is morallie no such thing to be feared And therfore Catholicke Kinges notwithstanding this opinion which they approoue do not therfore think theÌ„ selues in lesse securitie But he will saye that our Soueraigne being of a contrarie Religion hath iust cause to feare Let him then write bookes to perswade his Maiestie to be a Catholique and therby put him out of this preteÌ„ded feare Yet suppose he neither will nor can perswade that I deny that there is any such daunger as WIDDRINGTON maketh shewe of For bee it as in deed it is that the Pope can in some case depose a Prince as when he is incompatible or intolerable for his spirituall tyrannie yet that case happeneth seeldome and when it happeneth he often tymes ought not depose him as if hee forsee more hurte then good will ensewe theron he must giue the Prince warning and admonition before he pronounce sentence of Excommunication or deposition to which if the Prince harken the Pope can proceed no farther And if his admonition be contemned he must not with out Counsell actuallie excommunicate or depose him to which perchaunce his Counsellers will not aggree and if both he and they aggree to haue him deposed yet the particular Subiectes can not put the Prince out of Possession onlie the CoÌ„mon wealth or publique Authoritie hath such power which yet the Common wealth can seeldem exequute and is not bound alwaies to execute but may still obey the Prince ExcoÌ„municated deposed in lawfull thinges if by disobeying him any notable daunger is like to be incurred as I haue shewed aboue in the thirtenth Chapter And seing that these Circumstances do seeldome all meet deposition of a King is rara auis in terris and the exequution of the sentence of deposition is yet rarer and consequent lie not so much to bee feared as VViddrington would haue it And therfore VViddrington if he inteÌ„d reallie to secure the Prince should not defend the Oathe as hetherto he hath done but rather perswaded the Prince to take it quite a waye ther being perchaunce some daunger to him in vrging an odious oath apte to breed alienation in the subiectes myndes and no morall daunger at all as I haue shewed in not vrging it at all the sentence of deposition of a Prince being a rare thing and the exequution of it farre rarer Heere I might conclude but that I haue a word or twoe to say to Widdrington vpon occasion of his Newyeares-guifte and as much to the Catholique subiectes concerning their obedience to the King and lastlie to his Maiestie concerning his confidence which he may securelie put in them 73. WIDDRINGTON as it is thought A freindlie Admonition to WiddringtoÌ„ masqued with the lettres E. I. in the beginning of the last yeare presented the Catholiques of England with a new Explication of the Oath or rather with an old made new and offered it vnto them as a New-yeares-guift of no smal price and valew as by which as he sayth they may be more fullie instructed then they haue been by I. E. the Authour of the Prelate and Prince whose explication of the Oathe he auoucheth to the Kings most Excellent Maiestie to bee Pestiferous But as for his Newyeares-guift Ep. ad Regem it being ceÌ„sured in other his bookes by his Chiefe Pastour the Catholique hath iust cause to saye Quicquid id est timeo Danaos donae ferentes What euer it is L. 2. Aeneid I feare the Greeks and bringers of such guiftes And as for my Explication I can assure the sayd English Catholiques that it is and was allowed by the same Superiours who haue censured and condeÌ„ned Widdringtons and it is grounded in the practise of sacred Councells and holie and learned Popes our Chiefe visible Pastours and it is countenaunced by all the grauest and lernedst diuines doctours writers as I haue shewed in the eleuenth twelfe and thirtenth Chapters and as VVIDDRINGTON him selfe knoweth who confesseth that the opinion which holdeth that the Pope can in some case depose a Prince is more Common and consequentlie more probable wheras WIDDRINGTONS Authours either stand against him or are not of Credit in a matter of Diuinitie or are of cracked credit being censured and condemned in the Index of forbidden Authours And therfore wheras he vaunteth a litle to much for one of his CoÌ„ditioÌ„ and Quilâ—â—ie that I shall shortlie heare with shame enough bona verba quaeso what goodlie instruction I haue giue I desire him to take heed least he shame him self as he hath to much alreadie and more then I or other his friends desire as for mee I will not be ashamed of my Explication of the Oath it being conformable to the aforesayd Authoritie let scaÌ„dalous or censured opinions and Authours blushe and shame to appeare in publique nihil veritas erubescit sayth Tertullian nisi solummodo abscondi Tertull. lib cont Valent inianos in initio truth blusheth at nothing but to be hidden As for VViddringtons tauntes bitter irreuerent and immodest speeches which he bestoweth to liberallie euen on the grauest and learnedst writers and Prelates of this age let not VViddrington thinke that they esteeme them or regard them Such speeches may disgrace him selfe but not theÌ„ rather they will therby gather as Catholickes commonlie doe that such lauish languages sauour litle of the spirit of an humble modest and Catholique man as Widdrington hath been esteemed and still desireth to be reputed Wherfore not intending to contend with him in that kind nor to render euill for euill but as true Catholiques ought to do good for euill out of the ancient good will I haue of long tyme born and still do beare to his parson though I like not his proceedinges I desire him to harken to this my ensewing good Counsell though in so doing perchaunce and contrarie also to my desire I may force vppon him an vnwelcome courtesie and an vngratefull fauour 74. I wish him first to consider with what securitie of conscience he can still persist in the defeÌ„ce of the Oath The first good Counsell to Widdringtâ— not onlie against all the Authoritie by me and others alleaged but also against the expresse commaundement of his chiefe and Supreame visible Pastour Widdâ— Disp Th. sec 2. ca. 10. n. 56. he alleageth Vasquez oftentymes to prooue that a man may follow in practise any probable opinion and he seemeth to be wel conuersant in him why then doth he not marke and make his commoditie of that Doctrine of Vasquez concerning the Superiour when he commaundeth according to a probable opinion Vasquez Vasâ— 1 â— disp 62. n. 32. following therin the common opinion affirmeth that a subiect is bound to obey his lawfull Superiour when he commaundeth according to a probable opinion though he commaund a thing which is against the Subiectes opinion and that also probable Out of this I frame this Argument A subiect is bound to obey his lawfull Superiour when he commaundeth according to a probable opinion though
he commaund a thing against the subiectes opinion and that also probable but the Pope VViddrington lawfull Superiour commaunding VViddrington not to defend the Oath of pretended allegeaunce commaundeth at least according to a probable opinion ergo VViddrington is bound to obey the Pope in this against his own opinion though that were also probable The Maior Vasquez proueth because the Subiect may follow any mans probable opinion and consequentlie his Superiours that also being probable and if he may he must because his Superiour commaundeth The Minor VViddrington graunteth and can not deny the Conclusion then followeth to wit that VViddrington is bound in conscience and vnder payne of mortall sinne the thing commaunded being of great importaÌ„ce to desist from defending the oath the Pope hauing condemned it and commaunding him not to defend it To say that the Pope is misinformed and that therfore his declaration and coÌ„maundement grounded therin doth not bynd in conscience is but a poore stay for VViddringtons conscieÌ„ce because Disp Th. c. 10. sec 1. n. 53. as VViddrington alleageth out of father Parsons letter he informed him selfe of seauen or eight of the most lerned Diuines in Rome and since he hath heard what VViddrington him selfe can suggest To alleage his Authours is to litle purpose they being as aboue wee haue seen few and of litle or no Authoritie To say the Pope may erre wil as litle seue VViddringtons turne because euerie lawfull Superiour is to be obeyed when he commaundeth according to a probable opinion though in other things and euen in this he may erre To answer that he is then onlie bound to obey his Superiour when ther is no notable daunger or domage in obeying is as litle to the purpose partlie because the opinion according to which the Pope commaundeth is more then probable as aboue is proued partlie because though ther may be Temporall domage in refusing to take the oath yet for VViddrington not to defend it by publique writing ther is no more dauÌ„ger to him theÌ„ to many moe who neuer set pen to paper for the defence of it rather VViddrington should feare the spirituall daunger and domage which is incurred either by defending or taken it as his chiefe Pastour hath assured him 75. Secondlie I wish VViddrington to reflect vpon his own selfe The socoÌ„a good Counsell to VViddringtâ—Ì„ and the state of life to which he is called the dauÌ„gerous course he runneth and how farre he is proceeded in it how heauie an enterprise he hath vndertaken and how hardlie hee shall be able to goe thorough with it whoe applaude him in it who condemne him what Authours he followeth whoÌ„ he contradicteth whom he maketh glad whom he contristateth what a Schisme as it were he hath made amongest some of his Catholique brethren with what doubtes and Scrouples he hath troubled the myndes of others How many wel meaning and before verie zealous Catholiques he hath induced to take the Oath and what scope he hath giuen to the persequutour to vexe and afflict those who out of conscience refuse to take it how litle gratefull he hath shewed him selfe to the Sea Apostolique which bredde brought him vp how much to officious to her Aduersaries his chiefe Applauders what litle comfort at the hower of his death he shall reape of these his labours how much discomfort 76. And to you Holsome Counsell to the Catholiques worthie constant and renowned Catholiques I giue this holsome Counsell Seing that this Oath so much derogateth from the Church and her chiefe Pastours honour and Authoritie and giueth such scope to her Enemies and Persecutours as you haue hetherto defended still sauing some fewe do this Church her faith and Authoritie and haue sustained losse of libertie liuinges and liues rather then you would consent to the least iniurie which is offred her so do you not by taking this Oath falsifie your faith to CHRIST his Church chiefe Vicaire You haue passed the raging stormes and Tempests of a Sea of Persecution make not shipwracke of all your spirituall marchandize and merites in the mouth of the hauen you haue long since laied your hand to the plough do not now looke backe Luc. 9. Exod. 14 you haue almost past the red Sea of Persecution which hitherto hath yeelded you passage go not backe to Aegipt for then you will neuer come to the Land of Promise you haue runne a long time in the race 1. Cor. 9. faint not now before the goale rather looke vp to Heauen Gal. 5. and you shall see the Angell houlding in his hand a crowne of glorie Currebatis benè quis vos impediuit veritati non obedire You ranne well who hindered you not to obey the truth Persuasio haec non est ex eo qui vocat vos Ibid. this persuasion to take this Oath is not of him Ibid. that called you It is of the Enemie who enuyeth that you ran so well But ego confido in vobis quod nihil aliud sapietis I haue confidence in you in our Lord that you will be of no other minde nor do otherwise then becometh good Catholicks and such Catholicks also who haue beene tried and purged in the fornace on whome the eyes of God his Saincts and all the world are fixed In the meane time qui conturbat vos por tabit iudicium suum quicunque est ille he that troubleth you he that hath cast stumbling blockes and scandals in your way he that like the serpent hath buzzed in your eares shall beare the Iudgement of almightie God whosoeuer he bee 77. And as I desire you should be constant in your faith and Religion obedient to the Church and her chiefe visible Pastour in all which is belonging to their Authoritie so I exhort you to obey the Kings Maiestie your Soueraige Lord and Liege in all things which appertaine to his Regall power and so to giue to God his Church and chiefe Vicaire their due hommage and respect as you deny not to the King Tribute Rom. 13. Custome feare honour obedience fidelitie and faithfull seruice not to thinke that this which I haue sayed in behalf of the authoritie of the Church and her chiefe visible Pastour hath been to detract any the least due right and respect from our Temporall Lord and Soueraigne much lesse to giue any waye or scope to plottes conspiracies or libelles which may irritate the Prince purchase no good but rather procure disgrace and preiudice to the cause for which you suffer For as S. PETER telles you 1. Pet. 2. what glorie is it if sinning and buffeted you suffer but if doing wel you susteine patientlie that is thanke before God for vnto this you are called For it is better as the same Apostle assureth you to suffer as doing well if the will of God will haue it soe then doing ill 1. Pet. 3. And therfore 1. Pet. 4.
ergo he may stand in his owne defence and by warres defensiue may maintaine his possession And then to what iniuries and gatboiles the Church should expose Kings subiects and Kingdomes and consequently the whole Church who seeth not but he that is wilfullie blind and will not open his eyes so that either the Councell of Laterane was temerarious and rash to build so perilous a Decree vpon no assured but only probable opinion or she thought assuredly that the Pope had such Authoritie and then euerie obedient Child of the Church should rather follow hers then Widdringtons and some few his companions opinion For certes otherwise as it is iniustice to put one out of his land or house who hath probable right and withall possession because potior est cónditio possidentis better is the condition of him that is in possession So were it open iniustice in the Pope to depriue a King of his Crowne and Kingdome who hath probable right because it is as Widdrington saith but probable not assured that the Pope can depose him and who yet hath possession He answereth that the Church commandeth the Feast of the Conception and the Pope hath giuen authoritie to simple Priests to confirme and moreouer dispensed with Princes in the solemne vow of Religion which yet are grounded but on probable opinions But the foresaid Authour in his discussion of this Decree hath verie well shewed that such inconuenienecs follow not vpon these Decrees which are not so dangerous nor concerne not the whole Church as this decree doth but onlie particuler persons and therfore I will not actum agere 8. But here I can not but obserue how cunninglie Widdrington in his new yeares-gifte endeauoureth to make his Reader beleeue that I made this Argument against my selfe In his new yeares gift pag. 43. and 52. For wheras I out of the decree of the Generall Coūcell of Lateran which I supposed to be iust had inferred that the opinion which holdeth that the Pope can in some case depose a Prince on which this decree is grounded must needes be more then probable and no lesse then certaine else if it were but probable that the Pope can depose a Prince it were probable also that the Prince deposed had still probable Title and so being in possession should vniustly be dispossessed because better is the condition of the possessour who hath probable right VViddrington taketh it for a probable opinion only that the Pope can depose a Prince whieh I alwayes denied and disprooued and thence inferreth and as he would seeme euen by my argument and Confession that the Pope cannot without open iniustice depose a Prince Where I desire the Reader to note how I as all modest Catholickes should doe doe attribute so much to the Councelles decree that by it I prooue it to be a certaine opinion that the Pope can depose a Prince in some case else the decree had been vniust VViddrington notwitstanding this decree holdeth still that it is but a probable opinion that the Pope can depose a Prince and thence inferreth that the Pope can not iustlie depose and so is not ashamed nor afraid to confesse in effect that this decree of that so greate and Generall Councell is vniust which with what modestie he can do I report me to all modest Catholickes and to the iudgement of all iudicious Readers 9. Lastlie I will yet trie another waie to persuade these kinde of men which if they contemne Mat. 18. they can hardlie auoide that imputation of Ethnikes and Publicanes which Christ him selfe layeth on them that will not heare the Church For not onlie that which is expreslie and in actu signato defined by the Councell is to be beleeued vnder paine of heresie but also that which in actu exercito is defined I will explicate my self If the Pope especiallie with a Generall Councell decree or enact any Generall law which he commandeth to be obserued of the whole Church he doth not expresselie and in actu signato define the thing to be lawfull which he commandeth but yet he doth in actu exercito and tacitè define it to be lawfull because if he cannot erre in prescribing generall lawes to the vniuersall Church as if he could the whole Church which must obey her Chiefe Pastour should erre with him it followeth necessarily that he hath infallible assistance in enacting such lawes and consequently that it must not onlie be probable but also certainly true yea and so true that it is not onlie temeritie and rashenes but also obstinate heresie to holde that it is vnlawfull which the Pope thus commandeth Bellarm. lib 4. de Rom. Pont. cap. 5. Du Valle lib. de suprema Rom. Pont. in Ecclesiam potestate part 2. q. 7. This is the opinion of Bellarmine which he prooueth also verie solidlie The same a learned Doctour of the Sorbonnes and Chiefe Reader in Diuinitie called Du Valle holdeth and as Diuines knowe it is the common opinion though some few holde the contrarie Du Valle hath these wordes Han◠autem infallibilitatem non minùs quà m in fidei definitionibus agnoscunt omnes Catholici Doctores But this Infallibllitie no lesse then in definitions of faith all Catholick Doctours do acknowledge This both Bellarmine and he as others also prooue by many Arguments For First if the Pope could command an vnlawfull thing he should command vice for vertue and might forbid vertue as vnlawfull whence should follow that the Church which must obey her Chiefe Pastour should erre in a matter necessarie to saluation for she should imbrace vice for vertue and imbracinge that should be no more Holie Yea then the Church should erre in a matter of faith because if the Pope cōmād vice for vertue the Church which must giue eare to her Chiefe Pastour should embrace it as lawfull and consequentlie should embrace a thing against faith for as it is against faith to say or thinke that Christ is not reallie in the Blessed Sacrament so is it to say or thinke that vice is vertue which yet the Chiefe Pastour should teach in commanding and the Church should beleeue in embracing and obseruing Whence I inferre that the former decree of the Councell is a matter of faith and necessarily to be beleeued For by this decree the Pope and Councell of Lateran do absolue the subiects from obedience and fidelitie by a Generall Decree do depose the Prince from his Kingdome which if it were vniust as it must needs be if the Pope had no Authoritie the Pope and Councell should erre in a matter against faith because the Catholick faith teacheth that vertue is good vice is euill and vnlawfull yet if this decree of deposition of the Prince and absolution of his subiects from their fidelitie were against iustice the Church which must obey her Chiefe Pastour should be bound to thinke iniustice to be iustice vice to be vertue which is against faith And therfore if VViddrington notwitstanding this
man euen he that thinketh it by intrinsecall principles of reason and argument to be false frame a conscience that it is probable for the extrinsecall principles as the multitude learning and vertue of the Authours that holde it and consequently might sweare that he for these principles thinkes it probable yet he can not sweare as is cōmaunded by this Oath from his hart and before God that VViddringtons opinion is true and that therefore absolutely the Pope can not depose a Prince for any heresie or rebellion against the Church because as is before sayd he knowing that many hould contrarie to VViddrington and that farre moe are against him then with him who are as likelie yea more likelie to haue found out the truth then he he can not sweare absolutely that the Pope can not in any case depose Princes for that were to sweare that a thing false as I haue prooued or at least but probable as VViddrington confesseth is so certaine that the contrarie is most certainely false which is to sweare an vntruth and to commit periurie For as it is periurie to sweare that that is true which we know to be false so is it periurie to sweare that to be absolutely true which yet is doubtfull or at least but probable 23. Hence may easilie be gathered that this Clause of the Oath wanteth all the three companions of a lawfull Oath and so cannot be taken First it wanteth Iudgement because in deed as appeareth by my former arguments there is no iust cause or reason to sweare that it is probable much lesse that it is assured which is euen by VViddringtons owne acknowledgement but probable and so it is rash and wanteth Iudgement Secondly it wanteth Veritie for besides that I haue prooued aboue that VViddringtons opinion is false derogating to faith and Church yea scriptures and reasons and consequently that to sweare that it is true were to sweare an vntruth and to committ periurie VViddrington him selfe confesseth his opinion is but probable and consequentlie to sweare that it is vndoubtedlie true and the contrarie false is to sweare also an vntruth because it is false that that which is but probable is assuredlie true Thirdlie this Clause wanteth Iustice because it is an iniurie to the Pope to sweare absolutely that he hath no power nor Authoritie to depose Princes he hauing so assured and at least as I haue prooued so probable claime and Title to this Authoritie Widdr. supra euen by VViddrington his owne confession who acknowledgeth that the Popes who deposed Princes followed a probable opinion although he must also fay that all those Popes though holie and learned committed great in iustice in deposing thē they being in possession and hauing also probable right if those Popes had but probable Authoritie as aboue I haue declared 24. This might serue to reiect this Clause as altogether vnlawfull to be sworne but yet for more full satisfaction of Catholicks in this point I will bring another Argument to prooue that it can not in consciēce be sworne Because this Clause importeth that the Pope neither by him selfe nor by any another Authority or meanes can depose the King or dispose of any of his maiesties Dominions or authorize any forraine Prince to anoy him or inuade his countries or discharge any of his subiects of their alleageance or to giue licence or leaue to any of them to beare armes raise tumults or offer violence or hurt to his Maiesties Royall person state or gouernment or any his Maiesties subiects c. Wherein also is such difficultie that I can not see how in a matter so doubtfull or not so certaine a man may sweare so peremptorily and vndoubtedly Who so pleaseth to read Franciscus de Victoria that learned Dominican shall finde that he setteth downe diuers Titles by which the Spaniards might iustly inuade subdue the Indians which Titles whether any Christian Prince may haue to inuade England or any other countrie I will not dispute but onely alleadge them that the Reader may see that it is not so euident that a man may take this Clause of the Oath in so generall termes as is lyeth Victoria his opinion being no waies condemned but rather approoued by many Victoria Relect. de Indis Insulanis Titulis quibus Barbari potuerint venire inditionem Hispanorum 25. The first Title pertaining to this matter which Victoria alleadgeth is the Authoritie which the Pope hath to send Preachers euen to Infidels much more to Christian Countries that be hereticks because ouer these he hath spirituall Iurisdiction And although Paganes can not be compelled to imbrace Christian faith yet the Christian Preachers after they haue giuen reason of their Embassage may preach by that Authoritie which CHRIST gaue to his Apostles and successours when he sayd Euntes docete omnes gentes baptizantes eos c. Mat. 28 Going therfore teach yee all nations baptizing them c. And if the Paganes would hinder their preaching or after they haue preached hinder the conuersion of Infidels and the fruit of preaching they may with the souldiours whome they carrie with them force them to permitt them to preach and to permitt all that will to heare them and not to hinder their spirituall good and conuersion and if otherwise they cannot pursue nor defend this their right they may make warre vpon those that hinder them and pursue all those thinges which are lawfull in a iust warre And by this Title saith Victoria the Spaniards might make warre vpon the Indians if otherwise they could not preach the Christian faith nor withstand the obstinate Pagans who would hinder their conuersion that desired to be Christians And thus Victoria would say that the Pope might send Preachers to England and might desire and licence some Catholicke Prince to assist and defend the Preachers in procuring hereticks conuersion And if any hereticks woulde not permitte the Catholicke Doctours to preach or would hinder the conuersion of those that would be Catholicks the forraine Prince licenced by the Pope might in manner aforesaid as Victoria thinketh for I will say nothing of my selfe make warre vpon the English and seeing that warre cannot vnles by reason of ignorance be iust on both sides the English especially who are Catholicks could not defend those that oppose them selues against this Prince who assisteth the Preachers Thus would he say but as I so honour my Prince and loue my countrie that I desire not that any such Title should take place in England so I will not dispute of it 26. Another Title sayth Victoria by which the Spaniards might make warre on the Indians is if after some of them be conuerted to the Catholicke faith the others would force them to Idolatrie for then sayth he the Spaniards might by armes defend them they being become now their freinds and fellowes 27. A third Title sayth he might be this If the Indiās by lawfull or vnlawfull meanes that is by peaceble preaching
3. which S. AVGVSTINE sayth is a greater euill then to be killed by a sword consumed by fier or cast vnto wild beastes to be deuoured who doubteth but that he should be called the principall cause of the deposition he compelling the subiectes therunto by so great a punishment 40. Likewise as a forreine Prince may and is bound sometimes to defend Innocents so the Pope may licence and authorize yea and commaund him so to do he hauing authoritie as VViddrington auoucheth to commaund a Prince in tēporall matters and if at the Popes commaundement this Prince make warre vpon the Prince that intolerably molesteth Innocents in their faith and Religion as Victoria in the place before alleaged saith he may that which the Prince shall doe against the other tyrannizing Prince in the pursewing of his iust warre the Pope shal be said to do hee being the commaunder and consequently the principall agent And yet by this Clause of the Oath the subiects are commaunded to sweare that the Pope hath no authoritie to authorize any forreine Prince to anoy the King of England or to inuade his countries which is to abiure at least a probable opinion as certainely false which how it can be done with a good conscience I report me euen to VViddringtons large conscience But be this spoken to shew the daunger of swearing this Clause not to giue any scope against Kings or Princes whome I honour as God his Images and his Vicegerents in Earth The Third Clause Also I sweare from my heart that notwithstanding any declaration or sentence of excōmunication or depriuation made or graunted or to be made or graunted by the Pope or his successours or by any authoritie deriued or pretended to be deriued from him or his Sea against the said King his Heires or successours or any Absolution of the sayd subiects from their obedience I will beare faith and true alleageance to his Maiesti◠his Heires and successours and him and them will defend to the vttermost of my power against all conspiracies and attempts what soeuer which shal be made against his or their persons their crowne and dignitie by reason or colour of any such sentence or declaration or otherwise and will do my best endeuour to disclose and make knowne vnto his Maiestie his heires and successours all Treasons and Trayterous conspiracies which I shall knowe or heare of to be against him or any of them 41. Widdr. in Disp Theol. ca. 4. sect 1. n. 1. seqq Here VVIDDRINGTON insulteth against the learned Cardinall Bellarmine though the Phoenix for controuersies of this our age Cardinall Bellarmine sayth he Gretserus and Lessius contend that by this Clause is denyed to the Pope power to excommunicate which yet sayth he this Clause seemeth to suppose and the King professeth he had not the intention to denie But although this Clause seeme to suppose and the King in wordes seemeth to confesse or at least not to denie the Pope Authoritie to excommunicate yet in effect they denie it For depriuation of Regall Authority being an effect of excommunicating which ordinarily followeth excommunication of Kings and Princes in the deniall of the effect the cause is denied For as if you should say A man is not risibilis you should denie him to be homo so in denying that the Pope can depriue Princes of their Kingdomes you denie in effect tha he can excommunicate 42. Here WIDDRINGTON in his Newyearesgift insulteth against me for saying as he makes me to say that depriuation of Regall Authoritie is an effect of Excommunication as necessarilie following Excommunication as risibile followeth homo But if we looke into the matter narrowlie we shall finde he triumpheth before the victorie and counteth his chickins before they be hacht For first if we speake of the power of Excommunication and depriuation of which I speake but two lines before these wordes at which VViddrington carpeth I had shewed in the seauenth Chapter before that the power to excōmunicate which the cbiefe visible Pastour hath is one and the selfe same power with the power of depriuation and deposition which one power hath two actes and effectes the one principall and first intended called actus primarius and this is Excommunication or such like spirituall Censure and punishment the second is depriuation deposition and such like Temporall chastisement and correction which is actus secundarius a secundarie acte of the Chiefe Pastours spirituall power secondarilie intended when the first will not preuaile And these two actes are necessarilie belonging to the Popes spirituall power of Supremacie not that this power must needes alwayes exercise both or either of them but because the Pope can not haue this power but he must haue facultie to exercise them when a iust cause requireth it and so these two actes being necessarilie belonging to the Popes Supremacie he that denyeth him power to depriue or depose a Prince denyeth in effecte that he hath power to Excommunicate it being one and the selfe same power because the denyall of an effect necessarilie belonging to a cause is a virtuall denyall of the cause euen as to deny that fier can heate or rarifie is to deny it to be fier and to deny a man to be risibilis is to deny him to be man Secondlie if we speake of these two actes of this power although WIDDRNIGTON knoweth that the learned SVAREZ alleaged by him 2. p. Append contra Suarem sec 4. affirmeth that the suspension of Kinglie Authoritie is an effect of the acte of Excommunication I did not say that depriuation is alwayes an effect of the acte of Excommunication well knowing that although both these are so necessarilie belonging to the Popes power of Supremacie that it can not be without possibilitie of exercising them yet it is in his free choise to exercise either both or either of them and so he may excommunicate and not depriue and he may depriue as he did King CHILDERIC See Cap. Alius 15. q. 6. alleaged by me pag. 250. and not excommunicate And therfore I sayd onlie that depriuation of Regall Authoritie being aneffect of excommunication which ordinarilie followeth Excommunication of Kinges and Princes in the denyall of the effect the cause is denyed c. where WIDDRINGTON leaueth out those wordes which ordinarilie followeth because those wordes would haue made it plaine that I say not that depriuation is an effect of Excommunication in all Excommunicate persons but in Kinges and Princes nor alwayes in excommunicated Princes because a Kinge may be excommunicated and not deposed and he may be deposed as CHILDERIC King of Fraunce was and not Excommunicated but oftentimes and ordinarelie Cap. Alius 15. q. 6. because the Chiefe visible Pastour vseth not by name to excommunicere a Prince but he also ordinarilie especiallie in these later Ages deposeth him and for two reasons also the one because he ought not ordinatilie to proceede to so seuere a temporall punishment before he haue tryed whether the
l. 3. Pol. ca. 5. there are three parttcular Kinds of gouernment The first is called Monarchia when one as King and Monarch gouerneth The second is called Aristocratia when diuers but few and those of the better sort equall in Authoritie do rule The third is called Democratia when many and those of the Common people rule The first gouernmēt of it selfe is best because it is easier to finde one good and wise man then few much more hard to find many and it is easier for many to obey one then many for to obey many there are two difficulties the one in those that obey and that difficultie is also found in a Monarchie the second in the commanders and this is lesse in a Monarchie then in other gouernments because one can better agree then many and so when one commandeth it is easier for the subiects to agree in one then when many command Vide Bellar li. 1. de Sum. Pont. c. 2 And hence it is that Tyrannie which is opposit to Monarchie is not so bad as Faction opposed to Aristocratie nor Faction of a few so bad as Sedition of the people opposite to Democratie 7. Now therefore as the Communitie as is before declared hath power to gouerne it selfe so hath it power to choose that gouernment which it liketh best whether it be one of the former three simple gouernments or some other mixt of two or of all three of them And if the Communitie chooseth Magistrates who shall depend of the whole Communitie then the Communitie is the chiefe gouernour the Magistrates are but officers and ministers and so may be deposed by the people some times at pleasure some tymes only vpon some vrgent occasion and alwayes when the chiefe Magistrate dyeth his heyres succeed not necessarily but only they whom the people make choise of This gouernment was amongest the Romanes when they were gouerned by Plebiscita and Senatours and is this day to be seene in the Common VVealth of the Venetians the Geneuians and those of Genua If the Communitie make choise of a King then the Communitie despoileth it self of Authoritie and becometh a subiect and as it were a priuate person and giueth all power and Authoritie to the King to gouerne not principallie for his owne priuate but for the common good of the whole Kingdome And hence it is that the Common wealth cannot depose a King as it may a Magistrate vnles it be in case of intollerable Tyrannie 8. Hence appeareth a great difference betwixt the afore said power of the Communitie and the Regall power of the King because the former power of the Communitie followeth of necessitie the lawfull meeting of many in one societie in so much that it is not in the peoples power to meet with intention to liue together and not to haue that power and so this power dependeth not of any election but that the King or Peeres or the Magistrate rule and gouerne depended at the first of the election and free choise of the people in whose power it was to choose one or many to gouerne the rest and so Kinglie power is in deede of God but by meanes of election It is of God because it proceeded from the Communities power which is of God and Nature necessarilie following the naturall inclination which God hath imprinted in vs to liue in societie and yet it is in the King by free election because though the Communitie haue authoritie from God and Nature to rule it self yet that this power is giuen to the determinate person of the King dependeth of the peoples election 9. Now some thinke that supposing the peoples election God immediatelie giueth the power VVid. in Apolog. Rosp nu 163. pag. 128. This is the opinion of WIDDRINGRON in his Apologetical Answere for the right of Princes where he affirmeth that Quicunque in supremum Reipublicae superiorem legitimè deputatur c. VVhosoeuer is lawfully deputed as soueraigne Superiour of the common VVealth although he receaue that dedeputation or Title of power by the free consent of of men yet the totall power of ruling God onlie giueth vnto him by the law of Nature But VViddringron should haue marked that the people and Cōmunitie from which lawfullie assembled necessarilie floweth as aboue we haue seene a power to gouerne it selfe and to appoint gouernours not onlie designeth the person of the King but also trāsferreth her authoritie frō her selfe to the King and becometh herselfe a subiect and as it were a priuat person So that the Cōmunitie not onlie designeth the person of the King but also despoiling het selfe of the power she had from God and Nature giueth it vnto the person chosen and designed by her for King D. The. 2.2 qu. 10. a. 10. And thersore S. Thom. sayth that Dominion and prelacie Ciuill are brought in by humane lawe 10. VVhorein may be seene a manifest difference also betwixt the Pope and the King For the Cardinalles When they choose one of their companie to be Pope designe onlie his person as Caietan well obserueth but Christ only Caiet in opusc de Pont◠and not the Cardinalles after this deputation of his person giueth the power and iurisdiction it being supernatural as not only the end to which it is ordayned but also the Actes and functions of this iurisdiction doe manifestlie declare and therfore seing that a supernaturall Iurisdiction surpasseth the actiuitie of the Cardinalles they being but morall Agents and vsing no sacrament in the election and creation of the Pope he being ordinarilie Priest and Bishop before this Autoritie must be attributed only to God as the Authour but the Kings authority is naturall and morall ordayned only of it self to natural functions and to a natural end which is temporall peace and felicitie and so it not exceeding the Actiuitie of the people or Communities power may and is giuen by the people and consequentlie not only the deputation of the Kinges person but also his Regall Authoritie proceedeth immediately from the people 11. VVhence also may be gathered a difference betwixt the Authoritie which was in the Communitie before it made choise of a King and the Authoritie of a King for that Authoritie of the Communitie is immediately of God Nature proceeding necessarilie from a Communitie lawfullie assembled in somuch that it is not in the power of the Communitie to be without this power vnles it giue it to one or many gouernours but the Authoritie of the King doth not necessarilie flowe from this Communitie because it is in the free choise of the Communitie to make election of that gouernment in particular which it shall thinke best and so if it make election of a Monarchical gouernment and consequentlie of the King the King is to thanke the Communitie not only for the deputation of his person but also for his Regal Authoritie which being a naturall power and being before contained eminenter or virtualiter eminentlie or virtuallie in the Communities
And if this limitation proceeded from the King he might at his pleasure also take it away which were to giue Princes too much scope and libertie VVherfore as the people gaue the King his authoritie so it was the people that thus limited and restrained him for their owne preseruation for to the same Authoritie that giueth power it pertaineth to restraine it 16. Hauing thus prooued that the King or Prince hath Authoritie from God as Authour of Nature yet by meanes of the peoples election and graunt to gouerne the Kingdome or Common wealth it followeth that he hath Authoritie not only to command priuarelie or particulerlie as the Goodman of the house may command his wife children or seruantes but also to make lawes which shall binde the whole Communitie or Common wealth otherwise if he should command and the people might disobey he could not rule nor direct the people and so should not haue sufficient Authoritie 17. By which may appeare how absurd the opinion of our Reformers is Luth l. de capt Bab. Calu. l. 3 Inst c. 19. n. 14 l. 4. c. 10. and how iniurious to Princes yea and to God that appointeth them who blush not to say and auouch that all Christians that is Caluinists indewed with faith are so freed by Christ from all lawes and humane power that they can not bynde them in coÌ„science 18. Certes Luther in his booke of Babylonical Captiuitie and Caluin in his InstitutioÌ„s make it a part of the office of a Redeemer in Christ to haue so freed vs from all humane Authoritie and lawes that they can not bynde vs in conscience And the Anabaptists and Trinitarians who an 155â— at Alba-Iulia sett forth certaine Antitheses of the true and false Christ in their seuenth Antithesis affirme that falsus Christus habet in suâ Ecclesiâ Reges Principes Magistratus gladios at verus Christus nihil tale in Ecclesiâ pati potest The false Christ hath in his Church Kinges Princes Magistrates swordes but the true Christ can abide no such thing in his Church But this opinion may be euidentlie conuinced by that which is sayd for if Princes haue power from God and Nature to rule they haue power to make lawes and if they can make lawes they can bynd in conscience els their lawes were strawes and to little purpose especiallie when the subiect can auoid by slight the penaltie of the lawe VVherfore Saint Paul commands vs to be subiect to all lawfull humane Authoritie non tantum propter iram sed etiam propter conscientiam not only for wrath but also for conscience sake Rom. 13. And he addeth that he that resisteth this power which is of God Dei ordinationi resistit qui autem resistunt ipsi sibi damnationem acquirunt resisteth the ordinance of God and they that resiste purchase to them selues damnation which argueth an obligation in conscience Againe the same Apostle commandeth Titus to admonish Christians to be subiect to Princes and Potestaâ—es Ad Tit. 3. 1. Pot. 2. Saint Peter commandeth them to be subiect to euerie humane creature for God whether it be King as excelling c. and he giues the reason saying for so is the will of God By which it is manifest that we are bouÌ„d vnder sinne vnder God his displeasure to honour and obey Kinges and Princes and consequentlie that we are bound in conscience 19. Let not then our Reformers traduce Catholickes as enemies to Princely Authoritie and Idolators of the Popes power for we acknowledge and reuerence them both highlie in their kind but let the Reformers looke to them selues Plautus because qui alterum incusat probri ipsum se intueri oportet he that accuseth another must looke that he him selfe be free Ioseph l. 18. Ant. c. 2. Aug. l. 3. côt Cros c. 15. Exira de haeret c. 4 Anton. 4. p. tit 11. ca. 7. § 9. Luth. l. de saecul petest Trinita aij supra Buchan li. de iure Regni GoodmaÌ„ l. de obedien pag. 203. Beza ep 78. ad Buchanan Luth. supra Caluin l. 4. Inst c. 19 §. 14. Exod. 12. VVee Catholickes say not with Iudas Galilaeus That no Prince is to be obeyed nor with Cresconius That the Magistrate ought not to punishe nor with the Beguards That the perfect are not bound to obey lawes nor with VVickleph That the Prince by mortall sinne looseth his Authoritie nor with Luther That the Turke is decies probior prudentiorque nostris principibus ten times honester and wiser then our Princes nor with the aforesaid Trinitarians Anabaptists and Libertines That the true Christ suffreth no Princes nor Magistrates in his Church nor with Buchanan That the people onlie is to make lawes Reges sunt veluti Tabulaeriorum custodes nor with Goodman That women cannot raigne and that therfore Wiat rising against Queene Marie was no Traitour nor with Beza doe we call that lawfull and worthy Queene Marie the Mother of our soueâ—aine King Iames Medaea and Athalia as though as he saith Nullum illius sceleribus nomen idoneum inueniri posset no name answerable to her wickednesses could be found out Nor with Luther and Caluin that Princes lawes bynd not the faithfull in conscience But wee say and beleeue with scripture Thow shalt not detract from the Gods that is Princes who are called Gods by participation nor speake euill of the Prince of thy people Prou. 8. Mat. 22. VVe confesse that by God Princes raigne we command to giue to Caesar what is due to Caesar we allowe of S. IGNATIVS counsell Caesari subiecti estote in ijs Ign. epi. ad Antioch in quibus nullum animae periculum Bee you subiect to Caesar in those thinges in which is no daunger of the soule we are taught to giue to Magistrates as S. Eus l. 4. hist c. 14 POLICARP sayd and Potestates appointed by God that honour which is not preiudiciall to our soules or ReligioÌ„ we worship as TERTVLLIAN sayeth the Emperour Lib. aduersus Scap. cap. 2. the King sic quomodo nobis licet ipsi expedit vt hominem à Deo secundum solo Deo minorem so as it is lawfull for vs and expedient for him as a man second in Temporall Authoritie to God and only lesser then God For whilst the King keepeth within his bounds he hath no superiour in temporall matters but God And this is the honourable conceit which Catholikes haue of their Kinges and Princes CHAPTER III. Ecclesiasticall power is of God and distinct from the Ciuil Iurisdiction which also all members of the Church are bound in conscience to obey 1. HAuing giueÌ„ to Caesar and the Kingdome what is due to theÌ„ It followeth that I giue to Christ and his Vicaire yea and Church also what belongeth to them I haue prooued in the former chapter that Ciuill power is of God and Nature because it is necessarilie annexed to all lawfull societies to which God and Nature do incline
Ecclesiasticall lawes in giuing Authoritie to preach to minister Sacramentes and such like yet when it is necessarie for the conseruation of this power or of the Church or faith of which it hath the Charge that it dispose of Temporall matters it can do that also and so the same spirituall Authoritie which directlie and as it were ex prima intentione ordaineth and determineth of Spirituall matters dealeth also with Temporall affaires not absolutelie but as they are ordained and necessary to the attaining of the Spirituall end which is conseruation of the Church and faith and the soules faluation But because this power doth not respect Temporall thinges principallie and for them selnes but only secondarilie and as they are ordained to the conseruation of the Spirituall good of the Church it is sayd indirectlie only to respect Temporall matters and for as much as it medleth not ordinarilie but in some extraordinary case with the saied Temporall matters we may say that the Pope ordinarilie medleth with spirituall matters and hath for his ordinarie glaiue and weapons the Spirituall censures but when they will not serue to defend the Churches necessarie right then he may also vse the Temporall sword and punishment because the same Authoritie which handleth principallie directlie and ex prima intentione the spirituall glaiue may also command and handle the Temporall sword when it is necessarie to the spirituall end for then gladius est sub gladio as BONIFACE the Eight said The Temporall sword is subordinate and subiect to the Spirituall And this is the common opinion which our most Illustrious Cardinall Allan the honour of our countrie holdeth and defendeth in his Answer to the libeller Chap. 5.6 7. But this subiection of Temporall states to the Spirituall power of the Pope and Church may be diuerslie taken First it may be taken for subiection and inferioritie in the order of Dignitie only and so all Authours agree that the Spirituall power is Superiour to the Temporall Secondlie it may be vnderstood of a Superioritie in Directing not onlie by counsell but also by Commandement vnder paine of sinne and some spirituall mulct as excommunication suspension and Interdict And so also all good and Catholick Authours yea Barclaye and VViddrington confesse Widdring in Apol. n. 197. that the Spirituall power may not only direct by Counsell but may also command the Temporall power not to vse the Temporall sword or authoritie to the preiudice of the Church and it may also correct and punish those that refuse to obey by Spirituall penalties Thirdlie it may be taken for a subiection which importeth not onlie a subiection to the Commandement but also to the disposition of the Spirituall power in which sense the Pope and supreme Pastour may be said to haue Authoritie not only to command vnder paine of sinne Christian Princes to cease from persecuting or wrōging the Church or to implore their sword and Temporall Authorities and meanes to the necessarie defence of the Church but also if they refuse and contemne his spirituall Authoritie and penalties which he inflicteth vpon them he may dispose of their Crownes Kingdomes and Authoritie and bestowe them on some other that shall do the Church better seruice or at least shall not wronge her or do her that iniurie with the which the Churches right and faith cannot consist And this Authoritie Barclaye VViddrington and some others not only Hereticks Schismaticks but also who desire still to go by the name of Catholickes do deny Wherfore for the respect I beare and owe to God and his Church and for the information of some deceiued Catholicks and confutation of Hereticks and those Catholicks who in this point ioyne with them I will prooue it by many conuincing arguments in the ensuing chapters of this Treatise And first out of Scripture CHAPTER VIII By diuers places and examples of the old and nevv Testament it is prooued that the Pope in some case can not only by Spirituall Censure but also by Temporall punishment and euen by depriuation chastice Princes who are rebellious and doe tyrannically persecute and molest the Church 1. HAuing explicated how the Popes Spirituall power may dispose of Temporall things and euen Crownes and Diademes when it is necessarie for the Churches cōseruation or great and necessarie good it remaineth that I prooue the same But because the proofes are long and many I will in this Chapter alleadge only those Arguments which may be deduced out of the Text of Scripture And least the Aduersaries of the Popes authority in this point plaie with me as they haue donne with some learned writers of this time and bragge of the victorie when they can deuise any answere though neuer so slender I will be so bolde as to preuent them and to take this euasion from them For if it were sufficient to shape an vnshapen answere which hath only a shew of probabilitie then all the proofes out of scripture which the aunciēt Fathers produced against the auncient hereticks shal be called in question For what better and more pregnant place can be alleadged then that Ioa. 10. which the aunciēt Fathers cited out of S. IOHN against the Arrians Ego Pater vnum sumus I and the Father are one and yet the Arrians had their answer in redines to witt that God the Father and the Sonne are one not by vnitie of substance but consent of wils And what plainer wordes can be alleadged for the Reall presence then those of CHRIST This is my body Mat. 26. Clandius de Sainctes Repetit 1. ca. 10. and yet the Reformers of this time haue deuised no lesse then fowerscore expositions and answers all different from the Catholick sence and meaning But my Aduersaries are to waigh and ponder the soliditie of their answers and the conformitie also of them to the Churches definition and practise 2. 1. Reg. 13 My first proofe then shal be taken from examples of the olde and new Testament which do not a little patronize the aforesaid authoritie of the Pope SAMVEL as he anoynted King SAVL and created him King of the Iewes so he deposed him And although he did this as a Prophet yet this might be a figure of that which the Chiefe Pastour may do in the new law Zuing. art 41. 2. Paral. 26. whervpon Zuinglius whose authority must needs be of force against Protestantes saith plainly Quòd Reges deponi possunt Saulis exemplum manifestè docet That Kings may be deposed Saules example doth manifestlie teach 2. Par. 26. AZARIAS the High Priest deposed OZIAS for arrogating the Priests office for although God immediately marked him with a leprosie yet the high Priest after he was thus marked had authoritie from God by the Leuitical lawe Leu. 13. to separate him from all societie and cohabitation with his subiects Hence I inferre first that the high Priest had in some case authoritie to dispose of Temporall things though they belonged to Kings For cohabitation
affirme that in case of intolerable tyrannie against the Church the Pope may depose them But rather as they are content so to beare rule ouer their subiects as they will permitt God to beare rule ouer them so they should also be content to subiect them selues their Kingdomes Crownes and scepters to Christ and his Kingdome that raigning vnder him here for a time they may raigne with him hereafter for euer CHAPTER XV. An Explication of the late Oath of pretended Alleageance and of euery clause thereof deduced out of the former and some other grounds by which is prooued that it can neither be proposed nor taâ—en without grieuous offence of Almighty God 1. Vide Alphonsum de Castro V. IurameÌ„tum Gen. 21. Gen. 26. Gen. 31. Psal 17. Rom. 1.2 Cor 1. Philip. 1.1 Tim. 5 CAtholicks with common consent do confesse and hould against the Messalians Euchites Pelagians Waldenses Anabaptistes and Puritanes that it is lawfull in some cases to sweare as many of the greatest Sainctes haue done For ABRAHAM swore to Abimelech ISAAC to the same or another Abimelech IACOB to Laban MOYSES swore by Heauen and earth DAVID and others oftentimes vse this oath Viuit Deus as God liueth which is in effect to sweare by the life of God S. PAVL also did vse diuers oathes as Testis enim mihi est Deus for God is my witnesse and I call God to witnesse I testifie before God and such like Yea God him selfe knowing that we more easilie beleeue when a thing is sworne sweareth himselfe to winne credit at our hands Deut. 4. And in DEVTERONOMIE he commandeth vs to sweare saying Dominum Deum tuum timebis per nomen eius iurabis Thou shalt feare thy Lord God and shalt sweare by his name But as medicines are good yet not alwaies to be taken but onlie supposing a disease or sicknesse so oathes are not to be vsed but only supposing a necessitie as when we cannot otherwise be beleeued And therfore when there is no necessitie CHRIST sayth Mat. 5. Ego autem dicovobis non iurare omnino I say to you sweare not all to wit when there is no necessitie Iacob 1. And S. IAMES Nolite iur are quodcunque iur amentum Do not sweare any oath Deut. 6. But when there is necessitie God commandeth it Psal 62. as wee haue seene And Dauid commendeth it saying Laudabuntur omnes qui iurant in eo They all shall be praised who swearein him God Fot to sweare when necessitie vrgeth is an Acte of Religion and worship of God whome we acknowledge to be so true that he will not fauour a lye and of such a maiestie that none will dare to sweare by him vnlesse the thing be true which is the reason why oathes are easilie credited 2. D. Thom. 2.2 q. 89. art 3. But if we will haue our oathes free from all sinne we must ioyne to them these three companionsâ— or conditions Iudgement Veritie and Iustice according to that of HIEREMIE Hierem. 4 Iur obis in veritate in iudicio in iustitia Thou shalt sweare in Veritie Iudgement and Iustice. Iudgement is necessarie in the sweater Veritie in the thing he sweareth Iustice in the cause For want of Iudgement the oath is rash as when we sweare for euerie trifle for want of Veritie the oath is false and periurie as when we sweare a lye for want of Iustice it is vnlawfull as if one should sweare he would committ a sinne And if a man sweareth with out Iudgement he taketh Gods name in vaine if without Veritie he committeth periurie and makes God to patronize a lie if without Iustice he makes God a patron of sinne Wherfore he that would knowe whether the Oath which latelie is proposed to Catholickes be lawfull must marke whether it want not some one of these three companions or conditions to wit Iudgement Veritie and Iustice for if it want but one it is vnlawfull much more if it want all And because there may be difficultie as well about the proposer as the taker of this Oath let vs see first whether in the proposer may be found Iudgement Iustice and Veritie 3. As touching the first it may seeme not to be wanting in the Magistrate that proposeth and that for two reasons First because the Prince being of another religion then the Pope and knowing that Catholickes giue him power to depose Princes may seeme iustlie to feare least he will exercise this Authoritie vpon him Secondlie the late Gunpowder-plot may seeme to proceed from such an opinion and so the Magistrate to secure the Prince seemeth to haue reason to vrge the Catholicke subiects vnto such an Oath 4. But yet on the other side it seemeth most certaine that the Magistrate hath no iust cause to propose such an Oath consequentlie that in proposing it he obserueth not the first condition For first although the Magistrate may haue some cause to feare the Kings deposition supposing that he persecuteth the Catholicke faith and depriueth Catholicks of liuings libertie Rom. 13. and sometime life also yet as S. PAVL sayth Vis non timere potestatem bonum fac habebis laudem ex illa Dei enim Minister est tibi in bonum Si autem malum feceris time non enim sine causa gladium portat c. VVilt thou not feare the power do good and thou shalt haue praise of the same for he is Gods Minister vnto thee for good But if thou doe euill feare for he beareth not the sword without cause for he is Gods Minister a reuenger vnto wrath to him that doth euill So say I if Princes wil be free from all feare of the Popes power let them do good and they shall haue praise before God and men for the Pope is appointed Pastour vnto theÌ„ for their good But if they will do euill if they will persecute the Church her faith faithfull children then let them feare for he is Gods Minister hath the spirituall glaiue put into his hand to chastize correct all rebellious Christians And therefore as he that taketh a mans purse from him by violence hath no iust cause to compell him to sweare that he will not bewray him because he might and should haue abstayned from the iniurie and then an oath had not bene necessarie so the Prince or Magistrate hath no vrgent cause to propose this Oath to the Cath olicke subiectes because if he abstaine from persecutioÌ„ as he ought to do he needeth not feare the Popes power and so hath no sufficient cause to vrge his subiects by oath to abiure the Popes Authoritie that he in the meane while may persecute impunè 5. As for the Gunpowder plot it could not proceed from this opinion for it doth not follow that because the Pope caÌ„ depose the Prince therefore his subiects by priuate Authoritie may endeuour to kill him because the Pope is superiour the subiectes are inferiours he
knowing that so many Scriptures Theologicall reasons Councels Popes their factes and practise so many learned Doctours and Sainctes stand for the contrarie he can not sweare absolutely and with the former asseueration that the Pope hath no such authoritie he knowing that so many Authours and so great Argumentes and Authoritie do countenance the contrarie opinion Yea much lesse can he sweare for his opinion in this point then can a Thomist for his touching our Ladies Conception because the Thomist is licenced by the expresse leaue of the Church to teach and thinke as he doth and his aduersaries are commaunded by the Church not to condemne his opinion as hereticall Concil Trid. sess 5. c. 1. de Reform Sixtus 4 ca. graue nimis de reliq or erronious or rash which warrant VViddrington hath not for his opinion rather the Church hath condemned it in Councells and practise as wee haue shewed Who is then so hardie or rather so rash that dareth sweare absolutely that the Pope hath no authoritie to depose Princes or dispose of their Kingdomes the contrarie being not only probable yea more probable which VViddrington can not denie but also a matter of faith or so neerely concerning faith as the arguments and authoritie produced do warrant that Cardinall Allan in his Answer to the libeller sayth Chap. 4. it concerneth the Popes Supremacie and power Apostolicall Apol. pro Card. Bellar. cap. 6. cont 4. pag. 259. and Schulkennius verie well auerreth the contrarie is either hereticall or erronious and temerarious either of which is enough to deterre any timorous conscience But be it that the opinion which holdeth that the Pope in some cases can depose a Prince were but probable yet seing that the thing which is probable may be true and if it be the more common and probable opinion as Widdrington denyeth not but that this opinion of deposing Princes is it is most like to be true It followeth consequently that he that abiureth this probable yea more probable opinion that the Pope can in some case depose Princes exposeth him selfe to probable daunger of swearing false and abiuring the truth and so is periured because qui amat periculum in illo peribit Eccl. 3. he that loueth daunger shall perish therein out of which wordes Diuines do prooue that he who wittinglie and willinglie exposeth him selfe to probable daunger of any sinne is guiltie before God of that sinne as if he had actuallie committed 19. Certes if Veritie be a necessarie companion of a lawfull oath no man can sweare more then he thinketh there is veritie in the thing he sweareth Wherefore that he may sweare that this opinion is probable he must in conscience thinke it at least probable which if he ponder the Authoritie which aboue I haue produced for the contrarie he can not possiblie and with any reason thinke to sweare that he thinketh it not only probable but also absolutely and vndoubtedly true he must in conscience be so perswaded else he should sweare against his conscience and otherwise then in his conscience is true And how can hee perswade him selfe so fullie as to sweare that from his hart and before God he thinketh and holdeth that the Pope in no case can depose Princes or dispose of their Dominions he knowing that so many and with so great reason holde the contrarie who are as likelie and as farre more likelie not to be deceaued then he as they haue more reason and Authoritie for their opinion then he 20. Pag. 62. and Pag. 63. WIDDRINGTON in his Newyeares-gift answereth that whatsoeuer opinioÌ„ a man followeth in Speculation concerning the Popes Authoritie to depriue Princes yet he may as certainelie acknowledge and sweare that the Pope hath no Authoritie to depose the King that is to practise his deposition as it is cleare and manifest that he may certainlie acknowledge and sweare that the Pope hath no authoritie to committe open iniustice and that in a doubtfull vncertaine and disputable case the condition of the possessour is to be preferred But although Widdrington maketh great accounte of this answer yet it will be found defectiue For first VViddrington is not ignorant that the power and exercise of the power are two thinges which also may be separated for we haue the power of seeing when we sleepe but not the exercise of it we haue the power of walking when we repose our selues on our bedde and yet then we walke not And so the power of excommunicating and deposing is one thing and the exercise of it is an other and therfore the Bishop may haue power to excommunicate and yet not exercise that power and the Pope may haue power to depose although he do not actuallie depose any Secondly WIDDRINGTON knoweth that a man may haue the power to do a thing validlie that is so as the thing donne shall stand in force and yet not lawfullie that is with out sinne As for example the Prelate or Soueraigne Prince who haue Authoritie to dispense in positiue lawes subiect to their Authoritie if they dispense with out iust cause the dispensation according to the probable opinion of diuerse Diuines is valid and of force and freeth the dispensed in conscience Soto li. 1 de Iustitia Iure q. 7 a. 3. Siluest Angelus V. Dispensatio but it is vnlawfull and the dispenser sinneth So the Pope or Bishop may sometymes Excommunicate validlie and yet not lawfullie For Diuines affirme Excommunication may be three wayes vniust Ex animo when there is iust cause to excommunicate but the Bishop who excommunicateth doth it not out of Zeale of iustice or desire of amendment but out of enuie hatred or malice Ex ordine when the Bishop hath iust cause to excommunicate but obserueth not the order of Canonicall Premonition which is to be donne thrice or once for thrice Ex cauiâ when there is no iust cause The first excommunication is alwayes valid Lib. 1. Thesauri â—â—suum â—â—â—sci entia ca. 7. but vnlawfull so is ordinarilie the second as noteth Sayrus our countrie man the third is not onlie vnlawfull but also inualid and of no force So also the Pope may depose validlie and yet not lawfullie or without sinne For if the Prince giue sufficient cause of deposition and the Pope notwithstanding should as such a superiour is not easilie to be thought so to do depose the Prince out of hatred or enuie or else when prudeÌ„ce would haue him to tolerate the Prince for feare of garboyles and greater hurte the deposition should be valid and of force but yet vnlawfull and sinnefull Wherefore seing that in this second clause we are to sweare that the Pope hath no power or Authoritie to depose the King or to dispose of his maiesties Kingdomes or Dominions c. Although perchaunce he can not now as thinges stand lawfullie exercise his power in deposing an absolute Prince because much more hurt then good might come of it yet if it be
dependent of it or subordinate vnto it as is to bee seene euidently in the aforesayd and many other examples 34. But as touching Widdringtons examples they are not to the purpose for no marueile that a stone cannot discourse by or with a man a man being not subordinate to a stone nor any instrument of it and so as litle marueile it is that a stone cannot depose a Prince by the Pope as that VViddrington cannot be said to low by an oxe bleate by a sheepe or beare fruite by a tree here being no subordination or dependence as there is in the other examples by me alleadged and in the power of the Prince and Common wealth which euen by WIDDRNIGTONS confession is dependent of the Popes authoritie and may be directed and commaunded by it 35. Secondly this I prooue by reason grounded in the opinion which euen WIDDRINGTON himselfe admitteth Supra cap. 3. sect 4. n. 3. For in the place alleadged he graunted as probable that the Common wealth can depose a Prince though he denieth that authoritie to the Pope Widdr. in Resp Apolog. n. 12.13.14.15.16.21.23.27.28 alibi And in his Apologeticall Answer he confesseth that the Pope hath authoritie to commaunde a Prince in Temporall matters for the necessarie good of the Church as to vse his authoritie and to draw his sword for the necessarie defence therof and that he may inflict Spirituall censures on him if he disobey 36. Now if wee putte this together we shall finde that the Pope euē in widdringtons opinion may depose a Prince by the Common wealth although he could not doe it by himselfe immediately Disp Th. cap. 3. sec 4. n. 2. et 3. for WIDDRINGTON graunteth as probable that the Common wealth can depose a lawfull Prince in case of intollerable tyrannie for he graunteth that the contrairie opinion to wit that the common wealth can not depose a Prince is but probable and he confesseth that the Pope being supreame Pastour of the Church may commaund the Common wealth to vse this her Temporall power when it is necessarie for the conseruation of the Church 〈…〉 And seing that a commaūder is thought to doe that which another doth by his commaundemēt and to bee a principall cause of that of which the cōmaunded is but an executioner if the Pope commaund the Common wealth to depose her Prince and she obey her Pastour as WIDDRINGTON confesseth shee is bound to do then the Pope in that case shal be said to haue deposed the Prince because what the Common wealth doth at his commandment he is said to doe 〈…〉 yea he in that case is the principall agent and the Common wealth his instrument onely and executioner But VViddrington graunteth that the Pope may commaund the Common wealth to depose her Prince ergo he graunteth that the Pope if not by himselfe immediatly yet by another that is by the Common wealth can depose a Prince With what conscience then can VViddrington sweare to that clause of the Oath which sayth that the Pope neither by himselfe nor by any Authoritie of the Church or Sea of Rome or by any other meanes with any other hath any power or authoritie to depose the King c. seeing that he graunteth that the Pope may commaund the Common wealth to do it and that euery man is saied to do that which is done by his lawfull commaundement he being in that case the principall Agent and the Common wealth as is sayed a subordinate Agent and instrument onely 37. Pag. 75.76.77.78.79 To this VViddrington in his Newyearesguift answereth that a commaunder is not a true and proper cause especiallie when he hath not power to do that which he commaundeth but onlie a cause per accidens and so although the Pope should commaund the common wealth to depose their Prince and they at his commaundement should depose him yet the Pope should not be sayd to depose him as a true and proper cause Widdr. in bu Newyearesgift Pag. 65. n. 7. but onlie as a cause per accidēs But first VViddrington in this answer seemeth at least to contradict him selfe for if as he sayeth a commaunder is commonlie sayd to do that thinge which is donne by his commandement it followeth that a commaunder is commonlie counted a cause of that which is done by his commaundement and so if the Pope should commaund the common wealth to depose a Prince the common wealth should depose him at his commaundement he should be counted by the common conceite of men a cause of the deposition and though not by him selfe yet by an other should commonlie be sayd to haue deposed him How then can Widdrington sweare against this that is commonlie sayd to wit that the Pope neither by him selfe nor by any authoritie of the Church or Sea of Rome or by any other meanes hath any power or authoritie to depose the King c. seing that it is probable by WIDDRINGTONS confession that he may be sayd to haue power to depose a King in case of intollerable Tyrannie by the common wealth Wheras VViddrington affirmeth that the Pope in this case commaunding the common wealth should be onlie causa per accidēs a cause by accident in that he applyeth onlie the common wealth which is causa per se and the true efficient cause I must first tell him that euen a cause per accidens is commonlie called a cause and therfore the theefe who applyeth fier to the house and is a cause by accident of burning the same in that he applyeth the fier which is causa per se of the burning of the house is sayd commonlie and absolurelie to haue burned the house and shall be bound to restitution yea and hanged and that iustlie also for burning the house Wherfore if the Pope in that case should be at least causa per accidens he should in common speech be counted the cause of that deposition And therfore if VViddrington durst not sweare that the theefe neither by him selfe nor by any other cause can burne a house if he can by applying the fier that cā burne it how dareth he sweare that the Pope can not either by him selfe or by any other cause depose a Prince seing that he by VViddringtons Confession can by his commaundement apply the common wealth which is a cause per se and sufficient for such an effect Secondlie Widdrington abuseth his tearmes in saying that a cōmaunder is a cause by accident for though he be no phisicall cause of the effect yet he is a morall cause and in that kinde a principall cause and a cause per se which intendeth the effect and moueth the commaunded as an instrumēt and the commaunded though he haue not alwaies from the cōmaunder true authoritie because sometymes the cōmaunder hath none him selfe yet he hath from him morall influence and is sayd to worke the effect by vertue of his commaundemēt And so betwixt the commaunder and the applyer of
fier to the strawe there is great difference because he that applyeth the fier giueth no force nor actiuitie to the fier so his application is but conditio sine qua non and he is causa per accidens but the commaunder sometimes giueth authoritie and alwayes giueth morall influence and motion as doth the principall cause to the instrument and so he is a principall cause and causa per se 38. VVherfore to cleare the matter more I will distinguish three kindes of CoÌ„maunders The First is an vnlawfull commaunder The Second a lawfull Commaunder who hath Authoritie to commaund one to doe a thing but can not do it him selfe The Third is a commaunder who hath authoritie not onlie to commauÌ„d another but may also by him selfe do the thinge commaunded if he will And these are absolutelie called causes and causes principall and per se though not in the same manner In the First kinde are comprehended all Lordes or Masters who commaund theire seruantes or ministers to kill them whom they them selues haue no Authoritie to kill So if a Captaine should commaund his man to kill his enemie or one that standeth in his way of preferment or one whose wife or purse he desireth to haue he is sayd commonlie to be the principall cause Antonin lib. 4. tit 13. part 7. lib. 5. tit 15. part eadeÌ„ Mercado lib. 6. Sum. cap. 7. Vasq in Opusc de Restit c. 9. dis 1. dub 3. the seruant though he be a physicall cause yet he is but a ministeriall and instrumentall cause of the murder and though he haue no true Authoritie from his Master yet he hath as I sayd morall influence and doth the effect by vertue of that morall influeÌ„ce which moueth him And therfore if any restitution be to be made he is bound principallie and in the first place to restore and his seruant is not bound to restitution but in defect of his Master who is the principall cause and gaue morall influence and motion to his seruant although the seruant also because he was bound not to obey his Master shall endure the punishments due to murderers by the law Hence it is that Dâ—â—uines and Canonists do affirme that if the commaunder do recall his commaundemeÌ„t before his seruant hath donne the murder the seruant then shall be the principall and sole cause because after the commaundement is recalled he doth the murder of his owne Authoritie hauing now no morall influence or motion from his Master and so then he onlie is cause of the murder not his Master he onlie is bound to restitution if any be required not his Master and he onlie in the inward courte of Conscience deserueth hanging not his Master though the externall courte oftentymes when it presumeth that the Master did not reuoke his commaundement will pronounce sentence also against the Master In the Second kinde is the Confessarius who according to the common opinion in the Sacrarnent of Confession can commaund his peâ—itent to giue almes and his penitent is borind in conscience to giue the almes be it money bread corne or such like goodes and yet the penitent doth not loose dominion of those goods though he sinne in not giuing them to the poore and so the Confessariâ—us can not iustlie take them from him In the Third kind are Princes who giue authoritie to theire Iudges to coÌ„demne to death and by them or others his officers to the hangman to punish and hange malefactours Because although it be not conuenient for the Kinges Person to execute any immediatlie him selfe yet as he commaundeth and giueth authoritie to others so he might do that acte of iustice him selfe So the Pope or Bishop who giue authoritie to others to heare Confessions might them selues heare Confessions though because of their other affaires they vse not so to do 39. This distinction of commaunders supposed although the Pope had not authoritie of him selfe to depose a Prince yet if he can commaund the common wealth in some case to depose the Prince as VViddrington graunteth he can he should be a true morall and principall cause of the deposition because he should not onlie giue morall influence to the common wealth to depose for that euen an vnlawfull commaunder doth but he should also giue authoritie to the common wealth for although the common wealth hath of it selfe Authoritie to depose a Prince in some case and hath not this Authoritie from the Pope if the Pope haue Authoritie to commaund it followeth that the commoÌ„ wealth obeying his commaundement and Authoritie doth depose by his Authoritie And this to wit that the Pope may depose a Prince mediatlie by the common wealth I prooue out of VViddrington him selfe who to confirme his owne opinion which holdeth that the Pope can not depose a Prince alleageth Ioannes Parisiensis who writeth thus as VViddrington alleageth him Apud Widdr Disp Th. ca. 3. ser 3. n. 7. Si Rex est haereticus incorrigibilis contemptor Ecclesiâ—sticae Censurae porest Papa aliquid facere in populo vnde priuaretur ille saeculari honore deponeretur a populo excommunicando scilicet eos omnes ad quos spectat regem deponere qui ei vt Domino obedirent If a King be an hereticke and incorrigible and a contemner of the Churches Censure the Pope may do some thing in the people whereby he should be depriued of his secular honour and be deposed by the people to wit by excommunicating all those to whome it appertaineth to depose the King who should obey him as Lord. Out of this Aurhour whom WIDDRINGTON alleageth as a fauourer of his opinion I can easilie deduce that which VVIDDRINGTON denyeth to wit that though the Pope coulde not by him selfe depose a Prince yet he might by the Common wealth Because if the Pope can not onlie commaunde the Common wealth but also excommunicate all those subiectes that obey such a Prince he can compelle them to deny obedience to him vnlesse they will be separated by excommunicatioÌ„ from the Church out of which is no saluation If then any one would complayne of that Common wealth for deposing their Prince and denying obedience vnto him the people might answer that the Pope compelled them so to do and to leaue the King vnlesse they would leaue the Church whence followeth that the Pope in that case should be trulie sayd to haue beene the principall cause of deposition because he compelled the Common-wealth to depose him If VViddrington should say to his man kils such an one or I will kill thee who doubteth but that WIDDRINGTON should be counted the principall cause of murder wherfore seing that this Authour whom WIDDRINGTON produceth sayth that the Pope may say to the CoÌ„mon-wealth to whome it appertaineth to depose the Prince depose your Prince or I will separate you from the Church by Excommunication Aug. lib. cont aduers leg Prophet ca. 17. serm 68. de verbis Apost ca. omnis Christianus 11. q.