and yet Subjects to a Forreign Power But we need not trouble our selves to reckon the Evills consequent to this Procedure themselves have own'd them even the very worst of things The Rebellion of a Clergy-man against his Prince is not Treason because he is not his Princes Subject It is expresly taught by Emanuel SÃ and because the French-men in zeal to their own King could not endure this Doctrine these words were left out of the Edition of Paris but still remain in the Editions of Antwerp and Colien But the thing is a general Rule That all Ecclesiastical persons are free from Secular Iurisdiction in causes Criminal whether Civil or Ecclesiastical and this Rule is so general that it admits no exception and so certain that it cannot be denied unless you will contradict the Principles of Faith So Father Suarez And this is pretended to be allowed by Councills Sacred Canons and all the Doctors of Laws Humane and Divine for so Bellarmine affirms Against which since it is a matter of Faith and Doctrine which we now charge upon the Church of Rome as an Enemy to publick Government we shall think it sufficient to oppose against their Pretension the plain and easie words of St. Paul Let every soul be subject to the higher Powers Every soul That is saith St. Chrysostome whether he be a Monk or an Evangelist a Prophet or an Apostle Of the like iniquity when it is extended to its uâ—most Commentary which the Commenters of the Church of Rome put upon it is the Divine Right of the Seal of Consession which they make so Sacred to serve such ends as they have chosen that it may not be broken up to save the lives of Princes or of the whole Republick saith Tolet No not to save all the World said Henriquez Not to save an Innocent not to keep the World from burning or Religion from perversion or all the Sacraments from demolition Indeed it is lawful saith Bellarmine if a Treason be known to a Priest in Confession and he may in general words give notice to a pious and Catholick Prince but not to a Heretick and that was acutely and prudently said by him said Father Suarez Father Binet is not so kind even to the Catholick Princes for he sayes that it is better that all the Kings of the World should perish than that the Seal of Confession should be so much as once broken and this is the Catholick Doctrine said Eudaemon Iohannes in his Apology for Garnet and for it he also quotes Suarez But it is enough to have nam'd this How little care these men take of the lives of Princes and the Publick Interest which they so greatly undervalue to every trifling fancy of their own is but too evident by these Doctrines SECT III. THe last thing we shall remark for the instruction and caution of our charges is not the least The Doctrines of the Church of Rome are great Enemies to the dignity and security to the powers and lives of Princes And this we shall briefly prove by setting down the Doctrines themselves and their consequent Practises And here we observe that not onely the whole Order of Jesuites is a great Enemy to Monarchy by subjecting the Dignity of Princes to the Pope by making the Pope the Supreme Monarch of Christians but they also teach that it is a Catholick Doctrine the Doctrine of the Church The Pope hath a Supreme Power of disposing the Temporal things of all Christians in order to a Spiritual good saith Bellarmine And Becanus discourses of this very largely in his Book of the English Controversie Printed by Albin at Mentz 1612. But because this Book was order'd to be purg'd una litura potest we shall not insist upon it but there is as bad which was never censur'd Bellarmine sayes that the Ecclesiastical Republick can command and compel the Temporal which is indeed its Subject to change the Administration and to depose Princes and to appoint others when it cannot otherwise defend the Spiritual good And F. Suarez sayes the same The power of the Pope extends it self to the coercion of Kings with Temporal punishments and depriving them of their Kingdoms when necessity requires nay this power is more necessary over Princes than over Subjects The same also is taught by Santarel in his Book of Heresie and Schism printed at Rome 1626. But the mischief of this Doctrine proceeds a little further Cardinal Tolet affirms and our Countryman Father Bridgewater commends the saying That when a Prince is excommunicate before the Denunciation the Subjects are not absolved from their Oath of Allegiance as Cajetan sayes well yet when it is denounc'd they are not only absolved from their obedience but are bound not to obey unless the fear of death or loss of goods excuse them which was the case of the English Catholicks in the time of Henry the VIII And F. Creswel sayes it is the sentence of all Catholicks that Subjects are bound to expel Heretical Princes if they have strength enough and that to this they are tyed by the Commandment of God the most strict tie of Conscience and the extreme danger of their Souls Nay even before the sentence is declar'd though the Subjects are not bound to it yet lawfully they may deny obedience to an Heretical Prince said Gregory de Valentia It were an endless labour to transcribe the horrible Doctrines which are preach'd in the Jesuits School to the shaking of the Regal power of such Princes which are not of the Roman Communion The whole Oeconomy of it is well describ'd by Bellarmine who affirms That it does not belong to Monks or other Ecclesiasticks to commit Murthers neither doe the Popes use to proceed that way But their manner is first Fatherly to correct Princes then by Ecclesiastical Censures to deprive them of the Communion then to absolve their Subjects from the Oath of Allegiance and to deprive them of their Kingly Dignity And what then The execution belongs to others This is the way of the Popes thus wisely and moderately to break Kings in pieces We delight not to aggravate evill things We therefore forbear to set down those horrid things spoken by SÃ Mariana Santarel Carolus Scribanius and some others It is enough that Suarez sayes An Excommunicate King may with impunity be depos'd or kill'd by any one This is the case of Kings and Princes by the Sentence of the chiefest Roman Doctors And if it be objected That we are commanded to obey Kings not to speak evill of them not to curse them no not in our heart there is a way found out to answer these little things For though the Apostle commands that we should be subject to higher Powers and obey Kings and all that are in Authority It is true you must and so you may well enough for all this for the Pope can make that he who is a King
whole or in part for there is the same reason of them both than that which we have preached let him be Anathema and secondly by the sentence of the Fathers in the third General Council that at Ephesus That it should not be lawful for any Man to publish or compose another Faith or Creed than that which was defin'd by the Nicene Council and that whosoever shall dare to compose or offer any such to any Persons willing to be converted from Paganism Iudaism or Heresie if they were Bishops or Clerks they should be depos'd if Lay-men they should be accursed And yet in the Church of Rome Faith and Christianity increase like the Moon Bromyard complain'd of it long since and the mischief encreases daily They have now a new Article of Faith ready for the stamp which may very shortly become necessary to salvation we mean that of the immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary Whether the Pope be above a Council or no we are not sure whether it be an article of faith amongst them or not It is very near one if it be not Bellarmine would fain have us believe that the Council of Constance approving the Bull of Pope Martin the fifth declar'd for the Popes Supremacy But Iohn Gerson who was at the Council sayes that the Council did abate those heights to which flattery had advanc'd the Pope and that before that Council they spoke such great things of the Pope which afterwards moderate men durst not speak but yet some others spake them so confidently before it that he that should then have spoken to the contrary would hardly have escap'd the note of Heresie and that these Men continued the same pretensions even after the Council But the Council of Basil decreed for the Council against the Pope and the Council of Laeteran under Leo the tenth decreed for the Pope against the Council So that it is cross and pile and whether for a peny when it can be done it is now a known case it shall become an article of Faith But for the present it is a probationary article and according to Bellarmine's expression is fere de fide it is almost an article of Faith they want a little age and then they may goe alone But the Council of Trent hath produc'd a strange new Article but it is sine controversia credendum it must be believ'd and must not be controverted That although the ancient Fathers did give the Communion to Infants yet they did not believe it necessary to salvation Now this being a matter of fact whether they did or did not believe it every man that reads their Writings can be able to inform himself and besides that it is strange that this should be determin'd by a Council and determin'd against evident truth it being notorious that divers of the Fathers did say it is necessary to salvation the Decree it self is beyond all bounds of modesty and a strange pretension of Empire over the Christian Belief But we proceed to other instances Sect. III. THe Roman Doctrine of Indulgences was the first occasion of the great Change and Reformation of the Western Churches begun by the Preachings of Martin Luther and others and besides that it grew to that intolerable abuse that it became a shame to it self and a reproach to Christendome it was also so very an Innovation that their great Antoninus confesses that concerning them we have nothing expresly either in the Scriptures or in the sayings of the Ancient Doctors and the same is affirmed by Sylvester Priâ—rias Bishop Fisher of Rochester sayes that in the beginning of the Church there was no use of Indulgences and that they began after the people were a while affrighted with the torments of Purgatory and many of the School-men confess that the use of Indulgences began in the time of Pope Alexander the third towards the end of the XII Century but Agrippa imputes the beginning of them to Boniface the VIII who liv'd in the Reign of King Edward the First of England 1300. years after Christ. But that in his time the first Jubilee was kept we are assur'd by Crantzius This Pope lived and died with very great infamy and therefore was not likely from himself to transfer much honour and reputation to the new institution But that about this time Indulgences began is more than probable much before it is certain they were not For in the whole Canon Law written by Graetian and in the sentences of Peter Lombard there is nothing spoken of Indulgences Now because they liv'd in the time of P. Alexander III. if he had introduc'd them and much rather if they had been as antient as S. Gregory as some vainly and weakly pretend from no greater authority than their own Legends it is probable that these great Men writing Bodies of Divinity and Law would have made mention of so considerable a point and so great a part of the Roman Religion as things are now order'd If they had been Doctrines of the Church then as they are now it is certain they must have come under their cognisance and discourses Now least the Roman Emissaries should deceive any of the good Sons of the Church we think it fit to acquaint them that in the Primitive Church when the Bishops impos'd severe penances and that they were almost quite perform'd and a great cause of pity intervened or danger of death or an excellent repentance or that the Martyrs interceded the Bishop did sometimes indulge the penitent and relax some of the remaining parts of his penance and according to the example of S. Paul in the case of the incestuous Corinthian gave them ease least they should be swallowed up with too much sorrow But the Roman Doctrine of Indulgences is wholly another thing nothing of it but the abused name remains For in the Church of Rome they now pretend that there is an infinite of degrees of Christs merit and satisfaction beyond what is necessary for the salvation of his servants and for fear Christ should not have enough the Saints have a surplusage of merits or at least of satisfactions more than they can spend or themselves do need and out of these the Church hath made her a treasure a kind of poor mans box and out of this a power to take as much as they list to apply to the poor souls in Purgatory who because they did not satisfie for their venial sins or perform all their penances which were imposed or which might have been imposed and which were due to be paid to God for the temporal pains reserved upon them after he had forgiven them the guilt of their deadly sins are forc'd sadly to roar in pains not inferiour to the pains of hell excepting onely that they are not eternal That this is the true state of their Article of Indulgences we appeal to Bellarmine Now concerning their new foundation of Indulgences the first stone of
shall be no King and then you are dis-oblig'd so Bellarmine And if after all this there remains any scruple of Conscience it ought to be remembred that though even after a Prince is Excommunicated it should be of it self a sin to depose or kill the Prince yet if the Pope commands you it is no sin For if the Pope should err by commanding sin or forbidding vertues yet the Church were bound to believe that the vices were good and the vertues evil unless She would sin against Her Conscience They are the very words of Bellarmine But they add more particulars of the same bran The Sons of an Heretical Father are made sui juris that is free from their Fathers power A Catholick Wife is not tyed to pay her duty to an Heretical Husband and the Servants are not bound to do service to such Masters These are the Doctrines of their great Azorius and as for Kings he affirms they may be Depos'd for Heresie But all this is only in the case of Heretical Princes But what for others Even the Roman Catholick Princes are not free from this danger All the World knows what the Pope did to King Chilperick of France He Depos'd him and put Pipin in his place and did what he could to have put Albert King of the Romans in the Throne of Philip sir-named the Fair. They were the Popes of Rome who arm'd the Son against the Father the Emperour Henry IV. and the Son fought against him took him Prisoner shav'd him and thrust him into a Monastery where he dyed with grief and hunger We will not speak of the Emperour Frederick Henry the sixth Emperour the Duke of Savoy against whom he caus'd Charles the V. and Francis the I. of France to take Arms nor of Francis Dandalus Duke of Venice whom he bound with chains and fed him as Dogs are fed with bones and scraps under his Table Our own Henry the II. and King Iohn were great instances of what Priâ—â—â—s in their case may expect from that Religion Those were the piety of the Father of Christendome But these were the product of the Doctrine which Clement the V. vented in the Council of Vienna Qâ—â—â— jus Râ—gum à se pendere The right of all Kings depend upon the Pope and thereâ—ore even their Catholick Princes are at their mercy and they would if they durst use them accordingly If they do but favour Hereticks or Schismaticks receive them or defend them if the Emperour be perjur'd if he rashly break a league made with the See Apostolick if he do not keep the peace promis'd to the Church if he be sacrilegious if he dissipate the goods of the Church the Pope may Depose him said Azorius And Santarel sayes he may do it in case the Prince or Emperour be insufficient if he be wicked if he be unprofitable if he does not defend the Church This is very much but yet there is something more this may be done if he impose new Gabels or Imposts upon his Subjects without the Popes leave for if they do not pretend to this also why does the Pope in Bulla coenae Domini Excommunicate all Princes that do it Now if it be enquir'd By what Authority the Pope does these things It is answered That the Pope hath a Supreme and absolute Authority both the Spiritual and the Temporal Power is in the Pope as Christs Vicar said Azorius and Samarel The Church hath the right of a Superiour Lord over the rights of Princes and their Temporalties and that by Her Jurisdiction She disposes of Temporals ut de suo peculio as of Her own proper goods said our Country-man Weston Rector of the College at Doway Nay the Pope hath power in omnia per omnia super omnia in all things thorough all things and over all things and the sublimity and immensity of the Supreme Bishop is so great that no mortal man can comprehend it said Cassenaeus no man can express it no man can think it So that it is no wonder what Papirius Massonus said of Pope Boniface the VIII that he own'd himself not onely as the Lord-of France but of all the World Now we are sure it will be said That this is but the private Opinion of some Doctors not the Doctrine of the Church of Rome To this we reply 1. It is not the private Opinion of a few but their publick Doctrine own'd and offer'd to be justified to all the World as appears in the preceding Testimonies 2. It is the Opinion of all the Jesuit Order which is now the greatest and most glorious in the Church of Rome and the maintenance of it is the subject matter of their new Vow of Obedience to the Pope that is to advance his Grandeur 3. Not onely the Jesuits but all the Canonists in the Church of Rome contend earnestly for these Doctrines 4. This they doe upon the Authority of the Decretaâ—s and their own Law and the Decrees of Councills 5. Not onely the Jesuists and Canonists but others also of great note amongst them earnestly contend for these Doctrine particularly Cassenaeus Zodericus the Arch-Bishop of Florence Petrus de Monte St. Thomas Aquinas Bozius Baronius and many others 6. Themselves tell us it is a matter of Faith F. Creswel sayes It is the sentence of all Catholicks and they that doe not admit these Doctrines Father Rosweyd calls them half Christians Grinners barking Royalists and a new Sect of Catholicks and Eudaemon Iohannes sayes That without question it is a Heresie in the judgement of all Catholicks Now in such things which are not in their Creeds and publick Confessions from whence should we know the Doctrines of their Church but from their chiefest and most leading Doctors who it is certain would fain have all the World believe it to be the Doctrine of their Church And therefore as it is certain that any Roman Catholick may with allowance be of this opinion so he will be esteemed the better and more zealous Catholick if he be and if it were not for fear of Princes who will not lose their Crowns for their foolish Doctrines there is no peradventure but it would be declared to be defide a matter of faith as divers of them of late do not stick to say And of this the Pope gives but too much evidence since he will not take away the scandal which is so greatly given to all Christian Kings and Republicks by a publick and a just condemnation of it Nay it is worse than thus for Sixtus Quintus upon the XI of September A. D. 1589. in an Oration in a Conclave of Cardinals did solemnly commend the Monk that kill'd Henry the III. of France The Oration was printed at Paris by them that had rebell'd against that Prince and avouched for Authentick by Bouncher Decreil and Ancelein And though some would fain have it thought to be none of his