and that the rather because I will therein give a brief account of the state of the Popes and of the means and wayes by which they have grown to the present height of jurisdiction they now exercise as well over other Churches as over Princes and in that respect it may serve for an answer to the Doctors twentieth additional Chapter without incurring a just censure of an absolute digression from the subject matter of the Doctors discourse CHAP. XIV That the Pope hath no power to depose any Prince although an Heretick That Bishops are not equal with Kings and that the antient practice of Rome's church was against this neither claiming the same in Spiritual or Temporal capacities THe Pope of Rome claimes to be Peters successor and by vertue thereof to be Christs Vice-general universal father of the Church the onely dispensor of Apostolick Benedictions and supreme head of the Catholick Church these are the titles and appellations by which he desires to be distinguished that by these it may be known he is dignified above all the Clergy upon earth I have in the second Chapter given some satisfaction concerning the unjustness of this his claime yet I might admit him what he here desires to be thought to be and notwithstanding prove that that power of jurisdiction will not extend to a warrant his busie intermedling in temporal affaires much less be a sufficient warrant for his dethroning of any Prince or Potentate or disobliging his people and subjects from their obedience and duty to such civil Magistracy as is set over those people to rule and govern them In prosecution of this matter I will first treat of the power of Kings and Bishops in general then examine the Popes power in particular Kings are called sons of the most high Of the prerogative of Kings 2 Sam. 7.14 Gods on earth Psal 82.6 All people are to obey them in all they command Josh 1.28 They have their Commission from Almight God by me Kings reign Prov. 8.15 and Rom. 13. Their wrath is as the roaring of a Lyon Prov. 19.12 And if they transgress none is to question them Psal 51.4 Lyranus upon this Psalm says David had sinned against God alone as a Judge to punish him for being a King he had no superior to punish him and yet he had sinned against Vriah causing him to be murdered but as to be punished he crys out unto the Lord Against thee only have I done this evil And herewith agree Saint Ambrose de Apolog. David cap. 10. pag. 386. and Hugo Cardinalis upon that Psalm Kings shall bear rule and exercise dominion Luk. 22. He is the Minister of God to take vengeance on them that do evil The whole Scripture magnifies the majesty power and dominion of Kings which it witnesses to be given to those absolute Monarches and Kings mentioned in Scripture even by God himself that power which they had being of God Rom. 13. And none should say unto them What dost thou As for Priests it is plain by the Scripture that those under the Law were to offer sacrifice for the sins of the people Of the Office of Bishops 1 Chron. 9.2 Heb. 9.6 5.1 Gods Covenant with them was of life peace and that their lips should preserve knowledge Malach. 2.4 And the Priests under the Gospel are a holy Priesthood to offer up spiritual sacrifice acceptable to God by Jesus Christ 1 Pet. 2.5 they are commanded to pray for all men 1 Tim. 2. For Kings and all that be in authority and Peter the prime Apostle was commanded to follow Christ who left him an example of suffering and obedience which S. Peter himself witnesses to the world 1 Pet. 2.21 For hereunto are ye called for Christ also suffered for us leaving us an ensample that yee should follow his steps From all which places of Scripture may be deduced these conclusions Kings are representatives of God the Father to them is given all power and dominion to rule and command Priests are the lively Images of Christ to whom he has left his precept of humility to be obedient and serve To Kings is left authority to punish evil doers to Priests to pray for all men even their own oppressors not to recompence evil for evil Rom. 12.17 Kings are to use the material sword for vengeance Priests the spiritual sword the Word to make supplication for all Saints Eph. 6.18 Kings are not to be rebuked Priests are to suffer with patience Kings sit in Gods throne Priests serve at his Altar Kings are Angels of God 2 Sam. 14.20 Priests are the Embassadors of Christ beseeching us in Christs stead to be reconciled unto God Yet Kings though they be thus exalted and superintendent over all they have an especial charge to respect the Priests and hearken unto them Num. 27.21 And it is the duty of Priests to reverence them 2 Chro. 13. Priests pay their tribute of obedience and duty but Kings are to recompence it with respect and love The power of the Priest over the people ceased when Saul was King and yet Saul was to hearken to Samuel The Majesty of the one must not despise the humility of the other the King as I said is the Minister of Justice the Priests the Messengers of Mercy These two must not clash against each other but with Princely David ought with harmonious concurrence of spirit to sing of mercy and judgement mercy and truth to meet together righteousness and peace to kiss each other For as there is a Noli me tangere for the one Touch not mine anointed so there is a precept of preservation for the other Do my prophets no harm There is a general tye laid upon all Let every soul be subject to the higher powers wherein the Ministers of the Gospel are included and likewise there is a rule of obedience prescribed to all Heb. 13. Obey them that have the oversight of you for that they watch for your souls c. wherein Princes are not exempted Which shews that Princes are to hearken to their word and doctrine and to be courteous to them and not to grieve the holy Spirit of God Eph. 4. and they are to be obedient to Princes for that they bear not the sword in vain So that these two seem to have a mutual dependencie each on other the Priest must exhort with sound doctrine to which obedience must be given upon paine of damnation and the King may enjoyn the practice of that or any other rule of faith agreeable to the word of God which the Bishop likewise upon the same paine is bound to observe onely here is the difference in point of variance betwixt King and Priest the King is above the Priest to execute Judgement the Priest being bound to obey not to rule which is no confusion of the Ecclesiastical estate they being hereunto ordained to suffer for Christs sake when it shall please God for their sins or the sins of the people to
which she would derive all her power and jurisdictions doth therefore teach the people this tradition under paine of Anathema That Jesus met Peter as he was going out of Rome and the steps of their feet as they two stood talking have left an impression in the place which remaines to this day Now let a man examine the Scriptures and he shall find Saint Peter himself witness against this tradition in the third of the Act. 21. where he says That Christ ascended and the heavens shall containe him till he come which coming is called his second coming to Judgement according to the Article of the Apostles Creed and therefore that he should be bodily there with Peter so bodily as to leave the impression of his footsteeps is against Saint Peters own saying against the whole current of the Scriptures and against the Apostles Creed So I referr this to the Reader whether to believe Saint Peter himself or his pretended successor in this point It may be that Peter might see Christ in a vision as Stephen did Act. 7. but not bodily for that he is there in heaven whom the heavens must containe till all things be dissolved Another tradition the church of Rome teaches How that in the Church of the Fryers minors at Rome is a picture of the Virgin Mary drawn by Saint Luke which Gregory carrying in procession in the time of a Plague the Plague ceased and they taught the people that it was by our Ladyes meanes for the honor done to her Image and so ascribe that to her which is due unto the Lord God he correcting by Judgements and out of his goodness extending his mercy as seems best to his divine wisdome and hereby they neglect that duty God has enjoyned them in that they did flye to the Lady Mary for succor in that day of their visitation whenas God has commanded them to call upon him in the day of trouble and he will hear them The Papists likewise teach that in the Church of Sebastian in Rome an Angel appeared to Saint Gregory as he was saying Mass at the Altar of Saint Sebastian and said to him these words In this place there is true remission of all sins brightness and light everlasting joy and gladness without end And this favours of Atheisme to affirme that on earth there can be light everlasting as if the world should never have an end which is contrary to Scripture for that they plainly affirm an utter dissolution of all things 2 Pet. 3. And Saint Matthew witnesses How that at the end of the world the Sun shall be turned into darkness and the Moon and the Stars shall lose their light the Stars shall fall from Heaven and the powers of the Heavens shall be shaken They likewise teach that in the Church of Calixius is the Altar whereon Saint Peter said Mass which is not probable in respect he never mentions it in Scripture nor Saint Luke that ever he used any such thing besides the sacrifice of the Altar is against the Scripture as may appear in the sixteenth Chapter The Church of Rome likewise teaches that in the Church of Saint Johns the Lateran in Rome is a Chappel called the Sacrists wherein is remission of all sins both à poena culpa and that not far from the same Chappel is an ascent of thirty two steps which were the same Christ went up when he went before Pilate and were brought from Hierusalem thither and that whosoever ascends those steps for every step he hath a hundred yeers of pardon which is contrary to the Scriptures Matth. 1.21 It is Jesus that must save his people from their sins and the whole Scriptures witness that by his stripes we are healed it is his blood that is shed for many for the remission of their 〈◊〉 It is the Lamb of God that takes away the sins of the world Joh. 1.29 Neither is there salvation in any other Act. 4.12 and through his name all that believe shall receive remission of sins Act. 10.43 he being for that end sent into the world 1 Tim. 1.29 which gave himself for our sins that he might redeem us out of this present evil woâ—ld Gal. 1. and is a reconciliation for our 〈◊〉 1 Joh. 4. without which we are not cleansed his blood onely being our remission Hebr. 9. Wherefore how â—bominable is this Romish tradition which is for no other end but to cozen people out of their money who for the pardon to be received by going up those steps must liberally disâ—urse to his holiness use who more thinks upon that private advantage then Christian-like considers how by â—hat tradition he makes the death of Christ in vaine With many such like traditional stories doth the Church of Rome delude her blind votaries which I blush to repeate and will rather send the Reader to her own Legends where he shall finde great store of these Papal knocks then that I should be the â—uthor to discover these her fopperies which I rather wish were not at all then to her shame to be remembered For my part I honour Rome as the metropolis of Europe and her Church as being at first of Apostolical faith and doctrine and do heartily wish that these late gross absurdities I finde repeated of her were not true that so we might embrace her as one sister and might together serve the true and everliving God who is a Spirit and will be worshiped in Spirit and in Truth and that we might together keep the unity of Spirit in the bond of Peace for GOD is not the Author of confusion but of Peace as we see in all the Churches of the Saints Thus Reader I have briefly run through most part of the Doctors book and though I have not observed the very same method the Doctor has followed yet many of his Chapters being to one and the same purpose as who please to peruse his book will finde it true I have couched an answer to most material parts thereof in what I have formerly writ and now I am come to his twentieth Chapter which is concerning the Popes headship Now for that I have given answer to this in the second Chapter in relation to his universality it may be thought by some needless to treat any further thereof in relation to his spiritual jurisdiction and for that the Doctor hath not at all treated of his Temporal power it may be others be thought extravagant in me to add a Chapter concerning that particular Yet because that the Pope is bolstered up in this point by vertue of his Spiritual headship by many who extend it generally as well over temporalties as spiritualties And for that the Doctor having formerly treated of Romes Catholickship and of her universality and of her being the onely Catholick Church yet notwithstanding adds this twenteth Chapter of the Popes headship and for that as I said this headship is by same extended unto Temporalties I crave pardon to add this ensuing Chapter
but was reduced back and centred again in its own proper sphear and that not by any compulsive power but as if the succeeding Pope Adrian had felt som compunction of Spirit for detaining that which of Right belonged to the Civill Magistrate he did freely and by consent of a Councell at Lateran give power to Charles the Great to appoint the Bishop of Rome and to dispose of his See Apostolick which so remained in him and his Successours for a long time and since diverse Popes of Rome by vertue hereof have been deposed as Benedict 5th by Otho the first and Leo placed in his roome and Gelasius deposed by Hen. 5. and several others which came not in in right of the Emperours as may appear by the German and Italitan Histores wherefore the pretence of some Popes Parasite that Ludovious Pius successour to Charles the Great should release this priviledge of Collation back again is vain and utterly false as is evident by these transactions of succeeding Ages The Romans bound themselves to Henry 3d the Emperour by Oath not to meddle with the appointing the Emperour which after within four years when the Emperour was absent was violated the Clergy of Rome choosing Stephen 9th anno 1057. which being but an usurpation in the Clergy so to doe the Cardinalls thought they had as much right as those Clergy-men and therefore upon the Rule that one Thief may rob another did by the assistance of Pope Nicholas 2d and Hildebrand his Cardinal Chaplain take it to themselves so that whosoever is Pope by their Election hath no right to the Chair for that the Title of the Cardinalls is surreptitious and illegall in its Commencement Et quod ab initio valet in tractu Temporis non convaliscat For the Pope being a Spiritual man ought not to plead possession when as his claim is by Intrusion and prescribe he cannot for that these Records are extant to the contrary since therefore by primitive right and by reduction after a separation thereof and that made good by Authority of Pope and Councell and after by Oath confirmed it doth belong to the Emperour of the West or the King of France to appoint the Bishop of Rome Let the present Emperour look to his Right as he will be served and let him beware of too long a discontinuance of this priviledge for should the gnawing rusty teeth of time worm-eat and rase all his Records and Testimonies that prove him a right to this Collation he shall never repair his losse when as he may be sure the Vactitan Hill shall be stored with old and new additions to the Bishop of Rome a right to appoint Germany an Emperour And as the Emperour had right to Collate to the See of Rome so likewise had he the same right to other Metropolitan Sees of Germany till over looking his Right to Rome the rest fall from him according to the Rule Dato uno absurdo mille sequuntur But I return back to England and will shew what right the Civill Magistrate hath to appoint Bishops in England without consent of the Pope By the Antient Lawes and Constitutions of this Kingdome The Kings of England appoint Bishops without the Pope the King was Patrone of all the Bishopricks in the Land for the Rule is Patronum faciunt dos edificatio fundus they were all donative and of the Kings gift Per traditionem annuli Pastoralis baculi as appears by the Law-books 7 Edw. 4. Cook 10. Report 73. and Matthew Paris History fol. 62. The King by Edward the Confessours Lawes cap. 19. is declared to be Vicarius which was long before acknowledged by Eleutherius in his Epistle before recited summus persona mixta cum sacerdote Constitutus est ut Populum dominii super omnia ecclesiastica Regat By the Judges of old it was declared that Papa non potest mutare leges Angliae none can Found or Erect a Colledge Church Abbey c. without the Kings Warrant Dyer 271. the Priviledges of the Church were growing out of the Civil Magistrates power and therefore by the Articles Super clerum made 9 Edw. 2. no suite was to be before the Bishops for any matter whatsoever but a prohibition lay and there it is expressed in what cases it shall be allowed 16 Edw. 3. Excom 4. and 2 R. 3.22 Excom by the Pope is no disability of any suit within this Kingdome which resolutions are grounded upon the Common Law of this Kingdome which Common Law is but certain reasonable Customes and usages of the Land refined by the experience of succeeding Ages and drawn into forme by Edward the Confessor which gathered it out of Divine natural and moral principles and as I said the antient reasonable usages of the precedent Ages and that the King is by antient Custome Vicarius sumus and with the advice of his nobles did appoint Bishops is proved by Eleutherius who was the first Bishop of Rome that ever had any entercourse concerning Church affaires in this Land which was onely to assist and further the Ministry but in no means to take from the King what was his right or what formerly belonged to him nor was this Antient right ever invaded till Beckets businesse that I can find 't is true that some strangers were sent hither and recommended by the Bishop of Rome to be by him preferred to English Benefices which were out of courtesie accepted but this did not prove any right of Collation in the Bishop of Rome at all nor did ever he set up his pretence to that Right till Hen. 2. time Which quarrel the advantage of the troubled times did occasion not the Justice of the Popes Cause to spur him to clear his title thereto he knew well enough that the King had the sole Power and just Title without him to set up what Bishops he pleased And whereas it may be objected that the Bishops of England are elegible it is true they are so but that was by the consent of King John for before that they were not elegible but were made elegible by a Roll 15 Jan. 17. of K. John but notwithstanding that grant is so restrained that they cannot be elected without the Kings Writ of Conge Deslier As for the Pope excommunicating the King about Beckets quarrell Tho. Becket that doth not prove the Popes power so to do For to argue de facto ad jus brings with it an absurd consequence it pleased the King to submit to it not being able to oppose the Factions then stirred up against him Infra 90. 11 chap. But it cannot from thence be evinced that the Kings voluntary submission out of policy of State doth make the Popes claim to excercise that power in anothers Province lawfull I have more at large treated of this particular businesse in the 11 chapter to which I refer you But the main businesse insisted upon by the Papists is the grand contest between Innocent the third and
it was superfluous for expressio eorum quae tacite insunt nihil operatur It doth but argue he is covetous and ambitious covetous in that he hereby makes himself master of anothers Interest and ambitious in that he would be thought the Author of Princes dignities As for King Hen. 8. his adding that stile to his other distinguishments of Dignity it did not proceed from any conceit that he could not have stiled himself so had not the Pope saluted him with that courteous appellation But only in respect it was grown into fashion to adde to their temporall Styles some denotement of their ecclesiasticall power as the Emperour of Ethiopia stiles himself the Pillar of Faith without deriving that dignity from Rome It is true the French embrace the stile of Christian and the Spaniard of Catholick King from Rome yet I suppose they might without that be so dignified As for England it is plain that her King may without any donation thereof from Rome for that it is warranted by her antient Lawes and Eleutherius called Lucius Gods Vicar the King was stiled Persona mixta cum sacerdote which was many hundred years known before Hen. 8. Ante 37. Cap. 4. and therefore sith by the antient Lawes of the Land the King is Vicarius sūmus infra Regnas He must nominate or ought to Authorise some by vertue of his power all forrain provinciall Jurisdiction being lockt up by consent of Councels within its proper provinciall precincts to appoint Bishops this antient right being grounded upon Gods Word in that I have proved that the Temporall Magistrate did elect such as should be ordained and therefore for the Doctor to deny us to be a Church because we want succession of Bishops the new ones being appointed by the Temporall Magistrate when as they wanted nothing to compleat their Order seemes to me strange and unreasonall If the Doctor when he denies our succession of Bishops No discontinuance of Succession of Bishops in England when Queen Elizabeth turned out the old ones could prove that the new ones had no Imposition of Hands by Bishops then his Argument touched us something though it be not absolute necessary that Bishops ordain Bishops Ante 33.4 chap. For what if all the Bishops should die so neer at one time that none were left ordained by them shall not the Presbytery make Bishops they have right to the Keyes which are called Claves ecclesiae non episcoporum and they are the remaining Pillars of the Church and certainly may confer the Order of Bishop upon others and that the rather because the Councells forbid Bishops of another Province to ordain in a forrain Province and though it may seeme strange to some that Ministers which are subordinate should ordain Bishops and so confer Superiour Orders it is not if rightly examined contradictory to reason For in this first ordination of Priests and Deacons they are infra ordines majores which orders are called Holy and Sacramentall and are the Highest Orders witness Pope Vrban decret dist 60. sum Sacr. Ro. Eccl. 226. as for the Order of Bishops it is no more then a Priest as to the Holy and Sacramentall Order onely more excellent in respect of the Order of Governing which is rather of Humane then Divine right Priests ordain Bishops for as it is Divine it is no more then what every Priest hath by the Sacramentall order but as it is Humane it is transcendent in relation to Discipline Ante 33.4 chap. and therefore the Presbytery may agree to ordain one over them to govern them in ecclesiasticall Rites as the people may choose a Prince to Govern in civill affairs Hence it was that the Apostles sent John to Ephesus Peter to Antioch and appointed James over the Churches at Hierusalem which before such their Consignations were but equal with the other Apostles in every respect but after that if any other of the Apostles came where they had the over-sight they were observant of them Hence was it that James was prolocutor of the Councel at Hierusalem and not Peter because James was Bishop there I may from thence infer that if Peter came to Rome for the same reason he was observant of Paul and therefore it is conceived that in case of necessity Priests may ordain Bishops for that Bishops in relation to their Jurisdiction are not a Sacramentall Order but onely as they are Priests But if this opinion be by the learned condemned I shall submit and yet with confidence affirme that we may in England claim a Church notwithstanding For when Queen Elizabeth turned out some Popish Bishops those that were put into their roomes were ordained by the remaining part of the old Bishops For all the old Bishops were not turned out then nor in Hen. 8. his time For first in Hen 8. time the controversie was about Supremacy which question the Insolencies of the Pope occasioned though I doe not justifie that Prince for all he did and being once started it gave occasion of further scrutiny into the primitive Fathers and Councels Reformation of England Infra 55.5 chap. which did so far perswade the Consciences of the then Clergy that many of them did adhere to the Prince against the Pope and by that and other after inquisitions they found they had primitive right of calling Councels and reforming things amisse in their Church without appealing to Rome and thereupon having the authority of Scriptures Councells and Fathers they restored to themselves their just rights and shook off their servile obedience to the See of Rome which the Popes continued over them by keeping them up in ignorance not allowing them their own judgements and illumination ecclesiasticall to understand the plain letter of any thing be it never so far demonstrated to the easiest capacity without his Holinesse interpretation and having thus shaken off that slavish yoke of Rome the scales of blind obedience fell from their eyes and they clearly perceived the Popes false cunning and damnable abusings of Scriptures Fathers Councels and what not thorow his unjust usurpations of universality and infallibility whereby he became a new Legislator of Divine rules of Faith which had in them too much of grosse and fleshly compositions tending meerly to enslave Christendome and to set up the Popes triple Crown for all the people to worship thereby making them forsake Christ and his Truth for the fables and traditions of that abominable Idoll And as In Hen. 8. time all the Bishops were not turned out so neither at the coming of Queen Elizabeth to the Crown but continued in their Bishopricks excercising their function ordaining others as formerly onely the Archbishop of York the Bishops of Elie Lincoln Bath Worcester and Excester were outed and the Bishops of Saint Asaph Bangor London and Chester fled the rest continued and ordained others The Queen her self being Enaugurated by Bishop Oglethorp one of Queen Maries Bishops and Bishop of Carlisle and Parker the Arch-bishop
against him As for Saul he was not cast out by Samuel Samuel onely denounced Gods will which was to him revealed how that Saul should be cast from his kingdom and he did therefore by divine appointment anoint David in his steed But notwithstanding it appears by the Scripture that although Saul stood excommunicate as being rejected of God yet he continued still king and both David and the Israelites did obey him David calling him his Lord and Anointed 1 Sam. 24.7 God forbid saith he that I should lay hands upon him for who shall smite the Lords anointed and be guiltless 1 Sam. 26.9 And the like was of Jeroboam the Priest did not impose the punishment onely denounce the judgement that was to come upon him by way of Prophecie And whereas Azariah was shut from men being a leper and his son Jotham set up to rule in his stead this doth not prove that Excommunication which the Jesuites would perswade to be the figure of the spiritual leper doth ipso facto dethrone a King Azariah continued King till his death he was called King in the 22 yeer of his Raign which was the last yeer of his Raign 2 Kin. 15. So that Jotham was not King but Vice-gerent during his fathers leprosie and then his father dying he claimed an absolute power in his own right not by vertue of his fathers seclusion And whereas Athaliah was deprived of her kingdom by Jehoiada the Priest that was by vertue of Joash whom the Priest preserved in the Temple he being the right heir and Athaliah an Usurper and murderer of old Azariahs children onely Joash escaped her bloody treachery and after that the people did adhere to make Joash their king and did promise to put themselves under his Government whereupon the high-Priest did command Athaliah the usurper to be put from the throne for that Joash was both heir in blood and had the general approbation of the people 2 King 11. They clapped their hands and said God save the king And for Elijahs withstanding King Ahab it was because of his Baalitish Prophets whom by a miracle he demonstrated to Ahab to be the cause of the famine and the drought which he shewed by prayer for rain and Ahab being herewith convinced gave consent that the Baalitesh Priests should be delivered up which by consent of the people by a publike Decree were put to death by Elijahs hands But none of these examples do prove that Priests have a right to depose Kings though the contrary may be proved that Kings deposed Priests as Saul slew Abimelech for taking part with David Joash commanded Jehoiadahs sons to be put to death and Solomon displaced Abiathar the high-Priest from his primacy and dignity for following Adonijahs faction The Scripture recites nineteen Kings of Israel and fourteen of Judah who brake the Covenant made with the Lord and followed strange gods and drave the people to apostacie yet was not one of them deposed by a Priest or a Prophet for they knew that they â—eld their authority from God not from them and therefore with David all agreed to subscribe Who can lay his hand upon the Lords anointed and be guiltless Now as there can be no proof produced from the Old Testament so much less from the New but positively and plainly to the contrary Christ himself commanding tribute to Caesar and Rom. 13. Let every soul be subject to the higher powers and 1 Tim. 2. Let prayers and supplications be made for princes and 1 Pet. 2. Submit your selves for the Lords sake whether to the king as supreme or unto governours sent by him Again Christ said to his Apostles The kings of the Gentiles bear rule and exercise dominion Vos autem non sic Luke 22.25 There must be no strivings amongst them who should be the greatest which Christ manifesteth by setting a childe amongst them Matth. 18. By all which texts of Scripture it is plain that Ministers of the Gospel and successors of the Apostles are to submit to pray for but not oppose kings neither are they to look after worldly power and lordship Christ himself denying to meddle with the dividing of the land betwixt the two brethren Luke 12. For this was praeter his business he came about Now if the Pope would be thought to be Peters successor let him follow Peters precept and let him imitate Christ who commanded Peter to follow him let him do his Masters business Let him never think to intangle himself with the temporal affairs of this world let him never think of disposing of earthly Crowns but seed his flock and instruct them in the ways of godliness that they may with meekness temperance patience and snffering attain to a crown of glory being strengthned through the might of Christ his glorious power unto all patience and long suffering with joyfulness Col. 1.11 For such is the will of God that by well doing they may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men 1 Pet. 2.15 Let him not think to turn Peters keys into Hercules club and when a Prince will not hearken to him he may dethrone him for he hath no warrant for his so doing And the power of the keys given to Peter did not extend to this nor may the Pope claim any such priviledge by vertue thereof When Christ said to Peter The power of the keys doth not warrant the Popes deposing of Kings Whatsoever thou shalt binde on earth shall be bound in heaven and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven He did not thereby give him power to pull down kings for that after he enjoyned Cesars tribute and Peter himself after submitted and taught rules of obedience Nor was this power given to Peter alone of binding and loosing but to the rest of the Apostles also John James Bartholomew c. had the like power as I have shewed in the second Chapter And admit Kings be so included under the power of the Keys yet that doth not prove any power in the Priest to dethrone him onely to denounce Gods judgements against his sin and to admonish him and to pray for him but he must not meddle with his Temporal Regiment nor so far extend his Ecclesiastical power as to dis-engage Subjects from their Allegiance to such a Prince for that is against the practice of the Apostles and against the precepts of Christ And certainly if the Apostles or Peter had had any such power by vertue of the Keys they would never have suffered it to have been depressed without giving testimony to the world of the injury done unto them Peter if he suffered at Rome and Paul whom all stories agree to have suffered under Domitius Nero never so much as denouncing him Ethnick or uncapable to rule because a persecutor of Christs Saints nay they were so far from this that they commanded others for conscience sake to obey Heathen Princes and that because of their power which is from God which power as
I have partly shewed was beyond their compass to take from them The Jesuites being beaten from this hold of the Keys they betake themselves to the treble Pasce which after Christs resurrection was said unto Peter Joh. 21. and would fain deduce this power from thence and so perswade the world that the Shepherds Crook is the Arms of all other Sees not of Rome the Bishop thereof being no ordinary Pastor but one that is known by more Nable bearing viz. Mars a Papal Mitre ensigned with a triple Crown and a Cross Pater Sol which in my opinion stands for no good denotement of Episcopal dignity in respect it doth not sympathize with the Successor of Peter and therefore serves rather to denote him sprung of another tribe But this by the way They would fain perswade the world The treble Pasce doth not extend to depose Kings that this power was given to Peter by vertue of the treble Pasce and by his being Bishop of Rome is devolved upon the Pope which I have already touched in the second Chapter That nothing doth belong to Rome any more then anyother See Apostolique by any power thereby given I will onely for better illustration of the present point add this viz. That Peter and Paul both submitted unto Domitius Nero a cruel Heathen and persecutour neither did they thunder out any Excommunication against him thereby denouncing him uncapable to rule which if they had thought to have been so certainly they would not have concealed it at their sufferings when they saw they must die and all hopes of their natural lives debarr'd from them If Peter suffered at Rome he left no such Testimony behind him nor Paul neither so that for the Pope to aspire to this prerogative upon Peters score is an injury to that blessed Apostle he having received rules from his Master Christ to the contrary of which both he and the rest of the Apostles were faithful witnesses in their sufferings The Papists beaten from all Scripture there being neither from thence nor any practice Apostolical the least warrant for this their presumptuous claim they then begin to strive with flesh blood and forsaking the rules of Christ and the exmples of Peter and the rest of the Apostles notwithstanding they would have Peter to be the Rock of the Catholike Church they quit the harbor adjoyning to that Rock and rove themselves upon the billows of strange contests And as when the Fish Meron perceiving a storm lays hold upon a chance pimple stone thinks to save it self from the tossing of the waves by sticking to that whenas both it and its stone are tumbled to and fro at the will of the sea so these men think by a new-found invention of their own to make good this their bold assertion against all opposition whenas any reasonable Christian may easily refute the same and if with reason they will not be driven off it dash their brains against Peters Rock Wherfore they blush not to affirm that God was not provident enough to his Church if he should leave her without a head to rule and govern her and as a widow to be despoiled by any Heather or persecuting Prince and therefore of necessity the Pope must have this power they are the principal wards in S. Peters Keys to depose Princes and excite subjects to oppose them if occasion be otherwise the Church should want the Pope her Head that Pillar to support and that Eye to direct her as Cardinal Allen in his Apology observes Allen for deposing of Princes This Doctrine of Allen is gross and Heathenish tending to Blasphemy and infidelity infidelity in Gods promise he having promised his Spirit to his Church to the end of the world and that the gates of hell shall not prevail against it she shall not be totally extirpated from off the earth till Shilo come though she may be invisible in this or that Country as I have shewed in the fifth Chapter and therefore Christ bids his Apostles suffer for righteousness sake for Sanguis martyrum shall be semen Ecclesiae Wherfore for Allen to affirme that the Pope must have this power or the Church will be lost argues his distrust in Gods promise to his Church And it likewise savours of Blasphemy to tye Gods providence to the Papal Chair and so denying him a power or will to remove the Candlestick from Rome and to give it to another Providence as Aquinas defines it Aquinas summa contr Gentiles is said to be invisible and remain in Gods secret councel Nondum rebus impressa for after it appears and showes it self in effects sensible then it is called Fate not Providence Now for him to tax God of improvidence unless the Pope should have this visible power of deposing Kings is neither Scholar nor Divine like he might as a Sooth-sayer of Egypt experimentally upon the coincidence of the effect of some inspection or Heathenish observation as that when the black Eagle shall preach upon Laterane Steeple the top of Saint Angelo shall be lifted up as was at the time of Otho 3. and Gregory the 5. c. Or have foretold that it was the Fate of Rome that if any Prince withstood the Pope he should be deposed as was in Henry 4. and Gregory 7. dayes but not to conclude this upon Gods Providence which no man by the reach of humane reason is able to pry into it is more transcendent then the consult of flesh and blood can apprehend Saint Paul cries out How unsearchable are his Iudgements and his waies past finding out who hath knowne the minde of the Lord or who was his Counsellor Rom. 11.34 And will Allen take upon him to circumscribe Gods Providence To know the secrets of mans heart is Gods attribute but such is the gross impiety of this blasphemous man that rather then the Pope should want excuse to depose Kings he will take upon him to know Gods heart and prove this prerogative by Gods Providence whereby he runs himself upon these absurdities He doth hereby spoyle the honour and credit of the glorious Martyrs by accusing them of error or ignorance of error for tamely suffering whenas they should have resisted of ignorance if they suffered because they knew not the will of God herein And he doth likewise give God the lye for if it was God's providence to his Church to resist in case Religion be opposed by the Prince sure he would not have bid Peter go back into Rome as the Papists pretend nor would he have prescribed the forementioned rules of obedience which are diametrically opposite to Allens pretended knowne Providence It is not the revealed will of God that the Crosier should resist the Scepter and the Mitre the Crown none of the Fathers of Romes Church ever practised or published that Doctrine before Hildebrands daies and if it was Gods Providence first known to Allen then Allen proves the Church of Rome to have been invisible for 1074 yeares
Popes Law This is that which every one must swear to maintain before he be admitted into the General Councel and whose blinde obedience is to be pitied as much as the Popes presumptuous ruling by this counterfeit Record is to be lamented And I much wonder the Christian Princes will suffer the Pope upon such groundless and unjust terms to be Lord Paramount over them whenas the warrant by which he claims this power is meerly void in it self for that it wants their concurrence Nor is it credited as authentick as many of the Romane Bishops and Popes practising the contrary have been honest witnesses Pliny says It is the nobleness of the Eagle to leave part of her prey for other birds Whence it is that other birds of prey still follow after the Eagle to feed upon her scraps But if the Crow presume to come too neer the Eagle she lets her feel her talons and in stead of being fed the Crow becomes a prey her self And will the Germane Eagle suffer himself to be out-towred and cuffed with an Italian Rook It argues a degenerating spirit from the true Eagle to suffer it and gives occasion to the world to suspect that he is that bird the Eagle throws out of her nest and not one of those which the Eagle ciscovering Majestick rays in their eyes nâ—urishes up and carries on her wings above the common region here belowe The ancient Bishops of Rome never tasted of this sowre grape and I wonder how the later Popes came to set their teeth on edge Resist not evil was Christs precept Matth. 5.39 But the Pope is so far from this Rule that he will not do good to them that have been benefactors to him Kings have been kinde nursing fathers to the Church of Rome and will she be so unnatural to cast them off now that by their indulgence she is grown to a riper state Kings granted heâ— precedency above her sister-Churches Kings have endowed her above them and in necessity have relieved her Popes and will the Pope now likâ— the Wolf in the Fable devour the Crane that took the bone out of her throat Will the arrogant Hop having overtopped the Pole by which it grew think to bear up its weak head above its first supporter Sure these are practices which do little become a Spiritual Father an Universal Head of Christs Church who by how much his head is lifted on high should be more given to good works to piety to humility to charity and to patience and that the rather because on such an one in so eminent a place all eyes are fixed and should there finde examples of Godliness which might be as a heavenly light to guide them unto their Lord and Master Christ Jesus But I should wrong Romes Church should I for some mens faults condemn all All are not Tares that grow in that field In these last days Satan is more busie to throw in his seed because his time is short But heretofore she had Bishops which never laid claim to these unjust demands Wherefore that I may make the present Pope ashamed of this his unjust claim I will produce the godly practices of his predecessors to his own condemnation Notwithstanding all the shifts and tricks the Jesuites use The ancient Bishops of Rome modern Popes have obeyed the Emperour Ante ch 10 and cha 4. to maintain this strange power they ascribe unto his Holiness they fall short to give satisfaction to any reasonable man that hath not given himself up to a stupid sense to believe all they say be it right or wrong And who please to reflect upon the practices of former Ages will finde this to be a meer Innovation and inâ—roachment upon the Temporal power Melciades Bishop of Rome acknowledged Constantine the Great to be Supreme even in things Spiritual The same Constantine called a Councel at Aralatensis excluding Melciades out of it Where was then his Supremacie either in Spiritual or Temporal affairs Did not Damasus Siritius and Anastasius acknowledge Theodosius the elder their Supreme Lord and submitted unto him whenas Flavianus was accused before the Emperour for intruding into the See of Antioch who was by the Emperour freed against their wills as Theodor witnesses Lib. 5. cap. 23. Innocent the first obeyed Arcadius when he bid him call a Councel for the examination of Chrysostomes cause Gregory the Great being commanded to publish a Law made by Mauritius desired to be excused and shewed his reasons against it but those not prevailing he submitted and did publish the Law as appears by his Epist 61. lib. 2. cap. 100. S. Ambrose ante ch 10 S. Ambrose being commanded by Valentinian to allot a Church in Millain for the Arrians his answer was He would not willingly but being compelled he had learned not to resist And this is by some much pressed How that he did utterly withstand it How that he did excommunicate Theodosius the elder and made him do Penance For my part I do not credit the story for it is not likely that there was any such ruffling betwixt them whenas it appears by the testimony of all Writers that whenas Theodosius had freed the Empire from all troubles he retired himself to Mallain where S. Ambrose was Bishop and leaving off the charge of the Empire to his two sons Arcadius and Honorius he died in peace at Millain And certainly if there had been any such clashing betwixt them he would have made choice of some other place for his retirement Besides it doth not stand with S. Ambrose doctrine for he affirms Preces lachrymae sunt arma Ecclesiae He never taught that it was lawful to take vengeance upon the Supreme Magistrate as his Epist contr Auxentius doth witness He freeth Kings from all Laws made by man as appears in his book Apolog. David cap. 10. pag. 386. Rex nullis legibus tenetur humanis homini non peccavit David cui non tenetur abnoxius Now if he should inflict Penance upon the Emperour it was against this doctrine and so the Papists wrong S. Ambrose in fathering a practice upon him which was contrary to his profession Wherefore I suspect this tradition of the Church of Rome in this point that S. Ambrose should make Theodosius the Emperour do penance It may be he enjoyned Penance to Theodosius after he was become a private man during his retirement at Millain and after he had left off the Regiment of the Empire to his sons but that is no warrant for the Pope to do the like to the Emperour or any other King for that if he did so it was a punishment inflicted not upon the Emperour but upon Theodosius being a private man And as this makes nothing for the Pope in this particular point so may he not arrogate this by reason of his Universality granted by Phocas for that his predecessors never claimed or was it allowed or intended by the Emperour that he should have this power by vertue