any thing And the Boy answering He could not and therefore again the second time prayed and practised over and then also the second time upon hanging of the same Handkerchief as before ask'd by the same Exorcist Whether he could see now any thing And the Boy returning again the foresaid Answer and every one at present observing by their own seeing or looking on the Boyes eye-lids there was nothing at all done no kind of change and Father Finachty thereupon i. e. so soon as the Boy had the second time answer'd He could see nothing at all very carelesly without any further ceremony or notice taken thereof giving over and turning from this blind Boy to some other of those by that expected their turn but had no visible disease or evil and practising upon them When I had so particularly observed this of that blind Boy what my Lord Clancâ—rty had long before told me presently came to my mind viz. That in his own presence at Thurls Finachty disown'd the power of Curing meer natural diseases It remained therefore now that I should see him practice on the young Girle that was said to be troubled with Spirits or Fairies For it growing late there was an ordinary Countrey woman standing by that came to me and pray'd me to speak to him for her Daughter a young well-complexion'd Girle of about Thirteen or fourteen years old that they might be dispatch'd in time as having two Miles to go out of Town that Evening to Crumling a Village near Dublin where she said she dwelled I ask'd the woman what her daughter ail'd she answer'd That lately her Girle having gone abroad into the Fields she returned home much troubled with some apparition of Spirits she had there seen and continued ever since troubled with them especially at Night This occasion I embraced the more willingly that I doubted not his extraordinary gift if any he had consisted only in Exorcizing Spirits or Curing such distempers as commonly proceeded or at least were supposed to proceed from such evils Spirits or Fairies though at the same time I considered well enough not only that there nothing was visible to nor perceptible by any other of us there present of any such evil afflicting that young Maid but also that meer imagination and heat of blood or some other accident distempering her brain might have made her apprehend the trouble of Spirits where all the evil was from other causes and such as were natural in her own body or constitution However because I thought withall she was such a sort of Demoniack as all the very worst of those in that Countrey then commonly reputed Demoniacks by him and his Admirers I was desirous to see on this occasion the method of his practice on such And therefore pray'd him to turn to that Maid and examine both her self and Mother and then proceed with her as he thought fit because it was growing late and they had a longer way to go than others that Night He yields readily and seems glad of the opportunity when I told him she was said to be troubled with Spirits And after some few questions put by him to the Mother in publick before us all he says he must speak in private to the Girl and thereupon takes her away with him to another more private Room where none was but he and she together and there remains so for a pretty while I suppose examining her self more strictly though it seemed somewhat strange to me that he did not at least desire me to goe along with him and be present all the while at least in the same room at any even whatsoever such private examination the rather that I was the only Church-man with him that whole afternoon At last he calls for me and with me as many of the rest go as pleased or could well stand in the small room where he was We found the young Girl placed by him in a Chair just against the Window that is her face turn'd thither and the Casement opened Then he stands over her falls to his formal Adjurations and after he had Sign'd her several times with the Cross on the head and fore-head within a while asks her where she felt her evil and upon her answer that in her neck or shoulder arme or side c. pursues it still from limb to limb with Crossing that part of her body and continuing still his Exorcism Then he demands again and again was she well yet or did she feel it elsewhere Some time she answered she was well and felt nothing any more but then he box'd her and told her she lyed and then also but after some further Adjuration by him she crys here or there viz. in some other part of her body where he pursues it in the same method till he comes down to her feet and then rubs hard or rather strikes or stroaks hard her foot with his own over it in a sloping manner so that her toe was the last he touched with his sole as pretending to drive out the Devil from that last habitation or retreat of his into her toe Then bids her look stedfastly through the Casement or opening of the Window and tell what she had seen there and how many go out that way And if she demurr'd upon her answer threatens her and so leads her to confess she had seen some go out Then again he asked her what more did she see or did she not see a great Mountain far of and a great fire upon it and a great number of black fellows fighting and killing and chopping one another in pieces and throwing also one another into the fire when she had answered yes then he renews more vehemently his Conjurations Wherein as I took particular notice he used even from the beginning of his Exorcisme to insert a special command to a hundred thousand Devils enjoyning them to come from Hell and carry away that evil Spirit companion of theirs or those many such that possessed or molested this Creature of God and to leave her thenceforth free from their vexation c. But it seem'd nevertheless even by his own confession in that very place and time before and to us all present that some of those evil Spirits at least of those pretended by him to have possessed her continued still extream refractory and stubborn For after he had tyred himself and well nigh wearied the beholders at least me I am sure it growing very late and he having once more asked the Girl whether she did not find her self well and she answering yea he told her she lyed and then converting himself to the beholders but particularly to the Mother declar'd she was strongly yet Possessed she must come or be brought to him again at better leasure and that he must take much more pains with her than he could for that present Whereupon all parted How well satisfied others were I know not but sure I am I was my self much troubled at all I had
of his Majesties Kingdoms that the belief of Transubstantiation amongst English Irish and Scottish Catholicks is no more a Sign or an Argument of a Puritan Papist than it is at present amongst the French XII That we have no cause to wonder at the Protestants Jealousie of us when they see all the three several Tests hitherto made use of for trying the judgment or affection of Roman Catholicks in these Kingdoms in Relation to the Papal pretences of one side and the Royal rights of the other I mean the Oath of Supremacy first the Oath of Allegiance next and last of all that which I call the Loyal Formulary or the Irish Remonstrance of the year 1661 even all three one after another to have been with so much rashness and wilfulness and so much vehemency and obstinacy declined opposed traduced and rejected amongst them albeit no other Authority or power not even by the Oath of Supremacy (z) Art 37. of the Church of England And Admonition after the Injunctions of Queen ELIZABETH it self be attributed to the King save only Civil or that of the Sword nor any Spiritual or Ecclesiastical power be denied therein to the Pope save only that which the general Council of Ephesus (a) In the year 431. under Theodosius the Younger in the Case of the Cyprian Bishops and the next Oecumenical Synod of Chalcedon (b) In the year 451 Can. 28. under the good Emperour Martianus in the case of Anatolius Patriarch of Constantinople and the two hundred and seventeen Bishops of Africk (c) In the year 419. whereof Saint Augustine was one both in their Canons and Letters too in the Case of Apiarius denyed unto the Roman Bishops of their time and albeit the Oath of Allegiance was of meer purpose framed only to distinguish 'twixt the Loyal and disloyal Catholicks or the honest and Loyal party of them from those of the Powder-Treason Principles and albeit the Remonstrance of 1661 was framed only at first by some well meaning discreet and learned Roman Catholicks of the English Nation and was now lately signed by so many and such persons of the Irish Nation as we have seen before and was so far from entrenching on the Catholick Faith or Canons or Truth or Justice in any point that saving all these it might have been much more home than it is though indeed as from well meaning honest men it be home enough nay and albeit neither of these two later Tests the Oath of Allegiance or the Irish Remonstrance promiseth to the King any other than meer Civil obedience and this obedience too in meer civil or temporal Affairs only according to the Laws of the Land nor denyes any canonical obedience to the Pope in either Spiritual or Ecclesiastical matters purely such nor indeed in any matter at all wherein the Canons of the Catholick Church impower his Holiness and wherein his Key does not manifestly err How much more may it provoke them to see the few Ecclesiastical approvers of the said Tests especially of either of these two last to have been therefore persecuted amongst and by the foresaid generality of British and Irish Catholicks yea to have been look'd upon as Outcasts Excommunicants Schismaticks Hereticks and what not And that excellent man that most loyal and learned English Monk Father Thomas Preston for having formerly both under his own name and that of Roger Widrington so incomparably defended the foresaid Oath of Allegiance to have been forced nay content and glad at last to shelter himself in a (d) In the Clink at London prison from the furious persecution of the Opposers And after him so lately again Father Peter Walsh of Saint Francis's Order only for having promoted the said Loyal Irish Formulary of 1661 and for having Subscribed it himself and refused to retract his Subscription to have been reduced to a far worse condition than Preston even that of a Bannito or an Out-lawed man by publick denunciation and affâ—xion of him as an excommunicate person to be shun'd by all former Acquaintance except a very few and to be left alone at last for the matter one single person to maintain the justice of that Formulary and of his own defence and cause and carriage all along and consequently to grapple with a numberless number of subtle and powerful and implacable Adversaries How much more to see so many Books of Roman Catholick Doctors Italian Spanish German Dutch Candian English of Bellarmine and Becan and Suarez and Singleton and Sculkenius and Tortus and Eudamon Johannes and Gretser and Parsons and Fitzherbert c to have been written printed and published against the foresaid Oath of Allegiance enacted by King James And amongst the generality of the Roman Catholick Readers so many practical Students to have been indoctrinated by those very Books or some of them Although Books in truth wholly composed of lying Sophistry i.e. of very false Doctrines in point of Religion and very treasonable and pernicious in point of subjection as it hath been sufficiently proved concerning all the above mentioned Doctors by the foresaid indefatigable Writer Thomas Preston who has not left his Antagonists either place or possibility of saying a word to his last Pieces wherewith he so incomparably baffled all their Answers Replies Rejoinders c. How much more after all this and even since his present Majesties Restauration to see so much wrath and rage against so innocent a Formulary of their own and of professing Allegiance in meer temporal things only So many forreign Censures of Divines and forreign Letters of Inter-Nuncio's and Cardinals to have been procured And so many forreign both Citations and Excommunications to have been issued forth against the Subscribers of it with professed design both to suppress it utterly and either to silence them eternally or to destroy them for subscribing it yea so many Missionaries to have been employed and Commissaries authorized and for a dead lift and when opportunity served at last in the year 1669 besides Provincials instituted and Vicars Apostolical made even so many Bishops and Archbishops on a sudden to have been created in Ireland by his Holiness for that end chiefly And all this strange and late procedure against so harmless a profession of Allegiance to have been hitherto look'd upon by the generality of British and Irish Catholicks I mean by such of them as knew thereof not only with indifferent eyes and thoughts but by the far greater part of them received with complacency and by all for ought appears submitted unto with a perfect resignation of their Souls to the good pleasure of his Holiness and his Ministers I say it is not to be imagined that all these matters concerning those three several Tests one after another should have been and happened thus even publickly before the Sun and to the full Knowledge not of Catholicks onely but of Protestants but it must of necessity give very much ground to the more considering persons
amongst the same Protestants to perswade themselves that however in our neighbouring Catholick Kingdoms the Article of Transubstantiation and the Doctrine of the Bishop of Rome's universal Monarchy or of his both spiritual and temporal supreme Jurisdiction do not walk hand in hand together yet amongst the generality of Roman Catholicks in these Nations it hath been otherwise continually these last hundred years and is at present whether in the mean time this proceed out of Ignorance or Interest or both XIII That thus at last the only true both original and continual causes on our side of all the severe Laws and of all the other grievous misfortunes and miseries past and present which we complain of and groan under as peculiar to the Professors of the Roman Catholick Religion in these Nation appearing to be and really being such as I have hitherto discoursed none can be so short sighted or so unapprehensive as not without further discourse to understand likewise the only Christian and proper efficacious remedy of all the said evils for what I mean concerns the future and our own endeavours and concurrence with God and man to help our selves For certainly nothing can be more obvious to reason than that since our own either formal or virtual express or tacit owning of so many uncatholick Positions and so many unchristian practises by our continual refusing to disown them or either of them in any sufficient manner or as we ought by any proper Test hath been of our side hitherto the only immediate cause of all our woes and especially of all those legal Sanctions which upon due reflection do without doubt render our best condition even at present anxious it must follow That the only proper true and efficacious remedy on our side also must be at last our own free and unanimous and hearty and conscientious disowning of all and every the said erroneous Positions and wicked practises even by such a publick full and clear Instrument or Declaration and Oath as may satisfie all Protestants of our utter Aversness and Enmity to all Rebellious Doctrines and Practises whatsoever especially to those which tend to the maintaining of any kind of temporal Dominion or Jurisdiction direct or indirect or even any spiritual Power or Authority which may have the effect of such temporal in the Pope or See of Rome over his Majesty or any of his Majesties Subjects or at all within the Realms of England Ireland or Scotland or within any of the other Dominions acknowledging his Majesty even in any case of contingency imaginable especially in case of either true or only pretended Apostacy Heresie Schism c. and such publick Instrument Declaration and Oath so full and clear even also against all equivocations and both mental and vocal evasions whatsoever to be in your name together with your Petition most humbly presented to the King and Parliament some time this present Session by your sufficient Representatives the Roman Catholick Lords or such of them as will be pleased to take these matters to heart XIV That when in such manner as you ought you have performed that duty which you have so long owed to God and the King to your Country and Religion to the Christian Church in general and all mankind and amongst them to your selves and your posterity after you and when you have thereby done your part to disarm all the anger of the Presses and to silence all the clamor of Pulpits and put an effectual stop to a thousand new Invectives and ten thousand more Sermons preparing to incense the Protestant people against you i. e. when by such a publick Instrument or solemn Declaration and Religious Oath of the generality of your Nobles Ecclesiasticks and Gentry you shall have quite rendred unsignificant their I know not which more affrighting or bewitching Theme quite destroyed their Common place and no less effectually than clearly answered their only grand Objection against your Liberty viz. That of The inconsistence of the safety of a Protestant Prince or State or Kingdom or People with Liberty in the same Dominions given to Roman-Catholick Subjects and consequently when by doing so you shall have done your selves all the greatest right you can think of viz. you shall have conform'd to the inward dictates of a good Conscience wiped off from your holy Religion the outward scandal of most wicked Principles yielded to victorious Truth wheresoever you behold her and which is and must be consequential when you shall have thus after a tedious contest of above a hundred years advanced on your side the first considerable step to meet half way the Right Reverend Prelates and other learned Teachers of the Church of England in order to a happy reconciliation at last of the remaining differences then may you confidently expect from their side also i. e. from his most Gracious Majesty and the great Wisdom and Piety of both Houses of Parliament all that ease relaxation indulgence peace kindness love which by any men dissenting yet in so many other points from the Religion established by Law can be in reason expected even a Repeal at least of all the Sanguinary and Mulctative Laws For to expect an equality in all priviledges with those that are of the Protestant Church until God be pleased to bring you nearer them or them to you than in a meer profession how real and cordial and universal or comprehensive soever of Allegiance to the King in Temporal or Civil Affairs only I say till that day come which we pray for it will I believe seem unreasonable to your selves to expect that equality with them which they were not to expect of you if you had the power in your hands and they were in your condition How can they in reason expect so much favour as they now shew us if they retain any memory of former times and consider the now prevailing Party amongst us and Papal Constitutions even at this present governing that Party at least in relation to such as are reputed Hereticks or Schismaticks by the Consistory at Rome XV. That of those Ecclesiasticks who as the English Opposers of the Oath of Allegiance or the Irish Persecutors of the Loyal Remonstrance shall endeavour to persuade your continuing alwayes Rigid Papalins maugre Heaven and Earth and to stifle any motion or thought of giving a Protestant Prince or Parliament any more satisfaction in the principal point either of Consistence or Inconsistence c than your selves or your Predecessors have given hitherto some of them are naturally averse to the Crown of England and would be so though it were as entirely devoted now to the See of Rome as it was at Dover when King â—ohn laid it there at the Legat's feet others are daily expectants of Mitres and Titles and Bulls and Dignities from that City of Fortune others have already taken the Formal or Ceremonial possession of their now most Illustrious and most Reverend Lordships and these also have already at their Consecration
persuaded or dissuaded by any of these men It is not really your salvation they promote by dissuading or diverting you from such a profession of your Allegiance to the King as would in part formally and for the rest virtually and consequentially renounce abjure condemn abhor detest and even in formal terms protest against all those uncatholick Positions and unchristian Practises before related It is indeed their own worldly gain and greatness that the leading men aim at They drive at all and if they thrive they will have all If they fail in their great and bold attempt an attempt forsooth pro bono Ecclesiae Dei yet they know where to live as well for the conveniencies of this World as they do at present with you and many of them much better But when that happens you may starve many of you in a Jayle and your Posterity after you be for ever miserable not knowing where to find relief And by losing on such an account all the lawful comforts of this life to say no worse you cannot with any certainty or even the least intrinsick probability expect to be therefore crown'd as Martyrs or Confessors in the next However they may glorifie you to incite others to do as you have done you cannot amidst your Sufferings have the comfort of believing them or account your selves Martyrs of Christ or of the Christian or Catholick Religion unless you are silly enough to be persuaded That such Positions and Practises as the whole Christian Church from the beginning and even for Ten whole Ages after condemned in effect as erroneous and wicked be that Righteousness or part of that Righteousness whereof our Saviour speaks in St. Matthew declaring there unto us That (b) Mat. 5. Blessed are they who suffer persecution for Righteousness sake because theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven XVII That no less a man yea no less a Saint a Holy Doctor and Pope too than Gregory the Great Himself writing above a Thousand years ago to all the Bishops of Ireland (c) Whether of Hibernia as in the common Editions or of Iberia as in Rom. Correctan Gratian. de Consecrat dist 4. c 144. Ab Antiqua it matters not for either way it serves to my purpose on the subject of their being then under a grievous persecution for a less improbable less reprovable and I am sure less interested cause viz That of the Tria Capitula relating to the great Council of Chalcedon hath spoken as plainly to them as I do here to you For in his Epistle (d) L. 2. Regist Indict x. Ep. 36. Which Indiction fell into the year of Christ 592. superscribed Ad universos Episcopos per Hiberniam constitutos in causa Trium Capitulorum He told those Irish Bishops in plain terms That they were not to expect in the other life any rewards for their suffering in this for the cause of the Tria Capitula or for any other unreasonable cause whatsoever i. e. for any at all which was not of divine Cathloick Religion but of humane uncatholick Opinion or Faction not even for suffering so grievous a Persecution as they complain'd of nay seem'd also by their Letter to glory in Prima itaque sayes he Epistolae vestrae frons gravem vos pati persecutionem innotuit Quae quidem persecutio dum non rationabiliter sutinetur nequaquam proficit ad salutem Nam nulli fas est retributionem praemiorum expectare pro culpa Debetis enim scire sicut Beatus Cyprianus dixit quia Martyrem non facit poena sed causa Dum igitur ita sit incongruum nimis est de ea vos quam dicitis persecutione gloriari per quam vos constat ad aeterna pramia minime provehi And yet we know that cause of the Tria Capitula for which those ancient Bishops of Ireland did then suffer was in it self far more specious than yours can be in the Case proposed Nay we know it was indeed so specious and probable that they of Ireland then had not only the Bishops of many other Provinces even of the Roman Empire concurring with them in opinion but the chief of all Bishops in his time that was a little before St. Gregory the Great 's Pontificat even Pope Vigilius of Rome and Him also extreamly persecuted for the same cause yea buffeted drag'd imprisoned at Constantinople c. by command of the Catholick Emperor Justinian * Baron ad ann Christ 552. Nay we know it was so specious a Cause as not only to have in the bottom of it nothing of worldly Interest Dominion Power Riches nothing of Supremacy or Primacy even Spiritual much less any thing at all of Rebellion or Blood or Wickedness under any pretence whatsoever For these Sufferers both pretended and intended the sole honor of Christ against Nestorianism And yet we see how severely and positively they i. e. those ancient Bishops of Ireland or Iberia were by Gregory the Great dealt with on the point of their suffering persecution for that cause how specious or probable soever which a greater body of Christians did condemn and which all Christians might be sure was no part of those undoubted verities of Religion for which if occasion were they were bound to suffer and suffering and dying so were also to expect certainly and confidently the reward of the blessed a Crown of Glory in Heaven Whence you may judge what he would say to you at this present for being led by men who would persuade you still to suffer persecution for a Cause which hath nothing of that speciousness in it a Cause which hath nothing to make the sufferance for it appear in any wise rational to sober men a Cause that hath not the ancient nor even the modern Bishops of any one other Kingdom or Province in the World to make it seem the less improbable no nor any one of those ancient Bishops of Old Rome alone and yet a Cause that in the very outward Superficies hath nothing clearer than worldly Pomp Power Vanity Pride Usurpation Rebellion Treason Blood and all kind of Injustice and Vice to brand it and finally by very evident consequence a Cause that in its own nature conduces to nothing not according to reason can promote any thing less than the honour of either the Divinity or Humanity of our Saviour Christ against any Sect whatsoever XVIII That in the last place having your eyes thus prepared all these things being consider'd you may clearly see thorough that other sly artifice of those self same interested men whereby they would perswade you at least to so much filial Reverence to the great Father of Christendom as to acquaint Him first with your present condition send him a Copy of the publick Instrument you intend to fix upon with the Reasons also inducing you thereunto pray His approbation thereof in order to your signing it and then expect a while his Paternal Advice and Benediction before you make any further progress
and such I mean of them as have been so Printed I have moreover shewed there that were those very Lateran and Tridentine Canons nay the very General Statutes of Victoria received in the Countries or Provinces where I Printed any of those Books of mine or Father Caron his own excepted against by Adversaries and consequently where I now publish this present Book yet the meaning of the Fathers who made those Canons or Statutes could not extend nor be construed to extend to all Causes Cases and Contingencies whatsoever nor consequently to the Cause Case or Contingency wherein Father Caron and I have Printed heretofore or wherein I do now Print or Publish this present Work or shall hereafter any other on the same Subject Nay I have there abundantly and clearly proved That it is not in the power not even of the Universal Church of Christ as such to make if they would any such Canon or Statute or any I say of such meaning or sense because * 2 Cor. 13.10 there is no power given by Christ to his Church for destruction but for edification as Paul the Apostle hath long since declared XXX As for the more malicious Objections of another nature I mean those meer Calumnies and Forgeries which the In famous Author whoever he was of the Dublin Libel some years since written and dispersed there directly against me and other my Fellow Remonstrants I confess but withal indirectly and if I be not much deceived even principally aiming at the most Illustrious person of His Grace the Duke of ORMOND hath amassed together the most speciously i. e. the most cunningly but falsely too boot he could and which therefore or however may perhaps occur to some others who have read them and yet saw no Answer to them and for that reason may work in them against this present Book of mine some kind of prejudice I must advertise thee 1. That for what concerns either my self or my said Fellow Remonstrants I have also before now at large and of purpose in my foresaid Latin Hibernica Part III cap. 5 6 7. discovered as I shall yet hereafter in the Second Tome of this English Work as in a more proper place discover the imposture of those for one part lying and for the rest deceitful vain objections as being wholly composed either of meer Forgeries or imperfect Relations of matter of Fact and those Relations too given so imperfectly out of meer design to deceive the Reader by suppressing or saying not a word of that which if known would of it self not only not leave any place for an objection but clear all objections imaginable 2. That for what concerns His Grace the Duke of ORMOND you may see in the last Appendix of this Book i. e. in His own very Excellent Letter which is there a clear both discovery and conviction of and against all the malicious and lying Reflections of that Libel on Him for His management of Publick Affairs or Conduct of the Army in Ireland since the Peace of 1648 concluded till He was forc'd out of that Kingdom in 1650 by the Declaration and Excommunication of the Irish Prelats at Jamestown c. As for His Carriage formerly and first in disposing Affairs to and then concluding the former Peace or that of 1646 you may see Him in all respects throughly vindicated in the Complete History of all the Publick Transactions and other particulars too of the late Irish Wars Which History as I have said before is now preparing for the Press 3. That you may see moreover not only in my foresaid Hibernica but in my First Latin Epistle ad Haroldum which was published last year what Penalties I say not by the municipal Laws of England and Ireland which are known to all the Students of our English Laws but even by as well the Canon Law as the Civil he i. e. the AUTHOR of the foresaid LIBEL is obnoxious to How by the Laws of the Emperours Valentinian and Valens (a) Cod. de Famos Libel l. uni◠he should be put to death by the Canon (b) 5. q. 1. cap. quidam of Pope Adrian if he can be found or if appearing of himself he cannot prove the truth of the particulars of his Libel he must be stript naked and whipt with scourges by the Council of Eliberis (c) ead cap. Quidam he is to be anathematized by the Canon (d) ead cap. Quidam ex lib. 5. Epist Greg. Epist 30. sive cap. 130. in Castorii casu supra of Gregory the Great until he appear and confess himself to be the Author he is presently de facto deprived of the participation of the body and blood of our Lord and if notwithstanding he dare approach to these adorable mysteries he is also ipso facto even as to all other Goods and Rites of and communication with the Church both excommunicated and anathematized and wholly as a deceitful pestiferous person separated from the Holy Catholick Church How also not he alone who is the principal Author but even all others qui consansum in 〈◊〉 iniquitatis consilio praebuerum who consented with him in such iniquity are in the same manner ipso facto excommunicated anathematized and separated c. by the self-same Canon of Gregory How by both Civil and Canon Law he and they are likewise ipso facto per sententiam rendred infamous (e) Infames ipso facto per sententiam esse Gloss in dictum cap. Quidam verb. potuerit How moreover both by the foresaid Canon of Pope Adrian and foresaid Law of the Emperours Valentinian and Valens it is Enacted That not only such as consent unto or participate with the principal Author in his iniquity but such as even by chance either at home or abroad in any place whatsoever light upon a Libel and not tear it presently or burn it but reveal the Contents thereof to any other are to be taken for the principal Author or Authors and are accordingly to be punish'd That is are by the Ecclesiastical Court to be sentenced to Scourging and by the Civil to be sentenced to Beheading flagellandos esse sayes the Canon and Capitali sententiae subjugandos sayes the Law 4. That for the sake of Father Peter Talbot the Titular Archbishop of Dublin and of his Complices I took the pains to quote these Laws and Canons whereby it may be seen what he and they deserved nay what de facto they lie under by their infamous wretched tricks of Libelling against me and not against me onely but also against so many others those I mean no less truly venerable and pious than sincerely Loyal and Remonstrant Irish Priests For I will speak nothing here of the most Illustrious Duke of ORMOND who is infinitely above all the malice of those Libellers and hath hitherto by so much appear'd more and more deservedly glorious by how much the malice and envy of some men have fixed the eyes of all sober men
liberty or that ease from the penal laws which they so vehemently desired might be so sollicited and obtained by him That my Lord Aubigny himself though expecting the Cardinal Dignity was so farre from disapproveing that Remonstrance or their concurrence to it when first it came forth in Print That he sayed plainly and often to the Procuratour when complaining to him of his said Confessour Father Peter Aylmer at that time with his Lordship at London If the King would be advised by him there should not be a Priest in any of the three Kingdoms but such as would freely sign it That although a while after when he hearkned to the Jesuits he relented somewhat on consideration of their furtherance of his pretensions at Rome or of removeing the obstacles they might perhaps otherwise put in his waye yet on better consideration again return'd to his former and fix'd principles and therefore advised the said Father Aylmer either to sign or withdraw himself out of England Which was the immediate cause of Mr. Aylmers comming then for Ireland though with design also to do all the mischief he could to cross that business as truly he did by manifest untruths although he protested so lately before and so publickly in the presence of 30. Catholicks Priests and Catholick Bishops too at London when the rest signed it that he singled not himself for point of conscience and that he would with his blood sign the lawfulness and Catholickness of it yet pretending after that he had not sufficiently studied nor understood the point as indeed he never seemed to have before or after That for the rest of the Queens Chaplains ordinary or extraordinary I mean the English Irish who were concern'd and to whom it was proper I must confess the grand mistake was in not offering it them by authority at first when it came forth as to my knowledge it was intended to be offered at Hampton-Court and at Council upon a certain Sunday but none of the copies being at hand that day and other things intervening after they were neglected Which gave so much encouragement to all other dissentors ever since albeit the case of those Chaplains and that of the rest of the Irish Clergie be very different and that none of the rest who have been so expresly particularly and positively desired their own concurrence should on that pretence denye or excuse it That finally for what concerns my Lord Abbot Montague what ever his own peculiar interest was or is in relation to that Remonstrance or to an approbation of it if demanded I am sure that being as well as my Lord Aubigny acquainted with the Divinity of France having his title and so great a benefice there and being so conversant in that Court and Church his judgement must have been for the Catholickness and lawfulness of it And a person of so great both reason and experiance in the affairs of these Nations could not but conceive it was both expedient and necessary for such of the Romish Clergie natives as would live at home in any of them to sign it and for such as were abroad or would be not to hinder those at home by disswasion from the good they might expect thereby And could not but conceive it was both expedient and necessary even for His Majesties greater assurance of them that they should do so That besides nothing more in particular being known of my Lord Abbot Mountague's affection or disaffection to that matter nay were even his positive perswasion to the contrary known of certain as it was never for any thing I could here and I have listened after it sufficiently carefully enough yet his Lordships even such demeanour could be no rational pretence for them his forraign dependency his special priviledge by serving the Queen Mother in so great a capacity as he is known to serve Her exempting him from a rule concerning others that had no such arguments to excuse them To say nothing here of his being an English man and Priest of that Clergie who were not so neerly concern'd not to be backward as the Irish Clergie were and who nevertheless did then for the generality of them most heartily desire as they do at this present His Majestie were pleased to favour them so much albeit not lying under those great suspicions the Irish Clergie do at least not having in our dayes given such cause as to demand their subscriptions to such an Instrument and be content therewith in lieu of those other demonstrations the laws they lye under expect from them IX However such as made it their interest to oppose any further subscription made use of these and many other such pittiful and too too weak pretences to excuse their nonconcurrence when they saw no further probability in those no less weak pretences of Theological arguments borrowed from Suarez Bellarmine and others of their way that writ on the Subject of the Popes ill-grounded pretences to and over the Scepters and Royal Diadems or temporal authority of Kings and in particular of the Kings of England But indeed the true causes of their backwardness and reluctancy and which even themselves almost all generally upon occasion acknowledg'd were 1. That most of their leading men and such as not onely were in office over others but very many also that bore no such offices at all as then were pretendents and candidats either abroad at Rome for titulary Archbishopricks Bishopricks Vicar-generalships Deanries Parishes Provincialships Commissaryships c. or at home amongst their own Brethren for votes to be chosen presented or preferred to such offices either amongst the secular or regu-Clergie as they aspired unto albeit as poor and inconsiderable amongst the Clergie as little Cures in Parishes without other advantage than the bare benevolence of the laye people and even as poor and inconsiderable as a Guardianship Priorship or some such other now very vain title in Ireland amongst the Regulars For because at Rome and for what depended of that Court immediately they perswaded themselves that to subscribe would be a perpetual obstruction to all their hopes as the case stands in Ireland the King being of a different communion and even at home also they could expect no more favour from their own Brethren or their own actual superiours Bishops Vicars-general Provincials c. that were adverse to the Remonstrance as most of them certainly were even such as both in their judgements for point of conscience and in their natural inclinations also to the English Crown and interests of it in Ireland were truly in their Soules for the Remonstrance would not by any means be induced to declare themselves publickly such either in word or writing 2. That such as in the late Warrs had engaged themselves against both Peaces or either of them and against the foregoing Cessation and consequently for the Censures of the Nuncio apprehended it for want of Christian humility or a true sense of piety as the worst of evils
controversie is in whose time Ptolomey likewise surnamed Epiphanes King of Egypt dyed and his young Son called Ptolomey Philometor was crowned after him King of Egypt and by consequence had the dominion of Ierusalem and Iewry That Antiochus Epiphanes that wicked ambitious and most cruell King of Asia and Syria taking advantage of the minority of this young Ptolomey Philometor without any just cause or provocation or any other but his own ambitious desires entred Egypt with a huge army and with intention to seize the young King and possess himself of all his Kingdom of Egypt and of his other dominions and wel-nigh effected his designs having after his taking of Memphis besieged Alexandria it self and the young King therein but was on a suddain forced to break up his siege and relinquish all again and retire immediatly out of all Egypt upon summons sent him by the Romans to do so or abide a sharp war from them That in his forced return to his own Kingdom some few wicked Jews having out of desire to be revenged of others even by the loss of their Countrey animated him to camp before Ierusalem and the riches of that City and treasures of the Temple there having set him all on fire with covetousness he marched directly towards it and the Gates being treacherously set open to him by those within of that wicked faction he surprized it in the hundred fourty and third year of the raign of Seleucus the year of the world 3796. and before Christ 168. years That as this was done without any consent of the people generally or of their Governours so he behaving himself immediatly after as the most cruel tyrant that even surprized any place and having broke all kind of conditions either concerning Religion Estate or life even with those very traytors of their own City and Countrey and having spoiled both the City and Temple and carried all the spoils with him to Antioch but two years after he surprized them so and having left most cruel Edicts after him for the future and those put in execution with unparelled cruelty it is evident enough that as he had no just title for that was nor any permission from the lawful hereditary King Ptolomey Philometor to seize Ierusalem or Iewry so he had none from the people of Ierusalem or Iewry either first or last to entitle him to the rights of a lawful King not even I say from them in case they could justly give any such their own hereditary King being still alive and still too in possession of the greatest part of his dominions nor could two years such forcible and cruel possession entitle him to any right at all That in fine as all this is manifest in History in that of Iosephus I mean and in his twelfth Book of the Antiquities of the Jews and in his eleventh for what concerns Alexander the Great himself and being further it is no less manifest in the same History of Iosephus and in the seventh and eight chapters of the said twelfth Book and in the marginal Chronology That Mattathias took arms against the said Antiochus Epiphanes immediatly after the said second year of his unlawful possession kept of Iewry 〈…〉 is immediatly â—ften the 〈◊〉 and general and cruel 〈…〉 it is no less evident 〈◊〉 foâ— that he did so that is 〈…〉 his 〈…〉 King but against 〈…〉 unjust Usurper and Tyâ—â—â— also no less 〈◊〉 And consequently that no warlike actions nor exhortations of Mattathias nor any other of that Machabâ—â—â— ar◠〈◊〉 of his Sons or of that whole Nation of the Jews against Antiochus that faithless impious inhumane King of Asia â—â—e to any purpose alledged to maintain the pretended inherent power of any Subjects whatsoever to rebell against their own true â—egal undoubted rightful hereditary King however oppressing them either in their religious or civil rights or both And this is the second answer I intended in my More Ample Account And which I give here not that it is any way necessary or directly at all to that which our present Adversaries the Authors of this second paper dispute of principally at this present or in this paper I now answer but because they have given me by their indirect reflections and by their impertinencius therein a just occasion for which I thank them to give it here for a further illustration of what I said formerly on this subject XXXV As for their Latin Postscript because I guess it was only added as an answer to an argument I press'd them with ad hominem as we speak as also with the conclusion of it in English two of their own general principles or doctrine of Probability to convince them of the lawfulness in point of conscience of subscribing the Remonstrance notwithstanding the pretence of some not only extrinsick authority 〈◊〉 even intrinsick probability appearing still in their very souls though I never did nor do believe there was any such against some position or supposition wherein that Remonstrance is grounded or which is therein contained I allow them till the advantage they can derive from these Câ—suists even as themselves quote them here For I am sure they will accordingly find the doctrine of the Remonstrance to be at least both extrinsecally and intrinsecally most probable and consequently the signing of it lawful in point of conscience But abstracting 〈◊〉 these rules and authority of Casuists which at least in 〈◊〉 matter of probability and as I have most clearly shown in my More Ample Account pag. 16. c. ought to be not only abstracted from but quite rejected as most unsafe and false and erroneous as likewise and by consequence the final English perclose as a corollary thence derived of this paper I now consider I am no less certain they will find themselves obliged in point of conscience to approve of all the doctrine positions and suppositions too of the said Remonstrance and reject and condemn the contrary as very false eroneous and scandalous too and consequently very sinful if not manifestly heretical in Christian Faith If I say they have studied or shall as they ought to do the arguments on both sides or but consulted with the Catholick Authors that have so lately handled them at large against the sophismes of Bellarmine and others of 〈◊〉 way For I fear they will not take the paâ—ts to sougth 〈…〉 â—â—â—ancie famous great and Classick Authors and 〈◊〉 in them their own ignorance and errour so long since reproach'd in the very Schools For as concerning the Scriptures and Fathers and universal Tradition of the Catholick Church and practice of Primitive Christians and that also of all ensuing ages till the Eleventh of Christianity under Gregory the Seventh they themselves cannot â—â—ny all to be against them Whereof and â—s with other both arguments and objections 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 I could heartily wish they would to satisfie yet more fully themselves take but so much pains as to read over the Barclays and Wriddringâ—â—n Father
answer that Affrican Synod where those Fathers reprove the injustice of Celestine's demand of such transmarine judgments in the case of Apiarius requiring it to be transmitted out of Affrick to Rome and reprove I say that injustice in these very words which you may read in the now mentiond Synodical Epistle a few lines after the former words Or how can that kind of transmarine judgment be rational or legal whereunto the persons of necessary witnesses cannot be brought because either of their sex or infirmities of old age or of many other intervening impediments But that neither within the limits of the same Province nor even where the crossing of the Sea is unnecessary the parties accused be drawn too farre from their dwelling places and so molested too much by the Judges on pretence of a judicatory Innocent the Third has enacted even in a Councel Oecomenical of the whole earth cap. Nâ—nnulli Extra de Rescriptis But all this and very many other passages to this purpose I pass over at present as I have said before I pass over likewise that exception which the Canons allow against the unsafety of the place to which the summons are the unsafety of it I say if the nature of the controversy and present circumstances be considered Especially if we call to mind what several Religious men and of several Orders too that to clear themselves from calumnies in a Controversy not altogether unlike this and being not even summond in that or any other cause whatsoever nor convicted of any kind of crime the Judges themselves confessing both did venture hence to goe and appear at Rome or Madrit have suffered in our own days in our own late memory and suffered too without so much as any kind of even the very external formality of law or canons observed towards them and suffered so too most plainly against all the laws of God and nature And if we call moreover to mind those inhumane plots contrived in forraign Countries against the very lives of some even of our secular Nobility that having been formerly engaged with us in the same controversy were after in the ruine forced to shift abroad plots layd by some of those very men that now again endeavour to embroyle all anew commixe heaven and earth put all things out of frame the second time into the most horrid confusion they can of purpose partly to asperse and be revenged of us In fine I pass over the greatest exception of all The quarrel against us and the controversy in all parts to be such as concerns the temporal rights of all supream lawful Magistrates or Governours Kings and States Kingdoms and Common-wealths that acknowledge no dependency in temporals but from God alone whether they be Christians or Pagans Orthodox or Heterodox believers And consequently such whereof the Minister general or Commissary National of St. Francis's Order is so farre wide from being judge I mean as to any effect of being able and I speake onely here of ability in point of conscience to oblige their Inferiours to determine in any part against the right of Princes or silence the truth of the Gospel of Christ in this matter chiefly where the declaration of such truth is needful amongst Sectaries that are partly for want of such declaration made to them by Catholicks known to continue their separation walke in darkness and have a most strange aversion from the Church of Rome that neither is the great and most blessed Pontiff himself alone reputed a competent much less infallible Judge in this controversy not I say reputed so even by most celebrious and most excellent Catholick Divines though earnest renowned Champions for the Roman Faith in all its tenets and latitude Which manifestly abundantly appears not onely out of the late Decree of the Theological Faculty of Paris of the 8. of May this present year 1663. and many other decisions not of that Faculty of Paris alone but of all other Vniversities of the Kingdom of France and of the Gallicane Church too in general since the horrid murthers of Henry the Third and Fourth even of National Councels of the Bishops of the same Church against the several attempts of Boniface the Eight and Julius the Second but also out of the carriadge books actions of the Divines and Prelats of the Venetian Republick and Church against Paul the Fift in the year 1606. out of the sense and sentence of the Archbishops Bishops and Abbots of the Catholick Church of England in the Raigns of Edward the Third and Richard the Second above 300. years since Gregory the Eleventh and Martin the Fift strugling to the contrary but to no purpose as you may read even in Polydore Virgil in his life of Edward the Third out of the German Italian and other Churches truly Orthodox of several Nations of Europe their Prelats and Clergie who adhered to the Roman Emperours where the temporal rights were concernd against Gregory the Seventh and some other great Bishops of the Roman Sea lastly and yet more particularly our of our own William Occam in the cause of Lewis of Bauier and out of Iâ—â—nnes Parisiensis Gerson Major Almain Cardinal Cusan c. most famous writers and Doctors too both Catholick and Classick nay if any credit be given to Aventinus in his Seventh book of his Boiarian Annals where he relates the Decree of the foresaid Emperour Lewis of Bauier out of that General and celebrated Chapter of the whole very Order of St. Francis held at Perusia in Italy or out I mean of the famous Appeal they all that is their General Provincials and Doctors of Divinity made therein from Iohn the two and twentieth Pope of that name to a future Oecumenical Council of Christendom although I do not deny but the most immediate occasion of their appearing so as is related in that History against the Pope and appealing from him was his condemning the Franciscans for teaching That neither Christ nor his Apostles had any temporal right or property in earthly goods but onely simplicem usum facti Whom therefore in shew but really for an other cause that is for their siding against him with the Emperour and maintaining by their pens and Sermons the Emperours temporal rights he tearmed foolish animals pernicious foxes that by a seeming strictness of religion and hypocrisy abused the world and seduced the people having first set forth those Extravagants which you may read in the Canon law against the Order it self All which I say and very much more of this kind I pass over at present Nor least I exceed the measure of an epistle do I at this time alledge either those other arguments derived from the intrinsick nature or as they speak commonly from the very bowels of the cause it self or those which may be brought from or out of Canonical Scriptures or the monuments of holy Fathers who in a continual succession for nine hundred years compleat nay till the eleventh age of Christianity delivered
cognizance of the Priests alone As appears sufficiently by the contrary practice of their being taxed and punished by their civil Magistrats all along from that time forward while their Commonwealth State or Kingdom was in being So that none of all these examples out of the old Testament alleadged by Bellarmine prove as much as per quamdam similitudinem by some kind of similitude as he speaks that Christian Clerks are by the positive law of God or should be exempt from either the supream or not supream coercive power of the civil Magistrate in criminal causes or any causes whatsoever nay nor that they are exempt by such as much as from taxes if the supream Magistrate shall find it necessary to impose taxes on them which is a farre less priviledge Nor yet as much as prove that any Priests or Clerks whatsoever in any age or amongst any people have ever yet been so exempt by any kind of meer human law from such supream coercive power in criminal causes And as for that onely place which he produces out of the new Testament Mat. 17. these words of our Saviour Then are the Children free and least we scandalize them c give it them for thee and me who sees not further that it is as impertinent as any of those of the old Testament and yet more impertinent then some of them to inferre our present controversy or to inferre that as much as per quandam similitudinem by the positive law of God Clerks are exempt from the cognizance and punishment of the supream civil Magistrate or even to inferre their exemption from the very most inferiour civil Judicatories in any civil or temporal cause whatsoever though it were not criminal any way Our Saviour according to the exposition of St. Hilary intimats onely his own freedom or exemption as he was the natural Son of God from that imposition laid by his Father in Exodus 30. on all the children of Israel of a sicle to the holy Temple or Tabernacle which was yearly paid by the Israelits none at all excepted not as much as those very Levits or Priests What hath this to do with the exemption of others that were not the natural Sons of God or what to do with the exemption of such others from the civil Judicatories in other causes or from the supream coercive power of the Prince in criminal causes Or if we admit the exposition of those who say this Didrachma was a tribute layd by Caesar to be payed to himself not that sicle which by the law of Moyses was to be payed to the Temple or tabernacle how doth our Saviour intimating that himself was Son to a King infinitely above all Caesars and therefore in that respect not bound to pay it if he pleased and that onely to avoyd scandal he would pay it for as much as he was not yet known to others to be the natural Son of that onely supream King of all Kings and Caesars and for that he came on earth in that form he appeared in not to break the laws of God or man but to fulfil the former in all points and to observe the later too wherein they were not against the former how I say doth such intimation made by our Saviour in that passage of Matthew any way or even as much as per quandam similitudinem inferre this conclusion Therefore by the positive law of God all Christian Clerks are in criminal causes exempt from the supream civil coercive power of Princes or Magistrats Yes very well sayes Bellarmine Because all such are of the peculiar family of Christ they are his special servants and Ministers And we know that the children of Kings being exempt from tribute and taxes it is not their own persons onely are so exempt but all their servants and Domestick family Excellent But are not all Catholicks or at least are not all holy and truly vertuous and sanctified Catholicks both men and women and as well those of them as are meer laye persons and have no other relation to Churchmen but that of the Catholick communion or Faith are not I say such of the special family of Christ his especial servants and Ministers as well at least as some Clergiemen or as at least the laye servants of some Clergiemen or as their maid-servants and men-servants their Porters Gardners Brewers Cooks and Scullions And doth not Bellarmine all those of his way extend Ecclesiastical Immunity even that very self-same Immunity which he would per quandam similitudinem as he speaks maintain to be de jure divino positivo doth not he I say at least for some part extend that even to all such laye servants even Landresses Cooks and Scullions of Clergiemen Certainly himself elswhere confesses de Concil Author l. 2. c. 17. avers also as much to his purpose That all Christian Catholicks men and women as well of the Layety as Clergie of the whole earth are of one and self-same family of Christ and fellow servants of the same house under the great Steward and Major domo of Christ the Bishop of Rome And to prove that all are of the same family and house of Christ under the same Steward brings that quaerie of Christ himself in St. Luke 12. chap. Quis est fidelis dispensator et prudens quem constituit Dominis super familiam suam c. But whether he will confess or no that they are equally of Christs household it matters not being it is evident of it self the principles of Christian Religion being supposed that such vertuous holy and sanctified laye persons who are no way obliged to Churchmen nor their domestical servants at all are more truly and properly and excellently of the family of Christ and more truly properly and excellently his servants and Ministers too in general though not by particular designation to that is the special Ministery or function of Clerks then even very many Clerks themselves not to speak of the domestick laye servants of any Clerks whatsoever Besides I demand of any that will answer for this eminent Cardinal whether all that believe in Christ as they should by a living Faith are not not onely called children of light in several places of Scripture are not not onely called servants of Christ and Domesticks of God but also have not the power given them to be the very Sons of God as Iohn the Evangelist sayes Jo. 1. dedit eis potestatem filius Dei fieri and not onely to be called so but really to be so as Paul in an other place ut filij Denominemur et simus to wit by adoption and sanctification And being it must be answered they are so called they have such power given them they are so indeed and not by name onely I farther demand then where is the strength of Bellarmine's argument grounded on our Saviour's intimating in this place of Mat. that himself was free and on the example of Earthly Princes and of their children freed by
been delivered and declared unanimously by the Fathers therein from the beginning as of divine Faith or as the doctrine of Christ or of the Apostles as received from Christ or that the contrary is heretical c. Non enim sunt de fide sayes Bellarmine ubi supra disputationes quae praemittuntur neque rationes quae adduntur neque ea quae ad explicandum et illustrandum adferuntur sed tantum ipsa nuda Decreta et ea non omnia sed tontum quae proponuntur tamquam de fide Interdum enim concilia aliquid definiunt non ut certum sed ut probabile c Quando autem decretum proponatur tamquam de fide facile cognoscitur ex verbis Concilij semper enim dicere solent se explicare fidem Catholicam vel Haereticos habendos qui contrarium sentiunt vel quod est communissimum dicunt anathema ab Ecclesia excludunt eos qui contrarium sentiunt Quando autem nihil borum dicunt non est certum rem esse de fide Whence it must follow evidently and even by an argument a majori ad minus that neither the words or epithets used even by the most general Council may be in their decrees of Discipline Reformation or manners nor the suppositions or praevious or concomitant bare opinions which occasion'd the use of such words or epithets in such decrees bind any at all to beleeve such words or epithets were rightly used or fitly applyed or that those opinions were well grounded or certain truths at all Whereof the reason too is no less evident and obvious To wit that the Fathers or Council had not examined or discussed this matter it was not at all their business to determine it nor did they determine it And that we know laws of Reformation and even the very most substantial parts of such Canons are grounded often on or do proceed from meer probable perswasions or such as onely seem probable nay sometimes from the meer pleasure of such law makers All which being uncontrovertedly true where is the strength of Bellarmines grand or second argument framed of such bare words or epithets did we grant his sense even in the whole latitude of it were that of these Popes and Councils Or how will he seek to establish a maxime of such consequence or of so much prejudice to all supream civil Governours and even to the peace of the world to all mankind it self and a maxime for so much or for what hath reference to the exemption of Clerks as to their persons in criminal causes from the supream civil coercive power so clearly as will be seen hereafter in some of the following Sections against express and clear passages of holy Scripture and against the universal Tradition for a 1000. years at least how will he I say have the confidence to endeavour the establishing of such a maxime upon so weak a foundation which every man can overthrow at pleasure or deny with reason to be a foundation at all for that or any other maxime as I mean asserted to be declared such in the positive law of God either in holy Scripture or in undoubted Tradition For the positive law of God appears not to us but by either of these two wayes of the written or unwritten word of God himself 4. And lastly that besides all said in these three answers to this second argument of Bellarmine if we please to examine further what the places alleadg'd import we shall find that whatever the private or peculiar but indiscussed opinion of these Popes or Councils was or was not concerning our present dispute of the exemption of Clerks and that by the positive law of God as to their persons in criminal causes from the supream civil or temporal coercive power nay or whatever such words as jus diuinum ordinatio Dei voluntas omnipotentis c. abstractedly taken may import yet the places alleadged or these words or epithets used in them by these Fathers must not by any means be thought therefore to have comprehended our present case or extended to it at all And the reason is 1. That all Divines and Canonists agree that all expressions words or epithets in any law whatsoever must be understood secundum subjectam materiam or must be expounded by and according as the matter which is in debate or is intended requires and further so as no errour inconvenience or mischief follow and yet the law and words thereof maintain'd still in a good sense and to some good use especially according to former wholesome laws 2. That the matter unto which there was any reference in these places or authorities quoted so by Bellarmine was either Ecclesiastical Immunity in the most generical sense abstracting from the several underkinds true or false or pretended onely of it or was it in a less generical sense taken for that of their persons but still abstracting for any thing appears out of these places quoted from that pretended species of exemption of Clerks as to their persons from the supream civil coercive power in criminal causes especially when the crimes are high and so high too as they are subversive of the very State it self and are besides in meer temporal matters and no remedy at all from the spiritual superiours And in truth for what concerns the Council of Trent which as of greatest authority amongst us as being the very last celebrated of those we esteem general Councils Bellarmine places in the front 1. it is clear enough to any that will please to read the whole tenour of that twentieth chapter Ses. 25. de Reformatione which he quotes That that Council did even there so much abstract from this matter or so little intended it that on the contrary the Fathers much rather seem to speak onely there of the Ecclesiastical exemption of Clerks as to their persons from onely inferiour secular Judicatories or onely from the inferiour Courts Judges and Officers of Princes but not at all from the Princes themselves or from their supream civil power or that of their laws Which I am very much deceived if this entire passage whereof Bellarmine gives us but a few words do not sufficiently demonstrate Cupient sancta synodus Ecclesiasticam disciplinam in Christiano populo non solum restitui sed etiam perpetuo sartam tectam a quibuscumque impedimentis conservari praeter ea quae de Ecclesiasticis personis constituit saeculares quoque Principes officij sui admonendes esse censuit confidens eos ut Catholicos quos Deus sanctae fidei Ecclesiaeque protectres esse voluit jus suum Ecclesiae restitui non tantum esse concessuros sed etiam suâ— ditos suos omnes ad debitam erga Clerum Parcchos et superiores ordines reverentiam revecaturos neâ— permâ—ssuros ut officiales aut inferiores magistratus Ecclesiae et personarum Ecclesiastisarum immunitatem Dei ordinatione et Canonicis sanctionibus constitutam aliquo cupiditatis studio seu
way as by saying they understood not by divine that which is properly and strictly divine but that only which is in a large though somewhat improper acception such and by lay-persons understand only such inferior Lay-persons Judges or Governours as in certain cases haue not from the supream power and civil laws any cognizance of Church-men Which indeed is the only rational and natural exposition of these authorities without any erroneous absurdity falsity inconvenience or prejudice as the very Canon alledged above by me at large out of the Tridentine Synod seems expresly to intimate for as much as it expresly and signally desires or confides for so it speaks that Emperours Kings and Princes will not suffer that their Officials or inferior Magistrats or Judges violat the Immunities of the Church or Church-men out of any covetousness or inconsiderancy confidens c. nec permissuros ut officiales aut inferiores Magistratus Ecclesiae personarum Ecclesiasticarum immunitatem Dei ordinatione canâ—nicis sanctionibus constitutam aliquo cupiditatis studio seu inconsideratione aliqua violent Besides the Reader is to observe two things for that of the fourth Lateran 1. That where 't is said there that Laicks usurp too much of divine right c. by divine right here we ought not nor indeed can if we will not make the Fathers to speak improperly understand the law of God but only the right belonging to God whether that right be derived immediatly from the law of God or law of man 2. That it cannot be truly said that any Clerks receive no temporal thing or benefit from the supream civil Magistrate whereas all Clerks receive from them temporal protection at least And therefore in reason owe Allegiance to such their protectors For Boniface the VIII although his authority or judgment alone without a Council be amongst very Catholick Nations or Universities of no great value or esteem in this or any other which concerns the difference or controversie For we know well enough how his extravagant unam sanctam de Majorit obed is reputed in the Gallican Church and what his Letter Brief or Bull was to a King of France where he declared them all Hereticks that would not acknowledge himself to be supream in that Kingdom and as well in all temporals as in spirituals and that the same esteem indeed and as to our main purpose may be and also truly and groundedly may be entertain'd of Innocent the Third no judicious Divine that will read in Spondaâ—uâ—s Contin his proceedings against most of all the Christian Kings not in Europe only but in Asia will deny I say neverthess that for what concerns only our present purpose of the exemption of Clergymens persons in criminal causes from the supream civil coactive power under which they live and are protected our learned Cardinal alledges this very Boniface to no purpose albeit he alledge him in cap. Quamquam de Censibus in 6. Where indeed there is no such thing For in that place as it is manifest enough out of the whole chapter and purpose or matter treated therein which was only of and against Guidagia that is a kind of toll custome or exaction to be paid for the safeguard of High-wayes and out of the very words which Bellarmine would not quote because not to his general purpose or to that of proving generally all the parts of his Fifth Proposition Cum igitur Ecclesiae Ecclesiasticaeque persâ—nae ac res ipsarum non solum jure humano quin etiam divino à saecularium personarum exactionibus sint immunes it is I say very manifest hence that Boniface in that place and no other is alledged out of him doth not as much as touch upon our controversie or say as Bellarmine imposes on him that Clerks and their goods are exempt from the secular power For be it well or ill said of Boniface here that as well by divine right or law as by humane Churches and Churchmen are free or exempt from all publick exactions of secular persons whereas by such exactions all Divines and Canonists understand only tributes tolls customes or taxes whatsoever of money or other things imposed as payable to the publick and whereas the very matter treated of and determined by Boniface in that Chapter is only that of guidagia or pedagia which was a duty as it seems payable then in Italy by all travellers and for their safe convoy or safe travelling whereas he commands only there that in prosecution of a certain decree made by Alexander the IV. his Predecessor Church-men pay no such guidagia or pedagia for their own Persons or Goods which they carry along or cause to be carried or sent non causa negotiandi who sees not it is a very great inconsequence and meer abuse of the Reader to conclude that therefore Boniface the VIII supposed generally nay says it to be de jure divino positivo taking this jus divinum strictly and properly that Clerks are wholy exempt in all criminal causes and all matters whatsoever from the supream civil coercive power of Lay-Princes Certainly neither doth Boniface teach any such matter there nor must any such follow out of what he either supposes or dedetermines there Because it is clear enough that certain persons even meer lay-persons may have a priviledge from all kind of taxes and yet be subject in other causes and other matters both criminal and civil to such as impose taxes For Iohn the VIII That who ever please to consider that whole chapter Si Imperator quoted by Bellarmine will be convinced this Pope intends no more but that as it is fitting the Emperour himself should for what concerns Religion learn from and not teach the Church so in Ecclesiastical matters it was Gods pleasure that Clerks should be ordered and examined and if they chanced to fall into an errour should be also reconciled on their return not by the Lay-powers but by the Pontiffs and Priests Which these words omitted by the Cardinal recipique de errore remeantes do sufficiently insinuat Besides that any man knows it is a very weak and sensless argument of a positive law of God for any thing or any duty or any priviledge that either Iohn the VIII or any other even a whole General Council should speak in this manner Omnipotens Deus voluit it was the will of God unless they had withal and on the debate or controversie it self made of purpose an express Canon declaring that thereby or by such manner or by these words it is or it was the will of the omnipotent God they mean'd to signifie not the general or special providence of God or his good will or pleasure known only to us for example in the present matter of Exemption because we see the Clerks as to many things are exempted so by the laws of Princes and that we know this could never have been done by Princes if God had not moved their hearts to do so For
or body at pleasure according to the end this rational commandress hath prefixed to her self and on the other side we see that the flesh hath no empire no command over the spirit nor can direct or judge or restrain it in any thing Ergo sayes Bellarmine a paritate it must follow or be That in the same wise the Ecclesiastical power which is spiritual and therefore naturally superiour to the secular may when it is necessary direct judge and restrain or use coercion towards the civil power but never be it self directed judged or restrained by the secular Third argument thus As well in holy Scripture and other writings of holy Fathers as by the common custom of Christians Priests are adorned with the names or titles of Fathers and Pastors But nature teacheth that children are bound to obey their parents and willingly abide correction from them but never to think that they on the other side may themselves command correct or judge their parents And much more doth the same nature teach that sheep are directed and govern'd by their Pastours and when they straye are by the whistle or stick of their Pastors reduced again into their right way and pasture Which is so true that it would be plainly against nature that a sheep should direct or govern her Pastour Fourth argument thus Ecclesiastical persons are the Ministers of God consecrated for his onely service and for this very purpose offered by all the people to God Whence it is that they are called Clerici or Clerks from the greek word Cleros that signifies a lot as if by that name of theirs it were given us to understand that they belong specially to the lot of our Lord Which St. Hierom teacheth in his Epistle to Nepotianus But certainly in such things as are offered and consecrated to God and so in some wise made as if they were the property or peculiar of God no secular Princes can have any right Which both the light of reason doth shew and God himself delivers not obscurely in holy Scripture where he sayes in the last of Leviticus Quicquid semel Deo fuerit consecratum sanctum sanctorum erit Domino Fift and last argument thus God hath not seldom punished miraculously the prophaners of Churches and such as presumed to violate the immunities or privileges granted to sacred places Whereof much may be read with Tilmannus Bredenbachius l. 5. sacrarum collationum But that is a very notable testimony which is read of Basilius Porphyrogenitus Emperour of the Greek apud Balsamonem in Nomōca-none Photij in commentario canonis primi Synodi Constantinopolitanae primae secundae quam nos Latini Octavam appellamus For the said Basilius attributs the cause of the calamities of those days to a certain law made by his predecessour Nicephoras Phocas against the liberty of the Church Ex quo inquit lex ista robur habuit nihil boni penitus in hodiernum usque diem vitae nostrae contigit sed potius ê contrario nullum omninò genus calamitatis defuit From the time sayes Basilius that law of Nicepherus was observed no kind of good fortune happened in our life but rather on the contrary no sort of calamity was wanting And therefore this Emperour Basilius did with much reason abrogat wholly that law And these are the five arguments of Bellarmine The first grounded on his pretended custom of all Nations second on his similitude betwixt the Ecclesiastical power and lay and that of the soul and body third on the titles or names of Father and children and sheepheards and sheep fourth on the title or name of Clerks derived from the greek word Cleros and on the signification thereof and the fift on signs and prodigies as he speaks or calamities which pursued the infringers of Ecclesiastical Immunity liberty or Exemption And these arguments I have given all of them as neer as I could in his own words and form that the Reader may the more clearly judge of my answers and of the controversy in it self for what concerns my present purpose in this Section which is onely as I have often advertised the Exemption or not exemption rather by the law divine natural or law of nations of the persons of Clergiemen from the supream lay civil and coercive power in criminal causes And consequently also judge whether I wrong this most eminent Cardinal if I say as I do say That he hath by his doctrine here or in and as to this particular of such exemption and of such laws extreamly abused his Readers and not his Readers onely but his Religion and reason and Layety and Clergie and Church and State and even all mankind And that for this he pretends a custom of all Nations which never hath been yet of as much as any one Nation in the world both holy and prophane Scriptures neither of which have one word to the purpose a similitude that is lame titles or names latin and greek that to conclude his purpose are no less vain and finally the justice of God and saying of an Emperour that never executed nor this at all pronounced in our present case or dispute LXVII For and for what concerns his first argument and I mean still as he intends it to conclude not some kind of exemption Immunity or priviledge either local or personal given to Churches or Churchmen but even that plenary Exemption of his own or which he pretends of all their lands goods houses and persons too and in all kind of causes spiritual and temporal civil criminal mixt and this also not from the inferiour lay or civil Judges onely but also from all the very supreamest civil both directive and coercive powers on earth it is plain enough That his Assumption or Antecedent is false because he hath not yet nor any other can for him hereafter instance as much as any one single Nation in the world wherein they ever yet had or have at present such Exemption That for all those nations known to us we see dayly the quite contrary both taught and practised amongst them in relation to the supream civil power and as well to the persons of Clergiemen in some cases for what concerns judgement and punishment as to their goods and lands for that of taxes when the Commonwealth is necessitated to laye taxes on them That not one of those places he quotes either out of holy Scripture or other books or Histories prove that Antecedent of his or his Allegation of the custom of all nations in the point or even which is less of any one nation Though if he did or could prove it for some one nation yet he could not therefore be thought to have said any thing for the proof of that antecedent or of his grand position unless he did withal instance it generally That therefore likely it was that he onely quoted the books and chapters without giving the words or contents of those books or chapters whereby the Reader might be
Valentinian and with his Arrian Mother about the giving up a Church in Milan to thense of the Arrians did not I say this so great and so holy and so knowing Ambrose tell the Emperour that indeed the lands of the Church were under his power and therefore payed him tribute but that the Church it self was not for such an impious use Therefore our learned Cardinal is much out in his collection here from this Canon of the Apostles when he sayes that by natural reason because the goods or lands of the Church are called Dominicae therefore the cannot in any wise or for any use or in any case be subject to the supream lay Jurisdiction To his fifth and last argument I need not say much because it so little requires other answer than That it is the very worst sort of argument he could use for his Ecclesiastical Immunity and for the being of it as such from the very law of Nations and Nature For to pretend or alledge even true miraculous extraordinary judgments or punishments from God on the Profaners of holy places or even too on the tyrannical Oppressors of holy or Ecclesiastical Persons as also on a Prince or People for having made first or observed after out of covetousness hatred envy pride ambition or any other sinful end such laws as naturally must lessen the holiness or esteem or reverence which must be due to either such places or such persons what hath this to do with the religious worshippers of such places and with the careful protectors of such persons or with either Prince or People that for a just and holy end make a wholsome law which being observed by Church-men will make them more holy and more reverend Besides how often have we read of extraordinary judgments of God pursuing presently the injustice committed by either Prince or People against meer lay men and against such as could pretend no such exemption and against such too as had no right of their side but from the positive civil Institutions or Laws made by other meer lay-men If our most eminent Cardinal had alledged and proved but one only miracle wrought in the case that is wrought by the invocation of God and either expresly or even tacitly for the confirmation of his Thesis or the being of Clergymen so exempt as he would have them in all cases and all respects from the supream civil jurisdiction of lay Princes then indeed he might have had some colour to amuse the Reader with that his fifth Argument Albeit yet such miracle would not be home enough unless withal it appeared wrought to confirm their being so exempt by the law of Nations and Nature But neither for Churchmen or Church doth he as much as pretend to any such material miracle or any such extraordinary punishments from God And good God! what is it to prove such exemption as he pretends That the sacrilegious robbers or any other wicked prophaners of a Church dyed presently That a passionat wicked Prince who did without any form of justice without any just cause at all and who did even against his own laws and his own conscience persecute to death a Religious Prelate or Priest onely for having been a good Prelate or good Priest in reprehending wickedness that I say such a Prince had an evil or strange and suddain end Certainly were it acknowledged of all sides did God himself now expresly and intelligibly and evidently reveal it to all the world that notwithstanding any pretence or even any positive laws of men hitherto all kind of Churchmen and Churches and their persons goods lands houses c. were as other men in all kind of temporal matters subject to the disposition and coercion of not only the supream but also of the inferiour civil Magistrate yet from the providence and goodness and justice also of God we might rationally expect sometime and pray sometime also for such extraordinary and exemplary miraculous punishment of such as would abuse that right or that power given them by God to govern well questionless to govern holily and justly the Church of God and Ministers and lands and revenues of it Besides how often have such extraordinary miraculous punishments seized on the very Ecclesiastical Governours themselves and even on the very supream Ecclesiastical Governours who have oppressed the inferiour Clergie And yet there was no exemption of this inferiour Clergie from them concluded thence Lastly how knows for what injustice in particular did those extraordinary punishments from God and let us suppose them still truly miraculous and from God in a special way which yet will be hardly proved of most of them seize upon such as were said to have violated Churches or Churchmen against that which this learned Cardinal pretends to be Ecclesiastical Immunity Exemption or Liberty Did God reveal it was particularly for infringing that or infringing any part of all that which Bellarmine understands or pretends to be of true and due Ecclesiastical exemption and was moreover to shew by a testimony from Heaven That this Ecclesiastical Immunity of his must be admitted to be such by the law of Nations and Nature Or did God reveal it was not perhaps for some other indeed more unquestionably exorbitant wickedness of those very men so punished miroculously Or must the single conjecture of Basilius Porphyrogenitus be to us a certainty that indeed those evils happened at that time to the Constantinopolitan Empire by reason or because of that law whatever it was made by Nicephorus Phocas and further yet a concluding argument for the being of Bellarmine's such pretended Ecclesiastical Immunity from the law of Nations and Nature which onely is our present business or dispute Nay must we not rather according to reason attribute those very plagues or judgments from God at that time to other causes that is to the undoubted uncontroverted injustices and wrongs done by Nicephorus Phocas in using ill and abusing very much the supream power he had over the Clergie if I say there was any thing extraordinary in those plagues or if they were such as the like or farre worse did not fall on that people or Emperour of Constantinople very often before that law was made and after that law was again abolished and when Ecclesiastical Immunity was as strictly and religiously observed as ever or when the supream civil power as rightly used as ever for the veneration of holy places and holy persons Do not the Greek Historians of those times Curopolates and Cedrenus Zonaras and Glycas do not Baronius and his Abbreviator Spendanus ad Annum Christi 962. 964. confess with those Greeks That Nicephorus Phocas though otherwise an excellent and victorious Prince had been charged with several other exorbitances as with having suffered himself after the death of Romanus to be chosen Emperour by the Army notwithstanding that Basilius and Constantinus both lawful Sons to the deceased Emperour Romanus were yet alive and lawful Heirs of the Empire and
with marrying Theophanes Augusta or the widdow Empress notwithstanding his own former legitimate wife was still alive and no other cause to divorce from her and that besides he had received her or the said Theophanes's Son as a Godfather out of the Sacred Font and with too much liberty given to his army to oppress against all right and reason as well the Layety as the Clergie indulging them whatever they fancied and without any punishment and with robbing the very Churches of their donaries and with laying grievous excessive tributs on both Churchmen and Layemen against the law and with assuming to himself entirely the elections of Bishops and taking to himself also all the spoils of the dead Bishops and finally with endeavouring to have all the Souldiers killed under him in his warr against the Sarracens to be accounted and invoked as martyrs Do not the Greek Historians charge this Nicephorus with all these particulars and not with that law onely And if so as questionless it is so how could Basilius Porphyrogenitus or Bellarmine or we out of either perswade our selves with any certitude it was for a bare law revoking some former priviledges of the Clergie in case I say that law was such that Empire suffered in after days and not rather for some of those other undoubted exorbitancies against undoubted either divine or humane laws or suffered not for that law in it self but for the evil end or evil execution or use of it For a law may be good in it self and yet the intention of the law maker and his use of it very wicked And after all whether it was so or no what proof I beseech you is that bare saving conjecture opinion or judgement of Porphyrogenitus That Bellarmines pretended Exemption of Clerks in all both civil and criminal causes whatsoever from the supream civil power hath been established either by the law divine natural or by the law of Nations That saying of Basilius Porphyrogenitus doth not touch this matter at all So that from first to last I dare conclude That for such Exemption and by such law of Nature and Nations Bellarmine hath not brought as much as any one argument which may seem to have the least colour of even probability itself nay nor even of that very worst sort of probability or that which our late Schoolmen call extrinsick onely Which himself did know so well that after having laboured so much to impose on us such exemption by such laws in a whole chapter yet in the chapter immediately following which is his 30. chap. l. 1. de Cleric he dares not give this doctrine of his own any better title or any better assurance not even for the being of it as much as by the divine positive law but onely the title or assurance of a bare probability of consequence And which further yet he knew so well that as he never once thought of the least Exemption of Clerks either as to their goods or as to their persons in politick or temporal affairs criminal or civil causes from any civil power whatsoever supream or not supream not even from the most inferiour civil Courts or Judges or of any kind of Exemption at all established for them in temporal matters by any law divine either natural or positive that I say as he never thought of any such Exemption by such laws in all or any the former editions of his Controversies or not until the very last edition of them by his own commands so it must be confessed he was in this point a very great changling to wit after he had seen all his other arguments out of human law or out of the civil and Canon law for his exorbitant exemption answered home by Doctor William Barclay in his accurate though little book de Potestate Papae particularly in the 15. and 32. chapters of the said book For in those former editions himself taught in express tearms against the Canonists Exemptionem Clericorum in rebus politicis tam quoad personas quam quoad bona jure humano introductam esse non divino That the exemption of Clerks in politick matters as well concerning their persons as their goods was introduced by humane law not by divine Nay also as Barclay well notes de Potestate Papae c. 15. made it his business to wit in those former editions besides which the foresaid Barclay the Father knew of none to prove the truth hereof by three several sorts of arguments 1. by that of Paul Rom. 13. omnis anima potestatibus sublimioribus subdita sit according to St. Chrysostome's exposition and understanding of it to be a command as well for Clerks as for Laycks 2. by other testimonies of holy Fathers in the point 3. because sayes he nullum prâ—ferri potest Dei verbum quo ista exemptio confirmetur there cannot be any word of God alleadg'd for this exemption From which doctrine he was so farre in his last edition that seeing he was left no other argument undissolved no other way unblocked for maintayning or carrying on his Exemption or that of Clerks in his exorbitant latitude of it and yet would not yield to victorious Truth he would needs in his old age trouble himself and others with a new invention or pretension rather nay rather too a meer aequivocation in effect of not onely a positive law divine per quandam similitudinem but even of a natural law divine and further confound the law of nature with that of nations and yet in the end of all pretend no more cap. 30. in solutione primae objectionis but a meer probability of consequence for his positive law of God nor for his natural but such a third degree c 29. as by his own explication of the third degree is no kind of degree at all of any true law of nature Whether this be not to abuse both Clerks and Layicks Princes and Subjects the State and Church being the controversy is of so high concern to all for the peace of the world I leave the indifferent Reader to judge For I have done my part and proceed now to shew by the solution of his other arguments LXVIII That for what concerns human laws too either civil or Ecclesiastical the case is also clear enough of my side both against him and our late Doctors of Lovaine That by neither law Clerks have ever yet been exempted in criminal causes from the supream civil coercive power nay nor in any kind of meer temporal cause whatsoever criminal or civil from that supream civil power were it necessary for my present purpose to add this as it is not Though I confess they have been exempted and very justly too by several both imperial and other municipal and Royal laws from inferiour civil Judicatories in many civil causes and in some Countries by the peculiar municipal laws of such Countries exempted also in some criminal causes in prima instantia from the inferiour subordinate civil Judges and other Judges that
last edition and after so many recognitions l. 1. de Cleric c. 28. but retracts that and puts on a new face and amasses together all his reading ever since that Edition and all his veteran strength and wit to prove that not only by other arguments but also by the very civil laws of Roman Emperours all Clergiemen are wholly and generally exempt and in all causes both civil and criminal from all even the very supreamest civil coercive power on earth even from that of those very Emperours who made those laws To the fourth proposition sayes he Tractatu de Potestate Papae in rebus temporalibus cap. 35. which was that no writer hath recorded to posterity that Princes have exempted Clerks from their own power but only from the power of inferiour Magistrates I answer that whoever sayes so doth seem either to have read nothing or to have purposed to abuse his Reader For Ruffians writen l. 10. Hist c. 2. That Constantine the Emperour pronounced in express words It was not lawful for him to judge Priests but rather to be judged by them Whereby he declared openly enough that Priests were exempted not only from the power of inferiour Judges but also from that of the very supream To which declaration that law of the same Constantine which is the seventh in Theedosius's Code de Episcopis Clericis is consentaneous where it is said that the Readers of the holy Bible and the Sub-deacons and other Clerks qui per injuriaâ— Hereticorum ad curiam devocati sunt who by the injustice of Hereticks are called to Court shall be absolved and henceforth as in the East shall not be called to Courts minime ad curias devocentur sed immunitate plenissima petiantur but enjoy a most plenary freedom So he Whence being it is clear enough that he absolutely prohibits that Clerks be called to Courts and will have them to enjoy a most plenary freedom and that he excepts nothing at all it must be also manifest his mind was that neither shall they be called upon to the very Princes own supream Courts for it would not be a most plenary exemption if they were obnoxious as much as to the very principal Power it self Such an other is that law of Theodosius and Valentinian Cod. Theodos. l. ultima de Episc Clericis where we read thus Clerks whom without any distinction the unhappy presumer commanded to be lead to the secular Judges we reserve to Episcopal Audience For it is not lawful that Ministers of divine duties be subjected to they pleasure of temporal powers In which law where nothing is excepted all things do seem to be comprehended unless peradventure the Princes power may not be said to be temporal And even Iustinian himself in his 83. Novella so often quoted by our Adversaries as if therein Clerks did not seem to be exempted in criminal causes from the secular Court hath these words That he must be first degraded from his sacerdotal dignity by the Bishop and so be put under the punishment of the law Where we see Clerks as long as they remain Clerks not to be under the power of the laws but onely after they are by the Bishop deprived of their Clerical honour and therefore while they remain Clerks to be not onely exempt from the power of inferiour judges but even from the very laws of Princes for what belongs to coaction And this is it which the Council of Constance did say in the 31. Session That laymen have no jurisdiction or power on Clerks And certainly under the name of Laicks it comprehends even supream Princes whereas these are Laicks Finally that I may pass over many other arguments the Emperour Frederick the second speaks generally in his first constitution where he sayes We also enact that none presume to draw any Ecclesiastical person to a secular judgment either in a criminal or civil question against the imperial constitutions and canonical sanctions So much there But by secular judgment are not onely understood the judgments of inferiour judges but also those of the supream whereas all are equally secular And we see it so observed indeed where the reverence of sacred canons bears the sway Behold here good Reader the very last essaye of a dying cause Our great Cardinal having been unwilling but to say somewhat however himself so knowing a man as we must presume he was could not but know he said nothing at all in all this discourse to perswade any other even but meanly knowing or judicious Adversary That any Roman Emperour did ever yet by any of these laws or other whatsoever exempt or intend to exempt or that otherwise they or any els understood Clerks to be exempt by any other law from their own supream imperial power in temporal matters either criminal or civil though I dispute not at present of civil causes but onely of criminal For 1. who sees not That were the testimony of Ruffinus's being home in any point a convincing argument yet this which is here alleadged is not in any wise to the point or question Ruffinus tells indeed that Constantine said it was not lawful for himself to judge the Priests but tells not that Constantine ever said himself had exempted them so from himself or that they were so by any law of man Albeit therefore Constantine said so to the Bishops of the first general Council of Nice yet is it plain enough out of the very series of that History in Ruffine when they offered 〈◊〉 petitions to him one against an other that as this was said by an ordinary manner of speech onely and by way of complement so the words must not be taken strictly or scrupulously at all but onely as extolling the dignity of Bishops and as intending to deterre them from litigiousness and chieftly 〈…〉 purpose to free himself from the trouble of judging their hateful differences That this was the mind of Constantine appears by these manifold and manifest arguments 1. That for that his saying he gave this reason that Bishops were Gods and received power from God to judge of him de nobis qâ—â—que pudicandi But neither can relate to human constitutions Nor even to those are divine least otherwise it must follow that Constantine farre better understood the law of God when he so refused to judge the Bishops then those very Bishops themselves who in that holy Oecumenical Synod of Nice did repaire and complain to him as to their Soveraign Judg as may be seen in that very History of Ruffinus 2. That otherwise no Clerks Priests Bishops themselves can be Judges of other Clerks sed ille solus de quo scriptum est Deus stetit in Synagoga Deorum in mediò autem Deos dijudicat For so said Constantine to the Bishops on that occasion and consequently if you take his words strictly or scrupulously he said that Clerks were not onely exempted from his own tribunal or that of Princes but from that of Pontiffs
ut cumque summus sit non poterit huic immunitati aut exemptioni propriis legibus propriaque authoritate derogare So farr the learned Cardinal hath helped us on in this matter by giving us to our hand the authors and places quoted albeit only to shew against William Barclay that himself was not single in asserting such a power to the Pope But for these natural reasons or theological if you please to call them so which to solve is my business at present he hath left his Reader to seek Which makes me say that he hath not at all removed the cause of Barclay's admiration as he ought to have done Barclay admired that so learned and so judicious a man as Cardinal Bellarmine should maintain that the Pope could exempt the Subjects of Kings from all subjection to Kings and this without any consent from the Kings themselves adding as a further cause of his admiration how it was confess'd that before such exemption by the Pope those very persons so exempted by him or attempted to be so exempted to wit the whole Ecclesiastical Order of Clerks and even as well Priests Bishops Archbishops Patriarchs and the very Pope himself as other the most inferiour Clerks were all of them primitively originally and even by the very law of God subject to the secular Princes in all politick or civil and temporal matters and yet as a further cause adding also that the law of Christ submitted unto in Baptisme deprives no man of the temporal rights he had before baptisme and consequently deprived not for example Constantine the Great when baptized of the lawful power he had before he was baptized over the Christian Clergy Now that Bellarmine should go about to disswade Barclay from his admiration because forsooth he quotes five School-men that is four Divines and one Canonist who taught the same thing and produces only the bare words of the Assertion of two of them on the point but no reason at all of theirs or of any others or of his own for such assertion may seem to men of reason a strange way of perswading another man and master too of much reason As if Barclay should cease therefore any whit the less to admire so gross an errour in Bellarmine that some others also had fallen into the same errour before or after or together with him Nay if Bellarmine had not preposterously fixed on those very men for his companions or patrons who contradict themselves so necessarily that is at least virtually and consequentially in this matter or if he had only fixed on such Divines and Canonists who speak consequently however ungroundedly of the exemption of Clergymen as of divine right which I confess the generality of Canonists do then peradventure he might have seemed to have alledged somewhat though indeed very little to allay Barclays wonderment For truly those he alledges betray themselves and his cause manifestly whereas they hold also manifestly and at the same time that the exemption of Clerks is not de jure divino Which being once granted who sees not the main difficulties which lye so in their way as not possible to be removed for asserting a power in the Pope to make laws for that exemption independently of Princes Who sees not that the Pope cannot make or impose what laws he please to bereave either Prince or People of their temporal rights or of what part soever of such rights he thinks expedient or convenient And who sees not otherwise that he alone must de jure be ot least may de jure make himself to be the sole supream Prince on earth in all temporal things at least amongst Christians And therefore consequently who sees not that being the Pope is not so nor can be so nor can lessen the Princes temporal authority over his own Subjects where-ever the law of God doth not lessen it and what I say of the Pope I say too of the whole Church who sees not consequently therefore I say that neither Pope nor Council nor other authority of the Church if any other be imaginable can or could so exempt Clerks from the power of Princes being that before such exemption all Clerks were subject to Princes and by the laws of God and nature subject to them But for as much as it appears undoubtedly that Bellarmine was one that did not or at least would not see these either Antecedents or Consequents being he sayes in plain terms and in his own name also de Potestate Papae in temporalibus supra cap. 38. That whether the supream temporal Princes themselves have or have not or could or could not exempt ecclesiastical while in their Dominion from their own supream temporal power potuit tamen voluit summus Pontifex istos eximere aut jure divino exemptos declarare yet the supream Pontiff could exempt them so and hath exempted them so or at least could declare and hath declared them antecedently exempted so by divine right that is by God himself in holy Scripture or at least in his revealed word either written or unwritten Neque possunt Principes etiam supremi hanc exemptionem impedire That neither can the Princes even supream hinder this exemption and That all this is the common doctrine of the Divines and Canonists cui hactenus non nisi Heretiei restiterunt which none hetherto but heretick's have resisted and forasmuch also as not onely Franciscus Victoria Dominicus Soto Martinus Ledesma Dominicus Bannes and Didacus Covarruvias above particularly quoted but even the generality of Canonists and late School Divine Writers seem to be of the number of those that with Bellarmine did not or would see the same Antecedents and consequents and lastly forasmuch as we have already solved all they could say for their contrary assertions either out of Scripture or out of the laws and canons nay and out of not onely some other extrinsick authorities of other authors Philosophers and Historians I mean for what concerns matter of fact or the point of Clergiemens having been already exempted so by any whomsoever but also all the arguments grounded on or pretended from natural reason or which Bellarmine framed above for his law of Nature or Nations for the Clergie's being already so exempted now therefore to fall to that which onely is the proper subject of this present Section let us consider those other arguments pretended to be of natural reason or even of Theological reason if you please to call it so as it may perhaps be justly called because suppoâ—eing some principle of Faith which we find in other Authors as in Dominicus Soto and in Franciscus Victoria for the being of such a power in the Pope or Church or in either or in both together as purely such or as purely acting by a true proper certain or undoubted power of the Church as the Church or as a Church onely For thus it is they must state the question and that they do questionless suppose it stated Though I confess
his lawful Procurator to answer such crimes as were objected to him by the said Clergy and Academy and in the mean time to innovate nothing but to restore all things were innovated into their former state And therefore that they will find in Spondanus that this Emperour summon'd this Archbishop even as an Archbishop and consequently did not only summon and proceed against him as a Prince of the Empire but as a very Archiepiscopal Clerk and even too in a meer cause of Religion For this last particular also of the being of the cause for which the Emperour summon'd him a cause of Religion and Faith the same Spondanus hath expresly in the same place where he tells us that it was therefore the Pope Paul the III. who then sate in the See Apostolick thought fit by his own Letters of the 18. of Iuly immediatly following in the same year to summon to Rome the same Hermannus giving him sixty dayes for appearance before himself to wit least otherwise his Holiness might be thought to let go his own challenge of peculiar right in the See Apostolick only to proceed against so great a Clerk especially being the cause was properly Clerical and properly too a cause of Faith and reformation of the Church in religious tenets and rites and least consequently he might seem wholly to quit the quarrel of external coercion of either Clerks or Laicks where the crime was Heresie and by his own want or neglect of proceeding by his own proper Apostolical Authority against Herman whereas the Emperour had begun and proceeded already upon account or by virtue also of his own pure or sole imperial civil and lay power might be esteemed to acknowledge in lay Princes that supream external coercive right of even all sorts of very Clerks and even too of such in the very meerest and purest causes of Faith and Religion The testimony of Spondanus to this purpose is in these words Quod ut Pontifex audivit he means the summons sent by Charles from the Dyet of Worms for the Archbishop parum prohare visus quod Cesar in causa Fidei reformationis Ecclesiarum Iudicis authoritatem sibi sumeret die decima octava Iulii eundem Coloniensem ad sexagesimum diem citavit ut per seipsum vel per legittimum procuratorem coram ipso Romae se sisteret To that also which Bellarmine hath of crimina privilegiata and for as much as he sayes that in France those are call'd priviledg'd crimes whereof that Clerks may be accused before a lay Judge in the secular Court the Pope hath indulged I say it is farr otherwise And that Bellarmine could not shew nor any other can for him any Sanction or Law nay or any other authentick writing wherein it is recorded to posterity that such a priviledge was given by the Pope to Kings or Republicks Though I confess many Popes have been free enough of granting priviledges where they had no right to grant any and where only the ignorance or injustice of pretenders gave them some kind of bad excuse for attempting to give any and would willingly have all both Princes and people to desire of them priviledges for all they could themselves do before of themselves nay and were often bound to do without any priviledge Whence also it may be sufficiently evicted that it is no way probable this ordinary jurisdiction supream of Kings over Clerks was granted to them by the Pope but on the contrary certain that whereas anciently the very most Christian Kings and Emperours made use of all their both directive and coercive power to govern Clerks in all civil matters whatsoever nay and in spiritual matters too for what I mean concerns the external regiment of the Church by external direction of laws and by external coercion too of the material sword and to govern them also either immediatly by themselves or mediatly by their subordinat lay Judges and whereas the civil laws wherein and whereby afterwards the same Emperors and Kings exempted Clerks in many causes or most or if you please to say or think so in all whatsoever from the ordinary subordinate lay Judges have not a word of any exemption from the Prince himself the supream civil Judge of all both lay and Ecclesiastical Judge of his own Kingdom in the external coactive regiment therefore it must be concludent it was only from and by the free will of the Princes themselves that ordinary jurisdiction supream temporal or civil over Clerks was reserved still to themselves who remitted or bestowed away of their own right all whatever they pleased as they did that in the present case of deputing lay men for the ordinary subordinat Judges of those causes of Clerks which are not common but priviledged and retained also what they would Of all which the late and most learned Milletus may be read who in that choice and elegant Tract of his which he inscribed de delicto communi casis privilegiato shews very learnedly and clearly 1. That all such priviledges of Clergiemen had their whole and sole origen from Kings 2. And therefore that such crimes as Clerks are accused of and judged in foro civili in the ordinary civil or lay Courts are properly to be called delicta communia because to be tryed by the common law and before the common or lay Magistrate and those only which are remitted to the Bishop are by a contrary reason to be tearmed privilegiata to wit because it is by a priviledge granted by Kings or indulged by them to Bishops that bishops may take cognizance of and judge them As for Clarus and Ausrerius whom Bellarmine alledges for that his own sense of what is a priviledged crime of Clerks or for any other Canonists soever I regard not much what they say or not say in this matter Because they all commonly and without any ground not only bereave Princes of this supream right of either coeâ—cing or directing Clerks but also teach that all kind of meer temporal Principality flows and depends from the Papacy As that Legat did who in a Diet of the German Princes had the confidence to ask or querie thus A quo habet Imperator Imperium nisi habet a Domine Papa For so Radevicus hath related this Legats folly And so having throughly destroyed all the replies of Bellarmine to the grounds or any part of the grounds of my second grand argument and of the proof of it which second argument and proof of its Minor I derived partly from and built upon his own principles of Clergiemens being Cittizens and parts of the politick commonwealth I am now come to My third argument of pure natural reason which shall end this present Section Though I withal confess the grounds of this third argument are already given in my illustration of the former second But however for the clearer methods sake because too the medium is somewhat different from that in the form of my foregoing second I would give
they were shut up they were beaten they were racked burn'd killed tormented and yet they were multiplied They knew no other fight for safety but to contemne safety for safety Besides these let all other Fathers nay all Historians both sacred and profane both Christian and Heathen of those dayes that are extant speak their knowledg of this matter Let the raignes of Constantius Valens and even Julian the Apostat speak theirs And verily Mr. Prinn or Mr. Goodwin either or any else how industrious soever to except against the Rhetorick of Tertullian will find themselves mâ—te as to any colour against the number of Christians and ability according humane wayes of strength to carry on a design would their conscience permit them to entertain any against these persecuting Emperors Nor can it be denied that in their dayes the Catholicks and Christian Subjects had the greatest provocations and best opportunities could be thought on to carry it The orient and the occident the Nobility army Prelates and people were all Catholicks if you except a very few which in comparison made no number â—hen first Constance would have and really endeavoured with all his Authority to establish Arrianisme They were so for the matter when Valens thundered And upon Iulians entry on the Empire the world at least whereever the Roman Eagles spread their wings was altogether Christian unless peradventure you bring in competition a small inconsiderable number of Iewes and Pagans who had no command no force Yet we know they all suffered patiently with armes across all that which the fury of those heretick Emperours or the malicious cunning of even that Idolatrous Apostat could inflict on them and suffered the foundations to be laid again of Salomons temple to restore Judaisme and all the rites of Numa and sacrifices of heathen Gods to be reestablished rather then they would draw a sword against the Soveraign power Their Bishops and Clergie were more divinely principled then to infuse other maximes or lead them to any other practice then that which they read in the Apostles and Evangelists and which all the Christians ever since their dayes recommended to them by their lives and by their deaths Now to my before said purpose in this present Section or to that of my onely intended particular Instances here of some Bishops Patriarchs Popes and Princes after the first 300. years those Ages of the ten general persecutions wherein questionless all Christians almost every where had occasion and provocation enough to practice whatever they thought was lawfull for them to practise Of which particular Instances The first Instance shall be that of S. Athanasius one of the Fathers of the very first general Council was ever held soon after Patriarch of Alexandria I must confess I have already given this in my former Section but in latin onely and not so directly to my purpose there as to that of this present Section And therefore I repeat it here in English out of his Apology to the Emperour Constantius I have by no means resisted the commands of your Piety Farr be that from me For I am not hee that will resist as much as the City Questor and not onely not the Emperour Truly I prepared my self for going away For of this matter too Montanus is conscious that upon receiving your letters if he had vouchafed to write I had presently departed and by my promptitude in obeying had forerun your commandement For I am not so mad as to have thought such commands were to be contradicted Out of the Decree of your Majesty I studied to know your will But neither did I then receive what by right I postulated and yet now at this present I am not accused of any other cause For I have not resisted the Decree of your Piety Nor will I endeavour to enter Alexandria as long as it shall not by your Piety be lawfull for me And yet the matter in agitation here was the unjust exile of this great and holy Catholick Patriarch Athanasius and his just restitution to his own See as I noted before And yet he acknowledges that himself had been mad if he had not obeyed an Arrian that is a manifest Heretick Emperour by a bare decree or letter onely exiling him from his own proper Episcopal See And declares moreover plainly that he would never as much as endeavour to return to his said See without the same Emperours command or licence to return So conformable was his practise to the doctrine of all the holy Fathers as the doctrine of the Apostle in that precept Rom. 13. omnis anima potestatibus sublimioribus subdita sit The second Instance is of Eusebius Bishop of Samâ—sata that most holy and most laudable man of whom Theodoret Hyst l. 4. c. 15. tells and writes in these very words Cum edictum Imperatorium quo jubebatur in Thraciam proficisci c. When sayes Theodoret the Imperial Edict whereby he was commanded to go to banishment in Thracia was brought to him I think it very necessary to be known to such as are yet ignorant how he carried himself For the Messenger that brought this Edict arrived at twylight Whom Eusebius commanded to be silent and to conceal the cause of his coming For sayes he if the people educated in studies of piety shall understand of it they will drawn you in the river and I must answer for your death Having said this and according to custome done his office in the ministery of evening prayers then when sleep scizeth all men this good old man having trusted his secret to onely one servant departs the City His servant follows bringing onely a pillow and a book with him But when he came to the banks of the river for Euphrates runs by the walls of the City having entered a ship he bids the watermen steer directly to Zeugma where he arrives by morning Samosata is all in plaints and tears For his departure being discovered by means of that Servant's giving some necessary directions to some frends and who went in his company and what books were carried for him all the Cittizens universally lamented themselves as now being Orphanlike bereaved of their Father and Pastour Therefore in multitudes and vessels pursueing and searching for him up and down the river they overtake him at last And when first they mett and saw their desired Pastor nothing was to be heard or seen but plaints and sighs and a huge power of tears whereby to perswade him to remain with them and not suffer his sheep to be delivered to Wolves But when they could not perswade and had heard him reciting the precept of the Apostle wherein we are perspicuâ—â—sly enjoyned to obey the Magistrats and Powers some offer him Gold sâ—me Silver others Garments and others Servants being he was departing to a strange country and so farre distant from theirs But he having received some few things from such as were more intimately familiar with him and after he had by doctrine and by
against his will that he was as yet then a Novice in the Faith and that he â—â—mitted the matter to the Roman Pontiff I say this excuse is wholly vain For first who could constrain him next he was no late Convert and the matter of usurping jurisdiction over the Church was so great notable extraordinary among Christians and of such important consequence too that t is impossible he should not be instructed in it and especially in such an instance of it though he had till then been a meer Novice or even Catechumen And in the last place who sees not it is one thing to acknowledge himself an incompetent Judge and remit the parties to their own proper Judges and an other to assign and delegat Judges to the parties which Constantine did Nor was he reprehended herein or instructed either by those three French Bishops or by Melchiades himself not even although it was known that he was most pious and most ready both to heare and obey all divine instructions Nay so farre were these French Bishops was Melchiades himself from any such exception that in pursuance of this Commission or delegation from and by Constantine a Council was gathered together at Rome to the end this troublesome cause of Caecilian and the Donatist Bishops might be the more throughly and fully discussed Optatus l. 1. wherein yet onely they did sit as Judges who were so delegated by Constantine Melchiades Maternus Rhetitius and Marinus who also the matter having been heard and examined from first to last absolved Caecilianus and condemned the Donatists Augustinus in Brevic. coll di 3. c. 22. Nay Augustine insinuats no less then that the sole judgement of Melchiades had he undertaken any such himself alone in this controversie as it was then had been usurped or had been so if he had without the Emperour 's special delegation presumed to determine it but together with those other his French Collegues For Augustine treating of the pertinacy of the Donatists in their refusing to yeeld to so many former Judgements which absolved Caecilian and labouring to clear those former judgements from all opposition he objects to himself in behalf of the Donatists epist 162. thus An forte non debuit Romanae Ecclesiae Melchiades Episcopus cum collegis transmarinis Episcopis illud sibi usurpare juditium quod ab Afris septuaginta ubi primus Tifigitanus praesedit fuerat terminatum To this what doth Augustine answer Certainly he does not denye that such judgement of Melchiades might be justly thought in the case to be usurped but excuses the judgement of Melchiades which really de facto was not that which onely might be falsely supposed or bruted to have been and defends it that so was truly by saying again thus Quid quod nec ipse usurpavit Rogatus quippe Imperator judices misit Episcopos qui cum eo viderent de tota illa causa quod justum videretur statuerent Hoc probamus Donatistarum precibus verbis ipsius Imperatoris So c. So Augustine above or in the foresaid epistle The appeall of the Donatists to the Emperour himself doth follow upon and against the foresaid judgement of the Bishops at Rome Optatus l. 1. cont Parm. And what doth Constantine then t is true he breaks out into this no less just then admiring exclamation O rabida furoris audacia sicut in causis Gentilium fieri solet appellationem interposuerant Yet this imports not signifies not by any means that Constantine abominats the ignorance of the Appellants for having or as if they had against any divine or humane rule or canon had recourse to a laye tribunal For had it been so or had this been the motive of his exclamation he had dismissed them and remitted them back again to their own proper Episcopal Judges which yet he did not but admitted their appeal Therefore this exclamation of Constantine imports no more but his great wonder at the too great obstinacy of these Donatist Appellants and their too much want of Christian humility resignation simplicity and even of their too much want also of either peace or charity that they in professing themselves to be Christian Priests and Bishops would never leave of persecuting an other Bishop not acquiesce at all in such manifold Judgements of even stranger Bishops who sate so numerously on the cause both in Affrick and Europe but would rather as contentiously as even the meerest Gentils in the world by all the most odious and tedious advantages of secular laws and in so improbable a cause and even by such an appeal from the Emperours such Delegats continue then inveterat malice against an other Christian Bishop But however this be or whatever moved Constantine to this exclamation the matter of fact which followed cannot be denyed For sure enough it is that Constantine admitted this Appeal and not onely admitted it but would have it and had it discussed in an other Council of Bishops which he summond and convened at Orleance in France wherein too himself would be and was present to heare and see this cause again discussed and the late judgement thereupon of Melchiades the Roman Bishop and of the other three Delegats reviewed Euseb l. x. c. 5. Aug. epist 68. This admission of the appeal and this reexamination by Constantine and by his Councel of Orleance seems very harsh to Baronius tom 3. an 314. n. 35. And therefore sayes that Constantine was drawn against his will to admit so unjust an Appeal from the judgement or sentence of the great Pontiff But to that of being drawn against his will we have said before enough or that there was none could force him And for the fact in it self that is for his admission I am sure Augustine never once reprehends it how reprehensible soever the Appeal was in it self or on the behalf of the Appellants Nor did any other of the Bishops of those times reprehend Constantine's said admission of it But if Constantine however against his own will or rather inclination did so any way tyrannically or by usurpation extend his imperial power to Ecclesiastical matters or to such matters of the Church as by the law of God were out or beyond the proper sphere of his lay or civil power why were the Roman Pontiff silent Why did not Caecilianus except and not obey as he did Why so many other Bishops of greatest name and fame gathered together and celebrating great Councils and sitting as Judges to obey the command of Constantine Therefore it must follow that all the Bishops then were meer stupid brutes or certainly that Constantine was so a most cruel raging tyrant and trampler underâ—oot of all the liberties of the Church that they dared not gainsay him And whereas neither can be said that we allow Constantine to be a competent Judge of those affairs which are properly and strictly Ecclesiastical that is spiritual at least in such as are meer questions of right or of the spiritual doctrine
in it self purely or as abstracting from matter of fact we say two things here to clear all the fog which many of our late School Divines do raise without any cause at all to loose themselves and others in it The one is that in this cause of Caecilian and such others of Church-men wherein Constantine or other Christian Emperours interposed their imperial authority and carried themselves properly as Judges that wherein they did so was pure matter of fact whereof questionless the lay Emperours when judicious and just were secundum allegata probata as competent Judges as any Ecclesiastick And the other is that whereas the Emperour and the same we must say of every other supream or Soveraign Prince within his own dominions is of supream absolute independent power within his Empire he must consequently have sufficient authority from God himself to promote all that may be for the publick good peace or safety of his people in this life and of their happiness too in the other according as he is directed by the law of God and therefore also must have sufficient power from God himself to see and take effectual care and such effectual course as is necessary that the very Ecclesiastical affairs within his Empire be duely carried on Therefore albeit he be not the competent Judge in a doubtfull case what was or was not the Faith delivered once in such or such a point controverted yet he is a competent Judge to see and determine as to matter of Fact whether the Ecclesiasticks of his Kingdom duely observe the uncontroverted Faith or that part of Faith which all men which even themselves confess acknowledge to be that which was once so delivered or whether they duely observe the known and holy canons of the Church made for preservation of that Faith And he is a competent Judge also or hath a competent sufficient absolute independent power to force the very Ecclesiasticks themselves to keep that Faith entire and sound even also I mean as to the very Theory of it and to all questions of divine right especially where and when he sees that by reason of controversies arising about such very questions or Theory the publick external peace of either Church or State may be endangered or that the publick tranquillity depends of the unity of his people in such matters according to what was from the beginning taught By which very consideration that Constantine himself was very much induâ—ced â—o interess himself in these matters of Faith even himself also writes apud â—arrâ—nium tom 3. an 313. n. 37. least otherwise he should have seen dangeâ—ous troubles and commotions in his Empire and thence have suffered also very much in his reputation as not governing well or prudently or also as haveing imprudently embraced that religion whose professours he could not keep in peace or unity amongst themselves Of which consideration and judgement of Constantine or rather of which power and authority of Constantine or indeed of both the one and the other St. Augustine speaks ep 162. where he writes thus Quasi verò ipse sibi he means Felix Aptungitanus â—â—c comparavit ac non Imperator ita quasi jusserit ad cujus curam de qua rationem Deo redditurus esset res illa maximè pertinebat But of this authority and superintendency in general of Emperours Kings Princes and other supream temporal or politick States in and over the Church or the spiritual or Ecclesiastical both Superiours and Inferiours of the same Christian Catholick Church this is not the proper place to treat at large It sufficeth at present to say that forasmuch as Constantine did so and so often too interess himself in this cause of Caecilian and deputed Judges to hear and determine it he did all this by the true proper genuine authority of an Emperour and even of a Christian Emperour whose duty it is when the Ecclesiasticks themselves alone cannot end or compose their own dissentions that he by his own supream authority assist and promote their agreement and even force them to a just and equitable agreement Which the Milevitan Council approves in effect canone 19 and ponitur xi q. 1. c. 11. and in these tearms Placuit ut quicumque ab Imperatore cognitionem judiciorum publicorum petierit honore proprio privetur Si autem Episcopale judicium ab Imperatore postulaverit nihil ei obsit But that Constantine did in aftertimes adorn and magnifie the Church or Churchmen with most singular and most ample priviledges concerning civil judgments or judgments in civil affairs this he did not as Baronius tom 3. an 314. n. 37. would make us believe he did to correct or by way of correction of those former judgments of his own in the said or like affairs of Ecclesiastical persons which judgments our great Annalist sayes were unduly and unjustly usurped by the Emperour but did so or gave such priviledges out of his meer liberality and piety alway nevertheless reserving his own proper supream and general and imperial authority to provide upon emergencies by himself or by such others as he should think fit to depute for the necessities of the Church and Churchmen as often as he saw need However let us proceed in the matter of fact which is our proper subject here For notwithstanding the aforesaid judgment also of the Council of Orleance the Donatists yet appeal even from it and the second time to the Emperour himself against and in that cause of Cecilian and the Emperour admits again their appeal judges the matter himself absolves Cecilian and condemns the Donatists St. Augustine is my author and witness ep 48. and epist 162. where yet he neither accuses nor reprehends the Emperour Nor doth Cecilian except but obeyes and freely presents himself to be judged by the Emperour For it was a criminal judgment that is the matter debated was a crime charged upon him Nay St. Augustine openly sayes and avers that neither the accusing or appealing Bishops themselves were to be reprehended on this account that they drew or brought the affairs or causes of or accusations against other Bishops to a lay secular Judicatory For thus he writes ep 48. Si autem sicut falso arbitramini vere criminosum Caecilianum judicandum terrenis potestatibus tradiderant quid objicitis quod vâ—strorum praesumptio primitus fecit he speaks to the later Donatists quod eos non arguerimus sayes he quia fecerunt si non animo inuido noxio sed emendandi corrigendi voluntate fecissent Therefore St. Augustine sayes that where and when the dispute concerns the correction and amendment of Ecclesiasticks to demand the judgment or sentence and to appeal to the power of earthly Princes is not reprehensible if the accusers proceed not in such or indeed any other application out of envie or malice Concerning this second admission of Constantine or indeed rather concerning his whole procedure in this affair by admitting any appeal at all or
Canterbury as relating to our present purpose and put all that into this special form of argument Syllogisme and objection against my own grand Thesis Whatever doctrine condemns or opposes the justice of St. Thomas of Canterbury's cause quarrel or contest with Henry the second must be false But my grand Theirs of a power in secular supream Princes to coerce all criminal Clergiemen whatsoever living within their dominions is such or is a doctrine which condemns or opposes that very cause quarrel or contest of St. Thomas of Canterbury Ergo my grand Thests must be false The Minor will be proved thus and must be proved thus or not at all Such doctrine must necessarily suppose an errour both in the solemn canonization of him at least for a martyr properly such and yet he was solemnly canonized for a martyr properly such by Alexander the Third Pope of that name his own contemporary and must further necessarily suppose an errour too that both in the belief and practise of the universal Church of Christ forasmuch as they believe him to be a martyr properly such and both venerat and invocate him as such For that such doctrine as condems or opposes the justice of his quarrel against Henry the Second must also necessarily suppose such an errour in his canonization veneration and invocation as a martyr properly such appears hence manifestly that it is therefore he was canonized for such and is venerated and invocated as such because that quarrel of his was and is believed to have been just and that it was for maintaining the justice of it he suffered death and suffered death patiently and Christianly as became a true martyr without any resistance at all Now it is plain that such doctrine as must necessarily suppose such an errour in such canonization veneration and invocation of any must be false nay erroneous and schismatical nay and heretical too in Christian belief because it must consequently suppose that not onely the Pope nay not onely this or that particular orthodox nation but even the universality of all true Christian nations even the Catholick Church her self taken in her whole latitude not onely may sometime erre in matters which they she accounts to be part of her holy belief holy practise but hath already and continually err'd and almost for five hundred years compleat that is since the year of our Lord 1173. wherein Alexander Tertius canonized him solemnly for a martyr and she no less solemnly invocated him as such Then which consequent supposition what Roman Catholick can say that any may be more even fundamentally heretical For it must be granted as an article nay and also at least among Divines as a fundamental article of Christian Catholick religion that the true Christian Catholick Church is infallible in credendis agendis both in her belief and in her practise I mean such as she her self accounts divine or holy or certainly it must be granted that we have nothing at all infallible in her or in our religion delivered by her but what may without any special revelation from God or any either particular or universal tradition from her be demonstrated by pure natural reason and consequently that our belief of even the very whole mistery of the Incarnation of the Son of God and of that other no less above our natural reason of the Trinity of persons in one God which are purely credenda as likewise those of Baptisme and the Lords Supper quatenus inter agenda as they are practised are fallible and unreasonable practises being we have nothing to render us absolutely certain of the contrary if the universal Church be fallible in her belief and practise But for the Minor as I confess that I see no other proof possible but by instancing the particulars of the difference 'twixt King Henry the Second and this holy Praelat so I confess also that if in any of those particulars or in altogether my grand Thesis or any part of my doctrine hetherto in pursuance of that my Thesis may be found and that it be clear also that St. Thomas of Canterbury suffered death therefore and was therefore canonized a martyr by the Pope and as such was therefore venerated and invocated ever since or at any time by the Catholick Church then I must consequently grant the objection to be very well or at least very probably grounded as no man can deny it to be syllogistically formed or deny the conclusion to follow of necessity if both the Premisses be certainly true And for the first of them we have already seen it pretty well driven home at least by a very specious discourse and one concluding such an inconvenience as no Roman Catholick will dare allow I mean the infallibility of the whole Catholick Church either in religious belief or practise whatever in the mean time be held or thought of the Pope alone or of his particular Roman Diocess as taken a part from the rest or of any one or moe even National Churches whatsoever of Catholick communion so they amount not to that which we call and is truly the Catholick or universal Church or the general congregation of all particular or National Churches or of the more considerable parts of them or the General Representative of such more considerable parts of them which are now in Ecclesiastical communion with the Roman Bishop his particular Diocess of Rome For this general Congregation of all such particular Churches or of all the more considerable parts of them and this general Representative also whenever it is of all such more considerable parts is it I call now here and elsewhere still understand to be the Catholick Church Whereof I desire my good Readers to take special notice not that I see any special need of it to solve this objection but that I may no where seem either to equivocat or to be unwilling to be understood when there is occasion to distinguish between the sense of the Pope and that of the Church or between the authority of a particular Church or some one of ro moe peradventure and that which is properly of the universal Church Therefore now not onely to shew what may be said or not said and that even out of the very Ecclesiastical History or Annals of Baronius himself of the particulars of the said difference or quarrel and for the proof of the said Minor being it is onely from History all that can be said for the proof of it must be had and that Baronius can not be presumed to relate such matter of fact with any kind of partiality or favour to me or my Thesis or my doctrine against his own pretended Immunity of all Clergiemen or be presumed to omit any material thing which might any way advance his own pretence of such Immunity upon the contradictory question confirmed by the sense by the life and death of so great a Saint and even sealed by the bloud of so glorious a martyr
day murthered him in the Church as he was at evening prayer Seventhly you are to observe good Reader what the ancient Christian civil or municipal laws of England or those I mean of the State politick and civil as they are distinguish'd from the meer canons of the Church were concerning the immunity of Clergiemen from secular tribunals in the punishment of their crimes and were yet in the days of S. Thomas and Henry the second or at any time before that contest not legally repealed then by a contrary civil or municipal law of that land or by any contrary custom admitted or in force For I must confess that often considering with my self how it was not probable that so vertuous and just a man and even so knowing a man also as S. Thomas of Canterbury must have been being he studied so long both in Oxford and Paris and the civil law in Italy and was one of the Justiciers in London before he went to Italy was after Archdeacon and last of all before made Archbishop was five whole years great Chancellour of England sitting and judging in the Court of highest judicature how I say it was not onely not probable but not even really possible that such a man being made Archbishop of Canterbury should upon false grounds that is upon any such vain or trifling grounds as those are of some of our late School-divines Canonists or Historians or as those are of Bellarmine Baronius c. for the exemption of Clergiemen from secular tribunals even the very supream in or as to the judgment or punishment of their crimes whatsoever contend so mightily and so dangerously and so fatally at last with Henry the Second or contend with him at all upon such grounds for any kind of exemption of those two Clerks whereof before from the Kings Judicatories especially when the King himself desired they should be delivered to the secular Court because of their own proper great delinquency and because also or indeed cheifly of the great clamours were then against the more general delinquency of Clerks in England as not regarding much Ecclesiastical punishments or should also but I say still upon the grounds of Bellarmine or his Associats contend with that King upon the matter or subject of the second of those 16. Heads which begins Clerici citati c. and which is the only indeed of all those 16. Heads that any way touches our present controversie or which of all those Heads may at all be made use of against my doctrine of the subjection of Clerks in criminal causes to the supream civil power Therefore I took the pains in reading over all the more ancient civil or municipal laws of England as many as I heard were extant and not only the Saxon laws publish'd of late by Abrahamus Whelocus though formerly translated into Latin out of the ancient English or Saxon language by Gulielmus Lambardus but also the Norman laws made for England by William the Conquerour and his youngest Son King Henry the first as Roger Twisden gives them as likewise I yet further took pains in consulting the Histories of William the Conqueror William Rufus Henry the First King Stephen Henry the Second c. because I perswaded my self it could not be otherwise but that certainly S. Thomas had some good sure ground for himself in the municipal proper peculiar laws of England for that which concern'd his grand contest or even for that second head fingly taken of those above 16. or even also for his not delivering up to secular judgment those two criminal Clerks Nor truly was I deceived in my perswasion nor frustrated in my inquisition For having read the laws of King Inas who began to raign an 712. and ended an 729. of King Alured who began his raign an 871. and ended an 900 of King Ethelred who began an 979. ended an 1016. of King Edgar who began an 959. ended an 975. of King Edmund who began 940. ended 946. of Edward the Second of that name of Saxon Kings who began 900. end 924. and of Guthrun the Danish tributary King those laws I mean which are called Faedera Edwardi ac Guthruni Regum of King Ethelstan who began his raign 924. ended 940. of King Canutus who began 1016. ended 1035. of Edward the Third of that name of the Saxon Kings otherwise called Edouardus bonus Edward the Confessor and St. Edward who began 1042. ended 1066. as likewise those of Gulielmus Conquaestor who began 1067. ended 1087. and of Henricus primus who began 1100. ended 1135. I find enough to my purpose 'T is true those of Inas Ethelred and Aelstane have nothing in particular touching it nor those even of Edgar which were renewed again LXVII years after his death and after that by reason of the intervening wars they had been so long out of use and were so renewed by Edwardus bonus St. Edward the Confessor any thing but that in general which is the first of all his laws Primum Ecclesiae Dei jura ac Immunitates sitas omnes habento deâ—umas quisque c. yet those of Alured determine thus Sacerdos si quempiam interfecerit eorum omnium quae ope domicilii fretus acquisierit confiscatio sequitor eumque gradu spoliatum Episcopus è fano pellito ni Dominus data capitis aestimatione veniam illi exorarit And those of Edmund thus si quis hominis Christiani sanguinem effuderit ad Regium conspectum etsi ei seruierit non admittitor ni prius id sceleris juxta ac fuerit ei ab Episcopo ac sacerdote imperatum compensarit But those of Edward the Second and Guthrum thus Si quis sacris initiatus clepserit dimicarit peierarit aut fornicatus fuerit capitis aestimatione mulcta aut legis violatae paena pro îpsa delicti ratione compensato Deo saltem prout se regulae habuerint Ecclesiasticae faciat satis atque in custodiam ni fidejussores admoverit conjicitor Sacerdos si in diebus festis aut jeiuniis populo indicendis erraverit 30. solidis si quidem id inter Anglos evenerit mulctator fin idem in Dacis acciderit sesquimarcam pendito Sacerdos si ad dies in hoc condictos oleum non pararit sacrosanctum aut baptisma cum usus fuerit denegarit inter Anglos mulctator in Dacis autem legis violatae paenas luctooras nimirum duodenas numerato Si quis sacris initiatus capitale quidquam perpetrarit capitor ut tandem Episcopo criminis admissi paenas dependat And those also of Canutus in part after the same manner and in part otherwise or thus Si eorum qui Arae deservierint aliquis hominem occiderit aut insigne aliquod perpetrarit flagitium gradu honore dispoliatus perinde ei atque Papa circumscripserit habitandi locum exulato ac cumulatè compensato Sin is crimen fuerit inficiatus excusatio tripla esto Atque ni hanc quae Deo hominibus
Kings Absolution by the Cardinals having this Title Charta Absolutionis Domini Regis and beginning thus Henrico Dei gratia illustri Regi Anglorum Albertus tituli sancti Laurentii in Lucinia Theodinus tituli sancti Vitalis Presbyteri Cardinales Apostolicae Sedis Legati salutem in eo qui dat salutem Regibus Ne in dubium veniant quae geruntur c. And so proceeds to signifie his said Purgation and their own Absolution given to him upon the fame conditions Now I demand Whether there be any kind of likelihood that so knowing and so great a King as Henry the Second was then for he had Conquered Ireland that very year and thence it was that he Sail'd immediately to Normandy of purpose to purge himself and be absolved so as soon as he heard those Legates were come thither from Rome And he had the whole Sea-side of France and far in to the Land all along to Navarre in Spain under his dominion and in actual possession and had Scotland also Tributary though it was Two years after before he took the King of Scots should have made so wonderful a submission and in such words and received Absolution on such terms if he could have alledg'd any thing or matter of Treason against Thomas of Canterbury And that he also performâ—d all and more than all this for appeasing God's wrath against himself for having only given without further design the unfortunate occasion of the Saint's death we have seen already and in part before in his extraordinary Pilgrimage to and Humiliation at the Saint's Monument And we may in part also gather hence That by actual instance he quitted the requiring of that Oath of the Clergy for the observation of the sixteen customs For so doth Matthew Parker himself confess in express terms and in his life of Richard a Monk of St. Benedicts Order Prior of the Monastery of Dover who was the next succeeded Thomas Becket in the Archbishoprick and Primacy of Canterbury and in a Legatine power Apostolick also being fix'd upon by this very King Henry the Second to succeed so and confirm'd and consecrated so by the same often mentioned Pope Alexander the Third at Anagnia in Italy Et paulo post sayes Parker Archiepiscopus Primas Romanae Sedis Legatus cum Pallio in Angliam rediit Hic electus Regi fidelitatem juravit salvo ordine suo nulla prorsus facta mentione de prioribus regni consuetudinibus observandis Behold eight several Arguments which if at least taken all together and especially if they be also taken together with all I have said before in this second Appendix to answer such Objections as my self framed against my self I must confess I cannot for my own part but judge them to be so many and so strong Arguments and Presumptions in Law and Reason to persuade us of the greatest unlikelihood may be of any such matter as Treason possible to have been truly charged at any time on St. Thomas of Canterbury that I see not how any rational indifferent person may or might have ever entertained any such thought of him And so I conclude this second Appendix against the unweigh'd Relation and very inconsiderate Censure of Parker and much more yet against the barbarous and impious judgment of those Judges who under Henry the VIII above Three hundred years after the death of the Martyr condemn'd him for a Traytor repeating here again what I said before against the grand Atheistical Counsellor of the said King Henry the VIII in this matter who ever he was That it was neither Treason nor even any other less or real and certain misdemeanor he saw or he read in the life or death of Thomas of Canterbury put him on so execrable an Enterprize Sed avaritia illa quae caâ—tivavit discipulum comitem Christi captivavit militem custodem Sepulchri as St. Austin said of Judas who betrayed Christ and of the Souldiery that kept the Sepulchre of Christ And so also I conclude whatever I intended to say principally or incidentally against the tacite Objection of the Divines of Louain of this glorious Martyrs Contests with Henry the Second and of his opinion or judgment in such Contests in relation to the Doctrine of Ecclesiastical Exemption from the supreme civil coercive power of temporal Princes or to my own Doctrine which I am sure is the Catholick Doctrine and whatever else I intended to say principally or occasionally of the sanctity of his life and glory of his martyrdom and of the consistency of both with some humane invincible errors of his side speaking according to the objective verity or being of things in themselves as we see that other great and undoubted Saints and even the very Princes of the Apostles have fallen into such humane errors without prejudice to the sanctity of their lives or glory of their martyrdoms that Peter erred so out of zeal to gain both Jewes and Gentiles in Judaizing among the Jews c. and who reprehended him in that did no less himself err so in another occasion in making himself a Nazarâ—te and in circumcising Timothy so much against his own Doctrine there Si circumcidamini Christus vobis nihil proderit and elsewhere And finally whatever I intended to say directly and of purpose to shew that indeed St. Thomas of Canterbury did not in any part of all his Contests with Henry the Second as much as err so that is not err at all as much as inculpably or invincibly or at all against the very objective Truth of Things or Laws in themselves And yet I must tell my Reader that if Augustinus the first Archbishop of Canterbury had contested so or Reginaldus Polus the last Catholick in that See or many others after Austin for some Ages and before Cardinal Pool in other Ages intervening 'twixt his and that wherein Thomas Becket was Archbishop of that same See I could not justifie any of them for contesting so but plainly condemn them Because in their Times the municipal Laws of the Land were quite contrary in many points as they are at this day and have been so as to the punishment of criminal Clergymen in cases of Treason Murther Felony c. a long time and perhaps several Ages in England as well in those immediately after Henry the Second's dayes and notwithstanding the conditions of his Purgation Absolution and Satisfaction and then almost uninterruptedly till the change and after the change by Henry the VIII until this present as in those before the dayes of that Christian King of the Saxons who ever he was that first gave Clergymen those priviledges of Exemption in Criminal Causes from Lay Judicatories which I quoted before and proved to have not been repealed at any time after until Henry the Second's Reign And because they were the municipal Laws of the Land which only could warrant the grand Contest of St. Thomas of Canterbury at least in relation to the exemption of Criminal Clerks
and by his blessed Disciples preach't and declared to the Gentiles of the whole Earth But why this Discourse of the way of the Cross of the way of Religion and Christian Faith to an Abbot of Mount Royal 'T is paint not substance with which you colour things You pretend Religion but intend it not and so with notorious Sophistry alledge a not cause for a cause In St. Gregory Nazianzen's Orations of Peace where he treats of the great differences which then were amongst the Clergy especially the Bishops I find the true cause of that vehement spirit of yours and your and his Eminence Cardinal Barberin's opposition Besides ignorance in many of your Informers and Whisperers there is impetuous anger my Lord and hatred and spite and envy and there is avarice my Lord and pride and ambition and a blind passion to domineer and the glory pomp and vanity of the World But this too is it not o' th freest I confess it but 't is a freedom which the thing requires and which becomes a Christian Priest and old Divine and faithful Subject of His King in a Controversie no less great than unhappy between some of the Clergy with the whole Laity with supreme Princes themselves and Kings and Emperours of the World concerning Right in Temporals Nevertheless to say and write as I have done to the Internuncio of his Holiness and of a Cardinal Is it not misbecoming This I deny For as for your Lordship if in dignity as a Commendatory Abbot and Internuncio of the Pope you go before me yet in Order and spiritual power and in the Hierarchy you come behind me Nor is there in that respect so much difference betwixt a Bishop and the meanest Priest as betwixt you and me Nevertheless I respect and reverence an Abbot and much more an Internuncio nay honour your person without those titles if you respect me as is fitting For what concerns his Eminence as I have a great veneration for the height of the Sacred Episcopal Office as instituted by Christ our Saviour and the Dignity of Cardinal as constituted by the Supreme Bishops so I have a far greater for both in the person of his Eminence Cardinal Fr. Barberin and so much the greater as by the rule of our seraphick Father I know my self obliged by a stricter tye to reverence not only the Governor Protector and Corrector but as I am informed a Friend and Patron and singular Benefactor too of our Order and a man besides if this unhappy Controversie had not lessned his esteem pious and good Notwithstanding I maintain I have used no greater freedom against either than becomes the Cause than becomes Walsh or any other Priest who is a Divine and pious in the same Cause The Cause I must confess is in one respect proper to Walsh and the rest of the Subscribers but in more and more important respects 't is the Cause of a Kingdom of the British Empire of England Scotland and more particularly Ireland nay of all Common-wealths Kingdoms and Kings of Christian Faith over and above and by consequence of the universal Church People and Clergy and all Priests 'T is a Cause besides which for the side you take is wonderful bad and most false which has long since been exploded condemned adjudged and adjudged as seditious scandalous erroneous contrary to the Word of God Heretical and moreover dangerous to Kings and People destructive of the peace of the World apt even to make the Pope and Church of Christ be abominated hated and abhorred And yet so I say or as such adjudged exploded and condemned in all ages all times from the dayes of Gregory the VII to this present and at present also and that most of all by renowned Prelates famous Doctors Universities Churches most Kingdoms and Commonwealths through all Europe preserving notwithstanding the Faith and Communion of Rome Besides 't is a Cause for which and for that part I mean which you have undertaken to maintain albeit that were but only for the Popes indirect power and that also only in some cases over the Temporals of Christian Princes its most learned and eminent Patron Cardinal Perron demanded no more but that as problematical or as uncertain and doubtful it might pass uncensured and demanded this in an Assembly general of the Three Estates in France Lastly 't is a Cause which for that very unwarrantable part the Internuncio and Cardinal do so persuade urge press and to their power constrain also to be embraced and this with all manner of art and craft with all manner of industry and fraud but yet onely in a corner of the World amongst a company of ignorant Islanders the miserable Irish I mean far from the great Continent and but there indeed where such arts are not so well known that not content with the late and entire destruction of a miserable Nation procured by such frauds and fictions for Faith forsooth they would again ensnare them and would rather have them lose for ever the present small such as it is and all future hope of being restored to their Countrey or Religion or as I gladly would to the publick and free exercise of their Religion under a most clement Prince or even to any either temporal or spiritual advantages then not to embrace not believe this most impious Assertion and believe it as an Article of Faith without which they cannot be saved And would have them serve over again their wretched slavery undergo Prisons Banishments and Death And as heretofore in the persecution of the Vandals would have the whole Clergy Bishops Priests Religious as Traytors Rebels and Outlaws either be hanged at home or banishâ—t again to Beggery abroad leaving none in that Island of Saints to baptize the new born or confirm the baptised or absolve those of years or anoint the dying or consecrate or administer the holy Host to any Now if Walsh have expostulated defended and reproved as above and this after two nay almost three years of patience and silence in such a Cause against such an assertion such enormous errours and impostures such more then abominable plots and attempts who that considers the thing as it deserves can object against him that he has spoken more freely than became him But the Cardinal is Protector Corrector and Governour of the Order of the Minors and by consequence has the power of a Prelate and lawful Superiour over Walsh and yet against him much here is said I have granted this before But is it therefore not lawful for Walsh in this or the like case to use the freedom which he here uses or what do you think of St. Peter what of St. Paul what of that reprehension of St. Peter by St. Paul St. Paul was the last of the Apostles was called not the ordinary way was the Thirteenth was one who said He was not worthy the name of an Apostle St. Peter was the first chief greatest Prince of the Apostolical Order and Prince
cloud of Neotericks or of all the very most ancient Fathers and holy Doctors Doctors of Christianity all along for a Thousand years till Gregory the VII Pontificat Nor any thing at all either of holy Scripture or natural Reason both plain enough in the case For I have already in my First Part abundantly given all such Arguments And yet I will observe here that no where have I made use of Protestant Authors albeit many of them have most learnedly refuted all such petty and whatsoever other Objections but above others Joannes Roffensis most diffusely and excellently Nay nor made use not even of Marcus Antonius a Dominis the learned Archbishop of Spalato not even of him there I say where in his Ostensio errorum Francisci Suarez he canvasses the Allegation made of those 70 or 72 Authors and even reduces that number to 20. A small number God wot as to that of bare extrinsick authority of Writers if that I mean should be of any value as indeed it should not to persuade any Nay let us suppose that not only Marcus Antonius but even Joannes Barclaius in his Pietas had come short in their arguments or examination of those 70 or 72 Writers alledged by Bellarmine in his little Book de temporali potestate Papae against William Barclay for himself and that Eudaemon Joannes against John Barclay had got the better of him and not been throughly confuted by his more learned Answerer and consequently that in very deed Bellarmines whole number of 70 or 72 had been rightly and to his purpose alledged by the Bishop what proportion or rather what weight I pray could 72 late Writers have to persuade any in comparison of 72000 I am sure the most learned and holy Fathers Pastors Doctors of the University of Christians throughout the earth in all Ages from Christ and even Christ himself and his Apostles Peter and Paul in the head of them What to the belief and practice also of at least 72 millions or rather 72 hundred millions indoctrinated by them Nay or speaking even of those who writ on or as to the very point in specie and after I mean the subtle distinctions invented either by Schoolmen or others in the later and worser Ages since Gregory the Seventh's dayes what proportion can there be between those 72 Writers or Authors alledg'd by Bellarmine and those other more than 272 Writers quoted by Caron to the contrary but that of one to four So that from first to last if we regard even but the extrinsick authority onely of the number of Teachers and Writers and Writers I say on the very point and distinction the Bishop will find he relies on a weak Reed that will break and pierce and bore through his hand Nor can he pretend that St. Thomas of Aquin or S. Bonaventure have been holier than Chrysostom Austin Gregory the Great and so many other ancient Fathers whose doctrine in the controverted question so contrary to that of those late Scholastick canonized Saints I have before produced Sect. Lxxiii Lxxiv But the truth is that no extrinsick authority either of number or sanctity not even of the greatest Saints how numerous soever can be of any moment either against holy Scripture or Catholick Tradition that I may say nothing now of plain demonstration from the principles of natural reason Otherwise Cyprian of Africk and Firmilian of Cappadocia and Dionysius of Alexandria had born down the scale against other Doctors in the question of Re-baptization And for Holiness I demand who was holier than Cyprian himself alone Therefore neither did St. Thomas of Aquin nor St. Bonaventure's holiness render them infallible in their Scholastical disputes Nay do not our own Schoolmen every day reject both Thomas and Bonaventure even in a hundred points and even also where we have neither evident Scripture nor manifest tradition nor clear demonstration of reason but only stronger probabilities against them Do not all Scotists in the world laugh to scorn the Arguments in particular of Thomas of Aquin and maintain a Thousand contradictory Positions to the very Conclusions or Positions and Thesis's of Thomas and all his School of Thomists So much I could not forbear to say here occasionally though it be not my business now to dispute or confute What is more proper at present is to tell the Reader That my Lord of Ferns having received my Letter at St. Sebastian and seeing he could not prudently venture against my advice thought fit to send his letter of Proxy to his own Vicar-general N Redmond living then at home in his Diocess of Ferns and County of Wexford to supply his place in the National Congregation to be held at Dublin and vote pro or con for or against the Remonstrance according as he should see the major and sanior part do For those were the words of that Letter of Proxy if my memory fail me not for I saw and read it Whether any private instructions were contrary I know not And however we see no opposition at all no endeavours I mean from this Bishop to hinder the Fathers from meeting Which is the scope of all hitherto said as in this place said VI. AS for the Bishop of Kilfinuran Andrew Lynch the third and last of those Irish Bishops then abroad I have nothing to say that might relate to any opposition or contrivance of his to hinder the meeting of the Fathers in the National Congregation Nor indeed besides what you have already seen Part I. Sect. v. pag. 12. have I any thing else to remark here of him save only 1. That he was one of those 12 persons which the Nuncio immediately after the rejection of the Peace of 1646. recommended to Rome by his Dean Dionysius Massarius to be made Bishops and who by the same Dean received next Spring their Bulls and accordingly soon after both Consecration and Installation 2. That nevertheless in the controversie about the cessation of Arms with Inchiquin and censures of the Nuncio he seem'd to be for the Supreme Council 3. That he cunningly declined appearing either one side or other in the business of Jamestown 4. That I for my own part alwayes until I discovered him upon his landing at Dublin and by his carriage in the Congregation took him to have been rightly and honestly principled and therefore as on the same account for the Bishop of Ardagh so I had also on the same been in all occasions an earnest sollicitor of my Lord Lieutenant to suffer him to return out of France and come home to his charge of Kilfinuran 5. That notwithstanding several invitations by letters and otherwise from me to him since the year 1661. to the present 65. assuring him also that he might safely return and reside in his own Diocess yet he neither would nor it seems had any mind to return Whereof we shall see hereafter the causes 6. That concerning him and more closely in order to his affection or disaffection to our
I was my self present in the Congregation when this Letter was therein publickly read Sed canebatur surdis They had before obstinately resolved against all reason The Miracles and Revolutions they expected from the year 1666 their Forraign Intelligence and expectations and their lying Prophecies at home together with so many other vain perswasions of their own fixed them unalterable Whence it was That they neither did nor would give other answer to this Letter Subscribed by so many than what they had before given to my self alone viz. That none should speak any more against the former Remonstrance or those who subscribed and held to it still But how well they and their partizans have performed this verbal promise the Second Tome of this Work shall discover The truth is their Cabal never once intended to perform Whereof because I then also had been throughly perswaded by unanswerable and clear arguments in reply to their Answer I thought fit to say as I did accordingly before them all and both immediatly and publickly there in the place That both I my self and all the rest not only of those who subscribed the above Letter but all others of the former Remonstrants where ever dispersed throughout the Kingdom in whose behalf as well as their own such as were present in town had so subscribed that Expostulatory Letter would be at last necessitated to declare and would accordingly declare against them to the people even also at the Altars and from the Pulpits by laying the Sin of Schism besides the true causes too of all other evils threatning and impending over the Nation and Religion at their door if they on their side did not exactly perform their promise and perform it effectually by silencing all the malicious and ignorant traducers of the former Remonstrance and Subscribers of it Yet I must confess that although I did then really so intend as I spake and was not at all by any one of the Fathers either publickly in that Congregation expostulated with or privately there or elsewhere that I could hear even so much as murmured of for that my freedom in declaring what I had so resolved for all such future contingencies nevertheless upon after thoughts of taking more prudential ways i. e. ways of less noise and no scandal and yet I knew St. Bernard's Maxime Melius est ut scandalum oriatur quam veritas relinquatur I did while I remain'd in Ireland i. e. till May 1669 however provoked manifoldly in too too many instances both refrain my self and hinder all other Subscribers of the former Remonstrance from declaring so or speaking in Church or Chappel at the Altar or in the Pulpit any word or matter against them or any of them yea notwithstanding I had been many times and on several occasions mightily importuned to the contrary and that also by very good and vertuous men XX. BUT to return to the Bishop of Ardagh and Vicar General Apostolick of Cashel these two last Commissioners employed by the Congregation to His Grace the Duke of Ormond Lord Lieutenant General c of Ireland I must now tell my Reader That on Monday morning the 25 of June and 15th and last of our National Congregation the Fathers being Assembled to hear what their said Commissioners could report of their success on the former Saturday night upon delivering their last signed Paper and pleading their excuse for other matters to His Grace the Procurator gives them His Grace's positive commands to Dissolve that morning and retire to their respective homes telling them withal That His Grace found no satisfaction in any of their Addresses The Bishop of Ardagh on the other side endeavours to make them believe That His Grace did seem fully satisfied with their Remonstrance or Act of Recognition and other Paper of the Three first Sorbon Propositions delivered at the same time nay and that His Grace even in express terms had promised to represent unto His Maiesty these two Instruments as satisfactory i. e. as containing fully all those Declarations of Allegiance or Fidelity and Obedience which could be expected from any Roman-Catholicks whatsoever subject to His Majesty But the Procurator considering this to be the last time the Congregation was to meet and seeing no remedy but that he must either suffer the Fathers to dissolve and depart with so false and noxious too a Perswasion or must oppose this Prelat even to his face chooseth what any honest man especially of his place and trust would in such case And therefore tells the Fathers how himself having been present all the while at both times when the Lord Lieutenant spoke either to the said Bishop of Ardagh and Father John Burk Vicar General of Cashel on the 23 of June at night or before to the same Ardagh and Kilfinuragh on the 16 of the same moneth could and must assure the Congregation That His Grace did neither at the one or other time give any kind of ground for this relation viz of His seeming to have been satisfied with their said Addresses or instruments and of promising to represent them as satisfactory c. That on the contrary he gave ground enough by his short and sharp answers and by his severe countenance shewed to the last Commissioners viz. the foresaid Bishop of Ardagh and Vicar General of Cashel on Saturday night the 23 that he was extreamly unsatisfied That all the ground the Bishop could pretend for his relation made clear against him being that when he desired His Grace would be pleased to represent their said Instruments to His Majesty the answer made him by His Grace had been in these words only I will represent them as they deserve And that men of reason or judgment who knew in what manner His Grace had spoken these words what he said to Burk immediately after and how without further Ceremony nay with all other manifest signs of displeasure He dismissed them might easily see the Bishop had either strangly forgotten what he saw and heard or more strangely mistaken contraries one for an other This matter of the Procurators opposing to that relation made by Ardagh being over the Primat stands up and after some few words to the Chairman turning himself to the Procurator tells him what the Congregation had resolved upon in his behalf Viz. That in regard of his pains already taken for and many obligations put upon the the Roman-Catholick People of the Nation and of his great expences too for so many years past since he was made Procurator in the year 1660 as likewise considering that neither his future pains nor future expences in serving and obliging much more yet the same people by continuing and worthily discharging his office of Procurator for them with the King and His Majesties great Ministers of State could be less than thitherto both had been The Lords and rest of the Fathers of the Congregation partly to provide for their own concerns and partly to shew the most effectual signs they could
met and played and run bolt up right and streight with as much activity and strength as the tallest and most active of all the rest of the youths and as if he had never been cripled even to the extream wonderment of every one that had known before This much did that Gentleman Mr. Geoffry Brown assure to me of his own knowledge as likewise That he never heard that that man so cured had at any time after relapsed into his former state of a Cripple And that this was all he could say for certain of Father Finachty which happened says he I must confess many years ago in the Protectors time adding withal That of other matters then or before or since related of him he could say nothing nor could deermine for his own part whether that he saw was a true Miracle or no. This relation from Geoffery Brown together with Mr. Belings very great and confident opinion went far to perswade me that in some at least former instances whether by reason of the Faith or of the strong Imagination of those came to Father Finachty to be cured by him or whether of any special gift or Grace he had from God somewhat happened to some few persons that seem'd Miraculous And truly Mr. Belings in particular was so confident of such Gift and Grace in him that not long after this my self being present he moved the Lord Lieutenant very earnestly for a new Pass to be given to the said Father to the end he might freely and publickly appear again and practice where ever he pleased even at Dublin Though I must withal acknowledge that my Lord Lieutenant seem'd no less confident that nothing done by him was truly Miraculous but whatsoever was reported of him was either a lye or a cheat or at best and most and where or if any thing on some occasion or to some ones self did seem done to himself a work of meer fancy and strong imagination saying nevertheless to Mr. Belings and me That notwithstanding such his opinion of Finachty yet he affirmed not the ceasing of Miracles Vniversally in all parts of the Church or world nor denyed but peradventure at the very present even some Jesuits wrought true Miracles somewhere and on some occasions in the East Indies Japan or China for the Conversion of Infidels but then also adding withal and in the last place assuring Mr. Belings That however says he if Father Finachty come to Dublin and do but one Miracle only of all the incredible numbers reported he shall lye even in my own bed here within the Kings Castle and be as safe and free as I to come and go at his pleasure But Mr. Beling says he then concluding look you to it that instead of acquiring honour and converting Protestants to your own Religion by bringing that Miraculous man of yours hither and exposing him to more prying more narrow searchers than any he hath met with amongst men that are themselves willing to be deceived you find not quite contrary effects and make him an object of scorn for Mountebankery and your selves of laughter for your credulity as I am sure you will Now partly because Mr. Belings notwithstanding all his former earnestness for and esteem of that famous man desisted from any further prosecution of this business i. e. from any invitation of him to come and appear at Dublin for the Conversion of Protestants and partly too because I heard so many others albeit no less either zealous or judicious Roman-Catholicks of a quite contrary opinion to Mr. Bellings in Finachty's concern nor moved at all by Geoffrey Brown â—s Relations I also gave over then any further enquiry resolved nevertheless to renew it again if peradventure I should hear afterwards of any more new Wonders or new Miracles wrought But I did not hear a word of such new matters not even for the whole Twelvemonth next coming Nay he not contrary and in the mean while the Earl of Clancarty assured me That himself was present when and where Father Finachty during his late pass and progress about the Kingdom Exorcised publickly at the Lady Thurls in Ormond with all his might and strength and consequently also exercised all his power of Wonder-working or Curing miraculously and there observed That when he the said Exorcist Father Finachty had done with some who were brought to him or whom he himself had fixed upon as Demoniacks and another thrusting in through the crowd had succeeded in their place as having a sore shoulder and desiring to be Cured thereof Father Finachty looking first on it and seeing it even visibly sore not only answer'd in the hearing of all were present and near him as I was said the foresaid Lord of Clancarty That it was a natural sore i. e. an evil or disease proceeding from natural causes only and consequently from other than any Diabolical work by possession obsession or otherwise and That he had nothing to do with any sort of meer natural disease whatsoever but pursuant to this answer refusing to meddle with or practise on that sore-shoulderâ—d man dismiss'd him openly and presently without having once attempted to cure or to ease him by Exorcism or other exercise of praying or crossing or blowing or stroaking c. Besides this relation of my Lord Clancarty I was told also about the same time by another person of very good credit a Connaught man too of the same Countrey with the said Father that he viz. Finachty had formerly been servant in his youth to one Father Moor an old venerable Jesuit and skilful Exorcist That of this same Father Moor it was he learn'd his Art or knowledge of Exorcising And that besides that knowledge and his own continual practice and long experience wherein he might be wholly directed by the known Books of Exorcisms as Flagellum Daemonum and such other as without question he was throughly conversant in them he could not truly pretend to other extraordinary power gift or vertue These two so particular and positive relations of men whom I had much reason to believe could not but very much further my being wholly taken off at least for a time from inquiring more after that good Father unless or until peradventure I did upon some new grounds understand more of him and that of new Miracles and these too more authentick than the former reported of him And yet I will not deny but Mr. Brown's Relation and his Testimony continued still more deeply fix'd in my Thoughts and had more weight with me than I could by any means rid my self of But it was not very long ere I had again the powerful Argument of universal Report and that even from London of the said Father Finachty's new and most prodigious and manifold signs and wonders wrought there For about a Twelve-month or thereabouts or at least not much more after he had from his former Circuit withdrawn himself back to Connaught and and that all persons were silent concerning him
only or at least chiefly for the confirmation of the only true Church the Roman and conviction of all Dissenters 6. That as he at London desired my Lord Aubigny the Queens great Almoner he would be pleased to make in his behalf to the Court this offer viz. That the Protestants should pitch upon such a number as they pleased of all sorts of sick persons the places and Parishes where such infirm persons lived then bring them to the most expert Physitians to have their judgments of the truth and certainty of their being without question truly sick and of the quality and inverateness of their several Diseases then carry the same diseased persons to the Protestant Clergy Ministers and Bishops to be cured by their Prayers and when these had failed of doing those any good to bring them to him publickly before as many or such as they pleased to be present and they should see that by the invocation of God and for confirmation or evidence of the Roman-Catholick Church to be the only true Church and Religion of Christ he would cure them all the same saith he which I offered at London to my Lord Aubigny and by him to the Court but was not accepted there from me I do now here again offer to you and by you to the Lord Lieutenant and Council When he had so confidently and positively answered I was much troubled at the three last Articles For I believed my Lord Clancarty told me truth And I had much cause to believe those who related his having been servant in his youth to Father Moor and from him learned the manner of Exorcizing Nor did I want the fresh memory of many other Arguments to perswade me that what ever he had done of good to any though few was by Exorcism only and only where somewhat of Possession obsession or Witchcraft intervened Besides that I could hardly doubt he did but little to any of so many as came to him sick of natural diseases only I begun therefore now inwardly in my own mind to scruple both his veracity and humility vertues I think to be expected in a worker of wonders by the pure invocation of Christ And both I scrupled the more that I observed him to blush when I objected his learning from and being a servant to Father Moor and his gifts to be confined to the only effects of bare Exorcism Then besides I considered how I had never read of any Saint in former days that put himself so freely and purposely in all places and occasions upon working of Miracles by Exorcism or otherwise much less of any that undertook so boldly at least where so little need was But again remembring that in Matt. 7.22 23. * * Multi dicent mihi in illa die Domine Domine nonne in nomine tuo in nomine â—â—o damonia ejecimus in nomine tuo daemonia ejecimus in nomine tuo virtutes multas fecimus Et tunc confiteborillis Quia nunquam novi ves and withal considering the confidence of his offer I check'd my self However I desired him to consider well once more what he offer'd so and the consequence of his failure adding thus Father Finachty I am upon consideration of all I have from first to last heard of you inclined to think that in some occasions and to some few persons you have done some good that is that either your gift or their own Faith or at least their own strong imagination with some other natural helps hath been in some measure available to them when they came to you and you Exorcized or Crossed or Prayed over them or upon that occasion of your doing so but I am withal inclined to think you have failed the expectations of a thousand for one you have not Nay and moreover that the gift whatever it be is for Exorcizing only and not at all for curing natural Diseases I am sure Says he replying I have not failed one for a thousand I have cured and cured even of all sorts of pure Natural Diseases and what I offer I know and fear no tryal This reply made me fear the flattery or folly of some half sighted or half witted if not worse men had somewhat turn'd his brain for I dared not yet for all this entertain any determinat judgment or even scarce the least passing imagination of his being a willful Impostor Mr. Browns Relation besides the late reports and Letters from London and several other things told me for his advantage remaining still fix'd in my mind and making me rather shut my own eyes then see or freely entertain any such thought of him Which was the reason I would not any further at that time question what he had so positively averr'd himself But leaving that Subject prayed him nevertheless if not rather indeed the more to tell me when or how long since he first had found by real experience that God had bestowed these gracious gifts upon him was it then first in the Protector 's time when the reports came to us to London or was it before and what year After a little demurr he answered That long before that time when I further pressed to know was it in the time of the Confederat's and if said I so long ago it is strange I that lived constantly where the chief seat of the Confederate Assemblies and Councils and their Supream Power was even at Kilkenny whether all the Kingdom did resort did never hear one word of any such wonder-working man Notwithstanding says he it hath been so long since Pray said I hath it been as early as your being consecrated Priest Before I received any Orders at all greater or lesser Sacred or not answered he I am sorry for that said I and will give you my reason why For till now I was in good hopes your extraordinary gift in Exorcizing so effectually as you say you do might be in some measure attributed to or might be some Argument of the Authority and Power given to all Priests though given to them before they receive the Order of Priesthood or any of those called the Greater Orders even as soon as amongst the four former and lesser Orders they are ordained Exorcists But now I perceive you were a meer Lay-man and not so much as any sort of Clergy-man or Ecclesiastical person at all when first so gifted by God I was no other says he You will not be offended said I at one question more and then Iâ—le have done for this time What was I pray the very first particular whereby you assured your self experimentally then during your being a Lay-man That God had bestowed that extraordinary gift upon you Here again he demurred a little and then answered I had a brother of my own says he whose breeches the Devil stole away at night Whereupon I took a Book of Exorcisms and thence read a Prayer over him which was so effectual that the Devil restored his breeches And this was the first
immediately succeeding Internuntius's of Brussels Hieronimus de Vecchys and Jacobus Rospigliosi determined the case as well in this particular point as in all others of the like nature against the former protestation of 61. and so reserved to themselves a latitude or liberty of telling all others and practising themselves accordingly That indeed although it be not their own particular Doctrine sense or Judgement yet for as much as it is Romes or at least the Courts there and for as much as they owe obedience to that See and must submit their Judgements to and receive commands from it specially whensoever his Holiness shall declare or if he hath so al-ready on the point declared an obligation of Conscience or that it is of necessity or that it is a command to them which cannot be transgressed Salvâ veritate fidei Catholicae or sine dispendio salutis aeternae they must for these reasons obey and conform themselves to the contrary Doctrine and practice flowing from it To pass by at present I say all this and that for these causes or motives besides divers others which I likewise pass over this time they would no way censure the contrary doctrine nor as much as seem to dis-allow it as they do not as much as simply averr what their own judgment on the point is or shall be hereafter at any time Who cannot but see out of all said already that by Subjects in this passage they understand only such as are and must or ought to continue Subjects alwayes De Jure and even De Jure Divino not such as are de facto only Subjects such as are onely Subjects by force or out of prudence onely that is until they see they prudently may in some cases of deposition deprivation Excommunication or without any such sentences in some cases of Apostacy heresy schysme or of publick oppression or tyrannical administration and that the people themselves by virtue of their own pretended inherent Civil and supream right in some cases declare themselves exempt and their king or the person until then their King now devested of that power and themselves freed of all kind of tye of subjection to him For even in such cases or contingencies they will say and may truely say according to their present sense opinion and general negative abstraction here That it is not their Doctrine that Subjects may be discharged absolved or freed from their obligation of performing their duty And yet they will and may say then according to their present meaning and that meaning too which their Remonstrance in the words contexture all other present circumstances affecting it necessarily imports that such as were until then Subjects are no more Subjects And if they be still in fact or by force or out of prudence till they find their time they are not so by right Or if by right of the lawes of the Land yet not by a right derived from the lawes of God nature And therefore that although this proposition of theirs be alwayes true then too shall be according to this their present meaning or explication which understands by Subjects none but such as are and ought by the lawes of God nature to continue such and according as they understand the said lawes yet in the cases or emergencies above such persons owe no more any duty of obedience or allegiance and consequently need no further discharge absolution or freedom by the sentence or declaration of any man or men from such duty which hath not nor can have a being or existence in such cases but they are discharged absolved and freed from any such duty on them by the very nature and contingencie of things and by the very consequent ceasing of the obligation of duty of it self I mean and without any further ceremonie They will also and may truely say without giving cause by this passage or any other in their Remonstrance to be up-braided with untruth herein breach of promise or falsity that however or whatever they or any of them may themselves or shall otherwise peradventure think of this matter or whatever their own private Judgement or Doctrine be or be not yet if the Pope shall declare or hath already unto them his or that of his Courts to be the Doctrine of the Catholick Church and with all command them by his Apostolical authority to follow it they must accordingly practise And that it is therefore they formed this Declaration as all the other several clauses of their remonstrance with so much caution and reservation as withal they framed them so that they might not seem to denie the common principle of Christian faith allowed by both sides as too evident in Holy Scripture though for my own part I believe those other they decline to be no less evident there That Jure Divino or by the law of God Princes are to be obeyed by their Subjects and yet by so many abstractions distinctions and explications render that very principle unsignificant and unbinding if and when they shall think fit Whence the ingenious Reader may also perfectly understand the causes or motives of the subtilty and fineness used in placing the words that compose the Proposition or Declaration immediatly following or which directly relates to and seems to condemn the doctrine of the lawfulness not of deposing or depriving Kings but of murthering or killing them by the hands of their Subjects Wherein it might be expected by vulgar judgments that if in any passage the Assembly would be more clear and ingenuous although to such as are fully versed in the controversie and positions of Suarez Bellarmine and such others whose doctrine as to this point or whole matter the Assembly would not by any means condemn it will not seem strange they be no more since the lawfulness of killing or murthering of Kings even I say by the hands of their own Subjects must be equal to that of a sentence of deposition or deprivation of them by Pope or People or of a Censure of Excommunication or other commanding the people to rebel or take Arms against them or to put any such sentence in execution As indeed Bellarmine in his answer to William Barclay and Suarez in his to King James and all others of that way on this subject plainly confess and averr as a consequence unavoidable So many experiences where and as often as any such attempt of deposition hath been made and the nature of man to preserve himself to his power shewing the moral impossibility or at least the very rare contingency of an effectual deposition of a King by his Subjects but withal he was murthered by them Whence it is necessarily consequent that whoever licences the one must the other And yet these late Remonstrants or Subscribers to this Protestation of 66. would by their dexterity seem but to such only as are not conversant in the dispute or do not strictly examine the placing of their words to condemn a doctrine of so
all ignorance malice and other preoccupation whatsoever nay and from their subscription too the Fathers will find it a very hard taske to shew I say not impertinency for this I am sure they can not after what is said before with any colour insist on any longer but any such danger in the consequence of this Proposition It is not our doctrine that the Pope is above a general Council or of this simply The Pope is not above a general Council or of this other as simple which yet is the same in effect A general Council is above the Pope That such Divines of either Greek or Latin Church either Catholick or not as affirm the Papacie or Papal authority as such or as allowed either by those Canons which in opposition to others or by way of excellency are commonly stiled Canones Vniversalis Ecclesiae or as approved even by those other Canons which are properly and onely Papal Canons and are those of the Western-Church whether all or how many of them received generally in the Western-Church or not it matters not at this time that such Divines I say of either Church Greek or Latin as affirm this Papal authority over all other Churches in the world to be onely at the utmost and immediatly such by ecclesiastical and human institution of the Church not by any of Christ otherwise then by his approbation and ratification above in Heaven of what the Church long after his Ascension had here on earth ordained will find no kind of difficulty to shew the inconsequence of the Parliament's being above the King if a general Council be above the Pope First Because the power of a general Council truely such representing the Catholick diffusive Church is by all sides confessed to be originally and immediatly de jure divino or by the immediat institution of Iesus Christ himself whether in that passage of the Gospel dic Ecclesiae or in some other Secondly Because this power is unalterable undiminishable unsubjectable even by the Council it self to any other without a new revealed command from God himself which hath not been hitherto And therefore and out of that very passage of Mathew Dic Ecclesiae must be above the Pope being the Pope can not deny himself to be one of the faithful brethren and being all faithful brethren without exception of any are commanded by Christ himself in that passage of Mathew to be under pain of Excommunication obedient to the sentence of the Church in case they be accused or charged with any guilt before it Thirdly Because on the other side the power of Parliaments is by them not onely denied to be originally or immediatly either jure divino or humano over all persons whatsoever of the respective hereditary Kingdoms if we include the Prince amongst such persons but as such denied also to have been as much as in after times introduced by any allowance or Custom approved either by God or man Prince or people themselves Fourthly Because the very same divines assert constantly the power of supream or soveraign temporal Princes or Kings at least hereditary such as our King is and of which consequently the present dispute is to be jure divino or to be given them from God himself immediatly not from or by the people Or if these divines or any of them allow it has been originally and immediatly from the people at first even as from an efficient cause yet withal maintain that the people also did originally and immediatly so transferr the whole supream power from themselves even in all contingencies whatsoever that it must be ever after irrevocable by them Alleaging for proof that the Scriptures are so clear for the Subjection and obedience of the people even to had tyrannical Kings and not for fear alone but for conscience And further alleaging that there is no tribunal of the people and consequently there is no Parliament appointed by the law of God as neither by the laws of man or nature not even in the most extraordinary cases against their Prince or against any other offending besides that erected by the Princes power Whereunto certainly he never subjects himself so as to give the people or Parliament a supream power above his ownself or a power of superiority or jurisdiction over himself and coercion of himself though he some times bind himself and limit in some cases his own power but by his own power and will alone not by any inherent in the people And who sees not in this doctrine the great and cleer and evident inconsequence of this argument The Pope is not above a general Council Therefore the King is 〈◊〉 above his Parliament Or therefore whoever subscribes that antecedent gives an overture to those late horrid disputes Would not these divines rationally say upon their own grounds this were not to argue à simili but à dissimili Would not they tell you presently what the six hundred Catholick Bishops convened in the 4th general Council that of Calcedon I mean declared in their 27th Canon albeit some great and even holy Bishops of Rome complained of it grieviously that it was the Fathers that gave the priviledges to the Bishop of ancient Rome and that it was therefore they gave such priviledges to him because ancient Rome was then the Seat of the Empire That by consequence the Papacie and power thereof as such must be acknowledged to be as instituted by the Church onely at first so till the last to be dependent subordinate and under the power of the same Church because this power of the Church is for ever unchangeable while the world continues as having been given to it by Christ himself when upon earth And therefore the Pope cannot be above but under a general Council being it is either of all sides confessed the whole power of the Church is in a general Council truely such of it must be so at least in their grounds whether any els confess or oppose it And would not they further tell you the case is quite contrary in that of King and Parliament That first there is no such thing by divine immediate institution or by that of Christ or God immediatly as a Parliament or a power thereof That neither by the mediat institution of God that is by the laws of man there is any such thing or power at least in hereditary Kingdoms which may stand in opposition to the power of Kings Nor any at all in or without such opposition but what they derive originally immediatly and solely from the pleasure of Kings at least and as I mean still in hereditary Kingdoms That secondly or in the next place the power of Kings at least hereditary Soveraign and Supream is immediatly originally and onely from God himself Or if at first any way from the people yet so from them that after their institution translation and submission hoc ipso they must be so absolute and independent that they do not acknowledge nor any way have
give their own way any other than extrinsecal probability even this extrinsecal probability now ceasing where the reasons to the contrary are so manifestly insoluble and an Errour with reverence still to their dignities proved in their proceedings and sentence for what concerns Conscience since they have no power to make it an Article of our Belief that the Cessation is against Conscience Nay this Controversie being wholly or principally depending on a question of Fact cannot by any power on earth be so defined Vid. Bellarm. supra but that it may be lawful to follow the contrary opinion which defends it to be conscionable The Third Querie answered TO the Third That your Lordships printed Answers to the Propositions of the Lord Nuncio are not so short or unsatisfactory in any point as they might afford just ground for an Excommunication The reasons of which resolution are apparent in our Answers to the two former Questions and likewise hence That the Lord Nuncio in his Propositions inserted nothing but what did meerly belong to the Civil Government wherein notwithstanding if any Errour could be declared to have been committed your Lordships were content upon manifestation thereof to amend it or else what was provided for sufficiently before those Propositions were offered The Fourth Querie answered THat whereas the Oath of Association tyes all the Confederates to be dutifully obedient and observant of your Lordships just Orders and Decrees and whereas in our Answer to the first Querie it is sufficiently proved That the present Cessation is most just and lawful and by consequence your Orders and Decrees commanding the Confederates to accept and obey the Cessation must be just it follows That disobedience to such your Lordships Commands in not adhering to the Cessation is Perjury The Fifth Querie answered THat if it shall be found that the Excommunication and Interdict of the Lord Nuncio is against the fundamental Laws of the Kingdom and which the Prelates have sworn by the Oath of Association to maintain it is not lawful for them to publish or countenance the said Censures contrary to your Lordships positive Orders Neither do we see how can any of the Prelates otherwise answer if they condemn not the Oath of Association of injustice and themselves of having done ill in taking or approving it The Sixth Querie answered Bonac tom â— d. 4. q. 1. pun ultim n. 8. citans Suar. c. 41. Sanch. l. 1. de Matr. dis 32. Filluc tra 23. c. 9. q. 10. nu 279. IT being the common sense of Divines that in an Oath lawfully taken for the good and profit of another none can dispense without his privity and consent unto whom it was sworn but in certain cases exprest by the Authors cited in the margent and the Oath of Association being in it self lawful and sworn to the Kingdom for the publick good of the Nation and of each Confederate in particular certainly a dispensation cannot be given to any person or parties of the Confederates to break the said Oath or to take away the obligation of it without the consent of the Assembly unto which by a special clause of the said Oath and this is to be well noted the alteration or dissolution of the Oath is reserved none of the cases excepted by Authors having place in this matter Wherefore if any other of what power soever though it were His Holiness did otherwise attempt to dispense with any of the sworn Confederates both the Dispenser and dispensed would hereby transgress the Law of God and incur the guilt of a mortal and most heinous crime Besides that such a dispensation would be of its own nature invalid void and no way securing for the future the Conscience of the dispensed and consequently this party dispensed withall must of necessity as often as he makes use of such a dispensation so many times commit a mortal sin the Dispenser likewise and without question participating by his first action of the same evils All and every branch and particular of which resolution followeth by necessary inference out of the common and certain doctrine of Classick Authors who without controversie teach That the obligation of a lawful Oath is in a weighty matter under mortal sin and de jure divino by the Law divine natural and positive and that even His Holiness cannot without a manifestly just cause Vid. Bonaci tract de legi disp 1. q. 2. pu 3. prop. 2. nu 14. 15. uâ—i citâ—t Reginal Sanch. Sal. Valeâ— Toâ—e Vasq Cajet Sylv. Nava Sotum c. dispense in any obligation of the Law divine and that if he should otherwise his dispensation would be in it self void sinful and no way securing the Conscience of the party dispensed withal Which doctrine they make evident with many strong and perspicuous reasons unnecessary to be now rehearsed and specially declare it out of Holy Scripture 2 Cor. 13.10 where St. Paul tells That Christ consigned his power unto the Prelates of the Church non in destructionem sed in aedificationem not for destruction but for edification But who sees not that this power would be abused for destruction and not for edification if on pretence of it and without a manifestly just cause dispensations should be granted in the Law divine positive and natural And who is it that looks on the Confederates and their present condition with an impartial eye but will conceive that there cannot be a just cause for dispensing with them or particulars of them in their Oath of Association or with them in their obedience due by the said Oath to the Government established First In regard the sole cause pretended is the Cessation made and observed with Inchiquyn which we have notwithstanding proved to have been lawful necessary profitable and much to the advancement of the Catholick cause were it obeyed by refractories and per consequence of the glory of God How then could it be a just cause for dispensing with any in the Oath of Association or in the obedience due by the said Oath to all Orders of the Supreme Council or all such Orders as do not manifestly appear to be sinful Secondly Because such a dispensation breeds Sedition stirs Rebellion commenceth a Civil War and divides the Confederates into Parties throws fire and blood into their very entrals and by their own hands finally weakens them so by these wayes of mutual enmities and hostilities as hereby in reason they should be thought to be exposed as a prey to the common enemy of our Religion specially their disability when they were entire being considered and the prime scope of their Confederacy which is the propagation and glory of Catholick Religion very unlikely to be attained but rather despaired of Is there any one knows Ireland but should in reason have persuaded himself That all these evils should have followed such a dispensation if God did not prevent them by a miracle and on miracles we are not S. Tho. Val. Sanch. Lessi
strong motives and moral certainties produced before in our Answer to the second Querie and which we may have to persuade us that the Supreme Council who are chiefly aimed at in this business had no such evil intentions Which together with all hitherto said being duly pondered by them who now seem so adverse to us in opinion but by them discharged a little of passion retyring into their Souls and looking with an eye of indifferency upon this difference we doubt not but they will acknowledge before God the truth of our Assertions and with how little reason but great hazard of eternal salvation they disobey the Commands of the Supreme Council on pretence of the present proceedings of the Lord Nuncio and we hope as we most heartily desire with all our Souls that they or at least such of them as have an affection to Loyalty and a true zeal of Gods cause will by their unfeigned and repentant submission to the Supreme Authority established by the Kingdom make happy these Answers labour'd as the shortness of time did permit for their conversion and satisfaction of all good Patriots by DAVID Bishop of OSSORY F John Roe Provincial of the Excal Carmelites Nicholas Taylor Doctor of Divinity William Shergoli Professor of Divinity Prebend of Houth and Vic. For. of Fingal Fr John Barnwall Lector of Divinity Fa Simon Wafer Lector of Divinity F Peter Walsh Lector of Divinity Luke Cowley Archdeacon of Ossory and Protonotary Apostolick Laurence Archbold Vic. For. in the Deaneries of Brea Tawney and Glandalagh F Christopher Plunket Guardian of St. Francis Convent in Dublin Fa John Dormer Guardian of St. Francis 's Order at Castle-dermot Fr Bonaventure Fitz-Gerald Guardian of Kildare F Laurence Matthews Preses of Carmel Kilken F Laur. a sancto Bernardo Paul Nash Prebend John Shee Prebend of Main James Sedgrave FINIS THE FIRST APPENDIX CONTAINING Some of those PUBLICK Instruments related unto PARTLY IN THE QUERIES AND PARTLY In several places of the precedent WORK or in the Four Treatises of this FIRST TO ME. VIZ. I. The Oath of Association or that which was the essential tye of the Roman-Catholick Confederates of Ireland as such according to that Form wherein it was taken or renewed in the year 1644. II. The Lord Nuncio's Excommunication and Interdict by him and his Fellow Delegates or Sub-Delegates fulminated on the 27th of May 1648. against the Adherers to the Cessation made with Inchiquin III. The Supreme Councils Appeal interposed on the 31 of May the same year to His Holiness Pope Innocent X. from the said Censures Nuncio and His Fellow Delegates c. IV. The Articles of the Second Peace or of that on the 27th of the following January same year 1648. according to the old English computation but the 7th of February 1649. according to the new Roman stile concluded betwixt His Majesty CHARLES I. and the Roman-Catholick Confederates of Ireland by James Marquess of Ormond Lord Lieutenant of Ireland and Special Commissioner for His Majesty in treating and concluding that Peace V. The Declaration of the Archbishops Bishops and other Irish Prelates at Jamestown 12 Aug. 1650. against the said Marquess Lord Lieutenant General and General Governour of Ireland wherein they assume to themselves the Regal Power restore again the Confederacy declare the said Marquess devested of all power c. VI. The Excommunication of the same date fulminated by the same Irish Archbishops Bishops and others against all persons whatsoever obeying any more or at any time thenceforth the said Marquess however the King 's Lieutenant Printed in the Year M.DC.LXXIII The Preamble to the Oath of Association WHEREAS the Roman-Catholicks of this Kingdom of Ireland have been enforced to take Arms for the necessary defence and preservation as well of their Religion plotted and by many foul practices endeavoured to be quite suppressed by the Puritan Faction as likewise of their Lives Liberties and Estates and also for the defence and safeguard of His Majesties Regal Power just Prerogatives Honour State and Rights invaded upon and for that it is requisite That there should be an unanimous Consent and real Union between all the Catholicks of this Realm to maintain the Premisses and strengthen them against their Adversaries It is thought fit by them That they and whosoever shall adhere unto their Party as a Confederate should for the better assurance of their adhering fidelity and constancy to the Publick Cause take the ensuing Oath The Oath of Association I A. B. do profess swear and protest before God and his Saints and Holy Angels That I will during life bear true Faith and Allegiance to my Sovereign Lord CHARLES by the Grace of God King of Great Britain France and Ireland and to His Heirs and lawful Successors and that I will to my power during my life defend uphold and maintain all His and their just Prerogatives Estates and Rights the power and priviledge of the Parliament of this Realm the fundamental Laws of Ireland the free exercise of the Roman-Catholick Faith and Religion throughout all this Land and the Lives just Liberties Possessions Estates and Rights of all those that have taken or shall take this Oath and perform the Contents thereof And that I will obey and ratifie all the Orders and Decrees made and to be made by the Supreme Council of the Confederate Catholicks of this Kingdom concerning the said Publick Cause And that I will not seek directly or indirectly any Pardon or Protection for any Act done or to be done touching the General Cause without the consent of the major part of the said Council And that I will not directly or indirectly do any Act or Acts that shall prejudice the said Cause but will to the hazard of my Life and Estate assist prosecute and maintain the same So help me God and his Holy Gospel By the General Assembly of the Confederate Catholicks of Ireland Kilkenny July 26. 1644. Upon full debate this day in open Court Assembly it is unanimously declared by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and the Knights and Burgesses of this House That the Oath of Association as it is already penned of Record in this House and taken by the Confederate Catholicks is full and binding without addition of any other words thereunto And it is ordered That any person or persons whatsoever who have taken or hereafter shall take the said Oath of Association and hath or shall declare by word or actions or by persuasions of others That the said Oath or any Branch thereof doth or may admit any equivocation or mental reservation if any such person or persons be shall be deemed a breaker of his and their Oath respectively and adverse to the General Cause and as a Delinquent or Delinquents for such offence shall be punished And it is further ordered That the several Ordinaries shall take special care that the Parish-Priests within their respective Diocesses shall publish and declare That any person or persons who hath or shall take
pay We neither know when or where it was or who had more The manner of Mr. Daniel O Neal â—s coming into Command was thus he had taken great pains in bringing his Uncle General Owen O Neil to submit to the Peace and His Majesties Government so did he effectually labour after that work was effected to bring the Vlster Army to Our assistance when Cromwel was in his march from Dublin towards Wexford Owen O Neil being sick the Army was conducted by Lieutenant-General Farrel and Major-General Hugh O Neil but when it joined with the Leinster Munster and Connaught Forces and some English and Scottish Horse and Foot We found great difficulty how to distribute Orders with satisfaction to all these Parties the Vlster Party being unwilling to receive them by Major-General Purcell and the rest were as unwilling to receive them by Major-General Hugh O Neil But all Parties were content to receive them from Daniel O Neil and by him they were distributed and Major-General Purcell was sent into Munster where he had and exercised a Command in chief in the absence of superiour Officers nor was his Commission annulled or a new one of his place given to any other to this day So that if the displacing him or any other Officer without the consent of the Commissioners had been a breach of the Articles of Peace as it is not there is no Truth in the Affirmation that he was displaced Fourth Article of the Declaration A Judicature and legal way of administring Justice promised by the Articles of Peace was not performed but all process and proceedings done by Paper-petitions and thereby private Clerks and other corrupt Ministers enriched the Subjects ruined and no Justice done ANSWER For Answer to this We refer you to Our Answer to the Third Article of the said pretended Grievances Which Article and Answer are as followeth Article viz. The Third of those called the Grievances That whereas it was by the said Articles concluded there should be Judicatures raised and established in this Kingdom for doing of Justice and legal determining of differences and controversies arising betwixt His Majesties Subjects Articles of Peace art 13. see pag. 49. of the Append. of Instrum and that the Council-Table should onely meddle with matters of State and should not intermeddle with common business within the cognizance of the ordinary Courts nor with altering possession of Land nor make nor use private Orders Hearings or References concerning any such matters c. and the proceeding in the respective presidency Courts should be pursuant and according to His Majesties printed Book of Instructions and that they should contain themselves within the limits prescribed by that Book when the Kingdom should be restored to such a degree of quietness as they be not necessarily enforced to exceed the same Yet the People generally complain the said Judicatures have not been raised nor any other way prescribed for the determining of such controversies but the Council Table or rather the Lord Lieutenant alone and the Presidency or President alone took to them cognizance of all Causes and arbitrarily on Paper Petitions determined all Causes extrajudicially even to the altering of possessions and in consequence thereof to the determination of Titles and right of inheritance And though the present disuse of the Law as aforesaid is in the peoples mouth a heavy grievance at the present yet will Posterity have just cause to tell abroad That in the not erecting Inns of Court in pursuance of the said Articles of Peace through which to convey to them the knowledge of the Law See the Articles of Peace art 8. before in the Appen of Instrum pag. 49. they are given up to ignorance of government obedience or property And though the Province of Munster was not since January last in such absolute tranquility as before the War yet did not the state of it require a transgression of his Majesties said Book of Instructions which yet was violated in the practice of that Court by the Commissioners there intrusted being generally uninterested in the Kingdom in blood or fortune and all Protestants by reason whereof the less indifferency in matters relative to Religion was afforded to the Catholicks ANSWER Art the 8. ibid. By the Articles of Peace Judicatures were to be raised and Judges named by the advice and with the consent of the Commissioners For which purpose VVe sent to His Majesty for leave to make and use a great Seal which as soon as VVe had received VVe caused a great Seal to be made and were at all times ready to have agreed with the Commissioners what kind of Judicatures to raise and with what persons to have supplied them as will not be denied by the said Commissioners Which may suffice for Us to answer to that particular We acknowledge That according to the necessary power at all times invested in the chief Governour or Governours of this Kingdom VVe have received many Petitions and to the best of Our understanding have made just and equal Orders and References upon them and have also upon Certificate of the ablest men VVe could find finally determined some of them but never to the alteration of possession unless perhaps upon clear proof of forcible intrusions by violence contrary to all the Rules of Law and Reason Which if VVe had not done during the want of Judicatures every mans power would have been his Judge in his own cause What the Presidency or President have done irregularly or contrary to the Articles of Peace they shall be brought to answer when they or he shall be particularly charged That Inns of Court have not been erected according to the Articles of Peace Posterity may tell as loud as they please but if they have Schools to learn English enough to read the Articles of Peace they will find that His Majesty was only to enable the Natives of this Kingdom to erect one or more Inns of Court in or near the City of Dublin or elsewhere as should be thought fit by His Majesties Lord Lieutenant or other chief Governour or Governours for the time being Whereby by the scope of the Article which is for removing of incapacities it is plain the said Inns of Court were not to be erected at His Majesties charge And sure no man will have the impudence to say That VVe who had the honour to govern under His Majesty did give the least interruption to the erecting of them or that ever it was proposed to Us to give way to the erection of the said Inns. Whereof VVe confess there was never more need if their property be to instruct the People in their duty of obedience to Government with this addition That to charge Us with want of doing Justice without instancing the particular cases wherein VVe failed thereby taking from Us the means to vindicate Our Self from so high a Crime is sutable to the justice and practises of these Declarers Fifth Article of the Declaration The
by the sole vertue of their Sacerdotal or spiritual power for I did not then as much as dream of any such foolish consequence but against the pretence of an inherent natural civil and supream power in the people themselves as a people or civil society whether Priests otherwise or no Priests or mixt of both A farre more takeing though at least now under the new testament a false and vain pretence also To that precedent of the Macchabees alleadg'd out of the old Testament to justifie this pretence of such an inherent natural not spiritual power in Christian Subjects to rebell against their lawful Prince on pretext of oppression either in their religious or civil rights or both I answered briefly thus Pag. 94. of The More Ample Account That neither the praised valour noble attempts victories and atchivemenâ—s of the Machabees can prejudice this doctrine Because that as in their dayes yet the wisdome of the celestial Father our Saviour Christ was not come to enlighten the world or to teach the Jewes in particular the perfect understanding of their own law or to give a more excellent one to all Nations of the Earth so they relied still on the first donation of Palestine made by God himself immediatly to Abraham for the children of Jacob and made againe unto them in the Law of Moâ—es and doubtless were perswaded that no violence or force or conquering armes of the Asian Kings could devest them of that title which God himself appearing visibly had invested them with Is there any word here of such uncivil and â—rreverent language as ignorance of their own 〈◊〉 charged by me on the Macchabees Or who knows not that such perfect understanding thereof as the holy Jesus caught the world after is quite an other thing then ignorance simply spoken or such ignorance of the litteral sense of their law which would have been at that time or in the dayes of the Macchabees or any time before or after from the first giving of their law till Jesus came accounted ignorance by the knowing doctors of the said law and consequently have rendred those Macchabees guilty of a sinful neglect and hainous transgression And who sees not I made out their plea of justification not at all from such ignorance nor even from an imperfect understanding but from the immediate donation of Palestine to them as to their Predecessors and Successors by God himself appearing so visibly and manifoldly and by the clear express letter also of his Law unto them And therefore that I had sufficiently ruined all the strength of the argument built on this example by rebellious Christian Subjects for their pretence of such inherent supream natural power being they can pretend no such visible appearance donation law of God to themselves or to their Predecessors or Successors but know all to be quite contrary But after all suppose I had not made so clear demonstrations against such pretence of a temporal civil or natural power in the people or that I had not given so clear and satisfactory solution to this argument for it what can be thence concluded for the supernatural and purely spiritual power of Christian Priests just a meer nothing So that those Gentlemen might have spared themselves and me some labour in this point and particularly both in this fling they had here at my doctrine in my More Ample Account and in all that follows to no purpose in their own paper of that other answer which they say some do give but I am sure I never gave nor found my self necessitated to give Yet I profess my thanks unto them in this one respect here That they have given the occasion to clear yet more abundantly and perhaps too more satisfactorily at least to some that of the Macchabees I mean as it is urged for the pretended inherent right of the people as a civil or temporal Society though not as a spiritual or not as a Christian Church but still as a people purely or naturally considered I did verily intend to add in that same little Book of mine and to that now mentioned passage for a second answer what I shall here But having had no time to review that passage then when the Printer came to it I am now heartily glad of this occasion that I may yet with-all evidence and clearness imaginable ruine this very strongest argument out of Scripture whereof some especially of our Opposers make so much use as of the most specious argument can be for that right of the people at least as of a people though not as a Christian Church You are therefore good Reader to understand that this Antiochus against whom Mattathias begin the warr and his Sons the Machabeans continued it nobly and fortunatly was not that Antiochus the Great King of Asia who in the year of the world 3742 and before Christ 222. and either by title of conquest or of a just war against Ptolomey Philopater and his Son called Ptolomey the Famous King of Egypt and Jewry and against Scopas General to this Ptolomey the Famous or by title of the free and voluntary submission of the Jews themselves to him or by both titles was their lawful King as also a good bountiful and very favourable King unto them as long as he lived after I say that that Antiochus against whom Mattathias took arms and encouraged the rest of his Countreymen to take arms was not this Great and so good Antiochus but another many years after who was surnamed Epiphanes though King likewise of Asia who only and by the reasonable practiâ—es or some few Iews surprized Ierusalem in the year of the world â—79â— and before Christ 168. years That the Jews since their first free and voluntary submission to Alexander the Great himself in person and in the year of the world 3630 and before Christ 334. and since the death soon after of the said Alexander the year before Christ 322. were upon the partition of the Macedonias conquest and Empire peaceably subject first to Ptolomaeus Lagus and then after to his Son Ptolomey Philadelphus who had the Bible translated by the 72. Interpreters and so forth in a continual series to the other Ptolomeys Kings of Egypt only the few years excepted wherein Antiochus the Great prevailed so as I have said against Ptolomey Philopater or his Son Ptolomey the Famous and until this Great Antiochus contracted aliance with this Ptolomey by the marriage of Cleopatra upon which they were on both sides at peace again and all things restored to to their former condition and the command of Ierusalem and the rest of Iewry as likewise of Celosyria Phaenicia and other bordering Countreys returned to the Ptolomeys and the tributes as in former time since Lagus gathered by and paid to their Officers who were the very Jews themselves so it is plain and manifest in History that matters continued so until the dayes of this Antiochus Epiphanes King of Asia or Syria of whom our present