A Defense of the Catholic Faith, Book 1 · Chapter 5

A Defense of the Catholic Faith · Book 1 · Chapter 5

p. 45CHAP. V. Of the power of the Pope ouer the temporalities of Kings; and that he cannot take from Kings their Crownes, nor free ſubiects from the Oath of fidelity. And thereupon the reaſons of Bellarmine are examined.

THe King of great Britaine in his Apology complayneth of two Breues or letters Apoſtolique of Clement the eight, ſent into England a little before the death of the late Queene ELIZABETH, which were produced at the arrainment of Garnet the Ieſuite; by which the ſaid Pope excludeth him from the ſucceſſion of the Kingdome, by a generall debarring of all ſuch as were not of the Romane Religion. This thing being ſo notoriouſly vniuſt, and ſo publique, yet notwithſtanding Coeffeteau ſaith, that there hath beene a wrong interpretation made of this Popes intentions; and that it hath beene ſome particular mens drift, to put it into his Maieſties head, that he went about to hinder his eſtabliſhment in the Kingdome. Theſe are inſurious ſpeeches, to ſay that the King of great Britaine hath beene circumuented, and that men hauehave only made him beleeue things; but that he hath not ſeene any ſuch Breues, but ſpeaketh this onelyonly vponupon truſt.

There likewiſe, turning to the ſide of Kings againſt the conſent of the whole Romiſh Church, he ſpeaks thus: It is a thing without doubt, Fol. 6. pag. 2.that if the p. 48Pope would inuade Kingdoms, and giuegive them in prey to whom he pleaſeth, deueſting the right poſſeſſors of them, he well deſerueth that Princes ſhould stand ſtiffe againſt his vioſence, and ſhould ioyntly runne vponupon him as vponupon a robber and ſpoiler of their inheritances. And a litle after, The Popes pretend nothing ouer the temporalties of Kings, & are contented only to make their authority appear ouer the crimes of men, which he bindeth or looſeth without ſtretching of it, tyranically to diſpoſe of their poſſeſsions, otherwiſe then ſuch as are fallen vntounto him: what cauſes here moued Coeffeteau thus to fauour Kings, and to pare the Popes nayles ſo neare, I will not enquire: But I well know that in other times and in other places, he would for theſe wordes hauehave beene ſent to the Inquiſition. For he oppoſeth himſelfe againſt all the actions of Popes, and the iudgement of the whole Romiſh Church. The examples fallen out in England ſhall be moſt pertinent to this purpoſe, and ſuch as ſhall repreſent vntounto his Maieſtie of England how farre the Pope had ſet footing vponupon the temporalties of his predeceſſors, and how much diſhonoured their Crowne.Pag. 117: Cum Rex & Archiepiſcopus in partem ſeſeſſiſſent biſque deſcendiſſent & his equos aſcendiſſent, his habenā Archiepiſcopi Rex tenuit cum equum aſcenderet. Mathew Paris a Monke of the order of S. Bennet at S. Albans in England, and a diligent Hiſtorian, witneſſeth that in the yeare 1170. HENRY the ſecond being reconciled to THOMAS BECKET Archbiſhop of Canterbury, he twice helde the bridle whiles the ſaid Archbiſhop got to horſe; what ſubmiſſion then ſhould he hauehave yeelded to the Pope himſelfe, ſeeing that one of his Prelates and the King ſubiects would mit that his p. 49King and Maſter ſhould make him ſo ſeruile a ſubmiſſion? The ſame Authour teſtifieth,Pag. 125. Carnem ſuam nudamdiſciplinae virgarum ſupponens a ſingules viris religioſis quorum multitudo magna conuenerat ictus ternos vel quinos accepit. that the aforeſaid HENRY was ſcourged by way of penance, vponupon his bare fleſh by a company of Monks, ſome of which gaue him three ſtripes, others fiue. The Pope not content therewith, amerced him to keepe two hundred ſouldiers in pay, for the warres of Paleſtina, and to ſuffer that his ſubiects, of what quality or condition ſoeuer might thenceforward euoke their ſuites out of his Courts and appeale to Rome. Of which puniſhment Michauel in the firſt booke of his ſtorie of Florence, dedicated to Pope Clement the ſeuenth, ſpeaketh in this manner: Le quali coſcfurono da Enrico accettate, & ſattomeſſeſi a quel giudico vn tanto Rè che hoggi vn huomo priuato ſivergognarebbe a ſottometterſi: which things Henry yeelded vntounto, and he ſo great a King ſubmitted himſelfe to that cenſure, which a priuate man now a dayes would be aſhamed to vndergoe. And further addeth, that the Citizens of Rome ſcornefully vſed and curbed that very Pope, who did thus domineere in England, and would not ſuffer him to dwell in their Citie; and thereupon he taketh vp this exclamation, tanto le coſe che patono ſono piu diſcoste che d'appreſſo temute, that things did appeare more to be feared farre off then neere at hand.

After this HENRY ſucceeded RICHARD whom the Pope ſent into the Leuant; and he being dead, his brother IOHN came to the Crowne.Matt Paris pag 215. This IOHN complayned that the Pope drew more money out of England then out of any Countrey p. 48on this ſide of the Aples;Pag. 223. Papa ex conſilio Cardinalium. Epiſcoporum & aliorum virorum prudentium ſentētialiter definiuit, vt Rex Anglorum a ſolio deponeretur. Ad huius quoque ſententiae executionem ſcripſit Dominus Papa potent…ſſimo Regi Francorum Philippo quatenus in remiſſionem omnium ſuorum peccaminum hunc laborem aſſumeret, &c. and becauſe hee therein withſtood Pope Innocent the third (who couered his tyranny vnderunder a title of The liberties of the Church:) he was by the ſaid Pope in the yeare 1212 declared to be fallen from the Crowne, and his Kingdome giuen in perpetual title to Philippus Auguſtus the French King, and his ſucceſſors, with condition that he ſhould conquer him; graunting him thereupon remiſſion of all his ſinnes, and cauſing the Croiſade to be preached againſt the ſayde King IOHN of England: by meanes whereof he was brought into that perplexity, that he was conſtrayned to vndergo all the conditions which Pandulphus the Popes Legate impoſed vponupon him; as namely, that King IOHN to obtaine remiſſion of his ſinnes, ſhould render vp his Crowne into the Legates handes, and ſhould giuegive vp his Kingdomes of England & Ireland to the Pope; that he ſhould yeelde faith and homage to the Pope, as holding his ſaid Kingdoms in fee from the Church, as parts of the Popes Demaines, and of the patrimony of S. Peter; **Saluis per omnia denarijs beati Petri Eccleſiae Romanae mille marcas Eſtrelin gorum percipiat annuatim. The ſame Peters tribute was afterward brought into Poland, as Albert' Krantz writeth, Hiſt. Ʋandal. li. 8. c. 2.and in acknowledgement hereof, hee ſhould pay yearely to the Pope a thouſand Markes in money, to be payd at two ſeuerall times; beſides the Peter-pence which were paide by the pole. All which was executed accordingly, and the homage ſolemnly and formally done: the King himſelfe tendered the money in all ſubmiſſion, which the Legate❀❀Pandulphus autem pecuniam quam in arram ſubiectionis Rex contulerat ſub pede ſuo conculcauit. trod vnderunder his feete in token to Lordly dominion; following the cuſtome which the Pope began then to put in practiſe ouer the Emperours p. 49of Germany, to wit,**Imperator genu flectit, demū ad Pontificis pedes peruenit, illos in reuerentiam Saluatoris deuotè oſculator— Iterum genu flectns aurimaſſam ad pedes Pontificis offert, &c. that they ſhould be bound to come and take the Crowne at his handes, and after three lowly curteſies on the knee, and kiſſing of the Popes feete, the Emperour was to lay downe at the Popes feete ſitting in his Throne, a maſſe of golde, thanking his Holineſſe humbly vponupon his knee, as it is at large ſet downe in their holy Ceremonies, Lib 1. Sect. 5. cap. 3. The like is reported by Polydore Virgill in the fifteenth booke of his Storie, and by Blondus, Decad. 2. lib. 6.

Howbeit the aboueſaid King IOHN bare this yoake very impatiently; His Barons alſo hated him for hauing enthralled his Kingdome, and England was ſo farre exhauſted by cruel exactions that the ſaid King IOHN out of extreame diſpaire reſolued to caſt himſelfe and his Kingdome into the hands of the Mahumetans: and to that effect hee ſent Ambaſſadors to Morocco in Barbary to Amiral Murmelin King of Barbary and of Granada, to make him offer of his Kingdome; but the Barbarian would not accept it. Whereupon the Pope made his yoake more greeuous vponupon the King and his land, the Oath of ſubiection was renued and ingroſſed in writing, the inſtruments, which before were onelyonly ſealed on waxe were now ſealed on golde, and in ſtead of one thouſand Markes, the King was condemned to pay**According to Pope Innocents Letters, reported by Math. Paris, Ann. 1214 pag. 239. twelue thouſand Markes. Since that time the Popes hauehave called the Kings of England their vaſſals, and England their Demaines. VponUpon which conſideration, Ann. 1216 the Pope ſent letters of inhibition to Philip Augustus p. 50and Lewes his ſonne being then at Lyons to forbid them to paſſe ouer into England: but Philip anſwered the Popes Nuncio in theſe terms: England neyther is nor euer ſhall be the patrimony of S. Peter.Math. Paris, p. 270. Anno 1216 A King cannot giuegive his Kingdome without the conſent of his Barons: And thereupon all the French Nobility cryed out, that they would fight to the death in that quarrell.

IOHN being dead,Math. Paris pag. 425. Rex inclinato ad genua eius capite vſque ad interior a regni deduxit officiosè. his ſonne and ſucceſſor HENRY the third did homage to the Pope, and payed the accuſtomed tribute. Shortly after the Pope ſent into England a new Legate, one Otho a Cardinall; before whom the King bowed himſelfe ſo…low, as to touch the Legates knees with his head; which Cardinall behaued himſelfe more like a King then a Legate. This Cardinall being deſirous to hauehave entred into Scotland, the King would not receiue him,Non me memini Legatum in terra mea vidiſſe nec opus eſſe. Pag 530. Rex in ampliori regia Weſtmonaſterij pranſurus Legatum …uem inuitanerat in eminentiori loco menſae, ſcilicet in Regali ſede, quae in Medio menſae crat, non ſine muliorum obliquantibus oculis collocauit. ſaying, that he had neuer ſeene Legate in his Kingdome, neyther had he neede of them. But in England he was his owne caruer, cutting and paring away at his pleaſure, euen ſo farre as that he preſumed to ſit at table in the Chaire of State aboue the king, as hee did at a feaſt which king Henry the third made at Weſtminſter, as Matth. Paris witneſſeth: which Authour alſo, Ann. 1241. ſpeaking of his Legates returne, ſaith, that according to the account then made, he carried away more money with him, then he left in all the kingdome beſides, hauing rifled and ſpoyled it like a Vine, brouzed and troden downe by wilde Boares: yea all the Hiſtorians of England doe p. 51complaine of the pillages and exactions of Rome, which ſucked the Engliſhmen to the very blood. And as I vnderſtand, Cardinall Bellarmine hath lately made a booke againſt the king of England,Bellarm. in his new booke. pa. 19. Rex Anglorū duplici iure ſubiectus Papae vno communi omnib' Chriſtianis, ratione Apoſtolicae poteſtatis, quae in omnes extenditur, iuxta illud Pſal. 44. Conſtitues eos principes ſuper omnem terram: altero proprio, ratione, recti Dominij, &c.Ps 44 wherein he maintayneth that the Pope is direct Lord of England and Ireland; and that theſe kingdomes are the Churches fee Farmes, and the King the Popes vaſſall or feudatary: Things which I thought good to repreſent at large, to the end that his Maieſty of England may know and acknowledge, how much the Crowne which God hath giuen him, is beholding to the purity of the Goſpell; the preaching whereof hath broken that yoake, and hath made libertie to ſpring forth together with the truth, diſsipating at once both ſuperſtition and tyranny. Ieſus Chriſt ſaith, Ioh. 8. You ſhall know the truth, and the truth ſhall make you free: which ſaying may after a ſort bee applyed to this purpoſe: for there our Lord ſpeaketh of the ſeruitude of ſinne, and here we ſpeake of the ſlauery vnderunder the man of ſinne: there our Lord ſpeaketh of the freedome and deliuerance from the bondage of the father of lies, here we ſpeake of being enfranchized from the thraldome of the ſonne of perdition; and indeede that temporall ſeruitude of the Crowne of England, came from the ſpirituall bondage of the conſcience. For the Popes laid this ſubiection vponupon men, as a meanes and condition of obtayning remiſſion of ſinnes. Then England enioyed the happy golden age, in which eueryevery man for his money might enter into Paradiſe: but Ieſus p. 52Chriſt ouerthrew this bancke of money-changers ſet vp in the Temple, and detecting the abuſes, ſheered aſunder thoſe inuiſible chains of Cuſtome and Opinion, which held mens ſoules enſnared in and vniuſt ſeruitude. Certainely then the doctrine of the Goſpell is the ſetling and eſtabliſhment of Thrones, and that which exalteth & raiſeth Kings, ſeeing that it doth: not ſubiect their Crownes to any man liuing, and further ſtoppeth vp all wayes and acceſſe to rebellion and diſloyaltie.

Now out of that which aboue hath beene ſaid, it is euident that Coeffeteau (telling the king of great Britaine that the Pope doth neyther expoſe kingdomes as a prey, nor pretend any thing vponupon the temporalties of kings) thought the king a ſtranger at his owne home, and one that knew not his Genealogie nor the ſtory of his owne houſe; or elſe deemed him blinde, and bereft of ſenſe, when hee complayneth in his Apologie, that Bellarm. writing againſt him, dooth importunately inculcate this poſition, that the Pope may depoſe kings, in that he may excommunicate them. It muſt needes be then (if we beleeue Coeffeteau) that the king of great Britainecy ther did not read, or elſe vnderſtood not the booke of his Aduerſary.

If we would ſeeke out examples of the like caſes beſides theſe of England, we might fill a iuſt volume. How many Germane Emperours hauehave beene degraded from their Empire, by excommunications and Papall fulminations, and their Imperiall Diadem giuen in prey to him that could catch p. 53it? Did not Pope Iulius the ſecond, Anno 1511. take from king Iohn of Nauarre his kingdome, and giuegive it to Ferdinand king of Caſtile?This Bull of Alexander is found in the beginning of Franciſco Lopez de Gomara his Story of the …ndies. Did not Pope Alexander the ſixt, Anno 1492. diuide the Indies betweene the Portugals and the Spaniards, allotting the weſt Indies to the Spaniards, and the Eaſt to the Portugals: whereat Atabalippa the poore king of Peru asked who the Pope was, that gaue that which did not belong vntounto him. To omit the confuſions and hurly-burlies of later times, which of freſh memory hauehave blaſted and ſinged our kings with the lightnings of excommunications, and almoſt burnt them to powder, and hauehave made the people to riſe in rebellion againſt their ſoueraigne Prince, the ſoares doe yet bleede, neyther is the wound yet ſoundly cured.

Now if experience be not ſtrong enough to enforce the certainty of Papall vſurpations ouer kings; let vsus heare the Popes themſelues ſpeake;Clementina Paſtoralis de ſententia & reiudicata. Nos tam ex ſuperioritate quam ad imperium non eſt dubium nos habere quam ex poteſtate in quam vacante imperio Imperatori ſuccedimus. In ipſa vrbe vtriuſque poteſtatis Monarchiam Romanis Pontiſicibus declararet and let vsus learne what their intent is, rather from their owne mouthes then from the fearefull and doubtfull termes of this Iacobin. Clement the fift being in the Councell of Vienna, ſpeaketh thus: We aſwell by that Superiority which wee hauehave ouer the Empire, as by the power whereunto we ſucceed the Empire being vacant, &c. As it is contayned in the Clementine Paſtoralis. And in the Chapter Fundamenta de Electione in 6 Pope Nicholas the third, ſayth that Conſtantine hath graunted to the Biſhoppes of Rome both the one and the other Monarchy. And in the Chapter Venerabilem de Electione, Innocent p. 54the third maintayneth, that it is in him to aduance to the Empire whom he pleaſeth,Apoſtolica ſedes Romanum Jmperium à Graecis tranſtulit in Germanos. and that it was the Apoſtolique Sea that tranſlated the Empire from the Greekes to the Germanes. And that we may ſpare to produce the clauſes of Sixtus Quintus his Bull, Anno 1585. (which was the firſt thunderclap that cauſed all the confuſions in theſe later times) and which ſpeake more arrogantly and inſolently then all this that hath beene ſaid: Let vsus appeale to Cardinall Bellarmine for Iudge. Theſe are his wordes:De Rom. Pontif. li. 5. c. 6. § Quartum. Papa poteſt mutare regna & vni auferre, at que alteri conferre, tanquā ſummus princeps spiritualis, ſi id neceſſarium ſit ad animaru… ſalutem. The Pope can change Kingdomes; he can take them from one and giuegive them to another, as a Soueraigne ſpirituall Prince, when it ſhall be neceſſary for the ſaluation of ſoules. Of which neceſsity he will hauehave the Pope alſo to be Iudge. Conſonant whereto one Alexander Peſantius, a Doctor of the Citie of Rome, hath written a booke of the immunities of Eccleſiaſticall perſons, and of the power of the Pope, dedicated to the now-Pope Paul the fift, where he ſaith, p. 45. The Soueraine Biſhop hath by Diuine right a moſt full power ouer all the earth, as well in cauſes Eccleſiaſticall as Ciuill; adding in the margent, Papa iure diuino eſt directe Dominus orbis: The Pope by diuine right is directly Lord of the world. Yea within theſe few dayes there hauehave beene certaine Theſes printed and defended at Naples: in which were figured the Turkes Turbanes, the Imperiall and Regall Crownes,Le Cornet. Paulo 5. Vice-Deo, Chriſtiani orbis Monarchae, Pontificiae omnipotentiae aſſertori, &c. and the Coronet of the Dukes of Venice to hang in labels from the Popes Miter, and wherein the Pope is ſtyled Vice-God, Monarch of the Christian world, and defender of p. 55the PAPALL OMNIPOTENCY: where the Pope hath accepted the bargaine which our Sauior refuſed at the Diuels hands, Mat 4.9. Which was, to become Monarch ouer all the Kingdomes of the earth. Thus is the Church become an Hierarchie, and the ſpirituall kingdome conuerted into a temporall Monarchy. In witneſſe whereof the Popes triple Crowne is called by no other name then Il regno, the Kingdome. And the laſt Lateran Councell calleth the Pope in the firſt Seſſion, Prince of the whole world; in the third Seſsion, Prieſt and King: and in the ninth and tenth Seſſion his charge is called His Holineſſe Empire. Who will now make any doubt, but that Coeffeteau pleadeth the Popes cauſe vponupon good warrant, and approbation? And he goeth about to teach them more modeſty in ſpeach, then they are willing to learne, vnleſſe that perhaps to tumble downe a Prince from the height of his Empire with flaſhes of lightning, or to skimme away the whole wealth of his Countrey, be not to be termed a touching of their temporalties: And indeede there is ſome reaſon for that, for temporall goods when they come into his Holineſſe handes, they become ſpirituall, according to the ſtile which this witty age vſeth, who by a Biſhops ſpiritualties vnderſtandeth the rents and reuenues of his Biſhoppricke. The miſery of Princes in this caſe is, that if the Pope for their ſinnes impoſe this penance vponupon them, to lay down their Crownes, and to giuegive place to another, yet this Penance once done, is neuer followed with Abſolution: p. 56for he that ſeizeth vponupon their place by a right of conueniency,Droit de bienſeance. doth neuer quit or forgoe it but by force. There be ſteppes and degrees indeede to clymbe vp to a kingdome, but there is no other diſcent then a headlong downe-fall. It is a thing ſeldome ſeene, that a Prince ſhould ſuruiue his kingdome, or that he ſhould ſaue life or liberty after he is diueſted of Maieſty. And that which is more, Coeffeteau hauing taken from the Pope the power of diſpoſing of the temporalties of Kings, pag. 13. Doth he not in the next leaf following reſtore it to him againe, in theſe wordes? If Kings depart from their Duty, and in ſtead of defending the faith, ſeeke to ruine it, then it is in the Popes power to reclaime them, being in errour, and to bring forth his iuſt cenſures, to the end to turne away the miſchiefe which threatneth Religion. Now theſe cenſures are, the degrading of the Prince, the abſoluing his ſubiects from their Oath of Alleageance, and interdicting his Kingdome. And to ſhew that hee ought to proceede forcibly, and by way of fact, Coeffeteau addeth, That the Pope ought to oppoſe himſelfe herein euen to the perill of his life: And if we will exactly weigh the wordes of this Doctrine, fol. 7. we ſhall eaſily finde, that where he ſaith that the Pope doth not pretend any thing ouer the temporalties of Princes, hee meaneth all the while Romiſh Catholicke Princes, who obey the Pope, that is to ſay, that if they bee not ſuch as are now a dayes called Catholicks, the Pope may depriue them of their Kingdomes.

True it is that he reporteth vponupon vsus by way of p. 57recrimination,Pag. 15. That thoſe Princes who hauehave ſhaken off the yoake of the ſpirituall power of the Church, (that is of the Pope) ſee themſelues expoſed to the rigour of their Miniſters, whom by way of honor he calleth Tyrans. I looked all the while when hee would produce examples of Miniſters, who had eyther degraded or murthered their Kings, or who had beene trumpets of rebellion or fire-brands of ſedition, or who had skummed a Countrey of their money, or puniſhed ſinnes by the purſe: Or who after the example of Innocent the third,This is found in the Bull of Innocent 3. at the end of the Lateran Coū ſell. Salutis aeternae pollicemur augmentum. Ad Scapulum cap. 2. Nunquam Albiniani, nec Nigriani, nec Caſſiani inueniri potuerunt Chriſtiani ſed ijdem ipſi qui per genios Imperatorum iurauerant. hauehave giuen to thoſe who hauehave armed themſelues at their commaundement, a degree of honour in Paradiſe aboue others, who hauehave nothing for their reward, but bare life euerlaſting. But of all this he could alleadge no one example. For vntounto vsus agreeth that commendation which Tertullian giueth to the Chriſtians, we neuer were, ſaith he, of the league and conſpiracy of Albinius, Niger, or Caſsius, but thoſe rather who ſware by the life and Genius of the Emperour. The faithfull Paſtors hauing ſtripped themſelues of all this tyrannicall pride, hauehave only reſerued to themſelues the cenſuring of mens manners, by publicke and priuate reprehenſions, and in caſe men ſtand out and rebell againſt the word of God, after many rebukes they hauehave reſerued onelyonly the power of excluding them out of the Church as Pagans and Publicans, vntill ſuch time as by true humiliation they hauehave made their repentance to appeare. Theſe ſentences of bindeing and looſing in the mouth of the Paſtors are inlocutorie p. 58Decrees which God doth ratifie in heauen, till that himſelfe in the laſt day pronounce the Definitiue ſentence. They be the keyes which depend vponupon the word of God, and are annexed to the Goſpell. Keyes which open the Kingdome of heauen, that is, open to the penitent ſinner, an entrance into the Church, which in an hundred places in the Goſpell is called the Kingdome of heauen. Keyes which the Pope hath not at all, ſeeing he hath not that whereupon they depend, to wit, the true benefites of Ieſus Chriſt, contayned in the Goſpell: and if he had them, yet can they not ſerue his turne, ſeeing he hath changed the lockes, and hath made other gates to enter into the kingdome of God.

Being then ſufficiently cleared in this point, touching the Popes pretences, and Coeffeteaus intention, it were nor amiſſe, a little to heare their reaſons. EueryEvery man knoweth, that in the yeare 1301.Nicholas Giles. Pope Boniface the eight wrote very arrogant letters to Philip the faire, contayning theſe words: I will that thou know, that thou art ſubiect to me in temporall things, they that maintaine the contrary, we hold them madmen: we know alſo how this vigilant and couragious King handled the Pope. This Pope hath made an authenticke Bull, which is amongſt the extrauagants, and beginneth with V nam Sanctam: wherein he reproueth the Popes Souerainty both ouer the Spiritualty and Temporalty by certaine paſſages of Scripture, brought in by ſuch an extrauagant by as, that we ſhould thinke it ridiculous, p. 59were it not the Pope that ſpeaketh it, who hath all law in the Cheſt of his breaſt,Licet Romanus Pontifex qui iura omnia in ſcrinio pectoris ſui cenſetur habere. In hac (Eccleſia) eiuſque potoſtate duos eſſe gladios ſpiritualē videlicet & temporale Euangelicis dictis inſtruimur. Nam dicentibꝰ Apoſtolis Ecce gladij duo hic (in Eccleſia ſcilicet) cum Apoſtoli loquerentur non reſpondit Dominꝰ nimis eſſe ſed ſatis. Certe qui in poteſtate Petri temporalem glad…um eſſe negat male verbum attendit Domini dicentis Conuerte gladium tuū in vaginam. Cum dicat Apoſtolus non eſt poteſtas niſi a Deo quae autem ſunt a Deo ordinata ſunt, non autem ordinata eſſent niſi gladius eſſet ſubgladio De Eccleſiaſtica poteſtate verificatur vaticiniū Ieremiae, Ecce conſtitui te hodie ſuper gentes & regna. Si ſuprema poteſtas deuiat, a ſolo Deo non ab homine poteſt iudicari, teſtante Apoſtolo Spiritalis homo iudicat omnia &c. Niſi duo (ſicut Manichaeus) fin gat eſſe principia quod falſum & haereticum iudicamus, quia teſtante Moyſe, non in principijs ſed in principio coelum Deus creauit & terram. as himſelfe ſaith, cap. Licet. De Conſtitutionibus in 6.

Theſe then be his Texts and Quotations: I beſeech the Reader to lend his attention.

1. The Apoſtles ſaid to Ieſus Chriſt, Here are two Swordes, and Ieſus Chriſt did not anſwere, that is too much; but that is enough: Therefore the Pope hath the Spirituall and the Temporall Sword.

2. Ieſus Chriſt ſaid to S. Peter, Put vp thy ſword into thy ſheath.

3. S. Paul, Rom. 13. ſayth, that there is no power but is ordained of God. It muſt needes then be that the Temporall ſword be ſubiect to the ſpirituall.

4. God ſending the Prophet Ieremy to preach and propheſie to diuers people and nations, ſaith vntounto him, cap. 1. I hauehave ſet thee this day ouer people and Nations. This is a propheſie (if wee beleeue this Bontface) which giueth to the Pope power ouer the Temporalty of Kings.

5 S. Paul, 1 Cor. 2.15. ſpeaking of all the faithfull (whom he calleth ſpirituall, to oppoſe them to the Carnall man, of whom he ſpeaketh in the former verſe) he ſaith, that the ſpiritual man iudgeth and diſcerneth all things, and he is not iudged of any. This ſpirituall man is the Pope, the ſoueraigne Iudge, and who cannot be iudged.

6. Ieſus Chriſt ſaid to S. Peter, Whatſoeuer thou ſhalt binde in earth, ſhall be bound in heauen. Therefore p. 60the Pope is cheefe ouer the Temporaltie.

7. He addeth, that to acknowledge two Soueraigne powers is to be a Manichee.

8. That there can be but one beginning, and one cheefe Soueraigne, becauſe Moſes ſaith in the beginning of Geneſis, not, In the beginnings, but in the Beginning God created the heauen and the earth.

By all theſe Scientificall Demonſtrations, hee proueth that the Pope is cheefe ouer the Temporaltie as well as ouer the Spiritualty; and thereuppon admiring himſelfe in his own plumes, he concludeth by a new Article of faith: We declare, affirm, define and pronounce, that it is altogether neceſſary to ſaluation to be ſubiect to the Biſhop of Rome.

I would refute each of theſe reaſons, were it not that I am perſwaded, that the Pope did but mocke when he thus ſpake, and had no meaning to be beleeued. For ſurely Shamgars goade, or Gedeons bottels may as well prooue the Popes Empire ouer Kings as any of the former places. And indeede Bellarmine, who commendeth this Bull in generall as holy and good, hath beene aſhamed to produce theſe goodly reaſons in ſpeciall and by retaile, it is confutation enough for them onelyonly to hauehave propoſed them. For to diſpute by Scripture againſt them, were to vnſheath the ſword of the Goſpell againſt a filthy dung-hil. Such reaſons be fit to be propoſed but with the ſword in hand; for they are not receiued farther then he that propoſeth them is feared. And to very good purpoſe the King doth p. 61here apply the Fable, that when the Lyon would hauehave the Aſſes eares to be hornes, the other beaſts were bound to beleeue it. So theſe fooleries muſt paſſe for verities, becauſe his Holineſſe will hauehave it ſo.

Such a like May-game do we find in Bellarmine, and in all their late Diuines, who willing to cloake this their foule fact, hauehave inuented new termes to expreſſe the ſame thing. They ſay that the Pope, as Pope, hath not this power ouer the Temporalty directly but indirectly, and ſo farre forth as it is auaileable for the ſpirituall good. But a King diſpoyled of his Throne cannot take a few diſtinctions for a ſufficient payment; for what is it to him whether he be depoſed directly or indirectly, ſeeing that he looſeth his Kingdome, be it in what ſort ſoeuer: it is as if a man ſhould comfort one vponupon the ſcaffold, going to his execution, telling him, thou ſhalt not be beheaded with a ſword, but with a Fauchin. And indeed who doth not ſee that this diſtinction is but a meere contradiction? For that which is in it ſelfe euill, being done by a direct courſe, cannot be done iuſtly by an indirect courſe. If a ſubiect be forbidden to wrong his Prince directly, ſhall it be lawfull for him to hurt him indirectly? Surely that which I ought not to take away directly, I may not filtch away indirectly and by wrongfull dealing, ſeeing that the thing can no wayes belong to mee in what ſort ſoeuer. Furthermore Bellarmine by this diſtinction hath no meaning to contradict the Popes, whom we hauehave produced, who ſpeake of p. 62Kings as of their ſubiects, and terme themſelues Soueraignes in temporall affaires, ſo that this commeth all to one.

It bootes not to diſpute of the excellency of the ſpirituall power aboue the Ciuil, by comparing (as did Innocent the third) the Pope to the Sunne, and the Emperour to the Moone; for albeit this were ſo, yet doth not the excellency of one thing aboue another neceſſarily import that one muſt therefore gouerne another: for if I ſay that the faculty of Diuinity is more noble and more excellent, then the care and cuſtody of the Kings Treaſure, muſt it needes therefore follow that Diuines and Clergy men muſt ſway the Kings Exchequer? And as litle to the purpoſe is it to alleadge that the temporall power is ſubiect to the ſpirituall; for the queſtion is not whether it be ſimply ſubiect vntounto it, but whether it be ſubiect to it in temporall things, and with what puniſhments the Paſtor of the Church may puniſh the Magiſtrate when he forgetteth his duety,Foüiller en ſa bourſe. to wit, whether by depriuing him of his eſtates or by fingering his purſe; this is the point of the queſtion which Bellarmine was to proue and not to ſuppoſe. For what authority ſoeuer God hath giuen to faithfull Paſtors ouer the Magiſtrates as they are Chriſtians, yet doe they not let for all that to be ſubiect to the Magiſtrates as they are Citizens, and make a part of the Common-wealth. A king that is ſicke, is for the time ſubiect to the gouernement of his Phyſitians, and yet they neuertheles remaine his ſubiects. As then p. 63the Temporall gouernement doth not impoſe ſpirituall puniſhments, ſo the ſpirituall gouernement cannot impoſe temporall puniſhments, vnleſſe it be ſometimes by miracle, as S. Peter did vponupon Ananias and Sapphira; for ordinary power he hath none to doe it, neyther doth the word of God giuegive him any.

Now if the Pope by vertue of his keyes (of which he ſo much boaſteth) could diſpoſſeſſe a King of his Kingdome for any fault, whether it be true or pretended, it ſhould thence follow, that he hath a greater power ouer Kings then oner priuate and particular men, from whom he cannot by way of Penance plucke away their lands or houſes to giuegive them to their neighbours: for if it were ſo, the Pope ſhould be the direct Lord of all the lands and poſſeſſions of Chriſtendome. And ſeeing it is generally confeſſed, that the Heathen Emperours were not ſubiect to the Biſhops in temporall matters; can it ſtand with reaſon that Princes by being become Chriſtians, ſhould become leſſe Soueraignes then they were before, and that the faith of Ieſus Chriſt ſhould diminiſh their Empire?

I am not ignorant that the Prince ought ſo to adminiſter temporall things, that the ſpirituall adminiſtration be not thereby impeached I know alſo that if Princes offend God, it belongeth to the Paſtors not to be ſilent, but to oppoſe themſelues againſt that euil, by al thoſe wayes & means which God hath permitted, which are courſes ful of all reſpect and farre from any rebellion and ſedition. p. 64The faithfull Paſtor that ſhall leaſt of all flatter the Magiſtrate in his vices, is the man that ſhall carefully retaine the people in their obedience towards the Magiſtrate, and ſhall keepe that golden meane which is betweene flattery and ſedition. As he muſt not be a dumbe dogge, ſo muſt he not be a furious beaſt that had neede to be tyed vp.

And to the end that you may know, that theſe two kindes of ſubiection doe not iuſtle or ſhoulder each other as incompatible; I ſay that the Princes and the Paſtors in a State, are as the will and vnderſtanding in the ſoule of a man. The will commandeth the vnderſtanding with an abſolute commaund, which the Greekes call foreign, or Lord-like, inioyning it to ſtudy or to learne this or that thing. But the vnderſtanding on the other ſide leadeth on the will by ſuggeſtion without commaund; the one is done by authority the other by perſwaſion. So Princes command Paſtors, Paſtors ſollicite and intreate Princes: The reſpect which Princes owe vntounto them is not to their perſons, but to their charge and calling, and to the word or meſſage which they bring, for they be not the candle it ſelfe, but onelyonly the Candleſticke on which it is ſet,Ioh. 1. ver. 8.John 1:8 ſent, as our Sauiour ſaith of S. Iohn, not to be the light, but to beare witneſſe of the light: Howbeit this compariſon taken from the vnderſtanding and the will doth halt in more then one point; for the will cannot conſtraine the vnderſtanding, but Princes may compell Paſtors to obey their lawes, and to puniſh them corporally when they doe amiſſe. p. 65Againe the vnderſtanding is to guide the will in al things, but the Prince in an infinite of buſineſſe may do well enough without the helpe and counſell of his Clergy, eſpecially in affaires that are temporall and meerely ciuill. Againe the will doth neuer teach the vnderſtanding; for it conſiſteth wholly in motion and action; but many Princes hauehave reformed their Paſtors, and brought them back to their dueties; as did Conſtantine who in the Councell of Nice ſtifeled and ſmothered vp all quarrels among the Biſhops by caſting their diffamatorie libels into the fire: as did Dauid, who erected new orders in the Temple: and as did Salomon who depoſed Abiathar from the Prieſthood, being attainted of conſpiracy againſt him. And likewiſe Ezechias and Ichoſaphat, who clenſed the Temple and ſet vp the purity of Gods ſeruice againe. In this ſenſe, a Synodall Epiſtle written to Lewes the Courteous, calleth him Rectorem Eccleſiae, gouernor of the Church. And Lewes his young ſonne being at Pauia, tooke an account of the liues of the Biſhops, and of their diligence in their charge, as Sigonius witneſſeth in the yeare 855. The ſame Authour ſaith in his ſeuenth booke that Adrian conferred vponupon Charlemaigne the honour of gouerneing the Church, and of chooſing the Biſhoppe of Rome; not that he might change the doctrine of the Church at his pleaſure, but only to hold a ſtrait hand for the execution of the things which were enioyned by the word of God.

But Bellarmine addeth for a ſecond reaſon, That p. 66if the Church (that is to ſay the Pope) had not the power to diſpoſe of temporall things it could neuer attaine to perfection, but ſhould want neceſſary power to arriue at her intended end: For, ſaith he, wicked Princes might without feare of puniſhment intertaine heretickes to the ouerthrow of Religion. This is a reaſon without reaſon, and full of impiety, for it accuſeth the Church which was in the Apoſtles times of imperfection; which then had no power at all ouer the Temporalty, all things being then in the handes of Infidels. Add hereunto, that Kings might vſe the ſame reaſon, and ſay, that their power could not be perfect vnleſſe they had the meanes to diſpoſe of ſpirituall things, for that otherwiſe wicked Biſhops might without feare of puniſhment be vitious, mutinous, Necromancers and firebrands of ſedition againſt Princes: of all which enormities the Sea of the Biſhop of Rome can alone furniſh a multitude of examples; yea, after Baronius, Coeffeteau himſelfe doth confeſſe,Coeffeteau in his booke entituled A Refutation of falſhoods. fol. 68. pag. 1. that many monſters hauehave ſitten vponupon that ſeate▪ The Churches perfection doth not conſiſt in a ſtrength, able by force to defend it ſelfe, but in the purity of preſcribing the wholſome meanes of ſaluation. No otherwiſe then the perfection of Philoſophy dooth not conſiſt in hauing a ſtrong houſe, or a good ſword able to repreſſe thoſe that ſhould hinder her from being taught and profeſſed; but rather in the certainty, perſpicuity and ſufficiency of her Demonſtrations. God who hath neuer ſuffered that his Church ſhould be extinguiſhed by falſe teachers which infect p. 67the ſoules, will not permit that it ſhall be aboliſhed by wicked Princes which offer violence to the bodies; for whatſoeuer neceſſity any man can alleadge why he ſhould plucke the Crowne from a lawfull Princes head, yet can there be no neceſſity of doing any thing contrary to the will of God; as there is no neceſſity that doth binde a man to bee diſloyall, there can be no diſpenſing with the law of God. God ſayth by the mouth of his Apoſtle,Rom. 13.1.Rom 13:1 That eueryevery perſon ought to be ſubiect to ſuperior powers for there is no power but of God: Where it is cleare that he ſpeaketh of Princes and temporall Lords, becauſe he addeth, that they beare the ſword, as being the Miniſters of God, ordeyned for iuſtice: And a little after he commaundeth to pay them tribute and cuſtomes. Now at the time when the Apoſtle ſpake this, neyther the Biſhoppe of Rome nor any other did eyther carry the ſword or receiue any tribute. Who is he then that can diſpenſe with ſo preciſe a commaundement? Or what thing can be more neceſſary then to obey God? And note moreouer, that if the Pope be the Iudge of this caſe of neceſſity, for which Princes ought to be diſpoſſeſt, it will bee eaſie for him at any time to ſay, that it is neceſſary that this or that King be degraded, to the end to make himſelfe by that means King of Kings and diſpoſer of their Crownes.

Howbeit let vsus a little weigh and conſider what this neceſſity may be, which carrieth on the Pope to plucke from a King his Scepter, and to giuegive his Crowne to another. Bellarmine alleadgeth but p. 68one, to wit, if it be neceſſary to ſaluation. As in caſe a King be an Hereticke, an Infidell, or a perſecutor of the Church, or a fauourer and vpholder of errour. But he would faine hide and conceale from vsus that the Pope doth aſwell intrude himſelfe to diſpoſſeſſe Kings that are of his Religion, and no way in fault. So in the Decrees of the Romiſh Church in the 15. Cauſe, Quaest. 6. in the Canon which beginneth Alius, Romanus Pontifex Zacharias ſcil. Regem Fran corum non tam pro ſuis iniquitatibus quàm pro coquod tantae poteſtati erat inutilis à regno depoſuit &c. And the Canoniſts who hauehave made the Gloſſe, diſpute vpō that place whether a man ought to pay his debts to one excommunicated. Probabiliter dici poteſt quod excommunicato non ſit ſoluendii cum nemo debeat participate cum en. Lib. 5 cap. 7. §. Tertia. Non licet Chriſtianis tolerare Regem infid…lē aut hereticum, &c.the Pope ſpeaketh in this manner: Zachary the Biſhop of Rome hath depoſed the French King, not ſo much for his iniquities, as for that he is not fit for, nor capable of ſo great a power, and hath ſet vp Pippin the faher of Charles Emperour in his place, and hath diſcharged all the French-men from their Oath of fidelity. … Iulius the ſecond could not accuſe Lewes the twelfth, nor Iohn King of Nauarre of hereſie: nor yet Sixtus the fift the late king Henry the third, who notwithſtanding were by the Popes thundering Bulles declared to hauehave beene fallen from their kingdomes.

I freely indeede confeſſe, that in an Electiue kingdome, when queſtion is made of chooſing a new king, they to whom that charge belongeth, ought in no wiſe to chuſe a king that is an Infidell or an Idolater. But it is one thing to ſpeake of a king who is choſen by his ſubiects; and another, of a king who is a lawfull inheritour, and who is beholding to his birth for his Crowne, and to whom, ouer and aboue, his ſubiects hauehave taken the Oath of Alleageance. And therefore the Argument which Bellarmine draweth from the one p. 69to the other, to proue that Subiects are at no hand to endure a king that is an Heretick or an Infidel, doth not follow vponupon good conſequence. It auayleth not to ſay that the danger is like both in the one and the other; for it may ſo fall out that two things may be alike dangerous, whereof the one may be bad, and the other not: as for example, for a man to receiue in his body the ſhot of an harquebuſe from one that did aime to hit him, & from another that did it by chance is alike dangerous, but not alike wicked. And indeede euen in humane pollicy, and without any relation to the commandements of God, it is not expedient that ſubiects ſhould ſhake off the yoake of their Prince which is of a different Religion: for this were the next way to eſtrange Princes and Monarches from Chriſtian Religion, and to make them to hauehave it in deteſtation, as that which counſelleth and perſwadeth to rebellion, and maketh piety the cauſe of mutiny. Moreouer the queſtion here is not of the danger, but of the duety, nor yet what may arriue, but what ought to be done; we muſt not do euill that good may come of it. Many things are lawfull which are not expedient, but there is nothing expedient which is not lawfull When we hauehave done what we ought to doe, then God will doe what pleaſeth him; and he will doe nothing but for the good of his Church, which he cheriſheth as the apple of his eye: he hath bought it too deare, that he ſhould be of the minde to deſtroy it. Now if this rule of the Cardinall be neceſſary: that it is not permitted p. 70to Chriſtians to ſuffer a King that is an Hereticke or an Infidell: Saint Paul was very much miſtaken in giuing commaundement to obey Nero an Infidell and a perſecutor, and the Chriſtians then did not as they ought to hauehave done, in that they did not ſtabbe him, or make a myne of powder vnderunder his houſe: Bellarmine anſwereth, that they might iuſtly hauehave done it, but that they wanted forces, that is to ſay,Lib. 5. de Rom. Pontif. cap. 7. §. Quod ſi Chriſtiani olim non depoſuerunt Neronem &c. Id fuit quia deerāt vires. &c. that if they had been able, they would certainly hauehave done it, but that they feared to prouoke this Emperor againſt them, & to hauehave drawn perſecution againſt the Chriſtians. O bleſſed Apoſtle, how fitly to the purpoſe doſt thou ſtop this euaſion, & furniſheſt vsus with an anſwer that cutteth off all difficultie? for he ſaith, That we muſt be ſubiect to Princes not only for wrath, but euen for conſcience ſake. He wil that we obey Princes, not only for feare of incurring thier diſpleaſure, but alſo to ſatisfie the conſcience and our duety towards God. And S. Peter in like manner, in his firſt Epiſtle and ſecond Chapter, Submit your ſelues to all manner ordinance of man for the Lords ſake, whether it be to the King as to the Superiour, &c. This then is to be done, not only to ſtoope and yeelde to the preſent neceſſity, but alſo for Gods ſake. And to ſay truth, could not S. Peter at whoſe word Ananias and Saphyra gaue vp the ghoſt, and S. Paul, who in reaſoning with Elymas the Sorcerer ſtrooke him with blindeneſſe; could not they, I ſay, by the ſame power hauehave cruſhed this monſter Nero, or hauehave throne him from the height of the Capitoll.

p. 71But what wil they ſay if we produce ages, wherin Orthodox Chriſtians were the ſtronger party, and yet did they abſtaine from the life or Crowne of the Emperour. Constantius was an Arrian, againſt whom Liberius Biſhoppe of Rome did not caſt forth his lightnings, neyther did hee attempt to diſpoſſeſſe him, but vponupon the Emperours commaund hee went into baniſhment. After his deceaſe Iulian the Apoſtata mightily laboured to reſtore Paganiſme, at what time almoſt the whole Empire was Chriſtian; and that which is more, his Armies were compoſed of Chriſtian ſouldiers, as Ruffinus witneſſeth in the firſt booke of his Story, cap. 1. Theodoret, lib 4. cap. 1. Socrates, lib. 3. cap. 19. And indeed when the Armies after his death conferred the Empire vponupon Iouinian a chriſtian Prince, they cryed with one voyce, We are Christians. What could there be more eaſie then to hauehave thruſt this Apoſtata from the Empire? And if God hath giuen to the Biſhop of Rome this power to degrade Monarches, why was he then wanting to this his duety when there was ſuch a preſſing neceſſity, and ſo great a facility to hauehave done it? There liued at that time Gregory Nazianzen, the ornament of his age, who in his firſt Oration againſt Iulian, ſaith, that the Chriſtians at that time had no other remedy againſt the perſecutors, ſaue onelyonly their teares. But if our Popes now a dayes had then liued,This paſſage is alleadged in the 11. Decree Quaeſt. 3. c. Iulianus. and might hauehave beene beleeued, they would eaſily hauehave furniſhed other meanes. S. Auſtin vponupon the 124. Pſal. ſpeaking of the obedience that the Chriſtians yeelded p. 72to this Iulian, Diſtinguebant Dominum aeternum a Domino temporali & tamen ſubditi erāt propter Dominū aeternum etiam Domino temporali.They made a difference (ſaith he) betweene the Lord eternall and the Lord temporall, and yet they were ſubiect to their temporall Lord, becauſe of the Lord eternall. Such a like example we hauehave in the Emperour Valens an Arrian, and a perſecutor, whoſe officers and people were for the moſt part faithfull beleeuers, but their Religion neuer brake out into rebellion: The Emperour Valentinian the yonger was infected with Arrianiſme, as we ſee by the 33. Epiſtle of S. Ambroſe, where Valentinian ſendeth his Colonels and Captaines to diſpoſſeſſe the Orthodox Chriſtians of the Temple in the City of Milan, & to put in the Arrians. Ambroſe & the Chriſtian people withſtood him, but with modeſty, ſaying, Rogamus Auguste, non pugnamus. Non timemus, ſed rogamus. Whereat Valentinian was ſo much offended, that he called S. Ambroſe ‡‡Si Tyrannus es ſcrire volo, vt ſciam quemadmodum me aduerſum te praeparem.tyrant. At the ſame time one**Soſomen lib. 7. cap. 13. Maximus a Catholick Prince rebelled againſt Valentinian, and made him to forſake Italy, taking in hand the defence of the true faith againſt an Emperour that was an Hereticke. What did the Chriſtians then? Did S. Ambroſe or the Biſhop of Rome commaund the people to obey Maximus, and to rebell againſt Valentinian? Nothing leſſe: nay rather Valentinian by the helpe of Theodoſius and the Orthodoxes, was re-eſtabliſhed in his authority, which greatly ſerued to ſet him in the right way. To be ſhort, we finde in the auncient Church many Biſhops baniſhed and chaſtiſed by Emperours, but neuer any Emperour diſpoſſeſſed of his Empire by the Biſhoppe of Rome. p. 73So then Cardinall Bellarmine doth accuſe the auncient Biſhops of Rome, for that during the oppreſſion of the Church, they vſed not thoſe means and remedies which they had in their hands, in that they drew onelyonly the ſpirituall ſword, whereas our new Popes skirmiſh with both hands, and flouriſh both ſwords, beſides all other dexterities.

Yea futher if the auncient Biſhoppes of Rome were in doubt to prouoke the Emperors, for feare of being cauſe of much ſlaughter and confuſion; why did not this feare with-hold the late Popes from thundring againſt the Emperours Fredericke Barbaroſſa and Henry the fourth? Why did they draw on thoſe horrible confuſions which filled the weſt Empire with blood, ſacked many townes, and cauſed threeſcore maine battels to bee fought?

It is then a manifeſt corruption of the Scripture, when in the ſame place he produceth the Epiſtle of S. Paul, ſaying to the Corinthians, 1. Cor. 6. that rather then they ſhold go to law before vngodly men or Infidels, they ſhould erect thoſe who were of leaſt eſtimation in the Church, Iudges amongſt them: Then he addeth, Is it ſo, that there is not a wiſe man amongſt you, not one that can iudge betweene his brethren? From this Text Bellarmine maketh this collection, that the Corinthians might eſtabliſh new Iudges. This is to take the Scriptures cleane contrary to the meaning of them. For firſt S. Paul doth not ſpeake of depoſing Magiſtrates; ſecondly, he doth not ſpeake of erecting new ordinary Offices in the Common-wealth, but to chuſe p. 74out from among the faithfull ſome perſons, to compoſe their differences by arbitrement & peacable meanes, rather then to draw blame vponupon the Church by bringing their ſuits and quarrels before Infidels. This is the expoſition that Theodoret and Chryſoſtome giuegive vponupon this place, and Lyranus and Thomas vponupon this Epiſtle. Now if the Cardinall maintaine, that S. Paul doth ſpeake of forſaking the ordinary Iudges, to inſtitute new in their places, let him produce ſome examples hereof; let him ſhew vsus the practiſe of it. There he is ſilent, and for good cauſe; for who maketh any doubt but that the Chriſtians, if they ſhould hauehave ſet vp ordinary Iudges in place of Imperiall Officers, ſhould hauehave beene held culpable of Leze-maieſty.

The danger which he pretendeth to be intolerating an heretical King, cannot beare skale againſt the commaundement of God. Adde hereunto, that this reaſon is but weake in the mouth of a Ieſuite, who holdeth that a Pope,Bellar. l. 2. de Rom. Pont. c. 29 be he neuer ſo wicked and a deſtroyer of the Church, cannot be depoſed no not by a general Councell; and yet there is greater apparant danger in this, then in the former.

That which Bellarmine addeth, ſeemeth to hauehave beene written by him being aſleepe, and is nothing elſe but a quippe to make men laugh. He proueth that a faithfull people may free themſelues from the yoake of a Prince that is an Infidell, that is to ſay, may rebell againſt him, and that by the example of the beleeuing wife, which by the iudgement p. 75of the Apoſtle, 1. Cor. 7. is not bound to abide with an husband that is an Infidell, when hee will not dwell with her. Whereunto I anſwere, firſt that Similitudes are no proofes: Secondly, this Similitude being rightly taken doth not hurt vsus: for as a beleeuing wife is not bound to follow her husband when he forſaketh her, and wil no longer co-habite with her; ſo I will freely confeſſe, that ſubiects are not bound to acknowledge a King, that abandoneth his ſubiects, and will no longer be King ouer them, but renounceth his Realme: and this is all that may be drawne from this Compariſon. Thirdly, this Similitude is aduantageous vntounto vsus; for if we admit the Compariſon betweene the condition of a wife and of ſubiects, then will it definitiuely determine our Controuerſie, and make vsus gain the cauſe. For as while an husband that is an Infidell will abide with his beleeuing wife, ſhe may not forſake him, nor ſhake off her yoake: ſo while a King that is an Infidell will retayne his ſoueraignty ouer beleeuing ſubiects, they may not abandone him nor rebell againſt him. The wordes of the Apoſtle are directly to this purpoſe: If any woman hauehave an vnbeleeuing husband, and he conſent to dwell with her, let her not forſake him.

All that which Bellarmine addeth, is nothing elſe, but as his manner is, ſuppoſitions without proofes. We graunt him that Princes who againſt their promiſe, doe warre againſt the true fayth, deſerue to be depriued of their Kingdome; but wee denye that this power of depriuing them is in the p. 76Pope. VVe muſt reſerue that iudgement to God, ſeeing it is he that hath eſtabliſhed them, and that (as Tertullian ſayth) they are inferiour to GOD alone.Tertul. ad Scapulam & in Apolog. cap. 30. A quo ſunt ſecundi, poſt quem primi. Cap. 30. Cum dixit Petro Amas me, Paſce oues meas, idem dixit & caeteris.

As touching theſe wordes ſpoken to S. PETER; Feed my ſheepe, to omit for the preſent that which S. AVSTIN ſayth in his booke of the Chriſtian combate; that Ieſus Chriſt, ſaying to S. Peter, Feede my lambes, ſpake the ſame to the rest; as all the auncients with one accord doe ſay, that the power of binding and looſing was giuen to the Apoſtles, and to the whole Church in the perſon of S. Peter, to omit this, becauſe I will treat of it in his proper place: I onelyonly ſay, that albeit this had beene ſpoken to the Pope, yet might he not for all that chaſtiſe Princes with depriuation of their eſtates, or by raiſing a commotion among his ſubiects, or by impoſing fines and amercements vponupon his countreyes. This is to enterprete the word Feede, too licentiouſly, we had neede of new Grammer for this new Diuinity: for the word Feede, which in times paſt ſignified to teach and to guide, dooth now a dayes ſignifie to blaſt whole kingdomes with the lightning of excommunications, to ouerthrow great Monarches, and to ſucke and draw out the very ſubſtance of the poore people. Beare with our ſimplicity herein; for ſo great an abuſe in wordes maketh vsus to feare a greater in the matter it ſelfe. To ſpeake barbarouſly were an euill ſomewhat tollerable, were it not that Barbariſmes doe ſometymes paſſe into Hereſies, and incongruities in p. 77wordes into incongruity in fayth. Thus the Biſhop of Rome calleth himſelfe the Pylot and Steer-man of S. Peters Shippe, but he imployeth that barke to trafficke his owne gayne, and S. Peters nets to fiſh for Princes Crownes, and to entramell whole States and Common-weales. His keyes now a dayes ſerue onelyonly to open Cofers. His power of looſing only to looſe the bonds of fidelity, through a mutinous piety, and a factious Religion, which maketh it ſelf Iudge ouer the conſciences of kings, w^ch euen hateth their Religion becauſe it hateth their rule & gouernment, and maketh, that to be a good ſubiect, & to be a good Chriſtian, are things that cannot ſubſiſt together.

Bellarmines reaſons hauing beene very feeble, the examples which he produceth in the Chapter following are leſſe currant. He ſayeth that Oſias king of Iuda was dryuen out of the Temple by the High Prieſt, and depryued of his kingdome. The text of Scripture is direct to the contrary. It is ſaid 2. King. 15.2. that Oſias began to raigne in the ſixteenth yeare of his age, and hee raigned fifty two yeates: ſo that he liued threeſcore and eyght years: whence it appeareth that he was King euen vntill his death. In the fift verſe Iotham his ſon during the time of his fathers ſeparation, becauſe of his leproſie, he is not called King but gouernor of his houſe. And ver. 7. the beginning of the raigne of Iotham is reckoned only from the death of Oſias his father.

The example of Athalia driuen from the Kingdome by Iehoiada the high Prieſt is as little to the2. King. 11.2 Kgs 11 p. 78purpoſe. For wee ſpeake here of lawfull Princes depoſed, and he brings vsus an example of a woman th…t vſurped anothers Kingdome by force and tyranny, in which caſe eueryevery man is allowed to employ himſelfe to expel the vſurper, and to preſerue the Kingdome to the lawfull King.

The example of S. Amboſe Biſhoppe of Millan, who would not receiue the Emperour Theodoſius to the communion, by reaſon of that great ſlaughter which his ſouldiers, at his commaundement, committed at Theſſalonica, maketh expreſly againſt the Biſhop of Rome. For would the Pope now a dayes indure that a Biſhoppe of Millan or Colleyne ſhould intrude himſelfe to excommunicate Emperours, and to declare them to be fallen from their Empire without his permiſſion? Did Ambroſe this by the counſaile or commaundement of the Biſhop of Rome? And were it ſo that Ambroſe had beene, that the Pope now ſayth himſelfe to be, where will Bellarmine finde that Ambroſe did degrade the Emperour, or that he diſpenſed with his ſubiects for the Oath of fidelity? Let a man read his three and thirtieth Epiſtle, and he ſhall ſee with how great humilty he ſubmitteth himſelfe to an Arrian Emperour, ſo farre from preaching any reuolt of his ſubiects from him, that indeede hee willingly offered to dye, and to ſuffer perſecution, if ſuch were the will of the Emperour. As touching the law which Theodoſius impoſed vponupon himſelfe by the Counſell of S. Ambroſe, which was that from thence forward he would ſtay the execution p. 79of any ſentence of death vntil the thirtieth day. I cannot ſee how this can ſerue to giuegive vntounto the Pope power of depoſing Princes; For if Theodoſius would not hauehave followed the counſell of Ambroſe; there had beene no harme done. But this good Emperour did of his owne accord yeeld vntounto it.

After him followeth Gregory the firſt; at the end of whoſe Epiſtles is found a priuiledge graunted to the Abbey of S. Medard, which hath this clauſe for the burthen of the Song: If any King, Prelate, Iudge, or ſecular perſon what ſoeuer ſhall violate the Decrees of this Apoſtolicall authority, and of our commandement, be he of what dignity or greatnes ſoeuer he may be, let him be depriued of his honour. I might ſay that this is onelyonly an imprecation againſt Kings, and not a Decree of depoſition. But we neede not buſie our ſelues about the ſenſe, ſeeing that the Epiſtle is falſe. It is a priuiledge indeed vntounto which the name of Gregory is put, to winne the greater credite and authority. The falſhood of it appeareth firſt in the Barbariſme of the ſtyle; for men did neuer call, neyther at Rome nor in Italy, farmes or poſſeſſions by the name of Manſos. It is a word which is found in the Chapter of Charles the great, and of Lewes, which ſheweth that this priuiledge was firſt compoſed in France, and not written at Rome. Which thing alſo appeareth in this that he vſeth theſe wordes: Tuſiacum & Mortinetum fiſcos regios. To call the lands of the Kings Demaines, Fiſcos regios is a Barbariſme that may eaſily befall ſome French monke; but at Rome this would not p. 80hauehave beene vnderſtood: and you eſpye the French vaine in theſe wordes very often repeated, Dominus Medardus, Monſieur S. Medard. Adde hereunto that this priuiledge is abſurd and vniuſt; for it forbiddes to depoſe the Abbot of S. Medard howſoeuer attainted with crime, vnleſſe it be after the Popes pleaſure known, and after a Councel aſſembled, wherein there ſhall bee found a douſen witneſſes, beſides the accuſers. Now to breake this goodly priueledge is thought to bee a crime, for which a King ought to looſe his Kingdome. The cheef poynt is, that the humor of this Gregorie the firſt, who called himſelfe ſeruant of ſeruants, doth very much diſagree with theſe ſo arrogant terms; & which cut after the ſtile of an earthly Monarch. For writing to Mauricius the Emperor in his third booke and ſixt Epiſtle: But I the vnworthy ſeruant of your goodneſſe. Ego autem indignus pietatis tuae ſeruus. Ego vero haec dominis meis loquens, quid ſum niſi puluis & vermis.And a little after, Now I ſpeaking theſe things to you my Lords, what am I but duſt and a very worme? And the King of great Britayne hath wiſely obſerued in his firſt booke, that the Emperour Mauricius had commaunded this Gregory to publiſh a law, which Gregory himſelfe condemned as vniuſt; and yet to obey his Maſter, he publiſhed it. I, ſayth he, as one ſubiect to your commaundement, hauehave ſent theſe ſame lawes into diuers Countries; and becauſe they do not agree with God Almighty, I hauehave by theſe my letters ſignified it to my Lords and Maſters. How well this Gregory knew to keepe his rancke, and could not finde the way to draw this temporal ſword, which yet ſtucke faſt in the ſcabbard. For an p. 81vpſhot of falſhoods; ſo at the end of this goodly priuiledge the ſubſcriptions of the Biſhops of Alexandria and Carthage, who neuer knew the Abbey of S. Medard, eſpecially the Biſhop of Alexandria, who neuer ſaw Gregory, and who beſide that ſigneth his name very low among the thronge of ordinary witneſſes, albeit he neuer thought himſelfe inferiour in any thing to the Biſhop of Rome. After all ſigneth King Theodoret as inferiour to all the Biſhops.

After this Gregory, wee are brought downe to Gregory the ſecond, the great puller downe of Images. If we may beleeue Cedrenus and Zonaras great adorers of Images: this Gregory went about to hinder the Italians from paying their tributes to Leo Iſauricus, who had demoliſhed Images. But Platina who hath moſt carefully ſearched out the ſtory of Popes, witneſſeth the contrary, and ſayth in the life of this Gregory, that vponupon order giuen from the Emperour for the breaking downe of Images. The people of Italy were ſo much moued, Qua cohortatione adeo animati ſunt Italiae populivt Paulum abfuerit quin ſibi alium Imperatorē deligerent Quo minus a, id fieret authoritate ſua obſtare Gregorius amicuseſt.that it wanted but little, but that they had choſen themſelues another Emperour: but Gregory employed his authority to hinder that matter. Nay further he neuer for all that, declared Leo fallen from the Empire, he did not tranſlate his Scepter to another, he did not diſpenſe with his ſubiects for their Oath of Alleageance: And yet the Emperour at that time did onelyonly hold a third part of Italy, which was a very ſmall portion of the Empire; ſo that his tributes of Italy were vntounto him of very little value.

p. 82As for Pope Zacharie, when they report in the yeare 750 to hauehave taken from Childeriche the Kingdome of Fraunce to giuegive vntounto Pipin; and likewiſe Pope Leo the third, whom men ſay to hauehave tranſlated the Empire of the Greekes to the French by giuing the Empire to Charlemaine. I could conuince all this of falſhood, and ſhew that the practiſe and cuſtome of Popes is to giuegive vntounto ſome one, that thing which he cannot take from him; Or after hauing incyted ſome one to inuade the poſſeſſions of his neighbour, to vaunt afterward, and to reproach him; that what he got by rapine he now holdeth by his Holineſſe liberality; or as if in the Sacring of the Emperour, becauſe he hath put the Crowne on his head, he ſhould ſay that he hath giuen him the Empire; as if in the ſacring of a King he that hath inaugurated him by performing the Ceremony ſhould bragge that he hath giuen him the Kingdome. By this reaſon the Biſhop of Oſtias, who hath had for a long time the right of conſecrating the Pope, ſhould hauehave bin aboue the Popes: and the Biſhop of Millan ſhould giuegive the Kingdome of Italy to the Emperour, becauſe from him he is to receiue a Crowne of Iron: but this belongeth to another diſcourſe, neyther is the proofe of it neceſſary to this purpoſe. For had theſe Biſhops done much worſe then this, yet could not their example ſerue for a rule, vnleſſe it be ſhewed where and when God gaue them this power. For is it credible that the Biſhops of Rome could hauehave had in their hands this power neare eight hundred p. 83yeares together without enploying it? or that they ſuffered this temporall ſworde to hang ruſting on a pinne, without euer making vſe of it, vntill that after many ages this Zachary bethought himſelfe of putting it to ſeruice in an action which the Church of Rome it ſelfe confeſſeth to bevniuſt? Seeing that the Canon Alius, before aleadged, ſayth, that Childericke was not depoſed for any cryme, but becauſe Pipin was more capable of gouernement then he. How many Emperours and Kings vnfit to gouerne were there before this Childericke, whoſe Crownes the Popes neuer touched? But this Pope flattered Pipin to the end to be ſuccoured by him againſt the Lumbards, who kept him in ſeruitude.

Now to ſhut vp this whole matter, ſeeing that the Pope doth challenge to himſelfe this power ouer Kings, who is it that hath giuen it vntounto him? Is it from the vnwritten worde? Is it a cuſtome authoriſed by the time? or ſuffered by Princes? or ſlid it along by the fauour and ſleepineſſe of an age that liued in darkeneſſe? Or if God hath giuen him this power, let him produce his Title, let him ſhew the clauſes of this Donation.

2. Againe, If Chriſt left a Succeſſour or Lieftenant here on earth, it is certayne that he can exerciſe no other charge then that which Ieſus Chriſt did, being in the world. Now he did neuer degrade Kings, nor tranſlate Empyres. Nay how is it like he would hauehave done that, ſeeing that he could not be intreated to become a Iudge betweene priuate p. 84men in a Controuerſie that was of ciuill nature. He that teacheth vsus to yeelde tribute to Caeſar is it likely that hee would hauehave left a Lieftenant that ſhould make Caeſar himſelfe tributary.

3. If it be ſo, that S. Peter or any other Apoſtle had this power ouer Kingdomes: where dooth it appeare that euer he exerciſed it? And to what end ſerueth an authority without the execution? Or where did this power of the Biſhops ouer the temporality of Kings lie couring all this while, that it ſhould need to be rouzed vp ſome eleuen hundred yeares after Ieſus Chriſt?

4 Moreouer, It is God that giueth Kings and Princes their power, as Daniel told Nebuchadnezzar though an Infidel.Dan. 2.37.Dan 2:37 Thou O King art a King of Kings, becauſe the God of heauen hath giuen thee a Kingdome, and power, and ſtrength, and glory. And the Apoſtle, Rom. 13.1. hath tolde vsus that all powers are ordayned of God. Now that which God giueth, man cannot take away. Let the Pope take away if it pleaſe him, that which himſelfe hath giuen: let him take his Cardinals redde hattes, Archbiſhops pals, if euer he gaue any without money; Let him giuegive out againſt them that holde Benefices from him, that their Benefices are deuolted vntounto him by lapſe, but let him abſtaine from the Crowes of Kings, let him not touch the Lords annoynted.

5. Adde hereunto thoſe paſſages which the King of great Britaine hath learnedly obſerued in his Apology, by which he proueth, that God willeth that his pleople yeelde obedience to Kings euen p. 85to Infidels. So in the 27. of Ieremie; Submit your neckes vnderunder the yoake of the King of Babell, and ſerue him and his people: and cap. 29. Seeke the peace of the Citie whether I hauehave carried you, and pray for it; for in her peace you ſhall hauehave peace This was farre from mouing them to reuolt. Thus did the Iſraelites obey Pharaoh: And euen then when the Kings of Iuda were Idolaters, as Ahaz and Manaſſe, yet did the High Prieſts neuer for all that incite the people to Rebellion. The Emperour Nero was a prodigious monſter for all kinde of wickedneſſe, notwithſtanding S. Paul would hauehave men to obey him for conſcience ſake,Rom. 13.1. Timoth. 1.Rom 131 Tim 1 and for feare of offending God. But wee now a dayes ſtand vponupon better termes: for if wee ought to obey a Prince that is a Pagan, euen for conſcience ſake in Ciuill cauſes; how much more one that is truely a Chriſtian? And if a Tygre that hath climed to the top of the Empire, how much more a Prince that is wiſe and mercifull, who preſerueth the liues of thoſe that deſire his death? And if we may not obey any man that leadeth and commaundeth a mutiny and treaſon; how much leſſe ought we to obey the Pope, whoſe Empire is founded vponupon the ruines of the Goſpell, and who being prodigall of the blood of thoſe who are his, draweth perſecution vponupon them, to the end that they for him may looſe goods and life, yea and life eternall?

Now if any man vnwilling to enter this liſt, ſhal ſay that this is a matter of pollicy, and that we prye into matters of State; ſuch a one by his tergiuerſation p. 86wil more ouerthrow the Popes power, then if hee had expreſly fought againſt it. For if this power be a point without the compaſſe of Religion, it followeth thereupon that it is not ſounded vponupon the word of God: And if God had ſpoken of it in his worde, it were a point of Religion to beleeue it. The Pope then is to blame for making ſuch bragges of his keyes in this caſe, if it be nothing but a matter of pollicy, and ſuch as hath no ſparke of Diuinity in it: which thing Pope Clement the fift, doth couertly confeſſe in the extrauagant Meruit: Meruit Chariſſimi filij noſtri Philippi regis Francorum &c.where he declareth that he doth not vnderſtand that the extrauagant Vnam Sanctam of Boniface the eight, which giueth to the Pope ſoueraigne power ouer the Temporalties of Kingdomes as well as ouer the Spiritualtie, could bring any preiudice to the Kingdome of France, to make it more ſubiect to the Church of Rome, then before it was, but reintegrateth the ſaid Kingdome into the ſame eſtate that it was before the aboueſaid definition of Boniface, and that in acknowledgement of the merites of King Philip the faire, albeit hee had ſomewhat rudely accorded matters with Boniface. Let the Reader weigh and conſider this point aduiſedly. For in this extrauagant (which Bellarmine dooth approue and commend) Pope Boniface foundeth his pretenſions ouer the Temporalties of Princes, vppon many paſſages of the word of God. He meaneth then that his right is by the lawe of God: where againſt King Philip hedoth maintaine, that in temporal things he is ſubiect to no man. Within p. 87a while after Clement the fift paſſed it ſo, in fauor of the King, and exempted him from the rigour of this Bull; the Pope then made bolde to diſpenſe with the law of God: or if on the other ſide it be nothing elſe but an humane poſitiue law, then Boniface dealt very wickedly in ſeeking to ground it vppon the holy Scripture. But why ſhall Fraunce alone be exempted from this yoake and other Kingdomes ſhall be enforced to beare it? Could Philips merites diſpenſe with him for obeying the word of God produced by Boniface. Theſe Popes make a Religion of waxe, depending vponupon the conditions of the times, and the traine of their affaires, and make it a prop of their Dominion: they ſtretch it and ſhorten it like a ſtirrup leather, fitting not their wils to Religion, but Religion to their will. Now if Philip had bin Maſter of Rome and abſolutecommander in Italy, the Biſhops of Rome would hauehave thrown themſelues on their knees before him, as did Pope Adrian in the ſecond Counſell of Nice, 2. Act. and would hauehave called themſelues wormes, duſt, and his petty-ſeruants as did Gregory the firſt, writing to Mauricius.