« ForrigeFortsæt »
"not explain itself, from a fear of being forced to "confess that the proposition, though it did not "deserve the qualification of heretical, might be "censured with more measured expressions. Do not say that Paul the fifth has raised to a dogma "of faith, the opinion, that popes may depose kings. It is not, in this form, with this ambiguity of expression, that dogmas are established. "For, notwithstanding this bull, several English "were accused of a false conspiracy against the king, and condemned to death in 1678, and "1681; and these, in the moment of losing their "lives, declared that they acknowledged, with all "their heart, Charles the second for their true and
legitimate king, who could not be deposed by any 66 power; that they considered their opinion as cer"tain and indubitable, and that they never should
depart from it. They avoid to treat the opinion, "which attributes to the ecclesiastical power the
right to depose sovereigns, as heretical, because "the catholic church, to whose authority they were invariably attached, had not condemned it. This, "Richard Langhorne, a celebrated lawyer, declared "at his death, in the most clear and precise terms, "as well as lord Stafford and one cannot doubt, "that these great men had these sentiments in the "bottom of their hearts, since on the instant when
they were ready to receive the crown of martyr"dom, they declared them publicly.
"The bull of Paul the third against Henry the
eighth, and that of Pius the fifth against Eliza
beth, were waste paper, despised by the heretics,
"and, in truth, by the catholics, as far as their "decisions affected the temporal rights of the so"vereigns. Treaties, alliances, commerce, every thing, in a word, went on as before; and the popes knew this would happen still, the court "of Rome, though aware of the inutility of its "decrees, would publish them, with the view of acquiring a chimerical title. The heretics took "advantage of them, and the catholics suffered "much by them, as occasion was taken from the "bulls to persecute the catholics, not as catholics, "but as public enemies,-as men, ever disposed, "when the pope should order, to revolt against "the king.
"Let catholic divines, to the utmost of "their power, excuse the popes, as we have done "or endeavoured to do: but, if they are compelled "to blame some, who, in other respects, have la"boured with success for the clergy, and the ad
vantage of the church, but who unfortunately "have, though with good intentions, engaged in "affairs, that did not regard them, let them not "believe that, in allowing faults, they dishonour "the holy see; let them believe, that all this "turns to the glory of the church, and of God who protects her."
Final Division of Opinion on the Oath.
STILL, at the period to which the present pages relate, the discussion of the oath was continued. By several, both of the clergy and the laity, it was
taken. “ Some priests, and some of the religious,”
, says cardinal Bentivoglio, in the extract already cited from the Answer to the Memoirs of Panzani, “ admitted the oath ; and, deviating still more from “ the right path, endeavoured to maintain that it “ was not repugnant to the catholic faith.
But, “ the number of these priests is very small; and “besides, they are the least zealous, and the least “ valued for learning and virtue. All the rest of “ the clergy have shown the greatest steadiness in “ opposing the oath ; and the same must be said “ of all the regulars in general. Many of each
description, contemning a thousand dangers, " and even death itself, have publicly confuted it “with great strength of learning, and intrepidity “ of mind; and have thereby acquired singular “ merit with the whole church, and the highest veneration
the catholics of that kingdom.” But, it should not be unobserved, that cardinal Bentivoglio saw with ultramontane eyes; and would, therefore, be disposed to think unfavourably of all, who rejected the papal pretension to temporal power.
A letter written, in 1681, by the chapter of the English catholic clergy to cardinal Howard, stated that, " more of the nobility, gentry, and common
alty, had actually taken it, or seemed resolved “ to take it :” and desired his eminence to oppose an attempt, then supposed to be making at Rome, to procure a censure of those who took it. His opposition succeeded, and no such censure found its way to England.
It is observable, that, when James the second was duke of York, he himself took the oath of allegiance, and intimated an intention of enforcing it when he should be king.
L. 4. Complete Rejection (now adopted by the universal Catholic
Church,)-of the Pope's Deposing Power, in the Declaration of the Gallican Church, in 1682: But,
Magna est veritas, et prævalebit. SEVENTY-FIVE years after the date of the last of the briefs of Paul the fifth, the assembly of the Gallican clergy, in 1682, subscribed their celebrated declaration respecting the civil and temporal powers.--It consists of four articles :By the first, they resolved, that " the power,
, « which Jesus Christ had given to St. Peter, and 65 his successors, related only to spiritual things, " and to those which concern salvation, and not “ to things civil and temporal ; so that, in tempo“rals, kings and princes are not subject to the “ ecclesiastical powers; and cannot, directly or “ indirectly, be deposed by the power of the keys, “ or their subjects discharged by it, from the obe“dience which they owe to their sovereigns, or “ from the oaths of allegiance*.”
* The second article declares, that the plenitude of the power, which resides in the holy see and the successors of St. Peter, in respect to spiritual concerns, does not derogate from what the council of Constance has defined, in its fourth and fifth sessions, on the superior authority of general councils.
The three other articles are contested by some catholic divines : but, from the first, there is not
The third article declares, that the exercise of the apostolical power of the holy see should be governed by the canons, which have been enacted by the spirit of God, and are respected by all the christian world; and that the rules, customs, and usages, received by the kingdom and churches of France, and approved by the holy see, should be inviolably preserved.
The fourth article declares, that in questions of faith, the pope has the principal authority, and that his decisions extend over the universal church, and each church in particular; but that, unless they have the consent of the church, they are not irreformable.
These articles passed unanimously, and the monarch was desired to publish them throughout his kingdom. He immediately issued an edict, by which he ordered the declaration to be registered by all the parliaments, bailiwicks, stewartries, universities, and faculties of divinity and canon law, within his dominions. The edict forbad all persons, secular or regu. lar, to write or teach any thing contrary to the declaration; and that no person should be appointed professor of theology, who did not previously engage to teach no other doctrine.
The declaration met with little opposition in France*: out of France, the case was very different, and an interesting and instructive narrative might be framed of the contests to which it gave rise: but the subject of these pages requires no more than a short mention of the part which Bossuet took in it. The most voluminous, by far, of the adversaries of the declaration, was Thomas Roccaberti, general of the Dominican friars, archbishop of Valentia, and inquisitor-general. He signalized his zeal against it by three folio volumes of his own composition; and by publishing, in twenty-one volumes, folio, with the title of Bibliotheca Maxima Pontifica, a compilation of all the tracts, which he could discover, in favour of the pontifical claims. Bossuet replied to the former of the works, by a treatise intituled, “ La France Orthodoxe; ou, Apologie de “ l'Ecole de Paris, et le Clergé de France, contre plusieurs
* The reader will see, in c. lxxv, s. 8. of these Memoirs, that it was universaliy signed by the jesuits in France.