Oath that doe any way appertayne to the Ciuill and Temporall Obedience due to His Maiestie whom hee acknowledgeth for his true and lawfull King and Soueraigne ouer all His Domioions And Martinus Becanus a famous Iesuite in the first Edition of his Controuersia Anglicana writeth thus Becanus in Controuersia Anglic cap. 3. p. 102 And truly to me it is certaine that all the parts and propositions of the Oath are not false if they bee well declared For these are true first that King Iames is lawfull King of England Scotland and Ireland Secondly that in the same Kingdomes he is the Supreme or Soueraigne Lord in Temporalls 2. First therefore if wee consider the end of this Oath which is only to make profession of our temporall Allegiance and to make a true distinction not betwixt Catholikes and Protestants c. the expresse declaration of His Maiestie and the rules before mentioned in the second and third Obseruation it is euident that by those wordes Soueraigne Lord is not to be vnderstood the Kings Supremacie in Spirituall and Ecclesiasticall but only in Temporall and Ciuill causes 3. Secondly it is also euident that albeit by force of the expresse wordes and the plaine and common vnderstanding of the same to which the seuenth branch of this Oath tyeth the swearer wee are bound only to acknowledge that King Iames is lawfull and rightfull King of this Realme and of all other His Maiesties Dominions and Countries and not that Hee is the Soueraigne Lord of the same both for that those words Soueraigne Lord are put only ex parte subiecti and not ex parte predicati and therefore by vertue of the words are not affirmed as likewise he that stileth the Pope most holy and most blessed doth not affirme him to bee most holy and most blessed vnlesse the words most holy most blessed be put ex parte predicati also that if we regard the force and vertue of those words Soueraigne Lord they haue not the same sense which the words lawfull and rightfull King haue seeing that one may be a lawfull and rightfull King and yet not the Soueraigne Lord of His Kingdome as if the Emperour should make the great Duke of Toscan King of Hetruria he would be lawfull and rightfull King of that Countrie and yet not the Soueraigne or Supreme Lord of the same because hee is as a feudarie subiect to the Emperour Neuerthelesse because the lawfull and rightfull King of England is also the Soueraigne Lord of the same by reason and vertue of the matter we may lawfully and if it bee demanded at our hands are bound to acknowledge and sweare that King Iames is not only the lawfull and rightfull King of England of all other His Maiesties Dominions but also the Soueraigne or Supreme Lord of the same And in this sense both the XIII Priests and also M. Greene vnderstood the word Soueraigne in their Protestation and Declaration 4. Neither is it to the purpose which some obiect that the King of England is the Popes Vassall and as a feudarie subiect to him in Temporals and therefore the Pope and not King Iames is the absolute Soueraigne and supreme Lord in Temporals of this Kingdome For although wee should absurdly admit that for the title and clayme of Temporall Soueraigntie which the Pope pretendeth to haue ouer this Kingdome by vettue of some grant of former Kings may bee brought some probable proofe as there cannot seeing that it is euident that no King of England hath authoritie to giue away His Kingdome or make it subiect in Temporals to another Prince without the consent of the Kingdome it selfe and that no colour of any probable proofe can bee brought from any Authenticall Instrument to shew that the Kingdome of England euer consented to any such grant yet considering that no probable title can bee a sufficient ground to depriue any man of that Right Dominion or any other thing which he actually possesseth but such a title must bee most certaine and out of all controuersie as I shewed aboue in the Fift Obseruation it is manifest that notwithstanding any such probable title euery subiect of this Land may lawfully acknowledge by Oath that King Iames is not only the lawful and rightfull King of this Realme and of all other His Maiesties Dominions and Countries but also the Soueraigne or supreme temporall Lord of the same CHAP. II. The Second Branch of the Oath and an Explication thereof ANd that the Pope neither of himselfe nor by any authoritie of the Church or See of Rome or by any other meanes which any other hath any Power or Authoritie to depose the King or to dispose any of his Maiesties Kingdomes or Dominions or to authorize any forraigne Prince to inuade or annoy Him or his Countries or to discharge any of his Subiects of their Allegiance and Obedience to his Maiestie or to giue license or leaue to any of them to beare Armes rayse Tumults or to offer any violence or hurt to His Maiesties Royal Person State or Gouernment or to any of His Maiesties subiects within His Maiesties Dominions 1. This Branch supposing the former Obseruations hath in it no difficultie at all although wee should admit that the immediate obiect thereof or which is all one that which in this Branch by force of the words we are bound immediately to sweare is not only our sincere acknowledgement and perswasion but also that absolutely and assuredly the Pope hath not any authoritie to depose the King c. For considering that the whole tenour of this Branch tendeth to practise namely to depose to dispose to inuade annoy beare Armes rayse Tumults offer violence or hurt and to discharge subiects of their Allegiance and also that it is a doctrine approoued by many learned Catholikes and who haue examined all the arguments on both sides and consequently that it is truely probable that the Pope hath no authoritie to depriue Princes or to dispose of their Temporals it is as cleere and manifest that any man whether hee bee the Kings subiect or no what opinion soeuer he followeth in speculation concerning the Popes authoritie to depriue Princes yet hee may as certainly acknowledge and sweare that the Pope hath no authoritie to depose the King that is to practize his deposition or any other of those things mentioned in this Branch as it is cleere and manifest that hee may certainly acknowledge and sweare that the Pope hath no authoritie to commit open iniustice and that in a doubtfull vncertaine and disputable case the condition of the possessour is to bee preferred 2. Neither doe temporall Princes or other priuate men that haue any thing in their possessiō greatly regard what learned men who by the subtiltie of their wits can easily finde out some probable colour of a broken and pretended title may speculatiuely dispute in Schooles concerning their titles so that in practice notwithstanding such disputations and speculations they bee secured from
of the Law and declaration of the Law-maker only temporall Allegiance is demanded for that by the end and reason of the Law the ambiguitie of the words saith Suarez Suarez lib. 6. de Legibus cap. 1. nu 19. is chiefly to be determined and it is morally a sure meanes to finde out the will and intention of the Law-maker especially that reason which is expressed in the Law for then the reason of the Law is in some sort a part thereof because it is contayned and supposed therein 8. Fourthly it is to bee obserued that albeit English Catholikes might at the first before they examined particularly the end reason matter and contents of this new Oath iustly suspect it to be vnlawfull and to contayne in it more then temporall Allegiance and that His Maiestie and the Parliament vnder pretence of demanding that temporall Allegiance which by the Law of God and Nature is due to all temporall Princes did intend to haue couertly at leastwise abiured some spirituall obedience which by the institution of Christ is due to spirituall Pastours both for that it is a new vncouth and vnwonted Oath of Allegiance and expresly denyeth the Popes authoritie to depose wherewith other Christian Princes in the ordinarie Oaths of Allegiance which they demand of their subiects doe not in plaine and expresse termes intermeddle and also for that it was deuised by those who are opposite to the Catholike Romane Religion yet this bare suspicion can bee no sufficient cause ground or motiue to condemne it as likewise no man vpon a bare suspicion is to be condemned but only to haue it examined and if after due examination it be found faulty to reiect it if otherwise to approue it But doubtlesse whosoeuer will sincerely and with a pure desire to find out the truth and to yeeld without all partialitie as wel to Kings as to Popes that which is their due examine the occasion end matter and contents of this new and vnwonted Oath will quickly finde that it is condemned by some vpon a bare and naked suspicion and without due examination by others vpon a blind and inconsiderate zeale to the See Apostolike not regarding in like manner the dutie which by the Law of God they owe to their temporall Prince and by all that thinke it vnlawfull without sufficient ground 9. For the occasion of this vnwonted Oath was that vnwonted barbarous Powder-plot of certaine Catholikes who pretended to iustifie their neuer heard of Barbarisme vnder the colour of Religion and the Popes authoritie to dispose of the Crownes and liues of temporall Princes in order to spirituall good and so no maruell that to preuent the like vnwonted crueltie was deuised this vnwonted remedie And albeit the inuenters of this Oath are opposite to the Catholike Romane Religion and are fully perswaded that the Pope by the Law of God hath no authoritie ouer this Kingdome so much as in spiritualls yet there meaning was not as you haue seene aboue to meddle in this Oath with that spirituall authoritie which is granted him by all Catholikes but only to demand a profession of that temporall Allegiance which all the Subiects of this Land of what Religion soeuer they be doe owe to their temporall Prince and not to the Pope 10. And therefore which is carefully to bee obserued this Oath doth not meddle positiuely with the Popes authoritie for that it doth not belong to temporall Princes to declare what authoritie the Pope hath but it medleth positiuely with the Kings temporall Soueraigntie and negatiuely with the Popes authoritie and it doth not declare ◅ what authoritie the Pope hath but only what authoritie hee hath not And what man I pray you can bee so blinde as not to see that whosoeuer expresly affirmeth King Iames to bee his true and rightfull King and Soueraigne in temporalls and to haue ouer him and his other Subiects all Kingly Power Authority and Iurisdiction doth consequently and vertually deny the same of the Pope Wherefore if wee well examine the matter and contents of this vnwonted Oath wee shall find that His Maiestie and the State doe herein deny no other authoritie of the Pope expresly and by name then which not only in the Protestation of those thirteene Catholike Priests but also in all other vsuall Oaths of Allegiance which absolute Princes are wont to demand of their Subiects is vertually couertly and in effect implyed For whosoeuer sincerely and from his heart acknowlegeth any Prince to be his only rightfull King and Soueraigne in temporals which all absolute Princes in their vsuall Oaths of Allegiance demand of their Subjects hee must vertually acknowledge that the Pope is not his Soueraigne Lord in temporals and consequently that he hath no authoritie ouer his Prince or him in temporals and therefore neither to depose his Prince or to dispose of His temporall Dominions for that these are tēporal things for what end cause crime or pretext soeuer either spirituall or temporall they be done 11. Fiftly to know vpon what assured grounds the Popes authoritie to depose Princes or to attempt and practise their deposition is by Catholikes denyed in this Oath it is to be obserued that as Leonardus Lessius a famous Iesuite noteth very well Lessius in his Singleton part 2. nu 38. a power which is not altogether certaine but probable cannot be a sufficient ground or title whereby immediately any man may bee punished or depriued of that right dominion or any other thing which he actually possesseth but such a power or title must bee most certaine and without all doubt or controuersie Wherefore neither can the Pope nor any other Prince without manifest iniustice inuade the Kingdome of another Prince make warre against him or seeke to depose or dispossesse him vpon a probable vncertaine or controuersed title For certes saith the Authour of the Prelate and the Prince and who is knowne to bee a famous Doctor and Professor of Diuinity though masked vnder the name of I. E. Cap. 11. pag. 235. as it is iniustice to put one out of his land or house who hath probable right and and withall possession because poti◅r est conditio possidentis better is the condition of him that is in possession So were it open iniustice in the Pope to depriue a King of his Crowne and Kingdome who hath probable right and withall possession And this also is the receiued doctrine of all Diuines and Lawyers Victoria in Relect de ture belli nu 29. seq Vasquez 1. 2. disp 64. cap. 3. Gregorius de Valentia 2. 2. and Pope Adrian with many others cited by Valentia and grounded in the light of naturall reason and declared by the approued rules of the Law that no man can bee iustly inuaded or be put out of his possession vpon an vncertaine or controuersed title because In causa dubia siue incerta potior est conditio possidentis In a doubtfull or disputable cause the condition of the
God and Nature due to him from his Subiects so long as he remayneth their Prince and therfore he cannot absolue discharge or release them from the Obligation of this Oath or any part thereof or which is all one he cannot giue them leaue not to beare faith and true allegiance to his Maiestie and consequently not to defend him to the vttermost of their power against all Treasons and trayterous conspiracies which shall be made against his Royall person Crowne and dignitie and not to doe their best endeauor to disclose and make them knowne vnto his Maiestie seeing that to performe all these things Subiects are bound by the law of God and Nature wherein no temporall or spirituall authoritie can dispence And therefore the Authour of the Protestants Apologie for the Roman Church trac 3. Sec. 5. doth very well affirme that all Catholikes are by all Lawes Diuine and Humane indissolubly obliged in the highest degree of all earthly Allegiance to his Maiestie that now is as to their true vndoubted lawfull Soueraigne liege Lord and King CHAP. VI. The Sixt Branch of the Oath and an Explication of the same WHich Oath I acknowledge by good and full authoritie to bee lawfully ministred vnto mee and doe renounce all pardons and dispensations to the contrarie 1. This Branch contayneth in it no difficultie at all if wee consider what hath beene said before to wit that in this Oath is onely demanded a sincere profession of true temporall allegiance and that no authoritie or obedience which is due to the Pope is denied therein And that to treat of the Popes authoritie not affirmatiuely what power he hath but affirmatiuely what authoritie in temporalls the Kings Maiestie hath ouer his Kingdome and Subiects and consequently what authoritie in temporalls the Pope hath not ouer the said kingdome and subiects and also that to exact of Subiects an Oath not onely of their temporall allegiance in generall but also of such allegiance in particular which his Maiestie and the State shall for prudent reasons motiues thinke to be necessarie for the preseruation of the Kingdome from future Treasons Inuasions or Perturbations so that it bee contayned within the bounds of true temporall allegiance doth no way exceede the limits of temporall authoritie 2. First therefore by those words good and full authoritie is not vnderstood any authoritie of the Kings Maiestie in Ecclesiasticall causes but onely in temporall matters as is the ministring of an Oath of true temporall allegiance For although his Maiesty be perswaded that hee hath full and supreme authoritie not onely in temporall but also in Ecclesiastical affaires for externall gouernement and that the Pope hath not ouer him or his Subiects within this Realme any authoritie or iurisdiction nor power to excommunicate his Maiestie yet his meaning is not to meddle at all in this Oath eyther with his owne or with the Popes Ecclesiasticall Supremacie but onely with his owne temporall Soueraigntie and consequently with the Popes authoritie not to depose him or to dispose of his Kingdome or to authorize any forraigne Prince to inuade or annoy him or to absolue his Subiects from their obedience c. And therefore as I obserued before in the third obseruation wee must distinguish betwixt his Maiesties vnderstanding or perswasion and his meaning or intention for his meaning was not to exact in this Oath of His Subiects all which hee is perswaded he might lawfully exact of them but only to demand of them in this Oath a profession of that temporall Allegiance which all Subiects are bound by the Law of God to giue to their lawfull Soueraigne as it is manifest by the declaration both of His Maiestie and also of the Parliament and therefore Hee was carefull not to meddle with the Popes authority to excommunicate Him 3. Secondly it is certaine that albeit Christian Princes haue not authoritie to define and determine what position is hereticall or to punish Heretikes with spirituall punishments for these are meere spirituall things yet they haue authoritie to command their subiects to abiure such positions as are alreadie defined or knowne to bee manifestly false and repugnant to the holy Scriptures for such and to punish with temporall punishments the obstinate maintayners of the same especially as the mayntayning of such positions is hurtfull to the publike temporall peace whereof the King hath charge and who therefore may also by the materiall Sword repell the wrongs and iniuries offered to the temporall Kingdome or Common-wealth by Clergie-men and also the abuses of the spirituall Sword when they tend to the hurt of the ciuill Common-wealth as Franciscus Victoria Ioannes Parisiensis and Couerruuias doe well obserue Victoria Relect. 1. de potest Eccles sec 7. §. octaua propositio Parisiensis de potest Reg. Pap. cap. 11. ad 37. Couerruu cap. 35. Practic question Wherefore a King saith Dominicus Bannes Bannes 2. 2. q. 11. ar q. 1. doth punish Heretikes as most seditious Enemies to the peace of His Kingdome which cannot be preserued without vnitie of Religion And Marriage saith Dominicus Sotus Sotus in 4. dist 29. q. 1. ar 4. being a Sacrament in such sort that it is also a ciuill contract it nothing letteth but that as in the former respect it belongeth to the Ecclesiasticall Court so in regard of the later it is subiect also in some sort to the Ciuill Not that Princes can alter those things which are of the substance of Matrimonie but that they may punish them who contract they shall offend against the publike peace for against those crimes whose iudgement doth belong to the Ecclesiasticall Court they may also ordayne punishments as they disturbe the peace of the Common-wealth Which doctrine of Sotus may in the very like manner bee applyed to Heresie which being a spirirituall offence in such sort that also it disturbeth the temporall peace of the Common-wealth it nothing letteth but that as in the former respect it belongeth to the Ecclesiasticall Court so in regard of the later it is subiect also in some sort to the Ciuill not that Princes can determine and define what is Heresie but that they may punish Heretikes when by defending hereticall positions they shall offend against the publike good For against those crimes whose iudgement doth belong to the Ecclesiasticall Court they may also ordayne punishments as they disturbe the peace of the Common-wealth And therefore Christian Princes haue good and full power to compell their Subiects to abiure impious damnable and hereticall positions for such when it is necessarie to the preseruation of the publike temporall peace and to discouer how their Subiects stand affectted in point of their Loyaltie and due Obedience 4. Thirdly it is euident that Clergie-men being truely subiect to temporall Princes in regard of their naturall birth and of their liuing in Ciuill Societie with others and consequently bound according to the common doctrine of Diuines to obserue their iust Lawes not only virationis
Successours and him and them will defend to the vttermost of my power against all Conspiracies and Attempts whatsoeuer which shall be made against His or their Persons their Crown and Dignitie by reason or colour of any such Sentence or Declaration or otherwise and will doe my best endeuour to disclose and make knowne vnto his Maiestie his Heires and Successours all Treasons and Trayterous Conspiracies which I shall know or heare of to bee against him or any of them 4. And I doe further sweare That I doe from my heart abhorre detest and abiure as impious and hereticall this damnable doctrine and position That Princes which bee excommunicated or depriued by the Pope may be deposed or murthered by their Subiects or any other whatsoeuer 5. And I doe beleeue and in conscience am resolued that neither the Pope nor any person whatsoeuer hath power to absolue mee of this Oath or any part thereof 6. Which I acknowledge by good and full authoritie to bee lawfully ministred vnto me and doe renounce all Pardons and Dispensations to the contrarie 7. And all these things I doe plainly and sincerely acknowledge and sweare according to these expresse words by mee spoken and according to the plaine and common sense and vnderstanding of the same words without any Equiuocation or mentall euasion or secret reseruation whatsoeuer 8. And I doe make this recognition and acknowledgement heartily willingly and truly vpon the true Faith of a Christian So helpe me God A Copie of the Protestation which thirteene Reuerend Priests made of their Allegiance to Queene Elizabeth by a publike Instrument the last day of Ianuary 1602. in the last yeere of her Maiesties Reigne WHereas it hath pleased our Dread Soueraigne Ladie to take some notice of the Faith and Loyaltie of vs Her naturall borne Subiects Secular Priests as it appeareth in the late Proclamation and of her Princelike clemencie hath giuen a sufficient earnest of some mercifull fauour towards vs being all subiect by the Lawes of the Realme to death by our returne into the Countrie after our taking the Order of Priesthood since the first yeere of Her Maiesties Reigne and only demandeth of vs a true profession of our Allegiance therby to bee assured of our fidelitie to Her Maiesties Person Crowne Estate and Dignitie Wee whose names are vnderwritten in most humble wise prostrate at Her Maiesties feet doe acknowledge our selues infinitely bound vnto Her Maiestie therefore and are most willing to giue such assurance and satisfaction in this point as any Catholike Priests can or ought to giue vnto their Soueraignes First therefore wee acknowledge and confesse the Queenes Maiestie to haue as full Authority Power and Soueraigntie ouer vs and ouer all the Subiects of the Realme as any Her Highnesse Predecessours euer had And further we protest that we are most willing and readie to obey Her in all Cases and Respects as farre forth as cuer Christian Priests within this Realme or in any other Christian Countrie were bound by the Law of God and Christian Religion to obey their Temporall Princes as to pay Tribute and all other Regall Duties vnto Her Highnesse and to obey Her Lawes and Magistrates in all Ciuill Causes to pray vnto God for Her prosperous and peaceable Reigne in this life according to his blessed will and that shee may hereafter attaine euerlasting blisse in the Life to come And this our acknowledgement wee thinke to bee so grounded vpon the Word of GOD as that no Authoritie no Cause or pretence of Cause can or ought vpon any occasion be a sufficient Warrant more vnto vs then to any Protestant to disobey Her Maiestie in any Ciuill or Temporall matter Secondly whereas for these many yeeres past diuers Conspiracies against her Maiesties Person and Estate and sundrie forcible attempts for inuading and conquering her Dominions haue bin made vnder we knew not what pretences and intendments of restoring Catholike Religion by the sword a course most strange in the World and vndertaken peculiarly and solely against Her Maiestie and Her Kingdomes among other Princes departed from the Religion and Obedience of the See Apostolike no lesse then she by reason of which violent Enterprizes her Maiestie otherwise of singular clemencie toward Her Subiects hath beene greatly mooued to ordayne and execute seuerer Lawes against Catholikes which by reason of their vnion with the See Apostolike in Faith and Religion were easily suppâ—sed to fauour these Conspiracies and Inuasions then perhaps had euer bin enacted or thought vpon if such Hostilitie and Warres had neuer beene vndertaken We to assure Her Maiestie of our faithfull Loyaltie also in this particular cause doe sincerely protest and by this our publike fact make knowne to all the Christian World That in these cases of Conspiracies of practizing Her Maiesties death of Inuasions and of whatsoeuer forcible Attempts which hereafter may be made by any forraigne Prelate Prince or Potentate whosoeuer either ioyntly or seuerally for the disturbance or subuersion of Her Maiesties Person Estate Realmes or Dominions vnder colour shew pretence or intendment of restoring the Catholike Romane Religion in England or Ireland We will defend Her Maiesties Person Estate Realmes and Dominions from all such forcible and violent assâ—ults and iniuries And moreouer Wee will not only our selues detect and reueale any Conspiracies or Plots which we shall vnderstand to bee vndertaken by any Prelate Prince or Potentate against Her Maiesties Person or Dominions for any cause whatsoeuer as is before expressed and likewise to the vttermost of our power resist them but also will earnely perswade as much as in vs lyeth all Catholikes to doe the same Thirdly if vpon any Excommunication denounced or to bee denounced against Her Maiestie or vpon any such Conspiracies Inuasions or forcible Attempts to be made as are before expressed the Pope should also excommunicate euery one borne within Her Maiesties Dominions that would forsake the aforesaid defence of Her Maiestie and Her Realmes and take part with such Conspirators or Inuaders in these and all other like Cases wee in these and all such like Cases doe thinke our selues and all the Lay-Catholikes borne within Her Maiesties Dominions not bound in conscience to obey this or any such like Censure but will defend our Prince and Countrie accounting it our duties so to doe and that notwithstanding any Authoritie or any Excommunication whatsoeuer either denounced or to bee denounced as is aforesaid to yeild vnto Her Maiestie all obedience in Temporall Causes And because nothing is more certaine then that whilst we endeuor to assure Her Maiestie of our dutifull Affection and Allegiance by this our Christian and sincere Protestation there will not want who will condemne and misconstrue our lawfull Fact yea and by many finister suggestions and calumnies discredit our doings with the Christian World but chiefly with the Popes Holinesse to the greatest preiudice and harme of our good names and persons that may be vnlesse maturely wee preuent their endeuours herein
being put out of that which they really and bona fide doe possesse And doubtlesse most miserable were the state of all men that possesse any thing of worth and much more of Princes if vpon a title which some learned mâ—n may in speculation approoue it were lawfull to inuade their possessions before a lawfull Iudge and who is certainly knowne so to bee hath decided and determined the title or controuersie To preuent which mischiefe all Natitions being guided herein by the light of naturall reason haue agreed in this manifest principle that it is open iniustice to put any man out of his possession vpon any title which is not most certaine and free from all controuersie vntill a lawfull and vndoubted Iudge hath decided the matter I said a lawfull and vndoubted Iudge for if it be doubtfull vncertaine and questionable whether he be a lawfull and competent Iudge to determine that cause his decision cannot be sufficient to end the controuersie For which cause the Pope is not to bee accounted a lawfull and competent Iudge to decide this question concerning his owne pretended authoritie to depriue Princes for that it is a controuersie among learned Diuines and approued by very many as Pope Adrian the Cardinaell of Cambray the Cardinall Cusanus the Cardinall Panormitan the Cardinall of Florence Master to Panormitan Iohn Patriarch of Antioch Abulensis Ioannes Parisiensis Ioannes Gerson Iohn Maior Almaine and almost all the Vniuersitie of Paris cited by Widdrington Widdring in the discouerie of D. Schulkeuius slanders §. 7. that the Pope is not a competent Iudge to decide or define infallibly any doctrinall point and much lesse in his owne cause without a true and vndoubted generall Councell and therfore although he should hereafter as yet he hath not attempt to define and decide this question his decision could not end the controuersie nor giue sufficient warrant to any man to practize the deposition of Princes vpon so doubtfull vncertaine and questionable power or title 3. Neuerthelesse it behooueth temporall Princes to be very carefull that their titles to the Dominions which they lawfuly possesse be not so much as speculatiuely or only for Disputation sake disputed pro and contra by learned men least that some ignorant or turbulent spirits which either doe not know or of set purpose to colour their practices vnder a pretence of a probable title will not take notice of the manifest difference betwixt speculation and practice may take occasion thereby to disturbe the publike peace and to molest annoy or to offer any violence or hurt to their Royall Persons States or Gouernment For which cause the Parliament of Paris hath with great wisdome and reason oftentimes by publike Edicts ordained See beneath in the end of this Treatise some of these Decrees that the doctrine of deposing their Kings should not bee so much as taught and maintayned to bee probable or problematike that occasion be not giuen to seditious spirits who know not or will not take notice of the difference betwixt speculation and practice to attempt vnder pretence of a probable title any violence against the Crowns or sacred Persons of their Kings And the reason is manifest for that the temporall Common-wealth hath good and full authoritie to forbid the teaching and publishing of any doctrine which is not necessarie whereby probable danger to the Crownes and liues of temporall Princes and perturbations in the Common-wealth may arise 4. First therefore by those words of this Branch nor by any other means with any other it is euident that the Parliament which representeth the whole bodie of the Kingdome or Common-wealth did not intend to meddle with the authoritie which the whole Kingdome or Common-wealth may according to the opinion of some Doctors pretend to haue in some cases ouer their soueraign Prince as Lessius and others whom the Authors of the Prelate and the Prince doth seeme to follow doe idly obiect And although the meaning of those words were to deny that the whole Kingdome or Common-wealth hath no authoritie to depose their King yet considering that it is also a probable doctrine approued by many learned Catholike Diuines and Lawyers cited by Widdrington Widdr. in Apolog nu 111. and in his Answere to Fitz-herb part 3. cap. 11. nu 36. 37. that the Common-wealth hath no such authority it is also lawful for any man of what opinion soeuer hee bee in speculation concerning this authoritie of the CoÌ„monweath to acknowledge and sweare that the Common-wealth hath no more authoritie to depose the King that is to practize his deposition then she hath to commit open iniustice But the true meaning of His Maiestie and the Parliament is as the words themselues doe plainely signifie only to deny the Popes authoritie to depose c. to wit that the Pope neither of himselfe that is neither as a sole and totall cause nor by any authoritie c. that is neither as an Instrument or Minister of the Church or See of Rome nor by any other meanes with any other that is nor as a principall or true and proper partiall cause or Agent hath any authoritie to depose the King c. 5. Neither by those wordes or to authorize any forraigne Prince to inuade or annoy Him or His Countries did His Maiestie and the Parliamenâ— intend to denie the authoritie which temporall Princes may haue in somâ— cases to make warre against their neighbour Princes and consequently against His Maiestie if he should giue them iust cause of warre yet euer obseruing that no probable power cause or title can bee a sufficient ground to punish any Prince or to inuade His Countries but as the expresse words do plainly shew only to deny the Popes authoritie to authorize any forraigne Prince to inuade or annoy Him or His Countries because all the authoritie which temporall Princes haue to make warre or to inuade the Kingdome of an other Prince for what cause crime or end so euer it bee is deriued from their temporall Soueraigntie grounded vpon the Law of Nature or Nations not from the Popes authoritie And likewise all the authority which the temporall Common-wealth may pretend to haue in some cases to rise vp in Armes against their Prince is not deriued from the Popes warrant license or authoritie but if there be any such power from the Law of Nature And therefore with great reason this Clause denyeth in the Pope all power and authoritie to authorize any forraigne Prince to inuade or annoy His Maiestie or his Countries or to giue license or leaue to any of his subiects to beare Armes rayse Tumults or to offer any violence or hurt to His Maiestis Royall Person State or GouernmeÌ„t because although they shuld haue any such authoritie leaue or licence wherewith His Maiestie and the Parliament would not in this Oath intermeddle they haue it not from the Pope but from the Law of Nations or Nature 6. Secondly in this Branch is not