« ForrigeFortsæt »
that the latter contains some reprehensible passages, particularly on the power of the people to dethrone
“some passages of Mr. Courtenay's book against the oath of allegiance.
« In his fourth argument: I. “ • That it is a matter of faith believed by all catholics, " that the pope, by his spiritual authority, can authorize “ princes to make war, invade, and depose for spiritual ends.'
“ In his last argument : That the
hath an undoubted power to depose both “spiritual and temporal.
“ • That, whatsoever power the pope hath to deprive princes “ of their kingdoms and titles, or by authorizing of war for “cause of religion ;' (for he supposeth the only cause of re
ligion to be a sufficient title of war ;) · he hath much more “ to deprive them of their subjects' allegiance.
"From whence it clearly followeth, that, if the pope,' by “ whom he saith all catholics are to be governed in matters of “ conscience and religion, should depose the king, authorize
princes to invade him, ab solve his subjects from their allegiance, for cause of religion, and command them not to obey, but to take
part with those princes, if he will not de“sist to put in execution the penal laws 'made against ca“ tholics, they are bound, or at leastwise may lawfully rebel “ against him.'—Which to say, is, in my judgment, high trea" son ; and to persuade others, by public writings, to believe “ the same, is plain sedition.
" In his ninth argument : II. “ " That the temporal commonwealth, in some cases of extremity, can deprive princes of their royal dignity for
temporal causes; and, that it hath the same power to take “ it away, which it had to give it, and to make it elective or “ successive, as it shall appear best, in case of extremity.'-“ Which assertion is, in my judgment, very dangerous.
the sovereign, and to alter the established succession, and, on this account, had indisposed the king against the catholics. To appease him, the friends of the catholics recommended that the
should open a conciliating correspondence with his majesty: “ Some attention,” they observed, “was due from the
pope to the English catholics, who had suf“ fered more for the authority of the Roman see, " than all the other faithful of the church; some “ attention also was due to the king, on account of " the veneration, which he professed for the pope. “ His holiness writes to the pagan monarchs in
“ In his third argument : III. “That no person, (nor the king himself, because he “ is not the law-maker, but the king and parliament,) can add
any exception against the general prohibition of the law:“ Which is not, at least, well expressed in the law by suffi“ cient words, to declare the intention thereof in that behalf; “and, that the king alone was not the law-maker, but the * king and parliament.'--Which quite overthroweth the king's “supreme judicial authority to interpret laws, and his sovereign prerogative power to make them.
“ In his second, eleventh, and seventh arguments : IV. “. That whosoever taketh the oath incurreth formal “ heresy, idolatry, and high treason.'—Whereby he also taxeth “the king of incurring formal heresy and idolatry, and coin“ manding high treason.'
V. “ • That his arguments have satisfied his majesty :' and it is a common bruit among catholics, and divers say, that they are unanswerable.”
“ In Mr. Preston's hand; and endorsed by Windebanck.” No person can be surprised at the king's indignation at this work, or at his displeasure with the pope for not having condemned it.
“ India, to the schismatic sovereigns of Abyssinia :
why should not his holiness address letters of
equal kindness to his Britannic majesty ? His “ holiness tolerates the rejection of his deposing
power by the faithful in France, why should he
not tolerate equally the rejection of it by the “ catholics of England ?
Why should he not write to his majesty a letter to the following effect ?— That his holiness by it " should return him thanks for the favour, which he “ had shewn to the catholics, and urge its continu
ance : that he should acknowledge his majesty to “ be the true and lawful sovereign of his kingdoms; " — he might observe that the known allegiance of “ the catholics to his majesty rendered their taking “ of the particular oath in question altogether un“ necessary ; he might lament the indiscreet pub“ lications, to which it had given rise, --and, as a “ further indication of his own wishes for concilia“ tion, he might suspend his own decree, and the “ decrees of his predecessor respecting the oath,
leaving it and all that regarded it to stand, as if " there had been no such decree.' “ Such,” says father Leander,“
“ are the suggestions of some of our best and most intelligent men : and, with all due respect, I beg leave to
suggest the propriety of a compliance with them. “ It is not unworthy of his holiness, to conciliate " and make advances to gain his son to him, in imi“ tation of his predecessor St. Gregory the great,
who, by kind letters and paternal soothings, in “ duced king Ethelbert to attend to the preaching
« of St. Augustine. Neither is our king unworthy s of this ; nor is he an heretic, though he be not “ hitherto fully instructed in some doctrines ; nor “ did he ever quit the bosom of the church; but, “ having yet had none but protestant teachers, he “ remains in that belief, in which he was educated,
devout worshipper of God, according to his “ measure of knowledge.”
Father Leander proceeds to mention the appointment of a bishop:
« From those,” he says, “whom I can depend, I find that doctor Smith, “the bishop of Chalcedon, is personally obnoxious “ to the king and the state, on account of his ex“ cessive officiousness, while he was in England;
on account also of some things he has done in
France, which have offended his majesty. I am “ also informed, that it would be unsafe to send s other bishops into England, with the power of “ external jurisdiction *; and that it will displease “ the king, his ministers, and, in a particular man
ner, the bishops of the establishment. And why “ should these be offended and irritated ?
“Add to this, that the appointment would be “ unwelcome to a great proportion of the English “ catholics : for, though many lay catholics, and “ almost all, who are directed by the secular clergy, “ desire episcopal government, still the greater
part of those, who are guided by the regulars, “ dread it, as likely to expose them to the perils
• By external jurisdiction, Leander means the power of enforcing obedience and punishing by censures.
“ and severities of the law. I know that the num“ ber of the latter, though less than that of the “ former, makes it imprudent to disregard them.”
In a letter, which he afterwards addressed to the pope *, father Leander deprecates the circulation in England of works, in which the authority of the see of Rome is immoderately extolled, and the opinions of some school divines upon it, raised into articles of faith ; he strenuously recommends that his holiness should prohibit, under the heaviest penalties, all future publications of that tendency. The same spirit of wisdom and conciliation
appears in a letter, which Leander addressed to cardinal Barberini T.-- After lamenting the heats and misconceptions which had taken place in respect to the oath, “ Permit me,” he says, “ most eminent “ lord, my patron and my protector! to speak freely, “ but without offence. What have ye effected by
following the counsels and opinions of those, who “ have recommended severe measures, and obtained, “ with so much exasperation of the monarch, the “ decrees prohibiting the oath ? The monarch and " his friends are in astonishment that doctrines are “ condemned here, which are allowed in the realm “ of France. What else have our nobility and
leading men gained by these decrees, than its “ being believed, that the doctrines, on which they “ are founded, countenanced the wicked men en
gaged in the gunpowder conspiracy, and excuse
• Cla. State Papers, vol. i. p. 170.