The Novelty of Popery Opposed to the Antiquity of True Christianity, Book 7 · Controversy 7 · Chapter 5
CHAP. 5. Of the Abuſe of the Keyes, and of Abſolution, both that which is called Sacramental, and that which is given without the Sacrament.
IN the building of Popery, there is ſcarce any place where Satan hath more powerfully laboured, and more disfigured the Doctrine of the Goſpel, then in the uſe of the Keyes, and in the remiſſion of ſins, and in the abſolutions which the Prieſts and the Pope confer.
It is already a great abuſe, as we have proved, and a bold undertaking, that ſinful men take upon them to pardon ſins with authority of Judges, bearing themſelves as Judges in Gods cauſe, and uſurping a power which the Apoſtles never practiſed, and of which no example is found in the Word of God. But how many more abuſes are joyned with that?
I. Let us ſet in the front the unlimited and Soveraign power uſurped by the Pope to forgive ſins: Upon which, all the power that Biſhops and Prieſts have to forgive ſins, is made to depend. That power is thus deſcribed by Thomas the Angelick Doctor whom the Pope hath Sainted.(a)Thom. 21. Opuſc. cap. 10. Cum enim ſummus Pontifex ſit caput in corpore myſtico omnium fidelium Chriſti, & à capite ſit omnis motus & ſenſus in corpore vero, ſic etiam in propoſito. Propter quod oportet dicere in ſummo Pontifice eſſe plenitudinem omnium gratiarum, quia ipſe ſolus conſert plenam indulgentiam omnium peccatorum: Ut competat ſibi quod de primo Principe Domino dicimus, quia de plenitudine ejus nos omnes accepimus. Seeing that the High Prieſt is the Head in the myſtical body of all the faithful [members] of Chriſt, and ſeeing that in a true body, all the motion and ſenſe proceeds from the head, ſo it is in the thing now in hand. Wherefore we muſt ſay, that in the High Prieſt there is fulneſs of all graces, becauſe he alone conferreth a full indulgence of all ſins. So that to him is convenient, that which we ſay of the firſt Prince who is the Lord, that of his fulneſs we have all received, John 1.16. Which Papal power he ſtretcheth even over the temporal of Kingdoms. And hereupon he accuſeth Chriſt of importunity, ſaying, that(b)Unde Dominus utitur in Johanne quadam importuna interrogatione, ter quaerens à ſucceſſore ſuo beato Petro, quod ſi ipſum diligit, gregem paſcat. in the Goſpel according to Saint John, the Lord makes a troubleſom interrogation, asking of his ſucceſſor Saint Peter, that if he love him he would feed his ſheep. If we muſt believe this Doctor, Chriſt ought to have abſtained from that importunity, and given more reſpect to his ſucceſſor. The Pope then having (according to Thomas) fulneſs of grace and power to give full pardon of all ſins, ſo that of his fulneſs we all receive; no wonder that in the diſtribution of that fulneſs of graces he keeps ſome for himſelf. So far, that he is judge in his own cauſe, and diſpenſing himſelf from the vows which he made unto God, as the Jeſuite(c)Eman. Sa, Aphor. Confeſſ. in verbo Papa. Papa poteſt eſſe judex in cauſa propria, & abſolvere ab obligatione, qua quis homini tenetur, & ſecum ut volet diſpenſare. Emanuel Sa teacheth, in his Aphoriſms. Yea, as Bellarmine ſaith againſt Barcklay, He can in good ſenſe make ſin to be no ſin, and no ſin to be ſin. Having (as the laſt Council of Laterane ſaith)(d)Ult. Conc. Later. Seſſ. 10. all power both in heaven and earth.
II. Having then reſerved unto himſelf the power of remitting ſins without any reſervation or exception, he hath limited the power of Biſhops and Prieſts to certain caſes, which they cannot overpaſs, but upon the point of the penitents death. Murther, perjury, ſacriledge, blaſphemy, witchcraft, invocation of Devils, and eating fleſh on the week before Eaſter, are caſes reſerved to the Biſhop or his Penitentiary, and are above the power of Prieſts. Yet the Pope hath granted ſo many priviledges to ſome Confeſſors, to the Jeſuites eſpecially, that the Biſhops have almoſt nothing reſerved to themſelves. And the Doctors are not agreed about theſe caſes. It is not yet decided, Whether playing at Dice over ones own fathers grave, or cutting a Prieſts purſe while he is lifting up the Hoſt, or piſſing in the Holy-water, or cutting the ſtaff of Saint Francis into a game of nine-pins, be caſes reſerved to the Biſhop.
III. But beſides the ſins of which Prieſts and Biſhops can abſolve, there are crimes of an higher nature reſerved unto the Pope alone, and paſſing the power of the Biſhops. Theſe caſes are numbred in the Bull de Coena Domini, where we find the form of Excommunication, that the Pope thundereth out every year upon the Thurſday before Eaſter, which he ratifieth by caſting down a burning candle. There all, that are guilty of the caſes reſerved unto the Pope, are excommunicated. Among others, they that appeal from the Pope to the future Council. The Pirates that rob the Sea-coaſts of the Popes territories from mount Argentario to Terracina. The forgers of Apoſtolical Letters. They that carry arms to Hereticks. They that ſtop the Victualers bringing proviſion to the Popes Court. They that kill a Prelate. They that raiſe tenths upon the Clergy, or uſurp the rights of the Church, as Kings and their Chancellors, and their Courts of Parliament, for they are ſpecified by theſe names in the Bull. They that oppoſe the reception of the Council of Trent. They that ſtay or moleſt the Romipets, that is, the Pilgrims, going to Rome to get pardons. Theſe are the horrible crimes, the abſolution whereof is reſerved unto his Holineſs. For of the leſs crimes, as Murther, Sodomy, Inceſt, Witchcraft, Biſhops give Abſolution. Prieſts will commonly give the abſolution of fornication and theft, but not of eating fleſh in the holy Week, which yet is the Week in which Chriſt ate a Lamb with his Diſciples.
IV. Here words are wanting to deſcribe the grievouſneſs of the diſeaſe. Suppoſe that the Pope is Peters ſucceſſor, in the quality of Apoſtle, and Head of the Church, as if we preſuppoſed that a circle hath angles: Yet it is not found that Peter reſerved certain caſes unto himſelf, of which the other Apoſtles could not abſolve: Nor that he reſerved to the Apoſtles certain caſes, of which ordinary Paſtors could not give abſolution. For Peter knew that Chriſt had ſpoken to all the Apoſtles alike, when he ſaid, Whatſoever you ſhall bind on earth, ſhall be bound in heaven, Matth. 18.18. And whoſe ſoever ſins you forgive, they ſhall be forgiven, Joh. 20.23. And if the power of the Apoſtles had no limitation in this point, why ſhould their ſucceſſors have a limited power: Why muſt the charge which Chriſt gave them without exception, be reſtrained in their reſpect. Why ſhall the Biſhop of Rome be ſucceſſor of Peters illimited power, and the ſucceſſors of other Apoſtles, ſhall not be ſucceſſors of the power which the Apoſtles had without limitation, and without caſes reſerved unto Saint Peter?
V. Hence alſo it is made evident, that the power given unto the Apoſtles to forgive ſins, depended not on that of Saint Peter; and that Saint James and Saint Paul did not forgive ſins by Saint Peters conceſſion, or by dependance on his authority, ſince Chriſt gave to them all immediately the like authority to forgive: as Paul calls himſelf an Apoſtle not of men, neither by man, but by Jeſus Chriſt, Gal. 1.1.
VI. It is true that the Fathers of the Council of Trent in the fourteenth Seſſion, chap. 7. ground that reſervation of certain caſes upon a text of Rom. 13. where they make the Apoſtle ſay, Quae à Deo ſunt, ordinata ſunt: The things that are of God, are ordered or ſet in order; Whence they infer, that the higher powers muſt reſerve to themſelves ſomething above the inferiour powers. But that text is falſly alleadged, and corrupted both in words and ſenſe. In the words, for there is according to the Greek,(e)foreign. The powers that are in being, are eſtabliſhed or ordained by God. And ſo the French Bible of the Doctors of Lovain tranſlates it. In the ſenſe, for in this place Paul ſpeaks of Princes, and of the civil or ſecular power which beareth the ſword; and ſpeaks not of order or rank among Princes or highers powers, but ſaith only, that God hath eſtabliſhed and ordained them. And though the text ſaid that among higher powers there muſt be order or dependance the one on the other, it would not thence follow that the power of forgiving ſins in the Sacrament of penitence muſt be greater in ſome then in others; For the Sacraments change not nature according to the quality of perſons, no more then the preaching of the Goſpel, as it is ſeen in Baptiſm.
VII. The Pope was not contented with that. For of the ſatisfactions which Prieſts impoſe before or after abſolution, he may releaſe what he pleaſeth, and diſpenſe from them by Indulgence. The Prieſt will impoſe to a penitent for a ſatisfactory pain, to ſay ſo many prayers, to faſt ſo many dayes, to go to ſuch a place on pilgrimage, to give ſo much alms to Monks. If theſe penances are ill, the Prieſt ought not to have enjoyned them; if they be good, the Pope ought not to diſpenſe with them. It belongs not to him to exempt the ſinner from doing penance, ſince our Adverſaries ground the neceſſity of thoſe penances upon Gods command.(f)Bellar. l. 4. de poen. cap. 13. Indulgentiae faciunt, ut pro poenis quae nobis per indulgentiam condonantur, non teneamur praecepto illo de faciendis dignis poenitentiae fructibus. Bellarmin fears not to ſay, that, Indulgences make, that as for the pains which are remitted to us by the Indulgences, we are not obliged to obey that commandment of God, …o do fruits worthy of repentance. By the ſame indulgence the ſinner ceaſeth to be obliged to fulfill the rule that ſaith, Verily I ſay unto thee, thou ſhalt not come out thence, untill thou haſt paid the utmoſt farthing. For our Adverſaries underſtand that text of the ſatisfactory pain in Purgatory.
VIII. The terms uſed by the Prieſts in abſolution, are conſiderable. The Jeſuit Emanuel Sa in the word Abſolutio ſets down all the ſolemn words, and the whole form, ſaying that the wiſe ſpeak thus when they give abſolution. Our Lord Jeſus Chriſt abſolve thee, and I in his authority abſolve thee, firſt from the ſentence of excommunication, as far as I can, and thou needeſt. Next I abſolve thee from thy ſins, in the name of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghoſt, Amen.(g)Paſſio Domini noſtri Jeſu Chriſti, & merita B. Mariae & omnium ſanctorum, & quicquid boni feceris, & mali patienter ſuſtinueris, ſint tibi in remiſſionem peccatorum, & in augmentum gratiae & praemium vitae aeternae. The paſſion of our Lord Jeſus Chriſt, and the merits of the Bleſſed Mary, and of all the Saints, and all the good that thou ſhalt do, and all the evil which thou ſhalt patiently ſuffer, be unto thee for remiſſion of ſins, and augmentation of grace, and for the reward of eternal life, Amen. The ſame words are related by Cardinal Tolet in the third book of the Inſtruction of Prieſts chap. 11. This way of abſolution is but new, and the Goſpel ſaith nothing of it. The Goſpel ſpeaks of the remiſſion of our ſins by Jeſus Chriſt; ſaying that, Whoſoever believeth on him ſhall receive remiſſion of ſins through his name; And that God hath quickened us together with Chriſt, having freely forgiven given us all our offences. But that our ſins are forgiven us by the merit of the Saints, the Word of God ſaith not. Neither doth that Holy Word ſpeak of attaining to the reward of eternal life by the merits of Saints, or by our own. That abſolution cannot be done in faith, ſince it is not grounded on the word of God. If the paſſion of Chriſt be ſufficient to purchaſe for me the remiſſion of my ſins; What need I to add unto it the merit of men, who ſtood in need that their ſins ſhould be forgiven them by Jeſus Chriſt?
IX. To make the abuſe more groſs, the Prieſt giving the abſolution, impoſeth penances or ſatisfactory pains which the Council of Trent calls(h)Seſſ. 14. cap. 8. Ad praeteritorum peccatorum vindictam. revenges. So the Prieſt doth wholly forgive the ſin, and yet at the ſame inſtant he impoſeth puniſhments of the ſame ſin. He takes revenge of ſins forgiven: As if he ſaid, I forgive thee, but thou ſhalt be puniſht, for I have forgiven thee thy ſin, but not the pain of ſin. By this means Prieſts looſe the ſinner by the abſolution, and ſend him back bound by the obligation to a ſatisfactory pain; which pain if the penitent bears not, and ſubjects not himſelf to it, he eludeth (as much as in him lyeth) the ſentence of the Prieſt, and being more crafty then his Confeſſor, makes uſe of the abſolution, and rejects the conditions under which he received it. All that without authority of Gods word, who gives not that power to Paſtors to lay corporal or pecuniary pains upon the ſinner. And againſt the Lords example, who ſending back the woman taken in adultery, ſaid to her only, Go and ſin no more. John 8.11. without impoſing any penance upon her. And againſt the example of the Apoſtle St. Paul who receiving the inceſtuous man to the peace of the Church of Corinth, 2 Cor. 2.7. & 10. layeth no corporal or pecuniary penance upon him: And againſt the example of all the antient Church, which had no other abſolution but the publick, and made with good reaſon the fulfilling of the ſatisfaction to the Church to march before the abſolution and reconciliation with the Church, But in our dayes the Confeſſors give the abſolution before the ſinner hath fulfilled the injoyned penances, becauſe they are paid preſently after the abſolution; for if the ſinner were to fulfill the penances before the abſolution, that would keep back the payment. If this were in faſhion, I make no doubt but that Confeſſors would impoſe ſhort ſatisfactions, that they might be quickly paid.
X. Here is worſe yet; For ſometimes Prieſts will give abſolution before they know whether the penitent will accept of the ſatisfactory pain that ſhall be impoſed upon him. As Cardinal Tolet ſaith in the third book of the inſtruction of Prieſts chap. 12. Obſerve that the abſolution muſt not be given but after the penance impoſed and accepted. (i)Cum tamen probabile ſcit Confeſſarius poenitentem accepturum, non eſt inconveniens praecedere abſolutionem.Yet when the Confeſſor probably knows that the penitent ſhall accept the ſatisfaction, there is no inconvenience to make the abſolution go before.
Here it were good to know whether the abſolution be valid, when the penitent having received abſolution, and coming afterwards to conſider the nature of the ſatisfaction impoſed on him, declareth to the Prieſt, that he cannot accept of it, and will not fulfill thoſe penances, nor ſubject himſelf to them in any wiſe.
XI. Sometimes alſo Prieſts give abſolution without enjoining any ſatsfaction, as(k)Bellar. l. …. Indulg. c. 7. Paludanus teſtatur à Bonifaci… VIII. ſuiſſe prohibitum poenitentiarium, ne conſitentibus peccata anno illo Jubilei ſatisfactiones injungeret. Acts 10. John 3. Bellarmin ſaith. Which is another abuſe, For ſo the Sacrament of Penitence is adminiſtred without penitence, and a reconciliation is made without ſatisfaction, which ſatisfaction according to natural order, and the antient cuſtom, ought to go before abſolution. For even among men ſatisfaction muſt be made to the offended party before he can obtain pardon. But theſe Gentlemen will perſwade themſelves that God will approve of a pardon without penitence, and without ſatisfaction. Or that he ſhall like, that ſins be pardoned to a ſinner before he hath ſatisfied.
XII. There is no leſs abuſe in that doctrine of theirs, that the abſolution which the penitent hath received from the Prieſt is void, if the Prieſt that conferred it had no intention to confer it. A doctrine which makes of abſolution an illuſion, and fills the penitents mind with uncertainty, ſince it depends on a conjectural condition, upon which the repenting ſoul can fix no aſſurance.
But that doctrine is directly oppoſite to the doctrine of the Goſpel. For it makes the benefit of Chriſts merit and the remiſſion of ſins purchaſed by his death to depend upon a Prieſts intention. For this maxime of the Goſpel is true of any man that hath true repentance and ſeeks ſalvation in Chriſt, that believing in Chriſt he hath remiſſion of ſins and eternal life. Shall the want of intention in a Prieſt make the grace of Chriſt to the ſinner of none effect? Or ſhall the hypocriſie of a confeſſor who believeth not what he does, and hath a prophane intention to deride Religion, make the promiſe of the Goſpel void? Chriſt knew the hypocriſie of Judas, yet he ſent him to announce remiſſion of ſins by the Goſpel; Which Chriſt would not have done, had he known that the hypocriſie of Judas would have made the Sacraments which he adminiſtred of no uſe. Truly the Word of God, and the promiſe of abſolution of ſins are effectual, not according to the intention of the man that propounds it, but according to the diſpoſition of the perſon that receiveth it. The Word of God ſaith, that the man that believeth is ſaved, not he that is abſolved by one that believeth, or by one that hath an intention to effect what he ſaith. Yea I dare ſay, that if Satan being changed into an Angel of light, ſhould preach the truth of the Goſpel, and adminiſter the Sacraments, the condition of a man that ſhould believe in Chriſt by his word, ſhould be better then of him that out of unbelief ſhould reject the word of an Apoſtle.
XIII. To make the abuſe worſe, they ſeparate the power of giving Abſolution from the preaching of the Goſpel. For the true Office of Prieſts is to preach the Goſpel, and adminiſter the Sacraments. But in the Roman Church, a Prieſt cannot abſolve, unleſs he have an eſpecial priviledge, and ſome Prieſts give abſolution that preach not: Biſhops that preach not, and the Pope among others, give abſolution. For they hold that the power of abſolving, is a point of Eccleſiaſticall juriſdiction, which depends not on the order of Prieſthood,Note. nor on the nature of Epiſcopacy, but on the Popes power, who imparteth to ſuch as he pleaſeth, ſuch part of that power as he thinks good. Hence it is, that even a Lay-man, yea a woman can bolt out excommunications by the Popes Commiſſion.
XIV. Likewiſe there is a great abuſe in this aſſertion of their Doctors, that by vertue of the Keyes, attrition becomes contrition. They call attrition a ſorrow for ſin, proceeding only from the fear of puniſhment, but contrition, a ſorrow for ſin, proceeding from the love of God. The one is a ſervile grief, the other is a filial ſorrow. Is it credible, that the Keyes have the vertue to make vices to become vertues? For the grief for ſinning, moved only by the apprehenſion of the puniſhment that attends it, is evil, and proceeds not from the Spirit of adoption. A man muſt repent for ſuch a repentance. It is a forced, not a willing obedience. God is merciful to ſuch a Penitent, if he forgive his penitence, and puniſh him not for his obedience.
XV. The abuſe alſo is evident, in that abſolutions are given by others, and by ſubdelegate perſons, as if ſins could be forgiven by Atturney. As the Jeſuite Emanuel Sa (l)Eman. Sa, Apho. 4. Confeſſ. in Verbo Abſolutio, Art. 4. Abſolvere poteſt Epiſcopus per ſe vel per alium. Idem in verbo Epiſcopus. Oportet Epiſcopum eſſe Doctorem, id eſt, populum ſuum docere. Quod ſi non praedicat, ipſe dabit ſuis ſumptibus praedicatorem.ſaith, the Biſhop can abſolve, either by himſelf, or by others, them that are ſubject unto him by right, &c.
Biſhops do for the Sacrament of Penitence, what they do for preaching the Goſpel. For every Biſhop is obliged to preach, either by himſelf or by another. Some Biſhops being incapable to preach, becauſe they are yet children, or becauſe they are without learning, they preach by others. It is well for them if in the day of Judgement they may be admitted to give account by others, and to appear by Atturney. How ſhould they like it, if they were condemned to dine by others, and to faſt in their own perſon? But why could not a Prieſt giving abſolution by the Biſhops Commiſſion, give it of himſelf, and in his name, without borrowing another mans name?
XVI. What ſhall we ſay of the diſhoneſt gain, which the Clergy ſets up under colour of confeſſions and abſolutions? It is one of the prime revenues of ordinary Parſons. As if they ſaid, Pay me, for I have forgiven thee thy ſins. Is it not a reaſonable demand? But all that the Prieſts do, is nothing compared to that the Pope doth, and to the gain which he reapeth from the remiſſion of ſins. As his hands are longer, he ſweeps far more, and his rapines are anſwerable to his greatneſs. Would one inſiſt upon that matter, he might make a great book of it. The Book of the Apoſtolick Chancery ſheweth ſo much. That book made by a Dotary, Receiver of the caſual revenues of the Pope, hath made a great diſcovery of the myſterie of iniquity. Among other Articles, there is the Chapter of Abſolutions,(m)Taxa Cancel. Apoſtolicae excuſa Pariſiis in vico ſancti Jacobi ad crucem ligneam prope Sacellum Divi Juonis apud Toſſanum Denis 1520. cum privilegio. Abſolutio pro eo qui in Eccleſia cognovit mulierem, & alia mala commiſit, groſ. 6. Abſolutio pro eo qui matrem, ſororem, &c. carnaliter cognovit, groſ. 5. Abſolutio pro eo qui defloravit virginem, groſ. 6. Abſolutio pro perjurio, groſ. 6. Abſolutio pro eo qui revelavit confeſſionem alterius, groſ. 7. Abſolutio pro eo qui falſificavit literas Apoſtolicas, groſ. 17. vel. 18. Abſolutio & diſpenſatio ſuper homicidia, &c. groſ. 18. Abſolutio pro eo qui interfecit patrem, matrem, &c. groſ. 5. where theſe words are found, The Abſolution for him that hath known a woman in the Church, and committed other evils, coſts ſix groats. The abſolution for him that hath carnally known his mother, his ſiſter, or another kinſwoman of his, five groats. The abſolution for him that hath defloured a Virgin, ſix groats. The abſolution for a perjury, ſix groats. The abſolution for him that hath revealed the Confeſsion of another, ſeven groats. The abſolution for him that hath falſified Apoſtolical letters, ſeventeen or eighteen groats. The abſolution for a man and a woman who during the time of the Interdict, have carried away ſome dead bodies to bury them, nine groats. And in the 38. leaf, The abſolution for him that hath killed his father or his mother, &c. coſts five or ſeven groats. Thoſe groats are worth four pence, like our Engliſh groats. But in the end of the Book the taxes are raiſed, and groats are turned into Ducates. In the 32. leaf mention is made of a kind of letters called Confeſſional, whereby the Pope grants leave to a man to chuſe in the hour of death a Confeſſor, that gives full pardon of all ſins. But the Author ſaith that this is granted but to Princes, and with great difficulty. Every one knoweth that in Spain, none can have abſolution at Eaſter without buying the Papal Bull, which coſts two Realls for every man. Many example, I could bring to the ſame purpoſe. But the example of Pope Boniface the IX. whoſe life is written by his Secretary Theodoricus a Niem will ſerve for all. In the firſt Book of ſchiſm, chap. 68. he ſaith(n)Ad diverſa regna miſit quaeſtuarios vendendo dictam Indulgentiam offerentibus tantum quantum eſſent expenſuri in via, ſi propterea irſſent ad urbem, &c. Omnia peccata etiam ſine poenitentia ipſis confitentibus relaxarunt; Super quibuſdam irregularitatibus dispenſarunt interventu pecuniae, dicentes ſe omnem poteſtatem habere ſuper hoc, quam Chriſtus Petro ligandi & ſolvendi contuliſſet in terris. that the ſaid Boniface ſent Collectors to ſeveral Kingdoms, who fold the Indulgences, taking from the buyers as much money, as they ſhould have ſpent to fetch them at Rome. And he ſaith that the ſame Collectors remitted all ſins to all that confeſſed themſelves without penitence; and diſpenſed with ſome irregularities for money, ſaying, that for that they had the ſame power of binding and looſing on earth, as Chriſt had given to Peter. This Pope is the Inventor of Annates; Th… ſame Pope (as the ſame Theodorick his Secretary relateth) being at the point of death,(o)Lib. 2. Schiſm. c. 11. Cuidam interroganti ab eo in ultimo conſtituto qualiter ſe haberet aut ſentiret? respondens ait ſi pecunias haberem, bene ſtarem. and being demanded how he did, anſwered, I ſhould be well if I had money.
Antonine Archbiſhop of Florence, whom the Pope hath Sainted, in the third part of his Chronicles 22. Title, upon the year 1388. ſpeaks thus of that Pope,(p)Tempore hujus Bonifacii infamis curia habebatur de labe Simoniae, ut beneficia non tam meritis conferrentur quam plures pecunias offerentibus. Et replevit orbem terrarum Indulgentiis plenariis ita ut parvae Eccleſiae in ſuis feſtivitatibus parvo pretio eas obtinerent. In his time the Roman Court was very infamous for Simony. Benefices were conferred, not ſo much according to merits, as according to the greater ſumms of money that were offered. He filled the world with plenary Indulgences. So that ſmall Churches in their feaſts obtained them for little money. That Pope dyed in the year 1404.
About four and fifty years after him, Aeneas Sylvius of Siena was choſen Pope, and was called Pius the II. That Pope in the 66. Epiſtle to John Peregal ſpeaks thus,(q)Nihil eſt quod abſque argento Romana curia dedat, ipſa manuum impoſitio & Spiritus Sancti dona venduntur, nec peccatorum venia niſi nummatis impenditur. The Roman Court giveth nothing without money, even the laying on of hands and the gifts of the Holy Ghoſt are ſold, and the remiſſion of ſins is not imparted but to them that have money. If this witneſs may not be believed, I know not who may. And truly to make of a Biſhop who at the firſt had no revenue at all, a Prince that hath above thirty thouſand Ducates a day to ſpend, there was need of ravening luſtily, of making great prizes with Saint Peters net, and uſing the Keyes of the Kingdom of heaven to open many cheſts. For this the Cardinal and Jeſuite Tollet gives a gallant excuſe. In the fifth Book of the Inſtruction of Prieſts, in chap. 89. he ſpeaks thus of the gain which the Pope gathers from abſolutions and diſpenſations,(r)Dico non eſſe murmurandum contra Papam, quod exigit pro his pecunias, non per modum pretii, nam iſta ad ſuſtentationem dantur, qua multum indiget tanta in Eccleſia dignitas. I ſay, that we muſt not murmure againſt the Pope, who exacteth money for theſe things, not in form of price of ſalary; for theſe things are given for his entertainment: Of which ſuch a great dignity in the Church hath great need. Indeed, he that raiſeth armies, who hath guards of Switzers, and of Troops of horſe, is obliged to make a great expence, which among other profits, is maintained by the remiſſion of ſins. See Navarrus, in the title of Penitence and Remiſsion, in the 18. Council, where he maintains that the Pope hath well done to grant the remiſſion of all ſins, even of reſerved caſes, for one Giulio, which is the tenth part of a Ducate. His reaſon is,(ſ)Papa non puri hominis ſed veri Dei vicem gerit i… terris ut eſt in Can. Quan…o, adeo quod Gloſſa ejus a…, non poteſt dici ei, c…r ita facis? becauſe the Pope holds the place on earth, not of a man ſimply, but of the true God, and that none can ſay to him, Why doſt thou that? He ſhould have ſaid, What will become of the poor that is not worth a Giulio? Shall he have that puniſhment of his poverty (as if it were a crime) to be deprived of that Spiritual grace?
XVII. That power of abſolving extends even to the dead: Whereof we have an inſtance in the letters of homage and ſubjection of John King of England, which we ſhall hereafter produce: whereby, to obtain of Innocent the III. the remiſſion of ſins both for himſelf and his deceaſed friends, he ſubjecteth his Kingdom unto him, and promiſeth to pay a thouſand marks of ſilver to his Holineſs. The Book of the Apoſtolick Chancery ſheweth the ſame. The title of the Chapter is, De abſolutionibus mortuorum. Of the abſolutions of the dead. In the forty one leaf theſe words are found,(t)Pro mortuo excommunicato, pro quo ſupplicant conſanguinei, litera abſolutionis venit, Duc. 1. Carol. 9. For a dead man excommunicated, for whom his friends are petitioning, the letter of abſolution is ſold for one Ducate nine pence. (u)Pro muliere quae ſe ſuſpendit, ſive pro viro, ut poſsit Eccleſiaſticae tradi ſepulturae, Duc. 1. Carol. 9.For a woman that hath hanged her ſelf, or for a man, that they may be committed to Church burial, one Ducate nine pence. (x)Tolet de Inſtruct. Sacerd. l. 1. c. 7. Poteſt ab excommunicatione contracta in vita abſolvi poſt mortem.And Cardinal Tolet affirmeth, that a man may be abſolved after his death of an excommunication which he incurred in his life time. And how many Indulgences are given after death? How many priviledged Altars, upon which whoſoever ſaith a Maſs, draws a ſoul out of Purgatory at his own choice? By the Book of Roman Indulgences, it appears that there are few Churches at Rome without ſuch priviledges. Navarrus in the Commentary about the Jubilee and Indulgences in the 22. Obſervation, hath theſe words,(y)Dico convenire debere inter omnes mea ſententia, quod inferior Papa non poteſt indulgentiam extendere ad mortuos Purgatorii. Tum quod nunquam id videtur hactenus factum; Tum quod etiam non parum dubitatum extitit, an Papa id efficere poſsit juxta latiſsimè congeſta per Felicem. I ſay that all with one conſent ought, in my opinion, hold this truth, that no man inferiour to the Pope, can extend Indulgences unto the dead of Purgatory, both becauſe we ſee not that ever it was done hitherto, and becauſe no ſmall doubt was made, whether the Pope can do it.
XVIII. It is true that ſome Doctors begin of late to doubt, whether the Pope giveth pardons to the dead with authority of a Judge, or whether he give them only by way of ſuffrage or interceſſion; for, ſay they, the dead are none of his flock. He hath no charge to feed them. It was ſaid unto Peter, Whatſoever thou ſhalt bind on earth, not under the earth. And ſince the Pope hath no more the power to bind the dead, why doth he keep the power to abſolve them? But theſe men ſpeak without warrant, and the Pope gave them no charge to ſpeak ſo. And truly they ſpeak againſt reaſon and againſt experience; for this expreſſion of pardoning, or giving pardons by way of interceſſion, hath no ſenſe. Praying for one, is not forgiving him. Now when the Pope giveth letters of abſolution for the dead, he ſpeaks as a Judge. If he prayed for them only, that power ought not to be reſerved to him alone, for every one can make the ſame prayer. This appears evidently, in that the Pope giveth Indulgences by Letters Patents in Parchment ſealed with Lead, as Bellarmine acknowledgeth in the ſecond Book of Indulgences, chap. 5. For ſuch pardons are given in the form of a ſentence: The world never heard of prayers and interceſſions to God, ſealed and ſigned in an authentical form, nor or ſupplications to God in the form of Ordinances. Wherefore alſo Bellarmine in the ſame place(z)Bell. lib. 2. Indulg. cap. 5. Literae Pontificis ſuis legitimis ſigillis munitae ſigna ſunt, ita plumbum & membrana ſigna ſunt remiſsionis quam Pontifex pro poteſtate à Deo accepta concedit, &c. ſaith, that the Pope by theſe Letters thus ſealed, declareth his will, and the power which he received of God. And to aſſign to an Altar eighteen thouſand years of pardon, and ſo many forties of dayes, and the deliverance of a ſoul out of Purgatory, is not praying, but decreeing and ſpeaking, as having exactly calculated with God. But which way ſoever the Pope give Indulgences to the dead, he will have us to believe that theſe ſouls come out of Purgatory by that pardon. So that it is the ſame power under another title. And we ſhould have the declaration of ſome Pope of the laſt ages, whereby he ſhould declare, that he pretends no juriſdiction over the dead, and that the power of his Keyes extends not to them.
XIX. Of that power of giving Indulgences and Abſolutions to the dead, there is not one word neither in Scripture nor in all Antiquity. We have produced before the teſtimony of Cardinal Cajetan, and that of Gabriel Biel, who ſay, that in all the writings of the Fathers, there is no mention of Indulgences, nor of the treaſure of the Church made up of the overplus of the ſatisfactions of Chriſt, and of the Saints, of which the Pope takes upon himſelf the diſtribution. And Bellarmine in the ſecond book of Indulgences, chap. 10. acknowledgeth that Durandus, Roffenſis, Antoninus, and Sylveſter, ſay that Scripture makes no expreſs mention of Indulgences. To which I will add the teſtimony of Navarrus the moſt famous Doctor of the Canoniſts of the Roman Church; as alſo the title of his works giveth him that commendation, and one that was the Popes Penitentiary. Theſe are his words, What the cauſe is, that among the Antients ſo little mention is made of Indulgences, but among the late Authors the mention of them is ſo frequent: That moſt holy man (a)Johannes Roffenſis.John of Rocheſter, reverend by his dignity of Biſhop and Cardinal, hath taught it: Of whoſe diſcourſe about that point, this is the ſummary. That it is not certain by whom Indulgences were firſt given, and that ſome uſe of them, as they ſay, is very antient among the Romans. (b)Navarr. Tom. 3. Com. de Jubil. & Indulg. ſeptimo Notabili Art. 5. & 6. Quod multa de Evangeliis & aliis Scripturis ſunt nunc excuſa Inculentius & intellectu perſpicacius quam fuerunt olim. Quod nemo jam dubitat Orthodoxus, an Purgatorium ſi…, de quo tamen apud priſcos illos nullo vel quàm rariſſima fiebat mentio. Quod non fuit tam neceſſaria ſive Purgatorii ſive Indulgentiarum fides e…plicita in primitiva Eccleſia atque nunc eſt, &c. Quod dum nulla erat de Purgatorio cura, nemo quaeſivit indulgentias, quia ex eo pendet omne indulgentiarum pretium.That many things of the Goſpels and Scriptures are now more eminently printed, and more clearly underſtood, then they were in old time. That now no Orthodox man doubts whether there be a Purgatory, of which among the Antients no mention was made, or very infrequent. That the explicite belief, both of Purgatory and Indulgences, was not ſo neceſſary in the Primitive Church, as it is now. And ſoon after: While men cared not for Purgatory, men cared not for Indulgences, becauſe all the price of Indulgences depends on that. Sure the ſtrength of truth muſt needs be very great, ſince it fetcheth ſuch confeſſions from the ſtrongeſt of our Adverſaries. And I wonder how that language could be ſuffered in ſuch a famous man, one of the Roman Penitentiaries under Cardinal Borromeo, Great Penitentiary. And in the ſame Treatiſe he ſpeaks thus of the Conceſſion of Indulgences.(c)Quaeſtores non quaerunt commodum animarum ſed pecuniarum, &c. Per eam multum enervatur ſatisfactio poenitentialis quae tantopere eſt nobis utilis, &c. Adjuncto item illo quarto, quo… concedens indulgentiam de alieno ſolvit alterius debita, & indecorum eſſe id fuſius efficere ſignificat illud barbarum proverbium, D…corio alterius corrigiae longae. The Queſtors (ſo he calls the Collectors of the money that is got by pardons) ſeek not to gain ſouls, but to gain money. He adds that by that conceſsion of Indulgences, the Penitential ſatisfaction, which is ſo uſeful to us is much weakened, &c. That he that grants Indulgences, payeth one mans debts with the eſtate of another, and that to practiſe that too largely is unbecoming. It is (as the barbarous proverb ſaith) cutting large thongs out of another mans leather. He ſaith, that becauſe the Pope employeth the ſuperabounding ſatisfactions of Saints which he hath in his treaſure for the payment of others, it is credible that the Pope takes ſome alſo for himſelf, as the Jeſuite Emanuel Sa ſaith,(d)Eman. Sa, Aphor. in verbo Indulgentia. Indulgentia utitur etiam qui eam conceſsit. He that granted the Indulgence, makes uſe of it for himſelf alſo: So that he forgiveth his own ſelf. He ſhould have added, that they that have no money to pay the two Reals or the Giulio, to which the Indulgence or the Bull of Abſolution is taxed, have not the remiſſion of ſins. And that he that wants money, or good legs, or a horſe to go to Rome to the Jubilee, or to the places where the Pope hath tranſported the Jubilee, hath no ſhare in that ſpiritual grace.
XX. Out of the ſame abuſe of the Keyes, and the power of abſolving, came that intolerable Tyrannie, and depravation of Chriſts words, Whatſoever you ſhall bind on earth, &c. whereby the Pope maketh himſelf judge of all things, and Lord either direct or indirect, of all the eſtates of the world. If we ask by what power the Pope looſeth the obligation of Oathes made unto God, and the bond of allegiance of ſubjects to their Prince, and upon what ground he takes the authority of looſing and diſſolving marriages lawfully contracted, and diſpenſing children from their obedience to their parents, as likewiſe of exempting thoſe that have made vows, from the obligation of keeping them, and of giving and taking away Kingdoms; and by what power he puts an Interdict upon Cities and upon whole Countries, expoſing them for a prey to the next Conqueror, and delivereth ſouls from the power of Purgatory: They give us this anſwer, that Chriſt ſaid unto Peter, Whatſoever thou looſeſt on earth, &c. Let us ſuppoſe that the Pope is ſucceſſor of Peters Apoſtleſhip: Let us ſuppoſe that this was ſaid to Peter alone, although Matth. 18.18. this was ſaid to all the Apoſtles. What prophanation is this of the Word of God, that the power of looſing the bonds of ſin by Church-diſcipline, and by the preaching of the Goſpel, be tranſported to the looſing of vows, of marriages, of the fidelity of ſubjects, of the obedience of children to their parents, yea of ſouls after death? Where is one word of that, I ſay not in the Goſpel (which they alleadge to abuſe it) but in all Antiquity? A prodigious thing, that in the light of the Goſpel, after ſo many ruines and bloody wars, which that doctrine hath brought, theſe things are ſaid, yea and believed! And that in places where the Inquiſition reigneth, to make but a ſhew of doubting of theſe things, is a crime puniſhable with fire, and a caſe of Inquiſition!
XXI. Would one ſearch all the abuſes of theſe abſolutions, both the Penitential, and thoſe that are without the pretended Sacrament of Penitence, one might make a great volume of them. I will put here, ſome out of the rules of Emanuel Sa, and Cardinal Tolet, both Jeſuites.
(e)Eman. Sa, Aphor. in verbo Abſolutio. Abſolvere poteſt Sacerdos quivis à peccatis venialibus & à mortalibus etiam, à quibus poenitens eſt alias abſolutus.Every Prieſt can abſolve from venial ſins, and from mortal ſins alſo, of which the Penitent was abſolved already before. This rule giveth power to a Prieſt to do that which is already done, and to looſe a man that is not bound. By this means a man payeth twice for the abſolution of the ſame ſin. Beſides, when the Prieſt giveth abſolution of mortal ſins, he ſheweth thereby that they are venial, that is, pardonable.
(f)Ibid. Abſolvi poſſe morientem qui nihil poteſt confiteri, ſed tantum oſtendit ſigna contritionis, alii aiunt, alii negant, cum quibus ego ſenſi. Sed jam placet ut abſolvatur ſub conditione etiam amens, &c.A dying man that ſpeaks not, but giveth ſigns of contrition, and a man out of his wits, who hath before given ſigns of contrition, may be abſolved.
(g)Ibid. Abſolvi poteſt qui ex rationabili & juſta cauſa non vult omittere peccandi occaſionem: Modò proponat firmiter non peccare, etiamſi aliquoiles ſit relapſus.That man may be abſolved, who for a reaſonable and juſt cauſe, will not loſe the occaſion of ſinning, ſo that he have a ſtedfaſt purpoſe not to ſin any more, although he be often relapſed. I cannot conceive what occaſion of ſinning can be ſo juſt, but that one muſt loſe it.
(h)Ibid. Abſolvi poteſt qui non confitetur, aut negat peccatum quod Confeſſor ex alterius confeſsione intellexit illum commiſiſſe.A man may be abſolved, that will not confeſs, or that denyeth a ſin, which the Confeſſor hath learned by the Confeſsion of another, that he hath committed.
(i)Idem Cap. Abſolutio ab excommunicatione. Qui habet ordinariam facultatem abſolvendi in ſoro interiori, poteſt abſolvere etiam extra confeſſionem.He that hath the ordinary power of abſolving in the inward barr, can abſolve without confeſsion.
(k)Ibid. Poteſt abſolvi quis non ſolum ſine dolore fed etiam invitus, & ab una excommunicatione, relicta altera.Abſolution may be given to a man, not only without ſorrow [for his ſin] but alſo againſt his will, and may be abſolved of one excommunication, another remaining. Of which we have a notable example in the ſixth book of the Epiſtles of Cardinal d'Oſſat, Epiſt. 221. to the King, pag. 485. This is a ſtrange way of abſolution, to ſay to a man, Thou wilt not be abſolved from thy ſins, but thou ſhalt be, in ſpight of thy heart. And thou art excommunicated with two excommunications; I abſolve thee from one of them, and receive thee into the Church, but thou art excommunicated with another excommunication, and ſo thou remaineſt out of the Church. By theſe rules an impenitent man may be abſolved with a valid abſolution, and one that is truly penitent and contrite, with an invalid abſolution, namely, when the Confeſſor hath no intention to abſolve.
(l)Ibid. Abſolutus ſimpliciter ſed praeſtita cautione de ſatisfaciendo, ſi non ſatiſfaciat non reincidit.He that is plainly abſolved, but upon ſecurity that he will ſatisfie, if after that he do not ſatisfie, he falls not again into excommunication. Note, that here it is queſtioned of ſatisfying God for the puniſhment of ſins. When there is reaſon to inſtruct one who hath promiſed to ſatisfie, he is required to give ſecurity. God (belike) will have ſufficient ſecurity, and if the Prieſt accept of the ſecurity, God will accept of it alſo. And if God cannot get ſatisfaction from the party, he will ſue the ſecurity. Is not all that contrived with ſingular prudence, and with mature conſideration? And how meek is that dealing, that a man who after he hath received abſolution, ſcorns to make ſatisfaction, ſhould nevertheleſs, be ſuffered to enjoy the benefit of his abſolution? Why? the man hath outwitted God, and hath given him the ſlip, and now if God will be paid, he muſt ſtrain upon the ſecurity.
An abſolution made for an unjuſt cauſe yet is valid: So ſay,(m)Bellar. l. 1. de Indulg. c. 12. Cum ſummus Pont…ſex diſpenſat in jure Eccleſiaſtico, diſpenſatio eſt rata, etiamſi non adſit cauſa juſta. Satis eſt enim, ſi conſtet eum voluiſſe diſpenſare, cum id totum ab ejus arbitrio dependeat. Bellarmine, (n)Eman. Sa, loco ſuperiori. Abſolutio ex cauſa falſa valet, etſi id quidam negant.Emanuel Sa, and(o)Tolet. lib. 1. de Inſtruct. Sacerd. cap. 14. Abſolutio injuſta valet, ut habetur cap. de Venerabilibus §. Ubi de ſent. excom. in 6. Tolet.
(p)Nec foemina, nec Laicus, nec ſimplex Sacerdos abſolvere poſſant, niſi ex privilegio aliquo. Tolet de Inſtr. Sacerd. l. 1. c. 16.Neither a woman, nor a Lay-man, nor a common Prieſt can abſolve, but by ſome priviledge. For abſolving is a point of Eccleſiaſtical juriſdiction. Here obſerve, that even a woman can excommunicate, and abſolve by the Popes permiſſion.
Cardinal Tolet in the firſt book of the Inſtruction of Prieſts, in the fourteenth Chapter, gives many very conſiderable rules. He ſaith, that (q)Quilibet habens jus excommunicandi poteſt abſolvere, etiamſi nec presbyter nec diaconus nec ſubdiaconus ſit.one who hath no orders in the Church, can give abſolution in the outward barr. So that a Cobler having the Popes Commiſſion, may both excommunicate and abſolve.
Again,(r)Ad illam priorem non eſt neceſſaria voluntas excommunicati. Nam etiam invitus poteſt abſolvi, ſicut potuit invitus excommunicari, &c. Poteſt abſolvi ignarus & inſcius abſolutionis, &c. Poteſt etiam illa prior dari per literas, &c. Poteſt etiam illa fieri per procuratorem, &c. Cui de jure competit, poteſt alteri deligare vel demandare abſolutionem. To be abſolved at the outward barr, it is not neceſſary that the excommunicate perſon have a will to be abſolved. As he was excommunicated againſt his will, he may alſo be abſolved againſt his will. Alſo one may be abſolved without his knowledge. Tolet ſaith in the ſame place, that abſolution may be done by Letters, by Atturney, by Commiſſaries, and by Subdelegacy.
(ſ)Facultates quae per Romanum Pontificem dantur, per Jubilaeum aut Bullas Confeſſariis abſolvendi à quibuſvis cenſuris non concernunt forum exterius, ſed tantum ea quae ad poenitentiae forum & conſcientiae purgationem. Ut notat Pariſ. Conſil. 67. num. 20. lib. 4. Et Covarr. …bi ſupra ver. quinto atteſtantes hunc eſſe ſtylum Romanae Curiae ut revera eſt.The faculties which the Pope giveth by the Jubilee, or by Bulls unto Confeſſors to abſolve all cenſures whatſoever they be, concern not the outward Barr, but only that which regards the Barr of Penitence, and the purgation of the conſcience. That is, they abſolve ſinners before God only, not before men; and reconcile ſinners unto God, not unto the Church, nor to the Pope. So that the Pope having reconciled a ſinner unto God, hath not therefore reconciled that ſinner unto the Pope himſelf. That poor ſinner is acquitted towards God, by the pardon which the Pope gave him, but is not therefore acquitted towards the Pope, who by the Jubilee, intended to remit Gods intereſts, not his own. There is need of another abſolution again. And the ſaid Cardinal, after he hath alleadged many Doctors, ſaith that it is the ſtyle of the Court of Rome. (t)Abſolvetur cum Pſalmo, & oratione Dominica, verberibus, & aliis conſuetis. Ut dicit Sylv. abſolutio 3. num. 4.In the ſame place he ſaith that the abſolution of excommunicated perſons muſt be done with a Pſalm, and the Lords Prayer, and whipping, and other cuſtomary things. No wonder if thoſe that have uſurped the power of whipping penitents, make bold with their purſe. Through that whipping many Kings have paſſed; of which we will bring examples in the next Controverſie.
(u)Abſolutio injuſta valet, ut habetur cap. de Venerabilibus §. Ubi de Sent. Excom. in 6. Si Epiſcopus abſolvat non praemiſſa ſatisfactione, tenet abſolutio Epiſcopus tamen maleſacit & debet corrigi.And in the ſame Chapter, An unjuſt abſolution is valid. Again, If the Biſhop abſolveth without impoſing any ſaisfaction before, the abſolution holds, and yet the Biſhop doth evil, and muſt be corrected.
That I may not ſtir that ſink of abuſe further, Whoſo will ſeriouſly conſider the whole ſtructure of Popery, will eaſily perceive that the whole bulk of the doctrine tends to give authority to the Clergy, and to perſwade the people that God doth not impart unto men either remiſſion of ſins, or ſalvation, or any ſpiritual grace, but by the Sacraments which Clergy-men adminiſter, and by the intervention of their Miniſtry: As if God had tyed his own hands, to ſhew no grace to his people, unleſs they paſs through their hands before.
Hence is ſprung the opinion of the efficacy of Sacraments, by the only and bare action which they call in their canting, ex opere operato. That is, the Sacraments which they adminiſter, confer grace, although they were adminiſtred to one that ſleeps, or hath his mind ſomewhere elſe: And that the attention is not requiſite, it being ſufficient that he that receives them, reſiſt not purpoſely the grace, and ſet not his mind to hinder it. Hence came the doctrine, that the Sacraments are void and without effect, if the Prieſt that adminiſtred them had no intention, ſo that we muſt believe that the grace of God conferred by the Sacraments, depends on the Prieſts intention, though he be never ſo wicked. Hence alſo came that doctrine, that God doth not forgive ſins, but upon condition of receiving the Prieſts abſolution in caſe of poſſibility; That God forgiveth not thoſe ſins, which the Prieſt would not forgive; That Prieſts are Judges, and pronounce judicial ſentences which abſolve in Gods judgement. Hence alſo the power which the Biſhops challenge to give the Holy Ghoſt by the laying on of their hands, and by ordination, to print in the ſoul a Character which remaineth even in Hell. Hence the priviledge of Clarks and Kings to be partakers of the cup in the Communion, thereby to make Clarks to become fellows to Kings. Hence that terrible power of Prieſts, which goeth beyond all Angelical power, to create the Creator, and to make God with words, and holding him locked up, to be able to boaſt that they have Chriſt in their power, yea though the Prieſt were a Sodomiſt: For we have ſeen before, that for that crime a Prieſt falls not into irregularity, no more then for keeping Concubines. Wherefore theſe Gentlemen boaſt in their Books, that they have a power equal unto Gods. Theſe are the words of Beſſe a Doctor, and Preacher of the Prince of Conde, in the firſt book of the Royal Prieſthood, chap. 3. Joſhua did only make the Sun to ſtay where he was before, but Prieſts ſtay Chriſt being in heaven, to bring him to an Altar, where he had no abode before. The creature obeyed him, but the Creator obeyeth theſe. The Sun obeyed him, God obeyes theſe, whenſoever they pronounce the ſacred words. The remiſsion of ſins is of a divine juriſdiction. It is the work of a Soveraign, an effect for the Almighty, a ſtrain beyond humane merits and capacities. Yet it is a power imparted unto Prieſts, Quorum remiſeritis, &c. A ſign that the Godhead and the Prieſthood have I know not what common among them, and that they have almoſt the ſame greatneſs, ſince they have the ſame power. How high doth this man raiſe Prieſts! There wanted no more but to call them Gods. And that he doth in the ſame ſtrain. For having applyed unto Prieſts, that which God ſaith of Princes, he addeth, That which God is in heaven, the Prieſt is upon earth; And a little after, Prieſthood marcheth even with the God-head, and all Prieſts are Gods. A goodly doctrine; according to which, when you ſee a whoring and a drunken Prieſt, one that can hardly read his Maſs (and of ſuch the world is full) you muſt ſay, Here is a God; This man marcheth even with the Godhead, and hath the ſame power. Yea God obeyeth him, as this Doctor ſaith, and he hath God in his power, when he hath him lockt up in his box. And if that Prieſt dyeth impenitent, (which our Adverſaries deny not to be poſſible) here is a God carryed away by the Devil. This evil floweth from a higher ſpring, from the Head of the Papal Hierarchy, who could not raiſe his Empire, without raiſing together the props and pillars upon which his Monarchy ſtands. It is he who the firſt of Biſhops ſuffered himſelf to be(*)Conc. Lat. ult. Seſſ. 3. & 10. Ʋniverſis populis adorandus & Deo ſimillimus, & adorabunt eum omnes Reges Terrae adored and to be called God,(x)Gloſſa Extravag. Cum inter. Credere Dominum Deum noſtrum Papam, &c. Diſt. 96. Can. ſatiſ. Po…tificem conſtat à pio Principe Conſtantino Deum eſſe appellatum. and the Divine(y)Conc. Later. ult. Seſſ. 9. Divinae Majeſtatis tuae conſpectus. Liber. 2. Sacr. Cerem. ſect. 7. c. 6. Sedes Dei, id eſt, Sedes Apoſtolica. Bell. in Barcklayum. cap. 16. Poteſtas Papae eſt ſimilis poteſtati Dei, cujus Pontifex vicem gerit in terris. Majeſtie, and the(z)Extrav. de Immunit. Eccleſ. Tit. 22. ſup. Qu…i…n in 6. Bellar. l. 1. de Pontific. c. 9. ſect. Ac ne fortè. Bridegroom of the Univerſul Church, and his Holineſs excluſively to all others. It is he alone, who hath challenged to himſelf alone, and of late ages, the Apoſtles ſentence,(a)Extrav. Unam Sanctam de Minoritate & Obedientia. The ſpiritual man judgeth all things, but himſelf is judged of no man; as if all men of the world were carnal in compariſon of him. It is he who of late ages and without preſident, hath attributed unto himſelf infallibility in the faith,(b)De Conſtitutionibus Tit. 2. in cap. 6. Licet ubi Bonifacius VIII. ſic loquitur. Licet Rom. Pontifex qui jura omnia in ſcrinio pectoris ſui cenſetur habere, &c. and to have all the right [or Law] within the cloſet of his breaſt, and to be able to add to the Symbol, and to change that which God hath commanded in Scripture, and to make new Articles of Faith, and to be a Soveraign Judge above Scripture: Likewiſe, to diſpenſe from vows and oaths made to God, to promiſe a degree of glory in Paradice above the ordinary ſort, to unthrone Kings, to put down Emperours, to give his feet to kiſs to great Monarchs, to diſpenſe ſubjects from allegiance to their Soveraign, to put ſuch as he will in the number of Saints, commanding that they be prayed to, to give pardons for many thouſands of years, to give Indulgences to the dead, and to deliver ſouls out of Purgatory. It is he, who reſerving full power to himſelf to forgive ſins, hath limited the power of Prieſts and Biſhops …o certain caſes, granting them ſuch a portion of the Keyes as he would. That the world may think, ſince the authority of Prieſts goes ſo far, as to pardon ſins with authority of Judges, and to abſolve them before Gods, judicial ſeat, what may the power be of him that hath an unlimited authority, and in whom God put fulneſs of graces, that of his fulneſs we may all receive, as we heard Thomas ſaying before; That great man to whom he gave the title of Saint, and of Angelical Doctor.