became 〈◊〉 saying it was sentenc'd to the fire before it had escaped the presse And good reason Nihil enim tale à Patribus societatis didicit Good men they never taught him any such doctrine as is contained in that pestilent book de iuribus principalibus defendendis moderandis iustè Now if this be heresy or like it to preach such a Doctrine then likely it will be judg'd heresy in Princes to doe so that is to hold their crownes without acknowledgment of subordination to S. Peters chaire And if it be not heresy to doe so it is in their account as bad for so the Iesuits in their Veritas defensa against the Action of Arnald the Advocate affirme in terminis that the actions of some Kings of France against the Pope in defence of their Regalties were but examples of rebellion and spots to disgrace the purity of the French Lillies 5. Put case the Pope should chance to mistake in his sentence against a Prince for the cause of heresy yet for all this mistake he can secure any man to take away the Princes life or Kingdome His Lawyers will be his security for this point For although in this case the deposition of the Prince should be and be acknowledged to be against Gods law the Prince being neither Tyrant nor heretick yet his Holinesse commanding it takes away the unlawfulnesse of it by his dispensation So D. Marta and for this doctrine he quotes Hostiensis Felinus Cratus the Abbat the Arch bishop of Florence Ancharanus Iohannes Andreas Laurentius de Pinu and some others Indeed his Divines deny this sed contrarium 〈◊〉 observatur as it 's very well observed by the same Doctor for he brings the practise example of Pope Martin the fifth Iulius the second Celestine the third Alexander the third and Sixtus quintus all which dispensed in cases acknowledged to be expressely against Gods law 6. Lastly How if the Pope should lay a claime to all the Kingdomes of the world as belonging to S. Peters patrimony by right of spirituall preheminence I know no great security we have to the contrary For first It is known he hath claimed the Kingdome of England as feudatary to the See Apostolike Which when I considered I wondred not at that new and insolent title which Mosconius gives his Holinesse of Desensor fidei He might have added the title of Rex Catholicus Christianisstmus For D. Marta in his treatise of Iurisdiction which he dedicated to Paulus quintus hath that for an argumēt why he dedicated his Book to him because for sooth the Pope is the only Monarch of the World But of greater authority is that of Thomas Aquinas affirming the Pope to be the verticall top of all power Ecclesiasticall and Civill So that now it may be true which the Bishop of Patara told the Emperor in behalfe of Pope Sylverius Multos esse Reges sed nullum talem qualis ille qui est Papa super Ecclesiam Mundi totius For these reasons I think it is true enough that the constituting the Pope the judge of Princes in the matter of deposition is of more danger then the thing it selfe The summe is this However schisme or heresy may be pretended yet it is but during the Popes pleasure that Kings or subjects shall remain firme in their mutuall necessitude For if our Prince bee but excommunicate or declar'd heretick then to be a good subject will be accounted no better then irreligion and Anti-Catholicisme If the conclusion be too hard and intolerable then so are the Premises and yet they passe for good Catholike doctrine among themselves But if truly and ex animo they are otherwise affected they should doe well to unsay what hath been said and declare themselves by publique authority against such doctrines And say whether or no their determinations shall be de fide If they be then all those famous Catholique Doctors Thomas Aquinas Bellarmine Creswell Mariana Emanuel Sà c. are heretiques and their Canons teach heresy and Many of their Popes to be condemn'd as hereticall for practising and teaching deposition of Princes by an authority usurp't against and in prejudice of the Christian faith But if their answers be not de fide then they had as good say nothing for the danger is not at all decreased because if there be Doctors on both sides by their own assertion they may without sinne follow either but yet more safely if they follow the most received and the most authorized and whether this rule will lead them I will be judg'd by any man that hath considered the premises Briefly either this thing must remain in the same state it is and our Princes still expos'd to so extream hazards or else let his Holinesse seat himselfe in his chaire condemne these doctrines vow against their future practise limit his ordo ad spiritualia containe himselfe within the limits of causes directly and meerely Ecclesiasticall disclaime all power so much as indirect over Princes temporalls and all this with an intent to oblige all Christendome Which when I see done I shall be most ready to believe that nothing in Popery doth either directly or by a necessary consequence destroy Loyalty to our lawfull Prince but not till then having so much evidence to the contrary Thus much was occasion'd by consideration of the cause of the Disciples Quaere which was when they saw this that their L. and M. for his difference in Religion was turned forth of doores which when they saw They said Lord It was well they ask'd at all and would not too hastily act what they too suddēly had intended but it was better that they ask'd Christ it had been the best warrant they could have had could they have obtain'd but a Magister dixit But this was not likely it was too strange a Question to aske of such a Mr. A Magistre 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 crudelitatis Nothing could have come more crosse to his disposition His spirit never was addicted to blood unlesse it were to shed his owne Hee was a Prince of peace and set forth to us by all the Symboles of peace and gentlenesse as of a sheepe a lambe a hen a gentle twining vine the healing 〈◊〉 and is it likely that such a one should give his placet to the utter ruine of a company of poore Villagers for denying him a nights lodging moved thereto by the foregoing scandall of a Schisme Hee knew better what it cost to redeem aman and to save his life from destruction then to bee so hasty for his ruine And if the Fathers Confessors who were to answere the Question of the day had but reflected upon this Gospell they might have informed their penitents better then to have engaged them upon such Antichristian and Treasonable practises as to destroy an assembly of Christians as to depose or kill a King It is the proper cognisance of Mahumetanisme by fire and sword to
unjust in the condemnation of him but if they doe they thus proclaim their approbation of these Doctrines he was hanged for for that he had such was under his own hand by his own confession and of it selfe evident as is to be seen in the Arrest of the Parliament against him Lastly more pertinent to the day is the fact of Garnet who because a Iesuit could have done nothing for which he should not have found an Apologist for even for this his last act of high treason he was Apologiz'd for by Bellarmine Gretser Eudamon Johannes Thus farre we have found out persons fit enough to match any malice Boanerges all and more then a pareil for Iames and Iohn but I shall anon discover the disease to be more Epidemicall and the pest of a more Catholike infection and yet if we summe up our accounts we shall already finde the doctrine to be too Catholike For we have already met with Emanuel Sá a Portugall Mariana Ribadineira Spaniards Bonarscius a bas Almain Gretser a German Eudaemon Iohannes a false Greek Guignard Richeome and the Apologists for Chastell Frenchmen Bellarmine and Baronius Italians Garnet and Sanders English The Doctrine you see they would fain make Catholike now if it prove to be but Apostolique too then we have found out an exact parallel for Iames and Iohn great Disciples and Apostles and whether or no the See Apostolique may not sometime be of a fiery and consuming spirit we have so strange examples even in our own home that wee need seek no farther for resolution of the Quare In the Bull of excommunication put forth by Pius quintus against Q. Elizabeth of blessed memory there is more then a naked incouragement as much as comes to a Volumus Iubemus ut adversus Elizabetham Angliae Reginam subditi arma capessant Bone Iesu in que nos reservasti tempora Here is a command to turne rebels a necessity of being Traitors Quid co infelicius cui iam esse malum necesse est The businesse is put something farther home by Catena and Gabutius who writ the life of Pius quintus were resident at Rome one of them an advocate in the Roman Court their Bookes both printed at Rome con licenza and con privilegio And now hear their testimonies of the whole businesse between the Queen and his Holinesse Pius quintus published a Bull against Q. Elizabeth declared her a Heretique and deprived her of her Kingdome absolv'd her subiects from their oath of Allegeance excommunicated her and gave power to any one to rebell against her c. This was but the first step he therefore thus proceeds He procures a gentleman of Florence to move her subiects to a rebellion against her for her destruction Farther yet he thought this would be such a reall benefit to Christendome to have her destroied that the Pope was ready to aid in person to spend the whole revenew of the See Apostolique all the Chalices and crosses of the Church and even his very cloths to promote so pious a businesse as was the destruction of Q. Elizabeth The witnesses of truth usually agree in one The same story is told by Antonius Gabutius and some more circumstances added First he names the end of the Popes designe it was to take her life away in case she would not turn Roman Catholique To atchieve this because no Legat could come into England nor any publique messenger from the See Apostolique he imployed a Florentine Merchant to 〈◊〉 her subiects to a rebellion for her perdition Nothing but Sollevamento Rebellion Perdition and destruction to the Queen could be thought upon by his Holinesse More yet for when the Duke of Alva had feiz'd upon the English Merchants goods which were at Antwerp the Pope took the occasion instigated the King of Spain to aid the pious attempts of those who conspir'd against the Queen they are the words of Gabatius This rebellion was intended to be under the conduct of the Duke of Norfolk Viro Catholico a Roman Catholique Gabutius notes it for fear some Heretik might be suspected of the designe and so the Catholiques loofe the glory of the action However Pius quintus intended to use the utmost and most extreme remedies to cure her heresy all means to increase and strengthen the rebellion I durst not have thought so much of his Halinesse if his own had not said it but if this be not worse then the fiery spirit which our blessed Saviour reproved in Iames and Iohn I know not what is I have nothing to doe to specify the spirit of Paulus quintus in the Venetian cause this only Baronius propounded the example of Gregory the seaventh to him of which how farre short he came the world is witnesse Our own businesse calls to mind the Bulls of Pope Clemont the eight in which the Catholiques in England were commanded to see that however the right of succession did intitle any man to the Crown of England yet if he were not a Catholique they should have none of him but with all their power they should hinder his coming in This Bull Bellarmine doth extreamly magnify and indeed it was for his purpose for it was if not author yet the main encouragor of Catesby to the Powder Treason For when Garnet would willingly have known the Popes minde in the businesse Catesby eased him of the trouble of sending to Rome since the Popes mind was cleere I doubt not said Catesby at all of the Popes mind but that he who commanded our endeavours to hinder his coming in is willing enough we should throw him out It was but a reasonable collection I shall not need to instance in the effects which this Bull produc'd the Treason of Watson Cleark two English Seminaries are sufficiently known it was as a Praeludium or warning peice to the great Fougade the discharge of the Powder Treason Briefly the case was so that after the Publication of the Bull of Pius quintus these Catholiques in England durst not be good Subjects till F. Parsons and Campian got a dispensation that they might for a while doe it and rebus sic stantibus with a safe conscience professe a generall obedience in causes Temporall and after the Bull of Clement a great many of them were not good subjects and if the rest had not taken to themselves the Priviledge which the Pope sometimes gave to the Arch-bishop of Ravenna either to doe as the Pope bid them or to pretend a reason why they would not we may say as Creswell in defence of Cardinall Allen certainly we might have had more bloudy tragedies in England if the moderation of some more discreetly temperd had not been interposed However it is no thank to his Holinesse his spirit blew high enough But I will open this secret no farther if I may have but leave to
aim'd at but if they obeyed not the Proscriptiō having no just cause to the contrary such as were expressed in the Act then it should be adjudged their errand was not right therefore not their Religion but their disobedience Treasonable This was the highest 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the severity of this state against them now first I shall briefly shew that this proscription which was the highest penalty was for just cause as the case then stood and deserved on their part 2. It was but reasonable in case they obeyed not the proscription their stay should be made Treason 1. Because the Priests did generally preach the Popes power either directly over temporalls or else in order to spiritualls of which the Pope being judge it would come to the same issue and this was dangerous to the peace of the Kingdome and intrenched too much upon the Regalty In particular the case of bringing from the See of Rome and publishing of Bulls was by the Lords of the Parliament in the sixteenth year of Richard the second judg'd to be cleerely in 〈◊〉 of the Kings Crown and of his Regalty as it is well known and hath been of a long time known and therefore they protested together and every one 〈◊〉 by himselfe that they would be with the same Crown and Regalty inthese cases specially and in all other cases which shall be attempted against the same Crown and Regalty in all points with all their power I hope then if the State in the time of Queen Elizabeth having farre greater reason then ever shall judge that these Bulles the publishing of them the Preaching of their validity and reconciling by vertue of them her Subjects to the See of Rome be derogatory to her Crown and Regalty I see no reason She should be frighted from her just defence with the bugbear of pretended Religion for if it was not against Religion then why is it now I confesse there is a reason for it to wit because now the Popes power is an Article of Faith as I shall shew anon but then it was not with them any more then now it is with us but whether this will convince any man of reason I leave it to himselfe to consider But one thing is observeable in that Act of Parliament of Richard the second I meane this clause as it is well 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 been of a long time knowne The Popes incroachments upon the State of England had been an old sore and by its eld almost habituate but yet it grieved them neverthelesse nor was the lesse a fever for being hecticall but so it is that I am confident upon very good grounds it may be made as apparent as the noon Sunne for these 600 years and upwards that the Bishops of Rome have exercised so extream and continuall Tyranny and exactions in this Kingdome that our condition was under him worse then the State of the Athenians under their thirty Tyrants or then our neighbors are now under their Belgick Tributes So many greivances of the people expilations of the Church abuses to the State intrenchments upon the Royalties of the Crown were continued that it was a great blessing of Almighty God our Kingdome was delivered from them upon so easy termes which Grosthead Bishop of Lincolne thought would never be done but in Ore gladii cruentandi and now to have all these mischiefes returne with more strength upon us by the attempts of these Priests had been the highest point of indiscretion and sleepinesse I said with more strength because what anciently at the highest was thought but a priviledge of the Church began now to be an Article of Faith and therefore if admitted would have bound stronger and without all possibility of redresse And now if after all this any man should doubt of the justice of these Lawes against the Priests obtruding upon the State the Popes power I only referre him to the Parliament of Paris where let him hold his Plea against those great Sages of the Law for their just censures upon Florentinus Iacobus Thomas Blanzius and Iohn Tanquerell who were all condemned to a solemne honorary penance and satisfaction to the State and not without extreme difficulty escaped death for the same cause But this is hot all I adde Secondly the Pope had his Agent in England to stirre up the Subjects to rebell against the Queene as I proved before by the testimonies of Catena and 〈◊〉 It is not then imaginable that he should so poorely intend his own designes to imploy one on purpose and he but a Merchant and that the Priests who were the men if any most likely to doe the businesse should be un-imployed I speak not of the argument from matter of fact for it is apparent that they were imployed as I shewed but now but it is plain also that they must have been imployed if we had had no other argument but a presumption of the Popes ordinary discretion Things then remaining in this condition what security could the Queen or State have without the absence of those men who must be the instruments of their mischiefe Thirdly there was great reason those men might be banished who might from their own principles plead immunity from all Lawes and subordination to the Prince But that so these Priests might I only bring two witnesses leading men of their own Side Thus Bellarmine The Pope hath exempted all Clerks from subiection to Princes The same is taught by Emanuel Sà in his Aphorismes 〈◊〉 Clericus I must not dissemble that this Aphorisme however it passed the Presse at first yet in the Edition of Paris it was left out The cause is known to every man For that it was meerely to serve their ends is apparent for their French freedome was there taken from them they durst not parler tout so neere the Parliament but the Aphorisme is to this day retain'd in the Editions of 〈◊〉 and Colein If this be their Doctrine as it is plain it is taught by these leading Authors I mean Sà and Bellarmine I know no reason but it may be very just and most convenient to deny those men the Country from whose Lawes they plead exemption Secondly it was but reasonable in case they obeyed not the proscriptiō their disobedience should be made Capitall For if they did not obey then either they sinned against their conscience in disobeying their lawfull Prince and so are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and inexcusable from the Lawes penalty which may be extended at the pleasure of the Lawgiver where there is no positive injustice in the disproportion or if they did not sinne against their conscience then of necessity must they think her to be no lawfull Prince or not their lawfull Prince nor they her Subjects so ipso 〈◊〉 are guilty of high Treason their execution was for Treason not Religion and so the Principall is evicted which I shall beg leave to expresse in S. Cyprians language Non
that by vertue of a constitution of 〈◊〉 the ninth by which every man is freed from all duty homage allegeance or subordination whatsoever due to a Heretick whether due by a naturall civill or politicall right aliquo pacto aut quâcunque firmitate vallatum Et sic nota saith the glosse quod Papa potest absolvere Laicum de iuramento fidelitatis I end those things with the attestation of Bellarmine Est res certa 〈◊〉 at a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 maximum iustis de causis temporalibus indicare atque ipsos Temporales Principes aliquando deponere And again that we may be sure to know of what nature this doctrine is he repeats it Sic igitur de potestate in Temporalibus quod ea sit in Papa non Opinio sed Certitudo apud Catholices est And now let any man say if this be not a Catholike Doctrine and a likely antecedent to have Treason to be its consequent But I fixe not here onely this it is plain that this proposition is no friend to Loyalty but that which followes is absolutely inconsistent with it in case our Prince be of a different perswafion in matters of Religion For 2 It is not only lawfull to depose Princes that are hereticall but it is necessary and the Catholiks are bound to doe it sub mortali I know not whether it be so generally I am sure it is as confidently taught as the former and by as great Doctors 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 erraret si admitteret aliquem Regem qui vellet impunè fovere quamlibet Sectam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So Bellarmine And again Non licet Christianis tolerare Regem haereticum si conetur pertrahere subditos ad suam haeresim But F. Creswell puts the businesse home to purpose Certè non tantum licet sed summâ etiam iuris Divini necessitate ac praecepto imò conscientiae vinculo arctissimo extremo animarum suarum periculo ac discrimine Christianis omnibus hoc ipsum incumbit si praestare rem possint Vnder perill of their soules they must not suffer an hereticall Prince to reigne over them Possunt debent 〈◊〉 arcere ex hominum Christianorum dominatu ne alios inficiat c. 3 He that saith Subjects may and are bound to depose their Princes and to drive them from all rule over Christians if they be able meanes something more For what if the Prince resist still he is bound to depose him if he be able How if the Prince make a 〈◊〉 The Catholike subject must doe his duty neverthelesse and warre too if he be able He that 〈◊〉 he may wage a warre with his Prince I doubt not but thinks he may kill him and if the fortune of the warre lights so upon him the subject cannot be blamed for doing of his duty It is plain that killing a Prince is a certain consequent of deposing him unlesse the Prince be bound in conscience to think himselfe a Heretick when the Pope declares him so and be likewise bound not to resist and besides all this will performe these his obligations and as certainly think himselfe hereticall and as really give over his Kingdome quietly as he is bound For in case any of these should faile there can be but very sleder assurance of his life I would be loth to obtrude upon men the odious consequences of their opinions or to make any thing worse which is capable of a fairer construction but I crave pardon in this particular the life of Princes is sacred and is not to be violated so much as in thought or by the most remote consequence of a publike doctrine But here indeed it is so immediate and naturall a consequent of the former that it must not be dissembled But what shall we think if even this blasphemy be taught in terminis See this too In the yeare 1407. when the Duke of Orleans had been slaine by Iohn of Burgundy and the fact notorious beyond a possibility of conccalement he thought it his best way to imploy his Chaplaine to justify the act pretending that Orleans was a Tyrant This stood him in small stead for by the procurement of Gerson it was decreed in the Councell of Constance that Tyranny was no sufficient cause for a man to kill a Prince But yet I finde that even this decree will not stand Princes in much stead First because the decree runnes ut nemo privatâ Authoritate c. but if the Pope commands it then it is Iudicium publicum and so they are never the more secure for all this Secondly because 〈◊〉 tels us that this Decree is nothing 〈◊〉 id decretum Concilij 〈◊〉 Romano Pontifici Martino quinto probatum non invenio non Eugenio 〈◊〉 Successoribus quorum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ecclesiasticorum sanctitas stat Thirdly because though the Councell had forbidden killing of Tyrannical Princes even by publique authority though this Decree had beene confirmed by the Pope which yet it was not yet Princes are never the more secure if they be convict of Heresy and therefore let them but adde Heresy to their Tyranny and this Councell Non obstante they may be killed by any man for so it is determin'd in an Apology made for Chastel Licitum esse privatis singulis Reges Principes Hareseos Tyrannidis condemnatos occidere non obstante Decreto Concilij Constantiensis And the Author of the Book de iustâ abdicatione Henrici 3. affirmes it not only lawfull but meritorious How much lesse then this is that of Bellarmine Si obsint fini Spirituali Spiritualis potestas potest debet coercere Temporalem omni ratione ac viâ If omniratione then this of killing him in case of necessity or greater convenience must not be excluded But to confesse the businesse openly and freely It is knowne that either the Consent of the people or the Sentence of the Pope or Consent of learned men is with them held to be a publicum 〈◊〉 and sufficient to sentence a Prince and convict him of Heresy or Tyranny That opinion which makes the people Iudge is very rare amongst them but almost generally exploded that opinion which makes the learned to be their Iudge is I thinke proper to Mariana or to a few more with him but that the sentence of the Pope is a sufficient conviction of him and a compleate 〈◊〉 act is the most Catholique opinion on that Side as I shall shew anon Now whether the Pope or learned men or the people be to passe this sentence upon the Prince it is plaine that it is an Vniversall Doctrine amongst them that after this sentence whosesoever it be it is then without Question lawfull to kill him and the most that ever they say is that it is indeed not lawfull to kill a King not lawfull for a private man of his owne head without the publike sentence of his Iudge but when this Iudge whom they affirme to be the Pope hath passed