by the Word of God he may the Supream Government in all causes Ecclesiastical and Civil In those Causes you are not Subject to him for doth not the Pope claim the Supremacy in all Ecclesiastical and even in Temporal Causes at least in ordine ad Spiritualia Let the Rhemists complain that the Protestants extol only the Secular Power We acknowledge the King to be Supream Governour in all Causes and over all Persons within his Majesties Dominions for this is all that we attribute to the Secular Power and 't is the Glory of our Church to have taught and suffered for this Doctrine But for the Loyalty of the Rhemish Divines I refer the Reader to some of their Annotations as they are cited in the Margent (M) The Rhemish Testament was see forth by that Traiterous Seminary of English Papists and printed at Rhemes An. 1582. See the former part of their Annotations on ver 4. of this 13th Chapter to the Romans where they complain That now all is given to the Secular Power and nothing to the Spiritual which expresly is ordained by Christ and the Holy Ghost The exemption of the Clergy is asserted Annot. on S. Matth. 17.26 The Popes Infallibility Annot. on S. Luke 22.31 And in the Margent they say Popes may err personally not judicially or definitively The Popes Supremacy Annot. on S. John 21.17 And on 1 Pet. 2.12 They say Although all Power be of God and Kings Rule by him yet this is no otherwise than by his ordinary Concurrence and Providence He that desires to see a true Character of the English Seminaries may consult a Treatise penn'd by the direction of one of the greatest Statesmen and wisest men of his Age under this Title The Execution of Justice in England c. Reprinted An. 1675. My Lords 4th Testimony was taken from the Censure of the Doctors of the Famous Faculty of Sorbon against a Book of Sanctarellus particularly against the 30th and 31th Chapters In those two Chapters these Propositions are contained That the Pope can punish Kings and Princes with Temporal Penalties and depose and deprive them of their Kingdoms for the Crime of Haeresis and free their Subjects from their Obedience and that is hath been always the Custom in the Church and for other Causes also as for Faults if it be Expedient if the Princes be Negligent for the insufficiency and unprofitableness of their Persons Likewise That the Pope hath Right and Power over Spirituals and all Temporals also and that both the Powers Temporal and Spiritual are in him by Divine Right That it was to be believed that Power was granted to the Church and its Chief Pastors to punish with Temporal Penalties Princes the Transgressours of Divine and Humane Laws especially if the Crime be Haeresie Likewise that the Apostles were subject to Secular Princes de facto non de jure by Fact not by Right Moreover that as soon as the Pope is installed all Princes begin to be subject to him Lastly That he expounded the Words of Christ Whatsoever ye shall bind upon Earth c. to be understood not only of the Spiritual but of the Temporal Power c. The Faculty after mature deliberation disapproved and condemned the Doctrine contained in these Propositions and other like Expressions in the same Chapters as new false erroneous and contrary to the Word of God Given in the Sorbon Apr. 4. 1626. In Answer to all which I have many things to say but that I may not exceed my intended brevity I shall reduce them to the following Heads 1. That this Book of Sanctarellus was revised and approved by persons of greater Authority in the Roman Church than the Divines of Sorbon (N) Alegambe Bibl. script soc Jes in the life of Sanctarellus gives us this Character of him Vir moribus apprimé religiosis modestissima mansuetudine The Title of the Book is A. Sanctarelli soc Jes Tract de Haeres c. Ed. Romae 1625. In the License of the Master of the Sacred-Palace are these words In eo omnia religioni consona atque utilia adinvenerim In another of the Licenses In quo nihil reperi quod Sanctae Fidei aut bonis moribus adversetur It was printed at Rome permissu Superiorum approved by three Divines of the Society licensed by the General of the Order by the Master of the Sacred Palace and several other Divines By which we see what kind of Divinity was then in request at Rome But it may be the Divines of the Roman Church have one Conscience at Rome and another at Paris as was once said of the Jesuites 2. Since the breaking out of the Popish Plot in England when so many of that Religion were in danger of their Lives the Pope thought fit to condemn 65 Propositions as I shewed before but did not speak one word against the Power of deposing Princes though it was asserted in the same Divines and Casuists with the 65 Propositions And whether the Judgment of his Holiness or of the Divines of Sorbon be of greater value with Roman Catholiques let all men judge 3. Why do the Church and Court of Rome suffer an hundred as bad Books as this of Sanctarellus in which the same or worse Propositions are maintained to pass not only without Censure but with publique Anthority and Approbation 4. There are no Propositions in the places censured by the Sorbonists which he might not justifie by the Principles of the Bishops of Rome the most correct Editions of the Canon Law and in the Sentence of Excommunication and Deprivation of Frederick the Emperor with the Approbation of a General Council the Pope expounds the words of Christ as Sancturellus since did not only of the Spiritual but of the Temporal Power also (O) In the General Council of Lyons Concil tom 28. ut supra Innocent the 4th with the consent of the Council denounces Sentence of Deprivation against Frederick the Emperor Nobisque in B. Petri Apostoli persona sit dictum quodcunque ligaveris c. S. Marth 16. Also M. Paris ad An. 1245. p. 672. 5. What hath Sanctarellus said more than the Doctors of the Famous Faculty of Sorbon did both before and since the Publishing of his Book I know that Ancient College of Sorbon did for many years keep up a great reputation and was esteemed the Bulwark of Regal Authority but ever since the rise of the Jesuites many of their Determinations have been carried by Interest and Faction An. 1589 a little before the Murder of Henry the third of France the People of that Kingdom proposed these two queries to the Divines of Sorbon 1. Whether the People of France may not be discharged and set free from their Oaths of Allegiance made to Henry the Third 2. Whether they may not with a safe Conscience Arm and Vnite themselves collect and raise Money for the Defence and Preservation of the Roman Catholiques in that Realm against the wicked
and yet after he had been some weeks at Constance the poor Man is contrary to his safe Conduct cast into Prison This being done in the Emperours absence he comes to the Council argues the case with them upon which they pass that In famous Decree contained in the 19th Session from which it is plain that in the case of Heresie no Prince is bound to keep Faith with any persons whatsoever And this Act of the Council so fully satisfied the Emperours Conscience that he looked on himself as discharged from his obligation and not only concurred in the Sentence against the Prisoner but gave order for his Execution J. of Prague was trepann'd by a safe Conduct granted by that Council and being unacquainted with their Arts and Treachery ventures to Conftance where understanding the Jugglings of his Adversaries he thought to shift for himself by flight but being taken was burnt to death Again The Council of Constance Excommunicates and deprives of all Secular honour and dignity all that should presume to hinder Sigismund from meeting with the King of Arragon whether they be Kings Dukes Princes c. as all men know which have been conversant in the Acts of that Council But I come to the Decree produced by his Lordship a Decree which some Roman Catholicks of these Kingdoms know how to make their advantage of when others of greater Authority and Eminency in the Roman Church that dare speak their minds freely acquaint us with the true Catholick meaning of it Tell them of the Council of Constance It meddles not saith one (D) Suartz def fid Cath. l. 6. c. 4. p. 417. with Heretical Princes Excommunicated and Deposed by the Pope or by the Commonwealth and States of the Kingdom A Lawful King ruling in a Tyrannical manner may be punished only by publick Authority saith a Second (E) Greg. de Valentia Tom. 3. disp 5. qu. 8. punct 3. In his resolution of this Question utrùm liceat privato cuilibet civi occidere Tyrannum that is by the Commonwealth as himself expounds it This Decree extends not to Tyrants which conspire against the Publick good or against the Roman Catholick Religion saith a Third (F) Verone Apol. par 2. c. 13. A Commonwealth that is oppressed by a Prince ruling Tyrannically may and ought to have recourse to a Superiour Prince as the Pope of Emperour for the punishment of him but if this remedy cannot be had without danger the Commonwealth may by her own Power pass Judgment on such a Prince and if he be incorrigible either depose him or put him to death saith a Fourth (G) Dom. Bannes Scholast Comment Tom. 4. p. 174. Ed. 1614. qu. 64. Act. 3. Another wrote a Book in the time of the French League (H) I mean Bouchier the French Jesuite in that Treasonable Book which I quoted before in the compiling whereof as he tells us in the Preface he was assisted by many Lawyers and Divines In this Book he asserts the lawfulness of putting a King to death after he is condemned by Publick Authority Lastly our Country-man Parsons justifies the Doctrine of Bouchier and because Mr. Morton is charged with misrepresenting his sense let us take Parson's Account of Bouchier's meaning (I) Parsons in his quiet and sober reckoning c. p. 318 319 321. He holdeth That a Private man may not kill a Tyrant which is not first judged and declared to be a Publick Enemy by the Commonwealth and he proveth the same by the Decree of the Council of Constance But Bouchier grants saith Mr. Morton That when the Commonwealth hath condemned and declared any Tyrant for a publick Enemy he may be slain by a private Man Whereunto I Answer That then he is no Private man for that he doth it by the publick Authority of the Commonwealth as doth the Executioner that cutteth off a Noble-mans Head by Order and Authority of the Publick Magistrate These are not the Opinions of private Doctors their Books are Licensed according to the Order of the Roman Church and approved by Divines of great Learning and Authority they prove the Orthodoxy of their Doctrine from this very Decree of the Council of Constance which is now alledged as an Argument of Roman Catholick Loyalty And are not Kings and Princes wonderfully beholden to this Council They must be put to death with a little more solemnity than other Mortals and fall by the Sentence of a Papal Consistory or of an High Court of Justice 'T is not lawful for a common Parricide to Stab or Pistol the Lord 's Anointed of his own head No but his Holiness may hire Souldiers against him with Mony or with Indulgences He may invade his Country with his own Armies or with the Forces of Catholick Princes he may stir up a Rebellion within his Dominions or Authorize his own standing Army of Jesuites Monks and Friars to kill him with the approved Catholick Weapons with Pistol or Poyson Lastly the Common-wealth by its own or the Popes Authority may try and pass sentence upon him These things considered I cannot but conclude that it was a poor Security which the Irish Remonstrants offered to his Majesty since his Restauration by declaring against the killing of Kings by any private Subjects (L) We do hold it impious and against the Word of God to maintain That any private Subject may kill or murder the Anointed of God his Prince though of a different Belief and Religion from his And we abhor and derest the practise thereof as damnable and wicked Irish Remonstrance in F. Walsh his History p. 8. 3. P. 45. My Lords third Testimony was taken from the Annotations upon Rom. 13. in the English Catholick Edition of the New Testament set forth by the Colledge of Divines at Rhemes The words are these upon the Text He that resisteth c. ver 2. Whosoever resisteth or obeyeth not his lawful Superior in those Causes wherein he is subject to him resisteth Gods Appointment and sinneth deadly and is worthy to be punished both in this World by his Superiour and by God in the next life for in Temporal Government and Causes the Christians were bound in Conscience to obey even the Heathen Emperours And upon v. 4. some Protestants of our time care neither for the one the Prince nor for the other the Prelate though they extol only Secular Power when it maketh for them The Catholicks only most humbly obey both according to Gods Ordinance the one in Temporal Causes and the other in Spiritual In the Rhemish Testament it is the not some Protestants of our time c. A mighty Testimony of Roman Catholique Loyalty You are not to resist your Lawful Superior But if a Prince be lawfully deposed then he is no longer your Lawful Superior If you be Clergymen then he is none of your Soveraign and you are none of his Subjects In those Causes wherein you are Subject to him But what if a King challenge as
of England have done Have they not always been the Principal I had almost said the only Champions in this Nation to maintain the Protestant Cause Did they when under the Heaviest Persecution ever truck with the Papists for a General Toleration Or have they since the Kings Return endeavoured to procure an Indulgence or Abolition of the Laws against them Did they not boldly and honestly give the Nation Warning of the Danger of Popery before the breaking out of the Popish Plot I remember that a few Years since some Eminent Dissenters from the Church of England instead of joyning with us against the Assaults of a Common Enemy spoke very kindly of the Common and Innocent Papists as they were pleased to stile them And yet God forbid I should either charge this on the Body of Dissenters or say those very persons were Popish or Popishly affected I pray God open their eyes to see the Danger of Joyning with the Papists for a General Toleration and taking the same Course to keep out Popery which the Papists do to bring it in (R) Since the Declaration of Indulgence a little Book was drawn up by one Man but with the Consent of several Non-conformists with a Design to present it to the Parliament and published under this Title The Peaceable Design or an Account of the Non-conformists Meetings by some Ministers of London An. 1675. In this Book an Objection is put But what shall we say then to the Papists The Answer is The Papist in our Account is but one Sort of Recusants and the Consciencious and Peaceable among them must be held in the same Predicament with those among our selves that likewise refuse to come to Common Prayer But as for the Common Papist who lives Innocently in his Way he is to us as other Separatists and so comes under the like Toleration This Book was reprinted an 1680. and with some small Alterations Since the breaking out of the Plot Mr. Baxter as I find him quoted in the forementioned Book called The unreasonableness of Separation part 2 tells us Mr. H. is a Man of Latitude and tyeth himself to no Party or Opinions of other men and I so little fear the Noise of the Cenlorious that even now while the Plot doth render them most Odious say freely 1. That I would have Papists used like Men. I hope this Adrice is needless to English Protestants 2. I would have no man put to death for being a Priest 3. I would have no Writ De Excommunicato Capiendo or any Law compel them to our Communion and Sacraments 2. You cannot have forgotten That they which first joyned Popery and Prelacy quickly saw the Romish Papacy and Scottish Presbytery linked together Presbytery is Babylon Egypt a Limb of Antichrist a Tyrannycal Lordly Government a worse Bondage than that under the Bishops ' Antichristian Tyranny under the name of a Christian Presbyterian Church-Government ' An Episcopal Tyranny exchanged for a Presbyterian Slavery The Presbyterian is a Bloody Vnpeaceable and Persecuting way Presbytery is more Tyrannical than Episcopacy because one Tyrant is not so bad as many together The Divines of the Assembly are Anti-Christian Romish Bloody Baals Priests c. This was the Language of the Sectaries in the late Times 3. Have you never heard what Advantage Parsons Kellison and others have made of such Calumnies as these to the disgrace of the Reformed Religion Is not this the Way to gratifie the Romish Faction Will they not be emboldened in their Attempts against us and our Religion when the Governours of our Church and the Body of the Episcopal Clergy are represented as their Secret Friends or at least as not Hearty and Zealous in the Protestant Cause Sure it must raise their Hopes of reducing the Romish Religion to hear that they are now marching towards Popery which used to be looked upon as their most Formidable Adversaries But so much of this unreasonable and groundless Charge I will now sum up this whole Argument as briefly as I can You that dissent from the established Church of England are concerned in good earnest as I believe many of you are to maintain the Reformed Religion against the Abominations of Popery I would then offer to your consideration That you cannot reasonably hope to keep out Popery without a National settlement for how can a multitude of petty Sects and divided Interests maintain their ground against the Roman Forces that according to the Principles of the present Separation a National Settlement can hardly be expected V. G. If things Indifferent are unlawful in the Worship of God the same Objection will for ever lie against any Constitutions that should succeed in the room of ours and you must divide and subdivide to the Worlds end The same Principle which first led Men to the decrying of Kneeling at the Sacrament wearing a Surplice and the Cross in Baptism afterwards led them into Independency Quakerism c. They which cryed out against the Impositions of our Church could never set up a better or any Established Church or agree upon one way of Worship and Government among themselves Some of the Dissenters did ingenuously confess in the late Times that upon the pulling down the Establishments of our Church more Sects and Heresies sprang up within a very few years than were ever known in the Kingdom before But I will only appeal to the Testimonies of two Eminent Persons of the Presbyterian Persuasion some of whose words I have transcribed in the Margent (S) Gangraena by Th. Edwards Ed. 3. 1646. In the Epistle Dedicatory to the Lords and Commons Assembled in Parliament You have most Noble Senators done worthily against Papists Prelates and Scandalous Ministers in casting down Images Altars Crucifixes throwing out Ceremonies c. but what have you done against other kinds of growing Evils Heresie Schism Disorder against Seekers Anabaptists Antinomians Brownists Libertines and other Sects You have made a Reformation but with the Reformation have we not a Deformation and worse things come in upon us than ever we had before Were any of those Monsters heard of heretofore which are now common among us as denying the Scriptures pleading for a Toleration of all Religions and Worships yea for Blasphemy and denying there is a God You have put down the Book of Common Prayer and there are many among us have put down the Scriptures c. You have cast out the Bishops and their Officers and we have many that cast down to the ground all Ministers in all the Reformed Churches You have cast out Ceremonies in the Sacraments as the Cross kneeling at the Lords Supper and we have many cast out the Sacraments Baptism and the Lords Supper c. If Schism Heresie c. be let alone and rise proportionably for one year longer we shall need no Cavaliers nor Enemies from without to destroy us Mr. Baxter's Preface to the Cure of Church Divisions I have long stood by while Churches have been