some English Kings that seemed not to respect much the Popes authority in some occasions which he hath borrowed out of Syr Edward Cookes Reportes he may see the answere to that booke and so I thinke remaine satisfied Wherefore this shall suffice for the second head of argumentes throughout the new Testament though after also in the examination of some falsifications we shall haue occasion to say more Argumentes from Reason §. 3. 43. VVHerfore to passe no further in the second point of argumentes vnder the new Testament we shall say a word or two only of the third to wit of proofes affirmed to be deduced by vs from force of reason for so he intituleth them to wit Popish Argumentes from reason And to the end you may see his talent therin wee shal examine only the third reason in this place which he declareth in these wordes Except saith the Romish pretence there were a way of deposing Apostata Princes God had not prouided sufficiētly for his Church for this he citeth the Constitution Extrauagant of Pope Bonifacius and saith This obiection is in your Extrauagantes and so it may be called because it rangeth extra that is without the bondes of Godes ordinance c. But as in all his other citations generally he is neuer lightly true and sincere in all points no not thrice I thinke veryly throughout all this lying booke of his so neither heere and it would require a great volume alone to examine only some part of his leaues about this point of his shiftes and corruptions they are so many and thicke and craftily hudled vp togeather As for example heere first this sentence is not in the Popes Extrauagant at all but only in a certaine addition to the ordinary glosse or Commentary of Iohn Picard which addition was made by Petrus Bertrandus a late writer Secondly this Commentary saith nothing of deposing Apostata Princes but only affirming the foresaid opinion of Canonistes to be true that Christ was Lord absolutly in this life ouer all not only in spirituall authority but in temporall also he inferreth therby Christ should not haue sufficiently prouided for the gouernment of his Church Kingdome vpon earth Nisi vnicum post se talem Vicarium reliquisset qui haec omnia posset except he had left some such one substitute or Vicar after him as should be able to performe all these thinges to wit as belong both to spirituall and temporall power according as necessity shall require which later clause yow see that T. M. cut of as he added the other about Apostata Princes And thus much for his variety of corruptions in this little sentence now to the thing it selfe 44. The reason if we consider it without passion is strong and weighty and founded vpon the prouidence wisedome and goodnes of almighty God who hauing prouided diligently and admirably for the preseruation of all other thinges and Communities by him created or ordained should leaue the Christian Common-wealth vnfurnished of all remedy for the greatest euill of all others that possibly can fall out which is the corruption of the head that may destroy the whole body wherof he is head if it be not redressed As if for examples sake the Prince would extirpate Christian Religion bring in Mahometisme or other such abhomination ouerthrow all good lawes plant and establish vice dissolution Atheisme or commit some other such exorbitant wickednes as were not tolerable wherunto notwithstanding mans frailty without the helpe of Godes grace is or may be subiect In this case saith the obiection some remedy must haue byn left by Christ or els his diuine wisdome and prouidence had not prouided sufficiently for the preseruation of his Kingdome as by light of nature he left remedy to the body of euery Common-wealth vnder the Gentiles before his cōming which is euident both by Plato Aristotle Cicero others that wrote of Common-wealthes in those dayes and did alwayes presume that the said Common-wealthes had sufficient authority by law of nature to restraine exorbitant Princes when they were perilous to the publicke and the same haue held al other learned men that euer wrote of that argument afterward 45. But as for our Catholicke learned men both Deuines and Lawiers though they affirme as out of T. M. his frequent allegations of them in this his Treatise is euident that all obedience both externall and internall in conscience and workes is by Godes ordinance due vnto them yet that in such publicke perilles of the Church Common-wealth as before are mentioned when they fal out Christ our Sauiour hath not left his Church wholy remedilesse but rather that besides the naturall right which ech Kingdome hath to defend themselues in certaine cases he left also supreame power in his high Priest and immediate substitute to direct and moderate that power and to adde also of his owne whē extraordinary need requireth though with great deliberation consultation weighty motiues lawfull meanes and other like circumstances 46. This I say is Catholicke doctrine but what Protestants doctrine is were hard to set downe for that they speake therin as time and occasion serueth them hauing no rule or Canon at all wherto they are bound For what was both their doctrine and practice when and where they were discontented with their Princes both in England Scotland Flanders Geneua and France is euident by that which before we haue alledged in the first fourth Chapters of this booke now this man telleth vs another tale for the time present but what he would say or doe if he were in the discontented occasion of those his fellow-Authors that wrote so sharpely and violently no man can tell but let vs see now at length how substantially he doth satisfy this obiectiō for he giueth three or foure seuerall solutions therunto you shall heare what ones they are 47. The first is from Godes ordinance saith he for by the word of God as your Cunerus Deuinely reasoneth which is not partiall nor by the self pleasing fancy of sensuall affection must this question be determined though therfore it may seeme to vs a decree of nature for euery one to defend himself and the thinges he doth enioy yet the Law of God doth forbid to doe this by taking armes against the higher powers c. So T. M. out of our Cunerus And it is well that he alloweth this Catholicke writer to reason deuinely so far forth as he may seeme to make for him though in truth in the cōclusion of his discourse he is wholy against him For as first his whole speech in this seauenth Chapter by him cited is expresly against the Hollanders that vnder diuers pretences both of Religion and Scriptures for the same liberty of their countrey and the like tooke armes against their true naturall King which he reproueth and condemneth very piously and learnedly throughout this whole Chapter and in the
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
second and third Reasons §. 2. HIs second reason why his Maiesties Catholicke and Protestant subiects may not liue togeather in England is For that all Popish Priestes faith he doe attribute a double prerogatiue ouer Kings that is to say a Democraticall and Monarchicall Soueraigne ciuill power the first to the people the second to the Pope And for proofe of the first concerning the people he alleadgeth fower seuerall authorities of Catholicke writers but so corruptly and perfidiously as if nothing else did shew his talent of cogging and treacherous dealing this were sufficient to discouer the same though afterwardes greater store will occurre we shall runne ouer briefly all these fower 23. First he saith that Doleman in his Conference about succession hath these wordes The Common-wealth hath authority to chuse a King and to limit him lawes at their pleasure Which if it were truly alleadged as it lieth in the Author yet heere is no mention of the people or of Democraticall state but only of the Common-wealth which includeth both nobility and people and all other states Secondly Dolemans wordes are not of chusing a King but of chusing a forme of gouernement be it Democraticall Aristocraticall or Monarchicall Let vs heare the Author himself speake In like manner saith he it is euident that as the Common-wealth hath this authority to chuse and change her gouernement as hath byn proued so hath it also to limit the same with what lawes and conditions shee pleaseth wherof ensueth great diuersity of authority and power which ech one of the former gouernments hath in it self So he Where we see that Doleman speaketh of the power which a Common-wealth hath that is deuoid of any certeine gouernement to chuse vnto themselues that forme that best liketh them with the limitations they thinke most expedient and so we see in England France Polonia Germany Venice Genua and in the Empire it self different formes and manners of gouernement with different lawes and limitations according to the choice and liking of ech nation This place then of Doleman is corrupted by T. M. both in wordes and sense for he neither speaketh nor meaneth as the false Minister auoucheth him of giuing Democraticall power to the people ouer Princes established 24. There followeth the second place taken out of the French Iesuite as he calleth him De iusta abdicatione c. though it be well knowne that D. Bouchier Author of that booke yet liuing in Flanders and Canon of Tourney was neuer Iesuite in his life but all must be ascribed to Iesuits that may seeme odious This French Iesuite saith he sheweth a reason of Dolemans speach saying For Maiesty is rather seated in the Kingdome then in the King But I would aske the poore man why he doth alleadge this place or of what weight it is or may be for his purpose for so much as D. Bouchier in these wordes denieth not Maiesty to be in the King but to be more in the Kingdome for that the Kingdome giueth Maiesty vnto the King when it chuseth him and not the King properly vnto the Kingdome And is not this a great obiection or doth this proue that we ascribe Democraticall soueraignity ouer Kings vnto the people One of his owne Ghospell-brethren speaketh more roundly and roughly to the matter when he writeth Populo ius est vt imperium cui velit deferat The people hath right to bestowe the crowne vpon whome they list if we had said so what aduantage would T. M. haue sought thereat 25. His third place is out of D. Stapleton in his booke called Dydimus where he saith That the people are not ordeyned for the Prince but the Prince for the people His wordes in Latin are Non populi in Principum gratiam facti sed Principes in populi commodum creati sunt Multitudes of people are not made by God for Princes sakes but Princes are created for the commodity or good of the people and what is there in this sentence iustly to be reprehended Is not this euident by diuine and humane lawe and by the very light of nature it self that Princes were first ordeined by God for the good of multitudes and not multitudes for the vtility of Princes Will T. M. deny this or is not this far more modest and temperate then that of his owne brethren before mentioned whose wordes are Populus Rege est praestantior melior the people are better more excellēt then the King what wilfull wrangling is this in a turbulent Minister 26. His fourth and last place is out of M. VVilliam Reinoldes in his booke De iusta Reip. auctoritate c. whome he abuseth egregiously both in ascribing to him that which is not his and in deliuering the same corruptedly and by a little yow may learne much ex vngue leonem His wordes he citeth thus Rex humana creaturae est quia ab hominibus constituta and Englisheth in this manner A King is but a creature of mans creation where yow see first that in the translation he addeth but and mans creation of himself for that the Latin hath no such but nor creation but constitution Secondly these wordes are not the wordes of M. Reinoldes but only cited by him out of S. Peter and thirdly they are alleadged here by T. M. to a quite contrary sense from the whole discourse and meaning of the Author which was to exalte and magnify the authority of Princes as descending from God and not to debase the same as he is calumniated For proofe herof whosoeuer will looke vpon the booke and place it self before mentioned shal find that M. Reinolds purpose therin is to proue that albeit earthly principality power and authority be called by the Apostle humana creatura yet that it is originally from God by his commandement to be obeyed His wordes are these Hinc enim est c. hence is it that albeit the Apostle doe call all earthly principality a humaine creature for that it is placed in certaine men from the beginning by suffrages of the people yet election of Princes doth flow from the law of nature which God created and from the vse of reason which God powred into man and which is a little beame of diuine light drawne from that infinite brightnes of almighty God therefore doth the Apostle S. Paul pronounce that There is no power but from God and that he which resisteth this power resisteth God himselfe So M. Reinoldes 27. And now let the indifferent Reader iudge whether M. Reinoldes hath byn calumniated in this allegation or no whether this Minister is led by any rule of conscience and whether these be such pregnant arguments and proofes against vs as he promised at the first entrance of his booke And for the matter in hand he promised to proue as yow haue heard that we ascribed popular and Democraticall power to the people ouer Kings which how well he hath
bloud insteed of shed their bloud as though God were a bloud-spiller or comaunded the same to be done vniustly by others but all is strained by the Minister to make vs odious wheras himself indeed is therby made ridiculous And for that I haue byn somewhat longer in this example then I had purposed as also for that by this one if it were but one yow may ghesse of al the rest of his proceeding I wil heere cease referring the rest of this kinde to other more fit places and occasions afterwardes 58. And yet truly I cannot wel pretermit for ending this Chapter one little note more of rare singularity in this man aboue others which I scarce euer haue obserued in any one of his fellowes and this is that the very first wordes of Scripture alledged by him in the first page of his booke for the poesy of his pamphlet are falsly alleadged corrupted and mangled though they conteine but one only verse of Isay the Prophet and then may yow imagine what liberty he will take to himself afterward throughout his whole discourse His sentence or poesy is this Isay. 29. vers 9. But stay your selues and wonder they are blinde and make yow blinde which he would haue to be vnderstood of vs Catholickes but let any man read the place of Isay it self and he shall finde no such matter either in wordes or sense but only the word wonder to wit obstupescite admiramini fluctuate vacillate inebriamini non a vino mouemini non ab ebrietate And according to this are the Greek and Hebrew textes also So as what should moue T. M. to set downe so corruptly the very first sentence of his booke and cite the Chapter and verse wherin his fraude may be descried I know not except he obserued not the last clause of the Prophetes precept mouemini non ab ebrietate And so much for this HOVV THIS TREATISE VVAS LAIED ASIDE By sicknesse of the Author and some other causes And why it was taken in hand againe vpon the sight of a Catholicke Answere and a new Reply of T. M. dedicated to his Maiesty with the Authors iudgment of them both CHAP. III. HAuing written hitherto and passed thus far-forth in examination of the Ministers opprobrious libel of Discouery I was partly forced by grieuous sicknesse that continued for some moneths partly also induced for that I vnderstood that another Catholicke man had answered the said libell to lay that which I had written a side as also for that the occasion of time wherin this Treatise was begun soone after the detection of the often forenamed powder-treason seemed in great part to be past and hauing once laied it out of my handes had no great will afterward to goe forward theriwth as an argument of loathsome contention against most odious imputations and calumniations but yet after diuers monethes againe seing the said Catholicke answere to appeare which before I had not viewed togeather with a large Reply to the same by the Minister that first made and deuised the libell and that the said Minister had now resolued vpon instance of the said Answerer to manifest his name to wit of Thomas Morton which before went ciphered with the letters only of T. M. that might aswell haue signified Thomas Malmesbury or Montague or Monte-banke or any such like sur-name and further that he presumed to dedicate the same vnto the Kinges Maiesty by a speciall glosing Epistle full of fond Ministeriall malice against Catholickes intituling his said Reply A full satisfaction concerning a double Romish iniquity heynous Rebellion and more then heathenish 〈◊〉 And further that he had encreased his said worke with two or three new Treatises partly for iustifying of Protestantes in the case of Rebellion and partly for confuting of a Treatise written in defence of Equiuocation I was moued aswell of my self as by others exhortation to resume the thing into my handes againe to adioine by the view of the whole that which was wanting to the full confutation of this Ministers iniquity in laying such heinous Rebellion heathenish Equiuocation vnto Catholickes charge who of all men liuing are most free from iust reprehension in them both and the Caluinian sect and sectaries conuinced to be most guilty in the one and consciencelesse in the other as the iudicious Reader I doubt not shall see euidently proued and confirmed in that which is to ensue 2. It moued me also not a little to goe forward somewhat with this confutation though in as breiffe manner as might be to see that this deuise though neuer so fond and false of charging Catholicke doctrine with Rebellion Equiuocation was applauded not a little by some men of marke in our State as namely by his Maiesties late Attorney Generall aswel in his writing as pleadinges against Catholicks borrowing from this Ministers first Treatise diuers large parcelles and passages of his calumnious imputations about the forenamed two heades of Rebelliō and Equiuocation lending him againe in lue therof for his second Reply sundry obseruations collections of his owne concerning diuers Kings of England that seemed to him not so much to fauour or acknowledge the Bishop of Rome his authority ouer the English Church which yet now vpon further search is found to be contrary and so set downe and demonstrated at large by a late Answere published to the said Attorney his booke of Reportes as I thinke in hast will not be answered Wherupon forsomuch as this new deuised accusation of Rebellious doctrine and Equiuocation is taken vp by so many handes of those that be enemies to Catholicke Religion I thought it conuenient to cleere somewhat more this 〈◊〉 and as I had before I laid aside this worke treated sufficiently as it seemed to me of the former point concerning Rebellious doctrine vpon the sight only of T. M. his first pamphlet as in the precedent two Chapters yow haue seen yet now vpon the appearance of this Minister Thomas Morton in his proper name and person of his new Reply that promiseth full satisfaction in all it seemed necessary that I should goe forward to finish my first intent and to examine the second point or head of his accusation in like manner apperteining to the doctrine of Equiuocation made no lesse odious now by continuall clamours of sycophancy then the other of Rebellion it selfe 3. One other circumstance also stirred me greatly to proceed in this short worke which was that togeather with these bookes sent out of England aduertisement was giuen that this Minister Thomas Morton was Chaplain to my Lord of Canterbury who being head of the spirituall Court of Arches which is or ought to be the supreame for matters of cōscience in England I was in hope to haue some remedy against this his Lordships Chaplaine if I should demonstrate that he dealeth against all conscience obseruing no law either of truth or modesty towardes Catholick men
Buchanan Goodman and like Ministers in Scotland turning vpside downe that State against their Soueraignes the Rebellions raised in Suetia Polonia Germany Switzerland France and other countreys as his iustification is a more plaine condemnation of them and their spirits and doctrine in that behalfe then if he had said nothing at all as partly shall afterwardes appeare by some instances that we shall alledge therof 15. Thirdly he doth with as little discretion bring in that accusation before mentioned of hard wordes vsed by some of our Authors against his party that followeth Caluins doctrine as namely That they belieue no one article truly of the Christian Creed That they are Heretickes therin far worse and in more damnable state thē Turkes Iewes or Infidelles That their doctrine leadeth by consequence to Turcisme and Infidelity c. for by this occasion both the Author of the moderate Answere hath alledged many cleere authorities of principall Protestantes themselues that are of the same opinion and we haue added many more therunto in the precedēt Chapter of this booke wherby is made manifest that the profession of Caluins doctrine is no lesse held for Heresy Apostasy and infidelity by all other sortes of Protestantes of our daies then by Catholicke men themselues and much more may be added for iustification of that point which needed not to haue byn brought in but vpon this occasion to shew that English Protestantes are held for Hereticks not only by the Catholick Church whose iudgment most importeth but by the cheiffe pillars also of the Protestantes profession in other countreys And when I doe name Heresy and Heretickes the prudent Reader will remember that I doe name the most heinous and damnable thing that any Christian cogitation can comprehend no matter of iest or dispute but of terrour and teares 16. Fourthly I can as little commend the Ministers wit for drawing into the field againe a new disputation and speciall Treatise of his adioined in the end of this his Reply about Equiuocation or doubtfull speeches sometimes lawfull to be vsed for good and pious endes and for auoiding sinne and other hurtes both spirituall temporall wherin though the lawfulnes and necessity therof both by law of nature diuine and humane haue byn made euident vpon diuers occasions in England these later yeares since this calumniation was raised against vertuous and learned mē about the same yet one proofe wee shall adde more heere in this place which before I haue not seen set downe at any length which is that not only Protestantes themselues doe both vse and abuse the same as the Answerer declareth but that this very Author our Minister that inueigheth so sharpely ignorantly against the manner of speech which he calleth Equiuocation is forced in almost infinite places of his Reply either to graunt that he doth Equiuocate or els that he lyeth flatly And for this also I remit my self to the proofes that after shall ensue 17. And so to conclude this Chapter concerning my iudgment about the Answere and Reply to the foresaid Discouery of Rebellion and Equiuocation I must needes say that the Answerer hath endeauored to effectuate so much as he promised in the title of his booke which was of a iust and moderate Answere and in performance therof hath not only borne on matters temperately as before hath byn shewed but spared also his Aduersary in many pointes and namely in passing ouer his allegations without note or check hauing not perhaps either time or commodity of bookes to examine the same or perswading himself that in so small a pamphlet and palpable matter a Minister would not aduenture to vse so many falsifications but he was deceaued not knowing so well this generation of men who finding their cause deuoid of truth are forced to hold vp the credit therof by sleightes of falshood In the rest the Answerer quitteth himself learnedly and sheweth much reading in particuler as by the multiplicity of Authors by him alledged doth well appeare But the Replier is so far of from performing his promise of a full satufaction concerning double Romish Iniquity as he hath scarce satisfied fully or meanly any one argument or authority alledged by his aduersary who though I may presume he will best declare himself by his Reioinder to this Reply if he thinke him worthy of so much labour as in truth I doe not especially at this time when so grieuous punishmentes are procured in England by him his like for such as doe presume to answer their bookes yet meane I also briefly in this Treatise by some examples to make it manifest leauing the rest to himself to be treated and refuted by him more largely abundantly when he shall thinke it best conuenient my purpose being only to lay forth in general the iniuries which this Minister doth offer vnto all Catholick people by slaundering them in the foresaid two odious accusations of Rebelliō Equiuocation wherof hauing treated sufficiently about the first in the two foregoing Chapters and shall doe more in two other that ensue we meane by Godes help to passe thence to the other generall head of Equiuocation to handle the same with no lesse euidency of truth equity and piety of Catholicke doctrine therin then hath byn declared in the other before cōcerning our innocency wherin I remit me willingly to the indifferent Readers iudgmēt censure VVHAT THE MINISTER THOMAS MORTON DOTH IN THIS REPLY and full satisfaction ansvvere CONCERNING The former point of charge against Protestantes for Rebellion Conspiracies and Disobedience the effect wherof is drawne to three principall Questions CHAP. IIII. ANd now after iudgment giuen of this Ministers Reply in generall it shall be needfull that we descend somewhat to particulars for proofe therof And wheras he by so many sleightes and turninges of diuisions and subdiuisions numbers members of thinges to be handled or rather hudled as also by transmutation from due places alteration of order clipping and culling of wordes and sentences endeauoreth so to entangle the sight and vnderstanding of his Reader especially the more vnlearned as he may not easily finde where he walketh nor when he answereth to purpose and when not when he leaueth out and when he putteth in all when he dealeth plainly and when fraudulently and by consequence after much reading can scarce be able to make any firme conclusion at all about the matter in controuersy Our course shall be quyte contrary endeauoring to bring all to breuity perspicuity and certainty so much as in vs lyeth for so we thinke it necessary for the Readers true satisfaction after the small satisfaction he can receiue by the full satisfaction promised by this Minister 2. Wherfore to reduce all that before hath byn said by him or his Answerer or my self concerning the charge of sedition and Rebellion vnto some perspicuous order and method three pointes seeme vnto me most important to be considered in this matter as
cōprehending the summe substance of all that hath byn said answered or replied vpon The first concerning Heresy the second seditious doctrine tending to Rebellion and the third the practice and exercise therof wherin as in all other pointes of argument discourse when the obiection and solution is once heard and well considered no great difficulty remaineth for a discreet man to make the conclusion and to settle his minde therin The first Question about Heretickes and Heresy §. 1. FIrst then there hath byn a great contention and is betweene vs as in the second Chapter of this Treatise you haue heard about the name nature and application of Heresy and Heretickes this Minister maketh it a principall ground in the very beginning of his first discouery why Catholickes and English Protestantes may not liue togeather in one Common-wealth without continuall feares of treason to be practized from the said Catholicks for that they held Protestantes to be Heretickes and hereupon doth he bring in that long list and rablement of losses and penalties both temporall and spirituall adiudged by ancient Councelles and Canons Ecclesiasticall to be incident and due to all sortes of Heretickes rising vp against the Church from the beginning whervnto his moderate Answerer giueth that moderate satisfaction which in the precedent Chapter we haue signified to wit that concerning the execution of those penalties especially the externall it is not due against any vntill lawfull and iudiciall denuntiation haue passed and that forsomuch as apperteined to the imputation of Heresy vnto them that are of Caluins Religion professed in England not only Catholickes but diuers sortes also of the most renowned Protestantes did stand therin most resolutly holding them to be true and properly Heretickes And for this he cited many instances authorities and examples and we haue added more in the said second Chapter that goeth before 4. Now then it is to be considered maturely without passion or heat of contention whether this be so or not and how T. M. doth answere these instances of his first aduersary for mine hitherto he hath not seene for if this be true that indeed they are held for Heretickes by learned and graue men of their owne profession who are no lesse opposite to vs then they then falleth first the ground of his bitter exclamation against vs for reputing them so secondly followeth it also that as great probabilities of treasons and conspiracies may be suspected from those of the other sectes that hold them for such if that opinion be the cause of treasons as Lutherans Zuinglians Puritans and the like And lastly ensueth a weighty consideration that if by all sides they be held for Heretickes how deeply the graue or rather grieuous assertion of S. Augustine before alledged is to be held in memory pondered with terrour Firmissimè tene nullatenus dubites omnem Haereticum vel Schismaticum cum Diabolo Angelis 〈◊〉 aeterni ignis incendio participandum Hold for most certaine and no way make any doubt but that euery Heticke or Schismaticke of what sort soeuer shall be partaker of the flames of eternall fier togeather with the diuell and his Angelles which is a dreadfull sentence especially if we remember both his and all other Holy Fathers vniforme definition of an Hereticke to consist principally in this that he hold with obstinacy any one article contrary to the beliefe of the vniuersall visible and knowne Church for that out of these two maior and minor propositions the conclusion is easily made who is an Hereticke and therby also in the danger denounced by S. Augustine 5. The first proofe then which the Answerer alledgeth against the discouery of T. M. in this behalfe is the authority censure and iudgment of the Deane Colledge of the famous Lutheran Vniuersity in Germany named Tubinga set downe by the said deane and Comon Reader of that Vniuersity named Philippus Nicolaus in a large booke with this title Fundamentorum Caluinianae sectae cum veteribus Arrianis Nestorianis communium detectio A discouery of the fundamentes of the Caluinian sect which are common to them with the ancient Arrians Nestorians he proueth through many Chapters togeather that Caluinists are no lesse Heretickes then the other and they agree with him at least in seauenteene or eighteene principall articles alledging also 〈◊〉 authority to the same effect 6. This is the charge What doth the Minister now Reply vpon large and mature deliberation in this his full satisfaction Yow shall heare it in his owne wordes That which they did saith he in the spirit of opposition and contention is not much to be regarded and this is all he saith to the purpose for that presently he runneth a side to proue by other meanes that Caluin did not hold with the Arrians and Nestorians but this is to take a new contention in hand with the Vniuersity of Tubinga whether they censured well or no and not to answere vs whether Caluinists be truly Heretickes by the iudgment of that Protestant Vniuersity which in effect he granteth when he saith That it is not much to be regarded what they did in the spirit of opposition contention so as they censure him and he censured them wherby is cleer that in their iudgment both he and his are condemned which is the point in question 7. And by this and many other like authorities alledged by me to this purpose in the precedent second Chapter is euident that in the iudgment and conscience of all Lutheran Protestantes whatsoeuer not only in the spirit of opposition and contention as this man saith but in their calmest spirit if euer they be in calme all Caluinistes are held by them for damnable Heretickes yea deploratissimi Haeretici most desperate Heretickes saith Franciscus Stancarus a chief Superintendent in Polonia Alieni ab Ecclesia Dei satanae membra saith Luther himself cut of from the Church of God and therby made true members of Satan which censure being laied vpon them by men of their owne profession is a very considerable point to be marked by him that feareth the eternall fire before mentioned by S. Augustine For as if so many learned Phisitians should tell vs that we were in a dangerous consumption or so many skilfull Lawyers should admonish vs that we were by law in a case of extreme temporall danger of death we would looke about vs so much more ought we in this case 8. I passe ouer the testimony of Conradus before mentioned who affirmeth Caluinistes to belieue and teach rightly no one article of the Creed that also of Heshusius that saith their association is a most blasphemous sacrilegious sect that of Hunnius it is most damnable and the right way to hell that of Schutzius calling it the sinke of all wicked Heresies that of Modestus that maketh Caluinists as badd as Iewes and Mahometanes that of Matthias Grauerus and others that affirme all
next ensuing whose title is Quid in Tyrannide subdit is agendum sit What subiectes ought to doe in case of tyranny he sheweth two sortes of Tyranny and Tyrantes the one that inuadeth vniustly another mans dominions against the will authority of his King and Prince the other that leauing the office of a King and good Prince in protecting his people and Religion iustice among them turneth himselfe wholy to their affliction and oppression and that in the former case the people are taught by many examples of Scriptures to resist by armes where they can but in the second much more moderation is to be vsed all meanes of humble suite intreaty intercession prayer to God amendment of life and pacification to be vsed Quod si haec non iuuent saith he Superiorem in tempor alibus vti Reges Princeps non agnoscit tunc supremus Ecclesiae Pastor interpellandus occurrit qui bonis aequis subditorum querelis audit is plura Deo cooperante ratione auctoritate praestare poterit quà m vnquam 〈◊〉 armis impetrabit but if these meanes doe not help saith Cunerus and that the Prince doe acknowledge no Superiour in temporall causes as Kinges doe not then is the Supreme Pastor of the Church to be called vpon who hauing heard the iust good complaintes of the Subiects God assisting him shall be able to effectuate more by reason and authority with their Prince then euer the people themselues should haue obteyned by force of armes Thus he 48. And now will T. M. allow this also for deuinely spoken If he doe then we differ not in opinion If he doe not why doth he so often and continually cull out and cut of sentences of Authors that write directly against him as this Bishop Cunerus the Lawier Carerius the Deuine Bozius the Iesuites Bellarmine Salmeron Azor and others And yet I must admonish the Reader heere againe that if he compare the text it selfe of Cunerus with that which heere T. M. setteth downe in Latin and then the Latin with that he Englisheth he shall find such mangling vpon mangling by cutting of leauing out altering whole sentēces as he will see that this man can scarce deale truly in any thing And thus much for his first answere out of Cunerus making much more against him then for him as yow haue seene 49. And I leaue to discusse the Authority of S. Augustine which out of Cunerus he also alleadgeth for otherwise then out of our Authors bookes he hath little or nothing in any matter it being no lesse mangled by this man then is the text of Cunerus it selfe as euery one will finde that shall read Cunerus not so much as one note of c. being left any where lightly to signify that somewhat is cut of but all running togeather as if it were continuall speach in the Author whereas in deed they be but peeces scraps ioyned togeather and those also commonly with much corruption wherof I dare auouch that the Author shall finde aboue a hundred examples in this fraudulent Reply which is wholy patched vp out of the distracted sentences of our owne Authors by this art 50. But now to his second answere to the former obiection that Gods prouidence must needes haue lef't some remedy for the danger that may occurre by euill gouernment of Princes c. The second is saith he the consideration of examples of the primitiue Church when for the space of three hundred yeares it was in grieuous persecution there was found no power on earth to restraine that earthly power was therfore God wanting to his Church God forbid Nay rather he was not wanting for it is written Vertue is perfected in infirmity And againe As gold is purged in the fire so by affliction c. Because when the outward man suffereth the inward man is renewed and when I am weake then am I strong So he And doe yow see how patient and meeke this man is become now when there is nothing to suffer did his Protestant-Authors before mencioned write or teach this doctrine whē they were pressed by their Catholicke Princes to be quiet Or if this should be preached now at this day in Holland Zeland Frizeland Hungary Polonia Zweueland Transiluania where actually Protestantes are in armes against their naturall and lawfull Princes would it be receaued as currant and Euangelicall Would the examples of primitiue martyrs when there was scarce any temporall common-wealth extant among Christians be sufficient to prescribe a forme of patience sufferance to these men Why doe they not then put it in practice And why cease they not according to this mans doctrine from so notorious tumultuations against their lawfull Princes Why is not this doctrine of the Scripture of perfecting their vertue by bearing and suffering admitted by them I confesse it ought to be soe with all particuler men in their afflictions oppressions and tribulations and so teach our Doctors as before yow haue heard though when the hurt and danger concerneth a common wealth established in Christian Religion there be other considerations to be had as before hath byn set downe 51. But Protestantes obserue neither the one nor the other but both in particuler and common breake forth when they are streyned or discontēted into the vttermost violence they can and their Doctores are ready presently to defend them yea and to goe to the feild with them if need be against their Princes as experience hath taught vs both in Zwitzerland Scotland France and other places Wherfore this pretended preaching of patience and sufferance of T. M. in this place both in his outward and inward man is to small purpose 52. Wherfore his third answere is to the former obiection The view as he saith of our Popish principles wherby we teach that the Pope may not be iudged by any person vpon earth whether secular or Ecclesiasticall nor by a General Councel though he should doe something contrary to the vniuersall State of the Church neglect the Canons spare offenderes oppresse innocentes and the like For which he citeth both Bellarmine Carerius and Azor and then addeth that the Pope cannot be deposed for any of these no not though saith he to vse the wordes of your Pope himselfe one placed in the calendes of your martyrs he should carry many people with himselfe to hell yet no mortall creature may presume to say why doe yow so Thus he 53. Whervnto I answere first that all which Bellarmine Carerius Azorius and other Catholicke writers doe affirme of the Popes preheminency of authority immediatly vnder Christ so as he hath no Superiour Iudge betweene Christ and him that may sit in iudgment ouer him or giue sentence vpon him for matters of yll life tendeth only to shew that as he receiueth his supreame charge immediatly from Christ so by him must he be iudged not by man though
a heauenly Kingdome insomuch as S. Augustine doth doubt whether in the old Testament the Kingdome of heauen was euer so much as named and much lesse promised for reward and therfore those things that were then done amōg them foreshewed only or prefigured diuine thinges that were to succeed vnder the new Testament the other being not diuine but humane and earthly So Salmeron 5. Heere then are sundry important corruptions fraudes vttered by T.M. the one that the Iesuites and namely Salmeron are inforced to allow the temporall King to haue byn Supreme ouer the high Priest in spirituall matters vnder the old law wheras he doth expressely affirme and prooue the contrary both out of the Scripture it selfe by the sacrifice appointed more worthy for the Priest then the Prince many other testimonies as that he must take the law interpretation therof at the Priestes hands that he must ingredi egredi ad verbum Sacerdotis goe in and out and proceed in his affaires by the word and direction of the Priest and the like as also by the testimony of Philo and Ioseph two learned Iewes and other reasons handled at large in this very disputation and in the self same place from whence this obiection is taken And this is the first falsification concerning the Authours meaning and principall drift 6. The second corruption is in the wordes as they ly in the Latin copy as they are by me before mentioned Vbi id euenisset mirum esse non debere If any such thing had fallen out as was obiected to wit that Kinges sometimes had prescribed to the Priests what they should doe in Ecclesiasticall things deposed some c. it had byn no maruaile for somuch as their Ecclesiasticall Kingdome or Synagogue was an earthly and imperfect thing but yet this proueth not that it was so but only it is spoken vpon a supposition which suppositiō this Minister that he might the more cunningly shift of and auoid left cut of purpose the most essentiall wordes therof Vbi id euenisset if that had happened c. as also for the same cause to make thinges more obscure after those words of Salmeron that stand in his text Synagoga Iudeorum dicebatur terrenum potius quà m caeleste regnum The Synagogue or Ecclesiasticall gouernment of the Iewes was called rather an earthly then a heauenly Kingdome wheras contrary-wise the Ecclesiasticall power in the Christian Church is euery where called Celestiall after those wordes I say this man cutteth of againe many lines that followed togeather with S. Augustines iudgmēt before touched which serued to make the Authors meaning more plaine and yet left no signe of c. wherby his Reader might vnderstand that somewhat was omitted but 〈◊〉 againe presently as though it had imediatly followed 〈◊〉 cùm populus Dei constet corpore animo carnalis pars in veteri populo primas tenebat Wheras Godes people doth consist of body and minde the carnall or bodily part did cheifly preuaile among the Iewes and heerwith endeth as though nothing more had ensued of that matter thrustnig out these wordes that immediatly followed and made the thing cleere which are Et ad spiritualia significanda constituebaiur and that kinde of earthly power was appointed to signify the spirituall that was to be in the new Testament wherby is euidently seene that Salmeron vnderstood not by carnalis pars and regnum terrenum the temporall Kingdome of Iury as this Minister doth insinuate to make the matter odious but the Ecclesiasticall gouernment of the Synagogue vnder the old law in respect of the Ecclesiasticall power in the new wherof the other was but an earthly figure or signification 7. But now the third corruption most egregious of all is in his English translation out of the Latin wordes of Salmeron for thus he translateth them in our name In the Synagogue of the Iewes saith Salmeron was a State rather earthly then heauenly so that in that people which was as in the body of a man consisting of body and soule the carnall part was more eminent meaning the temporall to haue byn supreame In which translation are many seuerall shifts and fraudes For wheras Salmeron saith Synagoga Iudeorum dicebatur potius terrenum quà m caeleste regnum the Synagogue or Ecclesiasticall power among the Iewes was called rather an earthly then a heauenly Kingdome he translateth it the Synagogue of the Iewes was a State rather earthly then heauenly and this to the end he might apply the word of earth to the temporal Prince and heauenly to the Iudaicall Priestes which is quite from Salmerons meaning Secondly those other wordes of Salmeron being Cùm populus Dei constet ex corpore animo wheras the people of God doe consist of body and minde meaning therby aswell Christians as Iewes and that the Iewes are as the bodily or carnall part of the man and the Christians the spirituall and consequently their Ecclesiasticall authority earthly and ours heauenly this fellow to deceaue his Reader putteth out first the word Dei the people of God and then translateth it in that people to wit the Iewes the carnall part was the more eminent meaning saith he the tēporall which is false for he speaketh expressely of the Ecclesiasticall power among the Iewes which he calleth carnall and terrene in respect of the spirituall Ecclesiasticall among the Christians and not the temporall or Kingly power vnder the old Testament as this man to make vs odious to temporall Princes as debasing their authority would haue it thought And Salmerons cōtraposition or antithesis is not betweene the temporall and Ecclesiasticall gouernment among the Iewes but betweene their Ecclesiasticall gouernment and ours that of the Synagogue and this of the Christian Church wherof the one he saith to be terrene earthly the other spirituall and heauenly the one infirme the other powerfull ouer soules c. So as all these sortes and kindes of corruptions being seene in this one little authority yow may imagine what will be found in the whole booke if a man had so much patience and time to leese as to discusse the same exactly through 8. A little after this againe he bringeth in an example of the King of Israell Ozias who for presuming to exercise the Priests office in offering of incense being first reprehended and resistest for the same by Azarias the high Priest and fourescore other Priestes with him in the Temple was for his presumption presently and publickly in all their sightes punished by God and stroken with a leprosy and therupon remoued by the authority of the said high Priest first from the Temple and common conuersation of men and then also from the gouernment or administration of his Kingdome the same being committed to his sonne Ioathan all the dayes of his Fathers life about which example M. Morton first of all bringeth in Doctor
of the Church In this then we agree and haue no difference 24. There followeth in T. M. his assertion heere But not in the personall administration of them to wit of spirituall causes this now is a shift dissembling the difficulty and true State of the question which is in whome consisteth the supreame power to treate iudge and determine in spirituall causes which this man flying as not able to resolue telleth vs only that he cannot personally administer the same which yet I would aske him why For as a Bishop may personally performe all the actions that he hath giuen authority to inferiour Priestes to doe in their functions and a temporall Prince may execute in his owne person if he list any inferiour authority that he hath giuen to others in temporall affaires so if he haue supreame authority spirituall also why may he not in like manner execute the same by himself if he please But of this is sufficiently writteÌ„ of late in the foresaid booke of Answere to Syr Edward Cooke where also is shewed that a farre greater authority spirituall was giuen to King Henry the eight by Parlament then this that T. M. alloweth his Maiesty now for outward preseruation of the Church to wit To be head therof in as ample manner as euer the Pope was or could be held before him ouer England and to King Edward though then but of ten yeares old was granted also by Parlament That he had originally in himself by his Crowne and Scepter all Episcopall authority so as the Bishops and Archbishops had no other power or spirituall authority then was deriued from him to Queene Elizabeth by like graunt of Parlament was also giuen as great authority spirituall and Ecclesiasticall ouer the Church and Clergy of England as euer any person had or could exercise before which was and is another thing then this outward preseruation which T. M. now assigneth hauing pared the same in minced wordes to his purpose to make it seeme little or nothing but dareth not stand to it if he be called to the triall 25. Wherfore this matter being of so great importance and consequence as yow see I doe heere take hold of this his publicke assertion and require that it may be made good to wit that this is the substance meaning only of the English oath and that neither our Kinges of England doe chalenge more nor subiectes required to condescend to more then to grant to their authority for outward preseruation or ad Ecclesiae praesidium as S. Leo his wordes and meaning are and I dare assure him that al Catholickes in England will presently take the oath and so for this point there will be an attonement Me thinkes that such publicke doctrine should not be so publickly printed and set forth without publicke allowance and intention to performe and make it good Yf this be really meant we may easely be accorded if not then will the Reader see what credit may be giuen to any thing they publish notwithstanding this booke commeth forth with this speciall commendation of Published by authority c. 26. And for conclusion of all it may be noted that there hath byn not only lacke of truth and fidelity in citing Pope Leo for Ecclesiasticall Supremacy in Emperours aboue Popes but want of modesty discretion also for so much as no one ancient Father doth more often and earnestly inculcate the contrary for the preheminence of the Sea of Rome then doth S. Leo in so much that Iohn Caluin not being able otherwise to answere him saith that he was tooto desirous of glory dominion and so shifteth him of that way and therfore he was no fit instance for T. M. to bring heere in proofe of spirituall supremacy in temporall Princes 27. But yet in the very next page after he vseth a far greater immodesty or rather perfidy in my opinioÌ„ in calumniation of Cardinall Bellarmine whome he abuseth notably both in allegation exposition translation application and vaine insultation for thus he citeth in his text out of him Ancient generall Councelles saith the Romish pretence were not gathered without the cost of good and Christian Emperours and were made by their consentes for in those dayes the Popes did make supplication to the Emperour that by his authority he would gather Synods but after those times all causes were changed because the Pope who is head in spirituall matters cannot be subiect in temporall Bellarm. lib. 1. de Concil cap. 13. § Habemus ergo 28. And hauing alledged this resolutioÌ„ of Bellarmine the Minister insulteth ouer him in these words Who would thinke this man could be a Papist much lesse a Iesuit how much lesse a Cardinal who thus disableth the title of the Pope granting to vs in these wordes after these times that is after six hundred yeares the truth of purer antiquities challenging Popes to be subiect vnto Christian Emperours And yet who but a Papist would as it were in despite of antiquity defend the degenerate state saying after those times Popes might not be subiect in temporall matters As if he should haue said Then gratious fauour of ancient Christian Emperours then sound iudgment of ancient reuerend Fathers then deuout subiection of ancient holy Popes in summe then ancient purity and pure antiquity adieu But we may not so bastardly reiect the depositum and doctrine of humble subiection which we haue receaued from our Fathers of the first six hundred yeares and not so only but which as your Barkley witnesseth the vniuersall Christian world imbraced with common consent for a full thousand yeares So he 29. And doe yow see how this Minister triumpheth Who would thinke that men of conscience or credit could make such ostentation vpon meere lies deuised by themselues as now wee shall shew all this bragge to be And as for D. Barkley alledged in the last lines let any man read him in the booke and Chapter cited and he will wonder at the impudency of this vaunter for he speaketh no one word of gathering Councells or comparison of spirituall authority betweene the Pope and Emperour concerning their gathering of Councelles or Synodes but of a quite different subiect of taking armes by subiectes against their lawfull temporall Princes And what will our Minister then answere to this manifest calumniation so apparently conuinced out of Doctor Barkley But let vs passe to the view of that which toucheth Cardinall Bellarmine against whome all this tempest is raised 30. First then we shall set downe his wordes in Latin according as T. M. citeth him in his margent Tunc Concilia generalia fiebant saith he non sine Imperatorum sumptibus eo tempore Pontifex subiiciebat se Imperatoribus in temporalibus ideo non poterant inuito Imperatore aliquid agere idâ—irco Pontifex supplicabat Imperatori vt iuberet conuocari Synodum At post illa tempora omnes causae
Commentaries of many skilfull men in that science is called the 〈◊〉 as the other part appertaining to ciuill affaires deduced from the ancient Imperiall Romane Lawes is called the Ciuill-law and both of them concurring togeather in this our cause with the foresaid Schoole-Deuinity and florishing more within thes last foure hundred yeares then euer before as yow haue heard the exception made against them all by this our Minister must needes be iudged for light vaine and impertinent 10. For he that will cast his eyes vpon the face of Christendome for these last foure hundred yeares consider with himselfe that in all these ages the most eminent renowned men for learning conscience and vertue in all those three sciences or faculties now mentioned and vnto whome for all doubtes and difficulties appertayning vnto iustice equity and truth recourse was made as vnto Oracles of their dayes for the high esteeme they were held in among all men he I say that shall consider this and with what integrity they dealt in this affaire and must be presumed to haue dealt according to their skill for that they were not interessed therin for any temporall respect whatsoeuer he that shall but thinke of this weigh their vniforme and graue resolutions vpon this point that a man pressed vnlawfully to answere by vniust manner of proceeding may delude his demaunder not answere to his intention but to his owne will easely see what differēce there is to be made betweene these mens iudgmentes and the clamours of a few vnlearned Ministers in this behalfe that vnderstand not the grounds wheron the other or themselues doe speake 11. And to name some few examples who were accompted more learned Schoole Deuines in their daies in France Germany and Flanders then the forenamed Petrus Lombardus Bishop of Paris Maister of the sentences Iohn Gerson Chancellour of that Vniuersity Petrus Paludanus Patriarch afterward of Hierusalem Henricus de Gandauo Archdeacon of Tornay Gabriel Biel a very Religious learned man Adrianus that was Maister to the Emperour Charles the fift and after that Cardinal and Gouernour of Spaine for Philip the first finally Pope by the name of Adrian the sixt I might name also Iansenius Bishop of Gaunt in these dayes and others of our times but of these their learned works are extant and vpon diuers occasions they fauour defend the lawfulnes of Equiuocation in sundry cases as in the next Chapter shall be more particulerly declared 12. In Italy Sicily also many might be named both for Schoole Deuinity Canon and Ciuill law but I shall be contented with them only whose workes I haue had time to looke vpon for this point as Gratian with his Commentaries Pope Innocentius S. Thomas of Aquin Cardinal Caietan Astonsis in his Summe written almost three hundred yeares since Angelus de Clauatio famous Siluester Cosmus Filiarcus Chanon of Florence Abbot and Archbishop Panormitan Bartolus Baldus most famous Lawiers 13. But of the Spanish Nation many more as Didacus Couarruuias President or Chancellour of Spaine Martinus Nauarrus his Maister both excellent Lawiers Dominicus Sotus Confessour to the Emperour Charles the fifth Cardinal Tolet Emanuel Roderiquez Ludouicus Lopez Antonius de Corduba Petrus Nauarra Dominicus Bannes publicke Reader of Deuinity in Salamanca Michael Salon Doctor and Professour of the Deuinity-Chaire in Valentia Petrus de Arragon publicke Professour of the same science in the foresaid Vniuersity of Salamanca Gregorius de Valentia and Ioannes Azorius publicke Readers in Rome all renowned men for learning science conscience and through whose hands great matters haue passed for direction of iustice and equity both in foro fori and foro poli as Schoolemen speake both for diuine and humane proceedinges and yet doe none of all these condemne or deny absolutly the vse of Equiuocation in certaine cases but doe rather approue and confirme the same I meane both lawiers and deuines when they treat vpon these heades following de seruando secreto of concealing secretes both knowne in the Sacrament of Confession and otherwise de mendacio of lying de iureiurandis of swearing de fraterna correptione restituenda fama of brotherly admonition and restitution of another mans fame wrongfully taken away de Iudice de Reo de accusatore de testibus of a Iudge and his office of the defendant accuser witnesses and the like what they may doe or answere lawfully in cases that may occurre 14. Neither are these Authors to be accompted as single and separate from the rest of the learned men of their ages in this point which we handle but rather are conioined wholy with them both in iudgment and practice so as what these men did define to be lawful that did others in like manner both mainteine put in vre in iust occasions especially if they were of the self same order and ranke So as when for example wee cite Siluester Dominicus Sotus Caiëtan Paludanus Lopez and Bannes of the order of S. Dominick to haue taught this doctrine without reprehension of others of the same order we may inferre probably that all or most learned men of that Order throughout Christendome are of the same opinion And the like we may inferre of those of S. Francis order in respect of Angelus de Clauatio Astensis Antonius de Corduba here cited And the same of S. Augustines order by Petrus de Aragon and Michael Salon And of the most ancient and venerable Order of S. Benedict conteyning many thousandes of learned men by that which Abbot Panormitan and Gregorius Sayer our learned Countreyman haue written vpon this matter and the later more largely then many others And the like may be inferred of the order of Iesuits by that which is extant written by Cardinal Tolet Gregorius de Valentia Emanuel Sà Francisius Suarez Ioannes Azorius Ludouicus Molina and others So as by these few witnesses we may take a notice of the whole body and corpes of learned men throughout Christendome for that Lawiers also both Ciuill and Canon that haue written of the foresaid heades haue conformed themselues to the same doctrine as lawfull in equity and conscience And if any haue dissented it hath byn in particuler cases only as before in the seauenth Chapter and third Consideration hath byn noted 15. As for example Ioannes Genesius Sepulueda Historiographer of Charles the fifth Emperour whose authority Thomas Morton doth often times alledge against vs though in the principall he make fully with vs in his booke intituled Theophilus De ratione dicendi testimonium in causis occultorum criminum how a man may beare witnes in causes of secret crimes yet in some cases he dissenteth from the foresaid Authors holding singuler opinions by himselfe but yet vpon such groundes as doe indeed confirme the common sentence of the rest as afterward in due place shal be declared 16. Wherfore to end this Paragraph about the Cōsideration of Schoole Deuines and
and equiuocall as you see they doe all determine our controuersy most cleerly and confound Mortons vanity most apparently that saith and auoucheth No one Iota to be found in all Scripture no one example in all antiquity for the iust proofe or colour of any such Equiuocation or mixt proposition 32. I should vtterly weary my Reader if I would follow all or the greatest Part of that which may be sayed in this behalfe for that alwaies commonly all Prophecies that are minatory and doe threaten punishment haue still some secret-reseruation if they repent not as that of Isay to King Ezechias Haec dicit Dominus dispone Domui tuae quia morieris tu non viues This 〈◊〉 our Lord dispose of thy houshold for thou shall dy and shalt not liue and yet he liued 〈◊〉 yeares after If therfore the Prophet had byn demaunded shall not Ezechias liue any longer he had answered no vpon what had fallen the negatiue no If only vpō the wordes vttered it had byn false for he liued longer but if vpon that togeather with the reseruation in the meaning of the holy Ghost it was true And the like may be said of the Prophecy of Ionas Adhuc quadraginta dies Niniue subuerietur There remaine but fourty dayes before Niniue shall be destroyed so infinite other places Wherfore in this Th. 〈◊〉 was greatly ouerseene in making of confident a chaleng as before yow haue heard THE THIRD POINT OF THIS CHAPTER CONCERNING Other Scriptures alleadged And pretended to be answered by Thomas Morton §. 3. 33. BVt now we must come to a greater conflict which is to examine how our aduersary hath answered certaine examples out of Scripture alleadged as he saith for I haue not yet seene the writing it selfe by a Catholicke Treatise in written-hand intercepted wherby the lawfulnes of this kind of Equiuocation is auouched by his answere to those that are cited by himselfe we may imagine what he will be able to say to these other which haue byn here produced by vs and innumerable others that might be alleadged Examples out of the old Testament First then out of the old Testament he produceth two examples only the one of Iacob that told his Father that he was his eldest sonne Esau which in deed he was not and consequently we must graunt that either he spake false lied which the ancient Fathers S. Ambrose S. Augustine and others doe piously deny or els that he had some reserued further sense in his mind wherby his said speach might be verified and consequently his proposition be ambiguous and Equiuocall 34. But herunto T.M. answereth first that Cardinall Caëtan and diuers other learned men doe hold that Iacob is inexcusable from some sort of 〈◊〉 in this his speach and for this he alleadgeth the testimony of Pererius a Iesuite in his Commentaries vpon Genesis who disputing this matter at large in fiue seuerall disputations whether Iacob did ly or sinne at all in this speach saith that the said Caïétan with some other moderne writers doe hold that it may be graunted that the said Patriarch did commit some veniall sinne by making an officious ly in that behalfe But what doth 〈◊〉 himselfe agree to that opinion No truly But maketh this title of his last disputation therabout The common sentence of Deuines saith he is declared and defended which doth excuse and free Iacob from all manner of lying in his foresaid speach and then beginning with S. Augustine who in diuers partes of his workes doth most earnestly defend the Patriarch Iacob in this behalfe by many and manifold reasons and authorities both from all ly and sinne doth shew and declare that his speach was figuratiue and not deceiptfull conteyning mysterium non mendacium a mystery and not a ly To which effect one place out of his booke against lying shall serue for all Non est mendacium saith he quando silendo absconditur verum sed cùm loquendo promitur falsum Iacob autem quòd matre fecit auctore vt patrem fallere videretur si diligenter fideliter attendatur non est mendacium sed mysterium c. It is no ly when a truth is concealed by silence but when a falsity by speach is vttered that which Iacob did by the persuasion of his mother as though he would deceaue his Father if it be diligently and faithfully considered was no ly but a mystery 35. And then a little after in the same Chapter talking of such misterious speaches that seeme to say one thing and yet doe meane another he saith thus Vera non falsa dicuntur quoniam vera non falsa significantur seu verbo seu facto quae significantur enim vtique ipsa dicuntur putantur autem mendacia quoniam non ea quae vera significantur dicta intelliguntur sed ea quae falsa sunt dicta esse creduntur In a mysterious speach true thinges and not false are spoken for that true thinges and not false are signified either by the word or fact that hath a mystery in it for that in deed those thinges are spoken which are mysteriously signified by the speach but they seeme to be lies for that all men vnderstād not those things that are truly signified by the speach but rather those thinges that are false are thought to be spoken So S. Augustine Wherby is euident what he meaneth by a mysterious speach to wit when one sense is gathered by the wordes another sense truly signified which the naturall signification of the wordes doe not beare and therby a mysterious proposition must be called also Equiuocall in the sense that now wee handle and consequently also S. Augustine must needes be graunted to admit this kind of Equiuocation without lying wherby he so earnestly defendeth this Patriarch from all kind of ly whatsoeuer 36. And with S. Augustine doe concurre in this defence of holy Iacob both S. Hierome S. Chrysostome S. Gregory Theodoret S. Ambrose S. Isidorus S. Bede and of later writers Rupertus Gratian Alexander Halensis Petrus Lombardus S. Thomas and almost infinite others so as for Th. Morton to creepe out now vnder the shaddow of Caïētan and two or three other moderne Authors more against the whole streme and torrent of so many ancient Fathers and Catholike Deuines is a ridiculous euasion and worthy of Thomas Mortons defence and full satisfaction 37. His second example out of the old Testament is that of Hieremy the Prophet set downe by me before in my seauenth Chapter and fourth Consideration therof which this Minister the better not to be vnderstood relateth only in these few obscure wordes out of his aduersaries answere Such Equiuocation saith he did the Prophet Ieremy vse Ier. 38. when he tooke aduise of the King This relation is briefe abrupt and darke as yow see but we haue declared the matter with the circumstances in the former place to wit how
by amphibologie or equiuocation may be vsed which is not a lye And this in generall 14. But now in particuler what manner or forme of wordes may be vsed by the defendant for auoyding the iniury offred him and deluding the vniust Iudge is not so generally agreed of among all men For this same Sepulueda holdeth that 〈◊〉 inficiatio veri as his wordes are that is to say all manner of deny all of the thing that is true except of matters in confession hath the force of a ly or falshood and consequently cannot be admitted But this is commonly refuted by all and that with great reason as afterward shal be shewed for that otherwise in the examples before alleadged neither S. Iohn could truly haue denyed himself to be a Prophet nor Christ himselfe to be our Iudge in the sense they did for that they were truly both Prophet and Iudge in their meaning and yet did they truly deny them both 〈◊〉 Sotus also though he go further and do confesse that the defendant in such a Case being iniustly pressed by the 〈◊〉 may lawfully answere nescio I know nothing therof yet dareth he not as he saith to allow that he may say absolutly non feci I haue not done it as the priest may say of matters confessed vnto him non audiui I haue not heard any such thing for that in his iudgemēt as also in that of Sepulueda there is a great difference in the cases which though in some respectes it be graunted also by others yet in this point which is the only principall whether it be a lye or no all the rest doe hold that this negatiue answere of the defendant is no lesse free frō the nature of a lye then the other of the priest the one and the other being freed therfrom by the due and iust reseruation in the speakers mynd wherby the sense is made true not only in the meaning or vnderstanding of the speaker but in the sight of Almighty God the highest and supreme Iudge of all vnto whom it is lawfull to appeale in harte and word when any man is vniustly oppressed by humane iniquity 15. To begin then with the Authors of this cōmon opinion that the defendant may say I haue not done it vnderstanding so as by right and law I am bound to vtter it vnto yow first of all the famous Doctor Nauar that was schoolfellow with Sepulueda and liued togeather with Sotus discusseth the matter at large in diuers partes of his workes but especially in a particuler large Commentary vpon a Canon of the law taken out of S Gregories wordes that beginneth Humanae aures where he proueth that the said defendant being so pressed vniustly to answere when he hath no other way lefte to defend himselfe may truly and without any lye at all say he did it not with the foresaid reseruation of mynd that he did it not in some such sense as in his owne meaning and in the eares of Almighty God is true though the vniust Iudge taking it in another sense be deceaued therby which falleth out iustly vnto him for that he proceedeth iniustly against law And the said Doctor proueth this his assertion by many arguments taken both out of Scriptures Canon law and reason it selfe maruailling at the scrupulosity of Sotus in this behalfe and alleadging against him that of the psalme Trepidauit timore vbi non erat timor he trembled with feare where there was no feare to wit of sinne or lying in this case And moreouer refuteth his fellow-scholler 〈◊〉 by telling him that he was greatly deceaued in saying that no Schoole-Deuine vntil Gabriel had held this opiniō wheras saith he both S. Hierome S. Gregory and S. Thomas haue in effect expressed the same but more clearly Scotus Richardus Henricus Gandauensis Paludanus 〈◊〉 Io. Maior Siluester Angelus de Perusio Ioannes ab Anania whose places he cyteth out of their workes addeth the Ordinary Glosse ab omnibus nostris recepta receyued saith he by all our Canonists in cap. Ne quis 22. quaest 2. in locis infra q. 2. nu 10. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 citat is This writeth that renowned Doctor Nauar who was held for no lesse scrupulous tender and timerous of Conscience then any other writer cōmonly in his dayes as his austere manner of life did well testifie And after him haue written and defended the same opinion the most learned men for Scholasticall Deuinity in our age as Franciscus Toletus Michael Salon Dominicus 〈◊〉 Gregorius de 〈◊〉 Ioannes Azorius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Franciseus 〈◊〉 Tho. Sanchez all publicke Readers of Deuinity and others which for breuities sake I do omit and shall passe to set downe breifly the proofes of this their opinion The argumentes and groundes of this common opinion §. 4. 16. 〈◊〉 first is taken out of that we haue set downe before about the nature definition of truth and lying that whensoeuer any speach is cōforme in a true sense to the meaning of the speaker it is true and not a lye though the hearer should vnderstand it otherwise especially when there is no obligation at all of satisfiying the said hearer or demaunder as heere is presumed not to be and consequently saith Valentia a man may vtter any true proposition to himselfe though neuer so impertinēt to the demaund proposed by the vniust Iudge as if there were no man present or as if no such demaund had byn made at all as for example if a man that hath stolne should say to 〈◊〉 alone or to God truly sincerely I haue not stolne of malice or hatred to the person but of need or necessitie or I haue not stolne of my owne inclination but by induction of others or I haue not stolne so as I am bound to confesse it publickly for that there is no witnesse proofe or presumptiō against me or the like in all these speaches the proposition were true I haue not stolne though he reserued the other pointes in his mynd vnuttered It were true I say in it selfe and in the sight and eares of Almighty God and consequently no lye whatsoeuer the vniust Iudges do conceaue therof whose presence or demaundes in this case are nothing to be respected but that the defendant may answere and speake as though he the said Iudge or other hearers that haue no authority to examin him were not there so he vtter no falsity in it selfe 17. And for confirmation of this is alleadged the Authority of S. 〈◊〉 in his booke contra 〈◊〉 cyted by me before about the nature of a mysterious speach that vttereth one thing in wordes an another in sense and yet is 〈◊〉 by S. Augustine to be no lye Quae significantur saith he vtique 〈◊〉 dicuntur c. Those thinges that are signifyed in a mysterious speach are indeed truly spoken but they are thought to be lyes for that not the true thinges which are
signifyed by that speach are vnderstood to be spoken but those that are false So S. Augustine wherby is euident that in his iudgement the nature of a lie cōsisteth not in that it be held for a lye by others or that the hearer be deceaued but only that it agree not with the iudgement and meaning of the speaker as before hath byn discussed 18. But the authority of S. Greg. vrged by Doctor 〈◊〉 is more cleare who in his bookes of Morals taking vpō him to defend the truth of certayne words of holy Iob against Heliu that calumniated the same saith Quid 〈◊〉 si à rectitudine 〈◊〉 humano iudicio verba 〈◊〉 superficie tenus discrepent quando in cordis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 concordent c. What importeth it if our wordes in outward shew do seeme to disagree from the rectitude of truth in mans iudgement if in the hinge of our hart our said wordes be compact togeather and agree therunto Mans eares do iudge of our wordes as they sound outwardly but Gods iudgement is according as he seeth them come truly from our hart he knoweth that albeit mans will and intention may be declared or vttered in sundry formes of wordes yet that we ought not so much to consider wordes as the said will and intention of the speaker So S. Gregory wherby he sheweth euidently that God considereth the hart and intention of the speaker and that when he hath a true sense and meaning in the intention of his harte though the same wordes seeme false vnto man yet is it no lye in it selfe or in the eares of almighty God who iudgeth thinges as they be in themselues and not as they are taken by man 19. An other foundation of the lawfulnes of this doctryne is grounded vpon this rule that when in any proposition that seemerh imperfect in sense there may be supplied other particles or causes for the perfect sense therof out of the circumstances of place tyme and persons both of the speaker and hearer which clauses for iust reasons the speaker is not alwayes bound to expresse in wordes to the hearer it is asmuch for the truth of the proposition as if the said clauses were expressed and it is the rule of Doctor Bannes Salon Azorius and others and it was touched before by Iansenius in the precedent Chapter as a meane wherby to supply the vnperfect sense of many speaches of our Sauiour as those I do not iudge any man I do not ascend to this feast The sonne of man knoweth not the day and houre of Iudgement and the like which speaches though in outward shew of wordes they seeme false yet are they verified by the supplement of certayne reserued clauses not depending vpon euery mans priuate imagination and will but such as may be gathered and truly applyed according to the said circumstances of tyme place persons c. as clauses agreable therevnto 20. As heere when the defendant that is guylty saith non feci non vidi non occidi c. I haue not done it I haue not seene him I haue not killed him if we consider only these bare wordes and the iudges demaunde to whome it seemeth the defendant maketh these answers though indeed he doth not but speaketh as if the other were not present at all they are vntruthes he hauing done it but if we consider the circumstāces first of the person that is iniuriously demaunded and therby is not bound to answere at all to the others intention but to his owne and secondly the Iudge that presseth and demaundeth vnlawfully and therby deserueth to be deluded and thirdly the tyme and place of iudgement wherin the defendant contrary to law is vrged eyther to accuse him selfe or to escape by hauing some other meaning in his wordes then is set downe these circumstāces I say do easely defend the said speach from the nature of a lye agreable to the matter tyme and circumstances shewing that somewhat is necessarily vnderstood or reserued in mynde which maketh the said proposition to be true in the speakers meaning as hath byn shewed by many examples of Scriptures and Fathers in the foregoing Chapters 21. Wherfore all these Authours do conclude that in the foresaid case when iniurie is offred against lawe and when no appellation or other refuge is permitted nor any doubtfulnes of amphibologie or wordes can take place then is the oppressed defendant to turne himselfe to almighty God the righteous Iudge of all and framing to himselfe some true reserued sense may say I haue not done it I haue not seene him I haue not killed him and the like vnderstanding that he hath not done it so as the examination or punishment therof is subiect to that tribunall or he subiect to their iurisdiction wherby he is bound to vtter the same vnto him 22. Neyther is this to deny a truth or to lye but to conceale some truth which the defendant is not bound to vtter at that tyme and to that man and to vtter another which is different from that As for example he denyeth not that he hath done the thing that he is demaunded but not being bound to answere to that demaund he saith that he hath not done it in this or that maner which is a truth not demaunded neyther is this to lye for that a lye is when the speaker vttereth a thing which he knoweth to be false as before we haue largly shewed which in this case happeneth not for that he knoweth that he speaketh a truth in his owne meaning and in the sight of God which alwayes he must do when he vseth this euasion for that otherwise he should lye commit synne if he had not some true sense reserued in his mind conformable to the matter tyme and place and not feigned at randome as some fondly doe imagine 23. Nor is this doctryne preiudicial to the common conuersation of mans lyfe as Sepulueda some other haue obiected for that this manner of Equiuocation as Valentia Sayer and other learned men haue noted is not to be vsed without necessity or vrgent causes as particularly in iudgement when the 〈◊〉 is iniustly pressed to answere and when he hath right duty band or obligation to conceale the secret which the Iudge would know but in common conuersation though it should not be properly the syn of lying for the reasons aforesaid nor against the negatiue precept of truth yet should it be an other synne against the publick good of cyuill society and consequently against the affirmatiue precept of truth bynding euery man to speake truth with his neighbour according to the intention of the hearer and demander except he should demaund somwhat in preiudice of vs and we had right to conceale the same And thus much of this third case wherby all the rest may in a sorte be determined The fourth case about VVitnesses §. 5. 24. IN the fourth place ensueth the consideration of witnesses who do
of Protestants writeth of him Gregorius admodum leuiter agnouit Christum verbum Euangelij Gregory did know Christ and his ghospell very sleightly and then talking of S. Gregories famous workes and writing so greatly esteemed by learned and holy men he saith of his sermons Gregorij conciones ne teruncium quidem valent Gregories sermons are not worth a halfpenny And then speaking of an other parte of his workes or bookes called his Dialogues saith 〈◊〉 eum in Dialogo suo crassè decepit The dyuell did grossely deceaue him in his Dialogue and thus of him 22. And as for S. Augustine who is the second in ranke of his Apostrophe albeit they do not reiect him with so great contempt as S. Gregory yet when he maketh against them they esteeme him little Quisest Augustinus saith Luther against King Henry of England quis nos coget illi credere Who is Augustine or who shall compell vs to beleeue him but S. Hierome whome next M. Iewell adioyneth they handle much more spitefully Quinte Hieronyme saith Luther conculcamus cum tua Bethlem cuculla deserto Know thou Hierome that we do tread thee vnder our feete with thy Bethlem thy hood and they desert And againe in an other place VVhat can be more carnally spoken more wickedly sacrilegiously and blasphemously then that of Hierome Virginitas caelum coniugium terram replet Virginity doth fill heauen marriage filleth the earth And yet further I know no man saith he to whom I am so much an enemy as to Hierome for that he writeth nothing but of fasting choise of meates and of virginity and in truth Hierome should not be 〈◊〉 among the Doctors of the Church for that he was an hereticke c. And Caluin saith of the same Doctor 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 natura fuit cauillator Hierome was by nature a wrangler But Beza worse then all calleth him blasphemous wicked and impious and iniurious to the Apostle 23. Of S. 〈◊〉 whom M. Iewell calleth vpon in the fourth place Luther writeth thus Chrysostomum nullo loco habeo non est nisi loquaculus I hold Chrysostome in no accompt at all for that he is a brabling fellow And the Magdeburgians in their historie say of him contemptuously that he was bonorum operum Encomiastes liberi arbitrij patronū agebat a prayser of good workes and an aduocate for freewill So that yow see that the cause of their reiection and contempt is for that they are contrary in their doctrine As for S. Leo named by M. Iewell in the fifth place of Fathers it is easy to imagine of what credit he was among them seing that in the very controuersy of the Popes Supremacy heere handled by him both Caluin and Beza do note and cōdemne him of Ambition for taking vpon him and defending that authority Constat saith Beza Leonem in epistolis Romanae Sedis antichristianae arrogantiam planè spirasse It is manifest that Leo in his Epistles doth clearly breath forth the arrogancy of that Antichristian Roman Sea which in other wordes Caluin also Beza his maister doth confirme which being so and all this knowne to M. Iewell I would aske why he did call vpon these Fathers so earnestly saying If we be deceaued heerin yow are they that haue deceaued vs as though he had taught nothing but that they taught and that their authority had byn his rule as their aule was Paul and Christ Nay why doth he himselfe afterward expressely and by name reiect S. Leo in some of these very articles for proofe wherof he doth here call vpon him And namely about the Popes Supremacy and sacrifice of the Masse saying That there was no credit to be giuen vnto him c. Is not this double dealing Is not this pernicious Equiuocation on one side to call vpon him on the other to reiect him 24. Nay why did he adde further O Dionyse O Anacletus O Sixtus as though he had followed their doctrine also or admitted their authority wheras neither himselfe nor other Protestantes are knowne to admit any booke or worke of theirs now extant but to reiect and rayle against them all Dionysius Areopagita saith Luther nihil habet solidae eruditionis Dionysius Areopagita hath no solide learning at all Your counterfeit Anacletus saith M. Iewell to Doctor Harding doth not clayme all the Bishops throughout the world as belonging to his admission And the like they say of the other out of all with is euidently conuinced that this Apostrophe of M. Iewell to these Fathers O Gregory O Augustine O Hierome O Chrysostome O Leo O Dionyse c. if we be deceaued yow haue deceaued vs was an hypocriticall Equiuocation to deceaue the hearer contrary to the knowledge and conscience of himselfe that vttered the wordes for he could not be ignorant but that they were against him and his doctrine for that otherwise they had neuer byn so reiected and discredited by him and his 25. The fourth reason is for that the said ancient Protestantes Maisters of M. Iewell and from whome he tooke his learning and spirite did in sundry of the Articles heere by him named reiect contemne the ancient Fathers as contrary vnto them and their doctrine and how then could M. Iewell so confidently call vpon them in the same Let any man read Martin Luther in his booke de Captiuitate Babylonica about the Sacrifice of the Masse and he shall fynd that he reiecteth all the Fathers in that controuersy Si nihil habetur saith he quod dicatur tutius est omnia negare quà m Missae Sacrificium esse concedere If there be nothing to answere to the Authorityes of the Fathers it is more safe to deny all then to grant that the Masse is a Sacrifice And in an other booke Profiteor inprimis c. I do in the very beginning make this profession against those that will cry out that I teach against the vse of the Church and decree of Fathers heerin that I respect none of these thinges And yet further against King Henry of England Dicta Patrum induxit Rex c. The King bringeth in the sayings of Fathers against me for his massing Sacrifice and scoffeth at my folly that I would seeme more wise then all they but this is that which I said before that these Thomisticall asses haue nothing to bring forth but a multitude of men And then he goeth forward saying That if a thousand Augustines and a thousand Cyprians stand against him in this matter he careth not And fynally in another booke Non moramur si clamitent Papistae Ecclesia Ecclesia Patres Patres c. We care nothing at all if Papists cry out against vs the Church the Church Fathers Fathers they are but the sayings or deeds of men in so great a cause as this we care nothing for them And to the very same effect
disputeth Caluin though more cyuilly and cunningly about the same matter saying Non est cur vlla hominum authoritate vel annorum praescriptione c. There is no reason why we should suffer our selues to be drawne a side from the doctrine we teach by any authority of men or prescription of yeares Where yow see that he graunteth both antiquity of time and authority of the ancient Fathers to be against him in that controuersy of the Masse and Sacrifice And as we haue shewed the same in this article so might we in all the rest if time and place did permit but this is sufficient to proue in my opinion that the protestation of M. Iewell before mencyoned which so solemnly he made in the presence of almighty God was feigned and hypocriticall when he saith Not one father not one Doctor c. and then addeth for more asseueration when I say not one I speake not in vehemency of spirite or heate of talke but euen as before God by the way of simplicity and truth For if M. Iewell did know that this his maisters and elders Luther and Caluin were forced to reiect generally all the Fathers or the most parte of them for that they were against him for the sacrifice of the Masse then was it notable cosening Equiuocation to sweare protest before God in simplicity that no one did make for vs either in this or the rest of the articles 26. The fifth reason is for that we see by experience that all other English Protestant writers succeeding M. Iewell and being as it were his schollers and participating of his spirite sense and meaning began presently to reiect and cast of the Fathers vpon euery occasion wherin they were pressed by their authority as by the writings of Doctor Calshill Doctor Humfrey Fulke Charke VVhitakers and others is euident wherof I will alleadge only one example out of the last named in steed of all who being pressed with the consent of Fathers in a 〈◊〉 controuersy against him answered in this wise We repose no such confidence in the Fathers writinges that we take any certain proofe of Religion frō them because we place all our Faith and Religion not in humaine but in diuine Authority If therfore you bring vs what some one Father hath thought or what the Fathers vniuersally altogeather haue deliuered the same except it be approued by testimonyes of scriptures auayleth nothing it gayneth nothing it conuinceth nothing For the Fathers are such witnesses as they also haue need of the Scriptures to be their witnesses If deceyued by error they giue forth their testimony disagreeing from Scriptures albeit they may be pardoned erring for want of wisdome we cannot be pardoned if because they erred we also will erre with them So Doctor VVhitakers Where yow see what accompt he maketh of ancient Fathers and Doctors Patres etiam simul 〈◊〉 to vse his owne wordes yea all Fathers put togeather without proofe of Scripture to Authorize them it 〈◊〉 nothing saith he gayneth nothing it conuinceth nothing So as if M. Iewell had dealt plainly he might only haue called for Scripture at our hands and not so often for Fathers knowing by all probability aswell as his schollers that the Fathers were at least in many controuersyes against him and what Equiuocation then was this to call so often and earnestly for ancient Fathers yea some one place or sentence some two lines for wynning of the field was not this singuler and extraordinary yea hypocrisy and lying Equiuocation in the highest degree 27. The sixt reason is the consideration of his earnest exhorting of Catholickes to answere his Chalenge Now it standeth vpon yow saith he to proue but one affirmatiue against me and so to require my promise of subscribing And againe If yow of your parte would vouchsafe to bring but two lynes the whole matter were concluded And yet further Me thinketh both reason and humanity would that yow should answere somewhat especially being so often and so openly required c. VVhy be yow so loth being so earnestly required to shew forth but one Doctor of your side c. VVhat thinke you there is now iudged of you that being so long tyme required yet cannot be wonne to bring forth one sentence in your defence And yet againe more earnestly I protest before God bring me but one sufficient authority in the matters I haue required and afterward I will gently and quietly conferre with yow further at your pleasure And therfore for as much as it is Gods cause if yow meane simply deale simply betray not your right if yow may saue it with one word the people must needs muse at your silence for thinke not that any wise man will be so much your friend as in so weighty matters he will be satisfied with your said silence c. And not content with this he concludeth in these wordes of earnest exhortation Wherfore heere I leaue putting yow eft-somes gently in remembrance that being so often and so openly desired to shew forth one Doctor c. Yow haue brought nothing and that if yow stand so still it must needs be thought yow do it conscientia imbecillitatis for that there was nothing to be brought And heere once againe I conclude as before putting yow in remembrance that this long tyme I haue desired yow to bring forth some sufficient Authority for proofe of your party Thus farre M. Iewell 28. And would yow not thinke that this desire this intreaty this vrging and prouocation did proceed from a great confidence in his cause Truly if the confidence were not great the crafte and dissimulation was singuler but what ensued M. Doctor Harding and other learned men lying in Flanders being moued by zeale of Religion and prouokd by these insolent eggings began soone after to write bookes in answere of these challenges and to lay open the vntruthes and vanities therof which labours wrought so great effect with diuers of the discreeter sorte both Catholickes Protestants in England as M. Iewell thought it best to procure the publike prohibition of those bookes by the Magistrate for which he had so earnestly called before wherupō there were diligēt searches made to find out the same both in the vniuersities townes cittyes portes of the Realme as one that was then a searcher among others and a Protestant preacher in Oxford but conuerted afterward by these very reasons and by the vntruthes found in M. Iewell bookes doth testifie at large in an answere of his written to M. D. VVhitakers whose wordes I haue thought good to sett downe in this place For hauing refuted a speach of M. VVhitakers who pretended to be very glad that the Rhemes English Testament was abroad in many mens handes M. Reynolds writeth thus With like phrase saith he and character of shamelesse vaunting wrote M. Iewell to Doctor Harding saying VVe neuer suppressed any of your bookes M. Harding as
yow know but are very well content to see them so common that as now children may play with them in the streets Thus his face serued him co write then when in the selfe same Defence he by leauing out suppressed the very substance of that booke which he then pretended to answere and when by helpe of his fellow Superintendent and other friends euery corner of the Realme was searched for those bookes when the portes were layd for them Paules Crosse is witnes of burning many of them the Princesse proclamation was procured against them in the Vniuersityes by soueraigne authority Colledges chambers studyes clossets coffers and deskes were ransacked for them when not only children were forbid to play with them but ancient men and students of Deuinity were imprisoned for hauing of them so that all this can be nought els but a plaine example of palpable dissimulation and affected lying 29. So this learned and vertuous man who was so moued by the said dissimulation as it wrought his conuersion and detestation of that doctrine which could not be mainteyned but with such shiftes and cunning lyings as afterward more largely and particulerly yow shall heare him relate of himselfe for that conforme to this generall entrance by singuler hypocrisy and equiuocation as hath beene declared M. Iewell behaued himselfe also in particuler cases that did occurre making no 〈◊〉 to affirme or deny any thing that serued for his purpose though in his conscience he knew it to be neuer so false wherof we shall heare touch some few examples proportionable to the 〈◊〉 of reasons before set downe if not more in which is to be remēbred by the Reader that all the forsaid circumstances must be obserued to witt that the falshood cannot be excused by any probable error mistaking or ouersight of the speaker nor by any default of the Printer edition translation or the like but that it must needs proceed of a 〈◊〉 will to deceyue wittingly as before hath byn said And with this preuention and admonition shall we passe to the examples themselues Six Examples of Maister Ievvells particuler Equiuocation §. 3. 30. THE first example then shall be where M. Iewell going about to prooue in a certain sermon of his that it was no synne to marrie after vowes made of Chastity bringeth in this sentence of S. Augustine out of his booke de 〈◊〉 viduitatis to proue the same in these wordes Quapropter nō possum dicere à proposito meliori 〈◊〉 si nupserint 〈◊〉 adulteria esse non coniugia I cannot say that women which are fallen from a better purpose of continency if they marry that their mariage is adultery and not mariage at all and vpon this authority so alleadged and so plainly seeming to make for the Protestants doctrine of Votaries mariages yow must imagine how M. Iewell would exult and make the Schollers of Oxford thinke that he had said much for his purpose but he that shall read ouer that shorte booke de 〈◊〉 viduitatis of the good that is in wyddowhood written to Iuliana a religious seruant of God as S. Augustine calleth her shall fynd that the whole drifte of this holy Father in that 〈◊〉 is directly against M. Iewell and his fellowes prouing by many arguments that 〈◊〉 marriage in them that haue made a simple vow of Chastity or to vse S. Austines wordes that had a better purpose then mariage be true mariage and not adultery except there come afterward a solemne vow which maketh it no 〈◊〉 yet doth S. Augustine plainly proue that the slyding backe from that good purpose and vow is damnable not for that the mariage doth not hold but for that they haue broken their first faith made to Christ according to the wordes of S. Paul which S. Augustine affirmeth to haue byn meant to this purpose 31. So then heere is great wilfull falsity to alleadge S. Augustine as though he fauoured the marriages of Votaries whereas throughout this whole booke he doth purposely impugne the same yea that which is more in the very next immediate wordes that follow in the same sentence before alleadged by M. Iewell S. Augustines expresse wordes do ouerthrow all that is alleadged for Votaries For wheras he writeth I cannot affirme that women fallen from a better purpose if they marry that their marriages are adultery and not marriage it followeth immediately Sed plane non dubit auerim dicere lapsus ruinas à castitate sanctiori quae vouetur Deo adulteriis esse peiores but I do not doubt at all to affirme saith S. Augustine that the ruynes and fallinges of from holyer chastitie which is vowed to God are worse then adultery which he proueth by many strong reasons and arguments And now let the Reader consider what Equiuocation this might be in M. Iewell and whether it be possible to imagine that he was so occupyed and distracted as he did read the one halfe of the sentence and not the other or that he was so simple as he did not vnderstand what was the whole drifte and argument of S. Augustine in that booke and if he did and yet alledged him to the contrary yow see what ensueth And thus much of this first example 32. The second example is taken out of M. Iewells defence of the Apologie of England pag. 176. where taking againe in hand to proue that priests and Votaryes may marry for he was very frequent and copious in that matter it importing them much in that beginning to draw priests and fryers vnto them by this bayte he alleadgeth an example of a certayne noble man called 〈◊〉 of Caesarea in Cappadocia taken out of Cassiodorus the historiographer in these wordes At that tyme they say that Eupsychius the Bishop of Caesarea dyed in martyrdome hauing marryed a wyfe a little before being as yet in manner a new marryed man c. and he cyteth for this in the margent Cassiodorus in the tripartite historie And in an other place he alledgeth the same example to the same purpose out of Nicephorus but aswell these two authors as Zozomenus are witnesses against him of a notable wilfull falsification in this behalfe for that neither of them do say that Eupsychius was a Bishop or priest but only that he was Patritius Caesareae in Cappadocia that is to say a noble man or Senators sonne of Cesarea in Cappadocia and the falsification is so playne to him that shall read all the foresaid Authors and places by him cyted as no modest man can but blush to see M. Iewell alledge and vrge this forged example twice in one booke of his with such apparant falsitye nor can any of the foresaid circumstances of ignorance error or negligence probably excuse or defend him 33. The third exāple may be that of M Iewels slaunderous speach cōcerning the holy man Augustine sent by S. Gregory to conuert our nation to the Christian faith which Almighty God
that Pope Pius Quintus before he proceeded to any Ecclesiasticall Censure against Q Elizabeth wrote vnto her a letter offering to allow and ratifie the English Seruice Bible and Communion-booke as now it is in vse in that Kingdome if she would accept it as from him which she refusing to do he did excommunicate her by which tale he acquitteth notwithstanding Catholicks if yow marke it from procuring that excommunication for rebelliō which els where he often obiecteth most odiously against them For if vpon this cause she were excommunicated what parte had Ca holicks therin But yet I must needs say that the sictiō is one of the most vnlikely things and the most impossible in morall reason that any man can deuise For that Pope Pius Quintus albeit some man would imagine him to be so good a fellow as to care for no religion who is knowne to haue byn most zealous yet had he aduentured his Popedome by making such an offer for he should haue allowed of diuers points in the Communion-booke which are held by the Catholike Church for heresy and so condemned by the Councell of Trent and other Councels and now yow know it is a ground among vs that a Pope that should be an hereticke or approuer of heresie therby ceaseth to be Pope how improbable then is this of Pius Quintus his offer And why had not this letter in so many yeares byn published to the world for the credit of rhe English seruice and discredit of the Popes And yet the voice is that the Lord Cooke did so earnestly auouch this matter as he pawned therin not only his credit honesty bv expresse termes of protestation but euen his faith also to God and man A great aduenture no doubt And for that I assure my selfe 〈◊〉 the greater parte of the auditory being discreet men did imagine it to be quite false as I and others in effect do know it to be it must needs be a great blemish to my Lordes credit at the beginning of his Iudgeship that in other thinges also he be not belieued 79. But I vnderstand that the booke of this speach or charge now printed is expected shortly togeather with some other appertayning to the same man and then it may be that some body will examine matters more particulerly especially those that appertayne to the iniuring of Catholickes and afterward returne with the aggreuances to the Iudge himselfe seing he is now a Iudge to giue sentence of his owne ouersightes albeit I must confesse that as well my selfe as diuers other men haue lost great hope of his Lordship by this accident for before we did thinke that his ouerlashing in speaches when he was Attorney did proceed in great parte of the liberty of that office and that when he came to be iudge he would reforme his conscience ratione status in regard of his state of life but now it seemeth that he is farre worse though this I say shal be lefte by me to others to be discussed vpon the sight of the foresaid printed bookes 80. My speach at this time shall be only about that which passed in his booke of Reportes while he was Attorney and which hath byn disputed these monethes past betweene him and a Catholicke Deuine of our partie in his answere to the said Reportes which answere is in England And albeit therby may easely be seene the talent which M. Attorney had while he was Attorney in this kynd of worst Equiuocation notwithstanding his often declamations against the other sorte that with due circumstances we haue proued to be lawfull yet will I heere adioyne one example more but such a one as is worth the noting bearing away And it is this 81. That wheras in answering of dyuers lawes 〈◊〉 and ordinances which the Attorney alledged out of the raignes of sundry ancient Kinges to proue that they did exercise spirituall authority and iurisdiction the Deuine somtymes not hauing the law-bookes by him out of which the said lawes or authorityes were cyted supposing the allegations to be ordinarily true for who would suspect lawyers to be false in their cytations that were wont to be accompted most exact in that point did answere the same with that sincerity of truth and reason as to a man of his profession appertayned though somtymes also he was forced to suspect some fraud and thervpon requested such as had commodity in England to see the bookes that they would pervse the places and take them out verbatim which some haue done and haue found such store of Equiuocations and false dealing in the alleadging therof as neuer could be imagined in a man of his calling I shall only set downe one example and it shall be the first that is cyted by him in the whole booke to wit of the Charter of King Kenulphus of the VVest-Saxons vnto the Abbey of Abindon in Barkeshyre which Charter M. Attorney set downe with this preface To confirme saith he those that hold the truth and to satisfie such as being not instructed know not the ancient and moderne lawes c. these few demonstratiue proofes shall serue 82. And then beginneth he with the said Charter of King Kenulphus before the Conquest meaning to proue therby that the said King did giue vnto the said Abbey of Abindon spirituall Iurisdiction by vertue of his temporall Crowne exempting the same from all Authority of the Bishop which in deed was done by the Pope and so the Charter it selfe doth plainly expresse if it had byn truly related by M. Attorney And for that the Case is not long I shall set it downe verbatim as the Attorney hath it in his booke pag. 9. only putting into English that which is recyted by him in latin and left without any translation to make the matter more obscure and then shall wee lay forth also the true case wherby will be seene how true a dealer M. Attorney is in those his writinges and protestations which after we shall more largely consider of Thus then beginneth the Charter 83 Kenulphus Rex c. per literas suas patentes consilio consensu Episcoporum Senatorum gentis suae largitus fuit Monasterio de Abindon in Comitatu Bark cuidam Ruchino tunc Abbati Monasterij c. quandam ruris sui portionem id est quindecim mansias in loco qui à ruricolis tunc nuncupabatur Culnam cum omnibus vtilitatibus ad eandem pertinentibus-tam in magnis quam in modic is rebus in aeternam haereditatem Et quod praedictus Kuchinus c. ab omni Episcopali iure in sempiternum esset quietus vt inhabitatores eius nullius Episcopi aut suorum officialium iugo inde deprimantur sed in cunctis rerum euentibus discussionibus causarum Abbatis Monasterij praedicti decreto subijciantur ita quod c. Thus goeth the Charter as M. Attorney alleageth it which in English is as followeth 84. King Kenulphus
against F. Campian ibidem Charter of K. Kenulphus falsified by the Lord Cooke cap. 12. n. 81. 82. deinceps Choyse or election maketh heresy cap. 2. n. 20. Christ his tēporall Kingdome cap. 5. n. 18. Christ how he is our Iudge and how not cap. 8. n. 26. How he did feigne to go further then the castle of Emaus cap. 9. n. n. 98. 72. 73. His denyall to ascend to the festiuall day ibid. n. 59. Cicero his doubtfull answers cap. 9. n. 33. 34. Commotion of VVales anno 1605. and for what cause Pref. n. 7. 8. Comparison betwene the disobedience of Catholickes and Protestants cap. r. n. 27. Conference betwene two shamelesse Ministers cap. 4. n. 47. Confession and the secret therof cap. 10. n. 2. 3. Equiuocation lawfull for not reuealing matters heard in Cōfession ibidem Consent of Emperours necessary for gathering of Councels in oldtyme why cap. 6. n. 33. Contention about the expulsion of K. Ozias of Israell cap. 6. n. 8. 9. 10. 11. Contumacy defined by Sayer the Benedictine cap. 6. nu 51. Couētry case about the plague cap. 10. n. 31. B. Cunerus abused by Thomas Morton cap. 6. n. 47. 59. D DAVID Q. Maries Secrecary of Scotland murdered cap. 1. n. 21. Definitiō of Cōtumacy c. 6. n. 6 Definition of Truth by S. Augustine cap. 8. n. 40. Item of a lye ibidem nu 47. Deposition of Princes by the liuely word of God cap. 4. n. 34 Deuinity deducted from age to age cap. 9. n. 5. Increase therof ibidem nu 6. Schoole-Deuinity positiue their beginninges ibid. nu 7. Deuinity speculatiue and morall ibid. n. 8. Difference of contumacy and pertinacy cap. 6. n. 52. Disagreement betwene Protestants Caluinists cap. 2. n. 13. Dignity of Priesthood aboue Regalty cap. 5. n. 4. 5. deinceps n. 10. 11. 12. Discourse against Catholicks without name of Author or truth Prefat n. 13. Disobedience cōpared betwene Catholicks and Protestāts cap. 1. n. 27. Disputation of Plessis Mornay with the Bishop of Eureux cap. 12. n. 53. 54. Dissimulation when it is lawfull and when not cap. 11. n. 17. Doctrine and practice of rebellion whether more in Catholickes than Protestants cap. 1. n. 7. 8. 9. deinceps Dolman author of the Succession egregiously abused by Th. Morton cap. 2 n. 23. 34. 35. E ECCLESIASTICALL Supremacy in temporall causes how it is to be vnderstood c. 6. n. 22. Syr Edvvard Cooke his booke of reportes against Catholicks Pref. n. 9. 10. His Paradox of English Kings ibidem His false and odious assertions against Catholicks Ibid. n. 11. His Equiuocations ca. 12. n. 77. vsque ad finem capitis His notable fiction against Pius Quintus ibid n. 78. His Charge against Catholicks at Norvvich ibid. n. 79. Emperours consent necessary for gathering of Conncells in old tyme and why cap. 6. n. 33. England her pittifull state at this day Prefat n. 2. Equity of Catholike doctrine tryed by the effects cap. 4. n. 13. Equiuocation the doctrine therof how and when it is lawfull cap. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. per totum How the same is defended ibi cap. 7. n. 2. 3. 4. The vse therof receyued for 400. yeares ibid. n. 8. 9. 10. 11. deinceps The necessity therof in certain cases ibid. n. 20. 21. deinceps Equiuocation vsed by S. Paul cap. 7. n. 51 alibi in diuersis locis Equiuocation what it is cap. 8. per totum Equiuocation of two sorts ibi num 2. The definition therof by Aristotle ibid. n. 5. 6. 7. How it differeth from Amphibology ibid. n. 10. Equiuocation mentall verball cap. 8. n. 3. 12. Equiuocation defended by all foraine Cath. writers cap. 9 n. 11. 12. 13. deinceps cap. 10. n. 15. Equiuocation by reason and instinct of nature cap. 9. n. 81. Equiuocation preiudiciall to common conuersation cap. 10. num 23. Equiuocation in an oath how and when it is lawfull cap. 10. n. 29. 30. Equiuocation in Protestantes starke lying cap. 12. per totum Equiuocall and ambiguous speaches of our Sauiour cap. 8. n. 13. 14. cap. 9. n. 26. 27. 28. 61. Examples of false dealing of Thomas Morton cap. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. per totum Exasperations in Englād what they cause Prefat per totam The inconueniences that ensue therby ibidem Exemption of Clergy-men Th. Mortons notorious false dealing therin cap. 6. n. 13. 14. 15. deinceps Experience of tyme a good proofe cap. 7. n. 9. Extrauagant of Pope 〈◊〉 the eight falsified by Th. Morton cap 6. n. 43. F MY FATHER is Greater then I hovv ancient Fathers do vnderstād the same cap. 6. n. 100. 101. Footinges of Protestants in periodes of antiquity c. 5. n. 40. Fox his huge volume of Actes and Monumentes cap. 12. n. 48. Hovv he is called the Father of lyes Ibid. The same confuted Ibid. n. 50. 52. Syr Francis Hastinges his Equiuocations cap. 12. n. 66. 67. 68. deinceps His vvillfull vntruth about the poysoning of K. Iohn Ibid. His abuse of S. Hierome Ibid. n. 69. Fraud and Fallacy vvhat they be cap. 8. n. 48. 49. deinceps Fraud and deceipt of Thomas Morton in alleaging all sortes of Authors cap. 2. n. 23. 24. cap. 5. nu 5. 6. 7. 49. 53. per totum Caput Sextum deinceps per totum librum G F. GARNET his alleadging S. Augustine for the lavvfulnes of Equiuocatiō at his arraignment cap. 9. n. 52. 54. Genesius Sepulueda his opinion of Equiuocation cap. 9. n. 57. Abused notably by Tho. Morton Ibidem Giges-ringe one of Thomas Mortons signes cap. 11. n. 39. Gilby the Minister his doctrine and immodest speach of K. Henry the 8. cap. 4. n. 35. 〈◊〉 Cassander vvhat he vvas and his doctrine cap. 6. n. 69. The same condemned by English Protestātes Ibid. n. 69. 70. God cannot deceaue or cooperate to an vntruth cap. 7. n. 38. God hovv he permitteth men to be deceyued cap. 8. n. 54. cap. 9. n. 77. Gods Ordination oftentymes ioyned vvith his permissión cap. 9. n. 78. Goodman and other English Protestantes of Geneua their doctrine cap. 4. n. 16. 17. 34. Gratian Collector of the Canon-lavv cap. 9. n. 9. Gratians text corrupted and falfifyed by Thomas Morton cap. 2. n. 49. 52. S. Gregory his authority for the lavvfulnes of Equiuocatiō cap. 10. n. 18. Gregory de Valētia his Charge against Caluin for Arrianisme cap. 6. n. 78. His authority for Equiuocation cap. 10. n. 16. H HAMMOND his booke of the Cōmotion of Papistes in Herefordshire an 1605. Pref. n. 7. Hanmer and Charke their bookes against F. Campian cap. 12. n. 55. Their Equiuocations Ibidem n. 56. 57. deinceps Hanniballs ten prisoners their case set dovvne by Cicero cap. 11. n. 33. Heape of falsityes togeather committed by Thomas Morton cap. 5. n. 57. 58. Henry the fourth Emperour
per totum Propositions reserued how they be equiuocall and how not cap. 11. n. 14. Protestants their bookes and writinges against Caluinistes cap. 2. n. 12. 13. deinceps Protestant-Princes many of them neuer molested by the Pope cap. 2. n. 40. cap. 3. n. 8. Protestant-People more perillous then Popes cap. 2. n. 44. Protestantes in what cases they may be subiect to the penaltyes of heresyes cap. 3. n. 9. Protestants charged with heresie by men of their owne profession cap. 3 n. 12. cap. 4. n. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Protestants footings in periods of Antiquity cap. 5. n. 40. Puritans condemned by Protestants and Protestants by them cap. 4. n. 9. Q QVEENE Maries of Scotland mother daughter their afflictions by Protestants cap 1. n. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. Queene Mary of England her gouernmeÌ„t impugned by Protestants cap. 4. n. 28. 29. 30. The conspiracy of Syr Thom. VViat against her ibid. n. 37. Queene Elizabeth her gouernment coÌ„tradicted by some Protestants at the beginning cap. 4. n. 25. Quality and holynesse of such men as haue admitted the vse of equiuocation for lavvfull cap. 7. n. 16. 17. R REBELLION doctrine of Protestants about the practice therof cap. 1. n. 6. Rebellions against Q. Marie of England how they be ansvvered by Tho. Morton cap. 4. n. 29. 30. 31. 32. Rebellions in Flaunders and Germany by ProtestaÌ„ts against their lawfull Princes cap. 4. n. 48. 50. 51. 52. Reseruations mentall in Christes speach cap. 8. n. 13. 14. cap. 9. n. 26. 27. 28. 44. Circumstances necessary to find out mentall reseruations ibidem Reseruations mentall in Saint Iohn Baptist ibidem nu 18. 19. 20. M. Reynoldes boke of Caluino-Turcismus cap. 2. n. 6. His collectioÌ„ of moderne heresyes ibid. n. 8. Abused by Th. Morton 〈◊〉 num 27. Royardus the Franciscan abused by Th. Morton cap. 7. n. 59. S SSACRIFICE of Christians ceased in Alexandria cap. 6. n. 20. Salmeron the lesuite egregiously abused by Tho. Morton cap. 5. n. 7. cap. 6. n. 4. Sayer the Benedictine falsified and corrupted by Th. Morton cap. 6. n. 50. 51. His Discourse about Equiuocation in an oath cap. 10. n. 30. Scarres of infirmity in Tho. Morton cap. 9. n. 39. Scottish-Ministers their absurd positions doctrine c. 4. n. 23. Secretary Dauid barbarously murdered in Scotland cap. 1. num 21. Secret of confession cap. 10. n. 2. 3. 4. Secretes of the CoÌ„mon-welth ibidem n. 6. 7. How EquiuocatioÌ„ may be lawfull in defense therof ibid. n. 8. Sheep byters not tolerable in a Common-welth cap. 1. n. 4. Sociabylity in doctrine vvith Protestants not sufferable cap. 2. n. 5. Sotus the Deuyne abused and falsified by Th. Morton cap. 10. nu 34. 35. 36. D. 〈◊〉 abused by Tho. M. cap. 2. n 25. Stratageme of Iosue in taking the Citty of Hay cap. 7. n. 25. Also of Eliseus the Prophet ibidem n. 26. Of Iudith in 〈◊〉 Holofernes ibid. n 27. Supremacy impugned by diuers Protestants in the beginning and vvhy cap. 4. n. 36. Sutcliffe Deane of Excester and his notable shifting cap. 4. n. 9. 10. His testimony of Protestants doctrine for deposing of Princes ibid. n. 44. His full and round Ansvvere to the Three CoÌ„uersions of England hovv vaine and impertinent cap. 5. n. 54. T S. THOMAS of Aquin his seuere sentence against lying cap. 7. n. 35. Alledged by T. M. against himselfe cap. 11. num 56. Syr Thomas VViat his pretence against Queene Mary cap. 4. num 37. Thomas Morton his booke against Romish doctrine Pref. nu 12. His maine drift and seditious scope therin cap. 1. nu 1. 2. 3. deinceps The same confuted Ibid. alibi sapè His reasons against the disloyalty of Catholickes confuted cap. 2. per totum His egregious abusing of all sortes of Authors sacred and prophane cap. 2. nu 23. 24. 28. cap. 5. num 5. 6. 7. nu 49. per totum libruÌ„ deinceps A Catalogue of his corruptioÌ„s cap. 2. n. 57. cap. 5. nu 57. His lending and borrovving of the Lord Cooke cap. 3. n. 2. His fond florishes Ibidem n. 5. per totum librum His bad protectorshippe of Protestantes cap. 3. nu 13. His silly deuise of flattery about the deposition of Kinges cap. 4. nu 26 27. Thomas Morton not able to defend his Religion from heresy against his ovvne Protestant brethren cap. 4. num 12. His Treatise of the Popes Supremacy as head of RebellioÌ„ confuted cap. 5. per totum His great hypocrisy cap. 5. num 50. vbique deinceps His impudency Ibid. num 58. His impertinent Reasons confuted cap. 2. per totum cap. 5. num 59. His conceipt of the Oath of Supremacy in England cap. 6. n. 24. 25. His notable abuse of â—ardinall Bellarmine cap. 6. n. 27. 28. Item the like of Cardinall Tolet Ibid. nu 49. alibi His ten lyes at a clap c. 6. n. 64. His Oracle of LogitiaÌ„s cap. 8. num 6. His detestation of Equiuocation but not of lying cap. 8. num 20. His Socraticall demaundes ca. 9. num 22. His scarres of infirmity cap. 9. num 39. His Wanton and lasciuious speaches Ibid. num 60. His abuse of Doctor Genesius Sepulueda cap. 9. num 57. His Couentry-case about the plague cap. 10. nu 31. His egregious impudency and abuse of authors 〈◊〉 Ib. nu 32. 33. His lying Metropolis Ib. n. 33. His booke against EquiuocatioÌ„ examined and ansvvered cap. II. per totum Hovv he impugneth himselfe Ibidem num 13. His abusing of Azor cap. II. n. 18. 19. His Punica fides about falsification cap. II. nu 36. His egregious Cosenage Ibid. num 38. His absurd syllogismes cap. II. num 50. His Apostolical defense against lying cap. II. num 61. 62. Truth defined by S. Augustine cap. 8. nu 40. Three sortes or degrees therof Ibid. nu 41. Tumultes against lawful Princes practized by Protestantes cap. 1. num 13. 14. 15. deinceps Tumultes in Scotland cap. 1. n. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. Tyranny and Tyrantes of tvvo sortes cap. 5. nu 47. V VALENTIA the Iesuite his Charge against Caluin for Arrianisme cap. 6. n. 78. His authority for the lavvfulnes of Equiuocation c. 10. n. 16. Vanity of Thomas Mortons vaunt of Truth cap. 6. n. 2. Vasquez his discours about pertinacy cap. 6. n. 43. Venetians their disagreement vvith Pope Paulus Quintus cap. 5. num 41. Vncertainty in Protestantes doctrine Cap. 5. nu 46. Vse of Equiuocation receyued by Cath. Doctors for 400. yeares cap. 7. nu 8. VV VVHITTINGHAM deane of Durham his doctrine cap. 4. num 35. D. VVhitaker his absurd ansvvere to Doctor Sanders about the authority of Ancient Fathers cap. 12. num 26. VViat his practice and conspiracy against Q. Mary of England cap. 4. nu 35. M. VVilliam Reynoldes his booke of Caluino-Turcismus c. 2. n. 6. His collection of moderne heresyes Ibid.
num 8. Abused by Tho. Morton Ibid. num 27. VVitnesses hovv and vvhen they are obliged to speake the truth cap. 10. nu 25. 26. Y YESTVVERT the Printer his falsification in printing the Charter of K. Kenulphus cap. 12. nu 88. Z ZVINGLIVS the chiefe styrrer of Rebellion in the Cantons of Zuitzerland c. 1. num 14. Slaine Ibid. Zuinglianisme impugned by Luther cap. 2. nu 15. 16. FINIS The Authors first intention 4. Reg. 18. Esay 36. 〈◊〉 of hearers Reasons of the dedication Sundry heades vvherin Equiuocation is touched both in Lavv and Deuinity T M his appâ—ale to his Maiesty Epist â— initio The conformity of T. M. A Minister of simple truth Epistle to the King A sayned march against his Maiesty A 〈◊〉 march against his Maiesty VaÌ„guard 〈◊〉 CathoIicke Gentlemen suffering for his Maiesties title 〈◊〉 accused for their deuotion to the title of Scotland * Gen. 11. 7. 9. The vanity 〈◊〉 T. M in deuidinge our tongues A fond vaunt of T. M. refated Epist. ad Regem A false and malitious obseruation of T. M. against Popes refuted Hovv T. M. his bookes are so published as not published Epistle to the King against Equiuocation T. M. his idle Epistle to the deceaued brethren 1. Tim. 2. The diffi culty of 〈◊〉 M. hovv men may knovv vvhat is done 〈◊〉 they are a sleepe resolued Iohn 11. Priesthood of the old TestameÌ„t derided by T. M. greatly honored by Christ and his Apostles Act. 23. Heb. 7. 1. Thes. 2. False calumniations Baron tom 2. anno 100. sub finem in tom 8. anno 604. fusè The defence of the bodily assumptioÌ„ of the B. virgin See S. Bernard in his 5. Sermons of the Assumption of our B. Lady alibi Miracles vvrought by God for the coÌ„uersion of the Indians scoffed at by T. M. Act. 4. Marc. vlt. The contumely of T. M. about S. Francis louse * Anglicanos * Flemus Plus quà m ciuilia The pittifull 〈◊〉 of EnglaÌ„d Iusque datum sceleri Populumque potentem in sua c. Mat. 12. Exasperations Psal. 136. Malitious extension Of bookes and pamphletes Commotion of vvales In the Epistle of T. H. 22. Iunij 1605. * Auant false and lying Varlets saith one your vvordes are vaine and your hopes are more vaine Sir Edward Cookes booke against Catholicks His argument M. Attorneyes paradox of English Kings * Novv I heare it is answered False odious 〈◊〉 of M. Attorney The booke of T. M. about Romish doctrine A discourse vvithout name of Author or truth of argument Another Treatise Two other furious bookes * Now they are passed The Princely moderation of his Maiesty in his speach VVhat is Catholicum according to S. Augustine VVhich is the best sort of Catholicks My Lord of Salisbury his booke Against my Lord of Salisburies Deuine The first question about authority ouer Princes The second questioÌ„ The third questioÌ„ Sess. 15. About the doctrine of Equiuocation The law fulnes necessity and circumstances of EquiuocatioÌ„ The argument of the ensuing booke against T. M. The 〈◊〉 drift and seditious scope of T. M. The maine propositioÌ„ of T. M. censured Cicero lib. offic Inconueniences of exasperation and despaire Sheepe-biters not to be tolerated in a Common vvealth His vniuersall proposition improued by diuerse particulers 10. Reasons About doctrine and practice of Rebellion 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. An impor tant consideratioÌ„ Caluinian doctrine about obe 〈◊〉 to Princes Archb. of Cant. in the first Booke of dangerous positions cap. 4. 5. and 〈◊〉 in the Suruey of pretended discipline Forraine vvriters of Protestantes pernicious doctrine against Princes Launay in Replique Christienne lib. 1. c. 9. 6 n. 1566. Belfor lib. 6. cap. 〈◊〉 fol. 1565. A ' markeable point Practice of the Protestant doctrine for tumultes against Princes The Rebellions vpon Luthers doctrine The Smalcaldian associatioÌ„ Multitudes of insurrectioÌ„s against true Princes by the nevv Ghospel North. South In the East In the VVest France Flanders England Scotland See the Histories of ScotlaÌ„d 〈◊〉 by BucchanaÌ„ and Knox and by Holinshed and my Lord of 〈◊〉 his booke of dangerous Positions cap. 2. 3. 4. c. 〈◊〉 afflictions and death of Q Mary Regent of Scotland 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 proceeding against his Maiesties Mother A brief summe of matters fallen out in Scotland 〈◊〉 Holinsh. 〈◊〉 supra Prior 〈◊〉 made Earle of Murrey 1563. 1566. The barbarous murther of the Secretary Dauid The murther of the King The barbarous dealing against his 〈◊〉 Mother VVhat the King 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hath suffered at Protestats handes in 〈◊〉 of disobe dience RebellioÌ„ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Intollerable insolencies of Ministers against the King A vveighty consideratioÌ„ 〈◊〉 Princes Streyned 〈◊〉 against Catholickes The comparison betvveene the disobedience of Catholicks and ProtestaÌ„ts A decalogue of T. M. his reasons hardly streined Hovv T. M. proueth his assertions Iurginicius M. VVright M Reinoldes D. Gifford 〈◊〉 No sociability in doctrine but in coÌ„uersation there may be Perkins Catholick The harde speeches against Caluinistes ansvvered CaluinoTurcismus of M. Reinoldes Maister VVrights speeches D. Thomas 2. 2. quaest 5. art 3. Ibidem quaest 10. art 6. Hovv heinous a sinne heresy is * See Tertull li. de pudicitia Cypr. li. 4. ep 2. Athan ser. 2 contr Arrian Aug. li. de gratia Hier. con lucifer c. Tit. 3. M. Reinoldes collection about moderne heresies Franciscus Stancarus Minister epad Regem Poloniae Conradus Schlusselburgius in l. de Theologia CaluinistaruÌ„ impress Francof 1592. l. 2. art 13. 〈◊〉 Schulz lib. de 50. 〈◊〉 lit A. 6. lit Q. 〈◊〉 Tilmanus Heshusius AEgidius Hunnius fol. 181. Apo. 12. Many bookes of the learneder Protestantes against Caluinistes Ioannes Modestus 1587. Ioannes Matthias Albertus Grauerus RefutatioÌ„ of his second medium Luther contr art Louanien Thes. 27. Luther de Caena Dotomo 2. Ger. f. 182 190. Concerning the penalties incurred by Heresy according to the Canons The moderation of S. Augustine vvillingly admitted Aug. lib. de vtilitate credendi ad Honoratum Manichaeum VVho is an Hereticke lib. 4. de bap contra Donatistasc 16. Euery one that belieueth heresy is not properly an Hereticke Choice or election make Heresy Dol. par 1 pag. 13. cyted in Discouery pag. 9. DolemaÌ„s text abused in vvordes sense D. Bouchier p. 36. cyted in Disc. pa. 8. His cauillation against D. Bouchier Buchan l. de iure regni p. 13 Stapleton in Dydimo pa. 261 cyted in Disc. pa. 8. Peeuish vvraÌ„gling against D. StapletoÌ„ Buchanan li. de iure regnip 61 Reginaldus de iusta Reip. auctoritate c. c. 1. cited in Disc. pa. 8. 1. Pet. 2. M. Reinol des discourse M. Reinolds abu sed by T. M. The secoÌ„d charge ansv vered about the Popes authority The ansvver to S. Edvvard Cooke T. M. putteth his fictions for our positions Calumniation 〈◊〉 coÌ„uinced Catholick Princes successioÌ„s resisted by ProtestaÌ„ts CalumnÌ„ia tioÌ„ against Doleman Doleman part 1. pag. 216. T. M. 〈◊〉 bad dealing A
rabblement of false illations Iniurious dealing of T. M. The 〈◊〉 authority strained to many brāches of 〈◊〉 Many 〈◊〉 Princes neuer molested by the Pope Kinde offices of the sea Apostolick tovvardes his Maiesty of great Britanny See Thynnes addition to Holinshed pag. 446. the booke of dangerous positions p. 26 Pope Gregor 13. Tvvo Protestant Princes only censured by the Sea Apostolicke in our age Q. Elizabeth K. of Nauarre The happy successe in the K. of France Protestant people more pe rilous thē Popes Examples of bad dealing in T.M. Disc. p. 31. Naucl. p. 〈◊〉 gener 39. Our English Pope Adrian egregiously abused by T.M. Disc. p. 23. A notable corruptiō about Doctor 〈◊〉 1. Pet. 2. Consil. Constan. Sess. 15. Catholick moderation tovvardes censuring of Princes Knox 〈◊〉 hist. p. 372. Knox appel fol. 33. Disc pa. 4. Another cosenage about a text of Gratian. Apud Gra. causa 15. q. 6. cap. 4. gloss A doubt proposed solued See of this History of the Disputation before the King of France annexed to the confut of the first 6. moneths of Foxes Calendar Another fraudulēt case out of the Canon lavv Decret 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 de Haer. tit 7. c. 〈◊〉 Theseuere sentence of S. Augustine against Hereticks August l. de 〈◊〉 Cath. Deut. 13. Hier. contr vigilant eit a 〈◊〉 caus 23. q. 〈◊〉 c. legi A Catalogue of cor 〈◊〉 The very first text of Scripture alledged by him most corruptly T. M. his nevv Reply T. M. lendeth and borrovveth of S. Edvvard Cooke T. M. my Lord of Canterburies Chaplaine The Ministers manner of dealing Fond florishes of T. M. 〈◊〉 T. M. 〈◊〉 our Catholick Authors Iob 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 lib. Prior. 〈◊〉 Protestant Princes troubled by Popes in our daies Hovv Protestantes vvere denied by the Ansvverer to be subiect to the penalties of Heresy Of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the more moderate follovved by the Ansvverer Moderate Ansvvere cap. 1. §. 〈◊〉 Reply c. 4. 5. 6. c. Greg. de val to 3. disp 1. q. 12. de Apostas 〈◊〉 2. para 4. T. M. vvill needes proue Protestantes to be held for Heretickes T. M a bad Proctor for Protestantes The imputation 〈◊〉 Heresy vnto Protestantes 〈◊〉 brought in by T. M T. M. an example of Equiuocation The Authors Cēsure both of the Ansvverer Replyer The Ministers Sleightes Marke these consequences Aug. de fide Cathol citat apud Grat. tit 7. de Haereticis c. 2 First charge of Heresy laied vpon Protestantesby men of their ovvne pro fession Moderate Ansvver pag. 14. In praefat cap. 1. 2 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. c. Reply pag. 17. His sleight 〈◊〉 not satisfying the doubt Stanc l. de Trinit medi. Lut. li. contr Sacra epist. ad Marchio Pruss Ansvverer pag 15 The secōd charge of Heresy frō Puritanes Admonit 2. to the Par. pa. 25. suppl vers 36. Hovv T. M. doth shift of the Censure of the Puritanes The notable shifting of Deane Sutcliffe Sutcliffe in his full ansvvere part 1. C. 1. pag. 14. A third charge of Heresy against Protestantes by one of their ovvne Moderate Ansvver pag. 14. M. Hugh Broughtō Reply c. 7. T. M. cannot defend his Religion from Heresy against his ovvne people Aug. l. de vera Relig cap. 7. The equity of our doctrine tried by the effects The contrary effects of Protestant doctrine The vanity of this Reply Moder Ansvverer cap 4. The doctrine of Goodman and other English Protestāts of Geneua Goodman pa. 94. 119. 203. c. Cap. 1. Full satisfaction part 2. pa. 103. Dang posit l. 2. c. 1. A shameles assertion of T. M. denying a manifest truth The B. of Cant. his testimony of the primitiue English Geneuiās dan. posit pag. 218. 219. 220. 221. In his preface to Goodmās booke An euasiō taken avvay Their sedicious do ctrine against Q. Elizabeth Dan. posit pag. 18. 133 〈◊〉 suppl to the gouernour of VVales p. 16. 36. 37. 38. Mod. ans cap. 4. Positions of Scottish Mininisters Knox in Hist. p. 372 item to Engl. and Scotland f 78 Buechanan de Iure Reg. p. 13. 25. 40. 58. 61. Cap. 2. §. Contrarywise Hovv fully T. M. ansvvereth matters giueth satisfaction Reply 〈◊〉 107. To the obiection about Knox Buchanans doctrine Reply pa. 103. To theobiection of his Maiesties iudgmēt about the English Ministers notes 〈◊〉 the Bible Marke his poore shift 2. Par. 15. Not only Kings by Gods lavv appointed deposers as the Minister T. M. saith Reply pag. 101. To the Rebelliōs against Q. Mary vvhat he ansvvereth Stovv Holinshead others in their Cronicles Many cleere exāples to cōuince T. M. Stovv an 1554. May 18. 〈◊〉 other insurrections 〈◊〉 conspiracies by Ministers More exāples of Ministers treasons against 〈◊〉 Mary Knok in his 〈◊〉 to the Nobility fol. 63. 77. Goodman in his booke hovv Superiours ought to be obeied c. 〈◊〉 fol. 54. Princes to be deposed by the liuely vvord of God M. VVhittingham in his preface to Goodmās booke Gilby in Admon pag. 69. Gilbyes immodest speech against K. Henry and the supremacy Fox in an 1554. pag. 1289. The 〈◊〉 of Syr Tho. VVyat 〈◊〉 l. 2 de Schis p. 332. Reply 〈◊〉 107. No substantiall ansvvering to any thing Dang posit l. 1. c. 6. To the examples of France Vide Lodouicum Richome in expost apolog ca. 94. A vaine shift To the examples of Geneua Reply pa. 116. Ibid. pag. 119. Reply pa. 19. Mod. Ansvver c. 9. Great hypocrisy in the demaund of T. M. Bishop of Geneua vvas Lord 〈◊〉 also of the Citty Caluin to Sadolet p. 171. Bodinus l. de Repub. pag 353. Sutcliffe in Suric pag. 14. D Sutclifs testimony of Protestants doctrine for deposing of Princes Full satisfaction pag. 119. A 〈◊〉 conferēce be tvveene Sutcliffe Mortō The absurd false dealing of tvvo Ministers togeather Sundry other Rebellions of Protestāts Seely ansvveres or rather shiftings of Reply pa. 124. The title of T. M. his 〈◊〉 Treatise The cause of this seuerall Chapter Confut. pag. 1. To his first cauillation Math. 4. To his second cauillation Pag. 2. Carerius li. 2. Rom. Pontif. ca. 18. Sander in visib monarch The dignity of Priesthood proued to be more then Regall False dealing against 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 2. Carer l. 2. c. 1. Salmeron Disp. 12. in 〈◊〉 Paul Carer l. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hebr. 4. Hovv the old Testament vvas a figure of the nevv 1. Cor. 9. Deut. 25. 1. Cor. 10. 〈◊〉 p. 3. 〈◊〉 of T. M. Conf. par 3. pag. 3. A Sophisticall fallacy in steed of a demonstratiue argument Reply par 3. pag. 54. VVhether Christes Priesthood or Kingly povver vvere grea ter vpon earth 〈◊〉 l. 3. de Sacerdotio subinitio Chrys. ho. 5. de verb. Isaiae Ibid. Naz. orat ad ciues timore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 l. 3. de fid c. 5. Aug. l. 1. de consensu 〈◊〉 cap. 3. Psal. 2. Ibid. Hebr. 1. Psal. 8. 〈◊〉 28. Phil. 〈◊〉 Gen. 14. Hebr. 7. 〈◊〉 109. Hebr. 2. Hebr. 3. Hebr. 4.