Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	bishop_n	court_n	king_n	1,941	5	4.2586	3	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A02679	The excommunication published by the L. archbishop of Dublin Thomas Flemming aliàs Barnwell friar of the Order of S. Francis, against the inhabitants of the diocesse of Dublin, for hearing the masses of Peter Caddell D. of Divinity, and Paul Harris priests, is proved not onely injust, but of no validity, and consequently binding to no obedience. In which treatise is also discovered that impious plot and policy of the aforesaid archbishop and his friars in supplanting the pastors and priests of the clergy, thereby to bring all into the hands of the friars, of whose disorders and foule abuses (especially in this kingdome) something is noted. The second edition, enlarged. By me Paul Harris priest.	Harris, Paul, 1573-1635?; Caddell, Peter. aut; Fleming, Thomas, 1593-1666. aut	1633 (1633)	STC 12810; ESTC S116899	71,181	112

Chauncellour of Paris S. Richard of Dundalke Primat commonly called ●●machanus for that he was Archbishop of Armagh in his De●ensorium Curatorum Thomas Walfingham Monke of S. Albons in his History of the Kings of England Such as in our dayes have not spared to note their open faults and manifest corruptions some in one kind some in another are Card. Bellarm. in his Gemitus Columbae Philippus Rovenius Archbishop of Philippi in his Treatise de Missionibus Iohn Petrus Camus Bishop of Bellay in his Dialogue betwixt Nicephorus Tristan Camillus Caesar Censor of the bookes published in Rome in his defence of the Archb. of Philippi Et ego Paulus Veridicus in hoc stadio noviss●mus sudavi CAP. II. The doctrine of our Archbishop and Friars refuted who maintaine That Civill actions against Clergy-men are to be determined by the Bishop of the Diocesse TRue it is that regularly speaking the Canon lawes of the Church require that all causes as well Ecclesiasticall Criminall as Civill 〈◊〉 determinable by the Ordinary whensoever the Defendant is a man of the Clergy Concil Chalcedon can 9. Concil Agathense can 32. Concil Carthag 3. can 9. Tolletan 3. can 13. But to this I answer That as many other Canons lawes were never received in other parts of the Church no more was this at least for that last part of Civill causes in England or Ireland since the first conversion of the Natious heere by S. Patricke there by S. Gregory Neither let any thinke it strange that a generall canon law of the Church in some parts of the Church be received in others not Forsomuch as the Canon it self tels us that a Law may loose his strength and force of binding three manner of wayes First where the same was never approved or received Because saith the Law Leges instituuntur cùm promulgantur confirmantur dum approbantur 4. dist in istis ● prox Lawes are then ordayned when they are published but confirmed when they are approved Secondly if by a later law the former be disannulled e. 1. de Const in 6. So S. Aug. posterior canon corrigit priorem The later Canon corrects the former Lastly if by a contrary custome which is reasonable it be abrogated Locorum consuetudines ubi rationabiles sunt juri scripto derogare possunt cap. Dilecti 4. de arbitris c. 2. Ext. de Cons●ot●dinibus The customes of places being reasonable may derogate from the law written Now then I say That causes meerely Civill as Debts Inheritances Pawnes Morgages Leases Rents Annuities Pensions Purchases Sales and the like so often as Priests and Clergy-men were to be Defendants in all times as well under the government of the Saxon as Norman Kings were determinable by the Common-law never in any Ecclesiasticall Court at all So as it seemes unto me that law of the Church was either never received which in these Civill actions drawes the plea unto the Court of the Ordinary which I rather believe Or if it were at any time in observance by custome beyond all memory it was abrogated Neither need we so much to marvaile heereat since it is the common opinion of Divines that the exemption of Clergy-men as well in respect of their persons as their goods from saecular tribunalls was at the first introduced by humane not divine law So S. Greg. lib. 11. epist 54. doth no otherwise prove that a Priest ought not to be impleaded before a temporall Iudge but because Iustinian the Emperour had so ordained ● Read Card. Bellar. tom 1. Controversiarum printed at Leons in France 1587. lib. de Clericis cap. 28. But for the further clearing of this point Forsomuch as I am in the Negative our Archb. with his Friars in the Affirmative If they will maintaine that the law above cited in the beginning of this Chap. was ever in viridi observantia in due practise within these Kingdomes of England Ireland I say it is their parts by examples of Cases pleaded of Iudgments Sentences in such such Ecclesiasticall Courts of Bishops or their Vicar Generalls or their Chancellours to shew out of some auncient Records of the afore-named Courts Tribunals what may make for the confirmation of their cause which I assure my self they shall never be able to doe no not so much as to afford us one onely president though nothing be more common in the Common-law then Bishops Abbots Priests c. convented in the temporall Courts in Civill causes even in the best most Catholick times no lesse then at this day Hence are those Writs of temporall Courts unto the Diocaesan Bishops venire facies Clericum as also the Writs of Prohibition unto Ecclesiasticall Iudges as ancient as our common-lawit self which like unto Melchisedeck knowes neither father nor mother Why then doth our Archbishop Thomas Flemming aliàs Barnwell together with his Friars noyse it up and downe both Citty Countrey That A. B. Priest is excommunicated ● jure for calling C. D. Priest into the Court of the Kings Bench for detayning with-holding certaine of his Bookes from him most injuriously as was determined lately by the Lord Chief Iustice especially the aforesaid Priest A B. first having made his complaint unto his Ordinary the aforesaid Archbish could not be heard Shall we say That our Archbishop and Friars are either more wise more learned vertuous then the Bishops Pastours Priests the whole Clergy for so many hundred yeeres past so many Kings Iudges Iustices in whose Tribunals that course hath ever beene held O no I cannot bee of that minde but that these were as well seene in all Lawes divine humane as obedient children of the Church and as respective of the Censures thereof as we their posterity be To conclude then this point I confidently avouch and will maintaine against these our Innovatours who labour to infringe the auncient Lawes immemorable customes hitherto from our very cradle of Christianity received allowed and practised both by the Church and Common-wealth in these his Majesties Kingdomes That they declare themselves by such their audacious attempts neither to be good members of the Church nor yet good subjects unto his Majesty CAP. III. How the Archbishop Tho. Flemming aliàs Barnwe●l Frya● of the Order of S. Francis usurpet is a power never before heard of in this Kingdome to wit at his pleasure to banish the Kings subjects not onely out of his Diocesse but out of his Province IT is said That Exilium est mors civilis Banishment is a civill death And therefore in all reason not to be inflicted but by lawfull authority and for very grievous offences And first it is confessed by all Divines that Episcopall power in punishments is confined to the three Censures of Excommunication Suspension Interdict according to that of the Apostle Nam arma militiae nostra non car●alia sunt c. 2. Cor. 10. For the weapons of our warfare are not carnall

perills to take notice of the premises and strictly to observe the same Dated 6. of March 1631. Friar Thomas Flemming Archbishop of Dublin THE EXCOMMVNICATION PVBLISHED BY THE L. ARCHBISHOP OF DVBLIN Thomas Flemming aliàs Barnwell Friar of the Order of S. Francis against the Inhabitants of the Diocesse of Dublin for hearing the Masses of Peter Caddell D r of Divinity and Paul Harris Priests is proved not onely injust but of no validity and consequently binding to no obedience FIrst then gentle Reader give me leave to lay downe these few Principles of the Canon Law as the grounds of my following Discourse I. The first Principle is That the Censure of Excommunication grounded upon an intollerable error is both injust and invalide and so obligeing to no obedience neither in for o fori or in foro poli as much to say neither in Law nor Conscience Cap. Per tuas de sentent excom Glossa ad cap. Licet de senten Excom in Sexto S●tus in 4. sentent distinct 22. q. 1. art 3. C●varruvius ad Cap. Alma mater part 1. § 8. num 7. And it is the common Tenent of all Doctors II. The second Principle is That no Excommunication just valid can be fulminated but for a mortall sinne the same manifested afore-hand forbidden under paine of Excommunication so alwayes accompanyed with contumacy Sot in 4. distinct 22. q. 1. art 2. conclus 2. 4. Vgolinus tab 1. cap. 17. § 7. num 6. 8. cap. 27. Cap. Nemo Epis 11. q. 3. Concil Trident. sess 25. de Reformatione cap. 3. And it is the common Tenent of all Doctors III. The third ground is That Priests of the Hierarchy or Cleargy are bound to no further obedience unto their Bishop or Ordinary then Canonicall That is such as the Lawes of holy Church prescribe and which they promise in their Consecration vid. Ep. IV. The fourth is That in all Legall and Canonicall prosequution of cause or crime the Defendant is to be called unto his answer convicted of what he is accused before he be sentenced Cap. Cum Paulis 191. Vantius de Nullit●ti●us defectn pro●essus num 13. 14. 23. tom 4. Clement pastoralis dere judicanda Alexauder Concilio 123. L. si non defendantur ff De poenitentiâ 1. § finali ff in lege finali § Illud C. de Tempore in cap. 2. de litis contestatione lib. 6. And it hath the consent of all Doctors V. The fifth ground is That every man is to be taken and to be held for a good a legall and an upright man till the contrary be proved against him Regnla Iuris 8. These five Principles of the Canon Law I place as so many lampes or lanthernes in the entry of my following Discourse to enlighten the Reader with more ease and facility to passe thorough the same In which Treatise or Discourse I intend by Gods assistance to proove That the aforesaid Censure of Thomas Flemming aliàs Barnwell L. Archbishop of Dublin Friar of the Order of S. Francis is of the worst ranke of Excommunications of so defective a nature as besides the Injustice thereof it laboureth of a meere Nullity or Invalidity and consequently can produce no other effect then neglect or contempt CAP. I. The first Argument against the Excommunication MY first Reason or Argument by which it is manifest that the aforesaid Excommunication is not onely injust but invalid is for that it is grounded upon an intollerable error But how say you is that proved Mary as thus A sentence published without any cause or reason containeth an intollerable error So Sayr●● lib. 1. cap. 16 num 32. Suarez dist 4. sect 7. num 31. Ma●uale pralatorum art 13. Conclus 1. Alterius lib. 3. disput ● cap. 1. Bonacina tom 1. de Censuris disput 1. q. 1. puncto 10. num 9. Reginaldus lib. 9 num 106. and so commonly But such is the aforesaid Censure published without cause or reason as shall be proved Ergo it containes an intollerable error Now for the Minor of this Syllogisme namely That the precedent Censure was published without cause or reason I thus declare The cause of the Censure layde downe as appeareth by the Tenor thereof is the insolencie and obstinate disobedience of the two aforenamed Priests that without hope of amendment to the great disedification of his flock To which it is answered by the aforesaid venerable Priests in this their Apology or defence That this cause was never proved against them therefore is no cause at all by that rule of the law Causa non probam non est causa A cause not proved is no cause 24. q. 3. de Illicita and is manifest by the light of reason For they alledge that to this day they have never bin accused much lesse convicted of any such disobedience or obstinacy Nay they say further That as yet they never were cited before their Ordinary to answer any matter of disobedience in all their lives whatsoever Now then forsomuuch as the Canon it selfe tells us Quod publicum judicium est institutum ut innocentia protegatur culpa puniatur 2. q. 1. That publique Iudgments are therefore ordained that Innocencie may be protected faults punish●d And our wise Law-givers observing that this end and scope of the law could not otherwise be attained but by citing calling to their answer the parties supposed to be delinqu●nt admitti●g them to their defence Therefore was it ordained by the Canons lawes of holy Church that even in summary most compendious p●oceedings in which all solemnity of law may be pretermitted yet no Bishop or Prelate should presume to sentence any of their subjects These or either of these two maine pillars of all legall juridical proceeding being neglected namely Citation Conviction as is above proved in the fourth Principle And that in omission of both or either of these two essentiall parts of all lawfull processe all sentence publication of sentence following is to be held ipso fact voyde so Invalid in law as no appellation from such sentence shall be necessary to any other court or superiour For saith the Canon Quae contra legem facta ●unt pro infectis haberi debent 25 q. 2. Imperiali The things that are done contrary to law are to be accounted as not done at all Now then forsomuch as both these namely Citation Conviction have b●n omitted by their Ordinary Thomas Flemming aliàs Barnwell L. Archb of Dublin and Friar of the Order of S. Francis Tho setwo reverend Priests doe alledge that the sentence of Excommunication following fulminated against the Inhabitants of this Diocesse for hearing their Masses is utterly voyde For which so great a wrong both to Priest People satisfactio● of honour and dammages in all law conscience is due they being in possession of a good name of which they are not to be deprived till the contrary

platforme of Iustice Iudgment Descendam videbo utram clamorem qui venit ad me opere compleverint an non est ita ut s●●am Genes 18. I will goe downe saith Almighty God and I will see whether they have done according to the cry that is come unto me or whether it be not so that I may know So our Saviour in the processe of the adulterous woman Mulier Vbi sunt qui te accusabant Iohn 8. Woman where be thine accusers So hath he foretold us what shall be the forme processe of the last Iudgment at what time the sheepe shall be separated from the goates Math. 25. And thus have you seene some few examples out of Scripture of Iustice exercited in Iudgment by God himselfe Now as touching humane Iudgments who can make question but as Moses made the Tabernacle according unto that patterne which was shewed unto him by God himselfe in the mountaine Exod. 25. So ought all humane Iudgments to be squared according to the divine Of many to rehearse some few examples Such was the judgment of Salomon in the cause of the two Harlots about the quick the dead childe III. Reg. 3. Such was the judgment of Daniel in the case of chast Susanna Dan. 7. Such was the judgment of S. Peter in the matter of Ananias and Saphira Act. 5. And our blessed Saviour Redeemer in that his Arraignment where Injustice most of all did triumph in the seat of Iustice yet was admitted unto his answer saw his accusers heard his forged crimes urged by his malicious enemies enforced against him by two false witnesses last of all received his sentence pronounced by the mouth of the unjust Iudge Pontius Pilate Math. 27. But these two venerable Priests 〈◊〉 I confesse not in a matter which concernes their lives yet in a case which some will say is more to be esteemed then life it selfe to wit their honour and good name in the world were condemned not cited to Iudgment absent and 〈◊〉 at what time it pleased my L. Archbishop and his Fryars to sit upon the Bench. And that which in all Iudgments by the Law of Nature ought to be the last the perclose of the whole processe was here the first namely sentence For neither themselves or any in the place where they live did so much as once su●pect any proceeding in any cause with them or against them till sentence was proclaimed and that as publickely as at the high Crosse of Dublin and themselves condemned of Disobedience but how As I have said in termes of universality Of a Disobedience wanting his existence or being of a particular act or fact Of a disobedience without father or mother naked of all circumstances as time when place where person against whom A singular judgment I confesse and not much unlike unto that which they say in some barbarous Countreyes is exercised The man first hanged and then his cause examined O Nicodemus Nicodemu● Thou a Iew couldst say Numquid lex nostra judicat hominem c. Iohn 7. Doth our law condemne a man before he befirst heard and know what he hath done But had Nicodemus lived in these dayes among Christians he would sometimes have seen wrong injury and oppression to have sit in the seat of Iudgment I will then conclude this point with that saying of Festus unto King Agrippa in the behalfe of that great Apostle S. Paul when he was to be sent prisoner unto C●sar Sine ratione mihi videtur mittere vinctum causas ejus non significare Act. 25. It seemes unto me a thing unreasonable to send a man bound and not to signifie his cause And is it not thinke you a farre more unreasonable thing to thrust the people into the spirituall bondes and fetters of Excommunication and not to signifie the cause thereof And I wonder that our great Masters in Israel and you onely great Couucellours of warre against the poore Clergy my Lord I meane our Friars who professe so great Schollership would not advise your Hon who happily by reason of your other imployments cannot so well attend unto the study of the Canons what punishment that Bishop incurres who excommunicates before the cause thereof be proved See then for this the Councell of Paris with Gratian 24. q. 3. De Illicita And I will for the ease of my Reader set downe the words De illicita excommunicatione lex Iustiniani Imperatoris Catholici c. As touching unlawfull Excommunications the law of Iustinian the Catholicke Emperour which law the Catholicke Church doth approve and observe in his 123. Constitution cap. 351. hath decreed that no Bishop or Prelate excommunicate any person before the cause bee proved for which the Canons of the Church command this to be done and for his unjust attempt he shall so long abstaine from the sacred Communion as shall seeme good unto his Superiour So that Councell And it appeares by the Canon that such Prelates incurve suspension See Ext●●de sentent Excom Sacro So S. Gregory the great absolved the Bishop Magnus unjustly excommunicated by Laurence Archbishop of Millan See S. Gregory lib. 2. Epist 26. And the same Pope Gregory did punish Iohn a Bishop for inflicting of unjust Excommunications See for this the place above cited de illicita Excom And let them consider of this who teach that our Bishops cannot erre in their censures That they must be obeyed in right and wrong c. But I shall have occasion to speake of that point hereafter Forsomuch then as you see the Law tells us that no Excommunication can either be inflicted or incurred before the cause thereof be proved Let me humbly intereat your Hon my very good Lord for I suppose that you are neither too old to learne nor my selfe too yong to teach Nor doe I doubt albeit I be inferiour to you in place and dignity in Gods Church that it will either misbecome my profession as being a Priest nor my white haires as now being Paulus senex even Paul an old man to preach unto you That as well for the security of your owne conscience towardes God as to avoyde the scandall and obloquy of the world as also punishment from the higher powers That hereafter you will either make the cause of your Censures as well knowne and approved unto the world as you doe your punishments or else the punishments as private unto your selfe as the causes thereof And so hoping your Hon. will take the premisses into your consideration I will descend unto the next point which shal be to satisfie some doubts to answer to certaine objections which may be made in the behalfe of the Ordinary against my two former Arguments enforcing the Injustice and Invalidity of the Archbishops censure CAP. III. Certaine Objections in behalfe of the Archb. propounded and answered FIrst then it may be said in defence and excuse of the Ordinary That the times are such as our Prelats in

thereunto so I will undertake by Gods assistance to shew and upon good grounds that in all conscience it ought to be disobeyed And that whosoever yeeldeth obedience unto the same if he be not excused by invincible ignorance doth not only sin mortally but also continues in sin so long as in obedience thereunto he refuseth to heare the Masses of the aforesaid Priests CAP. VII Wherein it is proved That none in Conscience may obey the aforesaid Excommunication THus then I argue Defamation or the taking away of a mans good name is a mortall sin So S. Thomas 2. 2. q 73. 1. all Divines Yea so much is that defamation or detraction greater more grievous by how much it is more materiall the partyres against whom more honorable And it is to be understood That defamation or detraction is not only verball but also mentall and reall that is not only in word but in thought also and in fact And because every thing is made more familiar by examples I put the case that my self as also the whole neighbourhood hath understood of some scandalous sinne of one of our old friends and familiar acquaintance whom wee held albeit a poore yet an honest a very pious man wherupon we with-draw our good opinions from him our wonted conversation our familiarity and such benefites as from time to time we were wonted to bestow upon him and still would have continued if we had not heard such evils of him well it appeares unto us not long after that the party was wronged and free from all such vice wickednesse as he was charged withall and so as in conscience we are assured of his innocencie yet notwithstanding we beare ourselves towards him as formerly we did when we believed those evils of him to his great discomfort to his discountenance in the world and in fyne to his great shame infamy I say in this case we all sinne mortally and the blacke sinne of Detraction if not in thought and in word yet which is as bad as the rest really indeed So I say these two R. Priests so often mentioned were charged by their Ordinary with disobedience with continuall insolency c. All this is manifested to be a malicious slander notwithstanding are the people forbidden to be present at their Masses the same under paine of Excommunication One Fryar sayes the Censure ought to be obeyed Another sayes at least it is the safest way I say they both erre lead into errour For the safest way is not to defame my brother or to obscure his good name nor yet to joyne and concurre with such as do detract with-draw from his just honour and that especially in persons of so eminent a ranke in the Church as are anointed Priests by which meanes their ministery is lesse respected and themselves disinabled to walke in that vocation to which they are called And first the Bishop who gave so impious a sentence next the Friar who gadding from house to house seekes to perswade the same are guilty of most horride sin and as the Apostle calls it blasphemy And as well the one as the other obliged to satisfaction unto the Innocent so wronged as also unto the Church of God In the meane time let both Priest people comfort themselves in that sweet blessing pronounced by the month of our Saviour Mat. 5. Beati est is cùm maledixerint vobis c. Blessed are you when men shall revile you shall persecute you shall speake all evill of you lying for my sake Be glad rejoyce for great is your reward in heaven for so did they persecute the Prophets who were before you And forsomuch as it is the counsell of our sweet Saviour to love our enemyes to doe good to them that hate us to pray for them that persecute us It wil be a worke of mercy not I trust misbecomming me to give a parcell of good counsell advice unto my Prelat if with the Prophet Nathan by setting his fault before his face I convert him into a penitent David he to the spirituall comfort of his soule shall be reclaymed and I to my great consolation reape the fruit of my labours O then say I if the Archbishop of Dublin would but consider with himselfe set before his eyes the practise of the ancient Prelats of Gods Church with what leaden pases they descended unto censures never making use thereof but in remedilesse occasions where no admonition no exhortation no patience no longanimity would prevayle As if they had said with the Poët Cuncta prius tentanda sed immedicabile vulnu● Ense recidendum ne pars sincera trahatur All first attempt if nought prevayle its best Cut off that part which may infect the rest All courses are first to be taken with the myst icallmembers of Christs body with the children of the Church But that part I confesse which admits no cure must be separated from his fellowes The ancient Bishops did never fulminate their censures for triviall and light occasions and much lesse for causes not manifest and well proved Aug. in sermone de Quadragesima Nos a communione quenquam prohibere non possumus nifi au● sponte confessum aut in aliqu● sive saeculari sive Ecclesiastico judicio nominatum atque convictum We can excommunicate no man but him who either of his owne accord hath confessed or hath beene named and convicted in some saecular or Ecclesiasticall Iudgment Conc●lium Meldense c. 56. Nemo Episcoporum quemlibet sine centa manifesta peccatcausa communione privet ecclesiastica Let no Bishop without a certaine and a manifest cause of a sinne deprive any of Ecclesiasticall communion Concilium Aurolianense 4. cap. 2. Wormaciense cap. 13. Nullus sacerdotum quenquam rect● fidei hominem pro parvis levibus causis à Communione suspendat preter eas culpas pro quibus antiqui Patres arceri ab Ecclesia jusserun● contemnentes Let no Priest excommunicate any for small or light causes besides those faults for which the ancient Fathers have commaunded the contemners to bee forbidden the Church Againe S. Ang. serm 16. de verbis Domini C●pisti habere fratrem tuum tanquam publicanam ligas illum in terra sed ut just● alliges vide Nam injust● vincula disrumpit justitia Thou hast begun to account thy brother as a publican thou binds him on earth But take heed thou bind him justly For Iustice doth dissolve unjust bonds Alas then shall we thinke that this glorious S t sometime Bishop of Hippo in Affrick S. Augustin brought with him his censures his sentences in his pocket as Th● Flemming aliàs Barnwell Archbishop of Dublin useth then to send for a Priest against whom he desireth to have a cause And when he findes his opportunity drawes out his sentence of suspension from his pocket as he did against that R. Priest Fa. Patricke Cahil suspending him from all

but powerfull to revenge all disobedience c. For which cause Excommunication the first sharpest of all the censures is called Mucro Episcopi the Bishops sword Now if the Bishop will say with S. Peter Ecce d●o gladij behold two swords It must be knowne from whom hee hath that other his owne being spirituall and it is acknowledged by Divines that hee borroweth it from the civill Magistrate from Princes Temporall Governours who as good children of the Church were enduced to grant this temporall assistance onely in some cases unto the Pastor for the better government of his flocke in his Spirituall regiment And so it came to passe that prisons were allowed unto Bishops wherein not only to detaine but also to chastise Herètickes Simonists Blasphemers prophaners of the Sacraments vow breakers contemners of the fasts of the Church Holy-dayes violators of Ecclesiasticall censures and the like as also for faults not of so bad a note to inflict pecuniary mulcts fines at their discretion yet wee finde not that Bishops or Prelats who besides their spirituall jurisdictiō are not temporall Princes either in whole or in part doe corporally punish either theft or murders or treasons or rapes or blood-shed with infinite other offences which are dayly committed in all common-wealthes So never doe we finde by any record or register of any Ecclesiasticall court That in these Kingdomes either with cause or without cause it was permitted by the Church unto Archbishops or Bishops or ever did they exercise the paine of banishment either out of their Provinces or Diocesses It being a power meerely temporall and Regall never committed unto them no more then punishments of death losse of lim forfeyture of house land c. Nay if it be law which Sir Edward Cooke reports in his comment upon Littleton lib. 2. cap. Villinage sect 200. No subject may be banished out of the Kingdome but by Parliament authority for what cause or crime soever Shall then our Archbishop who borrowes his temporall power jurisdiction from the King assume the like authority But to this it will be said That the Archbishop onely exiles out of his Diocesse or at the most out of his Province not out of the whole land To which I answere but in case the foure Archbishops of this Kingdome should agree as within these sixe yeeres three of them at one time were gray Fryars to banish a man each one out of his Province is he not then banished the whole Kingdome of Ireland and with lesse difficulty might this be done in England where wee have only two Provinces two Archbishops Canterbury and Yorke And I trow it is no hard matter for two to agree But that which is most strange not to be believed were it not that it was done in the hearing of many witnesses in this Citty of Dublin against parties living and who at this day remaine in this Citty albeit I spare to name them I say so it was will be justified that this present Archbishop Friat Thomas Flemming aliàs Barnwell did by sentence banish out of his Diocesse men of the Clergy commanding them under Censures within 15. dayes to depart the same being demanded wherein they had offended or what they had committed deserving such punishment He answered that he knew no hurt by them but that he had no use of them slbeit verily he had use enough of them had he bin pleased to make use of them for they were of the most learned men of his Diocesse And whom a vertuous Prelat would have esteemed as his own eyes much lesse have banished But so the times are that learning vertue and good breeding are so farre from being stayres to honour and preferment as nothing can sooner with this Ordinary work his disgrace his dejection utter over-throw well then the Archbishop stands stiffe in this doctrine That he can ad nutum ad libitum banish any Priest out of his district which doctrine were it true what man I pray you would take upon him the vocation of a Clergy-man or of a Secular Priest knowing that ever after he must be a perpetuall slave to humour his Ordinary or else not to live in the Church for what one Bishop can doe another may doe And a Priest by this meanes may be banished out of all Christendome when as a Miller or a Baker or a Porter will aske never a Bishop in the land leave ro dwell in his Diocesse So much do our sacred Orders help us as rather they help to undoe us Say is not this to dominari in Clerum to tyrannize over the Clergy Is not this to encroach upon Regall authority Is not this to confound all lawes both of Church Common-wealth Wherefore for my part I allow very well of that Priest my deare friend Countrey-ma● who being commanded above two yeares agoe by the aforesaid Tho. Flemming alias Barnwell to depart his Diocesse alledging no cause against him He answered My Lord I will not banish you the Diocesse neither shall you me for so long as the King the State are pleased to permit me I will heere injoy the foure Elements if any give me ●piece of bread or a nights lodging I will take it be thankfull for the same so saying me thought he spake as my self would have done in the like case Neither by this do I intend to deny Exile to be a canonicall punishment but not used either by Ecclesiasticall or Civill Magistrates in these Kingdomes nor yet any-where else without some great haynous off●●ce 16. q. 1. Probirum 17. q. 4. Attendendum 24. q. 1. Qui contra And now I will conclude this point with the conclusion of that Speech which my self lately made in a publick audience as followeth Let me also signifie unto you That none of you presume or seek to maintaine Tho. Flemming aliâs Barnwell Archb. a Friar of the Order of S. Francis in his late usurped authority of Exile or banishment where in he takes upon him only at his pleasure at his will omni indictâ causâ to banish and throw out of his Diocesse any person whatsoever either of the Clergy or Laity which doctrin he hath both publickly taught as also of late practised on divers persons to the great disturbance both of the Church Common-wealth It being a meere usurpation contrary unto the Canons and the ancient statutes of this Kingdome And therfore it concernes us all as good subjects to maintaine our King in his Right against all innovation whatsoever for in so doing we shall fulfill the commaund will of our Saviour saying Give ●to Caesar what belongs ●●to Caesar unto God what is Gods And so not doubting but you will alwayes remaine as obedient children of the Church so loyall subjects unto ●is Majesty I give you all my benediction CAP. IIII. Of certaine most dangerous Heresies or rather Blasphemies of late preached and