him and cried out with a loud voice I am Pope and Emperor and have both the Earthly and Heavenly Empire This upon so publick an occasion looks very like the Teaching the Church Ex Cathedra But because words vanished into Air he left it in writing in these terms We say and define and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary to Salvation for every humane creature to be subject to the Bishop of Rome This being put into the Text of the Canon Law in which it is continued to this day we cannot think it Strange that Panorimitan Ostiensis Silvester with all the other Canonists assert the Popes direct Dominion over all the World And what can they say less Believing him to be Christs Vicar on Earth to whom all Power in heaven and earth was given of his Father therefore the power in Heaven being judged enough for Christ to manage himself they thought all the power in Earth was Committed to the Vicar This passed down without Contradiction among them but was not received by the rest of the Church yet the Indirect or as they termed it the Ecclesiastical power in cases of Heresie was Universally agreed to not one person Opposing it till Luther and his Followers came sawcily to look into the Popes Title to this and many other pretended Rights of the See of Rome But because the Plea for an Indirect Power was not Sufficient Since if a Prince did not Favour Heresie it was of no use And the pretention to a direct power was of an harsh sound Therefore a Title of another kind was set up It was pretended That all the Kingdoms in the Western and Northern parts of Europe were by formal Surrenders offered up to St. Peter and St. Paul And therefore whatever the Popes did was said to be done in Defence of their Rights which made Gregory the 7th fly to them in that flanting Address with which he begins his Sentences against the Emperor First of all the Donation of Constantine the Great was forged By which the Power of all the West Italy Sicily Sardinia Germany France Spain and England were given to the Pope This was put into the Text of the Canon Law and was stood to by all the Canonists It is true the Civilians wrote generally against it Among whom Bartholus may be reckoned for in his Preface to the Digests having mentioned the Opinions of some against it when it comes to his own he delivers it thus Take notice that we are now in the Territory of the Church for he taught at Bulloigne and therefore I say that Donation is valid But till Valla discovered the Impostures of it so manifestly that they are now ashamed to maintain it any longer their plea from it was never laid down But Augustinus Steuchus who undertakes the Vindication of that Donation against Valla does likewise alledge from some Instruments in the Vatican that both the Kingdoms of Spain Arragon France England Denmark Muscovy Sicily and Croatia and Dalmatia did Subject their Crowns to the See of Rome Krantzius tells us that Lakold King of Poland made it Tributary to Rome And for the German Empire tho Steuchus says nothing of it perhaps that he might not offend Charles the 5th yet there is both in the Canon Law and the Letters of Popes more to be said upon that Head than for any of the rest They pretend the Popes set up first the Empire of the West Then gave the Princes of Germany the Right of choosing the Emperor and does still give the Imperial Crown upon the Emperors Swearing an Oath of Homage to them according to the verse under that Insolent Picture set up by Pope Innocent the 2d In the Lateram of the Emperor lying prostrate at his feet and receiving the Crown from him Post homo fit Papae sumit quo dante Coronam But all these Surrenders were made use of only to strengthen the great pretention they had of being Christs Vicars and St. Peters Successours which from the end of the 11th Century till the beginning of the 16th for above 4 Ages together was as Authoritatively asserted by Popes as positively taught by Divines and as tamely received by the whole Church Emperors and Kings not presuming to contradict it as any other Article of Faith And for proofs of this we need appeal to no other witnesses than those 3. great Cardinals Baronius Bellarmin and Perron who may be presumed to have understood the Doctrine of their own Church better than any body else The First of those through his whole work strains his Industry to discover as many Instances as he can of it and never parts with any without expressing the particular satisfaction he had in so pleasant a Discovery I shall only set down what he says on the two 1st occasions that he met with When he takes notice of Gregory the Great 's priviledges formerly mentioned he adds You see Reader That the Popes can make Laws to which if Kings themselves do not yield Obedience they shall lose their Kingdoms Upon the first Deposition mâ—de by Gregory the 3d. He adds The Faithful in the West being awakened by this Thunder do immediately fall from the Obedience to Leo adhering to this Apostolical Pope So this Gregory left a worthy Precedent to Posterity that Heretical Princes be not suffered to reign in the Church of Christ if having been often admonished they continue to persist obstinately in their Errors Such strains as these do so often occur afterwards that they can scarce be reckoned It is well known what advice he gave P. Paul the 5th in the quarrel with the Venetians applying the voice to St. Peter Arise and Kill to the case in hand and that with his Insolent Paraenesis to that Republick are clear Evidences of his sence in this matter What Bellarmin taught more shortly and obscurely in his Controversies was afterwards made more plain both by his Writings about the Translation of the Roman Empire upon the Interdict of Venice and against King James and William Barklay And Cardinal Perrons Eloquent speech against the Bill put in by the Third Estate of France for Condemning those pretensions of a Deposing Power shews us not only his own sense but the sense of the whole Clergy of France in whose name he delivered it He calls the Contrary Opinion a Doctrine that breeds Schisms a Gate that leads unto all Heresie and so detestable that he and his Fellow Bishops will choose to burn at a Stake rather than consent to it He affirming That all the parts of the Catholick Church and of the Church of France in particular and all the Schools of Divinity till the coming of Calvin held the affirmative and says That no where in France since the Divinity Schools were set up can they find any one Doctor Divine or Lawyer any Decree Council or Sentence of Parliament or any one Magistrate Ecclesiastick or Politick who had held that in case of Heresie or
Church of Autim In which after the Priviledges are granted a Sanction is added in these words If any Kings c. shall endeavour to countervene this Writing let him lose the Dignity of his Power and Honour Or shorter in that of St. Medard Let him be deprived of his Dignity These are to be found both in all the MSS and Printed Editions of that Popes Works It is true the first of these to Saint Medard's Monastery is looked on as a forged Piece both by Cardinal Perron Sirmond and Lannoy But as it went for a true one till of late and is still defended by others Baronius in particular concluding from thence for the Popes Power over Kings so the other Priviledges are not denied to be true by any except Lannoy of late for ought I know These have been for above 600 years looked on as the Grants of that Pope But this may seem a private Writing and not of such force About 130 years after that Pope Gregory the 3d deposed Leo the Emperor from all his Dominions in Italy because he would not tolerate the Worship of I mages And if that single Heresie merited such a Sentence what may we look for among whose many imputed Errors this is but one and none of the most considerable Not many years after that did his Successor Zacharias upon a Message he received from France absolve that Nation from their Oaths to Childeric and ordered Boniface to Crown Pepin in his stead And not long after that Pope Adrian gave the Empire of Rome and of the West to Charles the Great As Bellarmine proves from above 30 of the Historians of that time and the Testimony of many Soveraign Princes Yet these being dark Ages in which there was more of Action than Dispute we do not find the Grounds laid down on which those Proceedings were founded But the constant Maxim of the Papacy was once to begin a Practice and then to find Arguments to defend it among which the Practice it self was no inconsiderable one for he was a mean spirited Pope that would in a Title fall short of what his Predecessors had assumed About 250 years after Charles the Great had assumed the Empire of the West there arose a Pope Gregory the Seventh that resolved to make the most of his See that could be and reckoning That the Empire of the West was the Gift of his Predecessors and building on that known Maxim That none can give that which they have not he looked on the supreme Dominion of it as one of the Perquisites of the See which he would by no means part with And therefore in his Dictatis in which he asserts the several Branches of his Prerogative these be three of them That the Pope only may use the Imperial Ensigns That he may depose Emperours And That he can absolve Subjects from their Fidelity to wicked Princes And to shew he was in earnest in these Doctrines he began soon to lay about him His first Threatnings were against King Philip of France who was a vicious Prince In a Letter to the Bishops of France he requires them to admonish the King for his Faults and if he did not mend them to put the whole Kingdom under an Interdict And if after all that he continued still Disobedient he Swaggers out in these Words We will have none to be ignorant or doubtful what we intend to do upon it for by the help of God we will endeavour by all Means to wrest the Kingdom of France out of his Possession But upon the submission of that King these Threatnings came not to any effect Yet he went on against the Emperor Hen. the 4th at the rate he had threatned the King of France I need not tell what all the World knows That he first Excommunicated and Deposed the Emperor in the Year 1076. Then upon his doing of Penance he received him into his Favour But upon new provocations he deposed him a second a third and fourth time in the years 1080 1081 and 1083. In all which he had the concurrence of so many Roman Councils and set up against him first Rodolph after that Herman as his Successors did first Conrade and then Henry that Emperor 's unnatural Sons The prosecution of the History is needless to my Design But in his Letter to Herman Bishop of Mets we meet with that which is more considerable For there he largely justifies his Proceedings which he grounds on the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven being given to St. Peter and the power of Binding and Loosing joined to them More places of Scripture he sought not but his Successor Boniface the 8th made use of Ecce duo Gladii and the power given to the Prophet Jeremiah Over Kingdoms to Root out Pull down Destroy Throw down to Build and to plant And they took it in great dudgeon if any would compare a single Prophet under the Law to Christ's Vicar under the Gospel But Gregory goes on in his Proofs to the Tradition of the Church And says The Fathers had often both in General Councils and in their particular Writings acknowledged That this Power was in the See of Rome That it was the Mother and Head of all other Churches That all matters were to be judged by it from whose Sentence no Appeal could lye Nor could there be a Review made of the Judgments passed in that See And to confirm what he had asserted he cites some Passages out of Gelasius and Julius and that Clause in the Priviledges granted by Gregory the Great formerly mentioned So here he very fully and formally delivers the Tradition of the Church and builds upon it He also cites the Precedent of Pope Zacharias his Deposing Childeric not for any fault he found in him but because he thought him not fit to Govern From that he goes on to some Reasons such as they are for the justification of his Proceedings The Pope having thus declared the Tradition and Doctrine of the Church it is not to be wondered at if both the Schoolmen mixt it with the Instructions they gave their Scholars and the Canonists made it a part of the Law of the Church Hugo de Sancto Victore Alexander Alensis Bonaventure Durand Peter of Aliac John of Paris Almain Gabriel Biel Henry of Ghant John Driodo John de Terre iremata Albert Pighius Thomas Waldensis Petrus de Palude Cajetan Franciscus Victoria Dominicus a Soto and many others in all 70 are reckoned by Bellarmin but Foulis enlarges the number to 177 whom he cites who did formally assert it Aquinas also taught it tho' in some places he contradicted himself But Boniface the 8th thought his Predecessors had proceeded in this matter too cautiously and therefore he went more roundly to work In the Jubilee in the year 1300 He shewed himself the first day in the Pontifical Habit but the second day he was clothed with the Imperial Habit a naked Sword being carried before
to the Pope That he from thenceforth may pronounce his Subjects discharged from their Obedience and expose his Territory to be seized on by Catholicks who having exterminated the Hereticks shall possess it withont contradiction and preserve it in the purity of the Faieh so as no injury be done to the Right of the Supreme Lord where there is such provided he do not any way oppose himself and the same Law is to take place on them who have no Superiour Lord. The Deposition of the Court of Tholouse being the thing then in their eye made that the Decree runs chiefly against Feudatary Princes yet as the last Clause takes in Soveraign Princes so by the Clause before it was provided That if the Soveraign did any way Oppose what was done against his Vassal he was to forfeit his Right I did in the former part of this Letter meet with all the Exceptions that are commonly made to this Canon Only one pretty Answer which a person of Honour makes is yet to be considered He tells us that there were so many Soveraign Princes or Ambassadors from them at this Council that we are to look on this Decree as a thing to which those Princes consented From whence he Infers It was rather their Act than an Invasion of their Rights made by that Council But be it so he knows they allow no Prescription against the Church If then those Princes consented to it upon which the power of Deposing had that Accession to fortifie it by it can never be recalled nor prescribed against It is true there were many Ambassadors from Princes there But they were all such as either held their Dominions by the Popes Grant or had been either Deposed by him or Threatned with Depositions or were the Children of those whom he had Deposed So no wonder they stood in such fear of the Pope that they durst not refuse to consent to every thing he had a mind to For indeed this Council did only give their Placet to a paper of Decrees penned by the Pope Henry called the Greek Emperor Brother to Baldwin that had seized on Constantinople had no other Title to it besides the Popes Gift Frederick the 2d who had been the Popes Ward was then the Elect Emperor of Germany made so at the Popes Instance who had Deposed the two Immediately preceding Emperours Philip and Otho the 4th the last being at that time alive So that he durst not contradict the Pope lest he should have set up Otho against him But no Emperor except Henry the 4th ever suffered more from the Popes Tyranny than he did afterwards One sad Instance of it was that the Pope having pressed his March to the Holy-land much did at last Excommunicate him for his delays upon which he to avoid further censures carried an Army thither which was so succesful that the Pope who hoped he should have been destroyed in the Expedition as the first Emperor of that name was now being vexed at his Success complained that he should have presumed to go thither while he lay under Excommunication and was in Rebellion against him and went about not only to Dethrone him but to get him to be betrayed by the Knights Hospitallers and Templers into the Sultans hands who abominating that Treachery revealed it to him John of Brenne had the Kingdom of Jerusalem by that same Popes Gift who took it from Almeric King of Cyprus and gave it him But Almeric had no cause to complain since he held Cyprus only by the same Copy of the Popes Gift So they both were at the Popes Mercy Our John of England was his Vassal as he usually called him But his Successour went higher calling the King of England not only his Vassal but his Slave and Declared That at his beck he could procure him to be Imprisoned and Disgraced James King of Arragon who was also the Popes Ward had no less reason to be afraid of the Pope who had Deposed his Father for Assisting the Count of Tholouse Philip Augustus King of France had his Kingdom twice put under an Interdict worse things being also threatned The like Threatnings had been made to Andrew King of Hungary but upon his Submission he was received into favour And now is it any wonder that those Princes gave way to such a Decree when they knew not how to help themselves by Opposing it which would have raised a Storm that they could not hope to weather Anothet thing is remarkable concerning this time by which the Belief of the Deposing Doctrine in that Age will better appear Other Princes whom Popes had Deposed procured some Civilians to write for them and got Synods of Bishops sometimes on their side against the Pope Because it was evident the Pope proceeded not upon the Account of Heresie but of private spite and hatred But in the case of the Count of Tholouse who was a manifest Favourer of that which was esteemed Heresie the Opinions of the Albigenses that were his Subjects not a Writer in all that Age durst undertake to defend his cause nor could he procure one Bishop to be of his side So universally was it received that in the case of Heresie a Prince might be Deposed by the Pope The 3d General Council that Confirmed this Power was the Council of Lions held by Innocent the 4th against the forementioned Frederick the 2d where as the Sentence bears The Pope having Consulted with his Brethren and the Holy Council being Christs Vicar on Earth to whom it was said in the person of St. Peter whatsoever ye bind on Earth c. Declares the Emperor bound in his sins and thereupâ—n Deprived by God of his Dominions Whereupon he by his Sentence does Depose him and absolves all from their Oaths of Fidellty to him Straitly charging all persons to acknowledge him no more either Emperor or King Declaring all that did otherwise Excommunicated ipso facto There are in this Process several things very remarkable It is grounded on a pretence to a Divine Tradition So here the whole Council concur with the Pope in asserting this power to flow from that Conveyance And thus either that Tradition is true or the Councils are not to be believed when they Declare a Tradition 2ly Tho this is but a Decree in one particular Instance yet it is founded on the General Rule And so is a Confirmation of it by which it is put out of doubt that the 4th Council of Later an included Soveraign Prinâ—es within their Decree 3ly When the Emperors Advocate appeared to plead for him He did not at all except to their Jurisdiction over him or Power of Deposing in the case of Heresie but denyed that the Emperor was guilty of the crimes Objected namely Heresie whereby he at least waved the denial of their Power in that case He also desired some time might be granted for the Emperor to appear and plead for himself in person Whereby he plainly acknowledged their
had asserted it And from such a succession of Councils it is reasonable to conclude That this Third Character of a Tradition of the Church agrees to it and if General Councils are fit Conveyors of Traditions we have as full Evidence as can be desired for proving this to be a Church-Tradition This last Character of a Tradition is what the whole Body of the Church has held in any one Age. Upon which they say we may calculate that such opinions must have come down from the Apostles since it seems neither credible nor possible that the Belief of the Church could be changed With this Arnold has of late made great noise And as the new Fashions that come from France do please our young Gallants best so some of the Writers of Controversies among us have taken up the same plea here That the whole Church received the Deposing Doctrine in cases of Heresy may be inferred from what had been said The Church is made up of Popes Bishops Priests Of Soveraign Princes and Subjects of all ranks That the Popes believed it none can doubt So many Definitions of Councils shews us as plainly what the Bishops and other Prelates believed the Writing of the School-men and Canonists shew what the rest of the Clergy believed Those Princes who suffered under the Sentences give at least a tacit consent to it since they never question it but study only to clear themselves of the imputation of Heresie The other Princes who made use of the Donations of the Popes shew as plainly that they believ'd it The great Armies that were brought about their Standards must have also believed it and the people who generally deserted the Deposed Prince notwithstanding the great vertues of some of them and the love that Subjects naturally carry to their Princes shew that they believed it So that if St. James his Question Shew me thy Faith by thy Works be applied to this particular the Answer will be easie What shall I mention the frequent depositions of Charles the 1st of Henry the 4th of his Son Henry the 5th of Frederick the 1st Philip Otho the 4th Frederick the 2d and Lewis the 4th in the Empire The frequent Depositions in Sicily and Naples the many attempts upon France that terrible Bull in particular of Julius the 2d against that good King Lewis the twelfth By which besides the Sentence against the King it appears he designed the total destruction of the Nation promising the Pardon of Sin to every one that killed one French Man the frequent Attempts upon England both in Hen. the 2d and K. John's time not to mention their later Bulls of Deposition against K. Henry the 8th and Q. Elizabeth the many Attempts in Spain particularly the deposing the King of Navarre by P. Julius and the Sentences against Henry the 4th then King of Navarre and the Prince of Conde All these and a great many more with the strange Effects that followed upon them are so clear Proofs of the Worlds believing this Doctrine for many Ages together that if Men had any Remainders of shame left with them they could not deny it And to this day all their Writers maintain it tho perhaps now the greatest part of the Laity know little of it but whenever the Tradition of the Church is laid before them they are obliged to submit or they fall from the Catholick Faith the chief Branch of which is To believe all the Traditions of the Church And since the Church is the same in all Ages according to their Doctrine the Traditions of any one Age must be as good as the Traditions of any other can be all being grounded on the same Authority And now let all the Reasons that Arnold brings to prove from the Churches believing Transubstantiation in any Age that she must have always believed it be considered and applied with a small variation of the Terms to this Purpose and we shall see if they conclude not as strongly in favour of this Doctrine as for that which he has pursued so much How can it be imagined says he that a Doctrine so contrary to common Sence and Reason could have been so universally received if every Man had not been taught it by those who instructed him in the Faith Will Men easily change their Faith Or tho particular Persons would prevaricate would the whole Clergy conspire to do it Or would the People take it easily off their hands These and many more Topicks of that sort may be so mustered up and set off by a Man of Wit and Eloquence that an ordinary Person would stare and not know what to say The Premises will shew that there is need but of very little Art to change the same Plea and fit it to this purpose with two great advantages beyond what can be fanci'd to be in the other The one is that the generality of Mankind is naturally more concerned in the preservation of Temporal things than about nice points of Speculation the one they see and handle every day and are much concerned about the other they hear little of and are not much touched with them So that it is less probable there could be a change made in opinions on which the Titles of Princes and the Peace of Kingdoms depended than about subtil Discourses concerning Mysteries So that the Plea is stronger for the Tradition of deposing Kings than for Transubstantiation A second Difference is That there was a continual Opposition made to the belief of Transubstantiation in all Ages which they themselves do not deny only they shift it off the best they can by calling the Opposers Hereticks but for the deposing Doctrine there was not one Person in the whole World that presumed to bring it in question from the first time it was pretended to till those whom they call Hereticks disputed against it and tho some few others who hold Communion with them have ventured on a canvasing of that Doctrine it is well enough known what thanks they got from Rome nor can they shew any one Book licensed according to the Rules of their Church that denies it And thus the Plea for this Doctrine has a double Advantage beyond that for Transubstantiation Upon the whole matter then if Tradition be a sure Conveyance and if we may pronounce what is truly a Tradition either from the Opinions of Doctors the Constitutions of Popes the Decrees of General Councils and the universal Consent of the whole Church for some Ages then the Doctrine of deposing Kings to which all these agree must be reckoned among Church-Traditions There is but one other Mark that can be devised of a Tradition which is What the Church has taught and believed in all Ages but for a certain Reason which they know very well they will not stand to that They know we do not refuse such Traditions and if only such may be received then the Worship of Images the Prayers to Saints the Worship in an unknown Tongue