiks was not thought material by any
of sowing dissention and diuiding Roman Catholiks by his Remonstrance hath gain'd him a litle credit and countenance in Court therfore he must be so learned and loyal as to teach not only the Irish Catholik Clergy but the whole Catholik Church their duty as if they were ignorant of it to God and Cesar Whence had he all this learning Did his teaching a yeare or two Philosophy and half a yeare or therabouts Diuinity in Kilkenny to half a dozen Schollars make him an Oecumenical master and adorn him with so extraordinary knowledge both Diuine and human as to instruct not only the dull Clergy of Ireland but the acutest wits of France Spain and Italy The man was so sensible of the aspersion you cast vpon his and your own Countreymen that I durst not excuse you and indeed you spoke inconsideratly for it s well known to most of the famous Vniuersities of Europe that as Irish men haue bin antiently their first Founders so they haue bin of late their chiefest Professors and greatest Ornament Your self might haue known or at least heard of Richard Wadding the Augustin in Conimbria of Iames Arthur the Dominican in Alcala Salamanca and Conimbria of Holiwood in Padua and Mussipont of Luke Wadding and Richard Lynch in Salamanca of Peter wadding in Prague all Jesuits of many famous Doctors of Sorbon in Paris of your own Friars Hicky Cauel Lombard and Luke Waddin in Rome Of the Iesuit Thomas Talbot aliàs de Leon in Granada the Oracle of all Spain not only for his profoundness in Diuinity but also for the vast extent of his knowledge in other sciences and languages You might haue knowen the eminent Doctor of Bologna Riredan of Tolosa not to speake of other famous Physitians who though not Professors yet Practioners so farr aboue the common sort as Fenell Fogotty O Meara c. That they may be recorded to posterity for patterns of safe and successfull prescriptions as others are for printed bookes These and others though all dead the two last only excepted yet are a fresh and euerlasting euidence against your imputing dulness of apprehension and ignorance to the Irish Clergy and nation I could name said an other four of the Irish Bishops yet liuing and many of the inferior Clergy especialy Regulars who taught with great applause in foreign and famous Vniuersities both Diuinity and Philosophy Without doubt they take ill that a petty friar should pretend to teach them their duty either to God or the King Why did he not confute them in the Congregation of Dublin an 1666. when he had the Lord Lieutenants fauor to countenance his doctrin and fright them into his opinions Why did not he answer then the Prolocutor Bishop Lynch and Father Nicholas Netteruilles reasons Why did he not accept of Father Iohn Talbots offer to shew in diuers particulars Frier Redmund Carons gross inexcusable falsifications in his Remonstrantia Hibernorum and in his lesser libel intituled Loyalty asserted Why did he not answer the obiections and reasons of many others as learned men as these who confounded him and his errors in that Congregation Then was the time to vindicat his doctrin and Remonstrance but if now after 6. years study Walsh his volum of that subiect is a nuisance to the Academies a bundell of errors rak't out of the ashes of burnt heretical bookes how wat it possible for him to speake then any thing but heresies and nonsense This your Countrey men What could I answer to this But 't is wors yet He gaue me the ensuing writing wherin he vndertakes to shew euen to yourself that those of the Irish Clergy you so much vndervalue had and haue still the better of you not only in wit but in learning euen in this controuersy after your 6. years study of this matter Let vs first of all saith he state it right You pretend that the Supremacy of temporal Soueraings doth not only giue them power to make ecclesiastical lawes euen in matters of Faith as appears by your foresaid own words speaking of lustinian the Emperor but that the spiritual authority of the Church can not warrant its punishing by corporal penalties such an irregular Friar as you are thought to be And to make this your Tenet more plausible you would fain inferr from the coerciue power in the Church of whipping such a fellow as you are a coerciue power to dethrone Princes as if forsooth they could not sit securely nor be at ease in their thrones if you should be disciplin'd Mr. Walsh the Soueraignty of Princes is so sacred a thing that I dare not medle with it and am forbid to write of that subiect as all others are who liue in France the man is a Graduate of Sorbon But you know that Bellarmin himself confesseth Princes can not be deposed for bare heresy though Popes may Their temporal iurisdiction can not be question'd for their errors How then can you inferr that if the Church may punish and whip you for heresy it may also depose Kings for the same Therfore I hope it may be discussed without consequence or offence ANIMAD 4. Whether it be heresy or Treason to maintain that the Superiors of the Franciscan Order by virtue of the spiritual power which they haue from the Pope of gouerning their Friars may command Friar Peter Walsh to be whipt against his own will for misdemeanors BE not angry Mr. Walsh vntill you heare me out It is no disgrace for a Religious man to be corrected by his Prouincial or General neither is it the first time that a Friar hath bin whipt and I am sure none euer deserued it better than you do But let us see what can you say for your not being whipt against your will for misdemeanors we will now suppose there are som and shall be proued time enough My self and others of the Irish Clergy obiected against this your main Tenet viz. that no corporal punishment may be inflicted by virtue of a spiritual power the general practise of the whole Catholik Church and all Religious Orders which not only put from Mass and depriue of the suffrages of the faithfull such Apostats as they excommunicat but also forbid them any commerce and conuersation with others nay command them to be whipt and impriprison'd when hands can be layd on them To this obiection you answer page 79. sec 33. thus I take in the first place their allegation of the Faithfull being whipt and commanded to vndergoe austere pennances to be vnconclusure Your reason Mr. Walsh Because euery Ghostly Father may in som cases enioyn his Penitent such punishments and by virtue of his meer spiritual power may do so but can inflict none either by himself or by an other if the penitent will be refractory And not only the Pope not only the Bishop but euery inferior Priest may in fore confessionali enioyn his penitent euen a King or Emperor whateuer is iudged necessary for his eternal Saluation and consequently in som
take his pass as the other Colonells did Hereby the Bishop incurr'd his Kings displeasure and ruin'd the fortune of his Brother a very loyal worthy gentleman and a good Commander After the Kings happy restauration this vndutifull carriage of the Bishop was not forgot at whitehall and he not knowing how to liue in France hauing also a desire to return to his own Countrey writ to you Mr. Walsh that he would do any thing you would haue him do so he might be permitted to return and liue at home A large offer and an argument of a large conscience in circumstances wherin he knew you wanted and sought at this very time a Bishop to head your vpstart Church You took him at his word and he set his hand to to your Remonstrance Whether he repented or no at his death I know not but I am sure Friar Redmund Caron whom you canonize for a Saint pag. 759. ought to haue retracted the doctrin of his Remonstrantia Hibernorum which was stuff't with so notorious and palpable falsifications that he can not be presumed to haue bin ignorant of them But his last aduice and Adieu to you is sad and remarkable for he declared as you say pag. 760. That you were bound in conscience to prosecute still euen after his death that matter of the Remonstrance and continue the defence or aduancement of that doctrin which in his life time you had for so many years and notwithstanding so much contradiction maintain'd You do a great iniury Mr. Walsh to the memory and merit of that Illustrious and Catholik Prelat Thomas Dease quondam Bishop of Meath in ioyning him in the same page with Caron as approuing at his death of your Remonstrance and doctrin What if he did approue of the book of Queries Was there any thought or knowledge then of your Remonstrance Is there any thing in that book of Queries asserting a spiritual supremacy in Princes or denying it to the Pope Doth it say that Secular Princes by their own sole authority may gouern the Church and make Ecclesiastical lawes euen in matter of Faith Doth it maintain that Catholiks both rashly and obstinatly deny to take the oath of Supremacy and by consequence commit a sin for not taking it Doth it say the General Councells of Ephesus and Calcedon gaue as much to temporal Princes and as litle to the Pope of spiritual authority as the oath of Supremacy doth Doth it say that som Catholiks hold Generall Councells are fallible Where will you find in the book of Queries that the Roman Catholik Church hath err'd enormously in its principles and practises these last 600. years and that all the Bishops thereof are either Traytors to their Princes or periur'd to the Pope in taking the vsual oath at their consecration Doth the book of Queries teach that if Bishops as Bishops help their Soueraigns with money or armes against Rebells or Vsurpers they offend God As also that temporal Soueraings offend God in exempting the Clergy from their Secular Supreme Courts Doth the book of Queries teach that God may work Miracles to confirm a falshood or at least the Sanctity of a man who has a good intention and zeale in maintaining it or dying for it thinking it to be a truth Or that a man who dyes so for maintaining an error is properly though not strictly a Martyr Or that the whole Church when it celebrats the feast of a Saint as properly and strictly a Martvr may be mistaken in declaring and belieuing him such a Martyr though not in belieuing him a Saint in Heauen All this you maintain in Saint Thomas of Canterberies case as necessary consequences flowing from the doctrin of your Remonstrance Did Bishop Thomas Dease nay did Caron himself defend these heresies The book of Queries only asserted the lawfullness of making peace and Confederacies with Protestants and that the Popes Nuncius could not validly excommunicat the Irish Catholiks for doing so and that it was lawfull to appeal to the Pope in those circumstances and that the said Appeal did suspend the Nuncius Censures No learned Catholik denyes this doctrin But not one Catholik in the world doth or can maintain your doctrines now mention'd and therfore you are not only heretik but an Impostor pretending that they who opposed the Nuntius his Censures and practises in Ireland were your Remonstrants ANIMADVERSION 9. Whether temporal Soueraigns can exempt from their Supreme coerciue power the Clergy of their Dominions THAT they haue don so de facto is euident by the lawes and practise of all Christian Emperors and Kings especialy in England euer since Christianity florished But what 's that to the purpose if Friar Walsh say they could not de iure or in conscience Pardon me 't is somthing For though Friar Walsh his authority be very great Especialy when he hath Barclay the Poet or Romantik writer to back him yet I hope the persuasion and practise of the whole Catholik Church the belief of all Christian Princes and Prelats for so many hundred years will weigh more than the opinion of a Romantik Poet or a Remonstrant Friar Excuse then I pray Mr. Walsh poor Cardinal Belarmin whose ignorance you so much pitty for being mightily startled at this position of yours and Barklay's The temporal a Friar Walsh 1. part of his first Treatise pag. 267 Seq Princes themselues how otherwise Supreme soeuer could not can not by any law right authority or power giuen them by God or man exempt from themselues that is from their own Supreme Ciuil and euen coerciue power the Clergy men of their Dominions Sure you must needs haue a very cleer demonstration for this Tenet that forces you to hold it being so contrary to the doctrin and practise of the Church You say you haue Out with it then Mr. Walsh and let not the Faithfull be any longer foold Good Reader be attentiue 't is a profound acute argument you will find it pag. 271. cit in these words Whosoeuer haue and continue any office which essentially inuolues a power Supreme both directiue and coerciue of all Clerks within their Dominions may not deuest themselues of the power of directing and coercing the same Clerks vnless they do withal deuest themselues of that office as towards the self same Clerks Because they can not deuest themselues of the essence of that which they hold still this arguing a plain contradiction But the Office of Kings inuolues a power supream both directiue and coerciue of all Clerks within their Dominions Ergo. The Minor you must proue Mr. Walsh I haue already don that saith he and at large by very natural reason I find none but that desinition of a King for which you quote your great claslik Author Almainus de sup potest c. cap. 5. thus Aliquem esie Regem nihil aliud est quam habere Superioritatem erga subditos in subditis esse obligationem pariendi Regi c. This is all you set
Bishops by secular lawes whereas themselues made the Secular Soueraigns Iudges of Caecilianus and Felix Catholik and innocent Bishops This being the whole drift of S. Augustin in that epistle you quote som words of it which euen as you order them make against you For euen in them the Saint taxes the ancient Donatists with presumption for accusing Caetilianus though he were criminal before a Secular Iudge and you pretend Saint Augustin only reprehended their enuy and malitious intention in accusing him but not the accusation itself If you had don your Reader the fauor and Saint Augustin the iustice to quote his words but foure lines after those you would haue cleer'd the whole matter and not haue forc't me to call you a shameless Impostor What think you of these words of S. Augustins Mr. Walsk Ibid. Illos autem magis hine arguimus qui apud Imperatorem vltrò Caecilianum accusauerunt quem prius apud Collegas trransmarinos conuincere debuerunt ipso autem Imperatore longè ordinatius agente vt Episcoporum causam ad se delatam ad Episcopos mitteret ne victi pacem cum fratribus habere noluerunt sed rursus ad eundem Imperatorem venerunt rursus non Caecilianum tantum verum etiam datos sibi Episcopos Iudices apud terrenum Regem accusauerunt But we reprehend them the Donatists the more that they accused of their own accord before the Emperor Caecilian whom first they ought to haue conuinc'd before the Collegues beyond the seas he means Bishops the Emperor himself hauing proceeded much more orderly sending the cause of Bishops which was brought to him to Bishops and yet they the Donatists Bishops being cast would not haue peace with their brethren but came again to the same Emperor and again accused before the earthly King not only Caecilian but also those Bishops which had bin appointed their Iudges a Friar Walsh his arguments apply'd to himself You haue not hitherto Mr. Walsh produced any argument against the doctrin and practise of the Catholik Church which hath not bin retorted against and applyed to yourself This also is of the same nature You censure and condemn your titular Archbishop of Dublin as the Donatists did Caecilian for defending himself against that petition and accusation of yours which you presented to his temporal Soueraign And because vpon that occasion som Inquiry was made into your own and your Remonstrant brethrens actions and som therof appeare to be Treasonable you complain of the said Archbishop as if he had sought to take away Churchmens liues by a secular power wheras if the truth were knowen he hindered the witnesses to giue in euidence against you because they were Priests and could not lawfull concurr to the death you deseru'd But if by your own prosecuting him your crimes vere casualy discouered and published by others he was no more oblig'd to saue you from the gallows than Bishop Felix was to saue the Donatist from the rack Notwithstanding this danger you were and are still in of hanging you are still as obstinat in persecuting that Prelat and in importuning the King and Parliament with false and forged accusations against him as the Donatists were against Archbishop Caecilian You criminat him in print after that your petition and accusations had bin cast out of the Conncel of Ireland as false and he dismist as innocent But you print not a word to cleer yourself of the Murthers and Treasons layd to your own charge not by him but by many others who say they will make them out whensoeuer commanded The vindication of yourself from these aspersions you remit to your Latina Hibernica or latin Irish volum consisting for the most part of ridiculous impertinent speaches of your own as if it were not to purpose or there were no room to insert a confutation of calumnies which endanger your life and haue ruin'd your reputation or as if english men could not be conuinc't of your innocency as well in english as in latin or Irish for your Latina Hibernica must be writ in one of these languages a Pag. 354 355. Peter Walsh his parity of Bishops and independent Episcopal Church Well now you haue don say you with Constantin only this you will add in relation to that his famous saying wherin he desir'd the Bishops to referr all their accusations to the great Iudge of all Christ our Sauior himself on the final day and to vse no other means of punishing constraining or forcing one the other by their own authority and at least in such things as properly concern'd the execution of their Episcopal office towards their respectiue flocks in relation I say to this part of that saying or the meaning of Constantin I will add say you that Constantin might haue heard of others or perhaps of himself learnd and read in Saint Cyprian's works for Cyprian was before his dayes what euen this great and holy Martyr Bishop himself said to this purpofe openly in a great Councell of his African Bishops of all whom as being himself the Archbishop of Carthage he was Primat Neque enim sayes he in Conc. Afric de Haeret. baptis quisquam nostrum Epis●opumse esse Episcoporum constituit aut tyrannico terrore ad obsequendi necessitatem Collegas suos adegit quando habeat omm● Episcopus prolicentia libertatis potestatis suae arbitrium proprium tanquam iudicartab alio non possit cum nec ipse possit alterum indicare sed expectemus vniuersi indi ium Domini nostri Iesu Christi qui vnus solus habet potestatem praeponendi nos in Ecclisiae suae gubernatione de actu nostro indicandi So this blessed Cyprian intending and signifiing if I be not very much deceiued the parity of Bishops amongst themselues or independence from the iudicial authority or authoritatiue iudgment of one an other if we regard only the immediat law of God and therfore exhorting them all not to iudge one an other by any such pretended authority but to leaue all their differences and dissuasions whatsoeuer about seueral or distinct wayes of discipline or of the gouernment or spiritual direction of their respec● ture flocks to the iudgment of our Lord JESVS Christ who sayes he is the onely and sole he that hath power both to prepone vs in the gouernment of the Church and to iudg● of our act Which final and peaceable aduice of Saint Cyprian to the Bishops of that aboue mention'd African Synod Constantin the great may be thought to haue alluded vnto in his aduice also being it is so like giuen to those other Bishops of the Nicen Councell But whether certainly it be so or not it matters not much heer or any more at all than to shew vpon what ground Constautin might haue aduised the Bishops to peace amongst themselues and for pure ecclesiastical differences in point of meer disciplin or reformation of manners or of the liues or conuersation of the Bishops themselues in peace
and vnity to expect if they were not otherwise of one sentiment or equal edification the iudgment of God alone and not proceed to the Censure of one an other especialy in the occasion then present of the grand Controuersy with Arrius of the chiefest fundamental of the Christian Faith itself and in itself abstracting so much from all personal failings in life and conuersation of either Bishop Priest or Laik Nor doth it matter it at present how or in what sense we must vnderstand this saying of Cyprian or euery or any particular branch of it further than that of Constantin and in his right meaning which I haue before giuen is paralell to it ANIMADVERSION 11. Friar Walsh his Idea of the doctrin and disciplin of the Catholik Church and of the equality of its Bishops THIS Explication and Comment of yours Mr. Walsh vpon Saint Cyprian and Constantins words concerning the Iudicature and Priuileges of the Clergy doth declare very wel that entertaining and pleasing Idea you tell the Catholiks of the three Kingdoms a Pag. 5. Dedicat. you haue had these many years wherin they are so much concern'd It can not be denyed but that its a very pleasant thing especialy for the Bishops to be so absolute so at peace and enioy such liberty amongst themselues that none but our Sauiour Iesus Christ can question them for the gouernment of their flocks or for any scandal of their own liues and conuersation This is your Idea and you say it was the sentiment of Saint Cyprian if you be not much mistaken and that Constantin the great had it from his writings and aduised the Bishops of the Nicen Councel according to this Idea to fall vpon the Arians and neuer trouble themselues with reprehending or correcting their own faults and frailties because all such things must be remitted to the day of Iudgment in the mean time euery Bishop hath his own proper abitrement pro licentia libertatis potestatis suae according to the pleasure of his own liberty and his own power I confess this is a great priuilege and more than euer the Roman Catholik Clergy euen the Pope himself prerended to for the Pope may be vnpoped at least for heresy But the Bishops of your Idea or Church Mr. Walsh are all Popes and yet can not be declared by any other Bishops or Cardinals to be deposed by Christ for any heresy or fault committed in gouerning their flocks Now though you declare yourself to be no Roman Catholik by this your parity of all Bishops and saying that by the immediat law of God the Pope hath no spiritual superiority or authority ouer other Bishops yet I hope you will giue temporal Soueraigns a superintendence or som power to keep those independent Bishops in order and Church disciplin at least you pretended so hitherto But now you say no. For Constantin and Saint Cyprians rule is that no Emperor no King none but Jesus Christ alone may order or iudge Bishops Vnus solus Iesus Christus habet potestatem proeponendi nos in Ecclesiae suae gubernatione de actu nostro iudicandi How com you then to fool vs hitherto and make the world belieue from the first page of your great volume vnto this 345 that temporal Soueraigns haue power and authority from God to correct not only the lay crimes but the Ecclesiastical faults of Bishops and to force them to keep the Canons Customs and disciplin of the Church Js this your zeal for the right of temporal Soueraigns Js this the scope and sense of your loyal Remonstrance Certainly it will be suspected you are a Cheat. Jf you be such a man Mr. Walsh you either were too scrupulous or did ouer act the Hypocrite when you refused the Bishoprick you say was ofterd to you by the Protestants I suppose in Ireland What could you desire more than to be equal with the Pope a Mr. Walsh his opinion of the validity of the 〈◊〉 Protestant Episcopacy and not accountable to any spiritual or temporal Superior vpon earth for the gouernment of your flock or yourself Especialy you hauing declared pag 42. n. 13. of your Preface that you hold yourself oblig'd in conscience for any thing you know yet to concurr with them who doubt not the ordination of Bishops Priests and Deacons in the Protestant Church of England to be at least valid And yea you haue read all whateuer hath bin to the contrary obiected by the Roman Catholik writers whether against the matter or form or want of power in the Consecraters by reason of their Schism or heresy or of their being deposed formerly from their sees By the way Mr. Walsh let me tell you that the Roman Catholik Church doth not ground its practise of ordaining absolutely and without any condition at all protestant Ministers who are conuerted and desire to be Priests amongst vs vpon their want of true and valid ordination proceeding from any Schism heresy or deposition of their Ordainers and first protestant Bishops for we all grant that neither Schism nor heresy of the Consecraters or their deposition makes an Ordination inualid as you see by what we hold of heretical Bishops but we ground the nullity of the protestant Episcopacy and ordination both vpon the inualidity of the protestant form of Episcopacy priestood and vpon their first Consecrater Parker vpon whose consecration all theirs doth depend neuer hauing bin consecrated a Bishop himself for besides many other proofs Iewel and Horn pretending to make out his and their own Episcopal consecration could neuer in their bookes printed to that purpose and in answer to Harding and Stapletons printed bookes and questions name then when it concern'd them most the Bishop that consecrated Parker nor produce as much as one witness of so publik and solemn a Consecration as his was pretended to be 50 years after This together with the 25. article of the Church of England declaring that Ordination is not properly a Sacrament because it requires no visible sign or ceremony and by consequence no imposition of Episcopal hands together with the Act of Parliament 8. Eliz. 1. is one of the chief grounds we haue to belieue the Protestant Bishops are not validly consecrated nor the Catholiks guilty of sacriledge in reordaining them when they are made Priests amongst vs. An other ground is the inualidity of the protestant Form for ordaining Priests and Bishops the Form I mean that had bin vsed since King Eduard 6. reign vntill the hapy restauration of King Charles 2 For after his restauration the Bishops themselues found our exceptions against the validity of King Eduards Form were reasonable and therupon were pleased to alter it adding therunto the words Bishop and Prust as we directed which or the equiualent are necessary to express the caracter receiued by the form and which were wanting in the old form a Sanders in Schism F. H●livood or Sacrobosco in hode●nuestig vera Christs Ecclesia c.
4. Fitz Simons in Britonomachia D. Champney D Harding D. Scapleton Treatise of Catholik Faith and Heresy Polit. Cathechism Nullity of the Clergy of England in answer to D Bramhalls vind Religion and Gouernment Erassus Sentor Iumor This and much more you might haue seen in the Catholik writers obiections Answers and replyes to Mason Btamhall Heylin and other Protestant writers And if you haue seen them you ought to be ashamed of being more obstinat than the Protestant Bishops themselues who by the amendment of their old Form confess it was defectiue and that a new Form was necessary otherwise they would neuer haue alter'd the old in so material a point after an hundred years dispute But seing you are satisfied with the protestant Episcopacy and belieue the oath of Supremacy to be so lawfull as to vpraid Roman Catholiks with rashness and obstinacy for not taking it I see not how you could scruple accepting of a protestant Bishoprick in your own Countrey and therfore I can hardly beliue any such thing was euer offerd you But if euer it will be offerd you it s twenty to one you will be desired first to cleer yourself and wash off that stain of innocent English bloud wherwith you are asperst and reputed irregular But to return to Constantin and Cyprian I can assure you that you are very much deceiued or at least you design to deceiue others in the interpretation you giue of their words It s generaly belieued that S. Augustin vnderstood Saint Cyprians works and words better than you do Mr. Walsh Now Saint Augustin after setting down lib. 3. de Baptisino cap. 3. those words of Saint Cyprian which you quote for the equality of Bishops as if none of them ought to be iudged by an other but only by God c. Sayes that S. Cyprian meant this of Controuersies wherin the Church hath not declared or defined the truth as yet in debate Opinor saith he in his quaestionibus quae nondum eliquatissima perspectione discussae sunt c. Jn such questions t' is very certain that not only Bishops in Prouincial and Gene-Councils but that euery priuat Doctor in the Schools may speake freely and not be forc't to any side or sentence and this is all that S. Cyprian meant if S. Augustin be not very much deceiued S. Cyprian was also in the right in telling his African Bishops that neither himself nor any of them was Episcopus Episcoporum Bishop of Bishops That is a title giuen only to the Bishop of Rome and hath bin giuen by a Primat of Afrik and Saint Cyprians successor Stephen in his letter to Pope Damasus in a letter I say writ to him in the name of three African Councils Beatissimo Domino Apostolico culmine sublimato S. Patri Patrum Damaso Papae c. Father of Fathers and Bishop of Bishops a Tertullian in lib. de Pudicrtia calls the Bishop of Rome iscopus Episcopor●m Bishop of Bishops signify the same thing in those Circumstances and himself declares it saying in the same Epistle summo omnium Praesulum Praesuli That the Bishop of Rome had authority and iurisdiction ouer other Bishops independently of any general Councils or their Canons and consequently had this authority from God immediatly is confess'd by S. Cyprian who liued before any of the four first general Councils and yet desired Stephen Pope lib. 3. Ep. 13. to depose the Bishop of Arles and put an other in his see Now to end with your Idea of the Church It is obserued in the liues of such Saints as are Fundators or Reformers of Regular Orders that God did reueale to them or giue them an Idea of their Congregations Was it God or the Deuil gaue you the Idea of your reformation yourself is much pleased with it but the Catholiks to whom you communicate and dedicate it haue no reason to be pleased with it For it is a wild wicked fancy of independency an vnreasonable liberty without subordination or discipline A company of dissolute fellows without feare of correction A commonwealth of Libertins without any coerciue power to keep them in awe or in order How can you imagin Mr. Walsh that Christ being infinit wisdom would institute a Commonwealth of frail men or a Church and not inuest the Gouernors therof who are the Clergy with any coerciue power to punish and correct such frailties of their sheep or subiects as he foresaw would be committed and corrupt others This is a pretty Idea of your Church but not of Christs An Idea your Remonstrants did practise whilst you were in power and gouernd them but too scandalous to continue ANIMADVERSION 12. Of the Emperors succeeding Constantin the Great TO proceed therfore from Constantin to more instances of matter of Fact in other Emperors and Kings who succeeded him saith Friar Walsh pag. 345. seq Constantius Constantins son offers himself first For this Constantius would haue and accordingly had the criminal cause of Stephanus the Patriatch or Bishop of Antioch as being accused de vi publica lege Cornelia de Sicarijs of murther to be tryed in a secular Indicatory and before himself in the Pallace and not by any means in the Church c. Neither is it material to obiect heer that Constantius was an Arrian for the Arian Bishops stood as much for the immunities of the Church and Church men and so did the Arrian Princes aduised by them as any Catholiks when the crime obiected was not diuersity in Religion To proue that Catholik Emperors iudged the causes and persons of Catholik Bishops in their lay Courts you quote the case of Stephen the Arrian Bishop of Antioch punish'd by Constantius the Arrian Emperor And yet Theodoret whom you cite for the murther as you say committed by Stephen though Saint Athanasius speaks not of murther tells you according to your own translation of his words that Stephen pleaded against the Emperor Clerks ought not be whipt or wounded At cum Stephanus petulanti ore illis contradiceret affirmaretque plagas non esse infligendas Clericis I will tell you the story as S. Athanasius a Ep. ad Solit. recounts it and you may apply it to yourself and other heretiks whose custom it is and has alwayes bin to discredit and defame their Catholik Confuters when they can not answer their arguments This Stephen you speake of hauing bin with other Arrian Bishops condemn'd and deposed as an heretik b Stephen the Arian Bishop in the Catholik Council of Sardica persecuted most barbarously those who had condemn'd him and the rest he layd spies and Catchpols for them in all sea ports and inland Towns when they returned from that Synod iust as you did in Dublin and other Towns for the poor old Archbishop Burk of Tuam Father Farcell Tully Moor add all who were against your Remonstrance Amongst others he persecuted the two Bishops Vincent and Euphrates who had bin sent by the holy Synod
do supplicat your Majesty you be pleased to command by a most pious order that Peter Walsh a disturber of the peace in lieu of Peter the Inuader of the Church Alexandria be transported to foreign parts Would any man of sense iudge by this humble request that our King or any other to whom it were made had that spiritual authority in Ecclesiastical matters which you would fain flatter Soueraigns with Nay suppose his Majesty or the Parliament were pleased for the peace of the three Nations and to punish you for teaching and printing that Bishops as Bishops can not lawfully help or succor their King to pull down an vsurper or oppose any rebellion to send you to row in the Galleys of Tangiers or to the Ba●bados to labor with the slaues in the Sugar Mills as you say pag. 357. one Chronopius a Bishop was sent to digg in the Syluer Mines by the Emperor Valentinian for appealing to him after he had bin condemned by an Ecclesiastical sentence of 70. Bishops would any one think that this Mission of yours to Tangiers or Barbados after you had bin condemned by the Church as an heretik for this doctrin could proue that the King or Parliament had power to gouern the Church or to make lawes in spiritual matters T is therfore to no purpose for me to confute these and other wild arguments of yours seing themselues sufficiently lay open your gross mistake and demonsttat your litle wit and iudgment But I will beg my Readers leaue and patience to relate your Achilles a The case of S. Iohn Chrysosiom in the controuersy of S. John Chrysostom Arcadius an Emperor also very Orthodo● 〈◊〉 Friar Walsh pag. 360. receiued the accusations against Iohn Chrysostom Bishop of Constantinople and thervpon hauing first ordered a iudicial procedure against this great and holy Bishop at last condemn'd and sent him with a guard of Soldiers farr off to exile Socrates lib 6. c. 16. Falad in Dial. And certainly Pope Innocent the first of that name who then gouerned the see of Rome where he inueighs bitterly against Arcadius and against Endoxia his Empress as against most grieuous Persecutors of so great and so holy a man doth not at all obiect that Arcadius being a meer lay man vsurped a i●d●●iary power in Ecclesiastical matters or so against his own Bishop nor that he proceeded so against him out of or by a tyrannical power and not by any legal authority ouer him in the case but only reprehends Arcadius in that he had not proceeded iustly against Chrysostom or in that he had not made right vse of the power which he had in the case and in a word in that he expell'd Chrysostom from his Episcopal throne before his cause had bin legaly and throughly sifted or iudged as it ought and consequently without obseruing the due formaliues or euen substantial or essential procedure in such case required by the law 〈◊〉 sayes he è throno suo re non iudicata magnum totius orb●s Doctorem Niceph. lib. 13. cap. 34. Nor doth Chrysostom himself any where complain of the Emperor as hauing vsurped a power of iudging condemning or banishing him And yet we know he writ to seueral especialy to Pope Innocent many letters f●aught with complaints of the Emperors vniust iudgment and proceedings against him acknowledging Arcadius or at least supposing him still a legal Iudge though vniust as to the sentence in the case You haue the misfortune Mr. Walsh to contradict yourself in euery story you tell and by consequence you haue a special gift of discrediting your own writings and making your relation and comments vpon it incredible and ridiculous You say in the beginning of this story that Arcadius receiued the accusations against Saint Iohn Chrysostom and therupon hauing first ordered a iudicial procedure against that holy Bishop at last condemned and sent him with a guard of Soldiers farr off to exise A iudicial procedure Mr. Walsh is to proceed secundum allegata probata if Arcadius did so and was Chrysostoms lawfull Iudge Pope Innocent could not reprchend Arcadius as proceeding vniustly against him or say that he condemned him re non iudicata Js to condemn one according to a iudicial procedure and by a lawfull authority to condemn him re non iudicata When therfore the Pope reprehended Arcadius for banishing Chrysostom re non iudicata before his cause was sentene't he meant as is vnderstood by euery man of sense that Arcadius was not his lawfull Iudge and that he ought to haue expected the sentence of the Apostolik sea or a Catholik Councel of Bishops to which the Saint had appeald You see Mr. Walsh how you contradict yourself and how difficult a thing it is to contradict truth and to corrupt such Authors as tell it without being caught in a lye Heare then the true story of S. Iohn Chtysostoms controuersy with the Emperor Arcadius as it is related by S. Iohn himself Palladius and the same Authors which you quote Theophilus Bishop of Alexandria and others ill affected to S. Iohn Chrysostom were employ'd by Eudoxia the Empress to depose that holy Prelat from his see his chief Accusers were som of his own Priests who could not endure his iust reprehensions for their faults Amongst other things himself sayes he was accused of too much familiarity with a certain woman and that he permitted people to receiue the communion after eating This accusation was heard by Theophilus and 36. Bishops of his and the Empress faction met at Calcedon and exhibited by two Priests of Constantinople which Chrysostom had excommunicated for notorious crimes The Saint had with him in Constantinople forty Bishops assembled to heare a charge of 70. articles giuen in against Theophilus but Thophilus who should haue stood at the bair in Constantinople sate as a Iudge in Calcedon and without any lawfull authority summon'd Chrysostom to appeare before him at Calcedon to answer the charge put in against him by the two excommunicated Priests But though the S. said he would appeare when soeuer the Iudges were lawfull and not parties yet the 40. Bishops who stuck to him signified to Theophilus that he should rather com to Constantiuople to cleer himself than call others to iudgment at Chalcedon Vpon this Chrysostom had sentence of deposition past vpon him at Chalcedon for contumacy forsooth And though he appeald to a Councell of Catholik and indisterent Bishops yet those of Chalcedon had so much interest with the Empress and shee with the Emperor as to haue Chrysostom halled out of his Church by Soldiers wherupon he retired to Bernetum of Bithinia But a sedition being feared in Constantinople for this iniustice the Emperor and the Empress also sent to desire him to return withall diligence which he did but as soon as he return'd he desired the Emperor as may be seen in his Epistle to Pope Innocent that his cause might be tryed in a lawfull Synod of Bishops so
yourself Would you haue him exhort the Emperor to remoue from his mind the Popes thoughts or a papal condemnation What would you be at The Pope desires the Emperor to be charitable and to be recoucil'd to the Church Is this to acknowledge in him a full proper legal and supreme power of coercion of Clerks write sense Mr. Walsh and beg pardon of the prinrer and Reader for your book is a manifest nuysance to common sense a The case of Hermannus Archbishop of Cullen in Charles 5. time I will presume a little further vpon my Readers patience to let him see how wittily you confute Belarmins answer to Barclay obiecting against the Ecclesiastical immunity the case of Hermanus Archbishop of Cullen whom the Emperor Charles 5. summon'd to iudment Belarmin sayes he did it as Hermanus was a Prince of the Empire and not as he was a Bishop To this you say pag. 264. That Belarmine writes so of this matter as he may be refuted with that Ieer wherwith a certain Boor pleasantly check'd a great Bishop as he rode by with a splendid pompous train The story is that a Countrey clown hauing first admired and said this pomp was very vnlyke that of the Apostles to whom Bishops did succeed and som of the Bishops train answering that this Bishop was not only a successor of the Apostles but also Heir to a rich Lordship and that moreouer he was a Duke and a Prince too the Clown replyed but if God sayes he condemn the Duke and Prince to eternal fire what will becom of the Bishop Euen so doth Belarmin write as that seauant spoke that this Hermanus whom Charles 5. summon'd to appeare was not only an Archbishop but a Prince also of the Empire And euen so do I say and reply with the Countrey swain when the Emperor iudg'd the Prince of the Empire did he not I pray iudge the Archbishop too But you will say that though indeed he iudg'd the Archbishop yet not as an Archbishop but as a Prince of the Empire Let it be so for neither do I intend or mean or at least vrge or press now that Clerks as Clerks are subiect to the coercion or direction of Kings but as men but as Cittizens and politik parts of the body politik which Kind of authority as Belarmin confesses Charles 5. both acknowledged and vindicated to the Emperor Mr. Walsh if Bèlarmín doth confess as indeed he doth that Clerks as men and Cittizens are subiect to the coerciue power and secular iudicature of temporal Soueraigns doth it follow that the Soueraigns can not exempt them as they are Clergymen from that very coerciue power and secular iudicature Heer you grant they are exempted as Clerks from it though in other places of your book you say its impossible they should be exempted vnless their Soueraigns cease to be Soueraigns I wish you did exempt and free yourself from these contradictions Indeed your story of the Countrey swain doth sufficiently conuince us of your great erudition but me thinks the application doth not so cleerly shew your incomparable acuteness You take the material man somwhat toogrossely You who are a Scotist should be better at your formal distinctions and consider in a man the form or quality of a Clerk or Churchman as raising him a degree aboue the natural or material manhood and common sort of mankind Saint Peter was more subtile he call'd the Priestood Regale Sacerdotium Not that the spiritual caracter of Priesthood or Episcopacy changes mans nature but his quality it places the person in a higher ranck than naturally he could arriue vnto Euen in human Creatures as such you may see this metaphysical distinction explain'd A Peer of the Realm is a man and as a man ought to be tryed by a common iury but his Peerage exempts him from that ordinary way of trial and yet he is still a man and can not euen as a man be tryed by twelue Commoners but by his Peers Jf the example of Subiects will not satisfy you consider that of Soueraigns Our ancient Kings of England did homage to the ancient Kings of France as Dukes of of Normandy Aquitain c. You will not deny they were men both as Kings and Dukes and did homage as men Doth it follow that because they were men and did homage as men they must needs do homage as Kings Or doth it follow that the King of France could not out of his respect to their Kingship exempt them euen as Dukes of Normandy and men from the supreme coerciue power of his Courts Would this vnking the French Kings I haue proued this to be consistent with Soueraignty and subiection in the 9. Animaduersion to which I remit you if you vnderstand not as yet how the same man may be priuiledged and punish'd vpon different scores What the Clown said is very true if God condemns the Bishop as he is a Prince to hell fire he must go thither also as he is a Bishop yet there is this comfort left to Bishops who are Princes God will neuer send them thither for maintaining the iust priuileges either of a Prince or Bishop but for som mortal sin vnrepented for which there is no priuilege or exemption I haue heard your story of the Bishop and Prince told otherwise viz that the Bishop lying a dying the Deuil appear'd to him as som think he doth to all men in that passage and tempting him to despair said he had don such and such things which were not sutable to his Episcopal function The Bishop answer'd he did not do those things as a Bishop but as a temporal Prince To this the Deuil reply'd I am a dull Deuil and can not vnderstand well those subtile distinctions as a Prince and as a Bishop therfote I will carry you to hell as you are such a man and as I find you without questioning whether you go as a Prince or as a Bishop I feare Mr. Walsh this will be your fate You will meet with som dull Deuil one as dull as yourself a Deuil that knowes not how to distinguish between Peter Walsh the Procurator and Peter Walsh the Friar He must be a very acute Deuil that can find out any formality or distinction to excuse your actings either as Procurator or Friar As Procurator you betrayd your trust and acted quite contrary to your commission and as a Friar you ought not to haue taken any without your Superiors leaue Therfore you being neither Prince Bishop nor lawfull Procurator but a poor simple Franciscan Friar suppose the Deuil had met you when you set out from Dublin well mounted and much finer I belieue in cloathes and ribands than the Bishop your Countrey swain was so much scandalized at and attended to search after those poor soules that hid themselues from your persecution suppose I say the Deuil should meet you and endeauor to hurry you with him to hell how could you find out any pretext to excuse your persecution