the King he was so gratious to the said Reymond by the treaty of peace as to restore it vnto him conditionally that it should returne to the said King if his said only daughter had not issue by Alphonse of France the Count of Poittou And when the same vniuersall Councell of Laterane which may worthily be called the most Vniuersal Councel for so much as besides the Pope and the foure Patriarkes of the East Matth. Paris in Ioan. adâ— an 1215. Magdeburg Cent. â—â— cap. 9. de Synod who were there present some in person as the Pope and the Patriarkes of Constantinople and of Hierusalem and the other by their legates as those of Alexandria and of Antioch there were seauenty Archbishops 412. Bishops and more then 800. Prelates and more then this all the Monarches and Kinges of Christendome were there assistant eyther by themselues or by their Ambassadours and the Emperour of the Fast the Emperour of the West the King of Hierusalem the King of France the King of England the King of Arragon the King of Castile and others When the Councell I say intended to prouide for the extirpation and rooting out of the Reliques of the Albigenses it ordeyned that the Princes who should become contemners of the Councell that condemned the Albigenses should be depriued of the obligation of their subiectes fidelity towardes them And this I remember not for an example to disturbe or trouble the publique peace and tranquillity sith the Heretikes be in so great a number as they make a notable part of the body of the Estate but to shew that we cannot hold that for hereticall which was pronounced and decreed 400. yeares since by the mouth of the Vniuersall Church For as touching them who for the frustrating of this decree do alleage and cite (a) Plat. in vita Innocen 3. what Platina and after him the (b) Suppl Chron. l. 13. ad an 1215. Supplement of the Chronicles affirme that the Councell proposed many thinges but resolued nothing they are more worthy of pitty then answere For who sees not that those Authors there speake of the preparatiues of the army for the warre of the holy Land and not of matters of Doctrine or Ecclesiasticall discipline Otherwise a man should impugne as false that therin was resolued the Article of Transubstantiation the Article of the Procession of the holy Ghost of the Father and of the Sonne the precept of annuall Confession to all the faithfull the condemnation of the errours of the Abbot Ioachim together with all the writinges of the Schoole Doctours alleaging these things the practise of all the Iurisdictions of France followed in the searching and finding out of heretikes We should impugne of falsity the Decretals of Gregory the ninth (c) Decret Gregor l. 5. tit 7. de haeret c. 13. Excommunicamus compiled twelue yeares after the Councell of Laterane where that decree is repeated at length vnder the title of the Councell of Laterane the writings of Matthew Paris (d) Math. Parisanâ—e ad ann 1215. a Writer of the same age and a great enemie of the Popes who sayth that the Councell of Laterane made 60. you must reade 70. Decrees the Bul of Pope Clement the 5. in fauour of King Philip the Fayre who returned the readers to the decrees of the Laterane Councell the Centuriators also (a) Acta inter Bonif. 8. Philip Pulch. who inserted all the 70. Articles of the Laterane Councell into their Centuries Finally we should impugne of falsity the coniunction of the County of Tholouse to the Crowne which was founded vpon that Councells Decree and the reasons and declarations of the Court of Parlament to King Lewis the Eleuenth touching the extinguishing of that pragmaticall Sanction or Decree where the Court prayeth the King to order the Elections according to the Councell of Laterane in these wordes In the Councell of Laterâ—ne saith the Court which (b) Refertur à Biblioth lib. 4. decret Eccl. Gall. was assembled held at Rome by Pope Innocentius the third in the yeare 1215. where were assistant and present 1333. Prelates there was prescribed a certaine forme of Election and thereunto was annexed that in case of the Electors negligence the right and power of prouision for the Church should fall to the Superiour Prelate Cap. (c) Cone Lateran c. 24. Quia propter Cap. (d) Ibid. 〈◊〉 23. Ne pro defectu But I haue made to far a digression let vs returne to our Historie Wherefore when the Generall Councell of Lateran which represented all the Christian Common wealth both spirituall and temporall meant to prouide for the extinguishing of the reliques of the Albigensian heresy it conceaued made and published this (e) Conc. Later c. 3. Canon If any Prince neglect in his landes and territories to extirpate the heresy of the Albigenses let him be excoÌ„municated by the Archbishop of the Prouince And if he continue obstinate let it within the space of one yeare be signified to the Pope that he may absolue his subiects from their Oath of fidelity And when Pope Innocentius the 4. did at the Councell of Lions absolue the Subiectes of the Emperour Frederike from the fidelity they owed vnto him I dispute not now whether iustly or vniustly for so much as my scope drift and intention is not but to shew how the Kinges of France haue in such occasions carried themselues the King S. Lewis took vpon him the protecting of the Popes cause against the Emperour The King of France saith Paulus (a) Paul Aemil. in vita S. Ludouici Aemilius being come to Lions by zeale of office of Religion for the assisting of Innocentius and hauing made a protestation that both himself his forces and the Counsel of his Realme were ready to maynteyne defend the power and authority of his Holines added strength and dignity to Innocentius his cause And euen those who to make the Pope the king S. Lewis odious write that the Pope offered to cause Robert Count of Artois the Kinges brother to be elected chosen in place of Frederike but that the Barons of France refused it add that the Barons themselues protested that the Emperour could not be deposed if he erred not in faith You shall heare the Barons wordes be they true or be they faigned deliuered after many inuectiues against the Pope by Matthew Paris an Englishman (b) Matth. Paris in Hen. 3. ad an 1239. who fauoured the Emperour was the Popes heauy enemie and taken out of him by Vignier (c) Vignier en la 3. p. de la Biblioth hist Pan. 1239. who yeilded not a whit vnto him in that behalfe And thus he sayth But to the end we may not seeme to contemne the Popes commandement though it be euident that it came from the Church of Rome more vpon hatred to the Emperour then for a loue to our Nation we will send men of prudence on
excepting only a few hypocritical Ministers amongst vs or profane Lawyers amongst our neighbours But as God would haue it neither the Ministers in France are of that opinion for they professe the contrary nor yet the Lawyers of England if you put the case home to them for howsoeuer it costes them nothing to sweare that the Pope can neuer come to depose a King because he is a protestant it would trouble some of their consciences if they haue any to sweare that if an Vpper and Lower house of the English Parlament should condemne a King who might happen to be so great a Tyrant as that he would abrogate all the Statutes and Common Lawes of the Realme bring in by force a summary course of Iustice as is vsed in Switzerland confiscate all the Common Lawyers of England who are able to spend aboue a thousand poundes per annum and in a word dispose of their wiues and children as if they were his owne it would trouble them I say to sweare that such a King might not be deposed by the Houses of Parlament and that themselues could not be so far discharged from the Oath of Fidelity which they made to him when they were sworne Iustices of Peace as to make some personall resistance in their owne defence There is nothing more certaine then that many a man reades ouer the Oath of Allegiance and diuers take it who consider not the importance of those fearefull generall clauses which include and exclude all particuler cases of No Pope No King neither by his owne nor by any other Authority for any cause whatsoeuer can Depose or Absolue subiects c. And yet as I said before there are so many Protestantes who by occasion of this Oath haue entred so deeply into the consideration of Kingly Authority as it is euident to all such as freely and familiarly liue with Protestantes and vnderstand sincerely from them what they think that thousands of them are growne to a lesse adoring conceipt of Royall Dignity then they were wont to haue And though his Maiesty can hardly come to know the preiudice that he hath susteyned by yeilding to them who haue vnfitly sought to help him or rather to help themselues by propounding this Oath because he is a King and cannot equally conuerse with his subiectes nor can he from his seruantes expect but such newes as will be pleasing to him yet it may be hoped for at the Handes of so Excellent a Iudgment as his Maiesty is endued withall that he will one day fall vpon the true account of these businesses by other meanes and not cōtinue his Catholike Subtectes in his so ill conceipt for professing of that beliefe which is now in terminis auowed by the learned and noble Catholikes euen of France the contrary whereof is not auowed by any Protestant Church vpon earth if we chaunge the name of Pope into the name of Common wealth and the sequele whereof hath done nothing but disseruice to him I beseech God of his infinite mercy giue his Maiesty such light of mind wherby to discerne the distempered thoughts of his Ministers who are in such a rage against Catholikes and to vs that he will vouchsafe so much strength of mind as that whatsoeuer happeneth we may rather obey God then Man AN ADVERTISMENT TO THE READER translated out of the French THE Author of this Discourse vnderstanding that some had put in print two seuerall Speaches in his name far different both in sense and wordes from that which he by word of mouth deliuered he was constrayned to bring this to light as an Antidot or Countermaund to those other Neither did he much wonder to see such peeces of changeable colours clapt togeather some true some false according vnto euery ones passion without resemblance to the originall for he doth thinke that no pen could follow nor memory retayne two Speaches wherof the shortest lasted three houres although swiftly pronounced But he was much astonished at the liberty of this tyme that within Paris himselfe being present any should publish two Speaches in his name without acquainting him with it therby to vnderstand whither he would acknowledge them for his owne It is true indeed that he was not the only man who had byn so dealt withall for some other Prelates had lyn handled after the same manner and found as litle of theirs in those remnantes bestowed on them as Euphorbus in Pithagoras Now therefore it doth suffice him to present thee with that he pronounced in the Chamber of the Third Estate For that it was in a manner all one with that he made in the Chamber of the Nobility the reasens being the same and no difference at all but in the beginning conclusion and ornuments By reason wherof the publishing of the one might serue for a generall remedy of the suppositions of the other two As soone as he had therefore signified to the Gentlemen of the Third Order that being to speake in their presence he thought himself obliged to make the same prayer to God which Pericles was accustomed to do being to speake to the Athenians that nothing might passe from him vnbeseeming those that had imployed him neyther of those that were to heare him Psal 50. he directed his words to God saying with the Psalmist Domine labia men aperies and then began as followeth THE ORATION IT had byn to small purpose Noble Gentlemen to honour the dignity of those that make profession to minister Iustice It had byn to litle purpose that which Aristotle taught vs by saying that Iustice is beautifull and admirable like to the starre Lucifer and it had byn to as litle purpose to haue taught vs that in iustice all vertues are summarily conteyned And the answere of Agesdaus King of Sparta had byn vnto as litle purpose which he gaue vnto the King of Persia who tooke to himself the title of the great King that he could not be greater then himselfe valesse he could proue he were more iust And that fable of the Poets had byn to as litle purpose faigning Minos the Patron of iust Princes to haue byn the sonne of Iupiter and that Themis and Dicas were placed on either side of Iupiter if the Scripture did not teach vs that by iustice Kings do raigne if the Sonne of God had not chosen him who was to be his figure called him Melchisedech that is to say King of iustice and that the same Melchisedech whose name doth signify King of Iustice had not been also King of Salem that is King of peace to shew that of iustice dependeth peace which is the mother of all good in heauen and earth And seeing the oracles of diuine scripture agree in cōmendation of this vertue with the testimony of prophane authors it seemes in giuing her the first place of honour and dignity amongst humane vertues is to put in execution the will both of God and men Now Gentlemen if euer there were any Nation in
that the Church doth this and sometimes it doth it not And againe (b) Ibid. q. 11. art 2. 〈◊〉 corpore art So soone as any is deuounced excomunicated by sentence for Apostacie from the faith his subiectes be absolued from his domination and subiection and from the Oath of fidelity whereby they were bound vnto him before Behold what this holy and wonderfull Doctour or rather this Eagle of Doctours whome the Schoole of Deuines calleth the Angelicall Doctour saith and this in his Summe which hath been euer publiquely read at Paris and held for the miracle and oracle of Scholasticall diuinity and who hath neuer been noted nor taxed in this Article by any neither French nor other And not only he but euen those also who among the Doctours of the faculty of Paris haue purposely and expresly written for the Emperours and for the Kings against the Popes and haue taken vpon them to demonstrate that the Popes could not declare the subiects absolued in conscience from the Oath made to their Princes haue alwaies excepted the case of heresy and infidelity and especially when the Princes went and proceeded so far as to haue a will to destroy and ouerthrow the Christian or Catholike Religion and to inforce and constraine their subiects in their consciences and to persecute them as they were either Christians or Catholikes For William Occam who fauoured the Emperour against the Pope and whome the French Doctours who haue impugned the Popes temporall authority haue taken for their Patron hauing written expressely touching the Power Ecclesiastique and Laique spirituall and temporall where he disputeth of set purpose that the Pope hath not any power at all to absolue the Subiects of Kings from the Oath of Allegiance they owe vnto them excepted in generall termes the cases of Heresy or Infidelity (a) Occam lib. 8. q. 2. c. 8. ad 3. alleg The Pope sayth he cannot ordinarily depose the Emperour no more then other Kings though he be neuer so worthy to be deposed nor for any crime or default though neuer so great if it be not of the number of the spirituall crymes And Iohn of Paris to whome the more sincere seruants and fauourers of Kings send the Readers to learne and vnderstand what ought to be the limits and bounds of the authority spirituall and temporall doth there bring the very same exception (b) Io. Par lib. de potest Regis Papae c. 14. If a Prince sayth he were an heretike and incorrigible and lib. a contemner of the Churches censure the Pope might do something in the behalf of the people wherof might ensue that he should be depriued of his secular dignity and deposed by the people And this the Pope may do in the only crime Ecclesiastique the vnderstanding and notice wherof appertayneth to him that is to excommunicate all them who should obey such a Prince as their Lord and Soueraigne And Iames Almaine Doctour of the Faculty of Paris who at what time King Lewis the 12. was at difference and variance with Pope Iulius tooke vpon him the defence of the Kings power against that of the Pope and for that cause did publish and put to light what Occam aforesaid had composed and written against the Pope touching the boundes of both powers and illustrated them with explications and notes of his owne relateth the words of Occam in these termes Doctour Occam (a) Almain l. de potest Eccles Late c. 8. sayth he writeth that Iesus Christ hath not giuen power to the Pope to depriue the Laiques of their Dominions and their possessions except in case that a secular Prince should abuse himselfe therin to the ruine of Christianisme or of the faith so as that abuse should extend to the domage of eternall felicity For in this case it is not to be denied but that the Pope hath power to dispose though other Doctours deny it albeit they confesse that the Pope hath only authority and power to declare that such a Prince ought to be deposed Loe Almaine his wordes in the first part of his booke And see agayne what he sayth in the second part of it The Doctour sayth he speaking (b) Alm. ibidem of Occam hath answered that if the Emperour be worthy of deposition for a cryme of the former kind that is for spirituall crymes he may be deposed by the Pope for as much as the Pope hath full power to punish spirituall sinnes But if he be worthy of deposition for a cryme ciuill and politique it then belongeth not to the Pope to depose him And it is not to be said that the condition of the Emperour and of other Kinges is not paralell alike and equall For Occam handleth them as equall and manteyneth that the Emperour dependeth not in any sort of the Pope for his temporalities And a little after passing vnto the opinion of Iohn Doctour of Paris he sayth (c) Alm. ibidem Iohn of Paris holdeth that for any crime either spirituall or politique it apperteyneth not vnto the Pope to depose the Emperour but by accident c. that is to say in as much as he may excommunicate him for such a cryme and all them that take parte with him and consequently by such an excommunication to constreyne them to depose him And so he deposeth him only by accident and indirectly and not directly And yet these be the principall supportes wherewith the Kinges and Church of France haue serued themselues when they meant to withstand and oppose themselues against the progresse of the Ecclesiasticall power ouer the temporall These be the bookes which the Kinges haue caused to be writtē for the maynteyning and vpholding of their authority These be the bookes which the Faculty of Diuinity haue caused to be published at such time as the Kinges had any variance with the Popes These be those writinges that were reprinted and put to light agayne and illustrated with explications when King Lewis the 12. entred into a difference with Pope Iulius in the time of the Councell of Towers and of Pisa These be the bookes which were caused to be published for the same subiect vnder our deceased King of glorious Memory and that an eight yeares since that is to say in the yeare 1606. and whereunto the Maisters of the Kinges retinue of the Parlament of Paris do remit and refer their Readers to vnderstand what be the batteries strongest defences of the Iurisdiction spirituall temporal And this Schoole of Sorbonne saith the deceased Monsieur Procuratour or Attorney Generall de la Guesle (a) Apud Rochell in Decreto Eccl. Gall. lib. 5. c. 8. speaking to the Schoole of Sorbone on the behalf of the Court hath excellent obseruations in the writings of Gerson and in the booke de potestate Regia Papali composed by Iohn of Paris Doctour in this faculty and in a thousand places besides And notwithstanding this what saith Iohn of Paris That the Pope (b)
who seeth not that it is a Sacriledge that hath at all times drawne the Ire Wrath and Vengeance of God aswell vpon Kinges and Princes as vpon particuler Persons who haue attempted the same Euery one knoweth that Saul (a) 1. Reg. 13 15. was deposed from the right of his Royalty and died a miserable death because he would take vpon him the office of a Sacrificer We know that Oza (b) â— Reg. 6. was punished with a sudaine death for putting his hand to the Arke that seemed to sway to the one side We know that King (c) 2. Paralip 26. Ozias was stroken with leprosy and excluded from the administration and gouernment of his Kingdome for taking the Censar into his hand And holy Writ saith (d) Malach 26. The lippes of the Priest shall keepe knowledge and the Law they shall require of his mouth because he is the Angell of the lord of Hostes. And the Prophet Esay (e) Esay 54. saith to the Church Euery tongue resisting thee in iudgment thou shalt iudge And againe (f) Idem 60. The King shall walk in thy light the people in the brightnes of thy rising And King Iosaphat distinguisheth the boundes of the one and the others Iurâ—diction in these wordes (g) 2. Paralâ—p 19. Amarias saith he the Priest and your Bishop shal be chiefe in these thinges that appertayne to God and Zabadias the sonne of Ismael who is the Prince in the house of Iuda shal be ouer those workes which perteyne to the Kinges office And our Sauiour (h) Matth. 19. saith himselfe VVhosoeuer shall not heare the Church let him be vnto thee as an Ethnick and a Publican And S. Paul speaking vnto Pastors (i) Act. 20. saith The Holy Ghost hath placed you Bishops to rule the Church of God which he hath purchased with his owne bloud And speaking to the Laytie he saith (a) Heb. 3. Obey your Prelates for they watch hauing to render an accompt of your soules And againe (b) Heb. 5. Neither doth any man take the honour to himselfe but he that is called of God as Aaron And therefore we see that the first Christian Emperours were euerso respectiue and Religious as they would neuer make themselues Iudges neither of matters of faith nor of matters of the Churches discipline nor of the Bishops causes among themselues for feare of violating the rectitude that Gods Ministers ought to bring to Ecclesiasticall Iudgments by the feare of temporall Iurisdictions And that if they published any lawes in such cases it euer was after the Bishops had passed them and to further the temporall execution of the decisions formerly made by Ecclesiastique authority It is not lawfull forme saith (c) Ruff. l. 10. Eccles hâ—st c. 2. Constantine the Great who am placed ouer temporalities to censure and iudge the causes of Bishops And the Emperour Valentinian (d) Sozom. l. 6. c. 7. the first said It is not lawfull for me who am of the Laitie to arrogate to my selfe the curiosity of searching into these matters And the Emperour Theodosius the second (e) Epist ad Sinodâ— Ephes writing to the Councell of Ephesus sayth It is not lawfull for him who is not of the ranke of Bishops to intermeddle himself with the decision of the affaires of the Church And the most glorious and victorious of all our Kinges which was Charlemaine confirming the answere that Censtantine made saith (f) Carol. mâ—gâ— l. 6. cap. 301. The Emperour Constantine answered vpon the accusations of the Bishops To me who am placed ouer temporalities it is not lawfull to iudge the Bishops causes And confirming that which the Emperour Valentinian had said he vsed these words (a) Ibid. Your busines is aboue vs and therefore iudge among your selues of your owne causes For you are aboue vs. And when on the contrary the hereticall Emperours would take vpon them to meddle with Ecclesiasticall iudgmentes the holy Fathers resisted them contradicted them with all manner of constancy We are not permitted said Hosius to the Emperour (b) Epist ad Const apud AthaÌ„ in ep ad solit vit agent Constance to hold the Empire on earth nor to You to lay hand on the Censar and to vsurpe the authority of Religion And S. Athanasius sayth (c) Athan. epist ad solit vitam agen When was it euer heard in the memory of man that the iudgments of the Church tooke their force from the Emperour And againe (d) Ibidem He treateth not of matters of the Roman CoÌ„mon wealth where there may be credit giuen to you as to an Emperour but he speaketh of a Bishop And a little after (e) Ibidem Who is he who seeing an Emperour occupying the chiefest place in matters of the Church would not iudge that it were the abomination of the desolatioÌ„ fortould by Daniel And Gregory Nazianzen (f) Greg. Naz. orat adcities ti percuis Princip irascent saith Will you heare a free word which is That the law of Iesus Christ subiecteth you to my Iurisdiction to my tribunal For we are Emperours also namly in an Empire greater and perfecter then yours And S. Ambrose (g) Ambr. ep 32. ad Imper. Valent innior saith Who maketh any doubt if we regard the order of the Scripture or the antiquity of the Church but that the Bishops in causes of faith haue a custome to iudge of Christian Emperours And againe Your Father said It is not for me to iudge betweene Bishops And your Clemency saith It apperteineth to me to iudge And S. Martin the renowned ornament of the Gaules saith (h) Apud Seuer Sulpit l. 2. sacrae hist It is an impiety new and not heard of before that a secular Iudge should iudge of matters of the Church And against this it helpeth not to alleage that the Emperour Constantine did call himselfe (a) Euseb l. 4. de vit Constant cap. 24. a Bishop out of the Church For Constantine by that meant nothing lesse then to say that he had iurisdiction and superintendency ouer the externall forme and discipline of the Church Els wherfore should he haue desired with so great instance the authority of the Councell of Nice for the decision of the day of Easter But he meant only to say that what the Bishops did by their preachings among the Christians within the Church that did he out of the Church by his Edictes against the Infidells He ordayned sayth â—usebius by his Edictes and gaue order to the Gouernours of the Pagans to cause them to keep the Sunday also aswell as the Christians and to honour the dayes of the Martyrs and the feastes appointed in the Churches And therof it came that hauing one day feasted some Bishops he called himselfe Bishop in their presence saying vnto them God hath placed you Bishops within the Church and me a Bishop out of the Church But me thinkes I heare You already say that
the matter of this article is not a question of Religion but a simple and meere question of Estate and Policy As if to handle how farre the spirituall vse of the keyes and of the power of binding and loosing which God hath giuen vnto his Church extendeth it self were not a question of Religion As if to dispute whether these keyes might passe to the excoÌ„municating of them that willingly obey their Princes who after hauing done homage of their Crownes to Iesus Christ come to vse manifest felony against him to proclay me warre against him and to impugne his faith and doctrine were not a question of Religion As though to dispute whether those keys could in conscience and in the Churches tribunall absolue soules of the Oath of Allegiance they owe to their Princes when their Princes violate and breake the reciprocall Oath they haue made to God and to them to mayntaine them in Christian and Catholike Religion were not a question of Religion For therin being two obligations and bandes by which the subiectes are bound to obey their Princes the one politicke which hath for his scope the peace and felicity of the temporall life and against the violating wherof there be temporall paynes ordained which is that wherof the Apostle speaketh (a) Rom. 13. when he saith That a man must obey Princes not only for wrath the other religious and Ecclesiastike which is that of the obedience that Christians owe to their Princes not for the simple respect of lawes and paynes temporall but for respect vnto God and for the consideration of rewards and paynes eternall which is that that the same Apostle (b) Ibid. calleth for conscience sake Who doubteth when there is question of vntying not of the simple knot politike for which the politike lawes be instituted but of the spirituall and Ecclesiastike knot and of the obligation contracted in the tribunall and Court of conscience and this being the matter which is now in dispute whether in case of heresy it may be vâ—tied or not who doubteth I say whether this question be a question of Diuinity And more then this whatsoeuer the matter be in it selfe who seeth not that to dispute if it be conforme or contrary to Gods word is a question of Religion But some will reply and say that this is so cleere and so euident by Scripture as it admitteth neither vntruth nor dispute nor censure Is it true Where then there is a proposition which all the schoole Doctours and namely the two great lightes of Schoole Diuinity S. Thomas and S. Bonauenture and so many other Bishops and Doctours haue thought conforme or at least not repugnant to the word of God shall the contrary proposition be so cleere in Scripture as it shall need neither to be disputed about nor censured And what article then of faith may not be thrust out of the Churches Tribunall and exposed to the prey of Hereticall presumption if it be inough to say that it is so cleere in Scripture as that therin there is neither need of dispute nor iudgment Indeed this might haue some apparence if those who hold the one of the propositions should alledge Scriptures for themselues and the others should not cite any at all But as well those who hold the affirmatiue proposition as those who hold the negatiue argue by Scripture answere by Scripture and reply by Scripture For example they who hold the affirmatiue that Princes who ouerthrow and destroy religion 1. Reg. 15. may be excluded and depriued of their right alledge that Samuel deposed Saul or according to others for I pretend not to treate here by way of resolution but only problematically declared him deposed for hauing violated the lawes of the Iewish religion â— Reg. 11. That the Prophet Abia deposed Roboam froÌ„ his right of regality that he had ouer the Ten tribes of the people of Israel because Salomon his Father had reuolted and fallen from the lawe of God and sacrificed to false Gods That the Prophet Elias deposed Achab for hauing imbraced 3. â—â—g 19. the religion of false Gods and persecuted the seruantes of the true God Those contrariwise who stand for the negatiue part answere that the organs instruments ministers and oracles of such depositions were the Prophets who were particulerly and infallibly instructed taught and inspired of Gods will and that their actions cannot be drawne into a consequence for the time of the Euangelicall law wherin there be more Prophets Those who reply forthe affirmatiue part say that where there were in the Iewish religion two sortes of missions the one ordinary which was Sacerdotall and the other extraordinary which was that of the Prophets it was to this end that if the ordinary came to decay or to decline it might be raysed vp agayne and supported by the extraordinary But in the law of the Ghospell there is but one mission and that Sacerdotall or of Priestes All the authority infallibility which was in the two missions of the old Testament is vnited in the only ordinary Sacerdotall mission of the new which consequently can no more fayle and be deceaued in iudging of Heresy or of Apostacy from Christian Religion which be the two only causes for which the French Doctours who haue written in fauour of Kinges think a Prince may be excluded from the right of raigning ouer Gods people then the propheticall mission of the old Testament And others adde that euen in the old Testament this prerogatiue was not restrayned to the Prophets alone but was extended to the Priest For the Priests iudged of the leprosy If thou perceauest saith the Law that there is difficulty betwene leprosy and leprosy Deut. 27. thou shalt arise go vp to the Priests of the Leuiticall stock And hereof there were two reasons the one for that the leprosy as all the ancient Fathers haue obserued was a figure of heresie the iudgment wherof by right apperteyned to the Priests of the new law of the Gospel alone the other for that the leprosy was not then one simple malady or disease naturall amongst the Iewes as it is now but it was a punishment extraordinary Leuit. 14. miraculous and diuine For this cause it lay one while in a stone of the wall Leuit. 13. which was to be pulled out to take it away another while in a linnen or wollen garment By occasion whereof the iudgment of this plague apperteyned to them who were the ordinary interpreters of the causes of Gods Ire that is to say to the Priestes And in this ease say they all were subiect vnto them euen the Kinges themselues and bound after they had giuen sentence of the leprosy and declared them to be touched with it to separate themselues from company and from the gouernment of the people And of this they bring for example the story of King Ozias 2. Paralip 26. who was suddainly stroken with a mark in the forehead for hauing
Apostacy cannot be secured To this obiection the answere is short and easy For the Church intermedleth not her selfe with the absolution of the subiects but in the Ecclsiasticall Court and therin besides this payne and that of excommunication it imposeth not any other By meanes wherof it is so far from consenting that any attempt be made vpon the life of them whom it hath excommunicated as it abhorreth all fortes of killinges and murtheringes and especially such as be sudaine and vnexpected in regard of the losse of both body and soule which cōmonly go therin accompanied togeather And if they say that the Church ordayneth it not but that it is the cause that it is done for as much as the Common wealth conforming it selfe to the Churches iudgment and making the same decision in the tribunall politique if the Prince keepe on his former course declareth him a Tyrant and an enemy of the state and consequently subiecteth him to the power of the Lawes politique which permit the conspiring against Tyrantes for the making of them away and for killing of them we bring first this exception that there is great difference betweene Tyrantes of vsurpation whome the Lawes permit to extirminate by all manner of wayes and Tyrantes of administration and gouernement who are lawfully called to their Principality but gouerne it ill and we add that the Hereticall Princes who persecute the faith and their Catholike subiects be of the number of Tyrantes of administration and not of the number of Tyrants of vsurpation against whome alone it is permitted to conspire by clandestine and secret practises And if they further vrge and say that the politique Lawes permit conspiracies against the one and the other we answere that they are politique prophane and heathenish Laws as those of the ancient Romans or of the Grecians in former tymes and not Christian politique Lawes For the Christian politique Laws consider not only in their Princes the respect due vnto them for the good of temporall pollicy and the regard of the Maiesty of the Estate which they represent but they further consider in them the Image and vnction of God who hath called them to that Dignity in so much as in them who haue once had the lawfull vocation of Royalty what Tyrany soeuer they exercise the Christian politique Laws neuer passe so farre as to permit the vse of proscription against their persons or that any do attempt by clandestine or secret coniuration or conspiracy against their persons or liues but they carry the same respect to them that did Dauid to Saul notwithstanding he knew he were reiected 1. Reg. 26. cast of and reproued of God when he said Who shall extend his hand vpon the anoynted of our Lord and shal be innocent In so much as if the Christians be constrayned to defend their religion and their life against Hereticall and Apostata Princes from whose allegiance they were absolued the Christian politique Laws permit not more then what is permitted by military Lawes and the right of nations that is to say open warre and not clandestine and secret 〈…〉 and conspiracies For there alwaies remayneth in them a certain habitude to the dignity Royall as it were a marke of a politique character that discerneth them from simple particulers and when the obstacle and impediment is taken away that is when they come to amend themselues and to giue satisfactiō it restoreth them to the lawfull vse and exercise of their regality And therefore we see that in so many controuersies that the Popes haue had with tēporall Princes neuer any Pope went so far as to coūsell or to assent to the murthering of Princes Contrariwise if any calumniators laboured to impute it vnto them they haue euer iustified themselues euen with the horrour and abhomination of such actes remembring themselues of these wordes of S. Gregory when the Lombards made war vpon him If I would haue medled with the death of men Greg. lib. 7. epist 1. the Nation of the Lombards should at this day haue had neither King non gouernors But because I stand in feare of God I will not haue to moddle or deale with the death of any person And touching the other point of the last Inconuenience which is that this medly maketh the remedies that they would bring to the daunger of the Kinges to be not only vnprofitable but also pernicious and domageable there needeth not much eloquence to perswade it For if those who made the attempts vpon the liues of our Kinges were moued to those horrible parricides by a false imagination which they conceaued to wit that our Kings did something in preiudice of religion how much more would they haue thought they had a greater better pretext if they had beleeued that our Kings had abused their authority by the bringing in of schisme and the ouerthrowing of Religion and that they had seene themselues in schisme separated from the communion of the Sea Apostolique and cut off from the other partes of the Church And more then this who vnderstandeth not that there cannot happen any thing of more and greater daunger for the life and authority of Kinges then intestine and ciuill wars which schismes do ordinarily draw after them Moreouer who knoweth not that the cōtempt and indifferencie of Religion which must needes follow vpon schismes engendreth and occasioneth Impiety and Atheisme and taketh quite away all the respect that men are wont to carry to Kinges for the loue of God and for the reuerence of Religion which is the strongest corps or Court of Guard and the surest rampaire for the defence and security of their persons For when Religion is had in contempt men are not any longer withholden from attempting vpon the persons of Kinges then by force and by feare of the temporall paynes and therfore when they thinke they may do it without beeing punished or that they contemne and make no reckoning of the temporall paynes they haue no more bridle to conteyne them or to hold them in Finally who seeth not that there can be nothing worse for the safety of the persons and of the estate of Kinges then to stir vp and drawe vpon them by an ouerture of a new schisme and diuision from the Church Psal 75. the wrath of him who taketh away the spirits of Princes from out of the earth And heere Gentlemen I will not with you vse more reasons and argumentes but wil passe ouer to exhortations and intreaties and wil coniure you to remember that you are French men and that you are also Christians and Catholikes and that in treating touching the securing of Kinges you must not only cast your eies vpon the earth but also lift them vp to Heauen and you must not remedy their temporall safetie in causing them to forgo and loose the euerlasting nor prouide for your bodily part which is France by destroying and ruyning the spirituall parte which is the Church The Pope tolerateth and