one an other so well that you combin'd to cheat the Kings Subiects of money and to establish the Remonstrant Church by virtue of the same imposture and forged Commission wherby your visitators and Collectors raised good summs for the Commissary Apostolyks occasions and expence This common persuasion seems to be well grounded 1. You could not be ignorant the Commissary was an Impostor because he had no other Commission to shew for his authority ouer all the Clergy of Ireland both secular and regular but a copy of the pretended Original and that so litle authentik that to gain it credit you got the vnwary Biâ—hop of Ardagh to confirm it as a true one 2. the Commissary had no instructions a thing vnusual and vnheard of in any person authorised with such an employment But this defect you supplyed by drawing instructions for his visitators which are extant of your own hands writing all which tended to the establishment of your Remonstrant Church And these instructions written with your own hand Mr. Walst shall be produced whensoeuer you please So that if you did not forge the Commission you drew for the Commissarys Instructions 3. You knew very well it was not a likely thing that the Court of Rome would giue so ample a power to an ordinary Friar ouer Bishops and all regular Superiors 4. When the It suits made difficulty to submit to your Impostor Commissary standing vpon the Priuileges of their Order you reprehended them seuerely and gaue God thanks that your-self was so deuoted to the Pope as not to dispute his Commissaries authority when they who by a peculiar vow are tyed to obey his Holiness were refractory and vpon this you and by your example the rest kneeld down crauing the Impostor Commissaries benediction and owning his authority 5. He was wholy directed by you still in your company he was your old acquaintance and of your own Order How is it then possible so remarkable an imposture as this could be conceald from a man so curious and corcern'd as you were in this intrigue Be not so filly Mr. Walsh as to fancy you can impose vpon the world that you went not halfs in a cheate your-self maâ—ag'd from first to last You haue no reason to say that during this time the poor Remonstrants had nothing to ballance all their sufferings but the bare sati sactten of conscience to be slighted by their friends and persecuted by their Fnnemies for prosesâ—ing and persoâ—ming their duty to the King according to the law of God Mr. Walsh call you suffering to haue a Commissary cum plenitudine potestatis at your command To see your deerest Remonstrants made his Visitators and Collectors taxing and raising moneys and that with Censures and Excommunications against such as refused or delayd punctual payment Call you suffering to see these your spiritual Children return home to you with money in their purses and treat you and your Commissary very splendidly at the sign of the Harp and Croun in Dublin almost euery night with good Cheer dancing and Danes or Irish Cronans especialy that famous Macquillemone which was stiled in a letter to Rome Cantio barbara aggrestu and call'd by the Soldiors of the Guards in Dublin hearing it euery night at midnight Friar Walsh and Friar N. singing of Psalmes Call you suffering to see your graue Remonstrants dance Giggs and Countrey dances to recreat your-self and the Commissary who was as ready and nimble at it as any of his Collectors but indeed it s said you danc't with a better grace than any of the Company Call you suffering that your Remonstrants in their visitations and exactions of money were so well horst as to run races and that your Saint N. should excommunicat and pursue the honest Priest Philip Draycot and cry â—â—â—d the N. because he would not submit to his authority and tax Call you suffering that the rest of your Collectors should do the like and make you and the Commissary merry with telling stories of the frights they put the simple people into and of the summs they extorted from them None durst complain of these exactions the Collectors pretending your power and fauor with the gouernment was so great as to wink at these your most illegal proceedings These were your sufferings and persecutions Mr. Walsh But you know persecution if not suffered for iustice is not meritorious You say your Remonstrant Church suffered this great persecution for professing and performing their duty to the King according to the law of God I pray is it a duty to the King according to the law of God to impose vpon and leuy from his Subiects money by the Popes authority either counterfeit or real We Anti-Remonstrants maintain the Pope hath no such power nor authority Your Remonstrants maintain he hath as appears by your Excommunications and suspensions yet extant Js this your duty to the King Is this according to the law of God Is this a bare satisfaction of conscience for professing and performing your duty Complain not then Mr. Walsh that you and your Remonstrant Church was slighted by the King by the Council by the Parliaments and Lords Lieutenants They clearly perceiued ye were but a company of Cheats that pretended loyalty and practised treason to be for the King and ruin'd his Subjects by the Popes pretended authority Besides Mr. Walsh you cheated my Lord Duke of Ormond as well in the beginning as in the whole progress of your Remonstrance You made his grace belieue that you were commissioned and had power to present that Formulary to his Majesty and to him in the name of the Clergy of Ireland both secular and regular and yet the power you had was but from very few and that power was in order to obtain for the Clergy the benefit of the peace 1648. as appeareth by their instrument pag. 5. of your History wherof one atticle is there should not be tendred any other oath or Formulary of Allegiance to them but one which is set down in the same articles to which your Remonstrance is manifestly opposit Moreouer you confess pag. 6. that you were soundly check't by his Grace as you expected for daring to reteine such an instrument from such men that is men as to the generality and chief of them formerly and lately too so caractered as they were for being in their indignations and carriage very much disaffected to his Majesties interests and very obnoxious to the Laws You see Mr. Walsh what thankes such buisy Friars as you get for intermedling in aflairs whether Ministers of state and the people concern'd will or no. On the other side you cheated the Irish Clergy and Gentry making the Clergy belieue they should haue liberty to exercise their functions and the Gentry that they should be restored to their estates if they sign'd your Remonstrance I pray Mr. Wash how many of the 95. noblemen and Gentlemen that subscribed are restored to their Estates by your Remonstrance name at
disciplin'd though I feare incorrigible Friar Thou hast seen him perhaps in a finer but neuer in a more proper dress Nothing becomes so well an Apostat Friar as strip't stuff I mean sound Lashes seasonably and charitably layd on Friar Walsh his decaying fauor and age make it credible to som that these my Animaduersions may work his conuersion I wish they do I am sure they are publisht with no other intention I beseech thee not to iudge of my education or temper by the roughness of my language in answer to a foulmoâ—th'd Author that makes the two late greatest writers of the Church Cardinal Baronâ—us and Bellarmin whose holy liues haue put them in the list of those who are to be first canonised shameless Impostors and all the Roman Catholik Bishops of the world for many ages Traitors and periur'd persons I am forc't to answer this Fool according to his folly as the scripture bids me and in his own language Therfore I am warranted to scold and scourge him into his habit and Conuent Yet I do it as gently as his insolency permits and as charitably as is consistent with my vindicating the innocence of those he traduceth I medle not with his personal frailties I only take notice of his publik treasons which he fathers vpon honest men and in my conscience all the harm I wish him is that he becom one It is natural enough to desire to know how a religious man came to be so madly extrauagant when excess of ambition litle wit and a mediocrity of reading meet in one subiect we may expect to find in his writings abundance of nonsense many nouelties but no true notions Peter Walâ—h his ambition of a Miter was so excessiue 30. years ago that to obtain it be turn'd the greatest Rebel and Nuntionist of the Irish nation and had a greater hand in the reiection of the peace of 46. and by consequence in the destruction of the late King and his people than any man liuing or all the Clergy which he accuseth for it The repulse he then met with after his eminent seruices to the Nuntio and Treasons against the King depriued him of that litle wit he had and euer since he hath bin scribling and printing of libels and troubling the world with an od kind of raw indigested heresies stoln from the worst of Authors but so vnconnected and absurdly applyed by his dull pen that though you may see he hath read som bookes yet you will easily perceiue he vnderstood very few and such as he vnderstood he wrested to a wrong sense No meruail therfore if his notions be false his discourses consuse his arguments weake and his contradictions so frequent that to confute him you need go no further than his own writings He is so transported with passion against the Church of Rome and those two great pillars therof Belarmin and Baronius that he treats and terms them no better than men hired by the Roman Court to Sacrifice all the world to the Popes ambition The rage he is in for not finding out arguments to make this and his other calumnies credible is so extraordinary that he forgets what he said in the foregoing page or line and through his whole work neuer remembers to speake consequently in any one particular But to the end you may be conuinc't I do not iniure him I will instance euen in this Preface one or two of his contradictions in the very main point he pretends to proue and cleer most exactly as being that wherupon he grounds his new religion One of his chief errors is * Peter Walsh in his History and Vind. pag. 417 in fine That supreme secular Princes neither could nor can grant any exemption from their own supreme ciuil coerciue power to the Clergy or Clerks their subiects liuing within their Dominions and remaining subiects to them because this forsooth implies a plain contradiction Vpon this paradox he raises a new Church or Reformation and despairs not to draw Princes from their own and their Ancestors piety by inculcating to them it is an essential part of their temporal soueraignty and Prerogatiue to haue a Spiritual supremacy but so absurdly limited that he thinks it their greatest security to haue their hands tyed by the law of nature and Gods word from honouring the Diuine Majesty and his Church with an exemption to its Ministers from supreme secular Courts He is opposed in this foolish Tenet both by Protestants and Catholiks for we all agree in this that God can not at least did not command temporal Soueraigns not to oblige and honor for his sake the spiritual Ministery by exempting them from the supreme coerciue power of the secular magistrat seing that for the peace of the commonwealth the safety of Princes and punishment of Malefactors it is abundantly sufficient that delinquent Clergymen be proceeded against by ecclesiastical Iudges Let vs now see how palpably he contradicts himself and wearies his Reader in this absurd and fundamental Thesis of his vast volum and new Religion Euery Catholik as well as himself obiects against it the Martyrdom and Miracles of S. Thomas of Canterbury it being euident out of all Histories both sacred and profane that S. Thomas sufferd was canonised and declared a Martyr for defending the immunities of the Church and particularly that of Churchmen from the coerciue supreme power of secular Courts The Friar grants S. Thomas his Sanctity Miracles and Martyrdom but sayes he sufferd and God wrought all those Miracles not because he did or could in conscience pretend that Church men were exempted from the supreme coerciue power of the Secular Magistrat but because he maintaind the temporal and municipal lawes of England then in force by which Clerks or Churchmen were so exempted from the secular supreme Courts Heer is one contradiction If there were municipal lawes in force then in England which warranted S. Thomas his proceedings for the immunity of the Church and Clergymen from the Kings supreme secular coerciue power or Courts and Churchmen had a true right to those exemptions as Friar Walsh confesseth from page 414. to page 418. of his History quoting the lawes themselues how can he without contradiction say that Princes and Parliaments did not nay could not make such lawes or grant such exemptions to Clergy-men How can he pretend such immunities or exemptions are contrary to the law of nature and the word of God He solues this difficulty with an other contradiction For after granting there were such lawes exempting Churchmen made by the Kings and Parliaments he sayes pag. 422. that S. Thomas at the instance and with the concurrence of all the other Bishops condescended to the Repeal of those temporal lawes which fauored the Clergy's exemption But then how was he a Saint or Martyr for defending the lawes that had bin repeald The answer to this is at hand saith Walsh very facil and cleer S. Thomas saith he in the same page 422. though he swore
she was a woman yet her successors can not be excepted against vpon that score But speak seriously Mr. Walsh do you think it was in the power of those who explain'd the Oath of supremacy if any did explain it to alter the common known signification of words and giue them a quite contrary in matters of religion Sacraments and Oaths If it were there would be no religion in the world no Faith either human or Diuine How could you therfore imagin the Conuocation or euen the Parliament of England did or can alter the signification of words in an Oath wherin a man professeth his Religion or an important point therof Can any power vpon earth declare this form of baptism valid I Baptise thee in the name of the mother and sister and Brother by pretending forsooth that by an Admonition of the Conuocation or any earthly authority the word Mother signifies Father sister son Brother Holy Ghost Do you fancy Mr. Walsh that any iudicious protestant or any Parliament man in England will belieue you if you should tell him that his child is well-baptis'd by such a form and explanation Jf you wil read the Statuts 1. Eliz. 1. 8. Eliz 1. You will find that the Kings of Englands supremacy is so spiritual and sublime that there needs no changing the signification of the word spiritual into temporal and that a King of England if he should think fit may according to the principles of the Protestaâ—e religion establih'd by the lawes of the land giue power by letters patents to any of his lay subiects to consecrate Bishops and Priests which is more than the Pope can do for he must a point a Bishop to ordain Priests and Bishops That the Kings of England may giue by their letters patents power to any of their lay subiects to consecrat Bishops and Priests is very cleer in the aforesaid statuts For by two of them there is giuen to the Queen's Highness her Heirs and Successors c. full power and authority by letters patents vnder the great seal of England from time to time to assigne name and authorise such person or persons at she and they shall think meet and conuenient to exercise vse enjoy and execute vnder her Highness all manner of iurisdictions priuileges preheminences and authorities in any wise touching or concerning any spiritual or Ecclesiastical power or iurisdiction within this Realm or any other her Majesties Dominions or Countreyes Now Priestood being nothing but a spiritual power to consecrat Christ's body and bloud and forgiue sins and Episcopacy including besides the same a spiritual power to consecrat and ordain Priests and Bishops who can doubt but that by vertue of these words and Statuts the Queen might and her successors may by their letters patents and great seal giue power to any of their lay subiects to make a protestant Bishop or Priest seing by those letters patents any person that is a subiect receiueth full power to exercise vse execute enioy c. all manner of iurisdictions preheminences and authorities in any wise touching or concerning any spiritual or Ecclesiastical power c. This is no vain speculation Mr. Walsh but a known practise grounded vpon the 25. article of 39. of the english Protestant Religion it being declared therby that no visible sign or ceremony and by consequence no imposition of Episcopal hands hath bin ordain'd of God for any of these fiue commonly call'd Sacraments wherof holy Orders or Episcopal consecration is one And therfore it s no meruail the Parliament declared 8. Eliz. 1. that the first protestant Bishops were should be true Bishops though it could not be proued that any Bishops euer laid hands vpon them The Story is known In the beginning of Q. Elizabeths reign it was questioned whether the Protestant Bishops were true or real Bishops the Catholik Bishops who refused to consecrat any of them maintain'd they were not because they had not any protestant who was a true Bishop to consecrat them hauing nothing to shew for the Episcopal caracter but the Queens letters parents and therfore the Catholik writers prouokt them in print to name the Bishop who ordain'd or consecrated them as themselues pretended but fiue or six years before This appears in * D Stapleton in his Counter blast against Horn fol. 79. 301. and in his return of vntruths gaianst Iewel fol. 130. D. Stapleton Dr. Harding and other bookes against Iewel edit 1565. 1563. fol. 57. 59. All the world perceiuing at that time how none of the two protestant writers who vndertook to answer Iewel and Horn could name any that consecrated Parker of whose consecration depended that of all the rest nor produce any Registers therof as Harding in express terms demanded it was thought necessary for supplying this shamefull silence and repressing the insolency of the popish Aduersaries to declare the ground wherupon the protestants claim'd to be true Bishops and to be both legaly and validly consecrated Then was made the Statut 8. Elizab. 1. which begins Forasmuch as diuers questions by ouermuch boldness of speech and talk hath lately grown vpon the making and consecrating of Archbishops and Bishops within this Realm c. And though D. Bramhall late Protestant Archbishop of Armagh and others in their bookes do endeauor to diuert the protestant layty from reflecting vpon the consequences which euidently follow from this Act of Parliament as fauoring more the Kings supremacy and spiritual iurisdiction than true Episcopacy and pretend that this Statut doth not giue his Majesty power to make Priests and Bishops hy letters patents and that euen Harding and Stapleion excepted not against the validity but against the legality of the first protestant Bishops consecration and caracter yet the words of this Statut as also of those Catholik Authors admit of no such interpretation The Statuts words are very cleer so are those of the Catholik writers whose design was not to proue that Parker Iewel Horn c. were not protestant Bishops but that they were not true Bishops or Bishops at all They knew very well that they were legal protestant Bishops because they knew they had the Queens letters patents issued forth to the person or persons whether Bishops or not that matters nothing as cleerly appears in the Statuts 1. Eliz. 1. and 8. Eliz. 1. And therfore D. Harding tells Iewel he doubts not but that he may shew him the Queens letters patents for his Episcopacy and by consequence that he was a protestant Bishop adding withall that he was no true Bishop because sayes he the Queen may giue the lands but not the caracter of a Bishop To proue then that they were both legaly and vasidly protestant Bishops the Parliament insisting vpon the purest protestant principles thought it sufficient to declare and make out that they were consecrated by virtue of the Queens letters patents and by som of hâ—r Majesties subjects whether lay or Ecclesiastiks was not thought material by any
do supplicat your Majesty you be pleased to command by a most pious order that Peter Walsh a disturber of the peace in lieu of Peter the Inuader of the Church Alexandria be transported to foreign parts Would any man of sense iudge by this humble request that our King or any other to whom it were made had that spiritual authority in Ecclesiastical matters which you would fain flatter Soueraigns with Nay suppose his Majesty or the Parliament were pleased for the peace of the three Nations and to punish you for teaching and printing that Bishops as Bishops can not lawfully help or succor their King to pull down an vsurper or oppose any rebellion to send you to row in the Galleys of Tangiers or to the Baâ—bados to labor with the slaues in the Sugar Mills as you say pag. 357. one Chronopius a Bishop was sent to digg in the Syluer Mines by the Emperor Valentinian for appealing to him after he had bin condemned by an Ecclesiastical sentence of 70. Bishops would any one think that this Mission of yours to Tangiers or Barbados after you had bin condemned by the Church as an heretik for this doctrin could proue that the King or Parliament had power to gouern the Church or to make lawes in spiritual matters T is therfore to no purpose for me to confute these and other wild arguments of yours seing themselues sufficiently lay open your gross mistake and demonsttat your litle wit and iudgment But I will beg my Readers leaue and patience to relate your Achilles a The case of S. Iohn Chrysosiom in the controuersy of S. John Chrysostom Arcadius an Emperor also very Orthodo◠〈◊〉 Friar Walsh pag. 360. receiued the accusations against Iohn Chrysostom Bishop of Constantinople and thervpon hauing first ordered a iudicial procedure against this great and holy Bishop at last condemn'd and sent him with a guard of Soldiers farr off to exile Socrates lib 6. c. 16. Falad in Dial. And certainly Pope Innocent the first of that name who then gouerned the see of Rome where he inueighs bitterly against Arcadius and against Endoxia his Empress as against most grieuous Persecutors of so great and so holy a man doth not at all obiect that Arcadius being a meer lay man vsurped a iâ—dâ—â—iary power in Ecclesiastical matters or so against his own Bishop nor that he proceeded so against him out of or by a tyrannical power and not by any legal authority ouer him in the case but only reprehends Arcadius in that he had not proceeded iustly against Chrysostom or in that he had not made right vse of the power which he had in the case and in a word in that he expell'd Chrysostom from his Episcopal throne before his cause had bin legaly and throughly sifted or iudged as it ought and consequently without obseruing the due formaliues or euen substantial or essential procedure in such case required by the law 〈◊〉 sayes he è throno suo re non iudicata magnum totius orbâ—s Doctorem Niceph. lib. 13. cap. 34. Nor doth Chrysostom himself any where complain of the Emperor as hauing vsurped a power of iudging condemning or banishing him And yet we know he writ to seueral especialy to Pope Innocent many letters fâ—aught with complaints of the Emperors vniust iudgment and proceedings against him acknowledging Arcadius or at least supposing him still a legal Iudge though vniust as to the sentence in the case You haue the misfortune Mr. Walsh to contradict yourself in euery story you tell and by consequence you haue a special gift of discrediting your own writings and making your relation and comments vpon it incredible and ridiculous You say in the beginning of this story that Arcadius receiued the accusations against Saint Iohn Chrysostom and therupon hauing first ordered a iudicial procedure against that holy Bishop at last condemned and sent him with a guard of Soldiers farr off to exise A iudicial procedure Mr. Walsh is to proceed secundum allegata probata if Arcadius did so and was Chrysostoms lawfull Iudge Pope Innocent could not reprchend Arcadius as proceeding vniustly against him or say that he condemned him re non iudicata Js to condemn one according to a iudicial procedure and by a lawfull authority to condemn him re non iudicata When therfore the Pope reprehended Arcadius for banishing Chrysostom re non iudicata before his cause was sentene't he meant as is vnderstood by euery man of sense that Arcadius was not his lawfull Iudge and that he ought to haue expected the sentence of the Apostolik sea or a Catholik Councel of Bishops to which the Saint had appeald You see Mr. Walsh how you contradict yourself and how difficult a thing it is to contradict truth and to corrupt such Authors as tell it without being caught in a lye Heare then the true story of S. Iohn Chtysostoms controuersy with the Emperor Arcadius as it is related by S. Iohn himself Palladius and the same Authors which you quote Theophilus Bishop of Alexandria and others ill affected to S. Iohn Chrysostom were employ'd by Eudoxia the Empress to depose that holy Prelat from his see his chief Accusers were som of his own Priests who could not endure his iust reprehensions for their faults Amongst other things himself sayes he was accused of too much familiarity with a certain woman and that he permitted people to receiue the communion after eating This accusation was heard by Theophilus and 36. Bishops of his and the Empress faction met at Calcedon and exhibited by two Priests of Constantinople which Chrysostom had excommunicated for notorious crimes The Saint had with him in Constantinople forty Bishops assembled to heare a charge of 70. articles giuen in against Theophilus but Thophilus who should haue stood at the bair in Constantinople sate as a Iudge in Calcedon and without any lawfull authority summon'd Chrysostom to appeare before him at Calcedon to answer the charge put in against him by the two excommunicated Priests But though the S. said he would appeare when soeuer the Iudges were lawfull and not parties yet the 40. Bishops who stuck to him signified to Theophilus that he should rather com to Constantiuople to cleer himself than call others to iudgment at Chalcedon Vpon this Chrysostom had sentence of deposition past vpon him at Chalcedon for contumacy forsooth And though he appeald to a Councell of Catholik and indisterent Bishops yet those of Chalcedon had so much interest with the Empress and shee with the Emperor as to haue Chrysostom halled out of his Church by Soldiers wherupon he retired to Bernetum of Bithinia But a sedition being feared in Constantinople for this iniustice the Emperor and the Empress also sent to desire him to return withall diligence which he did but as soon as he return'd he desired the Emperor as may be seen in his Epistle to Pope Innocent that his cause might be tryed in a lawfull Synod of Bishops so
to consent to the repeal of the lawes exempting the Clergy from the supreme coerciue power yet Swearing alone was not enough without further signing and sealing as it seems the custom then was of the Bishops and Peers in making of lawes nor all three together without a free consent in those or of those who swore so or sign'd and seal'd so and that there was no free consent but a forc't one by threats of imprisonment banishment death appears c. This answer may pass if it be true but immediatly he confesseth its not credible that the substance and validity of a law should depend vpon such formalities and indiuidual circumstances of euery particular man seing the maior vote in Parliament made the law For after that he had maintain'd positiuely in twelue pages the aforesaid answer he sudenly falls off from it in the 434. of his tedious volum and sayes Jt is not so cleer in all respects that those 16 heads of customs which S. Thomas opposed as being against the immunities of the Church passed not legaly and before the Saints death into a just municipal law of the land or of England For it may be said first and said also vpon very probable grounds out of the seueral Historians who writ of purpose of those dayes and matters that they all Bishops freely consented And secondly it may be said that the greater vote enacts a law in Parliament hauing the consent Roial whether one Bishop or more or euen all the Bishops dissent And thirdly yet it may be said that all lawes most commonly or at least too often may be call'd in question vpon that ground of feare of the Prince Notwithstanding this third or fourth contradiction and recantation of his answer building Saint Thomas of Canterbury's Sanctity vpon his suffering for maintaining the temporal lawes of the land in fauor of the Clergy's immunities notwithstanding I say he confesses there were no such temporal lawes then in England because they had bin repeal'd by Acts of Parliament with concurrence of Saint Thomas himself and the other Bishops yet he aduises his Readers pag 435. to fix rather vpon this answer both contradicted and adhered to by himself than on the others no less absurd which he giues By this you may guess how solidly grounded his religion is But then he supplyes the fifth contradiction and weakeness of all his Answers by a notable and acute general rule which he sets down in the beginning of the page 435. in these words Sixt and last reason That we must rather giue any Answer that inuolues not heresy or manifest error in the Catholik saith or natural reason obuious to euery man than allow or iustify the particular actions or contests or doctrine of any one Bishop or Pope how great or holy soeuer otherwise or euen of many such or of all their Partakers in such against both holy scripture plain enough in the case c. This sure if well applyed I confess may iustify this very absurd answer but me thinks answers which inuolue contradictions ought not to be comprehended in that vniuersal any answer which may be giuen to such pressing arguments against the Friars new Religion as this of S. Thomas his Martyrdom sanctity and Miracles For though an answer did not inuolue heresy or manifest error in the Catholik faith yet if it inuolues nonsense or a plain contradiction it inuolues an error against natural reason obuious to euery man except Peter Walsh and therfore it ought not be taken for a good answer it s much better in my opinion to allow or iustify the particular actions or contests or doctrin of one holy and learned Bishop or Pope and of all their partakers which in our case is the whole Roman Catholik Church euer since S. Thomas his Martyrdom then the fancies of a dull ignorant Friar that contradicts his own answers so frequently a Friar that ran mad for not obtaining a Bishoprik for which he sacrificed in the yeare 1646. the loyalty due to his King the respect due to his Lieutenant and the loue due to his Countrey which he inuolued in Bloud by printing and preaching against the gouernment against a very aduantagious peace against the publik faith and the obligation of maintaining it As for his maintaining the miracles and sanctity of S. Thomas of Canterbury it proceeds not either from deuotion to the Saint or any reuerence he hath for the doctrin or practise of the Catholik Church of these last 600. years seing he sayes it hath maintain'd and practised since Gregory 7. those enormous errors which he now would fain reform and by consequence its honouring S. Thomas for a Saint may be also an error in his opinion How then coms the Friar to be so deuout to S. Thomas as to say he was no Traitor You must know great part of his design in writing this vast volum was to make his Court to my Lord Duke of Ormond whose family owes and ownes its great Estate in Jreland to the scruple King Henry 2. had for persecuting the Saint and his relations wherof one of the neerest was my Lord Duke of Ormonds Ancestor to whom King Henry 2. gaue great priuileges and Lands in Jreland to expiat what fault he had in the murther of so innocent and holy a Prelat But if Peter Walsh had knowen my Lord Duke of Ormond as well as his neerest Relations do he would neuer contradict himself so manifestly and frequently for making Thomas Becket a Saint out of a complement to my Lord Duke whose iustice and integrity is so eminent that his fauor is not to be gain'd by courting him in his relations as diuers noblemen and gentlemen can witness who in hopes of being restored to their Estates by marrying his Neeces got nothing by the bargain but the honor of being allyed to so illustrious a family So that You see Friar Walsh is as much mistaken in his Courtship as in his doctrin Many perhaps will iudge these my Animaduersions superfluous 1. because Friar Walsh his book sufficiently declares its own absurdities 2. It s bulk is so great the stile so vnpolish't the parenthesis of his own praises so long so false and so impertinent that few will trouble themselues with reading a History so litle importing the publik so iniurious to particular persons and so false ridiculous and tedious in itself But because Peter Walsh is a likely man to fancy that others take as much pleasure in reading his book as himself doth I shall endeauor to disabuse him and do the publik that seruice as to put this vain Friar out of conceit with himself and his work If this may be effected which I confess is very difficult it will be a great ease to the publik and to the Press which he threatens with a second Tome of the same dull dirty stuff Jadmire more the patience of many worthy and witty men which this pittifull Friar hath endeuored to disgrace with lyes than I do the
other than to put the lawfull Proprietor in possession Mr Walsh see how heretical and destructiue your doctrin is Suppose a thing which hath happened and may happen very often Suppose I say an vsurper or Rebell will not go to confession or if he doth will not restore the vsurp't Kingdom or Prouince to his lawfull Soueraign according to his Confessarius his command Hervpon the Bishops of that Kingdom or Prouince according to their duty excommunicat the Tyrant or Rebell for his publik sin and contumacy in keeping out of his Kingdom the lawfull King He contemns their Censures Let me ask you this question Do the Bishops sin in raising of their own accord and as Bishops an Army against the Tyrant or Rebell only to put their lawfull King in possession Answer M. Walsh Do they sin I say in doing this duty would the Pope sin if as Pope he had don the same would Innocenâ— 10. haue sin'd if he helpt to raise an Army in defence of the late King or for the restauration of the present against that vsurper Cromuell would other Popeâ— haue sinn'd in doing the same in prosecution of theiâ— Spiritual Censures in case these had not seru'd theiâ— turn against the Barons when they excommunicated them for their rebellion against King Iohn or King Henry the third Is the whole Catholik Church guiltâ— of heresy and impiety for maintaining this doctrinâ— Speake out Mr. Walsh or at least retract for shamâ— this wicked destructiue principle and accuse not thâ— Church of God as asserting in itself a power preiudiâ—cial to Soueraigns that power I say which hath biâ— so often applied and of its own nature is so appliâ—abâ— to their safety and seruice Do not follow Blacklows he retical principles whom you page 43. 1. p. termâ— learned Priest of the Roman Communion though much for most of his bookes censur'd at Rome They are censured all and censured as Arch heretical And one of them obedience and Gouernment is censur'd for this very doctrin of yours viz. That Subiects sin if they endeauor to restore their disposest and exiled lawfull Soueraign And this Blaklow after all this you and the Blakloistes call a learned Catholik Priest Do you imagin that any Catholik or protestant Soueraign will permit you or a Chapter and Clergy that hold such an Author to be a Catholik and of eminent learning to liue in their Dominions and instruct their Subiects Retire retire to your Conuent good Father Walsh obey your Superiors retract your heretical doctrin so inconsistent with the safety of lawfull Soueraigns submit to the corporal punishment your General will inflict vpon you when you are absolued from so many spiritual Censures you haue incurr'd buisy your-self no longer with Church or state affairs seing you are not sit for either and are so ignorant that pretending to fauor the Soueraignty of Princes you make it vnlawfull for Bishops to ferue them and accuse the Church of heresy for claiming a power to correct with corporal punishments you and such Friars as you are ANIMAD 5. Whether the Roman Catholik Church hath fallen into heresy or hatherr'd enormously these last 600. years for contradicting Friar Peter Walsh his doctrin of a spiritual supremary in temporal Soueraigns and whether all the Roman Catholik Bishops of all the world haue bin for the same 600. years or as least are in this last Century either Traytors to their Soueraigns or periur'd to the Pope for taking the ancient and vsual eath before Episcopal Consecration IT S euident Mr. Walsh by your own words quoted in the first and second Animaduersion that one of the enormous errors wherwith you charge the Church of God for these last 600. years is that the 80. Popes the innumerable writers and all the Bishops therof deny'd to temporal Soueraigns that Supremacy which is attributed in the English oath of Supremacy and a Legislatiue power of making lawes in ecclesiastical matters euen of Faith We haue also quoted these your words of the page 40. n. 3. in your Preface to the Reader If the truth were known it would be found that Baronius and the rest following him were willing to make vse of any malicious vngrounded fictions whatsoeuer against Instinian the Emperor c. by reason his Lawes in ecclesiastical matters euen those of Faith are a perpetual eysore to them because these Lawes are a precedent to all other good Princes to gouern their own respectine Churches in the like manner without any regard of Bulla Coenae or of so many other vain allegations of those men that would make the world belieue it vnlawfull for Secular Princes to make ecclesiastical lawes by their own sole authority for the gouernment of the Church c. To reform therfore this so long erroneus Church and to restore to Secular Princes that spiritual iurisdiction which is giuen them in the oath of Supremacy or a legislatiue power of making ecclesiastical lawes euen in matters of Faith by their own sole authority you Friar Walsh haue found out a Remonstrance wherin all this power and right is asserted and as you say ought to be taken by all loyall Subiects especialy the Bishops who renounce their allegiance by this ensuing oath to the Pope before their consecration which you set down in latin and I translate into inglish The Oath wherby according to Friar Walsh all Bishops are made Traytors pag. 19 Dedic IN. Elect of the Church N. from this hour forward will be faithfull and obedient to S. Peter the Apostle and to the holy Roman Church and to our Lord Pope N. as also to his Successors I will not be in counsel consent or fact that they may loose life or limb or be imprisoned or violent hands laid vpon them in any manner or any iniury don to them vpon any color whatsoeuer The Counsell wherwith they will trust me by themselues their Nuncios or letters I will not reueal to their preiudice The Roman Papacy and royalties of Saint Peter I shall help to retain and defend Saluo meo Ordine against all men I will treat honourably the Legat of the see Apostolik as he passeth by and returns and shall help him in his necessities I shall endeauor to conserue defend increase and promote the rights honors priuileges and authority of the holy Roman Church of our Lord the Pope and of his Successors I will not be in counsell fact or treaty wherin are plotted any sinister or preiudicial things against the Lord Pope or the Roman Church And if I know of any such plots against them I will endeauor to hinder them to the best of my power as also discouer them as soon as I can to the Pope himself or to som other that may giue him notice therof I shall obserue and cause to be obserued to the vttermost of my power the rules of the holy Fathers the Decrees Ordinations or dispositions reseruations prouisions and Apostolik Mandats I shall impugn and prosecute to my power Heretiks
And that the Churches hoâ—ouring and innoking him as a true Martyr for maintaining its immunities is no argument that he defended therin iustice or truth because forsooth neither himself nor any other did inuoke God to work the Miracles to euidence the truth or iustice of those immunities S. Thomas maintain'd against the 16. or 12. lawes or customs of Henry 2. which were all in order to take away or diminish the Popes external spiritual iurisdiction and supremacy and to assert in the King a coerciue power ouer the Clergy I pray Mr. Walsh where do you find it declared necessary that the Mysteries of Christian faith be made credible or confirm'd by a formal or express inuocation of God to work miracles for euery one of them in particular Christ himself taught that Miracles confirm any general doctrin preacht by him who works them neither doth he put that condition or caution of a particular and formal inuocation of God without which you pretend the doctrin taught or sufferd for may be false But let that pass What more express inuocation or declaration of God can you desire for the truth and iustice of S. Thomas of Canterbury's doctrin than that so notorious and so long depending a controuersy between the Church and state should suspend all Christendom there being on the one side a powerfull Monarch who stood for the pretended right of Kings on the other but a poor banish't subiect though a Bishop to maintain that of the Church and that this poor man hauing bin murther'd by flattering Courtiers for maintaining the Church immunities God should work so many and so vndeniable Miracles at his dead body and Tomb that you are not only fore't to confess they are true ones but that King Henry 2. himself acknowledged S. Thomas had the truth and iustice on his side And therfore to satisfy God and the world rather for his vniust contest against the Church than for the Saints murther which the King neither intended nor desired that great Monarch did vndergo those corporal punishments which the Pope as his spiritual Pastor commanded him to do though you say he hath as spiritual Pastor no power to inflict vpon your self as much as a Disiplin like that which the Monks of Canterbury gaue King Henry 2. We haue related the principles of your religion and Remonstrance out of your own Alcoran your great volum is no better than Mahomet's Alcoran now let vs see what practises did flow from such principles ANIMADVERSION 7. Of the practises of Friar Walsh his Remonstrant Church IF the Roman Catholik Church of these last 600. years hath fall'n from the ancient Christian principles of loyalty due to temporal Princes as Friar Walsh pretends and all the Roman Catholik Bishops are Trayâ—ors to their Soueraigns by the oath they take at their consecration we may rather wonder God did not send sooner a holy man to reform these enormous errours than that after so long a time he should at length send Saint Peter Walsh to do it who by his good example as well as by his learned writings doth teach Catholik Subiects that allegiance from which they haue bin withdrawn for these six last Centuries Blessed be God who albeit for our sins he deferreth his mercies yet neuer fails to impart them sooner than we deserue Nor indeed could this age so infamous for murthers and rebellions against lawfull Soueraigns expect so Apostolik a Reformer as Peter Walsh hath proued himself to be You complain Mr. Walsh page 43 of your Preface to the Reader as also page 50 seqq that F. Peter TAlbot the titular Arâ—hâ—ishop of Dublin and Ring leader of the â—iâ—h Anti Remonstrants hath perseented the said Remonstrants to death as far as in him lay and that his answers to the petition you presented against him contain'd manifest vntruths you suggest also that he is thought to be Author of the Dublin Libel written against your Remonstrants directly but withall indirectly or euen principaly aiming at the most illustrous personof his Grace the Duke of Ormond Though I haue not the honor to be acquainted with that Prelat yet his being one and his writing against your accusations in his own defence mad me curious and concern'd and hauing inquir'd after the Papers which past between you I obtain'd a sight of them as also of that which you call the Dublin libel which is term'd by the Author therof a Vinâ—ication against Friar Walsh his Calumnies written by a Pastor of the Diocess of Dublin If all be true Mr. Walsh that is ther in alledged against you with particular circumstances you are the greatest Traitor and Rebel that breathes You are charg'd likewise not by Peter Talbot nor in the answer to your petition nor in the Vindication or Dublin libel but in another paper a part of murthering fiue poor English Soldiers of the garison of Raroffy in the County of Kildare at the bridge of Iohnston in the very beginning of the Irish commotion and that with such barbarous breach of faith or at least of the law of armes and incredible cruelty that it s to be admired how any who values the name or bloud of an englishman can see you much less profess to be your friend before you cleer your-self of that accusation 2. You are charged in the Vindication of being a most seditious Preacher or seducer of the people against their allegiance to the King and the royal authority residing in the Marques of Ormond Lord Lieutenant of Ireland vpon the proclamation of the peace of 1646. you seconded one Doctor Enos by approuing his infamous libel against the person and authority of his Excellency The drift and matter of the libel was to dissuade the people from admitting or adhearing to that good peace and from any agreement with the said Matques of Ormond because forsooth he design'd the Kings ruin as well as theirs This calumny Enos pretended to proue and you approued of all by commending the libel and the Author in print in the first leaf therof because his Excellency would not conclude before the yeare 46. any peace with the Irish though he had positiue and pressing commands from the King to do it but for three or four years delayd it by vnprofitable and suspitious cessations in which time the King was subdued and imprison'd and therfore his sayd Lieutenant might pretend and plead that seruice or at least a neutrality to the Parliament when they came to be Masters of all And besides his Excellency obseruing that the Erle of Glamorgan had giuen the Irish full satisfaction in the article of Religion most insisted vpon by them the Lord Lieutenant would not condescend therunto but rather declared against it imprison'd the Erle in the Castle of Dublin and therby disperst 10000. men ready to be shipt at water ford for his Maiesty's relief in England and ruin'd him by hindering that succor This was the Subiect of Enos and your libel Mr. Walsh the common sort of the Irish
Ormond But what is most falsely asserted by Peter Walsh is that in my answer I did giue a touch of the murther he is charged with I toucht not any such thing I am sure I did not intend to be his Accuser in any cause of bloud and I hindred others from accusing him as my Brother Iohn Talbot had also don nay I had him aduertised of his danger by a friend of his own as soon as Father Cauenagh and Father Bremingham attested the murther at Castleton in presence of my Lord Dongan Mr. Chasles White of Leixslip my self and others For though his barbarous inhuman cruelty if what is said of him be true deserues ten thousand deaths yet I would not for all the world concurr to it The thankes he gaue me for letting him know his danger to the end he might retire to his Conuent and do pennance for his sins was to misinforme the honorable House of commons and the committee of Religion by one of the two Mr. Warnhams commonly known by the name of Flahertys Varnham that I did most impudently exercise papal iurisdiction in Ireland by excommunicating and censuring his Majesties most loyal Subiects for subscribing to the Remonstrance And though this was known in Ireland to be a fable yet Mr. Varnham and som others of Friar Walsh his friends auerring it to be very true I haue sufferd much vpon that account and that infamous Friar though a known Traytor to God and the King laught in his sleeue after abusing the Parliament with notoriously false informations and insults for hauing bin so succesfull in exasperating the Caualeer party against one who endeauored to serue many of them in their exile abroad as som of them since were pleased to teftify though too late for my relief and redress of the iniury don to me My buisness is not to exaggerat this mans misdemeanors but rather to warn him once more of his danger and aduise him not to be so publik in London frequenting great Prelats and Noblemens houses vpon whom he must needs draw inconueniencies if he doth not cleer himself of treasons and murthers better then by saying in his great english Tome of Irish Rapsody that all these accusations are lyes or libels of the titular Archbishop of Dublin or of his friends and then tell his Readers he will vindicat himself in his latin Irish work Me thinks he might haue reserued som of his vnnecessary vncouth speeches and tedious repetitions for that work and in lieu therof cleer himself of those foul aspersions at least in a parentesis som of his being long enough to weary any patient Reader and to iustify any honest man This I hope is enough to vindicat me from Peter Walsh his calumnies which do not much trouble me it being the greatest honor of an honest man to be raild at by an heretik I am Your most obliged Seruant PETER TALBOT Mr. Walsh I haue bin assured by credible persons that what this Prelat sayes heer of you and himself is very true and that a man would be laught at in Ireland where these things happen'd if he question'd so notorious matters of fact wherof there are yet liuing many legal witnesses This supposed I must needs blame you for printing such lyes to discredit a Bishop or at least for not prouing what you say of him by more credible arguments than the bare assertion of your-self in your own cause If you being but a priuat person and a petty Friar say pag. 51. of your Preface that the Author of the Dublin libel for writing against you som pretended vntruths ought by the ciuil lawes to be put to death and by the Canon of Pope Adrian be stript naked and whipt with scourges if he can not proue the truth of the particulars of his libel what will the world say of you for writing manifest vntruths of an Archbishop Especialy when you can not proue that he is the Author or that you are iniur'd by that Dublin libel as you call it and for want of an answer to the particulars therin alleged against you remit your english Reader to a latin Irish work not yet composed not euer like to be printed I am troubled Mr. Walsh at this malitious folly of yours But patience I will now consider how your Remonstrant Church came to fail and fall ANIMADVERSION 8. How the Protestants who had formerly a good opinion of Friar Walsh his Remonstrant Church came at length to alter it and be fully conuinc't that both he and his Remonsttant Church-men are Cheats MR Walsh you complain very much pag. 577. seq of the second part of your first long Treatise that the Anti Remonstrants notwithstanding their opposition against you lost nothing either of liberty or other benefits or fanors at home from the Ciuil Magistrate from the Lord Lieutenant or Kings Majesty or his Court Council or Parliament being equal in all such for any material thing to the Remonstrants and on the other side were sure of all euen extraordinary fauors c. from their own Church and from the Conrt of Rome abroad while the Remonstrants were sure of nothing from either but slight from the one and extreme persecution from the other And these fate last years from 1667. to the end of the present year 1672 haue giuen sufficient arguments of both the one and the other During which time those poor Remonsirants had nothing to ballâ—nce all their sufferings but the bare satisfaction of conscience to be slighted so by their friends and persecuted so by their Ennemies for professing and performing their duty to the King atterding to the law of God This is a very sad story Mr. Walsh but the Dublin libel as you call it tells you an other quite contrary and you know it to be true nay you giue a hint of it in the pag 3. of your Preface to the Catholiks which needed an other Preface itself being a large book There you say that the Anti-Remonstrants persecuted your holy Church in a most surious manner with all the vilest arts of malicious Cabals Conspiraties Plots libels and an Impostor Commissary and a forged Commission What 's that Mr. Walsh An Impostor Commissary A forged Commission I pray explain yourself Did the Anti Remonstrants persecute your Remonstrance and Church by an Impostor Commissary and a forged Commission did the court of Rome send such a person and giue him such a commission If so he was no Impostor Well I see those Romans are strange men Is it possible they could be so ill natur'd as to persuade a poor Friar to play the Impostor or that he would be persuade to play the fool and knaue so egregiously meerly to vndermine your Remonstrant Church Good God in what a great mistake hath the world bin these 9. or ten years Truly Mr. Walsh 't is the persuasion of all England Ireland France and Italy that you and the Impostor Commissary agreed to persecute the Roman Catholik Clergy and vnderstood
take his pass as the other Colonells did Hereby the Bishop incurr'd his Kings displeasure and ruin'd the fortune of his Brother a very loyal worthy gentleman and a good Commander After the Kings happy restauration this vndutifull carriage of the Bishop was not forgot at whitehall and he not knowing how to liue in France hauing also a desire to return to his own Countrey writ to you Mr. Walsh that he would do any thing you would haue him do so he might be permitted to return and liue at home A large offer and an argument of a large conscience in circumstances wherin he knew you wanted and sought at this very time a Bishop to head your vpstart Church You took him at his word and he set his hand to to your Remonstrance Whether he repented or no at his death I know not but I am sure Friar Redmund Caron whom you canonize for a Saint pag. 759. ought to haue retracted the doctrin of his Remonstrantia Hibernorum which was stuff't with so notorious and palpable falsifications that he can not be presumed to haue bin ignorant of them But his last aduice and Adieu to you is sad and remarkable for he declared as you say pag. 760. That you were bound in conscience to prosecute still euen after his death that matter of the Remonstrance and continue the defence or aduancement of that doctrin which in his life time you had for so many years and notwithstanding so much contradiction maintain'd You do a great iniury Mr. Walsh to the memory and merit of that Illustrious and Catholik Prelat Thomas Dease quondam Bishop of Meath in ioyning him in the same page with Caron as approuing at his death of your Remonstrance and doctrin What if he did approue of the book of Queries Was there any thought or knowledge then of your Remonstrance Is there any thing in that book of Queries asserting a spiritual supremacy in Princes or denying it to the Pope Doth it say that Secular Princes by their own sole authority may gouern the Church and make Ecclesiastical lawes euen in matter of Faith Doth it maintain that Catholiks both rashly and obstinatly deny to take the oath of Supremacy and by consequence commit a sin for not taking it Doth it say the General Councells of Ephesus and Calcedon gaue as much to temporal Princes and as litle to the Pope of spiritual authority as the oath of Supremacy doth Doth it say that som Catholiks hold Generall Councells are fallible Where will you find in the book of Queries that the Roman Catholik Church hath err'd enormously in its principles and practises these last 600. years and that all the Bishops thereof are either Traytors to their Princes or periur'd to the Pope in taking the vsual oath at their consecration Doth the book of Queries teach that if Bishops as Bishops help their Soueraigns with money or armes against Rebells or Vsurpers they offend God As also that temporal Soueraings offend God in exempting the Clergy from their Secular Supreme Courts Doth the book of Queries teach that God may work Miracles to confirm a falshood or at least the Sanctity of a man who has a good intention and zeale in maintaining it or dying for it thinking it to be a truth Or that a man who dyes so for maintaining an error is properly though not strictly a Martyr Or that the whole Church when it celebrats the feast of a Saint as properly and strictly a Martvr may be mistaken in declaring and belieuing him such a Martyr though not in belieuing him a Saint in Heauen All this you maintain in Saint Thomas of Canterberies case as necessary consequences flowing from the doctrin of your Remonstrance Did Bishop Thomas Dease nay did Caron himself defend these heresies The book of Queries only asserted the lawfullness of making peace and Confederacies with Protestants and that the Popes Nuncius could not validly excommunicat the Irish Catholiks for doing so and that it was lawfull to appeal to the Pope in those circumstances and that the said Appeal did suspend the Nuncius Censures No learned Catholik denyes this doctrin But not one Catholik in the world doth or can maintain your doctrines now mention'd and therfore you are not only heretik but an Impostor pretending that they who opposed the Nuntius his Censures and practises in Ireland were your Remonstrants ANIMADVERSION 9. Whether temporal Soueraigns can exempt from their Supreme coerciue power the Clergy of their Dominions THAT they haue don so de facto is euident by the lawes and practise of all Christian Emperors and Kings especialy in England euer since Christianity florished But what 's that to the purpose if Friar Walsh say they could not de iure or in conscience Pardon me 't is somthing For though Friar Walsh his authority be very great Especialy when he hath Barclay the Poet or Romantik writer to back him yet I hope the persuasion and practise of the whole Catholik Church the belief of all Christian Princes and Prelats for so many hundred years will weigh more than the opinion of a Romantik Poet or a Remonstrant Friar Excuse then I pray Mr. Walsh poor Cardinal Belarmin whose ignorance you so much pitty for being mightily startled at this position of yours and Barklay's The temporal a Friar Walsh 1. part of his first Treatise pag. 267 Seq Princes themselues how otherwise Supreme soeuer could not can not by any law right authority or power giuen them by God or man exempt from themselues that is from their own Supreme Ciuil and euen coerciue power the Clergy men of their Dominions Sure you must needs haue a very cleer demonstration for this Tenet that forces you to hold it being so contrary to the doctrin and practise of the Church You say you haue Out with it then Mr. Walsh and let not the Faithfull be any longer foold Good Reader be attentiue 't is a profound acute argument you will find it pag. 271. cit in these words Whosoeuer haue and continue any office which essentially inuolues a power Supreme both directiue and coerciue of all Clerks within their Dominions may not deuest themselues of the power of directing and coercing the same Clerks vnless they do withal deuest themselues of that office as towards the self same Clerks Because they can not deuest themselues of the essence of that which they hold still this arguing a plain contradiction But the Office of Kings inuolues a power supream both directiue and coerciue of all Clerks within their Dominions Ergo. The Minor you must proue Mr. Walsh I haue already don that saith he and at large by very natural reason I find none but that desinition of a King for which you quote your great claslik Author Almainus de sup potest c. cap. 5. thus Aliquem esie Regem nihil aliud est quam habere Superioritatem erga subditos in subditis esse obligationem pariendi Regi c. This is all you set
and vnity to expect if they were not otherwise of one sentiment or equal edification the iudgment of God alone and not proceed to the Censure of one an other especialy in the occasion then present of the grand Controuersy with Arrius of the chiefest fundamental of the Christian Faith itself and in itself abstracting so much from all personal failings in life and conuersation of either Bishop Priest or Laik Nor doth it matter it at present how or in what sense we must vnderstand this saying of Cyprian or euery or any particular branch of it further than that of Constantin and in his right meaning which I haue before giuen is paralell to it ANIMADVERSION 11. Friar Walsh his Idea of the doctrin and disciplin of the Catholik Church and of the equality of its Bishops THIS Explication and Comment of yours Mr. Walsh vpon Saint Cyprian and Constantins words concerning the Iudicature and Priuileges of the Clergy doth declare very wel that entertaining and pleasing Idea you tell the Catholiks of the three Kingdoms a Pag. 5. Dedicat. you haue had these many years wherin they are so much concern'd It can not be denyed but that its a very pleasant thing especialy for the Bishops to be so absolute so at peace and enioy such liberty amongst themselues that none but our Sauiour Iesus Christ can question them for the gouernment of their flocks or for any scandal of their own liues and conuersation This is your Idea and you say it was the sentiment of Saint Cyprian if you be not much mistaken and that Constantin the great had it from his writings and aduised the Bishops of the Nicen Councel according to this Idea to fall vpon the Arians and neuer trouble themselues with reprehending or correcting their own faults and frailties because all such things must be remitted to the day of Iudgment in the mean time euery Bishop hath his own proper abitrement pro licentia libertatis potestatis suae according to the pleasure of his own liberty and his own power I confess this is a great priuilege and more than euer the Roman Catholik Clergy euen the Pope himself prerended to for the Pope may be vnpoped at least for heresy But the Bishops of your Idea or Church Mr. Walsh are all Popes and yet can not be declared by any other Bishops or Cardinals to be deposed by Christ for any heresy or fault committed in gouerning their flocks Now though you declare yourself to be no Roman Catholik by this your parity of all Bishops and saying that by the immediat law of God the Pope hath no spiritual superiority or authority ouer other Bishops yet I hope you will giue temporal Soueraigns a superintendence or som power to keep those independent Bishops in order and Church disciplin at least you pretended so hitherto But now you say no. For Constantin and Saint Cyprians rule is that no Emperor no King none but Jesus Christ alone may order or iudge Bishops Vnus solus Iesus Christus habet potestatem proeponendi nos in Ecclesiae suae gubernatione de actu nostro iudicandi How com you then to fool vs hitherto and make the world belieue from the first page of your great volume vnto this 345 that temporal Soueraigns haue power and authority from God to correct not only the lay crimes but the Ecclesiastical faults of Bishops and to force them to keep the Canons Customs and disciplin of the Church Js this your zeal for the right of temporal Soueraigns Js this the scope and sense of your loyal Remonstrance Certainly it will be suspected you are a Cheat. Jf you be such a man Mr. Walsh you either were too scrupulous or did ouer act the Hypocrite when you refused the Bishoprick you say was ofterd to you by the Protestants I suppose in Ireland What could you desire more than to be equal with the Pope a Mr. Walsh his opinion of the validity of the 〈◊〉 Protestant Episcopacy and not accountable to any spiritual or temporal Superior vpon earth for the gouernment of your flock or yourself Especialy you hauing declared pag 42. n. 13. of your Preface that you hold yourself oblig'd in conscience for any thing you know yet to concurr with them who doubt not the ordination of Bishops Priests and Deacons in the Protestant Church of England to be at least valid And yea you haue read all whateuer hath bin to the contrary obiected by the Roman Catholik writers whether against the matter or form or want of power in the Consecraters by reason of their Schism or heresy or of their being deposed formerly from their sees By the way Mr. Walsh let me tell you that the Roman Catholik Church doth not ground its practise of ordaining absolutely and without any condition at all protestant Ministers who are conuerted and desire to be Priests amongst vs vpon their want of true and valid ordination proceeding from any Schism heresy or deposition of their Ordainers and first protestant Bishops for we all grant that neither Schism nor heresy of the Consecraters or their deposition makes an Ordination inualid as you see by what we hold of heretical Bishops but we ground the nullity of the protestant Episcopacy and ordination both vpon the inualidity of the protestant form of Episcopacy priestood and vpon their first Consecrater Parker vpon whose consecration all theirs doth depend neuer hauing bin consecrated a Bishop himself for besides many other proofs Iewel and Horn pretending to make out his and their own Episcopal consecration could neuer in their bookes printed to that purpose and in answer to Harding and Stapletons printed bookes and questions name then when it concern'd them most the Bishop that consecrated Parker nor produce as much as one witness of so publik and solemn a Consecration as his was pretended to be 50 years after This together with the 25. article of the Church of England declaring that Ordination is not properly a Sacrament because it requires no visible sign or ceremony and by consequence no imposition of Episcopal hands together with the Act of Parliament 8. Eliz. 1. is one of the chief grounds we haue to belieue the Protestant Bishops are not validly consecrated nor the Catholiks guilty of sacriledge in reordaining them when they are made Priests amongst vs. An other ground is the inualidity of the protestant Form for ordaining Priests and Bishops the Form I mean that had bin vsed since King Eduard 6. reign vntill the hapy restauration of King Charles 2 For after his restauration the Bishops themselues found our exceptions against the validity of King Eduards Form were reasonable and therupon were pleased to alter it adding therunto the words Bishop and Prust as we directed which or the equiualent are necessary to express the caracter receiued by the form and which were wanting in the old form a Sanders in Schism F. Hâ—livood or Sacrobosco in hodeâ—nuestig vera Christs Ecclesia c.