King may with impunity be deposed or killed by any one saith Suarez Desens Fid. l. 6. c. 6. Sect. 24. The Pope can make that he who is a King shall be no King and then you are disobliged saith Bellarm. contr Barcl c. 7. The Secular power is subject to the Spiritual The Pope hath a sovereign power over Christian Kings and Princes to correct depose and appoint others in their places If a King be guilty of Heresie Schism or any intolerable crime against his People if he be guilty of negligence or sloth in his government if he fail in the performance of his Oaths and Promises or oppress the Church the Pope may divest him of his Royal Dignity saith Abrah Brovius de Pontif. Roman c. 46. p. 621. Col. 2. Which Book was printed at Cologne Anno 1619. and solemnly recommended and approved by his Superiours and Licensed by the Apostolick Inquisitor I might be infinite in instances of this kind but having almost wearied my self with raking in such a Dunghill I am not willing to tire my Reader too I shall therefore only produce one unexceptionable Witness more and that shall be their great and renowned Champion Bellarmine out of whose 5th Book De Romano Pontifice I shall take the pains to transcribe some passages and having subjoyned thereunto some instances of their practices suitable to their declared principles I shall then leave it to the judgment of any indifferent person what kind of Loyalty and Fidelity Sovereign Princes especially those who are of a different persuasion may hope to find from their Roman Catholick Subjects Bellarmine in the first Chapter of his fifth Book De Romano Pontifice having rejected two extreme Opinions concerning the Pope's power the one taught and maintained by Augustinus Triumphus Alvarus Pelagius Hostiensis and others of his own Communion viz. That the Pope by a Divine Right hath a most plenary power over all the World as well in Political as Ecclesiastical affairs And the other delivered by Calvin Peter Martyr Brentius and others whom he calls Hereticks viz. That the Pope as Pope hath not by Divine Right any Temporal power at all nor upon any account can command Secular Princes much less deprive them of their Kingdoms and Principalities and that Spiritual persons ought not to exercise Temporal Dominion He at last lays down a middle Opinion between both which he tells us is the common Opinion of Catholick Divines viz. That the Pope as Pope hath not directly and immediately any Temporal power but only a spiritual yet by virtue of that Spiritual power he hath indirectly at least a supreme power in Temporals This Opinion he undertakes to explain in his Sixth Chapter where he tells us That in Order to a Spiritual good he hath a Supreme Power of disposing all the Temporal things of all Christian People Which Power is just such over Princes as the Soul hath over the Body or sensitive Appetite by Virtue of this Power he may change Kingdoms and take them from one and give them to another he may make and alter suspend and abrogate Civil Laws as the Chief Spiritual Prince if it be for the safety of Souls In his Seventh Chapter he endeavours to prove this Exorbitant Power of the Pope by reasons all which are founded in the Subordination and Subjection of the Temporal to the Spiritual Sword which is a Foundation that will certainly fail him However upon this Foundation he thus builds The Ecclesiastical Republick can command and compel the Temporal which is indeed its Subject to change the Administration and to depose Princes and to appoint others when it cannot otherwise defend the Spiritual good And again it is not lawfull for Christians to suffer an Infidel or Heretical King if he endeavour to draw his Subjects to his Heresie or Unbelief But to judge whether a King do draw to Heresie or not belongeth to the Pope to whom the Care of Religion is committed therefore it belongs to the Pope to judge whether a King be to be deposed or not And if any one ask why the Christians of old did not depose Nero and Diocletian and Julian the Apostate and Valens the Arian He roundly answers it was not because they wanted Right but because they wanted Power to do it But lest any scrupulous Christian should boggle at those horrid things which these declared Principles must of necessity lead them to as Rebellion Murder Breach of Faith Violation of Oaths c. He will tell them that they are not answerable for any of these things For if the Pope should mistake and command Vice and forbid Vertue yet it were a sin against Conscience for the Church not to believe those Vices to be good and those Vertues to be evil All these instances that I have now laid before you were of men who lived and died in the Communion of the Church of Rome and most of them men of great Eminency both for their Parts and Places and therefore very likely to understand the Religion they professed Now either these men or our Explainer must be very much out and strangely unacquainted with the Principles of their Religion or else the Explainer must industriously design to put a chear upon those Persons of Quality to whom he presents his Scheme For nothing can be more different than his Explanation and this Declaration which these men have left upon Record But I think the choice is very easie which of these ought to be believed in this case and if this Cloud of Witnesses carry it as undoubtedly they will against one single unauthorized Explainer then certainly he was in the wrong box when the so much boasted of the Loyalty of the Roman Catholicks And now I shall only subjoyn an account of some few of their Practices correspondent to these Principles and they being put together will I suppose sufficiently discover the mistake of our Explainer Leo Isaurus Emperour of Constantinople was excommunicated by Pope Gregory the II d. his Country given away to the Lombards by which means he and his Successors lost all the Western Empire which the Pope and the French King afterwards shared between them Henry the IV th Emperour of Germany was excommunicated by Pope Gregory the VII th his Subjects absolved from their Obedience Rodulph Duke of Sueden and Burgundy set up against him to whom a Crown was sent by the Pope with this Inscription The Rock gave the Crown to Peter and Peter gives it to Rodulph Childericus King of France by the Advice and Authority of Pope Zachary the I st had his Head shaven was thrust into a Monastery and Pipinus Son of Carolus Martellus who was but a Subject and Servant to the King was anointed King in his stead Henry the III d. King of France was killed at the Siege of Paris with an empoysoned Knife by a Jacobine Fryar called Jaques Clement Which Murther Pope Sixtus the V th by a solemn Oration in the Consistory September the 2d 1589. commended to the Skies as Rarum insigne memorablile facinus So publickly was the King killing Doctrine owned by them at that time And what effect this Papal approbation did produce is evident for upon this encouragement King Henry the IV th Successor to Henry the III d. was also stabbed with a consecrated Dagger by a Jesuite named Ravilliac How frequent the excommunicating and deposing of Princes the absolving of Subjects from their Duty and Obedience and the stirring up of Tumults and Seditions against them by Popes and Papalins hath heretofore been History is so full that it would be an Herculean labour to transcribe all the instances thereof Now these declared Principles and avowed Practices of Roman Catholicks being put together and compared with our Explainer's profession may sufficiently evince how much he hath abused those Persons of Quality and how unfairly and dishonestly he hath dealt with them in his Explanation of the Roman Catholick's Belief in this Point But one would think he durst not deal thus considering what a solemn Protestation he makes in the Close of his Explanation For thus he concludes These we sincerely and solemnly profess as in the sight of God the searcher of all Hearts taking the words plainly and simply in their usual and familiar sense without any Equivocation or Mental Reservation whatsoever Were we not so well acquainted with the Power of Dispensations and the force of Mental Reservation among them did we not know that by these Artifices they can elude the most solemn Protestations make void all Oaths and Promises and dissolve any the most sacred Bonds which can be invented to oblige men it would look very uncharitably to suspect any man after such a solemn Protestation But that they can do all this and think they can do it with a safe Conscience notwithstanding their Protestation to the contrary is a ruled Case among their Casuists I shall only at present trouble you with one instance which is very applicable to the case in hand and with that conclude On occasion of the Powder-plot here in England an Oath of Allegiance was thought necessary to prevent such horrid attempts in time to come which a Roman Doctor cited by Arch-Bpishop Usher under this Character B. P. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epistol I. R. Impres An. 1609. taking notice of laughs aloud at the simplicity of it His words are worth remembring Sed vide in tanta astutia quanta simplicitas c. But see what simplicity here is in so great Craft When he had placed all his security in that Oath he thought he had framed such a manner of Oath with so many Circumstances which no man could any way dissolve with a safe Conscience But he could not see that if the Pope dissolve the Oath all its Knots whether of being faithfull to the King or of admitting no Dispensation are accordingly dissolved Yea I will say a thing more admirable you know I believe that an unjust Oath if it be evidently known to be such or openly declared such it obligeth no man That the King's Oath is unâ—… is sufficiently declared by the Pastor of the Church himself You see now that the Obligatian of it is vanished into smoke and that the â—…nd which so many wise men thought was made of Iron was 〈…〉 Straw FINIS
sense and meaning of the Holy Scriptures to others and it were to be wished that none had failed of their duty therein Qu. 12. Whether all that is mentioned in Scripture be not true according to the sense and meaning so delivered Ans All that is mentioned in Scripture is undoubtedly true according to the true sense and meaning thereof Qu. 13. Whether an obstinate Contradiction of any one truth thus delivered in Scripture though there appear no necessity it should have been mentioned in Scripture be not injurious to that divine Authority and veracity and which unrepented of shall bring damnation Ans An obstinate contradiction of any one plain truth delivered in holy Scripture is certainly a very great injury to divine authority and veracity Qu. 14. When difficulties did arise about the sense of Scriptures or matters of Faith whither the dicision of those controversies was carried and whether the present Church of every Age was not to decide it Ans It was undoubtedly the practice and is most rational that the present Church in every Age should decide such controversies For the Priest's Lips should preserve knowledge and they should enquire the Law at his mouth And no question the Church hath Authority to declare matters of Faith but not to make any new Articles of Faith Qu. 15. Whether every particular person was to have an Authoritative power in this decision or whether it was not universally left to the Heads and Governours of the Church Assembled together Ans Every particular person hath undoubtedly a Judgment of discretion allow'd him in matters of that nature but the Authoritative power of deciding and determining was in the Heads and Governours of the Church Assembled together for that end Qu. 16. Whether such a force of Hopes or Fears could possibly happen at once upon all the Heads of the universal Church Assembled together or after consenting to those that were Assembled as should make them declare that to be a truth revealed by Christ which was not so delivered to them to have been the ever esteemed sense of Scripture or perpetual tradition which was not so Ans Whilst men are men they will be liable to hopes and fears and subject to the power and force of them if therefore we consider the Heads and Governours of the Church as such we cannot allow them an Exemption therefrom and consequently there may be no impossibility in the things propounded We grant that in a General Council lawfully assembled we have great reason to hope for the presence direction and assistance of the Holy Ghost â—…t how far the passions and humours of men may frustrate our Hopes we know not This we certainly know that the Acts of one Council have been made void by another and therefore it is more than probable that one of them did declare something to be a truth revealed by Christ which was not so delivered unto them Qu. 17. Whether the Decisions of such Assemblies or general Councils were not always esteemed obligatory in the Church and whether particular Persons or Churches obstinately gainsaying such Decisions received by a much Major part of the Church diffused were not always esteemed to have incurred those Anathema's pronounced by such Councils Ans If those Assemblies or Councils be truly general we do very much reverence their Authority and think their decisions to be obligatory But we do not think all to be such that are called so As for instance The Council of Trent is by some sort of men looked upon as a general Council and all their Religion almost built upon the Authority thereof and yet the Church of England never received the decisions of that Council nor did the Galican Church for many years and yet neither the one nor the other did for all that esteem themselves to have incurred the Anathema's pronounced by that Council Qu. 18. Whether the universal Church did not in all Ages practice this way of deciding controversies and whether these be not as universal a tradition of this as the practice was universal without interruption Ans Universal practice will amount to an universal Tradition and that this hath been the practice of the Church in all Ages especially in matters of great weight we deny not nor should we oppose the same course now provided the Council were free and general But the Enquirer goes on Some will perhaps say that such Councils cannot Err in fundamentals but may in not fundamentals I ask these Qu. What are fundamentals and what not Ans Those things which are essentially necessary to the being of Religion may properly be called fundamental but those things which only respect order and decency therein and vary according to time and place and are alterable by the Governours of the Church when they see cause these are not fundamental Qu. Whether there be not some things fundamentals to the Church which are not to every particular Ans There may be some things fundamental to the Being of a Church which are not so to every particular member of that Church but whatsoever things are â—…ndamental to the Being of Religion are equally so to the whole Church and every member thereof Qu. Whether an obstinate denyal of what is fundamental or necessary to the universal Church or granting as I may say upon what is fundamental by a particular person be not in time a fundamental Errour especially after an universal declaration of it as truth delivered by Christ and his Apostles Ans This Query as it is here worded is hardly reconcileable to sense but I suppose his meaning is Whether for any particular person obstinately to deny what is fundamental or necessary to the universal Church and declared to be a truth delivered by Christ and his Apostles be not a fundamental Errour To which I answer That every particular Christian ought with all deference to submit his own private Judgment to the publick Judgment of the Church and though it do not appear so plain to him yet he ought rather to suspect his own than that of the Church But if in some things he cannot be satisfied and therein happen to differ from the Church provided he do not thereby break the peace and unity of the Church it will hardly amount to a fundamental Errour But what if it be declared by the Church to be a truth delivered by Christ and his Apostles will not that make it so To this I answer That no declaration of the Church how universal soever it be can make that to be a truth delivered by Christ and his Apostles which really is not so And therefore in that case we must have recourse to their Writings and if it be not either in express words contained therein or by sound consequence drawn therefrom we ought not to comply with it nor is it a fundamental Errour to differ therein Qu. Whether the universal Church assembled in a General Council ought not to be justly esteemed the decider of what is fundamental and what
Expression I am afraid his Holy Father will give him but small thanks for that opinion But if by his Supreme Church-Magistrate he mean that the Pope is above tha Council then what signifieth the sentence or interpretation of a Council if not confirmed by him So that till this case be rightly stated and agreed upon amongst them both they and we shall be at a loss whose declaration is to be the Rule which we are bound to follow We do highly reverence the Authority of Councils truly general and for any thing in disserence between us and the Church of Rome we dare appeal and stand to the determination of the four first general Councils But to be Hood winkt and bound up by an implicit Faith to receive and embrace every thing that is offered to us by those who call themselves Pastors or Supreme Church-Magistrates or by every Convention which calls it self a Supreme Council is more than we can consent to and more indeed than either Christ or his Aposdes required of their hearers When neither the Doctrine preached by Christ nor the Miracles done by him for the confirmation of that Doctrine could convince the stubborn and unbelieving Jews that he was the Messiah whither doth he send them he bids them search the Scriptures Joh. 5.39 And St. Paul highly commends the Bereans saying They were more noble than those of Thessalonica in that they received the word with all readiness of mind and searched the Scriptures daily whether those things were so Act. 17.10,11 Our Saviour and his Apostle St. Paul did not trouble their hearers with puzling questions Whether those Writings were the Word of God How they were assured that they were so What was the sense and meaning of them How they came to know it c. Nor did they send them to the Sanhedrim or any other Council to be instructed therein but they send them directly and immediately to the Scriptures themselves It was taken for granted then and ought to be so now that the Writings transmitted to them and us did really and indeed contain the Word of God and both our Saviour and St. Paul well knew that God had delivered his mind in words so intelligible that there was no fear of sending any one thereunto And indeed it were an unreasonable thing that every private Christian should be obliged to consult what sense and meaning is put upon the Holy Scriptures by a general Council before he receive and embrace them Nor will it suffice to say that they may learn it from their Pastors and Teachers for how shall they know that their Pastors and Teachers understand it any better than they do or if they do that they give them the true and genuine sense and interpretation for they may with as much reason suspect them as they can those Copies of the Sacred Writings which they have though in a Language different from the Original So that at this rate Christians will be involved in such Intricacies and Meanders that they will never know what they should believe and what not And therefore though we have a great veneration for what is delivered by Councils truly General yet can we not consent that that is the onely rule which all Christians ought to follow Qu. 9. If not then What other order was there left by Christ and his Apostles for the Christians of succeeding Ages to be truly and undoubtedly informed what Christ and his Apostles taught or wrought so many Ages before as binding Laws to them that should come after who never heard them speak nor saw any of their Original Writings Ans Even the same which our blessed Saviour recommended to the Jews and St. Paul so highly commended in the Bereans i. e. to search the Scriptures which whosoever doth and that with an humble and teachable temper of mind may therein easily discover such evident footsteps of Divinity as will plainly speak their Original and sufficiently inform us whence they are and by what manner of Persons they were written Therein may we find all things necessary to our Salvation writ in Characters so legible that he that runs may reade them so plain and easie that the meanest capacity may understand them So that to fortifie our perswasion that these are the Laws and Rules delivered by Christ and his Apostles if we had no other way left us this alone might suffice But if any private Christian meet with any thing therein which requires some help for satisfaction he hath Pastors and Teachers at hand to apply himself unto who are an Order of men instituted by Christ for that very end and purpose and in whom if he hath not some apparent reason to the contrary he ought to repose great confidence Qu. 10. Whether to the Testimonies and Decrees of those succeeding Pastors and Supreme Church-Magistrates and to their sentence given upon the Controversies of Religion risen in divers Ages is due at least as much Credit and Obedience although perhaps some of them might be vicious in Life as in temporal matters is due to the Laws Interpretations and Sentences of Supreme Civil Magistrates Ans That as much Credit and Obedience is due to the Testimonies and Decrees of the Pastors and Governours of the Church in matters of Religion as to the Laws Interpretations and Sentences of Civil Magistrates in temporal matters I readily grant But then we may do well to consider how far that Credit and Obedience ought to extend both in the one and other Case For as in temporal matters if the Commands of the Civil Magistrate do concern matters of Faith i. e. things which I am required to believe in that Case his Laws ought to be so clear and evident as may convince my reason and judgment otherwise I am not bound by a blind resignation to surrender up my faith and belief for it is not in the power of man to make me think otherwise than I do without such convincing reasons as may satisfie me that I think amiss But if I cannot believe as he would have me to believe yet ought I not by publickly opposing his Sentiments to raise a Faction and thereby disturb the Peace of that State in which I live Or if the Commands of the Civil Magistrate concern matters of Fact wherein my obedience is required in that case if I can with a safe conscience and without disobeying God do it I ought actively to obey the Civil Magistrate but if I cannot do it without displeasing God and wounding my own Conscience in that case I ought not to resist but passively to obey For here the Apostles Rule will hold good Whether it be better to obey God or Man judge ye So in matters of Religion If the Testimonies and Decrees of the Pastours and Governours of the Church do concern matters of Faith I do acknowledge that there is a great deference due to their sentence and opinion and unless there be very clear evidence to the contrary I ought rather to
viz. Their sincerity and Loyalty which he would fain insinuate to be the natural Offspring of their Principles and the constant Rule of their Practices These therefore are the things which we are now to take under Consideration and that we may be the more clear therein I shall consider them severally 1. And first as to their pretence of sincerity The Explainer tells us They believe That the Moral Law obliges all men to proceed with faithfulness and sincerity in their mutual Contracts one towards another and therefore their constant profession is that they are most strictly and absolutely bound to the exact and intire performance of their promises made to any Person of what Religion soever And as an Argument to evince the truth hereof he farther tells us that they utterly deny and renounce that false and scandalous position That Faith is not to be kept with Hereticks as most uncharitably imputed to their Practices and most unjustly pinned upon their Religion If this position That Faith is not 〈◊〉 be kept with Hereticks be untruly charged upon them then we must acknowledge that it were uncharitable to impute it to their practices and unjust to pin it upon their Religion but if it appear to be the Doctrine and Practice of their Church then it will undoubtedly overthrow all their pretentions to Faithfulness and Sincerity And that this is really the Doctrine and Practice of their Church we have the suffrage of a whole Council by them styled General viz. the Council of Constance by whom this Doctrine was own'd affirmed and practised And John Huss Hierom of Prague and Savanarola though they had the publick Faith for their safe conduct and return yet in defiance thereof by virtue of this Doctrine they were proceeded against and severely suffered The same thing was also fiercely disputed in the Diet at Worms in the case of Luther And had not Caesar been a better Christian than the Ecclesiasticks and more a Gentleman than his Holyness Luther notwithstanding his Safe Conduct had not returned safely from thence But lest any secular Princes hereafter should either through Scruple of Conscience or in point of honour think themselves obliged to keep their Word and so hinder them of their prey when it is in their hands the Doctrine is now improved and we are told There are two distinct Tribunals and the Ecclesiastical is the Superiour and therefore if a secular Prince gives his Subjects a Safe Conduct he cannot extend it to the superior Tribunal nor by any security given hinder the Bishop or the Pope to exercise their Jurisdiction Becanus in Theol. Scholast This Doctrine is also confidently taught and the practice thereof encouraged by their most eminent Doctors and Casuists Some instances whereof for it would fill a Volume to give you all I shall now present you with for your better satisfaction in this point Cardinal Tolet. de instruct Sacerd. l. 1. c. 13. expresly avows That if a man be bound by the Bond of Fidelity or Oath he shall be freed from that Bond if he to whom he is bound fall into Excommunication and during that Debtors are absolved from the Obligation of paying to the Creditor that debt which is contracted by words And the same Tolet. l. 4. c. 21 22. positively declares That Equivocation upon Oath before a Magistrate is lawfull Thomas à Jesu the Carmelite de covers Gentium dub 4. p. 218. puts this question Whether one that denyeth it when he is asked by an Heretick whether he be a Priest or a Religious man or whether he heard divine Service doth sin against the Confession of Faith To which he answers No. For that is no denying himself to be a Christian or Catholick For it is lawfull to dissemble or hide the Person of a Clergyman or a Religious man without a Lye in words lest a man be betrayed and in danger of his life and for the same cause he may lay by his Habit omit Prayers and because humane Laws for the most part bind not the Subjects Conscience when there is great hazard of life as in this case Azorius hath well taught And Cardinal Tolet. de Instruct Sacerd. l. 8. c. 39. n. 4. thus determines a Case propounded If saith he the times be hard or the Judge unequal a man that cannot sell his Wine at a due price may lawfully make his measures less than is appointed or mingle water with his Wine and sell it for pure so he do not lye and yet if he doth it is no mortal sin nor obligeth him to restitution A man may swear to positive untruths by the Law of directing the Intention saith F. Southwel Tract de Equivocat c. 8. p. 42 43. If a man hath taken an Oath of a thing honest and lawfull and in his power yet if it hinders him from doing a greater good the Pope can dispense with his Oath and take off the obligation saith Canus Bishop of the Canar Relect. de poenitent If a man hath promised to a Woman to marry her and is betrothed to her and hath sworn it yet if he will before the Consummation enter into a Monastery his Oath shall not bind him his promise is null but his second promise that shall stand He that denies this is accursed by the Council of Trent Sess 8. Can. 6. I am weary with transcribing such nauseous stuff and therefore omitting many more I shall only add one instance more Pope Pius V. upon occasion of some Missionaries to be sent into England declared That if they were summon'd before the Judges they might Sophisticè jurare Sophisticè respondere and that they were not bound to answer according to the intention of the Judges but according to some true sense of their own i. e. which was made true by the help of a Mental Reservation Apud G. Abbot de Mendacio c. in praef p. 6 c. By these instances you may perceive that the Doctors and Casuists of the Romish Church are not of our Explainer's opinion which to me is a very great Argument that he hath not dealt so fairly and candidly as he ought to have done in his Explanation It may be he will tell us that these were but private Persons and that the Doctrine of their Church is not to be measured by their private Opinions which if he do I shall readily own That the private Opinions of particular men ought not in reason to be charged upon that Society to which they belong And if so then our Explainer ought not to take it amiss if we do not receive his Explanation as the Doctrine of that Church of which he pretends to be a Member But if the united force of the Council of Constance and that of Trent both which they themselves reckon to be General with the concurrent opinions of so many eminent Doctours and Casuists of their own Church too none of which that we know have ever received the least check for publishing their opinions if these
I say will outweigh any Authority which this Explanation can pretend to then what becomes of all this goodly Profession which he here makes where shall we find all that faithfulness and sincerity which he here boasts of if making and breaking of promises if swearing and forswearing if the violation of all the most sacred Bonds wherewith mankind can be obliged may pass for faithfulness and sincerity we may expect great store of it amongst them And indeed whilst there is a power given to the Pope to dispense with Oaths and Promises and a liberty given to the People to make good all they say or swear by the Law of directing the Intentions by the Power of Equivocation and the force of Mental Reservation I cannot see any reason why we should expect better But if this be the Faithfulness and Sincerity they boast of we bless God that we know none such amongst us and we hope this will never prove an Argument sufficient to perswade any of ours to desert the Communion they are of for a Communion that allows such things as these And thus have I given you an account of their Faithfulness and Sincerity 2. The other thing which he boasts of is their Loyalty For he tells us They are most strictly and absolutely bound to an exact and entire performance of their promises made to the Magistrates and Civil Powers under whose protection they live whom they are taught by the word of God to obey not only for fear but Conscience sake and to whom they will most faithfully observe their promises and duty of Obedience notwithstanding any dispensation absolution or other proceedings of any foreign Power or Authority whatsoever We do indeed firmly believe That both they and we and all Subjects are most strictly and absolutely bound to an exact and entire performance of all those promises which we make to Magistrates and Civil Powers and that there is no power on earth either Foreign or Domestick that can dispence with our Oaths and Promises or absolve us from our Duty and Allegiance But whether this be the Belief of Roman Catholick we are not so well assured If we will take it upon the bare word of our Explainer it is but having found him faulty and disingenuous in the former points we may suspect him in this and therefore must not swallow all that he saith for Gospel till we have examined it We very well know that the Doctrines of learned and allowed Casuists and Practices of those who have greatest authority in the Roman Church have been quite contrary to this Explanation and we never found any disposition in them to so great a condescension nor ever heard that there was any such Reformation made in their principles and practices by any publick Authority among them If our Explainer had produced any authentick Records of any such thing we should with a great deal of readiness and rejoycing have embraced them but we cannot admit of his bare word as a sufficient evidence in this case Our blessed Saviour assureth us that no man can serve two Masters Matth. 6.24 Whilst therefore those of the Roman Communion do own the Pope as Supreme Head of the Church and allow him a sovereign and uncontrollable power over them both in Temporals and Spirituals by virtue of which he can dispense with their Oaths and Promises when he pleaseth we cannot see how they can be so exact in the performance of their promises made to Civil Powers For it is not only possble but often happens that the Civil Power under whose protection they live doth not own the Papacy nor hath any regard for the pretended power and dominion thereof and in such a case it is very likely their commands will interfere which if they do as we know they very often do how a Roman Catholick will carry himself even and so exactly divide his obedience to these different Sovereigns and their different commands as to please both I cannot as yet imagine How our Explainer will resolve this case I know not but I very well know that the Doctors and Casuists of the Roman Church and their Popes too will roundly tell us That the Power of the Pope is superiour to that of the Prince and therefore he is to be obeyed in the first place And if so then what becomes of all that Loyalty and Fidelity to Civil Powers which our Explainer so much boasts of To shew you therefore that notwithstanding this so specious Explanation of their Faith in this point we have sufficient reason to suspect the candour and ingenuity of the Explainer and the truth of what he says I shall only confront him with the declared Doctrines and avowed Practices of their own Church in this case All the Jurisdiction of all the Kings and Princes of the World dependeth on the Pope saith P. Clem. 5. in Concil Vienn And Pope Pius 5. in his Bull against Queen Elizabeth doth strictly will and command all her Subjects to take Arms against that Heretical and Excommunicate Queen The Deposing and King killing Doctrine dispensing with Oaths of Allegiance c. were made Articles of their Faith by the fourth General Council at Lateran under Pope Innocent 3. And it is pleasant to observe how nicely scrupulous some of their great men are in resolving this case gravely telling us That private men may not kill a King till he be deposed but if once he be excommunicate then he is no King and then they may kill him without scruple Or if he be an Heretick which the Pope can make him when he pleaseth then they may kill the Heretick but not the King Thus Suarez advers Sect. Anglic. l. 6. c. 4. Sect. 14. And c. 6. Sect. 22.24 Thus also Azorius the Jesuite Instit Moral part 1. l. 8. c. 13 And thus Mariana de Reg. Instit l. 1. c. 7 c. The Rebellion of a Clergyman against his Prince is not Treason because he is not his Prince's Subject saith Emman Sá Aphor. verb. Clericus When a Prince is Excommunicate before the Denunciation the Subjects are not absolved from their Oath of Allegiance as Cajetan says well yet when it is denounced they are not only absolved from their Obedience but are bound not to obey unless the fear of Death or loss of Goods excuse them which was the case of the English Catholicks in the time of Henry the Eighth saith Card. Tolet. concâ—r Eccles in Angl. fol. 336. It is the Sentence of all Catholicks that Subjects are bound to expell Heretical Princes if they have strength enough and that to this they are tyed by the Commandment of God the most strict tye of Conscience and the extreme danger of their Souls saith F. Creswel in Philopat Sect. 2. n. 160 161. Nay even before the Sentence is declared though the Subjects are not bound to it yet lawfully they may deny Obedience to an Heretical Prince saith Greg. de Valentia Tom. 3 disp 1. q. 12. punct 2. An Excommunicate