beasts, live unmolested, though debarred of the privilege of becoming soldiers or mayor's serjeants. The respective religions of the two kingdoms are now what they were then: whence proceeds this happy transition from persecution to lenity? Not from the Christian religion, whose spirit never changes, but from the different characters of its professors. The French Huguenots are now under Lewis XVI. They have been formerly under the sway of a Medicis. Formerly under the Stuarts, we are now governed by the Brunswics. Our magistrates are Protestants, but quite different from those who, instead of redressing grievances, used to foment the rebellion, with a view of enriching themselves by the spoils of oppression. In fine, Sir, let us divest ourselves of passion: religion will never arm our hand with theponiard. ART. V. I further declare, that it is no article of my faith, and that I do renounce, reject, and abjure the opinion, that princes excommunicated by the Pope and council, or by any au. thority of the see of Rome, or by any authority whatsoever, may be deposed or murdered by their subjects, or 'by any person whatsoever: and I do promise, that I will 'not hold, maintain, or abet any such opinion, or any other opinion, contrary to what is expressed in this decla'ration.' This article of the test requires a peculiar discussion: as the Pope's deposing power has caused such confusion in Europe, during the great struggles between the priesthood and empire, and is often an engine employed in parliament, to defeat the good intentions of the members, who, from principles of humanity and zeal for the prosperity of the kingdom, endeavour to remove the heavy yoke of penal restraints. The question is-Whether the deposing power be an article of the Catholic faith? For my heart startles and my hand recoils at the words, murdered by their subjects.' As if the principles of any sect of Christians authorized a gloomy ruffian to plunge the dagger in the royal breast. To deter mine the question, let us enquire, first, into the doctrine of the Church concerning the deposing power: secondly, into its origin. Resistance to princes has been an early charge against the Church and from her infancy down to this day, her pastors and doctors have repelled the calumny. An imputed doctrine then, yet still disclaimed, can never be an article of her faith. It is true that the concessions of princes to the Apostolic see an excessive veneration for the first Pastor of the Church-flattery in some-rash zeal in others--have raised up Bellarmin and some other champions for the deposing power, beyond the Alps. But the deviations of some individuals should be considered as spots in the sun, or the misconduct of a citizen whose fault should not be charged upon a large community. The apologists of the deposing power (now grown obsolete) are few and their doctrine must either stand or fall with the evidence or inevidence of their arguments, unsupported by authority, and contradicted by the practice and doctrine of all ages and nations. In the Apostles time, the Jews began to revolt, and sow the seeds of that rebellion which assembled the Roman eagles round their walls, and involved their nation in final destruction: their great pretence was-the seeming impropriety of the subjection of God's chosen people to a heathen dominion and, as the first converts sprung from the Jews, the Heathens confounded together Jews and Christians, and charged them alike with the doctrine of resistance to subordination and government. The great St. Paul vindicates the Christians, and lays down for a general rule, 'that every 'soul must be subject to higher powers; that there is no 'power but from God, and, that those who resist receive damnation unto themselves.'* Should any one reply, that, the church has more power over Christian kings, as 'by baptism they become her children,' it can be easily answered, that dominion and temporal power are founded in free-will and the laws of nations, but not conferred nor taken away by a spiritual regeneration: and Bellarmin himself is forced to acknowledge, that 'the Gospel deprives no man of * Romans, xiii. 6 his right and dominion, but gets him a new right to an eternal kingdom."* 6 The apostolical constitutions, whether genuine or spurious, are certainly of an ancient date, and give us great insight into the discipline of the primitive times. They command "to fear the king as God's institution and ordinance.'t The 'Christians worship God only,' says St. Justin Martyr, they are subject to the emperors in all things else.' By whose command men are born,' says St. Irenæus, by his 'commands also are kings ordained, as suits the circum'stances of those over whom they are set: some for the ⚫ amendment and benefit of their subjects; and some for 'fear and punishment; for reproof and contempt as the people shall have deserved; the just judgment of God reaching equally to all.' Tertullian, St. Ambrose, St. Augustine, St. Gregory Nyssen, Optatus Milevitanus, in fine, all the fathers declare, that kings have none above them, but God alone, who made them kings; that God bestows the heavenly felicity on the godly only, but the kingdoms of the earth on both godly and ungodly and that to him alone, the cruel Marius and the gracious • Cæsar, Augustus, the best of princes, Nero, one of the worst, Constantine the Christian, and Julian, the apostate, are equally indebted for their authority and 'power.' 6 If from the fathers you continue the long chain of venerable antiquity through the successive reigns of the Roman pontiffs, you will find the deposing power assumed by few; the pre-eminence of kings, and their dependence on God alone, asserted by the mildest and most learned, and those by far the greatest number. St. Gregory the Great not only disclaims any temporal power over kings, but even acknowledges himself their subject. The Emperor insists on the publication of a law. The Pope writes to him: 'I being subject to your command, have caused the law to be sent into several parts, and be 'cause the law agrees not with God omnipotent, I have by letter informed my serene lord. Wherefore I have in both Bellarmin. de Rom. Pontif. lib! v. e. 3. L done what I ought, obeyed the Emperor, and not con•cealed what I thought for God.' Eleutherius, Anastasius 2, Galasius, Symmachus, Gregory 2, Leo 4, Nicholas 3, Adrian 1, Nicholas 2, John 8, and Celestin 3, call the king God's vicar on earth: forbid the priest to usurp the regal dignity; and confine the power of the Church to the dispensation of divine, that of the prince to the administration of temporal things.' 1 If you consult cardinals, who have heightened the glory of their purple by their learning and piety, you will meet with numerous and steady assertors of regal independence. I pre-suppose what is known even to the vulgar,' says Cardinal Cusanus, that the imperial celsitude is independent of the sacerdotal power, having an immediate dependence ' on God.* Between the kingdom and priesthood, the proper offices of each are distinct, that the king may make • use of the arms of the world, and the priest be girt with the sword of the spirit, which is the word of God,' says Cardinal Damianus. In answer to some objections drawn from the conduct of a Pope, regular and exemplary in other respects, but too ready to interfere in temporal concerns, this great man replies: I say what I think, that neither Peter obtained the apostolical principality, because he • denied Christ, nor David deserved the oracle of prophecy, • because he defiled another man's bed.' As much as to say, that this Pope committed a fault, which he afterwards cancelled by repentance. If you still fear that the long-famed British throne should be overturned by syllogisms, or that the jars of schoolmen may silence the English cannon, (for you have nothing more to apprehend from the Pope) I can march to your aid a formidable army of scholastic divines, armed cap-a-pee in support of regal pre-eminence.--Navar, Durandus, Joan, Almain, Gerson, Victoria, Thom. Wald. Anton. de Roselli, Ægidius, Rom. Ambros. Catharinus, &c. &c. some of whom qualify the deposing power with the epithets of horrible and seditious and others style it downright madness. Add to the * Cus. 1. 3. Conc. c. 5. + Damianus, Lib. iv. Epist. 9. Paris, foregoing authorities, the Council of Constance in the year 1415. The declaration of the provincial congregation of the Jesuits at Ghent, in the year 1681, and that of the clergy of France in 1682; who declare that kings and princes by •God's ordinance are not subject in temporals to any ecclesiastical power, and that they cannot be deposed directly nor indirectly, by the authority of the keys of the Church, 'neither can their subjects be freed from fealty and obedience, nor absolved from their oath of allegiance.' 'Reges ergo et principes in temporalibus nulli ecclesiasticæ potestati Dei ordinatione subjici, neque authoritate clavium ecclesiæ "directe vel indirecte deponi, aut illorum subditos eximi a fide atque obedientia, ac præstito fidelitatis sacramento solvi 'posse: camque sententiam, ut verbo Dei, patrum traditioni, "et sanctorum exemplis consomam, omnino retinemdam."* Even in the canon law it is declared, that kings acknowledge no superior in temporals:' and, that appeals con'cerning temporals should not be brought to the Pope's tri'bunal.'t 6 6 In fine, the deposing power was so unknown in primitive times, that Bellarmin, who has ransacked the works of the fathers, and enriched himself with their spoils, in defending the doctrine of the Church, could cite none but St. Bernard in support of the novel doctrine of deposition: and yet this father, who mentions two swords in the Church, only means that in the Church are Christian princes invested with the right of the sword: For, in writing to Pope Eugenius, the saint uses these remarkable words: Earthly kingdoms have their judges, princes and kings. Why do you thrust your sickle into another man's harvest? St. Peter could not give 'what he had not: did he give dominion? It is the saying of the Lord in the gospel, the kings of the Gentiles have 'dominion over them, but you not so. It is plain dominion ' is forbid to apostles. Go now and dare usurp either domi"nion with the apostleship, or with the apostleship dominion. You are plainly forbid the one. If you will have both, you 'will lose both: you will be of the number of those of whom * Declaratio Cleri Gallicani, anno 1682; ↑ Cap. si duobus. Extra de appel. |