in his garment and on his high King of Kings and Lord of Lords Isa 33.22 The Lord is our King he will save us Psal 2.6 I am made by him a King over Sion his holy hill and a great many more of the same nature These say they and the like places are both plain in themselves and plainly expounded of a temporal regal power by the Fathers To which purpose they bring Theophylact expounding that to the Heb. whom he made Heir of all things that is made Lord of the whole World but how did he make him Lord Namely as man in the second Psalm he speaks to him Ask of me and I will give thee the Gentiles for thy Inheritance And St. Anselm upon the same place Whom the Father appointed according to the humanity the immutable Heir of all things that is possessor of all creatures And Haymo upon the same place too God the Father apointed his Son Heir of all things that is of the whole World or all creatures not onely according to the Divinity in which he is coeternal to his Father and coequal in the Omnipotence of the Deity and in which he eternally possesses all things with his Father but rather according to the humanity assum'd by the word he is appointed Lord and Heir over all creatures as God the Father promis'd him saying Ask of me c. And the Son himself rising from the dead speaks thus in the person of the humanity All power is given me in Heaven and in Earth Eusebius Emissenus He who according to his Divinity had alwayes with the Father and Holy Ghost power over all things now also according to his humanity has receiv'd power over all things as Man He who lately suffer'd let him Rule both in Heaven and in Earth and be believed the God and Lord not of the Jews onely but of all Nations L. 2. Cont. Parmen Optatus against the Donatists Why do you break such a promise and confine to a kind of Prison the vast extent of Kingdoms why do you strive to hinder so much goodness why are you against our Saviours merits Permit the Son to enjoy what was granted permit the Father to perform what he promised Why do you set bounds and fix Limits when the whole Earth was promised by the Father There is not any thing in any part of the Earth which seems exempt from his Possession The whole Earth with its Nations were given him These and the the like places are the chief supports of the affirmative opinion for I omit their Reasons not onely because a man who were strongly bent upon it may invent specious pretexts almost for any thing and they seem to me no other but because I take questions of Faith not properly to belong to the decision of meer Reason I mean in this manner that People should rashly determine by their ill grounded reasonings what is fitting or not fitting for God to do We are to learn of our Fathers and the Church what he has done and not by Airy speculations determine what he should do If this Doctrine hath been delivered to our Fore-Fathers we shall sure enough receive it from them but if we do not it will hardly belong to Faith even though it could be proved true In the mean time those who maintain the negative bring particular Answers to all these places the substance whereof devolves to this that the Kingdom and Regal power attributed to Christ in the Scripture is to be understood of his Spiritual Kingdom the Church unless where his person is spoken of as comprehending the divine as well as humane nature in which Cases Regal power and all that can be attributed to God may justly be affirmed of him 'T were to write a Book instead of a Letter to dilate them all particularly and when all is done this is the substance But then on their side they alleadge Scripture and Fathers in my opinion much more convincing And first they affirm the question is expresly and plainly decided by Christ himself Joh. 18.36 When being askt by Pilate if he were a King he denies it not but withal affirms his Kingdom is not of this World And methinks people might take his word and cease to dispute of what he so plainly determined for I cannot think otherwise but this Answer meets the difficulty in the Face and so reserves whether the right of omnipotence or spiritaal Regality as very positively to exclude Temporal power They alledge again Luke 12.14 Who has made me Judge or Divider betwixt you Our blessed Saviour was moved by one who heard him and perhaps believed in him to cause one Brother to divide an inheritance with the other And he not onely refuses the motion but says in a phrase usual in Scripture of denying by interrogation it was a matter in which he had nothing to do Now if Christ were truly a Temporal King 't is hard to imagine how rendring Justice to his Subjects who demanded it at his hands and determining emergent Controversies in which the very Office of a King does in a great measure consist should not belong to him I hove nothing to do with Possessions and I am no Temporal King to seem equivalent They alleadge besides Jo. 6.15 where Christ perceiving the multitude were resolved to make him King fled from them and hid himself Put him to have received temporal Dominion over all the World from his Father and 't will be hard to unriddle why he used it not in this occasion His Subjects more disposed to obey him they were willing they were forward to do their parts what can be said why he did not do his and govern them I said before and I cannot but repear it 'T is as much the duty of a King to govern as of Subjects to be governed and I cannot for my life imagine any other reason why he should refuse to govern then this that he was no temporal King If it may be permitted me to speak freely this position of temporal regal Power in Christ seems to me to include both nonsense and blasphemy For Nonsense it is to put a Power in him to no purpose an useless Metaphysical potentia never reduced into Act and blasphemy it is to say he was deficient in his duty and how that position will get clear of either of these absurdities I can by no means understand Other places of Scripture they bring but these are the most material Now because a Catholick cannot be a Catholick who maintains a position directly contrary to Scripture for neither he nor his position would be endured those of the other side have invented several Senses which they give to the places alledged and though those Senses seem to me full of Nonsense yet I cannot but commend in the Authors that they chuse rather to contradict common Sense then Scripture But do you Judge My Kingdom is not of this World that is say they 't is not by way of Election or Succession
I believe those who are of a contrary judgment will be convinc'd by what I have said neither did I go about to convince them My business was to satisfie you not to dogmatize And I hope you will perceive your Argument so answer'd that if those unquiet Spirits of fear and diffidence continue still to hant you the blame is not to be imputed to me Of two propositions which you assum'd to fix a power Paramount in the Pope upon our Faith I have shew'd a Catholick may safely deny either of both 'T is at his choice to take either way and any one does his business If he will deny a temporal Regality in Christ the difficulty is cut up by the root since a Vicar can not with any shadow of pretence challenge more then was in the Principal himself If not willing to meddle with that question he will take the other way and affirm that whatever power Chrit had he left only Spiritual to Peter and his Successors the difficulty is as fully cleared A Catholick take my word may unreprovably hold either or both and that you may have better security against your fears then my word can give you I have shewed you both maintain'd by those whom Catholicks are not permitted to reprove If all this be not enough to quiet your suspicious let me add that if you consider well you will find that of all men the Principles of Catholciks can least endure the contrary Doctrine Ask of your Fore-fathers walk in the antient Paths avoid novelties and the like are Maximes so known and universally receieved amongst them that who is known to contradict them is known so far to swerve from the acknowledged grounds of Catholick Religion Now when the authority of unquestionable antiquity is of the one side and on the other that of Authors both late and few and of no extraordinary credit a Catholick who knows what he does can so little doubt which part to take that I think he is not excusable if he so much as doubt or at least not otherwise then as zeal is excused by blindness None have that veneration for antiquity and Fathers which Catholicks pretend for they look upon them as the men who have begot them in the Gospel from whence they give them the name of Fathers as the most considerable Pillars of the Church as the principal Persons on whose attestation the Rule of Faith and Stability of Religion depends After the sacred Books of Scripture written by Divine Inspiration to which no writing of Man can be equall'd nor so much as compar'd we Reverence in the next place the Writings of the Fathers which we think useful too and the most useful of any to the understanding of the Scripture of which we hold them the best Interpreters We universally blame those of other Communions for preferring the obscurity of private interpretations before the clear light of Tradition And all these things are known and acknowledg'd by every body Wherefore since the great Lights of the Church St. Agustin and St. Hierom and St. Cyril and St John Chrysostom and St. Bernard and the rest shine clearly out and with a joint consent unanimously conspire into the same Doctrine none are so blamable as Catholicks if they oppose it And such men as Comitolus and Sermarinus and the like put into the contrary ballance weigh so little that t is shameful even that they should enter in The truth is the world goes otherwise then sharp-sighted men would think it should or could else t is not easie to conceive how it should be possible there should be found amongst those of our principles who should stand in opposition to the Fathers All that can be said is that worldly policy sometimes makes a little too bold with Christian simplicity and that preposterous zeal is very blind and therefore a very dangerous Guide And I shall take the liberty to tell you that understanding Catholicks who consider the way they take see if it were followed in other things it would mine Catholick Religion and that the men indeed perhaps by the priviledge of well meaning ignorance are Catholicks but the way is not a Catholick way Thanks be to God there are not many who walk in it and those who do I believe consider not what they do For sure I am that knowingly to sleight the Reverence due to Sacred Antiquity and set up new Masters in opposition to the Fathers of Christianity and Doctors of the Church agrees very ill with a Catholiek Spirit In fine as men will be men and God must make the World another thing then it is if we expect that all should do as they ought you will find among Catholicks some who hold the contrary Opinion but none who hold this reprovable And this I say the more confidently because I mistake very much if it be reprovable even amongst the Jesuits themselves who yet are thought the greatest Favourers of the Papal power At least I know they cannot reprove it without reproving their own best and most famous Authors Read Bellarmin de Rom. Pontif. the fourth Chapter of the fifth Book and Maldonat upon 27 Mat. and see if they do not both expresly hold and strongly prove the Doctrine of the Fathers and so far that the latter says people would make Christ a temporal King whether he will or no c. against his express declaration and that before a Court of Justice They are too long to be transcribed But if you take the pains to read them since that is safe enough from being reproved which there is no body to reprove I hope your suspicions will be at quiet However I think it but seasonable that I should and be permitted after so long a journey to rest Yours c. FINIS ERRATA PAge 3. line 13. read particular l. 36. r. were p. 7. l. 5. r. you cite p. 8. l. 1. for he r. his l. 5. r. enterfere l. 32. may r. my p. 10. l. 37. r. no extraordinary p. 17. l. 29. r. the Servants ear p. 18. l. 26. r. because he defiled l. 33. r. yet he gave l. 35. r. Rabanus p. 21. l. 6. r. dogmatically l. 9. r. any principle l. 11. r. his side p. 22. l. 8. r. suppose l. 28. r. branches p. 23. l. 22. r. Kings p. 24. l. 16. r. penetrat p. 27. l. 22. dele to l. 28. r. were disposed p. 30. l. 18. r. his answer signify'd l. ult r. resolvedness p. 31. l. 28. r. Creation By. The Fifth and Sixth OF THE Controversial LETTERS OR THE Grand Controversie Concerning The pretended Temporal Authority of POPES over the whole Earth And the True Sovereign of KINGS within their own respective Kingdoms Between two English Gentlemen The one of the Church of England The other of the Church of Rome LONDON Printed for Henry Brome and Benjamin Tooke at the Gun and at the Ship in St. Pauls Church-yard 1673. FRIEND I Must confess I am something better at ease at least I
Holy Books can mean nothing that I knovv but to knovv and beleive the Truth contained there And then consider vvhat vvork your zeal makes of it This Meaning is the thing about vvhich vve differ you understand it one vvay and vve another That then vvhich is to be Interpreted is the Meaning of Scripture that vvhich you assign for Interpreter is the Spirit and this Spirit is the very Meaning Is it possible you should not see that this is to make the Interpreter and the thing Interpreted all one That it supposes the same thing both understood and not understood at once Understood as Interpreter not understood as Interpreted Nay that it makes one thing the same and not the same vvith it self For to Interpret is to declare another thing and yet this which to be Interpreted must be another you make the Interpreter it self Pray persist not vvith your fine Language to perswade us that is to be the Interpreter vvhich vvhen vve once have there is nothing to be Interpreted for vvhen vve once have the Meaning vvhich you call to have the Spirit there needs no more any to tell us what we know already Again make us not despair of an end of our differences by assigning such a method to end them as supposes them first ended before it can be apply'd For the meaning being once known there is no difference for your Interpreter to end Besides since while we differ one of us has not the true meaning of Scripture 't is a strange method to reconcile us to refer us to what one of us has not nor can have while we differ I examine not with what propriety you speak though to be the Spirit and to be dictated by the Spirit seem different enough But this is plain that since the Spirit in the Books is to be interpreted the Spirit interpreting must be out of the Books And this our Controvertists will tell you is to be sought for in the Church to whom was promis'd the assistance of the same Spirit with which the Books were written And to them I refer you if you desire to dispute the Point farther for I intend not to meddle with Controversie For the rest of what you say of the mystery of our disagreement who both agree in what we would be at both condemn novelties and desire the Doctrine taught by Christ and his Apostles 't is a thing I must confess I wonder at as much as you and can as little unriddle Inimicus homo hoc fecit is all I can say to it and think our best remedy is to fall heartily to our prayers and sollicit the powerfull goodness of God to throw down at last that wall of division whose foundation we are so far from being able to overthrow that we cannot find where 't is laid nor upon what ground so mischievous a building stands To come then at last to our purpose I did I confess speak but little of the first point the Power of Princes immediately from God and the little I said I thought was more then needed and must think so still it seeming to me a question of so little importance either way that what I shall add is only in obedience to your commands which in my opinion might have imploy'd me in something more usefull But since your curiosity will not otherwise be satisfi'd let me tell you there are in this matter several opinions of learned men and all opinions only and only of learned men for the Church has not at all interpos'd and I believe either the same or at least as great variety is to be found amongst you Some hold that the Civil Power is given by God to the Community first which afterwards chooses the form of Government most pleasing or most proper and the persons to manage it So that they make it deriv'd from God immediately to the whole and by their mediation to the Magistrates There are who affirm as much of the Church and say that as God and Nature intend first and more immediately the whole then any part thereof as sight is given principally to the man and to the eye as the instrument by which the man exercises it so Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction is given principally and properly to the Church to the Pope and Bishops as instruments and those who are to execute it Again When a Prince is said to have his Power immediately from God some distinguish this word immediately and granting that the Power to command their Subjects is immediately from God which they say none denies they affirm that to have these and these Subjects for example the King of France the French of Spain the Spaniards c. is not immediately from God but by one of the four humane wayes by which Governments are introduc'd Election Inheritance Gift or just Conquest In which say they the case of the Pope and Secular Princes is different for to St. Peter and in him to his Successors all Christians of whatever Nation or quality were immediately subjected by Christ but for other Princes obedience to them when they are Princes is immediately commanded by God but where and over whom they shall be Princes depends upon humane means Others think this acuteness alters not the case and say that the Power of a Prince is one thing and the Title which he has to this Power is another that the Power is as immediately given Princes as to the Pope and that the Title to it is by humane means in both For he has no Power but by the means of humane Election more the Princes by Election Inheritance or the rest And so they make the designation of the person to be by humane means but the collation of Power immediately from God in both And thus every one speaks freely as his humour or learning serves and I for my part see not that this freedom is prejudicial any way for while we all agree we are to obey our Princes and if we do not we disobey God these subtleties I conceive are not much material One thing there is and but one that I can perceive which is of moment and which I hinted in my former Letter and that is that Position which makes the Power of the Prince deriv'd from the People seems liable to this pressing inconvenience that they seem not to part so wholly with it but in some cases they reserve a right to re-assume it again as when Princes prove tyrannical when the line fails and the like And this is a mischief of which great care is to be taken for one cannot easily find a greater For if the People retain any Power they must retain Judgement when to use it and if they be Judges when 't is lawfull to oppose the Prince when not there is a gap opened to all manner of Sedition and Rebellion or rather there can be no such thing as Sedition or Rebellion in the world at least of the People For when they oppose the Prince 't is a plain case by
thought necessary Learned Men should be constrain'd by Oaths and fear of Penalties terribilibus comminationibus to declare their thoughts of this matter Possibly Interest may have had some share in this backwardness Men of this sort of Learning belong most to the Church and may peradventure consider that If they displease him who carries the Keys he may perhaps make use of them to shut the Gates of Ecclesiastical preferment Besides they have been diligent to discountenance and suppress all Books written against the Popes Power so that a Private man cannot write without the hazard of a Censure on his Book and possibly on his Person These I think are the true Reasons I am sure they are good ones of the backwardness which you phansie proceeds from a prohibition of the Church and with a great deal of injustice and no truth heighten into malice and the execrable hypocrisie of teaching two Religions one to be published the other conceal'd and I know not what when all this while I assure you there is no such thing as a Prohibition of the Church at least that I know of for any man to speak what he thinks what Fisher mentions was a private Order made amongst the Jesuites and concerns only themselves but wise men are not forward to speak what may turn to their prejudice nor quiet men to interpose in the concerns of higher and the Highest Powers as I conceive they are not therefore blameable However it be He who from the Sence of those who have vvrit would infer the Sence of all Learned Men concludes in my opinion very fallaciously Those who Write not and whose Sence we know not being much more Numerous and every jot as Learned as those who Write But to let that pass this Doctrine has found a different reception in the world The French as their natures are frank and open without more adoe plainly deny it and besides a great many reiterated Arrest of Parliament have solemnly condemn'd it in all their Universities In other Countries they are more reserv'd and rather oppose the Execution of the Power than the Power it self They let the Pope and any for him talk as they please but when it comes to Practice it alwaies proves unjust in that particular and I believe alwaies shall do In Brabant the Custom is That all Bulls are understood of course to be Subreptitious till they be approv'd by the Prince In other places they have other expedients but as far as I see by several means they all compass the same end and admit no more than they think stands with their Profit Only the French bluntly tell the Pope You cannot others use softer words but their Actions say You shall not farther than we think fit Now for the Opinion of the Canonists since Divines universally reject it I may without more adoe reject it with them Of the other it may be enquir'd Whether it be of Faith and Whether it be True which are very different Questions And for Faith I positively and freely disclaim it both because the Maintainers of it themselves confess it is not and though some are unwary enough to heighten it to that degree yet they are but few and their rashness is generally condemn'd as ill grounded and carried too far And besides I see the contrary is openly maintain'd by as numerous and considerable a Member as any belongs to the Catholic Church and while at Rome they condemn Withrington and Barklay at Paris they condemn Bellarmin and Suarez The Pope and the rest of the vvorld knows and sees this and yet Communicate freely with them and account them all the while good Catholics Which is plainly to acknowledge it is no point of Faith in which they differ for if it were they could no more Communicate with them than with Arrius or Pelagius neither is any consideration of their Power or concern of Policy able to justifie or dispense with acknowledging him a Catholic who persists to maintain an Heresie All the difficulty is Whether it be true or no. And who am I that I should undertake to dogmatize in an Age so Antidogmatical and where no vanity is thought greater than that of Dogmatizing and this in a Question which has exercised the Wit and Learning of Men esteem'd so great that to oppose them may chance be counted Arrogance The most I can do is to tell you what I think and what I think is even in my own judgment so inconsiderable that I think it a great deal better to play the Historian than the Disputer and hope you will be satisfied if I inform you as much as I know of this Question and relate the Arguments hitherto produc'd on both sides at least as far as I am acquainted with them and leave you to judge as you see cause By this means as you will have all the Information I can give you so none can rationally blame me for barely relating what every body either knows already or may know that will take the pains to look upon what is publickly and every where extant But before I begin the Arguments it will not be amiss to look a little into the Origin of this Dispute and consider when and how it came into the vvorld Gregory the VIIth was the first that brought it on the Stage Till his time the Independent Power of Princes was never questioned They not only quietly dispos'd of Civil matters without controll except where any notorious Injustice happened and then both Popes and other zealous Prelates took the liberty to reprehend and sometimes Excommunicate them but had no small share in Ecclesiastical matters so far as to make Laws concerning them to invest the Persons duly chosen to Benefices and confirm the Election even of Popes themselves which was not held valid without their approbation Take it in the words of Onuphrius no enemy to this Pope Onuph de var. Creat Rom. Pont. L. 4. Though formerly the Bishops of Rome were respected as the Heads of Christian Religion the Vicars of Christ and Successors of Peter yet their Authority extended no farther than either to assert or maintain the Doctrines of Faith For the rest they were subject to the Emperours all things were done by Their appointment Themselves were Created by them neither did the Pope dare to judge or determine any thing concerning them Gregory the VIIth was the First of all the Bishops of Rome who relying on the Arms of the Normans and Wealth of the Countess Mathildis a Woman of great Power in Italy and inflam'd by the discord of the Princes of Germany opprest with Civil Wars contemning contrary to the Custom of his Predecessours the Imperial Power and Authority after he had obtain'd the Pontificate durst not only Excommunicate but deprive the Emperour by whom he had been if not Elected at least Confirm'd of his Kingdom and Empire A thing to that Age unheard of for as for the Fables which go about of Arcadius and Anastius and Leo the
the Bishop of Rome in place of Christ is set as a Prince over the whole world in spirituals and temporals and that it is naturally morally and by the Law of God to be held with a right faith that the Principality of the Bishop of Rome is the true and only immediate Principality of the whole world not only as touching things spiritual but likwise temporal and the Imperial Principality is depending upon it as being mediate ministerial and instrumental ministring and serving it and that it is ordained and instituted by it and at the commandment of the Papal Principality is moveable revocable corrigible and punishable I marry Here 's a man speaks to purpose Hang this squemish faint-heartedness which serves for nothing but to cover an ugly face with a vizor as ugly We know well enough what the mincing indirect in ordine ad spiritualia power would be at and 't is a great deal better to speak plainly for Orthodox truths such as concern the Law of God and right faith should be spoken so that people may understand them and know their duty As for Kings they are likely to boggle as much at the mask as the face If they be turn'd out of their Kingdoms and reduc'd to beggery the beggery will be direct beggery whatever the power is which brought them to it and this fine distinction but uncomfortable alms One would think this fellow were not to be match't and what think you of him who says in down-right terms Alvar. Pelagius de planctu Eccl. l. 1. a 37. That the Pope hath the propriety of the Western Empire and the rest of the world in protection and tuition He bids fair this man but of all commend me to Jacobus de Terano who explicating that scurvey text Tract Monarch· Give unto Caesar the things that are Caesars tells us It was spoken but for a time not for ever that it was to hold only til the Ascension of Christ and afterwards that should come to pass which was spoken when I shall be lifted up from the earth I will draw all things after me that is I will recover all the Empires and Kingdoms of the world and will take them from Caesar from Kings and Princes to give them to the Pope I have not met with any who bids fairer for the purple than this man And so I leave him and the rest of your learned Authors for though more men might be alledged and more from these men yet in truth I am weary and must pass over sundry passages of profound learning and useful knowledge as that Papa is deriv'd from the Interjection Pape Moscon p. 22. because his dignity and power is admirable to all men and is as it were the amazement of the World according to the Gloss in the Proeme of the Clementines Papa stupor mundi non Deus non homo sed utrumque That he is God best defin'd by negation Manch l. 3. c. 1. Carrer p. 132. so that if one ask whether the highest Bishop be a Duke a King an Emperor to answer warily we should by denying affirm the Pope to be quid praestantius quidve eminentius So that we may hope one day to see a mystical Theology made for the Pope and the inaccessible mystery of his power declar'd by negations Moscon p. 92. That unto the Pope as Pastor of the Church Lanc. Conrad l. 2. c. 1. S. 4. and Bishop of that holy Sea and by reason of his dominion and excellence is given Adoratio Duliae such worship as belongs to Saints and Reliques Besides I have seen cited That he is holden to be Christ's Vicar not only in respect of things in earth August Triump q. 18. a. 2. in Heaven and in Hell but even over Angels both good and bad That he is greater than Angels as touching dominion not in respect of himself merely but by Authority from God and may be superior to any Angels concerning recompence of reward art 5. and may excomunicate them That he is equal to God and can make something of nothing and wrong to be right and such pretty matters which if the ears of you Catholics were not as much hardned as the hearts of us Heretics would sound a little odly But to our purpose The method of discourse requires now that I should apply these sayings to the matter in hand but the application is so easie and obvious that to spend time in it must needs be equally tedious and needless For pray tell me can any Commonwealth be safe or subsist at all if Princes have no dominion but what they receive from the Pope If they hold their Empires and Kingdoms of him if they may absolve their subjects from allegeance and transfer their rights from one line to another If they be his Ministers his Vassals his Subjects If their power be ministerial and subservient to the Papal to be exercis'd at his beck and be at his command both corrigible and revocable If any thing be plain in the world this is that either Princes must be taken out of the world or these Maxims For without more ado he that makes a Prince be a Subject makes him no Prince speaking as I do of absolute Princes Wherefore leaving these things and their application to your consideration I turn my self to reflect on what I concieve you may reply Two things there are which I have heard alledged in your behalf with some appearance but not much substance First that notwithstanding all this Catholic Princes do live safely and govern quietly and therefore to conclude these doctrines are inconsistent with government is to conclude that cannot be done which we plainly see is done Next that while men are men there will be quot capita tot sententiae that nature is not furnisht with means to confine the fancies of private men to the limits of strict reason that these are problematical Questions which particular men dispute into probabilities but for which the Church is not responsible having never either defined or otherwise ingaged her authority for them To the first I reply that a certain King took poyson so long that it became food to him and yet I think poyson for all that a very dangerous thing and very inconsistent with health The Princes you mention have Antidotes undoubtedly with which I am not acquainted but let the Antidote be never so good poyson will be poyson still And truly I think Sir Thomas Moor did honestly when finding some passages in the book which Henry the 8th writ against Luther of which by the King's command he had the perusal and in which he thought the Pope was complemented a little too far he represented to the King that one day possibly they might fall out as afterwards they did and that then He might wish some things unsaid While those Princes and the Pope continue friends they need not much apprehend and possibly are not much accquainted with what passes amongst
should place the Emperor by himself in respect of his temporalities he should grant two beginnings which were Heresie In good Faith Sir I cannot think otherwise but if these men say true your Catholic Princes let them keep as fair as they will with the Pope are all Heretics in their hearts And then what follows Hark what a Cardinal and which I grieve an English man hath publisht to the World Card. Allen against the execution of justice p. 87. The Cannon Laws says he being authentical in the lawful Tribunals of the Christian World do make all Heretics not only after they be namely and particularly denounced but by the Law it self ipso facto as soon as they be Heretics are de jure excommunicated for the same to be depriv'd of their Dominions Philopater p. 154. Another tells us The whole School of Divines and Canonists do hold and that 't is certain and of Faith that any Christian Prince whatsoever if he shall manifestly deflect from the Catholic Religion and endeavour to draw others from the same does presently fall from all power and dignity by the very force of human and divine Law and that also before any Sentence of the supreme Pastor or Judge denounced against him and that his Subjects whatsoever are free from all Obligation of that Oath which they had taken for their Allegeance to him as their lawful Prince and that they may and ought if they have forces drive out such a man as an Apostate or Heretic and a Backslider from the Lord and Christ and an enemy to the Commonwealth from all Dominion over Christians lest he infect others or by his example or command avert others from the faith and that this certain definite and undoubted opinion of the best learned men is wholly agreeable and consonant to the Apostolical doctrine Upon these grounds it was publickly maintain'd that Henry the third of France was lawfully murthered before any sentence of excommunication past against him because though in hidden crimes formalities be requir'd yet evidens notitia facti sententiae locum tenet non percipit formam publicus dolor And that he had long liv'd as an excommunicate person de facto de justa abdic Hen. 3. l 4. c. 2 though the law had not past sentence upon him for favouring Heretics for Simony for entring into league with Hereticks the Queen of England and King of Navar for seizing the goods of the Church without the Popes privity and other offences against the Bulla Caenae Upon these grounds I have seen that execrable Villain Chastel who attempted upon Henry the Fourth what Ravillac after performed defended by a public Apology and I see no attempt can be so barbarous and inhumane which may not be defended by them So that by your favour your Catholic Princes are not secure Quiet they may be but never safe and for their quietness they may thank the lucky conjuncture of those stars which have influence upon the times of their government and restrain the malignity of these Doctrines Otherwise if they be not very cunning in school subtilties they may chance forfeit their Kingdoms and all their power per triccum de lege without ever knowing when or how live all their life time in the erroneous belief that they are very Kings and those who obey them their very Subjects and be deceiv'd all the while But be it as it will this answer which would justifie the innocence of these doctrines by the security of Catholic Princes comes pitifully off when instead of securing it takes them quite away which is a fine kind of security for it is plainly a much easier task to maintain by these doctrines that there is never a true Prince in the Christian world no not in those whom you call Catholics than it is to maintain the doctrines And yet when all is done 't is nothing to purpose neither For our Prince and People are of the number of those whom your Church takes for Heretics and can expect no other treatment from you than what you maintain belongs to Heresie Wherefore however your Catholic Princes satisfie themselves I neither see how he can be satisfied of the fidelity of such of his Subjects as approve of these opinions nor with what face they can pretend security and protection from him Pray think of this while I pass to what I put for a second answer and what I have sometimes heard alledged These opinions will you say are moot-cases probably disputed amongst private men in which the Church is neither engaged nor concerned Pray God this Church be not as slippery a word as either Heresie or Popery These men who thus magnifie the Pope certainly are not of our Church and I believe Presbyterians and Fanaticks of all sorts will disown them too so that even for pitty and not to make Infidels of them you must needs take them into yours But they who speak so kindly of the Pope need not fear disowning We see they are both acknowledged and esteemed and are all Capita alta ferentes Now 't is strange your Church should be unconcern'd in men whom you account Orthodox and learned and whose books come out with the approbation of those whom your Church commissionates for that purpose Me-things the Act of her Officers acting by her Authority should be taken for the Act of the Church Unless you will have the Pope pass for one of those careless Princes who deserve to be deposed for negligence and be ignorant that his Officers abuse their trust and licence unsound doctrines and this at Rome it self where a body would think sufficient care is taken that nothing pass which is not esteemed Orthodox Bring me a Book printed at Rome wherein the contrary doctrine is maintain'd and I will acknowledge there is some sense in this answer In the mean time let me give you a few instances and those at home by which it may appear the Pope is so far from ignorant and unconcern'd in these positions that he approves and countenances them and that both â—hotly and constantly In the reign of King James upon the occasion of the execrable Powder Treason the Oath of Allegeance was enacted by the pious wisdom of the Parliament to secure his Majesty and Successors from the like attempts for the future The Superior of the Catholic Clergy at that time was one Blackwell He after much and long debate of the matter with his fellow Priests at last resolved the Oath according to the plain and common sense of the words might with a safe conscience be taken by the Catholics and afterwards both took it himself and by his admonitions to Clergy and Laity recommended it to them as a thing both lawful and fitting The greatest part of the Clergy who repair'd to London upon that occasion followed the resolution of their Superior and had the Pope been either a little more ignorant or a little more negligent I think it had been better for you
of the Learned Men who Write in favour of the Pope stick to that way As Bellarmin is the most famous amongst them and most at hand I choose his Arguments believing as he was a Man of great Reading he fail'd not to make use of all that was considerable in those who Writ before him and seeing those who Write since borrow most from him He has Five in his Book De Rom. Pont. and Four in his Answer to Barklay The First are Answered by Barklay and better by Withrington and every one who Writes of this Subject takes notice of them In Answering I make use chiefly of Withrington inserting only upon occasion what I find in others Only to indulge something to my fancy and ease it of the grievous pain of Transcribing I neither tie my self to the order nor preciseness of the Arguments but make entire Arguments of themselves what the Author meant sometimes a proof of some part of an Argument going before While you have the Substance I hope you will allow me a little Variety for my own ease Bellarmin then After he had taught against the Canonists That the Spiritual and Civil Power are in themselves distinct and have different Offices different Ends c. yet when these two meet together then he affirms they make but one Commonwealth in which the Spiritual Power is superiour to the Temporal For saies he there cannot be two Heads and therefore one Power must of necessity be subject to the other when they both Club into one Commonwealth But this they do where the Law of Christ is receiv'd For we being many are one Body in Christ Rom. 12. And in one Spirit we were all baptiz'd into one Body 1 Cor. 12. And because the Members of the same Body must depend one of another and Spirituals cannot be said to depend on Temporals Temporals must depend on Spirituals and be subject to them To this they Answer differently Some granting the Spiritual and Temporal Power make but one Commonwealth affirm the Members independent one of another as the Hand depends not on the Foot nor the Foot on the hand but each free and absolute in their proper Functions are subject only to the Supream Head Christ Others in my opinion more rationally deny the Two Powers club into one Commonwealth and say The Spiritual makes one and the Temporal another and to many others as there are Independent Heads of this Power That the same men in different respects make both these Bodies and that as Clergy and Laity and all not excepting the Prince himself in as much as they are Faithful are subject to the Spiritual Power according to the nature of Spiritual Subjection so the same Laity and Clergy not excepting the Pope himself in as much as they are Citizens and parts of the Temporal Commonwealth are subject to the Temporal Power that is for as much as concerns the Law of God purely and abstracting from Humane Constitutions and such Changes as time has brought into the World For now the Pope is himself an absolute Prince and other Clergy Men have Priviledges and Immunities justly belonging to them When therefore 't is assumed that the Church is one Body they distinguish this word Church and say if it be taken Formally that is the Faithful under the notion of Faithful then indeed they make but one Body but neither doth this Body include both Powers for 't is only the Spiritual to which they are subject as Faithful as Citizens they belong to the Temporal But if the word Church be taken Materially for the Men which make up the Church an Acception something improper but yet such as comprehends both Powers then say they In this sence the Church is not one Body but two or if you vvill twenty as many as there are several Supream Temporal Powers in Christendom One Spiritual in relation to the Spiritual Power and which is properly the Church The rest Temporal in relation to their several Temporal Heads And this Answer as it seems fair in it self and justified by the sence and apprehension of Mankind for France and Spain for example both acknowledge the Pope and are both parts of the Church and that one Body of which the Apostle speaks but he that should therefore think them not to be Two distinct Bodies and Independent Common-wealths would be thought something extravagant so 't is a little more strongly inforc'd against Bellarmin by other parts of his own Doctrine For he teaches elsewhere That Church-men besides that they are Church-men are also Citizens and parts of the Civil Common-wealth and that all Members of every Body must be subject to their respective Head That the Civil and Spiritual Power are in their nature distinct Powers and have distinct Offices and Ends c. and that Christ did distinguish the Dignities and Offices of Pope and Emperour that one should not presume upon the Rights of the other That Christian Princes as well as Infidels acknowledge no Superiour in Temporals since Christ took not away the Rights of any and a King by becoming a Christian loses no Right he had before and the like Besides this Answer seems wonderfully strengthned by some Authorities mentioned in the former Letters Such as Gelasius to the Emperour Anastasius The Prelates of the Church owe you all Obedience And again The Bishops themselves are to obey your Laws and that because there are Two principal Powers by which the World is Governed the Sacred Authority of Bishops and Regal Power Likewise Pope Anastasius to the same Emperour Bishops are subject to the Laws of the Prince in what concerns Public Discipline and Princes to Bishops in the dispensation of the Mysteries and Sacraments according to the famous Canon of Leo the IV. Nos si incompetenter It is to be noted that there are Two Persons by which this world is governed The Regal and Sacerdotal as Kings are Chief in Worldly so Priests in Divine matters Therefore David though by his Regal Vnction he were over Priests and Prophets in affairs of the World yet was under them in those of God Much more might be alledged on this Subject but this I conceive is enough to shew the Answer given to Bellarmin has the support of Authority as well as Reason A Second Argument is from the ends of both Powers whereof one being Eternal the other Temporal happiness because the Eternal happiness is the Supream and Last end of all things Temporal happiness must be subordinate to it And because according to Aristotle where the Ends are subordinate the Faculties likewise are subordinate the Civil Power which aims only at Temporal happiness must be subordinate and subject to the Spiritual which looks after Eternal This Argument they Answer likewise two waies First by granting the whole which they say concludes nothing against them For admitting the Temporal Power to be subordinate to the Spiritual nothing follows more than than 't is under the other according to the Order which the other
the rest these are florishes on both sides The matter rests upon this issue which of the two has the best reasons and he that has will carry it T is time for me to leave it with you to stand for the Plaintiff or Defendant as you see cause and ease my self of this ungrateful labour You see what is said on both sides To tell you what the world thinks of their sayings is not so easy The world is a politick world they let the hot men write and wrangle and for themselves hear all and see all and say nothing The truth is while one side talks of Treason and the other of Sacrilege t is good to be wary T is not for private men to make an enemy either of Pope or Prince and as the case stands you cannot say I or No without displeasing one I must confess I am very sorry you would not let me play the Policitian for company Your importunity has drawn me into the list of those fools who disquiet themselves to please other folks and take a great deal of pains to be talk't on twenty to one very scurvily The quarrel is betwixt supream Powers and they best know what to do in their own concerns I fear t is little better then sawcines for men of our form to interpose in things so far above us and perhaps madness to thrust in bewixt two stones and be crusht in pieces I see this yet cannot avoid whether the charms of your Friendship or violence of your importunity T is true I have endeavoured to touch this tender matter as tenderly as I could What I profest at first I repeat again I do not dogmatize but relate and am sure you have no reason to be displeased that I would displease as few as I could This is the reason since you will needs have it why I beat about the bush and do not shoot my fools-bolt directly at the mark I do not take the satisfaction of your curiosity to import me so much as living quietly T is for Princes to resolve on the Can not or Shall not or what else they think fit Private men till they be commanded to declare them do best to keep their thoughts to themselves This I can assure you that though for these reasons I do not desire every body should know them I have none in this matter which do not become a good Christian and a good subject and Your faithful friend c. The Eleventh and Twelfth OF THE Controversial LETTERS OR Grand Controversie Concerning The pretended Temporal Authority of POPES over the whole Earth And the True Sovereign of KINGS within their own respective Kingdoms Between two English Gentlemen The one of the Church of England The other of the Church of Rome LONDON Printed for Henry Brome and Benjamin Tooke at the Gun at the Ship in St. Pauls Church-yard 1674. FRIEND OF all I have seen or heard you shall have it for Policy Sir Wood-bee himself is no body to you The sum of what I askt was in two words Are you a good Subject And the sum of your Answer is Betwixt you and me I would have it thought so but make no words on 't private men must not meddle with things above them Here 's Ragion di stato for you Things above them Why is Honesty among you lookt upon as a thing out of reach Are you of kin to the Muscovite who being askt of his Faith in God and hopes of Salvation reply'd They were things above him which he should be glad were true but could not think so great a Majesty could ever think of so poor a man Is it above you to be a good Subject and a thing which you dare not confess for modesty sake and the imputation of sawciness Are things carried so among you that you must needs live unquietly if your Neighbours know you deserve to live quietly Is it become a piece of interest and policy to be ill thought of and if there be an honest man among you must he by all means make a secret on 't for fear of exasperating Supream Powers and thrusting in betwixt two stones How have I been mistaken I took you for a plain dealing man and you are the very Pink of Policy But for meer shame I could find in my heart to quarrel with you and cannot for my life but tell you you have taken a great deal of pains to little purpose Pray permit me to revenge your nicety by unmannerly bluntness and to carry it to the uttermost ask you how far you are from Pedius in the Satyr Fur es ait â—edio Pedius quid crimina rasis Librat in Antithetis The question being of robbing no less than Soveraigns Are you a good Subject is but in less homely Terms Are you a Thief And your Answers are as like as the Questions Only Pedius was for Rhetorick and you for History Some say this and some say that which is all you tell me is but Historical Antithesis You tell me I may judge as I please I know I may and I do judge as all men of judgment do But pray remember those that do not plead directly Guilty or not Guilty cast themselves Had I only desir'd to know what people say it had been no such hard matter to have got Books and read them my self and never troubled you I know the Arguments well enough and I know what to think of them but I know not what to think of you whom a man that were not as I am very favourably inclin'd would be apt to suspect you think something which you are asham'd to own No Friend You scape not so I would and if you be not very obstinate will know what you are and whether those of your Religion may be trusted If you believe what is publickly written and own'd by some among you you are not if you believe it not but yet will not disown it as honest as you are in your heart since no body can tell but you are a knave how can you expect but to pass for one among the rest Either deal frankly with me or I must with you and tell you 't is Guilt that fears the light If you continue still to make a secret of what of all the world it most concerns those of your Perswasion to publish both for your own interest and honour of your selves and Church he must be a very good natur'd man who will think well of you who make dainty to shew why he should do so You are charg'd with inconsistence with Civil Government You faintly deny it and say you are traduc't but are shy to justifie your Innocence your Church it self is call'd in question where the Books are licenc't the Authors cherisht and the Doctrines put in practice You tamely hear all this and would have us think your Church a good Church for all that a pure unblemish't Church but if we will not of our selves kindly turn away our eyes and