A COPY OF THE DECREE: WHEREIN TWO BOOKES OF ROGER WIDDRINGTON an English Catho­tholick are condemned, and the Author commanded to purge himselfe: AND A Copy of the Purgation which the same ROGER WIDDRINGTON sent to his Holinesse Pope Paul the fift.

Translated out of Latine into English by the Au­thor, whereunto he hath also adioined an Admonition to the Reader concerning the Reply of T. F. &c. and the con­demnation of Fa: Suarez booke by a Decree of the Parliament of Paris.

He that iustifieth the wicked, and he that condemneth the iust, both are abhominable before God. Prou. 17.
IHS

Permissu Superiorum. 1614.

To the Reader.

THere came forth some few monethes since (Christian Reader) out of the supreme tribunall of the holy Inquisiti­on, a Decree printed at Rome by the Printer of the Apostolicall Chamber, & to be published throughout the whol Chri­stian world, wherein two Bookes which I wrote with a simple, and sincere intention, are condemned, and the Author commanded to purge himselfe forthwith. I haue obeyed their command, and made forthwith my purgati­tion, and haue done as much as lyeth in me, to send it forthwith to his Holinesse. But because that Decree is printed, and published in euery place, and the purgation which I haue sent is only in written hand, lest Catho­likes should perchance imagine, that I haue not been carefull to fulfill his Holinesse command for purging my selfe, I thought it necessarie to Print also, and publish that ma­nuscript purgation which I haue sent, which otherwise without doubt would come into few mens hands, that so the whole world may sin­cerely [Page] iudge as well of my purgation, as of that condemnation of my bookes, and whe­ther I am to be accounted a Catholike and a child of the Church, or an Heretike, and an enemie thereof, as some men very irreligi­ously, yet vnder pretext forsooth of religion, are not afraid. (I pray God forgiue them) to giue forth speeches of me.

Thy brother and seruant in Iesus Christ, ROGER WIDDRINGTON.

A Copy of the Decree. A DECREE To bee published euery where, made by the Sacred Congregation of the most Honourable Cardinals of the holy Ro­mane Church, specially deputed by our most Holy Lord Pope Paule the fifth, and the holy Apostolike Sea, for the examination of bookes, and their permission, prohibition, purgation, and impression throughout the vni­uersall common-wealth.

THe Sacred Congregation of the most Honorable Car­dinals of the holy Romane Church, deputed for the examination of Bookes, ha­uing seene a Booke falsly intituled, An Apologie of Cardinall Bellarmine for the right of Princes, against his owne reasons for the Popes authority to depose Secular Prin­ces, in order to spirituall good, written by Ro­ger Widdrington, an English Catholike, [Page] in the yeare of our Lord 1611. And ano­ther Book of the same Authour, intituled, A Theologicall Disputation concerning the Oath of Allegiance, dedicated to the most Holy Father Pope Paule the fifth, printed at Albionopolis, in the yeare of our Lord 1613. hath iudged both the Bookes worthy to bee condemned, and prohibited, and by the commaundement of our most Holie Lord Pope Paul the fifth, doth by this pre­sent Decree, vtterly condemne, and pro­hibite them in what language soeuer they are printed, or to be printed: and except the Author of them, who professeth him­self to be a Catholike, do purge (or cleere) himselfe forthwith, hee is to vnderstand, that he shall bee throughly punished with Censures, and other Ecclesiasticall punish­ments. Furthermore, it commandeth vn­der the penalties contained in the holy Councell of Trent, and in the Index of forbidden Bookes, that none, of what de­gree, or condition soeuer, be so bold from henceforth to print the foresaid bookes, or cause them to be printed, or keepe them with him in any sort, or reade them. Also it commandeth vnder the same penalties that whosoeuer haue them now, or shal [Page 7] haue them hereafter, he shall presently vp­on the knowledge of this present Decree, exhibite them to the Ordinaries of the places (where he is) or the Inquisitours. In testimony whereof this present Decree was signed, and sealed with the hand, and seale of the most Honorable, and most Reuerend Lord, the Lord Cardinall of S. Caecilia Byshop of Alba, the 10. of March 1614.

P. Byshop of Alba, Card. of S. Caecilia. The place ❀ for the Seale.
Regist. fol. 50.
Fr. Thomas Pallauicinus of the Order of Preachers, Secretarie.

Printed in Rome by the Printer of the A­postolicall Chamber. 1614.

An Admonition to the Reader, concerning the Reply of T. F. &c.

1 THis Decree of the Sacred Congre­gation, as it is thus translated into English, I haue (Courteous Reader) taken out of M. T. F. lately published, whose [Page 8] vnsound, and insufficient handling this Controuersie, but yet somewhat cunning, and colourable, and therefore easie to blinde the eyes of the simple, I will, God willing, ere it be long most clearely, but modestly discouer. In the meane time, thou maiest very plainely perceiue the weaknesse of his Discourse (to omit his intemperate and vncharitable bitternesse) if thou dost but consider the true state of the Controuersie, which is betwixt vs, and that all his Replies must be either euident demonstrations, or inuincible au­thorities, to which no probable answer can be giuen, otherwise he onely beateth about the bush, and will neuer prooue that which he pretended to conuince; and wilt also be pleased but sleightly to reade ouer the Appendix to my Theologicall Dispu­tation, wherein I fully answered all the arguments, which Fa: Suarez bringeth to demonstrate the doctrine for the Popes power to depose Princes to be a point of faith; which Doctrine as this Authour confesseth, is the maine question between him and me: and therefore for the better confirmation of his Reply, hee nakedly vrgeth all Fa: Suarez arguments (but [Page 9] concealing his name) which I in that Appendix haue already fully satisfied.

2 For first, I plainely declared the rea­son of that distinction, which I alledged betwixt the Popes power to command temporals, and to punish temporally by way of coërtion, which distinction see­meth greatly to trouble this Author, be­cause he perceiueth, that it satisfieth the chiefest Arguments, which are vsually brought from the authoritie of many Canons, and from the nature and effects of Excommunication, to prooue, that the Pope hath power, not onely by the pri­uiledges of Princes, but also by Christ his institution, and by consequence of his Pastorall office, to dispose of temporals, and to inflict temporall punishments by way of coërcion.

3 Secondly, I shewed, that Marsilius of Padua, whom with other enemies of the Church, Suarez affirmeth to haue first impugned this Doctrine of deposing tem­porall Princes by the Popes spirituall au­thoritie, was not by Catholike writers of former times accounted an heretick, for that he did impugne this Doctrine, nei­ther do those Authours, who relate Mar­silius [Page 10] his errours, as Castro, Prateolus, D. Sanders, and others, note this for one, that the Pope hath not power to depose Princes; which is an euident signe, that before this our miserable age, that Doc­trine for the Popes power to depose Prin­ces, was not accounted by Catholickes to be a point of faith.

4 Thirdly, that from the time of Gre­gorie the seuenth, who was the first Au­thour, that cleerely taught this Doctrine, (but after he had first put it in practise) and was the first Pope, that, contrarie to the custome of his Ancestors (saith Onuphrius) deposed the Roman Emperour (for which cause he had much adoe to cleere himself euen with his own friends, as appeareth by the Letter, which Hermannus Bishop of Mentz, his deare friend, and follower in all such his proceedings, wrote vnto him, desiring to be satisfied herein, and was by Sigebert, who in those dayes was greatly esteemed by the wisest for his singular vertue, and learning, although Cardinal Baronius, and Cardinall Bellar­mine doe without sufficient ground call him a Scismatick, at that time impeached [Page 11] of noueltie, not to say, of heresie, for so bee Sigeberts words) it hath been conti­nually euen to these our daies contradict­ed by Catholike Authors, as appeareth by Ioannes Trithemius, Jn Chro­nico Mona­sterii Hir. saug. ad an­num 1106. and Iacobus Almai­nus In lib. a [...] dominio na­turali &c. inprobatione conclus 2 ae. there related, but especially by the Kingdome of France, as witnesseth Petrus Pithaeus, In codice libertatum Eccles. Galli canae. a man greatly commended by Fa: Posseuine the Iesuit, for his singular learning and knowledge in Antiquities,In Appa­ratu verbo Petrus Pi­thaeus. and it is sufficiently confirmed by the late proceeding at Paris against the bookes of Card: Bellarmine, Becanus Schulckenius, and now lastly of Suarez, whose booke was for this Doctrine by a solemne Decree of the Parliament of Pa­ris, and Printed by the Kings Printer, and with the Kings priuiledge condemned, and reprochfully burned the 27. of Iune past by the hangman, before the great Staires of the Pallace, and foure of the chiefest Iesuites of France therein named, were enioyned vnder paine of treason in their Sermons to exhort the people to the contrarie Doctrine: And doubtlesse this Authour, who in all points followeth these former mens steps, if his booke had beene printed in Latine, would haue [Page 12] quickly perceiued by the fruits of his own labours, whether in France there be any Catholikes, who doe impugne this Doctrine of deposing Princes by the Popes authoritie, or no: And yet this Au­thour would cunningly perswade the sim­pler sort of Catholikes, therby to perplexe their consciences, that I onely am the man, who doe impugne this temporall authoritie of the Pope to depose Prin­ces; whereas hee cannot be ignorant, that besides mee, many others of our nation, as both the Barclaies, Mr Blackwell, Mr Warmington, Mr. Barret, those thirteene Reuerend Priests, all by publike writings, and many others of the best learned of our Nation, both Priests, and lay-men I could name, who are of my opinion; and if it were not for the clamors, threatnings, and violent proceedings of our Aduersa­ries, (I meane not Protestants) they vvould publikely professe as much as I haue done: and as for the State of France, what opi­nion they be of, it is manifest. And there­fore that Doctrine of Ʋasquez concerning probable opinions may bee very wel ap­plyed to this my doctrine, howsoeuer this Author falsely supposing the Doctrine for [Page 13] the Popes power to depose Princes to be defined, would gladly perswade our Eng­lish Catholikes to the contrarie.

5 Fourthly, I shewed in that booke, that seeing the Pope is not the Church, but onely a principall member thereof, their is to bee made a great distinction betweene the facts, and practises of Popes, and betweene the facts and practise of the Church: neither is the practise of many Popes, to bee accounted the practise of the Church, vnlesse by the vvhole Church it be allowed, as that opinion and practise for the Popes power to depose Princes, and to inflict temporall punishments by way of coërtion neuer was: and there­fore although it be, and hath beene, the more common opinion of Catholikes for some ages past, that the Pope hath au­thority to depose, yet that it is certaine, and not to bee contradicted, but to bee beleeued as a point of faith, and the con­trary not to be accounted an opinion, but rather an heresie, is altogether false. To the Councell of Lateran, which but of late yeares hath been vrged, and that onely by some few, because Suarez did onely barely relate it, and not vrge the wordes [Page 14] thereof, I did remit him to the Preface of my Apologelicall Answere, wherein I largely discoursed of the Decree of that Councel. But because this Author seemeth to stand much thereon, as the chiefe pil­lar and ground of his pretended defini­tion, I will at large in my Answere to his Reply treate of that Councell, and satisfie all the cauils (which neuerthelesse should bee cleere demonstrations, if this Author did intend to proue his purpose) vvhich hee hath taken out of D. Singletons, or ra­ther Fa: Lessius his Discussion of the Decree of that Councell, and I will shew, that it cannot be sufficiently proued, first, that the Councell by those words, tempo­rall Lord, did intend to include Soueraign Princes; secondly, that although it did by those words vnderstand Soueraigne Princes, yet that it did not suppose, that the Pope had authoritie to depose Soue­raigne Princes; & thirdly, that although it did suppose it, yet it did not suppose it as a point of faith, and an vndoubted doctrine, but at the most as probable opinion, so that from the authoritie of this Councel it can not bee conuinced, that it is a point of faith or an vndoubted doctrine, that the [Page 15] Pope hath authoritie to depose Soueraign Princes.

6 Lastly, thou maist perceiue (Good Reader) what strange paradoxes this Au­thor dare aduenture to maintaine by this, that he blusheth not to affirme, & would cunningly perswade our State, that my manner of handling this controuersie pro­bably, concerning the Popes authoritie to depose Princes &c. is dangerous & pernici­ous to his Maiestie, and therefore, that my books deserue to be prohibited, no lesse in Eng­land then Rome, and that wise men in the parts where hee is, doe greatly maruell, how it can stand with the wisedome of his Maie­sties Councell to permit them to bee printed and published in England.

7 But if this Author had either sin­cerely or entirely related my opinion, or else had put in minde the Reader against what kinde of Aduersaries I doe oppose, he would presently haue perceiued, that it is too apparantly, & shamefully vntrue, that my manner of handling this question probably is dangerous and pernicious to his Maiestie, as this Author doth endeuor to perswade his Maiesty, not for any loue that he is knowne to beare vnto the State, [Page 16] but to the end, by all likelihood, that hee and such like violent spirits, may vvrite more freely, and without being controu­led or contradicted by Catholikes, who, as hee is perswaded doe little regard the writings, and opinions of Protestants con­cerning this or any other Doctrine. For it may be dangerous to his Maiestie to han­dle a question probably against one Ad­uersarie, which will bee nothing dange­rous to handle it probably against an o­ther. As for example, if it were agreed vpon by all Catholikes, that the Pope hath no power to depose his Maiestie, then it were dangerous to his Maiestie, that any Catholike should call this in que­stion, and dispute it probably: but if on the contrarie side, all Catholikes should agree in this, that it were certaine, vn­questionable, and a point of faith, that the Pope hath power to depose his Ma­iestie, and to absolue his Subiects of their allegiance, to command them to take armes against him, &c. then if a Catho­like should call this in question, or, which is all one, dispute it probably, and main­taine that it is not certaine that the Pope hath such an authoritie, but it is question­able, [Page 17] and probable, that hee hath it not, no man of any sense, or vnderstanding can affirme, that such a manner of disputing this question probably against those Ad­uersaries, who hold it for certaine, can be any way dangerous, or pernicious to his Maiestie.

8 Now behold the manner that I haue taken in handling this Controuersie. Card. Bellarmin, Gretzer, Lessius, Becanus, Suarez, and other Diuines, especially of the Society of Iesus, whom this Authour doth in euery steppe, as though he were their Creature, follow, haue laid this for a sure and vndoubted ground, that it is a point of faith, and to be beleeued as cer­taine, and vnder paine of eternall damna­tion by all Catholikes, that the Pope hath power to depose Princes, to absolue Sub­iects from their Allegiance, and thereupon to commaund them to beare Armes, and raise tumults against their Prince so depo­sed. So that you see, that they already haue layd the danger, and vndoubted o­uerthrow to his Maiesties person and Crowne, if the Pope should perchance depose him, in that they affirme, that all Catholikes are bound in conscience to [Page 18] forsake him, and to fulfill the Popes com­maund, to the destruction of His Ma­iesties person and State. This Doctrine, to wit; that it is a point of Faith, and vn­doubted principle of Catholike Religion, that the Pope hath power to depose Prin­ces, and to inflict all temporal punishments by way of coercion, and that all Catho­likes are bound in conscience to forsake his Maiestie, and to beare Armes against him, in case the Pope should depose him, I haue taken vpon me, for two principall reasons, to impugne, and do not doubt cleerely to maintaine the same against the clamours of this Authour, or any other whatsoeuer. My first reason was, for that it is against the truth and puritie of the Catholike Church, She being the piller and ground of truth, that doubtfull opinions, and which among Catholikes are onely in Controuersie, and by the Parliament of Paris, haue beene condemned as scanda­lous, seditious, damnable, and Pernitious, should be enforced vpon English Catho­likes, as an vndoubted doctrine of the Catholike Faith, to the vtter ouerthrow of themselues, and their whole posterity, by mē who are in no danger to loose, but [Page 19] rather to gaine temporall aduancement thereby.

9 My second reason was, to assure His Maiestie, that all English Catholikes may, according to the grounds of Catho­like Religion, be true, and constant Sub­iects, and that notwithstanding any sen­tence of excommunication, or depriuation denounced, or to be denounced against his Maiestie by the Pope, they may with a safe conscience (marke well what I say) and also in practise they are bound, to ad­here to his Maiestie, and obey him in temporals, as still remaining their true and lawfull Soueraigne, and to resist any such sentence of Excommunication, or de­priuation. The reason wherefore I affir­med, that Catholikes might with a safe conscience adhere to his Maiestie, and resist the Popes sentence of depriuation, was, for that it is a probable opinion, and which with a safe conscience, and without danger of Heresie, error, or temerity, may bee embraced by Catholikes, that the Pope hath no authority to depose Princes, nor to inflict temporall punishments by way of coërcion, but that the last punish­ment, to which the Ecclesiasticall power is extended, are onely Ecclesiasticall and [Page 20] spiritual censures. Wherefore, that which this Author affirmeth, that I confesse, that it is probable, that the Pope can depose Princes is vntrue, vnlesse he meane that I confesse it for disputation sake, or as we vsually say, Dato non concesso, it being giuen, not graunted, for that it maketh no­thing for, or against the question which is in hand. Therefore positiuely I neither affirme it, nor deny it, neither with that part of the contradiction, Whether it bee probable, that the Pope can depose, and whe­ther it be probable, that the Oath may not be taken, doe I intermeddle: but whereas our Aduersaries doe with so great violence mayntaine, that it is certaine, and an vndoubted doctrine of Faith, that the Pope can depose, and that the Oath cannot bee taken, I at this present doe affirme the contrary, That it is pro­bable, that the Pope cannot depose, and that the Oath may lawfully be taken. Neither doe I, as this Authour imposeth vpon me, take probable in that sense, as Cicero in his Paradoxes did take it, when he affirmed, That nothing is so incredible, which by argu­ing may not be made probable, taking proba­ble, for that which hath som shew or color of probability, or do I take probable for that [Page 21] which I hold for probable, howsoeuer ab­surde it be, (as this Authour absurdly af­firmeth, that without doubt I doe) but I doe take probable in that sense, as Diuines doe take a probable opinion and which may be followed with a safe conscience, as I declared out of Vasquez, and hereafter a­gainst this Authour, and his confused de­scription of probable, which serueth onely to intangle the consciences of the simple, I will more at large declare, in which sense no Heresie or erroneous doctrine can bee made probable, the contrary being deci­ded by the Church, as this doctrin for the Popes power to depose neuer was, but hath euer beene impugned by Catholike Writers vpon sufficient grounds, and now lately condemned by the State of France, as pernicious and damnable doctrine.

10 But the second and principall rea­son, which I brought for the securing of his Maiestie, and which this Author T. F. fraudulently concealeth, wherefore Eng­lish Catholikes not onely may in specula­tion, for the reason aforesaide, but also in practise are bound, to adhere to his Maiesty, and to resist the Popes sentence of depri­uation, was, for that, supposing specula­tiuely [Page 22] it be vncertaine, whether the Pope hath any such power to depose a King, or no, it is an vndoubted rule among Law­yers, and grounded vpon the light of na­ture, and principles of Diuinity, that in causa dubia, siue incerta, melior est conditio possidentis. In a doubtfull and disputable case the state of him that is in possession is the bet­ter: And againe, Cum sunt iura partium obscura fauendum est reo potius, quàm acto­ri, VVhen it is vnknowne, which of the par­ties that are in suite hath right, the defen­dant is to bee preferred before the plaintiffe. Seeing therefore that from the very first beginning of this Controuersie, concer­ning the authority of Popes, and immuni­ty of Kings; that is, from the time of Gre­gory the seuenth, who was the first Pope that challenged vnto him this temporall power ouer Kinges, this authority of the Pope to depose Kinges (call it temporall or spirituall, as you please) hath beene vn­certaine, disputable, and euer contradic­ted by Catholikes, both Kinges and Sub­iects, and therefore it cannot be said that the Pope was euer in possession of this au­thority, (although we should grant, that power, right, or authority may be said to [Page 23] be possessed in that sense as possession is taken in Law, whereof in my Answere to this Authors Reply, I wil more at large dis­course) it consequently followeth, that what opinion soeuer any Catholike fol­low speculatiuely, concerning the Popes power to depose, yet in practise, vntill this Controuersie, concerning the Popes au­thority to depose Kings, and the immunity of Kings not to be deposed, shall be deci­ded, as yet it is not, he cannot with a good conscience endeuour to thrust out a King so deposed from the Kingdome, or Domi­nions which he lawfully possesseth. Wher­fore in the end of my Apologie I wrote these expresse words, of which also in my Epistle Dedicatory to his Holinesse I made mentiō And therfore if eyther Pope, Prince, or any other forainer, should attempt to thrust an hereticall Prince out of the Kingdome which he possesseth; this Controuersie concer­ning the deposition of Princes being vndeci­ded, he should contrary to the rules of Iustice do himselfe most manifest wrong. And much more a Subiect cannot be excused from ma­nifest treason, what opinion so uer hee doth speculatiuely maintain concerning the Popes temporall power, who practically vnder colour [Page 24] perchance of deuotion to the See Apostolike, not duly also considering the bond of his Al­legiance towards his Soueraigne, should en­deuour to thrust his lawfull Prince out of his Kingdome which he possesseth, notwithstan­ding any Excommunication, or sentence of depriuation denounced by the Pope against him. Wherefore it is apparant, that in practise I taught it to bee absolutely false, that the Pope hath authority to depose Princes.

11 Consider now (good Reader) first the vnsincere dealing of this Author, who concealeth the cheefest part of my opini­on in securing his Maiestie of the con­stant loyalty and allegiance, wherein all his Catholique Subiects are in conscience bound vnto him, that thereby hee may cause his Maiestie to be iealous of my fi­delitie, and to account me no good Sub­iect, as this Authour falsely affirmeth, that I am neither a good Subiect, nor a good Catholike, or Childe of the Church. But I trust in God, that it will appeare to all men, that Insurrexerunt in me testes iniqui, & mentita est iniquitas sibi, That false wit­nesses are risen vp against me, and wicked­nesse hath belyed her selfe; [...]al. 26. and that I will e­uer [Page 25] prooue my selfe to bee both a good Subiect to his Maiestie, and also a dutifull child of the Catholike Church.

12 Secondlie, consider the reason, why this Authour is so greatly offended, that I at this present doe onely take in hand (by answering probably all the arguments which on the contrary side are to be obie­cted) to shew, that it is at least-wise pro­bable, that the Pope hath no authority to depose Princes; and consequently, that any man may with a probable and safe conscience take the Oath; (for that the doctrine concerning the Popes authority to depose, is by this Authours owne con­fession, the maine question betwixt him and me, and the cheefe ground wherefore the Oath is iudged to be vnlawfull.) His reason therefore is, for that hee saw right well, what great aduantage I had against him, and what little aduantage hee had against me, in arguing or rather answering in this sort, and therefore he calleth it in heat of his zeale, The most deuolish deuice that any man could inuent. And truly if I should at this first beginning haue treated of this Controuersie in any other manner, then by handling it probably, in that sense [Page 26] as I haue declared, I might worthily haue beene censured of great imprudency, in giuing my Aduersary more aduantage a­gainst mee then was needfull. For this is the State of the question, whether it can be cleerely conuinced by the authority of the ho­ly Scriptures, Ancient Fathers, Generall Councels, or by necessary inferences from a­ny of them, as our Aduersaries pretend to conuince, that it is an vndoubted doctrine of Faith, and the contrary not be defended by a­ny Catholike, that the Pope hath power to de­pose Princes; and consequently that the oath cannot lawfully be taken. This is the questi­on: Marke now the aduantage I haue: for first I am not to prooue but onely to aun­swer: to defend, not to oppose: Secondlie, it is sufficient for me, that my answers be onely probable; but there Replyes must not bee onely probable, but also conuin­cing, and which with any probabilitie cannot bee answered. So that if I should goe about at the first to proue my opinion to be most true, which my aduersary affir­meth not to be questionable, I should, as it is euident, greatly disaduantage my selfe. For in such Controuersies, as are so vio­lently maintained by the Aduersary, that [Page 27] he will not grant the contrary part to bee questionable, it is necessary to proceed by degrees; first to make the thing question­able and disputable, which the aduerse part will not haue to be called in question: and after this is once agreed vpon, then to examine whether opinion be the truest. For perchance it may fall out, that as the opinion for the immaculate Conception of our B. Lady, before Scotus did oppose himselfe therein against S. Thomas and his followers, was scarse accounted probable, yet afterwards it was daily more and more followed, so that now it is esteemed to be the farre more true opinion: and as Al­phonsus Salmeron, In cap. 5. [...] Rem. disp. 51. Sect. D [...] inde. and Fa. Suarez Tom. [...]. disp. 3. sec. doe affirme, Agreed vpon by the consent almost of the Vniuersall Church, and of the Eccle­siasticall writers, Bishops, Religious Orders, and Vniuersities; and as that opinion, which holdeth that the Pope hath not power to dispence in the solemne vow of religious chastitie, neither in any lawfull marriage before it be consummate, is accounted by very many learned men to bee the farre truer opinion, notwithstanding the prac­tise of many Popes to the contrary: So it may fall out, that in processe of time this [Page 28] opinion that denieth the Popes authority to depose Princes, may bee embraced by almost all Ecclesiasticall Writers, Bishops, Religious Orders, and Vniuersities, not­withstanding the practise of many Popes, and the vehement opposition of the Iesu­ites at this present time to the contrary.

13 Thirdly, consider how little behol­ding are English Catholikes to this Au­thor T. F. who will needes enforce them euen with the temporall ouerthrowe of themselues, and of their whole posteritie to defend that doctrine to bee of faith, which the State of France hath condem­ned for scandalous, seditious, damnable, and pernicious, and also endeuoureth to per­swade his Maiesty, that no Catholick can, according to the grounds of Catholike re­ligion, be a true, and loyall Subiect to his Maiestie, but at the Popes pleasure, or which is all one, so long onely as the Pope shall not depose him, which hee may doe at his pleasure. But we haue great affiance in his Maiesties singular wisedome, and clement disposition, wherof we haue had both by his Maiesties gracious Procla­mation,Published after the discouerie of the Gun-powder trea­son. publike bookes, and effectuall deeds sufficient triall, that he will not bee [Page 29] drawne by the false suggestion of this Au­thor, (who would haue all Catholikes to be of the same violent spirit as hee is) to haue all his Catholike Subiects, in the same degree of iealousie, but that he will euer make a distinction betwixt them, who are his true hearted Subiects, and most loyall in all temporall affaires, and wil aduenture all, that they haue, and are, in defence of his Maiesties Royall person, and dignitie, against any sentence of de­priuation whatsoeuer, which shall be de­nounced against him by the Pope,For so much did those 13. Reuerend Priests Mr D. Bishop, Mr Colleto & the rest by a publik Act bear in date the la [...] of Ianuary 1602. promise to Queene Elizabeth: the copie wher of thou maist see my Appendix, page 346. (assu­ring themselues, that it is conformable to the grounds of Catholike Religion which they professe, and not repugnant to that spirituall obedience wherein they stand bound to the supreme Pastour of the Ca­tholike Church) and those other Catho­likes, who thinking it to bee a point of faith, that the Pope hath authoritie to dethrone Soueraigne Princes, will onely defend his Maiestie, and yeeld him tem­porall obedience, vntill the Pope, after his sentence of depriuation shall command them the contrarie. And therefore let this Author T. F. assure himselfe, that all his clamorous words, and threatning spee­ches [Page 30] shall nothing discourage mee from defending the truth, neither am I prest on, to write against him or any other, to shew my wit, as hee falsely affirmeth, or for hope of any temporall lucre, or prefer­ment, but meerely and sincerely for the loue I beare to God, Religion, the Catho­like truth, my Prince, and Countrey: for which causes I neither am, nor euer vvill be ashamed to be prest on, to write against this T. F. or any other such like Authour, who liuing in other countreyes, and out of danger to loose any thing, but rather in hope to obtaine aduancement by their writings, will presse English Catholikes to defend, with danger of loosing all that they haue, & of incurring their Soueraigne his high displeasure, that Doctrine to bee of faith, which the State of France ac­counteth damnable, and enioyneth the Ie­suites vnder paine of treason to preach the contrarie, as thou shalt perceiue by the Decree, which followeth, which is true­ly translated out of the French copie, prin­ted at Paris, vvhich I haue conferred with this English.

A DECREE Of the Court of Parliament made the 26. and executed the 27. of Iune 1614. AGAINST A Booke printed at Cologne this present yeere, entituled, Francisci Suarez Granatensis Societatis Iesu Doctoris Theologi Defensio fidei Ca­tholicae, et Apostolicae aduersus An­glicanae sectae errores, containing di­uers maximes, and propositions repugnant to the Soueraigne po­wer of Kings, ordained and establi­shed by God, the safetie of their persons, and the peace and tran­quilitie of their States.
The place ❀ where are set the Kings armes.

By F. Morel, and Peter Mettayer, the Kings Printers and Stationers in Ordina­rie. 1614. With his Maiesties priuiledge. [Page 32] Extracted out of the Registers of the Parliament.

THE Court of the great Chamber, Tournelle, and of the Edict assembled, hauing viewed the Booke printed at Co­logne this present yeare, entituled, Fran­cisci Suarez Granatensis, è Societate Iesu, Doctoris Theologi, Defensio Fidei Catholicae et Apostolicae, aduersus Anglicanae sectae er­rores, containing in the third book Chap­ter 23. pages 376. 79. 80. 82. Chapter 29. pages 310, 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. Chapter 6. page 834. Chap. 8. pag. 844. and in other places many propositions a­gainst the Soueraigne power of Kings or­dained and established by God, the peace and tranquilitie of their States, and that it is lawfull for their Subiects and strangers to attempt against their Persons. Conclu­sions of the Kings Atturney Generall.

All this being considered,

The said Court hath declared, and doth declare the Propositions, and Maximes contained in the said booke, to be scan­dalous, and seditious, tending to the sub­uersion of States, and to induce the Sub­iects of Kings, and Soueraigne Princes, [Page 33] and others to attempt against their Sacred Persons, and the speeches mentioning King Chlowis, and Philip the faire to bee false and slanderous, and hath also ordained and doth ordaine, that the said Booke of Suarez be burned in the Court of the Pal­lace by the Executioner of high Iustice. And it hath, and doth inhibite, and forbid all sellers of Bookes, and Printers, to print, fell, or disperse any of the said bookes, and also all other persons of whatsoeuer cal­ling or condition they bee, to haue, to write out, to retaine, or to teach in Schooles, or elsewhere, or to Dispute the said Maximes, or propositions. It also or­daineth according to the Decree of the 8 of Iune 1610. that the Decree of the Fa­cultie of Diuinitie made vpon the 4. of Iune the same yeere, concerning the re­newing of the Doctrinall Censure of the said Facultie bearing date the yeere 1408. confirmed by the Councell of Constance, together with this present Decree, as also those of the yeere 1578 & 95. shall yeare­ly be read the fourth day of Iune, as vvell in the said Facultie, as in the Colledge of the Priests, and Schollers of the Colledge of Clermont, and of the foure Orders of [Page 34] begging Fryars: And that at the request of the Kings Attourney General informa­tions shall bee taken of the contrauenti­ons against the said Decrees, and Prohi­bitions made against writing, hauing, or keeping the like bookes. Giuen in Parlia­ment the 26. day of Iune 1614.

Signed. Ʋoisin.

Furthermore it is Decreed, that the Fa­thers, Ignace Armand, Rector in this Ci­tie, Cotton, Frorton, and Sirmund, shall bee summoned the first day to the Court, and to them shall be shewed, that contra­rie to their declaration, and Decree of their General of the yeare 1610. the Book of Suarez hath been printed, and brought into this Citie, impugning the authoritie of the King, and against the safety of his Person, and State: and they shall bee en­ioined to cause their Generall to renew the said Decree, and to publish it, and to bring in an Act thereof within these six monethes: and to prouide, that no Books containing such damnable, and pernici­ous propositions bee made, or published by any of their company: and also they [Page 35] shall be enioyned in their Sermons to ex­hort the people to the Doctrine contrarie to the said propositions. Otherwise the Court will proceed against the transgres­sours as men guiltie of Treason, and di­sturbers of the publike quietnes.

This aboue said Decree, and the De­creed were pronounced in the presence of the Fathers, Ignace Armand, Charles de la Toure in the absence of Peter Cot­ton, Fronton da Duc, and Iames Sir­mund. And the Decree was put in exe­cution before the great Stayres of the Pallace the 27. of Iune. 1614.

A Copy of a Letter, which is said to be written by the most Reuerend, and right Honorable Lord, the Popes Nuncio at Brussels, to Mr George Birket Arch-presbyter then liuing.

Very Reuerend Sir, and as a brother most beloued in Christ.

THere came into the Citie of Rome a Theologicall Disputation concerning the Oath of Allegiance, the third worke [Page 36] published vnder the name of Widdrington. After it was there diligently examined, our most Holy Lord declared, that hee in no wise accepted of the Dedication of that booke, and that he thought the Au­thor of it was neither a child of the church, nor a Catholike; and further, that all Catholikes should abstaine from the reading thereof. Of these things I was certified some few daies since by let­ters of the congregation of the vniuersall Romane Inquisition by the commande­ment of his Holinesse, to the end that I should write thereof especially to your Reuerence, that you may signifie the same to the Catholikes there, and according to your wisdome make it known vnto them. God defend your Reuerence with his heauenly custodie. From Bruxells the 26. Nouemb. 1613.

Of your Reuerence most louing and respectiue

To the Letters, which are spread abroad among vs no name is subscribed.

A COPY OF ROGER WID­DRINGTONS Purgation. To the most Holy and most Blessed Father Pope PAVL the fifth, ROGER WID­DRINGTON an English Catholike wisheth euerlasting happines.

1 THere came vnto my hands some few daies since (most blessed Father) a certaine Decree of the Sacred Congre­gation of the right Honourable Cardinals of the Holy Romane Church, who are de­puted for the examining of bookes, dated the 16. day of March of this present yeere 1614, and printed in Rome by the printer of the Apostolicall Chamber, vvherein two bookes written by me in sinceritie, and simplicitie of heart, are by name, but yet onely in generall words without na­ming any crime either in particular or in generall, at which many doe maruell, al­together condemned and forbidden by the commandement of your Holinesse. And the Author of them vnlesse he shall forth­with purge himselfe, is threatned to bee punished with Censures, and other Eccle­siasticall punishments,

[Page]2 But what manner of purging your Holinesse doth expect at my hands, who am the Authour of those Bookes, and of what crime I ought to purge my selfe (see­ing that in this Decree there is no crime either in particular, or in generall obiect­ed against me of which I should purge my selfe, neither is my conscience priuie to any crime for the making, or publishing of those bookes) I can not verily in any wise perceiue. I know that certaine Do­ctors misinterpreting my words, haue in their publike writings falsely, and very iniuriously, not to speake a more heinous word (I pray God to forgiue them) im­peached me of certaine crimes (by whose instigation I know not whether your Ho­linesse hath beene mooued to condemne those bookes) but considering that both they are my Aduersaries in this contro­uersie, and that they are mooued, as I thinke, rather by affection, then by so­lide reason, and also that they do foulely corrupt my words, and wrest them to a most bad sense, and neuer intended by mee (as I could most cleerely demon­strate to your Holinesse, if it vvere now a conuenient time) I doe not thinke, that [Page] so great authoritie is to bee giuen, either to their sayings or writings, of what lear­ning, or dignitie so euer otherwise they be, that they are of force to binde mee, either to embrace their opinions, especi­ally being grounded vpon so weake foun­dations, or not to defend my innocencie from their false accusations in such an ex­ceeding great crime, as heresie is.

3 And that your Holinesse may cleere­ly perceiue, that I haue alreadie in these bookes, which are forbidden by your commandement, purged my selfe as much, as is sufficient for a child of the Catholike Church, I thinke it necessarie to repeate againe with as much breuitie as may be in what manner I haue in those bookes made profession of the Catholike faith (which in my opinion aboundantly sufficeth for the purging of my selfe from all imputation of heresie, errour, or any other crime, which doth depend on these) and for what thing I made Suppli­cation to your Holinesse in that Disputati­on of the oath of Allegiance, that there­by your Holinesse may manifestly perceiue, that some persons, not of the meanest de­gree, although perchance with the igno­rant [Page 40] sort of people they doe greatly im­paire my credite, yet they doe also bring your Holinesse into no small obloquy both among prudent Catholikes, and especi­ally among those, who are Aduersaries to the Catholike faith, whiles they are not afraid to diuulge, not so circumspectly in my iudgement as is fitting, that your Ho­linesse did in good earnest auouch, that you thought the Authour of that Disputa­tion to bee neither a Catholike, nor a child of the Church (whereas the Author doth professe himselfe both to be a Catholike, and a child of the Catholike Romane Church, and submitteth most humbly that Disputation and all his other writings to the iudgement of the Holy Catholike Romane Church) neither that you would accept of the Dedication of that booke, whereas that Dedication, as it is mani­fest by the Epistle of the Author writ­ten to your Holinesse, was onely a most humble Supplication of the Author, and of other Catholikes vnto your Holinesse, that your Holinesse, as being the supreme Pastour of the Catholike Church, and whose office is to instruct, and confirme the sheepe of Christ in the Catholike [Page 41] faith, would bee pleased to instruct them in the Catholike faith, & in those things, which your Holinesse had declared by your Breues to be cleerely repugnant to faith, and saluation. And that your Holinesse did speake the aforesaid words, both of the Authour, and also of the Dedication, some here giue forth, that your Holi­nesse his Nuncius then residing at Brussels did signifie as much to Mr George Birk [...]t the Arch-priest, who was then liuing, and that the same Nuncius did withall af­firme, that he was certified some few daies since of those things (for so bee the expresse words of the Nuncius his Letters,These Letters were dated at Brussels 26 Nouemb. 1613. which are spred abroad among vs) by Letters of the Congregation of the holy Romane vni­uersall Inquisition by the commandement of your Holinesse, to the end, that hee should write thereof especially to his Reuerence, that he according to his wisedome should signifie as much, and make it knowne here to Catho­likes.

4 First therefore I the Author of those Bookes did protest, That I composed them being mooued thereunto for the zeale of God, of Religion, and of my Countrey, and for other more particular reasons, which I re­lated [Page] in the beginning of those Bookes, without any respect of worldly fauour, or fear, neither with any obstinate mind, but onely to finde out the Catholike truth in this most weighty Controuersie, which belongeth to the yeelding of obedience due by the Law of Christ to God, and Caesar, to your Holinesse, who is the supreame Pastour in Earth of our soules, and to our King, his most excellent Maiestie, who in temporals is onely inferior to GOD, and I did submit most humbly In Apolog. Lect [...] in fine. whatsoeuer was contained in them to the iudgement and censure of the Catholike Ro­mane Church, whose Childe I professed my selfe to be, and if perchance any thing through ignorance had escaped me, which should not bee approoued by her, I did disprooue it, damne it, and would haue it for not writ­ten In Disp. in [...]e..

5 Besides, I did professe, In Dispu­ [...]. Cap. 6. [...]. 3. Num. [...]. & seq. that with all due honour and respect I did reuerence all the Canons of the Catholike Church, although I did freely confesse, that betwixt the Catholike Church and the Pope, who is onely the first and principall member thereof, betwixt some Chapters or Decrees of the Cannon Law, and betwixt others, a great distinction was to be made, and neuerthelesse I sincerely affir­med, [Page] that to euery one, in his degree and place, I gaue dutifull, but not equall credit. For in the vast Corps of the Canon Law, and in the Ʋolumes of the Councels are contained, ey­ther sayings, or assertions of the Ancient Fa­thers, or Decrees, or sentences of Popes and Councels: and these are either doctrinall, and which are propounded as things to be beleeued by the faithfull, or else morall, and which in the external discipline of the Church, are commanded to be obserued.

6 And first, I did acknowledge, that the doctrine which the Ancient Fathers either in expounding the Holy Scriptures, or in Questions belonging to Faith, haue with v­niforme consent deliuered: I did also vn­doubtedly beleeue, as being certainly per­swaded, that it was inspired by the Holie Ghost.

7 Secondly, I also with Melchior Ca­nus, and other Diuines affirmed, that the do­ctrine also of all the holie Fathers in thinges, which do not appertaine to Faith, may piously and probably be beleeued by Catholikes, yet that it ought not of necessity to be followed as certaine, and infallible.

8 Thirdly, I did professe, that the definiti­ons of Generall Councels, lawfully assembled, [Page 44] and confirmed by the Pope, wherein any do­ctrine is propounded to the whole Church, to be beleeued of al men as of Faith, are to bee receiued by Catholikes as infallible rules of Faith. Neuerthelesse, I did freely affirme with the aforesaid Melchior Canus, and Card. Bellarmine, that those opini ns, which in the said Councels are defined, or else sup­posed onely as probable, and those assertions which either incidently, and by the way are inserted, or for better declaration, or proofe of their decisions bee produced, are sometimes subiect to error, and may be Catholikes with­out any wrong to the Catholike Faith bee re­iected. This withall obseruing, of which also in other places I haue admonished the Rea­der that although I, professing my selfe to be a childe of the Catholike Romane Church, doe most willingly embrace whatsoeuer Gene­ral Councel confirmed by the Pope, which doe represent the Catholike Church, doe pro­pound to the faithful as necessarily to be be­leeued of faith, and which certainely, and e­uidently is knowne to bee the true sense and meaning of the Councels: neuerthelesse, I do not vndoubtedly beleeue euery doctrine which either Card. Bellarmine (speaking with due reuerence) or any other Doctour, seeing they [Page 45] are not appointed by God to be an vndoubted rule of the Catholike Faith, doe cry out to bee Catholike doctrine, to be the voyce of the Ca­tholike Church, to bee the meaning of the Scriptures and Councels, if especially some Catholike Doctours doe hold the contrary. Then truely, as it is meete, I doe reuerence with all dutifull respect, and I doe much at­tribute to their authority, but that all those collections, which they in their iudgements doe imagine to be euidently concluded out of holy Scriptures or Councels (considering that oftentimes they are deceiued, and do deceiue, and what they haue written when they were younger, they may recall when they grow el­der For Car [...] Bell. him­selfe in his old age ha [...] recalled many thinges which he wrote wh [...] he was yonger, & p [...] chance h [...] now being elder, will recall mo [...]) are to bee accounted for vndoubted assertions of faith, and the contrary opinion of other Catholikes to be rather esteemed an heresie then an opinion, this truly I cannot take in good part.

9 Fourthly, concerning the Canons, or Decrees of Generall Councels belong­ing to manners, and to the externall go­uernment of the Church, I promised to bee most ready to receiue willingly all those De­crees, which in places where I shall liue, shal be generally receiued; for these are properlie called the Decrees, or Canons of the Catho­like [Page] or Vniuersall Church which are by com­mon consent admitted by the Vniuersall Church. Neither doubtlesse is any man bound to admit those Lawes and precepts, which in the Country where he liueth, are not obser­ued by the people, as according to the receiued opinion of Deuines, and Lawyers; I there af­firmed. And the same I there auouched, was to be vnderstood proportionally of the de­crees of Popes, and Prouinciall Councels. For as concerning the Popes definitions be­longing to faith, if he define without a Gene­rall Councell, I confesse, that I haue often­times auerred, that very many, especially Ancient Diuines of the Vniuersity of Paris, whose names I there related,Cap. 10. sec. [...]. num. 27. are of opi­nion, that such Definitions, vnlesse they bee receiued by the Catholike Church, a [...] defini­tions of the Catholike Faith, are subiect to errour, whose opinion, both for the authority of so famous men, and also for the reasons, and grounds, whereon that opinion is foun­ded, I with later Deuines (to whose opinion also Card. Bellarmine himselfe doth plain­ly enough inclineLib. 2. de [...]oncil. cap. [...]., howsoeuer he would seeme to auerre the contraryLib. 4. de [...]om. Pont. [...]p. 2 & lib. de concil. [...]p. 17.) haue also oftentimes affirmed, is not to be condemned of heresie, errour, or temerity, which also [Page] now againe (speaking with all dutiful sub­mission) I feare not to confirme.

10 Lastly, concerning my Disputati­on of the Oath, and the Dedication ther­of, which seemeth to be that stone of of­fence, and rocke of scandall to some De­uines, especially of the Society of Iesus, and to those Catholikes who adhere to them, I cannot, to speake vnfaignedly, in any wise, vnderstand what can iustly bee obiected against it, or what fault I haue committed, either in making it, or else in dedicating it to your Holinesse, of which I should purge my selfe. For first of all, I the Authour of that Disputation and De­dication, haue therein professed; That I did not write it with any obstinate minde, but in manner of an humble petition, sincerelie, and for many reasons which I there re­hearsed, to informe your Holinesse more fully, who as heere we thinke, hath not beene rightly informed of the reasons, for vvhich English Catholickes are of opinion, that the Oath may lawfully bee taken; and for this cause I did dedicate it to your Holinesse, that after you had carefully examined all the reasons, for which English Catholikes doe think the Oath may lawfully be taken, your [Page 48] Holinesse might prouide both for their spiri­tuall and temporall safety, as according to your fatherly wisedome, and charitie should be thought most conuenient. And therefore, as in the end of that Disputation I affirmed, I did faithfully set downe all the cheefest ar­guments, which are vsually alleaged as well against the taking of the oath, as in fauour thereof, neither did I intend to affirme any thing of my owne opinion, but onely as repre­senting the persons of them, who of set pur­pose doe publikely maintaine, that the Oath either may, or may not lawfully be taken, lea­uing it to the fatherly care of your Holines, that when you haue beene fully informed of the whole progresse of the matter, and haue diligently examined all the reasons, for which English Catholikes, obeying the Kings com­maund, haue taken the Oath, you will bee pleased particularly to approoue them, or to condemne them, that Catholikes in this so most weightie a matter, which doth so neere­ly concerne the prerogatiue of your spirituall Authority, and of his Maiesties Royaltie, being fearefull to resist your Holinesse pre­cept declared in your Breues, and also beeing desirous to obey, as much as with a safe con­science they may, his Maiesties commaund, [Page 49] may clearely perceiue, which particular clau­ses of the Oath they are bound to admit, and which they are bound to reiect, and may in plaine and expresse termes without any am­biguitie of wordes be instructed by your Ho­linesse, in what manner they may satisfie their owne conscience, your Holinesse will, and also his Maiesties desire concerning all the particular partes of the Oath. For as they are very ready to hazzard their whole temporall estate, and also to loose their liues for the Catholike faith, which by the Church (to whom this office belongeth to define mat­ters of Faith, and not to priuate Doctours, who may deceiue, and be deceiued) is decla­red to be truly the Catholike faith, so doubt­lesse they are vnwilling to expose themselues, and their whole Family and Posterity, which this our age doth so much labour to ad­uance, to eminent danger of their temporall vtter ruine, onely for opinions, although they be maintained by the greater, and better part of Deuines, so that others, although farre fewer in number, doe defend the contrary. But as they are desirous with all their hearts to obey your Holinesse in spirituall matters, and in those things, which cannot be omitted [Page 50] without sinne: so also they might iustly thinke themselues to be more hardly vsed, then chil­dren are wont by their Parents, if, especially in these times, wherein by reason of the Ca­tholike Faith, which they professe, they haue greeuously incurred his Maiesties high dis­pleasure, who is of a contrary Religion, they should without sufficient reason be forbidden to giue that temporall Allegiance to his Ma­iestie, which they thinke by the Law of Christ to be due vnto him, hauing alwaies before their eies that commaund of Christ our Sauiour, Render to Caesar the thinges that are Caesars, and to God the thinges that are Gods.

11 And that your Holinesse may yet more cleerely perceiue, that this my Dis­putation of the Oath (which is rather to be called a most humble Supplication to your Holinesse) was written in manner of an humble Petition, I thinke it not a­misse to repeate also word by word these very last wordes of my Epistle to your Ho­linesse.

12 This therefore (most Holie Fa­ther) is our most humble Supplication to your Holinesse, First, that your Holinesse will bee [Page 51] pleased to examine diligently the reasons, for which our English Catholikes doe thinke the Oath may lawfully be taken, and wherof they are perswaded your Holiness is not yet right­ly informed: Secondly that after you haue throughly examined them, you will vouch­safe in regard of your Pastorall carefulnesse to instruct them, which parts of the Oath are, (I do not say only according to a probable opi­nion of some Doctors, but according to Ca­tholike Doctrine, necessarily to bee beleeued by all Christians) repugnant to faith and saluation, and therefore can not be taken by any Catholike with a safe, and probable con­science: Thirdly, that if your Holinesse shal finde, that you haue not beene rightly infor­med of those reasons, for which our English Catholikes doe think, that the Oath may law­fully be taken, and that therefore they haue not in a matter of so great weight proceeded rashly, and vnaduisedly, you will be pleased to receiue them, and their Priests into your an­cient fauour, and that if they, or any of them haue, not through their own fault but throgh the indiscreete zeale of others suffered any losse, or detriment in their good names, or o­ther waies, it may be restored againe to them [Page 52] in that best manner, as shall seeme conueni­ent to the charitie, iustice, and wisedome of your Holinesse.

13. Now what there is contained in this our humble Petition, against which your Holinesse hath iust cause to take so high displeasure, that you will not accept thereof, I remit to the iudgement of indi­ferent men, but especially of your Holines. For by that, which wee haue sayd, it doth manifestly appeare, that this disputation of the Oath was for that end composed by me, to informe your Holinesse (who is the Supreme Pastor of the Catholike Church, and to whom Christ our Lord hath giuen charge to feed his sheepe, not onely with precepts and Censures, but al­so with the word of Doctrine, and to in­struct them in the Catholike faith) truely of our state, and to propound vnto your Holinesse sincerely and with all duetifull submission those doubts, and difficulties, which both to my selfe, and other Catho­likes doe occurre about this new Oath, which is commaunded by his Maiesty, forbidden by your Holinesse, and dayly ta­ken by almost all Catholikes of the better [Page 53] sort, to whom it is tendred, yea euen by those, who haue the Iesuites for their di­rectours, howsoeuer these Fathers doe in outward shew seeme to condemne the same; that after your Holinesse had duely examined the reasons, and arguments, which are vsually alledged on both sides, against, and for the taking of the Oath, you would bee pleased to satisfie our con­sciences, and to make knowne vnto vs, what parts of the Oath may according to the principles of the Catholike faith bee lawfully, and what parts may not lawfully bee taken, and lastly to declare vnto vs, which bee those many things, which your Holinesse, being not rightly informed by some, as wee imagine, hath affirmed in your Breeues to bee cleerely repugnant to faith and saluation, for no man, be he ne­uer so great an enemy to the Oath, dare auouch, that all things contayned in the Oath are repugnant to faith and salua­tion.

14. Now I beseech your Holinesse to iudge, first, whether I the authour of those bookes, who haue professed my selfe to bee a Catholike, and a child of the Ca­tholike [Page 54] Romane Church, and haue subiec­ted all my writtings to her iudgment, and Censure, with that submission, that what­soeuer should not bee approoued by her I would disprooue, condemne, and haue it for not written, ought bee adiudged by the Supreme Pastour, and Father of the Catholike Church to bee no Catholike, nor a child of the Catholike Church. If I bee no Catholike, doubtlesse I must bee an heretike, & defend obstinately (seeing that heresie cannot be without obstinacy) some Doctrine contrary to the Catholike faith. But I (to say nothing at this time of the Doctrine, which I mainetained in those bookes, which if it were cleerely hereticall, why did not that sacred Con­gregation condemne those bookes as he­reticall?) protested to write nothing ob­stinately, but with an humble and sub­missiue mind, and ready to recall my er­rour, as soone as I should perceiue that I had erred in any thing. I confesse indeed that I may erre, but by God his assistance I will neuer be an heretik. And if perchance in any thing I haue erred, it is no errour of malice, or obstinacy, but of ignorance and [Page 55] infirmity: For I will neuer by God his pro­tection, wittingly and willingly defend a­ny thing at all, which I shall know to bee contrary to sound Doctrine, or to the Ca­tholike faith.

15. Secondly, concerning that, which some men, to no small scandall to Catho­like Religion, and to the great disgrace of the See Apostolike, especially among those who be Aduersaries to the Catholike Re­ligion, doe giue out, that your Holinesse should say, that you would not accept the Dedication of my disputation concerning the Oath, or rather the most humble Supplica­tion of me, and of other Catholikes, as I haue shewed before, this onely at this present I will say, that we English Catho­likes are doubtlesse most miserable, who dayly enduring so many discommodities of this life for the Catholike faith, which wee professe, and hauing prouoked his Maiesty, a Prince otherwise most merci­full, who professeth the contrary Religion, to take displeasure against vs, which of all the rest wee account most greeuous, and hauing therefore for a long time beene, and are dayly made a pittifull spectacle to [Page 56] this whole Kingdome; now by humble petition crauing to be instructed by your Holinesse in those things, which you by your Apostolical Breues haue to our most great temporall preiudice declared to be cleerely repugnant to the Catholike faith, doe not onely not deserue so much at your hands, as to bee heard herein, but your Holinesse also doth forbid and condemne our petition, and doth threaten the Au­thour to be punished with Censures, and other Ecclesiasticall punishments, vnlesse he purge himselfe very speedily, & yet af­ter an vnusuall maner impeacheth him of no crime, whereof hee should purge him­selfe.

16. For behold (most blessed Father) how miserable, and to bee pittied is our case. Our Kings most excellent Maiesty, to whom by the law of Christ wee owe tem­porall obedience, doth demaund of vs, vnder paine of incurring most greeuous penalties, an Oath which hee affirmeth to bee onely a temporall Oath, and of Allea­giance: your Holinesse, to whom by the law also of Christ we are bound to obey in spirituals hath by your Breues altogether [Page 57] condemned the same, as containing in it many things flat contrary to faith and sal­uation, and hath withall declared, that all those Priests, who either doe take the said Oath, or doe teach, or shall teach that it may lawfully bee taken, shall bee de­priued of their faculties: Wee English Ca­tholikes being betweene these two nar­row streights, and fearing least that by a­uoyding the gulfe of Charybdis, we should fall vppon the rocke of Scylla, that is least that wee should not render to God or Cae­sar, that which is their due, doe most in­stantly request your Holinesse, who is our Supreme Pastour in spiritualls, and whose proper office is to instruct & confirme the sheep of Christ in the Christian faith, that you will bee pleased to shew vnto vs those many things, or at least-wise one among those many, which in this Oath are so re­pugnant to faith and saluation, to the end that wee may both satisfie our owne con­sciences, and also fulfill your Holinesse and his Maiesties command, as much as in vs lyeth, and Catholike Religion will per­mit: And neuerthelesse your Holinesse doth not onely not admitte our petition, [Page 58] wherein with all dutifull submission wee doe propound the reasons and arguments, which are vsually obiected, against, and for the taking of the Oath, to bee exami­ned by your Holinesse, and affirming no­thing of our owne opinion; but you doe also by the euill information of others, as wee thinke, wholely condemne the same, without alleadging any crime either in perticular, or in generall against it, and doe declare, that the Authour thereof, or your humble petitioner, except hee purge himselfe forthwith, shall bee greeuously punished, and neuerthelesse you make no mention of any crime at all, whereof hee should purge himselfe.

17 Is it perchance a crime for those that are in ignorance, errour, and doubt, to haue recourse to the Supreme Pastour, and Doctor of the Church to be instru­cted by him in faith, and to propound with due submission the doubts, and diffi­culties, which trouble both their owne, and other mens consciences, to bee an­sweared and satisfied by him, and that not in things of small moment, but in such as, vnder paine of incurring great penalties, [Page 59] do belong to they eelding of due obedi­ence to God and Caesar? Is it a crime for childrē that are hungry, to craue bread of their Father, for sheepe that want Pasture, to require foode of their Shepheard, for Disciples that are ignorant, to beseech humbly instruction of their Maister and Teacher? Wee English Catholikes doe acknowledge your Holinesse to bee our spirituall Father, Pastour, and Maister, and doe most humbly request to bee instru­cted by your Holinesse in the Catholike faith, and in those many things, which your Holinesse by your Breues hath decla­red to be cleerely repugnant to faith and saluation: and your Holinesse doth damne and forbid our petition, and doth or­daine, after a maner altogether vnusuall, that I the Authour thereof, who in the name of the rest haue written, and com­posed the same, except I purge my selfe very speedily, shall bee punished most se­uerely: For, as I thinke in no tribunall on the earth, this custome is to be found, that any man is compelled by sentence of the iudge to purge himselfe vnder paine of incurring most greeuous punishments, [Page 60] vnlesse the Iudge doe make knowne vn­to him the crime, for which if hee doe not purge himselfe, hee is to be condemned: Besides that it is impossible for one to purge himselfe of that crime, whereof he is ignorant.

18 And to speake freely the truth (for now I, being summoned before the high­est tribunall on earth to purge my selfe, am by the law it selfe permitted to speak somewhat more freely, so that I speake truely and modestly) this new kinde of condemning the books of Catholike Au­thours, and of commanding the Authour to purge himselfe, being made by such a publike Decree, and vnder paine of in­curring the penalties contained in the Councell of Trent, and in the Index of for­bidden bookes, without naming any crime either in particular, or in generall, for which they are condemned, and of which the Author should purge himselfe (considering that the same punishment is not appointed in the Index for reading, without distinction, all sorts of forbidden bookes, neither doe all crimes require the same purgation) doth make both the See [Page 61] Apostolike odious to the Aduersaries of Catholike Religion, who will easily from hence take occasion to perswade them­selues, that the Bishops of Rome are wont to reiect at their pleasure, and to suppresse violently by threatnings, and not by ar­guments those opinions which they doe not like, and to promote by fauours, not by reasons, those opinions, which are pleasing vnto them; and also doth little satisfie prudent Catholikes, who can hardly perswade themselues, that the sa­cred Congregation of the right Honorable Cardinals, who are deputed for the exa­mination of bookes, (to whose informati­ons your Holinesse giuing credit, as we vn­doubtedly doe imagine, hath condemned those bookes, and ordained that the Au­thor shall be seuerely punished, vnlesse he forthwith purge himselfe) if they could haue found in them any proposition, which is certainely knowne to bee here­ticall, erroneous, or repugnant to sound doctrine, they would haue passed it ouer with so great silence, and (contrarie to to the vsuall manner of the See Apostolike in condemning the bookes of Catholike [Page 62] Authors, but of such especially, who are commanded to purge themselues, as by innumerable examples, which are extant in the tomes of the Councels, and in the Buls of Popes I could demonstrate) com­mand the Author to purge himselfe one­ly in generall words, vvithout shewing him any crime either in particular, or in generall, of which hee should purge him­selfe.

19 I therefore the Authour of those bookes, whom the Sacred Congregation by the commandement of your Holinesse hath enioyned to purge my selfe, but as yet I know not of what crime, a most du­tifull child of the Catholike Romane Church, and of your Holinesse in spirituals, and withall a most faithfull Subiect of the Kingdome of England, and of our Soue­raigne Lord King IAMES in temporals, being summoned before your Holinesse his supreme tribunall to purge my selfe, pro­strate at your Holinesse feete, doe humbly request you by the dreadfull Maiestie of God, the Supreme Iudge of all: First, that your Holinesse will iudge that which is right, and doe mee iustice, and not giue [Page 63] credit onely to the informations of them, who are my Aduersaries in this contro­uersie, and haue foulely corrupted my words, contrarie to my meaning, but that you will examine my cause by your owne certaine knowledge, and that you vvill make knowne vnto mee all those things, or at the least wise some of them, which in those bookes condemned by your Ho­liness commandement are cleerely known to bee repugnant to faith, or good man­ners. For I protest, that I am most readie to correct those things, which are to be corrected, to purge what is to be purged, to make more plaine what is to bee ex­plained, and to recall what is to bee re­called.

20 Secondly, that if your Holinesse, af­ter due examination of my writings shall find, that you haue been mis-informed by some persons, and that nothing is to bee found in those bookes, which is repug­nant to Catholike Doctrine, as some per­chance haue suggested to your Holinesse, you will be pleased to recall that sentence of the Sacred Congregation published a­gainst mee and my bookes, through euill [Page 64] information, or vehement importunitie of some men, or through misvnderstan­ding the true meaning of my words, and that you will haue a care of my good name, in that good sort, as shall seeme fitting to your wisedome, charitie, and iustice, and that you will account mee to bee a Catholike and a Childe of the Catholike Romane Church. For that which I did vvrite in another place, [...] Disput. [...] Admonit. [...] 8. I doe here repeate againe. I am a Catho­like and a child of the Catholike Romane Church, and if any man, of what degree so euer hee be, shall wrongfully accuse mee of heresie, let him know assuredly, that by the assistance of Almightie God, I will by all those meanes, which God and nature hath granted to innocent men to defend themselues, to the vttermost of my power defend my selfe from their false accusati­ons, vntill the Church, beeing fully infor­med of my opinion, shall in plaine, and par­ticular words (for no man can recall errors, vntill he know particularly what they be) con­demne the same.

21 Thirdly, that your Holinesse, will command, that this my purgation, and [Page 65] most humble petition may for future me­morie be registred among the Acts of the holy Office of the Inquisition, as the condemnation of my bookes is recorded, as appeareth by the Decree it selfe, that those, who hereafter shall succeede in that Office, may giue their sentence and iudgement as well of this my purgation, as of that condemnation of my bookes, and whether I am to bee accounted a Catholike, and a child of the Church, or an heretike.

22 But if your Holinesse will not bee pleased to admit this my Purgation, and most humble Supplication, and to recall the sentence denounced vpon euill infor­mation against my Bookes, and to haue a care of my good name, which hath wrongfully beene taken away, although I know right well, that the same mercifull and great God, who in times past preser­ued the credit of Robert Grosseteste By­shop of Lincolne, with whom Pope Inno­cent the fourth being wonderfully offended, Mathew Paris ad an­num 1253. §. diebus sub eisdem & ad annum 1254. §. Hoc etiam anno Domi­nus Papa. determined to cast his dead bones out of the Church, and to bring him into so great oblo­quie, that he should bee proclaimed through­out [Page 66] the whole world for an Heathen, Rebell, and disobedient, for that hee had written to the said Pope Innocent in the spirit of hu­militie and loue, that hee would correct his frequent or accustomed Crebros [...]os errores [...]orrigeret. errors, although I know, I say, that the same God, who is not an accepter of persons, is able also to deliuer me from the vniust attempts, and false informations of any whatsoeuer, and to make knowne my innocency to your Holinesse, and to the whole Christian World: neuerthelesse prayers, teares, and patience, ioyned with the testimony of a good conscience, shall be my cheefest re­fuge, and this shall bee my daily comfort, that it is no whit lesse, but rather more happy and gratefull to God, to suffer per­secution for Iustice sake at the handes of Kinsmen, and of the same Houshold, who in friendship and societie ought to bee more streightlie linked, then of Stran­gers.

23 Finally, if in this my purgation, which the Sacred Congregation by commaunde­ment of your Holinesse hath enioyned me, I haue offended any man, as I hope I haue not, by speaking any thing not with that [Page 67] circumspection as is fitting, (for wittingly and willingly I would giue no man any iust cause of offence) I doe most humbly craue pardon both of your Holinesse, for whose temporall and perpetuall felicitie, I will continually pray vnto our most merci­full God, and also of the whole Christian world. From my Study in the Feast of S. Iohn Baptist. 1614.

A most humble Childe, and Seruant of your Holinesse, and of the Holy See Apostolike,

The Authour of the Bookes as aforesaid, &c.

Errata.

Page 23. line 24. put out selfe. Page 45. line 7. them. Pag. 54. l. 2. writings. pag. 59. l. 1. yeelding. pag. 59. l. 18. manner.

This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Text Creation Partnership. Searching, reading, printing, or downloading EEBO-TCP texts is reserved for the authorized users of these project partner institutions. Permission must be granted for subsequent distribution, in print or electronically, of this EEBO-TCP Phase II text, in whole or in part.