she was a woman yet her successors can not be excepted against vpon that score But speak seriously Mr. Walsh do you think it was in the power of those who explain'd the Oath of supremacy if any did explain it to alter the common known signification of words and giue them a quite contrary in matters of religion Sacraments and Oaths If it were there would be no religion in the world no Faith either human or Diuine How could you therfore imagin the Conuocation or euen the Parliament of England did or can alter the signification of words in an Oath wherin a man professeth his Religion or an important point therof Can any power vpon earth declare this form of baptism valid I Baptise thee in the name of the mother and sister and Brother by pretending forsooth that by an Admonition of the Conuocation or any earthly authority the word Mother signifies Father sister son Brother Holy Ghost Do you fancy Mr. Walsh that any iudicious protestant or any Parliament man in England will belieue you if you should tell him that his child is well-baptis'd by such a form and explanation Jf you wil read the Statuts 1. Eliz. 1. 8. Eliz 1. You will find that the Kings of Englands supremacy is so spiritual and sublime that there needs no changing the signification of the word spiritual into temporal and that a King of England if he should think fit may according to the principles of the Protestaâ—e religion establih'd by the lawes of the land giue power by letters patents to any of his lay subiects to consecrate Bishops and Priests which is more than the Pope can do for he must a point a Bishop to ordain Priests and Bishops That the Kings of England may giue by their letters patents power to any of their lay subiects to consecrat Bishops and Priests is very cleer in the aforesaid statuts For by two of them there is giuen to the Queen's Highness her Heirs and Successors c. full power and authority by letters patents vnder the great seal of England from time to time to assigne name and authorise such person or persons at she and they shall think meet and conuenient to exercise vse enjoy and execute vnder her Highness all manner of iurisdictions priuileges preheminences and authorities in any wise touching or concerning any spiritual or Ecclesiastical power or iurisdiction within this Realm or any other her Majesties Dominions or Countreyes Now Priestood being nothing but a spiritual power to consecrat Christ's body and bloud and forgiue sins and Episcopacy including besides the same a spiritual power to consecrat and ordain Priests and Bishops who can doubt but that by vertue of these words and Statuts the Queen might and her successors may by their letters patents and great seal giue power to any of their lay subiects to make a protestant Bishop or Priest seing by those letters patents any person that is a subiect receiueth full power to exercise vse execute enioy c. all manner of iurisdictions preheminences and authorities in any wise touching or concerning any spiritual or Ecclesiastical power c. This is no vain speculation Mr. Walsh but a known practise grounded vpon the 25. article of 39. of the english Protestant Religion it being declared therby that no visible sign or ceremony and by consequence no imposition of Episcopal hands hath bin ordain'd of God for any of these fiue commonly call'd Sacraments wherof holy Orders or Episcopal consecration is one And therfore it s no meruail the Parliament declared 8. Eliz. 1. that the first protestant Bishops were should be true Bishops though it could not be proued that any Bishops euer laid hands vpon them The Story is known In the beginning of Q. Elizabeths reign it was questioned whether the Protestant Bishops were true or real Bishops the Catholik Bishops who refused to consecrat any of them maintain'd they were not because they had not any protestant who was a true Bishop to consecrat them hauing nothing to shew for the Episcopal caracter but the Queens letters parents and therfore the Catholik writers prouokt them in print to name the Bishop who ordain'd or consecrated them as themselues pretended but fiue or six years before This appears in * D Stapleton in his Counter blast against Horn fol. 79. 301. and in his return of vntruths gaianst Iewel fol. 130. D. Stapleton Dr. Harding and other bookes against Iewel edit 1565. 1563. fol. 57. 59. All the world perceiuing at that time how none of the two protestant writers who vndertook to answer Iewel and Horn could name any that consecrated Parker of whose consecration depended that of all the rest nor produce any Registers therof as Harding in express terms demanded it was thought necessary for supplying this shamefull silence and repressing the insolency of the popish Aduersaries to declare the ground wherupon the protestants claim'd to be true Bishops and to be both legaly and validly consecrated Then was made the Statut 8. Elizab. 1. which begins Forasmuch as diuers questions by ouermuch boldness of speech and talk hath lately grown vpon the making and consecrating of Archbishops and Bishops within this Realm c. And though D. Bramhall late Protestant Archbishop of Armagh and others in their bookes do endeauor to diuert the protestant layty from reflecting vpon the consequences which euidently follow from this Act of Parliament as fauoring more the Kings supremacy and spiritual iurisdiction than true Episcopacy and pretend that this Statut doth not giue his Majesty power to make Priests and Bishops hy letters patents and that euen Harding and Stapleion excepted not against the validity but against the legality of the first protestant Bishops consecration and caracter yet the words of this Statut as also of those Catholik Authors admit of no such interpretation The Statuts words are very cleer so are those of the Catholik writers whose design was not to proue that Parker Iewel Horn c. were not protestant Bishops but that they were not true Bishops or Bishops at all They knew very well that they were legal protestant Bishops because they knew they had the Queens letters patents issued forth to the person or persons whether Bishops or not that matters nothing as cleerly appears in the Statuts 1. Eliz. 1. and 8. Eliz. 1. And therfore D. Harding tells Iewel he doubts not but that he may shew him the Queens letters patents for his Episcopacy and by consequence that he was a protestant Bishop adding withall that he was no true Bishop because sayes he the Queen may giue the lands but not the caracter of a Bishop To proue then that they were both legaly and vasidly protestant Bishops the Parliament insisting vpon the purest protestant principles thought it sufficient to declare and make out that they were consecrated by virtue of the Queens letters patents and by som of hâ—r Majesties subjects whether lay or Ecclesiastiks was not thought material by any
disciplin'd though I feare incorrigible Friar Thou hast seen him perhaps in a finer but neuer in a more proper dress Nothing becomes so well an Apostat Friar as strip't stuff I mean sound Lashes seasonably and charitably layd on Friar Walsh his decaying fauor and age make it credible to som that these my Animaduersions may work his conuersion I wish they do I am sure they are publisht with no other intention I beseech thee not to iudge of my education or temper by the roughness of my language in answer to a foulmoâ—th'd Author that makes the two late greatest writers of the Church Cardinal Baronâ—us and Bellarmin whose holy liues haue put them in the list of those who are to be first canonised shameless Impostors and all the Roman Catholik Bishops of the world for many ages Traitors and periur'd persons I am forc't to answer this Fool according to his folly as the scripture bids me and in his own language Therfore I am warranted to scold and scourge him into his habit and Conuent Yet I do it as gently as his insolency permits and as charitably as is consistent with my vindicating the innocence of those he traduceth I medle not with his personal frailties I only take notice of his publik treasons which he fathers vpon honest men and in my conscience all the harm I wish him is that he becom one It is natural enough to desire to know how a religious man came to be so madly extrauagant when excess of ambition litle wit and a mediocrity of reading meet in one subiect we may expect to find in his writings abundance of nonsense many nouelties but no true notions Peter Walâ—h his ambition of a Miter was so excessiue 30. years ago that to obtain it be turn'd the greatest Rebel and Nuntionist of the Irish nation and had a greater hand in the reiection of the peace of 46. and by consequence in the destruction of the late King and his people than any man liuing or all the Clergy which he accuseth for it The repulse he then met with after his eminent seruices to the Nuntio and Treasons against the King depriued him of that litle wit he had and euer since he hath bin scribling and printing of libels and troubling the world with an od kind of raw indigested heresies stoln from the worst of Authors but so vnconnected and absurdly applyed by his dull pen that though you may see he hath read som bookes yet you will easily perceiue he vnderstood very few and such as he vnderstood he wrested to a wrong sense No meruail therfore if his notions be false his discourses consuse his arguments weake and his contradictions so frequent that to confute him you need go no further than his own writings He is so transported with passion against the Church of Rome and those two great pillars therof Belarmin and Baronius that he treats and terms them no better than men hired by the Roman Court to Sacrifice all the world to the Popes ambition The rage he is in for not finding out arguments to make this and his other calumnies credible is so extraordinary that he forgets what he said in the foregoing page or line and through his whole work neuer remembers to speake consequently in any one particular But to the end you may be conuinc't I do not iniure him I will instance euen in this Preface one or two of his contradictions in the very main point he pretends to proue and cleer most exactly as being that wherupon he grounds his new religion One of his chief errors is * Peter Walsh in his History and Vind. pag. 417 in fine That supreme secular Princes neither could nor can grant any exemption from their own supreme ciuil coerciue power to the Clergy or Clerks their subiects liuing within their Dominions and remaining subiects to them because this forsooth implies a plain contradiction Vpon this paradox he raises a new Church or Reformation and despairs not to draw Princes from their own and their Ancestors piety by inculcating to them it is an essential part of their temporal soueraignty and Prerogatiue to haue a Spiritual supremacy but so absurdly limited that he thinks it their greatest security to haue their hands tyed by the law of nature and Gods word from honouring the Diuine Majesty and his Church with an exemption to its Ministers from supreme secular Courts He is opposed in this foolish Tenet both by Protestants and Catholiks for we all agree in this that God can not at least did not command temporal Soueraigns not to oblige and honor for his sake the spiritual Ministery by exempting them from the supreme coerciue power of the secular magistrat seing that for the peace of the commonwealth the safety of Princes and punishment of Malefactors it is abundantly sufficient that delinquent Clergymen be proceeded against by ecclesiastical Iudges Let vs now see how palpably he contradicts himself and wearies his Reader in this absurd and fundamental Thesis of his vast volum and new Religion Euery Catholik as well as himself obiects against it the Martyrdom and Miracles of S. Thomas of Canterbury it being euident out of all Histories both sacred and profane that S. Thomas sufferd was canonised and declared a Martyr for defending the immunities of the Church and particularly that of Churchmen from the coerciue supreme power of secular Courts The Friar grants S. Thomas his Sanctity Miracles and Martyrdom but sayes he sufferd and God wrought all those Miracles not because he did or could in conscience pretend that Church men were exempted from the supreme coerciue power of the Secular Magistrat but because he maintaind the temporal and municipal lawes of England then in force by which Clerks or Churchmen were so exempted from the secular supreme Courts Heer is one contradiction If there were municipal lawes in force then in England which warranted S. Thomas his proceedings for the immunity of the Church and Clergymen from the Kings supreme secular coerciue power or Courts and Churchmen had a true right to those exemptions as Friar Walsh confesseth from page 414. to page 418. of his History quoting the lawes themselues how can he without contradiction say that Princes and Parliaments did not nay could not make such lawes or grant such exemptions to Clergy-men How can he pretend such immunities or exemptions are contrary to the law of nature and the word of God He solues this difficulty with an other contradiction For after granting there were such lawes exempting Churchmen made by the Kings and Parliaments he sayes pag. 422. that S. Thomas at the instance and with the concurrence of all the other Bishops condescended to the Repeal of those temporal lawes which fauored the Clergy's exemption But then how was he a Saint or Martyr for defending the lawes that had bin repeald The answer to this is at hand saith Walsh very facil and cleer S. Thomas saith he in the same page 422. though he swore
applauded works which som of them haue printed to assert the truth of Faith Perhaps they do not think him worth their confuting Though I am not particularly concern'd yet seing his book hath so much barbarous railing and heretical nonsense that it is a nuisance to ciuility as well as to Christianity I will shake his fundamental principles to the end the world may not be further abused by them nor by the stories of a virulent pen that vents nothing but heresies against the Church rebellion against Soueraigns enuy against his superiors malice against his equals calumnies against his aduersaries and commendations of himself THE FRIAR DISCIPLIN'D OR ANIMADVERSIONS ON FRIAR PETER WALSH HIS NEW REMONSTRANT RELIGION MR. WALSH I DECLARE to you and all the world that my exceptions against your Religion and Romonstrance are not against the supreme temporal power of Soueraign Princes which I do belieue and shall assert as much as any Catholik Diuine My exceptions are against not only a Spiritual supremacy you attribute to Kings and deny to the Bishop of Rome but also against many new vnheard of errors and in first place against that rash and heretical Tenet of yours viz. * Friar Walsh in his Dedicatory to the Catholiks of the three Kingdoms pag. 13. That all the Roman Catholik Bishops of the world are either Traytors to their Kings or periur'd to the Pope because they take before their consecration an Oath which hath bin taken in the Church many hundred years by all Bishops Item That for the space of these 600. years past the Popes and writers of the Roman Catholik Church for the most part a Idem Ibid. haue maintain'd enormous principles and practises which haue bin cryed down continually by most zealous and godly Prelats and Doctors as not only false wicked impious lxretical vnchristian but as absolutely tyrannical and destructiue of all Gouernment lawes property peace c. 2. That since the owning of such intollerable maxims and wicked actions or the not disowning them are not amongst the marks of a Roman Catholik in general but only b Idem pag. 14. of a certain sect or faction whom som calls Papalins others Puritan Papists and others Popish Recusants the Protestants could not but obserue how since the Oath of supremacy though fram'd only by Roman Catholik Bishops Abots and Doctors of the english nation and defended by the principal of the same occasioned the first separation or schism amongst the subiects of England and Ireland the far greater part of such as continued in the Communion of the Roman Church did seem also to adhere to the foresaid dangerous doctrins and practises i. e. to all the pretences and actings of the Roman Court for as much as they generaly refus'd to disown them either by that Oath of supremacy or by other That it is vnreasonable to think and incredible to belieue c Pag. 14. n. 10. that so many iudicious Princes Parliaments and conuocations who had themselues gon so far and ventured so much as they did only because they would not suffer themselues or the Protestant people gouern'd by them to be imposed on against their own reason in matters of Diuine belief Rites c. should at the same time be so concern'd to impose on others in the like as to enact laws of so many grieuous punishments yea of death itself in som cases c. That we haue no cause to wonder at the Protestants a Pap. 16. n. 10. iealousy of us when they see all the three seueral Tests hitherto made use of for trying the iudgment or affection of Roman Catholiks in these Kingdoms in relation to the Papal pretences of one side and the royal rights of the other I mean the Oath of supremacy first the Oath of Allegiance next and last of all that which I call the Loyal Formulary or the Irish Remonstrance of the year 1661. euen all three one after another to haue bin with so much rashness and willfullness and so much vehemency and obstinacy declined opposed traduced and reiected amongst them albeit no other authority or power not euen by the Oath of supremacy itself be attributed to the King saue only ciuil or that of the sword nor any spiritual or Ecclesiastical power be denied therin to the Pope saue only that which the general Councel of Ephesus vnder Theodosius the yonger in the case of the Cyprian Biâ—hops and the next Oecumenical Synod of Calcedon vnder the good Emperor Martianus in the case of Anatolius Patriarch of Constantinople and the 217. Bishops of Afrik whereof Saint Augustin was one both in their Canons and letters too in the case of Apiarius denyed vnto the Roman Bishops of their time See the same Friar pag. 24. 25. 1. part of the first Treatise saying that the sense wher in the sons of the Church of England take the Oath of supremacy is very Catholikâ— and that they allow a politik not spiritual headship to the King and that only in temporal causes or matters not in spiritual not euen in those which are by extrinsecal denomination only called Ecclesiastical or spiritual If this be so Bishop Fisher Sir Thomas Moor and all the learned english men who sufferd for refusing the Oath were great fools and were ignorant both in the english language and in Diuinity But if this be so Mr. Walsh why is it not declared by publik authority can you be so stupid and barbarous as to think that the King and Parliament of England would be so vnmercifull as to permit so much noble and honest blood to be spilt upon a mistake so easily rectified if they or the Church of England vnderstand the Oath of supremacy as you say they do Jn the 19 page of your Dedicatory you set down the Oath which all Bishops and Archbishops take before their Consecration or Pallium and though it be very ancient and accepted of by all not only Prelats but Princes yet you say pag. 20. they who take it Must be periur'd to the Pope if they proue faithfull to the King Whether so or no to God Iudge you I am sure if they were not Traytors in taking the foresaid Oath to his Holiness they were at least Renouncers of their Allegiance to his Majesty and of their obedience also to the Catholik Church And because you could not but foresee that Catholiks and rational men would not bee their own Guides in a matter of so great importance as the determining the rights of Popes and Princes nor so rash as to iudge the whole Catholik Church or all the Bishops therof were Traytors Tyrants Cheats Vsurpers and Heretiks you endeauor to diuert the Catholik Layty from their duty of consulting the sea Apostolik in this main point of Religion by endeauoring to raise in the same Layty a diffidence of all who aduise so pious and prudent an address you telling the Catholiks of the three Kingdoms pag. 22. n. 18. of your Dedicatory That in the
last place hauing your eyes thus prepared all these things being considered you may cleerly see thorough that other sly artifice of those self same interested man wherby they would persuade at least to so much filial renerence to the great Father of Christendom as to acquaint him first wich your present condition send him a Copy of the publik instrument you intend to fix vpon with the reasons also inducing you therunto pray his approbation therof in order to your signing it and then expect a while his paternal aduice and benediction before you make any further progress You may at the very first hearing of this proposal plainly discouer say you their design to be no other than by such indiscreet means of cunning delayes vnder pretence of filial reuerence forsooth to hinder you for euer from professing at least to any purpose * Ibid. pag. 22. i. e. in a sufficient manner or by any sufficient Formulary that loyal obedience you owe to his Maiesty and to the lawes of your Countrey in all affairs of meer temporal concern This you can not but iudge to be their drift vnless per aduenture you think them to be realy so frantik as to persuade themselues that from Iulius Cesar or his successor Octauian after the one or the other had by arms and slaughter tyrannicaly seized the Commonwealth any one could expect a free and voluntary restitution of the people to their ancient liberty or which is it I mean and is the more unlikely of the two That from Clement the tenth now sitting in the Chair at Rome or from his next or from any other successor now after six hundred years of continual vsurpation in matters of highest nature and now also after the liues of about fourscore Popes one succeeding an other since Hildebrand or Gregory 7. his papacy and since the deposition of the Emperor Henry 4. by him in the year of Christ 1077. any one should expect by a paper petition or paper Adress to obtain the restoring or manumitting of the Christian world Kingdoms states and Churches to their natiue Rights and freedom or that indeed it could be other than ridiculous folly and madness to expect this J haue quoted your own words Mr. Walsh to the end all indifferent persons may see I do not insure you in the account I giue of your religion and doctrin which I intend to confute reducing is to your twelue fundamental Tenets Jn this first Animaduersion I will treate of two See Friar Walsh his twelue Tenets or articles in the 6. Animaduersion 1. That the Oath of Supremacy hath bin rashly and obstinatly declined opposed and traduced by Roman Catholiks because it attributes to the King only ciuil authority and power and denies to the Pope no spiritual or Ecclesiastical saue only that which the two general Councells of Ephesus and Calcedon as also that of Afrik of 217 Bishops whereof S. Augustin was one denied to the Bishops of Rome 2. That the Popes and Bishops of the Roman Catholik Church for these last 600. years haue taught and practised enormous principles which godly men haue continualy cried down as wicked impious heretical and tyrannical and that the vsual Oath which all Catholik Bishops haue taken at their consecration for many hundred years is not consistent with the loyalty all Christians owe to their temporal Soueraigns ANIMADVERSION I. Whether the Oath of supremacy attributes only ciuil authority to the King and denies no spiritual or Ecclesiastical power or authority to the Pope THE best way to decide this controuersy is to set down the words of the Oath which are I. A. B. do utterly testify and declare in my conscience that the King's Majesty is the only supream Gouernor of this Realm and of all other his Maiesties Dominions and Countries as well in all spiritual or Ecclesiastical things or causes as Temporal and that no forain Prince Person Prelate state or Potentate hath or ought to haue any iurisdiction power superiority preheminence or authority Ecclesiastical or spiritual within this Realm and therfore I do utterly renounce and forsake all forain iurisdictions powers superiorities and authorities c. so help me God and the contents of this Book Mr. Walsh giue me leaue to ask you whether you euer read this Oath and if you did whether you are sure you vnderstand English or whether better than English-men do for the common opinion is that euery nation vnderstands its own language better than strangers Mr. Walsh all Englishmen vnderstand by the word spiritual a quite different thing from temporal as you may see in Thomas Thomasius his Dictionary If this be so I feare you will hardly persuade Englishmen that they do not vnderstand english at least as well as you or any other Irish man Now to the point Doth not the Oath in cleer terms auerre that the King is the only supreme Gouernor of England and of all other his Dominions as well in all Spiritual or Ecclesiastical things or causes as temporal Is temporal and spiritual the same or do these words signify the same Jf not how can you proue or pretend that no spiritual authority or power is giuen the King or denyed the Pope by this Oath of Supremacy I pray obserue if the King be the only supream Gouernor of his Dominions in all spiritual and Ecclesiastical causes or things hath he not all the spiritual power and authority in his own Dominions And if the Pope be a sorrain Prince Person or Prelate and no forrain Prince Person or Prelate hath or ought to haue any Ecclesiastical or spiritual iurisdiction power Superiority preheminence or authority within his Majesties Kingdomes how can the Pope haue any spiritual power or authority in the same J doubt very much whether your marginal note directing to I know not what admonition after the Iniunctions of * Pag. 16. of his Dedicatory to the Catholiks Q. Elizabeth and vpon the 37. article of the Church of England will bring you or the oath off so cleerly as you fancy By that Admonition after the iniunctions of Q. Elizabeth is pretended the Church of England did not attribute to the Queen power to exercise any spiritual function as that of consecrating Priests and Bishops or ministring the Sacraments Suppose this interpretation which came I must tell you som what too late were not known to be a pittifull shift to stop the mouthes of those who laught at the weakness of the Bishops in allowing and at the vanity of the Queen in assuming the spiritual supremacy of the Church suppose I say the Queen could not ordain Priests and Bishops because herself was neither Priest nor Bishop doth that hinder from hauing in herself and giuing to others spiritual iurifdiction to ordain and minister the Sacraments what think you of lay Princes and persons that are Bishops elect Haue they not spiritual iurisdiction and can they not giue it to others Though Q. Elizabeth was incapable of such spiritual iurisdiction because
And that the Churches hoâ—ouring and innoking him as a true Martyr for maintaining its immunities is no argument that he defended therin iustice or truth because forsooth neither himself nor any other did inuoke God to work the Miracles to euidence the truth or iustice of those immunities S. Thomas maintain'd against the 16. or 12. lawes or customs of Henry 2. which were all in order to take away or diminish the Popes external spiritual iurisdiction and supremacy and to assert in the King a coerciue power ouer the Clergy I pray Mr. Walsh where do you find it declared necessary that the Mysteries of Christian faith be made credible or confirm'd by a formal or express inuocation of God to work miracles for euery one of them in particular Christ himself taught that Miracles confirm any general doctrin preacht by him who works them neither doth he put that condition or caution of a particular and formal inuocation of God without which you pretend the doctrin taught or sufferd for may be false But let that pass What more express inuocation or declaration of God can you desire for the truth and iustice of S. Thomas of Canterbury's doctrin than that so notorious and so long depending a controuersy between the Church and state should suspend all Christendom there being on the one side a powerfull Monarch who stood for the pretended right of Kings on the other but a poor banish't subiect though a Bishop to maintain that of the Church and that this poor man hauing bin murther'd by flattering Courtiers for maintaining the Church immunities God should work so many and so vndeniable Miracles at his dead body and Tomb that you are not only fore't to confess they are true ones but that King Henry 2. himself acknowledged S. Thomas had the truth and iustice on his side And therfore to satisfy God and the world rather for his vniust contest against the Church than for the Saints murther which the King neither intended nor desired that great Monarch did vndergo those corporal punishments which the Pope as his spiritual Pastor commanded him to do though you say he hath as spiritual Pastor no power to inflict vpon your self as much as a Disiplin like that which the Monks of Canterbury gaue King Henry 2. We haue related the principles of your religion and Remonstrance out of your own Alcoran your great volum is no better than Mahomet's Alcoran now let vs see what practises did flow from such principles ANIMADVERSION 7. Of the practises of Friar Walsh his Remonstrant Church IF the Roman Catholik Church of these last 600. years hath fall'n from the ancient Christian principles of loyalty due to temporal Princes as Friar Walsh pretends and all the Roman Catholik Bishops are Trayâ—ors to their Soueraigns by the oath they take at their consecration we may rather wonder God did not send sooner a holy man to reform these enormous errours than that after so long a time he should at length send Saint Peter Walsh to do it who by his good example as well as by his learned writings doth teach Catholik Subiects that allegiance from which they haue bin withdrawn for these six last Centuries Blessed be God who albeit for our sins he deferreth his mercies yet neuer fails to impart them sooner than we deserue Nor indeed could this age so infamous for murthers and rebellions against lawfull Soueraigns expect so Apostolik a Reformer as Peter Walsh hath proued himself to be You complain Mr. Walsh page 43 of your Preface to the Reader as also page 50 seqq that F. Peter TAlbot the titular Arâ—hâ—ishop of Dublin and Ring leader of the â—iâ—h Anti Remonstrants hath perseented the said Remonstrants to death as far as in him lay and that his answers to the petition you presented against him contain'd manifest vntruths you suggest also that he is thought to be Author of the Dublin Libel written against your Remonstrants directly but withall indirectly or euen principaly aiming at the most illustrous personof his Grace the Duke of Ormond Though I haue not the honor to be acquainted with that Prelat yet his being one and his writing against your accusations in his own defence mad me curious and concern'd and hauing inquir'd after the Papers which past between you I obtain'd a sight of them as also of that which you call the Dublin libel which is term'd by the Author therof a Vinâ—ication against Friar Walsh his Calumnies written by a Pastor of the Diocess of Dublin If all be true Mr. Walsh that is ther in alledged against you with particular circumstances you are the greatest Traitor and Rebel that breathes You are charg'd likewise not by Peter Talbot nor in the answer to your petition nor in the Vindication or Dublin libel but in another paper a part of murthering fiue poor English Soldiers of the garison of Raroffy in the County of Kildare at the bridge of Iohnston in the very beginning of the Irish commotion and that with such barbarous breach of faith or at least of the law of armes and incredible cruelty that it s to be admired how any who values the name or bloud of an englishman can see you much less profess to be your friend before you cleer your-self of that accusation 2. You are charged in the Vindication of being a most seditious Preacher or seducer of the people against their allegiance to the King and the royal authority residing in the Marques of Ormond Lord Lieutenant of Ireland vpon the proclamation of the peace of 1646. you seconded one Doctor Enos by approuing his infamous libel against the person and authority of his Excellency The drift and matter of the libel was to dissuade the people from admitting or adhearing to that good peace and from any agreement with the said Matques of Ormond because forsooth he design'd the Kings ruin as well as theirs This calumny Enos pretended to proue and you approued of all by commending the libel and the Author in print in the first leaf therof because his Excellency would not conclude before the yeare 46. any peace with the Irish though he had positiue and pressing commands from the King to do it but for three or four years delayd it by vnprofitable and suspitious cessations in which time the King was subdued and imprison'd and therfore his sayd Lieutenant might pretend and plead that seruice or at least a neutrality to the Parliament when they came to be Masters of all And besides his Excellency obseruing that the Erle of Glamorgan had giuen the Irish full satisfaction in the article of Religion most insisted vpon by them the Lord Lieutenant would not condescend therunto but rather declared against it imprison'd the Erle in the Castle of Dublin and therby disperst 10000. men ready to be shipt at water ford for his Maiesty's relief in England and ruin'd him by hindering that succor This was the Subiect of Enos and your libel Mr. Walsh the common sort of the Irish
one an other so well that you combin'd to cheat the Kings Subiects of money and to establish the Remonstrant Church by virtue of the same imposture and forged Commission wherby your visitators and Collectors raised good summs for the Commissary Apostolyks occasions and expence This common persuasion seems to be well grounded 1. You could not be ignorant the Commissary was an Impostor because he had no other Commission to shew for his authority ouer all the Clergy of Ireland both secular and regular but a copy of the pretended Original and that so litle authentik that to gain it credit you got the vnwary Biâ—hop of Ardagh to confirm it as a true one 2. the Commissary had no instructions a thing vnusual and vnheard of in any person authorised with such an employment But this defect you supplyed by drawing instructions for his visitators which are extant of your own hands writing all which tended to the establishment of your Remonstrant Church And these instructions written with your own hand Mr. Walst shall be produced whensoeuer you please So that if you did not forge the Commission you drew for the Commissarys Instructions 3. You knew very well it was not a likely thing that the Court of Rome would giue so ample a power to an ordinary Friar ouer Bishops and all regular Superiors 4. When the It suits made difficulty to submit to your Impostor Commissary standing vpon the Priuileges of their Order you reprehended them seuerely and gaue God thanks that your-self was so deuoted to the Pope as not to dispute his Commissaries authority when they who by a peculiar vow are tyed to obey his Holiness were refractory and vpon this you and by your example the rest kneeld down crauing the Impostor Commissaries benediction and owning his authority 5. He was wholy directed by you still in your company he was your old acquaintance and of your own Order How is it then possible so remarkable an imposture as this could be conceald from a man so curious and corcern'd as you were in this intrigue Be not so filly Mr. Walsh as to fancy you can impose vpon the world that you went not halfs in a cheate your-self maâ—ag'd from first to last You haue no reason to say that during this time the poor Remonstrants had nothing to ballance all their sufferings but the bare sati sactten of conscience to be slighted by their friends and persecuted by their Fnnemies for prosesâ—ing and persoâ—ming their duty to the King according to the law of God Mr. Walsh call you suffering to haue a Commissary cum plenitudine potestatis at your command To see your deerest Remonstrants made his Visitators and Collectors taxing and raising moneys and that with Censures and Excommunications against such as refused or delayd punctual payment Call you suffering to see these your spiritual Children return home to you with money in their purses and treat you and your Commissary very splendidly at the sign of the Harp and Croun in Dublin almost euery night with good Cheer dancing and Danes or Irish Cronans especialy that famous Macquillemone which was stiled in a letter to Rome Cantio barbara aggrestu and call'd by the Soldiors of the Guards in Dublin hearing it euery night at midnight Friar Walsh and Friar N. singing of Psalmes Call you suffering to see your graue Remonstrants dance Giggs and Countrey dances to recreat your-self and the Commissary who was as ready and nimble at it as any of his Collectors but indeed it s said you danc't with a better grace than any of the Company Call you suffering that your Remonstrants in their visitations and exactions of money were so well horst as to run races and that your Saint N. should excommunicat and pursue the honest Priest Philip Draycot and cry â—â—â—d the N. because he would not submit to his authority and tax Call you suffering that the rest of your Collectors should do the like and make you and the Commissary merry with telling stories of the frights they put the simple people into and of the summs they extorted from them None durst complain of these exactions the Collectors pretending your power and fauor with the gouernment was so great as to wink at these your most illegal proceedings These were your sufferings and persecutions Mr. Walsh But you know persecution if not suffered for iustice is not meritorious You say your Remonstrant Church suffered this great persecution for professing and performing their duty to the King according to the law of God I pray is it a duty to the King according to the law of God to impose vpon and leuy from his Subiects money by the Popes authority either counterfeit or real We Anti-Remonstrants maintain the Pope hath no such power nor authority Your Remonstrants maintain he hath as appears by your Excommunications and suspensions yet extant Js this your duty to the King Is this according to the law of God Is this a bare satisfaction of conscience for professing and performing your duty Complain not then Mr. Walsh that you and your Remonstrant Church was slighted by the King by the Council by the Parliaments and Lords Lieutenants They clearly perceiued ye were but a company of Cheats that pretended loyalty and practised treason to be for the King and ruin'd his Subjects by the Popes pretended authority Besides Mr. Walsh you cheated my Lord Duke of Ormond as well in the beginning as in the whole progress of your Remonstrance You made his grace belieue that you were commissioned and had power to present that Formulary to his Majesty and to him in the name of the Clergy of Ireland both secular and regular and yet the power you had was but from very few and that power was in order to obtain for the Clergy the benefit of the peace 1648. as appeareth by their instrument pag. 5. of your History wherof one atticle is there should not be tendred any other oath or Formulary of Allegiance to them but one which is set down in the same articles to which your Remonstrance is manifestly opposit Moreouer you confess pag. 6. that you were soundly check't by his Grace as you expected for daring to reteine such an instrument from such men that is men as to the generality and chief of them formerly and lately too so caractered as they were for being in their indignations and carriage very much disaffected to his Majesties interests and very obnoxious to the Laws You see Mr. Walsh what thankes such buisy Friars as you get for intermedling in aflairs whether Ministers of state and the people concern'd will or no. On the other side you cheated the Irish Clergy and Gentry making the Clergy belieue they should haue liberty to exercise their functions and the Gentry that they should be restored to their estates if they sign'd your Remonstrance I pray Mr. Wash how many of the 95. noblemen and Gentlemen that subscribed are restored to their Estates by your Remonstrance name at
person or persons are the words of the Act and the title of the same which declares the substance and scope therof is All acts made by any person since 1. Eliz. for the consecrating inuesting c. of any Archbishop or Bishop shall be good The making of Bishops and giuing them spiritual iurisdiction only by the Kings letters patents was the primitiue doctrin and spirit of the english Reformation as appears by an Act of Parliament an 1. Eduard 6. entituled an Act for the election of Bishops and what scales and stiles they and other spiritual persons exercising iurisdiction Ecclesiastical shall vse In which Act saith D. Heylin the famous prelatik protestant writer it is ordain'd that Bishops should be made by the Kings letters patents and not by the election of the Dean and Chapters and that all their processes and writings should be made in the Kings name only with the Bishops Teste added to and seald with his seal c. it was plain and euident saith the aforesaid Doctor that the intent of the Contriuers was by degrees to weaken the authority of the Episcopal Order by forcing them from their strong hold of Diuine institution and making them no other than the Kings Ministers only his Ecclesiastical Sheriffs as a man might say I belieue a man may say so still according to the Statuts 1. and 8 Eliz. what say you Mr. Walsh will you yet say that the Oath of Supremacy acknowledges no spiritual authority in the King I am sure it ownes none in the Bishops bur that which they receiue from his Majesty and themselues own it in their Act or Oath of homage that they receiue all their iurisdiction as well spiritual and ecclesiastical as temporal wholy and solely from the King Are not you a litle out of countenance Mr. Walsh to see your confident assertion so manifestly contradicted by the Oath it self by the Statuts by D. Heylin and the Bishops themselues A NIMADVERSION 2. Whether the general Councells of Ephesus and Chalcedon as also the Prouincial of Afrik of 217. Bishops allowed as much to the Emperor and no more spiritual authority to the Pope than the Oath of Supremacy doth BUT in the name of God Mr. Walsh how com you to quote for the lawfullness of the Eglish Oath of Supremacy the general Councells of Ephesus and Chaltedon as also the Prouincial of Afrik with S. Augustin was not Nestorius and his heresy as also that of Pelagius condemn'd in that Councell of Ephesus by Pope Celestinus spiritual authority residing in his Legat Cyrillus of Alexandria Doth not S. Prosper say that all the Eastern Churches were purg'd of two plagues by Celestinus when the most glorious defender of the Catholik Faith Cyrillus Bishop of Alexandria was helpt by the Apostolik sword Did the Emperor Theodosius the yonger pretend to any spiritual iurisdiction or authority in that Councel He sent indeed his Domestik Candidianus to it not to act therin as the Emperor himself writes to the Synod but with an express caution and condition that he should not haue any thing to do with matters of Faith because saith he it is not lawfull for one that is not a Bishop to intermedle in Ecclesiastical buisness or consultations Why then was Candidianus sent by Theodosius the Emperor Mark well Mr. Walsh the reason That he might remoue buisy Monks and others from Ephesus because it is not lawfull saith he for such people to hinder by any tumult the examination of holy Tenets c. I feare most men will be apt to iudge that you are more concern'd in these words and reason of Theodosius than you are aware of T' is a wicked world Mr. Walsh we can not bridle ill tongues men will talke idely let vs be neuer so circumspect I hope you do not buisy yourself in these matters of the Church without your Superiors approbation or commission from the Bishops to whom such matters apertain properly And yet I know not what muttering there is that if any you had it s recall'd long since because you acted quite contrary to it Yourself doth confess page 5. of your first Treatise that your commission was to procure for Ecclesiastiks the benefit of the peace of 48. wherof the principal article or end was freedom of conscience and that a Vt saltem procuret nobis eas conditiones fauores gratias quae in articulis Pacis Reconciliationis An. 1648. compositae ratae confirmatae inter Excellâ—ntissimum Dominum Marchionem Ormoniae Confederatos Catholicos pactae promissae nobis fuerunt These are words of the Commission giuen to Friar Walsh by those few that employd him as you may see pag. 5. of his r. part 1. Treatise The same Friar sets down pag. 49. of his Appendix in the 8. article of the peace 1648. this enfuing Oath as the only to be exacted of Catholiks I. A. B. do truly acknowledge profess testify and declare in my conscience before God and the world That our Soueraign Lord King Charles is lawfull and rightfull King of this Realm and of other his Majesties Dominions and Countries and I will bear Faith and true Alleigance to his Majesty his Heirs and successors and him and them will defend to the vttermost of my power against all Conspiracies and attempts whatsoeuer which shall be made against his or their Crown and Dignity and do my best endeauor to disclose and make known to his Majesty his 〈◊〉 and successors or to the Lord Deputy or other his Majesties Chief Gouernor or Goâ—ernors for the time being all Treasons or Trayterous Conpiâ—acies which I shall know or heare to be intended against his Majesty or any of them and I do make this Recognition and a knowledgment heartily willingly and truly vpon the true Faâ—â—h of a Christian So help me God c. the Roman Catholiks should not be required to take any oathes but one specified in the 8. article of the same peace How came you then to act as their Procurator quite contrary to this and to your commission Realy Mr. Walsh if this be true you are wors than the buisy Monks of Ephesus At least you are very vnfortunat in your allegations of Councells they alwayes seem to make against yourself You bring against the Popes spiritual supremacy the example of the Emperor Martianus in the case of Anatolius and make the 28. Canon of the Councel of Calcedon the ground of your obiection wheras you know in your conscience if you know or read any thing that there are admitted but 27. Canons of the Councell of Calcedon and Theodoret who was present at it testifieth there were no more the clandestin Decree which Anatolius and som Greeks made and foisted into the Canons is reiected as ridiculous and forged as you may see at large in learned Cardinal Perons answer to King Iames lib. 1. cap. 34.2 That though the 28. were admitted as a genuine Canon yet what is that to your purpose against the
Bishop of Rome his spiritual supremacy That 28. Canon pretends only precedency of Constantinople before Alexandria not before Rome But it s much to my purpose and I hope it will be for your profit to mind you how the Emperor Martianus after that the Catholik Faith had bin confirm'd by the Bishops subscriptions did propose somthings in fauor therof to the Fathers thinking it decent saith he to haue them rather form'd or regularly framed by their Decree than by his own Imperial law And the first point of the intended Reformation was that to hinder heresies and the disorders of irregular Monks which of late had so disturbed and infected the Church of God it might be decreed that they should be subiect to the Bishops and not medle with Ecclesiastical or ciuil affairs but serue God and keep within their Monasteries Well Mr. Walsh I see let your friends do all they can to excuse or extenuate your faults you are resolued to lay yourself and them open to your Aduersaries Did not I but iust now aduise you as your best friend not to medle with ecclesiastical affairs which are aboue your capacity and learning especialy these general Councells You see what this of Calcedon and the Emperor Martianus think of irregular religious men and how the generality of people take you to be one of that kind a disturber of the peace of the Church and a broacher of heresies Lord God! could not you be quiet what made you name at all this Councell of Calcedon Did you not know how seuere it is against such men as you are reputed to be I wish with all my heart you had neuer com out of your Conuent and that you were retired in your cell For God's sake quote no more general Councells they are very opposit to your wayes and doctrin This of Calcedon consisting of 630. Bishops at least own'd S. Leo Pope for Head of the vniuersal Church and in his name and by his authority Dioscorus was condemn'd and deposed See Leo his epistle 47. to the Councel sent by his Legats to reside therin saying In these Brethren a Paschasinus and Lucentius Bishops Boniface and Basil Priests directed to you by the Apostolical see your Fraternities may belieue that I preside in your Synod And the Synod answers Truly you did preside as Head to the Members And the Legats sentence against Dioscorus was Sanctissimus ac Beatissimus Papa a The most holy and blessed Pope Leo Head of the uniuersal Church by vs his Legats with consent of the holy Synod being endow'd with Peter the Apostles dignity who is the foundation and rock of the faith and call'd Porter of the heauenly Kingdom hath depriued Dioscorus of Episcopal dignity and of all priestly functions Caput vninersalis Ecclesiae Leo per nos Legatos suos S. Synodo consentiente Petri Apostoli praeditus dignitate qui Ecclesiae fundamentum petra Fidei coelestis regni Ianitor nuncupatur Episcopali dignitate Dioscorum nudauit ab omni Sacerdotali opere fecit extorrem Mr. Walsh doth the Oath of Supremacy allow the Pope to be Head of the vniuersal Church or allow him so much spiritual iurisdiction as this Councel of Calcedon If not why do you quote it to that purpose Perhaps you may haue better luck with Prouincial Councells Let us see You alleadge S. Augustin and 217. Bishops of Afrik against Appeals to Rome in the case of Apiarius and you apply the same to the Oath of Supremacy Mr. Walsh if I be not mistaken Belarmin hath cleerly answer'd that obiection which you borrowed from Caluin as you do most others in your tedious volume from heretiks and Baronius in the very yeare and place quoted by you though you conceal it proues that S. Augustin and the Bishops of Afrik owned the Popes Supremacy and spiritual authority ouer them instancing the case of Antony Bishop Fussalensis of Numidia deposed from his Episcopal administration and reuenue by the Bishops of that Prouince He obtaining a letter of his pretended innocency from his Primat to Pope Boniface appeald to his Holiness Boniface dying his successor Celestinus fauored Antony yet with this caution and Prouiso in his letters if the matter of fact was true and Antony his narration not subreptitious Antony boasted much of this sauor and writ to his friends that the Pope not only gaue sentence for him but also would command the same to be executed by his Executors with military power Wherupon S. Augustin writ a letter to the Pope informing him of the truth and desired him to giue sentence for the people of Antony's Diocess which was the other party because the right was on their side and not to think vpon that violent way wherwith Antony threatned the poor people Permit not saith the Saint these things to be don I beseech thee per Christi sanguinem by the bloud of Christ by the memory of Peter the Apostle who admonisht the Prelats of Christian people not to domineer violently amongst the brethren Heer you see Mr. Wash S. Augustin and the African Bishops admitting of Appeals to Rome nay admitting in the Bishop of Rome right to a coerciue power for executing his sentence in Afrik though indeed they aduise him not to make vse of it in that case so did Ireneus aduise S. Victor the Pope not to excommunicat the Asian Churches albeit he doubted not of his power to excommunicat them Doth the oath of Supremacy allow the Pope such a Supremacy or such a latitude or extent of spiritual jurisdiction out of his temporal estate Let me once more intreat you Mr. Walsh per Christi Sanguinem not to betray your ignorance so manifestly not to expose your-self to the Censure and laughter of all who read Councells or Fathers Had it not bin much better for you not to haue intermedled with these matters wherof you vnderstand so litle than to be look't vpon as a vain ignorant heretik we your friends can not but be concern'd though we can say but litle for you ANIMAD 3. Whether it be rashness obstinacy and a sin in Roman Catholiks to refuse the Oath of Supremacy and Friar Walsh his Remonstrance MR Walsh I couple these two instruments the oath of Supremacy and your Remonstrance together because yourself makes no distinction between them as to the lawfullness of their being taken by Catholiks For though each of them seem to renounce the Popes spiritual authority a Pag. 24. 1. part yet you tell vs there is no such matter because Spiritual authority in those oathes Formularies signifies not Spiritual but temporal authority Seing therfore you are of opinion that the oath of supremacy may be taken with a good conscience by Roman Catholiks and that the whole Roman Catholik Church belieues and tells vs the contrary you haue no reason to be angry with Catholiks if they do not rely vpon your word in any point that concerns their conscience or religion and though your Remonstrance
of sowing dissention and diuiding Roman Catholiks by his Remonstrance hath gain'd him a litle credit and countenance in Court therfore he must be so learned and loyal as to teach not only the Irish Catholik Clergy but the whole Catholik Church their duty as if they were ignorant of it to God and Cesar Whence had he all this learning Did his teaching a yeare or two Philosophy and half a yeare or therabouts Diuinity in Kilkenny to half a dozen Schollars make him an Oecumenical master and adorn him with so extraordinary knowledge both Diuine and human as to instruct not only the dull Clergy of Ireland but the acutest wits of France Spain and Italy The man was so sensible of the aspersion you cast vpon his and your own Countreymen that I durst not excuse you and indeed you spoke inconsideratly for it s well known to most of the famous Vniuersities of Europe that as Irish men haue bin antiently their first Founders so they haue bin of late their chiefest Professors and greatest Ornament Your self might haue known or at least heard of Richard Wadding the Augustin in Conimbria of Iames Arthur the Dominican in Alcala Salamanca and Conimbria of Holiwood in Padua and Mussipont of Luke Wadding and Richard Lynch in Salamanca of Peter wadding in Prague all Jesuits of many famous Doctors of Sorbon in Paris of your own Friars Hicky Cauel Lombard and Luke Waddin in Rome Of the Iesuit Thomas Talbot aliàs de Leon in Granada the Oracle of all Spain not only for his profoundness in Diuinity but also for the vast extent of his knowledge in other sciences and languages You might haue knowen the eminent Doctor of Bologna Riredan of Tolosa not to speake of other famous Physitians who though not Professors yet Practioners so farr aboue the common sort as Fenell Fogotty O Meara c. That they may be recorded to posterity for patterns of safe and successfull prescriptions as others are for printed bookes These and others though all dead the two last only excepted yet are a fresh and euerlasting euidence against your imputing dulness of apprehension and ignorance to the Irish Clergy and nation I could name said an other four of the Irish Bishops yet liuing and many of the inferior Clergy especialy Regulars who taught with great applause in foreign and famous Vniuersities both Diuinity and Philosophy Without doubt they take ill that a petty friar should pretend to teach them their duty either to God or the King Why did he not confute them in the Congregation of Dublin an 1666. when he had the Lord Lieutenants fauor to countenance his doctrin and fright them into his opinions Why did not he answer then the Prolocutor Bishop Lynch and Father Nicholas Netteruilles reasons Why did he not accept of Father Iohn Talbots offer to shew in diuers particulars Frier Redmund Carons gross inexcusable falsifications in his Remonstrantia Hibernorum and in his lesser libel intituled Loyalty asserted Why did he not answer the obiections and reasons of many others as learned men as these who confounded him and his errors in that Congregation Then was the time to vindicat his doctrin and Remonstrance but if now after 6. years study Walsh his volum of that subiect is a nuisance to the Academies a bundell of errors rak't out of the ashes of burnt heretical bookes how wat it possible for him to speake then any thing but heresies and nonsense This your Countrey men What could I answer to this But 't is wors yet He gaue me the ensuing writing wherin he vndertakes to shew euen to yourself that those of the Irish Clergy you so much vndervalue had and haue still the better of you not only in wit but in learning euen in this controuersy after your 6. years study of this matter Let vs first of all saith he state it right You pretend that the Supremacy of temporal Soueraings doth not only giue them power to make ecclesiastical lawes euen in matters of Faith as appears by your foresaid own words speaking of lustinian the Emperor but that the spiritual authority of the Church can not warrant its punishing by corporal penalties such an irregular Friar as you are thought to be And to make this your Tenet more plausible you would fain inferr from the coerciue power in the Church of whipping such a fellow as you are a coerciue power to dethrone Princes as if forsooth they could not sit securely nor be at ease in their thrones if you should be disciplin'd Mr. Walsh the Soueraignty of Princes is so sacred a thing that I dare not medle with it and am forbid to write of that subiect as all others are who liue in France the man is a Graduate of Sorbon But you know that Bellarmin himself confesseth Princes can not be deposed for bare heresy though Popes may Their temporal iurisdiction can not be question'd for their errors How then can you inferr that if the Church may punish and whip you for heresy it may also depose Kings for the same Therfore I hope it may be discussed without consequence or offence ANIMAD 4. Whether it be heresy or Treason to maintain that the Superiors of the Franciscan Order by virtue of the spiritual power which they haue from the Pope of gouerning their Friars may command Friar Peter Walsh to be whipt against his own will for misdemeanors BE not angry Mr. Walsh vntill you heare me out It is no disgrace for a Religious man to be corrected by his Prouincial or General neither is it the first time that a Friar hath bin whipt and I am sure none euer deserued it better than you do But let us see what can you say for your not being whipt against your will for misdemeanors we will now suppose there are som and shall be proued time enough My self and others of the Irish Clergy obiected against this your main Tenet viz. that no corporal punishment may be inflicted by virtue of a spiritual power the general practise of the whole Catholik Church and all Religious Orders which not only put from Mass and depriue of the suffrages of the faithfull such Apostats as they excommunicat but also forbid them any commerce and conuersation with others nay command them to be whipt and impriprison'd when hands can be layd on them To this obiection you answer page 79. sec 33. thus I take in the first place their allegation of the Faithfull being whipt and commanded to vndergoe austere pennances to be vnconclusure Your reason Mr. Walsh Because euery Ghostly Father may in som cases enioyn his Penitent such punishments and by virtue of his meer spiritual power may do so but can inflict none either by himself or by an other if the penitent will be refractory And not only the Pope not only the Bishop but euery inferior Priest may in fore confessionali enioyn his penitent euen a King or Emperor whateuer is iudged necessary for his eternal Saluation and consequently in som
other than to put the lawfull Proprietor in possession Mr Walsh see how heretical and destructiue your doctrin is Suppose a thing which hath happened and may happen very often Suppose I say an vsurper or Rebell will not go to confession or if he doth will not restore the vsurp't Kingdom or Prouince to his lawfull Soueraign according to his Confessarius his command Hervpon the Bishops of that Kingdom or Prouince according to their duty excommunicat the Tyrant or Rebell for his publik sin and contumacy in keeping out of his Kingdom the lawfull King He contemns their Censures Let me ask you this question Do the Bishops sin in raising of their own accord and as Bishops an Army against the Tyrant or Rebell only to put their lawfull King in possession Answer M. Walsh Do they sin I say in doing this duty would the Pope sin if as Pope he had don the same would Innocenâ— 10. haue sin'd if he helpt to raise an Army in defence of the late King or for the restauration of the present against that vsurper Cromuell would other Popeâ— haue sinn'd in doing the same in prosecution of theiâ— Spiritual Censures in case these had not seru'd theiâ— turn against the Barons when they excommunicated them for their rebellion against King Iohn or King Henry the third Is the whole Catholik Church guiltâ— of heresy and impiety for maintaining this doctrinâ— Speake out Mr. Walsh or at least retract for shamâ— this wicked destructiue principle and accuse not thâ— Church of God as asserting in itself a power preiudiâ—cial to Soueraigns that power I say which hath biâ— so often applied and of its own nature is so appliâ—abâ— to their safety and seruice Do not follow Blacklows he retical principles whom you page 43. 1. p. termâ— learned Priest of the Roman Communion though much for most of his bookes censur'd at Rome They are censured all and censured as Arch heretical And one of them obedience and Gouernment is censur'd for this very doctrin of yours viz. That Subiects sin if they endeauor to restore their disposest and exiled lawfull Soueraign And this Blaklow after all this you and the Blakloistes call a learned Catholik Priest Do you imagin that any Catholik or protestant Soueraign will permit you or a Chapter and Clergy that hold such an Author to be a Catholik and of eminent learning to liue in their Dominions and instruct their Subiects Retire retire to your Conuent good Father Walsh obey your Superiors retract your heretical doctrin so inconsistent with the safety of lawfull Soueraigns submit to the corporal punishment your General will inflict vpon you when you are absolued from so many spiritual Censures you haue incurr'd buisy your-self no longer with Church or state affairs seing you are not sit for either and are so ignorant that pretending to fauor the Soueraignty of Princes you make it vnlawfull for Bishops to ferue them and accuse the Church of heresy for claiming a power to correct with corporal punishments you and such Friars as you are ANIMAD 5. Whether the Roman Catholik Church hath fallen into heresy or hatherr'd enormously these last 600. years for contradicting Friar Peter Walsh his doctrin of a spiritual supremary in temporal Soueraigns and whether all the Roman Catholik Bishops of all the world haue bin for the same 600. years or as least are in this last Century either Traytors to their Soueraigns or periur'd to the Pope for taking the ancient and vsual eath before Episcopal Consecration IT S euident Mr. Walsh by your own words quoted in the first and second Animaduersion that one of the enormous errors wherwith you charge the Church of God for these last 600. years is that the 80. Popes the innumerable writers and all the Bishops therof deny'd to temporal Soueraigns that Supremacy which is attributed in the English oath of Supremacy and a Legislatiue power of making lawes in ecclesiastical matters euen of Faith We haue also quoted these your words of the page 40. n. 3. in your Preface to the Reader If the truth were known it would be found that Baronius and the rest following him were willing to make vse of any malicious vngrounded fictions whatsoeuer against Instinian the Emperor c. by reason his Lawes in ecclesiastical matters euen those of Faith are a perpetual eysore to them because these Lawes are a precedent to all other good Princes to gouern their own respectine Churches in the like manner without any regard of Bulla Coenae or of so many other vain allegations of those men that would make the world belieue it vnlawfull for Secular Princes to make ecclesiastical lawes by their own sole authority for the gouernment of the Church c. To reform therfore this so long erroneus Church and to restore to Secular Princes that spiritual iurisdiction which is giuen them in the oath of Supremacy or a legislatiue power of making ecclesiastical lawes euen in matters of Faith by their own sole authority you Friar Walsh haue found out a Remonstrance wherin all this power and right is asserted and as you say ought to be taken by all loyall Subiects especialy the Bishops who renounce their allegiance by this ensuing oath to the Pope before their consecration which you set down in latin and I translate into inglish The Oath wherby according to Friar Walsh all Bishops are made Traytors pag. 19 Dedic IN. Elect of the Church N. from this hour forward will be faithfull and obedient to S. Peter the Apostle and to the holy Roman Church and to our Lord Pope N. as also to his Successors I will not be in counsel consent or fact that they may loose life or limb or be imprisoned or violent hands laid vpon them in any manner or any iniury don to them vpon any color whatsoeuer The Counsell wherwith they will trust me by themselues their Nuncios or letters I will not reueal to their preiudice The Roman Papacy and royalties of Saint Peter I shall help to retain and defend Saluo meo Ordine against all men I will treat honourably the Legat of the see Apostolik as he passeth by and returns and shall help him in his necessities I shall endeauor to conserue defend increase and promote the rights honors priuileges and authority of the holy Roman Church of our Lord the Pope and of his Successors I will not be in counsell fact or treaty wherin are plotted any sinister or preiudicial things against the Lord Pope or the Roman Church And if I know of any such plots against them I will endeauor to hinder them to the best of my power as also discouer them as soon as I can to the Pope himself or to som other that may giue him notice therof I shall obserue and cause to be obserued to the vttermost of my power the rules of the holy Fathers the Decrees Ordinations or dispositions reseruations prouisions and Apostolik Mandats I shall impugn and prosecute to my power Heretiks
vacant But where are your Bishops and parish Priests Must your Clergy be compos'd only of Cardinals Nay where are your sheep your flocks Mr. Walsh you name but 97. Laiks which number can not afford two Parishioners to each Pastor This is indeed a very litle flock pusillus grex but great I hope in virtue and merit Well! we will not say any thing against their persons but we will set down the fundamental principles wherby you distinguish this blessed flock from that of the Roman Catholik Church which you call Papalin puritan papist popish recusant c. Your 1. principle is that the english oath of supremacy may br a Page 16. of the Dedicatory lawfully taken by all Roman Catholiks nay that they commit a sin of rashness and obstinacy in refusing it You know Mr. Walsh all rashness and obstinacy is a sin 2. a In the Prof. pag. 40. Pref. pag. 49 That temporal Soueraigns may lawfully make lawes in ecclesiastical matters euen of Faith by their own sole authority 3. That for these 600. b Dedic page 13. last years the Roman Catholik Church hath err'd enormously for gainsaying these principles of yours 4. c Pet. Walsh sayes pag. 75. And yet I must tell my Aduersaries that such Catholik Diuines as hold the absolute fallibility of general Councels euen I mean in points of faith think they can say enough for themselâ—es c. That Roman Catholik Authors hold and maintain general Councells are not infallible in defining matters of Faith or doctrin Do you hold such Authors to be Roman Catholik Mr. Walsh If you do your are not one your-self 5. d Pag. 20. Dedic That all the Roman Catholik Bishops of the world for as many hundred years as they haue taken the vsual oath before their consecration haue bin and are now either Traitors or periur'd persons for taking it So that for all this time all general Councels were compos'd wholy of Traitors or periur'd persons 6. That Popes as Popes and Bishops as Bishops e Hâ—â—ory 1. p. sect 33. page 79 can not in conscience contribute or concurr by raising Troops or any other temporal wayes to defend the liues or rights of their lawfull soueraigns against Rebells or endeauor to restore them to their Kingdoms and Dominions if possess'd by vsurpers and Tyrants 7. That the supreme secular Princes can not grant to Clergy f 1. part of the 1. Treatise pag 417. sin men their subiects an exemption from the supreme secular judicature or from their supreme coerciue power Whence must follow that all Christian Princes haue sin'd in doing so and the whole Catholik Church err'd in commanding their piety for granting those immunities 8. That a Page 79 cit no spiritual power as such can inflict vpon any score a corporal punishment for any misdemeanors whatsoeuer particularly for heresy So that the Kings of England by virtue of their spiritual supremacy can not punish heresies And as supreme heads in temporal affairs they can as litle Whence follows that neither as spiritual nor as temporal Heads they can punish heretiks This is good newes for you and the Blakloists Mr. Walsh 9. That neither the Pope nor the b Friar Walsh in his pag 430. 1. part of the first Treatise saith I do my self as I confess I am bound most Religiously allow the â—anonization vencration and inuocation of Saint Thomas of Canterbury and all three of him as of a glerious Martyr too and not with standing I allow also all the mercies raported of him Generals of Regular Orders can inflict any corporal punishment vpon their inferior Priests or Friars for the greatest misdemeanors or for writing such follies as these of yours are Mr. Walsh This also may comfort you 10. That notwithstanding supreme temporal Princes can not in conscience or reason c Pag 429. exempt Clerks from their supreme coerciue power or Courts of secular iudicature according to your 7. principle yet God may and hath wrought great Miracles in the case of S. Thomas of Canterbury to confirm they may so exempt them and by consequence God according to your principles may encourage men to sin by miracles 11. That God may in all like cases work Miracles to assure the Church c Pag 429. that a man who dyes for defending the Church immunities is a Saint and enjoyes his Diuine sight notwithstanding those immunities could not be lawfully granted by Princes to the Church and the man who dyed for maintaining them dyed maintaining an error 12. a Fâ—iar Walsh his words ibid page 4â—9 One may be inuok't as a Martyr in the Church largely or not so strictly yet properly still if he dyes for witnessing or bearing testimony to a good zeal and great piety and excellent conscience in being constant to a cause which one esteems the more iust and generaly seems the more pious for all he knows though it be not an euangelical trnth and though perhaps too he may be deceiued in the obiectiue truth of what he dyes for This is your Creed Mr. Walsh the twelue articles of your Remonstrant Religion By this last all Iewes Turks and heretiks that are pious in their own way and dye for their erroneous Tenets are properly Martyrs though not so strictly and God may work Miracles to confirm the belief of their bliss piety and good conscience and by consequence all our Christian Miracles signify nothing as to the proof of the obiectiue truth of what we belieue they only proue that we mean well in belieuing the Mysteries of Faith though falie in themselues only such Christian and Catholik Martyrs whose Miracles as were wrought say you at the inuocation of God by the Saint himself or by any other that God might be pleased by working such Miracles b Page 429. to euidence the iustice of such a cause do confirm the truth of the doctrin profess'd by such a Martyr or Maintainer of it For if they had bin â—rought so the case would be cleer enough as to such who saw those Miracles or to whose knowledge authentik proofs of them di sufficiently com that enen the obedience truth and iustice of things in such a controuersy had bin on such a Saint or Martyr's side But otherwise wrought they can be no more but Diuine testimonies of his hauing wonderfully or extraordinarily serâ—ed God either â—n his life or death or both whether he was deceiued or no in som things And besides they can be no more or at least on any rational ground can not be said to be any more than Diuine testimonies of his being now with God in glory Do you say all this Mr Walsh to make the world belieue that Turks and Iewes are now with God or Saints in Gods glory Or only to proue that the Miracles wrought by God for S Thomas of Canterbury may stand very well with hauing no truth or iustice on his side in his known controuersy with King Henry 2.
consider oâ— it I went to Peter Walsh of whom I had then a good opinion to be aduised by him and told him sincerely that neither desire of liberty or auersion from regular disciplin inticed me to leaue the Society wherof I was a member and might continue if I would but that I was in circumstances wherin I thought I might do God the King and all who depended of him more considerable seruice than I could in the Society or euer again would be in my own power or of any other of my profession That I only scrupled the promise I had made as all others do who are not profess'd of entring into the Society He answer'd that he iudg'd in his conscience I might without any scruple leaue the Society vpon the aforesaid considerations and as for the promise of entring therunto that he had power to dispense therin because it was but votum simplex And I was so simple as to take his word So that you see I dismiss'd my self and vpon what score and by whose approbation You see also what Kind of man Friar Walsh is who both in his great English volum and in his latin epistle to Harold proclaims me an Apostat and a Traytor to the King as acting against him in the yeare â—9 wheras none knew the contrary better than Walsh himself I will briefly tell you the truth of all my Treasons Vpon Cromuells death the diuisions of his Army and the submission of his two sons the Commonwealths party was most like to preuail a thing the Spanish Minister very much appâ—â—hended wherupon they sent me to London to obserue and obstruct by their friends he Commonwealths men design but would not permit me to acquaint my own King with it though indeed it was altogether for his interest This journey of mine from Brussells to England rais'd a iealousy in the King and his Ministers as also in the Caualeers in London who thought I came in that coniuncture to further som ouertures of peace which the Common-wealth party had made to the Spanish Ministers The Erle of Clarendon who was very angry with me vpon the account of an imaginary Cardinal I mean of an odd story attributed to his Lordship continualy inculcated to his Maiesty the preiudice my negotiation might do his affairs I satisfied as many of the Caualeers in London as I thought I might trust with a secret and assured them my endeauors were and alwayes should be to serue the King and that there would be no peace with the Commonwealth party The same I assured Peter Walsh vpon his telling me he was going then to Brussells and deliuered to him a letter for my Lord of Ormond wherin I gaue his Excellency the same assurances I did the London Caualeers adding that a litle time would proue me to be an honest man for that I was then vpon my iourney to the Conferences of the Pirenées where the general peace was to be concluded wherin I hop't England would not be included notwithstanding the Ambassy and diligence of Sir Willian Locart to haue it comprehended in the Treaty Arriuing at Fuenterabra I went straight to our Kings Residents house and he telling me that he had many aduertissements of my ill intentions of obstructing his Majestyes affairs desired me to assure him of the contrary by my word which he would take because he thought I was an honest man and knew that those who writ against me to him had bin formerly in Flanders mistaken both in my interest and intention of seruing the King I shewed to the Kings Resident all my papers gaue him an account of my design assured him that Don Luis de Haro would giue me credit as to my relation of the Kings interest being the only considerable in England in case Don Alonso de Cardenu and the Marques of Caracona as was generaly feard should represent it otherwise He finding the success did answer my vndertaking and his own expectation gaue full satisfaction to the King of my fidelity and endeauors to serue him after that his Maiesty came to Fuenterabia The same testimony was giuen to his Maiesty by Don Luis de Haro himself and then the King was pleased to receiue me into his former grace and good opinion as also my Lord of Ormond who then trusted me with his concerns in the Court of Spain a pension promised but neuer paid vntill I sent him from Madrid three thousand eight hundred pounds in one Bill the summe due to him Notwithstanding that my Lord of Clarendons anger did still continue he neuer forgaue the story of the Cardinal wherin I had no hand yet the King after his happy restauration was gratiously pleased against the Lord Chancelors will to name me one of the Queens Almoniers but his Lordship and the Marques of Sandy Ambassador of Portugal found wayes soon after to depriue me of that honor Heere you haue all my Treasons which Peter Walsh hath disguised and dispersed in print with mysterious words and malititious reflexions contrary to his own conscience and the knowledge of the whole Court As to his railing and saying pag. 530. that I went to his Chamber in London an 1644. to importune him to take off a certain nobleman he means my Lord Duke of Ormond from hindering my being made a Bishop the truth is I went to Friar Walsh his Chamber but with greater indifferency than importunity for I shewed him the letter I had then receiued from the Inter-Nunâ—ius of Flanders as I did to many others offering me from Rome a Bishoprik and I remember very well I told Peter Walsh I valued not the offer so much as to accept of it without my Lord of Ormonds then Lieutenant of Ireland approbation and that I was very indifferent whether he would allow of such a thing or no. And indeed if I had not bin very indifferent I would neuer haue made vse of Friar Walsh his mediation whose design then was knowen to be to hinder all such promotions vntill himself had bin named Archbishop of Dublin And his Camerade Caron Archbishop of Armagh But I admire Walsh is not asham'd to touch this passage his Diabolycalenuy and foolish ambition hauing hurried him immediatly vpon the sight of my Letter to my Lord of Ormond informing him of his fears that the Talbots had a plot to assasinat his Grace as he had ground to suspect by a word that fell from one of the Brothers either Thomas or Peter Talbot he knew not which forsooth and therfore as his Graces Seruant he came to aduertise him of it wherupon ensued the imprisonment of three brothers which gaue occasion of murmuring to many and laughter to most to see such a noise made of what was found to be nothing else but the malice and plot of a knauish friar that endeuor'd to destroy a whole family least one of them might lye in his way or hinder him from that miter he look't after But a man who had Sacrificed the preseruation of
take his pass as the other Colonells did Hereby the Bishop incurr'd his Kings displeasure and ruin'd the fortune of his Brother a very loyal worthy gentleman and a good Commander After the Kings happy restauration this vndutifull carriage of the Bishop was not forgot at whitehall and he not knowing how to liue in France hauing also a desire to return to his own Countrey writ to you Mr. Walsh that he would do any thing you would haue him do so he might be permitted to return and liue at home A large offer and an argument of a large conscience in circumstances wherin he knew you wanted and sought at this very time a Bishop to head your vpstart Church You took him at his word and he set his hand to to your Remonstrance Whether he repented or no at his death I know not but I am sure Friar Redmund Caron whom you canonize for a Saint pag. 759. ought to haue retracted the doctrin of his Remonstrantia Hibernorum which was stuff't with so notorious and palpable falsifications that he can not be presumed to haue bin ignorant of them But his last aduice and Adieu to you is sad and remarkable for he declared as you say pag. 760. That you were bound in conscience to prosecute still euen after his death that matter of the Remonstrance and continue the defence or aduancement of that doctrin which in his life time you had for so many years and notwithstanding so much contradiction maintain'd You do a great iniury Mr. Walsh to the memory and merit of that Illustrious and Catholik Prelat Thomas Dease quondam Bishop of Meath in ioyning him in the same page with Caron as approuing at his death of your Remonstrance and doctrin What if he did approue of the book of Queries Was there any thought or knowledge then of your Remonstrance Is there any thing in that book of Queries asserting a spiritual supremacy in Princes or denying it to the Pope Doth it say that Secular Princes by their own sole authority may gouern the Church and make Ecclesiastical lawes euen in matter of Faith Doth it maintain that Catholiks both rashly and obstinatly deny to take the oath of Supremacy and by consequence commit a sin for not taking it Doth it say the General Councells of Ephesus and Calcedon gaue as much to temporal Princes and as litle to the Pope of spiritual authority as the oath of Supremacy doth Doth it say that som Catholiks hold Generall Councells are fallible Where will you find in the book of Queries that the Roman Catholik Church hath err'd enormously in its principles and practises these last 600. years and that all the Bishops thereof are either Traytors to their Princes or periur'd to the Pope in taking the vsual oath at their consecration Doth the book of Queries teach that if Bishops as Bishops help their Soueraigns with money or armes against Rebells or Vsurpers they offend God As also that temporal Soueraings offend God in exempting the Clergy from their Secular Supreme Courts Doth the book of Queries teach that God may work Miracles to confirm a falshood or at least the Sanctity of a man who has a good intention and zeale in maintaining it or dying for it thinking it to be a truth Or that a man who dyes so for maintaining an error is properly though not strictly a Martyr Or that the whole Church when it celebrats the feast of a Saint as properly and strictly a Martvr may be mistaken in declaring and belieuing him such a Martyr though not in belieuing him a Saint in Heauen All this you maintain in Saint Thomas of Canterberies case as necessary consequences flowing from the doctrin of your Remonstrance Did Bishop Thomas Dease nay did Caron himself defend these heresies The book of Queries only asserted the lawfullness of making peace and Confederacies with Protestants and that the Popes Nuncius could not validly excommunicat the Irish Catholiks for doing so and that it was lawfull to appeal to the Pope in those circumstances and that the said Appeal did suspend the Nuncius Censures No learned Catholik denyes this doctrin But not one Catholik in the world doth or can maintain your doctrines now mention'd and therfore you are not only heretik but an Impostor pretending that they who opposed the Nuntius his Censures and practises in Ireland were your Remonstrants ANIMADVERSION 9. Whether temporal Soueraigns can exempt from their Supreme coerciue power the Clergy of their Dominions THAT they haue don so de facto is euident by the lawes and practise of all Christian Emperors and Kings especialy in England euer since Christianity florished But what 's that to the purpose if Friar Walsh say they could not de iure or in conscience Pardon me 't is somthing For though Friar Walsh his authority be very great Especialy when he hath Barclay the Poet or Romantik writer to back him yet I hope the persuasion and practise of the whole Catholik Church the belief of all Christian Princes and Prelats for so many hundred years will weigh more than the opinion of a Romantik Poet or a Remonstrant Friar Excuse then I pray Mr. Walsh poor Cardinal Belarmin whose ignorance you so much pitty for being mightily startled at this position of yours and Barklay's The temporal a Friar Walsh 1. part of his first Treatise pag. 267 Seq Princes themselues how otherwise Supreme soeuer could not can not by any law right authority or power giuen them by God or man exempt from themselues that is from their own Supreme Ciuil and euen coerciue power the Clergy men of their Dominions Sure you must needs haue a very cleer demonstration for this Tenet that forces you to hold it being so contrary to the doctrin and practise of the Church You say you haue Out with it then Mr. Walsh and let not the Faithfull be any longer foold Good Reader be attentiue 't is a profound acute argument you will find it pag. 271. cit in these words Whosoeuer haue and continue any office which essentially inuolues a power Supreme both directiue and coerciue of all Clerks within their Dominions may not deuest themselues of the power of directing and coercing the same Clerks vnless they do withal deuest themselues of that office as towards the self same Clerks Because they can not deuest themselues of the essence of that which they hold still this arguing a plain contradiction But the Office of Kings inuolues a power supream both directiue and coerciue of all Clerks within their Dominions Ergo. The Minor you must proue Mr. Walsh I haue already don that saith he and at large by very natural reason I find none but that desinition of a King for which you quote your great claslik Author Almainus de sup potest c. cap. 5. thus Aliquem esie Regem nihil aliud est quam habere Superioritatem erga subditos in subditis esse obligationem pariendi Regi c. This is all you set
down of Almainus his definition and I haue no exception against it though I haue against your sincerity in deliuering the sense of it in English The true translation of it is this One to be a King is nothing else than to haus Superiority towards Subiects and that in Subjects there be an obligation of obeying the King This you translate thus One to be a King is nothing else but to haue a politik both directiue and coerciue power of Superiority ouer all the people of his Dominions and that consequently there be obligation answerable on the same people as Subjects to obey him These are your words pag. 271. Take my humble aduice Mr. Walsh and let it be a general rule to you her after neuer falsify neuer add words to a definition or Author wherupon you build the force of your argument especialy in a matter of so great importance as this For if you do most men will be tempted to say you are a knaue and if your dispute be against the doctrin and practise of the Church they will add you are so obstinat that though you see the weakness of your cause you had rather support it against the Church by corrupting Authors and abusing illiterat Readers than embrace and declare the truth Our Controuersy with you Mr. Walsh is reduced to this point whether a King deuests himself of his Kingship when he grants to the Clergy his own Subiects an exemption from his Supreme coerciue power or from being cited or punished for crimes by his Secular Supreme Courts of Judicature but withall leaues them to be cited and punished by Bishops or som other Spiritual power which in cases of Treason degrades the delinquent and deliuers him ouer to the Secular Courts You say a King doth deuest himself of his Kingship by granting such a priuilege to the Clergy And you proue it by the definition of Kingship But not finding in the definition of Kingship any mention of coercire power as if it were essential to a King not to dispense in it or exempt a Subiect from it you thrust into the desinition the word coerciue power and very cleerly conclude from your own forgery that if a King doth exempt any Subiects from it he doth vnking himself as to them and makes them no Subiects To be a King Mr. Walsh as your own friend Almain tells you is to haue a Superiority ouer Subiects and Subiects to haue an obligation of obeying their King Both are consistent with such an exemption from the supreme coerciue secular power as the Clergy pretends to You say no. Why not pag. 269. Because the point of Lording commanding iudging punishing at least in som cases is the very essence of principality so that the Prince can not remit or quit this and withall continue Prince Certainly you are mistaken Do you belieue Mr. Walsh that God is a Soueraign Prince or Lord of his Angels and Saints in Heauen This is no impertinent question to one of your principles If God then be a Soueraign Prince or Lord of his blessed Angels and Saints in Heauen without doubt Soueraignty may well stand with an exemption from the Soueraigns coerciue power of punishing euer or in any case his Subiects for the Saints in Heauen are Gods subiects and yet by his special fauor and gratious priuilege are exempted from his supreme coerciue power of inflicting euer pain or punishment vpon them If therfore it be not against the Diuine Kingship or Soueraignty of God to haue Subiects exempted from his supreme coerciue power I see no reason why human Kingship and Soueraignty which is not so absolute but a shadow of the Diuine may not be consistent with an exemption from the supreme human coerciue power sure you will grant the Angels and Saints in Heauen are as properly Gods subiects and he at least as properly their Soueraign as any King is of his subiects vpon earth Therfore the nature notion and essence of Kingship Soueraignty or Superiority as such is consistent with an exemption of the subiects from the coerciue power of the Soueraign Perhaps you will say That the Saints in Heauen can not sin and therfore there can not be any coerciue power in God their King to punish them This Mr. Walsh makes nothing for you Though the Saints in Heauen can not sin yet still they are Gods subiects and he their Soueraign they are exempted from his coerciue power though his subiects Therfore Soueraignty and subiection doth not necessarily exclude an exemption in subiects from the soueraigns supreme coerciue power Let me ask you an other question Was the mother of God or S Iohn Baptist and other Saints who by a singular priuilege were preserued from sinning Gods subiects vpon earth And yet there was no absolute impossibility of their not sinning vpon earth and by consequence none of being punish'd by Gods coerciue power for sinning And yet they were exempt from any such coerciue power vpon earth Therfore an exemption from coerciue supreme power is consrstent with subiection and a possibility of sinning Be not startled at this Mr. Walsh it s no new doctrin t is but a smale parcel of that ordinary Theology and common sense which you want I will giue you a reason for all this and you can not deny it without declaring yourself an Atheist The proper nature notion and essence of Soueraignty or Superiority doth not consist in not exempting subiects from a supreme or superior coerciue power of punishing them but rather in hauing power to pardon or exempt them as well as to inflict the punishment they haue deserued or may deserue Nay if you be not very stupid you will easily perceiue that the notion of exemption or priuilege inuolues a subiection and dependency in the person exempted or priuileg'd as doth independency Soueraignty or Superiority in him that grants it How then can it be inferr'd from an exemption from a supreme coerciue power of Secular Soueraigns granted to their Subiects of the Clergy that these are no Subiects and they no Soueraigns Learn a litle wit Mr. Walsh and know that nothing argues greater Soueraignty in a Prince than a power of exempting such of his subiects as he thinks fit from his own supreme coerciue power for that very exemption is still a dependency or an argument of their subiects dependency and subiection as well as a mark of the Prince his fauor to them I hope you comprehend now how it was and is in the power of temporal Soueraigns Without deuesting themselues of their Kingship to exempt from their own supreme coerciue power their subiects of the Clergy You say they neuer did so de facto that shall be now examined A NIMADVERSION 10. Whether Christian temporal Soueraigns haue de facto exempted their Subiects of the Clergy from their Supreme Secular Iudicature and coerciue power FRiar Walsh sayes they did not and proues by particular instances that they neuer intended any such thing The first Prince therfore I
do supplicat your Majesty you be pleased to command by a most pious order that Peter Walsh a disturber of the peace in lieu of Peter the Inuader of the Church Alexandria be transported to foreign parts Would any man of sense iudge by this humble request that our King or any other to whom it were made had that spiritual authority in Ecclesiastical matters which you would fain flatter Soueraigns with Nay suppose his Majesty or the Parliament were pleased for the peace of the three Nations and to punish you for teaching and printing that Bishops as Bishops can not lawfully help or succor their King to pull down an vsurper or oppose any rebellion to send you to row in the Galleys of Tangiers or to the Baâ—bados to labor with the slaues in the Sugar Mills as you say pag. 357. one Chronopius a Bishop was sent to digg in the Syluer Mines by the Emperor Valentinian for appealing to him after he had bin condemned by an Ecclesiastical sentence of 70. Bishops would any one think that this Mission of yours to Tangiers or Barbados after you had bin condemned by the Church as an heretik for this doctrin could proue that the King or Parliament had power to gouern the Church or to make lawes in spiritual matters T is therfore to no purpose for me to confute these and other wild arguments of yours seing themselues sufficiently lay open your gross mistake and demonsttat your litle wit and iudgment But I will beg my Readers leaue and patience to relate your Achilles a The case of S. Iohn Chrysosiom in the controuersy of S. John Chrysostom Arcadius an Emperor also very Orthodo◠〈◊〉 Friar Walsh pag. 360. receiued the accusations against Iohn Chrysostom Bishop of Constantinople and thervpon hauing first ordered a iudicial procedure against this great and holy Bishop at last condemn'd and sent him with a guard of Soldiers farr off to exile Socrates lib 6. c. 16. Falad in Dial. And certainly Pope Innocent the first of that name who then gouerned the see of Rome where he inueighs bitterly against Arcadius and against Endoxia his Empress as against most grieuous Persecutors of so great and so holy a man doth not at all obiect that Arcadius being a meer lay man vsurped a iâ—dâ—â—iary power in Ecclesiastical matters or so against his own Bishop nor that he proceeded so against him out of or by a tyrannical power and not by any legal authority ouer him in the case but only reprehends Arcadius in that he had not proceeded iustly against Chrysostom or in that he had not made right vse of the power which he had in the case and in a word in that he expell'd Chrysostom from his Episcopal throne before his cause had bin legaly and throughly sifted or iudged as it ought and consequently without obseruing the due formaliues or euen substantial or essential procedure in such case required by the law 〈◊〉 sayes he è throno suo re non iudicata magnum totius orbâ—s Doctorem Niceph. lib. 13. cap. 34. Nor doth Chrysostom himself any where complain of the Emperor as hauing vsurped a power of iudging condemning or banishing him And yet we know he writ to seueral especialy to Pope Innocent many letters fâ—aught with complaints of the Emperors vniust iudgment and proceedings against him acknowledging Arcadius or at least supposing him still a legal Iudge though vniust as to the sentence in the case You haue the misfortune Mr. Walsh to contradict yourself in euery story you tell and by consequence you haue a special gift of discrediting your own writings and making your relation and comments vpon it incredible and ridiculous You say in the beginning of this story that Arcadius receiued the accusations against Saint Iohn Chrysostom and therupon hauing first ordered a iudicial procedure against that holy Bishop at last condemned and sent him with a guard of Soldiers farr off to exise A iudicial procedure Mr. Walsh is to proceed secundum allegata probata if Arcadius did so and was Chrysostoms lawfull Iudge Pope Innocent could not reprchend Arcadius as proceeding vniustly against him or say that he condemned him re non iudicata Js to condemn one according to a iudicial procedure and by a lawfull authority to condemn him re non iudicata When therfore the Pope reprehended Arcadius for banishing Chrysostom re non iudicata before his cause was sentene't he meant as is vnderstood by euery man of sense that Arcadius was not his lawfull Iudge and that he ought to haue expected the sentence of the Apostolik sea or a Catholik Councel of Bishops to which the Saint had appeald You see Mr. Walsh how you contradict yourself and how difficult a thing it is to contradict truth and to corrupt such Authors as tell it without being caught in a lye Heare then the true story of S. Iohn Chtysostoms controuersy with the Emperor Arcadius as it is related by S. Iohn himself Palladius and the same Authors which you quote Theophilus Bishop of Alexandria and others ill affected to S. Iohn Chrysostom were employ'd by Eudoxia the Empress to depose that holy Prelat from his see his chief Accusers were som of his own Priests who could not endure his iust reprehensions for their faults Amongst other things himself sayes he was accused of too much familiarity with a certain woman and that he permitted people to receiue the communion after eating This accusation was heard by Theophilus and 36. Bishops of his and the Empress faction met at Calcedon and exhibited by two Priests of Constantinople which Chrysostom had excommunicated for notorious crimes The Saint had with him in Constantinople forty Bishops assembled to heare a charge of 70. articles giuen in against Theophilus but Thophilus who should haue stood at the bair in Constantinople sate as a Iudge in Calcedon and without any lawfull authority summon'd Chrysostom to appeare before him at Calcedon to answer the charge put in against him by the two excommunicated Priests But though the S. said he would appeare when soeuer the Iudges were lawfull and not parties yet the 40. Bishops who stuck to him signified to Theophilus that he should rather com to Constantiuople to cleer himself than call others to iudgment at Chalcedon Vpon this Chrysostom had sentence of deposition past vpon him at Chalcedon for contumacy forsooth And though he appeald to a Councell of Catholik and indisterent Bishops yet those of Chalcedon had so much interest with the Empress and shee with the Emperor as to haue Chrysostom halled out of his Church by Soldiers wherupon he retired to Bernetum of Bithinia But a sedition being feared in Constantinople for this iniustice the Emperor and the Empress also sent to desire him to return withall diligence which he did but as soon as he return'd he desired the Emperor as may be seen in his Epistle to Pope Innocent that his cause might be tryed in a lawfull Synod of Bishops so
yourself Would you haue him exhort the Emperor to remoue from his mind the Popes thoughts or a papal condemnation What would you be at The Pope desires the Emperor to be charitable and to be recoucil'd to the Church Is this to acknowledge in him a full proper legal and supreme power of coercion of Clerks write sense Mr. Walsh and beg pardon of the prinrer and Reader for your book is a manifest nuysance to common sense a The case of Hermannus Archbishop of Cullen in Charles 5. time I will presume a little further vpon my Readers patience to let him see how wittily you confute Belarmins answer to Barclay obiecting against the Ecclesiastical immunity the case of Hermanus Archbishop of Cullen whom the Emperor Charles 5. summon'd to iudment Belarmin sayes he did it as Hermanus was a Prince of the Empire and not as he was a Bishop To this you say pag. 264. That Belarmine writes so of this matter as he may be refuted with that Ieer wherwith a certain Boor pleasantly check'd a great Bishop as he rode by with a splendid pompous train The story is that a Countrey clown hauing first admired and said this pomp was very vnlyke that of the Apostles to whom Bishops did succeed and som of the Bishops train answering that this Bishop was not only a successor of the Apostles but also Heir to a rich Lordship and that moreouer he was a Duke and a Prince too the Clown replyed but if God sayes he condemn the Duke and Prince to eternal fire what will becom of the Bishop Euen so doth Belarmin write as that seauant spoke that this Hermanus whom Charles 5. summon'd to appeare was not only an Archbishop but a Prince also of the Empire And euen so do I say and reply with the Countrey swain when the Emperor iudg'd the Prince of the Empire did he not I pray iudge the Archbishop too But you will say that though indeed he iudg'd the Archbishop yet not as an Archbishop but as a Prince of the Empire Let it be so for neither do I intend or mean or at least vrge or press now that Clerks as Clerks are subiect to the coercion or direction of Kings but as men but as Cittizens and politik parts of the body politik which Kind of authority as Belarmin confesses Charles 5. both acknowledged and vindicated to the Emperor Mr. Walsh if BèlarmÃn doth confess as indeed he doth that Clerks as men and Cittizens are subiect to the coerciue power and secular iudicature of temporal Soueraigns doth it follow that the Soueraigns can not exempt them as they are Clergymen from that very coerciue power and secular iudicature Heer you grant they are exempted as Clerks from it though in other places of your book you say its impossible they should be exempted vnless their Soueraigns cease to be Soueraigns I wish you did exempt and free yourself from these contradictions Indeed your story of the Countrey swain doth sufficiently conuince us of your great erudition but me thinks the application doth not so cleerly shew your incomparable acuteness You take the material man somwhat toogrossely You who are a Scotist should be better at your formal distinctions and consider in a man the form or quality of a Clerk or Churchman as raising him a degree aboue the natural or material manhood and common sort of mankind Saint Peter was more subtile he call'd the Priestood Regale Sacerdotium Not that the spiritual caracter of Priesthood or Episcopacy changes mans nature but his quality it places the person in a higher ranck than naturally he could arriue vnto Euen in human Creatures as such you may see this metaphysical distinction explain'd A Peer of the Realm is a man and as a man ought to be tryed by a common iury but his Peerage exempts him from that ordinary way of trial and yet he is still a man and can not euen as a man be tryed by twelue Commoners but by his Peers Jf the example of Subiects will not satisfy you consider that of Soueraigns Our ancient Kings of England did homage to the ancient Kings of France as Dukes of of Normandy Aquitain c. You will not deny they were men both as Kings and Dukes and did homage as men Doth it follow that because they were men and did homage as men they must needs do homage as Kings Or doth it follow that the King of France could not out of his respect to their Kingship exempt them euen as Dukes of Normandy and men from the supreme coerciue power of his Courts Would this vnking the French Kings I haue proued this to be consistent with Soueraignty and subiection in the 9. Animaduersion to which I remit you if you vnderstand not as yet how the same man may be priuiledged and punish'd vpon different scores What the Clown said is very true if God condemns the Bishop as he is a Prince to hell fire he must go thither also as he is a Bishop yet there is this comfort left to Bishops who are Princes God will neuer send them thither for maintaining the iust priuileges either of a Prince or Bishop but for som mortal sin vnrepented for which there is no priuilege or exemption I haue heard your story of the Bishop and Prince told otherwise viz that the Bishop lying a dying the Deuil appear'd to him as som think he doth to all men in that passage and tempting him to despair said he had don such and such things which were not sutable to his Episcopal function The Bishop answer'd he did not do those things as a Bishop but as a temporal Prince To this the Deuil reply'd I am a dull Deuil and can not vnderstand well those subtile distinctions as a Prince and as a Bishop therfote I will carry you to hell as you are such a man and as I find you without questioning whether you go as a Prince or as a Bishop I feare Mr. Walsh this will be your fate You will meet with som dull Deuil one as dull as yourself a Deuil that knowes not how to distinguish between Peter Walsh the Procurator and Peter Walsh the Friar He must be a very acute Deuil that can find out any formality or distinction to excuse your actings either as Procurator or Friar As Procurator you betrayd your trust and acted quite contrary to your commission and as a Friar you ought not to haue taken any without your Superiors leaue Therfore you being neither Prince Bishop nor lawfull Procurator but a poor simple Franciscan Friar suppose the Deuil had met you when you set out from Dublin well mounted and much finer I belieue in cloathes and ribands than the Bishop your Countrey swain was so much scandalized at and attended to search after those poor soules that hid themselues from your persecution suppose I say the Deuil should meet you and endeauor to hurry you with him to hell how could you find out any pretext to excuse your persecution