that he acknowledged himselfe vnable to effect it yet at last wonne by their importunitie they being his friends promised to do the best he could hoping they would when they saw it with their memories helpe to supply his defects The same afternoone he began to set downe in writing the Popes speech in his owne phrase and stile as neare as he could remember and when he had done he commanded me being one of his Chaplains and two other of his gentlemen to write out copies thereof which he after presented to the Cardinals his friends who had importuned him to that labour Afterwards they gaue him thankes saying that it was the very Oration which Sixtus had vttered in Consistory and as I was enformed the Pope himselfe liking his doing therein said it was his speech indeed By this meanes the Oration was set forth and published among diuers particular friends and so I reserued to my self a copie which I sent as I haue said soon after to my beloued friend M. William Reynolds And as far as my memory serueth me this here printed according to the Parisian copie doth well agree with the originals first written in Rome for I do yet perfectly remember the beginning out of Abacucke to be the same likewise the facts of Eleazar and of Iudith with the circumstances to haue bene in that Oration as also the circumstances of the Friars going to certaine aduersaries of the league for letters of credence to the King Brisac then prisoner in the Bastile his going forth of the gate so dangerously and his passage through the heretickes campe to his Maiestie with other like circumstances there specified But whether the Pope in this his Oration approueth or alloweth of the Friars fact killing his King for that he had caused the Cardinall of Guise Archbishop of Rhemes to be put to death was esteemed of some a tyrant and fauourer of heretickes or onely admired the prouidence of almightie God as Cardinall Bellarmine in Tortus affirmeth I do not presume to define but leaue it to the consideration of each prudent reader What if the Pope vpon wrongs done to himselfe as a temporall Prince in Italy should authorize some of his vassals or feudatary Princes to wage warre against our King and inuade his dominions is not this lawfull for him by the law of nations How then doth the Oath say that the Pope neither of himselfe nor by any authoritie of the Church or sea of Rome or by any other meanes with any other hath any power or authoritie to depose the King or to dispose any of his Maiesties kingdomes or dominions or to authorize any forrein Prince to inuade or annoy him or his countries That his Holinesse as he is a temporall Prince in Italy may vpon iust cause reuenge iniuries offered by attempting the various euents of warre and thereby seeke to annoy his Maiestie or his countries no man I thinke will doubt but can any man hereby inferre that so doing he hath more authoritie to depose our King or dispose any of his Maiesties kingdomes or inuade his dominions then hath the Emperour French King King of Spaine or any other secular Prince And in case he should attempt in hostile manner not as he is a spirituall Pastor but a secular Prince by himselfe or by the helpe of any forreine Prince to inuade or annoy his Maiestie or his countries euery good subiect may lawfully and in dutie is bound to take armes in defence of his King and countrey against him no lesse then he ought to do against any other secular Potentate whatsoeuer But our Oath speaketh not of the secular power of the Bishop of Rome which he hath onely by the bountie and liberalitie of temporall Princes or by prescription in the temporall dominions he possesseth but of any authoritie whatsoeuer receiued from Christ or his Apostles as he is Christs Vicar and Peters successor as the words of the Oath seeme to import viz. That the Pope neither of himselfe that is as he is Pope nor by any authoritie of the Church or sea of Rome For thus his authoritie is onely and meerly spirituall which was neuer ordained by God to produce such effects as waging of warre inuasion of kingdomes deposing and dethroning of Princes as hath bene said before but onely to practise spirituall censures to wit excommunication suspension interdiction and such like which maketh nothing for such as refuse the taking of the Oath Another obiection some vse to make for their iustification against the Oath viz That he who sweareth must do his best endeuour to disclose and make knowne vnto his Maiestie his heires and successours all treasons and traiterous conspiracies which he shall know or heare of to be against him or any of them But to be a Priest to reconcile or to be reconciled to the Church of Rome is treason by the statutes of this kingdome Anno 23.27 Elizab. Therefore he is bound by this Oath to reueale Priests and all reconciled persons which no man can do without committing a most grieuous and hainous crime Are not these men narrowly driuē to their shifts trow ye when after labouring their wits to defend their refusall of the Oath they can find no better arguments The words of the Oath import that such as take it must make knowne all treasons and traiterous conspiracies which he shall know to be against him How I pray you can this be vnderstood of any who is not disposed to cauill to be meant of Priesthood and confession of sins or reconcilement to the fauour of God or vnitie of his Church and not rather of such like treasons and traitorous conspiracies as were inuented and should haue bene practised by those late wicked sulphurean traitors These indeed and others of like nature and qualitie are directly against his Maiestie his hieres and successours for repressing and detecting such this Oath was inuented and the Act framed not for disclosing Priests or reconciled persons who acccording to the intentiō of the Act are no such traitors as long as they enter not into any treasonable practise against his Maiestie and the State whereof God forbid all Priests should be guiltie And I trust both his Maiestie most learned and wise together with his graue and prudent Councell in their wisedomes know that besides some few who haue already giuen good proofe of their loialtie and dutifull affection though to their great temporall detriment for the same there are many moe who beare likewise a true English heart to their King and countrey and would be ready to make also proofe thereof if occasion were offered Wherefore supposing it were true that by the letter of the law all Priests Jesuites c. mentioned in the statute are to be reputed traitors and all reconciling treason yet I dare auouch it was neuer his Maiesties nor the lawmakers intent to bind any called to the Oath to reueale such kind of traitours or treasons which is made
glorie of God obstinately refuse to performe their dutie in obeying that precept of our Sauiour Render vnto Caesar that which is Caesars and that of S. Peter Regem honorificate and also the commandement giuen to Moyses Honour thy father and thy mother These assure you are they who giue cause of scandal indeed wherby their persecution if so they please to cal it is continued the Church perturbed Catholicke religion little regarded and many a soule lost But Vaeilli per quem scandalum venit Woe to him by whom scandall cometh Time will make triall who it is whether they or we In the meane while we say that the proper and true definition of scandall as it is defined by S. Thomas and others most aptly agreeth with the doctrine and example or words and deedes of such English subiects as withdraw men from performing their dutie to their dread Soueraigne not on such as perswade it and yet remaine no lesse Catholicke then they do pretend in euery point of faith Scandall is a word or deed not right Definition of scandall Tho. 2.2 q. 43. ar 1. Ieron in comment super Math. c. 15. giuing occasion of ruine that is of spirituall ruine or sinne Now what euill or shew of euill or sin is there in those who by their deedes and words example and doctrine teach and labour to induce all to do that which is right and due by the law of God What scandall or offence or occasion of sinne do they giue who perswade nothing against any one article or point of faith but meere allegiance to their Prince Doth this offend or scandalize any If they will be scandalized for well doing and take offence where none is giuen do they not shew how imperfect they are in the loue of God Pax multa diligentibus legem tuam non est illis scandalum Psal 118. To such as loue thy law ô God there is great peace and to them there is no scandall May not these be well likened to the Pharisies that of enuie and malice were offended or scandalized at the sayings and doings of our Blessed Sauiour who being told by his disciples of their scandall taken answered Omnis plantatio quam non plantauit Pater meus coelestis eradicabitur Math. 15. All planting which my heauenly Father hath not planted shall be rooted vp Let them alone blind they are guides of the blind And if the blind be guide to the blind both fall into the ditch Such are to be pitied and praied for not enuied whom we may answer in the same sort and with Haimo Haimo in Math c. 18. Greg ho. 7. in Sipro veritate scandalum oriatur magis veritas eligenda est quà m scandalum vitandum If for truth scandall do arise as it doth in this our case rather truth is to be chosen then scandall sought to be auoided The same affirmeth S. Gregorie the Great Ezech. pag. 2. as before pag. 45. And S. Thomas disputing whether spirituall goods are to be pretermitted for passiue scandall Tho. 2.2 q. 43. ar 7. saith That such goods as are de necessitate salutis ought not to be omitted for auoiding scandall because they cannot be pretermitted without mortall sinne as in our iudgements we take allegiance in the Oath to be but it is manifest saith he that none ought to sinne mortally to saue an other from sinne because according to the order of charitie a man ought to loue more his owne spirituall health then another mans The same likewise hath Ioannes de Burgo Pupil oculi Opera necessaria ad salutem non sunt omittenda ad vitandum scandalum proximi ex quacunqueradice procedat Workes necessarie to saluation are not to be omitted for auoiding the scandall of our neighbour out of whatsoeuer roote it proceedeth Herby deare brethren in our Lord Iesus I trust you rest satisfied that such as haue taken the Oath of allegiance wherein nothing hath bene hitherto proued by any learned man to be contained against any one point of faith haue not giuen cause of scandall as they haue bin slandered to haue done but by that their fact performing their bounden dutie to their dread Soueraigne according to the law of God haue sought to take away that horrible scandall giuen indeed by a few vngracious Catholikes in the gunpowder treason and which others daily giue to his Maiestie and the State in resisting the law made vpon so great reason and for the commō good of the realme Besides I trust your wisdomes will consider that to take the Oath being bonum spirituale wherein no euill thing against religion is contained they are not to pretermit it for the imperfections of some who are readie to suffer or take scandall where none is giuen Wherefore I exhort you all most dearely beloued Catholikes in the bowels of our Sauiour Iesus Christ as the very Reuerend and learned maister George Blackwell sometime our Archpriest did in his letter to his Assistants and you all both Clergie and Laitie for abolishing and ending this controuersie which hath scandalized the whole State you wold desist to impugne supreme authoritie in this case of the Oath most lawfull and iust as hath bene proued and ceasse any longer to prouoke to wrath his Maiesty our most clement Prince clement I say for I dare boldly auouch that neither the Pope nor any King or Prince in Christendome had he had the like cause offered by any his subiects especially of a contrarie religion and finding others of the same religion to refuse to make profession of their loyalty by an Oath required at their hands would shew such mercy and clemencie as his Maiestie hath done and doth Conferre the fact or enterprise of the Moores in Spaine now two years agone who wēt about as report goeth treacherously to bring in Turkes and forreiners to inuade the countrey with this Catesbeyan and Percian most barbarous treason and I doubt not but you will iudge them both worthy condigne punishment Compare againe the two Princes who by Gods ordinance carie the sword ad vindictam malefactorum to take reuenge on malefactours you shall find them both iustly prouoked to indignation against the delinquents yet the one viz. King Philip with great seueritie chastiseth the innocent with the nocent old yong men women and children expelling all alike out of his dominiōs to the number of nine hundred thousand as appeareth by his edict within the space of xxx dayes to the losse of all their immoueables Whereas the other our dread Soueraigne of his pitifull inclination did not punish in such sort the guiltles nor all the offendours according to their deserts but repressed by his edict the furie of his people readie to haue taken reuenge yea on many innocent persons for their sakes that had offended Embrace then deare brethren the mercie and long sufferance of this our milde and clement Prince whilest time is granted you lest through your default it be turned
heard his wife Abigail recount vnto him who by her prudence had appeased and pacified Dauid coming in furie and rage to reuenge what Dauid had intended against him he feared and trembled in such wise as with the newes he became euen senslesse Et emortuum est cor eius intrinsecus 1. Reg. 25. factus est quasi lapis that is And his heart was dead inwardly and he became as a stone and there upon within ten daies after striken by God gaue vp the ghost Had Nabal cause to feare Dauid not then accepted of the people for king Saul being yet aliue and haue not we iust cause to feare how we offend and stirre to ire our dread Soueraigne so mightie a Monarch Was the occasion that Nabal gaue in comparison of that of our Catholickes alike Conferre the crime of the one and the other and you shall find great inequalitie as great as betweene a word and a blow yea such a blow as posterity will hardly beleeue could be offered when they shal reade it in Chronicles Meane while we that by Gods goodnes are yet liuing and be eye witnesses thereof haue cause to lament and testifie with Habacuc the Prophet Quia opus factum est in diebus nostris Habac. 1. quod nemo credet cum narrabitur That a worke hath bene done in our daies which no man will beleeue when it shall be told and to wish that some discreete Abigail may be found to step forth and meete with our liege Lord comming in great ire to reuenge and with prudence to pacifie and perswade him to surcease for the loialtie and true affection of many other his innocent Catholicke subiects who lie prostate at his royall feete lamenting their brethrens follie and humbly beseeching pardon with offer for and in his defence of both life and limme But woe is me whilest some endeuour to quench a flaming fire by taking away the wood knowing that Cum defecerint ligna Prou. 26. extinguetur ignis When the wood faileth or is taken away the fire will be quenched others put more wood to the fire and so increase the flame Whilest his Maiestie meditateth mercie and requireth that which iustly he may and we in conscience are bound to performe Nabal yea many Nabals arise and do adde matter to kindle his wrath in resisting his will and denying his iust demand which is only to discharge their duties in rendering to Caesar that is Caesars to sweare fealtie and true obedience vnto him in temporals according to the tenure of the Oath framed and enacted the third yeare of his reigne without derogation to any spirituall authoritie of the Pope or infringement of any point of the Catholicke faith The cause then wherefore this Oath of allegeance was made no man can doubt but the most barbarous Gun-powder conspiracy was the onely vrgent motiue it neuer being in common knowledge so much as thought of before The scope and end thereof was that by taking or refusing the same the King and State might distinguish betweene true and faithfull and hollow-hearted Catholicke subiects Regis Praemo pag. 12. and his Maiestie might be more fully assured of their constancie and fidelitie in time of need vpon any cause to be offered whatsoeuer or by Prince people Pope or whosoeuer And can any man maruell that the Pope is therein named Doth this scandalize any Consider but what they were that inserted it the time and place and pretence of reason they had or might haue to imagine being so aduerse or opposite to him in religion and the Treason so fresh in memorie that his Holinesse might giue leaue or encouragement or at least be priuie and so to winke at such an attempt presuming that no Catholicke durst enterprise such a fact without conniuence at least of supreme authoritie And had they not cause to feare or doubt him more then any other none being therein culpable but only Iesuites and Catholickes of whom some haply thinke themselues bound to obey him whatsoeuer he command for that in their opinion he cannot erre in commanding Howbeit we that are by Gods grace Catholicks also agreeing in all points with Christ his Vicar the Pope of Rome in vnitie of faith do no way suspect that euer he was consenting much lesse gaue way to authorize such enormous and wicked designements though withall we dissent from them that thinke he cannot erre no not in a matter of fact The State there assembled were not such babes as that they needed be taught of the Pope his proceedings with Princes about their depriuations or depositions for diuers crimes when he hath hope to preuaile but especially for heresie or apostasie They knew right well likewise that if his Highnes should be by his Holinesse denounced and declared an hereticke what dangers might soone after ensue therefore was it thought wisedome to preuent a mischiefe ere it happen in exacting an Oath of allegeance at Catholicks hands in that maner and forme as it is set downe thereby more firmly to binde them to the performance of their dutie whereto otherwise by the law of God and nature they rest obliged For it is to be presumed that a Christian an honest man that hath feare of Gods iudgements wil not become perfidious nor rashly or vniustly breake that oath which discreetly and iustly he consented to take Iurabit proximo suo Psal 14. non decipiet He will sweare to his neighbour and wil not deceiue him By this now I trust deare Catholicke brethren you are satisfied that an Oath of allegeance may be iustly exacted at our hands and that we are bound to sweare fealtie to our Prince when it shall be required of vs. But you make doubt lest more be contained in this Oath then fealtie or ciuill obedience to his Maiestie viz. some points against the spirituall authoritie of the Pope which you being Catholickes may not gainsay but are bound in conscience to maintaine If you could satisfie vs say you that nothing is therein contained against any article of faith and that we may disobey his Holinesse who prohibiteth the taking thereof without danger of mortall sinne you shall do vs a singular pleasure therfore I pray you resolue vs herein that are much perplexed about it by reason of the great corporall troubles we are like to fall into if by disobeying the King we refuse it or for the hazard of our soules as we thinke if in disobeying the Pope and scandalizing our brethren the Catholickes we take it Beloued brethren I trust you expect not at my hands that I should fully and exactly discusse euery point of the Oath and answer euery scrupulous difficultie that some vse to make albeit it might be easie to effect for it would require a better librarie then mine is at this present more labour then I can well affoord by reason of my feeble bodie and a larger treatise then I meane to make Your desire is as I presume onely to know
world We know well that as he is the Sonne of God he is the King of glory King of kings Lord of heauen and earth and of all things Psal 23. Domini enim est terra plenitudo eius and reigneth with the Father and the holy Ghost for euer but what is this to a temporall kingdome what is this to the imperiall dignitie of secular maiestie Therefore I meane not to stand to confute this opinion of Canonists which hath bene most learnedly confuted by Cardinall Bellarmine Lib. 5. de sum Pont. c. 2. 3 but to let it passe as most absurd that cannot be proued by any sound reason nor ancient authorities either of Scriptures Fathers or Councels but maintained by captious fallacies vnapt similitudes and corrupt interpretations An other opinion there is of Diuines who dislike and with most strong reasons do confute the Canonists positiōs but yet so as they vphold and labour to maintain the Popes temporall power though in other sort then the former that is De Ro. Pont. lib. 5. c. 6. indirectly or casually and by consequence This then they write and namely Cardinall Bellarmine Asserimus Pontificem vt Pontificem et si non habeat vllam merè temporalem potestatem tamen habere in ordine ad bonum spirituale summam potestatem disponendi de temporalibus rebus omnium Christianorum We affirme that the Pope as Pope although he hath not any meerly temporal power yet in order to the spiritual good he hath a supereminent power to dispose of the tēpotall goods of all Christians And againe in the same chapter Quantum ad personas non potest Papa vt Papa ordinariè temporales Principes deponere etiam iusta decausa eo modo quo deponit Episcopos id est tanquam ordinarius iudex c. As touching the persons the Pope as Pope cannot ordinarily depose temporall Princes yea for a iust cause after that sort as he deposeth Bishops that is as an ordinary iudge yet he may change kingdomes and take from one and giue to an other as the chiefe spirituall Prince if that be necessarie to the health or sauing of soules And in the same booke the first chapter where he putteth downe the Catholicke opinion as he saith he altereth it somewhat in this manner Pontificem vt Pontificem c. That the Pope as Pope Lib. 5. cap. 1. hath not directly and immediatly any temporall power but only spirituall yet by reason of the spirituall he hath at least indirectly a certaine power that chiefe or highest in tēporals You haue here set downe by Cardinall Bellarmine the opinion of Diuines that the Pope as Pope or chiefe Bishop as chiefe Bishop hath not directly and immediatly any temporall power to depose Christian Princes but that indirectly I wot not how he may depose them and dispose of their temporals and so in effect and after a sort agreeeth with the Canonists that indeed such power is rightly in him only he differeth about the manner with a restraint from infidels to Christian Princes But I trust as he in improuing the Canonists assertiō of direct power ouer al the world driueth them to Scriptures or tradition of the Apostles so likewise we may require that he proue his indirect power by one of these two wayes If he cannot as most certainely he cannot then why should men giue more credite to him then to the other they being as Catholike and haply no lesse learned then he Why should his opinion be thought more true then the former To disproue the Canonists thus he writeth Ex Scriptur is nihil habemus Bellar de Ro. Pont l. 5. c. 3. nisi datas Pontifici claues regni coelorum declauibus regni terrarium nulla mention fit Traditionem Apostolicam nullam aduersary proferunt Out of Scriptures we haue nothing but that the keyes of the kingdome of heauen were giuen to the Pope of the keyes of the kingdome of the earth no mention is made at all Apostolical tradition our aduersaries produce none Hereby it seemeth the Cardinall goeth about to proue against his aduersaries that because the keyes of the kingdome of the earth are no where mentioned in the Scripture to be giuen to Peter and his sucsessors therefore the Pope hath not any direct authoritie to depose the Princes of the world nor dispose of their temporals insinuating that the keyes of the kingdome of heauen promised and granted to Peter or to the Church in the person of Peter can worke no such effect nor were granted to depriue Christian Princes or others of their scepters and regall dignities but onely by censures and spirituall authority to exclude vnworthy sinners from eternall felicitie and admit such as are truly penitent to the kingdome of heauen If this argument be good against the Canonists then why is it not also good against Cardinall Bellarmine himselfe when as he can no more produce Apostolicall tradition to confirme his indirect authoritie then the other their direct And of the keyes of the kingdome of the earth required for deposing Princes and disposing of temporals no mention is made in all the Scriptures no not for his indirect or casuall authoritie Consider besides I pray you for it is worth the noting how obscurely and ambiguously he writeth of the Popes power to depose thereby haply intending to seeke some starting hole of equiuocation if occasion serue and meane while leaue his reader doubtfull and still to seeke of his meaning which in my simple Judgement is such as the iudicious wit can hardly conceiue nor tell what he would say As for example that the chiefe Bishop as chiefe Bishop hath not any power meerly temporall c. as is noted before lib. 5. cap. 6. and in the same chapter The Pope as Pope cannot ordinarily note depose c. no not for a iust cause mary as he is the chiefe spirituall Prince he may depose and dispose c. Helpe me good Reader to vnderstand this riddle how these two differ in some essentiall point Pope and chiefe spirituall Prince I must confesse that I vnderstand not how he is the chiefe spirituall Prince but as he is Pope that is the Father of Fathers or chiefe Pastor of soules in the Church of God It is wel knowne that this title Pope or Papa in Latin hath bene attributed to many ancient Patriarchs and Bishops as well as to the Bishop of Rome though principally to him and now is appropriated to him alone and for nought else but for being Bishops and Ecclesiasticall Princes of the Church and for that cause only not for being a temporal Prince Peters successor hath his denomination Which in effect D. Kellison affirmeth saying D. Kellisons Reply to M. Sutel ca. 1. f. 9. Bern. lib. 2. de consid I grant with S. Bernard that the Pope as Pope hath no temporall iurisdiction his power as he is Pope being onely spirituall If then it be so that the Pope as Pope
in this point towards his liege Lord and secular Prince If it must be granted that Christians by the law of God are strictly bound to obey all iust determinatiue sentences and decrees that proceed from the Sea Apostolicke being the highest spirituall tribunall in Gods Church why must it not likewise be granted that subiects as wel Clercks as laicks are by the same law no lesse boūd in foro cōscientiae to be obedient to the King and his iust lawes the chiefest tribunall in the common wealth This I thinke no Christian wil deny as being most cleare and euident in holy Scriptures taught and practised by all ancient Fathers and holy Saints I confesse you will say that humane iust lawes haue their efficacie of binding all subiects to obey in the Court of conscience Tho. 1.2 q. 96. ar 4. from the eternall law of God of which they are deriued according to that of Salomon Per me Reges regnant Prou. 8 legum conditores iusta decernunt By me saith God Kings do reigne and Law-makers decree iust things But whether this law of the Oath which you aime at be such some make doubt for that Cardinall Bellarmine in Tortus and father Parsons in his Catholicke letter affirme many things to be contained therein against the spirituall primacie of the chiefe Pastor and his authoritie of binding and loosing and concerning the limitation to vse father Parsons owne words of his Holinesse authoritie to wit what he cannot do towards his Maiestie or his successors in anie case whatsoeuer Moreouer besides promise of ciuill and temporall obedience in the Oath other things are interlaced and mixt therewith which do detract from the spirituall authoritie of the highest Pastor at least wise indierectly saith he Therfore this law is iniust as being preiudiciall to the law of God and holy Church Some I know will be carping at me for affirming father Parsons to be the author of that Catholicke letter who being ashamed as may be thought of the slender and insufficient clearing the important matter of the Oath by foure seuerall and distinct waies according to his promise denie that euer he wrote the same But will they nill they it is so well knowne to be his and was to the Inquisition in Rome if I haue not bene misinformed and by a verie credible person that heard it from a gentleman present in the citie in his life time and at his death that he could not denie it and vpon the acknowledgement thereof whether with sorrow and griefe for some points vnaduisedlie or erroneously written and brought in question in his old age or somewhat else in some other booke of his against Doctor Morton touching the lawfulnesse of the Oath of Supremacie in some case I cannot say soone after fell sicke and died within eight daies But to returne to our matter Then lawes are said to be iust Tho. 1.2 q. 96.24 first when they are made for the common good secondly when they exceede not his power that maketh them and thirdly when they haue their due forme to wit when the burdens or penalties are imposed on the subiects with a certain equalitie of proportion in order to the common good or vtilitie of the weale publicke as S. Thomas noteth Such is this law of the Oath of allegiance made by full authoritie in Parliament for the conseruation of his Maiestie and whole commonwealth in tranquillitie and peace Tho. 22. q. 67.2.4 Innoc. 3. cap. Per venerabilem Extra Qui filij sint legitimi which is both priuate and common good When I say full authoritie I meane in temporals for so the Prince hath and onely in temporals in the common wealth no lesse thē the Pope in spirituals in the patrimonie of the Church Which law was generaly enacted for all English subiects though principally intended as a distinctiue signe to detect not Catholickes from Protestants nor such as denie the Kings spirituall supremacie in causes Ecclesiasticall from the Popes spirituall primacy as Cardinall Bellarmine in Tortus affirmeth but turbulent spirited Catholickes and these to represse from milde and dutifully affected subiects of the same religion such as disliking haply in words that most horrible conspiracy of Gunpowder King-slaying would in heart haue applauded the euent from those who in affliction for their conscience with patient perseuerance to the end how long soeuer God permit it to continue for our sinnes will in word and deede loue their enemies beare wrongs without murmuring and sincerely pray for the conuersion of their persecutors if they haue any following the example and doctrine of our blessed Sauiour and his holy Apostles That our dread Soueraigne in setting forth this Oath by Act of Parliament hath not exceeded the limites of his power is manifest in that it was framed onely for this end that his Maiesties subiects should thereby make cleare profession of their resolution Praefat monit Apolog. Reg. to vse his Maiesties owne words faithfully to persist in his Maiesties obediēce according to their naturall allegiance And so farre was his intent by the same Oath to detract from the Primacy or spirituall authority of the Pope of binding or loosing by Ecclesiasticall censures or sacraments as the Cardinall and father Parsons affirme that his Maiestie as it were by a most prudent preuention Praefat. monit to take away all scruples that might arise in Catholicke subiects consciences tooke speciall care that that clause inserted by the lower House into the Oath which detracted from the Popes spirituall authority of excommunicating his Maiestie should be forthwith put out And withall declared that the vertue or force of this Oath was no other then that the Popes excommunication might not minister a iust and lawfull cause vnto his subiects to attempt any thing by open or priuie conspiracies against his Maiestie or state What more I pray you could he haue done for clearing this controuersie and satisfying his subiects If then it be so that nothing is contained in this Oath but what appertaineth to naturall allegiance nor more by his Maiestie required then profession of ciuill and temporall obedience which nature prescribeth to all borne subiects as his Maiestie the interpreter of his owne law hath most sufficiently in his Premonition and Apologie made knowne to all by his pen nor that he intended by interlacing or mingling any thing to detract from the spirituall authoritie of the Pope no not indirectly nor against the law of God as is likewise manifest none can iustly say he hath exceeded his limits or that the law is vniust And wheras the Catholick letter hath That there are some things but specifying none of those some concerning the limitation of his Holinesse authoritie if he meane spirituall it is vntrue to wit what he cannot do towards his Maiestie or his successours in any case whatsoeuer That is a glosse of his owne inuention beside the text a notorious vntruth for there are no such words to be found in the
in temporals wherein they ought by the law and ordinance of God to be no lesse obedient then to their Pastors and Prelates in spirituals It followeth now to know what authoritie it is the Pope pretendeth to haue whether Ecclesiasticall or ciuill to depose lawfull Kings and dispose of their temporals and absolue subiects of their bounden dutie and naturall allegiance Which question who so desireth to see it more at large he may reade D. Barclai de potestate Papae and M. Widdrington de iure Principum where it is most sufficiently and learnedly handled and before in this my treatise pag. 17 I haue briefly touched it whereto I adde in this place a word or two more for your better satisfaction Among such Catholickes as refuse to take the Oath of allegiance are many who thinke indeed the Pope to haue no power to depose Kings or dispose of their kingdoms howbeit either vpon pretended scruple of conscience or other humane respects are against the taking and takers of the Oath as if they were little better then Heathens or Publicans And some so simple and ignorant as beleeue that no Pope euer challenged or attempted such authoritie on any Kings or Emperors and that no Iesuit or other learned man allowed or euer taught such doctrine so odious it seemeth vnto them But the wiser sort and more learned know how it hath bene challenged and practised by Popes on the persons of Henrie Otho Fredericke Emperours Iohn King of Nauarre for neither heresie or apostasie and since on Henrie 8. and Queene Elizabeth as by censures do appeare And that it is the moderne doctrine of many both Canonists and Diuines in these latter ages which at the first teaching thereof being so farre dissonant from the writings and practise of all antiquitie was generally adiudged to be noua haeresis as Sigebert reporteth S. Iohn Chrysostome that great Doctor vpon that place of S. Paul 2. Cor. 1. Non dominamur fidei vestrae We ouerrule not your faith Sigebertus in Chro. ad an 1088. Chrysost lib. 2 de dig sacerd c. 3. attributeth such power as forcibly restraines offenders from their wickednesse of life vnto secular Iudges vnder whose dominion they are not vnto the Church because saith he neither is such power giuen vnto vs by the lawes with authoritie to restraine men from offences nor if such power were giuen vs could we haue wherewith we might exercise such power c. So in his time and long after such power of compelling offenders by temporall punishments to conuert to better life was vnheard of to be in Bishops of the Church Cardinall Bellarmine in the catalogue of his ancient writers which he produceth against Barclai for the Popes temporall authoritie ouer Princes beginneth with one who was iudge in his owne cause Gregorie the seuenth that began his reigne in the yeare of our Lord 1073. not able of like to proue it out of any more ancient Father or generall Councell That this Pope was the first that challenged or attempted to practise such authoritie Otho in chro l. 6. c. 35. witnesseth Otho Frisengen a most learned and holy Bishop and highly commended by the Cardinall himselfe lib. 4. de Rom. Pont. cap. 13. Lego saith he relego Romanorum Regum Imperatorum gesta nusquam inuenio quenquam eorum ante hunc à Rom. Pontifice excommunicatum vel regno priuatum c. I reade and reade ouer againe the acts of the Kings and Emperors of Rome and in no place can I find any of them before this to wit Henrie the fourth to be excommunicated or depriued of his kingdome by the Bishop of Rome vnlesse haply any take this for excommunication that Philip the first Christian Emperor who succeeded Gordianus for a short space Euseb hist Eccl. l. 6. c. 25. was by the Bishop of Rome or as Eusebius reporteth of the Bishop of that place where he then resided placed among publicke penitents and Theodosius sequestred by S. Ambrose from entrance into the Church for cruell murther Whereby we may note that this learned man could not find no not one example in all precedent ages of depriuing kings of their regal scepters though of excommunication he proposeth onely these two which may haue some shew of truth for meere excommunication howbeit more probable it is they were not excommunicated at all maiore excommunicatione Then this Author in the next chapter following Otho ibid. c. â—6 describeth the intestine warres destruction of soules and bodies setting vp of Pope against Pope schismes and other manifold lamentable miseries that ensued vpon that fact of Pope Gregory against Henrie the 4 who commanded the Bishops of Ments and Colen to constitute Rodolph Duke of Burgundie Emperor Spec. hist l. 27. and to put downe Henrie whereupon followed a most grieuous warre wherein Rodolphus was ouercome who dying repentant said The Apostolicall commandement and the intreatie of Princes haue made me a trangressor of my oath behold therefore my hand cut off or wounded wherewith I sware to my Lord Henrie not trecherously to practise any thing against his life nor his glorie Who being ouercome the Bishop of Ments by the Popes commandement and with helpe of Saxons raised an other aduersary against the Emperor one Hermannus Knoflock whereupon followed likewise bloudie warres After this Henrie gathering his armie together driueth the Pope into France and setteth vp the Bishop of Rauenna against him whom he named Clement and so caused a schisme This sparsim out of the history Such like calamities are more then probable to fall on people and the Church when Emperors or Kings are so violently proceeded withall assured destruction of many and no hope of the correction of any by such means is like to ensue Was such power trow ye giuen by Christ to his Apostles tending to destruction not to edification No all to edification according to S. Paul 2. Cor. 10. none to destruction Otho Frisengensis in another place of his workes Li. 1. de gestis Frederici c. 1. writing of the Popes excommunicating the Emperour sheweth that Henrie 4. thought it to be such a nouitie as he had neuer knowne the like sentence to be denounced against any Romane Emperor before He liued an 1150. And Sigebert in Chronico 1088. affirmeth the doctrine of Priests By euill kings he meaneth such as are deposed Cont. Barcl cap. 5. teaching that no subiection is to be yeelded to euill Kings and though they sweare fidelitie are not bound to performe it to be noua haeresis a new heresie sprung vp Howbeit Cardinall Bellarmine will tell you that such doctrine and practise began about the yeare of our Lord 700 for before that time there wanted as he affirmeth either necessitie or oportunitie to teach or vse such power By reason of like there were no hereticall Princes impugners of the true faith before that time or that the paucitie of Christian Kings to assist the weake forces
excommunication depose his subiects neither can the Pope as spirituall Prince ouer all And Victora plainly saith thus That a Bishop de iure diuino hath power to excommunicate his subiects ex officio Victor de excom nu 1◠and by ordinary and proper power And what the Pope can do throughout all the world a Bishop may also do in his Bishopricke a few things excepted as to create a Bishop Who disagreeth not with the Cardinall in this that a Bishop is a true Pastor in his particular Church as the Pope is in the Catholicke and vniuersall that he may as well excommunicate the subiects committed to his charge as the Pope may all Princes and people that are sheepe of Christs fold by the authoritie giuen to Peter in those word Pasce oues meat By which Christ indeed constituted him Pastor ouer his flocke marry a spirituall Pastor not a temporall giuing him all authoritie necessary for that office which was only spiritual without coniunction of any other By vertue then of this spirituall authoritie the principall part for gouernment in foro exteriori is excommunication being grauissima poenarum then which none is more grieuous no Bishop can depriue any priuate man whatsoeuer within his Diocesse of the least parcell of his lands or goods that being the office of the ciuill power how then can the chiefe Bishop depriue Kings and Princes of their crownes and dignities the nature of this censure being all one in both Excommunication is defined to be separatio à commumone Ecclesiae quoad fructum suffragia generalia Tho. in suppl q. 21. ar 1. in 4. dist 18. q. 2. c. Excommunication is a separation from the communiō of the Church as touching the fruite and generall suffrages The fruite of the Church cannot be vnderstood of the fruite of temporall goods because these are not taken away from excommunicate persons This S. Thomas plainly shewing that it is beyond the nature of this censure to worke any such effect as to take away temporall goods And in the same qu. ar 3. Sed quia excommunicatio est grauissma poenarum c. But becausce excommunication is the greatest of all punishments therefore excommunication ought not to be inflicted no not for a mortall sin vnlesse the offender be obstinate Tunc enim postquam monitus fuerit c. For then after he shall be admonished if he contemptuously disobey he is reputed stubburne and ought to be excommunicated by the Iudge now not hauing any more to do against him And the same Doctor disputing whether heretickes are to be tollerated saith That after the first and second admonition if yet he be found obstinate Tho. 2.2 q. 11 ar 3. the Church not hoping of his conuersion meaning no doubt such a one as hauing professed the Catholicke faith hath made shipwracke thereof and fallen to heresie prouideth for the health of others separating him from the Church by the sentence of excommunication and further leaueth him to secular iudgement to be put to death Whereby you see that in case yea of heresie the Church can proceed no further then to excommunication after she hath declared and condemned him for his crime Can. corripiantur 24. q. 3. To this agreeth Molanus writing of the condemnation of Iohn Husse and Hierome of Prage by the generall Councel of Constance Mola de fide haer ser l. 2. c. 2 l. 3. c. 4. who as he saith hauing excommunicated anathematized and condemned them for heretickes and hauing no more to do with them deliuered them ouer to Imperiall power by which they were burnt So that temporall punishment of heretickes whether it be by confiscation of goods and patrimonie or death belongeth and is proper to the secular power as the spirituall do to Ecclesiasticall persons Which we see manifest by practise of all Christian countries yea and out owne that no man is to be put to death nor lose his goods vpon excommunication but onely by execution of the Princes law And Cardinall Bellarmine himselfe will confesse Bellarm. in Barcl c. 23. that extra casum haeresit out of the case of heresie by vertue of the sentence of excommunication there followeth not depriuation of temporall dominion or of particular goods or kingdomes and princedomes though saith he by and by Kings and Princes may be for iust causes depriued by the Pope of their kingdome or princedome Variously and ambiguously insinuating that there are other iust causes besides heresie but listeth not or rather as may be supposed cannot set downe what they are for as yet neuer were any determinately made knowne more then such as shall be deemed worthy of depriuation ad arbitrium Pontificis But as farre as I can see his Grace must maintaine other causes as well as heresie otherwise how can the deposition of Henrie Frederick Otho and other Princes be defended to haue bene lawfull who were neuer condemned by the Church for heresie And if there be other causes current to depriue Princes of temporals then there is for priuate men surely the Christian princely state must needs be farre worse then the plebeian or then if they were Heathens or Publicans which were absurd when as God the giuer of all power for correction of men is not acceptor personarum but ministreth iustice equally or indifferently to all all both Princes and people being populus eius oues pascuae eius his people and the sheepe of his pasture If there be any as me thinketh I heare one say that he is not yet satisfied as touching this point but desireth to know the finall cause nature and effects of excommunication let him note wel what the most learned and graue Cardinall Tolet of famous memory and others write thereof Est autem excommunicatio Ecclesiastica censura Tolet. Lib. 1. instruc sacerd c. 4. nu 1. qua homo Christianus bonis fidelium communibus priuatur Excommunication is an Ecclesiasticall censure whereby a Christian man is depriued of the common goods of the faithfull Which goods he faith arc three 1. externall conuersation consisting in mutuall talke and societie 2. participation of sacraments 3. prayers and suffrages of the Church And these in his opinion are not so much the effects as the very nature and substance of excommunication The end whereof Lib. 1. c. 11. n. 1 Li. 1 c. 10. n. 14. without controuersie is the good and vtility of man that he may repent and conuert himselfe to good as he saith Cap. Medicinalis de sent excom in 6. Decret 2. par 24. q. 3. cap. 36 when as excommunication is medicinall not mortall instructing not plucking vp by the roote Which agreeth with the Epistle of Pope Vban set downe in the Canon law Liquido apparet aliud esse excommunicationem aliud eradicatiouem c. It euidently appeareth that excommunication is one thing eradication another For he that is excommunicated as the Apostle saith to this end is excommunicated that
most credite and is truest were greatly wished might be made knowne to the parties whom it concerneth otherwise how can they tell what to do in this important businesse and what is required at their hands to retaine still or recouer their faculties being once lost How shall they obey if they know not what is commanded them 1. Cor. 14. Etenim si incertam vocem det tuba saith Saint Paul quis parabit se ad bellum For if the trumpet giue an vncertaine voice who shall prepare himselfe to battell Therfore it is most requisite that such as haue bin in possession of their faculties granted theÌ„ by authority of the Sea of Rome some 20. some 30. yeares agone and some more should know how and by whom they are taken from them and for what cause which ought to be for so the great fault because the paine is most grieuous should see moreouer not onely an authenticall copie of the originall letters but also the originals themselues if the Churches orderly proceedings be obserued otherwise all may be thought idle reports not to be beleeued Tho. 3. p. q. 19. ar 6. For Saint Thomas saith That when the Church depriueth heretickes and schismatickes and other such like withdrawing subiects from them either simpliciter or quantum ad aliquid simply or touching some particular thing they cannot put in practise or haue vse of the keyes touching that which they are depriued of Then I say it is verie necessarie that Priests not heretickes nor schismatickes or such like but most constant in euerie least article of the Romane faith should know whether they be forbidden simply all or else but some particular faculties receiued at their mission whereby they may in all humilitie shew themselues obedient to his Holinesse in surceasing from exercising what they shall perceiue to be by him forbidden them Now whereas the first report of the manner of taking away faculties is That Priests constantly persisting in teaching the lawfulnesse of the Oath had lost their faculties were disabled to absolue their penitents from deadly sin by vertue of the Archpriests admonitioÌ„ I wish the discreet reader not to giue credite thereto because doubt may well be made thereof seeing diuerse learned Priests yea such as haue not taken the Oath haue iudged otherwise viz That they were not lost and amongst the rest an Assistant esteemed of many to be one of the grauest and best iudgement in such cases Which will also most perspicuously appeare to him that shall with iudgement reade the Admonition and duly consider the Archpriests act and proceeding therein whether it be as it ought to be in euery respect conformable to that of the Popes Breues authorising him which was as followeth Ex Breui sum Pont. TibÃque iniungimus mandamus ac specialem facultatem ad hoc tribuimus vt authoritate nostr a omnes singulos Sacerdotes Anglos qui quoddam iur amentum in quo multa continentur quae fidei atque saluti animarum aperte aduersantur praestiterunt vel ad loca ad quae haeretici ad eorum superstitiosa ministeria peragenda conuenire solent consultò accesserunt aut qui talia licitè fieri posse docuerunt docent admonere cures vt ab huiusmodi erroribus resipiscant abstineant quod si intra tempus extraiudicialiter tamen arbitrio tuo illis praefigendum hoc facere distulerint seu aliquis illorum distulerit illos seu illum facult atibus priuilegys omnihus ab Apostolica sede seu illius authoritate à quocunque â—lio illis vel cuiuis illorum concessis eadem authoritate priues ac priuatos esse declares c. Datum Romae apud S. Petrum sub annulo piscatoris die 1. February 1608. Pontificatus nostri anno 3. And we enioyne and command you and for this we giue you speciall facultie that by our authoritie you take care to admonish all and singular English Priests who haue taken a certaine Oath wherein many things are contained which are manifestly against faith and the health of soules c. or haue taught and do teach such things may lawfully be done that they may repent and abstaine from such errors and if within the time extraiudicialiter notwithstanding by you to be prefixed vnto them they shal deferre to do this or any one shall deferre that you by the same authoritie deptiue and declare them or him to be depriued of all faculties and priuiledges granted them or any of them from the Sea Apostolicke or by her authority from any other whatsoeuer Dated at Rome the first of Frebruary 1608. This much out of the Popes Breue to the reuerend Archpriest M. Birket touching his facultie or commission giuen him first to admonish then after the time prefixed was expired no satisfaction being giuen of repenting or abstaining to depriue such and declare them depriued of their faculties Whereupon the Archpriest indeed sent a letter of admonition to the Priests then of and in the Clinke endorced To all the reuerend Secular Priests of England Which was as followeth Most dearely beloued brethren The Archpriests letter to the Priests of the Clinke whereas I haue alwayes desired to liue without molesting or offending others it cannot be but a wonderfull corsiue sorrow and griefe vnto me that against mine owne inclination I am forced as you haue seene by the Breue it selfe to prescribe a certaine time for such as do find themselues to haue bene contrarie to the points which are touched in the said Breue concerning the Oath and going to Church that they may thereby returne and conforme themselues to the doctrine declared by his Holinesse both in this and the other former Breues And therefore now by this present do giue notice vnto you all that the time which I prefixe and prescribe for that purpose is the space of two moneths next ensuing after the knowledge of this my admonition Within which time such as shall forbeare to take or allow any more the Oath or going to Church I shall most willingly accept their doing therein yet signifying vnto you withall that such as do not within this time prescribed giue this satisfaction I must though much against my will for fulfilling his Holinesse commandement depriue them and denounce them to be depriued of all their faculties and priuiledges granted by the Sea Apostolicke or by any other by authoritie thereof vnto them or to any of them and so by this present do denounce hoping that there is no man will be so wilfull or disobedient to his Holinesse order but will conforme himselfe as becometh an obedient child of the Catholicke Church And so most heartily wishing this conformitie in vs all and that we may liue and labour together vnanimes in domo Domini I pray God guie vs the grace to effect that in our actions whereunto we are by our order and profession obliged This 2. of May 1608. Your seruant in Christ George Birket Archpriest