Selected quad for the lemma: judgement_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
judgement_n discourse_n enter_v great_a 43 3 2.0898 3 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A45491 The loyalty of popish principles examin'd in answer to a late book entituled Stafford's memoirs : with some considerations in this present juncture offer'd to Protestant dissenters / by Rob. Hancock. Hancock, Robert, fl. 1680-1686. 1682 (1682) Wing H643; ESTC R25407 95,985 210

There are 5 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

conscientious persons is only this That we may hope they do not yet know their Churches Sense in this matter at present they do not know the repugnancy between their Duty to Princes and the Principles of their Communion And if so how we shall discover whether these men think themselves more obliged to their Duty to their King and Country than to the Judgment and Interest of their Church I am yet to learn But I cannot without too great a digression enter upon this Debate which would afford matter enough for an entire Discourse And yet I cannot pass by a very plausible pretence which some Roman Catholiques of late have very much insisted upon to vindicate themselves and their Religion A Roman Catholique Peer maintain'd a Distinction some years ago in the House of Lords between the Catholiques of the Church and those of the Court of Rome part of whose Speech I will here transcribe My Lords Give me leave to remind you what kind of Catholick I am that is a Catholick of the Church of Rome not a Catholick of the Court of Rome A distinction if I am not much deceived worthy of your memory and reflexion whenever any severe Proceedings against those whom you call Papists shall come in question since Catholicks of the Court of Rome do only deserve that Name (H) E. of Bristols Speech in the House of Peers March 15. 1673. The Publisher of his Lordships Speech refers us to the Dedication of Peter Walsh his History for a Proof of the Reasonableness of this Distinction And if this Distinction be just and reasonable as they say it is then it must be acknowledged that a man may be a true Son of the Roman Church that he may understand and act according to the Principles of that Religion and yet abhor the Abominations of the Court of Rome of its Adherents and Flatterers I am therefore obliged to examine the Grounds of this Distinction because it is inconsistent with the Principles laid down in the beginning of this Treatise For though I do not involve every person of the Romish Religion in the guilt of those horrid Doctrines and practises yet I charge them on the Roman Church and all such as both understand and act in conformity to her Principles I have perused and considered the Dedication of F. Walsh his Book and yet I cannot see that we are beholden to that Church for the Goodness and Loyalty of any Roman Catholicks but either to their Lukewarmness in Religion or to their Ignorance of the natural Tendency of its Principles either to the prevalence of common Reason and Christianity or of their natural Dispositions above their Religion Nor can I understand what they mean by the Church of Rome distinct from the Court where this Church is to be found What Judge of Controversies she hath established what Judicatory she hath erected to which an Appeal may be made from the Court of Rome or how they can maintain an external Communion with the Church if they lye under the Censures of the Court of Rome I speak of such times when no General Council is to be had and according to the present constitution of the Roman Church we are not like to see another so long as the World endures But waving these difficulties I shall endeavour to make the whole Matter obvious to a common Understanding Let us therefore put that very Case which we find in the Dedication of F. Walsh his History It is too evident from the Dedication and History of his Remonstrance that they which offer his Majesty the least Pledge of their Duty and Allegiance are in danger of being Censured and as much as lies in the Court of Rome cast out of the Communion of the Church The Irish Remonstrance was condemned in formal Terms as Vnlawful Detestable Sacrilegious yea in effect as Schismatical and Heretical by the publick Letters of the Internuntio●'s and of the Roman Cardinals de propaganda Fide They have not ceased for many years last past to persecute and defame the few remaining constant Ecclesiastical Subscribers they have kept them in continual ch●ce with Monitories Citations Depositions Excommunications and even publick affixion or Posting of them Of all which there was no Cause pretended but a manifest Design to force them to renounce their Allegiance (I) F. wals●… Ep. Ded. p 2 3. And though some Romanists in Ireland continued Loyal to the King during the late Rebellion in these Kingdoms yet they were all Excommunicated for their Honesty by the Popes Nuntio and his Irish Clergy (L) The Popes Bull against the Loyal Irish Cathol●… was dated Rome Aug●… 1665. by which they are required to do publique Penance their Obedience to the King Walsh Ep. Ded. p. 31.32 And that Sentence being judicially ratified at Rome we were very lately assur'd that many of them then continued under it (M) Considerations touching the true way to suppress P c. Ed. 1677. p. 44. Besides The Author of the Controversial Letters in his 8th Letter acknowledges That the Court of Rome and its Dependents are so diligent in suppressing all Books written against the Popes Power that a private man cannot write without hazard of a Censure on his Book and possibly on his Person Were not Barclay and Widdrington formerly condemned at Rome for opposing the Popes Power of Deposing Princes And have not those few English and Irish Writers which have since had the boldness to speak the Truth been branded and censured for that unpardonable Crime And now I shall bring this whole Matter to a short Issue 1. The Church Diffusive is no Body Politick nor can do any Act as such It can neither judge of Persons or Causes but as assembled in a Council and what if a General Council after all the Complaints of the injured Parties be hindred or deferred for many years and for many more sometimes assembled sometimes dissolved as the Council of Trent was During the Intervals of Councils there is no Authority that doth or can act in contradiction to the Court of Rome for neither the Church Representative nor the Authentick Laws of the Church have entrusted any Judicatory Independent on that Court with the Exposition or Execution of the Canons and Decrees of the Church No Council can be called but by the Popes Authority (N) Decret par 1. dist 17. c. 5. The Title is Non est Concilium sed Conventiculum quod sine sedis Apostolicae auctoritate celebratur And in the Intervals of Councils all matters of Importance are to be referred to the Papacy by the Laws of the Roman Church (O) Decret par 1. Dist. 17. c. 5. Majores vero difficiliores quaestiones ut sancta Synodus statuit beata consuetudo exigit ad sedem Apostolicam semper referantur I know the Council of Constance decreed That General Councils should for ever be held once in ten years and made as they thought a sufficient Provision for
the Guilt of his Blood scarce any one of which he said had been a Beginner or an active Prosecutor of the War If then by the Protestant Religion our Author mean the Christian Religion as it is professed in the Church of England or in the best reformed Churches abroad his Charge is most unjust and malicious if he mean any thing else by it he might better have called it the Popish or Fanatick than the Protestant Religion What a potent Faction of men which they may call Protestants as they call themselves Catholiques did in these Kingdoms all men know But of all men living the Romanists have the least reason to call them Traitors and Rebels as I shall shew afterwards But though the King was arraigned in the name of the Commons of England yet it was well observed by his Majesty at his Tryal That they never asked the Question of the tenth man of the Kingdom much less of the major part of the Nation They had no consent of the House of Peers the Ordinance for trying the King being rejected by the Lords They were no free or full House of Commons for that House being freed from the Insolence of the Army resolved upon a Treaty with his Majesty recalled their Votes of Non-Addresses and voted that he should be in Honour freedom and safety And after the major part of the House had voted the Kings Concessions to be a sufficient ground for Peace the Army Officers seized and committed some of the Members as they were coming to the House accused others of inviting the Scots the last Summer and required that they might be excluded Thus many of the Commons being forced out and others absenting themselves they restored the Votes of Non-Addresses and voted the drawing up a Charge of Treason against his Majesty This is that Venerable Assembly a mere unparliamentary Juncto which in obedience to these Masters damn'd all former Votes in Favour of the King and brought him to the Block against the Laws of the Kingdom the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy the Sense of the Church of England of the House of Peers and of the greater part of the House of Commons But if we trace the Footsteps of this Rebellion as far as we can it will appear that the Romish Faction had a great Influence both on the first Beginnings and Progress of it What is it that they have more maligned than the Government and Constitution of this Church and Kingdom Or how could the Roman Conclave find out a safer if not a quicker way to ruin the Protestant Religion than by breaking in pieces that Church which is the Strength and Beauty that Kingdom whose Soveraign was under God the Defender of the Reformation It was the Judgment of Bishop Bramhall That the Popes Privy Purse and Subtle Councils helped to kindle our Civil Wars which ended in the Tragical Murder of the Lords Anointed The intemperate Heat of the Seditious Spirits in Scotland had fermented a great part of the Kingdom but before they broke out into open Hostilities they made secret Applications to Cardinal Richlieu the great Minister of France and Favourite of Rome which made use of all his Interest and Policy to embroyl his Majesties Affairs in that Kingdom This great Statesman knowing that it was the Interest of England to hold the Ballance even between France and Spain and that his Majesty had in the year 35 hindred the French from making themselves Masters of the Spanish Netherlands resolved to blow the Coals in Scotland and practise upon the Male-contents whom he found so well prepared for an Insurrection To this purpose he sends Chamberlain a Scot to exasperate the Confederates against the King appoints one of his Secretaries to reside among them to be present in their Councils of War and to direct their Proceedings and some of the Covenanters had free access to Con the same Countryman whilst Chamberlain was Negotiating for the Cardinal This is certain the Court of Rome and the Jesuites those inveterate Enemies of our Religion and Government could not have thought of a more effectual and easie Method to bring us to ruin than by making us do their Work for them and the Cardinal who had formed those vast Designs of enlarging the French Monarchy observing if not raising the Tumults in that Kingdom laid hold of the Advantage which men of ambitious and restless Spirits had put into his Hands Ann. 1639. came to light a Letter of the Scotch Covenanters written to the French King wherein they desired his Protection and Assistance The Lord Lowdon being by the Kings Command examined about it confessed it was his hand-writing and that it was framed before the Pacification which being agreed to the Letter he said was never sent (D) The Memoires of D. Hamilton And The Memorials of the English Affairs ad an 1639. The late Author of the Impartial Collection hath furnished us with a more exact Discovery of the secret Influence which those Foreign Councils and Assistances gave both to the Scottish Commotions and English Rebellion The Letter to the French King is set down by him in English (E) An Impartial Collection of the great Affairs of State c. vol. 1. Published 1682. p. 276 277. which I will here transcribe SIR YOur Majesty being the Refuge and Sanctuary of afflicted Princes and States we have found it necessary to send this Gentleman Mr. Colvil to represent to your Majesty the Candour and Ingenuity as well of our Actions and Proceedings as of our Intentions which we desire to be engraved and written to the whole World with a beam of the Sun as well as to your Majesty We therefore most humbly beseech you Sir to give Faith and Credit to him and to all that he shall say on our part touching us and our Affairs being most assured Sir of an Assistance equal to your wonted Clemency heretofore and so often shewed to this Nation which will not yield the Glory to any other whatsoever to be eternally Sir your Majesties most Humble most Obedient and most Affectionate Servants Subscribed by divers of the Principal Covenanters At the Meeting of the Parliament in England Apr. 13. 1640. the Lord Keeper in his Speech to both Houses acquaints them Since his Majesty came from Berwick it came to his certain knowledge That they the Scots have addressed themselves to Foreign States and treated with them to deliver themselves up to their Protection and Power as by Gods great Providence and Goodness his gracious Majesty is able to shew under the Hands of the prime Ringleaders of that Faction than which nothing could be of more dangerous consequence to this and his Majesties other Kingdoms Whosoever they be that do or shall wish England ill they may know it to be of too tough a complexion and courage to be assailed in the Face or to be set upon at the Fore-door and therefore it is not unlikely but they may as in former times find
once pronounced it will be lawful for the Commonwealth to deny Obedience to him And because a War must necessarily follow the Counsels how to maintain it must be sit down Arms must be quickly provided and Taxes laid upon the People to defray the Expences of the War And if it be requisite and the Commonwealth cannot otherwise maintain it self it will be lawful both by the right of Defence and more by the Authority proper to the People to declare publiquely the King to be the common Enemy and then to kill him with the Sword The Commonwealth from which the Royal Power hath its Original may when the case requires it bring the King to Judgment and deprive him of his Soveraignty for the Commonwealth hath not so transferr'd the Right of Power to the Prince but it hath reserved a greater Power to it self 2. But if there be no opportunity for the States of the Kingdom to assemble in this case of necessity they may dispense with the Formalities of Law any man may do that which the Commonwealth is supposed to desire should be done the common voice of the People shall be his Warrant that cuts of the Kings Head 3. But what if this be like to endanger the Traytors Neck Then he may take away the King by conveying a strong and subtile Poyson into 〈◊〉 Garment or Saddle as the Moors have kill'd their Enemies with poysoned Presents But 't is time to draw to a conclusion of this Head J. Goodwin in one of his Pamphlets hath this remarkable expression As for offering violence to the person of a King or attempting to take away his Life we leave the proof of the lawfulness of it to those profound Disputers the Jesuites c. And one of his Adversaries in a Letter to him declares that J. Goodwin is for ought he knows the first and only Minister of any Reformed Church that ever was of that Jesuitical Opinion as himself stiles it (L) Nethersole in a Letter to J. Goodwin Printed Jan. 8 1648. And though I will not undertake to make good that Assertion yet to the Positions of any of our Sectaries I can oppose the Authorities of a whole Herd of Jesuites and other Divines of the Roman Church But to all these Observations I will only add one more That as a Preparative to the Murder of King Charles the First a Book was printed An. 1648. licensed by G. Mabbot bearing this Title Several Speeches delivered at a Conference concerning the Power of Parliaments to proceed against their King for Misgovernment The Heads upon which these Speeches are pretended to be made and the very Matter and Expressions excepting only some few not material Passages are wholly taken out of the Book of Parsons an English Jesuit the great Design of which was to baffle the Title of King James to the Crown of England animate the People to Rebellion and introduce the Roman Catholique Religion All the difference is Parsons published his Book by way of Dialogue these turned it into Speeches This Parsons was Rector of the English College at Rome missed very narrowly of a Cardinals Cap of how great esteem he was at Rome may be gather'd from that famous Inscription on his Monument (M) Aligambe p. 413 414. And he hath furnished the Seditious Spirits amongst us with Arguments and Precedents for their Practises against the King This false new Title they are the words of Mr. Prinne ' published at this Season intimated to the World that this Discourse of a Jesuit for which he was condemned of High Treason was nothing else but Speeches made by some Members of the Commons House at a Conference with the Lords of which Book though himself and divers others complained there was nothing done to vindicate the Houses from this gross Imputation (N) Prinne's Speech in the House of Commons Decemb. 4. 1648. p. ●00 By all which we see that the Popes and Jesuites though at a distance contributed very much to the late Bloody Wars in England and the dismal consequences of them All the difference I can find between the Heads of both Factions is only this Whether the Power of Deposing and Chastising Kings belongs to the People or to the Pope The Fanatique Sectaries allow the People by their Representatives to resume the Power into their own hands whereas some of the Popish Fanatiques reserve this Power to the Pope as the Common Father of Christendom Some I say for the greater part of them invest the Commonwealth with this Authority And so much of the first Proposition 2. In the Reign of King Charles the First the Pope stirr'd up his Subjects of the Roman Communion to Rebel forbad them to take the Oath of Allegiance and absolved them from their Obedience In the beginning of his Majesties Reign the Pope by his Bull strictly forbids the taking the Oath of Allegiance (O) Urban 8. Dilectis filiis Catholicis Angliae Romae Maii 30. 1126. An. 1642. The Pope persuades Eugenius Oneal to give proofs of his Valour in joyning with the Irish Catholiques against the Haeretiques grants to him and all his Adherents the Apostolical Benediction and Plenary Indulgence (P) In a Bull dated Octob. 8. 1642 to Eugegenius Oneal An. 1643. he grants a Bull of Plenary Indulgence to all the Roman Catholiques of Ireland who had joyned in the Rebellion began in the year 1641. (Q) This Bull is dated May 25 1643. all which Bulls are extant in the Histories of those times and therefore need not be transcribed When the Irish Papists submitted to the King subscribed and swore to the observation of the Articles agreed upon the Pope absolved them from their Oath took upon himself to be their General in the person of his Nuntio assumed the exercise of the Regal Power imprisoned those Roman Catholiques and threatned to take away their Lives who had promoted the Peace and desired to return to their Allegiance to his Majesty And 't is observable That soon after the most Infamous Rump had crowned all their Wickedness with the Murder of his Sacred Majesty they nulled the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy and so made themselves as Innocent as the Child unborn (R) Feb. 9. The House voted that the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy should be Null and Void Memorie 's of the English Affairs ad an 1648. Thus I have proved with as much brevity as a Discourse of this consequence would admit That neither the Reformed Churches abroad nor the Church of England gave any encouragement to the late Bloody Wars in England or the Murder of the Lords Anointed and I have shewed what Influence the Principles and Practises of the prevailing Faction of the Roman Church had upon them I have omitted nothing that deserves our Consideration except the Gunpowder Treason which having been the Subject of many Sermons and Books I shall pass it over only with these two Observations 1. The late Lord Stafford at his Tryal
not seem to conceal any thing which our Adversaries have to say for themselves I do acknowledge that three plausible exceptions are made to these testimonies 1. They say the forecited Canon is not an Act of the Fourth Council of Lateran but of the Pope only But if we may value the Judgment of the Council of Trent or of a Synod of our own Nation above the opinion of some private men we must conclude that this Decree was the Act of the greatest Council which the Church of Rome hath to boast of For the Council of Trent divers times refers to the Capitula in question as the Acts of the General Council of Lateran (P) Conc. Trid. de Ref. Sess 5. c. 2. refers to Conc. Lat. 4. c. 10. Sess 13. c. 9. to Conc. Lat. c. 21. Sess 24. c. 1. to Conc. Lat. c. 51. Sess 25. c. 8. to Conc. Lat. c. 12. Concil Oxon. an 1222. Conciliorum tom 28. c. 24. refers to Conc. Lat. 4. c. 20. c 28. to Conc. Lat. c. 47. c. 29. to Conc Lat. c. 66. c. 33. to Conc. Lat. c. 15 16 17. And so doth the Council of Oxford held a few years after that of Lateran 2. Others allowing this to be the Act of the Council pretend it is to be understood of inferiour Feudatory Lords not of Soveraign Princes I would not affix a more odious sense o●… the Fathers of that Great Council that their Decrees do import but when I consider by what Spirit they were acted what Antimonarchical Doctrines they taught I cannot easily be induced to a belief of their honesty in this matter For they strictly forbid all Clergymen not possessing Temporalties or Secular honours to swear Allegiance to Secular Powers (Q) Conc Lat. 4. c. 43. p. 125. tom 28. They denounce the terrible sentence of Excommunication against such Magistrates as demand any Tribute of Churchmen (R) Conc. Lat. 4. c. 46. p. 197 198. They make another Decree wherein the Approbation of the Council is expressed equally destructive of the Rights of Princes which must either extend to Soveraign Princes or else it was made to no purpose I mean the Decree in which all the Princes of Christendom are required to be at peace with one another for four years under pain of Excommunication and loss of their Dominions (S) p. 119 c. In the beginning of the Decree are these words Sacro approbante Concilio definimus c. Et qui acquiescere forte contempserint per Excommunicationem in personas interdictum in terras arctissimé compellantur c. Quod si forte censuram Ecclesiaticam vilipenderint poterunt noniimmeritó formidare ne per authoritatem Ecclesiae circa eos tanquam perturbatores negotii Crucifixi saecularis potentia inducatur But to come to the matter in question If the temporal Governour being required and admonished by the Church shall neglect to purge his Country from Haeresie and we know the meaning of that Word let this be signified to the Pope that from henceforth he may declare his Subjects free from their Allegiance and give away his Land to be possessed by Catholiques c. Saving the Right of the Principal Governour if he gives no hindrance and impediment in the matter but nevertheless let the same Law be observed towards them who have no Principal Governours over them Thus the Council of Lateran If this Canon be not to be understood of Soveraign Princes as well as subordinate Lords and Deputy Governours what doth the Council mean by that expression ' Nevertheless let the same Law be observed ' towards them who have no Principal Governours over them Do not those words plainly import thus much Let their Dominions be given away in the same manner What doth the Council mean by that other Expression Saving the Right of the Principal Governour if he gives no Impediment If he do it seems his Countries are to be given away too Did not the Popes challenge and execute a power of Deposing Soveraign Princes as well as Subordinate Lords before the Sitting of this Council And would any man of common Sense have given at least so fair a pretence for the continuance of this Power if they were not well enough pleased with it 3. It is pretended that the deposing of Frederick the Emperor in the Council of Lyons was no Act of the Council Against which I have these things to say 1. This Assertion is wholly precarious for I do not find so much as one plain and positive Testimony in favour of it 2. The Decree for the recovery of the Holy Land wherein Princes are enjoyned to keep the Peace under pain of Excommunication and Interdicting their Kingdoms is expresly said to be made with the approbation of the Council (T) Concil Lugdun tom 28. p. 445. Sacro approbante Concilio 3. The Emperor was deposed after mature deliberation had with the Council (V) Nos super premissis cum fratribus nostris Sancto concilio deliberatione praehabita diligenti c. In the History of the Council The same words are in the Popes Constitution Bullar Cherub tom 1. p. 64. In M. Paris Ed. Lond. 1640 p. 772. An. 1245. Platina p. 220. Omnium consensu Imperio Regnis privatur And Bellar. Tract de pot sum Pont. adversus Barclaium in opuse p. 845. haec sententia est summi Pontificis toto approbante Concilio hoc est tota consintiente laudante Christianorum Praesulum Universitate 4. If the Council had favoured the Emperor there can be no reason why he should appeal from that to another General Council and not rather from the Pope to that Council (X) History of the Conncil p. 458 459. in the 28th Tome of the Council 3. But it is time to proceed to the last Proof which is from the Publique Offices and Breviaries of the Roman Church St. Peters Universal Monarchy which is the Foundation of the Popes Power over Princes is expresly taught in the Roman Breviaries (Y) V. Briviarium Rom. ex Decreto S.S. Concil Trid. ristitutum Pii 5. jussu editum Et Clementis 8. auctaritate recognitisni Ed. Ant. 1614. In Fisto Petri Pauli Jun. 29. p. 710. Tu es Pastor Oviun Princeps Apostoloruni tibi tradidit Deus omnia regna mundi ideo tibi tradite sunt claves regni celorum In Festo Petri ad Vincula Aug. 1. p. 741 Tibi tradidit Deus omnia regna mundi Sihneron Ed. Col. Agrip. 1602 tom 4. p. 410. Expounds these words of the Breviary in the same sense viz. Of the Popes Temporal Power And how can any man be a true Son of that Church which doth not joyn in her publick Offices How can he say Amen to those Prayers which he believes do contain any false Doctrine in them And now let it be considered That this Doctrine hath been taught by all the approved Writers of the Roman Church and by the Authentique Canon-Law by the
by the Word of God he may the Supream Government in all causes Ecclesiastical and Civil In those Causes you are not Subject to him for doth not the Pope claim the Supremacy in all Ecclesiastical and even in Temporal Causes at least in ordine ad Spiritualia Let the Rhemists complain that the Protestants extol only the Secular Power We acknowledge the King to be Supream Governour in all Causes and over all Persons within his Majesties Dominions for this is all that we attribute to the Secular Power and 't is the Glory of our Church to have taught and suffered for this Doctrine But for the Loyalty of the Rhemish Divines I refer the Reader to some of their Annotations as they are cited in the Margent (M) The Rhemish Testament was see forth by that Traiterous Seminary of English Papists and printed at Rhemes An. 1582. See the former part of their Annotations on ver 4. of this 13th Chapter to the Romans where they complain That now all is given to the Secular Power and nothing to the Spiritual which expresly is ordained by Christ and the Holy Ghost The exemption of the Clergy is asserted Annot. on S. Matth. 17.26 The Popes Infallibility Annot. on S. Luke 22.31 And in the Margent they say Popes may err personally not judicially or definitively The Popes Supremacy Annot. on S. John 21.17 And on 1 Pet. 2.12 They say Although all Power be of God and Kings Rule by him yet this is no otherwise than by his ordinary Concurrence and Providence He that desires to see a true Character of the English Seminaries may consult a Treatise penn'd by the direction of one of the greatest Statesmen and wisest men of his Age under this Title The Execution of Justice in England c. Reprinted An. 1675. My Lords 4th Testimony was taken from the Censure of the Doctors of the Famous Faculty of Sorbon against a Book of Sanctarellus particularly against the 30th and 31th Chapters In those two Chapters these Propositions are contained That the Pope can punish Kings and Princes with Temporal Penalties and depose and deprive them of their Kingdoms for the Crime of Haeresis and free their Subjects from their Obedience and that is hath been always the Custom in the Church and for other Causes also as for Faults if it be Expedient if the Princes be Negligent for the insufficiency and unprofitableness of their Persons Likewise That the Pope hath Right and Power over Spirituals and all Temporals also and that both the Powers Temporal and Spiritual are in him by Divine Right That it was to be believed that Power was granted to the Church and its Chief Pastors to punish with Temporal Penalties Princes the Transgressours of Divine and Humane Laws especially if the Crime be Haeresie Likewise that the Apostles were subject to Secular Princes de facto non de jure by Fact not by Right Moreover that as soon as the Pope is installed all Princes begin to be subject to him Lastly That he expounded the Words of Christ Whatsoever ye shall bind upon Earth c. to be understood not only of the Spiritual but of the Temporal Power c. The Faculty after mature deliberation disapproved and condemned the Doctrine contained in these Propositions and other like Expressions in the same Chapters as new false erroneous and contrary to the Word of God Given in the Sorbon Apr. 4. 1626. In Answer to all which I have many things to say but that I may not exceed my intended brevity I shall reduce them to the following Heads 1. That this Book of Sanctarellus was revised and approved by persons of greater Authority in the Roman Church than the Divines of Sorbon (N) Alegambe Bibl. script soc Jes in the life of Sanctarellus gives us this Character of him Vir moribus apprimé religiosis modestissima mansuetudine The Title of the Book is A. Sanctarelli soc Jes Tract de Haeres c. Ed. Romae 1625. In the License of the Master of the Sacred-Palace are these words In eo omnia religioni consona atque utilia adinvenerim In another of the Licenses In quo nihil reperi quod Sanctae Fidei aut bonis moribus adversetur It was printed at Rome permissu Superiorum approved by three Divines of the Society licensed by the General of the Order by the Master of the Sacred Palace and several other Divines By which we see what kind of Divinity was then in request at Rome But it may be the Divines of the Roman Church have one Conscience at Rome and another at Paris as was once said of the Jesuites 2. Since the breaking out of the Popish Plot in England when so many of that Religion were in danger of their Lives the Pope thought fit to condemn 65 Propositions as I shewed before but did not speak one word against the Power of deposing Princes though it was asserted in the same Divines and Casuists with the 65 Propositions And whether the Judgment of his Holiness or of the Divines of Sorbon be of greater value with Roman Catholiques let all men judge 3. Why do the Church and Court of Rome suffer an hundred as bad Books as this of Sanctarellus in which the same or worse Propositions are maintained to pass not only without Censure but with publique Anthority and Approbation 4. There are no Propositions in the places censured by the Sorbonists which he might not justifie by the Principles of the Bishops of Rome the most correct Editions of the Canon Law and in the Sentence of Excommunication and Deprivation of Frederick the Emperor with the Approbation of a General Council the Pope expounds the words of Christ as Sancturellus since did not only of the Spiritual but of the Temporal Power also (O) In the General Council of Lyons Concil tom 28. ut supra Innocent the 4th with the consent of the Council denounces Sentence of Deprivation against Frederick the Emperor Nobisque in B. Petri Apostoli persona sit dictum quodcunque ligaveris c. S. Marth 16. Also M. Paris ad An. 1245. p. 672. 5. What hath Sanctarellus said more than the Doctors of the Famous Faculty of Sorbon did both before and since the Publishing of his Book I know that Ancient College of Sorbon did for many years keep up a great reputation and was esteemed the Bulwark of Regal Authority but ever since the rise of the Jesuites many of their Determinations have been carried by Interest and Faction An. 1589 a little before the Murder of Henry the third of France the People of that Kingdom proposed these two queries to the Divines of Sorbon 1. Whether the People of France may not be discharged and set free from their Oaths of Allegiance made to Henry the Third 2. Whether they may not with a safe Conscience Arm and Vnite themselves collect and raise Money for the Defence and Preservation of the Roman Catholiques in that Realm against the wicked