Certain general reasons, prouing the lawfulnesse of the Oath of allegiance, written by R.S. priest, to his priuat friend. Whereunto is added, the treatise of that learned man, M. William Barclay, concerning the temporall power of the pope. And with these is ioyned the sermon of M. Theophilus Higgons, preached at Pauls Crosse the third of March last, because it containeth something of like argument

CHAP. XXVII. (Book 27)

THerefore it is the opinion of many learned men that the Pope cannot giue power to a religious Person to breake his vow, that he may haue the property of a∣ny goods or a wife, according to the true and simple sence of Innocentius his words. And yet if we will diligently search and consider how much some things differ from other, and with a right iudgement to compare them together in the points wherein they properly agree or differ: there will because to confesse that the Pope hath far lesse power gi∣uen

him to absolue a People from the Religion-of their oath, by which they haue willingly and frankely obleiged their faith to their Prince, then to dissolue the vowes of re∣ligious Persons, that although in this last point peraduen∣ture, in some mens opinion, he may seeme to haue power to doe something deplenitudine potestatis, yet in the other we must thinke that he is able to doe iust nothing. Both for that the whole Order Monachall, and other Orders in the Church (as certaine thinke) haue proceeded from humane Constitutions, and the positiue law, ouer whom in that consideration the Pope hath full and all manner of power that may be, as we haue said a little before. But the submis∣sion and obedience due to Kings and Princes and all Ma∣gistrates and superiours is grounded vpon the law of Na∣ture and of God, being confirmed by both the Testa∣ments. For although it be a matter of humane law and or∣dination to vse this or that forme of Common-wealth or Gouernment, or to haue this or that Prince; but to reue∣rence him, whom we had once receiued, and submisly to obey him in all things, which are not contrary to Gods commandements, it is a matter not onely of humane, but also both of Naturall and Diuine institution. And this I thinke, no man will deny. Quipotestati resistit, Deiordinati∣on•• resistit. Whereby it commeth to passe, that that which was free and arbitrary in the beginning, that is presently turned into a necessity of obedience after that one faith of subiection is giuen.

As also, because by the vow of religiont, he obligation is taken only to God and the Church, whereof the Pope is the Vicar, or deputed head: and therefore if the Pope, to whom the free procuration and dispensation of all the buisnesses of the Church is permitted, shall as it were in a fashion of renewing a bond, transfuse and change the obli∣gation, taken to the Church, into another Obligation, and also doe interpret and consture that by the promise of a great good, (or performance) there is satisfaction

made, to the Lord God, who is the principall creditor in that businesse, peraduenture it will not be very absurd to say, that there may by chance prooue a liberation and free∣dome from the knot of the former vow and promise: vn∣lesse some may thinke, that it cannot be for this cause, be∣cause the transgression of a lawfull vow, is simply and of his owne nature sinfull, and that which is sinfull may not be al∣lowed to be donne to obtaine any good, although it be very great, a 1.1 But the solution of that obiection is very easie.

But the matter 〈◊〉〈◊〉 farre otherwise in the case of an Oath, which men in their bargaines and couenants are wont to take to confirme and ratifie another Obligation thereby. Seeing such a manner of oath is a certaine in∣crease of that obligation, to which it is added for securitie, in such manner as suerties••ip, or assurance of any Pledge or Moregage is vsually taken. And therefore although the oath be said to be made to God, yet in this case the ob∣ligation doth accrew not to God principally, but to the person to whom the oath is sworne: quia per iuramentum ••urans non intendebat placere Deo, sed satisfacere proximo b 1.2. Whereby it commeth to passe, that he to whom the Oath is taken, hath much more interest by that Oath, and ob∣taineth much more power either to retaine it, or to remit it, then is granted to the Church in a vow, for the Church or Pope, (euen as they confesse who submit all things to his pleasure) cannot without great and iust cause dispense with the solemne vow of Religion. But he to whom an other hath by oath bound his faith in the matter of giuing or doing, may both alone, and without cause, of his meere pleasure wholy free the Promiser from the Religion of his Oath, and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 it to him, whatsoeuer it bee, of him∣selfe; so as his onely leaue and good will obtained, neither is there any more need of the Popes absolution, neither if he shall not performe that which he promised, may he be reputed guiltie of periurie before God. Therefore it is in

a man in this Case, who can at his pleasure either retaine one that is bound, or dismisse him free, which because they are so by the consent of all men: how can it be, that the Pope may take from the Creditor against his will an Obligation taken to him by the best law that may be, I meane by the Law naturall, diuine and humane, by an oath euery manner of way lawfull, which was added to the law∣full contract? seing in this kind as in the former, there is no place left to Construction by which it may be presu∣med that he is satisfied, to whom principally the oath was made: viz. No Creditor speaking a word against nor shewing the contrarie seeing presumption yeeldeth to the truth c 1.3.

But let it be, that he may vpon cause take it away, and free the Promiser from the bond of his Oath, (because I wil not striue longer with the Canonists about this matter) let him then take it away, and what then force after thinke you will seeme in this our businesse? you will say that the people will be free from the commandement and subie∣ction of the Prince, a soone as they are loosed from the bond of their oath. Thinke you so indeed? what doe you not see, that this Oath, is but an Accessarie onely, to ratifie and assure the Obligation, whereby loyaltie and obedience was promised to the Prince? doe you not know that Accessaries are taken away and discharged with auoi∣ding of the principall Obligation, for although the prin∣cipall being cancelled the Accessarie falles, yet by the ta∣king away of the Accessaries the Principall is not destroi∣ed. Therefore the Obligation remaineth yet, to which this Oath was added: which because it consists vpon na∣turall and diuine Law, doth no lesse straitly hold the mindes and consciences of men before God, then if it were supported with an Oath, quia Dominus inter iur amen∣tum & loquelam nostram, nullam vult esse distantiam d 1.4, as much as concernes keeping faith of the promise. Al∣though the breaker of his Oath offendeth more, by rea∣son

of the contempt of God; and notwithstanding that in the externall Court Periurie is more grieuously puni∣shed, by reason of the solemnitie of the promise, then the faith neglected of a mans single promise and bare word, as we say.

But if the Pope would also cancell this Obligation de Apostolicae potestatis plenitudine, and deliuer and discharge the Subiects from the Oath of the King: and enioyne them that they should not dare to obey his requests, comman∣dements and lawes vnder paine of Excommunication: Shall not the expresse commandement of God seeme to con∣traueene this warrant of the Pope, I meane the comman∣dement of the honoring of Kings with all obedience? Is it not lawfull in such a businesse and in a cause the greatest almost that may be, to doe that which the Popes inter∣preters are accustomed to doe, in Controuersies of lesse moment? And that is, to make diligent and carefull in∣quisition into this same plenitudinem Potestatis, whether it extend it selfe so farre, as that by it should expresly be forbidden, which God doth expresly command? or that which God directly forbids to be done, the same may lawfully be commanded by it? God commandes mee by Salomon to feare the King: by his Apostles to honour the King, to be subiect and obedient to him. This surely is a commandement both of naturall and diuine Law: that the inferiour should obey the superiour, as long as hee forbiddeth not, who is superiour to them both, in the same kind of power. And he in this businesse betweene the people and the Prince, when the question is about temporall authoritie and subiection, is God alone, then whom alone the King is lesse in temporall matters, as in spirituall the Pope.

Seeing then all men doe ingenuously confesse, that this fulnesse of the Apostolike power is not so great, that the Pope may in any sort dispense in those things, which are bidden or forbidden by the expresse word of God (which

Axiome, or Proposition Bellarmine chiefely resteth on, while he would shew,

That the Pope cannot subiect himselfe to the coactiue sen∣tence of Councels. The Popes power ouer all men is, (saith * 1.5 he) by the law of God: but the Pope cannot dispence in the law of God.

We ought not to maruell a whit, if the Diuine com∣mandements of fearing and honouring the King, are so deepely impressed in the mindes of many Subiects, that they giueno place to contrary precepts, but rather em∣ploy all their care that therebe no obedience at all giuen to the aduerse edicts of the Pope either absolutory or pro∣hibitory: It hath beene oft tould me by great Personages, and those good men, that that diuine Precept of honou∣ring Kings, was of so great force with them, and had taken so deepe roote in their mindes, that they did perswade themselues, that by no Bulles nor contrary Indulgences they could be discharged of the scruple and weight of con∣science, and purchase security in the inner man, vz. their soules, that they should not performe and execute so cleere and manifest a commandement of Natuarll and Diuine law, nor yeeld the obedience promised and due to their Prince. And this is the reason, why so few of the Nobility did make defection from Henry the 4. Emperour, none from Phillip the Faire, none also from Lewes the 12. both Kings of France, by reason of the Popes Bulles and Cen∣sures, contayning sentence of Deposition. For that we mis∣take not any way we must vnderstand, that this Plenitude of Apostolicall power, doth onely comprehend that po∣wer which the Lord Iesus the sonne of God, when he liued in the world, as a man amongst men, was pleased to haue: and that so farre the Popes represent Christ vnto vs, and is his Vicar, (as we haue shewed aboue out of the doctrine of the most learned Bellarmine) but not that power which he as the sonne of God, and God himselfe, equall with the fa∣ther had from all eternity, and reserued to the omnipoten∣cie

of his Diuinity. Whereof he saith, All power is giuen me in Heauen and in Earth f 1.6.

Although I see some play the fooles, or rather the mad∣men so much, that they athrme, that this Omnipotency is also giuen to the Pope, and to prooue the same doe spin out a notorious argument of their owne vanity, in this ma∣ner.

Christ committed to the Pope the deputation of his office, as it is Matth. 16. cap. & 24. q. 1. can. quodcun{que} But all power in Heauen and in Earth was giuen to Christ, Math. 28.

Ergo, The Pope which is his Uicarc hath this power. Extra ae translat. cap. quanto.

So Peter Bertrandus in his additions Adgloss. extrauag. Vnum sanctam. de maior & obed. Who also was so bould as to adde, that which is not far from blasphemy.

For the Lord should not seeme to haue beene wise or discreet (that I may speake it with his reuerence) vnlesse hee had left such a one behinde him, who could doe all these things.

Had this man thinke you any braine? No maruell if Io. Gerson said, that Pusillos, little ones, that is to say, simple and ignorant Christians, being deceiued by such kind of vnskilfull Glos••ators and Postillators,

Estimare Papam vnum Deum, qui habet potestatem om∣nem in Caelo & in Terra.

Surely such grosse flatterers haue spoiled and corrupted the iudgement and liues of many Popes. Neither is it maruell, if Pius the fift the Pope, did tell Martinus Aspi∣lineta, That the Lawyers, (hee meant the Canonists, I thinke) were accustomed to attribute a great deale too much power to the g 1.7 Pope. Of whom Iohn de Turre cremata,

It is a great wonder h 1.8 (saith he) that Popes doe speake mo∣derately of the power which is giuen them; Euen certaine paltry Doctorculi, without any true ground, will needs by flatterie make them equall with God.

To which appertaines that which the Cardinall of Cu∣sa writeth, a man very conuersant in all Philosophie hu∣mane and diuine, and in storie besides; that certaine wri∣ters being willing to exalt the Roman See, worthy of all praise, more a great deale then is expedient or comely for the holy Church, doe ground themselues on apocryphall writings, and so deceiue both Popes and people.

Notes

• a 1.1

  Rom 3.
• b 1.2

  Panor••••. in cap. 1 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 4 de 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• c 1.3

  I. v••t D. quod met. ca l conti∣num. 127 §. ••um ita D. de verb. ob••••g.
• d 1.4

  Can. iura∣menti. 22. q. 5.
• * 1.5

  Lib 2. cap 18. de Concil.
• f 1.6

  Math. vlt.
• g 1.7

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 in comm••n. can. non 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Pa∣pa 12. q. 2.
• h 1.8

  In Ca•• 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 3 q. 2.