Divine Worship on Men as much as your Description doth And the Venetians particularly opposing the Popes Interloping in their Jurisdiction that other thing referred to in your Description is sufficiently known But if by your Description of Popery you intend only to give us a Dictionary of your Sense of the word generally as used by you and that you intend by the Extermination of Popery the Banishing only of those Principles of it that are Irreligionary out of Mens Minds namely the Principles that tend to the Popes Spiritual and Temporal Vsurpations I am not to quarrel with your expressing your own meaning But as I Judge several Roman-Catholick Writers using the Term Popery to intend thereby the Religion of the Church of Rome as for example the Author of the Compendium saying what I before referred to that nothing but Popery or at least its Principles can make the Monarchy of England again emerge or lasting yet as to which a Divine Sentence was in the Mouth of the King when in his Gracious Expressions in Council concerning the Church of England he Judged otherwise and said I know the Principles of that Church are for Monarchy c. and meaning by Popery what was called la Catholicitè I shall say that according to the common acception of the Word Popery were I to explain what I usually mean by it I would declare that I mean not only the Power of the Bishop of Rome but of any General Councils in Imposing Creeds and Doctrines c. on me And I desiring to have all Religionary Errors banished out of my understanding and Loving my Neighbour as my self will desire they may be so out of his and particularly if after he knoweth he is bought with a price he shall think it lawful for him to be a Servant of Men And will not only weigh the Commands and Decrees of any Bishop But of any General Council whatsoever And if in Matters that Import my Salvation I find them contrary to the Bible with a Salvo to the Reverence I owe to all Lawful General Councils I will desire them to excuse me from obeying them Were it not for what you have so well in p. 48. said that the Protestant Religion not making the intention of the Preist essential to the Sacrament of the Eucharist is more strongly assertive of the Real presence there than the Popish Hypothesis and for that great and excellent Notion of yours in your Discourse viz. That Papists and others being bought with a Price that therefore they ought not to be the Servants of Men and my Judging that according to what I have mentioned out of Dr Iackson that you would separate your self from any Church that imposed any thing Magisterially on Mens Faiths I might think that perhaps had you lived in the Reign of Henry the 8 th you would not have separated from the Ecclesia Anglicana as then by Law Established And therefore when by your warm Expressions in p. 47. after you have said that the Protestation that the Protestant Religion requires is such a continual one as is Reiterated upon every fresh Act and Attempt of the Papal Religion upon ours and whereby it would impose Creeds and Doctrines on us contrary to the Liberty of the Church of England as now by Law Established You tell us that We are to shew no Mercy to these Principles of Popery that disquiet the World and on the several occasions offered protest against the Damages that both our King and Country may have from the Rage of Popery I may tell you that this PROTESTANCY amounts to no more than what we read of in the Review of the Council of Trent where in Book 1. and 12 th Chapter the Author refers to the French King by his Embassadors causing a PROTESTATION to be made against the Council of Trent and as appeared by the Oration there made by Mr. Arnold de Ferriers the 22 d. of September 1563. where among other things having mentioned many grievances he saith that according to the Commands of the most Christian King they were constrained CONCILIO INTERCEDERE VT NVNC INTERCEDEBANT by the same Token that that Book relates how thereupon a certain Prelate of the Council of Trent not well understanding the Propriety of the Word Intercedere which the Tribunes were wont of Old to use when thay made their Oppositions and Hinderances asked his Neighbour PRO QVO ORAT REX CHRISTIANISSIMVS But of the French Kings Embassadors protesting not only against Grievances in the Council of Trent but against it self as a Grievance and of some occasions thereof it will come in my way to speak hereafter Nor was there ever any Instrument or Paper Writ with more sharpness of Anger and Scorn in the way of Defiance against Papismus or Popery than H. the 8 ths Protestation against the Council of Trent and yet inclusive too of another Protestation I mean of his Adherence to the Faith then called Catholick That long Protestation calls the Pope by the Name of Bishop of Rome and saith surely except God take away our right Wits not only his Authority shall be driven out for ever but his NAME also shall be forgotten in England Nor did ever any Protestant Writer in Queen Elizabeths or King Iames the First 's time or in our late Fermentation so zealously press the Exterminating of the Papal Power as Henry the 8ths Proclamation about the Abolishing the same Triumph at its being here done And where he saith We have by Good and Wholsom Laws and Statutes made for this purpose EXâ—IRPED ABOLISHED Separated and Secluded out of this our Realm the Abuses of the Bishop of Rome his Authority and Iurisdiction of long time Vsurped c. And the King there Orders all manner of Prayers Oraisons Rubricks Canons of mass-Mass-Books and all other Books in the Churches wherein the Bishop of Rome is NAMED or his Presumptuous and proud Pomp and Authority preferred utterly to be Abolished Eradicate and Razed out and his NAME and Memory to be never more except to his Contumely and Reproach remembred but perpetually suppressed and obscured The Act of 28 of Henry the 8 th before spoken of called an Act for Extinguishing the Authority of the Bishop of Rome was here referred to and which Act and other Acts of Parliament Establishing the Kings Supremacy and Excluding the Pope for ever I mentioned as revived in Queen Elizabeths time after their being repeal'd in Queen Mary's I need not observe to you how this present French King hath likewise lately shewn a very Commendable Zeal for the Exterminating the Vsurpations of the Papal Power in the Business of the Regalia and that the Case of that Kings Power is much altered for the better since D' Ossat Writ to Villeroy from Rome with so much Joy for his having found out an expedient as to the difference between Henry the 4 th and the Pope about the granting to one a Church Dignity in France Namely to have the Words put
having in p. 284. of his Iust Vindication of the Church of England spoke of the Trent Council saith We have seen heretofore how the French Embassador in the Name of the King and Church of France protested against it and until this day though they do not oppose it but acquiesce to avoid such disadvantages as must ensue thereupon yet they never did admit it Let no Man say that they rejected the Determinations thereof only in point of Discipline not of Doctrine For the same Canonical Obedience is equally due to an acknowledged General Council in point of Discipline as in point of Doctrine Monsieur Iurieu in his Historical Reflections on Councils and particularly on that of Trent which were Translated into English and Printed in the year 1684. Saith that the French Kings their Parliaments and Bishops dislike several things in the Decrees of the Council of Trent and mentions as the Reasons why the Council of Trent is not received in France these following 1. That the Council hath done and suffered many things that suppose and confirm a Superiority of the Pope over Councils 2. It hath confirmed the Papal encroachments upon ordinary's by exemption of Chapters and priviledges of Regulars who are both withdrawn from Episcopal Jurisdiction 3. That it hath not restored to the Bishops certain Functions appertaining to their Office and taken from them otherwise than to execute them as delegates of the See of Rome 4. That it hath infringed the priviledges of Bishops of being Judged by their Metrapolitan and Bishops of Provinces by permitting a removal of great Causes to Rome and giving Power to the Pope to Name Commissioners to Judge the Accused Bishop 5. That it hath declared that neither Princes Magistrates nor People are to be consulted in Setling and placing of Bishops 6. That it hath Empowered Bishops to proceed in their Jurisdictions by Civil pains by Imprisonment and by Seisures of the Temporalties 7. That it hath made Bishops the Executors of all Donations for Pious uses 8. That it hath given them a Superintendency over Hospitals Colledges and Fraternities with power of disposing their Goods notwithstanding that these matters had been always managed by Lay Men. 9. That it hath ordained that Bps. shall have the examining of all Notaries Royal and Imperial with power to Deprive or Suspend notwithstanding any Opposition or Appeal 10. That it hath given power to Bishops with consent of two Members of their Chapter and of two of their Clergy to take and retrench part of the Revenue of the Hospitals and to take away feudal Tithes belonging to Lay-Men 11. That it hath made Bishops the Masters of Foundations of Piety as Churches Chappels and Hospitals so as that those who have the Care and Government of them are obliged to be accountable to the Bishops 12. That in confirming Ecclesiastical Exemptions it hath wholy ascribed to the Pope and Spiritual Judges all power of Judging the Causes of Accused Bishops as if Soveraign Princes had lost the right they had over their Subjects as soon as they became Ecclesiasticks 13. That it hath empower'd the Ordinaries and Judges Ecclesiastick in Quality of Delegates of the Holy See to enquire of the Right and Possession of Lay-Patronages and to quash and annul them if they were not of great necessity and well founded 14. That in Prohibiting Duels it had declared that such Emperor or Prince as should shew favour to Duels should therefore be Excommunicated and Deprived of the Seignory of the place holding of the Church where the Duel was fought 15. that it hath permitted the Mendicant Fryars to possess Immoveables 16. That it hath ordained an Establishment of Judges it calls Apostoles in all Dioceses with Power to Judge of Spiritual and Ecclesiastical Matters in prejudice of the Ordinary 17. That it hath declared that Matrimonial Causes are of the Churches Jurisdiction 18. That it hath enjoyn'd Kings and Princes to leave Ecclesiasticks the free and entire possession of the jurisdiction granted them by the Holy Canons and General Councils that is to say usurped by the Clergy over the Civil Power These are the Principal Points Disputed in France These that tend to the Diminution of the Authority and Priviledges of Bishops to enlarge the Roman power are Rejected by the Bishops And those that would extend the power of Bishops to the Prejudice of the Civil Authority are Rejected by the Parliaments Between both this Council as enacting contrary to the Rights and Liberties of the Gallican Church was never at all received in France so as to obtain the force of a Law He then shews that the Popes Superiority over Councils is a point of Doctrine and was decided in the Council of Trent And yet that the Gallican Church believes the contrary I know it will be said saith he that the Council of Trent hath not decided that the Pope is Superior to Councils Men may talk as they please but things for all that will continue as they are It is true that among the Decrees and Canons of the Council there is none that saith in express Terms that the Pope is Superior to Councils and can be judged by none But the effect of such Decision is apparent in all the Acts and through the whole Conduct of this Council And he afterward saith that the Clause of proponentibus legatis was a plain Decision of the Popes Superiority over the Council But to these 18 Reasons of Mr. Iurieu about the Reception of the Trent Council in France being neither practicable nor practised I might add that according to what my Lord Primate Bramhal observes in another place of that Book of his I Cited before the Obedience promised to the Bishop of Rome as Successor to St. Peter and Vicar of Iesus Christ pursuant to the Trent Council may seem to quadrate but ill with the liberty of the Gallican Church to set up a Patriarch For in p. 194. of that Book he mentions that in Cardinal Richelieu's Days it was well known what Books were freely Printed in France and publickly sold upon pont neuf of the lawfulness of Erecting a new or rather restoring an old proper Patriarchate in France as one of the liberties of the Gallican Church And thereupon saith It was well for the Roman Court that they became more propitious to the French Affairs And if we consider how in the 22 d. Session of the Council of Trent Chapter the 11 th all Kings and Emperors are Anathematized who hinder any Ecclesiasticks from the Enjoyment of any of their feudal Rights or other profits and that it might well be supposed that the Course and Vicissitudes of time would put Roman Catholick Princes on somewhat of that Nature and which so eminently influenced the French King in the Munster Treaty none need wonder at the Trent Councils not being received in France There was a Book called a Review of the Council of Trent written by a Learned Roman-Catholick and Printed A. 1600. and Translated by Dr
place perhaps a quarter of one And if it had so pleased God that your Father had lived any considerable time longer I would have humbly offered it to his Consideration to have some Passages there omitted and particularly that wherein he giveth his thoughts of somewhat in p. 70. of my Discourse and likewise those wherein his Lordship is pleased to signifie his over-valuing of my poor Sixth-rate Talents and my performance in my Work But since he lived not long enough for my having an opportunity to satisfie him with my Reasons for the leaving out any passages as I did the incomparable Mr. Boyle I presum'd not to delete any thing therein worth the speaking of But as I took great Care to watch the Press in my Publication of that Noble Work of Mr. Boyles to prevent the Printers Errata so I have in this of your Fathers The Author of the Athenae Oxonienses having among the Lives of the Oxford Writers Writ that of your Father is there pleased to mention that in the beginning of the year 1686. He began to be admitted into the Favour of King James the II. But he was admitted into his Majesties Favour before and Mr. Ryley after your Fathers Death shew'd me this in his Lordships Diary viz. On March 8.85 Spent most at home in Business and Duty i. e. Prayer In the Evening was private with the Lord Sunderland my good Friend and then was with the King a full hour at Mr. Chiffinches who was very kind free and open in Discourse Said he would not be Priest-ridden Read a Letter of the Late King said I should be welcome to him I refer to this to shew likewise on what Terms he stood in the Royal Favour and which was so great to him that his Friends supposed that had he lived a Month longer he would have been Lord Chancellour and that his zeal for his Religion suffered no Diminution thereby and which sufficiently appeared by the Picture of his mind drawn by himself in the following Discourse and to which he was then applying his finishing Touches And hence the Reader may guess that his private Belief of his Prince not designing the unsettlement of our Religion Encouraged him in his thoughts of Loyalty and in his Inculcating the Moral Offices of it so much throughout the following Discourse And indeed his Advices then about it were but Eccho's to the Pulpits of the Divines of the Church of England in general that rang with it till the time of the setting up the Ecclesiastical High Commisssion and by virtue of which they had apprehensions of their being removeable out of their Church-Freeholds in two or three days time And whereupon they had as I may say in the School-Divinity Terms the motus primo primi to think that the Affirmative precepts of Preaching up Loyalty in their Sermons as before did not bind Semper ad Semper But your Father was in his Grave before the Birth of that Commission and it was several Months after in that year 1686. before the Commissioners opened their Commission and which they did on Tuesday the 3 d. of August that year However it may be said that no Revolutions time can cause can make persuasives to Loyalty wholy useless or it cease to be a Vertue or to want the Support of any Government and which must be supported by it But your Fathers growth in his Habitual Loyalty when he was so near his End needs no Apology And according to the observation I have met with from some of our Practical Divines that God watcheth when his Child is at the best and his Graces ripest and then takes him thus was it with your Noble Father And as no thought can be more obvious to a prudent States-Man who was for a time Employed by his Prince in a Provincial Kingdom under his Vice-Roy and was preparing to return to his King and to be under his Eye than that 't is his great concern to part fairly with the Vice-Roy and not to be conscious of having Dishonoured or of having render'd him uneasie in the discharge of his Office so neither can it be unthought of by any Pious Minister of Kings who are Gods Vice-Gerents that it highly imports him after his splendid Sojourning here to have the Testimonials of a good Conscience ready to carry to Heaven with him that he here Honoured the great King of Heaven and Earth in the persons of such Vice-gerents and did not by stirring up any popular ferments trouble their Administration and frustrate their Counsels Had your Father lived to have come to the Helm of State as a primier Ministre I believe his influence would have prevented many inconveniences that happened by the Bigotry Pedantry and blind zeal of some particular papists For tho I have own'd to the World in print the excellent Tempers and Justice and prudence of some Great Roman-Catholicks then yet I have often been diverted by the impotent passion of some certain Popish Bigots who because I in my Book which I designed as perswasive against the Exclusion the growth of the popular fears of Papists and Popery and wrote in the turbid interval of the Kingdom the interval of panic Fears and when the Ayre of Mens fancies was generally infected and the Kingdom was in a Chaos-like condition thought it necessary to Demonstrate that I was a Non-Papist and not to dilate in invectives against the Belief of any popish Plot whatsoever and against all the Witnesses in particular were pleased in common talk to shoot the bolts of their Censures against me and my Works And the truth is for any writer for the aforesaid purposes to have then appeared in such a Dress as they would have had him would have shew'd as strangely as when it once happened that one being to Act Theseus in Hercules furens coming out of Hell he could not for a long time be perswaded to wear some old sooty Clothes but would needs come out of Hell in a white Sattin Doublet Your Fathers Learned Book may in various places teach such Censorious bigots common sense And his Lordship justly coming under the Character of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I may account his single acknowledgment of my performance to out-weigh Myriads of such Ignorant Censurers and be very well content with my having escaped the Scandal of their praise But here I must needs say that as I have sufficiently shewn in print the aversion of my Humour from courting the popular praise of any party as having judged that the medicament of Notions I applyed to each would be necessarily helped in the working by the ungratefulness of the Taste so by my having so long delay'd the publication of this excellent Volume of your Father I have shewn some uneasiness or backwardness in receiving the various Honour he was pleased in his short Letter prefixed and following large one to do to that Work of mine which in obedience to his Commands and for the doing him Justice I
to have as much power by the Word of God here as any other Foraign Bishop and 't is pity but that the Iudgment of our Vniversities were shewn the World in Print and sent to the French King and particularly the Iudgment or Rescript of the Vniversity of Oxford as not being any where in Print as I know of But in an Old Book of Dr. James's against Popery But as to your thought of having that Rescript of the Vniversity of Oxford sent to the French King I for my part am disinclined to it The printing of it here may probably bring it to the notice of his Ministers and so perhaps to his I have heard how the French Embassador not long ago applyed to a Learned Friend of ours of the long Robe and of the Church of England and one who is a great Antiquary and desired him to furnish him with Copies of Records not printed in Dr. Burnets Works that related to Henry 8 th's withstanding the Papal Usurpation and no doubt but the Copy of this Oxford Rescript would have been as welcom to him and as necessary to Compleat his Collection as any could have been and the publication of it may perhaps be of use in some places of the Roman Catholick World abroad But I fear that the present French King will never without some strange unexpected provocation received from the Papacy advance so far towards the confines of Reformation as Henry 8 th did I know it was but Congruous to Worldly Politicks however contrary to Justice for French Kings formerly to use very high Severities to their Protestant Subjects in the Conjunctures of their quarrelling with the Pope and this you well observe in p. 329. out of the Book called the Policy of the Clergy of France Namely that the French Kings never made any Assaults on the Papal Power but what cost their Protestant Subjects very dear And of the like Nature were the Political Measures of Henry the 8 th here who at the same time burn'd his Protestant Subjects for what he called Heresy that he hang'd some of his Popish ones for what he called Treason in abetting the Papal Supremacy I know we should not presume to limit the most Holy God as to what Instruments he shall or shall not use in the Melioration of the Affairs of Church or State But the French King is one I never think of without Horror Nor do I entertain any idea of Gods making any right Lines in the World by so crooked an Instrument If David must not be allowed by the Course of Providence to build the Temple because his Administration of the Government had been so much dipp'd in Blood what good to Religion can we presage from such a Monarch as has made all Christendom almost one great Aceldama The great God will I believe take his time to make this Monarch share in the usual fate of Persecutors how prosperous soever he may be at present according to what is commonly observed out of the Heathen Moralist That the Divine Wheels are grinding and will grind to powder though they are slow in Motion Nor did God think fit to use our Henry 8 th as an Instrument to contribute towards the building his House here further than by removing the Rubbish of the Papal Vsurpations and by so Signally Acting therein by compassing the Popes power to be here reduced to the level of that of every other Foraign Bishop This was a Momentous thing and worthy the Sagacity and Politicks of King Henry and his Ministers and it must however be for his Honour acknowledged in our English Story The truth is that it having been so Customary for the Bishops of Rome when they met with a weak King here or one whose Affairs were Embarrassed to interlope in their Temporal Concerns and to presume to dispose of their Crowns and Regalities it was but Natural for such a Magnanimous Monarch as Henry the 8 th was to Stake down the Popes Spiritual power to that short tedder he did out of the Scriptures and to allow it to go no further there than any other Foraign Bishop's And thus I for my part would never prefer any Divine to be my Spiritual Pastor who claimed my Temporal Estate And as I think no Lords of Mannors who had the right of Advowson would present any one to a Living in their gift who without Sense or Reason did set up a title to the Mannor But the very thought of waters not rising higher than their Springs might well serve to mind Henry 8 th and some of our former Roman Catholick Princes that the Power of the Bishop of Rome in Temporals however Claimed by Popes was not allowed to rise higher than St. Peter's nor St. Peter's higher than his who said his Kingdom was not of this World and that St. Peter's Successor is not like Tamberlain to tread on the Heads of Christians nor like Alexander the Third to Tread on the Neck of an Emperor and Burlesquing one of King Davids Psalms Super aspidem basiliscum ambulabis conculcabis lâ—onem Draconem when it may be said that the Holy Iesus did tread so gently in his passage through the World that if he had trod on a bruised Reed he would not have broke it or if on smoking Flax he would not have quenched it A Man cannot throughly Write of the Old Papal Usurpations here without being as voluminous as Mr. Prynne and our Statute-Book doth sufficiently instruct us out of Hen. 8 th's Reign and former ones in the Fact of the Papal Arrogance and in the Fact and Right of their being withstood But I need not tell you of the common Observation that those Statutes in Henry 8 th's time that were most warm against the Papal Usurpations were but Declarative of our old Laws and Customs and as for example the dernier Ressort that the Cannon Law gives the Pope of Appeals from our Ecclesiastical Courts was an Usurpation long before the Statute of Henry the 8 th's time for prohibiting all Appeals out of England to the Court of Rome And thus the Constitutions at Clarendon plainly speak out how our Old Laws and Customs were to be observed in this point viz. That all Appeals must proceed regularly from the Arch Deacon to the Bishop from the Bishop to the Arch-Bishop and if the Arch-Bishop failed to do Justice the last Complaint must be to the King to give Order for Redress i e. by proper delegates and Mathew Paris A. 1164. thus tells us that in the Reign of Henry the Second the Custom then about Appeals was viz. Si emerserint ab Archidiacono debet procedi ad Episcopum ab Episcopo ad Archiepiscopum si Archiepiscopus defuerit in justitiâ exhibendâ ad Dominum Regem perveniendum est postremo ipsius in Curiâ Archiepiscopi controversia terminetur ita quod non debet ultrà procedi absque assensu Domini Regis But as to the Ridiculousness of the Papal Usurpations by the
Law Nay the Laws are evident to the contrary Namely that Sins ought only to reach to their Authors To the Laws that are brought to the contrary the Answer is clear and to the Canon Si audieris by which the gloss doth found it self much may be said As first that that was a Precept of the Old Judicial Law as appears clearly For 't is found in the 13 th of Deuteronomy And commands of that kind ceased to oblige under the new Law unless the institution thereof had been renewed Nor do we read of any such new Institution For Cyprian to whom that Text in the Decrets is ascribed had not the power of issuing out the General Laws for as much as he was not Bishop of Rome nor especially in a Case wherein order is given concerning Burning and Death as appears in the Text c. Or otherwise you may say that that Text doth not speak of Hereticks but of Idolaters and those Crimes are different as appears out of what hath been before said And again otherwise it may be said that it speaks so when all Persons of a City were infected with that Crime And if they were not all infected yet that was lawful at that time while there was a Command of God for it who is the Lord of Life and Death and for which there is a good Text where mention is made of Sampson's Homicide But to the other Laws which Archidiaconus urgeth 't is answered that those things were done by Gods Authority who did inwardly inspire the Authority of killing c. and it is to be said that he speaks when these things were done by the Authority of the Judge as appears in the end of the Text c. And as to somewhat else Cited you may say that 't is understood when in a lawful Case War was waged against them and there was added also to that the Authority of a Superior who could grant it Otherwise this Absurdity would follow that for an Act unlawful and disallowed the Pope might grant Indulgences which are only to be granted for a work of Charity According to what is named by the Doctors c. and for which the Text makes for as much as Saint Thomas holds out of the same 4. Sententiarum distinc 20. The Result of the whole will rest here that if a City doth fall into Heresie then it may be burn'd and destroy'd and not otherwise Bartolus Confirms this Resolution in the Case of Heresie and of Treason and in all other Cases where the Son is punished for the offence of the Father And thus it was done in the Case of Carthage which for its Rebellion was ploughed up as appears in the Pandects He saith likewise that he saw the Definitive Sentence of Henry the Emperor which he gave against the City of Brixia that Rebelled against him wherein he mentioned that the City was to be ploughed up The which punishment he afterward out of his Mercy released c. And thus Boniface did who by reason of the faults of some of the Templars destroyed their whole order because they were Hereticks But none inferior to a Prince can give this Sentence nor can it be done without the Authority of a Prince according to what Bartolus doth at large pursue And Salycet was of the same Opinion But when shall we say that a City commits Heresie so that it may be punished in the manner aforesaid I Answer then if they were all Hereticks or the Major part And it is requisite that they should meet together as a Community to commit this Crime Namely by joynt Councels Otherwise single Persons would be said to do it and not the Community c. Nor would I have you believe by this that the Innocent are punished with Corporal Punishment for the guilty which appears manifestly from what is said by Bartolus c. But accrding to the premisses the question is Whether the Community being punished for Heresie every single Person be deem'd to be punished so as that he may be judged to be severally punished for it and so ought not to be punished further To this I Answer that Persons singly may nevertheless be punished if they are found guilty of this Crime because what the Community doth owe Persons do not singly and so on the contrary c. For this Decision those things do serve that are noted by Ioannes and the Moderns and by Bartolus If any one would know what figure Gundissalvus makes in the account of the Learned Papal World you may tell him that I suppose that Tractate of his against Heretical pravity was Printed long before it was bound up with the Tractatus Criminales before mentioned For that by one whom I Employed to Consult the TRACTATES in 17 Volums in the Edition of Lions in the Year 1544. I am informed that that Work of Gundissalvus is there in the Second Volume fol. 267. the which alone would shew him to be a considerable Author and in the course of my Cursory View of some Civil Law Books writ of matters of State I have read him respectfully cited by Magerus de Advocatiâ Armatâ cap. 8. and p. 205. and by Klockius in his Book De Contributionibus And as an Indication of his not being valued as a singular or Heterodox Author by Passerus who published the Criminal Tractates aforesaid you may find somwhat of the Famous Boerius his Tractatus de Seditiosis published in the same Volume viz. char 57. n 18. asserted to the same purpose But none need wonder at Gundissalvus giving his opinion as he did when he tells us that Iohannes Andreas and Laurentius two Famous Canonists seemed to be of opinion that an Heretical City might be destroyed by any one and without the Judgment of the Church particularly ordering it Yet here in this place I have Cited out of Gundissalvus it is worthy of observation that some passages may render him appearing no Slave to Implicit Faith or one as I may say that roweth in the Popes Galleys His Judging of the Case as he did with so much Horror was very Commendable in him as was likewise his reproof of the Cannonists by him Cited and his saying that ones pen was to have been more tempered and his differing from the measures of the Text and Gloss about the Canon Si audieris and the Interpretation of the 13 th of Deuteronomy and answering the objection thence taken and from the Authority of Cyprian seems to have in it something of the Noble Berean But after all he doth in reality shew himself an arrant Canonist and with other Canonists by him cited he founds the Papal power of destroying Heretical Cities on the Popes being a kind of Prince or fifth Monarch over the World and on Heresie being a rebellion against him And that where the Major part of a City are Hereticks the most moderate of the Canonists think the destruction of it is lawful if there be the Judgment of the Church that is
Langbain and Printed at Oxon 1638. The Author is believed by Rivet in his Answer to Coeffeteau and by Langbain to be William Ranclin Dr. of Laws fiscal Advocate in the Court of Aydes at Oua in Henry the 4 ths time and after-terward Attorney General in the Soveraign Court of Aydes at Montpellier In ch 1. p. 11. of the Translated Book he tells us that being at Court he saw many earnest Suits Exhibited to the French King in behalf of the Pope for the receiving that Council and such as had been made to the preceding Kings but which they would never grant nor allow the publication of what they conceived so dangerous to Church and State And in ch 2. he gives us several Instances which were made to the late Kings for receiving the Council of Trent Charles the 9th was moved by the Embassadors of Pope Pius the 4th the Emperor and King of the Romans the King of Spain the Prince of Piemont soon after the year 1563. to Publish that Council The King said he would have the Advice of his Lords But it was Determined by them that he should not hearken to their Requests That in the year 1572. when Cardinal Alexandrino knew the Popes Nephew came out of Spain into France with Commission to reinforce the Suit to Henry the 3d. both the Pope and the Clergy urged him to publish it but nothing was done The Request was renewed by the Clergy at Blois and especially by Peter Espinoc Archbishop of Lions in the year 1576 but without any effect The Request was renewed by the Assembly of France Assembled at Melun in Iuly 1579. The Speaker was Arnalt Bishop of Bazas Nicholas Angelier Bishop of Brien made the like Instance to the same King Oct. 3. 1579. and again July 17. 1582. Renald of Beaune Arch-Bishop of Bourges and Primate of Aquitaine Delegate for the Clergy made the same Request at Fountain-Bleau but all in vain In the beginning of A. 1583. A Nuntio came from the Pope into France to Henry the 3d. but could not stir him from his purpose and in a Letter to the King of Navarre Henry 4. who afterward Succeeded him he protests that it was never in his thoughts to admit of it November the 19th 1585. the aforesaid Bishop Nicholas Angelier renews this Request very earnestly to the King and another Assault is made on him October 14. 1585. by the Bishop and Earl of Nayan who in his Speech is very Confident that the Council of Trent was guided by the Holy Ghost He adds though it was not received yet several things in that Council especially what concern'd the Clergy were inserted in the Canons of some of their Provincial Councils held in France at Rohan 1581 at Bourges 1584. at Tours 1585. and at Aix in Provence the same year One of the Kings Lieutenants General for the Administration of Iustice in an Assembly of the States particularly An. 1588. makes a Suit to the King to publish the Council but to no purpose Nay more The King did not receive so much as those very Decrees of the Council which were no way Repugnant to the Gallican Liberties However Suppressing the Name of the Council they Decreed the very same things at Blois An. 1579. But after all that this Author hath mentioned of the Parliament at Blois Decreeing the same things in the year 1579. that were agreeable to the Canons of the Council of Trent and of the fruitless Request of the Arch-Bishop of Bourges in 1582. and of others afterwards for the Reception of that Council I cannot but call to mind that Thuanus Hist. Tom. 4. lib. 94. p. 388. Edit An. 1620. tells us that in the year 1589. the same Arch-Bishop of Bourges in a Convention of the â— Estates did among other things propose ut Concilio Tridentino tradita disciplina ab omnibus recipiatur But nothing was done and the Speech of the Arch-Bishop and some others made in that Convention are by Thuanus called Orationes intempestivae And I might add that the Author of the Inventoire General des affaires de France from the Death of Henry the 4 th to the year 1620. tells us that in the year 1615 on the 19 th of February the Clergy Deputed the Bishop of Beauvais to pray the third Estate to agree to the publishing the Council of Trent And that Monsieur le President Miron in the Name of the 3d. Estate Replyed that they could not at present receive that Council The which agrees with what I have before alledged contrary to the Measures of Cressy and as doth likewise the Popes issuing out a Breve to the Cardinal of Ioyeux An 1605. and mentioned in the Memoirs p. 391. after the Histoire du Cardinal Duc de Ioyeux par le Sieur Aubery Advocat en Parlement aux Conseils du Roy Printed at Paris An. 1654. and in which Breve the Pope desires that Cardinals earnest endeavours for the introducing the Constitutions of the Council of Trent into France and acknowledgeth the Difficulty of that Work but withal addeth that he confideth in the Cardinals Industry as to the Labouring that point and saith that he had Writ to Hen. the 4 th about it And p. 931. there is another Breve of the Pope to that Cardinal A. 1615. which beginneth thus Venerab Frater noster Salut apostol benedict Planè dicere possumus expectavimus pacem ecce turbatio Superioribus namque diebus spem non levem conceperamus fore ut SSti Concilij Tridentini decreta in Galliâ reciperentur dum animum nostrum varietate multitudine pastoralium Sollicitudinum penè oppressum Sublevare hoc Solatio curabamus repentè ad nos allatum est quod 4 to Nonas â—ebr in publico conventu isthic attentatum fuerit in detrimentum supremae Authoritatis hujus SStae Apostolicae sedis c. And where he afterward complains to this effect that the King i. e. H. 4. had several times abused him with promises and pretensions that he would publish the Council of Trent but that nothing came of it If then any one will yet say that the French Clergy not being able in the year 1615 to engage the 3 d. Estate to agree to the Publishing the Trent Council did then Publish it themselves I shall leave him to consider both the Nature and the Event of such an Invasion of the Regal Rights and shall further acquaint him that according to the saying of De facto factum potest de facto tolli he may if he pleaseth consult the Publication of the Peace Relating to the French King and the Prince of Conde first Prince of the Blood Published in the Town of Loudun the 14 th of May A. 1616. and where he will find the 5 th and th 6. Articles to be as followeth viz. 5th That the Authority of the French church be observed and no allowance or Permission be granted for any Encroachment upon the Rights Franchises and Liberties of the same