those to whome it belongeth principally to discusse examine and determine this matter as afterwardes shall be shewed And yet as though he had made no such exception but admitted all kind of writers throughout all times in this matter he maketh this new ridiculous vaunt Shew vs saith he for your mentall reseruation but one Father whether Greeke or Latin one Pope whether Catholicke or Antichristian one Author whether learned or vnlearned who did euer so fancy c. 4. Wherunto I may answere that if the maker of this vaunt had had but one dram of discretion he would neuer haue set downe so many ones to confound himself for that presently we shall shew so many Fathers Greeke and Latin to haue allowed of the foresaid speech as had occasions to handle such Scriptures as conteine like propositions and so many Popes to haue approued the same as haue allowed the said Fathers sentences or haue liued since the collecting of the Canon Lawes wherin the said Fathers sentences are aboundantly cited and set downe and that so many learned graue pious Authors haue byn of this fancy if it be a fancy as haue byn consulted in cases of most moment that comprehend this controuersy So as for this Minister to except against foure hundred yeares togeather which in effect conteineth a graunt of all the learned of that time and yet to challeng one Father one Pope one Author learned or vnlearned sheweth a broken phantasy of an ydle braine indeed 5. But now to lay before the Readers eyes some brief consideration what is reiected in the exclusiō of these last foure hundred yeares about our point in controuersy it is to be noted that the science of Deuinity called by the Greeks Theology for that it is properly immediatly about God matter belonging vnto God hath growne frō time to time according to the growth of mankind and to the most ordinate and excellent prouidence of almighty God as S. Paul diuinely 〈◊〉 in diuers partes of his Epistles which we shall heere indeauour to declare by this particuler deduction that from the beginning of the world vnto the deluge there passing aboue a thousand and six hundred yeares to wit more then from Christ to this time set downe in Scripture vnder the liues only of ten mē there was no other Theology in all that time but only by speech and tradition of Father to sonne freind to friend maister to scholler predecessour to successour and from this againe vnto the time of Abraham which was vpon the point of three hundred yeares the same was obserued and from him to Moyses which was aboue other foure hundred yeares no booke is extant that was written though in these last foure hundred yeares from Abraham to Moyses God had his seuerall people as is knowne which were gouerned without any written word at all 6. But Moyses hauing written the fiue first bookes of the Bible commonly called the Pentateuch so many ages after the beginning of the world and sundry other holy men diuers bookes and Treatises after him againe vntill the comming of Christ albeit the sciēce and study of Deuinity was much enlarged therby yet was it barren in a certaine sort in respect of that which ensued after vnder Christ in the writinges of the Apostles and Apostolicke men and large Commentaries and expositions written theron by succeeding Christian ages which in time growing to be so many and great volumes partly of the said expositions and explanations of Scriptures partly of Treatises bookes and dogmaticall discourses partly of Ecclesiasticall Histories partly of discussions and determinations of Councelles both Generall Nationall Prouinciall and partly finally of resolutions decrees of Bishops chiefe Pastors for directiō of their flocks especially of the highest that held the Chaire for gouerning and moderating of all the rest 7. These thinges I say growing at length to so great a bulke manifold multitude of bookes Treatises tomes and volumes as many men had not time to read them ouer and much lesse leasure and iudgement to digest or conceaue them with that distinction order and perspicuity which was necessary it pleased almighty God out of his continuall prouidence for his said Church to inspire certaine men 〈◊〉 foure hundred years past to reduce the said vast corpes of Deuinity to a cleare methode by drawing all to certaine common places and heades and by handling and discussing the same so punctually distinctly and perspicuously as any good wit in small time may come to comprehend the whole without reading ouer the other so many huge volumes as before was necessary And this method was called afterwardes Schoole-Deuinity for that it did principally consist in disputation and discussion of matters exactly by discending into particulers and dissoluing all doubtes wheras the other manner of 〈◊〉 of Scriptures Fathers Doctors Histories and Councells seuerally remained with the name of positiue Deuinity as contenting it self only with assertiue doctrine without disputation or further discussion 8. The first and principall Authors of this method or methodicall study is accounted to be Petrus Lombardus Bishop of Paris aboue foure hundred fifty yeares past who for that he gathered into the foresaid method of generall heades all that any way appertained to Deuinity out of the sayinges and sentences of Scriptures and Fathers deuiding the same into foure bookes and euery booke into seuerall distinctions he was called afterwardes the Maister of the sentences and many learned men in ensuing times wrote Commentaries theron enlarging with great variety of matter the said method which he had inuented Others also made seuerall Summes of Theology differēt in name but in effect to the same imitation wherof may be accounted one of the first our often named learned Countreyman Alexander of Hales in Suffolke and after him S. Thomas of Aquine vpon whome many other learned men since that time haue and doe vnto this day write large Commentaries Diuers also considering that this methodicall study hath two partes the one speculatiue which is handled principally by the exercise of our vnderstanding in dispute the other moral that apperteineth to manners and action of life sundry learned men doe betake themselues principally to this later as more necessary to practice of Christian life and cases therin to be resolued in Conscience 9. And about the very same time or little before it came to passe by the like prouidēce of almighty God that the same method was thought vpon for reducing the Decrees and Constitutions of Councels Fathers Bishops and Popes apperteyning to Ecclesiasticall gouernment which grew now to be many vnto like general heades bookes causes questions and Chapters 〈◊〉 more facility of comprehending and remembring the same the cheif Author therof being Gratian a learned Monke of S. Benedicts Order which laborious and methodicall compilation approued by Popes at that time and from time to time afterwards and expounded by the writinges and
from Syr Edward Courtney Earle of Deuonshire Syr Nicolas Throckmorton others what to the conspiracy of VVilliam Thomas who hauing determined and plotted the murder of the said Queene and conuicted therof professed saith Stow at his death at Tyburne that he died for his countrey 30. I passe ouer other conspiracies and Rebellions as that of Vdall Throckmorton Iohn Daniel Stanton Cleber the three Lincolnes and after them Thomas Stafford and others that comming out of France with instructions of the brethren of Geneua surprised Scarborough Castle made proclamations against the Queene that she was iustly deposed and other such like attemptes by that sort of people who all professed themselues to be Protestantes and to haue entred into those affaires principally for their Religion And with what face or forhead then doth T. M. say in this place Shew vs what Protestant euer resisted c. 31. But much more impudent is the second part of his assertion about Ministers saying That no Minister of the Ghospell did euer kindle the least spark of sedition against Queene Mary Wheras his aduersary obiecteth many by name as Cranmer Ridley Rogers and Iewel before mentioned who as is euident by Fox his story in his Actes and Monumentes both dealt preached stirred people against her all that lay in their power And as for Cranmer it is euident he was condemned for the same treason in Parlament Ridley preached openly at Paules Crosse against her title Rogers at Clocester and Iewel was appointed to preach in Oxford had he not byn preuented by the sudden and vnexpected proclayming of the said Queene there by Syr Iohn VVilliams others 32. The instances also that we haue alledged of Goodman VVhittingham Gilby Couerdale VVitehead sundry others testified by my Lord of Canterbury to haue taught and practized sedition against the said Queene in those daies doe they not conuince this Minister Thomas Morton of rare singular impudency will any man euer belieue him hereafter what he saith or affirmeth denieth or shifteth of seing him to auouch so manifest vntruthes as these are with so shameles asseueration 33. But yet to conuince him somewhat more I think good to set downe some of the particuler wordes and phrases of two or three of the principall forenamed pillars of the Protestant primitiue Church in our Iland omitted for breuities sake by the moderate Answerer to the end yow may see their spirit iudge of this mans forehead in standing so resolutely in the deniall taken in hand For first Iohn Knox in a booke written printed at Geneua 1558. which was the last of her raigne wherin after he had said That is is not birth only or propinquity of bloud that 〈◊〉 a King lawfull to raigne aboue the people professing Iesus Christ c. He goeth forward saying thus I feare not to affirme that it had byn the duty of the Nobility Iudges Rulers and people of England not only to haue resisted and withstood Mary that Iezabel whome they called their Queene but also to haue punished her to death with all the sort of her Idolatrous Priestes togeather with all such as should haue assisted her c. Doe yow see here his Euangelicall spirit Doe yow see the essence of his doctrine Doe yow heare this new Prophet declare himself cleerly But let vs giue audience to another of like vocation and spirit 34. The second is his deere brother Christophor Goodman who in a booke of his printed also at Geneua the same yeare 1558. the title wherof was How Superiours ought to be obeyed writeth thus I know yow of England will say that the Crowne is not entailed to heire-males but appertaineth aswell to the daughters therfore by the lawes of the Realme ye could doe no otherwise then admit her but if this be true yet miserable is the answere of such as had so long time professed the Ghospell and the liuely word of God For if it had byn done by Pagans and heathens which knew not God by his word it might better haue byn borne with all but among them that beare the name of Godes people with whome his lawes should haue chief authority this answere is not tolerable If she had byn no bastard but the Kinges daughter as lawfully begotten as was her sister that Godly Lady and meeke lambe yet at the death of our lawfull Prince King Edward that should not haue byn your first coūsaile or question who should be your Queene but first and principally who had byn most meet among your Brethren to haue had the gouernment ouer yow For a woman to raigne Godes law forbiddeth whose raigne was neuer accompted lawfull by the word of God c. So he And behold heere now whether these mens worde of God did not serue them to all turnes euen to barre lawfull succession to depose the possessor and whatsoeuer themselues listed 35. The third Doctor of this learning was M. VVhittingham Deane afterwardes for his good merittes of Durham who made a preface to the foresaid booke of Goodman allowing and commending the same highly as a thing consulted examined approued by Caluin and the rest of the most learned Ghospellers of Geneua for thus he writeth M. Christophor Goodman conferred his articles and cheif propositions of his booke with the best learned in these partes who approuing the same he consented to enlarge the said worke and so to print it as a token of his duety and good affection towardes the Church of God and then if it were thought good in the iudgment of the Godly to translate the same into other languages that the profit therof might be more vniuersall So VVhittingham with whom concurred in iudgment VVhithead Couerdale Gilby and others then liuing in Geneua which Gilby wrote also of the like argument a speciall admonition to the Realmes of England and Scotland to call them to repentāce by all likelyhood for that they had admitted tolerated and not put to death Q. Mary of England and not yet deposed as after they did Q. Mary of Scotland both Mother and daughter and the booke was printed the same yeare by the same Crispin in Geneua wherin besides that which he vttereth against this Queene Mary as a Catholicke Princesse or rather no Princesse in his opinion he hath these wordes also of King Henry her Father euen after his fall from Catholicke Religion The boare was busy wrooting digging in the earth with all his pigges that followed him but they sought only for the pleasant fruites that they winded with their long snowtes and for their owne bellies sake c. This monstrous boare for all this must needes be called head of the Church vnder paine of treason displacing Christ our only head who alone ought to haue this title So Gilby And for that all this was spoken written and printed diuers yeares after Q. Mary was proclaimed and installed Queene and all tending euidently to sedition as
aud sinfull And that Catholickes only vse the first in 〈◊〉 cases and with circumstances and limitations But T. 〈◊〉 and his followes 〈◊〉 the first do vse 〈◊〉 the second which is false and lying 〈◊〉 Chap. XII pag. 483. The 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉 in some Protestant 〈◊〉 Bishops § 1. pag. 490. Six argumentes of M. Iewell Superintendent of 〈◊〉 his 〈◊〉 in this case § 2. pag. 493. Six examples of M. 〈◊〉 particular Equiuocation § 3. pag. 504. The vse of Equiuocating in English Protestantes-Ministers § 4. pag. 517. The vse of Equiuocation in Laymen Knightes § 5. p. 529. The Conclusion of the whole 〈◊〉 with a briefe exhortation 〈◊〉 Catholickes not to vse the liberty of Equiuocation 〈◊〉 in 〈◊〉 cases but where some 〈◊〉 occasion induceth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A Table of the particular matters 〈◊〉 in the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 TO ALL TRVE-HARTED ENGLISH-MEN That loue the honour safety and best good of their Nation Prince and Countrey THE PREFACE OF THE PRESENT DIVISION AND DISAGREEMENT About matters of Religion in England and of many importune exasperations vsed by diuers sortes of men to encrease the same and namely by this Minister T. M. his iniurious Libell I DOE not see deare Countreymen why I may not iustly our tymes circumstances therof considered begin these my first lynes of Preface with those wordes of Complaint and Admiration of the Poet Lucan wherby in few verses he comprehended and laid forth the rufull state of the rented Common-welth and Romane Empire by ciuill warres saying Bella per Aemathios plusquam ciuilia campos Iusque datum sceleri canimus populumque potētem In sua victrici conuersum viscera dextra 2. For if heere we change but Thessalian fieldes into English land and the Poets singing into our weeping and wailing all the rest agreeth most aptly if our diuision be not more rufull and lamentable then that of the Romanes For first our wars may truly be said to be plus quam ciuilia more then ciuill in that they are not only internall but domesticall also in such sorte as no one Prouince no one towne no one village no one howse or family is lightly to be found where some parte or other of this warre and dissention vpon difference of Religion taketh not some holde The Father somewhere accusing or suspecting his children the children flying or fearing their Father the Mother entring into 〈◊〉 with her daughter the daughter not trusting or confiding in her Mother the brother impugning his brother and wife complaining of 〈◊〉 husband the friend breaking with his friend and the neerest of kyn with those whome lawe of nature bandof bloud did most straitly combine knit togeather 3. Neither is this warre ended only in wordes or in bare debate of mindes iudgements willes and affections but it breaketh forth also into workes and hostile actions to the sight and admiration of all the worlde no aduersary Camps or armies standing more watchfull and distrustfull one of an other or vsing more stratagems of discouery spiery preuention or impugnation the one against the other then we among our selues wherof our continuall searches priuy intelligences bloudy and desperate conspiracies apprehensions imprisonments tortures arraignementes condemnations and executions are most loath some and lamentable witnesses 4 And as for Ius datum sceleri neuer could it be spoken so properly in the Romans misery as in ours when in deed though in some different sense that which was ius before is now scelus to uvitt that which was law right and equity under Catholicke Religion is now offensiue and punishable by the lawes of Protestants that which was then piety is now iniquity that which by them was vsed for deuotion is now scorned for superstition that which they reuerenced for highest Religion is now held in contempt and greatest derision such as then should haue byn hated and punished for hereticks are now esteemed for Christian and best reformed Catholicks and they vvhich in those dayes vvere called Catholicks as vvell by their enemyes as themselues and sate in iudgement vpon the rest are now brought into iudgement vnder them vvhose iudges at that tyme they vvere in the self same cause right and lawe being changed vvith the tyme and equity vvith mens affections articles of olde faith become crymes of new treason and finally all so inuerted and turned vpside downe and the differences so pursued vvith such hostile emnity of exulcerated mindes as the Poets conclusion falleth vpon vs euidently in the eye of all Christendome that vve being a potent people and dreadfull otherwise to all our neighbours haue turned our victorious hands into our owne bowels by this disunion in Religion and therby haue iust cause to feare the euent and inference threatned by our Sauiour except his holy hand protect vs that Euery Kingdome deuided in it selfe shall come to desolation 5. And that vvhich most encreaseth the feeling of this misery is that no man endeauoreth to mollify matters but all to exasperate no man applieth lenitiues but all corrosiues no man powreth in vvyne or oyle into the wound but all salte and vinegar no man byndeth vp or fomenteth but euery one seeketh to crush bruze and breake more all cry and clap their hands to exulceration saying with the children of Edom in the day of Hierusalems affliction Exinanite exinanite vsque ad fundamentum in ea Pull her downc pull her downe euen vnto the foundation 6. And to this effect haue vve heard and seene many speeches and sermons made sundry Bookes and pamphlets cast abroad or set forth in print some before the late cruell and hatefull conspiracy which might perhaps be some incitation to the designemēt or hastening therof and some presently therupon not only to exaggerate that fact whose atrocity by it self is such as scarsely it leaueth any place to exaggeration but also to extend and draw out the hatred and participation therof to others of the same Religion most innocent therin yea vnto the whole multitude so far as in them lieth a matter of exorbitant iniustice and intemperate malice 7. Of the former sorte of bookes and pamphlets we haue seene one set forth the yeare past by Thomas Hamond intituled The late Commotion of certeine Papists in Hereford Shire about the buriall of one Alice VVellington Recusant after the Popish manner in the tovvne of Alens-moore tvvo miles frō Hereford c. VVhich thing though it were but the fact of a few poore countrey people Catholickly affected as most are knowne to be in those partes to bury the said Alice and that in a sorte they were forced therunto least the dead corps should rot aboue ground the Minister of the place most obstinatly refusing to bury the same and that some other false companion in like manner is thought to haue byn set a worke to induce them into that trap as since hath byn vnderstood yet was the matter so exaggerated euery where
time vvhen this treason vvas plotted as to vse his owne wordes no 〈◊〉 grudge no invvard vvhispering of discōtentment did any vvay appeare VVhich assertion if you consider it well and compare it with our domesticall differences in Religion and variety of punishments laied vpon diuers sortes of men at that time euen before this fact fell out for the same will seeme a very great hyperbolicall exaggeration and ouerlashing for that the penalties of Recusancy and other like molestations were as rife then as at any other time before complaintes of Catholickes in diuers countreys no lesse pittifull 14. Another like Treatise followed this intituled A true reporte of the imprisonment arraignment and execution of the late Traitors imprinted by Geffery Chorlton VVhich so raileth vpon Catholicks and Catholicke Religion from the very beginning to the end therof as if none of them had byn free from the fact attempted or that their common doctrine had publickly allowed the same whereunto this seditious libell of the minister T. M. which now I am to confute endeauoreth to beare false witnes I will pretermit two other most virulent and spitefull Treatises intituled Pagano-Papismus and The picture of a Papist in which the Religion wherin all our auncestors both liued and died from the beginning of their Christianity vnto our daies and so many worthy nations great Princes and famous learned men doe professe round about vs at this day and doe hope to be saued therby is made worse then Paganisme vea the horrible sinke of all damnable heresies which notwithstanding were condemned by the same Religion and Church in former ages and consequently this censure sauoureth more of fury then of reason 15. But to leaue of the recitall of any more bookes or pamphlets to this effect there hath appeared further a matter of far greater importance which is a Catalogue of new lawes suggested in this Parlament against the said Catholickes wherin besides the former heape of penall statutes made to this affliction in precedent times diuers new are proposed for an addition and aggrauation of their Calamities far more rigorous if they passe then the former which being considered by forreine people doe make the state of English Catholickes vnder Protestant gouernement to seeme vnto them much more miserable and intolerable then that of the Ievves vnder any sorte of Christian Princes or that of the Grecians or other Christians vnder the Turke or Persian or that of bondsubiectes vnder the Polonians Svvecians Moscouians and other such Nations so as all this tendeth as yow see and as before we haue noted to more desperate disunion of mindes and exasperation of hartes 16. Only I must confesse that in two mens writings I finde more moderation then in any of the rest who yet being more interessed in the late grieuous designed delict then any of the other that write therof had most cause to be prouoked against the delinquents The first is his Maiesties speach both in his Proclamation and Court of Parlament In the former he professeth to distinguish betvveene all others calling themselues Catholicks the Authors of detestable treason and that by good experience he vvas so vvell persuaded of the loyalty of diuers of that 〈◊〉 as that he assured himselfe that they did as much abhorre that odious 〈◊〉 as himselfe And in the second his Maiesty speaking in Parlament distinguished betweene different sortes of Catholicks allowing to the one sort both the opinion of loyalty and possibility of saluation detesting in that point to vse his Highnes wordes the cruelty of the Puritanes and thinking it vvorthy of fier that vvill admit no saluation to any Papist VVhich is an argument of his Princely moderate meaning not to condemne the whole for a part though in our sense the distinction vsed by his Maiesty in that place of some Catholicks that holde some pointes of our Religion and of others that holde all cannot stand For that we accompt them not for Catholicks at all nor may wee that holde not all but a part for that Catholicum is secundum totum and not secundum partem as well S. Augustine noteth and consequently he that belieueth a part only or any one iote lesse then the whole cannot be in our sense nor in that of S. Augustine a true Catholicke 17. And surely though his Maiesty in this place out of the preiudicate persuasions of others and 〈◊〉 suggested informations seeme to be persuaded that no Catholicks of this condition that belieue and imbrace the whole can euer proue either good Christians or faithfull subiects yet is our hope and constant praier to almighty God that he will in time so illustrate that excellent vnderstanding of his Highnes as the same will see and discerne betweene these absolute and perfect Catholicks that yeeld themselues wholy in obsequium obedientiam fidei in all that the vniuer sall Church prescribeth vnto them to be belieued and others that chuse take and leaue what they like or list vpon their owne iudgement which choice or election called otherwise heresy if wee belieue the Holy Scriptures and sense of all antiquity in this behalfe is the most dangerous and pernicious disease in respect of both those effects heere mentioned by his Maiesty that is vpon earth And when his Highnes shall further with deliberation and maturity haue pondered how many ages his noble Auncestors Catholicke Kings and Queenes of both Realmes haue raigned in peace honour and safty ouer subiects of the first sorte and how infinite troubles turmoiles violences dangers hurtes and losses his Maiesties owne person and all his neerest in bloud and kinred haue suffered in a few yeares of those other new chusers to omit their doctrine I doubt not but that out of his great prudence and equanimity he will mollify and mitigate the hard opinion conceaued of the former notwithstanding this late odious accident fallen out by the temerity of a few as the world knoweth 18. The second example of some moderation before mentioned or at least wise meant was my L. of Salisburies answere to Certeine scandalous papers as he called them which though being written in the time and occasion they were the answerer wanteth not his stinges that pearce euen to the quicke yet supposing the pretended iniury offered by that fond menacing letter and the condition of men in his place and dignity not accustomed to beare or dissemble prouocations of that kind all may be called moderate that is not extreme though for the letter it self if any such were I presume so much of his Lordships wisedome and prudence as he could hardly deeme or suspect any Catholicke to be so mad as to write such a franticke commination but rather that it came from the forge of some such other as togeather with the blowe to be giuen therby to all Catholickes had furthermore a desire to drawe forth from his L. the answere therby to see and try his style and to that end gaue
doctrine of Equiuocation ambiguity of speach amphibology or mentall reseruation in certaine cases lawfull which doctrine his Lordship termeth strange and grosse and that it teareth in sunder all the bandes of humane conuersation for that I am to handle this matter more largely and particularly in the ensuing Chapters of this booke especially from the fourth forward the whole bulke of our aduersaries calumniations consisting in these two pointes of Rebellion and Equiuocation I will heere make answere to his Lordship as to a man of science and experience that I maruaile greatly how he can thinke that doctrine to be strange which is so ordinary and vsually to be seene in all the bookes of Catholicke Deuines for the space of these three or foure hundred yeares by confession of his owne writers how also he can tearme it grosse that the greatest wittes of Christendome for so long at least haue held for learned and founded not only vpon euident groundes of reason nature equity and iustice in diuers cases and for such allowed throughout all tribunales of Christendome both Ecclesiasticall and Ciuill but warranted also by authority of many expresse examples of Holy Scriptures and Fathers and in some cases so necessary for auoiding the sinne of lying periury discouering of secrettes iniuring our neighbours and other such inconueniences as if I should heere set downe the said particular cases both concerning secrecy or safty of him that is forced to equiuocate as afterward I shall doe in conuenient place I presume his Lordship as so great a common-vvealthesman would allow therof with due circumstances as iust and necessary and recall that part of his censure wherin he saith That it teareth in sunder all the bandes of humane conuersation especially if he remember that we doe except from the licence of Equiuocation the common conuersation of men in contractes bargaines and other like affaires wherby any dammage or preiudice may grow to another man and much more in matters appertaining to the cleare and manifest profession of our faith And thus much for this place the refidue afterward 25. And now hauing spoken all this by way of Preface we shall returne to the particular Treatise of T. M. for more of his name we cannot yet find out entituled An exact discouery of 〈◊〉 doctrine in case of conspiracy c. which we haue taken in hand to answere in this place and to shew that as his meaning is malicious and meanes foolish so is his proposition pernicious and argumentes vaine to proue the same wherin I remit me to that which afterwardes yow shall see set downe THAT THE MAYNE PROPOSITION INSINVATED AND VRGED BY T. M. That Catholickes are not tolerable in a Protestant Common-vvealth in respect of Rebellion and Conspiracies Is vntrue indiscreet and pernicious and falleth rather vpon the Protestant-Subiect then the Catholicke CHAP. I. THe whole drift of the Author throughout this malignant inuectiue to be nothing els but to perswade that Protestantes and Catholickes cannot liue togeather in one common-wealth nor vnder one Prince or Gouernour if he be a Protestant is cleare and manifest by all his whole discourse proofes and argumentes which afterwardes we shall more particularly in due place discusse yea to the end he may make this diuorce and separation betweene the Kinges Maiesty of Great Britany and his Catholicke subiectes for thither he bendeth all his battery the more irreconciliable and remedilesse he placeth the ground of this incompossibility not in the will which may be changed but in the iudgement and beliefe of Catholickes to wit in their publicke and receiued doctrine which doctrine well he knoweth not to lye in the handes of particular men nor of particuler Prouinces to change or alter at their pleasure as Protestantes may and doe heere taking a part and there leauing as they list but they must stand firmely and vniuersally to the whole this being truely Catholicum as ancient Fathers define it And hence it is that T. M. inferreth thus It is taken out saith he of the expresse dogmaticall principles of their Priests and Doctors and collected from their owne publicke positions c. which how true or false it is shall appeare after Now let vs examine some other circumstances of this proposition 2. First then I say and auerre that this his maine and fundamentall axiome of the incompossibility of Catholicke and Protestant people togeather vnder the Gouernement of his Maiesty of Great Britany is not only false and erroneous in it selfe as afterward shal be declared but pernicious also to the common-wealth preiudiciall to his Maiesties both comfort safety hurtefull to the state seditious against peace scandalous to the hearers offensiue to forreine nations that liue vnder Princes of different Religion both Catholicke and Protestant and hatefull finally to the eares of all moderate peaceable and prudent people and is on the other side no waies profitable needfull expedient or conuenient thus in publique to be proposed For I would first demaund this famous mak-bate what gaine or vtility may be expected either to Prince or people by putting in print this so odious an assertion of extreeme diffidence and distrust betweene his Maiesty and so many thousande of his subiects that admitted him with all ioy comfort at his first entrance to the Crowne Is it perhaps to preuēt some dāger that may be doubted from such kind of people and to make his Maiesty more carefull and vigilant for his safty If that be so a priuate aduise had beene more important to himselfe or his Counsell for that the publishing and proclayming therof procureth not only diffidēce but also restles solicitude on both sides the one to preuēt the other 3. Secondly I would aske what he will doe or haue to be done with so great a multitude of people as in all his Maiesties Kingdomes doe loue and fauour the Religion which this masked Minister impugneth and would put them in despaire of any sufferance or tolerable condition vnder his Maiesties gouernment Will he haue them all made away from the face of the Earth This were hard except Noe his floud should come againe or some other equiualent inundation either of water fyer or sword And for the later though some thinke he could wish it yet who knoweth not but that the bowels of England are so combyned and linked togeather at this day in this point as hardly can the sword passe the one but it must wound also deeply the other What then Will he haue them to liue in perpetuall torment hatred suspicions iealosyes auersions detestations deadly hostilities the one with the other This is a state more fit for hell then for any peaceable and Christian common wealth nor of it selfe is it durable if we beleeue either reason or experience of former times For we know what Cicero what other wise-men among the very Heathens haue obserued what they haue written what they haue counselled to be done or to be
Protestant party to flatter and deceiue her with false oathes and 〈◊〉 she promised that she would not but he arriuing the next day after the Bishop vnto her at 〈◊〉 in France made so great promises oathes and protestations vnto her as by little and little gate credit with her and so returned into Scotland by England where he had his full instructions yow must thinke to dispose the mindes of all sortes to receiue and obey the said Queene after his and their fashion and agreement for which good office she gaue him soone 〈◊〉 her returne the Earledome of Murrey and committed the cheife Gouernement of the Realme vnto him But what effectes ensued we shall now in few wordes declare 21. When vpon the yeare 1563. which was two yeares after her returne to Scotland she resolued by consent of her Parlament to marry her knisman the Lord Darley newly made 〈◊〉 of Rosse and Duke of Albany this Earle of Murrey made a leagne of his confederates against the same pretending that it would be in 〈◊〉 of their Religion and brake into open warres against them both saith Holinshed and when they were pressed by the Kinges and Queenes forces they had alwaies their refuge into England and their counsaile and direction both thence and from their Ministers that neuer parted from them how to prosecute their matters against their Princes wherof the first point was to abuse the yong Kinges credulity and to set him against the Queene and hence ensued that strange and horrible act of entring her priuy chamber when she was at supper vpon the fourth of march 1566. in the company of the 〈◊〉 of Murton the Lordes Ruthen and Lindsey all Protestantes and armed who saluted her first with this greeting she being great with child That they would no longer suffer her to haue the gouerning of the Realme nor to abuse them as hitherto she had done And then pulled violently from her her Secretary Dauid which stood there present seruing her at table and for his refuge tooke hold of her gowne which they cut of and slew him with many stabbes to such fright of the afflicted Queene as it was no lesse then a miracle that she had not perished therwith or miscaried of her child which was his Maiesty that now gouerneth England hauing six monethes gone with the same This was done at a Parlament when all the Protestant confederates met togeather and tooke as yow must thinke the ghostly counsaile of their good Ministers for so holy an enterprise And vpon the 20. of Iune next was the Prince borne which thing not pleasing some that there should remaine any yssue of that family which they desired to extinguish the said King his Maiesties Father was most cruelly murthered in Edenbrough on the tenth of February next ensuing 22. Nor did the matter cease heere but rather now ascended to the greatest height of malicious Treason 〈◊〉 euer perhaps hath byn vsed against any crowned Prince in the world for that these Lordes of the Congregatiō as they called themselues that is to say Religious Rebels congregated against their sworne Prince gathering forces togeather laid violent handes on her Maiesties person first at Carbar-hill by Edenbrough when confidently she presumed as to her subiectes to goe vnto them and treate of peace and then casting her into prison depriued her of her Crowne set vp against her the name of her dearest iewell the yonge Prince not yet a yeare old made Regent her greatest enemy the Earle of Murrey her bastard traiterous brother held Parlamentes made lawes debarred her the sight of her sonne for euer and finally waging open warre against her and ouerthrowing her forces in the feild she being present forced her into England and there following her also procured vnto her the greatest disgraces dishonoured her with the foulest reportes defamed her with the most spitefull sermons bookes and printed libelles and finally oppressed her with the most notorious open iniuries that euer were cast vpon a person of her Maiesties quality dignity And all this without any scruple or remorse of conscience at all nay all was auerred to be done according to the very rule of the Ghospell for the Ghospell and this by all the Ministers both of Scotland and England 23. And thus much of the second Queene Mary of Scotland brought to her ruine by the Euangelicall obedience of these new Ghospellers but as for the yong Prince her Noble sonne whome she loued most dearely aboue all earthly creatures and neuer was permitted so much as to embrace or see him more afterward what passed in this time by the same sorte of mē both during his minority and afterward what cōtentions 〈◊〉 warres 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 what murthers what conspir cies Rebellions and violences were vsed were ouerlong to recount in this place the Histories are full and the 〈◊〉 made and set forth in print by the foresaid 〈◊〉 Authour of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in his sixt Chapter and 〈◊〉 booke against the 〈◊〉 doth touch many 〈◊〉 pointes of diuers notorious 〈◊〉 and violences offered by them and their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Kinges person state and dignity as their taking his authority vpon them his surpriz and restraint at Rutheuen vpon the yeare 1582. the brethrens allowing and authorizing the same afterward expresly against the Kinges declaration to the contrary 24. The 〈◊〉 also against his person at Striueling vpon the yeare 1584. and many railing speaches sermons and bookes against him and his gouernment made in England to disgrace him and namely the seditious preaching of Dauison and other Scottish Ministers against 〈◊〉 in London in the Church of the Old-Iury and this being in the moneth of May it followed in Nouember after that these Ministers with their complices returning into Scotland with aide from England though this circumstance the Author con ealeth as not making for his purpose they gat ten thousand Rebelles togeather and 〈◊〉 their tentes before the towne of Striueling whither the King was retired to fortify himselfe in the Castle making proclamations in their owne names and there draue at length his Maiesty to yeald his person into their handes with the liues of his dearest friendes and was depriued also by them of his old guard and a 〈◊〉 put vpon him All which actes were not only defended afterward by the chiefe Ministers of that Realme but the King himselfe was called in like manner Ieroboam by them and threatned to be rooted out as Ieroboams race was if he continued in the course he held and many other like 〈◊〉 by them committed which for breuityes sake I forbeare to recount in this place 25. Now then to returne againe to our former ponderation set downe in the beginning of this Chapter let euery sage and prudent Prince consider and weigh with himselfe which of these two waies which of these two people which of these two groundes of doctrine which of these two methodes of practice which of these
our times of such as call themselues Protestants but especially the followers of Caluin are farre more perillous and detestable then Paganisme Iudaisme or Turcisme let him read not only his foresaid fower bookes De Caluino-Turcismo but two speciall large Chapters or Treatises of this very matter in his booke De iusta Reipublicae potestate c. to wit the 4. and 5. and he will rest satisfied 9. Nor doe Catholicke writers only make these Protestations against Caluin and his doctrine but many of the most learnedest other Protestants of these daies as hath byn touched One most famous preacher and Protestant writer or rather Superintendent in Polonia called Francis Stancarus in an epistle to the King himself saith of him and to him Quis Diaboluste ô Caluine seduxit vt contra filium Dei cum Arrio obloquaris c. Cauete o vos Ministri omnes a libris Caluini praesertim in articulis de Trinitate incarnatione mediatore Sacramento Baptismi praedestinatione continent enim doctrinam impiam blasphemias Arrianas What deuill hath seduced thee o Caluin that thou shouldest speake iniuriously against the sonne of God with Arrius the Hereticke c. Beware all yee Ministers of Caluins bookes especially in the articles of the Bl. Trinity Incarnation of the mediator of the Sacrament of Baptisme and of predestination for they conteine impious doctrine and blasphemies of Arrius 10. Another brother and Protestant-Preacher no lesse zealous then he in Germany named Conradus Schlusselburge saith of him his 〈◊〉 that himself hath declared proued in three large books Hòs de nullo ferè Christianae doctrinae articulo rectè sentire That they scarcely belieue aright any one article of Christian beliefe which is the self same that the forenamed Catholicke writer Iurgiuicius obiected before which T. M. tooke so impatiently as yow haue heard And the same brother in one of his said bookes affirmeth Quod Caluinistae ipsum filium Dei mendacij arguunt Deum sua omnipotentia spoliant sunt abiurati hostes profligatissimi falsatores Testamenti filij Dei That Caluinists doe charge the Sonne of God with a ly doe spoile God of his omnipotency and are foresworne enemies and most wicked falsifiers of the Testament of the Sonne of God 11. And another famous Doctor of the same new Ghospell and spirit saith that this sect of Caluinists their doctrine Sentina quaedam est c. is a certeine sinke into which all other heresies doe flow it is the last rage of the diuell which he in his fury doth exercise against Christ and his Church c. And then further Qui partes eorum sequitur c. he that followeth their sect is a manifest and sworne enemy of God and hath denied his faith which he promised to Christ in his baptisme So he And consider now whether this be not as great detestation of Caluins doctrine by principal learned Protestants as T. M. hath picked out of Catholicks wrested wordes before recited 12. But yow must not thinke that heere is an end for there would be no end if I should prosecute all that might be said in this case Tilmannus Heshusius a Superintendent of the Protestants in the same countrey calleth Caluins doctrine Blasphemam Sacrilegam sectam a blaspemous and Sacrilegious sect and writeth a speciall booke of this title A defence of the Holy Testament of Christ against the blasphemous confession of Caluinists And AEgidius Hunnius writing a booke De Caluino Iudaizante of Caluin playing the Iew after a long confutation saith thus Dâ—â—â—â—um satis superque iudico c. we haue detected I suppose sufficiently and more then sufficiently that Angell of darkenes Iohn Caluin who comming forth of the pit of hell hath partly by his detestable wickednes in wresting Scriptures partly by his impious pen against the Holy Maiesty of Christ partly by his horrible and monstrous paradoxes about predestination drawne both himself into hell a great number of starres as the Apocalips speaketh 13. I pretermit many others as that of Philippus Nicolaus a Protestant-Minister of Tubinga who in the yeare 1586. set forth a booke in 4. with this title A Discouery and this I write for our discouerer of the fundaments of the Caluinian Sect and how they agree with old Arrians and Nestorians Wherby also is demonstrated that no Christian man can take part with them but that he must defend Arrianisme and Nestorianisme So he But the next yeare after there came another booke forth printed in the same Vniuersity with this title A demonstration out of the Holy Scriptures that Caluinists and Sacramentaries are not Christians but rather baptized Iewes and Mahometanes and a little after that againe came forth the booke of Ioannes Matthias the great Preacher in VVittenberge De cauendo Caluinistarum fermento how to auoid the leauen of the Caluinists and then another of Albertus Grauerus of like function vpon the yeare 1598. entituled BelluÌ„ Ioannis Caluini Iesu Christi The warre betweene Iohn Caluin and Iesus Christ and al this written set forth and printed by chiefe Protestant brethren which if the inference of T. M. be true against Catholickes that in respect of the difference of their doctrine and for that they holde Caluinists to haue no true faith they may not liue togeather vnder one Prince then must it follow also that neither these Lutherans and Caluinian Protestants can liue togeather and the very same ensueth betweene English Protestants Puritanes vpon the difference of their doctrine and belief which hath no lesse opposition in deed and detestation the one of the other in bitternes of speach then haue the Lutherane Protestants against them both as may easily be demonstrated out of their owne bookes if we would stand vpon it And this shall be sufficient for the refutation of his first medium brought forth to proue that Catholicks and Protestants cannot liue togeather in one common wealth for that the one side accompteth the other for Hereticks 14. But the second medium is yet more childish which is that for so much as we not only doe hold Protestants to be excommunicate Hereticks but subiect also to all the punishments penalties set downe in the Popes Ecclesiasticall Canons Decrees Constitutions for the same which are many and grieuous as that Hereticks must leese their goods cannot gather vp tythes nor recouer debtes nor institute heires and other such like and more sharpe penalties prescribed in old time by the Canon law against ancient Hereticks herof he inferreth that we detract all humane society from Protestants and consequently we are not tolerable in a Protestant common-wealth 15. But we answere first that touching the former part to wit the imputation of heresy and excommunication to the Protestant party of England that followeth the Sacramentary doctrine of Caluin and Zuinglius yow haue heard now immediately before how that imputation is
performed by these places alleadged yow haue seene 28. Finally to stand no longer vpon this whether we or they Catholicks or Protestantes doe attribute more to popular licence against Princes when they giue not contentment may aboundantly be seene in that we haue set downe before and will ensue afterward both of their doctrine and practises in like occasions And so much of this first charge now will we passe to the second 29. The second is that we ascribe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 power and souer aignty ouer Kings vnto the Pope wherin first what he saith of ciuill souer aignty is a meere fiction and calumniation of his owne if it be out of the Popes owne temporall Dominions For we ascribe no such vnto him ouer other Princes or their subiects but that authority or soueraignty only which Catholicke doctrine ascribeth to the Bishop of Rome as Successor to S. Peter Prince of the Apostles spirituall head of the vniuersall visible Church of Christ which is only spirituall for spirituall ends to wit for the direction and saluation of soules And if at any time he be forced to passe further then this and by a certeine consequence to deale in some temporall affaires also it must be only indirectly in defence or conseruation of the said spirituall that is to say when the said spirituall power apperteining to soules cannot other wise be defended or conserued as more largely hath byn treated before 30. This then is the summe and substance of Catholicke doctrine about this point of the Popes authority which from the beginning of Christianity hath byn acknowledged in Gods Church and in no place more then in England where it hath byn both held practised from the very first Christened King of our nation Ethelbert vnto K. Henry the 8. for the space of almost a thousand yeares without interruption as largely and aboundantly hath byn shewed and laied forth to the view of all men in a late booke written in answere to S. Edward Cookes fifth part of Reportes and this with great honor prosperity of the Princes therof and vnion of their people vnder their gouernment and without such odious or turbulent inferences as now are made therevpon by vnquiet spirittes that would set at warre euen mens imaginations in the ayer therby to mainteine disunion discorde and diffidence betweene Princes and namely betweene our present noble Soueraigne and his Catholicke subiects 31. And first of all let vs heare this turbulent T. M. how vpon the enuy of this authority he frameth and foundeth all his ensuing reasons VVe demaunde saith he how farre these pretended powers of people Pope may extende and heervpon we argue To which I answere that in imagination they may extend so farre as any fantasticall braine shall list to draw them but in the true meaning of Catholicke reall doctrine they can extend no further then hath byn declared And as for the popular power of people ouer Princes we haue now refuted the calumniation shewed that it is a mere fiction of his owne and no position of ours and that his Protestant doctrine doth ascribe much more licence to popular tumult then the Catholicke without comparison and for that of the Pope I haue declared how it is to be vnderstood to be of his owne nature in spirituall affaires only without preiudice of ciuill Princely gouernement at all and so the practice of the worlde and experience of so many Princes great States and Monarches liuing quietly securely vnder the same authority both in former times and ours most euidently doth proue and confirme 32. But yet let vs see and consider how falsely and calumniously this Make-bate doth herevpon argue in his third reason inferring for his assumption or minor proposition thus But all Popish Priestes vpon this pretended Supremacy and prerogatiue of Pope and people doe vtterly abolish the title of succession in all Protestant Princes Ergo. Wherin to shew him a notable liar it shall be sufficient to name all the Protestant Princes that haue had title of successiō in our coūtrey for therof he speaketh principally since the name of Protestant hath byn heard of in the world being three in number to wit K. Edward the sixt Q. Elizabeth and K. Iames that now raigneth all which were admitted peaceably to their Crownes as well by Priestes as Catholicke people who notwithstanding in some of their admissions wanted not meanes to haue wrought disturbances as the world knoweth so as if one instance only doth truly ouerthrow any general proposition how much more doth this triple instance not able to be denied ouerthrow and cast to the ground this vniuersal false assertion of T. M. which auerreth That all Popish Priests 〈◊〉 vtterly abolish the Succession of all Protestant Princes Will he not be ashamed to see himself cōuinced ofso great and shameles ouerlashing 33. And on the other side one only Catholicke Princesse being to succeed in this time to wit Q. Mary we know what resistance the Protestants made both by bookes sermons Treatises and open armes and how many Rebellions conspiracies robberies priuy slaughters and other impediments were designed and practised afterward during the few yeares she raigned we know also what was executed against the gouernment and liues of the two noble Catholicke Queenes her neerest neighbours one of them most straitly conioyned in bloud that raigned at that time in Scotland to omit others before mētioned that were debarred from their lawfull succession or excluded from their rightfull possession for their Religion in Sweueland Flanders other places as cannot be denied 34. Wherfore it is more then extraordinary impudency in T. M. to charge vs with that which is either peculier or more eminent in themselues and false in vs and what or how farre this fellow may be trusted in these his assertions may be gathered by the last sentence of all his discourse in this matter where he hath these wordes F. Persons in his Doleman doth pronounce sentence that whosoeuer shall consent to the succession of a Protestant Prince is a most grieuous and damnable 〈◊〉 And is it so in deed Syr 〈◊〉 and will yow stand to it and leese your credit if this be falsely or calumniously alleadged then if yow please let vs heare the Authors owne wordes 35. And now saith he to apply all this to our purpose for England and for the matter we haue in hand I affirme and hold that for any man to giue his helpe consent or assistance towardes the making of a King whome he iudgeth or belieueth to be faulty in Religion and consequently would aduance no Religion or the wrong if he were in authority is a most grieuous damnable sinne to him that doth it of what side soeuer the truth be or how good or bad soeuer the party be that is preferred So he And his reason is for that he should sinne against his owne conscience in furthering such aKing And is
report the state therof the conclusion will be that yow may rather proue those Bishops to haue byn iniuriously ambitious then the Citty Rebellious So he 47. This is his faithfull reply and full satisfaction according to the title of his booke And now consider good Reader what honest men these two Ministers are that so contradict the one the other and that vpon conference togeather for thy deceipt and cosenage for euen now yow heard Doctour Sutcliffe to affirme that the Bishop of Geneua had byn temporall Prince for many hundred yeares and that vpon the preaching of Farellus Caluin and others they chaunged their Monarchy into a popular State and that himself misliked the same according to the groundes of deuinity and how then doth he say heere to his fellow Minister Morton that the Bishop of Geneua was neuer there Prince and that the state of the towne was a free State of it self Can these thinges stād togeather Morton saith moreouer he could not finde Sutcliffes booke which truly is a thing very strāge there being so many thousandes printed of them in England but more strange it is that Deane Sutcliffe should so soone forget his owne booke and what he wrote therin so egregiously cosin his Brother-Minister in their priuate conference as to make him belieue and vtter now in print quid pro quo and chalke for cheese as he doth But it cannot seeme probable that Morton belieued it himself but rather would make the simple Reader belieue the same and so dazell his eyes for his deceipt this is their manner of dealing in most matters where fraude may be vsed 48. It were ouer long to looke into all other examples obiected by the moderate answerer how they ar replied vnto by T. M. As for example the known reuoltes and Rebellions of Flanders and of those States against their lawfull Princes and so many outrages committed therin for almost now forty yeares if not more the bloudy tumultes in Germany and Switzerland vpon Luther and Zuinglius their doctrine wherin Zuinglius himself the head stirrer was slaine the like in Denmark for expelling Catholicke Religion and bringing in of Lutheranisme the manifest Rebellion intrusion and oppression of Duke Charles in Sweueland against his Nephew the King of Polonia lawfull Inheritour of those States enduring vnto these daies as also the open warres of Boscaine and his fellowes in Hungary against the Emperour in fauour of Protestant Religion and of the Turke himself whose Confederates they confesse themselues to be 49. Into these other examples as I said time will not permit vs to enter with any length nor will it be to any purpose for that we shall finde them as sleightely answered or shifted of as the rest before For vnto the first and last of Flanders and Hungary the Minister answereth in effect nothing at all and I meruaile not if he answered this with silence seing he answered all the tumultes of Scotland for so many yeares continued by saying only as yow haue heard That Buchanans Chronicle was recalled by an act of Parlament 50. To the other of Germany and Luthers seditious proceedinges both in wordes writinges and deedes wherin it is obiected among many other thinges that he censured both K. Henry of England and many other Princes with intolerable insolent and vile speaches affirming them vnworthy of all gouerment that Protestantes handes must be imbrued with bloud that thervpon ensued most bloudy warres throughout Germany and almost all Christendome besides Munsters Rebellions also in the same countries who preached that Rebellion against Catholicke Princes for Religion was to be called The warre of God and that he had 〈◊〉 commandement from God to that effect whervpon ensued the slaughter of a hundred thirty thousand men in three monethes c. To the first of Luther he answereth very sagely in these wordes Luthers literall censure of wordes will be partly confessed but the other of swordes which drew bloud can neuer be proued Yow see vpon what pointes of desperate deniall he standeth and yow may remember how cleerly the matter hath byn proued before and what is extant in most writers of our time about the same 51. The other of Munster he reiecteth as not being of his Religion yet no man can deny but that he was of Luthers schoole and spronge out of the first seed and spirit of that new Ghospell but hard it is to discerne who be brethren and who be not when it standeth for their commodity to acknowledge or deny one the other Heere yow see he denieth Munster acknowledgeth Luther to be of their Ghospell and fraternity and yet no man doth reiect them more contemptuosly or condemneth them more seriously for Heretikes then Luther himselfe as before out of his owne wordes yow haue heard To the stirres in Switzerland raised by Zuinglius who was slaine also in the feild he saith in like manner nothing and little more to Denmarke but that now all is quiet there and Lutherane Religion in full possession but he telleth vs not by what styrres and tumultes the same was brought in 52. To that of Sueueland and the open Rebellion of those Kingdomes he findeth only this shift to put of the matter It was saith he the demaund of the whole state for defence of their countrey priuiledges liberties and fruition of Religion can any Papist call this Rebellion No truely Syr in your sense who doe call the state whatsoeuer multitude of people doth rebell against their Princes for the liberty of your Ghospel for so yow called the party Protestant of Scotland if yow remember the Lordes of the Congregation and the state of the Realme and the other party that stood with the Queene was called a faction and so likewise in France and Flanders Germany and Sueueland those that tooke exceptions first and then armes against their Princes are called the State or States vnited Prouinces those of the Religion and by other like titles of honour and the other part or rather body it selfe hath the name of Enemies Persecutors Tyrantes Papistes and other odious appellations But I would make this demaund how came 〈◊〉 particuler men to be States to be called the Common-wealth were they not first subiectes And did they not first withdraw themselues from the obedience of their lawfull Princes by sleightes dissimulations pretence of greiuances liberty of Ghospell and the like deuises vntill at last they fell to open armes May not any number of rebells make themselues a state in this sense But I will vrge yow no further for that I well see yow cannot answere to driue yow beyond the wall is to small purpose I haue compassion of yow A BRIEF CENSVRE IS GIVEN OF A NEVV TREATISE set forth by T.M. INTITVLED A Confutation of the Popes Supremacy as supreme head of Rebellion c. Annexed to his former iustification of Protestant-Princes for matters of Rebellion CHAP. V. THis Minister Thomas
with his being a King he meant and so he ought to doe as he was man and inferiour to his Father and when he speaketh of the other of his being a King he vnderstandeth it as he was God and equall to his Father and so taking the one in one meaning and the other in the other his principall meaning is to deceaue his Reader with a sophisticall argument instead of a demonstratiue yet doth the good man so confide in his logicall science as in one place he triumpheth ouer his Aduersary that did but once name Logicke in these wordes Dare yow saith he appeale to Logicke this is the art of all artes and the high tribunall of reason and truth it self which no man in any matter whether it be case of humanity or deuinity can iustly refuse which is so ridiculous a simplicity as no man can read without laughter For what high tribunall I pray yow hath logicke in deuinity Or who gaue her this tribunall was there no deuinity before Logicke was inuented by the Philosophers Logicke is not a science according to Aristotle but only modus sciendi a manner or meane how to come to science and it ministreth not matter but forme of argument as armour to the Logitian wherby to impugne falshood and ignorance in euery science euen as the Cutlers shop doth yeeld weapons to souldiers that goe to warre and yet cannot the Cutlers shop be iustly called the high tribunal of all matters belonging to Chieualry and feates of warfare and consequently this was a vaine florish ostentation 10. But now to returne to the principall point we haue seene that this argument is so far from being demonstratiue as it is no argument at all in regard of the Equiuocation and fallacy therin conteyned Let vs then consider the same in respect of the matter substance it self First I say that it conteyneth a manifest fond and impious paradox that Christes Kingdome as he was both King and Priest had the preheminence of his Priesthood and I call it a paradox for that I thinke no Christian man of learning euer held it before and much lesse any sound deuine Secondly I call it fond in respect of his ridiculous reasons alledged for the same which presently we shall examine And thirdly I call it impious for that it is both against the Scriptures and preiudiciall to Christes highest dignity of Priesthood vpon earth Wherby also followeth that this Ministers inference or conclusion Ergo this order inherent in Christ ought to be held as conuenient among Christians must be censured by the same censures for that it concludeth a generall preheminence and excellency of Kingly State before Priesthood which is the quite opposite assertion to that which all ancient Fathers and namely S. Chrysostome out of all their common sense doth maintaine in his bookes De Sacerdotio affirming that the office and dignity of a Priest doth so far exceed that of a King as gold doth siluer heauen earth and the soule the body Regno Sacerdotium saith he tanto est excellentius quantum carnis Spiritus interuallum esse potest Priesthood is somuch more excellent then Kingly authority as there can be difference imagined betweene flesh and spirit And in another place the same Father Sacerdotium est principatus ipso etiam Regno venerabilior maior Priesthood is a Princedome more venerable great then is Kingly authority And then againe Ne mihi narras purpuram c. doe not tell me of purple or diademe of scepter or golden apparell of Kinges for these are but shaddowes and more vaine then May-flowers Si vis videre discrimen quantum absit Rex a Sacerdote expende modum potestatis vtrique traditae c. If yow will see indeed the true difference betweene them and how much the King is inferiour to a 〈◊〉 consider the measure of power geuen to them both yow shall see the Priestes tribunall much higher then that of the King So he Wherunto agreeth that of S. Gregory Nazienzen spoken to the Emperour himself The law of Christ saith he hath made yow subiect to my power and to my tribunall for wee Bishops haue an Empire also and that more excellent and perfect then yours except yow will say the spirit is inferiour to the flesh and heauenly thinges to earthly 11. So he And much more to this effect which yow may read cited out of diuers Fathers in a booke set forth this last yeare in answere to Syr Edward Cookes Reportes by a Catholicke deuine who handleth this point more largely and particularly in the second and fourth Chapters of the said answere And this is sufficient to shew the inference or conclusion of T. M. to be false touching the power and dignity of Priesthood and of Kingly principallity among men Now let vs returne to the consideration therof in Christ himself which is the principall question though in effect it be decided by that which now wee haue shewed for that the dignity and preheminence aboue Kingly dignity of Priesthood in man which the foresaid Fathers doe so resolutly affirme inferreth also the preheminence of Priesthood in Christ for somuch as from that descendeth this other but yet I thinke it not amisse to handle the same somewhat more distinctly the Ministers paradox therin being so prophane and irreligious as hath byn said 12. First then as Christ is acknowledged both by them and vs to haue byn both Priest and King according as he was prefigured in Melchisedech who had both these dignities in himself so the one and the other excellency of Priestly and Kingly preheminence were in him according as he was man and vnder his Father which for so much as appertained to his Priesthood is graunted heere by T. M. and the matter is euident in itself for that Christ as God could not offer Sacrifice nor make intercession to his Father for vs which are the chief offices of Priesthood for that this belōgeth to an inferiour according to that saying of S. Ambrose Sacerdos idem hostia Sacerdotium tamen humanae conditionis officium est Christ was both Priest and Sacrifice yet was his Priesthood the office of humane condition S. Augustine also talking of both dignities saith Secundum hominem Christus Rex Sacerdos effectus est Christ was made both King and Priest according as he was man And the same is plaine by Scripture in which euery where is acknowledged that Christes Kingdome was giuen him by his Father Ego autem constitutus Rex ab eo super Sion montem Sanctum eius saith Christ in the Psalmes I am apointed King by him vpon his holy hill of Sion ergo he was King by gift and appointement of his Father And in the same Psalme God the Father saith vnto him Postula à me dabo tibi gentes haereditatem tuam possessionem tuam terminos terrae Aske of me and I will
cut of the other clause that expounded all sub nomine diuinarum Scripturarum vnder the name of diuine Scriptures And secondly that in relating which are diuine Scriptures the bookes of the Machabees Tobie Iudith and others excluded by him and his from that number are set downe for Canonicall And thirdly which maketh the falfification most notoriously wilfull is that in the selfe same Canon there followeth these wordes Liceat etiam legi passiones Martyrum cùm 〈◊〉 dies eorum celebrantur It is lawfull also to read in the Church besides Canonicall Scriptures the passions of Martyrs when their yearly festiuall dayes are celebrated which wordes do cleerly decide the controuersy and proue M. Iewell a wilfull lyer and that he did know that he did lye as nothing can be more cleare or euident And besides they decyde two seuerall controuersies against them as yow see the first that the books of Machabees were held for Canonicall by this Councell in S. Augustines tyme and the second that the festiuall dayes of Saincts were celebrated 〈◊〉 yeare publikely in the Church and the histories of their 〈◊〉 read in those dayes 39. The sixt and last example in this place for I haue promised to passe no further shall cōteyne two or three cases togeather the first out of Leo the great Pope Leo saith M. Iewell in the Apologie holdeth that vpon one daye it is lawfull to haue but one massem one Church but these men say dayly in one Church commonly ten masses 20. or 30. yea sometimes more So M. Iewell But he that shall looke vpon the place it selfe in S. Leo shall find the quite contrary decreed and sett downe by that holy man for thus he writeth vnto the Archbishop or Patriarch of Alexandria Vt in omnibus obseruantia nostra concordet illud quoque vloumus custodiri c. That our vse or obseruance may agree in all poynts as well in Alexandria as heere we will haue this also to be kept that when any more solemne sestiuity shall call togeather a more aboundant meeting of people and that the multitude of the faithfull shall be so great as the Church or Chapell cannot hold them togeather that then without doubt of further deliberation the oblation of the sacrifice be iterated or celebrated againe least otherwise if they only which came first should be admitted vnto this deuotion they which came afterward might seeme to be excluded wheras it is conforme both to piety and reason that so often as the presence of new people do fill the Church wherin the solemnity is exhibited so often also should the sacrifice be offred for that otherwise it must necessarily fall out that some parte of the people should be depriued of their deuotion if the custome of saying one masse only being reteyned none could offer sacrifice but such as came in the first parte of the day 40. These are the wordes of S. Leo by which yow see that he doth determine decree the plaine contrary to that which M. Iewell affirmeth to wit that as 〈◊〉 as any multitude of people should come to the Church so often the sacrifice of the masse should be reiterated for their deuotion In which wordes though among Catholiks there may be some question about S. 〈◊〉 his meaning to wit whether he meant of more then one chiefe or solemne masse to be said in one Church or Chappell or that one and the selfe same Priest in such cases might reiterate his owne masse and sacrifice if there were no other Priest present as Strabo and Dur and do interpret him yet in this controuersie there can be no doubt or question but that he saith the quite contradictory to that which M. Iewell affirmeth him to say who telleth vs that Pope Leo saith that it is not lawfull to say vpō one day mere then one masse in one Church wheras S. 〈◊〉 saith it is both lawfull expedient and necessary to be done What Equiuocation then call yow this in M. Iewell And furthermore S. Leo in this place as supreme Bishopp prescribeth and giueth order in Ecclesiasticall rites as yow see to Dioscorus Patriarch of Alexandria for offering and iterating the sacrifice of the Masse wherby is euident that in these two articles at the least of Supremacy the Masse which are of the first and principall that M. Iewell setteth downe S. Leo was against him and flatly for vs so as it may please him now to leaue out of his Apostrophe O Leo if we be deceaued your haue deceaued vs c. And this for the first case 41. The second case may be that of M. Iewell in the defence of the Apologie pag 131. where talking of the most excellent man Pope Celestinus that sarte in the Sea before Leo he saith of him thus Pope Celestinus was a Nestorian heretike but cyteth no Author at all for it and the assertion is so strange and so contrary not only to truth and reason but also probability as of no man he could haue spoken it more falsely and absurdly for that it was Celestinus that condemned Nestorius and all his heresyes it was Celestinus in whose place Cyrillus the Archbishop of Alexandria sate President in the third generall Councell at Ephesus where Nestorius was accursed and condemned Of this Celestinus the learned Bishop Prosper who then 〈◊〉 writeth Nestorianae impietati praecipua Alexandrini Episcopi industria Papae Celestini repugnat authoritas The speciall diligence of the Bishop of Alexandria and the Authority of Pope Celestinus resisteth the impiety of Nestorius And yet is Pope Celestinus a Nestorian Who would say so but M. Iewell who careth not what he saith 42. The third Case is somwhat more pleasant though no lesse malicious for wheras it had byn obiected vnto M. Iewell for the 〈◊〉 of S. Peter in feeding gouerning that Christ had said to him alone pasce oues meas pasce agnos meos feed my sheepe feed my lambes M. Iewell to 〈◊〉 this priuiledge alledgeth a sentence of Christ out of S. Markes 〈◊〉 quoted in the margent Quod vni dico omnibus dico What I say to one I say to all therby inferring that the foresaid wordes of Christ to S. Peter as a so the other Thou art Peter or a rocke and vpon this rocke will I buyld my Chruch and other such like speaches were equally meant also of the rest wheras in deed Christ neuer vsed these wordes Quod vni dico omnibus dico noris it to be 〈◊〉 out of Scripture but rather our Sauiour hauing made in S. Marks Ghospell a large Sermon about the day of Iudgement and the terror therof and exhorted all sortes of people to be watchfull extended the same also vnto those that were absent or should liue in succeeding ages saying Quod vobis dico omnibus dico vigilate That which I say to yow heere present I speake to all both absent to come be watchfull which
4. 48. AS for this sort of men though it might be sufficient which before we haue noted and set downe out of the writings of this one Minister T. M. for proofe of our 〈◊〉 yet to shew the conformity of spirit in others also of the same profession coate we shall briefly heere alledge some few more examples and those of the chiefest English Ministers for to talke of forraine were infinite that haue writen against Catholike Religion in these our dayes 49. And with whom in this poynt may we better begin then with Iohn Fox himselfe not vnfitly called by some the Father of lyes in his huge Volume of Acts and Monuments who as he was one of the first that tooke vpon him in our language to set abroad the prayses of that Protestant Church by way of history so did he by deedes leaue a document what liberty the writers of that professiō do take vnto themselues in this kynd of Equiuocation that auoucheth falsities well knowne to be such to the vtterer For that not only throughout his whole worke doth he vse the same vpon euery occasion but euen in the very first lynes and tytle also of his booke promising to set downe The continuance and succession of his said Church from the beginning to our dayes but indeede neuer meant to performe any parte therof as well knowing that he could not as by a special Treatise hath byn these years past most euidently made manifest that the said Fox towards the end of his said volume was enforced to begin his broken succession cōtinue the same with notorious condēned heretiks from Berengarius downeward as in that Treatise is largely declared manifold exāples are layd forth of his voluntary falshood in almost infinite points by him recorded against his owne knowledge and conscience as may be seene in the Table or Index of that booke vnder the word Fox 50. And finally the same Author in the end of the third parte of the said worke doth in one Chapter conuince him of aboue an hundred and twenty wilfull lyes vttered by him in lesse then three leaues in his said Acts and Monuments and those such as no wayes they may be excused eyther by ignorance error or other such circumstance which before we haue touched but must needs proceed of voluntary fraud and malice himselfe knowing that it was false which he related One only exāple will I cyte heere out of all the said 120. lyes wherby yow may make a ghesse of all the rest 51. The Papists do teach saith he most wickedly and horribly saying 〈◊〉 Christ suffred for Originall synne or synnes going before baptisme but the actuall synnes which follow after baeptisme must be done away by mans merits And this assertion of ours he putteth downe in a different letter as though they were our owne very wordes and sense which is most false for that we hold them neyther in wordes nor sense so as the are rather two wicked and horrible lyes of his then any wicked or horrible doctrine of ours 52. For first we say not That Christ suffered only for Originall synne but for all synnes both originall actuall precedent and subsequent after our baptisme S. Thomas his wordes are cleere for our common doctrinè in that behalf part 3. q. 1. art 4. Certum est c. It is certayne saith he that Christ came into the world to blot out not only originall sinne but all sinnes c. And this is the common doctrine of all Deuynes amongst vs. The secōd poynt also That actuall sinnes after baptisme cannot be done away by mans merit but by the merits of Christ and by the grace and vertue of his said passion is no lesse euident in all our writings as you may see in S. Thomas for all 1. 2. q. 114. art 7. where he saith Nullus potest mereri sibi reparationem post lapsum c. That no man can merite his rysing againe after synne but that it must needs proceede of the only grace of God and merite of Christ. And the same teacheth the Councel of Trent sess 6. cap. 14. 16. c. So as these are two not orious lyes in re grauissima in a matter of most moment as yow see and cannot be imputed to error or ignorance with any probability And of the same kynd are the other hundred and odde which before we haue mentioned and are vttered as hath byn said within the compasse of three leaues and therby we may take a scantling of Iohn Fox his Consciencie in this kind of lying equiuocation when it may make for his aduantage And this shall suffice for the first example 53. The second example shall be out of an other Minister that liued ioyntly with Iohn Fox to 〈◊〉 Doctor Calfhill of Christs Church in Oxford who was a speciall great defender of M. Iewells chalenge in those dayes of the primitiue English Protestant Church to wit That no one Doctor no one Father no one Councel no one Anthority could be brought for our doctrine c. But when a litle after there were certaine ordinarie 〈◊〉 appointed euery Saturday in a seuerall isle of the said Colledg-Church for triall of Controuersies and for some 〈◊〉 of the Protestants confidence therin those may remēber that liued in the vniuersity at that tyme that M. Bristow and some other 〈◊〉 students in Deuinity repayring thither to dispute forced M. Calfhill that was the moderator to deny or 〈◊〉 to shifte of so many Fathers Doctors and other ancient authorities as most men langhed to heare it and his owne friends were ashamed at the matter And when a litle after he wrote a very irreligious and prophane answere to a certaine Catholike Treatise writen by M. Martiall of the Holy Crosse of Christ he was oftentymes dryuen to the same follies eyther of open reiecting or ridiculous shifting of the same Fathers As for example when S. Ambrose writing of the necessity of 〈◊〉 signe among Christians and especially in Churches 〈◊〉 That a Church cannot stand without a Crosse no more then a shippe without a mast c. He answereth that it cannot stand without a 〈◊〉 beame or crosse 〈◊〉 or one piece of tymber shut into another And do yow imagine that he did think as he said 54. Againe in the same booke where it is obiected out of S. Athanasius words against the Gentils That infinite miracles were wrought by the signe of the Crosse as casting out dyuels and the like yea and that S. Athanasius did prouoke the Gentils to come and make proofe therof and Christians to vse the same saying Vtatur signo vt illi dicunt ridiculè Crucis c. Let him vse against all inchauntments the signe of the Crosse which Pagans call ridiculous and he shall see the Diuels to be put to flight by 〈◊〉 southsaying to cease Magicke and poysoning destroyed c. So 〈◊〉 Athanasius Whervnto Calfhill answereth thus If yow
any other faith but that which all Christian Churches haue but only that there is greater deuotion in them and greater simplicity to beleeue 71. These are S. Hieroms wordes which if Syr Francis had set downe wholy and simply as the lye in him he saw how they would make against him in diuers poynts and therfore he willingly and wittingly cut of both the beginning and ending as yow haue heard applied the midst to a wrong sense neuer thought of by the Author himselfe And the same is proued against him in the allegation of many other Authors as of S. Augustine pag. 18. of S. Bede and Arnobius pag. 34. 35. and of S. Chrysostome pag. 52. all to one end corruptly and fraudulently alleadged for some shew of proofe that publike seruice ought to be in vulgar tongues only which yet being truly examined make nothing for his purpose but quite contrary And thus much in this place for the first Knight 72. As concerning the second Knight Syr Philip Mornay his case is notorious that hauing published a great booke full of authorities against the Masse vpon the yeare 1599. seeming to shew great learning therin the same was fond afterward to be so full of deceipts and wilfull falsifications as a very learned man Monsieur Peron then Bishop of Eureux and now Cardinall made publike offer to proue aboue fiue hundred such wilfull falsifications to be in that booke requesting also by humble suite his Maiesty of France to command publike triall with his presence as at length it was effectuated in the presence of the King and great parte of his 〈◊〉 and other learned men on both sides vpon the yeare 1600. and 4. of May as appeareth both by the Kings owne letter extant in print as also by the publike Acts set forth by the approbation of the said King and his Counsell 73. In this Conserence of tryall fiue hundred wilfull falsifications being obiected as I said to this Knight and when the tyme grew neere three score 〈◊〉 exhibited vnto him by the said Bishop out of which to make his choise for the first dayes tryall the said Syr Philip Mornay choise 19. of those which he thought himselfe best able to defend or excuse and of this number also he placed in the first ranke such as seemed to him to be of least enormity wherof notwithstāding the straitnes of tyme permitting only 9. to be handled he was conuinced publikely in all and euery one of them and had sentence geuen against him by the Iudges as well Protestants chosen of his side as the other that were of the Bishops Religion the summe wherof I shall briefly touch in this place 74. The first was that he had falsified the Schole-Doctor Ioannes Scotus alleadging him as though he had doubted of the Reall-presence for that hauing proposed the question whether Christ were really in the Sacrament vnder the formes of bread and wyne he did according to the fashion of Scholes make arguments to the contrary saying Videtur quòd non it seemeth that he is not so there for these and these reasons which afterwards he solueth and holdeth the contrary position for true and Catholike to wit that Christs body is really there wherupon the sentence of the Iudges was that Mōsieur Plessis in this matter had taken the obiection of Scotus for his resolution 75. The second falsification wherof he was conuinced was that he had alledged Bishop Durandus an other Scholasticall Author very fraudulently about the controuersie of Transubstantiation affirming him to say and hold for his owne position that which he cyteth only as an obiection out of an other and answereth the same The third and fourth falsifications were that he had corrupted plainly S. Chrysostome in two seuerall places by him alledged about prayer for the dead producing two particuler testimonyes out of him quite contrary to his owne meaning and expresse wordes The fifth was out of S. Hierome about praying to Saints The sixth out of S. Cyrill about honouring the holy Crosse. The seauenth out of the Code or Imperiall lawes about painting or keruing the signe of the said Crosse. The eight out of S. Bernard about honouring our blessed Lady The ninth and last of an authority of Theodorete about Images 76. All which places being diligently examined and Syr Philipp Mornay suffred to say and alledge what he could for his defence or euasion he was conuinced manifestly by the said Bishop of Eureux and sentenced by all the Iudges to haue committed falfification and vntrue dealing in them all And the like would the said Bishop haue shewed declared in all the rest to the number of fiue hundred if the said Mornay could haue byn brought to haue continued the combat which he would not as yow may see in the said publike Acts printed in French vpon the yeare 1601. with approbation of the King himselfe And he that will see more particulers of this in the English tōgue may read a Treatise or relation therof set forth in the yeare 1604. taken out of the foresaid French publike Acts of the said tryall And so this shall serue for this French Knight wherby yow may see the conformity of spirit in them all when occasion is offered to Equiuocate in the worst sense 77. Our last example then shall be of S. Edward Cooke lately the Kings Attorney who hauing taken vpon him these yeares past to be both a sharpe writer and earnest actor against Catholiks seemeth therwith to haue drunke also of this spirite in such aboundant measure as he is like in tyme to ouer-runne all the rest if he go forward as he hath begonne For that being admonished not long agoe by one that answered his last booke of Reportes of diuers notorious his excesses committed in this kind he is men say so farre of from correcting or amēding the same as he hath not only in a late large declamatiō against Catholicks in a charge giuē by him at Norwich repeated and auouched againe the same excesses but hath 〈◊〉 others also therunto of much more apparant falsity As for example he was admonished among other points that it was a notorious vntruth which he had writen and printed that for the first ten yeares of Queene Elizabeths raigne no one person of what religion or sect so euer did refuse to go to the Protestants Church and seruice which the Answerer confuteth so clearly and by so many witnesses as a man would haue thought that the matter would neuer haue byn mencioned more for very shame and yet now they say that the Attorney being made a Iudge hath not only repeated the same but auouched it also againe with such asseueration in his foresaid Charge as if it had neuer byn controlled or proued false 78. Nay further they write that he adioyned with like asseueration diuers other things no lesse apparātly false then this as for example
c. by his letters patentes with the counsell and consent of the Bishops and Counsellours of his nation did giue to the 〈◊〉 of Abindon in Barkshire and to one Ruchinus Abbot of that Monastery a certayne portiō of his land to wit fifteene Mansians in a place called by the country-men Culnam with all profittes and commodityes great and small appertayning thervnto for euerlasting inheritance And that the foresaid Ruchinus c. should be quiet from all right of the Bishop for euer so as the inhabitantes of that place shall not be depressed for the tyme to come by the yoke of any Bishop or his officers but that in all euentes of thinges and controuersyes of causes they shall be subiect to the decree of the Abbot of the said Monastery so as c. And then doth M. Attorney continue his speach thus This Charter was pleaded in 1. H. 7. and vouched by Stanford as at large appeareth which Charter graunted aboue 850. yeares sithence was after confirmed per Eduinum Britaniae Anglorum Regem Monarcham anno Domini 955. by which appeareth that the King by this Charter made in Parliament for it appeareth to be made by the Counsell and consent of his Bishops Senators of his Kingdome which were assembled in Parlament did discharge and exempt the said Abbot from the Iurisdiction of the Bishop c. And by the same Charter did grant to the same Abbot Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction within his said Abbey which Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction being deriued from the Crowne continued vntill the dissolution of the said Abbey in the raigne of King Henry the eight So he 85. And by this yow may see what an important conclusion he doth inferre of the Kinges supreme iurisdiction in spirituall affayres at that time Whervnto the Deuine comming to answere and supposing that M. Attorney would not falsity or belye his Authors hauing protested most solemnly fol. 40. of his his booke that he had cyted truly the very wordes and textes of the lawes resolutions iudgmentes and actes of Parlament all publicke and in print without any inference argument or amplification quoting particularly the bookes yeares leaues Chapters and other such like certayne references as euery man at his pleasure may see and read them c. The answerer I say hearing this formall protestation and supposing besides that the man would haue some respect to his credit and honour in this behalfe granting all as it lay answered the same as yow may see in his booke but now vpon better search it falleth out that this whole 〈◊〉 was falsely alledged by M. Attorney in the very point of the principall controuersy in hand about the Kinges spiritual Iurisdiction for that whatsoeuer the Charter did ascribe expresly to the Pope his Authority the Attorney suppressing the true wordes relateth it as proceeding from the King temporall authority of his Crowne For proofe wherof I shall set downe the very wordes of my learned friends letter out of England about this point after view taken of the law-bookes themselues and then let any man say how farre M Attorney is to be credited in any thing he writeth or speaketh against Catholickes 86. As concerning saith he the Charter of King Kenulphus for the Sanctuary of the Monastery of Abindon yow must know that M. Attorney hath egregiously abused his Reader in that and other points For the Case standeth thus That in the first yeare of King Henry the 7. Humphrey Stafford was attainted by Act of Parlament of high 〈◊〉 and tooke Sanctuary first in Colchester in Essex after fled to Culnam and tooke Sanctuary in the Abbey of Abindon and being taken from thence brought vnto the Tower of London from thence brought vnto the Kings-bench he pleaded that he was drawne by force out of the said Sanctuary of Culnam and prayed his Counsell to plead that poynt which by all the Iudges of both benches was graunted vnto him And so they pleaded in this manner 87. Idem Humphridus per Consilium suum dixit quod Kenulphus Rex Merciorum per litteras suas patentes consilio consensu Episcoporum Senatorum gentis suae largitus fuit Monasterio de Abindon ac cuidam Ruchino tunc Abbati Monasterij illius quandam ruris sui portionem id est quindecim Mansias in loco qui a ruricolis tunc nuncupabatur Culnam cum omnibus vtilitatibus ad 〈◊〉 pertinentibus tam in magnis quà m in modicis rebus in aeternam haereditatem Et quod praedictus Ruchinus ab omni Regis obstaculo Episcopali iure in sempiternum esset quietus vt inhabitatores eius nullius Regis aut ministrorum suorum Episcopiue aut suorum Officialium iugo inde deprimerentur sed in cunctis rerum euentibus discussionibus causarum Abbatis Monasterij praedicti decreto subijcerentur 〈◊〉 quod c. And heere ceaseth M. Attorney leauing out as yow see in his recitall the wordes that go before ab omni Regis obstaculo c. that the monastery should be free from all obstacle of the King as also these wordes vt inhabitatores eius nullius Regis aut 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 deprimantur that the inhabitants be not opprest with any yoke of any King or his ministers wherby is euident that the King in his Charter did for his part giue exemptions from temporall royall power but especially the fraude is seen by cutting of the wordes that do ensue which decyde the whole controuersy which are these Et etiam allegauit vltra quod Leo tunc Papa concessit dicto Abbati dictas 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Et quod Eduinus tunc Britaniae Anglorum Rex Monarchus concessit quod praefatum Monasterium omnis terrenae seruitutis esset liberum quae 〈◊〉 praedecessoribus suis Catholicis videlicet à dicto Sancto Leone Papa dicto Rege Kenulpho c. Et quod virtute litter arum bullarum praedictarum tempore confectionis earundem eadem villa de Culnam fuit Sanctuarium locus priuilegiatus c. Which in English is thus And moreouer the said Humphrey Stafford by his Counsell alledged furthet for himselfe that Pope Leo had graunted vnto the said Abbot the said immunityes and priuiledges that K. Edwin then King monarch ouer all the English in Britany had graunted that the said Monastery should be free from all earthly seruitude which by his Catholike predecessors to wit the said holy Pope 〈◊〉 the said King Kenulphus was graunted and that at the tyme of the making of the foresaid letters patentes and Bulles the said village or towne of Culnam was a Sanctuary and priuiledged place by vertue of the said patents and Bulles 88. This is word for word the very plea of Humphrey Stafford for the Sāctuary of the Monastery of Abindon as it was pleaded by his learned Counsell in law euen as it is recorded in the reportes of the yeares of King Henry the seauenth as