out a Postern-Gate After his Speech was ended the King produced the Original Letter which he intercepted as it was going to the French King and ordered it to be read (F) Impartial Collections p. 309 c. As to the later Insurrections in Scotland I will only observel That besides the Information of some Romish Priests being sent thither to prepare them for a Rebellion their very Declaration shews they were acted by a Popish Spirit for the Act of Supremacy was condemned and the Kings Authority in Ecclesiastical Affairs call'd an Vsurping Power But to return So true were the Romish Emissaries to their good Old Cause that having set the factious Party to work in Scotland they took advantage from that conjuncture to stir up a National Rebellion and barbarous Massacre in Ireland of which I have spoken already I cannot pass over the Conspiracy against the King in the Year 1640 because it gives some further light into the Designs of Cardinal Richilieu and the Jesuites Whilst his Majesty resided at York he was acquainted by the Archbishop of Canterbury with the Information he had received from Sir W. Boswel his Majesty's Ambassadour at the Hague By the discovery of this Plot it is evident that the Jesuitical Party exasperated the King and his Subjects one against another labouring to incense his Majesty against them as conspiring against his Crown and Government and them against their Soveraign as aiming at the subversion of their Laws Liberties and Religion That they stirred up the Scots to rebel hindred all accommodation between the King and them and endeavoured to bring his Majesty under a necessity of craving the Assistance of the Papists which he should neither obtain without yielding to their own terms nor refuse without the hazard of his life That for the compassing of their Ends Cardinal Barbarino was engaged fifty Scotch Jesuites were maintain'd in London Cuneus in quality of the Popes Legate Chamberlain Chaplain and Almoner to Cardinal Richlieu Sir T. Matthew a Jesuited Priest Captain Read a Secular Jesuite and that all the Papists in England did contribute to the carrying on the design Here was a Plot against the King and Kingdom and Protestant Religion of which he that desires a full account may consult Mr. H. Lestrange and Mr. Sanderson in their Histories Prinn's Romes Master-piece and others of later time What great numbers of Priests Jesuites and other Romish Agents afterwards flocked into England what various shapes they assumed how they insinuated into the Councils and Armies of the Kings Enemies Mr. Gatford Prinn Dr. du Moulin and others informs us to whom I refer the Reader And even some of the Members in the Long Parliament were sensible how active our Enemies of Rome had been in raising and fomenting the War as we learn from a late Writer who sate in that Assembly I will barely relate what he saith without making any Collections or Inferences from his words The Parliament Vote That which was done at York for a Guard to the King to be a preparation for War against the Parliament a breach of the Trust reposed in him by his People contrary to his Oath and tending to the dissolution of his Government and all such as serve him there to be Traytors to the Laws of the Kingdom Upon the debate for raising an Army one of the Members declared his sense Our Enemies of the Popish Church have left no Evil Arts unessayed to bring us to our present posture and will yet leave none unattempted to make our breaches wider well knowing that nothing will more advance their Empire than our Divisions Our Misery whom they account Hereticks is their Joy and our Distractions will be their Glory and all Evil arts and ways to bring Calamities upon us they will esteem Meritorious (A) Memorials of the English Affairs ad An. 1642. Sanderus de Schism Angl. 1585 p. 188. Quo Haereticorum ut fit bello Catholici indies plures constantioresque in fide fiunt Campanella de Mon. Misp Amst 1641. p. 204. Jam verò ad enervandos Anglos nihil tam conducit quam dissensio discordia inter illos excitata perpetuóque nutrita quod citò occasiones meliores suppeditabit P. 207. Verum ab alia parte instiget primores Comitiorum aut Parliamenti ut Angliam in formam reipublicae reducant Nor did the design of Cardinal Richlieu die with him it was vigorously pursued by Mazarine to whom he left his Instructions at his death and what an intimate Correspondence was maintain'd between him and the Grandees of Derby House we are told by the Author of the History of Independency (B) Hist of Indep p. 114 115. His words are these To negotiate which the detaining of the Prince in France the Grandees of Derby House and the Army have an Agent lying Lieger with Cardinal Mazarine the great French Instrument of State who is so well supplied with Money and so open handed that it hath been heard from Mazarines own Mouth That all the Money the Queen and Prince have cost the Crown of France hath come out of the Parliaments Purse with a good advantage It is likewise said Mazarine hath an Agent here to drive on the Interests of France in England To all which we may add That the King having assented in the Isle of Wight to pass five strict Bills against Popery the Jesuites in France at a General Meeting there resolved to bring him to Justice by the power of their Friends in the Army And this resolution of the Fathers was agreeable to the sense of the Roman Conclave For the Question being sent to Rome from the whole Party of Jesuites in England the year before the Kings death whether considering the present posture of Affairs it was lawful for the Catholicks to work a change in the Government by making away the King whom there was no hope to turn from his Heresie It was answered affirmatively (C) Answer to Philanax Anglicus p. 59 65. To what I have said upon this Argument I will add these two Propositions 1. That the grounds on which the War against the King was maintain'd so far as it was maintained under a colour of Religion were laid by the prevailing Faction of the Roman Church and the most dreadful effects of Fanaticism which were the consequents of it may be justified by their Principles And here I could make it evident That the same Maxims of Political Divinity the same Arguments and many times the same Phrases and Expressions are to be found in the heads of both Factions I know it is disputed whether the Ring-leaders of Sedition amongst us poysoned the Jesuites or the Jesuites them but I do not envy the Bishops of Rome the honour of having first poysoned them both with Antimonarchical Doctrines If Milton the great Oracle of one of the Factions had owned himself to be a Papist there had been no reason to wonder at the Impiety of his Doctrines which he
by the Word of God he may the Supream Government in all causes Ecclesiastical and Civil In those Causes you are not Subject to him for doth not the Pope claim the Supremacy in all Ecclesiastical and even in Temporal Causes at least in ordine ad Spiritualia Let the Rhemists complain that the Protestants extol only the Secular Power We acknowledge the King to be Supream Governour in all Causes and over all Persons within his Majesties Dominions for this is all that we attribute to the Secular Power and 't is the Glory of our Church to have taught and suffered for this Doctrine But for the Loyalty of the Rhemish Divines I refer the Reader to some of their Annotations as they are cited in the Margent (M) The Rhemish Testament was see forth by that Traiterous Seminary of English Papists and printed at Rhemes An. 1582. See the former part of their Annotations on ver 4. of this 13th Chapter to the Romans where they complain That now all is given to the Secular Power and nothing to the Spiritual which expresly is ordained by Christ and the Holy Ghost The exemption of the Clergy is asserted Annot. on S. Matth. 17.26 The Popes Infallibility Annot. on S. Luke 22.31 And in the Margent they say Popes may err personally not judicially or definitively The Popes Supremacy Annot. on S. John 21.17 And on 1 Pet. 2.12 They say Although all Power be of God and Kings Rule by him yet this is no otherwise than by his ordinary Concurrence and Providence He that desires to see a true Character of the English Seminaries may consult a Treatise penn'd by the direction of one of the greatest Statesmen and wisest men of his Age under this Title The Execution of Justice in England c. Reprinted An. 1675. My Lords 4th Testimony was taken from the Censure of the Doctors of the Famous Faculty of Sorbon against a Book of Sanctarellus particularly against the 30th and 31th Chapters In those two Chapters these Propositions are contained That the Pope can punish Kings and Princes with Temporal Penalties and depose and deprive them of their Kingdoms for the Crime of Haeresis and free their Subjects from their Obedience and that is hath been always the Custom in the Church and for other Causes also as for Faults if it be Expedient if the Princes be Negligent for the insufficiency and unprofitableness of their Persons Likewise That the Pope hath Right and Power over Spirituals and all Temporals also and that both the Powers Temporal and Spiritual are in him by Divine Right That it was to be believed that Power was granted to the Church and its Chief Pastors to punish with Temporal Penalties Princes the Transgressours of Divine and Humane Laws especially if the Crime be Haeresie Likewise that the Apostles were subject to Secular Princes de facto non de jure by Fact not by Right Moreover that as soon as the Pope is installed all Princes begin to be subject to him Lastly That he expounded the Words of Christ Whatsoever ye shall bind upon Earth c. to be understood not only of the Spiritual but of the Temporal Power c. The Faculty after mature deliberation disapproved and condemned the Doctrine contained in these Propositions and other like Expressions in the same Chapters as new false erroneous and contrary to the Word of God Given in the Sorbon Apr. 4. 1626. In Answer to all which I have many things to say but that I may not exceed my intended brevity I shall reduce them to the following Heads 1. That this Book of Sanctarellus was revised and approved by persons of greater Authority in the Roman Church than the Divines of Sorbon (N) Alegambe Bibl. script soc Jes in the life of Sanctarellus gives us this Character of him Vir moribus apprimé religiosis modestissima mansuetudine The Title of the Book is A. Sanctarelli soc Jes Tract de Haeres c. Ed. Romae 1625. In the License of the Master of the Sacred-Palace are these words In eo omnia religioni consona atque utilia adinvenerim In another of the Licenses In quo nihil reperi quod Sanctae Fidei aut bonis moribus adversetur It was printed at Rome permissu Superiorum approved by three Divines of the Society licensed by the General of the Order by the Master of the Sacred Palace and several other Divines By which we see what kind of Divinity was then in request at Rome But it may be the Divines of the Roman Church have one Conscience at Rome and another at Paris as was once said of the Jesuites 2. Since the breaking out of the Popish Plot in England when so many of that Religion were in danger of their Lives the Pope thought fit to condemn 65 Propositions as I shewed before but did not speak one word against the Power of deposing Princes though it was asserted in the same Divines and Casuists with the 65 Propositions And whether the Judgment of his Holiness or of the Divines of Sorbon be of greater value with Roman Catholiques let all men judge 3. Why do the Church and Court of Rome suffer an hundred as bad Books as this of Sanctarellus in which the same or worse Propositions are maintained to pass not only without Censure but with publique Anthority and Approbation 4. There are no Propositions in the places censured by the Sorbonists which he might not justifie by the Principles of the Bishops of Rome the most correct Editions of the Canon Law and in the Sentence of Excommunication and Deprivation of Frederick the Emperor with the Approbation of a General Council the Pope expounds the words of Christ as Sancturellus since did not only of the Spiritual but of the Temporal Power also (O) In the General Council of Lyons Concil tom 28. ut supra Innocent the 4th with the consent of the Council denounces Sentence of Deprivation against Frederick the Emperor Nobisque in B. Petri Apostoli persona sit dictum quodcunque ligaveris c. S. Marth 16. Also M. Paris ad An. 1245. p. 672. 5. What hath Sanctarellus said more than the Doctors of the Famous Faculty of Sorbon did both before and since the Publishing of his Book I know that Ancient College of Sorbon did for many years keep up a great reputation and was esteemed the Bulwark of Regal Authority but ever since the rise of the Jesuites many of their Determinations have been carried by Interest and Faction An. 1589 a little before the Murder of Henry the third of France the People of that Kingdom proposed these two queries to the Divines of Sorbon 1. Whether the People of France may not be discharged and set free from their Oaths of Allegiance made to Henry the Third 2. Whether they may not with a safe Conscience Arm and Vnite themselves collect and raise Money for the Defence and Preservation of the Roman Catholiques in that Realm against the wicked
Communion may have a great and just Sense of their own Honour and that Duty which they owe to their King and Country They may be better Men and better Subjects than the Principles of their Church and Religion do either incline or allow them to be This may come to pass any of these three ways 1. When they do not understand the Sense of the Roman Church or the natural tendency of the Principles of their Religion for the Confessors and Guides of Souls which have the Faith and Consciences of the Laity in their keeping do not think fit at all times and in all places to instruct their Disciples in such Doctrines 2. When their natural Tempers and Dispositions are stronger than the Principles of their Church and Religion For I do not think the worst Religion in the World can root out all common Reason and natural Conscience all good Nature and Humanity and make all men Bloody and Disloyal whom Nature hath made Kind and Peaceable Some men have more of the Generosity of the English Man than of the Treachery of the Papist the very names of Murder and Treason strike a kind of Horror into the minds of men and natural Conscience if it be not bribed or biassed by a bad Religion or a vicious Life will startle at the thoughts of Assassinations and Rebellions the violation of Oaths and Contracts 3. When they have not much Zeal for Religion For if men be cool and indifferent in that Religion which they profess they may be over-ballanced with the Love of their King and Country And yet after all no man knows just how much ignorance good-nature or indifferency in Religion will serve to ballance the Fury of a misguided Zeal II. I come to consider the Principles and Practices of the Roman Catholiques in the time of the late Rebellion And though I would not lessen the Services which some persons of that Religion have done to his Majesty or Royal Father of Blessed Memory yet I must say there are many things which overthrow all the Pretences of Loyalty to the Crown that are made by the main Body of Roman Catholiques That this is no uncharitable Surmise will appear if we look back as far as the Irish Rebellion wherein the Roman Catholiques of that Kingdom were almost universally engaged I know the Seditious Practices of such as called themselves Protestants were by so much the more inexcusable by how much Protestant Principles are more inconsistent with Religion than these of the Papists But the Tumults in Scotland were now in a great measure suppressed and the King had by some Acts of Grace and Additions of Honour to the Malecontents of that Kingdom quieted if not obliged his Enemies when he was surprized with the news of a desperate Rebellion and barbarous Massacre of many thousand Protestants in Ireland And as his Majesties Affairs were hereby put into a much worse condition than before so the Parliament in England became more unreasonable in their Demands more resolute in their Answers than otherwise they either would or durst have been For the King conjures them by all that is or can be dear to them or him to take into consideration the case of his distressed Protestant Subjects but to use his Majesties own Words The Distractions and Jealousies here in England made most men rather intent to their own Safety or Designs they were driving than to the Relief of those who were every day inhumanely butcher'd in Ireland (A) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 printed 1649. p. 92. The Parliament in England pass a Vote That the Kingdom be forthwith put into a posture of Defence and soon after another That the Ordinance for the Defence of the Kingdom is not prejudicial to the Oath of Allegiance They Vote That what was done at York for a Guard to the King was a Preparation for War against the Parliament a breach of the Trust reposed in him by his People c. (B) Memorials of the English Affairs printed 1682. ad an 1641 1642 But to return to Ireland Here was a Plot and Design against the Crown and Government of which his Majesty expressed the greatest Abhorrence and Detestation and offer'd to go in Person to reduce the Rebels to Obedience A Plot in which the main Body of the Papists and no others were actually concerned (C) In the Preamble to the Bill of Settlement in Ireland an 1662. it is called An Unnatural Insurrection against his Majesties Royal Father his Crown and Dignity which first broke out Octob. 23.1641 and afterwards spreading it self over the whole Kingdom it became a formed and almost National Rebellion of the Irish Papists And in an Act of Parliament for keeping the 23d of October as an Anniversary Thanksgiving It is said That many malignant and rebellious Papists and Jesuits Seminary Priests and other Superstitious Orders of the Popish pretended Clergy most disloyally treacherously and wickedly conspired to surprize the Castle and City of Dublin and all other Cities and Fortifications of that Realm and that all Protestants and English throughout the whole Kingdom which would not joyn with them should be cut off c. See the late History of the Irish Rebellion in Folio And F. Walsh in the Dedication of his History of the Irish Remonstrance tells us of an Universal Rebellion or Insurrection of all the Catholiques in Ireland a very few excepted against his Majesties Laws Authority and Deputies of that Kingdom An. 1641. Of their Confederacy formed and a War continued by them for many years after of two several Peaces the first 1646. the second 1648. with his Majesties Lord Lieutenant in that Interim scandalously violated by the prevailing party among them Yea to that prodigious height did the Insolence of the rebellious Faction arise that at length they banished his Majesties Lieutenant and took the Royal Authority upon themselves But it may be since his Majesties happy Restauration they have repented of their former Wickedness Repented of a Rebellion that was Blessed and Sanctified by the Pope A Catholique Army for so they stiled themselves repent of fighting for the Catholique Cause They were so far from repenting that the Popish Clergy of that Kingdom assembled in a National Synod Ann. 1666. refused to petition the King for Pardon though there were at least thirty then present and above five hundred more of them alive which were obnoxious to the Laws for their carriage during the late Wars of the Roman Catholique Confederates (D) History of the Irish Remonstrance p. 667 671 672. Indeed since his Majesties Return some of the Irish Clergy and Laity agreed to present such a Remonstrance to his Majesty as might seem to give him some tolerable security of their Loyalty for the future But the whole number of Ecclesiastical Subscribers was only Sixty nine the Opposers being two thousand or thereabouts besides all others in the Irish Colleges and Seminaries abroad And of these few Subscribers some fell off immediately
and yet after he had been some weeks at Constance the poor Man is contrary to his safe Conduct cast into Prison This being done in the Emperours absence he comes to the Council argues the case with them upon which they pass that In famous Decree contained in the 19th Session from which it is plain that in the case of Heresie no Prince is bound to keep Faith with any persons whatsoever And this Act of the Council so fully satisfied the Emperours Conscience that he looked on himself as discharged from his obligation and not only concurred in the Sentence against the Prisoner but gave order for his Execution J. of Prague was trepann'd by a safe Conduct granted by that Council and being unacquainted with their Arts and Treachery ventures to Conftance where understanding the Jugglings of his Adversaries he thought to shift for himself by flight but being taken was burnt to death Again The Council of Constance Excommunicates and deprives of all Secular honour and dignity all that should presume to hinder Sigismund from meeting with the King of Arragon whether they be Kings Dukes Princes c. as all men know which have been conversant in the Acts of that Council But I come to the Decree produced by his Lordship a Decree which some Roman Catholicks of these Kingdoms know how to make their advantage of when others of greater Authority and Eminency in the Roman Church that dare speak their minds freely acquaint us with the true Catholick meaning of it Tell them of the Council of Constance It meddles not saith one (D) Suartz def fid Cath. l. 6. c. 4. p. 417. with Heretical Princes Excommunicated and Deposed by the Pope or by the Commonwealth and States of the Kingdom A Lawful King ruling in a Tyrannical manner may be punished only by publick Authority saith a Second (E) Greg. de Valentia Tom. 3. disp 5. qu. 8. punct 3. In his resolution of this Question utrùm liceat privato cuilibet civi occidere Tyrannum that is by the Commonwealth as himself expounds it This Decree extends not to Tyrants which conspire against the Publick good or against the Roman Catholick Religion saith a Third (F) Verone Apol. par 2. c. 13. A Commonwealth that is oppressed by a Prince ruling Tyrannically may and ought to have recourse to a Superiour Prince as the Pope of Emperour for the punishment of him but if this remedy cannot be had without danger the Commonwealth may by her own Power pass Judgment on such a Prince and if he be incorrigible either depose him or put him to death saith a Fourth (G) Dom. Bannes Scholast Comment Tom. 4. p. 174. Ed. 1614. qu. 64. Act. 3. Another wrote a Book in the time of the French League (H) I mean Bouchier the French Jesuite in that Treasonable Book which I quoted before in the compiling whereof as he tells us in the Preface he was assisted by many Lawyers and Divines In this Book he asserts the lawfulness of putting a King to death after he is condemned by Publick Authority Lastly our Country-man Parsons justifies the Doctrine of Bouchier and because Mr. Morton is charged with misrepresenting his sense let us take Parson's Account of Bouchier's meaning (I) Parsons in his quiet and sober reckoning c. p. 318 319 321. He holdeth That a Private man may not kill a Tyrant which is not first judged and declared to be a Publick Enemy by the Commonwealth and he proveth the same by the Decree of the Council of Constance But Bouchier grants saith Mr. Morton That when the Commonwealth hath condemned and declared any Tyrant for a publick Enemy he may be slain by a private Man Whereunto I Answer That then he is no Private man for that he doth it by the publick Authority of the Commonwealth as doth the Executioner that cutteth off a Noble-mans Head by Order and Authority of the Publick Magistrate These are not the Opinions of private Doctors their Books are Licensed according to the Order of the Roman Church and approved by Divines of great Learning and Authority they prove the Orthodoxy of their Doctrine from this very Decree of the Council of Constance which is now alledged as an Argument of Roman Catholick Loyalty And are not Kings and Princes wonderfully beholden to this Council They must be put to death with a little more solemnity than other Mortals and fall by the Sentence of a Papal Consistory or of an High Court of Justice 'T is not lawful for a common Parricide to Stab or Pistol the Lord 's Anointed of his own head No but his Holiness may hire Souldiers against him with Mony or with Indulgences He may invade his Country with his own Armies or with the Forces of Catholick Princes he may stir up a Rebellion within his Dominions or Authorize his own standing Army of Jesuites Monks and Friars to kill him with the approved Catholick Weapons with Pistol or Poyson Lastly the Common-wealth by its own or the Popes Authority may try and pass sentence upon him These things considered I cannot but conclude that it was a poor Security which the Irish Remonstrants offered to his Majesty since his Restauration by declaring against the killing of Kings by any private Subjects (L) We do hold it impious and against the Word of God to maintain That any private Subject may kill or murder the Anointed of God his Prince though of a different Belief and Religion from his And we abhor and derest the practise thereof as damnable and wicked Irish Remonstrance in F. Walsh his History p. 8. 3. P. 45. My Lords third Testimony was taken from the Annotations upon Rom. 13. in the English Catholick Edition of the New Testament set forth by the Colledge of Divines at Rhemes The words are these upon the Text He that resisteth c. ver 2. Whosoever resisteth or obeyeth not his lawful Superior in those Causes wherein he is subject to him resisteth Gods Appointment and sinneth deadly and is worthy to be punished both in this World by his Superiour and by God in the next life for in Temporal Government and Causes the Christians were bound in Conscience to obey even the Heathen Emperours And upon v. 4. some Protestants of our time care neither for the one the Prince nor for the other the Prelate though they extol only Secular Power when it maketh for them The Catholicks only most humbly obey both according to Gods Ordinance the one in Temporal Causes and the other in Spiritual In the Rhemish Testament it is the not some Protestants of our time c. A mighty Testimony of Roman Catholique Loyalty You are not to resist your Lawful Superior But if a Prince be lawfully deposed then he is no longer your Lawful Superior If you be Clergymen then he is none of your Soveraign and you are none of his Subjects In those Causes wherein you are Subject to him But what if a King challenge as
words Hoc est Corpus meum are in their Bibles If mens Senses are not to be trusted in plain sensible Matters he will hardly prove any of these things but if they are then it is evident that such Principles are asserted in some of their General Councils What follows p. 47. shall be considered afterwards P. 47 48. Paragraph 1. Of the Catholique Faith and Church in General Which Paragraph doth not fall within the compass of my present Design Paragraph 2. Of Spiritual and Temporal Authority P. 48 c. General Councils which are the Church of God Representative have no Commission from Christ to frame new matters of Faith but only to explain and ascertain unto us what anciently was and is received and retained as of Faith in the Church upon arising Debates and Controversies about them The definitions of which General Councils in matters of Faith only and proposed as such oblige under pain of Heresie all the Faithful to a submission of Judgment It is no Article of Faith to believe that General Councils cannot err either in matters of Fact or Discipline c. Hence it is deduced If a General Council much less a Papal Consistory should undertake to depose a King and absolve his Subjects from their Allegiance no Catholique as Catholick is bound to submit to such a Decree Hence also it followeth The Subjects of the King of England lawfully may without the least breach of any Catholick Principle renounce even upon Oath the Doctrine of Deposing Kings Excommunicate for Heresie c. General Councils are the Church of God Representative And hath the Church of God diffusive intrusted them with a Power of concluding in some things and not in others or of obliging particular persons so far and no further Where hath the Church of Rome warranted any such distinction as this Author makes between matters of Faith and Practise or confined the whole Power of General Councils to matters of Faith only Lastly suppose there were as indeed there is not some ground for such a distinction yet why must Transubstantiation be a matter of Faith and the deposing of Princes be none when both came out of the same Forge the General Council of Lateran How doth it appear that the Council did not propose this as matter of Faith as well as the other But I will appeal to the General Council of Constance both because the Author of the Controversial Letters urges a Decree of that Council to prove That the Church of Rome teaches the Duty to Princes to be a direct point of Faith (B) Controvers Let. Ed. 2. 1674. p. 36. And because we are told That all Roman Catholiques are bound to submit to the Decrees of the Council of Constance (C) Staffords Memoirs p. 44. And doth not this Council challenge a Power immediately from Christ which all persons of whatever state and dignity are bound to obey both in things pertaining to Faith and the extirpation of Schism and the General Reformation of the Church in the Head and Members (D) Concil Const Concil tom 29. p. 257. Ipsa Synodus in spiritu Sancto congregata legitimé Generale Concilium faciens Ecclesiam Catholicam militantem repraesentans potestatem a Christo immediaté habet cui quilibet cujuscunque status vel dignitatis etiamsi papalis existat obedire tenetur in his quae pertinent ad fidem extirpationem dicti Schismatis Reformationem generalem Ecclesiae dei in Capite Membris Did not this Council define against an Error in Practise 't is their own expression challenge a Power of dispensing with the Institution of Christ and even of Excommunicating all such Presbyters as should presume to obey his Institution rather than their Decree (E) Conc. Const Sess 13. p. 372 373. Hot Generale Concilium declarat decernit definit contra hune errorem viz. Of the peoples receiving the Sacrament in both kinds and after Supper quod licet Christus post coenam instituerit suis discipulis adminiftraverit sub utraque specie panis vini boc venerabile sacramentum tament hoc non obstante c. praecipit sub poena Excommunicationis quod nullus Presbyter communicet populum sub utraque specie panis vini And now to bring this whole matter to a short Issue By whatever Arguments this Author can prove that Roman Catholicks as such are bound to receive the Sacrament in one kind only by the same it may be proved 1. That if a General Council or a Papal Consistory by Authority derived from a General Council should depose a King and absolve his Subjects from their Allegiance all Roman Catholiques as such are bound to submit to such a Decree 2. That the Subjects of the King of England may not without breach of a Roman Catholique Principle renounce the Doctrine of deposing Kings Excommunicated for Heresie I confess there is a Roman Catholique Principle of Aequivocation and Mental Reservation by the benefit of which they may renounce the deposing of Kings but so they may the receiving the Sacrament in one kind also P. 49. Nor do Catholiques as Catholiques beleive that the Pope hath any direct or indirect Authority over the Temporal Power and Jurisdiction of Princes c. This he asserts with his usual considence gives Bellarmine the lie and out-faces all the Arguments and Authorities of the Cardinal and others without offering at the least proof of his Position It is an Article of Catholick Faith that no Power on Earth can license men to lie to forswear and perjure themselves c. on pretence of promoting the Catholick Cause or Religion But let him prove if he will prove any thing to the purpose That it is an Article of Roman Catholick Faith to believe Either that there are no Venial Sins such as do not put a man out of the Favour of God and hazard his Salvation Or that an Officious Lie is a Mortal Sin in their account Or that that which otherwise would be a Lie or Perjury may not in some cases be excused by a Mental Reservation or Equivocation The Doctrine of Equivocation however wrong fully imposed on the Catholick Religion is neither taught nor approved by the Church as any part of her Belief But if this be not a part of the Practical Divinity of the Roman Church either she hath none at all or else hath not let the World know where to find it Indeed it is not taught in their General Councils for they do not use to descend to particular Rules of Conscience and Practise but it is taught by the generality of those Divines whom the Church hath entrusted with the Souls of men Are either the Books censured or the Authors punished Are not the Books published with Approbation and those Authors most countenanced which maintain this Doctrine Hath the Church given any Caution or made any Declaration against it And if after all this the Church doth not approve of it what must
the Observation of that Canon (P) Concil Constant Sess 39. p. 577. tom 29. Et Conciliis Generalibus provisione erga futura schismata quem terminum lice at summo Pontifici de fratrum suorum S. R. Ecclesiae Cardinalium Consilio ob emergentes forté casus abbreviare sed nullatenús prorogetur but how easily the Court of Rome hath eluded the force of their Decree all the World knows 2. Suppose a General Council should be called yet according to present Constitution of the Roman Church it cannot act in opposition to the Court of Rome For not to insist on the great Numbers of Monks and Friars of Canonists and such like Creatures and Vassals of the Papacy with which their Councils are filled all the Bishops who have Decisive Votes in Councils are under an Oath of as absolute Allegiance to the Pope as any Subject in Christendom is to his Natural Prince For proof hereof I appeal both to the Roman Pontifical where the Oath is to be seen (Q) Pontif. Rom. p. 59 60. and to F. Walsh himself to whom the Catholicks of the Church of Rome refer us (R) F. walsh in the Dedication of his History p. 19. All the Bishops bind themselves at their Consecration Liege-men to his Holiness by the strictest Oath that could be sworn or penn'd especially being the Pope himself is the only Interpreter thereof See also the History part 1. p. 513. In this Oath among other things they swear to defend the Roman Papacy and the Regalities of St. Peter to observe with all their might the Rules of the Holy Fathers the Apostolical Decrees and Commands by which are undoubtedly meant the Popes Canons and Commands They are bound by this Oath to observe at least all the Canons that are already set forth and enjoyned and are not many of those Canons destructive of the Rights of Princes Is there the least notice taken in this Oath of the Obedience due to them And though the Papal Usurpations have been for some Ages lamented and complained of by the better part of the Christian World yet the Church of Rome hath not used any effectual means to prevent them as she was bound both in Prudence and Conscience to do if she had no mind to let the Pope keep up their Pretensions to them Besides when it was desired that the Pope would dispence with this Oath at the Council of Trent and leave the Bishops to the freedom of their Consciences the Motion was rejected as not only F. Paul but Cardinal Pallavizine himself acknowledges (S) Pallavi Hist. Cone Trid. Tom. 2. p. 366.367 Ed. 1670. 3. If any Decrees of General Councils should chance to prove prejudicial to the Papacy they shall signifie no more than his Holiness please For if the Pope think fit to dispense with them or to interpret them according to his own mind who can help it Was not the Order of the Jesuites set up against a Decree of one of their General Councils (T) Bullar Cherub tom 1 p. 654. Paul the third in his Bull of approbation of that Order hath this expression Non obstantibus Generalis Concilii Faelicis recordationis Gregorii Papae 10. acquibusvis aliis Constitutionibus Ordinationibus Apostolicis caeterisque contrariis quibuscunque The Council to which he refers is that of Lateran under Innocent the third c. 13. De Novis Religionibus prohibitis where 't is expresly said firmiter prohibemus ne quis de caetero novam Religionem inveniat c. Are not all men by the Laws of the Church bound to resort to the Pope for the Sense of their Decrees (V) Decret par 1. dist 17. c. 4. Quoties aliqua de Universali Synodo aliquibus dubitatio nascitur ad recipiendam de eo quod non intelligant rationem aut sponte ii qui salutem animae suae desiderant ad Apostolicam sidem pro recipienda ratione conveniant aut si forté it a obstinati contumaces exteterint c. 4. To put this matter out of all doubt I add That whatever pretences there might be for this Distinction between the Church and Court of Rome before the Council of Trent yet they are utterly destroyed by that Great Oracle of the present Roman Church For the Fathers of that Council tamely gave up the Cause betrayed their own and their Churches Liberties abetted the Usurpations of the Court of Rome took away the Legality of Appeals from that Court to a General Council and the Superiority of their own Power to that of the Papacy they enjoyned all the Beneficed Clergy to take an Oath of Obedience to the Pope made him the Judge and Interpreter of all their Decrees provided that all Writers should either speak for the Court of Rome or be silent What was the Issue of this goodly Convention but the confirming the Pope in his Usurped Power the enslaving the Consciences of the Clergy and leaving the whole Christian World of that Communion under an impossibility of ever having a Free General Council (X) History of the Church of Trent by F. Paul l. 8. an 1563. Conc. Trid. Sess 25. Decret de Ref. c. 2. c. 5. c. 21. de libt prohibit reg 10. c. And Card. Pallavizine Hist. Conc. Trid. tom 2. p. 367. And now let al Wise and Impartial men judge whether the Distinction between the Church and Court of Rome be not utterly insignificant as to those purposes for which it is commonly produced Object Hereunto some Persons stick not to say That Dispensations and I know not what Indulgences and Pardons whereby to legitimate the Crimes of Lying and Forswearing when the Interest of our Church requires it are a main part of our Religion and by Consequence the Denial of our Principles is no sufficient Justification of our Innocence I have not leisure to discourse of their Dispensations Indulgences and Pardons But that Dispensations have been granted from Rome to legitimate these Horrid Crimes we are assured by Persons of unquestionable Credit Whether the Generality of the English Papists in the beginning of Queen Elizabeth's Reign had any Dispensations for the Dissembling their Religion and coming to our Churches I know not but not long after The very Dispensations were intercepted in Scotland and shewed to the King by which they were allowed to Promise Swear Subscribe and do what else should be required of them so as in Mind they continued firm and did use their Diligence to advance in secret the Roman Faith (Y) Spotswoods History of the Church of Scotland ad an 1580. p. 308. And sure it was not without Reason on the Irish Remonstrants part That they left out that Clause in their Formulary which was contained in the Oath of Allegiance viz. That the Pope cannot dispense with this Oath We know no less Person than Laynez the General of the Jesuites declared in the Council of Trent That to say the Pope cannot by Dispensations disoblige