as God preuented the Iewes and whereas they by lawe of Nature had permission to choose their Kinges yet for their greater good he chose thē one him selue immediatelie so although by the lawe of Nature men otherwise might haue prescribed the manner of worshipping God and the worship had been lawfull so that it had been the worship of the true God and had been free from superstition yet because God hath ordained vs to a supernaturall end and would haue our Ecclesiasticall gouernment free from all superstition he hath himselfe appointed the manner of gouernment and hath giuen the Authoritie So in the lawe of Moyses he chose the Tribe of LEVI to serue in the Tabernacle and Temple and to menage Ecclesiasticall matters he instituted also sacrifices sacramentes and Ceremonies in like sort in the new lawe of Grace vnder which we liue he committed the gouernment of his Church to the Apostles and Disciples only and their successours he instituted seuen Sacramentes and a sacrifice he gaue vs a lawe and beleefe which first he deliuered by preaching then by the written Ghospelles and Epistles of his Apostles and other thinges he committed to the Church which he had instituted and established 5. So that as there is a Ciuill and Temporall Power residing in the Common wealth by which the Prince or Magistrate can gouerne and rule and cōmaund for the conseruation and promotion of the Temporall good of the same so is there a spirituall and Ecclesiasticall Power residing in the Church by which the Pastours haue Authoritie to preach teach administer Sacraments determine of matters of Religion to call Councelles for the better clearing of matters and enacte lawes which shall be thought expedient vnto the honour of God the spirituall good of the Church and euerie ones saluation And this is called Ecclesiasticall power which is distinct from the Temporall in many pointes 6. First in respect of the end and finall cause for Temporall power of it selfe aymeth only at Temporali Iustice peace and conseruation of the Temporall state of the Kingdome or Common wealth Ecclesiasticall power intendeth in this life the spirituall health of the soule and eternall rest and peace in the next Secondlie these powers haue diuers Actes and seing that powers are distinct by their Actes it followeth that Temporall and Ecclesiasticall or spirituall power are distinct That they haue distinct Actes it is manifest for the Temporall power maketh lawes for this corporall life and Temporalle state but the spirituall and Ecclesiasticall power maketh lawes for the soule and her direction the Temporall power remitteth the paines only of sinnes but the spirituall Power remitteth the sinne it self according to that Ioan. 20 Quorum remiseritis peccata c. VVhose sinnes you shall forgiue c. The Temporall power inflicteth and remitteth only Ciuill and Temporall punishments as imprisonment banishment temporall death but the spirituall power as now it is for in the old law there was not Potestas Clauium excommunicateth suspendeth interdicteth which are spiritual punishments and bonds of the soule and remitteth not only these paines but also eternall death and paine of Hell for when the Priest remitteth mortall sinnes he chaūgeth eternall paine into temporall yea some times when the Penitent cometh with a great contrition he remitteth both Eternall and Temporall Thirdly they differ in their obiectes for the spirituall power disposeth not of Temporall thinges but only as they are necessary to the spirituall The Temporall meddleth not with spirituall nor Ecclesiasticall matters according to that of S. AMBROSE S. Ambr. lib. 5. ep 33. ad Marcel soror Ad Impetatorem Palatia pertinent ad sacerdotem Ecclesiae Publicorum tibi maenium ius commissum est non sacrorum To the Emperour Pallaces appertaine to the Priest Churches to thee Emperour the right of common Walles is committed not of Churches And NICHOLAS Pope in an Epistle to MICHAEL the Emperour Ca. Cum ad verū dist 96. Vide etiā ca. Quoniam d. 10. Nec Imperator iura Pontificum arripuit nec Pontifex nomen Imperatoris vsurpauit quoniam Christus sic actibus propriis dignitatibus distinctis officia potestatis vtriusque discreuit Neither hath the Emperour taken to him the rights of Bishops neither hath the Bishop vsurped the name of the Emperour because Christ hath distinguished the offices of both by their distinct actes and dignities Fourthlie they differ in respect of the subiect and materiall cause for although it be not impossible for these two Powers to consort in the same subiect for we see they did in Melchisedech and in the first begotten of the Iewes in the law of Nature and in the Machabees who were Priests and Princes and consequentlie had temporall and spirituall power yet as in other thinges these powers are distinct so God not only in the law of Grace but also in the law written of Moyses would haue these powers placed in distinct subiectes and Persons 2. Paral◠19. For in the law of Moyses AMARIAS menaged matters of the Church law ZABADIAS gouerned the affaires of the Kingdome the Kinges and Princes of the Iewes were of the Tribe of IVDA the Priests of the Tribe of LEVI and those gouerned onely the Common VVealth enacted Temporall lawes waged battaile c. whereas the Priests ruled it matters of the Tabernacle and Temple offered sacrifice and gouerned the Synagogue And now in the law of Grace Christ gaue all spirituall power to the Apostles and their successours and not to Princes for to the Apostles and their successours it was saied VVhatsoeuer you shall bynd vpon earth Mat. 18. shal be bound in heauen and whatsoeuer you shall losse vpon earth shal be loosed in heauen To Princes it was neuer sayd so To the Apostles and their successours it was sayd Ioan. 20. Whose sinnes you shall forgiue they are forgiuen them and whose you shall retaine they are retained To Princes neuer To S. PETER an Apostle and Priest it was sayed Mat. 16 Thou art Peter and vppon this Rock will I build my Church To no Prince was it euer sayd in that sort To Apostles and Priests Christ sayed Matth. vlt. Goinge therefore teach ye all Nations baptising them in the name of the father the sonne and the holy Ghost To Princes neuer To Apostles and Priests Christ said Ioan. 6. As my liuing father hath sent me so I send you that is to preach to minister Sacramentes and to gouerne the Church Ephes 4. To Princes neuer To the Apostles Doctours Pastours Prophets Christ committed his Church to be gouerned Act. 28. to Princes neuer To Priests S. Paul gaue this admonition Attendite vobis vniuerso gregi in quo vos Spiritus Sanctus posuit Episcopos regere Ecclesiam Dei quam acquisiuit sanguine suo Take heede to your selues and to the whole flocke wherin the holy Ghost hath placed you Bishops to rule the Church of God which he hath purchased
with his owne bloud But neither he nor any Apostle euer gaue that charge to Princes Fiftelie they differ in the cause efficient for the Ciuill and Temporall Power proceeds from God and Nature by meanes of the peoples election as is in the former Chapter declared but the spirituall power of the Church as it implieth Potestatem ordinis Iurisdictionis in foro interiori is from God immediatelie it being supernaturall and exceeding humane power And although the Ecclesiasticall humane power which inferiour Prelates haue proceeded from superiour Prelates especiallie the Pope yet not from the Prince or Common wealth but from the Pastours and Church So that as the Pope Priests and Church doe willinglie acknowledge the temporall and ciuill power of the Prince Magistrates and Common wealth or Kingdome so the Prince Magistrates and Common wealth must be content to recognize a spirituall power of the Pope Bishops Priests and Church to which obedience is due euen of Princes who are subiect to the Church no lesse then are temporall subiectes to the Prince yea rather more 7. This power all true Christians and Catholickes acknowledge none but Heretickes and Infidels deny The Waldenses Guido Carmel in har VVald Turrecr l. 4. SuÌ„ma de Eccl c. 35. CoÌ„c Const sess 8. et 15. a. 14 Luth. a. 27. Dan in Bulla Leon. 10 Cal l. 4. Inst ca. 20 n. 6. 7. as witnesse Guido and Turrecremata as also VVicleph and Hus as the Councell of Constance relateth denyed all Ecclesiasticall power and sayed that Popes and Bishops Decrees and Canons did not bynd any The same is Luthers opinion Caluin affirmeth that neither the Pope nor his mitred Caluin sayeth horned Bishops can bynde mens Consciences by their decrees and ordinances and that for two causes First because they are no true Bishops which yet neither he nor all his secte could euer prooue Secondlie because though they were true Bishops yet they are not legislatours or lawmakers that Tytle agreeing only to Christ only he and his graunt that they may inculcate Gods lawes but make no newe 8. Well it is knowen that is was alwaies the manner of Heretickes to contemne all Ecclesiasticall Authoritie because it condemned them But as I haue alleaged proofes in the former Chapter for Ciuill power of Princes so can I not want argumentes for the spirituall and Ecclesiasticall power when Christ promised PETER that he should be the foundation and head of the Church he promised this power in and ouer the Church Mat. 16. for if PETER be head of the Church he can rule the mysticall bodie and if he can rule the same then can he also make Ecclesiasticall lawes for that is belonging to a superiour of euerie great and perfect communitie as is before shewed Secondlie Christ gaue this power to PETER when after his Resurrection he saied Pasce oues meas Feede my sheepe Ioan. 21. For the office of a Pastour may be gathered by the office of a shepheard who is to gouerne his sheepe to feede them and to defend them from the wolfe and so a spirituall shepheard and Pastour must haue authoritie to rule by lawes to feede by preaching and Sacraments and to defend by censures and his Pastorall staffe and coerciue power Eph. 4. VVhereupon Saint Paul saith that Christ hath giuen to his Church not only Doctours and Prophetes to teach but also Pastours to feede and gouerne And seing that the Church hath as much neede now of a supreame visible Pastour and rather more then at the beginninge it followeth that PETER hath a successour who hath the like Authoritie And seing that all Fathers all Councelles all histories all practise of the Church possession and prescription for 1600. yeares stande for the Pope of Rome he is this successour and he it is that hath the supreame Ecclesiasticall and spirituall power after Christ Thirdlie Mat. 18. Christ commandeth to obey the Church and saith That he that will not giue eare to the Church is to be accounted as an Ethnike and Publican which is a signe that the Church hath Authoritie and Iurisdiction to heare causes and to pronounce sentences to which obedience is to be giuen Fourthlie not withstanding that in the old law of Moyses God determined almost all by him self by his morall iudiciall and ceremoniall lawes yet he gaue power to the Synagogue and her Pastours to interprete the law to resolue doubtes concerning the law and to enact some lawes as occasion was offred And therefore we see with what seueritie God commanded obedience to the Priests saying Deut. 17 Si difficile â—mbiguum c. If thou perceaue that the Iudgement with thee be hard and doubtfull betweene bloud and bloud cause and cause leprosie and leprosie and thou â—â—e that the wordes of the Iudges within thy gate do â—arie arise and ge vp to the place which our Lord thy God shall choose and thou shalt come to the Priests of the Leuiticall stocke and to the Iudge that shall be at that time and thou shalt aske of them who shall thew thee the truthe of the Iudgement And thou shalt do what soeuer they that are Presidents of the place which our Lord shall choose shall say and teach thee according to his law and thou shalt follow the sentence c. And he that shal be prooued refusing to obey the commandement of the Priest which at that time ministreth to our Lord thy God and the decree of the Iudge that man shall die and thou shalt take away the euill out of Israel and the whole people shall feare that none asterward swell with pride By which we see that the Highe Priest had Power not only directiue but also coerciue vnder paine of death And we read how the victorie of Iudith ouer Holofernes was celebrated by the Iewes with commandement of a holie daye Iudith vlt. which law was merelie Ecclesiasticall made by the Priests and was not commanded by God his law The like festiuall day was decreed by Mardocheus and receaued by the Iewes in memorie of their deliuerie from Amans tyrannie by meanes of Hester Hester 9. which also was no diuine but an humane and Ecclesiasticall law Likewise the Machabees instituted the feast of the Dedication 1. Mach. 4. Ioan. 10. which Christ afterwards obserued with the rest of the Iewes and yet this was not commanded by God his law Againe Christ commandeth to do that which they who sitt in Moyses Chaire doe saie Mat. 23. but not alwaies what they doe much more would he haue vs to do that Lib. 4. Inst cap. 20. n. 21. Act. 15. which they who sitt in Saint Peters yea Christs seate do command And we read in the Actes which Caluin well saw but glosseth vntowardlie how the Apostles in their first Councell made a new law by which they commanded the conuerted Gentils to abstaine from eating of bloud and things strangled which were now the olde lawe being abrogated things
appertained to military affaires And so from the first establishing of the law of Moyses the Temple and Synagogue was committed to the Tribe of LEVI the scepter and regall Authoritie was giuen to the Tribe of IVDA in like sort in the law of Grace when the Church came to her greatest perfection Christ appointed particularly Apostles Doctours Ephes 4. and Pastours to gouerne the Church and confirmed Princes in their temporall Authoritie commanding that obedience should be giuen to the Pastour in spirituall matters and to the Prince in temporall Mat. 22 Rom. 13 2. VVherfore least in giuing one of these Potentates too much Mat. 22 I may do iniutie to the other I must follow our Sauiours Commandement and so giue to Cesar that which belongeth to him that I take not from God and his Church what appertaineth to them And although in giuing both but their due I may perchance displease one yet if I may haue that indifferent audience which the grauitie and equitie of the cause requireth I hope to offend neither and how soeuet it happen I had rather displease then do wronge or iniurie And wheras in our Iland by the sway of Authoritie and terrour of lawes it hath bene made High Treason to denie the Prince Authoritie in matters Ecclesiasticall I protest that what I shall say in this matter proceedeth not from any disloyall minde towards my Princes true Authoritie nor from any itching desire I haue to lay open the disgrace of my Countrie which I would rather couer if it were possible with my owne life and bloud and to discharge my self from all iust imputation of Treason I desire to haue the leaue to plead this onlie for my defence that if this be Treason in mee not onlie all Catholick Priests Doctours and Prelates of the Church but also all the ancient subiectes not onlie of England but of all other Christian Countries must incurre the same imputation with me because there was neuer Christians before our English Protestants that gaue Ecclesiasticall power to Princes and there was neuer King of England or of any other Countrie what soeuer that euer was so hardie as to challenge such Authoritie before King HENRIE the Eight which his Challenge seemed so preposterous and monstrous that all the World stood and to this day standeth amazed at it and euen our Puritanes at home and all the new sectes abroade do abhorre and derest it And I in this Chapter shall bring such Argumentes against it that I hope that euen our English protestants who hitherto haue adored it wil be ashamed hence forth to submitt them selues to so monstrous Authoritie 3. My first Arguments shall be drawen from scriptures them selues For if the King had any such Authoritie then no doubt scripture which â—s aboue wee haue seene so often inculcateth Princes Authoritie in matters temporall would neuer haue kept silent this Ecclesiasticall power if they had had any such this being the greater and more eminent but scripture neuer giueth Princes this Authoritie neuer commandeth Christians to obey them in Ecclesiasticall matters but rather giueth that Authoritie to Apostles Bishops and Pastours and Commandeth obedience in this kinde to them not to Princes ergo Princes haue no Authoritie to command in Ecclesiasticall matters The Minor Proposition in which onlie consists the difficultie I proue out of those places of Scripture which aboue I haue alleaged and here will bring in againe yet to another purpose For to S. PETER no Temporall Prince but an Apostle and Pastour was promised the headship of the Church and consequently the soueraintie and supreame power of the Church Tues Petrus super hane Petram aedificabo Ecclesiam meam Mat. â—6 The Hebrew hathâ— Thou art a Rocke and vpon this Rocke will I build my Church And seing that to PETER it was sayd Thou art a Rocke to him also and not to CHRIST the Chiefe and independent Rocke nor to the faith of Christ as our Aduersaries would haue it it must needs be sayd and vpon this Rocke will I build my Church because the Relatiue This hath relation to him that was spoken of imediatly before which was only PETER not CHRIST nor the faith of CHRIST and therfore the Rocke and foundation of the Church and Head being all one it followeth that PETER and consequently the Pope his successour for the Church after PETERS tyme had as much neede or rather more of a Head and Pastour as in PETERS tyme and none euer practized Authoritie ouer all the Church but the Pope as all Councels and histories do witnesse is the supreme Head of the Church and so not euerie King no not any King in his Kingdome Apostles Prophetes Euangelists Pastours and Doctours onlie CHRIST gaue to gouerne his Church as S. PAVLE sayth not Princes Ephes 4. Mat. 18 To Apostles it was sayd VVhat soeuer you shall binde vpon earth shall be bound also in Heauen and what soe-euer you shall loose vpon earth shall be also loosed in heauen Ioan. 20 Neuer to Princes To Apostles it was said VVhose sinnes you shall forgiue they are forgiuen them and whose you shall retaine they are retained Neuer to Princes Of Bishops and Priests it was sayd Neb. 13. Obey your Prelates and be subiect to them for they watch as being to render account for your soules of Princes neuer rather they by these wordes are commanded also to obey Act. 20. To Bishops it was sayd Take heedâ— to your selues and the whole flocke wherein the Holie Ghost hath placed you Bishops to rule the Church which he hath purchased with his owne bloud to Princes neuer To a Bishop it was sayd Tit. 1. For this cause I left thee in CRETE that thou thouldst reforme the things that are wanting and thouldst order Priests by Cities as I also appointed thee To Princes neuer 4. I will not denie but that Princes are to assist the Church by sword scepter and Power and to punnish at the Churches direction not onlie Theefes and murderers but also Hereticks as CONSTANTINE and other Emperours did I graunt that they are nourcing Fathers Isay 49. but no Superiours to the Church And therfore if we read ouer both the old and new Testament we shall neuer finde that any King as King medled in the gouernment of Ecclesiasticall persons and matters 5. Bilson when he was VVardon of VVinchester wrote a booke called The True Difference betwixt Christian subiection and Vnchristian Rebellion in which he striueth but in vaine to prooue that the Prince hath supreme Authoritie in causes Ecclesiasticall and gouernment of the Church And to prooue this he citeth Nabuchodonosor Darius Par. 2. pag. 191 the King of Niniue Moyses Iosue Dauid Salomon Asa Iosaphat Ezechias Manasses Iosias and Nehemias as though they had gouerned the Ecclesiasticall affaires of the Synagogue In Tortura Torti pa. 363. So doth also D. ANDREWES But if I should graunt them that all these were by God appointed Rulers of
knowing that so many Scriptures Theologicall reasons Councels Popes their factes and practise so many learned Doctours and Sainctes stand for the contrarie he can not sweare absolutely and with the former asseueration that the Pope hath no such authoritie he knowing that so many Authours and so great Argumentes and Authoritie do countenance the contrarie opinion Yea much lesse can he sweare for his opinion in this point then can a Thomist for his touching our Ladies Conception because the Thomist is licenced by the expresse leaue of the Church to teach and thinke as he doth and his aduersaries are commaunded by the Church not to condemne his opinion as hereticall Concil Trid. sess 5. c. 1. de Reform Sixtus 4 ca. graue nimis de reliq or erronious or rash which warrant VViddrington hath not for his opinion rather the Church hath condemned it in Councells and practise as wee haue shewed Who is then so hardie or rather so rash that dareth sweare absolutely that the Pope hath no authoritie to depose Princes or dispose of their Kingdomes the contrarie being not only probable yea more probable which VViddrington can not denie but also a matter of faith or so neerely concerning faith as the arguments and authoritie produced do warrant that Cardinall Allan in his Answer to the libeller sayth Chap. 4. it concerneth the Popes Supremacie and power Apostolicall Apol. pro Card. Bellar. cap. 6. cont 4. pag. 259. and Schulkennius verie well auerreth the contrarie is either hereticall or erronious and temerarious either of which is enough to deterre any timorous conscience But be it that the opinion which holdeth that the Pope in some cases can depose a Prince were but probable yet seing that the thing which is probable may be true and if it be the more common and probable opinion as Widdrington denyeth not but that this opinion of deposing Princes is it is most like to be true It followeth consequently that he that abiureth this probable yea more probable opinion that the Pope can in some case depose Princes exposeth him selfe to probable daunger of swearing false and abiuring the truth and so is periured because qui amat periculum in illo peribit Eccl. 3. he that loueth daunger shall perish therein out of which wordes Diuines do prooue that he who wittinglie and willinglie exposeth him selfe to probable daunger of any sinne is guiltie before God of that sinne as if he had actuallie committed 19. Certes if Veritie be a necessarie companion of a lawfull oath no man can sweare more then he thinketh there is veritie in the thing he sweareth Wherefore that he may sweare that this opinion is probable he must in conscience thinke it at least probable which if he ponder the Authoritie which aboue I haue produced for the contrarie he can not possiblie and with any reason thinke to sweare that he thinketh it not only probable but also absolutely and vndoubtedly true he must in conscience be so perswaded else he should sweare against his conscience and otherwise then in his conscience is true And how can hee perswade him selfe so fullie as to sweare that from his hart and before God he thinketh and holdeth that the Pope in no case can depose Princes or dispose of their Dominions he knowing that so many and with so great reason holde the contrarie who are as likelie and as farre more likelie not to be deceaued then he as they haue more reason and Authoritie for their opinion then he 20. Pag. 62. and Pag. 63. WIDDRINGTON in his Newyeares-gift answereth that whatsoeuer opinioÌ„ a man followeth in Speculation concerning the Popes Authoritie to depriue Princes yet he may as certainelie acknowledge and sweare that the Pope hath no Authoritie to depose the King that is to practise his deposition as it is cleare and manifest that he may certainlie acknowledge and sweare that the Pope hath no authoritie to committe open iniustice and that in a doubtfull vncertaine and disputable case the condition of the possessour is to be preferred But although Widdrington maketh great accounte of this answer yet it will be found defectiue For first VViddrington is not ignorant that the power and exercise of the power are two thinges which also may be separated for we haue the power of seeing when we sleepe but not the exercise of it we haue the power of walking when we repose our selues on our bedde and yet then we walke not And so the power of excommunicating and deposing is one thing and the exercise of it is an other and therfore the Bishop may haue power to excommunicate and yet not exercise that power and the Pope may haue power to depose although he do not actuallie depose any Secondly WIDDRINGTON knoweth that a man may haue the power to do a thing validlie that is so as the thing donne shall stand in force and yet not lawfullie that is with out sinne As for example the Prelate or Soueraigne Prince who haue Authoritie to dispense in positiue lawes subiect to their Authoritie if they dispense with out iust cause the dispensation according to the probable opinion of diuerse Diuines is valid and of force and freeth the dispensed in conscience Soto li. 1 de Iustitia Iure q. 7 a. 3. Siluest Angelus V. Dispensatio but it is vnlawfull and the dispenser sinneth So the Pope or Bishop may sometymes Excommunicate validlie and yet not lawfullie For Diuines affirme Excommunication may be three wayes vniust Ex animo when there is iust cause to excommunicate but the Bishop who excommunicateth doth it not out of Zeale of iustice or desire of amendment but out of enuie hatred or malice Ex ordine when the Bishop hath iust cause to excommunicate but obserueth not the order of Canonicall Premonition which is to be donne thrice or once for thrice Ex cauiâ when there is no iust cause The first excommunication is alwayes valid Lib. 1. Thesauri â—â—suum â—â—â—sci entia ca. 7. but vnlawfull so is ordinarilie the second as noteth Sayrus our countrie man the third is not onlie vnlawfull but also inualid and of no force So also the Pope may depose validlie and yet not lawfullie or without sinne For if the Prince giue sufficient cause of deposition and the Pope notwithstanding should as such a superiour is not easilie to be thought so to do depose the Prince out of hatred or enuie or else when prudeÌ„ce would haue him to tolerate the Prince for feare of garboyles and greater hurte the deposition should be valid and of force but yet vnlawfull and sinnefull Wherefore seing that in this second clause we are to sweare that the Pope hath no power or Authoritie to depose the King or to dispose of his maiesties Kingdomes or Dominions c. Although perchaunce he can not now as thinges stand lawfullie exercise his power in deposing an absolute Prince because much more hurt then good might come of it yet if it be
indifferent and not otherwise forbidden Fiftlie Mat. 18. Christ gaue authoritie to his Apostles to loose and bynd by excommunications suspensions and interdicts which actes of Iurisdiction are the spirituall bands and Censures which the Church layeth vpon rebellious Christians as Diuines and Fathers interprete Which power Saint Paul in his second Epistle to the Corinthians insinuateth saying If I come againe I will not spare and againe These things I write absent that being present I may not deale hardlie according to the power which our Lord hath giuen me vnto edification and not vnto destruction 1. Cor. 4. 1. Cor. 5. D. Th. in hac loca Gregor Nyssâ—in orat aduersus eos qui agre ferunt reprehens Chrysost hom 60â— ad pop Ant. Hieron ep 53. And in his first Epistle he sayth VVhat will you in rodde that I come to you or in charitie and the spirit of mildnesse And againe he in absence by his letters and mandatum excommunicateth the incestuous person and deliuereth him vp to Satan Out of which wordes Saint Gregorie of Nisse and Saint Chrysostome do gather the power of Excommunication As also doth Saint Hierom who marueileth that the Bishop in whose Diocese Vigilantius liued did not Virga ferrea confringere vas inutile tradere in interitum carnis vt spiritus saluus fiat With an iron rodde breake that vnprofitable vessel and deliuer him to Satan for the destruction of the flesh that the spirit may be saued So S. AVGVSTIN Aug l 1. de pen. cap. 14. so all Fathers so Caluin him selfe vnderstand this place of the power of Excommunication though Caluin will haue onlie the Presbyterie and companie of Seniours not any one alone to excoÌ„municate contrarie to the expresse text which telleth vs that Saint Paul alone absent did excommunicate and deliuer vp to Satan VVhere is to be noted that by excommunication stubbern Christians are saied to be deliuered vp to Satan either because they are cast out of the Church where Satan domineereth or else for that they are depriued of the suffrages and helpes of the Church and so more exposed to Satans tentations or lastely because in the Primatiue Church the Deuil by and by seazed and tooke poslession of the person excommunicated 10. Sixtlie as because the law of Nature could not determine particulerly of all particulers Ciuill power was necessarie to gouerne the Communitie and enact lawes conducing to the Temporall state so because God his law hath not determined all particulers it was necessarie the Church should haue power to call Councelles tomake patticuler lawes according to the times and other circumstances 11. Seuenthlie euerie absolute Common wealth hath power in the Prince and Magistrates to gouerne and defend it self to make lawes to punishe Malefactours c. But the Church is an absolute Common wealth and more absolute then a Kingdome this being subordinate to that not that to this ergo it was to haue all spirituall Authoritie necessarie to gouerne and defend it selfe else Christ had not sufficientlie prouided for it 12. Fightlie we are bound to obey Princes lawes and Authoritie in conscience ergo much more the Churches Authoritie and law this being spirituall that but temporall this being the subordinant that the subordinat power as wee shall see herafter And therfore if the Apostle will haue euerie soule to be subiect to Authoritie and higher powers Rom. 13 he will especiallie that they be subiect if they be members of the Church vnto her spirituall power for as SYMMACHVS Pope sayd once to the Emperour ANASTASIVS Si omnis potestas à Deo est Ep. ad Anastaf Imp. magis ergo quae rebus praestituta est diuinis defer Deo in nobis nos deferemus Deo in te If all power be of God much more therfore that power which gouerneth diuine matters Honour thou God ô Emperour in vs and we will honour him in thee CHAPTER IIII. These two Iurisdictions and powers Ecclesiasticall and Ciuill are compared and conferred and the preeminence is giuen to the Ecclesiasticall 1. AS the little world Man called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 can not consist without bodie and soule nor the great world without the Sunne and Moone so neither can the spirituall world of the Church flourish any time vnlesse it be supported as by two Pillars by the spirituall and Temporall power and Authoritie But as if the Moone should or could contend with the sunne and would or could disdaine to receaue light from the sunne or would or could encroach vpon the sunnes right in the gouernmet of the day all would be out of order so if one of these powers should be at variance with the other and would not receaue light and direction by the more lightsome or would encroach preposterouslie on the others demaines the Church could not long flourish And as if the body should rebell against the soule the flesh against the spirit sensualitie against reason it would perturbe reasons order and breake the Oeconomie of Morall life so if one of these powers should offer iniurie to the other the Mysticall bodie of Christ his Church would be out of frame Wherfore seeing that Christ the Wisdome of God is the Authout of both he no doubt hath disposed them sweetlie Sap. 7. and consequentlie hath setled some order betwixt them because Quae à Deo sunt Rom. 13. ordinata sunt Those thinges that are of God are ordered And for as much as Pluralitas principatuum non est bona Pluralitie of principalities is not good Arist l. 12. Metaph. cap. vlt. to wit Vnlesse one be subordinate to the other no doubt he hath subiected one of these to the other For which cause in this Chapter I will endeauour to shew which of these powers taketh the precedence which hath the preeminence and superioritie wherin and how farre 2. But because Comparisons betwixt so great Powers and Principalities and especiallie in these our corrupted times are odious I protest before hand that I entend not do detract any right or prerogatiue from either but onely to giue to Caesar and his temporall power what belongeth vnto them and to God and his Church Mat. 21. what appertaineth to them For I confesse and haue prooued that both these Authorities are of God both are excellent and eminent in their kinde both to be honoured both to be obeyed within their limites both so necessarie to the Church of God that it can no more stand without them then the world without Sunne and Moone For take away Temporall power and who shall defend the Church and assist her for the execution of her lawes and sentences Take away the spirituall power and who shall direct and correct the Temporall when it is exorbitant Take away the Temporall and who shall drawe the sworde Take away the spirituall and who shall preach the worde Take away the Temporall and who shall haue care of our corporall and temporall life Take away the spirituall and
who shall haue care of the spirituall and eternall life But let the one not encroache vpon the other let both helpe one another and both are stronger as was excellently obserued by NICHOLAS the Pope Nichol. epist ad Michael Imp. cap. Gum ad verum ventum est d. 96. Cum ad verum ventum est neque Imperator Iura Pontificatus arripuit nec Pontifex nomen Imperatoris vsurpauit quoniaem idem Mediator Dei hominum homo CHRISTVS IESVS sic propriis actibus dignitatibus distinctis officia Potestatis vtriusque difcreuit vt Christiani Imperatores pro aeternâ vitâ Pontificibus indigerent Pontifices pro cursu temporalium tantummodo rerum Imperialibus legibus vterentur VVhen it came to the vnderstanding of the truth neither the Emperour did take vnto him the rightes of Bishop-like authorotitie nor the Bishop did vsurp the name of the Emperour because the same Mediatour of God and men man Christ Iesus hath distinguished the offices of both powers by their proper actes and distinct dignities as that Christian Emperours for attaining eternall life should neede Bishops and Bishops should vse the Imperiall lawes for the cause only of temporall thinges 3. But as both are necessarie so both are not equall but the one inferiour to the other the one subordinate to the other else the one would be an hindraÌ„ce to the other and both would cause confusion And certes if we will not preferre the bodie before the soule heauen before earth temporall before eternall life VVe must preferre the spirituall and Ecclesiastieall power before the Temporall and consequentlie the Church before the Common VVealth 4. These two powers and the preemineÌ„ce of the spirituall before the Temporall were prefigured as Turrecremata hath well remarked by the two brazen Pillars in the Porch of Salomons Temple The Porch was a figure of the Church Militant Turrecr lib. 4. cap. 87. 3. Reg. 7. the Inner Temple of the Church Triumphant because as by the Porch the Iewes entred into the Temple so by the Church Militant and by no other way Christians haue entrance into the Church Triumphant The two brazen Pillars that sustained the Porch signified the Power Temporall spirituall which support the Church Militant and the pillar on the right hand signified the spirituall power the Pillar on the left hand the Temporall power whence it is that that must take the precedence of this and this must be subordinate to that 5. And truly that the spirituall and Ecclesiasticall power is superiour to the Temporall and more eminent then it I prooue First by those thinges by which I haue prooued them in the former Chapter to be distinct For the end and finall cause of the temporall power is temporall and naturall to witt temporall peace the end of the spirituall Authoritie is eternall and supernaturall peace the immediat cause efficient of the Temporall is the people the immediat cause of the spirituall is God The matters in which the temporall power is occupied are temporall the affaires which the spirituall gouerneth are Ecclesiasticall and spirituall the functions of the temporall are all temporall the functions of the spirituall power are all spirituall and supernaturall as absoluing from sinnes ministring Sacraments offering of sacrifices enacting lawes for the soules health excommunicating absoluing c. The temporall ruleth especially the bodies the spirituall the soules that ruleth the Kingdome or Common Wealth this the Church To the King the Keyes of Cities are offered to the Priest and Pastour the Keyes of heauen He remitteth temporall Mulctes and paynes no sinnes at all The Priest and Pastour remitteth sinnes and absolueth from all paynes He can cast out of his Kingdome by banishement the Pastour out of the Church by Excommunication And therfore looke how farre eternall felicitie excelleth temporall God the People supernaturall and diuine thinges naturall and humane spirituall functions temporall soules bodies the Church the Common VVealth the Keyes of heauen the Keyes of cities sinnes ciuill penalties eternall temporall punishment excommunication banishement so farre the Ecclesiasticall and spirituall excelleth the Ciuill and Temporall Authoritie By this Argument S. CHRYSOSTOM as alwaies very excellentlie proueth the Priests to be greater then the King Chrysost homil 4. de verbis Isaiae tom 5. Mane intra tuos terminos ô Rex alij sunt termini Regni alij sacerdotij hoc Regnum illo maius est Rex ea quae sunt in terris sortitus est administranda caeterùm ius sacerdotij è supernis descendit Regi corpora commissa sunt sacerdoti animae Maior hic Principatus propterea Rex caput submittit manui sacerdotis vbique in scripturâ sacordotes inungebant Reges Remaine within thy boundes O King others are the limites of the Kingdome others of Priesthood this Kingdome is greater then that The King hath the administration of the things of the earth but the right of Priesthood defcendeth from aboue To the King bodies are coÌ„mitted to the Priest soules greater is this principalitie and therfore the King inclineth his head to the hand of the Priest and euerie where â—n Scripture Priests did anoint Kings Secondlie there is no Christian can denie but that since God hath ordained vs to a supernaturall end to witt the cleate vision and fruition of him selfe as all Scripture witnesseth that he hath all our goods also and states are ordained to the same end and are not well vsed but rather abused when they are vsed to serue our pleasures contrarie to that end whence followeth that all temporall thinges since the former Institution and ordination of God are Media meanes in respect not only of out supernaturall end but also of supernaturall meanes as Sacraments Grace and supernaturall functions which are more proportionate and more neere meanes to that end and consequentlie temporall power which ordaineth of these meanes is subiect to spirituall power which principally considereth the supernaturall meanes and end For as the art of ryding is more noble Arist li. 1. Eth. c. 1. then the art of making bridles as Aristotle to a like purpose reasoneth because this is ordained to that so the spirituall power which disposeth of supernaturall thinges is nobler then the Temporall this being ordained to that and the end being more noble then the meanes 6. Thirdlie Philosophers affirme that all habites and faculties are specified and dignified by their actes obiectes and endes and so Morall Philosophie which hath vertue and manners the health of the soule for its obiect is more noble then the art of Phisicke which teacheth only to cure the diseases of the bodie and to restore corporall health Seeing therefore that the obiects of spirituall power are supernaturall and heauenlie the obiects of Temporall power are naturall and earthlie the end also of spirituall power is eternall beatitude the end of temporall power temporall felicitie the actes also and functions of that power spirituall and supernaturall the actes of this naturall and
to the cause But the Pastours of the Church as is manifest out of the alleaged places of scripture haue Authoritie to gouerne and rule the Church and all the members and subiects thereof ergo they haue authoritie to do all those thinges which are necessarily belonging therevnto but they should not haue all power belonging therevnto vnlesse they haue a Power Legislatiue and not onlie directiue but also coerciue at least by spirituall paines ouer Christians and the lay power and temporall Iurisdictions ergo their spirituall power is not onlie aboue the temporall in dignitie but also in authoritie and power of commanding else they had not sufficient power to gouerne the Church which is committed vnto them 14. But because this veritie will appeare more by that which I shall alleage in the next Chapter to prooue that the Pastours of the Church haue spirituall authoritie ouer Kinges and Emperours I will here make an end desiring all wordlinges and Politikes who so inculcare obedience to Princes and secular power not to forgett their dutie and obedience to the Church and her Pastours who haue Authoritie as well as princes and greater then theirs and to thinke also with them selues that he that will not obey the Church Mat. 18. is to be held as an Ethnike and publican and that Deut. 17 if he that stubbornlie refused to obey the Highe priest in the olde lawe was to die for such disobedience what punishment remaineth for them who contemne Church and Pope which yet are in dignitie and power as farre aboue the synagogue and her priests and Bishops as the veritie surpasseth the figure the bodie the shadow the guift the promise Christ Moyses Christes preisthood that of Aaron Christes facrifice and Sacramentes those of the Iewes and synagogue CHAPTER V. Ecclesiasticall and Temporall peeres and princes are compared together and out of the Comparison is gathered that not only priuate laymen but euen temporall princes though otherwise absolute are subiect to the pastours of the Church and especially to the supreame visible pastour as is prooued by many arguments 1. I intend not by this comparison to detract the least from Kings and Princes Naziāz orat 17. ad ciues timore perculsos Psal 81. for I acknowledge their Authoritie to be of God them selues the Images and sonnes of God according to that Ego dixi Dij estis filij excelsi omnes I saied you are Godds and the sonnes of the highest all I will not let to giue them in a good sence those high titles with which the Romanes and Grecians stiled them who called them Filios Deorum Deos terrae Ioues mundi The sonnes of Goddes Goddes of the earth and Iupiters of the world for as God is the supreame Monarch of the world so are they of their Kingdomes in the gouernment wherof they imitate the Monarchicall gouernment of the world I graunt that a King in respect of the laitye is as the eye and head in the bodie as she sunne amongst the planets as the Cedar amongst Trees as gould amongst metalles as fier amongst the Elements as the sea amongst waters I will willinglie acknowledge him the second person after God and onlie lesser then God in temporall Authoritie Tertul. l. aduersus Scap. c. 2. 2. But yet it is not one of Kings least honours to acknowledge thē selues sonnes of the Church Ambros orat in Auxentium as S. AMBROSE tould Valentinian the Euiperour And therfore as Priests are content to giue to the King and Prince that honour which is due vnto them so Princes must not disdaine to giue to Priess their due respect and right Princes I graunt are called Gods by participation and the anointed of God so are Priests and in this kinde greater Gods then they because they approche nearer vnto the true God and only God by essence who therfore is called Deus Deorum Psal 49. 135. God of Goddes and their consecration and anoynting being a Sacrament is farre holier then that of Kings for which cause CONSTANTIN called the Bishopes of NICE his Gods Ruf. l. 1. Cap. 2. and would not be Iudge of them to whose iudgement he was to stand and as Princes are Kinges so are Priests and by so much greater Kinges then they by how much it is more to be a Kinge of soules then bodies wherfore the scriptures alleaged in the former Chapter which giue to the spirituall power a superioritie and authoritie ouer the temporall do prooue also that Bishops and especiallig the High and chiefe Pastour are euen Kings Pastours Ioan. 21 and superiours For when Christ bad PETER feede his sheepe he made him Pastour ouer all Christians and so the King if he wil be a sheepe of Christ must be a sheepe of PETER and consequentlie of the Pope his successour Mat. 18. and must acknouwledge him his Pastour And When Christ saied Dic Ecclesiae c. Tell the Church and if he will not beare the Church let him be vnto thee is an Ethnick and Publican Did he exempt Princes from the Churches Tribunal And when he saied What soeuer you shal binde vpon earth Mat. vlt. shal be bound in heauen were Princes excepted No no. If Princes will be members of the Church they must be subiect to the visible Head therof If they will be sheepe of Christ they must acknowledge PETER and the Pope his successour for their Pastour 3. Neither can their temporall soueraintie exempt them for that only maketh them so absolute that they are subiect to no temporall power yet remaine they notwithstandinge subiect to the spirituall power of the Church and as subiect as the lowest Christian and haue no more commaund ouer the Church then the meanest of the people True it is that they are defendours or ought so to be and Protectours of the Church Pastours and superiours they are not but sheepe and inferiours And therfore after that the Prophet Esaye had saied Erunt Reges nutritij tui c. Esai 49. Kinges shall be thy nourcing Fathers to shewe that this importeth no superioritie ouer the Church he addeth VVith countenance cast downe toward the ground they shall adore thee the Churche and they shall licke vp the dust of thy feete 4. And this I proue first by reason grounded in faith and Diuinitie For the King by Baptisme is made as trulie a member of the Church as the meanest Christian and is incorporated as deepelie by the Caracter of Baptisme as any hee is regenerated and borne againe as much as any else he should not be so good a Christian as others And seing that by this incorporation and natiuitie as is before declared the Pastours especiallie the chief Pastour who is Head of this bodie hath power ouer all Christians it followeth that he hath also power ouer Kinges and so as the King can punnish rebelles Malefactours cast them out of the Realme by banishement so may the Chiefe Pastour punnish a rebellious King
he may make Ecclesiasticall lawes propose the word of God by preaching and true interpretation of it in Councels separate heretikes from the sheepefould by excommunication least they peruert others Yea if the Prince be supreme Head of the Church all Authoritie of preaching administration of Sacraments calling Councels iudging and defining in them collation of Benefices giuing of orders Iurisdictions absoluing dispensing excommunicating proceedeth from him VVherefore King HENRIE the Eight as he challenged the Title of supreme Head so he challenged almost all this Authoritie as we haue seene And to Queene ELIZABETH in the first Parlament and first yeare of her raigne the like authoritie was graunted Vide Sander de Schis Angl. fol. 149.150.151 See also Poultons Abbridgement of the statutes For in that Parlament it was decreed that she her heires and successours should haue all priueledges preeminences prerogatiues and spirituall superiorities which may be exercised or had of any power or man Ecclesiasticall That she and her successours should haue all power of nominating and substituting whom she will to correct heresies schismes abuses and to vse all authoritie which an Ecclesiasticall Magistrate may doe There also it was decreed that no Synode shoulde be called but by the Princes letters and commandement and that a Bishop should not be nominated or elected by any other then the Princes Authoritie nor should exercise any Iurisdiction but at the Queenes pleasure nor otherwise then by Authoritie from her Regall Maiestie And hence it is that the Prince writeth to the Archbishop in this manner For as much as all Iurisdiction as well Ecclesiasticall as secular proceedeth from Kinglie power as from the Head we giue thee Power to promote by these presents to holy Orders c. And the Archbishop of Canterburie vseth this stile VVe N. by the Diuine permission Archbishop and Primat of England authorised sufficientlie by the Kinges or Queenes Maiestie c. This argueth that in England all Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction to excommunicare absolue to preach and minister Sacraments to call Synodes to decree in them to make Ecclesiasticall lawes c. proceedeth from the Prince as from the Head and fountaine and consequentlie seing that what Authoritie the Prince giueth to others he hath him self hee may excommunicate make Ecclesiasticall lawes call Councels sitt as supreme Iudge in them as others by his Authoritie doe And seing he can giue to others Iurisdiction to giue Orders he may also minister Sacraments preach and teach for this Authoritie he giueth to others And therfore as in all Common wealthes the Prince can do those thinges which his inferiour Officers do though it be not alwaies so conuenient so if all Ecclesiasticall power proceedeth from the King as from the Head and fountaine looke what the Bishops and Ministers can do by Authoritie receaued from him that he also him self may do which yet is so ridiculous that our Princes hitherto haue bene ashamed of manie of those offices and as we shall see anon euen the Protestants of England when they are pressed are ashamed of this monstrous Authoritie 14. Seuenthlie if Christian Kings for few of our Aduersaries dare say that Pagan Kings haue Ecclesiasticall Authoritie be heads of the Church it followeth that till CONSTANTINE or PHILIP the first Christian Emperours the Church was without a head for three hundred yeares If you say that S. PETER and his successours were heads till CONSTANTINE then I demaund who deposed Pope SYLVESTER when CONSTANTINE came to be Christian and consequently Head or if S. SYLVESTER was not deposed then it followeth that there were two Heads at once and those not subordinate 28. Eightlie I prooue this by Kings and Emperours Confessions And as towching Kings wee haue seene their Confessions in the former Chapter As for Emperours CONSTANTINE as we haue seene called the Bishops of the Nicen Councell Ruffinus li. 1. cap. 2. Euseb lib. 4. de vita Constāt cap. 24. his Gods and Iudges and as Eusebius reporteth he was wont to say to Bishops Vos ô Episcopi intra Ecclesiam ego extra Ecclesiam à Deo Episcopus constitutus sum You ô Bishops in affaires with in the Church I in matters without the Church am appointed pointed Bishop by God Meaning that he was to be a vigilant Prince in the gouernment of the Empire but not to meddle with Ecclesiasticall affaires And therfore when the Donatists in a matter pertaininge to the Churches deciding appealed from a Councell of Bishops holden by Pope MEICHIADES vnto him Non est ausus saieth S. August epi. 162. Augustin Christianus Imperator sic eorum tumultuosas fallaces quaerelas suscipere vt de iudicio Episcoporum qui Romae sederant ipse iudicaret He durst not so to admit their complaints as to Iudge of the Bishops who in Rome had sit in Iudgement Yea OPTATVS saieth Optat. lib. 1. cont Parm. circa finem That when he saw they appealed in such a matter vnto him he exclamed O rabida furoris audacia sicut in causis Gentilium fieri solet appellationem interposuerunt O VVood mad audacitie of furie they haue interposed an Appellation as is wont to be done in the causes of Gentils Tortura Tort. pa. 174. VVheras Doctour ANDREWS saith that CONSTANTIN delegated the Bishops to heare the Donatists cause I demande wheron he groundeth that for if he might delegate he might haue iudged of the Bishops sentence and yet S. AVGVSTIN saieth he durst not And although at last ouercome by their importunitie he heard them yet not as Iudge but as an Arbiter THEODOSIVS the yonger sent Counte Candidianu◠to the Councell of Ephesus With this caueat That he should not meddle in Ecclesiasticall matters because illicitum est eum qui non sit ex ordine sanctissimoram Episcoporum sese Eccelesiasticis immiscere tractatibus It is vnlawfull for him that is not of the order of most holy Bishops to entermeddle him selfe in Ecclesiasticall treaties and affaires But Doctour ANDREWES answereth Tortura Torti pa. 175. That it is no good Argument to say A Count can not meddle in Councels ergo an Emperour cannot But he should haue remembred that this Count was sent to supplie the Emperours place and therfore if he as the Emperours Ambassadour could not meddle in Councels neither could the Emperour him selfe He should also haue marked the Emperours reason which was because it is vnlawfull for him that is not of the order of Bishops to meddle in Ecclesiasticall affaires which reason aswell excludeth the Emperour as the Count vnlesse Doctour ANDREWES will make all Kings and Emperours Bishops VALENTINIAN the elder saied Sozom. 16 ca. 7. 2.1 Sibi qui vnus è laicorum numero erat non licere se huiusmodi rebus interponere It was not lawfull for him who is one of the layitie to meddle in such matters And although Doctour ANDREWES would expound Zozomen who reporteth this speech of the Emperour by Nicephorus Hist Tri. part lib. 7.
c. 8. who reporteth the Emperour to haue saied Mihe negotiis occupato Reipublicae curis distento res huiusmodi inquirere non facile est It is no easie for me who am busied with businesses and distracted with the cares of the Common wealth to take notice of these matters as though the Emperour had authoritie to meddle in Councels but was not at leisure yet the greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with Doctour ANDREWES leaue Tortura Torti pag. 174. signifieth not facile but fas as he may see in BVDAEVS and consequentlie that the Emperor meant that it was not lawfull for him to intermeddle in such matters And this meaning NICEPHORVS his next words do argue When he sayth Vos autem quibus haec procuratio mandata est But you to whom this procuration is committed The same meaning also do ZOZOMENVS his owne words following insinuat Et ideo Sacerdotes Episcopi quibus haec curae sunt c. And therfore Priests and Bishops who haue care of these thinges So that the Emperour meant that he could not onlie not be at leisure but also that it was not lawfull for him to meddle in Councels Yea he was so farre from intermedling in Ecclesiasticall matters that when the Bishops assembled at Milan desired him to nominate the Bishop of Milan he wrote to the Bishops to choose such a one as to whom said he we that gouerne the Empire may incline our heads because saith he supra nos est talis electio such an Election passeth our Authoritie 16. Ninthlie This the ancient Fathers haue taught and told euen Emperours to their faces ATHANASIVS Epist ad soli vitā agentes Si istud est iudicium Episcoporum quid commune cum eo habet Imperator c. If this belong to the Iudgement of Bishops what hath the Emperour to do with it And a little after Quando à condito aeuo auditum est quando Iudicium Ecclesiae Authoritatem suam ab Imperatore accepit aut quando vnquam hoc pro iudicio agnitum est Plurima ante haec Synodi fuere multa Iudicia Ecclesiae habita sunt Sed neque Patres istiusmodi res principi persuadere conati sunt nec Princeps sein rebus Ecclesiasticis curiosum praebuit VVhen from the beginning of the world was it hearde when did the Iudgement of the Church take her Authoritie from the Emperour Many Synods before these tymes haue been many Iudgementes of the Church haue been giuen But neither did the Fathers persuade the Prince to meddle in those matters neither was the Prince so curious as to entermeddle in Ecclesiasticall matters Yea in the same Epistle he addeth Quis enim videns eum Constantium in decernendo Ibidem Principem se facere Episcoporum praesidere Ecclesiasticis iudiciis non merito dicat illum eam ipsam Abominationem desolationis esse For who seing him Constantius making him selfe Prince of the Bishops in decerning and bearing Authoritie ouer Ecclesiasticall Iudgements may not worthilie say that he is the Abomination of desolation And in that very Epistle he often tymes calleth CONSTANTIVS the Precursour of Antichrist for arrogating Authoritie in Councelles and ouer Bishops and for entermeddling in matters appertaining to the Church HOSIVS Cordubensis Athan. Apol. pro fuga purum ab initio whom Athanasius calleth vere Osium that is a Saint and of whom he giueth this commendation In what Synode was not hee the Captaine and Ringleader VVhom did not hee by defending the truth draw to his Opinion VVhat Church doth not keepe the monuments of his Presidence HOSIVS I say thus highly commended by S. ATHANASIVS being vrged by Constantius to communicate with the Arrians and to subscribe against Athanasius Athan. epist ad soli vitam agentes wrote vnto the Emperour in this manner Beleeue mee sayth he who may be thy Grand father I was in the COVNCELL of SARDIS when thou and thy Blessed brother CONSTANS called vs thether c. VVhat Bishop there was banished or when did he entermeddle him selfe in Ecclesiasticall Iudgements And then he giueth th' Emperour this holsome Counsell worthie to be followed of all Princes Desine quaeso memineris te mortalem esse c. Leaue of I pray thee and remember that thou art a mortall man Feare the day of Iudgement Keepe thy selfe pure for that day Do not entermeddle thy selfe in Ecclesiasticall matters nor do thou commaund vs in this kinde but rather learne those thinges of vs. God to thee hath committed the Empire to vs he hath giuen the charge of thinges belonging to the Church and as he who with maligne lookes carpes at thy Empire contradicteth the diuine Ordinance so do thou take heed least drawing that which appertaineth to the Church vnto thy selfe thou be made guiltie of a great crime Giue it is sayd to Gaesar what belongeth to Caesar and what appertayneth to God to God VVherfore neither is it lawfull for vs to holde the Empire in earth neither hast thou O Emperour power ouer the sacrifices and holyes Ambros lib. 5. op 32. ad Valens These thinges I write for the care I haue of thy Saluation c. S. AMBROSE hath manie notable sentences vttered by him with libertie and plainesse worthie such a Prelat Writing to VALENTINIAN the younger who by the Instigation of his mother vrged him to a disputation or conference in matters of Religion in the Consistorie before the Emperour he refused because the Emperour had nothing to do in such matters neither saith he to Valentinian the younger ought any to iudge me contumacious seing that I affirme that onlie which thy Father of August Memorie did not only answere by speech but also by his lawes decreed to wit In causa fidei vel Ecclesiastici alicuius ordinis eum iudicare debere qui nec munere impar sit nec iure dissimilis Haec enim verba rescripti sunt Hoc est sacerdotes de sacerdotibus voluit iudicare That in a cause belonging to faith or to Ecclesiasticall order hee should giue Iudgement who is neither inseriour in office nor in Right vnlike For these are the words of the Rescript That is he would haue Priests to Iudge Priests And a little after Quando audisti Clementissime Imperator in causa fidei Laicos de Episcopo iudicasse c. When didst thou heare ô most Clement Emperour that laymen Iudged a Bishop in a cause of faithe and againe Pater tuus Deo fauente vir maturioris aeui dicebat Non est meum iudicare inter Episcopos c. Thy Father who by Gods fauour was a man of riper age sayd It is not my office to Iudge between Bishops thy Clemencie sayth I must Iudge And he being baptized in Christ thought him selfe vnable to beare such a waight of Iudgement thy Clemencie of whom the Sacraments are yet to be deserued Orat. in Auxent quae sequitur epist citatam arrogateth iudgement in a
matter of faith when as thou knowest not the mystieries of faith And yet againe to the same purpose he addeth Soluimus quae sunt Caesaris Caesari quae sunt Dei Deo c. VVe haue payed to Caesar what was Caesars Tribute is Caesars it is not denyed the Church is Gods therfore it must not be giuen to Caesar because the Temple can be no right of Caesars No maÌ„ can deny but that this is spokeÌ„ with Caesars honour For what more honorable then for the Emperour to be called the sonne of the Church Which when it is sayd it is sayd without sinne it is sayd with grace Imperator enim bonus intra Ecclesiam non supra Ecclesiam est for a good Emperour is within the Church not aboue the Church The like libertie of speech he vseth also in an Epistle to his sister Marcellina Ambr li. 5. cit ep 33. ad Marcellinam sororem Mandatur denique Trade Basilicam c. To be briefe the Emperours commaund is Deliuer vp the Church I answer it is neither lawfull for mee to deliuer it nor expedient for thee O Emperour to take it Thou canst by no law spoile or ransake the house of any priuat man and thinkest thou that the house of God may by thee be destroied and ruinated It is alleaged that to the Emperour all thinges are lawfull all thinges are his I answer doe not ô Emperour charge thy selfe as to thinke that thou hast Imperial right ouer diuine thinges Do not extoll thy selfe but if thou wilt raygne longe be subiect to God It is written Mat. 22 What is Gods to God what is Caesars to Caesar To the Emperour Palaces do belong to the Priests Churches To thee is committed the care and charge of publick walles not of those that be holy If S. AMBROSE would not yeeld a Church or Chappell to the Emperours disposition would he if he had liued in King HENRIE the Eight his time and in England haue permitted him to seaze vpon all Abbayes Abbay lands and Churches belonging vnto them Or would he or S. ATHANASIVS or HOSIVS haue permitted him to sitt in Parlament as supreme Iudge in matters not only temporall but Ecclesiasticall or if they had seene Cromwell appointed King Henrie the Eights Vicaire Generall in Spirituall causes taking place aboue all the Bishops and Archbishops in their Conuocation would not ATHANASIVS haue called it the Abomination of desolation 14. Bilson in his Difference pa. 174. Andr. in Tortura Tortipa 169. Field li. 5. de Eccles cap. 53. To this Argument Doctour BILSON Doctour ANDREWES and Doctour FIELD answere that Constantius and Valentinian the younger were reprehended by these Fathers not for medling in Councels and Ecclesiasticall affaires but for tyranizing ouer Bishops and for partiall and vniust dealing But if these Fathers had meaÌ„t no otherwise they would not so absolutly haue reprehended medling in Ecclesiasticall matters but would onlie haue inueighed against the abuses For if a Pope who is in deed Head of the Church should abuse his Authoritie in Councels or Ecclesiasticall Iudgments though euen a Catholick who takes him for supreme Head might reprehend the abuse Athan. supra yet he could not saie to him as ATHANASIVS did to Constantius If this be the Iudgment of Bishops what hath the Pope to do with it Nor could he say to the Pope as he did to the Emperour VVhen was it euer heard from the beginning of the world when did the Iudgment of the Church take Authoritie from the Pope Neither could he haue sayd to the Pope Hosius supra as HOSIVS sayd to the same Constantius VVhen was the Emperour present to wit as Iudge for as Protectour and hearer he knew and saw CONSTANTIN the Great present in the Councell of Nice in Ecclesiasticall Iudgments Neither could he haue sayd to the Pope as the same HOSIVS saieth to Constantius Do not intermeddle in Ecclestasticall businesses nor do thou command vs in this kind but rather learne these thinges of vs. Much lesse could those wordes of S. AMBROSE Ambros supra which he so bouldlie spake to Valentinian haue been sutable to the Pope or any supreme Head Ecclesiasticall VVhen didst thou heare ô most Clement Emperour Pope that any of the laitie Clergie Iudged Bishops in a cause of faith Much lesse could these other words of S. AMBROSE haue been fitting a Pope or any supreme head Ecclesiasticall A good Emperour Pope is in the Church not aboue the Church Nor could S. AMBROSE haue denyed so peremptorily to deliuer a Church or Chappell to the Emperour if he had deemed him supreme head of the Church much lesse could he haue alleadged that reason of his denyall To the Emperour Pallaces appertaine to the Priest Churches for if the King be supreme Heade of the Church then Churches pertaine to him as well as Pallaces 15. But let vs heare another Father S. Chrysost ho. 4. de verbis Isaiae 2. Paral. 26. CHRYSOSTOME pondering the audacious fact of King OZIAS who in the pride of his power victories and former vertues arrogated to him selfe the Priests office hath these words Rex cum esset Sacerdotij Principatum vsurpat Volo inquit adolere incensum quia iustus sum Sed mane intra terminos tuos alij sunt termini Regni alij termini Sacerdotij Being a King he vsurpeth the power of Priesthood I will sayth he offer incense because I am iust But stay within thy limits Others are the bounds of the Kingdome others of the Priesthood If then the King hath his limits prefixed and contained within the Kingdome it followeth that he cannot intermeddle him selfe as a superiour in Ecclesâ—asticall causes but he shall passe his limits The same Father in his next Homelie hath these words Chrysost hom 5. de verbis Isaiae which are worthy the marking Quanquam nobis admirandus videatur Thronus Regius ob gemmas affixas aurum quo obcinctus est tamen rerum terrenarum administrationem sortitus est nec vltra potestatem hanc praeterea quicquam habet Authoritatis Verum sacerdoti Thronus in Coelis collocatus est de coelestibus negotiis pronunciandi habet potestatem Although the Kings Throne seemes to vs worthy to be admired for the pretious stones wherwith it is besett and the gould wherwith it is couered yet the King hath only the administration of terrene things neither hath he beyond this power any further Authoritie But to the Priest a throne is placed in HeaueÌ„ and he hath power to pronounce senteÌ„ce of heauenly businesses and affaires appertaining vnto heauen 16. Tenthlie I proue this veritie by the Arguments wherwith in the former Chapter I haue prooued that Kings Christian by baptisme are made subiects of the Church as much as is the lowest Christian and that not onlie Popes but inferiour Bishops haue challenged superiority ouer them which also Princes from the beginning haue euer acknowledged For if Princes in matters Ecclesiasticall be
regna dat coelestia That Christ is come why dost thou dread O Herode thou vngodlie foe He doth not earthlie Kingdomes reaue That heauenly Kingdomes doth bestow 4. And so although CHRIST were euen as man a Temporall King yet he not actually raigning him self it is not likelie that he should giue any such authoritie to S. PETER and the Pope his successour And although hee had actually raigned him self yet it is not necessarie that he should giue that Authoritie to S. PETER for hee had also the power of Excellencie by which he might command euen Infidels not baptized and by which he instituted a Church Sacraments and a Priesthood which S. PETER and the Pope his Successour can not doe Certes none can denie but that CHRIST might haue giuen S. PETER supreme Iurisdiction spirituall ouer the Church without Temporall because as spirituall power is not necessarily annexed to the Temporall as I haue proued in the former Chapter so Temporall power is not necessarily ioyned to the spirituall and therfore seing that neither the law of God nor Nature nor man giueth any such Temporall Iurisdiction to the Chiefe Pastour of the Church why should either he challenge it or we giue it him especiallie it being a thing verie inconuenient and odious that either the Church or her Chiefe Pastour should haue any such Temporall power For if it were so that the Church or her supreme Pastour had any such soueraintie it would deterre all Pagan Kings and Princes from our Religion fearing least the Church by her absolute Authoritie might depriue them of their Kingdomes Crownes and Scepters at her pleasure And hence it is that the Popes them selues confesse that they haue no Imperiall nor Kinglie Authoritie giuen them by CHRIST but rather that these two powers are in distinct subiects So NICHOLAS Pope sayth Cum ad verum ventum est c. Ca. cum ad verū d. 96. Vide supra pa. 66. et pag. 78. VVhen it came to the vnderstanding of the truth neither did the Emperour take vnto him the rights of Bishop-like Authoritie nor did the Bishop vsurpe the name of the Emperour because the same Mediatour of God and men man Christ IESVS hath distinguished the offices of both powers by their proper and distinct dignities as that Christian Emperours for attaining eternall life should neede bishops and Bishops should vse the Imperiall lawes for the cause onely of temporall things And S. BERNARD Bern. li. 2. de Cōsid ca. 6. Nam quid tibi aliud dimisit Sanctus Apostolus quod habeo inquit tibi do c. VVhat other thing did the holie Apostle leaue vnto thee what I haue saith hee I giue thee VVhat is that One thing I know it is neither gould nor siluer seing that he sayth gould and siluer is not with mee Bee it that by some other way thou maist challenge this vnto thee yet not by Apostolicall right for he could not giue thee that which he had not VVhat he had he gaue sollicitude as he sayd ouer the Churches Did be giue thee rule and domination not ouer-ruling the Clergie but made example of the flocke and doost thou thinke this to be spoken onlie out of humilitie not in veritie the voice of our Lord is in the Ghospell the Princes of the Gentils ouer-rule them c. but it shal not be so amongst you 5. But although the Pope and Chiefe Pastour of the Church hath no direct Temporall power but only in his owne Temporall Patrimonie and Kingdome by which he may dispose of Kingdomes Crownes and scepters yet he hath a Spirituall power which may directlie and ordinarilie dispose of spirituall matters and indirectlie and in some extraordinarie case of the Temporall also that is when it shall be iudged necessarie for the consernation of the faith or Religion or the Churches lawes and right or some other great and necessarie good I say the Pope hath no direct power ouer Princes for then he might limit their power abrogate their lawes and depose their persons at least for some iust cause though it did not concerne either faith or the Churches right or necessarie good as the King can deale with his Viceroy and any of his subiects and then Princes should not be absolute and independent who yet as aboue is declared in Temporall matters and so long as they exceede not the bounds of their authority by commanding things contrary to Gods law or the Churches Canons acknowledg no Superiour in earth neither Pope nor Emperour nor Common wealth For as for the Emperour all Princes who are not his Vassals as the Kings of Spaine England and France are not as they acknowledge him Superiour in dignitie and therfore will and must giue him the precedence whersoeuer they meete yet they are not subiect to him nor bound to obey him vnlesse it be when the Pope the Chiefe Pastour and hee the greatest Prince in dignitie shall thinke it necessarie that all Christian Princes contribute or concurre for the defence of Christendome against the Turke or such like Common enemie As for the Pope I graunt that CHRIST gaue him no Temporall power at all which aboue I haue prooued for that Temporall power which he hath in Italie hee had not by Christs immediat graunt but onlie by Constantines and other Emperouts and Princes donation which donation supposed and confirmed also by Prescription and his subiects yea all the Christian worlds consent that part of Italie which he possesseth is as trulie appertaining to him as England is to the King of England France to the King of France and Spaine to the King of Spaine onlie the Pope cannot transfer his Kingdome to his Heyres as they may because it cometh not to him in particular by hereditarie succession but onlie by election Yea if the Pope were by the law of God a Temporall Soueraine Prince ouer all the world other Princes should holde of him and CONSTANTINES donation by which he made him Temporall Prince of Italie had been no donation but restitution As for the Common wealth I haue aboue declared how it hath despoiled it self of all authoritie and by translating it to the King is trulie a subiect and like a priuate person and so hath no power ouer the King vnles it be in case of intollerable Tyrannie as aboue is explicated 6. I say yet that the Pope hath an Indirect power ouer Kings euen in Temporall mattters which power notwithstanding is not Temporall but spirituall nor any distinct power from his spirituall supremacie but euen the self same And therfore GREGORIE the Seuenth in his deposition of HENRIE the Fourth sayth that he deposeth him by the power he hath from S. PETER of binding and loosing And although his Pastorall and Spirituall power directly and ordinarily hath the menaging only of spirituall matters and so directly and ordinarily exerciseth it self in excommunicating interdicting and suspending frō Spirituall offices calling Councels and deciding controuersies of faith in them in making
lesse daungerous to them seing that by permitting Popes and Bishops to doe it they might derogate to their owne authoritie and giue occasion to them to prescribe against them and to do it not in the Princes but in their owne name and Authoritie And when did WIDDRINGTON heare that any good Christians appealed from the Church and Pope in these lawes vnto Princes as to their highest Superiours when did they reiect any of these lawes till they had informed them selues that they were made not by the Churches but by the Princes authoritie Certes WIDDRINGTON in this openeth a wide gap for Heretickes and all contemners of the Churches authoritie And what may he not defend if he be permitted to vse this libertie and audacitie As for his Authours we shall see hereafter in the ensewing thirteenth Chapter how many they are and of what Authoritie 4. Wherfore my Argument shall proceede as it began in this manner The Pope by VViddrington can make a Decree to depose inferiour Temporall Lordes ergo Supreame Princes they as Christians being as subiect te the Church by Baptisme as aboue is shewed in the 5. Chapter num 4.5.6 as much as the lowest Christians though in that they are absolute Princes they haue no Superiour but God in Temporall Authoritie To say that Pope INNOCENT made this Decree of his own head is but to shew great ignorance for in Generall Councels Popes speake ex Cathedra and as publick not priuate persons and what they decree is With the common consent of all the Bishops or the most part else if the Pope should do all of his owne head in vaine should he assemble Generall Councels But that all the Councell and Christian world consented to this decree it is cleare enough for that no mention is made of any variance betwixt the Pope and the Councell in this matter To say that the true Councell of Laterane is not extant or that the Canons extant were compiled only by INNOCENTIVS because in this Councell the Councell of Laterane though not this but another is cited and alleadged are so improbable euasions that they merit not confutation and are verie suffieientlie reiected by the booke called Discussio decreti Magni Concilij Lateranensis 5. One thinge there is bearing more shew which our Aduersaries might alleage to wit that if this Councell did in expresse tearmes define that the Pope hath power to depose Princes they would then yeeld because what a Generall Councell with the Pope defineth directly and expresly is a mattet of faith and it is heresie to gainsay it But seing that all thinges spoken or written in a Councell are not matters of faith for as Diuines commonlie say the reasons which the Councell bringeth for confirmation of her decree and those things which are spoken incidentlie Bellarm. lib 2. de Concil cap. 11. 12. and the things which are determined as probable are not of necessitie to be beleeued it seemeth that by this decree we are not bound to beleeue that the Pope can depose Princes because though the Pope and Councell make a decree of deposition yet they define not expresly nor sub Anathemate vnder paine of Curse that the Pope can depose Princes 6. But who so pleaseth to consider this decree well and without all passion or partiall affection must needs confesse that this decree ought to be of verie great credit for first the Pope and Councell suppose at least that the pope can depose Princes else they would neuer haue made such a Decree and consequentlie this decree argueth that the Pope and all the Prelates Princes and Legates present were of that opinion which no doubt they being so many and so learned must needs beare a great sway amongst all good Christians for what they thought all the Christian world at least for the most part thought all receauing and approouing this Councell But widdringtoÌ„ will say that he will not denie but that they all thought so piouslie and probablie yet because they defined not in expresse tearmes that the Pope can depose Princes he will not beleeue it A peremptorie Answer certainlie and wherin to say no more the Answerer shall shew him selfe verie slow and hard of beleefe and to hardie also who blusheth not to gainsay so many learned and godlie Prelates and whome so many graue countenances and Iudgements can not moue 7. But I will deale yet another Way and out of the selfe same decree Although the Pope and Councell in the alleaged decree do not expreslie define that Popes can vpon iust cause depose Princes yet it argueth that they nor onlie probablie but verilie and assuredlie thought he could else to haue grounded so odious a decree and iniurious also if the Pope haue not Authoritie vpon a probable opinion had bene great rashnesse For the Councell had exposed therby if the opinion had not bene supposed most assured the King and Common wealth yea and sometimes the whole Church to vprores garboiles rebellious warres and such like And warre should haue bene iust also on both sides For the subiects might haue refused to obey the deposed Prince as being freed by a Generall Councels authoritie from all obligation to him and being warranted by the same Councell that now he is no more their King but an vsurper and Inuader against whom euerie particuler man hath iustum bellum iust warre And so as if a forraine Prince should vniustlie inuade France without iust title or wrong receiued euerie Frenchman might resist him if he could because he hauing no Title all the Kingdome and euerie particuler member hath iust warre against him so if a Prince deposed persist in gouernment he is according to the Popes and Councels opinion which VViddrington confesseth to be probable an vsurper and inuader and consequentlie euerie one of his former subiects hath iust warre against him Cicero lib. 3. de offic Hâ—rodotus lib. 3. Xiphilin in Augusto AlexaÌ„d ab Alex. li. 3. c. 26 D. Th in 2. d. vlt. q. 2. a. 2. ad 5 Sot lib. 5. de Iust q. 1. art 3. alij infra cap. 15. citandi no lesse then as all the best Philosophers and Diuines teach the subiectes haue against an vsurper of the crowne And yet this Prince deposed might iustlie also persist in his possession because no man is bound to forgoe that to which he hath probable right being warranted by the rule of the law †Reg. 65 de Regulis Iuris in 6. In pari delicto velcausa potior est conditio possidentis In the like default or cause better is the condition of him that is in possession And againe * Reg. 11 ibid. Cum sunt iura partium obscura reo fauendum est potius quà m Actori VVhen the rightes of the parties are obscure the guiltie or accused is to be fauoured before the Actour or accuser But the Prince in this case hath according to VViddrington probable right and is in possession and he is reus not Actors
at that venerable Councell of Trent Bochel in praef ad lectorem saying quantas nouissimis temporibus vbique terrarum excitarit turbas Synodus Tridentina nemo est qui nesciat what troubles in these latter times the Councell of Trent hath stirred vp no man is ignorant And in an other place he seekes to exempt the King of Fraunce and his Officers from Excommunication Lib. 2. tit 16. cap. 3. as though they could not be excoÌ„municated by their Pastour wherin whilest he would exalt his King he depresseth him so lowe as that he maketh him of Christianâ—ssimus which title he hath worthilie long enioyed not to be Christianus because if he be a Christian he is a sheepe of Christ and consequentlie of S. PETER to whom Christ committed his sheepe Ioan. 21. Pasce oues meas and consequentlie also of the Bishop of Rome his successour yea and of other Pastoures and therefore for a iust cause may be by them seuered from the folde by Excommunication Lib. 5. c. 45. pag. 906. en Extraic d'aucuns articâ—tes du Concile de Trent Likewise in his 5. booke he setteth downe an extract of many of the Decrees of the Councell of Trent which like to no good Catholicke he reiecteth as contrarie to the libertie and practise of Fraunce Yea in many places vpon the least occasion he glaunceth against that hohe and renowned Councell Wherefore as in other thinges so in this which he fathereth on Cardinall Pelue and other Prelates he deserueth no credit Secondlie the imputation which he layeth on them is so absurd that I can not beleeue that they who were well seene in the Councelles Decrees would euer reiect that Decree of the Councell because that Decree onlie depriueth a Kinge of the citie place or Dominion which he holdeth of the Church as is manifest by those wordes quâ—d ab â—cclesia obtinent Concil Trid. â—ess 25. c. 19. which they holde of the Church wherfore either the Kinge of Fraunce holdeth some citie or demaine of the Pope and Church or he doth not If he do no marueile that the Pope can in that case depriue him the Pope being in this his Temporall Lord of whome he holdeth that Temporall Dominion if he be not that extract of BOCHELLVS is most absurd which he setteth downe in these french wordes Lâ— concile excommunie priue le Roy de la Ville on lieu Bochell lib. 5. tit 20. c. 45. pag. 916 En extraict d'aueuns articles du Concile de Trent ou il aurà permis vn duel sess 25. cap. 19. the Councell of Trent excommunicateth and depriueth the Kinge of the towne or place where he shall permitte a duelle sess 25. cap. 19. where we see that he ascribeth to the Councell as though it did absolutelie depriue the King of whatsoeuer towne or place wheras the Councell depriueth him onlie of that towne or place which he holdeth of the Church And therefore these wordes following Ceste Article est contre l'authoritie du Roy qui ne peut estre priuè de son temporel ou partie d'iceluy pour le regard duquel il ne recognoit aucun Superieur quelque il soit This Article is against the Authoritie of the Kinge who can not be depriued of his temporallities or any part therof in respect of which he acknowledgeth no Superiour these wordes I say are most absurde and vnworthie that graue Assemblie not vnbeseeming Bochellus whose spirit they resemble Wherefore this booke of Bochellus is forbidden to be printed or solde in Catholicke countries where the Councell of Trent is receaued and where a Censor librorum is appointed And yet such authours Widdrington is enforced to fly vnto 16. He alleageth also Mr. George Blacwell the late Archpriest who in his examination and as Widdrington sayth euen to his death persisted in Widdringtons opinion concerning both the oath and deposition of Kinges But it is well knowne to many that Mr. Blacwell whilest he was at libertie was so Zealous for the Popes Authoritie deposing that he thought it a matter of faith And I haue heard a Catholicke Gentleman named who visiting M. Blacwell in Prison sayd vnto him did not you M. Blacwell heretofore tell me that the oath of allegeance was in no case lawfull And Widdrington him selfe knoweth that in a certaine conference betwixt the Archpriest and other Priests at which VViddrington him selfe was present Mr. Archpriest sayd he thought the Pope had Authoritie to depose a Prince but yet matters standing as they did he could not lawfullie exercise it Yea in that conference also WIDDRINGTON him selfe was ZEALOVS for this the Popes authoritie though after his imprisonment and after his Chiefe Pastours Breues which should haue confirmed him he hath chaunged his opinion Let then the Reader iudge of what Authoritie the wordes of a fearfull olde man then Prisoner and straightlie examined are he especiallie hauing auerred the contrarie when he was at libertie what else can hence be gathered then that rather out of feare then Iudgement he allowed the oath when he was in his Aduersaries handes of whom otherwise he expected all rigour And perchaunce WIDDRINGTON him selfe who before his imprisonement was so Zealous for the Popes authoritie and against the oath hath not now so much chaunged his minde as his tounge nor speaketh not so much out of iudgement and opinion as out of feare or faintenesse of harte And now that he hath begun he thinkes he must go forward 17. Lastely he alleageth in all his bookes the 13. Reuerend Priestes thinking by their Authoritie and credit for they were graue and learned men constant confessours and twoe of them glorious martirs to grace and credit his opinion But because they are able enough to answer for them selues I will not entermeddle my selfe in other mens matters onlie in a worde or two I will answer what in effect I thinke they might answer and what I haue heard some of them answer And this I thought good to do for 2. reasones first for the respect and loue I beare to them they being of my coate and principall men of the English Clergie which so constantlie hath borne the brunt of a longe persecution that it may be an example to all other Clergies and a mirrout to furure ages Secondly least I should do them iniurie For if I answering to VViddringtons other Authours should say nothing of these by VViddrington so often alleaged I might giue occasion to the world to thinke that I passed these with silence because they were so manifest fautours of VViddringtons opinion as I could not tell what to say in their defence I answer First that this their protestation was by them made before the Popes Breues came forth that is Anno 1603. and therfore bee it that then they were of that opinion yet seing that since the Breues were published they professe and protest the contrarie as VViddrington well knoweth and that one of them yet liuing whilest he was in
antealata quia Princeps non improbans vsum censetur illum approbare when the Prince knowing the vse doth approoue it or doth not disprooue it there ariseth a custome which hath the force of a law or which sufficeth to derogate to the law before made because the Prince not disproouing an vse is thought to approoue it This is the doctrine of Diuines and Lawiers Widdr. Disput Theol. c. 6. sec 3. n. 25.27.28 which VViddrington him selfe approoueth in diuerse places Wherefore seing that in England the sentence of Pius Quintus pronounced against Queene Elizabeth was not obserued for three and thirtie yeares before the thirteene Priests Protestation and that all that while euen the Catholickes obeyed her as Queene the Popes knowing and not contradicting yea some of them as I haue heard of Pope Gregorie the 13. and Clement the 8. expresselie approouing it followeth that at the time of the 13. Priests Protestation the sentence of deposition by contrarie vse and custome was abrogated and so Queene ELIZABETH was at that time in the same state she was in before the sentence and consequētlie might be acknowledged for true Queene and to haue as full power and Authoritie as any of her Predecessours But because widdrington may alleage that these 13. reuerēd Priests not ōlie promised that they would acknowledge Q. Elizabeth notwithstanding any sentence alreadie pronoūced but also notwitstanding any Authoritie or any Excōmunication whatsoeuer either denoūced or to be denounced to yeeld vnto her Maiestie all obediēce in tēporall causes I answer that the 13. Reuerend Priests might acknowledge in the Pope authoritie to depose the Queene and yet promise her obedience in Lawfull thinges supposing the sentence would be inualid for some of the aforesayd causes and not for want of authoritie Againe they might thinke that if the Queene would giue for herafter libertie of Conscience as was pretended and continue the same as the 13. Priests might hope the Pope should haue no cause to Excommunicate or depose her and therfore would not or if he would they might imagine that in that case he could not iustlie nor without great iniurie to the Catholickes of England proceede so against her that being to prouoke her to a new persecution and so the 13. Reuerend Priestes might thinke them selues not bound to obey in that case the Popes sentence and commaundement it being vniust and consequentlie rebus sic stantibus they might promise notwithstanding any sentence to be denounced to obey the Queene in all Temporall and lawfull causes and to defend and assist her If VViddrington should here obiect that if the 13. Priests might promise to acknowledge and obey Queen Elizabeth notwithstanding any sentence to be pronounced supposing the sentence would be vniust why may not the Catholique Subiect of England take the oath of pretended alleageance and sweare that the Pope can not depose the King and that if he should he would still acknowledge and obey him supposing the sentence would be vniust I answer him that the case is not like because in the oath the question is de iure not de facto and therfore the Subiect sweareth absolutlie that the Pope hath not any power or Authoritie to depose the King and that notwithstanding any sentence of Excommunication or depriuation made or graunted or to be made or graunted against the sayd King or any absolution of the sayd subiectes from their obedience he will beare true fayth and true allegeance to his Maiestie And seing that the Pope hath such Authoritie to depose a Prince as here I suppose it is periurie at least to sweare absolutlie that he hath no such Authoritie ouer the King and it is iniurie to the Pope But the 13. Priests speake de facto not de iure and therfore they protest not that the Pope hath no such Authoritie but promise what they would doe de sacto notwithstanding any his Authoritie that is that not withstanding the Popes Authoritie and sentence so libertie of Conscience were graunted to all English Catholickes as they were borne in hand it should they would still acknowledge and obey the Queene supposing in that case the sentence would be vniust and so of no force to bynd in conscience Wherfore seing that these 13. Reuerend Priestes might make their Protestation of acknowledging and obeying Q. ELIZABETH not for that they thought the Pope could not depose her but for other reasons alleaged why should then VViddrington take them in the worst sence why should he bringe them so oft on the stage why should he thinke to grace his opinion by their grauitie learning and Authoritie he knowing whatsoeuer they thought of the Popes Authoritie in deposing before the Popes Breues came forth as they protest they neuer thought as VViddrington doth that when he began to impugne this the Popes Authoritie and against his Chiefe Pastours commaundement to defend the oath they protested in priuat and publicke the contrarie And so VViddrington may aske thē forgiuenesse by publicke writing whom he hath publickelie and yet wrongefullie sought to defame 18. Here because I would not passe my limittes of breuitie which I intended in this booke I thought to haue concluded this Chapter But after I had examined these Authours yea after that the Printer was come to this Chapter I came to the sight of VViddringtons Supplication and Appendix ioyned to it which before I had nor seene for that Catholickes making a scruple either to read or to keepe bookes forbidden by the Chiefe Pastour and Superiours being vigilant and worthilie to suppresse such bookes it is hard in Catholicke countries to meete with any of VViddringtons bookes two of them being expresselie condemned and all his later bookes being almost but repetitions of the former yet hauing hitte vpon this booke I was desirous to see with what dexteritie he defended these authours against Schulckennius And I find that he refused to acknowledge two of them to wit Dante 's and Ocham In Append § 6 num 2. saying Imprimis falsum est me aut Dantem aut Occamum pro meis authoribus produxisse c. First it is false that I produced either Dante 's or Ocham for my Authours But I onlie affirmed that by IOHN AZORIVS they were alleaged for that opinion And yet who could thinke otherwise then that he had produced them for his Authours seing that after the first opinion of Cardinall Bellarmine and others which holdeth that the Chiefe Pastour may in some case dispose of Temporalities and Regalities he setteth downe the second opinion of those who holde that the Chiefe Pastour in no case by no Authoritie either directlie or indirectlie hath power to depose a Prince and cōming to the Authours of this second opinion which he him selfe Embraceth he sayth Hanc sententiam vt refert Ioannes Azorius Societatis Iesu Theologus sequuntur Gulielmus Occamus Ioannes Parisiensis Dante 's Aligerius Iacobus Almainus c. This sentence as Ioannes Azorius a diuine of
3. which S. AVGVSTINE sayth is a greater euill then to be killed by a sword consumed by fier or cast vnto wild beastes to be deuoured who doubteth but that he should be called the principall cause of the deposition he compelling the subiectes therunto by so great a punishment 40. Likewise as a forreine Prince may and is bound sometimes to defend Innocents so the Pope may licence and authorize yea and commaund him so to do he hauing authoritie as VViddrington auoucheth to commaund a Prince in tēporall matters and if at the Popes commaundement this Prince make warre vpon the Prince that intolerably molesteth Innocents in their faith and Religion as Victoria in the place before alleaged saith he may that which the Prince shall doe against the other tyrannizing Prince in the pursewing of his iust warre the Pope shal be said to do hee being the commaunder and consequently the principall agent And yet by this Clause of the Oath the subiects are commaunded to sweare that the Pope hath no authoritie to authorize any forreine Prince to anoy the King of England or to inuade his countries which is to abiure at least a probable opinion as certainely false which how it can be done with a good conscience I report me euen to VViddringtons large conscience But be this spoken to shew the daunger of swearing this Clause not to giue any scope against Kings or Princes whome I honour as God his Images and his Vicegerents in Earth The Third Clause Also I sweare from my heart that notwithstanding any declaration or sentence of excōmunication or depriuation made or graunted or to be made or graunted by the Pope or his successours or by any authoritie deriued or pretended to be deriued from him or his Sea against the said King his Heires or successours or any Absolution of the sayd subiects from their obedience I will beare faith and true alleageance to his Maiesti◠his Heires and successours and him and them will defend to the vttermost of my power against all conspiracies and attempts what soeuer which shal be made against his or their persons their crowne and dignitie by reason or colour of any such sentence or declaration or otherwise and will do my best endeuour to disclose and make knowne vnto his Maiestie his heires and successours all Treasons and Trayterous conspiracies which I shall knowe or heare of to be against him or any of them 41. Widdr. in Disp Theol. ca. 4. sect 1. n. 1. seqq Here VVIDDRINGTON insulteth against the learned Cardinall Bellarmine though the Phoenix for controuersies of this our age Cardinall Bellarmine sayth he Gretserus and Lessius contend that by this Clause is denyed to the Pope power to excommunicate which yet sayth he this Clause seemeth to suppose and the King professeth he had not the intention to denie But although this Clause seeme to suppose and the King in wordes seemeth to confesse or at least not to denie the Pope Authoritie to excommunicate yet in effect they denie it For depriuation of Regall Authority being an effect of excommunicating which ordinarily followeth excommunication of Kings and Princes in the deniall of the effect the cause is denied For as if you should say A man is not risibilis you should denie him to be homo so in denying that the Pope can depriue Princes of their Kingdomes you denie in effect tha he can excommunicate 42. Here WIDDRINGTON in his Newyearesgift insulteth against me for saying as he makes me to say that depriuation of Regall Authoritie is an effect of Excommunication as necessarilie following Excommunication as risibile followeth homo But if we looke into the matter narrowlie we shall finde he triumpheth before the victorie and counteth his chickins before they be hacht For first if we speake of the power of Excommunication and depriuation of which I speake but two lines before these wordes at which VViddrington carpeth I had shewed in the seauenth Chapter before that the power to excōmunicate which the cbiefe visible Pastour hath is one and the selfe same power with the power of depriuation and deposition which one power hath two actes and effectes the one principall and first intended called actus primarius and this is Excommunication or such like spirituall Censure and punishment the second is depriuation deposition and such like Temporall chastisement and correction which is actus secundarius a secundarie acte of the Chiefe Pastours spirituall power secondarilie intended when the first will not preuaile And these two actes are necessarilie belonging to the Popes spirituall power of Supremacie not that this power must needes alwayes exercise both or either of them but because the Pope can not haue this power but he must haue facultie to exercise them when a iust cause requireth it and so these two actes being necessarilie belonging to the Popes Supremacie he that denyeth him power to depriue or depose a Prince denyeth in effecte that he hath power to Excommunicate it being one and the selfe same power because the denyall of an effect necessarilie belonging to a cause is a virtuall denyall of the cause euen as to deny that fier can heate or rarifie is to deny it to be fier and to deny a man to be risibilis is to deny him to be man Secondlie if we speake of these two actes of this power although WIDDRNIGTON knoweth that the learned SVAREZ alleaged by him 2. p. Append contra Suarem sec 4. affirmeth that the suspension of Kinglie Authoritie is an effect of the acte of Excommunication I did not say that depriuation is alwayes an effect of the acte of Excommunication well knowing that although both these are so necessarilie belonging to the Popes power of Supremacie that it can not be without possibilitie of exercising them yet it is in his free choise to exercise either both or either of them and so he may excommunicate and not depriue and he may depriue as he did King CHILDERIC See Cap. Alius 15. q. 6. alleaged by me pag. 250. and not excommunicate And therfore I sayd onlie that depriuation of Regall Authoritie being aneffect of excommunication which ordinarilie followeth Excommunication of Kinges and Princes in the denyall of the effect the cause is denyed c. where WIDDRINGTON leaueth out those wordes which ordinarilie followeth because those wordes would haue made it plaine that I say not that depriuation is an effect of Excommunication in all Excommunicate persons but in Kinges and Princes nor alwayes in excommunicated Princes because a Kinge may be excommunicated and not deposed and he may be deposed as CHILDERIC King of Fraunce was and not Excommunicated but oftentimes and ordinarelie Cap. Alius 15. q. 6. because the Chiefe visible Pastour vseth not by name to excommunicere a Prince but he also ordinarilie especiallie in these later Ages deposeth him and for two reasons also the one because he ought not ordinatilie to proceede to so seuere a temporall punishment before he haue tryed whether the