nakednesse although he cannot denie his errour yet doth hee not cast away all the Fig-leaues of couert and although hee cannot but yeeld yet will he seeme so to yeeld as onely vpon an Intreatie forsooth which indeede he doth vpon a Charge and Challenge and to be onely content to doe that which he doth by constraint and to haue condescended onely in the way of Indulgence which he doth thorow the euidence of his owne guiltinesse I suppose that Theophrastus did neuer shewe a more liuely Character and Picture of any vice then is this Character of a smooth and subtile Reckoner which is exemplified in this confession of M. Parsons who so acknowledgeth his most manifest errour as if hee did not or would not acknowledge it which maketh me to hold his Protestation to be lesse credible 34. His Protestation is that He then vnderstood the matter otherwise that is to say otherwise then he dooth now in his more Sober Reckoning which doubtlesse if he had bin then truely Sober he could not haue vnderstood otherwise as may be made euident by a like example of a Lawyer pleading in this manner The debt which your Clyent challengeth of the defendant is of two sorts the one is vpon Bils the other vpon Bonds I haue answered vnto all that you can challenge by vertue of Bils what haue you to say to the Bonds The Bonds you say were made vpon due considerations and before diuers competent witnesses whereunto I answere that the considerations are vnlawfull and the witnesses are insufficient and that which will discouer the inualidity of the Bonds most they are razed and interlined Thus the Pleader for the defendant Presently starteth vp a Lawyer for the contrary part and desireth to bee heard for the Plaintife My Lord saith he to the Iudge the last Pleader concerning the debts challenged by vertue of Bonds hath said thus What haue you to say for the Bonds as though nothing had beene said thereunto Did we not alleage that there were faire instruments that there were due considerations that there were sufficient witnesses c. What a notorious dissimulation and Hypocrisie was it then in him to conceale our alleadgements Or how can your Lordship suffer such a one to pleade in your presence His Aduersary standeth vp and replieth saying Your Lordship seeth the impudencie of this fellow for I haue both mentioned the Bonds the witnesses and considerations and haue particularly answered and disabled these his obiections In the end the peruerse wrangling Lawyer perceiuing his owne folly maketh the same Apologie for himselfe which M. Parsons hath done Well I am so equall and easie to be intreated in this matter or rather indulgent as I am contented to yeeld vnto your interpretation protesting sincerely that I vnderstood you in another meaning Would not such a protestation ioyned with such a confession mooue eyther laughter or indignation Such is the case betweene me and M. Parsons in euery degree and yet will he be thought to haue dealt sincerely SECT IX The ninth Charge touching the testimony of Holinshed 35. WHereas I related onely Holinshed to proue that there was not any Scruple of Religion obiected against Wyat in the Oration of Q. Mary M. Parsons to prooue me a falsificator leauing the Authour Holinshed put in his place M. Foxe and concludeth against me that The Minister lieth openly He now bestirreth himselfe in this case The summe of Mr. PARSONS his Reckoning THough the History of Holinshed doth relate the pretence of Wiat to haue been against the Queenes marriage concealing and dissembling the point of Religion in that place which else-where he confesseth as after shall be seene yet John Foxe a more auncient and authenticall Historiographer then he doth plainely set downe that together with the pretence of marriage the cause of Religion was also pretended c. And it cannot be presumed but that M. Morton had seene and read this yet durst affirme that there was no mention of Religion at all in Wiats pretence Which is the first lie The Reueiwe 36. Doe you see the falshood of this Reckoner he is charged to haue put vpon me the testimony of M. Fox as though I had cyted it contrary to his meaning which I did not indeed so much as mention And now at length perceiuing his own fraude to be laid open whereunto hee cannot answere one word he doth onely endeuour to bring me into his owne predicament of falsifying by another tricke so as if in reckoning he meant to play some stoppage of debt But I asked M. Parsons why he did so faithlesly and malitiously change Holinshed into Foxe he answereth iust nothing This is Soberly and quietly Reckoned Thus much for my charge against him Let vs heare what he hath now against me Mr. PARSONS his Reckoning AND the same M. Foxe also sheweth that in the Oration of Q. Mary that their pretence of mariage seemed to be but a Spanish Cloake to couer their pretended purpose against Religion And this testimony of M. Fox must needes haue beene knowne to M. Morton and consequently here is a second lie The Reuiew 37. Holinshed is a professed Historian and writ a large and determinate Storie of all memorable things which were done in the daies of Q. Mary and other Kings of England after her raigne but the subiect and matter of the Actes and Monuments written by M. Foxe is the passions and Martyrdomes of the faithful both of ancient and latter times not only in England but also in other Countries as for other matters of Historie he relateth them but obiter not professedly nor yet so copiously as Holinshed hath done Wherefore it is as great indiscretion in M. Parsons to challenge me to neglect Holinshed and in a point of History to take my Certificate from M. Foxe whom then I had not presuming that I must needes haue seene and read that sentence in him to drawe me thereby into suspition of a wilfull falshood wherein he hath giuen vs the perfect length of his owne foote because mala mens malus animus that is according to the English Prouerb As a man vseth himselfe so he museth and iudgeth of others For could any but a selfe-guilty minde censure another so peremptorily that he must needes haue seene a booke which might haue bin wanting and was not as I haue shewed so needefull to be seene But I leaue this to M. Parsons more sober consideration wherein it may be he will be contented to thinke that he hath done me an iniury What yet more Mr. PARSONS his Reckoning WHeras he saith that no Minister of the Gospel was brought in question as a Commotioner in that cause it is both false in it selfe and cautelously set downe for it being notorious that al Protestants in England did concur in the rebellion of the D. of Northumberland who can doubt but that in the second also of Wiat they had their hearts there although not
any authority ouer them and by Cardinall Allen and M. Parsons who taught that Priests may equiuocate before them because they be Tyrants In these the Answerer needed M. Parsons his helpe but it would not be belike he iudged that the Answerer for modcrating of matters had erred immoderatly 23 Furthermore he was directly noted to haue slandered an Author as though he had taught Subiects to fight against their Kings and was confuted by the words of the Author himselfe There followed his slanders against Caluin and Bezu and confoted from the confessions of them both He pursued Beza yet more extremly to make him guilty of the death of the Duke of Guize suborning Pultrot to kill him wherein he was confuted by the testimony of their owne Historian He obiected a Conuenticle held at Cabellion wherein he said it was decreed by Protestants that All the families of ancient houses and all ciuil gouernment should be taken out of the World where he was charged to shew his Authour or else to confesse his slander These foure grosse slanders are so many debts the debter Non est soluendo had nothing to pay therefore M. Parsons was loath to meddle with him for the discharge of his Reckoning 24 He staid not here but fell afresh vpon Luther making him say that Among Christians there is no Magistrate no Superiour which wicked falshood was expressely controlled by the contrary doctrine of Luther out of his Tom. 1. in Gen. c. 9. where he condemneth the Pope and his Clergy for shaking off the yoake of temporall gouernment But not contented with this he imposeth againe vpon Luther the cause of the losse of Belgrade and Rhodes by the hands of the Turke his entrance vpon Hungary together with the death of King Lodouick and Buda conquered citing for proofe thereof Munster and Pantaleon which points were examined his allegations were prooued falsifications and the cause of the ruine of Hungary and of Bohemia the 〈◊〉 of Rhodes together with a thousand such Euils was attributed vnto the Couetousnesse of the Pope of Rome by their owne Historians 25 Lastly he maketh Luther to be of the same opinion and practise of Rebellion with Muntzer which was proued to be an vgly falshood by their owne Authour Peter Frarer who confessed that Luther writ against that Muntzer and his Complices and exhorted all Christians to persecute those rebellious ones vnto death Could there be any fouler slanders than these or more plainly discouered Notwithstanding this Moderate Answerer hath behaued himselfe thus yet hath he been said by M. Parsons to haue acquitted himselfe learnedly But what shall I say but like Patron like Client Thus much for Omissions An Answer vnto M. PARSONS eight Chapter concerning the L. Coke §. VI. 26 M. Parsons directeth his eight chapter of his Reckoning only vnto my Lord Coke concerning the Municipall lawes of England which Argument he himselfe did before prosecute vnder the name os a Catholike Diuine wherein he seemeth to be so conuersant as if he had turned his Diuinitie into humane Policie yet peraduenture so vnskilfully that the verse of Nauita de ventis c. may be inuerted vpon him thus Nauita de terris de ventis narrat arator After a long intermission as he calleth it of his affaires by interlacing a Treatise against the Lord Coke whereunto he expecteth no Answer from me hee calleth againe vpon me in his next Chapter An Answer vnto M. PARSONS his ninth Chapter concerning the Fresh lies as helyingly calleth them and recapitulateth §. VII The summe of M. PARSONS his Reckoning IN this ninth chapter is layed together another choice number of new and fresh vntrueths of later date in the last Replie of M. Morton and albeit those that are to be touched in this chapter haue been for the most part handled and discussed before yet thaet they may be more effectually represented vnto the eye and memorie of the Reader by putting the principall of them together in a rancke c. The Reuiew 27 At the sirst reading of this inscription of a new chapter of new and fresh lies I thought that M. Parsons would haue brought in some new charges which haue not hitherto been mentioned but by his next words telling vs that These for the most part haue been handled before I do perceiue that his fresh criminations are stale and smell rancke both of 〈◊〉 by intituling twelue leaues New and fresh lies and also of plaine falshood by saying that they haue been handled but only for the most part for I see none at all now alleged which he hath not alreadie handled in his former Reckoning but yet with vnwashed hands and heart as my Answer hath particularly disclosed And now I make bold to call M. Parsons to a summary account of his owne charges A briefe Recapitulation of the manifolde frauds and falsities of M. PARSONS which haue been discouered in this Reckoning 28 Vpon the sight of his repetition of falshoods which he hath vntruly imputed vnto me I haue been prouoked to requite his iniurious dealing with a summarie recognition and recapitulation of the principall vntrueths which I haue truely layed vnto his charge and haue alreadie handled which now I need not touch but only point at according to the marginall Notes of this Encounter 29 The first booke cap. 2. one falshood cap. 4. another cap. 6. two cap 7. two cap. 8. two cap 10. foure cap. 12. fifteen and then many other in one and after that eleuen more cap. 13. six cap. 14. also eleuen Then in the second booke cap. 1. many in one and againe three more cap. 2. seuen cap. 3. foure cap. 4. two cap. 5. diuers in obiecting heapes offalshoods besides his manifold guiles and frauds and ridiculous vanities wherewith almost euery page is bespangled which might make vp as many moe notes of insinceritie if I would but vse M. Parsons his art of Reckoning But the former kinde which haue been pointed at being both so many and so manifest vntrueths may ferue for M. Parsons his conuiction for I may well spare the confession of their owne Priest who notifieth M. Parsons how prone he is to forge and falsifie CHAP. VIII Conteining an Answer vnto M. Parsons his tenth chapter §. I. M. PARSONS his Reckoning THe tenth and last Chapter conteineth his new challenges protestations and vaunts wherein hee hath inwrapped himselfe in the bands of further absurdities The Reuiew 1 THe particulars of this last part of your Reckoning are not of any such nature that they may require any large Discourse I will therefore be briefe taking them as I finde them distinguished into matters which more specially concerne me and your selfe First of the first The summe of M. PARSONS his Reckoning He protesteth for his owne sinceritie and diligence in reuiewing his books yet is forced to confesse in his owne defence sometime that he did not see the Authour
dealings of others yet It cannot be denied saith he but that Bellarmine by following Sanders and others rashly hath not a little erred in three points of his defence of the Popes temporall authority and thereupon could not But maruell as he himselfe saith that men who are for their Learning so famous doe so negligently set downe their iudgements in writing as though they had not read the Authours which they commend or had not understood them at all or else had 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 their meaning which fault is frequent in this age And among other errours of Bellarmine he obserueth him to follow Gratian in a singular corruption to wit whereas an auncient Councell decreed Can. 32. Ne Clericus quemquam praesumat apud secularem Iudicem Episcopo non permittente pulsare Gratian contrariwise deliuereth it thus Clericum msllus praesumat pulsare c. 17. These few faults are more then enough to haue beene discouered by their owne Authours out of one Controuersie of their Cardinall Bellarmine As for other notes of his contradictions whereof he is conuinceable I remit them vnto their proper place In the interim seeing that Card. Bellarm. who in Mr. Parsons his estimate is the most Syncere Author of all other Romanists hath beene thus deepely charged by their owne Doctors of so much insincerity our Reader may conceiue thereby how little confidence any may yeeld vnto their other lesse confiderate or conscionable Doctors I proceede and because the fellowshippe which Card. Bellarmine had with Card. Baronius will not permit them to be diuided I adde An Accusation made by the foresaid Marsilius against their Cardinall BARONIVS 18. Cardinall Bellarmine aduanceth Cardinal Baronius in this manner That most worthy and learned Baronius saith he doth demonstrate by most cleare euidences that there was neuer such 〈◊〉 graunted vnto Emperours for the electing of the Pope But I haue answered saith Marsilius that Baronius hath no authority in the Question of Immunities I haue heard that as he hath taken a liberty to mend the Fathers Canons and Historians so he will correct the Councels after his 〈◊〉 and for his owne purpose and to assume vnto himselfe a license hereunto which God forbid Certain it is he shall not be able to mend the text of S. Paul of Chrysostome of Thomas of S. Augustine and others so that we neede not to regard the nouelties of his illustrious Lordship Againe he saith that The answeres of Card. Baronius are not unlike meaning vnto the answeres of Card. Bellarmine who whilst he cannot finde an obiected argument able to be assoyled by History he saith that these wordes haue beene inserted into the bookes In breefe I will say no more saith he of Card. Baronius but that he is an Historian yet Liuing whose workes are suspected where he intreateth of the Immunity namely of the Clergie who when he wanteth other support doth dislike all Historiographers and when he admitteth any he singleth out the wordes which make for him but those which make against him he saith were inserted by others as it here happened in the story of Luitprandus whose booke hath beene the space of 700. yeares approued in the Church but hee reiecteth the authority both of this and of other Writers of his time Seeing therefore that his Annals or Chronicles haue not that estimation in the world as he supposed and that there is a booke which will come forth shortly intituled The Errors of Baronius wherein there are discouered more then twenty seuerall errours which he hath committed in denying this one most auncient Historie concerning Pope Iohn to wit Iohn 12. whom the godly Emperour Otho deposed I shall not neede to say more of his authority 19. Neyther shall I neede to adde any more to this which hath beene said because our Reckoner Mast. Parsons knoweth although we should not reckon by the strict rules of proportion but by the remisse principles of probability onely that if twenty errours may bee found in the compasse of three sheetes of paper set forth by Baronius then may we presume that many hundreth vntruths do lie lurking within his whole Annals which containe twelue huge volumes which in all probability may bewray some apparances of vniust dealings SECT IIII. The loose dealing of their Iesuit Boucher by the accusation of Barclaius their owne Romish Doctor 20. WHereas M. Boucher obiecteth the testimony of Bodine to proue that It is lawful for a priuate man to kill a lawfull King if he shall tyramize ouer his subiects M. Barclay aunswereth saying The Authour in the same Chapter doth plainely contradict you and the wordes themselues doe openly pronounce that you haue belyed his iudgement And after that he made the matter manifest by alleaging the Author at large he shutteth vp the point saying What a mischiefe meaneth this manner of handling Authours and so proceedeth on to vrge him to confesse eyther his wilfull falshood or else his rashnesse in giuing credite to other mens Notes In the next place he chargeth Boucher for alleaging the Supposititious and bastardly Tracts which are falsly fathered vpon Tho. Aquinas to wit the bookes de Regimine Principis which although they be vulgarly receiued as his yet are they fraught with such dotages and fooleries as if they were written to mooue laughter as Cuiacius hath said Finally not to diue any deeper into this puddle-water of falsities Barclay is offended with Boucher for bringing in the sentence of Sarisburiensis laymed and corrupted which saith Barclay you must say you haue deliuered from the relation of others or else you must needs loose your credite by the crime of forgery 21. And now may our Reader iudge whether M. Parsons haue not as I once said lauishly hazarded the credite of the chiefe Pillars of the Romish Church vpon a Triple falsitie as it were vpon a Trey-trippe euen by the confessions of their owne Doctors Something will be expected to be said concerning Gratian. SECT V. The Falshoods which are confessed to swarme in Gratian the auncient compiler of the Decrees of Popes Fathers and Councels 22. AFterwards the zeale which Mr. Parsons hath for the defence of the Romish Authors transported him to iustifie their Gratian also especially in one point wherin notwithstanding his guilt will appeare to bee most transparant But now in generall their owne Antonius Augustinus an Arch-bishop in Spaine hath lately written a booke professedly for the purging of Gratian whose faults he saith are Ità multa c. So many that they cannot be declared in one day many false inscriptions of Authors ascribing many words vnto Gregorie Ambrose and Augustine which are no where to be found or not in them producing also true Authors but yet so as oftentimes bringing in contrary sentences 23. Afterwards he proceedeth to vnfold many particular grosse and dangerous vntruths of Gratian the Compiler of the Decrees of Councels and Popes and of the Testimonies of Fathers
a worke which for diuers hundred yeeres was admitted for the publike directorie of the Doctors of the Romish Church 24. Heere heere had beene a large field of falsities for Mr. Parsons his pen to galloppe in and to play his Rhetoricall curuets if that his Holy itch as hee calleth such his desire to be meddling with Protestants had not mooued him rather to calumniate the manisest truthes of his Aduersaries then to acknowledge the Falsifications committed by the Principall Authors of his owne side If peraduenture these confessed corruptions in these their particular but yet publike and famous Bookes seeme not to our Reader sufficient to prooue Mr. Parsons his Distinctiue Note to be notoriously calumnious wee haue further to acquaint him with that which followeth SECT VI. A generall practise of fraud in the Romish Church according as it is confessed by their owne Doctors 25. THe generall practise of deceit which now commeth into our viewe is of two kinds the first is their professed abuse of Authors as is manifest both by corrupting of their Books also by peruerting their meanings For euidence whereof we haue concerning the former the confession of their forenamed Marsilius It is a matter known vnto all saith he that those things which were written in the behalfe of Lay Magistrates haue beene and still are razed out of the Councels Canons and Bookes of other Doctors yea out of the very Breuiaries and Missals insomuch as it may bee feared lest that in processe of time that vnlimited power of the Pope in temporall affaires will be established So that hee that will compare the Bookes that were written in the yeere 1530. or 1550. with the writings at this day whether they write of Councels or of other things be shall easily finde where the Vintage is So that it is a maruell that after this haruest we found any clusters of grapes for the defence of our prince Wherby in tract of time it will come to passe that none will giue credit vnto any writings and that the Church of God will be ouerthrowen Which I speake saith he vpon this occasion which is offered by the Lord Cardinall as also wishing very earnestly that bookes bee not depraued which I say with all humilitie and reuerence Marsilius pursueth him further saying It need not be maruelled why we cannot alledge many for this opinion he sheweth two reasons the first is Because this question is but new the second because if any write freely he is forthwith compelled to retract himself as it hapned to the Lord Cardinall Bellarmine himself or else such things are blotted out of their bookes or else threats are cast out insomuch that Sotus could say vpon the conclusion of this matter It becommeth a seruant to thinke much and say litle 26. Can there be any greater fraudulencie then this or in this fraude a more pernicious tyranny against either the liuing or the dead then thus to tye as it were cords vnto their tongues and compelling them to speake contrary to their meaning so farre sometimes as to chaunge visible into Inuisible Besides they doe further so professe to deale with Auncient Authors as either to suffer many errors so they call the opinions when they are obiected against them in dispute or to extenuate them or to excuse them or else by some newe deuised comment to denie them 27. The second kind of deceitfulnesse hath beene belike sensible ynough at Rome seeing that their owne learned Doctor Espensaeus was forced to complaine thereof When Pope Paulus 4. saith he did seriously affirme that hee intended to choose me into the order of Cardinals I doe religiously sweare that as often as I thought vpon the report of obteining the red Hat freely which others hunted after for money who were repulsed I giue immortall thanks vnto God that he suffered not I will not say so much good but so much euill to happen vnto me Quid facerem Romae mentirinescio What should I doe at Rome I cannot lie Now if Rome which will seeme to bee the Metropolis of all sanctitie become the Exchange of lying we may suspect that Mr. Parsons after his so long residence in that place may happily haue receiued some taint This wee may trie by the confession of his owne Romish Authors after that we haue first heard what he will say for himselfe SECT VII Mr. PARSONS his protestation of his own Integritie Master PARSONS Reckoning As for falsities they may proceede of diuers causes and in diuers degrees and with sundry circumstances of more or lesse fault so that there may be a falsitie without a falshood where of my meaning is not in this place but whosoeuer shall be found in a wilfull and witting falsitie or rather falshood that is knowen to be such by the vtterer I doe thinke it to abhorre so much from the nature it selfe of an honest and ciuill man as of what Religion so euer he be he will not commit it once much lesse thrice As for my selfe I stand confident that he will neuer be able to bring any such fraud against me much lesse thrice three The Reueiwe 28. Mr. Parsons hath truely expressed the Character of an honest man to wit that he doth alwayes abhorre all wilfull falshood and he will needs Canonize himselfe and be registred in the Calender of honest men But words are but as letters and deedes as seales so that if Mr. Parsons protestation bee contradicted by his conuersation then his writings whereof we are to speake in the Chapters following may be presumed to bee no truer then his other actions And if in his morall behauiour he be a true man then their twentie and eight Seminarie Priests were blacke Saints who in their Appeale made vnto Pope Clement the eight against the factions of the Iesuits speaking of Master Parsons note Patrem Robertum praecipuum c. that is Father Robert Parsons the chiefe Author of these factions And for a man Dissembling to forewarne our Messengers say they whom we sent vnto your Holinesse that they might escape the hands of them that layde watch to catch them when notwithstanding he was the principall plotter to haue them intrapped and who in taking their Examination appointed a Iesuite to write downe their Aunsweres but so as altering their words at his pleasure 29. This and much more to this effect was deliuered to the Pope against Mr. Parsons by a grand Inquest of their owne Priests in their ioynt Appeale vnto him with whom they account it a damnable sinne to lie or equiuocate The summe wherof one of their Priests in his Quodlibets hath expressed saying of Mr. Parsons that He is the abstract and quintessence of all coggeries and forgeries c. This is that worthy excellent that lies dissembles and equiuocates at euery word Notwithstanding I desire the good Reader that these imputations which are cast vpon him by his owne brotherhood may not any whit
that we be subiect lest that any might not performe this in loue but as of cōstraint he addeth Not for feare of wrath but for conscience sake that is not dissemblingly but dutifully in good conscience in loue of him that is God who commandeth subiection as in another place he commandeth seruants to obey their iniurious Masters but not with eye-seruice as onely pleasing men but as pleasing God If this kinde of subiection was challenged of Christians vnder Paganish Kings and heathenish Masters how could you but giue cause of iealousie vnto our kingdome by that your Title which will promise no more but that It is not impossible to liue in subiection In the end for want of better demonstration of your good intention in that Title you run to a similitude Mr. PARSONS his Reckoning ALthough this It is not Impossible doe containe but in generalitie yet doth it suppose all necessarie conditions that are to be required for performance As for example If a Noble woman should resolue to depart from her husband saying it is impossible for me and you to liue together the difference of our natures and conditions being considered and that her husband should answere againe It is not impossible doth he not aunswere sufficiently and to the pur pose For he vnderstandeth the other circumstances included If you beare your selfe like a wife haue respect to both our honours and the like The Reuciwe manifesting the absurditie of Master PARSONS his Similitude 4. Whereas the question is how a subiect should manifest the trueth of his loyaltie vnto his King Mr. Parsons giueth vs a Similitude how an Husband who is the Lord shall make faith of his behauiour vnto his wife who is the subiect This is an absurd elusion rather then an illustration changing the case by altering the Sex For an husband hath a libertie to make his equall conditions and the terme of possibilitie may become him but it is otherwise with a wife who standeth in the obligation of subiection to her husband 5. I propounded vnto Mr. Parsons a contrary similitude to wit If a wife to mitigate her husbands ielousie occasioned by her loose behauiour should seeke to satissie him by saying be cōtented good husband it is not impossible for me to become an honest woman hereafter whether her husband wold take this for a iust Mitigation This any one may know to be an agreeable and proportionable Similitude which Mr. Parsons hath not aunswered vnto but concealed that he might more liberally which by his leaue is a peece of fine craft call my assertion vaine and impertinent as followeth Mr. PARSONOS Reckoning VAine therefore is the cauillation of Mr. Morton saying that there is nothing else prooued but a possioilitie The Reueiwe 6. These words It is not impossible by true equipollency doe they signifie any more but It is possible and so è contra As for example he that should commend Mr. Parsons saying It is not impossible for him to write moderately saith no more according to the rule of equipollency but It is possible for him to write moderately I wish that Mr. Parsons had looked better to his booke of Modals before that he had made me this rawe Reckoning We now come to SECT II. The first Argument of the Impossibility of due subiection The charge against Mr. PARSONS 7. HE said that Christ together with the commission in spirituall affaires gaue vnto Peters successors a charge and ouersight of temporalities in like manner with authoritie to proceede against temporall Gouernours for defence and preseruation of his spirituall charge whether directly as commonly Canonists teach or indirectly as Diuines hold there is no difference but in the manner of speech for in the thing it selfe both parties doe agree Heere is an aduancing of a power in temporall affaires ouer a King which I thought could no more possibly consist with the Ciuill Oath of Allegeance in our land whereby all forraine Iurisdiction in such cases is excluded then can temporall Supremacie and no Supremacie Mr. PARSONS Reckoning for his discharge WHereto I aunswere that in beliefe and Doctrine they cannot be reconciled but in ciuill life and conuersation and practise of due temporall obedience they may be no lesse for any thing touching this point then if they were al of one Religion if such Make-bates as these would cease to set Sedition The Reueiwe 8. I haue written nothing for mouing but for remouing of Sedition which the Title of your Mitigation did but onely palliate and cloake as now in your aunswere you further bewray They may agree say you although not in Doctrine yet in conuersation If I shall replie and say that you will not agree with vs in the Doctrine concerning Ciuill Conuersation Ergo you will not agree with vs in Ciuill Conuersation can you possibly shape me any sensible aunswere For seeing it is your doctrine to excommunicate and roote out all Protestants as Heretickes whensoeuer there is an opportunitie to proccede against them by armes or otherwise Shall any looke for Grapes of Thornes or Figges of Thistles Can any expect a Ciuill practise from such vnciuill and brutish positions and doctrines SECT III. The second Reason of Impossibility and charge against Master Parsons 9. IT was demaunded how farre it pleased Mr. Parsons to extend the Papall power in temporall affaires against such as doe contradict his spirituall Iurisdiction He tolde vs that Two Protestant Prmces were excommunicated consured and molested by the Sea Apostolike Q. Elizabeth of England and K. Henrie then of Nauarre now of France the first of these two for the violent chaunge of Religion which she made in the Realme with depriuations and imprisouments of Catholicke Bishops Prelates and Clergie c. The other for feare he comming to the Crowne of France in that disposition wherein hee then was presumed to bee should attempt the like chaunge in that great kingdome c. These examples said I are both plaine and pregnant A Protestant Queene must be depriued for resisting the spirituall Iurisdiction of the Pope and a Protestant King must bee also deposed least peraduenture he may make any resistance Now we see that the same Papall authoritie is by the lawes of Greate Britaine as expressely excluded their Religion suppressed their Clergie exiled and Protestants Religion according to former proceedings continued All which doth argue as great an Impossibilitie of dutifull Subiection as it is for Hinderance and Sufferance Chaunge and Continuance of the same Religion to be matched and married together Thus then and now I am ready to take his Reckoning Mr. PARSONS his Reckoning His two next reasons of Impossibilitie are so obscurely and intricately set set downe as if he vnderstand them himselfe it is much in my opinion for as for me I see not I confesse what inference can be made out of them though I haue purused them ouer with much attention more then twice and the same I suppose the common Reader
probabilities may be in reason to perswade his Maiestie that his Catholique subiects would not liue quietly and confidently vnder him if they might be vsed as Subiects and haue that Princely and Fatherly protection from him which both lawes doe allow to free-borne subiects and they may hope and expect from his benignity where no personall or actual delict shal haue made them vnworthy thereof The Reuiew 19. If your Catholickes M. Parsons may be vsed as Subiects Let me entreate you for some few minutes of time to take vpon you the face of an ingenuous man and tel vs whether you thinke them to be vsed as Subiects or no It is likely you are of the same minde you were when you said that His Maiesties milde and sweete respect towards Catholikes at his first entrance was soone by arte of their enemies auerted long before the Conspiracie fell out for that not onely all the most cruell Statutes and penall lawes made by Q. Elizabeth were renued and confirmed before this with addition of others tending to no lesse rigour and acerbity but also the exaction of the same was put in practise with great seuerity Nor were mens goods and persons onely afflicted but the liues also of sundry taken away for cause of Religion before this Powder-Treason fell out But to proceed a little further in the narration of some points of heauie persecution which ensued soone after his Maiesties being in England much before the Powder-treason was attempted So you goe on reckoning vs your Pressures which you call Violence intollerable New angariation yea an huge Sea of Molestations and Exagitations One word more What I pray you do you thinke of the Powder-men who liued at libertie in great ryote They were halfe a score young Gentlemen put in despaire by apprehension of publique persecution without demerit of the persecuted Well then it is plaine that youacknowledg no Probability of quiet Subiection in your Catholiques to wards his Maiestie further then that they are vsed as Subiects but say you they are vexed with intollerable violence new angariations and persecutions without their demerit You neede say no more your Reader will easily vnderstand your conclusion which giueth vs a fare-wel vnto all voluntary subiection Thus we haue vnmasked M. Parsons that we might see his bare face 20. I willingly omit as friuolous his next descant vpon a Red-rose and a White for albeit there is Now no difference of Titles betweene the Red-rose and the White yet is there oddes betweene loyall subiection and treasonable Positions and practises which end in blood as redde as any Rose SICT. V. An Addition vnto the former Impossibilities 21. VNto the former Argument I added as an assistant your professed Couert of Mentall Reseruation vsed by you in your examinations for a cloake of much perfidiousnesse which worketh an Impossibility of discouery and consequently addeth vnto the former Impossibilities Mr. PARSONS his Reckoning concerning the priuiledge of Priests and their exemptions THat we may equiuocate before incompetent Iudges and that the Lay-Iudges in England are incompetent to examine Priests may be as well vsed for an argument to proue that Lay-men and Priests cannot liue together in Spaine and Italy and other Catholike countries for that there also Lay-men are incompetent Iudges in Clergie-mens causes and so are Clergy-men themselues if they haue no lawfull Iurisdiction or proceede not lawfully The Reuiew 22 Thus you answere only for iustification of your Priests we see by this the notable prerogatiue of a Romish Priest to wit whensoeuer he commeth to be examined before a Lay-Magistrate he is priuiledged to Equiuocate because Lay-Magistrates according to M. Parsons doctrine are unto them Iudges incompetent 23. But by what law M. Parsons can you pleade such an exemption by Diume law some of your side haue so taught but your more sober Authours dare confute them as we read in their Marsilius to wit The Exemption of Ecclesiasticall persons in temporall and criminall matters Medina rest q. 15. a most sound and Catholique Authour saith is not prescribed in any place of Scripture and concludeth that it is not by Diuine law Couarruvias lib. pract ca. 31. conclus 2. is of the same opinion who is also a solid and Catholique Authour Victoria also and Sotus consent thereunto and so did formerly meaning Bellarmine the L. Cardinall himselfe So he It must therefore follow that all such Exemption proceeded from humane indulgence and may vpon humane necessity be altered againe neither is that prerogatiue vniuersall therefore it may bee that M. Parsons when hee named Spaine and Italy saw some cause to pretermit Fraunce 24. Howsoeuer their case may be in other Countries yet the oddes betweene them and ours is farre different because the Romanist doe acknowledge a power spiritual in their Bishoppes and account them to be competent Iudges both to examine and also vpon iust cause to deliuer their Clerkes into the handes of secular Magistrates and so vnto execution according to the nature of their demerit but in England they hold both lay and spirituall Gouernours to bee in like cases altogether incompetent and therefore the Argument of Impossibilitie is more in England then it can bee eyther in Spaine or Italy yet this was the best shift that Mast. Parsons could make to confound two cases of England and Spaine which are no lesse different then England and Spaine CHAP. IIII. A briefe Discourse concerning Mentall Equiuocation proouing that M. PARSONS by one Grant hath ouerthrowne his defence of Mentall Reseruation SECT I. 1. MAster Parsons for the iustifying of Mental Equiuocation hath borrowed as he calleth it a Reason from the example of the Faxe which creature when he is in danger of hunters is taught by the instinct of nature to winde and turne to trip it backward and forward and all to deceiue the Hunters and to secure himselfe So saith hee may man vse the arte of Mentall Reseruation in some cases 2. This being M. Parsons his owne example he may not be offended with me if I intitle the discussing of this point The hunting of the Fox especially knowing that their owne Priest hath made bold to write thus against him If you can procure Charles Pagets booke saith hee against Father Parsons you shall finde the Foxe so vncased and left so naked of all honesty wisedome and iudgement in these points c. But first we will prepare our selues to the sport Mr. PARSONS his Reckoning SEe what ostentation and vaunt hee vsed at his first entrance as though he would do great matters indeed for thus he beginneth That P. R. hath flatly ouerthrowne his desence of Mentall Equiuocation which is made so euident as that no wit of man can possibly excuse him This you see is confidently spoken of himselfe and his wit but his Reader will finde as great want of wit and discretion in this bragge and in the Medium here chosen to
to alter the speech which was lawfull being spoken vnto the incompetent hearer such as was his seruant to be vnlawfull sinnefull and damnable when it was spoken to a Magistrate iustly examining him because the examinate is bound in conscience not to delude the Magistrate who is the Minister and Officiall of God in that businesse yet this difference of Competent and Incompetent doth not chaunge a true speech into a lie For there is a double kind of a true speech the first is direct the second indirect as is plaine in the former Verball Equiuocation of the Bull which being vnderstood of the naturall Bul is a truth because that word Bull in that sense agreed with the vnderstanding of the Speaker but yet an indirect truth because it accordeth not vnto the intention of the hearer So that that which Mr. Parsons calleth the principall difference consisting in being Bound or not Bound is nothing else but the singular fallacie of Mr. Parsons by confounding of two truths and by not distinguishing an indirect trueth from a lie 18. To make this yet more familiar vnto my Reader A boy in the Schoole who shot at a Hart which was in the Parke of a neighbour Knight is asked thereof by his schoole-fellow vnto whom he is not tyed in any bond of duetie to yeeld a direct aunswere and he aunswereth I shot not at the Knights heart meaning the heart which was in the Knights bodie which sense although it be not direct yet euen in the iudgement of Mr. Parsons it is true the same boy is asked the same question of his Schoolemaster who hath charge ouer him to instruct and correct him and with whom he is bound to vse no collusion and he aunswereth I shot not at the Knights Hart vsing the same indirect sense 〈◊〉 before Afterward the fact is discouered the Boy is whipped and that iustly but why Not because he spake lesse truely vnto his Schoolemaster then vnto his Schoolefellow but because he spake not more directly when he was challenged thereunto by the bond of duetie and obedience SECT IIII. Another Reason taken from Master PARSONS his Confession concerning the Clause of Reseruation 19. MAster Parsons is content to repeat my next Reason where I sayd That In mentall Equiuocation P. R. saith that the Clause of Reseruation mixed with the outward speech maketh but one proposition which is as true in the mind of the Speaker as if it were wholly deliuered in the outward speech As for example I am no Priest mixed with this clause conceiued in mind To tell it you is as true in the iudgement of P. R. as if it had beene without Reseruation fully expressed with the mouth saying I am no Priest to tell it you Now then Say P. R. for I meane to fetter you in your owne shacles the woman whē she said to S. Peter I haue sold it but for so much if she had reserued in her mind this clause To giue it vnto you either had it beene by vertue of Reseruation a truth or els notwithstanding that Reseruation it had been a lie If the clause of Reseruation might haue made it a truth then hath not P. R. said truth in concluding That no clause of Reseruation could sauc it from a lie If contrariwise the trick of Reseruation could not saue it frō a lie then doth not the reserued clause To tell it you being mixed with the outward speech I am no Priest make vp one true proposition and consequently it must be concluded of the Priestly Equiuocation as is heere by P. R. confessed of the womans viz. that no clause of Reseruation can saue her speech from a lie For if she had said vnto Saint Peter in plaine words I haue sold it but for so much to giue it in common or such like this euery one knoweth had beene a true speech yet the saying I sold it for so much with mentall Reseruation reseruing in her mind to giue it in common Or To tell it vnto you was notwithstanding this Reseruation euen by the iudgement of P. R. a flat lie Thus farre Mr. Parsons in repeating my argument which if he haue aunswered sufficiently then shall I conceiue better of his euill cause Mr. PARSONS his Reckoning for his owne discharge THis is his 〈◊〉 and greatest argument whereof as presently you shall heare he vaunteth exceedingly conquering me first in his margent writing there An 〈◊〉 conuiction of P. R. and then againe A plaine demonstration To say nothing of the fetters and shacles in the text it selfe And I haue thought good to lay foorth his whole Discourse as it lieth together in his booke that hereby you may see with what manner of substance he filleth vp Paper and what sort of shacles he hath to fetter men withall which are as strong as the nets of cobwebs for that in this place his whole Discourse and argument is founded vpon a manifest false ground and principle to wit vpon the meere mistaking or fond supposition that the two aunsweres of the Priest and the Woman viz. I am no Priest with obligation to tell it vnto you And I sold it for no more with obligation to giue vnto you are of equall falsitie which we still denie and he cannot proue and yet himselfe doth often heere repeat that I do hold the aunswere of the Priest to be true and hers to be false for that his was made to an incompetent Iudge and hers to a competent so as she was bound to haue answered directly vnto Saint Peters meaning Which being so what needed all this long obscure speech of Mr. Morton which might haue bene spoken in foure lines for I grant that the aunsweres of the Priest and the Woman do make each of them in themselues being mixt with your Reseruation a whole perfect proposition as if they had bene vttered without Reseruation The Reueiwe 20. You are exceeding tedious M. Parsons when will you come to the aunswere of the former argument which was grounded vpon your owne Grants The first was this that The clause of Reseruation mixed with the outward words doth make a whole perfect proposition or speech which agreeing with the minde of the Speaker is as true said you as if it were wholly vttered with the mouth Now the womans supposed Mentall Equiuocation had beene a true speech if it had beene wholly vttered with the mouth thus Sir I sold it but for so much to deliuer in common c. which being concealed by a Mentall Reseruation Mr. Parsons hath called a Lie Whereupon I haue inferred and that necessarily that the Mixture of the Clause of Reseruation with an Outward speech doth not of it selfe make the speech true and consequently their doctrine of Equiuocation and Mentall Reseruation is not onely a lying Doctrine but also a Doctrine oflying By this time we haue him in such straits that he must either denie his answere of Obligation or els condemne his former position of Reseruation I
purpose 11. Againe a third sort to wit Platina Blondus and Sabellicus granting that the Synode Francford condemned the Synode which the Greekes call the seuenth generall one not for decreeing that Images shuld be adored but that they should be remooued which is flat contrary to the words of the Synode of Franckford as is acknowledged by their Iesuite Vasquez Quam pro adorandis imaginibus fecerunt which was made for adoring of Images Neuerthelesse Master Parsons will not thinke this to be any thing to the purpose 12. Their last refuge is this that The Synode of Francford was deceiued in thinking that the Synode of Nice decreed any vnlawfull worship of Images and so did erre in condemning it Which last aunswere serued me to make a demaund which I am now to reckon for with Mr. Parsons Mr. PARSONS his Reckoning ANd Mr. Morten doth fondry insult when he biddeth his Aduersarie P. R. to tell him in good earnest if the Fathers of the Counsell of Francford iudging that second Councell of Nice confirmed by the Pope did erre in defending the vse of Images did they erre in faith or no Whereunto I aunswere c. The Reueiwe 13. Soft Sir whereunto will you aunswere I propounded a full Argument adding that If the Councell of Francford did erre in faith in condemning the other of Nice then your Bellarmine and Baronius haue deceiued vs who sayd that it erred but in fact but if it erred not in faith when it condemned that Councell which the Pope consirmed for the worship of Images then to cōdemne the definition of the Pope for the worship of Images is no error of Faith This your simplicitie would not expresse but make an abrupt answere saying that it was an error of Fact not of Faith Let vs heare it Mr. PARSONS his Reckoning THe Fathers of the Councell of Francsord erred in Fact and not in Faith being informed that the Councell of Nice had determined that which it did not to wit that diuine honour was giuen vnto Images for if they had beene informed of the truth they would not haue contradicted it as neither if they had knowen that the Rope had confirmed it would they haue doubted of the authoritie thereof The Reueiwe 14. Then belike the Fathers of the Councell of Francford did not know that Pope Adrian had confirmed the second Councell of Nice Master PARSONS his Reckoning IT is a witting error in M. Morton to say that they of Francford knew that the Councell of Nice was confirmed by the Pope But Mr. Morton would deceiue vs by craft and subtiltie The Reueiwe 15. Except that Master Parsons had prostituted his conscience vnto iniurious dealing hee would neuer against his perfect knowledge haue thus accused me of Witting craft and deceit For first hee was not ignorant that Adrian the Pope did confirme the second Councell of Nice as their Iesuite Vasquez did witnesse Secondly he saw me further alleadge out of the same Iesuite that The Councel of Francford could not be ignorant of the decree of the second Councell of Nice because that the Legates of Pope Adrian were present in that Councell as all Histories doe write saith he and the subscrptions doe demonstrate These two viz. that Pope Adrian did confirme the second Councell of Nice in the Decree of Images And then this The Councell of Francford could not be ignorant of the confirmation therof being both put together doe inferre that The Councell of Francford could not be ignorant that the Pope had confirmed the Decree of the second Councell of Nice How then could hee call such proofes which are taken out of their owne Authors and layd so visibly before his eyes a witting error craft and deceit whereunto although I shall not answere as the Archangell did vnto the Diuell saying The Lord rebuke thee yet must he giue me leaue to say God forgiue thee for I pointed directly in my Preamble vnto this place of Vasquez which Mr. Parsons subtilly concealeth and according to his woont faceth out the matter with a false imputation of falsehood yet least he might seeme to haue erred without reason hee vseth an Argument M. PARSONS his Reckoning FOr the Caroline Bookes themselues euen as they are set out by the Centuriators doe vse that for a principall argument on the behalfe of the Councell of Francford to impugne the Nicene Councell for that they supposed that the said Nīcene Councel was not confirmed by Adrian the Pope wherein they were deceiued by false information I meane those of Francford but Mr. Morton would deceiue vs by craft and subtiltie The Reuiewe 16. He talketh of craft telling vs of the Caroline Bookes mentioned by the Centurists how they Supposed that the second Councell of Nice was not confirmed by Adrian without quoting the direct place wherin he hath committed as great a falshood as may serue to giue him his owne true denomination For if we shall consult with the Centurists themselues they will tell vs that Pope Adrian did rule by his Legates in the second Councell of Nice which he afterward did approue whereunto the Legates of the Pope doe require a subscription but the Decree goeth against the sentence of Pope Adrian and concluded that the adoration of Images is wicked and condemned that Councell which Pope Adrian held to be vniuersall And more then to that purpose I doe not finde I proceede SECT III. The Contradictory aunsweres of Romish writers about the Epistle of Epiphanius against Images 17. THe matter is whether Epiphanius did not condemne the worship of Images Their contradictory aunsweres are many and memorable Mr. PARSONS his Reckoning IT is to be noted as before that whatsoeuer difference of opinions there be or may be among Catholicke Writers of Controuersie about the true meaning of Saint Epiphanius in this place yet is it nothing at all to Mr. Mortons purpose who is bound to proue that they wrote against their owne knowledge and conscience which I suppose were hard to do for that euery man must haue bin presumed to haue written according as his iudgement gaue him and consequently that all this which M. Morton hath so studiously gathered together is nihi ' ad rhom bum nothing to the purpose and therfore I could not but laugh when I read his conclusion of this Instance saying That if P. R. shall desire 500. instances of this kind I bind my selfe saith he vnto him by a faithfull protestation which I beleeue yea if it were 5000. in a weekes warning The Reuiew 18. It is well that your Church is so richly fraught with such Contradictions which if they seeme not vnto you very ougly why did you conceale them The Epistle of Epiphanius is obiected by Protestants wherein hee is said to haue seene hanging in Church an Image as it were of Christ or of some Saint and to haue taken and rent it as being an abuse contrary vnto the authority
particularly examined discussed and prooued to haue beene so many inexcusable slaunders euen in that Booke of Apologie whereof Master Parsons himselfe hath taken particular notice but more fully and exactly in my lass Catholicke Appeale the fift Booke whereof is spent in the confutation of these and otherslaunders which our Romish Aduersaries haue falsly obiected against Caluine and other Protestants Thus we see that his Ponderous Consideration being put into the ballance is found to weigh no more then doth a vaine and fantasticall conceit CHAP. IX Concerning three other corrupted Allegations of Cardinall Bellarmine SECT I. The charge concerning Saint Cyprian in the poynt of Tradition 1. SAint Cyprian stood vpon written Tradition Bellarmine said that he did it in defending an error Therfore no maruaile saith he though Cyprian erred in so reasonning for the which cause Saint Augustine doth worthily refute him In which place S. Augustine seemeth to bee so farre from confuting him for reasoning so that he saith That which Cyprian warneth vs to runne vnto the fountaine that is vnto the Traditions of the Apostles from thence to deriue a Conduict to our times that is chiefly and doubtlesse to be performed The summe of Mr. PARSONS his Reckoning THis was no good forme of arguing in him but in this necessitie for defending this error for first Saint Augustine doth of purpose refute the same and Saint Cyprian doth elsewhere yeeld and allow the vnwritten Traditions I graunt that S. Cyprian saith as Saint Augustine also doth that when any Tradition or Doctrine can bee clearely shewed out of Scripture Optimum est It is questionlesse the best way of all But when there is no Scripture for proofe of it then saith S Augustine Consuetudo illa c. that is The custom which was opposed against Cyprian must be beleeued to haue proceeded from the Apostles as many things else which the Vniuersall Church doth hold and therefore are well beleeued to haue beene commaunded by the Apostles albeit they are not found written The Reueiwe 2. What Saint Augustines iudgement was concerning the sufficiencie of Scripture as it is defended by the Protestants he hath often vnfolded saying that Amongst all things which are contained plainly in Scripture all those things may be found which concerne faith and manners of life And againe Whensoeuer there is a case of greatest difficultie and we haue no cleere proofes of Scriptures for our conclusions so long must mans presumption keepe silence And euen of this question of not rebaptizing he doth refute it out of Scriptures By as he speaketh certaine proofes and not by coniectures as Bellarmine calleth them before the definition of a Councell And heere also although Bellarmine be in part iustifiable yet looke vnto the sentence of Cyprian and you shall find his reasoning negatiuely from Scripture which is condemned by Bellarmine to bee iustified by Saint Augustine although it be there applied by him affirmatiuely SECT II. The second exception against Bellarmine The charge concerning S. Peters Ordination 3. THe summe of the exception standeth thus Bellarmine defended that Saint Peter onely was ordeined a Bishop by Christ and that the other Apostles were ordeined Bishops by Saint Peter and endeuoured to prooue this out of the testimonies of Anacletus Clemens Alex. Eusebius Cyprian Leo Augustine But these Fahers saith their Victoria do not intend that which the Authors of this opinion doe pretend As for other writings which are attributed vnto Clement and Pope Anacletus which are both many and great they are saith their Cardinall Cusanus Apocrypha wherein they who extoll the Romane Sea which is worthy of allpraise do aboue that which is conuenient or meete either wholly or partly rely We are now to Reckon first for the matter it selfe and then for the maner of deliuerance of it in my Preamble Mr. PARSONS his Reckoning ALl this which Mr. Morton alle adgeth heere if it were graunted as it lieth conteineth nothing but two different opinions between learned men in a disputable question Whether Christ did immediately and by himselfe consecrate all or some of his Apostles Bishops or one onely with authoritie to consecrate the rest Turrecremata and Bellarmine doe hold the one for more probable but Victoria Cusanus and some other do allow rather the other What wilfull falsehood is there in this Or is it not singular folly to call it by that name The Reueiwe 4. If all this were graunted Mr. Parsons Then I can tell you you must either renounce the iudgement of Bellarmine or else recant your owne Reckoning you haue graunted first that Bellarmine did prooue out of Turrecremata that Christ did make onely Saint Peter Bishop with authoritie to consecrate the rest Secondly that Victoria thinketh the contrary opinion to be more probable and aunswereth the argument of Turrecremata saying that the Fathers cited for the same Reuerà non significant id quod Authores huius sententiae volunt That is That in trueth they doe not signifie so much as the authoritie Mr. Parsons should haue said Authors of this opinion would haue them Lastly that Cardinall Cusanus here cited doth to the like effect aunswere the same arguments 5. In all these confessed points consisteth the maine matter of my former exception Notwithstanding this euidence Mr. Parsons saith If it were graunted c. What tricke shall we call this Yet thus much being graunted marke Master Parsons what will follow hereupon viz. that the Church of Rome hath lost her supposed Motherhood For Bellarmine presuming that all auncients held the Church of Rome to bee the Mother-church addeth in these words Quod non videtur c. that is Which seemeth not to be true saith he except in that sense because Peter who was the Bishop of Rome had ordeined all other Apostles Bishops either by himselfe or by others See this and blush at your ignorance Bellarmine reasoneth thus Except Peter did ordaine the rest of the Apostles Bishops your Church of Rome cannot be truely called the Mother-church but that Peter ordained the rest of the Apostles Bishops Mr. Parsons doth hold it to be a matter disputable their Cusanus thinketh it to be improbable their Victoria concludeth pro certo that Certamly Peter did not ordaine them Bishops The conclusion will follow of it owne accord which is this viz. It is therefore but Disputable or Improbable yea an Incredible doctrine to say that the Church of Rome is the Mother-church When Mr. Parsons shall consider this I thinke he will repent him of this Reckoning 6. May I be furthermore so bold with Mr. Parsons as to demand why he did translate Authores eius sent entiae that is The Authors of this opinion into The authoritie of this opinion I say what authoritie had he for these trickes for of his purpose we will make no question For he was loath that the opinion of Bellarmine should be held by
Because our Elders saith Baronius seeme to haue beene ignorant of these Canons at what time the authority of them had beene most necessary as namely when the Controuersie of Affrica was on foot meaning that solemne reiecting of Appeals vnto Rome I leaue these to be discussed rather by some others This confession of their Cardinall layeth a shrewd suspicion of forgerie vpon them And their Bishop Tarraconensis speaking to the same point saith that the Iesuite Turrian could not perswade him that these are the true Canons of the Councell of Nice We see the zeale that Coccius hath for this Article who leauing the ordinary Canons of Nice runneth into Arabia to seeke for some sparke to kindle a Purgatory fire And yet when all is done there is nothing in that Canon but Fiat Oratio pro eo which proueth no more the fire of Purgatorie then that the Blessed soules are purged in that fire 24. Eusebius Caesariensis vitae Constant. l. 4. cap. 60. cap. 71. Prayers are made for the soule of the Emperor Constantine is the eight witnesse This is the testimony which Coccius vseth for proofe of Romish Purgatorie as though Eusebius and the faithfull of those times had thought that the Soule of that godly Emperour could bee then deteyned in torment of Purgatorie fire before it could ascend into blessednesse But Coccius himselfe else-where doth both know and acknowledge the confession of Eusebius concerning the soule of Constantine to wit When as I thinke saith Eusebius how that his most blessed soule doth enioy life with God and that he is honorably inuested in immortality of the blessed world I am surprized with an amazement and cannot speake And againe Coccius in the same place addeth a second testimony of the same Eusebius out of Lib. 3. de vita Constant. cap. 45. where it is said of the same Constantine that His soule being now dissolued from the bands of this slesh is assumed vnto immortality and an Angelicall nature and vnto our Sauiour Christ Iesus Which testimony of Eusebius Coccius bringeth in to prooue that The soules of holy men after their departure out of this life goe directly into heauen Marke now good Reader the distorted wit of this Coccius who in one place instanceth in the Soule of Constantine to shew that soules are deteined in a Purgatory torment before they can ascend vnto blessednes and yet in another place singleth out the example of the Soule of the same Constantine to proue by the testimony of the same Eusebius also that the Soules of holy men are not kept in places of anguish and affliction after their death but are presently Assumed into the kingdome of happinesse I wish Mr. Parsons to looke vnto his Coccius whom hee hath chosen to be the witnesse of all these witnesses and let him tell vs whether such kinde of dealers deserue not to be nayled to the post 25. The ninth witnesse must bee Athanas. Quaest. 34. which in the iudgement of their Sixtus Senensis Seemeth not to be the booke of Athanasius but is as their Iesuite Posseuin confesseth a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is Falsly inscribed Athanasius Coccius belike was in doubt that this feigned witnesse would be in danger to loose his 〈◊〉 and therfore he sought to corroborate his sentence with another testimony of Athanasius cited by Damascen 26. The tenth witnes is Damascen Serm. De defunctis citing Athanasius out of his bookes De ys qui fide dormierunt but this witnesse also is one of the Poste concerning whom Bellarmine saith that It may be easily prooued to be none of the bookes of Damascen Here againe we see what little credite is to be giuen vnto Coccius in impannelling his Iurie who will haue a forged booke of Damascen to confirme a forged booke of Athanasius and all to defend a forged Purgatory which may well become both Coccius to doe and M. Parsons to approue Greeke Fathers abused by Coccius for defence of Romish Purgatory THE SECOND DECADE 27. The first witnesse following after Athanasius is Basil. cap. 4. in Esaiam Qui abluit c. where he telleth vs of a Reserued tryall and examination which shall be made by fire in the life to come whereinto Flagitia that is Criminall sinnes must enter such as a man doth purposely commit which must be punished with the fire of iudgement And againe In cap. 6. There is a purifying fire And yet againe In cap. 9. There is an expurgation according to that of the Apostle He shall be saued yet as it were by fire Al these testimonies are of the same stampe therefore that answere which their owne Senensis giueth vnto two places may satisfie for all three viz. The speech of Basil in Esa. 4. vpon these wordes He shall purge Hierusalem in the spirit of iudgement and in the spirite of heate c. where he saith that this is referred vnto that triall and examination which shall be in the world to come c. as also his speech vpon Esa. 9. saying that the Prophet sheweth that earthly things must be deliuered igni punitiuo that is vnto the punishing fire for the good of the soule c. These speeches doe seeme saith Senensis to imply that which the former sentences did to wit the sentences of Lactanctius and Origen viz. the fire of conflagration which shall be in the last day which by the confession of Bellarmine doth nor make for Romish Purgatory 28. The second is Ephraem Orat. aduersus superbiam Doost thou consider the fire saith hee which we must passe thorow What fire trow we is this he sheweth in 1. Cor. 3. The day of the Lord will declare euery mans worke which day shall be reuealed by fire This fire is so plainely the fire of conflagration in the last day of iudgement and consequently not the Romish Purgatory-fire that Bellarmine discussing the meaning of that Scripture 1. Cor. 3. The day of the Lord shall be reuealed by fire saith that Omnes veteres c. that is All the auncient Writers seeme to vnderstand by this the day of their last iudgment and their opinion saith he herein seemeth vnto me most true Then may we say that Coccius his inference from that fire of the last iudgement to proue a fire of Purgatory before that day of iudgement is most false The second place of Ephraem Paraenet 49. is of the same stampe onely Transitus per ignem The last testimony is out of Ephraem his Testament but read Trithemius de Illust. Scriptoribus and especially the Iesuite Posseuin who reckoning almost an hundred Tractats of Ephraem did omit his Testament 29. Cyrill of Hierusalem entreth in the second place of this scene who in Cateches 5. mystag saith that Prayer is offered in the dreadfull Sacrifice for the helpe of Soules which he illustrateth by a similitude of making Supplication for one that is cast into exile by the displeasure of a King which
sheweth the State of soules in exile not in a fierie Fornace in paenâ damni and not Sensus it is the not fruition of blessednesse but yet not the sense of Torment and therefore concerneth not the Romish Purgatory as may appeare by the second confessed Obseruation 30. Greg. Nazianzene is the fourth of this ranke who Orat. 10. in Laudem fratris defuncti Prayeth God to receiue the soule of his brother Caesarius This is the onely testimony which Coccius produceth out of Nazianzen vpon this kinde of prayer by M. Parsons and Coccius his conclusion we are to beleeue that Nazianzen thought that the Soule of that Caesarius might then haue beene in Purgatory torment and not in heauenly blessednesse But alas for the crookednesse of contentious spirits for Coccius himselfe vseth the very same Orat. 10. of Nazian in Laudem fratris Caesary defuncti which is in praise of his brother Caesarius then departed to prooue a quite contrary conclusion to wit that the Soules of the faithfull after they be departed doe goe immediately into heauen Albeit the wordes of Nazianzen be in manner of prayer thus But thou O diuine and sacred man I wish thee to penetrate the beauens and to rest in the bosome of Abraham to beholde the Qxire of Angels and the glory of the blessed Saints c. Not that he doubted of his present blessednes for in the same Orat he saith thus Credo c. I beleeue that euery generous soule is pretious in Gods sight and as soone as it departeth out of the body goeth presently vnto the Lord and receiueth blessednesse Euen as he doth in his next Oration which hee made in the commendation of his sister Gorgonia then dead Equidem non dubito c. I doubt not faith he but that thou now enioyest the Quire of Angels and the contemplation of the blessed Trinity c. Which was the so vndoubted doctrine of Nazianzen concerning the soules of all the godly who depart in the faith of Christ that Nilus the Greeke Bishop doth vse a sentence of Nazianzen for the confutation of Romish Purgatorie viz Nazian Serm. de Pasch. speaking of the state after this life saith saith Nilus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. c. That there is no Purgation 31. The fift is Gregory Nissen in Orat. Quòdnon sit dolendum ob eorum obitum qui in fide decesserunt And li. de animâ resurrect he maketh mention of Purgatory fire after this life c. This witnesse reacheth beyond the Romish Purgatory and further then the Romanists themselues will allow for if a Greeke Bishop may be thought fit to vnderstand what was the iudgement of Greg. Nissene concerning the state of the dead then let vs listen vnto Nilus who telleth vs that Greg. Nissen seemed to fauour that opinion which defended 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is a Redint egration which sinners meaning the damned shall finde after the ende of their punishment and calleth that punishment a Purgatory fornace therefore wee answere saith Nilus that those were the pernitious Comments of certaine Heretickes who accorded vnto Orlgen and did to that end abuse that singular light of the Church viz. Greg. Nissene to make him seeme to be a Patron of their opinion Secondly we say saith Nilus that although that holy man Greg. Nissene did hold that opinion which being questionable in his time was afterward condemned by a Councell yet he is not to be followed in his errour which errour was condemned in Origen And that his bookes are not free from such like corruptions it is herein very credible because that Nicephorus speaking of his Booke De anima suspecteth that Certaine Heretickes had infused some Origenicall opinions into it Seeing then that either the witnesse Nissene himselfe was in the errour of Origen or else his Bookes were infected therewith An erronious witnesse may not bee admitted for a competent Author of trueth For if the blind leade the blind beware the Ditch That next place which they take out of Damascene wee haue seene already nayled vnto the poste for forged stuffe 32. Timotheus Alexandrinus commeth in for a sixt witnesse in his Resp. Interrog 14. Oblatio non est facienda super eum qui sibi mortem intulerit But such sentences doe not inferre Purgatorie as hath beene proued The Bookes themselues of Responsa and Interrog heere cited by Coccius are not admitted by their Iesuite Posseuine who bringeth in Gennadius to report that this Timotheus was condemned by the Councell of Calcedon and to haue beene exiled for an Hereticke What dealing is this of our Aduersaries to obiect him whom they themselues doe reiect 33. Epiphanius approacheth in seuenth place to yeelde his testimonie who saith nothing but Prodesse orationes mortuis which as hath beene prooued containe not in them any sparke of tormenting fire Besides it may concerne our Aduersaries to examine this witnesse more strictly least whilst they labour to draw from him their pretended trueth they draw vpon themselues an errour condemned by the practise of the Church which is to pray for the mitigation of the paine of the damned with whom we haue no communion because Epiphanius albeit hee accounted Origen after his death an Hereticke and an enemie of the Church by whose doctrine some were made meate for the Diuell yet did hee pray that God would pardon him 34. Chrysostome being the eight witnesse is hayled in by the heeles to speake nothing to the purpose For either his speeches may signifie onely Prayer for the dead which doeth not necessarily inferre any Purgatorie torment or Prayer for them who are in ioye which confuteth Purgatorie or else Prayer for them who died in their sinnes in the state of damnation which is farre beyond Romish Purgatorie and which kind of Prayer our Aduersaries themselues doe thinke to bee transgressions rather then deuotions These we shall shew by examining the seuerall particulars in order 35. The first Hom. 6. de Sacerdotio cap. 4. He speaketh of Prayers for the sinnes of all both quicke and dead Whereas according to our former Obseruations Prayer for remission of sinnes may haue diuers respects besides the deliuerance out of the torment of Purgatorie fire immediately after death as namely remission from Poena damni onely or from the Iudgement of Examination which is not of purgation or if of sense yet of that which is the Fire of conflagration in the body at the last day and not presently and lingeringly after death 36. The second Hom. 32. Why dost thou intreate the Priests to pray for the dead I know thou wilt answere that thou dost so that he may obtaine rest and finde the Iudge mercifull vnto him But if Coccius hadhad the leisure to haue stepped but one foot further to the words next following hee should haue seene Chrysostome confute his Inserence As thus Dost thou therefore weepe and crie Dost thou not see how contrarie thou art to
thy selfe For seeing thou thinkest that the Soule departed is gone into flourishing and delightfull Meadowes Why dost thou raise vp such tempests meaning of teares Will M. Parsons iudge that this place can prooue a Purgatorie torment Will he erect a fierie Fornace vpon flourishing meadowes 37. In the rest of the testimonies wee may obserue that which Senensis obserued in Hom. 33. in Matth. Chrysostome saith he may seeme to haue fallen after a sort into the opinion of them who thought that Prayer for the dead might profit the very damned We say more that he doeth more then seeme to haue beene of that opinion as the places themselues which Coccius hath pointed at doe easily bewray For Hom. 16. in Ioh. The partie whom Almes and Oblations are said to profit after death is called a Sinner and such a sinner as Did often offend God and such an offender as did transgresse in malice therefore he saith His malice is cut off by death but the iust is placed in safetie and freed from future feare And Hom. 21. in Act. Apost Wishing to Diminish the punishment of the dead he describeth such a dead partie as spent the most part of his life vainely seruing sinne and the diuell 38. In Hom. 41. in 1. Cor. There is we confesse the approbation of Prayer for soules that they may receiue some comfort But what kind of Soules they bee the place doeth manifest where Chrysostome diuideth them onely into two Orders Them who liued well in this life and them who liued ill And the Sinner for whom the Prayers are required was such an one Who had power namely in his life to expiate his sins and would not and who by death Was hindred lest he should multiply sinnes Like as is more plainely manifested in the next place In Epist. ad Philipp Serm. 3. Moral Where he telleth vs that much profit redoundeth vnto the dead by our Prayers for sinners departed But will you know what colour these Sinners were of verily as blacke as Murrians for they were such in Chrysostome his estimate Who dying in the abundance of riches which in their life time they neuer vsed for the comfort of their soules And the last place Hom. 69. ad Pop. Antioch doeth not differ from the rest I aske therefore with what conscience doe our Aduersaries cite these testimonies which because they are erronious they themselues will not iustifie and imbrace 39. Palladius Hist. Lausiac cap. 40. Possesseth the ninth place but as if Pallidus were his name being afraid to bee knowne and no maruell seeing that their Iesuite Posseuine doubteth not to say of him that he was spotted with Origenicall impieties The same Palladius who writ the Historia Lausiaca their Cardinall Baronius prooueth both out of S. Hierom and Epiphanius to haue rotted in the contagious heresie of Origen c. which Baronius further collecteth out of that Historia Lausiaca which are the Bookes of Palladius which Coccius here produceth for proofe of their Purgatorie Which may disable the credit of Coccius who in impannelling the Iurie could make no better choise 40. Synesius Epist. 44. is the last of this Decade in whom there is no mention of Prayer for the dead nor yet of any paine after death excepting that which is paena immortalis That is eternall But our Aduersaries dreame not of any other Purgatorie paine but that which is Temporall And thus much of these ten witnesses I referre vnto the iudgement of my Reader to discerne whether they bee not either counterfeit or Apocryphall or corrupt or else violently vrged beyond their proper aime Witnesses among the Greeke Fathers abused by Coccius for defence of Romish Purgatorie THE LAST DECADE 41. Atticus Patriarcha Constantinop Epist. ad Cyrillum Alexand. Here is a solemne Preface what will this first witnesse say There is mention to be made of Bishops departed c. at the time of the Communion on the mysticall Table But we haue obserued from our Aduersaries that Commemoration doeth not inferre any Supplication nor yet Supplication any tormenting purgation 42. Iohannes Cassianus Collat. 2. cap. 5. is called vpon by Coccius to speake for Purgatorie But he may not bee admitted into the number of witnesses because he hath long since beene impeached of falshood by Pope Gelasius who reckneth this Booke among the Apocrypha writings which is a thing that their Card. Baronius will haue vs obserue See saith he the censure of Gelasius wherein the same workes of Cassianus speaking of the Collations here mentioned by Coccius are reiected as being no way Catholicke Yet are not Coccius and his assistant M. Parsons ashamed to shake this Knight by the hand and to make him one of their choyse witnesses 43. In the third place Socrates steppeth forward in his Lib. 7. Hist. cap. 25. to tell vs how that In solemne Prayers there was mention made of Bishops after their departure But I demand of M. Parsons how often hee hath heard mention made of the names of Holy men and women departed out of this life at S. Paules Crosse and els-where by our Preachers of England in their Prayers of thankesgiuing for their former grace and present ioy and not as of requests to free them from any Purgatory torment Yet so it is Socrates must serue their turne to fill vp a number 44. But what shall we say to Theodoret Hee first Lib. 5. Hist. cap. 36. recordeth the Act of Theodosius who prayeth to God to pardon the iniuries which his Parents had committed of ignorance Wee reade that Isaacke said vnto Abraham Father behold the fier and the wood but where is the Lambe for the burnt offering I may inuert the speech and say here is the Sacrifice of Prayer but where is the fire for we haue already prooued that Prayer for remission doth not necessarily inferre any Purgatorie torment The second place aleadged out of Theodoret is Hist. Sanct. Patrum de Iacobo Nisibita But this is not found in their Posseuine among the workes of Theodoret. The third place is noted to be in 1. Cor. 3. Quiequid interuenit c. Which words as Coccius himselfe confesseth being cited by Aquinas for Purgatorie are not now found either in the Greeke or Latine Copies of Theodoret May we not then iudge them worthy the post No doubtlesse saith Coccius for Marke for he will giue vs a reason the words were rased out saith he by some Greekishenes who misliked Purgatorie If this were sensible then the Latines likewise misliked Purgatorie for the Sentence saith Coccius is not now found in the Latine Translations of Theodoret So that M. Parsons is to make his choise whether hee will confesse that one sentence of Theodoret to bee forged for proofe of Purgatorie or else both the Greeke and Latine Churches to haue beene false Registers of the Bookes of Theodoret. 45. The fift Authour is Basilius Seleucius Conc. de Exsuscit Lazari speaking of Sacrifice
offered for those who offended God in many things vsing the same straine of speech as Chrysostome had done by extending Prayer vnto the soules of grieuous and mortall offenders Which doctrine the stomacke of the Purgatorians will in no wise disgest 46. What will become of the testimonie of their sixt witnesse whom Coccius nameth Diadochus de perfectione Spirit cap. 100 All that he will say is that Men fearing death a little enter as it were into iudgement to be Examined by the fire of iudgement c. But their Cardinall Bellarmine hath told vs already that this fire doeth differ from the fire of Purgatorie For the fier of Iudgement is but a Trying and examining fire and that fire of Purgatorie is a purging and tormenting fire 47. But now let euery man giue roome for two Emperors doe approach and seeme to offer their testimonies for Purgatorie The first is Iustinus Imp. Epist. ad Hormisdam who saith That we may not contemne all the memories of the dead That is The Commemorations of their names as their Cardinall Baronius teacheth shewing that heereby was meant the tollerating of the mention of the names of some in the Catalogue of orthodoxall Bishops who died in the schisme of Acatius Now if Commemorations of Bishops and Saints departed doe necessarily conclude them to be in Purgatorie fire then how shall wee celebrate the names of Patriarkes Prophets Apostles Martyrs yea and of the glorious vessell of Grace the Virgine Marie to praise God that they are in rest and blessednesse What iniurie will not these Purgatorians doe vnto other Authors who dare offer such violence vnto the sentence of so great an Emperour 48. The nex Emperour is Iustinianus Nouella de Monachis Hee is also without due reuerence thrust in and vrged to speake nothing to the purpose saying onely that There are Funerals performed for the dead which are called their Memorials To what end is this Let M. Parsons stretch this out with his teeth as farre as he can yet shall hee not possibly make Memorials of the dead reach so farre as the Purgatorie fire for the afflicting of their soules as hath beene shewen and will be hereafter more apparant 49. Procopius Gazeus Ad cap. 6. Esaiae is the ninth Author vpon whom M. Parsons must serue a Latitat before he will appeare For their Sixtus Senensis speaking of these Commentaries saith that They haue not as yet beene turned into Latine but are kept in the Venetian Librarie And when he is suffered to speake the best that he can it is no more but this that There is a celestiall place of Purgation of mens soules euen by the Seraphins This celestiall and heauenly Purgatorie must needes be spirituall by the force of the Holy Ghost and not by any hellish torment but differeth as much from the reall fire which is our Aduersaries fornace as doth Heauen from Hell 50. The tenth and last man of their Greeke witnesses is Iohannes Climachus who liued about the yeere 580. Gradu 4. de Insomnijs All that the testimonie hath is but the Celebration of seruice for the sleeping of ones soule which doth make no more for Purgatorie then to pray that the soule of him that sleepeth may in the end be ioyned with the body and made partaker of the consummation of blisse 51. Because M. Parsons in his Challenge hath allotted vnto me but the compasse of sixe hundred yeares I will not transgresse to proccede in discouering many base counterfeits and corrupt Authours whom Coccius hath brought to serue his stage I now desire the Christian Reader to ponder and apply the Obseruations and Grants of our Romish Aduersaries noted aboue in the first Section to apply the allegations of Coccius vnto them and seeing that M. Parsons did earnestly desire that I should demonstrate the abuse of one and thirtie Fathers whether Greeke or Latine within the compasse of sixe hundred yeeres after Christ to trie whether I haue not satisfied him already euen in the Greeke Authors for besides the ten Greeke Liturgies we haue found Greeke Authors if we shall admit Damascen for one who fell in obiter into Coccius his Catalogue thrice Ten which by being examined according to the confessed principles conclusions animaduersions and obseruations of our Aduersaries themselues appeare to be either foysted or corrupted or discredited or wrested to prooue that which cannot bee euinced from them which wee may so much the rather suspect because that their owne Bishop Roffensis went so farre in his time as to confesse that There was none or very rare mention of Purgatory in the Greeke Fathers and that the doctrine therof was hardly knowne in those times and more absolutely their Polydore Virgil graunting that It was not acknowledged by the Grecians vnto this day Which sheweth that their Salmeron and Coccius in alleaging more then all the Greeke Fathers for proofe of that doctrine haue done this with a Greekish according to the Prouerb with a deceiueable faith Thus much of the Greeke Fathers SECT IIII. The testimonies deliuered in the name of the Latine Fathers abused by Coccius for proofe of Purgatory 52. THis booke groweth bigge and corpulent if I should deale as particularly in the Latine as I haue done in the Greeke Testimonies I might complaine of an Amphora exit therefore will I insist onely vpon those allegations which may be best satisfied from the principles of our Aduersaries and leaue the rest remitting my Reader to the Confutations which other Protestants haue yeelded vnto them 53. Tertullian is made the Captaine of this band whom some of our Aduersaries haue noted to haue held that the soules are in sequestred receptacles wherein they neyther receiue paine nor their reward of blessednesse which doctrine in the iudgement of their Iesuite Suarez doth consequently gainesay the doctrine of Purgatory fire And this answere in generall might satisfie their particular obiections out of Tertullian notwithstanding we shall examine these 54. The first is De testimonie animae aduersus Gentes cap. 4. Thou prayest for the bones and ashes of the dead that they may haue refreshing and wishest that he the departed may rest well with them who are apud inferos The party whom Tertullian bringeth in praying thus is not a Christian but a Pagan and the purpose which Tert. hath to alleadge that and other opinions of the Heathen was not to approue them but to proue out of them that there is an Immortality of the soule euen as he doth from another absurd opinion of theirs in calling wicked men diuels and thereby confessing that there is a Diuell and consequently a Tormenter and therefore also a Day of iudgement Concerning the truth of this answere my Reader may consult with their owne Renatus Laurentius in his Argument and Annotations vpon this booke 55. The second Tert. de corona militis ca. 3. We make Oblations for the dead and this parte Coccius hath cut off for their
vnto M. Parsons he was too inconsiderate to put this in his Reckoning for one of the falshoods which were obiected against him 5. Neuerthelesse lest that I might disturbe the Order of M. Parsons his Reckoning I thought good to fill vp this his first place with a perfect falshood indeede of his owne not yet mentioned which is such as may perswade any man of Conscience that M. Parsons his Conscience hath taken such a leake as is able to drowne his soule except hee repent which I will vnfold in the next Paragraphe A foure fold falshood committed by M. Parsons against M. Caluine in the end of his last third Chapter Mr. PARSONS his Reckoning FInally Iohn Caluine himselfe treating of this matter confesseth that the vse of Prayer for the dead which supposeth Purgatorie was practised in the Primitiue Church aboue one thousand three hundred yeeres agone Ante mille trecentos Annos saith hee vsu receptum fuit vt precationes fierent pro defunctis It was receiued in vse aboue a thousand three hundred yeeres past that Prayers should bee made for the soules of them that were departed And a little after where Iohn Caluine in the former place cited after his confession of the receiued vse of Prayer before one thousand three hundred yeeres saith Sed omnes fateor in errorem abrepti suerun But all of them I confesse were caried away with errour The Reueiwe 6. M. Parsons hath singled out of all the bookes of Mr. Caluine this one place which he presenteth to his Reader for a spectacle of contempt vsed by M. Caluine against auncient Fathers and hath laid this downe as it were for the vp-shot of his whole Reckoning of that his third Chapter But see I beseech thee good Reader what a knot of falsities hee hath tyed together in this one accusation First these wordes Ante mille annos c. are propounded onely as an Obiection of Romish Doctors thus Cùm ergo obijciunt Aduersary ante mille trecentos annos c. That is Wheras my Aduersaries saith Caluine doe obiect vnto me that prayers for the dead were wont to be vsed in the Church a thousand three hundred yeares since Secondly when he commeth to answere he saith Ipsiverò veteres c. But those auncients were carried away with errour Where M. Parsons to make M. Caluines aunswere more odious put in Omnes veteres that is All auncient Fathers erred therein as though Caluine had condemned them All in this point 7. Thirdly Caluine a little after in the same Section yeeldeth a fuller answere saying Verum nè glorientur Aduersaris nostri quasi veterem Ecclesiam erroris sui sociam habeant c. But least that our Aduersaries iaith Caluine may boast as though they had the auncient Church a companion in their errour I say that there is a great difference between them for those ancients vsed a memory of the dead least that they might seeme to haue altogether neglected them but yet did also confesse that they did not doubt of the State of the dead As for Purgatorie saith Caluin they held it to be an vncertaine thing Besides we might easily produce diuers testimonies of ancient Fathers wherby the vse of those prayers is manifestly confuted Thus farre Mr. Caluine signifying that he was not destitute of the iudgement of Antiquity for the oppugning of the doctrine which was obiected against him which part of the answere Mr. Parsons hath wholly concealed 8. Lastly Caluine saith M. Parsons confesseth that the vse of Prayer for the dead which supposeth Purgatory was practised c. Neuer taking notice that Caluine denieth that consequence holding that Prayer for the dead doeth not inferre Purgatorie 9. Is not here as great a manifestation of witting malice and falshood for ought that can appeare to any Reader as an Aduersarie could possibly vse First to alleadge Caluines obiection in that sense wherein it was obiected as if it had beene his Assertion Secondly by cogging a Die in deede in foysting in the word All Thirdly by concealing Caluines more absolute answere And lastly by implying a consequence which is by Caluine plainely confuted What will now become of M. Parsons his Confidence of his owne sinceritie who boasteth that there cannot be brought against him any one example of such a falsitie much lesse thrice three seeing that here are at least three grosse falshoods in this one we further enter vpon the falshoods wherewith he was charged in the Preamble SECT II. The second Charge of the Clause of Reseruation 10. HOw could M. Parsons without some Equiuocating fraude affirme that the Clause of Reseruation was not set downe by me in Latine except onely once seeing that it was expressed in Latine aboue twentie times The summe of M. PARSONS his Reckoning THe trueth is that my meaning was according to the meaning of M. Mortons assertion promising that he would alwayes so set down the clause of Reseruation in Latine that the simple Reader should not vnderstand it no more then simple men could vnderstand Aristotles Philosophy in which maner I found it put downe but once indeede thoughout the whole Booke to wit in the place before mentioned that is to say wholly in Latine for thus hee writeth comming to the said clause of Reseruation Loquar enim Latinè nè Jdiotae ansam sibi arripiant nequitèr 〈◊〉 vt quis 〈◊〉 illud detegere 〈◊〉 words hee Englisheth not and consequently might bee some veyle to the ignorant not to vnderstand him But in all other places though he put in oftentimes I know not this or that Vt tibi dicam vt tibi reuelem c. Yet doeth he so vtter in English all the rest of the cases professed as the simpliest man may vnderstand the same and consequently I hold them for vttered in English and not in Latine The Reuiew of the former Reckoning 11. The onely shadow of excuse which M. Parsons hath for couert of his former vntrueth when hee said that The clause of Reseruation was set downe in Latine but once notwithstanding it bee found in Latine aboue one and twentie times is to point at one place which hee saith is onely and wholly in Latine thus Loquar enim c. But here he craftily cutteth off the words which goe immediately before for thus it standeth in the Booke A Catholicke being asked whether a Priest be in such a place may notwithstanding his perfect knowledge to the contrarie answere Hee is not there vt loquar enim Latinè nè I diotae ansam sibi arripiant nequitèr mentiendi quis teneatur illud det egere Where it is as apparant that the mentall Equiuocation in this place for the Parenthesis is no part of the sentence being this Hee is not there Vt quis teneatur detegere cannot be said to be wholly in Latine more then I am no Priest Vt tibireuelem Or I am no Priest Vt tibi dicam Which
sentence of Caluine I dare not pronounce that he was in this errour 26. Doe you not heare Genebrard Lindanus and Canisius pronouncing Caluine an Hereticke for that opinion for which Bellarmine saith that hee himselfe durst not condemne Caluine How then could M. Parsons say truely that these writers doe agree Herein hee offereth no small iniurie vnto Bellarmine whom whilst he would reconcile vnto others he maketh to be an Aduersarie to himselfe as though Bellarmine had condemned Caluine in that wherein he iustified him according to the Index of his Booke Caluini sent entia 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 explicatur defenditur That is The sentence of Caluine concerning 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is explained and defended But especially hee wrongeth his owne conscience by an inexcuseable falshood SECT VII The seuenth Charge 27. M. Parsons in his Mitigation brought me in as Confessing in effect all that my Aduersarie the moderate Answerer had obiected against Protestants when as contrariwise there was scarce any thing obiected excepting the aboue named examples of Goodman Knox Buchanan and Muntzer which I did not particularly consute These and almost euery particular instance I then prosecuted oftentimes by the confessions of their owne Doctors whom M. Parsons in his Answere durst not so much as touch by any mention And could such like confutations be In effect a confessing of all This seemed vnto me to bee a large and lauish falshood Let vs see what account Mr. Parsons will make for this The summe of M. PARSONS his Reckoning ALthough he vsed all possible Art that hee could to answere yet are his Answers such where hee doeth answere for to sundry chiefe points he saith nothing at all as doe easily shew that in substance he confesseth all and cannot denie what is obiected and where hee seeketh to denie any thing there hee intangleth himselfe more then if flatly hee confessed the same And in proofe hereof I spend a dozen leaues at least in refuting all his Answers proouing that they yeeld not a full but a faint satisfaction The Reueiwe 28. This you haue now affirmed and that in Print euen in Romane letters But I appeale vnto any Reader vnderstanding English to iudge hereof what I haue done in confutation of the moderate Answerer the particular instances there obiected doe fully manifest which concerned either England Fraunce Geneua Germanie yea or the losse of Rhodes and part of Hungarie which according to the report of their owne Histories befell thorow the couctousnesse of Pope Adrian Secondly what Mr. Parsons hath not Answered in his Dozen leaues of his Mitigation vnto the second part of the Full satisfaction consisting of twelue Chapters will be as euident Wherein any may obserue the diuers Arguments then vsed for the defence of Protestants which Mr. Parsons passed ouer without Answere the Summarie points whereof are these 29. First the generall Doctrine of Protestants by as Bellarmine confesseth expounding the place of Saint Paul Rom. 13. to signifie that the Pope and all Ecclesiasticall persons ought to bee subiect vnto Princes Secondly that the English Protestants by the confession of the Iesuite Salmeron Doe acknowledge a Soueraigntie of Kings in cases Ecclesiasticall Thirdly the expresse Doctrine of Caluine and of Beza aduancing the Authoritie of Kings Fourthly the iustifying of the Protestants in France from the testimonies of Romish Historians Fiftly to omit some other proofes acquitting Luther by his owne expresse Doctrine and by other euidences confuting the slarders which the moderate Answere cast vpon him which M. Parsons nimbly skipped ouer in fauour of his shinnes playing the very Mare-maide a woman aboue water talking largely and promising a confutation of all points but when he commeth to the principals Atrum desinit in piscem as mute as a Fish as might bee manifested by many examples In the meane time we may reckon this his last Assertion in the number of his grauida mendacia because this one falshood is big with many other falshoods in the belly thereof SECT VIII The eight Charge concerning a Transition asking haue you ought to say to their practise 30. I Was accused by M. Parsons to haue dissembled the practises of Caluine and Beza which were obiected by the moderate Answerer and to haue vsed this Interrogation Haue you any thing to say to their practise in an hypocriticall dissemblance as though nothing had beene obiected against them to the end that I might passe them ouer and answere nothing at all Albeit it bee most euident by the place it selfe that I vsed that Interrogation by way of a Transition onely to the end that I might more emphatically and effectually both note and confute the obiections against Caluine and Beza which immediately I also performed Therefore M. Parsons in accusing me of Dissimulation and hypocrisie did me no litle iniurie and now commeth halting in with a strange maner of Reckoning The summe of M. PARSONS his Reckoning I Am so equall and easie to bee intreated in this matter or rather so indulgent as I am content to accept of his interpretation professing sincerely notwithstanding that I vnderstood him in another meaning when I wrote my Booke the words themselues leading mee thereunto Howsoeuer it bee there can bee no least matter of malice framed against me True it is he endeauoureth both before and after to Answere vnto diuers proofes of seditious practises obiected by his Aduersaries against Caluine and Beza The Reueiwe 31. In this part of his Reckoning I shall desire my Reader to obserue these two points M. Parsons his maner of Confession and protestation for they are remarkeable He confesseth now that in that place I Endeauored both before and after to Answere vnto the seditious practises obiected a-against Caluine and Beza and yet accused me in his Mitigation for concealing the whole matter rating and reuyling me and calling my Satifaction in this point Hypocrisie and Dissimulation so farre forth as to make me a man not to be tru sted hereafter But why for concealing and dissembling forsooth such obiections against Caluine and Beza which now vpon better consideration he confesseth I did not dissemble but expressely mentioned and also endeauoured to answere them 32. Thou seest then Christian Reader how vile and hainous an opprobrie M. Parsons laide vpon me euen of Not to be trusted hereafter and vpon how friuolous and false a pretence according as he hath here plainely confessed I call the Confession plaine because hee graunteth I did not conceale them 33. Notwithstanding marke I beseech thee in what maner he conueigheth this his Confession which he beginneth thus I am so equall and easie to bee intreated or rather so indulgent as I am content to accept of his interpretation c. See now after that hee had beene charged with egregious impudencie by his false imputation of Hypocrisie Dissimulation and being at length ashamed of his owne discouered
Iacob would M. Parsons his learning licence him to condemne that speech of incongruitie Although I haue M. Parsons now at this aduantage yet will I not in requital of his owne scurrilitie about the Syllogisme send him vnto the Schoole againe to learne his Grammer but rather hold it sufficient to haue thus admonished him hereof SECT XII The twelueth Charge concerning Doleman alias Parsons 50. THe inquirie is whether Doleman alias Parsons held it to be a damnable sinne for any of his Catholicks to suffer any Protestant Prince to succeede in the Crowne This is your owne case M. Parsons and it wil therefore concerne you much to make vp a straight Reckoning if you will free your intention from Treason Your Answere in your Mitigation was this Is there any word peculiar of a Protestant Prince or of his successor Nay doth not the text speake plainely of making a King where none is c. How then can this malicious cauelling Minister c. This you spake in your lesse temperate moode but since I haue told you thatthe materiall subiect of that Booke was the Succession to the Crowne of England after the decease of Queene ELIZABETH where you spake expresly of an Heire apparant and in particular and by name tooke exception against our now Gracious Soueraigne King IAMES to debarre him from the inheritance of Great Brittaine I must expect of you a more solemne account M. PARSONS his Reckoning HIs last words Of damnable sinner were spoken as well against Catholickes as Protestants and meant more principally of Election then of Succession The Reueiwe 51. Mr. Parsons in his Mitigation would not be knowne to haue meant any more then of making a King by Election Now hee is brought to confesse that hee vnderstood it although lesse Principally of Succession also Which I confesse is a more Sober Reckoning Now yet wheras there is as good a right for an heire to succeed in the Crowne as there is for a King to possesse it M. Parsons reason of not making or admitting the right heire apparant who by the lawes of England is King immediatly after his Predecessor hath yeelded vp his last breath did necessarily inferre that he meant indeed by not making to marre a King which I prooued by a Syllcgisme which did sufficiently manifest his meaning viz. Maior Euery man is a damnable Sinner who admitteth any to the Crowne whom he thinketh faultie in Religion Minor But euery Romish Catholicke in the opinion of Mast. Parsons thinketh all Protestant Princes faultie in Religion Ergo. Euery Romish Catholicke who admitteth a Protestant to succeede in the Crowne is in the opinion of M. Parsons a damnable Sinner Let vs if you please Reckon likewise for this Mr. PARSONS his Reckoning ALl this Syllogisme I say is as well verified of Protestants as Catholickes and consequently the force of this Argument concludeth nothing at all against vs more then against himselfe and his For as for the Maior proposition no Protestant of sense I thinke but will grant that it is a damnable sinne to admit any Prince if it lie in his hand to preferre or hinder whom he thinketh to bee faultie in Religion for that otherwise we must say that Protestants haue no Conscience concerning Religion if they will aduance wittingly any one that will in their opinion destroy the same And then I make the Minor But euery true Protestant thinketh Romish Catholicks faultie in Religion Ergo euery true Protestant that admitteth a Catholicke Prince to succeede in the Crown is a damnable sinner And then what shall we say of the Dolphine of France when he commeth to yeeres to succeede in that Crowne after the death of the king his Father Will the Protestants receiue him or no The Reueiwe 52. The Maior was indeed propounded generally but according to the euident scope of that booke of Dolman it was intended only against Protestants for their Dolman alias Mr. Parsons himselfe being of the Romane Religion did professe it to bee a damnabē sinne to admit of King Iames and so of other Protestant Princes notwithstanding the right of their inheritance to succeed in the Crowne which is all that I haue affirmed of Dolman for the which notwithstanding he hath made so lowde and a lewde clamor saying How is this fellow to be trusted in these his Assertions c. But yet now graunteth in effect my former Assertion 53. True it is that in electing a King a man is bound in conscience to vse his libertie for the good of religion but religion it selfe teacheth vs that in admitting a Successor who according to the lawes of that Kingdome hath a right vnto the Crown the libertie of election ceaseth and the necessitie of admittance by the doctrine of Protestants is layd vpon vs be the partie neuer so aduerse vnto vs in faith as it appeared in their admittance of the now King of France euen when he reuolted from their Religion whom the Romanists would not admitt whilest that he was a Protcstant in profession And this difference of comparison betweene Protestants and Romanistes will continue vntill the Romanistes haue taken out this Lesson of Primitiue and Catholicke Doctrine to witte Diuersitie of Religion doth not change the naturall right of Inheritance which Rule preuailed in the mostpure times as Barkley their owne Doctor prooneth euen when Christians were winnowed and purged with persecution at what time the Apostle exhorted them saying Let euery Soule be Subiect vnto the higher powers And Euen then saith your Cunerus when the Martyrs by reason of their multitude were able to conspire against their Persecutors yet chose they rather to suffer for the obedience and honour which they were commaunded to performe vnto Kings then to resist if it happned that they could not saue themselues by flying This was the true victorie of Christians There is one thing more which you will haue me Reckon for M. PARSONS Reckoning in Charging his Aduersarie ANd to prooue this to bee an exaggeration That all Priests doe vtterly 〈◊〉 the Succession in all Protestant Princes I alleadged contrarie examples in all the Protestant Princes that euer succeeded in England since the beginning of the world who are knowne to bee but three in number King Edward Queene Elizabeth and King Iames who were admitted both by Priests and Lay-men Ergo all Priests doe not vtterly abolish all Succession in all Protestant Princes c. And consequently some moderation must be graunted on our side against this odious exaggeration A Reuiewe shewing how M. Parsons is fettered in his owne Assertions 54. Is this an honest kind of Reckoning to tell what you alleaged and to conceale what I replied namely that it is a sillie sophistrie for you in a question of right to oppose for your discharge only a matter of fact which is no better reasoning then to say that certaine Robbers were honest and quiet Subiects because they suffered three
stronger men then themselues to passe securely on the way For you know M. Parsons that your not resisting where you want force is done with that reseruation as your Doctors haue taught Vntiil there be sufficient firce to resist Otherwise tell me I pray you when you obiect that three Protestant Princes were admitted peaceably How is it which you could not denie that Henry King of Nauarre was resisted lest that comming to the Crowne of France in that disposition wherein he was presumed to bee namely a Protestant hee should attempt the change of Religion in that great Kingdome Here the case of Religion we see was the same in K. Edward of England and King Henry of France and yet behold resisting the one and not resting the other Can you imagine any other reason of this difference but the hauing and not hauing of Power to resist Therefore in this Reckoning you haue beene wisely craftie by concealing an Obiection which you could not satisfie 55. I doubt I shall but trouble you in asking you another Question but you must pardon me for the cause it selfe doth challenge thus much The three Protestant Princes who were as you say so peaceably admitted to the Crowne were they admitted voluntarily on your part or no If they were admitted voluntarily then by your owne former Doctrine M. Parsons all your Catholickes were damnable sinners who admitted any to the Crowne whom they thought to be of a faultie Religion If they were not voluntarily admitted then are you a fraudulent AEquiuocator in answering that They were admitted peaceably reseruing as it may seeme in your minde because our Catholickes had no power to resist Wee draw to a conclusion M. PARSONS his Reckoning WHerefore to come to knit vp this Reckoning briefely with M. Morton we see first that he hath not beene able exactly to verifie any one of his two former propositions out of his owne Syllogisme concerning Dolemans Assertion but that he hath vsed exaggeration and calumniation in them both and that whatsoeuer he hath vrged neuer so boldly to incite his Maiestie against vs may with much more reason and force of argument bee retorted against himselfe and his The Reuiew confuting M. Parsons from the iudgement of his fellow Priest 56. I haue bin earnestly and sharply censured by M. Parsons as one false calumnious and malicious because I noted his booke which he named Dolman to be a Treatise very seditious and rebellious and as though he goodman had meant nothing but well therein he durst in his Mitigation pleade for his Dolman and now againe forbeareth not to reuiue the iustification of that booke in this his newe Reckoning Albeit he could not be ignorant of the iudgment which one Romish Priest with the consent of many moe had passed vpon him Parsons his bookes saith he were seditious as his Philopater speaking most rebelliously against her Maiestie and the whole State and Nobles of this land his Dolman intituling most trayterously the Spanish Infanta to the English Crowne Thus we see his will was extreamely Trayterous 57. The same Authour dooth furthermore display a fine peece of witt-craft which M. Parsons vseth to practise In the most of Father Parsons seditious books which he hath published saith the same Priest he hath eyther concealed his name or giuen thē such a name as pleased him to deuise and one of his said bookes being set out by him under the name of M. Dolman Now that many exceptions are taken against it hee Goodman was not the Author of it his name is not Dolman and gladly wold he shift and wash his hands of it but all the water betwixt this and Rome will not serue his turne so to doe although by the common opinion of the Iesuits he may by lying and Equiuocating make a faire shew So their Priest And now I ofter the matter to our indifferent Readers to iudge whether Mr. Parsons being thus blazoned by their owne Priest as a man notably Seditious euen in their booke called Dolman and a lying Equiuocator may be thought to haue beene eyther in answering and quallifying of the obiected rebellious position a iust Mitigator or else in this booke a conscionable Reckoner in charging me with falshood SECT XIII The thirteenth charge against Mr. Parsons concerning Pope Gregory 7. alias Hildebrand the first Pope that deposed an Emperour from the testimony of Otto Frisingensis 58. I Said in the Text that Gregory the seuenth was the first Pope who dcpriued any Emperor of his regiment as saith your Otto Frisingensis Adding in the Margent Vt refirt Tolossanus that is According as he is alleadged by Tolossanus Mr. Parsons supposing that the testimony of Otto Frisingensis is alleadged contrary to his meaning noteth me for the falsificator whereas not I but their owne Romish Doctor Tolossanus was the reporter of the testimony of Frisingensis I would onely know whether it were not a malitious tricke in M. Parsons to charge me with the error if yet it were an errour of my Authour Tolossanus The summe of Mr. PARSONS his Reckoning in the discharge of himselfe IN the English Text which was written for the deceiuing of the Englishcommon reader was nothing layd at al of Tolossan ' but thus in disgrace of Pope Gregory the seuenth I reade and reade again saith your Otto Prisingensis and I finde that Pope Gregory the seuenth called Hildebrand in the yeare 1060. was the first Pope that euer depriued any Emperour of his Regiment Onely in the margent he setteth downe in Latine the words of Frisingensis with cyting the booke and Chapter and then addeth Ut 〈◊〉 Tolossanus lib. 26. The Reueiwe 59. That is to say in plaine English that not I but Tolossanus cyted Frisingensis contrary to his meaning And so is Mr. Parsons found to haue falsified in accusing me offalshood And now consider good Reader I pray thee that he hath no colour for the excuse of his former slander and errour but to say that the reported Authour Frisingensis was in the text to deceiue the English Reader and that Tolossanus the reporter was set downe in Latine in the margent which any man of Sobriety would be ashamed to alleadge for were not Frisingensis and Tolossanus both Latine Authours and therefore indifferently knowne and vnknowne to the English Reader How then can this excuse Mr. Parsons fraudulency for he vnderstood that these Latine wordes which were set downe in the margent viz. Vtrefert Tolossanus do signifie being Englished As Tolossanus reporteth so that the very childishnesse of this excuse of his false dealing doth more fully bewray both his folly and falshood 60. As for me I could not thinke it necessary to seeke for Frisingensis when I had at hand so good a Reporter as is their owne Doctor Tolossanus and yet when al is said Frisingensis saith that that Pope Gregory the seuenth was the first who eyther excommunicated or deposed an Emperour Mast.
vsed in anoath for by an oath an officious lye becommeth pernicious because of the neglect of the reuerence of God who is witnesse vnto a mans oath Thus farre Sepulueda 7. Whence we vnderstand the fraudulent dealing wherevnto Mr. Parsons accustometh himselfe who informed his Reader that I could find but onely Sepulueda contradicting their Equiuocation in all the time appointed and yet all these were within the compasse of foure hundred yeeres Aquinas liuing about the yeere 1210. Scotus Anno 1300. Biel Anno 1462. Henricus de Gandauo Anno 1293. Mr. Parsons hath yet one note more which he would haue obserued I would pray my Reader not to denie him his best attention M. PARSONS his Reckoning NOte by the way the lauish immodestie of M. Morton citing that learned Doctor Gabriel Biel out of Genesius 〈◊〉 by the contemptuous title of Lewde Sophister Whereas Sepulueda stileth him in the same place Theologum Doctissimum a most learned Diuine The Reuiew 8. Then belike I haue made Sepulueda call Gabriel a lewde Sophister will you be so good as but to looke once againe vnto the place which is in the Preamble pag. 83. and I doubt not but you will finde out your owne errour or rather recognize your notable falshood For I named not Gabriel a lewde Sophister in citing the testimonie of Sepulueda but some eight lines after I made bold to censure him so of my selfe which any one who is not wittingly captious will plainely discerne What then must we note you for M. Parsons for noting this by the way but a man that was by the way when you made that note 9. If you further aske me a reason of so censuring Gabriel I shall tell you he attributeth vnto the power of nature so much as doth detract from the power of the spirit of Gods grace If this reason be not sufficient take an other viz. Although Gabriel held that the Equiuocation aboue mentioned is a lye and consequently a sinne yet I thinke none before Gabriel Biel saith Sepulueda durst affirme that a lye in bearing false witnesse in an other mans behalfe is excusable Be he therefore as learned as you wil yet might he be said to play the part of a Sophister who excused a lye which none did euer before him SECT III. The second instance against Mentall Equiuocation is from the iudgment of the Iesuit Azorius in his Instit. Moral part 1. lib. 11. c. 4. § Meatamen And vpon occasion hereof the Doctrine of Equiuocation is more exactly examined First we propound the state of this Question as it is defined and defended by M. Parsons The Charge of T. M. against M. Parsons 10. THe second falsity of P. R. is his affirming that Mental Equiuocation for herevpon we only dispute hath beene vniuersaly receiued of all Vniuersities and people in Christendome and not contradicted by any The first witnesse conuincing this Mitigation of falshood is Azorius c. M. PARSONS his Reckoning and Charge against his Aduersarie THe opinion of Azorius is falsly obiected by M. Morton as making for him whereas it maketh wholly against him The Reuiewe 11. Here is a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a maine gulfe of difference betweene our two iudgments I affirme that Azorius doth condemne the AEquiuocation which M. Parsons hath defended M. Parsons saith that Azor hath beene falsly obiected and that he maketh wholly against me Vpon this point hath M. Parsons diuers times raised vp his most clamorous inuectiues against me in this his book of Reckoning wil it please thee gentle Reader now to audit our accompts First wee are to set downe the state of the Question M. PARSONS his Reckoning BVt now let vs see notwithstanding further what Azorius saith against Equiuocation in generall for to this effect he is brought in in this place as though he held that al Equiuocation were to be reiected as lying for proofe whereof he citeth two places out of the selfe same leafe and page of Azorius The Reuiewe 12. All AEquiuocation M. Parsons thus you say and therfore put this in the number of my new and fresh lyes as you cal them saying Here followeth a notable conuiction of falsehood against him for alleaging Pa. 84. of his Preamble the Iesuit Azorius as condemning all vse of AEquiuocation c. And yet you know that before the propounding of the testimonies of Azorius and other Iesuits in the very same page of the Preamble I restrained our whole dispute vnto Mental AEquiuocation only for hereupon only said I we dispute which word only was repeated in the Preamble more then seauen times And yet can you with a wide mouth say without exception that I would haue Azorius to speake against All Equiuocation Are you not like to make a good end of your Reckoning who haue thus falsifyed in the beginning 13. In all disputes it is necessary wee know the point in question we contend therfore about Mental AEquiuocation only It is in the second place as necessary to know What is the mentall Equiuocation which M. Parsons doth defend 14. True Equiuocation saith M. Parsons may be either verball or mentall Verball is that when word or speech hath either naturally or by peculiar custome of particular language two or more significations This is truely and plainly said of the Verball Equiuocation tell vs as distinctly what the Mentall is Mentall Equiuocation is when any speech hath or may haue a double sense not by any double signification or composition of the wordes themselues but only by some reseruation of minde in the speaker whereby his meaning is made different from that sense which the wordes that are vttered doe beare or yeld without that Reseruation Doe not now forget I pray you M. Parsons that you distinguish Mentall Equiuocation from Verball by this note to wit that the double sense which is in the Mentall Equiuocation is not in the words themselues but only by some reseruatiō in the mind of the speaker which meaning is different from that sense which the words vttered doe beare very well we shall afterwards try whether Azorius doe iustifie this manner of Equiuocation or no. 15. In the next place seing that the outward speech and the inward mentall Reseruation are so different we demaund whether you thinke the same kinde of Mental Equiuocation to be true or no These wordes of a Priest I am no Priest mixed with this reseruation To tell it vnto you or such like agreeing with the minde of the speaker is as true as if the whole proposition were vttered with the mouth without reseruation thus I am no Priest to tell it vnto you We must remember this also in discussing the iudgment of Azorius to know whether he did allow that euery such speech which being vttered wholy in the mouth and agreeing with the minde of the speaker be likewise true when it is halfe reserued in the minde of the speaker
your Aduersary said so farre and no further to the purpose in hand Or is it not rather true that you cut him off and would not suffer him to say any further for your Aduersary did fully cleare the matter if you would haue suffered him to tellon his tale for these are his wordes Whereby it is manifest that all Catholikes doe not allow of Equiuocation where he is not bound to answere the Iudge or Examiner proceeding vniustly and not according to law and equity Whereby is euident that he alleaged not Sà as denying all Equiuocation but in particular cases where he that is demaunded is not bound to make answere The Reueiwe 39. The Moderate Answerer saith that Sà allowed not Equiuocation c. and I reported no more for if my Reader can finde that I added All Equiuocation then wil I be contented with the adiunct of a detestable lyer What else I cut off forsooth the Answerers tale not telling that be meant of such cases wherein a man is bound to answere Graue crimen this his meaning was sufficiently expressed in the very que stion it selfe as I alleadged it standing thus Some there be that say that he who is not bound to answere c. Here the case was manifested to hold onely Where the partie is not bound to answer in which cases M. Parsons doth iustifie Mentall Reseruation but Eman. Sâ telleth vs that some Romish Doctors doe not admit this doctrine and perhaps saith he with better reason We shall neede no more for now I haue our Raynard in the straits what are the cases Mast. Parsons for I meane to pose you wherein you would haue your Eman. Sâ seeme to admit of a mentall Reseruation Eyther must they be when the partie is bound to answere vnto a competent and lawfull Iudge which kinde of mentall Reseruation you haue held to be vnlawfull and a lie Or else it must be vnderstood in case that the partie is not bound to answere vnto the Iudge because the Iudge is incompetent and in this case Eman. Sà as you know doth not allow of your Mentall Reseruation Therefore as I did not conceale the case you speake of so haue you no cause to haue it reuealed because it maketh fully against you who defend a Reseruation when a man is not bound to answere as before an incompetent Iudge Now therefore after you haue gained attention of your Reader consider what arrerages come vpon you by this Reckoning first your falshood in taxing the omission of the word perhaps Secondly in obiecting the word All thirdly imputing a concealement of the Case and lastly the losse of your cause by the iudgement of Sà and together with him by the iudgement of Some other Romish Writers SECT V. The next witnesse against M Parsons his described mentall Equiuocation is the Iesuite Maldonate The Charge against M. Parsons 39. MAldonate said I a principall Iesuite and Casuist resolueth thus Whosoeuer dooth endeauour by feyning to deceiue another although he intend to signifie something else yet doubtlesse he lyeth Mr. Parsons How will satisfie for this Mr. PARSONS his Reckoning against his Aduersary HE stileth Maldonate a Casuist who is neuer knowne to haue read or written of Cases in his life but Scholasticall Diuinity hee professed many yeares in Paris and left very learned Commentaries vpon all the foure Euangelists though the Roman Index 〈◊〉 Anno 1607. doe mention that certaine cases of conscience published by another and Printed at Lyons Anno 1604. were falsly ascribed to him The Reueiwe 40. Rather will M. Parsons play small play then sit out and now the Gamster thinketh that he hath taken a blot for Maldonate forsooth was no Casuist If this be an error then marke good Reader what guides haue mis-led me First a Casuist being one who discusseth cases of conscience the very Title of the booke Anno 1605. in the name of Maldonate is this A briefe Summe conteyning most difficult Questions of Cases of conscience necessarie for euery Priest when he heareth confessions Which booke was set forth Permissu Superiorum that is By permission of the Superiours Secondly in the Epistle Dedicatory the same Maldonate is by name commended by the Collector of these cases a Friar in these wordes When I sought for a man who had explicated the difficulty of some cases of conscience I could finde none among the most learned who had performed this better then Maldonate which argueth that he was to bee esteemed a most singular Casuist Lastly your owne Iesuite Ribadineira in his Catalogue of Iesuiticall-Authors An. 1608. expresly recounteth among the workes of Maldonate the foresaid Summa Casuum Conscientiae 41. Will Mr. Parsons charity giue him leaue to say that your Friar Martin and the other Superiours who suffred it to passe and your Iesuite Ribadinèira also were heerein Grosse deceiuers Then indeede must I confesse that I haue beene grossely deceiued But seeing that he knew that Maldonate was thus esteemed of by these Romanists his charity towards his owne friends might haue a little asswaged his malice against me whilst that he chargeth me by the Grossenesse of other mens deserts And we may furthermore obserue what little credite is to be giuen vnto their Romish bookes which come vnder the name of their Writers seeing that the books of Iesuites are falsly inscribed Let vs leaue titles and examine the truth of the matter it selfe M. PARSONS his Reckoning DOth Maldonate say any thing in this sentence that is not conforme to our common doctrine of Equiuocation No truely for we graunt that whosoeuer doth indeauor by feyning to deceiue another doth lie Insomuch that it agreeth well with the definition of a lie set downe in St. Aug. Mendacium est falsa vocis significatio cum intentione fallendi A lie is a false signification of speech with intention to deceiue which two clauses of the definition of a lie I doe proue and demonstrate for diuers leaues together in the 8. Chapter of my former Treatise that they cannot agree with the nature of Equiuocation and by consequence that Equiuocation is no lie Not the first clause a false signisication of speech which is when the speech doth differ from the meaning and sense The Reuiewe 42. Least that Maldonate might seeme to make against you you answere not directly to these wordes Although he intend not to signifie aliquid praetereà that is Something else which indefinitely signifieth something Else whatsoeuer it be Now apply your last example vnto this Rule If your friend demaund of you to lend him some money which you know that you haue in your Chest yet you are prouided to answere I haue it not meaning to lend it This your Azorius called a plaine lye and this is it which Maldonate doth intend who in this exception against any Reseruation which is onely mentall doth imply all saying Although he feine to himselfe
any one taxation against me either in his former booke of Mitigation or in this his new Reckoning with more variety and virulency of wordes then he hath done this his Trifling rash and lying slander euery word peircing to the very soule saying Where is his conscience where is his simplicity in Christ Iesus where his innocencie here is his guiltinesse and here his trechery yet now shameth not to say as though he had not greatly vrged that point against me that he passed ouer the matter in a word or two Much like as one who after he had peirced a man into his braines and stabbed him at the very hart with many a mortall wound should excuse himselfe saying I gaue him but a Trifling blow or two SECT XI The eleauenth Charge 60. COncerning the doctrine of Doleman houlding it a damnable sinne for any Romanist to admit a Protestant Prince vnto the Crowne Which I haue answered and as I hope satified but yet M. Parsons hath found out some other odde endes to be reckoned for Mr. PAROSNS his Reckoning I Deny that either the true wordes or sense of Doleman was related by him and consequently he cannot be excused from a witting falsehood The Reuiew 61. Who is this that accuseth me M. Parsons in whose behalfe in the behalfe of Doleman alias M. Parsons for what for accusing Mr. Parsons to haue held it a damnable sinne for any of his Catholiques to admit any Protestant vnto the Crowne of England which notwithstanding was prooued by the force of a Syllogisme concluding thus Ergo Dolman aliàs M. Parsons held it a damnable sinne for any Romish Professour to admit a Protestant to the Crowne But since that M. Parsons tooke a surfeit of his owne foolish Syllogisme the consequence of Syllogismes could not wel relish in his mouth Secondly this sense is so euident that their owne Priests haue called that booke intituled Dolman a Trayterous Seditious and most infamous booke against the English State which is so euident that whosoeuer shall but reade that booke may see that if M Parsons his own conscience could be heard speake we should neede neyther the confession of their own Priests nor the consequence of M. Parsons to make vp the conclusion SECT XII The twelfth Charge Mr. PARSONS his Reckoning THis imputation was about false dealing on M. Mortons behalfe in setting downe in generall that All Popish Priests doe abolish the succession of all Protestant Princes vpon the pretence of prerogatiue in Pope and people Wherein he is conuinced of diuers falshoods handled before by vs in the first Chapter The Reuiewe 62. I answere that if I haue beene iustly conuicted nay if I haue not beene iniuriously traduced by M. Parsons in this matter then shal I subiect my selfe vnto him as worthy to be condemned in all We both remit our selues vnto our former Reckoning about this point SECT XIII The thirteenth Charge 63. IT concerneth the testimony of Otto Frisingensis against Gregory the seuenth M. PARSONS his Reckoning WHich was alleaged quite contrary to the wordes and meaning of the Authour Frisingensis so that he was enforced to lay the fault partly vpon Doctor Tolossanus partly to abuse the testimony of Claudius Espencaeus and to make him say and auerre that which he doth not but relateth out of others And in no one imputation hitherto was he more grauelled then in this as the Reader may see by turning vnto the place it selfe The Reuicwe 64. I haue much cause to thanke M. Parsons for this so plaine dealing in saying that I haue not beene grauelled hitherto in any one imputation more then in this because hereby our Reader may more easily conceiue of Mr. Parsons his former Imputations and thereby coniecture of them that follow how sicke and feeble they are by my answere vnto this wherein I shall shew what kinde of Grauell Mr. Parsons vseth to cast in my way for if in this point I stand not cleare then let our Reader holde me guilty of all the other Imputations wherewith M. Parsons hath besmeered me 65. The summe of the Answere which I haue deliuered at large is this First that I cyted truely the testimony of Tolossanus whom onely I pointed out in the marginall note to be the Authour of that testimony neyther hath M. Parsons excepted against it Secondly that M. Parsons with fine fraude concealed my Allegation that thereby his imputation of falshood might carry the better pretence and now since the discouerie of his craft and malignancy therein he findeth no better euasion then to say that my marginall cytation was not in English as though that would be any excuse for Mr. Parsons who vnderstandeth Latine Thirdly that Cl. Espensaeus dooth expresly approue the Epistle of the Priests of Liege wherein Pope Gregory the seuenth aliâs Hildebrand is noted and reproued as being the first Pope who perturbed the Emperiall States of Christendome by presumption of deposing the Emperour from his dignity Lastly that M. Parsons in this his new Reckoning in saying that Espensaeus did not approue that Epistle hath committed an irrecouerable vntruth which will be vnto his conscience as grauell would be to his mouth vntill he spit it out by true repentance SECT XIIII The fourteenth Charge 65. THe crimination which Mr. Parsons vrged against me was this His wordes saith he are these Pope Hildebrand saith our Chronographer was excommunicate of the Bishops of Italy for that he had defamed the Apostolique Sea with Simony and other capitall crimes and then cyteth for proofe hereof Lambertus Schaffnaburg Anno 1077. As if this our Chronographer had related this as a thing of truth and not rather as slanderous obiection cast out by his Aduersaries that followed the part of Henry the Emperour The discharge 66. My discharge was taken from the wordes of Shaffnaburgensis Which are these After that the fame had gone thorowut Italy that K. Henry had set foote within the coasts All the Bishops of Italy did flocke vnto him congratulating his comming because he came with a resolute courage to depose the Pope to wit Gregory 7. Afterward he sheweth their reasons That they feared not the Popes excommunication whom all the Bishops of Italy for iust cause had excommunicated who had by violence obteyned the Sea Apostolike by Symoniac all heresie had defiled the same by murthers and adulteries and other capitall crimes 67. Thus the Bishops of Italy by the testimony of Shaffnaburgensis behaued themselues against Hildebrand and this was the onely matter which I proposed as worthy of proofe for as I then said The point now in question is whether this Author Lambertus Schaffnaburg did thinke that those Bishops of Italy had condemned this Pope Gregory for whether they did it iustly or vniustly is the second question for such crimes or no I haue affirmed that Schaffnaburg was of this opinion but P. R. denyeth it calling my assertion impudent impiety Let vs be iudged by
in the cap. 10. the Confessions of Sepulueda Azorius and others In this second booke and cap. 3. the Confession of Sotus and cap. 4. the opinion of Cicero and c. 14. the iudgment of Maldonate Al these largely discussed 31 The last Effect is the infamy which redoundeth vnto the professed Equiuocators both in their speeches and in their books for there is no doubt but M. Parsons and his fellowes who durst seeke to iustifie their Mentall Equiuocation by Scriptures the writings of the holy Ghost will not spare to Equiuocate in their owne writings either for the discrediting of their Aduersaries or for the 〈◊〉 of their owne deformities or else for the speedier aduancement of their cause presuming that although they report and professe some things which in outward words are meerely false and may by their outward sound helpe forward to the building vp of the Romish Church yet that in such cases they ought to mortifie their falshoods of the outward speech with their exorbitant secret reserued inappreheÌ„sible conceits And then what credence may such writers expect of their Readers 32 S. August writing against some professors of the true religion yet in one point so far erroneons as to thinke that they might dissemble themselues to be heretikes only to the end that they might by lying more easily discouer those Heretikes called Priscilianists who concealed their heresie by lying and by pretending that they were Orthodoxe and Catholikes He reasoneth the matter thus Thou wilt say saith he that I therefore lie that I may catch a lyar viz. The Priscilianist Then hee maketh the Priscilianists to answer saying But how shall I know whether thou do it rather least thou shouldst be catched of me By by S. Augustine returneth to the Orthodoxe Can he perswade a man saith he that he will not lie that he be not catched himselfe who lieth that he may catch another Doest thou not perceiue whereunto this euill practise doth lead to wit that both they may seeme to be worthily suspected of vs and we of them and euery one of each another and so it shall come to passe that whilest that our beliefe is taught by lying no man shall know whom to beleeue Which reward of not being beleeued is of all men most due vnto Mentall Equiuocators such as teach men to say to their friends I haue no money meaning to lend it vnto you and to their Aduersaries I am no Priest meaning with purpose to tell it vnto you c. which speeches when their Cases happen to be truely knowen to wit that the one had money and the other was a Priest doe carry nothing else in their outward sound which onely can be vnderstood of man but the euident apparance of a lie and are indeed in themselues as hath beene both prooued and confessed no better than flat lies yet could M. Parsons haue no other remedies whereby to mortifie his manifold vntruthes which vniustly vnconscionably he did heap vpon me Notwithstanding I doe earnestly pray if he be yet aliue or if he be dead I wish that such his Calumniations be neuer laid vnto his charge Laus Deo See his booke intituled Dolman part 2. cap. 5. cap. 10. See his Treatise of Three Conuersions of England in the Additions vpon the newes of the succession of the King of Scotland to the Crowne of England num 8. which Addition was printed Anno 1603. Baruch 1. 11. Iud. 5. 21. Luc. 4. 10. * ver 9. a Aug. b Lib. Verisimil Theolog. c. ex Gilb. Cogn lib. 1. Narrat c M. Brereley and his fellow in their booke called The Protestants Apology c. the second Edition Praefa to the Reader pag. 10. d Quodlib pag. 236. e Reck pag. 669 f Cùm vnum taÌ„tùm exemplum tuae defensionis he speaketh vnto Gretzer in Frisiam allatum esset hocipsum propter nefandam maledicentiam non inueniret emptorem Lubbertus Replic lib. 1. cap. 1. g Luc. 16. v. 6. h The marginall notes will point almost at euery one i Gen. 9. k The Romish Apologists in their second Edition of their Protestants Apology concerning the testimony of Delriê° And their Moderate Answerer in his late patterne of a Protestant about the legitimation of Q. Mary and Q. Elizabeth l Iud. 10. 20. m Aug. n Galat. 6. 17. o Hier. l. 3 Proëm in Epist. p Me Petilianus ManichauÌ„ esse dicit loquens de me Conscientia boc ego iudico me non esse loquens de meâ Conscientiâ eligite cui credatis q 1. Thess. 5. 21. Reckoning ca. 3. §. 1. pa. 119. 120. P. R his presumption a Posseuin Appa rat Tit. Fr. Suarez b Varia Opuscula Theologica approued by the Vniuersitie of omplutum vnde the hands of eight Doctors See the beginning c Franciscus Cumel variarum disputationum c. 1 ugduni 1609. d See all these Encomia in the beginning of his worke e F. Cumel Dispu Variar Tom. 3. pag. 126. col 1 f Pag. 128. col 2. g Pag. 129. col 1. h Ibid. pag. 267. col 2. i Pag. 15. col 1. in margine k Ibid. pag. 137. col 2. in margine l Ib. pa 133. 〈◊〉 m Ibid. pag. 195. col 1. n Ibid. pag. 124. col 2. o Ibid. pag. 131. col 2. p Epist. Dedicat. in Tom. 3. Reekon cap. 3. 5. 6. pag. 149. 150 r Desensio Iohannis Marsi'y in fauorem 〈◊〉 8. propositiones contmentis 〈◊〉 scripsit illustrissimus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bellarminus 〈◊〉 1606. s 〈◊〉 P. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 An. 1606. t 〈◊〉 aius de 〈◊〉 Pape Ad Clementem 8. Pontif. cap 37. u 〈◊〉 desens pag. 280. a Pag. 285. Notable falsifications of Bellar. confessed b Pag. 297. c Pag. 322. d pag. 324. e Ibid. f Pag. 361. g P. Paulus Apolog pag. 569. * Bellerminus planè contranum Gersoni tribuit c. h Marsil defens pag. 222. i Pag. 288. k Pag. 289. l Jbid. m Pag. 346. n P. Paulus Apol pag. 602. o Ib. pag. 606. p Barcla de potesta Papae c. 37. q Ib. cap. 32. r Conc. Agathen Anno 506. can 32. * See hereaster cap. 8. a Marsil quo supra pag. 357. b Ibid. c Ibid. pag. 300. d Ib. pag. 354. a Barc'a cont Monarchom 1. 5. 〈◊〉 6. pag. 360. b Bodm 1. 2. de Repub. cap. 5. c Barcla 1. 6. c. 20. pag. 490. d L. 1. de feud Tit. 1. e Barcla 1. 6. c. 24. pag. 510. * Sec hereaftes ca. 5. §. 3. c. a Ant. Augustin ' Archiepiscopus Tarraconens de emend Gratiani lib. 1. Dialog 1. pag. 5. Paris 1607. a Defens Marsil Cont. Bellar. pag. 331. A daungerous Art of corrupting of Authors b Ibid. pag. 338. c Index Belgieus per Iunium pag. 17. d Index Belg. apud Pappum pag. 12. c Cl. Espencaeus Tract 6. Epist. dedic ad card castil Reckon pag. 215. Idem pag. 214. a Declaratio 〈◊〉 turbationum quae inter Iesuitas Sacerdotes in
Vasquez quo suprà p. 241. Two notable vntruths Reckon p. 148. Tom. 4. Ano. 392 fine M. Parsons froward Calumniation q Vasq Ies. l 2. de Adorat 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 M. Parsons vniust Calumniation * Preamb. p. 63. (1) Pelagiani c. Bellar l a. de Eccles. Misit c. 9. §. Pelagiani (2) Hic proprius c. Valet Ies de mig pecc c. 2. (3) Caluinus c. Idem ib. in princ c. 8. in Tom. 2. disp 6 q. 11. punct 1. Reckon ca. 3. §. 7. pa. 155. a Bellar. loco suprà citato A Calumnious Taxation Reckon ib. b Jnstit l 2. c 1. §. 4. 5. Caluins iudgement c Ibid. §. 7. d Reckon p. 155 e Bellar. l. 1. de bap c. 4. §. quintum Caluines iudgement iustified by Romanists f See Cassander himselfe de baptismo Infantum g Valent. lib. de pecc orig c. 7. in princip vnto the end of the Chapter Tom. 2 de pecc orig disp 6. q. 12. punct 1. §. 4. h Praef. in libros Vegae i Vega. l. 2. de Iustif. c. 6. § Et probauit Protestants iudgement concerning original sinne iustified by their aduersaries Reck. c. 3. §. 7. pag. 158. Hierom. 2. l. cont Pelag. k Catholique Appeale 1. 5. cap. 22. § 3. Sinnes how veniall and mortall l Apud Vasquem Tom. 1. in 1. Tho. 2 disp 42 c. 1. n. 4. p. 929. m Cath. Appeale quo supra §. 4. n Bellar. l. 1. de Amiss grat c. 4. §. His erroribê° * Preamb. p. 63. 4 Nouatianorum c. Bellar. l. 4. de notis Eccl. c. 9. §. NouatianoruÌ„ 5 Nouatianorum c. Castro l. 12. Haer. 3. Tit. Paenitentia Vega li. 13. de Iustif. c. 2. p. 486. Moldon Ies. in Ioh. 5. 4. 6 Non Negant c. Bellar. l. 3. de Iustif. c. 6. saepe alias 7 Non de c. Bellar. l 1 de 〈◊〉 c 8. §. vt 〈◊〉 Reckon cap 3. §. 8 pag. 160. Bellarmines slaunder Recko quo supra M. Parsons fraudulent dissembling Reckon p. 163. M. Parsons precipitate and rash in diuination a Ctholicke Appeal l. 4. c. 〈◊〉 And to proue that such like Denials doe not make an Hereticke see the Audiani in the same booke Reckon pag. 162. 163. M. Parsons his childish rash obiection of craft b Catho Appeale quo supr Reckon pag. 162. His fond and false coniecture Reckon p. 163. His loose and vniust reprehension * Pream pa. 64. 8 Manicheotum c. Bellar. l. 4. de notis Eccles c. 9. §. Manichaeorum 9 Iohannes Caluinus c. Bellar. l. 1 ae Grat. primi 〈◊〉 c. 1. §. In codem Reckon ca. 3. § 9. pa. 167. Bellarmines flaunder Reckon p. 167. * Reckon ibid. pag. 168. Two Fathers notably abused by M. Parsens and Bellarm. c Aug. Tom 6. de Haeres c. 46. d 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dagian e Hier. in Jsaiam Reckon pag. 168. f Maldon Ies. Comment in Luc. 15. ver 13. g See aboue The fathers iudgement concerning free-will h Epist. dedicat ante libros Hilary Reck. pag. 169. His heady taxation i Cath. Appeale l 5 c. 19. k Caluin Instruct aduers. Libert c. 3. l Pererius Jes. in Gen. 11. l. 16. Disp. 17. n. 255 c. * Pream pa. 64. 10 Henr. Bullingerum c. Bellar. praef in contr de Christo. §. HenriceÌ„ Greg. Valent Ics. lib. devnit Triait c. 9. 12 Tertullianus c. Bellar. l. 1. de Cluisto c. 10 §. Respondeo 2. Recko pag. 172. M. Parsons maketh Bellarmine to betray the Catholique cause Reckon p 171. M. Parsons lauish wrangling m As is plaine in the first part of my Apolog. Cath. pag. 149. whence the sentence was transcribed n See in the beginning of Tertul. Basil. An. 1521. Admonitio ad Lectorem de quibusdam Tertulliani dogmatis Reck. p. 173. Three obseruable points M. Parsons ignorance of the iudgement of Tertullian * Preamb. p. 65. 13 Secundum errorem c Bellar. l. 1. de beat Sanct. c. 4. PauloÌ„ post initium 14 Octaus obiectio c. Bellar. l. 1. de Imag c. 8 §. 14. 13. Reckon pag. 164. 165. M. Parsons is ignorant of Beliarmines booke with which he saith he consulted a See his booke Devanit Scient cap. 6. ve sus finem where he calleth the Protestants Hereticks And as some note was commended by Pope Leo the tenth l 1. Ep. 38. See the booke of Pope loan pag. 104. M. Parsons his answere entangleth Bellarmine in an higher suspition of slander * Luc. 26. 2. Reckon pag. 175. b Caluin aduers. Libertin c. 22. c Bellar. l. 4. de Christo c. 9 §. Si quis d Caluine vpon the text of the penitent thiese e Instit. l. 3. c. 20. §. 20. f Bellar. l. 1 de Eccles. Triumph c. 1. §. Eundem habet Bellarmine depraueth the sentence of Caluine g Instis. que suprà h Bellar. l. 1. de beat sanct c. 5. §. 〈◊〉 Reckon quo suprà p. 174. i Bellar. l. 1. de Eccles. triump c. 1. §. Secundum errorem * See here after l. 1. c. 12. §. 13. M. Parsons partiality * Preamb. p. 65. 15 Bellar. l. 4. de notis Eccles. c. 9. ad finem 16 Quae sententia c. Bellar l. 1 de Euch. c. 1. initio 17 Docet Caluinus c. Bell 〈◊〉 §. Secundò docet 18 Docet Caluinus c. Valent. Ies. Tom. 4. disp 6. 〈◊〉 3. punct 1. §. Item k Reck. cap. 3. §. 12. pag. 181. k Reck. P. 182. lin vlt. Reckon p. 177. Recko pag. 179. M. Parsons silly wrangling l Bellar. l. 4. de notis Eccl. c. 9. l. 1. de Eucharist c. 1. §. edidit c. Reckon p. 179. His fond impertinency Reckon ibid. m Bellar. l. 1. de Eucharist c. 1. M. Parsons Ignorance of the obiected heresie Reckon ibid. His wilfull vntruth M. Parsons aime is eyther false or friuolous Reckon pag. 183. Mr. Parsons vnreasonable exaction * 1. Cor. 12. 17. n Apolog. Cathol part 1. Noto 6. * Preamb. p. 66. Recko c. 3. § 13. pa. 187. a Aug. de doct Christ. l. 2. c. 9. b Lib. 2. depeccat merit remiss ca. 36. c Contra Donatist l. 1. c. 7. Tom. 7. d Bellar. l. 1. de Rom. Pont. c. 23. e Relect. 2. §. 2. num 8. Cusanus l. 3 de Concord c. 2. Reck. pag. 195. g Recko p. 193. h Pag. 194. Mr. Parsons crooked dissimulation i Bellar. lib. 1. de Pont c. 27. §. Secund rat Rome by iust consequence is not the Mother-church Mr. Parsons ignorance Reck. p. 192. Loose and absurd cauils Recko pag. 193. A Simile illustrating Mr. Parsons deceitful peeuishnes k Reckon 194. l Concord Cath. l. 3. c 2. His malignant lust of accusing his Aduesary Popes Epistles forged * Preamb. pa. 67 7 Extat apud c. Bellar. l. 4. de Pont. c. 13. § Extat 8 Being vrged c. 9 Tu Theologorum c. Platina
his aduersary Recko p 43. n. 67 * Ibid. p. 44. n. 69 M. Parsons pertinacy in his errour m Preamb. p. 14. His threefold falsity m Preamb. pa. 15 Reckon pag. 47. * See aboue lib. 1. cap. 1. c. M. Parsons his rash and peremptorie Assertion Reckon pag. 47. num 74. M. Parsons learnedly bewrayeth his want of learning in a Grammaticall quidditie n Barclaius contra Monarchom li. 3. ca. 5. p1 137 Gene. 27. 36. o Pseamb pa. 22 p Mitig. cap. 2. pag. 72. q Preamb. pa. 23 Reckon p. 1. 51. num 82 and p. 1. 263. where he calleth this the eleuenth M. Parsons relenteth somewhat from his former Tenet r Treamb pa. 24 Reckon 〈◊〉 54. Difference betweene Election and Succession s Barckley in two Bookes the one Contra Monarchomakos The second De potestate Pa. p. e handleth this at full and concludeth expressely against the Doctrine of the Iesuites See also the confession of others Full satisfact part 3. cap. 8 c. * Rom. 13. Reckon pag. 51. His craftie concealement A Simile t Preamb. u Mitig. pag 77. num 〈◊〉 A Dilemma See aboue Reckon pag. 53. x Quodlib p. 107 and againe pag 310. M. Parsons false and treasonable dealing discouered by his owne fellow y Quodli p. 286. M. Parsons can denie his owne writing a Prcamb p. 27. Reckon pa. 61. M Parsons a plaine falsifier His childish excuse b Frising Chron. lib. 6. cap. 35. c Preamb. quo suprà Reckon p. 64. His absurd reasoning A Simile Reckon p. 64. M. Parsons will needes behead a King whom he accounteth an Hereticke A necessary obseruation concerning Excommunication and Eradication d M. Blackwell exam pag. 41. from Medina in primā secunde p. 513. q. 96 art 4 M. Parsons fully confuted by his fellowes e Ludouic Apolog p. 175. f Aquin secunda secundae q. 11. art 3. * Matth. 18. 17. Reck. p. 64 65 Tolos de rep l. 6. c. 13. n. 20. g Barclay de potestate Papae cap. 40. h Baron Ano. 726. num 26. M. Parsons negligence in Storie i Preamb. p. 29. Reckon pag 66. 67. Espen l. 2 Digress in Ep. ad Timoth * Reckon p. 67. in Espen cap. 6. p. 274. Edit Paris 1561. * Reckon ibid. k Espencaeus in the very same place which M. Parsons hath cyted M. Parsons palpable vntruth l Pag. 273. of his booke aboue cyted Bloody Popes m Espen Comm. in Tit. 3. 1. Digress 10. pa. 513. Paris 1568. n Exam. pag. 54. o Barcla De pot Papae cap. 9. p Apologia P. Pauli §. Videre non pag. 624. q Cusanus Card. Concord Cathel l. 3 c. 41. pag. 812 Reckon pag 67. r Jbid. pag. 275. M. Parsons his militarie Discipline s Quodlib p. 236 His manifold vntruethes Reckon ibid. t Cumel Tom. 3. var. Disp. pag. 131. Col. 1. u Bellarm. l. 1. de Cleric cap. 22. x Espenc Epist. Dedic ad Card. Castil antè Sex Tract a Preamb. p. 〈◊〉 2. Mitigat pag. 279. 281. 284. Reckon cap. 4. §. 11. pag. 265. M. Parsons hath lost his logicke b Reckon ibid. pag 266. c Mitig. p. 284. d Matth. 4. * Preamb. p. 83. Reckon pa. 267. * See aboue * See above e Sepulueda de ration dicendi tellimon cap. 3. pag. 468. f Ibid. cap. 5. pag. 471. S. pulueda condemneth Mast. Parsons Equiuocation for a lie M. Parsons wilfull vntruth M. Parsons second vntruth g Satisfact part 3. p. 82. out of Sepulueda de rat occulta ca. 19. M. Parsons AEquiuocation not ancient h Sepulueda quo suprà in praefat Aquinas i Ibid. cap. 15. Scotus k Ibid. cap. 18. Henricus de Gandauo l Ibid. cap. 19. Gabriel Reckon Ibid. pag. 267. M. Parsons dent falshood m Sepulueda quo supra a Preamb. p. 84. Reckon cap. 4. §. 12. pag. 269. Reck. ibid. p. 269. b Reck. cap. 9. pag. 643. c Preamb. p. 84. M. Parsons vntruth d Mitigat c. 12. n. 3. pag. 484. e Jbidem f Mitigat c. 8. g Reck. pag 100. h Mitigat p. 344 Reck. pag. 270. * Jbidem pag. 270. 271. * Ibid. pag. 271. i Azor Inst. Mor. Tom. 1. l. 11. c. 4. §. Secunda Regula Azorius his meaning An Example k Sepulucdo de rat dicendi testimon cap. 3. Reckon p. 271. 〈◊〉 272. * Encount p. 216 * Preamb. p. 85 l Quinta regula c. Azor. Jes. Jnst. part 1. l. 11. c. 4 in fine cap. M. Parsons AEquiuocation found to be a lie Reckon p. 272. 273. Reckon ibid. A wicked forgery vsed by M. Parsons to shift himselfe from the note of a lie m Azor. part 1. Inst. Moral l. 11. c. 4. §. Quintò M. Parsons vseth a strange and strong delusion to abuse his Reader n Azor. ibid. M. Parsons example of mentall AEquiuocation proued a lie out of Azorius His abuse of his Reader M. Parsons professeth to AEquiuocate with his friends * Preamb. p. 86. o Mod. Answ. cap. 10. Reck. c. 4. §. 13. pag. 276. * Reck. pag. 279. * Reck. p. 276. about the 20. line How desperat ly M. Parsons can falsifie Reck. pag. 276. * Reck. pag. 277. p Miligat cap. 8. pag. 321. and as I repeated it Preamb. pag. 43. M. Parsons witlesse falsity q Reck pag. 278. num 79. His singular fraude Reck. pag. 276. A due suspiciō of craft among the Romanists in altering and corrupting the opinions of their owne Iesuits * See aboue cap. 1. §. 2. 6. * See herafter Cap. 14. §. 1. Reck. pag. 278. 279. His rude cauil r Preamb. p. 86. Dilemma * Preamb. p. 87. f Maldon Ies. Commen in Luc. vlt. vers 28. Reckon cap. 4. §. 14 pag. 283. M. Parsons dissolute and vast rashnesse and ignorance t Tit. Ioh. Maldonatus Obserue the little credite which may be giuen vnto new Romish bookes Reckon pag. 283. 284. Lib. de mend c. 4. lib. con mend ca. 12. Reck. pag. 284. Stratagems not properly lies Reck. pag. 285. M. Parsons friuolous distinction u Act. 5. Reckon pag. 285. 286. a Mitigat Epist. dedic n. 18.19 b Preamb. p. 90. Excellēt fraud in abuse of their owne Authors See a little after num 5. Reckon cap. 5. §. 1. pag. 295. c Mitigat Epist. Dedicat. num 18. 19. Reck. pag. 296. 197. d Index libror. prohibit Tit. Polydor. Virg. Reck. pag. 297. Popes change their Christen names Reck. pag. 300. 302. Iesting * 1. Cor. 7. v. 10. e Preamb. p. 91. 8. f Bellar. in his Correctorio pag. 170. pag. 192. Reck. cap. 5. §. 2 pag. 308. Fond cauillations g Mitigat cap. 2. pag. 79. h Preamb p. 93. in sine His fraudulent concealement of his falshood i Preamb. p. 94. Reck. pag. 313. M. Parsons his admirable craft and falshood Reck. pag. 314. M. Parsons lauish vntruth k Preamb p. 94. l Preamb. pa. 95. Reckon cap. 5. § 3. pag. 321. 322. m Lib. 3. de abdicat Hen. 3. c. 16 pag.
267. M. Parsons notorious falshood Reck. pag 322. n Bouchier de iusta abdic l. 4. c. 2. o Ibid. c. 3. p. 354 M. Parsons excusable falshood p Cap. 4. p. 358. q Barcl l. 5. con tra Monarchom c. 6. p 361. r Quodl p. 296. Reck. pag. 323. a Reckon cap. 5. §. 4. pag. 326. M. Parsons vnseemely scurrility b Decret l 1. de Rescript Tit. 3. cap. 5. Prauâ insinuatione suggestum c. c Import Consider pag. 8. d P. Robertus Personus alià s Cowbuccus Iesuita praecipuus c. Declarat motuum perturb inter Iesuitas Sacerdotes pag 23. Reckon pag. 331. 332. e Pag. 102. M Parsons exceeding craft and deceit f Reynolds in Rossaeo p. 18. g Pag. 10. M. Raynolds sentence of detraction from Regall authority h Pag. 85. i Pag. 539. The Euidence A coÌ„firmation from their owne Doctors k 〈◊〉 cont Monarch lib 3. cap. 3. l The Authour of the Booke intituled verisimilia Theologica Iuridica c. pag. 155. m Barcla quo supra n Jbid. lib. 4. * Lib. 4. cap. 4. o Marsil defens cont Bellarm. pag. 212. Reck. pag. 328. * Reck. pag. 329. p Mitigat p. 403. M. Parsons and Bellarmines sophistry q Marsil 〈◊〉 cont Bellar. c. 3. pag. 201. Power of a King immediately from God A necessary distinction betweene Title and Power Bellarmine confuted by Marfilius r Card. Cusan Concord Cathol lib. 3. c. 41. Post Marcellinum Papatum vacâsse septem annis s Sunt qui scribunt post morteÌ„ Nicolai primi Sedem vacâsse annis octo mensibus septem Platina in vita Nicolai primi * See aboue cap. 1. t P. Paulus Apolog pro Gersone cont Bellar. pag. 569. Bellarmines apparant confessed falshood u Reck. pag. 328. a Preamb. p. 105 Reck. pag. 335. b See aboue Cap. 1. Romists ouertaken in the guilt which they impute to others c See aboue Cap. 12. §. 8. Reck. p. 339. 340 d Tolet. Instruct. Sacerd l. 1. c. 13. §. Sixtus M. Parsons confuted by their Card. Tollet Reck. pag. 340. 341. Greg 9. Decret l. 5. Tit. 7. c. 16. The mistery of non payment of debts made by promise Reck. pag. 374. Popes Canon of killing of Heretiques e Pream p. 107. A Dilemma f Pream p. 108. g See Thuanus hist. lib. 52. Reck. pag 349. M. Parsons his vngodly silence betrayeth his whole pretence of their loyalty in the States of Protestants A Similitude h Preamb. p. 108. Reck. pag. 351. i Preamb p. 106. His extrauagancie k Pream p. 111. l Greg. 13. ad futuram rei memoriam c Reckon cap. 5. § 7 pag. 355. The authority of the Romish Glosse vpon the Decrees and Decretals c. m Sess. 4. The dubious authority of their vulgar Romish Translation of the Bible n Mald. Ies. in Matth. 6. 5. o Ribera Ies. in Heb. 4. 2. p Salmeron Ies. 〈◊〉 Iac. 5. 16. q Catholike appeale Lib. 4. cap. 18. §. 3. M. Parsons his frothy argument Reck. pag. 357. M. Parsons false iuggling r Satisfact part 3 pag. 34. s Preamb. p. 111. t Preamb. pag. 111. 112. His notable fraude u In Extrauag comm lib. 1. de Maior Obed. cap. 1. A false and bloudy Glosse in the Extrauagants a Preamb p. 112 Reck. pag 358. * Reck. ibidem pag. 363. M. Parsons his vnwise demaÌ„d Caluin his iudgment iustified by Bellarmine b See aboue cap. 12. n. 27. c Danaeus Resp. ad Bellar. contro 2. lib. 20. cap. 19. * See aboue d See this aboue cap. 12. Reck pag. 364. e See aboue cap. 12. num 41. f Mitigat p. 88. g See this aboue cap. 12. num 47. Reck. cap. 5. §. 10. pag. 365. M. Parsons former grieuous slaunder partly confessed and throughly discouered h Mitigat p. 234 M. Parsons exquisite fraudulency in couering his falshood Reck. cap. 5. §. 11. pag 366. M. Parsons defendeth that booke which hath beene accounted rebellious by their owne Priest i Important Consider in the Epist Dedicat. And see the like confessed aboue Reck. cap. 5. §. 12. pag. 367. k See aboue Reck. c. 5. P. 367. What kinde of Graueller M. Parsons is l See aboue cap 12. Sect. 13. m Mitig. ca 6. n. 37. pag. 215. n Preamb. p 120 Lambertê° Scassnaburg hist. 〈◊〉 An. 1077. 〈◊〉 sin o Preamb p. 120. Reckon cap. 5. pag. 376. His meere quarrelling Dan. 6. Reck. pag 374. Reck. pag. 374. M. Parsons miserable fraude and falsity p Mitigat p. 215. His fabulous figment Reck. pag. 378. M. Parsons lustfull appetite to wrangle q Maldonat Ies. vpon the Text. Reck. pag. 384. r Mitigat cap. 2. num 46. pag. 80. s Vrsperg quo suprà A memorable exaÌ„ple of treasonable practise by Bishops Reck. pag. 385. His deceitfull opposition t Preamb. p. 121. u Stapleton Doctr. princip lib. 13. cap. 15. pag. 547. Reckon cap. 6. pag. 392. a The Protestants Apologie for c. Reckon pa. 392 M. Parsons beginneth this second part of his Reckoning with a lauish falshood Recken cap. 6. pag. 393. b Full Satisf part 1. pag. 3. M. Parsons fraud c Bellar. Ricog operum pa. 81. Reckon pa. 398. His inordinate iangling about words Reckon pa. 399. The odds between M. Parsons and Azorius concerning Equiuocation Reckon pa. 402. His extreme captiousnes Escapes in Bellarmines books wherin the particle NON is wanting d Bellar. Recog lastly printed pag. 127. e Pag. 144. f Pag. 153. g Pag. 159. h Pag. 162. i Pag. 178. k Pag. 185. l Pag. 186. m Pag. 188. Reckon pa. 403 * See aboue lib. 1. c. 4. * See aboue Ib Reckon pa. 407. His folly His malice Reckon pa. 410. Barkl lib. 6. advers Monarch c. 26. M. Parsons his prosu e fraud Reck. pag. 413. Reck. ibid. Reckon ibid. M Parsons grosse falshood n Bellar. lib. 1. de Cont. c. 13. §. Habemus ergo Reckon ibid. Plaine ' iangling about words Reckon ibid. o Iosh. 24. 1. M. Parsons manisold absurdities The power of gathering of Synods p Tortus aliâs Bellarminus in Resp. ad 〈◊〉 pag. 144. q Card. Cusanus Concord Cath. lib. 2. cap. 25. Reckon pag. 414. M. Parsons his carping veine A similitude A strange change in pa pall presumptions Reckon page 415. M. Parsons notable falshood r Ful Satisfact part 3. pag. 2. Reckon ibid. f Salmeron Ies. Part. 3. Disp. 12 in epist. Pauli in genere §. Sed contrà Whether the Prince or the Priest was supreame in the law of Moses t Salmeron Ies. Tom. 12. Tract 63. pag. 428. §. Sed nunc M. Parsons flatly confuted by Salmeron Reckon pag. 420. Ceremonies of the old law how figures of the new a 1. Cor. 10. Reckon pag. 422. M. Parsons his egregions vntruth b Carerius depotestate Rom. Pont. lib. 2. in 〈◊〉 cap. c Carerius lib. 2. de potestat Pont. c. 9. p. 127. d Quod lib pa. 152. 288. Reckon pa. 424. Dolman part 1. pag. 13. M. Parsons his