and that the tradition of the Fathers obserue the tradition of the Fathers to giue to vnderstand that it was not then any new inuention or deuise did warrant that he could not be deposed if he erred not in faith (d) Epist Henr. 4. ad Greg. 7. à Protestant edita vnà cum alijs Refertur à Centuriat Cent. 11. c. 8. de Schismate The tradition of the Fathers saith the Emperour hath taught that I ought to be iudged by God alone and that I could not be deposed for any crime so I declined not from the faith which is not pleasing vnto God And when Philip Augustus the litle sonne of Philip the first was fallen into the like contempt and dislike of his wife Engeberge sister to the King of Denmark that his Grandfather was of his wife Bertha and had caused his mariage to be dissolued disaunlled by Cardinal William his vncle Archbishop of Rhemes and Legate in France in preiudice of his former mariage he tooke to wife the daughter of the Duke of Morauia The Pope thereupon tooke notice of the matter as of the violating and transgressing of a Sacrament vnder pretence of religiō And seeing the resistāce that the King made he excommunicated him interdicted his Realme (a) Du Tillet en la vie de Philip. August The sentence of Cardinall William was sayth the Lord of Tillet reuoked by Pope Innocent the third as giuen without order of iustice And because the King presently after the sentence giuen holding himselfe vntied and free married Agnes daughter of the Duke of Morauia the King and the Realme were interdicted And hereunto the Cronicle of Foiz cited by Vignier hath addeth (b) Viginer liure 3. de Phist de Prance en Panne 1200 en la Biblioth hist pag. 3. That during the time of this interdict they did put in France to the publique contracts not in the raigne of Philip but in the raigne of Iesus Christ. And when Iohn King of England who was not yet at that time obliged by any temporall acknowledgment to the Pope (c) Act. in t Bonif. 8. Phil. Pulch. fol. 91. p. 1. had driuen the Bishops out of his Realme and seized vpon their goodes the same King Philip Augustus held an assembly of his Estates at Soysson where he proposed to make warre vpon the King of England for that he persecuted the Church and for that the Pope had discharged and absolued his subiects from their oath of Allegiance to him (d) Du Haillan li. 10. de Phist de France en la vie de Phil. Aug. Rigard lib. de vita Thil. Aug. adan 1212. The King sayth Du Haillan notwithstanding he be an historiā very passionate against the Popes at the intreaty of the Pope at Soyssons held an assembly of the Prelates and Peeres of his Realme to take aduise and consult about the meanes how he might passe euer into England against King Iohn to make war vpon him as a persecutor of the Church whome the Pope had then excommunicated acquiting taking away and discharging his subiectes of the Oath of allegiance they did owe vnto him And a litle after The greater part of the Nobility were of opinion that he had iust cause so to do as well being thereunto moued by authority of the Pope as for the reestablishing of the Bishops and other the Prelates in their Churches from which they had beene thrust and driuen out by Iohns Tyranny whome the Pope had excommunicated And againe all the Nobility with one accord promised Augustus to serue him with their owne persons in this enterprize Ferrard the Count of Flanders only excepted And when the Emperour Otho nephew of the said Iohn King of England meant to take his part and to make warre vpon France the said Philip Augustus sent vnto the Pope to sollicite and mooue him to declare Otho depriued of all the rightes of his Empire and for the execution of this censure he bestirred himself and vsed his courage and his Armes so effectually as vnder the conduct and fauour of the Popes cause and quarrell he wan the greatest battavle that euer King of France had gayned against any Emperour to wit the battayle du Pont de Bouuines where the Emperour had aboue an hundred and fifty thousand fighting men The King sayth du Haillan aduertised of the threates of the Emperour Otho Du Haillan la mesine Rigard ibid. vsed such expedition in the busines and wrought so effectually with the Pope as he declared the said Otho enemy of the Sea of Rome and depriued him of his Imperiall titles And the Electors of the Empire at the sollicitation and incitement of Augustus who sent to them Ambassadours to make his way elected and chose Frederike the King of Sicily Emperour And a litle after he putteth downe King Philip his speach to his army in these wordes My Friends saith the King let vs take good courage Du Haillan ibid. Rigard ibid. Let vs not be afraid Let vs haue honour before our eies and the feare of God in the first place to whom we must recommend our selues VVe haue to fight against an Enemy condemned censured and excommunicated by the Church and for his impieties and wickednes separated and cut off from communion with the faithfull And when Reymond Count of Tholouse and the greater part of Gaule Narbonoise became to be infected with the heresy of the Albigenses began to persecute the Catholikes there assembled first a Councell of French Bishops at Montpellier (a) Histoire Albigeoise rapportèe par Vignier en son hist de France liu 3. en l'ann 1214. and after that the Councell of Laterane for heresy depriued both him and Reymond his sonne of the County of Tholouse and adiudged it to Symon Count of Montfort who had taken armes against him and of this came the vnion of the County of Tholouse and of the adioyning Prouinces to the Crowne of France By decree of all the Councell of Laterane saith du Haillan (b) Du Haillan en la vie de Philip August Rigard ibid. whom I do often cite because it is euery where in the handes of all Reymond the Count of Tholouse his sonne also named Reymond were excommunicated c. And the County of Tholouse was adiudged to Symon Count of Montfort And againe Simon shewed vnto the Estates of the County of Tholouse the decree of the Councell by which he was declared Count of the said County And there opposed not any one against it but all with one accord tooke the Oath of fidelity to him And the Lord of Tillet saith in his Memorials these wordes En la vie de Louys 8. The County of Tholouse came to the King by good right the said Reymond and his Father being confiscated that is to say hauing lost it by confiscation for heresy and Symen Count of Montfort hauing procured and gotten it and Amaulry his Sonne hauing transferred and made it ouer to
who seeth not that it is a Sacriledge that hath at all times drawne the Ire Wrath and Vengeance of God aswell vpon Kinges and Princes as vpon particuler Persons who haue attempted the same Euery one knoweth that Saul (a) 1. Reg. 13 15. was deposed from the right of his Royalty and died a miserable death because he would take vpon him the office of a Sacrificer We know that Oza (b) â— Reg. 6. was punished with a sudaine death for putting his hand to the Arke that seemed to sway to the one side We know that King (c) 2. Paralip 26. Ozias was stroken with leprosy and excluded from the administration and gouernment of his Kingdome for taking the Censar into his hand And holy Writ saith (d) Malach 26. The lippes of the Priest shall keepe knowledge and the Law they shall require of his mouth because he is the Angell of the lord of Hostes. And the Prophet Esay (e) Esay 54. saith to the Church Euery tongue resisting thee in iudgment thou shalt iudge And againe (f) Idem 60. The King shall walk in thy light the people in the brightnes of thy rising And King Iosaphat distinguisheth the boundes of the one and the others Iurâ—diction in these wordes (g) 2. Paralâ—p 19. Amarias saith he the Priest and your Bishop shal be chiefe in these thinges that appertayne to God and Zabadias the sonne of Ismael who is the Prince in the house of Iuda shal be ouer those workes which perteyne to the Kinges office And our Sauiour (h) Matth. 19. saith himselfe VVhosoeuer shall not heare the Church let him be vnto thee as an Ethnick and a Publican And S. Paul speaking vnto Pastors (i) Act. 20. saith The Holy Ghost hath placed you Bishops to rule the Church of God which he hath purchased with his owne bloud And speaking to the Laytie he saith (a) Heb. 3. Obey your Prelates for they watch hauing to render an accompt of your soules And againe (b) Heb. 5. Neither doth any man take the honour to himselfe but he that is called of God as Aaron And therefore we see that the first Christian Emperours were euerso respectiue and Religious as they would neuer make themselues Iudges neither of matters of faith nor of matters of the Churches discipline nor of the Bishops causes among themselues for feare of violating the rectitude that Gods Ministers ought to bring to Ecclesiasticall Iudgments by the feare of temporall Iurisdictions And that if they published any lawes in such cases it euer was after the Bishops had passed them and to further the temporall execution of the decisions formerly made by Ecclesiastique authority It is not lawfull forme saith (c) Ruff. l. 10. Eccles hâ—st c. 2. Constantine the Great who am placed ouer temporalities to censure and iudge the causes of Bishops And the Emperour Valentinian (d) Sozom. l. 6. c. 7. the first said It is not lawfull for me who am of the Laitie to arrogate to my selfe the curiosity of searching into these matters And the Emperour Theodosius the second (e) Epist ad Sinodâ— Ephes writing to the Councell of Ephesus sayth It is not lawfull for him who is not of the ranke of Bishops to intermeddle himself with the decision of the affaires of the Church And the most glorious and victorious of all our Kinges which was Charlemaine confirming the answere that Censtantine made saith (f) Carol. mâ—gâ— l. 6. cap. 301. The Emperour Constantine answered vpon the accusations of the Bishops To me who am placed ouer temporalities it is not lawfull to iudge the Bishops causes And confirming that which the Emperour Valentinian had said he vsed these words (a) Ibid. Your busines is aboue vs and therefore iudge among your selues of your owne causes For you are aboue vs. And when on the contrary the hereticall Emperours would take vpon them to meddle with Ecclesiasticall iudgmentes the holy Fathers resisted them contradicted them with all manner of constancy We are not permitted said Hosius to the Emperour (b) Epist ad Const apud AthaÌ„ in ep ad solit vit agent Constance to hold the Empire on earth nor to You to lay hand on the Censar and to vsurpe the authority of Religion And S. Athanasius sayth (c) Athan. epist ad solit vitam agen When was it euer heard in the memory of man that the iudgments of the Church tooke their force from the Emperour And againe (d) Ibidem He treateth not of matters of the Roman CoÌ„mon wealth where there may be credit giuen to you as to an Emperour but he speaketh of a Bishop And a little after (e) Ibidem Who is he who seeing an Emperour occupying the chiefest place in matters of the Church would not iudge that it were the abomination of the desolatioÌ„ fortould by Daniel And Gregory Nazianzen (f) Greg. Naz. orat adcities ti percuis Princip irascent saith Will you heare a free word which is That the law of Iesus Christ subiecteth you to my Iurisdiction to my tribunal For we are Emperours also namly in an Empire greater and perfecter then yours And S. Ambrose (g) Ambr. ep 32. ad Imper. Valent innior saith Who maketh any doubt if we regard the order of the Scripture or the antiquity of the Church but that the Bishops in causes of faith haue a custome to iudge of Christian Emperours And againe Your Father said It is not for me to iudge betweene Bishops And your Clemency saith It apperteineth to me to iudge And S. Martin the renowned ornament of the Gaules saith (h) Apud Seuer Sulpit l. 2. sacrae hist It is an impiety new and not heard of before that a secular Iudge should iudge of matters of the Church And against this it helpeth not to alleage that the Emperour Constantine did call himselfe (a) Euseb l. 4. de vit Constant cap. 24. a Bishop out of the Church For Constantine by that meant nothing lesse then to say that he had iurisdiction and superintendency ouer the externall forme and discipline of the Church Els wherfore should he haue desired with so great instance the authority of the Councell of Nice for the decision of the day of Easter But he meant only to say that what the Bishops did by their preachings among the Christians within the Church that did he out of the Church by his Edictes against the Infidells He ordayned sayth â—usebius by his Edictes and gaue order to the Gouernours of the Pagans to cause them to keep the Sunday also aswell as the Christians and to honour the dayes of the Martyrs and the feastes appointed in the Churches And therof it came that hauing one day feasted some Bishops he called himselfe Bishop in their presence saying vnto them God hath placed you Bishops within the Church and me a Bishop out of the Church But me thinkes I heare You already say that
all this while that French Catholikes were in this poynt agreeing rather with the Parlament in England then the Church of Rome But God be praised the curtaine is drawne at length which heretofore hath parted the stage from the attyring house and now the spectatours who are as many of our Country as can write and read may seâ— that such as plead the partes of ciuill rich and religious persons are many of them no better then insolent beggarly and lewd companions This worke is performâ—d in this Oration following wherewith I haâ—e thought good to present the courteous Reader composed and prâ—nounâ—ed by that ornament of our age the Cardinal of Peron a man so well knowne to the world for the great childes portion which the father of all good thinges hath allotted out vnto him of incomparable learning prudence and zeale towardes the Catholique Faith It pleased God by his meanes long since to conuert the last King of France from his erroneous beliefe to make the said Cardinall amongst others an Instrument of compounding that busines of the Venetians whereupon the peace of the Church did in some sort depend and now this honour was only wanting to him that he should be the meanes to restore one of the noblest members of the Church for so we may without any vanity to the glory of God esteeme the English Catholikes who with so admirable grace and strength are stil swimming through the bitter waues of persecution to the honour of only suffering for that faith which other Catholike Countries do professe wherof our Aduersaries haue studied so earnestly to depriue vs whilest they say the doctrine conteyned in the Oath of Allegiance is impugned by vs out of singularity or seditious humour and that our next neighbouring Churches of the same Communion would acknowledge and confesse the same But I must not reflect so particulerly vpon the dignity of the Cardinalls person and the extreme obligation which al good English Catholikes haue to him as therby to neglect the setting forth of the aduantaâ—e which our cause hath got by his Oration For although it were not a matter of small importance if it had beene deliuerâ—d by himself but as a priuate man yet it ought to rise to another manner of accoumpt when it appeareth that as the stile thereof was ordered by his eloquence and the sound thereof pronounced by his voyce so also the substance and strength of it did spring euen from the hart roote of the whole Clergy of France represented by those Archbishops and Bishops and other Prelates there assembled and was both ioyfully receaued and clerely auowed by the whole Nobility of France assembled also and represented in lik maÌ„ner Now to the end good Reader that thou mayâ—st runne through with moâ—e facility and be able with more syncerity to discerne of that which is conteyned in the Oration I will make thee acquainted with the occasion therof and premise also some few other thinges whereof perhaps thou art ignoranâ— and which may serue to set thy iudgment straight in that which followeth The Parlaments in France haue no resemblance to ours in England but are certaine sedentary and supreme Courts of Iustice compounded only of Lawyers who iudge without appeale within their seuerall precinctes of Iurisdiction Of these Courtes there are eight in France all independant on of another though the Parlament of Paris haue a Country vnder it of greater extent and by residing in that Citty which is the ordinary habitation of the French Kinges it hath growne to that kind of amâ—ition and vsurpation which some Patriarchs of Constantinople and some Bishops of Rauenna haue been subiect to in different causes but vpon like occasions That which in France doth answere the nature of our English Parlament is the holding of the three Estates Generall the Clergy the Nobility and the Communalty which last is called the Third Estate but it is with this difference amongst others that they sit in three seuerall Chambers whereas the two former of ours sit in one and wheras with vs an Act is not presented to the King vnles the maior part of both our Houses or Chambers do finde it good in France if the maior part of two Chambers do resolue vpon any proposition it is to go vnder the name of all the Three Estates although one of them should dissent therin This supposed I wil proceed to informe thee courteous Reader that the greater number of the deputies of the third Chamber in this last Assembly of the Estates in France did conceaue frame the forme of an Oath which they wished might be ministred in that Kingdome as that which beares the name of Allegiance is in ours whereby the same principall Article is â—biured namely that no French King can be deposed nor his subiects absolued from their obedience by any Pope for any cause whatsoeuer and that the contrary opinion is Hereticall and repugnant to the doctrine of the Scriptures But this difference is found betweene the two Oathes that whereas the English one in one of the clauses seemes to exclude not only the authority of the Church ouer Kinges but euen of the CoÌ„mon wealth also yea though it should be accompanied with that of the Church that of France shooâ—es only at the abnegation of the Churches authority Nor is there a man in that Kingdome who appeares to h ld that Kinges in certaine cases are not subiect to the censure of the Common wealth And as for the Parlament of Paris in particuler who knowes not that diuers of that body haue now helped to animate the Prince of Condé and his complices to take armâ—s against the King and Queene of France vpon the supposall which they make of the ill Gouernment of that Kingdome But howsoeuer thaâ— case standes this Oath was drawne by the Chamber of the Communalty which in France is called the Third Estate and reiected as conteyning false and wicked doctrine by both the Chambers of the Clergy and Nobility and coâ—sequently for the reason that I gaue before by the Estate Generall Some man perhaps amongst oâ—r English aduersaries may obiect that notwithstâ—nding the custome and stile of France doth beare that whatsoeuer is authorized or reprâ—oued by any two of the Chambers doth take the name of all the threâ— yet it makes exceedingâ—y for the credit of our Oath of Allegiance that they of the Third Estate in France which is the greatest member of that body should c nspire in opinion with the Authours of our English Oath though they be of a contrary Religion to the Protestant in other thinges and esteemed the most deuout professours of it in that Kingdome I answere that this argument may looke fayre a far off but with such as know how thinges were carried it will fall out to be of no force at all It is to be vnderstood that this Chamber of the Third Estate was wholy in effect compounded of Lawyers most of them belonging to the Court of Parlament
excepting only a few hypocritical Ministers amongst vs or profane Lawyers amongst our neighbours But as God would haue it neither the Ministers in France are of that opinion for they professe the contrary nor yet the Lawyers of England if you put the case home to them for howsoeuer it costes them nothing to sweare that the Pope can neuer come to depose a King because he is a protestant it would trouble some of their consciences if they haue any to sweare that if an Vpper and Lower house of the English Parlament should condemne a King who might happen to be so great a Tyrant as that he would abrogate all the Statutes and Common Lawes of the Realme bring in by force a summary course of Iustice as is vsed in Switzerland confiscate all the Common Lawyers of England who are able to spend aboue a thousand poundes per annum and in a word dispose of their wiues and children as if they were his owne it would trouble them I say to sweare that such a King might not be deposed by the Houses of Parlament and that themselues could not be so far discharged from the Oath of Fidelity which they made to him when they were sworne Iustices of Peace as to make some personall resistance in their owne defence There is nothing more certaine then that many a man reades ouer the Oath of Allegiance and diuers take it who consider not the importance of those fearefull generall clauses which include and exclude all particuler cases of No Pope No King neither by his owne nor by any other Authority for any cause whatsoeuer can Depose or Absolue subiects c. And yet as I said before there are so many Protestantes who by occasion of this Oath haue entred so deeply into the consideration of Kingly Authority as it is euident to all such as freely and familiarly liue with Protestantes and vnderstand sincerely from them what they think that thousands of them are growne to a lesse adoring conceipt of Royall Dignity then they were wont to haue And though his Maiesty can hardly come to know the preiudice that he hath susteyned by yeilding to them who haue vnfitly sought to help him or rather to help themselues by propounding this Oath because he is a King and cannot equally conuerse with his subiectes nor can he from his seruantes expect but such newes as will be pleasing to him yet it may be hoped for at the Handes of so Excellent a Iudgment as his Maiesty is endued withall that he will one day fall vpon the true account of these businesses by other meanes and not cōtinue his Catholike Subtectes in his so ill conceipt for professing of that beliefe which is now in terminis auowed by the learned and noble Catholikes euen of France the contrary whereof is not auowed by any Protestant Church vpon earth if we chaunge the name of Pope into the name of Common wealth and the sequele whereof hath done nothing but disseruice to him I beseech God of his infinite mercy giue his Maiesty such light of mind wherby to discerne the distempered thoughts of his Ministers who are in such a rage against Catholikes and to vs that he will vouchsafe so much strength of mind as that whatsoeuer happeneth we may rather obey God then Man AN ADVERTISMENT TO THE READER translated out of the French THE Author of this Discourse vnderstanding that some had put in print two seuerall Speaches in his name far different both in sense and wordes from that which he by word of mouth deliuered he was constrayned to bring this to light as an Antidot or Countermaund to those other Neither did he much wonder to see such peeces of changeable colours clapt togeather some true some false according vnto euery ones passion without resemblance to the originall for he doth thinke that no pen could follow nor memory retayne two Speaches wherof the shortest lasted three houres although swiftly pronounced But he was much astonished at the liberty of this tyme that within Paris himselfe being present any should publish two Speaches in his name without acquainting him with it therby to vnderstand whither he would acknowledge them for his owne It is true indeed that he was not the only man who had byn so dealt withall for some other Prelates had lyn handled after the same manner and found as litle of theirs in those remnantes bestowed on them as Euphorbus in Pithagoras Now therefore it doth suffice him to present thee with that he pronounced in the Chamber of the Third Estate For that it was in a manner all one with that he made in the Chamber of the Nobility the reasens being the same and no difference at all but in the beginning conclusion and ornuments By reason wherof the publishing of the one might serue for a generall remedy of the suppositions of the other two As soone as he had therefore signified to the Gentlemen of the Third Order that being to speake in their presence he thought himself obliged to make the same prayer to God which Pericles was accustomed to do being to speake to the Athenians that nothing might passe from him vnbeseeming those that had imployed him neyther of those that were to heare him Psal 50. he directed his words to God saying with the Psalmist Domine labia men aperies and then began as followeth THE ORATION IT had byn to small purpose Noble Gentlemen to honour the dignity of those that make profession to minister Iustice It had byn to litle purpose that which Aristotle taught vs by saying that Iustice is beautifull and admirable like to the starre Lucifer and it had byn to as litle purpose to haue taught vs that in iustice all vertues are summarily conteyned And the answere of Agesdaus King of Sparta had byn vnto as litle purpose which he gaue vnto the King of Persia who tooke to himself the title of the great King that he could not be greater then himselfe valesse he could proue he were more iust And that fable of the Poets had byn to as litle purpose faigning Minos the Patron of iust Princes to haue byn the sonne of Iupiter and that Themis and Dicas were placed on either side of Iupiter if the Scripture did not teach vs that by iustice Kings do raigne if the Sonne of God had not chosen him who was to be his figure called him Melchisedech that is to say King of iustice and that the same Melchisedech whose name doth signify King of Iustice had not been also King of Salem that is King of peace to shew that of iustice dependeth peace which is the mother of all good in heauen and earth And seeing the oracles of diuine scripture agree in cōmendation of this vertue with the testimony of prophane authors it seemes in giuing her the first place of honour and dignity amongst humane vertues is to put in execution the will both of God and men Now Gentlemen if euer there were any Nation in
the King he was so gratious to the said Reymond by the treaty of peace as to restore it vnto him conditionally that it should returne to the said King if his said only daughter had not issue by Alphonse of France the Count of Poittou And when the same vniuersall Councell of Laterane which may worthily be called the most Vniuersal Councel for so much as besides the Pope and the foure Patriarkes of the East Matth. Paris in Ioan. adâ— an 1215. Magdeburg Cent. â—â— cap. 9. de Synod who were there present some in person as the Pope and the Patriarkes of Constantinople and of Hierusalem and the other by their legates as those of Alexandria and of Antioch there were seauenty Archbishops 412. Bishops and more then 800. Prelates and more then this all the Monarches and Kinges of Christendome were there assistant eyther by themselues or by their Ambassadours and the Emperour of the Fast the Emperour of the West the King of Hierusalem the King of France the King of England the King of Arragon the King of Castile and others When the Councell I say intended to prouide for the extirpation and rooting out of the Reliques of the Albigenses it ordeyned that the Princes who should become contemners of the Councell that condemned the Albigenses should be depriued of the obligation of their subiectes fidelity towardes them And this I remember not for an example to disturbe or trouble the publique peace and tranquillity sith the Heretikes be in so great a number as they make a notable part of the body of the Estate but to shew that we cannot hold that for hereticall which was pronounced and decreed 400. yeares since by the mouth of the Vniuersall Church For as touching them who for the frustrating of this decree do alleage and cite (a) Plat. in vita Innocen 3. what Platina and after him the (b) Suppl Chron. l. 13. ad an 1215. Supplement of the Chronicles affirme that the Councell proposed many thinges but resolued nothing they are more worthy of pitty then answere For who sees not that those Authors there speake of the preparatiues of the army for the warre of the holy Land and not of matters of Doctrine or Ecclesiasticall discipline Otherwise a man should impugne as false that therin was resolued the Article of Transubstantiation the Article of the Procession of the holy Ghost of the Father and of the Sonne the precept of annuall Confession to all the faithfull the condemnation of the errours of the Abbot Ioachim together with all the writinges of the Schoole Doctours alleaging these things the practise of all the Iurisdictions of France followed in the searching and finding out of heretikes We should impugne of falsity the Decretals of Gregory the ninth (c) Decret Gregor l. 5. tit 7. de haeret c. 13. Excommunicamus compiled twelue yeares after the Councell of Laterane where that decree is repeated at length vnder the title of the Councell of Laterane the writings of Matthew Paris (d) Math. Parisanâ—e ad ann 1215. a Writer of the same age and a great enemie of the Popes who sayth that the Councell of Laterane made 60. you must reade 70. Decrees the Bul of Pope Clement the 5. in fauour of King Philip the Fayre who returned the readers to the decrees of the Laterane Councell the Centuriators also (a) Acta inter Bonif. 8. Philip Pulch. who inserted all the 70. Articles of the Laterane Councell into their Centuries Finally we should impugne of falsity the coniunction of the County of Tholouse to the Crowne which was founded vpon that Councells Decree and the reasons and declarations of the Court of Parlament to King Lewis the Eleuenth touching the extinguishing of that pragmaticall Sanction or Decree where the Court prayeth the King to order the Elections according to the Councell of Laterane in these wordes In the Councell of Laterâ—ne saith the Court which (b) Refertur à Biblioth lib. 4. decret Eccl. Gall. was assembled held at Rome by Pope Innocentius the third in the yeare 1215. where were assistant and present 1333. Prelates there was prescribed a certaine forme of Election and thereunto was annexed that in case of the Electors negligence the right and power of prouision for the Church should fall to the Superiour Prelate Cap. (c) Cone Lateran c. 24. Quia propter Cap. (d) Ibid. 〈◊〉 23. Ne pro defectu But I haue made to far a digression let vs returne to our Historie Wherefore when the Generall Councell of Lateran which represented all the Christian Common wealth both spirituall and temporall meant to prouide for the extinguishing of the reliques of the Albigensian heresy it conceaued made and published this (e) Conc. Later c. 3. Canon If any Prince neglect in his landes and territories to extirpate the heresy of the Albigenses let him be excoÌ„municated by the Archbishop of the Prouince And if he continue obstinate let it within the space of one yeare be signified to the Pope that he may absolue his subiects from their Oath of fidelity And when Pope Innocentius the 4. did at the Councell of Lions absolue the Subiectes of the Emperour Frederike from the fidelity they owed vnto him I dispute not now whether iustly or vniustly for so much as my scope drift and intention is not but to shew how the Kinges of France haue in such occasions carried themselues the King S. Lewis took vpon him the protecting of the Popes cause against the Emperour The King of France saith Paulus (a) Paul Aemil. in vita S. Ludouici Aemilius being come to Lions by zeale of office of Religion for the assisting of Innocentius and hauing made a protestation that both himself his forces and the Counsel of his Realme were ready to maynteyne defend the power and authority of his Holines added strength and dignity to Innocentius his cause And euen those who to make the Pope the king S. Lewis odious write that the Pope offered to cause Robert Count of Artois the Kinges brother to be elected chosen in place of Frederike but that the Barons of France refused it add that the Barons themselues protested that the Emperour could not be deposed if he erred not in faith You shall heare the Barons wordes be they true or be they faigned deliuered after many inuectiues against the Pope by Matthew Paris an Englishman (b) Matth. Paris in Hen. 3. ad an 1239. who fauoured the Emperour was the Popes heauy enemie and taken out of him by Vignier (c) Vignier en la 3. p. de la Biblioth hist Pan. 1239. who yeilded not a whit vnto him in that behalfe And thus he sayth But to the end we may not seeme to contemne the Popes commandement though it be euident that it came from the Church of Rome more vpon hatred to the Emperour then for a loue to our Nation we will send men of prudence on
the matter of this article is not a question of Religion but a simple and meere question of Estate and Policy As if to handle how farre the spirituall vse of the keyes and of the power of binding and loosing which God hath giuen vnto his Church extendeth it self were not a question of Religion As if to dispute whether these keyes might passe to the excoÌ„municating of them that willingly obey their Princes who after hauing done homage of their Crownes to Iesus Christ come to vse manifest felony against him to proclay me warre against him and to impugne his faith and doctrine were not a question of Religion As though to dispute whether those keys could in conscience and in the Churches tribunall absolue soules of the Oath of Allegiance they owe to their Princes when their Princes violate and breake the reciprocall Oath they haue made to God and to them to mayntaine them in Christian and Catholike Religion were not a question of Religion For therin being two obligations and bandes by which the subiectes are bound to obey their Princes the one politicke which hath for his scope the peace and felicity of the temporall life and against the violating wherof there be temporall paynes ordained which is that wherof the Apostle speaketh (a) Rom. 13. when he saith That a man must obey Princes not only for wrath the other religious and Ecclesiastike which is that of the obedience that Christians owe to their Princes not for the simple respect of lawes and paynes temporall but for respect vnto God and for the consideration of rewards and paynes eternall which is that that the same Apostle (b) Ibid. calleth for conscience sake Who doubteth when there is question of vntying not of the simple knot politike for which the politike lawes be instituted but of the spirituall and Ecclesiastike knot and of the obligation contracted in the tribunall and Court of conscience and this being the matter which is now in dispute whether in case of heresy it may be vâ—tied or not who doubteth I say whether this question be a question of Diuinity And more then this whatsoeuer the matter be in it selfe who seeth not that to dispute if it be conforme or contrary to Gods word is a question of Religion But some will reply and say that this is so cleere and so euident by Scripture as it admitteth neither vntruth nor dispute nor censure Is it true Where then there is a proposition which all the schoole Doctours and namely the two great lightes of Schoole Diuinity S. Thomas and S. Bonauenture and so many other Bishops and Doctours haue thought conforme or at least not repugnant to the word of God shall the contrary proposition be so cleere in Scripture as it shall need neither to be disputed about nor censured And what article then of faith may not be thrust out of the Churches Tribunall and exposed to the prey of Hereticall presumption if it be inough to say that it is so cleere in Scripture as that therin there is neither need of dispute nor iudgment Indeed this might haue some apparence if those who hold the one of the propositions should alledge Scriptures for themselues and the others should not cite any at all But as well those who hold the affirmatiue proposition as those who hold the negatiue argue by Scripture answere by Scripture and reply by Scripture For example they who hold the affirmatiue that Princes who ouerthrow and destroy religion 1. Reg. 15. may be excluded and depriued of their right alledge that Samuel deposed Saul or according to others for I pretend not to treate here by way of resolution but only problematically declared him deposed for hauing violated the lawes of the Iewish religion â— Reg. 11. That the Prophet Abia deposed Roboam froÌ„ his right of regality that he had ouer the Ten tribes of the people of Israel because Salomon his Father had reuolted and fallen from the lawe of God and sacrificed to false Gods That the Prophet Elias deposed Achab for hauing imbraced 3. â—â—g 19. the religion of false Gods and persecuted the seruantes of the true God Those contrariwise who stand for the negatiue part answere that the organs instruments ministers and oracles of such depositions were the Prophets who were particulerly and infallibly instructed taught and inspired of Gods will and that their actions cannot be drawne into a consequence for the time of the Euangelicall law wherin there be more Prophets Those who reply forthe affirmatiue part say that where there were in the Iewish religion two sortes of missions the one ordinary which was Sacerdotall and the other extraordinary which was that of the Prophets it was to this end that if the ordinary came to decay or to decline it might be raysed vp agayne and supported by the extraordinary But in the law of the Ghospell there is but one mission and that Sacerdotall or of Priestes All the authority infallibility which was in the two missions of the old Testament is vnited in the only ordinary Sacerdotall mission of the new which consequently can no more fayle and be deceaued in iudging of Heresy or of Apostacy from Christian Religion which be the two only causes for which the French Doctours who haue written in fauour of Kinges think a Prince may be excluded from the right of raigning ouer Gods people then the propheticall mission of the old Testament And others adde that euen in the old Testament this prerogatiue was not restrayned to the Prophets alone but was extended to the Priest For the Priests iudged of the leprosy If thou perceauest saith the Law that there is difficulty betwene leprosy and leprosy Deut. 27. thou shalt arise go vp to the Priests of the Leuiticall stock And hereof there were two reasons the one for that the leprosy as all the ancient Fathers haue obserued was a figure of heresie the iudgment wherof by right apperteyned to the Priests of the new law of the Gospel alone the other for that the leprosy was not then one simple malady or disease naturall amongst the Iewes as it is now but it was a punishment extraordinary Leuit. 14. miraculous and diuine For this cause it lay one while in a stone of the wall Leuit. 13. which was to be pulled out to take it away another while in a linnen or wollen garment By occasion whereof the iudgment of this plague apperteyned to them who were the ordinary interpreters of the causes of Gods Ire that is to say to the Priestes And in this ease say they all were subiect vnto them euen the Kinges themselues and bound after they had giuen sentence of the leprosy and declared them to be touched with it to separate themselues from company and from the gouernment of the people And of this they bring for example the story of King Ozias 2. Paralip 26. who was suddainly stroken with a mark in the forehead for hauing
notwithstanding what Azarias the high Priest said vnto him taken the Censar in hand to offer incense before the Altar the high Priest iudging it to be the leprosy did thrust him out of the Temple and from conuersing with the people by that meanes caused that the administration and gouernment of the Kingdome was taken from him and transferred to his sonne though among other nations the leprosy depriued none of conuersation with others nor of the gouernment of the Common wealth witnesse wherof is Naaman 4. Reg. 5. who was Generall of the warfarre of the King of Syria and Gouernour of his whole Kimgdome Finally to passe from thinges figured to things literal 1. Mach. 2. seq they allege the story of Matathias high Priest the head of the family house of the Machabees who seeing Antiochus who raigned in Iury to haue an intent to force the Iewes in their ancient customes and to ouerthrow their law and to persecute them by punishmentes torments death tooke armes gathered Gods dispersed seruantes together who effected wrought so much vnder his cōduct and his sonnes as they deliuered the people from the yoke of the Seleucides and tooke from them the Kingdome of Iury and by that meanes conserued the religion of the Iewes which without such a resolution fauoured by Gods visible assistance had els beene quite exterminated and abolished out of the land Those who hold the negatiue part come downe to the new Testament and cite for themselues this passage of S. Rom. 13. Paul where he writeth Let euery soule be subiect to higher Powers 1. Petr. 2. For he that resisteth the power resisteth the order instituted of God And this of S. Peter Be ye subiect whether it be to Kings as more excelling or to Rulers And by this they inferre that obedience to Kinges is of Right Diuine and therefore cannot admit dispensation by any authority neither spirituall nor temporall The maynteyners of the affirmatiue part answere to this that these passages do not in any sort touch the knot or difficulty of the controuersie For the question say they is not whether it be de Iure diuino to obey Kinges whilest they are Kinges or knowne for Kinges But the question is if it be de Iure diuino that he who hath beene once known acknowledged for King by the body of Estate may cease to be that is that he may do some thing by which he commeth to loose and forgo his rights to cease to be acknowledged for King Now these two questions be farre different For to take an example euen of him vnder whome S. Peter suffered martyrdome it was de Iure diuino to obey Nero whilest he was Emperour But it was not de Iure Diuino say they that he could not fall from his Imperiall rightes and be deposed and declared an enemy of the Common wealth It was de Iure diuino so long as Antiochus was by the Community of the Iewes acknowledged for King that the Iewes should obey him in matters that were not against God For he was no lesse temporall soueraigne of the Iewes then was the Emperour Claudius vnder whome S. Peter wrote But after that Mattathias the high Priest and the rest of the nation of the Iewes who liued conforme to their owne law had declared him a Tyrant and a violatour of the consciences of the people of God therefore no more their lawful Prince the particuler Iewes were then no longer bound to yeild him obedience And not only the defenders of the affirmatiue parte but euen M. Barcklay himselfe who is the principall propugner of the negatiue part vseth this distinction and sayth Controuers Menarch Mach. l. 4. cap. 16. There is not any case wherin the people can rise against a Prince ruling after an insolent manner so long as he continueth King For this commandement of God is alwaies against it Honour the King and he that resisteth power resisteth God And therfore the people cannot haue by any other means authority ouer him vnles he do something by which he by right ceaseth to be King And els where they adde 1. Petr. 2. what S. Peter writeth Rom. 13. Be subiect to euery creature whether it be to King as excelling or to Rulers as sent by him And S. Hebr. 13. Paul Let euery soule be subiect to higher powers And the same Apostle writeth els where in more expresse words thus Obey your Prelates and be ye subiect vnto them For they watch for your soules as those who ought to render accompt Hence it ariseth that it is as wel de iure diuino to yeild spirituall obedience to Prelates as it is to yeild temporall obedience to Princes And yet it followeth not that it is de iure diuino that the Prelates no not the Pope himselfe cannot fall from their rights of Prelacy nor that it is de Iure diuino to continue to obey them after they haue lost their right But the defendours of the negatiue part obiect that the Church which liued vnder the first Pagan Emperours neuer made vse of this right of absoluing in the spirituall Court the Christians from the Oath they had made vnto them And contrariwise that the first Christians preached not any other thing then obedience that they yeilded to the Emperours To this againe the maynteyners of the affirmatiue part answere many thinges For first they say that the Church not hauing absolued the Christians of the Oath of fidelity by thē made to the Pagan Emperours all the Christians in particuler were bound euen in conscience to obey them and pray to God for the safety and prosperity of their Empire And as touching the cause for which the Church did not take away the spirituall obligation the Christians had to obey them they bring three reasons The first is For that it had beene ouer great imprudency and folly to irritate and incense the Pagan Emperours by such a declaration in a time when they were the Lordes of the whole world for that such an act could haue beene not only vnprofitable but also absolutly domageable pernicious to the Christians against whom to incense the Emperour at such time as they had all the forces and the world within their handes was not to succour or promote religion but to precipitate ouerthrow it cleane For it is not sufficient to say that the Church is bound to doe some thing because she may lawfully do it vnlesse she also can doe it with prudence and profit The second reason is For that there is great difference betweene the Pagan Emperours vnder whome the Church began to lay her first foundations and to take the first rootes and the Princes who should now fall into Heresy or into Apostacy from Christian religion and should become either Arians or Mahometans or Pagans For the Pagan Emperours who then were had not yet at that tyme done homage to Christ nor yielded
time the Christian people hath by the conuersion of Emperours and Empires and by the reduction of Kinges and Kingdomes beene gayned and consecrated to Iesus Christ his temporal raigne it cannot any more be vsurped nor possessed by way of right by the enemies of Christs name And hence it is that whatsoeuer Conquest the Turke maketh of the Christians and whatsoeuer possession of long continuance it be he cannot by any tract of tyme gaine the least inch of prescription ouer Christian people who were formerly subiect to Christes temporall tribunall before any such Conquest by him made And to say the contrary were not only to imbrace and hod one of Luthers errours who hath taught that the warre that the Christians made against the Turkes was vniust and vnlawful not only to cōdemne the authority of so many Councells which haue decreed the expeditions of the holy Land for the ayding of the Christians of the East for the deliuering of them from the yoke and seruitude of the Infidells which had beene a thing vniust For the Accessary followeth the Principall and if the Christians of the East had beene lawfull subiectes to the Mahometan Princes they neither could haue reuolted from them nor rebelled against them But also euen to anathematize and accurse the memory of so many Christian Worthies and to affirme that so many Knightes Princes and Kinges among them our most glorious S. Lewis who dying in that warre as Champious maynteyners of Christes cause pretended to gayne the Crowne of Martyrdome dyed in a cause vniust and worthie of damnation But those who defend the negatiue part reply and say that in tyme of the first Arian Emperours Constantius and Valens before whome the Empire had already acknowledged Christ Iesus the Church vsed not such manner of proceeding nor acquited the Christians of their obedience On the contrary that the Bishop Hosius writing vnto the Emperour Constantius Apud Athana in epist desolit vit agen saith vnto him in these wordes As he who would spoyle you in your Empire should resist Gods ordenance So I feare that your vsurping the authority of the Church will make you culpable of a great cryme To this then the defendants of the affirmatiue part answere two thinges The one that the Custome of obliging Princes to make an expresse oath vnto God and to their people to liue and to die in the Christian and Catholique Religion had not yet place in the tymes of the first Heretique or Apostata Emperours was not brought in but afterwards namely then when they would stay and hinder Religion from falling into the same perills wherin it was vnder them The other that the Church vsed not this proceeding not for default of Right but for want of force and strength not for want of power in it to ordeyne it but through want of ability in the Christian people to execute it For it is not inough to bind the Church to declare Princes Infidells to haue lost their rightes to exhort their subiects to depart from their obedience that she may lawfully do it but it is further necessary that she be able to do it prudently and profitably And therefore S. D. Tho. 2.2 2. q. 10. art 10. Thomas after he had said Infidells by the desert of their Infidelity be worthy to loose their power ouer the faithfull addeth But this the Church sometimes doth and sometimes doth it not And if we should conclude that because the ancient Church hath not declared the first Arian Emperours excluded from the right they had from God of commaunding Catholiks that therefore she had not the authority to do it we then should conclude the very same that because it excommunicated them not it had no authority to do it For we find not that any either Pope or Councell did euer namely and personally excommunicate the Arian Emperours Not for that the Church cānot excōmunicate them as wel as other Ariās whome it excōmunicated from tyme to tyme but for that it deemed it a matter of imprudency and pernicious to Religion to exasperate them not hauing forces to represse and curbe them And as touching Hosius they āswere that he saith not that the Church cānot absolue in the spiritual Court the Catholiks from the obedience of Cōstantius if she should haue thought it profitable possible and necessary for them to attempt the deliuery of themselues from his tyranny Neither saith he that if the Emperour Constance being a Catholique Prince had not beene dead and that he had declared and proclaymed warre against his brother Constantius as he threatned he would do if he ceased not to persecute the Catholikes the Catholikes of the East would not haue ioyned taken part with him and would not haue belieued that the Church could haue dispensed with them about their oath of fidelity they had made to Constantius Theod. hist Eccles lib. 2. cap. 9. alibi But they say that Hosius speaketh of them who of their priuate authority and of their owne ambition raised themselues against Constantius to depriue him of the Empire and to become Tyrantes themselues Yet Lucifer Calaritanus maketh no difficulty Lucif Cola. rit lib. de non parcend in Deum delinq to call Constantius himselfe A Tyrant and the Antiochus of his age and protesteth that he is not bound towardes him to obserue the modesty of wordes which the Apostle commaundeth to be obserued to Princes and Magistrates for as much as the Apostle speaketh of Princes who haue not yet belieued in Christ and not of such Princes as haue reuolted from Christ I adde saith he that the Apostle speaketh of Princes and Magistrates which haue not yet belieued in the only Sonne of God whome we should by our humility and meeknes and long patience in aduersity and most great obedience in thinges reasonable prouoke to belieue in him But those who hold the negatiue part Socrat. hist Eccl. lib. 3. cap. 19. reply that the Christians might well haue deposed the Emperour Iulian the Apostata For when the Emperour Iouian who was elected after his death Theod. lib. 4. cap. 1. answered the soldiers of the Army Sozom. lib. 6. cap. 1. that he would not haue a commaund ouer men who were not Christians they replyed that they were Christians And to this againe they who maynteyne the affirmatiue part want not their answere For on the contrary they auerre that the Church could not do it prudently nor profitably For besides that the Christians were so deuided as the faction of the Arians alone ioyned with the Heathens without speaking of other Heretikes or of the cold Catholikes who as S. Gregory Nazianzene saith Greg. Naz. in Iul. orat serued the tyme and had not as he further addeth other law then the Emperours will held their foote vpon the Catholike Churches throate And besides when Iulian was Emperour he was so far from persecuting the Catholikes at the first as that in
the beginning of his Empire which continued but there yeares he called the Catholike Bishops home againe who had beene banished and sent into exile by Constantius his predecessour And in the end he had by fauours and his other carriage so gayned the souldiers of the Roman bands as they made almost all profession of Paganisme Whence it was that Iouian a Christian souldier being by them chosen after Iulian his death answered them that he would not commaund men who were not Christians For the answere which they made We are Christians was as much to say that all they made an outward profession of Paganisme to please Iulian yet in their heartes they continued still Christians By occasion whereof the feare of a greater ruine hauing hindered the Church from absoluing the Catholikes from the obligation of fidelity in behalfe of Iulian the Apostata they were still bound to do that which S. Austine sayth of them Aug in Psal 124. For the loue of the Emperour of Heauen they obeyed the Emperour of the Earth But some will say the Christians might well haue deposed the Emperour Valentinian for as much as they were the stronger in Millane when he would haue one of their Churches for the exercising of his Heresy therin It is true But to this the defendants of the affirmatiue part answere foure thinges The first that the memory of the Emperour Gratian his elder Brother and as it were Father and Tutor of the Emperour Valenâ—â—ar and slayne by Maximus the Tyrant and the most Catholike Prince and the greatest freind of S. Ambrose that euer was changed all the malice or euill that the Catholike people could haue had or carried towardes Valentinian into fauour and compassion and into a desire of assisting him for the reuenging of that murther and making away of his Brother The second is that Valentinian was yet so yong the sonne of so Catholike a Father as there was not any cause or ground to despaire of his conuersion which also followed within a while after and that with so great an Edification of the Church as S. Ambrose celebrateth him for one of the most Religious Emperours of his age The third that though in the beginning the people conteyned themselues within the simple boundes of petition gaue Valentinian to vnderstand We contend not O Emperour but we become Suppliantes vnto you yet when Valentinian had a meaning to proceed further the people held their owne resisted the Emperour and stood so resolute in the matter as he fearing a tumult and reuolt was constreyned to yeild vnto them Hence it is that they thought not that the commandment our Sauiour gaue to his disciples when they persecute in one Cittie to flie into another was an absolute perpetuall precept but rather a dispensation a permission accommodated to the tyme wherein the Christian people either were still vnder Pagan Emperours or had not yet the meanes to make resistance against persecutions by might and force The Fourth is that the Emperour Valentinian his owne souldiers thought not themselues so bound in way of fidelity vnto him as they belieued they could not be dispensed with when he should perseoute the Catholikes For when the tumult began to be hoat they caused it to be signified vnto him that if he would come vpon the Place he should come thither accompanied for as much as they would assist and help him if they sawe him conioyned and to take part with the Catholikes els they would put themselues in company with the troupes that held with Ambrose But the propugners of the negatiue part recurre to the Analogy of other practises of the Church say that for Heresie the owners are not depriued of their goodes and consequently much lesse Princes should be spoyled of their estates To this agayne the maynteyners of the affirmatiue part bring two answers The one is that in this our Realme Heretikes loose not their goodes and the cause is for that the execution of the lawes made against Heretikes is suspended for the conseruation of the publique peace and tranquillity But if there should creep forth some third sect in France should begin to growe and were not come to be so great and to make a notable part of the body of Estate as Arianisme or Nestorienisme it is questionles that the other two would â—udge them who should make such profession worthy to be depriued not only of their goodes but of their liues also For this is practised at Geneua where Caluin caused Seruetus to be burnt and it is the practise at this day in England where the Most Renowned moderne King of Great Britany punisheth the Arians with losse of goodes and of life The other answere is that there is a great difference between the power that owners haue ouer their goodes and that which Princes haue ouer their Estates For goodes are made for their Maisters and Princes contrariwise for their Estates neyther haue goods any soule nor can be compelled by force or by example or by perswasion of their Maisters to loose life euerlasting as subiectes may be by their Princes by meanes whereof the preiudice of the one doth not make any consequence for the other And if this question be no where found certainly decided neither by scripture nor by the decrees of the ancient Church nor by the Analogy of other Ecclesiasticall proceedinges how is it that lay persons will of their owne authority and without light and president of any generall Councell of any Oecumenicall Synod of any vniuersall Assembly of the Church yea against the greater part of the rest of the Church coÌ„uert this doctrine into an article of faith and make the Clergie to sweare it is conformable to Gods word cause them to abiure the other as a doctrine contrary to the word of God impious and detestable It is fiue and twenty yeares since those of your Order caried away by the tumult and trouble of the tyme laboured in the full Assemblie of Estates to establish one Fundamentall Law of Estate cleane contrary to that article of yours And now you propose another Fundamentall Law intituled of Estate and of Religion quite contrary to that former And will you not you but those by whose inspiration and aduise these clauses be crept into your Bill that the Laytie cause the Clergie to sweare it That the Laytie exact of the Clergie an Oath in matter of faith That the Laytie impose the Lawes of Religion vpon the men of the Church O reproach and shame Oscand all O gate set open to all sort of Heresies And shall our faith then be subiect to the varieties and inconstancy of the affections of the people who chaung euery fiue and twenty yeares And shall the flockes then be guides to their shepheardes Luc. 16. Hebr. 13. and Pastors And shall the children teach their Father And shall that then be frustrated that our Lord hath cryed aloud The scholler is not aboue the Maister And
Apostacy cannot be secured To this obiection the answere is short and easy For the Church intermedleth not her selfe with the absolution of the subiects but in the Ecclsiasticall Court and therin besides this payne and that of excommunication it imposeth not any other By meanes wherof it is so far from consenting that any attempt be made vpon the life of them whom it hath excommunicated as it abhorreth all fortes of killinges and murtheringes and especially such as be sudaine and vnexpected in regard of the losse of both body and soule which cōmonly go therin accompanied togeather And if they say that the Church ordayneth it not but that it is the cause that it is done for as much as the Common wealth conforming it selfe to the Churches iudgment and making the same decision in the tribunall politique if the Prince keepe on his former course declareth him a Tyrant and an enemy of the state and consequently subiecteth him to the power of the Lawes politique which permit the conspiring against Tyrantes for the making of them away and for killing of them we bring first this exception that there is great difference betweene Tyrantes of vsurpation whome the Lawes permit to extirminate by all manner of wayes and Tyrantes of administration and gouernement who are lawfully called to their Principality but gouerne it ill and we add that the Hereticall Princes who persecute the faith and their Catholike subiects be of the number of Tyrantes of administration and not of the number of Tyrants of vsurpation against whome alone it is permitted to conspire by clandestine and secret practises And if they further vrge and say that the politique Lawes permit conspiracies against the one and the other we answere that they are politique prophane and heathenish Laws as those of the ancient Romans or of the Grecians in former tymes and not Christian politique Lawes For the Christian politique Laws consider not only in their Princes the respect due vnto them for the good of temporall pollicy and the regard of the Maiesty of the Estate which they represent but they further consider in them the Image and vnction of God who hath called them to that Dignity in so much as in them who haue once had the lawfull vocation of Royalty what Tyrany soeuer they exercise the Christian politique Laws neuer passe so farre as to permit the vse of proscription against their persons or that any do attempt by clandestine or secret coniuration or conspiracy against their persons or liues but they carry the same respect to them that did Dauid to Saul notwithstanding he knew he were reiected 1. Reg. 26. cast of and reproued of God when he said Who shall extend his hand vpon the anoynted of our Lord and shal be innocent In so much as if the Christians be constrayned to defend their religion and their life against Hereticall and Apostata Princes from whose allegiance they were absolued the Christian politique Laws permit not more then what is permitted by military Lawes and the right of nations that is to say open warre and not clandestine and secret 〈…〉 and conspiracies For there alwaies remayneth in them a certain habitude to the dignity Royall as it were a marke of a politique character that discerneth them from simple particulers and when the obstacle and impediment is taken away that is when they come to amend themselues and to giue satisfactiō it restoreth them to the lawfull vse and exercise of their regality And therefore we see that in so many controuersies that the Popes haue had with tēporall Princes neuer any Pope went so far as to coūsell or to assent to the murthering of Princes Contrariwise if any calumniators laboured to impute it vnto them they haue euer iustified themselues euen with the horrour and abhomination of such actes remembring themselues of these wordes of S. Gregory when the Lombards made war vpon him If I would haue medled with the death of men Greg. lib. 7. epist 1. the Nation of the Lombards should at this day haue had neither King non gouernors But because I stand in feare of God I will not haue to moddle or deale with the death of any person And touching the other point of the last Inconuenience which is that this medly maketh the remedies that they would bring to the daunger of the Kinges to be not only vnprofitable but also pernicious and domageable there needeth not much eloquence to perswade it For if those who made the attempts vpon the liues of our Kinges were moued to those horrible parricides by a false imagination which they conceaued to wit that our Kings did something in preiudice of religion how much more would they haue thought they had a greater better pretext if they had beleeued that our Kings had abused their authority by the bringing in of schisme and the ouerthrowing of Religion and that they had seene themselues in schisme separated from the communion of the Sea Apostolique and cut off from the other partes of the Church And more then this who vnderstandeth not that there cannot happen any thing of more and greater daunger for the life and authority of Kinges then intestine and ciuill wars which schismes do ordinarily draw after them Moreouer who knoweth not that the cōtempt and indifferencie of Religion which must needes follow vpon schismes engendreth and occasioneth Impiety and Atheisme and taketh quite away all the respect that men are wont to carry to Kinges for the loue of God and for the reuerence of Religion which is the strongest corps or Court of Guard and the surest rampaire for the defence and security of their persons For when Religion is had in contempt men are not any longer withholden from attempting vpon the persons of Kinges then by force and by feare of the temporall paynes and therfore when they thinke they may do it without beeing punished or that they contemne and make no reckoning of the temporall paynes they haue no more bridle to conteyne them or to hold them in Finally who seeth not that there can be nothing worse for the safety of the persons and of the estate of Kinges then to stir vp and drawe vpon them by an ouerture of a new schisme and diuision from the Church Psal 75. the wrath of him who taketh away the spirits of Princes from out of the earth And heere Gentlemen I will not with you vse more reasons and argumentes but wil passe ouer to exhortations and intreaties and wil coniure you to remember that you are French men and that you are also Christians and Catholikes and that in treating touching the securing of Kinges you must not only cast your eies vpon the earth but also lift them vp to Heauen and you must not remedy their temporall safetie in causing them to forgo and loose the euerlasting nor prouide for your bodily part which is France by destroying and ruyning the spirituall parte which is the Church The Pope tolerateth and
he ought when he assayeth to bring in a Schisme and diuision in ours But shall it be said that what the King of Great Britany doth in England against the Catholikes doth serue vs for a law and an example to do the same in our Catholique Countrey Shall it be said that France that hath for so many ages beene honoured with the name of a most Christian Realme Hier. contra Vigil and in which S. Hierome said there were no monsters is brought to this that it permitteth not Catholike religion but with the same conditions and seruitudes that be imposed vpon it in England Shall it be said that Ecclesiasticall persons be not suffered to liue in Frāce but vnder the stipulations conditions vnder which it is permitted them to liue in England Shall it be said that the Catholikes of France and especially the Clergy enioying security and freedome shall be enforced to sweare and binde themselues to belieue the same thing which with groaning and sighes thereby to gayne some litle breath is done by Catholiques in England And if there be found in England Catholikes constant inough to suffer all sortes of punishments rather then to consent vnto it shall there not be found those in France to doe the same rather then to subscribe to sweare an article that putteth the raynes of the faith into the handes of the Laytie and bringeth a diuision and Schisme into the Church Yes certainly Gentlemen such will be found in France And all we who are Bishops will rather go to martyrdome then giue our consentes to the deuiding of Christes body Apud Euseb Eccl. hist lib. 6. cap. 37. remembring this saying of S. Dionysius of Alexandria That the martyrdomes that men suffer for the hindring of the Churches diuision be no lesse glorious then be those that men endure for absteyning from sacrifising to Idolls But we are not God be thanked vnder a King who maketh martyrs he leaueth the souls of his subiectes free and if he doth it to those of his Subiectes that be strayed from the Church how much more will he do it to those soules of his Catholike subiects we liue the one and the other vnder the shadow of the Edictes of peace in liberty of conscience And wherefore then should we be constreyned to sweare that which we forbeare to make others to sweare There is not one only Synod of Ministers who would haue subscribed to that article which they would bind vs to sweare There is not one Consistory of others but beleeueth that they are discharged of their Oath of fidelity towardes Catholike Princes when they shal be forced by them in their consciences Of this come those modificatiōs that they haue so oft in their mouth Prouided that the King forceth vs not in our conscience Of this come these exceptions in their profession of faith So the Soueraigne Empire of God abide in his owne integrity Of this came the taking of arms so many times against the Kings when they would take from thē the liberty of religiō Of this came their insurrections and rebellions both in Flanders against the King of Spayne Sweden against the Catholike King of Polonia whome they spoiled of the Realme of Sweden his lawfull inheritance and therin established Duke Charles a Protestant Neither yet do they restrayne these exceptions to the only case of religion of conscience but they further extend them to secular matters The writinges of Buchanan Bruse and infinite others giue testimony who will that if the Kinges fayle in temporall conuentions and accord which they haue made with their subiects their subiectes be free to reuolt from them Not considering that there is great difference as we haue already declared betweene faylinge in a simple accord made by Oath and destroying the Oath by the which the accord was made For when a Prince doth of frayltie or of humane passion commit some iniustice he doth indeed against the Oath he hath made to his people to do them iustice yet he doth not thereby destroy his Oath But if he make a contrary Oath that is to say insteed of what he hath publiquely and solemnly sworne to his people which was to do them iustice to wit as far as humaine frailty will permit he should sweare and bind himselfe by another publique and solemne Oath that he would neuer render them iustice but rather sweare that he will minister nothing but iniustice he should then destroy his Oath renounce his owne Royaltie in renouncing by a contrary Oath the clauses and conditions of his former oath for which and by meanes and occasiō wherof his Royalty was instituted And therefore Barckley the Achilles of the doctrine of your Article hath had most iust cause to reprehend and find fault with the aforesaid authours but in reprehending them he hath reserued an exception of two cases which make much more to the preiudice of Kinges then do the Churches censures from which he would exempt them For he affirmeth expresly that in two cases the people may shake off the yoke of Kinges Guil. Barcl lib. 4. cont Monarchomach c. 16. arme themselues against them Behold his wordes What then Can there not occurre any cases in which the people may rise take armes by their owne authority and assaile a King insolently raigning None indeed so long as he contynueth King For this commaundement of God contradicteth it alwaies Honour the King c. who resisteth power risisteth God The people then addeth he cannot haue by any other meanes power ouer him but when he doth some thing by which he ceaseth of right to be King For then for as much as he spoyleth and depriueth himself of his principality and maketh himself a priuate person the people remayneth free and becommeth superiour And these two cases as he saith be when a Prince laboureth and hath intention to exterminate and ouerthrow the Kingdome common wealth as Nero and Caligula did or when he will make his Kingdome feudatary to another Ibidem I finde saith he two cases in which a King by fact maketh himself of a King no King and depriueth himself of his royall dignity and of power ouer his subiectes The one is if he goeth about to exterminate the Realme Common wealth that is to say if he hath a designe and intention to destroy the Realme as it is recorded of Nero that he had a deliberation to exterminate the Senate and the people of Rome c. And the other if the King hath a wil to put himselfe vnder the clientele and protection of some other But who seeth not that this is a thing tooto vnworthie for a Christiā to admit these exceptions in case of the destruction of a Cōmon wealth and not in case of the destruction of Religion and otherwise the iudgment which the people may make of the one is much more perilous to Princes thē that which the vniuersall Church may forme of the other And