and men of several qualities The same person is both a man and a Rich and Proud man a Powerful and an Angry man and we see Wit and Ambition Goodness and Ignorance Learning and Fantasticalness often coupled together and a hundred several mixtures of several qualities united all in one material Man Now consider what fine work there would quickly be if every one of these useless formalities as you call them must be chargeable with all actions if Riches must be taken away because the Rich Proud man has scorn'd and Power because the Powerful Angry man has wronged his Neighbour if Wit must bear the blame of Ambition and Goodnesâ— the miscarriages of Ignorance and Learning the Errors of Fantasticalness Reason is our very Nature and yet I think there are few to whom Nature has not given Logick enough to see that we do not always act as reasonable and who are not learned enough to separate the Animal from the Man To speak yet plainer a severe Father a harsh Master do they not sometimes use their Children and Scholars unreasonably and so as utterly to spoil them A corrupt Judge does he not pervert Justice and render those Tribunals from whence men expect the relief of Injuries the seats of Oppression What then Must the Father and the Master and the Judge be condemned for the faults of the Man and none of these powers left in the world because they have been and daily are abused I think you and every body will confess that this were unreasonable and yet your Argument spares none of them For 't is all one to Children and Pleaders if they be materially opprest and misus'd whether this be done by the fault of the Office or the Officer and small comfort it is to tell them that their Judges and Masters acted in their case as passionate men not as Judges and Masters for they remain opprest still and the formality relieves them not Kings themselves are men too and not exempt from the failings of Mortality Our Country indeed has this amongst other things to thank God for that she has been extraordinarily blest with good Kings but History affords examples of such elsewhere as have been unjust and cruel and tyrannical And if you will not allow the King and his sacred Function to be free from the aspersions to which the Man is sometimes liable let me tell you Friend your Doctrine will be more dangerous and more inconsistent with Government than the Papal pretensions Now as in all these cases and a hundred more which happen every day and every where Nature teaches us to examine the formality from whence the mischief proceeds and endeavour to provide against that and let the rest alone so I think it ought to be in the case of the Church We condemn not Learning because some learned men are fantastical nor Riches for the pride of rich men why must the Church be condemned for the fault of Church-men Authority and Goodness and Wit are not blemisht by the errors of those who have them the Power of Fathers and Masters and Judges is and must be preserved in the world however Severity and Covetise daily abuse it and if this be so in all the rest of the world can you think it reasonable the Church alone should be exempted from the general rule and be more answerable for the faults of those who live in her communion than Authority for the faults of bad men in Authority The faults indeed should be taken away but the Church let alone And truly had your Reformation as you call it gone no farther than to retrench abuses such as these you mention and who knows but there may be other I might peradventure have call'd it so too But instead of abuses to take away Office and all and defie the supreme Pastor of the Church and alter the whole face of Religion there by your favour you reformed a little too far For the same Logic which makes the Church responsible for the errors of Church-men makes the Office responsible for the faults of the Officer and that is to take all Offices out of the world where men will be men and liable to be reduced from the path of vertue in spight of all preventions possible in such a nature as ours I hope by this time that distinction does not appear so airy and useless as you imagined you shall permit me to add that possibly you are no less concern'd in it than We. For we are not the only men amongst whom Principles inconsistent with Government may be found Remember who they were that ruin'd England by the late War and were guilty of things which to dilate were as unsavoury as needless They were so far from Popery these men that fear of Popery was a chief Engine employed in the mischief Sad fate by the way and preposterous wisdom to destroy our selves for fear of being destroyed and run into Fire and the Sword for fear of Ink and Paper Neither is England the only example Scotland and the Netherlands and Germany and France have felt lamentable effects from the Doctrines of men who would take it for an imputation to have learnt any thing of the Pope So that it is very plain that the Papal is neither the only nor the only dangerous King-deposing power in the world 'T is as plain that these men are neither Infidels nor of our Church so that you must even exercise your Pity too and take them into yours Or if pity will not prevail I hope at least you will take care so to defend your Allegiance a not to overthrow your Church And unless you make your Creed consist but of Eleven Articles I see not how you can disown the Communion of these men for 't will be a strange Catholic Church which communicates neither with the Church of Rome nor her Adversaries Wherefore if your Argument be good and Religion must answer for the faults of those who profess it there is no remedy but Princes to be secure must banish all Religion and People turn Atheists to be honest men and good Subjects Now whatever answer you would give to one who should charge such wicked principles upon your Church because they are maintained by numerous and learned and famous men amongst you the same I give for mine I believe for all your Pique to formalities you would go near to distinguish your Church or Believing men from the Erring men and say you communicate with the Men but not with the Errors So you shall permit me to say for mine and this farther that whatever you say you must of necessity either condemn your selves or absolve us 'T is not that the force of your Argument drives me to that way of answer which I have chosen it being easie to shew the Churches innocence even in your own way and without the help of your disliked formalities Your Argument in short is this Learned men in the Church hold wicked Doctrines therefore the Church
particular 'T is true as long as there is good intelligence betwixt Prince and subject and the Peoples affections carry them to their Soveraigns interests this shall not may do pretty well For no effect can follow from a Power which is hindred to work and 't will be alwayes easy enough to find a pretence for not doing what we are before hand resolved shall not be done Neither did I ever think the Pope's Power so stong that it was likely to prevail where Prince and People both joyn against it So that in this case your Can not and your Shall not are two lines which meet both in the same center no deposition But what becomes of a King if his subjects be not affected as they should A mule is not more humerous than the Multitude nor can boggle more extravagantly and upon less occasion And though they be well disposed are subject to be wrought upon by the artifice of those who are not and easily possest with a thousand jealousies and fears from which even those who possess them perhaps are free enough themselves If upon any capricious toy of their own or crafty suggestion from abroad they come to wish the Prince less Power then he has and that he stood in awe of some body 't will be the easiest thing in the World to perswade them that what they desire should be true is so and that he is subiected to the Pope whose claim is as fair as any if they would have him subject at all And where 's your Shall not then I fear he will go near to repent the modesty of his Polities and find too late that by delaying to fix the Pope's Can not in the minds of his subjects he has brought a worse Cannot upon himself a Can not avoy'd being turn'd out of his Throne If in such a posture of things he would but go about to perswade the People of the Pope's Can not on all likelyhood t' would incense them more and make them think it yet more just he should be deprived of his own right who would invade the right of another For if it be not truly the Pope's right why did he suffer it to pass uncontroul'd so long and now begin to question it when it makes against him But let them do what they will in other Countries and follow such Maxims as they conceive fittest for them Plain dealing suits best with the English Natures and will I believe prove the best Policy If they think good elsewhere to let their security depend on tricks much good may their Policies do them I should be sorry it should be taken for good Policy here However I recommend plain dealing to you for why should you go beating about the bush when your mark is fair before you But I forbear to press you now If your next please me not you are like to hear more I have nothing to do at present but to intreat you would dispatch it away by the first and to assure you I am Yours c. FRIEND I Have been neither busy nor sick but only of the lazy disease Idleness which is sickness and business both or as bad and should perhaps do better to continue idle still then be longer busy with this subject Your silence made me hope my last might have serv'd turn and excus'd me from dealing farther in an argument to which I have no fancy But it seems you are not satisfi'd When I know what 't is you stumble at I will do the best I can to keep you upright But when you talk of plain dealing I know not what you would have To acquaint you plainly with what People say is plain dealing in my judgment One can hardly dogmatize without some subtilty but the Historian is a plain man I hope you have no just cause of exception against my relation hitherto and I shall endeavor to give you as little in the progress which since you so much desire to know take it without more ado and take this consideration along with you that we are now come to the Triarii The Arguments which made up my last Letter were such as occur'd to Bellarmin when he had no opposition to help his fancy and expected none at least from those of his own communion Afterwards Barclay in France and Withrington in England write both against him And as opposition is the best whetstone of wit the sight of what can be said against us on the one side enlarging wonderfully our prospect of things and representing them in a clearer view and on the other the shame of being worsted and pleasure of victory streining our abilities and pressing from them all they will afford We cannot but look upon these later productions of his as the uttermost he was able to do For certainly he omitted nothing which he thought could be said in his defence You will therefore observe these Arguments with more attention while I relate them with the same fidelity They are principally four all in his Book against Barclay Schalkenius has the very same sometimes a little differently worded sometimes not all So that I perceive they are what they finally bide upon The first is this That it is certain and manifest that the Pope upon just cause may judg of temporals and sometimes depose temporal Princes we prove first from the common consent oâ— Writers whose words I have related at the beginning of this disputation where he had alledged no fewer than 70 For what Doctors teach with a common consent in different times and places that the Vniversal Church is believed to hold and teach For God therefore placed Pastors and Doctors in the Church Eph. 4. that the people should follow them as their guides and not reeede from them unless perhaps they see some one bring in some novelty against the common doctrine as Barclay at this time has done This is the first Argument which speaks big and makes a magnificent shew engaging no less than the Universal Church it self But sure Bellarmin either forgot himself or thought his Readers would when he objects novelty to Barclay Novelty was the very thing objected against his opinion when it first broke out in the world in the time of Gregory VII This Novelty not to call it haeresy was not yet crept into the World Vin. Bâ—ll c. says one That the indepency of the two supream Powers was the true opinion of all the antients and if doubts be newly started by a sinister desire of pleasing in many let the old be recalled says another Cusan And does he now pretend antiquity He who of all the men in the World a body would think has the least reason when the most ancient Author himself can alledg in prof of this old doctrine of his is Greg. VII the man who began this bustle and was charged with novelty for doing so and after all liv'd but in the 11th age Since Christ 's time what is once new in the Church is alwaies
I can what is the reason when a man affirms a thing without proof there is so little obligation that on the contrary t is lightness to believe him I suppose because bringing no proof and by no proof I mean no sufficient proof he may for ought appears be mistaken and we with him Why then instead of one put twenty that say it or if you will a hundred or as many as Arithmetick can number and put them to bring no more proof then the single man in what is their case different from his or how am I excus'd from lightness or secur'd from error if I believe them Wherefore either produce the man who brings sufficient proof and let us see that sufficient proof of his and let alone the 69 Cyphers which stand before him or if none can be produced 't is a clear case they are altogether so many insufficient proofs and to think that number is sufficient when every particular is insufficient is to think that a great many nothings vvill make something And this is the case of Bellarmin's Authority which yet has something particular in it Of his 70 Witnesses half are either Canonists or such who professing other studies rely in this point on the Arguments of the Canonists These Arguments Bellarmin himself thinks faulty and has taken successful pains to confute Now would I fain know what great necessity there is of believing those who I know before hand have themselves no reason to believe what they tell me To offer me these is plainly to offer me error for security against error and to make me believe that I shall not be deceiv'd if I follow those who are and that the way to go right is to go after those who stray I know Bellarmin thinks them right in the main though they mistake in a circumstance for example that they think well of the power though they are out in thinking it Direct But if they miss and mistake all in the circumstance how can I know but they do so in the main 'T is plain they all mistake when they say 't is direct therefore their consent in saying a thing does not make that thing to be true wherefore neither can the other in which he thinks they say true be therefore true because they say it and this even in Bellarmin's Judgment And that he should press that on another which he does not value himself seems a little unreasonable Then for the other half who go upon other grounds then the Canonists I will take the liberty to suppose they go upon the same with Bellarmin or worse For he was too judicious a man to back good arguments and choose bad in their rooms Now what his are besides what you will find here you know by my last If any man think them good he may for me But this is clear that no number of men perswaded by these arguments can add more strength to the conclusion then those arguments give it And so we are just where we were If the Arguments be sufficient to prove the conclusion the business is done and Authority superfluous if they be not what he calls Authority is but a number of insufficient proofs or of men led by them which infufficiently proofs I am desired to take for sufficient proof And this in plain English is to desire me because those who are deceived are a great many to believe they are not deceived as if by adding black to black and laying on black enough the wall would become white I know that number generally carries with it a fair perswasion especially where the men are otherwise considerable that they are not all mistaken But of the one half of these Bellarmin assures us they actually are mistaken notwithstanding their number and whoever does not approve Bellarmin's Arguments can not but think as much of the other half Wherefore it must of necessity rest upon proof at last and this Topic of Authority might in my opinion have very well been spared For if any can see the conclusion prov'd he needs no Authority but is oblig'd in vertue of that sight to stand to what he sees though there were none in the world of thâ— same judgment with him But to those who cannot this Authority is a bare saying without proof that is no Authority However Bellarmin tryes to make it up and intitle the Church it self to the sayings of his 70 men What Doctors teach sayes he with a common consent in different times and places that the universal Church is believed to hold and teach For God therefore placed Pastors and Doctors in the Church Eph. 4. that the People should follow them as their Guides c. I think to make this Argument look any thing like to his common he should have added universal consent For if Doctors teach differently many one way and many the quite contrary I hope the Church ought not to be believed to hold and teach what both teach or if she do she must plainly be believed to hold and teach contradictories Now for Bellarmin's 70 Canon hath alledged more then twice 70 on the other side How then is it possible to find the Churches doctrine by the consent of her Doctors when they are so far from common consent that they teach direct contraries Again to universality of consent there goes universality both of time and place Bellarmin either thought of no more or could produce no more than out of the Western Church I hope he does not think the Church confin'd to the West In all controversies of Faith others and he himself uses to produce testimonies from other places We hear of S. Cyprian and S. Austin S. Basil S. Cyril S. Jo. Chrysostom Origin Tertullian c. whereof none belong to the West Can that consent be universal to which there concur none of these once so famous parts of the Church Then for time he begins with Greg. 7. and he liv'd but in the 11th age Are 10 whole ages so inconsiderable that they make nothing to universal consent These links can never hang well together that have such a gap in them nor is it possible to be believed the Church should universally teach what none of all her Doctors in ten ages mentioned Alass how little substance there is in these great words common consent and the Church But God therefore placed Pastors and Doctors that People should follow them very true But when God placed those Pastors and Doctors he put into their mouths the Doctrine which they should preach and teach So far as they deliver that doctrine they have his Authority for their warrant but no further If they will teach any other truth they may without doubt provided they can make it appear to be Truth in which case the evidence by which they can make it appear is their warrant not the Authority of God and provided farther that what they teach in this manner be neither prest by them or accepted by others as part of the
teach enough of all conscience we know well enough what will follow without the help of his inferences and know that twenty worse things will follow then subordination of powers But is Bellarmin in earnest too and will he reduce the Catholick Church to the narrow compass of those who believe his Doctrine How Lawful general Concils teach and that evidently that Princes may be deposed Why what a hand has he made on 't His Friends Coton Sonran and the rest of the Jesuites who by a publick declaration disavow'd and detested this doctrine were no very honest men by his reckoning The French are all direct Hereticks without more ado and I fear it will go hard with the Pope himself who so freely and openly communicates with them As for my small acquaintance they are all in as bad a case as Falstaffs old Hosts if sack be a sin They 'l be mall'd to my knowledg If he do not make amends with the weakness of his proofs for the confidence of his assertions we are all undone But the comfort is that all Catholicks are not of his mind For this very Book had the luck to light into a certain Catholick Country where it was publickly condemn'd and the men who did it did not for all that think they contradicted any thing evidently taught by lawful general Councils But let us see what those Councils say The truth is since of ten which he cites 2 only are general 8 might have been spared For particular Councils according to his own doctrine are not so irrefragible but what they determine may be brought into doubt But we must take his Arguments as they are His first Council is 900 years old under Greg. 2. wherein he would make us believe the Emperor Leo Isaurus was excommunicated and depriv'd of the tributes which he us'd to receive out of Italy And this is one of the stories which Onuphrius takes for fables Bellarmin alledges for proof for the Council is not extant the testimony of Zonaras a Greek Historian whose words are these Gregory who at that time ruled the Church of old Rome involved them together with the Emperor in a synodical Anathema and making a league with the French forbad the tributes which till that time were paid from thence to the Empire Barclay answers that he mistook the meaning of Zonaras thinking that those 2 several things because they are joyned in one period hapned therefore at the same time 'T is true that either this Pope or his Successor Greg. 3 did in a Synod excommunicate not the Emperor particularly but Iconoclasts in general 'T is true that Greg. 3. made a league with the French or rather fled to their protection from the injuries of the Lombards from which the Emperor either could or perhaps would not defend him And therefore Writers who say that after this league Italy withheld their usual Tributes though the matter of fact be not altogether so clear but none say they withheld them by the authority of any Council As far as can be gathered the exasperated people were willing to keep their mony for their own defence and not by sending it into Greece expose themselves defenceless to those injuries which they either suffered or feared And thus far there is mention of the Pope's consent and even countenance at last for he opposed the sway of the people a good while and by his authority preserv'd them in their allegeance to the Emperor yet sided with them at long run in this keeping their mony at home But for deposing the Emperor much less in a Synod neither he nor any body else thought of it on the contrary to his dying day he acknowledged him his Emperor and Lord. Whether the People or he did well in doing so much as they did is another question which belongs not to me to determin But I suppose it is no wonderful thing that a remote Province of a great Empire should upon some dissatisfaction fail at some time in their duty and the men of greatest Authority among them joyn with them This is standing upon their terms more then becomes subjects but 't is not deposing and much less deposing by the Authority of those great men who take their part One might as well say the Prince of Orange by his Authority deposed the King of Spain from the Low Countries because he was the Principal Actor with those who fell from him But to make short work with our case there was in it I think no deposition at all But if this Tribute matter must be called deposition to that concur'd no Council and betwixt them both 't is plain there is no Argument There comes next in play the famous business of Greg. 7 which takes up 6 Councils more These because they belong all to one subject you shall give me leave to respit till I have rid my hands of his next Council which belongs to another 'T is the Council of Clerment where he says Vrban 2. excommunicated and deposed Philip. 1. of France for casting off his lawful Wife marrying an Adulteress and refusing upon admonition to make satisfaction For this he cites M. Paris and Sigebert I have not seen Sigebert but M. Paris who particularizes the Acts of the Council and among the rest this excommunication makes no mention of deposing I but sayes Bellarmin deposition must be understood to go along with excommunication Marry I thank him heartily Vnderstood quotha Is our evident teaching come to understanding and understanding those things to be the same than which the world has none more different Excommunication is a pure spiritual censure and deprives a man of none but pure spiritual goods deposition is quite contrary and takes away only temporal It passes my understanding how one of these must necessarily follow out of the other Pray why must we understand it does Because says he Historians testify the Pope forbad the Crown should be set upon the Kings head while he remain'd excommunicate and in particular Ivo Bishop of Chartres writes to the Pope that he would be threatned unless he restored the Crown and took off the excommunication that the King and Kingdom would fall off from their obedience Very well Why then according to Ivo there was a King still and that King had a Kingdom and so much credit in it that 't was not impossible but he might cause it to revolt These things do not hang together A man may as soon understand how excommunication and deposition infer one another as how a Crown can be restor'd to one who is a King and has a Kingdom or how the Pope should forbid the Crown to be set on his head who had been crowned long before the Pope was Pope 'T is hard and not very wise to forbid things that are past If this mystery had not been unridled for me I had been quite at a loss But if I may believe Barclay and Withrington it was at that time the custom of France for the King
would have this one Spiritual Power command both in Spirituals and Temporals Which is of two to make one third Power neither wholy Spiritual be cause it extends to Temporals nor wholy Temporal because it acts in Spirituals but equivalent to both And if this be not to confound the two Powers and make one of these two which he saies Christ would have divided I would be glad to learn what is and what other way they can be confounded And yet the jest is even while he does this he presses the confusion of the Powers as a great inconvenience upon the Canonists who are not altogether so faulty as himself and can extricate their Doctrine a great deal better In two words either he confounds the Powers and then he disobeys Christ who he saies would have them kept asunder or he does not and then he disobeys him in permitting one to meddle with the rights of the other For certainly 't is the right of the Temporal power to command the Subjects to that power and require their allegiance and service And to take away these Subjects and this Allegiance is to meddle and that very far too vvith what belongs to the right of another The Truth is these Tricks turn a question of as great importance as any in the world into pure words and illusion The vvorld is in suspence about the decision of this great Question concerning the independent Soveraignty of the two Powers and how that command in the Gospel Reddite quae sunt Caesaris Caesari quae sunt Dei Deo should be obey'd All the learning of ten Ages teach the powers were distinguisht by Christ one given to the Bishop the other to the Prince The Canonists and they but some and all late men teach they were given both to the Pope This third indirect Party coming to settle a point of this importance profess at first that the Powers truly are as Christ commanded they should be distinct and the Pope for his share has the Spiritual only Would not any man think now the business decided and that we had no more to do but obey our Prince in Temporals and Bishop or if you will Pope for I will not meddle with that question in Spirituals and there 's an end Why this 't is to be illiterate says Bellarmin and not understand distinction The Popes power is only Spiritual but yet this Spiritual power indirectly and for the good of Souls virtually and by means of some other proprieties of speech extends likewise to Temporals and may dispose of Kingdoms as it sees fit Why then call it Temporal in the name of God if it can dispose of Temporals and say the Pope is Universal Monarch if he be so and stand to it Yes we do stand to it replies Bellarmin but we love to speak properly and do not call the Pope Vniversal Monarch though he can dispose of all the Kingdoms of the World because he does it not in vertue of a Temporal power but by a spiritual working and after an indirect manner Hang the manner how he does it if he can do it What has the World to do with these mannerly tricks A King is well holp up who after he is dispossest comes to understand that this came about after another fashion and in another manner then he was aware of Well! but are you for the Canonists or against them why truly I am for them and I am not for them And our Question What must be said to that Must we obey our King or the Pope This is what the world looks after Why according to one half of the resolution which says Princes are supream in Temporals and have in them no Superiour we must obey our King according to the other half which saies a power vvhich is only Spiritual can dispose of Temporals too we must obey the Pope But how must I do with this Licet and non Licet must I cut my self in two and list a Leg and an Arm under one a Thumb and a Shoulder under the other and if I happen to meet in the battle fight my King-self against my Pope-self Because this is something difficult and they are men of reason I imagine they would condescend a little in this point and let me remain entire As long as the answer is divided 't is well enough But then I must chuse the right half That 's it I would be at Pray tell me then must whole I take the Spiritual or the Temporal half Why the truth is you must take the Spiritual half Parasits and Flatterers may tell you otherwise But this is the truth of the story Why then to what purpose all this illusion of my Princes Soveraignty and Independency when after all he is neither Soveraign nor Independent To what purpose this bustle against the Canonists only to say the same thing at last but with more ado Could you not have plainly told me at first what I must trust to and spared the trapan of so many useless disguises The result of all your Spirituals and Indirects and good of Souls and whatever else is in short I must obey the Pope against my Prince only I must in spight of all sence believe my Prince is a true and Soveraign King and has no Superiour in Temporals and the Pope no power but Spiritual and so besides a Traytor and a Rebel become sensless and a block into the bargain Here 's your fine opinion of which you make such a Mystery and are so shy to discover your thoughts Come come leave dodging and deal above-board Answer me these things and shew me that Bellarmin speaks sence and sence not injurious to Government and the safety of Princes or disclaim him plainly as you have the Canonists 'T is at your choice to do what you will but do one and that effectually or take notice I tell you I will believe for the future your Church is a wicked Church absolutely inconsistent with Civil Government and has not one sound member in her no not one Put me not off with formalities and think to scape with telling me this doctrine belongs not to your Church as a Church and that only the Material men hold it 'T is the material men I only care for at present We converse not with your formal Church vve hear and see and deal with Material men These are they can do us good or harm and 't is but reason we should know vvhat to expect from them Formalities are ayry things no rope can catch them but Material men you know maye be suspended and vvhen they are found guilty and have no hopes of reprieve but in the innocence of their formalities I doubt it goes hard vvith them In two vvords clear your selves from an imputation which you have brought upon your selves or confess you cannot be cleer'd and remember that silence is a confession and so I shall take it as all Justice in the world does and believe it vvas not the wickedness
Britain or by some other fetch It would undoubtedly run the fate of its Neighbour Kingdoms and it is not a pin matter for a Title to that which must come in at last and when it comes will bring Title enough with it Nature and Necessity make perhaps as good Titles as Law and I know not whether the Law have any better then possession If the Pope get once possession as when he has got England and Ireland I see not what can keep him from it 't wil be to no more purpose to be sollicitous for a Title then for a man to look after a horse who is at his journies end For Titles serve but to obtain or hold what they pretend to which he that has already and so that it cannot be taken away no longer needs them But if the worst come to the worst why may not the Pope dispense with a Title as well as other things altogether as hard and not altogether so advantagious Plenitude of power set once on the tenter-hooks I believe will stretch as far as that and what cannot he do Who can do all which is necessary for the good of the Church and who is alone to determine what is necessary Who shall hinder him from calling the Bunch a Horn if he please But these are no jesting matters Baron ad an 1135. n. 21. 1173. n. 10. 1159. n. 21. England and Ireland have both been challenged and that before King John was born though his resignation be in truth the most specious matter which can be alledged Scotland to put it out of doubt what would become of it has been actually claim'd as well as the rest So that our Soveraign enjoys not one foot of land free from dispute Ep. Bonif 8. ad Edw. 1. ap Mat. West ad an 1301 It is to much purpose to dispute of Divine Right when if there were no such thing in the world we have as much to fear from Human. The worst Divine Right can do is to make us dependent and subject and this they say we are without relation to it And 't is this we fear not caring much how the mischief happens if it cannot be avoided It imports not much whether I be a slave by the misfortune of War or Birth if I must tug at the Oar. I tell you truly thinking of these things has put me into a very bad humour I distrust every thing and am not satisfy'd where learneder men than my self are I would be glad to have some better security than Prescription pag. 19. for though our Author say and I think it a sufficient Plea I doubt if you were Judges his Authority would hardly keep us from being cast Nay I am sure it would not for he confesses the Pope allows it not and his Judgment would overrule it at last Besides though He slip over the business of Hen. 2. the Vatican Register and Petrus Blesensis me thinks make too much noyse to be slighted What we think considerable may perhaps not prove so when it comes to the Test and however no caution against you is too much Again why may not Constantins Donation one day rise up in Judgment against us Britain was at that time one of the Western Provinces of the Roman Empire Omnes Italiae seu Occidentalium Regionum Provincias c. and if this Deed be valid undoubtedly past with the rest I know well enough there are among you who make bold with this evidence and refuse to admit it for Authentick But there are too who stand stifly for it and among these several Popes Were there any likelyhood it would bring Grist to the Mil I do not think the Palea set before it would hinder it from passing for good Wheat Cap. Constantinus Dist 96. In fine while Human Right not only may but actually is pretended at this day we have reason to look about us The Lovain Divines if the History of the Irish Remonstrance say true Hist of the Irish Remonst p. 117. made it one of their four chief grounds and the only ground of Right for condemning that Remonstrance and since they declare not in particular whence they deriv'd the pretence of Human Right make it necessary we should be secured against all You see where the Shoe pinches make it easy if you can though when you have done your uttermost I fear 't will pinch still For you are but a single man and what a single man can do is not considerable Besides you conceal your self conscious it seems of being disowned by your fellows who if they be otherwise perswaded what will your single honesty do us good A Traytor or two in a Nation can do no great harm and one or two honest men as little good As you carry matters you seem to confess the generality is not of your mind Nay how do I know that so much as single you are as honest as you pretend and truly mean as you say You may with the liberty allowed in your Church Prevaricate for ought I know even though you should renounce Prevarication or you may according to your comfortable doctrine of Extrinsick Probability embrace to morrow what you reject to day You are questionless much beholding to your Church which with her infallible guidance has brought you to that pass that if there be an honest man among you He cannot make out that he is so but must thank the good nature and Charity of his Neighbours for what reputation he has I must confess I am sorry for the severities which are falling on you but yet my pity does not so far blind my Reason but that I see they cannot complain of being treated like knaves who cannot produce any satisfactory evidence that they are otherwise and though they could are too few to be taken notice of For the eye of all Laws looks only on Generals and 't is not possible that every man in a nation should have a particular Law made for him Pray excuse me if I press too hard and seem to add to your troubles which I am so far from desiring to increase that I would ease it if I could For truly notwithstanding what I have said I make no question but you are a very honest man and take it upon your word that there are more as honest as your self And I declare freely that I concur with the judgment of those * and if they would perform that common duty it is very probable that there appearing no more danger to threaten the Estate from them than from other men those Laws which the iniquity of their fore-fathers brought upon them by their conspiracies and Treasons may be suspended towards their Innocent Children until such time as their peaceable demeanour and good carriage shall make it appear just to be abolished Animadvers upon Fanaticism Fanatically imputed by a Person of Honour p. 261. These things I yield to be reasonable 1. That where there is a real
accounts But I mind not the Position but the Answer Since the Prince breeds and nourishes feeds and secures Priests as well as others in the Politick life it is plain he has in that respect the Notion of Father and Shepherd even to them and Bellarmin has no manner of Reason to deny they may be called Children and Sheep and obliged to do what nature teaches Children and Sheep ought to do The fourth Argument is this The Clergy are the Ministers of God consecrated to his service alone and offered by the whole people for that purpose whence they have their name as belonging to the Lot of God But the Princes of the World certainly can have no right over those things which are offered and consecrated to God and made as it were his proper goods If I had a mind to Dispute of Etymologys or thought it worth while to maintain against him that the Clergy have their name rather because God is their Lot than They Gods there would be enough to take my part But I love not to lose time for which reason too I forbear to except against all that is exceptionable in the Argument It will be sufficient to say that it differs little in substance from its fellows only it is set forth in another manner The Service and Lot of God are but what he called Spirit and Pastors before And the same Key will serve to the Lock In as much as they are the Lot of God and in respect of his Service to which they are consecrated the Clergy are unaccountable to the Secular Power but when they devest themselves of the Clergy-man and wear only the man that man if he deserve to feel the Secular Sword may for any thing I see in the Argument Wickedness is sure no part of God's Lot nor can I imagine how the priviledge of his service should be pretended where there is no service of his nay where the pretender acts directly contrary to it Were it true that Princes had nothing to do with things belonging to God or men consecrated to his Service all Christians and all things seem in a fair way towards Exemptions as well as Clergy-men For God has a very true property in all Things and Christians are all and that very solemnly consecrated to his service They serve him indeed in another way than the Clergy but they truly serve him and are by solemn consecration obliged to that service Since we see that service is so far from exempting them from subjection to Princes that obedience to them is part of it it is plain there is no repugnance betwixt the service of God and subjection to Princes unless they command things contrary to that service And from such commands all men are exempt as well as the Clergy with this difference that the Clergy are exempt from all that is contrary to the service of Clergy-men the rest only from what is contrary to the service of Christians Yet Bellarmin would bear us in hand that what he says is certain and tells us that the Light of Reason shews it and God has not obscurely delivered it in the last of Leviticus Whatsoever is once consecrated to God shall be Holy of Holys to the Lord. The Light of Reason may indeed do much when he makes it appear but He who is so much for Exemptions should methinks allow us to be exempt from the Ceremonial Law The Chapter he cites takes order about the offerings made to God and appoints some to be redeemed others not But those commands are given to the Jews we see nothing like them in the Christian Law And no body knows better than himself that we are to be guided by our own not their Law and that it lays no obligation on us purely as their Law though the matter of it do sometimes bind us on the score of Reason He says indeed that 't is so in this case but barely to say so is not to prove His word if that were the business would go far with me but when he is making Arguments I expect an Argument I say no more at present because this I conceive is as much as needs for an Answer and I intend to discourse of the merits of this cause more at large hereafter The fifth and last Argument is from signs and Prodigys shewn as he says by God on those who have presumed to violate Ecclesiastical Immunities For proof of this he sends us to one Bredembachius an Author I have never seen and therefore not knowing nor having means to know particulars can only answer in general If the signs and Prodigys he talks of be true Miracles and those express to the point clearly wrought in confirmation of Immunities extended as far as Bellarmin stretches them though I am slow of belief yet if it be truly so I will wash my hands of the business God forbid I should doubt of any thing let it seem never so strange and never so cross to my reason which carries his seal to it uncounterfeited But I am strongly perswaded there is no such matter If there were Bellarmin is a strange man to amuse us with his probabilities and unnecessary consequences when he had proof in store infinitely more convictive than even demonstration it self A Miracle may perhaps have been done to shew God's care of the Church or Ministry He is not less powerful now than heretofore in his Judgments upon Nadah and Abiu Oza and Ozias But Miracles are not lightly to be believed and when they are manifest Bellarmin's Doctrine may be ne're the truer unless they come home to it In likelihood who had Bredembachius to see what he says would find no more than observations of signal perhaps unusual and unhoped prosperities happening to some who favoured the Clergy and crosses to those who did otherwise which his whether piety or bigottery enhances into Miracles If this be all the Fire to the smoke the Topick ill becomes Bellarmin's learning Who had the Malice to collect all that History affords of adversity to the good and prosperity to the bad might perhaps make as big a Book as that of Bredembachius For 't is an old complaint and that of a Wise man too that all things happen alike to the Good and the Bad as if God had no care of the World while in truth he has the greater by letting things happen so and by that Providence teaching us not to value the Goods of this World but raise our hearts to better I am the apter to think there is no more in it because Bellarmin himself makes a famous business of what I should not have thought worth alledging As for Prodigys and Signs as many as there be in Bredembachius he had no mind it seems to become Voucher so much as for one for he cited not any But he tells us the Emperour Basilius Porphyrogenitus laies all the Calamities of that time to the charge of a certain Law made by Nicephorus Phocas against Ecclesiastical
The Controversial Letters OR THE Grand Controversie Concerning The pretended Temporal Authority of POPES over the whole Earth and the true Sovereign of KINGS within their own respective Kingdoms Between two English Gentlemen The one of the Church of England The other of the Church of Rome The first two Letters The Second Edition LONDON Printed for Henry Brome and Benjamin Toke at the Gun and at the Ship in St. Pauls Church-Yard MDCLXXIV E. Libris Beblioth Eccles Cathedr Petribur SIR I Fear the heat of our last Encounter may have done me some prejudice in your good opinion and would justifie to you if I can both my zeal and my friendship Permit me therefore with a more settled calmness to give you the Reasons which sway'd with me then but which the promptness of my nature possibly might so disguise that they might not then appear reason to you As this is my only so I hope 't will be my full justification for though we ow much to friendship we ow more to Truth and that Friend who bars the use of reason in his Friend does in my judgment ill deserve that Name Notwithstanding let me add what I think you are already sufficiently perswaded of that I am far from the blind zeal of those who think Popery an imputation so scandalous and contagious that it destroyes all correspondence with those who own it I have met with several besides your self of your judgment in Religion accomplisht men and so qualified that I cannot but wish either that all such men were Protestants or all Protestants such men I think so well of some parts of your Religion that there are who think the worse of me I read your books alwayes without hatred and sometimes with pity at the unequal combat betwixt the Knight and the Giant though I make no doubt you are even with us in this particular and are all Knights in your own Countreys When I hear People cry out Papists and Popery I have sometimes the bluntness to ask what they mean for having heard them apply'd both to Prelatics and Fanatics they must needs be words of a strangely large size and magical comprehension if they can fit parties so different and what know I but they may be so explain'd that you may own them no more than other folks In fine I look upon my reason as one of the greatest gifts I have receiv'd from God and am perswaded 't is a duty I ow him to use it as well as I can Wherefore I as little approve the passionate zeal of our side as I understand the sublime perfection of blind obedience on yours but where I see you have reason I am content to allow you have so Yet after all Friend I must continue constant to what I maintain'd at our last meeting I love my King and my Countrey as I ought and can neither believe that can be a true Religion which teaches doctrines inconsistent with Government nor believe otherwise but that yours does teach such doctrines And though I know their pestilent influence does not alwayes work for you have in the late times of tryal approved your selves honest men yet I cannot think that Commonwealth safe in which they are either tolerated or conniv'd at Of this I will make your self Judge and in this Paper produce my evidence which shall be the very words of the most famous Authors amongst you who if they be sufficient for number and considerable for learning and plain in expression and own'd for yours I see not what more can be expected from me nor what at all can be reply'd by you or any else To begin then there are I must confess some modest men amongst you Bellarm. de Rom. Pon. l. 5. c. 2. who speak sparingly of the Pope and affirm Princes are not the Popes Vicars These exempt from his Soveraignty the greatest part of the World for they make Infidel Princes true and supreme Princes of their own Kingdoms and say the Pope is not Lord of those possessions which Infidels hold Nay they go so far as to dare say He is not JVRE DIVINO Lord so much as of the whole Christian world Id. c. 3. And that all his power to depose Princes and dispose of their Kingdoms is only indirectly and in ordine ad spiritualia which alas is a matter of nothing and he must needs be a very scrupulous man who boggles at it For this opinion are cited besides two Cardinals Bellarmine and Cajetan abundance of other famous men with hard names Henricus and Joannes Driedo Turrecremata Pighius Waldensis Petrus de Palude Franc. Victoria Dominicus Soto Sanderus Aspileveta Covarruvias and so many others that Bellarmine affirms it is communis sententia Catholicorum Theologorum though in that particular as you will presently see he was a little out But these as many and as learned as they are are but dow-bak't men and scent strongly of wicked carnal policy and heresie too as an honest Gentleman fairly insinuates by the title of his Book Alex. Carrerius adversus impios Politicos nostri temporis Haereticos design principally against this opinion And so Bellarmine scap't fairly for Sixtus Quintus if the information I had from a very good hand deceive me not had a great mind to have burnt his book Though he scap'd more narrowly at Paris for giving too much to the Pope than at Rome for giving too little His fellow Suarez had his book burnt there by the common Hangman and he was found guilty of the same fault but he was a Cardinal for which respect I suppose they dealt more mercifully and only condemn'd and forbid him But this by the by Your hearty men whom the bugbears of carnal policy cannot fright from the defence of truth tell us another story and say plainly what we must trust too Vnless says Franciscus Bozius Fr. Bozius de Temp. Eccl. Monarchia praef ad Clem. 8. there be one supreme Monarch in the Church in all things the unity of the Church cannot be preserved for seeing the Church by divine institution doth consist of a Kingdom and a Priesthood if it were otherwise there should be in the same absolutely one Monarch of the Kingdom and another of the Priesthood That if for avoiding dissentions about sacred causes one supreme Head is appointed why not in the same manner of the Kingdom that there should be one and the same Head both of the Kingdom and Priesthood lest in like sort there should happen dissention betwixt them that therefore it is the rather to be held that Peter doth supply Christs place not only in the Priesthood but in the Kingdom that he might be a King and likewise a Priest according to the order of Melchisedech who was both a King and Priest The famous Cardinal Baronius sayes the same Baron Ann. Tom. 1. An. 57. p. 432 433. That David did foretell that the Priesthood of Christ should be according to the order of
so little subtilty that every body does the like almost in every occasion There remains only to examine upon what Principle those who assert these errors proceed whether upon Faith or some other Faith is a reliance upon some Authority and in our case the Authority of Christ who alone is acknowledged the Author and Revealer of all which we are to believe Wherefore of any point in question it must either be pretended that it was revealed by Christ or it cannot be pretended that it belongs to Faith and if any maintain it upon other grounds so far he acts not as a believer but as otherwise qualified Now there are in the world two principal ways by which claim is made to the Authority of Christ for that which we maintain is Faith and that wherein we do not engage his Authority neither of us say is Faith or that they act as faithful who upon reason or experiment for example maintain any thing The World hopes from the learned industry of the Royal Society the sight of many truths yet hidden from her but all their endeavours can never make Faith of them nor concern your Church in them as considerable members of it as some of them are For they go not your Church-way of Faith They look not into Scripture but Experiments and act as Learned not as Church-men What they shall discover to the World will be revealed not by Christ but by them and if any believe them they will have no Christian but Society-Faith Such is the case of our Church Tradition in her known method by which she pretends to the Authority of Christ If any will run upon their own heads and discourse and maintain things and never look into her Rule She can be no more concerned in their proceedings than the Church of England in those of Gresham Colledge For since Faith is that by which she is a Church and Tradition that by which she comes to Faith people must engage Faith if they will engage the Church and Tradition if they will engage her Faith Wherefore whoever goes about to prove any thing otherwise than by Tradition uses not the method to come to Faith I mean the method approved by our Church and this conclusion whether true or false neither reaches Faith nor aims at it and by consequence cannot belong to the Church or Congregation of the Faithful Now reflect a little upon your Authors and see if they go this way to work and the first thing is the consent of the present Age for Tradition signifying the consent of all Ages 't is a madness to pretend it for that which is not believed so much as by the present Do they or can they even offer at this while they see themselves contradicted by men as learned and farr more numerous While all the Universities of a great Kingdom disapprove and condemn their Doctrine and their Books are burnt in the face of the World by public Justice and the men who do this acknowledged good Catholics all the while Do they or can they pretend the consent of former Ages while they know all Antiquity agrees that for many Ages Popes were so Supreme in Spirituals that in Temporals they were Subjects Such they acknowledged themselves and as such the Emperours treated them When and how and upon what occasion they came to be temporal Princes is known to all who are knowing in History A condition by the way which he who envies them little understands or little loves the good of the Church with which 't was much worse when Popes were hindred from doing their duty by the unjust violence and oppression of powerful men amongst whom they lived Do they alledg the undoubted Testimonies of the Fathers of the Church assembled in a general Council Nothing of this appears in what you have produced The men themselves are most of yesterday All many Ages since Christ and there needs no second Argument to prove any thing that it is not Faith if it can be proved that it began in any Age since the first as these opinions plainly did But consider their Arguments They are either grounded upon some odd interpretation of Scripture as the order of Melchesedech the two Swords St Peters walking on the water and the like or else upon some deduction and reasoning as weak as the water which they mention And this methodt though per impossibile it could prove the thing true yet could never prove it to be Faith There are many things in the world which are so acknowledged to be true that they are withall acknowledged not to be Faith Was it taught by Christ Was it believed by Christians Semper ubique ab omnibus Till this appear it neither is nor can be Catholic Faith But that which I insist upon is that this method is plainly resolved into Reason and can no more engage the Church of Rome than the experimental learning of the Royal Society the Church of England The Authors you produce rely not upon the Authority of Christ testified by an uninterrupted conveyance down to us but upon the strength of their own discourses which if they be weak and fail the Church never undertook that all in her Communion should discourse strongly Neither can she herself do more then testifie of the truths delivered to her and they are such and were so delivered This testimony is all which can be expected from her as a Church speaking of what concerns us to speak of her power to make Ecclesiastical Laws and the like are no part of our case if she fail in this and either testifie that to be delivered which was not so or suppress any thing which was delivered blame her but for this that some Members in her Communion have weak Reasons or strong Passions if you blame her consider the confusion you will bring into the World which I have so much dilated before that to repeat it would be tedious here But will you have a taste of the Churches sense of these things Consider the Hymn made in the first Ages of the Church inserted since by public Authority into her solemn Office received by all the Faithful and used on the Feast of the Epiphany Non eripit mortalia qui Regna dat coelestia Can the Church which prays thus be thought to favour the deposing power Or can her sense appear more plainly than in the consent of an universal practice But let us look upon her in a Council Wickleff amongst other errors had advanced this Proposition Populares c The people may at their pleasure correct their offending Lords Con. Const Sess 8. And this amongst the rest was condemned by the Council of Constance To the same Council was offered another Article worded in this manner Quilibet Tyrannus c. Every Tyrant may and ought lawfully and meritoriously be killed by any of his Vassals or Subjects even by secret plots and subtle insinuations or flatteries notwithstanding any Oath or League made with
him not expecting the Sentence or command of any Judge whatsoever This they condemned too and hear if you please in what terms The Holy Synod desirous to rise up against this Error Sess 15. and to take it wholly away declares and defines this Doctrine to be erronious in Faith and Manners and rejects and condemns it as Heretical Scandalous and giving way to Frauds Deceits and Lies Treasons and Perjuries Moreover it declares and decrees that those who pertinaciously assert this most pernicious Doctrine are Heretics and as such to be punished according to the Canonical Decrees Behold the most exorbitant of your Doctrines directly and authentically condemned And though I am not ignorant that some of them may find in the expressions as they lie in the Council wherewith to evade her Censure yet I conceive her sence so clear that those evasions can appear no better than evasions For 't is a plain case She takes Duty to Princes to be a direct point of Faith since she condemns the contrary of Heresie and since she allows not even Tyrants to be kill'd I conceive she declares plainly enough against the deposing power whose chief ground is that deposed Princes are no longer Princes but Tyrants for without doubt of all sorts of Tyrants those are the least such and have most title to the protection of the Council I beseech you mistake me not as if I thought my self such Princes indeed were Tyrants but I speak in the Language of those who think so and I maintain they are Condemned by the Council even though their impossible ground were supposed true And if her expressions are not so direct and formal as to avoid all cavill The reason is obvious Councils do not make Propositions to be condemned but condemn such condemnable ones as they find made to their hands She condemned that Doctrine in the terms in which is was proposed to her and by her carriage shews what it is to expect from the Church in whatever terms it be proposed People may talk at random in the Schools where 't is proposterously thought a piece of learning to be able in the morning to defend one thing and in the afternoon the quite contrary but let these men and their learning appear in a Council and they will go near to be askt since they know that to give obedience Prepositis etiam discolis and that not only for fear but for Conscience was taught by the first Masters of Christianity and evidently believed and practised ever since and ab omnibus and ubique and semper by what warrant they bring in an exception to a Rule established by Christ and tell us 't is to be understood if the Pope command not the contrary They will be urged to produce their authority for this exception of theirs to name the Father that taught it and Children that believed it to make out its Universality both in Time and Place and if they can do none of all this as plainly they cannot 't is well if they scape the censure of Heresie themselves who are so forward to fix it upon others Subtilties and the knack of talking and the opinion of learning will avail them little where the constant Rule is Tradition and not delivered and not to be believed is all one But I go too far it being neither my business nor intention to dispute the Question Thus much when I was once in I could not chuse but say and I cannot but add that if the contrary to your doctrine be not sufficiently defined already it may be when Princes please and in such terms as they please when ever they think fit to use their interest for the calling of another General Council In the mean time I conceive there is never a King in Christendom who has not credit enough with the Clergy of his own Dominions to cause them to condemn those opinions All the Universities of France have done it already and I presume no Catholic Church-men if they were required by their Prince would refuse to follow their example Mean time what belongs to me is that those opinions are not Doctrines of the Church since they do not so much as pretend to the only Rule by which she judges of Doctrines and their only grounds are private deductions of private men with which if the Church should be charged and Faith made responsible for the miscarriges of Reason it would be an injustice whose consequence would quite invert the order of the World and leave neither Church nor Prince nor Magistrate nor Policy nor Oeconomy on Earth But if this be so how come so many men esteemed learned to assert such extravagances the Pope to allow them private men to endure them I answer how can it be otherwise while men are men and the World the World Popes are men and have long time both been and lived in the State and splendor of Princes Can it be thought strange if Flatterie have found access to a Court and amongst so many if some have given ear to it They are generally very good men but of late better versed in Polities that Divinity For the most part they are well skilled in the Law especially the Canon an useful knowledge for Church Government but for Divinity they use or relie on others And if men who pass for able Scholars and great Divines flatter them with an addition and power and tell them it truly belongs to them and that they can and will maintain it Can you who think Miracles are ceased wonder they should be content it be thought true They see many who oppose it are their profest enemies and if it be perpetually incultated to them that the rest have got a tang of that enmity by conversing with them how can it be but they will be perswaded of it at last Wee see the often repetition even of known lies cheats the teller at last into a belief of them And if once they come to be perswaded the thing is true it were wonder they should not discountenance those who oppose it and cherish those who maintain it Then if one Pope declare any way the rest will all go on the same road unless some very extraordinary action stop their journey They understand the Art of Governning very well and see that if one Pope should undoe what his Predecessor has done things would soon fall into disorder So that they are slow but very tenacious in their resolves and 't is the hardest thing in the world to get them to alter their course And all this is so far from strange that it were strange it should be otherwise Then for learned men consider how much Ecclesiastical Promotions depend upon the Pope and what plenty of means he has to gratifie all who appear for his interest While one hopes for a Canonry another a Bishopric another has the dazling purple glittering in his eyes They will all be apt to say what they think will please him in whose power it is
me to think they do I have shew'd you what the Sentiments of the Fathers and the Church are for the rest it belongs not to me This which I have done being only to obey your Commands and testifie the power you have over Your c. The Seventh and Eighth OF THE Controversial LETTERS OR Grand Controversie Concerning The pretended Temporal Authority of POPES over the whole Earth And the True Sovereign of KINGS within their own respective Kingdoms Between two English Gentlemen The one of the Church of England The other of the Church of Rome LONDON Printed for Henry Brome and Benjamin Tooke at the Gun at the Ship in St. Pauls Church-yard 1673. FRIEND I Know not how it happens but the more you shew me methinks the less I see While I read your Letters I find not what to except against yet when I look off I remain still unsatisfi'd That there should be a Spiritual Power distinct from the Temporal is plainly necessary in it self and own'd by us We go not to Westminster Hall for remission of our sins or to hear the Word of God preach'd or receive the Sacraments These things belong to Spiritual Magistrates amongst whom the Chief with us is the Bishop of Canterbury as with you the Bishop of Rome And since for Orders sake and the nature of Government a Chief there must be It matters not much whether as one wittily said the top link of the Spiritual Chain be fastned to the Chair of Canterbury or of Rome So the Temporal Primacy be undisturb'd and undisturbable by the Spiritual it seems all one vvhether have it I mean in point of Safety for true or false is another question And truly I neither see how your Spiritual Primacy should disturb it if all be true you say nor why I should doubt of the truth of what you say while I consider you say nothing of your own head but bring such Vouchers for every thing that I think your Church cannot say otherwise unless she throw off that Reverence which with so much ostentation she professes to have for Antiquity And yet of necessity there must be more in it The mischiefs against which I would be secur'd have actually happened Princes have been deposed and the world has been too much concerned in the effects of this Power to be ignorant of it Our own Princes have not been exempt from attempts of this nature and the hazard the nation ran in 88. is not yet out of our memory So that manifestly either you believe one thing and do another or you have not inform'd me truly but covered an ugly face with a handsom vizar Truly I believe better of your candour than to suspect you deceive me by design yet certainly things are not so cleer and smooth of your side as you would make me believe To read your Papers one would think nothing could be more innocent than your doctrine in this Point yet the vvorld is witness of doings far from Innocent I must confess I was sometime sufficiently perplext to unriddle this mystery But at last I remembred Bellarmin and vvhen I reflected on his Indirect and in ordine ad Spiritualia Power methought I had found the clew to guide me out of this Labyrinth That distinction does it Friend and in truth I never so well understood the vertue of Distinctions before for by the help of this I perceive you may say enough to pass for honest men and in the mean time reserve as much liberty as heart can vvish to play the knave Pardon my bluntness 't is without malice I assure you but I am too much intent upon the Question to be choice of my vvords especially to you and consider a little You have told me the Spiritual and Civil Power are distinct that the Popes Power is Spiritual and is not Coactive Why Bellarmin and any that follows him will grant all this But if vve conclude thence That the Pope has nothing to do vvith Temporals they vvill not suffer us but say His Power is indeed of its own nature Spiritual and directly regards only the good of Souls but if Temporals concern that good His Power is extended to them too not directly as if they were its proper object but indirectly as they collaterally fall in and are joyn'd to that which is its proper object So that they intend not that any part of that Authority which I conceive prejudicial to Princes and inconsistent with Government should be taken from him but plainly seek to establish it though another vvay and whereas Others go plainly to work and tell us without more adoe That the Pope is the only Supream Monarch of the Earth These go a little about the bush and say indeed He is not directly Lord of Temporals but come at last to the same and tell us He may as uncontroulably dispose of them as if he were If this be true all you have said is to no purpose and all you can say while you stick to this will not absolve you from inconsistency with Civil Government For 't is a plain case If the Pope may interpose in the disposition of Temporals as often as they have relation to Spirituals that He may interpose alwaies Since of necessity they must and cannot but be alwaies ordered either well or ill and both cases belong to the concern of the Soul And then 't is all one as some body in this case handsomly said whether my eyes be put out by a direct stroke of a Tennis Ball or by Bricol William Rufus was as mortally wounded by the Arrow which glanced as if it had been shot directly at him If Princes may lawfully be depos'd and their Subjects absolv'd from their Allegiance and oblig'd to obey the commands of another and that in Temporals they are no longer Sovereign nor absolute even in Temporals and whether the Power above them be Direct or Indirect Spiritual or not Spiritual so it be a Power and can act they are alwaies unsafe Pray Friend let me have no dodging Tell me plainly Is this the Doctrine of your Church or is it not If it be unless you can shew me That those can be good Subjects and true to their Prince who acknowledge another Power which they are to obey against their Prince and how that Prince is Supream in Temporals who has another above him whose Commands he is to obey in the disposition of those Temporals or if he do not his Subjects are not to obey him I must for all you have said continue in my first thoughts and not believe you tolerable in any Commonwealth If it be not true I think you would deserve very well of your Church to free her from the scandal which the credit of those who hold this and the countenance she gives them brings upon her In all events I beseech you speak plainly for else I must needs think either that your Church teaches you to hold what you are asham'd to own or vvhich is
depos'd for vvhat no repentance could cure Again in the Nevv Lavv he vvould make us believe Chilperick vvas depos'd for insufficiency Did the Pope admonish him to repent the grievous fault of having so little vvit and allovv him time to provide himself of better brains and better organs and vvhen he found him incorrigible and all persvvasion lost upon him and that say the Pope vvhat he could he vvould not do vvhat he could not do then at last after fruitless and long deluded patience cast him off Wherefore though Bellarmine do require such Formalities as cannot conveniently be spared yet possibly he may not think their necessity so absolute as that the Deposition should be void if they concur not But let him think vvhat he pleases vvhile vvith all his insignificant Buts he preserves this substance that a King may be deposed if instead of three be require three hundred Ceremonies the opinion is still inconsistent vvith Civil Government And for our Case in particular our Soveraign does not think fit to repent vvhat Bellarmine cals Heresie and a deposing fault for this reason because he does not think it a fault and is for that reason very like to be incorrigible in it too and vvhoever thinks he may therefore be deposed is himself pernicious and not to be endured in his Dominions And so much for the taking avvay But. For the giving But he tels us The Pope may also give the Kingdom to another yet not at pleasure to whom he thinks fit for so indeed Kings were but precarious Kings But He is ty'd to the order of Justice whether Succession or Election take place or if there be none can claim then to him whom reason profers I fear the truth of this may be questioned Sure I am that vvhen Q. Elizabeth vvas deposed and her Kingdom given to the Spaniard there vvere better Titles afoot in the vvorld then K. Philips Thanks be to God the Throne of England has not been vacant and the Popes reason never troubled to fill it When Kingdoms are expos'd to prey 't is catch that catch can I see no great order of Justice in that But suppose it vvere true vvhat signifies this order of Justice and vvhat bar to the Popes pleasure in Succession or Election If the next Heir or next Elect be a man vvho pleases not the Pope I suppose he must be pass'd by and so as many as offer till they come at last to some body who is rectus in Curiâ For the first might stand as vvell as any of these vvho I conceive are all in the number of those vvho cannot claim and then vvhat does Succession or Election hinder but the Pope still gives at pleasure since none shall succeed or be elected but vvhom he pleases Again vvhat difference betvvixt giving a Kingdom to vvhom the Pope pleases and to vvhom Reason meaning the Popes Reason prefers Preference of Reason is nothing in the vvorld but that the Pope pleases to think it fitter this man should be prefer'd then the other So that Election and Succession and Reason are nothing in truth but the Popes Pleasure and all that Bellarmine affords us is a meer sound of vvords vvhich signifie nothing and if they did vvere nothing to purpose neither For vve are all this vvhile beside the Cushion It makes nothing I think to the justification of a Robbery that the prey vvas equally shared and vvhen a King is dethroned he is as much dethroned if he be succeeded by the next heir as by a stranger neither do I believe he is much concern'd vvho comes next upon the Stage vvhen his ovvn part is ended Our Question at Present is whether Kings in Bellarmins doctrine be only precarious Kings By the way Precarious is not very currant English I think we should call it holding at will or pleasure or if you will coyn a new word Tenure by Intreaty But however let us keep our Authors word Barclay objects that Bellarmin makes Kings precarious because he allows the Pope to take away and give Kingdoms and this whenever he has a mind as being sole judge in the case Bellarmin answers that Kings were indeed Precarious if their Kingdoms could be dispos'd of at pleasure but because the Pope is ty'd to the order of Justice in that point they are not precarious As if Barclay insisted on that or thought their being Precarious depended on that disposition The Son in defence of his Father laughs at that notion of Precarious and rightly observes that Precarious is not said with relation to him that gives but him that takes away 'T is the power of revocation if that word fit him vvho never gave plac'd in the Pope the power of deposing when the Pope thinks fit which makes a King precarious let the Kingdom be dispos'd how 't will afterwards the King is still precarious purely Tenant at vvill But pray tell me truly Do you in earnest find any thing in these healing Buts of Bellarmin which makes his opinion a jot sounder then the Canonists a jot safer for Princes or more dutiful for Subjects For my part I profess seriously I find nothing unless non-sence will do the feat There is a little more non-sence in this opinion then the other and if that be a security for Princes it would do vvell if the vvorld ran mad as fast as it could While men are in their wits they vvill go near to think never a Barrel better Herring Just such work he makes vvith Barclays next Proposition which was this To judge when 't is necessary for the good of Souls that a King be depos'd belongs only to the Pope and none is to question his Judgment This he saies is like the former and if it be ill understood is false but rightly understood is true but then concludes not what Barclay would have it Now am I terribly afraid that ill understood is as much in Bellarmins language as truly understood or so as it truly signifies and rightly understood means understood otherwise then as it signifies For else I cannot for my heart see but if the Pope may depose when there is necessity and judge when this necessity happens and none must call his judgment in question and these words mean as they sound Kings are purely Tenants at will and the Pope may depose them whenever he pleases to judge it necessary which is what Barclay would conclude What is the good meaning in which vve must rightly understand it Why It does indeed belong to the Pope saies he to judge whether it be necessary a King should be depriv'd of his Kingdom Very well So Barclay understood it and so Bellarmin himself understands it Why does it not conclude then that Princes may be depos'd at pleasure Because of another But. But saies he it does not belong to the Pope to feign necessities at pleasure or serve his passions under pretence of necessity Bellarmin is as unlucky it his Buts as Distinctions Whoever said it belong'd to
the Fire burns de Facto but only warms de Jure That Bellarmin is a great Scholler de Facto but de Jure none at all I know I speak impertinently but I meant to do so and yet think I speak as pertinently as he who saies Duty is only duty de Facto but de Jure not duty He might ee'n as well have made use of his Indirect here too and said the Pope was subject only Indirectly but was not subject Directly or contrariwise for 't is all one Young Sophisters sometimes when they are put to it and know not how to shift off an Argument find something or other which sounds like a distinction no matter what it signifies and whether any thing or nothing so it serve turn for the present And I doubt he remembred the trick a little too long But Subjection to Princes being prov'd by Examples and Commands This is the Reserve for Examples when they are ill-natur'd and will not be turn'd off otherwise For Commands there is another common place which now 't is known is nothing but he was a very subtle man lure that first discovered it It consists in distinguishing the same man into a Prince and a not-Prince and then interpreting all obedience we find commanded belongs to the Prince only the not-Prince has no share in it This distinction because it is indeed a little hard they attribute to the Omnipotent power of the Pope and say that the Prince till he be deposed is a Prince but afterwards no Prince and because it still falls short for the man governs and lives like a Prince still they etch it out with its fellow distinction and say he is no Prince de Jure though he be de Facto And now bring 'em as many and as plain places for obedience as you will 't is the easiest thing in the world to get cleer of them Bring Scripture bring Fathers that a Prince is to be obey'd True say they while he is a Prince but now he is no longer a Prince Princes in my opinion have hard luck to stand in the Popes way and become the first sad examples of his Omnipotence otherwise there is no Law of God or Man which may not be overturn'd as easily by the same engine For he may as soon and as well declare That Wife to be no Wife That Man to be no Man and make Adultery and Murther lawful as that King to be no King and make Rebellion innocent There would not want as likely pretences for the one as the other if people would but look after them For Example A Man is a rational Creature who acts unreasonably disclaims his nature and may be dispatch't without contradicting the Divine Law which forbids men to be kill'd while they are men but he by the Popes declaration is no man As much may be found out for the Wife as much for Estates as much for every thing For there neither is nor can be any stronger title to any thing then the Law of God and that the King has to his Kingdom and if that will not do nothing will This is just Montalto Sin but enough and you trapan the Devil and become vertuous even by being wicked To refuse obedience to a King is with them a crime and a crime which deserves damnation marry to Un-king him and deny there is any obedience due to him is an innocent thing As if taking his Power quite away were not a greater disobedience then to resist it A particular disobedience may have a particular and sometimes excusable cause but a general disobedience such as leaves them no longer any Power to command is of all disobedience the greatest most inexcusable in it self and most contrary to the Divine Law And yet he would perswade us we sin if we obey not a particular perhaps trifling Command but if we take away Power and all we are very honest men Whereas in truth when I disobey a Power which I acknowledge perhaps I wrong my self most for I do not my duty but when I no longer acknowledge my Princes Power I do him as well as my self the greatest wrong I can and yet this greatest wrong with Bellarmine is no wrong These are the healing Distinctions which Bellarmine applies to his Doctrine and by which the sound Deposing is to be distinguisht from the unsound Deposing If you find any such soveraign vertue in them I shall be glad to learn it But for our part we think Deposing an uncurable disease a poyson for which there is no Antidote Disguise it how you will while it remains Deposing 't is alike intolerable alike inconsistent wâ—th the safety of Princes and duty of Subjects Call the Power indirect call it in Temporals not temporal as long as 't is Power and can do the feat no honest ear can hear it Tell us of admonition and space of repentance tell us of Synods and Consistories of disposing the prey according to Justice of not feigning necessities tell us what you will while you tell us Deposing is good Doctrine we cannot believe you good Subjects Bring a thousand Schoolmen and ten thousand subtilties against them all we will stand by our honest Parliament Doctrine That the Crown of England is and alwayes has been free and subject immediately to God and none other and who refuses his Fellowship in that Doctrine I know not with what face he can pretend to a Fellowship in any thing else But the truth is I do not see that Bellarmine with all his art does so much as guild the bitter Pill or make it a jot less nauseous For what is the very worst the Canonists say Take their opinion in his own expressions and he says all they say and in terms as positive and as comprehensive Take Carerius or whoever is the highest flyer among those I sent you at first and the worst is but this That the Pope has jurisdiction over all things both spiritual and temporal throughout the world that he may absolve Subjects from the Oath of Allegeance Depose Kings and transfer their Dominions from one line to another And which of this worst does Bellarmine with his proper Distinctions and cautious Buts deny 'T is true they call his Power Direct and Bellarmine Indirect but what matter is it how they are called if one can do as much as the other And I would fain know what they can do with their Direct which be cannot with his Indirect 'T is true they make but one absolute Monarch of the world and all the rest but arbitrary Lieutenants and Bellarmine cals them true Kings but makes them as much subject as if they were but Lieutenants Were Kings perswaded once it were their duty to resign at the Popes command they would themselves make no difficulty to call and think him their supreme Lord. 'T is only in consideration of the scurvy consequence which would follow viz. that being supreme and absolute Lord he might dispose of his own as he
If the Laws would take into their protection such only as should give you the satisfaction which your selves should judge reasonable perhaps their number may prove great enough to deserve their care and then you would have what you desir'd however it is not unworthy the care of Laws to provide that no man should suffer without demerit Now I am upon this Subject pardon a little freedom and a little Tautology You complain I am single and conceal'd and will not take notice that 't is your dealing which makes me so What reason has any body to joyn with me what reason have I to discover my self when doing so will make us worse then we are already which I refer me to your self if it be not bad enough You will not be fatisfy'd but with what you know will cause dissatisfaction among our selves A man that had any jealousy in his nature would startle at this but yet while your pretences for thus much are at least specious those whose conscience will allow them are willing to do as you would have them satisfy you your own way and upon your own Terms When this is done you are as little satisfy'd as before And out come harsh suspitions of I know not what craft and danger cover'd under these specious Condescendencies out come harsher things then bare suspitions the Sword of the Law hanging naked over our heads and threatning us with all the sharpness of its unavoydable edge You will not let us pass for good Subjects till we have done what no Nation in Christendom besides your selves thinks necessary for the trial of good Subjects Sure the English are not the only good Subjects nor the only wise men of the world However when a man has past the test of your uttermost scrupulosity and may be call'd a good Subject even in your nice language then has this good Subject to expect for his comfort which will be taken his twenty pound a month or his two Thirds Shall I venture to say what has by some less credulous been long thought As Princes resolv'd to make War would yet be thought inclin'd to Peace and seek to perswade the World they draw not their Swords but forc't by Justice and necessity so deal you with us no answer that is or can be made to their Reasons shall keep the Ratio ultima from thundring at last nor no return we make to your Objections shall hinder you from what you have determin'd concerning us Whether we stand on our justification or yield to you whether innocent or guilty They are perswaded we shall with all our several Principles and subdivisions Wheat and Tares indifferently be bound up together into one condemned bundle and thrown into the fire at last This they gather partly from your objections which in truth are wonderful cross urging now Danger and then Craft now Number and presently after Fewness and when one is taken taken off you never fail of another nor shew any disposition that you ever will They gather it more apparently from your Actions more certain signs of the mind by far than words and think it a foolish thing to guess at what you mean by what you say when they see what you do When a Prince fills the Frontiers with Magazines and Souldiers and Weapons they think his intentions plain enough and judge not of them by his manifests If this be what we must trust to which truly I shall be the last man who believes if the good Subject must be condemned that the Papist may not escape and no hopes of living with comfort in this world but by forfeiting our hopes of the next It is not for us to think of any thing but the next World and those comforts which will not fail us of good Christians and a good Conscience And I very earnestly entreat you to leave me in quiet as long as the Law will let me to study what only becomes me Patience For to study longer how to satisfy those who will not be satisfy'd and with a great deal of pains purchase the reputation of one more dangerous than those who will not perhaps cannot answer you is not more uncomfortable than irrational Is not your next Objection a kind of secret Declaration to use the Figure call'd a Bull of your mind in this point You would have it impossible so much as for a single person to give you satisfaction because one may prevaricate even while he renounces prevarication I cannot tell how far you are in earnest but this to my eye looks like a reserve in store when other pretences fail to maintain a resolution of admitting no satisfaction Otherwise can you seriously believe there is no trusting no taking one anothers word because the Doctrine of Aequivocation has been taught in the world If this were true Cities and Societies had been left off by this time and we had in Deserts been experiencing the comforts of the returned Golden Age. For there is no living in society without mutual trust Those doctrines do not hinder us from keeping up society still and dealing together with security enough and if we can give security to one another such as serves the turn and enables us to converse and treat with confidence what should hinder but we may give it to you too But let us look upon the Objection Some of our Communion have thought Aequivocation lawful therefore none may be trusted Do you think this Inference concluding Will you have every one of our Communion answerable for what is said by any one Pray consider whether Positions have not been maintain'd by some of your Communion with which if others should be charged they would think themselves not fairly dealt with it is no more reasonable to impute these doctrines to our Communion in which if there be who hold there are too who contradict them The Yea's and the No's should not be confounded and which is more unjust the No's condemn'd for the fault of the Yea's For my own particular I could produce if that would satisfie you sufficient Compurgators for my innocence in this particular and sufficient witnesses that I never believ'd Aequivocation lawful nor was ever taught it was nor ever heard of it without a scurvy character But then if the fancy should take you to except against my Compurgators you would leave me no means to make out my Innocence and yet I am very sure I am innocent Yet let me tell you if you go this way to work you may chance be caught in your own Trap. For this is no point of Religion It belongs purely to Learning and may be held by men of different Communions You read our Authors as well as your own and I suppose assent to as much as you think true in them Pray who shall be your Compurgator that you do not your self hold this doctrine which you object to me And why may not I as well suspect you of Prevarication as you me For 't is nothing to purpose
that it is not found in your Books You may think it true by what you find in ours and if you may who shall secure me that you do not And then there is no remedy but we must all into the wilderness But if you think your self sufficiently justifi'd that no word or action of yours has given a reasonable ground of suspicion that you believe the doctrine true truly I can say as much for my self and if need be bring good proof of what I say If this will not do I know not how either of us can clear our selves nor how we can deal with one another or any body else with either of us I conceive therefore this Topic of yours is manifestly deceitful and as a Canon overcharged bursts it self instead of hitting the Enemy becomes ineffectual by having too much force For evidently if your Inference be true viz. that none of us can be trusted this is also true that absolutely none can be trusted whether of us or you and if there can be no Trust there can be no Society in the world which is a Conclusion so destructive that the Argument must of necessity be deceitful which infers it To dive farther into the business belongs not to me If you will not take this in payment demand your debt where it is due I for my part owe you no more on this account than you me For I never held Aequivocation lawful no more than you and am no more to answer for it I shall only say that were we indeed such Juglers as you seem to fear so dextrous at the Legerdemain of Aequivocation nothing you could do would exclude us from any benefit which other Englishmen enjoy You know well enough that words cannot be so contriv'd but sophistry may work upon them and if we thought it allowable to take advantage by it we should long before this have taken all your Oaths and it may be by stretching our Conscience a little farther dissembled in actions as well as words and gone to Church and taken your Sacraments and continued Papists all the while Alas we need not trouble you for Physick if we had such a Remedy of our own in store But you know no discouragements no apprehension even of utter ruine has prevailed with us to do what yet you would perswade us we think we lawfully may and which if we did §. 54. we were stark mad to refuse The candid Author of the Considerations has truly observ'd such a liberty would destroy us and I hope you are sufficiently secured if you cannot be undone by us but by undoing our selves In the next place you touch slightly upon Probable Opinions more I suppose with the exuberancy of a flowing fancy then check of a real concern These Doctrines have been so treated by those of our Communion that I believe you sufficiently perswaded there are not many of yours who have less kindness for them I know not how you can use them worse than to place them Aegidius Gabrielis specimina Moralis Christianae Diabolicae pag. 293. as a late Author has done among the Devils Morals However it be they are plainly laid open to the view of every body and we have taken care you should not be ignorant of any thing we know concerning them In my opinion it is needless for me to stay on a Subject so largely treated by better pens guided by more acquaintance with them All I shall return by way of answer is that I can give you no more light than you have already and that you may if you truly apprehend any danger from them provide for your own security as you please and treat those who shall refuse to give it as you please too If this do not satisfie you nothing that I can say will Having said thus much to your collateral exceptions I come at last to the principal business of your Letter those Pretences which the Pope may have by Human Right Though you observe it not Cap. Constantinus Dist 96. I conceive it best to follow the order of Time and begin with the famous Donation of Constantin Of this there is a very formal Charter extant in the Canon Law and said by some to be preserv'd in the Vatican by which Rome Italy and all the West are convey'd to the Pope besides other particulars which concern not our question There is great disagreement among learned men who treat of this Argument Some labour to make good the Charter others the Donation only and there are who reject both the one and the other I speak only of our Authors for as for yours they all agree with the latter Now although I conceive that to overthrow either is to overthrow both for if the Charter be forged the Donation cannot be prov'd of which this is the only Evidence produced or produceable and again if the Donation be disproved the Charter cannot be valid yet to consult my own ease I chuse only to speak to the Donation lest the nice scrupulosity of those who think the Donation may be true though the Charter be false should engage me in a new labour For the Charter let it suffice that it is generally rejected by men of greatest Learning and Judgment and among the rest by Baronius himself Baron ad an 1191. n. 52. one not likely to cast away slightly any thing that makes for the advantage of the Pope As for the Donation it seems the product of a fancy little acquainted with Nature and the course of human action or at least little minding them Constantin was a Prince who with great labour and fortune prevail'd against his powerful Competitors and establisht the Empire in himself and his family I cannot easily imagin a conceit more wild than that he should so little value what he had purchas 't with so much toil and danger as to make a present of the best part of it to one who never so much as ask't him for it Princes do not use to think so slightly of their Dominions Soveraignty bears a greater rate then so nor will they much sooner consent to forego a part then the whole Or if the suspicion might pass son not impossible in Princes by long and quiet enjoyment of Power grown weary or perhaps insensible of what they enjoy as men become cloy'd with the same conditions as well as the same meats yet 't is hardly imaginable of such a man as Constantin He had fought hard and often and dangerously for what he had he had staked against it his Life and Honour and all he had and hoped He who struggles into Soveraignty through so many difficulties must needs value it more than to throw a great part of it away as soon as he has got it He might without any hazard or pains have quietly enjoy'd almost as much as if his Donation were real he reserv'd to himself For certainly a composition might have taken up all differences with his Competitors had he