nor governed as Worldly Kingdomes are by Treasuries and Officers and Armies To omit that a Kingdom of this World though received and governed another way then usually Kingdomes are is still a Kingdome of this World for the World is the World let it be governed how 't wil this seems to me to say that the Kingdom of Christ is no Temporal Kingdom For temporal Kingdoms can not subsist nor go on without such things and he that says his Kingdom had them not says plainly his Kingdom was such a Kingdom which needed none of those things Which in other words I think is to say it was not a Temporal Kingdom Again say they the Kingdom of Christ is therefore said not to be of this world because at that time most worldly Kingdomes were got by injustice and governed by wicked and idolatrous Laws and such the Kingdom of Christ was not But pray the Kingdomes now a days establisht with Justice and governed with equity are they not Kingdomes of this World Or did Constantine forfeit his worldly Empire by abolishing those Idolatrous Laws and making better in their places Strange Interpretors of Scripture Who would make worldly Kingdoms inconsistent with vertue and Kings cease to be Kings when they turn good men and most deserve to be so Besides if the world were divided into Kingdomes however unjustly got and wickedly governed t' was yet divided into Kingdomes and what Room was then left for Christ Would they have him a King and give him no Kingdome or a Kingdom no where Farther what can be said why he did not establish his just Kingdom in the place of those wicked ones and take so much injustice out of the World I think nothing but only this that his Kingdom was of another nature made to take away injustice from all Dominion from none I say nothing of the impertinence of alledging injustice in the beginning of Empires a position which would shake the Foundations of the most setled Governments and leave few Princes secure of their Titles A third answer is that his Kingdom is not of this World because not onely of this World but of Heaven and Earth and all Creatures as if this World and more were not this World Besides it mistakes the question too which is not of the extent of his Power to which every Body knows that every thing is subject but of the manner whether besides the omnipotence of his divine nature and the spiritual Regality of his humane there were in him a Temporal power and he were appointed by his Father as Saul to judge the People and go before them 1 Reg. 21.8 and fight their battles This is what the Scripture tells us People expect from their Kings and who speaks not to this speaks not to the question Farther they say that Christs Kingdom is not of this world because worldly Kingdomes are over Bodies his over Souls worldly Kingdomes require obedience to a Temporal Prince his knowledge of and obedience to the Prince of Heaven worldly Kingdomes are extinguisht by death or War c. his is perpetual and immortal c. And this is to say as plain as can be said that 't is spiritual and not temporal For Temporal Kingdoms are over Bodies and if Christs Kingdom be only over Souls 't is not temporal again 't is not temporal if it can not be extinguisht for no temporal thing is immortal Farther to contra-distinguish the temporal Prince from the Prince of Heaven is directly to yield the question and change sides That prejudice should be so strange a blindness and men think to answer by saying the very same with their Adversaries To that of the division of the Inheritance they answer that what Christ refus'd was to be made Arbitrator betwixt the two Brethren But besides that to understand the place of Arbitration seems a little violent for Arbitration requires the Consent of both Parties and there appears nothing but the complaint of one against the injustice of the other His answer imports that medling with Inheritances was a thing with which he had nothing to do and that whether he thought fit or no to become an Arbitrator temporal Matters belonged not to him Again they say his signify'd he was no Ordinary Judge whose Duty and Obligation it was to determine civil Controversies but that his Jurisdiction was Voluntary and Arbitrary And if this be not to say he was not a temporal King I understand nothing for a temporal King is oblig'd by his Office to do Justice and determine civil Controversies and his power is not Voluntary and Arbitrary but Coactive and Obligatory Thirdly They answer that Christ meant his judicial power was not by humane concession as if he could not have done the business as well by Authority from Heaven as from Earth and had not been that way more empowered and more oblig'd to perform his duty Fourthly That Christ came not into the World to judge temporal things though he had full power so to do which is just what the other side says that he was not sent or empower'd by his Father for that purpose though as God he might do what he pleas'd What a pleasant folly this unresolvedness to maintain a thing is which makes people bring for answer the very position they oppose Lastly He is said to have refus'd dividing the Inheritance because Division is the work of the Devil Division of hearts indeed is so but division of possessions is a work of peace and a necessary means to Union of hearts 't is a command from God and a duty in Kings This is chiefly what is said on both sides you will judge as you see cause I for my part believe none better acquainted with the truth then Christ himself and I mean to take his word and believe his Kingdom is not of this World and I care not who knows it If I mistake his meaning and that the Kingdom which he says is not of this World prove yet to be a worldly Kingdom I shall at least have the comfort to err in very good Company and good Company you know is a thing I love sufficiently St. Cyril of Alexan. speaking of the Hyacinth in the Mytre of Aaron The Hyacinth says he De ador in spir l. 11. signifies Heaven remember therefore Christ saying my Kingdom is not of this World for Christ is not an Earthly but a Heavenly King and has all creatures under his feet St. John Chrysostom Christ says he Hom. 87. in Mat. acknowledges himself a King but a Heavenly King ' which elsewhere answering Pilate he says more clearly my Kingdom is not of this World And in another place Hom. 39. in 1 Cor. 15. Stripture knows two Kingdoms one of Adoption and Familiarity another of Creation by the Law of Making and Creating he is King of all Jews Pagans Devils Adversaries by familiarity and care he is King of the Faithful and those who willingly commit and subject themselves to him
I believe those who are of a contrary judgment will be convinc'd by what I have said neither did I go about to convince them My business was to satisfie you not to dogmatize And I hope you will perceive your Argument so answer'd that if those unquiet Spirits of fear and diffidence continue still to hant you the blame is not to be imputed to me Of two propositions which you assum'd to fix a power Paramount in the Pope upon our Faith I have shew'd a Catholick may safely deny either of both 'T is at his choice to take either way and any one does his business If he will deny a temporal Regality in Christ the difficulty is cut up by the root since a Vicar can not with any shadow of pretence challenge more then was in the Principal himself If not willing to meddle with that question he will take the other way and affirm that whatever power Chrit had he left only Spiritual to Peter and his Successors the difficulty is as fully cleared A Catholick take my word may unreprovably hold either or both and that you may have better security against your fears then my word can give you I have shewed you both maintain'd by those whom Catholicks are not permitted to reprove If all this be not enough to quiet your suspicious let me add that if you consider well you will find that of all men the Principles of Catholciks can least endure the contrary Doctrine Ask of your Fore-fathers walk in the antient Paths avoid novelties and the like are Maximes so known and universally receieved amongst them that who is known to contradict them is known so far to swerve from the acknowledged grounds of Catholick Religion Now when the authority of unquestionable antiquity is of the one side and on the other that of Authors both late and few and of no extraordinary credit a Catholick who knows what he does can so little doubt which part to take that I think he is not excusable if he so much as doubt or at least not otherwise then as zeal is excused by blindness None have that veneration for antiquity and Fathers which Catholicks pretend for they look upon them as the men who have begot them in the Gospel from whence they give them the name of Fathers as the most considerable Pillars of the Church as the principal Persons on whose attestation the Rule of Faith and Stability of Religion depends After the sacred Books of Scripture written by Divine Inspiration to which no writing of Man can be equall'd nor so much as compar'd we Reverence in the next place the Writings of the Fathers which we think useful too and the most useful of any to the understanding of the Scripture of which we hold them the best Interpreters We universally blame those of other Communions for preferring the obscurity of private interpretations before the clear light of Tradition And all these things are known and acknowledg'd by every body Wherefore since the great Lights of the Church St. Agustin and St. Hierom and St. Cyril and St John Chrysostom and St. Bernard and the rest shine clearly out and with a joint consent unanimously conspire into the same Doctrine none are so blamable as Catholicks if they oppose it And such men as Comitolus and Sermarinus and the like put into the contrary ballance weigh so little that t is shameful even that they should enter in The truth is the world goes otherwise then sharp-sighted men would think it should or could else t is not easie to conceive how it should be possible there should be found amongst those of our principles who should stand in opposition to the Fathers All that can be said is that worldly policy sometimes makes a little too bold with Christian simplicity and that preposterous zeal is very blind and therefore a very dangerous Guide And I shall take the liberty to tell you that understanding Catholicks who consider the way they take see if it were followed in other things it would mine Catholick Religion and that the men indeed perhaps by the priviledge of well meaning ignorance are Catholicks but the way is not a Catholick way Thanks be to God there are not many who walk in it and those who do I believe consider not what they do For sure I am that knowingly to sleight the Reverence due to Sacred Antiquity and set up new Masters in opposition to the Fathers of Christianity and Doctors of the Church agrees very ill with a Catholiek Spirit In fine as men will be men and God must make the World another thing then it is if we expect that all should do as they ought you will find among Catholicks some who hold the contrary Opinion but none who hold this reprovable And this I say the more confidently because I mistake very much if it be reprovable even amongst the Jesuits themselves who yet are thought the greatest Favourers of the Papal power At least I know they cannot reprove it without reproving their own best and most famous Authors Read Bellarmin de Rom. Pontif. the fourth Chapter of the fifth Book and Maldonat upon 27 Mat. and see if they do not both expresly hold and strongly prove the Doctrine of the Fathers and so far that the latter says people would make Christ a temporal King whether he will or no c. against his express declaration and that before a Court of Justice They are too long to be transcribed But if you take the pains to read them since that is safe enough from being reproved which there is no body to reprove I hope your suspicions will be at quiet However I think it but seasonable that I should and be permitted after so long a journey to rest Yours c. FINIS ERRATA PAge 3. line 13. read particular l. 36. r. were p. 7. l. 5. r. you cite p. 8. l. 1. for he r. his l. 5. r. enterfere l. 32. may r. my p. 10. l. 37. r. no extraordinary p. 17. l. 29. r. the Servants ear p. 18. l. 26. r. because he defiled l. 33. r. yet he gave l. 35. r. Rabanus p. 21. l. 6. r. dogmatically l. 9. r. any principle l. 11. r. his side p. 22. l. 8. r. suppose l. 28. r. branches p. 23. l. 22. r. Kings p. 24. l. 16. r. penetrat p. 27. l. 22. dele to l. 28. r. were disposed p. 30. l. 18. r. his answer signify'd l. ult r. resolvedness p. 31. l. 28. r. Creation By. The Fifth and Sixth OF THE Controversial LETTERS OR THE Grand Controversie Concerning The pretended Temporal Authority of POPES over the whole Earth And the True Sovereign of KINGS within their own respective Kingdoms Between two English Gentlemen The one of the Church of England The other of the Church of Rome LONDON Printed for Henry Brome and Benjamin Tooke at the Gun and at the Ship in St. Pauls Church-yard 1673. FRIEND I Must confess I am something better at ease at least I
found in the Words of Scripture as well as in all others For certainly to forfeit our Reason is a very preposterous kind of respect Now as far as I am acquainted vvith Controversie I conceive that when we deny it to be the Judge or Rule of Controversie we mean the Words abstracting from the Sence and when you affirm it is you mean the Sence abstracting from the Words For methinks you should not hold your selves or pretend to perswade us that material Sounds or stroaks of the Air or Lines drawn by a Pen are that very Word of God to which so much Respect is due especially when after so long a course of time vve have not the Original Words neither at least that vve know to be such vvhich the first Pen-men us'd but Translation upon Translation and such variety of Copies that there is no small difficulty in the choice Pray enquire and satisfie your self vvhether this be not the truth of the business for if it be I see not that you give more to the Words than vve and that vve give as much to the Sence as you For nothing can be plainer than that this Position The Sence is the Rule is no contradiction to ours The Words are not the Rule vvhich two are so far from irreconcileable that they have no opposition and may for ought appears in the Terms be both true The Terms in vvhich the Controversie is stated Scripture is Scripture is not the Rule are indeed contradictory but what we mean by these Terms has no opposition For you mean that the Truth contain'd in Scripture is without exception to be indisputably believ'd by all so that no Authority whatever it be on Earth whether Pope or Church can pretend any way to be exempted from entire submission to it and this no Catholic denies We mean the Words of Scripture because we see them daily wrested to several Sences are not alone able to give us certainty which the true Sence is And this I conceive no Protestant bound to affirm For you consult the Fathers in difficulties where you are unsatisfi'd and by their Authority either find or justifie the Sence in which you understand the Words Wherefore 't is very evident that we deny not what you affirm and you affirm not what we deny and that our only contradiction in this Point is the Contradiction of Words which we both so understand that there is no contradiction in what we mean by them For you say We must believe what Scripture saies and we say so too We say we cannot sufficiently know by the bare Words alone what Scripture saies and we must believe and you I think say not the contrary Rule then with you signifies Rule of Belief or that which is to be believed with us the Means by which we must know what we are to believe Which two are as different as may be yet both being confounded in the same word Rule make a shift with the assistance of the peevish animosity and stiff crosness of our unhappy times to keep us still at odds and expose us to the reproach of being disrespectful to Scripture for denying it to be the Judge or Rule of Controversie when all the while we agree to what you mean by Judge of Controversie Heu quantum est in rebus inane In short give us the true Sence of Scripture and if we submit not to it with all the ready Obedience due to it you shall not need to condemn us Our public Professions besides the self conviction of Conscience will condemn us to your hands but if we refuse to accept for Gods Word a wrong Sence of those words in which 't is exprest I think we shew more respect to the Word by desiring a true one than those who would impose a false one For 't is only the True sence which is indeed Gods Word and there is nothing farther from respect to it than to accept a False one instead of it Pray when a Presbyterian Interprets Scripture to the destruction of Episcopacy or an Arian to the overthrow of Christ's Deity or a Socinian of the Trinity Are you disrespectful to Scripture for rejecting their Interpretations or they for making them This we take to be the Case betwixt you and us and that you offer us wrong Sences of Scripture and then blame us for want of Respect to Scripture for not accepting them Whereof whatever be the truth which I will not meddle with this is plain that we do no more to you than you to Sectaries and therefore cannot be thought to have less respect for Scripture than your selves I have read somewhere and I cannot but think it true that for all these scandalous imputations there are none who shew that true respect to Scripture which Catholics do For besides the Reverence we bear to the Sence we have also an Authentic Copy of the words to which we tye our selves and cannot refuse in Dâ—sputation whereas others take the liberty to fly from one Copy and one Language to another as best serves their turn which a body would think were a proceeding savour'd more of a desire to justifie themselves than Reverence to those Sacred Oracles The truth is the Controversie betwixt us concerning Scripture is not about the Word of God in which we both agree but of the Means to know it and that plainly shews the true Word of God is submitted to of all hands For otherwise vve need not much trouble our selves to find it out or care what it said if vve did not acknowledge it obliged us to Belief And since you will not I presume say that a wrong Sence of the material vvords is the true Word of God or Divinely inspir'd all this hideous contempt vvherewith vve are reproacht amounts to no more than that we will not vvilfully contradict our eye-sight but think the vvords both may and are too often wrested to vvrong meanings that is that the Material vvords are not vvhat they signifie vvhich is just to say A man must needs despise the Grape if he think the Bush is not the Wine 'T is strange an Objection of so little substance should be or so obstinately prest or so universally entertain'd You too talk gravely for Company and admonish us of refusing a Judge to vvhom vve must one day submit our selves vvether vve vvill or no as if true desire to know his Sentence and true submission to it vvhen vve do know it vvere to refuse it I do not know vve refuse any thing of Scripture but your Interpretation vvhere vve think you are in the vvrong and I trust you vvill not say your Interpretation is the Judge vvho at the last day shall sit upon the quick and the dead But the Spirit of God is Gods best Interpreter say you and since that is to be had in Books Divinely inspir'd we should seek no farther How prettily does this sound and yet hovv little does it signifie To have the Spirit vvhich is in those
worse obliges you to conceal the Mischief she teaches that by the reputation of a fair Outside you may preserve your selves in a condition to appear to purpose vvhen time and opportunity make it seasonable for her to discover her injust designs If this happen I must needs profess I shall have a worse opinion of your Church than ever I had For to maintain a false or bad Doctrine which you think to be true or good is but Errour a fault which unless other Circumstances aggravate the case is very pardonable because very natural Men were not men if they were not subject to it But to teach Wickedness and keep this wickedness conceal'd from those who are not as wicked as themselves to pretend a sound Outside and carry a rotten heart has so much Malice joyn'd to the Errour that 't is abominable in a private man and I have not a name abominable enough to say what 't is in a Church After all your brags of Sanctity I hope you vvill not fall into the woe which the Gospel pronounces against Whited Sepulchres beautiful without but within full of dead mens bones and filthiness In fine if you think Bellarmins Doctrine true you have the liberty to make it consistent with Civil Government if you can I 'le promise you to consider what you can alledge as fully and impartially as you can desire and give every Argument its full weight But if you say nothing or dodge it off which is as good as saying nothing being well enough acquainted with your nature to know you are not backward to communicate any thing you can to the satisfaction of your Friends especially when it tends to the justification of your selves I shall know how to set the saddle upon the right horse and without putting you to the confusion of revealing the shame of your Mother conclude you are forbidden to speak and though you were not allow you do wisely to say nothing where nothing is to be said that can make for your justification The Jesuite Fisher was commanded by King James to deliver his Sence of this amongst other Points propos'd to him And he Answered the rest but past this over with this plain Confession for his excuse That he was forbidden to speak of that Subject If you follow his Example I shall believe you have one Religion vvhich you publish for your Reputation and another vvhich you conceal for your Interest I shall expect your Answer vvith impatience and in the mean time remain Your c. FRIEND I Must confess I should have thought my self oblig'd to you if you had dispenst with me in the Question you now propose so pressingly Hitherto I have said nothing but what the Fathers have said for me and hope if any man dislike any thing he will consider before he condemn it what it is to slight and oppose an Authority so venerable But now I am not only without the support of Authority for 't is not to be expected a peremptory decision should be found in the Fathers of a Question which entered not into the world till a good while after they had left it but the face of Authority is on the other side not but that I conceive the Question fully decided to those who mind Sence not Words For it appears very plainly in what I have already produc'd That the Temporal Power moves in its own sphere both Supreamly and Independently which is in truth the whole business But yet because this word Indirect is not found in the Fathers 't is still pretended that the Question is not decided by them and those who have appeared against that Power are for the most part discredited by Censures and rendred so unfit to support others that they have not been able to uphold themselves In my judgment not without partiality For they were Men of Learning and Vertue nor is any thing that I know laid to their charge more then that they thought otherwise in this Point than they think at Rome And yet they at Rome at the same time freely communicate with some who think the same and publish their thoughts and own them in the face of the vvorld However it be I so much value the content of thinking my thought quietly to my self and letting others think as they please of going unregarded on my own road and let others stray as much as they will without thinking my self bound to set them right that I know not any task you could enjoyn me to which I have a greater aversion And I must tell you frankly that were there no more in the case than the bare satisfaction of your curious humour I would intreat you to satisfie it at some other rate than the quiet of your Friend and putting him out of his easie road and setting him to strive against the stream But since with a kind of malicious importunity you profess to interpret my Silence to the disadvantage of the Church I must run the hazard of being perhaps traduc'd my self rather than suffer her to be so and think my self oblig'd to sacrifice my Humour and inconsiderable Concerns to Her honour and service Wherefore since there is no remedy but I must swallow this ungrateful Pill I pray God make it as wholsome as I find it bitter To begin then 'T is too much known that there is a Power attributed to the Pope by some more than is thought due by others and more than some Popes themselves believe for 't is written of Pius Vth. that he blam'd the groundless flattery These Favourers of the Pope are divided into two branches Some giving him an absolute Direct Power over all both Spirituals and Temporals Others restraining his Direct Power to Spirituals but extending it to Temporals too in as much as they have reference to Spirituals The former is call'd the opinion of the Canonists they being most of that Opinion who hold it the later is the opinion of Divines who generally go this way Now if there were nothing in the case but the Authority of the Maintainers and strength of the Reasons by which they maintain it People might dispute with freedom and let the strongest Argument carry it But Popes have taken part and own'd this Power and though they have not determin'd either the way or the thing yet they take it for granted they have it some way and proceed upon it By this means it has got the face of Authority and the universal Reverence we bear our Chief Pastour as it inclines many to think well of all that is favourable to him so it awes the rest who do not into a shiness of contradicting it So that of Learned Men those who write of this Subject write generally in favour of it those who think otherwise chuse other Subjects to write of as in truth there is but little reason to disgust Higher Powers meerly to shew there Learning But this reservedness has been so much taken notice of that long since it has been
was a scurvy thing to jabber words and never mind what they signifie For there is nothing in all this which Indirect power can mean but Direct Power In fine there is no way to make this Power Indirect but by saying either that the Pope when he commands Deposition does not command Deposition which for my part I would not do because I fear I should tell a lye or else that Deposition does not follow from that from which it follows and if I should say this too I fear I should tell two lies But however since Indirect sure must be some way opposite to Direct The Popes Power to be Indirect must be some way not directed to Deposition Which way this should be he must be wiser than I that can tell If Determination or Intention would do it sure it cannot be thought he is not determin'd or does not intend to do that which he commands And if the Directness be taken as it ought from the immediate influence of the power upon the effect we see he precisely commands this particular effect and 't is maintained this effect must follow in vertue of that command Now if any man can understand how a Power should be Indirect in respect of an Effect to which it is directed all the ways by which Power can be directed I would gladly be directed to that man to learn of him how nonsence may become sence But till I do meet him I must needs think that this distinction of Direct and Indirect in this case is a meer sound of words which signifie nothing and by which the Authors speculate themselves into nonsence and abuse themselves and their Readers I am not ignorant that those who maintain this Indirect Power speak otherwise of it but I think I speak as all men besides themselves speak and know not by vvhat right they force upon vvords meanings proper to their purpose and contrary to what general custom has fixt upon them To alter common and setled Notions is to perplex and embroyl things and condemn the inquiries of men to hopeless and endless confusion For Truth is discovered by seeing the connexion of Notions and Notions are known by Words and if the Notions belonging to vvords remain not steady and unchanged our search after Truth must needs end in uncertain noise and inextricable blunder He who has the liberty to alter the notion of vvords is empowred to maintain any thing If he take a fancy to defend that Jet is vvhite 't is but by vvhite meaning black and the business is done Where I see Notions changed I am mighty suspicious there is a design upon some Truth or other in the Changers And so I fear it happens in our case For if Indirect Power mean according to the apprehension of men Power to an Indirect effect Those who will maintain in the Pope an Indirect Power must to speak sence say that though he has not immediately and properly Power to Depose yet he has power to do something out of which Deposition vvill follow And this they vvould fain be at For give them their due they are no enemies to sence vvhile sence is no enemy to them They offer therefore sometimes at Excommunication and vvould make us believe that from thence must follow Deposition Excommunication is vvithout doubt a proper effect of Spiritual Power and so comes vvithin the sphere of the Popes activity and if it vvould but follow that an Excommunicated Person can have no Communication no vvay and vvith none An Excommunicated Prince vvould by that means be Deposed For he could not govern those vvith vvhom he could have no entercourse and if he could no longer govern he vvere no longer King This now is sence and intelligible but the mischief is it will not do They find Excommunication when they consider it a little better hinders indeed Communion in Spirituals but if there be any temporal tye to the Excommunicated person as of a Wife to a Husband a Servant to his Master all Subjects to their Prince Excommunication leaves this as entire and strong as it was before Any that has business with him may deal with him notwithstanding his Excommunication For it would be fine if when an Excommunicated person ows me mony I should not require my debt of him because he is Excommunicated Wherefore no Excommunication will hinder a Prince from conversing freely with his Subjects and his Subjects with him Nay they are obliged to all the acts of Duty to which they were before and not to become faulty themselves if perhaps their Prince be so Wherefore because this will not hold water they will not trust to it but think it safer to make bold with a word and give it a new notion than venture the cause upon a foundation which they are conscious will fail them 'T is a great deal better to talk a little non-sence than by obstinately sticking to sence hazard the loss of a good Cause That the Pope shall have power to depose Kings come what will they are resolv'd And because the Canonists do not thrive very well with their extravagance of making him sole and absolute Monarch of the World they think fit to be a little more modest and allay the bold heat with sprinckling this Indirect vpon it But then the notion of that word importing what they cannot make good there is no remedy but they must give it another If they could have kept the sence too it would have been so much the better but since that will not be they think it at least something if their Tenet let it signifie what it will sound not altogether so harshly as the Canonists with which they perceive the World not very well pleas'd Bellarmine therefore applies this lenitive and saies the Pope disposes of Temporals only Indirectly but whether he forgot the impertinent Circumstance or had any other reason never tells us what that word means in his Rom. Pont. where he first uses it but leaving it to shift for it self and us to guess what it means goes on to prove the power which he calls Indirect never offering to shew that 't is Indirect Neither is there any mention or use made of the word that I perceive in the whole course of his Arguments So that 't is manifest Power was the thing for which he was concern'd For the Indirect he thought it no great matter what became of it being perhaps in his own judgment but an insignificant sound without influence upon the thing Nevertheless against Barclay when he had bethought himself he kindly tells us what he means The Popes Power says he is per se and properly spiritual and therefore has reference Directly to spiritual matters as the primary object but Indirectly that is in order to Spirituals reductively and by necessary consequence to use that phrase looks upon Temporals as a secundary object to which it applys not it self but upon occasion casu or casualiter as the Canon speaks This is if you