Renowned applauded Doctors teach that the Pope may excommunicate Kings and that an excommunicated King is no King and he that killeth him killeth not a King When the Roman Council under Greg. 7. decreeth that the Pope may depose Emperours And the same Greg. 7. li. 4. Ep. 7. conspireth in the like Doctrine The Oration of Card. Peron is well known If so great a Kingdom as France that glorieth of its Church-liberties can bear so much what will not those bear that are less able to deliver themselves The words of this Great and pretendedly Moderate Cardinal in a Moderate Kingdom in a publick Writing against a Protestant Learned King King James pag. 453. as cited by A. Bishop Usher of Babylon pag. 163. is fit to be written on the Doors of all Princes and of the Pope himself in Capital Letters viz. By this Article that Kings may not be deposed by the Pope We are cast headlong into a manifest Heresie as binding us to confess that for many Ages past the Catholick Church hath been banished out of the whole world For if the Champions of the Doctrine contrary to this Article do hold an impious and detestable opinion contrary to Gods Word then doubtless the Pope for so many hundred years expired hath not been the Head of the Church but a HERETICK and the ANTICHRIST What would you have more to satisfie Kings than their own profession that Either the Pope may depose Kings or 〈◊〉 he is not the Head of the Church but an Heretick and Antichâ—iâ—t and hath been so for many hundred years Can you shâ—w their Interest plainlier than all this And lest any say that this is but the Doctrine of the Jesuits remember that Perron was another kind of man and the famous Perverter of King Henry the fourth And I will cite here the words of one more of a multitude even one that wrote so long ago as to be numbred with the Fathers in Biblioth Patr. To. 4 p. 913. and a Roman Cardinal Bertrard Card. Epis. Eduens de Orig. usu Jurisd Qu. 4. Respondeo dico quod Potestas Spiritualis debet dominari omni humanae Creaturae per rationes Hostiensis Item quia Jesus Christus silius Dei dum fuit in hoc mundo etiam ab aeternâ— naturalis dominus fuit de jure naturali in Imperatores quoseunque alios depositionis sententias ferre potuisset damnationis quaseunque alias Utpote in personas quas creaverat donis naturalibus gratuito donaverat etiam conservabat Et eadem ratione etiam ejus Vicarius potest Nam non videtur discretus Dominus fuisse ut cum reverentia ejus loquar nisi unicum post se talem Vicarium reliquisset qui haec omnia posset Fuit autem iste Vicarius ejus Petrus apud Mattheum Et idem dicendum est de successoribus Petri cum eadem absurditas sequeretur si post mortem Petri humanam naturam a se creatam sine regimine unius personae reliquisset I will English it lest the unlearned believe not what Fathers what a Biblioth Patrum what Cardinals and what Doctrines the Roman Clergy obtrude upon the Christian world I answer and say that the spiritual Power ought to have domination over every humane creature by Hostiensis reasons Also because Jesus Christ the Son of God while he was in this world and also from Eternity was the Natural Lord and by Natural Right could pass the sentence of Deposition and of Damnation and any other upon Emperours and upon any others as being persons that he had created and endowed with Natural Gifts and freely and also preserved And by the same reason his Vicar can do it For the Lord seemeth not to have been discreet that I may speak with reverence to him unless he had left behind him one such Vicar who could do all these things And in Matthew this his Vicar was Peter And the same must be said of the successors of Peter seeing the same absurdity would follow if after the death of Peter he had left humane nature created by himself without the Regiment of One person Do you think this is not plain dealing enough if men are willing to understand I know that there were Emperours and Princes that strugled hard before they suffered themselves to be thus subjected And these Emperours had Lawyers Statesmen and Divines that took their parts as all the Treatises in Goldastus his three Volumes de Monarch and his Imp. Constit. shew But still those that sided with the Pope spake contrary as the argumentations of those Books besides the Authors whom they oppose do shew And alas Occham and Marsilius Patavinus and Widdrington and Barclay came all too late For all that Secular Power which was cloaked with the name of Ecclesiastical and Spiritual was before so deeply rooted in the Papacy that they durst plead for no more than that Princes are not subject to the Pope in Temporals But as you truly note abundance of Temporals and of the Magistrates proper work about things Ecclesiastical was still vailed under the name of Spiritual And at last even the Temporal Power again claimed more subtilly and indirectly as in ordine ad spiritualia But you 'l say that All men are naturally so regardful of their own Interest and especially Princes that it is not possible they should be so servile tame and self-abasing as to give away so great a part of their Kingdoms to a Forreigner yea to one that claimeth all by himself or by his most famous Writers and by his Councils claimeth a power to depose them They that with their own Nobles and other Subjects are so jealous of their Prerogatives would never so far depose themselves if they did but know what they do And therefore when Popish Princes understand the matter they will shake off the yoke and reâ—ssume their right Answ. It 's true that Protestant Princes and States have done so And the true meaning of our Oath of Supremacy is the same with your main design And though some have stumbled at those words that the King is Supream Governour in all Causes Ecclesiastical the meaning is only as hath been oft publickly declared that he is the Supream Civil or Coactive Governour by the Sword in all Causes Ecclesiastical so far as they fall under that Coactive or Coercive Government And hereby the King doth but reassume the Royal Power over the Clergy and the affairs of Religion which the Pope had usurped under the name of Ecclesiastical For it s well known what was called Ecclesiastical Power in England in the times of Popery so that this much of the Vail is removed long ago among all Protestants And if you peruse but Bishop Bilsons excellent Tract of Christian Subjection and Bishop Andrews his Tortura Torti to pass by all others you will see that this Case is better opened than I for my part am able to open
and Religion Now I call not all this an Usurpation of Magistracy so far as he useth no Corporal force and threatneth no penalty but excommunication and damnation For every true Pastor with his own flock hath the Power of Guiding them by delivering Christs Doctrine and Precepts and commanding obedience as his Servant or Embassadour in his Name and of denouncing his judgements and of judging obligingly who are fit to be taken in to the Church by Baptism and who to be cast out as Impenitent by excommunication in his own particular Charge or Society And if the Pope usurp a power of doing all this and more as an Universal Pastor only this is an Usurpation of a Church Power and not of a Magistracy And indeed if you will acquit him from the guilt of the Mysterie of Iniquity any further than he invadeth Magistracy it self you will do him a great deal of wrong For he is the Vicarius Christi and the Vice-Christ more notably by his Spiritual Usurpation of a power proper to Christ himself or at least of a power that Christ never gave him II. His setting up a KINGDOM and invading the MAGISTRACY is done I. Directly II. Indirectly and Consequentially I. Directly 1. By holding a Secular Jurisdiction as the King of Rome where he exerciseth the Supream Civil Power acknowledging no Superiour Civil Governour either as to the Legislation or Execution in all the parts of his own Dominions 2. By his laying claim to many Kingdoms as his own among which England is one as pretended to be delivered to him by King John and supposing that the Kings do hold them as under him and by his Grant 3. By laying claim to the Temporal or Corporal Government of all the world say some or of all the Christian world say others Of which you may see a multitude of Volumes written in the defence of his pretensions In particular all those aforesaid were of this subject which all Goldastus his Collected Treatises for the Right of Princes do confute I gave you Cardinal Bertrands words before And though some of their Clergy who live under Princes that are not willing to resign their Crowns do disclaim the Popes direct Title to the Universal Civil Soveraignty yet he himself disclaimeth it not nor condemneth the Books as such that have been written to defend it In the Jesuits Morals the last Chapter hath this Title That the Jesuits teach that the Church cannot command spiritual and internal actions That its Laws and guidance are humane and that it is it self only a Political Body Where the Jansenist chargeth them with destroying the Church from its foundation and making it altogether external humane and Politick and that which needeth only Politick Vertues for its Government and the exercise of its principal offices and that they make its Laws but humane and politick which oblige only to things external and chargeth them as Cyprian did the Novatians Quod Ecclesiam humanam faciunt So that if he accuse them justly here is no room for any subterfuge It is not the Spiritual and Temporal power that he makes them claim but the Temporal or External only But what doth the Jansenist himself therefore disclaim all Temporal Power in the Church or is he just to Kings Judge but by pag. 388. where he boasteth of Laymans Confession of the Truth that Ecclesiastick power is instituted immediately from God and the Civil power comes immediately from men And that Civil power regards properly and directly wealth and peace temporal only And he adds For the Civil power regards the outward order and Civil tranquility alone and prescribes none but outward and humane means to attain this end Which is all false and most injurious to Kings whom this moderate Jansenist would hereby set as far below every Priest in real dignity and amiableness to the Subjects as a Humane Creature is below a Divine and the interest of the body is below that of the soul. Whereas indeed God is the immediate Original of Civil and Church power though in both the Persons are designed by the means of men And both have God himself for their ultimate end and the Common Good of the Society for their Common End which ever consisteth most in spiritual felicity referring to Eternal Though the Magistrates weapon be the Sword and the Pastors only the Word by which all this is brought to pass Indeed it is not possible that the Papacy in its present State can be defended by any man how moderate soever without Injury to Princes and States whose Power the Pope hath so notoriously invaded and usurped For how can they defend him that usurpeth the Power of Kings or usurpeth a false Power over Kings and not be injurious to them that the Usurper injureth But it is most wonderful to me that when W. Barclay defendeth the right of Monarchs in such a Kingdom as France that hath power and will to hold fast its own he should complain as if he undertook a Cause which most were against him in and in which he expected to be wondered at for his singularity 4. By their Inquisition and by their Decreeing Corporal Penalties in their Councils and Decreeing the deposition of Princes and the giving away their Dominions to others as in the two fore-cited Councils Roman suâ— Greg. 7. Lateran sub Innoc. 3. In a word by all that they do in their Usurped Legislation Judgement and Execution by the Sword or a forcing Power as in themselves II. But the more successful Usurpation of the Power and Rights of Princes is Indirectly and as Bellarmin defendeth it in ordine ad spiritualia By using their Ecclesiastical Usurped power upon mens Consciences in such a way as shall overtop the Magistrates power of the Sword when they decree that all are Hereticks that believe their senses and deny Transubstantiation and that all such Hereticks shall be banished or burnt the Clergy is not to do this themselves but to deliver them over to the Secular Power The Pope and Clergy do but charge it on their Consciences in the name of Christ. And if Princes obey them not or Temporal Lords will not burn or banish all such Hereticks for believing sense the Pope is not to touch their bodies but to excommunicate them And if they will not yet obey the Pope when they are excommunicate the Pope Good man will not draw a Sword against them but only use the Spiritual Sword by giving their Dominions to others which is but by word of mouth he doth but declare such a Temporal Lord to be dispossest of his Title and require another to take his Lands and let his great Divines publish that an Excommunicate King is no King and that to kill him is not to kill a King And if Princes will defend themselves by Arms the Pope will not send his Clergy in Arms against them but only by the Spiritual Sword or Word command other Princes States and people to arm themselves against their
him The alms of the people is enough for the poor Let them never procure us envy for our Lands let them take them if they please I do not give them to the Emperour but I do not deny them So far Bilson All this we allow And if all this be the concurrent judgement of all sorts of sober Protestants called Episcopal or Presbyterians what reason hath any Erastian upon the account of the Magistrates interest to quarrel with them If any practise not according to these principles let them hear of it Indeed in point of convenience we greatly differ from some men That is 1. Whether it be convenient for the King to make Church-men Magistrates or not 2. And whether it be convenient immediately to back their Excommunications with the Sword And for the Magistrate to be the Clergies Executioner or to imprison men eo nomine because excommunicate and not repenting 3. And whether it be convenient to make the same Court called Ecclesiastical so mixt of Pastoral and Secular Power united in one Chancellor who is no Pastor but a Lay man or in a Bishop as that in and by it the Magistrates and the Spiritual Government shall be either confounded or so twisted as to be undiscernable or become one tertium But for this as we love not to be too forward in teaching Magistrates what is convenient though many of the ancient Fathers have done it plainly and spoken against the Magistracy of Priests and Cyâ—il of Alexandria is branded by Socrates and others with some infamy as the first Bishop that used Coercive power so you have more cause to say what you have to say in this to the Magistrate himself than to the Bishops or Presbyteries For if the Magistrate will needs-make Priests his Officers and put his Sword into such hands as have enough to do in their proper work Or if he will punish men with the Sword because they are punished already by excommunication or because they repent not lest excommunication alone should prove uneffectual quarrel not for his actions with other men It is his own doing and it is himself that you blame when you blame these things Say not that Prelates or Presbyteries take the Magistrates power from him but say the truth that the Magistrate giveth it them and will have it so to be Though I excuse none that urge him to it or voluntarily assume his Power Bishop Andrews also saith Tortur Torti p. 383. Cohibeat Regem Diaconus si cum indignus sit idque palam constet accedat tamen ad Sacramentum Cohibeat medicus si ad noxium quid vel insalubre manum admoveat Cohibeat Equiso si inter equitandum adigat Equum per lâ—cum praeruptum vel salebrosum cui subsit periculum Etiamre medico Etiamne Equisoni suo subjectus Rex Sed de Majori potestate loquitur sed ea ad rem noxiam procul arcendam qua in re Charitatis semper Potestas est maxima Here you see what Church Government is in Bishop Andrews sense and how far the Bishops hold the King himself to be restrainable even by a Deacon And yet but I think according to your own sense I pray you judge then whether the Bishops and you differ as far as you imagine and whether the Courts and Church power which offendeth you be not set up by Kings themselves who make the Bishops their Officers therein To which add what Bilson proveth that Patriarchs Metropolitans and Archbishops Dignities are the gift of Princes and not the institution of Christ and then you will see more that it is the Princes own doing I add to the like purpose more out of Bilson pag. 313. We grant they must rather hazard their lives than baptize Princes which believe not or distribute the Lords mysteries to them that repent not but give wilful and open signification of iniquity c. This is Church Government which none can contradict This is it that Chrysostom so often professeth also as that he would rather let his own blood be shed than give the blood of Christ to the unworthy And Beda Hist. Eccles. l. 2. cap. 5. telleth us that Melitus Bishop of London with Justus was banished by the heirs of King Sabareth because he would not give them the Sacrament of the Lords Supper which they would needs have before they were baptized And by the way if Bishops say that Kings must be used thus the Non-conformists are not such intolerable Schismaticks as some now represent them for desiring that every Presbyter may not be compelled against his Conscience to give the Sacrament to the basest of the people that are ignorant what Christ or Christianity is and to them that are not willing to receive it but are forced to take it against their wills for fear of a Prison nor to baptize the Children of such Parents as know not what baptism is or as are professed Infidels having not so much as Christian Adopters but only Ceremonious persons called God-fathers and God-mothers Papirius Massonus in vita Leonis 1. reciteth his words of the Magistrates banishing the Manichees and addeth Ex hac rei gestae narratione perspicuum est Romanos Episcopas relegare tunc non potuisse nec in exilium reos mittere utì hodie faciunt sed eos tantum censura coercere poenâ— ecclesiastica mulctarâ— I add no more supposing that almost all sober Episcopal Presbyterians Independents and Erastians are agreed in all the first ninety four Propositions if not all that are here asserted and that all those may suffice to signifie their Concord and promote their Reconciliation if Interest mistaken and Passion mis-guided did not much more than difference of judgement in these matters to cause their alienation And as I have written this to vindicate both the Power of Kings and the Office of Pastors from any mens unjust suspicions or accusations who look only on one side and to shew that these Offices are no more contrary than Head and Heart than Light and Heat so I do require the Reader to put no sense upon any thing here written which is injurious to the Government of Magistrates or Pastors or contrary to the Laws For all such senses I do hereby disclaim FINIS Read the Declaration against the Oath of Allegiance by H. I. for the Popes deposing Kings pa. 16 17 27 43. Read Hottomans Franco-Gal cap. 7. and his Brutum â—â—lmen pag. 87 97 98. Read Withriagton and Barclay against Bellarmia in Goldastus Tom. 3. de Mon. And Bellarmia against Barclay c. 9. Vid. Sua ez â— advers sect Aâ—glic li 6. cap. 4. sect 14. cap. 6. sect 22. 24. Azor. â—rs Mor. par 1. l. 8 c. 13. Dom. Bannes in Thom. 22. q. 12. art 2. August Triump de potest Eccl. q 46. art 2. There is no doubt saith he but the Pope may depose all Kings when there is reasonable cause for it See the Jesuiâ—s Morals and Mystery of Jesuitism and Myster Patrum Jesuitarum ☜ ☜ ☜ ☞ ☞ ☞ ☜ ☜ ☜ See Bellarm. de Pontif. Ro. li. 5. c. 1. 6. 7. 8. he saith It is the common judgement of all Catholick Divines that the Pope ratione spiritualis hath at least indirectly a certain Power and that the highest in Temporals Which c. 6. he saith is just such over Princes as the soul hath over the body or sensitive appetite and that thus he may change Kingdoms and take them from one and give to another as the chief Spiritual Prince if it be but necessary to the safety of souls Yea he saith that It is not lawful for Christians to tolerate an Infidel or Heretical King if he endeavour to draw his Subjects to his Heresie or unbelief But to judge whether a King do draw to Heresie or not belongeth to the Pope to whom the care of Religion is committed Therefore it belongâ—th to the Pope to judge a King to be deposed c. * You are mistaken when you twiâ—â— call Maximus Imperator Ethnicus who but for his â—â—â—patioâ— haâ— been a Christiaâ— Saint