Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
truth_n doctrine_n scripture_n tradition_n 1,683 5 8.8849 5 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A67437 The history & vindication of the loyal formulary, or Irish remonstrance ... received by His Majesty anno 1661 ... in several treatises : with a true account and full discussion of the delusory Irish remonstrance and other papers framed and insisted on by the National Congregation at Dublin, anno 1666, and presented to ... the Duke of Ormond, but rejected by His Grace : to which are added three appendixes, whereof the last contains the Marquess of Ormond ... letter of the second of December, 1650 : in answer to both the declaration and excommunication of the bishops, &c. at Jamestown / the author, Father Peter Walsh ... Walsh, Peter, 1618?-1688.; Ormonde, James Butler, Duke of, 1610-1688. Articles of peace.; Rothe, David, 1573-1650. Queries concerning the lawfulnesse of the present cessation. 1673 (1673) Wing W634; ESTC R13539 1,444,938 1,122

There are 17 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

confess that their both Constitutions and Oath if there be any such Oath of those amongst them them they call Masters of Divinity are only for maintaining the doctrine of St. Thomas of Aquine not as articles of Faith nor as the doctrine of the Church nor Dogmatically at all at least not out of their School Pulpits but only by way of Scholastical speculations and for sharpning of wits and shifting the truth problematically or probably in all such matters wherein the Scripture or Tradition was not clear and certain and still only within the Schools That otherwise the whole Order of the Franciscans and all the other Schools of Scotists who maintain as stiffly and are alike by their Constitutions bound to maintain against St. Thomas the Thomists all the speculations all the subtleties of the Subtile Doctor Scotus who writ ex professo against all or almost all even every individual position of St. Thomas as well in his Divinity as Philosophy where the matter is not certain otherwise by Scripture or Tradition were to be condemned by them Which yet they will not dare in point of morallity prudence and conscience That moreover it is manifest St. Thomas of Aquin is not weaker in his proofs for any of his Theological opinons then for this of a power in the Pope or Church for deposing Infidel or Heretick Princes on pretence or because of Infidelity Apostacy Schisme Heresy where he determines it so in his Theological Sum. 2. 2. q. x. ar 10. and q. 12. ar 2. And that he relyes for proof of so weighty an Assertion first on a reason that would not move the meerest novice in Divinity Quia fideles sayes he merito suae infidelitatis merentur potestatem amittere super fideles qui transferuntur in filios lucis Supra q. 10. ar 10. in corp Which yet is the only reason this great Holy Doctor brings to prove that a very infidel Prince who was never Baptized may be deposed by the Church Secondly for proof of that same Assertion as relating specially to an Apostat Heretick or Schysmatick Prince that was Baptized relyes onely and wholy on the bare judgment and practise of Gregory the VII otherwise called Pope Hildebrand or on that Canon made by this Pope which you may find in Gratian. 15. q. 6. cap. Nos Sanctorum That as it is therefore manifest that St. Thomas of Aquin is not weaker in his proofs of any of his Theological Assertions then of this of a power in the Pope or Church for deposing Infidel or Heretick Princes as the Reader may see partly in the Latin notes which follow this Paragraph for the rest satisfie himself at large in Father Caro'ns Remonstrantia Hibernorum so it is no less manifest that generally where the Thomists find in any other positions of this Angelical Doctor and those too of infinite less concern insuperable difficulties they decline him there expound him or his mind by some other place of his workes where he held the contrary or perhaps retracted considerately what he had before unadvisedly handled by the example of St. Austin himself in his books of Retractation And so those Irish Fathers might if they pleased have declined in this matter St. Thomas in his said Sum and expounded St. Thomas there by following St. Thomas where he holds by plain consequence of reason the contrary in his exposition of St. Pauls Epistles to the Corinthians That they could not deny but that notwithstanding all their Constitutions and Oathes whatsoever they all now generally and confessedly and without any exposition or interpretation of one place by an other decline St. Thomas of Aquin even in that matter wherein their whole Order these full 300 years found themselves most concern'd of any in point of reputation at least to follow defend him that is in the dispute of the Blessed Virgins conception without original sin Nor can deny this matter to have come within these late years to that height in Spain even where they are in such esteem that the very Provincial of their Order in the Kingdom or Province of Castile was confined to Penna de Francia by orders from the King until he subscribed under his hand against that opinion of St. Thomas in this matter and consequently acknowledged so the Blessed Virgin conceaved without original sin against the confessed doctrine of St. Thomas and against the letter of his Constitutions and verbal tenour of his Oath as a Master And yet he was not so commanded by any decrees of the Church which as it is well known hath never yet decided that question And yet also that question of the Blessed Virgin is no less known to be of infinite less consequence to the Peace or Settlement of either Church or State for the owning or disowning of either the affirmative or negative resolution and for a subscription to either than ours of the Remonstrance of our indispensable loyaltie in Temporal things to the Supream Magistrate and our lawful and rightful King Finally that St. Thomas of Aquin's Scholastical assertion whatever it be or a Statute in an Order to teach such or such a doctrine or Oath of some few members of such an Order how learned religious or eminent soever that Order be is a very bad plea at least in such a matter as ours against ten thousand other Holy and eminent Fathers Doctors Prelates in all Countreys and ages of the Church against so many express clear passages of Holy Scriptures against the universal tradition of all Christians till Gregory the VII days about the Xth. age of Christianity and against the greatest evidence of both natural reason and of hundreds too of Theological arguments the first grounds of Christianity being once admitted Qu●ni●●● autem singula persequimur admonere oportet D. Thomam alicubi in ea opinione esse ut existimet ius dominii praelationis Ethnicorum Principum justè illis auferri posse 22. q 10. art 10. per sententiam vel ordinationem Ecclesiae authoritatem Dei habentis vt ille ait D. Thomae magna apud me authoritas est sed non tanta ut omnes ejus disputationes pro Canonicis Scripturis habeam vel ut rationem vincat aut legem Ejus ego Manes veneror doctrinam suspicio Sed non est tamen cur illa ejus opinione aliquis moveatur tum quia nullam suae sententiae vel rationem idoneam efficacem vel authoritatem profert tum etiam quia in explicatione epistolae Pauli ad Corinth 1. contrarium planè sentit tum denique quia neminem secum antiquorum Patrum consentientem habet Cap. 6. rationes multae authoritatesque in contrarium supperunt Ratio autem quam adfert est quia infideles merito suae infidelitatis merentur potestatem amittere super fideles qui transferuntur in filios Dei Mala ratio tanto viro indigna quasi verò si quis meretur privari officio beneficio
cloud of Neotericks or of all the very most ancient Fathers and holy Doctors Doctors of Christianity all along for a Thousand years till Gregory the VII Pontificat Nor any thing at all either of holy Scripture or natural Reason both plain enough in the case For I have already in my First Part abundantly given all such Arguments And yet I will observe here that no where have I made use of Protestant Authors albeit many of them have most learnedly refuted all such petty and whatsoever other Objections but above others Joannes Roffensis most diffusely and excellently Nay nor made use not even of Marcus Antonius a Dominis the learned Archbishop of Spalato not even of him there I say where in his Ostensio errorum Francisci Suarez he canvasses the Allegation made of those 70 or 72 Authors and even reduces that number to 20. A small number God wot as to that of bare extrinsick authority of Writers if that I mean should be of any value as indeed it should not to persuade any Nay let us suppose that not only Marcus Antonius but even Joannes Barclaius in his Pietas had come short in their arguments or examination of those 70 or 72 Writers alledged by Bellarmine in his little Book de temporali potestate Papae against William Barclay for himself and that Eudaemon Joannes against John Barclay had got the better of him and not been throughly confuted by his more learned Answerer and consequently that in very deed Bellarmines whole number of 70 or 72 had been rightly and to his purpose alledged by the Bishop what proportion or rather what weight I pray could 72 late Writers have to persuade any in comparison of 72000 I am sure the most learned and holy Fathers Pastors Doctors of the University of Christians throughout the earth in all Ages from Christ and even Christ himself and his Apostles Peter and Paul in the head of them What to the belief and practice also of at least 72 millions or rather 72 hundred millions indoctrinated by them Nay or speaking even of those who writ on or as to the very point in specie and after I mean the subtle distinctions invented either by Schoolmen or others in the later and worser Ages since Gregory the Seventh's dayes what proportion can there be between those 72 Writers or Authors alledg'd by Bellarmine and those other more than 272 Writers quoted by Caron to the contrary but that of one to four So that from first to last if we regard even but the extrinsick authority onely of the number of Teachers and Writers and Writers I say on the very point and distinction the Bishop will find he relies on a weak Reed that will break and pierce and bore through his hand Nor can he pretend that St. Thomas of Aquin or S. Bonaventure have been holier than Chrysostom Austin Gregory the Great and so many other ancient Fathers whose doctrine in the controverted question so contrary to that of those late Scholastick canonized Saints I have before produced Sect. Lxxiii Lxxiv But the truth is that no extrinsick authority either of number or sanctity not even of the greatest Saints how numerous soever can be of any moment either against holy Scripture or Catholick Tradition that I may say nothing now of plain demonstration from the principles of natural reason Otherwise Cyprian of Africk and Firmilian of Cappadocia and Dionysius of Alexandria had born down the scale against other Doctors in the question of Re-baptization And for Holiness I demand who was holier than Cyprian himself alone Therefore neither did St. Thomas of Aquin nor St. Bonaventure's holiness render them infallible in their Scholastical disputes Nay do not our own Schoolmen every day reject both Thomas and Bonaventure even in a hundred points and even also where we have neither evident Scripture nor manifest tradition nor clear demonstration of reason but only stronger probabilities against them Do not all Scotists in the world laugh to scorn the Arguments in particular of Thomas of Aquin and maintain a Thousand contradictory Positions to the very Conclusions or Positions and Thesis's of Thomas and all his School of Thomists So much I could not forbear to say here occasionally though it be not my business now to dispute or confute What is more proper at present is to tell the Reader That my Lord of Ferns having received my Letter at St. Sebastian and seeing he could not prudently venture against my advice thought fit to send his letter of Proxy to his own Vicar-general N Redmond living then at home in his Diocess of Ferns and County of Wexford to supply his place in the National Congregation to be held at Dublin and vote pro or con for or against the Remonstrance according as he should see the major and sanior part do For those were the words of that Letter of Proxy if my memory fail me not for I saw and read it Whether any private instructions were contrary I know not And however we see no opposition at all no endeavours I mean from this Bishop to hinder the Fathers from meeting Which is the scope of all hitherto said as in this place said VI. AS for the Bishop of Kilfinuran Andrew Lynch the third and last of those Irish Bishops then abroad I have nothing to say that might relate to any opposition or contrivance of his to hinder the meeting of the Fathers in the National Congregation Nor indeed besides what you have already seen Part I. Sect. v. pag. 12. have I any thing else to remark here of him save only 1. That he was one of those 12 persons which the Nuncio immediately after the rejection of the Peace of 1646. recommended to Rome by his Dean Dionysius Massarius to be made Bishops and who by the same Dean received next Spring their Bulls and accordingly soon after both Consecration and Installation 2. That nevertheless in the controversie about the cessation of Arms with Inchiquin and censures of the Nuncio he seem'd to be for the Supreme Council 3. That he cunningly declined appearing either one side or other in the business of Jamestown 4. That I for my own part alwayes until I discovered him upon his landing at Dublin and by his carriage in the Congregation took him to have been rightly and honestly principled and therefore as on the same account for the Bishop of Ardagh so I had also on the same been in all occasions an earnest sollicitor of my Lord Lieutenant to suffer him to return out of France and come home to his charge of Kilfinuran 5. That notwithstanding several invitations by letters and otherwise from me to him since the year 1661. to the present 65. assuring him also that he might safely return and reside in his own Diocess yet he neither would nor it seems had any mind to return Whereof we shall see hereafter the causes 6. That concerning him and more closely in order to his affection or disaffection to our
of the Land does warrant or hath at least sometime warranted That to the Crowns of England Ireland and Scotland as we can see no derivation of Divine right from Christ by St. Peter to His Holiness so neither can we see any colour of Humane right by any such consent c. That the late and last evasion of Bellarmine * Bellarmine against Barclay and others from the Argument grounded on that before-mention'd passage of St. Paul's command to the Romans and on the conformable practice of the primitive Christians when being most numerous and able to defend themselves they suffered nevertheless patiently under the Sword of persecuting Emperours is such a wicked device as makes the Apostles meer Temporizers in their Doctrine and consequently such as calls in question the whole truth of the Gospel Which to assert though onely by the s●quel of a slie distinction or unevading evasion is clearly no less than Blasphemy in Christian Religion Lastly That to approve so much as by silence those Principles and Practices the defence of which drive their Patrons at last to such Blasphemy yea not to condemn expresly those Positions and Actions which declare or infer it to be lawful for Subjects to dethrone nay to kill their Princes and embrue their hands in the blood of those Fellow Subjects that are defending their Princes and to act so much horrid cruelty upon the onely account of such improbable Rights Titles or Pretences of the Pope and See of Rome or even upon the joint account of introducing or re-establishing the Roman-Catholick Religion is no other than to approve at least consequentially or tacitely that which overthrows all Divine both Law and Testimony all Religion and right Reason whatsoever Nay that it is no other indeed than not onely to contradict the whole Doctrine but even to frustrate the whole design of the Gospel which either was none at all or without any question was to convert the world to God by the word of the Cross (a) 1 Cor. 1.18 and lead Souls to Heaven through the strait gate and narrow way (b) Mat. 7.14 And what are these but the mortification of our senses the contempt of riches pleasures greatness honour dominion and all the gaities of this world The crucifying of our Lusts whether Pride or Vain-glory or whatever else is or leads into sin Finally the practice of all contrary virtues especially those of humility and charity and meekness and a patient suffering in this life all the evils that God permits man to inflict Persuade your selves hence That the wrath of man works not the righteousness of God That the wisdom which is from above is gentle and peaceable as well as pure and That 't is a more glorious thing to gain one Soul to Christ by the soft and still voyce of the Gospel than to destroy a multitude because they will not come into the Fold before the chief Shepherd leads them Think besides that if the Church from particular grew Universal or Catholick by persecution and that the blood of Martyrs was the seed of the Church we should remember from whence we were hewen and tremble by contrary methods to be the Instruments of bringing Religion to that pass that there shall scarce be found Faith upon earth (c) Luc. 18.8 See moreover with your own eyes the fatal Catastrophe of all those Roman-Catholicks who in these very Nations have pursued such contrary methods at any time since 1537. Behold so many thousand heads crush'd in pieces under the Divine vengeance as broken Masts advanced on the Promontory of Rocks to give notice of the deplorable Events they have found even in this world whose example nevertheless but too many of your present Teachers advise you to follow when they dissuade you from condemning or disowning the same contrary methods the very same unchristian wayes Yea particularly behold on the most eminent place of the Promontory those Apostolical Ministers and Legats of the Holy See in Ireland Nicholas (a) He was an 1579 by Gregory XIII sent Nuncio to Ireland but with a Consecrated Banner and some Italian and Spanish Troops to invade that Kingdom as they did but were defeated by the Lord Grey Sanders an English man wandring alone in the Mountains of Kerry and starving there to death under a Tree Owen Mac Egan (b) Alias Eugenius O Hegan He was in the Rebellion of Tirowen made Bishop of Ross was great with the King of Spain was Vicarius Apostolicus in Ireland under Clement VIII had power from His Holiness to dispose of all the Ecclesiastical Livings of Munster but as Captain leading a Troop of an hundred Horse against the Loyallists with his Sword drawn in one hand and his Breviary and Beads in the other he was Slain and his Troop Routed an 1602 3. of Irish birth and race giving up his last breath even yet in a much more unepiscopal unclerkly unseemly manner And John Baptist Rinuccini (c) This good Italian Archbishop Prince and Extraordinary Nuntius in Ireland after many former practises by himself and his Dean Dionysi●s Massarius at last in the year 1648 May 27. issued out his Excommunication c. July 13 following he summoned a National Synod to appear at Galway After which the Supreme Council declaring on the 28 that such a National Synod could not be he issued out his Bloody Declaration which together with the effects of it put all Ireland in confusion and obliged the Loyal Party there to drive him out of the Countrey which he left Febr. 23. the same year 1648 9. What happened in the mean while at home in his own Diocess and especially in his Episcopal See of Fermo you may read in the Moderate Intelligencer Where in the Letters from Rome of July 11 2● and July 17 27 of that year I find That lately before there had been an Insurrection of that people of Fermo against their Governour Seignior Visconti whom they slew and made themselves their own Masters They endeavoured to excuse this to the Pope their chief Lord under whom the Bishop is Prince of that City But the Pope not satisfied with their excuse sent Seignior Imperiale his Apostolick Commissary with an Army of Horse and Foot to chastise them He sent a Company of Corsicans before whom they received into the City and then fell upon them and made them Prisoners Other Towns in that Countrey of Marca dell ' Ancona Rebelled by their example and the secret encouragement they had received from the Spaniards of Naples By the Letters of Aug. 3. S. N. it appears that they sent again to the Pope but then He would not hear them The mean while Impiriale I know not how became Master of the City i. e. Fermo By the Letters of Aug. 15. S. N. 't is said he had then filled the Prisons with the Inhabitants of that City By those of Sept. 1. S. N. 't is said that yet they were in Arms about the Countrey
the foresaid Six of Sorbon applied c. Whereof you may see more in the Second Part of the First Treatise pag. 687. XVIII I can give no other excuse for the meanness or rather badness of my stile all along this Book but either my own inability to make it better or certainly my want of leasure to review or mend it having been necessitated to send my very first rough draughts sheet by sheet as I writ them to the Press Which was the reason that I took no care nor could of the language though I took enough of the matter I knew even when I was writing that I enlarged often and repeated the same things not seldom where I needed not were it my design to write onely for the Learned or those of quick apprehension But seeing those I intended chiefly to speak unto were the Roman-Catholick Clergy of Ireland whereof very few are great Clerks I chose that manner of writing for their sake that the meanest of them might understand whatever I would be at XIX My reasons for annexing those three several Appendixes which after the Fourth Treatise you find in the end of the Book were chiefly 1. To convince thee good Reader with the greater clearness and evidence how necessary it was for the Roman-Catholick Clergy of Ireland either to approve of and subscribe the foresaid Loyal Formulary of the year 1661 or certainly some other containing at least the substance thereof in point of indispensable Faith and Obedience to His Majesty being as it appears in the said Appendixes they had been formerly as to the generality or at least greater part of them so obnoxious to the Laws even after and in other instances than either the First Rebellion in 1641 or the continuance of the War till 1646 or even the breach of the First Peace or of that Peace I mean concluded published and received the same year 1646 both at Dublin Kilkenny and some other places and yet after all since His Majesties happy Restauration would be thought good Subjects and have expected as to matters of Religion the benefit of the Second Peace viz. of that of the year 1648 or at least a connivence at their free and publick exercise of Religion and respective Functions 2. To convince thee also how unreasonably the Fathers in particular of the foresaid National Synod or Congregation at Dublin in the year 1666 refused not only to subscribe or approve the above Loyal Formulary of 16661 nor only to give any other of their own framing which could signifie any thing more than a plain resolution of their side against being bound by Subscription or any other kind of profession to continue Loyal but even so much as to petition His Majesty for pardon nay so much as to acknowledge any Errour committed by them or any others of the Irish Clergy in the late Wars of that Kingdom 3. Besides I consider'd that in several places of this Book I related to the matters contain'd in those Appendixes And I thought it not amiss for that very reason to annex them at length were it but for satisfying the Reader 's curiosity XX. For what concerns particularly the First Appendix viz. the Kilkenny little Book of Queries c I had this further motive to re-print and annex it here that I might thereby shew the Reader I have not even in this present Work taught other Doctrine than such as might be consequential to and grounded upon those general Maxims of Truth and Faith and Duty and Obedience owing to the Supreme Temporal Magistrate notwithstanding any decision of the Pope to the contrary which I had so long before laid down and asserted even Four and twenty years since in that little Piece of mine * How much I suffered 〈◊〉 particularly for having been the genuine onely Author of that Kilkenny Book of Queries and how Emerus Mac Mahon the Bishop of Clogher threatning me therefore to my own face before at least Twenty Religious men swore a bloody Oath That if or although all Ireland were or should happen to be forgiven for their opposing the Nuncio yet I should never be forgiven especially for having written that Book See Pag. 584 in the Second Part First Tome at Kilkenny and asserted also therein even with the joint approbation and concurrence of One and thirty zealous Roman-Catholick Divines under their own proper hands whereof two were Bishops and the Bishops then of most repute for Learning and Piety in Ireland viz. David Roth Bishop of Ossory and Thomas Desse Bishop of Meath the former a Doway Doctor of Divinity and the latter a Parisian Doctor in the same Faculty Besides I had this other motive also viz. That I think what is there said to shew the Nullity of Rinuccini's Censures of Excommunication and Interdict against the Supreme Council c. and to shew it as well ex natura rei i. e. for want of any sufficient cause or mortal sin or contumacy against which they should have been fulminated as by vertue also of the Appeal interposed even the very same Discourse the same Reasons and Canons and other Authorities alledged there in answer to the Second Querie do no less manifestly in all points evince the Nullity of the several late Censures of Excommunication against me Indeed amongst those who understand my Latin Vindication * Hibernica Tert. Part. Epist I. ad Haroldum I need no such help but amongst others who understand English onely I thought it not amiss for this very end to cause a Re-impression here of that Book XXI It is true I do my self subscribe to that Book not as the onely Author but as one of the Colledge or of the Sixteen Answerers to the Queries propounded by the then Supreme Council of the Confederate Catholicks of Ireland to David Lord Bishop of Ossory and the Colledge of Divines convened by him at the desire of the Council of purpose to answer those Queries Nor would I nor could I otherwise do for two Reasons 1. That I was desired by that Colledge of Divines to write in their name that Book of Queries and Answers c so as they all might jointly Sign it as their common and unanimous Resolves on the Queries proposed to them 2. That the immediate end of writing it was to undeceive the generality of the Irish Nation at that time divided in all Provinces Counties Baronies Parishes Cities Towns Villages and almost Houses throughout the Kingdom about the Cessation with Inchiquin of one hand and the Censures of Excommunication and Interdict of Rinuccini on the other It was to persuade them of the injustice and nullity of the said Censures and of the consequent obligations of all Church-men to open all their Churches and both Church-men and Lay-men to frequent their said Churches as they did before and not to regard but plainly to slight the Censures of the Nuncio enjoining the contrary Now the duller sort of the Commonalty was more like to be persuaded by
Three thousand pounds to build a Colledge I had no sooner put these two questions to them but they took Pen in hand and Signed that very Approbation of theirs which you see amongst those of others prefix'd to that little Book * Some years after but not before the Kingdom had been quite over-run by the Parliament I was told that one of the Society had reported I had in my Printing of this Book added much which was not in my Original written Copy and consequently which they had not approved To which the Answer is 1. That I was by the Colledge authorized to add in the Printing of it what I further pleased for strengthning or confirming by Law and Reasons their Resolves 2. That I added not a word in the Printing but onely out of the very Canons and Classick Authors what every one judged necessary I should add viz. very brief and very clear Solutions of some few Objections or rather Quotations brought me in two several Papers as from the Nuncio's Canonists or Learned Council the one Paper from Waterford the other from Galway and both against the validity of the Appeal and both also brought me just then when the Press was employed on that very point 3. That the general satisfaction which even all as well the Answerers as the Approvers of it yea those very Fathers of the Society found in it as soon as it came out in Print and continually after without objecting for so many years any such matter is a sufficient Argument that I dealt both fairly and conscientiously as I ought in Printing of this little Work with their Approbation XXV To understand more clearly what these other instances were besides those of the Insurrection in 1641 and continuation of the War till 1646 and breach of the First Peace made that same year 1646 and opposition after not only to the Cessation but to the Second Peace and both concluded in the year 1648 in which and for which other instances and I mean those hinted in general but not specified by me before the generality or any considerable part of the Roman-Catholick Irish Clergy of those dayes were obnoxious to the Laws there is very much to enlighten you in the Appendix of Instruments but much more in the Duke of ORMOND's long and excellent Letter which makes the last Appendix And therefore I would advise you to read that Letter in the first place i. e. before you read any other Part or Treatise of this Book although it be in order the very last Piece or Appendix of it XXVI Certainly it was no design that made me not give in the Appendix of Instruments as well the publick Acts of the Congregation of the Irish Clergy at Waterford under the Nuncio in the year 1646 against the Peace of that year as I gave those against both the following Cessation and other Peace concluded in the year 1648. The onely reason why I did not give them is That I had them not by me nor could have them from any other when I was Printing that Appendix Wherefore I must remit thee for them partly to honest Doctor Callaghan alias Philopater Irenaeus his Latin Vindiciae and partly to the English and both complete and accurate History of the whole last unhappy Wars of Ireland which is now preparing and you will suddenly see I hope XXVII This present Book not only as it now contains Four Treatises besides the Appendixes but as it was intended first to have also the Fifth and Sixth Treatise had been published at Dublin and in Easter Term there 1669 but that I was before viz. in September 1667 admonish'd for some prudential reasons to hold my hand for a time at least from going on with the Second Part of the First Treatise which is altogether of matters of Fact What those reasons were it 's needless to mention It sufficeth to tell here 1. That they related not to my self and consequently that they were no apprehensions of my side or of any other of my Friends that I had written or maintained any Doctrine or Proposition in this Book which might not very well abide the light and publick Censure of any Roman-Catholick Schools or Doctors proceeding on the grounds of Christianity or undoubted Catholick Truths 2. That soon after the foresaid Admonition I desisted from prosecuting any further study of this Book and suspended the Press when I came to pag. 442 which is in the First Part of the First Treatise having before that seen the Second Third and Fourth Treatises Printed there also at Dublin 3. That when after four years more the cause of that Admonition and those Reasons were wholly over I at the importunity of some judicious worthy Friends last year 1672. much about this time Twelve-month resumed here at London my intermitted-study of this Book to finish it as you see and so have added and Printed here what follows from the foresaid pag. 442 to the end of the Second Part of the First Treatise or to pag. 765 for some Fourscore sheets 4. That for this cause or the different places where this Book was Printed so by Parts you must not wonder at the difference of the Paper Ink and Character in those same Parts thereof The Dublin Printing-house was not furnish'd well with any of them but very ill at least with Paper and Letter when I Printed there and as ill with a Corrector too Albeit I must confess the London either Corrector or Printer which my Copies here lighted on hath also not seldom partly overseen and partly mistaken horribly And yet I think there are not any such over-sights or mistakes of either Correctors or Printers in any Part of this Book which alter the sense in any material thing though perhaps there may be some few that may a little retard some Readers 5. That to help this matter as well as I can at present I have in the preceding Leaf of the Body of the Book given those Errata or at least the most considerable of them which I have my self upon my own review observed leaving to thy discretion many lesser And perhaps too I leave some as great as any other but leave these onely because they escaped my observation as they easily might the Author For certainly as to literal faults nay and as to some verbal too any Author commonly speaking must be not the best Corrector of his own Work because he lightly runs over what he hath already in his head And yet after all I must confess I have been forc'd commonly all along to be my own Corrector such mean ones they were I lighted on in the Printing-houses and withal so ill written and blotted and crossed my own Copies i.e. my rough draughts were The greatest mischief was the Composers were sometimes pragmatical and sometimes impatient Which made them not to stay my reading of their amendments i.e. my seeing whether they had precisely observed my Corrections of every word and letter They often struck
as Subject to that Metaphysical contingency nay more most of them then that of our Protestation Why then may it not be as lawful for us to practice herein notwithstanding such conditional and caprichious interrogatories We have this advantage of them that in our judgments and in the judgments of at least the incomparably far greater part even of the Catholick Church there is not only both extrinsecal and intrinsecal probability in that we promise and protest but even an absolute certainty as grounded on most clear Scriptures and traditions and that the contrary positions or tenets are so farr from having any intrinsick probability at all that they are manifest errors against the word of God whereas they on the other side practice daily in matters of greatest concern relying only on the bare saying or quotation of one or two Casuists and these too not seldom extravagant and superficial men for matter of knowledg in the most profound questions of Religion And it is further manifest by reason that were such Metaphysical contingencies or apprehensions of them of power to render any unlawfulness in our signing the said Protestation the very same contingencie must vitiat their opposing us even I say as to the question of expediency or necessity And all the expositions made by the Fathers on hard passages of Scriptures and all the Sentences or controverted conclusions of Catholick writers in the succession of all ages since the days of Peter Lombard have been and are still unlawful even as to the expediency of delivering or teaching them Which to assert would be in effect to bereave our selves of all charity and all modestie and all reason Nay all the Canons Definitions Anathematismes of so many ancient holy Christian Councels either Provincial or National as we find in the Tomes of Councels and which have been held some a thousand others 11. 12. 13. 1400. years agoe and some latter all reverenced and many of them canonized by the very Popes themselves must have been unlawful and not onely temerarious but even sinful scandalous and schismatical yea the profession of the Trinity of persons or Divinity of Jesus Christ or an Oath or Protestation made to that purpose disclaiming in and renouncing all Doctrine and authority to the contrary that is in so much would be not onely unexpedient but even unlawful sinful scandalous schismatical before the first general Councel of Nice against Arrius or that other which was held at Constantinople against Macedonius yea that admonition of Paul Though we or an Angel from heaven preach any other Gospel unto you then that which we have preached unto you let him be accursed would be so too nay and that asseveration of our Saviour Christ himself in the Gospel was rash and false Si dixero quia non scio eum similis ero vobis mendax if this argument or interrogatory of our opposers be to any purpose or if their foolish impertinent discourses or private whispers ever since the 15. of Feb. last amongst our lay Gentry here signifie any thing to prove that we renounced or disclaimed in the Doctrine or Authority of a General Councel because we disclaim and renounce any at all as yet known to us which teaches or maintains any power Papal or Princely Spiritual or Temporal which may absolve us from our natural Allegiance to His Majestie or which may license us to rebell against him or to kill or murther the Anointed of God our Prince though of a different belief from ours Though which is observable our Protestation rigorusly taken as to this particular be onely against all such authority as is forreign and that that of a general Council truly such be known not to be properly forreign to any Christian Country And although the true meaning and purpose of it be onely against the Spiritual or Temporal pretended power of Popes alone But however this be or any thing heretofore said to these wild imaginations I would ●ain know whither it be not an undubitable Maxime in moral Philosophy and Divinity that our action is then lawful when it is against no law that is yet known or doubted to be either of God or man And expedient when in the judgment of wise men or in our own weighing all circumstances it is expected to conduce towards a good or just end we propose to our selves And whether the possibility of a future law or declaration against or inhibition of the like any more can vitiat actions qualified so which precede such laws Certainly as this last querie must be answered in the negative so the two former in the affirmative Now let any man that reads this passage and what I have given before it and for its illustration here in this present Book and Section let I say any such man of what affection soever so he be a man of reason be judge himself whether in this passage I do undervalue the authority of general Councils And I am sure there is no other passage in any other of all my writings where I say any thing to undervalue them And yet I must tell my adversaries that such Catholick Divines as hold the absolute fallibility of General Councils even I mean in point of Faith think they can say enough for themselves to prove that themselves do not therefore or indeed at all undervalue General Councils And enough also to prove that they justly charge their opposers with overvalueing General Councils As also to prove that themselves do still acknowledg a General Council truly such to be the onely Supream Tribunal in the Church And still acknowledg the Supream power of making Canons which concern either Faith or Discipline to be in this Council And still too acknowledg both external and internal acquiescence and obedience due from all persons even from the Pope himself to all their decrees in all Spiritual matters purely such whatsoever wherein an intollerable error against the Faith received is not evidently demonstrated And enough moreover to prove that to attribute more then this to General Councils howsoever truly such were indeed to overvalue them against truth and Tradition And finally enough also to prove it may be as daungerous an errour in religion or Faith to overvalue either Pope or Council as to undervalue them But whether such Catholick Divines as think so or think themselves can say enough for all and each of these particulars do think aright I am not concern'd at present no further then to tell my Adversaries they should rather dispute against them who give some kind of ground then charge me and falsely too being I give them no such ground at all nor any other of being charged with undervalueing General Councils XXXII Fourthly they would find their allegations false where they say that in the opinion of the Diffusive Church corporal punishments may be inflicted by a spiritual power I say that this is false if they mean as they do certainly and must speaking to the purpose by the word
with marrying Theophanes Augusta or the widdow Empress notwithstanding his own former legitimate wife was still alive and no other cause to divorce from her and that besides he had received her or the said Theophanes's Son as a Godfather out of the Sacred Font and with too much liberty given to his army to oppress against all right and reason as well the Layety as the Clergie indulging them whatever they fancied and without any punishment and with robbing the very Churches of their donaries and with laying grievous excessive tributs on both Churchmen and Layemen against the law and with assuming to himself entirely the elections of Bishops and taking to himself also all the spoils of the dead Bishops and finally with endeavouring to have all the Souldiers killed under him in his warr against the Sarracens to be accounted and invoked as martyrs Do not the Greek Historians charge this Nicephorus with all these particulars and not with that law onely And if so as questionless it is so how could Basilius Porphyrogenitus or Bellarmine or we out of either perswade our selves with any certitude it was for a bare law revoking some former priviledges of the Clergie in case I say that law was such that Empire suffered in after days and not rather for some of those other undoubted exorbitancies against undoubted either divine or humane laws or suffered not for that law in it self but for the evil end or evil execution or use of it For a law may be good in it self and yet the intention of the law maker and his use of it very wicked And after all whether it was so or no what proof I beseech you is that bare saving conjecture opinion or judgement of Porphyrogenitus That Bellarmines pretended Exemption of Clerks in all both civil and criminal causes whatsoever from the supream civil power hath been established either by the law divine natural or by the law of Nations That saying of Basilius Porphyrogenitus doth not touch this matter at all So that from first to last I dare conclude That for such Exemption and by such law of Nature and Nations Bellarmine hath not brought as much as any one argument which may seem to have the least colour of even probability itself nay nor even of that very worst sort of probability or that which our late Schoolmen call extrinsick onely Which himself did know so well that after having laboured so much to impose on us such exemption by such laws in a whole chapter yet in the chapter immediately following which is his 30. chap. l. 1. de Cleric he dares not give this doctrine of his own any better title or any better assurance not even for the being of it as much as by the divine positive law but onely the title or assurance of a bare probability of consequence And which further yet he knew so well that as he never once thought of the least Exemption of Clerks either as to their goods or as to their persons in politick or temporal affairs criminal or civil causes from any civil power whatsoever supream or not supream not even from the most inferiour civil Courts or Judges or of any kind of Exemption at all established for them in temporal matters by any law divine either natural or positive that I say as he never thought of any such Exemption by such laws in all or any the former editions of his Controversies or not until the very last edition of them by his own commands so it must be confessed he was in this point a very great changling to wit after he had seen all his other arguments out of human law or out of the civil and Canon law for his exorbitant exemption answered home by Doctor William Barclay in his accurate though little book de Potestate Papae particularly in the 15. and 32. chapters of the said book For in those former editions himself taught in express tearms against the Canonists Exemptionem Clericorum in rebus politicis tam quoad personas quam quoad bona jure humano introductam esse non divino That the exemption of Clerks in politick matters as well concerning their persons as their goods was introduced by humane law not by divine Nay also as Barclay well notes de Potestate Papae c. 15. made it his business to wit in those former editions besides which the foresaid Barclay the Father knew of none to prove the truth hereof by three several sorts of arguments 1. by that of Paul Rom. 13. omnis anima potestatibus sublimioribus subdita sit according to St. Chrysostome's exposition and understanding of it to be a command as well for Clerks as for Laycks 2. by other testimonies of holy Fathers in the point 3. because sayes he nullum pr●ferri potest Dei verbum quo ista exemptio confirmetur there cannot be any word of God alleadg'd for this exemption From which doctrine he was so farre in his last edition that seeing he was left no other argument undissolved no other way unblocked for maintayning or carrying on his Exemption or that of Clerks in his exorbitant latitude of it and yet would not yield to victorious Truth he would needs in his old age trouble himself and others with a new invention or pretension rather nay rather too a meer aequivocation in effect of not onely a positive law divine per quandam similitudinem but even of a natural law divine and further confound the law of nature with that of nations and yet in the end of all pretend no more cap. 30. in solutione primae objectionis but a meer probability of consequence for his positive law of God nor for his natural but such a third degree c 29. as by his own explication of the third degree is no kind of degree at all of any true law of nature Whether this be not to abuse both Clerks and Layicks Princes and Subjects the State and Church being the controversy is of so high concern to all for the peace of the world I leave the indifferent Reader to judge For I have done my part and proceed now to shew by the solution of his other arguments LXVIII That for what concerns human laws too either civil or Ecclesiastical the case is also clear enough of my side both against him and our late Doctors of Lovaine That by neither law Clerks have ever yet been exempted in criminal causes from the supream civil coercive power nay nor in any kind of meer temporal cause whatsoever criminal or civil from that supream civil power were it necessary for my present purpose to add this as it is not Though I confess they have been exempted and very justly too by several both imperial and other municipal and Royal laws from inferiour civil Judicatories in many civil causes and in some Countries by the peculiar municipal laws of such Countries exempted also in some criminal causes in prima instantia from the inferiour subordinate civil Judges and other Judges that
of them I mean as treated of the subject untill at least the Schools began in Peter Lombards dayes or at least untill Gregory VII who was a little before nay and many Fathers Interpreters and great School Divines too after the said Gregory and Lombards dayes but that I would not without necessity be too tedious these whom I have given being both many and after the Apostles the chief Fathers of Christianity whose writings are extant LXXIV Having so done in pursuance of my promise in my LXXI Sect. with my fourth and grand argument indeed which is purely Theological and is that grounded on the 13. Rom. according to the general and vnanimous exposition of that passage by the holy Fathers untill the age of Gregory the VII I am now come to my LXXIV wherein I am to give according also to my promise in the said LXXI Sect. some Instances of the practise of the holy Fathers in pursuance of this their doctrine so given hetherto in the last Section or in the LXXIII going immediately before this present And therefore this present Section is an appendage of the former as containing the best confirmation can be of the holy doctrine of the Fathers by their as holy practise in all degrees But although for matter of Instance or practise the Instance or practise of Christ himself who after commanding Peter to put up and sheath his sword declared himself to have twelve legions of Angels at command to free himself and rest of his company from the both civil and Ecclesiastical power of those who apprehended him and yet would not resist but was obedient even to the civil powers even to death it self acknowledging the very power of an Idolater civil Lieutenant over his body and acknowledging it as given from above albeit I say this Instance or practise of Christ alone should be and is enough for matter of example as Christ himself alone is or should be the onely exemplar to us in all his actions omnis enim Christi actio nostra est instructio said one of those auncient Fathers very well and albeit after and besides that of Christ our Lord the practise of all his most blessed Disciples and great Apostles too those infallible expositors of his will and law those his own proper divine special extraordinary Embassadours to all Nations of the world for teaching them by word and deed his true and pure doctrine and no other should make up Instances enough being they all even Peter himself not excepted conformably to their express doctrine practised so that is obeyed so the civil and even Infidel Princes placed over the world by God that they appeared not onely at their tribunals nay sometimes also of their own free will appealed to them but suffered patiently death it self at their command and this without pleading any exemption without other reluctancy whatsoever nay and without attempting once to make use against these Princes of even their so divine extraordinary miraculous power whereby notwithstanding in other cases and against other men they could make and did make both men and Devils and the very elements to obey their commands and albeit after and besides this Instance too of all those immediate Disciples and Apostles of our Lord we read in general other innumerable examples of all Christians both Laicks and Clerks Priests Bishops Popes and Councils also of both other Bishops and Popes during the primitive Ages of Christianity and the first 300. years and read so in general such innumerable Instances of their practise in those Ages as well of purity as of persecution conformable in all points to that which I have shewn to be the doctrine of all even the holy Fathers who are after the Apostles most famous in the Church of Christ and read these general and innumerable instances in no worse Authors and witnesses then Tertullian Cyprian and St. Augustine albeit I say all this be true and absolutely certain yet it is not my purpose to take up this Section with discouse upon either that particular Instance of the practise of our Lord himself or of that other of his immediate Disciples and Apostles or even on that general one of the practise of all Christians the first 300. years till Constantine the great But my chief purpose here is to give some other and particular Instances of the practise according to that doctrine of very eminent and holy Fathers even Bishops Patriarchs and Popes after the said first 300 years and the conformable practise also of Christian Princes in their times However it may be worth your patience first to read over transiently this following note extracted out of My More Ample Account pag. 88. 89 90 91 92 93 94. inclusively concerning that general practise or that of all Christians in general within the very first 300. years as the said Tertullian in his Apologetick cap. 37. Lactantius l. 5. Cyprian ad Demetrianum and Austin de Civit. Dei l. 22. relate it But now that nothing may be wanting to confirme throughly and according to my first intent this necessary doctrine nothing desired more to illustrate or perswade it to be infallible truth of Christian Religion let us in pursuance of the maximes consider the practise of all primitive Christians for the space of many hundred years while the Church was most holy and most pure and let us consider this practise in the undubitable writings and clearest passages of the before named most famous primitive Fathers who delivered to after ages as well the letter as the sense of the new Testament and consequently the belief or judgment of the B. Apostles and Evangelists the Commandements of Christ and pleasure of God in our case Wherein if any thing be more evident then a religious holy Conscience or perswasion of suffering rather all losses the most grievous all tortures the most exquisite death it self the worst of evills in this world rather then take armes against the Soveraign Magistrate or against the lawes or any thing more evident then that the primitive Christians at least for three or foure the first and best ages of the Church did suffer accordingly and upon this account as well as that of glory and of Christian belief that God in his own time would revenge their quarrel as to whom alone it belonged to right them against the powers of the ●●rth or any thing likewise more evident then that conscience constant practice belief even general throughout the whole world amongst Christians in Europe Asia Africk without any one exception whereever they lived and even there and then where and when they were so numerous that by secession onely without rebellion without armes without committing treason they might have ruined the greatest Empire in the world if I say any thing may be more evident then all this in the primitive practice Let eloquent Tertullian speake in the first place and in his Apologetick for those of his own Age to the Roman Emperors and Senate Quoties enim
either give the spiritual power of the Papacy or take it away from any or should conceive that after the Church had legally revoked that power she once or twice gave Emperours to chose or elect for ever all Popes nay and all other Bishops too of the Western Church yet the Emperour could institute the Pope And the sense also wherein I condemn that Article for both parts is that which any should conceive or express by saying in other significant words that both the spiritual institution and spiritual destitution and the spiritual correction and spiritual punition of the Pope or the punition of him by spiritual wayes or in a spiritual manner or at all by the spiritual sword belongs to the Emperour as such or as only Emperour without any delegation or commission from the Church And the sense moreover wherein I condemn that Article as at least false is that whereby any might conceive that not only before the Popes were legally invested in those temporal principalities which they now enjoy and did enjoy or at least pretended to enjoy as supream temporal Princes in the time or a little before and after the time of Ioannes XXII but also after they were and are legally invested and possessed of a supream temporal independent Soveraignty if I mean they be so re vera at all which is not my business here to determine did I know well how to determine it it belong'd or belongs to the Emperour to give as much as the sole Temporals of the Papacy or take them away from the Pope or as much as to correct or punish him in any other though meer temporal civil or corporal way of coercion by the civil or material sword Now 't is clear enough that neither my Thesis in general concerning the subjection of all Clergiemen whatsoever to their own respective civil Princes nor my particular deduction from it concerning the very Popes themselves and their subjection likewise to the Roman Emperors before these Roman Emperours were legally devested of the real Soveraingty of Rome are touch't by the condemnation of either part or both parts together in any such sense of them or of either of them as I have given hitherto And it is no less clear to me that the reasons of Iohn the XXII against this third Article drives at no condemnation of it in any other sense For amongst these reasons one is the forged donation of Constantine the Great cap. Constantinus dist 96. And another is composed of a plain denyal or plainly false exposition of cap. Adrianus xxii Dist xliii and cap. In Synod ead Distinc and of a posterior revocation by the Popes themselves of the priviledge granted to Emperours in those Canons nay and of a renunciation made of that priviledge by later Emperours also So that if we gather the sense wherein Iohn the XXII censured this third Article even for either of both parts joyntly or severally as we may and ought to gather it from the reasons which he alledges against it we must evidently conclude his censure to have related only to those times wherein the Pope pretended the very temporal and legal supream independent authority or Soveraignty of the City of Rome and of some other Principalities and to those times also which preceded such priviledge given to the Emperours or followed the revocation and renunciation of such priviledge not to the time during which it held But it is apparent enough that my doctrine concerning the Popes subjection to the supream civil coercive power of the Roman Emperours had relation to those other times only wherein the Popes without any peradventure most expresly confessed themselves and to those moreover wherein they should so according to the truth of things confess themselves to be de facto and de jure subject in all temporals to the Roman Emperours And therefore is is likewise apparent enough that I am no way concern'd in this Article of Marsilius and Iandunus or in the condemnation of it Much less am I concern'd how false or how true the Popes allegations or how weak and unconcluding his reasons are which he makes against it and which are the only motives as he pretends of his definitions against it for the very chief Assertors and Defenders of the infallibility of pure Papal Definitions in matters of Faith confess that the reasons alledged by Popes in their definitive Busts are no part of the definition it self nor as such have any kind of infallibility not tye any o●her to approve of them further then their own proper native evidence works the understanding to an assent And yet withal as I said before so I now say again that Iohn the XXII's reasons against this third Article of Marsilius and Iandunus prove sufficiently that the doctrine of a supream civil coercive power as warranted by the law divine both natural and positive to be in Emperours or lawful Kings of Rome to coerce judge and punish the very Pope himself in criminal causes when the Pope was no supream temporal Prince or when or if at any time hereafter he shall cease to be such or if even at present he be not such and that he live within such Emperour 's or Kings dominions for this is it and all it I say in the exposition of my general Thesis in relation to the Pope is no way concern'd in the condemnation pronounced by the same Iohn the XXII against the same third Article because not in the sense wherein his said reasons prove he condemn'd this Article But forasmuch as it may be of some good use to the Reader not onely for a more full understanding of what I treat here but in other parts of this work to see at leingth both that no less famous then forged canon or chapter Constantinus dist 96 noted with a Palea in Gratian himself and those other true canons or true Chapters Hadrianus and In Synodo dist LXIII for as true and undoubted these two are by all men quoted and accounted I will not loose this occasion to give so here all three consequently If you think your labour lost in perusing them and you will not if you be not extreamly uncurious you may skip over them to my observations on the 4. and 5. article of Morfilius Ex Gratiano distinct XCVI cap. Constantinus Constantinus Imperator quarta die sui baptismi privilegium Romanae Ecclesiae Pontifici contulit ut in toto orbe Romano Sacerdotes ita hunc caput habeant sicut judices Regem In eo privilegio ita inter caetera legitur Utile judicavimus unà cum omnibus Satrapis nostris universo Senatu optimatibusque meis etiam cuncto populo Romanae gloriae imperio subiacenti ut sicut beatus Petrus in terris vicarius filii dei esse videtur constitutus ita Pontifices qui ipsius Principis Apostolorum gerunt vices principatus potestatem amplius quam terrena imperialis nostrae Serenitatis mansuetudo habere videtur concessam
quarrel and though his body likewise had been subservient and obedient in all things to the most holy dictats of his Soul For we know that invincible or inculpable prejudice ignorance or inadvertisement against the truth of things in the course of a mans life in his actions or in his contests or even some time in his doctrine which strikes not at the fundamentals of Christian doctrine so his Soul be ever piously and charitably and Christianly and resignedly disposed to embrace truth when known either by evidence of reason or from such an authority as it is bound to submit unto doth not hinder either Sanctity or martyrdom or miracles or due canonization or a fit veneration or answerable invocation of him as even a martyrized and miraculous Saint The example of S. Cyprian that great holy martyrized Saint and Patriarch of Affrick who both lived and dyed in a wrongfull contest with even the Popes of Rome themselves and even also in a very material point of Christian doctrine is evidence enough for this And S Paul's contest with S. Peter at Antioch about the observation of the Jewish laws is evidence enough And very many other examples of great holy Fathers and Doctors of the Catholick Church who lived and dyed in material errours and material heresies too especially if the doctrine of Bellarmine in many places nay or that of even of many or rather most other School Divines be true may be produced ex superabundanti to make good this evidence 4. That the infallibility of Pope Alexander the third in canonizing S. Thomas of Canterbury and I speak now to them who suppose the Pope so infallible in all his Definitions or Bulls concerning any doctrine or fact or matter of Piety that he is so too in his canonization of Saints implyed or inferr'd of necessity that all his quarrels or at least the substantial part of that quarrel which occasion'd his death principally immediatly ultimatly not onely was just but must have been just according to the very objective truth of things in themselves and that otherwise there could be no infallibility in the said Alexander's canonization of him for a Saint and a martyr and that likewise the pursuant veneration and invocation of him for such by the Church and the miracles wrought at his hearse before he was interr'd as for example the candles lighting of themselves about his hearse after they had been quenched and his lifting up his hand after the office of the dead was ended and blessing the people c and so many other miracles wrought at several times at his Tomb after he had been long enterred that I say neither that veneration or invocation could be in truth practised without impiety or at least very much temerity not those miracles alleadg'd without forgery and fallacy nor he called a martyr in any true sense if his quarrels or quarrel as now is said with Henry the Second had not been just according to the objective truth of things in themselves For as I denyed the former three suppositions so I do this fourth also or at least I say that I am not bound to admit it First because that even allowing or if I did allow Bellarmine's or any other's doctrine of the infallibility of Popes in their Bulls of canonization and other Bulls whatsoever yet is it plain enough and even admitted by such Divines that possibly there may be an errour in some particular allegations or suppositions entertained by the Popes in the process formed for such canonization and even expressed also or insinuated in the very letters of the canonization and that no such allegations or suppositions reasons or motives are defined in any Bull of canonization or even in any other whatsoever but the principal design onely and that this in Bulls of canonization is onely that such or such a holy man is in the joyes of the blessed seeing God in the face and therefore he may be invocated as such and consequently that the infallibility which they do attribute to the Popes in their Bulls of canonization may subsist notwithstanding that some of those motives or inducements were in themselves false according at least to the objective truth of things For all which these Divines pretend to in this matter is the infallible assistance of Gods holy spirit or of his external Providence promised infallibly as they suppose to the Pope in not proposing any by such a solemn declaration to be invoked as a Saint who is not so indeed but not in supposing this or that which is said of some passage of his life nor by consequence in supposing what was the true cause of his violent death when he dyed so or that the cause was such as would make him a martyr in the stricktest sense of this word Martyr as used in the Church by way of distinction not onely from a Confessour but from such holy men who suffered violent deaths unjustly that is not by the prescript of the laws but by the power onely of wicked men or women and that too sometimes not for any cause they maintayn'd but out of hatred to their persons or to arrive at some worldly end which their life observed whereof St. Edward the Second a Saxon King of England Son to the good King Edgar is a very sufficient example who was and is invoked as a martyr and a very miraculous martyr too notwithstanding he was murthred onely by a servant and at the command of his Stepmother Alfreda as he was drinking on horseback and this too for no other cause but that her own Son Ethelredus should come to be King as presently he was made Polydore Virgil Anglicae Historiae l. VII as sometimes also for a cause which though not so clear on either side in the judgment I mean of some other indifferent men nay perhaps unrighteous on the side of the holy sufferers according to the objective truth of things in themselves yet invincibly appearing just or the more just and the more holy and pious unto them and to others also who had their life otherwise and justly too or according also even to the certain objective truth of other things in due veneration For Martyr in Greek is a witness in English and martyrdom in the Ecclesiastical use of the word is variously applyed sometime strictly to import a violent death suffered without any reluctance and suffered meerly and onely for professing or for not denying a known certain evident or notorious Catholick Evangelical truth or which is the same thing to import a witnessing or a bearing testimony to such a truth by such a death sometime largely or not so strictly however properly still to import by such a death a witnessing or a bearing testimony to a good zeal and great piety and excellent conscience in being constant to a cause which one esteems the more just and generally seems the more pious for all he knows though it be not an evangelical truth and though perhaps
in his own Conscience and both before God and man confess it when he reflected on so many Texts of Holy Scripture especially on that of St. Paul 13 Rom. and on the Doctrine and Expositions of all the Holy Fathers and on the practice not only of the Primitive Church but of all ensuing Churches throughout the World and of both Laity and Clergy until Gregory the VII time some Ten entire Ages after Christ and all for the independency of the civil Power of Princes from the Church as also for the subjection of the Church in civil matters to earthly Princes Humane nay and daily humane Experience also forasmuch as we see it Taught by so many famous Divines and read in their Books That it is not alwayes safe in point of Conscience to follow that opinion in practice which in pure speculation seems probable to us nay or even that which so seems the more probable whereof I could instance a variety of Examples and see it taught and read in them consequently That some may have a pure speculative opinion as probable nay as the more probable to them for such or such a power to be in the Church in actu primo and yet not this other annexed consideratis omnibus That it is lawful for the Church to proceed at any time to the execution of it And forasmuch also as all Ghostly Fathers or the Judicious and who are of a timorous Conscience nay and others too besides Ghostly Fathers daily find it so in themselves at least in such cases wherein they know that if possibly they should err and transgress against the objective Truth of Things and Laws by following in practice such a speculation as upon some ground or other seems to them to be probable or even the more probable they may run a great hazard to undergo the punishment due in the justice of God for such breach whereas they are absolutely certain that whether their such speculation be true or false yet if they in practice follow the contrary opinion or speculation there is no Law at all as much as objectively taken which may be transgressed by them As for Example in case of such a pure speculative opinion of a power in ones self to force away his Horse or Purse or House or Lands or Lordship or Principality from another who both himself and Predecessors was and were ever till then bona fide in peaceable possession and were so if it was a Lordship or Lands c. for a Thousand years For in such a case there can be no sin no breach of any Law in not Conforming in practice to the speculation but there may be in Conforming And consequently common experience also in the daily regulation of our own Conscience tells us there must not of necessity be such a connexion of dictates Besides who sees not that whether so or no there was not in England at least in the dayes of Thomas of Canterbury any Law making it Treason to hold That the Christian Church in some extraordinary case might transfer the Right of that Crown from Henry the Second As for Example in case he had really Apostatized and not only from the true Papacy or from Pope Alexander to the Anti-Pope Victor but even from Christianity it self as some of his Ambassadors to Rome and the Bishop of London in some of his Letters extant in Hoveden seemed to Threaten either the one or the other T is true I am against the Doctrine which attributes any such power to the Church as a Church or to it at all de jure divino and much more against the lawfulness of putting such pretence in execution But hence it doth not follow That as much as in my judgment the Doctrine of such power or of such practick lawfulness is Treasonable at least in all Times and all Countries For the Church may some time and in some Countrey have such a power by meer humane Right And whether she have or no where the Law of the Countrey doth not make the practice Treason or the Doctrine or Dictate Treasonable neither can be so Each or both may be unconscientious erroneous injurious and wicked at least according to the objective Truth of Things and Laws of God in themselves but to be Treason or Treasonable is another thing I said That in the dayes of Thomas there was no such Law in England for I leave it to the Learned and Reverend Judges of England to determine Whether after the Laws of Praemunire by Edward the Third and Richard the Second were made and that Declaration in this of Richard the Second made by joint consent of the Bishops too That the Crown of England is subject to none but God it be Treasonable Doctrine in England to teach the contrary I am sure the like in France and of France though extremely and most justly too censured by all the Universities of France and the Abettors or Teachers of such degraded lately in Schools and otherwise punished yet Cardinal Peron's interposition in the time of Henry the Third of France by his fine speech in the Assembly of Estates hinder●d it from being then declared Treason or Treasonable or Heresie or Heretical and ever since from being accounted or punished as Treason or Treasonable though of late severely and I think justly proceeded against as at least false erroneous scandalous dangerous against the Word of God c. And yet I am sure also That whether it be so or no at this time either in France or England St. Thomas of Canterbury cannot be said to have been or to be concern'd You will say again perhaps objecting your very last and strongest reserve That whatever may be said to excuse his principles of Judgment or Doctrine from being Treasonable for that I mean which appears in any of his Epistles or in that Speech of his at Chinun or other extant nothing can be said to excuse him from actual Treason which is more and worse For you will say That the Archbishop of York and Bishop of London and Salisbury did so charge him when after his return he refused to absolve them but on such a condition as they would not lie under without the Kings consent and when therefore they having cross'd the Sea to the old King the Father to Normandy they sent an Express back to England and to the young King to persuade the said young King That Thomas had sought and endeavoured to depose him Qui ei persuaderent sayes Spondanus out of Baronius and Baronius out of the Saints own 73 Epist which was his last to Pope Alexander Thomam quaesivisse cum deponere But I answer That such a charge of his such publick and profess'd Enemies was not is not to be at all believed without other proof than their own such private suggestion of it by their own Messenger to the young timorous King That no Relation or History makes mention not only not of any proof but not as much as of any
Thirteenth especially considering that the promise and declaration thereof made in that Thirteenth is delivered in such words as must of necessity argue though not a formal yet a virtual assertion because a supposition of each of these three last Sorbon Propositions in that very ma●ner I have now presently express'd or of the truth of them and by consequence also a virtual censure and condemnation of the contrary Tenets For otherwise how could We declare truly honestly and conscientiously That it is our unalterable resolution proceeding freely from the persuasion of a good Conscience and shall be ever with Gods grace First never to approve or practise according to any Positions which in particular or general assert any thing contrary to His Majesties Royal Rights or Prerogatives c. and consequently never to approve of or practise any thing contrary to the genuine Liberties of the Irish Church c Secondly not to maintain defend or teach that the Pope is above a General Council Thirdly also never to maintain defend or teach That the Pope alone under what consideration soever c. is infallible in his definitions made without the consent c as at large in the said Thirteenth complex Proposition or Paragraph How I say could We or any persons whatsoever declare truly honestly and conscientiously in such terms such a resolution as to such matters unless we or they were at the same time inwardly and throughly persuaded of the verity of those three assertory single Propositions which I say are previously and at least virtually supposed and by consequence also of the falsity of the opposite doctrines For no man at least no Divine Preacher Confessor Leader and Guide of others by his Calling and Function may or can honestly profess in publick to the World such an unalterable resolution unless he be inwardly persuaded that doctrine he disclaims in is false and the contrary true because the Apostle and reason too assures us That whatever proceeds not from Conscience is a sin and consequently that it is unlawful for any man at least who is bound to be the spiritual guide of others to profess especially in such manner such a resolution against doctrines pretended to be Religious and Evangelical of the falsity of which he is not throughly convinced being it is clear enough that want of such conviction would argue his Soul to be either habitually or actually depraved i. e. resolved to run wilfully the hazard of opposing an Evangelical Truth and therefore to be in a wicked state 10. That the foresaid Colledge of Divines consisted partly of graduated or licensed and instituted Professors of Divinity and partly of other qualified Fathers but who were also Divines although not as the former instituted Professors to teach in the Schools and that the names and qualities too or titles of all both these and those I mean as many of them as I can exactly now remember to have ordinarily come to that meeting were as followeth viz. Fr Antony O Docharty Minister Provincial of St. Francis's Order in Ireland Fr Thomas Dillon Vicar Provincial of the Discalceat Carmelits in Ireland Laurence Archbold a Secular and Parish-Priest formerly Vicar General of Dublin George Plunket a Secular Parish-Priest and Archdeacon of Meath Fr Antony Gearnon of St. Francis's Order several times formerly Guardian viz. of the Convents of Dundalk Dublin c. Fr John Reynolds of St. Dominick's Order Protonotary Apostolical c. Fr Thomas Talbot of St. Francis's Order one of Her late Maiesty the Queen Mother's Chaplains Fr Valentin Brown of St. Francis's Order Reader Jubilat of Divinity and formerly Minister Provincial of Ireland Angel Goulding a Secular Parish-Priest of St. Owens in Dublin and Doctor of Divinity Fr Bernardinus Barry of St. Francis's Order and Reader Jubilat of Divinity Fr Thomas Harold of the same Order Reader Jubilat of Divinity Fr Simon Wafer of the same Order Reader of Divinity Fr John Grady of the same Order Reader of Divinity Fr Peter Walsh of the same Order Reader of Divinity and Procurator c. In all Fourteen whereof Nine Franciscans three of the Secular Clergy one of the Carmelits and one of St. Dominick's Order and this last viz. Father John Reynolds was also their Secretary or he that writ down what they had agreed upon and kept the Papers This is a true account of the occasion end time and manner also of debating as likewise of the persons who debated the said Fifteen Propositions or Doctrine of Allegiance contain'd in them And now there remains but a few other particulars I would have here briefly advertised 1. That several other Churchmen at several times came to that little meeting as it was free and open for any that pleased to come and go when he would and object whatever he thought fit but that I do not remember any of those others that came so to have objected any thing 2. That Father Harold was he as he is a very able man that disputed most and press't hard against me on the controverted points or arising difficulties though he concurr'd at last with my sense on every point 3. That where I speak of a select number of Divines by that word select I would signifie only those who of the foresaid whole number of Fourteen were School-professors of Divinity who were indeed but seven whereof I am sure that five were as select as any our Countrey could then afford 4. That amongst the same foresaid number of Fourteen there were three who had been actual Members of the late National Congregation viz. Antony Docharty Provincial of the Franciscans Thomas Dillon Provincial of the Carmelits and Angel Goulding Doctor of Divinity 5. That six of the whole number had neither before nor after sign'd the controverted Remonstrance viz. Antony Docharty Thomas Dillon Bernardinus Barry John Grady Angel Goulding George Plunket 6. And lastly That I have been by so much the more exact in giving the particulars of this Colledge of Divines held after the National Congregation was dissolved and of the matters debated therein by how much I found it and my self also even for it traduced by false relations thereof sent over Seas For my Lord Bishop of Ferns out of his own candid nature and some kindness also to me was pleased to let me know so much though not before the year 1669. The words of his Letter dated the 6th of October said year 1669 to the present purpose are these Father Peter Walsh is said to have used fraud and force in the Congregation of the Clergy at Dublin anno 1666 and that he kept an Anti-Congregation of his own faction to vex them I saw a relation sent over of that I saw also severe lines of a great Cardinal to that purpose Whereunto he further adds kindly some further notice viz. of the late cause of their anger against me at Rome in these other words It was ill taken by all That after Cardinal Franciscus Barberinus 's Letter in His Holinesse
the said Cardinal Barberin and the two Internuncio's de Vecchiis and Rospigliosi their own proper many Letters first pag. 16. and 17. and then pag. 513 515 531. and again pag. 634 636. and further yet pag. 647 and 648 and also out of the Belgian Commissary General 's Citation or Summons to Father Caron and rest of the Subscribers dated and sent in the year 1663 pag. 104. and moreover out of both Father Caron's and my own Answer also to that Summons from pag. 105. to pag. 115. and further yet out of my own two and they also very long Letters written to the Internuncio Hieronymus de Vecchiis pag. 533. and from thence to pag. 555. yea also out of my special animadversions on the foresaid Cardinal Barberin's last Letter in the year 1666 See them from pag. 636. to pag. 639. and my former observations too particularly on two Letters of de Vecchiis from pag. 516. to pag. 522. yea and out of my long disputes in so many intire Sections consequently against the four principal grounds of the Louain Vniversity Censure pag. 117. to pag. 487. nay out of even this whole History or First Tome thereof as it shall hereafter yet as clearly appear out of the Second Tome and very great variety also even of other Arguments therein than any given in this First Tome That the only ground of terming Me and Caron Apostates was and is our subscribing promoting and defending by word and print The Loyal Irish Remonstrance presented to the King in the year 1661. S. V. or of the Doctrine of Allegiance and both profession and promise of Obedience contained in the Remonstrance to His Majesty in all Temporal things according to the Laws of the Land and withal our constant refusing to retract our said manual Subscription therefore I may with all justice and confidence answer that great Man or great Roman who ever he be whose Letter the Bishop of Ferns saw that termed Me and Caron Apostates and may answer him so I mean also with all truth and certainty 1. That if by the term Apostates or rather abstract thereof he mean to signifie or we understand that which is commonly or usually imported thereby and that indeed which to perstringe hurt or annoy us would be the only material sense to be intended by him viz. a backsliding or falling off either first from the profession of true Christianity or of some Article thereof or secondly from our Sacerdotal Function or thirdly at least from the Regular Institute of St. Francis to which by solemn vows we have obliged our selves then certainly it is not Walsh and Caron are Apostates in such proper usual harmful meaning nor even in any at all of these three respects now given but he himself and his Associates in terming us so that are indeed the true Apostates in that sense and Apostates too I mean in the very first and consequently worst of the said three relations i. e. Apostates from Catholick Faith and Christian Doctrine because from an essential Article and Evangelical necessary truth and from reason also to boot Or without question That the blessed Apostles Peter and Paul and all the holy Fathers following them immediately one after another for a Thousand Years till Pope Hildebrands dayes of Antichristian usurpation were grand Apostates in that very sense and first relation also 2. That if the said great Roman who ever he be meant only to term us so in a diminutive restrain'd improper unusual forreign and false acceptation meaning or sense of the word Apostate or in that which only may according to the generical or etymological sense import an Apostacy backsliding or falling off from the worldly corrupt and unjust interest of the Roman Court i. e. from any defence assertion belief or good opinion of their tyrannical and continual not only oppressing the Liberties of all other Churches but invading the Rights of all other even Secular Princes if I say he meant only this neither I nor Caron when alive would be much concern'd to answer him Though we could say that in that very case or in this very generical or etymological meaning his supposition had been false being we were never at any time in our lives for that wicked interest and therefore could not be in any kind of even generical or etymological sense Apostates from it In which respect as I can speak assuredly for my self That even from the beginning ever since I understood any thing in Controversial Divinity I both abhorr'd and upon occasion declared against the unlawful encroachments of either the worldly Court or particular Church which you please of Rome on the Temporal Rights of Supreme Secular Princes and both uncanonical and tyrannical either usurpation or administration of other Patriarchal National Provincial Diocesan Churches throughout the earth so in behalf of Father Caron who dyed at Dublin in the Month of May 1666 a little before the National Congregation there assembled and of his manifest read undoubted conscientiousness all along in both signing first and defending after the controverted Remonstrance and alwayes to his death refusing to retract his Subscription or alter his opinion and profession as to that matter I can no less assuredly speak That when he was on his death-bed even after he had received the Sacrament of Extreme Vnction and as far as I remember his last viaticum too of the Holy Eucharist nay as I am sure when he was every moment expecting death without any kind of hopes of recovery and being in this condition however still in his perfect senses he was told by me and others it had been bruted of him abroad in the City even amongst Lords and Ladies That being come to this point he retracted his signature and defence thereof and his whale Doctrine or Books of that matter He presently desired me to call in to his Chamber the whole Community of the Franciscan Fathers who were then next room to him at Supper for it was in their Dublin Convent he lay sick prepared himself to death and there also dyed even the very next day as far as I can remember after I had so called the Fathers However what is to my purpose is certain viz. That as soon as they were all entered the Commissary General who a little before came from Spain Father Mark Brown heading them our dying Father Redmund Caron having first declared the cause of his sending for them at that time to be the foresaid false report and then his trouble that any religious men should be so unreasonably desirous to advance or cherish a Faction as to invent lyes of a dying man that was every moment expecting to appear at the Tribunal of the great Judge to give there an account of both his life and doctrine in the third place he declared unto them and desired them all to bear witness of his Declaration That as he was now suddenly to answer God he both subscribed first the Remonstrance and engaged after
their future fidelitie hereafter in the cases or contingencies wherein they are suspected I leave the indifferent reader to be judge I know what their answer will be to these two last Objections They will say the Propositions of Sorbon had no such exception against equivocation no censure of the contrary positions But the reply is no less obvious and shews the answer in both parts unsatisfactory Because the disparity is as great as the divinity and doctrine and loyalty of that famous Colledge nay and of all the Gallican Church is known to be such that their Propositions as from them and to their King or people needed no such additional exception or censure at such time as they gave those very Propositions in the year 1663. So many books lately before written by the Divines of that Faculty and Church and by the Curats of Rouen and Paris against the whole mass of casuistical opinions amongst which that of equivocations in such cases at least as ours as likewise the other of extrinsecal probability ma●ch in the first rank and their general horror of such vile Sophistrie and withal the settledness of the generality of the French Nation both Ecclesiasticks and Lay-men in the true honest and obvious meaning of the said Propositions as comprising without further addition or specification those very cases which our congregational Divines would by their distinctions and reservations except alwayes and yet further the very penalties enacted in the rules of Sorbon and other French Universities against any that would maintain the positions of Bellarmine or the doctrine of a power in the Pope for deposing Kings all these four arguments I say to speak no more shew there was no need that the Sorbonists in the said Propositions to their own King should expresly or any other way than by the bare Propositions in themselves protest they declared them sincerely without equivocation or mental reservation And so many former no less known heavy and home censures not only of Sorbon and Paris but of all other Universities in France against that very doctrine of any power whatsoever and consequently against that which is called by new names direct or indirect ordinary or extraordinary and casual or supernatural spiritual celestial divine c. in the Pope for deposing Kings evict this confession likewise That there was no need Sorbon should to those their own propositions in the year 1663. add any new censure at all of the contrary doctrine To all which and as well concerning that of equivocation as this of censure may be added that the Sorbon-Facultie's purpose in determining and presenting the foresaid six propositions to the French King on the eighth of May 63. was only to wipe off the false aspersion which some had lately and groundlesly cast upon them as if they had held the contrary in terminis Which to have been their chief purpose may be seen by that Title of theirs prefixed to the same six propositions Declaratio Facultatis Sorbonicae contra quasdam propositiones falso impositas eidem Facultati Now who sees not that to this end it was sufficient to give the contrary or contradictory propositions without any kind of addition or explication And who sees not that our case or that of our said Congregation of Dublin of the Irish Roman Catholick Clergy was wholy different in all particulars both the doctrine and practice contrary to the plain sincere and obvious meaning of the said six propositions conceived by men that are no Sophisters hath been and is with all truth and justice grounded on sad long and manifold experiences as withal the doctrine and practice of equivocation and mental reservation charged on the generality that is on the far greater part for number of the said Irish Clergy and their Representatives And neither of them have ever yet except only those few Subscribers of the Remonstrance of 61. for ought appears either in this age or any former since the debates arose first by Books Declarations Propositions or otherwise under their hands or names any way censured that pernicious doctrine or practices following it of the Pope's power or pretence of power for deposing Kings c. as neither the doctrine of equivocation or mental reservation in such cases as ours or in any other soever But to shew what only now remains that Sorbon had that all the rest of the Catholick Universities of the Gallican Church and kingdom had lately before and both sufficiently and smartly too censured the positions contrary to the foresaid three or that of any power or pretence of power in the Pope to deprive or depose Kings raise their Subjects or the people otherwise subject in rebellion against them I will give here out of very many others those censures only of the said Faculty of Sorbon fourth of April 1626. and of the whole University of Paris the 20th of April the same year against the said uncatholick doctrines And further only add the prosecution of the same censure by the other seven Universities of France the same year too All which the late Author of the Quaeries on the Oath of Allegiance hath rendred in English and prepared to my hand as extracted out of a Book lately before printed at Paris Entituled A Collection of divers Acts Censures and Decrees as well of the Vniversity as of the faculty of Theology at Paris The Title of that of Paris and consequently of that of Sorbon therein is A Decree of the Vniversity of Paris made by the Rector Deans Proctors and Bachelors of the said Vniversity in a General Assembly had on the 20th of April 1626. at the Matutines And then immediatly follows the Decree it self in these words to a tittle It having been represented by the Rector that the sacred Faculty of Theologie moved as well by their ardent zeal and fidelity towards the Church His most Christian Majesty and his Kingdoms as also by the true and perfect love which they bear to right and justice and following therein the illustrious examples left by their Predecessors in like cases upon mature examination af a certain Latin Book Entituled A Treatise of Heresie Schisme Apostasie c. and of the Popes power in order to the punishment of those crimes printed at Rome 1625. had in the 30. and 31. Chapters of Heresie found these propositions That the Pope may with temporal punishments chastise Kings and Princes depose and deprive them of their Estates and Kingdoms for the crime of Heresie and exempt their Subjects from the obedience due to them and that this custom has been alwaies practised in the Church c. and thereupon had by a publick just and legal sentence on the 4th of April censured these propositions of that pernicious Book and condemned the doctrine therein contained as new false erroneous contrary to the law of God rendring odious the Papal Dignity opening a gap to Schisme derogative to the soveraign authority of Kings which depends on God alone retarding the conversion of
Infidels and heretical Princes disturbing the publick peace tending to the ruine of Kingdoms and Republicks diverting Subjects from the obedience due to their Soveraigns and precipitating them into faction rebellion sedition and even to commit Parricides on the sacred persons of their Princes The Rectors Deans Proctors Batchelors and whole Vniversity have made this Decree That the sacred Faculty of Theology ought highly to be commended for having given a judgment so pious so religious so wholsome against so wicked and dangerous a Doctrine for having so opportunely held forth to the whole Church but especially to all France the clear light of ancient and orthodox Doctrine for having so gloriously followed the illustrious generosity of their Predecessors and performed a task not only becoming their particular profession to defend the truth but deserving the imitation even of the whole Vniversity it self And to obstruct altogether the very entrance of this new and pernicious doctrine and cause all those who now are or hereafter shall be members of this Vniversity or merit promotion to any degree therein to remember for ever to form and regulate their opinions according to the judgments pronounced by that sacred Faculty and keep at utmost distance from the doctrine so justly proscribed and that every one in particular may fly detest and abhor it and as well in publick as privat combat confute and convince its falsity They do decree that in the next solemn procession as also annually in the Assembly for the procession general immediatly after opening the Schools in the month of October this censure shall publickly be read by the Proctor of the University the first business nothing to intervene and recorded in the Registers of each Faculty and Nation and that two Copies hereof written and signed by the hand of the Clerk of the sacred F-culty of Theologie shall be kept in the common Records of the University and the like number be sent as soon as may be to all Superiours of Colledges and Houses to the end all possible care and diligence be used to secure all those who frequent or reside in the said Colledges from the corruption and poyson of this pernicious doctrine and that they never give way that any person whatsoever presume to say or do any thing contrary to what has so wisely been determined and ordained by that sacred Faculty If any Doctor Professor Master of Arts or Scholler resist and disobey or go about in any sort by word or writing on any cause or pretence whatsoever to offer at the least attempt or make the least opposition against this so laudable and legal a censure let him for a note of infamy and ignominy be expelled and deprived of his degree faculty and rank by a sentence that may for ever cut off all hope of admittance Quintaine Scribe of the University The like Decrees and censures have been made and past on the same occasion and against the same doctrine that the Pope can punish Kings with temporal punishments depose or deprive them of their Kingdoms or Estates c. and have been publickly enacted by these other several Universities following as appears too out of the foresaid Collection of Divers Acts c. By the Vniversity of Caen assembled in the Convent of St. Francis 7. May 1626. By the Vniversity of Rheims the four Faculties being assembled in the Chappel of St. Patrice 18th May 1626. By the Vniversity of Tholouze the Rector and professors of all the Faculties being assembled in St. Thomas's School at the Dominicans 23. May 1626. By the Vniversity of Poitiers assembled at the Dominicans 26. June 1626. By the Vniversity of Valence assembled in the great Hall 14. July 1626. By the Vniversity of Burdeaux assembled at the Carms 16. July 1626. By the Vniversity of Bourges all the Deans and Doct●rs-Regent of all the Faculties assembled by the Rector 25. November 1626. By all which the said doctrine was condemned as false erroneous contrary to the word of God pernicious seditious and detestable And so I conclude this my third Treatise or my considerations of the foresaid three Sorbon-propositions as applied by the Congregation to our own gracious King and themselves or Catholick Clergy and people of Ireland Or which is the same thing my considerations of what the said three single Propositions do signifie as from them and as to any further or clearer assurance of their fidelity hereafter to the King or Government in the cases controverted than that was they had before signified by the former paper of their Remonstrance alone without any such additional propositions Now to their third or last paper I mean that of their reasons given to my Lord Lieutenant why they would not subscribe the other three or the three last of those six of Sorbon applyed mutatis mutandis to our King and them selves THE FOURTH TREATISE CONTAINING Answers To the reasons presented in writing to His Grace the Twentieth of June 1666. by Father John Bourk Vicar General of Cashil and Father Cornelius Fogarty D. V. I. in behalf of and by Commission from the Congregation The title of the said writing or reasons being The reasons why we the Roman Catholick Clergie signed not the other three propositions But no hand or Subscription either of Secretary Speaker or any other not even of those very Commissioners that delivered it unto the Paper BEcause that writing is somewhat long and I have already given it intirely and consequently word by word in my first Treatise or Narrative where the Reader may turn to it I will onely take it here by pieces as I have in my second Treatise their Remonstrance And having little to say to the title nor else but what I hope will appear in the procedure and conclusion of these answers which is that I might as justly prefix to this Treatise of mine as a Gentleman in England since the Kings Restoration did to a piece of his own this other title The Jesuits reasons unreasonable and that Father N. N. of the Society can tell his Clients the misterie of such prefixion or application as who hath been as well the chief contriver of those reasons as he was next the Chairman the grand obstructer of the Subscriptions unto I mean the three last propositions I observed their said writing consists of five Paragraphs Whereof the first though short enough truly yet comprehends in general their reasons The following other four are only to prove by induction and by special instance of their rejected propositions and consideration of them what is said so in general is that first Paragraph Which Paragraph therefore they begin and conclude in those words Because we conceive them not any way appertaining to the points controverted And though we did we thought we had already Sufficiently cleared all scruples either by our former Remonstrance seperatly or jointly with the first three propositions we had already subscribed But to make us believe or conceive these reasons as reasonable they give first
inclination to nor any the least tincture of a Iansenist And if what I have said here conclude me to be a Iansenist I profess my self one But if it do not as I am sure it doth not then I am none at all it not such a one as Father N. N. and the Congregation should and ought and must profess themselves in life and death if they will not live and dye out of the Catholick Church Whence it appears evidently that whatever Father N. N. intended by his few Iansenists that furthered this dispute I cannot be comprehended amongst such And I have shewed already there is none remaining to be rightly or justly intended by such But for as much as whether he really meaned any or no or entertained in his own breast with or without ground that suspition of any or no but onely intended this jealousie as a meer trick to abuse the unlearned Roman Catholicks in the reading of his paper with some kind of specious pre●ence for not signing and consequently fixed on this of Iansenisme as the most proper to strike the greatest horrour into them of a doctrine furthered by such men as Iansenists so lately and solemnly condemned by three Popes of Heresie as he sayes I thought also fit but by no trick at all further yet a little to disabuse the readers of that unreasonable writing of his by giving here exactly and sincerely all those very doctrines which imputed to Iansenius whether found in his book or no and whether in his sense or no have been so condemned by three Popes already and are those onely which gave the name of Iansenists to such as before that condemnation maintained them in the sease they conceived them written first by Iansenius himself for such of these doctrines I mean as they allow to be in Iansenius and still maintain that neither all are found in him nor any of all condemned in his sense In giving of which I have no further end than that such readers by comparing those doctrines to this dispute may themselves be judges of this truth also that our present dispute of the Popes fallibility or infallibility without the consent of the Church hath no kind of relation to them nor they to it And of this other too that F. N. N. hath indeed no less impertinently than invidiously brought this to question The doctrines therefore of Iansenius or imputed to him in whatever sense are these following here commonly called the five condemned Propositions 1. Aliqua Dei praecepts hominibus justis volentibus et conantibus secundum praesentes quas habent vires sunt impossibilia deest quoque illis gratia qua possibilia fiant 2. Interiori gratiae in statu naturae lapsae nunquam contradicitur 3. A● merendum et demerendum in statu naturae lapsae non requiritur in homine libertas â necessitate sed sufficit libertas â coactione 4. Semipelagiani admittebant praevenientis gratiae interioris necessitatem ad singulos actus etiam ad initium Fidei et in hoc erant haeretici quod vellent gratiam esse ●alem cui posset humana voluntas vel resisterevel obtemperare 5. Semipelagianum est dicere Christum pro omnibus omnino hominibus mortuum faisse et sanguinem fudisse Now let any man that understands reason be judge whether the dispute of the Popes fallibility or infallibility without the consent of the Church and the decision of it in the negative against the Pope cannot be furthered by any either privatly or publickly under-hand or overboard but he must fall under the suspicion of maintaining those five so condemned propositions or some ●ne of them For my own part I protest again in the presence of God I neither have maintained nor do nor will any of them unless first determined by the known consent of the Church or that of a General Council And yet I have done already and will hereafter do what becomes me to further this dispute now in hand and the decision of it already by the Catholick Universities of France against the Popes infallibility without the consent of the Catholick Church And I know others have done so before I or Iansenius was born And that all the world can do so without either formal or virtual or consequential relation to them or any of them whether they be true or false heretical or not found or not in the Book or Works of Iansenius or by those three Popes or any of them condemned or not in his meaning To his last pretence or the disturbance of both King and Countrey which he hath kept for his Triarii for his very last and strongest and surest reserve and therefore gives it in these very last words of his Paper I need not say more in this place having said so much already before to falsifie this supposition of his side and verifie it of my own against him but that were it true as he alleages it he had indeed behaved himself for so much like an Orator or Sophister of repute reserving his best argument of all to conclude all In fine triumphat Orator That being it is so manifestly false in his sense and to his purpose I wonder with what confidence he alleages it That he could not give his cause a more deadly wound than by rubbing up again our memory of this consideration That I have shewed already it is not this dispute of that sixth Proposition against the Popes infallibility and resolve of it in the negative which only was the dispute and the resolve intended all along by those that furthered it in their Congregation that can be said to be to the disturbance of either King or Countrey but the contrary dispute and resolve for that pretended infallibility must be that in this matter which ever yet since it first began hath been accompanied infallibly in several parts of the world with the disturbance of both and not with the disturbance only but with ruine also of King and Countrey together nay and of the Church too no less than of the State Politick or Civil That this latter kind of dispute and resolve for which F. N. N. and his Congregation or at least very many of them would fain be if they knew well how are already and too notoriously known to be the very first grand and necessary fundamental of the superstructure of that other so false dangerous and destructive pretence of the power direct or indirect or whatever else you call it in the Pope for deposing Kings and licencing Subjects to rebel against them That whether so or no yet no man can deny this latter pretence of power from God to depose Kings and raise their Subjects against them to be altogether insignificant where it comes to the test of reason or even of Scripture or Traditional dispute amongst rational knowing men without that other of infallibility concomitant and unseparably annexed That if so many late and sad experiences at home within this last century of years or
propositions of this paper at large and with all clearness discharged our duty as to the three first of those fi● of Sorbon and that now remain only the three last 13. We declare further it is our unalterable resolution proceeding freely from the perswasion of a good Conscience and shall be ever with Gods grace First never to approve or practice according to any doctrine or positions which in particular or general assert any thing contrary to His Majesties Royal Rights or Prerogatives or those of his Crown annexed thereunto by such Laws of England or Ireland as were in force before the change under Henry the 8th And never consequently to approve of or practice by teaching or otherwise any doctrine or position that maintains any thing against the genuine liberties of the Irish Church of the Roman Communion as for example that the Pope can depose a Bishop against the Canons of the said Church Secondly not to maintain defend or teach that the Pope is above a General Council Thirdly also never to maintain defend or teach That the Pope alone under what consideration soever that is either of him as of a private person or Doctor or of him as of a publick Teacher and Superiour of the universal Church or as Pope is infallible in his definitions made without the consent approbation and reception of the said Church even we mean in his definitions made either in matters of discipline or in matters of faith whether by Briefs Bulls Decretal Epistles or otherwise 14. Lastly we declare it is our unalterable resolution and shall be alwayes by Gods grace That if the Pope should or shall peradventure be at any time hereafter perswaded by any persons or motives to declare in any wise out of a General Council or before the definition of a future General Council on the point or points against the doctrine of this or any other the above propositions in whole or in part or against our selves or any others for owning or subscribing them We though with all humble submission to his Holiness in other things or in all spiritual matters purely such wherein he hath power over us by spiritual commands according to the Canons received universally in the several Roman Catholick Churches of the world shall notwithstanding continue alwayes true and faithful to our Gracious King Charles the Second in all temporal things and contingencies whatsoever according to the true plain sincere and obvious meaning and doctrine of all and every the fourteen propositions of this paper and of every part or clause of them without any equivocation mental reservation or other evasion or distinction whatsoever and in particular without that kind of distinction which is made of a reduplicative and specificative sense wherein any such may be against the said obvious and sincere meaning and consequently vain and unconscionable in this matter QUERIES CONCERNING The LAWFULNESSE of the Present CESSATION AND OF THE CENSURES AGAINST ALL CONFEDERATES ADHERING unto it PROPOUNDED By the RIGHT HONOVRABLE the SUPREME COUNCIL to the most Reverend and most Illustrious DAVID Lord Bishop of OSSORY and unto other DIVINES WITH ANSWERS GIVEN and SIGNED by the said most Reverend PRELATE and DIVINES Printed at KILKENNY Anno 1648. And Re-printed Anno 1673. The Censure and Approbation of the most Illustrious and most Reverend Thomas Deasse Doctor of Divinity of the University of Paris and Lord Bishop of Meath I The undernamed having seriously perused and exactly examined the Answers made to the QUERIES by the Right Reverend Father in God David Lord Bishop of Ossory and by the Divines thereunto subscribing do esteem the same worthy to be published in Print to the view of the world as containing nothing either against God or against Caesar but rather as I conceive the Answerers in the first place do prove home and evidently convince the Excommunication and other Censures of the Lord Nuncio c. to have been groundless and void even of their own nature and before the Appeal and besides do manifestly convince that in case the Censures had not been such of their own nature yet the Appeal interposed suspends them wholly with their effects consequences and jurisdiction of the Judge or Judges c. And withal do solidly and learnedly vindicate from all blame the fidelity integrity and prudence of the Supreme Council in all their proceedings concerning the Cessation made with the Lord Baron of Inchiquin notwithstanding the daily increasing obloquies and calumnies of their malignant opposers In the second place the Answerers do sufficiently instruct the scrupulous and ignorant misled People exhorting them to continue in their obedience to Supreme Authority as they do in like manner confute and convince efficaciously the opposition of such obstinate and refractory persons as do presume to vilifie and tread under foot the Authority established in the Kingdom by the Assembly of the Confederate Catholicks And finally the Answerers dutifully and loyally do invite all true hearted Subjects to yield all due obedience to their Sovereign and to any other Supreme Civil Magistrate subordinate and representing the Sovereigns Supreme Authority according to the Law of God the Law of the Church and the Law of the Land Thomas Medensis Given at K●lkenny Aug. 17. 1648. Another Approbation BY the perusal of this Treatise intituled Queries and Answers I am induced to concur with other eminent Surveyors thereof That it contains nothing contrary to approved Doctrine sound Faith or good Manners and therefore that behooveful use may be made thereof by such as love truth and sincerity 7. August 1648. Thomas Rothe Dean of St. Canie And Protonotary Apostolick c. Another Approbation HAving perused by Order of the Supreme Council the Queries propounded by the Supreme Council c. with Answers given them by the Right Reverend DAVID Lord Bishop of Ossory and other Divines and being required to deliver my sense of this work I do signifie That I find moving in the said Queries of Answers against Catholick Religion good Life or Manners but much for their advancement and great lights for the discovery of Truth I find by evident proofs declared that the Council in this affair of Cessation Appeal interposed against and other proceedings had with the Lord ●uncio and his adherents 〈◊〉 themselves with a due resentment of the general destruction of the Kingdom and with is true and knowing zeal of Loyalty for the maintenance of the Catholick Religion Justice lawful Authority the lives estates and rights of the Confed●ran●s I find by uncontroulable reasons proved That the Confederates cannot without worldly ignomity and Divine indignation f●ll from the said Cessation while the condition are performed and time expired I find lastly hence and by other irrefragable arguments That all and every of the Censures pronounced either by the Nuncio or any else against the Council or other Confederates upon this ground of concluding or adhering to the Cessation are unreasonable unconscionable invalid void and against Divine and Humane Laws