Iconoclast I value them not Thus then stood things in the vvorld when Hildebrand Archdeacon of the Church of Rome was chosen to the Papacy in the year 1083 and called Gregory the VIIth The Contests which in his daies began betwixt the Spiritual and Civil Power are the reason I suppose why he is so differently represented by those who vvrite of him His Enemies give him the Character of an Imperious Tyrannical and several waies Wicked Man his Friends on the other side praise him as much and affirm he was a man of great Prudence and Vertue and so far that it hath been attested by several Miracles And for my own part I must confess I incline to believe well of him For he had been the support of the Papacy during the time of several Popes his Parts and Industry having drawn upon him the greatest weight of all business and was so far from aspiring to that dignity that if Baronius say true He treated with the Emperour not to consent to his Election assuring him before hand that if he did He would be very severe against the Abuses practic'd in his Court. Besides if Sigonius may be believ'd and the passages he relates vvhich can hardly be read vvithout horrour the Emperour was a very Wicked Man but that which concerns this matter was That all Benefices were with all the Licentiousness of a depraved Court expos'd to sale and He that could Fee a Courtier was vvithout Merit or even Capacity possest of the most considerable Preferments of the Church As this vvas a mischief palpably destructive to all Goodness so 't is not incredible from the irregularity of a debauch'd Court. And if the Pope desir'd to have it remedied the end he propos'd was but what became him if the means had been so too I am the more inclin'd to believe this true because the Germans in a great measure took part with the Pope forct the Emperour to comply and after several Traverses at last took the Crown from him and plac'd it on his Son However it were the Emperour notwithstanding the Popes Remonstrances gives consent to the Election and confirms him and the Pope was as good as his word And first Excommunicates those who should receive Investitures of Benefices from Laymen afterwards the Laymen who should grant them and lastly provok'd by the Emperour who in a Synod at Wormes had forbidden Obedience to him Excommunicates and deposes the Emperour himself And this iâ— the first unquestionable Example of this kind which has appear'd in the Christian World Bellarmin indeed and his Followers would make us believe there are Examples more Ancient but in my opinion he proves them not well and you see Onuphrius counts them but Fables and those of that Age at least those vvho favoured the Emperour exclaim'd against it as a Novelty unheard of not to call it Heresie as one faies But though the thing were now done it appears not yet in vertue of what Power 't was done As that Age was not I think extraordinary subtle the distinctions of Direct and Indirect Power were not yet found out and the Pope himself speaks in common That the care of the Christian World and Authority to bind and loose was committed to him confiding in the Judgment and Mercy of God and Patronage of the B. Virgin and supported by the Authority of SS Peter and Paul c. but descends not to particulars So that it appears not whether he acted in vertue of a Spiritual or Temporal Power Directly or Indirectly and 't is likely he speculated not so far One thing is pretty remarkable in his second Sentence for he made two which ends in this manner After he had commanded all concerned to withdraw their Obedience from Henry and yield it to Rudolphus speaking as he does all along to the Apostles SS Peter and Paul You then See the words in Platina saies he most holy Princes of the Apostles confirm what I have said by your Authority that all men at last may understand if you can bind and loose in Heaven we likewise on Earth may give and take away Empires Kingdoms Principalities and whatever mortals can have Let Kings and all Princes of the World understand by his Example what you can do in Heaven and what power you have with God and hereafter fear to contemn the commands of the Holy Church And shew this Judgment upon Henry quickly that all Sons of Iniquity may perceive that he falls from his Kingdom not by chance but by your means This nevertheless I desire from you that by Repentance he may at your request find favour of our Lord at the day of Judgment For my part I cannot imagine but a man who speaks thus must needs mean uprightly and think at least he does well Notwithstanding the Apostles did not do as he desir'd them For this Rudulphus after he had fought twice upon equal terms with the Emperour was overthrown in the third Battle and so wounded in the right hand that he dy'd of it and dy'd full of Repentance and acknowledgment of his own fault and the Justice of God who had deservedly punisht him in that hand with which he had formerly sworn Fealty and Service to his Lord. So that though I believe the Pope thought himself much in the right yet the Court of Heaven thought not fit to grant his Request but ordered things quite contrary to his expectation and desire The next famous Example is of Frederic the IId a Prince of great Power and Parts who falling out with several Popes as resolute as himself after several breaches at several times made up and several Sentences publisht and recall'd and renew'd again was at last with the astonishment and horrour of all present saies M. Paris solemnly Excommunicated and depos'd in the Councel of Lions And this made both Princes and Prelates begin to look about them foreseeing that if this deposing Power should go on a slight Pretence might at last serve turn to unthrone perhaps an Innocent Man and bring the vvorld into confusion which possibly was the cause the Popes Sentence was not executed For this Frederic notwithstanding those proceedings kept the Empire till his death which happened long after But still I see not any ground to judge whether the Power were yet thought Direct or Indirect and in likelyhood People had in common a great Veneration for the Supream Pastour and his Decrees and thought them wicked men vvho submitted not to them but what kind of Power he had and hovv far it extended as far as I can perceive they little considered 'T is observable both in this Sentence and the former of Gregory VII that the Emperour is first Deposed and afterwards Excommunicated in aggravation as it were of the former Penalty The business was a little more discust in the Contests betwixt Boniface the VIIIth and Philip the Fair of France As this Pope is Recorded for a man of more mettle than Vertue his proceedings were
writing and of the subject I take them out of Withrington and Barclay who being the latest writers I suppose have seen what was sayd before though the truth is I am forc'd to use them more by necessity then choice my library not affording me those former Books whom I would gladly see The first says Withrington is like that which Bellarmine makes against those who assert a direct Temporal Power in the Pope If the Pope have and that by Divine Right power to depose Princes in order to spiritual good this must appear either by Scripture or Tradition Tradition is not pretended Out of Scripture the two chief places are those now mentioned Mat. 16. and Joh. 21. both which he endeavours to shew are meant only of spiritual power To this Schulkenius for Bellarmin replys He labours in vain to prove these places are meant of spiritual power for this they freely grant him But say they this power which formally is spiritual is virtually temporal or his the vertue to extend it self to temporals in as much as is requisite to spiritual good And therefore Bellarmins Argument is good because he intended only to prove by it that the Popes power was formally spiritual which is true and acknowledged by Withrington But Withringtons naught because he does not prove that the Power is not virtually Temporal and cannot extend to deposition c. If I had a mind to answer for Withrington I should not think my self silenc'd by this reply For when he says the Arguments are unlike the one good the other bad I cannot perceive by what reason one should believe him Bellarmins Argument is good says he because his Conclusion that the Popes Power is spiritual is true as if the Argument were a jot the better because the Conclusion is true The Argument is naught if the Conclusion follow not from the premisses though it be never so great a truth otherwise But what was the Argument No direct Power in Scripture therefore no direct Power This I take is Bellarmins Argument and by the favour of Schulkenius no deposing Power in Scripture therefore no deposing Power is so like it that they must be both good or neither That the Conclusion of the one is true and the other false is voluntarily said and nothing to purpose for the question is whether they have not the same dependance on their premisses If Bellarmin conclude well against the Canonists because they cannot shew their direct Power in Scripture I see not why Withrington concludes not as well against Bellarmin unless he can shew his deposing Power in Scripture which as far as I see Schulkenius does not go about to do But I have nothing to do with Withrington he has answer'd for himself though by ill luck I have not the Book now by me I am only to observe how the case stands betwixt the two parties which in short is thus Is the deposing Power in Scripture says Withrington 'T is virtually says Schulkenius I fear this is no very direct answer and suppose VVithrington should ask again Is this vertue apparent in Scripture To which Schulk gives me no ground to judge what he would reply And so I must leave them as I find them and pass to the Second Argument Coercitive Civil and coercitive spiritual Power being different and independent Powers must have distinct Courts and distinct penalties VVherefore as the Civil Power cannot inflict a spiritual punishment so neither can the spiritual Power inflict a civil punishment And this he strengthens by two Considerations 1. That the distinction of the two Courts since in the manner of proceeding the persons and causes brought before them and all other formalities they may agree must be taken from the difference of the penalties or nothing 2. Because no Commonwealth looking only into nature can deprive a subject of other goods then such as are proper to that Commonwealth the spiritual can only take away spiritual goods as the temporal only temporal They answer The two Powers are distinct but not wholly independent when they club into one mystical Body viz. the Church in which case the temporal is subject to the spiritual and therefore though the temporal cannot meddle with the spiritual the spiritual may with the temporal And for his additional Considerations they slight the first as being nothing but the conclusion of his argument repeated yet say however that Temporal punishments are not so proper to Temporal power but they may be inflicted by the spiritual And to the second that in Commonwealths subordinate the superior may deprive the subject not only of the priviledges proper to it self but those also which belong to the inferior Commonwealth This answer relishes much better with me then the former for it plainly denies at least half of what is assumed namely that the powers are independent which is a direct and allowable answer for so much But for the other half they deal not so cleverly They allow the powers distinct even in their penalties and yet maintain that one may award the penalties of the other which looks as if they were not distinct in their penalties Again they say they are distinct but assign not in what they are distinct They deny not what Withrington assumes that they may use the same proceedings take cognizance of the same matters convene the same persons And if they may inflict the same penalties too by what shall they be distinguisht So that I think they had no such great reason to slight his first consideration For certainly distinct powers must be distinct in something But you see where it rests Withrington since they deny it is oblig'd to prove the Independence of the two Powers which whether he have done or no I cannot tell Shall I tell you my thoughts freely I suspect the old School-Proverb An Ass may deny more more than Aristotle can prove may have some place here and that the Answerer has still the better end of the staff When it was Bellarmins turn to prove the dependance and subordination of the two Powers and Withringtons to answer you may perceive by my last where you have the Argument He could deal well enough with Bellarmin Now they have changed sides and Withrington is on the proving hand how it will happen I know not The third Argument is from the multitude of inconveniences which follow from the other opinion As that the Pope may as well take the life as Kingdom of any Prince and driving it a little higher authorize any private man to turn Assassin and kill the King by treachery when he cannot be conveniently depos'd To this they say they can answer easily enough but yet as easy as it is they do it not All they reply is let this pass as nothing to purpose meer bugbears to render the Papacy odious when of so many Princes who have been depos'd so many who have perisht by violent deaths what by the treachery of their subjects what by the force of their Enemys
of Princes in short how they are not as bad as those who are direct Knaves These are the things in which alone the world is concern'd if the two opinions agree in these let them differ in inconsiderable niceties as much as they will they are the same in danger the same in inconsistency with Civil Government and that if you remember was the thing with which we began and where for ought I see we still stick Till I see such a difference I must needs think all you have said no better then pure illusion and all you can say till you say where this difference is will be but to talk learnedly from the purpose For my part I must profess I can find none But because I would be glad to learn of any body I will entreat Bellarmine to tell me what difference he finds and what provision he makes with his learned distinctions for the Security of Princes and Fidelity of Subjects The first which comes in my way is in the state of the Question That the Pope directly and immediately hath not any temporal Power but only spiritual but indirectly at least in vertue of this spiritual Power hath highest or soveraign Power over Temporals And because Directly's and Indirectly's should break no squares he leaves them out against Barclay Cap. 12. when he had a mind to speak properly When we speak properly says he we say the Pope has Power in or over Temporals but not Temporal Power as Pope Now to acknowledge my ignorance I must confess I am quite gravel'd at very first and cannot for my life imagine what kind of thing this only Spiritual and not Temporal Power should be which yet is highest or soveraign even in Temporals Without doubt vve men of the vvorld are vvonderful ignorant things and if vve but offer to understand any thing these Scholars say 't is odds vve mar all Who of our lovv form but vvould have thought that Povver over Temporals had been Temporal Povver If I mistake not I have heard from some body that had some acquaintance vvith these Scholars that Powers are specifi'd by their Acts which is indeed too high for me It may be to purpose and it may not But I had verily thought that who could do temporal things had temporal power and vvho could do spiritual things spiritual I was out it seems and perceive now that properly speaking 't is otherwise For all that I cannot but think there is such a thing as Temporal Power in the vvorld and if Power in Temporals be not It there remains nothing that I know which can be It but Power in Spirituals and for the same reason Power in Temporals must be Spiritual Power and so Kings because they have to do vvith Temporals have in truth Spiritual Power only vve speak improperly in the vvorld and call it Temporal But this does not fadge neither For then the Pope should be said to have Temporal power for this proper reason because he has power in Spirituals Now I remember me there is a certain Pope vvho says Kings have no Superior in Temporals Inno. 3. C. per Ven. Qui filii sint legit This Barclay objected to Bellarmin and he answers that by Superiour in Temporals is meant a Temporal Superior Now I consider not how vvell this answers Barclay For let the Superiour be a temporal or a spiritual Superiour so he be Superiour in Temporals The King has a Superiour in Temporals But this is not to my purpose I only observe that Bellarmin vvas of the mind vvhen he vvrote this that Superiour in Temporals was all one vvith Temporal Superiour And then I see no reason in the vvorld vvhy power in Temporals should not also be all one vvith Temporal power Certainly since Power makes the Superiour there is as much sympathy betwixt the Superiour and the Power as this comes too But in the name of vvonder vvhat does Power in Temporals signifie and vvhat Temporal Power Bellarmin means the Pope may by his power in Temporals dispose of the temporal thing call'd a Kingdom The Canonists mean some such thing by their Temporal Power By this account both signifie power to dispose of Temporals and methinks 't is no such mortal quarrel vvhether a dog must be said to be beaten vvith a stick or a staff Or are they perhaps mere sounds to vvhich belongs no sence but vvhat they give them as they find convenient for their purpose and so vvhen vve are askt vvhat Temporal or what in Temporals signifies we must answer vvith Montalto What you please Father Never believe me if I can make more of this in Temporals then an Inchanted Castle vvhich houses and entertains the Knight as long as he has use of it and as soon as he is gone vanishes into a pure Temporal Inn. Which way soever I turn me I am quite at a loss so that I think 't is best to give it over and let Bellarmin alone vvith his power over Temporals and no Temporal Power and speak to you in a language vvhich both of us understand Do you in earnest believe there is any such difference betwixt these two that the one makes a good the other a bad Subject And that a King is safe enough as long as his Subjects speak properly Marry if their language once become less exact then let him look to himself Good School-masters are the only Guards if this be true I am afraid to meddle vvith Bellarmin again for vvhether I say I or no 't is odds but I shall be out still But yet I guess he meant his Power in Temporals is truly Power If it be true Power sure there is true obedience due to it And if all Christians are bound to obey him in Temporals Kings can have no Subjects but Infidels unless to be even with the Pope they fall to commanding in Spirituals For if they can command in nothing I do not see how they are Kings But this is but shifting sides and leaves us still vvhere vve vvere Let Bellarmin say vvhat he vvill He vvho has power to command is to be obey'd if the Pope can command in Temporals I must obey him in Temporals And he vvhom I must obey in Temporals is my King and no body else So that the Pope is universal Monarch vvithout more ado and there is no King in the World besides himself For 't is not the proper name of Power but Power which does the business Call it how you vvill properly or improperly if there be a Power in the vvorld vvhich Kings themselves must acknowledge and submit their Crowns and leave their Kingdoms vvhen this Power requires them They are not Kings I mean Soveraigns of vvhom vve only speak And they vvere mightily out vvho said Princes vvere solo Deo minores that they vvere accountable only to him and had none else above them and twenty other such untrue things For Bellarmin has found one that is above them and I fear above God too
at least he can take away vvhat God gave vvhich is to make a little too bold vvith him But I am out again as I fore-saw I should be All this says Bellarmin follows from the vvicked direct Temporal Power of the Canonists not from my innocent Indirect power over Temporals I told you there vvas no medling vvith Schollers While vve keep vvithin our own verge vve may happily light upon a little indirect sence vvhich may serve turn and do vvell enough among our selves but if vve go beyond our bounds and tread the forbidden paths of Schollership it turns presently direct nonsence I verily thought this had follow'd But it seems it does not Bellarmin has stopt the Carrier with a Distinction which for fear of mistakes you shall have in his own words If Adver Barc c. 5. saies he there were in the Pope Spiritual and Temporal power directly and he were King of the World as he is Bishop of the universal Church and other Kings did but meerly execute temporal Jurisdiction truly the Pope might at his pleasure deprive whatsoever Kings of the administration and execution of temporal Jurisdiction and by this means take away Civil government or confound it with the Ecclesiastical and would be greater then Christ because he could take away Powers which he willed should be and be distinct These now to my apprehension are naughty things and the opinion out of which they follow a naughty opinion And I must needs commend Bellarmin for chusing another out of vvhich it may not follow that Popes at their pleasure may deprive any King of the execution of temporal Jurisdiction and take away Civil government and be greater than Christ This you see is vvhat he saies follows from the other opinion and vvhat he makes us expect does not follow from his Let us hearken then to what he saies of it and understand it if vve can But goes he on if we put in the Pope only Spiritual power Directly and Temporal Indirectly that is only in order to Spirituals it does not follow that the Pope can take away or confound Civil government Once in my life I was in the right This is what I thought was not to follow What is that which does then Why It follows only saies he that the Pope by his Spiritual and Apostolic most eminent Power can direct and correct the Civil Power and if it be needful to the Spiritual end take it away from one Prince and give it to another Pray assist me a little for I am in again as deep as just now with in Temporals not Temporal Was not this taking away Civil power the thing vvhich he said did not follow from his opinion and does he not now say it does Or have I rendred him amiss Let me see his own words are non sequitur posse tollere sed solum sequitur posse adimere O! 't is tollere which does not follow and only adimere vvhich follows And here 's a plain difference for one vvord has four syllables and the other but three The mischief is those who understand not Latin will not presently find it and I hardly know how to help them For whether it be that Latin be the more proper language for distinctions or that he be better at Latin then I at English I am puzled to render it And yet I have consulted my Dictionary but there is but one English word to take away for both But methinks it sounds scurvily to say it does not follow he can take away but it does follow he can take away That looks like saying and unsaying giving and taking vvhich is Childrens play To make some difference then we must say It does not follow he can take away but it follows he can away-take which though it be to force the language a little yet 't is better to make bold vvith that then spoil the sence and make no distinction at all Princes then were in a sad case if the wicked doctrine of the Casuists were true that their Kingdoms may be taken away but as long as they may only be away-taken all 's vvell enough But yet this is not well neither Bellarmin loves to speak properly and this away-take perhaps would not please him as indeed it has but an odd sound To be then both just to him and not injurious to our language we vvill put it thus It does not follow he can take away Civil power vvith a vvord of three syllables it only follows he can take it away with a word of four This is true English and a true difference For one kills on Tierce and the other en Quart which though they may happen from the same hand and the same sword are yet distinct killings And so thanks to Bellarmin we have master'd a deep point of learning and understand the Canonists opinion is a very wicked opinion because it exposes a Prince to the villanous thrust en Tierce but Bellarmin's very innocent vvhich laies him open only to the fair en Quart Now you may judge with your infallible judgment as you please but I must needs think that to take away with a word of 4 or if you will 40 syllables is to take away and to hit en Quart is to hit and if any judge these things may be practic'd upon our sacred Soveraign I must farther think and plainly tell you he deserves to be confuted by Judge and Executioner too But stay May not Bellarmin say perhaps that to take away Civil Power from one Prince and give it to another is not absolutely to take away Civil Power but only to translate it since the Power remains only put into other hands Truly he may say this for ought I know and twenty other things of which I shall never dream But I think he could not mean it in this place For here he intends to speak contrary to the Canonists and as mad as they are I believe there is none among them so sensless to say or think that Civil power can absolutely be taken away out of the vvorld by the most direct and unlimited Power that is or can be They know vvell enough there must be Civil Power as long as there is Civil Government and there must be Civil government as long as there be Cities and Men. So that Civil Power can no more nor sooner be taken out of the vvorld then Mankind For should the Pope take all Power into his own hands and appoint Lieutenants here and there where he could not be in person these Lieutenants must of necessity have and exercise Civil Power even though they were Churchmen As the Pope himself actually does For when in his own Territories he punishes Malefactors for civil Crimes he does not do this in vertue of his Spiritual power but as a Temporal Prince as one that has Civil power as well as Ecclesiastical Wherefore I conceive Bellarmin cannot say he meant his taking away Power of taking it absolutely out of the vvorld taking from
thought fit that they refuse to give him that Title Now Bellarmine sticks to the consequence which is all the mischief and makes the Pope do all that a supreme Monarch could do and thinks all is well if he do not call him so when as if he could do what Bellarmine would have him he truly were supream Monarch and Bellarmine might make no bones to call him by his proper name The truth is ' â—would anger any King at heart to be put out of his Kingdom and not so much as know why nay while on the contrary he is fully perswaded he cannot be dispossest even by those who dispossess him If a Canonist come and tell him Sir you must descend the Pope your supream Lord has so commanded If he believe the Canonist he understands how a superior Power is to be obey'd and submits as a Lieutenant when his Commission is recalled But if Bellarmine come and tell him you are now a private man the Pope has so declared Without doubt he will reply what if he have Have not you your self told me that I am a true King no Vassal of the Popes but supream in Temporals Have not you told me the Popes Power is only spiritual and do you tell me now I must give up my temporal Crown to the command of a spiritual Authority All this is true quoth Bellarmine but yet you must obey What! must I obey one who cannot command in such things Yes he can 'T is something hard for you to understand who are no Scholar you can understand what 't is to obey and that is enough for you the rest belongs to us of the Trade In my conscience this would sooner put a man out of his wits then out of his Kingdom and who kept his wits I believe would go near to keep his Kingdom too In fine the sum total of the Canonists account is but this That the Pope by reason of his absolute supream Authority in all things is not to be questioned but obey'd in whatever he commands And if Bellarmine go less in substance whatever he do in words I am mistaken Nay how much short is he even in words when he tels Barclay C. 17. That if the spiritual Prince happen to abuse his Power by excommunicating a temporal Prince unjustly or absolving his Subjects from their obedience without just cause and so disturb the temporal Commonwealth This were sin in the spiritual Prince but yet that temporal Prince could not assume to himself the judgement of spiritual things or judge the spiritual Prince and much less depose him from his spiritual Seat This is worded in opposition to Barclay who by the same Argument which Bellarmine brings for the Deposition of Princes proves that they may as well depose Popes But if this do not signifie that right or wrong the Pope is always to be obey'd I understand it not For Deposition according to him is a spiritual thing an act of spiritual Power to judge of this a Prince must not assume to himself no not in case of Injustice And if he must not question what remains but to obey it and this in all Cases just or unjust Let the boldest Canonist that is out-go this if he can Upon the whole I see no other difference betwixt the two opinions but that one is abominable false and the other abominable false and abominable full of non-sense besides They with one bold untruth subject all Princes to the Pope and for the rest discourse at least consequently Were their Principle true all would follow which they say He makes Princes as much subject as they and when he has done cals them true soveraign Princes and discourses so that no part hangs together Every one fals together by the ears with his fellow and makes such mad work that a body can understand nothing of it but that 't is false Consider a little what he teaches in his Rom. Pont. against these Canonists That Christ or the Christian Law deprives none of the Right and Dominion he had before that otherwise Christianity would be injurious and a wrong instead of a benefit and therefore Christian Rings and Emperors acknowledge no Superior in Temporals but are true and supream Princes in their own Kingdoms Again That Christ our Lord has distinguisht the Acts Offices and Dignities of Popes and Emperors that one should not presume to meddle with the Rights of the other and a great deal more to this purpose But that strange things happen in the world now and then one would not suspect that these things and Deposition should both be taught by one man and that man a friend of the Popes Sure if I were Pope I should not think my self much oblig'd by him who gives me a Power to do injuries But with what Distinction-sodder shall we ever cement these things Does a King lose nothing when he loses his Kingdom Is nothing taken away when all is gone Is he depriv'd of no Right who is depriv'd of the Right to reign Is it no injury to be turn'd out of a Throne to be forc't to change Purple for Rags and languish out a despised life in helpless Beggary Do Christian Princes acknowledge no Superior in Temporals if they acknowledge one at whose command they must quit their Temporals By the way we are at our Superior in Temporals again with the meaning of which for my late bad success I dare not meddle It signifies you know ee'n what you please But let it signifie what it will I am sure no Distinction can hinder but who has Power to command in Temporals is Superior in Temporals And he would make us believe at the same time both that Christian Princes know none such and yet do know a certain Person who can command away their Temporals from them To make both these true at once is me thinks a pretty confident undertaking Then again what means this that the two Powers are distinct and one not to meddle with the Rights of the other I am sure he does not mean that the same Person cannot have and exercise both because then the Bishop of Rome could not be a temporal Prince Now I understand how in that case the Powers are distinct in themselves notwithstanding they are united in one Person because that one Person commands temporal things in vertue of one power and Spiritual in vertue of another which certainly he may do who has both But when there is but one Power extended to both kind of actions The powers certainly are then confounded if they can be confounded at all For what can confounding or mixing in this case signifie but making one of two which one shall have the vertue of both So liquors so every thing that I know in the world are blended or confounded together Wherefore 't is Bellarmin not the Canonists who truly confounds these Powers They make them two but say the Pope has both Bellarmin saies he has but one and that the Spiritual only but
would have this one Spiritual Power command both in Spirituals and Temporals Which is of two to make one third Power neither wholy Spiritual be cause it extends to Temporals nor wholy Temporal because it acts in Spirituals but equivalent to both And if this be not to confound the two Powers and make one of these two which he saies Christ would have divided I would be glad to learn what is and what other way they can be confounded And yet the jest is even while he does this he presses the confusion of the Powers as a great inconvenience upon the Canonists who are not altogether so faulty as himself and can extricate their Doctrine a great deal better In two words either he confounds the Powers and then he disobeys Christ who he saies would have them kept asunder or he does not and then he disobeys him in permitting one to meddle with the rights of the other For certainly 't is the right of the Temporal power to command the Subjects to that power and require their allegiance and service And to take away these Subjects and this Allegiance is to meddle and that very far too vvith what belongs to the right of another The Truth is these Tricks turn a question of as great importance as any in the world into pure words and illusion The vvorld is in suspence about the decision of this great Question concerning the independent Soveraignty of the two Powers and how that command in the Gospel Reddite quae sunt Caesaris Caesari quae sunt Dei Deo should be obey'd All the learning of ten Ages teach the powers were distinguisht by Christ one given to the Bishop the other to the Prince The Canonists and they but some and all late men teach they were given both to the Pope This third indirect Party coming to settle a point of this importance profess at first that the Powers truly are as Christ commanded they should be distinct and the Pope for his share has the Spiritual only Would not any man think now the business decided and that we had no more to do but obey our Prince in Temporals and Bishop or if you will Pope for I will not meddle with that question in Spirituals and there 's an end Why this 't is to be illiterate says Bellarmin and not understand distinction The Popes power is only Spiritual but yet this Spiritual power indirectly and for the good of Souls virtually and by means of some other proprieties of speech extends likewise to Temporals and may dispose of Kingdoms as it sees fit Why then call it Temporal in the name of God if it can dispose of Temporals and say the Pope is Universal Monarch if he be so and stand to it Yes we do stand to it replies Bellarmin but we love to speak properly and do not call the Pope Vniversal Monarch though he can dispose of all the Kingdoms of the World because he does it not in vertue of a Temporal power but by a spiritual working and after an indirect manner Hang the manner how he does it if he can do it What has the World to do with these mannerly tricks A King is well holp up who after he is dispossest comes to understand that this came about after another fashion and in another manner then he was aware of Well! but are you for the Canonists or against them why truly I am for them and I am not for them And our Question What must be said to that Must we obey our King or the Pope This is what the world looks after Why according to one half of the resolution which says Princes are supream in Temporals and have in them no Superiour we must obey our King according to the other half which saies a power vvhich is only Spiritual can dispose of Temporals too we must obey the Pope But how must I do with this Licet and non Licet must I cut my self in two and list a Leg and an Arm under one a Thumb and a Shoulder under the other and if I happen to meet in the battle fight my King-self against my Pope-self Because this is something difficult and they are men of reason I imagine they would condescend a little in this point and let me remain entire As long as the answer is divided 't is well enough But then I must chuse the right half That 's it I would be at Pray tell me then must whole I take the Spiritual or the Temporal half Why the truth is you must take the Spiritual half Parasits and Flatterers may tell you otherwise But this is the truth of the story Why then to what purpose all this illusion of my Princes Soveraignty and Independency when after all he is neither Soveraign nor Independent To what purpose this bustle against the Canonists only to say the same thing at last but with more ado Could you not have plainly told me at first what I must trust to and spared the trapan of so many useless disguises The result of all your Spirituals and Indirects and good of Souls and whatever else is in short I must obey the Pope against my Prince only I must in spight of all sence believe my Prince is a true and Soveraign King and has no Superiour in Temporals and the Pope no power but Spiritual and so besides a Traytor and a Rebel become sensless and a block into the bargain Here 's your fine opinion of which you make such a Mystery and are so shy to discover your thoughts Come come leave dodging and deal above-board Answer me these things and shew me that Bellarmin speaks sence and sence not injurious to Government and the safety of Princes or disclaim him plainly as you have the Canonists 'T is at your choice to do what you will but do one and that effectually or take notice I tell you I will believe for the future your Church is a wicked Church absolutely inconsistent with Civil Government and has not one sound member in her no not one Put me not off with formalities and think to scape with telling me this doctrine belongs not to your Church as a Church and that only the Material men hold it 'T is the material men I only care for at present We converse not with your formal Church vve hear and see and deal with Material men These are they can do us good or harm and 't is but reason we should know vvhat to expect from them Formalities are ayry things no rope can catch them but Material men you know maye be suspended and vvhen they are found guilty and have no hopes of reprieve but in the innocence of their formalities I doubt it goes hard vvith them In two vvords clear your selves from an imputation which you have brought upon your selves or confess you cannot be cleer'd and remember that silence is a confession and so I shall take it as all Justice in the world does and believe it vvas not the wickedness
be at and shall never be so senceless to be diverted by vvhat he saies from considering vvhat he vvould do I tell you once for all we would fight as freely against the Pope as the Turk if he come like a Turk in Arms and you may easily believe me for all Nations do it vvithout difficulty when there is occasion French Spaniards Italians themselves have all had their turns Marry if he come like a Pope to direct our feet in the ways of that peace which Christ bequeath'd as a legacy to his Church I for my part vvill fall down at his feet and kiss them too laugh you as much as you vvill In the mean time I vvould advise you as you do me to let Politics alone and not go about to perswade the vvorld Heresie was the cause of all the danger of 88 vvhen if there had been no such thing there had not been one Ship or one Souldier the less Had Queen Elizabeth been Inquisition-proof as much as King Philip he vvould have done just as he did For 't was the enemy of Spain and friend to Holland not the enemy to the Pope vvith vvhom he had the quarrel Had the Pope himself been in her place the Pope had been invaded as she vvas And this I say not altogether by guess for both he and his Father actually did invade the Pope and his Father take him prisoner too But so much for your Politics and my reservedness of which I have now given you the very reason and told you the Truth the whole Truth and nothing but the Truth As for Bellarmin I wish you had spared some of your smartness He was a great man and if you would undertake to answer all that he has writ peradventure you would go neer to find him so Nay do but write on any chuse what you think the easiest Subject as much as he has done of intricate matters and if you do not somewhere or other give occasion of as much sport as you have made with him I shall much marvel A great piece of Mastery it is out of so many Volumes where 't is impossible the Author should alwaies be equally attentive to pick out a few lines and turn them to Burlesque If I had a mind to take his part against you perhaps I could make it appear He is not altogether such an Ass as you would make him even in this question For example You quarrel with him because as you say he forgets to explain what he means by Indirect where he first uses the word As if those against whom he then writ did not understand it well enough and need no explication His notion pleases not you and you say it is not the Notion of the world Suppose it be not He writ to that part of the World which understood it in his Notion If they understand one another what is' t to you and me what words they use Again you say He makes no use of that word in the whole course of his Arguments What is it to purpose whether he did or no It may be he had no occasion But if you consider his Arguments you will find they proceed all upon what he understands by Indirect Power and that they are all along opposite to the Canonists who maintain in the Pope a power properly Temporal whereas he places in him only a Spiritual Power and then endeavours by those Arguments to prove that supream Spiritual Power may in vertue of its being so extend also in some cases to Temporals which is in his language to be Indirect and was so understood by those against whom he intended his Arguments So that he is so far from forgetting as you imagine his Indirect that he makes use of it and nothing else More I could say in his behalf if I had a mind But I mean not to engage for him He has friends a great deal more learned then I who can speak for him when they think convenient As you have ordered the matter I have enough to do to quit my self However I mean now to endeavour it and quit my self so if I can that I may hear no more of you For I am very weary of being baited thus long at one stake and will come no more there if I can help it I tell you then I will stand by your Parliament-Doctrine as much as you or any of his Majesties Subjects and take it unkindly at your hands you should surmise I would do otherwise That Parliament was a Catholick-Parliament if you remember and might have put you in mind that Catholicks may be both good Catholicks and good Englishmen 'T is true there may be Traytors of them and those Traytors may disguise their Treason with the pretence of Religion as who would not get as hand some a vizard as he could for so ugly a face But 't is plain that their Religion has no inconsistency with their duty to their King and Countrey when we see their Religion was no hindrance to them for providing for the liberties of their Countrey against the encroachments of pretended Religior On the contrary I conceive it more shameful and more wicked for us who persevere in the same Faith to degenerate from the same Loyalty then for men of other perswasions But to go on I disavow and detest the wicked and pernicious Doctrine which teaches the deposition of Kings whom I acknowledge to hold independently of God and will be ready on all occasions to lay down my life in confirmation of this Truth and when you please will give under my hand that 't is new false erroneous contrary to the Word of God and several ways mischievous besides and will never maintain any opinion to the contrary I know not how you will relish this way of speaking but I can assure you 't is a way in which wiser men then I have walk't before me But to give a direct Answer to the Question to which you have reduc't the whole and which by the way I am very glad you have confin'd to Temporals for I do not mean to be perswaded out of my Religion by your earnestness I answer thus That I will at all times and in all occasions stand by my King against whatsoever Power and under whatsoever pretences And because you are particularly jealous of the Pope I declare I will stand by my Soveraign and believe it my duty so to do against the Pope as firmly as against any other as being fully perswaded he has no Power Direct or Indirect Virtual or Formal or by whatever names it has or may be call'd to depose or dispossess him of all or any part of his Dominions or authorise his Subjects not to perform faithful obedience to him And I absolutely disclaim all Doctrine to the contrary by whomsoever maintained and under whatsoever disguises And if you distrust my word I will pawn you my hopes of salvation and swear all this in as ample manner as you can devise
not the worst of the Case It is pretended in the behalf of the deposing Doctrine that it relyes on divine Right and the hot abetters of it will hardly suffer those to pass for good Catholicks who reject it The truth is they cannot well go less For while it is acknowledged as on all hands it is That subjection to Princes is commanded by Gods Law that which takes away this subjection must be Gods Law too or nothing And indeed considering the import of the Question and the immediate influence it has upon a main Point of duty it cannot well be doubted but the Truth on which side soever it be dees belong to Gods Law Certainly the Wisdom of God who took flesh purposely to instruct the world in all necessary duty did not leave out so considerable a part Now that his Law teaches we are to obey temporal Princes is both plain in it self and as I come from saying plainly confest by every body But 't is evident we cannot at the same time obey two Powers commanding contrary things Wherefore I cannot see but to require obedience in Temporals to the spiritual Power by the same Law which commands obedience to the Temporal is to make that Law contradictory and impossible to be obey'd Which as 't is a Blasphemy intolerable in any Christian so I fear 't is unavoidable in those who put a temporal vertue in the spiritual Power For that vertue plainly obliges to obedience in Temporals to which obedience we are obliged by another vertue that of the temporal Power And this is to require we should do what Christ himself has assured us is impossible to be done serve two Masters The way by which they seek to avoid this is by saying Kingly obedience as inferior must yield to Papal obedience as superior Which I think is by striving to weather Scylla to split upon Charibdis We have assurance from those whom we have more reason to credit that Kings are inferior only to God and have none above them but him alone I suppose this is to be understood of the same kind of Superiority For otherwise 't is ordinary enough for the same man to be both Superior and Inferior to another in several respects as a Father to a Son who is a Magistrate But 't is plain there is no reconciling this Doctrine with that of a Papal Superiority in Temporals We may as soon obey both when they command contraries as believe one has no Superior besides God to whom the Pope is Superior And yet there is another thing which sticks more with me This Papal Superiority in Temporals is no where to be found but in their own fancies There is no such thing in Scripture or Tradition Councils or Fathers To obtrude upon us an invention of their own heads and this for a part of Gods Law is to add to the Law of God Let them either shew that place of Gods Law which teaches Kingly Power is inferior and Papal superior and this in Temporals or shew how they do not give us for Gods Law that which is not and entitle themselves to the maledictions of the Apocalyps Feed my sheep and whatsoever you shall bind is not Kings are inferior in Temporals and their interpretation which hooks in Temporals is not Scripture Besides the Council of Trent has forbid the Scripture to be Interpreted against the unanimous consent of the Fathers And if any one Father can be brought who Interprets those places as they do or who does not Interpret them quite contrary if he meddle with them at all truly there is more to be said for them than I am aware of But let us consider a little farther In a Question which belongs to Christian duty and the law of God how does or how should a Catholic proceed I conceive who goes to work like a Catholic should frame his belief according to his Rule of Belief I think that is the use of a Rule To my judgment they go not this way who are for Deposing as indeed they cannot For if Tradition be as I conceive it is the Catholic Rule there is no applying this Rule to Deposition Look into all Bellarmins Arguments Those in his Rom. Pont. are all from Reason deducing such inferences from Scripture or acknowledg'd points of Catholic Doctrine as make to his purpose These deductions till they be acknowledged rightly made which hitherto is deny'd and that upon very good grounds have no force at all to induce belief and though they were acknowledg'd would make at most but a Theological conclusion Those against Barclay are all from Authority and this Authority is either of a single Pope Boniface 8 or a great many single men or those men met together in Councils For as for Scripture which he pretends and which indeed would do the business if it declared it self he makes nothing of it Now there is no number or quality of men let them be Catholics never so much which obliges to a belief of what they say otherwise then when they witness the point in question was received by them from their Ancestours as taught originally by Christ which testimony of theirs hands it over for such a point to those who come after In all other cases they speak their own private judgments and this whether single or assembled and for that reason are not parts of Tradition or the Catholic Rule and make no necessity of Belief And these being all the waies they have to the wood I do not discern the Catholic way among them But what is the consequence There are but two things acknowledg'd by Catholicks to which we are oblig'd to submit our Judgments Scripture and Tradition if these be truly two and not one thing with two names For as for Councils They belong to Tradition and are when duly qualifi'd the most considerable parts of it In Scripture we find Subjection and Obedience and this for Conscience possessing our Souls in patience expecting our reward in the next world and the like no word of Deposition Look into Tradition and we find Ten whole Ages perswaded and practising according to the same Maxims persevering in faithful obedience to just commands and patient refusal of unjust ones and apprehending they were oblig'd by the law of God so to do We find all the Fathers of all those Ages confirming them in this apprehension and inculcating the duty of Obedience even to Tyrants and Persecutors We find Popes themselves not only teaching but practising the same Doctrine obeying commands sometimes thought unreasonable and unjust and submitting with patience to the pleasures of their then acknowledg'd Lords the Emperours This is if any thing can be semper Vbique ab omnibus And this is the known Rule of the Catholic Church The opposite Opinion began at such a time in such a place and by such a Man and when it began was cry'd out on as a novelty conâ—rary to the ancient Doctrinâ— which in all other cases is
Melchisedech That when Christ being a King and a Priest received all judgment of the Father that is most full judicial power He joyning the same with his Priesthood did institute in the Church a regal Priesthood translating in suos I conceive he means St. Peter and his Successors all the power he had of his Father This new coronation of King Peter so long after his death and the mystery of King and Priest meeting in Melchisedech which St. Paul never dreamt of though he treat the subject particularly and something to better purpose and the admirable expedient to avoid dissentions by taking away Regal power are pleasant matters and deserve to be reflected on but that I have so much of this divertive stuff to produce that I cannot stay every where Thomas Bozius tells us Tho. â—ozias de jure stat praefat ad Aldobrand that if Christ be King of Kings and Lord of Lords in like sort the Church must be Queen and Lady that all temporal Regal power doth reside first in the soul of Christ and then in the Church his Spouse the Queen of the World and from her is deriv'd to others Faithful or Infidels as out of a fountain Isid Moscon de Majest militant Eccles P. 96. Isidorus Mosconius sayes to the same purpose That not only all faithful people but likewise Infidels and every natural creature is subject to the commandment of the Pope he is to be worshipped of all men and for this cause he receiveth of all the faithful adorations prostrations and kissing of his feet What pretty truths there are in the World which negligent men overslip by inadvertence who would have thought the Mogul and King of Pegu and Chinese Tartar had deriv'd their little streams of power from the great Channel of the Church Ungrateful men who so little acknowledge their Benefactors But since all natural creatures are subject to his commands I wish some body that has credit would prevail with him that Lyons and Bears and Adders and such naughty natural creatures might be forbidden to do us any harm for the future For as simple as he seems to sit at Rome and though he is pleased to make but little shew of any such power he can stop the mouths of Lyons and quench the violence of Fire So that had we not been Hereticks he might have done us a greater kindness here at London in the time of the fate dismal Fire then we are aware of I warrant you he could have whisper'd down the wind and with one grave Nod have cool'd the courage of the Fire But let us return to Mosconius P. 91 teaching us farther that the Pontifical and Regal power and all other powers are most plentiful in the Pope and do reside in the Pontifical dignity That all dominions whatsoever depend upon the Church P. 656. and upon the Pope as Head of the Church That in the Pope Authority is consider'd in Emperors and Kings power P. 670. and thence it is that power doth depend upon Authority P. 27. That the Pope is call'd universal Judge King of Kings and Lord of Lords P. 677. That Emperors and Kings may be compell'd to keep their oaths taken in their Coronation and Confirmation in that by virtue of such oath they are made the Popes Subjects P. 80. That all temporal Jurisdiction must be exercised not at the Popes command but at his Beck Princes will charge command God who is Lord of all doth by his beck command according to that Dixerat nutu totum tremefecit Olympum That Christ had full Jurisdiction over all the world and all creatures P. 85. and therefore the Pope his Vicar hath so In truth these Authors of yours are considerative men and as careful as they are able They reflect that Popes are generally old men and have often weak lungs and 't was charitable to exempt them from the painful trouble of commanding and make a nod serve the turn Carrerius in his zeal against impious Politicians and Heretics teaches us That true just ordain'd by God Alex. Carrer de Potest Rom. Pont. p. 9. and mere dominion as well in spiritual things as in temporal was brought forth by Christ and the same was committed to St. Peter and his Successors That Christ was Lord over all Inferiors P. 111. not only as God but likewise as man having even then Dominion in the earth and that therefore as the dominion of the world was in Christ both divine and humane so it must be confessed that it was in the Pope his Vicar That the mystery of Redemption being accomplisht Christ as a King gave unto Peter the administration of his Kingdom and St. Peter did execute that his power against Ananias and Saphira That Ghrist as he is man is directly Lord over all the world in Temporalities P. 124. and that therefore the Pope is so likewise in that he is Vicar That the supreme power of judging all and the top of dignities P. 126. and the height of both powers are found in Christs Vicar That as the divine and humane dominion were in Christ P. 150. so in Christs stead the dominion of the world in the Pope is both spiritual and temporal P. 151. divine and humane That the unremovable Truth doth design by Peters only coming by water to Christ that the whole dominion which is signified by the Sea is committed to St. Peter and his Successors 'T is quaint that and surprizing but yet this water me thinks is something an unstedy foundation That as the Pope cannot say he is not Christs Vicar so he cannot deny but that he is Lord over all things because the earth is the Lords and the fulness thereof whereby all things heavenly earthly and infernal are subject unto Christ the Lord and thence it is that he did commit unto the Pope who doth supply his place upon earth the right of the Heavenly and Terrene Empire That he should forget the infernal Empire the famous Purgatory power which for all it be under ground time has been when no glebe above ground has been more fruitful Elsewhere he teaches that there are divers Powers of men given by God P. 142. and divers Authorities all which do depend upon the highest Authority meaning I suppose the Popes and thence as the stars from the sun receive their light That the Imperial power concerning the administration of temporal matters doth proceed from the Pontifical power P. 145. as the light of the Moon from the light of the Sun P. 161. That the Empire of Rome before it was converted to Christ was a dominion usurpt and tyrannical because the true dominion was in the line of Christ That the Emperor is the Popes Minister for God did appoint him tanquam summi Sacerdotis Ministrum That no King or Emperor hath jurisdiction or dominion but from Christ and by consequence can have none at all but from his
either grounded upon or warranted by the Instruction left by S. Peter to his fellow Pastours in these words 1 Pet. 5. Feed the flock of God which is among you providing not by constraint but willingly according to God neither for filthy lucre sake but voluntarily neither as over-ruling the Clergy but made Examples of the flock from the heart From these words some gather this difference betwixt the Spiritual and Temporal Power that the one is accompanied with the power of Constraint the other not I know the word Coacte is sometimes expounded otherwise and that some and in particular V. Bede understand by it the exclusion of that Mercenary interest which in service some propose to themselves while others serve for Love And this sence is without doubt a good and a true one but I know not whether the Apostle meant it though peradventure he or rather his Inspirer might according to S. Austin's Rule That all the Truth was meant by God which is contained in the words he Inspired Otherwise that seems to be the import of the Second Branch Not for lucre but voluntarily and this Interpretation with a needless tautology makes the two branches signifie but one thing which the Apostle seems nevertheless to distinguish However it be considering that before S. Peter Christ himself puts Dominion and non-dominion for the difference betwixt Secular and Spiritual Power The Kings of the Gentiles have dominion over them but you not so Luke 22.25 And that S. Paul tells the Corinthians The arms of his warfare are not carnal Cor. 10. I conceive that whatever S. Peter meant this doctrine is very true that Force and Constraint belong only to the Civil Magistrate and not to the Spiritual I mean in vertue of his being a Spiritual Magistrate for these Formalities of which you profess'd so much dislike return again in spight of my teeth and there is no discoursing without them Otherwise the man who is a Spiritual Magistrate may upon other accounts justly have and justly use Constraint nay it may be his due in consideration of his Spiritual Magistracy but not originally deduc'd from thence but annexed to it or accrued by other means According to S. Bernard mentioned in my last Not by right of Apostleship Now if I can make out to you that it may irreprovably be held in our Church that this Spiritual Power of which you are so jealous cannot use Force or Constraint upon any man I hope you will have no cause of complaint against it nor fewel for those fears which still disquiet you For certainly a Power which cannot use Force is a little dangerous If it can perswade you to what it would you then act by your Inclination or Choice but if it cannot you are free to do what you will And I think you would not wish to be more safe Consider then what men they are whom they must reprove who will reprove this Doctrine And first S. Hierom delivers it very plainly Epitaph Nepot Ep. 3. We must obey the Bishop as the King nay the Bishop less than the King for he is over the unwilling the Bishop over the willing One subjects by Fear the other is given to Service One imprisons the Body to death the other preserves the Soul to life S. Greg. Nazian Apologet We ought not to constrain by Force or Necessity but perswade by Reason and Example of our lives Again Our Law and Law-maker have especially provided that the flock be fed not by constraint but freely and willingly And Orat. 1. cont Jul. Apost These things Julian had in his mind as those who were privy to his secrets discovered but he was restrained by the clemency of God and the tears of the Christians whereof many and by many had now been shed since this was their only remedy against a Persecutor S. Jo. Chrysost in Act. Hom. 3. comparing the care of a Bishop with the care of a Father makes that of a Bishop much more heavy as having more Children and less Power What saies he will not the Bishop endure who has so many not of his houshold Family but whose Obedience is in their own power Again The Emperour has command over the whole world the Bishop is Bishop only of one City and yet he has as much more care as there is difference betwixt a River stir'd with the wind and the Sea swelling and raging Why so because there are there more helps since all things are perform'd by Laws and Commands here is no such thing for it is not lawful to command by Authority Hom. 10. in 1. Thessalon A Father both by Natural and Civil Laws uses his Child with much freedome If he instruct him against his will if he strike him none hinders him nor dares the Son himself look up A Priest has much difficulty for first he must rule those that are willing to be ruled and whom by his government he is to please Again We domineer not over your Faith Beloved nor order these things by the right of command and dominion To us is commended the speech of Doctrine not the Authority of Power and Principality We hold the place of Counsellors and Exhortors He who counsels when he delivers his opinion forces not the hearer to accept it but leaves in his power the free choice of what is to be done And Hom. 1. in Ep. ad Tit. I omit to say that a Bishop cannot with truth be called a Prince Why Because it is in the Power of their Subjects to obey or not Again De Sacerdot L. 2. External Judges when they find wicked men who have transgrest the Laws shew themselves endued with great Power and Authority and force them to change their manners whether they will or no. But here we must not use force but only perswade and by that means make him become better whose cure we have undertaken For neither have we any Power given by Law to force Delinquents and if we had we have not whereon to exercise this force and Power since Christ gives an eternal Kingdom to those who not by force but by a firm resolution of the soul abstain from sin Wherefore there is need of much art that Christians who are ill-affected will perswade themselves that they ought submit to the cure of Priests Again upon these words in the last to the Heb. Hom. Ult. Obey your Prelates that they may do this with joy not lamenting c. You see that when an Ecclesiastical Prince is contemned he ought not return revenge but all his revenge is to weep and sigh And upon Isa 6. Hom. 4. The King forces the Priest exhorts He with necessity this by counsel He has sensible this spiritual arms c. S. Aust de fide oper C. 2. says The material sword used in the Old Testament by Moyses and Phinees was a figure of the degradations and excommunications to be exercised in the New when in the discipline of the Church the visible sword should cease Origen
that business none was better satisfi'd then the guilty and punisht Emperor himself who more lov'd and honour'd S. Ambrose ever after And 't is likely if all spiritual Princes would imitate the zeal of that excellent Prelate and preserving the respect due to the dignity of secular powers strive only to redress the errors of their frailty that Temporal Princes would imitate the Piety of that excellent Emperor and there would be never any clashing betwixt them But this by the by I have only to do with the Argument and 't is not the least I have to do to find the force of it For 't is plain the bare words themselves without a comment will not do and Bellarmin has here forgotten to give a comment And so there remains nothing but to rove at random and hope if luck serve to hit right If Bellarmin understand this Decree in that manner in which he understood it who made it Boniface the 8 as far as can be gathered by those who writ of him was perswaded he was vested in a Power as unlimited and absolute as the wildest of Canonists ever fancied that he was the only universal Monarch and all Princes his subjects without more ado You remember how he writes to the King of France We would have you know you are subject to us both in spirituals and temporals and take for Hereticks who think otherwise Now there is one in my opinion very good reason why Bellarmin should not understand the Decree in this manner and that is because he thinks that sence not true and maintains the Pope has no such power and the Canonists are out who give it him If he will understand it as Clement 5 seems to understand it you must pardon me if I entertein you with seemings we must rove where we can do no better it will amount to no more than bare spiritual power as indeed the words themselves carry no farther We neither will nor intend says he that any prejudice be done to the King or Kingdom of France by the Decree in question nor that the King Kingdom or Inhabitants be more subject to the Church of Rome then they were formerly but that all things be in the same state in which they were before the said definition Now one point of the state in which things were before was if we believe the King of France as also Innocent 3 who had declared as much that he was subject in temporals to no man And so there remains only subjection in spirituals in which Clement 5 understood the Decree and challenged to the Church of Rome and this will freely be allow'd to Bellarmin by a great many who for all that will allow no deposition Now because neither of these Comments will fit him as far as I perceive he will hardly find one ready made but must take the pains to make one for himself if he will do any thing And yet when he has done a Comment is one thing and a Text another One is not altogether so current mony as the other Although in this particular his comment must be better mettal then the Text it self or will hardly pass The whole Canon Law the Decrees not only of particular Popes but particular Councils unless in circumstances which happen not in this case are freely and openly deny'd the power to oblige to belief But I will not meddle with this point which would draw on a new and that controversial dispute and I am no man of Controversy What I have sayd is answer enough to an Argument no better prest Yet I shall make one observation more and so take leave of it This Canon according to the declaration of Clement 5 defined nothing new says Bellarmin but only declared the ancient obligation of being subject to the Apostolick Sea Now would I fain understand how we should know by this Canon what that ancient obligation was The question is whether the ancient subjection were in temporals or spirituals And the Canon is declared to define neither the one nor the other but only the ancient obligation and if it define nothing in the question it might very well have been let alone of necessity we must know what this ancient obligation is before we can know what this Canon has defined and then 't is a clear case we can know nothing by the Canon but must depend on another knowledg and by that find out what the Canon sayes If things be left by this Canon as the Pope says they are in the state in which they were before it is not possible to know how this Canon left them but by knowing how they were before See now how well this Canon proves in the Pope a power over temporals which says no more but that he has a power he alwaies had but whether that power be temporal or spiritual is wholly silent 'T is something a new way of arguing to bring us in proof that things are as Bellarmin says they are a Canon which says only they are as they were before and force us to a new search to know how they were before of which we have no intelligence from his Canon but as far as we can have intelligence otherwise have reason to think they were quite contrary to what Bellarmin pretends For the French who took themselves particularly concern'd in this Canon did neither then nor since believe any obligation to be subject in temporals and were unsatisfied till they procur'd this Declaration from Clement 5 that things were as they were before and because this satisfied them 't is in my opinion a strong proof that it was then known there was no subjection in temporals due before However it be the proof from the Canon stands plainly thus You must in vertue of this Canon believe the Pope has power over Temporals because he has a power which by the Canon you cannot know whether it be over temporals or no Or you must know by the Canon the Pope has a temporal Power which whether it be temporal or no you must know from something else then the Canon That is I must know in vertue of the Canon what I cannot know in vertue of the Canon Which proof being that in vertue whereof I know signifies the Canon is a proof which is not a proof The third Argument is from Councils and is thus proposed by Bellarmin We prove it thirdly from the Councils before mentioned whereof the two last were general For how can that be brought into doubt or depend on the opinion of men which general Catholick and lawful Councils approve But these ten Councils and especially the two last of Lateran and Lyons do most evidently teach that temporal Princes may be depos'd by the Pope when the necessity of the Church requires it and consequently that the temporal Power of Princes is subject and subordinate to the spiritual power of Popes In my opinion he might have spared that consequently If lawful general Councils evidently teach Deposition they
I think will be so madly blasphemous to question the absolute Soveraignty and Omnipotent power of God over all things But the same person was man too and 't is from that formality the Pope claims for suppose 't is no less impiety to affirm that what belongs to the Divine Nature is not communicable to any to whom that Nature is not communicated then 't is to deny of the Divine Nature that which truly belongs to it And this Bellarmin well understood when he argues thus De Rom. Pont. l. 5. l. 4. Christ as man while he liv'd on Earth neither had nor would have Dominion meerly temporal over any Province or Town But the Pope is the Vicar of Christ and represents Christ to us as he was while he liv'd amongst men Wherefore the Pope as Christ's Vicar and consequently as Pope has not Dominion meerly temporal over any Province or Town Speaking now of Christ precisely as Man those who attribute temporal power to him and make him a secular King go one of these two ways They either alledge right of Succession by descent from David or a particular grant from God the Father in whose power it being to dispose of all Kingdoms they affirm he has transfer'd this Right upon his Son as Man Of these two the first is hard to prove and in my opinion signifies nothing when 't is prov'd The descent indeed of Christ from and that by two several beanches is recorded in the Gospel but descent gives a tittle to none but the nearest of the descent and that Christ was the nearest is so far from appearing that I know not how it possibly should 'T is true that Solomon and his Posterity Reigned to Jeconias but of him the Prophet Hier. 22.30 Foretold there should not be of his seed a man who should sit upon the Throne of David and have power longer in Juda So that the Succession of that Regal Line of David seems ended in him 'T is true Zedechias or Mathanias Reigned 11 years after him who was not of his seed for he was his Uncle but from him to Aristobulus of the Race of the Machabees who first reassum'd the Regal Diadem there was not any King at all amongst the Jews That Nathan or any of his Posterity either Reign'd or had right to Reign nothing appears and much less that Christ was the nearest of the descendents from either that or the other branch In so much darkness I think 't is evident there can be no clear title However I conceive another thing is clear which even supposing that Christ were next in descent to David would quite take away all Title to his Kingdom and that is that in his time the Kindom was legally and justly translated from the Family of David to the Asmoneans For certainly to affirm that the Machabees and their Successors who with excellent vertue recover'd the lost Scepter and setled it in their own Family were all Intruders and Usurpers and Tyrants would be a wild and preposterous assertion and such an one as would unsettle all the translations of Empires which concur in the course of History whereof few perhaps have been made with greater virtue or more justice What King can be secure of his Title if the Asmoneans were no Rightful King And if they were descent from David gives Christ no more title to the Throne of David then Signior Paleologo far be all irreverence from the comparison has to the Empire of Greece or Goodman Plantagenet to the Crown of England A title therefore by descent seems very hard to prove but though it were prov'd I think there is so little got by the bargain that it might have been e'en as well let alone For right to the Kingdom of David is but right to the Kingdom of David and I suppose the Pope will not agree to have his Authority confin'd to the Guetto at Rome and be put to the trouble of Assembling the dispers'd Jews that he may have over whom to Reign and wringing out the ancient Kingdom of David from the present Possessors that he may have where to Reign He knows well enough the strength and stability of long possession and I dare say will not change his spiritual title at Rome for the best and fairest temporal title which can be made him to Hierusalem and where else the right of David can give him any interest 't is hard to imagine The other Plea is a Grant from his Father who may undoubtedly dispose of Kingdoms and every thing else as he pleases But his usual way of giving Kingdoms is to put those to whom he gives them into actual possession by Election Succession the Sword or other secondary means To give bare titles without other fruit is a course not suitable to the method of his proceeding Lawyers indeed have invented a distinction betwixt the Dominion and usus fructus of a thing and the distinction is useful here below but I suspect distinctions are strangers in Heaven and that plain dealing providence deals little in Chican However it be being resolv'd not to penerrate into the depth of the question my self I shall onely observe to you what people say on both sides and leave you to judge This short reflexion by the way I suppose I may irreprovably make that if the Father made any such grant the Son was not ignorant of it And if he knew such power was given him and yet refused to use it I perceive not how he will be excus'd from the blame of not doing what belong'd to him to do A King certainly is as much oblig'd to govern as a Subject to obey and since 't is manifest blasphemy to say Christ was deficient in any point of duty this in reference to my dulness is unavoidable Christ did not perform the duty of a temporal King therefore he was no temporal King But these are onely my thoughts by the by what people say on both sides is this Those who would have Christ a temporal King alledge in proof these places of Scripture which speak of his power in general and expresly apply the name of King to him in particular Such as Heb. 1.2 Whom he made Heir of all things by whom also he made the Worlds Heb. 2.7 Thou hast Crowned him with honour and glory and set him over all the works of thy hands For in that he subjected all things he left nothing not subject to him 1 Cor. 5.24 When he shall have evacuated all Principality and Power and Vertue Mat. 28.18 All power is given me in Heaven and in Earth Jo. 23.3 Knowing that the Father had given all things into his hands Jo. 5.22 For the Father judges no man but has given all judgment to the Son he has given him power to judge because he is the son of man Apoc. 17.14 They shall fight with the Lamb and the Lamb shall overcome them because he is Lord of Lords and King of Kings And again 19.16 And he has written
crime which deserves death they deliver him degraded over to the Secular Magistrate to receive him I know that some would have this to proceed only from the prohibition of the Canons which for decency forbid the Clergy to meddle with bloud But by their favour considering the unanimous Doctrine of the Fathers before delivered I cannot think but the true indecency is the want of power or in St. Bernard's language their thrusting their Sickle into other mens Harvest Otherwise an action truely vertuous seems far from indecent and to purge the Commonwealth of a bad Member is not only a vertue but a necessary one too and such as the Commonwealth cannot subsist without Not only the Judge but the Executioner too may be Saints for all the severity of their Offices and I should think that things which consist with vertue ought not be thought mis-becoming and what are necessary cannot So that I must needs believe this Custom of the Church implies her sence that her Power is at an end when she has us'd her spiritual rod Excommunication and if any more be fit to be done she must have recourse to temporal Power which if it think not fit to proceed I know not why they are not at their liberty This is what occurs to me in Answer to the point you propos'd I hope it will prove satisfactory and fully quiet the jealousie you have of the spiritual Power For certainly there cannot be a more unreasonable fear in the world then to fear that which you know can do you no harm That men should be in the world impowr'd to declare to us the commands of God and way to Heaven and press them by efficacious perswasion upon us and take all opportunities in season and out of season to that purpose is so far from prejudicial to mankind that we cannot fancy a greater nor more needed Good And if you will take it away you must take mankind away too For if our nature require we be govern'd by reason it requires too that men be permitted to shew it us when we see it not of our selves If perswasion and exhortation be thought harmfull to men our nature is fram'd very ill upon which those harmfull things are in proper means to work all commerce and all society must end when these things are forbidden For what use is there of conversation if it become unlawfull for me to perswade another man to his own or my good If it were not folly to dilate a point so plain what might not be said of it Farther if men become obstinate and will not hear reason it is very natural and very fit they should be reclaim'd if it may be by openly shewing them their fault and making them sensible they are in the wrong which if they be 't is fit they should amend if they be not the company before whom the reprehension is made will see it and take their parts And he who reprehends them wrongfully will incur the shame intended for them So that by this Power none will run the hazard so much as of shame but those whose obstinacy in sin truly deserves it Indeed I have not known this Power put in practice whether we owe the discontinuance of it to the Laws or Confession but 't is plain 't is in the Church and good for Mankind it should be so After this if the Sinner remain yet obstinate what remains but that vertuous men and the Church should have no more to do with him who will not do good to himself and may do harm to others but look upon him in our Saviours language as an Ethnic and Publican and have no Commerce and Communication with him till Repentance restore him to his former condition In which I take the substance of Excommunication to consist And this I conceive is so far from harm that I suppose you will make no difficulty to allow it all not only ours but all who pretend to the title of a Church claiming thus much Power at least For that which you only do and only can fear that this Spiritual Power should go too far and look upon the disposing of Kingdoms and altering Commonwealths as things within her reach I hope I have brought you sufficient evidence to make you see that the All fore-seeing Providence of our Wise Law-maker has provided abundantly for your security in distinguishing the two Powers and putting them into several hands and committing the Spiritual Sword to the Church the Material to the Prince For if the Spiritual Power cannot use Force and be only over the Willing and such as may chuse whether they will obey or no which you see the Fathers plainly affirm there is no possible fear from it If any encroachments be made to the prejudice of other mens Rights we have the same security against them as against all Injuries the Protection of our Prince oblig'd to defend us and arm'd with Power to do it We are taught He bears not the Sword in vain And we see by experience he does not For notwithstanding these flattering Positions which you make so terrible Princes know well enough how to preserve themselves and their Subjects from receiving any harm from them So Catholics have done in all times and so they do still 'T is true they are generally willing enough to gratifie the Pope with permitting any thing to be said in his favour and shew that respect to the Common Father of Christendom as to let him and those who are addicted to him say even what they please But yet they do as they think fit And make no difficulty to Assemble National Councels and settle even Ecclesiastical Affairs with their own Bishops nay to make War upon the Pope himself And while they use the Sword are justified still by the Pens of Learned men who take their parts For all this they leave not off their respect to their Church but so prosecute their Civil concerns that they leave the Rights of the Church untoucht and make Peace with so much reputation to the Pope that they refuse not sometimes to ask pardon even when they are the persons wrong'd But while they give this respect to the Vicar of Christ they leave not for all that to do their business and preserve their own Rights And while they keep the Sword in their own hands let the Pope talk as he pleases think themselves secure enough They apprehend no great danger from Solligisms which they can use at any time as Alexander did the Gordian knot Notwithstanding since it may be dangerous to a Prince that the minds of his Subjects be possest with false Doctrines especially in matters concerning Religion which men generally prefer before Allegiance according to that Aequum est Deo magis obedire quam Regi though in truth Religion and Allegiance can never interfare it might concern the prudence of Princes to take that care in these matters which is fitting But I am no Counsellour and my condition obliges
me to think they do I have shew'd you what the Sentiments of the Fathers and the Church are for the rest it belongs not to me This which I have done being only to obey your Commands and testifie the power you have over Your c. The Seventh and Eighth OF THE Controversial LETTERS OR 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 at the Ship in St. Pauls Church-yard 1673. FRIEND I Know not how it happens but the more you shew me methinks the less I see While I read your Letters I find not what to except against yet when I look off I remain still unsatisfi'd That there should be a Spiritual Power distinct from the Temporal is plainly necessary in it self and own'd by us We go not to Westminster Hall for remission of our sins or to hear the Word of God preach'd or receive the Sacraments These things belong to Spiritual Magistrates amongst whom the Chief with us is the Bishop of Canterbury as with you the Bishop of Rome And since for Orders sake and the nature of Government a Chief there must be It matters not much whether as one wittily said the top link of the Spiritual Chain be fastned to the Chair of Canterbury or of Rome So the Temporal Primacy be undisturb'd and undisturbable by the Spiritual it seems all one vvhether have it I mean in point of Safety for true or false is another question And truly I neither see how your Spiritual Primacy should disturb it if all be true you say nor why I should doubt of the truth of what you say while I consider you say nothing of your own head but bring such Vouchers for every thing that I think your Church cannot say otherwise unless she throw off that Reverence which with so much ostentation she professes to have for Antiquity And yet of necessity there must be more in it The mischiefs against which I would be secur'd have actually happened Princes have been deposed and the world has been too much concerned in the effects of this Power to be ignorant of it Our own Princes have not been exempt from attempts of this nature and the hazard the nation ran in 88. is not yet out of our memory So that manifestly either you believe one thing and do another or you have not inform'd me truly but covered an ugly face with a handsom vizar Truly I believe better of your candour than to suspect you deceive me by design yet certainly things are not so cleer and smooth of your side as you would make me believe To read your Papers one would think nothing could be more innocent than your doctrine in this Point yet the vvorld is witness of doings far from Innocent I must confess I was sometime sufficiently perplext to unriddle this mystery But at last I remembred Bellarmin and vvhen I reflected on his Indirect and in ordine ad Spiritualia Power methought I had found the clew to guide me out of this Labyrinth That distinction does it Friend and in truth I never so well understood the vertue of Distinctions before for by the help of this I perceive you may say enough to pass for honest men and in the mean time reserve as much liberty as heart can vvish to play the knave Pardon my bluntness 't is without malice I assure you but I am too much intent upon the Question to be choice of my vvords especially to you and consider a little You have told me the Spiritual and Civil Power are distinct that the Popes Power is Spiritual and is not Coactive Why Bellarmin and any that follows him will grant all this But if vve conclude thence That the Pope has nothing to do vvith Temporals they vvill not suffer us but say His Power is indeed of its own nature Spiritual and directly regards only the good of Souls but if Temporals concern that good His Power is extended to them too not directly as if they were its proper object but indirectly as they collaterally fall in and are joyn'd to that which is its proper object So that they intend not that any part of that Authority which I conceive prejudicial to Princes and inconsistent with Government should be taken from him but plainly seek to establish it though another vvay and whereas Others go plainly to work and tell us without more adoe That the Pope is the only Supream Monarch of the Earth These go a little about the bush and say indeed He is not directly Lord of Temporals but come at last to the same and tell us He may as uncontroulably dispose of them as if he were If this be true all you have said is to no purpose and all you can say while you stick to this will not absolve you from inconsistency with Civil Government For 't is a plain case If the Pope may interpose in the disposition of Temporals as often as they have relation to Spirituals that He may interpose alwaies Since of necessity they must and cannot but be alwaies ordered either well or ill and both cases belong to the concern of the Soul And then 't is all one as some body in this case handsomly said whether my eyes be put out by a direct stroke of a Tennis Ball or by Bricol William Rufus was as mortally wounded by the Arrow which glanced as if it had been shot directly at him If Princes may lawfully be depos'd and their Subjects absolv'd from their Allegiance and oblig'd to obey the commands of another and that in Temporals they are no longer Sovereign nor absolute even in Temporals and whether the Power above them be Direct or Indirect Spiritual or not Spiritual so it be a Power and can act they are alwaies unsafe Pray Friend let me have no dodging Tell me plainly Is this the Doctrine of your Church or is it not If it be unless you can shew me That those can be good Subjects and true to their Prince who acknowledge another Power which they are to obey against their Prince and how that Prince is Supream in Temporals who has another above him whose Commands he is to obey in the disposition of those Temporals or if he do not his Subjects are not to obey him I must for all you have said continue in my first thoughts and not believe you tolerable in any Commonwealth If it be not true I think you would deserve very well of your Church to free her from the scandal which the credit of those who hold this and the countenance she gives them brings upon her In all events I beseech you speak plainly for else I must needs think either that your Church teaches you to hold what you are asham'd to own or vvhich is
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
not one has been kill'd by any Pope or his command Even Antipopes themselves their greatest enemyes have found not only safety but gentle and favourable usage from them when they have faln into their hands This they amplyfy and dress as handsomly as they can but methinks after all t is but a sorry dish For sure t is no God-a-mercy to the opinion that Popes have been better men then It would have made them On the contrary since they were therefore good men because they did not do what the opinion allows what must the opinion be which if they had follow'd they had not been good men That they did not do ill they owe to their own vertue but that they might have done ill makes the opinion naught At least I conceive so and had I been in their place would rather have given no answer then such a one For another inconvenience he urges that Princes may be deposed and murthered for any crime which in the judgement of the Pope deserves it if he sell a Bishoprick plunder a Church fall into any sort of wickedness nay if he live not according as his state and condition requires To this last they except as a wresting of Bellarmins words beyond his intention but for the rest reply again that 't is another odious amplification and that it may be understood for what causes Princes may be depos'd by the sentences against Hen. 4. and Fred. 2. In general that the causes must be very weighty and such that the punishment be to edification not destruction I must acknowledge my dulness and that I comprehend not the force of this answer To my apprehension by the sentences against these two Emperors can be known no more then the reason why these two Emperors were deposed from whence it may be gathered that for the same faults a Prince may become liable to the same punishment but whether there be any other deposing faults and which they be cannot I think be understood by them Then again these weighty and to edification-causes may for any thing they say to the contrary be any which the Pope judges such Now this is that which VVithrington objects and I had thought that to say the same with my Adversary had not been to answer him The third Inconvenience is that not only the Pope but every Bishop may depose by this doctrine and with a little more stretching perhaps every Curate too where the Prince belongs to their Diocess or Parish And this he justifies by an argument of Bellarmins against the Canonists which he puts thus If the Pope be the supreme Lord of the whole Christian world every Bishop is Lord of the Towns subject to his Bishoprick for what the Pope is in the universal Church every Bishop is in his own Diocess They reply that by this argument it may perhaps be concluded that a Bishop may excommunicate a Prince as well as the Pope but not depose him because though he be in his Diocess what the Pope is in the Church as much as amounts to being truly a Pastor and truly a spiritual Prince not a Vicar or temporary Delegate yet the Pope has more power over the whole then a Bishop over his particular For which reason deposition was reserv'd to the Pope in the Council of Lateran VVherefore Bellarmins Argument is good and Withringtons naught He who undertakes the defence of another must stand to it that his man is still in the right but otherwise I see not why one argument should be thought good and the other bad If the Pope be a temporal Prince the Bishop is a temporal Prince says Bellarmin because he is in his part what the Pope is in the whole this is good says Schulkenius If the Pope be a virtually temporal Prince the Bishop is a virtually temporal Prince says VVithrington and for the same reason how comes this to be bad because says Schulkenius the Pope has more power over the whole then the Bishop over his particular This belongs to Bishop-craft which I understand not but if it be true first Bellarmins argument is as bad as VVithringtons for it may be reply'd to it that it does not follow the Bishop is a temporal Prince though the Pope be because though the Bishop be no Vicar yet he has not the power which the Pope has And then again though the Pope be a greater virtually temporal Prince then the Bishop yet the Bishop is a virtually temporal Prince too and may proceed beyond excommunication and spiritual jurisdiction and set his hand to temporals For if spiritual power be virtually temporal and the Bishop have it and this in his own right as well as the Pope not by way of delegation I hope he may use what he has and dispose of temporal things in order to spiritual good And where shall this stop To mention as he does reservations is to grant that it belongs to the nature of the power though the extent of it were afterwards confin'd by consent Besides reservations are temporary and changeable things and what is reserv'd to day may not be so to morrow However if the greater virtually temporal Prince may depose Kings sure the lesser may depose private men for this temporal vertue must be able to do something in Temporals And thus much is inconvenience enough in conscience though I see not well how he avoids the other Were I to answer Sculkenius I should except against his understanding the Samenes which Bellarmin puts in Pope and Bishop of being both spiritual Princes not Vicars which I verily think is to make Bellarmin say what he never dreamt of or if he did was quite from his purpose But that is not my business I am only to observe how matters stand which are as you see In the last place Withrington urges that this supream power over temporals delivered in such general and unlimited terms not determining how great or what kind of spiritual good that must be in order to which Deposition is lawful seems a just occasion of perpetual suspicion and jealousy in Princes and apt to disturb the publick quiet c. They answer Christ may as justly be reprehended for delivering the spiritual power in general terms as Commonwealths for submitting in general to obedience of Princes whom they create Whereof I take neither to be true for Commonwealths have things call'd Laws and Customs by which doubts rising from general expressions are explained And for the general expression in the Gospel whatever you shall bind c. I hope he will not perswade us but as general as it sounds to us it was very particularly understood by the Apostles And as they understood it so they practis'd and so they taught and among other things subjection to Princes notwithstanding the amplitude of that Commission But if both were true still the inconvenience remains for ought I can see since whatever be the reason of the general terms us'd in the Gospel and elsewhere it abates
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
good or no is a dispute in which I am not concern'd it not importing much to our times to know what was just in those For whether his Title were just that of his present Successors is not a jot the better nor a jot the worse if it were stark naught Wherefore I positively deny the Inference imply'd in our Author's discourse the Conqueror did arbitrarily dispose of the Kingdom therefore K. John justly might because that Arbitrariness of his does not conclude he had Right so much as to the Crown and much less to dispose as he pleas'd of it 'T is farther urged That the very granting of Magna Charta from the Prince to the People is a plain Argument that at least the power of our Norman Princes was originally arbitrary and unconfin'd till themselves were pleas'd to restrain it by voluntary compacts and concessions And this as the former is true of Power but I cannot grant it of Right The Fact is interpretable both ways and may as well argue Right in the People to the things granted as in Princes to grant them And if Justice required that such things should be granted the Power which till the grants were past hindred the People from what it was fit they should have can hardly be thought just The Truth is this difficulty would ask rather a Treatise than a Letter The Notions of Power and Right would be explained and setled It would be shewn how Right is acquired and how lost How the Freedom of Nature is changed into subjection why and how far some command others obey and in vertue of what with twenty other Considerations necessary enough to clear the difficulty as it ought but too long for a Packet To say briefly as much as may serve turn I observe that we use these words Just or Right as all others in different senses We call him a Just man who gives to every one what the Law makes his due in which sense the Law is the Rule of Just and Vnjust Just meaning as much as agreeable Vnjust the same as contrary to Law But sometimes we apply the same Terms to Laws themselves and say some are Just others Unjust As if Marriage or the propagation of posterity were universally forbidden or every body commanded to cut off their Legs or Arms such Laws would be thought and called Unjust In this case the notion of those words is very different from what it was before Unjustice now signifying opposition not to Law which cannot be opposite to it self but to something else which the Law-makers had in their eye when they made a just Law and which was their Rule and directed them to order what they did and not the contrary If we reflect what this is we shall find that Just and Vnjust are said with reference to the nature of man For other things being made for his use are not alwayes to be dealt with as is most fitting for them but as they may best serve him But man must be used as his nature requires and if he be not we say he is wronged I conceive therefore that the Root of Justice lyes in the nature of man and that the consideration of what is fitting or unfit for it is the original Rule of Just and Unjust To descend to more particulars and dispute how far one man may justly be hindred from his particular good for the greater good of the society in which he lives with the rest of the Considerations which belong to Law-makers is not to my purpose It is enough if I observe that Just signifies radically Commensurate or Fit generally implies Agreement which Agreement is supposed to be made on sight of what is fit for both parties agreeing So that antecedently to Laws which are and ought to be in practice at least betwixt members of the same common-wealth look't on as the only Rules of Justice there is a proportion or exigence of Nature with respect to which some things are Just others Unjust and to which when Laws have not an eye they themselves are thought not Just And this explication I take to be not only true but universally acknowledged For if positive agreements be thought absolutely necessary to the notion of Justice I know not how that notion can be found in the Laws of Nature and Nations which are the highest and most binding of all others and yet are before and manifestly without agreements To apply this to our case I consider that Government has been embrac'd for the good of the world to avoid the mischief of lawless humors destructive to society and that the Good of the Commonwealth is or ought to be the Princes Rule from which when he swerves his Action is not Just because unproportioned and not suited to that exigence of Nature which is the root of Justice yet it does not follow that a Prince every time he does unjustly may be resisted That is another and at present unconcerning Question I consider farther that nothing can more import the good of the Commonwealth than the Governors themselves For they are the main hinges on which the common good turns and the Fountains from which all goods flow to particulars If these be such as may endanger long setled Laws and Customs and render the properties of subjects uncertain and unsecure the Commonwealth alwaies totters and often falls But all this will unavoidably follow if the nomination of supream Governors be left to arbitrary pleasure They may be strangers and through ignorance unable to preserve national Laws They may be enemies and through ill affection studious to break them In fine to fancy that any thing can be more against the common good than to want known rules of succession and that a Nation should be bound to obey whoever is named by chance or humor is to fancy there may be some member more considerable to the Body than the Head If this discourse be good it may be understood how the Arbitrary power even of Conquerors may be bounded otherwise than by their voluntary Compacts and Concessions namely by nature and by the proportion of their Actions to the subject on which they Act. It is true that antecedently to compacts their Actions cannot be called Vnjust as unjust signifies breach of agreements but as Vnjust signifies breach of proportion and the violation of what nature requires They may be unjust even before they bind themselves by compact to observe this proportion This now I concieve is our Case and that since the good of the Commonwealth is the Rule of the Princes Action and that 't is plainly against that good that their supream Governors should be appointed arbitrarily the arbitrary dispositions of the Crown mentioned by our Author were effects more of Power than Right I think himself will grant if those Norman Princes were unconfin'd till they voluntarily confin'd themselves that 't was at least reasonable and fit they should be confin'd in this point and sure a Power to act unreasonably and
Polls likewise and their share in other Taxes if they have any thing liable to the Tax Wherefore though Bellarmin went as far as ever he could to find out this Formally and cannot go farther though he would never so fain unless he blind folks For people who have their eyes can see where the Clergy materially live yet this Formality will do the Clergy no good the material share which he cannot deny them drawing along with it a share in punishments when they deserve it and Taxes too And as the Clergy are no way advantaged the Common-wealth I believe will be as little concern'd in his subtlety So they can punish the persons and assess the goods I suppose they will not mind much with what Formalities men of speculation amuse themselves But let us look upon those Exemptions a little nearer That Common-wealth I conceive is sickly and not like to live long where the members are not protected from injury and provision made for their quiet But where is no power to do it there can be no Common-wealth For a Common-wealth is the means to procure quiet and safety for which men joyn and continue in Society It can be no means to procure them if it have no power to procure them and so ceases to be a Common-wealth and becomes an independent unsociated multitude standing every one on his own guard and at War with his Neighbour I know not whether it may be called so much as a Heard of a kind of rational Beasts preying as meer Beasts the stronger upon the weaker Now the power of the whole Body being as has been discoursed in the Head or Prince the Prince must have power to right his subjects in case of wrong or there can be neither Head nor Body Neither is it material from whence the wrong comes Whoever does it whether Native or Alien in or out of his Dominions become subject to his Prince whom he has wrong'd as far as concerns reparation Relief is sought at his hands and he gives it by forcing the offender to amends if he be within his reach or if he be not 't is just to pursue him where he is and right his Subjects by War This Reason indispensably subjects Clergy-men to the power of the Prince even though they had according to Bellarmin's extravagant conceit another Prince of their own For 't is not what they are or to whom they belong but what They may do If they can do wrong we need not look for more And that they may do wrong is something too plain Whatever Exemptions they claim or have they have none from the corruption of Nature 'T were to be wish'd they had That one Exemption would be more worth than all the rest But they may and alas do fall ometimes as well as others and need as well as others the fear of punishment to awe the crookedness of Nature into some straitness It would sound harsh and shew perhaps invidious to dilate this Head into all sorts of wickedness and shew what might be done and must be suffered if there were no help for it Let it suffice that to deny the Prince a power over them when they happen to break the Laws and fall into crimes is to abandon private men to all the wrongs which the Clergy may be tempted to do and want vertue to resist the Temptation to abandon the publick to the remediless danger of machinations if at any time they arrive at the height of wickedness Treason In short 't is to deny the Prince to be Prince For he is plainly no Prince who has no power to right his Subjects By the way to avoid mistakes let me declare once for all by Prince I mean all along the subject of supreme power wheresoever lodged in one or more persons according to the different constitutions of different Common-wealths That variety is nothing to me and I will not embroil my self in unconcerning things It may perhaps be thought that these are causless surmizes and that the goodness of Clergy-men is wrong'd by being so much as suspected of doing wrong to others and that however at worst right may upon complaint be had against as many as own him whom Bellarmin makes their Prince But I doubt there is more of Bigottery than sence in those thoughts Not that I question the goodness of the Clergy But 't is not for men to change the security of relief when they need it which they have from their Head as Members into a faint and possibly deceitful confidence of a private mans vertue And then to seek relief from any but ones own Prince to omit that 't is unpracticable and has a hundred insuperable inconveniences besides 't is plainly against the nature and end of a Common-wealth For men live united to obtain redress of wrongs by their union and would quickly break it if they be forc'd to seek it elsewhere and where the very pursuit of it may chance prove as great a wrong as that whereof they pursue redress As these things are too plain to be a secret any where they are understood in Italy it self and when time was were actually pleaded 'T was urged in behalf of the Venetians in their contests about this matter with Paul V Consideratio sup Cens Stis suae P P. Pauli V. That the power of punishing offences against the Laws could not be separated from the supreme Power and that to say a Prince had any body in his Dominions not subject to him in Temporal matters or any other concerning the publick good was all one as to say he was not Prince To make which discourse the more striking They brought it to his own door and alledged That the Pope exempted indeed from Bishops and Archbishops but could not exempt from himself without ceasing to be Pope They urged also what peradventure is more sensible in a Country so impatient of injuries but yet ruinous every where That the Laity being wrong'd by the Clergy and not revenged by the Magistrate will revenge themselves and which is worse out of despair of being righted when they are once wronged study to be before-hand and prevent the wrongs they fear Which what a gate it sets open to the disturbance and ruine of the Common-wealth is needless to be mentioned I have not been sollicitous particularly of the Exemption from Taxes claim'd by Bellarmin because I think it will not be hard to get his consent that the Goods of the Clergy go along with their Persons Nevertheless we may briefly reflect which I think was hinted before that the Prince or supreme power is to provide for the security of the whole that provision cannot be made without means that these means being in the hands of particulars unless they may be taken out of those hands to be employ'd for the publick good as occasion requires no provision can be made and the end of Society is lost And since the Clergy have their share oftentimes a very large one in the
men They cannot be without such things as the nature of men requires Meat to feed and Cloaths to cover them and this not only what is barely sufficient to preserve them from Hunger and Cold but as the temper of the World is where Poverty is alwaies accompanied with abjection and scorn in a proportion which may keep them in reputation with those among whom They live and with whom in a condition of Contempt They would want credit to do them the good they ought Besides there must be Churches for people to Assemble in The service there must not be slovenly and sordid and apt to tempt those who come to irreverence or abstain from coming again for scorn You I know blame our Church for excessive Pomp in the Sacred Service I for my part think no Pomp can be too much Had you reflected as much as I have done on the nature of man and how strong the Animal part is yet in the best of us peradventure you would be of my mind But letting that pass there goes expence to all this and who will be most thrifty in the Service of God will find it cannot be performed in any tolerable way for a little Christianity would quickly be in a lamentable case if the Clergy had not wherewith to maintain themselves as 't is fit They should be maintained or their maintenance depended on the Capricio's of often froward and sometimes malicious men They must of necessity either diminish into a number too small or languish in a contempt unable to benefit the World If there were no money to build Churches no provision to keep them in repair no allotments for the expences of the Service in them within a while there would be either no Churches or no Service in them If They were debar'd the exercise of their Functions or transplanted into other Callings or so taken up with other employments that they could not attend their own whether by the humorous pleasure of other men or their own irregular passions mankind must needs lose the benefit it receives by them and that is no less than the hopes because the means of a happy Eternity That both the men therefore and the Goods appropriated to these ends be look'd upon as Sacred and appropriated in a peculiar manner to God and wicked or inconsiderate men be aw'd by the fear of Sacriledge from prejudicing Christianity by medling with either is a great mercy of God and great benefit to Man But it follows not therefore They may on no occasion be touch'd A Clergy-man may become wicked and hardned and obstinate in wickedness The good of the Common-wealth may require that the incorrigible offender be cut off whether for Example or to avoid perpetual Injuries and disturbances to particulars or sometimes hazard to the whole Can any man think if this be a requisite and necessary good that God would hinder it and that He who neither has nor can have other end in all he commands then good to man should command what is harmful to man The injury to him if any could be done him would be to harbour so preposterous a conceit of him and his commands as if he would be displeased when we did our selves good But if the Temporal Sword must be used 't is evident it must be used by the Temporal Power for the Spiritual has it not to use And because it must not strike blindly the Temporal Power must also take cognizance of the matter and see why and when and how far it is fit to strike For the rest here is great reason They should be exempted from Magistracy and Souldiery from Trades Offices and whatever Services of the Common-wealth For their own Function plainly requires a whole man whether you look upon the qualities necessary for it neither to be gained nor preserved without long and constant pains or the perpetual and those necessary occasions of exercising it Between both They have employment for every minute of time they have and for more if they had it and must of necessity neglect their own duty if any considerable part of their time be taken with any other Again as a man of no esteem shall be but ill heard of whatsoever he speaks there will be small efficacy in their Exhortations to vertue and good life if They be not in good reputation Wherefore if at any time They yield to the temptations of human frailty it is but fit their faults be kept as much as may be from the eyes of the Vulgar and rectified among themselves And if they have Judges of their own quality to end their differences and correct their misdemeanours and preserve their reputation unsoyl'd with the Laity the benefit is not less perhaps more to the Laity than to Them In fine 't is for the advantage of the Common-wealth that They have whatever is useful to perform in the best manner a Function which is more advantagious to the Common-wealth than any other is or can be And if the Common-wealth grant Them not all such Exemptions or Priviledges or however you will call them it plainly wrongs it self But yet it is the Common-wealth which grants them For as for Judges unless they Act in the nature of Arbitrators by voluntary consent and submission of the partys They cannot proceed to force but by vertue of the Temporal Sword and however Ecclesiastical the Persons be the Judges are pure Secular Judges when they proceed in that manner Again since no person nor his Service can be taken from the Common-wealth without its good will and consent the other Exemptions are also from the Common-wealth though peradventure in things apparently inconsistent with the Function to allow the Function may be to grant the Exemption without more ado That of particular Judges is more subject to the circumstances of Time and Place and therefore more depends on the pleasure of Common-wealths which also proceed differently as every one finds most convenient for itself As for their Goods to note this briefly by the way The Clergy were at first rather Trustees or Stewards than Proprietors Being look'd upon as men free from affections to the things of this World the piety of rich men gave largely to them to maintain Themselves and the Poor whence their Revenues got the name of the Patrimony of the Poor besides to keep the Churches in repair and furnish the expences of the Service in it The money thus given was put into the Bishops hands and by his appointment distributed to the several uses by the Deacons who gave account of their distribution to the Bishop Afterwards the passions of men giving occasion to complain of inequality in the distributions this Arbitrary management was altered by Canons and the Whole divided into four parts One for the Poor another for the Clergy a third for Repairs the fourth for the Bishop and his Family to exercise Hospitality In process of time this too was changed What became of the share of the Poor and