God and Nature due to him from his Subiects so long as he remayneth their Prince and therfore he cannot absolue discharge or release them from the Obligation of this Oath or any part thereof or which is all one he cannot giue them leaue not to beare faith and true allegiance to his Maiestie and consequently not to defend him to the vttermost of their power against all Treasons and trayterous conspiracies which shall be made against his Royall person Crowne and dignitie and not to doe their best endeauor to disclose and make them knowne vnto his Maiestie seeing that to performe all these things Subiects are bound by the law of God and Nature wherein no temporall or spirituall authoritie can dispence And therefore the Authour of the Protestants Apologie for the Roman Church trac 3. Sec. 5. doth very well affirme that all Catholikes are by all Lawes Diuine and Humane indissolubly obliged in the highest degree of all earthly Allegiance to his Maiestie that now is as to their true vndoubted lawfull Soueraigne liege Lord and King CHAP. VI. The Sixt Branch of the Oath and an Explication of the same WHich Oath I acknowledge by good and full authoritie to bee lawfully ministred vnto mee and doe renounce all pardons and dispensations to the contrarie 1. This Branch contayneth in it no difficultie at all if wee consider what hath beene said before to wit that in this Oath is onely demanded a sincere profession of true temporall allegiance and that no authoritie or obedience which is due to the Pope is denied therein And that to treat of the Popes authoritie not affirmatiuely what power he hath but affirmatiuely what authoritie in temporalls the Kings Maiestie hath ouer his Kingdome and Subiects and consequently what authoritie in temporalls the Pope hath not ouer the said kingdome and subiects and also that to exact of Subiects an Oath not onely of their temporall allegiance in generall but also of such allegiance in particular which his Maiestie and the State shall for prudent reasons motiues thinke to be necessarie for the preseruation of the Kingdome from future Treasons Inuasions or Perturbations so that it bee contayned within the bounds of true temporall allegiance doth no way exceede the limits of temporall authoritie 2. First therefore by those words good and full authoritie is not vnderstood any authoritie of the Kings Maiestie in Ecclesiasticall causes but onely in temporall matters as is the ministring of an Oath of true temporall allegiance For although his Maiesty be perswaded that hee hath full and supreme authoritie not onely in temporall but also in Ecclesiastical affaires for externall gouernement and that the Pope hath not ouer him or his Subiects within this Realme any authoritie or iurisdiction nor power to excommunicate his Maiestie yet his meaning is not to meddle at all in this Oath eyther with his owne or with the Popes Ecclesiasticall Supremacie but onely with his owne temporall Soueraigntie and consequently with the Popes authoritie not to depose him or to dispose of his Kingdome or to authorize any forraigne Prince to inuade or annoy him or to absolue his Subiects from their obedience c. And therefore as I obserued before in the third obseruation wee must distinguish betwixt his Maiesties vnderstanding or perswasion and his meaning or intention for his meaning was not to exact in this Oath of His Subiects all which hee is perswaded he might lawfully exact of them but only to demand of them in this Oath a profession of that temporall Allegiance which all Subiects are bound by the Law of God to giue to their lawfull Soueraigne as it is manifest by the declaration both of His Maiestie and also of the Parliament and therefore Hee was carefull not to meddle with the Popes authority to excommunicate Him 3. Secondly it is certaine that albeit Christian Princes haue not authoritie to define and determine what position is hereticall or to punish Heretikes with spirituall punishments for these are meere spirituall things yet they haue authoritie to command their subiects to abiure such positions as are alreadie defined or knowne to bee manifestly false and repugnant to the holy Scriptures for such and to punish with temporall punishments the obstinate maintayners of the same especially as the mayntayning of such positions is hurtfull to the publike temporall peace whereof the King hath charge and who therefore may also by the materiall Sword repell the wrongs and iniuries offered to the temporall Kingdome or Common-wealth by Clergie-men and also the abuses of the spirituall Sword when they tend to the hurt of the ciuill Common-wealth as Franciscus Victoria Ioannes Parisiensis and Couerruuias doe well obserue Victoria Relect. 1. de potest Eccles sec 7. §. octaua propositio Parisiensis de potest Reg. Pap. cap. 11. ad 37. Couerruu cap. 35. Practic question Wherefore a King saith Dominicus Bannes Bannes 2. 2. q. 11. ar q. 1. doth punish Heretikes as most seditious Enemies to the peace of His Kingdome which cannot be preserued without vnitie of Religion And Marriage saith Dominicus Sotus Sotus in 4. dist 29. q. 1. ar 4. being a Sacrament in such sort that it is also a ciuill contract it nothing letteth but that as in the former respect it belongeth to the Ecclesiasticall Court so in regard of the later it is subiect also in some sort to the Ciuill Not that Princes can alter those things which are of the substance of Matrimonie but that they may punish them who contract they shall offend against the publike peace for against those crimes whose iudgement doth belong to the Ecclesiasticall Court they may also ordayne punishments as they disturbe the peace of the Common-wealth Which doctrine of Sotus may in the very like manner bee applyed to Heresie which being a spirirituall offence in such sort that also it disturbeth the temporall peace of the Common-wealth it nothing letteth but that as in the former respect it belongeth to the Ecclesiasticall Court so in regard of the later it is subiect also in some sort to the Ciuill not that Princes can determine and define what is Heresie but that they may punish Heretikes when by defending hereticall positions they shall offend against the publike good For against those crimes whose iudgement doth belong to the Ecclesiasticall Court they may also ordayne punishments as they disturbe the peace of the Common-wealth And therefore Christian Princes haue good and full power to compell their Subiects to abiure impious damnable and hereticall positions for such when it is necessarie to the preseruation of the publike temporall peace and to discouer how their Subiects stand affectted in point of their Loyaltie and due Obedience 4. Thirdly it is euident that Clergie-men being truely subiect to temporall Princes in regard of their naturall birth and of their liuing in Ciuill Societie with others and consequently bound according to the common doctrine of Diuines to obserue their iust Lawes not only virationis
crying out to them to take heede be not only partakers of their spirituall harme but doe also cooperate to their temporall ruine and so haue cause to rue your silence and to cry out your selues when it is too late Vae mihi quia tacui Woe is mee because I haue held my peace Isa 6. But if perchance any of you who in your consciences thinke the Oath to be lawfull should for some worldly respect which God forbid cry out against the takers or approouers thereof this were not only to sin most damnably against your owne consciences but also in some sort against the Holy Ghost and to impugne that which in your soules and consciences you thinke and acknowledge to bee true which how hardly it is forgiuen either in this World or the next Mat. 12. our Sauiour himselfe doth expresly witnesse 4. Lastly those Priests that in their consciences thinke the Oath to be vnlawfull and thereupon do not only giue warning to those whom they haue taken vpon them to guide and direct to take heede and beware of the spirituall danger which they thinke will arise by taking the same but also in their zeale do cry out against their Catholike Brethren who either doe take the Oath or thinke it to be lawfull as Apostates from the Catholike Faith and Religion and disobedient children to the Pope and Church giuing the like occasion to others to cry out against them as Apostates from their naturall Allegiance and disobedient disloyall Subiects to their temporall Prince it behoueth them most of all to looke to themselues and according to the admonition which Card. Bellarmine vpon occasion of relating the fearefull death of Pope Innocentius the III. giueth to Prelates and Pastours Bellar. de geâ—…itu columbae lib. 2. cap. 9. to examine all the secrets of their consciences most exactly lest perchance it bee erroneous albeit to them it seeme to be sound iust and that their zeale albeit to them selues seeme pure and according to knowledge bee not blind and grounded vpon wilfull or culpable ignorance like that which the Iewes had in crucifying our Sauiour and Saint Paul when he was Saul in persecuting his Disciples who thought thereby to doe God great seruice 5. And truly if their Zeale were hurtfull to none but to themselues they would doubtlesse be the more excusable but considering how preiudiciall it is both to his Maiesties honour and also to his temporall Soueraigntie how scandalous it is to Catholicke Religion and how iniurious it is to their Catholike brethren not inferiour to themselues in vertue and learning whom they seeke to disgrace and to make odious to all Catholickes epecially to their benefactors and friends and so by taking from them their good names and maintenance to bring them into extreame want and miserie and as much as in them lyeth into manifest desperation for which they are one day to render a most strict account they haue great cause to examine their consciences narrowly and carefully to consider vpon what assured grounds they can excuse themselues at the dreadfull day of Iudgement for taking such scandalous iniurious and vncharitable courses both against their Soueraigne Prince whom next vnder God they are bound to honour and obey in temporals and also against their Catholicke brethren who not onely are as learned and religious as themselues but also haue examined this important controuersie and all the danger both spirituall and temporall that dependeth thereon as diligently if not farre more then they themselues haue done 6. To the end therefore that all of you my deare Countrimen may examine your consciences in this poynt of the Oath more easily and eactly and be more fully instructed therein then you haue beene by I. E. the Authour of the Prelate and the Prince who if the common rumour bee true will heare shortly with shame enough what goodly Instructions he hath giuen you I haue out of Roger Widdringtons expresse doctrine and grounds collected this little Treatise which for that it was finished this first day of the yeare I am bould to present it to your Charities for a New-yeares-gift as a small token of the great desire I haue both of your spirituall and temporall welfare And my onely request is that you will bee pleased to read it as I hope you will it beeing neither so prolixe but that in some few houres you may mane it ouer nor so obscure but that any man of meane capacitie may vnderstand it and after you haue read it to iudge thereof accordingly And if I shall heare that you haue reaped any benefit thereby I shall thinke my paines exceeding well bestowed but howsoeuer I shall not thinke my labour lost by giuing you this euident token of my loue for that the loue and dutie I owe to my Prince and Countrie to the Catholicke Religion and to you my deare Catholick brethren and aboue all to God Almightie the Author of all truth yea truth it selfe and who will in due time render to euerie man according to his workes Rom. 2. hath for the defence of a necessarie truth moued mee to take this paines And so with my best wishes I bid you heartily farewell hoping that you will bee wise and not be transported with a blind and intemperate zeale towards Prince or Prelate but that you will bee carefull to feare God to honour the King and without all partialitie to render to God and Caesar and consequently to Popes and Princes that which is their due A Copie of the new Oath of Allegiance deuided into eight Branches as it is in this Treatise explayned 1. I A.B. doe truely and sincerely acknowledge professe testifie and declare in my conscience before God and the World That our Soueraigne Lord King Iames is lawfull and rightfull King of this Realme and of all other his Maiesties Dominions and Countries 2. And that the Pope neither of himselfe nor by any authoritie of the Church or See of Rome or by any other meanes which any other hath any Power or Authoritie to depose the King or to dispose any of his Maiesties Kingdomes or Dominions or to authorize any forraigne Prince to inuade or annoy Him or his Countries or to discharge any of his Subiects of their Allegiance and Obedience to his Maiestie or to giue license or leaue to any of them to beare Armes rayse Tumults or to offer any Violence or hurt to his Maisties Royall Person State or Gouernment or to any of his Maiesties Subiects within his Maiesties Dominions 3. Also I doe sweare from my heart that notwithstanding any Declaration or Sentence of Excommunication or Depriuation made or granted or to be made or granted by the Pope or his Successours or by any Authoritie deriued or to be deriued from him or his See against the said King his Heires or Successours or any absolution of the said Subiects from their Obedience I will beare Faith and true Allegiance to his Maiestie his Heires and
of the Law and declaration of the Law-maker only temporall Allegiance is demanded for that by the end and reason of the Law the ambiguitie of the words saith Suarez Suarez lib. 6. de Legibus cap. 1. nu 19. is chiefly to be determined and it is morally a sure meanes to finde out the will and intention of the Law-maker especially that reason which is expressed in the Law for then the reason of the Law is in some sort a part thereof because it is contayned and supposed therein 8. Fourthly it is to bee obserued that albeit English Catholikes might at the first before they examined particularly the end reason matter and contents of this new Oath iustly suspect it to be vnlawfull and to contayne in it more then temporall Allegiance and that His Maiestie and the Parliament vnder pretence of demanding that temporall Allegiance which by the Law of God and Nature is due to all temporall Princes did intend to haue couertly at leastwise abiured some spirituall obedience which by the institution of Christ is due to spirituall Pastours both for that it is a new vncouth and vnwonted Oath of Allegiance and expresly denyeth the Popes authoritie to depose wherewith other Christian Princes in the ordinarie Oaths of Allegiance which they demand of their subiects doe not in plaine and expresse termes intermeddle and also for that it was deuised by those who are opposite to the Catholike Romane Religion yet this bare suspicion can bee no sufficient cause ground or motiue to condemne it as likewise no man vpon a bare suspicion is to be condemned but only to haue it examined and if after due examination it be found faulty to reiect it if otherwise to approue it But doubtlesse whosoeuer will sincerely and with a pure desire to find out the truth and to yeeld without all partialitie as wel to Kings as to Popes that which is their due examine the occasion end matter and contents of this new and vnwonted Oath will quickly finde that it is condemned by some vpon a bare and naked suspicion and without due examination by others vpon a blind and inconsiderate zeale to the See Apostolike not regarding in like manner the dutie which by the Law of God they owe to their temporall Prince and by all that thinke it vnlawfull without sufficient ground 9. For the occasion of this vnwonted Oath was that vnwonted barbarous Powder-plot of certaine Catholikes who pretended to iustifie their neuer heard of Barbarisme vnder the colour of Religion and the Popes authoritie to dispose of the Crownes and liues of temporall Princes in order to spirituall good and so no maruell that to preuent the like vnwonted crueltie was deuised this vnwonted remedie And albeit the inuenters of this Oath are opposite to the Catholike Romane Religion and are fully perswaded that the Pope by the Law of God hath no authoritie ouer this Kingdome so much as in spiritualls yet there meaning was not as you haue seene aboue to meddle in this Oath with that spirituall authoritie which is granted him by all Catholikes but only to demand a profession of that temporall Allegiance which all the Subiects of this Land of what Religion soeuer they be doe owe to their temporall Prince and not to the Pope 10. And therefore which is carefully to bee obserued this Oath doth not meddle positiuely with the Popes authoritie for that it doth not belong to temporall Princes to declare what authoritie the Pope hath but it medleth positiuely with the Kings temporall Soueraigntie and negatiuely with the Popes authoritie and it doth not declare ◅ what authoritie the Pope hath but only what authoritie hee hath not And what man I pray you can bee so blinde as not to see that whosoeuer expresly affirmeth King Iames to bee his true and rightfull King and Soueraigne in temporalls and to haue ouer him and his other Subiects all Kingly Power Authority and Iurisdiction doth consequently and vertually deny the same of the Pope Wherefore if wee well examine the matter and contents of this vnwonted Oath wee shall find that His Maiestie and the State doe herein deny no other authoritie of the Pope expresly and by name then which not only in the Protestation of those thirteene Catholike Priests but also in all other vsuall Oaths of Allegiance which absolute Princes are wont to demand of their Subiects is vertually couertly and in effect implyed For whosoeuer sincerely and from his heart acknowlegeth any Prince to be his only rightfull King and Soueraigne in temporals which all absolute Princes in their vsuall Oaths of Allegiance demand of their Subjects hee must vertually acknowledge that the Pope is not his Soueraigne Lord in temporals and consequently that he hath no authoritie ouer his Prince or him in temporals and therefore neither to depose his Prince or to dispose of His temporall Dominions for that these are tēporal things for what end cause crime or pretext soeuer either spirituall or temporall they be done 11. Fiftly to know vpon what assured grounds the Popes authoritie to depose Princes or to attempt and practise their deposition is by Catholikes denyed in this Oath it is to be obserued that as Leonardus Lessius a famous Iesuite noteth very well Lessius in his Singleton part 2. nu 38. a power which is not altogether certaine but probable cannot be a sufficient ground or title whereby immediately any man may bee punished or depriued of that right dominion or any other thing which he actually possesseth but such a power or title must bee most certaine and without all doubt or controuersie Wherefore neither can the Pope nor any other Prince without manifest iniustice inuade the Kingdome of another Prince make warre against him or seeke to depose or dispossesse him vpon a probable vncertaine or controuersed title For certes saith the Authour of the Prelate and the Prince and who is knowne to bee a famous Doctor and Professor of Diuinity though masked vnder the name of I. E. Cap. 11. pag. 235. as it is iniustice to put one out of his land or house who hath probable right and and withall possession because poti◅r est conditio possidentis better is the condition of him that is in possession So were it open iniustice in the Pope to depriue a King of his Crowne and Kingdome who hath probable right and withall possession And this also is the receiued doctrine of all Diuines and Lawyers Victoria in Relect de ture belli nu 29. seq Vasquez 1. 2. disp 64. cap. 3. Gregorius de Valentia 2. 2. and Pope Adrian with many others cited by Valentia and grounded in the light of naturall reason and declared by the approued rules of the Law that no man can bee iustly inuaded or be put out of his possession vpon an vncertaine or controuersed title because In causa dubia siue incerta potior est conditio possidentis In a doubtfull or disputable cause the condition of the
thereof 1. This Clause hath in it no more difficultie then is in the former seeing that it implieth supposeth and is grounded vpon the iustice and veritie of the Third and Second Branch First therefore by those wordes And I doe beleeue is not vnderstood a supernaturall beliefe but only a morall credulitie as the next wordes and in conscience am resolued which are an explication of the former doe sufficiently declare and the sense of them is that I doe thinke and am perswaded in my conscience that neither the Pope c. For it cannot with any reason be imagined that the words which are last added must diminish but rather increase or at least wise more fully declare the truth and veritie of the former wordes As for example it were vnaptly spoken to say that such a one is a man and also a liuing creature Princes may be murthered and also deposed by the Pope I doe most certainly beleeue so and also I doe thinke or am perswaded so 2. Secondly the meaning of this Clause is not to deny the Popes power to absolue or dispence in Oaths in generall but only in this Oath or any part thereof as the expresse wordes doe plainly signifie neither doth it follow that because the Pope cannot dispence in this Oath therefore hee cannot in other Oaths wherein there is not the like reason as of this or that because hee can dispense in other Oaths wherein there is not the like reason therefore hee can dispence in this 3. Thirdly neither is it the meaning of this Clause that if perchance any one should offend God by taking this Oath against his conscience thinking it to be vnlawfull the Pope hath not power to absolue him in the Sacrament of Penance from the guilt of sinne thereby committed but only the meaning is that the Pope hath not power to absolue or dispence with any man in this Oath or any part thereof that is to free release and discharge him from performing any of those things which in this Oath hee hath promised to performe or which is all one to giue him leaue or licence to do against that which in this Oath hee hath promised to doe or not to doe For all the parts and parcels of this Oath are either assertorie as that Our Soueraigne Lord King Iames is lawfull and rightfull King of this Realme c. and that the Pope hath not any power or authoritie to depose him c. or to authorize any forraigne Prince to inuade or annoy Him or His Countries or to discharge any of His subiects of their Allegiance c. and that from my heart I doe abhorre detest and abiure as impious and hereticall c. and no assertorie Oaths can bee dispenced withall neither hath the Pope any power or authoritie according to the receiued doctrine of all Diuines to absolue any man from the bond of these kind of Oaths So S. Thom. 2. 2. q. 89. ar 9. and all other Diuines And the reason is because the matter of an assertorie Oath being of an act present or past is now made altogether necessarie and irreuocable for that as soone as euer the Oath is made it is either true or false by reason of the truth or falshood of the act which now is past Wherefore seeing that it is impossible that the act which is past be not past so also it is impossible that the Popes Dispensation or Absolution can alter it or recall it for it is impossible that the act of swearing which is now or hath beene true be not now or hath not beene true Or else they are promissorie to wit wherein some thing is promised for the future time to bee done or not to be done And only these kinde of Oathes can bee dispenced withall For as well saith Saint Thomas S. Thom. 2. 2. q. 89. ar 7. with whome all other Diuines doe herein agree the bond of an Oath is referred to some thing which is to bee performed or omitted wherefore it doth not appertayne to an assertorie Oath which is of a thing present or past but only to a promissorie Oath 4. Now in this Oath of Allegiance only three things are promised by the swearer all which are contained in the third Branch to wit that notwithstanding any declaration or sentence of Excommunication or depriuation made or to bee made against the Kings Maiestie his Heires or Successors First he will beare faith and true allegiance to his Maiestie his Heires and Successors Secondly hee will defend them to the vttermost of his power against all Conspiracies c. and Thirdly he wil make known vnto them all Treasons trayterous Conspiracies which hee shall know or heare of to bee made against any of them Wherefore there is no more difficultie in this Clause then is in the third whereon this Clause is chiefely grounded And therefore it is most euident that the Pope hath no more authoritie to Absolue or dispence in any of these three things which the swearer promiseth then hee hath authoritie to depose the King and to make him no King for that it is most certaine as Cardinall Bellarmine him selfe confesseth Bell. in Tract contra Barclai cap. 21. pag. 202. that Subiects are bound by the Law of God to beare faith and true Allegiance which includeth the resisting and disclosing of all Treasons and Traiterous Conspiracies to their lawfull Prince so long as he remaineth Prince seeing that it is euident as well obserueth Suarez Suarez in Defens c. lib. 3. cap. 3 num 3. that the obligation of obedience in any degree or state whatsoeuer doth so long endure in the subiect as the dignitie or power and iurisdiction doth endure in the Superiour for these are corelatiues and the one dependeth on the other Therefore it is manifest that the Pope hath no more authoritie to absolue or dispense in this Oath or any part thereof to wit in those three things before mentioned then hee hath to make Kings no Kings and to depriue them of their Regall dignitie power and iurisdiction 5. Fourthly neither is it the meaning of this Clause that the Pope hath not any power to absolue the swearer from the promise which hee maketh to performe those three things mentioned in the third Branch only with this reduplication as it is sworne or confirmed by Oath or which is all one only from the sacred and religious bond of the Oath but the meaning is that the Pope hath not authoritie to absolue from this Oath or any part thereof for as much it concerneth the ciuill and naturall obligation of temporall Allegiance both for that when it is said that the Pope hath authoritie to absolue one from an Oath which he hath made to doe some certaine thing the meaning is according to the plaine and proper signification of the words the common Doctrine of all Diuines and the vsuall practices of Popes who when they absolue from any Oath they absolue from all
but also vi legis by force of the Law doe owe true Allegiance to their naturall Prince no lesse then Lay men and that therefore hee may lawfully demand of them as they are Subiects an Oath of their Allegiance whensoeuer hee shall iustly suspect their fidelitie And although some Clergie-men should bee so capricious as to imagine contrarie to the practice of the Primitiue Church the doctrine of the Ancient Fathers and manifest reason that they are not subiect at all to the authoritie of temporall Princes and thereupon should make a scruple to take this Oath as lawfully ministred to them by good and full authoritie yet this could not bee a sufficient proofe that the Oath is vnlawfull in it selfe or that Lay-men cannot lawfully take it and also acknowledge that it is lawfully ministred vnto them by good and full authoritie 5. Lastly in those words And I doe renounce all Pardons and Dispensations to the contrarie is not implyed a renouncing in generall of the Popes authoritie to giue Pardons and Dispensations but as the wordes doe plainly signifie in them is only contayned a denyall of the Popes authoritie to dispence with the Swearer or to giue him leaue and license to doe contrarie to that which hee hath promised in this Oath Wherefore the veritie of these last wordes is chiefly grounded vpon the lawfulnesse of the Fift Branch For if the Pope hath no power and authoritie to absolue the Swearer from any part of this Oath because those three things before mentioned which he promiseth to performe he is bound by the Law of God and Nature to performe and that therein no authoritie of Pope or Prince can dispence it is manifest that hee may lawfully renounce all Pardons and Dispensations to the contrarie CHAP. VII The Seuenth Branch of the Oath and an Explication thereof ANd all these things I do plainly and sincerely acknowledge and sweare according to these expresse words by me spoken and according to the plaine and common sense vnderstanding of the same words without any equiuocation or mentall euasion or secret reseruasion whatsoeuer 1. This Branch is greatly to bee regarded for that it expresly declareth in what sense the Swearer is bound to take all the parts and parcels of this Oath And first by those first words And all these things I doe plainly and sincerely acknowledge and sweare c. it is manifest that the immediate obiect of all this Oath and euery part therof or which is all one that which in all the former Branches I doe directly and immediatly sweare is my plaine and sincere acknowledgement to wit that our Soueraigne Lord King Iames is the lawfull and rightfull King of this Realme c. and that the Pope hath not any power or authoritie to depose him c. and that I will beare Faith true Allegiance to His Maiestie c. and that from my heart I doe abhorre detest and abiure as impious and hereticall c. and that I doe beleeue and in conscience am resolued c. and that it is lawfully ministred vnto me by good and full authoritie and that I doe renounce all Pardons and Dispensations to the contrarie Whereupon the Oath concludeth thus And I doe make this recognition and acknowledgement heartily willingly and truly vpon the true faith of a Christian. So that the plaine and proper meaning of this Branch is that whatsoeuer I doe sweare in this Oath I doe sweare plainly and sincerely according to these expresse words c. 2. Secondly the meaning of those words without any equiuocation c. is not that there is not to be found in this Oath any equiuocall wordes and which may not haue two proper and vsuall significations especially if they be taken barely and by themselues alone for if wee consider them as they be ioined with other words and make a full and perfect sentence and doe also duly regard the intention of the Law-maker with the other obseruations before set downe we shall hardly find any one sentence in this Oath so equiuocall or ambiguous that according to the common vnderstanding of men it hath two senses equally common which is properly to bee equiuocal But the plaine and proper meaning of those words is that the Swearer must not in this Oath equiuocate or vse any equiuocation mental euasion or secret reseruation whatsoeuer but that he must deale plainly and sincerely according to the minde and intention of the Law-maker For it is one thing to vse equiuocall words and an other thing to equiuocate or to vse equiuocation because one may vse equiuocal words and not deceiue or delude the hearer for that hee vseth the words in that sense wherein the hearer vnderstandeth them But to equiuocate implyeth a fraudulent deceitfull and vnsincere dealing by vsing the words in an other sense then the hearer vnderstandeth them 3. Wherefore the plaine meaning of this Branch is that albeit in this Oath there might bee found diuerse common senses of the same wordes yet the Swearer must not equiuocate but hee must take the wordes in that sense wherin the Law-maker vnderstandeth them with whome hee is bound by vertue of this Branch to deale plainly sincerely without any guile fraude deceit euasion or secret reseruation whatsoeuer But if perchance there should any difficulty arise concerning any ambiguous word or sentence contayned in this Oath and the will meaning and intention of the Law-maker could not bee knowne then wee must vse those rules which according to the approued doctrine of all Diuines and Lawyers wee haue aboue set downe for the interpreting of doubtfull and ambiguous speeches in any Law And namely among the rest that in penall Lawes and odious matters the milder and more fauourable sense and which contayneth in it no absurditie is to be chosen 4 Seeing therefore that according to the doctrine of all Diuines it is not lawfull to equiuocate or to vse equiuocation but we must answere plainly and sincerely according to the meaning and intention of the Iudge when hee proceedeth iuridically and demandeth no vniust and vnlawfull thing but which hee hath authoritie to demand it is manifest that the veritie of this Branch dependeth wholly vpon the lawfulnesse of the Oath and vpon the authoritie of the maker thereof and that consequently there is no difficultie in this Clause supposing the lawfulnesse of the former Clauses and that this Oath is lawfully ministred by good and full authoritie CHAP. VIII The Eight and last Branch of the Oath ANd I doe make this recognition and acknowledgement heartily willingly and truely vpon the true faith of a Christian So helpe mee God 1. The lawfulnesse of this Branch dependeth wholly vpon the veritie and iustice of the former Clauses and will cleerely appeare if wee suppose as hath beene shewed before that this Oath of Allegiance contayneth in it no falshood or iniustice and that it is ministred vnder great penalties by lawfull authoritie to make a triall how his Maiesties subiects stand
that false and peruerse opinion shall be held for seditious and to bee censured All Strangers that shall write and publish it for sworne Enemies of the Crowne All his Maiesties Subiects that shall adhere vnto it of what qualitie or condition soeuer they be for Rebels infringers of the fundamentall Lawes of the Kingdome and guiltie of Treason in the higstest degree And if there be found any booke or Discourse written by any Stranger Ecclesiastike or of any other qualitie that containeth any proposition contrarie to the said Law directly or indirectly the Ecclesiastikes of the same Order established in France shall be bound to answere them to impugne and contradict them incessantly without respect ambiguitie or equiuocation vnder paine of being punished with the same punishments as aboue said as abetters of the enemies of this State This Article is in effect and substance all one with our new Oath of Allegiance and the lawfulnesse thereof is manifest by the former Discourse and how greatly Card. Peron was mistaken in impugning the said Article Widdrington sheweth both in his Answere to Fitz-herbert part 3. chap. 11. num 15. seq and in his Discussion of the decree of the Lateran Councell against Lessius part 2. sec 9. and part 3. sec 9. A Copie of the Arrest or Decree of the Parliament of Paris wherein Card. Bellarmine his booke against William Barclay is condemned Taken out of the Records of the Court of Parliament the 26. of Nouember 1610. THis present day the Kings Solicitours Lewis Seruin the Kings Attorney making the Declaration and Lewis Duret the Kings Aduocate subscribing aduertised the Court that it was related to them that some few daies since there hath beene divulged in this city of Paris a new booke entituled Tractatus de potestate Summi Pontificis in temporalibus aduersus Gulielmum Barclaium Auctore Roberto S. R. E. Cardinale Bellarmino Romae per Bartholomaeum Zannetti printed this present yeere out of which booke diuers persons some with a good intent and others with an euill haue divulged many things which they haue collected from thence And because this Booke doth containe propositions which are preiudiciall to the Kings power and authoritie and to the State of France of whom the Author speaketh in the same manner as of other Kings Princes and Common-wealths they haue through their care gotten a Copie thereof which they hauing exactly read and examined thought it their duties to aduertise the Parliament of those things which are against the Powers established by God and especially against this Kingdome Wherefore they haue obserued that Cardinall Bellarmine doth in this new Treatise not only teach those propositions which hee affirmed in his former books as in that booke which is intituled De Romani Pontificis Hierarchia written in the time of Pope Sixtus the V. and dedicated to the said Pope which he hath deuided into fiue books in the last whereof hee maintaineth that the Pope hath temporall power indirectly But they also haue obserued that to this erroneous assertion others no lesse false and tending further are added in the places by them cited which the Parliament if it be so pleased may behould And first the very Title is to be obserued wherein he giueth to the Pope a power in temporals Then hee bringeth diuerse authorities from the writings of Italians French-men Spaniards Germans English Scots beginning with Pope Gregorie the VII who liued in the yeere of our Lord 1073. c. Wherefore to the end that fraud and deceit may for the safegard of true French men be preuented the aforesaid Attorney generall considering that in regard of Conscience and the office which hee beareth in being the Kings Attorney he is bound sincerely to discharge his duty produceth Cardinall Bellarmines booke which was written when our King Henry the Great was liuing in whose raigne none durst aduenture to diuulge the same but published forthwith as soone as he was dead wherein hee hath noted diuers places which the Parliament may peruse especially pag. 37 38. 57. 58. and 76. 77. to which may be added 160. 115. 116. And moreouer he exhibiteth in written hand the requests which the Kings Attorneys doe in the Kings name demand to wit that by Decree of the Parliament it be enacted That none of what qualitie or condition soeuer shall receiue haue keepe print or vtter this booke of Bellarmine vnder paine of Treason ordained against those that shal transgresse the same c. The matter being examined The great Chamber Criminall and of the Edict being assembled THe Court hath decreed and doth decree that no person of what qualitie or condition soeuer vnder payne of Treason ordayned against those that transgresse the same doe receiue keepe communicate print vtter or sell the said Booke which contayneth that false and detestable proposition tending to the subuersion of supreme Powers established and ordayned by God inciting Subiects to rebellion and derogating from the authoritie of Princes animating to attempt against their liues and Crownes and finally to disturbe the publike peace and quietnesse Those that haue Copies of the saide Booke or know any that haue are commanded forthwith to make it knowne to their Iudges that vpon the demand of the Kings Attorneys Inquisition bee made against the Crime and those that be guiltie be punished accordingly It forbiddeth vnder the same punishment Doctours Professours and others to treat dispute write teach directly or indirectly in Schooles Colledges or other places the said proposition The said Court doth ordayne that this Decree bee sent read published recorded and obserued according to the afore said manner and forme in all the Benches subiect to the Iurisdiction of this Court. The Substitutes to the Kings Attorney are commanded to cause forthwith this Decree to be put in execution and to aduertise the Court within a moneth of their diligence Made in Parliament vpon Friday 26. Nouemb. 1610. Signed VOISIN The decree being made the Kings Attorneys were sent for to whom the pleasure of the Court was signified and according to the Decree the said Booke of Bellarmine was deliuered to their hands A Decree of the Court of Parliament made the 26. and executed the 27. of Iune 1614. Against a Booke printed at Collen this present yeare which is entituled Francisci Suarez Granatensis Societatis Iesu doctoris Theologi Defensio fidei Catholicae Apostolicae aduersus Anglicanae sectae errores contayning many maximes and propositions contrarie to the Soueraigne powers of Kings ordayned and established by God the safetie of their persons the peace and quietnesse of their States The Place ✚ where the Kings armes of France and Nauarre are set At Paris By F. Morel and P. Mettayer the Kings ordinarie Printers and Stationers 1614. With his Maiesties Priuiledge Taken out of the Records of the Parment The Court of the great Chamber Criminall and of the Edict assembled hauing seene the Booke printed at Collen this present yeare entituled Francisci Suarez Granatensis Societatis
Iesu Doctoris Theologi Defensio fidei Catholicae Apostolicae aduersus Anglicanae sectae errores contayning in the third Booke Chap. 23. p. 376. 79 80 82. Chap. 29. p. 410. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20. Chap. 6. pag. 834. Chap. 8. pag. 844. and in other places many propositions contrarie to the Soueraigne powers of Kings ordained and established by God the peace and quietnesse of their States and that it is lawfull for their subiects and strangers to attempt against their persons Conclusions of the Kings Attorney generall All which beeing considered The said Court hath declared and doth declare the propositions and maximes contayned in the saide Booke to bee scandalous and seditious tending to the subuersion of States and to induce the subiects of Kings and soueraign Princes and others to attempt against their sacred persons and the discourses making mention of King Glodoueus and Philip the Faire to be false and slanderous Hath ordayned and doth ordayne the said Booke of Suarez to bee burned in the Court of the Palace by the Executioner of high Iustice Hath made and doth make iniunctions and inhibitions to Stationers and Printers not to print sell or vtter it and to all persons of what qualitie or condition soeuer not to haue copie out keepe teach in Schooles nor in other places nor to dispute the said maximes and propositions It doth ordayne that according to the Arrest made the 8. of Iune 1610. that the Decree of the Theologicall Facultie made the 4. of Iune the same yeare of renewing the doctrinall Censure of the said Facultie made in the yeare 1408. confirmed by the Councell of Constance together with this present Arrest or Decree as also those of the yeare 1578 and 95. bee read every yeare the 4. day of Iune as well in the said Facultie as in the Colledge of the Priest and Schollers of the Colledge of Claremont This Colledge of Claremont is the Iesuites Colledge and of the foure Mendicants And that at the instance of the Kings Attorney generall informations be taken of the transgressions against the said Arrests and Inhibitions bee made against the copying out hauing and keeping the like bookes Made in Parliament the 26. day of Iune 1614. Signed VOISIN Moreouer it is decreed that the Fathers Ignace Armand Rectour in this Citie Cotton Fronton and Sirmund shall be sent for the first day of the Court and it shall be shewed them that contrarie to their declaration and the Decree of their Generall made in the yeare 1610. the Booke of Suarez hath beene printed and brought into this Citie against the authoritie of the King the safetie of his Crowne and State And it shall be enioyned them to cause their Generall to renew the said Decree and that it be published and that they bring in the Act within sixe moneths And that they prouide that no bookes contayning such damnable and pernicious propositions bee hereafter made or published by any of their Societie And that it bee inioyned them to perswade the people by their Preachers the Doctrine contrarie to the said propositions Otherwise the Court wil proceed against the transgressours as against Traytors and perturbers of the publique peace The aforesaide Arrest or Decree and what hath beene decreed was pronounced in the presence of the Fathers Ignace Armand Charles de la Tour who came in place of Father Cotton absent Fronton du Duc and Iames Sirmund And the Arrest was executed before the great Staires of the Pallace the 27. of Iune 1614. A Copie of another Arrest or Decree of the Parliament of Paris wherein the former doctrine of practizing the deposition of Soueraigne Princes is condemned and the former Decrees made against the Bookes of Card. Bellarmine and Suarez are againe confirmed An Arrest or Decree of the Court of Parliament touching the Kings Soueraigntie in Temporals and against the pernicious doctrine to attempt vpon the sacred persons of Kings The place ✚ of the Kings Armes of France and Nauarre At Paris By F. Morel P. Mettayer the Kings Ordinarie Printers and Stationers 1615. Taken out of the Records of the Parliament WHereas the Kings Attourney Generall hath complayned to the Court all the Chambers thereof being assembled that albeit by many Arrests or Decrees heretofore made with great and mature deliberation the Court hath confirmed the Maximes which haue at all times beene held in France and are naturally engrafted to the Crowne That the King doth not acknowledge any Superiour in Temporals of his Kingdome but God alone And that no power or authoritie can rightfully release his Subiect from the Oath of Allegiance and Obedience which they owe to Him nor suspend depriue or depose him from his said Kingdome and much lesse to attempt or to cause to attempt either by publike or priuate authoritie against the sacred persons of Kings Neuerthelesse it hath beene aduertized that by Discourses as well in priuate as in publike many persons doe presume to call in question the said Maximes to dispute of them and to hold them for problematike from whence may arise very many inconueniences which of necessitie must be prouided against and that speedily Hee the said Attourney requesteth that seeing the Court is assembled all businesses set aside it will bee pleased to ordaine that the said Decrees shall be renewed and againe published in all the Benches subiect to the Iurisdiction of this Court to the end that the mindes of all the Kings Subiects of what quality or condition so euer may be kept firme and assured concerning the said Maximes and Rules and for the safetie of the Kings life the publike peace and quietnesse With Inhibitions not to transgresse the same vnder the penalties set downe by the said Arrests And that it be enioyned to all their Substitutes to cause the publication thereof to be made and to certifie the Court within a moneth vnder paine to be depriued of their Offices The Court all the Chambers being assembled hath ordayned and doth ordayne that the Arrests of the 2. Decemb 1561. the 29. Decemb. 1594 the 7. of Ianuarie and the 19. of Iuly 1595. the 27. of May the 8. of Iune and the 26. of Nouemb. 1610. and the 26. of Iune 1614. shall bee kept and obserued according to their forme and tenour Forbidding all persons of what qualitie or condition soeuer to transgresse the same And to this end they shall bee published in the Bayliwikes Stewardships and other Benches subiect to this Court by the care of the Substitutes to the Attourney Generall who shall certifie the Court with in a moneth vnder paine to answere it at their perill Made in Parliament the second of Ianuarie 1615. Signed VOISIN The lawfulnesse of all these Arrests or Decrees is manifest partly by that which hath beene said in this Treatise in the Fourth and Fift Obseruation and in the Second Third and Fift Chapters and more particularly by Widdrington in his Discussion of the Decree of the Lateran Councell against Lessius part 2. sect 9. for that Christian Princes by vertue of their temporall power haue good full authoritie according to the doctrine of Ioannes Parisiensis Ioh. Paris de potest Reg. Pap. c. 21. ad 37. Victoria Victoria Relect. 1. de potest Eccles sec 7. §. octaua propositio Sotus Sotus in 4. dist 29. q. 1. ar 4. Bānes Bannes 2. 2. q 11. ar 4. q. 1. in fine Couerrunias Couerr cap. 35. pract quest which is grounded in manifest reason to forbid the maintayning teaching and publishing not only of hereticall erroneous and false propositions but also of all vnnecessarie doctrines and positions be they neuer so probable as the teaching and publishing of the same is dangerous to the Crownes and liues of temporall Princes and tendeth to the subuersion of the State and to the disturbance of the publike peace in the Ciuill Common-wealth whereof the Prince hath charge and to punish with temporall punishments the teachers maintayners and publishers of such dangerous and seditious doctrines Haec omnia Ecclesiae Catholicae indicio subiecta sunto FINIS Page Line Faults corrected 8. 13. would would not 35. 4. at first at the first 71. 16. Authors Authour 87. 27. or vnlawfull or lawfully 133. 20. bound bound 144. 16. bound bound 146. 10. dipose dispose 187. 1. and to be and be 191. 4. Deputies Deputies
more then any other part thereof But the Authours of Bookes must now adaies if they looke not themselues to the translating publishing of them speak as it pleaseth the Translators Censors 15. Neither is it sufficient for any man which also is to bee obserued to condemne any doctrine as temerarious or improbable for that in his iudgement and opinion it is repugnant to Scriptures ancient Fathers Councels Canons practice of the Church and Theologicall reasons if it bee approued by other learned Catholikes who haue examined all the arguments on either side for otherwise the Thomists might condemne of temeritie the Scotists and the Scotists the Thomists in the question of the B. Virgins Conception The Diuines of Rome might condemne of temeritie the Diuines of Paris and the Diuines of Paris the Diuines of Rome in the question of the Popes infallibilitie and superioritie of the Pope and a Generall Councell and the Iesuites might condemne of temeritie the Dominicans and the Dominicans the Iesuits in the question of the efficacie of Grace for all of them alledge for their opinion Scriptures Fathers Councels Canons Theologicall reasons it is vsuall in most Theological questiōs to bring such arguments on both sides But true probabilitie and improbabilitie and whereof not only learned men but also the vnlearned without any great difficultie or perplexitie of conscience may iudge is to be taken not from intrinsecall grounds which are vnknowne to vnlearned men but from extrinsecall grounds to wit the authoritie of learned men who are knowne to approue that doctrine And therefore Aristotle Aristotle lib. 1. Top. cap. 8. whome all Philosophers Diuines do herein follow did by extrinsecall grounds define probable to be that which is approued by wise learned and skilfull men in the Art which they professe as in a matter of Law that is probable which is approued by learned and skilfull Lawyers in a matter of Physicke that is probable which is approoued by learned and skilfull Physicians and in a matter of Theologicall learning that is probable which is approoued by learned and skilfull Catholike Diuines which definition of probable is grounded in the light of naturall reason for that it is not against prudence and therefore no temeritie to giue credit to one in a matter wherein he is skilfull according to that vulgar maxime Vnicuique in sua arte perito credendum est Credit is to bee giuen to euery man that is skilfull in his Art 16. These bee the two principall grounds for which the doctrine of deposing Princes by the Popes authoritie may lawfully bee denyed and also abiured in the manner aforesaid for if it bee certaine that it is open iniustice to dispossesse any man vpon a probable vncertaine and controuersed power or title and it is also certaine that it is a controuersie and not certaine whether the Pope hath authoritie to depose Princes or no it followeth euidently that it is as lawfull for any man to sweare that the Pope hath no authoritie to depose Princes as that hee hath no authoritie to commit open iniustice But of this probabilitie see more beneath in the end of this Treatise 17. The Seuenth and last Obseruation is that wee must carefully consider what the swearer is bound to acknowledge and sweare in euery branch of this Oath by force and vertue of the expresse words and according to the plaine and common vnderstanding of them to which by the seuenth branch hee is expresly tyed and what he may lawfully acknowledge and sweare by reason of the matter for this distinction may no little auaile to the better vnderstanding of some clauses of this Oath seeing that it may often fall out that in regard of the matter one may lawfully sweare that which by force of the words hee is not bound or demanded to sweare As for example if one bee commanded to sweare what his iudgement opinion perswasion or acknowledgement is concerning something whereof notwithstanding he is certaine by force of the wordes hee is bound only to sweare that hee thinketh iudgeth is perswaded and acknowledgeth it to bee so yet by reason of the matter which to him is certaine hee may lawfully sweare that absolutely and assuredly it is so Likewise if one bee commanded to abiure as false and hereticall a conditionall disiunctiue proposition which implyeth a choice to take which part of the disiunction he please by force of the wordes hee is bound to abiure but one part of the disiunction as hereticall because to make such a disiunctiue proposition to bee false and hereticall it sufficeth that one part only of the disiunction bee false and hereticall yet somtimes by vertue of the matter when both parts of the disiunction are heretical he may lawfully abiure both as heretical albeit by force of the wordes hee bee not bound thereunto As these propositions Any man may lawfully honour or blaspheme God The Pope by vertue of his Pastorall power may excommunicate or murther any wicked Christian are false and hereticall and yet one part of the disiunction is true and only the other is false and hereticall but both parts of this proposition any man may lawfully hate or blasphem God are false and hereticall so by reason of the matter both parts may be abiured as hereticall although by force of the forme of words to abiure the whole proposition as heretical it sufficeth to abiure only one part thereof as hereticall And how this also may bee applyed to the fourth branch of the Oath wherein a conditionall disiunctiue proposition is contayned and whether the doctrine not only of murthering Princes which be excommunicated or depriued by the Pope but also of deposing them may bee abiured as hereticall you shall see beneath These Obseruations being considered there will be found little or no difficultie in any part or parcell of the Oath The First Chapter The First Branch of the Oath and an Explication thereof I A.B. doe truely and sincerely acknowledge professe testifie and declare in my conscience before God and the World That our Soueraigne Lord King Iames is lawful rightful King of this Realme and of all other His Maiesties Dominions and Countries 1. This Branch which is the ground and foundation of the whole Oath and as it were the roote and fountaine from whence all the other branches wherein the Popes authoritie is any way denyed doe spring and are deriued is so cleere and manifest that no learned and well affected subiect can take any colourable exception against the same In so much that Fa. Parsons * In his Booke entituled The Iudgement of a Catholike English man c. part 7. nu 22. pag. 13. 16. himselfe feareth not to affirme that there is no man who sticketh or maketh difficulty to acknowledge our Soueraigne to bee true King and rightfull Lord ouer all his Dominions for that euery English Catholike will sweare and acknowledge most willingly all those parts and clauses of the
Oath that doe any way appertayne to the Ciuill and Temporall Obedience due to His Maiestie whom hee acknowledgeth for his true and lawfull King and Soueraigne ouer all His Domioions And Martinus Becanus a famous Iesuite in the first Edition of his Controuersia Anglicana writeth thus Becanus in Controuersia Anglic cap. 3. p. 102 And truly to me it is certaine that all the parts and propositions of the Oath are not false if they bee well declared For these are true first that King Iames is lawfull King of England Scotland and Ireland Secondly that in the same Kingdomes he is the Supreme or Soueraigne Lord in Temporalls 2. First therefore if wee consider the end of this Oath which is only to make profession of our temporall Allegiance and to make a true distinction not betwixt Catholikes and Protestants c. the expresse declaration of His Maiestie and the rules before mentioned in the second and third Obseruation it is euident that by those wordes Soueraigne Lord is not to be vnderstood the Kings Supremacie in Spirituall and Ecclesiasticall but only in Temporall and Ciuill causes 3. Secondly it is also euident that albeit by force of the expresse wordes and the plaine and common vnderstanding of the same to which the seuenth branch of this Oath tyeth the swearer wee are bound only to acknowledge that King Iames is lawfull and rightfull King of this Realme and of all other His Maiesties Dominions and Countries and not that Hee is the Soueraigne Lord of the same both for that those words Soueraigne Lord are put only ex parte subiecti and not ex parte predicati and therefore by vertue of the words are not affirmed as likewise he that stileth the Pope most holy and most blessed doth not affirme him to bee most holy and most blessed vnlesse the words most holy most blessed be put ex parte predicati also that if we regard the force and vertue of those words Soueraigne Lord they haue not the same sense which the words lawfull and rightfull King haue seeing that one may be a lawfull and rightfull King and yet not the Soueraigne Lord of His Kingdome as if the Emperour should make the great Duke of Toscan King of Hetruria he would be lawfull and rightfull King of that Countrie and yet not the Soueraigne or Supreme Lord of the same because hee is as a feudarie subiect to the Emperour Neuerthelesse because the lawfull and rightfull King of England is also the Soueraigne Lord of the same by reason and vertue of the matter we may lawfully and if it bee demanded at our hands are bound to acknowledge and sweare that King Iames is not only the lawfull and rightfull King of England of all other His Maiesties Dominions but also the Soueraigne or Supreme Lord of the same And in this sense both the XIII Priests and also M. Greene vnderstood the word Soueraigne in their Protestation and Declaration 4. Neither is it to the purpose which some obiect that the King of England is the Popes Vassall and as a feudarie subiect to him in Temporals and therefore the Pope and not King Iames is the absolute Soueraigne and supreme Lord in Temporals of this Kingdome For although wee should absurdly admit that for the title and clayme of Temporall Soueraigntie which the Pope pretendeth to haue ouer this Kingdome by vettue of some grant of former Kings may bee brought some probable proofe as there cannot seeing that it is euident that no King of England hath authoritie to giue away His Kingdome or make it subiect in Temporals to another Prince without the consent of the Kingdome it selfe and that no colour of any probable proofe can bee brought from any Authenticall Instrument to shew that the Kingdome of England euer consented to any such grant yet considering that no probable title can bee a sufficient ground to depriue any man of that Right Dominion or any other thing which he actually possesseth but such a title must bee most certaine and out of all controuersie as I shewed aboue in the Fift Obseruation it is manifest that notwithstanding any such probable title euery subiect of this Land may lawfully acknowledge by Oath that King Iames is not only the lawful and rightfull King of this Realme and of all other His Maiesties Dominions and Countries but also the Soueraigne or supreme temporall Lord of the same CHAP. II. The Second Branch of the Oath and an Explication thereof ANd that the Pope neither of himselfe nor by any authoritie of the Church or See of Rome or by any other meanes which any other hath any Power or Authoritie to depose the King or to dispose any of his Maiesties Kingdomes or Dominions or to authorize any forraigne Prince to inuade or annoy Him or his Countries or to discharge any of his Subiects of their Allegiance and Obedience to his Maiestie or to giue license or leaue to any of them to beare Armes rayse Tumults or to offer any violence or hurt to His Maiesties Royal Person State or Gouernment or to any of His Maiesties subiects within His Maiesties Dominions 1. This Branch supposing the former Obseruations hath in it no difficultie at all although wee should admit that the immediate obiect thereof or which is all one that which in this Branch by force of the words we are bound immediately to sweare is not only our sincere acknowledgement and perswasion but also that absolutely and assuredly the Pope hath not any authoritie to depose the King c. For considering that the whole tenour of this Branch tendeth to practise namely to depose to dispose to inuade annoy beare Armes rayse Tumults offer violence or hurt and to discharge subiects of their Allegiance and also that it is a doctrine approoued by many learned Catholikes and who haue examined all the arguments on both sides and consequently that it is truely probable that the Pope hath no authoritie to depriue Princes or to dispose of their Temporals it is as cleere and manifest that any man whether hee bee the Kings subiect or no what opinion soeuer he followeth in speculation concerning the Popes authoritie to depriue Princes yet hee may as certainly acknowledge and sweare that the Pope hath no authoritie to depose the King that is to practize his deposition or any other of those things mentioned in this Branch as it is cleere and manifest that hee may certainly acknowledge and sweare that the Pope hath no authoritie to commit open iniustice and that in a doubtfull vncertaine and disputable case the condition of the possessour is to bee preferred 2. Neither doe temporall Princes or other priuate men that haue any thing in their possessiō greatly regard what learned men who by the subtiltie of their wits can easily finde out some probable colour of a broken and pretended title may speculatiuely dispute in Schooles concerning their titles so that in practice notwithstanding such disputations and speculations they bee secured from
being put out of that which they really and bona fide doe possesse And doubtlesse most miserable were the state of all men that possesse any thing of worth and much more of Princes if vpon a title which some learned mâ—n may in speculation approoue it were lawfull to inuade their possessions before a lawfull Iudge and who is certainly knowne so to bee hath decided and determined the title or controuersie To preuent which mischiefe all Natitions being guided herein by the light of naturall reason haue agreed in this manifest principle that it is open iniustice to put any man out of his possession vpon any title which is not most certaine and free from all controuersie vntill a lawfull and vndoubted Iudge hath decided the matter I said a lawfull and vndoubted Iudge for if it be doubtfull vncertaine and questionable whether he be a lawfull and competent Iudge to determine that cause his decision cannot be sufficient to end the controuersie For which cause the Pope is not to bee accounted a lawfull and competent Iudge to decide this question concerning his owne pretended authoritie to depriue Princes for that it is a controuersie among learned Diuines and approued by very many as Pope Adrian the Cardinaell of Cambray the Cardinall Cusanus the Cardinall Panormitan the Cardinall of Florence Master to Panormitan Iohn Patriarch of Antioch Abulensis Ioannes Parisiensis Ioannes Gerson Iohn Maior Almaine and almost all the Vniuersitie of Paris cited by Widdrington Widdring in the discouerie of D. Schulkeuius slanders §. 7. that the Pope is not a competent Iudge to decide or define infallibly any doctrinall point and much lesse in his owne cause without a true and vndoubted generall Councell and therfore although he should hereafter as yet he hath not attempt to define and decide this question his decision could not end the controuersie nor giue sufficient warrant to any man to practize the deposition of Princes vpon so doubtfull vncertaine and questionable power or title 3. Neuerthelesse it behooueth temporall Princes to be very carefull that their titles to the Dominions which they lawfuly possesse be not so much as speculatiuely or only for Disputation sake disputed pro and contra by learned men least that some ignorant or turbulent spirits which either doe not know or of set purpose to colour their practices vnder a pretence of a probable title will not take notice of the manifest difference betwixt speculation and practice may take occasion thereby to disturbe the publike peace and to molest annoy or to offer any violence or hurt to their Royall Persons States or Gouernment For which cause the Parliament of Paris hath with great wisdome and reason oftentimes by publike Edicts ordained See beneath in the end of this Treatise some of these Decrees that the doctrine of deposing their Kings should not bee so much as taught and maintayned to bee probable or problematike that occasion be not giuen to seditious spirits who know not or will not take notice of the difference betwixt speculation and practice to attempt vnder pretence of a probable title any violence against the Crowns or sacred Persons of their Kings And the reason is manifest for that the temporall Common-wealth hath good and full authoritie to forbid the teaching and publishing of any doctrine which is not necessarie whereby probable danger to the Crownes and liues of temporall Princes and perturbations in the Common-wealth may arise 4. First therefore by those words of this Branch nor by any other means with any other it is euident that the Parliament which representeth the whole bodie of the Kingdome or Common-wealth did not intend to meddle with the authoritie which the whole Kingdome or Common-wealth may according to the opinion of some Doctors pretend to haue in some cases ouer their soueraign Prince as Lessius and others whom the Authors of the Prelate and the Prince doth seeme to follow doe idly obiect And although the meaning of those words were to deny that the whole Kingdome or Common-wealth hath no authoritie to depose their King yet considering that it is also a probable doctrine approued by many learned Catholike Diuines and Lawyers cited by Widdrington Widdr. in Apolog nu 111. and in his Answere to Fitz-herb part 3. cap. 11. nu 36. 37. that the Common-wealth hath no such authority it is also lawful for any man of what opinion soeuer hee bee in speculation concerning this authoritie of the CoÌ„monweath to acknowledge and sweare that the Common-wealth hath no more authoritie to depose the King that is to practize his deposition then she hath to commit open iniustice But the true meaning of His Maiestie and the Parliament is as the words themselues doe plainely signifie only to deny the Popes authoritie to depose c. to wit that the Pope neither of himselfe that is neither as a sole and totall cause nor by any authoritie c. that is neither as an Instrument or Minister of the Church or See of Rome nor by any other meanes with any other that is nor as a principall or true and proper partiall cause or Agent hath any authoritie to depose the King c. 5. Neither by those wordes or to authorize any forraigne Prince to inuade or annoy Him or His Countries did His Maiestie and the Parliamenâ— intend to denie the authoritie which temporall Princes may haue in somâ— cases to make warre against their neighbour Princes and consequently against His Maiestie if he should giue them iust cause of warre yet euer obseruing that no probable power cause or title can bee a sufficient ground to punish any Prince or to inuade His Countries but as the expresse words do plainly shew only to deny the Popes authoritie to authorize any forraigne Prince to inuade or annoy Him or His Countries because all the authoritie which temporall Princes haue to make warre or to inuade the Kingdome of an other Prince for what cause crime or end so euer it bee is deriued from their temporall Soueraigntie grounded vpon the Law of Nature or Nations not from the Popes authoritie And likewise all the authority which the temporall Common-wealth may pretend to haue in some cases to rise vp in Armes against their Prince is not deriued from the Popes warrant license or authoritie but if there be any such power from the Law of Nature And therefore with great reason this Clause denyeth in the Pope all power and authoritie to authorize any forraigne Prince to inuade or annoy His Maiestie or his Countries or to giue license or leaue to any of his subiects to beare Armes rayse Tumults or to offer any violence or hurt to His Maiestis Royall Person State or GouernmeÌ„t because although they shuld haue any such authoritie leaue or licence wherewith His Maiestie and the Parliament would not in this Oath intermeddle they haue it not from the Pope but from the Law of Nations or Nature 6. Secondly in this Branch is not
or Successours or any absolution of the said Subiects from their obedience yet he wil beare faith and true allegiance to his Maiestie his Heires and Successours and him and them will defend c. Neuerthelesse the lawfulnesse or iustice of this promissorie Oath supposeth for the principall ground thereof the veritie of the former assertorie Clause and therefore it implieth and vertually containeth a deniall of the Popes authoritie to depriue or depose Princes and to absolue Subiects froÌ„ their temporall allegiance for that whosoeuer doth sweare that notwithstanding any sentence of depriuation or absolution of subiects from their obedience made or hereafter to be made by the Pope or his Successours against his Maiestie his Heires or Successours to make this promise iust and lawfull he must consequently deny that the Pope hath Authoritie to depriue Princes or to absolue Subiects from their obedience as Suarez examining this Branch of the Oath doth most clearely demonstrate Suarez in Defens lib. 6. cap. 3. See Widdring against Fitzherbert part 1. cap. 5. For if the sentence of depriuation to be made at any time hereafter against the King his Heires or Successours for any manifest cause or crime whatsoeuer may be iust lawfull and effectuall it is as vnlawfull to take this clause as it is vnlawfull for one to sweare that he will not obey the Popes sentence and commandement which hereafter he shall impose be it neuer so inst and without all errour or default But if this sentence of depriuation at any time hereafter to be made can neuer be iust it must needs follow that the Pope hath no more authoritie to depriue or depose the King his Heires or Successours then he hath authoritie to commit open iniustice 2. Wherefore those thirteene Reuerend Priests who solemnly protested to Queene Elizabeth that notwithstanding any authoritie which words are farre more generall then notwithstanding any sentence of depriuation or any Excommunication either denounced or to be denounced against her Maiestie c. they would yeeld to her Maiestie all obedience in temporall causes would then haue made no difficultie to take this Branch of the Oath and consequently to free themselues from periurie they must also deny the Popes Authoritie to depriue and depose Princes for that the iustice of this Branch implieth supposeth as a chiefe ground thereof a deniall of the Popes authoritie to depriue and depose as Suarez doth most plainely conuince 3. First therefore in this Clause is not denied the Popes power to Excommunicate but onely that Excommunication being a spirituall censure doth not worke this temporall effect as to make Kings no Kings or to depriue them of their Royall right and Soueraigntie and consequently not to absolue Subiects from their naturall allegiance which according to the doctrine of Card. Bellarmine and Suarez they doe by the law of God and Nature owe to their lawfull Prince Bell. in Tract contra Barclaium cap. 21. pag. 202. Suarez in Defens c. lib. 6. cap. 3. nu 6. And thus much his Maiestie hath also in expresse words declared The truth is saith his Maiestie The Kings Maiestie in his Premonition c. pag. 9. that the Lower house of Parliament at the first framing of this Oath made it to containe that the Pope had no power to Excommunicate mee which I forced them to reforme onely making it to conclude that no Excommunication of the Popes can warrant my Subiects to practise against my Person or State denying the deposition of Kings to be in the Popes lawfull power as indeede I take any such temporall violence to be farre without the limits of such a spirituall censure as Excommunication is And also that depriuation or deposition from temporall kingdomes is not an effect of ExcommunicatioÌ„ Widdrington hath shewed at large heretofore and Becanus and Suarez doe also in expresse words affirme the same Widdrington in his Apologie nu 346. in his Answer to Suarez part 2. sect 4. and in his Answer to Fitzher part 3. cap. 1. FroÌ„ hence it is very apparaÌ„t saith Becanus Becanus in quest de fide haereticis seruanda ca. 8. nu 16. and in his Controuersia Anglic. cap. 3. qu. 2. that Heretikes by this precisely that they are excommunicated are not depriued of their Dominion or Iurisdiction either ouer their subiects or ouer their temporall goods but this depriuation is a destinct punishment and inflicted by a destinct law And againe It is one thing saith he to excommunicate a King and another thing to depose him or depriue him of his Kingdome neither is the one necessarily connected with the other Many Kings and Emperours haue beene excommunicated and yet not therefore deposed and contrariwise many deposed and yet not therefore excommunicated See also Suarez cited by Widdrington in his Apologie Suarez tom 5. disp 15. sect 6. nu 3. and in his answere to Suarez and Fitzherbert 4. And therefore in very truth I am sorie and doe in some sort pittie the Author of the Prelate and the Prince a man whom heretofoâ—e I haue much loued respected and honoured that he should so grosly forget himselfe as to bewray so palpably such great want of learning iudgement and sinceritie in affirming so boldly and without any proofe at all Pag. 298. that depriuation of Regall authoritie is an effect of excommunicating Kings and Princes and so in denying the effect the cause is denyed For as saith he if you should say A man is not risibilis that is hath not power to laugh you should deny him to be a man so in denying that the Pope can depriue Princes of their Kingdomes you deny in effect that he can excommunicate Whereas this Authour knew right well that Widdrington in that very Chapter which hee citeth did by the expresse doctrine of Suarez and Becanus but now related cleerely prooue against Lessius who vrged euen as nakedly and without any proofe at all the same obiection that depriuation is no effect at all of Excommunication much lesse proprium quarto modo as risibilis a power to laugh is to a man as this Authour most vnlearnedly affirmeth And yet forsooth he taketh vpon him as it may appeare by the very Title and Inscription of his Treatise to giue a full Instruction and appeasement to the consciences of English Catholikes concerning the Oath of Allegiance But this shall suffice at this present for an imperfect portraying of this Authours want of iudgement and sinceritie in his Explication of the Oath of Allegiance especially if wee consider his person the Office hee now beareth and the doctrine which in former times hee held for that as I am told his perfect Picture both in this and other points is alreadie drawne and will be set forth in liuely colours ere it be long 5. Secondly it is euident by the former Obseruations that those wordes Heires and Successours doe not signifie Vsurpers as some would wrest them contrarie to the meaning of the Law the
vniust Inuasions Rebellions and Powder-Treasons 7. Wherefore for the last farewell I beseech you again and againe deare Countrimen not to forget those two most certaine Principles whereon is chiefly grounded the Doctrine for the iustifying of the Oath and for the securing of Princes from all trayterous Conspiracies practises and attempts vnder the colour and pretence of the Popes authoritie to depose them to wit that it is a great controuersie among learned Catholickes and therefore not certayne but truely probable that the Pope hath no authoritie to depriue Soueraigne Princes and that no power or title which is not most certayn but in controuersie can bee a lawfull ground whereby immediately any man may be punished or depriued of that right dominion or any other thing which hee really and bona fide possesseth both which Principles are as you haue seene so cleare and manifest that no learned man can from his hart deny them howsoeuer some one or other for some temporall respect end or motiue may speake or write contrary to his mind and knowledge 8. But as Widdrington towards the end of his Answer to Fitzherberts Preface well obserueth out of Molina and Lessius both famous Iesuites there is a great difference betwixt the possessing of temporall and corporall goods as Lands Houses Crownes Kingdomes and the like and the possessing of authoritie Iurisdiction rights and claymes which one may pretend to haue to such temporall goods For that possession properly is onely of temporall goods and such goods may properly be possessed although the party who hath true right to those goods contradicteth neuer so much but rights and claymes are not properly possessed but they are onely said to be as it were in some sort or improperly possessed and besides to the possessing of power authoritie iurisdiction right or claime to any temporall thing in such manner as right iurisdiction and claime may be sayd to be possessed it is necessarie that the right or claime which is pretended be without contradiction and resistance of the aduerse part Otherwise if one should challenge any right or authoritie be it good or bad true or false and should exercise that pretended right or authoritie the aduerse part contradicting he might neuerthelesse be said to bee in possession of that right or authoritie which is manifestly false and absurd For so if a Lay-man should pretend to haue true spirituall iurisdiction ouer Clergie men as power to excommunicate and should exercise that pretended iurisdiction hee might be said to be in possession of true spirituall iurisdiction although the Clergie should neuer so much contradict and except against the same And for this reason albeit some Popes haue for as many hundreds of yeares as haue beene since the time of Pope Gregorie the Seuenth challenged a right and authoritie to depriue Kings of their regall Soueraigntie yet they cannot be said to haue beene for one day or one houre in possession of that their pretended right and authoritie because Christian Kings and Subiects from the time of Henrie the Fourth Emperour who was the first Emperour that was depriued by Pope Gregorie the Seuenth vntill the time of Henrie the Fourth most Christian King who was the last King who was depriued by Pope Sixtus the Fift haue euer resisted and contradicted this pretended authoritie and clayme of Popes to depriue them of their temporalls And although perchance there should haue beene or hereafter shall be some or other Christian King who for some priuate or publique respect and interest hath not or shall not resist the Popes sentence of depriuation denounced or to bee denounced against him but rather yeeld thereunto yet this cannot preiudice his successors or be a sufficiēt ground that the Pope may be truely said to be in possession of his pretended right authority and claime to depriue Kings in general but at the most to depriue that King in particular who did not resist or gainsay but rather acknowledged the right and authority which the Pope claimed to depriue him 9. Finally although it may bee obiected that diuerse Popes haue practized the deposing of Princes and many learned Diuines haue approued the said practice therefore the practice being approued by many learned and skilfull men in the Arte which they professe is truly probable euen according to Widdringtons grounds which he taketh from Vasquez Yet this is easily answerd For those Popes and learned men in approuing that practice for lawfull did either thinke assuredly that the doctrine for the Popes power to depriue Princes was most certaine vnquestionable and out of all controuersie and that the contrarie doctrine was not at that time nor could lawfully bee approued by any learned Catholike which howsoeuer those Doctours might at that time thinke or be perswaded wherein neuerthelesse they were greatly deceiued because euen from the first broaching of this doctrine and practice by Pope Gregorie the VII A thing vnheard of before that Age saith Onuphrius Onuphr lib. 4. de varia creat Rom. Pont. it hath euer beene a great controuersie saith Azor the Iesuite Azor. cited aboue in the Sixt Obseruat betweene Popes and Emperours yet now it is so cleere and manifest that there is at this time a great controuersie among learned Catholikes concerning this authoritie of the Pope as that all the World both by the publike writings and proceedings in this controuersie can giue sufficient testimonie of the same Or else those Popes and Doctours did not consider and examine the difference betwixt speculation and practice but without any further examination thought euery doctrine that was probable and approoued by learned men in speculation and might speculatiuely and abstracting from practice bee disputed in Schooles pro and contra might also bee practised and put in execution not considering whether it tendeth to the preiudice of a third person and to the dispossessing him of that which hee actually and bona fide possesseth or no whereas it is most certaine and out of all controuersie as hath beene shewed aboue that it is open iniustice to depriue vpon a probable or controuersed power or title any man of that which hee hath really in his possession 10. Now it is euident according to Vasquez doctrine which Widdrington followeth and which stands with manifest reason that the approbation and authoritie of ancient or moderne Doctours is not sufficient to make their doctrine probable to other learned men if either their doctrine bee grounded vpon some principle which to those learned men is manifestly false or it may bee confuted by some reason which to those learned men seemeth inuincible and not to be answered and which reason those Doctours haue not seene considered and examined Obseruandum tamen maxime est c. But it is greatly to bee obserued saith Vasquez Vasquez 1. 2. disp 62. cap. 4. nu 18. cited by Widder in disp Theolog c. 10. sec 2. nu 16. that it may sometimes fall out that the ancient Writers whose opinions are