perturbarent quia tunc Concilii Sententia esset potiùs attendenda This Pope you see acknowledg'd that in things concerning the Catholick Faith the Pope being of one opinion and the Council of another that of the Council was to be chosen Now this were ridiculous if the Pope were Infallible in Decisions touching Faith since there is no opinion which we ought to prefer before a man that is Infallible And therefore Pope Eugenius what-ever he pretended to place himself above all Councils durst never arrogate that of Infallibility Dionysius Rikel Carthusian term'd the Extatick or Illuminated Doctor as having through all his Works joyn'd an illuminated and inflamed Piety with his profound skill in Divinity in his Treatise of the Authority of the Pope and Councils having in several passages spoken highly of that of the Pope does notwithstanding acknowledge that in Council one cannot dispute the having this advantage above the Pope That a Council cannot erre in matters which pertain to Faith and good manners and that the Pope may erre there The power of a Council saies he is in this greater then the Pope's that Iesus Christ has promis'd to his Church or the Council which is her Representative an infallible direction and divine assistance which shall never fail So as a Council can neither erre in matters of Faith nor in what regards good manners forasmuch as it is immediately led by the Holy Spirit in the Determination of these things And therefore the Pope himself is in these things to adhere to the Churche's Determination that is to the Decrees of the Council as to an Oracle and regulation of the Holy Ghost whereas the Pope being obnoxious to erre in points of Faith good manners and other matters necessary to Salvation methinks men should not acquiesce in his judgement as the onely certain opinion because he is not an infallible rule nor yet a foundation so establish'd but that it may deviate from the Truth This holy Monk saies the same thing in a Sermon upon S. Hilarie and excepting onely those Authors who are notoriously ingag'd in the Interests of the Roman Court all the knowing Divines of that Age spake the same Language I observe onely Pope Adrian the VIth who having taught the same Doctrine before he was exalted to the Pontificate did not onely not retract it afterwards but caus'd his Works to be printed at Rome in which we may yet reade these words namely in his fourth Book of Sentences If by the Roman Church saies he you understand him who is the Head of it 't is certain pray mark the term that this Head of the Roman Church viz. the Pope may erre even in things appertaining to Faith by defending an Heresie by his Determination or Decretal Si per Ecclesiam Romanam intelligatur Caput ejus certum est quòd possit errare etiam in iis quae tangunt Fidem Haeresin per suam Determinationem aut Decretalem asserendo See what this holy and knowing man has written being then a private person and what it was he so approv'd when he was Pope so little did his Advancement blind him as it has done many others or make him forget what he ow'd to Truth to gratifie his new Dignity with advantages which he believed Iesus Christ never imparted to him It is not here necessary to alledge the Parisian Doctors opinions so well known to the World and to the Iesuites themselves who term the opinion against Infallibility Sententia Parisiensium but we must not omit the sense of the whole Faculty in a Body in this celebrious Declaration of the Faith which she made by order of Francis the I st and which was afterwards verified in Parliament so as in France it held a particular force of a Law and a publick Ordinance Having therefore receiv'd a command of the King to reduce into Articles the principal Points of Faith attacqu'd by Hereticks she declares That General Councils cannot erre in Points of Faith and regulation of good manners Certum est Concilium Generale legitimè congregatum universalem Ecclesiam repraesentans in Fide morum determinationibus errare non posse But for the Pope see what she saies of it all It is no less certain that there is one Sovereign Bishop by divine right in the Militant Church to which all Christians ought to submit and who has likewise power to conferre Indulgences Nec minùs certum est unum esse jure Divino Pontificem in Ecclesia Militante cui omnes Christiani parere tenentur qui quidem potestatem habet Indulgentias conferendi This different manner of speaking of Councils and the Pope in two Articles which immediately follow attributing Infallibility to the Council and none to the Pope sufficiently states the different sentiments which these Doctors had both of Councils and Popes upon this subject For I think not my self oblig'd to refute the extravagancies of a certain Writer of these times who pretends to prove by the Obedience which these Doctors teach is due to the Pope as if by that we acknowledg'd his Infallibility By the same argument he may prove that not onely all Bishops in particular but that all Abbots and Abbesses Priors Prioresses are infallible because they are promis'd obedience But he should have learn'd that in promising obedience to the Pope men are so far from acknowledging an entire submission of belief to his Decisions that the Divines say expresly and amongst others Mons. Duval Summo Pontifici parendum esse sive errare possit sive non Which signifies but this That men should not Dogmatize the contrary to what he has decided and with this caution yet nisi Error sit intolerabilis as Gerson affirms Such as has been the common sentiment of our Parisian Divines till Mons. Duval who would have introduc'd Opinions into the Sorbon totally repugnant to these ancient Maxims But as 't is customary with those who engage in quarrells against what is universally receiv'd it has hitherto been with much wariness For he did in that manner assert the Pope to be infallible in matter of Faith that in the same breath he likewise taught 't was no matter of Faith to believe it Non est de fide Summum Pontificem esse infallibilem He holds moreover that the Opinion of his not being infallible is neither rash nor erroneous Non est erroneum neque temerarium temeritate opinionis dicere Summum Pontificem in decernendo errare posse And speaking concerning the Decision of a Pope against a Doctor of Paris he saies That this Definition of Sixtus the IVth is not of Faith but onely very certain because saies he the Definitions of the Sovereign Bishops have not the certitude of the Catholick Faith till they be first received by the Universal Church or a General Council And thus whatever the Doctor 's design be and those of his gang to advance the Authority of the Pope they have been yet oblig'd to acknowledge that a Divine
against the Lord and against his Anointed That is to say The Pope is Iesus Christ and all Christian Kings who maintain their Sovereignty against the Usurpations of Rome are the Herods and the Pontius Pilates This publick decry yet in the Books of these Writers is nothing so considerable as the particular and clandestine traverses that the Court of Rome excites upon all occasions whatsoever against those whom she believes not favourable to her Interests By that it is she stops the mouths and stays the Pens of almost all Learned persons who cannot really possess themselves of that Title that they are not inwardly persuaded of the Hypocrisies of these ambitious pretensions but they chuse rather to be silent then to speak of it Because there are but a very few persons so in love with Truth as in resolving to maintain it will endure to be tormented and barretted all their life-time and to be torn in pieces when they are dead They see that Kings and their great Ministers take not for the most part that care to protect those who maintain and defend their Right by some testimony of their acknowledging it as the Court of Rome does to persecute them or at least to deny them all kind of favour They must be touch'd with an extraordinary Zeal and very disinteress'd to surmount all these considerations and to sacrifice themselves for the Interest of their Prince and Countrey without any hope of advantage or to speak more properly with reason to apprehend all sort of disadvantage by it All those principally who are ty'd to any Community are thereby oblig'd to a silence which they believe to be just as holding themselves responsable for the conservation of their Body And 't is true these vast Bodies have stricter bonds which tie them to Rome and are more expos'd to Persecution because they have more places which expose them to seisure to which one may adde that almost all the Religious and Communities have their Generals resident at Rome who will never permit that the Divines of their Orders should undertake to teach things which would not be well receiv'd there and from which there may lie a grudge against the whole Order They are therefore Private persons onely who are fit upon these encounters to engage for the Truth but then it is necessary that they be furnished with Light to know it with Zeal to love it with Steadiness not to fear the ills it may produce and with Sincerity and Disinterest that so they may have no occasion to be in danger of being thwarted And when there were onely this last how rare a thing it is to be found Well therefore has Iohn Major that renowned Doctor of Paris long since observ'd That it was not to be wonder'd at if they were fewer who declared for a Council then for the Pope since Councils met but seldom and gave no Benefices whereas the Pope does and thence 't is saies he men flatter him with an omnipotent power as well in Spiritual things as temporal Hinc homines ei blandiuntur dicentes quòd solvere potest omnia quadrare rotundata rotundare quadrata tam in Spiritualibus quà m in temporalibus Hence it proceeds that the Liberties of the Gallican Church and the ancient Maxims of the Sorbon are now-a-daies hardly vindicated but by secular persons such as We that have less relation to the Court of Rome then Ecclesiasticks have whereof the wisest of them are rather satisfied to approve them in their heart without defending them in their Books such power have fear and interest upon the spirit of those who should be more free from them by the Sanctity of their Profession But if there be persons disinterested so as not to be touch'd by these temporal considerations it often falls out that having little judgment and less science their Piety it self engages them into these new Opinions because they are publish'd in the World under this artificial veil That 't is forsooth to violate and wound Religion to contest the Pope's Infallibility and temporal Sovereignty over Kings Those in the mean time who have no relation to it but this pretext without any mixture of humane interest may easily be disabus'd if once they but consider that the most pious of all our ancient Doctors as the illustrious Gerson wihtout mentioning Dionysius the Carthusian and the blessed Cardinal d' Arles have oppos'd with greater vigour those ambitious pretences of the Court of Rome and that they have judg'd that on the contrary 't is the sincere Zeal for the Catholick Religion which ought to oblige all judicious Divines courageously to resist this temporal Superiority over Kings and Infallibility as two inseperable Maxims one from the other either of them capable to raise very great mischiefs to the Church For in effect what is there more opposite to the real benefit of the Catholick Religion then this Doctrine of the Pope's Superiority over Kings in Temporals which is a necessary consequence of Infallibility and of the power which they give him to depose them Is not this to render Religion abhorr'd and suspected of all Princes as the Sorbon has judiciously remark'd in the Censure of Santarel to give them cause to believe that 't is impossible they should have Subjects at the same time good Catholicks and faithful to their King What Infidel Prince indeed would permit men to preach Faith in the Countries under his obedience if he knew that all those who embrace it think themselves by that dispens'd with for obedience to him farther then another Sovereign pleases who can at any time cause them to take up arms against their lawful King Were this for example a proper expedient to incline the Americans to receive our Faith to say to them as some Spaniards did that the Pope had bestow'd their Country on the King of Castile And however Barbarians as they were had they not reason to reply as they did That they knew no such thing as a Pope but that if there were he must needs be a wicked man to give away that which was none of his own Were not this also to dispose Heretical Princes not to suffer Catholicks in their States when they shall behold them but as so many subjects to another Prince who has power to command them to depose him in the Country where they live And do not we know that 't is this has so imbitter'd the King of England against the Papists and the almost sole cause of the disturbance which they suffered in Iames's time as being to this day the greatest obstacle to the progress of Religion in that Kingdom In fine what Catholick Prince would be willing that his Dominion which he takes so much pains to preserve both in Peace and War should continually depend upon the judgment of one sole Person who may be possess'd perhaps by his Enemies or transported by his proper passions For 't is a weak confidence to resolve they will give the Pope no occasion
it expedient when they become negligent of their duties when they are incapable to govern and their persons burthensome to their Kingdoms He adds That the Apostles were not subject to the secular Princes but de facto onely not de jure and in summe that since the Pontifical Majesty had been establish'd all other Potentates were become but his Vassals So soon as ever this Book appear'd in France the Sorbon knowing that the Doctrine was invented and publish'd for the universal destruction of Civil Polity and particularly the Monarchy of France which was at that time governed by the most Christian most clement and just King Lewis the XIIIth that in treading the steps of their Ancestors she might testifie her zeal and affection as well towards this Religious Prince as towards the whole most Christian Kingdom and at the same time satisfie that which all honest men requir'd of her resolv'd to examine the two Chapters of this Book of Santarel 30 and 31 where this matter was treated of And on the 1 of April 1626. having first heard the Deputies report and consider'd the several Opinions of all the Doctors she condemn'd the Positions being the common Opinion of the Iesuites for a novel false and erroneous Doctrine repugnant to the Word of God and that renders odious the dignity of the Pope opens a gap to all Schism derogates from the Supreme Authority of Kings which depends on God alone disturbs the publick tranquillity tends to the ruine of Kingdoms States and Republicks debauches Subjects from that Obedience and Submission due to their Sovereigns inciting them to Factions Rebellions Seditions in summe to commit Parricides against the persons of their natural Princes This Censure approved by the whole Body of the University of Paris and the rest of the Universitics of France was authoriz'd also by a famous Decree of Parliament of the 13. March 1626. which declared the Propositions contain'd in this Book of Santarel false scandalous and seditious as tending to the subversion of Sovereign Powers ordain'd and establish'd by God and to the stirring up of Subjects against their Princes withdrawing their Obedience inducing them to attempt against their Persons and States disturbing of the publick peace and order'd that the Book should be torn and burnt and that the Iesuites should be oblig'd to disavow and detest it and to approve the Censure of the Sorbon This vigorous resistence of the Parliament and Sorbon has of late render'd the Iesuites a little more reserv'd in producing to the world this pernicious Doctrine But as they never abandon what they have once undertaken they have invented a way of establishing it after a more dextrous but more dangerous manner for daring no more to propose it grossly and in terminis they work more subtily to introduce the Principles on which it depends by necessary consequence wisely judging that if once by their artifice they can but deceive the vigilancy of our Magistrates and the Sorbon they shall easily make the People swallow it when-ever they please and that as a Truth indubitable which they will shew by a necessary consequence from what they have already made pass for a most Catholick Verity This is that which the Iesuites have done in maintaining that famous Thesis of the 12 December 1661 as a Catholick Truth repugnant to the Greek Heresie concerning the Primacy of the Pope namely That Jesus Christ hath given to all Popes whenever they shall speak è Cathedra the same Infallibility himself had as well in matters of Right as in those of Fact And that we might not imagine there were any great mystery in this condition When they should speak out of their Chair Cùm loquerentur ex Cathedra they expresly declare that this Condition does not concern the Pope's speaking in the head of a General Council And in proposing for example for one Constitution made ex Cathedra the two Constitutions on the Five Propositions they give us clearly to understand that they do not pretend that to the end the Pope should speak from his Chair it were necessary for him to assemble so much as a Council of the Bishops of his Province as the other Popes did or that he should consult the College of Cardinals as they have since done enterprising nothing how inconsiderable soever but by the advice of their Brethren De consilio Fratrum but that 't is sufficient for him to speak in his Bulls or from the Constitutions and Decrees which use to be pasted up on the Gates of S. Peter and in Campo de Fiori this being the onely solemnity which at Rome they pretend does render them sufficiently authentick and that without so much as thinking it necessary they should be receiv'd and publish'd in the Provinces See now to what a height the Iesuites pretensions are come All that the Popes say in their Bulls and Constitutions as well on matters and questions of Fact as those of Right is to be look'd on as indubitably true as if Iesus Christ had himself avow'd it the Pope's Infallibility being still the same according to their reckoning on these occasions and incounters as that of the Son of God himself Now how little so ever one knows of the Fundamentals of Santarellism that is to say of the Doctrine which affirms the Pope has power to depose Kings it must needs be acknowledged that it is establish'd by this Thesis of the Iesuites and that it is after a sort made more pernicious and criminal then ever it has hitherto been For the defenders of this Doctrine so prejudicial to Kings were contented to establish this temporal power in Popes by shewing that they themselves did attribute it to themselves by several Bulls and Decrees and that so we were bound to believe them as being infallible in matters concerning Faith But there was none of them that yet durst deny but that Popes might fail and be mistaken in the exercise of this power because none of them did ever think them infallible in Questions which concern'd the Fact whereas the Iesuites now presume on both They render Popes absolutely Masters of Kings in attributing to them who by so many Bulls have defin'd their Superiority over the Temporalty of Kings the very same Infallibility with Iesus Christ even in matters of Right so as they leave a King whom a Pope had deposed no place of appeal or so much as to complain that the Pope might be mistaken in the matter of Fact upon which they had judged him worthy of so severe a punishment since by this new Doctrine of the College of Clermont he is equally infallible whether he judge in general that he has this power to depose Kings which is the Question de jure or in particular that such a King merits to be so us'd which is the Question de facto We must therefore clear these two points One that the Infallibility of the Pope in matters of Right is according to the Iesuites the establishment of his Power
over Kings the other that his Infallibility in matters of Fact takes away all means from the Kings they please to depose to complain of so rigorous a Sentence For the first 't is an easie matter to convince all the world of it nor ought we to imagine it a Consequence held onely by those who profess themselves enemies to the Iesuites Doctrine and which the Iesuites disavow 't is a Consequence which they themselves derive from it which they every-where acknowledge must needs follow and which does so indeed naturally and of necessity For Popes as Iesuites themselves have learn'd us have so many waies decided that they have power to degrade Kings and dispose of their Kingdoms when-ever they judge it for the interest of Religion that if to be Catholick one is oblig'd to consider all that Popes say in their Chair that is by their Bulls as Decisions of infallible authority and Oracles pronounc'd even by Christ himself Kings their Ministers and Parliaments must either renounce the quality of Catholick or else tamely acknowledge that Kings are Sovereigns independent in respect of their own Subjects and other Princes but nothing so in regard of the Pope but that he has power to make them descend from their Throne and to resolve them into their simple Originals so as exercising a Royalty superiour to theirs it may be said of his Empire as an heathen Poet said of that of God Omne sub regno graviore regnum est All this is an infallible consequent of Infallibility as the Iesuites well prove For who can chuse but believe that Popes have the power to depose Kings if once he be persuaded that their Decisions are so many Articles of Faith when it shall be shew'd him that Gregory the VIIth has decided it in express terms in a Council held at Rome Anno 1067 according to Onuphrius Baronius and all the Iesuites Quòd Papae liceat Imperatores deponere quòd à Fidelitate iniquorum subditos potest absolvere Whence Lessius the Iesuite concludes supposing the Principle of Infallibility That this Doctrine is no problematick Doctrine but a constant Truth not to be deny'd without violation of our very Faith We must absolutely believe says he that this Doctrine viz. that the Pope may depose Kings is an undoubted truth and not such as we may believe what we please of but such an one as is intirely certain not to be contradicted without wounding our Faith And this I prove first Because these Propositions are defin'd in proper terms in the Roman Synod under Gregory the VIIth where it is affirm'd that the Pope may depose Emperours and absolve the Subjects of wicked Princes from their Oath of Allegiance and Fidelity Now a Definition made by a Pope in Council is matter of Faith This is clear now without mincing nor can it be more expresly declar'd that the power to depose Kings is a necessary consequent of Infallibility so as those Iesuites must needs be very impudent who shall after this dare to affirm that they are their Enemies who derive this sequel from their Doctrine The Iesuite Cardinal Bellarmine under the feign'd name of Sculkenius writing against Widrington proves in the same manner by this Gregorian Decree that the Pope's Superiority over Kings is an Article of Faith 'T is an Heresie saies he to affirm that the Pope as Pope and ex jure divino has not the power to depose Secular Princes of their States as oft as the publick good or some urgent necessity of the Church does require it I prove this Conclusion An Opinion becomes heretical when its contradictory is de Fide But it is de Fide that the Pope has power to depose Princes since it has been defin'd and concluded by Gregory the VIIth in a Roman Council where it saies expresly That the Pope may depose an Emperour Now who can deny this Conclusion that holds but the Principle which is That what has been defin'd and concluded by a Pope is de Fide Is not this Argument of the Cardinal invincible supposing the Maxime to be true By consequent then who can doubt but that according to the Iesuites opinion and the truth it self the power of deposing Kings is in the Pope a certain Consequence of his Infallibility The same Gregory the VIIth has so often decided the same Point that no man questions his pretence of making it an Article of Faith as may yet be seen in the Bull of the Deposition of the Emperor Henry the IVth made likewise in Council where addressing his speech to S. Peter and S. Paul he thus expostulates Now therefore exert and vindicate your power O great and most holy Princes of the Apostles that all the world may take notice and acknowledg that if you can bind and loose in Heaven you can also on Earth dispose of Empires of Kingdoms Principalities and Marquisates in summe of all mens goods and fortunes whatsoever by taking them away from those who deserve them not and by bestowing them on others For if you judge things Spiritual shall we believe you have not the power to judge of Temporal and Secular Let all the Kings and Princes of the Age learn what your grandeur is and your power and not dare to despise the Commandments of your Church and be sure to leave such prompt and lasting marks in the judgment which you exercise against Henry that his ruine be not attributed to the fate of arms or fortuitous accidents of War but to your sole and almighty power In consequence of this he denounc'd to the Emperor as from God that he should never win battel But if Popes are infallible according to the Iesuites in actions past 't is certain at least that they are not in those which are to come For never did Prince gain so many remaining Victor in more then 50 pitch'd Battels and having at the very first slain the person whom his Holiness had design'd to make Emperor in his place I could recount a number more of Passages relating to the same Pope where he argues for the same Doctrine as visibly founded in the Scripture and annex'd to the Papal dignity For 't is not imaginable that he should pretend onely this right over Emperors because the Popes had so much contributed to the re-establishment of the Western Empire On the contrary 't is perspicuous that his pretence was over all Kings and that it was built on that Supposition of his viz. that the power of the Keys contain'd in it the Temporal Superiority which made him set upon the Crown he sent to Rodulphus Usurper of the Empire this Latin Verse Petra dedit Petro Petrus Diadema Rodulpho To shew that he believ'd he had power to dispose of Kingdoms by a right pretended to be given S. Peter by Iesus Christ himself 'T is likewise on the same basis he threatned Alphonsus King of Arragon to stir up his Subjects against him if he gave him not speedy satisfaction concerning a certain