last place hauing your eyes thus prepared all these things being considered you may cleerly see thorough that other sly artifice of those self same interested man wherby they would persuade at least to so much filial renerence to the great Father of Christendom as to acquaint him first wich your present condition send him a Copy of the publik instrument you intend to fix vpon with the reasons also inducing you therunto pray his approbation therof in order to your signing it and then expect a while his paternal aduice and benediction before you make any further progress You may at the very first hearing of this proposal plainly discouer say you their design to be no other than by such indiscreet means of cunning delayes vnder pretence of filial reuerence forsooth to hinder you for euer from professing at least to any purpose * Ibid. pag. 22. i. e. in a sufficient manner or by any sufficient Formulary that loyal obedience you owe to his Maiesty and to the lawes of your Countrey in all affairs of meer temporal concern This you can not but iudge to be their drift vnless per aduenture you think them to be realy so frantik as to persuade themselues that from Iulius Cesar or his successor Octauian after the one or the other had by arms and slaughter tyrannicaly seized the Commonwealth any one could expect a free and voluntary restitution of the people to their ancient liberty or which is it I mean and is the more unlikely of the two That from Clement the tenth now sitting in the Chair at Rome or from his next or from any other successor now after six hundred years of continual vsurpation in matters of highest nature and now also after the liues of about fourscore Popes one succeeding an other since Hildebrand or Gregory 7. his papacy and since the deposition of the Emperor Henry 4. by him in the year of Christ 1077. any one should expect by a paper petition or paper Adress to obtain the restoring or manumitting of the Christian world Kingdoms states and Churches to their natiue Rights and freedom or that indeed it could be other than ridiculous folly and madness to expect this J haue quoted your own words Mr. Walsh to the end all indifferent persons may see I do not insure you in the account I giue of your religion and doctrin which I intend to confute reducing is to your twelue fundamental Tenets Jn this first Animaduersion I will treate of two See Friar Walsh his twelue Tenets or articles in the 6. Animaduersion 1. That the Oath of Supremacy hath bin rashly and obstinatly declined opposed and traduced by Roman Catholiks because it attributes to the King only ciuil authority and power and denies to the Pope no spiritual or Ecclesiastical saue only that which the two general Councells of Ephesus and Calcedon as also that of Afrik of 217 Bishops whereof S. Augustin was one denied to the Bishops of Rome 2. That the Popes and Bishops of the Roman Catholik Church for these last 600. years haue taught and practised enormous principles which godly men haue continualy cried down as wicked impious heretical and tyrannical and that the vsual Oath which all Catholik Bishops haue taken at their consecration for many hundred years is not consistent with the loyalty all Christians owe to their temporal Soueraigns ANIMADVERSION I. Whether the Oath of supremacy attributes only ciuil authority to the King and denies no spiritual or Ecclesiastical power or authority to the Pope THE best way to decide this controuersy is to set down the words of the Oath which are I. A. B. do utterly testify and declare in my conscience that the King's Majesty is the only supream Gouernor of this Realm and of all other his Maiesties Dominions and Countries as well in all spiritual or Ecclesiastical things or causes as Temporal and that no forain Prince Person Prelate state or Potentate hath or ought to haue any iurisdiction power superiority preheminence or authority Ecclesiastical or spiritual within this Realm and therfore I do utterly renounce and forsake all forain iurisdictions powers superiorities and authorities c. so help me God and the contents of this Book Mr. Walsh giue me leaue to ask you whether you euer read this Oath and if you did whether you are sure you vnderstand English or whether better than English-men do for the common opinion is that euery nation vnderstands its own language better than strangers Mr. Walsh all Englishmen vnderstand by the word spiritual a quite different thing from temporal as you may see in Thomas Thomasius his Dictionary If this be so I feare you will hardly persuade Englishmen that they do not vnderstand english at least as well as you or any other Irish man Now to the point Doth not the Oath in cleer terms auerre that the King is the only supreme Gouernor of England and of all other his Dominions as well in all Spiritual or Ecclesiastical things or causes as temporal Is temporal and spiritual the same or do these words signify the same Jf not how can you proue or pretend that no spiritual authority or power is giuen the King or denyed the Pope by this Oath of Supremacy I pray obserue if the King be the only supream Gouernor of his Dominions in all spiritual and Ecclesiastical causes or things hath he not all the spiritual power and authority in his own Dominions And if the Pope be a sorrain Prince Person or Prelate and no forrain Prince Person or Prelate hath or ought to haue any Ecclesiastical or spiritual iurisdiction power Superiority preheminence or authority within his Majesties Kingdomes how can the Pope haue any spiritual power or authority in the same J doubt very much whether your marginal note directing to I know not what admonition after the Iniunctions of * Pag. 16. of his Dedicatory to the Catholiks Q. Elizabeth and vpon the 37. article of the Church of England will bring you or the oath off so cleerly as you fancy By that Admonition after the iniunctions of Q. Elizabeth is pretended the Church of England did not attribute to the Queen power to exercise any spiritual function as that of consecrating Priests and Bishops or ministring the Sacraments Suppose this interpretation which came I must tell you som what too late were not known to be a pittifull shift to stop the mouthes of those who laught at the weakness of the Bishops in allowing and at the vanity of the Queen in assuming the spiritual supremacy of the Church suppose I say the Queen could not ordain Priests and Bishops because herself was neither Priest nor Bishop doth that hinder from hauing in herself and giuing to others spiritual iurifdiction to ordain and minister the Sacraments what think you of lay Princes and persons that are Bishops elect Haue they not spiritual iurisdiction and can they not giue it to others Though Q. Elizabeth was incapable of such spiritual iurisdiction because
if he had iudged this cause of Caecilianus without his Maiesties commission it should be demonstrated that Saint Augustin maintains the quite contrary and reproaches the Donatists that euen against their own holding the Emperor not to be a competent Iudge of Ecclesiastical differences they made vse of him in this controuersy and at the same time found fault with Caecilianus and Felix a An fortè sicut quidam dixit quod quidem cum nobis diceretur displicuit sed tamen praetermittendum non est Ait enim quidam non debuit Episcopus Proconsulari iudicio purgarâ— c. for defending themselues before a Secular Iudge A Certaine man saith Saint Augustin meaning one of the Donatists themselues said a thing which you are not willing to heare but must be told you this man said A Bishop ought not be cleerd by the iudgment of a Proconsul This the Donatists obiected against Bishop Felix because Aelianus by Constantins command had examined the whole matter again and declared Felix innocent What doth Saint Augustin answer to this obiection As if forsooth Felix or Caecilianus had sued or desired such a iudgment quasi verò ipse sibi hoc comparauerit Jt was at the instance of the Donatists not of the Catholiks a lay man iudg'd the matter and supposing the Emperor took vpon him the arbitration or iudgment of it whether with consent of the parties or only with permission of Felix and Caecilian who could not help themselues any other way supposing I say the Emperor took vpon himself the examination of the matter he was bound in conscience to haue a great care to find out the truth that innocency might not be oppressed and the innocent Bishops had no reason to refuse or hinder the relief and remedy they found by that examination And therfore S. Augustin answers the Donatists obiection Non debuit Episcopus Proconsulari iudicio purgari Quasi vero ipse sibi hoc comperauerit ac non Imperator ita quaeri iusserit ad cuius curam de qua rationem Deo redditurus esset res illa maximè pertinebat Arbitrum enim Iudicem causae traditionis Schismatis illi eum fecerant qui ad eum etiam pretes miserant ad quem posteà prouocarunt tamen iuditio eorum acquiescere noluerunt Out of these words you see Saint Augustin sayes it belong'd to Constantins care most of all to examin or inquire into that matter because the Donatists had desired him to be Arbiter or iudge of it and Caecilianus and Felix did not or rather durst not except against him as appears by the Saints words excusing these two for not excepting against that lay Iudge which the Donatists impos'd vpon them and taxing these for recurring to him Wherfore saith Saint Augustin Ep. 162. a Itaque si culpandus est quem Iudâ—x â—errenus abâ—oâ—uit cum ipse â—bi hoc non proposcisset quâ—nto magiâ— culpandi sunt qui terrenum Râ—gem suae causae iudicem esse voluerunâ— Si autem criminis non est prouocare ad Impâ—ratorem non est criminis audiri ab Imperatore Ergâ— nec ab illo câ—â— causam delegauerit imperator D Aug ibid. Quendam euam suspenâ—um eculeo in causa Felicis Episcopi amicus ille voâ—uit criminati c. quoted by yourself Mr. Walsh if he ought to be blamed who is deâ—lared by a temporal Iudge when he desired none such how much more are they to be blamed that would needs haue a temporal King to be Iudge of their cause But if it be no crime to appeal to the Emperor sure it is no crime to be heard by the Emperor Therfore neither is it any to be heard by him to whom the Emperor did delegat the cause This is a good argument ad hominem against the Donatists They also obiected against the Bishop Felix that one was tortured in the examination of his cause to wrest the truth from him Saint Augustin excuses Felix from being any way blameable in that buisness Nunquid poterat Felix saith he contradicere ne tanta diligentia vel seueritate quaereretur cum eius causam inueniendam cognitor agitaret Quid enim erat aliud nolle sic quaeri quam de crimine confiteri How could Felix hinder the diligence or seuerity of him that inquired into that cause would he not haue confessed himself guilty if he had obstructed that examination Heer you see Mr. Walsh how S. Augustin blames the Donatist Bishops for repairing to a lay Iudge but excuses the Catholik Bishop Caecilianus and Felix for defending themselues before a lay Iudge whom they did not desire to be Iudge of that Ecclesiastical cause There is great difference between the Plaintiff and the Defendant Many things are lawfully don in a man's defence when he is violently or vnreasonably assaulted which are not lawfull when don otherwise The same practise of the Donatist Bishops recurring a Friar Walsh imitats the Donatists example in his persecuting Catholiks Bishops to a secular Iudge of their own accord and taxing the Catholik Bishops with a crime for answering and defending themselues when they are recommanded to appeare before the same Iudge doth Saint Augustin obiect in his 48. Epistle also which you quote as fauoring the quite contrary Nay Saint Augustin himself say you pag. 350. openly sayes and auers that neither the accusing or appealing Bishops themselues were to be reprehended on this account that they drew or brought the affairs or causes of or accusations against other Bishops to a secular Iudicatory For thus he writes Ep. 48. Si autem sicut falsò arbitramini verè criminosum Caecilianum iudicandum terrents potestatibus tradiderant quid obijâ—itis quod vestrorum praesumptio primitus fecit he speaks to the later Donatists quod eos non arguerimus sayes he quia fecerunt si non animo inuido noxio sed emendandi corrigendi voluntate fecissent Therfore Saint Augustin sayes that where and when the dispute concerns the correction and amendment of Ecclesiasticks to demand the iudgment or sentence and to appeal to the power of earthly Princes is not reprehensible if the accusers proceed not in such or indeed any other application out of enuy or malice Thus you Is it the part of a Christian writer Mr. Walsh to impose vpon his Readers such falshoods as you do and then vpon that great Doctor of the Church Saint Augustin This great Doctor writ that Epistle 48. to proue it was lawfull for Churchmen to implore the protection and help of secular Princes and the execution of their lawes against heretiks and schismatiks but not their Iudicature as is euident by the text And because Rogatus and other Donatists reprehended the Saint for changing his former opinion into this which he now defended he retorts their arguments and puts them in mind of the ancient Donatists practises against Caecilian shewing how inconsequently and absurdly they argued against the punishment of conuicted heretical
applauded works which som of them haue printed to assert the truth of Faith Perhaps they do not think him worth their confuting Though I am not particularly concern'd yet seing his book hath so much barbarous railing and heretical nonsense that it is a nuisance to ciuility as well as to Christianity I will shake his fundamental principles to the end the world may not be further abused by them nor by the stories of a virulent pen that vents nothing but heresies against the Church rebellion against Soueraigns enuy against his superiors malice against his equals calumnies against his aduersaries and commendations of himself THE FRIAR DISCIPLIN'D OR ANIMADVERSIONS ON FRIAR PETER WALSH HIS NEW REMONSTRANT RELIGION MR. WALSH I DECLARE to you and all the world that my exceptions against your Religion and Romonstrance are not against the supreme temporal power of Soueraign Princes which I do belieue and shall assert as much as any Catholik Diuine My exceptions are against not only a Spiritual supremacy you attribute to Kings and deny to the Bishop of Rome but also against many new vnheard of errors and in first place against that rash and heretical Tenet of yours viz. * Friar Walsh in his Dedicatory to the Catholiks of the three Kingdoms pag. 13. That all the Roman Catholik Bishops of the world are either Traytors to their Kings or periur'd to the Pope because they take before their consecration an Oath which hath bin taken in the Church many hundred years by all Bishops Item That for the space of these 600. years past the Popes and writers of the Roman Catholik Church for the most part a Idem Ibid. haue maintain'd enormous principles and practises which haue bin cryed down continually by most zealous and godly Prelats and Doctors as not only false wicked impious lxretical vnchristian but as absolutely tyrannical and destructiue of all Gouernment lawes property peace c. 2. That since the owning of such intollerable maxims and wicked actions or the not disowning them are not amongst the marks of a Roman Catholik in general but only b Idem pag. 14. of a certain sect or faction whom som calls Papalins others Puritan Papists and others Popish Recusants the Protestants could not but obserue how since the Oath of supremacy though fram'd only by Roman Catholik Bishops Abots and Doctors of the english nation and defended by the principal of the same occasioned the first separation or schism amongst the subiects of England and Ireland the far greater part of such as continued in the Communion of the Roman Church did seem also to adhere to the foresaid dangerous doctrins and practises i. e. to all the pretences and actings of the Roman Court for as much as they generaly refus'd to disown them either by that Oath of supremacy or by other That it is vnreasonable to think and incredible to belieue c Pag. 14. n. 10. that so many iudicious Princes Parliaments and conuocations who had themselues gon so far and ventured so much as they did only because they would not suffer themselues or the Protestant people gouern'd by them to be imposed on against their own reason in matters of Diuine belief Rites c. should at the same time be so concern'd to impose on others in the like as to enact laws of so many grieuous punishments yea of death itself in som cases c. That we haue no cause to wonder at the Protestants a Pap. 16. n. 10. iealousy of us when they see all the three seueral Tests hitherto made use of for trying the iudgment or affection of Roman Catholiks in these Kingdoms in relation to the Papal pretences of one side and the royal rights of the other I mean the Oath of supremacy first the Oath of Allegiance next and last of all that which I call the Loyal Formulary or the Irish Remonstrance of the year 1661. euen all three one after another to haue bin with so much rashness and willfullness and so much vehemency and obstinacy declined opposed traduced and reiected amongst them albeit no other authority or power not euen by the Oath of supremacy itself be attributed to the King saue only ciuil or that of the sword nor any spiritual or Ecclesiastical power be denied therin to the Pope saue only that which the general Councel of Ephesus vnder Theodosius the yonger in the case of the Cyprian Biâ—hops and the next Oecumenical Synod of Calcedon vnder the good Emperor Martianus in the case of Anatolius Patriarch of Constantinople and the 217. Bishops of Afrik whereof Saint Augustin was one both in their Canons and letters too in the case of Apiarius denyed vnto the Roman Bishops of their time See the same Friar pag. 24. 25. 1. part of the first Treatise saying that the sense wher in the sons of the Church of England take the Oath of supremacy is very Catholikâ— and that they allow a politik not spiritual headship to the King and that only in temporal causes or matters not in spiritual not euen in those which are by extrinsecal denomination only called Ecclesiastical or spiritual If this be so Bishop Fisher Sir Thomas Moor and all the learned english men who sufferd for refusing the Oath were great fools and were ignorant both in the english language and in Diuinity But if this be so Mr. Walsh why is it not declared by publik authority can you be so stupid and barbarous as to think that the King and Parliament of England would be so vnmercifull as to permit so much noble and honest blood to be spilt upon a mistake so easily rectified if they or the Church of England vnderstand the Oath of supremacy as you say they do Jn the 19 page of your Dedicatory you set down the Oath which all Bishops and Archbishops take before their Consecration or Pallium and though it be very ancient and accepted of by all not only Prelats but Princes yet you say pag. 20. they who take it Must be periur'd to the Pope if they proue faithfull to the King Whether so or no to God Iudge you I am sure if they were not Traytors in taking the foresaid Oath to his Holiness they were at least Renouncers of their Allegiance to his Majesty and of their obedience also to the Catholik Church And because you could not but foresee that Catholiks and rational men would not bee their own Guides in a matter of so great importance as the determining the rights of Popes and Princes nor so rash as to iudge the whole Catholik Church or all the Bishops therof were Traytors Tyrants Cheats Vsurpers and Heretiks you endeauor to diuert the Catholik Layty from their duty of consulting the sea Apostolik in this main point of Religion by endeauoring to raise in the same Layty a diffidence of all who aduise so pious and prudent an address you telling the Catholiks of the three Kingdoms pag. 22. n. 18. of your Dedicatory That in the
4. Fitz Simons in Britonomachia D. Champney D Harding D. Scapleton Treatise of Catholik Faith and Heresy Polit. Cathechism Nullity of the Clergy of England in answer to D Bramhalls vind Religion and Gouernment Erassus Sentor Iumor This and much more you might haue seen in the Catholik writers obiections Answers and replyes to Mason Btamhall Heylin and other Protestant writers And if you haue seen them you ought to be ashamed of being more obstinat than the Protestant Bishops themselues who by the amendment of their old Form confess it was defectiue and that a new Form was necessary otherwise they would neuer haue alter'd the old in so material a point after an hundred years dispute But seing you are satisfied with the protestant Episcopacy and belieue the oath of Supremacy to be so lawfull as to vpraid Roman Catholiks with rashness and obstinacy for not taking it I see not how you could scruple accepting of a protestant Bishoprick in your own Countrey and therfore I can hardly beliue any such thing was euer offerd you But if euer it will be offerd you it s twenty to one you will be desired first to cleer yourself and wash off that stain of innocent English bloud wherwith you are asperst and reputed irregular But to return to Constantin and Cyprian I can assure you that you are very much deceiued or at least you design to deceiue others in the interpretation you giue of their words It s generaly belieued that S. Augustin vnderstood Saint Cyprians works and words better than you do Mr. Walsh Now Saint Augustin after setting down lib. 3. de Baptisino cap. 3. those words of Saint Cyprian which you quote for the equality of Bishops as if none of them ought to be iudged by an other but only by God c. Sayes that S. Cyprian meant this of Controuersies wherin the Church hath not declared or defined the truth as yet in debate Opinor saith he in his quaestionibus quae nondum eliquatissima perspectione discussae sunt c. Jn such questions t' is very certain that not only Bishops in Prouincial and Gene-Councils but that euery priuat Doctor in the Schools may speake freely and not be forc't to any side or sentence and this is all that S. Cyprian meant if S. Augustin be not very much deceiued S. Cyprian was also in the right in telling his African Bishops that neither himself nor any of them was Episcopus Episcoporum Bishop of Bishops That is a title giuen only to the Bishop of Rome and hath bin giuen by a Primat of Afrik and Saint Cyprians successor Stephen in his letter to Pope Damasus in a letter I say writ to him in the name of three African Councils Beatissimo Domino Apostolico culmine sublimato S. Patri Patrum Damaso Papae c. Father of Fathers and Bishop of Bishops a Tertullian in lib. de Pudicrtia calls the Bishop of Rome iscopus Episcoporâ—m Bishop of Bishops signify the same thing in those Circumstances and himself declares it saying in the same Epistle summo omnium Praesulum Praesuli That the Bishop of Rome had authority and iurisdiction ouer other Bishops independently of any general Councils or their Canons and consequently had this authority from God immediatly is confess'd by S. Cyprian who liued before any of the four first general Councils and yet desired Stephen Pope lib. 3. Ep. 13. to depose the Bishop of Arles and put an other in his see Now to end with your Idea of the Church It is obserued in the liues of such Saints as are Fundators or Reformers of Regular Orders that God did reueale to them or giue them an Idea of their Congregations Was it God or the Deuil gaue you the Idea of your reformation yourself is much pleased with it but the Catholiks to whom you communicate and dedicate it haue no reason to be pleased with it For it is a wild wicked fancy of independency an vnreasonable liberty without subordination or discipline A company of dissolute fellows without feare of correction A commonwealth of Libertins without any coerciue power to keep them in awe or in order How can you imagin Mr. Walsh that Christ being infinit wisdom would institute a Commonwealth of frail men or a Church and not inuest the Gouernors therof who are the Clergy with any coerciue power to punish and correct such frailties of their sheep or subiects as he foresaw would be committed and corrupt others This is a pretty Idea of your Church but not of Christs An Idea your Remonstrants did practise whilst you were in power and gouernd them but too scandalous to continue ANIMADVERSION 12. Of the Emperors succeeding Constantin the Great TO proceed therfore from Constantin to more instances of matter of Fact in other Emperors and Kings who succeeded him saith Friar Walsh pag. 345. seq Constantius Constantins son offers himself first For this Constantius would haue and accordingly had the criminal cause of Stephanus the Patriatch or Bishop of Antioch as being accused de vi publica lege Cornelia de Sicarijs of murther to be tryed in a secular Indicatory and before himself in the Pallace and not by any means in the Church c. Neither is it material to obiect heer that Constantius was an Arrian for the Arian Bishops stood as much for the immunities of the Church and Church men and so did the Arrian Princes aduised by them as any Catholiks when the crime obiected was not diuersity in Religion To proue that Catholik Emperors iudged the causes and persons of Catholik Bishops in their lay Courts you quote the case of Stephen the Arrian Bishop of Antioch punish'd by Constantius the Arrian Emperor And yet Theodoret whom you cite for the murther as you say committed by Stephen though Saint Athanasius speaks not of murther tells you according to your own translation of his words that Stephen pleaded against the Emperor Clerks ought not be whipt or wounded At cum Stephanus petulanti ore illis contradiceret affirmaretque plagas non esse infligendas Clericis I will tell you the story as S. Athanasius a Ep. ad Solit. recounts it and you may apply it to yourself and other heretiks whose custom it is and has alwayes bin to discredit and defame their Catholik Confuters when they can not answer their arguments This Stephen you speake of hauing bin with other Arrian Bishops condemn'd and deposed as an heretik b Stephen the Arian Bishop in the Catholik Council of Sardica persecuted most barbarously those who had condemn'd him and the rest he layd spies and Catchpols for them in all sea ports and inland Towns when they returned from that Synod iust as you did in Dublin and other Towns for the poor old Archbishop Burk of Tuam Father Farcell Tully Moor add all who were against your Remonstrance Amongst others he persecuted the two Bishops Vincent and Euphrates who had bin sent by the holy Synod