Emperour receive Baptism from the Bishop the Sacraments Penance desire their Prayers their Benediction lastly you administer humane he dispenses divine things to you Greg. the 2d Ep. 13. to the Emperour Leo As the Bishop has no power to look into the Palace and meddle with regal dignity dignitates regales deferendi so neither has the Emperour to look into the Church c. Bishops are therefore set over Churches abstaining from the business of the Comwonwealth that Princes in like manner may abstain from Ecclesiastical matters Leo 4. 2. q. 7. c. Nos si incompetenter It is to be noted that there are two Persons by which the World is governed the Royal and the Sacerdotal As Kings preside in the affairs of the World so Priests in what belongs to God It belongs to Kings to inflict corporal to Priests to inflict spiritual punishment He Judex carries the Sword for punishment of the bad and praise of the good these Preists have the Keys to exclude the excommunicate and reconcile the penitent Nicolas 3d. C. Inter haec 32. q. 2. The holy Church of God is not govern'd by worldly Laws she has no Sword but the Spiritual with which she doth not kill but quicken Adrian the first in the Council of Franckfort seems to me with one little word to explain very well the Commission given to St. Peter Peter sayd he in reward of his confession was made Porter of Heaven and had power to bind and loose so much we already know 't is recorded in Scripture but what was it he could bind and loose Souls says the Pope These Popes understood and us'd their power as well as most of their Successours and they knew nothing of Temporal power but confin'd what was given them to spiritual and divine things and care of the Soul And that this too is the sense of the Church I think will appear by the Prayer us'd on the Feast of St. Peters Chair which antiently ran thus O God who by giving the Keys of Heaven hast deliver'd to Peter the Pontifical dignity of binding and loosing Souls This last word Souls is left out of the latter Editions I suppose to render the Prayer more conformable to the expressions of Scripture and peradventure to keep more close to antiquity of which they are very tenacious at Rome for Platina in the Life of Leo 4th delivers the rude draught of this Prayer whence 't is likely the Prayer was taken without that word But the meaning with the word and without is the same Words may alter but the Churches sense alters not But let us hear some other of the Fathers Hosius Bishop of Corduba who presided in the Council of Nice and was counted in his time the Father of Bishops writes thus to the Emperour Constantius God has committed the Empire to you Vid. Athan. Ep. ad Solicitarios and entrusted us with what belongs to the Church And as he who looks upon your Empire with envious Eyes contradicts the divine Ordination so do you take heed that by drawing affairs of the Church to you you incur a great crime It is written give what is Caesars to Caesar and what is Gods to God Wherefore neither is it lawful for us to take an Empire on Earth neither does the Power of Sacrifices and holy things belong to you S. Jo. Chrysost hom 4. in verb. Isaiae Bodies are committed to Kings Souls to Priests He has material those spiritual Arms. S. Hierom. in cap. 16. Mat. The Spiritual Key extends not it self to Temporals without Arrogance Theophylac upon John 21. Our Lord makes Peter not a Prince not a King but commands him to be a Pastour Feed says he not Kill c. S. Anselm upon Mat. 26. There are secular Officers by whom Temporal things and Spiritual Officers by whom Spiritual things are managed Wherefore the material Sword is given to carnal and the Spiritual to Spiritual Officers and as what belongs to the Church is not proper for Kings so neither ought the Bishop to meddle with what belongs to Kings Which because Peter who represents spiritual men did when he us'd the material Sword and cut off our Servants Ears he deserv'd to be reprehended by our Lord. Hugo de san Victor de sacr fid l. 2. p. 3. c. 4. Earthly Power has the King for Heads Spiritual Power the Pope Earthly things and all ordained for earthly Life belong to the power of the King Spiritual things and all belonging to Spiritual life to the Pope Again l. 2. p. 2. c. 3. It is given to the faithful Christian Laity to possess Temporals to the Clergy onely Spirituals are committed St. Bernard speaks thus to the Pope De consid l. 1. c. 6. Your Power is not in Possessions but in Crimes and for these not for them you have received the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven Consider Hugo's onely Spirituals and St. Bernards not for Possessions or Temporals and judge whether a Catholick is like to be reproved for not extending the Popes power beyond Spirituals And in his 2d Book speaking of Temporals Be it says he that you may some other way challenge these things but not by the right of Apostleship for he Peter could not give what he had not himself what he had that he gave the care as I said over Churches Rupertus Abbas upon these words nor a Rod Mat. 10. speaks thus But now there are two Rods one of the Kings of Gentiles another of the Disciples of Christ The Rod of of the Kings of Gentiles is the Rod of Dominion the Rod of the Disciples of Christ is the Rod of Direction the Rod of Pastoral duty solicitously watching over the cure of Souls The Rod which is of Dominion is not granted to the Ministers of the Gospel of Peace and that is forbidden here nor a Rod c. Cardinal Damianus L. 4. Ep. 9. ad Olderic Episc Firman Between the Kingdom and Priesthood the proper Offices of each are distinguisht that the King may make use of the Arms of the World and the Priest be girt with the Sword of the Spirit which is the Word of God If any Object that Pope Leo engaged himself often in War who nevertheless is a Saint I say what I think that neither Peter obtained the Apostolical Principality because he denied Christ nor David deserved the Oracle of Prophecy because defiled another mans Bed Schoolmen as they speak more plainly are a little more severe Almain de Authorit Eccles c. 2. puts this difference betwixt Ecclesiastical and Lay power that by this onely corporeal punishment is inflicted by other Spiritual precisely Joan. de Parisiis c. 10. de potest Reg. Pap. Granting that Christ had temporal authority and plwer yet gave it not to Peter c. 15. Answering the Objection from Quodcunque solveritis c. I answer with Chrysostom and Ravanus by this is not understood any power given but Spiritual to absolve from the bond of Sins and it were foolish
Vicar I understand now the reason St. Peter commands Christians to be obedient to the Authority of Heathen Princes and Governours because he knew very well how they came by it For though all their power before was usurp'd and tyrannical yet after they had deriv'd it from him it became a lawful Authority If our wicked Politicians be not confounded with this I know not what will do it I am sure I am to meet with such stuff in a Church which boasts of purity of her doctrine and which cherishes the Authors not only as good Christians but learned men and Masters of Christianity Lael Zecch Tract Theol. P. 81. Laelius Zecchius tells us that the Pope by the Law of God hath power and temporal dominion over the whole world That the same is prov'd by the words Luk. 22. Behold here are two swords which signifie the power spiritual and temporal and because Christ whose Vicar the Pope is hath both powers according to the words Matt. ult All power is given me in heaven and in earth that thence it may be deduced that the Pope is absolutely Lord of all the Christian world and Kings and Christian Princes are to acknowledge that they hold of him their Empires and Kingdoms and all that are faithful ought to be subject unto him and that as oft as such Princes do any great hurt in the Church the Pope may deprive them of their Kingdoms and transfer their right to others Franciscus Bozius Fran. Boz de temp Eccle. Monarch l. 1. c. 3. p. 52. C. 7. p. 98. That the supreme temporal Jurisdiction throughout all the world doth belong to S. Peter's Successors so as one and the same is the Hierarch and Monarch in all things That Christ left the Church to be govern'd by the best form of government but the best form of government is absolute Monarchy even in all temporal things therefore Christ left his Church to be so govern'd That the Keys of Heaven were given to Peter L. 2. c. 14. L. 3. c. 1. p. 894. therefore of all the earth That the right of dominion and relation of Infidels may justly by the sentence and ordination of the Church be taken away because Infidels by reason of their infidelity deserve to lose their power over the faithful C. 14. p. 530. c. 14. p. 530. That the Church hath receiv'd that power over Nations which Christ according to his humane nature reciev'd of his Father but Christ receiv'd absolutely of his Father all power in temporalibus therefore the Church likewise receiv'd it by participation of his fulness c. 16. p. 537. That the supreme coactive power in all temporal things belongeth to Ecclesiastical persons by divine Law revealed and expressed in the Scriptures That Kings P. 676. annointed with holy Oil are called as Vassals of the Church That by reason of the supreme Monarchy in all things L. 5. p. 823. temporal laws may be made and Kingdoms taken away for just causes Henricus Gandavensis if Carrerius cite him truly Car. p. 28. That by the Law of God and nature the Priesthood doth over-top the Empire and both Jurisdiction over Spiritualties and Temporalties and the immediate execution likewise of them both depend upon the Priesthood both by the Law of God and Nature Carr. p. 130. Antoninus That they who say the Pope hath dominion over all the world in Spirituals but not in Temporals are like the Counsellors of the King of Syria who said the Gods of the Mountains are their Gods and therefore they have overcome 〈◊〉 let us fight with them in the Plains and Valleys where their Gods dwell not and we shall prevail against them Carr. p. 130. 3 Reg. 20. Augustinus Triumphus That the Son of God hath declar'd the altitude of the Ecclesiastical power being as it were founded upon a Rock to be above all principality and power that unto it all knees should bend of things in heaven in earth and under the earth or in hell 'T is come at last this infernal power 't was only long of a bad memory we had it not before P. 131. That Secular Powers were not necessary but that Princes might perform that through terror of discipline which the Priest cannot effect by power of doctrine and that therefore if the Church could punish evil men Imperial and Secular principality were not necessary the same being included potentially in the principality Apostolical And why cannot the Church punish evil men if both Jurisdictions and the immediate execution of both be in her But we understand him well enough when time serves the conclusion shall be that Princes are unnecessary because the Church by her double power can do the business of the world without them And so farewel useless Princes Aug. de Anc. de Potest Ecc. Q. 39. a. 2. Farther he tells us that Imperial or Regal power is borrowed from the Papal or Sacerdotal for as much as concerneth the formality of dignity and recieving the authority Pretty formalities those Q. 45. a. 2. That the Pope hath Jurisdiction over all things as will temporal as spiritual through the world That he may absolve Subjects from the Oath of Allegiance Q. 46. a. 3. That upon just cause he may set up a King in every Kingdom L. Conr. in templ om judic l. 2 c. 1. S 4. for he is the Overseer of all Kingdoms in Gods stead as God is the Supervisor and maker of all Kingdoms Lancecelot Conradus That He may appoint Guardians and Assistants to Kings and Emperors when they are insufficient and unfit for government That he may depose them and transfer their Empires and Dominions from one line to another Celsus Mancinus Cel. Manc l c. 1. That in the highest Bishop both the Powers and Jurisdictions are spiritual and temporal and that as he is the most eminent person of all men in spiritual power Th. Boz de jur stat l. 1. c. 6. p. 37. P. 52. so he is in temporal Thomas Bozius That Kings and principal Seculars are not immediately of God but by the Interposition of Holy Church and her chief Bishops That warlike and military compulsive power is given to the Church over Kings and Princes That if it be found sometimes that certain Emperors have given some temporalities to the highest Bishops as Constantine gave to Silvester this is not to be understood that they gave any thing which was their own but restor'd that which was unjustly and tyrannically taken from the said Bishops Ap. Carrer P. 132. Rodoricus Sancius That there is one Principlity and one supreme-Prince over all the world who is Christ's Vicar according to that of Dan. c 8. He hath given him power and honour and rule and all people and tongues shall serve him and that in him therefore is the fountain and spring of all principality and from him all other powers do flow P. 131. 132 That
only such as are propos'd for Faith This being admitted as it is universally the difficulty is plainly answered For 't is as plain as can be that here is nothing propos'd for Faith The Emperor is depos'd his deposition is that which is decreed and that is propos'd as a thing to be done not believed To depose is one thing to define they have power to depose is another Had they made such a Decree and obliged all Christians under Anathema to believe it had been to purpose to alledg it But as far as I can learn there was no thought of any such thing in the Council Now for Acting People may act and sometimes very rationally upon probable grounds and such as none are bound to believe And they may have very good grounds for acting in one case which themselves may not think sufficient in another It is very unreasonable out of a particular action to conclude a power which shall extend to all cases when from the bare action there is no necessity of believing a power even in that case The most that can be made of it is that the Council suppos'd or took for granted they had power to do what they did And it may be they had For the Emperor had sworn particularly to stand to the Judgment of the Church He pleaded in this Council by his Procurators who when they saw things go against them made no exception to the Jurisdiction of the Court but appeal'd to a future Council more general pretending all were not present who had right to sit there But why may not a Council take for granted more then every body is obliged to grant This supposition of theirs was undoubtedly one of the Reasons of their Decree And Bellarmin assures us we are not bound to believe any of their reasons So that for his particular he had no reason to expect this Decree should cause belief in any But whether he had or no this is plain without him That where there is nothing to be believ'd there can be no belief and where there is nothing in his languag propos'd for Faith there is nothing to be believ'd Here is something commanded but nothing defin'd and as sure as no Mass no hundred Mark no Definition no Article of Faith Wherefore I cannot sufficiently wonder to see learned men lay so blindly about them some with great formality citing the Council and heightning its authority by reckoning up the number and quality of those who met there others striving to diminish it by consulting Historians and carefully observing all exceptions they afford when all this while the Authority of it neither applys it self nor can be applyed to the matter in hand For t is evident they defined nothing one way or other and afford us no more then a bare matter of fact past indeed in or by a Council but whatever be true or whether the Fact were just or unjust our belief is not a jot concern'd and this even by the confession of those who most urg the Council The Fate of eager Disputers is upon us with much ado we are where we were again and must either be taught this Doctrine by Decrees which teach nothing or which neither are nor were intended for teaching Decrees or not to be taught it all as far as I perceive For this is the sum total of his ten Councils His fourth and last Argument is He says from Scripture and if you will pardon a scurvy pun t is indeed very far from it so far that one would not readily perceive what Scripture has to do with it As tedious as it is to transcribe I must submit to the pains of setting down and you to the patience of reading his whole Discourse for fear I should be suspected of wronging it by contracting Fourthly says he We prove it from the divine writings as Greg. 7 proves it in 21 Epistle of the 8 Book For we find the Ecclesiastical Primacy of the Bishop of Rome most manifestly founded on Scripture and Tradition in which Primacy is contained most ample Power of governing binding and loosing whomsoever even Kings and Emperors and this neither Barclay nor any Catholick denies But out of this principle is gathered plainly enough that there is in the Bishop of Rome a power to dispose of temporals even to the deposition of those Kings and Emperors For by that spiritual Power the Pope can bind secular Princes by the bond of excommunication by the same he can loose the people from their Oath of Fidelity and Obedience he can oblige the same People under pain of Excommunication not to obey the excommunicated King and chuse them another Besides since the end of spiritual government is the gaining eternal life which is the supream and last end to which all other ends are subordinate of necessity all secular Power must be subject and subordinate to the spiritual power of the supream Ecclesiastical Hierarch which secular power he is to direct and if it deviate correct and judge and in fine bring to pass that it hinder not the salvation of Christian people And this is the reason why both Greg. 7 and Innocent 4. when they depos'd Emperors to shew they did it justly alledg'd the words of our Lord Whatever you shall bind on Earth shall be bound in Heaven and whatever you shall loose on Earth shall be loosed in Heaven Mat. 16. And feed my Sheep Jo. 21. namely to signify that their power to dispose of temporals when the salvation of souls the safety of Religion and preservation of the Church require it depends not on the uncertain opinions of men but the divine Ordination of Christ the eternal King and highest Bishop and who above all is God blessed for ever according to the Apostle Rom. 11. This is every word of what he calls proof from Scripture if you or any else think it so you shall find me reasonable But indeed it sticks with me Let us see The Ecclesiastical Primacy of the Pope says he is founded in Scripture and Tradition and this Primacy extends to Kings and Emperors and contains most ample power of governing binding and loosing and this no Catholick denies Very well and because I must acknowledg my self a Catholick I must acknowledg I think it all very true Thus far we are right Only I take this most ample Power to mean no more then most ample Ecclesiastical power for that is all which Ecclesiastical Primacy imports which Ecclesiastical Power that it extends to Kings and Emperors no King nor Emperor who acknowledges the Ecclesiastical Primacy scruples to admit For they take themselves to be part of the flock of Christ and claim their share in the benefit of the Keys as well as others But out of this Principle says he the deposing Power is plainly gathered The Controversy sure will quickly be at an end now Scripture is acknowledged on all hands and what is plainly there or may be plainly deduc'd from thence will find a ready
to understand a power given to absolve from the Bond of Debt Again c. 14. To Peter was given spiritual power onely to remit sins nor can be do any thing in temporals but in foro conscientiae Aegid Rom. Q. de utraque potestat art 3. It is to be understood that Christ had a threefold power over bodies souls and temporal goods The first he us'd by curing infirmities c. The second viz. Spiritual he both us'd and delegated as much as is necessary and expedient for the good of Souls The third He neither us'd nor gave but rather forbad both to Peter and the other Apostles as is said And concludes In the Commission given to Peter his Vicar we read not temporal but onely spiritual power committed to him I will give Thee the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven he said not and Dominion over worldly things Wherefore he presently adds as explicating himself to mean onely spiritual power Whatever you shall bind c. Ambros Catharin upon Rom. 13. That the pope is Vicar of Christ is nothing to purpose to make us believe he has power given him to rule all the World in temporals It rather perswades us such power was not given him because Christ refus'd it and as he was man had it not in the World for after the Resurrection 't was said all power is given me c. But in this World he was subject to secular powers Wherefore he left the Pope Vicar of that Kingdom which was given him by his Father while he liv'd on Earth namely the spiritual Kingdom over his Sheep c. Otherwise if he be the Vicar of Christ absolutely according to all the power which Christ had he should have power over Angels and the Blessed which is ridiculous And again These powers are different from one another and no man can usurp either at his pleasure and to think and teach otherwise is most seditious and most horrible Anton. de Rosell de Protestat Imp. Pap. p. 1. c. 38. Whence I conclude 't is Heresie and Madness to say that the universal Administration of Temporals is or can be in the Pope Greg. Haimbarg de prim Pap. Whence it appears 't is a fable and invention that is writ in the Decretals that Popes have the plenitude of power givem them and such a Dominion that they are over Kings and Princes in Temporals They are smart fellowes these Schoolmen and speak home and yet are good Catholicks for all that and acknowledg'd to be so neither are they otherwise reprov'd or reprovable then as Scholars take the freedom to censure one another Mean time since a Catholick may unreprovably hold that the two powers were distinguisht by Christ and joyn'd by the Devil the temporal committed to Princes and the spiritual to Bishops who if they be Souldiers of God are not to meddle with secular business that while Bishops dispense divine Princes are to administer humane things that to the Clergy belong onely spirituals and the Popes power has nothing to do with possessions that dominion is forbidden him and onely the Rod of direction granted c. I hope you may quiet your fears and not suspect I shall either be disown'd or reprov'd by my Church if upon the security of so much Authority I deny your first Proposition and affirm the Popes Vicarship is confin'd to spirituals and that it hinders not Princes from being Gods Vicars as well as himself who if they manage all their trust are accountable onely to him second to whom they are and except whom they have none above them I mean in their own kind Onely I would not have you boggle at this that the Pope is not every where expresly nam'd For though the Order of Government require that the Head should have more power then an inferior Member as the Commission of a General must be larger then that of a private Captain yet I think none will doubt but the power of the Pope and the rest of the Clergy is all of the same kind and the more which belongs to him as Head of the Church signifies more of the same sort of actions not power of another nature But because I am to say nothing of my self let St. Leo tell you this and more in a Sermon inserted into the Churches Office on the Feast of St. Peters Chair at Antioch where speaking of the Confession of St. Peter and the promise made him upon it The force indeed says he of this power past into the other Apostles and the Constitution of this Decree of the keys descended to all the Princes of the Church but 't is not without cause that what is intimated to all is commanded to one For this is therefore particularly entrusted to Peter because the example of Peter is propos'd to all the Governors of the Church And so much to the first Proposition which though I have abstained from treating dogmatially yet I have said or rather shew'd you that others say what may abundantly quiet your fears and that a Catholick who confines the Popes power onely to spirituals is so far from contradicting my principle receiv'd amongst Catholicks that he has the warrant of great I had almost said all Authority on this side at least so much that is not well consistent with Catholick principles to oppose it But I pray mistake me not for though I have said nothing of my self yet I would not be misinterpreted so much as to have alledg'd ought which might be thought to question any not onely spiritual but even temporal power which may justly belong to the Church and which when it does she may without doubt justly use But 't is one thing to have power by agreement of men and another by Commission from Christ and I would say no more then St. Bernard has said before me that however such things may belong to the Church yet not by right of Apostleship Your Argument assum'd that a Vicar had the same power with him whose Vicar he is what I have alledg'd was only to answer that and as I am not oblig'd so I meant not to go farther What I shall adde in examination of your second Proposition you will perceive is more to satisfie your Friendship then your Argument for whether Christ had temporal Dominion or no if he gave it not to the Pope the Pope is never the near and your Argument sufficiently cleer'd Notwithstanding since I would not give you cause to complain I neglect any thing you propos'd let us consider how far this is true that Christ had all temporal as well as spiritual power But Friend I hope your feud to formalities is abated for I must tell you beforehand there is no discoursing on this subject without distinguishing the God from the Man Yow know in Christ the distinct properties of both Natures were so united that they both made but one Sacred Person to which person nothing can be deny'd which can with truth be affirm'd of God and none
thought necessary Learned Men should be constrain'd by Oaths and fear of Penalties terribilibus comminationibus to declare their thoughts of this matter Possibly Interest may have had some share in this backwardness Men of this sort of Learning belong most to the Church and may peradventure consider that If they displease him who carries the Keys he may perhaps make use of them to shut the Gates of Ecclesiastical preferment Besides they have been diligent to discountenance and suppress all Books written against the Popes Power so that a Private man cannot write without the hazard of a Censure on his Book and possibly on his Person These I think are the true Reasons I am sure they are good ones of the backwardness which you phansie proceeds from a prohibition of the Church and with a great deal of injustice and no truth heighten into malice and the execrable hypocrisie of teaching two Religions one to be published the other conceal'd and I know not what when all this while I assure you there is no such thing as a Prohibition of the Church at least that I know of for any man to speak what he thinks what Fisher mentions was a private Order made amongst the Jesuites and concerns only themselves but wise men are not forward to speak what may turn to their prejudice nor quiet men to interpose in the concerns of higher and the Highest Powers as I conceive they are not therefore blameable However it be He who from the Sence of those who have vvrit would infer the Sence of all Learned Men concludes in my opinion very fallaciously Those who Write not and whose Sence we know not being much more Numerous and every jot as Learned as those who Write But to let that pass this Doctrine has found a different reception in the world The French as their natures are frank and open without more adoe plainly deny it and besides a great many reiterated Arrest of Parliament have solemnly condemn'd it in all their Universities In other Countries they are more reserv'd and rather oppose the Execution of the Power than the Power it self They let the Pope and any for him talk as they please but when it comes to Practice it alwaies proves unjust in that particular and I believe alwaies shall do In Brabant the Custom is That all Bulls are understood of course to be Subreptitious till they be approv'd by the Prince In other places they have other expedients but as far as I see by several means they all compass the same end and admit no more than they think stands with their Profit Only the French bluntly tell the Pope You cannot others use softer words but their Actions say You shall not farther than we think fit Now for the Opinion of the Canonists since Divines universally reject it I may without more adoe reject it with them Of the other it may be enquir'd Whether it be of Faith and Whether it be True which are very different Questions And for Faith I positively and freely disclaim it both because the Maintainers of it themselves confess it is not and though some are unwary enough to heighten it to that degree yet they are but few and their rashness is generally condemn'd as ill grounded and carried too far And besides I see the contrary is openly maintain'd by as numerous and considerable a Member as any belongs to the Catholic Church and while at Rome they condemn Withrington and Barklay at Paris they condemn Bellarmin and Suarez The Pope and the rest of the vvorld knows and sees this and yet Communicate freely with them and account them all the while good Catholics Which is plainly to acknowledge it is no point of Faith in which they differ for if it were they could no more Communicate with them than with Arrius or Pelagius neither is any consideration of their Power or concern of Policy able to justifie or dispense with acknowledging him a Catholic who persists to maintain an Heresie All the difficulty is Whether it be true or no. And who am I that I should undertake to dogmatize in an Age so Antidogmatical and where no vanity is thought greater than that of Dogmatizing and this in a Question which has exercised the Wit and Learning of Men esteem'd so great that to oppose them may chance be counted Arrogance The most I can do is to tell you what I think and what I think is even in my own judgment so inconsiderable that I think it a great deal better to play the Historian than the Disputer and hope you will be satisfied if I inform you as much as I know of this Question and relate the Arguments hitherto produc'd on both sides at least as far as I am acquainted with them and leave you to judge as you see cause By this means as you will have all the Information I can give you so none can rationally blame me for barely relating what every body either knows already or may know that will take the pains to look upon what is publickly and every where extant But before I begin the Arguments it will not be amiss to look a little into the Origin of this Dispute and consider when and how it came into the vvorld Gregory the VIIth was the first that brought it on the Stage Till his time the Independent Power of Princes was never questioned They not only quietly dispos'd of Civil matters without controll except where any notorious Injustice happened and then both Popes and other zealous Prelates took the liberty to reprehend and sometimes Excommunicate them but had no small share in Ecclesiastical matters so far as to make Laws concerning them to invest the Persons duly chosen to Benefices and confirm the Election even of Popes themselves which was not held valid without their approbation Take it in the words of Onuphrius no enemy to this Pope Onuph de var. Creat Rom. Pont. L. 4. Though formerly the Bishops of Rome were respected as the Heads of Christian Religion the Vicars of Christ and Successors of Peter yet their Authority extended no farther than either to assert or maintain the Doctrines of Faith For the rest they were subject to the Emperours all things were done by Their appointment Themselves were Created by them neither did the Pope dare to judge or determine any thing concerning them Gregory the VIIth was the First of all the Bishops of Rome who relying on the Arms of the Normans and Wealth of the Countess Mathildis a Woman of great Power in Italy and inflam'd by the discord of the Princes of Germany opprest with Civil Wars contemning contrary to the Custom of his Predecessours the Imperial Power and Authority after he had obtain'd the Pontificate durst not only Excommunicate but deprive the Emperour by whom he had been if not Elected at least Confirm'd of his Kingdom and Empire A thing to that Age unheard of for as for the Fables which go about of Arcadius and Anastius and Leo the
submission from every body And though I suspect this Gathering will go near to take the business out of the hands of Scripture yet since it is no great matter who does it so the Miracle be done let us only observe at present how he gathers this plain inference of his and how it follows if the Pope be invested with the Power belonging to Ecclesiastical Primacy he is invested likewise with the Power of deposing Kings It is worth while to attend a little to a matter of this consequence and a little attention will serve turn where things are so plain Pray how does this follow so plainly why thus says Bellarmin Because the Pope by his spiritual Power can bind even Kings with the bond of Excommunication Suppose he can what then And by the same he can loose people from their Oath of Fidelity and Obedience and oblige them under excommunication not to obey the former excommunicated King but chuse them a new one How He can absolve subjects from the duty of Obedience and oblige them to chuse a new King Why this is the very thing call'd Deposing and if he can depose undoubtedly he can depose But whether he can do this is the thing in question and what he undertook to prove by a plain collection out of Scripture and does he offer us for proof the very thing to be prov'd This it neither proving nor gathering but saying twice over what they who deny once will deny as often as it is or can be repeated till it be prov'd T is in plain terms to say he can loose the band of Allegeance therefore he can loose the band of Allegeance or he can Depose therefore he can Depose In good earnest I should not easily have believed that such a man as Bellarmin should have over-seen himself so much But I perceive the greatest men that are are men and have their failings And though I should not have run proud of my own wit if I alone had observ'd a defect so palpable yet I must needs confess I am not the first discoverer Jo. Barclay has been before me and it may be as many as have considered the Argument as the truth is I say almost nothing which I have not from others If you remember I engaged no farther then to acquaint you what others say and I am as good as my word But it is so tedious and hobling a labor to be alwayes going over and over again with This man says that and t'other man the other that I cannot endure alwaies to cite my Authors But to return to our matter All we have here in proof of the deposing power is that the Pope has it which he that will take for a proof may but I fear that who believs it for that reason had as good believe it for no reason at all And how much soever there may be of Reason I verily think there is little of Scripture in it There follows the subordination of the two Powers from the subordination of their ends which is one of the 5 Arguments related in my former Letter and which to repeat again I suppose would be as ungrateful to you as tedious to me But there Bellarmin alledg'd it as an Argument from Reason and how he comes here to intitle it to Scripture I cannot guess The truth is I am wholly to seek why these two together and these two are all which belong to this Head should be called proof from Scripture when no place of Scripture is so much as alledged He assumes indeed that Ecclesiastical Primacy is founded in Scripture and Tradition But this is part of the question No Catholick disputes it with him The question is whether the Scripture teach the deposing Power is joyned to that Primacy I would fain see that place of Scripture which teaches this When Bellarmin undertook to prove his doctrine by Scripture I expected as I think any man would he should produce some place which teaches it either expresly or so that it might plainly be gathered from it And instead of this he brings us one reason such as it is and another which is not so much as a reason but a bare saying over what he was to prove and this he calls proof from Scripture He cites indeed in the Process of his discourse Mat. 16. and Jo. 21. but does not go about to shew how they are to his purpose only by way of History tells us that two Popes alledg'd them to shew that they dealt justly and that the power they challenged is not founded on uncertain opinions but divine Authority Undoubtedly these Popes had reason to desire it should be thought they dealt justly and that this power of theirs was not founded on uncertain opinions And every body knows they have alledged those places and more But every body is not satisfied with those allegations nor can perceive by them that divine Authority does indeed warrant their deposing claim neither does Bellarmin contribute any thing to their satisfaction They find in S. Hierom that the spiritual Key extends it self not to Temporals without arrogance and some body else from S. Jo. Chrysostom has told them that by the Keys is not understood any power given but spiritual to absolve from the bond of Sin and that it were foolish to understand it of a Power to absolve from the bond of debt And if they think it as wise to understand it so as to understand it of a Power to absolve from the bond of Allegeance they may do so for Bellarmin But you have a great deal to this purpose cited formerly and much more might be added if it were necessary by which it may be gather'd something more plainly then Bellarmin gathers that the Church understood not the power of the Keys as those Popes would have us understand the 16 of S. Mathew The like is of the other place of Feeding of which you observ'd unhappily that to understand it of Deposing is to think Christ meant his Sheep should be fed with knocks Upon that occasion you know I brought you S. Bernard affirming that to feed is no more then to Evangelize Fac opus Evangelistae Pastoris munus implesti I could easily produce Authority enough for the right sence of this place But another of the 5 Arguments mention'd in my last being drawn from hence you see there are all that Bellarmin could make of it which I have no mind to say again Several other Arguments there are scattered up and down by several Authors But I take these to be the principal At least they are those which Bellarmin chose and he being look'd upon as the Principal Patron of this opinion I think it needles to look after more and in his judgment worse It is now time to acquaint you with the arguments produc'd on the other side and the answers to them You shall permit me to contract them into as little room as I can for my Letter swells and I am weary both of