« PreviousContinue »
“ And whereas the spiritual faculties that we have hi- any similar therto communicated to others have beengenerally granted authority by us on the grounds of reports or testimonials from
on others some third party; we further grant and communicate to being now you the power, if you shall find any, and whomsoever you to be supershall find, among the persons to whom such faculties seded at his have been granted, less adapted for the exercise of such
pleasure. faculties at all, or in such ample degree, or abusing the faculties granted them, in such cases to deprive, restrain, or suspend, the parties concerned, and to communicate the same to persons whom you may find suitable for hav. ing such faculties committed to their charge, and who have not received them from us, or from other legitimate authority and power, according as you shall judge expedient in the Lord for the Salvation of souls.
“ And in general, we grant you the power of regulat. The extent ing other matters all and singular, that any other vicars of Roth's and procurators general, and administrators in matters authority in
his new of of jurisdiction, from right or usage have been accustomed, and are permitted, to superintend, even should they be such as might require a more special mandate than is expressed in these presents for their execution, settlement, exercise, or procuration.
“In testimony whereof we have with our own hand subscribed these presents, and caused our seal to be affixed thereto.
“Given at Rome in the Vatican Palace, in the year The date, 1609, on the Ides [the 13th] of June, Indiction VII. the and authorFifth year of the Pontificate of our most holy Father and ity of this
document. Lord in Christ, Paul the Fifth, now by divine Providence pope.
“PETER LOMBARD, Archbp. of Armagh,
“ Primate of the Kingdom of Ireland.
[place of the seal —)
“JOHN GAY, Secretary.”
ON THE DEPOSING POWER, AND ITS RESULTS IN ENGLAND.
The mischievous consequences of Rome's claim to a
The penal transactions of the seventeenth century connected with the Oath of Allegiance, or rather with the opposition to it, and assertion
of the papal claim to a power of deposing secular power of de princes, engaged in by the adherents of the comprinces munion of Rome in those days, furnish to the
student of that portion of our history matter for consideration which cannot but be regarded with a painful interest: an interest not likely to be lessened from studying, in connection with such recitals, the remarkable and instructive com
ments on them supplied by eminent writers of exposed by
the same communion. No authors can condemn, the most re in stronger language than do those to whom we writers of refer, the injustice of that claim which was so her own prominently put forward, and so earnestly concommunion,
tended for, from the very commencement of the breach between England and Rome. This remark will be sufficiently illustrated in the subjoined extracts from two of those writers, the English Roman Catholic bishop Berrington, and the eminent Irish Dr. O'Conor, as well as from those given from another not less famous author of the same faith in Art. 72 inf. In order to under
stand the circumstances of the transaction alluded to in the extracts given in this article, it will be needful to go back a little, in order to direct our attention to some earlier proceedings in England and elsewhere connected with this subject.
From a reference to the bull of Fius V. containing the Excommunication &c. of Q. Eliza- sive bulls of beth, as given in Art. 45. sup. it will be seen Xill. are that that document, as addressed to the subjects issued in of Rome, was mandatory in its character, not of that of only freeing them from their allegiance, but Paul
commanding all and singular, nobles and peo- Queen Filiple, not to presume to obey her or her laws', on pain of being themselves involved in sentence of anathema. Gregory XIII. however, succeeding to the popedom in May, 1572, appears to have considered that the continuance and enforcement of an order so peremptory would endanger his authority; and he therefore issued an explanatory bull, * declaring that this language of the Excommunication should be so understood as that the same should always bind the queen and the the heretics, but that it should by no means bind the Catholics, as matters then stood or were ; only thereafter it should bind them, when the public execution of that bull may be had or made.” In other words, the effect of the bull of
• Mr. Butler, Historical Memoirs, i. 196. Phelan's Policy, 136.
Pius was to be in a good measure suspended, but only until such time as the Court of Rome should have power to enforce its execution. The Spanish Armada, upon which the Roman government chiefly depended for the effecting of this object, was not yet equipped, and in the mean time domestic treason would have been easily crushed in England. But when the Armada was ready for sea, a fresh bull was issued, restoring
that of Pius to its full force once more. The Arma- On the failure of the Armada, the queen, as a da gonc, the Romish means of checking the treasonable sentiments priests in
propagated among the Romish priesthood in ordered, by England, addressed to them a special proclamaroyal pro tion, which after acknowledging the distinctions to make an observable between different classes of them in 1edgement regard to loyalty and good order, proceeded to
enjoin, that all should quit the realm “except giance,
such as before a member of the privy council, or a bishop, or the president of Wales, should acknowledge allegiance and duty to her:" with these latter she declared that she would then take such further order as should be thought most fit and convenient.” But of the entire num
ber in England at the time, thirteen only thought Thirteen fit to avail themselves of this occasion for expressobey :
ing their sentiments of loyalty to her majesty.
By these individuals a paper was presented to the Privy Council, entitled “A Protestation
of Allegiance," in which they profess to hold her majesty as rightful sovereign of the realm, with as full authority as any of her predecessors, or other Christian prince elsewhere was ever lawfully possessed of; and themselves bound to obey her as much as any Protestants; and that this was so plain a duty from the Word of God, that no authority, cause, or pretence, could ever on any occasion justify them in disobeying her in temporal and civil matters. And that even if the pope were to excommunicate all her subjects that would not join in plots and invasions against her, occasioned by excommunications denounced against her, they should still consider themselves bound in conscience to disobey such censures and abide faithful to the queen. At the same time, they express the highest regard for their supreme spiritual pastor, the bishop of Rome, as the successor of St. Peter, &c. “ For,” say they, “ as we are most ready to spend our blood in the defence of her majesty and our country, so we will rather lose our lives than infringe the lawful authority of Christ's Catholic Church.”
This Protestation was well received by the which elicits Privy Council, and also approved by the queen. on their proIt likewise occasioned much general discussion ceeding among the members, lay and clerical, of the Ro- University mish Communion in England ; in consequence of of Louvain, which an application was made to the University VOL. III.