of any lay-mans temporall goods and patrimonie for any cause whatsoeuer yea for heresie it selfe who is not temporally a vassall and subiect to his Holinesse And if his spirituall authoritie giuen him by our Sauiour can worke no such effect much lesse his temporall which was neuer granted by Christ by whom he ought to haue whatsoeuer he hath for the good gouernment of his Church but by holy secular Princes whereof Cardinall Allen writeth thus The chiefe Bishops of Christs Church In his answer to the Eng. iust pag. 144. our supreme Pastors in earth by Gods prouidence and by the graunts of our first most Christian Emperours and Kings and by the humble and zealous deuotion of the faithfull Princes and people afterwards haue their temporall states dominions and patrimonies whereby they most iustly hold and possesse the same and are thereby lawfull Princes temporall and may most rightfully by their soueraigntie make warres in their owne and other mens iust quarell as occasion shall vrge them thereunto This he The like in effect writeth the most excellent lawyer D. Barclai Lib. de potestate Papae ◠15. that the Pope himselfe is no otherwise excluded from temporall subiection to secular Princes then that by the benefite or liberalitie of Kings he was made a King forsooth a politicall Prince acknowledging none for his superiour in temporals And the same doth the most earnest maintainer of the Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction confesse whom many thinke to be Cardinall Bellarmine Sub nomine Francisci Romuli pag. 114. in his answer to the principall chapters of an Apologie c. Generalis inquit verissima est illa sententia debere omnes omnino superiori potestati obtemperare Sed quia c. It is a generall and most true sentence that all ought to obey higher power but because power is of two sorts spirituall and temporall ecclesiasticall and politicall whereof the one belongeth to Bishops the other to Kings Bishops ought to be subiect to Kings in temporall things and Kings vnto Bishops in spirituals as copiously do dispute Gelasius the first Gelasius Nicolaus in his Epistle to Anastasius and Nicolas the first in his Epistle to Michael But because the Bishop of Rome is not only the chiefe Ecclesiastical Prince to whom all Christians by the law of God are subiect but is also in his owne Prouinces a temporall Prince neither doth he acknowledge any superiour in temporals as nor other absolute and soueraigne Princes do in their kingdoms and dominions thence it proceedeth that he hath no power aboue him in earth Not then because he is chiefe Bishop and spirituall father of all Christians therefore he is deliuered from temporall subiection but because he enioyeth a temporall principalitie subiect to none In those things therefore which appertaine to the good of the common-wealth and ciuill societie and are not repugnant to the diuine ordinance Clerkes are no lesse bound to obey the soueraigne temporall Prince then other citizens or subiects as Cardinall Bellarmine himselfe verie notably sheweth Quia clerici In lib. de Clericis c. 28. praeterquā quod clerici sunt sunt etiā ciues partes quaedam Reipub. politicae Non sunt exempti clerici vllo modo inquit ab obligatione legum ciuilium quae non repugnant sacris canonibus vel officio clericali That clergie men besides that they are clergie men are also citizens and certaine parts of the politicall commonwealth Clerkes saith he are not exempted by any meanes from the bond of the ciuill lawes which are not repugnant to the sacred canons or their clericall office By this you may see that the Pope hath his temporalities and temporall power not from Christ but from Constantine and other Christian Princes and people and was euer subiect to ciuill gouernment of Emperours till such time as by their graunts he was made a King and temporall Prince and so had no superiour and that Clerks as parts of the political cōmonwealth are bound to obey al iust lawes of the same cōmonwealth no lesse then the Laitie but more of this in another place as occasion shall serue Now to come somewhat nearer the question that I promised and you desire to be resolued on as touching the Popes authoritie to depose Princes of their temporall dominions First you are to note that of this matter there are two opinions much different the one from the other one of the Canonists another of Diuines The Canonists hold it for true doctrine to be maintained Tho. Bozius Carerius D. Marta and others that all power whatsoeuer is in this world either temporall and ciuill or spirituall and ecclesiasticall was giuen directly by Christ to Peter and his successors and what power any Kings or Princes in the whole world either Christians or Infidels haue it all dependeth of the Pope and is deriued from him to them as touching the temporall execution so that as Lord of the world he may depose Princes take away their kingdomes and principalities and giue or dispose them to whom he list though no man know the cause why he doth so if he shall iudge there is sufficient cause to do it If this were true doctrine then woe to all Princes that should at any time yea but breake amitie and friendship with him that sitteth in Peters seate what securitie could they haue of their estates Then might they expect of Princes and rulers to be made priuate men and subiects then may it be granted that our Soueraigne were not vnlike to be depriued of his temporals his subiects to be discharged of their obedience and his territories giuen in prey to his enemies But this opinion is held to be most false by many Diuines because it cannot be proued either by authoritie of Scripture or by tradition of the Apostles or practise of the ancient Church or by the doctrine and testimonies of the ancient Fathers Howbeit Bozius a late writer most stoutly defendeth the same Lib. 2. cap. 11 and greatly blameth many excellent Diuines among whom is renowmed Cardinall Bellarmine and calleth them new diuines saying moreouer that they teach most manifestly false doctrine Lib. 5. cap. vlt. and repugnant to all truth because they say that Christ as man was neuer a temporall king nor had any temporall dominion on earth nor did exercise or practise any regall power for by these assertions the principall foundations of Bozius friuolous arguments are ouerthrowne which as most true they confirme by the testimony of our Sauiour himselfe Math. 8. Luc. 9. Foxes saith he haue holes and the foules of the aire nests but the Sonne of man hath not where to put his head If Christ Iesus as he was the son of mā had not so much in this world as a cottage to rest himself in where I pray you is his kingdome where is his temporall dominion who can conceiue that one can be king and Lord who hath no kingdome or Lordship in the vniuersall
this confidence then of Gods assistance and for the instruction of certaine Catholikes who simply beleeue the inconsiderat assertions of some of their teachers that such as take the Oath do and must renounce the Popes spirituall auctoritie of excommunication and abiure or condemne for heresie a disputable position to wit that the Pope may depose for heresie or apostacie which is most vntrue as will easily appeare to him that without passion and with iudgement shall reade the Oath or this my booke These and such like I exhort not to be too credulous in a matter of so great moment as this is giuing eare to euery one that will say it may not be taken and can shew them no true reason why nor in what point it is vnlawfull If any list wilfully to reiect this my wholsome counsaile and will rather still giue eare to such as worke their ouerthrow what else can they in reason expect but losse of lands and goods perpetuall imprisonment by the law finall destruction to them and theirs and haply get no merite to benefite their soules if his Maiestie in clemencie excelling be much exasperated which with carefull regard ought to be looked vnto because Qui nimium emungit elicet sanguinem He that straineth too much draweth bloud And may not his Princely Maiestie be well sayd to excell in mercie and clemencie who first with speede vpon the discouery of the Gun-powder treason set forth his Proclamation worthy neuer to be forgottē therby to stay the furie of the people readie doubtlesse at that time to haue murthered all that should beare the name of Catholike without respecting who were innocēt or who were nocent after himselfe Suetonius in Augusto as Augustus Caesar in person pleaded for the life of a souldier by his pen interpreting the Oath of allegiāce pleaded as it were to giue satisfactiō of his Royall meaning intent of the law for such as he needed not so farre to condescend vnto This rare worthy example of our most learned most prudent Prince I must needes say was to me the least among many others a very vrgent motiue to aduenture this spirituall combat of defending according to my power the Oath of allegiance Cic. lib. 1. Offic. Studiosè saith Cicero plerique facta Principum imitantur Many follow diligently the facts or examples of Princes And if you reade the booke of the Iudges you shal see what encouragement the example of Gedeon then Iudge of the Israelites gaue vnto his small armie consisting but of 300 souldiers against the Madianites their enemies in number almost infinite Iudic. 7. Quod me videritis facere said this great Captaine hoc facite ingrediar partem castrorum quod fecero sectamini What you shall see me do do you the same I will enter into a part of the army and what I shall do that do you follow which they did and obtained a happie victory To whom can I better liken our mightie Monarch king Iames then to that worthy Gedeon To me he seemeth likewise in effect to say vnto his subiects What you see me do do ye the same as I haue begun to write so follow my example endeuoring by pen to defend my right which is all I require by the Oath Who admireth not the profound wisdome and great pietie of his Maiestie that he foreseeing the fatall and wilfull fall of diuers of his beloued subiects by reason of the Popes Breues prohibiting the Oath of allegiance would be pleased for them their good to retire himselfe from his princely recreations to painefull labor both with mind and body and to be the first that with his pen writ a learned Apologie for the Oath Wherein for satisfaction of the perplexed consciences of some of his subiects his Highnesse imitating our Blessed Sauiour 1. Tim. 4. qui vult omnes saluos fieri neminem vult perire who is willing all should be safe will haue none to perish interpreted his meaning to be not to derogate from the Popes spiritual authoritie but to require his subiects to performe their loyalty naturall obedience onely in temporals which is due by the law of God nature therby to draw all to his loue and their owne safety Vouchsafe then beloued reader to spend some idle and vacant time to peruse this short Treatise written by thy welwiller for thy behoofe to confirme thee if thou take the Oath or to perswade thee if thou fearest it to be vnlawfull the time thou spendest herein may counteruaile thy paines Doubt nothing if thou be Catholike he is a Catholike priest that writeth and teacheth thee herein Catholike doctrine if thou be none yet giue this booke the reading assuring thy selfe this Author to be likewise a good loyall subiect and as such he purposeth to liue and die Feare God honor the King and in charitie pray for me thy hearty welwiller Thine euer in Christ Iesus WILLIAM WARMINGTON Priest A Table of the principall points contained in this Treatise THe most barbarous conspiracie of certaine Catholickes cause of the Oath of Allegiance Pag. 1. No wisedome to prouoke a clement Prince to wrath Pag. 2. Many miseries fall yea on innocent persons when a Prince exasperated punisheth in ire Pag. 3. Our King peerlesse for clemencie in the Gun-powder treason Pag. 5. The end why the Oath was made Pag. 7. Great reason for naming the Pope in the Oath Ibid. Samuel at Gods appointment annointed Saul King but did not nor could depose him Pag. 9. The obiection of Ioiada the high priests deposing Queene Athalia answered Pag. 13. Whether the Church or the Pope may iustly depose Kings Ibid. Pag. 87. Popes haue their temporall states not by Christ but by the grants of secular Princes Pag. 15. The Canonists opinion of the Popes deposing Princes Pag. 17. The opinion of certaine Diuines touching the same point Pag. 18. To depose Princes is no matter of faith Pag. 21. 22. Not defined in the Councell of Lateran that the Pope hath power to depose Princes Pag. 22. The decree of that Councell Pag. 24. Cardinal Bellarmines assertion of this Councels definition refelled Pag. 26. Heretickes are to be punished temporally by the ciuill magistrate not by the Ecclesiasticall Pag. 32. The Constitution of Fredericke the Emperour Pag. 34. Frederickes law for the punishment of heretickes toucheth not Kings Pag. 35. The Chapter of the Councell of Lateran supposed a decree yet is not de fide Pag. 36. How you may know a decree to be de fide Ibid. The Breues of Pope Paul 5. are no definitions ex cathedra Pag. 37. Whether the Pope alone may define matters of faith Pag. 38. No sinne not to obey the Popes priuate assertion or opinion in matters vndetermined by the Church Pag. 39. That the Pope not only in matters of fact but also in faith he alone without a Councell may erre as some affirme Pag. 42. Whether Priests or Laicks are bound
in this point towards his liege Lord and secular Prince If it must be granted that Christians by the law of God are strictly bound to obey all iust determinatiue sentences and decrees that proceed from the Sea Apostolicke being the highest spirituall tribunall in Gods Church why must it not likewise be granted that subiects as wel Clercks as laicks are by the same law no lesse boūd in foro cōscientiae to be obedient to the King and his iust lawes the chiefest tribunall in the common wealth This I thinke no Christian wil deny as being most cleare and euident in holy Scriptures taught and practised by all ancient Fathers and holy Saints I confesse you will say that humane iust lawes haue their efficacie of binding all subiects to obey in the Court of conscience Tho. 1.2 q. 96. ar 4. from the eternall law of God of which they are deriued according to that of Salomon Per me Reges regnant Prou. 8 legum conditores iusta decernunt By me saith God Kings do reigne and Law-makers decree iust things But whether this law of the Oath which you aime at be such some make doubt for that Cardinall Bellarmine in Tortus and father Parsons in his Catholicke letter affirme many things to be contained therein against the spirituall primacie of the chiefe Pastor and his authoritie of binding and loosing and concerning the limitation to vse father Parsons owne words of his Holinesse authoritie to wit what he cannot do towards his Maiestie or his successors in anie case whatsoeuer Moreouer besides promise of ciuill and temporall obedience in the Oath other things are interlaced and mixt therewith which do detract from the spirituall authoritie of the highest Pastor at least wise indierectly saith he Therfore this law is iniust as being preiudiciall to the law of God and holy Church Some I know will be carping at me for affirming father Parsons to be the author of that Catholicke letter who being ashamed as may be thought of the slender and insufficient clearing the important matter of the Oath by foure seuerall and distinct waies according to his promise denie that euer he wrote the same But will they nill they it is so well knowne to be his and was to the Inquisition in Rome if I haue not bene misinformed and by a verie credible person that heard it from a gentleman present in the citie in his life time and at his death that he could not denie it and vpon the acknowledgement thereof whether with sorrow and griefe for some points vnaduisedlie or erroneously written and brought in question in his old age or somewhat else in some other booke of his against Doctor Morton touching the lawfulnesse of the Oath of Supremacie in some case I cannot say soone after fell sicke and died within eight daies But to returne to our matter Then lawes are said to be iust Tho. 1.2 q. 96.24 first when they are made for the common good secondly when they exceede not his power that maketh them and thirdly when they haue their due forme to wit when the burdens or penalties are imposed on the subiects with a certain equalitie of proportion in order to the common good or vtilitie of the weale publicke as S. Thomas noteth Such is this law of the Oath of allegiance made by full authoritie in Parliament for the conseruation of his Maiestie and whole commonwealth in tranquillitie and peace Tho. 22. q. 67.2.4 Innoc. 3. cap. Per venerabilem Extra Qui filij sint legitimi which is both priuate and common good When I say full authoritie I meane in temporals for so the Prince hath and onely in temporals in the common wealth no lesse thē the Pope in spirituals in the patrimonie of the Church Which law was generaly enacted for all English subiects though principally intended as a distinctiue signe to detect not Catholickes from Protestants nor such as denie the Kings spirituall supremacie in causes Ecclesiasticall from the Popes spirituall primacy as Cardinall Bellarmine in Tortus affirmeth but turbulent spirited Catholickes and these to represse from milde and dutifully affected subiects of the same religion such as disliking haply in words that most horrible conspiracy of Gunpowder King-slaying would in heart haue applauded the euent from those who in affliction for their conscience with patient perseuerance to the end how long soeuer God permit it to continue for our sinnes will in word and deede loue their enemies beare wrongs without murmuring and sincerely pray for the conuersion of their persecutors if they haue any following the example and doctrine of our blessed Sauiour and his holy Apostles That our dread Soueraigne in setting forth this Oath by Act of Parliament hath not exceeded the limites of his power is manifest in that it was framed onely for this end that his Maiesties subiects should thereby make cleare profession of their resolution Praefat monit Apolog. Reg. to vse his Maiesties owne words faithfully to persist in his Maiesties obediēce according to their naturall allegiance And so farre was his intent by the same Oath to detract from the Primacy or spirituall authority of the Pope of binding or loosing by Ecclesiasticall censures or sacraments as the Cardinall and father Parsons affirme that his Maiestie as it were by a most prudent preuention Praefat. monit to take away all scruples that might arise in Catholicke subiects consciences tooke speciall care that that clause inserted by the lower House into the Oath which detracted from the Popes spirituall authority of excommunicating his Maiestie should be forthwith put out And withall declared that the vertue or force of this Oath was no other then that the Popes excommunication might not minister a iust and lawfull cause vnto his subiects to attempt any thing by open or priuie conspiracies against his Maiestie or state What more I pray you could he haue done for clearing this controuersie and satisfying his subiects If then it be so that nothing is contained in this Oath but what appertaineth to naturall allegiance nor more by his Maiestie required then profession of ciuill and temporall obedience which nature prescribeth to all borne subiects as his Maiestie the interpreter of his owne law hath most sufficiently in his Premonition and Apologie made knowne to all by his pen nor that he intended by interlacing or mingling any thing to detract from the spirituall authoritie of the Pope no not indirectly nor against the law of God as is likewise manifest none can iustly say he hath exceeded his limits or that the law is vniust And wheras the Catholick letter hath That there are some things but specifying none of those some concerning the limitation of his Holinesse authoritie if he meane spirituall it is vntrue to wit what he cannot do towards his Maiestie or his successours in any case whatsoeuer That is a glosse of his owne inuention beside the text a notorious vntruth for there are no such words to be found in the
taken without deniall of their faith neuer shewing them any particular point which it is for to say truth they cannot So then their bare word must be beleeued as an oracle or else in fine with a bat they will beate men downe The Popes commandement not hauing ought else to say which may conuince It may be admired they make no more conscience in such an important businesse as this is not hauing the Churches definition nor ancient Fathers approbations for their assertions After all some burst forth in most vncharitable railing slanderous backbitings against such priests as in conscience haue performed their dutie in taking it and persist in teaching the lawfulnesse thereof withdrawing friends and charitable almes from them counselling some and commanding others not to resort vnto them as I haue bene credibly told by some that haue themselues bene forbidden and much more such like dealings which shall not be here rehearsed Ignosce illis Deus quia nesciunt quid faciunt These ought not to be the proceedings neither of good subiects nor of discreete guides of mens soules or true disciples of Christ who are made knowne to all by a notorious cognisance commonly called loue or charity giuen by our Sauiour Christ In hoc cognoscent omnes quia discipuli mei estis Ioan. 13. si dilectioneÌ„ habueritis Adinuicem In this all men shal know that you are my disciples if you haue loue one to another Which badge were to be wished more visible then it is in some that pretend to be true followers of Christ Now to the authoritie of S. Paul may be answered that an hereticke so taken condemned and denounced by the Church is to be auoided in his heresie to be taken heed of that he be not seduced by him haeresis enim serpit vt cancer for heresie creepeth as a canker and in humane conuersation also when there is hope to reduce him thereby to a better mind Vt spiritus saluus sit But as no Catholike is by the lawes of this realme to be accompted a Recusant till he be conuicted so is none by the lawes of the Church to be reputed an hereticke to be auoided till he be by her admonished condemned and denounced for such which is neuer without pertinacie in heresie And what maketh this for them that say we denie the Popes authoritie God forbid that I by his grace a Catholicke priest should euer denie the Popes spirituall power to excommunicate any Prince or people that were once incorporated into the body mysticall of Christ by Baptisme but as I haue denied excommunication of her owne nature to extend to deposition and taking away of temporals so I may not grant that euery excommunicate person is to be abandoned of all and debarred of all humane society and conuersation Though humane communication esteemed one of the common goods is found also among the faithfull as to eate together to salute to talke negotiate and such like yet this sort of communication belongeth not to them properly as they are Christians and members of the Church but as they are citizens parts of the body politick And as they are such they are bound to adhere vnto the head of this body their Prince not to forsake but obey him in all iust ciuill causes notwithstanding any sentence of excommunicatioÌ„ as hath bene proued before out of Syluester Panormitan others which is not to deny the Popes power No if you reade Tortus and beleeue him I know you wil change your opinion for vpon those words That the Pope neither of himselfe nor by any authority of the Church or Sea of Rome hath any power or authority to depose the king c. or to discharge any of his subiects of their allegiance and obedience to his Maiestie c. He writeth thus Torâ—us par 3. Here it is manifestly seene that this Oath doth not containe onely ciuill obedience in things meerely temporall as the Authour of the Apologie our Soueraigne so oft hath repeated but it containeth also a denyall of the Popes power which is not a thing meerely temporall but a holy thing and giuen from aboue which no mortall man can take away or diminish It is strange that his Maiesties oft repetition of a truth nothing to be contained in the Oath or required but ciuil obedience seemeth irkesome to the Cardinal it being very necessary wheÌ„ men will not vnderstand but his Grace goeth not about to disproue it And who I pray you is a better interpreter of a law when doubts or difficulties arise then he that made the law If it containes a deniall of the Popes power his Grace should haue done well to haue proued it and shewed wherein Though the Cardinall for many respects ought of me somtime not vnknown vnto him highly to be reuerenced and his writings credited yet in this matter to me most cleare I must craue pardon if I differ from him in opinion and write otherwise not being able after study and diligent search of this matter to see it so manifest as his Grace wold make his reader beleeue It is most manifest the ancient Fathers neuer taught so viz. to be in the Popes power to depose Kings nor discharge subiects of their loyaltie and dutifull obedience the Church neuer yet defined it so can I then be so credulous to beleeue his bare word without better proofe His ipse dixit in this will not be sufficient The other florish to leade away a simple and inconsiderate reader forsooth that the Popes power is spirituall a holy thing from heauen c. is somewhat vainely and to no purpose inserted for no Catholicke denieth it and we that haue taken the Oath of allegiance are readie with Gods grace if need were to shed our bloud in defence therof and euerie point of Catholicke faith albeit we suffer disgraces and neuer receiued temporall benefite nor euer tooke oath vsque ad effusionem sanguinis inclusiuè so to do as the most illustrous and most reuerend purple Fathers are accustomed to take when in publicke consistory they receiue their hats The Cardinall in Tortus goeth on further to prooue by subsequent words in the Oath that the Popes spirituall power is denied Parag. 4. which were enough to terrifie Christian subiects if it were true The words are these Also I do sweare from my heart that notwithstanding any declaration or sentence of excommunication or depriuation made or granted or to be made or granted by the Pope or his successors or by any authoritie deriued or pretended to be deriued from him or his Sea against the said King his heires or successours or any absolution of the said subiects from their obedience I will beare faith and true allegiance to his Maiestie his heires and successors Here saith the Card. is openly denyed that the Pope hath power to excommunicate Kings though they be heretikes Note his proofe For how saith he can a Catholicke lawfully and iustly sweare that he will
disturbance of him or his people c. This they so vertuous and learned did with their Prince without resistance as knowing it to be their dutie so to do and his case to be farre different from that of our Soueraigne who was neuer excommunicated nor relapsed or indeede hereticke as I haue alreadie said and could more largely proue if need were yet they did not then nor euer will denie the Popes spirituall power to excommunicate And may not the King of great Brittaine require the like of his subiects both Clergie and people and they performe the same as well as the French without preiudicating the Apostolicall power When Monsignore Fontana Bishop of Ferrara knowing well the now Duke of Modina then vsurping the title and dominion of Ferrara to be excommunicated by name in most parts of Italie did notwithstanding of necessitie communicate with him as a subiect with his Prince and did refuse to publish it in his owne Church without the Dukes consent notwithstanding the Popes order and commandement vnto him Will any man say that this good Bishop denied the Popes spirituall power to excommunicate That were ridiculous or offended in disobedience No necessitie if nought else excused So enough of this matter There is another knot to be vntied which seemeth insoluble to wit that I do beleeue that neither the Pope nor any person whatsoeuer hath power to absolue me of this Oath or any part thereof c. And that I doe renounce all pardons dispensations to the contrary Is not this a plaine denying of the Popes spirituall authoritie Cardinall Bellarmine in Tortus plainly teacheth me Tortus §. 5. that he who a little before by swearing denieth the Popes power to bind the same doth now denie his power to loose For of those words of our Lord Quodcunque solueris super terram erit solutum in coelis all Catholicke men gather that power belongeth to the chiefe Bishop to absolue not onely from sins but also from punishments censures lawes vowes and oathes when it may be expedient to the glorie of God and health of soules This knot to him that vieweth it well will not be found to haue more difficultie to vnknit then the former of binding For as it is an vndoubted veritie that no Bishop no nor the Pope can by vertue of excommunication lesse by any temporall power out of his owne territories thrust any priuate Christian man out of his possessions who before had right thereto and bereaue him thereof as hath bene proued so it is as certaine that they can no more absolue a subiect of his dutie and naturall allegiance to his Prince and of his oath of fealtie made vnto him discharging him of all subiection and obedience then they can a wife of her dutie to her husband of childrens honoring their parents or seruants their maisters being warranted for the performance thereof by the law of God Honour thy father and thy mother c. against which no power in earth can dispence nor absolue them that is release them of such dutie At this word Absolue some silly soules yea and others that would be accounted wise are as it were scandalized beleeuing that taking the Oath they shall denie the Popes spirituall power of absoluing a sinner of his sinnes in foro conscientiae which euery Priest hauing iurisdiction may do little considering that they are not like to confesse their sinnes to him this yeare or euer in their life and out of confession his authoritie stretcheth not to remit or absolue one from deadly sinne These in a sort resemble some good creatures that I haue noted in Italie when they heare the Preacher in his sermon vtter this word Confiteor will by and by knocke their breasts thinking he is talking of confession when as the word signifieth sometime to giue thankes And like people of small vnderstanding beleeue that by renouncing all pardons and dispensations to the contrary they must denie the Popes power of granting indulgences or pardons as the practise is to beades graines crosses c. and of dispensing in any case whatsoeuer it being spirituall as cannot be denied Here I stand ambiguous Prou. 26. whether I should follow Salomons counsell or no Responde stulto iuxta stultitiam suam ne sibi sapiens esse videatur Answer a foole according to his folly lest he thinke himselfe wise It shall not be haply amisse for their more satisfaction to condescend somewhat vnto such letting them to vnderstand that to men of any iudgement it must needs be ridiculous who know it cannot nor ought so to be vnderstood but onely of pardoning and dispencing or releasing subiects of a lawfull Oath of fealtie and dutifull obedience to their Soueraigne This is not spirituall power which belongeth to the Church and therefore when such pardons and dispensations shall be offered by his Holines as is neuer like to be euery good subiect is bound to renounce them as being contrary to the ordinance of almightie God I aske these what they thinke whether the Pope or any power in earth can command absolue in this sence as we take it or dispence against the law of God and nature They must needs say as truth is he cannot and according to S. Thomas doctrine In his quaesunt de lege naturae 2.2 q. 88. ar 10. in praeceptis diuinis non potest per hominem dispensari In such things as are of the law of nature and in diuine precepts it cannot be dispensed withall by man Then I inferre and it is Barclaies argument not solued by Cardinall Bellarmine But subiection and obedience due to Princes and superiors is de iure naturali diuino this cannot be denied being euident in Scriptures Therefore neither the Pope nor any power in earth can command any thing absolue or dispense against it and consequently cannot command subiects not to performe obedience to their Prince or superior in that wherein he is superior if he should it is lawfull for them not to obey him not to accept of such a dispensation We grant with the Cardinall that it appertaineth to the Popes spirituall power to absoblue from sins also from paines and censures lawes vowes and oathes verumt amen non quidquid libet licet it is not meant in all lawes all vowes nor all oathes No man I thinke will say that he can absolue from the iust ciuill lawes of secular Princes for that were in alienam messem falcem mittere and to be a monarchicall superior in temporals which is not to be admitted but onely in his owne lawes and the Canons Decrees or positiue lawes of the Church wherein I confesse he hath plenitudinem potestatis as likewise Princes haue in the commonwealth and thereby may dispense in their owne lawes as S. Thomas teacheth 2.2 q. 6.7 ar 4. Princeps habet plenariam potestatem in republica 1.2 q. 96. a. 5. ad 3. Who according to the same in another place is said to be
other kings of Iuda who were much more wicked then Saul was and on impious Ieroboam that led with him all Israel to Idolatrie Achab Ochozias Ioachaz and the rest of the kings of Israel who exceeded in all kind of impietie in whose dayes florished Ahias Semeias Elias Eliseus Isaias Ieremy and other great Prophets indued with maruellous courage zeale authoritie and sanctitie of life yet none went about to depose or take the crowne from the head of any Prince lawfully inuested though he were neuer so wicked knowing right well that whatsoeuer they wrought with Princes about the ouerthrow of some or setting vp of others or foretold what was to happen vnto them it was not by any ordinarie power that they had but extraordinary by speciall commandement and reuelation from Almightie God Now by this fact of Samuel it may well be deduced that whensoeuer the Pope gouernour of Gods house shall haue speciall reuelation from aboue as Samuel had that such a particular king is to be deposed and another placed in his roome thē it cannot be denied but he may do as Samuel did that is as I haue said he may and ought to declare the will of God reuealed vnto him without any concurrence to the execution thereof onely denouncing Gods sentence of deiection or deposition of such a Prince when he knoweth certainly that so is the will and pleasure of our Lord whose will none may contradict Voluntati eius quis resistit Who is able to resist his will nor is any to expostulate why he doth so And if such a thing should euer happen then were the argument good and sound otherwise weake and of no force If any man after this obiect vnto me that Athalia was deposed and slaine by the commandement of Ioiada the high Priest when she had reigned seuen yeares therefore it seemeth he had authoritie frō God so to do and if he had why should not the Pope haue the like ouer exorbitant Princes For solution hereof I referre him to the place of holy Scripture where he may see with halfe an eye 4. Reg. 11. that Athalia was no lawfull Queene but an vsurping tyrant who had murthered all the kingly race and so intruded her selfe most vniustly Whereupon Ioiada high Priest brought forth and presented to the people Ioas sonne to Ochozias who was strangely preserued by meanes of his Aunt Iosaba when he was but an infant from that tyrannous slaughter made by his Grandmother Athalia and together with their full consents performing the dutie of a good subiect restored the true heire to the right of his kingdome which could hardly haue bene effected without the high Priests assistance who was the chiefest in matters of religion and therefore much honoured and respected of the people So this fact of Ioiada proueth nothing but that it is lawfull for a state or commonwealth to depose an vsurper and restore the true heire to his right and not that he had any authoritie to depose any lawfull Prince were he otherwise neuer so exorbitant in life manners and beleefe or cruell in his gouernment Well Sir though this be granted that neither the Synagogue of the Iewes nor Samuel the Prophet nor Ioiada the high Priest had authoritie to depose Princes and dispose of their temporals yet can we not be perswaded but that the Church of Christ and his Vicar in earth the Pope whose power is not limited to one sort of people as it was in the old law but is extended ouer all Christians as well Princes as people throughout the world may iustly depose kings and dispose of their kingdomes when he shall iudge it expedient to the glory of God and vtilitie of the Church And the rather because this hath bene practised by diuerse precedent Popes vpon certaine Princes in these latter ages for crimes adiudged by them to deserue the same which we suppose they would neuer haue enterprised had they not sufficient warrant out of holy Scriptures or examples of the Apostles and ancient Bishops of Gods Church or else authoritie from the holy Ghost by a definitiue sentence in some generall Councell We pray you touch this point so as you may resolue vs throughly whether they haue all or some of these proofes for that authoritie if they haue not then is it cleare in our opinions not to be de fide and if it be not a point of faith binding all to beleeue that his Holines hath such authoritie we see no reason why vpon his bare commandement we should so deepely plunge our selues into a sea of calamities as of necessitie we must by losing all lands and goods whatsoeuer we haue to the vtter vndoing of our selues wiues and children and hazarding our liues by perpetuall imprisonment for refusing to performe our dutie to our Soueraigne by taking the Oath of allegiance wherein we sweare fealtie and ciuill obedience which is due by the law of God and nature Reddite quae sunt Caesaris Caesari quae Dei Deo Render saith our Sauiour to Caesar that which is Caesars and to God that which is Gods Besides if we refuse it we shall not take away but greatly increase the heauie imputation of treason and treacherie which our aduersaries haue this long time layd on Catholickes and confirme them in this their wrong opinion that to be a true Catholicke of the Romane Church and a good subiect cannot stand and agree together Beloued brethren lest any man be scandalized at this my writing iudging it not to sauour of a true Catholick heart nor of an obedient child of the Apostolicke Church but rather to proceed from an euill affected minde fraught with passion accept for a premunition and I wish I may not be mistaken * that sincerely and without spleene or passion I intend to set downe nothing but what I shall thinke in my opinion to be truth and that I honour and reuerence with heart and mind the holy Catholicke Church of Rome acknowledging and stedfastly beleeuing with the holy Fathers that to be the mother of Churches the Sea of Peter the rocke against which hell gates shall not preuaile the house of God out of which who eateth the Lambe is profane and out of which no saluation is to be hoped for as the great D. S. Augustine and others do teach vs In serm super gestis Emer Donat. and elsewhere Hieron ep ad Dam. Amb. 1. Tim. 3. Athan. ep ad Felicem and that the Pope is the chiefe Bishop and Pastor thereof Christs Vicar in earth and successor to S. Peter prince of the Apostles who by his spirituall power giuen by Christ our Lord hath iurisdiction ouer all Christian Princes and monarchs as well as poore men so farre as is requisite to the conuersion and feeding of soules But I cannot easily be induced to beleeue that this power giuen him by Christ in S. Peter extendeth it selfe to the depriuation or deposition of secular Princes of their dominions or to the deposing
And may expose his land to be occupied by Catholickes Is not this trow ye the groundworke of the Cardinals bulwarke for the Apostolicall authoritie of deposing Princes and disposing of their temporals It seemeth yes in his answer to D. Barclai howbeit his Grace bringeth nothing to proue such power to be in the Pope Supra pag. 54 but onely saith that you wote not what is the voice of the Catholicke Church and he that contemneth to heare her is no way to be accounted a Christian but as a heathen and Publican What words here in the name of God import a definition The Councell as you may see vseth none of these words to make a decree de fide ordinamus statuimus definimus we ordaine decree define the Pope to haue authoritie to depose nor anathema qui hoc non credit anathema to him that beleeueth not this nor yet Haec est fides Catholica This is the Catholicke faith but onely saith That if the temporall Lord admonished by the Church shal neglect to purge his countrey from heresie he is to be excommunicated by the Metropolitan and if he contemne to make satisfaction within a yeare it is to be signified to the Pope that he may expose his land which is not to depose authoritatiuè to be occupied by Catholickes crucem praedicando that is to giue indulgences or pardons to such as shall voluntarily take armes and aduenture their liues to fight against heretickes and as he is accustomed in like sort to grant to all Christians that shall arme themselues and labour to expell the Turks or Saracens out of the countries they vsurpe vpon or the holy land as will appeare plainly to him that readeth this Canon of the Councell For it followeth immediatly Catholici vero qui crucis assumpto charactere ad haereticorum exterminium se accinxerint illa gaudeant indulgentia illoque priuilegio sint muniti quod accedentibus in terrae sanctae subsidium conceditur And let the Catholickes who hauing taken the signe of the crosse shall addresse themselues to the rooting out of heretickes enioy the same indulgence and be armed with the same priuiledge which is granted to such as prepare themselues to the recouery of the holy land Hereby euery man may see that in this wise to expose a country by such priuiledges and pardons to Prince or people who either vpon zeale of dying Martyrs as they thinke or rather couetous desire to enlarge their dominions and to enrich themselues with others spoiles are ready to take such an occasion and to runne before they be sent is nothing to this purpose for deposing a lawfull Prince by any authority giuen the Pope by our Sauiour Christ in S. Peter or by the holy Ghost in a generall Councell You will say vnto me Are not heretickes being obstinate vpon contempt of the Churches sword of excommunication to be punished temporally by depriuation and confiscation of their goods yea and by death too Yes But by whom Not by any decree of Pope or Councell but by the wholesome lawes of Emperors and Kings for the Church that is the Pastors therof after excommunication Tho. 2.2 q. 11. ar 3. quia non habet vltra quod agat because she can proceed no further is accustomed to deliuer ouer obstinate heretickes and such as she condemneth to the secular magistrate to be punished temporally whose right it is Costerus in fidei demonst propo 3. c. 12. Con. Constan sess 21 as Costerus writeth which is also manifest in the Councell of Constance in the punishment of Hierome of Prage and Iohn Husse who being declared to be heretickes excommunicated and condemned were forthwith deliuered ouer to the secular power to be punished by death Romanae Ecclesiae consuetudo saith Costerus loco citato in puniendis haereticis talis est c. The custome of the Church of Rome in punishing heretickes is after this manner After they are apprehended by the ciuill or ecclesiasticall magistrate first they are examined by learned ecclesiastical men whether they be indeed heretickes which being found they are instructed in the right faith c. Then saith he if they remain obstinate ab Ecclesiae gremio vt putrida mēbra excōmunicationis gladio resecantur qui secundùm legum Regumque decreta prout fas est in eos animaduertant Nulli enim competit Ecclesiastico vel sanguinem fundere vel capitis quenquam condemnare They are cut off with the sword of excommunication as rotten members from the lap of the Church and are deliuered to the ciuill magistrate to be punished who according to the decrees of lawes and Kings may punish them as reason is For it is not meete for any Ecclesiasticall person either to shed blood or to condemne any to death In the generall Councell of Constance was pronounced a definitiue sentence against Iohn Husse wherein for his pertinacie in heresie as that Councell tooke it Molanus de fide haeret ser l. 2. c. 2. his degradation was committed to sixe Bishops as writeth Molanus out of Cochlaeus and his execution to the secular power Haec sancta Synodus Ioannem Husse attento quòd Ecclesia Dei non habeat vltra quod agere valeat iudicio saeculari relinquere Can. corripiantur 24. q. 3. ipsum curiae saeculari relinquendum fore decernit This holy Synode decreeth considering that the Church of God can proceed no further to wit then to excommunicate and other spirituall punishments to leaue Iohn Husse to secular iudgement and that he ought to be left to the secular Court Hence saith Molanus it is euident with what small consideration some write that Iohn Husse was burnt vpon the sentence of the Councell of Constance when as it was left to secular iudgement Taken out of Cochlaeus lib. 2. ex Hussita Now let it be demanded why heretikes noble or ignoble haue not bene and yet are to be depriued of their temporals and punished by death by vertue of that decree of Pope Innocentitus in the Councell of Lateran but rather by the decree of Fredericke the second Emperour which he made being solicited thereto by the Pope anone after that Councell at Padua 22. Februarij indict 12. against certaine heretikes called Patareni if that of the Pope or Councell were to bind and be of force If the first were obligatorie what needed the secōd of like forme to be made The Emperor might wel haue spared his labour if that former had bene deemed sufficient And this is certaine and a sufficient proofe of the insufficiencie thereof that the subsequent Popes Direct inquisit lit Apost p. 13. 17. 51. Innocentius 4. Alexander 4. and Clements 4. would haue their Iudges to punish and proceed against heretikes by vertue of that constitution of Fredericke and not by the chapter of Lateran which they would neuer haue done by Caesars law and not their owne had they not knowne that Caesars law in that behalfe was of greater force
and much more moment then their owne And lest you should hauing perchance neuer seene this imperiall Decree doubt thereof I haue thought good to set it downe at large which is this Statuimus etiam hoc edicto in perpetuum valituro Constit Fred. Imper. cont Patarenos vt Potestates Consules seu Rectores quibuscunque fungantur officijs defensione fidei praestent publicū iuramentum quòd de terris suae ditioni subiectis vniuersos haereticos ab Ecclesia denotatos bona fide pro viribus exterminare studebunt ita quod amodo quandocunque quis fuerit in perpetuam potestatem vel temporalem assumptus hoc teneatur capitulum iuramento firmare alioquin neque pro Potestatibus neque pro Consulibus seu consimilibus habeantur eorumque sententias ex tunc decernimus inutiles inanes Si vero Dominus tēporalis requisitus monitus ab Ecclesia terram suam purgare neglexerit ab haeretica prauitate post annum à tempore monitionis elapsum terrans ipsius exponimus Catholicis occupandum qui eam exterminatis haereticis abque vlla contradictione possideant in fidei puritate conseruent saluo iure Domini temporalis dummodo super hoc nullum praestet obstaculum nec aliquod impedimentum apponat eadē nihilominus lege seruata contra eos qui non habent Dominos temporales c. Datum Paduae 22. Februarij indictione 12. In English thus We decree also by this edict for euer to be of force that Potestates and Consuls or Rectors what offices soeuer they beare for defence of faith take a publike oath that they shall seriously endeuour what in them lieth to roote out all heretikes noted by the Church out of the countries subiect to their gouernment so that from hencefoorth whensoeuer any shall be assumpted to a Potestacie for euer or for a time let him be bound to confirme this chapter by oath otherwise let them not be esteemed for Potestates or for Consuls or such like and their sentences we decree forthwith to be vnprofitable and of no force And if the temporall Lord required and admonished by the Church shall neglect to purge his countrie from hereticall prauitie after a yeare expired from the time of the admonition we expose his countrie to be occupied by Catholikes who when the heretikes are rooted out may possesse it without any contradiction and maintaine it in the puritie of faith the right of the principall Lord being reserued so that vpon this he bring no obstacle nor procure any impediment the same law notwithstanding being obserued against them that haue not principall Lords c. Giuen at Padua 22. of Februarie indiction 12. Now can any man perceiue by this imperiall law procured and vsed by the Church in the punishment of heretikes that kings are bound to take the oath therein specified or that it is meant their countries should be giuen from them if after the Churches admonition they yet remaine negligent in extirpating heretikes Nothing lesse First because kings are not named or mentioned which is requisite but Potestates as are in Italie Consuls and Rectors or Gouernours of prouinces such as are inferiors or subiect to the Emperour or kings therefore they are not comprised in the law Nor secondly can they be comprised therein though perchance you will say that by the latter clause it is meant also by kings and all other absolute Princes who haue no dependance of the Emperour for that they are not bound to the keeping of the law being penall L. Princeps D de legibus Princeps enim solutus est legibus For the Prince is freed from lawes That is as the Grecians vnderstand frō the penalty of lawes Thirdly the Emperor being no superior to absolute kings cannot constraine them by any law ciuill nor punish them L. non magistratus D. de recep Qui arbi For Par in parem non habet imperium multo minus inferior in superiorem A peere or equall hath not dominion ouer his equall much lesse an inferiour ouer his superiour as subiects ouer their lawfull Prince Now if the Emperour or any other Peere may by vertue of that law depriue an absolute king of his kingdome and confiscate whatsoeuer he hath which are grieuous punishments then is he subiect to penall lawes and to be corrected not onely by his peeres but also by inferiors and his owne subiects which is absurd Tert. ad Scapulā Praesid Carthag Amb. in li. Qui inscrib Apol. Dauid and against the authorities abouesaid and iudgement of ancient Fathers Tertullian Ambrose Gregorius Turonensis and others who write that a king is inferiour but to God alone that is in temporals that they are not to be punished by penall lawes being defended with the power of their empire Greg. l. 5 hist c 7. if thou speaking of a king dost offēd who shall correct thee who shal cōdemn thee but he that hath pronoūced himselfe to be Iustice This being so then cannot that law of the Emperor take hold on kings nor punish thē temporally But supposing that chapter of the Councell whereof we spake before or rather of Innocentius in the Councell were a decree what then doth it follow infallibly that it is de fide No. The most reuerend Cardinall Bellarmine will tell you Bella l. 2. Concap 12. that in Councels the greatest part of the acts appertaine not to faith as disputations reasons explications c. Sed tantum ipsa nuda decreta ea non omnia sed tantùm quae proponuntur tanquam de fide That is But onely the verie bare decrees and not all those neither but onely such as are proposed as of faith For sometime saith he Councels do define somewhat not as certaine but as probable as the Councell of Vienna which decreed to be holden as the more probable that grace and vertues are infused to infants in Baptisme as is Clement vnica de summa Trinit fide Cath. Why then Sir how shal I know when a decree is of faith and when it is not Cardinall Bellarmine in the place aboue noted will put you out of doubt thereof Quando autem decretum proponatur tanquam de side facilè cognoscitur ex verbis Concilij semper enim dicere solent se explicare fidem Catholicam vel haereticos habendos qui contrariū sentiunt c. Whē a decree is proposed as of faith it is easily knowne by the words of the Councel for they are alway accustomed to say that they explicate the Catholike faith or they are to be held for heretikes that think the contrarie or which is most vsuall they say Anathema and exclude out of the Church those that are of contrary opinion And when they haue none of these it is not certaine that the matter is of faith This he By which you learne may secure your conscience that the doctrine of depositiō of Princes either directly or indirectly ordinarily or
person should not erre but to Peter together with the Apostles assembled at his sermon before his passion who represented the whole body of the Church as appeareth by the words of our Sauiour in Saint Iohns Gospell Paraclitus autem Spiritus sanctus Iohn 14. c. quem mittet Pater in nomine meo ille vos docebit omnia suggeret vobis omnia quaecunque dixero vobis You may note how the holy Ghost then promised and afterward sent on the day of Pentecost was promised to all and sent vnto all not to Peter alone And in the same chapter that this holy Ghost was to remain with them and be in them Apud vos manebit in vobis erit And in another place Cū autem venerit ille Spiritus veritatis Ioh. 16. docebit vos omnem veritatem And when he shall come the Spirit of truth he will teach you all truth In all these places is manifest that Christ spake alway in the plurall number that the holy Ghost the Comforter should remaine and be in his Church and should teach his Church all truth and not any one of his Apostles successors in particular This special priuiledge of not erring in matters of faith was reserued for his deare spouse the Catholike Church alone as appeareth euident likewise in Saint Matthewes Gospell Tu es Petrus Math. 16. super hanc petram aedificabo Ecclesiam meam portaeinferi non praeualebunt aduersus eam Thou art Peter and vpon this rocke I will build my Church and the gates of hell shall not preuaile against her That is the Church as Iansenius and others vnderstand it represented in a generall Councell which Church is called by Saint Paul 1. Tim. 3. Columna firmamentum veritatis The pillar and groundworke of truth Not any one man in the house of God was euer such And Alphonsus de Castro a great learned man and an earnest defender of this Church against heresies and heretikes blusheth not to write plainely that Omnis homo errare potest in fide Contr. haeres l. 1. c. 4. etsi Papa sit Euerie man may erre in faith yea the Pope himselfe without exception Yet I neuer heard that he was condemned of heresie or sinne for saying so This then being so no man of vp right iudgement can with reason censure him of heresie that shall affirme The Pope may erre in his opinion of the Oath for Haeresis est circa eaqnae sunt fidei 2.2 q. 11. ar 2 sicut circa propriam materiam 2.2 11. ar 2. as S. Thomas saith Nor of mortall sin if he refuse to obey his prohibition for taking thereof the taker not intending to contemne his commandement Tho. 22. q. 104.2.2 ad 1. ad inobedientiam enim requiritur quòd actualiter contemnat praeceptum nor to transgresse against the law of God but onely to render to Caesar that which is Caesars that is ciuill obedience due vnto him both by the law of God and nature without denying or derogating anie authoritie spirituall of the Sea Apostolicke according to his Maiesties declaration and interpretation of his owne meaning set downe at large in his Apologie and Praemonition The intention then being good the end good and iust the act of such as take it cannot be but good and lawfull and no sin at all For secundum finem morales actus species sortiuntur Tho. 2.2 q. 89 ar 5. ad 1. q. 105 2.1 And as true it is that Actus agentium non operantur vlira ipsorum voluntatem seu intentionem And this much as touching the Popes opinion or assertion in his Breues Now it remaineth to resolue the difficultie of his precept or prohibition of the Oath whether Priests and Catholickes in England be bound vnder paine of deadly sinne to obey it and so to disobey the Kings Highnesse who for his more securitie vpon so iust a cause requireth the same The cause why the Pope prohibited Catholickes to take the Oath of allegiance as it lieth may seeme to haue bene for that in his opinion he was perswaded many things to be contained therein repugnant to faith Which opinion supposed true no man indeede can take it without perill of damnation because euery Christian is bound vsque ad effusionem sanguinis inclusiue to professe and maintaine all points of faith when occasion of persecution shall be offered against heretickes Iewes Turkes or what infidels soeuer according to the doctrine of our Sauiour Math. 10. Luk. 9. Qui autem negauerit me coram hominibus negabo ego eum coram Patre meo And he that shall denie me before men I will also denie him before my Father Likewise in another place Qui non renunciat omnibus quae possidet Luk. 14. non potest meus esse discipulus And then were it malum non quia prohibitum verùm ex se to take such an oath But till it appeare more cleare and be more substantially proued then hitherto hath bene by any that some point therein contained is manifestly against faith what that point is I cannot see why any man should forthwith vpon a bare commandement though of the supreme Pastor hazard his life in perpetuall bonds with losse of all that he hath and vtter ruine of his dearest wife and children For his priuate will subiect to error can be no infallible rule of mans actions but the will of God which is alway right and hereupon a man may in case be disobeied be he Prince or Prelate but the most righteous God neuer For that the commandement of God is alway iust wherein can be no error Gen. 22. no not in willing Abraham to kill his sonne Isaac Exod. 12. Ose 1. nor in commanding the Iewes to spoile the Aegyptians of their goods nor also in bidding the Prophet Osea to commit fornication The reason hereof you may reade in S. Thomas But an earthly King Prince or Prelate See S. Tho. 22 q. 104. ar 4. yea the Prince of Prelates may and doe sometimes command iniust things or may vsurpe dominion iniustly in which cases subiects are not bound to obey them 22. q. 104. ar 6. nisi fortè per accidens as S. Thomas noteth propter vitandum scandalum vel periculum vnlesse haply accidentally for auoiding scandall or danger That some Kings and secular Princes haue vsurped domination and commanded iniustly no man I thinke will doubt and our domesticke aduersaries will easily grant but to say that the Prince of Prelates the Pope Peters successor should erre in commanding or command that which is iniust guarda la gamba take heed some nicely precise pure and rigid if not simple and foolish people audito verbo hoc scandalizabuntur no lesse then the Pharisees were scandalized at the doctrine of our blessed Sauiour as we reade in S. Mathewes Gospell Math. 15. for that they thinke of like the Pope so to be confirmed in grace that he cannot
once commit a mortall sin If they will so easily be scandalized for speaking the truth I trust I may be bold Greg. hom 7. in Ezech. Haimo in Math. c. 18. without sin to say with S. Gregorie Si de veritate scandalum sumitur vtiliùs nasci permittitur scandalum quà m quòd veritas relinquatur If scandall be taken for speaking truth it is better a scandall should be permitted to arise then truth left vntold I will relate therefore certaine true facts but not censure them which without this or such like occasion offered I euer purposed to haue concealed and referre to the readers iudgements whether they were errors in gouernment and sinnes or no. When Sixtus Quintus otherwise a prudent Prince and learned Pastor commanded a boy of fourteene yeares of age to be hanged in Rome for a fault which in many mens iudgements deserued not death but rather whipping or some such punishment and being in all humility told by the Iudge that by the ciuill lawes he was not to be executed till he came to the age of 16 he answered Then I will giue him two of my yeares Whereupon the poore lad contrarie to law ended his life in port hast in a halter Whether this were a iust sentence or iniust I will not say it seemed at his departure out of this life to be scored among his misdeeds for being in extremis one like in habit to S. Francis appeared to him who had appeared long before foretold al his fortunate risings to honor and now warned him to prepare to die for his time was come Hereat Sixtus appalled said Diddest thou not promise me that I should reigne one lustre and halfe a lustre is the space of fiue yeares Yes and now it is in maner expired he had then reigned fiue yeares foure moneths and three daies for if you remember you gaue a boy two yeares to hang him This I heard constantly reported by manie in Rome presently vpon his death But who this was that appeared S. Francis or some other transfigured in his habite it was not knowne and I leaue to the consideration of men to thinke what they list Likewise it happened that in his time a Clergie man nephew vnto old Martinus Nauarrus the great Canonist coming into S. Peters Church doubtlesse with intent to pray found standing against a pillar by our Ladies altar a pilgrims staffe wherewith he strake the Iudge of the Suitzers being on his knees at his praiers before the crucifixe altar and brake his head so as the bloud ran about his eares and fell on the pauement whereby the Church being profaned forthwith all Masses and other diuine seruice ceassed for a time I speake what I know being then oculatus testis incontinently the partie fled toward the new Church but pursued by certaine Suitzers attending on the said Iudge was apprehended and the Pope then sitting in Consistorie aduertised of the fact who commanded a ghostly father to be prouided for him religiously and well done for safetie of his soule and that he should not hope for life but prepare to die out of hand summum ius for he would not dine till the offender were hanged A hard sentence of the supreme Pastor Haste here made waste of bloud Would God he had well considered S. Ambrose his penance enioyned Theodosius the Emperour and his humble acceptation thereof viz. not to punish any malefactor to death for a moneths space after the crime committed then haply his wrath and indignation might haue bene pacified and the offenders life saued Incontinently a gallowes was set vp before the Suitzers gate and the Spanish gentleman brought to execution within three houres after the blow giuen the Pope standing in a gallerie of his pallace Consistorie being ended to see him coming as was most certainly reported vnto me then lying in the pallace by such as had reason to know it and would not be pacified or intreated for his life neither by the Spanish Ambassadour who posted to the Court to that end though in vaine for audience would not be granted nor by any other howbeit his seruant the Suitzer in short space after recouered and liued diuers yeares after that to my knowledge How 〈◊〉 these commandements were I referre to the readers iudgement and whether they sauoured not more of a passionate secular Prince then of a milde spirituall Pastor Moreouer the said Pope hauing created Cardinall the Deane of Toledo Mendoza by name a verie noble and worthie gentleman a comely and courteous Prelate and well beloued of many dealt often with the said Cardinall to resigne his Deanrie into his hands by reason of the indignitie he should be driuen into if at any time after he were to reside in his Deanrie according to order by taking inferior place in the Church to the Bishop of the Diocesse being no Cardinall which was a thing he would not consent vnto saying they were incompatibilia Deane and Cardinall in one person The Cardinall vnwilling to lose so great reuenewes by making such a resignation thought it no sinne therein not to yeeld to his Holinesse Pope Sixtus notwithstanding out of his absolute authoritie volens nolens depriued him of his Deanry bestowed it on another Spaniard who after Sixtus death plaied least in sight for feare what might befall him by some of the Cardinall his friends for accepting or seeking it And the Pope to make his donatiō valid sent Monsignore Burghesius Auditor di camera who sitteth now in Peters chaire with straight commandement vnto Cardinall Mendoza either forthwith to send the writings of his Deanrie or else to go immediatly with the said Prelate to the Castle The Cardinall hereat sore perplexed and straightned on euerie side making choice of the lesse euill chose rather quietly though much against his liking to send his writings and be depriued of his Ecclesiasticall liuing then bereaued of his temporall life in the castle of S. Angelo whence is hard getting foorth for any that shall enter therein Many hereat muttered and murmured iudging the commandement to sauour of great iniustice After this Pope Clement in the beginning of his reigne with more haste thē good speed resembling likewise rather a passionate Prince then a meek Pastor gaue order or commandement that a certain gentleman of Cardinall Farnesius apprehended on Saturday before Palmsunday should be executed the wednesday following being the feast of the Annunciation of the blessed virgine Marie and in the holy weeke against all clement Christian customes and good order which spare to execute any malefactor on such times would not hearken to any other information then that of the Gouernour the gentleman 's knowne aduersarie no not of the Cardinall who hearing thereof with all speed posted from Grotta ferrata toward his Holinesse at Rome for his seruants life albeit in vaine for he was inexorable and audience would not be granted him till the poore gentleman had lost his head whereupon the Cardinall being
de Ro. Pont. c. 3. it a quoque non esse idem Pontificatum Imperium nec vnum ab alio absolute pendere Note that euen as the Sunne and Moone are not one and the same planet and as the Sunne did not institute or appoint the Moone but God so likewise the Papacy and Impery are not one and the same nor the one do absolutely depend of the other By these two great lights Sun and Moone Cap. Solitae de maiorit obedien Pope Inocentius interpreteth to be meant two dignities which are Pontificall authority and Regall power Moreouer this distinction of these two great powers that ancient and renowmed Hosius Bishop of Corduba writing to Constantius the Arrian Emperour most manifestly sheweth L. 2. de liber Christ c. 2. whose sentence is related in an Epistle of holy Athanasius in this manner Tibi Deus imperium commisit Atha ep ad solit vitam agentes nobis quae sunt Ecclesiae concredidit quemadmodū c. To you God hath committed the Empire to vs he hath deliuered those things which belong to the Church and euen as he that with malignant eyes carpeth your Empire contradicteth the ordinance of God so do you also beware lest if you draw to you such things as belong to the Church you be made guiltie of a great crime Giue it is written Math. 22. Mar. 12. to Caesar those things which are Caesars and to God those which belong to God Therefore neither is it lawfull for vs in earth to hold the Empire nor you ô Emperour haue power ouer incense and sacred things Thus this learned Bishop and renowmed in the first Councell of Nice In cap. Inquisitioni de sen excom Hereupon Innocentius the third and Panormitan conclude that laickes are not bound to obey the Pope in those things that are not spirituall or which concerne not the soule as they speake but onely in those places which are subiect to his temporall iurisdiction That these two powers are independent of each other and the temporall not subordinate to the spirituall but since the comming of Christ separate and so distinguished by their proper acts offices and dignities that the one may not vsurpe the right and power of the other without iniurie to each other Pope Nicolas the first plainly witnesseth in his Epistle to Michael the Emperour as appeareth also in the Canon law Can cum ad verum ventū est dist 96. Barcl de potest Pap. c. 13. L. 5. de Rom. Pont. c. 3. which you may reade in D. Barclai of worthie memorie in case you can get it Which place I may not pretermit to note vnto you as it is set downe in Cardinall Bellarmine Idem mediator Dei hominum homo Christus Iesus sic actibus proprijs dignitatibus distinctis officia potestatis vtriusque discreuit c. The same Mediator of God and men the man Christ Iesus hath so seuered the offices of both powers by proper acts and distinct dignities that both Christan Emperours for eternall life should haue neede of the chiefe Bishops and the chiefe Bishops for the course of temporall things onely should vse Imperiall lawes Here saith the Cardinall the Pope speaketh not of the onely execution but of power and dignitie c. For whatsoeuer Emperours haue Pope Nicholas saith they haue it from Kings and Emperours this execution as being himselfe chiefe King and Emperour or else he cannot If he can then is he greater then Christ if he cannot then hath he not in deed Regall power This he Who in the same chapter bringeth Pope Gelasius to this purpose Duo sunt inquit Imperator Auguste Gelas ep ad Anast Imp. Decret dist 96. Can. Duo sunt quibus principaliter mundus hicregitur Authoritas sacra Pontificum Regalis potestas c. There are two things O noble Emperour whereby principally this world is gouerned the sacred authoritie of Bishops and Regall power c. Where it is to be noted saith Bellarmine that Gelasius speaketh not onely of the excution but of the verie power and authoritie lest our aduersaries say as they are accustomed that the Pope hath indeed both powers but committeth the execution to others That the ends likewise of these two powers are different the Cardinall confesseth saying that the politicall hath for her end temporall peace and the Ecclesiasticall eternall saluation And hereto agreeeth Nauarre in Relect. cap. Nouit do iudic nu 90. Nauar. By this now is apparent that these two powers their ends offices and dignities are distinct and separate from each other If then the one command any thing which appertaineth not to his power or wherein he is not superiour it is a generall rule as Cardinall Tolet noteth that such a one is not of dutie to be obeyed Tolet. de 7. peccatis mort c. 15. Vnicuique superiori saith he obediendum est ex obligatione in his tantum in quibus est superior And the inferior dischargeth well his dutie if he promptly obey in those things wherein he is inferior as a seruant in seruilibus such as appertaine to a seruant and for this citeth Pope Innocentius cap. Inquisitioni de sent excom Whereupon if the Pope should in virtute obedientiae command any man to giue away his vineyard or house or sell his patrimonie as Bellocchio cupbearer to Sixtus 5. would haue had the Pope by his Breue to command a subiect of his to do because the poore mans land lay commodiously for him and pleased him Naboths case which his Holinesse refused to do answering he could not he might do no mā wrōg or a cleargie man to resigne his benefice with cure to some vnworthy person which is against a diuine precept he is not to be obeyed as the same author affirmeth in the chapter aforesaid And alledgeth Panorm in cap. Inquisitioni de sent excom and Io. Andr. c. Cum à Deo de rescript Much lesse is any n = a Cap. litteras de rest spoliat superior yea the Pope himselfe to be obeyed according to n = b Cap. Inquisit c. Panormitan commanding any sinne though but n = c 11. q. 3. can Quid ergo veniall And n = d Verbo obedientia nu 5. Syluester Intellige etiam si Papa credit mādatum iustum tamen subdito constat illud in se continere peccatum Vnderstand although the Pope beleeueth his mandateto be iust but yet the subiect knoweth it contains a sin de restit spol lit Here may be noted that the Pope may hold one opinion and an inferiour may hold the contrarie and more true without sinne Yea and a Bishop in case the Pope should command him to be absent from his residence without some necessitie he is not bound to obey because saith Tolet cum absque causa rationabili aliquid praecipitur Instruct sacer l. 5. c. 4. nu 3. non debemus audire When any thing is
Oath as In any case whatsoeuer Neither is the Popes spirituall authoritie limited or once touched therein as by his Maiesties intention sufficiently made knowne vnto vs doth manifestly appeare And Caietan teacheth that in such like case if the intention of the man that commandeth may be knowne Caietan ver praecepti trangressio it is inough because the force of the precept dependeth of the intention of him that commandeth Now to end this matter I wish you to note the fraude of that Catholicke letter writer for to haue set downe in plaine termes that his Holinesse may depose his Maiestie dispose his kingdomes to whom he list licence subiects to raise tumults take armes against him or murther him and such like he knew would sound to good subiects most odious therefore he thought it to be a point of policie not to deale plainely but leaue the Reader perplexed with this obscuritie What his Holinesse cannot do towards his Maiestie in any case whatsoeuer Whose bare assertion without proofe or truth can in reason conuince none but such as want their common sense Now that it hath bene proued nothing to be contained in the Oath against the law of God nor decrees of any generall Councell and that his Maiestie in making this law and requiting of his subiects the performance thereof according to his intention which is but iust and good hath not gone beyond his bounds will any yet be so wilfully blind as not to see that by the immaculate law of God he is bound in conscience to render to Caesar that is Caesars to be obedient to higher powers as well the ciuill in temporals as the Ecclesiasticall power in spirituals Saint Peter prince of the Apostles taught this doctrine to the Christians of the primitiue Church that they should submit themselues and be obedient to secular Princes and Magistrates though they were heathens 1. Pet. 2. Subiecti igitur estote omni humanae creaturae propter Deum siue Regiquasi praecellenti siue Ducibus tamquam ab eo missis c. Be subiect therefore to euery humane creature for God whether it be to the King as excelling or to rulers as sent by him to the reuenge of malefactors but to the praise of the good for so is the will of God that doing wel you may make the ignorance of vnwise men to be dum And a little after exhorting thē to feare God his next lesson is to honor the King Deum timete Regem honorificate How I pray you is a King honoured when his iust precept is neglected or contemned Some haply without consideration both ignorantly vnwisely wil grant that Catholick kings are to be honoured and obeyed but doubt may be made of such as by the Church are reputed or rather condemned heretikes and aduersaries to the Catholicke faith I aske these if there be any so simple whether Emperours Kings and Princes to whom the Apostles preached this subiection and obedience were not aduersaries yea and persecutors of the Catholicke faith and continued such the space of more then three hundred yeares howbeit the Christians of those dayes instructed both by the doctrine and example of the Apostles in all dutifull humilitie did not giue freely but rendred to Caesar his due how peruerse soeuer their Gouernours were Which lesson Saint Peter their chiefe Pastor immediatly after in the same chapter had taught them Serui subditi estote in omni timore dominis non tantum bonis modestis sedetiam dyscolis Seruants be subiect in all feare to your maisters not onely to the good and modest but also to the wayward Ephes 6. Colos 3. This dutifull subiection likewise teacheth Saint Paul Serui obedite Dominis carnalibus cum timore tremore in simplicitate cordis vestri sicut Christo Seruants be obedient to your Lords according to the flesh with feare and trembling in the simplicitie of your heart as to Christ not seruing to the eye as it were pleasing men but as the seruants of Christ doing the will of God from the heart with a good will seruing as to our Lord and not to men If seruants then commanded by the Apostle were bound to serue and obey their temporall Lords and maisters with such care and diligence were they neuer so froward and wicked Pagans for such no doubt many Christians did serue who by their examples threats or enticements might hazard to withdraw them from the true worship of God are not subjects now by the same law as well bound to be obedient to lawfull Kings and Princes be they neuer so wicked in manners or opposite to faith and Christian religion as heretikes and apostates are Were they not Pagan Princes and Potestates whom Saint Paul willed Titus to admonish Christians to obey at a word Admone illos saith he Principibus Potestatibus subditos esse dicto obedire Admonish them to be subiect to Princes and Potestates to obey at a word S. Ambrose Vpon which place Saint Ambrose Admonish as if he should say Although thou hast spirituall gouernment ouer spirituall matters yet admonish them to whom thou preachest to be subiect to Kings and Princes because Christian religion depriueth none of his right The same holy Father and also Saint Augustine write of the prompt obedience of Christians to Iulian the Apostata which may be a verie good example for Catholickes of these latter times to shew like obedience if they light on like Princes saying Iulianus extitit infidelis Imperator Aug. in Psal 124. Super illud Non relinquet Domi nus virgam Habetur 11. q. 3. c. Iulian. nonne extitit Apostata iniquus idololatra c. Iulian was an infidell Emperour was he not an Apostata wicked an idolater Christian souldiers serued an infidell Emperour When they came to the cause of Christ they acknowledged not but him that was in heauen When he willed them to worship Idols to sacrifise they preferred God before him But when he said Bring foorth your armie go against that people they obeyed incontinently The distinguished the eternall Lord from a temporall Lord and yet for the eternall Lord they were subiect also to the temporall Lord. Hereby is euident that Iulian had right to command Christian souldiers in temporals and they shewed all prompt obedience knowing that their religion taught no iniustice that notwithstanding his Apostacie he being lawfully called to the Empire they were not nor could be absolued of their loyaltie and ciuill obedience towards him Was so notorious an Apostata to be of dutie obeyed and not a king who cannot be iudged an hereticke because he doth not pertinaciter defend any opinion against the Church of Christ but royally promiseth to forsake the religion he professeth if any point or head thereof belonging to faith can be proued not to be ancient catholicke and Apostolicke Here Cardinall Bellarmine will answer That the Church in her nouitie or beginning wanted forces forsooth after three yea foure hundred
saith further Quae autem sunt à Deo ordinatae sunt And those that are of God are ordained Therefore he that resisteth the power resisteth the ordinance of God adding Tho. 2.2 q. 105. ar 1. contrarie to the loue of God in not obeying his commandement and contrarie to the loue of his neighbour withdrawing from his superior obedience due vnto him And they that do resist what get they They purchase to themselues damnation hauing committed a deadly sinne in resisting Which kind of purchase I wish many in this our countrey to note diligently and in time to take heed of But I know some will inferre that this place of S. Paul may well and ought to be vnderstood of Prelates and the chiefe Prelate Christs Vicar who are also higher powers and therefore toucheth such as by obeying the King in the Oath of allegiance disobey their spirituall Pastor the Pope These deceiue themselues not considering the drift of the Apostle for if they marke well they will easily see that S. Paul in this chapter vnderstandeth not the spirituall directly but the secular power as must needs appeare manifestly to him that readeth the text Nam Principes saith he non sunt timor◠boni operis sed mali c. For Princes are no feare to the good worke but to the euill But wilt thou not feare the power do good and thou shalt haue praise of the same for he is Gods minister vnto thee for good But if thou do euill feare for he beareth not the sword without cause for he is Gods minister a reuenger vnto wrath to him that doth euill By whom can all this be meant but by the secular power To whom is tribute due to be rendered not giuen gratis because it is an act or worke of iustice but to the secular power Who carieth such a sword to punish corporally to death and by the ordinance of God but Kings and secular Princes who are Gods ministers and vicegerents in earth for this purpose This sword neuer belonged to Peter nor his successors by Christs institution as D. Kellison confesseth against M. Sutcliffe D. Kellison in his Reply to M. Sutcliffe cap. 1. fo 13. his words are these If beside this spirituall power which he hath ouer the whole Church Sutcliffe suppose that either we giue him or that he challengeth to himselfe any temporall power ouer Christian Kings and kingdomes he is foully deceiued for we confesse and so doth he that Christ gaue him no such sword nor soueraigntie c. We acknowledge indeed two swords in the Church of Christ the one spirituall the other temporall but we giue them not both to the Pope For the supreme spirituall power is the onely sword which he handleth the supreme temporall power out of Italie pertaineth to the Emperour Kings and Princes For as there are in the Church of God two bodies Idem fo 14. the one politicall and ciuill the other Ecclesiasticall or mysticall the one called the common-wealth the other the Church so are there two powers to direct and gouerne these bodies and the one is called ciuill or temporall the other Ecclesiasticall and that ruleth the bodies this the soules that the kingdome this the Church that makes temporall this spirituall lawes that decideth ciuill causes this determineth and composeth controuersies in religion that punisheth bodies by the temporall sword this chastiseth soules with the spirituall glaiues and bonds of excommunication suspension interdicts and such like and the end of that is temporall peace the scope and butte of this eternall felicity and so that being inferiour this superiour that must yeeld to this when there is any opposition And so we giue to the Pope one sword onely ouer the Church and not swords as Sutcliffe saith They are secular Princes likewise who may exact customes and to whom tribute ought of dutie to be paied by all subiects thereby to sustaine and maintaine their dignitie gouerne their kingdome in peace and iustice and protect them from all enemies such excepted as by their priuiledges for the honour of Christ are exempted Tributum Caesaris est Ex. de trad Basil ep ad Valentin non negetur saith S. Ambrose This was neuer due to the Apostles the spirituall Princes of the Church nor consequently to Bishops wno as they are bishops only either did they exercise such a sword or euer acknowledge to be permitted thē by the institutiō of our B. Sauiour of whō they receiued their cōmissiō al power they could practise for gouernmēt of his Church till the worlds end Coste c. 14. Costerus a reuerend and learned Iesuite in fidei Demonst pag. 95. commendeth Erasmus for writing thus Erasm ep ad Vulturium Neocomum Nihil vi gerebant Apostoli scil tantùm vtebantur gladio Spiritus neminem agebant in exilium nullius inuadebāt facultates c. Haec Erasmus non minus disertè quà m verè They that is the Apostles did nothing by violence they vsed only the sword of the Spirit they droue none into exile they inuaded no mans possessions c. This Erasmus saith Costerus no lesse wisely then truly And a litle before in the same booke cap. 12. he teacheth Cost propos 3. cap. 12. that the materiall sword belongeth not to any Ecclesiasticall person Nulli enim competit Ecclesiastico vel sanguinem fundere vel capitis quenquam condemnare For it appertaineth not to any Ecclesiasticall person either to shed bloud or to condemne any man to death Then not to the Pope as he is an Ecclesiasticall person and successour to Peter doth it belong to vse such a sword Hereto agreeth Sir Thomas More in his treatise vpon the passion Morus in pas Dom. pag. 139◠Bern de consid li. 4. c. 3.4 See Gratian. 23. q. 8. in princ Mitte gladium in locum suum c. Put vp saith Christ to Peter thy sword into his place as though he would say I will not be defended with sword And such a state haue I chosen thee vnto that I will not haue thee fight with this kind of sword but with the sword of Gods word Let this materiall sword therefore be put vp into his place that is to wit into the hands of temporall Princes as into his scabberd againe to punish malefactors withall Adding that the Apostles haue to fight with a sword much more terrible then this that is the spirituall sword of excommunication the vse whereof pertaineth to Ecclesiasticall persons alone as the other to secular Iustices This he most learned in his time and no lesse zelous in Catholicke religion Morus in passione Domi. He goeth on pag. 1393. saying that Christ after this told Peter that he had done very euill to strike with the sword and that he declared also by the example of the ciuill lawes Matth. 26. who saith Omnes qui acceperint gladium gladio peribunt c. For by the ciuill lawes of the Romaines vnder which
the Iewes at the same time liued whosoeuer without sufficient authority were spied so much as to haue a sword about him to murther any mā with was in a manner in as euill a case as he that had murthered one indeed If Peter exercising a materiall sword in defence of Christ and at such time as the vse thereof might seeme to him very necessary was sharply reprehended for that he had no lawfull authoritie in such wise to fight for him is it not a sufficient document for his successours not to vse violence on secular Princes by exercising the materiall sword no not in ordine ad spiritualia in defence of Christs spouse the Church for that she hath no warrant so to do Our Sauiour a little before his passion seeing his Apostles to contend about superiority teaching them their duties and in them all their successours and the different gouernment betweene them and secular Princes said Luc. 22. Reges gentium dominātur eorum qui potestatem habent super eos benefici vocantur vos autem non sic c. The Kings of the Gentiles ouerrule them and they that haue power vpon them are called beneficials But you not so but he that is the greater among you let him become as the yonger c. Vpon which place Origen S. Hierome Chrysostome and Basil with one assent vnderstand that secular Princes are not content onely to haue subiects but also by ouerruling they vse thē but you not so to wit you my Apostles and successours after me for it is your part to serue to minister and to feede by word and example c. And in Saint Matthewes Gospell Math. 20. our Sauiour said vnto two of his disciples Iames and Iohn You know that the Princes of the Gentiles ouerrule them and they that are the greater exercise power against them It shall not be so among you but whosoeuer will be the greater among you let him be your minister c. Is it not plaine tnat our Lord Iesus though he teach not paritie with Puritans nor forbiddeth superiority among Christians neither Ecclesiasticall nor temporall yet he will not that his Apostles nor their successors Bishops and Priests being called to the state of a celestiall kingdome that differeth from the conditiō of a temporall kingdome should rule like vnto Kings and secular Princes who cary a materiall sword ad vindictam malefactorum for reuenge of malefactors and some now and then imperiously gouerne their subiects with pride tyranny contempt of inferiours and for their owne lucre more then the vtility of their subiects Which kind of gouernement is forbidden both by the doctrine and example of our Sauiour 1. Pet. 5. Presbyteros Compresbyter so readeth and expoundeth S. Hierome ep 85. So translate Erasmus and Beza and humility commended to all the Cleargie yea to Peter himselfe who cōformably to this likwise instructed such as at any time to the worlds end should beare rule in Gods Church saying Seniores igitur qui sunt inter vos obsecro ego consenior c. The seniors therefore that are among you I beseech my selfe a consenior with them c or Priests my selfe a fellow Priests feede the flocke of God which is among you prouiding not by cōstraint but willingly according to God neither for filthy lucre sake but voluntarily neque vt dominātes neither as ouerruling the Clergie but made examples of the flocke from the heart Whereby appeareth that all violence coaction and compulsion by exercising the temporall sword which is the sword of Kings is wholly forbidden all Ecclesiasticall persons To me it seemeth not without a mysterie that onely Peter among the rest of the Apostles should not strike any in all that hellish troupe coming in fury to lay violent hands on their Lord no not the traytor Iudas that with a kisse betraied him the ringleader of the rest and so better deserued to haue had his head cut off but onely him whose name is so precisely recorded by the Euāgelist to be Malchus and that he should be checked and reproued by our Sauiour Iohan. c. 18. of whom haply he expected to be commended for his zeale But though Peter might pretend iust cause to be moued to strike as he did yet was his fact reprehensible in two respects First for that asking Christ the question whether he and his fellow for no moe of the eleuen had swords about them should strike or no stroke without his grant yea against his will Secondly because his fact had rather a shew of reuenge then of defence For what might he think to do with 2. swords against so many what possibility to preuaile And as may appeare likwise by Christs words vnto him Math. 26. Returne thy sword into his place for all that take the sword shall perish with the sword And in S. Iohns Gospell Iohan. 18. Put vp thy sword into the scabbard the chalice which my Father hath giuen me shall not I drinke it By all which is cleare that Peter was iustly reprehended for striking without commission the high Priests seruant Malchus which name in Hebrew or Malcuth signifieth Rex or Regnum doubtles in my iudgemēt not without a great mystery the admirable prouidence of God thereby haply instructing posterity that no lesse reprehensible is it in Peters successours as they are Peters successors to dethrone Kings and depriue them of their kingdomes which cannot be done without drawing forth and striking with the materiall sword then it was in Peter himselfe for cutting off Malchus eare And that they ought not to vse such kind of violence on the persons of Kings no nor inferiors to Kings hauing no commission from Christ to punish corporally no more then Peter had against Malchus but onely spiritually Now to returne to the authoritie or power meant by S. Paul Rom. 13. Omnis anima It is most plaine that the Apostle in that chapter recommended to Christians their dutiful obedience to secular Potestates because hauing preached obedience to spirituall Pastors some newly conuerted thought themselues being Christians See S. Chrysost in c. 13. ho. 23. Ro. to be freed by Christ from al former subiection now not bound to obey either Emperour King or any temporall Lord for that they were heathens and persecutors of the Apostles and Christs religion For which cause and for that the Apostles generally were slandered and said to be seditious and vntruly charged of their aduersaries that they withdrew men from order and obedience to ciuill lawes and officers Saint Paul here as S. Peter doth in his first Epistles to stop the mouth of such flanderous tongues cleareth himselfe and expresly chargeth euery man and woman to be subiect to their temporall Princes and superiors howbeit in such matters as they may lawfully command and in things wherein they are superiors Conformable to his doctrine was likewise his example and of the rest of the Apostles who in all matters not repugnant to
in temporals wherein they ought by the law and ordinance of God to be no lesse obedient then to their Pastors and Prelates in spirituals It followeth now to know what authoritie it is the Pope pretendeth to haue whether Ecclesiasticall or ciuill to depose lawfull Kings and dispose of their temporals and absolue subiects of their bounden dutie and naturall allegiance Which question who so desireth to see it more at large he may reade D. Barclai de potestate Papae and M. Widdrington de iure Principum where it is most sufficiently and learnedly handled and before in this my treatise pag. 17 I haue briefly touched it whereto I adde in this place a word or two more for your better satisfaction Among such Catholickes as refuse to take the Oath of allegiance are many who thinke indeed the Pope to haue no power to depose Kings or dispose of their kingdoms howbeit either vpon pretended scruple of conscience or other humane respects are against the taking and takers of the Oath as if they were little better then Heathens or Publicans And some so simple and ignorant as beleeue that no Pope euer challenged or attempted such authoritie on any Kings or Emperors and that no Iesuit or other learned man allowed or euer taught such doctrine so odious it seemeth vnto them But the wiser sort and more learned know how it hath bene challenged and practised by Popes on the persons of Henrie Otho Fredericke Emperours Iohn King of Nauarre for neither heresie or apostasie and since on Henrie 8. and Queene Elizabeth as by censures do appeare And that it is the moderne doctrine of many both Canonists and Diuines in these latter ages which at the first teaching thereof being so farre dissonant from the writings and practise of all antiquitie was generally adiudged to be noua haeresis as Sigebert reporteth S. Iohn Chrysostome that great Doctor vpon that place of S. Paul 2. Cor. 1. Non dominamur fidei vestrae We ouerrule not your faith Sigebertus in Chro. ad an 1088. Chrysost lib. 2 de dig sacerd c. 3. attributeth such power as forcibly restraines offenders from their wickednesse of life vnto secular Iudges vnder whose dominion they are not vnto the Church because saith he neither is such power giuen vnto vs by the lawes with authoritie to restraine men from offences nor if such power were giuen vs could we haue wherewith we might exercise such power c. So in his time and long after such power of compelling offenders by temporall punishments to conuert to better life was vnheard of to be in Bishops of the Church Cardinall Bellarmine in the catalogue of his ancient writers which he produceth against Barclai for the Popes temporall authoritie ouer Princes beginneth with one who was iudge in his owne cause Gregorie the seuenth that began his reigne in the yeare of our Lord 1073. not able of like to proue it out of any more ancient Father or generall Councell That this Pope was the first that challenged or attempted to practise such authoritie Otho in chro l. 6. c. 35. witnesseth Otho Frisengen a most learned and holy Bishop and highly commended by the Cardinall himselfe lib. 4. de Rom. Pont. cap. 13. Lego saith he relego Romanorum Regum Imperatorum gesta nusquam inuenio quenquam eorum ante hunc à Rom. Pontifice excommunicatum vel regno priuatum c. I reade and reade ouer againe the acts of the Kings and Emperors of Rome and in no place can I find any of them before this to wit Henrie the fourth to be excommunicated or depriued of his kingdome by the Bishop of Rome vnlesse haply any take this for excommunication that Philip the first Christian Emperor who succeeded Gordianus for a short space Euseb hist Eccl. l. 6. c. 25. was by the Bishop of Rome or as Eusebius reporteth of the Bishop of that place where he then resided placed among publicke penitents and Theodosius sequestred by S. Ambrose from entrance into the Church for cruell murther Whereby we may note that this learned man could not find no not one example in all precedent ages of depriuing kings of their regal scepters though of excommunication he proposeth onely these two which may haue some shew of truth for meere excommunication howbeit more probable it is they were not excommunicated at all maiore excommunicatione Then this Author in the next chapter following Otho ibid. c. â—6 describeth the intestine warres destruction of soules and bodies setting vp of Pope against Pope schismes and other manifold lamentable miseries that ensued vpon that fact of Pope Gregory against Henrie the 4 who commanded the Bishops of Ments and Colen to constitute Rodolph Duke of Burgundie Emperor Spec. hist l. 27. and to put downe Henrie whereupon followed a most grieuous warre wherein Rodolphus was ouercome who dying repentant said The Apostolicall commandement and the intreatie of Princes haue made me a trangressor of my oath behold therefore my hand cut off or wounded wherewith I sware to my Lord Henrie not trecherously to practise any thing against his life nor his glorie Who being ouercome the Bishop of Ments by the Popes commandement and with helpe of Saxons raised an other aduersary against the Emperor one Hermannus Knoflock whereupon followed likewise bloudie warres After this Henrie gathering his armie together driueth the Pope into France and setteth vp the Bishop of Rauenna against him whom he named Clement and so caused a schisme This sparsim out of the history Such like calamities are more then probable to fall on people and the Church when Emperors or Kings are so violently proceeded withall assured destruction of many and no hope of the correction of any by such means is like to ensue Was such power trow ye giuen by Christ to his Apostles tending to destruction not to edification No all to edification according to S. Paul 2. Cor. 10. none to destruction Otho Frisengensis in another place of his workes Li. 1. de gestis Frederici c. 1. writing of the Popes excommunicating the Emperour sheweth that Henrie 4. thought it to be such a nouitie as he had neuer knowne the like sentence to be denounced against any Romane Emperor before He liued an 1150. And Sigebert in Chronico 1088. affirmeth the doctrine of Priests By euill kings he meaneth such as are deposed Cont. Barcl cap. 5. teaching that no subiection is to be yeelded to euill Kings and though they sweare fidelitie are not bound to performe it to be noua haeresis a new heresie sprung vp Howbeit Cardinall Bellarmine will tell you that such doctrine and practise began about the yeare of our Lord 700 for before that time there wanted as he affirmeth either necessitie or oportunitie to teach or vse such power By reason of like there were no hereticall Princes impugners of the true faith before that time or that the paucitie of Christian Kings to assist the weake forces
of the Church against her persecutors was such as there could be no hope to preuaile As if true faith and religion which is now beside the Indies restrained into a corner of Europe onely did not replenish before that time Europe Africke and Asia No there wanted not necessitie to practise such authoritie on Constantius Iulian Valens Valentinian and other like professed aduersaries of Christ and his Church nor oportunitie Christians being so many so potent replete with maruellous zeale and constant courage in defence of Gods truth to the losse of lands and life if they had knowne such power of deposing to haue bene in the Church and chiefe Pastors thereof and the Pastors knew well what their dutie was in that behalfe But where I pray you lay this power hidden for the space of 700 hundred yeares after Christ by the Cardinals confession suppose I should grant so much vnto him of disposing of temporals in ordine ad finem spiritualem no Scripture no tradition no ancient Father or generall Councell in all that time teaching it If he say there was where or how doth it appeare His Grace hath not yet neither in Tortus nor against our Kings Apologie nor in his last against Barclai produced any such cleare testimonie as may conuince Our Sauiour Christ himselfe refused to intermeddle in deuiding a temporall inheritance betweene two saying Quis me constituit iudicē aut diuisorē super vos Luc. 12. Who hath constituted me a iudge or a diuider ouer you disdaining as it were as Iansenius noteth that he should be troubled or drawne frō the celestiall businesse Iansen conc for which only he was sent by his Father to haue care of carnall and base things thereby also to teach such as are his that they ought not to intangle themselues in profane businesse that gouerne the Apostolicke office According to this is that of S. Paul Nemo militans Deo 2. Tim. 2. implicat se negotijs secularibus No man that is a souldier to God entangleth himselfe with secular businesse What more intangling what more secular then to intermeddle in deuiding and disposing of temporals Non est discipulus super magistrum The disciple is not aboue his maister Therefore his Vicar ought not in such wise to be iudge ouer Kings in things terrene when they are taught by our Sauiours example not to be hindered from celestiall affaires which onely do concerne them whose power is ouer sinnes of men not ouer their possessions In criminibus non in possessionibus potestas vestra Bern. lib. 1. de consid cap. 2. Againe S. Peter prince of the Apostles hauing receiued of Christ all power necessary for the gouernement of his Church which was to be deriued to his successors had not that power which is temporall but onely spirituall for in the Apostles times the Ecclesiasticall and ciuill were distinct and separate as the Cardinall confesseth lib. 5. de sum Pont. cap. 6. Which could not be but were conioyned if they had any such power yea indirectly If then Peter had no temporall power directly or indirectly giuen him by Christs institution who doubtlesse foresaw that it was necessary to be in him and his successours for the correction and direction of soules to their spirituall end it were absurd to say that succeeding Popes as they are Peters successors should haue more ample power then he or any of the Apostles had De Ro. Pont. li. 5. c 4. And the Cardinals argument which he maketh against the Canonists helpeth for confirmation of this matter in hand to wit Christ saith he as he was man while he liued on earth receiued not nor would haue any temporall dominion but the Pope is Christs Vicar and representeth Christ vnto vs such as he was while he liued here among men Therefore the Pope as Christs Vicar and so as Pope hath not any temporall dominion How then cometh it that Popes in these latter ages practise on exorbitant Princes deposition and disposing of temporals when they shall iudge it necessarie or expedient to a spirituall end hauing no commission no warrant of our Sauiour so to do Is it by temporall onely or spirituall onely or by both By their temporall power which reacheth no further thē the patrimony of the Church it is euident they cannot for so they are but equals not superiours to absolute Princes and Par in parem non habet imperium No neither haue they which is more being no Monarchs authority from Christ to put any man to death to banish or to depriue any priuate man of his goods Cost in Osiand propos 7. as Costeru◠a learned Iesuite and other good Authors do hold Nemo Pontifex sanguinis leges tulit hoc munu◠Imperatorum est qui varia◠poenas de haereticis scripserunt quos bonorum spoliatione infamia exilio morte imòigne puniri iusserunt c. No Pope hath made lawes of life and death this is the office of Emperours who haue written downe diuerse puniments for heretickes whom they haue cōmanded to be punished with losse of goods infamie exile death yea with fire c. He goeth on The Pope at Rome putteth no man to death he hath his secular Iudges who minister iustice by the lawes of Caesar To this agreeth Iacobus Almain De ratione potestatis laicae est poenā ciuilem posse infligere Almain de dom nat ciuili in vlt. edit Gersonis vt sunt mors exilium bonorum priuatio c. It belongeth to the secular power to inflict a ciuill punishment as are death banishment depriuing of temporall goods But the Ecclesiasticall power cannot by the institution of God inflict any such paine no not imprison any as many Doctors hold but it reacheth onely to spirituall punishment that is to excommunication and the other punishments which he vseth ex iure purè positiuo sunt are onely by a positiue law Who in another place hath thus Alm. de pot Eccles laic c. 13. q. 1. c. 9. Christus secundum humanitatem c. Christ according to his humanity had greater power then the Pope hath as to institute the Euangelicall law neither had he his power limited to sacraments for he could pardō without application of sacraments his Vicar hath not such but onely that which is declared in his Vicarship for he gaue him power to remit sinnes to preach to giue indulgences c but it is no where found that he gaue him power to institute and depose Kings therefore by any power giuen him from Christ note well he hath not soueraigne power of iurisdiction in temporals This he With these may be ranked Ioannes Maior Maior in 4. dist 24. q. 3. Maximus Pontifex no◠habet dominium temporale super Reges c. The chiefe Bishop hath not temporall dominion ouer Kings For the contrary being granted saith he it followeth that Kings are his vassals and that he may expell them de facto out
not obey the Pope excōmunicating an hereticall king vnlesse he beleeue that an hereticall king cannot be excōmunicated by the Pope Nay here in our Oath with due respect to his Grace be it said is neither openly no nor couertly denied that the Pope hath power to exōmmunicate Kings though they be heretikes as the Cardinall beareth his reader in hand I maruaile he wold in such wise adde vnto thrust into the text of the Oath that which no man no nor himselfe can find therein For let it be well viewed and considered it will presently appeare that there is no mention at al of the Popes excōmunicating Kings though they be heretiks or heretical Kings but onely if he should excommunicate our King and absolue his subiects from their obedience yet I will beare true faith and allegiance to his Maiestie What sincere dealing is this Such glosses or wilfull additions are but manifest corruptions of the text which ought not to be vsed by any that professe sincerity truth So this makes nothing against vs but rather against himself Then he cometh with his needles minor which no Catholick denieth But power to excōmunicate is intrinsecall to the Apostolicke primacie and vnseparable from it when as our Lord said to Peter as to the first spirituall Primate Math. 16. Whatsoeuer thou shalt binde vpon earth shall be bound also in heauen What is this to the purpose What Catholicke that hath taken the Oath will denie it It is not vnlike to one that frameth an aduersarie in the aire to fight withall If French Catholickes be demanded what they will do in this case if the Pope should excommunicate their King and discharge his subiects of their obedience they will forthwith answer that notwithstanding any monitions excōmunications or interdicts they will not forsake but obey their King in temporals from which obedience they cannot be absolued or dispenced withall by the Pope as is in decretis Ecclesiae Gallicanae lib. 2. cap. 1. Nay they will bring certaine priuiledges for them and their King against the Popes censure of excommunication yet these like good Catholickes will beleeue that he hath power to excommunicate an hereticall King So in our case a man of any iudgement may clearely see it is neither openly nor couertly explicitè nor implicitè denied but plainely granted of such as take the Oath that the Pope may excommunicate albeit vpon iust cause adhering to his Prince he obey not the sentence I aske if his Holinesse in Rome should determine to create some Priest or Prelate Cardinall or Bishop and he of humilitie or for some other cause best knowne to himselfe notwithstanding the Popes determination refuse to accept of the dignity Quis est hic laudabimus eum Who is he and we will commend him doth it follow that therefore he denieth the Pope to haue power to conferre those dignities on them Or if a King be pleased to extend his mercie toward an offender condemned to die granting him a pardon can it be said though he list not to accept thereof notwithstanding the Kings grant for that he hath a shrewd wife that maketh him wearie of his life or for some other cause that he denieth the King to haue power to pardon his offence It may be admired that one so excellently learned will argue so weakely None would haue thought but the booke bearing the name of Mattheus Tortus had bene in deed his Chaplains not the Cardinals had not his Grace discouered himselfe in his answer to our Kings Apologie Whosoeuer saieth or sweareth that notwithstanding any sentence of excommunication yet he will beare true faith and allegiance to his Prince no way denieth it but supposeth such a sentence to be or to haue bin When the Pope in his writings putteth this clause Non obstantibus constitutionibus Apostolicis contrarijs quibuscunque Notwithstanding any contrary Apostolicall constitutions whatsoeuer c. as in the Briefe of Paulus the fifth to maister George Birket dated 1. Febr. 1608. or in others Non obstantibus priuilegijs quibuscunque c. Notwithstanding whatsoeuer priuiledges Is it not manifest that such priuiledges or Apostolicall Constitutions are supposed to be or might haue bene before granted So in our case none denieth the Popes excōmunication but chuseth vpō iust cause to adhere to his Prince notwithstanding the sentence of excommunication against him which he presupposeth to be or else may be granted If any will say There can be no iust cause to adhere and obey his Prince if he be excommunicated it were ridiculous and false as all writers affirme some cases being excepted whether he be excommunicated à iure vel ab homine Vict. de excom nu 10. Cum omnibus excommunicatis saith Victoria among the rest quocunque modo sint excommunicati c. With all excommunicate persons in what sort soeuer they are excommunicated it is lawfull to participate in these things which are contained in this verse Vtile lex humile res ignorata Tolet. l. 1. inst sacer c. 11. n. 7 Nauar. Ench. c. 27. n. 26. Tho. 4. dist 18. ar 4. necesse Nauarre likewise Regulariter participans c. Ordinarily he that communicateth with one that is excommunicated with the greater excommunication incurreth the lesser yet it faileth in these Vtile lex c. The declaration of which words he that vnderstandeth Latin may see in the same place of Nauarre in Caietans Summe Emanuel Sa and other Authors Now who is so simple as to thinke that a wife is bound to abandon her husband and not to participate with him children to forsake their fathers seruants their maisters and not communicate with them in domesticall affaires if they should be excommunicated If it be lawfull for such as it is by lex and humile why not also for subiects to communicate in all ciuill causes with their Prince there being absolute necessitie besides vtile and humile to warrant them so to do according to the rule as it is in Nauarre Quod non est licitum in lege necessitas facit licitum What is not lawfull in the law Nau. Ench. c. 27. nu 35. necessitie maketh lawfull It is not vnknowne that Henrie the fourth the late French King obtaining the Crowne of France when he was yet an hereticke relapsed and de facto excommunicated by the Pope required an Oath of fealtie of the Clergie of Paris for the better securitie in his dominions as by their records do appeare whereupon the chiefe of all the learned Doctors and faculties both of the secular and religious Clergie of that citie willingly without delay performed their dutie taking a corporall oath of fealtie and true allegiance to his Highnesse notwithstanding the Popes excommunication with promise to assist him to their power against all leaguers whatsoeuer among which his Holinesse at that time was one that should machinate or attempt any thing against his person hinder his peace and quietnesse or raise armes to the
is not deliuered vs by man but is proclaimed from God admitteth no humane dispensation at all neither is it lawfull for any man in any sort to absolue from these that is Ioan. De Turrecrē in can Lector dist 34. diuine precepts Such I take our Oath of allegiance to be published and proclaimed by God commanding subiects and all inferiors to render vnto Caesar and all superiours their due against which no dispensation no absolution can be of force And herein I say not that his Holinesse cannot dispence or absolue from any Oath but from this particular Oath wherein is nothing promised which is not manifestly law full and profitable and due to him to whom it is made and in such an Oath S. Thomas saith 2.2 q. 89. ar 9. ad 3. dispensation seemeth to haue no place because besides the obligation to Almightie God there riseth a new to his Maiestie which cannot be released by Pope subiects or any other then by himselfe to whom it is made Neither doth the Popes power extend to the taking away of the right of a third person in matters which are not Ecclesiasticall as Caietan affirmeth And therefore cannot absolue a subiect from an Oath of allegiance to his Prince for that it would be preiudiciall vnto him Caiet In 2 2. q. 89. ar 9. Praelatus Ecclesiasticus etiam Papa c. An Ecclesiasticall Prelate saith he yea the Pope hath not in such maner power ouer Oathes as ouer vowes Because it is not in the Popes power to take away the right of a third man in matters not Ecclesiasticall as it is in his power to change to wit vowes into something more acceptable to God for that he is Gods Vicar and is not the Vicar of that man neither is he so ouer him as he may depriue him of his goods at his pleasure Tolet. instr sacer li. 4. c. 23. nu 3. Whereto agreeth Card. Tolet Quando iuramentum c. When an Oath is to the vtilitie of some third person it cannot be dispenced withall no not by the Pope without the consent of the third person as also the Pope cannot take away an other mans goods Whereto tendeth our Oath but to the vtilitie or good of his Maiesty and to his great preiudice would it not be if his subiects should accept of any absolution from the same Speculator likewise denieth that the Pope may absolue any man from a lawfull Oath Tit. de legato §. nunc ostendendum n. 24. because the bond of keeping an Oath and performing it to God is of the law of nature and diuine By this appeareth that iust and lawfull Oathes being such as may be preiudiciall to a third person cannot be dispenced withall But the Church vseth to remit an Oath extorted by force or feare It may be answered that if such an Oath extorted be manifestly vniust and would be against the law of God to be taken without force or feare no violence or feare of losing goods or life can make it lawfull Which doctrine is taught in the Canon-law lib. 1. Decretal de his quae vi metusue cap. 2. in glossa and 15. c.q. 6. in glossa Extra de iureiurando that for no feare it is lawfull to incurr e a mortall sin C. super co de vsuris Which in another place is taught also of a veniall sinne Therfore an Oath extorted of a thing vnlawfull the Church vseth not to remit or release when as no man will thinke that vnlawfull Oaths are to be kept as hath bene said before What say you then to lawfull Oathes yet compelled by feare of losing goods libertie c If it be iust and lawfull which thou art required to do why doest thou refuse to do it and why expectest thou compulsion to make thee to performe that which in dutie thou art bound I know thou wilt grant that a father may shake his rod threaten to correct his child and beate him if of stubburnnesse will not aske blessing or will not do his dutie by obeying him So may the Magistrate who carrieth the sword ad vindictam malefactorum not onely threaten but really punish and force thee to performance of that which is lawfull and thou oughtest otherwise to do And God himself the patterne of good gouernment threatneth hell fire and punisheth seuerely the transgressors of his law with many corporall afflictions and therby forceth many to obserue and keepe his commandements which of loue without any such compulsion they ought in dutie to do Will any hereof inferre that the Pope or any power on earth can absolue these from performing their duty to God or man for that it is extorted by feare Then I conclude that lawfull Oathes such as are made by subiects to Princes of their fidelitie bind in conscience although they be forced on them by feare of punishments and cannot be dispenced withall To this purpose Caietan saith that Oathes of him that promiseth whether they be coacted or voluntarie Caiet in 2.2 si habent materiam bonam moraliter do binde in the court of conscience Whereas some will say that Popes haue practised this authorie of absoluing subiects from lawfull Oaths it may be answered with Ioan. de Turrecrecremata Syluester Soto and others That the facts of Popes make not an article of faith And it is one thing to do somewhat de facto and another to determine that so it ought to be done de iure Turrecremata speaking of vnlawfull dispensations saith And if it were so done at any time by some Pope either ignorant in diuine learning or blinded with couetousnesse of mony which for such exorbitant dispensatiōs is accustomed to be offered or else to please men it followeth not that he could do it iustly that was Clement 3. dispencing with Constantia a professed Nunne to marrie with Henrie 6. Emperor son to Fredericke 2. The Church is gouerned or ought to be gouerned by rights lawes not by such facts or examples Thus you see that it is no denying his Holinesse spirituall power to say that he cannot dispence in all lawes all vowes or all oathes nor consequently absolue me of this Oath of allegiance How I pray you can I sweare truly as I must if I do well that which neuer was determined or defined by the Church but is matter of opiniō diuersly held of diuers learned men Verie well and without sinne And you may obserue what is commanded in holy Scripture to such as shall take an Oath Ierem. 4. Iurabis Domino in veritate in iudicio in iustitia For then is a man said to sweare truly that his doctrine of opinion v. g. that the Pope cannot by any authoritie depose Princes or such a thing is true not onely when he certainly knoweth it to be so but also when he is perswaded in his conscience vpon probable reason Tolet. instru sacer l. 4. c. 21 nu 4. Syl. verb. periurium 22. q. 2.
that he acknowledged himselfe vnable to effect it yet at last wonne by their importunitie they being his friends promised to do the best he could hoping they would when they saw it with their memories helpe to supply his defects The same afternoone he began to set downe in writing the Popes speech in his owne phrase and stile as neare as he could remember and when he had done he commanded me being one of his Chaplains and two other of his gentlemen to write out copies thereof which he after presented to the Cardinals his friends who had importuned him to that labour Afterwards they gaue him thankes saying that it was the very Oration which Sixtus had vttered in Consistory and as I was enformed the Pope himselfe liking his doing therein said it was his speech indeed By this meanes the Oration was set forth and published among diuers particular friends and so I reserued to my self a copie which I sent as I haue said soon after to my beloued friend M. William Reynolds And as far as my memory serueth me this here printed according to the Parisian copie doth well agree with the originals first written in Rome for I do yet perfectly remember the beginning out of Abacucke to be the same likewise the facts of Eleazar and of Iudith with the circumstances to haue bene in that Oration as also the circumstances of the Friars going to certaine aduersaries of the league for letters of credence to the King Brisac then prisoner in the Bastile his going forth of the gate so dangerously and his passage through the heretickes campe to his Maiestie with other like circumstances there specified But whether the Pope in this his Oration approueth or alloweth of the Friars fact killing his King for that he had caused the Cardinall of Guise Archbishop of Rhemes to be put to death was esteemed of some a tyrant and fauourer of heretickes or onely admired the prouidence of almightie God as Cardinall Bellarmine in Tortus affirmeth I do not presume to define but leaue it to the consideration of each prudent reader What if the Pope vpon wrongs done to himselfe as a temporall Prince in Italy should authorize some of his vassals or feudatary Princes to wage warre against our King and inuade his dominions is not this lawfull for him by the law of nations How then doth the Oath say that the Pope neither of himselfe nor by any authoritie of the Church or sea of Rome or by any other meanes with any other hath any power or authoritie to depose the King or to dispose any of his Maiesties kingdomes or dominions or to authorize any forrein Prince to inuade or annoy him or his countries That his Holinesse as he is a temporall Prince in Italy may vpon iust cause reuenge iniuries offered by attempting the various euents of warre and thereby seeke to annoy his Maiestie or his countries no man I thinke will doubt but can any man hereby inferre that so doing he hath more authoritie to depose our King or dispose any of his Maiesties kingdomes or inuade his dominions then hath the Emperour French King King of Spaine or any other secular Prince And in case he should attempt in hostile manner not as he is a spirituall Pastor but a secular Prince by himselfe or by the helpe of any forreine Prince to inuade or annoy his Maiestie or his countries euery good subiect may lawfully and in dutie is bound to take armes in defence of his King and countrey against him no lesse then he ought to do against any other secular Potentate whatsoeuer But our Oath speaketh not of the secular power of the Bishop of Rome which he hath onely by the bountie and liberalitie of temporall Princes or by prescription in the temporall dominions he possesseth but of any authoritie whatsoeuer receiued from Christ or his Apostles as he is Christs Vicar and Peters successor as the words of the Oath seeme to import viz. That the Pope neither of himselfe that is as he is Pope nor by any authoritie of the Church or sea of Rome For thus his authoritie is onely and meerly spirituall which was neuer ordained by God to produce such effects as waging of warre inuasion of kingdomes deposing and dethroning of Princes as hath bene said before but onely to practise spirituall censures to wit excommunication suspension interdiction and such like which maketh nothing for such as refuse the taking of the Oath Another obiection some vse to make for their iustification against the Oath viz That he who sweareth must do his best endeuour to disclose and make knowne vnto his Maiestie his heires and successours all treasons and traiterous conspiracies which he shall know or heare of to be against him or any of them But to be a Priest to reconcile or to be reconciled to the Church of Rome is treason by the statutes of this kingdome Anno 23.27 Elizab. Therefore he is bound by this Oath to reueale Priests and all reconciled persons which no man can do without committing a most grieuous and hainous crime Are not these men narrowly driuē to their shifts trow ye when after labouring their wits to defend their refusall of the Oath they can find no better arguments The words of the Oath import that such as take it must make knowne all treasons and traiterous conspiracies which he shall know to be against him How I pray you can this be vnderstood of any who is not disposed to cauill to be meant of Priesthood and confession of sins or reconcilement to the fauour of God or vnitie of his Church and not rather of such like treasons and traitorous conspiracies as were inuented and should haue bene practised by those late wicked sulphurean traitors These indeed and others of like nature and qualitie are directly against his Maiestie his hieres and successours for repressing and detecting such this Oath was inuented and the Act framed not for disclosing Priests or reconciled persons who acccording to the intentiō of the Act are no such traitors as long as they enter not into any treasonable practise against his Maiestie and the State whereof God forbid all Priests should be guiltie And I trust both his Maiestie most learned and wise together with his graue and prudent Councell in their wisedomes know that besides some few who haue already giuen good proofe of their loialtie and dutifull affection though to their great temporall detriment for the same there are many moe who beare likewise a true English heart to their King and countrey and would be ready to make also proofe thereof if occasion were offered Wherefore supposing it were true that by the letter of the law all Priests Jesuites c. mentioned in the statute are to be reputed traitors and all reconciling treason yet I dare auouch it was neuer his Maiesties nor the lawmakers intent to bind any called to the Oath to reueale such kind of traitours or treasons which is made