she meant that she might dispose of Church matters as her Father had and have power to forme what Church she pleased and so that should suffice her Highnesse It is to be noted thirdly that the aforesaid oath when it was made was unlawfull to be taken by any Catholique as the oath before made in the dayes of King Henry the 8th Although when it was made it was not altogether so unlawfull as that of King Henry because in his dayes there was no other Church extant or like to be extant in England but the Catholique Church of which contrary to the Law of God and his own conscience he made himself head as appears by a booke set forth by the said King himself in the later end of his raigne and many yeers after he had framed his Oath of Supremacie intituled A necessary Doctrine and Erudition for any Christian man set forth by the Kings Majestie of England c. In which he sets forth the Christian faith then to be professed in England Which was as absolutely Catholique and the self-same in every point as now it is in Rome And if any man should have sworne him the supreame head as he intended of that Church he would have sworne false as making the Church a Monster in having two heads or depriving the Pope of his authoritie granted him by God which had been to have denyed an Article of faith but when the said Oath was repealed in Queene Maries dayes And another Oath of Supremacie made in the aforesaid first yeere of Queene Elizabeth It was as I have said to inable her not so much to be head of the Church then extant and to be utterly abolished as to be Governour of a new Church distinct from the Catholique Church then out of hand to be propagated and established of which to sweare Her Head before it was or to sweare Her Head of the Church then extant which she conceived superstitious of which indeed she was not head was in a true and proper sence unlawfull And so continued unlawfull untill after the abrogation of Masse and perfect establishment of the new Protestant Church within this Realme and other His Majesties Dominions Which being established as now it is the said Oath of Supremacie ceased from being unlawfull because then there was an apparant face of a Church distinct from the members of the Catholique Church which then began scarce to appeare in respect of the greater multitude of which only she was supreame governour and chief head and no other person whatsoever had or ought to have any jurisdiction or preheminence in the same and all that were or are not of the same faith and Church were and are in a true and proper sense forreiners to the same It is to be noted fourthly that a man may be said to be a Forreiner in a twofold sence First in respect of a temporall Dominion Secondly in respect of faith whence ariseth a spirituall jurisdiction In the first sence all that are not Natives of His Majesties Dominions although some Lawyers say all that doe no homage to His Majestie are forreiners In the second sence all that are of the Protestant faith with the King are Domesticks of the same faith and within His Dominions only subject to His spirituall jurisdiction by the Laws of the Realme And all that are not of the Protestant faith are forreiners to the same conformable to St. Paul who accounted all those of whatsoever Nation or under whatsoever temporall Dominion or Iurisdiction in the world who were of the same faith with himselfe which he taught were Domesticks of that faith And those of whatsoever Nation or temporall Dominion that were not of the same faith he accounted forreiners Whence he saith Gal. 6.10 Let us doe good to all but especially to the domesticks or those of the house of faith And 1 Thess. 4. vers 12. Rogamus ut honeste ambuletis ad eos qui foris sunt nullius aliquid desideretis We desire you brethren that you walke honestly towards them that are without that is forreiners to our faith and need nothing of any mans It is to be noted fifthly and chiefly what conditions are required in every lawful oath which according to the Prophet Ieremy are three viz Truth Iudgement and Iustice for he saith in his fourth Chapter Thou shalt sweare our Lord liveth in truth and in judgement and in justice upon which place the holy Doctor S. Hierome noteth that the foresaid conditions are requisite to every oath of whom all Divines have leâ—rned the same requiring in every lawfull oath every of the said three conditions The reason hereof is because an oath being an invocation of God as witnesse that what we speake is true it is requisite that we should use judgement or discretion to see that we doe nothing rashly or without due reverence devotion and faith towards so great a Majestie but we must especially regard that we make not him who is the chiefe and Soveraigne veritie and inflexible justice either ignorant oâ— what we say or Patron of a lye as witnesse of that which either is false in assertion or unjust in promise Hence an oath wanting Iudgement or discretion and wisdome is a rash and foolish oath that which wanteth Iustice is called an unjust oath And finally where there is not truth it is adjudged a false or lying oath and is more properly then all the rest called Perjurie These notes premised I shall now prove the said Oath of Supremacie to be lawfull for any Catholique to take Every Oath that is accompanyed with the three said conditions or companions viz. veritie justice and judgement in the opinion of all Divines Canon and Civil Lawyers is a lawfull Oath but such is the Oath of Supremacie above recited in every part and particle of the same Ergo. The Minor is proved discoursing of every branch in particular and first of the first branch wherein I sweare that the King is only Supreame Governour of this Realme as well in all Spirituall or Ecclesiasticall things or causes touching the Church of the said Realm as Temporall touching the State or of any other his Dominions Which I doe sweare discreetly as a thing true and just For there is no other Supreme Governour of temporall things to be assigned but the King as all will confesse nor of Ecclesiasticall things or the Church of England as by a sufficient Enumeration may be proved For the Parliamâ—nt is not supreame governour of the Churches within this Realme when as according to the naturall light of reason the King is governour of that and therefore not supreame The Primate cannot be assigned supreame governour when as he hath all his authoritie of government from the King and so he hath a Superior A Lay-eldership cannot be supreame governour for although it be unknowne what it is or from whence it receiveth its authoritie yet I thinke no Lay-eldership so barbarous as not to
6â— de leg cap. 1. upon the will and intention of the lawmaker which is the soule of the law the substance and force of the law doth chiâ—fly depend therefore it by any meanes the will of the lawmaker may be knowne according to it especially we must understand the words of the law But the will of the lawmaker is sufficiently knowne concerning this oath to make it apparently unlawfull for any Catholique to take as appeareth by the words of King Iames of blessed memory saying in his Premonition pag. 9. and in his Apology for the oath pag. 2. and 9. that by the oath of Allegiance he intended to demand of his subjects nothing else but a profession of that temporall Allegiance and civill obedience which all subjects by the law of God and nature doe owe to their lawfull Prince c. For as the Oath of Supremacie saith he was devised for putting a difference betweene Papists and them of our profession So was the oath of Allegiance ordained for making a difference between the civilly obedient Papists and the perverse disciples of the Powder treason by which words it appeareth that King Iames held both the law and the law maker intended by the oath of Supremacie to put a difference betweene Papists and Protestants and that no Papist would take that oath wherein the Jurisdiction of the Pope was intended to be abjured Ergo the said oath of Supremacie is to be interpreted accordingly all doubtfulnesse of words set aside and consequenter unlawfull for any Catholique to take To the Major of which Objection I answer first granting the same Secondly with a distinction that the intentions of the law and law maker are to bee sought when they interpret the law in a truer sense then the plaine words doe as they lie otherwise not lest it want veritie To Suarez I answer that himselfe saith in the place before cited that if at any time the propertie of the words of an oath should induce any injustice or like absurditie concerning the minde or meaning of the lawmaker they must be drawne to a sense although improper wherein the law may be just and reasonable for this is presumed to be the minde of the law maker as it hath beene declared by many lawes in F. tit de lege thus Suarez So that although there were in the words of this oath divers significations impropper and unusuall yet in the opinion of Suarez it might be taken and the words interpreted in the truest sense abstracting from the reall intention of the law maker how much more then say I the words being not improper or unusuall but according to the intention of the law and law maker may they be taken in the more favourable sence which may make the law to be just and reasonable See for this doctrine Can. Cum tu de testibus cap. 16. Can. ad nostram de Iurejurando cap. 21. et de regulis â—â—ris in 6. reg 49. in paenis leg Benignius F. de leg Leg. In ambigua ibidem Hence it followeth first out of the doctrine of the said Suarez that although the words and sentences contained in this oath being considered barely by themselves and without due circumstances to wit the intention of the law and lawmaker and to what end and purpose the sâ—id oath was framed may seeme to some doubtfull and ambiguous although to me they seeme not so that is not cleare and morally certaine and so for one to sweare them in that doubtfull sence were to expose himselfe to danger of perjurie yet considering as I have said that such doubtfull words are to be taken in the more favourable sense and which maketh the law to be just and reasonable and to contain no falshood or injustice If any one sweare those words which of themselves are doubtfull in no doubtfull sense but in a true and determinate sense and wherein they are not doubtfull but cleere and morally certaine there is no danger of perjurie at all It may seeme to follow secondly out of the aforesaid doctrine that such as tooke the oath of Supremacie in King Henry the eighth dayes which rather then those famous and glorious men Sir Thomas Moore and Bishop Fisher would take they worthily chose to die were not to be condemned of perjurie because it might be supposed that they being learned Bishops and Noblemen knowing what belonged to an oath did draw the same to some improper sense which ought to have beene the intention of the aforesaid King to make the law just as if they should have sworne the then King Head or chiefe of the Church of his countrey for that he was Sovereigne Lord and ruler of both persons Spirituall and Temporall all sorts being bound to obey his lawfull civill lawes and commandements And so in this sense although it be a kinde of improper speech every King is Head of the Clergy and all others of his owne Countrey Or peradventure they might sweare him Supreame Head of the Church of England that is Chiefe of the congregation of beleevers within his dominions for so in our language we commonly say him to be the head of a Colledge Court or Citie that is the chiefe and him to be chiefe who is supreame therein The Church being then taken by all Divines for a congregation of men Why might not King Henrie be improperly sworne in the opinion of Suarez Head of the then congregation in England So that what Sir Thomas Moore lawfully and piously refused with relation to the intention of the aforesaid King others might without perjurie take with relation to the law of God abstracting from all unlawfull intentions to wit that every oath be just and reasonable as being to be taken in Veritie Iustice and Iudgement and so what was unlawfull in a proper sence might at lest be free from Perjurie in an improper Thus understanding the first branch and the second and third in the same sence before delivered they might peradventure be excused as I have said from perjurie But never from sinne For considering the state of England in those dayes and the absolute intention of the King which well knowne to the whole world was to be sworne Supreame Head of the Catholique Church Catholique religion still here remaining as I have said his oath was as much different from this now oath of Supremacie as darknesse from light For by this the Queene claimed not the Supremacie granted by Christ to Saint Peter as did her father but onely to be Supreame governour of a Church out of which she would not onely discard the Pope but likewise roote out all Catholique religion contrary to her fathers minde as I have shewed so that the question in the said Kings dayes was about an Article of faith viz. Whether the Supremacie were granted by God to the King or to the Pope Which Article they were bound with losse of their lives to have professed being called thereunto for then did occurre the
were to the injury of the Gospell retained and Christ himselfe blasphemed which no Christian eare ought to endure a See page 22. letter Q b If Papists trusted not in their owne merits it would goe better with them then I feare it will with many who the more they arrogate to themselves the more they derogate from our Saviour and the further they go from salvation I confesse many of them upon their death-beds have renounced their own merits and wholly stucke to our Saviours yet certaine it is that the generall doctrine of the Church of Rome is for trust in their own merits For they teach that faith alone doth not justifie us before God that good works are not only satisfactory for sin but also meritorious of eternall life and supererogatory also for others Consil. Trid. in sess 16. Bellar. l. 5. de iustif c. 16. and they who beleeve that they can so farre stead them do commonly confide in them Let them returne to the more ancient and true tenent with Bernard saying Meritum meum est miseratio Domini Gods mercy is my merit and if their be any worke of our own meritorious it is the renouncing our owne merits and flying meerely to Christ sufficit ad meritum scire quod non sufficiant merita Let them confesse with holy Iob Iob. 9.3 that they cannot answer one of a thousand and professe with Esay Esa. 64.6 All our righteousnesse is as filthy clowts and pray with David Psal. 143.2 Lord enter not into iudgement with thy servants for in thy sight shall no man living be iustified and close up their last Will and breath also as Bellar. is said to have done For Papists often dye in another faith then they lived with that holy ejaculation Lord vouchsafe to receive me into the number of thy Saints non meriti estimator sed veniae largitor not weighing my merits but pardoning my offences and we will not only cleare them of Pharisaicall pride and trusting in themselves but also conceive a better hope of their salvation c See a spunge to wipe out this false aspersioÌ„ upon that worthy servant of Christ and great Instrument of Gods glory pag. 59. letter H. d See the Advertisement to the Reader f The head of controversies betweene the Romish and Reformed Churches is the controversie about the Head of the Church which the Papists will have the Pope to be but reformed Churches Christ alone I say head of the Vniversall or Catholique Church but of particular Churches sovereigne Princes within their severall Realmes may be termed Heads that is chiefe Governours which this Priest here acknowledgeth For the acknowledgement of this supreame authoritie and power of the King in his dominions of England and Ireland the Oath of Supremacie was appointed by Act of Parliament in the 35. of Henry the eighth to be taken by all his Majesties subjects this Act was continued in the reigne of Edward the sixth but repealed in the first and second of Philip and Mary and revived the first of Queene Elizabeth now the question here is whether the Oath of Supremacie thus confirmed by divers Acts of Parliament exclude not that Spirituall jurisdiction which all Papists beleeve to be in the Pope Iure divino or which comes all to one whether a Papist ut siâ— that is remaining a Papist and holding his Popish religion may salvâ— conscientiâ take this Oath of Supremacie this Priest affirmeth he may but we shall demonstrate the contrary hereafter by impregnable arguments drawne from the intention of the Law-makers the letter of the Acts of Parliament and the Queenes Injunctions the judgement of the Church of Rome and the confession of the adversarie himselfe g Not the same authoritie which the Pope had in all things but so farre as it is expounded and limited in the Queenes Injunctions in the first yeere of her reigne the Queene as her brother and father before onely resumed that power which the Pope had unjusty taken from the Crowne and usurped it himselfe a power which is and was of ancient time due to the Imperiall Crowne of this Realme that is under God to have the Sovereigntie and rule over all manner of persons borne within these Realmes and Dominions and Countries of what estate either Ecclesiasticall or temporal soever they be See admonition to the Injunctions in the Appendix h Calvine conceived that King Henry the eighth by the Title of Head of the Church challenged a farre greater power then what the Act of Parliament acknowledged in him or he ever exercised but after the Title of Head of the Church was publikely declared and expounded by Q. Elizabeth boâ—h he and all the Reformed Churches rested satisfied in the lawfulnesse of that Title which imported not Supreame teacher or directer unto Trtuh but Supreame commander for the Truth in all causes and over all Persons i The intention of Henry the eighth and Queene Elizabeth was the selfe same as is expressed in the Act of Parliament 35. Henry the eighth and the Admonition annexed to the Injunctions of the 1 Elizabeth namely the extirpation and extinguishment of the usurped and pretended authoritie power and iurisdiction of the See and Bishop of Rome and the recovery of their owne right by adorning the Crowne with a flowre before wrongfully taken from it and here I cannot sufficiently admire the impudence of this Priest who so confidently affirmes that the intention of Queene Elizabeth was divers from her father in prescribing and requiring this Oath whereas she her selfe in the above named Admonition declareth to all her loving subjects That nothing was is or shall be meant or inâ—ended by the same Oath to have any other dutie allegiance or bond required by the same then was acknowledged to be due to the most noblâ— King of famous memory K. H. 8. her Maiesties father or K. Ed. 6. her Maiesties broâ—â—er k The liberty he speakes of was given by the approbation of the chief Vniversities beyond the Sea of the Romish Religion l Not to forme another Church but to reforme that Church which was before and restore Religion to her puritie by the example of Ezekiah Iosiah and other religious Kings m No power at all excepted but the former power explained onely how farre it extended viz Not to the authoritie and power of Ministrie of divine Office in the Church which none of the Kings or Queenes of this Realme possessours of the Crowne ever challenged Nor I in this place by what authoritie your Bishops anoynt your thumbes and ordaine your Priests to offer the unbloody sacrifice of the Masâ—e for the living the dead There is nec vola nec vestigium of any such calling in the Scripture or purer Antiquitie as for our Ministry it is â—o clearely justified together with the succession thereof out of your own best records and tenents by Francis Mason de succes Episc. Ministerio Angl. that ever since the printing therof all your Romish cavillers
carpers at it have been as mute as fishes o See p. 117. letter â— p A shameles untruth in his sense for he taketh Catholike as usually in this Pamphlet for the Romish and Popish Church in that sense it is most false For there were many congregations in England before this 35 of Hen. 8. of Protestants and divers crowned with martyrdome as Th. Man in the yeere 1518. Io. Browne in the yeere 1517. and divers others set down in the Acts and Monuments of the Church some before and some after Luther began the Reformation in Germanie q A notorious untruth as appeares by the very Act Ann. 35. in which the Oath of Supremacy was first required to be taken King Henry never challenged to himselfe the Style of Head of the universall Church but only to bee supreame Hâ—ad under God of the Church of England and Ireland and all other His Majesties Dominions r No other Oath at all in sense but the former only abridged in words as will appeare evidently by comparing them both which are copied out in the Appendix s A ridiculous evasion and contrary to the intention and letter of the law as shall be proved hereafter The intention of the law was to abrogate the Popes usurped jurisdiction not over the Protestant Churches which he never had but over the Romish Catholiques or Papists which he before that time enjoyed and exercised Besides the letter of the law carryeth supreame governour of the Realme and all other Her Highnesse Dominions and Countreys not only of the Protestant Church within Her Realmes This is made more evident in the Admonition to the Injunctions 1. Eliz. where Her Supremacie is described to be over all manner of persons borne within Her Realmes Dominions and Countreys therefore over Papists as well as Protestants unlesse they be no manner of persons t I acknowledge the word forreiner is sometimes taken for an opposite to domesticus fidei a stranger from the covenant of grace but in the Act of Parliament and Oath of Supremacie as it is expounded in the Admonition which is also Enacted the word forreiner can signifie no other but those who are not natives u Neither can the Pope Here we thanke him for freeing us from all subjection to the Pope and See of Rome Though he challengeth not to be the Head of the Catholike that is the universall Church of Christ scattered farre and wide over the whole face of the earth yet he challengeth to be and is Supreame Governour of all His Subjects within His Dominions whether they are members of the Romish or Reformed Church w The superstition and Idolatry of Papists practised in England doth not any way abridge His Majesties Supreame power for he exerciseth His power not in regulating those idolatrous and superstitious rites but in suppressing them and punishing those who so defile Gods worship in His Kingdome x See this Evasion refuted pag. 120. letter S. y The words of the Oath are not that no forreiner Prince or Prelate hath or ought to have any iurisdiction or spirituall authoritie within the Protestant Church but within the Realmes therefore no jurisdiction within His Majesties Dominions over any members either of the Protestant or of the Romish Church z See the Answer to this sophisme pag. 120. letter T. a It is true if the words will beare it and it be agreeable to the intention of the law lawmaker but maledicta glossa quae corrumpit contextum cursed be the Glosse which corrupts the Text quite perverts the meaning of the law as this doth See the Injunctions b Of the intention of the law and lawmaker in prescribing this oath to that which I have spoken before I shall adde something in the close of this Chapter to which â—referre the Reader for further answer c The law is just and reasonable without your forced and forged Glosse for why should not all that enjoy the benefit of his Majesties lawes as well as Protestants submit themselves to his Majesties scepter and supreame power over themselves as well as Protestants especially seeing the power is the same which the most religious Kings of Iuda and most Christian Emperours of Rome and divers of his Majesties Predecessors within this Realme have exercised upon all their subjects d See pag. 119. letter Q. e See pag. 119. letter R. f And yet his words as you cite them out of his Praemonitorie Preface pag. 9. are these The oath of Supremacie was devised for putting a difference betweene Papists and them of our profession Devised by whom but by the lawmakers and if devised by the the lawmakers for this end to put a difference betweene Papists Protestants it cannot be denied but that it was their intention to make this oath as a didinctive signe whereby to know Papists in the kingdome from Protestants g See pag. 118. letter P. h The question whether a Papist may with a safe conscience take the â—ath of Supremacie may be understood either in sensu diviso or in sensu composito in sensu diviso it is true that a Papist may and ought to take the Oath of Supremacie for he that is now a Papist may become a Protestant and then he not onely may but ought to take this Oath being lawfully tendered unto him but in sensu composito it is false that a Papist continuing in his faith and profession of popery may with a safe conscience take this Oath for this Oath implyeth the renouncing a maine Article of his faith from whence he hath the denomination of a Papist See the Notes of the Rhemists upon Act. 11.26 which fasten and assume this word or name Papist to the children of their papall Church namely the Popes Supremacie and this as before was promised shall now be demonstrated 1. â—irst from the intention of the law and lawmakers who prescribed this Oath of Supremacie as appeares both by the Preface to the Oath Whereas therâ— was a Statute made and ordained against such as would extoll and stand to the iurisdiction power and authoritie of the See and Bishop of Rome in which Statute there is comprised another oath in such wise as in the same Statute among other thinâ—â— is mentioned for as much as in both the said Oathes there lacketh full anâ— sufficient words whereby some doubts might rise Be it enacted by the authoritie of this Parliament that this Oath hereafter mentioned in this Act shall sâ—and in force and place of the same two Oathes And by these words in the bodie of the Oath I shall keepe all the contents of the Act and all other Acts and Statutes made in and for that purpose viz. the derogation the extirpation and extinguishment of the usurped and pretended authoritie power and iurisdiction of the See and Bishop of Rome As likewise by the Preface to the Act of Parliament in 1. Elizabeth viz. To the intent that all usurped and forreigne power and authoritie Spirituall and Temporall may
for ever be cleerely extinguished and never to be used or obeyed within this Realme or any other your Maiesties Dominions and Countries may it please your Highnesse that it may be enacted as followeth c. Hence I thus argue No Papist with a good conscience can take an Oath prescribed by an Act of Parliament made purposely and with an expresse intention for the extirpation of the Popes jurisdiction and Supremacie over the whole Church which he claimeth by vertue of Christs promise made to Peter tibi dabo claves But such is the Oath of Supremacie as appeares by the Statutes above cited Ergo No Papist with a good conscience may take it 2. Secondly from the letter of the law and formalâ— and expresse words of the Oath which are these That neither the See nor Bishop of Rome nor any forreigne Potentate hath or ought to have any Iurisdiction power or authoritie within this Realme neither by Gods Law nor by any other iust law or meanes Henry 8.35 yeere hereunto adde the Admonition to the Queenes Injunctions Hence I thus argue No Papist may take an Oath which containeth in it the renouncing a prime Article of his faith necessary to salvation in his Religion and the iudgement of his Church But every Papist taking the Oath of Supremacie renounceth a prime Article of his faith necessarie to salvation For so we reade in the Extravagans cap. unam sanctam de maior et obed Subesse Romano pontifici omni humanae creaturae declaramus dicimus definimus et pronunciamus omnino esse de necessitate salutis We saith Boniface the eighth declare say define and pronounce that it is altogether or absolutely necessary to salvation for every humane creature to be subiect to the Bishop of Rome Ergo no Papist may take the Oath of Supremacie 3. Thirdly from the judgement of the Church of Rome which accounteth Fisher Bishop of Rochester and Sir Thomas Moore sometimes Lord Chanâ—ellour of England blessed and glorious Martyrs because both these lost 〈◊〉 heads â—ather then they would acknowledge the King Supreame Head 〈…〉 and 〈◊〉 the Popes Headship To omit the testimonies 〈…〉 â—ovius Bishop in Italie Iohn Cochleus of Germanie William Paradine a learned Historian of France Cardinall Poole living in the Court at Rome and writing to the King in the defence of Ecclesiasticall unitie saith thus by the figure of Apostrophâ— Thy Father O England thy ornament thy deâ—â—nce was brought to his death being innocent in thy sight and a little after he lefâ— his life for thy sake left he should overthrow and bâ—tray thy salvation and Cardinall Bâ—llarmine in his Booke De Scriptoribus Ecclesiasticis ab Anno 1400. ad 1500. thus writeth of Fisher Bishop of Rochester Iohannes Fischerus natione Anglus Episcopus Roffensis posteà S. R. E. Cardinalis et quod longe gloriofius est Martyr Christi occisus est Henrici octavi Regis anglorum iussu Anno 1535. Iohn Fisher an English man Bishop of Rochester and afterwards Carâ—inall and which makes him farre more glorious a Martyr of Christ was slaine by the coommandement of King Henrie the eighth in the yeere of our Lord one thousand five hundred thirty five Whence I thus argue To his evasion that it was not the same Oath See the answer p. 119. letter R. and the Appendix p. 141. Either Fisher and Moore were no Martyrs who died for refusing to take this Oath or they are no good Papists who take it But Fisher and Moore were famous and glorious Martyrs in the opinion of the Romane Church as hath beene prooved Ergo they who take the Oath of Supremacie are no good Papists 4. Fourthly from the confession of this Priest pag. 118. The Oath of Supremacie when it was made in the dayes of King Henry 8. was unlawfull to be taken by any Catholique and pag. 119. If any had sworne the King to be Supreame Head of that Church he would have sworne false as making the Church a monster having two heads or depriving the Pope of his authoritie granted him by God Whence I thus argue The Oath of Supremacie prescribed by that Act of Parliament in the 35. of Henry 8. was unlawfull to be taken by any Roman Catholique as this Priest confesseth But the Oath of Supremacie prescribed by Act of Parliament in the first of Elizabeth in force at this day is the same with the Oath prescribed by Act of Parliament in the 35. of Henrie the eighth as appeareth by comparing both the Oathes together with a proviso in an Act the fifth of Elizabeth for expounding this Oath where it is said That we confesse and acknowledge in her Maiestie her Heires and Successours no other authoritie then that which was challenged and lately used by the noble King Henrie the eighth and King Edward the sixth as in the Admonition to the Qeenes Injunctions more plainly appeares The Queenes Maiestie would that all her loving subiects should understand that nothing was is or shall be meant or intended by the same Oath to have any other Dutie Allegiance or Bond required by the same Oath then was acknowledged to be due to the most noble King of famous memorie King Henrie the eighth her Maiesties father or King Edward the sixt her Maiesties brother Ergo the Oath of Supremacie prescribed by Act of Parliament the first of Elizabeth is unlawfull to be taken by any Romane Catholique I conclude therefore super tota materia that the taking of the Oath of Supremacie is an abrenunciation of the Romish faith and consequently that we wrong no Papist that takes the Oath if we beleeve him a forswearer who forsweares his beliefe De memorando irrotulatâ— * The Helâ—esaus wâ—re condâ—mned for heretikes for holâ—ing a man might deny his faith with his mouth so hee keepe it in his heart Euseb. hâ—st l. 6. c. 31. a Rom. 10.10 Cic. pro 〈◊〉 Amâ—r vultu saepe ladâ—tur 〈◊〉 Ep. â—â— contamiâ—ari se 〈…〉 aâ—am illam vidâ—â—i◠〈◊〉 ibid. Feâ—endâ—m ne est ut gentilis sacrifâ—câ—t christianus inter sit Sâ—zo hist. eccles l. 5. c. 16. prejecto ad pedes auâ—o c. * Suidas in Auxent * Marcus Bishop of Arrethusa Theod. hist. l. 3 c. 6.
admit the King chiefe governour of the same Neither can the Pope be any way supreame governour of the aforesaid Church because he professeth himself only supreame head and governour of the Catholique Church and of no other according to Saint Paul 1 Cor. 5.12 what is it to him to judge of them that are without of which Catholique Church His Majestie dâ—th not claime to be head Neither will he be governour of any spirituall or ecclesiasticall thing therein as conceiving the same both superstitious and idolatrous Ergo. the King must be supreame governour of the Protestant Church That the King is only Governour is proved because none other can be assigned his equall in preheminencie of government in the aforesaid Protestant Church For the second or third branch it is likewise proved For I sweare them likewise discreetly truly and justly viz. that no forrein Prince Person Prelate c. hath or ought to have any jurisdiction c. within this Realme in the said Protestant Church which I adde as before because according to the intention of the Law and Law-maker as I have before said it was so meant For neither doth His Majestie or did Queene Elizabeth claime to be chiefe Governour of the Catholique Religion or Romane Church or any jurisdiction therein It being by them both as I have often said abhorred as superstitious and abolished for the same reason by the said Queene and State of England therefore it is against reason and a kinde of pettie treason to sweare either of them governour of a Religion which they apprehend so evill but in respect of the Protestant Church established the Pope is a forrein Person and Prelate and his jurisdiction forrein Neither hath he or any other forrein Person any jurisdiction in the aforesaid Church or ought to have for as I have said in the fourth note out of Saint Paul as all those that are of the Catholique faith are domesticks of that faith and all that are not of the same faith are forreiners to it so all that are of the Protestant faith of which His Majestie is governour are domesticks of the same and all that are not of the same are forreiners to that Religion Hence appeares the truth of the said branches wherein is said in the second That no forrein Prince c. and in the third I doe utterly renounce and forsake all forrein jurisdictions c. which I doe justly and lawfully renounce as well in respect of the Protestant Church as of the Catholique for as I have said the Pope is truly a forreiner to the Protestant Church in respect of which I must by the law renounce his jurisdiction And he is no forreiner in respect of the Catholique Church in which I am bound to respect him and his jurisdiction for if all Catholiques be domesticks one to â—he other as I have proved out of Saint Paul how can the Pope who is chief of that faith be said to be a forreiner his jurisdiction being as internall and intrinsecall as innate and naturall to every Catholique in the world as it is to him that stands next him in his chamber at Rome And therefore there being no forrein jurisdiction in the Catholique Church in every sence I may lawfully renounce all forrein jurisdictions The fourth and last branch can have no difficultie at all with any Catholique So that the words of this Oath seeme to me so cleere and lawfull since the establishment of the Protestant Church that it may be taken of any Catholique without any the least danger of Perjurie or any other sinne scandall being avoyded or without mentall reservation or secret equivocation that I admire that any man hath so long scrupulized to the losse of himselfe and fortunes when as being necessitated to take the same and scandall being easily to be avoyded as I have said out of Diana and others he might have prevented his owne ruine with a safe conscience as I conceive Sir Iohn Winter and other men of estates did who are reported to have lately taken the same It may be objected first that this Oath thus explicated hath no coherencie the first branch with the second and third and therefore that it be coherent and taken conformably to the intention of the law-maker as we sweare the King to be onely Supreame Governour of the Church of England in the first branch so ought we in the second and third branch to renounce all Jurisdiction forreign to the same To which I answer first that coherencie is no condition requisite to an oath but impertinent to the truth or falshood of the same for there be many things of a different nature inserted in an oath Secondly that there is a most perfect coherencie in the aforesaid explication for as in the first branch I sweare the King Head of the Church of England so in the second and third I abjure all forreigne Jurisdictions whatsoever Which are the very direct words of the oath for there are no words in any branch signifying a renunciation of all Jurisdiction forreigne to the Protestant Church of England Whence there is a great difference between renouncing all Jurisdiction forreigne to the particular Church of England and renouncing all forren Jurisdiction For a forren Jurisdiction renounced is rightly described A power or right denied to be extent to the swearer by any law and is more generall then a Jurisdiction forreign to the Protestant Church which is onely a power not extent to a Protestant quâ talis which although it be forren to the said Church yet it may be properly extent and appertaining to the swearer So that it is intended by the said oath that as in the first branch we sweare the King onely Supreame Governor of the Protestant Church within this Realme and his Dominions so in the second and third we are to renounce all forren Jurisdictions whatsoever which either the Pope or any other forren Person hath or ought to have in the same which every Catholique may lawfully do notwithstanding that generall saying That the Pope hath Iurisdiction over all Christians for that is meant a generall Jurisdiction in the Catholique Church either actuall or potentiall extent to all which is forren to none and which by taking this oath is not denyed I answer thirdly that all penall lawes as is this law for taking the oath in doubtfull words are ever to be taken in the more favourable sense and which makes the law to containe no falshood or injustice And therefore in this law to sweare as the words lye may be done without any injâ—stice or falshood which is and ought to be presumed to be the minde of the lawmaker for no law or lawmaker intends perjurie And therefore it is a frivolous thing to invent scrupulous crotchets which the words doe not import It may be objected secondly that the oath must be interpreted according to the intention of the law and lawmaker for as Suares saith lib.
per vâ—scera misericordiae charitatem quam Christus à suis omnibus exigit ut eam paluâ— dilucide quam primùm expediatis qua multi in hoâ— regno implicatâ— torquentur Quod haec charta complectitur nullius nomine singulariter praefertur quia non ad unum aliquem pertinet quod hic petitur sed ad omnes fere nobiles quos Anglia habet Catholicos quibus jam multis modis pericula intentantur Iis universis in tua illustrissima Dominatione magna spes auxilii effulget si eadem vel Dei vel nobilitatis respectu agere dignabitur cum amicis quos in concilio habet Tridentino ut huic questioni quae totius nobilitatis nomine his adjuncta est responsum maturum Deliberatum accommodetur huc commoda tuae D. opera perferatur In quo haud dubie acquiessent perturbatae nunc conscientiae si ex tetam sancto nobili patre certiores fieri possint quid patres hac de re iudicent Quanquam fortasse tutum non fuerit hanc questionem publice in concilio proponi ne res divulgata nostrorum protestantium animos exacerbet aliquibus periculum acceleret nisi tuae prudentiae aliter videatur ideo tua prudentia consultius fecerit si ita cum selectis quibusdam hanc causam egerit ut quod ipsi in hac causa piissimi doctissimi theologi consulti significaverint id proinde valeat ac si universi patres sententias dixissent Caeterum hoc totum tuae Do judicio arbitrio relinquendi satius sit ut ipsa quod magis in rem esse prospiciat â—d libere agat Qui in Anglia â—unc sunt theologi partim metuunt partim varie respondent ideo plane omnibus satisfaciet quod te procurante ex Tridenâ—â—no huc respondebitur Pro quo vestro tam firme christiano vere religioso animo non possumuâ— non Deo opt max. agere gratias nobis magnopere gratulari Etsi enim calamitatum vestrarum sensus cunctos vehementer tangat cruciet ut Christiana charitas hortatur quae tam arcto necessitudinis vinculo omnes devinctos constrictos tenet ut mutuo afficiat membra atque fratrum commoda incommoda non aliena sed propria ducat in illo tamen non est minima consolatio quod calamitosis hisce temporibus in eo potissimum regno in quo fides religiosorum miserè jacet cernimus nullo iniuriarum concursu aut metus vi charitatis vestrae ardorem extinguâ— aut fidem convelli aut constantiam labefactari quinimò vos esse qui in tanta rerum omnium confusione ac molestiarum turbulentissimá tempestate nunquam curvaveritis genua ante Baal non sine magna Divini nominis Christianaeque disciplinae gloria Ne igitur vestris constans animus qui nullis coÌ„modis ad impietatem torqueri flective unquam potuit fallacibus rationibus ad vestram perniciem comparatis aut Divinae legis ignoratione pietatisve simulatione deciperetur minueretur quod sustinemus dignum Christiani hominis officio debitum existimavimus vestris piissimis optatis morem gerere causamque vestram examinandam accuratè diligenter maturèque commissimus gravissimis quibusdam patribus ac reverendissimis Dominis Archiepiscopo Bracharensi Archiepiscopo Lanciâ—nensi Episcopo Dombriscensi Episcopo Lerenensi reverendo patri Iacobo Laineâ— generali societatis Iesu simulque spectatissimis quibusdam Doctoribus Alphonso Salmeroni Fratri Petro de Soto quem arbitramur vobis facie nomine notissimum D. Georgio de Fr. Francisco Fercensi Doct. Melchiori Cornelio Iacobo Paiva de Andrada item Doctori quorum omnium religio pietas eruditio certissimis testimoniis explorata est Quorum sententias nostro etiam judicio comprobatas non dubitamus quin sententiae totius concilii instar sitis merito habituri Hâ—i igitur patres ac Theologi quibus haec provincia data est cum sâ—pe convenissent atque diligenter circumspectè divina oracula sanctorum patrum sententias instituta deliberando evolvissent communibus suffragiis concluserunt minime vobis sine magno scelere divinaque indignatione licere hujusmodi hereticorum precibus illorumve concionâ—bus inâ—eresse ac longe multum praestare quaevis atrocissima perpeti quam in profligatissimis sceleratissimisque ritâ—bus quovis signo illis consentire c. The Oath of Supremacie Enacted 35. Henrici octavi I A. B. Having now the vaile of darknesse of the usurped power authoritie and jurisdiction of the See and Bishops of Rome clearely taken away from mine eyes doe utterly testifie and declare in my conscience that neither the See nor the Bishop of Rome nor any forrein Potentate hath nor ought to have any jurisdiction power or authoritie within this Realme nether by Gods law nor by any other just law or means And though by sufferance and abuse in times passed they aforesaid have usurped and vendicated a fained and unlawfull power and jurisdiction within this Realme which hath been supported till few yeeres passed therefore because it might be deemed and thought thereby that I tooke or take it for just and good I therefore now doe clearely and franckly renounce refuse relinquish and forsake that pretended authoritie power and jurisdiction both of the See and Bishop of Rome and of all other forrein powers And that I shall never consent and agree that the foresaid See or Bishop of Rome or any of their successours shall practise exercise or have any manner of authoritie jurisdiction or power within this Realme or any other the Kings Realmes or Dominions nor any forrein Potentate of what estate degree or condition soever he be but that I shall resist the same at all times to the uttermost of my power And that I shall beare faith truth and true Allegiance to the Kings Majestie and to his heires and successours declared or hereafter to be declared by the authoritie of the Act made in the Session of the Parliament holden at Westminster the fourteenth day of Ianuary in the five and thirtieth yeere and in the said Act made in the eight and twentieth yeere of the Kings Majesties reigne And that I shall accept repute and take the Kings Majestie his heires and successours when they or any of them shall enjoy his place to be the only supreame Head in earth under God of the Church of England and Ireland and of all other His Highnesses Dominions And that with my body cunning wit and uttermost of my power without guile fraud or other undue means I shall observe keepe maintaine and defend all the Kings Majesties styles titles and rights with the whole effects and contents of the Acts provided for the same and all other Acts and Statutes made or to be made within this Realme in and for that purpose and the derogation extirpation and extinguishment of the usurped and pretended authoritie power and jurisdiction of the See and Bishop of Rome and all