world We know well that as he is the Sonne of God he is the King of glory King of kings Lord of heauen and earth and of all things Psal 23. Domini enim est terra plenitudo eius and reigneth with the Father and the holy Ghost for euer but what is this to a temporall kingdome what is this to the imperiall dignitie of secular maiestie Therefore I meane not to stand to confute this opinion of Canonists which hath bene most learnedly confuted by Cardinall Bellarmine Lib. 5. de sum Pont. c. 2. 3 but to let it passe as most absurd that cannot be proued by any sound reason nor ancient authorities either of Scriptures Fathers or Councels but maintained by captious fallacies vnapt similitudes and corrupt interpretations An other opinion there is of Diuines who dislike and with most strong reasons do confute the Canonists positiōs but yet so as they vphold and labour to maintain the Popes temporall power though in other sort then the former that is De Ro. Pont. lib. 5. c. 6. indirectly or casually and by consequence This then they write and namely Cardinall Bellarmine Asserimus Pontificem vt Pontificem et si non habeat vllam merè temporalem potestatem tamen habere in ordine ad bonum spirituale summam potestatem disponendi de temporalibus rebus omnium Christianorum We affirme that the Pope as Pope although he hath not any meerly temporal power yet in order to the spiritual good he hath a supereminent power to dispose of the tēpotall goods of all Christians And againe in the same chapter Quantum ad personas non potest Papa vt Papa ordinariè temporales Principes deponere etiam iusta decausa eo modo quo deponit Episcopos id est tanquam ordinarius iudex c. As touching the persons the Pope as Pope cannot ordinarily depose temporall Princes yea for a iust cause after that sort as he deposeth Bishops that is as an ordinary iudge yet he may change kingdomes and take from one and giue to an other as the chiefe spirituall Prince if that be necessarie to the health or sauing of soules And in the same booke the first chapter where he putteth downe the Catholicke opinion as he saith he altereth it somewhat in this manner Pontificem vt Pontificem c. That the Pope as Pope Lib. 5. cap. 1. hath not directly and immediatly any temporall power but only spirituall yet by reason of the spirituall he hath at least indirectly a certaine power that chiefe or highest in tēporals You haue here set downe by Cardinall Bellarmine the opinion of Diuines that the Pope as Pope or chiefe Bishop as chiefe Bishop hath not directly and immediatly any temporall power to depose Christian Princes but that indirectly I wot not how he may depose them and dispose of their temporals and so in effect and after a sort agreeeth with the Canonists that indeed such power is rightly in him only he differeth about the manner with a restraint from infidels to Christian Princes But I trust as he in improuing the Canonists assertiō of direct power ouer al the world driueth them to Scriptures or tradition of the Apostles so likewise we may require that he proue his indirect power by one of these two wayes If he cannot as most certainely he cannot then why should men giue more credite to him then to the other they being as Catholike and haply no lesse learned then he Why should his opinion be thought more true then the former To disproue the Canonists thus he writeth Ex Scriptur is nihil habemus Bellar de Ro. Pont l. 5. c. 3. nisi datas Pontifici claues regni coelorum declauibus regni terrarium nulla mention fit Traditionem Apostolicam nullam aduersary proferunt Out of Scriptures we haue nothing but that the keyes of the kingdome of heauen were giuen to the Pope of the keyes of the kingdome of the earth no mention is made at all Apostolical tradition our aduersaries produce none Hereby it seemeth the Cardinall goeth about to proue against his aduersaries that because the keyes of the kingdome of the earth are no where mentioned in the Scripture to be giuen to Peter and his sucsessors therefore the Pope hath not any direct authoritie to depose the Princes of the world nor dispose of their temporals insinuating that the keyes of the kingdome of heauen promised and granted to Peter or to the Church in the person of Peter can worke no such effect nor were granted to depriue Christian Princes or others of their scepters and regall dignities but onely by censures and spirituall authority to exclude vnworthy sinners from eternall felicitie and admit such as are truly penitent to the kingdome of heauen If this argument be good against the Canonists then why is it not also good against Cardinall Bellarmine himselfe when as he can no more produce Apostolicall tradition to confirme his indirect authoritie then the other their direct And of the keyes of the kingdome of the earth required for deposing Princes and disposing of temporals no mention is made in all the Scriptures no not for his indirect or casuall authoritie Consider besides I pray you for it is worth the noting how obscurely and ambiguously he writeth of the Popes power to depose thereby haply intending to seeke some starting hole of equiuocation if occasion serue and meane while leaue his reader doubtfull and still to seeke of his meaning which in my simple Judgement is such as the iudicious wit can hardly conceiue nor tell what he would say As for example that the chiefe Bishop as chiefe Bishop hath not any power meerly temporall c. as is noted before lib. 5. cap. 6. and in the same chapter The Pope as Pope cannot ordinarily note depose c. no not for a iust cause mary as he is the chiefe spirituall Prince he may depose and dispose c. Helpe me good Reader to vnderstand this riddle how these two differ in some essentiall point Pope and chiefe spirituall Prince I must confesse that I vnderstand not how he is the chiefe spirituall Prince but as he is Pope that is the Father of Fathers or chiefe Pastor of soules in the Church of God It is wel knowne that this title Pope or Papa in Latin hath bene attributed to many ancient Patriarchs and Bishops as well as to the Bishop of Rome though principally to him and now is appropriated to him alone and for nought else but for being Bishops and Ecclesiasticall Princes of the Church and for that cause only not for being a temporal Prince Peters successor hath his denomination Which in effect D. Kellison affirmeth saying D. Kellisons Reply to M. Sutel ca. 1. f. 9. Bern. lib. 2. de consid I grant with S. Bernard that the Pope as Pope hath no temporall iurisdiction his power as he is Pope being onely spirituall If then it be so that the Pope as Pope
in temporals wherein they ought by the law and ordinance of God to be no lesse obedient then to their Pastors and Prelates in spirituals It followeth now to know what authoritie it is the Pope pretendeth to haue whether Ecclesiasticall or ciuill to depose lawfull Kings and dispose of their temporals and absolue subiects of their bounden dutie and naturall allegiance Which question who so desireth to see it more at large he may reade D. Barclai de potestate Papae and M. Widdrington de iure Principum where it is most sufficiently and learnedly handled and before in this my treatise pag. 17 I haue briefly touched it whereto I adde in this place a word or two more for your better satisfaction Among such Catholickes as refuse to take the Oath of allegiance are many who thinke indeed the Pope to haue no power to depose Kings or dispose of their kingdoms howbeit either vpon pretended scruple of conscience or other humane respects are against the taking and takers of the Oath as if they were little better then Heathens or Publicans And some so simple and ignorant as beleeue that no Pope euer challenged or attempted such authoritie on any Kings or Emperors and that no Iesuit or other learned man allowed or euer taught such doctrine so odious it seemeth vnto them But the wiser sort and more learned know how it hath bene challenged and practised by Popes on the persons of Henrie Otho Fredericke Emperours Iohn King of Nauarre for neither heresie or apostasie and since on Henrie 8. and Queene Elizabeth as by censures do appeare And that it is the moderne doctrine of many both Canonists and Diuines in these latter ages which at the first teaching thereof being so farre dissonant from the writings and practise of all antiquitie was generally adiudged to be noua haeresis as Sigebert reporteth S. Iohn Chrysostome that great Doctor vpon that place of S. Paul 2. Cor. 1. Non dominamur fidei vestrae We ouerrule not your faith Sigebertus in Chro. ad an 1088. Chrysost lib. 2 de dig sacerd c. 3. attributeth such power as forcibly restraines offenders from their wickednesse of life vnto secular Iudges vnder whose dominion they are not vnto the Church because saith he neither is such power giuen vnto vs by the lawes with authoritie to restraine men from offences nor if such power were giuen vs could we haue wherewith we might exercise such power c. So in his time and long after such power of compelling offenders by temporall punishments to conuert to better life was vnheard of to be in Bishops of the Church Cardinall Bellarmine in the catalogue of his ancient writers which he produceth against Barclai for the Popes temporall authoritie ouer Princes beginneth with one who was iudge in his owne cause Gregorie the seuenth that began his reigne in the yeare of our Lord 1073. not able of like to proue it out of any more ancient Father or generall Councell That this Pope was the first that challenged or attempted to practise such authoritie Otho in chro l. 6. c. 35. witnesseth Otho Frisengen a most learned and holy Bishop and highly commended by the Cardinall himselfe lib. 4. de Rom. Pont. cap. 13. Lego saith he relego Romanorum Regum Imperatorum gesta nusquam inuenio quenquam eorum ante hunc à Rom. Pontifice excommunicatum vel regno priuatum c. I reade and reade ouer againe the acts of the Kings and Emperors of Rome and in no place can I find any of them before this to wit Henrie the fourth to be excommunicated or depriued of his kingdome by the Bishop of Rome vnlesse haply any take this for excommunication that Philip the first Christian Emperor who succeeded Gordianus for a short space Euseb hist Eccl. l. 6. c. 25. was by the Bishop of Rome or as Eusebius reporteth of the Bishop of that place where he then resided placed among publicke penitents and Theodosius sequestred by S. Ambrose from entrance into the Church for cruell murther Whereby we may note that this learned man could not find no not one example in all precedent ages of depriuing kings of their regal scepters though of excommunication he proposeth onely these two which may haue some shew of truth for meere excommunication howbeit more probable it is they were not excommunicated at all maiore excommunicatione Then this Author in the next chapter following Otho ibid. c. â—6 describeth the intestine warres destruction of soules and bodies setting vp of Pope against Pope schismes and other manifold lamentable miseries that ensued vpon that fact of Pope Gregory against Henrie the 4 who commanded the Bishops of Ments and Colen to constitute Rodolph Duke of Burgundie Emperor Spec. hist l. 27. and to put downe Henrie whereupon followed a most grieuous warre wherein Rodolphus was ouercome who dying repentant said The Apostolicall commandement and the intreatie of Princes haue made me a trangressor of my oath behold therefore my hand cut off or wounded wherewith I sware to my Lord Henrie not trecherously to practise any thing against his life nor his glorie Who being ouercome the Bishop of Ments by the Popes commandement and with helpe of Saxons raised an other aduersary against the Emperor one Hermannus Knoflock whereupon followed likewise bloudie warres After this Henrie gathering his armie together driueth the Pope into France and setteth vp the Bishop of Rauenna against him whom he named Clement and so caused a schisme This sparsim out of the history Such like calamities are more then probable to fall on people and the Church when Emperors or Kings are so violently proceeded withall assured destruction of many and no hope of the correction of any by such means is like to ensue Was such power trow ye giuen by Christ to his Apostles tending to destruction not to edification No all to edification according to S. Paul 2. Cor. 10. none to destruction Otho Frisengensis in another place of his workes Li. 1. de gestis Frederici c. 1. writing of the Popes excommunicating the Emperour sheweth that Henrie 4. thought it to be such a nouitie as he had neuer knowne the like sentence to be denounced against any Romane Emperor before He liued an 1150. And Sigebert in Chronico 1088. affirmeth the doctrine of Priests By euill kings he meaneth such as are deposed Cont. Barcl cap. 5. teaching that no subiection is to be yeelded to euill Kings and though they sweare fidelitie are not bound to performe it to be noua haeresis a new heresie sprung vp Howbeit Cardinall Bellarmine will tell you that such doctrine and practise began about the yeare of our Lord 700 for before that time there wanted as he affirmeth either necessitie or oportunitie to teach or vse such power By reason of like there were no hereticall Princes impugners of the true faith before that time or that the paucitie of Christian Kings to assist the weake forces
not obey the Pope excōmunicating an hereticall king vnlesse he beleeue that an hereticall king cannot be excōmunicated by the Pope Nay here in our Oath with due respect to his Grace be it said is neither openly no nor couertly denied that the Pope hath power to exōmmunicate Kings though they be heretikes as the Cardinall beareth his reader in hand I maruaile he wold in such wise adde vnto thrust into the text of the Oath that which no man no nor himselfe can find therein For let it be well viewed and considered it will presently appeare that there is no mention at al of the Popes excōmunicating Kings though they be heretiks or heretical Kings but onely if he should excommunicate our King and absolue his subiects from their obedience yet I will beare true faith and allegiance to his Maiestie What sincere dealing is this Such glosses or wilfull additions are but manifest corruptions of the text which ought not to be vsed by any that professe sincerity truth So this makes nothing against vs but rather against himself Then he cometh with his needles minor which no Catholick denieth But power to excōmunicate is intrinsecall to the Apostolicke primacie and vnseparable from it when as our Lord said to Peter as to the first spirituall Primate Math. 16. Whatsoeuer thou shalt binde vpon earth shall be bound also in heauen What is this to the purpose What Catholicke that hath taken the Oath will denie it It is not vnlike to one that frameth an aduersarie in the aire to fight withall If French Catholickes be demanded what they will do in this case if the Pope should excommunicate their King and discharge his subiects of their obedience they will forthwith answer that notwithstanding any monitions excōmunications or interdicts they will not forsake but obey their King in temporals from which obedience they cannot be absolued or dispenced withall by the Pope as is in decretis Ecclesiae Gallicanae lib. 2. cap. 1. Nay they will bring certaine priuiledges for them and their King against the Popes censure of excommunication yet these like good Catholickes will beleeue that he hath power to excommunicate an hereticall King So in our case a man of any iudgement may clearely see it is neither openly nor couertly explicitè nor implicitè denied but plainely granted of such as take the Oath that the Pope may excommunicate albeit vpon iust cause adhering to his Prince he obey not the sentence I aske if his Holinesse in Rome should determine to create some Priest or Prelate Cardinall or Bishop and he of humilitie or for some other cause best knowne to himselfe notwithstanding the Popes determination refuse to accept of the dignity Quis est hic laudabimus eum Who is he and we will commend him doth it follow that therefore he denieth the Pope to haue power to conferre those dignities on them Or if a King be pleased to extend his mercie toward an offender condemned to die granting him a pardon can it be said though he list not to accept thereof notwithstanding the Kings grant for that he hath a shrewd wife that maketh him wearie of his life or for some other cause that he denieth the King to haue power to pardon his offence It may be admired that one so excellently learned will argue so weakely None would haue thought but the booke bearing the name of Mattheus Tortus had bene in deed his Chaplains not the Cardinals had not his Grace discouered himselfe in his answer to our Kings Apologie Whosoeuer saieth or sweareth that notwithstanding any sentence of excommunication yet he will beare true faith and allegiance to his Prince no way denieth it but supposeth such a sentence to be or to haue bin When the Pope in his writings putteth this clause Non obstantibus constitutionibus Apostolicis contrarijs quibuscunque Notwithstanding any contrary Apostolicall constitutions whatsoeuer c. as in the Briefe of Paulus the fifth to maister George Birket dated 1. Febr. 1608. or in others Non obstantibus priuilegijs quibuscunque c. Notwithstanding whatsoeuer priuiledges Is it not manifest that such priuiledges or Apostolicall Constitutions are supposed to be or might haue bene before granted So in our case none denieth the Popes excōmunication but chuseth vpō iust cause to adhere to his Prince notwithstanding the sentence of excommunication against him which he presupposeth to be or else may be granted If any will say There can be no iust cause to adhere and obey his Prince if he be excommunicated it were ridiculous and false as all writers affirme some cases being excepted whether he be excommunicated à iure vel ab homine Vict. de excom nu 10. Cum omnibus excommunicatis saith Victoria among the rest quocunque modo sint excommunicati c. With all excommunicate persons in what sort soeuer they are excommunicated it is lawfull to participate in these things which are contained in this verse Vtile lex humile res ignorata Tolet. l. 1. inst sacer c. 11. n. 7 Nauar. Ench. c. 27. n. 26. Tho. 4. dist 18. ar 4. necesse Nauarre likewise Regulariter participans c. Ordinarily he that communicateth with one that is excommunicated with the greater excommunication incurreth the lesser yet it faileth in these Vtile lex c. The declaration of which words he that vnderstandeth Latin may see in the same place of Nauarre in Caietans Summe Emanuel Sa and other Authors Now who is so simple as to thinke that a wife is bound to abandon her husband and not to participate with him children to forsake their fathers seruants their maisters and not communicate with them in domesticall affaires if they should be excommunicated If it be lawfull for such as it is by lex and humile why not also for subiects to communicate in all ciuill causes with their Prince there being absolute necessitie besides vtile and humile to warrant them so to do according to the rule as it is in Nauarre Quod non est licitum in lege necessitas facit licitum What is not lawfull in the law Nau. Ench. c. 27. nu 35. necessitie maketh lawfull It is not vnknowne that Henrie the fourth the late French King obtaining the Crowne of France when he was yet an hereticke relapsed and de facto excommunicated by the Pope required an Oath of fealtie of the Clergie of Paris for the better securitie in his dominions as by their records do appeare whereupon the chiefe of all the learned Doctors and faculties both of the secular and religious Clergie of that citie willingly without delay performed their dutie taking a corporall oath of fealtie and true allegiance to his Highnesse notwithstanding the Popes excommunication with promise to assist him to their power against all leaguers whatsoeuer among which his Holinesse at that time was one that should machinate or attempt any thing against his person hinder his peace and quietnesse or raise armes to the
A MODERATE DEFENCE OF THE OATH OF ALLEGIANCE Wherein the Author proueth the said Oath to be most lawful notwithstanding the Popes Breues prohibiting the same and solueth the chiefest obiections that are vsually made against it perswading the Catholickes not to resist soueraigne Authoritie in refusing it Together with the Oration of Sixtus 5. in the Consistory at Rome vpon the murther of Henrie 3. the French King by a Friar Whereunto also is annexed strange Reports or newes from Rome By WILLIAM WARMINGTON Catholicke Priest and Oblate of the holy congregation of S. Ambrose IEREM 4. Iurabis Viuit Dominus in veritate in iudicio in iustitia Thou shalt sweare Our Lord liueth in truth in iudgement and in iustice Permissu Superiorum An. Dom. 1612. An Admonition to the Reader THe purpose of the Author in this Treatise is to manifest vnto such as imbrace the Romaine faith that they may take the Oath of allegiance vnto his Maiestie without any preiudice vnto the same And therefore if in this his ensuing discourse he hath inserted any peculiar doctrines of the Church of Rome those that are of an aduerse perswasion ought not to take offence but rather make true vse thereof and haue iust cause to acknowledge the clement and moderate proceeding of the State herein THE PREFACE OF THE AVTHOR TO THE READER WHEN by the prouidence of Almightie God courteous Reader who sweetly disposeth all things I was by two Pursuiuants apprehended the 24. of March 1607. after our English accompt and committed to the Clinke by the Lord Bishop of London on the 26. of the same moneth 1608 I entred somewhat more deepely into the consideration of the controuersie of the Oath of allegiance then before whilest I was at libertie I had done And presently consulting with some of my brethren whom I found there prisoners before my comming I thought it very expedient to informe the Popes Holinesse of the lamentable estate of our countrie what miseries and imminent dangers such Catholikes as should refuse the Oath of allegiance were like to fall into by reason of his Breues prohibiting them to take it what diuision among Catholickes what perturbation they were vndoubtedly to breed in the Church of England our dread Soueraigne being thereby not without iust cause exasperated hoping by such meanes to procure a remedy before the malady grew too desperate But they more prudent and better experienced in such like Romane informations then my selfe thought it better in their iudgements and more expedient with patience to expect future euents from Rome and not so to proceed as being to small or no purpose at all Hereupon I rested satisfied though sorie in mind to consider the manifold euils that were like to ensue as long as these two principall powers Ecclesiasticall and ciuill the Pope and our King were at variance and did not intend to set pen to paper of this matter for that I knew my selfe the meanest among the rest of my brethren that had taken the Oath and because I had as I thought in discharge of my particular duty made sufficient proofe of my loyaltie towards his Maiestie by accepting the Oath when it was required at my hands In the end aduised by a friend one of my brethren to premeditate and prouide reasons for our taking it to be sent to Rome for it was to him more then probable he said that in short space after we should receiue a commandement from his Holinesse so to do and desirous withall to yeeld some satisfaction to the State for the great scandall certaine of our brethren had giuen by their perfidious inconstancie in taking the Oath anon after being freed from troubles relented and impugned as hath bene reported that which they seemed by their act to haue iudged lawfull I resolued vpon mature consideration to reduce into some method for helpe of my memorie and satisfaction of a friend certaine notes which in scattered papers I had collected cōcerning this matter not intending yet to publish them for feare first of offending some Catholikes who pretending the Oath to be vnlawfull though they know not well wherein are ready with rash censures to iudge and condemne before sentence of condemnation from the chiefe Iudge be giuen but especially I feared lest I should offend the Popes Holinesse who in his Breues hath either admonished or prohibited all Catholikes to take it or to teach the lawfulnesse thereof At length knowing my intention to be not to offend any one nor to contemne his Holinesse commandement but to aduance what in me lyeth the glory of God by setting downe sincerely what in my iudgement is truth and perswading euery Catholike subiect to render to Caesar those things which are Caesars to performe his dutie to his Maiestie in taking the Oath of allegiance to seeke thereby to remoue the imputation of treachery and treason I held it my dutie both to God and man to breake silence to cast away this humane feare and to put on the mantle of charitie quae foras mittit timorem 1. Ioh. 4 Howbeit gentle reader whilest I meditated to go forward in these my labours for the benefite of my brethren in Christ the Catholikes of England sodainly that questiō of our B. Sauiour as it were to deterre me from thē came into my mind Quis ex vobis volens turrim aedificare Which of you minding to build a tower doth not first sit downe and recken the charges that are necessarie whether he haue to finish it lest after he hath laied the foundation and is not able to finish it all that see it begin to mocke him saying That this man began to build and he could not finish it I forthwith stayed and cast my accompts that is I weighed the small meanes I had to relieue me taking paines my infirme and feeble body slender furniture of bookes and many interrupted distractions which my pouerty in prison ministred vnto me and considered whether I might be able to bring this short treatise to an end so auoide that illusion This man beganne to build and he could not finish it Then though my meanes and abilitie euery way I knew to be small yet trusting in the assistance of almightie God whose glorie hereby I principally seeke and is the chiefest reason of this my processe I was by and by encouraged to attempt the defending of this Oath which I iudged farre beyond my talent calling to remembrance that of the Prophet In Deo meo transgrediar murum Psal 17. In my God I will passe ouer a wall Philip 4. And the saying of S. Paule Omnia possum in eo qui me confortat I can do all things in him that is through his helpe that strengtheneth me nothing doubting also but Phil. 2. v. 13. Qui operatus est in me velle operaretur perficere pro bona voluntate He that wrought in me to will would likewise worke to accomplish according to his good will Vpon
to obey the Popes prohibition of this Oath of allegiance Pag. 44. A boy vnder age hanged in Rome Pag. 46. A nephew of old Nauarre the Canonist by the Popes commandement hanged in hast Ibid. Card. Mendoza depriued of his Deanry of Toledo by force Pag. 47. A Gentleman of Card. Farnesius put to death by Pope Clement Pag. 8. 48. The opinion of some ouermuch deuoted to the obedience of the Pope Pag. 50. Obedience due to all superiors yet is their power contained within certaine limits Pag. 51. Ecclesiasticall and ciuill power both immediate from God both distinct and independant of each other Pag. 53. A superior yea the Pope in diuers cases may be disobeyed without sinne Pag. 57. The Breues of Paulus 5. prohibiting the Oath of allegiance may be not obeyed without sinne Pag. 59. Many euils ensue vpō obeying the Pope in this case of the Oath Pag. 60. A cōmandement vpon error of wrong information bindeth not Pag. 62. The Popes bare precept not alway sufficient to cause men to hazard their temporall states Ibid. Cases not doubtfull but manifest as is this of the Oath need no solution from the Pope Pag. 63. Subiects bound to obey all iust lawes of their temporall Princes Pag. 64. The law of the Oath of allegiance iust Pag. 65. The Kings Maiestie in setting forth this Oath hath not exceeded his limits Pag. 66. All lawfull Kings be they heathens or heretickes are to be obeyed by their subiects in temporals Pag. 68. That the Pope or Church do permit euill Princes to reigne a strange phrase Pag. 70. The place of S. Paul Omnis anima to be vnderstood principally of subiection to secular power Pag. 72. The material sword forbiddē to be vsed by Ecclesiasticall persons Pag. 74 Not without a mystery that Peter shold strike none but Malchus Pag. 78. The Apostles and their successors subiect to Emperours and Kings de iure Pag. 79. Gregory 7. the first that chalenged tēporal power to depose Princes Pag. 84 The doctrine and practise of deposing when it began according to Cardinall Bellarmine Pag. 85. Whether the Pope by his spirituall power wherein he is successor to Peter may depose Princes Pag. 87. 91. Excommunication what it is the nature and effects thereof Pag. 95. No denial of the Popes power of binding to say that Princes notwithstanding excōmunicatiō ought to be obeyed of their subiects Pag. 100. The Popes spirituall power of excommunicating Kings not denied as Cardinall Bellarmine in Tortus affirmeth Pag. 104. Whether I may renounce all pardons dispensations which shal be against this Oath of Alleg. without denying the Popes power Pag. 108. No deniall of the Popes power of absoluing to say that he cannot absolue me of this Oath Pag. 112. Whether the Pope may remit lawful oaths compelled by feare Pag. 114. How a matter onely of opinion may be truly sworne Pag. 116. The doctrine that teacheth That Princes excommunicated by the Pope may be deposed or murthered by their subiects may be abiured as impious and hereticall Pag. 119. To teach it lawfull to murther yea a tyrant is hereticall Pag. 123. The Oration of Sixtus 5. in the Consistorie of the murther of the King of France Pag. 128. The Pope as a temporall Prince may wage warre but not inuade any Kings dominions as he is Christs Vicar Pag. 149. Priests and reconciled persons as such onely no traitors by the intention of the Oath Pag. 150. How an Oath is to be interpreted Pag. 152. In what sort a man is to sweare before a lawfull magistrate Pag. 153. Not such as take but the refusers of the Oath giue cause of scādal Pag. 154. The Authors exhortation to Catholickes Pag. 156. Strange Reports or Newes from Rome Pag. 159. TO THE CATHOLICKES OF ENGLAND BEloued brethren in Christ Iesus Whereas the Kings most excellent Maiestie being the true lawful and right inheritour to the Crowne and Realme of England by the prouidence of almightie God entred and possessed the same with tranquillity and peace and the great applause of all his subiects as well Catholickes as Protestants or others of different sects and opinions his Highnesse as it were to requite their dutifull affection forthwith gaue great hope of a most happie and prosperous regiment and out of his bountie and clemencie extended many his most royall fauours indifferently vpon all till such time as some of the one sort to wit a few giddie headed desperate and disloyall Catholicks associated with certaine of the Societie prouoked his wrath and indignation against them yea and all the professors of the same religion for their fact Who was not moued as all men will confesse without iust cause for that they viz. Catholickes onely either concealed or most barbarously attempted in that hellish-like manner of gunpowder fire the memorie whereof must needs remaine for euer most grieuous to all true hearted Catholike subiects the cruell murther of so many worthie Commons and Noble personages in Parliament assembled yea of the most towardly and innocent yong Prince the Queene and King himselfe and then soone after also had followed vndoubtedly the desolation ruine and destruction of the whole realme of England Hereupon by the generall consent of all three estates and the Kings Maiestie it was thought necessarie an Oath of allegeance in such forme should be framed and enacted as Catholikes for whom chiefly it was made should haue no cause scrupulously to refuse to take the same and the Kings Highnesse with his whole estate might be better secured and freed from all feares and dangers imitating herein other Kings and Princes as occasions shall be offered them If euer the Kings of France or Spaine or other Princes whatsoeuer had cause to exact an Oath of fealtie of their subiects for safetie of their persons or state then certes no man that hath but common sense will denie but our King hath more then iust vpon so horrible and monstrous cause giuen as the like haply was neuer heard of from the beginning of the world Could any man haue thought it strange or held it crueltie if being in such wise and by such persons prouoked he had in his wrath and indignation rigorously proceeded against all others of the Romane religion as suspecting them to beare no better mind towards him though manie thousands doubtlesse no way consented nor were euer priuie to that horrible fact And if he had what ruine of Catholike families what hauocke of Christian bloud with the destruction of soules and other infinite miseries should we haue seene But the omnipotent God whose name be blessed for euer who hath the rule and gouernment of the hearts of Kings inclined his royall heart to mercie and compassion of his subiects knowing right well the faith and loyaltie of many of the same religion as his Maiestie most benignely expressed in his Proclamation and that he should haue punished the innocent with the nocent as well his friends as his foes Oh what follie were it for a
commanded without reasonable cause we ought not to obey for it were more then is due And the same Cardinall in another place faith thus Li. de 7. pec mort c 15. Nullus obligatur obedire suo superiori in actibus interioribus puris puta intellectus voluntatis No man is bound to obey his superior in pure interior acts to wit of the vnderstanding and will Who explicateth himselfe If a superior say vnto his inferior Loue thine enemie See S. Tho. More epist ad filiam or this man in particular or else beleeue this or that opinion the inferior is not bound to beleeue it nor to obey because saith he the soule is subiect only to God And for proofe alledgeth Saint Thomas whose words are In his quae pertinent ad interiorem motum voluntatis 2.2 q. 104 art 5. homo non tenetur homini obedire sed solum Deo In such things as appertaine to the inward motion of the will a man is not bound to obey another man but onely God And this he affirmeth to be the common doctrine Out of these cases you may gather and secure your conscience that a superiour yea Christs Vicar the Popes Holinesse may be disobeyed without scruple of sinne modo absit contemptus notwithstanding his commandement prohibiting the Oath of allegiance because no man can force any to beleeue that which is matter onely of opinion not of faith formally vnlesse his vnderstanding be first conuinced that it is an infallible truth which is commanded And this of the Oath being an inward act of the vnderstanding is not subiect in that case to the commandement of any man according to the doctrine of the Authors aforesaid And furthermore by obeying his Holinesses Breues and disobeying his Highnesse law in a matter as yet vndetermined great damage to many is more then likely to ensue and infinite scandals to the losse of soules to arise in the Church which euerie Christian man and good subiect is bound to auoide Qui amat periculum peribit in illo He that loueth danger shall perish in it And Qui causam damus dat damnum dedisse viderur It seemeth he doth the hurt that giueth cause thereof If this satisfie you not lend me a patient and diligent eare and you shall heare more If I shew you by the authoritie of the Sea Apostolicke that his Holines who sitteth now at the sterne Paulus Quintus forbidding all Catholickes to take the Oath of allegiance is not therein to be obeyed I trust you will require no other testimonie but beleeue it to be lawfull and resolue not to hazard your estates for refusing it hereafter Marke then what a learned Cardinal writeth of Innocentius 3. Pope Eleganter dicit Innocentius de sent excom cap. Inquisitioni Franciscus de Zabarel de schismat quòd Papae non est obediendum quando vehementer praesumitur statum Ecclesiae perturbari vel alia mala ventura Et peccaret obediendo cum deberet futura mala praecauere Elegantly saith Innocentius that we are not to obey the Pope when there is vehement presumption that the state of the Church is to be perturbed or other euils are like to ensue And in obeying a man should sin when as he ought to preuent future euils Now tell me I pray you or let our domesticke aduersaries or such as are inwardly perswaded that the Pope cannot by any authoritie deriued from Christ dethrone Kings directly or indirectly howbeit forsooth in policie refuse to take the Oath and discharge their dutie to Caesar for feare of losing friends and commodities nor dispossesse any priuate man of his temporals who is not his subiect of which sort there are many let them I say or any one of them tell me whether by disobeying the Kings highnesse and obeying the Pope in this case of the Oath the Catholick Church in England is not like to be greatly afflicted the memorie of the Gun-powder treason reuiued the Catholickes miseries aggrauated the heate of persecution continued and increased whole families vtterly ruined propagation of faith hindered many soules lost and a thousand euils like to follow with manie scandals to the State and all the Realme by reason of obeying his Holinesse Breues if our most clement Prince with rigour vpon this their indiscreete obedience prosecute his law made for the securitie of him and his posteritie The authoritie aforesaid being of a Pope as that Author affirmeth censureth such a one to offend note well in obeying whom the Pope when as he is bound to beware before hand or preuent such future euils or dangers Then ought not all Catholickes and good subiects doe what in them lieth to preuent the manifold euils that hang ouer their heads by satisfying the Magistrate and refusing to obey such a precept as is the only cause thereof for had no prohibion come from Rome few or none had stood against the Oath especially when as nothing hath bene yet proued by any that haue written of this subiect since the coming of the Breues foure yea fiue yeares agone and more to be contained in the Oath against faith Syluester likewise alledging Panormitane agreeable to the former authoritic Syluest vâ—rb obedietiâ— â—u â— saith that the Pope is not to be obeyed not onely when his precept is iniust or sauoureth sin but also when by such obedience it may be presumed that the state of the Church is like to be greatly disturbed or some other detriment or scandall is to ensue yea although he should command vnder paine of excommunication latae sententiae Nec est saith he ei obediendum si ex obedientia praesumeretur status Ecclesiae perturbandus vehementer vel aliud malum aut scandalum fut urum etiam si praeciperetur sub poena excommunicationis latae sent entiae Vt notat idem in cap. Si quando in cap. Panormit See â—elin in cap. Si quaÌ„do nu 4. in c. Accepimus Cum à Deo de rescrip And goeth forward Ex quo ipse in dicto cap. Si quando infert Quod si c. Whereupon he inferreth that if he the Pope command any thing vnder paine of excommunication ipso facto by execution whereof it is presumed there will be a scandall in the citie of soules or bodies he is not to be obeyed c. It followeth Imo ex cap. Officij de poenis remis habetur c. Yea it is euident that the positiue law interpreteth that restitution which is de iure diuino sometime is not to be made by reason of danger when it may happen to soules or bodies then it may be wel inferred that obedience in like case may be pernicious and so ought not to berendered Tolet. de 7. Pec. mort cap 15. The same writeth Cardinall Tolet citing these authors Nulli superiori praecipienti aliquid c. No superiour commanding any thing whereby scandall or any notable detriment of others do follow is to
be obeyed in such a precept So say Panorm and Syluester ver obed § 5. where they say that in this case we are not to obey although the superiour command vnder paine of excommunication for it bindeth not quando malè imponitur when it is iniustly imposed Emmanuel Sa likewise Obediendum non est cum creditur inde malum oriturum Aphoris Sa ver obedien When it is thought euill may come by obeying we are not to obey Againe He is not bound to obey that thinketh the superiour commandeth vpon error as being misinformed and that if he knew the truth he would not command and also that superiours by their generall edicts intend not to bind with great detriment This Sa. And had not Catholickes I pray you before the Popes second Briefe iust cause to be perswaded that the Breues were procuted by sinister suggestions and wrong informations of some ouer-hastie and busie person and that if his Holinesse had had true and particular notice by some other true harted subiect how things stand with them have in England what perturbations they might breed in the Church and what losse and detriment was vndoubtedly to fall on such as should obey them and thereby refuse the Oath that he would neuer haue granted forth the said Breues in maner and forme as he did nor when he had granted them intended to bind Catholickes to obey to their so great detriment and damage For that were addere afflictionem afflictis which kind of crueltie is not to be thought can proceed from that holy Sea And this may suffise for answer to the point so much stood vpon by many inconsideratly precise of obeying or disobeying the Popes Breues prohibiting the iust Oath of allegiance Howbeit a word or two more may not be omitted vt obstruatur os loquentiū iniqua to flop the mouth of standerous tongues and to answer a fond or rather strong argument as some thinke and say that in dubijs as is the Popes power of deposing Princes in their opinions we are to haue recourse to the Sea of Peter for solution and there to learne what is truth to be embraced what is errour to be auoided Yea what is there decided the Church is bound to beleeue though it be that vertue is euill and vice good as Cardinal Bellarmine formerly hath taught strange doctrine Lib. 4. de sum Pont. cap. 5. §. Vltimo but now in his late Recognition retracted saying that he spake of doubtfull acts of vertues or vices For if in the old law the decision of difficult and doubtfull questions and ambiguities inter sanguinem sanguinem causam causam Deut. 17. lepram lepram were granted to the Priests of the Leuiticall stocke and to the Iudge that should be for the time much more to the Priests of the new law and to Christs Vicar the chiefe Iudge and interpreter in all Ecclesiasticall controuersies Therefore in this case of the Oath now controuerted Catholickes are to require no more but his bare precept and whosoeuer disobeyeth it taking the oath sinneth deadlie This some wise in their owne conceits and learned in the estimation of others haue said and taught howsoeuer otherwise verie inconstant in their opinions iudgements but how prudently charitably or learnedly let the discreet reader iudge These haue forgotten who it is that saith Nolite iudicare non iudicabimini Luc. 6. nolite condemnare non condemnabimini And what S. Thomas teacheth Ecclesia non debet praesumere de alique peccatum Supplem q. 47. ar 3. quousque probetur The Church ought not to iudge any of sin till it be proued Indeed if the Popes precept were such as S. Iohn Euangelist recommended and often inculcated to his Disciples at his departure out of this world Hieron lib. descrip Eccles which was as S. Hierome writeth Filioli diligite alterutrum Little children loue ye one another then as he said vpon their tediousnesse of hearing it so oft repeated Praeceptū Domini est si solum fiat sufficit It is our Lords precept and if it only be done it sufficeth then I say we should not need to diue farther in seeking reasons but simply to obey quia praeceptum Papae est because it is the precept of the Pope but by reason of the infinite difference betweene the commanders and the commandements we must craue pardon if we say Et si solum fiat non sufficit if in this case of the Oath there be but his bare precept it is not sufficient Touching the other point I must needes confesse that in obscurities and doubtfull questions and difficulties in the Law of Christ all Christians are to repaire to him that sitteth in Peters chaire for the light of interpretation and true solution thereof as S. Hierome did to Pope Damasus Hieron ep ad Damasum desiring if he had erred in his writings to be corrected by him Also Athanasius in his distresses appealed to Foelix and Iulius Popes of Rome S. Iohn Chrysostome to Innocentius Coste rus in Enchir. de sum Pont. Calendion of Antioch to Pope Foelix and other ancient Fathers in their distresses and difficult causes were wont alway to seeke for succour and redresse of the Pope of Rome then being but in cases perspicuous wherin are no ambiguities or doubts to be made against which nothing was euer formally decreed in any generall Coūcell nor by any ancient Father taught but is most plaine and euident in holy Scriptures and as cleare as the Sunne in the firmament that needeth not And such is the duty of inferiours to superiours of subiects to their lawfull Princes of children to parents of rendring to Caesar that is Caesars and so forth for which there is an expresse commandement from the Highest wherein no power created can dispence or iustly command the contrary Which if any should attempt to do as his Holinesse seemeth to haue done in prohibiting the Oath of allegiance it may well be by a Catholik English subiect in all humilitie and reuerence to the Sea Apostolicke yet with Christian courage answered Non obedio praecepto Regis sed praecepto legis 2. Macch. 7. I obey not the precept of the King that is the Pope but the precept of the law And Obedire opertet Deo magis quà m hominibus Act. 5. We must obey God rather then men To conclude in such a case not to do as the Pope commandeth in this Breues so there be no cōtēpt as I haue said of his precept is no mortall sinne ex fine enine morales actus speciem habent See Caiet 5. Precepti transgressio Tho. 2.2 q. 105. ◠1. ad 1. For morall acts haue their formality of the end and such disobedience being materialis tantum maketh not a deadly sinne cose quently no sin at al. And this much as touching obedience to the Popes H. Breues It followeth now that we treat briefly of a subiects dutie
of England and Protonotarie Apostolicall After which admonition the Archpriest proceeded no further nor euer afterwards did depriue nor declare any one to be depriued of his faculties as he should haue done strictly according to the order and commission granted him by his Holinesse that now is Paulus 5 and not to denounce them lost during the time of the admonition exceeding his bounds as he did saying And by this present do denounce Therefore most certaine it is that the Priests to whom knowledge of the admonition came did not then lose their faculties by vertue thereof Neither is it to be credited that the Cardinals of the Inquisition who are both wise and learned can iudge them lost by that act as the second report affirmeth if they were truly informed and as well experienced in the case as some here their inferiors in euery respect are If they haue bene of that opinion and iudged so yet is the contrary opinion of other learned men rather to be beleeued and followed being much more probable then theirs But suppose we should grant which is not to be granted that those Priests who receiued and tooke notice of the admonition were iustly depriued and had lost their faculties at least some others who haue taken the Oath since that generall letter being neuer admonished nor euer seeing that or any other letter from the Archpriest to any such end are free and haue not lost them the Archpriest being bound by his faculty admonere singulos to admonish each one in particular at least to giue him knowledge thereof that shall take the Oath or teach it lawfull or to go to the Protestants Churches to their Seruice Besides why I pray you should not that Priest be exempted from losing his faculties albeit he saw and read the admonition who wrote and endeuoured what he could possibly to send to the Archpriest as in his letter he required to giue him such satisfaction as might haue caused his Reuerence to stay from censuring him when the time prefixed should haue bene expired but could not find any meanes to conuey letters vnto him which some if need were can testifie This all know quod ad impossibile nemo tenetur that none is bound to a thing impossible to be effected So then consequently neither did that Priest lose his faculties by the admonition Howbeit all without exception and without any excuse for no excuse must be admitted are depriued all abandoned of Catholickes and as if they were the greatest offenders that euer were in Gods Church adiudged vnworthy of the charitable almes and poore meanes which they had to sustaine their painfull and tedious life And if the most illustrious and most reuerend Cardinals of the congregation of the holy Office haue taken them away as it is in the third report then is it requisite that the Priests whom this matter toucheth should see and know with what authoritie they do it whether by facultie from his Holinesse or of themselues by their owne power and also the forme of their sentence all which lieth hidden in the clouds and cannot be seene Whereas the fourth report hath that the Viceprotector of his owne authoritie by his letters written to the Archpriest depriued such Priests as are aboue mentioned of their faculties is most vaine and worthy to be exploded as a forged fable For it is not to be credited that a sage Prince and pillar of the Church wil euer attempt to do that which is not in his power vnlesse it be giuen by him whom we acknowledge to haue plenitudinem potestatis in spiritualibus specially in such a case as ours is What if his Grace hath done it by order from his Holines as the fift report saith is not his sentence then to be accepted and obeyed Yes I acknowledge as a child of the Church ought that a sentence or censure proceeding mediate or immediatly from the chiefe Pastor is to be respected and feared as S. Gregorie teacheth me Yet I thinke none wil denie but it ought orderly to be made knowne to the parties whom it concerneth and that vntill it come by orderly meanes to their knowledge it bindeth not nor then neither if the censure be manifestly vniust as procured by obreption false information or any sinister meanes which may vitiate the processe Whereto agreeth Petrus Gregorius in his bookes de Repub. Pet Greg de repub l. 26. c. 5 saying Sed neque rescripta omnia aut impetrata seu extorta à summo Pontifice per suggestionem falsam vel obreptionem aut in praeiudicium alterius devent effectum vel consequentiam habere quia haec Sedem Romanam quae iustitiae cultrix est redderent ignominiosam saepe praetâ—r intentionem Pontificum quorum rescriptis perpetuò duae clausulae adijciuntur vel omissae adiectae censentur Si preces veritate nitantur sine praeiudicio tertij inauditi L. 1. §. Si quid à principe nequid in loco publico p. But neither all rescripts or matters obtained or rather wrested from the Pope by false suggestion or obreption or to the preiudice of another ought to haue any consequence or take effect because such like proceedings would make the Sea of Rome which is a louer of iustice ignominious oftentimes be side the intentioÌ„ of Popes to whose writings alwaies two clauses are added or being omitted are adiudged to be added to wit If the petitions are grounded on truth and without preiudice of a third person that is vnheard Now that this censure of suspension from faculties if there be any such extant hath bene obtained or wrested out by some sinister meanes to wit by false suggestion or wrong information of one or other ouerhastie solicitor that is greedie to see what will be the euent and finall issue of this our controuersie is very probable The cause that maketh me suspect false information in this our case is that to my knowledge a certaine prime Priest in a letter to his friend affirmed he had sent information to Rome of as much as any of vs that haue taken the Oath can say in defence thereof yea and more Which doubtlesse is a most faise suggestion if he hath so informed and farre beyond his talent to performe What else I pray you is this but by obreption to procure or extort that from either the Cardinall Viceprotector or from the Pope which would neuer haue bene granted as may be presumed against reuerend Priests ne-neuer heard what they can say for themselues and to their great preiudice Therefore if the soliciter and informer haue so egregiously erred in deceiuing his Holinesse the censure or sentence so procured is of no validitie at all The sixt and last report is that the Pope in a Breue to the Archpriest commanded him to depriue all those Priests of their faculties which do or shall concurre with maister Blackwell without giuing any admonition admitting any excuse or obseruing any order of law So that the Archpriest