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
Bishop of Rome his spiritual supremacy That 28. Canon pretends only precedency of Constantinople before Alexandria not before Rome But it s much to my purpose and I hope it will be for your profit to mind you how the Emperor Martianus after that the Catholik Faith had bin confirm'd by the Bishops subscriptions did propose somthings in fauor therof to the Fathers thinking it decent saith he to haue them rather form'd or regularly framed by their Decree than by his own Imperial law And the first point of the intended Reformation was that to hinder heresies and the disorders of irregular Monks which of late had so disturbed and infected the Church of God it might be decreed that they should be subiect to the Bishops and not medle with Ecclesiastical or ciuil affairs but serue God and keep within their Monasteries Well Mr. Walsh I see let your friends do all they can to excuse or extenuate your faults you are resolued to lay yourself and them open to your Aduersaries Did not I but iust now aduise you as your best friend not to medle with ecclesiastical affairs which are aboue your capacity and learning especialy these general Councells You see what this of Calcedon and the Emperor Martianus think of irregular religious men and how the generality of people take you to be one of that kind a disturber of the peace of the Church and a broacher of heresies Lord God! could not you be quiet what made you name at all this Councell of Calcedon Did you not know how seuere it is against such men as you are reputed to be I wish with all my heart you had neuer com out of your Conuent and that you were retired in your cell For God's sake quote no more general Councells they are very opposit to your wayes and doctrin This of Calcedon consisting of 630. Bishops at least own'd S. Leo Pope for Head of the vniuersal Church and in his name and by his authority Dioscorus was condemn'd and deposed See Leo his epistle 47. to the Councel sent by his Legats to reside therin saying In these Brethren a Paschasinus and Lucentius Bishops Boniface and Basil Priests directed to you by the Apostolical see your Fraternities may belieue that I preside in your Synod And the Synod answers Truly you did preside as Head to the Members And the Legats sentence against Dioscorus was Sanctissimus ac Beatissimus Papa a The most holy and blessed Pope Leo Head of the uniuersal Church by vs his Legats with consent of the holy Synod being endow'd with Peter the Apostles dignity who is the foundation and rock of the faith and call'd Porter of the heauenly Kingdom hath depriued Dioscorus of Episcopal dignity and of all priestly functions Caput vninersalis Ecclesiae Leo per nos Legatos suos S. Synodo consentiente Petri Apostoli praeditus dignitate qui Ecclesiae fundamentum petra Fidei coelestis regni Ianitor nuncupatur Episcopali dignitate Dioscorum nudauit ab omni Sacerdotali opere fecit extorrem Mr. Walsh doth the Oath of Supremacy allow the Pope to be Head of the vniuersal Church or allow him so much spiritual iurisdiction as this Councel of Calcedon If not why do you quote it to that purpose Perhaps you may haue better luck with Prouincial Councells Let us see You alleadge S. Augustin and 217. Bishops of Afrik against Appeals to Rome in the case of Apiarius and you apply the same to the Oath of Supremacy Mr. Walsh if I be not mistaken Belarmin hath cleerly answer'd that obiection which you borrowed from Caluin as you do most others in your tedious volume from heretiks and Baronius in the very yeare and place quoted by you though you conceal it proues that S. Augustin and the Bishops of Afrik owned the Popes Supremacy and spiritual authority ouer them instancing the case of Antony Bishop Fussalensis of Numidia deposed from his Episcopal administration and reuenue by the Bishops of that Prouince He obtaining a letter of his pretended innocency from his Primat to Pope Boniface appeald to his Holiness Boniface dying his successor Celestinus fauored Antony yet with this caution and Prouiso in his letters if the matter of fact was true and Antony his narration not subreptitious Antony boasted much of this sauor and writ to his friends that the Pope not only gaue sentence for him but also would command the same to be executed by his Executors with military power Wherupon S. Augustin writ a letter to the Pope informing him of the truth and desired him to giue sentence for the people of Antony's Diocess which was the other party because the right was on their side and not to think vpon that violent way wherwith Antony threatned the poor people Permit not saith the Saint these things to be don I beseech thee per Christi sanguinem by the bloud of Christ by the memory of Peter the Apostle who admonisht the Prelats of Christian people not to domineer violently amongst the brethren Heer you see Mr. Wash S. Augustin and the African Bishops admitting of Appeals to Rome nay admitting in the Bishop of Rome right to a coerciue power for executing his sentence in Afrik though indeed they aduise him not to make vse of it in that case so did Ireneus aduise S. Victor the Pope not to excommunicat the Asian Churches albeit he doubted not of his power to excommunicat them Doth the oath of Supremacy allow the Pope such a Supremacy or such a latitude or extent of spiritual jurisdiction out of his temporal estate Let me once more intreat you Mr. Walsh per Christi Sanguinem not to betray your ignorance so manifestly not to expose your-self to the Censure and laughter of all who read Councells or Fathers Had it not bin much better for you not to haue intermedled with these matters wherof you vnderstand so litle than to be look't vpon as a vain ignorant heretik we your friends can not but be concern'd though we can say but litle for you ANIMAD 3. Whether it be rashness obstinacy and a sin in Roman Catholiks to refuse the Oath of Supremacy and Friar Walsh his Remonstrance MR Walsh I couple these two instruments the oath of Supremacy and your Remonstrance together because yourself makes no distinction between them as to the lawfullness of their being taken by Catholiks For though each of them seem to renounce the Popes spiritual authority a Pag. 24. 1. part yet you tell vs there is no such matter because Spiritual authority in those oathes Formularies signifies not Spiritual but temporal authority Seing therfore you are of opinion that the oath of supremacy may be taken with a good conscience by Roman Catholiks and that the whole Roman Catholik Church belieues and tells vs the contrary you haue no reason to be angry with Catholiks if they do not rely vpon your word in any point that concerns their conscience or religion and though your Remonstrance
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