baptized in the name of Jesus because unus Deus unum baptisma and as it is still one Faith which a man confesseth severall times and one Sacrament of the Eucharist though a man often communicates so it might be one baptism though often ministred And the unity of baptism might not be deriv'd from the unity of the ministration but from the unity of the Religion into which they are baptized though baptized a thousand times yet because it was still in the name of the holy Trinity still into the death of Christ it might be unum baptisma Whether S. Cyprian Firmilian and their Collegues had this discourse or no I know not I am sure they might have had much better to have evacuated the force of that Argument although I believe they had the wrong cause in hand But this is it that I say that when a Question is so undetermin'd in Scripture that the Arguments rely only upon such mysticall places whence the best fancies can draw the greatest variety and such which perhaps were never intended by the holy Ghost it were good the rivers did not swell higher then the fountaine and the confidence higher then the Argument and evidence for in this case there could not any thing be so certainly proved as that the disagreeing party should deserve to be condemn'd by a sentence of Excommunication for disbelieving it and yet they were which I wonder at so much the more because they who as it was since judg'd had the right cause had not any sufficient Argument from Scripture not so much as such mysticall Arguments but did fly to the Tradition of the Church in which also I shall afterward shew they had nothing that was absolutely certaine 3. I consider that there are divers places of Scripture containing Numb 6. in them mysteries and Questions of great concernment and yet the fabrick and constitution is such that there is no certain mark to determine whether the sense of them should be literall or figurative I speak not here concerning extrinsecall meanes of determination as traditive Interpretation Councels Fathers Popes and the like I shall consider them afterward in their severall places but here the subject matter being concerning Scripture in its own capacity I say there is nothing in the nature of the thing to determine the sense and meaning but it must be gotten out as it can and that therefore it is unreasonable that what of it selfe is ambiguous should be understood in its own prime sense and intention under the paine of either a sinne or an Anathema I instance in that famous place from whence hath sprung that Question of Transubstantiation Hoc est corpus meum The words are plain and clear apt to be understood in the literall sense and yet this sense is so hard as it does violence to reason and therefore it is the Question whether or no it be not a figurative speech But here what shall we have to determine it What mean soever we take and to what sense soever you will expound it you shall be put to give an account why you expound other places of Scripture in the same case to quite contrary senses For if you expound it literally then besides that it seems to intrench upon the words of our blessed Saviour The words that I speak they are Spirit and they are life that is to be spiritually understood and it is a miserable thing to see what wretched shifts are used to reconcile the literall sense to these words and yet to distinguish it from the Capernaiticall fancy but besides this why are not those other sayings of Christ expounded literally I am a Vine I am the Doore I am a Rock Why doe we flie to a figure in those parallel words This is the Covenant which I make between me and you and yet that Covenant was but the sign of the Covenant and why doe we fly to a figure in a precept as well as in mystery and a proposition If thy right hand offend thee cut it off and yet we have figures enough to save a limb If it be said because reason tells us these are not to be expounded according to the letter This will be no plea for them who retaine the literall exposition of the other instance against all reason against all Philosophy against all sense and against two or three sciences But if you expound these words figuratively besides that you are to contest against a world of prejudices you give your selfe the liberty which if others will use when either they have a reason or a necessity so to doe they may perhaps turn all into Allegory and so may evacuate any precept and elude any Argument Well so it is that very wise men have expounded things * Sic S Hieron In ad â—esâ—entiâ provocatus ardore studio Scriptuarum allegoricè interpretatus sum Abdiam Prophetam cujus historiam nesciebam De sensu Allegorico S. Script dixit Basilius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Allegorically when they should have expounded them literally So did the famous Origen who as S. Hierom reports of him turned Paradise so into an Allegory that he took away quite the truth of the Story and not only Adam was turned out of the Garden but the Garden it selfe out of Paradise Others expound things literally when they should understand them in Allegory so did the Ancient Papias understand Apocal. 20. Christs Millenary raign upon earth and so depressed the hopes of Christianity and their desires to the longing and expectation of temporall pleasures and satisfactions and he was followed by Justin Martyr Irenaeus Tertullian Lactantius and indeed the whole Church generally till S. Austin and S. Hierom's time who first of any whose works are extant did reprove the errour If such great spirits be deceiv'd in finding out what kinde of senses L. 23. de Civit. Dei c 7. praefat â— 19. in Isai. in c. 36. Ezek. be to be given to Scriptures it may well be endur'd that we who sit at their feet may also tread in the steps of them whose feet could not alwayes tread aright 4. I consider that there are some places of Scripture that Numb 7. have the selfe same expressions the same preceptive words the same reason and account in all appearance and yet either must be expounded to quite different senses or else we must renounce the Communion and the charities of a great part of Christendome And yet there is absolutely nothing in the thing or in its circumstances or in its adjuncts that can determine it to different purposes I instance in those great exclusive negatives for the necessity of both Sacraments Nisi quis renatus fuerit ex aquâ c. Nisi manducaveritis carnem filii hominis c. a non introibit in regnum coelorum for both these Now then the first is urg'd for the absolute indispensable necessity of baptism even in Infants insomuch that Infants goe to part of Hell if
things with spirituall The holy Ghost teaches yet it is upon our co-operation our study and endeavour while we compare spirituall things with spirituall the holy Ghost is said to teach us because these spirituals were of his suggestion and revelation 3. For it is a rule of the Schools and there is much reason Numb 14. in it Habitus infusi infunduntur per modum acquisitorum whatsoever is infused into us is in the same manner infused as other things are acquired that is step by step by humane meanes and co-operation and grace does not give us new faculties and create another nature but meliorates and improves our own And what S. Paul said in the Resurrection is also true in this Question That is not first which is spirituall but that which is naturall and then that which is spirituall The graces and gifts of the Spirit are postnate and are additions to art and nature God directs our councels opens our understandings regulates our will orders our affections supplies us with Objects and Arguments and opportunities and revelations in scriptis and then most when we most imploy our own endeavours God loving to blesse all the meanes and instruments of his service whether they be naturall or acquisite But whosoever shall look for any other gifts of the spirit besides Numb 15. the parts of nature helped by industry and Gods blessing upon it and the revelations or the suppplyes of matter in holy Scripture will be very farre to seek having neither reason promise nor experience of his side For why should the spirit of Prayer be any other than as the gift and spirit of saith as S. Paul calls it 2 Cor. 4. 13 acquired by humane meanes using divine aids that is by our endeavours in hearing reading Catechizing desires to obey and all this blessed and promoted by God this produces faith And if the spirit of Prayer be of greater consequence and hath a promise of a speciall prerogative let the first be proved and the second be shewn in any good record and then I will believe it too 4. And the parallel of this Argument I the rather urge because Numb 16. I find praying in the holy Ghost joyned with graces which are as much Gods gifts and productions of the spirit as any thing in the world and yet which the Apostle presses upon us as duties and things put into our power and to be improved by our industry and those are faith in which I before instanced and charity Epist. Jud. ver 20. But ye beloved building up your selves on your most holy Faith praying in the holy Ghost keep your selves in the love of God All of the same consideration Faith and Prayer and Charity all gifts of the Spirit and yet build up your selves in faith and keep your selves in love and therefore by a parity of reason improve your selves in the spirit of prayer that is God by his Spirit having supplyed us with matter let our industry and co-operations per modum naturae improve these gifts and build upon this foundation So that in effect praying in the holy Ghost or with the Spirit Numb 17. is nothing but prayer for such things and in such manner which God by his Spirit hath taught us in holy Scripture Holy prayers spirituall songs so the Apostle calls one part of prayer viz. Eucharisticall or thanksgiving that is prayers or songs which are spirituall in materiâ And if they be called spirituall for the efficient cause too the holy Ghost being the Author of them it comes all to one for therefore he is the cause and giver of them because he hath in his word revealed what things we are to pray for and there also hath taught us the manner And this is exactly the Doctrine I plainly gather from the objected Numb 18. words of Saint Paul The spirit helpeth our infirmities How so it followes immediately For we know not what we should pray for as we ought So that therefore he is the Spirit of supplication and prayer because he teaches us what to ask and how to pray so he helps our infirmities 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it is in the Greek Collaborantem adjuvat It is an ingeminate expression of helping us in our labours together with him Now he that shall say this is not sufficiently done by Gods Spirit in Scripture by Prayers and Psalmes and Hymnes and Spirituall Songs and precepts concerning prayer set down in that holy repository of truth and devotion undervalues that inestimable treasure of the Spirit and if it be sufficiently done there he that will multiply his hopes farther then what is sufficient may possibly deceive himself but never deceive God and make him multiply and continue miracles to justifie his fancy 5. Better it is to follow the Scriptures for our guide as in all Numb 19. things else so in this particular Ephes. 6. 17 18. Take the sword of the Spirit which is the word of God Praying alwayes with all prayer and supplication in the spirit The Word of God is the sword of the Spirit praying in the Spirit is one way of using it indeed the only way that he here specifies Praying in the Spirit then being the using of this Sword and this Sword being the Word of God it followes evidently that praying in the Spirit is praying in or according to the Word of God that is in the directions rules and expresses of the Word of God that is of the holy Scriptures The summe is this Whatsoever this gift is or this spirit of Numb 20. Prayer it is to be acquired by humane industry by learning of the Scriptures by reading by conference and by whatsoever else faculties are improved and habits enlarged Gods Spirit hath done his work sufficiently this way and he loves not either in nature or grace which are his two great sanctions to multiply miracles when there is no need 6. So that now I demand Whether or no since the expiration Numb 21. of the Age of Miracles does not Gods Spirit most assist us when we most endeavour and most use the meanes He that sayes No discourages all men from reading the Scriptures from industry from meditation from conference from humane Arts and Sciences and from whatsoever else God and good Lawes provoke us to by proposition of rewards But if Yea as most certainly God will best crown the best endeavours then the spirit of Prayer is greatest in him who supposing the like capacities and opportunities studies hardest reads most practices most religiously deliberates most prudently and then by how much want of meanes is worse then the use of meanes by so much ex tempore Prayers are worse then deliberate and studyed Excellent therefore is the councell of S. Peter 1 Ep. Chap. 4. ver 11. If any man speak let him speak as the Oracles of God not lightly then and inconsiderately If any man minister let him doe it as of the ability which God giveth great reason
quiet and charitable in some dis-agreeings that then and there the inconvenience ceases if they were so in all others where lawfully they might and they may in most Christendome should be no longer rent in pieces but would be redintegrated in a new Pentecost and although the Spirit of God did rest upon us in divided tongues yet so long as those tongues were of fire not to kindle strife but to warme our affections and inflame our charities we should finde that this variety of Opinions in severall persons would be look't upon as an argument only of diversity of operations while the Spirit is the same and that another man believes not so well as I is onely an argument that I have a better and a clearer illumination than he that I have a better gift than he received a speciall grace and favour and excell him in this and am perhaps excelled by him in many more And if we all impartially endeavour to finde a truth since this endeavour and search only is in our power that wee shall finde it being ab extra a gift and an assistance extrinsecall I can see no reason why this pious endeavour to finde out truth shall not be of more force to unite us in the bonds of charity then his misery in missing it shall be to dis-unite us So that since a union of perswasion is impossible to be attain'd if we would attempt the cure by such remedies as are apt to enkindle and encrease charity I am confident wee might see a blessed peace would bee the reward and crown of such endeavours But men are now adayes and indeed alwayes have been since the expiration of the first blessed Ages of Christianity so in love with their own Fancies and Opinions as to think Faith and all Christendome is concernd in their support and maintenance and whoever is not so fond and does not dandle them like themselves it growes up to a quarrell which because it is in materiâ theologiae is made a quarrell in Religion and God is entitled to it and then if you are once thought an enemy to God it is our duty to persecute you even to death we doe God good service in it when if we should examine the matter rightly the Question is either in materiâ non revelata or minus evidenti or non necessariâ either it is not revealed or not so clearely but that wise and honest men may be of different minds or else it is not of the foundation of faith but a remote super-structure or else of meere speculation or perhaps when all comes to all it is a false Opinion or a matter of humane interest that we have so zealously contended for for to one of these heads most of the Disputes of Christendome may be reduc'd so that I believe the present fractions or the most are from the same cause which St Paul observed in the Corinthian Schisme when there are divisions among you are ye not carnall It is not the differing Opinions that is the cause of the present ruptures but want of charity it is not the variety of understandings but the disunion of wills and affections it is not the severall principles but the severall ends that cause our miseries our Opinions commence and are upheld according as our turns are serv'd and our interests are preserv'd and there is no cure for us but Piety and Charity A holy life will make our belief holy if we consult not humanity and its imperfections in the choyce of our Religion but search for truth without designes save only of acquiring heaven and then be as carefull to preserve Charity as we were to get a point of Faith I am much perswaded we should finde out more truths by this meanes or however which is the maine of all we shall be secured though we misse them and then we are well enough For if it be evinced that one heaven shall hold men of severall Opinions if the unity of Faith be not destroyed by that which men call differing Religions and if an unity of Charity be the duty of us all even towards persons that are not perswaded of every proposition we believe then I would faine know to what purpose are all those stirres and great noyses in Christendome those names of faction the severall Names of Churches not distinguish'd by the division of Kingdomes ut Ecclesia sequatur Imperium which was the Primitive * Optat. lib. 3. Rule and Canon but distinguish'd by Names of Sects and men these are all become instruments of hatred thence come Schismes and parting of Communions and then persecutions and then warres and Rebellion and then the dissolutions of all Friendships and Societies All these mischiefes proceed not from this that all men are not of one minde for that is neither necessary nor possible but that every Opinion is made an Article of Faith every Article is a ground of a quarrell every quarrell makes a faction every faction is zealous and all zeale pretends for God and whatsoever is for God cannot be too much we by this time are come to that passe we think we love not God except we hate our Brother and we have not the vertue of Religion unlesse we persecute all Religions but our own for luke-warmnesse is so odious to God and Man that we proceeding furiously upon these mistakes by supposing we preserve the body we destroy the soule of Religion or by being zealous for faith or which is all one for that which we mistake for faith we are cold in charity and so loose the reward of both All these errors and mischiefes must be discovered and cured and that 's the purpose of this Discourse SECTION I. Of the nature of Faith and that its duty is compleated in believing the Articles of the Apostles Creed FIrst then it is of great concernment to know the nature and integrity of faith For there begins our first and great mistake Number 1. for Faith although it be of great excellency yet when it is taken for a habit intellectuall it hath so little roome and so narrow a capacity that it cannot lodge thousands of those Opinions which pretend to be of her Family For although it be necessary for us to believe whatsoever we Numb 2. know to be revealed of God and so every man does that believes there is a God yet it is not necessary concerning many things to know that God hath revealed them that is we may be ignorant of or doubt concerning the propositions and indifferently maintaine either part when the Question is not concerning Gods veracity but whether God hath said so or no That which is of the foundation of Faith that only is necessary and the knowing or not knowing of that the believing or dis-believing it is that only which in genere credendorum is in immediate and necessary order to salvation or damnation Now all the reason and demonstration of the world convinces Numb 3. us that this foundation
against their Adversaries and for the truth and never offered to call for the Pope to determine the Question in his Chaire Certaindly no way coud have been so expedite none so concluding and peremptory none could have convinc'd so certainly none could have triumph'd so openly over all discrepants as this if they had known of any such thing as his being infallible or that he had been appointed by Christ to be the Judge of Controversies And therefore I will not trouble this discourse to excuse any more words either pretended or really said to this purpose of the Pope for they would but make books swell and the Question endlesse I shall only to this purpose observe that the Old Writers were so farre from believing the infallibility of the Roman Church or Bishop that many Bishops and many Churches did actually live and continue out of the Roman Communion particularly * Vbi illa Augustini reliquorum prudentia quis jam ferat crassissimae ignorantiae illam vocem in tot tantis Patribus Alan Cop. dialog p. 76 77. Vide etiam Bonifac. 11. Epist ad Eulalium Alexandrinum Lindanum Panopli l. 4. c. 89. in fine Sa'meron Tom. 12. Tract 68. § ad Canonem Sander de visibili Monarchia l. 7. n. 411. Baron Tom. 10. A. D. 878. S. Austin who with 217 Bishops and their Successors for 100 years together stood separate from that Church if we may believe their own Records So did Ignatius of Constantinople S. Chrysostome S. Cyprian Firmilian those Bishops of Asia that separated in the Question of Easter and those of Africa in the Question of rebaptization But besides this most of them had opinions which the Church of Rome disavowes now and therefore did so then or else she hath innovated in her Doctrine which though it be most true and notorious I am sure she will never confesse But no excuse can be made for S. Austins disagreeing and contesting in the Question of appeales to Rome the necessity of Communicating Infants the absolute damnation of Infants to the paines of Hell if they die before Baptism and divers other particulars It was a famous act of the Bishops of Liguria and Istria who seeing the Pope of Rome consenting to the fifth Synod in disparagement of the famous Councell of Chalcedon which for their own interests they did not like of they renounced subjection to his Patriarchate and erected a Patriarch at Aquileia who was afterwards translated to Venice where his name remaines to this day It is also notorious that most of the Fathers were of opinion that the soules of the faithfull did not enjoy the beatifick Vision before Doomesday whether Rome was then of that opinion or no I know not I am sure now they are not witnesse the Councels of Florence and Trent but of this I shall give a more full account afterwards But if to all this which is already noted we adde that great variety of opinions amongst the Fathers and Councels in assignation of the Canon they not consulting with the Bishop of Rome nor any of them thinking themselves bound to follow his Rule in enumeration of the books of Scripture I think no more need to be said as to this particular 8. But now if after all this there be some Popes which were notorious Hereticks and Preachers of false Doctrine some that Numb 15. made impious Decrees both in faith and manners some that have determin'd Questions with egregious ignorance and stupidity some with apparent Sophistry and many to serve their own ends most openly I suppose then the infallibility will disband and we may doe to him as to other good Bishops believe him when there is cause but if there be none then to use our Consciences Non enim salvat Christianum quod Pontifex Tract de interdict Compos à Theol. Venet. prop. 13. constantèr affirmat praeceptum suum esse justum sed oportet illud examinari se juxta regulam superius datum dirigere I would not instance and repeat the errours of dead Bishops if the extreme boldnesse of the pretence did not make it necessary But if we may believe Tertullian Pope Zepherinus approv'd the Lib. adver Praxeam Prophecies of Montanus and upon that approbation granted peace to the Churches of Asia and Phrygia till Praxeas perswaded him to revoke his act But let this rest upon the credit of Tertullian whether Zepherinus were a Montanist or no some such thing there was for certain Pope Vigilius denyed Vid. Liberal in breviatio cap. 22. Durand 4. dist 7. q. 4. two natures in Christ and in his Epistle to Theodora the Empresse anathematiz'd all them that said he had two natures in one person S. Gregory himselfe permitted Priests to give confirmation which is all one as if he should permit Deacons to consecrate they being by Divine Ordinance annext to the higher orders and upon this very ground Adrianus affirms that the Pope may erre in definiendis dogmatibus fidei And that we may not feare we shall want instances we may to secure it Quae. de confirm art ult take their own confession Nam multae sunt decretales haereticae sayes Occham as he is cited by Almain firmitèr hoc credo 3. dist 24. q. unica sayes he for his own particular sed non licet dogmatizare oppositum quoniam sunt determinatae So that we may as well see that it is certain that Popes may be Hereticks as that it is dangerous to say so and therefore there are so few that teach it All the Patriarchs and the Bishop of Rome himselfe subscrib'd to Arrianism as Baronius confesses and * Dist. 19. c. 9. L. 4. Ep. 2. Gratian affirms that Pope Anastasius the Second was strucken of God for communicating A. D. 357. n. 44. with the Heretick Photinus I know it will be made light of that Gregory the Seventh saith the very exorcists of the Roman Church are Superiour to Princes But what shall we think of that decretall of Gregory the Third who wrore to Bonaface his Legate in Germany quod illi quorum uxores infirmitate aliquâ morbidae debitum reddere noluerunt aliis poterant Vid. Câ—iranz Sum. Concil sol 218. Edit Antwerp nubere was this a Doctrine fit for the Head of the Church an infallible Doctor it was plainly if any thing ever was doctrina Daemoniorum and is noted for such by Gratian caus 32. q. 7. can quod proposuisli Where the glosse also intimates that the same priviledge was granted to the Englishmen by Gregory quia novi erant in fide And sometimes we had little reason to expect much better for not to instance in that learned discourse in the * Canon Law de majoritate obedientiâ where the Popes Supremacy over Kings is proved from the first chapter of Genesis and the Pope is the Sunne and the Cap per venerabitem qui filii sint legitimi Emperour is the Moone for
But the observation and experience of all wise men can justifie this truth All that I shall say to the present purpose is this that consideration is to be had to the weakness of persons when they are prevail'd upon by so innocent a prejudice and when there cannot be arguments strong enough to over-master an habituall perswasion bred with a man nourish'd up with him that alwayes eat at his table and lay in his bosome he is not easily to be called Heretique for if he keeps the foundation of faith other articles are not so cleerly demonstrated on either side but that a man may innocently be abused to the contrary And therefore in this case to handle him charitably is but to doe him justice And when an opinion in minoribus articulis is entertain'd upon the title and stock of education it may be the better permitted to him since upon no better stock nor stronger arguments most men entertain their whole Religion even Christianity it selfe 5. There are some persons of a differing perswasion who therefore Numb 5. are the rather to be tolerated because the indirect practices and impostures of their adversaries have confirmed them that those opinions which they disavow are not from God as being upheld by means not of Gods appointment For it is no unreasonable discourse to say that God will not be served with a lye for he does not need one and he hath means enough to support all those truths which he hath commanded and hath supplyed every honest cause with enough for its maintenance and to contest against its adversaries And but that they which use indirect arts will not be willing to lose any of their unjust advantages nor yet be charitable to those persons whom either to gain or to undoe they leave nothing unattempted the Church of Rome hath much reason not to be so decretory in her sentences against persons of a differing perswasion for if their cause were entirely the cause of God they have given wise people reason to suspect it because some of them have gone to the Devill to defend it And if it be remembred what tragedies were stirred up against Luther for saying the Devill had taught him an argument against the Mass it will be of as great advantage against them that they goe to the Devill for many arguments to support not onely the Mass but the other distinguishing Articles of their Church I instance in the notorious forging of Miracles and framing of false and ridiculous Legends For the former I need no other instances then what hapned in the great contestation about the immaculate conception when there were Miracles brought on both sides to prove the contradictory parts and though it be more then probable that both sides play'd the jugglers yet the Dominicans had the ill luck to be discovered and the actors burn'd at Berne But this discovery hapned by providence for the Dominican opinion hath more degrees of probability then the Franciscan is cleerly more consonant both to Scripture and all antiquity and this part of it is acknowledged by the greatest Patrons themselves as Salmeron Posa and Wadding yet because they played the knaves in a just question and used false arts to maintain a true proposition God Almighty to shew that he will not be served by a lye was pleased rather to discover the imposture in the right opinion then in the false since nothing is more dishonourable to God then to offer a sin in sacrifice to him and nothing more incongruous in the nature of the thing then that truth and falshood should support each other or that true doctrine should live at the charges of a lye And he that considers the arguments for each opinion will easily conclude that if God would not have truth confirmed by a lye much lesse would he himself attest a lye with a true miracle And by this ground it will easily follow that the Franciscan party although they had better luck then the Dominicans yet had not more honesty because their cause was worse and therefore their arguments no whit the better And although the argument drawn from miracles is good to attest a holy doctrine which by its own worth will support it selfe after way is a little made by miracles yet of it selfe and by its owne reputation it will not support any fabrick for instead of proving a doctrine to be true it makes that the miracles themselves are suspected to be illusions if they be pretended in behalfe of a doctrine which we think we have reason to account false And therefore the Jews did not beleeve Christs doctrine for his Miracles but dis-beleeved the truth of his Miracles because they did not like his doctrine And if the holinesse of his doctrine and the Spirit of God by inspirations and infusions and by that which Saint Peter calls a surer word of prophecy had not attested the Divinity both of his Person and his Office we should have wanted many degrees of confidence which now we have upon the truth of Christian Religion But now since we are fore-told by this surer word of prophecy that is the prediction of Jesus Christ Vid. Baron AE D. 68. n. 22. Philostrat l. 4. T. 485. compend Cedren p. 202. that Antichrist should come in all wonders and signs and lying miracles and that the Church saw much of that already verified in Simon Magus Apollonius Tyaneus and Manetho and divers * Stapleton prompt Moral pars aestiva p. 627. Heretiques it is now come to that passe that the argument in its best advantage proves nothing so much as that the doctrine which it pretends to prove is to be suspected because it was foretold that false doctrine should be obtruded under such pretences But then when not onely true miracles are an insufficient argument to prove a truth since the establishment of Christianity but that the miracles themselves are false and spurious it makes that doctrine in whose defence they come justly to be suspected because they are a demonstration that the interested persons use all means leave nothing unattempted to prove their propositions but since they so faile as to bring nothing from God but something from the Devill for its justification it 's a great signe that the doctrine is false because we know the Devill unlesse it be against his will does nothing to prove a true proposition that makes against him And now then those persons who will endure no man of another opinion might doe well to remember how by their exorcismes their Devils tricks at Lowdon and the other side pretending to cure mad folkes and persons bewitched and the many discoveries of their jugling they have given so much reason to their adversaries to suspect their doctrine that either they must not be ready to condemne their persons who are made suspicious by their indirect proceeding in attestation of that which they value so high as to call their Religion or else they must condemne themselves for making
life for in matters speculative as all determinations are fallible so scarce any of them are to purpose nor ever able to make compensation of either side either for the publike fraction or the particular injustice if it should so happen in the censure But then as the Church may proceed thus far yet no Christian man or Community of men may proceed farther For if they Numb 2. be deceived in their judgement and censure and yet have passed onely spirituall censures they are totally ineffectuall and come to nothing there is no effect remaining upon the soule and such censures are not to meddle with the body so much as indirectly But if any other judgement passe upon persons erring such judgements whose effects remaine if the person be unjustly censured nothing will answer and make compensation for such injuries If a person be excommunicate unjustly it will doe him no hurt but if he be killed or dismembred unjustly that censure and infliction is not made ineffectuall by his innocence he is certainly kill'd and dismembred So that as the Churches authority in such cases so restrained and made prudent cautelous and orderly is just and competent so the proceeding is reasonable it is provident for the publike and the inconveniences that may fall upon particulars so little as that the publique benefit makes ample compensation so long as the proceeding is but spirituall This discourse is in the case of such opinions which by the former rules are formall heresies and upon practicall inconveniences Numb 3. But for matters of question which have not in them an enmity to the publique tranquillity as the Republique hath nothing to doe upon the ground of all the former discourses so if the Church meddles with them where they doe not derive into ill life either in the person or in the consequent or else are destructions of the foundation of Religion which is all one for that those fundamentall articles are of greatest necessity in order to a vertuous and godly life which is wholly built upon them and therefore are principally necessary If she meddles further otherwise then by preaching and conferring and exhortation she becomes tyrannicall in her government makes her selfe an immediate judge of consciences and perswasions lords it over their faith destroyes unity and charity and as if he that dogmatizes the opinion becomes criminall if he troubles the Church with an immodest peevish and pertinacious proposall of his article not simply necessary so the Church does not doe her duty if she so condemnes it pro tribunali as to enjoyne him and all her subjects to beleeve the contrary And as there may be pertinacy in doctrine so there may be pertinacy in judging and both are faults The peace of the Church and the unity of her doctrine is best conserved when it is judged by the proportion it hath to that rule of unity which the Apostles gave that is the Creed for Articles of meer beliefe and the precepts of Jesus Christ and the practicall rules of piety which are most plaine and easie and without controversie set downe in the Gospels and Writings of the Apostles But to multiply articles and adopt them into the family of the faith and to require assent to such articles which as S. Pauls phrase is are of doubtfull disputation equall to that assent wee give to matters of faith is to build a Tower upon the top of a Bulrush and the further the effect of such proceedings does extend the worse they are the very making such a Law is unreasonable the inflicting spirituall censures upon them that cannot doe so much violence to their understanding as to obey it is unjust and ineffectuall but to punish the person with death or with corporall infliction indeed it is effectuall but it is therefore tyrannicall We have seen what the Church may doe towards restraining false or differing opinions next I shall consider by way of Corollarie what the Prince may doe as for his interest and onely in securing his people and serving the ends of true Religion SECT XVI Whether it be lawfull for a Prince to give toleration to severall Religions FOr upon these very grounds we may easily give account of Numb 1. that great question Whether it be lawfull for a Prince to give toleration to severall Religions For first it is a great fault that men will call the severall sects of Christians by the names of severall Religions The Religion of JESUS CHRIST is the forme of sound doctrine and wholsome words which is set downe in Scripture indefinitely actually conveyed to us by plaine places and separated as for the question of necessary or not necessary by the Symbol of the Apostles Those impertinencies which the wantonness and vanity of men hath commenced which their interests have promoted which serve not truth so much as their own ends are farre from being distinct Religions for matters of opinion are no parts of the worship of God nor in order to it but as they promote obedience to his Commandments and when they contribute towards it are in that proportion as they contribute parts and actions and minute particulars of that Religion to whose end they doe or pretend to serve And such are all the sects and all the pretences of Christians but pieces and minutes of Christianity if they doe serve the great end as every man for his owne sect and interest beleeves for his share it does 2. Tolleration hath a double sense or purpose for sometimes by it men understand a publick licence and exercise of a sect Sometimes it is onely an indemnity of the persons privately to convene and to opine as they see cause and as they meane to answer to God Both these are very much to the same purpose unlesse some persons whom we are bound to satisfie be scandaliz'd and then the Prince is bound to doe as he is bound to satisfie To God it is all one For abstracting from the offence of persons which is to be considered just as our obligation is to content the persons it is all one whether we indulge to them to meet publikely or privately to do actions of Religion concerning which we are not perswaded that they are truely holy To God it is just one to be in the dark and in the light the thing is the same onely the Circumstance of publick and private is different which cannot be concerned in any thing nor can it concerne any thing but the matter of Scandall and relation to the minds and fantasies of certaine persons 3. So that to tolerate is not to persecute And the question Numb 3. whether the Prince may tollerate divers perswasions is no more then whether he may lawfully persecute any man for not being of his opinion Now in this case he is just so to tollerate diversity of perswasions as he is to tolerate publike actions for no opinion is judicable nor no person punishable but for a sin and if his opinion by reason
Court of life and death cannot be an Ecclesiasticall tribunall and then if any man or company of Men should perswade the Church not to inflict her censures upon delinquents in some cases in which shee might lawfully inflict them and pretend to give her another compulsory they take away the Church-consistory and erect a very secular Court dependant on themselves and by consequence to be appeal'd to from themselves and so also to be prohibited as the Lay-Superiour shall see cause for * Whoever therefore should be consenting to any such permutation of power is traditor potestatis quam S. Mater Ecclesia à sponso suo acceperat he betrayes the individuall and inseparable right of holy Church For her censures shee may inflict upon her delinquent children without asking leave Christ is her 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for that he is her warrant and security The other is beg'd or borrow'd none of her owne nor of a fit edge to be us'd in her abscissions and coërcions * I end this consideration with that memorable Canon of the Apostles of Can. 39. so frequent use in this Question 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let the Bishop have the care or provision for all affaires of the Church and let him dispense them velut Deo contemplante as in the sight of God to whom he must be responsive for all his Diocesse The next Consideration concerning the Bishop's jurisdiction is of what persons he is Iudge And because our Scene lyes herein Church-practice I shall only set downe the doctrine of the Primitive Church in this affaire and leave it under that representation Presbyters and Deacons and inferiour Clerks and the Laity are already involved in the precedent Canons No man there was exempted of whose soule any Bishop had charge And all Christs sheepe heare his voice and the call of his sheap-heard-Ministers * Theodoret tells a story that when the Bishops of the Province were assembled by the command of Valentinian the Emperour for the choice of a Successor to Auxentius in the See of Millayne the Emperour wished them to be carefull in the choice of a Bishop in these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theodoret. lib. 4. c. 5. Set such an one in the Archiepiscopall throne that we who rule the Kingdome may sincerely submitt our head unto him viz in matters of spirituall import * And since all power is deriv'd from Christ who is a King and a Priest and a Prophet Christian Kings are Christi Domini and Vicars in his Regall power but Bishops in his Sacerdotall and Propheticall * So that the King hath a Supreme Regall power in causes of the Church ever since his Kingdome became Christian and it consists in all things in which the Priestly office is not precisely by Gods law imployed for regiment and cure of soules and in these also all the externall compulsory and jurisdiction in his owne For when his Subjects became Christian Subjects himselfe also upon the same termes becomes a Christian Ruler and in both capacities he is to rule viz both as Subjects and as Christian Subjects except only in the precise issues of Sacerdotall authority And therefore the Kingdome and the Priesthood are excelled by each other in their severall capacities For superiority is usually expressed in three words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Excellency Impery and Power The King is supreme to the Bishop in Impery The Bishop hath an Excellency viz. of Spirituall Ministration which Christ hath not concredited to the King but in Power both King and Bishop have it distinctly in severall capacity the King in potentiâ gladii the Bishop in potestate clavium The Sword and the Keyes are the emblems of their distinct power Something like this is in the third Epistle of S. Clement translated by Ruffinus Quid enim in praesenti saeculo prophet â gloriosius Pontifice clarius Rege sublimius King and Priest and Prophet are in their severall excellencies the Highest powers under heaven *** In this sense it is easy to understand those expressions often used in Antiquity which might seem to make intrenchment upon the sacrednesse of Royall prerogatives were not both the piety and sense of the Church sufficiently cleare in the issues of her humblest obedience * And this is the sense of S. Ignatius that holy Martyr and Epist. ad Philadelph disciple of the Apostles Diaconi reliquus Clerus unà cum populo Vniverso Militibus Principibus Caesare ipsi Episcopopareant Let the Deacons and all the Clergy and all the people the Souldiers the Princes and Caesar himselfe obey the Bishop * This is it which S. Ambrose said Sublimitas Episcopalis Lib. de dignit Sacerd cap. 2. nullis poterit comparationibus adaequari Si Regum fulgori compares Principum diademati erit inferius c. This also was acknowledged by the great Constantine that most blessed Prince Deus vos constituit Sacerdotes potestatem vobis dedit de nobis quoque judicandi ideo nos à vobis rectè judicamur Vos autem non potest is ab hominibus judicari viz. saecularibus and incausis simplicis religionis So that good Emperour in his oration to Lib. 10. Eccles hist. c. 2. the Nicene Fathers It was a famous contestation that S. Ambrose had with Auxentius the Arian pretending the Emperors command to him to deliver up some certain Churches in his Diocesse to the Arians His answer was that Palaces belong'd to the Emperour but Churches to the Bishop and so they did by all the lawes of Christendome The like was in the case of S. Athanasius and Constantius the Emperour exactly the same per omniae as it is related by Ruffinus * S. Ambrose his sending his Deacon to the Emperour Lib. 10. Eccles hist. cap. 19. to desire him to goe forth of the Cancelli in his Church at Millain showes that then the powers were so distinct that they made no intrenchment upon each other * It was no greater power but a more considerable act and higher exercise the forbidding the communion to Theodosius till he had Theodor. lib. 5 c. 18. by repentance washed out the bloud that stuck upon him ever since the Massacre at Thessalonica It was a wonderfull concurrence of piety in the Emperour and resolution and authority in the Bishop But he was not the first that did it For Philip the Emperour was also guided by the Pastorall rod and the severity of the Bishop De hoc traditum est nobis Euseb lib. 6. cap. 25. quod Christianus fuerit in die Paschae i. e. in ipsis vigiliis cùm interesse voluerit communicare mysteriis ab Episcopo loci non priùs esse permissum nisi confiteretur peccata inter poenitentes staret nec ullo modo sibi copiam mysteriorum futuram nisi priùs per poenitentiam culpas quae de eo ferebantur plurimae deluisset The Bishop of the place would not
credunt c. As a Bishop is in the Church so the Church is in the Bishop and he that does not communicate with the Bishop is not in the Church and therefore they vainely flatter themselves that think their case faire and good if they communicate in conventicles and forsake their Bishop And for this cause the holy Primitives were so confident and zealous for a Bishop that they would rather expose themselves and all their tribes to a persecution then to the greater misery the want of Bishops Fulgentius tells an excellent story to this purpose When Frasamund King of Byzac in Africa vide Concil Byzacenum An. Dom. 504. Surium die 1. Ianuar. Baron in A. D. 504. had made an edict that no more Bishops should be consecrate to this purpose that the Catholike faith might expire so he was sure it would if this device were perfected vt arescentibus truncis absque palmitibus omnes Ecclesiae desolarentur the good Bishops of the Province met together in a Councell and having considered of the command of the tyrant Sacra turba Pontificum qui remanser ant communicato inter se consilio definierunt adversus praeceptum Regis in omnibus locis celebrare ordinationes Pontificum cogitantes aut Regis iracundiam si qua forsan existeret mitigandam quò faciliùs ordinatiin suis plebibus viverent aut si persecutionis violentia nasceretur coronandos etiam fidei confessione quos dignos inveniebant promotione It was full of bravery and Christian sprite The Bishops resolved for all the edict against new ordination of Bishops to obey God rather then man and to consecrate Bishops in all places hoping the King would be appeased or if not yet those whom they thought worthy of a Mitre were in a faire disposition to receive a Crowne of Martyrdome They did so Fit repentè communis assumptio and they all striv'd who should be first and thought a blessing would outstrip the hindmost They were sure they might goe to heaven though persecuted under the conduct of a Bishop they knew without him the ordinary passage was obstructed Pius the first Bishop of Rome and Martyr speaking of them that calumniate and disgrace their Bishops Epist. 2. endeavouring to make them infamous they adde saith he evill to evill and grow worse non intelligentes quòd Ecclesia Dei in Sacerdotibus consistit crescit in templum Dei Not considering that THE CHURCH OF GOD DOTH CONSIST or is established in BISHOPS and growes up to a holy Temple To him I am most willing to adde S. Hierome because he is often obtruded in defiance of advers Lucifer cap. 4. the cause Ecclesiae salus in summi Sacer dot is dignitate pendet The safety of the Church depends upon the Bishops dignity THE Reason which S. Hierome gives presses this § 46. For they are schismaticks that separate from their Bishop businesse to a further particular For if an eminent dignity and an Vnmatchable power be not given to him tot efficientur schismata quot Sacerdotes So that he makes Bishops therefore necessary because without them the Unity of a Church cannot be preserved and we know that unity and being are of equall extent and if the Unity of the Church depends upon the Bishop then where there is no Bishop no pretence to a Church and therefore to separate from the Bishop makes a man at least a Schismatick For Unity which the Fathers presse so often they make to be dependant on the Bishop Nihil sit in vobis quod possit vos dirimere sed Vnimini Episcopo subjecti Deo per illum in Christo saith S. Ignatius Let nothing divide you but be united to your Bishop Epist. ad Magnes being subiect to God in Christ through your Bishop And it is his congè to the people of Smyrna to whom he writ in his epistle to Polycarpus opto vos semper valere in Deo nostro Iesu Christo in quo manete per Vnitatem Dei EPISCOPI Farewell in Christ Iesus in whom remaine by the Vnity of God and of the BISHOP * Quantò vos beatiores judico qui dependetis ab illo Episcopo vt Ecclesia à Domino Iesu Ad Ephes. Dominus à Patre suo vt omnià per Vnitatem consentiant Blessed people are ye that depend upon your Bishop as the Church on Christ and Christ on God that all things may consent in Vnity * Neque enim aliundè haereses obortae sunt aut nata sunt schismata quà m inde quòd Sacerdoti Dei non obtemperatur S. Cyprian ep 55. nec unus in Ecclesiâ ad tempus Sacerdos ad tempus Iudex vice Christi cogitatur Hence come SCHISMES hence spring HERESYES that the Bishop is not obeyed and admitted alone to be the high Priest alone to be the Iudge The same S. Cyprian Epist. 69. repeates againe and by it we may see his meaning clearer Qui vos audit me audit c Indeenim haereses schismata obortae sunt oriuntur dum Episcopus qui unus est Ecclesiae praeest superbâ quorundam praesumptione contemnitur homo dignatione Dei honoratus indignus hominibus judicatur The pride and peevish haughtinesse of some factious people that contemne their Bishops is the cause of all heresy and Schisme And therefore it was so strictly forbidden by the Ancient Canons that any Man should have any meetings or erect an Altar out of the communion of his Bishop that if any man prov'd delinquent in this particular he was punish'd with the highest censures as appeares in the 32 Canon of the Apostles in the 6 th Canon of the Councell of Gangra the 5 th Canon of the Councell of Antioch and the great Councell of Chalcedon all Act. 4. which I have before cited The summe is this The Bishop is the band and ligature of the Churches Unity and separation from the Bishop is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Theodorets expession is a Symbol of faction and he that separates is a Schismatick But how if the Bishop himselfe be a heretick or schismatick May we not then separate Yes if he be judg'd so by a Synod of Bishops but then he is sure to be depos'd too and then in these cases no separation from a Bishop For till he be declar'd so his communion is not to be forsaken by the subjects of his diocesse least they by so doing become their Iudges judge and when he is declar'd so no need of withdrawing from obedience to the Bishop for the heretick or schismatick must be no longer Bishop * But let the case be what it will be no separation from a Bishop ut sic can be lawfull and yet if there were a thousand cases in which it were lawfull to separate from a Bishop yet in no case is it lawfull to separate from Episcopacy That is the quintessence and spirit of schisme and a direct overthrow to Christianity and
reports that Hosius Bishop of Epist. ad Solitar Corduba president in the Nicene Councell said it was the abhomination of delolation that a lay-man should be judge in Ecclesiasticis judicijs in Church-causes And Leontius calls Church-affayres Res Suidas in vitâ Leontij alienas à Laicis things of another Court of a distinct cognisance from the Laity * To these adde the Councell of Venice for it is very considerable in Can. 9. A. D. 453. this Question Clerico nisi ex permissu Episcopi sui servorum suorum saecularia judicia adire non liceat Sed si fortasse Episcopi sui judicium caeperit habere suspectum aut ipsi de proprietate aliquà adversus ipsum Episcopum fuerit nata contentio aliorum Episcoporum audientiam NON SAECULARIUM POTESTATUM debebit ambire Alitèr à communione habeatur alienus Clergy-men without delegation from their Bishop may not heare the causes of their servants but the Bishop unlesse the Bishop be appealed from then other Bishops must heare the cause but NO LAY IUDGES by any meanes * These Sanctions of holy Church it pleased the Emperour to ratifie by an Imperiall edict for so Novell constit 123. Iustinian commanded that in causes Ecclesiasticall Secular Iudges should have no interest SED SANCTISSIMUS EPISCOPUS SECUNDUM SACRAS REGULAS CAUSAE FINEM IMPONAT The Bishop according to the Sacred Canons must be the sole judge of Church-matters I end this with the decretall of S. Gregory one of the fower Doctors of the Church Cavendum est à Fraternitate vestrâ ne saecularibus viris atque non sub regulâ nostrâ degentibus res Ecclesiasticae lib. 7. epist. 66. committantur Heed must be taken that matters Ecclesiasticall be not any waies concredited to secular persons But of this I have twice spoken already § 36. and § 41. The thing is so evident that it is next to impudence to say that in Antiquity Lay-men were parties and assessors in the Consistory of the Church It was against their faith it was against their practice and those few pigmy objections out of * Tertull. Apol. c. 33. S. Ambros. in 1. Tim. 5. 1. lib. 1. de offic c. 20. S. August lib. 3. contra Crescon Epist. 137. Tertullian S. Ambrose and S. Austin using the word Seniores or Elders sometimes for Priests as being the latine for the Greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sometimes for a secular Magistrate or Alderman for I thinke S. Austin did so in his third booke against Cresconius are but like Sophoms to prove that two and two are not foure for to pretend such slight aëry imaginations against the constant knowne open Catholike practice and doctrine of the Church and history of all ages is as if a man should goe to fright an Imperiall army with a single bulrush They are not worth further considering * But this is That in this Question of lay-Elders the Moderne Aërians and Acephali doe wholly mistake their own advantages For whatsoever they object out of antiquity for the white and watry colours of lay-Elders is either a very misprision of their allegations or else clearly abused in the use of them For now adayes they are only us'd to exclude and drive forth Episcopacy but then they misalledge antiquity for the men with whose Heifers they would faine plough in this Question were themselves Bishops for the most part and he that was not would faine have beene it is knowne so of Tertullian and therefore most certainly if they had spoken of lay-Iudges in Church matters which they never dream'd of yet meant them not so as to exclude Episcopacy and if not then the pretended allegations can doe no service in the present Question I am only to cleare this pretence from a place of Scripture totally misunderstood and then it cannot have any colour from any 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 either divine or humane but that Lay-Iudges of causes Ecclesiasticall as they are unheard of in antiquity so they are neither nam'd in Scripture nor receive from thence any instructions for their deportment in their imaginary office and therefore may be remanded to the place from whence they came even the lake of Gebenna and so to the place of the neerest denomination The objection is from S. Paul 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 let the Elders that rule well be 1. Tim. 5. 17. accounted worthy of double honour especially they that labour in the word doctrine especially they therefore all Elders doe not so Here are two sorts of Elders Preaching Ministers and Elders not Preachers Therefore Lay-Elders and yet all are governours 1. But why therefore Lay-Elders Why may there not be diverse Church-officers and yet but one or two of them the Preacher Christ sent me not to Baptize but to Preach saith S. Paul and yet the commission of baptizate was as large as praedicate and why then might not another say Christ sent me not to Preach but to Baptize that is in S. Pauls sense not so much to doe one as to doe the other and if he left the ordinary ministration of Baptisme and betook himselfe to the ordinary office of Preaching then to be sure some Minister must be the ordinary Baptizer and so not the Preacher for if he might be both ordinarily why was not S. Paul both For though their power was common to all of the same order yet the execution and dispensation of the Ministeries was according to severall gifts and that of Prophecy or Preaching was not dispensed to all in so considerable a measure but that some of them might be destin'd to the ordinary execution of other offices and yet because the guift of Prophecy was the greatest so also was the office and therefore the sense of the words is this that all Presbyters must be honour'd but especially they that Prophecy doing that office with an ordinary execution and ministery So no Lay-Elders yet Adde to this that it is also plain that all the Clergy did not Preach Valerius Bishop of Hippo could not well skill in the Latine tongue being a Greek borne and yet a Godly Bishop and S. Austin his Presbyter preach'd for him The same case might occurre in the Apostles times For then was a concurse of all Nations to the Christian Synaxes especially in all great Imperiall Citties and Metropolitans as Rome Antioch Ierusalem Caesarea and the like Now all could not speak with tongues neither could all Prophecy they were particular guifts given severally to severall men appointed to minister in Church-offices Some Prophecyed some interpreted and therefore is is an ignorant fancy to think that he must needs be a Laick whosoever in the ages Apostolicall was not a Preacher 2. None of the Fathers ever expounded this place of Lay-Elders so that we have a traditive interpretation of it in prejudice to the pretence of our new office 3. The word Presbyter is never used in the new Testament for a Lay-man if a Church officer
Baronius concerning the book of Iohannes de Roa who sometimes had been a Iesuit but then chang'd his order and became Augustinian saying it was sentenc'd to the Baron tom 6. Annal. An. Dom 447. n 8 fire before it had escaped the presse And good reason Nihil enim tale à Patribus societatis didicit Good men they never taught him any such doctrine as is contained in that pestilent book de iuribus principalibus defendendis moderandis iustè Now if this be heresy or like it to preach such a Doctrine then likely it will be judg'd heresy in Princes to doe so that is to hold their crownes without acknowledgment of subordination to S. Peters chaire And if it be not heresy to doe so it is in their account as bad for so the Iesuits in their Veritas defensa against the Action of Arnald the Advocate affirme in terminis that the actions of some Kings of France against the Pope in defence of their Regalties were but examples of rebellion and spots to disgrace the purity of the French Lillies 5. Put case the Pope should chance to mistake in his sentence against a Prince for the cause of heresy yet for all this mistake he can secure any man to take away the Princes life or Kingdome His Lawyers will be his security for this point For although in this case the deposition of the Prince should be and be acknowledged to be against Gods law the Prince being neither Tyrant nor heretick yet his Holinesse commanding it takes away the unlawfulnesse of it by his dispensation So D. Marta and for this doctrine he quotes Hostiensis Felinus Gratus the Abbat the De Iurisd cas 64. n. 14. Arch bishop of Florence Ancharanus Iohannes Andreas Laurentius de Pinu and some others Indeed his Divines deny this sed contrarium tamen observatur as it 's very well observed by the same Doctor Num. 17. for he brings the practise example of Pope Martin the fifth Iulius the second Celestine the third Alexander the third and Sixtus quintus all which dispensed in cases acknowledged to be expressely against Gods law 6. Lastly How if the Pope should lay a claime to all the Kingdomes of the world as belonging ro S. Peters patrimony by right of spirituall preheminence I know no great security we have to the contrary For first It is known he hath claimed the Kingdome of England as feudatary to the See Apostolike Which when I considered I wondred a Rex Anglorū est subditus Romano Pontisici ratione directi domini◠quod in Regnum Angliae Hiberniae Romana habet Ecclesia Bellarm. Apol. adv R. Angl. c. 3. not at that new and insolent title which Mosconius gives his Holinesse of Desensor fidei He might have added the title of Rex Catholicus Christianissimus For D. Marta in his treatise of Iurisdiction which he dedicated to Paulus quintus hath that for an argumēt why he dedicated his Book to him because for sooth the Pope is the only Monarch of the World But of greater authority is that of Thomas Aquinas affirming the Pope to be the verticall top of all power Ecclesiasticall b De Maiest milit Eccles. c. 1. pag. 25. c Tibi à quo emanat omnis iurisdictio unicus in orbe Pontifex Imperator Rex omnium Principum superior rerumque personarum supremus Dominus Epist. Dedicat d 2 Sent dist 44. lib. 3. de Regim Princ. and Civill So that now it may be true which the Bishop of Patara told the Emperor in behalse of Pope Sylverius Multos esse Reges sed nullum talem qualis ille qui est Papa super Ecclesiam Lib. erat in Breviar de causâ Nestorian cap. 21. Mundi totius For these reasons I think it is true enough that the constituting the Pope the judge of Princes in the matter of deposition is of more danger then the thing it selfe The summe is this However schisme or heresy may be pretended yet it is but during the Popes pleasure that Kings or subjects shall remain firme in their mutuall necessitude For if our Prince bee but excommunicate or declar'd heretick then to be a good subject will be accounted no better then irreligion and Anti-Catholicisme If the conclusion be too hard and intolerable then so are the Premises and yet they passe for good Catholike doctrine among themselves But if truly and ex animo they are otherwise affected they should doe well to unsay what hath been said and declare themselves by publique authority against such doctrines And say whether or no their determinations shall be de fide If they be then all those famous Catholique Doctors Thomas Aquinas Bellarmine Creswell Mariana Emanuel Sá c. are heretiques and their Canons teach heresy and Many of their Popes to be condemn'd as hereticall for practising and teaching deposition of Princes by an authority usurp't against and in prejudice of the Christian faith But if their answers be not de fide then they had as good say nothing for the danger is not at all decreased because if there be Doctors on both sides by their own * Charity maintaind by Cath. cap. 7. assertion they may without sinne follow either but yet more safely if they follow the most received and the most authorized and whether this rule will lead them I will be judg'd by any man that hath considered the premises Briefly either this thing must remain in the same state it is and our Princes still expos'd to so extream hazards or else let his Holinesse seat himselfe in his chaire condemne these doctrines vow against their future practise limit his or do ad spiritualia containe himselfe within the limits of causes directly and meerely Ecclesiasticall disclaime all power so much as indirect over Princes temporalls and all this with an intent to oblige all Christendome Which when I see done I shall be most ready to believe that nothing in Popery doth either directly or by a necessary consequence destroy Loyalty to our lawfull Prince but not till then having so much evidence to the contrary Thus much was occasion'd by consideration of the cause of the Disciples Quaere which was when they saw this that their L. and M. for his difference in Religion was turned forth of doores which when they saw They said Lord It was well they ask'd at all and would not too hastily act what they too suddēly had intended but it was better that they ask'd Christ it had been the best warrant they could have had could they have obtain'd but a Magister dixit But this was not likely it was too strange a Question to aske of such a M r. A Magistro mansuetudinis licentiam crudelitat is Nothing could have come more crosse to his disposition His spirit never was addicted to blood unlesse it were to shed his owne Hee was a Prince of peace and set forth to us by all the Symboles of peace and