under spiritual temporal or mixt of both is not so much disputed amongst learned men as that other far different question drawn especially from the 27th Canon of the great Council of Chalcedon as also from some others of his purely spiritual or at least Ecclesiastical power which has no respect at all to Temporals either directly or indirectly whether this power be truly by Divine right immediately over all the faithful through the whole world or onely by Humane and Ecclesiastical right or else from both at least in that latitude to which they commonly extend it that is over all the faithful everywhere none exempted either in any district of any of the other Patriarchs or in any cause With which most difficult question though I have no intention ever to meddle as however I am fully resolved to follow in this point the common doctrine and to stand unmoveably fixt to the decision of General Councils nevertheless because all men are not of the same mind that is do not judge or understand every way alike many things which may be alledged on both sides nor have the same inclinations or that forward strong and constant affection to his Holiness and the See of Rome which I have notwithstanding the injuries which I cannot deny many and as many as since the beginning of the last War in Ireland took part with the King have suffered with me I thought fit to intreat your Lordship and do with all earnestness beseech you that you will let the Subscribers live in peace not move them to impatience or anger nor reject them from Ecclesiastical charges without other demerit than this pretended one of Subscription and that you will not put a bar to the publick good of undoubted Religion for the maintenance of an assertion so far at least doubtful that in the judgment of many and those Catholick Writers and even entire Universities it deserves the name not so much as of an Opinion but of Error and Heresie and also yet so doubtful that the reason is plain why 't is call'd Heresie Understand my Lord material Heresie as they call it For I conceive no Orthodox Censurers and least of all I ever thought of charging formal Heresie upon the Pope or Church of old Rome or its particular Diocese so much as in this matter controverted betwixt us formal Heresie not being found without obstinacy against the Faith of the Universal Church undoubtedly known But as for material Heresie many orthodox learned and pious men have not doubted to fix it openly upon the Patrons of your opinion mov'd by this amongst other reasons namely that Heresie is no less in excess of than recess from the due mean in points to be believed or that 't is as much Heretical to add to Faith that is assert preach teach impose upon the Faithful to be believed as necessary to salvation or as revealed by God taught by the Apostles preserved by perpetual succession in the Church and as a part of the depositum delivered by Fathers in every age of Christian Religion to their Children That of whose necessity revelation and tradition there is no undoubted and certain evidence but opinion at most or likelihood and this only to somefew of the Faithful the rest which make a greater or as great or at least a considerable part of the Catholick Church denying disclaiming condemning abjuring it I say that according to those Doctors 't is as much Heretical to add to Faith in such manner as it is to substract from it i. e. as it is to deny any thing to be of Catholick Faith of which nevertheless t is truly undoubtedly certainly universally evident that it was revealed by Christ and deposited by the Apostles as much as any other Article of Faith Now who does not see that these who teach that Assertion of the Popes right over the Temporals of Princes as a point of Catholick Faith without the belief of which or with the witting denial of which none can be saved or entirely profess the Christian Catholick Faith relie upon Arguments at best but probable and grounding only opinion against the greater or equal or indeed the far greater remaining part of the Catholick Church which in all ages of Christianity have denied and still persevere to deny disclaim abjure that Position as impious and contrary to the doctrine received by Tradition and without difficulty solve such Arguments which they look upon as Spiders webs as ridiculous Sophisms as Trifles and pure Toyes And indeed some orthodox Doctors moved by this discourse not to mention other Reasons fear not to brand your Position with the note of Heresie But if your Lordship desire my own opinion in the case I must confess ingenuously I see not why it is not as much truly an intollerable error to assert in Popes Bishops Priests or any of the Clergy or even Laity a power to be believed as of divine Catholick Faith which does not certainly and evidently appear from the Rule of Faith that is either from Scripture or Tradition or both as it is to deny a power which does so appear * * See Bellarmine himself de Conc. l. 4. c. 4. where he teaches Errorem esse intollerabilem proponere aliquid credendum tamquam articulum fidei de quo non constet an sit verum vel falsum At last my Lord I conclude this long Letter and yet I neither repent my labour nor ask pardon for my prolixity since it no way more concerns Walsh to write Truth than it does an Internuncio to read it And if your Lordship be of the same judgment it will be well if otherwise I must bear it with patience Let it suffice me to have done what became an honest man videlicet to have refuted slanders reproaches revilings to have proved Caron and Walsh were causelesly term'd by your Lordship either Schismaticks or Apostates or which is less yet any way disobedient causelesly by contempt men of dirt causelesly also raisers of I know not what troubles to the Church of God lastly that without cause it was said to Gearnon's face he had better have been in his grave than subscribed Let it suffice to have defended the freedom of expostulating in a cause most just to have shewn it reasonable and answered those things which with most apparence are alledged to the contrary Lastly let it suffice that for a conclusion I have made you a hearty Prayer and a Petition no less earnest adding at the end and for a complement of the whole discourse that reason of so urgent a Petition which swayes with those Divines who censure with freedom your doctrine Neither have I more to add but onely my wishes that for the future the Internuncio's of Bruxels may be more men of heavenly spirit at least when they have to do with men of earthly dirt Which humbly saluting your Lordship and kissing your hands with all due respect and affection truly and from his soul wishes My LORD
confess that their both Constitutions and Oath if there be any such Oath of those amongst them them they call Masters of Divinity are only for maintaining the doctrine of St. Thomas of Aquine not as articles of Faith nor as the doctrine of the Church nor Dogmatically at all at least not out of their School Pulpits but only by way of Scholastical speculations and for sharpning of wits and shifting the truth problematically or probably in all such matters wherein the Scripture or Tradition was not clear and certain and still only within the Schools That otherwise the whole Order of the Franciscans and all the other Schools of Scotists who maintain as stiffly and are alike by their Constitutions bound to maintain against St. Thomas the Thomists all the speculations all the subtleties of the Subtile Doctor Scotus who writ ex professo against all or almost all even every individual position of St. Thomas as well in his Divinity as Philosophy where the matter is not certain otherwise by Scripture or Tradition were to be condemned by them Which yet they will not dare in point of morallity prudence and conscience That moreover it is manifest St. Thomas of Aquin is not weaker in his proofs for any of his Theological opinons then for this of a power in the Pope or Church for deposing Infidel or Heretick Princes on pretence or because of Infidelity Apostacy Schisme Heresy where he determines it so in his Theological Sum. 2. 2. q. x. ar 10. and q. 12. ar 2. And that he relyes for proof of so weighty an Assertion first on a reason that would not move the meerest novice in Divinity Quia fideles sayes he merito suae infidelitatis merentur potestatem amittere super fideles qui transferuntur in filios lucis Supra q. 10. ar 10. in corp Which yet is the only reason this great Holy Doctor brings to prove that a very infidel Prince who was never Baptized may be deposed by the Church Secondly for proof of that same Assertion as relating specially to an Apostat Heretick or Schysmatick Prince that was Baptized relyes onely and wholy on the bare judgment and practise of Gregory the VII otherwise called Pope Hildebrand or on that Canon made by this Pope which you may find in Gratian. 15. q. 6. cap. Nos Sanctorum That as it is therefore manifest that St. Thomas of Aquin is not weaker in his proofs of any of his Theological Assertions then of this of a power in the Pope or Church for deposing Infidel or Heretick Princes as the Reader may see partly in the Latin notes which follow this Paragraph for the rest satisfie himself at large in Father Caro'ns Remonstrantia Hibernorum so it is no less manifest that generally where the Thomists find in any other positions of this Angelical Doctor and those too of infinite less concern insuperable difficulties they decline him there expound him or his mind by some other place of his workes where he held the contrary or perhaps retracted considerately what he had before unadvisedly handled by the example of St. Austin himself in his books of Retractation And so those Irish Fathers might if they pleased have declined in this matter St. Thomas in his said Sum and expounded St. Thomas there by following St. Thomas where he holds by plain consequence of reason the contrary in his exposition of St. Pauls Epistles to the Corinthians That they could not deny but that notwithstanding all their Constitutions and Oathes whatsoever they all now generally and confessedly and without any exposition or interpretation of one place by an other decline St. Thomas of Aquin even in that matter wherein their whole Order these full 300 years found themselves most concern'd of any in point of reputation at least to follow defend him that is in the dispute of the Blessed Virgins conception without original sin Nor can deny this matter to have come within these late years to that height in Spain even where they are in such esteem that the very Provincial of their Order in the Kingdom or Province of Castile was confined to Penna de Francia by orders from the King until he subscribed under his hand against that opinion of St. Thomas in this matter and consequently acknowledged so the Blessed Virgin conceaved without original sin against the confessed doctrine of St. Thomas and against the letter of his Constitutions and verbal tenour of his Oath as a Master And yet he was not so commanded by any decrees of the Church which as it is well known hath never yet decided that question And yet also that question of the Blessed Virgin is no less known to be of infinite less consequence to the Peace or Settlement of either Church or State for the owning or disowning of either the affirmative or negative resolution and for a subscription to either than ours of the Remonstrance of our indispensable loyaltie in Temporal things to the Supream Magistrate and our lawful and rightful King Finally that St. Thomas of Aquin's Scholastical assertion whatever it be or a Statute in an Order to teach such or such a doctrine or Oath of some few members of such an Order how learned religious or eminent soever that Order be is a very bad plea at least in such a matter as ours against ten thousand other Holy and eminent Fathers Doctors Prelates in all Countreys and ages of the Church against so many express clear passages of Holy Scriptures against the universal tradition of all Christians till Gregory the VII days about the Xth. age of Christianity and against the greatest evidence of both natural reason and of hundreds too of Theological arguments the first grounds of Christianity being once admitted Quâ—niâ—â—â— autem singula persequimur admonere oportet D. Thomam alicubi in ea opinione esse ut existimet ius dominii praelationis Ethnicorum Principum justè illis auferri posse 22. q 10. art 10. per sententiam vel ordinationem Ecclesiae authoritatem Dei habentis vt ille ait D. Thomae magna apud me authoritas est sed non tanta ut omnes ejus disputationes pro Canonicis Scripturis habeam vel ut rationem vincat aut legem Ejus ego Manes veneror doctrinam suspicio Sed non est tamen cur illa ejus opinione aliquis moveatur tum quia nullam suae sententiae vel rationem idoneam efficacem vel authoritatem profert tum etiam quia in explicatione epistolae Pauli ad Corinth 1. contrarium planè sentit tum denique quia neminem secum antiquorum Patrum consentientem habet Cap. 6. rationes multae authoritatesque in contrarium supperunt Ratio autem quam adfert est quia infideles merito suae infidelitatis merentur potestatem amittere super fideles qui transferuntur in filios Dei Mala ratio tanto viro indigna quasi verò si quis meretur privari officio beneficio
multis aliis reclamabant dicentes ad Papam non pertinere Imperatorem instituero vel destituere Out of all which I think I may conclude that the Objectors themselves will if they lay aside prejudice and passion and compare all I have answered here to their objection of the opinion of two General Councils that of Lateran and that of Lyons will I say confess this allegation of theirs not only vain but absolutely false XXXI Thirdly they will find their allegations false where they say That General Councils are undervalued by some that believe only the diffusive Church is infallible I say they will particularly find this transient animadversion of theirs to be very false if they mean here the Procurator as they do undoubtedly but withal either stupidly or maliciously grounding themselves on what he hath in The Mare Ample Account pag. 60. Where indeed there is no ground at all for this calumny nor any man but a meer blockhead will say there is whatever may be said upon serious consideration of the controversie in it self about the fallibility or infallibility of General Councils debated throughly of purpose For his discourse there is no other then this That in case of such a metaphisical or morally impossible contingency as was caprichiously proposed to him by Father Bonaventure Brudin a little before one of those Franciscan Professors of Divinity at Prague in Bohemia and insisted on mightily and by way of interrogation What would the Subscribers do or think of their Remonstrance if a general Representative of the Church or a General Council truly such did hereafter condemn it His discourse I say upon this occasion as in answer to this wilde interrogatory was That in such case should it happen which yet the Procurator seemed clearly there to hold it was impossible it should happen the Subscribers would either have recourse to the diffusive Church or which is very probable suffer themselves to be mislead it being very possible said he that out of one impossibility another should follow as Logitians tell us it is certain Where it is evident he is so farr from undervaluing General Councils That according to at least some very learned Catholick Divines he rather overvalues them in seeming here to hold it absolutely impossible they should erre against any doctrine of Faith once delivered plainly in Scripture and by Tradition For that he seems to say so here if he say any thing at all of the question of either side or of the fallibility or infallibility of General Councils is most clear and manifest by or in that reason he giveth for his said disjunctive answer and for either the first or second or both parts of it it being very possible that out of one impossibility another should follow c. Where any rational man will confess he holds it impossible That a General Council truly such should define the contrary And why so but because he supposed two things 1. That the doctrine of the Remonstrance was and is a doctrine of Catholick Faith clearly delivered as such by Scripture and by Tradition 2. That it was and is impossible That a General Council truly such should define against any such doctrine or any doctrine so delivered And is not this as much as in plain terms to hold absolutely That a General Council truly such is infallible in all definitions of Faith or at least so infallible as never to define against Faith and consequently rather to overvalue than undervalue the authority of General Councils if I say we regard what some other eminent Catholick Writers teach or what in particular may be read in Franciscus à Sancta Clara's learned work of Councils that I mean which he calls Systema And any rational man will further confess That that disjunctive resolution of the Subscribers and only for such a case expressed so by the Procurator was purely conditional and the condition such too as for any thing known there of the Procurators judgment was and is absolutely impossible considering the special providence of God his promises to the Church but possible only in the fond imagination of the Proposer or of such a case which wil never be nor can ever be according to all that may be gathered out of that book or passage of the Procurators opinion For what else can his reason signifie which he gives for that disjunctive conditional answer or what these words it being very possible that out of one impossibility another should follow as Logicians tell us it is certain Which is that one impossibility that must be here the antecedent which is it I say if not this That a General Council should define the doctrine of the Remonstrance to be false and which is the other impossibility that must be the consequent if not the recourse of the Subscribers to the diffusive Church or suffering themselves to be mislead c Now therefore it is clear first that he holds both that Antecedent and this Consequent to be impossibilities for so he sayes expresly they are And next it is no less clear that he holds the Antecedent absolutely impossible upon this ground only that he also holds the doctrine of the Remonstrance to be delivered plainly by Scripture and by Tradition and withal holds it an absolute moral impossibility that a general Council truly such should define any thing against plain Scripture or Tradition For otherwise how could he call that imaginary supposition or case an impossibility or as he speaks there one impossibility There is no man of reason would say deliberatly it were impossible that a General Council should define against any controverted doctrine unless he held as well and as firmly that a General Council might not erre as he holds well and firmly either part of that controverted doctrine it self Which is so plain that it needs no further illustration being there is no other ground imaginable for maintaining or asserting an impossibility of a General Councils defining so No other ground therefore is given here by the Procurator for being taxed with undervaluing the authority of General Councils but only this conditional proposition which he confesses implied virtually in his discourse If a General Council shall define the contrary doctrine to be true such General Council will erre But that this conditional proposition which yet was forced from him by that chimaerical Interrogation doth not amount unto an assertion of any real true moral possibility of a General Councils erring himself hath further demonstrated by several unanswerable arguments in the prosecution of his said discourse or answer pag. 62. as by that of St. Paul to the Galathians chap. 1. ver 8. Though we or an Angel from heaven preach any other Gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you let him be accursed And by that of our Saviour Christ himself to the mis-believing Jews Ioh. 8.55 If I shall say that I do not know him meaning his Father I shall be like unto you a lyar 'T
deposed from the sacaerdotal office but also thrust into a strict monastery to do perpetual pennance But nothing is concluded hence or may be against our case but on the contrary much for it as I mean to a lawful discovery of the sin or treason if such it be without discovering the sin or him that in his confession tells that intended treason For it licences the Confessors to consult in some cases with others telling them of the sins without revealing the sinner But for the rest it reflects not at all on the case of the Confessors discovery of an evil intended or plotted by others that never confess'd unto him such evil or such plot albeit the confessor knew it by or in the Sacramental confession of one of the very plotters or of some other that had no further hand in it then that of baâ—e knowledg Much less doth this Canon any way touch the case of a only seeming confitent or of such as is wickedly obstinately still impenitent however discovering such conspiracy in the confessional Seat And as little doth it say that either this kind of confession is any way Sacramental or the Seal or Obligation to keep it secret more then what is meerly natural or would be in case the party told it without any seeming formalities of a seeming Sacramental though truly known to the Confessor to be a very unsacramental confession Besides who knows not the general doctrine of Catholick Divines in relation to the Canons of the Church as such Canons only That they never bind nor intend to bind nor indeed can bind any not even I mean where they are received as this Canon is generally and ought to be not even where they seem in express words to come home to the case all the particular circumstances of it as this Canon doth not in any respect that I say such Canons neither do nor can bind any against the Law of God positive or natural Nay which is more that as barely such or as Canons of the Church only they bind not the faithful to observance where and when the observer must thereby suffer of loss of life or limb or estate or liberty or any other notable great and heavy inconvenience or evil which may be declined by the non observance of them For it is a known maxime of Divines in such cases that the Church is a pious indulgent mother But would she be so or not rather appear a cruel step-mother if she were supposed to make a Canon for concealing the intended ruine of King and Countrey and of an infinite number of Innocents nay and of her self too as may be well supposed in the case and concealing this also when the discovery so made by a confessor might prevent the whole mischief It s cruelty and inhumanity and want of piety and charity and religion and learning and reason too that would make any think she would be so impious And secondly what they can alleadg is That by the divine law natural as t is called by them for positive law divine they have none nor pretend any from Scripture or Tradition all Confessors must so behave themselves towards their penitents or confitents too let them say if they please as not to render the Sacrament of pennance odious And that a lawfulness once allowed in any case for the Confessor to reveal a thing or matter whatever it be told him in the confessional Seat and to reveal it I mean without his consent would render this holy Rite very odious and give occasion to many sinners not to declare their sins entirely but wholly to estrange themselves from confession for ever But if this argument concluded any thing to the purpose it would also conclude that Confessors must not discharg the duty they are confessedly and without contradiction of any side bound unto by all the laws of Reason and by all the Canons of the Fathers They would not enjoyn so many restitutions of lands and goods and same so extreamly grievous very often to penitents Nor would enjoyn so many other heavy pennances either medicinal or satisfactory no less painful then shameful too in many cases And who can deny but such injunctions render confession odious to nature Nay who can deny but the very duty it self of bare confession as it is prescribed by the Canons and Councils of the Church and by all Divines of the Roman Communion taught as necessary and as it is required to be exactly of all particular mortal sins of word deed or even inward consent alone and both of their number as farre as one can remember or conjecture after sufficient examination and of all kind of circumstances too that change the species as they speak must be very odious to nature especially when the sins are unnatural or shameful But if it be answered that such is the duty of the Confessor enjoyn'd him by the positive laws of the Church and by those natural laws also of Reason being he is Judge in that holy tribunal in the place of God and that such too is the doctrine of the Church and Catholick Faith where no liberty is left to Divines for teaching otherwise even so I answer to this allegation or objection of the Sacrament of confession to be rendred odious if the Confessor may be free in any case to make use of notices had therein without the Confitents permission It may indeed render it odious in such a case But to whom To a wicked impenitent or to a most unreasonable man To none truly rational and penitent to no such person making a true Sacramental confession or to none that is resolved at any time to confess holily will the confessors discharging his own duty render such a holy confession odious A duty whereunto and whereby in such case he is bound even by all the very laws of God as well positive as natural as may be easily demonstrated if at any time reqvired to hinder and prevent timely even by such a revelation such deplorable general and otherwise irremediable evils as would in all kind of moral certainty follow his not revealing the design communicated so in confession and let us always suppose the confitents denyal of consent to such revelation Though as I have noted before such denyal can hardly if at all be supposed in a true penitential confitent or in a true Sacramental confession unless we suppose withal the penitent to be some strange meer natural blockhead that is not capable of understanding his own obligation in such a case or the ghostly Fathers instructions in it Which yet is very like an impossible supposition 6. That our Masters of Lovain will find it a very hard if not absolutely impossible task To perswade a knowing pious man that either any dictate of natural reason or any ordinance of human Canons much less any article of Christian Faith or Catholick Religion hetherto delivered us either formally or virtually by Scripture or by tradition tye Confessors I
this great Prince And so we are at least throughly quitt even for matter of example And so I have also done with my sixth and last of all those considerations or of all those points on which I have said before in the beginning of my animadversions of or answers to the third ground of the Censure it had much better become our masters of Lovaine Doctors of Divinity and of so grave and so judicious a Faculty as that of Lovaine should be to reflect seriously before they had precipitated so temerariously and injuriously and even erroneously to boot to censure that Remonstrance of 61. on this ground of its pretended promise or tye on Confessors to break the Sacred Seal of Confession The nullity and falsity of which pretence or ground although I knew that my very first consideration of all the six had sufficiently evinced yet I would ex superabundanti and to clear this matter in all particulars and to instruct others more fully give all the rest albeit unnecessary amongst men of reason to vindicate in this behalf or any other that Remonstrance LX. I onely to end all whatever I intended to say on this occasion further add it is a confirmation of what I have said before in my first consideration that if our sticklers at home for the Lovaine Censure in this behalf or if the opposers of the said Remonstrance of 61. on account of obliging Confessors to break the Sacred Seal of Confession will continue still their malicious clamours against it on this account finding all other accounts to stand them in no stead though I be sure they find this very same to stand them in as little as any of all they must confess themselves consequently obliged to clamour no less nay more against the Remonstrance of 66. whereof hereafter I will treat at large even that of the Dublin Congregation of that year even that of the general Representatives of the whole Clergie of Ireland even that of their Archbishops Bishops Provincials Vicars general Divines altogether For if the former of 61. be quarreld at for expressing onely the readiness of the subscribers of it to reveal c. and for expressing such readiness without any express engagement or any at all in other express tearms then these two words being ready words of their own proper strict signification not engageing at all the subscribers to reveal or that they will discover actually but at most a present preparation or disposition of mind to discover c certainly this passage of the Remonstrance of 66. wherein there is an express engagement or one in express words that they will or shall discover c. must be in reason as much at least if not more quarreld at on that account Wherefore pursuant c. we do engage our selves to discover unto your Majesty or some of your Ministers any attempt of that kind rebellion or conspiracy against your Majesties person Crown or Royal authority that comes to our knowledge For here is the same general notion of knowledge without any express distinction of it without any express reservation or exception of that knowledge which is had in confession as indeed there should not be any either express or tacit thereof more then is in the former Remonstrance of 61. LXI To the fourth and last ground of that Censure of Lovaine against this Remonstrance of 61 their pretence of its renouncing Ecclesiastical Immunity or of subjecting Clergiemen against Ecclesiastical Immunity to the cognizance and punishment of the civil Magistrate The Procurator and other subscribers answer'd 1. That there is not a syllable in that Remonstrance which may seem to any man of reason to say either formally or virtually expresly or tacitly That Churchmen have not or ought not to have either by the laws of man civil or Ecclesiastical or by the laws of God positive or natural any such immunity or exemption either for their goods or persons from the cognizance or punishment of the subordinate inferiour civil Courts Magistrates or Judges I mean any such immunity or exemption as the Catholick Faith or Catholick Church teacheth as out of Scripture or out of Tradition or even as by virtue of any canon or custome obliging as much as the very Churchmen to assert or maintain it or not to renounce or disacknowledge it not even in some cases or some Countreys where the civil or municipal laws are contrary to such canon or such custome as for example England and Ireland where this last century of years the laws and customs are known to be so much altered from that they perhaps have formerly been in this matter That the acknowledgment of the King to be our King and our supream Lord too or the acknowledgment of his absolute independent supremacy in all temporals within his own Dominions concluds neither formally nor virtually a disacknowledgment or even the least renunciation of any kind of real true pro-per Ecclesiastical Immunity acknowledg'd by other parts or people or Churches or Churchmen in the world even in the most Catholick Countries No more certainly then doth the like acknowledgment known to be made by word and by writing by all Catholick French Spanish Venetian German c Clergiemen to their own respective Kings Emperours States conclude that they disacknowledg or renounce thereby or by any other means that which they call or acknowledg to be Ecclesiastical Immunity or Exemption amongst themselves That as little doth the acknowledging our selves bound under pain of sin to obey His Majesty in all civil and temporal affairs as much as any other of His Majesties Subjects and as the laws and rules of Government in this Kingdom require at our hands that I say as little doth this acknowledging such obligation draw along with it by either formal or virtual consequence our disacknowledging or renouncing our right or pretence to any true real or proper Ecclesiastical Immunity or Exemption If we have indeed or can have or ought to have any such right or pretence of right in the case For such obligation and such acknowledgment of it can and does very well consist evermore with a challenge or claim to all kinds of true and proper Ecclesiastical Immunity or exemption whether that challenge or claim be well or ill grounded in the case being it is very well known that other His Majesties Subjects are not bound under pain of sin to obey His Majesty by an active obedience always not even in all civil and temporal affairs but either by an active or passive only And being it is no less known that the laws and rules of Government in this Kingdom require no more at their hands even in all civil and temporal affairs then to be so obedient as either to do that freely which they prescribe or patiently and without resistance to abide the penalties of the same laws and of His majesties pleasure And being moreover it is evident of it self that a Priest can without making any resistance patiently christianly
earthly Princes and in all criminal causes whatsoever LXIV And let the Reader be also himself Judge betwixt me and this most eminent Cardinal or his defenders the Divines of Lovaine of the strength or weakness of his second proof which is the only remaining of his arguments for a Position so temerarious I say so temerarious in as much as it exempts by any law whatsoever and specially by the positive law of God all Clerks from the supream civil coactive power of supream temporal Magistrates Princes or States and that too in meer temporal matters What I would therefore say further is 4. That the case is still clear enough on my side as to any such positive law of God in holy Scripture notwithstanding all or any of his allegations of Councils or Canons for himself in his said second proof and whereof only that proof consists I admit that the Council of Trent Ses 25 cap. 20. de Reformat speaks thus Eccelesia et personarum Ecclesiasticarum Immunitas Dei ordinatione et Canonicis sanctionibus instituta est That the Council of Colen held a little before the Tridentine Synod speaks also thus par 9. c. 20. Immunitas Ecclesiastica vetustissima res est jure pariter divino et humano introducta quae in duobus potissimum sita est Primum ut Clerici eorumque possessiones à vectigalibus et tributis aliis que muneribus laicis libera sint Deinde ne rei criminis ad Ecclesiam confugientes inde extrahantur That the Council of Lateran held under Leo the X. and but a little too before that of Trent speaks further thus in the 9. Ses Cum a jure tam divino quam humani Laicis potestas nulla in Ecclesiasticas personas attributa sit innovamus omnes et singulas constitutiones c. That another of Lateran also under Innocent the III. hath this language cap. 43. Nimis de jure divino quidam Laici usurpare conantur viros Ecclesisiasticos nihil temporale obtinentes ab eis ad praestanda sibi fidelitatis juramenta compellunt That Boniface the VIII in cap. Quanquam de censibus in 6. speaks of Ecclesiastical Immunity as if it had been certainly granted to be of divine right That John the VIII also hath these words or expression can si Imperator dist 96. Non a legibus publicis non a potestatibus siculi sed a Pontificibus et sacerdotibus omnipotens Deus Christianae Religionis Clericos et sacerdotes voluit ordinari et discuti That Symmachus with his whole third Roman Synod long before John the VIII affirmed That solis sacerdotibus disponendi de rebus Ecclesiae indiscusse a Deo cura commissa est That finally Innocent the IV. though as Bellarmine himself confesses here not as Pope but as a particular Doctor in his Commentaries upon cap. 2. de majoritate et obedientia after he had taught that Clerks were by the Pope with the Emperours consent exempted from the Lay-power adds moreover that forasmuch as this kind of exemption seems not to be a plenary or full exemption therefore it must be said that Clerks have been exempted so by God himself I admit I say these Councils either Provincial or General as they are or as they are called such respectively and these Popes likewise have in the places quoted these expressions or this manner of speech where they have somewhat to enact or treat of concerning the exemption of Clerks and that consequently in these places they dog in general terms speak of that exemption in general so as to attribute it in part to Gods ordination as the Fathers of Trent or to the Divine right or law as those of Colen of both Laterans Boniface the VIII or to the will of God as Iohn the VIII and for what concerns to particular the disposing of the Goods of the Church Symmachus too in that his Roman Synod As for Innocent the IV. it matters not at all what he sayes on this subject in the place quoted being its confessed by Bellarmine himself that he writ these Commentaries before he was Pope and therefore in so much is but as another private Canonist of whom we are not bound to take notice where he brings no proof For we confess there is a number of such Canonists and some Divines too that without any ground in holy Scripture or Tradition hold with him in this point but whom therefore all other sound and great Divines who examine the matter throughly and strictly charge with errour both against express Scripture and Tradition But for these Councils either General or Provincial and for these Popes also who being Popes did speak so so all and every of whom we must observe that reverence due respectively to them the answers are 1. That none at all of these places or authorities alledged out of them are home enough to our present case or dispute of the exemption of Clergy-men by the positive law of God in holy Scripture from the supream civil co-active power of Kings or States Nor as much as one word hereof And therefore did we grant as we do not nor can by any means that these Councils or Popes intended by such expressions or by these or such other words Dei ordinatione jure divino omnipotens Deus voluit a Deo cura commissa est to signifie that such exemption of Clerks even in the whole height and latitude or sense of it in Bellarmines way had been ordained immediatly and expresly by God himself or by some express immediat positive law of his delivered unto us by Revelation and by the tenets of Catholick Faith to be by us believed yet should it not follow that therefore these Councils or Popes did signifie this positive law of God for it was or is in holy Scripture Because there may be positive laws of God come to us by Tradition though not a word of them in Scripture And because it is evident these authorities alledged have no distinction at all nor any intimation of Scripture 2. That being it is plain enough out of what is said before to Bellarmines arguments out of Scripture that these Councils or Popes could not pretend to any such positive law of God in holy Scripture and no less plain out of Bellarmine himself and others of his way that they could as little pretend to any such as delivered us by Tradition for himself doth not in all this matter as much as once pretend the least Tradition unless peradventure some body will misconster him or his second proof here and say he mean'd it as a proof of Tradition in the point which cannot be laid to his charge at all for he could not be so grosly overseen as to give us only such sayings of these late Councils of Trent Cullen Lateran or of these three Popes for a Catholick Tradition and we know very well and confess he makes other kind of arguments for any particular tenets being of Tradition arguments composed of
Sorbone understood this as well as they and yet those Sorbonists who questionless understand too as well as they what is material or pertinent and what not have not thought it immaterial or impertinent to give this 4th Proposition subscribed by themselves to their own King in order to a greater assurance of their standing by him in all cases against the attempts of Popes acting singly without or separatly from a general Council That so and not a whit less is the Subject of the three former Propositions disputed in all Catholick Vniversities and yet they themselves of the Congregation thought it not impertinent or immaterial to sign those That whether they or the Sorbonists had thought so or not of this 4th Proposition the reason is obvious and evident for it to be very pertinent and material Because out of the Pope's being owned to be above a general Council it must follow in their opinion that hold him so that his decrees or definitions in matters of faith or which he declares to be such made without nay even against any Council how general soever otherwise must be submitted unto as infallible or as infallibly true and as articles of Divine saving faith to be necessarily believed by all the faithful after sufficient knowledge of such definition And consequently must follow according to that opinion that if the Pope alone without any general Council nay without consulting with any other person alive at least without consultation with or consent from any but his own particular Divines or Clergie of the City of Rome or particular Church in that City or Bishoprick shall define at any time that the three former Propositions or any thing or clause in them is Heretical Schismatical sinful Scandalous or against faith good life or Salvation both Sorbonists and our Congregation must retract their subscription and sign there recantation For both sides hold there is an infallibility not onely in the Catholick Church in general or not onely in the diffusive body of true believers but also in their supream visible and accessible Representative or Tribunal on earth of the said Catholick Church or true believers to which all sides must submit in declarations of divine Faith Now if the Pope be above a general Council who sees not that it must follow evidently that his person his representation his tribunal is the supream visible and accessible of the Church and therefore in the judgement of such as acknowledge him so must be even without a Council absolutely infallible in his definitions of faith Which being once admitted nay being not rejected upon the contradictory question what securitie or assurance can the King have of the fidelity of such persons who plainly and expresly refused to reject it The Pope without a Council may in tearms define the contrary And there are not wanting Divines even of the Congregation who understand the Canons so that they hold and speake and teach and preach too where they dare without fear of the Magistrat or laws that several Popes have long since by their decretal Epistles inserted in the body of the Canons defined as of the Catholick faith the very points against which those three former propositions were subscribed by the Sorbonists or against those three propositions in their sense though not against the sense of the Congregation or not against the same three propositions in the sense of the said congregation which is by so many abstractions distinctions and exceptions quite an other thing and farr different from the sense of Sorbone Which three answers being duely considered whither this last passage of their Divines preaching teaching or speaking so as I have now said fall under consideration or not for that matters not to weaken my answers here given to that first argument I now demand of any that will so duely consider these answers whither it can be said with any colour of reason or truth that the congregation thought a subscription to the 4th proposition to be not material to the affair or laying aside that querie of their thought whether in it self the proposition was immaterial as to the affair in hanâ— to be subscribed certainly none can say that understand the business aright but that as it was very material for the King and State and for their purpose to demand it of and expected it from them in or as to the point of assurance of their Loyaltie hereafter against such Papal attempts so it was very material to the purpose of the Congregation which as appears was in effect to give no assurance at all not to answer therein the Kings or States either demand or expectation Which and no other was the true and onely reason why they would not subscribe this 5th proposition as it was likewise their onely true inward reason for not subscribing either of the other two the 4th already considered and the sixth and last whereunto I am now making all the hast I can after I have given my answers also to their second argument on the present Subject I onely before I come so farr add for a further conviction of the unreasonableness of this very first specifical reason which they pretend both for not signing this same 5th proposition and for shewing the immaterialness or impertinency of subscribing it that if that first reason of theirs were allowed consequently it must follow that the demand of any kind of subscription to any proposition whatsoever controverted or disputed in all Catholick Vniversities must be unreasonable And therefore besides hundreds more that of subscribing for example this proposition It is not Our doctrine that the blessed Virgin is conceived in original sin Or that of this of an other kind A tyrant by title or administration or both or either may without any sin he killed by every private man though he have no publick authority power command or licence given him for killing That the Congregation in signing and for signing the three first propositions thought or at least pretended publickly they were induced thereunto by the example of Sorbone as by a sufficient if not indeed only motive and argument of the Catholickness and lawfulness of those propositions in themselves and by consequence of a subscription to them and that they had the same example for this 4th notwithstanding it be controverted or disputed in all Catholick Vniversities That notwithstanding this 4th proposition be so controverted or disputed yet not otherwise in many or most even Catholick Vniversities than as other doctrines or positions which nevertheless they hold to be at least and for one side of the contradiction theologically false if not manifest errors and heresies in faith And therefore in most Catholick Vniversities it is disputed not that they hold this proposition true or as much as doubtful The Pope is above a general Council but that they would shew it by Scripture tradition and reason and by solution of all that can be alledged for it to be manifestly false and erroneous in the
of God be wanting in any reverence duty or obedience which by Vow or Rule or Canon or Reason I do or may according to the Faith or Doctrine of the Universal Church owe either to the most Holy Father the Bishop of Old Rome or to any other Bishops or to any other Prelates or Superiours in their respective places whether Secular or Regular because doing otherwise I could not but condemn my self of using evil means to attain or drive at lawful ends and consequently of being as bad an Interpreter of that saying of our Lord in St. Matthew (a) Matth. 6.22 Si oculus tuus fuerit simplex totum corpus tuum lucidum erit as any of the late extrinsick Probablists are Whereunto also is consequent That I never at any time hitherto intended nor shall I hope through the same grace of God for the future willingly or wittingly intend either in my Writings Actions or Designs any thing against the Divine Authority of the Catholick Church or even against the venerable either Majesty or Primacy or even Power Authority and Jurisdiction of the First of Bishops or First of Apostolical Sees the Roman I mean not altogether so far as a number of Popes speaking in their own cause or a company of Schoolmen prepossessed by them or frighted or hired or misled through corruption and ignorance of the later times have asserted the former in their Canons and the other in their speculative Writings but as far as the Catholick Church in all Ages hath believed or taught how great soever or whatsoever that Patriarchical or Jurisdictional power be which she believes or acknowledges to be in the Roman Archbishop either from divine Title or humane onely nay which but the National Churches hard by us though composing her but in part the Spanish and the Sicilian the French and German the Venetian and the Polish notwithstanding they be of strict communion with the Pope do universally or unanimously believe For I think it too hard a task for any private man much more for me to know better what hath been delivered in all former Ages or is believed in this present as an Article or Doctrine of undoubted Faith divine by the Universal Church of Christ on earth than may be learned from the unanimous consent of those very National Churches of Europe alone agreeing together upon any Article as undoubtedly such Other humane Laws indeed or Canons or Customs they may agree in that oblige not other Catholicks of their communion in other Kingdoms or Nations but where and as much as they are received and not abolished again or antiquated either by a Municipal Law or National Canon or even by general Custom prescribing against the former The Sixth and last Appendix relating likewise generally to the former Questions That as notwithstanding my Appeal to your judgment of discretion I never intended to exempt or withdraw my self i. e. my person from the Authoritative or binding sentence of Canonical Delegates if my Adversaries continue their prosecution and His Holiness may be induced to grant me such Delegates as He is certainly bound to do or at least to acquit me and rescind all the illegal proceedings hitherto of his subordinate Ministers and Officials against me so neither do I decline their judgment of my Writings Nay on the contrary my resolution hath alwayes been and I hope shall evermore be which I do now the second or third time declare in Print under my own hand or name to submit with full and perfect resignation every word in my several Books even to the Authoritative judgment not only of the Catholick Church the House (b) 2 Tim. 3. of the living God and the pillar and foundation of truth or which is the same thing of its lawful Representative an Oecumenical Synod truly such that highest Tribunal on earth in matters of Divine Faith and Holy Discipline nor only of a free Occidental Council of the Latin Church alone but even of any other Judges whatsoever many or few or even so few as two or three that shall in the interim of such a Council be delegated by His Holiness or any other that hath a lawful Church-power to require obedience from me in such cases provided those other Judges Delegate be competent i. e. indifferent or above all those exceptions which the Canons of the Catholick Church allow To the Authoritative sentence even of any such Delegates I will and do submit both my Person and my Writings in this sense that if I cannot conform my own inward opinions reason or belief to theirs yet I will abide whatever punishment they shall therefore inflict upon me and patiently undergo it until absolv'd from it or dispens'd with by a higher or at least equal power But to that of such an Oecumenical Synod or even such an Occidental onely as before I shall moreover God willing as I do at this very present for all future times most heartily conform all the most inward dictates of my Soul for what concerns any matter of pure Christian Faith and shall throughly acquiesce in their determination whatever may be in the mean time disputed by others or even my self of the absolute Fallibility as to us of the very most General Representatives or most Oecumenical Councils themselve before their Decrees be at least virtually or tacitely received by the Represented or Diffusive Church without publick opposition to them from any considerable part of the said Church Besides for what concerns not the binding power of publick Tribunals but the discerning of every private Conscience I shall and do most readily submit even every word also in my Writings not only to your â—ensure but to that of all such learned men of whatsoever Nation or Religion as diligently and sincerely seek aâ—ter Truth And God forbid I should be otherwise disposed or that I who believe and maintain the Pope himself not to be Infallible not even in His definitions of Faith if made by Him without the concurrence either of the Catholick Church diffusive or of its lawful Representative a General Council truly such wherein He is but the First or Chief Bishop onely should think my self not Fallible or not subject to Errour Yet I hope and am sufficiently assured that in any material point either of Doctrine or Practice relating to the publick Controversie in hand I have not hitherto fallen into Errour After all this submission it must not seem strange if I except as I do plainly in this Cause both against the Authoritative and Discretive Judgment of all the Roman Ministers Cardinals Consistories Congregations Courtiers and all their Clients whatsoever And yet it is not their Fallibility but their Partiality their extreme blindness or wilfulness or both in their own Cause and for maintaining their own worldly Interest and consequently it is their actual Errour yea and actual prejudgment too of the Cause without so much as giving any reason nay without so much as hearing once the Parties concern'd
Caesar we are tyed to clear if from imputation and professing it also a Rule that we will follow in our affections it seems altogether inexcusable if we startle at any engagement within the verge of Regality wherein our Allegiance is payable And therefore in the Circumstances you seemed to stand in to free the Holy Catholique Faith on one side from obloquies and redeem your selves from calumnies and on the other to relieve the Layety under your charge from heavy pressures and further to open a dore to your liberty of Religion we must needs judge you have performed the Office of good Pastours both in framing and subscribing your Allegiance to the Prince to hold forth to the whole whole world your Religion pure and spotless your Allegiance built on a basis immoveable and your selves well resolved Subjects For our parts we would be glad to runn into those occasions even with the hazard of our lives or the loss of our last drop of blood to worke out our freedom from the severity of our penal laws much more would we think it happy to gain it with the renounce of an Opinion which justly brings a jealousie upon us from our Prince and fellow Subjects and in the judgement of the chief Assertours of it of no greater note then to bring along with it the pains of Damnation to those of their party that speak preach or print it as appears by a written paper have published by themselves Wherefore that you may see how we stand affected were this Declaration of yours tendred us by Authority in lieù of what otherwise we lye under we should willingly embrace it considering it as well singles out the loyal Subject from those of the bad Principle as reduces the erroneous into the number of penitents My Lord The Apostolical advice to give none the least offence in our Ministry but to preserve our selves blameless to all sorts of people and the Church of God is the sole pardon I can plead for this entrench upon your patience well knowing your imployments speak you a follower of the Apostles by being a Servant to all persons in all things not seeking your own but the Countryes profit that they may be saved in which common concerne I shall be ever ready to runn your Lordships ways being subject to the laws of the same holy Church and Dread Soveraign whom God long preserve whose most loyal Subject I will ever remain and My Lord Your Lordships most humble servant in Christ Iesu Humphry Ellice Dean of the Chapter London October 18th 1662. XXII Much about this time also William Burgat Vicar General of Imly and Custos as they call him of the Diocess of Limerick came from the Province of Munster to Dublin of purpose to speak to the Procuratour about his own and the common affairs of all the Clergie both of that and the Province of Connaght For this Gentleman hearing in August before that the Procuratour was arrived from London writt him presently a very civil letter expressing much loyalty to the King and affection to the Lord Lieutenant And his letter was seconded with a good character given of him then to the Procuratour by persons of Interest and knowledg in that Province of Munster the Earl of Clancarty and Iohn Walsh Esq By that letter the said Father Burgat let the Procuratour know himself had been deputed some three or four years past in the Protectors tyranny and by the Clergie of that Province as entire Agent for themselves to Rome about their Ecclesiastical affairs and by those of the Province of Connaght also joyned in commission with an other one Doctor Cegan for themselves That money to bear his charges could not be had until about that time of His Majesties most fortunat Restauration That seeing the great and happy change he demurr'd on the matter until the Earl of Clancarty's first comming to Ireland That having communicated unto his Lordship what he intended he was advised by the said Earl not to stirr till he had seen and been advised by Father Walsh the Procuratour And that therefore he vehemently now desired to meet him about Kilkenny or where else he would appoint But the Procuratour having answer'd with desires of his comming to Dublin and meeting there Father Burgat came at last along to Dublin Where notwithstanding the Procuratour spent much time informing him for 6. dayes consequently of the causes and ends of the Remonstrance and that the said Father Burgat averred constantly that he neither found any thing in it could not be justly owned nor heard any in his own Province hitherto speaking otherwise or one word against it yet whether perverted by such obstinate persons of the Dublin Clergie as he conversed with daily then or whether byass'd by his own former intrigues and principles received at first and retayned still after from his Bishop when alive Terlagh O Brien a Prelate of too much violent zeal for the Nuncius's quarrel and further yet by his pretensions at Rome and his entended journey thither he would not sign at all then or there at Dublin pretending for excuse that being he came from the whole Province of Munster to be informed he would have the greater power to perswade them all generally if he returned back without preingagement and the less if otherwise Desiring nevertheless the Procuratour to write by him to the chief Vicar General or Apostolical as they call him Iohn Burk of Cashil to be communicated to the rest concerning that matter of the Remonstrance and their subscription Which the Procuratour did but never had answer from either For it seems Mr. Burgat who by all means declined nay expresly refused to be presented to my Lord Lieutenant though invited often to it by the Procuratour because my Lord so lately had seen his letter and heard that good character of him given by my Lord Clancarty and Mr. Iohn Walsh and was commission'd as above by two Provinces judg'd it better for his own private ends to have nothing to do in that business at least not to appear for it Which was the reason also he did not acquiesce to so many pregnant reasons given him by the Procuratour against his undertaking such a journey to Rome at least as an Agent or publick person representing both or either of those Provinces Albeit he was so farre convinced by such reasons as to promise the Procuratour he would only go as farre as Paris to leave there some youths at School and thence return immediately with purpose to alleadg new and probable difficulties met with and so excuse himself to the Clergie that had employed and given him money which otherwise he must have restored back and yet not so neither or by only restoring their money without going over Seas excused himself with any colour being they so long depended of him But in this promise also he failed For he went along to Rome and there sollicited ever since and lost both his money and time without
60. Capitula which Mathew Paris tells were proposed by Innocent to the Fathers or whither that Council enacted these or any other Canons whatsoever yet I say it clearly appears out of the very text or express letter of those 72 chapters now attributed to that Council and I mean the Text or express words of the 11. Chap. 33. Chap. 39. Chap. 51. Chap. and 61. Chap. that they are not the Acts of the Council but with additions at least And consequently that they are of no credit at all as Acts of that Council For in the 11. Chap. we find these words or manner of speaking In Lateranensi Concilio piâ fuit institutione provisum And Chap. 33. Evectionum et personarum mediocritatem observent in Lateranensi Concilio definitam And Chap. 39. De multa providentia fuit in Lateranensi Concilio prohibitum c. Quia vero propter Suppressiones et Cupiditates quorundam nullus hactenus fructus aut rarus de praedicto statuto pervenit nos evidentius et expressius occurrere cupientes praesenti Decreto statuimus c. And Chap. 61. In Lateranensi Concilio noscitur fuisse prohibitum c. Nos autem id fortius inhibentes c. Behold Innocent himself or Gregory the IX or whoever els was author of these 72. Canons witnessing plainly that they are not the Canons of that Council but Canons made after that Council because relating to other Canons formerly made by that Council Now where are those other Canons formerly so made by that Council no where certainly extant hitherto or at least at this present if not those 72. Supposititious ones which yet implyes a plaine contradiction How Cardinal Perons arguments to prove them assented to by that Council are sufficiently answered by other Catholick Divines who tell him that Abbot Joachimus's errors and Amalrichus's are not therefore condemned by Catholicks that they believe this Council to have made those Acts now extant as their's which condemn them but therefore certainly because the Fathers there did not oppose or at most made the two first Acts of those 72. or because the Church universal did after allow of the said two first Acts of Innocents condemnation of the said errours and received or approved that condemnation as they found it in the books of Decretals published by Gregory the IX and because they found that condemnation in all parts of it conform to their old auncient belief And the same they say of the articles of Transubstantiation and of the procession of the Holy Ghost And the same also proportionably of that Canon of Discipline in cap. Omnis utriusque Sexus or of that of annual confession How further when that most Illustrious Cardinal urgeth that both Scholastical Doctors and even Popes and Councils too quote some of the said 60. 70. or 72. Canons of Lateran and as of Lateran he is answered by other learned Catholicks that they are quoted so indeed by some but onely still out of supposition or onely because those Canons were so propounded or rehearsed in that Council but not out of any certain knowledg judgment or belief that they were confirmed or assented to by that Council Being such of the quoters as were indeed learned or versed in Ecclesiastical History might have known what the Historians of those days tell us that the said Capitula seemed to some to be easie and pleasing but to others heavie and burdensome and that nothing at all was plainly concluded in that Council How besides to a third argument which may be drawn out of the Council of Constance in the 39th Session where ordaining what profession the future Pope was to make those Fathers of Constance decree that every future Pope hereafter to be chosen must make this confession and profession before his election be published That he doth firmly believe the holy Catholick Faith according to the tradition of the Apostles General Councils and other holy Fathers but especially according to those traditions or Canons of the eight sacred general Councils to witt of the first of Nice of the 2d of Constantinople of the 3 d. of Ephesus of the 4th of Calcedon of the 5th and 6th of Constantinople of the 7th of Nice and of the 8th of Constantinople and also of Lateran Lyons and Vienna also general Councils how I say to this argument it is answered by very learned Catholick Divines that by the Council of Lateran here is not understood this whereof we treat under Pope Innocent the 3d. but the former celebrated under Pope Alexander the 3d. in the year 1180. And if it be understood of this Council of Lateran under Innocent it is onely say they for what concerneth those decrees wherein mention is made of the approbation of the Council as is that 46th Decree which the Council of Constance mentioneth in the Bull of Confirmation of the Emperour Fredericks constitution As also that by the Council of Lions here is not understood that under Pope Innocent the 4th who in the presence thereof excommunicated the Emperour Frederick and whereat onely 140. Bishops were present but that under Pope Gregory the Xth. in the year 1274. whereat St. Bonaventure and St. Thomas of Aquin and more than 700. Bishops were present according to Eberardus whom Binnius citeth How also did we graunt or admitt as I for my part and for what concerns the present dispute do freely graunt and admitt those 72. chap. controverted especially the 3 d. of them Ext. de Haereticis Et at tributtur Concilio Lateranensi 4. Poniturque inter ejusdem Concilii Canones Can. 3. whereof our grand controversie now is Excommunicamus et anathematizamus omnem haeresim c. Damnativero Saecularibus potestatibus praesentibus aut eorum Ballivis relinquantur c. Qui autem inventi fuerint sola suspitione notabiles c. Moneantur autem et inducantur et si necesse fuerit per censuram Ecclesiasticam compellantur c. Si vero Dominus temporalis requisitus et monitus an Ecclesia terram suam purgare neglexerit ab hac haeretica faeditate per Metropolitanum et Comprovinciales Episcopos Excommunicationis vinculo innodetur et si satisfacere contempserit infra annum significetur hoc summo Pontifici ut ex tunc ipse Vasallos ab ejus fidelitate denunciet absolutos et terram exponat Catholicis occupandum qui cam exterminatis haereticis fine ulla contradictione possideant er in fidei puritate conservent salno jure Domini principalis dummodo super hoc ipse nullum praestet obstaculum nec aliquod impedimentum opponat eadem nihilominus lege servata circa cos qui non habent Dominos principales to have been conciliarly assented to by those Fathers of Lateran yet nothing to purpose can be concluded hence or out of any of those Canons admitted as such or out of the Canon alleadged or pleaded for so mightily not I say concluded from that Canon and there is no other Canon but that
as Subject to that Metaphysical contingency nay more most of them then that of our Protestation Why then may it not be as lawful for us to practice herein notwithstanding such conditional and caprichious interrogatories We have this advantage of them that in our judgments and in the judgments of at least the incomparably far greater part even of the Catholick Church there is not only both extrinsecal and intrinsecal probability in that we promise and protest but even an absolute certainty as grounded on most clear Scriptures and traditions and that the contrary positions or tenets are so farr from having any intrinsick probability at all that they are manifest errors against the word of God whereas they on the other side practice daily in matters of greatest concern relying only on the bare saying or quotation of one or two Casuists and these too not seldom extravagant and superficial men for matter of knowledg in the most profound questions of Religion And it is further manifest by reason that were such Metaphysical contingencies or apprehensions of them of power to render any unlawfulness in our signing the said Protestation the very same contingencie must vitiat their opposing us even I say as to the question of expediency or necessity And all the expositions made by the Fathers on hard passages of Scriptures and all the Sentences or controverted conclusions of Catholick writers in the succession of all ages since the days of Peter Lombard have been and are still unlawful even as to the expediency of delivering or teaching them Which to assert would be in effect to bereave our selves of all charity and all modestie and all reason Nay all the Canons Definitions Anathematismes of so many ancient holy Christian Councels either Provincial or National as we find in the Tomes of Councels and which have been held some a thousand others 11. 12. 13. 1400. years agoe and some latter all reverenced and many of them canonized by the very Popes themselves must have been unlawful and not onely temerarious but even sinful scandalous and schismatical yea the profession of the Trinity of persons or Divinity of Jesus Christ or an Oath or Protestation made to that purpose disclaiming in and renouncing all Doctrine and authority to the contrary that is in so much would be not onely unexpedient but even unlawful sinful scandalous schismatical before the first general Councel of Nice against Arrius or that other which was held at Constantinople against Macedonius yea that admonition of Paul Though we or an Angel from heaven preach any other Gospel unto you then that which we have preached unto you let him be accursed would be so too nay and that asseveration of our Saviour Christ himself in the Gospel was rash and false Si dixero quia non scio eum similis ero vobis mendax if this argument or interrogatory of our opposers be to any purpose or if their foolish impertinent discourses or private whispers ever since the 15. of Feb. last amongst our lay Gentry here signifie any thing to prove that we renounced or disclaimed in the Doctrine or Authority of a General Councel because we disclaim and renounce any at all as yet known to us which teaches or maintains any power Papal or Princely Spiritual or Temporal which may absolve us from our natural Allegiance to His Majestie or which may license us to rebell against him or to kill or murther the Anointed of God our Prince though of a different belief from ours Though which is observable our Protestation rigorusly taken as to this particular be onely against all such authority as is forreign and that that of a general Council truly such be known not to be properly forreign to any Christian Country And although the true meaning and purpose of it be onely against the Spiritual or Temporal pretended power of Popes alone But however this be or any thing heretofore said to these wild imaginations I would â—ain know whither it be not an undubitable Maxime in moral Philosophy and Divinity that our action is then lawful when it is against no law that is yet known or doubted to be either of God or man And expedient when in the judgment of wise men or in our own weighing all circumstances it is expected to conduce towards a good or just end we propose to our selves And whether the possibility of a future law or declaration against or inhibition of the like any more can vitiat actions qualified so which precede such laws Certainly as this last querie must be answered in the negative so the two former in the affirmative Now let any man that reads this passage and what I have given before it and for its illustration here in this present Book and Section let I say any such man of what affection soever so he be a man of reason be judge himself whether in this passage I do undervalue the authority of general Councils And I am sure there is no other passage in any other of all my writings where I say any thing to undervalue them And yet I must tell my adversaries that such Catholick Divines as hold the absolute fallibility of General Councils even I mean in point of Faith think they can say enough for themselves to prove that themselves do not therefore or indeed at all undervalue General Councils And enough also to prove that they justly charge their opposers with overvalueing General Councils As also to prove that themselves do still acknowledg a General Council truly such to be the onely Supream Tribunal in the Church And still acknowledg the Supream power of making Canons which concern either Faith or Discipline to be in this Council And still too acknowledg both external and internal acquiescence and obedience due from all persons even from the Pope himself to all their decrees in all Spiritual matters purely such whatsoever wherein an intollerable error against the Faith received is not evidently demonstrated And enough moreover to prove that to attribute more then this to General Councils howsoever truly such were indeed to overvalue them against truth and Tradition And finally enough also to prove it may be as daungerous an errour in religion or Faith to overvalue either Pope or Council as to undervalue them But whether such Catholick Divines as think so or think themselves can say enough for all and each of these particulars do think aright I am not concern'd at present no further then to tell my Adversaries they should rather dispute against them who give some kind of ground then charge me and falsely too being I give them no such ground at all nor any other of being charged with undervalueing General Councils XXXII Fourthly they would find their allegations false where they say that in the opinion of the Diffusive Church corporal punishments may be inflicted by a spiritual power I say that this is false if they mean as they do certainly and must speaking to the purpose by the word
Green and Preston and last of all the most laborious and learned Latin Work In fol. of Father â—edmond Caron entituled Remonstrantia â—â—bernorum which is to be had in Dublin at Mr. Dancer the Booksellers in Castlestreet and which alone may serve for all the rest And then a Gods name such of them as pretend scruple in point of conscience if any of them do yet for I am perswaded certainly it is no more but a bare pretence and I know there are scarce any that alledge even such pretence or any thing at all of conscientiousness in the matter but meer temporal considerations let them determine as conscience not as worldly and mistaken interests shall direct them XXXVI Now to return whence I have so long digressed Soon after â—â—e said papers received and the former answered in writing as you have seen and the latter by word of mouth as you find here upon several occasions the Procurator being somewhat earnest with Father Shelton the then Superiour of the Society for his final resolution because some others of that very Society desired him to be so earnest alledging their own delayes was that only of knowing his resolution pro or con and promising they would themselves even in case of his denyal subscribe nevertheless immediatly Father Shelton having first convoked to Dublin from several parts such as he thought fit to consult with came at last to the Procurators Chamber and without further debate about the merits of the cause told him briefly and positively they would not subscribe that Form nor any other determining the main Question that is any disowning a power in the Pope to depose the King or absolve his Subjects from their allegiance in temporal affairs because said he this was a matter of right controverted 'twixt two great Princes Yet they would frame one of their own and such as became them to subscribe Upon which he departed But the Gentleman that accompanied him one of his own Society Father Iohn Talbot who had often before treated of the same matter and promised his own concurrence with several others of his Order whatever the Superiour did told the Procurator in his ear as they were parting that Father Shelton had not rightly delivered the result of the rest But nevertheless being soon after demanded the performance of his own former and free promise excused himself also until he had seen or known it was expected by my Lord Lieutenant himself that they should subscribe of that their subscription was required or desired by his Grace and not by the Procurator only Wherein desiring further to be satisfied the said Superiour Father Shelton and with him two more of the Society Father Thomas Quin and Father Iohn Talbot being called upon waited on his Grace having first sent to the Procurator their own Form or that which they would subscribe even this you have here The Jesuits first Remonstrance Declaration or Protestation of Allegiance AS we do acknowledge King Charles the Second to be our true and lawful King and rightful Soveraign of Ireland and all His Majesties Dominions So we confess our selves to be in conscience obliged to obey His Majesty in all civil and temporal affairs and notwithstanding diversity of Religion in Him and us We protest we are and during life shall be as loyal to his Majesty as any of his Subjects whatsoever and as either in Spain or France the Catholick Subjects are to their respective Kings and will be ready to detect and discover to His Majesty and to his Ministers whatsoever Treasons or Conspiracies shall come to our knowledge yea and expose if need be our lives in defence of his Majesties Person and Royal Authority and that by no Power on Earth whether Spiritual or Temporal we shall be moved to recede from any point of this our Allegiance and we further from our hearts detest for impious Doctrine and against the Rules of all Christianity to averr That any Subject can murther his Anointed King or Prince though of a different Faith and Religion and much more we abhorr as damnable the practice of that wicked assertion But being told by the Procurator it signified a meer nothing not even as much as a bare absolute or positive acknowledgment of the King to be King much less any thing of the cases controverted as that of the Popes pretended power to depose the King or even of his actual procedure to a deposition excommunication dispensation with or absolution of Subjects from their Allegiance whether he have such power or not they changed that their first Form and prepared this other which themselves delivered my Lord on the 4th of December 62. The Procurator being present and Father Quin speaking first as one formerly known to his Grace and one to that sign'd with seven other Catholick Divines of Dublin the lawfulness and tye upon Catholicks to resist the Irish Forces headed by the Nuncio when the Confederats rejected the peace of 46. and were drawn to besiege Dublin The tenor of their second form was this The Jesuits second Remonstrance Declaration or Protestation of Allegiance WE acknowledge His Majesty King Charles the Second to be our true and lawful King supream Lord and rightful Soveraign of this Realm of Ireland and all other His Majesties Dominions We acknowledge our selves bound in Conscience to obey his Majesty in all civil and temporal affairs and notwithstanding the diversity of Religion in Him and us we engage that during life we shall be as loyal to his Majesty as any of his Subjects whatsoever and as either in Spain or France the Catholick Subjects are or ought to be to their respective Kings and shall be ready to expose if occasion shall require our lives in defence of His Majesties Person and Royal Authority and no power on earth shall move us to recede from any point of this our Allegiance We shall be ready to detect and discover to his Majesty and his Ministers whatsoever Treasons or Conspiracies against his said Majesty shall come to our knowledge We detest from our very hearts that impious doctrine which averreth that any Subject can murther his anointed King or Prince though of different judgment in religion and we abhorr the damnable practice of that wicked assertion Their answer was then from his Grace that he would consider of it next morning That if it came short of the printed one as to the substance or sense they could expect no benefit thereby That it was in vain to use any distinctions or reservations That when he thought fit to act in this matter as the Kings Lieutenant he should not repute any person worthy of his Majesties protection that would not acknowledge the Royal Power independant from any but God alone That notwithstanding Father Quin insisted so much on the loyalty of his own Order in the late controversies and wars of Ireland yet he could not forget how the chief person of them Father Robert Nugent was a great Mathematician at Killkea when
such be amongst the Subscribers can make themselves ready for the voyage before they can fit themselves with necessaries for so long a journey before they can get money to bear their charges and Passes to save them harmless the time will be wherein according to our constitutions the Commissary Visitor must go about the Province at home in Circuit And if so wherefore a journey so chargeable tedious and no less dangerous specially of so great a multitude and of persons too not convicted nor confessed nay of persons never once heard to speak or write for themselves never yet as much as once any way questioned either by messenger or by letter to this very day What I say further is That it would very well become your Paternity and the Minister General to consider seriously with your selves what your selves would do if your own condition or case in the Dominions of Spain Germany Franâ—e Poland Venice or other States and Principalities of Italy were like ours here If banishment proscription treason death it self the worst of evils and the vilest kind too of death were established by law where you live against the maintainers of the great Pontiffs pretended power either direct or indirect for deposing your own King and bereaving him of Crown and life together If you had now your selves groan'd for some ages under the yoke of severest laws against your Religion led the life of slaves in servitude and bondage if your Altars had been destroyed your Churches polluted your Holies contaminated your Goods confiscated and persons out-lawed And that now at last after so great and so long sufferings you saw a beam of light discovering some comfort some fair hopes of seeing in your own dayes under a pious King a cessation of your evils end of your persecutions restitution of your people liberty of religion intended for you and nothing else expected from you by a good lawful and merciful Prince your own natural Prince I mean but only that you would under your hands-writing renounce the late bloody horrid assertion of a Sermarine or Bellarmine Comitolus or a Suarezius a Gretzer Becan Lessius or any other such one or more Neotericks whether Divines or Canonists or both Assertions publickly and frequently condemned heretofore even by the most famous Universities Prelates Clergie and people of the greatest Catholick Nations of Europe and besides that you would only profess against assertions so strangely enormous pernicious and scandalous of such the foresaid few Divines or Canonists to be unalterably undispensably faithful in temporals to your own Monarch notwithstanding any attempts or machinations whatsoever of any person or power on earth even that of the great Pontiff to bereave your King of his temporal rights Scepter Crown or Life I say it would become your Paternitie and Minister General of the Order to consider with your selves coolely what you would think lawful to do in that case of your own what to determine as Christian Divines and what to declare promise and subscribe as faithful Subjects to your King Likewise to consider with your selves what then you would think of Caron Walsh or any others of your own Order that subscribed our above mentioned Form if I mean they in the now supposed case had the same power of or superiority over you which you indeed have over them and they used I say not abused it to estrange to alienate you and all other fellow Subjects from being so faithful to your King in his temporal Government to this end proceeded against troubled molested you with illegal summons and breach of Canons and did so too with the manifest prejudice of Catholick Religion and with the yet more special infamy hatred horrour of the Seraphick Institution amongst those are not of our Church Certainly prudent wise learned men men so zealous for Religion Faith and the service of God would alledge That there is no power given for destruction but for edification that we must rather obey God then any men whatsoever commanding against God Faith and Religion against the publick good or peace of a Catholick Nation so strangely of late and so many years together afflicted then men men too I say proceeding so either out of a certain blind obedience that sees not God or out of zeal that is not according to the knowledge of God or lastly and which is worst of all out of a sinful awe they stand in of other men who rule by power only domineering amongst the Clergie against the Prince of the Clergies precepts of Faith and examples of Life And what I finally say is That however your most reverend Paternities would carry your selves in the supposed case it concerns you in that wherein you are to be very careful and cautious that as the reverend Father Caron well adviseth in this matter or controversie if it be this indeed you intended in your Letter to the said Father your Paternities proceed religiously maturely and charitably or which is the same thing that without a just cause you proceed not to citations censures or any sentences whatsoever For when the sentence is either notoriously null by reason of an intollerable errour or through want of matter that is of a lawful cause or sin and this very sin to have a clear contumacy along with it or when the sentence is otherwise unjust by reason the substantial or essential form of judicial procedure such as the Canons and reason prescribe is not observed and much more when both that and this are manifest what fruit what effect can you hope thereof Certainly it appears out of the Canons and Doctors that a sentence of this nature obliges not Which you may see in cap. Venerabilibus Parag. potest quoque de sent Excom in 6. cap. per tuas Parag. nos igitur eod tit in Tâ—let l. i. c. 10. and Gandidus disquis 22. 24. dub 3. de Censur where he alledges Sâ—tus d. 22. q. 1. a. 2. and Suarez de Censur disp 6. sec 7 n. 52. averring moreover that when a censure is in this manner invalid or null in both Courts that is the internal of conscience and external of the Church its unnecessary to have an absolution as much as for caution as they speak With whom Henriques too l. 13. de Excommunicat cap. 15. Sayrus l. 1. de censur cap. 16. go along And as to the generality of the sentence all other Divines and Canonists Nay it appears out of that most learned and most holy Chancellor of the School of Paris Gerson de Excom consideratione 5tâ— tom 2. that a farr greater and more sinful contempt of the keyes of the Church is to be imputed to the Prelate or Ecclesiastical Judge so as is now said abusing his power then to the party censured if there be any comparison at all in the abuse Nay it further appears out of this most famous Divine that it may and is sometimes both meritorious in it self and honourable to the
praescripto protestamur profitemur nos esse humillimos obedientissimos ejusdem sanctae Sedis filios subditos paratosque pro illius Superiorum nostrorum authoritate animas penere Adeeque nos hujusmodi Schismatica attentata detestari nec eorum authores vel fautores pro genuinis fratribus agnoscere Quia tamen ex authentico testimonio Reverendorum Patrum Provincialis Exprovincialis Angliae verbis scriptis nobis exhibito constat ulteriores processus contra hujusmodi refractarios non solummodo in nullum bâ—num cessuros sed etiam in grave praejudiâ—ium persecutionem et perniciem Catholicorum in Anglia et Hibernia hinc censemus hâ—c tempore supersedendum ulteriori executioni salva semper Superiorum authoritate quorum mandatis et ordinationibus cum omni humilitate et animorum promptitudine nos submittimus Datum Antuerpiae c. Subsignatum erat ab omnibus Quâ—d testâ—r Frater Iacâ—bus de Riddere Commissarius Generalis Germanâ— Belgious Extractum Lovanii 4. Ianuarii 1665. per me Fratrem Bâ—naventuram Docharty Now to be more particularly and fully informed of the truth of this Instrument or copy as soon as I received it I accoasted the then Provincial of the Franciscans in England Father N. L. Croix whom I know to have been a member of that Congregation And he told all was true but withal that himself refused to sign it Behold here another considerable effect of that Lovaine Censure For albeit endeavours have been used to get the University of Salamanca in Spain to conncurr in the like or some other as bad censure against the Remonstrance and great expectations thereof as appears out of the Dominican Provincial Father John Harts letter yet nothing could be done there nor in any other University in the world against it only that of Lovaine excepted To which because some Anti-Remonstrants look so much on this University Censure to bear down the scales the Subscribers oppose Sorbon and Navarre and all the eight Universities of France and all those too in the State of Venice besides the practice and doctrine of the whole Christian world out of the temporal Patrimony of the Pope a small district of Italy to say nothing of so vast a cloud of other yet more convincing testimonies and authorities of Scriptures Fathers Doctrine and Practice of the whole primitive Church and that also of all succeeding ages of the Christian Church until Gregory the VII who lived not until the eleventh age of Christianity nor to say any thing too of so many irrefragable arguments of reason both Natural and Theological which may be seen partly in my More Ample Account and for the rest very learnedly at large in Father Carons Remonstrantiá Hibernorum LII But the last and worst effect of all was a kind of specious pretence for those more unlearned and more ignorant of the Irish Clergy in all places both at home in Ireland and abroad in other Countreys and not for such only but for the more knowing of the Dissenters or Opposers to heighten their animosities and strengthen their opposition and even to except amongst the vulgar thence forward against the Remonstrance not as unexpedient only or unnecessary but as sacrilegious schismatical and heretical being it was in effect declared such by the Lovaine Divines Which is the reason I think it not amiss to give here what I know or what I have heard from those very eye-witnesses of the chief grounds those Lovaine Doctors built upon to issue a Censure of so much temerity falsity and folly Father Brian Barry of St. Francis's Order who was then at Lovaine a learned understanding Gentleman and Father Iohn Brady the chief Agent for and Sollicitour of this Censure were they that gave me this account For I have said before the first and long censure of that University wherein the propositions apart and censure of each and grounds of every censure are distinctly set never came to publick view nor could be seen by any of the Subscribers to this day Therefore what I give here of that matter must be on the credit of those two Gentlemen And 't is like none will doubt at least the Agents relation that procured it especially when they know he is a man that wants neither understanding nor memory as I assure them he is First ground That the Remonstrance bereaves the Pope and See Apostolick of that humane right or that even temporal civil and politick Supremacy or Soveraignty which he hath or pretends partly by donation partly by submission and partly too by prescription to the Kingdoms of England and Ireland 2. That if not formally at least virtually and consequentially it bereaves the Pope of even a meer spiritual binding and loosing power of the Subscribers as for example in case he should make warr on the King of England of set and only meer purpose to recover the Church-lands of Ireland to restore them to the right proprietors and apply them to those holy uses they were at first design'd unto by the donors and in such case should on pain of excommunication command all Irish Catholicks not to fight against his army landed in this Kingdom but on the contrary to joyn heart and hand with it against the King and moreover to hold themselves really truly and conscientiously absolved by him from all Allegiance to his Majesty 3. That it tyes Ghostly Fathers to reveal secrets heard in Sacramental Confession as when the penitents accuse themselves or otherwise declare in the confessional seate either directly or indirectly any treason plot or conspiracy against the King 4. That it subjects Clergy-men against ecclesiastical immunity to the cognizance and punishment of the civil Magistrate And these were all the grounds which the said Agent Father Brady told my self upon his arrival at Dublin from Flanders after procuring the said censure which the Lovaine Divines had given of that Remonstrance as being therefore sacrilegious and against the sincerity of the Catholick Faith Weak ones indeed and partly most false and partly too most unsignificant to prove either the one or the other LIII For in relation to the first ground as the Procuratour then reason'd with the said Agent Neither can that humane right or title of the Pope or See of Rome to England or Ireland be proved so even as to its first Origine much less as to the continuance of it in after ages that any Divine may even according to the common rules or maximes of School Divinity censure him that is in actual possession bona fide his predecessors before him for so many hundred years to be either guilty of sacriledge or of doing any thing against the sincerity of Catholick Faith for defending his said possession and title thereof against all opposers Nor consequently censure the Subscribers of a declaration which asserts that right unto him to be guilty of either The onely Original pretence of the Bishop or See Apostolick to Ireland is that relation which
testimonies of all Ages from the first of Christianity I say that being it is therefore plain and clear enough to any dis-interessed judicious and conscientious Divine that neither these Councils or Popes could upon rational grounds pretend any positive law of God properly or truly such either out of Scripture or out of Tradition at least for such exemption of the persons of Clergymen and in temporal affairs too from the supream civil coercive power it must consequently be confessed that unless we mean to charge an errour on these Councils and Popes we must allow the answer of such Divines as with Dominicus Soto 4. dist 25. q. 2. art 2. hold against Bellarmine in this matter to be not only full of respect but of reason also viz. that by jus divinum ordinatio divina voluntas omnipotentis cura a Deo commissa these Councils and Popes understand that right or law Divine that ordination Divine that will of God that care by God committed which is such only in as much as it is immediatly from or by the Canons or laws of the Church and that by jus humanum they understand the civil laws or institutions of meer Lay-Princes And indeed that of respect in this answer will be allowed without contradiction And that that of reason also cannot be any more denyed I am sure will appear likewise to any that please to consider how it is very usual with Popes and Councils to stile their own meer Ecclesiastical Canons Divine and such Canons I mean which by the confession of all sides never had any positive law of God in Scripture or Tradition for them For amongst innumerable proofs hereof which I could give that of the 27. Canon of the General Council of Chalcedon and that other in the third action of the VII General Synod will be sufficient proofs For in the former it is plain that meer Ecclesiastical Rules though concerning only the district jurisdiction and preheminence of the Constantinopolitane Patriarch and some other Bishops and Metrapolitans are called divine Canons and that in the latter too the title of divine constitutions or divinely inspired constitutions is attributed to the laws or Canons in general of the Church So that jus divinum ordinatio Dei c. must not be opposed in these places quoted by Bellarmine or any other such to all that which is properly strictly immediatly or only from men however taken for Lay-men or Church-men but to that which is from men acting by a meer lay natural civil temporal and politick power and not at all acting or enacting laws as the Church enacts by a pure spiritual supernatural and therefore by way excellency called a divine power and their laws therefore too in that sense or for so much called divine though not divine at all in the strict proper sense of a divine law as by this we ought to understand that which was immediatly made or delivered by God himself and by the mouth of his Prophets or Apostles or by Scripture or Tradition 3. That however this be or however it may be said by Bellarmine or by any other to be well or ill grounded or to be truly according to the sense or mind of these Councils and Popes he alleadges yet even Bellarmine himself and all others of his way will and must grant that although we did suppose and freely admit his sense of these places to have been that indeed of these Councils and Popes yet the argument is no way concluding any other not even I say for as much as it is grounded on the authority or manner of speaking used by these very Councils which are accounted General as Trent and both these Laterans 1. Because the canons or places alleadged are at best and even at most even the very best and most material of them but canons of Reformation or canons of meer Ecclesiastical Discipline which are worded so And no man that as much as pretends learning is now so ignorant as not to know that even entire Catholick Nations and many such too oppose very many such canons even of those very Councils which themselves esteem or allow as truly General and oppose not the bare words or epithets onely as our dispute now is of such words or even of bare epithets but the whole matter and sense and purpose nay and the very end too uncontrovertedly admitted to have been that of such General Councils And the reason is obvious enough vz That in canons of Reformation Discipline or manners as it is generally allowed and certain the Fathers deliver not nor intend nor pretend to deliver or declare the Catholick Faith and that in all other things they are as fallible and as subject to errour as so many other men of equal knowledge though without any of their authority or spiritual superiority 2. Because that in the very Decrees or Canons of Faith General Councils even the most truly such may erre in such words as are not of absolute necessity for declaring that which is the onely purpose of such Canon For so even Bellarmine himself teaches l. 2. de Concilior Authoritate c. 12. expresly and purposely and in these very words Denique in ipsis Decretis de fide non verba sed sensuâ— tantum ad fidem pertinet Non enim est haereticum dicere in canonibus Conciliorum aliquod verbum esse supervacaneum aut non rectè positum nisi forte de ipso verbo sit decretum formatum ut cum in Concilio Niceno decreverunt recipiendam vocem 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 et in Ephesino vocem 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Where you see that he exempts onely from this general rule the case wherein a Council should of purpose frame a Decree or Canon of Faith concerning the very use of such or such a word or epithet as the first of Nice-did for the word bâ—mousion or consubstantial against Arrius and the Council of Ephesus did for the word Deotocon or Godbearing against Nestorius Which cannot be said by Bellarmine or any other in his behalf or that either any Council or Pope have ever yet done so as to or concerning the use of the words jus divinum ordinatio divina c or of the single word or Epithet Divine in our case 3. Because and according also to not onely truth but eveâ— Bellarmine himself again in the same book and chapter in the Acts of General Councils even those Acts which concern Faith neither the disputes which are premised nor the reasons which are added nor those things or words which are inserted for explication or illustration are of Faith or intended by the Fathers to be submitted unto without contradiction as a matter certain and infallible but the bare decrees onely and not all even those very decrees but such of them onely as are defined expresly to be the Faith delivered that is as even Bellarmine himself elswhere and all the Schools now teach with him such as are said in such Council to have
Priest treat of or debate any question or subscribe any Proposition or declaration against his conscience and Religion nor on the other side ought or could any person at least such as are commanded by God and whose commission and function it is from the holy Jesus and holy Spirit to preach and teach purely the Gospel of Christian Religion and oppose by all just means any kind of innovation in the rule of Catholick and saving faith ought or could any such I say through fear of loosing those temporal profits of the whole earth had he them in actual possession omit to treat or debate or declare or subscribe a Proposition sound in it self and necessary withal in circumstances even as relating to such treatie debate declaration or subscription to oppose such innovation That such is this question and such the 6th declaration or proposition being a negative resolve of it against the Popes infallibility without the consent of the Church For were not the said resolve Catholick or sound in Catholick Religion even in the judgment of Father N. N. and of the Congregation they should have cleerly said so and were bound by their calling and on pain of everlasting damnation to have answered so for the discharge of their duty to God and their flocks Neither should any fear or favor have hindered their answering so For what will it availe a man to gaine the whole world and suffer the detriment of his Soul was the question of our Lord. And again in on other place do not fear those that kill the body onely but fear him that hath power to cast both body and Soul into everlasting fire was the same Heavenly Masters advise and command unto his Disciples And that the question it self of the Popes infallibility without a Council as that of the Councils without or against the Pope when he will not conform to them and the resolve of it on one side or other for or against the Pope is so necessary where the question is debated publickly and seriously for a resolve there is no man of judgement can deny Because thereon depends the whole certainty of what we are to believe or what we are to hope for as a necessary mean to Salvation It being manifest that Popes often have declared and commanded us many things to believe and may hereafter yet much more which the Church never did consent unto nay which many Catholick Churches in Europe have already and often too both contradicted and condemned But if the Pope or his determination be the infallible rule of faith then must all such people or Churches be in a damnable condition as opposing that rule and beleiving an error That hence it appears sufficiently and evidently this question or treatie of it is not onely not unprofitable but the most profitable can be seeing it regards directly the greatest profit imaginable that of the Salvation of Souls by the necessary rule or means of saving faith That further the profittableness of the negative resolve against the Popes infallibility if that resolve be Catholick in it self as neither Father N. N. nor Congregation denyes but grants it to be doth hence appear that such resolve alone removes the grand obstacle of reunion and reconciliation of such a world of particular Churches that profess Christ and by consequence of their Salvation by restoring them to the vnity of rhe Catholick Church wherein alone as in the Ark Noah Salvation is to be had For the grand remora is that by reason of that challenge of the Pope or rather of others for him of an absolute infallibility in himself they think they cannot expect his communion without being lyable to impositions on them in matters of faith at his pleasure and such impositions too as very many most learned and pious Catholicks themselves in all countries will not cannot submit unto but must therefore abide such vexation often as no less often makes their Communion with the Roman See and Pontiff cumbersome and loathsome and a yoake of that great absolute and intollerable subjection which neither themselves or Fathers before them could bear with Christian patience That if the reduction of so many millions of straying sheep into the fold and the consequent Salvation of their Souls or the preservation of those are in it already appear not sufficient arguments of profitableness to Father N.N. and the Congregation in the debate and resolve of this question if that which brings along with it per se and of its own nature the greatest Spiritual profit can be the gaine of Soules and eternal Salvation in the other life be not ranked hereby him or them in the number of things profitable but comprehended as onely such and understood by his and their unprofitable question which yet I believe F. N. N. or the Congregation will hardly own and if they will have us understand here that which as to the conveniencies of this world and life is unprofitable let it be so and then too let all prudent men judge whether people of their Condition Country and Religion should not esteem and confess that question and resolve of it in the present circumstances to be indeed not onely not unprofitable in any respect but certainly and without contradiction very profitable as being the most useful they could fix upon before together with or next after a sufficient Oath of Allegiance to remove the great jealousy hath been justly harboured as of the Roman Catholick Clergie of Ireland and their predecessors this entire last centurie of years ever since at least Queen Mary's Reign so and farr yet more of the present Clergie ever since the 23th of October 1641. and most of all since the Waterford Congregation in 46. and James-town Council in 48. and of their too too great dependency of the Court of Rome and too too great credulitie in or belief of and submission to any decree or command or even to an ordinary letter proceeding thence though onely from one of the Ministers and also though to the direct and absolute ruine of the King and of his Kingdoms and people together And let all prudent men judge whether being that Congregation was held by the Fathers and their Remonstrance and three first Propositions of Sorbone were subscribed by them and presented of purpose or at least under pretence to remove those jealousies and thereby obtain for themselves and rest of the Clergie and to the lay people too directed by them some peace and some ease and some indulgence and comfort either by an absolute revocation of the penal Laws against their Religion or by a mitigation or suspension of such Laws and that the Fathers thought or undoubtedly should think any thing in it self otherwise Catholick or honest and just that should be in the then present circumstances useful to that end to be also profitable in this world or life because helping on that end or that relaxation or suspension of the Laws which questionless they esteem profitable even