H)WERS OF THE POPE.



have ever been approved by your Church. Suarez
asks the question: " An Pontiftx ratione sue
spiritualis potestates, possit Christianos principes
non solum dirigere prae eiprendo, sed etiam cogere
puniendo, etiam usque ad regni privationem."t.
" Can the Pontiff, in virtue of his spiritual authority,
not merely advise and direct Christian princes, but
also coerce them by punfltlment, even to the etenw
of depiegzng th/tem of regal power, if weed bell"
This question he answers in the affirmative. And
Baronius, whose authority is eminent at Rome,
says: " All who take from the See of St. Peter one
of the two swords, and allow only the spiritual, are
branded for heretics." What, reverend sir, do you
think of this statement of Baronius I His authority
as a historian, you acknowledge. His testimony to
a fact, corroborated by a hundred other authentic
testimonies, no one can doubt. You say that the
temporal power of the Pope is not " the clerly and
officially announced doctrine " of your Church.
That though out of the states of the Church he has
great power, it is not temporal, but spiritual. This
you say, is the doctrine of the Church. BaroniUs
says: All who would allow the Pope " only
the pirihtual 8word," or power, " ARE BIAWDED
uxErios." It was so then. It is so yet. To deny
the temporal power was, and is. heretical. To
maintain it, therefore, was, and is, " the clearly and
officially announced doctrine " of the Church. And,



 I use the word papist as Roman Catholic theologians
them'elves use it, whei dwelling )n the papal power.
tTreitise De Primuatie. Lih. iii, cap. 21.



149