had no other fault but that it is placed by you in the same line and predicament as to the lawfulness of taking it with the oath of Suprecacy Catholiks are bound to refuse it neither can a Franciscan Friar who reproaches Roman Catholiks with rashness and obstinacy for not taking the oath of Supremacy expect to be their Spiritual Director but rather to be concluded by them an Apostat and must not take ill if his writings should be reiected and burnt as heretical Seing therfore Mr. Walsh your arguments pretending to proue that the two general Councells of Ephesus and Calcedon as well as the Prouincial of Afrik taught the doctrin which Roman Catholiks except against in the oath of Supremacy are found to be mistakes what other arguments do you produce to conuince Catholiks of rashness and obstinancy for not taking that oath None but your own authority nothing but your saying that the Roman Catholik Church hath err'd rashly and obstinatly for these 600. last years because it admitted not a Spiritual Supremacy in temporal Soueueraigns Realy Mr. Walsh I do not belieue your sole authority is a sufficient argument to proue the Church hath erred To proue so rash an assertion you would fain make us mistrust the testimonies of holy and learned Authors of the Church History as Baronius Bellarmin and others They are Impostors you say hired by the Court of Rome to diuest Emperors and Kings of their right of gouerning spiritual and ecclesiastical affairs and to place it in the Pope Your words page 40. to the Reader are If the truth were known it would be found that Baronius and the rest fallowing him were willing to make vse of any malitious vngrounded fictions whatsoeuer against lustinian the Emperor This Justinian was in the later end of his dayes an heretik and took vpon him to make lawes in matters of Faith but he dyed sudenly before he could publish them Yet before he was an heretik he made good Edicts in fauor of the true Faith and for this he is commended by Popes and Councells as a Catholik as also because it s sayd he was reconcil'd at his death Now you Mr. Walsh say that the ancient and modern writers knew well enough he was neuer an heretik but that they diffame him as an heretik because his laws in Ecclesiastical matters euen those of Faith are a perpetual eysore to them because these laws are a precedent to all other good Princes to gouern their own respectiue Churches in the like manner without any regard of Bulla Caenae or of so many other vain allegations of those men that would make the world belieue it vnlawfull for secular Princes to make ecclesiastical lawes by their own sole authority Truly Mr. Walsh I haue endeuored to know the truth of those two Cardinals Bellarmin and Baronius and do find they were both holy humble men so farr from being hir'd by the Court of Rome that neither of them could be persuaded by it to accept of more for their maintenance than what was absolutely necessary for their dignity They liued and dyed in the list of the poor Cardinals both were named Cardinalls against their will both industriously sought to make themselues vncapable of the Popedom Twenty dayes did Baronius resist in the Conclaue the offers and importunities of the Cardinals his friends who were able and resolued to make him Pope vntill at length he persuaded them to choose Leo 11. Both these Cardinals virtues are so conspicuous that many press for their Canonization and it s belieued it will be obtain'd God working Miracles to testify that they deserue it This is the truth Mr. Walsh and the world blames you very much for calling such men Hirelings Impostors c. What shall your friends say to excuse you when they heare you call'd an ignorant spitefull heretik for calumniating such holy men as these Som who obserue your actions say you are hired to write these calumnies and that you haue chosen rather so base and mercenary a way to damn your self and others than to liue quiet and serue God in your Cell according to your rule and profession Good God Mr. Walsh is this possible Can you sell your own soul and the reputation of Saints for such paltrey stuff and at so low a rate as 200. per an If this be true you are vnhappy but Gods mercy expects your repentance for which we your friends can but pray Others think you despair not by your litle bookes and this great Volume to gain the fauor of temporal Soueraings I can not belieue they will by your persuasion degenerat from the example of their renown'd Predecessors and particularly from that of Constantin the great who was so far from making laws for ecclesiastical matters or persons or medling with matters of Faith that his saying and maxim was a Rufinus lib. 10. hist cap. 2. S. Gregor lib. 4. epist 45. speaking to the Bishops Ves Dij estis a summo Deo constituti aequum non est vt homo iudicet Deos I do not think I say Mr. Walsh that Christian Princes will degenerat from this example applauded by all the world when Christianity was in its primitiue purity to follow that of the Emperor Iustinian when he fell from the Faith of Christ Would it not be rashness both in Soueraigns and Subiects to preferr your bare testimony who are to my griefe reported to be the greatest lyar and Impostor in the world before the joint testimony of all orthodox writers and the practise of the whole Roman Catholik Church euer since it began to florish vnder Constantin the great Many except against your stile as well as against the matter You excuse page 43. of your Preface the meanness or rather sadness of your stile all along your book you took no care you say of the language though you took enough of the matter In my opinion you are more faulty in the choice of your matter than in your expression of it But you thought perhaps the matter was so good and necessary for the Saluation of souls that you b Ibidem pag. 43. enlarged often and repeated the same things not seldom where you needed not were your design to write only for the learned or those of quick apprehension But seing those you intended chiefly to speak vnto were the Roman Catholik Clergy of Ireland wherof very few are great Clerks you chose that manner of writing for their sake that the meanest of them might vnderstand whateuer you would be at I am sory to heare this Mr. Walsh will you disgrace your own nation One of them spoke thus to me of you How comes none of the Roman Catholik Clergy of Ireland to haue as quick an apprehension and as much learning as Peter Walsh their Countreyman and one who spent his time more idely than most of them Is it because his forwardness in promoting protestancy against his conscience and his importuning great men to be made an instrument
Ormond But what is most falsely asserted by Peter Walsh is that in my answer I did giue a touch of the murther he is charged with I toucht not any such thing I am sure I did not intend to be his Accuser in any cause of bloud and I hindred others from accusing him as my Brother Iohn Talbot had also don nay I had him aduertised of his danger by a friend of his own as soon as Father Cauenagh and Father Bremingham attested the murther at Castleton in presence of my Lord Dongan Mr. Chasles White of Leixslip my self and others For though his barbarous inhuman cruelty if what is said of him be true deserues ten thousand deaths yet I would not for all the world concurr to it The thankes he gaue me for letting him know his danger to the end he might retire to his Conuent and do pennance for his sins was to misinforme the honorable House of commons and the committee of Religion by one of the two Mr. Warnhams commonly known by the name of Flahertys Varnham that I did most impudently exercise papal iurisdiction in Ireland by excommunicating and censuring his Majesties most loyal Subiects for subscribing to the Remonstrance And though this was known in Ireland to be a fable yet Mr. Varnham and som others of Friar Walsh his friends auerring it to be very true I haue sufferd much vpon that account and that infamous Friar though a known Traytor to God and the King laught in his sleeue after abusing the Parliament with notoriously false informations and insults for hauing bin so succesfull in exasperating the Caualeer party against one who endeauored to serue many of them in their exile abroad as som of them since were pleased to teftify though too late for my relief and redress of the iniury don to me My buisness is not to exaggerat this mans misdemeanors but rather to warn him once more of his danger and aduise him not to be so publik in London frequenting great Prelats and Noblemens houses vpon whom he must needs draw inconueniencies if he doth not cleer himself of treasons and murthers better then by saying in his great english Tome of Irish Rapsody that all these accusations are lyes or libels of the titular Archbishop of Dublin or of his friends and then tell his Readers he will vindicat himself in his latin Irish work Me thinks he might haue reserued som of his vnnecessary vncouth speeches and tedious repetitions for that work and in lieu therof cleer himself of those foul aspersions at least in a parentesis som of his being long enough to weary any patient Reader and to iustify any honest man This I hope is enough to vindicat me from Peter Walsh his calumnies which do not much trouble me it being the greatest honor of an honest man to be raild at by an heretik I am Your most obliged Seruant PETER TALBOT Mr. Walsh I haue bin assured by credible persons that what this Prelat sayes heer of you and himself is very true and that a man would be laught at in Ireland where these things happen'd if he question'd so notorious matters of fact wherof there are yet liuing many legal witnesses This supposed I must needs blame you for printing such lyes to discredit a Bishop or at least for not prouing what you say of him by more credible arguments than the bare assertion of your-self in your own cause If you being but a priuat person and a petty Friar say pag. 51. of your Preface that the Author of the Dublin libel for writing against you som pretended vntruths ought by the ciuil lawes to be put to death and by the Canon of Pope Adrian be stript naked and whipt with scourges if he can not proue the truth of the particulars of his libel what will the world say of you for writing manifest vntruths of an Archbishop Especialy when you can not proue that he is the Author or that you are iniur'd by that Dublin libel as you call it and for want of an answer to the particulars therin alleged against you remit your english Reader to a latin Irish work not yet composed not euer like to be printed I am troubled Mr. Walsh at this malitious folly of yours But patience I will now consider how your Remonstrant Church came to fail and fall ANIMADVERSION 8. How the Protestants who had formerly a good opinion of Friar Walsh his Remonstrant Church came at length to alter it and be fully conuinc't that both he and his Remonsttant Church-men are Cheats MR Walsh you complain very much pag. 577. seq of the second part of your first long Treatise that the Anti Remonstrants notwithstanding their opposition against you lost nothing either of liberty or other benefits or fanors at home from the Ciuil Magistrate from the Lord Lieutenant or Kings Majesty or his Court Council or Parliament being equal in all such for any material thing to the Remonstrants and on the other side were sure of all euen extraordinary fauors c. from their own Church and from the Conrt of Rome abroad while the Remonstrants were sure of nothing from either but slight from the one and extreme persecution from the other And these fate last years from 1667. to the end of the present year 1672 haue giuen sufficient arguments of both the one and the other During which time those poor Remonsirants had nothing to ballâ—nce all their sufferings but the bare satisfaction of conscience to be slighted so by their friends and persecuted so by their Ennemies for professing and performing their duty to the King atterding to the law of God This is a very sad story Mr. Walsh but the Dublin libel as you call it tells you an other quite contrary and you know it to be true nay you giue a hint of it in the pag 3. of your Preface to the Catholiks which needed an other Preface itself being a large book There you say that the Anti-Remonstrants persecuted your holy Church in a most surious manner with all the vilest arts of malicious Cabals Conspiraties Plots libels and an Impostor Commissary and a forged Commission What 's that Mr. Walsh An Impostor Commissary A forged Commission I pray explain yourself Did the Anti Remonstrants persecute your Remonstrance and Church by an Impostor Commissary and a forged Commission did the court of Rome send such a person and giue him such a commission If so he was no Impostor Well I see those Romans are strange men Is it possible they could be so ill natur'd as to persuade a poor Friar to play the Impostor or that he would be persuade to play the fool and knaue so egregiously meerly to vndermine your Remonstrant Church Good God in what a great mistake hath the world bin these 9. or ten years Truly Mr. Walsh 't is the persuasion of all England Ireland France and Italy that you and the Impostor Commissary agreed to persecute the Roman Catholik Clergy and vnderstood
vacant But where are your Bishops and parish Priests Must your Clergy be compos'd only of Cardinals Nay where are your sheep your flocks Mr. Walsh you name but 97. Laiks which number can not afford two Parishioners to each Pastor This is indeed a very litle flock pusillus grex but great I hope in virtue and merit Well! we will not say any thing against their persons but we will set down the fundamental principles wherby you distinguish this blessed flock from that of the Roman Catholik Church which you call Papalin puritan papist popish recusant c. Your 1. principle is that the english oath of supremacy may br a Page 16. of the Dedicatory lawfully taken by all Roman Catholiks nay that they commit a sin of rashness and obstinacy in refusing it You know Mr. Walsh all rashness and obstinacy is a sin 2. a In the Prof. pag. 40. Pref. pag. 49 That temporal Soueraigns may lawfully make lawes in ecclesiastical matters euen of Faith by their own sole authority 3. That for these 600. b Dedic page 13. last years the Roman Catholik Church hath err'd enormously for gainsaying these principles of yours 4. c Pet. Walsh sayes pag. 75. And yet I must tell my Aduersaries that such Catholik Diuines as hold the absolute fallibility of general Councels euen I mean in points of faith think they can say enough for themselâ—es c. That Roman Catholik Authors hold and maintain general Councells are not infallible in defining matters of Faith or doctrin Do you hold such Authors to be Roman Catholik Mr. Walsh If you do your are not one your-self 5. d Pag. 20. Dedic That all the Roman Catholik Bishops of the world for as many hundred years as they haue taken the vsual oath before their consecration haue bin and are now either Traitors or periur'd persons for taking it So that for all this time all general Councels were compos'd wholy of Traitors or periur'd persons 6. That Popes as Popes and Bishops as Bishops e Hâ—â—ory 1. p. sect 33. page 79 can not in conscience contribute or concurr by raising Troops or any other temporal wayes to defend the liues or rights of their lawfull soueraigns against Rebells or endeauor to restore them to their Kingdoms and Dominions if possess'd by vsurpers and Tyrants 7. That the supreme secular Princes can not grant to Clergy f 1. part of the 1. Treatise pag 417. sin men their subiects an exemption from the supreme secular judicature or from their supreme coerciue power Whence must follow that all Christian Princes haue sin'd in doing so and the whole Catholik Church err'd in commanding their piety for granting those immunities 8. That a Page 79 cit no spiritual power as such can inflict vpon any score a corporal punishment for any misdemeanors whatsoeuer particularly for heresy So that the Kings of England by virtue of their spiritual supremacy can not punish heresies And as supreme heads in temporal affairs they can as litle Whence follows that neither as spiritual nor as temporal Heads they can punish heretiks This is good newes for you and the Blakloists Mr. Walsh 9. That neither the Pope nor the b Friar Walsh in his pag 430. 1. part of the first Treatise saith I do my self as I confess I am bound most Religiously allow the â—anonization vencration and inuocation of Saint Thomas of Canterbury and all three of him as of a glerious Martyr too and not with standing I allow also all the mercies raported of him Generals of Regular Orders can inflict any corporal punishment vpon their inferior Priests or Friars for the greatest misdemeanors or for writing such follies as these of yours are Mr. Walsh This also may comfort you 10. That notwithstanding supreme temporal Princes can not in conscience or reason c Pag 429. exempt Clerks from their supreme coerciue power or Courts of secular iudicature according to your 7. principle yet God may and hath wrought great Miracles in the case of S. Thomas of Canterbury to confirm they may so exempt them and by consequence God according to your principles may encourage men to sin by miracles 11. That God may in all like cases work Miracles to assure the Church c Pag 429. that a man who dyes for defending the Church immunities is a Saint and enjoyes his Diuine sight notwithstanding those immunities could not be lawfully granted by Princes to the Church and the man who dyed for maintaining them dyed maintaining an error 12. a Fâ—iar Walsh his words ibid page 4â—9 One may be inuok't as a Martyr in the Church largely or not so strictly yet properly still if he dyes for witnessing or bearing testimony to a good zeal and great piety and excellent conscience in being constant to a cause which one esteems the more iust and generaly seems the more pious for all he knows though it be not an euangelical trnth and though perhaps too he may be deceiued in the obiectiue truth of what he dyes for This is your Creed Mr. Walsh the twelue articles of your Remonstrant Religion By this last all Iewes Turks and heretiks that are pious in their own way and dye for their erroneous Tenets are properly Martyrs though not so strictly and God may work Miracles to confirm the belief of their bliss piety and good conscience and by consequence all our Christian Miracles signify nothing as to the proof of the obiectiue truth of what we belieue they only proue that we mean well in belieuing the Mysteries of Faith though falie in themselues only such Christian and Catholik Martyrs whose Miracles as were wrought say you at the inuocation of God by the Saint himself or by any other that God might be pleased by working such Miracles b Page 429. to euidence the iustice of such a cause do confirm the truth of the doctrin profess'd by such a Martyr or Maintainer of it For if they had bin â—rought so the case would be cleer enough as to such who saw those Miracles or to whose knowledge authentik proofs of them di sufficiently com that enen the obedience truth and iustice of things in such a controuersy had bin on such a Saint or Martyr's side But otherwise wrought they can be no more but Diuine testimonies of his hauing wonderfully or extraordinarily serâ—ed God either â—n his life or death or both whether he was deceiued or no in som things And besides they can be no more or at least on any rational ground can not be said to be any more than Diuine testimonies of his being now with God in glory Do you say all this Mr Walsh to make the world belieue that Turks and Iewes are now with God or Saints in Gods glory Or only to proue that the Miracles wrought by God for S Thomas of Canterbury may stand very well with hauing no truth or iustice on his side in his known controuersy with King Henry 2.
And that the Churches hoâ—ouring and innoking him as a true Martyr for maintaining its immunities is no argument that he defended therin iustice or truth because forsooth neither himself nor any other did inuoke God to work the Miracles to euidence the truth or iustice of those immunities S. Thomas maintain'd against the 16. or 12. lawes or customs of Henry 2. which were all in order to take away or diminish the Popes external spiritual iurisdiction and supremacy and to assert in the King a coerciue power ouer the Clergy I pray Mr. Walsh where do you find it declared necessary that the Mysteries of Christian faith be made credible or confirm'd by a formal or express inuocation of God to work miracles for euery one of them in particular Christ himself taught that Miracles confirm any general doctrin preacht by him who works them neither doth he put that condition or caution of a particular and formal inuocation of God without which you pretend the doctrin taught or sufferd for may be false But let that pass What more express inuocation or declaration of God can you desire for the truth and iustice of S. Thomas of Canterbury's doctrin than that so notorious and so long depending a controuersy between the Church and state should suspend all Christendom there being on the one side a powerfull Monarch who stood for the pretended right of Kings on the other but a poor banish't subiect though a Bishop to maintain that of the Church and that this poor man hauing bin murther'd by flattering Courtiers for maintaining the Church immunities God should work so many and so vndeniable Miracles at his dead body and Tomb that you are not only fore't to confess they are true ones but that King Henry 2. himself acknowledged S. Thomas had the truth and iustice on his side And therfore to satisfy God and the world rather for his vniust contest against the Church than for the Saints murther which the King neither intended nor desired that great Monarch did vndergo those corporal punishments which the Pope as his spiritual Pastor commanded him to do though you say he hath as spiritual Pastor no power to inflict vpon your self as much as a Disiplin like that which the Monks of Canterbury gaue King Henry 2. We haue related the principles of your religion and Remonstrance out of your own Alcoran your great volum is no better than Mahomet's Alcoran now let vs see what practises did flow from such principles ANIMADVERSION 7. Of the practises of Friar Walsh his Remonstrant Church IF the Roman Catholik Church of these last 600. years hath fall'n from the ancient Christian principles of loyalty due to temporal Princes as Friar Walsh pretends and all the Roman Catholik Bishops are Trayâ—ors to their Soueraigns by the oath they take at their consecration we may rather wonder God did not send sooner a holy man to reform these enormous errours than that after so long a time he should at length send Saint Peter Walsh to do it who by his good example as well as by his learned writings doth teach Catholik Subiects that allegiance from which they haue bin withdrawn for these six last Centuries Blessed be God who albeit for our sins he deferreth his mercies yet neuer fails to impart them sooner than we deserue Nor indeed could this age so infamous for murthers and rebellions against lawfull Soueraigns expect so Apostolik a Reformer as Peter Walsh hath proued himself to be You complain Mr. Walsh page 43 of your Preface to the Reader as also page 50 seqq that F. Peter TAlbot the titular Arâ—hâ—ishop of Dublin and Ring leader of the â—iâ—h Anti Remonstrants hath perseented the said Remonstrants to death as far as in him lay and that his answers to the petition you presented against him contain'd manifest vntruths you suggest also that he is thought to be Author of the Dublin Libel written against your Remonstrants directly but withall indirectly or euen principaly aiming at the most illustrous personof his Grace the Duke of Ormond Though I haue not the honor to be acquainted with that Prelat yet his being one and his writing against your accusations in his own defence mad me curious and concern'd and hauing inquir'd after the Papers which past between you I obtain'd a sight of them as also of that which you call the Dublin libel which is term'd by the Author therof a Vinâ—ication against Friar Walsh his Calumnies written by a Pastor of the Diocess of Dublin If all be true Mr. Walsh that is ther in alledged against you with particular circumstances you are the greatest Traitor and Rebel that breathes You are charg'd likewise not by Peter Talbot nor in the answer to your petition nor in the Vindication or Dublin libel but in another paper a part of murthering fiue poor English Soldiers of the garison of Raroffy in the County of Kildare at the bridge of Iohnston in the very beginning of the Irish commotion and that with such barbarous breach of faith or at least of the law of armes and incredible cruelty that it s to be admired how any who values the name or bloud of an englishman can see you much less profess to be your friend before you cleer your-self of that accusation 2. You are charged in the Vindication of being a most seditious Preacher or seducer of the people against their allegiance to the King and the royal authority residing in the Marques of Ormond Lord Lieutenant of Ireland vpon the proclamation of the peace of 1646. you seconded one Doctor Enos by approuing his infamous libel against the person and authority of his Excellency The drift and matter of the libel was to dissuade the people from admitting or adhearing to that good peace and from any agreement with the said Matques of Ormond because forsooth he design'd the Kings ruin as well as theirs This calumny Enos pretended to proue and you approued of all by commending the libel and the Author in print in the first leaf therof because his Excellency would not conclude before the yeare 46. any peace with the Irish though he had positiue and pressing commands from the King to do it but for three or four years delayd it by vnprofitable and suspitious cessations in which time the King was subdued and imprison'd and therfore his sayd Lieutenant might pretend and plead that seruice or at least a neutrality to the Parliament when they came to be Masters of all And besides his Excellency obseruing that the Erle of Glamorgan had giuen the Irish full satisfaction in the article of Religion most insisted vpon by them the Lord Lieutenant would not condescend therunto but rather declared against it imprison'd the Erle in the Castle of Dublin and therby disperst 10000. men ready to be shipt at water ford for his Maiesty's relief in England and ruin'd him by hindering that succor This was the Subiect of Enos and your libel Mr. Walsh the common sort of the Irish
take his pass as the other Colonells did Hereby the Bishop incurr'd his Kings displeasure and ruin'd the fortune of his Brother a very loyal worthy gentleman and a good Commander After the Kings happy restauration this vndutifull carriage of the Bishop was not forgot at whitehall and he not knowing how to liue in France hauing also a desire to return to his own Countrey writ to you Mr. Walsh that he would do any thing you would haue him do so he might be permitted to return and liue at home A large offer and an argument of a large conscience in circumstances wherin he knew you wanted and sought at this very time a Bishop to head your vpstart Church You took him at his word and he set his hand to to your Remonstrance Whether he repented or no at his death I know not but I am sure Friar Redmund Caron whom you canonize for a Saint pag. 759. ought to haue retracted the doctrin of his Remonstrantia Hibernorum which was stuff't with so notorious and palpable falsifications that he can not be presumed to haue bin ignorant of them But his last aduice and Adieu to you is sad and remarkable for he declared as you say pag. 760. That you were bound in conscience to prosecute still euen after his death that matter of the Remonstrance and continue the defence or aduancement of that doctrin which in his life time you had for so many years and notwithstanding so much contradiction maintain'd You do a great iniury Mr. Walsh to the memory and merit of that Illustrious and Catholik Prelat Thomas Dease quondam Bishop of Meath in ioyning him in the same page with Caron as approuing at his death of your Remonstrance and doctrin What if he did approue of the book of Queries Was there any thought or knowledge then of your Remonstrance Is there any thing in that book of Queries asserting a spiritual supremacy in Princes or denying it to the Pope Doth it say that Secular Princes by their own sole authority may gouern the Church and make Ecclesiastical lawes euen in matter of Faith Doth it maintain that Catholiks both rashly and obstinatly deny to take the oath of Supremacy and by consequence commit a sin for not taking it Doth it say the General Councells of Ephesus and Calcedon gaue as much to temporal Princes and as litle to the Pope of spiritual authority as the oath of Supremacy doth Doth it say that som Catholiks hold Generall Councells are fallible Where will you find in the book of Queries that the Roman Catholik Church hath err'd enormously in its principles and practises these last 600. years and that all the Bishops thereof are either Traytors to their Princes or periur'd to the Pope in taking the vsual oath at their consecration Doth the book of Queries teach that if Bishops as Bishops help their Soueraigns with money or armes against Rebells or Vsurpers they offend God As also that temporal Soueraings offend God in exempting the Clergy from their Secular Supreme Courts Doth the book of Queries teach that God may work Miracles to confirm a falshood or at least the Sanctity of a man who has a good intention and zeale in maintaining it or dying for it thinking it to be a truth Or that a man who dyes so for maintaining an error is properly though not strictly a Martyr Or that the whole Church when it celebrats the feast of a Saint as properly and strictly a Martvr may be mistaken in declaring and belieuing him such a Martyr though not in belieuing him a Saint in Heauen All this you maintain in Saint Thomas of Canterberies case as necessary consequences flowing from the doctrin of your Remonstrance Did Bishop Thomas Dease nay did Caron himself defend these heresies The book of Queries only asserted the lawfullness of making peace and Confederacies with Protestants and that the Popes Nuncius could not validly excommunicat the Irish Catholiks for doing so and that it was lawfull to appeal to the Pope in those circumstances and that the said Appeal did suspend the Nuncius Censures No learned Catholik denyes this doctrin But not one Catholik in the world doth or can maintain your doctrines now mention'd and therfore you are not only heretik but an Impostor pretending that they who opposed the Nuntius his Censures and practises in Ireland were your Remonstrants ANIMADVERSION 9. Whether temporal Soueraigns can exempt from their Supreme coerciue power the Clergy of their Dominions THAT they haue don so de facto is euident by the lawes and practise of all Christian Emperors and Kings especialy in England euer since Christianity florished But what 's that to the purpose if Friar Walsh say they could not de iure or in conscience Pardon me 't is somthing For though Friar Walsh his authority be very great Especialy when he hath Barclay the Poet or Romantik writer to back him yet I hope the persuasion and practise of the whole Catholik Church the belief of all Christian Princes and Prelats for so many hundred years will weigh more than the opinion of a Romantik Poet or a Remonstrant Friar Excuse then I pray Mr. Walsh poor Cardinal Belarmin whose ignorance you so much pitty for being mightily startled at this position of yours and Barklay's The temporal a Friar Walsh 1. part of his first Treatise pag. 267 Seq Princes themselues how otherwise Supreme soeuer could not can not by any law right authority or power giuen them by God or man exempt from themselues that is from their own Supreme Ciuil and euen coerciue power the Clergy men of their Dominions Sure you must needs haue a very cleer demonstration for this Tenet that forces you to hold it being so contrary to the doctrin and practise of the Church You say you haue Out with it then Mr. Walsh and let not the Faithfull be any longer foold Good Reader be attentiue 't is a profound acute argument you will find it pag. 271. cit in these words Whosoeuer haue and continue any office which essentially inuolues a power Supreme both directiue and coerciue of all Clerks within their Dominions may not deuest themselues of the power of directing and coercing the same Clerks vnless they do withal deuest themselues of that office as towards the self same Clerks Because they can not deuest themselues of the essence of that which they hold still this arguing a plain contradiction But the Office of Kings inuolues a power supream both directiue and coerciue of all Clerks within their Dominions Ergo. The Minor you must proue Mr. Walsh I haue already don that saith he and at large by very natural reason I find none but that desinition of a King for which you quote your great claslik Author Almainus de sup potest c. cap. 5. thus Aliquem esie Regem nihil aliud est quam habere Superioritatem erga subditos in subditis esse obligationem pariendi Regi c. This is all you set
six Englishmen at the bridge of Iohnston I am also accused of hauing wrested the Castle of Kilkenny from your Majesties faithfull subiects the Lord Viscomt Montgacret and put it into the Nuntius hands and this by virtue of an Excommunication writ and fixt by my own hand which is said to be the very original in my Lord Iohn Berkley's custody Sir all these are but calumnies heer I offer my self to the tryal of both Why do you not do this Mr. Walsh if you be innocent You are very forward in accusing others both to the King and Parliament of treason and after your accusations were found to be meer calumnies you haue the considence to print them in this your bundle of lyes as truths But if you scruple presenting yourself as S. Athanasius did before the King or his Lieutenant me thinks you might imitat that Saint in writing at least an Apology for yourself and confuting the calumny especialy hauing mention'd and complain'd of it in this large volum of yours wherin you repeat ouer and ouer many of yours own tedious and impertinent speeches Js it possible Mr. Walsh that you can not bring one argument or example to defend your principles that is not retorted against your person and proceedings You coin not off much better with your story and instance of Constantin the same Emperor a The Controuersy of the Donatists with Caecilianus and Felix about the controuersy between the Donatists and Caecilianus the Primat of Afrik whom those heretiks or schismatiks had accused of betraying and burning the holy scriptures in time of persecution Constantin admiring at their troubling himself a lay Prince with such matters answerd them in great anger as Optatus tells you with those words b Optat. lib. 2. Petitis à me in saetulo iudicium cum Ego ipse Christi iudicium expecto Yet they extorted by their importunity from him being then but a new Cathecumen the naming of three Bishops for Iudges of the cause but considering afterwards that without the Bishop of Rome such causes could not be canonicaly decided he remitted both parties to Melchiades then Pope bidding each take along with them ten Bishops of their own faction together with the three aforesaid French Bishops Sentence being giuen by the Pope and his Collegues in Rome against the Donatists and Caecilianus by the same sentence declared innocent the Donatists appeal'd from it to the Emperor who in a rage for their appealing to him said O rabida furoria audatia Sicut in causis Gentilium fieri solet appellationem interposuerunt But the Donatists pretending that Bishop Felix the Ordainer of Caecilianus was as guilty as any one of the Traditores and that Caecilianus and the matter of fact had not bin well examined the principal things hauing bin omitted the Emperor commanded the Proconful Aelianus to inquire very diligently into the whole buisness again which he hauing don declared Caecilianus and Felix innocent and condemned again the Donatists From this sentence also they appeald to the Emperor who as S. Augustin sayes Ep. 162. a Aug. Contra Donatistatum pertinaciam Ep. 162. Dedit ille aliud Arelatense iudicium aliorum scilicet Episcoporum non quia iam necesse erat sed eorum peruersitatibus cedens omnimodo cupiens tantam impudentiam cohibere Noque enim ausus est Christianus Imperator sic corum tumultuosas saliaces querelas suscipere vt de iudicio Episcoporum qui Romae sederant ipse iudicaret sed alios vt dixt Episcopos dedit à quibus tamen illi ad ipsum rursus Imperatorem provocare maluerunt Qua in re illos quemadmodum detestetur audistis Atque vtinam saltem ipsius iudicio infanislimis animositatibus suis finem posuissent atque vt eis ipse cessit vt de illa causa post Episcopos iudicaret à Sanctis Antistibus postea veniam petiturus c. Sic illi aliquando cederent veritati like a Christian Emperor not daring to humor so much their peruersness as to iudge of the sentence formerly giuen by the Bishop of Rome and his Collegues appointed other Bishops at Arles to iudge the cause not because it was necessary to haue an other iudgment but to giue way to their impudent obstinacy resoluing afterwards to beg pardon of the holy Bishops The Donatists hauing bin cast also in the Councell of Aries they appeald again to the Emperor who then vtter'd those remarkable words recorded by Optatus Dico enim vt se veritas habet Sacerdotum indicium ita debet haberi ac si ipse â—ominus residens iudicet nihil enim licet his alind sentire vel aliud iudicare nisi quod Christi Magisterio sum educts I speake the truth as it is saith Constantin The Priests or Bishops iudgment ought to be esteem'd so as if our Lord himself residing amongst them did iudge For they may not think nor iudge otherwise than they are taught by Christ This is the truth of the story Mr. Walsh which you corrupt pag. 348 seqq concealing Constantins sentences and sentiment of the incompetency of his own iudicature in Ecclesiastical matters related by Optatus and your contradicting Saint Augustins plain text to impose Caluins ridiculous answer consured by Belarmin and other heretiks errors vpon such as belieue you haue so much common honesty and shame as not to be a wicked falsifier and Forger T is true say you pag. 349. Constamin breaks out into this no less iust than admiring exclamation O rabidi furoris audacia sicut in causa Gentilium fieri solet appellationem interposuerunt Yet this imports not signifies not by any means that Constantin abominats the ignorance of the Appellants for hauing or as if they had against any Diuine or human rule or Canon had recourse to a lay Tribunal For had it bin so or had this been the Motiue of his Exclamation he had dismissed them and remitted them back again to their own proper Episcopal Iudges which yet he did not but admitted their Appeal But how euer this be or what euer moued Constantin to this exclamation the matter of fact which followed can not be denyed For sure enough it is that Constantin admitted this appeal You add pag. 349. This admission of the Appeal and this reexamination by Constantin and by his Councel of Orleans you ignorantly mistake all the way Orleans for Arles seems very harsh to Baronius And therfore sayes that Constantin was drawn against his will to admit so vniust an Appeal from the iudgment or sentence of the great Pontiff But to that of being drawn against his will we haue said before enough or that there was none could force him And for his admission of the Appeal I am sure Augustin neuer reprehends it I pray Mr. Walsh did not Constantin remit the Donatists to Melchiades Bishop of Rome and those others ioyn'd with him when they appeal to Constantin himself Therfore euen according to your own Confession the