heard his wife Abigail recount vnto him who by her prudence had appeased and pacified Dauid coming in furie and rage to reuenge what Dauid had intended against him he feared and trembled in such wise as with the newes he became euen senslesse Et emortuum est cor eius intrinsecus 1. Reg. 25. factus est quasi lapis that is And his heart was dead inwardly and he became as a stone and there upon within ten daies after striken by God gaue vp the ghost Had Nabal cause to feare Dauid not then accepted of the people for king Saul being yet aliue and haue not we iust cause to feare how we offend and stirre to ire our dread Soueraigne so mightie a Monarch Was the occasion that Nabal gaue in comparison of that of our Catholickes alike Conferre the crime of the one and the other and you shall find great inequalitie as great as betweene a word and a blow yea such a blow as posterity will hardly beleeue could be offered when they shal reade it in Chronicles Meane while we that by Gods goodnes are yet liuing and be eye witnesses thereof haue cause to lament and testifie with Habacuc the Prophet Quia opus factum est in diebus nostris Habac. 1. quod nemo credet cum narrabitur That a worke hath bene done in our daies which no man will beleeue when it shall be told and to wish that some discreete Abigail may be found to step forth and meete with our liege Lord comming in great ire to reuenge and with prudence to pacifie and perswade him to surcease for the loialtie and true affection of many other his innocent Catholicke subiects who lie prostate at his royall feete lamenting their brethrens follie and humbly beseeching pardon with offer for and in his defence of both life and limme But woe is me whilest some endeuour to quench a flaming fire by taking away the wood knowing that Cum defecerint ligna Prou. 26. extinguetur ignis When the wood faileth or is taken away the fire will be quenched others put more wood to the fire and so increase the flame Whilest his Maiestie meditateth mercie and requireth that which iustly he may and we in conscience are bound to performe Nabal yea many Nabals arise and do adde matter to kindle his wrath in resisting his will and denying his iust demand which is only to discharge their duties in rendering to Caesar that is Caesars to sweare fealtie and true obedience vnto him in temporals according to the tenure of the Oath framed and enacted the third yeare of his reigne without derogation to any spirituall authoritie of the Pope or infringement of any point of the Catholicke faith The cause then wherefore this Oath of allegeance was made no man can doubt but the most barbarous Gun-powder conspiracy was the onely vrgent motiue it neuer being in common knowledge so much as thought of before The scope and end thereof was that by taking or refusing the same the King and State might distinguish betweene true and faithfull and hollow-hearted Catholicke subiects Regis Praemo pag. 12. and his Maiestie might be more fully assured of their constancie and fidelitie in time of need vpon any cause to be offered whatsoeuer or by Prince people Pope or whosoeuer And can any man maruell that the Pope is therein named Doth this scandalize any Consider but what they were that inserted it the time and place and pretence of reason they had or might haue to imagine being so aduerse or opposite to him in religion and the Treason so fresh in memorie that his Holinesse might giue leaue or encouragement or at least be priuie and so to winke at such an attempt presuming that no Catholicke durst enterprise such a fact without conniuence at least of supreme authoritie And had they not cause to feare or doubt him more then any other none being therein culpable but only Iesuites and Catholickes of whom some haply thinke themselues bound to obey him whatsoeuer he command for that in their opinion he cannot erre in commanding Howbeit we that are by Gods grace Catholicks also agreeing in all points with Christ his Vicar the Pope of Rome in vnitie of faith do no way suspect that euer he was consenting much lesse gaue way to authorize such enormous and wicked designements though withall we dissent from them that thinke he cannot erre no not in a matter of fact The State there assembled were not such babes as that they needed be taught of the Pope his proceedings with Princes about their depriuations or depositions for diuers crimes when he hath hope to preuaile but especially for heresie or apostasie They knew right well likewise that if his Highnes should be by his Holinesse denounced and declared an hereticke what dangers might soone after ensue therefore was it thought wisedome to preuent a mischiefe ere it happen in exacting an Oath of allegeance at Catholicks hands in that maner and forme as it is set downe thereby more firmly to binde them to the performance of their dutie whereto otherwise by the law of God and nature they rest obliged For it is to be presumed that a Christian an honest man that hath feare of Gods iudgements wil not become perfidious nor rashly or vniustly breake that oath which discreetly and iustly he consented to take Iurabit proximo suo Psal 14. non decipiet He will sweare to his neighbour and wil not deceiue him By this now I trust deare Catholicke brethren you are satisfied that an Oath of allegeance may be iustly exacted at our hands and that we are bound to sweare fealtie to our Prince when it shall be required of vs. But you make doubt lest more be contained in this Oath then fealtie or ciuill obedience to his Maiestie viz. some points against the spirituall authoritie of the Pope which you being Catholickes may not gainsay but are bound in conscience to maintaine If you could satisfie vs say you that nothing is therein contained against any article of faith and that we may disobey his Holinesse who prohibiteth the taking thereof without danger of mortall sinne you shall do vs a singular pleasure therfore I pray you resolue vs herein that are much perplexed about it by reason of the great corporall troubles we are like to fall into if by disobeying the King we refuse it or for the hazard of our soules as we thinke if in disobeying the Pope and scandalizing our brethren the Catholickes we take it Beloued brethren I trust you expect not at my hands that I should fully and exactly discusse euery point of the Oath and answer euery scrupulous difficultie that some vse to make albeit it might be easie to effect for it would require a better librarie then mine is at this present more labour then I can well affoord by reason of my feeble bodie and a larger treatise then I meane to make Your desire is as I presume onely to know
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
of any lay-mans temporall goods and patrimonie for any cause whatsoeuer yea for heresie it selfe who is not temporally a vassall and subiect to his Holinesse And if his spirituall authoritie giuen him by our Sauiour can worke no such effect much lesse his temporall which was neuer granted by Christ by whom he ought to haue whatsoeuer he hath for the good gouernment of his Church but by holy secular Princes whereof Cardinall Allen writeth thus The chiefe Bishops of Christs Church In his answer to the Eng. iust pag. 144. our supreme Pastors in earth by Gods prouidence and by the graunts of our first most Christian Emperours and Kings and by the humble and zealous deuotion of the faithfull Princes and people afterwards haue their temporall states dominions and patrimonies whereby they most iustly hold and possesse the same and are thereby lawfull Princes temporall and may most rightfully by their soueraigntie make warres in their owne and other mens iust quarell as occasion shall vrge them thereunto This he The like in effect writeth the most excellent lawyer D. Barclai Lib. de potestate Papae ◠15. that the Pope himselfe is no otherwise excluded from temporall subiection to secular Princes then that by the benefite or liberalitie of Kings he was made a King forsooth a politicall Prince acknowledging none for his superiour in temporals And the same doth the most earnest maintainer of the Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction confesse whom many thinke to be Cardinall Bellarmine Sub nomine Francisci Romuli pag. 114. in his answer to the principall chapters of an Apologie c. Generalis inquit verissima est illa sententia debere omnes omnino superiori potestati obtemperare Sed quia c. It is a generall and most true sentence that all ought to obey higher power but because power is of two sorts spirituall and temporall ecclesiasticall and politicall whereof the one belongeth to Bishops the other to Kings Bishops ought to be subiect to Kings in temporall things and Kings vnto Bishops in spirituals as copiously do dispute Gelasius the first Gelasius Nicolaus in his Epistle to Anastasius and Nicolas the first in his Epistle to Michael But because the Bishop of Rome is not only the chiefe Ecclesiastical Prince to whom all Christians by the law of God are subiect but is also in his owne Prouinces a temporall Prince neither doth he acknowledge any superiour in temporals as nor other absolute and soueraigne Princes do in their kingdoms and dominions thence it proceedeth that he hath no power aboue him in earth Not then because he is chiefe Bishop and spirituall father of all Christians therefore he is deliuered from temporall subiection but because he enioyeth a temporall principalitie subiect to none In those things therefore which appertaine to the good of the common-wealth and ciuill societie and are not repugnant to the diuine ordinance Clerkes are no lesse bound to obey the soueraigne temporall Prince then other citizens or subiects as Cardinall Bellarmine himselfe verie notably sheweth Quia clerici In lib. de Clericis c. 28. praeterquā quod clerici sunt sunt etiā ciues partes quaedam Reipub. politicae Non sunt exempti clerici vllo modo inquit ab obligatione legum ciuilium quae non repugnant sacris canonibus vel officio clericali That clergie men besides that they are clergie men are also citizens and certaine parts of the politicall commonwealth Clerkes saith he are not exempted by any meanes from the bond of the ciuill lawes which are not repugnant to the sacred canons or their clericall office By this you may see that the Pope hath his temporalities and temporall power not from Christ but from Constantine and other Christian Princes and people and was euer subiect to ciuill gouernment of Emperours till such time as by their graunts he was made a King and temporall Prince and so had no superiour and that Clerks as parts of the political cōmonwealth are bound to obey al iust lawes of the same cōmonwealth no lesse then the Laitie but more of this in another place as occasion shall serue Now to come somewhat nearer the question that I promised and you desire to be resolued on as touching the Popes authoritie to depose Princes of their temporall dominions First you are to note that of this matter there are two opinions much different the one from the other one of the Canonists another of Diuines The Canonists hold it for true doctrine to be maintained Tho. Bozius Carerius D. Marta and others that all power whatsoeuer is in this world either temporall and ciuill or spirituall and ecclesiasticall was giuen directly by Christ to Peter and his successors and what power any Kings or Princes in the whole world either Christians or Infidels haue it all dependeth of the Pope and is deriued from him to them as touching the temporall execution so that as Lord of the world he may depose Princes take away their kingdomes and principalities and giue or dispose them to whom he list though no man know the cause why he doth so if he shall iudge there is sufficient cause to do it If this were true doctrine then woe to all Princes that should at any time yea but breake amitie and friendship with him that sitteth in Peters seate what securitie could they haue of their estates Then might they expect of Princes and rulers to be made priuate men and subiects then may it be granted that our Soueraigne were not vnlike to be depriued of his temporals his subiects to be discharged of their obedience and his territories giuen in prey to his enemies But this opinion is held to be most false by many Diuines because it cannot be proued either by authoritie of Scripture or by tradition of the Apostles or practise of the ancient Church or by the doctrine and testimonies of the ancient Fathers Howbeit Bozius a late writer most stoutly defendeth the same Lib. 2. cap. 11 and greatly blameth many excellent Diuines among whom is renowmed Cardinall Bellarmine and calleth them new diuines saying moreouer that they teach most manifestly false doctrine Lib. 5. cap. vlt. and repugnant to all truth because they say that Christ as man was neuer a temporall king nor had any temporall dominion on earth nor did exercise or practise any regall power for by these assertions the principall foundations of Bozius friuolous arguments are ouerthrowne which as most true they confirme by the testimony of our Sauiour himselfe Math. 8. Luc. 9. Foxes saith he haue holes and the foules of the aire nests but the Sonne of man hath not where to put his head If Christ Iesus as he was the son of mā had not so much in this world as a cottage to rest himself in where I pray you is his kingdome where is his temporall dominion who can conceiue that one can be king and Lord who hath no kingdome or Lordship in the vniuersall
glorie of God obstinately refuse to performe their dutie in obeying that precept of our Sauiour Render vnto Caesar that which is Caesars and that of S. Peter Regem honorificate and also the commandement giuen to Moyses Honour thy father and thy mother These assure you are they who giue cause of scandal indeed wherby their persecution if so they please to cal it is continued the Church perturbed Catholicke religion little regarded and many a soule lost But Vaeilli per quem scandalum venit Woe to him by whom scandall cometh Time will make triall who it is whether they or we In the meane while we say that the proper and true definition of scandall as it is defined by S. Thomas and others most aptly agreeth with the doctrine and example or words and deedes of such English subiects as withdraw men from performing their dutie to their dread Soueraigne not on such as perswade it and yet remaine no lesse Catholicke then they do pretend in euery point of faith Scandall is a word or deed not right Definition of scandall Tho. 2.2 q. 43. ar 1. Ieron in comment super Math. c. 15. giuing occasion of ruine that is of spirituall ruine or sinne Now what euill or shew of euill or sin is there in those who by their deedes and words example and doctrine teach and labour to induce all to do that which is right and due by the law of God What scandall or offence or occasion of sinne do they giue who perswade nothing against any one article or point of faith but meere allegiance to their Prince Doth this offend or scandalize any If they will be scandalized for well doing and take offence where none is giuen do they not shew how imperfect they are in the loue of God Pax multa diligentibus legem tuam non est illis scandalum Psal 118. To such as loue thy law ô God there is great peace and to them there is no scandall May not these be well likened to the Pharisies that of enuie and malice were offended or scandalized at the sayings and doings of our Blessed Sauiour who being told by his disciples of their scandall taken answered Omnis plantatio quam non plantauit Pater meus coelestis eradicabitur Math. 15. All planting which my heauenly Father hath not planted shall be rooted vp Let them alone blind they are guides of the blind And if the blind be guide to the blind both fall into the ditch Such are to be pitied and praied for not enuied whom we may answer in the same sort and with Haimo Haimo in Math c. 18. Greg ho. 7. in Sipro veritate scandalum oriatur magis veritas eligenda est quà m scandalum vitandum If for truth scandall do arise as it doth in this our case rather truth is to be chosen then scandall sought to be auoided The same affirmeth S. Gregorie the Great Ezech. pag. 2. as before pag. 45. And S. Thomas disputing whether spirituall goods are to be pretermitted for passiue scandall Tho. 2.2 q. 43. ar 7. saith That such goods as are de necessitate salutis ought not to be omitted for auoiding scandall because they cannot be pretermitted without mortall sinne as in our iudgements we take allegiance in the Oath to be but it is manifest saith he that none ought to sinne mortally to saue an other from sinne because according to the order of charitie a man ought to loue more his owne spirituall health then another mans The same likewise hath Ioannes de Burgo Pupil oculi Opera necessaria ad salutem non sunt omittenda ad vitandum scandalum proximi ex quacunqueradice procedat Workes necessarie to saluation are not to be omitted for auoiding the scandall of our neighbour out of whatsoeuer roote it proceedeth Herby deare brethren in our Lord Iesus I trust you rest satisfied that such as haue taken the Oath of allegiance wherein nothing hath bene hitherto proued by any learned man to be contained against any one point of faith haue not giuen cause of scandall as they haue bin slandered to haue done but by that their fact performing their bounden dutie to their dread Soueraigne according to the law of God haue sought to take away that horrible scandall giuen indeed by a few vngracious Catholikes in the gunpowder treason and which others daily giue to his Maiestie and the State in resisting the law made vpon so great reason and for the commō good of the realme Besides I trust your wisdomes will consider that to take the Oath being bonum spirituale wherein no euill thing against religion is contained they are not to pretermit it for the imperfections of some who are readie to suffer or take scandall where none is giuen Wherefore I exhort you all most dearely beloued Catholikes in the bowels of our Sauiour Iesus Christ as the very Reuerend and learned maister George Blackwell sometime our Archpriest did in his letter to his Assistants and you all both Clergie and Laitie for abolishing and ending this controuersie which hath scandalized the whole State you wold desist to impugne supreme authoritie in this case of the Oath most lawfull and iust as hath bene proued and ceasse any longer to prouoke to wrath his Maiesty our most clement Prince clement I say for I dare boldly auouch that neither the Pope nor any King or Prince in Christendome had he had the like cause offered by any his subiects especially of a contrarie religion and finding others of the same religion to refuse to make profession of their loyalty by an Oath required at their hands would shew such mercy and clemencie as his Maiestie hath done and doth Conferre the fact or enterprise of the Moores in Spaine now two years agone who wēt about as report goeth treacherously to bring in Turkes and forreiners to inuade the countrey with this Catesbeyan and Percian most barbarous treason and I doubt not but you will iudge them both worthy condigne punishment Compare againe the two Princes who by Gods ordinance carie the sword ad vindictam malefactorum to take reuenge on malefactours you shall find them both iustly prouoked to indignation against the delinquents yet the one viz. King Philip with great seueritie chastiseth the innocent with the nocent old yong men women and children expelling all alike out of his dominiōs to the number of nine hundred thousand as appeareth by his edict within the space of xxx dayes to the losse of all their immoueables Whereas the other our dread Soueraigne of his pitifull inclination did not punish in such sort the guiltles nor all the offendours according to their deserts but repressed by his edict the furie of his people readie to haue taken reuenge yea on many innocent persons for their sakes that had offended Embrace then deare brethren the mercie and long sufferance of this our milde and clement Prince whilest time is granted you lest through your default it be turned