probable that the Pope hath power to depose as Widdrington confesseth it is probable I demaunde of Widdrington how he can sweare resolutelie that the Pope hath no such authoritie he being not ignorant that many learned men holde it and that more then probable that he hath And so for all this Answer my former Argument is in force wherfore although it were but probable that the Pope hath authoritie to depose a Prince and that consequentlie he could not actuallie without iniustice depose him the cōdition of the Possessour being to be preferred yet seing that the power is one thinge the exercise an other and that it is at least probable that the Pope hath power to depose how can WIDDRINGTON knowing this probabilitie sweare absolutelie that the Pope hath no authoritie to depose As for example one is in possession of a Tenement and hath probable right an other hath also probable right to it but without possession and so can not iustlie dispossesse because in the like defaulte or cause De Reg◠Iuris in 6. better is the condition of him that is in possession Although therfore in this case one might sweare that he who is not in possession can not iustlie dispossesse the partie who hath the possession yet he could not sweare that he hath no right to the Tenement if he know that he hath probable right And therefore although if it were but probable that the Pope can depose one might sweare that he cannot exercise this power iustlie because melior est conditio Principis possidentis yet he could not sweare as in this clause he is commaunded that the Pope hath no power nor right to depose a Prince For as a man may haue probable right to a Tenement and yet can not put him out of possession who also hath probable right because possession hindereth so the Pope might haue probable authoritie to depose yet could not actuallie depose a Prince because his possession hindereth Lastelie by as many Arguments as I haue deduced out of Scriptures Councelles The ologicall principles and practise of holy Popes to prooue that the Pope can in some cases depose a Prince I haue also prooued WIDDRINGTONS opinion improbable And although three or foure Authours or as many as VVIDDRINGTON alleageth may make an opinion probable Vasq 1. 2. disp 62. ca. 4. yet as Vasquez and others do well obserue they must be skilfull in that arte and science and the rest of the torrent of Doctours must admitte it as probable and not note it of errour or temeritie And therfore though some few Doctours holde with VViddrington or rather he with them yet seing that the rest of the Doctours in number learning and sanctitie farre excelling do stand against his opinion that his Authours either holde against him or are censured by the Church that the Decrees of Councelles and facts of Popes do condemne him his Authours and his opinion and that latelie his Chiefe Pastours sentence hath pronounced that the oath of Alleageance containeth thinges contrarie to faith and saluation in which wordes no doubt WIDDRINGTONS opinion the principall subiect of the oath is deepelie taxed how can WIDDRINGTONS opinion be probable and if his opiniō be not probable the contrarie opinion which holdeth that the Pope can depose a Prince must be more then probable and no lesse then certaine as besides other Arguments the Lateran Decree which otherwise should be vniust doth demonstrate whence followeth that the Pope hath not onlie power to depose but may also execute it without iniustice the Prince deposed hauing no probable right or Title remaining And this is the opinion of all those who holde that the Pope can depose Princes and this was the opinion of the Popes so learned and so holie that haue deposed Princes and so must thinke it more then probable else the Prince as I said after deposition should retaine probable right and so being also in Possession could not iustlie be deposed 21. Widdr. Disp Th. cap. 3. sect 3. n. 3. cap. 10. sect 2. n. 11. This Argument will haue more force if we consider that this Oath is not onlie proposed to those that holde with WIDDRINGTON but also to those and those especially who holde against him and can not chaunge their opinion or depose their conscience because they haue no probable reason to depose it at least so as to thinke absolutely and vndoubtedly that the Pope cannot depose Princes or dispose of their Temporall states For although if VViddringtons opinion were probable as it is not they might so depose their conscience as to thinke the contrarie probable and consequently might sweare it is probable yet they can not sweare that they thinke from their hart and before God that VViddringtons opinion is absolutely true and consequently the contrarie absolutely false they knowing that there is such reason and Authority for the contrarie Yea this Oath is proposed to all sortes as well those that are learned as vnlearned as well those that haue capacitie to Iudge of the Oath as those that haue not such as are the most part of those to whome it is tendered And how shall they with any saferie of conscience sweare that before God and in their harts they thinke that the Pope can not depose Princes they being not able to iudge of the matter and knowing no more probabilitie for the one side then for the other 22. VViddrington sayth that those that can not iudge may rely vpon the learned and so though by intrinsecall principles which are the reasons and Arguments which are produced for this opinion they can not iudge which opinion is probable or more probable they being not of capacitie to conceaue of the force of Argumentes yet by extrinsecall principles that is Authoritie of others who are counted good and learned men they may frame to them selues a conscience that the Pope can not depose Princes because many learned and good men holde that opinion To which purpose he citeth his Maister Gabriel Vasquez whome notwithstanding he misconstrueth Vasq 1.2 disp 62. c. 8. For although Vasquez togeather with Henricus Conradus and Siluester whome he alleadgeth do holde that an ignorant man may follow in practise a probable opinion yea the Counsell of a prudent learned and good man who telleth him it is a probable opinion although the common opinion be contrarie And so if VViddringtons opinion were probable might also holde with him and consequently sweare what hee thinketh yet I denie VViddringtons opinion to be probable and haue prooued it not only improbable but also repugnant to scriptures Theologicall reasons Councels and consequently directlie or indirectlie to faith it selfe But suppose which yet I will not graunt that VViddringtons opinion were probable yet neither Vasquez nor any Diuine affirmeth that it is lawfull to sweare absolutely that VViddringtons opinion is true If VViddringtons opinion were probable by reason of the Authoritie of the Authours that holde it then might any
also with great consent both of the Latin and Greeke Church and in it were present the Patriatches of Constant inopole and Hierusalem in their proper persons the Patriatches of Alexandria and Antioche by their Legates Archbishops Latin and Greeke 70. Bishops 412. Abbots and Priours aboue 800. the totall number of all the Prelares were at least 1215. The Legates also of the Greeke and Romane Emperours of the Kinges of Hierusalem France Spaine England and other Princes were present with the rest This Councell then called the Great for the number of Prelates in the Third Chapter after excommunication pronounced against Hereticks admonisheth secular powers and commandeth them to purge their countries from Heretikes and to promise the same by oath then the Councell addeth Si verò Dominus temporalis c. Council Later sub Innoc 111. cap. 3. But if the Temporall Lord being required and admonished by the Church shall neglect to purge his land or Territorie from hereticall lewdnesse let him be excommunicated by the Metropolitane and the rest of his Comprouinciall Bishops And if he contemne to satisfie within a yeare let this his contempt be signified to the Chiefe Bishop the Pope that from that tyme he the Pope may denounce his vasalles freed from all fidelitie vnto him and may expose his land to be possessed by Catholiks who heretickes being exterminated may possesse it without any contradiction and conserue it in puritie of faith without preiudice to the Principall Lords so that he put no obstacle nor impediment the same law notwithstanding obserued concerning those who haue not Principall Lords This Councell I suppose to be of sufficient Authoritie for it was Generall and in number of Prelates and Bishops surpassed the first Councell of NICE by many It was of as great Authoritie as any Councell can be because the Authoritie to make lawes and to decide controuersies dependeth not of the sanctitie but only of the lawfulnes of the Pastours and seing that these Pastours could say as much for their ordination and vocation as the Fathers of the Councell of NICE could it must needs follow that this Councell as are also all lawfull Generall Councels was of as great Authoritie as was that of NICE which our Soueraigne Liege King IAMES admitteth with the other first three Generall Councels In prâ—f monit pag. 37. and consequentlie cannot reiect this which is of the same Authoritie To say that the Pope speaketh onlie of them who are subiect temporally to his Temporall Authoritie which he hath in Italie were ridiculous because the wordes are Generall and if they were restrained to Italie the decree could haue had little force To say that absolute Princes are not comprehended in this decree but onlie inferiour Princes who holde feudum Regale of them is absurd for a little before this alleaged decree the CouÌ„cell ordained that seculares potestates secular powers must take an oath to expell hereticks out of their countries which wordes secular powers agree to absolute Kings and Emperours else when S. PAVL commaunded that euerie soule be subiect to higher powers potestatibus sublimiâ—ribus Rom. 13. Kinges and Emperours must be excepted because they goe not vnder the name of Powers And immediatly after this admonition the Councell addeth the alleaged decree Si verò Dominus Temporalis c. But of the Temporall Lord c. Where she calleth the same Dominos Temporales Temporall Lords whom before she called Potestates saeculares Secular powers And are not Kings and Emperours Domini Temporales Temporall Lords yea and principallie and more properlie to be called so then those Princes that holde of others If Widdrington would denie this Title to our King he would be counted a Traytour And what can they alleage against those others so expresse wordes eâdem nihilominus lege seruatâ circa eos qui non habent dominos principales the same law not withstanding obserued concerning those who haue not principall Lords In which words euen Kinges and Emperours are comprehended for they especially haue no Temporall Lords 3. But let Widdrington vnderstand by secular powers and Temporall Lordes whome he will as certes he spendeth many wordes to shew that by Temporall and principall Lordes absolute Princes are not vnderstoode if the Pope coulde make a decree of deposition against inferiour Princes why not against supreame Princes they in that they are Christians being as subiect to the Church and her Chiefe Pastour as other Christians of inferiour degree Widdr. in discussione discussionâ—s Decreti Concil Lat. sec 5. a. n. 3. Widdrington answereth that the Pope and Generall Councell may make a decree of deposition against inferiour magistrates or Lotdes by consent and Authoritie giuen them by Soueraigne Princes but he can not make a decree of deposition against supreame Princes because they neuer consented neuer gaue him Authoritie against them selues Idem sec 5. nu 15. Hence Widdrington sayth also that all temporall mulctes and punishmentes which the Church decreeth shee decreeth by authoritie giuen her from Princes and that therfore in such penall lawes Christians may refuse to obey till they know that the Prince gaue the Pope and Councell such Authoritie yea that in these lawes they may appeale from Pope or Generall Councell to the Princes But as in other thinges Widdrington to holde vp the cause whose defence he hath vndertaken is forced to helpe him selfe with the worst opinions and to seeke authoritie from the obscurest Authours and these of the least credit So dealeth he in this for he is not ignorant that whatsoeuer some one or two Authours may say that all the current of Diuines mislike them in this and counte it straunge yea and absurde to say that all the penall lawes of the Church which prescribe Temporall mulctes related in the Canon law and in Councelles should haue theire force not from the Councelles and Pastours but from Kinges and Princes For although they confesse that Princes gaue to the Pope his Temporall Demaines and consequentlie Temporall and princelie Authoritie within the limites of the same yet in what meeting of Princes in what Councell did euer Princes conspire to giue the Pope Temporall Authoritie through out the whole Church And in the last Generall Councell of Trent in which diuerse Temporall penalties are decreed what mention is there of the Princes donation of Authoritie to the Councell Princes and Emperours by them selues or their Legates are present at the Councell to protect the Fathers to assist them for execution of theire lawes but that they euer gaue authoritie to the Councell to enact any Temporall law or that the Fathers of the Councell and the Chiefe Pastour of the Church demaunded licence and Authoritie of the Emperour or Princes to make such lawes who euer read who euer heard And why could not the Princes why would not they them selues enact such lawes in their owne name as sometimes they haue don against Heretickes that being a thinge more honourable for them and
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
examples of the ould 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 chap. 8. By Theologicall arguments grounded in principles of faith and the Nature of the church as it is an absolute common wealth the same power of the Supreame Pastour is prooued chap. 9. The same verity is confirmed by the practise of the Church in punnishing heretickes temporally with losse of goods liberty and liues chap. 10. The same power of the Pope ouer Princes is prooued by authority of Generall Councelles out of which are gathered for the same authority â—uident and conuincing arguments chap. 11. By the facts of the holy and learned Bishops of Rome especially Gregorie the seauenth the same power is confirmed chap. 12. By the number of Doctours who haue embraced the opinion that giueth this power to the Pope the same doctrine is prooued betwixt the number grauity and authority of which Doctours and those who staÌ„d for VViddringtons opinion there is no comparison to be made chap. 13. By the doctrine and practise of heretikes the same against them is demonstrated and thence is inferred that the questioÌ„ betwixt vs and them is not so much whether the Pope hath any such authority as whether the Pope or they haue it chap. 14. An explication of the late Oath of pretended Alleageance and of euery clause therof deduced out of the former and some other grounds by which is prooued that it can neither be proposed nor taken without grieuous offence of Almighty God Chap. 15. THE RIGHT AND IVRISDICTION OF THE PRELATE and the PRINCE CHAPTER I. BY WAY OF INTRODVCTION IT IS shewed that there be two powers in the Church the one Ciuill the other Ecclesiasticall which are both necessarie ALMIGHTY God in the first creation of this materiall world Gen. 1. prouided two great lightes to illuminate rule and gouerne it the one he called luminare maius the other luminare minus we commonly call them the SuÌ„ne Moone And no sooner had he created as it were the spirituall world of his Church but he appointed also two great lightes to gouerne it and direct it to the end prefixed The one is the Ecclesiasticall power of the Church residing in her Bishops and Pastours the other is the Temporall power of the CoÌ„mon wealth Magistrate or Prince Both powers are great in their kind both of God both as necessary to humane societie as the SuÌ„ne and Moone to this world Gelas ep ad â—mp Anastas VVherfore GELASIVS Pope saith Duo sunt Imperator Auguste quibus hic muÌ„dus principaliter regitur Autoritas sacra PomificuÌ„ Innoc. 3. Cap. Solitae de maior obed Regalis potestas Two thinges there are O noble Emperour by which this world is principallie gouerned the sacred Authoritie of Bishops and Regal power And Innocentius the Third vsing the former similitude saieth Ad firmamentum Coeli hoc est vniuersalis Ecclesiae fecit Deus duo magna luminaria id est duas instituit dignitates quae sunt Pontificalis Authoritas Regalis Potestas For the FirmameÌ„t of Heauen that is of the vniuersal Church God made two great lights that is he instituted two Dignities which are Pentifical Authoritie and Regal power But because the world now adaies aboundeth and as it were swarmeth with those kind of men whoÌ„ the Apostle calleth Animales homines 1. Cor. 2. quinoÌ„ sapiunt ea quae sunt spiritus sensual men who perceaue not those thinges that are of the spirit of God and therfore preferre the body before the soule this present life before the future time in which they are to liue but for a time before eternitie in which they are to liue eternally and consequently esteeme more of state then of Religion of the Common wealth then the Church and of the Temporall power of Princes then of the spirituall authoritie of Pastours I will by cleare and euident arguments so establish both that I will also sincerely deliuer which of them hath the preeminence and precedence For they who seeke to depriue vs of either of these powers do as if they would take from the world the Sunne or the Moone as though both were not necessary and they who do so admire the Temporall power and dignitie that they debase and misprise the spirituall though that indeede ruleth only the night of TeÌ„porall affaires this the day of the spirituall state are like vnto Owles who are so pleased with the Moone light that they could be contented there were no Sunne at all CHAPTER II. Some Ciuill power floweth immediatly froÌ„ God and nature Regali power proceedeth immediatly from the peoples election and donatioÌ„ mediatly from Gods ordination so that after the election of the people and reception the King is superiour who may command and binde in conscience the people are subiects and bound to obey 1. MAn by a naturall propension which God and Nature hath ingraffed in him desireth to consorte in companie and is prone to frieÌ„dship fellowship and societie And therfore Aristoâ—le saieth that Arist l. 1 Polit. ca. 2. Ciuitas est ex his quae natura sum The citie is one of those things which haue their source from nature and that homo natura ciuile est animal Man by nature is a ciuill liuinge creature And he addeth Ibidem Qui absque ciuitate est per naturam non per fortunam aut nequam est aut potior quam homo He that liueth out of the citie induced therto by inclination of nature not by fortuâ—e is either wicked orbâ—tter then man Ibidem Yea saith he Qui in coÌ„mum societate nequiâ— esse quique nullim indiget propter sufficientiam nulla pars est â—iuitatis quare aut Bestia aut Deus He that can not liue in common societie and needeth no mans hâ—lp by reason that he is sufficient of him selfe is no part of the Citie VVherfore he is either a beast or a God And thence he concludeth that Homo est sociale animal magis quà m Apes quà m omne gregariuÌ„ animal Man is a liuing creature more sociable theÌ„ bees or any consorting liuing creature And we see by experience how all reasonable and liuing Creatures desire societie The Angelles although they haue no familiar conuersation with meÌ„ as being aboue the raÌ„ke of men needing no humane helpe yet they haue Hierarchies and Orders rule and gouernment amongst them selues and the superiour illuminateth the inferiour and all of them speake and confer with one another and in this maÌ„ner they liue together which argueth a societie 〈◊〉 and though they conuerse not visibly and familiarly With vs yet for the charitie they beare vnto vs and for the neede we haue of theÌ„ some of them are our ordinary Guardians others are extraordinary Embassadours sent on diuine messages
with his owne bloud But neither he nor any Apostle euer gaue that charge to Princes Fiftelie they differ in the cause efficient for the Ciuill and Temporall Power proceeds from God and Nature by meanes of the peoples election as is in the former Chapter declared but the spirituall power of the Church as it implieth Potestatem ordinis Iurisdictionis in foro interiori is from God immediatelie it being supernaturall and exceeding humane power And although the Ecclesiasticall humane power which inferiour Prelates haue proceeded from superiour Prelates especiallie the Pope yet not from the Prince or Common wealth but from the Pastours and Church So that as the Pope Priests and Church doe willinglie acknowledge the temporall and ciuill power of the Prince Magistrates and Common wealth or Kingdome so the Prince Magistrates and Common wealth must be content to recognize a spirituall power of the Pope Bishops Priests and Church to which obedience is due euen of Princes who are subiect to the Church no lesse then are temporall subiectes to the Prince yea rather more 7. This power all true Christians and Catholickes acknowledge none but Heretickes and Infidels deny The Waldenses Guido Carmel in har VVald Turrecr l. 4. SuÌ„ma de Eccl c. 35. CoÌ„c Const sess 8. et 15. a. 14 Luth. a. 27. Dan in Bulla Leon. 10 Cal l. 4. Inst ca. 20 n. 6. 7. as witnesse Guido and Turrecremata as also VVicleph and Hus as the Councell of Constance relateth denyed all Ecclesiasticall power and sayed that Popes and Bishops Decrees and Canons did not bynd any The same is Luthers opinion Caluin affirmeth that neither the Pope nor his mitred Caluin sayeth horned Bishops can bynde mens Consciences by their decrees and ordinances and that for two causes First because they are no true Bishops which yet neither he nor all his secte could euer prooue Secondlie because though they were true Bishops yet they are not legislatours or lawmakers that Tytle agreeing only to Christ only he and his graunt that they may inculcate Gods lawes but make no newe 8. Well it is knowen that is was alwaies the manner of Heretickes to contemne all Ecclesiasticall Authoritie because it condemned them But as I haue alleaged proofes in the former Chapter for Ciuill power of Princes so can I not want argumentes for the spirituall and Ecclesiasticall power when Christ promised PETER that he should be the foundation and head of the Church he promised this power in and ouer the Church Mat. 16. for if PETER be head of the Church he can rule the mysticall bodie and if he can rule the same then can he also make Ecclesiasticall lawes for that is belonging to a superiour of euerie great and perfect communitie as is before shewed Secondlie Christ gaue this power to PETER when after his Resurrection he saied Pasce oues meas Feede my sheepe Ioan. 21. For the office of a Pastour may be gathered by the office of a shepheard who is to gouerne his sheepe to feede them and to defend them from the wolfe and so a spirituall shepheard and Pastour must haue authoritie to rule by lawes to feede by preaching and Sacraments and to defend by censures and his Pastorall staffe and coerciue power Eph. 4. VVhereupon Saint Paul saith that Christ hath giuen to his Church not only Doctours and Prophetes to teach but also Pastours to feede and gouerne And seing that the Church hath as much neede now of a supreame visible Pastour and rather more then at the beginninge it followeth that PETER hath a successour who hath the like Authoritie And seing that all Fathers all Councelles all histories all practise of the Church possession and prescription for 1600. yeares stande for the Pope of Rome he is this successour and he it is that hath the supreame Ecclesiasticall and spirituall power after Christ Thirdlie Mat. 18. Christ commandeth to obey the Church and saith That he that will not giue eare to the Church is to be accounted as an Ethnike and Publican which is a signe that the Church hath Authoritie and Iurisdiction to heare causes and to pronounce sentences to which obedience is to be giuen Fourthlie not withstanding that in the old law of Moyses God determined almost all by him self by his morall iudiciall and ceremoniall lawes yet he gaue power to the Synagogue and her Pastours to interprete the law to resolue doubtes concerning the law and to enact some lawes as occasion was offred And therefore we see with what seueritie God commanded obedience to the Priests saying Deut. 17 Si difficile â—mbiguum c. If thou perceaue that the Iudgement with thee be hard and doubtfull betweene bloud and bloud cause and cause leprosie and leprosie and thou â—â—e that the wordes of the Iudges within thy gate do â—arie arise and ge vp to the place which our Lord thy God shall choose and thou shalt come to the Priests of the Leuiticall stocke and to the Iudge that shall be at that time and thou shalt aske of them who shall thew thee the truthe of the Iudgement And thou shalt do what soeuer they that are Presidents of the place which our Lord shall choose shall say and teach thee according to his law and thou shalt follow the sentence c. And he that shal be prooued refusing to obey the commandement of the Priest which at that time ministreth to our Lord thy God and the decree of the Iudge that man shall die and thou shalt take away the euill out of Israel and the whole people shall feare that none asterward swell with pride By which we see that the Highe Priest had Power not only directiue but also coerciue vnder paine of death And we read how the victorie of Iudith ouer Holofernes was celebrated by the Iewes with commandement of a holie daye Iudith vlt. which law was merelie Ecclesiasticall made by the Priests and was not commanded by God his law The like festiuall day was decreed by Mardocheus and receaued by the Iewes in memorie of their deliuerie from Amans tyrannie by meanes of Hester Hester 9. which also was no diuine but an humane and Ecclesiasticall law Likewise the Machabees instituted the feast of the Dedication 1. Mach. 4. Ioan. 10. which Christ afterwards obserued with the rest of the Iewes and yet this was not commanded by God his law Againe Christ commandeth to do that which they who sitt in Moyses Chaire doe saie Mat. 23. but not alwaies what they doe much more would he haue vs to do that Lib. 4. Inst cap. 20. n. 21. Act. 15. which they who sitt in Saint Peters yea Christs seate do command And we read in the Actes which Caluin well saw but glosseth vntowardlie how the Apostles in their first Councell made a new law by which they commanded the conuerted Gentils to abstaine from eating of bloud and things strangled which were now the olde lawe being abrogated things
Prieste and commandement of the Emperour And therfore when S. AMBROSE sayth Dolere potero poteroflere c. I may be sorie I may weepe I may groane Against armes souldiours and the Gothes my teares are my weapons For such are the armes and defences of the Priest Other wise I neither must nor can resist VVhen I say S. AMBROSE saith that he hath no other armes but teares and prayers hee meaneth only that the ordinarie weapons of the Church are Spirituall but denieth not but that in an extraordinarie case the Church and Chiefe Pastour may vse Temporall armes when spirituall weapons are not sufficient CHAPTER X. The same verity is confirmed by the practise of the Church in punishing heretickes temporally with losse of goods liberty and liues 1. THe Church is a Citie on a Hill Matt. 5 and therfore so illuminated by the Sonne of Iustice that no cloud of errour can obscure or endarken her Mat. 16. Shee is builded on a Rocke so surelie that the gates of hell heresies can neuer preuaile against her 1. Tim. 3. Shee is the pillar of truth and therfore can not maintain any vntruth Shee is the Spouse of Christ Osee 2. and so priuie to all his secrets Shee is so guided by her Head Christ Iesus so directed by his and his Fathers spirit the Holy ghost that she can not erre either in her definitions or generall practises and customes and therfore S. AVGVSTINE saith that to call in question quod tota per orbem frequentat Ecclesia Aug. ep 118. that which the whole Church through out the world practiseth is insolentissima insania most insolent madnes Amongst other of her practises one is and that verie auncient and generall to punish by sword or fire or els by Temporall mulctes an obstinate Hereticke And therfore to doubt whether it be lawfull or no August ep 48. 50. l. Mâ—nichaeos l. A riani l. quicunque C. de haeret Cap. ad abolendam Ca. vergentis c. excoÌ„municamus 1. 2. de haeret is by S. AVGVSTINES rule most insolent madnes This practize I know pleaseth not hereticks no more then the execution of Iustice is liked of Malefactours And therfore the a August li. 2. contra epist Parmen ca. 7. lib. 2. contra lit Petil. cap. 10. lib. 2. coÌ„tra ep GaudeÌ„t cap. 17. 26. Donatists and b Ioan. Huss art 14. Constantia damnat Hussits in times past and of late c Luth. in Assert a. 33. Luther to saue their owne skinnes stifly stand to it that the Church cannot punish hereticks Temporally especially with death and the same d In Assart art 33. Luther in one of his articles condemned by LEO the Tenth sayth haereticos comburi estcontra voluntatem spiritus that heretickes should be burned is against the will of the spirit To whom not withstanding Caluin in practise subscribed not for he caused Michael Seruetus to be burnt reseruing for him selue his goulden Chaine as e Resp pag. 54. Restius reporteth both he and Beza by and by published in print that it is lawfull to vse the Temporall sword against Hereticks which also Benedictus Aretius alloweth in his historie De supplicio Valentini Gentilis And certes that Hereticks may be temporally punished by the Church I haue alreadie prooued by many places of scripture especiallie out of the olde Testament out of which I may argue for the Churches practise with S. Ciprian Cypr de Exhort Martyrij cap. 1. Si ante aduentum Christi circa Deum colendum Idola speruenda haec praecepta seruata sunt quaÌ„to magis post aduentum Christi sunt seruanda quando ille veniens non verbis tantum nos hortatus sit sed factis If before the Comming of Christ those precepts were obserued touching the worshiping of God and reiecting of Idols how much more are they to bee obserued after the coming of Christ seing that hee coming hath not exhorted vs onlie by words but also by deeds Aug ep 48 et 50. S. AVGVSTIN speaking of the hereticks of his time sayth Videte qualia faciunt qualia patiuntur Occidunt animas affliguÌ„tur in corpore See what things they do and what they suffer they kill soules and are punished in bodie they kill sempiternally Lib. 2. coÌ„tra lit Petil â—a 7. li. 1. contra Parm. cap. 7. Concil Calced Act. 1. Anton. 3. pâ—tit 19. c. 1. §. 4. and suffer Temporall deathes And in diuers other places he prooueth that they may be punished Temporally though once he was of opinion that they should not be forced by the sword but persuaded onlie by the word Dioscorâ—â— Bishop of Alexandria in the first Action of the Councell of Calcedon Si Eutyches praeter dagma Ecclesiae sapit noÌ„ solum paenâ dignus est sed igne If Eutyches thinke otherwise then the Church teacheth he deserueth not onely to be punished but also to be burned VVhereupon S. Antonine reporteth that in the time of INNOCENTIVS the Third no lesse then a hundred and fourescore Hereticks of the Albigenses were burned for obstinat and pertinacious maintaining of their damnable sect Concil Constat sess 15. art 14. And in the Councell of Constance IOHN HVS and HIEROM of Prage were condemned to the same death In praem Concil Nicen. Sozom. li. 1. c 20 Sòcr li. 1 cap 6 Niceph. li. 8. cap. 18. can Ipsapietas 23. qu. 3 l. Quicunque C de haeret Et ca. ad abolendam ca. vergeÌ„tis c. excom municamus v. c. absolutos de haret Concil Lateran sub Innâ—c 3. can 3. l. Cuncti l. Ariani l. Manichaeos C. de heret and ended their miserable life by fire VVhere also Hvs his fourtenth Article in which he affirmed coÌ„trarie to this practise that the Prelats of the Church in deliuering Hereticks to secular power were like to the Scribes and Pharisees who procured Christs death and yet said Nobis non licet interficere quenquam It is not lawfull for vs to kill any was condemned Certes in the Councell of NICE ARRIVS bookes were commanded to be burnt vnder paine of death as he and his followers were banished In THEODOSIVS the Emperours time hereticks were mulcted and punished in their purses And after MARTIAN and VALENTINIAN decreed punishment of death against them The Common law also is full of Temporall punishments prescribed for hereticks They are deliuered vp to the secular power to be punnished according to the Emperours lawes their goods are confiscated Aduocates and Notaries that fauour them are sufpended from their offices and made by the law infamous for euer They are depriued of the right of making their last Will and Testament or succeeding by Testament and are condemned to perpetuall prison Finally those that were bound to Hereticks are freed from their bonds 2. If VViddrington answer that this Argument prooueth onlie that Hereticks may be punished yet not by the
lesse daungerous to them seing that by permitting Popes and Bishops to doe it they might derogate to their owne authoritie and giue occasion to them to prescribe against them and to do it not in the Princes but in their owne name and Authoritie And when did WIDDRINGTON heare that any good Christians appealed from the Church and Pope in these lawes vnto Princes as to their highest Superiours when did they reiect any of these lawes till they had informed them selues that they were made not by the Churches but by the Princes authoritie Certes WIDDRINGTON in this openeth a wide gap for Heretickes and all contemners of the Churches authoritie And what may he not defend if he be permitted to vse this libertie and audacitie As for his Authours we shall see hereafter in the ensewing thirteenth Chapter how many they are and of what Authoritie 4. Wherfore my Argument shall proceede as it began in this manner The Pope by VViddrington can make a Decree to depose inferiour Temporall Lordes ergo Supreame Princes they as Christians being as subiect te the Church by Baptisme as aboue is shewed in the 5. Chapter num 4.5.6 as much as the lowest Christians though in that they are absolute Princes they haue no Superiour but God in Temporall Authoritie To say that Pope INNOCENT made this Decree of his own head is but to shew great ignorance for in Generall Councels Popes speake ex Cathedra and as publick not priuate persons and what they decree is With the common consent of all the Bishops or the most part else if the Pope should do all of his owne head in vaine should he assemble Generall Councels But that all the Councell and Christian world consented to this decree it is cleare enough for that no mention is made of any variance betwixt the Pope and the Councell in this matter To say that the true Councell of Laterane is not extant or that the Canons extant were compiled only by INNOCENTIVS because in this Councell the Councell of Laterane though not this but another is cited and alleadged are so improbable euasions that they merit not confutation and are verie suffieientlie reiected by the booke called Discussio decreti Magni Concilij Lateranensis 5. One thinge there is bearing more shew which our Aduersaries might alleage to wit that if this Councell did in expresse tearmes define that the Pope hath power to depose Princes they would then yeeld because what a Generall Councell with the Pope defineth directly and expresly is a mattet of faith and it is heresie to gainsay it But seing that all thinges spoken or written in a Councell are not matters of faith for as Diuines commonlie say the reasons which the Councell bringeth for confirmation of her decree and those things which are spoken incidentlie Bellarm. lib 2. de Concil cap. 11. 12. and the things which are determined as probable are not of necessitie to be beleeued it seemeth that by this decree we are not bound to beleeue that the Pope can depose Princes because though the Pope and Councell make a decree of deposition yet they define not expresly nor sub Anathemate vnder paine of Curse that the Pope can depose Princes 6. But who so pleaseth to consider this decree well and without all passion or partiall affection must needs confesse that this decree ought to be of verie great credit for first the Pope and Councell suppose at least that the pope can depose Princes else they would neuer haue made such a Decree and consequentlie this decree argueth that the Pope and all the Prelates Princes and Legates present were of that opinion which no doubt they being so many and so learned must needs beare a great sway amongst all good Christians for what they thought all the Christian world at least for the most part thought all receauing and approouing this Councell But widdringtoÌ„ will say that he will not denie but that they all thought so piouslie and probablie yet because they defined not in expresse tearmes that the Pope can depose Princes he will not beleeue it A peremptorie Answer certainlie and wherin to say no more the Answerer shall shew him selfe verie slow and hard of beleefe and to hardie also who blusheth not to gainsay so many learned and godlie Prelates and whome so many graue countenances and Iudgements can not moue 7. But I will deale yet another Way and out of the selfe same decree Although the Pope and Councell in the alleaged decree do not expreslie define that Popes can vpon iust cause depose Princes yet it argueth that they nor onlie probablie but verilie and assuredlie thought he could else to haue grounded so odious a decree and iniurious also if the Pope haue not Authoritie vpon a probable opinion had bene great rashnesse For the Councell had exposed therby if the opinion had not bene supposed most assured the King and Common wealth yea and sometimes the whole Church to vprores garboiles rebellious warres and such like And warre should haue bene iust also on both sides For the subiects might haue refused to obey the deposed Prince as being freed by a Generall Councels authoritie from all obligation to him and being warranted by the same Councell that now he is no more their King but an vsurper and Inuader against whom euerie particuler man hath iustum bellum iust warre And so as if a forraine Prince should vniustlie inuade France without iust title or wrong receiued euerie Frenchman might resist him if he could because he hauing no Title all the Kingdome and euerie particuler member hath iust warre against him so if a Prince deposed persist in gouernment he is according to the Popes and Councels opinion which VViddrington confesseth to be probable an vsurper and inuader and consequentlie euerie one of his former subiects hath iust warre against him Cicero lib. 3. de offic Hâ—rodotus lib. 3. Xiphilin in Augusto AlexaÌ„d ab Alex. li. 3. c. 26 D. Th in 2. d. vlt. q. 2. a. 2. ad 5 Sot lib. 5. de Iust q. 1. art 3. alij infra cap. 15. citandi no lesse then as all the best Philosophers and Diuines teach the subiectes haue against an vsurper of the crowne And yet this Prince deposed might iustlie also persist in his possession because no man is bound to forgoe that to which he hath probable right being warranted by the rule of the law †Reg. 65 de Regulis Iuris in 6. In pari delicto velcausa potior est conditio possidentis In the like default or cause better is the condition of him that is in possession And againe * Reg. 11 ibid. Cum sunt iura partium obscura reo fauendum est potius quà m Actori VVhen the rightes of the parties are obscure the guiltie or accused is to be fauoured before the Actour or accuser But the Prince in this case hath according to VViddrington probable right and is in possession and he is reus not Actors
may by a compendious satisfaction take from all all scruple of scandall behould our Lords Bodie which I shall take and receaue let it be to mee this day a triall or experiment of myne Innocencie that Almighty God may this day either absolue me by his Iudgement from suspicion of the crime obiected against mee if I be Innocent or may kill me by sodain death if I be guiltie Then he demaūded of the Emperour whether he would make the like protestation but he hauing a guiltie conscience durst not After this the Emperour contemning all former promises and oathes returned to his vomit Wherfore the same Pope in the Councell also at ROME anno 1080. excommunicated him againe and againe declared him still deposed being before onlie absolued from excommunication and admitted to the Communion 10. Widdr. Disput Theol. c. 3. sect 1. n. 8. But VViddrington excepteth against this Councell for that it was not Generall But certes the Authoritie of this Councell is sufficient to moue any true Christian hart and child of the Church For many thinges giue this Councell great credit First as Schulckenius well obserueth it was confirmed by the Pope Schulck in Apol. pro Bellarm pag. 260. which according to the common opinion makes a matter of faith because to PETER and consequentlie to the Pope it was sayd super hanc Petram aedificabo Ecclesiam meam Luc. 22. and vpon this Rocke will I build my Church and to him CHRIST sayd Ego rogaui pro te Petre vt non deficiat fides tua tu aliquando conuersus confirma fratres tuos I haue prayed for thee PETER that thy faith fayle not and thou once conuerted confirme thy brethren Where CHRIST prayed for PETER as a publick person and that he might not erre in teaching others because CHRIST prayed for him that he might confirme others and so if the Chiefe Pastour do speake ex Cathedra though not in a Generall but only in a Prouinciall Councell it makes a matter of faith according to the cōmon a D. Th. 2.2 q. 1. art 10. Waldēs lib. 2. doctrin Fidei cap. 47. et 48 Turrecr l. 2. summae cap. 109. Driedo lib. 4. de Eccles dogm ca. 3. par 3. Caiet in opusc de potestate Papae Conc. ca. 9. Canus lib. 6. de locis c. 7. Bellarm. lib. 4. de Pont. c. 2. Du Valle l. de supr Pōt Author par 2. q. 1. alij opinion For although many heresies were condemned by Generall Councels yet farre more by Popes with their ordinarie Councell or Prouinciall Councels onely as the Quartadecimi by Pope VICTOR the Nouatians by CORNELIVS the Pelagians by INNOCENTIVS and ZOZIMVS and many other hereticks and heresies by other Popes without Generall Councels All which to call in question were to bring into doubt many Decretall Episties and to giue a great scope to many Hereticks to plead not guiltie as not being condemned by a Generall Councell Secondlie the Pope that decreed the deposition of HENRIE the fourth was a great Saint who was brought vp as him selfe often confesseth from a child in the schoole of S. PETER and so knew well the practise of the Church he wrought myracles liuing and dead and left many other testimonies of his great sanctitie and innocencie of life All which is abundantly testified by diuers authors whome b Bellar. lib. 4. de Rom. Pont. cap. 13. Bellarmine citeth and is recorded also by c Baron tom 11. an 1084. n. 10. an 1085. n. 11. 13. Baronius Thirdlie his successours VICTOR the third VRBANVS the second PASCHALIS and others approoued this sentence of Excommunication and deposition Fourthlie all the Christian world except a few Schismatikes followers of the Emperour and the Antipape whom he sett vp fauoured and approoued the sentence as is easie to be seene in d Baron to 11. in Greg. 7. Baronius WILLIAM the Cōquerour King of England PHILIP King of France ALPHONSVS King of Castile CANVTVS King of Denmarke ROBERT Count of Flanders and other Princes held with GREGORIE the seuenth Yea the learnedst and holyest Bishops and Abbots were all for GREGORIE the seuenth as HVGO Abbot of Clunie BERNARDVS Abbot of Massilia DESIDERIVS Abbot of Cassina and after successour to Pope GREGORIE chosen so much against his will that for a yeere he would not vndertake the charge S. ALPHONSE Bishop of Salernum our learned LANERANC Archbishop of Canterburie Sainct ANSELME Bishop of Luca Abbas Vrsperg ad an 1080. to whom Vrspergensis though a Schismatick giueth this commendation Anselmus Lucensis liter is apprimè eruditus ingenio acutissimus facundia praecipaus quod omnibus maius est in Dei timore sancta conuersatione nominatissimus adeo vt tam in vitâ quà m post mortem referatur miraculis clarus Anselme of Luca greatlie learned most sharpe of witt principall in Eloquence and which is more then all most famous for his feare of God and holie conuersation in so much that he is sayd to haue floruished with miracles in his life tyme and after his death So this Schismaticke who followed the Emperour and Guibert the Antipape saith of him This S. ANSELME wrote an Epistle to Guibert the Antipape Baron anno 1080. num 29. in which he compared GRBGORIE the seuenth to S. CORNELIVS Pope and called Guibert the Antipape à Preuaricatour Lastlie all the Christian world sauing the Schismatikes applauded it none called this deposition in question none but Schismatikes doubted of his Authoritie So that the Emperour was deposed as it were by consent of the whole Church 14. I could alleage also that this Councell in which HENRIE the fourth was deposed did not onlie depose him but also did define that the Pope can depose Princes for to the same Councell Baron tom 11. an 1076. num 31. as BARONIVS affirmeth appertaine GREGORIE the seuenth his Breuiores sententiae shorter sentences which are intitled Dictatus Papae amongst which this is one Quod Papae liceat Reges deponere That it is lawfull for the Pope to depose Kinges Another is Quod à fidelitate iniquorum subiectos potest absoluere That he can absolue subiects from their fidelitie promised to wicked Kinges Neither are Widdringtons exceptions against these shorte sentences Widdr. Disput Thcol. c. 3. sect 1. n. 6. and definitions of any moment As for example Suppose sayth he these sentences were defined in that Councell of Rome Quomodo tibi constat eat tanquam propositiones ad fidem pertinentes non vt probabiles solùm assertiones definitas esse How knowest thou that those propositions are defined as appertaining to faith and not as probable assertions only By which exception he might except almost against all the Canons in all the Generall Councels and euen against the Generall Councell of Trent in whose Canons he shall finde Anathema pronounced but seldome in the doctrine defined in the Chapters And so when the Councell defineth any
at that venerable Councell of Trent Bochel in praef ad lectorem saying quantas nouissimis temporibus vbique terrarum excitarit turbas Synodus Tridentina nemo est qui nesciat what troubles in these latter times the Councell of Trent hath stirred vp no man is ignorant And in an other place he seekes to exempt the King of Fraunce and his Officers from Excommunication Lib. 2. tit 16. cap. 3. as though they could not be excoÌ„municated by their Pastour wherin whilest he would exalt his King he depresseth him so lowe as that he maketh him of Christianâ—ssimus which title he hath worthilie long enioyed not to be Christianus because if he be a Christian he is a sheepe of Christ and consequentlie of S. PETER to whom Christ committed his sheepe Ioan. 21. Pasce oues meas and consequentlie also of the Bishop of Rome his successour yea and of other Pastoures and therefore for a iust cause may be by them seuered from the folde by Excommunication Lib. 5. c. 45. pag. 906. en Extraic d'aucuns articâ—tes du Concile de Trent Likewise in his 5. booke he setteth downe an extract of many of the Decrees of the Councell of Trent which like to no good Catholicke he reiecteth as contrarie to the libertie and practise of Fraunce Yea in many places vpon the least occasion he glaunceth against that hohe and renowned Councell Wherefore as in other thinges so in this which he fathereth on Cardinall Pelue and other Prelates he deserueth no credit Secondlie the imputation which he layeth on them is so absurd that I can not beleeue that they who were well seene in the Councelles Decrees would euer reiect that Decree of the Councell because that Decree onlie depriueth a Kinge of the citie place or Dominion which he holdeth of the Church as is manifest by those wordes quâ—d ab â—cclesia obtinent Concil Trid. â—ess 25. c. 19. which they holde of the Church wherfore either the Kinge of Fraunce holdeth some citie or demaine of the Pope and Church or he doth not If he do no marueile that the Pope can in that case depriue him the Pope being in this his Temporall Lord of whome he holdeth that Temporall Dominion if he be not that extract of BOCHELLVS is most absurd which he setteth downe in these french wordes Lâ— concile excommunie priue le Roy de la Ville on lieu Bochell lib. 5. tit 20. c. 45. pag. 916 En extraict d'aueuns articles du Concile de Trent ou il aurà permis vn duel sess 25. cap. 19. the Councell of Trent excommunicateth and depriueth the Kinge of the towne or place where he shall permitte a duelle sess 25. cap. 19. where we see that he ascribeth to the Councell as though it did absolutelie depriue the King of whatsoeuer towne or place wheras the Councell depriueth him onlie of that towne or place which he holdeth of the Church And therefore these wordes following Ceste Article est contre l'authoritie du Roy qui ne peut estre priuè de son temporel ou partie d'iceluy pour le regard duquel il ne recognoit aucun Superieur quelque il soit This Article is against the Authoritie of the Kinge who can not be depriued of his temporallities or any part therof in respect of which he acknowledgeth no Superiour these wordes I say are most absurde and vnworthie that graue Assemblie not vnbeseeming Bochellus whose spirit they resemble Wherefore this booke of Bochellus is forbidden to be printed or solde in Catholicke countries where the Councell of Trent is receaued and where a Censor librorum is appointed And yet such authours Widdrington is enforced to fly vnto 16. He alleageth also Mr. George Blacwell the late Archpriest who in his examination and as Widdrington sayth euen to his death persisted in Widdringtons opinion concerning both the oath and deposition of Kinges But it is well knowne to many that Mr. Blacwell whilest he was at libertie was so Zealous for the Popes Authoritie deposing that he thought it a matter of faith And I haue heard a Catholicke Gentleman named who visiting M. Blacwell in Prison sayd vnto him did not you M. Blacwell heretofore tell me that the oath of allegeance was in no case lawfull And Widdrington him selfe knoweth that in a certaine conference betwixt the Archpriest and other Priests at which VViddrington him selfe was present Mr. Archpriest sayd he thought the Pope had Authoritie to depose a Prince but yet matters standing as they did he could not lawfullie exercise it Yea in that conference also WIDDRINGTON him selfe was ZEALOVS for this the Popes authoritie though after his imprisonment and after his Chiefe Pastours Breues which should haue confirmed him he hath chaunged his opinion Let then the Reader iudge of what Authoritie the wordes of a fearfull olde man then Prisoner and straightlie examined are he especiallie hauing auerred the contrarie when he was at libertie what else can hence be gathered then that rather out of feare then Iudgement he allowed the oath when he was in his Aduersaries handes of whom otherwise he expected all rigour And perchaunce WIDDRINGTON him selfe who before his imprisonement was so Zealous for the Popes authoritie and against the oath hath not now so much chaunged his minde as his tounge nor speaketh not so much out of iudgement and opinion as out of feare or faintenesse of harte And now that he hath begun he thinkes he must go forward 17. Lastely he alleageth in all his bookes the 13. Reuerend Priestes thinking by their Authoritie and credit for they were graue and learned men constant confessours and twoe of them glorious martirs to grace and credit his opinion But because they are able enough to answer for them selues I will not entermeddle my selfe in other mens matters onlie in a worde or two I will answer what in effect I thinke they might answer and what I haue heard some of them answer And this I thought good to do for 2. reasones first for the respect and loue I beare to them they being of my coate and principall men of the English Clergie which so constantlie hath borne the brunt of a longe persecution that it may be an example to all other Clergies and a mirrout to furure ages Secondly least I should do them iniurie For if I answering to VViddringtons other Authours should say nothing of these by VViddrington so often alleaged I might giue occasion to the world to thinke that I passed these with silence because they were so manifest fautours of VViddringtons opinion as I could not tell what to say in their defence I answer First that this their protestation was by them made before the Popes Breues came forth that is Anno 1603. and therfore bee it that then they were of that opinion yet seing that since the Breues were published they professe and protest the contrarie as VViddrington well knoweth and that one of them yet liuing whilest he was in
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