albeit I cannot let passe to set downe the iudgement of another learned stranger extant in a printed booke of his in defence of Cardinall Bellarmin whome M. Morton chiefely pretendeth to impugne but so weakely and absurdly as the said learned man giueth a very contemptible censure of the whole worke saying Hoc opus merito suo inter stulcissima quae ex Nouatorum officina prodierunt sedem sibi deposcit adeò fatuè stolidè insulse non dissertat sed delirat Which words also for the forsaid cause I leaue vntranslated And this may suffice for his first chalenge there followeth the second 12. If I haue not earnestly desired saith he and by the law of loue challenged of my frends strict iustice in noting such deprauations as might any way occur and least they should suspect their reprehension to become lesse acceptable vnto me if I haue not proâ—essed it to be my greatest offence not to be in that maÌ„ner offended If I haue bin euer so peruersly obstinate as not willing to be reformed by any aduersary then I will confesse my selfe worthie of all criminations fraudes trickes deceipts cosenages c. 13. To which challeng I answere that if M. Morton haue had this earnest desire indeed which he speaketh of and haue requested his friends by the law of loue to note in strict iustice his dâ—prauatioÌ„s as he protesteth we must needs conclude that either he hath had few faithfull friends to performe that friendly office vnto him or that they were very carelesse in their annotations or he not very prompt to follow their aduertismeÌ„ts supposing the multitude of faults that are found wherof neither he nor they did take any notice or seeke to correct them And as for his willingnes to be reformed by any aduersary and that his greatest offence was and is not to be in that manner offended I do not see how it can be true or held for probable for so much as my selfe being his aduersary in the cause and controuersy betwene vs hauing sought friendly in my booke of Mitigation to admonish and reforme him in many errours and falsities vttered by him he hath byn so farre of from taking it in good part or not being offended therewith as he hath vtterly lost himselfe through impacience in diuers passages in this his answer as before you haue heard vpon diuers occasions no where will it more appeare then by the second part of this his challenge concerning his aduersary presently to ensue wherein he passeth the scolding of any bad woman lightly that euer I haue heard of if inuectiue scurrility be scolding Wherfore in this he protesting one thing and doing the contrary within so few lines it may easely be seene what credit may be giuen to his wordes Let vs passe to his third chalenge 14. Although I can not saith he but choose to be strooke rather of a friend who woundeth that he may heale tâ—en of an enemy who intendeth only to hurt a friendly animaduersion being as an Antidote which is a reprehending of me least I might be reprehensible and the taxation of an enemy beiâ—g as toxicum calummously poysoning whatsoeuer deserueth good yet if I haue euer byn so wickedly peruerse as not whensoeuer iustly to be willingly reproued by my aduersary turning his venome inâ—o treacle his deformation into reformation then I say I will confesse my self worthy of all the criminations as before 15. This Challeng if we consider it well is only a multiplication of words without new sense or substance for that in the later part of the former Challeng he protested the same that he doth heere that he was willing to be reâ—ormed by any Aduersary which here he repeateth againe with some more Rhetoricke of phrases but no more truth For that I being his Aduersary and reprouing him of so many vntruthes and offering to stand to the triall as now I haue done he hath not only not taken it patiently nor turned venome into treacle but quite contrariwise treacle into venome for that my admonitions were treacle indeed to resist the venome of a lying spirit infused by heresy if he would haue taken the benefit thereof And as for the Antidote which here he speaketh of to be reprehended friendly least he might be reprehensible if it be so much to be estemed as he saith so it is indeed then much more obligation is there to be patient in receauing reprehension where a man is actually reprehensible indeed and that in so high a degree as I do pretend and proue that M. Morton is by his false dealing before laid downe which yet he holding for toxicum I haue very litle hope though much desyre that it may do him good but to others I trust it will that are not so partially and passionatly interessed in the matter 16. His fourth Challeng is vttered in these words If in my ordinary course of life saith he any man can charge me with a bent to this vice of â—alsity though it were for hope of whatsoeuer aduaÌ„tage c. then I will confesse my selfe worthy c. Vnto which Challenge if so he will needs call it for I neuer saw Challenges runne in this forme I haue this only to answere that the falsifications obiected are extant à parte rei and auouched out of his Bookes published in his name and whether he wrote the same either of a bent to this vice or of a back that is to say of a necessity or kind of compulsion for manteyning of a bad cause I will not stand to dispute or determine Neither will I alleage any thing iniuriously against M. Mortons person which I do loue from my hart in the true loue of Christ our Sauiour wishing his best spirituall good as myne owne and do esteme him also for the good partes that God hath bestowed vpon him though I do pitty the euill imployment thereof in the cause he defendeth And this shal be sufficient concerning his chalenges protestatioÌ„s about his owne persoÌ„ Now to the person of P. R. his Aduersary CONCERNING the person of his Aduersary P. R. and absurd Challenges made against him §. II. IF in any other place of his whole Booke which yet are many as you haue seene by the perusall therof and of my answere M. Morton forgot himself or rather lost himself by vehemency of passion grief and choller he seemeth principally to haue done it in this place where he ceÌ„sureth his aduersary in foure seueral challeÌ„ges which I haue thought best to set downe together not to answere theÌ„ seuerally as I did in the foâ—mer Paragraph For that indeed there is nothing in these but excesse of intemperate heat in coÌ„tumelious speach Thus then he writeth 18. Concerning the disposition of my Aduersary saith he if he be not manifâ—sted to haue so behaued himself in tearmes so dispitefully malâ—gnâ—nt as if the Capitall letters oâ— his name P. R. did iustly
endeuour to deceiue Three things also I must confesse to haue bâ—ne the speciall causes of this griefe and indignation sâ—metimes conceiued The first to see a yong man as they say you are so lately come from the Schooles so lightly furnished and so little expâ—rienced in greater studies as scarsely you could haue life or leasure to looke at the varietie of Bookes Authors that haue written therof especially concerning the Catholick religion for a thousand yeares togeather which you grant to be ours to come forth as it were in his hose and dublet challeng the whole Church of God and the whole ranke of profound learned men therof whose bookes for deep learning iudgement and varietie of reading you can not but confesse in truth and modestie that you are not able to beare after them And fynallie they are thousands and you are but one thy were ould you are yong their beards were hoarie and gray yours is yet red they wore out their ages with studie you haue yet but lately begone they haue had the continuance of many ages the wit learning experience diligence of all Christian Nations that held the same Religion with them your prescription of tyme is small your association of fellowes Fathers Doctors or Councells lesse For if you goe out of the little Iland of Britany where all that professe themselues Protestants in all things are not wholy with you you shall fynd abroad all the rest in most things against you And yet do you so confidently tryumph and insult euery where as though you alone were able to ouercome and vanquish whatsoeuer was established before you in our ReligioÌ„ different from yours saying euery where with contempt when you speake of this ranke of learned men and when any thing displeaseth you in them your owne Bishops your owne Doctors your owne CouÌ„cells your owne Fathers your owne Popes say this or that yea though they were neuer so ancient and holie As of three Popes togeather Zozimus Bonifacius Celestinus that liued with S. Augustine and were highly commended by him aboue twelue hundred yeares agoe you speake so contemptuouslie as if they had byn some three petty Ministers of your owne ranke And this I confesse to haue byn one principall cause of my sharpe wryting against you which yet if you would once amend on your part you should quiâ—klie fynd correspondence on myne And so I suppose â—ou will perceaue that I haue begone in this Booke â—hough whiles you perseuâ—re in your old vayne of preâ—â—mption and insolencie you are like to drawe forth â—nsweres nothing pleasing your owne humor which â—ing of pryde as in all Sectaries as accustâ—med to be 〈◊〉 liketh humility and patience in all people but only 〈◊〉 themselues Another cause was the circuÌ„stance of tyme when 〈◊〉 wrote your first Discouerie against Catholikes 〈◊〉 not being contented to haue set abroad diuers â—â—â—tings of yours in Latin touching fâ—ygned absurdâ—â—â—es and contraries of dâ—ctrine fâ—und as you preâ—â—â—â— in their wrytings wherof you are like shortlie â—heare out of Germany to receiue the said abâ—â—â—dities and falshoods doubled vpon your self as â—â—u will perceiue by that piece of the latyn Epistle â—â—itten from thence which I haue imparted with â—â—u in the last Chapter of this my râ—â—koning not â—â—ntented I saie with this iniurie offered vs â—ou watching a tyme of pressure and tribulation fynding the same to fall out in full measure by the hatefull accident of the powder-treason you raÌ„ne as the Rauen to the fallen sheep to picke out her eyes that is to say to adde exasperation to exasperation affliction to affliction calumniation to sycophancy against all sortes of Catholicks And then came forth in hast your litle infamous bloudie Lybell without a name which out of your charitie would needs make all Catholiks Traytors in the very roote of Catholicisme it self that is to say in the fundamentall doctrine of their Religion So as euerie one of them must be forced to denie his faith in that ReligioÌ„ or else acknowledge himself trayterous in his duty of temporall allegiaÌ„ce and subiection Which paradox to make somewhat probable you were forced to accompanie with so manie fraudulent shiftes deceipts and falsities as haue byn conuinced against yow in my former Treatise coÌ„firmed now in this which though of it self it moued no small indignation to see so many manifest falshoods so bouldly auouched and ratified againe by you afterwards as in this fynall reckoning will apeare yet must I confesâ—e that the forsaid circumstance of time did principally mooue me to be more sharpe in my CoÌ„futation And it made me also to remember a certaine historie that I had read in old Lactantius Firmianus in his first booke intituled De Iustitia which I shall recite as I fynd it in hym yow may apply vnto your self so much therof as yow maie thinke to fit you The storie is of a certayne heathen Philosopher who in tyme of persecution tooke occasion to write against Christian religion Ego saith Lactantius cùm in Bithynia Oratorias litteras accitus docerem c. When as I being sent for taught Rhetoricke in Bithynia and the Churches of Christians by the Edicts of Diocletian Maximinian were commanded to be ouerthrowne a certaine chief Philosopher taking the occasion of that tyme nescio vtrum superbiùs an importuniùs iacenti atque abiectae veritati insultaret did insult ouer the truth of Christes Religion oppressed and trodden vnder foot I know not whether with greater pryde or importunity c. And then he describeth at large the manners of this Philosopher which were ouerlong to repeate heere I meane of his Lybertine life of his good fare of his ambiâ—ion with the Magistrate and Princes And fyâ—ally he saith of him Disputationes suas moribus destruebat mores disputationibus arguebat ipse aduersus se grauis censor acerâ—imus accusator He ouerthrew his disoutations â—ith his manners and condemned his owne manners by his disputations being a graue Censurer and most sharp accuser against himselfe And theÌ„ saith further Eodem ipso tempore quo iustus populus nefariè lacerabatur tres Libros euomuit contra Religionem nomenque Christianum In the very self same time that the innocent Christian people were impiously torne in pieces by the persecutor he cast forth three Bookes against the Religion and name of Christians And Lactantius addâ—th that albâ—it he was effusus in PrincipuÌ„ laudes and flattered the Emperors then liuing no lâ—sse thâ—n M. Morton hath done ours yet all sortes of men aswell Hâ—athen as others did mislyke and detest his cruell deuise to wryte against themâ— when as they lay vnder so heauie a yoke of present persecution Id omnes arguebant saith he quòd illo potissimùm tempore id opeâ—is esâ—et agressus quo furebat odiosa crudelitas All sortes of men did condemne this that he had taken in hand to put forth his bookes at that
witnesses be not sufficient against the Pope wherof one is a Monke another an Abbot the third a Card. let vs further vnderstand that fourthly Seuerinus Binius in his new EditioÌ„ oâ— the Councells confesseth that the Bishops in a Councell at Wormes An. 1076. declared that Gregory was to be deposed And that the Councell at Papia An. 1076. did excommunicate â—im and that the CouÌ„cell of Bishops at Brixia did depose him the Asts of which CouÌ„cell as they are recited by VrspergeÌ„sis shew these causes because he was an vsurper oâ— the Sea c. And the CouÌ„cell at Mentz An. 1085. declared him to be iustly deposed Thus we see that P. R. by denying one CouÌ„cell of Bishops of Italy in Papia to haue opposed theÌ„selues against this Gregorie hath contrary to his desire gayued with that one of Papia three other Councells one of Brixia another of Wormes the last of Mentz So vnlucky hath he byn c. 136. To this I answere first that the whole supposall of this narratioÌ„ to wit that I did deny the CouÌ„cell or ConciliabuluÌ„ of Pauia to haue excoÌ„municated Pope Gregory is vtterly false For that this was not in questioÌ„ betweene vs as hath appeared by the former discourse but whether Lambertus did relate and allow of the same or no wherof neyther point is found in him to wit neither that he relateth the fact as out of his owne asseueration but only as obiected by passionate enemies much lesse doth he approue the lawfulnes therof but impugne it This was the state of our question which now M. Morton seing his errour would willingly chang but nothing falleth out more aptly for his conuiction then the bringing in of Seuerinus Binius in this place to be a fourth witnes with Benno Vrspergensis and Sigebertus for disgracing of Pope Gregory by affirming that he was condemned in foure seuerall Councells here meÌ„tioned But what if Binius do expressely say that all these CouÌ„cells were but factious metings and no Councells and set vp by the Emperour the Antipope made by him for malice against the true Pope that they were wicked and schismaticall Bishops that met there in conspiracy against their true head doth this serue to M. Mortons purpose for disgracing of Pope Gregory by Binius his testimony Or doth he deale plainly with his Reader in telling him that Binius is a 4. witnes that ioyneth with Benno Vrspergensis Sigebert in condemning Pope Greg 137. As for Benno the counterfait Card. no man denieth but that he did condemne Pope Gregory if that Booke be his that goeth in his name the like we must vnderstand of Vrspergensis and Sigebert if we belieue M. Morton who saith that they wrote out of their owne iudgment against him wherof notwithstanding we haue shewed the contrary how then can he coople Binius as a fourth witnes to these three which Binius he confesseth to be contrary in iudgement and to defend Pope Gregory most â—arnestly calling these Councells Conciliabula factious and schismaticall conspiracies Let vs set downe here a comparison for better coÌ„ceauing the matter If a Iew of our time should take vpon him to disgrace the Apostle S. Paul as many of them haue sought to do for enuy that he was first a zealous follower of their law and should reckon vp the conspiracies made against him in diuers tymes different places how he was condemned by sundry metings of principall men both Iewes Gentiles often layd in pryson often escaped by flying and the like inferring therof that he was a troublesome euill man should for witnes hereof bring forth the testimonies not only of some ancient hereticall enemy of his that liued with him but other two also who in the accuâ—ers opinion were not his frends and then for a fourth witnesse should ioyne vnto them the testimony of S. Luke himself that recounteth these things but in the Apostles high praise and then should vaunt tell his Reader as heere M. Morton doth that now he had foure witnesses conspiring togeather in the same matter would you say that this man dealt otherwise then as a Iew indeed that is to say perfidiously 138. Let vs heare then what this Binius cited here for the fourth witnes saith against or rather for in the behalfe of Pope Gregory First he speaking of a certaine pious embassage or Legation sent by the said Pope to the excommunicated Henry he saith thus Quam cùm numinis contemptor cultor perâ—idiae excepisset c. VVhich embassage when the Emperour that contemned God followed perfidiousnes had receiued coÌ„trary to the law of NatioÌ„s had beaten with wâ—ips the Legates that brought the same had afflicted theÌ„ with most grieuous iniuries he presently thereupon gathered together at Wormes in Germany a CoÌ„uentiâ—le of excommunicated Schismaticall Bishops against the Pope in which CoÌ„uenticle with the greatest coÌ„tumâ—ly that could be deuised were appointed set forth published those things which Lambertus Schaffnaburge doth relate in his history to wit about the deposing of Pope Gregory c. This is his narration And is not this a good fourth witnâ—sse to ioyne with the former for discrediting of Pope Gregory and may not a man aswell alleage S. Luke against S. Paul as Binius against this Pope in this cause Or might not wee obiect the sacred sufferings and persecutions of that holy Apostle out of S. Luke by the same sort of argumeÌ„ts that M. Morton doth here the conspiracies of the wicked Emperour schismaticall Bishops against Pope Gregory their Apostolicall gouernour though I do not compare the person of Pope Gregory with the person of S. Paul as M. Morton will presently calumniate but the manner of proceding and arguing in their supposed aduersaries the Iew M. Morton But we shall haue occasion to speake more of this in the next point concerning blasphemy for needs he will haue this my reprehension of him not only to be false foolish vnlucky as you haue heard but also blasphemous this point then we must in this last place consider of 139. In the end of my former charge I do set downe an example to shew the absurdity of M. MortoÌ„s disgracing of Pope Gregory out of the writings of Lambertê° Frisingensis by a comparison takeÌ„ out of the new Testament in these words If an enemy said I would discredit both Christ ChristiaÌ„ religion say Your owne Euangelists do recount foule things against him as heere this Minister saith that our Historiographer doth oâ— Pope Gregory namely that he was accused by the Scribes Pharisies for casting out diuells in the power of Beelzebub c. which our Euangelistes do recouÌ„t indeed but do condemne theÌ„ also as false calumnious were not this as good as faithfull a manner of reasoning as this other of T. Morton out of Lambertus Frising against Pope Hildebrand who is by them most
by name excommunicated and denounced for such yet for so much as concerned the guilt of heresy as it is a choice of a particuler sect and difference of ReligioÌ„ from that which the knowne Catholicke Church doth hold and professe I alleaged sundry autheÌ„ticall proofes as well out of the definition of heresy and an hereticke set downe by S. Augustine vnto Honoratus infected with the heresy of the Manicheans out of the same Father against the Donatists defining who is properly an heretike to wit Qui manifestata sibi doctrina Catholicae â—idei resistere maluerit illud quod tenebat elegâ—rit he that after the doctrine of the Catholicke faith generally held is made knowne vnto him shall determine notwithstanding rather to resist and make choice of that which before he held As also I shewed and demonstrated the explication of this definition vnto English Protestants and professors of the English Religion of our dayes out of great variety of other ProÌ„testant Authors of other Countreys who all affirme aâ—d determine that the Religion doctrine of Iohn Caluin which is now most followed in England is formâ—lly and truely heresy consequently the Proâ—essors and manteyners therof must needs be hereticks for which I alleaged not only the Censure oâ— Franciâ—â—us Stancarus a chiefe Protestant Superinâ—endâ—nt in Polonia who saith that they are deploraâ—issimi haereticâ— most desperate hereticks but also the Censure of a whole Lutheran Vniuersitie in Germany named Tubinga whose cheefe Reader of Deuinity Philippus Nicolaus in the name of the whole Vniuersity decreâ—th that Caluinists are daÌ„nable heretikes intituling his booke thus FuÌ„damentorum Caluinianae sectae cum Arianis Nestorianis communium detectio A discouery of the â—ouÌ„dations of the Caluinian sect which are common to them with the Arians and Nestorians In which booke this Doctor proueth throughout many Chapters togeather that Caluinists are no lesse Hereticks then the said Arians Nestorians that they agree with them at least in 17. or 18. articles alleaging also Luthers Authority to the same effect who saith that they are alieni ab Ecclesia Dei Sathanae membra cut of from the Church of God and members of Sathan 7. And after this I added further to this effect I will passe ouer quoth I the testimony of many other learned protestant Ministers Doctors teachers as namely Conradus Sclusselburgius who affirmeth Caluinists To belieue and teach rightly no one article of the Creed as also I will do that of Heshusiê° affirming That their associatioÌ„ is a most blasphemous sacrilegious sect that of Hunnius That it is most damnable the right way to hell that of Ioannes Schutzius That it is the sinke of all wicked heresyes that of Ioannes Modestus that affirmeth Caluinists To be as bad as Iewes Mahomets that of Ioannes Matthias and of Albertus Grauerus and others that affirme all those that follow the doctrine of Caluin to be professed enemyes of Christ. All which I do cyte in my last book against M. Mort. quoting their names works and Chapters years when they wrote more largely particulerly in the pages heere set downe in the margent All which men being chiefe Doctors Readers Preachers or Pastours of our Protestant people such as our ProtestaÌ„t Ministers of EnglaÌ„d hold for their brethreÌ„ against vs that are Catholicks do easely wype away with these their asâ—euerations the childish clamour of M. Morton against Catholiks for holding his CaluiniaÌ„ doctrine to be heresy seing that so many learned graue Protestants inlightened with the spirit of God as they must needs graunt do hold auerre the same 8. And why then had not he answered somwhat to this Charge being so weighty substantiall as it is Why had he not giuen some satisfaction Or at leastwise meÌ„tioned the same in this his last Reply Was not this as necessary a subiect to be handled as to put himself to discusse the wit memory skill and other qualities of his Aduersary Or when do you thinke will he be able to answere this matter Or what substance hath he or may be presumed to haue for making this payment 9. Nay that his substance is small or rather none at all for discharging these debts may well appeare for that he being further pressed by me afterward about the like argument of Iohn Caluins being an hereticke and that most heinous damnable by the publike testimony of his said Protestant brethren the Lutheran Doctors and this not only in the common known controuersies betweene theÌ„ about the Reall presence other Sacraments for which by Luther they were called Sacramentaries but euen about the highest articles of the blessed Trinity Diuinity of Christ equality with his Father Godhead of the Holyghost the like he hath shifted of the same in this his Reply by no lesse silence then the former not so much as naming the matter but in generall termes telling vs that he will pay all his debts in time yet did I vrge him as much as might be to draw froÌ„ him some answere For thus I said vnto him when he had accused al our writers of extreme malignity in ceÌ„suring Caluin Caluinists for heretiks insinuatiâ—g also in his booke of Full satisfaction that the former Lutheran Doctors wherof some had bene obiected before by the moderate answerer had bene corrupted depraued by vs a poore shift you see when their owne bookes are extant in print the places knowne of their printing I told him I say that I would bring against him a new booke of a famous late Lutheran Doctor Reader of Deuinity called Aegidius Hunnius printed at VVittemberg vpon the yeare 1593. which should confirme this and much more My words were these 10. VVe shall heere quoth I with as much breuity as may be bring â—orth the Iudgment of another renowned Protestant Doctor coÌ„curring with the forsaid he being a publike Reader of Deuinity in another famous Vniuersity of Germany namely Wittemberg where Martin Luther himselfe once held the chaire as Caluin did in Geneua this Doctour whose name is Agidius Hunnius in a seuerall Treatise set forth about a dozen yeares gone intituled by him Caluâ—us Iudaizans dedicated vnto one Dauid Pareus a principall Caluinian Doctor setteth downe the argument of his booke thus in the first front therof This booke is to shew saith he that Iohn Caluin hath most detestably presumed to corrupt in â—auour of Iewes Arians the most cleare places testimonies of Scripture concerning the glorious Trinity Deity of Christ of the Holy-ghost aboue all the predictions of Prophets â—or the comming of the Messias his Natiuity passion ascension and sitting at the right haÌ„d of God c. with a cleare confutation of his false corruptioÌ„s therin c. This is the title argument of the booke which he doth prosecute for almost two hundred pages togeather diuiding the same into two
there are conteyned in one First then page 163. The Deuinâ— doth cite the seuerall lawes of William Conquerour out of Roger Houeden parte 2. Annalium in vita Henrici 2. â—ol 381. and by them doth proue that the Conquerour acknowledged the Popes supreme Authority in causes Ecclesiasticall And is not this a legall record And in the next two leaues following he doth cyte aboue twenty diâ—ferent places out of the Canon law and Canonists which though perhaps M. Attorney will not cal legall in respect of his Municipall lawes yet iudiciall records they cannot be dâ—nyed to be Moreouer pag. 245. 246. he doth alleage the testimony of Magna Charta cap. 1. made by king Henry the third as also Charta de â—oresta made vpon the ninth yeare of his raigne Charta de MertoÌ„ made in the 18. of the same Kings raigne as other lawes also of his made vpon the 51. yeare oâ— his Gouernement all in proofe of the Popes iurisdiction and are all legall authorityes And furthermore he doth cyte pag. 248. statut anno 9. Henrici 6. cap. 11. and pag. 262. he citeth againe the said Great Charter and Charter of the Forest made by K. Henry the 3. and confirmed by his sonne King Edward the first diuers tymes And pag. 271. he citeth two lawes anno 1. Edward 3. stat 2. cap. 2. 14. eiusdem statut 3. pro Clero and doth argue out of them for profe of his principall purpose against Syr Edward And how then or with what face doth or can the Knight auouch heere that the said Deuine alleageth no one Act or law of Parlament or other iudiciall record throughout his whole booke doth he remeÌ„ber his owne saying in this his Preface That euery man that writeth ought to be so carefull of setting downe truth as if the credit of his whole worke coÌ„sisted vpoÌ„ the certainty of euery particuler period Doth he obserue this How many periods be there heere false of his But let vs see further Pag. 277. in the life of king Edward the first the said Deuine doth cite an expreâ—se law of King Edward 3. Anno regni 25. as also pag. 283. he doth alleage statut de consult editum anno 24. Edwardi 1. and another Anno 16. Edwardi 3. cap. 5. and all these things are cited by the Deuine before he commeth to treat peculierly of the lyfe of King Edward the third but vnder him after him he doth not alleage as few as 20. legall authorities and statutes of Acts of Parlaments so as for M. Attorney to auouch here so boldly peremptorily as he doth that the Deuine in all his booke did not alleage so much as any one authority eyther out of the coÌ„mon lawes or Acts of Parlament or other legall or iudiciall record is a strange boldeneâ—se indeed And yet he sayth that he found the Author vtterly ignorant and exceeding bold But if he could conuince him of such boldnes as I haue now conuinced himselfe for affirming a thing so manifestly false I should thinke him bold indeed or rather shameles for that heere are as many vntruthes as there are negatiue assertions which is a Nimium dicit with store of witnesses 23. It is another Nimium dicit also yf yow consider it well that which he writeth in the same place that when he looked into the booke euer expecting some answere to the matter he found none at all Wheras he found all that is touched in the former Paragraph and much more which was so much in effect as he saw not what reply he could make therunto which himselfe confesseth a litle before in these wordes saying Expect not from me good Reader any reply at all for I will not answer vnto his Inuectiues and I cannot make any reply at all vnto any part of his discourse yet doth he endeauour to mitigate this also saying That the Deuine answereth nothing out of the lawes of the Realme the only subiect sayth he of the matter in hand And a litle afâ—er againe I will not sayth he depart from the State of the question whose only subiect is the Municipall lawes of this Realme But this reâ—uge will not serue both for that I haue now shewed that the Deuine hath alleagâ—d many testimonies out of the Municipall lawes as also for that this is not true that the question is only about these lawes for that as before hath beene shewed the true state of the question betweene vs is VVhether supreme Ecclesiasticall authority in spirituall afâ—aâ—res did remayne in Queene Elizabeth and her Ancestours by right of their temporall Crownes or in the Bishop of Rome by reason of his primacy in the Chaire of S. Peter which great matter is not to be tryed only as in reason yow will see by the Municipall lawes of England or by some few particuler cases deduced from them but by the whole latitude of diuine and humane proofes as Scriptures Fathers Doctors histories practises of the primitiue Church lawes both Canon and Ciuill and the like as the Deuine doth teach in differeÌ„t occasions of his booke adding further That albeit it should be graunted to Syr Edward that this matter should be discussed by the common Municipall and Statute lawes of England only yet would he remayne wholy vanquished as largely doth appeare by the deduction of the said Deuine throughout all the succession of English Kings from Ethelbert the first Christened to King Henry the 8. that first fell into schisme against the Church of Rome This then was a notorious Nimium dicit 24. Another is when he sayth in reproofe of the Deuines answer to his Reports that the booke is exceeding all bounds of truth and charity full of maledictions and calumniations nothing pertinent to the state of the question and that it becommeth not Deuines to be of a fiery and Salamandrine spirit soming out of a hoat mouth c. which indeed will seeme to any indifferent man a stange passionate exaggeration of Syr Edward exceeding all tearmes of simple truth for that there is nothing found in that booke but temperatly spoken and with respect as it seemeth both to his Office and Person but yet when he saw the exobitant intemperance of the Attorneyes hatred against Catholicks to draw him to such acerbity of bloudy calumniations that he would needes inuolue them all in the heynons cryme of treason by meere sycophancy malicious collections vpoÌ„ false supposed groundes and fictions of Pius quintus his Bull and such like impertinent imputations no meruaile though he were more earnest in the repulsion of such open wronges but yet with that moderation as I perswade my selfe no iniurious or contumelious speach can be alleaged to haue passed from him in all that booke much lesse such inuâ—ctiues as heere M. Attorney chargeth him withall as also with that fierie Salamandrine spirit foming out of a hoat mouth wherein besydes the contumely which he will easily pardon Syr Edward speaketh more
setting downe the same wherin if he had gone about to recall or mislike any part therof as ouer iniurious to Catholicks we should haue accepted therof most gratefully and adioyned with him in the iust reprehension of Pricket as hauing related that speach more maliciously then it was meant against vs but I can discouer no such meaning or moderation in Syr Edward by that he hath written since that time or spoken againe in that place whereof I haue heard by some that were present that he hath borne himselfe no lesse insolently then in the former speach especially bringing in tales against Monks to get applause therby of the vulgar people against that order of Religious men in the Catholike Church whereof you haue heard one example before of the Prior that was feigned to haue gotten by fraud a Gentlemans land in helping him to make his Testament another was of an Abbot that made an inclosure and tooke in a high way within his inclosure and for that there was a rough and rude Country-man that brake downe his inclosure saying that he would passe where his father and grandfather had passed the Abbot being a lustie tall fat and strong knaue sayth Syr Edward desiring to fight hand to hand with this clowne or country-man when he was to repasse that way tooke on a seruing mans apparrel if you will belieue the story went to the place watched his returne ioyned with him in combat and was well beaten by him And then did Syr Edward both laugh hartily and giue God thankes that he had found out such a History to tell them in that place and further he sayd that he was hartily glad that it fell vpon an Abbot And was not this graue matter thinke you for a Iudge to treate in that place and auditory VVhat would the Roman Senate haue thought of their yong Roman Iudge whose imitation it seemeth that Syr Edward in the beginning of his Speach had prefixed vnto himselfe if they had vnderstood that from the Bench and Seate of Iustice euen pro rostris he had vsed such leuity of speach and action as this is 120. But heere now it may be that my L. will be some-what displeased to haue his things published abroad which he did but speake for his priuate pleasure mirth and triumph in his Countrie of Norwich But the fault is his owne in speaking it so lowdely and not obseruing the counsaile of his Honourable friend who hearing him one day oâ—erlash very much as heere is reported against Catholikes said merily but wisely vnto him speake softer my Lord for that otherwise you will be ouerheard beyond the seas But for remedy of this also it seemeth that his Lordship hath thought now vpon a more effectuall way to be free from these admonishments from beyond the seas For in this new last Preface of his after a great reprehension of those that write in these our times saying Quotidie plures quotidie peius sâ—ribunt that euery day more do write and do write worse wherin I doubt not but his owne writings are excepted by his Lordship being also a moderne writer himselfe he coÌ„meth to pronounce this terrible sentence vpon all Catholicke bookes and writings that come from abroad Si quisquam hominum c. Yf any man shall bring into England any of those Bookes which I haue seene lately written from Rome or Romanists or shall by reading seeme to patronize them with his suffrage or with approuing them shall deliuer them to others to be read he must oâ— necessitie â—or the first fault be condeÌ„ned in a Premunire with losse of goods and lands and to be imprisoned during life at the Princes pleasure and for the second he must suffer death as in case of treason This is his denunciation and determination which he prooueth not otherwise in this Preface but only by his owne asseueration It may be that he will go about to prooue it afterward out of some lawes that he is to relate in this his seauenth Part of Reportes and that he will do it as substantially as he prooueth before in his fifth part that Q Elizabeth and her predecessours according to the ancient common-lawes of England had supreme Ecclesiasticall authority Yf he doe somewhat may chance to be sayd to the booke wheÌ„ it shall be seene for hitherto I haue had no view therof at all only I must needs say heere that in wise and indifferent mens iudgmeÌ„t Syr Edward being a writer himselfe against Catholickes and hauing therby prouoked them to answere him as before you haue heard how ioyfull he was when any obiections were made by the Student against his writings and the more saith he the better he hath not prouided well for his credit and honour to go about now to barre all writing on our side by terrour of penalties yea of death it self For this is plainly to prouoke to the field and then to get a proclamation that if his enemy do ouercome him his victory shal be death 121. But I cannot perswade my self that Syr Edward will easily get any such vniust and dishonorable refuge for his defence For either he must procure it to be decreed of new by some moderne law which being so vnreasonable I cannot expect from the wisedoms of so many graue men that must haue voycâ— therin or he will deduce it out of some ancient lawes of England and therin I dare ioyne with him that he is not able to do it 122. VVherefore my counsayle should rather be to Syr Edvvard that either he would cease to prouoke vs by writing or intemperate speaking against Catholickes or take in good part our temperate answers or cause them with like temperance to be confuted by himself or by some on his part or so finally change his course towards vs as we may haue no speciall cause to complayne of him more then of others which were a farre better way in my opinioÌ„ to peace and profit of both parts then by terrour of punishments to seeke to oppresse all Catholicke writings which will be very hard for him to do And when it should succeed he were like to gaine least of all therby For that most probable it is that in such a case they would all turne their pennes against himself insteed of other argument by his meanes prohibited 123. And this is as much as I haue to say about this last Preface which commeth intituled thus Deo Patriae Tibi signifying therby as I comprehend the matter that this seauenth Part of his Reports now come forth is dedicated as seruiceable to all those three to God our Country and the Reader which if it be no otherwise written then the fifth Part that I haue read it may very well be returned againe by the Reader saying Nâ—c Deo nec Patriae nec Mihi It is neyther profitable nor seruiciable to Gods honour nor to our Countrey nor to Me. Not to God for that it impugneth his
A QVIET AND SOBER RECKONING VVITH M. THOMAS MORTON somewhat set in choler by his Aduersary P. R. CONCERNING Certaine imputations of wilfull falsities obiected to the said T. M. in a Treatise of P. R. intituled Of Mitigation some part wherof he hath lately attempted to answere in a large Preamble to a more ample Reioynder promised by him But â—eere in the meane space the said imputations are iustified and confirmed with much increase of new vntruthes on his part returned vpon him againe So as finally the Reckoning being made the Verdict of the Angell interpreted by Daniel is verified of him Daniel 5. vers 27. Appensus es in statera inuentus es minus habens You haue byn weighed in the ballance are found to want weight There is also adioyned a peece of a Reckoning with Syr Edward Cooke now L. Chief Iustice of the CoÌ„mon Pleas about a Nihil dicit some other points vttered by him in two late Preambles to his sixt and seauenth Partes of Reports Permissu Superiorum M. DC IX THE STATE OF THE QVESTION handled in this Booke MAISTER Thomas Morton vpon the yeare 1606. tooke vpon him to write a malicious Disâ—oâ—erie against Catholicks and their doctrine about Rebellion presently vpon the powder-treason and the Pamphlet was soone after confuted and returned vpon himselfe by the Moderate Answerer he replyed with a discourse intituled A full Satisfaction adding therunto another Treatise against Equiuocation To this opposed himselfe P. R. Author of the Treatise tending to Mitigation and handled in the same both the one and other subiect charging him further with many foule faultes of witting falsehood wherunto M. Morton hath exhibited now lastly a large new Preamble with promise of another booke to follow in time that is to say he hath presented a great head without a body and this with no small signes of extraordinary impatience For pacifying wherof P. R. hath takeÌ„ the paines to reuiew oâ—â—er againe the accompts and findeth him farre more faultie then before For that in lieu of clearing old debts he contracteth new and in excusing former falsities he multiplieth many other So as now The chiefe question commeth to be Whether M. Mort. in the cause he defendeth can write truely or no whether his falshood therin be voluÌ„tary or necessarie or rather both that is to say voluntary in respect of himselfe that might haue omitted them and necâ—ssarie in regard of his cause that could not be defended without themâ— and consequently in different respects both voluntary and necessary In which point M. Morton holdeth the negatiue I the affirmatiue The Reader shall see the proofes of both sides A BRIEF NOTE OF THE CHAPTERS VVHICH ARE set forth more largely in the end of this Booke with their seuerall Paragraphes THE first conteyneth the Answere to M. Morton his first Inquiry about the VVit Learning Memorie c. of his Aduersary P.R. 2 The second answereth the secoÌ„d Inquiry about some points touching the subiect of Rebellion and Equiuocation 3 The third haÌ„dleth a part of the third Inquiry about many falsities obiected by M. Morton against Cardinall Bellarmine 4 The fourth discusseth like imputations of falsities obiected by him against his Aduersary P. R. 5 The fift examineth how substaÌ„tially M. Morton endeauoureth to â—â—â—are himselfe from many wilfull vntruthes obiected against him by P.R. 6 The sixt layeth forth a great number of vntruthes obiected to M. Morton which he pretermitteth without answere or mention 7 The seauenth wherin are haÌ„dled diuers other sorts of voluntary omissions of M. Morton aswell in defending himself as the credit of his Clients commended vnto him and namely of Syr Edward Cooke now Lord Chiefe Iustice. 8 The eight treateth diuers seuerall points with the sayd Syr Edward Cooke about two new Prefaces of his lately set forth in print 9 The ninth returning to M. Morton againe layeth togeather another choice number of new falsities and falshoods made in excuse of the old 10 The tenth and last handleth twelue new Challenges made by M. Morton after the Victory lost There is added for an Appendix in the end a Case of Equiuocation newly written from England to be resolued about the false Oath of two Ministers VVherin there is mention also made of D. Kings Sermon at the Court vpon the fiâ—th of Nouember 1608. Cyprian lib. 4. Ep. 9. A pud prophanos extra Ecclesiam positos esse aliud non potest nisi mens praua fallax lingua odia venenata sacrilega mendacia Idem lib. 1. Ep. 3. ad Cornelium Haec est verè dementia non cogitare nec sentire quòd mendacia non diu fallant noctem tamdiu esse quamdiu illucescat dies clarificato autem die sole oboâ—to luci tenebras caliginem cedere Hilarius lib. de Trinit Haeretici cùm stultè mentiantur stultiùs tamen in mendacij sui defensione sapiunt THE EPISTLE DEDICATORY TO THE VNIVERSITIES OF ENGLAND MVCH more then one yeare is not yet past learned CouÌ„try-men since I preseÌ„ted vnto you a Treatise intituled of Mitigation in answere of an other most bitterly writteÌ„ by M. Thomas Morton Miniâ—â—er about Rebellion Equiuocation In which Treatise of myne besydes the two said poynts of principall argument handled at large especially the later as more capable of varietie in the Treatise therof a great multitude of falsities were layd open as vttered by M. Morton and those so frequent grosse and palpable as they must needes be thought to haue beene both willfull and witting the censure wherof notwithstanding I was content to remitt vnto yow as presuming more of the integrity of your iudgments in poynts of learning and matter of fact then distrusting the sequele of your vnequall affections by reason of our difference in religion 2. This Treatise M. Morton perusing fynding himselfe as it seemeth not a litle strayned therein was carried therby into so great exorbitant a streame of passion as neyther he could stay himselâ—e from answering somewhat out of hand therby to preueÌ„t the Readers preiudice as himselfe confesseth nor yet daring to ioyne yssue vpon my booke and argument therof as it lay did after a strange new fashionâ— deuise to set forth a Preamble for some present remedy accompanied with a promise of a larger booke Reioynder to ensue afterwards And I do call this a strange deuise not only for that I haue not seene the same often practized by any writer lightly except Syr Edward Cooke who perhaps by this mans imitation hath answered of late with a Preface of lesse then foure leaues in quarto his Aduersaries booke of more then two hundred against him but also for that in this Preamble which inlargeth it selfe to aboue two hundred twentie pages there is not the tenth part bestowed vpoÌ„ the two chiefe Questions of Rebellion Equiuocation but rather vpon other matters subiects framed by himselfe of nâ—w wheâ—of thâ— most may iusâ—ly be deâ—med wholy
that he would allwayes so sett downe the clause of Reseruation in Latin that the simple Reader should not vnderstand it no more then simple men could vnderstand Aristotles Philosophy in which manner I found it put downe but once indeed throughout his whole booke to witt in the place before mentioned that is to say wholy in Latin for thus he writeth comming to the said clause of Reseruation Loquor enim Latine ne Idiotae ansam sibi accipiant nequiter mentiendi vt quis teneatur illud detegere which wordes he Englisheth not and consequently might be some veile to the ignorant not to vnderstand himâ— but in all other places though he put in often tymes I knew not this or that vt tibi dicam vt tibi reuelem c. yet doth he so vtter in English all the rest of the cases proposed as the simplest man way vnderstand the same and consequently I hold them for vttered in English not in Latin nor any way to be like therin to the EditioÌ„ of Aristotles Philosophy whervnto for this pretended obscurity depth he compareth these his wise Disputes So as in this his sense I said truly that I â—ound him to vtter the matter but once to my remembrance wholy in Latin in such sort us the English Reader could not vnderstand him aboue 40. tymes perhaps in English and this is more then needed in so trifling a cause Let vs come to the conclusion 21. The Reckoning of this accompt with M. MortoÌ„ must then be that he hauing contradicted himselfe manifestly in three seuerall pointes of this Paragraph as before you haue seene and I in none that he can proue my Memory hath not beene so bad therin â—s he would haue men belieue and if it had byn yet â—ere it but errour of Memory and not of VVill and coÌ„â—â—quently without any malice or fraud for that there â—as no interest And so though M. MortoÌ„ could proue his errour obiected against me as he cannot yet is â—e farre froÌ„ prouing any thing to his purpose of wilâ—â—ll and witting falshood wherof is our principall â—â—ntention as aâ—ter shall appeare And of this followâ—â—h agayne that it is but lost time and labour to conâ—â—nd about these trifles which M. Morton bringeth in 〈◊〉 entertaine his Reader as though he said somwhat â—heras in deed he doth but fly the chiefe matter to handled for the small confidence that he hath in 〈◊〉 cause Now then let vs passe to an other skirmish 〈◊〉 small importance as this AGAINST THE Learning of P. R. especially in Logicke §. III. â—HE title of this Paragraph is set downe by M. Morton in these wordes An argument of P. R. hi◠〈◊〉 of learning in Logicke wherin he hath prouoked all Vniuersiâ—â— in the world to laugh at him in the point of Syllogizing A â—â—rnefull accusation as you see and to frame this arâ—â—ment against my skill in Logicke he hath made a â—â—pe of aboue 240. leaues in my booke from the forâ—er place of his precedent cauill against my Memory and â—â—e very title of the Paragraph it selfe doth shew â—hat he was in choler when he wrote it wherby 〈◊〉 hath bene drawne to bring that into iudgment of â—ll Vniuersities of the world about a certayn false Silâ—ogisme of his which I remitted only to the iudgmeÌ„t of his owne Vniuersitie of Cambridge both for the matter and forme therof neyther of them being defensible with any colour of truth and yet hath he taken the matter in hand with such eagernâ—sse as he presumeth to make this generall appeale I daâ—e presume to make a generall Appeale saith he to Cambridge Oxford Rhemes Rome and to all Vniuersities whether of Protestantes or Romanists whether Christian or Pagan yea vnto his owne hiâ—ling boyes Sophisters who P. R. sayth are able to make syllogismes in one moneth though the text in the Treatise of Mitigation by himselfe heere alleadged saith not one but 4. moneths I do chalenge sayth he P. R. for his false syllogisme willing if he dare that heerupon we venture our degrees which we haue taken in the Schooles c. Do you see the mans eagernes choler But heere I do intreat him if euer els where that he stay himselfe that we make a quiet sober reckoning of this matter and then we shall see who is like to leeâ—e or gayne by the accompt and where the spirit of truth is fouÌ„d which is or ought to be the principall end of this Inquiry and not vaunting challenging 23. First then that the matter may be vnderstood wherupon the controuersie grew concerning M. Mortons false argument syllogisme which himselfe concealeth for the most part in latin much lesse of my speach then was necessarie foâ— explication therof the Reader must know that he taking vpon him to impugne all vse of Equiuocation both in speach oath setteth downe these two propositions as the foundatioÌ„s of his worke the first That euery equiuocation by a mentall reseruation is not a hidden truth but a grosse lye The second That euery Equiuocation whether mentall or verball if it be vsed in an oath to any person whatsoeuer though it be no lye in it selfe yet is it an abhominable profanation of that sacred institution of God Of which two propositions the first is refuted largely by me throughout eyght Paragraphes together in my Treatise of EquiuocatioÌ„ this as well by euident testimonies of Scriptures as also practice of Saintes and other manifeâ—t proofes reasons The second is discusâ—ed in the 9. other ensuâ—â—g Paragraphes by like authorityes examples and arguments After all which P. R. commeth to examine M. Mortons arguments which he vsed for confirmation of his said later proposition which was â—ound to coÌ„sist in this false principle That euery man to whome we sweare by God who is competent Iudge of all is made also therby competent Iudge ouer the swearer in such sort as the said swâ—arâ—r is bound in conscience to sweare according to the intention of him to whome the Oath is made he being otherwise neuer so incompetent a â—udge vioâ—ent or vnlawfull examiner which being proued to â—e an apparant false conclusion for that otherwise eâ—ery thiefe that forceth a true man to sweare by God where his money lyeth byndeth him also to sweare sincerely directly to the sayd thiefes intention P.R. taketh in hand to examine M. Mortons first principall argument touching the same His Wordes are these which I shall set downe as before by way of charge and after we shall see the discharge and so peaceably make vp the Reckoning in the most frendly manner wee may The Charge giuen by P. R. against M. Mortons Syllogisme 24. The absurdity and folly of this second proposition say I appearing so manifestly in itselfe as it doth by our precedent proofes what should we staÌ„d to examin the argumeÌ„ts reasoÌ„s that may be brought for it by so fond
Thâ— Chaldean paraphrase hath it thus Be astonished wonder you are terâ—ified and do maruaile you are drunke but not with wine The old latin translation both of S. Hierome and before him speaketh thus Be astonished and maruaile wauer yee and reele you are drunke but not with wyne you are moued but not with dronkenesse 70. These are the ancientest textes both of Heâ—rew Greeke Chaldy and Latin out of all which 〈◊〉 would pray M. Morton quietly soberly without passion to forme and frame this his predominant â—entence against Catholicks Stay your selues and wonâ—er they are blind and make you blynd Is there any such â—hing in this verse He would fayne for shew of â—ome defence help himselfe also of the next verse foâ—â—owing which is the tenth and sayth thus as himâ—elfe traÌ„slateth it Because the Lord mingled for you the spirit 〈◊〉 slumber he will shut your eyes he will couer your Prophets â—nd chiefe-ones which see visions But what is this to the â—urpose He cyted but the ninth verse and neyâ—her in this nor in the tenth that eâ—sueth as you see â—s conteyned his sentence oâ— staying our selues to see bâ—â—nd men make other men blynd And wheras he runneth to S. Hieroms CoÌ„mentaries and those of Hector Pintus where they apply some words of the later verse to the blindnesse of the Scribes and Pharisies it is nothing to our purpose for they iustifie not his sentence and poesy taken out of the ninth verse and much lesse do they go about to shew hereby as he doth that Catholickes are blynd in respect of Protestants and do make other men blynd which is his purpose to proue And it is to be noted that sentences prefixed for posyes ought to be cleare not so forced and wrested as this is which was the cause that I noted it and M. Morton can no way iustifie the allegation therof in reall truth and substance as now you haue heard Other contumelious speachâ—s of his I let passe as meere scratchings and scoldings indeed and shall take in hand the view of another complaynt against me noe lesse feeble and impertinent then this WHAT M. MORTON alleadgeth against the Charitie of P. R. §. VI. THE tytle of this Paragraph in M. Morton is layd forth in these wordes An argument of P. R. his kind of charity attended with a triumphant falshood And this he saith for that I had reprehended him in my booke of Mitigation for a place cyted out of a treatise of Alexander Carerius Doct. of the Canon law in Padua which he wrote of late de Potestate Romani Pontificis wherin after cyting of many other writers whome he saith to be of his opinion he addeth the testimony of one Celsus Mancinus saying Nuperrimâ— verò Celsus Mancinus in tractatu de Iuribus Principatuum c. But last of al Celsus Mancinus doth hold the same opinion with vs in his Treatise of the Rights of Principalityes c. Which wordes M. Morton alleadging and making his aduantage of them he was noted by me for two differences from the booke of Carerius printed in Italie by direction of the Authour himself first that after the title de potestate Romani Pontificis was added in M. Mortons booke aduersus impios politicos et nostri temporis haereticos which addition was not in my copy of Carerius owne booke 72. The second that he had Nuperrimè verè Celsus Mancinus in steed of nuperrimè verò which being contrary to the first edition which I had of Carerius his booke and seing no reason why I should suspect it to be otherwise in any other later impression I did lay it to his charge especially for that I did see him abuse it â—gregiously to his aduantage as hath byn said as though Carerius had ridicâ—lously exalted his witnesse Mancinus by naming him verè Celsus truly â—â—fty whereas his meaning was but only to say that â—elsus was his Christian name And had I not reaâ—â—n to note such a slippery shift deuised by M. Morton 〈◊〉 a scoffe against a Catholike learned Authour â—hat lacke of charitie can he find heerin â—3 But now M. Morton will cleere him selfe and â—roduceth to this purpoâ—e another edition printed 〈◊〉 Cullen that hath these points as he â—yteth them â—hich edition though I haue not seene nor heard 〈◊〉 before yet do I thinke it meet to giue credit to 〈◊〉 affirmation nor will I offer him that iniuri◠〈◊〉 to doubt therof especially for so much as he saith 〈◊〉 he hath shewed the same to many friendes of 〈◊〉 naming also the yeare and forme in which it is â—â—inted All which being graunted that in this 〈◊〉 Cullen impression the addition of contra haeretiâ—â—s c. may haue bin added which was not in mine 〈◊〉 doth this inferre nothing against me nor my â—haritie For that where I saw a defect I noted 〈◊〉 nor could I learne of any other edition nor suâ—pect that if there were or might be yet thaâ—â—here would be cause to alter the title of his first ediâ—ion which himselfe ouerlooked so as this hath 〈◊〉 least scratch against me 74. But now for the second point obiected of verè for verò though M. Morton do alleadge in like maÌ„ner for his excuse the Authority or rather errour of his CulleÌ„ editioÌ„ yet can he not so easely discharge himselfe therof for that the very contexture of speach must needes argue to his conscience that it should be verò and not verè for that otherwise there should haue byn no apt sense nor any coniunctiue particle to connect the testimony of Celsus Mancinus to the former The great letter C. also in the beginning of Celsus if this be not in like manner altered in M. Mortons edition froÌ„ the original must needs haue shewed vnto him that it was no nowne adiectiue but a proper name of a man and consequently must be ioyned with verò and not with verè 75. And fynally if the thing had byn doubtfull or might haue byn as hardly it could to any indifferent or iudicious reader yet ought not he nor could with a good conscience vse the same for an insultation sâ—offe against two such learned men as Carerius and Mancinus are for these are his wordes Carerius citeth another called Câ—lsus by interpretation high or lofâ—y and therfore ensignes him with verè Celsus as truly so named and so truly he may be if wee iudge him by the loftines of his stile and Conclusion Thus farre his scoffe which for so much as to me it seemed to stand vpon the voluntarie mistaking of verè for verò and so it must still albeit he fell vpon an erroneous print I had iust causâ— to repell the said scorne as I did with some acrimony of speach but yet nothing comparable to the excessiue bitternes of M. Morton who condemneth me not only of Malice but also of madnes for my reprehension intituling his whole Paragraph as you haue heard against my
of the speach yet some may when the hearer hath authority to oblige in conscience the speaker to answer directly to his meaning and to vtter truth as hath â—yn declared And with this wee might end but that we may not let passe a contradiction or two which offer themselues in this his speach For in the â—eginning of this argument as you haue heard he writeth thus As we heere find a woman making a lye to S. â—eter a competent Iudge so we read that S. Peter made a lye â—o a woman an examiner incompetent And for this he ciâ—eth Matth. 26. and yet in his former booke of Full saâ—isfaction he wrote thus if you remeÌ„ber that the maid â—o whom S. Peter swore was coÌ„petent inough to heare a true oath â—f he had bin as ready to sweare truly So as there he made â—er competent and heere incompetent which of â—hem he will stand vnto now I know not although â—t seemeth that he is more bound to stand to the first â—hat she was S. Peters coÌ„petent Iudg or examiner for â—hat he bringeth it for a proofe of his maior propoâ—itioÌ„ in that famous syllogisme of six termini which â—hen he made and now cannot nor so much as atâ—empteth to defend as before you haue seene in which the maior was this The competency of God by whoÌ„ we sweare maketh euery one competent Iudges and hearers to â—home we sweare Whereunto if we would adioine â—his minor but S. Peter sware by God vnto this maide the conclusion will follow in good forme ergo she was a competent Iudge and consequently also a competent examiner for that euery competent Iudge hath likewise lawfull authority to examine So that you see that M. Morton there did not only affirme it but proue it also by syllogisme that she was S. Peters lawfull Iudg nay he held it for so certaine that he did set it downe for a proofe of his said maior propositioÌ„ thus The maior saith he is true for that our Sauiour in auouching truth held Pilate for a competent Iudg although he did not iâ—ridicè but falsely proceed S. Paul in his cause appealed to Cesars Tribunall seat who was a Pagan Iacob did couenant â—ith Laban an idolater And the mayd to whome S. Peter swore was coÌ„petent inough to heare a true oath if he had bene as readie to sweare truly In which words you see that he affirmeth the maid to haue bene competent by that S. Peter did sweare by God vnto her and therby pretendeth to proue his maior proposition that the competency of God by whome we sweare maketh euery one coÌ„petent Iudge to whome we sweare And yet within two lines after he saith againe but she was no lawfull examiner and Pilate was a partiall Iudge so that denying her to be lawfull examiner and yet to be competent Iudge is a plaine contradiction in it selfe For that as hath beene said whosoeuer is competent Iudge hath power also thereby to examine for that otherwise he could not iudge of the truth wherof he hath noâ— authority to examine so as the maides case seemeth very troublesome to M. Morton no lesse then she was importune to S. Peter But let vs see the residue of the examples how they make to M. Mortons purpose for proofe of his maior 37 The point which they should prooue is this that whosoeuer sweareth to another by God doth therby make him or her to whome he sweareth his lawfull and competent Iudge The fondnesse of which assertion though we haue sufficiently layd open before in our Treatise of Mitigation by sundrie reasons and examples yet shall we heere againe take the paines to examine seuerally in a word or two his other three examples as we haue done now that of the maid His first is of Pilate Our Sauiour saith he in auouching truth held Pilate for a competent Iudge But now what of this Did our Sauiour make Pilate his competent Iudge by swearing to him by God How can he proue it Or who would suppose or inferre this but M. Morton His second example is S. Paul in his cause appealed to Cesars Tribunall seat But this is lesse to the purpose then the former for that heere was no oath at all of the Apostle wherby Cesar might be constituted his competent Iudge His third example is of Iacobs couenaÌ„t with Laban which was an idolater and is most of all from the purpose and little lesse indeed then ridiculous for that neither Iacobs couenant with Laban nor Labans with Iacob for the couenant was reciprocall did make either Laban to be competent Iudge to Iacob nor Iacob to Laban but both of them remained â—as before though bound in faith and promise the one to the other for perfourmance of that mutuall frendship which they had promised but yet without any superiority of being Iudges the one to the other as euerie man in common sense doth see and consequently M. Mortons maior propositioÌ„ that euery man is made our Iudgeâ— to whome we sweare is not proued to be true by any of these foure instances nor by theÌ„ alltogeather Let vs passe then to his third His third Argument confuted 38. Thirdly saith he in mentall EquiuocatioÌ„ P. R. saith that the clause of reseruaton mixed with the outward speach maketh but one proposition which is as true in the mind of the speaker as if it were wholy deliuered in the outward speach As for exaÌ„ple I am no Priest mixed with this clause coÌ„ceyued in mind to tell it you is as true in the Iudgment of P. R. as if it had bene without reseruation fully expressed with the mouth saying I am noe Priest to tell it you Now then say P. R. for I meane to fetter you in your owne shackles the woman when she sayd to S. Peter I haue sold it but for so much if she had reserued in her mind this clause to giue it to you either had it bene by vertue of reseruation â— truth or els notwithstanding that reseruation it had bene a lye If the clause of reseruation might haue made it a truth then hath not P. R. said truth in concluding that no clause of reseruation could saue it from a lie If contrariewise the tricke of reseruation could not saue it from a lye then doth not the reserued clause to tell it you being mixed with the outward speach I am no Priest make vp one true proposition and consequeÌ„tly it must be concluded of the Preistly Equiuocation as is heere by P. R. confessed of the womans vz. that noe clause of reseruation can saue their speach from a lye For if she had said vnto S. Peter in plaine words I â—aue sould it but for so much â—â— giue it in common or such like this euery one knoweth had beene a true speach yet she saying I sould it for sâ— much with mentall reseruation reseruing in her mind to giue it in coÌ„mon or to tel it vnto you was
call it a Mitâ—gation was very ominous and vnluckie to them whome specially it laboureth to deâ—end wheroâ— yet he alleageth no one proofe in the world but only the May be before mentioned to wit that I said that albeit dangers may fall out as in alâ— other Common-wealthes so yet may Protestants and Catholickes liue togeather in cyuill vnioÌ„ and dutifull obedience if they will and be permitted And then from this assertion he leapeth presently to another saying that my foresaid Treatise of Mitigation hath betrayed my whole cause both in the one and the other question of Rebellion and Equiuocation for proofe whereof he hath no other argument as now you haue heard but only for the former of Rebellion certayne fond deuised impossibilityes against the said may be And for the other question of Equiuocation he hath only the case of the poore lying-woman Saphyra which yet he esteemeth so highly to make for him as he dareth pronounce that it ouerthroweth my whole defence of mentall Equiuocation and that so euidently as no wit of man can possibly excuse the same Which vehemeÌ„t hyperbolicall asseueratioÌ„ of his I assure my selfe will seeme to the iudicious Reader that hath takeÌ„ a view of the triall past to proceed of so litle wit of man as it may scarce possibly be defended from plainfolly 50. Well then this being all that is answered to the substance of my booke we must passe to certaine accidents therof which are sundry grieuous imputations of false dealing laied to M. Mortons charge which I did obiter and as it were by the way lay opeÌ„ in my Treatise thereby to shew the weakenes and misery of his cause which forced him a maÌ„ otherwise much louing truth as himselfe euery where protesteth to fall into such inexplicable labyrinths of grosse absurdities as few men before him haue done And for that these accidents did seeme perhaps to touch him more neerly then the substance of the controuersy it selfe for that they are more sensible in the Readers eye and eare therfore he hath principally adressed himselfe in this his Preamblatory-reply to euacuate or infringe some of these imputations but with what successe the euent it selfe will shew in the ensuiâ—g Chapters THE THIRD CHAPTER ANSVVERING TO M. MORTONS THIRD INQVIRY CONCERNING falsities obiected by him though falsely against Catholicke writers but especially against Card. Bellarmine wherof no one can be proued PREFACE IN the former two Chapters the â—eader hath now taken a view of their seuerall subiects and arguments and in the first what light skirmishes M. MortoÌ„ thought best to make for some triall of his valour in answering vpon sundry small quarrels picked â—ut heere and there from different places of my whoâ—e Treatise and with what successe the same hath bene by him performed In the second he hath seene two short assaults about the two mayne matters in controuersy oâ— Rebellion Equiuocation which being conteyned but in two small Paragraphes and treating only two single obiections do easily shew how little store of substantiall reply M. Morton hath to so large a Treatise as mine was But we must expect the residue of full complement in his promised larger Reioynder 2. Now in the meane space wee are to examine three or foure other poyntes which he handleth in this his last Preamble-Reply especially about his owne defence for that he being deeply charged in my booke for manifold vntrue dealing in his writings which oftentimes was such as could not proceed so much of error or mistaking but sauoured of willfull and witting deceiptfullnes that commonly is called malice which poynt for that I noted and vrged often both against himselfe and against many other of his profession and this by great number and variety of examples aâ—d iâ—â—tances he feeling himself touched not a little in credit with this matter as it may seeme thought good after due deliberation to take this course of remedying the matter First to obiect by way of recrimination diuers falsityes though farre vnlike against sundry Catholicke wryters and namely against Caâ—d Bellarmine And then againe the same against me And in the third place to shape an answere to some of the foresayd vntruthes wherwith I had charged him such as you may imagine he thought himselfe best able somwhat to shaddow or disguise leaping ouer the rest of most importance as after you shall perceaue So as these three points are now to be handled in this and the next two ensuing Chapters 3. And first for an entrance to this matter he indeauoureth at the beginning to excuse himselfe froÌ„ malice against Catholicks in these words From the imputation of malice against the persons of men saith he if I should need the testimony of man my aduersaries may acquit me who haue acknowledged in me better measures by their owne experience D. VVri M. Const. M. Ga. I haue halfe iniured theÌ„ with halfe naming them but I hope they will pardon me this wrong knowing that it is not spoken in exprobration to them but for iustificatioÌ„ of my selfe c. So he But I see not why he needeth to excuse â—imselfe from exprobration which euer supposeth â—rue merits and benefits truly obiected which how â—arre M. Morton may obiect to these Catholicke men â—y him heere named I know not But howsoener 〈◊〉 be it litle maketh to the purpose for that the â—â—putation of malice was not in respect of his hatred â—gainst this or that particuler man as to their perâ—â—ns but against their cause that in such a bloudy â—â—rt of sycophancy as included all the persons of that â—eligion and therfore his fawning vpon two or â—â—ree in externall words and countenance either in â—erson or els where whiles in his chaÌ„ber he sought 〈◊〉 writing his spitefull infamous and virulent lyâ—â—g bookes to oppresse them all cut their throats â—â—â—is measure was not good but may iustly be called a â—alicious measure and yet was this M. Mortons measure â—r so much as no man did euer write so maliciously 〈◊〉 my knowledg as he nor in so odious an argumeÌ„t â—â—d iealous a tyme. â—â— Moreouer malice doth not only consist in haâ—ed to particuler persons as heere M. Morton would â—eme to insinuate by his answere but in crafty and â—eceiptfull dealing against charity conscience and â—eason especially in cyting false witnesse of Authors â—gainst Catholicks and their Religion as he is conâ—inced often to haue done And therfore wheras in â—he end of this his defence from malice he saith â—hat he must expostulate with Catholicks according to the Apostles example saying Am I your enemâ— because I tell you truth which sentence liked him so well as he would needs put the same also for his poesy in the first front of his booke the Catholicks will answere no Syr Yow are not our enemy â—or telling truth which yow do very seldome in any matter of controuersy betweâ—ne vs and you but for making many a false and pernicious lye And so the note
Secondâ—y for that if he had vttered the matter plainly â—s it lieth in Bellarmine he had marred his sleight of â—unning to Free-will graâ—ted by Caluin in the first â—reation of man for that it is euident by these â—wo Fathers that they speake of Free-will after â—he fall of Adam Therfore it was necessary for him â—o conceale their names which yet was fraudulent â—2 The third fraude is that wheras Cardiâ—all Bellarmine doth alleadge two poynts wherein â—he Protestantes of our tyme but especially Calâ—in doe concurre with the Manichean heresie the one that which hath bene sayd of the denying of Free-will the other in reprehending and condemning Abraham Sampson Sara Rebecca Iudas Machabaeus Sephora c. and other Saintes of the old Testament as S. Augustine testifieth that the Maniâ—â—eans did and Bellarmine sheweth that Caluin doth hold the very same prouing by multiplicity oâ— placeâ— quoted out of his workes M. Mort. passeth euer with silence this latter prooâ—e as vnanswerable and yet will haue vs thinke that Bellarmine did iniure Caluin in noting him with the Manichean heresy which is as much as if a man hauing two writings to shew for a suite in Law the Attorney of the aduerse part should suppresse the one which is most playne and euident and cauill about the other And this shall suffice for this third obiection Now let vs passe to the other more notable which was promised before THE FOVRTH OBIECTION against Card. Bellarminâ— about preteÌ„ded false imputation of Arianisme vnto Protestants §. X. BELLARMINE saith he accuseth M. Bullinger of Arianisme because of the sentence tres sâ—nt 〈◊〉 statu sed gradu c. notwithstaâ—ding he knew this was the very sentence of â—ertullian and is therfore â—ls where expounded as orthodoxall and iustifyable by himselfe If this be so notable an obiection with M. Morton as before he vaÌ„ted it is asigne that he hath grâ—at penury of notable ones for that this is so notable as it is indeed nothing but that only necessity and penury did driue M. Morton to produce it and so it seemeth that himselfe did esteeme of it by his obscure propounding tâ—eroâ— as though he would not haue it well vnderstood albeit he terme it neuer so noâ—able â—4 For better conceauing wherof the Reader â—ust know that Cardinall Bellarmine in the Preface to â—is fiue bookes de Christo proposing dyuers sortes of â—duersaryes among our moderne Protestants that â—â—ther openly or secretly did impugne the diuinity â—f Chriâ—t or some article therunto belonging after â—e naming of many others he writeth thus of â—ullinger Henricum Bullingerum saith he non puduit â—ibere c. Henry Bullinger that was the Successor 〈◊〉 Vldericuâ— Zuinglius was not ashamed to write in â—is booke of the Scripture that ther are three persons 〈◊〉 the Godhead non statu sed gradu non substantia sed 〈◊〉 non potestate sed specie diâ—â—erentes diâ—â—ering not in â—ate but degree not in substance but in forme not 〈◊〉 power but in kynd which truly saith Bellarâ—ine the Arians themselues would scarce haue durst 〈◊〉 auouch â—5 Thus wrote Bellarmine and what now saith â— Morton against it He knew saith he that this was â—e very sentence of Tertullian True it is but euery â—hing that is in Tertullian who wrote before the Councell of Nice wherin matters and formes of â—peach about the persoÌ„s of the blessed Trinity were â—â—ore exactly discussed is not fit nor secure for a â—euyne of our times to follow And if M. Morton had â—onsidered well oâ— the paradoxes of Tertullian gatheâ—ed together by learned Pamelius in his last edition 〈◊〉 wherfore this is one and the last of all and censured â—or dangerous by the said Author and other learned men it is likely that he would not so â—ashly haue obiected the same to Bellarmine for reprehending it in Bullinger 86. But M. Morton bringeth a twofould argument for ground of his challenge the one in latin out of Gregorius de Valentia as though he had alleadged the foresaid sentence out of Tertullian with approuing or at least wise not improuing the same For thus is the matter aâ—â— aged by M. Morton in his margent out of â—alentia Sic 〈◊〉 â—ertullianus in libro aduersus Praxeâ—m tres sunt non statu sed gradu non substanâ—ia sed â—orâ—a non potestate sed spâ—cie Gregor Valentia Iesuita l. de Vnitate Trinitate cap 9. And then in the English text he saith as yow haue now heard that Bellarmine himselfe els where in his works expoundeth the same sentence of Tertullian as orthodoxall and iustifyable 87. But in both these instances are fraudes on M. Mortons behalfe and no such sincere dealing as were requisite among men that handled good causes For that first there is no such narration oâ— Tertullians sentence in Valentia as heere is set downe without reprehension therof nor is Tertullian so much as named by him in the place alleaged but a greiuous reprehension is vsed by him against Bullinger for vsing the said sentence as orthodoxall Bullingerus Sacramentarius saith he tres in Diuinitate personas differre dicit non statu sed gradu c. Bullinger the Sacramentary affirmeth that there are three persons in the Deity which differ nâ—t in state but degree not in substance but forme not in pâ—â—er but kind by which wordes he doth not only ouerthrow thâ— Godhead of the Sonne but euen the whole mystery of the most â—oly Trinity So Valentia And this was his Iudgement of that sentence which M. Morton would haue his Reader thinke that Valentia had allowed of as of an orthodoxall senteÌ„ce of TertulliaÌ„ Can there be any more wilfull witting fraud then this 88. Now as for the allowance therof els where by Cardinall Bellarmine himselfe M. Morton doth oâ—â—er him great abuse for he neuer alloweth any where of that sentence as it standeth wholy in his booke against Praxea or as it is accepted and vsed by Bullinger but only taken in hand in his first booke de Christo to interprete in good sense certaine speaches of Tertullian obiected by Arians and Trinitarians against the Godhead of Christ as though he had fauoured them therin coÌ„ming to a place cited out of the same booke against Praxea where he saith Dum siliâ—m agnosco sâ—cundâ—m à Patre desendo for so much as I acknowledge the Sonne I do defend him as second after the Father wherby the Hereticks would proue the Sonne not to be equall to his Father Cardinall Bellarmine answering to this place saith that the Sonne is called second by Tertullian not because he is inferiour or not equall to the Father but only according to the order of beginning or origen for that the Sonne is originally of the Father and by this occasion he expoundeth also the first two words of the foresaid senteÌ„ce statu et non gradu saying that per gradum intelligit ordineÌ„ personarum Tertullian by degree
in the life of the Popes Zepheâ—inus Innocentius writeth that the decree that was made by Zepherinus for receauing the communion at least once a yeare about Easter was extended also to Confession by Pope Innocentius which only is found written by Platina saith Bellarmine and not by any other Ecclesiasticall historiographer adding further these wordes Sed neque Platina c. But neither Platina did write those liues of Popes by publike authority nor out oâ— publike records in such sort as they may be called our Annales and oftentimes is he reprehended by our Historiographers for that he fell into diuers errours in his history by following of Martinus Polonus and yet doth not Platina say that which Caluin saith that there was no law extant about the necessity of Confâ—ssion before the time of Zepherinus and Innocentius but only that the certaine time when and how often a man should confesse and communâ—cate was then prescribed more in particuler 122. So as heere you see Platina doth make nothing for M. Caluin and lesse for M. Morton who dealt fraudulently according to his fashion and neuer commonly doth otherwise when reciting in his margent the latin text of Bellarmine he cut out the words immediatly following Vt annales nostri dici possint Platina did not write the liues of Popes as they may be called our Annales And albeit Plaâ—ina saith in the Preface of his history vnto the Pope Sixtus 4. who liued somwhat aboue 100. yeares past that he had coÌ„manded him to wriâ—e the Popes liues yet this proueth not that his collection is an Authenticall history of our Church or so well performed by him as all things therin contained must be held for exact truth and we bound to accept of the same which is all in effect that Cardinall Bellarmine auoucheth And who would haue brought in this for an example of wilfull falshood but only M. Morton Nay who would haue made oftentation therofâ— saying that he findeth greater difficulty to subtract then to multiply such examples but himself that seemeth not to discâ—rne betweene saying somewhat in words and nothing in effect But yet we must passe a little further to see an impertinency or two more THE FOVRTH Obiection against Cardinall Bellarmine touching false allegations about Purgatorie §. XVI AFTER long prying vpon Cardinall Bellarmines bookes being aboue 60. in number and the notes therout gathered which before you haue heard M. Morton commeth at length to seeke some quarrels at that which the Cardinall hath written in defence and demonstration of the doctryne of Purgatorie and saith that he will end with that matter His wordes are these I will now saith he confine my selfe within the precincts of but one onely controuersye concerning Purgatorie where Bellarmine distinguishing of the diuers acceptions of the word Fire in the writings of ancient Fathers concludeth that when the Fathers speake of the Fyre of the day of doome when all the world shall be of a flame they meane not Purgatory-fire which soules suffer immediatly after death After this he alledgeth most playne places as he calleth them out of the Fathers for proofe of Purgatorie Amongst others in his first booke de Purgatorio S. Ambrose serm 20. in Psalm 118. for proof oâ— Purgatory-fyre which he himselfe confesseth in his next booke not to be meant of Purgatorie So he dealeth also with S. Hillary vrging his sentence vpon the Psalm 118. as an euident place for Purgatory which by his owne iudgement seemeth not to signify Purgatory And yet againe among Fathersâ—or â—or Purgatorieâ— he alledgeth the testimonyes of Origen Basil Lactantius Hierome Ambrose all which are acknowledged expresly by Sixtus Senensis from the euidence of the contexts to haue spoken only of the fyre of the day of iudgement and consequently as Bellarmine hath taught vs not of the fire of Purgatorie Lastly he proâ—esseth to confirme the doctryne of Purgatorie out of most of the Greeke and Latin Fathers And another Iesuitâ—â—ith â—â—ith more largely of all the Greek Fathers which is an assertion as false as peremptory euen by the confession of their owne Bishop saying That there is very rare mention of Purgatory in the Greeke Fathers and that the latin Fathers did not all at first apprehend the doctryne therof Thus far he 124. And now let the Reader note how many impertinent poyntes to say nothing of their falsity that ioyntly also will be discouered are heere couched togeather that iâ—â—o say all that are heere handled for that all conioyned together do not conuince any one wilfull or witting vntruth in Bellarmine though there should be found any ouersight as there will not be but rather yow will discouer the most cunning dealing in M. Morton if iugling be cunning therby to make Bellarmine seeme to haue some contradiction in him that euer perhaps yow read For first where the said Cardinall writeth that when the Fathers speake of the â—yre of the day of doome when all the world shall be in a flame they meane not Purgatory â—yre though the thing it selfe in some sense may be grauÌ„ted yet in the places by him cyted Bellarmine hath no such thing but only treating of that fire mencioned by the Apostle 1. Cor. 3. Vniuscuiusque opus quale sit ignis probabit Fire shall proue what euery mans worke is he saith Aliqui Patrum per ignem non intelligunt ignem Purgatorium sed ignem diuini Iudicij per quem satendum est omnes etiam Sanctos Christo excepto transire Some Fathers do not vnderstand by this fire that must try euery mans workes the fire of Purgatory but the fire of Gods iudgment through which we must confesse that all Saints also must passe except Christ himselfe 125. And for this opinion he cyteth S. Hilary and S. Ambrose vpon the Psalme 118. as also S. Hierome who seeme to vnderstand by this prouing-fire mentioned by S. Paul not the purging-â—yre of Purgatorie which is meÌ„tioned presently after in the same place of the Apostle when he saith ipse tamen saluus erit sic tamen quasi per ignem which later fyre to be vnderstood of Purgatory after death Bellarmine proueth by the playne exposition of S. Cyprian S. Ambrose S. Hierome S. Augustine S. Gregorie and others 126. Now then M. Morton seeing this discourse of Bellarmine would needs pick a quarrel therat and frame vnto himself some shew of coÌ„trariety in him by voluntarie mistaking of the fire of Gods iudgement and triall due to euery soule immediatly after death for the fyre of doomes day when the world shall be in a flame wherof Bellarmine neyther speaketh nor had occasioÌ„ to speake nay he doth expresly deny and shew that the prouing-â—yre of Gods iudgmeÌ„ts mentioned by S. Paul is not the fyre of the conflagration of the world and then doth M. Morton frame to himselfe a contradiction in Bellarmine as though he had said
preface mentioned T. M. in his expresse name Thomas Morton fiue seuerall tymes but this fault were very pardonable were it not in him who will thinke no fault pardonable in his aduersary So M. Mort. And then he playeth vpon me further saying In this coÌ„tradiction I thinke rather that P. R. his penne did runne before his wit and so will he excuse himself except he had rather be accompted lyingly wittie then witlesse rash c. 7. And do you see how M. Morton triumpheth at his first entrance as though he had conuicted me of some great matter yet he confesseth that the fault were pardonable in any other but not in me So as in it selfe and in his owne nature he granteth it to be pardonable and thereby also he must needes acknowledge it to be impertinent to our purpose and to the argument in hand which is of vnpardonable faults to wit of wilfull and malicious lying wherunto noe pardon may iustly be giuen for that it is voluntary and not of errour or infirmity this if the fault were confessed or could be proued against me 8. But now what if this be noe fault or contradiction at all in P. R. either pardonable or not pardonable Yea and that M. Morton did well know it to be so yet would obiect it heere for a coÌ„tradictioÌ„ that in the first place play vpoÌ„ me for it as you haue heard what will you say theÌ„ of his conscieÌ„ce who holdeth mine for so miserable as it were a hapinesse for me to haue none May not euery man then to vse his owne words vnderstanding English preseÌ„tly discerne the same Let vs come to the proofe 9. He affirmeth me to write in the end of my Preface to the Reader that hauing spoken all that by way of Preface I would returne to the particuler Treatise of T. M. adding further by a parenthesis for that more of his name then those two letters I could not yet find out and yet saith he in the Epistle dedicatory to both Vniuersities that goeth before the said Preface I called him by the name of Thomas Morton fiue times But if I shew that the said dedicatory Epistle was written after the Preface then is there noe contradicton at all and if M. Morton must needs know it to be so then hath he either a miserable cause or conscience or both that is driuen thus to abuse his Reader for some little shew of matter against me First then that the Dedicatory Epistle of euery worke is wont to be the last thing that is written or printed and that by order of nature and good methode it should be so to the end the Authour should know what he presenteth and dedicateth M. Morton I thinke can hardly deny and he that shall read either his Dedicatory Epistle to the King in his first Reply called A â—ull satisfaction or this to the L. of Salisbury prefixed before his Preamble will easily see that they were both written and printed after the Treatises themselues For that in both Epistles is set downe briefly what is handled in the Treatises themselues and the like he could not but see and acknowledg in my Dedicatory Epistle that it was written after the coÌ„mon Preface and Treatise and consequently that I might know his name distinctly when I wrote this and be ignorant therof when I wrot the other 10. Secondly I do expressely signifie in the very first lines of my said Epistle Dedicatory to the Booke that the said Epistle was written after the Treatise and Preface therof For thus I do beginne my speach to the Schoole Diuines and Lawyers of both Vniuersities It was no part of my purpose learned Countrymen when I tooke this Treatise â—â—rsâ— in hand either to wade so far therin as now I haue byn compelled nor yet to prefix any other Epistle Dedicatory before the same then the large common Preface it selfe that doth ensue which may partly appeare by the argument and namely also and principally by that which we haue set downe in the third Chapter of this Treatise c. Which wordes of mine do euidently shew that my Dedicatory Epistle was written after the comon Preface and Treatise and therfore well might I come to know M. Mortons name when I wrote the Epistle though I knew it not when I wrote the other as now hath byn said and these words also must needes M. Morton haue seene and so not to haue erred if his will had not byn obstinate to errour Wherunto may be added that if I had written the dedicatory and printed it with the common Preface the Printer would haue begunne the numbers of the pages and register of Alphabet with that and not with the said Preface as he doth 11. But thirdly to conuince him indeed most apparaÌ„tly of witting willing fraud in this pointâ— I must tell the Reader I did in the place heere cyted of the third Chapter of my Treatise set downe clearely and perspicuously when and by what occasion I came to vnderstand whome the two letters T. M. did signifie which before I vnderstood not and the occasion was by the comming forth of the first reply of M. Morton intituled A â—ull satisfaction wherunto he thought best being pressed to it by his Aduersary to put his name at length diuers moneths after I had trauailed in answering his first Inuectiue of Discouery that had onely the bare two letters for his name my speach in that place was this But yet after diuers moneths againe seeing the said Reply to appeare that the said Minister had now resolued to manifest his name to wit of Thomas Morton which before went cyphered with the two letters onely of T. M. that might as well haue signified Thomas Malmesbury or Montague or Montebank or any such like Syrnames as Thomas Morton I was mooued aswell of my selfe as by others exhortation to resume the thing into my hands againe 12. So wrote I at that time and now would I haue the Reader to iudge between vs as M. Morton also requireth whether it be likely that he knew that my Dedicatory Epistle wherin I take notice of his name were written after the common Preface and first two Chapters of the Treatise or no and if he knew it as needs he must in any mans iudgment both by the words before alledged out of the beginning of my Epistle Dedicatory and the same auouched by me againe in the 6. nuÌ„ber of the said Epistle and yet would obiect that for a witlesse contradiction in me that hath no more contrariety then to say for some monethes I knew not whome the two letters T. M. did signifie but aâ—terward I did come to know it by M. Mortons owne exposition let the discreet Reader I say iudge what furniture M. Morton is like to haue of substantiall matter to proue wilfull and malicious lyes against me when he beginneth with this poore and idle obiection wherin only his owne wilfullnes is
true explanation of your meaning with a cleare confutation and reiection of the same and consequently these Rhetoricall shifts are idly brought in by you nothing nâ—edfull for me For P. R. tooke you in your true meaning wherin you desire to make Catholicke Doctours contemptible in generall for their blindnesse though to some yow will seeme to graunt the opinion of learning but yet with such restraint and limitation as you make it not better for instruction of Christian soules then the learning of the Diuell himselfe For this is your wise and graue conceipt Let them be as greatly learned say you as they are and would seeme to be yet must there be a con I meane an hart zealous of the truth to be ioyned with science to make vp a perfect conscience which is the true Doctour indeed otherwise we know that the serpent by being the most subtile of all the beasts in the field will deserue no better commendationâ— then to be accoÌ„pted the skillfullest seducer By which discourse of yours a man may easily see whether your meaning were generall in your former speach about ignorant Doctours or no and how impertinently you bring it in heere for an argument of wilfull falshood against me for that I vnderstood you in your owne sense I will not discusse your concept of your science with your con which was borrowed of Iohn Reynolds and of others before you and though I be loath to tell it you least it may seeme to sauour of reuenge yet I must say it for your better information that many men thinke very little of the one or other to be in your selfe as they should be either science or good conscience alleadging your writings for testimony of both HIS FOVRTH obiected falshood against P. R. §. IIII. NEXT vnto this he produceth for a falshood in me that I say in my booke of Mitigation that he taketh vpon him to iustifie the writings and doings of the Protestants of our dayes for their seditious doctrines and practizes against Princes who please them not and among others M. Goodman in particuler that wrote the most scandalous booke against the Regiment of women in Q. Maries dayes and assisted Knox Buchanan and others in troubling and turning vpside downe Scotland wheras M. Morton saith that he condemned him and consequeÌ„tly that I dealt iniuriously with him Thus he citeth my words in a different letter as though they stood so in my text He Thomas Morton doth particulerly iustifie Goodman 21. But first you must vnderstand that it is his common vse neuer lightly to alleadge truly and sincerely any text that he will vse to his profit either in Latin or English and let the Reader make prooâ—e of it if in twenty places alleadged by him he find foure without all alteration let him say that I do offer him iniury My words talking of the parts of M. Mortons Reply called the Full satisâ—action were these Secondly he taketh vpon him yet more fondly in the second part of this his Reply to make a publicke iustification of all Protestants for rebelling against their Princes in any countrey whatsoeuer but more particulerly and especially in England and therin doth so iustifie Cranmer Ridley Syr Thomas VVyatt and others that conspired against Q. Marie in England Knox 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 countries as his iustification is a more condemnation of them and their spirits and doctrine in that behalfe then if he had said nothing at all as partly shall afterward appeare by some instances that we shall alleadge therof 22. By which words of mine you may see that I did not single out Goodman alone as particulerly iustified by M. Morton as he would make the Reader belieue by his crafty and corrupt manner of citing my words but that among many others he did go about also so farre as he durst to excuse and iustifie him saying as presently you shall heare that albeit he approued him not for this he durst not do my L. of Canterbury hauing written so terribly against him in his booke of Dangerous positions yet that the examples alleadged against him by the Moderate Answerer might excuse him which were of most intollerable speaches of his against Princes and heere againe in this his Preamble that in respect of Romish Priests he might be thought excusable wherby a man may see his inclination to iustifie him and his writings if with security he might haue donne it How then is it such a falsity in me to say that among so many others before named whom he cannot deny but that he seeketh to iustifie them he sought also to excuse and iustifie Goodman though not in so absolute a manner as the other Saints of his yet in some degree conuenient to his estate and merit Let vs see what I do write afterward more about this iustification of Goodman my wordes these 23. The moderate Answerer say I alleageth first the wordes of Goodman in his booke against Q. Mary wherin he writeth expresly that it is lawfull by Gods law mans to kill both Kings and Queenes wheÌ„ iust cause is offered her selfe in particuler for that she was an enemie to God and that all Magistrâ—ts and Princes transgressing Gods lawes might by the people be punished condemned depriued and put to death as well as priuate transgressours and much other such doctrine to this effect cited out of the said Goodman All which the Bishop of Canterbury his second booke of Dangerous positions hath much more largely both of this Goodman and many other English Protestants chiefe Doctours of their primitiue Church residing at that time in Geneua And what doth T. M. now reply to this You shall heare it in his owne wordes If I should iustify this Goodman saith he though your examples might excuse him yet my hart shall condemne my selfe But what do you professe to proue all Protestants teach positions rebellious prooue it heere is one Goodman who in his publike booke doth mantaine it I haue noe other meanes to auoid these straites which you obiect by the example of one to conclude all Protestants in England rebellious then by the example of all the rest to answere there is but one So he 24. And this is his Full satisfaction and faithfull reply as he calleth his booke but how poore satisfaction this giueth and how many points there be heere of no faith or credit at all is quickly seene by him that will examine them For first how do the examples alleaged against this Goodman by the moderate answerer excuse him as heere is said seeing the wordes he alleageth against him out of his owne booke are intollerable and my Lord of Canterbury alleageth farre worse as for example that it is most lawfull to kill wicked kings when they fall to tyraÌ„ny but namely Queenes
and therupon that Q. Mary ought to haue bene put to death as a tyrant monster and cruell beast alleaging for confirmation therof diuers examples out of holy Scripture as that the subiects did lawfully kill the Queenes Highnesse Athalia and that the worthy Captaine Iehu killed the Queenes Maiesty Iezabell and that Elias though no magistrate killed the Queenes Highnes chaplains the Priests of Baal and that these examples are left for our instruction c. And now tell me how may these examples excuse M. Goodman as our minister Morton auoucheth So in my other Treatise 25. Whereby you will see that I did no iniurie to M. Morton nor vsed falshood in saying that he sought in some sort to iustify also Goodman as well as the rest according to the title of his Treatise which was A iustification of Protestânts in case of Rebellion without excepting of any but he vsed falshood in alleaging my words in the fashion he did setting them downe in such sort as might seeme that I affirmed him to iustify absolutely both Goodman and all other Protestants especially Cranmer Ridley VVyat and others there mentioned wheras my wordes are that he doth so iustify theÌ„ as his iustification is a more playne condemnation of them and their spirits and doctrines in that behalf then if he had said nothing of them at all Heere then is euident falshood and treachery in alleaging my words and sense as you see 26. And yet as though he had taken me at a great aduantage he runneth to his accustomed ridiculous interrogations VVhat excuse now shall P. R. make shall it be edition print translatioÌ„ there is no difference in these kindes VVas it negligence or ignorance the words are playne and all in English Thus he playeth with himself and his Reader and answereth all but that he should to witt that it is plaine that he desyred to iustifie Goodman so farre forth as he might or durst though his iustification indeed be a more condemnation of theÌ„ as then I sayd and now must both repeat and confirme HIS FIFTH obiected falshood against P. R. §. V. THIS obiection is but a peece or parcell cut out of the former to make vp a number to which end he stretcheth out matters by all meanes possible to multiply therby his ranke of obiections vsing the self same thing in sundrie places as before you haue seene in the second obiection about the reseruation in latin and after will appeare in manie other points and heere and in other insuing obiections he taketh parcells of that which had beene handled before For that in the precedent obiection you haue heard how Cranmer Ridley Syr Thomas VVyat Knox Buchanan Goodman Gylby VVhittingham and other Protestant Ministers were accused in matters of rebellion for their writings and practyses against their lawfull Princes and how slenderlie M. Morton defended the same you haue also seene and heard how he picked out the person of Goodman as not defended or iustifyed by him Now he commeth in with two more Knox and Buchanan saying To the obiected examples of Knox and Buchanan as Doctouâ—s and Actors of the rebellion in Scotland my answere was that their seditious doctrine was condemned in Scotland noting them to haue bene worthie of all condemnation and yet doth P. R. obiect neuerâ—hâ—lâ—sse against me as though I haue iustiâ—ied them 28. VVhereto I answere first by the verie words of his defence in the former obiection set downe about Goodman he seeketh to cleare all other saying If I should iustifie this Goodman though your examples might excuse him yet my hart shall condemne my self but what doe you professe to proue All Protestants teach positions rebâ—llious prooue it heere is one Goodman c. By the example oâ— all the râ—st I answer there is but one By which answere it is euident he clereth all the rest and yf you looke vpoÌ„ my L. of Canterburies booke of Dangerous positions you shall finde as bad or worse positions gathered by him out of Knox and Buchanan then out of Goodman though all be most pestilent Not onely then one Goodman alone is there that holdeth this position according to my L. of Canterburies booke which authority I perswade my self made M. Morton togeather with some feare of his Maiesties mislike to answer so cautelously as heere he setteth downe that their seditious doctrine was condemned in Scotland saying that he answered so before in his full Satisfaction But indeed not fully so but onely that there was an act of Parlament in Scotland vpon the yeare 1584. to call in that Cronicle of Buchanan censuring all such attempts and innouations which is somewhat lesse yf you marke then that their seditious doctrine was condemned in Scotland 29. Let vs see then how I impugned this his shift in the booke of Mitigation These are my words For Knox and Buchanan their assertions he answereth vs you might haue added that there was in Scotland an act of Parlament to call in that Chronicle of Buchanan censuring all such attempts and innouations And then citeth in the margent anno 1584. which was almost thirty yeares after the said doctrine had ben taught preached practized in that Kingdome by those first ghospellers And is not this a full satisfaction trow you What if the Chronicle of Buchanan were called in that recounted with approbation and insolent triumph the attempts made vpon their lawfull Princes by incitation of this doctrine Doth this take away the doctrine it self Or doth it prooue that these first ghospellers held it not What became of the other bookes of Knox and namely his Chronicle for he wrote also a Chronicle of the same matters and of his owne acts therin as Caesar did his Commentaries were they abolished heerby Or doe not the same things remayne in Holinshed Hooker Harrison Thyn and other wryters aswell English as Scottish Or doth all this prooue that this was not their doctrine See then how full or rather fond this Satisfaction is 30. Thus I wrote then shewing that M. Mortons euasion was insufficient to say that there was an act of Parlament in Scotland to call in the Chronicle of Buchanan for heere is nothing spoken of Buchanans other Bookes nor yet of any bookes of Knox nor do I find that M. Morton did vse these words of coÌ„demning them then which now he doth that their seditious doctrine was condemned in Scotland Nay as I noted before by saying that onely one Goodman had held positions seditious he thought to iustify and cleare both these two all other their companions from iust reprehension Whereby you see how idle an obiection against me this is of wilfull falshood for that I said he endeauoured to defend generally all Protestants from seditious doctrine and practise which indeed he doth throughout all his second part of his sayd full satisfaction For proof wherof it is sufficient to alleage the very title written ouer euery page before mentioned
wordes of Polidore non extra iocum dictum sit let it not be spoken but in iest wher vnto here now he answereth nothing in effect but first with this interrogation Can this be ought but a transcendent impudency to blame me for not citing that testimony which his Pope least it might be citedâ— hath vtterly razed out But Syr be more calme I pray yow for you are not blamed for not cyting that which our Pope had commanded to be blotted out in our Copies but for not cyting that which remayned in yours was willingly omitted by you as now it appeareth for that it made against you This is then his first answere very cholerike as you see His second is a certaine euasion by a sleightfull translation into English wherby he seeketh to shift of the force therof for thus he Englisheth it As for example saith he which may not be spoken without a iest if peraduenture he had byn before a wicked man c. which sleight euery man that is but meanly learned in the latin tongue will easely discouer For that non dictum sit cannot be fitly translated it may not be spoken without a iest but let it not â—e spoken but in iest wherin I remitt me to the sense of the text it self So as about this second poynt M. Morton remayneth culpable two wayes first in dissembling and suppressing this iest in his first booke and now in seeking to auoyd the same by sleightfull translation But let both trickes go vnder one and so I make it but one falshood which laid to the other before do make two notorious vntruthes wherwith I do charge M. Morton now againe in this his last Reply and say they are vnanswerable 17. As for that which he inveigheth against our Index expurgatorius wherin he saith that our Popes doe appoint what wordes shall be put out in mens bookes as if they pulled out their tongues least they should speake it is not worth the answering And I remember that I haue handled the matter els where against some of M. Mortons fellowes Good reasoÌ„ it must needs seeme in any reasonable mans iudgement that such as professe themselues Catholiks should be content that if in any workes of theirs any thing had escaped them that eyther disagreed from the publike rule of faith acknowledged by the whole Church or were temerarious scandalous inconsiderate or otherwise offensiue should be censured and reformed by publike authority of the same Church And he that hath not this humility and submission with him is not worthy to be accompted a Catholike or sonne of the Catholike Church 18. And as for others that are not Catholicks they rather gayne heerby for that wheras their bookes that handle matters of religion and are iudged to conteine inexcusable heresies are wholy forbidden to be read by Catholiks but with particuler licence yet some other workes of theirs that either treat not of that subiect or do it so moderatly as with paring and cutting of some exorbitant things that be most offensiue they may be made tollerable and are permitted to remayne to posterity and all this by the benefitt of this Index expurgatorius which otherwise should be extermined with the rest wherof almost infinite exaÌ„ples may be seene in the Indices expurgatorij of euery Catholike Country which permit bookes of hereticall Authors of all sorts to be read commonly and publikely after they haue byn censured and reviewed in this sort which is not done by the Pope himselfe or by his particuler order in this or that place as M. Morton would seeme fondly to perswade his Reader when he saith that Anno Domim 1572. by the Authority of Pius Quintus the foresaid wordes of Polidor were commanded to be blotted out and againe which his Pope saith he vtterly razed out c. but the same is performed by a Congregation of learned men in euery Nation by commission of the said Church and Head therof 19. And I would demaund of M. Morton or any indifferent man on his behalfe if in England there were the like Congregation appointed of learned men to examine and censure bookes of their owne men that are set forth or after they be published and are found to be so full of palpable vntruthes as these of his and some other of his fellowes are were it not a good prouidence and more profitable both to their publike cause and priuate credit of the writers themselues that some such reuiew should be made than that euery man writing what he list without checke or controlement do come after to shame their owne cause by so many and manifest vntruthes laid open to the publike sight and laughter of the world as in this and other bookes appeareth But this point of prouidence concerneth not me and I haue mentioned it only by inforcement of M. Mortons importunitie Let vs passe to the sebond imputation THE SECOND Charge of wilfull falshood against M. Morton and pretended to be answered by him but poorely performed § II. AFTER this first charge which he tooke vnto himselfe out of my Epistle Dedicatory and hath so badly discharged as you haue heard with adding of new falshoods he taketh the second out of the fourth Paragraph of my second Chapter of the said Treatise of Mitigation where I hauing repreheÌ„ded him for false accusing of Pope Sixtus Quintus that he censured the late K. Henry of France for this only crime as he auerreth for that himselfe being a Papist yet fauoured the Protestants c. concealing the two knowne murthers both of the Cardinall Duke oâ— Guise I do passe on to tell him of another egregious falsity about the feigned death of our English Pope Adrian by a fly in these wordes The Charge 21. And againe in the same place or precedent page he hath these words Pope Adrian being guilty of like sediâ—ious practice against the Emperour Henry the second was choked with a fly And in his quotation citeth Nauclerus for it Generatione 139. which should be 39. for that Nauclerus hath nothing neere so many Generations in that part and insteed of Henry the second he should haue said Fredericke the first of that name for that Henry the second was before the time of our Conquest and almost two hundred yeares before Adrian the 4. our English Pope of whom we now speake who liued in the time of King Stephen and King Henry the second of England and was a holy man and accompted the Apostle of Noruegia for conuerting the same to our Christian faith before he was Pope and all Authors do write honourably of him and so doth Nauclerus affirme and therfore though he maketh mention of such a fable related by Vrspergensis that was a Schismaticall writer in those dayes who also doth not absolutly auouch it but with this temperament vt â—ertur as the report goeth yet doth the sayd Nauclerus reiect the same as false and confuteth it by
vocatioÌ„ though afterward in life they should be neuer so wicked euen as S. Paul writing to the CorinthiaÌ„s termeth theÌ„ vocatis Sanctis Saintes by vocatioÌ„ though afterwards he signifieth diuers of theÌ„ to be loaden with grieuous heinous sinnes and of these Saints there is store in the world 130. Thirdly Sanctity is takeÌ„ also of ScholmeÌ„ for a speciall vertue not differing in substaÌ„ce from the verue of ReligioÌ„ but only that it hath a certaine generality in it not only to apply our minds firmly to Gods seruice but also to liâ—t vp all the works of other morall vertues vnto the same seruice honor of God as for exaÌ„ple the act of abstineÌ„ce or temperance which in a morall man may be vsed to other morall ends as to the health of body opinion of sobriety the like this speciall vertue of Sanctity directeth the same to the glory of Almi God the like in the actions of all other moral vertues But for so much as concerneth our matter Sanctity was taken by me in the first sense wherin a man may be vertuous and yet no Saint according to the definition of S. Dionysius Areopagita Sanctitas quidem est vt secunduÌ„ nos loquamur omni scelere libera perfectaque penitus in coinquinata munditia Sanctitie to speake according to our vse is a certaine perfect and vnspotted puritie oâ— life free from all touch oâ— wickednes which is somewhat more if you marke it then common vertue as M. Morton would haue it And thus much for his acutenes in reprehending my speach in distinguishing vertue from sanctitie which it seemeth that either he vnderstood not or considered not well of his reprehensioÌ„ before he vttered it but to the matter it selfe for proof of my vnlucky imputing falshood vnto him in alleaging the authoritie of Lambertus he bringeth forth three witnesses to wit Benno Cardinalis Abbas Vrspergensis Sigebertus all German writers that reprehend the life of Pope Greg. the 7. called before Hildebranduâ— But what infelicitie is this vnto my imputation out of LaÌ„bertus It is felicitie inough for my attempt if M. Mort. will needs haue it so that he hath not byn able to cleere him selfe from opeÌ„ fraud in alleaging Lambertus against Pope Hildebrand as now you haue heard This other is a new matter and from the purpose whether there be other Authors that speake and write euill of Pope Gregory or no it is sufficient for me to haue shewed that Lambertus did not but in his behalfe and prayse consequently that he was falsely brought in for his discredit 132. But yet to say somewhat of these three other Authors also alleaged here by M. Morton to proue my infelicitie that in taking froÌ„ him one Lambertus I haue gotten three others to come out against me to wit a Monke an Abbot a Cardinall I will answere first vnto the Cardinall to wit Benno who being not made by the true Pope Gregory the 7. but by the Antipope calling himselfe Clement the 3. at the procurement of the Emperour that was his professed enemy he caÌ„not be accompted either a true Cardinall or a lawfull witnes therefore no maruaile though in the booke ascribed vnto him by the ProtestaÌ„ts of our days he be found to raile most inteÌ„peratly against the true Pope Greg. about which booke of BeÌ„no notwithstanding I referre me to the Iudgment of another Cardinall whose name beginneth with the same letters I meane Card. Bellarmine who hauing diligeÌ„tly pervsed the said rayling booke testifieth that he found it excessiue railing so extreme full of lies coÌ„trary to the writings of all other Authors that had written of the same Pope either whiles he liued or after his death vntill Luthers time wherof he nameth 32. Anthors in particuler ten of theÌ„ that wrot whiles he was liuing as he protesteth that he was forced to doubt least some Lâ—theran had writteÌ„ the same vnder the name of the foresaid false Card. Benno Wherfore of this man being such as he was conuinced for an open liar by so many witnesses we say no more but leaue him to M. Morton as a fit Knight of the Post for his purpose 133. As for the other two monkes Vrsperg Sigebertus the same Card. Bellarmines iudgmeÌ„t is that albeit they being fauorers of the Emperour in that factioÌ„ durst not write ouer plainly in the praise of Pope Greg. dispraise of his enemy the Emperor their patrone yet doth he shew out of their workes that setting aside a manifest error of Sigebert that imagined Pope Gregory to be of opinioÌ„ that the Masle of a Concubinary Priest was not good which he neuer said but for a punishmeÌ„t only coÌ„manded men not to heare such a naughty Priest in the rest Card. Bellarmine as I said doth proue that in sundry other occasions both of theÌ„ did rather coÌ„mend Pope Greg. theÌ„ discommend him as is euident out of sundry places in their owne workes which Bellarmine citeth 134. But nothing doth discredit more the bringing in of these two witnesses by M. Mort. then the ioyning theÌ„ to Benno as though they had byn of his opinion or had written against Pope Gregory as he did Let vs examine but only this one place alleaged heere out of Vrsperg then let any man say what is to be thought of M. Mort. fidelity thus he alleageth him The Abbot Vrsperg saith he writeth thus P. Gregory was an vsurper of the Sea of Rome not appointed by God but intruded by fraud money a disturber oâ— the Empire a subuerter oâ— the Church So he But now let any man read the place yeare by him quoted and he shal find the wordes indeed and worsâ— related by Vrspergensis as vttered against Pope Gregory by certaine enemies of his gathered togeather iussu Regis Henrici by the coÌ„mandment of K. Henry in forme of a Councell or Synod at Brixia they being in number 30. Bishops but that VrspergeÌ„sis did affirme any thing of himselfe or approue the same is not to be found but rather the quite contrary For in the very same place and page he sheweth how these things were coÌ„tradicted refuted by the famous Anselmus Bishop of Luca then liuingâ— A man saith he most excellent well learned sharpe in wit c. and that which exceedeth all a man knowne to â—eare God and oâ— all holy conuersation in so much as both in his liâ—e and after his death he was famous in doing miracles So VrspergeÌ„sis of him that did defend Pope Gregory against these slaunders which M. Morton alleageth as auerred by Vrsperg wil not he yet blush at this new fraud of his discouered wil he still coÌ„tinue of forge new lyes against the Authors expresse wordes and meaning 135. But yet me thinks that the other which ensuâ—th is more shamefull to wit the ioyning of Seuerinus Biniê° for a fourth witnes to the former three wherof he writeth thus Iâ— three
men that they were exempted Iure by law he passâ—th on to examine in his second proposition Quo iure by what law Diuine or humane they are exempted And in his third he holdeth that aliqua exemptio Clericorum â—st de iure diuino that some kind of exemptions of Clergy men from Ciuill power is by diuine law and not humane only and fourthly he commeth to this which here is set downe by T.M. but not as he setteth it downe Our â—ourth proposition saith Victoria is that the persons of Clergy men are not absolutely and in all things exempted from Ciuill power â—ither by Diuine or humane law which is euident by that cleargy men are bound to obey the temporall lawes of the Citty or Common wealth wherin they liue in those things that do appertaine to the temporall gouerment and administration therof and do not let or hindâ—r Ecclesiasticall gouerment 55. These are the words of Victoria as they lye togeather in him and then after some arguments interposed for his sayd conclusion he addeth also this proofe That â—or so much as Clergy men besides this that they are Mynisters of the Church are Cittizens also of the common wealth they are bound to obey the temporall lawes of that Common wealth or Prince in temporall affaires and then ensueth the last reason here set downe in English by T. M. in thâ—se words Moreouer sayth Victoria for that a King is King not only of Laymen but of Clergy men also therefore aliquo modo subiâ—ciuntur ei in some sort they are subiect vnto him Which words aliquo modo in some sort the Mynister leaueth out And is this plaine dealing And theÌ„ it followeth imediatly in Victoria And â—or that Clâ—rgie men are not gouerned in temporall matters by Ecclesiasticall power thereâ—ore they haue their temporall Prince vnto whom they are bound to yield obedience in teÌ„porall affaires And this is all that Victoria hath in this matter and in â—hese very words And let any man consider the patching which T. M. vseth both in English and Latin in this place to make some shew for his feygned demonstration out of Victoria and he will see how poore and miserable a man he is and how miserable a cause he defendeth And in particuler let the very last proposition be noted which he cyteth and Englisheth as out of victoria to wit the Clergy is subiect to thâ— Ciuill authority inteÌ„porall things â—or such matter is not ruled by any power spirituall wherby he would haue his Reader to imagine that no spirituall power may haue authority to gouerne temporall matters whereas the words of Victoria are Clerici quantum ad temporalia non administrantur potestate Ecclesiastica that Clergy men â—or so much as apperteineth to temporall affaires are not gouerned by Ecclesiasticall power but by the temporall which there beareth rule So as this fellow by a subtile sleight changing the nominatiue Case from Clerici non administrantur to temporalia non administrantur frameth his plaine Demonstration out of plaine cosenage and forgerie And is this naked innocency c Thus farre I had in my former Treatise And heere you see I was earnest inough in vrging pressing for an answere if it might haue byn had but none came at all but other trifling toyes in steed therof and that in great store as our former discourses haue declared and yet we must go forward to recount moreâ— THE TWELFE falshood pretermitted by Thomas Morton §. XII VVE shall passe from priuate Doctors to an Archbishop and Martyr of our owne Countrey S. Boniface whome M. Morton seemeth to make a Pope also for that his speach is alleadged in one of the Popes Constitutions My former charge against M. Morton about that matter was this that ensueth 57. Now sayd I to the second wherin he sayth that one of our Popes placed also in the Calends of our Martyrs doth affirme that though a Pope should carrie many people with himselfe to hell no mortall man may presume to say why do you so I do greatly maruaile with what conscience or if not conscience with what forehead at least these men can write and print and reiterate so often in their bookes things that they know or may know to be meerly faâ—se and forge Is not this a signe of obstinate wilfulnes and that neither God nor truth is sought for by them but only to mainteine a part or faction with what sleight or falshood so euer I fynd this very obiection set forth in print not many yeares agone by Syr Francis Hastings in his Watchword and Defence therof and the same auouched stoutly after him for a tyme by Matthew Sutclisse the Mynister Aduocate and Proctour of that Deâ—ence but afterward I find the same so confuted at large by the VVarn-word and so many lies falshoods and euident frauds discouered therin as the said M. Sutclisse in his Replie intituled A full round answâ—re though good roundly to let it passe without any answere at all which I can find in his said booke though I haue vsed some diligence in search therof which I do adde for that he changeth the whole order of answering from the method of his Aduersary to the end not to be found and so answereth nothing in order or place as it is set downed by him whom he preteÌ„deth to answere but rather taking a new vast and wild discourse to himself snatcheth here a word and there a word to carp at not as they lye in his Aduersaries booke but as it pleaseth him to admit them now from the end of the booke then from the beginning then from the myddle And with this substantiall method he taketh vpon him to answere all books that come in his way for so he hath answered of late the booke also of Three Conuersions of England and may do easely all that is written by Catholicks if carping only and scolding be answering 58. Wherfore to this instance here resumed by T. M. though I must remit him or rather the Reader for larger satisfactioÌ„ to the said Catholick Treatise intituled The VVarnwoord yet here briefly I am to tell him first that he erreth grossely in affirming in this place the Author of this Canon cited by him Si Papa to haue byn a Pope for that the said Canon was gathered by Gratian out of the sayings of S. Boniface Martyr as in the title of the sayd Canon is expressed which Boniface was neuer Pope but a vertuous learned English-man that liued aboue 850. yeares agone and was the first Archbishop of Mentz or Moguntia in Germany of which people Countrey he is called by all ancient writers the Apostle for that he first publikely conuerted that NatioÌ„ erected that primate Sea and suffred glorious Martyrdome by the Gentills for the faith of Christ. Wherfore the scoffe of T.M. calling him our Pope placed in the Calends of our Martyrs besides the ignoraÌ„ce tasteth also of much profane malice and
111. There followeth said I within 2. leaues after a heape not only of falshoods but also of impudencies For wheras his Aduersary the moderate Answerer had said That not only Kings but Popes also for heresie by the CanoÌ„ lawes were to be deposed he answereth thus The Authours of the doctrine of deposing Kinges in Case of heresy do professe concerning Popes That they cannot possibly be hereticks as Popes and consequently cannot be deposed not saith Bellarmine by any power Ecclesiasticall or Temporall no not by all Bishops assembled in a Councell not saith Carerius though he should do anything preiudiâ—iâ—ll to the vniuersall state of the Church not saith Azorius though he should neglect the Canons Ecclesiasticall or peruert the lawes of Kings not saith Gratians glosse though he should carâ—y infinite multitudes of soules with him to hell And these fâ—renamed Authours do auouch for confirmation of this doctrine the vniuersall consent of Romish Deuines Canonists for the space of an hundred yeares 112. So he Wherto I replyed that in these wordes are as many notorious and shameles lyes as there be assertioÌ„s Authors named by him for the same For first quoth I the foure writers which he mentioneth there in the tâ—xt to wit Bellarmine Carerius Azor GratiaÌ„ do expressely clearly and resolutely hold the contrary to that he affirmeth out of them for that they teach and proue by many argumentsâ— that Popes both may fall into heresies and for the same be deposed by the Church or rather are ipsâ— facto deposed and may be so declared by the Church And their wordes here guilfully alleaged by Tho. Mort. as sounding to the contrary are manifestly spoken and meant of manners only and not of faith that is to say if they should be of naughty life yet haue they no Superiour to depose them for that cause they being immediatly vnder Câ—â—ist though for heresy they may be deposed which insteed of all the rest you may read largely handled in Bellarmine in his second booke de Pontif. where among other proofes he citeth this very Canon of Gratian here mentioned by T. Mâ— saying â—aereticum Papam posse iudicari expresse habetur Can. Si Papa dist 40. It is expressely determined in the Canon Si Papa that a Pope falling into heresie maybe iudged and dâ—posed by the Church And more That in the 8. generall Councell and 7. Session Pope Honorius was deposed â—or heresie So Bellarmine And the same doctrine hold the other two cited by our Minister to wit Carerius Azor. So as here be foure notorious lyes togeather that by no shift or tergiuersation can be auoided for that T. M. could not but manifestly see that he alleaged these foure Authors quite contrarie to their expresse wordes drift and meaning What then will you say of this â—ellow and his manner of writing Shall he be credited hereafter 113. But yet not content with this he citeth other foure or fiue Authors besids in the margent to wit Gregorius de Valentia Salmeron Canus Stapleton Costerus all which in the very places by him cited are expressely against him And is not this strange dealing Let Canus that goeth in the myddest speake for all fiue who hauing proued first at large the opposit proposition to T. M. to wit that Popes may fall into heresy and be deposed for the same concludeth thus his discourse negandumâ—saith â—saith he quin Summus Pontisex haereticus esse possit It cannot therâ—ore be denied but that the Pope may be an hereticke adding presently wherof one or two examples may be giuen but none at all that euer Pope though he fell into heresy did decree the same for the whole Church By which last words of Canus is discouered the ridiculous fallacy of T.M. alleaging here out of our foreâ—aid writer That Popes cannot possibly be hereticks as Popes consequently cannot be deposed wherof they say the flat contrary as you haue heard That Popes may be hereticks as Popes and consequently may be deposed But yet that God as Popes will neuer permit them to decree any hereticall doctrine to be held by the Church 114. Consider then I pray you said I what a fellow this Minister is in abusing thus so many Authors so manifestly but especially do you note the impudency of his Conclusion And these â—orenamed Authors saith he do auouch for confirmation of this doctrine the vniuersall consent of Romish Deuines and Canonistes for the space of an huÌ„dred yeares So he But I would aske him of what doctrine That Popes cannot be hereticks or be deposed for the same You haue heard them now protest the contrary and you may read them in the places here cited out of all the nyne seuerall writers before mentioned who by their expresse contrary doctrine do proue T. M. to haue made nyne seuerall lyes against them in this his assertion and now the tenth and most notorious of all is this his Conclusion That they do auouch â—or confirmation oâ— that which he obiecteth the vniuersall consent of Romish Deuines and Canonists for the space of an hundred yeares which besids the â—anifest falsity therof seene in their owne words and works here by me cited it coÌ„teineth also great folly simplicity to say that they auouch the consent of Romish Deuines and Canonists for an hundred yeares for that their proofes are much elder Bellarmine among the rest for deposition of Popes doth cite the 8. Generall Councell vnder Pope Adrian the second for aboue six hundred yeares agone and the Canon Si Papa out of our Countrey man S. Boniface Archbishop of Ments Martyr aboue seauen hundred yeares agon and collected by Gratian and confirmed by Popes as part of the Canon law aboue foure hundred years agone So as to say that now they auouch Authors oâ— an hundred yeares old against that which for so many hundred yeares before was held and established is meere folly or rather foolish malice 115. Thus I wrote in my former Treatise of Mitigation wherby as by all the rest that here hath bin set downe the Reader will see what store of graue matter M. MortoÌ„ had to answere for his owne defeÌ„ce if indeed he had meant to defend himself really and substantially and not to haue slipt out vnder the shaddow of a Preamble for answering his aduersary but indeed laying hands only vpon a few the lightest imputations that he could picke out And yet by the way the Reader must note that euery one or the most of these examples of falshood here obiected do coÌ„teine diuers sundry points which being laid togeather do make I dare auouch a double number to that which heere we haue sett downe if they were seuered singled out after the manner of M. Mortons mincing his imputations before produced about Goodman Knox Buchanan Syr Thomas VViat the like seuerally set forth to the shew So as according to this reckoning
partes the first wherin he sheweth how Iohn Caluin most wickedly maliciously vnder pretence of interpreting the Scripture in differeÌ„t sense from the ancient Fathers did go about couertly to weaken infringe or take from the Christiâ—ns all the strongâ—st arguments which they had or haue out of the Scriptures for the Godhead of Christ and his equality and consubstantiality with the Father c. And in the second part of his booke Doctor Hunnius sheweth that the said Caluin vseth the same fraud and malice by ouerthrowing all the predictions fortellings of Prophets about Christ is he was man 11. Thus far I wrote at that time and then produced somewhat largely and particulerly 18. examples partly out of the old and partly out of the new Testament maliciously peruerted by him in fauour of Iewes and Arrians against the truth and certainty of Christian Religion leauing out 20. more which Doctor Hunnius doth handle and in the end concludeth thus Quapropter vt receptui canam detectuÌ„ satis superque iudico Angelum illum tenebrarum Ioannem Caluinum qui ex abyssi puteo emergens c. VVherfore that I may now saith he retire my selfe I do iudge that Angell of darknes Iohn Caluin to be sufficiently and more then sufficiently discouered who being raysed from the pit of hell to the peruerting of mankind hath partly by his detestable desire of wresting Scriptures ouerthrowing the bulwarkes of ChristiaÌ„ Religion which it hath against Iewes and Arians partly also by his impious pen against the holy and sacred Maiestie of Iesus Nazarenus now exalted in heauen partly also by his peruerse doctrine of the Sacraments and horrible monstrous paradoxes of his absolute predestination hath obscured in these our later dayes no small part of the light and sunne of Gods truth and drawne with him a great number of starres as the Apocalyps saith headlong into hell from whom God euerlasting by his mercy signe protect his seruants least they may be inâ—ected with this most pestilent plague oâ— Caluinian errour conuert those that are infected vnto Iesus Christ the Pastour of their soules to the end they perish not in their error but be saued euerlasting with those that faithfully do loue God And this I had to warne the Church of Christ of the most wicked deceipts of Iohn Caluin 12. Hitherto are the wordes of Doctour Egidius Hunnius which you see with what vehemency of spirit and protestation he vttereth them against the heresies of Caluin and Caluinists so as they may easely be seene to come from his hart full determination of his setled iudgemeÌ„t who being so principall a Protestant and learned Doctour and Professour of Deuinity held for a brother of the selfe same Church by which M. Morton meaneth to be saued if he haue any such meaning I meruaile what impression it maketh in him or whether it maketh any thing at all which I should haue beene glad to haue vnderstood by a word or two of his answere but nothing commeth from him and so this debt must be laid vp with the rest vntill the day of payment come which when it may be or how much or what he will be able to pay yea though he deâ—erre it vntill doomesday is a matter easily to be coniectured by such as caÌ„ cast vp accompts looke into debtors abilityes or possibilityes for their discharge But yet one thing is cleare without any answere of his I would haue it noted by the reader that all his inuectiues to his Maiesty against vs for calling and holding them as heretiks out of the foâ—said definition of S. Augustâ—n other Fathers do fall to the ground as vayne friuolous for so much as so principall men of their own brotherhood do affirme the same as now you haue heard And thus much about the first head or questioÌ„ whether the Protestant Religion of Englaâ—d so fâ—r forth at leastwise as it followeth the doctrine of Caluin be truly accompted heresy or no And consequeÌ„tly damnable to the holders thereof 13. Two other great heads of coÌ„trouersy there were betweene vs in this first part of my forsaid Treatise about Rebellion the first whether the doctrine of Catholicks or of Protestants did more fauour obedience vnto their temporall princes secondly which part did most practize the same And about the first for Catholicke doctrine it is largely proued by me throughout the whole first part of my Treatise that it is exact in all respects for obliging men to do all due obedieÌ„ce both vnto temporall spirituall superiours not only when they are good and vertuous but also disâ—â—lis that is bad fastidious as the Apostles word is that we must obey theÌ„ out of conscience as Ministers of God froÌ„ whom they haue their authority power And when the exorbitaÌ„t defects of any Prince or gouernor shall impose necessity of redresse or restraint it may not be by priuate Authority or popular mutiny but by order iudgmeÌ„t publike authority Wheras on the other side the ProtestaÌ„t doctrine is shewed out of their owne words writers authors to teach the quite coÌ„trary which authors I do cite as namely Caluin Beza HottomaÌ„ others in France by the testimonyes of Launay Belforest other French writers in England Scotland Goodman Gilby VVhittingham Knox Buchanan others by the testimonies of their owne writings stories of the Archbishâ— of Canterbury out of his first Booke Of dangerous positions of D. Sutcliffe in his Suruey oâ— preteÌ„ded discipline against the PuritaÌ„s that is the most zealous sort oâ— Caluinists all which haue set downe their resolute opinioÌ„s that it is lawfull when the Prince offereth iniuries or becometh as they call it a Tyrant especially in matters of ReligioÌ„ they hold it lawfull I say by their Deuinity for the Nobility or people or priuate men as they haue or may haâ—e coÌ„modity to do it to make reuenge either vpoÌ„ his person or otherwise yea by death it selfe 14. And as for the second point which is the practise of this doctrine I do shew such a notorious difference betwene Catholicke Protestant people out of the experieÌ„ce of this our preseÌ„t age as nothing can be more conuincing out of publike histories mens memory yeâ— aliue that there hath byn more violence offered by the Protestant people subiects to their lawfull true Princes by armes actions coÌ„spiracies rebellions other forcible means within the compasse of almost one halfe age in the Northern pâ—rts of the world to wit Germanie France Flanders England Scotland Denmarke Sweueland Polonia and other partes then was pracâ—ised or heard of in a thousâ—nd yeares before throughout all the Christian worâ—d Wherin for that his Maiestie of England that now is vnto whom my Aduersary presumed to dedicate his booke can be the best and most honorable aâ—d authenticall testimony of any Prince perhaps lâ—â—â—â—g in regard
of the many troubles and perills which he and his Royall linage haue passed therin I do stay my selfe longer vpon the contemplation of broyles raysed by that means in ScotlaÌ„d both before the birth of his Maiestie and afterward which is so lamentable a storie as no man can read it but with horrour and infinite regreâ—t of mind 15. These things being layd forth by me many other to this effect which for breuities sake I doe pretermit here to repeat had it not bene conuenient that M. Morton in this his last Reply seing he would needs reply should haue signified in some few words vnto vs how he would or could satisâ—ie this mayne charge and debt especially for so much as this touched the very hart of his cause in this first argument about rebellion For albeit his Reply be but a preamble yet is it a large one of aboue a hundred twentie pages in quarto wherof he might well haue bestowed some one or two in acknowleging at least vnto his Reader what I had touched concerning this mayne poynt that is so important But it seemeth that he would haue his Reader imagin that no more substantiall matter was treated by me then he hath set down in those skirmishes other trifling contentions in this his preamble before discussed 16. But his greatest omission and pretermissioÌ„ indeed was in this matter the concealemeÌ„t of what soeuer in eâ—fect I had said for laying open the absurdities hurts inconueniences that did and must needs ensue to the Realme and Common wealth by this intolerable licence taken vp by rayling-Ministers to traduce and slaunder at their pleaâ—ure â—o many thousaÌ„ds of quiet well-meaning people faithfull Subiectes of his Maiestie by way of Sycophancie drawing them into suspicions of Rebellions Treasons conspiracies faithles meaning towards their Prince Countrey and this in râ—gard of their religion faith and conscience which lyeth not in their power by force to alter but with the euerlasting perdition and â—uine of their soules 17. This I shewed how damnable a course it was how seditious pernicious to all quiet Sâ—ates and I declared in particuler what stinging exasperations there had byn layd vpon English Catholikes for many yeares togeather out of such motiues as these arâ— how grieuous and dangerous a thing it is to driue men to desperation how litle thanks or reward he deserueth that casteth in fyre-brands to kyndle sedition deuideth any Princes subiects among themselues and from their said Prince how potent and happy his Maiesty of great Britany were if such makbates would suffer him to enioy his greatnes and felicitie and to be beloued and serued of all his people ioyntly that the pursuing of Catholiks with that â—agernes that now is seene for their only religion this in the sight of the whole Christian Catholike world that is of the same religion cannot but worke pernicious and preiudiciall effects both at home abroad in begetting sinister auerse affections iudgments worse wordes and writings conforme therunto how that when Protestants began their sect were vnderlings to Catholiks all their books preachings and speaches tended to shew and proue that it was againâ—â— the ghospell of Chrisâ— and contrary to all reason Religion equity and pietie to vexe men for their conscience that now they hauing the gouernement in their owne handes it cannot be but extreme dishonorable vnto them to vse such continuall vexations angariations vnto Catholiks for their said Religion which they neuer changed nor inuented of themselues but continued in that wherin their ancestours had both liued and dyed from the first planting of Christian faith in that Iland 18. Many of these points did I touch and handle more largely in this first part of my Treatise concerning obedience and Rebellion and did expect that M. Morton would haue returned me some part of substantiall answere in this his Reply But this credit also remayneth vndischarged as the rest we must expect the full payment at his further leasure and ability Yet some few scatterings he left about this matter in his third Inquiry and eleuenth Paragraph which we haue discussed beforâ— in the second Chapter of this our Answere and haue found it to be of no force at all to giue satisfaction to any of these points which heere we haue mentioned And therfore we conclude that in effect he hath omitted and pretermitted all the principall points handled by vs in this affayre Let vs now pasâ—e to the secoÌ„d generall argument of my said Treatise of Mitigation which is about â—quiuocation let vs sâ—e whether M. Morton haue vsed the same sleight of concealment therin also as in the former OF M. MORTONS Pretermissions in the second argument of my Treatise about Equiuocation §. II. YOV haue heard how many principall points M. Morton hath passed ouer with a deepe silence as it were in the first argument of my Treatise concerning the controuersy of Rebellion Now let vs turne our eyes vpon the second subiect which is of Equiuocation against which he made such great clamours and outcries in his former empty booke of full Satisfaction as if it had beene the most strange new absurd ridiculous and blasphemous doctrine in the world For clearing of which point I was forced to write fiue or six large Chapters and bestow almost three hundred pages to represse his sayd clamours vaine exasperations and childish insultations against the same reducing first the whole matter to fiue serious and important considerations as it were for an entrance into the whole Treatise The first how peruersely and calumniously M. Morton and his fellowes do deale with vs to make vs odious in this controuersy mistaking of purpose the true state of the question of which point I wrote then as followeth 20. And first of all said I to the end the indifferent Reader may vnderstaÌ„d with what kind of aduersaries we are to deale in this matter I thinke it necessary for declaring their peruersity and preuenting some calumniations to make a certaine briefe protestation or explication here at the beginning that we do not take this defence of Equiuocation in hand either for patronage of lying as this new discouered false Minister doth euery where most slaunderously in 〈◊〉 nor for that we delight in this art or manner of euasion by Equiuocation though it be no lye at all but rather do allow and like â—ar better oâ— simple plaine and resolute speach in all Catholikes concerning as well matters of ordâ—nary conuersation as of their conscience and religion especially at this tâ—me when God hath giuen them so singuler an occasion to professe the same to his great honour their owne euerlasting good increase oâ— mâ—riâ—t yet â—or that perfection is one thing obligation is another we may not bind men to more then Gods precept byndeth which is neuer to lye or vtter anyvntruth But as for the other of
no Father had any one place or sentence against Protestant religion he would neuer so much haue discredited them all as heere he doth Wherfore the false EquiuocatioÌ„ of M. Iewell is notable in this place 46. But besides this I do lay forth six seuerall examples of egregious wilâ—ull corruptions taken out of M. Iewells bookes and wordes which are ouâ—r long to be repeated heere two or three also of M. Hornes practise in that behalfe who possessed the bishopricke of VVinchester for some yeares sundry out of M. Calfield diuers out of M. Charke and M. Hanmer and no lesse notorious and wilfull out of M. Perkins some very markable out of Syr Francis Hastings a great nuÌ„ber intolerable out of Syr Philip Mornay who was chalenged by the Bishop of Eureux for 800. and affroÌ„ted with threescore at one offer and conuinced of nine in one dayes conference before the present King of France and his Counsell 47. And finally I adioyne to the former for my last witnesse of false dealing Syr Edward Cooke late Attorney Generall to his Maiesty and not long since manifesting himselfe to the world for a writer against Catholiks whose spirit I do shew by sundry examples to be like the rest in that behalfe leauing the defence both of him and the others to M. Mortons patronage who hath had so litle care of their credit as it seemeth that he hath not so much as once meÌ„tioned them or any one of theÌ„ in this his Reply but leaueth euery one to shift for himselfe which omission cannot but seeme somewhat preiudiciall vnto them for that euery man will therof inferre that their causes were so bad as he durst not take their defence in hand but especially will this seeme to be true in the cause of Syr Edward Cooke whome M. Morton had more obligation to deâ—end in that in his booke of full Satisfaction against me he serued himselfe of diuers examples authorityes taken out of the said Knightes booke allwayes repoâ—table Reportes as there he calleth them VVhich he hauing seene answered since that tyme in my Treatise of Mitigation and shewed to be impertinent and nothing to the purpose had obligation therby to haue defeÌ„ded somewhat in this his Reply eyther the things themselues or the Author or both but neyther of them hath he donne and therfore do I meane to handle this omission seuerally in the sequent Paragraph OF M. MORTONS OMISSIONS Concerning the defence of Syr Edward Cooke wholy pretermitted by him §. IIII. ALBEIT perhaps M. Morton may say that his meaning was to take in hand the dâ—fence of his Client Syr Edward Cooke in his other promised Reioynder and therfore said nothing of him now in this his Preambling Reply yet hauing now seene him very hardly charged in two seuerall Bookes the one of the Catholick Deuine in aÌ„swering to the fiâ—th part of his Reportes the other the Treatise of Mitigation with the like imputations of vntrue dealing as are laid against M. Morton himselfe it seemed that it had byn a point of frendship if not of duty to haue said somewhat for preuenting and staying at least the Readers preiudice as in his Preface he said he did for himselfe especially for so much as he had seene now and read all those places which he borrowed out of M. Cooke to furnish one whole Chapter of his full Satisfaction fully answered and confuted by the Catholicke Deuine in his foresaid Booke which M. Morâ—â—â— might haue at leastwise mentioned among so many other poyntes of lesse importance which he handleth if his hart had not serued him to take vpon him the whole defence 49. But all these indeed are signes of feeblene in both parties I meane as well in the Patron 〈◊〉 the Client for that it is no lesse strange that Syr 〈◊〉 Cooke himselfe hauing set forth a certaine Preface for some excuse of himselfe and this after my Treatise of Mitigation wherin he was so deeply charged with sundrâ— grosse and willfull falshoods had byn seene and read by him and yet to say neuer a word of this charge nor how he could discharge it this silence I say is no lesse straÌ„ge vnto me then the other of M. Morton but rather more for that Syr Edward was to defend himself M. Morton another propria magis premunt our owne affayres do more presse vs then other mens Wherfore to the end that I may somewhat oblige both M. Morton in his promised Reioynder to be more myndfull of this matter and Syr Edward himself if he meane to write any more Bookes against vs to cleare somewhat this Charge that was layd against him I shall repeate the same againe here as it was there set downe in my other Treatise Thus theÌ„ I wrote at that tyme. 50. Our last example said I shall be of Syr Edward Cooke lately the Kings Attorney who hauing taken vpon him these yeares past to be both a sharpe writer and earnest Actor against Catholicks semeth therwith also to haue drunke of this spirit in such abouÌ„dant measure as he is like in time to ouerrunne all the rest if he go foreward as he hath begunne For that being admonished not long a goe by one that answered his last Booke of Reportes of diuers notorious his excesses committed in this kind he is men say so far of from correcting or amending the same as he hath not only in a late large declamatioÌ„ against Catholiks in a Charge giuen by him at Norâ—ich repeated and auouched againe the same excesses but hath added others also therunto of much more apparant â—alsity As for example he was admonished among other points that it was a notorious vâ—truth which he had wrytten and printed that for the first tenne yeares of Q. Elizabethes Raigne no one person of what religion or Sect soeuer did refuse to go to the Protestants Church Seruice which the Answerer confuteth so clearly by so many witnesses as a man would haue thought that the matter would neuer haue byn mentioned more for very shame and yet now they say that the Attorney being made a Iudge hath not only repeated the same but auouched it also againe with such asseueration in his foresaid Charge as if it had neuer byn controlled or proued false 51. Nay further they wryte that he adioyned with like asseueration diuers other things no lesse apparantly false then this As for example that Pope Pius Quintus before he proceded to any Ecclesiasticall Censure against Q. Elizabeth wrote vnto her a Letter offering to allow ratiâ—y 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 doe he did excoÌ„municate her By which tale he acquiteth notwithstanding Catholiks if you marke it from procuring that Excommunication for rebellion which elswhere he ofteÌ„ obiecteth most odiously against them For if vpon this cause she were excommunicated what part
had Catholicks therin But yet I must needs say that the fiction 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 ReligioÌ„ 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 CoÌ„munion booke which are held by the Catholicke Church for heresy and so condemned by the Councell of Trent and other Councells And now you know it is a ground among vs that a Pope that should be an Hereticke or approue of heresy thereby 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 the 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 therein not only his credit and honesty by expresse termes of protestation but euen his â—aith also to God and man a great adueÌ„ture no doubt And for that I assure my self that the greater part 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 muâ—t needs be a great blemish to my Lords credit at the beginning of his â—udgship that in other things also he be not belieued 52. But I vnderstaÌ„d 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 appertaine to the iniuring of Catholicks and afterward returne with the agrieuances to the Iudge him selfe 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 accideÌ„t for before we did thinke that his ouerlashing in speaches when he was Attorney did proceed in great part of the liberty of that office and that when he came to be Iudge he would reforme his ConscieÌ„ce ratione Status in regard of his state of life but now it seemeth that he is far worse though this I say shal be left by me to others to be discussed vpon the sight of the foresaid printed Bookes 53. 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 party in his answere to the said Reports which Answere is in England And albeit thereby may easily be seene the taleÌ„t which M. Attorney had while he was Attorney in this kind of worst Equiuocation notwithstanding his often declamations against the other sort 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 and bearing away And it is this 54. That whereas in answering of diuers lawes statutes and ordinances which the Attorney alleaged out of the Raignes of sundry aÌ„cient Kinges to proue that they did exercise spirituall authority and iurisdiction the Deuine sometymes not hauing the law bookes by him out of which the said lawes or authorities were cyted supposing the allegations to be ordinarily true â—or who would suspect lawiers to be false in their citations 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 apperteyned though sometymes also he was forced to suspect some fraude and therepon requested such as had commodity in England to see the Bookes that they would peruse the places and take them out Verbatim which some haue done and haue found such store of Equiuocations and false dealing in the alleaging therof as neuer could be imagined in a man of his calling I shal only set down one example and it shal be the first that is cited by him in the whole Booke to wit of the Charter of King Kenidphus of the VVest Saxons vnto the Abbey of Abindon in Barkshire which Charter M. Attorney set downe with this Preface To confirme saith he those that hold the truth and to satisfy such as being not instructed know not the ancient and moderne lawes c. these few demonstratiue prooses shall serue 55. And then beginneth he with the said Charter of king Kenulphus before the coÌ„quest meaning to proue therby that the said king did giue vnto the said Abbey of AbindoÌ„ spirituall iurisdiction by vertue of his temporall Crowne exempting the same from all authority of the Bishop which indeed was done by the Pope and so the Charter it self 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 recited by him in Latin and left without any translation to make the matter more obscure then shall we lay forth also the true Case whereby wil be seene how true a dealer M. Attorney is in those his writyngs and protestations which after we shall more largely consider of Thus then beginneth the Charter 56. Kenulphus Rex c. per literas suas Patentes coÌ„silio consensu Episcoporum SenatoruÌ„ 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 vâ—iâ—itatibus ad eandem pertinentibus tam in magnis quà m in modâ—cis rebus in aeternam haereditatem Et quòd praedictus Ruchinus 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 predicti decreto subiiciantur ita quòd c. Thus goeth the Charter as M. Attorney alleageth it which in English is as followeth 57. King Kenulphus c. by his letters Patents with the Counsayle consent of the Bishops and Counsaylours of his Nation did giue to the Monastery of Abindon in Barkeshire and to one Ruchinus Abbot of that Monastery a certaine portion of his land to wit â—ifteene Mansions in a place called by the Country men Culnam with all proâ—its and coâ—modities grâ—â—t â—nd small appertayning thereunto for â—ueâ—lasâ—ing inâ—eritance And that the â—oresaid Râ—â—â—inus c. should be quiet from all right of the Bishop for euer so as the inhabitaÌ„ts of that place shall not be depressed
for the tyme to come by the yoke of any Bâ—shop or his Officers but that in all euents of things Controuâ—rsies of Cases they shal be subiect to the dâ—cree of the Abbot of the said Monastery So as c. And theÌ„ doth M. Attorney continue his speach thus 58. This Charter was pleaded in 1. H. 7. vouched by Stanâ—ord as at large appeareth which Charter granted aboue 850. yeares sytâ—ece was aâ—ter confirmâ—d per Edwinum BritaÌ„niâ—e AngioruÌ„ Regem Monarcham anno Domini 955 By which appeareâ—h that the King by this Charter made in Parliament for it appeareth to be made by the Counsâ—ll and consâ—â—nt of his Bishops and Senators of his Kingdome which wâ—re assâ—mâ—led in Parlamâ—nt did discharged and exâ—mpt the said Abbot frâ—m the iurisdiction of the Bishop c. And by the same Charter did grant to the same Abbot Ecclâ—siasâ—icall iurisdiction within his said Abbâ—â— whâ—ch Ecclesiasâ—icall Iurisdiction bâ—ing deriued fâ—oÌ„â—he Câ—oâ—â— contynned vntill the dissoluâ—ion oâ— the said Abbey in the Raigne 〈◊〉 K. Henry the eight So he 59. And by this you may see what an important ConclusioÌ„ he doth inâ—erre of the Kings supreme Iurisdiction in spirituall affaires at that tyme whereunto the Deuine comming to answere and supposing that M. Attorney would not â—alsify or bely his Authors hauing protested most solemnly fol. 40. oâ— his Booke that he had citâ—d truly the very words and texts oâ— the lawes resolutions iudgmâ—nts and actes of Paâ—lament all 〈…〉 and in print without any inâ—erence argumâ—nt or ampliâ—icaâ—iâ—n quoting particulerly the Bookes years leaues Chapters and other such lâ—ke certayne referencâ—s as euery man at his 〈◊〉 may see and read them c. The Answerer I say hearing this formall protestation and supposing besides that the man would haue some respect to â—is credit honour in this behalf granting all as it lay answered the same as you may see in his Booke But now vpoÌ„ better search it falleth out that this whole Case was falsely alleaged by M. Attorney in the very point of the principall CoÌ„trouersy in hand about the Kings spirituall Iurisdiction for that whatsoeuer the Charâ—ter did ascribe expresly to the Pope and his authority the Attorney suppressing the true words relateth it as procâ—eding from the King temporall authority of his Crowne For proofe wherof I shall set downe the very words of my learned freÌ„ds letter out of England about this point after view taken of the law bookes themselues and then let any man say how far M. Attorney is to be credited in any thing he writeth or speaketh against Catholicks 60. As concerning saith my friend the Charter of King Kenulphus for the Sanctuary of the Monastery of Abindon you must know that M. Attorney hath egregiously abused his Reader in that and other pointes for the Case standeth thus That in the first yeare of King Henry the 7. Humfrey Stafford was attainted by Act of Parlament of high treason tooke Sanctuary first in Colchester in Essex and after fled to Culnam and tooke Sanctuary in the Abbey of Abindon and being taken from thence brought vnto the Tower of London and from thence brought vnto the Kings Bench he pleaded that he was drawne by force out of the said SaÌ„ctuary of Culnam and praied his Counsaile to pleade that point which by all the Iudges of both Benches was granted vnto him And so they pleaded in this manner 91. Idem Humphridus per Consilium suum dixit quòd Kenulphus Rex MercioruÌ„ per Literas suas pateÌ„tes consilio coÌ„sensu EpiscoporuÌ„ SenatoruÌ„ gentis suae largitus suit Monasterio de Abindon accuidam Ruchino tunc Abbati Monasterij illius quandam ruris sui portionem id est quindecim Mansias in loco qui à Ruricolis â—unc nuncupabatur Culnam cum omnibus vâ—ilitatibus ad eandâ—m partinentibus tam in magnis quam in modicis rebus in aeternam haereditatem Et quòd praedicius Ruchiâ—us ab omni Regis obstaculo â—piscopali â—ure in sâ—mpitâ—rnum esset quietus vt inhabitatorâ—seius nullius Regis aut Miniâ—â—roruÌ„ suorum Episcopiâ—e aut suorum Offiâ—ialium iâ—go inde deprimerentur sed in cunctis rerum euentibus disâ—tissionibus causarum Abbatis Monasterij praedicti decreto suâ—ijâ—â—râ—ntur Ita quòd c. And here ceaseth M. Attorney leauing out as you see in his recitall the wordes that go before ab omni Regis obstaculo that the Monastery should be free from all obstacle of the King as also these words vt inhabitatores eius nullius Regis aut MinistroruÌ„ suorum iugo deprimantur that the inhabitaÌ„ts be not opprest with any yoake of any King or his Ministers Wherby is euideÌ„t that the King in his Charter did for his part giue exemptions from temporall and Royall power But especially the fraud is seene by cutting of the wordes that do ensue which decide the whole controuersy which are these Et etiam allegauit vltra quòd Leo tunc Papa concessit dicto Abbati dictas immunitates priuilegia Et quod Edwinus tunc Britanniae Anglorum Rex Monarchus coÌ„â—â—ssit quòd praesatum Monastâ—rium omnis terrâ—nae sâ—râ—â—tuâ—is esset liberum quae à prâ—decâ—ssoriâ—us suis Catholicis videlicet à dicâ—o sancto Lâ—â—ne Papa dicâ—o Rege Kâ—nâ—lpho c. Et quòd virtute literarum Bullarâ—m praediciarum tâ—mpore conâ—ecâ—ionis earuâ—dâ—m eadem villa de Culnam suit Sanctuarium lâ—cus priuilegiatus c. Which in English is thus And moreouer the said â—umphrey Stafford by his CouÌ„saile alleaged further for himselfe that Pope Leo had granted vnto the said Abbot the said immunities prâ—uiledges that king Edwin theÌ„ King Monarch ouer all the English in Britany had granted that the said Monastery should be free from all earthly seruitude which by his Catholicke predecessors to wit the said holy Pope Leo and the said King Kenâ—lphuâ— was granted and that at the time of the making of the foresaid letters Patents and Bulles the said village or Towne of Culnam was a Sanctuary priuileged place by vertue of the said Patents and Bulles 62. This is word for word the very plea of Humphrey Stafford for the Sanctuary of the Monastery of Abindon as it was pleaded by his learned Counsaile in law euen as it is recorded in the Reports of the years of K. Hâ—nry the seauenth as they are printed by Pinson the law printer in the tyme of K. Henry the eight before the Protestant religion came vp And the Lord Brooke in his Abridgement of the law in the title of Corone placito 129. doth accordingly set downe the same Case with mentioning of the Bulles of Pope Leo for the said immunities and priuileges But all the Protestant editions in the tyme of the late Quene Elizabeth printed by Tottell and Yestwort haue committed a notable tricke of falsification in leauing out altogether these markable words That Leo then Pope did
other Princes being of contrary beliefe haue also made the contrary lawes 16. These heads of demonstration togeather with foure more not vnlike to these which for breuity I do pretermit being laid forth at large by the Deuine with the manifest proofes and declarations out of the ancient and irrefragable histories of our Nation to make this euident inference that our Christian Kings before the Conquest did all of theÌ„ acknowledge the Popes supreme Iurisdiction in spirituall affayres and consequently they acknowledged also that it appertayned not to themselues And wheras the Attorney to proue his assertion alleageth two examples before the Conquest the one of K. Kenulphus about a Priuiledge he gaue to the Abbey of Abingdon the other of K. Edward the Conâ—essour that sayth That a King as Vicar of the highest must defend the Church it is answered by the Deuine that both of these examples do make against M. Attorney The first for that there is expresse mention that this Priuiledge was giuen by Authority from the Pope and the second that it is nothing to the purpose K Edward speaking of temporall Authority wheÌ„ he sayth That the King is Vicar of the highest and in the very same place insinuating most manifestly that in spirituall affayres the Pope is supreme and consequently that both these authorities were frandulently brought in by M. Attorney yea the former most willâ—ully corrupted as I do shew more largely and particulerly in the end of my twelfth Chapter of my booke of Miâ—igation And was not all this to the purpose Or will M. Attorney call this a Nihil dicit wheÌ„ the cause shall come before him in seat of Iudgment 17. Lastly the Deuine comming downe from the tyme of the Conquest vnto our dayes to wit to the raigne of K. Henry the viij sheweth largely in the seuerall liues of euery one of those Kings that in this point of the Popes supreme Ecclesiaâ—ticall Authority they were all vniforme in one the selfe same beliefe and acknowledgment which he proueth out of their owne wordes factes lawes histories other authenticall proofes And if at any time there fell out any disagreement or disgust betweene any King and the Pope that liued in his tyme it was only vpon particuler interests complaints of abuses by officers euill informers or the like for remedy wherof some restrictions agreements or concordates were made as now they be also in other Catholick Countries not for that any English King from the very first Christened vnto K. Henry the 8. nor he neyther for the first 20. yeares of his raigne did euer absolutly deny the Popes supreme Iurisdiction in Ecclesiasticall causes 18. And secondly the sayd Deuine answereth fully to all those pieces and parcels of lawes that M. Attorney produceth which are shewed either fraudulently to be alledged or wholly misconstred or vtterly to be impertinent to the conclusion which they should inferre And shall this in like manner be iudged from the purpose and a Nihil dicit where now is that Iudge that gaue sentence â—or him in this behalfe will he come forth stand to his sentence Or will Syr Edward Cooke be so vnreasonable in this behalf as to request any man to belieue him that such a Iudgment was giueÌ„ for him Or that he fouÌ„d so vniust a Iudge as would giue such a sentence so contrary to all conscience sense and reason But yow must note that many men haue noted this to be somewhat singular in Syr Edward Cooke as many other points be that when he talketh of Catholicks or their aâ—fayres he is so confident resolute precipitant in his asseuerations against them especially when he preacheth on the Bench or giueth his Charge that except we belieue him at his bare word contrary to all liklihood of truth the most part of that he speaketh will seeme to be wilfull vntruthes spoken against his owne conscience so litle he remembreth the saying of the prophet Pone ostium circumstantiae labijs meis I do not say they are lyes for that were inurbanity considering his present dignity but that they may seeme such to the wyser sort for that they lacke this doore of true circumstances to make them probable wherof we shall haue occasion to touch some more examples afterward Now we shall passe on to examine whether this Nihil dicit obiected to his Aduersary do not fall more iustly vpon himselfe and therwith also an opposite charge called a Nimium dicit which is to speake more then is true THAT THE Imputation of Nihil dicit doth fall more rightly vpon M. Attorney as doth also the Nimium dicit or euerlashing in his assertions §. II. HAVING shewed now that the Nihil dicit cannot be ascribed to the Catholicke Deuine for that he left written so much and so effectuall to the purpose he had in hand it would be an easie mâ—tter to shew in regard of the contrary effectes that the saâ—e remaineth with M. Attorney both for that he answered litle or nothing and that wholy from the purpose The â—irst is manifest by this new Preface of his wherin he answereth scarce halfe a page to more then 400. pages of my booke written against him The second also is not obscure by that I haue written in the precedent Paragraph of the impertinencie of proofs produced against vs which afterward perhaps may be better examined and consequently for both these respects the Nihil dicit lighteth vpon himselfe 20. Now then lâ—tting passe this Nihil dicit we shall contemplate a while the Nimium dicit when more is vttered then the truth with shall be the proper argument and subiect of this present section or Paragraph and this only about such matters as he hath now freshly and lasâ—ly vttered in this Preface that in all conteyneth but one only printed sheet wherby appeareth how great a volume it would arise vnto on our behalfe if we should examine the vntâ—uthes of all his other writings against vs. 21. To begin then with that which before we touched he auoucheth in this his Preamble That he could not fynd in all the booke any autâ—ority out of the bookes of Common lawes oâ— this Realme Acts of Parlaments or any legall and Iudiâ—iall records quoted or cyted by the Catholiâ—ke Deuine for the mantenance oâ— any of his opinions or conceipts wherupon as in Iustice sayth he I ought I had iudgment giuen for me vpon a Nihil dicit Thus farre the Knight wherby you perceaue that the immediate cause of this iudgment giuen in his fauour was grounded vpon this presumption that the Deuine neyther quoted nor cyted any one such witnesse throughout all his booke which if it be euidently false as now I shall proue it then must the Iudge confesse if he will not be Iudex iniquus that the sentence of Nihil dicit is to be reuoked as vniust 22. Let vs see then how true or false this assertion is or rather how many seuerall falshoods
then I suppose his skill in Philosophie or history will be able to auerre or beare him out For that ancient Pliny in his naturall history treating of the nature of the Salamander which lyueth in fyre sayth not that he is hoat fiery but contrary wise so extreme cold of nature as he resisteth the very force of the fire if selfe So as whiles M. Attorney goeth about to accuse his aduersary of too much heate his example inferreth that he is ouer could that he mistooke quid pro quo And was not this a Nimium dicit in like manner 25. Another excesse though of meaner marke including also a NimiuÌ„ dicit is coÌ„mouly noted in Syr Edward all his speaches writings not wanting also in this litle preface which is a heaping together of many latin senteÌ„ces without Englishing or rightly applying them therby to seeme more admirable to the ignorant when they heare so frequent phrases and sentences which they vnderstand not and in other Countries it is accompted Pedanteria or playing the petty Schoolemaister nothing fit for graue men to vse wherof notwithstanding yow haue some store also in this litle Preface though but of one printâ—d sheet of paper as hath beene sayd for both in the first and last page he beginneth and endeth with that and few other pages pasâ—e without some respeâ—sion therof as ille didicit maledicere ego maledicta contenmere which sentence is euidently false in the eye and eares of all men that either haue read our books or heard him speake For as he cannot produce any maledictons of ours against him so haue we as many witnesses of his most bitter rayling against Catholicks Catholick Religion whose cause euery good man ought to esteeme a thousand times more theÌ„ his own as he hath writteÌ„ books scroles or libels against vs or hath giueÌ„ coÌ„tumelious Charges on the Bench which are continuall but especially and by name I remit my selfe to the most insolent inuectiue which he made against vs in his own CouÌ„trey at Norwich on the 4. of August anno Domini 1606. set forth afterward in print and againe in the same place at sundry tymes in the ensuing years in all which iniurious speaches besydes his other poeticall inuentions to make vs odious or ridiculous he triumphed also in this kynd of Grammaticall Pedanteria of alleaging sundry laâ—in sentences against vs wherof I may chance to haue occasion to treate more afterward 26. But I am departed vnawares from the examples of his present Preface and therefore shall returne thither againe When he saw himselfe ouerloaden with the multitude and variety of testimonies for prouing the principall question of the Popes supreme authority spirituall he answered thus For his Deuinitie and histories cyted by him only published in the sayd Booke ad faciendum populum I will not answere for then I should â—ollow him in his errour And is not this a goodly answere Was yt errour in the Deuine or vanity ad â—aciendum populum to proue by grounds of Deuinity Scriptures Fathers practice of the Primitiue Church and other lyke Theologicall proofes that Q. Elizabeth in right could not haue supreme Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction and out of all sortes of histories beloÌ„ging to England to conuince that none of her Ancestours did euer in fact pretend the same Was this only ad â—aciendum populum to hunt after popular applause How impertmently is this Grammaticall phrase applyed by Syr Edward 27. But let vs see the next In reading these and other of my Reportes sayth he I desire the Reader that he would not reade and as it were swallow too much at once for greedy appetites are not of the best digestion the whole is to be attayned by partes and nature which is the best guyde maketh no leape Natura non facit saltum In which words as I acknowlege the aduertisment to be good that a man ought not to reade too much togeather least he confound his memory So why this phrase of Natura non facit saltum is brought in but only for the forsaid Grammaticall oftentatioÌ„ I see not Nature maketh no leape but she procedeth orderly digesting one thing after an other it is true but what is this to proue that a man may not reade to much at one tyme Surely this leape of M. Attorney was somewhat wyde from the purpose and if his wrytings in law-matters be no more gracious and attractiue then are his discourses in Deuinity and Controuersies I presume the Reader that esteemeth his tyme worth the bestowing will not haue need of this aduertisment that he read not ouer much at once in his Reportes for that wearines will soone bring him to that moderation 28. And thus much haue I thought good to say briefly to such points of this Preâ—ace as concerne his Reply to the Catholicke Deuine for in effect Syr Edward answereth no more to all his large Booke theÌ„ now yow haue heard albeit in the â—ormer part of this his Preface he taketh another matter in hand which is first to auerre that the antiquity and excellency of our Municipall lawes in England which he calleth the Common do exceed all other humane lawes whatsoeuer in the world Then for proofe of this he bringeth in a Student of the sayd CoÌ„mon law to propose vnto him foure particuler Cases wherof the laâ—t for which all the other were brought in is whether the ancienâ— lawes oâ—â—ngland did admit any Appeales to Rome in Causes spirituall or Ecclesiasticall and then vaunteth presently thus I had no soâ—uer seene these questions saith he but instantly I found direct and demonstraâ—iue answere vnto the same But by his leaue Syr Edward must haue patieÌ„ce to let me tell him that his Answers are so far of from being demonstratiue that is to say euident certaine and irrepugnable as that they are not so much as Logicall that is to say probable nor haue any true forme or force of a lawfull argument in them for that they go about to proue vniuersalls by particulers and yet do not so much in effect as proue those seely particulers which they pretend These two points then are to be examined first about the supposed antiquity excelleÌ„cy of his Municipall lawes and secondly his proofe and confirmation therof by his Answers to the Students foure questioÌ„s deuised by himselfe For that no Student I suppose of any meane tallent of wit or learning would hauâ— proposed such questions for confirmation of so great a matter as is pretended or would haue byn content with so symple Answers as here are set downe VVHETHER THE Common Municipall Lawes of England be more ancient and excellent than any other humane Lawes of the world §. III. FOR better vnderstanding of this point I shall first set downe some lynes of Syr Edwaâ—ds narration which beginnâ—th thus Since the publishing of the fifth part of my Reports a good Student of the Common Lawes desyred to be
not seene the Author himself calling this my curtesy a dramâ— of sugar Was this diligence Was this iealousy of his owne infirmity Nay he saith more that he hath perâ—ormed greater exacâ—nes in this point then any one Author to his knowledg for many ages Is not this excâ—ssiue ouerlashing against others and ouerweening in himselfe What one Author can he bring â—orth among Catholicke writers who in a booke of this small bulke and bignes may be found to haue vttered the least part of such manifest vntruthes as heere haue bin proued and conuinced against him 7. He hath taken in hand before as you haue seene Cardinall Bellarmine to search pick some matter out of him that might seeme to beare some shew of vntruth but hath bin able to find no one as we in the third Chapter of this our Answere haue made it plaine and yet is there great difference betwene the case of Cardinall Bellarmine and M. Morton if you coÌ„sider it For wheras he writeth for some excuse of himself in this place that it is almost impossible for any man citing â—oure or fyue hundred testimonies as factors in their accompts but that by chance he will erre in some particulers without note of â—raude or Cosenage then much more may this be yelded to the Cardinalls works and authorities cited therin which no doubt are fifty for one at least in regard of this Preamble and then ensueth this comparison that M. Morton hauing vttered so many grosse and witting vntruthes in so little a booke the Cardinall so few or rather none at all that M. Mort. can find and prooue in so many thousand authorities as in his volumes are cyted it maketh more notable the vanity of this first challeng or brag that he hath done more in strict examination and censuring of his owne bookes then any other author for many ages togeather 8. Thirdly the reckoning is now made so cleere and perspicuous subductis ex vtraque parte rationibus by casting the accompts most exactly on both sides especially by our last three precedent Chapters to wit of the fourtene falshoods obiected against him which he chose out to answere but could not and then by the twice fourteene which he wittingly pretermitted as vnanswerable and lastly the number of new lyes and falshoods vttered in discharge of the former the reckoning I say is made so euident and palpable as it must needs cause great laughter to see M. Morton come forth and say after all this That if he haue not in the iealousie of his infirmity so reuiewed and examined his booke not as an Author but as a Censurer discouering his owne escapes c. he will confesse himselfe worthie of all the criminations fraudes tricks and deceipts layd against him by his aduersarie wherin I see no other way can be taken by iustice but as in suites of obligation when the conditions are not fulfilled the penalties must be vndergone by the obliged wherunto by band and obligation he is lyable that is to say M. Morton must be coÌ„demned of all the imputations before recyted 9. Fourthly to the end it may appeare that not only I who am his Country-man haue obserued this manner of dealing in his treatises written in English but strangers also in such pieces as he hath set forth in the Latin tongue though I confesse in all truth sincerity that I neuer read or saw any thing of his in that tongue I shall heere set downe the words of a learned stranger that some daies past wrote a letter out of Germany to a friend of his about two books of M. Mortons confuted by hym and almost ready to go to the prynt I know not the very title of the said bookes but I haue the originall Letter of the writer imparted vnto me by my learned friend to whome it was written I haue shewed the same to sundry others who will testifie that it is not feigned by me By which letter is euident what stuffe is conteyned in the said two Bookes and what opinion he hath of the Author And if I shall vnderstand that any fraud or falshood is suspected on my part in this relation I shall procure the Answerer to cause this Epistle of his to be printed with the said Answere his words therefore are these treating with his frieÌ„d of the edition of his said Answere The Censure of a stranger concerning two books of M. Mortons set forth in Latin against the Iesuits Quid Mortoni editionem retardârit in proximis iam perscripsi Liber quin magnus sit nullo breuiâ—atis studio effici potest Nam Mortoni liber crassus est ex nostrorum potissimùm scriptis mendaciter citatis totus ille cento consutus est Vnde vt hominis mendacissimi impudentia prodatur necessarium est singulorum verba sic primò poni vt abillo relata sunt eadem deinde cum fide ex ipsis Authoribus recensenda cum tempestiua aliqua Mortonianae artis commendatione Primum librum habet ille ad 100. circiter Capita varias materias imo omnes pene iam controuersas continet prout ab illo emissiâ— est totum confutaui tot in illo adeoque crassa mendacia demonstraui vt frustra sit ad alterum progredi in quo homo insulsissimus plerumque ex primo repetit familiarissimis sibi figuris hoc est mendacijs alijs aliterilla exornat itaque ex hoc paucula taÌ„tùm delibabo Si Scribam inuenero legendi gnaruÌ„ dabo operam vt exscribatur c. Nam in hoc labore suscipieÌ„do non aliud spectaui quà m vt errantibus asieno sub nomine viam veritatem ostenderem Vnde in singulis Capitibus Catholicum primo sensum quem Mortonus peruertit exposui aliqua Scripturae vel Paâ—rum authoritate stabilini Mortoni deinde mendacia calumnias detexi Quòd factu non admodum suit difficile nisi quod laboriosum fuit Authores quos citat conquirere singulos excutere vt de Mortoni perfidia euidenter constaret Librum Passauij reliqui quò simul atque rediero spero autem nosilluc ante Pentecosten redituros me operi acâ—ingam c. Grecij 20. Aprilis 1608. G. I. 11. Thus that learned stranger who I assure my selfe must needs laugh hartily if he shall vnderstand that M. Morton maketh such speciall protestations and challenges of the integrity of his conscience and iealosy oâ— his infirmity and of the seuere examining and censuring his owne bookes before they come abroad and yet that they come forth with so many grosse falsities as both he and we and all other his Readers that be not passionate do find I haue not thought good to translate this Epistle into English for that there be some wordes more sharp therin then I would willingly vse against an Aduersary whome I seeke rather to pacifie and satisfie with reason if it be possible then to exulcerate by sharpnes of speach
and concealed by him pag. 490. § 4. Of M. Mortons omissions concerning the deâ—ence of Syr Edward Cooke wholy pretermitted by him pag. 500. § 5. The discharge and reckoning about the former charge made to Syr Edward Cooke pag. 510. § 6. To the other â—oure Cases obiected by M. Morton out of Syr Edward Cooke pag. 523. THE EIGHT CHAPTER VVHich by occasion of two new Prefaces lately set forth by Syr Edward Cooke doth handle diuers controuersies with him aswell about a Nihil dicit obiected by him to his Aduersary as also about the antiquity and excellency of the Municipall Common-lawes of England and some other points It hath 6. Paragraphes pag. 529. § 1. Of a new Preface set â—orth lately by Syr Edward Cooke now Iudge wherin he condemneth his Aduersary the Catholicke Deuine of a Nihil dicit and with what iustice or iniustice he doth the same pag. 531. § 2. That the imputation of Nihil dicit doth fall more rightly vpon M. Attorney as doth also the Nimium dicit which is to vtter more then is true pag. 542. § 3. VVhether the common Municipall lawes of England be more ancient and excellent then any other humane lawes of the world pag. 551. § 4. About foure seuerall questions sayd to be propounded by the student in law and solued by the Iudge for confirmation of the antiquity and eminency of our moderne English lawes pag. 573. § 5. How that the foresayd Nimium dicit as it importeth Falsum dicit is notoriously incurred by Syr Edward Cooke in sundry other assertions also appertayning to his owne faculty of the law which were pretermitted by the Catholicke Deuine in his Answere to the fifth part of Reports pag. 587. § 6. Of another Preface instantly come vnto my hands prefixed before the L. Cookes seauenth part of Reportes conteyning new iniuries offered to Catholickes by him pag. 604. THE NINTH CHAPTER VVHich layeth togeather another choice number of new lyes made willfully by M. Morton ouer and aboue the old in this his Preamble whilst he pretendeth to excuse or defend the said old It hath 20. severall heads pag. 625. 1. About the equiuocatioÌ„ of Saphyra he affirmeth me to say that there is an Equiuocation which no reseruation can saue from a lie p. 262. 2. About Theodoret egregiously corrupted by him pag. 629. 3. Claudius Espencaeus falsified and made to say that which he doth not pag. 629. 4. Of Doctor Franciscus Costerus notably abused made to write that which he neuer thought pag. 630. 5. About Gratian falsely accused for â—alsification pag. 631. 6. About symbolyzing of Protestants with Pelagians three witting vntruthes pag. 632. 7. Concerning the Councell of Eliberis and Sixtus Senensis misvnderstood pag. 634. 8. Of Bullingers blasphemous doctrine about the Trinity falsely ascribed to Gregory de Valentia pag. 635 9. The contention betweene S. Augustine and S. Cyprian about rebaptizing misrelated pag. 636. 10. VVhether Catholike authors do speake contrary to their owne iudgments in the article of Purgatory pag. 637. 11. VVhen the letters of T. M. came to be vnderstood what they signified pag. 638. 12. About Holinshead and Iohn Fox guilfully alleadged and stood vpon pag. 638. 13. Fraudulent dealing in relating the death of Pope Anastasius pag. 639. 14. About Pope Gregory the thirteenth his licence for printing the Câ—nnon-law egregiously calumniated pag. 640. 15. How the Manichean heresie is imputed to Caluin and T. Mortons deceiptfull dealing therin pag. 641. 16. About the Nouatian heresy obiected to Protestants and false trickes therin pag. 642. 17. D. Azorius his fiue rules about Equiuocation fraudulently and falsely applyed pag. 643. 18. VVhether the Iesuit Emanuel Sà doth coÌ„tradict all EquiuocatioÌ„ or no and how egregiously he is abused therein pag. 644. 19. VVhether Iohn Maldonate were against all Equiuocation and whether P. R. did fly to answer him pag. 645. 20. About Polydore Virgil falsified in two very materiall points pag. 646. Out of which twenty heads aboue fifty particuler falsities are deduced and plainely demonstrated besides the former THE 10. AND LAST CHAP. COnteyning new Challenges Protestations vaunts and other vehemeÌ„t assertions of M. Mort. that wrappe him in baÌ„ds of further absurdâ—â—ies then any of his â—ormer errours and ouersights before layd downe It hath 3. Paragraphes conteyning 12. new Challenges of M. Morton pag. 649. § 1. First concerning his owne person and what new protestations and Challenges he maketh thereabout pag. 651. § 2. Then concerning the person of his aduersary P. R. and foure new Challenges against him pag. 659. § 3. Thirdly about his book cause it self foure other Challenges wherwith he concludeth his whole worke offering to haue it burned if he performe not what he promiseâ—â—â— pag. 664. AN APPENDIXâ— COncerning a case of Equiuocation lately written out of England wherin resolution is demaunded about the false oath of two Ministers VVhether iâ— may be salued by the licence of Equiuocation or no Togeather with a note out of Doctour King his Sermon preached at the Court 5. Nouemb. 1608. so â—ar â—orth as it toucheth Equiuocation p. 671. AN ALPHABETICAL TABLE OR INDEX OF THE CHIEF MATTERS HANDLED IN THIS BOOKE A ABsurdities of M. MortoÌ„ cap. 2. num 34. AdriaÌ„ the Pope whether choked with a fly c. 5. n. 20.22 Ananias and Saphyra their fact discussed cap. 2. num 23. c. The ridiculous Antiquity of the Venetian lawes cap. 8. n. 40. Appeales to Rome cap. 3. num 18. cap. 8. num 75. seq Azor alleaged to condemne EquiuocatioÌ„ in that place wher he expresly auoucheth it c. 4. n. 69. c. cap. 6. n. 16.17 c. See ibidem num 9.10.11 c. B BEllarmine charged to impute falsely Pelagianisme to the Protestants cap. 3. num 58. His true assertion touching the same ibid. num 61. He truly chargeth Protestants with the heresy of Nouatus ibid. n. 67. Most falsely accused of contradiction by M. Morton touching a place out of Theodoret. ibid. n. 94. c. Item for cyting S. Cyprian and S. Augustine for traditions Ibid. n. 104.105 c. Item for alleaging S. Ambrose S. Hilary S. Augustine for Purgatory num 123. Bellarmines words cuÌ„ningly clipped and changed by M. Morton concerning an errour of Caluin and Beza cap. 5. num 96. Binius abused about the death of Pope Vrban cap. 5. num 34. Broughtons censure of the English Bible cap. 1. num 67. Britans their manners conuersaâ—â—on and lawes in Cesars time c. 8. n. 35.36.37 deinceps British lawes See Lawes Q. Brundeâ—ica her speach cap. 6. num 38. C CAluin intangled about Purgatory and concerning his atrium or porch c. 3. n. 92. Caluinisme is heresy by the iudgment of other Protestants cap. 7. num 6.7 9. L. of CaÌ„terbury charged to haue corrupted a passage in M. Reynolds cap. 5. num 88. The place in Carerius about Verè Verò examined c. 1. n. 70.71 Cassander abused cap. 6. n. 79. The Catholicke Deuine defeÌ„ded against Syr
11 Nicep l. 16. c. 12. Eâ—ag l. 3. c. 18. â—â— 23. â—ibâ—â—at c. 19. * Disâ—in 19. cap. 9. a lib. 4. Hierarc cap. 8. b Lib. 2. Propâ—g c In visib monarchia lib. 7. fol. 386. d tomo 6. in Anastasio e Lib. 4. de Pâ—ntif cap. 10 §. Decimus nonus est Anastasius 2. In vita Anâ—stâ—sij Imperatoris L. de vitis Pontif. Româ—n cap. 115. About the death of Vrbanus tertius calumniated by T. M. Anno 1187.13 Cal. Nouemb a in Henrico 20. p. 362. in fine b Lib. 3. c. 34. in fine Preamb. p. 98. 99. The authors that wrote of Pope Vrban his death Aâ—out the asâ—â—rtion of D. Boucher peruerted Pâ—eamb pag. 95. D. Boucher de abdic l. 3. c. 16. Mitig. pag. 80. Disâ—ou pag. 23. A notable corruptioÌ„ about D. Boucher 1. Pet. 2. Concil CoÌ„stant Sâ—ss 15. Catholick moderatioÌ„ towards censuring of Princes Knox in hist. p. 372. Knox appel fol. 33. A very pretty euasion of M. Mort. The ouerthrow of his euasion M. Mort. condemned in the principall Two accessoryes The secoÌ„d Accessory About the abuse of M. VVilliam Reinolds Mitig. pag. 68. Discou pag. 8. Râ—inold de iusla Râ—ip auctoâ—itate c. 1. M. Reynolds discourse Rom. 13. Pag. 100. A strange euasion of M. Mort. by accusing R.C. A moderate satisfaction demaunded for a great crime The word but maliciously inserted Preamb. pag. 100. How the authority of Kings is from God and how from man The particle bâ—t slily inserted â—y M. Mort. An obiectioÌ„ made by himself which he is not able to solue Matth. 16. Marc. 5. Diuers shiftes to get out About the decree of Gratian wroÌ„gfully alledged Mitig. pag. 82. Another Cosenage about a text of Gratian. Apud Grat. causa 15. q. 6. cap. 4. Gloss. A doubt proposed solued See of â—his â—â—stoâ—y the disâ—utatioÌ„ bâ—fâ—â—e the King of Fâ—ance aâ—nexed to the Confut of the first 6. Monâ—thes of Foxes Calendar Foure falâ—â—â—oodes about one thing Pream p. 104. Mitig. p. 84. nu 52. Considerations vpon the former coâ—fessioÌ„ of T. M. Supra c. 2. The conference betweene M. Stocke and M. Morton for diuiding the shame of falsifying Discou p. 4. full Satisâ— part 1. pag. 21. Mitigat p. 82. Pream p. 104. M Stocks defence The sword scabbard both wounding M. Mortons cause Greg. 9. decret l. 5. tit 7. c. 16. Medin Cod. de restitut q. 3. causa 9. Tolet. lib. 1. Instruc cap. 13. §. Sextus About another false pretended decree in Gratian. Mit. p. 84. Decret l. 5. de haeret tit 7. c. 5 The seuere sentence of S. August against hereticks August l. â—e Fide Cath. Hier. cont Viâ—il cit a Gratiano caus 23. q. 8. c. Legi A Catalogue of corruptions The Comedy bâ—twene M. Moâ—toÌ„ M. Stock Preamb. pa. 107. Vide Posseâ—in in â—iblioth verbo Gratianus M. MortoÌ„ more pardonable then M. Stocke Deutr. 31. M. Mort. fond Dilemma Whether spilling shedding of bloud be all one Preamb. pag. 108. A shamefull denying of a Canon in the third Councell of Carthage About the Extrauagant for the Glosse Mit. p. 173. 174. Disco p. 34 Extrauag coÌ„munium de Maiorâ— ObedieÌ„tia §. VnaÌ„ sanctam Extrauagant of Bonifa 8. falsly alleaged Addit ad â—om extrauag de maiorit in c. 1. ad finem Preamb. p. â—10 A ridiculous answere by a figure Preamb. p. 111. A notorious seÌ„sles falsification of Pope Gregory the 13. Extrauag CoÌ„mun l. 1. de maiorit Obed. cap. 1. ad finem About the hâ—â—â—â—â—e of Autothâ—isme obiected to Caluin and the corruptioÌ„ of Bellarmines wordes thâ—rin Mitig. p. 230. Bellarm. wordes frauduleÌ„â—ly alledged Caluins manner of speach coÌ„demned by Bellarmine Poore weak answeres Preamb. p. 113. M. MortoÌ„ hardly pressed M. Mort. idle repetition of thinges before discussed About a place of Isay 29. See before cap. 1. §. 5. cap. 4. §. 10 Isay. 29.9 Mitig. p. 88. About verè verò in Careriê° Mitigation p. 234. See before cap. 1. §. 6. cap. 4. §. 10. About Dolman falsely alleged See cap. 1. §. 7. Mitigat p. 72. ImpertineÌ„t â—itations About the succession of ProtestaÌ„t Pâ—inces Mitig. p. 72. full satisfact part 1. c. 13. p. 9. Preamb. p. 116. About Otho Frisingensis peruertedâ— Supra c. 1. 〈◊〉 8â— 103. cap. 4. §. 10 About LaÌ„mbertus Scafnaburg peruerted M. MortoÌ„s fond animosity whereoâ— see afterward c. â— â—itiâ— p. 215. nuÌ„ 37. Lamb. Schafnab in histor Germaniae ann 1077. sub fineÌ„ The submission of the Emperor Henry the fourth to Pope HildebraÌ„d at CanusiuÌ„ Lambert vbi supra A comparison expressing the fraud of T. M. Preamb p. 119. 120. Pag. 1â—â—â— M. Mortons narration out of LaÌ„bert about Pope Gregories excoÌ„munication What manner of ItaliaÌ„ Bishops impugned Gregory 7. A case expressing the nature of M. Mortons calumniation out of Lambertus p. 120. Lâ—mb vbi supra an 1077. Preamb. p. 120. 121. The vnfaithfull dealing of T.M. in alleaging LaÌ„bertê° his wordes About the folly obiected to P. R. How Lamb. autority might haue byn alleaged without lying Infelicity obiected against the argumeÌ„t of P. R. Diuers acceptioÌ„s of SaÌ„ctity 1. Cor. 1. 2. Cor. 1. 15. The description of saÌ„ctity by S. Dionysius c. 12. De diuin nominib The bad Card. Benno and his feygned booke by the Protestantes Bellar. l. 4. de RoÌ„ Pontif. c. 13. Preamb. p. 123. Vrsperg in anno 1080. p. 224. edit Basil anno 1569. How Vrspergensis writeth in fauour of P. Greg. Preamb. p. 124. M. Mortons whole supposal false Benno the couÌ„terfaite Cardinall A comparison expressing M. MortoÌ„s case of vnfaithfull dealing Binius tomo 3. Concil p. 1281. The testimony of Binius for Pope Gregory How absurdly blasphemy is obiected to P. R. for alleaging an example of the Euanglists Mitig. p. 217. What blasphemy is D. Tho. 2.2 q. 13. art 1. Preamb. p. 125. Comparisons may be piously made betweene God creatures Math. 13. Luc. 23. Matt. 20. Luc. 19. Luc. 12. Luc. 13. A false trick or two in T. M. for a parting blow Epist. dedicat to the L. Salâ—â—b Preamb. p. 88. Vasquez mistaken and slaundered about the nature of heresie pertinacy Mitig. pa. 219. The first example of corruptions Vasq. disp 126. c. 3. in 1. Tom. About the the nature of heresie and pertinacy Ibid. c. 1â— Valentia 2.2 qu. 11. puncto 1. Turrec 4. suÌ„ma par 2. c. 1. Doctores omnes 4. d. 13. D. Tho. 2.2 art 2. vide etiam Cau. 14. q. 3. Can. Dixit Apostolus Can. Qui in Ecclesia Obstinacy necessarie to heresy Vasquez his discourse about pertinaâ—ie How heresy is consummated in the vnderstanding and not in the will Aug. l. de vtil cred ad Honor. Aug. l. 4. conâ—i Doâ—at c. 16. S. Austins explication of the whole matter Azor corrupted about the word Peâ—tinaciâ—er Mitig. pag. 225. De iâ—st pun Hâ—er l. 1. cap. 10. Azor corrupted Azor peruerted about the Case of CoueÌ„try Mitig. 430 §. 7.
Scripture â—ith The Sonne shall not beare the iniquitie of â—â—e Father nor the Father of the Sonne but eâ—â—ry one must answere for himselfe let vs seâ—â—â—en how M. Morton doth performe this point â—â—en then saith he when I was in greatest â—â—â—lousie of mine owne myscarriage I conceiâ—â—d a double matter of comfort First from â—â— selfe that knowing I durst present my â—â—plications vnto the Iudge of the secret â—â—ughts of all hartes I doubted not but that â—ng able with true confidence to appeare â—ore God I should not greatly feare the â—â—sure of man This is one defence more Rhetoricall then reall 〈◊〉 how could he dare with such confidence appeare before God with the burthen of so many â—ntruthes as afterward you will see conuinced â—â—ainst him especially in the three last Chapters â—f this our Answere And if he be not able to â—efend them before man how will he iustifie theÌ„â—efore God Let vs see his second defence for this first standeth only vpon his owne confidence SecoÌ„dly saith he from my aduersary tooke I matter of comfort presuming that he that would write in defence of mentall Equiuocation would be found to equiuocate in writing also This you see is but a presumption and that a very poore one For as a man may write of warre and yet not fight and of Agriculture or husbandry and yet neither plow nor sow So may he write of Equiuocation and yet not Equiuocate and Equiuocate also and yet not lye So as this could be but a silly comfort for M. Morton to presuppose and hope that I would Equiuocate in writing of Equiuocation which was not needfull And if I had yet might I do it without lying and so nothing therby haue relieued his case that was so deeply charged with that fault And finally if I had bene able to be conuinced of any point in that kind as afterward you will see that I was not yet S. Augustines rule is Quod societas peccantium auget potiùs quà m excusat peccatum Fellowship in sinne increaseth rather then excuseth the fault Though truly it may seâ—me that M. Morton would highly esteeme this fellowship with me if he could bring it about and thinke himselfe well defended if he could attaine it Which I am lead to belieue not only by his labour diligence solicitude therin but by the last Conclusion of his forâ—named Epistle to my self which he endeth thus for an vpshoot I may thinke saith he the Scripture verified vpon you where it is thus written Therfore art thou inexcusable O man whosoeuer thou be that iudgest for doing the same thinges by iudging an other thou condemnest thy selfe Out of which text of the Apostle M. Morton would proue that I doing the same things with him in this point of fraud and false dealing I cannot condemne him without condemning also my selfe which consequence I grant but deny the antecedent Which I assure my self M. Morton will neuer be able to proue in any one point of moment throughout this whole concertation of ours himselfe being taken faultie almost at euery turne as you will see And yet doth he vaunt as though his integritie were extraordinary in this behalfe telling vs that as the Greeke CoÌ„maunder being in appaâ—aÌ„ce mortally wounded demanded of his souldiers whether the Citie were safe whether his â—uckler or shield were sound and being saâ—isfied in them receiued health and after beâ—ame victorious So he vnder so ghastly wouÌ„ds â—f my penne hauing generally inquired â—prightly answered himself that his cause was â—afe and his conscience sound began more resolutely to confront me Thus you see that he hath cleared himselfe is become victorious vpon a suddayne by force of a similitude only And in truth the tale is pretily told by him in wordes but let vs come to the substance of the things If M. Mortons cause be so safe and his conscience so sound how do there stand togeather afterward in the sixt Chapter of this my Answere aboue thirty vntruths pretended to haue bin wittingly pretermitted by him in his last Preamblatorie Reply as vnanswerable now aboue fiftie more newly added out of the said Reply which are set downe in my seauenth Chapter If these can be really defended by him he doth somewhat And for diuers of them he ought to haue done it before But if they cannot as I assure my selfe without making of more new they cannot then is neither M. Mortons cause safe nor his conscience sound in this behalfe Nay his sheild and buckler is vtterly broken and his Cittie of refuge quite ouerthrowne But he promiseth vs a more forcible EncouÌ„ter to ensue after he hath discharged his part in another taske of more importaÌ„ce in the Answere of the Catholicke Apologie which saith he by this calumnious Treatise of P. R. his Mitigation as by an aduerse tempest hath receiued some interruption And by this you see that M. Morton is still doing whether well or euill God knoweth I maruaile he feareth not the scratch due to his ytch wherof he speaketh in his Preamble For if out of Germanie there come that multitude of scratches that is threatned by him whose letter I haue mentioned in the latter end of this Answere do ioyne themselues with these scratches of myne both old and new that do march togeather in this my answere against him they are like to make a great squadron And M. Morton will haue his hands full in defending himselfe from them and in procuring that of scratches and scarres they do not beâ—ome deeper wounds vnto his credit But indeed I do not expâ—ct any such new Encounter as he promisâ—th For if he had reallie meant it and had seene himselfe able to performe it he would haue answered substantially in this Preamble some of the chiefest difficulties that were laid against him to the end to make his Reader belieue that he would be able to satisfie the rest in the said promised EncouÌ„ter But not doing this but shewing rather his extrâ—me weaknes in clearing any one point obiected against him it seemeth but a iest to talke of a new Encounter to come And as for answering the Catholicke Apoâ—ogie which he saith he is in hand withall as 〈◊〉 taske of more importance I do easely graunt 〈◊〉 if he can performe his taske well But M. Morton well knoweth the Topicall place à maâ—ori ad minus è conuerso If he haue not â—yn able to performe lesser matters nor defend the things by himselfe written either in Latin or English but by so many vntruthes as haue bin exhibited against him what will he be able to do in another mans worke especially of such moment difficulty as the said Apologie is where he must answere to other mens sayings especially ProtestaÌ„ts out of whose testimonies the Author of that Apologie doth so clerely conâ—ute their Religion and conâ—irme the Catholicke if I mistake not the worke as neuer any booke
written in our language hath more â—ffâ—ctually done And consâ—quently the confutation of this booke would râ—quire an impugnâ—r of more substance and strongâ—r sâ—nâ—wes then those of M. Morton though othâ—rwise I vndâ—rstand that God be thanked his bodily consâ—itution be neither weake nor feeble But to come to an end let vs see how he conâ—ludâ—th his Epistle to the Earle of Salisbury If by this brief Preamble it be not manifest saith he that P. R. hath in this Treatise preuaricated in his whole cause both in the question of Rebellion and Equiuocation betraied his Countreys State disgraced the Romish Schooles and strangled his owne conscience I refuse not that to the crimes obiected against me by him this may be added that I durst affiâ—me so much before your Lordship To which Rhâ—toricall and florishing conclusiâ—n I know nâ—e better answere thâ—n to accâ—pt of the ofâ—er And for triall thâ—rof to referre me to the Booke hâ—re in hand which treateth euery thing punctually and â—xâ—ctly inuiting by this occasion the Honourable Personage hâ—re namâ—d to tâ—e râ—ading and pâ—rusâ—ng thâ—rof For though the difâ—â—râ—nâ—e of our cause be disfauourable vnto me with his Lordshippe yâ—t dare I câ—nfide in the equanimitie of his Iudgâ—mâ—nt in a case of such quality as hâ—re is sâ—t downe about preuaricating in my cause betraying my Countrey disgracing our Schooles and strangling my owne Conscience All which depending vpon our maÌ„ner of proceeding in the ensuing pointes of this Booke his Lordâ—hippe will easily discouer with the quicke â—ye of â—is Iudgment the truth of things though it were â—gainst himselfe And therefore I do willingly â—ay hands vpon the last clause of this Challenge of â— Morton to wit that if he proue not all â—hese things here obiected against me and cleere â—imselfe from all imputations of wilfull vntruthes â—yd against him in my Treatise of Mitigation 〈◊〉 is content to haue this added also as the greaâ—â—st sinne of all the rest that he durst affirme â—â—e same vnto his Lordshippe Wherin I could conuince him presâ—ntly if I â—ould without further dispute For that he taâ—â—ng vpon him in this his Prâ—amble to answere â—â—ly 14. vntruthes of more then 40. obiected â—â—ainst him it is euident that he â—learâ—th himâ—â—â—fe not frâ—m the rest tâ—at hee pretermitted â—nd then laâ—ing vnto this that in the said 14. he 〈◊〉 found not to haue cleared himsâ—lfe substantially â—â—om any one of moment but to haue adioyned â—boue 40. or 50. more as is declared in the â—ubsâ—quent Treatise how can he defend himsâ—lfe bâ—fore my L. of Salisburies Honour from open preuaricating in this his Challenge But I will not prâ—sse him any further heere let the ensuing Combate discâ—rne try betweene vs. And so returning to talke with M. Morton againe whome for a time I haue left and spokeâ— in the third person to the end I might not seeme to obiect to his face so many important defaultes together I do saie Syr that now you see that I haue bin bould to vse the libâ—rty that you gaue me in the subscription of your Letter when you saie that you are myne to warne and to bâ— warned I haue râ—ceiued your warning and returned mine I beseech allmightie God it mayâ—be to his greater glorie and both our goods or at leastwise of other men that shall read or heare the same Yours Wishing you all good in the author of all goodnes P. R. Faultes escaped in the Printing â—pist Dedic pag. 6 lin 4 for he read wee â—pist Admon pag. 4â— lin 13 for nor read not â—agâ— Line Fault Correction 〈◊〉 24 in latin in relating 〈◊〉 27 heares hearers 〈◊〉 18 vse the vse 〈◊〉 23 impawing impawning 〈◊〉 vlâ— competèt competent 〈◊〉 28 stuly study 〈◊〉 â— some all 〈◊〉 Ibid. Equiuocation be Equiuocation or lying be 〈◊〉 28 said say 〈◊〉 31 indeed though indeed my father is not dead though ◠〈◊〉 18 euident euidently 〈◊〉 26 is in 〈◊〉 14 one owne 〈◊〉 2 had had he had had 〈◊〉 34 begin being 〈◊〉 35 pertracta pertractata â—â—2 10 Clemens AlexaÌ„der Clemens Alexandrinus â—â—7 â— these are these â—01 29 Chapters Charges 314 28 quod quid â—â—1 28 verue vertue â—01 5 answere Answerer â—11 27 these those 427 25 the law the new spi the new law the spirituall c. 434 5 ouer euer 462 11 which with 477 3 is as 540 7 to do 640 16 obiection others obiection of otherâ— 642 14 Chap. 5. Chap. 3. 648 4 fourth Chap. fifth Chapâ— THE FIRST CHAPTER ANSVVERING TO THE FIRST OF â— THOMAS MORTONS three vaine Inquiryes concerning the Witt Memorie Learning Charitie Modestie and Truth of his Aduersarie P. R. THE PREFACE THE very title of this M. Mortonâ— first Inquiry about the insufficiency of his aduersary doth plainly shew that he was in choler passion when he wrote it for that otherwise in so graue and weighty controuersies as are betweene vs he would ueuer haue rifled so manifestly as by leauing the matter to ruÌ„ne â—o the person and fall a scolding and scratching acâ—ording to his former threat For what are these perâ—onall impugnations but scratches whereof you shall haue heere store to witt some seauen or eight whole Paragraphes which yet are such as draw noe bloud nor doe scarre any man but the scratcher himselfe as by further examination it will appeare For first what doth he gaine to his cause if he could prooue indeed that his Aduersarie had scarcitie both of witt memorie learning Greeke Hebrew Logike and other abilities heere mentioned Were not his victorie the lesse in ouercoÌ„ming so weake an aduersarie And were not his shame the greater yf he should be ouercome by him Yes truly 1. Moreouer M. Mortons intention being or ought to be principally to satisfy the charges and imputations of falshood and vntrue dealing layd vnto him in the Treatise of Mitigation for hastening whereunto for that they raysed great scarres in the readers eye he omitted to handle any thing at all of the chief argument of that Treatiâ—e it seemeth veriâ— impertinent that he should leese so much time and spend so much paper in premising so manie skirmishes as are these Paragraphes about the sufficiency or insufficiency of his aduersarie before the maine battaile it self but the reason is conceaued to be the small comfort he had to come to the said battaile and therefore as schollers that are truants doe seeke occasions to loyter and linger and â—ntertayne themselues in euerie corner of the streete thereby to prolong their iourney so M. Morton in this affayre For albeit he pretend and professe his purpose to beâ— to cleare himselfe from the sayd imputatios yet knowing how little able he is to doe it and how small coÌ„fort he is to receyue therein wheÌ„ he cometh to the point he differreth the matter as loÌ„g as he can which is to the verie last end of his booke speÌ„ding first in this first Inquiry eight or nine Paragraphes as hath bene said to inquyre of my sufficiency
wherin I do chalenge him to haue often vsed the worst sort of these formall lying Equiuocations whilest he impugneth the other sort that lawfully and without lying is vsed some tymes and in some cases by Catholiks and was by the Apostles Prophets and Christ himself as now you haue heard yet in this his Reply he pretermitting to answere to the things themselues obiected picketh only quarrels at the forme of the diuision and subdiuision as you may see before in our first Chapter where the matter is haÌ„dled largely and the cauill layd open and refuted But to the end that M. Mort. omissions and sly dealing in the principall poyntes may better appeare it shal not be amisse perhaps to set downe some particulers wherwith he was charged at that time The Charge 34. As for example said I when he writeth in his late booke of Full satisfaction No one iota of Scripâ—ure 〈◊〉 one example in all antiquity no one reason in the naturalâ— wiâ— of man no one Author Greâ—ke or Latin no one Father no onâ— Pope Christian or Antichristian doth make for Equiuocation as we defend it or any colour therof neyther did they so much as 〈◊〉 any such thing Heere is first seene a notorious vntruth of the assertion it selfe and coÌ„sequently it is a matâ—riall lye and materiall Equiuocation for that the matter deliueâ—ed is vntrue And secondly it is most probable that Tho. Mort. must needs know it to be a lye hauing seene so many Authors and reasons alleaged â—or it by the Catholicke Treatise which he pretendeth to coÌ„â—ute Wherof it followeth that it was a â—oâ—mall lyâ— also and a â—ormall lying Equiuocation in the highest degree of deceipt and falshood 35. And so in like manner in the foâ—mer Chapter when he alleageth Azor Dominicus Sotus and Cicero directly against their owne meaning words and drift in the very same places which he citeth and taketh words out of theÌ„ for his pretended purpose he could not but see and know that it was a lye to cyte them to the contrary and yet he thought best to do it and tel his Reader that they were of a contrary opinion This then is formally to lye and Equiuocate in the worst and superlatiue degree of false Equiuocation 36. About which point the Reader may be remitted to the second Chapter of this treatise last Paragraph therof where he shall see diuers exaÌ„ples layd togeather and among other that which he reporteth of the death of our English Pope Adrian choaked as he saith with a flye and citeth Nauclerus for the same who though he mention yet refuteth expresly that â—able which T.M. concealed where he is shewed in like manner to corrupt notably a passage of Doctor Boucher auouching him to say that which he expresly impugneth about the killing of a Tyrant by a priuate man and priuate authority 37. And the like corruption he is conuinced to haue vsed in citing Gratian the Collector of the Canon lawâ—s and his Glosses peruerting their wordes and whole sense as is there set downe with sundry other examples which shew that the man did not lye of error or ouersight but meerlie out of malice to deceiue the simple and credulous Reader knowing in deed that he did lie And the same is demonstrated by many exaÌ„ples most apparent euident throughout the whole sixt Chapter of this booke and other places so as if we had noâ— other proofe of this spirit but in Tho. Morton himself it were sufficient to proue our purpose for that of all other lightly of his coate he professeth most innocency simplicity and sincerity in this behalfe by this doth principally proue our purpose which is that they Equiuocate lye both wittingly willingly then most of all wheÌ„ they make greatest protestation of truth 38. As when T. M. talketh of his naked innocency in his Epistle to the Kings Maiesty of detesting Equiuocation from his soule of styling himself A Minister of simple truth finally his vsurping of those protestations of S. Paul before meÌ„tioned That in all things he spake the truth and lyed not which Thomas Morton as we often haue proued before could not choose but know to be a wilfull lye indeed hauing seene read the Aâ—thors which so manifestly he beâ—yeth as neuer in this he will be able to cleare himselfe And heerof we do fynally inferre that he and his do equiuocate in the worst kynd which by vs and ours is neuer vsed and so while he declameth against lawâ—ull EquiuocatioÌ„ practiseth vnlawfull he sheweth himselfe a playne preuaricator 39. And for that this matter is of so great importance for the Reader well to conceaue in these dayes of controuersyes betweene vs I meane to stay my self somewhat in this Chapter vpon this point to shew that indeed it is a substantiall signe distinctiue betweene all Sectaries and Vs at this tyme and â—hat in matters of controuersy our writers shall neuer be found guilty in these kyndes of false lying and malicious â—quiuocations where not only vntruth is vttered but it is wittingly also vttered the writer knowing that he writeth vntruth as often now hath bene said Which manner of dealing inferreth two pointes the one that such a writer or speaker hath no conscience that vttereth things against his owne knowledge and which God seeth to be false and falsely meant in his hart and the other that his cause hath no ground of substantiall truth which cannot be defended without such wilfull lyes 40. In this theÌ„ if you please let vs insist a while let Tho. Mort. bring forth any Catholicke Author whatsoeuer that wrote against Protestants since these heresyes began that hath bene taken in this impiety I meane that hath set downe in print any such falsity as cannot be excused eyther by ignorance ouersight negligence errour of print translation diuersitie of editions or the like but that it must needes be presumed that he knew the vntruth and yet would set it â—orth of this kind I say let him shew me buâ— one example among all Catholike writers of our time and I will in my conscience greatly mistrust and discredit the Author whether it be another or my selfe but if he shew me two or three in any writer of this kind I shall neuer be able to belieue him more And wheras the number and variety of Catholike writers is so great as the world seeth it were no great labour to shew it in some if that spirit did raigne amongst them as it doth in ProtestaÌ„t writers out of whom great volumes might be framed of this one point if a man would imbrace them all throughout all nations but I meaning to speake of Englishmen and those very few in respect of the multitude and not hauing all their workes by me at this preseÌ„t am forced only to vse some few notes taken heertofore out of their bookes which notwithstanding shall suffice for this short view which we pretend
And for better methode memory I haue thought good to reduce my notes at this time to three sortes of men that haue written against vs. First ProtestaÌ„t Bishops then Ministers and â—astly Lay-men but of good sort I meane Knightes and of ech one of these shall we make our seuerall paragraphs 41. Thus farre I wrote at that tyme and as for the first part of that which I did set downe that M. Morton had byn taken in many and inexcusable false Equiuocations which in effect are the same with lying if before it was euident by the particuler examples heere alleaged and many others I do presume that now it will be much more manifest after his Reply and this my reioynder made vnto the same For that not only his former faults coÌ„mitted in this kind in his former Treatises oâ— Discouery Full Satisfaction are more orderly layd forth as by the precedent part of this Chapter appeareth then they were in my Treatise of Mitigation but many â—ew escapes are detected in like manner as will â—ppeare in the sequeÌ„t Chapter dedicated only to this particulâ—r effect 42. And as for the second point to dâ—â—lare that this spirit of false dealing ioyned with necâ—ssity and mysery of their bad cause is commâ—â— not only vnto him but vnto many of his brethrâ—n must needs be vnto all of them whensoeuer they takâ— pen in hand to defend the same for that one lye cannot be defended without another as hath beene said therfore I do produce teÌ„ seuerall witnesses two of them called Bishops M. Iewell and M. Horne fiue inferiour Ministers M. Iohn Fox M. Calâ—ield M. Hanmer M. Charke M. Perkins and might haue named 5. tymes more three lay men also Knights that haue written against vs Syr FraÌ„cis Hastings Syr Philip Mornay Syr Edward Cooke alleadging not one but sundry examples out of ech oâ— their workes might enlarge my selfe to a voluÌ„e iâ— that argumeÌ„t if I would say what I haue fouÌ„d in their their brethrens workes in this kynd staÌ„ding only precisely vpoÌ„ this that they be such exaÌ„ples as there is not only materiall falshood fouÌ„d in the thing but so apparaÌ„t also as it must needs be presumed the partie knew it to be such when he wrote it consequeÌ„tly was formall lying false equiuocating indeed 43. As for example when M. Iewell in the beginning of Q. Elizabeths time to draw her the Realme to change Religion become ProtestaÌ„t did preach at Paules Crosse in the Court with a most confident semblance and sundry teares did cast foâ—th 28. seuerall articles against Catholike Religion saying that if eyther the English or any other learned Catholicks in the world could shew but one place of Scripture one Father one Doctor one allowed example of the Primitiue Church within the â—irst 6. hundred yeares after Christ for cleare proofe of any one of these 28. articles he would yield subscribe be no more a Protestant adding also these words I speake not this in vehemency of spirit or heat of talke but euen as before God by way of simplicity and truth least any of you should happily be deceiued and thinke there is more weight on the other side then in conclusion will be found c. Which protestation he repeated diuers times and in diuers sermons And then yet further he brake into this vehement Apostrophe O merciâ—ull God! who would thinke that there could be so much wilfulnes in the hart of man O Gregory O Austine O Hierome O Chrysostome O Leo O Dionyse O Anaclete O Sixtus O Paul O Christ if we be deceiued herein you are they that haue deceiued vs c. 44. In which words protestations I did shew by 5. or 6. conuincing reasons that there must needs be much hypocrisie dissimulation and Equiuocation against his owne conscience and that consequently euery member and branch of this deceiptâ—ull speach must needs conteyne a formall lye knowne for such to himselfe when he vttered them for that he could not be ignorant how many not only places and sentences the ancient Fathers for example had against diuers of these Protestant articles that he holdeth but whole Treatises also against some And as for that of the Reall Presence which was one of his most principall he had beene present himselfe not many yeares before and one of the Notaries also in the disputation of Cranmer Ridley and Latimer at Oxâ—ord vnder Q. Mary wherin there were so many and so pâ—rspicuous places and discourses of ancient Fathers brought against them for the said Reall Presence as they remayned wholy confouÌ„ded as may be seene by him that is diligent and will stand attent by the relation therof sâ—t forth by Iohn Fox himself in his Acts and Monuments and more pithily collected out of him in a seuerall printed Treatise set forth these yeares past by N.D. in the â—hird Part of the Three Conuersions of England 45. And finally when Doctor Harding many other learned Catholickes began to write against M. Iewell and this hypocrisie of his they came forth with so huge a number of authenticall authorities in al these kyndes which he nameth here Scriptures Fathers Doctours Councells examples of the primitiue Church within the first six hundred yeares as they forced him to procure a prohibition of their bookes by the State And theÌ„ was he vrged about these speaches of his Now it standeth vpon you to proue but one affirmation agaiâ—st me and so to require my promise of subscribing And againe If you of your part would vouchsafe to bring but tâ—o lynes the â—hole matter were coÌ„â—luded And yet further Shew forth but one Doctor oâ— your side yea one sentence in â—our deâ—â—nce c. All which I do proue to be notorious cogging and dissimulation for that many other Protestants more learned then him selfe do acknowledg the Fathers to haue many sentences against him and cannot be stood vnto by them without ouerthrow of their cause And among others I do alleadge these wordes of Doctor VVhitaker VVe repose no such confidâ—nce saith he in the Fathers writings that we take any certaine proofe of Religion â—rom thâ—m because we place all our faith and Religion not in humane but in diuine authority If therâ—ore you bring vs what some Father hath thought or what the Fathers vniuersally all togeatâ—er haue deliuered the same except it be approued by testimony of Scriptures it auaileth nothing it gayneth nothing it conuinceth nothing For the Fathers aâ—â— such witnesses as they also haue need of the Scriptures to be their witnesses Iâ— deceiued by errour they giue â—orth their tâ—stimony disagreing from Scriptures albeit they may be pardoned erâ—ing â—or want of wisedome we cannot be paâ—doned if because they â—rred we also â—ill erre with them So Doctor VVhitaker more learned perhaps in the Fathers then M. Iewell though not so confident For if he had found by his experience that