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
to obey the Popes prohibition of this Oath of allegiance Pag. 44. A boy vnder age hanged in Rome Pag. 46. A nephew of old Nauarre the Canonist by the Popes commandement hanged in hast Ibid. Card. Mendoza depriued of his Deanry of Toledo by force Pag. 47. A Gentleman of Card. Farnesius put to death by Pope Clement Pag. 8. 48. The opinion of some ouermuch deuoted to the obedience of the Pope Pag. 50. Obedience due to all superiors yet is their power contained within certaine limits Pag. 51. Ecclesiasticall and ciuill power both immediate from God both distinct and independant of each other Pag. 53. A superior yea the Pope in diuers cases may be disobeyed without sinne Pag. 57. The Breues of Paulus 5. prohibiting the Oath of allegiance may be not obeyed without sinne Pag. 59. Many euils ensue vpō obeying the Pope in this case of the Oath Pag. 60. A cōmandement vpon error of wrong information bindeth not Pag. 62. The Popes bare precept not alway sufficient to cause men to hazard their temporall states Ibid. Cases not doubtfull but manifest as is this of the Oath need no solution from the Pope Pag. 63. Subiects bound to obey all iust lawes of their temporall Princes Pag. 64. The law of the Oath of allegiance iust Pag. 65. The Kings Maiestie in setting forth this Oath hath not exceeded his limits Pag. 66. All lawfull Kings be they heathens or heretickes are to be obeyed by their subiects in temporals Pag. 68. That the Pope or Church do permit euill Princes to reigne a strange phrase Pag. 70. The place of S. Paul Omnis anima to be vnderstood principally of subiection to secular power Pag. 72. The material sword forbiddē to be vsed by Ecclesiasticall persons Pag. 74 Not without a mystery that Peter shold strike none but Malchus Pag. 78. The Apostles and their successors subiect to Emperours and Kings de iure Pag. 79. Gregory 7. the first that chalenged tēporal power to depose Princes Pag. 84 The doctrine and practise of deposing when it began according to Cardinall Bellarmine Pag. 85. Whether the Pope by his spirituall power wherein he is successor to Peter may depose Princes Pag. 87. 91. Excommunication what it is the nature and effects thereof Pag. 95. No denial of the Popes power of binding to say that Princes notwithstanding excōmunicatiō ought to be obeyed of their subiects Pag. 100. The Popes spirituall power of excommunicating Kings not denied as Cardinall Bellarmine in Tortus affirmeth Pag. 104. Whether I may renounce all pardons dispensations which shal be against this Oath of Alleg. without denying the Popes power Pag. 108. No deniall of the Popes power of absoluing to say that he cannot absolue me of this Oath Pag. 112. Whether the Pope may remit lawful oaths compelled by feare Pag. 114. How a matter onely of opinion may be truly sworne Pag. 116. The doctrine that teacheth That Princes excommunicated by the Pope may be deposed or murthered by their subiects may be abiured as impious and hereticall Pag. 119. To teach it lawfull to murther yea a tyrant is hereticall Pag. 123. The Oration of Sixtus 5. in the Consistorie of the murther of the King of France Pag. 128. The Pope as a temporall Prince may wage warre but not inuade any Kings dominions as he is Christs Vicar Pag. 149. Priests and reconciled persons as such onely no traitors by the intention of the Oath Pag. 150. How an Oath is to be interpreted Pag. 152. In what sort a man is to sweare before a lawfull magistrate Pag. 153. Not such as take but the refusers of the Oath giue cause of scādal Pag. 154. The Authors exhortation to Catholickes Pag. 156. Strange Reports or Newes from Rome Pag. 159. TO THE CATHOLICKES OF ENGLAND BEloued brethren in Christ Iesus Whereas the Kings most excellent Maiestie being the true lawful and right inheritour to the Crowne and Realme of England by the prouidence of almightie God entred and possessed the same with tranquillity and peace and the great applause of all his subiects as well Catholickes as Protestants or others of different sects and opinions his Highnesse as it were to requite their dutifull affection forthwith gaue great hope of a most happie and prosperous regiment and out of his bountie and clemencie extended many his most royall fauours indifferently vpon all till such time as some of the one sort to wit a few giddie headed desperate and disloyall Catholicks associated with certaine of the Societie prouoked his wrath and indignation against them yea and all the professors of the same religion for their fact Who was not moued as all men will confesse without iust cause for that they viz. Catholickes onely either concealed or most barbarously attempted in that hellish-like manner of gunpowder fire the memorie whereof must needs remaine for euer most grieuous to all true hearted Catholike subiects the cruell murther of so many worthie Commons and Noble personages in Parliament assembled yea of the most towardly and innocent yong Prince the Queene and King himselfe and then soone after also had followed vndoubtedly the desolation ruine and destruction of the whole realme of England Hereupon by the generall consent of all three estates and the Kings Maiestie it was thought necessarie an Oath of allegeance in such forme should be framed and enacted as Catholikes for whom chiefly it was made should haue no cause scrupulously to refuse to take the same and the Kings Highnesse with his whole estate might be better secured and freed from all feares and dangers imitating herein other Kings and Princes as occasions shall be offered them If euer the Kings of France or Spaine or other Princes whatsoeuer had cause to exact an Oath of fealtie of their subiects for safetie of their persons or state then certes no man that hath but common sense will denie but our King hath more then iust vpon so horrible and monstrous cause giuen as the like haply was neuer heard of from the beginning of the world Could any man haue thought it strange or held it crueltie if being in such wise and by such persons prouoked he had in his wrath and indignation rigorously proceeded against all others of the Romane religion as suspecting them to beare no better mind towards him though manie thousands doubtlesse no way consented nor were euer priuie to that horrible fact And if he had what ruine of Catholike families what hauocke of Christian bloud with the destruction of soules and other infinite miseries should we haue seene But the omnipotent God whose name be blessed for euer who hath the rule and gouernment of the hearts of Kings inclined his royall heart to mercie and compassion of his subiects knowing right well the faith and loyaltie of many of the same religion as his Maiestie most benignely expressed in his Proclamation and that he should haue punished the innocent with the nocent as well his friends as his foes Oh what follie were it for a
glorie of God obstinately refuse to performe their dutie in obeying that precept of our Sauiour Render vnto Caesar that which is Caesars and that of S. Peter Regem honorificate and also the commandement giuen to Moyses Honour thy father and thy mother These assure you are they who giue cause of scandal indeed wherby their persecution if so they please to cal it is continued the Church perturbed Catholicke religion little regarded and many a soule lost But Vaeilli per quem scandalum venit Woe to him by whom scandall cometh Time will make triall who it is whether they or we In the meane while we say that the proper and true definition of scandall as it is defined by S. Thomas and others most aptly agreeth with the doctrine and example or words and deedes of such English subiects as withdraw men from performing their dutie to their dread Soueraigne not on such as perswade it and yet remaine no lesse Catholicke then they do pretend in euery point of faith Scandall is a word or deed not right Definition of scandall Tho. 2.2 q. 43. ar 1. Ieron in comment super Math. c. 15. giuing occasion of ruine that is of spirituall ruine or sinne Now what euill or shew of euill or sin is there in those who by their deedes and words example and doctrine teach and labour to induce all to do that which is right and due by the law of God What scandall or offence or occasion of sinne do they giue who perswade nothing against any one article or point of faith but meere allegiance to their Prince Doth this offend or scandalize any If they will be scandalized for well doing and take offence where none is giuen do they not shew how imperfect they are in the loue of God Pax multa diligentibus legem tuam non est illis scandalum Psal 118. To such as loue thy law ô God there is great peace and to them there is no scandall May not these be well likened to the Pharisies that of enuie and malice were offended or scandalized at the sayings and doings of our Blessed Sauiour who being told by his disciples of their scandall taken answered Omnis plantatio quam non plantauit Pater meus coelestis eradicabitur Math. 15. All planting which my heauenly Father hath not planted shall be rooted vp Let them alone blind they are guides of the blind And if the blind be guide to the blind both fall into the ditch Such are to be pitied and praied for not enuied whom we may answer in the same sort and with Haimo Haimo in Math c. 18. Greg ho. 7. in Sipro veritate scandalum oriatur magis veritas eligenda est quà m scandalum vitandum If for truth scandall do arise as it doth in this our case rather truth is to be chosen then scandall sought to be auoided The same affirmeth S. Gregorie the Great Ezech. pag. 2. as before pag. 45. And S. Thomas disputing whether spirituall goods are to be pretermitted for passiue scandall Tho. 2.2 q. 43. ar 7. saith That such goods as are de necessitate salutis ought not to be omitted for auoiding scandall because they cannot be pretermitted without mortall sinne as in our iudgements we take allegiance in the Oath to be but it is manifest saith he that none ought to sinne mortally to saue an other from sinne because according to the order of charitie a man ought to loue more his owne spirituall health then another mans The same likewise hath Ioannes de Burgo Pupil oculi Opera necessaria ad salutem non sunt omittenda ad vitandum scandalum proximi ex quacunqueradice procedat Workes necessarie to saluation are not to be omitted for auoiding the scandall of our neighbour out of whatsoeuer roote it proceedeth Herby deare brethren in our Lord Iesus I trust you rest satisfied that such as haue taken the Oath of allegiance wherein nothing hath bene hitherto proued by any learned man to be contained against any one point of faith haue not giuen cause of scandall as they haue bin slandered to haue done but by that their fact performing their bounden dutie to their dread Soueraigne according to the law of God haue sought to take away that horrible scandall giuen indeed by a few vngracious Catholikes in the gunpowder treason and which others daily giue to his Maiestie and the State in resisting the law made vpon so great reason and for the commō good of the realme Besides I trust your wisdomes will consider that to take the Oath being bonum spirituale wherein no euill thing against religion is contained they are not to pretermit it for the imperfections of some who are readie to suffer or take scandall where none is giuen Wherefore I exhort you all most dearely beloued Catholikes in the bowels of our Sauiour Iesus Christ as the very Reuerend and learned maister George Blackwell sometime our Archpriest did in his letter to his Assistants and you all both Clergie and Laitie for abolishing and ending this controuersie which hath scandalized the whole State you wold desist to impugne supreme authoritie in this case of the Oath most lawfull and iust as hath bene proued and ceasse any longer to prouoke to wrath his Maiesty our most clement Prince clement I say for I dare boldly auouch that neither the Pope nor any King or Prince in Christendome had he had the like cause offered by any his subiects especially of a contrarie religion and finding others of the same religion to refuse to make profession of their loyalty by an Oath required at their hands would shew such mercy and clemencie as his Maiestie hath done and doth Conferre the fact or enterprise of the Moores in Spaine now two years agone who wēt about as report goeth treacherously to bring in Turkes and forreiners to inuade the countrey with this Catesbeyan and Percian most barbarous treason and I doubt not but you will iudge them both worthy condigne punishment Compare againe the two Princes who by Gods ordinance carie the sword ad vindictam malefactorum to take reuenge on malefactours you shall find them both iustly prouoked to indignation against the delinquents yet the one viz. King Philip with great seueritie chastiseth the innocent with the nocent old yong men women and children expelling all alike out of his dominiōs to the number of nine hundred thousand as appeareth by his edict within the space of xxx dayes to the losse of all their immoueables Whereas the other our dread Soueraigne of his pitifull inclination did not punish in such sort the guiltles nor all the offendours according to their deserts but repressed by his edict the furie of his people readie to haue taken reuenge yea on many innocent persons for their sakes that had offended Embrace then deare brethren the mercie and long sufferance of this our milde and clement Prince whilest time is granted you lest through your default it be turned
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
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
yeares from her beginning to depose Iulian Constantius Valens and other hereticall Princes and therefore permitted Christians to obey them in temporals Saint Cyprian saith that in his time the number of Christians were verie great Cypr. in Demetrianum Tertul. in Apologet. And Tertullian writeth thus Were we disposed not to practise secret reuenge but to professe open hostilitie should we want number of men or force of armes Are the Moores or the Parthians or any one nation whatsoeuer more in number then we that are spread ouer all the world We are not of you and yet we haue filled all the places and roomes which you haue Your Cities Ilands Castles Townes Assemblies your Tents Tribes and Wards yea the Imperiall Pallace Senate and seate of judgement Euseb l. 3. de rita Constan Niceph. l. 5. c. 25. c. Eusebius likewise and Nicephorus report That the whole world as it were vnder Constantius was Christian and the greater part Catholicke How then is it true that the Church in her nouitie wanted forces And therefore she permitted Christians to obey their Princes in temporals saith the Cardinall Euen so permitted as father Parsons in his letter to the Catholickes of England against the Oath of allegiance affirmeth that Pope Clement by a Breue had permitted ciuill obedience to our King and recommended to all Catholickes soone after his Highnesse entrance vnto the Crowne As if ciuill obedience had not bene otherwise due but by his Holinesse permission Who would haue thought such an imprudent and strange kind of phrase could haue so escaped his pen But it seemeth he had learned the same out of Cardinall Bellarmines writings and so presumed it would passe as current without controlement And may not the world maruell be it spoken with due reuerence to his great dignitie which I haue euer and in heart still do honour that a man so excellently learned will teach that Christian subiects vnlesse they be permitted by the Church are not bound to render obedience to their lawfull Kings and Princes if they become heretickes or aduersaries to true religion and persecutors Princes infidels lose no right but are the true and supreme Princes of their kingdomes as he himselfe teacheth Lib. 5. de Ro. Pont. c. 2. for dominion is not founded either in grace or in faith so as the Pope hath no authoritie to meddle with them Marry if these become Christians and after fall to heresie what then In that case saith he Potest regna mutare vni auferre Cap. 6. alteri conferre He may change kingdomes and take from one and giue to another saith he Then is their condition worse as touching temporall possessions then it was when they were infidels worse then the conditiō of the basest of their subiects But Christian religion depriueth no man of his right who had right in infidelitie cannot lose the same by receiuing the grace and faith of Christ which is agreeable to the doctrine of the Cardinall howsoeuer he seemeth sometime to teach contrary to himselfe Bellar. lib. 5. de Ro. Pont. c. 3. Christ did not saith he nor doth take kingdomes from them to whom they belong for Christ came not to destroy those things which were well setled but to establish them And therefore when a King becometh a Christian he doth not lose his earthly kingdome which by right he held but purchaseth a new interest to an euerlasting kingdome otherwise the benefites receiued by Christ should be hurtfull to Kings and grace should destroy nature If Christian Kings lawfully attaining to their dominions by right of nature enioy the same as cannot be denied and so are to be obeyed why not also if they happen to fall backe into heresie or infidelitie their right not being founded in grace or in faith To say that such Princes or magistrates are not to be obeyed cometh neare the heresie charged vpon Wickliffe and condemned in the Councel of Constance and is repugnant to the doctrine of the holy Ghost in sacred Scriptures and practise of all blessed Saints and Martyrs who most promptly without any permission of the Pope or Church obeyed Pagan Princes vnder whom they were subiect in all ciuill causes onely in defence of faith and Gods truth made choice rather to shed their bloud then by obeying Caesar to disobey God And where such a permission was euer granted as to obey Iulian or other hereticall Emperour cannot be found in any generall Councell or ancient Fathers writings before the dayes of S. Thomas of Aquine 2.2 q. 12.2.2 of whom the Cardinall learned his doctrine of permission to obey till such time as they had forces to depriue them of their Empire Consider I pray you that S. Paul hauing receiued his doctrine immediatly from heauen writing to the Christians in Rome permitted not for a time but strictly commanded them euer to obey higher powers Rom. 13. Sap. 6. Omnis anima potestatibus sublimioribus subdita sit Let euery soule be subiect to higher powers Was this meant trow ye for onely higher powers Christians or heathen onely for a time No but for all sorts of rulers and as long as there be superiors and inferiors The holy Apostle in this and other his Epistles often inculcateth this necessary vertue of obedience diligently exhorting and commanding as well subiects to be obedient to their Princes as seruants to their masters and all inferiors to their superiors And were not these maisters and higher powers for the most part Pagans Were they not enemies to Christian religion whom they were taught to obey Was any sort of inferiors exempted from obeying S. Iohn Chrysostome will put you out of doubt that such subiection is commanded to all sorts Priests Monkes Chrysost in cap. 13. Rom. hom 23. August in lib. expositionis quorundam propos ex epist ad Rom. and secular men as the Apostle himselfe declareth in the verie beginning Omnis anima potestatibus sublimioribus subdita sit etiam si Apostolus sis si Euangelista si Propheta siue quisquis tandem fueris neque enim pietatem subuertit ista subiectio Let euery soule be subiect to higher powers yea if thou art an Apostle if an Euangelist if a Prophet or finally whosoeuer thou art Marke well For this subiection subuerteth not pietie or religion And he specially noteth that S. Paul saith not simply Obediat but subdita sit And why because power is of God Non est enim potestas nisi à Deo For there is no power but of God Quid dicis saith this holy Father to S. Paul Omnis ergo Princeps à Deo constitutus est Istud inquit non dico Neque enim de quouis Principum sermo mihi nunc est sed de ipsa re What saist thou O Paul is then euery Prince constituted of God This saith he I say not For neither of euery Prince do I now speake but of the thing it selfe that is of power And the Apostle
faith and religion were most obedient to their temporall Gouernours though Pagans and cruell persecutors yea and their successors many hundred yeares after to their lawfull Princes were they neuer so wicked heathens or heretickes When Saint Paul being accused of many crimes by the Iewes appealed to Caesar saying Act. 25. Ad tribunal Caesaris sto ibi me oportet iudicari At Caesars iudgement seate do I stand there I ought to be iudged because this is the place of iudgement saith Gloss interlin is it to be thought that he would haue said he ought there to be iudged if de iure he had not bene subiect to that tribunall or that he did it for feare of death who was ready before not only to be bound and suffer imprisonment but also to die in Ierusalem for the name of Iesus And who will iudge this holy Apostle to be so readie to commit such a crime for sauing his life as by his doctrine and example to teach and do that which was vnlawfull to be taught or practised to subiect against equitie all Priesthood to the iurisdiction of a secular Prince specially because he was not compelled to go to Ierusalem to make a lie so preiudiciall to all the Clergie euer after But well he knew that he was then de iure subiect to Caesars tribunall being therein become an imitator of our Sauiour Christ who in iudgement submitted himselfe to Pilate Caesars Lieutenant and said that his power to iudge him was not onely permitted Ioan. 19. but giuen from aboue And our B. Sauiour whose actions are our instructions in paying tribute for himselfe and Peter as due to the Emperour whose subiect he acknowledged to be as he was a mortall man Math. 17. taught vs by his example that the adopted sonnes of God Peter not excepted are not by the diuine law freed from subiection to secular authoritie in tributes customes and such like when himselfe the naturall Sonne of his heauenly Father King of kings by yeelding it shewed it to be Caesars due and that it ought to be payed by all that after should beleeue in him such excepted as by good Princes grants and priuiledges should be exempted howbeit himselfe was not otherwise bound thereto then for auoyding scandall for that he was the naturall Sonne and onely begotten of the King of heauen which they knew not who exacted tribute and therefore free To which purpose Saint Augustine writeth thus Quod dixit Ergo liberi sunt filij c. That he said Therefore the children are free is to be vnderstood that the children of a kingdoÌ„e are in euery kingdome free Aug. l. 1. qu. Euan. q. 23. that is are not tributaries Which S. Augustine must needs mean of a kings natural children and not of the sonnes and children of God by adoption for so all vertuous and good Christians should be freed from paying tribute which is absurd and contrarie to the doctrine of Saint Paul Omnis anima c. euerie soule To this agreeth Saint Thomas Tho. 2.2 q. 104. a. 6. ad 1. That such as are made the sonnes of God by grace are free from the spirituall seruitude of sinne but not from corporall seruitude by which they remaine bound to their temporal Lords And such subiection Saint Gregorie the Great acknowledged both by his example and doctrine to be due to the Emperour as to his superior in temporals following therein no doubt the steps of all his predecessors before him Ego autem saith he in an Epistle to Mauritius and Augusta indignus pietatis vestrae famulus Greg. l. 2. ep 61. And I an vnworthie seruant of your pietie And a little after For to this end power was giuen from aboue to the pietie of my Lords ouer all men If ouer all men then ouer himselfe though Pope and the adopted sonne of God by grace But some will say that Saint Gregorie submitted himselfe of humilitie not of dutie Which is a great iniury and derogation to this great Doctor and blessed Saint who was vir simplex rectus ac timens Deum Iob. 1. Reall and simple without any duplicitie fearing more God then the Emperour without all fiction or lying knowing well what a sinne it would be to him by such a pernicious fiction to preiudice greatly all Pontificall dignitie euer after Old Eleazarus in the Macchabees he knew 2. Macch. â— had taught him not so by faining to leaue an euill example to posteritie but rather to suffer martirdome as he did And Saint Augustine saith Aug. ser 29. de ver Apost That when a man maketh a lie for humilitie sake if he were not a sinner before by lying he is made a sinner Albeit Saint Gregorie were an Italian and a most noble Romane yet are we not to imagine that his Worthinesse would once vse to any much lesse to the Emperour such ceremoniall complements of courtesie as many in those parts now adayes do and not of the menest sort to wit Ton seruitore anzisono schiano divostra signoria I am your seruant yea I am a base seruant or slaue of your Maistership or Worship and other such like when they meane nothing lesse or do an vnlawfull act for feare of the Emperour displeasure Saint Gregorie vndoubtedly ex animo obeyed the Emperour commanding him to send a law which he had made into diuers parts of the world to be promulgated which he refused not to do albeit the law in Saint Gregories iudgement contained many things against the Ecclesiasticall libertie In fine epist 61. l. 2. Ego quidem iussioni subiectus eandem legem per diuersas terrarum partes transmitti fâ—ci c. I being subiect to your commandement haue caused the law to be sent through diuers parts of the world In the end Vtrobique ergo quae debui exolui qui Imperatori obedientiam praebui pro Deo quod sensi minime tacui On both sides therefore haue I performed my dutie or done what I ought which is to be noted who haue both obeyed the Emperour and also for God haue not bene silent what I thought This obedience Cardinall Bellarmine against Barclai saith was coacted and de facto but not de iure By which answer who seeth not what an imputatioÌ„ of frailty weaknesse is laid on him that ought to be and was murus aeneus petrafortitudinis against any power whatsoeuer that commandeth vniustly A weake defence for so strong a rocke who both in doctrine and example left a perfect patterne of a most humble Pastor and glorious Saint burning with the fire of charitie readie no doubt to haue exposed himselfe to martirdome rather then for sauing his life to consent to a veniall sinne A mirror may he be to his successours and all Bishops would God he had many followers in his profound humilitie which is the vertue that most exalteth Prelate Prince or people to glorie And this much of subiects duties to their Princes
further manifest for that no Magistrate ministring the Oath doth euer interprete the law in that sence or giue charge to any for detecting such So that these are but ridiculous and the cauelling shifts of some to withdraw men from performing their dutie to his Maiestie whereby they cause a confusion and perturbation in the whole realme bring many families to ruine hinder the conuersion of many soules and minister iust occasion vnto the State to suspect little fidelitie in their hearts what faire shew soeuer they make in words Here by reason of such an interpretation made of reuealing and detecting Priests and reconciled persons it shall not be amisse to know how an Oath is to be interpreted and in what sort euery one is to sweare that taketh an oath before a Magistrate Molanns writeth that an oath stretcheth not to things vnlawfull Mola de fide haer ser lib. 2. c. 7. Omne iuramentum iuris interpretatione ad licitatantum non vero ad mala se extendit Euery oath by the interpretation of the law extendeth to lawfull things onely and not to such as are euill The case is most perspicuous and plaine that in the Oath of allegiance it cānot be drawn to be meant of reuealing Priests as Priests not otherwise traitours because it should be extended to that which is to be reputed euill according to the knowne Catholicke Romaine faith which his Maiestie in his learned Apologie professeth no way to prejudice by taking this Oath Marc. 6. When Herod Tetrarch of Galilee sware to giue Herodias daughter what she would aske though halfe his kingdome who will say that it extended to the cutting off S. Iohn Baptists head it being manifestly euill in it self Yea but in this matter of our Oath what if the case be doubtfull Emanuel Sa a Iesuite teacheth you Sa. Apho. verb Interpretatio that in poenis in punishments a milde interpretation is to be made and being doubtfull it is to be interpreted to the better part and more benigne and more probable Then what reason haue these that wil make the case doubtfull to interprete this clause of the Oath not to the better but to the worse and more improbable Now a word or two how an oath is to to be taken before a lawfull magistrate Whosoeuer sweareth to an officer being required eithere sweareth guilefully or without guile which is not to be denied Then saith S. Thomas He who sweareth sincerely without guile Tho. 2.2 q. 89. ar 7. ad 4. Syluest verb. Iuramentū 3. is bound according to the intention of him that sweareth he that sweareth with guile ought to sweare according to the sound vnderstanding of him to whom the oath is made And to this purpose saith Innocentius in Cap. Innocentius Veniens de iureiurando That an oath giuen generally of performing obedience to commandements is so interpreted as it may not be extended but to these things which were thought of or indeed ought to be thought of Which is to be meant of things lawfull Then it followeth a little after And if he that requireth the oath be a Iudge in bona fide requiring it in a lawful case according to the order of law then that taketh place 22. q. 5. to wit Isido li. 2. de sum bo c. 31. Quacunque arte verborum quis iuret Deus tamen qui conscientiae testis est it a hoc accipit sicut ille cui iuratur intelligit With what cunning sort of words soeuer any sweare yet God who is witnesse of the conscience so accepteth it as he before whom the oath is made vnderstandeth and he that wittingly sweareth not according to the intention of him that requireth it sinneth deadly and is periured and is bound to performe it as he vnderstood it This is meant as S. Thomas saith of a guilefull oath and such a one is made guiltie in two sorts for that first he taketh the name of God in vaine and with subtiltie deceiueth his neighbour Hereupon I inferre that to sweare to reueale all treasons and traiterous conspiracies cannot be extended to be meant of Priests Priesthood or reconciling because it was neuer thought of nor ought to be thought of in the Oath Neither is it his Maiesties or his officers intent as I assure my selfe to draw any thereby further then to make profession of their allegiance and not to entangle any mans conscience in matters of faith and religion which is sufficient for iustification of his Maiestie in requiring it and for satisfaction of Catholickes lawfully to take it After all this that hath bene said there remaineth yet one stumbling stone more to be remoued and so I will end which is commonly called Scandall For that some there be that vse to say being pressed with stronger argumēts then they can well answere they could be content to take the Oath as either holding it lawfull or else not able by any important reasons to disproue it vnlesse they borrow some one or all foure of the Catholicke letter deemed to be father Parsons to little purpose were it nor for offending many Chatholicks who are much scandalized at the taking and takers thereof And is it not strange for Christian men professing charitie to take scandall where none is giuen Are not also many other Catholikes no lesse but rather more iustly scandalized at such as refuse it yea and the whole state beside both Nobles and commons together with his Maiestie cannot but rest much scandalized not onely at such persons but also at their religion for their sakes If they will say vnto such as take the Oath as Achab King of Samaria said vnto Elias the Prophet Tunè es ille qui conturbas Israël 3. Reg. 18. Art not thou he that troublest Israël For so some Quorum os maledictione amaritudine plenum est whose mouth is full of malediction and bitternesse haue said in effect Psal 13. That such Priests as haue performed their dutie in taking the Oath of allegiance and sought thereby to pacifie the Kings wrath worthily conceiued against Catholickes for the demerite of a few haue caused a trouble and great perturbation in the Church which vndoubtedly would neuer haue bene say they had all Catholickes and Priests stood constantly against the Oath But such loyall subiects Priests or Laickes may well retort vpon them as Elias did vpon King Achab Non ego tur baui Israël sed tu domus patris tui It is not I that haue troubled Israël but thou and the house of thy father who haue forsaken the commandements of our Lord. It is not such as haue taken the Oath that cause trouble in the Church nor forsake the commandements of our Lord but such Priests and people as wilfully refuse it and perswade others against it to the hazard yea losse of some of their liues and of the lands and goods of others and also of the soules of such as louing more the glorie of men then the
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