a Doctrine And this to the face of a Priest pious exemplar religious I could say a Gentleman too if you will have this circumstance of blood to be of moment and who for Christ despis'd a fair Estate descended to him by inheritance and chose the Order of St. Francis A Priest so zealous for the Catholick Faith that for many years before and after this Subscription even to old Age he had laboured painfully and successfully in the Irish Vineyard to reduce Sectaries to the Church and preserve and comfort those which were Catholicks and this while the late Tyrants were in power in extreme straits and often imprisonments Who had often suffered banishment and been snatch't from the very jaws of death having been condemn'd to the Gallows by the sentence of the Laws and Judges A death which being for his Faith and the Pope he was not only most ready but most desirous to undergo but that his Judges when they saw his resolution envy'd him the glory of Martyrdom as they publickly told him This judgment of yours concerning such a man to be pronounced to his own face and pronounced by a Religious Abbot nay and also by the Abbot of Mount Royall Poor Gearnon then had better have been in his grave say you than subscribed What then is it you do not say of Caron Walsh and the rest of the Subscribers What not only of those whose names are long since in Print but which make far the greater number those who are yet only in Manuscript Guardians Priors Doctors of Divinity Bishops What of those not only Clergymen but almost of all the Lay-Catholick both Gentry and Nobility in Ireland the rest who have not yet being ready to Subscribe when call'd upon What of the English Clergy of the same Communion and Faith who 't is manifest have approved this Form of our Fidelity and made another for themselves not only not unlike ours but for what concerns the Point in Controversie far better What of the French Venetian Spanish German indeed all Catholicks in Europe and not only in Europe but all Christians of all places and all times both present and past whenever their Interest is or has been in question Nay What do you think of the Holy Doctors Prelates and Fathers whose memories are now in veneration and who conspired with us in this Doctrine nay taught it us Lastly What of the Primitive Church it self and the chief and greatest Doctors of it the most Holy Apostles and the very Princes of the Apostles Peter and Paul who first after our Saviour himself in their Epistles taught this Doctrine to the World Had it then indeed been better all these universally had never been than been defiled with this venemous Contagion Had it truly and consequentially been better too the Religion of the Cross had not been Taught by Christ Preach't by his immediate Disciples and by their Successors delivered down Better that even after it had been Preach't and believed the Superstition thereof had not been preserved but totally abolish't Better Christian Churches had been shut up their Altars profaned and destroyed the dispensation of Sacred things had ceased Sacraments Sacrifices and the Sacred dispensers of them taken away And if all this sufficed not for rooting out the pestiferous Error much better to join with Julian for restoring Paganism and Judaism or with the Saracens and Turks for setting up the fiction of Mahomet and so shutting the gates of Heaven and opening those of Hell to all Mankind by the miserable loss of souls to bring joy to the wicked spirits and make the Angels of peace as the Prophet speaks weep bitterly But a Christian Abbot to say That from whence all this would follow O shame To prefer the Temporal but most vain and false Monarchy of the Pope before the true and certain one of our eternal Bishop Saviour God! O Wickedness And to wish this rather should perish than that not be establish't O abominable and mad See my good Lord whether too much heat in a bad Cause has drawn you and the consequence of an unadvised Judgment pronounced against Father Gearnon and the Subscribers unless perhaps you would be thought to have spoken without any judgment i. e. without weighing the consequence of what you said Whatever you would have us think how much rather according to Religion more pious according to reason more prudent had it been with that most holy and most prudent Abbot of Clareval S. Bern. Ep. 170. ad Ludovic Reg. Franc. to have praised the unshakable resolution of Gearnon and the other Subscribers in performing their Allegiance to their King Although the whole World should conspire against them And by the example of that holy Saint to have added what his Writings testifie of him That even in such case viz. of a Conspiracy even of the whole world the God of Heaven is to be feared by us and therefore we are to believe that not even in such a case 't is lawful for Subjects to attempt any thing against Regal Majesty or Plot against the Life Authority or Crown of Him who is subject to God alone second to none amongst Mortals first in His own Kingdom after God and in Temporals judged by God alone How much more pious and more prudent had it been with that most prudent Saint thus to have exhorted Gearnon and each other of the Subscribers Stand thou in thy Testament exercise thy self therein and remain in the work of thy Commandments until Death take thee away as in effect also that wise Hebrew Jesus the Son of Sirach long before St. Bernard's time premonish't us Ecclesiastic xi 21 But you my Lord persuade the direct contrary and not only persuade but to your power constrain and constrain both by word and deed and that almost for these Three whole Years although not alwayes in the same words Although the whole world should be on our Kings side and the Pope alone against him by Sentence either of Deposition Privation or perhaps only Excommunication that at the back of his Holiness we not only lawfully may but ought to plot and attempt against our otherwise lawful King is your Sentence Hierom Abbot of Mount Royal your Admonition Exhortation Precept and what not Which because we do not embrace but by a publick and necessary Protestation detest on the sudden we are become wicked men deserve to be razed out of the number of the Faithful and by your Lordship are particularly termed disobedient Apostates Schismaticks Men of Dirt who have raised Troubles to the Church of God and Men who had better have been first in their Graves And thus indeed Hierom Abbot of Mount Royal however otherwise Bernard Abbot of Clarevalle But O the difference 'twixt Abbot and Abbot O Abbas Abbas as the same St. Bernard cryes out in the life of another Saint and Abbot St. Benedict comparing himself to him O the difference I say 'twixt Abbot and Abbot The Abbot who Teaches Duty to
their dear Countrey with so many other bordering Kingdoms of Christianity lest open as a prey to the fury of Barbarians what reproach and what confusion to see a Turk obtain a victory from Christ against Christians when Amuâ—â—th in the heat of that Battel observing his own army put to the worst by the valour of Vladislaus drew forth out of his bosome the scroll of the articles of Cessation signed by the Christian King and casting his eyes to Heaven challenged Christs Divinity if he did not presently shew himself a revenging God for that dishonour done his Name by this perfidiousness of Christians What some would fain here say yet it is only to say somewhat not because they conceive it hath any colour of reason that it belongs to the Judge from whom not to the Appellant or others to know whether the causes of the Appeal be probably or evidently just is answered by Glossa in cap. Cum Appellationibus de Appellat in 6. where these express words are That it belongs to the Judge Superiour to whom the Appeal is made to examine and judge of the lawfulness of the Appeal and by Glossa in cap. ut debitus extr de Appellat That this depends not of the Judge from whom but of the truth it self Whence may be inferred That the Appellant as he really sees probability or evidence in the Causes alledged may accordingly address himself to the superiour Judge and obey no more the inferiour to whom it no way belongs to judge of the Causes when they are such as being proved they would be thought reasonable otherwise than by giving a bare answer or apostles And this is it the Glosse intends For doubtless he intends not to exclude the power of the superiour Judge in examining and giving sentence for or against the Appeal Yet certain it is That if the Appellant sees the very superiour Judge not to sentence aright either in the matter of the Appeal or any other it is lawful to appeal further even from him to his superiour if any be Gloss cap. Romana verb. Minus legitima de Appellat in 6. Lastly and most directly to the purpose by Gloss in cap. Sollicitudinem extr verb. Episcopus posset (l) 〈…〉 in 〈…〉 ext 〈◊〉 Appell verb. â—â—icopus pâ—ssâ—â—bâ—d quare judâ—x non pâ—â—est cognâ—scâ—râ—e Appellatione ab ipso facta sicut cognoscit an sua sit jurisdictio Ideo non potest cognoscere de Appellatione quia cum probabilis causa exp sita est in Appellatione jam exemptus est a Jurisdictione illius est illi suspectus praesumptio est pro ipso quod semper vellet judicare pro sua Jurisdictione c. Where 't is demanded Wherefore cannot the Judge from whom an Appeal is made know that is call in question examine juridically and judge or give sentence of the same Appeal And 't is answered That therefore he cannot be a Judge of the Appeal made from him because that a probable cause being alledged in the Appeal the Appellant is exempted from his Jurisdiction â—e me suspected to him and because it may be presumed that the Judge in this case wouâ—â— give sentence in favour of his own Jurisdiction c. Nay the very Text of cap. ut debitus § Cum autem puts this business out of all debate where it is said (m) Cum autem ex rationabili causa putâ—verit appellandom coram eodem Judice causa Appellationis exposita tali viz. quae si soret probata deberet legitima reputari Superior de Appellatione cognoscat c. That it belongs to the superiour Judge to examine and give sentence whether the causes were in themselves reasonable or no As for the inferiour Judge the Appellant is bound only to expose or alledge before him probable or reasonable causes to wit such causes which being proved ought to be reputed lawful And therefore the Judge from whom hath no right to examine juridically the truth of them since the Appellant is only bound to expose or alledge them before him and not to prove them for who sees not that to be bound to alledge and to be bound to prove are far different And consequently he cannot hinder a just Appeal by saying it belongs to him to know and judge whether it be a just Appeal or no or whether the Causes expressed be reasonable or no Which is yet more plainly and indeed throughly cleared without any place left for expositions or distinctions by cap. Si a Judice de Appellat in 6. where its expresly decreed by Boniface the VIII (n) Si a Judice a quo propter gravamen quod tibi proponis illatum appellas ad docendum resore gravatum ad audiendam revocationem ejusdem gravaminis si de ipso docuerâ—s nam supponit quod ad hoc non teneris ut infâ—a statim tibi terminus praefigatur Nec corameo cum ipse per se id videre habeat docere nec etiam tanquam coram Judice cum per appellationem sit suspensa ipsius Jurisdictio comparere teneris nisi ad hoc solum ut revocationem ipsam audias si eam duxcrit faciendam That for to prove you had just or probable causes to appeal you are not bound to appear or answer before the Judge from whom you appealed in regard sayes Boniface that he is no more your Judge whereas by your Appeal especially when it is from an extrajudicial or a gravamine as our Appeal is his Jurisdiction is suspended Only one case excepted which is not to our purpose yet that is when the Judge from whom saniori ductus consilio being better advised would recall his past sentence whereby the Appellant was grieved for only in this case he is bound being called to appear before the Judge a quo to the end he may hear the sentence of his grievance recalled What can be desired more manifestly convincing If the Judge from whom once the Appeal is interposed from a grievance and probable Causes therein expressed that is such as being proved ought to be accounted probable if he be no more Judge if he have no more jurisdiction over the Appellant but only in that one case if the Appellant be not bound to appear before him for to prove the truth or justice of his motives of Appeal how doth it belong to him to examine juridically the truth of these Causes or to sentence the Appeal to be good or bad or on pretext hereof to hinder the Appellant from the prosecution of the Appeal or getting the benefit of an Appeal Certainly it cannot be unless we admit a plain contradiction And certainly as yet we have not seen one Chapter Passage or Glosse of the Law could be produced to the contrary by such as seem to maintain the invalidity of the Appeal though they have laboured much in heaping together Citations But all to no other purpose then either that as we grant and never denied probable causes of the Appeal
sinful obedience to the will of others Because the Procurator had out of a particular regard of such honest men of their Society in Ireland as joyn'd with him formerly in the differences with the Nuntio and out of an esteem and affection also for their Society in it self as considered in its primitive foundation institution and observance and in its labours for the training up of youth laying aside the latter prejudices brought upon it by those inconsiderat works of some though too many of their chief writers because I say the Procurator had for those reasons ventur'd so fairly and earnestly both in his More Ample Account and in his private discourses lately and earnestly with some persons of highest rank in both Kingdoms to vindicate as much as in him lay the Irish Jesuits though not every individual of them from those aspersions the generality of that Order lyes under amongst Protestants at least in England and from such aspersions indeed against their practises and against their principles or doctrine not of deposition only but of equivocation mental reservation and of the lawfulness of changing opinions resolutions and practices too at pleasure according to their other maximes of extrinsick probability and in all matters whatsoever and because he had done so much herein that whereas before those great persons had no inclination at all to receive any kind of declaration of Allegiance or faithfulness from men of such principles as the foresaid printed Authors argue in their opinions the Society in general to be yet he prevailed so far with them as not to involve the Fathers in Ireland in the same esteem with such others of the same Order in some other Countries as had so justly deserved their blame and censure 9. To that other excuse common to the three late Orders as well Capuchins and Carmelits as Jesuits the answer was That the Princes or States permission of or connivence with them should more be regarded then that either of Ordinaries or pre-existent Regulars or of the Court of Rome it self And this they could not expect in reason if they they appeared not zealous of His Majesties lawful rights and prerogatives in all temporal matters and for the peace and safety of his People and Kingdoms at least if they shewed themselves perverse and peevish against either or against so lawful and necessary a duty as is a bare naked Remonstrance or Declaration of their loyal principles and affections where and when so justly expected from them by and to assure His Majesty of their better carriage hereafter then Himself or his Father of glorious memory had found in the late wars of their Countrey And if by their cheerful hearty concurrence to such demonstrations of duty they merited a better opinion hereafter to be had of them by His Majesty and great Ministers of State and such as would really deserve protection they needed not fear the opposition of others whatsoever whiles they behaved themselves as men of discretion and their profession should 10. To that Bugbear which those of the Secular Clergy alledged to excuse themselves it was said That they very well knew it was a meer pretence That the Shoo did not really pinch them there That albeit the Regulars were numerous and of esteem yet not of so great or prevalent as in such a matter or any at all which had reason for it and for the Secular Clergy could any way bear them down even in case the Regulars did not concur with them That they were the Pastors and Leaders of the Flock by power command and law of the Church and their authority and jurisdiction established by the Canons from the very beginning That the Regulars had no such authoritative commanding power nor subjection due unto them from the people but was voluntary in the internal Court of Conscience in foro paenitentiali or only in the private auricular confessional seat That besides it had no kind of colour but their example would be immediatly followed by all Regulars by some freely and heartily who were otherwise themselves our of judgment and affection too so principled and so affected and only expected their authority to back them by others out of shame and fear to see by any further opposition themselves reduced to a streight of giving other reasons then such as they could not own or maintain and of discovering so the true cause rebellious principles and affections and consequently of seeing themselves houted at by all sober and good people even of their own religion and communion And as for the false aspersion and scandal raised against that Remonstrance amongst some of the Commons as if it signified in effect as much as the Oath of Supremacy it was themselves suffered that of meer purpose to go oâ— and they might with one single declaration as easily disabuse all pâ—ssessed therewith as it was raised without any ground That no Church-man even the most malicious would before any understanding man own the raising or forwarding of it however it was known that some few of them in private corners did whisper it to the illiterate as I could name a certain Prior of the Dominicans Order Father Michael Fullam to have done most unconscientiously that I may say no more though chiefly of purpose to excuse by such diabolical forgeries their own opposition when upbraided therewith by good honest wel-meaning people as some few others of them had the impudence and I could instance Father W. L. of the Society and Father D. D. of the Franciscans for a long time to say and aver too that the King as being a Protestant should not be prayed for at all by Catholicks either publickly or privatly though some few others also and somwhat more warily though erroneously enough too and against plain Scriptures both in the Old and new Testament and the continued practice of the primitive Church distinguish'd the manner of praying for him and a long time held and indoctrinated others that he should not be prayed for so as to desire the temporal safety of his Crown or Person victory over his enemies or any prosperous earthly success unto him at all but his conversion only and repentance in this life and salvation in the next without any further addition That as this heretical doctrine was soon and quite beaten down by the contrary practice of the whole Clergy both Secular and Regular which now we see and hear at all Chappels and Altars so that calumny and scandal would throughout the Kingdom cease in one fortnight if they pleased to declare it such as they are bound in conscience truth and honesty to do 11. As for the pick of some to the Procurator whom they falsely suppose to be the Author of the Remonstrance though had he been so he would rather glory therein then be ashamed thereof or of the Declaration of loyalty inserted in that Remonstrance if not peradventure for being any way or in part defective or not home enough in some things
which were it his draught it had not been albeit in the main dispute it be fully sufficient the answer waâ— That it became not Priests nor Christians nor even moral or rational honest men although neither Priests nor Christians to obstruct the common good out of private animosities much less to obstruct it to the prejudice of the Religion and Worship of God and obstruct all too by sinister wayes by calumnies and forgeries and a false pretence of Religion where there was nothing less then Religion intended but rather the quite contrary That in relation to his former actings in the controversies with the Nuntio if they had considered things rightly they would rather acknowledge admire with thankfulness adore the Providence of God which had inspired him then to do as he did and as became a good Patriot Subject religious Man Christian Priest and Catholick Divine to the end he might be after so many revolutions some way instrumental to save them again That they have found his endeavours even in forwarding that Remonstrance and in many other Instances very useful and very advantagious and profitable too for all both Catholick People and Clergy of Ireland And therefore he might in some measure and sense though with infinit disproportion answer such of them as traduce or maligne him as Christ did the Jews when at the instigation of some both of the envious Priests and wicked Scribes and Pharisees too that religious but hypocritical Sect of those ancient people of God the multitude taking stones to throw at their Saviour of purpose to kill him he told and demanded of them as the Gospel relates multa opera bona ostendi vobis Ioh. â— 32. c. propter quod eorum opus lapidatis me That for his exposition of the said Remonstrance in his More Ample Account if it did not convince them as he believed it did or whether it did or no yet were not they desired to subscribe it nor was it ever intended by him or any other they or any else should either subscribe or approve otherwise of it but as they pleased to read or lay it by That he alone was to answer for that Book if there was any thing amiss in it And from them no more was expected but to sign the Remonstrance in it self barely considered according to the true obvious and sincere meaning of all the several passages And if they taking it so could otherwise rationally expound it than the Procurator did in his said little book themselves were to satisfie their own consciences in that behalf and leave his book to stand or fall to the Authors cost or profit That however he found it a tye of duty on himself for many respects and particularly for that of acting by special Commission for the Catholicks both Clergy and Lay-people of Ireland and to obtain for them some liberty ease or connivence in the exercise of Catholick Religion To let them know they could not by other expositions answer or arrive at the ends of that exposition nor shew themselves to be truly sincerely loyal or faithful to the King in those contingencies wherein their allegiance might be for their former actions prudently suspected 12. And for the general objection of all their allegation of the laws still in force c. they were desired to consider 1. How happy they would have thought themselves immediatly before the Kings Restauration and for so many other foregoing sad years under usurping Tyrants if they had found a suspension only of those laws and that connivence at the exercise of their Religion they now enjoyed under His most Sacred Majesty and ever since or immediatly after the Remonstrance presented in their names or behalf to Him That they had far more assurance than they yet deserved being they demurr'd so long on professing under their hands a dutiful subjection and no other certainly than without any such profession they were bound to by all the laws of God under pain of Hell or Damnation and by all the laws of the Land under the severest punishments of Treason That they were not to expect capitulations from the King for their being Subjects but neverthess had cause enough to see if they were not wilfully blind He was and would be to them all a good merciful gracious compassionat and indulgent King blotting all their former iniquities or those of so many of them as had been unjust to Him and his Father and Lieutenant and other protestant People quite out of His remembrance evermore if they did shew themselves true penitents and converts and sincere performers of their duty hereafter That they were no indifferent no competent Judges of those Articles they pleaded whether they were broken or no by the King or his Ministers or if broke in any part or to any person whether such breach was lawful and necessary or no in the present conjuncture of affairs after so great a change or alteration of the case That reason might tell them considering the condition of their Country and Inhabitants thereof which requires other laws and other proceedings and another kind of use of laws at least in matter of Religion than England does at present they could have no ground to fear any forcing of them to other Countreys for want of protection at home if and whiles they demeaned themselves peaceably provided they gave generally and cheerfully that assurance expected from them of such peaceable demeanour hereafter That in case of the very worst imaginable of evils the comfort of a good conscience were to be preferred by them to any earthly emolument and the conscience of having done their duty by washing the scandal of unholy tenets from their Religion would be a portable theatre to them whethersoever they should be forced and the assurance of suffering only in such case for a pure holy and undefiled Religion and Communion for justice and the Catholick faith only not for suspicion or conviction of treasonable maximes and practices condemn'd in all other Kingdoms and States in their own cases as impious uncatholick unchristian and even I say condemn'd by the professors of their own Church every where out of the small temporal Principality of the Pope And therefore they needed not apprehend any such attempt scorn prejudice or persecution abroad for having performed such a christian duty at home but on the contrary to be praised and cherished if not perhaps such as through vanity and folly would esteem no other refuge but where they might withal expect titles and miters which they very little deserved if not by such deserts as would untitle and unmitre them wholy if they were sifted narrowly according to the Gospel of Christ or Canons of the Catholick Church though perhaps they would hold them fast enough according to those other late ones made by Papal authority alone But that if the very saddest they could by Chymeraes frame to themselves did happen in such case as well abroad as at home it became
the guilt of Sacriledge to refix their signatures which can be no less even formally than to say That the Remonstrance in it self is sacrilegious But that virtually and consequentially they judge it also to be either Heretical or Schismatical no other proof is requisite besides that where they say That moreover it contains some things repugnant to the sincere profession of the Catholick Religion For whoever sayes so of any form must virtually and consequentially say the same form is either Heretical or Schismatical or both because all judicious learned persons know very well That no things are repugnant to the sincere profession of Catholick Religion but such things as imply Heresie or Schism or both Secondly You are to consider That in their first and long original unpublish'd Censure the Louain Divines gave these four chief grounds which I have hitherto impugned in well nigh a Hundred sheets and gave them I say for their own grounds of alledging those two pretended Causes or Reasons and of their consequent Censure so as above of our Remonstrance as unlawful detestable sacrilegious c. And consequently you are to consider That being those four chief grounds of theirs are so clearly and utterly and universally ruined by me hitherto their said two pretended Causes or Reasons which had no subsistence but in those grounds must also be no less universally clearly and utterly ruined and by further consequence so likewise no less universally clearly and utterly must their said Censure be being this depends wholly on those two Reasons or Causes and these on the four grounds Thirdly You are to consider yet more particularly the grand Temerity against Prudence Falsity against Truth Injury against Justice and Scandal against Charity of this Censure by reflecting first on those Reasons or Causes given in and for it and secondly on the sense of each of those words adjectives or epithets of it and by comparing both these epithets and those causes to the several parts clauses or propositions of the Remonstrance it self analyzed into propositions or even to the whole Remonstrance as comprising all together without any such Analysts understanding now by the Remonstrance that part of it which only is in dispute the Act of Recognition with the Declarations Renunciations c. therein contained and the Petitionary address thereunto annexed To which purpose I desire the judicious learned Reader to look back to the 7 8 and 9th page of this First Part and read there once more attentively that our Remonstrance from first to last and then analyse or resolve it I mean resolve those Recognitions Declarations Renunciations Promises c. and Petitionary addresses all therein contained and analyse or resolve all into so many particular distinct propositions as they are fit or may be resolved into and after this to apply those two Reasons or Causes and each and all those adjectives or epithets of the above Louain Censure to each proposition severally nay and to all at last jointly taken And to the same purpose I desire him to consider that in no part of the Remonstrance nor in the whole taken together any obedience is promised or acknowledged or confessed to be due to our Sovereign Charles the Second or any other Temporal Prince but that which is in Civil and Temporal Affairs only and none at all in spiritual things nor in any kind of spiritual thing For so is the obedience it promises acknowledges or confesseth as due to our gracious King in His own Dominions by all his own Subjects whether Protestants or Catholicks and as due to all other absolute Princes and Supreme Governors within their own respective Dominions also and by their own respective Subjects so I say is that obedience most signally expressed and determined in formal words and in two several passages of this Remonstrance to all Civil and Temporal Affairs adding further yet and in signal formal words too that it be in such meer Civil and Temporal Affairs not universally or absolutely in all cases according to the arbitrary will or pleasure of the Prince Charles the Second but as the Laws and Rules of Government in such things in this Kingdom do require at our hands and to other such Supreme independent Princes or Magistrates according to the Laws of each Commonwealth respectively Whence any judicious Reader may conclude at least if he have read what I have hitherto so diffusely writ of the subjection of all even Clergy-men to the Supreme Temporal Magistrate in Temporal things That the Divines of Louain did most rashly falsly injuriously and scandalously suppose their first Cause or Reason of their Censure viz. That our Remonstrance contains a promise of a more ample Obedience than Secular Princes can exact from their Catholick Subjects or their Subjects make unto them For I have demonstrated at large before that by the Law of God and Nature and by the Laws of man as well these are Ecclesiastical as Civil all men are bound to pay such obedience to their respective Kings or Supreme Magistrates And if they are so bound to pay it sure the Prince may especially when he sees Reason for it require a promise or an acknowledgment or confession or declaration of it from them and they make such promise acknowledgment c. And I am sure too that our Prince had much Reason then when that Remonstrance was made and hath yet still to expect such even a most formal promise and declaration from the Romish Clergy of Ireland and they no less to make it to Him To the same purpose yet of seeing further into the Temerity Falsity Injury and Scandal of the said Louain Censure the Reader may be pleased to reflect again once more and no less particularly on their abovesaid second Supposition Cause or Reason of it as you have seen that Louain Faculty in this their short Censure which we now handle express that second Cause viz. That moreover it contains some things repugnant to the sincere profession of Catholick Religion and I desire the good Reader to apply this and compare it either to all the propositions jointly taken or to every one severally of our Remonstrance and then judge whether I have not just Reason to complain of them and tax them as I do that this which they suppose in the second place is most rashly falsly injuriously and scandalously supposed or alledged by them as a Cause or Reason of their Censure For what can be more rash false injurious and scandalous than to condemn or censure a pure and meer Acknowledgment Confession Declaration or promise of Loyalty or of Allegiance Fidelity and Obedience to our Rightful and Supreme Lord and Sovereign and a promise of such in meer Temporal things made to Him by His own natural Catholick Subjects and made in a publick Remonstrance wherein those of England as well nay antecedently to as those of Ireland joyn'd than I say to condemn or censure such a publick Instrument of such a great Body containing of the
not only by priority of place or honour of dignity or only vocation or age or sanctity but I speak with the generality of Divines by priority of an ordinary Pastor and Prelate that is of spiritual Jurisdiction received from Christ over the Rams as well as sheep of the flock as well over the Apostles universally as all the rest of the faithful And yet St. Paul reprehended St. Peter not with less but far greater liberty though in a case if I mistake not of less moment and this in a Publick meeting of the Disciples and not only reprehended but resisted him to his face reproov'd accus'd him of Judaism among the Jews Gentilism among Gentiles dissembling amongst both and that he walked not uprightly according to the truth of the Gospel And this passage betwixt St. Peter and himself St. Paul would have testified to the Christian world in the Epistle which he writ to the Galatians although this dissembling of St. Peter was afterwards defended from sin by St. Austin against the Writings of the learned and holy St. Hierom. 'T is superfluous to rehearse what others have done in process of time and almost all ages of Christian Religion in imitation of St. Paul and with like liberty reprehending even Popes themselves the Successors of St. Peter what the holiest Bishops the most Religious Abbots most austere Monks the best Priests and the devontest Laity and Clergy almost of all degrees and all these united to the Roman Church and Bishop in the strictest tye of Ecclesiastical communion For the present and for a Letter let that one example of St. Paul suffice and let it suffice to excuse Walsh from too great a freedom in writing to an Internuncio of an Internuncio whom he does not acknowledge for his Superiour and to an Internuncio of a Cardinal whom he does acknowledge I complain or reproach or object nothing but that in the present Controversie you walk not according to the truth of the Gospel but that by that dissembling or flattery or at least wicked errour of yours you strive to put a yoke upon the neck of the Disciples the Christian world beyond comparison worse than that of the Mosaick Law and strive to impose this yoke of a kind of Papal Tyranny by arts truly bad A yoke which neither we nor our Fathers could bear a yoke plainly contrary to the yoke of Christ My yoke is sweet sayes our good Saviour and my burthen light That of yours is full of thorns and your burthens more than insupportable driving both body and soul even to Hell And shall it be thought a fault in Walsh after he has been provoked with much injury and urged with reproaches and slanders and that only for this cause That he writes more freely than becomes him not against the Pope himself Alexander the VII whom God long preserve to the good of his whole Church who for his own part is said to be so innocent in this matter that he has severely reprehended both Cardinal and Abbot not against those of his Court or Ministers universally but onely one inferiour though a commendatory Abbot and one Bishop though a Cardinal but two of the whole number of his Ministers Will they say That though the matter require freedom yet 't is not allowable in Walsh nor fit in an Inferior to and of a Superior¿ What then was not Paul inferiour to Peter and Bernard to Eugenius and Robert that holy Bishop of Lincoln to Innocentius So many other famous holy Catholick Writers were they not inferiour to Popes I say themselves to whom or of whom many even in this very Controversie have written and written with a liberty at least not less If you object again That Walsh is tyed by a particular vow of his Rule to render obedience to his Superiours Walsh will reply again That to this very day he never was commanded by any Superiour either under obedience as the custom is or censure nor in vertue of the Holy Ghost or by any formal so much as simple command not so much as by a single admonition either not to hold as he does or not to write or speak And Walsh will reply That the obedience he has vow'd is Canonical not Political and to be understood of spiritual not civil matters And he will reply besides That a Vow neither is nor can be a bond of iniquity as from the Canons themselves of the Popes even the very dullest of the Canonists teach Lastly he will reply too That a man is not less obliged by a precept of Divine or even Ecclesiastical Law receiv'd I mean and not repugnant to the Divine Law than by the tye of a Vow how solemn soever And that St. Paul St. Bernard Robert of Lincoln and the rest of whose greater at least equal freedom in expostulating with the greatest and holiest Popes I have spoken above were tyed to Canonical obedience by a precept of the Divine I speak according to the opinion of your Lordship without doubt and the most common amongst Divines or Ecclesiastical Law or both and that many of them had also upon them the tye of a religious Vow Why then should not that be lawful to Walsh which was lawful to them and many of them in this very Controversie or some other wholly like it If your Lordship say our Holy Father Alexander the VII who now sits in the Throne of St. Peter has written Letters to you by which it appears it is the judgment of His Holiness That this Form of ours contains Propositions which are all one with those condemn'd long since by Paul the V. and lately again by Innocont the X. If I say you object thus Walsh will answer First As for what concerns our Holy Father Alexander the VII that where a thing makes to the prejudice of a third person and this manifestly makes to the prejudice not only of one single third person but of a great Kingdom of many such Kingdoms nay of the whole World credit by the Canons is not to be given either to your Lordship or any other Minister whatsoever and howsoever dignified with Cardinalship or other Title unless he produce the Original or at least authentick Copy thereof You have yet produced none you have shew'd none either to the parties concerned or to any other as far as we can understand Besides that private Letters even of our Holy Father Alexander himself are not of force to oblige the faithful to a conformity of judgment or opinion much less of Faith which is Catholick and Divine unless some Rescript or Decretal Epistle some Bull or Brief which kind of writings you do not so much as alledge come out with due solemnity be publish't and promulgated and this not directed to any particular person or persons neither to one Clergy People or Kingdom or even more than one but to all the faithful of Christ wherever they be Otherwise that according to many eminent Divines even of those who are for the
fortune of War and division of minds had hapned he also thought fit to change parties and look back towards the old Confederacy and consequently to be as active as others in the unhappy Congregation of Bishops at Jamestown in the year 1650. signing both their Declaration against the King 's Lieutenant and Excommunication too against all that would any way obey his Excellency This remedy not proving either useful or proper but far more noxious and the Parliament Forces gaining thereby and by the Lord Lieutenant's departure so much ground that all seemâ—d very soon after to be in a desperate condition and the Marquess of Clanrickard by Ormond left Deputy for the King in pursuance of Monsieur St. Katherin's negotiation with him from the Duke of Lorrain having sent other Commissioners to Flanders to Treat with his said Highness of Lorrain provided they had first the King's consent our Bishop my Lord of Ferns also departs the Kingdom to sollicit aids from Catholick Princes but not otherwise authorized thereunto than by the Letters of private persons albeit otherwise some of them Bishops Coming to Paris and there denied access which he desired to His Majesty our Gracious King and attributing this affront to the Marquess of Ormond he takes it to heart and speaks and both writes and prints too a little piece wherein he reflects too severely and unjustly on him the said Marquess of Ormond Which if I mistake not was it that occasion d those Books written after at Paris in opposition and answer one to the other by Father John Ponce the zealous Nuntiotist Franciscan and Richard Belings Esq that no less Ormonist than known Royalist although in former times the first Legat to Rome from the Confederates and other Princes of Italy and the very man that occasion'd the sending of the Nuncio to Ireland The negotiation with the Duke of Lorrain having come to nothing and Limmerick and Galway surrendred and consequently soon after the whole Kingdom submitted to the Parliament of England the afflicted Bishop knowing that by reason of his having on his return from Rome immediately quitted the Nuncio party and both submitted to and promoted the Peace of 1648 and of his consequential being blasted ever since by the factious Irish at Rome as an Ormonist there could be no favourable reception or accomodation expected for him in that Court he shifts the best he can for himself in several places until at last the Archbishop of St. Jago in Galicia in Spain harbour'd him generously and bountifully according to his dignity and merits where continuing for some years and officiating as a Suffragan Bishop he begun a correspondence with me by Letters soon after His Majesties happy Restauration as together with his Lordship did the good Irish Father of the Society of Jesus Father William St. Leger and either by James Cusack a Secular Priest and Doctor of Divinity or by Father George Gould a Franciscan both which came from him directly and brought me Letters hither to London he sent me some writings of his own against Ferral's Book The Book as I have noted before which not only bastardizing all those Irish not descended of the more ancient Septs or Names that possess'd Ireland even before any Invasion either of English or Danes nor only in general involving all that later brood under the Title of wicked Politicians Anti-Catholicks c. but particularly and singularly falling on the Two Ambassadors yea and taxing them with having of set purpose all along betrayed the Nuncio and his cause the Book I say that by such precious Contents from the first line to the last of it both opened our good Bishop's eyes more then any other argument could to see clearly the ultimate designs of that Party which led him blindfold so long and so often especially at Waterford in 1646. and Jamestown in the year 1650. and if I be not very much out in my conjecture was at least partly either the cause or the occasion of his beginning so and desiring a correspondence with me then anno 1662. at London he himself remaining at St. Jago What followed after his first Letters to me i. e. after what Dr. Cusack one of the first Subscribers of the Remonstrance writ him back what he return'd in the year 1662. to this Doctor what to the Duke of Ormond and me in 1665 pro or con upon the Subject of the Remonstrance what to me again in May 1666. from St. Sebastian viz. after he had received the Indiction and presuming licence to return home had quitted his good condition at St. Jago what I to him in answer and finally what he replyed to me in July that same year from Paris will best appear out of the Bishops own Letters Whereof I give here as many as I judg'd material or useful to any design of this First Tome and much the rather because he is not only the onely Bishop yet alive of those of the Irish Nation that were made before Nuncio Rinuccini's time but the onely also that endeavoured to give the best reasons he could for himself or for his own dissent as to that expected or desired from him And I must say this besides that surely had he the writer of them had as good a cause and been as much conversant in the Gallican Theology which in the point controverted is that of the Primitive Fathers of Christianity as he is both a good Orator and laying the Affairs of Ireland aside a very pious and exemplar Prelate the Irish Nation generally had never been as unhappy as it is even at this present The Roman-Catholick Bishop of Fern's Letter from St. Jago 18 Junii 1662. To the Reverend James Cusack Doctor of Divinity at London SIR BY the four last Letters I had from you to which I have heretofore answered you demand from me two things to wit an approbation of a Protestation signed by L. B. of Dromore your self and other Divines of our Nation in that City and that I would give you a power to sign a Procuratorium Father Peter Walsh hath from the Clergy of Ireland whereunto Edmund Reilly Antony Geoghegan James Dempsy and others have consented as you write to me To the same I also willingly consent and do hereby impower you to sign in my 〈◊〉 the said Procuratorium but with this limitation the said Father Walsh shall do nothing for me nor in my name touching the above mentioned Protestation until he shall receive my own express sense and answer That Protestation seems a Rock to the Divines of our Nation in this Kingdom and they wonder ye there made so easie a work of it yet of your good intentions in illo facto most of them rest well satisfied persuading themselves there was a necessity of undeceiving the Prince and clearing our Clergy from black Calumnies but they differ from you in the judgment of the matter and lawfulness of the said Protestation Briefly the opinion of the Divines here as well of our Nation
and only to decline the Remonstrance of 61. or approbation of it by that short paper which you have in the Narrative offered them to that pupose of their approbation and insisted upon by Father Peter Walsh resolved as an expedient and only to take off the said Father P. W. from insisting upon their subscription to that paper of approbation of the said Remonstrance of 61. and resolved to move unto him that he would be content with the six propositions of Sorbon and if he would and withal would return to their house and declare so they would also all most readily and heartily subscribe those even all fix propositions of Sorbon whereof the last is that against the Popes infallibility without the consent of the Church And for my own part who certainly should know best of any if there had been any such design before laid I protest here in the presence of God and to all the world 1. That I never had my self nor knew nor thought nor once suspected that any other Iansenist or not Iansenist had any such design or as much as talk or thought ever at any time before to move that congregation or any of them to as much as to debate and much less to subscribe as much as any one or moe of those six propositions of Sorbon 2. That I am sure there was none else besides my Lord Lieutenant himself and my self and that catholick and virtuous grave Gentleman of quality whom my Lord sent with his second third message to the house none else I say besides themselves or some of themselves and I now mean their own special Committee that either under-hand or over-board furthered that dispute And that neither his Grace nor my self furthered it at all before the Congregation themselves altogether as above raised it first and furthered it so far and so much as I have said 3. That what my Lord Lieutenant and his said Messenger did was all over-board as the Fathers know very well and cannot with any colour deny as neither can they at all deny that what I did in that business or those Gentlemen themselves had deputed as a special Committee to consider it and report it to their house or what any other members that spoke in their house in pursuance thereof before or after the committing or report of it was all over-board 4. That as I did no more therein privatly or publickly but what themselves knew publickly from my self so it was no more but what themselves too both in effect and word desired or were pleased I should do Which was only to represent to my Lord Lieutenant the far greater advantage and security might be derived from their signing those propositions of Sorbon for what concerned their loyalty than from the Remonstrance of 61. against which they had so much pike or at least from the signing of which they were so much deterred by the several and late letters too from Cardinal Francis Barbarin and from the two Internuncius's De Veechiis and Rospigliosi and therefore that his Grace would be content with and accept of their subscription to the said Sorbons propositions applied to his Majesty and themselves and to repute a second Instrument containing those propositions so applied and signed by them together with the former of their own Remonstrance sufficient to assure the King of their fidelity hereafter and further not to expect or demand their signing of that other Remonstrance of 61. being they were so loath to proceed point blanck contrary to the foresaid letters as to the form though in effect and in another manner or form and by such formal propositions too for the justifying of which at Rome they had the President of France to back them they were willing as they professed to do the same thing And that more than this which was for their own advantage and according to their own desires I did nothing with my Lord to further this dispute Nor was that whatever I did under-hand For so I related it to themselves and so themselves desired I should do with my Lord and there was no other way to perswade His Grace to let them sit longer when he saw they fixed upon another Remonstrance than that of 61. For any thing else or more to further this dispute with my Lord either underhand or over-board I protest again in the presence of God that I did nothing at all Indeed I did or least intended to do somewhat more with His Grace in relation to their own Remonstrance when I saw him so unsatisfied with it because he found therein no mention of no descent to the specifical or particular cases of deposition deprivation excommunication or other declaration c. and saw him for the same cause unsatisfied still even with the six propositions as from them even joyntly taken with their own said Remonstrance For I told his Grace that too might be remedied by them without signing the Remonstrance of 61. And that they might do so by adding to the foresaid six propositions one short declaration more under their hands That it was their meaning their Remonstrance should be understood even of and in such particular cases of deposition c. if ever they should chance to happen But this too was for their good as God knows I meaned it and what themselves should and ought to have done of themselves if they intended any thing to purpose But whether so or no it s plain that it was not to further with my Lord underhand or over-board either this other dispute of infallibility but to take his Grace off the thoughts of expecting or desiring from them any more the signing of that Remonstrance of 61. And consequently to obstruct the cause of my own grief in seeing their Congregation or meeting for which I laboured so much and so long and for their own good only and that of the rest of the Clergy and Layety of Roman Catholicks in this Kingdom forced to dissolve on a suddain with reproach and scorn and laughter and with more prejudices too against them with the State than before they met together As for any thing done or spoken by me to themselves or amongst themselves to further this dispute and I did nothing nor by any other way amongst them but by speaking as they know I did or spoke all that publickly and nothing unhand as I have observed before I spoke that only too after themselvs had begun and offered it Nay they know or may remember if they please that when after I saw them resolved to send the three first propositions alone without the three last and I excepted and told them they would do better to send all six as they first offered by me to my Lord that if any thing it would be all the six together would take him off the thoughts of expecting their positive concurrence to the Remonstrance of 61 they answered that if those three first would not do they would add the rest And
of his Majesties Kingdoms that the belief of Transubstantiation amongst English Irish and Scottish Catholicks is no more a Sign or an Argument of a Puritan Papist than it is at present amongst the French XII That we have no cause to wonder at the Protestants Jealousie of us when they see all the three several Tests hitherto made use of for trying the judgment or affection of Roman Catholicks in these Kingdoms in Relation to the Papal pretences of one side and the Royal rights of the other I mean the Oath of Supremacy first the Oath of Allegiance next and last of all that which I call the Loyal Formulary or the Irish Remonstrance of the year 1661 even all three one after another to have been with so much rashness and wilfulness and so much vehemency and obstinacy declined opposed traduced and rejected amongst them albeit no other Authority or power not even by the Oath of Supremacy (z) Art 37. of the Church of England And Admonition after the Injunctions of Queen ELIZABETH it self be attributed to the King save only Civil or that of the Sword nor any Spiritual or Ecclesiastical power be denied therein to the Pope save only that which the general Council of Ephesus (a) In the year 431. under Theodosius the Younger in the Case of the Cyprian Bishops and the next Oecumenical Synod of Chalcedon (b) In the year 451 Can. 28. under the good Emperour Martianus in the case of Anatolius Patriarch of Constantinople and the two hundred and seventeen Bishops of Africk (c) In the year 419. whereof Saint Augustine was one both in their Canons and Letters too in the Case of Apiarius denyed unto the Roman Bishops of their time and albeit the Oath of Allegiance was of meer purpose framed only to distinguish 'twixt the Loyal and disloyal Catholicks or the honest and Loyal party of them from those of the Powder-Treason Principles and albeit the Remonstrance of 1661 was framed only at first by some well meaning discreet and learned Roman Catholicks of the English Nation and was now lately signed by so many and such persons of the Irish Nation as we have seen before and was so far from entrenching on the Catholick Faith or Canons or Truth or Justice in any point that saving all these it might have been much more home than it is though indeed as from well meaning honest men it be home enough nay and albeit neither of these two later Tests the Oath of Allegiance or the Irish Remonstrance promiseth to the King any other than meer Civil obedience and this obedience too in meer civil or temporal Affairs only according to the Laws of the Land nor denyes any canonical obedience to the Pope in either Spiritual or Ecclesiastical matters purely such nor indeed in any matter at all wherein the Canons of the Catholick Church impower his Holiness and wherein his Key does not manifestly err How much more may it provoke them to see the few Ecclesiastical approvers of the said Tests especially of either of these two last to have been therefore persecuted amongst and by the foresaid generality of British and Irish Catholicks yea to have been look'd upon as Outcasts Excommunicants Schismaticks Hereticks and what not And that excellent man that most loyal and learned English Monk Father Thomas Preston for having formerly both under his own name and that of Roger Widrington so incomparably defended the foresaid Oath of Allegiance to have been forced nay content and glad at last to shelter himself in a (d) In the Clink at London prison from the furious persecution of the Opposers And after him so lately again Father Peter Walsh of Saint Francis's Order only for having promoted the said Loyal Irish Formulary of 1661 and for having Subscribed it himself and refused to retract his Subscription to have been reduced to a far worse condition than Preston even that of a Bannito or an Out-lawed man by publick denunciation and affâ—xion of him as an excommunicate person to be shun'd by all former Acquaintance except a very few and to be left alone at last for the matter one single person to maintain the justice of that Formulary and of his own defence and cause and carriage all along and consequently to grapple with a numberless number of subtle and powerful and implacable Adversaries How much more to see so many Books of Roman Catholick Doctors Italian Spanish German Dutch Candian English of Bellarmine and Becan and Suarez and Singleton and Sculkenius and Tortus and Eudamon Johannes and Gretser and Parsons and Fitzherbert c to have been written printed and published against the foresaid Oath of Allegiance enacted by King James And amongst the generality of the Roman Catholick Readers so many practical Students to have been indoctrinated by those very Books or some of them Although Books in truth wholly composed of lying Sophistry i.e. of very false Doctrines in point of Religion and very treasonable and pernicious in point of subjection as it hath been sufficiently proved concerning all the above mentioned Doctors by the foresaid indefatigable Writer Thomas Preston who has not left his Antagonists either place or possibility of saying a word to his last Pieces wherewith he so incomparably baffled all their Answers Replies Rejoinders c. How much more after all this and even since his present Majesties Restauration to see so much wrath and rage against so innocent a Formulary of their own and of professing Allegiance in meer temporal things only So many forreign Censures of Divines and forreign Letters of Inter-Nuncio's and Cardinals to have been procured And so many forreign both Citations and Excommunications to have been issued forth against the Subscribers of it with professed design both to suppress it utterly and either to silence them eternally or to destroy them for subscribing it yea so many Missionaries to have been employed and Commissaries authorized and for a dead lift and when opportunity served at last in the year 1669 besides Provincials instituted and Vicars Apostolical made even so many Bishops and Archbishops on a sudden to have been created in Ireland by his Holiness for that end chiefly And all this strange and late procedure against so harmless a profession of Allegiance to have been hitherto look'd upon by the generality of British and Irish Catholicks I mean by such of them as knew thereof not only with indifferent eyes and thoughts but by the far greater part of them received with complacency and by all for ought appears submitted unto with a perfect resignation of their Souls to the good pleasure of his Holiness and his Ministers I say it is not to be imagined that all these matters concerning those three several Tests one after another should have been and happened thus even publickly before the Sun and to the full Knowledge not of Catholicks onely but of Protestants but it must of necessity give very much ground to the more considering persons
submission most heartily and freely appeal That you may determine for what concerns you of the truth or falsity likelihood or unlikelihood of that worst of Scandals viz. Desertion of my Order and Religion wherewith I have been frequently asperst on several occasions as in former times even Twenty years ago by some of the Nuncio's Faction so of late during all these four last years by others of the Anti-remonstrants especially by some Church-men who so little consider their holy Function that they seem to have lost all regard to Truth and Honesty and do not boggle at the shame of being daily found in manifest Forgeries so they may but do their work to serve themselves by it or to rid out of their way any person who they fear may obstruct their ambition i. e. their design of confounding all again if they alone cannot otherwise command all Onely I shall further beg as to this matter that before you determine of it you would be pleased to read over these following Appendages First Appendage relating to the Fourth Querie That in regard of the times places and occasions I lived in and employments I had and Books and persons I conversed with of every side and my own both curiosity and concern to understand matters aright and to see into their genuine causes I may without vanity say of my self That I have had more than common opportunities to know the Doctrines and Practises of the Roman Court what they are and how hurtful how pernicious to these Kingdoms and to the Roman-Catholick Religion And that ever since I came to see into these things at least ever since I gave my self to a serious and full consideration of those principles and wayes which was about Twenty seven years since upon occasion given me by that Faction I have most heartily abhor'd and at all times and upon all occasions protested against them and the more I have known of them still the more I have seen cause to detest and to protest against them as I do at this day Second Appendage relating to the Fifth Querie That I can and do appeal to God Himelf That next after the regard of not wounding mortally my own Conscience by a manifest desertion of Truth and equivalent profession of such Errours as I know certainly to be against the Doctrine of the Catholick Church and Gospel of Christ the chiefest motive I had for bearing up constantly so long a time against all Censures Precepts Monitories Denunciations Affixions Decrees and other grievous concomitant Persecutions in the often mention'd Cause of the Loyal Formulary was the regard of not doing you all the Roman-Catholicks of His Majesties Three Kingdoms the greatest injury that I could possibly do you or perhaps any man of my degree by confessing the grand Objection against you to be insoluble For I saw clearly That if either the temptation of preferment to Offices and Dignities or the tryal of punishment by Censures and Calumnies and all their Consequents at the pleasure of some Grandees at Rome should have had that influence on me as to make me in effect absolutely to renounce my Allegiance to the King by retracting the Subscription of my hand to that Instrument professing it in meer Temporal things onely the Argument thence derivable must have been obvious to any judicious knowing Protestant inclin'd to do you a prejudice as soon and as often as the Parliament sate and were moved in your Concerns Such an Argument I mean as urged home by a good Orator would even before indifferent Judges give much colour to that grand Objection viz. The inconsistence in these Nations 'twixt the safety of a Protestant Government and the giving of Liberty to Roman-Catholicks by repealing the penal Laws yet in force against them In substance it would have been alledg'd That the Roman-Catholicks at least for the generality of them would be alwayes right or wrong directed by their Priests That their Priests are most of them on the Popes side in this Controversie And if any of them be so hardy to oppose his usurpations there is no trusting of them for there is no reason to expect that any of them will stand to his principles and hold out For Example they might have instanced in unworthy me if I had fallen off after so long and such manifold tryals of my constancy for Twenty years past and after so many and so great obligations to persevere until the end of my life This and much more would in all probability I am sure might in all reason be alledg'd to make that great Objection hold against you had I hitherto submitted to the dictates or pleasure of the Roman Court in either Cause But it is not my business here to open more at large or press more home this Argument with all the aggravating circumstances both such as are fresh in memory and such as might be derived from the memory of former times My purpose was to hint it onely as believing this enough to shew you the reasonableness of that second Motive I had for holding out so constantly in such a Cause and in the very manner I did all along against so numerous and so dangerous Adversaries especially seeing that very manner of my holding out so or of defending my self the best I could against them was and is authorized not only by the Divine Laws of Nature and Christianity but also most expresly and clearly by the positive Constitutions of men even of Roman-Catholicks viz. the fundamental Laws of England and Ireland not to speak now of other Catholick Nations of Europe so many Hundred years since Enacted by the Roman-Catholick Princes and Parliaments of these Kingdoms against all Forreign Citations or Summons from a Forreign Power beyond the Seas and also the Ecclesiastical Canons of the Catholick Church throughout the World nay of the very Papal Canons themselves forbidding in express terms Judicia Vltramarina (a) Vid. S. Cyprian Epist 55. ibi Statutum esse omnibus nobis c. Concil Affrican Episcop 217. inter quos Divus Augustinus erat Can. 92. relatum pariter in Cad Can. Eccles Affric Can. 125. Synod ad Coelest Item 3. q. 6. haecce capita viz. Ibi. Vltra Si quis Clericus Peregrina Qui crimen q. 9. cap. Nec extra Item cap. Nonnulli de Rescrip Item Stat. General Barchinonensia Ord. Min. cap. 6. §. 1. num 1. 2. ubi Patres rationem habent illius naturalis Canonum aequitatis and expresly decreeing against many other special Injustices and Nullities on other grounds in the late procedure against me (b) If you would see more Quotations both of the Canon and Civil Law against every particular Injustice committed in Summoning me to appear beyond Seas and which do justifie in all respects my procedure in not obeying such Summons you may consult my Latin Epistle to Harold pag. 6 7. besides my Latin Hibernica Third Part and you will find a very great abundance of the
the Argument of extrinsick probability than by the intrinsick reasons whereof they were not so capable And this extrinsick probability must have been by so much the greater by how much they saw the Authors of the Book to be Sixteen besides Fifteen other Approvers thereof XXII None must wonder to see amongst these Approvers the whole Colledge almost or Professed House of the Jesuits then at Kilkenny For indeed there was no more of note in their said House but Sign'd under their approbation save onely Father John Mac Egan one of their Professors of Philosophy The truth is they were all every one for the peace of the Nation and return of the People to their due obedience to His late Majesty of ever blessed Memory and Crown of England if you except the said Egan whose approbation therefore the rest thought not fit to desire at all as themselves told me They were all beside him not only of ancient English extraction but of their affection who were most against the wayes or designs of Owen O Neal and the Nuncio They were of that very Colledge of Divines that was convened to resolve the Queries They voted therein as I did against the validity of the Censures and together with the rest prayed me to write They kept their Chappels open from the first day of the difference notwithstanding the Dominican and Franciscan Monasteries of Kilkenny had shut their own Churches in observance of the Interdict In fine they were all none excepted and had been for some years before my own very civil kind familiar Friends above any other Order that was then in that City XXIII And yet I cannot deny but they play'd least in sight when the Book came to be Sign'd by the Bishop and rest of the Answerers These as soon as they had done Signing went immediately with it to the Grand Extraordinary Council of the Four Provinces Which Council expected them and it impatiently as hoping it might clear the scruples of the multitude and consequently take away the chief encouragement which Owen O Neal had to pitch his Camp so near Kilkenny that his Tents could be seen from the Walls Nor were they frustrated of their expectation Perhaps the Fathers were startled at that so near approach * Even the 〈…〉 Counâ—â—â— themselveâ— together with thâ—se other 〈◊〉 then 〈◊〉 them to their assistance out of the Toâ—â— Provinces were so startled at this so near approach of Oweâ— O 〈◊〉 Army and the shutting of Churches in observance of the Nuncio's Interdict and the great division of the People at the same time on the point also of the verâ— Excommunication it self that after the Colledge of 〈…〉 at least such of them as were most industrious had first confer'd Notes and turn'd Books for ten daâ—â—â— together and then laid the whole burthen on me during the three dayes and three nights I had without â—â—â—â—ting once my eyes continued at one Table writing that Book I remember very well how besides â—â—hers Richard Belings Esq a leading Member of and chief Secretary to the said Council came several 〈◊〉 from them to my Chamber to hasten my dispatch and to tell me the great danger of delay being the 〈◊〉 was in sight and the People so divided And I remember also very well how for the same reasons 〈◊〉 â—oâ—c'd to watch moreover even the very two next dayes and nights immediately following the forâ—â—â— three for studying the first Sermon that was Preach'd in Ireland of purpose on the Subject of the 〈…〉 against them and the Nuncio Nor could I not even for this other reason otherwise choose 〈…〉 before it was publish'd in all the Churches of the Town which kept not the Interdict that I 〈◊〉 next Sunday following Preach in the Cathedral on the great and then present Controversie To perâ—â—â—â— which duty notwithstanding I had not shut my eyes for five dayes and nights before God gave me strength My Text was that of Susâ—nâ—aâ— in the Prophet Daniel Augustiae sâ—nt mihi undique Dan. 13.22 〈◊〉 answerable to the great perplexity I was in 'twixt fear of the Nuncio's indignation of one side if I 〈◊〉 my duty and my belief of God's vengeance threatning me on the other hand if I did not of the Enemy and therefore absented themselves as intending if they could to sleep in a whole skin by securing themselves on every side But I nevertheless found my self more concern'd in their absenting themselves than to pass it over without Expostulation seeing I was desired by them as well as by others to write that little Book to justifie their practice XXIV Wherefore as soon as the Sixteen Notaries appointed that day by the Council for Copying it fairly had done and that I was commanded to put it in Print and to oversee it in the Press and that others also had brought me their own Approbations thereof those Approbations I mean which you see before the Book next unto the Title-page I sent to the Fathers of the Society to desire at least their Approbation under their own hands to be Printed together with the rest minding them at the same time of the publick end of the Book and expostulating with them for their absence on the former day wherein they should have appeared and Sign'd amongst the principal Answerers Whereupon they came to me and pray'd to be excused pretending 1. There was no necessity of their appearing in Print either as Answerers or as Approvers seeing there were already so many others who gave authority enough to the Book 2. That others could not be such losers as they should be without any peradventure by appearing in Print or at all under their hands in that Book against the Nuncio They had not only bestowed a Coach and Six Horses on his Lordship but lent him Twelve hundred pounds sterling which they were sure to lose for ever in case they put their hands to that Book 3. That they could excuse and justifie even before his Lordship their practice in keeping open their Chappel notwithstanding the Interdict because they did therein but what the priviledges of Regulars and the very Papal Canons allowed them to do by conforming themselves to the Mother-Church or Cathedral but that of approving such a Book they could not excuse In giving these three several Reasons or Excuses the Fathers who nevertheless were my own very special good Friends drill'd on three whole dayes keeping me at a stand when the Approbations given by others were under the Press Which was the cause that seeing interest onely kept them off I desired them to consider seriously Whether since both their Conscience and Affection would lead them to give their approbation also under their own proper hands as others had already done before them the loss unto them of Three thousand pound from others were not greater than that of the Twelve hundred lent the Nuncio And whether the General Assembly had not some time before the late difference with the Nuncio promised them
Three thousand pounds to build a Colledge I had no sooner put these two questions to them but they took Pen in hand and Signed that very Approbation of theirs which you see amongst those of others prefix'd to that little Book * Some years after but not before the Kingdom had been quite over-run by the Parliament I was told that one of the Society had reported I had in my Printing of this Book added much which was not in my Original written Copy and consequently which they had not approved To which the Answer is 1. That I was by the Colledge authorized to add in the Printing of it what I further pleased for strengthning or confirming by Law and Reasons their Resolves 2. That I added not a word in the Printing but onely out of the very Canons and Classick Authors what every one judged necessary I should add viz. very brief and very clear Solutions of some few Objections or rather Quotations brought me in two several Papers as from the Nuncio's Canonists or Learned Council the one Paper from Waterford the other from Galway and both against the validity of the Appeal and both also brought me just then when the Press was employed on that very point 3. That the general satisfaction which even all as well the Answerers as the Approvers of it yea those very Fathers of the Society found in it as soon as it came out in Print and continually after without objecting for so many years any such matter is a sufficient Argument that I dealt both fairly and conscientiously as I ought in Printing of this little Work with their Approbation XXV To understand more clearly what these other instances were besides those of the Insurrection in 1641 and continuation of the War till 1646 and breach of the First Peace made that same year 1646 and opposition after not only to the Cessation but to the Second Peace and both concluded in the year 1648 in which and for which other instances and I mean those hinted in general but not specified by me before the generality or any considerable part of the Roman-Catholick Irish Clergy of those dayes were obnoxious to the Laws there is very much to enlighten you in the Appendix of Instruments but much more in the Duke of ORMOND's long and excellent Letter which makes the last Appendix And therefore I would advise you to read that Letter in the first place i. e. before you read any other Part or Treatise of this Book although it be in order the very last Piece or Appendix of it XXVI Certainly it was no design that made me not give in the Appendix of Instruments as well the publick Acts of the Congregation of the Irish Clergy at Waterford under the Nuncio in the year 1646 against the Peace of that year as I gave those against both the following Cessation and other Peace concluded in the year 1648. The onely reason why I did not give them is That I had them not by me nor could have them from any other when I was Printing that Appendix Wherefore I must remit thee for them partly to honest Doctor Callaghan alias Philopater Irenaeus his Latin Vindiciae and partly to the English and both complete and accurate History of the whole last unhappy Wars of Ireland which is now preparing and you will suddenly see I hope XXVII This present Book not only as it now contains Four Treatises besides the Appendixes but as it was intended first to have also the Fifth and Sixth Treatise had been published at Dublin and in Easter Term there 1669 but that I was before viz. in September 1667 admonish'd for some prudential reasons to hold my hand for a time at least from going on with the Second Part of the First Treatise which is altogether of matters of Fact What those reasons were it 's needless to mention It sufficeth to tell here 1. That they related not to my self and consequently that they were no apprehensions of my side or of any other of my Friends that I had written or maintained any Doctrine or Proposition in this Book which might not very well abide the light and publick Censure of any Roman-Catholick Schools or Doctors proceeding on the grounds of Christianity or undoubted Catholick Truths 2. That soon after the foresaid Admonition I desisted from prosecuting any further study of this Book and suspended the Press when I came to pag. 442 which is in the First Part of the First Treatise having before that seen the Second Third and Fourth Treatises Printed there also at Dublin 3. That when after four years more the cause of that Admonition and those Reasons were wholly over I at the importunity of some judicious worthy Friends last year 1672. much about this time Twelve-month resumed here at London my intermitted-study of this Book to finish it as you see and so have added and Printed here what follows from the foresaid pag. 442 to the end of the Second Part of the First Treatise or to pag. 765 for some Fourscore sheets 4. That for this cause or the different places where this Book was Printed so by Parts you must not wonder at the difference of the Paper Ink and Character in those same Parts thereof The Dublin Printing-house was not furnish'd well with any of them but very ill at least with Paper and Letter when I Printed there and as ill with a Corrector too Albeit I must confess the London either Corrector or Printer which my Copies here lighted on hath also not seldom partly overseen and partly mistaken horribly And yet I think there are not any such over-sights or mistakes of either Correctors or Printers in any Part of this Book which alter the sense in any material thing though perhaps there may be some few that may a little retard some Readers 5. That to help this matter as well as I can at present I have in the preceding Leaf of the Body of the Book given those Errata or at least the most considerable of them which I have my self upon my own review observed leaving to thy discretion many lesser And perhaps too I leave some as great as any other but leave these onely because they escaped my observation as they easily might the Author For certainly as to literal faults nay and as to some verbal too any Author commonly speaking must be not the best Corrector of his own Work because he lightly runs over what he hath already in his head And yet after all I must confess I have been forc'd commonly all along to be my own Corrector such mean ones they were I lighted on in the Printing-houses and withal so ill written and blotted and crossed my own Copies i.e. my rough draughts were The greatest mischief was the Composers were sometimes pragmatical and sometimes impatient Which made them not to stay my reading of their amendments i.e. my seeing whether they had precisely observed my Corrections of every word and letter They often struck
thereof in Ireland was too well known and how he had been one of the Delegats made by or in pursuance of that subreptitious Bull procured from Alexander the VII for absolving from the Nuntio's censures as if Innocent the X. had determined the controversy and appeal against the Appellants adherers to the Cessation made with the Baron of Inchiquin which yet never appeared to have been so determined by Innocent and therefore consequently and for many other notorious false informations it is very certain that according to the Canons this Bull of Alexander the VII must be void in it self yet even this very Bishop sent to the said Sir Nicholas Plunket that he for his part approved of the Protestation And for Cluanfert albeit the most earnest of all when at home in Ireland for the Nuncio he was as farr off as Hungary if then alive and nothing could be heard from him No more did any thing in a pretty while after from Nicholas French the Bishop of Ferns officiating at St. Diego in Gallicia for the Arch-bishop of that See but what he writ to the Procuratour himself with whom ever since the Kings Restauration he kept frequent correspondence and gave him evident arguments of his falling off from the Nuncio's party ever since he had a sight some two years before His Majesty was restored of that wicked feditious book delivered in hand-writing by Richard Ferral the Cappucin to the Congregation of Cardinals De Propaganda Fide at Rome The contents of which booke and particularly because the Authors of it fell fouly and generally therein upon all the Catholicks of Brittish extraction in Ireland and would have none such ever preferred by the Pope to any ecclesiastical dignity in Ireland and yet very particularly taxed the said Bishop of Ferns himself notwithstanding all his former zeal and Sir Nicholas Plunket also with him though joynt Embassadours to Rome of having betrayed the cause of the Nuncio and holy See to their Adversaries these contents I say and the Proceedings consequent thereunto of that Congregation de propaganda did so estrange Ferns that he sent to London several papers and books of his own study written against that Book though not yet come to publick view from the print As Father Iohn Lynch a priest of Galway at St. Malâ—s hath already published in print his Alithinologia dedicated to the same Congregation de propaganda against it From Ferns therefore they had nothing at all to countenance them at that time if his many and frequent letters under his own hand to the Procurator can be testimonies of his judgment as I am sure they are for he is candid man In which letters he signified at first his own approbation of it so far that he maintained in Spain privately against such Irish as he heard speak against it to himself the lawfulness of it though withal confessing he was not provided of such books as could enable him sufficiently having not before then studied that question but gone along heretofore in practice and theory with that common opinion which was taught in the Schools where he had been conversant formerly Only that after this Remonstrance came forth he lighted by chance on a little book called Strena Catholica written by an English Catholick Divine some fifty years since for the catholickness and lawfulnes of the English Oath of Allegiance in the Statute of King Iames enacted by occasion of the Powder-plot Treason And that out of this little book he reason'd for the Remonstrance against those Irish that opposed it in Spain Where yet he added it was not fit for him to declare himself more at that time and this was when the Queen was come from Portugal when for many reasons it was feared there would not be twixt that Country where he was exiled and England such fair correspondence kept And on the other side he was not sure of protection at home in Ireland Yet withal he advised the Procurator to write an Apology for himself and the cause in hand to his Holiness being he had so many opposers of his country-men at Rome And this was all that Ferns declared of his own judgment or inclinations in that matter until the Congregation of 66. was passed For the Archbishop of Ardmagh Primate Reilly he was indeed recalled to Rome and was there soon after the said Remonstrance was published and for three whole years after but wary enough not to appear in any thing against it but by such Letters to the Procurator as told him that his Holiness however displeased yet would not meddle in any censures against it that his little book entituled The more ample Account published in English on that Remonstrance being translated at Rome into Italian and Latine in order to be censured if they could pick out of it any colourable pretence lay dormant at last in the Colledge de propaganda without any censure at all and was like to continue so for ever notwithstanding all the endeavours used to get it burned or censured at least The good old sickly Archbishop of Tuam remains of all those Irish Bishops were abroad then Nor did he as yet then contribute to any more opposition although wholy in the hands and power of some Fathers of the Society but what you have to this letter which he gave in answer to the Bishop of Dromores to him from London To the most Reverend my Lord Bishop of Dromore c. London My Lord YOur Letter of the 9th of January and received on Monday last could have no speedier answer by reason of my distance from the Post This only to let your Lordship know it is come to hand and that I am making ready copies of the paragraph thereof that concerns your inclosed paper and of the paper it self to send to the respective places where any of our brethren reside in France that being in my opinion a better course to comply with your Lordships desire of the speedy return thereof then to send one about which would require more time I do not think but the subscription of the said paper may have some difficulty not through any dis-affection to our Soveraigns service but through the mis-constructions its stile resembling somewhat the Oath of Allegiance is subject unto and the occasion some unsettled spirits will take to gloss upon it and wrest out of our good intentions venome to spue in our faces as your Lordship knows they do with less grounds The proof that was made of loyalty to our Soveraign by what we have suffered at home and even yet suffer abroad rather then we should flinch from our duty to his Majesty when we had some power might be very sufficient satisfaction to any indifferent man that we forget not nor can forget our obligations to our natural Prince We rather daily pray for his Majesties prosperity and cause those that depend upon us so to do then think of any other forrein power or Prince for to deprive our own
in this world to condemn as much as virtually or consequentially their former temerity in such engagements and that they cleerly saw their subscription to that Remonstrance must have been thought by rational men wherein I confess they were not deceived a tacit and virtual or consequential acknowledgement of their said former proceedings to have been illegal and unjust though it was not therefore intended 3. That some who had been earnest enough for the said Peaces and Cessation and all along against the Nuncio saw their neerest Catholick Relatives born to good Estates very many of them who had fought in those quarrels for the King and all along declined any conditions even from the Parliament no more regarded by the Kings Declaration and several Bills of Settlement than the very first grand contrivers of the Rebellion but their estates given away eternally to such as fought against the King even all along even from the very first day of the Warrs while any Warr continued 4. That such others and they were the farre greater number as had no affection at all to the Royal or English interest nor ever at any time had from the beginning conceived a subscription would before the world tye them to that duty they would not be tyed unto albeit for the generality of them they were more wary then to discover to others this their own peculiar cause but in lieu thereof pretended if not conscience yet at least reverence to the See Apostolick when yet being pressed on by reason and argument in point of Religion Faith and Justice many of them in private conference declined ingenuously all pretences and confess'd the true cause without any further shifting Whence it is that I know they laugh in their sleeves to see those other Gentlemen of their indeed common profession but not extraction through inconsiderancy other vain false pretences of Religion or submission to the Holy See interpose betwixt them the State so that they need not fear any peculiar necessity to be put on themselves either to discover or decline that their own motive or cause which indeed is the cause that renders them so strangly obstinate 5. That besides the Regulars generally at least the Mendicant Orders who in this Country live most by publick begging at the altars of parish Priests where the people meet on Sundays and other festivals for which if they will thrive they must have the licence and recommendation of the respective Ordinaries Bishops or Vicars general or at least not to be opposed by them or discountenanced by the parish Priests themselves pretended it a sufficient plea for not signing when they were desired That it behoved them to do nothing in such a matter before the Ordinaries and secular Clergie concurr'd or at least not to subscribe without their consent being sure if they did of meeting with much disfavour and opposition from them and with a substraction consequently through their means of the benevolence of the laye people over whom the Ordinaries and Priests must have had so great an influence as was known And moreover that each of those Mendicant Orders in particular being reason'd with alleadged that if they had singly done it or without the concurrence of such other Orders as depended in that kind of the secular Clergie they should be sure to be singularly branded as not regarding the Holy See and those oâ—hers extolled and particularly recommended in their place and by the said Clergie to the devotion of the people Whereby it would come to pass immediately that they would not be able to live in communities or otherwise And further that their priviledges and faculties from the Pope which gave them so much exemption from the Ordinaries and credit amongst the people would questionless upon the odious complaint of others and representation at Rome of their signing runn a very great hazard to be totally recalled 6. The Dominicans pretended and truely too that hitherto they had been all united in one and the self same way without any visible breach amongst them not even at that time of tryal when other Orders were devided in this Kingdom That particularly they could not but reflect on their own printed Acts of Kilkenny or of their Provincial Chapter held in their Convent there 18. Ian. 1643. under Albertus otherwise Terlagh ô Brien Prior Provincial then of their Order In which Acts and amongst the Declarations the second is of this tenour pag. 6. Declaramus cum juxta mentem Divi Thomae quem omnes Theologi in hoc sequuntur bellum quodlibet ex sufficienti Principis authoritale justa causa et recta intentione justificetur Catholicorum hoc bellum pro fidei defensione regiis praerogativis patriae libertate vitae et bonorum conservatione contra impiissimi Calvini sectam susceptum undiquaque justissimum esse Vnde Acta Capituli Nationalis Kilkenniae celebrati 10. Maii 1642. quoad hoc recipimus fratribusque nostris recipienda proponimus mandantes ut eis nullatenus directè vel indirectè se opponere audeant That further yet their general Constitutions or those of their whole Order throughout the world binds them all nay and Oathes moreover bind such as are called Masters among them to defend all the doctrine or opinions of their Angelical Doctor St. Thomas of Aquin and that St. Thomas of Aquin's doctrine 2. 2. q. 10. ar 10. and q. 12. ar 2. is cleerly against that whereon the Remonstrance is grounded and against that also which is therein even formally and expresly contained 7. That such of the Franciscan Order as had been the very chief Heads amongst all the Regulars to maintain the Censures of the Nuntio and all other consequents even against the rest of the same Order who no less eminently opposed the said Censures that those Franciscans I say alledged that to sign any such Remonstrance was point blanck against all their former proceedings and against all those opinions too in which their said proceedings were grounded 8. That those Orders of a later brood in the Church which began but within this last Century or much about an hundred or sixcore years since and therefore had no ancient foundations in Ireland or any at all before the change of Religion or suppression of religious houses I mean the Jesuits Cappuchins and Excalceat Carmelits and therefore to this day have no legal admission in this Countrey for houses or new erections and for old they never had any not even I mean according to the Papal canons or constitutions which prescribe as necessary thereunto besides the consent of the Supream temporal Magistrate still supposed an admission from the Ordinary with the consent of the People and pre-existent Regulars least otherwise the multiplication of religious Orders and Houses especially such as live by almes might prove too great a burthen to the Layety and Clergy both and too destructive also to themselves one of another That those three late Orders I say pretended generally for their own
them who by special function are Preachers of the Gospel of Christ and of all the promises and rewards of it to others to apply those also to themselves make use of them and remember that saying of our Saviour the eight and last and most comfortable of all the Beatitudes taught by this heavenly Master on the Mount to his Apostles Disciples and others and to all Christians by them Beati qui persecutionem patiuntur propter justitiam Math. 5.10 quoniam ipsorum est regnum caelorum whether they suffer by Prince or Pope For from both many holy men have often suffered persecution for justice and some that are at this present glorified and invoked in the Roman Calendar as Saints possessing actually that Kingdom of heaven so promised them for suffering for justice have been persecuted on that account in their life and to their death by Popes alone as for example St. Ignatius sometime Patriarch of Constantinople excommunicated by Iohn the eight of Rome 13. That other no less general objection viz. That the Subscribers Lay or Ecclesiastick reaped no advantage by their subscription more then others who had not subscribed the Lay Proprietors not their temporal Estates nor Ecclesiasticks a liberty or freedom to exercise their spiritual function without fear or danger albeit the most powerful to render the Remonstrance unsignificant amongst such as either look only on the present and see no further or such also as value nothing but by temporal advantages yet was more then sufficiently more then abundantly solved by those other considerations offered to the Objectors 1. That the design of that Remonstrance and subscription of it was not thereby to be restored to their temporal estates because if such it had infallibly designed an unsettlement of the whole Kingdom since it was clear enough there is no Roman Catholick but on condition or certainty of being restored to his Lands or other temporal pretences would sign it and no less evident on the other side they could not be all restored without infallible disturbance of the publick peace and hazzard of all sides in a second bloody war there being so numerous and stubborn a party which must have been in such case dispossess'd of all their livelyhood for ever how justly or unjustly soever acquired at first 2. That nevertheless very many or most of those Remonstrants or Subscribers had been already or were to be one way or other provided for some upon title of Innocency others by special provision As indeed we have seen effected and not Remonstrants only c. That if the opposers both of Clergy and Laity had not delayed so long their own concurrence and thereby rendered themselves and their Catholick Nation suspected a new but taken time by the sore-lock and throughout the Kingdom generally cheerfully and heartily manifested their firm unalterable resolution whatever the former carriage of any was to stand inviolably firm to the King hereafter in all contingencies whatsoever according to that Remonstrance and as the first Subscribers had in their own behalf and for their sake also done they might with some colour have made this objection But being the Subscribers were so few and they almost so innumerable that opposed still with headiness and rashness it was too soon to expect those favours which are commonly given by a State upon good grounds of considerable advantage to it self such as would be in the present case the assuring of all the Catholicks in Ireland to stand firm and loyal in all kind of dangerous contingencies whatsoever 3. That all generally of that Religion ever since that Remonstrance was exhibited and graciously accepted by His Majesty had much ease connivence and liberty for publick meetings and publick exercise of their Religion throughout all the Kingdom without any considerable molestation therefore in any place if some very few walled Towns only and within the walls only or close by them be not excepted and that favour done at first continued ever since by reason only of that Remonstrance and for the sake of those who had given and subscribed it and in expectation of the concurrence of the rest to the same or like dutiful manifestation of their Allegiance That although some numbers of poor Catholicks in some few parts Town or Counties had been three or four several times taking one place with another molested by presentments in some Bishops Courts Inditements and Capiases by the civil Officers of Judges of the Assize and of Sheriffs yet upon application made they found themselves presently at ease and rest from any further prosecution 4. That albeit the indiscretion of too great a multitude of Catholicks and too publickly and boldly convening and thronging in the streets from about twelve a clock at night on Christmass day till at noon even at the very door of the Parish Church or St. Owens in Dublin where those of the contrary Religion warranted by the laws and where also the very guards did meet to serve God in their way occasion'd that disturbance and hurry objected yet they might visibly see the favour done the Remonstrant Clergy whose Chappel that was For notwithstanding their indiscreet carriage in that matter they were all set at liberty within three or four dayes and only because they were known to be true and faithful Remonstrants as besides their subscription to that paper they had all along in the former quarrel of the Nuncio and other differences of the Consederats in the late wars approved themselves to be men so loyally religiously and conscientiously principled 5. That for the Proclamation whatever the cause of it was they had no cause to complain of its execution Lastly that they were blind if they did not see ungrateful if they did not acknowledge the vast difference 'twixt the condition then of both the Lay Proprietors as to matter of estate and of Ecclesiasticks as to that of liberty and of both in all respects and that they could not but remember they were in all of them generally a little before and for so many years together without scarce any humane hope to see any end of their miseries 14. Their objection of some words and these were no more but two or three only Pope renounce Papal was answered by desiring them to shew by reason or argument how the naming of the Pope or of his Papal power or pretence or renouncing of that power in him which they confessed was not in him could argue any irreverence or disrespect especially where and when it was so necessary to use that expression or an equivalent and no other would or could do the work or compass the end they so vehemently and rationally desired That surely the Catholicks of England then which there are none in the world more observant of all respect and reverence to the Pope who were the authors and framers of the Protestation who worded it throughly knew very well these words were not irreverential in any wise That they should find
certain that ever since the chief leading men of that Order conforming themselves further to all such directions as they receive from their Colledg or Convent of Irish Dominicans at Lovain as those of that Colledg to what they themselves procure from Rome and transmit to Ireland have been in all parts of this Kingdom very insolent and violent all of them in private discourse amongst all sorts of men decrying the Remonstrance and Subscribers of it if not as unlawful and heretical yet certainly against the Interest of the Pope Country and Religion and some of them preaching publickly at altars against both in the vilest and impudentest manner telling the people they should rather abide all evils suffer death it self then approve of such a form pursuant to the late Priour of Dublin but now of Naas Father M. Fullam's attestation under his own hands writing in a letter to one of his own Order Father John Scurlog that he would for his own part sooner take the Oath of Supremacy To such a degree of folly and frenzy their malice to the Subscribers drove them Which was the cause that especially in Connaght and Vlster they spared not to asperse the whole Order of Franciscans as well those had not yet subscribed as those did amongst the common people with defection from the See Apostolick because the Procuratour and greatest number of Subscribers and maintainers of that form are Franciscans and those tollerated by and countenanced or at least not proceeded against by their chief Superiours and to the end they might by such scandals raised of the Franciscans be themselves esteemed the Champions of the Great Pontiff in Ireland and both lessen the credit of others and gain to boot their benefactors Which was next that of pretensions at Rome and distractions at home against the peace of the Country and establishment of the King the only marke they shott at XX. Wherein they had the Augustinian Order who are twixt threescore and fourscore in this Kingdom but most of them in Connaght their unalterable and no less in so much unconscionable Associats I mean as to the generality of them For I do not involue every individual of them in such unworthy intrigues though I can say that not as much as one of this Augustinian Order hath for so many years since 61. though several of them very home reason'd with by the Procuratour himself any way declared his or their moderation in this matter so farre they were all from subscription excepting only that one Gentleman of theirs Father Gibbon who subscribed at London amongst the other 25. there And can say this much too of them that Father Martin French their late Priour at Dublin hath acknowledg'd there some 3. or 4. years since they were the Order of all others that ledd the Van of opposition by common consent or decree in a chapter held by them in 62. and in Connaght a little before those others of the Dominicans or Franciscans were held which was to them as it proved since like the laws of Medes and Persians irrevocable untransgressable without any regard of any other laws either of man or God positive or natural XXI About the same time the Procuratour had the above answers of the Dominican and Franciscan Chapters or Provincials he received from England by letter from the Bishop of Dromore bearing date the 18th of October the said year 62. another letter therein enclosed which was to the said Bishop from the Dean and in behalf of the Chapter of the English secular Clergie For those have a certain select number how many they are I do not exactly remember but I think about 28. composing their Chapter which represents and gives orders to all that Clergie wherever dispersed in England and Wales making a farre greater number for they were about 600. in Cromwels time sufficient learned and loyally affected all of them to the King Which enclosed letter of the English Dean and Chapter the Bishop sent the Procuratour as it was of purpose written to answer without place of reply an other pretended scruple of some of the Irish Clergie that they had not seen any approbation of the Remonstrance or concurrence from the Clergie of England though specially and by name invited to it by the Procuratours printed Advertisement annexed to the Remonstrance and by his book or The More Ample Account which he soon after publish'd amongst them at London The original being shewed by the Procuratour convinced all that would be convinced by reason for it was that you have here in the copy For the Right Reverend Father in God Oliver Lord Bishop of Dromore Right Reverend Father in God c. ALthough it be a chief point of Christian duty to be passive even in injustices without reply yet is that patience scarce profitable though with the gaine of private vertue where the publique receives prejudice And for this reason do I give your Lordship this trouble for understanding from persons of Quality that I and the rest of my Brethren of the Chapter are reported to obstruct the subscriptions of the Irish Clergie to the Declaration of Allegiance here exhibited to His Majestie as upon this score that being desired to joyn with you in it we refused it as both imprudent and unjust and by that refusal of our concurrence gave occasion to divers of the Irish Clergie to do the like by which we seem to be a block in the way to that freedom of Conscience which we would gladly purchase with our blood We humbly begg this favour of your Lordship that as you are best able to cleer us in this point that our concurrence was never required nor were we privy to your business the circumstances of our conditions being different from yours so your Lordship being assured of our judgment would please to signifie it where it may undeceive the over-credulous My Lord I have spoke with our Brethren concerning this business and find them so farre from censuring your draught or proceed in that protestation that as we know it destructive to Soveraign Majestie to be dependent in Regalities so we take it derogative to good Subjects to deny him the power Absolute in Temporalities And therefore being taught by the law of God to give him obedience indispensable we cannot but judge in that you runn along with your duty As for the expressions passing a censure upon the contrary tenets as some peradventure may think them too severe we could wish the circumstances of affairs in these His Majesties Kingdoms could have declared them impertinent but considering this age overrun with disloyaltie and even amongst those of our Holy Catholique Faith some to our great grief have been too active under colour of bad principles it cannot but be necessary to declare those principles no other then the Cockle of wicked doctrine sowed by the Enemy of mankind to the prejudice of Christianity which being a law of an absolute Rectitude in setting right our duties to God and
compassing as yet any of his designs XXIII Likewise about the same time the R. R. Father in God Iohn Burk the Catholick Archbishop of Tuam very aged infirm and sickly and looked upon as not able to live one year longer came unexpectedly from St. Maloes and in my Lord Lieutenants absence arrived at Dublin privatly accompanied with father Thomas Quin the Jesuit and another of that Society in whose power and under whose directions this aged venerable Prelate wholy was The Procurator having done his first respects of visit to his Lordship desired to know his cause of venturing so confidently without acqainting first and having by some way addressed himself to my Lord Lieutenant and understood of some connivence for his return Minded him of the carriage and proceedings all along of the Clergy and especially of the Bishops of Waterford and Iames-stown That although his Lordship carried himself fairly and loyally in opposing the Nuncio even to his face at Galway and forced open the Church there which the Nuncio would have to observe his Interdict other Censures that he had sided all along with the Cessation supream Council at Kilkenny in that business and further too in concluding the second Peace yet he could not forget how he sullied all his former glory by his after unfortunate sitting and concurring at Iames-stown with other Bishops to those disloyal Declarations made there That he had not since by any publick or private application to His Majesty or Lord Lieutenant or by submission and repentance declared to either washed of the stain of that scandalous horrid transgression nor given any assurance of his more loyal carriage hereafter That yet both were of absolute necessity from a Prelate of highest rank such too as for example and for the satisfaction of God and men should be publick That he should therefore petition for himself and by his example induce the rest of the Irish Clergy to do the like and most humbly beg pardon for the time past and for the future sign that Remonstrance whereof to that end he had in France from London a sufficient account All which and much more to this purpose the Procurator humbly and earnestly minded him of even sometime in the presence of the above Father William Burgat Vicar General of Imly The good Archbishop heard him all out both attentively and patiently enough without sign of displeasure but return'd no other answer then That he was now so broken with age and many diseases of body that his mind also or understanding was no more of any kind of strength or capable to discern what he was to do in that or other things That he was for the matter dead already That he ventured this journey from France by Sea all along for otherwise he could not of purpose only to die and lye down at rest in his grave native soil That he would not have been to bold as to land at Dublin but that he supposed my Lord Lieutenant away thence in the Countrey at that time as it happened and that he might be carried away privatly to his own Province of Connaght without any further noise of his arrival or knowledge thereof given to my Lord Lieutenant And that being his Grace the Lord Lieutenant was now returned to Town he desired the Procurator should most humbly present his most submissive respects and make that true Apology for him of the design of his coming and desire of being connived at for so short a time as he had to drag a miserable life and end it by a death more welcome which he daily expected But the Procurator saw well enough that how infirm soever this good Archbishop was in body yet he had still sufficient apprehension and this excuse proceeded from the Fathers by whom he was led of late in all things perswading themselves his behaving himself so would give both countenance and authority enough amongst Catholicks not to themselves alone but to all others of the Clergy in denying or opposing a subscription which he had so declined That his name or extraction and his known affection sometimes formerly to the King and English Interest we 〈…〉 himself sufficiently of entertaining other scruples in that matter then those of religion and reverence to the See Apostolick And his quality of Archbishop and the only then of that Nation and Religion at home and the only moreover known to have formerly declared against the Nuncio would be a strong confirmation thereof at least might be a very probable excuse for all others of inferior degree until he had declared himself on the point All which and the use thereof notwithstanding the Procurator did well enough perceive and foresee yet he could not help having done his own duty But however advised this good Archbishop to retire as he did immediatly in a litter to Connaght where he remains ever since guided still by the same Fathers as wholly in their power The sequel whereof shall be seen hereafter in its proper place or second Part of this Narrative XXIV The Procurator therefore and by several other arguments seeing now certainly where the first obstruction to a further progress lay which should be removed and seeing that albeit the Fathers of the Society were but a very few in Ireland and most of them in or near Dublin yet their correspondency both at home and abroad especially at Rome was look't upon by most of the Pretendents in or Dependents of that Court and their own confidence withall in themselves was great partly because they had so dexterously behaved themselves in the Nuncio's quarrel that as they were perswaded much could not be objected to them on that account and partly for other causes and for that in particular of their extraction generally as for that also of some powerful Relations of some of them and albeit he saw well enough at the same time what influence the example of the Dublin Clergy in general both Parish-priests and Religious Orders of which Orders there he had only yet won the Franciscans and two of the Dominicans but none at all of the Augustinians Carmelits Cappuccins or Jesuits no more then he had none of the Parish-priests who were four or five and together with the said Regulars made fifty Priests or there abouts in that City albeit I say the Procurator saw well enough what influence the example of the Dublin Clergy in general would have upon the rest abroad in other parts of the Kingdom and that it would be to no great purpose but altogether vain to expect a concurrence from these if those had refused even there where the Lord Lieutenant and Council and Parliament sate and where notwithstanding the Dissenters had as much favour or freedom tolleration or connivence or whatever else you call it as the Subscribers and that on the other side the Dissenters had the advantage of the Subscribers at Rome and with the Generals of Orders beyond Seas of whose special favour
as much as a thought of pardoning him or offering him his life on condition he would renounce the contrary opinion some man can aver certainly or truly or as much as probably that what he alledged for himself of having only known the plot in confession either sacramental or not sacramental was true 2. That in case it had been true his own very Order that is all the Writers of his own Society if we may believe Suarez condemn his opinion of the seal for as much as he pretended it was therefore he would not reveal the plot because he had only heard it in confession and consequently seal'd up from any discovery by him For Suarez defies the King of Great Brittain ' gainst whom he writ even King Iames himself to produce as much as one Jesuit Writer that ever held it to be against the seal of confession oâ— any way unlawful to reveal the treason so as the Penitent or Confitent himself were neither directly or indirectly revealed And yet it is very certain that Father Garnet not only not did so whereas he might safely have done so even without any kind of danger to himself and might have done so by a hundred wayes and without as much as discovering himself but also pretended that he ought not to have done so or to have revealed the treason albeit there could be no danger thereby of revealing either directly or indirectly him that told it in confession 3. That hence it appears this objection whatever it be good or bad is not properly or peculiarly against the doctrine of this sixt consideration but more directly against that of the third and fourth where the Doctors of Lovaine and their ignorant sticklers may see other Catholick and Classick Doctors crying shame on them condemning it To which Doctors there quoted I now add Alexander Hales part 4. q. 78. memb 2. art 2. S. Thomas 4. distinct 21. q. 3. ar 1. ad 1. Scotus in 4. dist 21. q. 2. Hadrianus Papa 4. dist ubi de Sacram. Câ—nf edit Paris 1530. pag. 289. Navar. in Enchirid. c. 8. Ioseph Angles in Florib part 1. pag. 247. edit Antuerp Petrus Soto Lect. 11. de Confess Suarez Tom. 4. in 3. part D. Thomae disp 33. paragraph 3. Greg. de Valentia Tom. 4. disp 7. q. 13. punct 3. who all teach what I have in my said third and fourth consideration the lawfulness of disclosing the treason without disclosing the Penitent 4. That it s no way probable that a man so versed in at least not so ignorant of the doctrine of his own School or wherein he was bred with Father Suarez his old companion in Spain the doctrine of extrinsick probability as we must suppose a Provincial of the Society to have been should have made conscience of revealing the treason without revealing the Confitent being we cannot by any means presume that he was so extreamly ignorant as not to know this kind of revealing was taught by so many famous and pious even Classick Divines 5. That we may rather certainly and groundedly perswade our selves That being himself in other Instances confessed he knew of that wicked plott by other means also or out of confession as well from Father Greenwell as from Mr. Catesby it was no pretence of a Confessional Seal or any such opinion of the being of such a Seal in the case that hindered him from discovering either the treason it self or the traytors but that other more damnable opinion which he learned of so many other in this licentious and impious writers That no faith no allegiance is due from any Catholick Subjects to an excommunicate heretick Prince nor sinful treason can be committed against him or his laws or his people who support him 6. That be it so or be it otherwise nay granting all the objection pretends to or that it were true certain and notoriously known that Father Garnet had suffered only and meerly and when he could otherwise choose for that opinion of the unlawfulness for such a Confessor to reveal the very individual person of such a Conficent as we have supposed in our case and had suffered death for refusing to retract when he might have had life pardon for retracting yet all this amounts to no more then to an argument of the inward opinion of one single man or of his not pretending outwardly in word what he had not inwardly in thought But perswades no rational man therefore that his opinion was true or his perswasion right or his zeal according to knowledg much less that his martyrdom was Christian or glorious We know there are martyrs of errour as well as of truth and these to be the martyrs of Christ and those the martyrs of the Adversary of Christ We know what death and how willingly the Donatists and Circumcellions Gregor l. 2. Regist. op 36. ad Vniversos Episcopos Hibernia and twenty other sorts of Sectaries in all ages to this present suffered often for their false opinions And we know whose saying it is that Non paena sed causa martyrem facit And we know moreover how pertinently that indeed great and holy Pope St. Gregory the Great applyed this passage of Cyprian with so many other excellent sentences of his own reproving those ancient Bishops of Ireland a 1000 years since for their sufferance of persecution in so bad a cause and upon account only of so bad a cause as their opinion was of the Tria Capitula 7. And lastly that being it is on the contrary certain that Father Garnet approved not so his at any time inward perswasion by such outward testimony of his blood spilt or life lost to confirm it much less his constancy in it and being therefore that all can be concluded from his allegation or his suffering amounts to no more than to a bare outward pretence of his own having followed once such an opinion in such an unhappy and unholy matter of fact and this pretence also taken only or made use of that unconstantly contradictorily too for to excuse himself in part that is to lessen his guilt of that horrid conspiracy nay being in very deed and by Father Garnets own confession that he had other knowledg of that plott then what he had onely in confession and consequently being that he could pretend no more truly to excuse himself then a meer natural secrecy without any kind of relation to a sacramental secrecy Iohn de Serres in Henry the Fourth Pag. 865. Translat Grimstone The objectors will give me leave to mind them of as pious and religious a Father that Millanese Father Honorio of the Cappucchins Institute who farre more fortunately discreetly piously and conscientiously practised according to the quite contrary even home or at least as home upon one side as Father Garnet may be justly said to have done on t'other to our case by discovering to Henry le Grand of France the very individual person that was to assassinat
cognizance of the Priests alone As appears sufficiently by the contrary practice of their being taxed and punished by their civil Magistrats all along from that time forward while their Commonwealth State or Kingdom was in being So that none of all these examples out of the old Testament alleadged by Bellarmine prove as much as per quamdam similitudinem by some kind of similitude as he speaks that Christian Clerks are by the positive law of God or should be exempt from either the supream or not supream coercive power of the civil Magistrate in criminal causes or any causes whatsoever nay nor that they are exempt by such as much as from taxes if the supream Magistrate shall find it necessary to impose taxes on them which is a farre less priviledge Nor yet as much as prove that any Priests or Clerks whatsoever in any age or amongst any people have ever yet been so exempt by any kind of meer human law from such supream coercive power in criminal causes And as for that onely place which he produces out of the new Testament Mat. 17. these words of our Saviour Then are the Children free and least we scandalize them c give it them for thee and me who sees not further that it is as impertinent as any of those of the old Testament and yet more impertinent then some of them to inferre our present controversy or to inferre that as much as per quandam similitudinem by the positive law of God Clerks are exempt from the cognizance and punishment of the supream civil Magistrate or even to inferre their exemption from the very most inferiour civil Judicatories in any civil or temporal cause whatsoever though it were not criminal any way Our Saviour according to the exposition of St. Hilary intimats onely his own freedom or exemption as he was the natural Son of God from that imposition laid by his Father in Exodus 30. on all the children of Israel of a sicle to the holy Temple or Tabernacle which was yearly paid by the Israelits none at all excepted not as much as those very Levits or Priests What hath this to do with the exemption of others that were not the natural Sons of God or what to do with the exemption of such others from the civil Judicatories in other causes or from the supream coercive power of the Prince in criminal causes Or if we admit the exposition of those who say this Didrachma was a tribute layd by Caesar to be payed to himself not that sicle which by the law of Moyses was to be payed to the Temple or tabernacle how doth our Saviour intimating that himself was Son to a King infinitely above all Caesars and therefore in that respect not bound to pay it if he pleased and that onely to avoyd scandal he would pay it for as much as he was not yet known to others to be the natural Son of that onely supream King of all Kings and Caesars and for that he came on earth in that form he appeared in not to break the laws of God or man but to fulfil the former in all points and to observe the later too wherein they were not against the former how I say doth such intimation made by our Saviour in that passage of Matthew any way or even as much as per quandam similitudinem inferre this conclusion Therefore by the positive law of God all Christian Clerks are in criminal causes exempt from the supream civil coercive power of Princes or Magistrats Yes very well sayes Bellarmine Because all such are of the peculiar family of Christ they are his special servants and Ministers And we know that the children of Kings being exempt from tribute and taxes it is not their own persons onely are so exempt but all their servants and Domestick family Excellent But are not all Catholicks or at least are not all holy and truly vertuous and sanctified Catholicks both men and women and as well those of them as are meer laye persons and have no other relation to Churchmen but that of the Catholick communion or Faith are not I say such of the special family of Christ his especial servants and Ministers as well at least as some Clergiemen or as at least the laye servants of some Clergiemen or as their maid-servants and men-servants their Porters Gardners Brewers Cooks and Scullions And doth not Bellarmine all those of his way extend Ecclesiastical Immunity even that very self-same Immunity which he would per quandam similitudinem as he speaks maintain to be de jure divino positivo doth not he I say at least for some part extend that even to all such laye servants even Landresses Cooks and Scullions of Clergiemen Certainly himself elswhere confesses de Concil Author l. 2. c. 17. avers also as much to his purpose That all Christian Catholicks men and women as well of the Layety as Clergie of the whole earth are of one and self-same family of Christ and fellow servants of the same house under the great Steward and Major domo of Christ the Bishop of Rome And to prove that all are of the same family and house of Christ under the same Steward brings that quaerie of Christ himself in St. Luke 12. chap. Quis est fidelis dispensator et prudens quem constituit Dominis super familiam suam c. But whether he will confess or no that they are equally of Christs household it matters not being it is evident of it self the principles of Christian Religion being supposed that such vertuous holy and sanctified laye persons who are no way obliged to Churchmen nor their domestical servants at all are more truly and properly and excellently of the family of Christ and more truly properly and excellently his servants and Ministers too in general though not by particular designation to that is the special Ministery or function of Clerks then even very many Clerks themselves not to speak of the domestick laye servants of any Clerks whatsoever Besides I demand of any that will answer for this eminent Cardinal whether all that believe in Christ as they should by a living Faith are not not onely called children of light in several places of Scripture are not not onely called servants of Christ and Domesticks of God but also have not the power given them to be the very Sons of God as Iohn the Evangelist sayes Jo. 1. dedit eis potestatem filius Dei fieri and not onely to be called so but really to be so as Paul in an other place ut filij Denominemur et simus to wit by adoption and sanctification And being it must be answered they are so called they have such power given them they are so indeed and not by name onely I farther demand then where is the strength of Bellarmine's argument grounded on our Saviour's intimating in this place of Mat. that himself was free and on the example of Earthly Princes and of their children freed by
been delivered and declared unanimously by the Fathers therein from the beginning as of divine Faith or as the doctrine of Christ or of the Apostles as received from Christ or that the contrary is heretical c. Non enim sunt de fide sayes Bellarmine ubi supra disputationes quae praemittuntur neque rationes quae adduntur neque ea quae ad explicandum et illustrandum adferuntur sed tantum ipsa nuda Decreta et ea non omnia sed tontum quae proponuntur tamquam de fide Interdum enim concilia aliquid definiunt non ut certum sed ut probabile c Quando autem decretum proponatur tamquam de fide facile cognoscitur ex verbis Concilij semper enim dicere solent se explicare fidem Catholicam vel Haereticos habendos qui contrarium sentiunt vel quod est communissimum dicunt anathema ab Ecclesia excludunt eos qui contrarium sentiunt Quando autem nihil borum dicunt non est certum rem esse de fide Whence it must follow evidently and even by an argument a majori ad minus that neither the words or epithets used even by the most general Council may be in their decrees of Discipline Reformation or manners nor the suppositions or praevious or concomitant bare opinions which occasion'd the use of such words or epithets in such decrees bind any at all to beleeve such words or epithets were rightly used or fitly applyed or that those opinions were well grounded or certain truths at all Whereof the reason too is no less evident and obvious To wit that the Fathers or Council had not examined or discussed this matter it was not at all their business to determine it nor did they determine it And that we know laws of Reformation and even the very most substantial parts of such Canons are grounded often on or do proceed from meer probable perswasions or such as onely seem probable nay sometimes from the meer pleasure of such law makers All which being uncontrovertedly true where is the strength of Bellarmines grand or second argument framed of such bare words or epithets did we grant his sense even in the whole latitude of it were that of these Popes and Councils Or how will he seek to establish a maxime of such consequence or of so much prejudice to all supream civil Governours and even to the peace of the world to all mankind it self and a maxime for so much or for what hath reference to the exemption of Clerks as to their persons in criminal causes from the supream civil coercive power so clearly as will be seen hereafter in some of the following Sections against express and clear passages of holy Scripture and against the universal Tradition for a 1000. years at least how will he I say have the confidence to endeavour the establishing of such a maxime upon so weak a foundation which every man can overthrow at pleasure or deny with reason to be a foundation at all for that or any other maxime as I mean asserted to be declared such in the positive law of God either in holy Scripture or in undoubted Tradition For the positive law of God appears not to us but by either of these two wayes of the written or unwritten word of God himself 4. And lastly that besides all said in these three answers to this second argument of Bellarmine if we please to examine further what the places alleadg'd import we shall find that whatever the private or peculiar but indiscussed opinion of these Popes or Councils was or was not concerning our present dispute of the exemption of Clerks and that by the positive law of God as to their persons in criminal causes from the supream civil or temporal coercive power nay or whatever such words as jus diuinum ordinatio Dei voluntas omnipotentis c. abstractedly taken may import yet the places alleadged or these words or epithets used in them by these Fathers must not by any means be thought therefore to have comprehended our present case or extended to it at all And the reason is 1. That all Divines and Canonists agree that all expressions words or epithets in any law whatsoever must be understood secundum subjectam materiam or must be expounded by and according as the matter which is in debate or is intended requires and further so as no errour inconvenience or mischief follow and yet the law and words thereof maintain'd still in a good sense and to some good use especially according to former wholesome laws 2. That the matter unto which there was any reference in these places or authorities quoted so by Bellarmine was either Ecclesiastical Immunity in the most generical sense abstracting from the several underkinds true or false or pretended onely of it or was it in a less generical sense taken for that of their persons but still abstracting for any thing appears out of these places quoted from that pretended species of exemption of Clerks as to their persons from the supream civil coercive power in criminal causes especially when the crimes are high and so high too as they are subversive of the very State it self and are besides in meer temporal matters and no remedy at all from the spiritual superiours And in truth for what concerns the Council of Trent which as of greatest authority amongst us as being the very last celebrated of those we esteem general Councils Bellarmine places in the front 1. it is clear enough to any that will please to read the whole tenour of that twentieth chapter Ses. 25. de Reformatione which he quotes That that Council did even there so much abstract from this matter or so little intended it that on the contrary the Fathers much rather seem to speak onely there of the Ecclesiastical exemption of Clerks as to their persons from onely inferiour secular Judicatories or onely from the inferiour Courts Judges and Officers of Princes but not at all from the Princes themselves or from their supream civil power or that of their laws Which I am very much deceived if this entire passage whereof Bellarmine gives us but a few words do not sufficiently demonstrate Cupient sancta synodus Ecclesiasticam disciplinam in Christiano populo non solum restitui sed etiam perpetuo sartam tectam a quibuscumque impedimentis conservari praeter ea quae de Ecclesiasticis personis constituit saeculares quoque Principes officij sui admonendes esse censuit confidens eos ut Catholicos quos Deus sanctae fidei Ecclesiaeque protectres esse voluit jus suum Ecclesiae restitui non tantum esse concessuros sed etiam suâ— ditos suos omnes ad debitam erga Clerum Parcchos et superiores ordines reverentiam revecaturos neâ— permâ—ssuros ut officiales aut inferiores magistratus Ecclesiae et personarum Ecclesiastisarum immunitatem Dei ordinatione et Canonicis sanctionibus constitutam aliquo cupiditatis studio seu
way as by saying they understood not by divine that which is properly and strictly divine but that only which is in a large though somewhat improper acception such and by lay-persons understand only such inferior Lay-persons Judges or Governours as in certain cases haue not from the supream power and civil laws any cognizance of Church-men Which indeed is the only rational and natural exposition of these authorities without any erroneous absurdity falsity inconvenience or prejudice as the very Canon alledged above by me at large out of the Tridentine Synod seems expresly to intimate for as much as it expresly and signally desires or confides for so it speaks that Emperours Kings and Princes will not suffer that their Officials or inferior Magistrats or Judges violat the Immunities of the Church or Church-men out of any covetousness or inconsiderancy confidens c. nec permissuros ut officiales aut inferiores Magistratus Ecclesiae personarum Ecclesiasticarum immunitatem Dei ordinatione canâ—nicis sanctionibus constitutam aliquo cupiditatis studio seu inconsideratione aliqua violent Besides the Reader is to observe two things for that of the fourth Lateran 1. That where 't is said there that Laicks usurp too much of divine right c. by divine right here we ought not nor indeed can if we will not make the Fathers to speak improperly understand the law of God but only the right belonging to God whether that right be derived immediatly from the law of God or law of man 2. That it cannot be truly said that any Clerks receive no temporal thing or benefit from the supream civil Magistrate whereas all Clerks receive from them temporal protection at least And therefore in reason owe Allegiance to such their protectors For Boniface the VIII although his authority or judgment alone without a Council be amongst very Catholick Nations or Universities of no great value or esteem in this or any other which concerns the difference or controversie For we know well enough how his extravagant unam sanctam de Majorit obed is reputed in the Gallican Church and what his Letter Brief or Bull was to a King of France where he declared them all Hereticks that would not acknowledge himself to be supream in that Kingdom and as well in all temporals as in spirituals and that the same esteem indeed and as to our main purpose may be and also truly and groundedly may be entertain'd of Innocent the Third no judicious Divine that will read in Spondaâ—uâ—s Contin his proceedings against most of all the Christian Kings not in Europe only but in Asia will deny I say neverthess that for what concerns only our present purpose of the exemption of Clergymens persons in criminal causes from the supream civil coactive power under which they live and are protected our learned Cardinal alledges this very Boniface to no purpose albeit he alledge him in cap. Quamquam de Censibus in 6. Where indeed there is no such thing For in that place as it is manifest enough out of the whole chapter and purpose or matter treated therein which was only of and against Guidagia that is a kind of toll custome or exaction to be paid for the safeguard of High-wayes and out of the very words which Bellarmine would not quote because not to his general purpose or to that of proving generally all the parts of his Fifth Proposition Cum igitur Ecclesiae Ecclesiasticaeque persâ—nae ac res ipsarum non solum jure humano quin etiam divino à saecularium personarum exactionibus sint immunes it is I say very manifest hence that Boniface in that place and no other is alledged out of him doth not as much as touch upon our controversie or say as Bellarmine imposes on him that Clerks and their goods are exempt from the secular power For be it well or ill said of Boniface here that as well by divine right or law as by humane Churches and Churchmen are free or exempt from all publick exactions of secular persons whereas by such exactions all Divines and Canonists understand only tributes tolls customes or taxes whatsoever of money or other things imposed as payable to the publick and whereas the very matter treated of and determined by Boniface in that Chapter is only that of guidagia or pedagia which was a duty as it seems payable then in Italy by all travellers and for their safe convoy or safe travelling whereas he commands only there that in prosecution of a certain decree made by Alexander the IV. his Predecessor Church-men pay no such guidagia or pedagia for their own Persons or Goods which they carry along or cause to be carried or sent non causa negotiandi who sees not it is a very great inconsequence and meer abuse of the Reader to conclude that therefore Boniface the VIII supposed generally nay says it to be de jure divino positivo taking this jus divinum strictly and properly that Clerks are wholy exempt in all criminal causes and all matters whatsoever from the supream civil coercive power of Lay-Princes Certainly neither doth Boniface teach any such matter there nor must any such follow out of what he either supposes or dedetermines there Because it is clear enough that certain persons even meer lay-persons may have a priviledge from all kind of taxes and yet be subject in other causes and other matters both criminal and civil to such as impose taxes For Iohn the VIII That who ever please to consider that whole chapter Si Imperator quoted by Bellarmine will be convinced this Pope intends no more but that as it is fitting the Emperour himself should for what concerns Religion learn from and not teach the Church so in Ecclesiastical matters it was Gods pleasure that Clerks should be ordered and examined and if they chanced to fall into an errour should be also reconciled on their return not by the Lay-powers but by the Pontiffs and Priests Which these words omitted by the Cardinal recipique de errore remeantes do sufficiently insinuat Besides that any man knows it is a very weak and sensless argument of a positive law of God for any thing or any duty or any priviledge that either Iohn the VIII or any other even a whole General Council should speak in this manner Omnipotens Deus voluit it was the will of God unless they had withal and on the debate or controversie it self made of purpose an express Canon declaring that thereby or by such manner or by these words it is or it was the will of the omnipotent God they mean'd to signifie not the general or special providence of God or his good will or pleasure known only to us for example in the present matter of Exemption because we see the Clerks as to many things are exempted so by the laws of Princes and that we know this could never have been done by Princes if God had not moved their hearts to do so For
in pursuance of those priviledges so generally granted by this pious Emperour Constantine to all Clerks of the Catholick Communion it was that he writ to Anulinus the Prefect of Affrick that letter whereof I treated before but whereof I have shewed also that Beliarmine made other use then he should or could which Eusebius hath at length in his Ecclesiastical History l. X. c. VII and I give here now wholy out of him to this end also that the Reader may himself be Judge with how little reason our learned Cardinal did quote it for a proof of a law of Nature or Nations for his exemption or in his whole latitude of the exemtion of Clerks from the supream civil coercive power even in all kind of criminal causes whatsoever albeit this consideration belong properly to the former Section Ave Anuline carissime nobis Cum ex multis rebus constet religionem illam in qua summa divinae majestatis reverentia custodituâ— spretam quidem maxima reipublicae impâ—rtasse discrimina eandem verorite susceptam ac cust litam nomini Romano maximam prosperitatem cunctis mortalium rèbus divina id tribuente beneficientia proecipuam felicitatem contulisse placuit ut homines illi â—ui cum debita sanctimonia assidua hujus legis obseruantia ministerium suum divinae religionis cultui exhibent laborum suorum mercedem repâ—rtent Anuline carissimâ— nobis Quocirca eos homines qui intra Provinciam tibi creditam in Ecclesia Cathâ—lica cui Caeciliarus praeest huic sanctissimae religioni ministrant quos Clericos vâ—care consiteverunt ab omnibus omnino publicis functionibus immunes volumus câ—nservari wâ—errâ—re aliquo aut casu sacrilego a cultu summae divinitati debit â—abstral â—ntur sed ut pâ—tius absque ulla inquietudine propriâ— legi deserviant Quispe his summam venerati nem divinâ— numini exhibentibus maximum inde em sumentum republicae videtur accidere Vale Anuline carissunt ac desideratissime nâ—â—is Thirty six years after this letter and the former priviledge of Constantine the Sons of this great Emperour Constantius and Constâ—ns the one an Arrian the other a Consustantialist governing the Roman Empire their father being dead Arbitiâ— Lâ—llâ—â—nus being Consuls gave yet a further priviledge to Bishops and only to Bishops not to other Clerks that it should not be lawful to accuse them of crimes before Secular Judges And so decreed by an express law L. Mansuetudinis 12. eâ—d tit For as for other Ecclesiastical Persons Priests inferiour Clerks or Monks they remained still as they were in all both civil and criminal causes under the jurisdiction of the civil I mean subordinat lay Magistrates until Iustinians time And therefor it was that Leo and Anthemius both and together Emperours about some threescore years before Iustinian to favour somewhat more yet the Clergy and that they might not be drawn too farr by the lay Judges enacted Ne orthodoxae fidei sacerdotes Clerici cujuseumque graâ—us aut Monachi in causis civilibus extra Provinciam aut lâ—cum aut regionem quam habitant ex ullius penitus majoris minorisue sententia Judicis pertraâ—antur sed apud suos Iudices ordinarios id est Provinciarum Rectores omnium contra se agentium excipiant actiones That no Priests oâ— Clerks of what degree soever nor Monks of the orthodox Faith be in civil causes drawn at all out of the Province place or Countrey where they dwel by any higher or lower Judge whatsoever but be left to answer before their own ordinary Judges that is the Rectors of Provinces the actions of all Plaintiffs against them Behold how these most pious and Catholick Princes declared the Presidents of Provinces to be the ordinary Judges of the Clergy Whom yet none of all the holy Fathers or great Pontiffs of those times did rebuke herein or taxed with any errour or with having declared or spoken in such matters and in their publick Institutions or Laws any thing at all less truly less piously or less orthodoxly Whence it appears how injuriously they speak of Iustinian that charge him with usurping any jurisdiction over Ecclesiasticks whereas on the other side they should acknowledge themselves infinitly bound to him for as much as he was the very first of Emperours that in civil causes exempted Clerks from secular that is lay Judicatories to which till his time they had been subject in all such causes Which exemption or priviledge given so by him is to be seen in the before-mentioned law of his Novel 83. but still with the also fore-mentioned caution that in criminal causes of Clerks the Pretor have cognizance however with this other caution also to see them degraded by the Church before he give definitive sentence or at least before he proceed to execution when their crime is found by him to be such as deserves the Gallies or Mines or Exile or Death or any other infamous punishment All which being so or this which I have now related being the true origen and progress of Ecclesiastical Immunity given so by several Emperours and at seueral times from the conversion of Constantine until Iustinian made this law in his 83. Novel First it is clear enough by these very laws without relating to or depending at all of Bellarmines concession that Clerks have been originally subject in all politick matters not only to the supream power of secular Princes and consequently subject in criminal causes to their said supream civil coercive power but also in both civil and criminal causes to the subordinat lay or civil power of inferiour Judges Otherwise certainly neither could those Emperours grant those priviledges at least as priviledges nor would so many learned virtuous and holy Fathers Bishops and Popes as were then in the Roman Empire advise so ill in their own concern and in that of truth also and Christian Religion that they would own such exemption as from the benefit concession or priviledge of such lay Princes if they had believed to have had it formerly and originally from the very essence of Religion For by owning such priviledges from those Princes they confessed themselves to have been subject to such as could give them this exemption being it is manifest that nothing can be freed or exempted which was not bound and subjected before in such matters wherein after the exemption is Besides the very Emperours themselves are sufficiently known in History to have been so pious that if they had been taught by the Bishops or at any time had been of themselves otherwise perswaded that Clergy-men were exempt from their power by the law divine they would have declared so much presently and generally in their own laws edicts without mincing without reserving stil a power even to their inferiour Judges to proceed against Clerks in most or many or some matters For if those good Emperours and other Christian Kings in their dayes bestowed on the Church so profusedly and only out of
last edition and after so many recognitions l. 1. de Cleric c. 28. but retracts that and puts on a new face and amasses together all his reading ever since that Edition and all his veteran strength and wit to prove that not only by other arguments but also by the very civil laws of Roman Emperours all Clergiemen are wholly and generally exempt and in all causes both civil and criminal from all even the very supreamest civil coercive power on earth even from that of those very Emperours who made those laws To the fourth proposition sayes he Tractatu de Potestate Papae in rebus temporalibus cap. 35. which was that no writer hath recorded to posterity that Princes have exempted Clerks from their own power but only from the power of inferiour Magistrates I answer that whoever sayes so doth seem either to have read nothing or to have purposed to abuse his Reader For Ruffians writen l. 10. Hist c. 2. That Constantine the Emperour pronounced in express words It was not lawful for him to judge Priests but rather to be judged by them Whereby he declared openly enough that Priests were exempted not only from the power of inferiour Judges but also from that of the very supream To which declaration that law of the same Constantine which is the seventh in Theedosius's Code de Episcopis Clericis is consentaneous where it is said that the Readers of the holy Bible and the Sub-deacons and other Clerks qui per injuriaâ— Hereticorum ad curiam devocati sunt who by the injustice of Hereticks are called to Court shall be absolved and henceforth as in the East shall not be called to Courts minime ad curias devocentur sed immunitate plenissima petiantur but enjoy a most plenary freedom So he Whence being it is clear enough that he absolutely prohibits that Clerks be called to Courts and will have them to enjoy a most plenary freedom and that he excepts nothing at all it must be also manifest his mind was that neither shall they be called upon to the very Princes own supream Courts for it would not be a most plenary exemption if they were obnoxious as much as to the very principal Power it self Such an other is that law of Theodosius and Valentinian Cod. Theodos. l. ultima de Episc Clericis where we read thus Clerks whom without any distinction the unhappy presumer commanded to be lead to the secular Judges we reserve to Episcopal Audience For it is not lawful that Ministers of divine duties be subjected to they pleasure of temporal powers In which law where nothing is excepted all things do seem to be comprehended unless peradventure the Princes power may not be said to be temporal And even Iustinian himself in his 83. Novella so often quoted by our Adversaries as if therein Clerks did not seem to be exempted in criminal causes from the secular Court hath these words That he must be first degraded from his sacerdotal dignity by the Bishop and so be put under the punishment of the law Where we see Clerks as long as they remain Clerks not to be under the power of the laws but onely after they are by the Bishop deprived of their Clerical honour and therefore while they remain Clerks to be not onely exempt from the power of inferiour judges but even from the very laws of Princes for what belongs to coaction And this is it which the Council of Constance did say in the 31. Session That laymen have no jurisdiction or power on Clerks And certainly under the name of Laicks it comprehends even supream Princes whereas these are Laicks Finally that I may pass over many other arguments the Emperour Frederick the second speaks generally in his first constitution where he sayes We also enact that none presume to draw any Ecclesiastical person to a secular judgment either in a criminal or civil question against the imperial constitutions and canonical sanctions So much there But by secular judgment are not onely understood the judgments of inferiour judges but also those of the supream whereas all are equally secular And we see it so observed indeed where the reverence of sacred canons bears the sway Behold here good Reader the very last essaye of a dying cause Our great Cardinal having been unwilling but to say somewhat however himself so knowing a man as we must presume he was could not but know he said nothing at all in all this discourse to perswade any other even but meanly knowing or judicious Adversary That any Roman Emperour did ever yet by any of these laws or other whatsoever exempt or intend to exempt or that otherwise they or any els understood Clerks to be exempt by any other law from their own supream imperial power in temporal matters either criminal or civil though I dispute not at present of civil causes but onely of criminal For 1. who sees not That were the testimony of Ruffinus's being home in any point a convincing argument yet this which is here alleadged is not in any wise to the point or question Ruffinus tells indeed that Constantine said it was not lawful for himself to judge the Priests but tells not that Constantine ever said himself had exempted them so from himself or that they were so by any law of man Albeit therefore Constantine said so to the Bishops of the first general Council of Nice yet is it plain enough out of the very series of that History in Ruffine when they offered 〈◊〉 petitions to him one against an other that as this was said by an ordinary manner of speech onely and by way of complement so the words must not be taken strictly or scrupulously at all but onely as extolling the dignity of Bishops and as intending to deterre them from litigiousness and chieftly 〈…〉 purpose to free himself from the trouble of judging their hateful differences That this was the mind of Constantine appears by these manifold and manifest arguments 1. That for that his saying he gave this reason that Bishops were Gods and received power from God to judge of him de nobis qâ—â—que pudicandi But neither can relate to human constitutions Nor even to those are divine least otherwise it must follow that Constantine farre better understood the law of God when he so refused to judge the Bishops then those very Bishops themselves who in that holy Oecumenical Synod of Nice did repaire and complain to him as to their Soveraign Judg as may be seen in that very History of Ruffinus 2. That otherwise no Clerks Priests Bishops themselves can be Judges of other Clerks sed ille solus de quo scriptum est Deus stetit in Synagoga Deorum in mediò autem Deos dijudicat For so said Constantine to the Bishops on that occasion and consequently if you take his words strictly or scrupulously he said that Clerks were not onely exempted from his own tribunal or that of Princes but from that of Pontiffs
criminal causes while or during their being Clerks or before degradation For as for that other passage or those other words which Bellarmine takes hold of to abuse his Reader prius hunc spoliari a Deo amabili Episcopo sacerdotali dignitate ita sub legum manu fieri in English these this Clerk to be spoiled first of his sacerdâ—â—al dignity by the beloved Bishop of God and so to be put under the hand of laws who sees not that please to read that Novel nay that please to read what Bellarmine himself before and elswhere l. de Cler. c. 28. most expresly and particularly taught of the contents of that Novel who sees not I say that these words prius hunc spoliari c. ita sub legum manu fieri do not signifie in that law that Clerks were not before the Bishop degraded them subject in such criminal causes to the lay Presidents of Provinces or to the laws but onely after such degradation It is expresly provided in that very law as Bellarmine himself in the book of his now quoted confesses That the lay judg is in the very first place of all and before any such degradation to take cognizance of such criminal causes of Clerks and that in the next place if this lay judge find him guilty the Bishop is to degrade him before the execution or judgment of execution be given by the judge Is it not plain enough that by this very law or Novel of Iustinian Clerks were in such causes subject to such lay Judges and laws before any degradation by the Bishop could such lay Judges take cognizance of any cause or person that were not by law subject to them Therefore it is evident that the words prius spoliari c. in that passage quoted by Bellarmine and words ita sub legum manu fieri must as there be onely understood in relation to a publick definitive sentence of punishment and execution of such Which that Novel ordains for the honour of the sacred function of Priests not to be pronounced before the Judge give notice to the Bishop to degrade such a Priest as is by the same lay Judge upon examination and full discussion of the cause found to have deserved some infamous punishment as for example to be condemned to death or to the mines or perpetual banishment That so it may not be said that a Priest but a man despoiled first of the dignity of a Priest and of the very order it self as much as could be and of all kind of priviledges of the Clerical order was legally condemn'd and suffer'd such an ignominious punishment And by consequence the priority signified by that word prius relates to the posteriority of a definitive publick sentence of such infamy and to the execution of it not at all to a posteriority of power in such lay Judge over such a Clerk in such a cause which power we have now seen by that very Novel to have been anteriour to and wholly independent of the Bishops degradation being that the power of judicial cognizance of the crime was such And by the same consequence that being under the power of the civil laws imported by those other words ita sub legum manu fieri signifies onely a certain kind of being under and that too in order onely to such a subordinate Judge in such a cause but not all kinds of being under nor any kind at all in order to the supream civil Judge As for Bellarmines Allegation here of the Council of Constance Ses 31. it s not to the purpose because whatever may be said to have been meaned by the Fathers in those or any other such words or whether they intended only an exemption from the subordinat ciuil or lay Judges or even from the supream yet they say not here or elsewhere that such exemption whâ—tever was given by the civil laws Besides it is evident that the Fathers of Constance made no Canon at all in this point of exemption and that albeit they have these words alledged here by the Cardinal yet they only have them or make use of them in a particular case decreeing the liberty of the Bishop of Aste from an unjust imprisonment wherein he was by force kept by Philip the Count of Virtues a Philippo Comite virtutum who was not the said Bishop's supream temporal Prince or Lord but a subordinate and who without any warrant from the Supream had by usurpation imprisoned the said Bishop So that the Fathers of Constance alledging in the particular sentence they gave for this Bishop and against this Counâ— and in such a particular that laici nullam in Clericos potestatem aut jurisdictionem habent and alledging this only too by way of supposition or as a reason of their said particular sentence in favour of the said Bishop must not be presumed to have supposed more then was necessary for the justification of their said sentence especially where to have supposed so must have been point blanck without any former canon of the Church or law of the Empire or custom of the world and consequently against plain Scripture Rom. 13. as I will shew hereafter But to be exempt from the jurisdiction or coercive power of subordinat civil or subordinat lay Judges Lords or Princes according to the late civil laws of the Empire and to the custom that by little and little was introduced and then in force in the Christian world was enough for that purpose or justification of that sentence notwithstanding a plenary subjection still of even Bishops to the supream lay coercive power The Fathers of Constance therefore being justly exasperated against the said Earl did rationally and pertinently secundum subjectam materiam make use of these words in the sentence they gave against him attendentes quod subditi in eorum Praelatos Laici in Clericos nullam habent jurisdictionem potestatem For it is a rule in both the canon and civil Law that the sense of words how indefinit soever in any instrument writing or speech whatsoever must not be what they import in a strict Gramatical or Logical sense but what they do ex intentione loquentis according to the intention of the speaker or writer and that this intention must be gathered not only out of the beginning middle and conclusion or end of any such instrument writing or speech and out of the collation of altogether Cum utriusque Juris argumenta nos doceant ea quae in medio ad finem atque principium ea quae in fine ad utrumque vel corum alterum recte referri sayes Nicholas III. in his Decretal Exiit de verbor significatione in Sexto but also as natural reason tells us ex subjecta materia out of the very matter whereof or concerning which the law instrument writing or discourse is What last of all is alledged out of Frederick the Second's Constitution being it is no more but a general ordinance or
of the rest none at all The first Council then which decreed any thing concerning this point was the third Council of Carthage held Anno Domini 307. St. Augustine being one of the Fathers and subscribers of it Whereof the 9. Canon is of this tenour and very words Item placuit ut quisquis Episcoporum Praesbyterorum Diaconorum seu Clericorum cum in Ecclesia ei crimen fuerit intentatum vel civilis causa fuerit commota si relicto Ecclesiastico judioiâ— publicis judiciis purgari â—â—luerit etiamsi pro ipso fuerit prolata sententia locum suum amittat hoc in criminali judicio In civili vero perdat quod evicit si locum suum obtinere voluerit Cui enim ad eligendos judices undique patet authoritas ipse se indignum fraterno câ—nsortiâ— judicat qui de universa Ecclesia male sentiendo de judicio seculari poscit auxilium cum privatorum Christianorum causas Apostolus ad Ecclesiam deferri atque ibi determinari praecipiat Also we have ordained that if any Bishop Priest Deacon or other Clerk being charged in or before the Church with a crime or having but even a civil suit commenced against him shall decline Ecclesiastical Judgment and choose rather to have his cause tryed in publick Courts or Judicatories though he have sentence given for him yet he shall loose his place and this in a criminal judgment But in a civil that he forgo what he hath wonn if he desire to hold his place For he that is at full liberty to choose his Judges where he will shews himself unworthy of the fellowship of his bretheren when judging ill of the whole Church he sueth to secular judicatories for help whereas the Apostle commandeth that the causes of private Christians be brought to the Church and there determined Is there I beseech you any word here out of which may be gathered by any probable consequence That this Council intended to exempt Clergie-men from the jurisdiction of secular Magistrats or to declare that no Laicks are lawful Judges in any causes of the Clergie So little of any such matter that on the contrary the whole tenour shews plainly enough those Affrican Fathers beleeved that Laicks were always very legal and competent Judges in the politick or temporal causes of Clerks And shews plainly enough those Fathers endeavoured onely by this Canon to bridle the stubborness and restrain the giddiness of such Clerks as when their causes were already begun to be debated in the Church before Ecclesiastical Arbiters did nevertheless without any cause and before sentence renounce them and run to the secular Judges for a determination In which case yet this Council disallows not the sentence given by the secular Judge nor pronounceth him to be no competent Judge but onely for punishment of the levity and improbity of such a Clerk prescribes him to quit the benefit of such a sentence or els to loose his place But that those Fathers at the same time acknowledg'd the civil Magistrats to be lawful Judges of Clerks may hence be sufficiently evicted that they restrained this decree to that case onely wherein a crime is in the Church that is before an Ecclesiastical Judge charg'd on a Clergieman or a civil suit commenced against him in the Church quo crimen Clerico in Ecclesia fuerit intentatum aut civilis causa commota Out of these two cases therefore it was lawful for a Clerk notwithstanding this Canon to have recourse to lay Judicatories and secular publick Judges How clear soever this matter be yet Bellarmine would needs argue against it in his book against William Barclay cap. 34. where he tels us that himself sees in this canon many things for the exemption of Clerks Primum enim sayes he aperâ—è damnant Patres recursum ad judicia secularium Magistratuum quod certe non facerent si seculares Magistratus omni ex parte legittimi judices Ecclesiasticorum fuissent c. For first sayes he the Fathers openly condemn a recourse to secular Magistrats which truly they would not have done if the secular Magistrates were in all respects lawful judges of Ecclesiasticks For what sin or fault had it been to appeal from the judgment of the Bishop to the judgment of the President of the Province or of the Prince himself if the President or Prince were a lawful Judge not onely of the Clerk but also of the Bishop Next this Council rescinds the sentence of the secular Judg pronounced against a Clerk forasmuch as the canon decrees that a Clerk absolved in a criminal cause by a secular Judg shall loose his place and in a civil cause shall loose that which was adjudged to him and so shall in neither of both causes reap any benefit by a sentence pronounced in his behalf by a secular Judg. For albeit the Fathers decree so by way of punishment yet the punishment had been unjust if it had not been a crime for and in a Clerk to acknowledg any secular judgment Lastly because Barclay sayes this Council doth reprehend onely those Clerks that after a cause begun to be discussed before an Ecclesiastical judg transferre it to a secular which may seem to be injurious to Ecclesiastical judges let him see what the Council of Milevi of the same age and celebrated in the same Affrick sayes For thus it speaks in the Nineteenth canon Placuit ut quicumque ab Imperatore cognitinem judiciorum publicorum petierit Honore proprio privetur si autem Episcâ—pale judicium ab Imperatâ—re postulaverit nihil ei obsit It hath been our will that whoever shall of the Emperour demand the cognizance of publick judgments shall be deprived of his proper Honour but if from the Emperour any demand Episcopal Audience that such demand shall not disadvantage him Where we see the Fathers do not treat of a judgment already begun in the Court Ecclesiastical but absolutely prohibit Clerks under a most grievous penalty that they shall not have recourse to the Emperour to demand any secular discussion and yet do licence the recourse of Clerks to demand Episcopal Audience to wit for avoiding secular judgments Hetherto Bellarmine Notwithstanding all which it is always clear enough that not onely nothing at all is decreed in this canon of Carthage for the exemption of Clergiemen from secular Iudicatories but even very much against it if the canon be considered without prejudice For if it had not been lawful even I mean in point of conscience for the secular Magistrate or judg to here the causes of Clerks wherefore did not the Fathers in this Council of Carthage forbid under censures the secular Iudges themselves not to admit Clerks to their Courts or not to give judgment in their causes But here is not a word against the judges that do so Besides when the Fathers give the reason of their said decree forbidding Clerks to go spontaneously of themselves to try their causes in secular Iudicatories they
extended them to other Kingdoms and that besides they were after approved of and received by the Bishops of such other Kingdoms That neither Gratian's insertion of them into the body of his Decretum nor the publication of his Decretum as such by the approbation authority or command of Popes makes them hoc ipso to be extended or of more binding authority in the nature of laws then they were before such insertion publication or approbation command or authority or makes them hoc ipso to be laws for the Catholick Church but onely to be more authentick whereas we know there are a thousand authorities alleadged by Gratian which are not therefore binding laws to the Church Thirdly that whatever may be said of Inferiour lay Judicatories judgments or Judges nothing at all can be with any kind of colour inferr'd hence against the supream of the Emperour himself in any matters whatsoever laws or canons whereby his power may be conceived whether right or wrong to be any way limited Because the supream extraordinary and absolute judgment of the Prince is never understood never signified by or comprised under the general notion or common use of these words secularia judicia as the Prince himself is not understood by the general or common name of a Judge or of a secular Iudge being these words or the like according to the common use or meaning signifie onely such as are such by special office and not him at all who by a supereminent power creats both these and all other even much higher Officials For it is a rule among both Civilians and Canonists That the words of any Canons Institutions or other laws whatsoever though Canons or laws of priviledg must be stâ—â—cti juris and strictae interpretati nis where otherwise a very great inconvenience must follow or where they derogate to a former uncontroverted right of any third person and much more when by any other interpretation they derogate to the supream authority either spiritual in the Pope or temporal in the Emperour and most of all when they ruine and quite destroy either in relation to their subjects being that in so much they are purely odious though in other points where no such prejudice is they are purely favourable And Odia restringi favores autem convenit ampliari is a rule of the very Canon law in Sexto Now who sees not there can be nothing more inconvenient in it self and more odious to Princes then that so vast a number of both men and women living within their Kingdoms and going under the name and title of their Subjects should yet be exempted wholly from their even supream royal power and in all cases whatsoever civil or criminal Pursuant to the former rule is that other which Felinus hath cap. uit de sanâ—nia Quoties species a â—â—â—it aliquid generi numquam appellatione generis venit species Now Iu â—ex secularis and judicium seculare is a genus Rex Imperator c. and judicium supremum Regium or judicium supremum imperiale is a species And pursuant also to both rules is the doctrine of that celebrious late Doctor of Paris Andreas Duuallius de suprema Rom. Pontif. in Ecclesiam potestate part 2. q. 4. p. 264. where notwithstanding his being so great and known a stickler against the ancient School of Paris for the Pope in too many things yet he writeth thus Notum est nomine Cleric rum c. It is manifest that in any odious matter Bishops are not comprehended under the name of Clerks nor sometimes in the same matter â—ther Religious men under the name of Mâ—nks neque similiter nomine Dominorum Reges nor likewise Kings under the name of Landlords Govern us or Lords in regard of the height and Majesty of the Royal dignity c. And finally pursuant to the said rules and their meaning or scope it is that we read the same or the like other exceptions and of several other particulars from a comprehension under general notions in Armilla verb. Abbas n. XI verb. Clericus n. 2. verb. sacerdos n. 1. Sayrus tom 1. l. 3. c. 33. Navarr tom 2. commentar in cap. Finali de simâ—nia n. 5. Silvester verb. excommunicatio 19. n. 82. Parag. Quadragesima tertia Innâ—centius in can sedes Apostolica de Rescriptis Moreover as it is a general maxime That in a general concession or priviledge how general soever the words be such things are not to be understood as granted which evident reason tell us that in all probability the Prince or Pope or other Legislator or graunter of such concession or priviledge would not grant by any means if he had reflected or thought on it in particular so it must be as general a rule That in a general prohibition of any law or Canon and how general soever the words be such things are not prohibited which if reflected on in particular right reason tells us that in all probability it could not have been the intention of the makers of such a law or Canon to prohibit them Out of all which it is evident enough that no Divine or Canonist may conclude from the prohibition of this Council of Agde or of this Canon of it or of this second part of the said Canon that the Fathers comprehended or intended to comprehend the supream absolute and extraordinary judgment of Kings or Emperours under the general notions of secularia judicia but onely such as were commonly understood by such those I mean of subordinate inferiour Iudicatories and from which there might be upon rational grounds and by the concession or permission of their Prince or custom of the Country even at that very time wherein these Fathers lived an exemption of Clerks For who is so bereaved of common sense as to say that the Councils of Christian Bishops in those days would be so high or unreasonable or rather so mad as to prohibit Clerks not to appear at all before the King Emperour or other supream Magistrate though called upon and expresly commanded to appear before them which yet these Fathers must be said to have decreed in this Canon or second part of it if Bellarmines allegation of it be to his main purpose here of Exemption of the Clerks by this Canon from even the supream civil coercive power or if it be against mine here also which is that no Canon hath ever yet so exempted them not even this of Agde or which is the same the same thing if secularia judicia in this Canon reach even to the very supream of the Emperour or other King and in all cases and causes temporal civil or criminal whatsoever But if Bellarmine or any other for him see no absurdity in granting this to have been the meaning of this ancient though onely Provincial Synod of a few Bishops of Guien onely he must pardon me for not joyning with him in so hard a censure or opinion of such scandalous consequence of any Catholick Coucil especially so
ut cumque summus sit non poterit huic immunitati aut exemptioni propriis legibus propriaque authoritate derogare So farr the learned Cardinal hath helped us on in this matter by giving us to our hand the authors and places quoted albeit only to shew against William Barclay that himself was not single in asserting such a power to the Pope But for these natural reasons or theological if you please to call them so which to solve is my business at present he hath left his Reader to seek Which makes me say that he hath not at all removed the cause of Barclay's admiration as he ought to have done Barclay admired that so learned and so judicious a man as Cardinal Bellarmine should maintain that the Pope could exempt the Subjects of Kings from all subjection to Kings and this without any consent from the Kings themselves adding as a further cause of his admiration how it was confess'd that before such exemption by the Pope those very persons so exempted by him or attempted to be so exempted to wit the whole Ecclesiastical Order of Clerks and even as well Priests Bishops Archbishops Patriarchs and the very Pope himself as other the most inferiour Clerks were all of them primitively originally and even by the very law of God subject to the secular Princes in all politick or civil and temporal matters and yet as a further cause adding also that the law of Christ submitted unto in Baptisme deprives no man of the temporal rights he had before baptisme and consequently deprived not for example Constantine the Great when baptized of the lawful power he had before he was baptized over the Christian Clergy Now that Bellarmine should go about to disswade Barclay from his admiration because forsooth he quotes five School-men that is four Divines and one Canonist who taught the same thing and produces only the bare words of the Assertion of two of them on the point but no reason at all of theirs or of any others or of his own for such assertion may seem to men of reason a strange way of perswading another man and master too of much reason As if Barclay should cease therefore any whit the less to admire so gross an errour in Bellarmine that some others also had fallen into the same errour before or after or together with him Nay if Bellarmine had not preposterously fixed on those very men for his companions or patrons who contradict themselves so necessarily that is at least virtually and consequentially in this matter or if he had only fixed on such Divines and Canonists who speak consequently however ungroundedly of the exemption of Clergymen as of divine right which I confess the generality of Canonists do then peradventure he might have seemed to have alledged somewhat though indeed very little to allay Barclays wonderment For truly those he alledges betray themselves and his cause manifestly whereas they hold also manifestly and at the same time that the exemption of Clerks is not de jure divino Which being once granted who sees not the main difficulties which lye so in their way as not possible to be removed for asserting a power in the Pope to make laws for that exemption independently of Princes Who sees not that the Pope cannot make or impose what laws he please to bereave either Prince or People of their temporal rights or of what part soever of such rights he thinks expedient or convenient And who sees not otherwise that he alone must de jure be ot least may de jure make himself to be the sole supream Prince on earth in all temporal things at least amongst Christians And therefore consequently who sees not that being the Pope is not so nor can be so nor can lessen the Princes temporal authority over his own Subjects where-ever the law of God doth not lessen it and what I say of the Pope I say too of the whole Church who sees not consequently therefore I say that neither Pope nor Council nor other authority of the Church if any other be imaginable can or could so exempt Clerks from the power of Princes being that before such exemption all Clerks were subject to Princes and by the laws of God and nature subject to them But for as much as it appears undoubtedly that Bellarmine was one that did not or at least would not see these either Antecedents or Consequents being he sayes in plain terms and in his own name also de Potestate Papae in temporalibus supra cap. 38. That whether the supream temporal Princes themselves have or have not or could or could not exempt ecclesiastical while in their Dominion from their own supream temporal power potuit tamen voluit summus Pontifex istos eximere aut jure divino exemptos declarare yet the supream Pontiff could exempt them so and hath exempted them so or at least could declare and hath declared them antecedently exempted so by divine right that is by God himself in holy Scripture or at least in his revealed word either written or unwritten Neque possunt Principes etiam supremi hanc exemptionem impedire That neither can the Princes even supream hinder this exemption and That all this is the common doctrine of the Divines and Canonists cui hactenus non nisi Heretiei restiterunt which none hetherto but heretick's have resisted and forasmuch also as not onely Franciscus Victoria Dominicus Soto Martinus Ledesma Dominicus Bannes and Didacus Covarruvias above particularly quoted but even the generality of Canonists and late School Divine Writers seem to be of the number of those that with Bellarmine did not or would see the same Antecedents and consequents and lastly forasmuch as we have already solved all they could say for their contrary assertions either out of Scripture or out of the laws and canons nay and out of not onely some other extrinsick authorities of other authors Philosophers and Historians I mean for what concerns matter of fact or the point of Clergiemens having been already exempted so by any whomsoever but also all the arguments grounded on or pretended from natural reason or which Bellarmine framed above for his law of Nature or Nations for the Clergie's being already so exempted now therefore to fall to that which onely is the proper subject of this present Section let us consider those other arguments pretended to be of natural reason or even of Theological reason if you please to call it so as it may perhaps be justly called because suppoâ—eing some principle of Faith which we find in other Authors as in Dominicus Soto and in Franciscus Victoria for the being of such a power in the Pope or Church or in either or in both together as purely such or as purely acting by a true proper certain or undoubted power of the Church as the Church or as a Church onely For thus it is they must state the question and that they do questionless suppose it stated Though I confess
Ecclesiastical Immunity or Exemption by such his proceedings What therefore might be the cause of his desiring or accepting such a Bull if the story of it be true we may easily conteive to be of one side King Philips inexorable rigour I will not say cruelty first in excluding so many thousand religious and sacred men from all pardon and grace and next in pursuing and destroying them as irreconciliable enemies when he might have made them very tractable Subjects and on the other the Popes pretence of even the temporal Soveraignty or supream Lordship of the Country and Kingdom of Portugal as having been made tributary to the Church of Rome by Alphonsus the first Duke and King thereof according to Baronius ad annum Christi 1144. and the proceedings after of several Popes against some Kings of Portugal upon that ground by excommunicating and deposing some instituting others in their place and by exacting of them yearly at first agreed upon under Lucius the II. four ounces of Gold and after that four Marks of Gold under Alexander the IV. as an acknowledgement of his being the supream Lord of it or of its being held in Fee from the Bishops of Rome King Philip therefore to establish himself against the titles of so many other pretendents to that Crown thought it the safest way when he had done his work to make all sure with the Pope for after-times and get himself acknowledged King of Portugal even by him who pretended to be supream Lord of the Fee Though otherwise it be apparent also in Baronius that the Kings of Portugal did acknowledge so much dependence from the Kings of Castile as being bound to appear at their Court when called upon and give them three hundred Souldiers to serve against the Moors amounts unto But this could be no prejudice to a former independent and supream right of Popes to Portugal if there was any such especially whereas the same Barnius makes Castile it self feudatary to nay all Spain (a) Baron ad an Christiâ—â—â— â—01 〈◊〉 1703 the property of the of See Rome as likewise he doth in several places of his Annals all the Kingdoms of Christendome not even France (b) ad an 702. it self excepted And therefore nothing can be concluded from King Philips admission of this Bull but either his remorse of having abused that power God gave him over those religious men or used it in so much more like a Tyrant then a King unless peradventure he perswaded himself upon evident grounds they would never be true to him or his wariness in seeming so the more observant of the Pope in all things according to the maximes of Campanella while he drove at the universal Monarchy But however this be or not its plain enough out of his so publick refusal in the face of the Kingdoms of Portugal and Castile and in that publick Assembly of all the Estates amongst which the Ecclesiastical was the chief and out of his so long and severe prosecution and persecution of those Monks for three whole years till he destroyed them all and out also of the silence even by the Ecclesiasticks themselves of that argument of exemption when the occasion to alledge it was the greatest might be offered at any time and finally out of his receiving continually the most holy Sacraments of the Church all that time without any reprehension or objection made to him by the Church of so publick and so scandalous and so bloody and sacrilegious violation of her pretended nearest and dearest laws I say it is plain enough out of all that whatever the story be of that Bull or whatever the true or pretended motives of King Philip to accept of it neither his own Subjects of Spain or Portugal Clerks or Laicks nor those of other Churches or Kingdoms either Princes or people nor even the Prelats or Pope himself that was then did any way so regard the suppositions or even admonitions comminations nay or even actual censures of other Popes in their Bulla caenae or otherwise as to think perswade themselves that a true obliging canon or law either of God or Man of the State or Church or even as much as of the Pope himself could be concluded thence for any real or true exemption of Clerks from the supream civil power in criminal causes And so I have done with Bellarmines voluit As for his other saying above That hitherto only Hereticks have contradicted this kind of Exemption even this so extraordinary and extravagant exemption of all Clerks in all temporal causes whatsoever civil or criminal from the supream civil and coercive power I remit the Reader to the next following Section saving one where he shall see a farr other sort of Doctors then Hereticks to contradict it even Austins and Hieroms and Chrysostoms and Gregories nay the whole Catholick Church in all ages until these later and worser times wherein the contest was raised first and again renewed by some few Popes and their Partizans against the supream temporal power of Emperours Kings and States Only you are to take notice here Good Reader That 't is but too too familiar with our great Cardinal to make Hereticks only the opposers of such private or particular but false opinions or doctrines of his own as he would impose as the doctrines of the Catholick Church on his undiscerning Readers as on the other side to make the most notorious Arch-hereticks to be the patrons of such other doctrines as himself opposes and would fright his Readers from how well and clearly soever grounded in Scriptures Fathers Councils Reason Which is the very true genuine cause wherefore he gives us where he treats of such questions so exact a list of those chief and most notorious Hereticks who held against him on the point and gives them also in the very beginning of his chapter or controversie whatever it be As in this of Ecclesiastical Exemption besides what I have quoted now out of his book against Barclay cap. 35. he tells us l. de Cleric c. 28. First in general that very many Hereticks contend that all Clerks of what soever degree are de jure â—â—vin by the law of God or by the same law ought to be subject to the secular power both in paying tributes and in judicial proceedings or causes Secondly that Marsilius de Padua and Ioannes de Ianduno though Catholick Lawyers to Lodâ—uick of Bauer the Emperour but esteemed Hereticks by Bellarmine because some tenets of theirs were condemned by Iohn the XXII Pope of that name taught that not even our Sauiour himself was free from tribute and that what he did Mat. 17. when he payed the didrachme or tribute money he did not freely without any obligation to do so but necessarily that is to satisfie the obligation he had on him to do so Thirdly that Iâ—hn Calvin l. 4. Institut c. 11. Parag. 15. teaches that all Clerks ought to be subject to the laws and tribunals of secular Magistrats excepting
there was not as much as a coercive power in the politick or civil Head for correcting punishing or any way restraining the Ringleaders of such fatal dances and where the Clergie themselves both Priests and Bishops and Popes too themselves were these Ringleaders But suppose the Popes had never had a hand in such matters yet if Princes could not at home with themselves and without application to the Pope consequently without too too long delayes while the difference twixt them and their own Clergie were debated at Rome if I say in the mean time the Princes these politick Heads of the civil common-wealth might not in conscience make use of all their strength to coerce the Factious and Rebellious Clergiemen and if such Clergiemen lay under no kind of tye to submit to their coercion how could it be possible in nature that either the one were enabled with a sufficient power of politick Heads or the other had incumbent on them sufficient tyes of Citizens parts or members to attain the ends of their politick common-wealth which they are supposed to compose joyntly Before such debate were ended nay before the beginning of it could be or as much as the news of any such matter could arrive at Rome the evil would often be incurable if it could not be cured at home by the coercive power of the Politick Head and material sword Avant therefore such unsatisfactory answers of Bellarmine answers which himself must have very well known to have been voyd even of all truth and conscience and yet would give them because he could give no better in so bad a cause and that his worldly interest did not suffer him to yield to the victorious cause But although I have so now sufficiently illustrated and abundantly proved my last Minor proposition or that of my last proof and thereby evidently concluded my former whole second argument yet for the satisfaction of the more curious Reader and as an appendix of that either my last proof or of that my former second argument whereof it was the proof I will give here in Bellarmine's own words what he answered to the simile of the natural Head and members of the natural body and to some other particulars objected to him on this occasion by William Barclay You say sayes Bellarmine to Barclay that all the members must be so under the Head and all the Citizens so under the Rector of the Citty that the Head and Rector may correct and punish all the members and Citizens and that Clerks are members of the body politick and as to temporal thing Cittizens of the earthly Citty I answer In the natural body its necessary that all the members be under and obedient to the Head because in such a body exemption hath no place But in the body politick wherein exemption hath place it is unnecessary that all the members that is all the Cittizens be properly under or subject to the power of the Head that is to that of the Rector And therefore it is unnecessary that the Prince may coerce or punish all the Cittizens as it is unnecessary that all the Cittizens pay tribute or that all bear arms or turn souldiers to defend the Republick but it may suffice that by counsel or exhortations or prayers to God they help the temporal common-wealth But the Republick will be troubled or disturbed if Clerks may without fear of coercion or punishment transgress the laws of Princes I answer that they shall not without punishment transgress for they shall be coerced by their own immediate Bishop or by the chief or Great Bishop But Charles the V. called Hermannus the Archbishop of Colen to his own secular tribunal 'T is true but he called him as a Prince of the Empire for the Pope Paul III. called before himself too the same Hermannus as an Archbishop witness the same Surius in the same place which very Surius a little after writes an 1547. that by the Pope's and Emperours command Hermannus was deposed but that the sentence of deposition was given by the Pope But how diligent an observer of Ecclesiastical Immunity Charles the V. was may be hence understood that in the year 1520. a most horrid conspiracy against the said Charles being detected wherein there were some Ecclesiasticks Charles did punish the Laicks but remitted the Clerks to their own Ecclesiastical Situations to be punished Witness Malin â—4 c. 21 de Hispan priâ—og Barclay added that there are some grievous transgressions or crimes which in France go under the name of privilegâ—â—ta priâ—iledged as reserved to the Princes But this argument may be retorted against the Author For such are not called priviledged because the Prince had reserved them to himself or to his own cognizance when he gave the priviledg of exemption to Clerks as Barclay sayes they are but are called such or crimina privilegiâ—â—a because that by the priviledg of the See Apostolick it is indulged to the Kings of the French that they may take cognizance of such crimes when committed by Clerks which Clarusq 36. Parag. finn vâ— sicul ultariâ—◠〈◊〉 and Auâ—â—â—rius in Clementina Vit Clericorum de offic Jâ—d Ord â—iâ—uâ—â— do explicate Bellarmine therefore sayes here the difference in the similed or which to our purpose must be in the similitude twixt the natural body and politick body is that in the politick exemption hath no place and that hence it is unnecessary that all the members politick that is all the Citizens be properly under or subject to the power of the politick Head that is of the Rector and therefore also that it is unnecessary that Princes may coerca or punish all the Cittizens as it as unnecessary that all the Cittizens pay tribute c. But who sees not that there is no exemption can be in the body politick oâ— of the members of it which may not by similitude be applyed to and found in the natural body For the respective members of natural Bâ—dyes may be qualified with those exemptions which are not against the nature or essence of such members in the same body and under the same Head For example the hand may have this exemption bestowed on it that it be not bound to labour daily and the feet this exemption that by a man's lyeing down a bed they may rest from going And yet will it not follow that either the natural hands or natural feet are not under the power of the natural Head Even so in the body politick may it very well be and is it de fact that some part of the Cittizens be exempted from tributs and from Judicial courts or those of subordinate and ordinary Judges and yet be still under the power of the politick Head to witt of the King or Prince or other supream Governour But neither in the politick body nor in the natural body can the members be so exempted that they be no more under the Head because this would be against the definition and essence of members and
his lawful Procurator to answer such crimes as were objected to him by the said Clergy and Academy and in the mean time to innovate nothing but to restore all things were innovated into their former state And therefore that they will find in Spondanus that this Emperour summon'd this Archbishop even as an Archbishop and consequently did not only summon and proceed against him as a Prince of the Empire but as a very Archiepiscopal Clerk and even too in a meer cause of Religion For this last particular also of the being of the cause for which the Emperour summon'd him a cause of Religion and Faith the same Spondanus hath expresly in the same place where he tells us that it was therefore the Pope Paul the III. who then sate in the See Apostolick thought fit by his own Letters of the 18. of Iuly immediatly following in the same year to summon to Rome the same Hermannus giving him sixty dayes for appearance before himself to wit least otherwise his Holiness might be thought to let go his own challenge of peculiar right in the See Apostolick only to proceed against so great a Clerk especially being the cause was properly Clerical and properly too a cause of Faith and reformation of the Church in religious tenets and rites and least consequently he might seem wholly to quit the quarrel of external coercion of either Clerks or Laicks where the crime was Heresie and by his own want or neglect of proceeding by his own proper Apostolical Authority against Herman whereas the Emperour had begun and proceeded already upon account or by virtue also of his own pure or sole imperial civil and lay power might be esteemed to acknowledge in lay Princes that supream external coercive right of even all sorts of very Clerks and even too of such in the very meerest and purest causes of Faith and Religion The testimony of Spondanus to this purpose is in these words Quod ut Pontifex audivit he means the summons sent by Charles from the Dyet of Worms for the Archbishop parum prohare visus quod Cesar in causa Fidei reformationis Ecclesiarum Iudicis authoritatem sibi sumeret die decima octava Iulii eundem Coloniensem ad sexagesimum diem citavit ut per seipsum vel per legittimum procuratorem coram ipso Romae se sisteret To that also which Bellarmine hath of crimina privilegiata and for as much as he sayes that in France those are call'd priviledg'd crimes whereof that Clerks may be accused before a lay Judge in the secular Court the Pope hath indulged I say it is farr otherwise And that Bellarmine could not shew nor any other can for him any Sanction or Law nay or any other authentick writing wherein it is recorded to posterity that such a priviledge was given by the Pope to Kings or Republicks Though I confess many Popes have been free enough of granting priviledges where they had no right to grant any and where only the ignorance or injustice of pretenders gave them some kind of bad excuse for attempting to give any and would willingly have all both Princes and people to desire of them priviledges for all they could themselves do before of themselves nay and were often bound to do without any priviledge Whence also it may be sufficiently evicted that it is no way probable this ordinary jurisdiction supream of Kings over Clerks was granted to them by the Pope but on the contrary certain that whereas anciently the very most Christian Kings and Emperours made use of all their both directive and coercive power to govern Clerks in all civil matters whatsoever nay and in spiritual matters too for what I mean concerns the external regiment of the Church by external direction of laws and by external coercion too of the material sword and to govern them also either immediatly by themselves or mediatly by their subordinat lay Judges and whereas the civil laws wherein and whereby afterwards the same Emperors and Kings exempted Clerks in many causes or most or if you please to say or think so in all whatsoever from the ordinary subordinate lay Judges have not a word of any exemption from the Prince himself the supream civil Judge of all both lay and Ecclesiastical Judge of his own Kingdom in the external coactive regiment therefore it must be concludent it was only from and by the free will of the Princes themselves that ordinary jurisdiction supream temporal or civil over Clerks was reserved still to themselves who remitted or bestowed away of their own right all whatever they pleased as they did that in the present case of deputing lay men for the ordinary subordinat Judges of those causes of Clerks which are not common but priviledged and retained also what they would Of all which the late and most learned Milletus may be read who in that choice and elegant Tract of his which he inscribed de delicto communi casis privilegiato shews very learnedly and clearly 1. That all such priviledges of Clergiemen had their whole and sole origen from Kings 2. And therefore that such crimes as Clerks are accused of and judged in foro civili in the ordinary civil or lay Courts are properly to be called delicta communia because to be tryed by the common law and before the common or lay Magistrate and those only which are remitted to the Bishop are by a contrary reason to be tearmed privilegiata to wit because it is by a priviledge granted by Kings or indulged by them to Bishops that bishops may take cognizance of and judge them As for Clarus and Ausrerius whom Bellarmine alledges for that his own sense of what is a priviledged crime of Clerks or for any other Canonists soever I regard not much what they say or not say in this matter Because they all commonly and without any ground not only bereave Princes of this supream right of either coeâ—cing or directing Clerks but also teach that all kind of meer temporal Principality flows and depends from the Papacy As that Legat did who in a Diet of the German Princes had the confidence to ask or querie thus A quo habet Imperator Imperium nisi habet a Domine Papa For so Radevicus hath related this Legats folly And so having throughly destroyed all the replies of Bellarmine to the grounds or any part of the grounds of my second grand argument and of the proof of it which second argument and proof of its Minor I derived partly from and built upon his own principles of Clergiemens being Cittizens and parts of the politick commonwealth I am now come to My third argument of pure natural reason which shall end this present Section Though I withal confess the grounds of this third argument are already given in my illustration of the former second But however for the clearer methods sake because too the medium is somewhat different from that in the form of my foregoing second I would give
be confessed that the French and English Kings were their Protectors and Defenders against the Kings of Spain Or who would say that Henry the Second of France was King of the Confederate Princes of Germany although it be confessed also that the said Confederate Princes chose him for their Protector And as little doth that other reason or pretence and allegation of Bellarmine cives illi leges regni sponte servent that the Cittizens of that so exempted Citty do freely observe the laws of the Kingdom make any material difference in the case unless peradventure that if the Spaniards would receive the laws of France and by an express Statute enact these laws for themselves or otherwise out of custom observe them it must be granted that consequently the Spaniards renounce their own Principality and yield themselves to that of France But if Bellarmine understand or mean that Citty so exempted to be no more of the Kingdom then is the similitude to no purpose being himself grants and averrs that after and notwithstanding the exemption of Clerks Kings are not onely Kings of the Laymen but also of the Clergiemen Reges esse nonsolum Laicorum sed etiam Clericorum Reges Yet as for the reasons which he gives for this concession and asseveration I must say they are childish and unworthy of Bellarmine The first is that Clerks do freely observe the politick laws But I have rejected this presently or a little before Nor indeed can it be said with any colour that it some Nation as for example now the Armenians did receive observe the laws of a forraign King as for example too those of the King of France or Poland or Spain c. therefore such Nation must be said to acknowledg this forraign King for their own King The second is quia Clerici causas quas cum Laicis habens cum actores sunt aâ— tribunal iâ—sius Regis deferunt in judicio sententiae ejus in ejusmodi causis acquiescum that Clerks when being Actors against Laicks bring their causes to the King's tribunal and in such causes acquiesce to the judgment and sentence of his temporal Court or politick Judges But who sees not that this is not to acknowledg him to be their King And who sees not that there is no other subjection of Clerks herein but such as is acknowledged by meer strangers forraigners aliens and such as is necessary in all kinds of judicial proceedings If a Frenchman have a suit with a Spaniard if any man of this King 's natural and legal Subjects commence a suit against the Subject of an other King and living still in the Dominions of this other King must not such a Plaintiff or such an Actor apply himself to the Courts or Judicatories of the Defendant that is to those of this other King Will the Plaintiff therefore acknowledg this other King to be simply or absolutely his own King will a Spaniard if he sue in France and before French Judges acknowledg therefore the French King to be his own King or will a Hollander sueing an Englishman in England therefore acknowledg the King of England to be his own meer trifles Actor sequitur forum Rei And therefore as you rightly conclude that he is the Defenders King simply and absolutely before whom in the case he is convented so is it unreasonably inferred that he is the Actor's King before whom such Actor convents an other But sayes Bellarmine Clerks do pray in specie for the King and pray thus Pro Rege nostro N. For our King N. c. And what is more against Bellarmine For hence nothing follows more directly then that the King is King of Clerks also and that Clerks are his Subjects For who can conceive the King to be King of Clerks and yet that Clerks should not be his Subjects Being that as Almainus de sup potest c. q. 2. cap. 5. teaches Aliquem esse Regem nihil aliud est quam habere superioritatem erga subditos in subditis esse obligationem parendi Regi c. One to be a King is nothing els but to have a politick both directive and coercive power of superiority over all the people of his Dominions and that consequently there be obligations answerable on the same people as Subjects to obey him However Bellarmine would needs by so many absurd arguments uphold his very absurd sentences which say in plain tearms the King to be King of Clerks and yet Clerks not to be Subjects to the King a Citty or people to be absolutely free and yet have the King for their King and themselves for part of his Kingdom and which in word consequently confound the very notions of King and Subject and of ruling and being ruled But certainly nothing could be said to confirm and illustrate more my purpose here or that of no power in Kings to exempt Clerks from their own supream power then that Bellarmines answers and reasons for the contrary are such wretched ones indeed Out of the refutations of which and of all said before in this Section especially in prosecution of my second and third Argument it will be obvious enough to frame this other in behalf of that Corollary or Incidental Position which I gave only as an appendix of my third argument Whoever have and continue any office which essentially involves a power supream both directive and coercive of all Clerks within their Dominions may not devest themselves of the power of directing and coercing the same Clerks unless they do withal devest themselves of that office as towards the self same Clerks Because they cannot devest themselves of the essence of that which they hold still or while they hold it or for the time wherein they are to hold it this arguing a plain contradiction But the office of Kings involves a power supream both directive and coercive of all Clerks within their Dominions For this I have proved already and at large by very natural reason Ergo whoever have the office of Kings may not devest themselves of a power supream both directive and coercive of all Clerks within their Dominions unless with all they devest themselves of the office Kings as towards the self same persons Now we have seen hitherto that not only by reason and experience but even by our learned Cardinals own concessions and allegations Kings have not devested do not devest themselves of the office of Kings towards the Clerks of their Dominions but on the contrary that Kings are truly properly and essentially Kings also of such Clerks And consequently too we have seen that while the case is so and for the time it shall be so with them they cannot by any priviledges at all they have given hitherto or shall give hereafter so exempt Clerks as to exempt them from their own supream directive and coercive power And so I end this LXXII Section of my three grand Arguments of all their appendages composed partly of undoubted Theological
under Titus and Vesâ—asâ—an some forty years after the death of Christ Now therefore that of danger that Christians might easily perswade themselves that they were all set free from the laws and power of men by the grace and liberty of the Gospel and that of the consequent danger also of too much scandal to be cast upon them as originally Gallicans and teaching Christian liberty which yet was not rightly understood by some and not of scandal only but of grievous persecutions from Gentil Princes against the religion in general and faith of Christ I say that these dangers fore-seen by the blessed Apostle and his desire of removing such dangers and obstructing also other consequent inconveniencies having been the only cause motive end of that general Edict of his omnis anima potestatibus sublimioribus subdita sit who sees not it was not to his purpose here as not to treat of the spiritual Superiority of Bishops or Pastors or of their spiritual sword or of the obedience or awe beleivers should stand in to either so neither to command or intend that Laicks onely should obey the Lay powers and Clerks the spiritual For if he had intended either those spiritual powers onely or that spiritual sword onely or if he had exempted any at all of the Christians especially so great and considerable a body of them as all their Apostles Evangelists Doctors Prophets Bishops Priests Deacons c. and as all these would prove in time to be who sees not that the secular heathen Princes would think themselves to have a most just cause to rage against them as everting all humane government and power We know and see daily that even Christian Princes even now a days nay even ever since the very first Christian Princes were nor even the most pious and godly of them did ever yet abide that as much as any one individual person how high and holy a Clerk soever should be in their Kingdom and not subject in temporals Therefore the very true primary and proper end of this general edict of Paul concludes against all and every of the above answers no less evidently then the letter or text it self in that whole discourse of Paul Thirdly and yet more particularly and singly as to Bellarmine's own so strange and new and proper invention as I have noted before that some take that answer to be which I have placed as a third answer but certainly his whether it be different or not I am no less certainly perswaded that all disinteressed judicious men will confess that both his reasons for it are convinced again by the very letter of the text or whole context of the Apostles discourse there not onely to be vain pittifull subtilities or rather childish unsignificant captions of words but also to inferre manifest contradiction in that very whole context For though Bellarmine above de Translat Imperij l. 1. c. 2. n. 7. after he had answered Illyricus that S. Paul said not Let every soul be subject to the politick powers but Let every soul be subject potestatibus sublimioribus to the more sublime or higher powers and after he had consequently told Illyricus that before he went about to exalt the politick powers above all souls and by consequence above the Pope himself of whom sayes Bellarmine the chief question is he ought to demonstrate first that the power of the politick Magistrate is more sublime then that of the Ecclesiastical although I say after this Bellarmine interrogates whether S. Paul himself did not openly subject all the faithfull not even the Magistrate excepted to the Bishops where he sayes Obedite prepositis vestris subiacete eis Ipsi enim pervigilant quasi rationem pro animabus vestris reddituri c. Heb. 13.17 And then produces Nazianzâ—n Ambrose Chrysostome and Bernard who all subject Princes to the Church yet I say withall it is plain enough he brings nothing here to purpose or to prove the reasonableness of or any kind of seeming colour in his answer but those two very bad childish arguments which he most unreasonably grounds on the word powers and on the word higher or words more sublime For no man disputes but grants that all the faithfull including the very Magistrate Prince King or Emperour are bound in spiritual matters purely such or as such to obey the spiritual Superiours of the Church clave non errante which is all can be derived or was intended by St. Paul in that passage to the Hebrews or by those Fathers So that so much of Bellarmines allegations here was impertinent What therefore he relyes upon as material is 1. that as he pretends the word potestatibus powers in that general edict of St. Paul may and ought to be understood in the abstract as Logicians speak vz. as importing onely the authority which Princes have and not the concrete of that power or not the Princes themselves as having that power or authority 2. that as he pretends also the word sublimioribus in that same general command of Paul was intended by Paul comparatively not positively and that comparison also intended by Paul to be betwixt the Ecclesiastical power as more sublime in its own nature and the secular as less sublime Behold his two and onely reasons for an answer so inconsistent not onely with that motive and end we have seen before the Apostle had but so contradictory also to the very letter and all kind too of any litteral sense in the letter For who sees not that by the very letter and litteral sense of that whole context it is evidently seen that St. Paul took the word potestatibus powers in the concrete or which is the same thing that by the word powers he mean'd the very secular Princes themselves who had that power which made them higher or sublimer then others For he sayes that whosoever resist that power acquire damnation to themselves And then presently for Princes are not a terrour of good works but of the evil And soon after will you sayes he not fear the power do well and you shall have praise And then immediatly For he is the Minister of God Whence if it be not evident that by the word powers the Apostle intends the Princes themselves and not their authority in the abstract but in the concrete as affecting and acting in and by the Princes or rather the Princes as acting by it I must confess I understand not how any thing at all can be proved out of any text For besides that the powers or the power in the abstract are not is not resisted or feared but in the concrete it is at least evident that Princes who are a terrour and the Minister of God are powers and power in the concrete And yet nothing is more evident nor can be out of any text then that those which are or that which is called the higher or more sublime powers in the first verse omnis anima potestatibus sublimioribus subdita sit are in the
indeed a tye of conscience Though I confess withall it be not altogether improbable that Mauritius about the latter end of his raign was not so acceptable to Gregory For Gregory as greatly joyed writes to Phocas l. 11. indic 6. ep 43. immediat Successor to Mauritius That the yoake of sadness being now removed the Church was come to the dayes of liberty and that in the latter times of Mauritius he kept no Agents in the Imperial Couâ—t because the Ministers of the Roman Church with fear declined and fled from those burdensome and sharper times And writing to Leontia the Empress ibid. ep 44. he gives God thankes that such heavy burdens of so long a tract of time were removed from his shoulders and that now under Phocas he underwent a light easy yoak and such as he was willing to bear and that till now the Church of Peter was layed for in wait or ambushments And yet I say also here that Gregory writing thus to a most impious cruel Parricide oâ— his very own supream Lieg Lord and of his wife children altogether and both to a trayterous rebellious Vsurper of his Crown such as all Histories acknowledg Phocas to have been and praysing and soothing him so as peradventure carrying himself popularly at first and remitting or forgiving to Gregory some of those regalities or of those imperial duties which Mauritius as lawfull Prince found himself have no cause to remit but which Usurping Tyrants do commonly remit and see cause enough to remit to such as at first or last can make opposition to them it cannot be denyed that herein Gregory was surprized with somewhat humane And therefore we must not wonder if perhap if I say at any time though in a different or unlike matter the same Gregory lying under those ordinary weaknesses of men and not seldome of the very best or holiest men expressed some little passion against Mauritius himself without contradiction of any side or person the lawfull Emperour and expressed himself so because Mauritius in defence and for neâ—essary preservation of the Imperial rights looked narrowly to the Bishops kept them to their duty and the very chief Pontiff himself the Roman Patriarch in due subjection to the Empire Be it therefore so and this is a second Answer to Baronius here let us grant those complaints of Gregory were against Mauritius let them be against whomsoever Baronius will of all those Emperours lived in the dayes of Gregory yet whereas they are onely against the either true or pretended Simony of such Emperour as I have shewed before and may be seen at large in the Authors and places quoted by me and whereas they neither contain nor hint any thing as if such Emperour had hindered the Sacerdotal jurisdiction or vsurped or encroached upon it it is also plain enough that all this labour of Barâ—nius is in vain For in the election or confirmation of the Bishop of Rome the Emperours of those times would and did exercise their own Imperial authority That Gregory took extreamly to heart And these Emperours exacted money for such election or confirmation But this seem'd alltogether intollerable to this good Pope as in his opinion implicitly containing or involving the very first heresy sprung up in the Church that I mean which from Simon Magus is called the Simoniacal heresy And this was the very greatest nay all the cause Mauritius gave to the complaints of Gregory And this was the grand nay and sole and whole Simoniacal excess of that Emperour whoever he was of whom Gregory so complains as is manifest out of those very expressions which are most ardent in Gregory where nothing is read of any vsurped or tyrannical dominion over either the Priesthood it self or the Priests Nor was this unknown to Baronius himself For speaking of those Emperours whom those complaints of Gregory might have touch'd thus he sayes Tom. 8. an 590. nu 6. Hac parte tantùm damnandi quòd confirmationem electi in Romanum Pontificem sibi vindicarent Imò adde ita vindicarent ut ex ipsa electione confirmatione pecuniam etiam aliquam vellent acccipere But let us here this learned Annalist making a little further progress Ibid. tom 8. an 593. n. 18. Quibus imprimis sayes he vides sanctum Gregorium definire non solum non esse subditam Regibus aliquo modo Ecclesiam verumetiam firmiter asseverare non habendum esse Mauritium inter Imperatores dum adversus Dei Sacerdotes Regiam potestatem exercet What do you say Baronius Is this indeed your candour will you amuse and abuse your Readers so That the Church as such purely is not subject to secular Princes is very certain but as certain also that Churchmen as men or as parts of the civil common-wealth are in all humane things subject to the Politick Head of the same civil commonwealth And no less certain too that such Politick Heads Kings or Princes have even by the very law of nature a special peculiar and royal but still political interest and right in the election and confirmations of Bishops within their own dominions though it be not hence consequent that they have a power over the Church as a Church or that the Church as a Church is subject to them Nay it is certain and clear enough to any disinteressed and learned person that for the temporalties annexed to a Bishoprick the Prince may at the election or confirmation of the Bishop and may without any kind of Simony require exact and receive such a sum of money as by the written laws or custome is or ought to be paid though it be confessed those laws or customes would be damnable which should set Bishopricks or any Churchlings to sale or should exact even from such as are worthily and canonically elected and confirmed such a sum as in reason should be too grievous a burden to the Church or hinderance to the service of God there unless peradventure the manifest necessities of the Republick either Ecclesiastical or civil or both did require otherwise Now whether or how grievous or how contrary to law or how much hindering the service of God or not that exaction was whereof Gregory complains I know not But I am sure of this that Gregory never said nor dreamed that that Emperour of whom he complains should not be esteemed an Emperour upon this account that he exercised royal power towards over or against the Priests of God but upon this other that he destroyed rather then governd the Empire Therefore Gregory observed some defects in that Emperour as to or concerning the very temporal regiment of his Empire But what this defect was let others enquire as also whether Gregory said well or no that for any such or other defect whatsoever he should not be esteemed Emperour For neither belongs to my purpose here That which is more directly to my purpose is to observe what follows in Baronius Rursum sayes he ejusdem Gregorij sententia reddi
firmum intelligis Christi Ecclesiam ab ipso liberam factam esse quam Imperator iniquissimé redigere studuerit in servitatem How this is made firme out of that sentence of Gregory in his Commentaries or any other elsewhere I cannot by any means understand In that sentence or passage we have nothing at all of the recovery of the liberty of the Church as he calls it for he perpetually complains that a Simoniack Prince hath through avarice kept the Church under as a bond-woman and that he would domineer over the Roman Church in particular Indeed in his epistles to Phocas and Leontia before quoted he speaks of the times of liberty whereunto the Church was come under that Usurping Tyrant but sayes not that himself restored this liberty However because it is not material whether so or no but onely to shew Baronius's unwary if not rather designed manner of expressing the most immaterial things that which I would observe indeed is what he so ushers in even his material and main distinction For having now done with his praeludium he comes at last to the purpose and sayes Adeo ut quod dicit in duabus recitatis epistolis he means the two epistles written to Mauritius himself and to his Physitian Theodorus a Deâ— subjectes fuisse sacerdotes Imperatori ne ipse sibi contrarius Gregorius fuisse dicatut necesse fit ut aliud diviâ—â— itibuere voluerii voluntati permissioni vero aliud In Gregory there is no contrariety For in the place alleadg'd out of his Commentaries he reprehends Iustinus the younger that by Simony he made the Church a servant or slaves 〈◊〉 forasmuch as it seemed to him the Bishop was not freely elected but the eleâ—tioâ— bought and sold where money must have intervers'd for obtaining a confirmation of it And in those two epistles whereof the dispute in written so to Mauritius and Theodorus he sayes the Emperour had in humane thinge by divine authority and Apostolical precept dominion over the very Priests In all which it is plain enough there is no kind of contrariery to himself Before S. Gregory's days Facundus a most praise-worthy Bishop and famous in the Church did write apud Baron tom 7. an 547. n. 35. how Theodosius the Emperour when reprehended by St. Ambrose knew very well Quod non ex temporali potestate qua fuerat etiam sacerdotibus Dei praepositus sed ex eo pervenire posset ad vitam quod illis erat ipse subjectus Now albeit the other evasion of Baronius where he interprets Gregory's commission or concession made by God of the very Priests to the Emperours dominion and power so as if these words imported no more but a bare permission of God that Mauritius although unjustly and tyrannically ruleing should exercise over and execute his power against the very Priests albeit I say this evasion appear out of what is already said to be what it is a meer groundless evasion yet I think fit to sift and examine it heer of purpose throughly For even Bellarmine too cont Barcl c. 3. n. 10. cont Apol. P. Pauli hath his refuge to it saying that that obedience which S. Gregory writes himself to have given was out of worldly feare and force and was de facto onely not de jure And brings for proof a certain complaint of Gregory against Mauritius whom he likewise but not without some inconsiderancy sayes to be the very same Emperour of whom Gregory complains in his Commentaries even part of the very same we have given before as here in these words In â—antâ—m autem sitae temeritatis extendit vesaniam ut caput omnium Ecclesiarum Romanam Ecclesiam sibi vindicet in Doâ—â—ina Gemium terrenae jus potestatibus vsurpet As for Baâ—onius he tom 8. an 58â— n. 19. explicates that permission thus Sed auomodo permissioni cum videlicet permiserit Deus ut ipse deplorat nâ—n posse exequi munus suum Summum universae Ecclesiae Sacerdotem nisi etiam perseluta pecunia electioni factae ipse consensisset Imperator Sic igitur Deum subiecisse tradit Sacerdotes Mauritio Imperatori ut olim eosdem subiccerat persocutoribus Nerâ—ni atque Diocl. siam aues in eâ—s etiam gladia agere permisit Cum ijsdem certe constat Gregorium adnumerâ—sse Mauriticum ubi in Psalm paenit ver Iultio tu domine ait Quid Nero Quid Dioclesianus Quid denique iste qui hoc tempore Ecclesiam persequitur Numquid non omnes portae inferi Habes ergo sayes he ex Gregorio ipsa sensum verbarum ipsius Qua interpretatione nulla verior nec germanior esse potest ut sic dixisse voluerit subjectos a Deo Sacerdotes Imperatori quemadmodum Christus redemptor noster fatetur se divina permissione subditum potestati Pilati sicut â—tidem dixitâ—ijs qui ipsum neci tradere satagobant Haec est hora vestra potestas tenebrarum Quamobrem sires jure agatur non violenâ—ia ut solent latrones in silvis non subjectos esse sacerdotes Imperatoribus sed Imperatores Sacerdotibus ejusdem Gregorij sicut aliorum Sanctorum Doctorum omnium constâ—ns est firmaque sententia Hetherto Baronius But certainly this rather of Baronius himself is in its own kind merum latrocinium a meer robbery whereby he invades the Reader and spoyles him of his beleef and reason not any right just or true patronage or defence whereby to support a faeeble cause Omnium sayes he Sanctorum Doctorum haec est constans firmaque sententia and brings not one of all because indeed he saw none of all the holy ancient Doctors whom he could bring oâ— alleadg to his purpose or who denye the subjection of Priests in temporal matters to the secular Magistrat but endeavours to impose on the more simple unlearned Readers with his own bare single assertion without any kind of proof As for Gregory in particular whereas Baronius alleadges nothing out of his writings to prove this assertion must it not also be deemed a Robbery in the City and Vaticane worse then that is committed in the woods so or on pretence of such a bare saying of one Bishop to rob all the Emperours of so numerous and so considerable a part of their Subjects and to say that was the sentence of Gregory whereas nothing is more manifest in Gregory's own words And deeds then that he held the quite contrary And further to averre that all Gregory's complaints were certainly against Mauritius and his comparison to Nero and Dioclesian was of him individually and determinatlye whereas it is neither certain nor likely that Gregory mean'd or thought at all of Mauritius in that passage Nor indeed is there any great difficulty to shut up this gap through which both these great Cardinals Baronius and Bellarmine think to escape For even a School boy that scarce had been taught the first rudiments of grammar will soon observe in the very bare words of Gregory our sentence or the contrary
sayes Theodorecus l. 2. c. 9. 10. maximè omnium caepit clamare orare Imperatorem ut de iniquo indignoque ejus facinore non Episcoporum Concilio sed pro tribunali judicium quaeratur seque pollicetus primum Episcoporum Clericos qui facinoris conscij erant supplicioÌ„ coercendos traditurum Stephani quoque ministros ait eodem medo puniendos esse At cum Stephanus petulanti ore illis contradiceret affirmaretque plagas non infligendas esse Clericis placuit Imperatori Magistratibus ut quaestio de facto in Regia haberetur Ad hunc modum ergo intellecta Stephani improbitate primum Episcopis qui tum aderant mandatum dant Judices ut hominem abdicent Episcopatu deinde illi ipsi eum Ecclesia penitus expellant Where you are to observe that not onely not the judgment of the fact of Murder but not even the judgment of this question of right whether the said Patriarch or Bishop Stephen of Antioch should be deposed or no is remitted to the Ecclesiastical court or to the Church or Council of Bishops but peremptory command sent by the lay Judges to the Bishops to depose him actually and by their spiritual judgment whom they the same lay Judges had already and by a civil judgment sentenced to be so deposed albeit these lay judges reserved to themselves still or to the civil power the real execution of both sentences that is the actual and corporal expulsion of Stephen from Antioch Nor is it material to object here that Constantius was an Arrian for the Arrian Bishops stood as much for the immunities of the Church and Churchmen and so did the Arrian Princes advised by them as any Catholick Bishops or Princes did when the crime objected was not diversity in religion And this crime of Stephanus was a meer lay crime and consequently a crime that by the very laws of even Constantine the great himself nay and of all other Catholick Princes after him and after Constantius his Arrian Son for many hundreds of years and even too by the very express laws of Justinian himself so long after Constantine and Constantins was even when committed by any Ecclesiastick whosoever to be tryed and judged by the civil Judg that is by the Praetor of the Province But however this matter be of Constantius whether he was then a down right Arrian or not albeit this be not material as I have now proved I am sure his brother Emperour Constans who ruled in the west was ever a zealous Consubstantialist and orthodox in all preciseness And yet our often mentioned Athanasius Bishop of Alexandria and Paulus Bishop of Constantinople being deposed from their Sees by other Bishops and having their refuge to him that is to this Emperour Constance in the West he at their instance and earnest petition and even in a cause meerly Ecclesiastical but for the relief of innocency oppress'd wrongfully sends letters to his said brother Constantius wherein as Socrates writes l. 2. c. 12. and Sozom. l. 3. c. 9. he signifies his pleasure that three Bishops be sent from the East to give him an account of the causes why Athanasius and Paulus had been deposed nay and threatens otherwise or if the said Athanasius and Paulus upon account given were found to have been unjustly deposed and should not be restored again to make warr on Constantius Which to avoid Constantius sent him Narcissus the Cilician Theodorus the Thracian Maris the Chalcedonian and Marcus the Syrian four Bishops as after also when Constans was not satisfied with the causes which these four Bishops alleadged he actually restored Paulus and Athanasius though for a time onely for he again banished them In which procedure of Constance I believe our very Antagonists will not have the confidence to say there was any vsurpation being that such religious orthodox Bishops as this Paul and Athanasius and so rigidly observant as they of Ecclesiastical Discipline were his Authors and Petitioners to reassume the judgment of themselves albeit in a cause purely Ecclesiastical or which onely or at least chiefly concern'd a spiritual sentence of deposition of two Bishops from their Episcopal Sees pronounced against them by a Council of other Bishops But whether our said Antagonists will or no pretend therein any vsurpation I am sure the matter of fact is true as I am sure also that even natural reason it self will force them to confess there was a supream right in Constans to relieve by all due means oppressed innocy and that there was no other way so ready just and equitable as this which he took Valentinianus a Catholick Emperour also shall make up the fourth of those Instances of Princes to our purpose For he condemned by his own Imperial sentence Bishop Chronopius to the silver mines for having appealed from an Ecclesiastical sentence of 70 other Bishops L. 2. Quorum Appel C. Theodâ—s and forced him accordingly to suffer it by going to and labouring in the said mines The very same Valentinian punished by diverse banishments the Bishops Vrsicinus Gaudentius Vrsus Ruffus and several other Bishops too because their Schysmes troubled the publick peace and tranquillity Iure mansuetudinis nostrae sensibus sayes he vel divinitus damnarum est vel tranquillitate naturae ne cum delinquentium facinore legum severitate certemus ac speâ—emendationis futurae mitiorem esse vellemus correctionis injuriam quam provocat meritum nostrum Ampeli Pater charissime Augustorum Dudum Vrsicini inquietudine provocati faventes concordiae populi Christiani quâ—eti etiam Vrbis sacratissimae providentes uno interim loco intra Gallias dumtaxat perturbatorem tranquillitatis publicae statueramus jure cohiberi scilicet ne applicatione morum latae dissensionis incommodum spargeretur Verum naturae nostrae mansuâ—tudine levigati ita memorato abscedendi copiam dedimus ne ad Vrbem Romam vel certè suburbicarias regiones pedem inferat neque nequitiae suae cogitationem canetur infundere Idetiam de caeteris ervoris consortibus Gaudentio videlicet Vrso Ruffo Auxanone Auxanio Adiedo Ruffino sancimus c. Apud Baronium tom 4. an 371. n. 1. Therefore also by this instance and by this law too of Valentinian as it ought to be the chief care of Princes as incumbent on them by their publick office and duty and by the very nature of Principality or Government that the publick peace and tranquillity be preserved entire in and amongst their Citties Cittizens and other people subject to them so it must be consequently their charge to coerce the very Ecclesiasticks themselves if they disturb that peace or tranquillity Gratianus the Emperour likewise in all points Orthodox as the dareling of S. Ambrose however onely a Catechumen banish'd on the same account the Bishops Instantius Salvianus and Priscillianus and banish'd them not onely out of their episcopal Sees or Citties wherein and whereof they were Bishops but out of all countries subject to him Though after being ill advised he
restored them back Severus hystor l. 2. in fine Nor doth Baronius himself tom 4. an 381. n. 110. reprehend him in this matter or at all upon account of usurping on Ecclesiastical persons rights or judgments but onely upon account of having favoured hereticks to wit forasmuch as he restored those three Bishops whom himself had before so lately banish'd Ex quo quidem facinore sayes Baronius sibi necem comparavit But this is a most vain judgment of Baronius For the said Instantius and Priscillianus soon after appealing to Maximus the tyrant Emperour Vsurper and murderer of Gratianus were by him as being or at least pretending to be an earnest Catholick called to his own presence to be judged again by his Imperial authority the Catholick Bishops who accused them desiring this of him most earnestly and were at last condemned by him the one to have his head cut off and the other to be carried to a place of perpetual banishment Several other Bishops also the very same great Catholick Hypocritical Zelot Maximus punish'd in the self same manner some by death and some by banishment Prosper in Chron. Severus l. 2. observing still the Catholick Praelats with much respect and above all St. Ambrose himself notwithstanding he saw very well that Ambrose could not be drawn to approve of his treacherous usurpation but stood still firm to young Valentinian the lawfull Emperour though an Arrian profess'd and consequently an Haeretick Emperour Against whom on that specious pretext of heresy Maximus rebelled and usurped the Empire as being himself a Catholick and pretending onely or at least chiefly to maintain Catholick religion against Arrianisme which infected the young Emperour Valentinian and his mother And yet Baronius might know that this very Maximus who so put even those very heretick or Schismatick Bishops to exile and death whom Gratian restored a little before and was himself therefore and by Gods special ordinance or just permission most cruelly murthered by Maximus if we may believe Baronius for what concern'd the cause of Gods permission of the untimely death of Gratian I say Baronius might know that this very Maximus saw suddenly after as violent and fatal an end of his own Empire and life together by the victorious arms of Theodosius Now to observe that heer which is more to our purpose I confess that Severus reproves the inconstancy of those Catholick Bishops who charg'd Priscillian in that they sufferd him to provoke that is to appeal to the Emperour or that they sufferd the causes of the Church to be judged or determined by a Secular Iudg. But to me it seems plainly that the cause of Priscillian and of the rest was not purely Ecclesiastical For that Priscillian himself was charg'd also with meer lay crimes and that having confess'd his own obscenities he was condemned the same Severus tells And that of such crimes nay indeed of all crimes whatsoever so they were found to be real crimes much more when they disturbed the publick peace or endanger'd it the more sublime the meer Secular powers were the Judges and avengers by strict coercion and corporal punishment or by the material sword and pure force S. Paul teacheth and the perpetual custome in all Christian Kingdoms and States confirmeth Arcadius an Emperour also very orthodox received the accusations against John Chrysostome Bishop of Constantinople and thereupon having first ordered a judicial procedure against this great and holy Bishop at last condemned and sent him with a guard of Souldiers farr off to exile Socrates l. 6. c. 16. Pallaâ— in Dialâ—g And certainly Pope Innocent the first of that name who then govern'd the See of Rome where he inveighs bitterly against Arcadius and against Eudoxia his Empress as against most grievous persecuters of so great and so holy a man doth not at all object that Arcadius being a meer lay man usurped a judiciary power in Ecclesiastical matters or so against his own proper Bishop nor that he proceeded so against him out of or by a tyrannical power and not by any legal authority over him in the case but onely reprehends Arcadius in that he had not proceeded justly against Chrisostome or in that he had not made right use of the power which he had in the case and in a word in that he expelled Chrisostome from his Episcopal throne before his cause had been legally and throughly sifted or judged as it ought and consequently without observing the due formalities or even substantial or essential procedure in such case required by the law Ejecisti sayes he ê throno suo rerum judicata magnum totius orbis Doctorem Nicephor l. 13. c. 34. Nor doth Chrisostome himself any where complaine of the Emperour as having usurped a power of judging condemning or banishing him And yet we know he writt to several especially to Pope Innocent many letters fraught with complaints of the Emperours unjust judgment and proceedings against him acknowledging Arcadius or at least supposing him still a legal Judg though unjust as to the sentence in the case Theodosius the younger Emperour known likewise to have been still a most zealous and pious Catholick Prince clap'd in prison Cyril Patriarch of Alexandria Praesident of the General Council of Ephesus and together with him Memnon an other Catholick Bishop albeit this good Prince was in the merit of the cause abused by the false informations of John Patriarch of Antioch and of those other Bishops of his faction who met in a private Council amongst themselves at Ephesus too and separated or absented themselves from the rest or from the publick session house where the said Praesident and generality sate And though after by the great Council of Ephesus to wit when all the Bishops met there the second time the cause of Cyril having been examined he was and all of his way declared innocent and John and his complices condemn'd by their Ecclesiastical sentence yet or notwithstanding all this could not the said great Catholick prisoners Cyril Memnon c be set at liberty out of prison not even I say by the authority of this very great and true Oecumenical Council All this great Council did and all they could do as to this of the liberty of these prisoners was to write and petition to the Emperour by their Legats sent of purpose and in this behalf to his Majesty and petition him by this very tenour and forme of words Nunc verò his scriptis per hos Legatos â—ientissimos Episcopos vestra pia genua pretensia manibus attingimus ut quae â—i lenter acta sunt cum sanctissimis pientissimis Episcopis Cyrillo Memnone nullumque canonibus robur habentia prorsus irrita sint c. Relat. Syn. Ephes. apud Cyril in Apologetico And then soon after conclude thus Oramus igitur Vestram Majestatem soluite nos illos a vinculis vinctis enim fratribus ac Praesidibus sancte nostrae synodi etiam nos quodammodo
opinion or rather certain and true judgment of such a power in the Emperour as properly and essentially belonging to his Imperial office it was that the orthodox Bishops of Syria writ also to the same Emperour Leo for punishing by his own Imperial power according to the laws of the civil Commonwealth Timotheus Elucus Bishop or Patriarch of Alexandria as by the same laws and against both the same laws and Princes too being guilty of various crimes but in particular of adultery and murder De delictis autem say they post Câ—ncil Chalced. praesumptionibus quas nefandê commisit Reipublicae legibus corum praesulibus judicio competenti subdetur Where you see a meer secular judgment called or said to be a competent judgment of criminal Bishops And indeed that the banishment of the said Timotheus which soon after followed by the decree of this Emperour Liberat. Brevi c. 13. proceeded onely from his own proper Imperial power not from any Church power or from any commission or delegation from the Church we may gather sufficiently out of the 100. epist of the above S. Leo the Pope wherein he writes thus to Gennadius Dilectio tua eniti elaborare debit ne redeundi integram capiat libertatem de quo jam Edictis suis Princeps Christianissimus judicavit Finally pursuant to the same knowledg of the Imperial power and authority from God for judging and sentencing the criminal causes and inflicting corporal punishments in such criminal causes and on such Clergymen as were found guilty Pope Simplicius epist 9. 11. beseecheth the Emperour Zeno Vt quod per nos sayes he Ecclesia seriò postulat imô quod ipsi specialiùs supplicamus Petrum Alexandrinae Ecclesiae pervasorem ad exteriora transferri piissima praeceptione jubeatis But to leave this judgment of Popes or other Bishops of the power and authority Royal in the case which Judgment as such of the power is not the proper and primary subject of this section or at least of this part of it and to return to matter of fact onely and this of the Princes themselves acting by particular Instances The next Prince I offer to the Readers consideration is Theodoricus King of Italy For this Prince albeit an Arrian as to his beleef of the Trinity of persons or Divinity of Jesus Christ yet in all other points of Christian religion and in his veneration and observance of the Church and Churchmen and of their priviledges and exemptions in general and this without any distinction of Arrians or not Arrians he was precise wary and strict enough nor is there any reprehension or complaint of him in History as not being so And yet he is recorded to have admitted of and discussed the accusations drawn and presented to him by the very Catholicks themselves both Layety and Clergye against Pope Symmachus Of which matter Anastasius Bibliothecarius writes thus in Symmacho Post annos vero quattuor aliqui ex clero zelo ducti aliqui ex Senatu maximè Festus Prâ—binus insimulaverunt Symmachum subornarunt falsos testes quos miserunt Ravennam ad Regem Theodoricum accusantes beatum Symmachum occultè revocarunt Laurentium post libellum Romae factum fecerunt Schysma divisus est iterum Clerus nam alij communicaverunt Symmacho alij Laurentio Tunc Festus Probinus Senatores miserunt relationem Regi caeperunt agere ut visitatorem daret Rex Sedi Apostolieae quod canones prohibent And albeit upon debate this King at last remitted this cause of Symmachus to a Council of Bishops and that by the same King's licence several Councils of Bishops convened at Rome to sift it throughly which Councils I have amongst others and upon an other occasion quoted in the marginal note of my introduction to this first Treatise pag. 1. yet no man can deny that he admitted the accusations and thereupon and as judg of them and of the whole cause exercised several judiciary acts as having a legal power or Christian authority to do so Nor did Symmachus except or resist nor did any for him or in his behalf or in behalf of the Church or of Ecclesiastical Immunity reprehend Theodorick for doing so Nay we have seen before in this Treatise Sec ... this very Symmachus himself openly professing that he himself would yield to God in the Emperour's person to wit by obeying him in humane things as we saw him desiring on the other side that the Emperour should likewise revere God in the person of the Pontiff doubtless for what concern'd spiritual or divine matters The Catholick Emperour Justinus proceeded yet more imperially in the criminal cause of Dorotheus Bishop of Thessalonica For this Bishop being accused of sedition and of several murders too and particularly of the murder of Iohn who was one of the Legats of the See Apostolick and the rest of the Apostolick Legats being his accusers before the Emperour and being so also by express command from Hormisda the Pope whose Legats they were and he too that was murdered and this Pope himself pressing hard that the said Bishop Dorotheus the supposed murderer of his Legat should either be deposed by the Emperour from his Bishoprick and sent to banishment farr from his place or See and Church or certainly be sent to Rome with all fit prosecution of his cause Iustin indeed proceeded to a judicial tryal and sentence of the criminal Bishop but with so much regard of his own imperial power in the case that he neither did the one nor the other which Hormisda so earnestly pressed for Of all which the Suggestions amongst and after the epistles of Hormisda and these epistles themselves particularly the Suggestion which is after the 56. epist and the second Suggestion after the 64. epist and the 57. epistle in it self may be read Promittit say the Legats writing to the Pope Sancta Clementia for so they stile the Emperour vindicare citare Dorotheum quia nos contestati sumus pietatem ejus c. And Hormisda himself the Pope epist 57. writing to the said Legats Nam eumdem Dorotheum sayes he Constantinopolim jussu Principis didicimus evocatum adversus quem Domino filio nostro Clementissimo Principi debetis insistere ne ad eamdem civitatem denuo revertâ—tur sed Episcopatus quem numquam bene gessit honore deposito ab eodem loco ac Ecclesia longius relegetur vel certè huc ad urbem sub prosecutione congrua dirigatur But wherefore doth not this Pope command his Legats to insist upon the delivering of such a criminal a criminal Bishop into their own proper custody hands and power to proceed against him to judg and punish him as they shall find cause being they alone and not the Emperour were his competent Judges in the case if we believe our Bellarminians and Baronius wherefore do not these Legats wherefore doth not this Pope himself being denied what he desired fulminat excommunications against Iustine
and this barely too crimen Ecclesiasticum it is declared that if any charge a Clerk with the former sort of crime the secular judges shall determine the cause but if with the later that the Bishop onely shall have power to judg it Quod si de criminali causa litigium emerserit tunc competentes judices in hac civitate scilicet Constantinopolitana vel in Provinciis interpellati consentaneum legibus terminum imponant c Sin autem crimen Ecclesiasticum est tunc secundum canones ab Episcopo suo causae examinatio paena procedat nullam communionem aliis judicibus in hujusmodi causis habentibus Which although it was first or originally a meer civil constitution or Novel of Iustinian yet was after made a canon of the Church by being inserted in and received by the Church amongst her canons in corpore Iuris canonici or in Gratian. Sixt canon as to pure Ecclesiastical crimes and to their punishment in case of disobedience to the Bishops was long before and not a Papal canon onely but a canon of the third Council of Carthage which was that is called the Vniversal Council understand you of Affrick and is that also in Gratian XI q. 1. c. Petimus where it is declared that intruded Bishops contemning the admonitions of the Church belong in such case to the lay judicatory Seaventh canon distinguishing likewise in effect sufficiently and clearly enough as the above fift hath done betwixt lay crimes or at least some lay crimes that is crimes which are common as well to lay-men as to Clergie-men and both Ecclesiastical crimes or such as are proper onely to Ecclesiastical persons and other crimes too which are strictly civil but not criminal is that of the first Council of Matiscon held in the year 582. under King Gunteramnus and Pope Pelagius II. wherein and in the 7. chap. the Fathers decree Vt nullus Clericus de qualibet causa extra discussionem Episcopi sui a seculari judice injuriam patiatur aut custodiae deputetur Quod si quicumque Iudex cujuscumque Clericum absque causa criminali id est homicidio furto aut maleficio facere fortasse praesumpserit quamdiu Episcopo loci illius visum suerit ab Ecclesiae liminibus arceatur Whence appears evidently these Fathers held it no breach of Ecclesiastical Immunity that Clerks accused of murder theft or maleficium what ever they understood by this word or whether witchcraft onely according the special acception and restriction of this word or sense of it by some authors or generally all kind of lay evils or wickedness according to the general or etymological sense thereof should be subject to the meer lay coercive power of even inferiour lay judges whereof I have said more at large before And therefore by this canon Princes were to the end of the fift age of Christianity in possession of their own proper supream civil power of punishing Clerks in their own lay and princely Iudicatories tribunals or courts and even by their own inferiour proper and meer lay delegated or commission'd judges when I say the cause or accusation was purely criminal and of such crimes in specie as are murder theft or witchcraft Eight canon is that still in Gratian 23. q. 5. cap. Principes For though Isidorus de sum bon c. 35. be the original Author of it yet as in Gratian it is now allowed and accounted amongst the canons of the Church And that indeed not unworthily For thus it speaks Principes seculi non numquam intra Ecclesiam potestatis adeptae culmina tenent ut per eamdem potestatem disciplinam Ecclesâ—asticam muniant Caeterum intra Ecclisiam petesta es necessariae non essent nisi ut quod non fraevalet sacerdos efficere per doctrinae sermonem potestat hoc impleat per disciplinae terrâ—rem Saepe per regnum terrenum caeleste regnum proficit ut qui intra Ecclesiam positi contra fidem disciplinam Ecclesiae agunt rigore Principum conterantur ipsamque disciplinam quam Ecclesiae humilitas exercere non praevalet corvicibus superborum potestas principalis imponat ut venerationem mereatur virtutem potestatis impertiat Cognoscant Principes saeculi Deo debere se rationem reddere propter Ecclesiam quam a Christo tuendam accipiunt Nam sive augeatur pax displina Ecclesiae per fideles Principes sive soluatur ille ab eis rationem exiget qui corum potestati suam Ecclesiam credidit Here you see that not out of or by vertue of any commission or delegation from Bishops or Popes Princes do exercise the distriction of their power even within the Church that is against Churchmen and even too in Church affairs but out and by vertue of their own proper authority which they received from God And you see also that the Church as such by reason of its humble and essential constitution may not exercise or make use of any penal discipline as belonging to her self but for such coercion must have recourse to the power of Princes Nor let any think to evade by saying that Princes are in so much or as punishing such persons or as determining correcting or amending such affairs but Ministers of the Church and executors of the sentence or power of the Church pursuant to that which Innocent III. and the Glosse upon him say or determine cap. ut famae de sent Excom extracted out of the said Innocent's answer to the Bishop of London For I have before already in several Sections proved by reason Scripture tradition of the Fathers and practise too both general and particular and of both Fathers and Princes and Pontiffs and people that Princes have hethertoo proceeded and de jure proceeded against such persons and even too in such matters by their own proper authority without any commission had from the Church As likewise that they received from God himself such their own proper universal authority and right to proceed so against all persons whatsoever laymen or Clergiemen guilty of any crimes and in all causes too whatsoever temporal or spiritual forasmuch or wherein they relate to the external peace of the Commonwealth and to the meer external government of the Church by the power of the material sword And we have seen too already that the power of inflicting corporal punishment by way of coaction and force is absolutely denyed to the Church as a Church Which being so who will be so unreasonable as to attribute a power to Her of deputing commissioning or delegating Ministers or executors to inflict them so But what this canon or Gratian or rather Isidore who was the original Author sayes here is very observable I mean where it sayes that Princes have the height of their power within the Church and that God himself hath committed his Church to their power even as Leo Magnus the Pope writing to Leo the Emperour ep 81. sayes Debes incunctanter advertere Regiam potestatem tibi non
solum ad mundi regimen sed maxime ad Ecclesiae praesidiuâ— esse collatum At most therefore what is in this matter granted to the Church is that Ecclesiasticks be not by Princes proceeded against coercively to punishment if their transgression be onely or meerly Ecclesiastical and the punishment be corporal I say be not so and in such case punished corporally unless or until the Church do her own duty first by depositions or censures or both Except you always still such extraordinary cases wherein the Superiours of the Church should or would themselves also peradventure be too refractory or too contumacious against reason as guilty of the same crimes or for any causes whatsoever countenancing or favouring the criminal Clerks and therefore refusing to proceed at all or at least onely against them For when a degraded Clerk is given over to the secular Court he is not delivered so by the Church to the secular Magistrats as if the Church did mean or intend these Magistrats should proceed by vertue of a power derived from her or be the Ministers or executioners of her own sentence which if capital she hath no power no authority at all from God or man to pronounce or decree as if any other way it be purely civil or forcible at all corporally for example to corporal restraint or imprisonment she hath for so much all her power from man and from the civil laws onely but he is given over so by the Church as meaning and intending onely that such a criminal Clerk be thenceforward under the ordinary power of even the inferiour lay Magistrats and Judges and by such delivery or giving over signifying unto them that they may now proceed if they please and think fit either to absolve or condemn him For even Caelestinus III. himself a Pope of the later times confesses c. Non ab homine de judic that Ecclesiastical punishment is of a quite other nature then that which is lay and that the Church hath no kind of power or authority to inflict such punishments as are in their own nature lay punishments or which is the same thing that she hath no power no authority at all of her self as a Church to inflict any punishment but purely Ecclesiastical but suspension deposition excommunication the lesser and greater and finally degradation when the criminal Clerk is delivered over or left under the secular power let the crimes of such a Clerk be ever so great and ever too such pure lay crimes even perjury theft and murder c and even heightned also by incorrigibleness A nobis fuit ex parte tua quaesitum sayes the above Caelestine utrum liceat Regi vel alicut seculari personae judicare Clericos cujuscumque ordinis sive in furto sive homicidio vel periurio seu quibus cumque fuerint criminibus deprehensi Consultationi tuae taliter respondentus quod si Clericus in quocumque ordine constitutus in furto vel homicidio vel periurio seu alio crimine fuerit deprehensus legittime atque convictus ab Ecclesiastico Iudice deponendus est Qui si depositus incorrigibilis fuerit excommunicari debet deinde contumacia crescente anathematis mucrone feriri postmedum verò si in profundum malorum veniens contempserit cum Ecclesia non habeat ultra quid faciat ne possit esse ultra perditio plurimorâ—m per secularem comprimendus est potestatem ita quod ei deputetur exilium vel alia legittima paena Where you are to observe singularly as to our present purpose of distinction betwixt Ecclesiastical and secular punishment and of no power at all in the Church to inflict corporal secular civil or lay punishments what Caelestinus sayes in these words Cum Ecclesia non habeat ultra quid faciat As you are also to note that he answers not directly or rather indeed not at all to the main question whether the King or other secular powers could punish Clerks guilty of or manifestly deprehended in perjury theft or murder but declines that of the authority of Kings or of other secular powers acting of themselveâ— in such cases without relation to the desires of the Church that they should act so and onely prescribes to the Ecclesiastical superiours how they themselves are to proceed by degrees aâ— becomes them against such criminal Clerks For otherwise it hath been seen before and in the very laws of Iustinian submitted unto by the Church that in such criminal causes the civil Praetors proceeded immediately against Churchmen though execution of the sentence was suspended until degradation was by the Bishop And it hath been seen that in a very auncient Council of Bishops long before this Calestine the first of Matisconum I mean the cases of theft murder and malefice were still expresly and particularly supposed or rather declared to have no Ecclesiastical exemption but to be still under the cognizance of even the inferiour lay judges And reason it self and the necessary preservation of both State and Church tell us that Caelestine's answer here cannot be otherwise understood in all the formalities of it and as relateing to the power supream of Kings who acknowledg none but God above them in temporals and who recieve not or incorporat not by their own proper power and into their own civil law this canon of Caelestine in any other sense or any other Church canon at all either like or unlike to it exempting Clerks in such crimes and in the first Instance from their supream legal cognizance or even from that of their subordinat ordinary secular and lay judges For I confess that in such Kingdoms or temporal States if any such be wherein the Princes or people or civil Governours and civil laws or customs have recieved such Ecclesiastical canons for the exemption of Clerks in such crimes until such Ecclesiastical formalities had preceeded it is fitting they be obserued and ought to be observed while the civil laws which onely gave them force or a binding virtue remain unrepealed and if the litteral observation of them strike not at the very being or at least peaceable and well being of the Commonwealth But observed so that is by virtue of the civil reception and incorporation of them into the civil laws and by the civil power they make nothing at all against my main purpose or against that of those other canons I alledg for the power of Kings from God to punish delinquent Clergiemen with civil and corporal punishments where and when they shall upon rational grounds judg it necessary and expedient for the publick good of either Church or State and where and when it is not against the laws of the land that they punish them so either by themselves immediately or by their subordinat lay judges either extraordinary or ordinary The Bishops of Affrick acknowledging this power in temporal Princes write in this manner and stile to the Emperour Vt novellae praesumptionis scandalum quod adversus fidem nostram attentatum
this to do or wherein doth this condemnation or judgment reflect on the doctrine which teacheth not of Christ but of the Disciples of Christ and only teacheth that all men who are only men and not Gods or that all mortal and sinful men whether Laymen or Clergiemen who are members of any commonwealth and not the heads thereof do lye under a proper and strict obligation not only of charity for the avoiding of scandal but of justice also to be humbly subject in criminal causes to the supream coercive power of the supream politick head Nay and under an obligation of justice also even to pay him tribute if he himself exempt them not from tribute I mean were it necessary for me to urge that of tribute as it is not And only teacheth moreover that such obligation of Justice ariseth from the very law divine it self both natural and positive or which is the same thing is evidently commanded by reason and by revelation by plain Scripture and Catholick Tradition by the doctrine and practice of the Christian Bishops themselves and of even their very best Christian Princes and people all along from the beginning of Christianity until this present day Certainly there is no man so blind as not to see that that first article of Marsilius and Iandunus or condemnation of it hath nothing to do with this doctrine Nor yet so blind as not to see that my elucidation of this doctrine all along or any where in this Tract hath nothing to do with that first Article taken I mean in that sense wherein as I have declared already and in no other the said Iohn the XXII condemn'd it I confess I have before that is in the 239. page of this first Part by occasion too of speaking somewhat against Bellarmine concerning the doctrine of Marsilius and Iandunus or that part of their doctrine which is in this first article said That our Saviour himself by his non scandalizemus eos in Mat. 17. sufficiently proves that not even himself was altogether to free but that as the fulfiller of the old Law and Prophets and as the giver of yet a more perfect law for the salvation of mortals and as a pure man he was bound videlicet by the rules of not giving just cause of scandal and ruine to others in that circumstance to pay the didrachma And that Marsilius de Padua or Ioannes de Ianduno were not condem'd nor censur'd at all for saying that any pure man who was not together both God and man as our Saviour Christ was by the wonderful union of both natures or that any other besides our Lord or even for saying that Peter himself was not exempt from the supream temporal power in temporal matters I have said so there I confess But what then or doth it follow that by such answer to Bellarmine I maintain this first article of Marsilius and Iandunus or that I fall under the condemnation of this first article nothing less This first article is as the Pope himself relates it in these words and only in these words Illud quod de Christo legitur in Evangelio B. Matthei quod ipse soluit tributum Caesari quando staterem sumptum ex ore piscis illis qui petebant didrachma jussit dari hoc fecit non condescensive liberalitate suae pietatis sed necessitate coactus And the condemnation of this article or the sense wherein this article was condemned is that which imposes a constraint of necessity on our Saviour for paying the didrachma and which denyes that he paid it not condescensively that is not out of his meer condescension and out of the liberality of his piety Now who sees not first that I do not by any means deny it was out of his meer condescension to the infirmities of weak men and of his liberality and piety that our Saviour commanded the didrachma to be paid nay who sees not that I do rather expresly enough say it was meerly out of his liberality piety and condescension he commanded it to be paid so for himself Do not I say most expresly or at least insinuat most sufficiently that he paid it only to avoid scandal and that he was bound by no other law to pay it but by the law of love and charity or which is the same thing and to repeat here again my own former determinate words that as the fulfiller of the old law and Prophets and as the giver of a more perfect law for the salvation of mortals and as a pure man he was bound videlicet by the rules of not giving just cause of scandal and ruine to others in that circumstance to pay the didrachma And secondly and indeed consequently who sees not that in that discourse of mine or whole passage quoted above out of my 239. page I have not a word importing any constraint of necessity or any either constraint or necessity for in effect they are both the same or import the same thing taking these words properly or absolutely and simply that is without any dimunitive adjection addition restriction or taking them not any way at all for that which is secundum quid tale as they ought not to be taken but for that which is simpliciter tale as they ought to be taken where other words or the subject restrains them not For to aver such constraint or such necessity incumbent on our Saviour in paying the didrachma were as much as to aver that either he had an inward constraint or necessity on his will or soul for want of that inward essential indifferency which makes the will and soul free in it self inwardly to volitions and nollitions or had an outward compulsion or coaction of his executive faculty for want of outward means as for example twelve legions of Angels at his command to free him from the power of those that would force him to payment whether he would or no if he had denyed it or certainly had the constraint or necessity of an obligation or tye of justice and obedience on him arising from the tribute law it self obliging him as other men under the guilt of sin and other penalties of such law to pay tribute Which last kind of necessity is that which the arguments of Iohn the XXII against the first article of Marsilius do seem to fasten upon it and condemns in it and the whole article for seeming to say that out of such necessity our Saviour paid the didrachma But whether so or no I am not concern'd because I remove all three kinds of necessity from our Saviour and all other kinds too of necessity if there be any other simply such For though I say in the beginning of the said passage page 239. that our Saviour himself by his own non scandalizemus eos Mat 17. sufficiently proves that not even himself was altogether so free c but that he was bound c and consequently say that our Saviour wanted some kind of freedom
contemporary English man though Latin Writer and who might therefore have known the truth and was most likely to have writ but what he thought was the truth especially in a matter of such consequence being he is reputed to be a sincere Historian and as such quoted often by Baronius himself tels us in his Annals that S. Thomas and the other Bishops had Pope Alexander's consent to swear in that form however Baronius deny it for this reason forsooth that Alexander being some time after this accoasted by S. Thomas when he fled out of England and presented with the heads of those were called the Royal customs did soundly check him for ever having upon any tearms sworn to observe them That after this Parliament or great Council of Clarendon was broke up and upon S. Thomas his departure from the Court there it happening sayes Baronius out of a certain Supplement annexed to the Acts of S. Thomas that he was grievously rebuked by his Cross-bearer as having by such his carriage and oath betrayed the libertyes of the Church the Saint immediatly and most deeply sigh'd repenting what he did therein and presently also dispatch'd an express to Alexander craving an absolution and purposing in the mean while to abstain from all both Pontifical and sacerdotal office and ministery and that to his letter the Pope return'd him an other full of comfort whereby also after commanding him to confess his sins to a discreet Priest he absolved him from the said oath That when the King had heard how the Archbishop fell off the second time and refused to sign and seal the agreement of Clarendon according as it was there also agreed that he should sign and seal it nay and that he refused to stand at all to his oath whether seal'd or not seal'd being much more bitterly exasperated then ever he sent Embassadours to Alexander and to desire particularly two things of him viz. 1. that the Legantine Power Apostolick used to be entrusted to the Archbishop of Canterbury should be given for the time to the Archbishop of York and that his own Holyness would be pleased to confirm the foresaid Royal customs That Alexander upon this embassy finding himself in streights on each side that is on the point either of alienating for ever from himself that Kings good affections to whom nevertheless he owed so much for benefits receaved formerly on of granting his desire to the prejudice of the Church or Church liberty thought fit to use this mean for saving all viz. to bestow that Legantine power on the Archbishop of York whereby to satisfie the King in some degree and yet to deny him the confirmation of those Royal customs that the Church might not suffer writing withall at the same time to the Archbishop of Canterbury our S. Thomas and exhorting him earnestly that by all means he should endeavour to observe and please the King always and in all things Salva honestate Ecclesiastici â—rdinâ— That in a conjuncture wherein by other letters of a later date this Pope Alexander had restrained so that Legantine power of the Archbishop of York that he should have no power at all over Thomas of Canterbury's person or Diocess or to exempt the Suffragans of Canterbury from obeying him still as their own proper Metropolitan in all Metropolitical rights thereby frustrated the Kings great design in desiring that Legation for York being this design was no other but to get Thomas canonically deposed wherein the King being therefore in earnest angry even with the Pope himself had rendered the said Legaâ—tine Commission useless to all other lesser purposes now that the Pope had so rendred it to the said great purpose that I say in this conjuncture Thomas of Canterbury with the rest of the Bishops being called by the King to Northampton to give aâ— account of the revenues of the vacant Churches which he had while he was Chancellour administred and being accordingly brought to a strict account of these revenews and after demanding the advice of the rest of the Bishops when he had heard most of them advising that either he should renounce and give up his Archbishoprick or obey the King in all things having desired time to consider till next day and having also early on that next day celebrated the Mass of St. Stephen the Protomartyr as preparing himself for martyrdom which on that very day he hoped to suffer having carryed secretly about himself the most Sacred Hoast according to ancient custom but publickly carrying in his own hands his own Archiepiscopal cross and going in this manner to the Palace he was both scorn'd and derided by his own Suffragan Bishops and was by them and by others also of the Kings Council and as they saâ—e in Council condemned by a sentence of deposition as a perjured man and one disloyal to the King because he refused to stand to his former promise and oath to observe the Royal customs That S. Thomas having there in presence pleaded his own cause and shewed that when he was against his own will drawn by the King to the Church or Archbishoprick of Canterbury he was at that very time of his election and promotion declared by the King to be freed of and absolved from all tyes of the Court and further declining the judgment as well of the King as of his Council and appealing to the Pope and declaring also that he did by no means quit or give up his own Archiepiscopal See he reserved the further and universal cognizance of his whole cause to the See Apostolick of Rome to which he there also and then summon'd his fellow Bishops for having chosen rather to obey men then God that presently departing Court but loaden with contumelies and reproaches of Courtiers he soon after fled or parted the Kingdom for Flanders and to an Abbey of Monks called S. Bertin's in the Citty of S. Omers whence writing to the Pope of all things done and of his Appeal and flight he obtained from his Holyness an abrogation of all such proceedings against him That on the other side while all his other lesser Adversaries in England decryed him as a fugitive the King above all being wonderfully enraged sent the Archbishop of York and other Bishops of England to Alexander to accuse Thomas and to desire his Holyness to send a Legat a Latere to England to judg of the cause depending twixt him and Thomas provided also he sent Thomas in person back to be judg'd in England That albeit these Episcopal Embassadours press'd this matter vehemently in the name of their King and even to threats of Schysme on his behalf yet the Pope thought not fit to deliver so innocent a man to such cruel Adversaries but rather that he should be expected as he was called to be judg'd by himself that is by his own Holyness in their presence and that they refusing this offer of the Pope or not content with this answer departed with much indignation
the death of St. Thomas of Canterbury and by the Saxon Danish Norman laws of England all along till Henry the Second himself 's own raigne and until after this controversie happen'd criminal Clerks even guilty of murder were to be judg'd and punish'd only by the Court Ecclesiastical â—ay that not only by the same laws all Clergiemen 〈…〉 all crimes whatsoever to be judg'd only by the Bishops but that all the very 〈◊〉 of the Church were â—â—all causes whatsoever to be adjudg'd only in the Church of Ecclesiastical Tribunals nor should have recourse to those were by way of distinction commonly called the Kings Courts but only in default of justice done according to law in the Courts of the Church Which being in or as to both differences the law of England contrary to which iâ— both differences oâ— cases Henry the Second would have forced St. Thomas and no other law of God or Man commanding St. Thomas to submit to the King in either as the case stood not even that of St. Paul 13. to the Romans because St. Thomas had in both as in all his other differences the sublimer â—oâ—â—ers in the law of the land for himself who sees not that St. Thomas needed not for his own justification in either differences pretend either the positive law of God or the natural law of God or the law of Nations or the Imperial law or even any Church law or Papal law or Canon for the exemption of criminal Clergiemen from the secular Courts when he denyed to deliver up the two criminal Clerks or when he refused to sign or seal that second Head of Henry the Second's customes which second head was such as subjected all Clergie-men in all kind of causes civil criminal mixt spiritual and temporal to the cognizance of the Kings even ordinary lay Judges and Courts as you may see by turning to and reading over again in my fourth Observation that second Head of those 16 And who seeâ— not but he might at the same time without any contradiction inconsequence oâ— contrariety maintain that still it was true that abstracting from the laws of England then as yet 〈◊〉 because not legally repealed all Clerks in England were by the laws of â—eason and laws of God and doctrine of the Fathers and many Canons too of Popes and Councils subject in all temporal causes both civil and criminal to the lay civil Courts and Judges of Henry the Second Nay who sees not but for any thing alledg'd or known out of the Histories of either his life or death or martyrdome or canonization or miracles or invocation of him after as a glorious martyrized Saint and even martyrized only too if you please in meer defence of the Church liberties and immunities who sees not I say but that notwithstanding any thing hitherto so alledg'd out of all or any of those Histories he not only might be but was rigidly and constantly of this judgement and opinion especially being these Histories tell us in one instance that when he was so much pressed to sign to those 16. Heads as the royal customes of Henry the First he doubted they were no such customes of Henry the First or were no customes at all and therefore chiefly and only fell off after swearing them and would not sign or seal them at all as was desired and expected from him albeit his Cross-bearer's check did forward his repentance for having sworn Sed cum descriptas consuetudines sayes Parker himself in the life of our Saint perlegisset Thomas for when he swore to observe them he did not see them in writing nor were they digested at all into heads and therefore he only swore in general to observe those customes which Henry the Second called â—nitas consâ—â— tudines his Grandfathers customes and royal customes â—ulâ—â—â—◠〈…〉 an ill â—um quaedam inter consuetudines essent habendae itâ—â— diem deliâ—â—◠〈…〉 sigillum chirographum adhiberet petiit and whereas also he could not be ignorant of the laws both Imperial which he had studied and of the laws of England where he lived and judged so long as Chancellor Or who sees not briefly that that there is no contradiction that a most rigid 〈◊〉 Bishop should dye for the rights of the Clergie and be therefore a Marâ—â—◠〈◊〉 yet acknowledge all those rights or at least many or some of them 〈◊〉 â—â—â—ch he dyed as for example that of exemption came to the Clergie from the meer civil or municipal and politick just laws of the land and only from such laws of the land and not by any means immediatly from any other law divine or humane of nature or Nations or of the Church Pope or Emperour if not in so much only as the laws of God and nature approve all just laws of every land 〈◊〉 they be repealed by an equal authority no that which made them Finally who sees not also that notwithstanding all this or notwithstanding the municipal laws of England were for St. Thomas in every particular of his said manifold opposition to his King or that by the same laws the English Clergie had such exemptions from secular Courts yet St. Thomas might have been of this opinion also and perswasion at the same time and was so too most rigidly and constantly for ought appears to the contrary out of the Acts of his life or other Historians that as by no other laws of God or man or reason so neither by those very laws of England either himself or any other Clergieman was exempt from the supream civil coercive power or even could be exempt during their being subjects or their acknowledging to be so or their living in the quality of subjects 1. Because the very name and nature of subjection draws along with it and either essentially or at least necessary implyes this which is to be subject to the supream coercive power at least in some cases and some contingencies 2. Because that if both himself and all other Ecclesiastical Judges and Bishops taking the Pope himself too in the number did fail in their duty of punishing Clerks notoriously scandalously and dangerously criminal or that if the criminal Clerks themselves would not according to the law of the land submit to the sentence and punishment prescribed into them by the Bishops or if even also the Bishops themselves were altogether guilty of the same crimes or patronizers of the criminals and would not amend or satisfie of themselves without any peradventure t is evident that the supream civil coercive power might and ought in such cases to proceed against them by plain force and corporal coâ—rcion cuia salus populi suâ—rema lex esto 3. Because the power whereby S. Thomas himself and all other Bishops and Ecclesiastical Judges proceeded in a compulsory way to any civil or corporal coercion of criminal Clerks against the will of the same Clerks as to seizing their persons imprisoning them whiping them taking away their temporal goods confining them
too he may be deceived in the objective truth of things and sometime to import onely a witnessing by bloud so spilt or a testimony of innocent and holy bloud against those cruel men who spil'd it for no other cause but that themselves might reap some worldly advantage thereby though otherwise they had no quarrel at all with such a Saint nor he with them or with any other for defence of which his life should be taken away Secondly this fourth supposition is denyed by me because neither the diffusive nor representative Church was ever concern'd I mean their pursuant veneration or invocation of any canonized for a Saint and under the title of a martyr was never concern'd in such an intrigue as this viz whether in the more strict or large sense of the word Martyr he were a Martyr nor concern'd whether his whole or even any substantial part of his quarrel as in his Legend or in the process of his canonization was true or no or such as might entitle to martyrdom strictly taken according to the objective truth of things nor truly concern'd any further in him or in his life or death but that he was a great extraordinary servant of God in both or at least at the time of his death and that now he was in the glory of God For this onely being certain though all other matters reported of him were uncertain their veneration and invocation of him must be not onely void of all impiety but acts of true religion and true piety and for the rest they are free to believe or not by humane faith according as they see those humane proofs alleadg'd to be strong or weak Thirdly that fourth supposition is denyed because the miracles wrought cannot be said upon rational grounds to have been wrought in confirmation of the at least objective truth or justice of this or that controversy whatsoever not certainly Evangelical which such a Saint or Martyr sometimes had in his life being they were not wrought at the invocation of God by the Saint himself or by any other that God might be pleased by working such miracles to evidence the justice of such a cause For if they had been wrought so the case would be clear enough as to such who saw those miracles or to whose knowledg authentick proofs of them did sufficiently come that even the obedience truth and justice of things in such a controversy had been on such a Saints or Martyr's side But otherwise wrought they can be no more but divine testimonies of his having wonderfully or extraordinarily served God either in his life or death or both whether he was deceived or no in some things and whether he had some times and in some occasions or controversies some failings or no at least out of want of true knowledg or sound reflection for the very greatest Saints might have been deceived sometimes nay and failed too sometimes in their duty and besides they can be no more or at least on any rational ground cannot be said to be any more then divine testimonies of his being now with God in glory Out of all which I think 't is evident enough there are several suppositions in the proof of the Major which I am not bound to allow not even in their principles or doctrine who teach the infallibility of the Pope in his Bulls of canonization and several suppositions which yet I am not bound to allow notwithstanding I do my self as I confess I am bound most religiously allow the canonization veneration and invocation of St. Thomas of Canterbury and all three of him as of a glorious martyr too and notwithstanding I allow also all the miracles reported of him And consequently I think 't is evident enough that it is not necessary to admit the Major to wit this proposition whatever doctrine condemns or opposes the justice of S. Thomas of Canterbury's quarrel against Henry the Second is false for any such suppositions or for any such inconvenience as that proof of it which I have given before would inferr or deduce out of the denyal of it Therefore my reason in and for admitting that Major in this my second answer is no such matter nor is that I could not maintain St. Thomas of Canterburie's extraordinary great sanctity in his life and in or at his death and his consequent canonization veneration invocation miracles not that I could not I say maintain all without admitting that Major and granting that of necessity the quarrels causes or controversies of such a Saint with such a King and in such matters as those of Thomas of Canterbury were in must have been just from first to last of the Saints side and just I mean according to the objective truth of things in themselves But my reason for admitting it so simply and absolutely without any distinction in this second answer is that I see no reason to call in question the credit of those Historians who relate the matter of fact in that controversy so and so circumstantiated or the credit of other Historians or Antiquaries who relate those ancient Saxon Danish Norman laws of England all along unrepealed in our case till Henry the Second did so repeal or attempted to repeal them so and that on the other side all right reason shewes that S. Thomas of Canterbury having so the very municipal laws of the land of his side he had justice also arising immediatly from such laws of his side and consequently that the same right reason shews that whatever doctrine condemns or opposes such known justice in the quarrel of any man whatsoever Saint or not Saint Martyr or not Martyr must be false in the case And this and this onely is my reason for admitting so that Major But what then Must I admit the Minor subsumed thus But my doctrine condemns or opposes the justice of St. Thomas of Canterbury's quarrel c with Henry the Second Must I admit this Minor I say nothing less For I deny it plainly and flatly and that too without any kind of distinction And that I may deny it so deny it without any contradiction contrariety inconsistence or falsity you have had already in my first answer and in my precedent observations enough to convince you Therefore consequently it must be said that the conclusion does not follow or that of the Syllogisme which pretends my doctrine of a supream civil coercive power of Clerks in criminal causes to be false for it is ill inferr'd the Minor being false or being denyed upon such rational grounds as I have formerly given An other Answer yet may be as a second to the Syllogisme though a third in order to the matter in it self or to the judgment of St. Thomas of Canterbury For the Major may be distinguish'd thus whatever doctrine condemns or opposes the justice of such part of S. Thomas of Canterbury's quarrel which was all along and until the very last of his life that whereon he did and would
absolutely or actually yet establish'd Or doth not the very nature of a Parliament and the necessary and plenary freedom of the members thereof evince this 3. T is likewise true that in the great Council or Parliament held at Norththampton and when he saw some of the very Bishops violently bent against him to ingratiat and endear themselves more and more to the King and the rest through fear yielding and saw them all generally conspiring with the lay Peers and joyntly with such Peers condemning and deposing him by their sentence from his Bishoprick he appealed to the Pope from such a sentence and such Judges and such a Judicatory and in such a cause But what then Or was it treason by the nature of the thing in it self or of such an Appeale of such a man and in such a case and from such Judges or was there any law then in England making such appeal to be treason certainly it was not by either Not by the nature of such an appeal as abstractedly considered in it self because neither appeals in a spiritual cause to the Pope nor decisions in a spiritual way of such Appeals by the Pope do of their own nature draw along with them any lessening of the Majesty or supream power of the Prince or of any part of it which is proper to him nor of the safety of the people though by accident that is by abuse only sometimes of the Appellants themselves or of such Appeals or of the decision of them by some Popes and by the neglect of either Prince or Parliament giving way to frivolous appeals or admitting of notoriously corrupt decisions they may prove hurtful Nor was there any law of England as yet then establish'd when the when the Saint appealed so which made it treason or which indeed at all prohibited him or any other Clerk to appeal to Rome in any pure ecclesiastical cause whatsoever or from the judgment of either spiritual or secular Judges or even of both together in any pure spiritual or Ecclesiastical cause such as that judgement was which was pronounced in that Council or Parliament of Northamton against this holy Archbishop even a sentence of his deposition from the See Nay the continual practice of England till then for so many hundred years before and for some time after too warranted by the very municipal laws or municipal Customs or both to appeal to the Pope in such causes which practice in many Instances of even great Bishops and Archbishops both of Canterbury and York and of the Kings also of England sending sometimes their own Embassadours to plead against such Bishops and Archbishops and sometimes to help or plead for them you may see at large everâ— in Matthew Parkers own Antiquitates Britannicae evicts manifestly it was neither treason by law or by reason or by the nature of such Appeals And the practice of other Kingdoms of Christendome till this day continued shews no less that it might have been and may be duly circumstantiated without any lessening of the Majesty of the Crown danger to the safety of the people or without prejudice to any Besides who sees not that it is against the very law of God as delivered to us from the beginnings of Christianity that Lay-men as such may fit in judgment on or give sentence for the taking away the Spirituals of a Bishop As such they can neither give nor take away any spiritual Power Jurisdiction or Authority purely such from the very meanest Clerk whatsoever Indeed if a King be made the Popes Legat in his own Kingdomes as Henry the first of England was you may read it in Houeden in whom also you may see that Henry the Second wrought all he could to get the same power from Rome for himself then such a lay person but not as a meer lay person may give sentence in such causes according to the extent of his commission And who sees not moreover that the Bishops of England who sate in the Council and as sitting there proceeded most uncanonically against their own Primat If they would proceed canonically against him with any colour as much as of the ancient canons of the Church it should have been in a canonical Convocation or Council of Bishops alone and of such other Clergymen as by the canons ought to vote and the Primat should have a fair tryal and be tryed by the canons only Those Bishops failed in all this And therefore Thomas had reason to appeal to the Pope from their sentence For ever since the general Council of Sardica there was at least in the Occidental Church an appeal allowed Bishops even from their equals and even too from their superiours to the supream Bishop or him of Rome as the Fathers of Sardica at the desire of Hâ—sius their President to honour the memory of St. Peter ordained by an an express Canon Though I confess that for what concern'd the temporals of his Archbishoprick which he held only from the King and municipal laws of the land he could not appeal to the Pope understand you otherwise then as to an honourable Arbiter by consent by vertue of any canon only or at all against the said municipal Laws or Customs of the Land if they had been against him in the case of his said Temporals as I have shewed they were not or at least I am sure were not so against him not even I mean in such an appeal concerning his meer Temporals as to render him guilty of treason for appealing so oâ— in such the meer temporal concerns of his Bishoprick And yet I add that Histories make no mention of any such kind of Appeal as this last made by him then when he appealed from the Council of Noâ—thampton though he had reason after to labour in all just meer and pure Ecclesiastical ways to recover the very temporals also of his Church to the same Church T is true moreover that immediatly after his appeal he departed the Council or Parliament the Court and Kingdom and departed the Kingdom incognito in a secular weed But neither was this any treason nor even disobedience or mis-demeanour in him There was no writ of ne exeat Regno against him There was no law of God or man prohibiting him to depart so nor any reason indeed as the case stood with him The King had stabled his own horses in his lodgings to affront him He challeng'd him for thirty thousand pounds which he had administred formerly during his Chancellorship and challeng'd him of so great a sum of purpose to pick a quarrel to him for the Saint had given him an account of all when he was Chancellor and was by the Barons of the Exchequer and Richardus de Luci Lord chief Justice and by the young King himself acquit of all these and whatsoever other accounts before he was consecrated He was notwithstanding his Appeal sentenc'd by the Barons at the Kings desire to be seized on and put in prison The Archbishops of
in general against the said Censure or on the account only or by occasion only of those two Suppositions or two Causes or Reasons expressed therein wherefore the Louain Doctors did so Censure our Remonstrance as you have seen or in formal words did declare it to be unlawful detestable sacrilegious and wherefore they did also virtually or consequentially as you have likewise seen before Censure and Declare it further to be Heretical or Schismatical or both and forasmuch as I find it at least no less behoveful to speak yet more directly and particularly against those very Essentials both formal and virtual or consequential of that Censure I form these following Arguments against all I. No Remonstrance Declaration Paper or Form of Allegiance to the Prince is unlawful or can be Censur'd to be unlawful which contains not some Clause or some Proposition against some Law divine or humane For therefore only any thing can be said to be unlawful forasmuch as it can be justly said to be against some such true and undoubted Law But that Remonstrance c. of ours contains no Clause or Proposition against any Law divine or humane Ergo 't is not unlawful nor can be Censur'd to be unlawful The Conclusion evidently follows out of the premises And the Minor which is the only Proposition wants proof you have already seen proved partly in this very Section and partly throughout those many other long and large Sections before wherein I have first proceeded in a negative way answering all the Laws alledg'd by either Bellarmine or any other for the Exemption of Clergymen from the Supreme Civil Coercive power of Lay Princes and next have also proceeded in a positive or affirmative way alledging on the contrary all those Laws divine and humane which you may see there for the subjection of even all kind of Clergymen to the said Supreme Civil power II. No Remonstrance can be justly Censur'd to be detestable but that which can be justly said to contain some Clause or some Proposition that is execrable or worthy to be abhorr'd for only that which is justly reputed such can be justly said to be detestable Ours contains no Clause or Proposition that is execrable or worthy to be abhorr'd because it contains nothing against any Law divine or humane and the Remonstrance which contains no such thing contains no Clause or Proposition that is execrable or worthy to be abhorr'd Ergo our Remonstrance cannot be justly Censur'd to be detestable III. No Remonstrance can be according to any true Theology Censur'd to be sacrilegious or the Subscribers of it declared to be tyed under the guilt of Sacriledge to refix or revoke their Subscriptions which contains not some Clause or some Proposition warranting Sacriledge either taken in the true proper and strict sense of this word Sacriledge or in that at least which is the improper and larger sense of it But ours is a Remonstrance which contains no such Clause or Proposition c. Ergo c. The conclusion follows evidently according to the rules of Logick and the Major is evident ex terminis to any that is not a Beetle-head The Minor which only of all the Propositions of this Syllogism requires proof I prove thus no less evidently Sacriledge properly and strictly taken and according to the Etymology of the word sayes Azorius Instit Moral l. 9. cap. 27. is the stealing of a Sacred thing Vnde Sacrilegi dicuntur sayes he speaking in this proper and strict sense qui res Sacras surripiunt aut qui rem non Sacram in loco tamen Sacro depositam aut commendatam furantur And Sacriledge in the improper and larger sense sayes the same Author and with him other Divines and Canonists as it is often also now or even more commonly taken is a sin whereby a Sacred thing is polluted or unworthily and impiously handled used or treated that is not with that honour veneration and respect which the Laws of God or man commands us under sin to use or treat Sacred things Appellatione autem rei sacrae sayes the same Azor accipitur ea quae sanctitatem aliquam habet aut Christi institutione aut Ecclesia consecratione unctione benedictione ut vocatur quae est precatio qua Ecclesiae Minister certis ritibus ceremoniis Ecclesiasticis adhibitis bona precatur rei quam sacrat Ea item quam Ecclesia ad sacros usus ministeria destinavit But who sees not that there is not in our said Remonstrance any proposition or clause or passage warranting either the stealth of any Sacred thing according to the first sense or in the latter the pollution violation injurious force done to irreverence or dishonour or any unworthy or impious usage handling or treating of any Sacred thing whatsoever Religion or Faith Sacrament or Sacramental Place Goods Lands Rite Ceremony c For what I have already said at large in this very present Section and what I have before Treated yet far more largely in so many other preceding Sections against the four grounds of the Louain Theological Faculty do without any possible contradiction which may as much as seem rational most evidently demonstrate That there is not in our said Remonstrance any such proposition clause or passage warranting c. First Because what is so said in both does most evidently demonstrate That in the Remonstrance there is no power attributed to the King nor obedience acknowledg'd or promised as due from the Subjects but meerly Temporal and Civil or rather in meer Temporal and Civil things and according to the Laws of God and Nature and Canons also of the Church nor any denied to the Pope or Church not even any I mean out of the Popes or Churches own peculiar temporal Territories but only such power and such obedience as are not spiritual or in spiritual things nay this very present Section besides other matters demonstrates also That there is nothing else in the Remonstrance Secondly and particularly because the attributing such Temporal power to the Prince and requiring or warranting such obedience in Temporal or Civil things from or in the Subjects cannot be Sacriledge in either sense nor the denying of the same Supreme Royal politick power in Temporal matters to the Church or Pope in other Territories than such as are acknowledged or indeed are their own peculiarly and independently as to the Supreme politick power can be any more Sacriledge in either sense For who sees not that here is no violation of any kind of Right due by any Law to either Sacred persons or other Sacred things whatsoever And who knows not it is confessedly true That Sacriledge in either sense must be a violation of some such Right Lastly Because I have most particularly and professedly demonstrated before these four things 1. In so many different long Sections That the Pope hath not either de facto or de jure any either divine or humane Right to the temporal or politick Supremacy of
maxima ab extraneo quolibet Visitatore Altera vero Pro-regis Excellentissimi Ormundi mens mihi paulo post clare absque ambagibus ullis ab ipsomet declarata nempe si quisquam externus hoc est Regi nostro non subditus adveniret eundem fore impraesentiarum multo magis obnoxium suspicioni adeoque non sine pactis quibusdam observandis progressurum nisi periculo capitis En Pater mi Reverendissime quibus adductus eram argumentis ut vel Patribus in Diffinitorio congregatis vel aliis forte seorsim sive per Nuncium sive per Epistolam aliquid judicii mei ipsius de persona postulanda signanter autem de R. P. Carono intimaverim In quem quia subito fama erat convenisse Patres atque Pro-rex noster audiverat adeo ut cuncta in illo nupero Montisfernandi congressu tractabantur qualiterque certo convenerant in personam ullam Regiae Majestati gratam ut Caronum esse omnibus constat jam non ita liberum sit mihi de alio quoquam cogitare praesertim cum agnoscatur hic esse talis etiam contra quem non sit ulla exceptio Canonica vel in Ordine vel in Ecclesia ac calis praeterea qui maxime omnium qu praesentari possunt obeundo muneri sit idoneus Caeterum quod scribatur ut intelligo ad Reverendam Paternitatem Vestram designatos ante hac nuper Visitatores nec positive gratos aut ingratos esse Pro-regi nescio plane quo errore scriptum sit Constat enim ingratissimos esse ac fuisse ambos positive quidem Ac Dalachanum certe ni ego ipse vehementer intercessissem de expresso particulari Judicum ordine quaerendum fuisse ad carceres furcas utpote Majestatis laesae inter primos eximie reum ut fatetur ipse idem Dalaghanus nec tamen ita reum quod Sacerdos aut Ecclesiasticus vel etiam Commissarius Fratrum esset sed quod a multis retroactis annis proditor perduellis nimirum in captura Regiae arcis Athloniensis quodque praeterea in confesso esset eundem etiam caetera durante bello Confaederatorum Catholicorum Hiberniae sequacem fuisse tenacissimum ac promotorem egregium factionis Eugenianae Nuntiatistarunque uti vocantur Ac porro constat statutum esse Proregi neminem ejusmodi hominum permittere seu admittere ad clavum regiminis in Ordine antequam sufficientia praestiterint argumenta fidelitatis in futurum etiamsi interventu meo velit in privata conditione quiescentibus ita veniam dare praeteritorum ut nec vitae nec libertatis periculum queat esse modo praestent Regi posthac juramentum fidelitatis in temporalibus Atque ita Reverendissime Pater finem facio Epistolae quam adeo prolixam fecit rei ipsius gravitas necessitasque ac difficultas etiam replicandi satis tempestive ob interjecta nempe spacia terrarumque mariumque sicubi forte Paternitas Vestra Reverendissima haereret non intellectis plene circumstantiis Restat ergo solum repetere vota ac preces quod identidem facio qua par est humilitate ac instantia pro R. Carono manus Reverendissimas deosculans rursum quoque etiam decet Reverentia cultu affectu benedictionem orans Londini XVIIII Cal. Jan. M.DC.LXIV Reverendissimae Paternitatis Vestrae Humillimus Filius Subditus Frater Petrus Valesius But notwithstanding all these Letters even those before from Ireland and other Reasons whatsoever given by him that delivered them viz. the above Father Antony Gearnon yet forasmuch as the terms of the common Letter from the Definitory to the said de Riddere were so couch'd and the Preamble of it such as you see it i. e. such as sufficiently intimated they desired no such matter willingly and forasmuch as some of them or others of their affections for them immediately advertising their friends at Rome had a Petition exhibited to Cardinal Francis Barberin President of the Congregation de propaganda fide and Protector too of the Franciscan Order throughout the World representing to him indifferently Lyes and Truths in this matter and wrought with him to send the said Petition and his own Commands also by Letter to the foresaid Commissary General de Riddere residing then at Mechlin in Brabant enjoyning him not to Commission Father Caron or any of the Remonstrants And forasmuch lastly as these Letters of Cardinal Barberin were received by de Riddere some dayes before Father Antony Gearnon was arrived at Mechlin The said Commissaries Answer to Father Gearnon was That the Affairs of the Franciscans in Ireland were by the Minister general of the whole Order throughout the World residing at Madrid in Spain reserved to himself as to the determination of the grand Controversies amongst them and therefore nothing could be done by him in Flanders being his hands were tyed by a superiour power only that he would give Letters and Licence to him the said Father Gearnon if he pleased to go to Spain and apply himself to the said Minister general By which Answer as the said Commissary General de Riddere politickly declined the imputation and charge might be otherwise laid at his door for refusing to appoint as Visitor any one of those who were by his Majesty or great Ministers accounted truly Loyal and as such might have more permission or connivence than others and as he warily conceal'd the true cause which was the said Letter of Cardinal Francis Barberin and his own fear of losing himself in the Roman Court if contrary to the said Letter he had appointed that is Commissioned any of the known Remonstrants so also Father Gearnon saw well enough it was to no purpose for himself to go to Spain though recommended by the said Commissaries Letters For by dealing privately with de Riddere's then Secretary he understood the true cause and got a Copy both of that Letter of Cardinal Barberin to the said Commissary and of the Commissaries Answer thereupon to Barberin which Answer was in effect That he would never Commission any of the Remonstrants Of which Answer and fixed Resolution of de Riddere against those Remonstrants in general none at all of such of them as would not retract excepted and even I say against them upon that account only of their being such or having conscientiously signed and unalterably till then adhered to their signature of that Loyal Formulary that the Reader may be throughly convinced I give here at length the now mention'd Letter of Cardinal Barberin with the Petition or Memorial presented to him both sent by himself to de Riddere and withal give this Gentlemans Answer to his Eminency That of Barberin was in Latin as followeth Reverende admodum Pater EXponitur mihi ex parte Provinciae Hiberniae confusio magna quam causaret deputatio Patris Raymundi Caroni sive alicujus alterius ex illa factione in Commissarium sicuti fusius habetur in memoriali his adjuncto Quare vivaciter
Ecclesiasticos quam Saeculares praesertim Nobiles congruis admonitionibus sedulo continere satagat in sincera perfecta erga Sanctam Apostolicam Sedem observantia rejectis commentis novae formulae fidelitatis Valesianorum Illud enim est quod Ecclesiam Dei majori damno ac pernicie afficere potest quam quaevis anteacta Haereticorum persecutio In eo autem munere obeundo non est quod Paternitati Vestrae suggeram utpote ubertim in hujusmodi materiis instructae ex propria eruditione ac prudentia praeter ea quae nuper ipsi viva voce insmuavi signanter ut sic refutetur arguatur illud Juramentum ne tamen Regii Ministri ansam accipiant in Catholicos saeviendi eosque tanquam Regiae Dominationi quia ab Ecclesia defecerit infestos persequendi De omnibus porro quae in causa fidei at statu Ecclesiae digna notatu compererit gratissimum mihi erit Paternitatis Vestrae Litteris identidem edoceri Illas autem inscribat absque operculo A Monsieur Monsieur Francois Rossi-Bruxelles ita enim secure ad me perferentur Denique Paternitatis Vestrae Sacrificiis me animitus commendo Bruxellis 7. Octobris 1663. Paternitatis Vestrae Studiofissimus Hieronymus Abbas Montis Regalis In English thus Reverend Father in Christ YOur Paternities most friendly Letters dated at Paris the 20th of the last month I have received wherein you signifie that you are now again upon thoughts of your Journey to Ireland Wherefore I wish you a most happy Journey and send you the Faculties of an Apostolical Missionarie As for that which you mention of danger of Confusion in that Kingdom by occasion of the Visitor now suddenly to be Commission'd he meant the Visitator of the Franciscan Order in Ireland who was then to be sent or at least Commission'd from beyond Seas I could wish you did particularly inform me on that Subject that understanding fully the whole Affair I might timely take my measures Nothing occurs to me which at present I may recommend But the sum of all consists herein That rejecting the Comments Lyes or false Device of the new form of Fidelity of the Valesians you labour diligently by congruous Admonitions to contain your Countreymen especially the Nobility and Gentry in a sincere and perfect observance of the See Apostolick For that Formulary is it which can do more harm unto and bring more ruine upon the Church of God than all the forepast persecution of Hereticks In order to the discharging of that Duty incumbent on you its needless that I suggest any other thing to your Paternity being a man throughly and abundantly instructed in such matters by your own eradition and prudence besides those which I have lately by word of mouth insinuated to you signally That the said Oath be refuted and reproved so as that notwithstanding the Royal Ministers may not thence take occasion of severity against Catholicks or of persecuting them as people studiously and maliciously undermining the Royal Dominion on account of its having fallen from the Church As for the rest know it will be most grateful unto me that by your Letters I be frequently advertised of all Note-worthy matters concerning the cause of Faith or State of the Church which shall occur to you Your Letters without cover you may superscribe A Monsieur Monsieur Rossi-Bruxelles for so they will securely be brought to me To conclude I commend my self heartily to your Paternities sacrifices Bruxels 7. Octob. 1663. Your Paternities Most Affectionate Hierom Abbot of Mount Royal On either Letter though you need no Animadversions because they are of themselves plain enough as it is also plain that as well by these as other you have Sect. vii this Internuncio begun that which his Successors ever since more vigorously pursued viz. to have the Remonstrants esteemed both Schismaticks and Hereticks yet I cannot here but give some few Observations First Observation is How these men would pull out our eyes and make us believe the Pope would have all kind of Duty Faith and Obedience paid by us to our King to be exemplars of these vertues even to Hereticks and in a place of darkness the lights of the world in such matters and yet at the same time and by the same Letters to condemn us in effect as Schismaticks and Hereticks for any way acknowledging our King to be King and promising to obey Him as such and at the same time also to procure a publick University Censure of the Louain Divines to condemn our Subscription of such acknowledgment and promise and no less solemnly than formally or in express words to judge both to be unlawful detestable and sacrilegious yea and consequentially or virtually to be also Schismatical and Heretical For that our very such bare acknowledgment and promise c. were so condemn'd by them is manifest because our said Remonstrance and Subscription neither contain'd nor imported any more than such bare acknowledgment and promise c. being they contain'd and imported only this much That we acknowledge the King to be Supreme in all Temporal and Civil Affairs and that we promised to be faithfully and unchangeably obedient to him in such that is only in all Temporal and Civil things leaving out of purpose all mention of any kind of Spiritual things or causes Now who sees not that if we be condemn'd for only acknowledging the King to be Supreme in Temporals we are consequently condemn'd for the bare acknowledgment of his being at all or in any way or sense our King For there are but two or at most three wayes or senses wherein any can be truly said to be King The one that he be Supreme both in Temporals and Spirituals The other that he be in Temporals only and the last that only in Spirituals either purely and essentially or only by extrinsick denomination such But we have not Remonstrated nor have we Subscribed our acknowledgment of the King 's being our King either in the first or last sense but have been as to the words of our Formulary as far from either of both these two senses as Heaven is from Earth And therefore have only in the second Whence is further most evidently consequent That being we are condemn'd for Remonstrating or Subscribing in that sense we are also for the very barest acknowledgment can be of the Kings being any way King For how can we acknowledge him King if ever also as to very Temporals we deny his Kingship And therefore it is not only a meer Cheat and Imposture but Folly Non-sense and even plain contradiction to say That his Holiness would have us to be and continue still in our duty faith and observance to any person as to our King and yet at the same time to tell us That our profession of fidelity and obedience in Temporal things is unlawful detestable and sacrilegious nay Schismatical and Heretical upon this account that by such profession we both promise a more ample obedience to
ruine the credit of the Ecclesiastick Subscribers to the end the people or rest of the Clergy might not be indoctrinated or lead by them on the controverted point so prejudicial to the worldly interest of the Roman Court and Pontiff He would have them cryed down for disobedience to their Ecclesiastick Superiours Excommunicated persons Schismaticks Hereticks and in a word for wicked men designing wickedness and undermining the very fundamentals of the Old Religion Church and Head of the Church and in all things conspiring also to ruine their own Nation eternally for the sake of English Scots and others both British and Irish Hereticks And yet in the mean time to pretend nothing at all of the true ground but amongst those were sure to the Cabale nay on the contrary to deny stifly That the quarrel to or against the said Ecclesiastick Subscribers is upon any such ground of their Subscription to the Remonstrance least peradventure His MAJESTY or His great Ministers being informed and convinced thereof should cherish them and punish their opposers and consequently the doctrine of the said Remonstrance be more and more both spread and rooted amongst the Roman-Catholicks of His MAJESTIES Dominions and so the Letters also from Rome and Bruxels and Censure of Louain and other proceedings from other parts also beyond Seas and opposition at home against the said Formulary and Ecclesiastick owners thereof prove rather hurtful than profitable or advantagious to maintain the Roman Courts pretensions to England Ireland c. I am sure if any think me deceived in this my judgment or interpretation of this passage of de Vecchiis Letter to Father Bruodin he will not think so whatever he speaks after he shall not only consider the former passage and rest of the same Letter together with the whole tenour of those other Letters of the same de Vecchiis to Lyons Caeron and others which you have page 15 513 531. and of those of Cardinal Francis Barberin which you have page 17. and page 505. of this First Part and of those many others too partly of the same Cardinal Barberin and partly of the now Cardinal then Internuncio Rospigliosi which you have moreover in the Second Part of this First Treatise in several pages together and besides all these Letters when he shall reflect on the bitter invectives of the above de Vecchiis against Caron and Walsh in his personal Conference at Bruxels with Father Antony Gearnon one of the Subscribers and shall peruse my long Letter which is given hereafter Sect. Lxxxvi in answer to those invectives However I am most certain no indifferent man can think so after perusing also the Second Tome of this Work wherein matter of Fact since the year 1666. to this present 1672. shall be related and consequently the fate of that Loyal Formulary and well-meaning Subscribers thereof shall be seen to be that they have been especially these last four years viz. from the year 1668. to this present 1672. as they are yet still persecuted from the Court of Rome abroad and its Emissaries here at home by Depositions Excommunications and all kind of other the very vilest and inhumane wayes too infamous Lyes and abominable Calumnies and horrid Plots and Conspiracies also even of Assassination against such of them as would not calmly yield and retract their Subscription or yield obedience to the Roman Decree or Patents of Cardinal Barberin that Decree or those Letters Patents I mean so uncanonically injuriously and as to any right or tye of the Canons invalidly too deposing Father Francis Coppinger from his office of Provincialship over all the Franciscans of Ireland both at home in that Countrey and abroad in Forreign parts and the Irish Colledges in such parts and deposing him I say for no other cause but only That he was one of the late Remonstrants as he was formerly all along one also of the old Anti-Nuntiotists and that it was too too prejudicial both to the Roman Court abroad and its Emissaries at home in Ireland to see the Provincial Superiour of the most numerous Order in that Kingdom nay and together with him so many Local or Conventual Superiours called Guardians to be of that dangerous Sect of Valesian Remonstrants as Internuncio de Vecchiis called them For in that Second Tome you shall see the chief Anti-Remonstrants and above all the fiercest Leader of them all now lately in the year 1669. by that Court and questionless for advancing its designs and interests in these Kingdoms created Archbishop of one of the Metropolitical Sees of Ireland making use of even all the very most truly wicked Maxims of those now commonly stiled See the late Book intituled The Jesuits Morals The Jesuits Morals and of set purpose too making use of those Morals to suppress the said Remonstrants even as such But more especially to ruine both in name fame or esteem yea and if necessary in their very being and life too such of the same Remonstrants as should peradventure make or rather indeed have already made head or any resistance against him or the dictates of Rome to and by him Such persons I mean as knew full well and no less contemn'd his shameful ignorance and yet shameless impudence his lying genius and innumerable forgeries his arrogance unparallelâ—d and ambition without end his disloyal designs and spirit of revenge Gulielmus Tyrius and in fine his Religion and Devotion like those heretofore of the Senior of the Mountain that very zealous but withall both impious and barbarous and inhumane and Mahumetan Author Captain Prince of those devoted Eastern or Assyrian Assassines we read of in Gulielmus Tyrius And therefore in the said Second Tome you shall see the same Prelate and to the very same end of triumphing in the destruction of the Remonstrants shall see him particularly and singularly making use of all the most abominable and horrible doctrines As 1. Of those of Dicastillus Crassetus Danjou Albius Franciscus Amicus and so many others besides the grand but impudent Apologist all related by Ludovicus Montaltius Ep. 15. (a) See Ludovic Montalt in his Provincial Letters Ep. 15. and Willielmus Vendrockius in his Notes upon the same letter Notat 1. §. 1 2 3. 4. but especially 4. Edit Latina Colon An. 1658. and by Vendrockius in his Notes on that Epistle and by both there objected to the Jesuits for the lawfulness according to Conscience and Christianity of ruining your Adversaries by calumniating them i. e. by aspersing them with nay and by accusing them of all kind of invented and forged Crimes imaginable even Adultery Murther Heresie Treason c. And 2. Of those also either of (b) See the same Montalt Ep. 13. and the same Vendrockius ibid. Notat Unic §. 2 3 4 5. Lessius or Molina or Escobarius or Reginaldus or Baldellus or Fillutius or Desboys or the foresaid brave Amicus not to say any thing now of Peter Navarr Sayrus Gordon or Caramuel or several
Ressort pour a la diligence de ses Substituts y estre pareillement leues publiees signifiees aux Professeurs de Theologie dudit Ressort a ce qu'aucun n'en pretende cause d'ignorance Faict en Parlement a Rennes le 21. Aoust 1663. We shall hereafter see those six above inserted Sorbon Declarations whether French or Latin as you have them here in both Languages out of the French Copy translated into English by the Fathers of our National Irish Assembly But for as much as it may peradventure be objected by some of the more unreasonably exceptious and contentious Irish That I ought rather to give here an exact Copy of the very and only Paris Impression it self in Latin of those Acts of that University than of any of them elsewhere in France Printed I thought fit to obstruct also herein such endless wranglers and give that which was transmitted in the said year 1663. immediatly from Paris to London Acta Parisiensia Declaratio Facultatis Theologicae Parisiensis per illius Deputatos Regi exhibita circa theses de Infallibilitate Papae OCtavo Maii die Ascensionis D. N. Jesu Christi convenerunt domini deputati de Mince Morel Betille de Breda Grandin Guyard Guischard Gabillon Coguelin Montgailard in domum Facultatis juxta decretum pridie in Congregatione Generali factum ut convenirent de iis quae Regi Christianissimo declaranda erant ex parte Facultatis per os Illustrissimi ac Reverendissimi D. Archiepiscopi Parisiensis designati cum Amplissimo Comitatu Magistrorum ejusdem Declarationes Facultatis Parisiensis factae apud Regem super quibusdam propositionibus quas non nulli voluerunt ascribere eidem Facultati I. NOn esse doctrinam Facultatis quod summus pontifex aliquam in temporalia Regis Christianissimi Authoritatem habet imo Facultatem semper obstitisse etiam iis qui indirectam tantummodo esse illam Authoritatem voluerunt II. Esse doctrinam Facultatis ejusdem quod Rex nullum omnino agnoscit nec habet in temporalibus superiorem praeter Deum eamque suam esse antiquam Doctrinam a qua nunquam recessura est III. Doctrinam Facultatis esse quod subditi fidem obedientiam Regi Christianissimo ita debent ut ab iis nullo pretextu dispensari possint IV. Doctrinam Facultatis esse non probare nec unquam probasse propositiones allas Regis Christianissimi Authoritati aut Germanis Ecclesiae Gallicanae libertatibus receptis in Regno Canonibus contrarias v. g. quod Summus Pontifex possit deponere Episcopos adversus eosdem Canones V. Doctrinam Facultatis non esse quod summus Pontifex sit supra Concilium Oecumenicum VI. Non esse doctrinam vel dogma Facultatis quod summus Pontifex nullo accedente Ecclesiae consensu sit infallibilis Ita de verbo ad verbum Acta Parisiis Impressa Regi exhibita Mense May 1663. For so word by word is the Printed Copy of the very Latin Paris Impression of these Acts and Six Declarations presented to His Most Christian Majesty in the month of May 1663. XIII THE Reader may now questionless expect an account from me of some either learned or at least prudential debate amongst the Fathers in so grave an Assembly upon so solemn a Message as you have before seen to them on such a Subject from the Duke of Ormond His Majesties Lord Lieutenant then of that Kingdom But I am sorry I can give none at all either of the one or other sort nay nor of any either learned or unlearned or prudential or imprudential because of no kind of debate on that Message For indeed they took no more notice of it than if none at all had been sent them the leading men the Prelats and their numerous and sure sticklers over-awing and silenceing presently any that seemed inclining to move for paying as much as any even due or civil respect in such matters to the Lord Lievtenant or as much as to dispute the equity of what their Cabal had privately before the Congregation sate resolved upon viz. not to comply with His Grace in any material point but to sign and present a new unsignificant Formulary of their own i. e. That prepared to their hands and utterly decline That which His Grace expected from them yea not to suffer any mention at all to be as much as once made in publick of the former Remonstrance So powerfully influential on them was their Prophetical opinion of wonders to be expected by and for themselves done in that wonderful year of 1666. Nor did they seem at all to consider they might be as well defeated of all such their vain worldly carnal hopes of Empire Glory Pomp which they drove at as the Apostles were when before receiving the Holy Ghost in fulness on the 5th day they put this vain question Domine si in tempore hoc restitues Regnum Israel But to leave animadvertions so it was indeed That the Fathers did not once debate not only not the heads of the Procurators Speech but not a word of the very Message from his Grace Albeit they considered how to gratifie the Procurator himself for what was past i. e. for the liberty they had now enjoyed for so many years since 1662. through his endeavours and oblige him also for the future to continue the like endeavours for them as their Procurator And indeed I had scarce been an hour abroad hard by them walking in a Garden to take the fresh air after my long speech which together with the heat of the room made me retire a little when Father Francis Fitz Gerrald a Franciscan one of the Members of that Congregation as Procurator for the Vicar General of the Diocess of Cluan a vacant See in the Province of Casâ—el came with pleasing news to flatter me as he thought telling me the Congregation had voted two thousand pounds sterling to be Levied of all the Clergy of the Kingdom by several gales to be payed me towards my expenses hereafter in carrying on as general Procurator the great affair of their liberty and freedom as till then I had the four last years Him at that time I only answered that was not the point to be either resolved or debated Soon after the Primat himself came forth to me where I continued alone walking And he also would with the same consideration have wrought me to a more plyant temper I answered him to this purpose My Lord you should have known me better then to think to amuse me with the news of any such prepostrous either motions or resolves There will be time enough to consider of such inferiour matters when you shall have first done your duty in order to the King to my Lord Lieutenant and Protestant State Council Parliament which are and ought to govern you under God in all temporal affairs nay your duty to your Native Country and Irish Nation your Church and Catholick Religion and when you shall consequently
to suffer themselves to be carried on or hold to such rash resolves but to consider more seriously and maturely what the consequences might be For said I as to the First Either you intend to give the Lord Lieutenant full satisfaction by comprising plainly in your new Formulary the whole sense of the former Remonstrance or you do not intend any such matter but only to present him with some unsignificant Formulary not reaching home the points in controversie If the former to what purpose then would you vary from the words of that Remonstrance not only signed allready by a Bishop by so many other Divines and by so great a number also of the Nobility and Gentry all of your own Church and Communion but so solemnly presented to so graciously accepted by his Majesty so much to your ease and quiet hitherto promoted and so much also desired by His Majesty and Lord Lieutenant to have your further concurrence to it by your Manual Signature Do you intend to render your selves not without cause suspected by changing that form to work a Schysm amongst those of your own Communion and Nation To condemn all those who have Sign'd the first Formulary Do not you see it lawful for you in point of Conscience and Religion to approve what hath been done already for your ease by so many Noble Learned good Patriots but unlawful for them to fall from the justification of it Must the supercilious ungrounded Letters of Roman Courtiers or unconscionable unchristian ignorant censures of a Forreign University have such power amongst you Must Passion or even a mistaken interest rule you that are the Priests of God and carry you headlong to Schysm Besides consider the Lord Lieutenant will understand very well how it must follow That if in deference to the Roman Dictators you change as much as the words only of that Forme upon the same ground you must fall from the sense also when they shall presently send their next Letters condemning what you have done Lastly consider it is not against the words of the Remonstrance as any way less reverential that the Roman Court is or hath been hitherto incensed as you may see even in Cardinal Barberin's last Letters of April 24. this same year 1666 where he acknowledges the Remonstrance couch'd in bland oribus verbis but against the sense so that if you intend to give the sense of it in other words you must nevertheless incur their indignation If the later Do you think the Lord Lieutenant after so many years experimental knowledge of the meaning and purpose of such other several unsatisfactory Forms offered to him to decline that one which was and is satisfactory will not apprehend wherein you come short or think you he understands not English words or the material sense of them as well as you Think you that none of his Council can should himself not perceive the defectiveness Or think you that I my self could or ought to dissemble your imposing on His Grace if none else could see the Imposture But to what purpose do I question what you intend I know it Fathers And know you intend a Formulary coming short even in sense of all and each the very material passages of the Remonstrance even a Formulary that signifies nothing at all for His Majesties or Graces or Councils or Parliaments or even any particular persons either Protestants or Catholicks satisfaction as to the controverted points And therefore know 't will be rejected And what think you will the consequence be What in this conjuncture of publick affairs Erit novissimus error pejor priore And you will be certainly looked upon as men of profligate Principles and Designs and in due time also both considered and adjudged as men not worthy either of Protection or other Commiseration and not you alone but all the Clergy both Secular and Regular obeying you Nay which is yet more lamentable the very Lay-people observing you will be looked upon as men carried on blind-fold to or at least fitted and prepared for all pernicious designs when you are pleased to give the Signal As to the Second resolve or answer to my Second Querie concerning a Petition for Pardon I asked them whether they had forgotten the general either Rebellion or Insurrection which they pleased to call it of the year 1641 or the National Congregation of the Clergy Regular and Secular at Waterford under the Nuncio in the year 1646 or the other at Jamestown An. 1650 even after the Nuncio's departure or who in the mean time or rather indeed all along from 1641 to the year 1648 fought against both the Laws and those who had not only the Laws but the Kings especial Commission or who had been for the Nuncio's Censures against the Cessation who against both Peaces who for a Forreign Protectour who for the alienation of the Crown who for the design of Mac Mahon the Irish Jesuits Printed Book of Killing not only all the Protestants but even all such of the Roman Catholicâ— Irish who stood for the Crown of England and Rights of the King to Ireland and for choosing an Irish Native for their King Eligite vobis Regem vernaculum I asked them further did they indeed know none at all of the Irish Clergy yet surviving none of that very Congregation guilty of any of those matters or of any part of the Blood spilt in the late unhappy Wars or thought they it needless indeed to ask pardon of the King for such men in general or did they not know there was no Act of Indempnity yet for any such at least Clergy-men And then added Alas Fathers what a reproach will the very Presbyterians of Scotland whom you esteem the worst sort of Hereticks be unto you They have throughout all their Synods and Classes both unanimously and justly too agreed to beg the Kings Pardon and accordingly have beg'd and obtained it for their former actings And I have my self read their Petitions to that purpose in Print You that esteem your selves the only Saints for a holy Apostolical Religion will you come short of them in your duty Take heed Fathers that if you persist in your inconsiderate resolution I may not properly and truly for this very cause say to you that which our Saviour did in the Gospel to his own Countrymen the Jews who were yet the only people entrusted with the Oracles of God Amen dico vobis quoniam publicani peccatores precedent vos in Regnum Dei And here I expostulated again with the Bishop of Ardagh even before all the Fathers for his contrivance or at least very strange mistake both of my intention and words when I delivered my sense to his Lordship some two days before the Assembly sate first concerning such a Petition from them And repeated there in publick what passed between him and me on that Subject as you have it before at large Sect. 9. pag. 640. From hence I returned again to the former Subject of the
Paper they go therefore presently to stroaking and the far greater number is of the Procurotors side Doctor Patrick Daly Vicar General of Ardnagh and Judge Delegate for the Province of Vlster being in the very last place to stroak for the Fathers rose in order from the right hand where the Primat was first to the left and so going to the Table that stood before the Chairman they stroaked in presence of Witnesses and the said Doctor sitting on the upper forms next place but left hand to the Primat consequently had been the last in stroaking and seeing his turn very near stands up and applying himself to the Chairman speaks aloud That they had no liberty no freedom at all either to vote or to speak according to their own proper inclinations while the Procurator was present Whereupon I answered That although that Reverend Doctors Exception seemed by the consequence of it not only to reflect in a very high and injurious Nature on the inclinations of the House but even also to overthrow the essential constitution of it either by taking away the liberty even that very liberty he complained wanting of every individual Member to speak his mind or by excluding any one he pleased on such false pretence of Liberty from being present at voting or debating whenever a factious party or Cabal apprehended such a ones presence or reason to thwart their designes yet to the end that neither the said R. Doctor nor any other might at any time alledge such want of freedom through my staying in the House after I had been desired as much as by any one whosoever to withdraw I would therefore do what he desired and accordingly withdrew having first nevertheless told the Doctor that he spoke too late in order to that Vote in hand being every one mighe see 't was already carried of my side and even carried so by even very near two Thirds of the House on whatsoever side the Doctor himself would stroak But within half an hour after I had been gone forth I had cause to repent my civillity to the Doctor being I was sure the House would have sided with me against the Doctors so manifestly unreasonable exception and staid me within notwithstanding it if I had not my self chosen rather to recede For the adverse party seeing that when the votes or stroaks of either side were numbred those for a Committee were far more numerous presently take advantage of my absence lay their heads together and Cabal it so that in effect they frustrated the ends of that Vote by fixing on such Members for this Committee as were sure to be every one against the signing of those Three last Sorbon Declarations or if any of the other side were named or chosen to sit in the said Committee they were neither the men of parts were named for that side nor at all considerable for number in respect of those chosen for the other Whereof having notice presently brought me by some of the more Loyal Members even just then when the new chosen Committee had been withdrawn from the House to the Room appointed for them and having also a list of this Committee given me at the same time where I found the Bishop of Ardagh to be the first and consequently Chairman being he was the only Bishop amongst them I saw no other way left to prevent if possible their intended unhappy resolve and report but that my self as I was desired by others of the Congregation should assist the said Committee as being more specially concerned and above any one priviledged by all right and equity to be present at least in all such Committees relating to the main end of the Congregation But upon my entry into the Committee room the said Bishop of Ardagh meets me and professes in plain terms the Committee should not sit nor debate any thing while I were present pretending that being not by name specified by the Congregation I could not challenge the priviledge to sit or vote amongst them Having replyed many things hereunto at last I told his Lordship I would be content to be only present while they debated the matter and during that time to offer my reasons and answer objections to the contrary to the end they might the more prudently at last resolve and that when they came to a decisive Vote I would withdraw to the end that his Lordship nor any other should pretend that I awed them by my presence to any determination And until then surely they ought not to fear reason Yet all was to no purpose The Bishop was furiously bent to hinder any satisfaction to be given to the Lord Lieutenant in the point so powerful were the late Roman Letters with him and his own expectation to be therefore translated from the poorer See of Ardagh either to the Archbishoprick of Dublin or at least to the Bishoprick of Meath even which to him would be if not of greater dignity yet of greater emoluments than any other in the Kingdom I therefore seeing he was obstinate parted telling him I had done my part and called himself to witness that I had omitted nothing to prevent the evil which I foresaw their Resolutions would bring upon the Catholick Clergy and People of Ireland XVIII NExt day which was the 22. of the Moneth and 12. of the Congregation that excellent Committee headed and lead by Ardagh brought into the House even such a report as and no other then was expected from rash and factious Councellors who only sought for new Combustions at home and perferments from abroad for abusing so their Religion and Country And the Chairman of the House who had a chief hand in getting such men fix'd on for this Committee and by all arts both encouraging and edgeing them on to a negative Resolve against signing the other Three c of which Resolve by the Committee Ardagh made now report I say that hereupon the said Chairman of the House viz. Andrew Lynch Bishop of Kilfinuragh applauding them and taking thence occasion again to magnifie the French King and in order to what comparison every one understood and both consequently and earnestly perswading the whole House to acquiesce in what the Committee had resolved upon i. e. for not signing by any means any of those Three last Declarations of Sorbon as applied c the Congregation at last i. e. the major part amongst them unfortunatly is perswaded As soon as they had finally so determined the Procurator enters and upon some occasion given him sharply expostulates with the Chair-man Kilfinuragh even publickly before all the House for his carriage in the whole procedure telling him in plain terms it favoured so little either of a Loyal Subject or good Catholick much less of a Bishop that he shewed himself very unworthy of that Chair wherein he sate but wherein he should never have sate had I once suspected him to be so strangely disaffected to all duty justice truth or so byassed for Forraign
I had for some time intended concerning Father Finachty which was to inquire particularly of all the most judicious and knowing both Ecclesiasticks and Laicks throughout the several Diocesses of Ossory or Kilkenny Leighlin Kildare and Dublin where the said Finachty had some two years before in the time of his pass or permission publickly in his great meetings practised what he could and to enquire I say of them all what they knew or believed of him or his miracles or had seen done by him that should persuade them either the one way or other Therefore I did presently enquire all I could first at Kilkenny next in the Diocess of Leighlin then in that of Kildare fourthly in the Diocess of Dublin it self abroad in the Countrey all in my way back to that Capital City and in the last place within that same Metropolitical City again the second time and much more exactly than before Having in eight or nine dayes or thereabouts ended this enquiry and reflecting on the sum of what I found thereby I found my self as little satisfied as if not much more unsatisfied than before What troubled me most was That all the Church-Fathers whether Regulars of what Order soever or Secular Parish-Priests to whom I spake on the Subject and I speak to a great many having visited them of purpose for that end even every one of them seem'd against Finachty Others when I spoke of him shaking their heads and shrugging their shoulders Others in plain terms calling him a grand Impostor and covetous Wretch assuring me he did in effect no other thing really but what he did for himself i. e. Cheat all the World receive all was offer'd him in any place by some well-meaning but deluded People both rich and poor viz. Horses Watches Gold Silver pieces of woollen and linnen Cloth c. which said they argued him not to be a man of so much as ordinary either grace or vertue much less of extraordinary holiness or miraculous gifts Others and and to instance one viz. Father Dominick Dempsy a venerable old and experienced Franciscan of known repute affirming to me in the Convent of Clane That the said Finachty's very pretence of Exercising and dispossessing Devils was to their knowledge a lying Cheat of his own That his custom was to get a multitude together in some open field and there being encircled by them while every one of the simpler sort looked on him as an undoubted Wonder-worker to single out before them all some young Maid then to say she had been possessed by the Devil and if she denied it to box her and bang her lustily until she being so confounded before the People and to be rid of the shame by yielding to him had confessed what he pleased and answer'd all his Interrogatories as he would and led her himself to the answer during his Exorcising of her That he had done so hard by at Downadea where Sir Andrew Alymer lives within Two miles of the said Franciscan Convent of Clane and That one Maid so abused by him there came to my self to confession very soon after sayes the above Father Dominick accusing her self penitently That to be rid as soon as she could of the shame of being continued so publick a spectacle where every one believed him rather than her she had against her own knowledge and check of Conscience acknowledged her self possessed by the Devil and sufferâ—d him to practise on her as such even there publickly before the whole multitude and said what ever else he would have her say to his further Interrogatories and so abused all the People too whereas truly in her life she had never been troubled with Devil or other evil but was perfectly in health both of body and mind As for the Lay-persons some few I met that cryed him up and others that decryed him down as much In the Diocess of Leighlin a Gentlewoman told me in the presence of several others That she had her self gone Thirty mile to see him practice at Downadea aforesaid but if he came again to the Countrey she would not go Thirty paces nay nor over the Threshold to see his Miracles so little had she of cause in what she had already seen to believe any truth in them or expect any wonders from him Yet being come to the Lady Dongans at Castle-town and Lady Whites at Leixlip both places in the Diocess of Dublin and wherein Finachty had in his perambulatory Circuit appeared and practised I found the Ladies and other Gentlewomen had entertained a better opinion of him For some of those of Castle-town affirmed to me That he had with them there and themselves being present restored a Cripled man to going and a Blind man to seeing And some also of those of Leixlip told me That with themselves in that Town he had throughly quieted a Woman that before his coming was either possessed or mad as who did sometimes walk even on the very ridge of the Roofs of Houses Yet I must confess the Parish-Priest of Castle-town Father Gerrot Kevanagh seemed not throughly satisfied of the miraculousness of what was done there For sayes he to me Father Finachty used other help than that of Exorcising Praying Touching or bare Crossing He lay down upon and stretch'd out by pure force the knees of the Cripple so that he seem'd by pure force to have stretch'd his sinews or removed the impediment whatever it was that hinder'd him before from going and with his fingers too he forcibly opened the eye-lids of the blind man Besides sayes he neither the one nor the other was perfectly Cured by him whatever the means were the Blind saw not clearly nor did the Cripple go not even then at all so strongly and confidently but rather so as if he were to relapse again very soon as we have seen he hath already for the matter And this to the best of my remembrance was what the said Father Kevanagh told me at Castle-town as of his own knowledge for he said himself was present and saw all was done and the manner and method of doing whatever was done at Castle-town At last when I came to Dublin and there also enquired I found as little satisfaction or rather less for any matter done there by Father Finachty though still in Town since his late arrival and practising daily in one place or other I found the Protestants laughing to scorn all our Allegations of late Miracles in our Church Nay Dr. Loftus told me They had been once on a resolution to bring Finachty in to the Bishops Court for a Wizard or an Impostor and that himself had put them off till he had first spoken to me or at least until my Lord Lieutenant's return And from the Roman-Catholick Churchmen I understood that in those few dayes of my absence they themselves both Seculars and Regulars in a meeting held by them of purpose the Vicar-General Apostolick being present had been upon a debate to forbid Finachty
any thing And the Boy answering He could not and therefore again the second time prayed and practised over and then also the second time upon hanging of the same Handkerchief as before ask'd by the same Exorcist Whether he could see now any thing And the Boy returning again the foresaid Answer and every one at present observing by their own seeing or looking on the Boyes eye-lids there was nothing at all done no kind of change and Father Finachty thereupon i. e. so soon as the Boy had the second time answer'd He could see nothing at all very carelesly without any further ceremony or notice taken thereof giving over and turning from this blind Boy to some other of those by that expected their turn but had no visible disease or evil and practising upon them When I had so particularly observed this of that blind Boy what my Lord Clancâ—rty had long before told me presently came to my mind viz. That in his own presence at Thurls Finachty disown'd the power of Curing meer natural diseases It remained therefore now that I should see him practice on the young Girle that was said to be troubled with Spirits or Fairies For it growing late there was an ordinary Countrey woman standing by that came to me and pray'd me to speak to him for her Daughter a young well-complexion'd Girle of about Thirteen or fourteen years old that they might be dispatch'd in time as having two Miles to go out of Town that Evening to Crumling a Village near Dublin where she said she dwelled I ask'd the woman what her daughter ail'd she answer'd That lately her Girle having gone abroad into the Fields she returned home much troubled with some apparition of Spirits she had there seen and continued ever since troubled with them especially at Night This occasion I embraced the more willingly that I doubted not his extraordinary gift if any he had consisted only in Exorcizing Spirits or Curing such distempers as commonly proceeded or at least were supposed to proceed from such evils Spirits or Fairies though at the same time I considered well enough not only that there nothing was visible to nor perceptible by any other of us there present of any such evil afflicting that young Maid but also that meer imagination and heat of blood or some other accident distempering her brain might have made her apprehend the trouble of Spirits where all the evil was from other causes and such as were natural in her own body or constitution However because I thought withall she was such a sort of Demoniack as all the very worst of those in that Countrey then commonly reputed Demoniacks by him and his Admirers I was desirous to see on this occasion the method of his practice on such And therefore pray'd him to turn to that Maid and examine both her self and Mother and then proceed with her as he thought fit because it was growing late and they had a longer way to go than others that Night He yields readily and seems glad of the opportunity when I told him she was said to be troubled with Spirits And after some few questions put by him to the Mother in publick before us all he says he must speak in private to the Girl and thereupon takes her away with him to another more private Room where none was but he and she together and there remains so for a pretty while I suppose examining her self more strictly though it seemed somewhat strange to me that he did not at least desire me to goe along with him and be present all the while at least in the same room at any even whatsoever such private examination the rather that I was the only Church-man with him that whole afternoon At last he calls for me and with me as many of the rest go as pleased or could well stand in the small room where he was We found the young Girl placed by him in a Chair just against the Window that is her face turn'd thither and the Casement opened Then he stands over her falls to his formal Adjurations and after he had Sign'd her several times with the Cross on the head and fore-head within a while asks her where she felt her evil and upon her answer that in her neck or shoulder arme or side c. pursues it still from limb to limb with Crossing that part of her body and continuing still his Exorcism Then he demands again and again was she well yet or did she feel it elsewhere Some time she answered she was well and felt nothing any more but then he box'd her and told her she lyed and then also but after some further Adjuration by him she crys here or there viz. in some other part of her body where he pursues it in the same method till he comes down to her feet and then rubs hard or rather strikes or stroaks hard her foot with his own over it in a sloping manner so that her toe was the last he touched with his sole as pretending to drive out the Devil from that last habitation or retreat of his into her toe Then bids her look stedfastly through the Casement or opening of the Window and tell what she had seen there and how many go out that way And if she demurr'd upon her answer threatens her and so leads her to confess she had seen some go out Then again he asked her what more did she see or did she not see a great Mountain far of and a great fire upon it and a great number of black fellows fighting and killing and chopping one another in pieces and throwing also one another into the fire when she had answered yes then he renews more vehemently his Conjurations Wherein as I took particular notice he used even from the beginning of his Exorcisme to insert a special command to a hundred thousand Devils enjoyning them to come from Hell and carry away that evil Spirit companion of theirs or those many such that possessed or molested this Creature of God and to leave her thenceforth free from their vexation c. But it seem'd nevertheless even by his own confession in that very place and time before and to us all present that some of those evil Spirits at least of those pretended by him to have possessed her continued still extream refractory and stubborn For after he had tyred himself and well nigh wearied the beholders at least me I am sure it growing very late and he having once more asked the Girl whether she did not find her self well and she answering yea he told her she lyed and then converting himself to the beholders but particularly to the Mother declar'd she was strongly yet Possessed she must come or be brought to him again at better leasure and that he must take much more pains with her than he could for that present Whereupon all parted How well satisfied others were I know not but sure I am I was my self much troubled at all I had
conveniently be However bid him be ready and let him know we shall be ready for him within two or three days Thus my Lord Lieutenant Much about that same time Father Finachty sent and came also himself to let me know he had now stayed six whole weeks in town expecting that Licence and occasion adding that he could stay no longer for it but would depart to Connaught if not suddenly granted He withal soon after and early in the morning sends me word that he would say Mass privately in my lodging and accordingly comes and says in a private Oratory I had there my self serving him at Mass When he had done and was come down and sate at a fire for 't was Winter and cold weather ready to drink his mornings draught with a toast which was a preparing for him there he complaining of weakness and drowth by reason of the continual sweat every night whereunto he had been for some days before and then subject in comes to that same room unexpectedly Sir William Petit Knight a learned acute Physitian and great Traveller and with him an other ingenious young Gentleman Mr. Robert Southwel * * He is now Sir Robert Southwel Knight and one of the Clerks of the Council at White-Hall hath been moreover lately Envoy Extraordinary both to Portugal Castile as last of all to Flanders likewise for some years a Traveller in other parts of Europe both of them Protestants and both of my acquaintance I having known nothing of their coming or cause thereof did think they only came to see my self as at least Mr. Southwel used sometimes to do But it appeared after that Sr. William Petit was commanded by the Lord Lieutenant to go together with one Doctor Yarner an other Protestant Physitian and find me out and tell me how the sick persons were now in town and all other matters ready of their side and bid me therefore give notice thereof to Father Finachty that he might fix his day his place and company he would have present of his side Now because Sr. William could not meet then with Doctor Yarner he brought along with him Mr. Southwel who both could shew him the way to my Lodgings and was willing enough to come upon such an occasion which suspended the thoughts of many This was the cause of their coming as my Lord Lieutenant himself told me after at night for they did not as being surprized with a suddain curiosity when they saw one with me and that to their question asking me aside who it was I answered he was a person they would perhaps desire to be acquainted with even the famed Wonder-working Priest Father James Finachty For I had no sooner told them so then without any further reply or Ceremony they both go to the fire where he sate and sitting down by him who seemed at first to take no great notice of them Sir William Petty being next him begins to speaks to him in this manner or at least I am sure to this purpose Father I have of a long time heard much of you and lately much more than formerly For my own part I am on this occasion and for what concerns Religion as a piece of white Paper You may write in my Soul what you please as to the way of worshipping God if you attest that way by plain Miracle And therefore if you do by your Prayer remove this Wart which you see on my finger and thereupon shewed that finger of his hand and the Wart thereon I will presently declare my self of your Religion So soon as I had heard Sir William out I thought it high time for me to interpose as knowing his acuteness in Philosophy and Father Finachty's dulness even in matters of Divinity And therefore I desired Sir William to consider better of what he proposed and how unsutable it was to the ordinary custom we read of Saints invoking God and applying themselves immediately to him for a favour above nature to such as desired their intercession This was or only or doubtless customarily to ease them and cure them of some disease or evil which was an affliction to them and could otherwise have no help for it in their own power That this Wart could not be said to be such because either he could easily remove it by many sorts of natural applications known well to himself or if he could not that yet it brought neither pain nor deformity nor other inconveniency with it And therefore such demand of his side and such attempt of Father Finachty could be no less in either than a manifest temptation of God even that kind of sin which Divines with much reason teach to be very mortal in it self and abominable to God Besides let me tell you Sir William said I adding to what I now immediately related that unless you bring along with you a great Faith in God and very pious disposition of your Soul you can expect no Wonders to be done for your sake not even there where otherwise the subject matter could not be denyed to be fit enough Read St. Mark the Evangelist * * Et non polerat ibi virtutem ullam facere nisi paucos infirmos impositis manibus curavit mirabatur propter incredulitatem eorum Marc. 6. vers 5. 6. c. 6. and you shall find that not even our Saviour Christ himself could work Wonders in his own Country where the people were incredulous and that he therefore admired their incredulity to be such as hindred him This I added purposely because I would forestall his further tempting of that weak man Father Finachty and obviate his consecutions to be drawn from any failure he should peradventure see And it indeed together with what I said before made Sir William so considerative that he not only quitted insisting on the removal of his Wart but desired to read that Chapter and passage in Mark which I alledged and accordingly did presently read it even in the Protestant English Bible which I called for of purpose to satisfie him Which being over he recollects himself again and attacks anew Father Finachty telling him That he had in truth an infirmity was very troublesome to him I am purblind Father says he I can read at such or such a distance very near my eyes but cannot a word at any other wherein others do If you will cure me of this troublesome infirmity I shall humbly and religiously acknowledge as I ought Gods both merciful and wonderful hand therein I had by chance walked over towards the Window on the other side of the room when and as soon as Sir William had ended these few words of his later proposal But sooner then I was half way returned back I saw Father Finachey first standing up then saying to Sir William Let us try and then also immediately advancing a few steps and kneeling his back being turned to them and his face to the wall and consequently by private prayer to
must needs without other pretence than those already given by you depart immediatly out of town for Connaught and consequently disappoint the great expectations you would needs breed in others hitherto of what you would do in case of your Licence granted then I pray withal consider whether all the world both Protestants and Catholicks will not justly hold you to be a meer Impostor and to have been no better at any time past since you first pretended your Miraculous gift I assure you my Lord Lieutenant himself hath already this very evening said so much to me of his own judgment of you in case you depart on any such pretence of your own sickliness or what ever else you please before you appear now and endeavour at least to perform of your side To this discourse of mine Father Finachty at last answered He would then stay and appear without further delays And I for my part was better pleased he should do so than not whatever issue he had therein for I thought it less harm he were reputed a mad frantick man than a knavish Hypocritical Impostor But he had no sooner declared that his final fixed resolution as now and as I thought it to be than he presently added O that I had again those two Possessed Women which the Jesuits brought to me the other day This not only troubled me anew as I was carelesly walking the room before him but extorted from me this return O Father Finachty would you had believed or yielded to me when at our first acquaintance I told you freely my own opinion of you was That if any or whatever gift you had was only that of an Exorcist i. e. only that of helping sometimes peradventure some persons against Witchcraft Possession or Obsession but not any one from Natural diseases proceeding from other causes However yea and notwithstanding I see not why you should desire those very two Women at such a publick Tryal being you have not Cured them albeit you have Exorcized them and cannot be certain whether your Luck even so much as with or on them can be better there than elsewhere it hath been yet if they be to be found at all in town or near you shall have them brought to you All which objections or doubts of mine notwithstanding he concluded again and assured me That by God's grace he would not fail to appear and put matters to an issue even on those very same diseased persons whatever they were that were prepared by the foresaid Protestant Physitians On this assurance given so by him I took leave with him for that night not doubting of the sincerity of his promise and left him there in my own Chamber and bed leaving also one to attend and serve him if he had wanted any thing and went my self to lye in the private Oratory that was in the same house over his head But I was scarce out of my bed when unexpectedly even by the break of day I saw him even also as accoutred for a march come up into that room where I lay and telling me in plain terms I must excuse him in that finding himself not well and having been all night in so great a sweat that he throughly wet the sheets as I might find says he if I pleased to look he must and would be gone out of town presently and take his journey to Connaught praying me withal to excuse him to the Lord Lieutenant and assure His Grace that so soon as he recovered his health and strength he would not fail to come if I called him and perform what was either expected from him or himself had offered It may well be thought how concerned I was in this plain discovery or rather in the consequential reflections thereof upon the Roman-Catholicks that for so many years had suffered themselves to be so strangely deluded by such a man For I saw 't was obvious to any man that he could not be very ill nor wanted health nor strength sufficient to Exorcize Pray and Cross infirm persons nor consequently to appear at or in that publick Tryal offered by himself who could nay where and when he might otherwise freely choose would needs venture even in the beginning of Winter on so long a journey on Horse-back from Dublin to Loghreogh i. e. about an hundred English miles yet seeing clearly it was to no purpose to object any more to or expostulate with him on that Subject I only answered That I was sorry it was so with him that he could not perform his great undertakings and that I thought nevertheless it was very fit he excused himself by Letter to the Lord Lieutenant and gave therein to his Grace that assurance he then gave me viz. of returning to perform as soon as he had found himself recovered as to his health and strength But he prayed to be excused in this also alledging that he was not so great a Master of his Pen as that he would presume to write to the Kings Lieutenant Father Finachty said I you both have a legible nay fair Character and can write good sense when you please for I have seen some of your Letters And being it is so and that such your suddain departure now may appear if not incredible at least very disadvantageous to your self unless you excuse it in some probable way to His Grace I pray write to Him under your own hand and with your own Pen what you say hear to me for excusing it No he would not venture to write Why then said I if you be diffident of your own stile or phrase at least give me leave to indite your sense in such a Letter and then transcribe it your self adding or substracting what you please Nor that neither by any means would he but insisted still on my own excusing him by word of mouth Well then Father Finachty said I being you will needs so unexpectedly go and will not so much as write a few lines to excuse your self on such an occasion Let me at least perswade you to go directly your journey to Connaught and place there you intend to abide in without diverting in your journey either to the right or left hand or holding at all any publick Meetings or giving any Fields for that is your own phrase to People or so much as practising in private on any sick person whatsoever until first you have for some weeks recollected your self in spiritual exercises i e. in retirement into and examination of your own heart and both Humiliation of your self before God and hearty Repentance too for any thing truly chargeable on you before him if but peradventure some vanitie you took in some gift appearing at any time heretofore to have been bestowed on you Which advice if you observe I doubt not you will find more spiritual comfort and true advantage thereby then you have hitherto found by all your desired Fields Nor consequently doubt but your eyes will then be opened more clearly than of
one at least in exchange of his own so little poor and contemptible See amidst the Rocks of Burrin that he never desired to visit or see it And James Dempsy the Vicar-General Apostolick of Dublin and Capitulary of Kildare no less had long'd for a new Creation i. e. the Episcopal Title and Mitre of either See And John Burk the Apostolical Vicar of Cashil had been likewise a daily Expectant of a new Bull whereby to be created Archbishop of that See by the sollicitation of his Agent in the Court of Rome Father William Burgat who yet it seems was more successful for himself than for the said Burk that employ'd and maintain'd him there for so many years And the Provincials of the Dominicans and Franciscans John O Hart and Antony O Docharty had been vying one another a long time who should for the like ends i. e. a Bull and Mitre or Episcopal Title ingratiate himself most at Rome by what arts soever even by denigrating each one the other And the Augustinian Provincial Stephen Lynch had likewise not been without hopes of the like preferment or at least continuation in his office of Provincialship being he kept his own Order so entire from signing the controverted Remonstrance that not one of them did sign it save only Father John Skirret the Prior of Galway and who therefore hath been ever since under persecution And again the foresaid Bishop of Ardagh had surely promised himself if by others too he had not been assured of such matters indeed as had no motive of Religion or Catholick Faith in them when about the beginning of the Session as he and I on some occasion walked together in the street near the Convention house and to his question viz. Whether if they did not sign the controverted Remonstrance His Grace the Lord Lieutenant would suffer the Bishops depart for France I had answer'd Yes without any doubt he presently and over-passionately replyed Then it shall never be sign'd I have a sure and safe and commodious harbour in France even 300 Pistols a year besides a House and Garden expecting me there and therefore I will not sign nay will be glad to be turn'd away for not signing And lastly That Father Nicholas Nettervil the Jesuite Doctor of Divinity could not but seem to me as far transported as any other with downright earthly considerations without any mixture at all of heavenly or spiritual regards yea and peradventure somewhat higher flown that way than most others even of the more Leading Members when after he had in full Congregation refused to submit to the decisions of the House for what concern'd the Jesuits continuing or abstaining from further use of the pretended priviledges of exempted Regulars wherein they prejudice the Secular Clergy on this accompt That he was no member of the Irish Province of his Order but of that which is called the Province of France and yet would be and continue a member of this National Congregation he withall soon after but whether also after his and Kilfinuragh's publick Speeches magnifying so speciously and vehemently the French King yea expresly endeavouring to shew as of one side the necessity or at least equity of making even all the six late Sorbon Declarations as they were in terminis meant only of and directed to that King so of the other to prove even manifest iniquity in the application of them although mutatis mutandis or at least of the three latter of them to our English King or whether before this occasion And whether in the House when all the members were present or not I do not remember now determinately and certainly But yet remember very well it was during the Session and in the presence of many of the Fathers amongst whom I was my self one hearing his words and observing his gesture and no less admiring his boldness at such a time when we were in open War with both Holland and France That he should dare then I say to carry himself so rashly in publick before company as first laying hand on the hilt of his Sword for he commonly wore one and certainly that day did then presently and in a braving manner to say I will never lay this Sword of my side till I go to France and see the Most Christian King 4. That if the Reader will be further satisfied as to the point of the several interests and ends not only of these more leading men but of all other the Members in general whether leading or not leading of that Congregation he may be pleased to look back to the First Part Sect. ix x. from pag. 21. to pag. 41. where they are at large both delivered and answer'd 5. And lastly That notwithstanding all or any thing hitherto said any where in this Book of the true genuine apparent either general or specifical causes or even of some one particular and individual such cause or motive as proper to any one person and I mean said as if such cause or causes had been the only true original Spring whence the final inflexible and fatal obstinacy of the Congregation did proceed yet I must after all acknowledge That I am my self now as I have been still from the very time of that Congregation more than sufficiently convinced There was truly one other but indeed latent cause or end and that both peculiar to one only of those leading Members and peradventure wholly unknown to any of the rest which had at least as great an influence on the original contrivement and fierce management of the Resolves of the said National Congregation as any of the former apparent causes if not rather much greater though wholly hidden or secret influence than they altogether had And yet being this hath been so latent a cause or end that I my self could not so much as once suspect or guess at it until by meer chance a few dayes ere the Congregation dissolved relating to a certain person somewhat of my trouble to see one of those leading men so violently declaring himself and furiously hurrying others on against all reason I had the secret told me with such clear circumstances and that too by one who had all the best means to know them that I was convinced and being it is still nevertheless I hope as to others a secret for me I am sure it is I cannot give my Reader any other knowledge of it not even in general not even without reflecting so much as indirectly on any particular person than what he may understand by my assuring him That if he please to read the ΑÎΕΚΔΟΤΑ or Historia Arcana of Procopius Caesariensis whether Alemannus or Eichelius be in the right concerning that History and therein consider well what kind of thing that was to which this Author attributes not only the original influencing of Justinian in all those wicked counsels and prodigious evils related of or ascribed unto him whether truly or falsely * Though I think them very unjustly
those words our Supream Lord and further because of the genius and temper and so many several interests of the men that composed that Congregation and Interests also though in some or many respects divided yet all through pre-occupation ignorance and a perverse obstinacy conspiring together in the main of not speaking their conscience plainly either pro or con for these reasons I say this acknowledgment from them and in these words alone of the Kings Supremacy in Temporals or to speak more properly as I would fain to the purpose of the Kings temporal Supremacy or supream politick and civil Power with the Sword corporal or carnal if I may so speak over all persons subject to him and in all causes indifferently wherein corporal force or co-action is used is lyable to as many deceitful evasions and interpretations as any of the former in that recognition or of those that follow after in their confessions or promises And yet herein they need not find out any way that hath not been chalked before them by some of their sophistical Predecessors these sixty years It is but to pursue their steps and tell the people as several of their chief Speakers and Interpreters have already by clear expressions given sufficient cause to expect they will when they find it convenient that he is acknowledged Supream for the present but not so for the future That both for the present and future he may be acknowledged Supream but their meaning may be and is That he is and may be so de facto not de jure in fact only in actual possession and by force only not by right That he may be so by right also but by such right only as the laws of the Land can or do give him not by such right as the laws of the Church may much less by that right which the laws of God and nature have not given him in those contingencies above Finally as they leave themselves a latitude by the former answers notwithstanding this recognition of Supream in those bare words only or any thing else in this Remonstrance to maintain alwayes the saâ—rilegiousness of the Remonstrance of 61. I speak according to the Censure of the Lovaine Divines of that Remonstrance of 61. and even upon their grounds of humane right which the Popes pretend to the kingdoms of England and Ireland and which those Divines of Lovaine assert unto the See of Rome viz. Those of a pretended submission donation prescription feudatary title given and forfeiture made so they retain the like notwithstanding this acknowledgement here notwithstanding all said before and after To maintain no less stiffely when they shall think fit the other pretended but divine Supream both Temporal and Spiritual right of Popes as well to the Realms of England and Ireland as to all and over all at least Christian Kingdoms and Kings in the world For they will and may say according to their principles which they flatly denied to quit by any sufficient expression or indeed rather denied to meddle with at all or declare themselves in any manner on the point according to such I say they will plead when they shall think it may be done prudently That they do not here acknowledge the King their Supream Lord but in relation only to or in rank and order only of such Lords as are meerly temporal not by any means absolutely or without such relation not at all in relation to such Lords as have a power absolutely divine or supernatural and is composed by God himself both of temporal and spiritual natural and supernatural and is immediatly given by Him to them over the whole earth at least the parts of it that are Christian and also at least in some extraordinary cases Of the emergencie of which cases that they themselves alone I mean such Lords are Judges appointed by Him and that such Lords are the Popes only and certainly they will say And consequently that by no general acknowledgement of a meer temporal â—upremacy in a King by a Catholick it can be presumed he any way intended to relate to that divine spiritual supernatural extraordinary Attribute Power or Supremacy of the Popes even in temporal matters or intended any way to deny it For it is a maxim with Canonists that in a general expression is not to be understood that which the Expressor would not specifically grant were it demanded of him in specie much less that which being demanded of him specifically he of set purpose refuses to express it so though he write not under his hand that specifical demand or denial but passes both by I will say nothing at present of the relative or comparative form of this recognition which they choose rather then that positive and absolute one of the former Remonstrance of 61. Though I be sure that that of 61. being absolute and positive for it is worded thus We do acknowledge and confess your Majesty to be our true and lawful King supream Lord and rightful Soveraign of this Realm of Ireland and of all other your Majesties Dominions puts us not to an inquiry after the manner or measure of the truth lawfulness rightfulness or supremacy of his Titles of his Kingship Lordship or Soveraignty over or to all his other Dominions or those are called his besides Ireland as this of the Congregation must them that please to understand it by the rules of Sophistry or Subtilty Whereby they gave cause to suspect they would have their own relative or comparative form understood by such as listed to understand or interpret it so when they found it could be done prudently For they would have their 's not to be positive at all but relative as you see in their own words which say only thus We acknowledge your Majesty to be our true and lawful King supream Lord and undoubted Soveraign as well of this Realm of Ireland as of all other your Majesties Dâ—minions Now the Querie is how well they acknowledge or would have others to acknowledge him True and lawful King supream Lord and undoubted Soveraign of all other his Majesties Dominions How well of Tangier Jamaica or France c And if his Majesties title to these or either of them be uncertain with them or by many or some of them not accounted good or just at all whether by this relative form they choose of purpose they declare or acknowledge his title to Ireland to be any better The liberty they leave themselves by their manner of expression here to have recourse for interpretation when they please to their logical Sophistry and make this acknowledgement sometimes and to some persons a modal Proposition at other times and to other persons a Proposition not modal but only de extremo modificato gives them the trouble to answer these Queries As in the impartial understanding Reader it and what is here said thereupon may work this perswasion That notwithstanding this their kind of owning and acknowledging his Majesty they are still
which they make or intend to make there if any at all indeed they make or intend together with so many quibbles and fallacies yet this Remonstrance at least as from them does no way bind them after such declaration of the Pope to hold as much as to such however inconsiderable acknowledgements or promises Fourteenth Exception That further yet as from them and without relation to any such matter declared by the Pope it leaves them alwayes at liberty upon another account not to hold to their said however inconsiderable acknowledgments and promises Videlicet upon account of their maximes of extrinsick probability or of their perswasion of the lawfulness of changeing opinions and of practising too according to the contrary opinion of others and consequently of practising against all their acknowledgments ownings Declarations promises and oaths in this their own Remonstrance according to the doctrine of such Catholick Authors as maintain all oathes of Allegiance made to a Heretick Prince to be rendred absolutely void by the very Canons of the Roman Church in corpore Juris Canonici Fifteenth Exception That finally as from them it leaves them still at liberty to say they framed and subscribed it according to the very largest rules of equivocation and mental reservation and with as many and as fine abstractions exceptions constructions restrictions and distinctions too especially that of the specificative and reduplicative sense as any the most refined Authors and most conversant in such matters Canonists or Casuists or School-divines could furnish them with in time of need And these being the most obvious material Exceptions against this Remonstrance of 66. the Reader may judge of their reasonableness or unreasonableness as he please if he hath already or when he shall have read through not only the former part of this Second Treatise but both the first and second part of the first Treatise of this Book To which if he add the reading also of all the other four he may without any question judge the better of these Exceptions whether they be well grounded or not THE THIRD TREATISE CONTAINING The three propositions of Sorbon considered as they are by this Dublin Congregation applyed to His Majestie of Great Britain and themselves And what they signifie as to any further or clearer assurance of their fidelity to the King in the cases controverted HAving given in my Narrative the occasion upon which and the persons by whom after a long dispute these propositions with the other three of the six late of Sorbon were first offered to be assented to and signed in a distinct or different instrument or paper from that of their Remonstrance and how after those very persons hindered the signing of the other or last three and further in my exceptions to instances against and observations upon that Remonstrance of theirs upon their wording of and meaning by and in the several passages or clauses all along having noted their voluntary and contradictory omissions of what was necessary and what was both expected and demanded from them on the particular points and noted their abstractions reservations exceptions equivocations illusive expositions and yet no less if not more destructive constructions I need not say much here to shew the unsignificancy of the said three propositions I mean as to the publick end for which these Assembly subscribers would impose on others or flatter themselves they were subscribed by them For it will be obvious and easie to any understanding man that shall first read those fore-going small Tracts of mine to see evidently there can be no more assurance of the present or future faith of those Congregational subscribers or from their subscriptions to the said three additional propositions than was besorâ— intended by them in or could be from their sole Remonstrance taken according or in that sense of theirs which I have so declared at large I confess that in the state primitive or in that of the innocency of Christians these alone peradventure might have been sufficient to that end Nay and at this very present are very significant as proceeding from and applyed by the Sorbon-faculty and Gallican Church to their own most Christian King and themselves To wit amongst a People and in a Country where no other doctrine is taught or believed or as much as scarce thought upon if not by a very few privâ—tly in corners but that which they have learned from the express Canons of their own ancient Councils and of that particularly of Paris well-nigh a thousand years since in pursuance of the Tradition of their yet more ancient Fathers all along to the Apostles of Christ and Christ himself That kingly power is immedietly from God alone as from the primary and only efficient cause and no way depending of the Church or People Where the practice was so frequent when occasion was offered to resist the usurpations and incroachments of Popes on the Jurisdiction Royal and to oppose and contemn their Sentences of Deposition Deprivation Excommunication and other attempts whatsoever of the See of Rome against their Kings Parliaments or People Where Pithou's most Catholick and voluminous Books of the natural and genuine liberties of the Gallican Church and so many other great Catholick Writers on that subject are extant and frequent and conversant with them daily Where finally that King in their opinion is both their own and really most Christian and themselves of the same Religion with him and by him all their interests both religious and civil spiritual and temporal in the greatest latitude and height they can desire maintained exactly I confess that from such men of such principles in such a Country and to such a Prince these three Propositions barely as they are worded might peradventue do well enough But to conclude hence or that because the French King was pleased or satisfied with them so as coming from and presented to himself by Sorbon His Majesty of Great Britain our Gracious King must be or should be in our present case and on the points controverted amongst us pleased or satisfied with the self same resolutions or propositions aâ—d in the self same words only the application changed without any further addition explanation or descent to particulars and so pleased with them as coming from us were a very great fallacie and very great folly The cases are different in all particulars And therefore it must be consequent in reason that more particulars may and should be required and in other words that is in words expresly and sufficiently declaring as well against all equivocations and other evasions as particularly to the particular points in our own case The design having been as it is and must be yet to get us to resolve and declare satisfactorily and our own Interest and that of our Religion too especially as now in Ireland leading us thereunto But alas the private Interests of some very few men of that Congregation blew durst in the eyes of all the rest so as they
Confederates fallen to such an ebb and sad condition our two most flourishing Armies defeated and brought to nothing our quarters over-run by four several Enemies burnt wasted and for no less than a third part of what was ours intirely even last year now made tributary our own Forces of the Vlster Army devouring what was left by the Common Enemy and in Hostile wise destroying all places which by others were untouch't and which before this Cruelty were able to and really did support the most considerable proportions of the charges of War our Exchequer hence both empty and altogether hopeless to get in monies from a Countrey so totally exhausted and so lamentably ruined our expectations of great Sums and helps from beyond Seas being turn'd to wind smoke and despair for any thing hath yet appeared or if some little quantity be come it being feared that it should be given for maintaining sides and supporting Factions against the Government as we have seen in effect proved no common Granaries for the Publick and but very small store of grain with any private persons in so great a dearth of Corn as Ireland hath not seen in our memory and so cruel a Famine which hath already killed Thousands of the poorer sort and therefore no possibility to keep an Army in the field though no other want had been but that of bread and if Enemies were as hitherto coming on us from the four Winds lastly so much dissention such distance and such malignant hatred 'twixt our selves within the body of the Confederates as the wiser sort did not without cause conceive to be too ominous and to weaken us no less than could the strongest Army of our Enemies an ebb so low and a condition so sad of the Confederates that according to humane hopes there was no likelihood without a Cessation with some one Party they might subsist this Summer either by a defensive War in all the Provinces or an offensive in one and a defensive in the rest Yet by the Cessation they might be so enabled that according to much probability Religion might be planted this season where Heresie is most insolent and powerful of any place in the Kingdom For if that Party of the Confederates which now opposeth the Cessation were obedient and together with the Forces of the Marquess of Clanrickard drawn by this Cessation from a Neuter to a Confederate or at least to a social War against His Majesties Enemies and of the Lords Taffe Preston and Inchiquin nay should Inchiquin stay at home and give no help but only forbear annoying us should we say the foresaid Lords and Forces march against the Scots and Dublin who sees not but by the help of this Cessation Faith and Religion might in many places be planted this Summer on the ruines of Heresie And hence it is That Thirdly it is clear The Cessation is so far from disadvantaging Religion as there could hardly be a better way thought of to further it Whence followeth That not only necessity which hath been now declared but also utility or great advantage gotten by it for the Cause doth warrant it since by the Articles Inchiquin himself with his victorious Army is bound to display these Colours for us which so many times we groaned to see against us More indeed than the nature of a Cessation draweth along with it and if it be taken together with the former benefit of the second and fifth Article and with the care had that the Lord of Inchiquin's Protestant Party should not enjoy the like benefit or liberty of either their Function or Religion in our quarters more it is plain to the honour and profit of our Faith than the greatest and most Catholick Kings and Emperours performed in the like occasions Certainly we know the King of Spain hath to pass over the present Peace so long expected and so much spoken of almost in our own memory concluded a Truce of Twelve years with the Hollanders (r) Auctarium Chron. ad annal Barronii ad an 1609. and yet no such liberty obtained for the Catholick Religion within their quarters Nay we know That the most powerful and most virtuous Charles the V. King of Spain and Emperour of Germany though his Kingdoms were so vast his Forces both at Sea and Land so great his Treasures so inexhaustible and himself so victorious yet to provide for the safety of his Estate rather than to hazard too much with the Hereticks of Germany (s) Idem ad an 1547. 1552. was contented to give them by express Article and Act of Parliament the free exercise of their Religion and Function even of that Religion which was presented by the Lutherans and is called Confessio Augustana throughout all Germany (t) Yet liberty of Religion is the very worst of evils most repugnant to and destructive of Catholick Faith and of all Civil Government and only out of meer necessity to be permitted Becan in Suâ— de fid Haer. ser c. 16. q. 4. con 2. 3. by vertue of which Act and of other such Acts made by his Successors the Lutherans and Catholicks on several hours use their Rites in the same Churches in many Towns of Germany c. even to this present day We know moreover That Matthias Caesar (u) Knolls in his Turk Hist in Achâ— Gospar Landorp in the year 1606. articled with the Protestant rebellious Hungarians That from thenceforth it should be lawful for every man throughout the Kingdom of Hungary to have the free use of his Religion and to believe what he would And in the year 1609. for to purchase his own peace and safety of his Empire gave free exercise of Religion and delivered the University of Prague to the rebellious Sectaries on the 12th of July and several Churches in Austria and Moravia to the Hereticks then in Arms (x) See at large in the Turkish History in Achmat fol. 1290. the pacification made with the Protestant States of Moravia and Austria and fol. 1295. the pacification made with the Bohemians on the 12th of March We know lastly That Henry the III. King of France was constrained through the dangers otherwise threatning his State to condescend to a worse Peace than any of these mentioned with the Huguenots at large set down in Surius (y) Surius ad an 1576. And that Henry the IV. seeing his Flour-de-lucis thrown into a Labyrinth of Troubles by the same Hereticks to provide for the good of his Kingdom by quietness confirmed unto them their liberty of Religion gave stipends to their Ministers out of the Publick Treasury and certain strong holds as a pledge for performance Yet no Censures issued against these Catholick Princes or Subjects for such Agreements no Declaration made by His Holiness or by the Clergy against them but Churches open to them alwayes and Sacraments administred Which questionless could not be if His Holiness if the Prelates of those Kingdoms if the Clergy and Universities did
for such proceedings and Censures cannot be either justly or validly but from persons who are Judges in the case and whose Jurisdiction is not suspended in the same cause Hence is manifest That the Lord Nuncio â—s renovation and confirmation in his Apostles refutatories of his former sentence his execution of the Interdict and all other his proceedings against any of the Confederates on this ground and since the Appeal are unjust and invalid for what either concerns Conscience or the Canons do determine Which is further proved out of cap. Dilectis filiis 55. de Appellat § Quia vero Where Innocent the III. decreed against the Dean of Altisiodorum for having proceeded to the execution of an Interdict notwithstanding and after an Appeal made to Rome The reason of which Decree the Pope gives in these words Cum Appellatione ad fidem Apostolicam interposit a nihil debuerit innovari Where likewise he declares for the same reason That the Excommunication pronounced by the Archbishop of Sein or Senonensis against the same Dean and denunciation made to have been of no force from the beginning and that the said Archbishops Canons did without guilt notwithstanding the denunciation communicate with the Dean so censured and lastly that all proceedings attempted after the Appeal were in themselves void as he does by his Decree disannul them yielding for reason that the accessory is of the same nature with the principal which we have before touched Can we desire any more Canons more pertinent or fitting our purpose it's needless we alledge them though many more we have But because peradventure besides these Tears of Law the sense of Doctors may yet be expected let the Authors seen in the opposit margin (e) Candidus disq 22. art 39. dub 4. ubi citat Lopez par 2. tr de clavibus cap. 12. Pal. in 4. d. S. q. 1. art 4. con 2. Sayrum lib. 1. de Censur cap. 16. n. â—3 Bonac too 1. tract de Censur d. 1. q. 2. punc 2. numer 3. Diana P. 5. T. 3. R. 30. Silvester verb. Appellat Hieron Rodriq ibi Porte eod verb. be read and it will be found that the common Doctrine of Summists Divines and Canonists hath hitherto been That a just Appeal of it self and presently when 't is made devolves the cause to a higher Tribunal suspends the sentence given and withal hinders the inferiour Judge from proceeding any further All which the Doctors comprehend in the double effect which they say is necessarily annexed to a just Appeal to wit devolving and suspending Now for a just Appeal (f) Cand. supr disq 3. reliqui apud ipsum Candidus Boâ—acina Sayrus and others commonly affirm two only conditions are necessary The first that it be made with expression of sufficient probable or likely causes or such as the Appellant thinks bona fide are just probable likely or sufficient motives for appealing but that no other expression or of any other causes is acquired And truly with the Doctors herein the very Canons and Glosses do concur cap. ut debitus (g) Cap. Bonae memoriae §. Praemissâ—s extr de Appel Praemissis igitur diligenter inspectis praedictoâ— Aâ—batem Monachos in eum statum in quo tempore Appellationis lactae ex versimilibus probabilibus ad nos legitime interpositae nostuntur proprietatis parti uttilibet salvo Jure decernimus reducendos ac fructus mediâ— temporis perceptos câ—nsuimus parâ—â—r assignandos eisdem verb. ex rationabili ext de Appellat cap. Dilectis filiis 55. verb. Legitime eod tit cap. Cordi nobis eod tit in 6. often in the case of the Glos and c. Bona memoria § Praemissis ext eod tit where Innocentius III. clearly determines the Appeal to be just and the causes of the Appeal to be sufficient when it is made ex probabilibus aut verisimilibus that is when they are probable or seeming true though indeed they be not in themselves true It sufficeth therefore sayes the Glosse (h) Glossa ibid. Sufficit ergo quod sit probabilis causa Appellationis licet non sit vera vel necessaria Talis videlicet debet esse quod si esset probata legitima esset tunc valet Appellatiâ— further declaring this matter that the cause of Appeal seem probable though it be not certain or true It is enough it be such as being proved may seem lawful for then the Appeal is valid The very same in effect is affirmed by Glossa in cap. Cordi nobis (i) Glossa in cap. Cordi nobis de Appellat in 6. Causa rationabilis ad appellandum aâ— interloquutoria vel gravamine aliquo illa est quae si esset vera deberet legitima reputari aut quae si esset vera necessario inferret appellantem fuisse gravatum de Appellat in 6. as may be read in the margin The second condition necessary and which accomplisheth a just Appeal is that it be made and tendered to the Judge from whom before the dayes prefixed for admonishment or the condition be fulfilled when the Appeal is from a conditional Excommunication Censure or sentence as that against the adherents to the Cessation was or at least within the time limited for entring Appeals That both conditions have been observed punctually in the Appeal made by the Council in their own and in the name of all the rest of the Confederates is apparent to all have read it who have weighed the motives therein expressed and noted the dates both of it and of the sentence against which it was interposed this having been of the 27th of May 1648. and that of the last of the same month dispatch'd away presently to their Lordships the Nuncio and his Delegates But of the second condition there is no controversie All the question is of the first that is Whether the causes or motives of the Appeal were sufficient Yet even herein we see no difficulty Doubtless the Council and many Thousands more of the Confederates were persuaded bona fide that the Nuncio proceeded with due observation of his Lordship may it be said unjustly and that they had expressed before his Lordship most just motives to appeal from his Censures and complain to his Holiness of such proceeding Which bona fides alone would suffice us for securing our own Consciences in opposing his sentence and in hindring to our power the execution of his Censures and all his other proceedings on the same ground yea though the motives were only just in the opinion of the Appellants Which is the doctrine of Authors now cited and must be of all Divines who generally teach and it is in it self most certain and taught us by natural reason That the immediate and next Rule according to which we must square our actions in matters of Fact and cases of Conscience is our own proper bona fides and opinion However this be of our bona fides whether we had it or
no yet doubtless even the Lord Nuncio and Delegates will not deny but the causes expressed in the Appeal are probable or likely or such as if they can be proved to be true will be thought sufficient There is no man of judgment hath ever yet seen or will see the Appeal that can or will deny this And if so how could it be rejected in foro exteriori as unjust whereas it hath the conditions prescribed by the Doctors Canons and Glosses for a just Appeal the one to have been made in due time and the other to have expressed in it motives which may seem in facie Ecclesiae to be probable likely or such as being proved would be thought lawful For that of bona fides mentioned by some of the Divines is not required by them but only for securing the interiour Conscience of the Appellant and not for any thing might concern the exteriour Tribunal wherein judgment is not given of the interiour opinion or bona fides of the Appellant but of that which appears exteriourly as of the causes expressed in the Appeal c. which if secundum allegata probata they be found true the Judge ad quem to whom only it belongs will give sentence for the Appeal whether in the mean time the interiour opinion of the Appellant was a bona fides or no. For of the interiour God alone is Judge not the Church And this is the reason why the Canons and Glosses speaking of the reasonableness and justice of the causes which being expressed makes the Appeal just require only such motives as seem probable or true though in themselves they be not true or such as being proved to wit before the Judge ad quem would make the Appeal lawful and say nothing of the bona fides conceiving this to be impertinent and not belonging to the external Court of judgment which they do chiefly regard Yet because the bona fides of the Appellants may be sufficiently conjectured out of the probability likelihood or evidence of the motives expressed in the Appeal who can doubt that knows the state of Ireland and looks on our condition with an indifferent eye but the Council and Confederates had not only probable motives but even reasons in themselves and before the World most evidently just which necessitated them to make their address to His Holiness and throw themselves into His protection though for point of Conscience this was needless from the violent proceedings of the Lord Nuncio and his either Delegates or Sub-delegates as being for private ends opposite to the advancement of Religion and of the common Cause destructive of the Kingdom and illegally thwarting the Supreme Civil power of the Confederates by drawing the people in as much as in them lie to Sedition and Rebellion All which motives and many more your Honours expressed at large in your Appeal and their truth may be manifestly inferred out of our sad condition the great necessity the Countrey stood in of a Cessation and the no less utility might be derived from it for the Catholick Cause as your Honours of the Council declared in your said Appeal and we have shewed in our answer to the first Querie Unto which motives may yet be added according to the power for adding your Lordships reserved to your selves in your Appeal what is consequent out of them and out of other particulars expressed in the Appeal videlicet That your Honours and the rest of the Confederates were commanded on pain of Excommunication and Interdict not to adhere unto a Cessation concluded upon actually and from which neither you nor they could fall without omission of most vertuous acts Fidelity in performance of Promises Religion in sacred Oaths and Disobedience to Authority nor without commission of sinful acts unfaithfulness in Contracts Perjury in Oaths and disobedience to Authority From which likewise you could not fall without extremely endamaging and hazarding the Commonwealth by reason of the strength and multitude of enemies which that Cessation rejected would on all sides come upon us besides the judgments of God would hang over us for our perfidiousness (k) See both in Sacred and Prophane Histories the dreadful punishments that attended alwayes the breach of Publick Faith and Perfidiousness See in the 2d of Kings 2â— how Heaven pursued with vengeance the King and whole Kingdom of Israel for having broken Faith with the Gibeonites though no less than a Hundred years since the Covenant made with them Josh 9. yea and though in that Covenant the Gibeonites used subtlety and were by profession Infidels Were not the chosen people and Nation of God for this breach of Faith scourged with an universal Famine even in the dayes of holy King David propter Saul domum ejus sanguinum quia occidit Gabeonitas And notwithstanding so many Thousands starved to death by this Famine was the Divine wrath appeased until Seven of his Sons who brake the League were resigned over by King David to the pleasure of the offended Gibeonites and were Crucified alive by them upon a Mount before the face of God Et dedit eos in manus Gabaâ—nitorum qui cruc fierunt eos in monto coram Domino repropitiatus est Deus torrae post hac See in the 36 of Paralipâ—m the deplorable fate of the unfortunate King Sedecias and of his Kingdom for having contrary to promise made renounced his Allegiance broken League with and taken Arms against Nabuchadnezzaâ— the Monarch of Babylon A â—ege quoquo Nabuchadâ—â—sâ—â— recesserat qui adjuraverat eum per Deum Was not his Kingdom therefore utterly destroyed the holy City râ—zed the Temple of God burn'd the miserable King deprived of those eyes wherewith before he beheld the Covenant broken finally his Countrey planted with Aliens and both himself and the remainder of his people translated to Babylon for to lead the life of Slaves in a long Captivity of 70 years Yet Sedecias was drawn to this breach of Peace through causes no less specious than Nebuchadnezzar's Idolatry in Religion and Tyranny in his Government of the elect Nation of God See in Gregory Sceidius and in Knolls's Turkish History the formidable event of a Cessation or Ten years Truce broken formerly concluded 'twixt Vladislaus the Christian Catholick King of Hungary and Amwâ—ath the Turkish Monarch but broken by the Christian King soon after 't was published by the persuasions and overmuch importunity of part of the Clergy specially of Julian the Florentine Cardinal then Legate Apostolick in the Kingdom of Hungary who needs would dispense in the Oath interchangeably taken by Christians and Turks for observing the Cessation Alas how late came repentance when the poor Hurgâ—rians beheld their valiant and good Vladislaus slain before their faces in the Battel of Varra their Nobility slaughtered â—â—lian himself with oâ—her Authors of this misfortune all naked covered only with blood and yielding the ghost their Army ever before this faithless dealing victorious totally destroyed and
are to be alledged (o) This only and no more for what concerns this matter can be deduced out of c. Pastoralis §. verum de appellat cap. Legitima eod Gloss § Legitima in 6. c. Romana eod §. quod si objiciatur Glossa ibid. §. Vera Nota insuper c. cum appellat eod See all this confirmed by c. Interposra de appellationibus extr where it appears sufficiently though it be for the contrary opinion produced that the validity of an Appeal is to be proved before the Judge ad quem For the case of the said Chapter is One appealed who expressed only a probable cause in his appeal The question was whether it were sufficient for the Appellant to prove before the Judge to whom that his cause was probable although perhaps not true And it was resolved That he ought to prove it to be both probable and true unless he offered of his own accord to prove this truth before the Judge from whom and yet was not heard for in this case it is enough he prove before the Judge ad quera that the cause of his Appeal was probable though not true In which question and answer made by the Pope there is not a word for the adversaries but much to our purpose as appears by the Glosse partly and partly by these words nisi hoc se offerens probaturem c. Whence is gathered that he had no obligation to prove it before the Judge a quo but what was done by him was of his own accord not by any tye of the Law At least we may confidently say that nothing may be inferred against us out of this Chapter Nay this Text speaks in case the Appellant even before he enters his Appeal do offer to prove his allegations to be true and not after the Appeal is made as appears in the Glosse there and by the Glossa of cap. Si a Judic verb. teneris de appellat in 6. ibi per Dominic which the common pâ—actice proveth Whence further is manifest that there is no obligation by this Chapter to prove before the Judge a quo the truth of the appeal since questionless before in given in there can be no such obligation therein and before the Judge from whom though not their truth to be proved before him or that when the Judge is refused or excepted against or to speak the terms of the Law when there is a recusation of him not an Appeal that then the recusatorie exceptions are to be proved before Arbiters given by the Judge and chosen by common consent of the Plaintiff and Defendant It is in this case of recusation that cap. cum speciali de appellat extra and cap. Legitima eod tit in 6. speak and not in case of Appeal which is far different from the former It is true that the Judge a quo hath so many dayes allowed him by the Canons to consider what kind of apostles he is to give and that in admitting or rejecting the Appeal he doth in so much ex animi sui opinione out of his own private opinion judge of its probability or improbability yet followeth it not hence that he giveth any juridical or binding sentence or judgment of the Causes obliging either before God or the World the Conscience of the Appellant For the giving of the apostles is nothing else but a bare answer to the Appeal which the Law permits him to give either dimissory or refutatory that is either admitting or rejecting the Appeal either right or wrong but at his own peril if he give not a right answer and admit the Appeal when it is from a just and probable grievance and hath in it expressed probable Causes the Law providing likewise for the liberty and safety of the Appellant that whatsoever answer this be he is not bound to conform himself to it if it be to his disadvantage since he hath once lawfully appealed or with expression of reasonable Causes and since this Judge from whom hath no power to summon him nor to examine Witnesses nor to form any Process concerning the lawfulness or unlawfulness of the Causes expressed which power notwithstanding for to summon examine form a Process must be supposed in him that is the proper Judge and can give a binding sentence of the lawfulness or unlawfulness of the Appeal Whence followeth that they say nothing to purpose who object That the Lord Nuncio and Bishops did not conceive such pressing necessity for concluding the Cessation or such great profit to arise thence which are the prime reasons alledged in the Appeal for excepting against the Censures but rather that it was fixed on with intention to bring in the late rejected Peace and for other consequences following that business and consequently that they conceived no truth in the Causes alledged For in case we did grant their suspitions to be true before God as they are not yet nothing hence may be inferr'd for disproving the lawfulness of the Appeal in foro exteriori wherein only they proceed since they cannot deny but the Causes alledged are such as if they can be proved they ought to be thought lawful and since they are not to be Judges herein as hath been now seen by so many Canons Glosses and Reasons and lastly since we are bona fide persuaded of the probability if not evidence of our motives nay though we had no bona fides interiourly but only seemed exteriourly to have it And verily this Answer satisfieth (p) This great opposition and seeming alteration of judgment in the Lord Nuncio must be very strange to such as know that it appears out of Letters and Messages from his Lordship to the Council which are on Record how his Lordship about the first of March when there was but a bare report of a Cessation to be made with the Parliamentary Scots desired the Council that business to wit the Cessation with the Scots should go on for that he expected a blessing thence not only to this but also to other Kingdoms Nay a little before Inchiquyn was declared for His Majesty did not he approve a Cessation to be made even with him What is the reason of so much desire expressed for making a Cessation with the Parliamentary Scots rather than with Inchiquyn or others or why with I chiquyn himself when he was for the Parliament and not much more now when he is for the King Neither doth the Lord Nuncio's answer seem in any wise to satisfie where he sayes in another of his Letters to excuse this that his intention in his former Letters or Messages was to have an accomodation or league made with him not a Cessation For who is it conceives not that a Cessation of Arms with Sectaries must be conscionable even by the Lord Nuncio's own concession and no just ground for Excommunication if an Accomodation or League be lawful since the Cessation of its own nature brings along withâ—t less communication with
causa Barthol Lancello Specul Menoch march Scâ—c plures alii cum communi Doctorum apud August Barbos in coll ad decretal in dictâ— cap. Pastoral n. 2. and as the Canonists commonly maintain Furthermore we say That if His Holiness ex plenitudine potestatis would give or hath given his Lordship a power above the Canon Law and such extraordinary faculties as that he should not be bound to admit even just Appeals yet hereby His Holiness never intended nor could lawfully or conscionably intend to hinder the Appellants from opposing the execution of an unjust sentence given against them much less from opposing a sentence or censures of their own nature invalid when their own Consciences tells them that his Lordship grounds himself upon ill information or that the obeying of the sentence may prove disadvantagious either to the Publick or Particulars against Equity and Right For in this and such like cases the Law of Nature takes place and allows the Appellant or Party aggrieved to preserve his own Right even by force if no other means be at hand against the unjust proceedings of a corrupt ignorant malicious or ill informed Judge specially if this Party aggrieved be a Prince State Council or Commonwealth which hath a Supreme Civil power as our case is Nay if His Holiness who is the Supreme Ecclesiastical Judge on earth and from whom there is no Appeal in matters belonging to his judicature otherwise than from himself to himself did upon ill information or for any other cause whatsoever give judgment or pronounce Censures contrary to justice and conscience or which would be disadvantagious to our Publick cause or destructive of our Commonwealth or of the lives liberties or fortunes of the Confederates or of the Council and that part of the Confederates who adhere to them and to the Cessation being incomparably the greater part of the Kingdom there is no Catholick Divine in the World but must confess it would be lawful to resist and oppose His Holiness in this case and to hinder the execution of such a sentence yea that such as are in Publick Authority would be bound in Conscience and under pain of a most grievous mortal sin to use their uttermost endeavours for opposing the said execution even vi armis if it were necessary and no other means left of reconciliation or for preservation of the Publick Yet certainly we do not fear that any such evil shall ever come immediately from the Sacred Throne of our most Blessed Father Innocentius Lastly What is objected by some out of cap. Ad nostram and cap. Reprehensibilis de Appellat That no Appeal is allowed from a sentence given in a controversie of Faith and consequently that your Honours Appeal is against the Law since the adhering to the Cessation to be unlawful is an Article of Faith and the sentence of Excommunication and other Censures were pronounced by the Nuncio to make the Confederates religiously observe the said Article that is not to adhere to or observe the said Cessation We say all and every branch of what 's here objected is so false and so absurd as it cannot be sufficiently admired with what face can any broach such ignorant Positions What is more clearly and without controversie decreed in Sacred Canons than that all weighty causes and questions happening about Articles of Faith which are the most weighty of all causes are to be referred unto the See Apostolick and even frivolous Appeals in such Controversies be admitted that is though the causes of appealing in these matters appear not to be so just or reasonable as are required by the Canons to be in Appeals interposed from grievances in other matters See this expresly defined in the Canons placed in the Margent (s) Alexander III. in cap. majores de Baptismo majores Ecclesiae causas praesertim articulâ—s fidei contingentes ad Petri sedem referendas intelliget qui eum quaerenti domino quem discipuli dicerent ipsum esse respondisse nâ—tabit Tu es Christus filius dei vivi pro eo dominum exorasse ne deficiat fides ejus c. See cap. Ut debitus § ultim juncta Gloss in verb. causis de appellat cap. Translationem de officio Legatâ— Bellarm. l. 4 de Rom. Pont. c. â— See Bellarm. l. 4. de Rom. Pont. l. â— de Concil authorit where he teacheth and with him the Catholick Doctors commonly that only His Holiness is infallible in definâ—ng or declaring matters of Faith and that even General Councils much more National are of no such infallibility but may err until or before His Holiness confirm them Nay some Catholick Doctors as Bellarm l. 2. de Concil cap. 5. hath affirm that National Synods though so confirmed are not infallible and so constantly taught by Canonists as our opposites cannot produce one Author for themselves And what is more out of all doubt with both Heretick and Catholick Divines than that even His Holiness as Pope and Vicar of Christ yea and together with his Consistory of Cardinals and which is more sitting in a General Synod of the Universal Church on earth might err in Controversies of Fact which principally depend on informations and testimonies of men Read Bellarmine 4. de Romano Pontifice cap. 2. And consequently what is more certain and evident than that it is impossible the adhering to the Cessation concluded with Inchiquyn to be unlawful can be a matter or article of Faith or as such declared by any power on earth not to speak of the Lord Nuncio who hath no power no not together with his National Synod to define or declare such Articles even in capable matters or in questionibus juris otherwise then as a particular Doctor since it is plain that the question of the lawfulness or unlawfulness of it is a meer question of Fact and principally depending on the informations and testimonies of men Finally What is more plain to any knowing Reader of the two Chapters alledged against us out of the Canons by some of our opposites than that neither of them hath a word to that purpose or which by a Scholar may be understood in the sense they are produced against us For cap. ad nostram speaks only of just corrections of persons who are by profession Regulars as if a Religious man transgresseth manifestly his Rule or Institutions of his Order in this case and very justly no Appeal is admitted nisi tamen modus excedatur sayes Gloss ibid. verb. minus if a certain punishment be prescribed by the Canons for such a transgression and no other inflicted for if the punishment be arbitrary then according to Panormitan even a Regular might appeal in case of correction yea though his crime were notorious And as for cap. Reprehensibilis it makes the same sense though it be not restrained solely to the correction of Regulars but is more generally understood de disciplina Ecclesiastica of the correction of all Ecclesiasticks
never to do an act of charity c. would be plain disobedience to the Commands of God would be damnation to their Souls Or will they deny but their foolish excuse of blind obedience to their earthly Superiours injunctions would not in this case justifie them either before God or men nor likewise that other senseless evasion That it is not their parts to examine the justice of the Commands imposed upon them by their Prelates but simply to do what they are bid Will not they also confess if we reason with them a little further that it is therefore they should not obey and these excuses would not serve them in such a case because such Commands would be against the Law of God And will not they admit their knowledge hereof to be derived hence that they see it so expressed in Scriptures Fathers Doctors of the Catholick Roman Church in all Ages let it now be supposed that their Superiours should tell them the contrary in the same case How therefore do they on such mad pretences obey the Commands of their Superiours enjoining them to substract Civil obedience from the Supreme Civil power in a matter concerning the peace and tranquility of the Commonwealth and in a matter wherein their Superiours cannot shew nor themselves can see any evil implied Do not they see it is against the express Law of God to substract obedience from the Civil power in this case Do not the Scriptures Councils * Concil Tol. x. c. 2. Si quis religiosorum ab Episcopo usque ad extremi ordiâ—is Clericum sive Monachum generalia juramenta in saluteâ— Regium gentisque aut Patriae data reperiatur violasse voluntate profana mox propria dignitate privatum loco honore habeatur exclusus Becanus in Sum. Theol. de bonit act in t c. 4. q. 7. con 4. alii apud ipsum Fathers Doctors the practice of the Church of Christ in all Ages proclaim it They cannot be ignorant hereof and if any of them hath been hitherto certainly their ignorance can be no longer invincible that is such as might not be overcome by humane industry nor probable that is which hath probable reasons to maintain their disobedience to the Council For what reasons can be probable against the plain sense of Holy Scriptures and the unanimous consent of the Holy Fathers and Doctors of the Catholick Church in all Ages As for affected ignorance gross vincible or improbable none of them excuse from damnation according to the sense of all Catholick Writers But alas Ignorance is not the cause of sinful Obstinacy Malice and a natural inclination occasioneth it in very many a rash engagement in others hopes of preferment to Benefices and Superiority in others in others a stupid fear of losing what they had being persuaded by experience of the former revolution that an Excommunication the most unjust would alter the whole frame of Government and that there should be no living in Ireland for any would oppose the Lord Nuncio's design herein or the power of Owen O Neill Behold the true causes of their Obstinacy In others an apprehension of shame and disgrace in reclaiming an error and falling from this way they once resolved on and no sense of Conscience Behold the reason why even the best and most learned amongst them being demanded the ground of their opposition do say commonly That they will neither give reason nor take reason and when they speak their mind at full do now at last only censure the intention which the Council and their Adherents had in the concluding the Cessation because they find no other cause and yet would seem not without some cause to reject it which they are engaged for so many unworthy causes to oppose But who sees not in our Answers to the first and second Querie the false imposture of this last refuge Yet by reason they make hereof more use than of any other we briefly propose the ensuing considerations First That the Declaration and Censures of the Lord Nuncio Congregation and Delegates in obedience to which they disobey the Council were not against such evil intentions but against the very substance of the Articles of Cessation as in themselves evil and unconscionable 'T is manifest to any that please to read and peruse the tenour of both Decrees which contain not a word importing other sense Bâ—n tract de Legib. disp 1. q. 1. punct 8. prop. 2. alii apud ipsuâ— ibid. and therefore cannot be extended to evil intentions though we granted such intentions to have been in regard a penal Decree or Law is to be restrained not extended according to the Maxim of Canonists Wherefore this recourse of theirs to evil intentions and their not shewing any other evil in the object that is in the Cessation it self or in the conclusion and observation of it concludes an Errour in the decree or sentence of Excommunication and consequently disannuls it and leaves them no reasonable pretence for disobeying the Council since their pretence is the supposed obligation of the Censures which even their own Answer takes away The second is Though it were granted that the Council or others who negotiated the affair of Cessation had such intentions at first or upon the perfection of it yet might they have changed such evil intentions into good during the Nine dayes given in the monitory Decree for deliberation and consequently if there be no other evil but of their intentions how could the Nuncio proceed to execute his Censures since they protested in their Appeal before the Ninth day and in other Printed Declarations that they had no such intention Nay how could he proceed to this execution though they never had made any such exteriour Protestation whereas without it they might have taken away the ground of the Excommunication to wit the supposed evil intentions The third That questionless our opposites will not deny but Thousands are of the Confederates who desired and embraced the Cessation not out of any such evil intention but for a just end and for their own preservation How then could such be Excommunicated since the ground of this Excommunication to wit evil intention is not to be found in them And if these be not Excommunicated is it not plain That none is Excommunicated whose Conscience tells him That he did not adhere to the Cessation with any evil intention How then doth the Nuncio proceed indifferently against them all as Excommunicated persons Nay how can he proceed against any of them as such but only against him or them whose naughty intentions are apparent and whose intentions can be apparent to him but either out of confession or secundum allegata probata by exteriour proofs for God alone is Judge of the interiour not the Church And who is it that was so convicted or confessed before him such intentions Nay who is it was summon'd to his Tribunal for such a business The fourth Consideration is of the
not to be hoped that We could do any thing considerable against the Rebels and We desired them if they had a mistrust of Us or dislike of Our Government that they would clearly let us know it telling them That such was Our desire of the Peoples preservation that there was nothing within Our power consistent with Our duty to the KING and sutable to Our Honour that We would not do at their desire for that end Withall letting them see that Our continuance with the name and not the power of Lord Lieutenant could bring nothing but ruine upon the Nation and dishonour upon Us so that in effect we propounded either that they would procure Us due obedience or propose some other way by Our quitting the Kingdom how it might be preserved In answer whereunto they gave Us many expressions of respect and affection and promised to endeavour the procuring of the obedience We desired then also giving Us a Paper containing some Advices or Propositions for the future conduct of Affairs All which seemed to Us to imply their desire of Our continuance in the Government and their compliance with Us though in that particular of erecting a Privy Council their itch to have a hand in the Civil and Martial Affairs was and is apparent by the ensuing Copy thereof 13th of March 1649. Remedies proposed to His EXCELLENCY for removing the Discontents and Distrusts of the People and for advancing His MAJESTIES Service presented by such of the Clergy as met at Lymerick the 8th of March 1649 and the Commissioners of Trust I. HAving joined our selves in this meeting upon Your EXCELLENCIES Summons and in compliance with Your pleasure in delivering our Sense how any life might be conserved in this gasping Kingdom The following Considerations we thought fit to be represented to Your Excellency II. It is generally thought That most of the present Distresses of the Kingdom did proceed from the want of a Privy Council as ever it was accustomed heretofore to assist the Government of this Land in War and Peace We conceive it essentially necessary That such a Council be framed of the Peers and others Natives of the Kingdom as well Spiritual as Temporal to fit with Your Excellency daily and determine all weighty Affairs of the Countrey by their counsel The Commissioners of Trust being onely entrusted for the due observation of the Articles of Peace had not the authority of Counsellors and the affairs that intrench most upon the matters of State of the Kingdom were not their study or charge III. That there be an exact Establishment of the Forces forthwith setled and agreed on directing what numbers the Army of the Kingdom shall consist of Horse and Foot what each Province shall bear what number each Regiment Troop and Company shall consist of and laying down such Rules that no payments be made but according to the number of Forces that shall be visible and extant for service and the said Establishment to be forthwith put in Execution and the said Army once established and made certain not to be multiplied or exceeded other than by solemn further establishment to be made with the consent and concurrence of the Commissioners of Trust if there be cause for it And in that Establishment a certain and sure course be taken That all the Forces have the same assurance and the like equality of payment for all the Army And in that Establishment all preventions possible to be be set down for avoiding the burthening of the People with Thorough-fare Delinquency or Free-quarter or any other Forces than those continued in the Establishment and none to have Command but in one capacity and to serve in the head of that Command otherwise not to be in Command And in the said Establishment considering the necessity the Kingdom it reduced unto the burthen of General Officers or other burthens that may be spared or not found necessary to be put by and the Kingdom at present eased thereof IV. That on the composure of that Army and on Garrisoning of places necessary to be Garrisoned exact wariness be used That none against whom just exception may be taken or who by any probability considering all circumstances cannot so well be confided in as others of this Nation be either of the number whereof those established Forces shall consist or be put or continued in Garrison V. That several places are Garrison'd without the consent or concurrence of the Commissioners of Trust It is proposed That the Forces placed in such Garrisons be forthwith removed and withdrawn and not Garrison'd but by consent of the Commissioners of Trust and that none be placed in such Garrisons but such as the Commissioners of Trust will consent to be placed therein And for particular instance of this Grievance the Castle of Clare Clonraud Ballingary and Bunratty are instanced and what else are of that nature the Commissioners of Trust are to represent and instance forthwith and see redress afforded therein to the Peoples satisfaction if any such be of that nature VI. That it is a great cause of jealousie and mistrust among the People That where Catholicks were setled or understood to be setled in some of the greatest employments of Trust in the Army they have been notwithstanding removed and put by for avoiding of those causes and grounds of mistrust the Catholicks so setled or understood to be setled in such employments are desired to be forthwith restored VII That for satisfaction of the People who in the many disorders of these times see no face of justice exercised among them a Judicature be erected according to the Articles of Peace wherein all Causes without limit between Party and Party may be heard and determined and that Judges of Assize go Circuit twice each year at least and over and besides this that some persons as Justices of Peace in Quarter-Sessions or otherwise be entrusted in each County to whom the Inhabitants of each such County may have their applications for Redress against Oppressions and Extortions hapning within that County and for Debts and other Complaints not exceeding Ten pounds This will free Your Excellency from the trouble of those multitudes of Complaints that come before You for want of other Judicatures and will leave Your Lordship the time entire to be disposed in the Consults of the State Affairs for the better management of the War and other the great Affairs that may concern the better Government of the Kingdom these being of so high a nature and so much tending to the Peoples preservation as no other matter or causes should be interposed that might give any interruption thereunto VIII That to the very great grievance and dissatisfaction of the People the Receiver General hath failed to altar his Accompts concerning the â—â—st Sums of Money levied from the People since the 17th of January 1648. though the same hath been long expected and the grievances from the Agents of Counties long foreslowed in expectation of those accompts It is
pay We neither know when or where it was or who had more The manner of Mr. Daniel O Neal â—s coming into Command was thus he had taken great pains in bringing his Uncle General Owen O Neil to submit to the Peace and His Majesties Government so did he effectually labour after that work was effected to bring the Vlster Army to Our assistance when Cromwel was in his march from Dublin towards Wexford Owen O Neil being sick the Army was conducted by Lieutenant-General Farrel and Major-General Hugh O Neil but when it joined with the Leinster Munster and Connaught Forces and some English and Scottish Horse and Foot We found great difficulty how to distribute Orders with satisfaction to all these Parties the Vlster Party being unwilling to receive them by Major-General Purcell and the rest were as unwilling to receive them by Major-General Hugh O Neil But all Parties were content to receive them from Daniel O Neil and by him they were distributed and Major-General Purcell was sent into Munster where he had and exercised a Command in chief in the absence of superiour Officers nor was his Commission annulled or a new one of his place given to any other to this day So that if the displacing him or any other Officer without the consent of the Commissioners had been a breach of the Articles of Peace as it is not there is no Truth in the Affirmation that he was displaced Fourth Article of the Declaration A Judicature and legal way of administring Justice promised by the Articles of Peace was not performed but all process and proceedings done by Paper-petitions and thereby private Clerks and other corrupt Ministers enriched the Subjects ruined and no Justice done ANSWER For Answer to this We refer you to Our Answer to the Third Article of the said pretended Grievances Which Article and Answer are as followeth Article viz. The Third of those called the Grievances That whereas it was by the said Articles concluded there should be Judicatures raised and established in this Kingdom for doing of Justice and legal determining of differences and controversies arising betwixt His Majesties Subjects Articles of Peace art 13. see pag. 49. of the Append. of Instrum and that the Council-Table should onely meddle with matters of State and should not intermeddle with common business within the cognizance of the ordinary Courts nor with altering possession of Land nor make nor use private Orders Hearings or References concerning any such matters c. and the proceeding in the respective presidency Courts should be pursuant and according to His Majesties printed Book of Instructions and that they should contain themselves within the limits prescribed by that Book when the Kingdom should be restored to such a degree of quietness as they be not necessarily enforced to exceed the same Yet the People generally complain the said Judicatures have not been raised nor any other way prescribed for the determining of such controversies but the Council Table or rather the Lord Lieutenant alone and the Presidency or President alone took to them cognizance of all Causes and arbitrarily on Paper Petitions determined all Causes extrajudicially even to the altering of possessions and in consequence thereof to the determination of Titles and right of inheritance And though the present disuse of the Law as aforesaid is in the peoples mouth a heavy grievance at the present yet will Posterity have just cause to tell abroad That in the not erecting Inns of Court in pursuance of the said Articles of Peace through which to convey to them the knowledge of the Law See the Articles of Peace art 8. before in the Appen of Instrum pag. 49. they are given up to ignorance of government obedience or property And though the Province of Munster was not since January last in such absolute tranquility as before the War yet did not the state of it require a transgression of his Majesties said Book of Instructions which yet was violated in the practice of that Court by the Commissioners there intrusted being generally uninterested in the Kingdom in blood or fortune and all Protestants by reason whereof the less indifferency in matters relative to Religion was afforded to the Catholicks ANSWER Art the 8. ibid. By the Articles of Peace Judicatures were to be raised and Judges named by the advice and with the consent of the Commissioners For which purpose VVe sent to His Majesty for leave to make and use a great Seal which as soon as VVe had received VVe caused a great Seal to be made and were at all times ready to have agreed with the Commissioners what kind of Judicatures to raise and with what persons to have supplied them as will not be denied by the said Commissioners Which may suffice for Us to answer to that particular We acknowledge That according to the necessary power at all times invested in the chief Governour or Governours of this Kingdom VVe have received many Petitions and to the best of Our understanding have made just and equal Orders and References upon them and have also upon Certificate of the ablest men VVe could find finally determined some of them but never to the alteration of possession unless perhaps upon clear proof of forcible intrusions by violence contrary to all the Rules of Law and Reason Which if VVe had not done during the want of Judicatures every mans power would have been his Judge in his own cause What the Presidency or President have done irregularly or contrary to the Articles of Peace they shall be brought to answer when they or he shall be particularly charged That Inns of Court have not been erected according to the Articles of Peace Posterity may tell as loud as they please but if they have Schools to learn English enough to read the Articles of Peace they will find that His Majesty was only to enable the Natives of this Kingdom to erect one or more Inns of Court in or near the City of Dublin or elsewhere as should be thought fit by His Majesties Lord Lieutenant or other chief Governour or Governours for the time being Whereby by the scope of the Article which is for removing of incapacities it is plain the said Inns of Court were not to be erected at His Majesties charge And sure no man will have the impudence to say That VVe who had the honour to govern under His Majesty did give the least interruption to the erecting of them or that ever it was proposed to Us to give way to the erection of the said Inns. Whereof VVe confess there was never more need if their property be to instruct the People in their duty of obedience to Government with this addition That to charge Us with want of doing Justice without instancing the particular cases wherein VVe failed thereby taking from Us the means to vindicate Our Self from so high a Crime is sutable to the justice and practises of these Declarers Fifth Article of the Declaration The
is requisit but onely that simple or natural ratiocination or discourse which all men can have Such for example sayes he thirdly are all the precepts of the Decalogue For out of that first principle imprinted in the hearts of all men That God is to be worshipped must follow that Idols ought not to be worshipped and that we ought not to swear God in vaine As likewise out of that other first principle what you would not have done to your self you must not do to an other must follow that you must not kill you must not commit adultery you must not steal c. It is true indeed sayes our learned Cardinal and perhaps truly too in so much that some such precepts as these of the second degree or some such conclusions have been sometimes and in some nations blotted out of the hearts of men by too great a blindness which did seize their understanding faculty as appears out of Caesar lib. 6. de Bello Gallico where we read that amongst the Germans theft was esteemed no vice but a vertue and out of St. Hierom l. 2. in Iovinianum and of Theodoret l. 9. ad Gracos who relate many vices against nature which have been approved as lawful in some countries not onely by the people but by their laws and law-makers And yet notwithstanding this ignorance or blindness of some concerning the precepts of nature in such matters it is also and alway true that such precepts do truly and properly belong to the law divine natural as St. Thomas of Aquin teaches 1. 2. q. 94. art 5. q. 100. art 8. where he holds that no dispensation can take place or be given at all in the precepts of the Decalogue or in such as we commonly call the ten commandements because these are properly of divine natural right or law The third degree of natural precepts is of such others as are deduced indeed from the principles of the law of nature but not by a consequence absolutely necessary nor altogether or any way evident and therefore do want humane institution And these are they which the Divines properly referre to jus gentium the law of nations This being the doctrine of this great Cardinal and his division or distinction of the several degrees of the law divine natural and his Resolve of the above Quere being that which a little after he gives in these words His ita explicatis dicendum videtur Exemptionem Ecclesiasticorum non pertinere ad primum vel secundum gradum naturalium praeceptorum nec tamen esse juris tantum positivi sive canonici sive civilis sed referendam esse ad tertium gradum praeceptorum juris naturae seu quod idem est ad jus gentium that the Exemption of Ecclesiasticks belongs not to the first or second degree of natural praecepts and yet is not from any law positive onely either canonical or civil but must be referr'd to the third of those are praecepts of the law of nature or which is the same thing sayes he to the law of nations I leave it now to the judgment of all judicious men whether he do not abuse the name of the law of nature or law divine natural and of precepts of such a law and consequently his undiscerning Reader by attributing that name to those dictats which are not indeed any such law or any precepts at all of such law not even I say according to his own doctrine here For a law divine natural hoc ipso that it is such a law or indeed any true law at all and precepts of the law divine hoc ipso that they are such precepts or even any true preceps of any true law must be of necessity binding this property or quality of binding as it is confessed of all sides being essential to a true law and true precept of such law I mean still according to that proper sense wherein I must be understood to speak here of laws and precepts that is as they are distinguished from other free unobliging rules of direction council or advice which not a superiour onely but every conscientious and knowing Inferiour also may give And yet Bellarmine here confesses in effect that the Exemption of Ecclesiasticks was not obliging any nor binding by the sole vertue of any pure dictate of natural reason or not at all antecedently to an institution made by man forasmuch as it is onely of the third degree and therefore positive and consequently not a conclusion that follows any way at all evidently or necessarily out of any evident or certainly true principle of natural reason And what is this els but the dictat thereof not to be binding at all by natural reason and therefore consequently no law no precept of that same reason For if we see it doth not follow certainly out of any evident or allowed principle as our natural reason will not suffer us to be bound by it upon the bare account of such an uncertain false illation so will not our natural reason suffer us to esteem it upon that same bare account a law of meer natural reason and consequently nor a law divine natural Whence also it must be evident enough that Bellarmine seeks without any sufficient ground to impose again on his Readers credulity where he sayes in his said Resolve that this Exemption is not onely juris positivi sive canonici sive civilis For if it was not at all as his own doctrine here confesses it was not before the institution or determination of men however this determination was made by custome onely or otherwise how can it be true that it is not onely from or by a positive law institution or determination of men and this law either civil or canonical or both being there is no other way of a positive determination Behold the reason partly wherefore this learned Cardinal seeing well enough his doctrine and Resolve or both together could not but argue him of absolute contradiction if he would be understood so as to speak properly or even to speak sense at all flyes immediatly from the name or title of law divine natural to that of a law onely of Nations or rather confounds both together that is the law of nations and his third degree of the laws divine natural But so he might have without any authority to impose new names confounded together and comprehended under the self-same appellation heat and cold and vice and vertue or at least as many different species's of qualities as have no contrariety in the same subject However allowing him this priviledge or passing by this shifting of names or appellations and his attributing in some sense though an improper abusive sense the titles of a law of nature and of a law of nations to the exemption of Clergiemen in his own greatest height extent or latitude of this exemption or as it imports even that exemption which he maintains to be of the persons also of Clergiemen and even in all temporal causes
whatsoever civil and criminal and not from the inferiour laye Magistrats onely but from the very supream which of persons and in relation to the supream coercive power is that onely which is my present purpose to examine and oppose let us now see how well he maintains by his arguments what he so undertakes or asserts here and see whether any of the four proofs he frames or all together can perswade any man of reason that his said Exemption of Clergiemen is in any sense at all de jure positivo naturali of law divine natural or even as much as de jure Gentium of the law of nations Onely you are first to take notice that Bellarmine himself hath transiently discovered his own principal design or end in strugling so much for this title or name either of a law divine natural or law of nations nay of both and attributing both to that which might establish the Exemption of Ecclesiasticks in the height and latitude he asserts it for their lands goods Churches Houses Persons c. from all kind of laye power subordinate or supream That end I give in his own words and corrollaries which you may read in himself a little before his proofs c. 29. l. 1. de Cleric Rursus sequitur ut ea quae sunt de jure gentium quia sunt aliquo modo naturalia non possint a Principibus vel Magistratibus abrogari vel immutari contra autem quae sunt de jure civili quia sunt pâ—rro positiva sicut a Principe vel Magistratu constituuntur ita posse a Principe vel Magistratu abrogari And a little beneath where he though all in vain endeavours to reconcile Driedo and some Canonists to the Divines especially to Victoria and Sâ—to and to St. Thomas himself those asserting the Exemption to be of the law of nature or law divine natural and these that it is onely of positive human law Et ideo addunt sayes he meaning Victoria and Sâ—tus in hanc Exemptionem câ—nsensisse omnes gentes ac pretterea non posse mutari vel abrogari a Regibus et Principibus etiamsi omnes simul coniuncti eam abrogare conentur Where you see plainly his end is no other in pleading either a law divine natural or a law of nations for his Exemption of Ecclesiasticks but that his Reader might go away with this perswasion That in case either can have any colour out of his arguments then it must be further concluded that no power on earth can at any time hereafter pretend to change or lessen this Exemption And so the Pope alone must be for ever the onely absolute supream Monarch even in all temporals of all Clergiemen wherever in the world and even his temporal kingdom for goods lands houses persons must be at least on this account if all other pretences be overthrown diffused throughout all Kingdoms and States of the earth And France alone for example must acknowledge at least three hundred thousand French men and women though born within and never out of France to be with all their goods lands houses revenues persons properly and onely accountable to him even I mean still in all temporals as to their onely supream Lord and not accountable at all in any thing to him we call or who is truly the French King Lewis the XIIII All which must be concluded according to his design if his Reader can be once perswaded by his arguments that his Ecclesiastical Immunity is as much as de jure Gentium of the law of nations For he would have us believe him that a law of nations cannot be so purely positive but that it must be partly also natural or at least cannot be at all so positive or so from the consent or custom of men that any less number then that of all nations wherever and of all even the Subjects of all nations that is of all men both Princes and Subjects can in any particular Kingdom or State revoke or change it because forsooth his unevident unnecessary conclusions of the third degree are those whereof the laws of nations are framed and consequently those laws of nations are in so much or aliquo modo natural and that even such or aliquo modo natural institutions cannot be otherwise altered and his Exemption of Ecclesiasticks must be ranked amongst those institutions or laws of nations or amongst those dictats which are aliquo modo naturalia LXVI Having so considered his design let us now to his arguments whereby he pretends to prove his Assertion or that of his Ecclesiastical Exemption or Immunity even as to the persons of Clergiemen from the very supream civil power and even in all temporal matters and causes whatsoever civil or criminal to be aliquo modo de jure divino naturali and without any modus at all to be de jure Gentium or of the law of nations Four several arguments are formed by him to prove this Assertion Whereof the first argument thus It is the custom of all nations that Clerks be so exempted Therefore c. For sayes he what is every where descends from nature it self which is common to all And to prove this Antecedent he alleages That amongst the Hebrews the Levits were exempt from tributs out of the 30 of Exodus and 1. of Numbers That amongst the Egyptians under Pharao the Priests were exempt Gen. chap. 47. That the same exemption was enjoyed by the Hebrew Priests under Artaxerxes 1. Esdras 7. chap. That the same too as enjoyed by the Gentil Priests may be known out of Aristotle l. 2. Oceonom out of Caesar l. 6. de bello Gallico out of Plutarch in Gamillo and out of others And amongst Christians That the Emperour Constantine the Great no sooner was openly professed Christian then he incontinently as if nature her self had taught him declared the Priests exempt from the common duties of other Christians as appears out of his Epistle to Anulinus recorded by Eusebius l. X. Histor Eccles. c. 7. Wherein other Christian Emperours did imitate him But to this purpose Iustinians words are to be noted particularly l. Sancinius 2. Cod. de Sacrasanctis Ecclesiis For when he had in this law priviledg'd the Churches that is the publick places of prayer he added presently Cur enim non facimus discrimen inter res divinas humanas cur non competens praerogativa caelesti favori conservetur by which words sayes our learned Cardinal this Emperour signified that exemption not to be the pleasure of men or arbitrary but due and necessary Second argument thus or from some kind of similitude which we may conceive betwixt the Soul and Body of one side and the spiritual and temporal power on the other The soul or spirit is ordered so by nature in relation to the body or flesh that although she hinder not the actions of the body while or when they are regular yet if otherwise she curbs them and absolutely in all cases governs the flesh
miraculous power as that of Peter and Paul by prophecy and prayer in some other or in many other godly persons of the Church even such a miraculous power as may impetrat or may foretell the most corporal and deadly punishment on this or that wicked sinner But what hath this to do with that which is the coactive power of the Church this miraculous power may be in the most inferiour person of the Church in him that hath no kind of Church office or Church power at all and that coactive power is only in some chief Officers of the Church this is extraordinary and miraculous that ordinary and requiring no miracle this very contingent and for sometimes only and tyed to no certain sort of persons that absolutely and perpetually constant for all and in one certain degree of persons And therefore I may conclude again that no such corporal coaction nor any such coactive power of such corporal coaction is concluded or may be concluded by the second or last sort of Iohn the XXII's arguments as that is which is denyed by me or by any other Christian to be alwayes proper to and necessarily resident in the Church or as that is which is properly truly and simply called the coactive power of the Church And therefore also I may conclude further that the definition of Iohn the XXII against the fift and last Article of Marsilius and Iandunus concerns not my foresaid doctrine or my foresaid explications answers or digressions where I say that the Church of Christ as such purely hath neither temporal territory nor carnal or material sword or say the same thing in these other words that the Church as a Church hath no secular corporal or carnal power from Christ but from worldly Princes and States only to punish either corporally or civilly or that none at all from Christ to punish for example by imprisonment banishment death or by confiscation or deprivation of his temporal goods or rights or by any other corporal force or means can inflict any other kind of punishment against the criminal's own consent but that all her power as from Christ is purely spiritual and the means of executing such power must also be purely spiritual whether in the mean time the power it self or execution of it be miraculous or not miraculous and whether also the things prescrib'd or enjoyn'd be in their own nature purely spiritual or not For I confess the Church even as a pure Church only may and may by her own proper ordinary and perpetually constant Church power both prescribe and enjoyn or command strictly many things which are otherwise in their own nature purely civil temporal and corporal and that such commands oblige the spirit of man under sin when they are laid clave non errante that is when the laws of God or man or nature do otherwise require the performance of the same things either as a pure satisfaction to the vindicative justice of God for the fin committed or as a pure reparation or restitution to another man of his goods unjustly detained or as a remedy to prevent sin and that therefore the Church even as a pure Church may in some cases enjoyn also even corporal fastings watchings disciplines hair-cloathes pilgrimages c. and not only a real restitution of temporal goods illgotten or ill detained Nay and I alwayes confess that for whatsoever she can justly prescribe by her directive power spiritual she hath also an answerable coactive power spiritual even also in relation to such corporal injunctions or afflictions though she have not from Christ any corporal means allowed her of her own to force due obedience to such her either directive or coactive power but only in ordinary and to her Superiours only the spiritual means of pure Ecclesiastical or pure spiritual censures or of such as are no way civil censures and in extraordinary amongst her Prophets and wonder-working Saints the spiritual means of pure prayer and prophesie All which I am sure can be very true and infallible notwithstanding I allow this definition of Iohn the XXII against the fift Article of Marsilius and Iandunus to be absolutely true and infallible even this very definition It is false erroneous and heretical that the whole Church joyn'd together cannot punish by a coactive punishment even the most wicked person unless the Emperour grant them power to do so or punish that person so For the bare grammatical words of this definition as it lyes in it self or as they I mean the two words punitione coactiva lye in it and the theological sense too of them given by Iohn the XXII himself in other words in his Bull if this sense of those or these may be gathered from his arguments as and as I have noted before it must be in all reason admit very well of my construction being coactive punition whether in its own nature it be properly corporal or properly and only spiritual is a moral genus not only to that coactive punition which is properly and purely spiritual and to that which is properly and strictly corporal but to that also which is inflicted by means that are purely spiritual and to that which is not inflicted or put in execution by such means but by meer humane civil or corporal means and force and being the rule is generally allowed that such definitions and words in them are stricti juris and consequently not to be extended beyond that which the most ordinary strict signification of them and the materia subjecta and no prejudice to a third and in a word which a good sense requires quia odia sunt restringenda as the rule of the very canon law in Sexto is Yet if notwithstanding all this or all said hitherto upon this fift Article of Marsilius and Iandunus any will be still so unreasonably contentious as to fix rather a contrary sense that is a bad sense to the definition of Iohn the XXII against it I cannot help that otherwise then to oppose to Iohn the XXII and to such bad sense affixed to him the clear and good sense of another Pope even of Celestinus III. in the very canon law too cap. Non ab homine de Judiciis quoted by me at length in my former Section or in my LXXV Section and to oppose also the clear and good sense of even a general Council and that a late one too as being held after the dayes of Iohn the XXII I mean the Council of Constance where the Fathers Sess 15. speak thus Attento quod Ecclesia Dei non habet ultra quod agere valeat judicio seculari relinquere ipsum Curiae seculari relinquendum fore decernit which they speak in the case of Ioannes Huss after they had excommunicated and degraded him and lastly to oppose the very essential constitution of the Christian Church and of her Ecclesiastical Superiours as such And yet I must advertise my Readers that the very contrary bad sense of
this definition of Iohn the XXII against this last article of Marsilius and Jandunus doth not gainsay or contradict at all my main purpose or Thesis of a coercive power supream in Christian Princes over all Clerks and in all their criminal causes whatsoever For these two positions have no contradiction 1. There is a coactive power humane and corporal and civil too if you please in the Christian Church as a pure Christian Church 2. This coactive power humane corporal and civil too or not civil as you please is not altogether independent in it self but is subordinat to the higher humane and corporal powers of supream temporal Princes That they are not contradictory or inconsistent we see by the example of both civil and Ecclesiastical tribunals For the inferiour tribunals notwithstanding they have a true proper innate coactive power civil or spiritual respectively are subordinat to the superiour And so I have done at last with this long discourse occasion'd by the fourth objection or that of the conincidency of my doctrine with the condemn'd doctrine of Marsilius and Jandunus Which by a strict examen of all their five Articles and comparison of all and of each of them all to my own doctrine all along and to that which is the doctrine of the Catholick Church I have proved to be very false as I declared also that I hold no part of even their very true uncondemn'd doctrine as it was their doctrine but as it was and is the doctrine of the Catholick Church Which Catholick doctrine or doctrine of mine because it is that of the Catholick Church I am sure without any peradventure I have sufficiently nay abundantly demonstrated by reason Scripture and Tradition Therefore now to The fift and last of all these objections which I call'd remaining for the reason before given that objection I mean built upon the contrary judgment or opinion as t is pretended of St. Thomas of Canterbury and upon his Martyrdom or death suffered therefore and of his canonization also therefore and consequent veneration and invocation of him throughout and by the universal Church as of a most glorious martyrized Saint therefore This objection I confess is very specious at first as it makes the very greatest noyse and the very last essay of a dying cause But it is onely amongst the unlearned inconsiderat and vulgar sort of Divine or Canonists or both it appears to and works so T is onely amongst those who know no more of the true history of this holy mans contests and sufferings or of the particulars of the difference twixt him and his King or of the precise cause of his suffering either death at last or exile at first for a long time or many years before his death but what they read in their Breviary which yet is not enough to ground any rational objection against me though peradventure enough to solve any T is onely amongst those who do not consider duely nor indeed have the knowledg or at least have not the judgment discretion or reflection to consider duely what it amounts to in point of Christian Faith as to others or to the perswasion of others against me or my doctrine hetherto that any one Bishop how otherwise holy soever in his own life should have especially in these days of King Henry the second of England and of Pope Alexander the third of Rome suffer'd even death it self for the defence of true Ecclesiastical Immunities in general or of this or that Immunity in particular or for having opposed some particular laws either just or unjust I care not which made by a secular Prince against some certain Ecclesiastical Immunitie and whether made against those which are or were certainly true Immunities or those were onely pretended I care not also which T is onely amongst those who do not besides consider duely that not even the greatest Saints and greatest Martyrs have been always universally freed not even at their death for any thing we know from some prepossession of some one or other ilgrounded even Theological opinion or of moe perhaps and that such weakness of their understanding Faculty in such matters did not at all prejudice their Sanctity or Martyrdom because the disposition of their Souls or of that Faculty of their Souls which is called the Will was evermore perfectly obedient humble had the truth of such very matters been sufficiently represented to them because they had other sufficient manifold causes and Instances of their true Sanctity and true Martyrdom according to that knowledg which is saving though I do not averr any such prepossession here nor am forced by the objection to averr any such prepossession of St. Thomas of Canterbury in any thing which is material T is onely among such inconsiderat Divines I say that the objection grounded on his opposition to Henry the Secon'd laws concerning Clergiemen and on his exile death miracles canonization invocation appears so strong against the doctrine of a supream inherent power in secular Princes who are supream themselves to coerce by temporal punishments all criminal Clerks whosoever living within their dominions Whether the Divines of Lovain who censured our Remonstrance as you have that Censure of theirs page 120. of this first Part be to be ranked amongst such inconsiderat Divines I leave to the Reader 's own better consideration when reflecting once more both on it and all the four grounds of it he observes moreover particularly the day of the date of it so signally express'd by them in these tearms Ita post maturam deliberationem aliquoties iteratam censuimus ac decidimus Lovanii in plenu Facultatis Congregatione sub juramento indicta ac servata die â—9 Decembris gloriosi Pontificis Thomae Cantuariensis Angliae quondam Primatis mortyrio consecratae Anno Dominae Incarnationis 1662. And whether they did of purpose fix on this day of S. Thomas of Canterbury as most proper for such a censure I know not certainly but suppose undoubtedly it was not without special design they mention'd him and his primacy glory martyrdom and how that 29. day of December of their censure was consecrated to his martyrdom as I profess also ingenuously it was the reading of this so formal signal date of theirs made me ever since now and then reflect on the specious argument which peradventure some weak Divines might alleadg for their fourth ground Though to confess all the truth I never met any that fram'd it methodically or put it into any due or undue form of argument for them or of objection against me but onely in general objected that S. Thomas of Canterbury suffered for maintayning the liberties of the Church and of Clergiemen against Henry the second Which is the reason and that I may leave nothing which may seem to any to be material unsaid or unobjected cleerly and fully by my self against my self I put all which my adversaries would be at in this concern of St. Thomas of
Thirteenth especially considering that the promise and declaration thereof made in that Thirteenth is delivered in such words as must of necessity argue though not a formal yet a virtual assertion because a supposition of each of these three last Sorbon Propositions in that very maâ—ner I have now presently express'd or of the truth of them and by consequence also a virtual censure and condemnation of the contrary Tenets For otherwise how could We declare truly honestly and conscientiously That it is our unalterable resolution proceeding freely from the persuasion of a good Conscience and shall be ever with Gods grace First never to approve or practise according to any Positions which in particular or general assert any thing contrary to His Majesties Royal Rights or Prerogatives c. and consequently never to approve of or practise any thing contrary to the genuine Liberties of the Irish Church c Secondly not to maintain defend or teach that the Pope is above a General Council Thirdly also never to maintain defend or teach That the Pope alone under what consideration soever c. is infallible in his definitions made without the consent c as at large in the said Thirteenth complex Proposition or Paragraph How I say could We or any persons whatsoever declare truly honestly and conscientiously in such terms such a resolution as to such matters unless we or they were at the same time inwardly and throughly persuaded of the verity of those three assertory single Propositions which I say are previously and at least virtually supposed and by consequence also of the falsity of the opposite doctrines For no man at least no Divine Preacher Confessor Leader and Guide of others by his Calling and Function may or can honestly profess in publick to the World such an unalterable resolution unless he be inwardly persuaded that doctrine he disclaims in is false and the contrary true because the Apostle and reason too assures us That whatever proceeds not from Conscience is a sin and consequently that it is unlawful for any man at least who is bound to be the spiritual guide of others to profess especially in such manner such a resolution against doctrines pretended to be Religious and Evangelical of the falsity of which he is not throughly convinced being it is clear enough that want of such conviction would argue his Soul to be either habitually or actually depraved i. e. resolved to run wilfully the hazard of opposing an Evangelical Truth and therefore to be in a wicked state 10. That the foresaid Colledge of Divines consisted partly of graduated or licensed and instituted Professors of Divinity and partly of other qualified Fathers but who were also Divines although not as the former instituted Professors to teach in the Schools and that the names and qualities too or titles of all both these and those I mean as many of them as I can exactly now remember to have ordinarily come to that meeting were as followeth viz. Fr Antony O Docharty Minister Provincial of St. Francis's Order in Ireland Fr Thomas Dillon Vicar Provincial of the Discalceat Carmelits in Ireland Laurence Archbold a Secular and Parish-Priest formerly Vicar General of Dublin George Plunket a Secular Parish-Priest and Archdeacon of Meath Fr Antony Gearnon of St. Francis's Order several times formerly Guardian viz. of the Convents of Dundalk Dublin c. Fr John Reynolds of St. Dominick's Order Protonotary Apostolical c. Fr Thomas Talbot of St. Francis's Order one of Her late Maiesty the Queen Mother's Chaplains Fr Valentin Brown of St. Francis's Order Reader Jubilat of Divinity and formerly Minister Provincial of Ireland Angel Goulding a Secular Parish-Priest of St. Owens in Dublin and Doctor of Divinity Fr Bernardinus Barry of St. Francis's Order and Reader Jubilat of Divinity Fr Thomas Harold of the same Order Reader Jubilat of Divinity Fr Simon Wafer of the same Order Reader of Divinity Fr John Grady of the same Order Reader of Divinity Fr Peter Walsh of the same Order Reader of Divinity and Procurator c. In all Fourteen whereof Nine Franciscans three of the Secular Clergy one of the Carmelits and one of St. Dominick's Order and this last viz. Father John Reynolds was also their Secretary or he that writ down what they had agreed upon and kept the Papers This is a true account of the occasion end time and manner also of debating as likewise of the persons who debated the said Fifteen Propositions or Doctrine of Allegiance contain'd in them And now there remains but a few other particulars I would have here briefly advertised 1. That several other Churchmen at several times came to that little meeting as it was free and open for any that pleased to come and go when he would and object whatever he thought fit but that I do not remember any of those others that came so to have objected any thing 2. That Father Harold was he as he is a very able man that disputed most and press't hard against me on the controverted points or arising difficulties though he concurr'd at last with my sense on every point 3. That where I speak of a select number of Divines by that word select I would signifie only those who of the foresaid whole number of Fourteen were School-professors of Divinity who were indeed but seven whereof I am sure that five were as select as any our Countrey could then afford 4. That amongst the same foresaid number of Fourteen there were three who had been actual Members of the late National Congregation viz. Antony Docharty Provincial of the Franciscans Thomas Dillon Provincial of the Carmelits and Angel Goulding Doctor of Divinity 5. That six of the whole number had neither before nor after sign'd the controverted Remonstrance viz. Antony Docharty Thomas Dillon Bernardinus Barry John Grady Angel Goulding George Plunket 6. And lastly That I have been by so much the more exact in giving the particulars of this Colledge of Divines held after the National Congregation was dissolved and of the matters debated therein by how much I found it and my self also even for it traduced by false relations thereof sent over Seas For my Lord Bishop of Ferns out of his own candid nature and some kindness also to me was pleased to let me know so much though not before the year 1669. The words of his Letter dated the 6th of October said year 1669 to the present purpose are these Father Peter Walsh is said to have used fraud and force in the Congregation of the Clergy at Dublin anno 1666 and that he kept an Anti-Congregation of his own faction to vex them I saw a relation sent over of that I saw also severe lines of a great Cardinal to that purpose Whereunto he further adds kindly some further notice viz. of the late cause of their anger against me at Rome in these other words It was ill taken by all That after Cardinal Franciscus Barberinus 's Letter in His Holinesse
's name to the Clergy he viz. Father Peter Walsh no way lowr'd his Sail but remained obstinate and insolent I likewise saw a great Man's Letter I mean a Roman termed him and Caron Apostates But I hope as it hath appear'd manifestly before in the former Sections that I have not used in any manner not even in the least degree whatsoever any kind of either fraud or force in that Congregation so by what I have said hitherto in this present Section and third Appendage therein it doth no less now appear that I kept no Anti-Congregation at all much less any such of my own faction to vex them the foresaid National Congregation For to pass over now as not material that the foresaid Colledge of Divines was not held at the same time with but first assembled after the Congregation had dissolved and four parts at least of five departed to their own respective dwellings in other parts of Ireland neither can it be said 1. That that Colledge was of my faction being it had from the beginning even the first day thereof almost one moyety of Anti-Remonstrants and was free and open for ten times so many of that sort to enter it after at any time they pleased Nor 2. That it was called either to determine any thing contrary to what the Congregation had professed or as much as to debate on that which they had concluded Nor 3. That it did in truth determine or debate any such matter No nor 4. can it be said that any such was the design or scope of calling that Colledge whereas interessed Members of the Congregation were to compose it and that after all nothing was to be therein carried by the greater vote but by the stronger reason and clearer conviction and full concurrence at last of every individual person And therefore as that Colledge ought not to be nay could not in any reason or with any truth be called an Anti-Congregation so ought it be said 1 To have been composed not only not of those of my faction or not of them more than of those of the contrary but not of any persons whatsoever that might in any wise according to their own rule proceed factiously if otherwise they would And 2 To have been kept for a much better end than to vex them or than that could be of vexing the Congregation Unless peradventure any can shew That to secure His Majesty of the Roman-Catholick Clergy of Ireland as much as hand or subscription can and thereby to answer home and fully refute the grand objection of the inconsistency of Catholick Religion and by consequence of the toleration of it with the safety of a Protestant Prince or State be not a much better end than that of vexing the Congregation Or at least can prove That to secure so His Majesty and to answer so that grand objection was not the end which Peter Walsh proposed to himself in calling or keeping that Colledge Which yet can never be proved being so directly even against the very so long since printed Title of those Fourteen Propositions which he prepared and presented to be as they were indeed the only matters to be agreed on by the Divines of that same Colledge Now if out of all it doth not appear that I kept no kind of Anti-congregation much less any such of my own faction to vex them the foresaid National Congregation I know not how any thing can appear For the often mention'd Colledge of Divines held upon the Fifteen Propositions being cleared of that scandalous name of an Anti-congregation there was no other held by me or by any other besides me to be charg'd with it because neither I nor any other hold any kind of other Colledge Congregation or Meeting while that National Congregation sate besides it self nor after it dissolved but only the foresaid Colledge of Divines upon the Fifteen Propositions A Letter indeed and but that one Letter you have before pag. 696. address'd to the National Congregation it self yea address'd by way of humble desire and Petition was during the Session subscribed by Eighteen of my Friends or of those who had formerly subscribed the Remonstrance of 1661. and delivered to the Speaker and read in the House But I assure the Reader That the Fathers who sign'd that Letter kept neither Anti-congregation nor Congregation because neither Colledge nor any Meeting at all in any house or place or time or upon any other business or even upon that very Letter whereas only some of them first and others after met some by chance and some perhaps of purpose walking in a Garden hard by the House where the National Assembly sate as they were desired and they themselves thought also good did singly sign that Letter And yet after and notwithstanding all such known manifest Truths I believe my Lord of Ferns did see as he sayes he did that false relation sent over to Flanders out of Ireland and those severe lines also of a great Cardinal to that purpose But who can hinder either the lying of Lyars or even the severe lines of an interested Cardinal on such a Subject As for the other friendly advertisement given me in the same paper and next place therein by my Lord of Ferns viz. How it was taken ill by all that after Cardinal Franciscus Barberinus c because it doth not properly or indeed at all concern my present third Appendage and that I have elsewhere at large in a more proper place answer'd it I will only say here 1. That as you may see before in this Treatise viz. pag. 632. that Letter of Cardinal Francis Barberin which the Bishop means here so you may see also there pag. 636 637 638 and 639. my brief animadversions both on that same and other Letters too as well of the said Barberin as of the three Bruxels Internuncio's immediately succeeding one after another these ten years past Hieronymus de Vecchiis Jacobus Rospigliosi and the last of all ........ Airoldi 2. That if I had lowr'd my Sail in any kind of way or sense the said Cardinal desired I had by doing so renounced the Catholick Faith as to one essential or at least material and necessary point thereof and even betrayed my Countrey to boot and consequently by doing so or complying with the Cardinal in any way must have at the same time profess'd my self an impious Rebel against the Church and a perfidious Traytor against the King Crown and Kingdom 3. That refusing to do so is so far from remaining either obstinate or insolent that without any doubt it is on the contrary remaining constant and resolute in the very best cause I could and was in Conscience obliged to undertake and maintain against the corrupters both of Loyalty and Christianity 4. That being it appears now more than manifestly more than abundantly as well out of the Louain Vniversities Censure which I have given pag. 102. and the Franciscan Belgick Declaration pag. 116. as out of