Spirituall because they are not issues of those things which Christianity hath introduc'd de integro and are separate from the interest of the commonwealth in it's particular capacity for such things only are properly spirituall 5. The Bishops jurisdiction hath a compulsory deriv'd from Christ only viz. infliction of censures by excommunications or other minores plagae which are in order to it But yet this internall compulsory through the duty of good Princes to God and their favour to the Church is assisted by thesecular arme either superadding a temporall penalty in case of contumacy or some other way abetting the censures of the Church and it ever was so since commonwealths were Christian. So that ever since then Episcopall Iurisdiction hath a double part an externall and an internall this is deriv'd from Christ that from the King which because it is concurrent in all acts of Iurisdiction therefore it is that the King is supreme of the Iurisdiction viz. that part of it which is the externall compulsory * And for this cause we shall sometimes see the Emperour or his Prefect or any man of consular dignity sit Iudge when the Question is of Faith not that the Prefect was to Iudge of that or that the Bishops were not But in case of the pervicacy of a peevish heretick who would not submitt to the power of the Church but flew to the secular power for assistance hoping by taking sanctuary there to ingage the favour of the Prince In this case the Bishops also appealed thither not for resolution but assistance and sustentation of the Church's power * It was so in the case of Aëtius the Arian Honoratus the Prefect Constantius being Emperour For all that the Prefect did or the Emperour in this case Tripart hist. lib. 5. c. 35. was by the prevalency of his intervening authority to reconcile the disagreeing parties and to incourage the Catholikes but the precise act of Iudicature even in this case was in the Bishops for they deposed Aëtius for his heresie for all his confident appeale and Macedonius Eleusius Basilius Ortasius and Dracontius for personall delinquencyes * And all this is but to reconcile this act to the resolution and assertion of S. Ambrose who refus'd to be tryed in a cause of faith by Lay-Iudges though Delegates of the Emperour Quando audisti Clementissime Imperator S. Ambros. Epist lib. 2. Epist. 13. in causâ fidei Laicos de Episcopo judicâsse When was it ever knowne that Lay-men in a cause of Faith did judge a Bishop To be sure it was not in the case of Honoratus the Prefect for if they had appealed to him or to his Master Constantius for judgment of the Article and not for incouragement and secular assistance S. Ambrose his confident Question of Quando audisti had quickly been answered even with saying presently after the Councell of Ariminum in the case of Aëtius and Honoratus * Nay it was one of the causes why S. Ambrose deposed Palladius in the Councell of Aquileia because he refused to answer except it were before some honourable personages of the Laity And it is observeable that the Arians were the first and indeed they offer'd at it often that did desire Princes to judge matters of faith for they despayring of their cause in a Conciliary triall hoped to ingage the Emperour on their party by making him Umpire But the Catholike Bishops made humble and faire remonstrance of the distinction of powers and Iurisdictions and as they might not intrench upon the Royalty so neither betray that right which Christ concredited to them to the incroachment of an exteriour jurisdiction and power It is a good story that Suidas tells of Leontius Bishop of Tripolis in Lydia In verbo 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a man so famous and exemplary that he was call'd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the rule of the Church that when Constantius the Emperour did preside amongst the Bishops and undertooke to determine causes of meere spirituall cognisance insteed of a Placet he gave this answer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I wonder that thou being set over things of a different nature medlest with those things that only appertaine to Bishops The MILITIA and the POLITIA are thine but matters of FAITH and SPIRIT are of EPISCOPALL cognisance 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Such was the freedome of the ingenuous Leontius Answerable to which was that Christian and faire acknowledgement of Valentinian when the Arian Bishops of Bithynia the Hellespont sent Hypatianus their legate to desire him ut dignaretur ad emendationem dogmatis interesse that he would be pleas'd to mend the Article Respondens Valentinianus ait Mihi quidem quum vnus de populo sim fas non est talia perscrutari Verùm Sacerdotes apud se ipsos congregentur vbi voluerint Cumque haet respondisset Princeps in Lampsacum convenerunt Episcopi So Sozomen reports the story The Emperour would not meddle with matters of faith but hist. tripart lib. 7. c. 12. referred the deliberation and decision of them to the Bishops to whom by God's law they did appertaine Upon which intimation given the Bishops conven'd in Lampsacum And thus a double power met in the Bishops A divine right to decide the article Mihi fas non est saith the Emperour it is not lawfull for me to meddle And then a right from the Emperour to assemble for he gave them leave to call a Councell These are two distinct powers One from Christ the other from the Prince *** And now upon this occasion I have faire opportunity to insert a consideration The Bishops have power over all causes emergent in their diocesses all I meane in the sense above explicated they have power to inflict censures excommunication is the highest the rest are parts of it and in order to it Whether or no must Church-censures be used in all such causes as they take cognisance of or may not the secular power find out some externall compulsory instead of it and forbid the Church to use excommunication in certaine cases 1. To this I answer that if they be such cases in which by the law of Christ they may or such in which they must use excommunication then in these cases no power can forbid them For what power Christ hath given them no man can take away 2. As no humane power can disrobe the Church of the power of excommunication so no humane power can invest the Church with a lay Compulsory For if the Church be not capable of a jus gladij as most certainly shee is not the Church cannot receive power to put men to death or to inflict lesser paines in order to it or any thing above a salutary penance I meane in the formality of a Church-tribunall then they give the Church what shee must not cannot take I deny not but Clergy men are as capable of the power of life and death as any men but not in the formality of Clergy-men A
Baronius concerning the book of Iohannes de Roa who sometimes had been a Iesuit but then chang'd his order and became Augustinian saying it was sentenc'd to the Baron tom 6. Annal. An. Dom 447. n 8 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 Gratus the Abbat the De Iurisd cas 64. n. 14. Arch bishop of Florence Ancharanus Iohannes Andreas Laurentius de Pinu and some others Indeed his Divines deny this sed contrarium tamen observatur as it 's very well observed by the same Doctor Num. 17. 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 ro 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 a Rex Anglorū est subditus Romano Pontisici ratione directi domini◠quod in Regnum Angliae Hiberniae Romana habet Ecclesia Bellarm. Apol. adv R. Angl. c. 3. not at that new and insolent title which Mosconius gives his Holinesse of Desensor fidei He might have added the title of Rex Catholicus Christianissimus 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 b De Maiest milit Eccles. c. 1. pag. 25. c Tibi à quo emanat omnis iurisdictio unicus in orbe Pontifex Imperator Rex omnium Principum superior rerumque personarum supremus Dominus Epist. Dedicat d 2 Sent dist 44. lib. 3. de Regim Princ. and Civill So that now it may be true which the Bishop of Patara told the Emperor in behalse of Pope Sylverius Multos esse Reges sed nullum talem qualis ille qui est Papa super Ecclesiam Lib. erat in Breviar de causâ Nestorian cap. 21. 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 Sá 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 * Charity maintaind by Cath. cap. 7. 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 or do 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 M r. A Magistro mansuetudinis licentiam crudelitat is 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
from a higher fountaine For it is one of the maine excellencies in Christianity that it advances the State and well being of Monarchies and Bodies Politique Now then the Fathers of Religion the Reverend Bishops whose peculiar office it is to promote the interests of Christianity are by the nature and essentiall requisites of their office bound to promote the Honour and Dignity of Kings whom Christianity would have so much honour'd as to establish the just subordination of people to their Prince upon better principles then ever no lesse then their precise duty to God and the hopes of a blissefull immortality Here then is utile honestum and necessarium to tye Bishops in duty to Kings and a threefold Cord is not easily broken In pursuance of these obligations Episcopacy payes three returnes of tribute to Monarchy 1. The first is the Duty of their people For they being by God himselfe set over soules judges of the most secret recesses of our Consciences and the venerable Priests under them have more power to keep men in their duteous subordination to the Prince then there is in any secular power by how much more forcible the impressions of the Conscience are then all the externall violence in the world And this power they have fairely put into act for there was never any Protestant Bishop yet in Rebellion unlesse he turn'd recreant to his Order and it is the honour of the Church of England that all her Children and obedient people are full of indignation against Rebells be they of any interest or party whatsoever For here for it wethanke God and good Princes Episcopacy hath been preserv'd in faire priviledges and honour and God hath blest and honour'd Episcopacy with the conjunction of a loyall people As if because in the law of Nature the Kingdome and Priesthood were joyned in one person it were naturall and consonant to the first justice that Kings should defend the rights of the Church and the Church advance the honour of Kings And when I consider that the first Bishop that was exauctorated was a Prince too Prince and Bishop of Geneva me thinks it was an ill Omen that the cause of the Prince and the Bishop should be in Conjunction ever after 2. A second returne that Episcopacy makes to Royalty is that which is the Duty of all Christians the paying tributes and impositions And though all the Kings Leige people doe it yet the issues of their duty and liberality are mightily disproportionate if we consider their unequall Number and Revenues And if Clergy-subsidies be estimated according to the smallnesse of their revenue and paucity of persons it will not be half so short of the number and weight of Crownes from Lay Dispensation as it does farre exceed in the proportion of the Donative 3. But the assistance that the Kings of England had in their Counsells and affaires of greatest difficulty from the great ability of Bishops and other the Ministers of the Church I desire to represent in the words of K. Alvred to Walfsigeus the Bishop in an Epistle where he deplores the misery of his owne age by comparing it with the former times when the Bishops were learn'd and exercis'd in publike Counsels Faelicia tum tempora fuerunt inter omnes Angliae populos Reges Deo scriptae ejus voluntati obsecundârunt in suâ pace bellicis expeditionibus atque regimine domestico domi se semper tutati fuerint atque etiamforis nobilitatem suam dilataverint The reason was as he insinuates before Sapientes extiterunt in Anglicâ gente de spirituali gradu c. The Bishops were able by their great learning and wisdome to give assistance to the Kings affaires And they have prosper'd in it for the most glorious issues of Divine Benison upon this Kingdome were conveyed to us by Bishops hands I meane the Union of the houses of York Lancaster by the Counsells of a Iohn Speeds Hist. l. 9. c. 19. n. 23. p. 716. Bishop Morton and of England Scotland by the treaty of b Ibid. c. 20. n. 64. p. 747. Bishop Fox to which if we adde two other in Materia religionis I meane the conversion of the Kingdom from Paganisme by S t Augustine Archbishop of Canterbury and the reformation begun and promoted by Bishops I think we cannot call to mind foure blessings equall to these in any age or Kingdome in all which God was pleased by the mediation of Bishops as he useth to doe to blesse the people And this may not only be expected in reason but in good Divinity for amongst the gifts of the spirit which God hath given to his Church are reckon'd Doctors Teachers and * 1. Cor. ca 12. v. 28. helps in government To which may be added this advantage that the services of Church-men are rewardable upon the Churches stock no need to disimprove the Royall Banks to pay thanks to Bishops But Sir I grow troublesome Let this discourse have what ends it can the use J make of it is but to pretend reason for my Boldnesse and to entitle You to my Book for I am confident you will owne any thing that is but a friends friend to a cause of Loyalty I have nothing else to plead for your acceptance but the confidence of your Goodnesse and that I am a person capeable of your pardon and of a faire interpretation of my addresse to you by being SIR Your most affectionate Servant J. TAYLOR Syllabus Paragraphorum § 1. Christ did institute a government in his Church p. 7 2. This government was first committed to the Apostles by Christ p. 12 3. With a power of joyning others and appointing Successours in the Apostolate p. 13 4. This succession into the ordinary office of Apostolate is made by Bishops p. 15. For the Apostle and the Bishop are all one in name and person 5. And office p. 20. 6. Which Christ himselfe hath made distinct from Presbyters p. 22 7. Giving to Apostles a power to doe some offices perpetually necessary which to others he gave not p. 23 As of Ordination 8. And Confirmation p. 28 9. And superiority of Iurisdiction p. 35 10. So that Bishops are successors in the office of Apostleship according to the generall tenent of antiquitie p. 49 11 And particularly of S. Peter p. 54 12 And the institution of Episcopacy as well as of the Apostolate expressed to be Divine by primitive authority p. 62 13 In pursuance of the Divine institution the Apostles did ordain Bishops in severall Churches p. 68 As S t Iames at Ierusalem S. Simeon to he his successor 14 S. Timothy at Ephesus p 75 15 S. Titus at Creet p. 85 16 S. Mark at Alexandria p. 93 17 S. Linus and S. Clement at Rome p. 96 18 S. Polycarp at Smyrna and divers others p. 97 19 So that Episcopacy is at least an Apostolicall Ordinance of the same authority with many other points generally believed p. 100 20 And was an
to move them to so damned a conspiracy or indeed to any just complaint Secondly if these were not the causes as they would faine abuse the world into a perswasion that they were what was I shall tell you if you will give me leave 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to derive it from its very head and then I will leave it to you to judge whether or no my Augury failes me First I guesse that the Traitors were encouraged and primarily mov'd to this Treason from the preuailing opinion which is most generally receiv'd on that side of the lawfulnesse of deposing Princes that are Hereticall I say generally receiv'd and I shall make my words good or else the blame shall lay on themselves for deceiving me when they declare their own mindes I instance first in the Fathers of the Society a Nec ulla eis injuria fier si deponantur Lib. 5 de Rom. Pontif. cap. 7. Ex ipsa vi juris ante omnem sententiam supreâ—i Pastor is ac Iudicis contra ipsum prolatam Lugduni impres 1593. p. 106. n 157. Amphith honor p. 117. Sed heus Arnalde à cuius institutione hau sisti nullaÌ„ posse intercidere causam quae regem cogat abire regno Non religionis Bellarmine teacheth that Kings have no wrong done them if they be deprived of their Kingdomes when they prove Heretiques Creswell in his Philopater goes farther saying that if his Heresy be manifest he is deposed without any explicite judiciall sentence of the Pope the Law it selfe hath passed the sentence of deposition And therefore Bonarscius is very angry at Arnald the French Kings Advocate for affirming that Religion could be no just cause to depose a lawfull Prince If hee had beene brought up in their Schooles hee might have learnt another lesson papa Potest mutare regna uni auferre atque alteri conferre tanquam summus Bellar. de Pont. R. â— â— lib 5. Princeps spiritualis si id necessarium sit ad animarum salutem saith Bellarmine Hee gives his reason too quia alioqui possent mali Principes impunè sovere Haereticos which is a thing not to be suffered by his Holinesse Cap. â— This Doctrine is not the private opinion of these Doctors but est certa definita atque indubitata virorum clarissimorum sententia saith F. Creswell I suppose Vbi saprà p. 107. hee meanes in his owne Order and yet I must take heed what I say for Eudaemon Iohannes is very angry with S r Edward Cooke for saying it is the Doctrine of the Iesuits Doe they then deny it No surely but Non est Iesuitarum propria it is not theirs alone Apol. pro Garnet â— â— sed ut Garnett us respondit totius Ecclesiae quidem ab antiquissimis temporibus consensione recepta Doctrina nostra est and there hee reckons up seven and twenty famous Authors of the same opinion Creswell in his Philopater sayes as much if not more Hinc etiam infert Vniversa Theologorum Iuris consultorum Ecclesiasticorum Schola est certum Num. 157. de fide quemcunque Principem Christianum si à religione Catholicà manifestè deflexerit alios avocare voluerit excidere statim omni potestate ac dignitate ex ipsâ vi juris tum Humani tum Divini You see how easily they swallow this great camell Adde to this that Bellarmine himselfe prooves that the Popes temporall power or of disposing of Princes Kingdomes is a Catholique Doctrine for hee reckons Contra Barclaium in prin cip ferè up of this opinion one and twenty Italians fourteene French nine Germans seven English and Scotch nineteen Spaniards these not è faece plebis but è primoribus all very famous and very leading Authors You see it is good Divinity amongst them and I have made it good that it is a generall opinion received by all their Side if you will believe themselves and now let us see if it will passe for good Law as well as good Divinity It is not for nothing that the Church of France protests against some of their received Canons if they did not I know not what would become of their Princes Their Lillies may be to day and to morrow be cast into the oven if the Pope either call their Prince Huguenot as he did Henry the fourth or Tyrant as Henry the third or unprofitable for the Church or Kingdome as he did King Childeric whom Pope Zechary de facto did depose for the same cause and inserted his act into the body of the Law as a precedent for the future quod etiam ex authoritate Can. Alius caus 15. q. 6. frequenti agit sancta Ecclesia it is impaled in a parenthesis in the body of the Canon least deposition of Princes should be taken for newes The law is cleere for matter of fact the lawfulnesse followes Haereticis licitum est auferri quae habent and this not only from a private man but even from Princes Cl. 1. in Summa 23. q. 7. nam qui in majore dignitate est plus punitur or take it if you please in more proper termes Dominus Gl. cap. ExcoÌ„municaâ—â—â— tit de 〈◊〉 l. 5. Papa Principem saecularem deponere potest propter haeresim so another may be chosen like the Palatines and Castellans in Poland just as if the King were dead Nam per haeresim plusquam civilitèr mortuus censetur saith Simancha and that by vertue of a constitution of Gregory the ninth by which every Cap. 45. de paenit 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 Laâ—cum de iur amento fidelitatis I end those things with the attestation of Bellarmine Contra Barclaiumc ap 3. Est res certa explorata a posse Pontificem maximum iust is de causis temporalibus iudicare 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 Catholicos 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 perswasion 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
too forward in condemning where God hath declared no sentence nor prescribed any rule is to disswade from tyranny not to encourage licentiousnesse is to take away a license of judging not to give a license of dogmatizing what every one please or as may best serve his turn And for the other part of the Objection Fifthly This Discourse is so farre from giving leave to men to professe any thing though they believe the contrary that it takes order that no man shall bee put to it for I earnestly contend that another mans opinion shall be no rule to mine and that my opinion shall be no snare and prejudice to my selfe that men use one another so charitably and so gently that no errour or violence tempt men to hypocrisy this very thing being one of the Arguments I use to perswade permissions lest compulsion introduce hypocrisy and make sincerity troublesome and unsafe Sixthly If men would not call all opinions by the name of Religion and superstructures by the name of fundamentall Articles and all fancies by the glorious appellative of Faith this objection would have no pretence or footing so that it is the disease of the men not any cause that is ministred by such precepts of charity that makes them perpetually clamorous And it would be hard to say that such Physitians are incurious of their Patients and neglectfull of their health who speak against the unreasonablenesse of such Empericks that would cut off a mans head if they see but a Wart upon his cheek or a dimple upon his chin or any lines in his face to distinguish him from another man the case is altogether the same and we may as well decree a Wart to be mortall as a various opinion in re alioqui non necessariâ to be capitall and damnable For I consider that there are but few Doctrines of Christianity that were ordered to be preached to all the world to every single person and made a necessary Article of his explicite beliefe Other Doctrines which are all of them not simply necessary are either such as are not clearly revealed or such as are If they be clearely revealed and that I know so too or may but for my own fault I am not to be excused but for this I am to be left to Gods judgement unlesse my fault be externally such as to be cognoscible and punishable in humane judicatory But then if it be not so revealed but that wise men and good men differ in their opinions it is a clear case it is not inter dogmata necessaria simpliciter and then it is certain I may therefore safely disbelieve it because I may be safely ignorant of it For if I may with innocence be ignorant then to know it or believe it is not simply obligatory ignorance is absolutely inconsistent with such an obligation because it is destructive and a plaine negative to its performance and if I doe my honest endeavour to understand it and yet doe not attain it it is certain that is not obligatory to me so much as by accident for no obligation can presse the person of a man if it be impossible no man is bound to doe more then his best no man is bound to have an excellent understanding or to be infallible or to be wiser then he can for these are things that are not in his choyce and therefore not a matter of a Law nor subject to reward and punishment so that where ignorance of the Article is not a sin there disbelieving it in the right sense or believing it in the wrong is not breach of any duty essentially or accidentally necessary neither in the thing it selfe nor to the person that is he is neither bound to the Article nor to any endeavours or antecedent acts of volition and choyce and that man who may safely bee ignorant of the proposition is not tyed at all to search it out and if not at all to search it then certainly not to find it All the obligation we are capable of is not to be malicious or voluntarily criminall in any kind and then if by accident we find out a truth we are obliged to believe it and so will every wise or good man doe indeed he cannot doe otherwise But if he disbelieves an Article without malice or design or involuntarily or unknowingly it is contradiction to say it is a sinne to him who might totally have been ignorant of it for that he believes it in the wrong sense it is his ignorance and it is impossible that where hee hath heartily endeavoured to finde out a truth that this endeavour should make him guilty of a sinne which would never have been laid to his charge if he had taken no paines at all His ignorance in this case is not a fault at all possibly it might if there had been no endeavour to have cur'd it So that there is wholly a mistake in this proposition For true it is there are some propositions which if a man never heare of they will not be required of him and they who cannot read might safely be ignorant that Melchizedeck was King of Salem but he who reads it in the Scripture may not safely contradict it although before that knowledge did arrive to him he might safely have been ignorant of it But this although it be true is not pertinent to our Question For in sensu diviso this is true that which at one time a man may be ignorant of at some other time he may not disbelieve But in sensu conjuncto it is false For at what time and in what circumstance soever it is no sinne to be ignorant at that time and in that conjuncture it is no sinne to disbelieve and such is the nature of all Questions disputable which are therefore not required of us to bee believed in any one particular sense because the nature of the thing is such as not to be necessary to be known at all simply and absolutely and such is the ambiguity and cloud of its face and representment as not to be necessary so much as by accident and therefore not to the particular sence of any one person And yet such is the iniquity of men that they suck in opinions as wild Asses doe the wind without distinguishing the wholesome from the corrupted ayre and then live upon it at a venture and when all their confidence is built upon zeale and mistake yet therefore because they are zealous and mistaken they are impatient of contradiction But besides that against this I have laid prejudice enough from the dictates of holy Scripture it is observable that this with its appendant degrees I meane restraint of Prophesying imposing upon other mens understanding being masters of their consciences and lording it over their Faith came in with the retinue and traine of Antichrist that is they came as other abuses and corruptions of the Church did by reason of the iniquity of times and the cooling of the first heats of
For others I shall be incurious because the number of them that honour you is the same with them that honour Learning and Piety and they are the best Theatre and the best judges amongst which the world must needs take notice of my ambition to be ascribed by my publike pretence to be what I am in all heartinesse of Devotion and for all the reason of the world My Honour'd Lord Your Lordships most faithfull and most affectionate servant J. TAYLOR The Contents of the Sections SECTION I. OF the Nature of Faith and that its duty is compleated in believing the Articles of the Apostles Creed Pag. 5. SECT II. Of Heresy and the nature of it and that it is to be accounted according to the strict capacity of Christian Faith and not in Opinions speculative nor ever to pious persons pag. 18. SECT III. Of the difficulty and uncertainty of Arguments from Scripture in Questions not simply necessary not literally determined pag. 59. SECT IV. Of the difficulty of Expounding Scripture pag. 73. SECT V. Of the insufficiency and uncertainty of Tradition to expound Scripture or determine Questions pag. 83. SECT VI. Of the uncertainty and insufficiency of Councels Ecclesiasticall to the same purpose pag. 101. SECT VII Of the fallibility of the Pope and the uncertainty of his Expounding Scripture and resolving Questions pag. 125. SECT VIII Of the disability of Fathers or Writers Ecclesiasticall to determine our Questions with certainty and Truth pag. 151. SECT IX Of the incompetency of the Church in its diffusive capacity to be Iudge of Controversies and the impertinency of that pretence of the Spirit pag. 161. SECT X. Of the authority of Reason and that it proceeding upon the best grounds is the best judge pag. 165. SECT XI Of some causes of Errour in the exercise of Reason which are inculpate in themselves pag. 171. SECT XII Of the innocency of Errour in opinion in a pious person pag. 184. SECT XIII Of the deportment to be used towards persons disagreeing and the reasons why they are not to be punished with death c. pag. 189. SECT XIIII Of the practice of Christian Churches towards persons disagreeing and when Persecution first came in pag. 203. SECT XV. How farre the Church or Governours may act to the restraining false or differing opinions pag. 210. SECT XVI Whether it be lawfull for a Prince to give toleration to severall Religions pag. 213. SECT XVII Of compliance with disagreeing persons or weak Consciences in generall pag. 217. SECT XVIII A particular consideration of the Opinions of the Anabaptists pag. 223 SECT XIX That there may be no Toleration of Doctrines inconsistent with piety or the publique good pag. 246. SECT XX. How farre the Religion of the Church of Rome is Tolerable pag. 249. SECT XXI Of the duty of particular Churches in allowing Communion pag. 262. SECT XXII That particular men may communicate with Churches of different perswasions and how farre they may doe it pag. 264. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 OF THE LIBERTY OF PROPHESYING THe infinite variety of Opinions in matters of Religion as they have troubled Christendome with interests factions and partialities so have they caused great divisions of the heart and variety of thoughts and designes amongst pious and prudent men For they all seeing the inconveniences which the dis-union of perswasions and Opinions have produced directly or accidentally have thought themselves obliged to stop this inundation of mischiefes and have made attempts accordingly But it hath hapned to most of them as to a mistaken Physitian who gives excellent physick but mis-applies it and so misses of his cure so have these men their attempts have therefore been ineffectuall for they put their help to a wrong part or they have endeavoured to cure the symptomes and have let the disease alone till it seem'd incurable Some have endeavoured to re-unite these fractions by propounding such a Guide which they were all bound to follow hoping that the Unity of a Guide would have perswaded unity of mindes but who this Guide should be at last became such a Question that it was made part of the fire that was to be quenched so farre was it from extinguishing any part of the flame Others thought of a Rule and this must be the meanes of Union or nothing could doe it But supposing all the World had been agreed of this Rule yet the interpretation of it was so full of variety that this also became part of the disease for which the cure was pretended All men resolv'd upon this that though they yet had not hit upon the right yet some way must be thought upon to reconcile differences in Opinion thinking so long as this variety should last Christ's Kingdome was not advanced and the work of the Gospel went on but slowly Few men in the mean time considered that so long as men had such variety of principles such severall constitutions educations tempers and distempers hopes interests and weaknesses degrees of light and degrees of understanding it was impossible all should be of one minde And what is impossible to be done is not necessary it should be done And therefore although variety of Opinions was impossible to be cured and they who attempted it did like him who claps his shoulder to the ground to stop an earth-quake yet the inconveniences arising from it might possibly be cured not by uniting their beliefes that was to be dispaird of but by curing that which caus'd these mischiefes and accidentall inconveniences of their disagreeings For although these inconveniences which every man sees and feeles were consequent to this diversity of perswasions yet it was but accidentally and by chance in as much as wee see that in many things and they of great concernment men alow to themselves and to each other a liberty of disagreeing and no hurt neither And certainely if diversity of Opinions were of it selfe the cause of mischiefes it would be so ever that is regularly and universally but that we see it is not For there are disputes in Christendome concerning matters of greater concernment then most of those Opinions that distinguish Sects and make factions and yet because men are permitted to differ in those great matters such evills are not consequent to such differences as are to the uncharitable managing of smaller and more inconsiderable Questions It is of greater consequence to believe right in the Question of the validity or invalidity of a death-bed repentance then to believe aright in the Question of Purgatory and the consequences of the Doctrine of Predetermination are of deeper and more materiall consideration then the products of the beliefe of the lawfulnesse or unlawfulnesse of private Masses and yet these great concernments where a liberty of Prophecying in these Questions hath been permitted hath made no distinct Communion no sects of Christians and the others have and so have these too in those places where they have peremptorily been determind on either side Since then if men are
sayes nothing against those Articles though he misse the particular sense of the place there is no danger or sinne in his Exposition but how that analogy of Faith should have any other influence in expounding such places in which those Articles of Faith are neither expressed nor involv'd I understand not But then if you extend the analogy of Faith further then that which is proper to the rule of Symbol of Faith then every man expounds Scripture according to the analogy of Faith but what His own Faith which Faith if it be questioned I am no more bound to expound according to the analogy of another mans Faith then he to expound according to the analogy of mine And this is it that is complain'd on of all sides that overvalue their own opinions Scripture seems so clearly to speak what they believe that they wonder all the world does not see it as clear as they doe but they satisfie themselves with saying that it is because they come with prejudice whereas if they had the true beliefe that is theirs they would easily see what they see And this is very true For if they did believe as others believe they would expound Scriptures to their sense but if this be expounding according to the analogy of Faith it signifies no more then this Be you of my mind and then my Arguments will seem concluding and my Authorities and Allegations pressing and pertinent And this will serve on all sides and therefore will doe but little service to the determination of Questions or prescribing to other mens consciences on any side Lastly Consulting the Originals is thought a great matter Numb 5. to Interpretation of Scriptures But this is to small purpose For indeed it will expound the Hebrew and the Greek and rectifie Translations But I know no man that sayes that the Scriptures in Hebrew and Greek are easie and certaine to be understood and that they are hard in Latine and English The difficulty is in the thing however it be expressed the least is in the language If the Originall Languages were our mother tongue Scripture is not much the easier to us and a naturall Greek or a Jew can with no more reason nor authority obtrude his Interpretations upon other mens consciences then a man of another Nation Adde to this that the inspection of the Originall is no more certain way of Interpretation of Scripture now then it was to the Fathers and Primitive Ages of the Church and yet he that observes what infinite variety of Translations of the Bible were in the first Ages of the Church as S. Hierom observes and never a one like another will think that we shall differ as much in our Interpretations as they did and that the medium is as uncertain to us as it was to them and so it is witnesse the great number of late Translations and the infinite number of Commentaries which are too pregnant an Argument that wee neither agree in the understanding of the words nor of the sense The truth is all these wayes of Interpreting of Scripture which of themselves are good helps are made either by design Numb 6. or by our infirmites wayes of intricating and involving Scriptures in greater difficulty because men doe not learn their doctrines from Scripture but come to the understanding of Scripture with preconceptions and idea's of doctrines of their own and then no wonder that Scriptures look like Pictures wherein every man in the roome believes they look on him only and that wheresoever he stands or how often soever he changes his station So that now what was intended for a remedy becomes the promoter of our disease and our meat becomes the matter of sicknesses And the mischiefe is the wit of man cannot find a remedy for it for there is no rule no limit no certain principle by which all men may be guided to a certain and so infallible an Interpretation that he can with any equity prescribe to others to believe his Interpretations in places of controversy or ambiguity A man would think that the memorable Prophesy of Jacob that the Scepter should not depart from Judah till Shiloh come should have been so clear a determination of the time of the Messias that a Jew should never have doubted it to have been verified in Jesus of Nazareth and yet for this so clear vaticination they have no lesse then twenty six Answers S. Paul and S. James seem to speak a little diversly concerning Justification by Faith and Works and yet to my understanding it is very easy to reconcile them but all men are not of my mind for Osiander in his confutation of the book which Melanchton wrote against him observes that there are twenty severall opinions concerning Iustification all drawn from the Scriptures by the men only of the Augustan Confession There are sixteen severall opinions concerning originall sinne and as many definitions of the Sacraments as there are Sects of men that disagree about them And now what help is there for us in the midst of these uncertainties If we follow any one Translation or any one Numb 7. mans Commentary what rule shall we have to chuse the right by or is there any one man that hath translated perfectly or expounded infallibly No Translation challenges such a prerogative as to be authentick but the Vulgar Latine and yet see with what good successe For when it was declared authentick by the Councell of Trent Sixtus put forth a Copy much mended of what it was and tyed all men to follow that but that did not satisfie for Pope Clement reviews and corrects it in many places and still the Decree remaines in a changed subject And secondly that Translation will be very unapt to satisfie in which one of their own men Isidore Clarius a Monk of Brescia found and mended eight thousand faults besides innumerable others which he sayes he pretermitted And then thirdly to shew how little themselves were satisfied with it divers learned men amongst them did new translate the Bible and thought they did God and the Church good service in it So that if you take this for your precedent you are sure to be mistaken infinitely If you take any other the Authors themselves doe not promise you any security If you resolve to follow any one as farre only as you see cause then you only doe wrong or right by chance for you have certainty just proportionable to your own skill to your own infallibility If you resolve to follow any one whether soever he leads we shall oftentimes come thither where we shall see our selves become ridiculous as it happened in the case of Spiridion Bishop of Cyprus who so resolv'd to follow his old book that when an eloquent Bishop who was desired to Preach read his Text Tu autem tolle cubile tuum ambula Spiridion was very angry with him because in his book it was tolle lectum tuum and thought it arrogance in the preacher
have suspended or cassated the Decree in case the Pope had then disavowed it For besides the condemnation of Pope Honorius for heresy the 13 th and 55 th Canons of that Councell are expressely against the custome of the Church of Rome But this particular is involved in that new Question whether the Pope be above a Councell Now since the Contestation of this Question there was never any free or lawfull Councell * Vid. postea de Concil Sinvessane §. 6. N. 9. that determined for the Pope it is not likely any should and is it likely that any Pope will confirm a Councell that does not For the Councell of Basil is therefore condemn'd by the last Lateran which was an Assembly in the Popes own Palace and the Councell of Constance is of no value in this Question and slighted in a just proportion as that Article is disbelieved But I will not much trouble the Question with a long consideration of this particular the pretence is senselesse and illiterate against reason and experience and already determin'd by S. Austin sufficiently as to this particular Epist. 162. ad Glorium Ecce putemus illos Episcopos qui Romae judicaverunt non bonos judices fuisse Restabat adhuc plenarium Ecclesiae universae Concilium ubi etiam cum ipsis judicibus causa possit agitari ut si male judicasse convicti essent eorum sententiae solverentur For since Popes may be parties may be Simoniacks Schismaticks Hereticks it is against reason that in their own causes they should be judges or that in any causes they should be superior to their judges And as it is against reason so is it against all experience too for the Councell Sinvessanum as it said was conven'd to take Cognisance of Pope Marcellinus and divers Councels were held at Rome to give judgement in the causes of Damasus Sixtus the III Symmachus and Leo III and IV as is to be seen in Platina and the Tomes of the Councels And it is no answer to this and the like allegations to say in matters of fact and humane constitution the Pope may be judg'd by a Councell but in matters of Faith all the world must stand to the Popes determination and authoritative decision For if the Pope can by any colour pretend to any thing it is to a suprem Judicature in matters Ecclesiasticall positive and of fact and if he failes in this pretence he will hardly hold up his head for any thing else for the ancient Bishops deriv'd their Faith from the fountaine and held that in the highest tenure even from Christ their Head but by reason of the Imperiall * Vide Concil Chalced act 15. City it became the principall Seat and he surpriz'd the highest Judicature partly by the concession of others partly by his own accidentall advantages and yet even in these things although he was major singulis yet he was minor universis And this is no more then what was decreed of the eighth Generall Act. ult can 21. Synod which if it be sense is pertinent to this Question for Generall Councels are appointed to take Cognizance of Questions and differences about the Bishop of Rome non tamen audacter in eum ferre sententiam By audactèr as is supposed is meant praecipitanter hastily and unreasonably but if to give sentence against him bee wholy forbidden it is non-sense for to what purpose is an Authority of taking Cognizance if they have no power of giving sentence unlesse it were to deserre it to a superiour Judge which in this case cannot be supposed for either the Pope himselfe is to judge his own cause after their examination of him or the Generall Councell is to judge him So that although the Councell is by that Decree enjoyn'd to proceed modestly and warily yet they may proceed to sentence or else the Decree is ridiculous and impertinent But to cleare all I will instance in matters of Question and opinion For not only some Councels have made their Decrees Numb 5. without or against the Pope but some Councels have had the Popes confirmation and yet have not been the more legitimate or obligatory but are known to be hereticall For the Canons of the sixth Synod although some of them were made against the Popes and the custome of the Church of Rome a Pope a while after did confirm the Councell and yet the Canons are impious and hereticall and so esteem'd by the Church of Rome her selfe I instance in the second Canon which approves of that Synod of Carthage under Cyprian for rebaptization of Hereticks and the 72 Canon that dissolves marriage between persons of differing perswasion in matters of Christian Religion and yet these Canons were approved by Pope Adrian I. who in his Epistle to Tharasius which is in the second action of the seventh Synod calls them Canones divinè legalitèr praedicatos And these Canons were used by Pope Nicholas I. in his Epistle ad Michaclem and by Innocent III. c. à multis extra de aetat ordinandorum So that now that wee may apply this there are seven Generall Councels which by the Church of Rome are condemn'd of errour The * Vid. Socra l. z. c. 5. Sozom. l. 3. c. 5. Councell of Antioch A. D. 345. in which S. Athanasius was condemn'd The Councell of Millaine A. D. 354. of above 300 Bishops The Councell of Ariminum consisting of 600 Bishops The second Councell of Ephesus A. D. 449. in which the Eutychian heresy was confirmed Gregor in Regist li. 3. caus 7. ait Concilium Numidiae errasse Concilium Aquisgrani erravit De ra ptore raptâdist 20. can de libellis in glossâ and the Patriarch Flavianus kild by the faction of Dioscorus The Councell of Constantinople under Leo Isaurus A. D. 730 And another at Constantinople 35 years after And lastly the Councel at Pisa 134 years since Now that these Generall Councels are condemn'd is a sufficient Argument that Councels may erre and it is no answer to say they were not confirm'd by the Pope for the Popes confirmation I have shewn not to be necessary or if it were yet even that also is an Argument that Generall Councels may become invalid either by their own fault or by some extrinsecall supervening accident either of which evacuates their Authority and whether all that is required to the legitimation of a Councell was actually observ'd in any Councell is so hard to determine that no man can be infallibly sure that such a Councell is authentick and sufficient probation 2. And that is the second thing I shall observe There are so many Questions concerning the efficient the forme the Numb 6. matter of Generall Councells and their manner of proceeding and their finall sanction that after a Question is determin'd by a Conciliary Assembly there are perhaps twenty more Questions to be disputed before we can with confidence either believe the Councell upon its meere Authority or obtrude
these times have been called the last times for 1600 years together our expectation of the Great revelation is very neer accomplishing what a Grand innovation of Ecclesiasticall government contrary to the faith practice of Christendome may portend now in these times when we all expect Antichrist to be revealed is worthy of a jealous mans inquiry Secondly Episcopacy 2. if we consider the finall cause was instituted as an obstructive to the diffusion of Schisme and Heresy So in 1. ad Titū S. Hierome In toto orbe decretum est ut unus de Presbyteris electus superponeretur coeteris VT SCHISMATVM SEMINA TOLLERENTUR And therefore if Vnity and division be destructive of each other then Episcopacy is the best deletery in the world for Schisme and so much the rather because they are in eâdem materiâ for Schisme is a division for things either personall or accidentall which are matters most properly the subject of government and there to be tryed there to receive their first and last breath except where they are starv'd to death by a desuetude and Episcopacy is an Unity of person governing and ordering persons and things accidentall and substantiall and therefore a direct confronting of Schisme not only in the intention of the author of it but in the nature of the institution Now then although Schismes alwaies will be and this by divine prediction which clearly showes the necessity of perpetuall Episcopacy and the intention of its perpetuity either by Christ himselfe ordaining it who made the prophecy or by the Apostles and Apostolick men at least who knew the prophecy yet to be sure these divisions and dangers shall be greater about and at the time of the Great Apostacy for then were not the houres turned into minutes an universall ruine should seize all Christendome No flesh should be saved if those daies were not shortned is it not next to an evidence of fact that this multiplication of Schismes must be removendo prohibens and therefore that must be by invalidating Episcopacy ordayn'd as the remedy and obex of Schisme either tying their hands behind them by taking away their coercion or by putting out their eyes by denying them cognisance of causes spirituall or by cutting off their heads and so destroying their order How farre these will lead us I leave to be considered This only Percute pastores atque oves despergentur and I believe it will be verified at the comming of that wicked one I saw all Israel scattered upon the Mountaines as sheep having no sheapheard I am not new in this conception I learn't it of S. Cyprian Christi adversarius Ecclesiae ejus inimicus Epist. 55. ad hoc ECCLESIae PRAEPOSITVM suâ infestatione persequitur ut Gubernatore sublato atrociùs atque violentiùs circà Ecclesiae naufragin grassetur The adversary of Christ and enemy of his Spouse therefore persecutes the Bishop that having taken him away he may without check pride himselfe in the ruines of the Church and a little after speaking of them that are enemies to Bishops he sayes that Antichristi jam propinquantis adventum imitantur their deportment is just after the guise of Antichrist who is shortly to be revealed But be this conjecture vaine or not the thing of it selfe is of deep consideration and the Catholick practise of Christendome for 1500 years is so insupportable a prejudice against the enemies of Episcopacy that they must bring admirable evidence of Scripture or a cleare revelation proved by Miracles or a contrary undoubted tradition Apostolicall for themselves or else hope for no beliefe against the prescribed possession of so many ages But before I begin mee thinks in this contestation ubi potior est conditio possidentis it is a considerable Question what will the Adversaries stake against it For if Episcopacy cannot make its title good they loose the benefit of their prescribed possession If it can I feare they will scarce gain so much as the obedience of the adverse party by it which yet already is their due It is very unequall but so it is ever when Authority is the matter of the Question Authority never gaines by it for although the cause goe on its side yet it looses costs and dammages for it must either by faire condescention to gain the adversaries loose something of it selfe or if it asserts it selfe to the utmost it is but where it was but that seldome or never happens for the very questioning of any authority hoc ipso makes a great intrenchment even to the very skirts of its cloathing But hûc deventumest Now we are in we must goe over FIrst then that wee may build upon a Rock §. 1. Christ did institute a governement in his Church Christ did institute a government to order and rule his Church by his authority according to his lawes and by the assistance of the B. Spirit 1. If this were not true how shall the Church be governed For I hope the adversaries of Episcopacy that are so punctuall to pitch all upon Scripture ground will be sure to produce cleare Scripture for so maine a part of Christianity as is the forme of the Government of Christs Church And if for our private actions and duties Oeconomicall they will pretend a text I suppose it will not be thought possible Scripture should make default in assignation of the publick Government insomuch as all lawes intend the publick and the generall directly the private and the particular by consequence only and comprehension within the generall 2. If Christ himselfe did not take order for a government then we must derive it from humane prudence and emergency of conveniences and concurse of new circumstances and then the Government must often be changed or else time must stand still and things be ever in the same state and possibility Both the consequents are extreamely full of inconvenience For if it be left to humane prudence then either the government of the Church is not in immediate order to the good and benison of soules or if it be that such an institution in such immediate order to eternity should be dependant upon humane prudence it were to trust such a rich commodity in a cock-boat that no wise Pilot will be supposed to doe But if there be often changes in government Ecclesiasticall which was the other consequent in the publike frame I meane and constitution of it either the certain infinity of Schismes will arise or the dangerous issues of publick inconsistence and innovation which in matters of religion is good for nothing but to make men distrust all and come the best that can come there will be so many Church governments as there are humane Prudences For so if I be not mis-informed it is abroad in some townes that have discharged Simler de rep Helvet fol. 148. 172. Episcopacy At S t Galles in Switzerland there the Ministers and Lay-men rule in Common but a Lay-man is president But the
as willing as any man to comply both with the Clergy and people of his Diocesse yet he also must assert his owne priviledges and peculiar Quod enim non periculum metuere debemus de offensâ Domini quando aliqui de Presbyteris nec Evangelij nec loci sui memores sed neque futurum Domini judicium neque nunc praepositum sibi Episcopum cogitantes quod nunquam omnino sub antecessoribus factum est ut cum cōtumeliâ contemptu Praepositi totum sibi vendicent The matter was that certaine Presbyters had reconciled them that fell in persecution without the performance of penance according to the severity of the Canon and this was done without the Bishops leave by the Presbyters Forgetting their owne place and the GOSPELL and their BISHOP set over them a thing that was never heard of till that time Totum sibi vendicabant They that might doe nothing without the Bishops leave yet did this whole affaire of their owne heads Well! Vpon this S. Cyprian himselfe by his owne authority alone suspends them till his returne and so shewes that his authority was independant theirs was not and then promises they shall have a faire hearing before him in the presence of the Confessors and all the people Vtar eâ admonitione quâ me vti Dominus jubet ut interim prohibeantur offerre acturi apud nos apud Confessores ipsos apud plebem Vniversam causam suam * Here it is plaine that S. Cyprian suspended these Presbyters by his owne authority in absence from his Church and reserved the further hearing of the cause till it should please God to restore him to his See But this fault of the Presbyters S. Cyprian in the two next Epistles does still more exaggerate saying they ought to have ask'd the Bishops leave Sicut in praeteritum semper sub antecessoribus factum est for so was the Catholike custome ever that nothing should be done without the Bishops leave but now by doing otherwise they did prevaricate the divine commandement and dishonour the Bishop Yea Epist. 11. but the Confessors interceeded for the lapsi and they seldome were discountenanc'd in their requests What should the Presbyters doe in this case S. Cyprian tells them writing to the Confessors Petitiones itaque desideria vestra EPISCOPO servent Let them ketpe your petitions for the BISHOP to consider of But they did not therefore he suspended Epist. 12. them because they did not reservare Episcopo honorem Sacerdotij sui cathedrae Preserve the honour of the Bishops chaire and the Episcopall authority in presuming to reconcile the penitents without the Bishops leave The same S. Cyprian in his Epistle to Rogatianus Epist. 65. resolves this affayre for when a contemptuous bold Deacon had abus'd his Bishop he complain'd to S. Cyprian who was an Arch-Bishop and indeed S. Cyprian tells him he did honour him in the businesse that he would complaine to him cum pro EPISCOPATUS VIGORE CATHEDRAE AUTHORITATE haberes potestatem quâ posses de illo statim vindicari When as he had power Episcopall and sufficient authority himselfe to have punish'd the Deacon for his petulancy The whole Epistle is very pertinent to this Question and is cleare evidence for the great authority of Episcopall jurisdiction the summe whereof is in this incouragement given to Rogatianus by S. Cyprian Fungaris circa eum POTESTATE HONORIS TUI ut eum vel deponas vel abstineas Exercise the power of your honour upon him and either suspend him or depose him * And therefore he commends Cornelius the Bishop of Rome for driving Felicissimus the Schismatick from Epist. 55. the Church vigore pleno quo Episcopum agere oportet with full authority as becomes a Bishop Socrates telling of the promotion and qualities of S. Iohn Chrysostome saies that in reforming the lives of the Clergy he was too fastuous and severe Mox Tripart hist. lib. 10. cap. 3. igitur in ipso initio quum Clericis asper videretur Ecclesiae erat plurimis exosus veluti furiosum universi declinabant He was so rigid in animadversions against the Clergy that he was hated by them which clearely showes that the Bishop had jurisdiction and authority over them for tyranny is the excesse of power authority is the subject matter of rigour and austerity But this power was intimated in that bold speech of his Deacon Serapio nunquam poteris ô Episcope hos corrigere nisi uno baculo percusseris Vniversos Thou canst not amend the Clergy unlesse thou strikest them all with thy Pastorall rod. S. Iohn Chrysostome did not indeed doe so but non multum post temporis plurimos clericorum pro diversis exemit causis He deprived and suspended most of the Clergy men for diverse causes and for this his severity he wanted no slanders against him for the delinquent Ministers set the people on work against him * But here we see that the power of censures was clearely and only in the Bishop for he was incited to have punished all his Clergy Vniversos And he did actually suspend most of them plurimos and I think it will not be believed the Presbytery of his Church should joyne with their Bishop to supend themselves Adde to this that Theodoret Ibid. cap. 4. also affirmes that Chrysostome intreated the Priests to live Canonically according to the sanctions of the Church quas quicunque praevaricari praesumerent eos ad templum prohibebat accedere ALL them that transgressed the Canons he forbad them entrance into the Church *** Thus S. Hierome to Riparius Miror sanctum Advers Vigilant Epist. 53. Episcopum in cujus Parochiâ esse Presbyter dicitur acquiescere furori ejus non virgâ APOSTOLICA virgâque ferreâ confringere vas inutile tradere in interitum carnis ut spiritus salvus fiat I wonder saith he that the holy Bishop is not mov'd at the fury of Vigilantius and does not breake him with his APOSTOLICALL rod that by this temporary punishment his soule might be saved in the day of the Lord. * Hither to the Bishops Pastorall staffe is of faire power and coërcion The Councell of Aquileia convoked against the Arians is full and mighty in asserting the Bishops power over the Laity and did actually exercise censures upon the Clergy where S. Ambrose was the Man that gave sentence against Palladius the Arian Palladius would have declined the judgement of the Bishops for he saw he should certainly be condemned and would faine have been judg'd by some honourable personages of the Laity But S. Ambrose said Sacerdotes de Laicis judicare debent non Laici de Sacerdotibus Bishops must judge of the Laity not the Laity of Bishops That 's for the jus and for the factum it was the shutting up of the Councell S. Ambrose Bishop of Millaine gave sentence Pronuncio illum indignum Sacerdotio carendum in loco
Court of life and death cannot be an Ecclesiasticall tribunall and then if any man or company of Men should perswade the Church not to inflict her censures upon delinquents in some cases in which shee might lawfully inflict them and pretend to give her another compulsory they take away the Church-consistory and erect a very secular Court dependant on themselves and by consequence to be appeal'd to from themselves and so also to be prohibited as the Lay-Superiour shall see cause for * Whoever therefore should be consenting to any such permutation of power is traditor potestatis quam S. Mater Ecclesia à sponso suo acceperat he betrayes the individuall and inseparable right of holy Church For her censures shee may inflict upon her delinquent children without asking leave Christ is her 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for that he is her warrant and security The other is beg'd or borrow'd none of her owne nor of a fit edge to be us'd in her abscissions and coërcions * I end this consideration with that memorable Canon of the Apostles of Can. 39. so frequent use in this Question 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let the Bishop have the care or provision for all affaires of the Church and let him dispense them velut Deo contemplante as in the sight of God to whom he must be responsive for all his Diocesse The next Consideration concerning the Bishop's jurisdiction is of what persons he is Iudge And because our Scene lyes herein Church-practice I shall only set downe the doctrine of the Primitive Church in this affaire and leave it under that representation Presbyters and Deacons and inferiour Clerks and the Laity are already involved in the precedent Canons No man there was exempted of whose soule any Bishop had charge And all Christs sheepe heare his voice and the call of his sheap-heard-Ministers * Theodoret tells a story that when the Bishops of the Province were assembled by the command of Valentinian the Emperour for the choice of a Successor to Auxentius in the See of Millayne the Emperour wished them to be carefull in the choice of a Bishop in these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theodoret. lib. 4. c. 5. Set such an one in the Archiepiscopall throne that we who rule the Kingdome may sincerely submitt our head unto him viz in matters of spirituall import * And since all power is deriv'd from Christ who is a King and a Priest and a Prophet Christian Kings are Christi Domini and Vicars in his Regall power but Bishops in his Sacerdotall and Propheticall * So that the King hath a Supreme Regall power in causes of the Church ever since his Kingdome became Christian and it consists in all things in which the Priestly office is not precisely by Gods law imployed for regiment and cure of soules and in these also all the externall compulsory and jurisdiction in his owne For when his Subjects became Christian Subjects himselfe also upon the same termes becomes a Christian Ruler and in both capacities he is to rule viz both as Subjects and as Christian Subjects except only in the precise issues of Sacerdotall authority And therefore the Kingdome and the Priesthood are excelled by each other in their severall capacities For superiority is usually expressed in three words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Excellency Impery and Power The King is supreme to the Bishop in Impery The Bishop hath an Excellency viz. of Spirituall Ministration which Christ hath not concredited to the King but in Power both King and Bishop have it distinctly in severall capacity the King in potentiâ gladii the Bishop in potestate clavium The Sword and the Keyes are the emblems of their distinct power Something like this is in the third Epistle of S. Clement translated by Ruffinus Quid enim in praesenti saeculo prophet â gloriosius Pontifice clarius Rege sublimius King and Priest and Prophet are in their severall excellencies the Highest powers under heaven *** In this sense it is easy to understand those expressions often used in Antiquity which might seem to make intrenchment upon the sacrednesse of Royall prerogatives were not both the piety and sense of the Church sufficiently cleare in the issues of her humblest obedience * And this is the sense of S. Ignatius that holy Martyr and Epist. ad Philadelph disciple of the Apostles Diaconi reliquus Clerus unà cum populo Vniverso Militibus Principibus Caesare ipsi Episcopopareant Let the Deacons and all the Clergy and all the people the Souldiers the Princes and Caesar himselfe obey the Bishop * This is it which S. Ambrose said Sublimitas Episcopalis Lib. de dignit Sacerd cap. 2. nullis poterit comparationibus adaequari Si Regum fulgori compares Principum diademati erit inferius c. This also was acknowledged by the great Constantine that most blessed Prince Deus vos constituit Sacerdotes potestatem vobis dedit de nobis quoque judicandi ideo nos à vobis rectè judicamur Vos autem non potest is ab hominibus judicari viz. saecularibus and incausis simplicis religionis So that good Emperour in his oration to Lib. 10. Eccles hist. c. 2. the Nicene Fathers It was a famous contestation that S. Ambrose had with Auxentius the Arian pretending the Emperors command to him to deliver up some certain Churches in his Diocesse to the Arians His answer was that Palaces belong'd to the Emperour but Churches to the Bishop and so they did by all the lawes of Christendome The like was in the case of S. Athanasius and Constantius the Emperour exactly the same per omniae as it is related by Ruffinus * S. Ambrose his sending his Deacon to the Emperour Lib. 10. Eccles hist. cap. 19. to desire him to goe forth of the Cancelli in his Church at Millain showes that then the powers were so distinct that they made no intrenchment upon each other * It was no greater power but a more considerable act and higher exercise the forbidding the communion to Theodosius till he had Theodor. lib. 5 c. 18. by repentance washed out the bloud that stuck upon him ever since the Massacre at Thessalonica It was a wonderfull concurrence of piety in the Emperour and resolution and authority in the Bishop But he was not the first that did it For Philip the Emperour was also guided by the Pastorall rod and the severity of the Bishop De hoc traditum est nobis Euseb lib. 6. cap. 25. quod Christianus fuerit in die Paschae i. e. in ipsis vigiliis cùm interesse voluerit communicare mysteriis ab Episcopo loci non priùs esse permissum nisi confiteretur peccata inter poenitentes staret nec ullo modo sibi copiam mysteriorum futuram nisi priùs per poenitentiam culpas quae de eo ferebantur plurimae deluisset The Bishop of the place would not
because no Legat could come into England nor any publique messenger from the See Apostolique he imployed a Florentine Merchant to stirre her subiects to a rebellion for her perdition Nothing but Sollevamento Qui incolaruÌ„ animos ad Elizabethae perditionem rebellione factâ commoveret Rebellion Perdition and destruction to the Queen could be thought upon by his Holinesse More yet for when the Duke of Alva had seiz'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 Gabutius This rebellion was intended to be under Efflagitabat ab Rege ut Anglorum in Elizabetham pie conspiranrium studio foveret 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 loose 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 Holinesse 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 Hildebrand to him of which how farre short he came the world is witnesse Our own businesse calls to mind the Bulls of Pope Clement 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 Apol. adv R. Angl. it was for his purpose for it was if not author yet the main encourager of Cates by to the Powder Treason For when Garnet would willingly have known the Popes minde in the businesse Cates by eased him of the trouble of sending to Rome since the Popes mind was cleere I doubt not said Cates by at all of Proced agt. Traytors the Popes mind but that he who commanded our endeavours to hinder his coming in is willingenough 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 â—â—noc Decretal de rescript cap. si quando 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 Philop pag. 212. n. 306. 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 instance once more If I mistake not it was Sixtus Quintus who sometimes pronounced â—ep 11. 1589 a speech in full Consistory in which hee compares the assasinat of Iaques Clement upon Henry the third to the exploits of Eleazar Iudith where after having aggravated the faults of the murdred King concluded him to have died impenitent denyed him the solemnities of Masse Dirge and Requiem for his soule at last he ends with a prayer that God would finish what in this bloudy manner had been begun I will not aggravate the foulenesse of the thing by any circumstances though I cannot but wonder that his Holinesse should say a prayer of so much abhomination it is of it selfe too bad If his Holinesse be wrong'd in the businesse I have no hand in it the speech was printed at Paris three By Nichol. Nivelle and Rollin Thierry months after the murder of the King and avouched for authentick by the approbation of three Doctors Boucher Decreil and Ancelein let them answer it I wash my hands of the accusation and only consider the danger of such Doctrines if set forth with so great authority and practis'd by so uncontroulable persons If the Disciples of Christ if Apostles if the See Apostolique if the fathers Confessors prove Boutefeu's and Incendiaries I 'le no more wonder if the people call for fire to consume us but rather wonder if they doe not And indeed although it be no rare or unusuall thing for a Papist to be de facto loyall and duteous to his Prince yet it is a wonder that he is so since such Doctrines have beene taught by so great Masters and at the best hee depends but upon the Popes pleasure for his Loyalty which upon what security it rests you may easily guesse from the antecedents Thus much for consideration of the persons who ask'd the Question they were Christs Disciples they were Iames and Iohn But when Iames and Iohn saw this Our next inquiry shall be of the cause of this their angry Question This we must learne from the fore-going story Christ was going to the feast at Ierusalem and passing through a Village of Samaria ask'd lodging for a night but they perceiving that hee was a Iew Ver. 50. would by no meanes entertaine him as being of a different Religion For although God appointed that all of the seed of Iacob should goe up to Ierusalem to worship 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yet the Chrysost. in hunc locum Tribes of the separation first under Ieroboam worship'd in Groves and High places and after the captivity being a mixt people halfe Iew halfe Gentile procur'd a Temple to be built them by Sanballat their President neare the City Sichem upon the Iosephi antiq Lib. 11. c. 6. mountaine Gerezim stiling themselves pertinentes Posiellus de linguis lib. 12 Deut. 27. ad Montem benedictum by allusion to the words of God by Moses they shall stand upon the Mount Gerezim to blesse the people and these upon Mount Ebal to curse And in case arguments should faile to make this schisme plausible they will make it good by turning their
gentlenesse as of a sheepe a lambe a hen a gentle twining vine the healing Olive and is it likely that such a oneshould 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 maintain their cause and to propagate their Religion by ruine of Princes and conquering their Kingdomes But it is the excellency of Christianity that by humility and obedience it made Princes tributary to our Deare Master and homagers to his Kingdome When Valentinian sent Calligonus his Chamberlaine to S. Ambrose to threaten him from his faith his answer was Deus permittit tibi ut impleas quod minaris Ego patiar quod est Episcopi tu facies quod est spadonis He did not stirre up the numerous people of his Diocesse to rebell against the Emperour or depose him imployed no agent in his Court to undermine his security nor assasine to take his life He and the rest of those good Fathers would not have lost their possibility of being Martyrs for the world unlesse it were by perswading the Emperours to the Christian faith Wee pray for all our Governours that they might have long life a secure government a safe house strong armies good subjects quiet world So Tertullian Apologet. I had thought that the Doctrine and example of our B. Saviour the practise Apostolicall and primitive had beene tyes enough to keep us in our obedience to God and the King and in Christian charity to all but I finde that all these precepts come to nothing for the Apostles and primitive Christians did not actually depose Kings nor alter states nor call for fire to consume their enemies not because it was simply unlawfull so to doe or any way adverse to the precepts of Christ but because they wanted Power So Bellarmine The Church gave De Pontif. R. l. 5. c. 7. leave that the faithfull should obey Iulian because then they wanted forces And F. Creswell is very confident of the businesse They might without all Question have appointed to themselves other Kings and Princes if Philopater P. 107. n. 158. the Christians had beene strong enough to bring their intendments to passe But because they could not therefore it was not lawfull for them to goe about it nor is it for us in the same case especially if the Prince hath quiet possession and a strong guard about him then by no meanes is it lawfull for a single man by Disp. 5. in c. 13. ad Roman his owne authority to assault his Prince that rules Tyrannically So Salmeron But who sees not that this way murder may be lawfull For true it is God commanded us saying Thou shalt not kill that is if thou art not able to lift up thy hand or strike a stroake thou shalt not blaspheme that is if thou beest speechlesse thou must be obedient to thy Prince that is if thou canst not tell how to helpe it Good Doctrine this And indeed it might possibly be something if God had commanded our subordination to Princes only for wrath for then sivires adsint if wee can defend our selves we are secure wee need not feare his wrath but when he addes also for conscience sake I cannot sufficiently wonder that any man should obtrude so senselesse so illiterate and so impious an interpretation upon the Christian world under the Title of Catholique Doctrine Christ when he was betrayed and seized upon by his Murderers could have commanded twelve Legions of Angels for his Guard Non defuerunt vires and in all humane likelyhood such a Satellitium as that would have mov'd them to a beliefe in him or else I am sure might have destroyed the unbelievers Shall I say more against this rude glossema Then thus It is false that the Primitive Christians had not power to defend themselves against their Persecutors Heare S. Cyprian Nemo nostrum quando apprehenditur reluctatur nec se adversus iniustitiam violentiam vestram quamvis nimius copiosus noster sit Populus ulciscitur They could have resisted and that to blood but they had not so learned Christ. Prayers and teares were the armes of Christians and then they had a defence beyond all this when they were hard put to it Mori potuerunt a submission of their bodies to Martyrdome was their last refuge Thus S. Agnes Lucia Agatha Christina Domitilla sav'd both their faith and chastity non armis sed ignibus carnificis manu the tormentors last cruelty defended them from all succeeding danger I will not yet conclude that that which these men obtrude for Catholique Doctrine is flat and direct heresy I will instance but once more and then I shall In the fourth Councell of Toledo which was assembled when the usurping and Tyrannizing Goths did domineere in Europe the most where of were Tyrants Vsurpers or Arrians the Councell decreed that if any man did violate the life or person of his King aut potestate Regni exuerit kill him or depose him Anathema sit c. He should be accursed in the sight of God and his Holy Angels and together withall the companions of his iniquity hee should be separated from the Catholique Church And now I hope I may say that these men who either practise or advise such practises as killing or deposing Kings are as formally condemn'd for heresy and anathematiz'd as ever was Manichee or Cataphrygian I know not but perhaps this might be thought of when the Iesuits were inscrib'd heretiks upon the publike pillar before the Louure in Paris upon their banishment however let them answer it as they may it concernes them as much as their being Catholiques comes to Et considerent quia quae praedicant tantoperè verba aut ipsorum summorum Pontificum sunt suas fimbrias extendentium aut illorum qui eis adulantur as said Aeneas Sylvius but at De gestis concil Basil. lib. 1. no hand can it be Christian Doctrine I instanc'd in these things to shew the Antithesis between the spirit of our B. Saviour who answer'd the Question of the text and the Fathers Confessors of whom was ask'd the Question of the day But give mee leave to consider them not only as mis-informing their penitents but as concealing their intended purpose for even this way the persons to whom the Question was propounded made a Cap. quantae de senten excom c. delicto ibid. in 6. 13. q. 3.
q. 3. themselves guilty of the intended machination For by all Law Ecclesiasticall and Civill hee that conceales an intended Murder or Treason makes himselfe b l. 1. occisorum ad I. c. Syllanian l 1. §. 1. ad l. Cornel. de falsis l. quisquis ad l lul Maiest as much a party for concealing as is the Principall for contriving Ob. But these Fathers Confessors could not be accused by vertue of these generall Lawes as being exempt by vertue of speciall case for they received notice of these things only in confession the seale of which is so sacred and inviolable that he is sacrilegious who in any case doth breake it open though it be to avoid the greatest evill that can happen so Bellarmine to save the lives of all the Kings in Christendome Apol. adv R. Angl. Casaub. ad Front Duc. In 3. part D. Thom. disp 33. Sect. 1. n. 2. so Binet though to save a whole common wealth from dammage temporall or spirituall of body or soule so Suarez A considerable matter On the one side wee are threatned by sacriledge on the other by danger of Princes and common-wealths for the case may happen that either the Prince and whole State may be suffered to perish bodily and ghostly or else the Priest must certainly damne himselfe by the sacrilegious breach of the holy Seale of confession Give me leave briefly to consider it and both for the acquittance of our state in its proceedings against these Traytors and for the regulating of the case it selfe to say these two things 1 This present Treason was not revealed to these Fathers Confessors in formall confession 2. If it had it did not bind to secresy in the present case Of the first only a word 1 It was only propounded to them in way of Question or consultation like this in the text as appeared Vide Casaub. ep ad Front D. p. 133. by their owne confessions and the attestation of then S r Henry Mountague Recorder of London to Garnet himselfe It could not therefore be a formall D. Soto in 4. l. Sent. d. 18. q. 4 art 5. concl 5. Navar. c. 8. n. 18. Suarez disp 33 Sect 2. Coninck desâ—gil conf dub 1. n. 7. confession therefore not bind to the seale It is the common opinion of their owne Doctors Non enim inducitur obligatio sigilli in confessione quam quis facit sine ullo animo accipiendi absolutionem sed solum consilij petendi causâ 2 It was propounded to these Fathers Confessors as a thing not subjicible to their penitentiall judicature because it was a fact not repented of but then in agitation and resolved upon for the future How then could this be a confession whose institution must certainly be in order to absolution and how could this be in any such order when it was a businesse of which they could not expect to be absolved unlesse they hop'd to sinne with a pardon about their necks and on condition God would be mercifull to them in its remission would come and professe that they were resolved to anger him In reason this could be no act of repentance neither could it by confession of their own side It is the doctrine of Hostiensis and b Cap Sacerdos 3. q. n. 116. Navarre and c In lucubrat ad Bartolum in L. ut vim n. 22 ff de iustitia iure Cardinall Alban confesse it to be most commonly received 3 It was not only not repented of but by them reputed to be a good action and so could not be a matter of confession I appeal to any of their own Manuals and penitentiary bookes It is culpable say they I am sure it is ridiculous in any man to confesse and shrive himselfe of a good action and that this was such in their opinion it 's plaine by that impious answer of Garnet affirming it a businesse See proceed against late Traitors greatly meritorious if any good might thence accrue to the Catholique cause 4 By this their pretended confession they endeavoured to acquire new complices as is evident in the proceedings against the Traitors They were therefore bound to reveale it for it neither was nor could be a proper and formall confession That this is the common opinion of their own Schooles see it affirmed by Aegidius Coninck Vbisuprà The first particular then is plain Here neither was the forme of confession nor yet could this thing be a matter of confession therefore supposing the seale of confession to be sacredly inviolable in all cases yet they were highly blameable for their concealement in the present 2 But the truth of the second particular is more to be inquired of That is that though these things had been only revealed in confession and this confession had been formall and direct yet they were bound in the present case to reveale it because the seale of confession is not so inviolable as that in no case it is to be broken up and if in any especially it may be opened in the case of treason I never knew any thing cryed up with so generall a voyce upon so little ground as is the Over-hallowed seale of confession True it is that an ordinary secret committed to a friend in civill commerce is not to be revealed upon every cause nor upon many but upon some it may as they all confesse If thus then much rather is this to be observed in the revelation of the secrets of our consciences not only from the ordinary tye to secrecy but likewise least sinnes should grow more frequent if so great a remedy of them be made so odious as to expose us to a publike infamy or danger of the law The Councell therefore that first introduc'd this obligation was very prudent and reasonable pleads a thousand yeares prescription and relies upon good conveniences This is all that ever could be prov'd of it as may appeare anon but these are too weak a base to build so great a structure on it as to make it sacriledge or any sinne at all to reveale confessions in some cases 1 For first if because it is delivered as a secret and such a secret it is the more closely and religiously to be kept it is true but concludes no more but that it must be a greater cause that must authorize a publication of this then of the secrets of ordinary commerce between friend and friend 2 If the licensing of publicatioÌ„ of confession be a way to make confession odious and therefore that it may not be publish'd I say if this concludes then on the contrary it concludes farre more strongly that therefore in some cases it may be published because nothing can make a thing more odious and intolerable then if it be made a cover for grand impieties so as to engage a true subject quietly Knowingly to see his Prince murdred 3 If it be discouragement to the practise of confession that some sinnes revealed in it must