riseth out of true premises even so your concluon or his Lordshrhs which you please is false because it is inferred upon false premises that is drawn from a fufty vessel of unwholsome doctrine which the one of you two hath broached the piercing or at least running whereof I have now as you see endeavoured to stop with a handsome Faucet 1. Will you now be pleased to see your errours to make men subject unto their lawfull Prince by Gods law you hold it needfull that for the right and title of their subjection some text of holy Scripture be produced remember it hath been declared before that power and title to power are two different heads that power is from God and of necessity followes or comes after title The French King rules and governes in France not by law of inheritance but by vertue of authority received from God The Venetian Prince I meane the Republic and body of State howsoever you have learned of Cardinall Bellarmine with great artifice and skill to seale up the eyes of your own knowledge in the matter beares not command and rule over Padua by such meanes as they first attained to the dominion thereof but because being impatronised or made Lords of Padua by humane meanes they have it now in command and ever had from the time of their first occupation possession by vertue of the power and right received from God himselfe And herein what difference can you find to lye between Prince and Pope For if the Pope shall be asked wherefore he is Pope this will be his answer because I have been Canonically elected by the Cardinals to the Popedome and for that purpose he will never study or stand to produce any testimony of Scripture but aske him by what authority he gives or grants his indulgences c. surely he will answer because God hath given him power to forgive sinnes 2. To prove that Princes are subject unto priests by the law of God you cut out and frame a silly sheepish argument from sheepe and shepherds Gods law say you is the law of nature by natures law the sheep is in state of subjection to the Shepherd by Gods law therefore the Laic Prince is in the like state of Subjection to the Priest I answer the Prince is no sheep of the Shepheard priest but of the great Shepherd Christ for Christ said not to Peter Feed thy Sheep but Feed my Sheep So that your Argument if it conclude any thing at all concludes that Princes are subject unto Christ and not unto the Priest Nay the Priest as a sheep in temporall causes and matters is rather subject unto the Prince David gave the terme and nomination of sheep to all his people and Subjects Ego erravi isti qui sunt Oves quid focerunt It is I that have sinned what have these my sheepe done S. Pauls words are pungent and peremptory Let every soule be subject unto the higher Powers If then your argument hath any sinewes to evince that Subjects are bound by Gods law to yeeld obedience unto their Superiors of highest power then all priests likewise who are Subjects no lesse then others are directly bound by Gods law to the due obedience of their temporall Princes penall or Statute Lawes at least in temporall matters 3. The father you say is not subject unto the sonne if Hetrodox his own Father yet living were now elected King or Pope should not Hetrodox his Father as a man and a Christian be subject unto Hetrodox his Sonne whether King or Pope Howsoever young Hetrodox the sonne should beare due respect and reverence to old Hetrodox as to the Father Again the Father a Laic may receive absolution of his own sonne a priest and the son a priest may receive correction by the authority and command of his Father a secular Magistrate if men would not be intrapped in the snares of error they must learn to distinguish between titles and persons a Prince in spirituals being a sonne in temporals may be a Father 4. Touching the similitude of body and soul howsoever I grant it may be true in part as in this point by name that a temporall Prince his power is Per se of it selfe over the body and the spirituall priests power is over mens soules yet your similitude wants weight of truth in some other part and halts down right For temporall power save only as it is exercised by a Christian is not subordinate to spirituall power no not in ecclesiasticall and spirituall causes on the contrary the subjection of priests in temporall causes is plainly subordinate unto the temporall Prince Arguments thus framed are not worth a rush temporall power is over mens bodies and spirituall power is over their soules as the body then is directed and ruled by the soule and the soule not by the Body so he that is armed and authorised with temporall power must be directed and ruled by such as are invested with spirituall power I say again such reasons are not worth a rush for body and soule together do make one whole compound creature which is man whereas corporall power and spirituall power make not one body but rather two bodies and two heads These two powers as both are powers are different in all things and without subordination as either of them is a power neither doth Nazianzen teach the contrary much lesse teach your affirmative as who soever will read Gregory himselfe shall readily finde For thus much Gregory writeth in effect and no more that as the soule is more noble then the body so the spirituall power is more noble then the temporall which for my part so long as I go for a Roman Catholic I dare not deny 5. You are much overseen Hetrodox to charge me with makeing use of this doctrine to the hurt of the Church when I should rather whet and scoure my weapons against hereticks And herein you resemble me to the spider that sucks poyson from the same sweet and oderiferous herbs or flowers out of which the industrious Bee sucks honey Have you not herein much forgot your selfe He that delivers the truth neither fights nor speakes against our mother the Church but against such as harbour settled and secret pretensions in their breasts to usurpe more then appertains to their persons callings or degrees Again the Church is the Kingdome of heaven and you speak in your whole discourse of none but earthly Kingdomes in which without all question the Church can have no share nor interest nisi per accidens ex donatione fidelium but such as comes upon the By as we say that is by casuall meanes or else by franke donation or free gift of the faithfull the grandeur of all which earthly Kingdomes and of all other temporall States the Church doth establish Thirdly the use of this doctrine tendeth and serveth not only for the confuting and extirping of heresies or heretics but likewise of all such as maintain and broach any
Ecclesiastic is not in so precise manner or direct degree immediate from God as the power secular The reason Because it is in the man Christ or in Christ as man to wit as in the Head of the Church Joh. 22. to whom alone it is immediately communicated of God All Power is given to me in Heaven and on Earth So that all Ecclesiastick power which the chiefe Bishop challengeth and assumeth to himselfe is at best hand but a Delegate power communicated and committed to him by Christ For Christ being that Mediator between God and man as the Apostle speaketh it must follow by good consequence that God gives the superiority and power Ecclesiastic to the chief Bishop not immediately without meanes but mediately or by meanes id est Per Christum mediatorem by the Mediator Christ or by the meanes of Christ and this mediate power of the Pope is no Soveraign or Princely power but a Vicariate or deputed power it imports not Dominion and Soveraignty but rather Service and Ministery And hereupon the chiefe Bishop takes it for no disparagement for no vility for no abatement in his high and honourable Stile to be titled the servant of Gods servants a Pastor a Bishop c. All which titles imply Ministery rather then Lordship and humility rather then greatnes Mat. 11.8 For dominion and grandene are not sutable not sortable not compatible with a chiefe Bishops house as he is a Bishop Luk. 7.25 but with Kings Courts Hetrod I find Orthodox that you have the Prince of Philosophers Eleuchs at your fingers end but withall that you are superlatively positive in your new doctrine Orthod Soft good Sir a little more of your patience neither my Doctrine Hetrodox nor new doctrine It is no piece of my coine but comes out of S. Pauls Mint yea rather it beares a right stamp of the Holy Ghost speaking with S. Pauls tongue or at least writing with S. Pauls quill The Apostles words are thus couched and extant in the text Let every soule be subject to the higher Powers Rom. 13.1 for there is no Power but of God which text is expounded by Chrysostome in these expresse tearmes Facit hoc Ap. c. The Apostles purpose and intent is to shew in these words that Christ hath not brought his divine Lawes and Ordinances into the Church of any such intent and purpose as to undermine and subvert politic Regiments and civill States but for the better establishing and reforming of humane governments And there the Apostle teacheth withall that all Subjects and inferiors are bound to the due performance of his Apostolicall precept and charge not only seculars but also cloistered Monkes and Priests for so much is testified and verified in his first words Let every soule be subject unto the higher Powers be thou Apostle Evangelist Prophet or of any other degree condition or quality in state of a Subject Neque tamen pietatem subvertit ista subjectio howbeit godlinesse by this kind of subjection shall never come in danger to be subverted Thus farre Chrysostome Hetrod You go too farre Orthodox I neither can bear in my self nor forbear you any longer The passage which you alleadge and quote out of Paul treats of power in a generallity and teacheth obedience of Subjects to their lawfull Soveraigns and Superiors in grosse or to Superiors of every sort and degree and of every calling to be by Gods own Ordinance It doth not directly shew that such and such persons are subject in their callings to the secular Prince by the immediate Ordinance of God It is not denyed that all power is of God but some power is immediately of God Such was the authority of Moses and Aaron such also now is the Popes authority and power Some other power is likewise of God but mediatly as by meanes of succession or of election or of some other humane title And as for Chrysostoms testimony upon S. Pauls passage it is thus to be answered The holy Father affirmeth not in his testimony that Priests and Monks are bound by S. Pauls precept and authority to render obedience unto secular Princes but rather unto their own Superiors whomsoever It is no lesse true that Ecclesiastics are bound to keep and observe all such Lawes politick and civill as are not repugnant unto Ecclesiastic Lawes and such as are necessary for common commerce between Ecclesiastic and Laic persons For in the course and cariage of temporall affaires as Pope Nicolaus writeth unto the Emperour the Church makes good use of the Lawes Imperiall Howbeit Ecclesiastics are not bound and tyed to such observance of secular Princes Lawes by way of any force but only by way of direction that is to say Vi rationis non vi legis by vertue and right of reason but not by vertue and right of Law Let me give this instance for example The temporall Prince commands a tax to be set upon the price of corn in this case Ecclesiastics are bound to buy and sell at such price not because they are bound to the said law but because they are bound to buy and sell at a just and lawfull price and because in reason of State as also in common reason the price taxed by any lawfull Prince within his own Teritories must passe the muster of lawfull prices Howbeit say it comes to passe that some Ecclesiastic breaks the said law yet can he not for such delict or transgression of the Law be fetcht Coram nobis before the civill Judge or Magistrate by Sub paena or by any other of the Kings Writs nor can he be punished by the Laic Prince to whom he is not subject but by processe out of his own Ecclesiasticall Superiors Court. Orthod Let me have leave Hetrodox to give you the stop in your full careere know you Hetrodox what you say Is the Apostles text Let every soule be subject to the higher Powers to be understood of power in generall and not of secular Princes power The best is you avouch it with a bare affirmative you send it forth but bare and naked without any upper Garment not so much as a Waste-coate either of double or single stuffe I meane without any one reason of proofe at all But how can it be possible that Paul there speaks of power in generall Is it not his full and whole scope in that Chapter to stop the mouthes of those who slandered the Christians of that age and time to be seditious routs to professe very scandalous and pernitious doctrine to wit that Christians were not bound to the obedience of secular Princes but were exempted from all secular jurisdiction S. Paul then speakes to the point and saith Let every soul be subject to the higher powers i. e. to seculars of eminent place and high charge yea the very epithite Sublimioribus higher is a plain tearm of restraining the word Power And that S. Paul did foster and fancy none other conceit or meaning I appeale to
Manâ—â—cript Lectures and in his first Books the words of Sotus are both found and read If now being of another mind he be not pleased to acknowledge and grant us the same and would have us to belâ—eve that he hath not written what I now avouch and averre the matter is not of any great consequence In his Books we see infinite alterations choppings and changings every day Sotus by him cited hath left it upon Record and that serves my turne And howsoever it imports but little to the principall question whether he will have it so uttered by the tongue and penne of Sotus or no that puts me to no manner of trouble so long as I finde it extant in the writing of Sotus himselfe whose Doctrine whose phrase nay whose verie words the learned take notice to be in great request with his Lordship and not a little pleasing to his appetite 6. You practise no small subteltie of refined wit when you shew that you are so unwilling to have that opinion which is taught by many Canonists called an opinion of the Canonists where is in the same companie a Divine the same opinion and that an opinion of the same may not be called an opinion of Divines when one Canonist is of their side and holds the same Tenet But every Novice in Theologie knowes that Appellatio Donominatio fit a majori parte things have their Appellaâ—ion and Denomination from the greater part yea Bellarmine himselfe works upon this distinction and the title of the question using this Argument Probatur opinio Theologorum ergo contraria opinio est Canonistarum the opinion of the Divines is approved and therefore the contrarie opinion is the Canonists amongst whom albeit in these last impressions he cites Navarrus a Canonist and not a Divine neverthelesse for the reason before alledged it is of no import The opinion of those who affirme the Pope to be Lord in Temporals is called the opinion of Canonists because it is not founded upon any Authoâ—iâ—ie of Scripture but only upon certaine Canons or Lawes Registred in the Decrees and Decretals and the contrarie opinion is that of the Divines because it is built upon Gods Word in the holie Scriptures 7. The Supreame Power Temporall you say is by all Authors except Heretikes granted to the Pope If that be so then doubtlesse Navarrus take him for one amongst many other is a notorious Heretique in this formall conclusion In cap. Novit Quare dicendum est Papam nullam habere potestatem laicam neque supremam neque mediam neque infimam The Pope therefore stands in no degree at all of Laiorck Temporall power neither in the highest nor in the middle nor in the lowest Region of Temporall power For my part I call that opinion Heresie and so I compt it which in explicite and implicite sense fights against holy Scripture and such is the opinion of all those who affirme the Pope to have Supreame Temporall Authority Our Lord Christ saith Mat. 16. Tibi dabo claves Regni coelorum I will give thee the Keyes of the Kingdome of Heaven and the Pope saith Regni terrarum of all Earthlie Kingdomes Christ saith Mat. 20. Mark 10. Luke 22. Ioan. 19. Ioan. 20. Reges Gentium dominantur eorum vos autem non sic the Kings of the Earth beare rule over them but so shall not yee and the Pope saith vos autem sic and so shall ye Christ saith my Kingdome is of this World and the Pope saith nay my Kingdome is of this World and over the whole World Christ saith as my Father hath sent me so doe I send you my Disciples and the Pope saith not as the Father hath sent me so doe I send you There be two Supream Powers two Heads of all Christians Professors of Christian Religion Terrena potestas caput Regem Spiritualis potestas habet Summum Pontificem Hug. de Sanct. vict l. 2. de Sacr. p. 2. c. 4. the King is the head of all Earthlie and Temporall power the Pope of all Spirituall power Pope Gelasius in an Epistle to the Emperour Anastasius Duo sunt Imperator Auguste quibus principaliter mundus hic regitur Auctoritas Sacra Pontificum Regalis Potestas This World Decr. dist 96. Caudâ—o sunt most noble Emperour is chiefly governed by two Supreame Powers the Sacred Authoritie of Popes and the Temporall Authoritie of Kings Innocentius III. held this Article for so certaine and indubitable that he made no scruple to affirme Cap. Novit Regem in Temporalibus neminem Superiorem recognoscere that in Temporall causes the Kings of the Earth doe acknowledge and take no mortall creature to have anie Superioritie of Power or any right any reason to crowe over their Crownes How then can there be anie truth in the L. Cardinals affirmative Pontificem recognoscit the King doth acknowledge the Pope for that is to say the Pope is dignified and endowed with Supreame Temporall power with which words I must confesse that I am plunged in a deepe pit of astonishment For those Authors who grant an indirect Authoritie to the Pope break not forth into this unreasonable and exorbitant excesse but use a certaine mitigation of the word indirectlie as that it is Spirituall non per se sed per accidens not in it selfe but by occasion and accessarilie to write in case of necessitie and most of all with consent of the parties interested But for any to affirme the holie Fathers power to be Supreame and Temporall fateor scandalum est mihi to me I must confesse it is a scandall or stumbling block and stone of offence so long as not onely the true doctrine but also the Doctrine of the Lord Cardinall Bellarmine can hold up the head and stand in full force l. 5. de Rom. pont c. 3. and 4. 8. I have not charged the Lord Cardinall to hold the foresaid Booke was never of St. Thomas his penning I have onely alledged that his Lordship hath made so good and so cleare demonstration of that point that never yet anie answer durst peepe abroad to contradâ—ct his Lordships demonstration As for your subterfuge that the said Historie was perhaps afterward primed or popt into the foresa d Booke that carrieâ— no shew of proâ—abilitie seeing you produce not anie one conjâ—cture not any one reason to fortifie the same For to what purpose had any man a mind to patch up the said Historie in so good so faire a Wâ—b as the foresaid Booke to what end how long time since He that dares take upon him to affirme these things shall make the credit of all Histories to shrinke and shake The Lord Cardinall Baronius flies to the same Answers as to his best refuge When he is put hard to his trumpes and shifts how to untie the knot of an Argument drawne from Historicall Authoritie straitwaies he thinkes to take up mens lips and to dazzle their eye-sight with such and such words are
any man because he is a Thiefe or an Adulterer except first he be admonished and then he wilfully denies obedience But betweene disobedience and obstinacie there is a great difference For a man may stand stubborne and obstinate in some sin whereof he hath never beene advised never admonished by the Church This man for all his obstinacie cannot be stricken with a Thunder-Bolt of Excommunication On the contrary a man may be disobedient and for his disobedience may be Excommunicated albeit afterward he persist not obstinate in Disobedience The words of Christ if he will not heare the Church do signifie disobedience and to speake properly not obstinacie Orthodox Fie Hetrodox that a man of your deepe learning should be so shallow I will not say idle in a matter so serious So clear is the light of this fourth Proposition that I much wonder how you have devised and raised any matter against it whereby to make opposition Now to frame the sounder answer it will be necessary to make some Explication of the Proposition it selfe I speake not here of all the powers which Peter had from Christ our Lord as his Vicar in Earth for they were two the one of Order the other of Jurisdiction In this place I meddle not with power of Order I onely define the power of Jurisdiction and this power I say is meerly Spirituall First because Christ our Lord never practised any Temporall Jurisdiction but this jurisdiction which Christ gave to Peter is part of the same Jurisdiction which was practised by Christ himselfe Ergo it is no manner of way Temporall but meerely Spirituall The Major as it is called hath beene proved before at large the Minor is cleere by the words of Christ himselfe As the Father hath sent me so I send you the consequence therefore or conclusion remaines indubitable Ioan. 20. that this Jurisdiction is no manner of way Temporall Secondly This Jurisdiction or Power is not all that Power which Christ himselfe had as Head of the Church For he never according to all the Doctors communicated to his Apostles the Power of his Excâ—llencie much lesse the power of his Spirituall Kingdome which by Cardinall Bellarmine is called his Power Eternall yet such as had a beginning though it shall continue and last for ever with which Power by secret meanes he governes his Church For that power he practiseth and exerciseth in Heaven by himselfe alone It is therefore a Branch of that power whereof our Saviour saith Data est mihi omnis Potestas All power is given unto me the power of Christ whether as high Priest or as King is meerely Spirituall Ioan. 20. as it is proved by the Authority of St. Augustine and of all the best Divines the Branch therefore of the same power namely that Branch which was given to St. Peter is meerly Spirituall Thirdly The power given to Peter is to Loose and to Binde that is to absolve and not absolve sinne the power to absolve or not absolve sinnes is meerely Spirituall Ergo the power of Binding and Loosing given to Peter is meerly Spirituall Fourthly Hee that defines a Habit from the end thereof drawes the best Definition Thus hath Aristotle defined vertue virtus est quae â—onum faecit habenteâ— vertue is that which betters her owner and possessour the end of the Popes power according to all is life eternall and that end is meerly Spirituall Ergo he that affirmes the Popes power is meerely Spirituall produceth a right affirmative because he defines the Popes power by the right and proper end thereof Lastly If the power of Jurisdiction which Christ gave unto Peter had not beene meerly Spirituall but Temporall doubtlesse he would have taken up materiall Kâ—yes and would have said unto Peter and the rest of the Apostles take ye these keyes whose sinnes c. But Christ having done that Spirituall work breathed on them all and said Receive ye the Holy Ghost and saying these words receive ye the Holy Ghost or the Holy Spirit he undoubtedly declared it was no Temporall power that hee then bestowed but a power meerly Spirituall And this Hetrodox is that which before I have pronounced that as well by the Act which our Saviour did as also by the words that hee spake it is aptly gathered that for certaine the said power is meerely Spirituall Now I purpose to draw a Picture of your particular Errours 1. You argue from the Genus to the Species in this manner The Popes power as Orthodox affirmes is meerely Spirituall Orthodox therefore hardly believes the Pope to be some simple Priest or common Curate just as if I should frame this Reason Hetrodox affirmes that a Lion is a creature therefore Hetrodox affirmes that a Lion is a little Ant or Pismire or this Argument Hetrodox affirmes the power of the most Christian King is Temporall therefore Hetrodox affirmes the most Christian King is the Father of a private Familie with power oeconomicall were it not a very abusive straine a wrong intollerable if I should make Hetrodox the Father of so ridiculous Ergoes worthy to be hissed knocked and stamped out of all Theologicall and Philosophicall Schooles If Orthodox pretends and avouches that Papall power is meerly Spirituall he doth not forsooth thereby avouch that Papall power is restrained to a private Familie and without all Jurisdiction like the power of every simple and common Curate but Orthodox grants it is a power over all the Soules that are subject unto the Popes power 2. Againe Sir you are pleased to terme it Heresie for any to affirme that Papall power is meerly Spirituall and I must make bold to tell you Hetrodox the contrary Doctrine hath no great conformity or congruity with divine Scripture and by name is not conformable to that faire Text Sicut misit me c. As my Father hath sent me Ioan. 20. so I send you my Apostles the power which our Saviour himselfe being sent of his Father exercised in this world was meerly Spirituall Ergo the Popes power being a Branch of the same power which Christ himselfe exercised is likewise meerly Spirituall True it is that his power as we must hold extends and spreads it selfe Jure Divino by Gods Law over all his owne Subjects which Article being denied by the foresaid Authors whom you have remembred before they were thereupon condemned but not because they maintained the Popes power to be meerely Spirituall For it is one thing to maintaine the Pope hath no Jurisdiction and another thing to affirme that his Jurisdiction is meerely Spirituall 3. You alledge Navarrus to this purpose That Papall power is not meerly Temporall as if he had said the Popes power is Temporall but accessorily Spirituall Thus much is noted by these words is not meerly Temporall But know Hetrodox that Navarrus was never so much overseene to suffer so grosse an Errour to drop out of his learned braine or painfull quill Navarrus affirmes the full contrary take the file
Councels as of others and the notable evidence of a goodly vintage will manifestly appeare so as it may be reckoned for a wonder that after so great a vintage there be found some few clusters or bunches of Grapes which make for the honourable Rights and Titles of our most gracious Princes This way if it shall be followed long will prove the high way to crack the credit of all Scripture and to bring the whole Church of God to finall Ruine 16. Againe In the text of the ancient Breviaries you tell us the word Animas was never extant These eyes of mine have seene Manuscript Breviaries of more then 200. yeares antiquity with some Breviaries printed of more then an 100. The word Animas is extant in both and were it not extant yet I say it ought for the removing of all occasions of discord there to have a place 17. Last of all you confound the word of Disobedience with the word of Obstinacie This I hold for a certaine Position the man that disobeyeth a Law cannot incurre the censure of Excommunication This likewise for no lesse indubitable the man obstinate in sinne cannot be excommunicated when he hath not beene admonished of his fault or offence before But I never so much as dreamed to affirme the one or the other of these Positions I have hitherto onely affirmed that for the enwrapping of anie man within the most sore bands of Excommunication two things are of necessity to be presupposed the one that hee hath fallen into some sinne the other that being admonished thereof divers and sundry times hee hath not repented And what else is that but obstinacie in sinne For if any man shall commit some sinne and afterward being thereof admonished shall truly repent he ought not at any hand to be Excommunicated but for his persisting after he hath beene duly admonished he may and must beare the most heavy Censure of Excommunication So that obstinate persisting in sinne is the last cause of Excommunication of which obstinacie it is a manifest signe that being admonished he hath not beene reformed and become a new man So that all Disobedience is not a materiall cause of Excommunication nor yet all obstinacie but onely that obstinacie which presupposes Admonition Of this I speake of the same speake all the Doctors and therefore this Doctrine is neither new nor false But now Hetrodox t o insist over long upon matters most cleare and manifest it is but a manifest folly let us for this time part good friends after so sharpe a fray and prepare for the next encounter to morrow morning Hetrodox It pleaseth me right well The fifth daies Conference upon the fifth Proposition Orthodox YOu are later arrived this morning worthy Hetrodox then at any of our former meetings Hetrodox Not in any weakenesse of Spirit want of courage or disposition of mind to avoid this daies combat but as constrained by extraordinary impediment and unexpected restraint For in good and sober sadnesse my fingers have itched ever since peepe or breake of day to have your fifth Proposition by the eares Orthodox In good time you shall have not onely your Fingers but also your Hands full of skirmishing this day and yet shall not be able to draw one drop of the blood of my fifâ—h Proposition though I know you to be a most expert and skillfull master at the shâ—rpe Hetrodox Well Sir let us leave complementall prefacing and fall roundly to the matter Your fifth Proposition goes upon these same legs if I well remember the termes That aâ—â—â—it some Authors you know not upon what good ground be of opinion that as well the persons as the goods of Ecclesiastics are by Gods Law exempted from the secular Princes power neverthelesse the contrary opinion that such exemption is grounded upon mans Law is the sounder the more agreeable and consonant unto Divine Scripture unto the writings of the holy Fathers and to the file and thred of Histories Orthodox I have no reason to except against your memory you have hit the naile on the head my fift Proposition runs in the very same straines and forme of termes What exception have you to make against it in whole or in part Hetrodox If you did beare the least sparke of reverence to holy Church you surely would never have this used lavish and absolute affirmative that as well the Persons as the goods of Ecclesiastics have obtained Exemption and Immunitie from the Sâ—cular arme only by mans Law Sess ult cap. 30. In the Generall Councell of Trent it is cleerely declared That Immunitie of the Church and of all Ecclesiasticall Persons was instituted by Gods Ordinance and by Ecclesiasticall Decrees What Christian is he that dares give the affront or contest against so high so sacred Authorit e Par. 9. cap. 20. Before the Tridentive the Councell of Câ—lâ—y'â— declared the same in these words Ecclesiasticall Immuniâ—â—e pleads upon termes of great Antiquity and got good footing in the Church Jure divino pariter humano as well by Gods Law as mans Law Sess 9. In the Laterane Councell under Leo X. it is determined that Laics have no power over Ecclesiasticall persons neither by Gods Law nor by mans Law which words are directly and properly contrary to your Assertion that Layick Princes by mans Law have power over Ecclesiasticall persons Must not you Orthodox be some new Goliah who in the height of your tenâ—erity dare set your face and foot against so many Squadrons of the Lords Armie that is against so many Vniversall Councels Cap quamque de Consibus Before the said Counsels Pope Boniface left in good Record as a matter notorious and of none denyed that Church-men and Church-goods are not within the Circle but free and exempt from the reach yea from all touch of Secular Power and that even by Gods own divine Ordinance Before Boniface John VIII hath testified That Priests and other Cleries might neither be admitted into Orders Gratia Dist 96. Caâ— si Imperator nor judged by anie Secular Power but only by Popes according as Almighty God himselfe had appointed and ordained And the verie same that John left written of the persons Pope Simmachus long before together with all the III. Councell held at Rome in his presence hath witnessed of their goods That which I tell you Orthodox hath not anie stitch of Inconformitie with sacred Scripture The Patriarch Joseph exercising the Office of Vicar Generall to King Pharoh Gen. 47. exempted the Priests and freed them from the burthens which the rest of the people were enjoyned and enforced to beare 1 Esâ—r 7. Artaxerxes King of Persia exempted likewise all the Priests of the Hebrewes because the light of Nature which immediately shineth and cometh from God plainelie declares it is a thing most convenient Pope Alexander III. upon this ground uttered this worthy Sentence in the Later an Councell Cap Non minu s de Immun Eccl. It
and the Masse being celebrated in all the rest of the Churches I would not have men to feare where no feare is nor cause to feare nor to give any cause why those who alwaies have beene faithfull to their Prince the most illustrious Republic should draw upon their own heads any such imputation as this Filii matris mea pugnaverunt contra me the Sons of my mother have fought against me but I would wish them rather to fight and strive how they may best obey that Apostolicall Precept let every soule be subject unto the higher Powers Rom. 13.15 not only because of wrath but also for Conscience sake I make no doubt at all of their constancie for I rest well assured they are almost ready to lay downe their life for their Prince The Lords of Venice have ordained on paine of death That all the Religions in the City shall keepe their Churches open and shall celebrate Divine Service as they have done before Have the Lords made this Decree out of any feare least such of the Religions to whom they stand well-affected who both know and follow the true Doctrine as in a manner they doe all would now doe otherwise than they have done or would not goe on to celebrate and exercise all the Offices of their Ministerie No sure wherefore then was that grievous penalty ordained Forsooth onely that none of the said Offices might be intermitted in that Citie which ever hath stood Catholique and now professeth to continue Catholique more then ever Whereupon she will not suffer any change at all to be seene in the exercises of Piety or â—â—e intermission of the said exercises to be unto any an occasion of their Precipitation For which mischiefe the Prince for the Churches behalfe and for her benefit by Gods Law is bound to provide a Remedy by all meanes possible Last of all I commend to the Religions the Doctrine of Navarrus as a most safe haven Cap. Novit de judiciu Notab 3. manu cap. 27. de Censuris wherein they may ride without all danger and this it is That what Exemption soever they enjoy the same they enjoy not by Gods Law but by the Priviledge of their Princes who have power to retract diminish dilate and amplifie the said Priviledges when and how they please according to such new reasons as rise and as good occasion shall be represented for the doing thereof to the common utility and publike benefit or advantage of the Dominions under their Subjection For the same power the Pope exerciseth in the priviledges of Indulgences and other matters depending upon his Spirituall Authority which by him sometimes are annulled sometimes diminished and sometimes augmented Hetrodox From false Principles you inferre a false conclusion That for so much as the sentence of our holy Father is of no validity therefore it ought not in any wise to be feared and that by consequence the Priests of Venice and thorow the whole Venetian Dominion are bound in conscience to celebrate all Divine offices as if they had not beene interdicted at all First you affirme That according to the Doctrine of Navarrus the Sentence of the Pope when it is Nulla is to be feared and observed untill the people shall be thorowly perswaded of the Nullitie to the end there may breed and grow no scandall Then you subjoyne the Venetian people are fully and wholly perswaded of the Nullity of the Popes Excommunication by the Dukes Edict as much to say when the Judge affirmes his Sentence is just and in full force and the Malefactor sales it is unjust and of no force when the Malefactor should be credited and the Judge not believed What Sentence at any time shall goe current for just and in force if the Malefactors word and credit may be taken Next you affirme That certaine Religious persons are inexcuseable for chusing to depart out of the City rather then to celebrate Divine Offices and that very many thereby have beene scandalized Alas good Sir the said Religious have no need of your excuse and if any other have beene scandalized by their obedience to the holy Father the words of our Saviour to the Pharisees will serve well to remove and take away the scandall Sinite illoâ— they are blind leaders of the blind Mat. 15. let them alone Then you affirme it is enjoyned by Gods Law to defend the liberty of their Prince whereas Ecclesiasticall Sentences are enjoyned by mans Law and that ought ever to give place unto the Law of God At every word you take the Divine Law in your mouth no mervaile your Argument runs in this divine forme To defend the Princes liberty is by the Law of God Ecclesiastical Sentences are by the Law of man the Law of man gives place unto the Law of God Ergo the Priests ought to despise the Popes Excommunication and Interdict and to defend the Liberty of the Venetian Duke But heare you Sir my answer If it be by Gods Law to defend the Liberty of an Earthly Prince much more it is by Gods Law to defend the liberty of the Church the Spouse of the Heavenlie Prince I say moreover The liberty which the Duke of Venice pretends now a daies is a liberty to clap up such in prison as are none of his Subjects and to make Lawes against Justice and Piety and therefore it is according to Gods Law not to defend but rather to impugne such a Liberty And I yet subjoyn that Ecclesiasticall Sentences as touching Power are by Gods Law established Mat. 10. and founded on the Gospell And againe you affirme That some are deceived in thinking this present controversie to be de Fide when it is onely de Moribus and that if any thing be expressed in Scripture which makes this businesse to be de Fide it is the Republics opinion expressely taught by St. Paul I answer The Principall controversie is not de Fide Neverthelesse those who have undertaken the defence of the Venetian Cause have in their discourses mingled certain Errors in matter of Faith And whereas in your accustomed way of Wisedome no doubt you tell us the opinion of the Signorie is expresly taught by St. Paul your wisedome doth not marke That such things as are expressely taught by St. Paul cannot be called opinions For then it should follow that some doubt might be made of St. Pauls Doctrine because opinions are ever doubtfull and uncertaine The truth is Hetrodox the opinion of the Signorie is not found in St. Pauls Epistle to the Hebrewes Obey them that have the oversight of you Hebr. 13.17 and submit your selves for they watch for your soules as they that must give account for your Soules Now against this Doctrine which goes not in the Church for an opinion but for a most certaine Article of Catholique Faith your Lords of Venice deceived by such as your selfe no DD. but Seducers are precipitated in these daies and carried headlong as it were downe
partly Excommunicate to reduce and bring them unto the lap of the Church and now behold they departed from the Faithfull unjustly excommunicated and interdicted Fiftly that if all the Religious had followed the example of those few in abandoning their Pastorall charges the Venetian Dominion should have beene left for a Country of Paganisme without any Priests that Woolves at pleasure might have run together on heaps to woorrie and to glut their paunches with the blood of the silly sheepe and Lambs of Christ Last of all the occasion of this great scandall was augmented by some temerarious and over-confident Bravodoes in speech cast out by the said Religious that his Holinesse the Pope is the Monarch of Christendome and ought in all things whether Temporall or Spirituall to be obeyed by whomsoever These are scandals to speake truth inexcusable which in case they doe not spring from the blindnesse of those by whom they are given it may well and truly be averred their Actions are so much the more culpable and the more to be condemned 4. You grant obedience to the Naturall Prince and concurrence in his Defence is by Gods Law and the holy Fathers sentence by mans Law and neverthelesse without any reason you denie the consequence that Subjects have done well and taken the right course in obeying their Prince rather then the Sentence of the Pope The instance which you induce is of no more force or weight then your first Answer For thus you inferre If it be according to Gods Law for Subjects to defend the Liberty of their Naturall Prince on Earth much more it is according to Gods Law to defend the liberty of the Church the Spouse of the Prince in Heaven It is a true Inference I confesse but nothing pertinent or proper to the present case because the Lords of Venice never pretended to rob the Church of any Right or Libertie whatsoever For the Lords leaving all things in their entire strength doe enact most just Lawes and ordinary judgements touching Delicts and Goods which are subject unto their power This they have alwaies done time out of mind and yet never anie of this present Popes predecessors hath taken stomack against our Lords for such their Acts but rather by connivance or tacite silence hath yeelded gracious consent to their just operations So that in Venice there being none that goeth about or seeks to deprive the Church of anie Libertie how can the Ecclesiastics there have anie occasion to defend the said Libertie 5. You againe confound the word Duke and the word Prince The Duke doth not anie thing of him selfe in the Venetian State the Prince that is the Republic sets downe all Orders the Prince makes all the Lawes To what purpose then should you seek to draw the person of the Duke into any odious hatred by putting the Duke to be the Author of those Acts which are to be attributed unto the whole Republic as unto the true Father and Mother of the said Acts. 6. You affirme the Prince of Venice commits to prison such as have ho ranke amongst his owne Subjects The contrary hath been already proved that Clerics in grievous Delicts which touch not so much as the hemme of Spirituals are not exempted so that by consequence they are in the ranke of Subjects as also it hath beene shewed before that the liberty left by Christ our Lord unto the Church is the libertie of the Spirit and from the bondage or slaverie of sinne 7. The Lawes now in question made by the Lords of Venice you say are against Justice and Pietie For this Opposition I will turne you over and referre all indifferent Judges to Antonius Quirinus a most noble Senator of the State in his Aviso and to F. Paulus of Venice in his Considerationi 8. You put us in mind that Ecclesiasticall Sentences as touching power are by Gods Law This will not be denyed or gaine-said so long as they marshall themselves within their own bounds and territories but when they fall to range out of their owne Religion or Limits and to lash those who justly stand upon the practise of their owne Temporall and lawfull power then they are not onelie by Gods Law in respect of their power but directlie opposite unto the Law of God and flat against all reason 9. You grant and confesse the present Controversie stands not in point of Faith but in matter of Manners Then you subjoyne that which neither your selfe nor anie other hath not proved nor shall ever by Gods grace be able to prove that in the Bookes written by such as hold and maintaine the opinion of the Republic there are to be found sundrie Errours in Faith An Error in Faith is when one affirmes a point of Doctrine contrarie either to sacred Scripture or to the definitive judgment of the Church which cannot erre tanquam de Fide This no man living shall be able to prove hath at anie time been taught by such as have defended or now doe maintain the cause of the Republic When matters are debated of so great importance it is not lawfull to hang a Priest in generals If the Disputant seeke or think men should give him Faith and Credit without all hesitation he must come to the particulars In the meane time so long as the parties offended are reproved by others and no just cause at all shewed of the said Reproofe they have reason to believe the said Reproofe will result and turne to their favour 10. You confound the Principles and the Conclusion which is virtually contained in the Principles The Principle from which the opinion of the Republic is derived is touching Faith and in St. Paul Omnis anima c. Let every Soule be subject unto the higher Powers but the Conclusion is a certaine opinion grounded upon all that hath beene said before I have not said the Principle taught by St. Paul is an opinion but have onely said that opinion is most certain which is grounded upon a Principle of Faith taught by the Divine Apostle And so the sharpe subtiltie or subtle sharpnesse of this your opposition vanisheth like smoake in the vast Region of the Aire 11. St. Pauls text Obey them that have the over-fight of you and submit your selves for they watch for your Soules as they that must give account for your Soules you understand to enjoyne obedience unto Spirituall overseers in all things or matters whatsoever whereas the Apostle by whom this lesson had been taught before concerning Temporall Princes Let every Soule be subject unto the higher Powers to the end he might not goe crosse or speake in termes of contradiction that former Principle is understood by all writers on that place to the Hebrewes to treate of Spirituall power and over Soules This appears by the account which the said Prelates must render unto God namely an account for the Soules of the people not for their Goods or other Temporall matters 12. I never speake of the Head in
water First because your comparison of the Princes is impertinent and inâ—pt Secondly because I would haue you know that if some Princes interdicted and excommunicated have met with a miserable death some Popes in like manner Interdicters and Excommunicators of others have drunk of the same cup and have been scourged with the same whip of a miserable death By all that hath been hitherto dilated in our sixe dayes Conference concerning the Doctrine of eight Propositions five in Thesis three in Hypothesis the same Doctrine is manifestly declared to be found Catholic and trâ—e conformable to divine and holy Scripture to generall Councels to sacred Canons to imperiall Constitutions to the example of holy Popes of most prudent Kings and Emperours to the Doctrine of the holy Fathers I and of those Catholic Doctors who have written and printed since the sacred Councell of Trent by name Navarrus Medina Couarruvias Victoria Sotus Cornelius Jansenius That all those three Propositions which make up the main of the controversie are most certain and true Catholic and most firmely founded as extracted from the sweet Fountain of holy Scripture from the goodly great Rivers of Generall Councels of sacred Canons of Imperiall Constitutions of unreproveable Histories of worthy Saints and of Catholic Doctors The three Propositions be these 1. The chiefe Bishop Nudus a Donariis Privilegiis Principum jure Pontificatus as Navarrus writeth and St. Barnard that is to say stript and left naked of Princes Donations and priviledges and only measured by the right Pole of his Pontificall Priest-hood or high Priestly Dignity nullam habet laicam Potestatem can claime or challenge no kind of Laic-power neither in the highest degree nor in the middleward nor in the lowest ranke neque actu neque habitu neither for Fact nor Habit. 2. In temporall matters and in other Delicts Temporall quae Spiritualia non attinent having nothing to doe with Spirituals for that phrase is used by Couarruvias Ecclesiastics are not exempted from the secular Prince his power in the whole or for the whole and by the Law of God but only for some Delicts and in some cases or matters and that either by the priviledges of Princes themselves or by Pontificial Canon which the said Princes have received and admitted or else by custome long approved 3. That a void and invalide Sentence when there is a cleere Constat of the Nullity ought neither to be observed nor so much as feared So that of all the former Doctrine in this whole Defence that may be averred of the Venetian Republic which the Holy Ghost hath spoken of the white Dove in the Canticles Et macula non est in te and thou art without spot most of all in those her two wings I mean in the defence of her Catholic Religion and of her liberty which two Prerogatives proper to her self and to this day pure Virgins we hope and trust so much in the favour of our Lord God that he will be graciously pleased to conserve in their Virginity without spot for ever The Sun is now setting the three Races run and high time to repaire to lodging and rest Glad would I bee to understand Het how you rest satisfied with my Defence of these eight Propositions but however in your approbation of my Discourse or my contrary resolution I am resolved to rest ever at your service Hetrodox know this to be my resolution Orthodox I must be I will be semper unus idem ever one and the same I depart in the same beliefe wherein I came the first day to this Campe-fight or single Combate Howbeit common civility commands to render due thankes for the merit of these Discourses and Christian Charity much more commands Hetrodox or Card. Bellarmine which you please the Champion of Rome even to wish nothing but good and happinesse to Orthodox or Ioannes Marsilius Neapolitanus the worthy Champion of Venice and yet with a Salvando la querela with a saving this learned quarrell conference or contention FJNJS