satisfyed in one speciall point of my Epistle to the second part of my Reports where I affirmed that yf the ancient Lawes of this noble â—and had not excelled all others speaking of humane it could not be but some of the seuerall Conquerours â—ouernours therof that is to say the Romans Saxons Danes or Normans and especially the Romanes who as they iustly may do boast of their Ciuill Lawes would as euery of them might haue altered or changâ—d the same And sayth he some of another proâ—â—ssion are not persuaded that the Common Lawes of England are of so great antiquity as there superlaâ—iuâ—ly is spoken So he And in these last words I presume he vnderstood the Deuine that impugâ—ed this excessiue imaginary antiquity of our Municipall â—awes in his Answere to the Reports and Syr Edward hauing seene the same should in reason haue answered somewhat therunto if he had byn prepared for it 30. But he thought that course not best but rather to help himselfe with the pretendâ—d authority of Syr Iohn Fortescue chiefe Iustice of England in the Raigne of King Henry the 6. saying that he was a great Antiquary he was a notable man indeed though more as it seemeth in the skill of our Common Lawes then in matters of Antiquity out of whome Syr Edward to help his cause and assertion citeth the words following As touching the antiquity of our Common Lawes sayth he neither are the Roman Ciuill Lawes by so long continuance oâ— ancient tymes confirmed nor yet the Laâ—es oâ— the Venetians which aboue all other are reporâ—ed to be of most antiquity â—or so much as their Island in the beginning of the Britans was not then inhabited as Rome also then vnbuilded neither the Lawes of any Nation of the world which worshipped God are of so old and ancient yeares wherâ—ore the contrary is noâ— to be said nor thought but that the English customes are very good yea oâ— all other the very best Thus he if he be rightly cited for I haue not his booke by mâ— 31. And though I do respect and reuerence both these mens professions and much more their state place of Iudges yet doth force of truth oblige me to contradict their errour which seemeth to me very grosse and palpable or rather their errours and mistakinges in sundry points here downe As first in that yt is auerred that the Ciuill law and Roman lawes are not of so long continuance of ancient tymes as the ancieÌ„t Municipall Lawes of England are which he goeth about to proue by two seuerall meanes wherof both do conteine aswell falsyties as absurdities if I be not greatly deceiued therin 32. His â—irst meanes of proofe is â—or that in the beginning oâ— the Britans Rome was then vnbuylded and conquently that the British Lawes are more ancient then those of the Romans And then supposing further that those British Lawes which were in the beginning of the Britans were neuer changed but recâ—iued in England fâ—oÌ„ time to time haue indured to our dayes are the Common Lawes of our Realme at this day Wherin there are many suppositions as yow see strange to heare but harder in my opinion to be proued As first that the Britans in their beginning euen before Rome was buylt had such good Lawes as the Romans in EnglaÌ„d seauen huÌ„dred years after the said building of Rome were coÌ„tent to accept for their Lawes in that land And the lyke after them the Saxons other CoÌ„querous people that ensued which is such a paradox vnto men of reason learning as the very naming therof cannot but cause laughter For albeit the British nation be more ancient then the Roman according to the Story of Geffrey Monmouth that affirmeth theÌ„ to discend from Brutus a Nephew of Aeneas from whom Romulus the founder of Rome some ages after descended and that they were a valiant warlike nation from the beginning yet that they had such good politicke and ciuill Lawes themselues being vnciuill in those dayes is a matter incredible which I proue thus That wheras the Roman Lawes began from Romulus himselfe from Numa Pompilius other ancient Law-makers among them and this soone after the building of Rome I meane the more older Lawes of the twelue Tables and the lyke continued from tyme to tyme afterwards vntill the coÌ„ming of Iulius Caesar into Britany which was aboue 600. yeares after Rome was built aboue a thousand after Brutus had byn in England in which tyme yt is probable that the British Lawes would haue growne to greater perfectioÌ„ theÌ„ they were in the beginning yet I say that the said Lawes customes of the Britans are recorded to be such in Iulius Caesar his daies set downe by his owne penne as also by the writings of diuers other Roman Greeke Authors that succeded for two or three hundred years after him as must needs be incredible that they should be continued by the Romans Saxons and other people that followed them And then if they were such and so rude so many ages after their beginning what may we imagine they were at their very begynning it selfe which was a thousand yeares before from which tyme our two Knights heere do inferre their antiquity and eminency aboue the Roman Lawes 33â— Let vs see then what ancient Histories do report of the British Lawes and Customes in Iulius Caesar his tyme and afterwards Caesar the Roman-Captaine hauing made two iourneys into England and informed himselfe diligently about the Lawes and Customes of the Brytans in those dayes which was about 60. yeares before the Natiuity of our Sauiour setteth downe many things of their small policy in that time As first the description of their manner of consultations in their warre wherin he sayth that in commune non coâ—sulunt they haue no common Counsells and then describing the chiefe Citty of the Realme where their K. CassiuelaÌ„ that was head of all the rest had his Court Counsaile somewhat about the Thames though not where London was afterward built he sheweth that it was in a wood and that the walles were trees cut downe round about insteed of fortresses within which they inclosed both themselues and their Cattle and this was the symplicity of that tyme. 34. After this he setteth downe many Lawes and customes of theirs farre vnfit to be receiued by the Romans other people after them as Nummo aereo aut annulis ferreis ad certuÌ„ pondus examinatis pro numâ—o vtebantur Their money was of brasse and rings of yron giuen out by weight And then againe that they had a law and custome luto se inficere quod caeruleum efficit colorâ—m to paint themselues with a certaine earth that made a blew colour And Solinus wryting more then an hundred yeares after Caesar againe sheweth this law and custome to haue byn so inuiolable among them in his dayes that the very Children had the figures and shapes
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
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
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
for any thing â—â—omised against Cardinall Bellarmine whose estimaâ—â—on is like to be highly increased with all indiffeâ—â—nt men by this assault both for conscience sincere â—ealing and learning and M. Morton greatly blemiâ—â—ed in them all for that coÌ„monly no one instance â—ath he alleaged of fraud in his aduersarie but with â—ome fraud in himselfe none perhaps with more theÌ„ in this sixt last obiectioÌ„ in that kynd concerning the testimony of Tâ—eodoret for the Reall Presence â—or that heere be so many foule faults wilfull corâ—uptions as truly after so many admonishments if â— should vse the same it would make me ashamed to â—ooke any man in the face 96. He indeauoureth to frame a contradiction â—â—out of Bellarmine in that he chargeth Caluin with an ancient heresy recorded by Theodoret which heresy â— did affirme that there is only a figure of Christes body in the Sacrament and then will he proue out of Bellarmine himselfe for contradiction of this first that the said heresy is not ancient then that it is not to be found at this day in Theodoret thirdly that Caluin doth not deny the Reall Presence and so he concludeth as you haue heard heere is no more oddes then betweene anâ—â—â—â—â— and not ancient heresy not heresy But if in all and euery one of these three poyntes M. Morton be conuinced wittingly to haue falsifyed and that he could not but know that he did so what excuse then will he make or what will the discreete and honest Reader say or thinke of him Novv then to the particulers 97. The charge which Cardinall Bellarmine maketh vpon Zuinglius Caluin not Caluin only as M. Mortâ—â— text importeth is taken from the last of those 20. old heresies before signified to be obiected by the Cardinall to the Protestants of our time in his booke of the Notes of the Church and by him is set downe in these wordes The twentith old heresie saith Bellarmine wherin the Protestants of our time do participate with old heretickes is of them that denied the Eucharist to be truly the flesh of Christ would haue it to be the figure or image of the body of Christ. So it is related in the seauenth Generall CouÌ„cell and sixt Action Tom. 3. and long before that Theodoret in his Dialogue intituled Impatibilis doth relate the same out of S. Ignatius Scholler to the Apostles And this heresy is taught in these our daies by Zuinglius in his Booke De verbis Coenae Domini by Caluin lib. 4. Instit. cap. 17. § 12. And so we haue layd forth the heresies of 20. Archeretickes that were coÌ„demned by the Church within the first seauen hundred yeares after Christ which heresies being â—â—lden by vs for such and by our Aduersaries for 〈◊〉 articles of their faith it followeth that our doctrine doth agree with the doctrine of the ancient Church â—â—d the doctrine of our aduersaries with the anciâ—â—t heresies So he â—â— And this is Cardinall Bellarmines charge Let â—â—e Reader now marke how brokeÌ„ly it is set downe 〈◊〉 M. Morton For first he mentioneth only Caluin to 〈◊〉 challenged for this last heresy of the Sacramentaâ—es against the Reall Presence as now I haue said â—auing out Zuinglius who is equally charged by the â—â—rdinall for the same thing which is one tricke â—hen he omitteth wholy the mention of the 7. Geâ—â—rall CouÌ„cell which so long agoe related confuâ—â—d the said heresy this is another tricke Furtherâ—ore he coÌ„cealeth in like maÌ„ner the name authoâ—â—tie of old S. Ignatius who in his tyme which was â—â—mediatly after the Apostles held the denying of 〈◊〉 Reall Presence to be an heresy this is a third â—icke All which poyntes could not be pretermitted 〈◊〉 M. Morton nor any one of them indeed but by voâ—â—ntary deliberation and consequently he must be â—â—esumed to haue done it of set purpose to deceyue â—ut let vs come to his two heads of contradiction â—hich he will needs find in Bellâ—rmine â—9 The first is that Cardinall Bellarmine is affirmed â—y him to say that that hereticall opinion cited â—â—fore against the Reall Presence out of Theodoret is 〈◊〉 ancient nor yet now to be found in Theodoret and â—or this he citeth Bellarmines owne wordes as he saith â—â—b 1. de Euchar. cap. 1. initio and that in latin to wit â—uae sententia citaâ—ur à Theodoreto in Dialogo vbi tamen nunc â—on habetur VVhich sentence of S. Ignatius against old â—eretiks is cited by Theodoret in his dialogue where â—otwithstanding now it is not to be found So he telâ—eth vs out of Bellarmine both in Latin English â—ut corrupteth him egregiously in both lauguages First in allegation and then in translation as now shall be demonstrated For first the true vvordes of Cardinall Bellarmine in latin are these Quae sententia ciâ—atur à Theodoreto in 30. Dialogo ex epist. Ignatij ad Smyâ—â—â—ses vbi tamen nunc non habetur That is to say This sentence concerning old heretiks denying the Reall Presence is cyted by Theodoret in his third dialogue out of S. Ignatius his Epistle to the Christians of Smyrna where notwithstanding it is not now found meaning expresly that it is not found at this day in that Epiâ—tle of S. Ignatius but in Theodoret it is found and is extant both in Greeke and latyn as euery man may see that will read the place quotedâ— So as heere agayne M. Morton corrupteth Bellarmâ—â—â— both in Latin and English leauing out not only the mention of S. Ignatius his Epistle ad Smyrnenses and then making his Reader belieue that the testimony of Theodoret was not to be found at this day in him but also vpon this falsification of his owne will needs frame a contradiction in Bellarmine And can there be any more witting and wilfull falshood then this Can this dealing stand with the solemne and extraordinary protestations which he maketh of sincerity in the end of his booke euen against hiâ— owne infirmityes 100. But let vs see yet further how he proueth that Bellarmine hauing said before that this heresy of denying the Reall Presence was very ancient contradicteth himselfe and saith in the very same place that it is not ancient for which he alleadgeth these wordes of the Cardinall Ne autem glorientur Caluinistae c. And to the end that the Caluinists may not glory that their opinion against the Reall Presence is very ancient it is to be noted that those most ancient hereticks mentioned by S. Ignatius did not so much impugne the SacrameÌ„t of the Eucharist as the mistery of Christ his incarnation For so much as therfore they denied the Eucharist â—o be the flesh of Christ as S. Ignatius doth signifie in â—he same place for that they deny Christ to haue â—lesh c. â—01 Which testimony if you consider it well â—oth not proue at all that the denyall of the Reall â—resence was no
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
obiection also in this Chapter about the succession of ProtestaÌ„t Princes and the 13. about an allegation out of Frisingensis haue byn all handled before and brought in by him againe and agayne therby to make a shew that he answereth to many things wheras in truth he answereth to nothing truly and substantially no not indeed to the easiest of these which heere he hath picked out to shew his manhood in defending them And yet he saith in the Preface of this Chapter That he hopeth to giue such satisfaction to all as that not only the wound of slaunder may be cured but euen also the suspicious scarre of imputation may be wyped away THE FIRST obiected falsity pretended to be answered by Thomas Morton §. I. IN the first front of his squadroÌ„ of 14. obiected falsities chosen by him heere to be defended he placeth a reprehension of mine made vnto him in my Epistle dedicatory to the Vniuersities for that in his Epistâ—e to the K. Maiestie of his Treatise intituled A full Satisfaction he vseth these calumnious words Polidore obserueth saith he that the Popes a long time in their election had their names changed by Antiphrase viz. the elected if he were by naturall disposition fearfull was named Leo if cruell Clemens if vnciuill Vrbanus if wicked Pius if couetous Bonifacius if in all behauiour intollerable Innocentius c. This speach as malicious and contumelious fraught with deceiptfulnes I iustly reprehended noting by the way that he had cited no place in Polidore wheras he hath written sundry books besides his histories I noted also that diuers Kinges and Princes might haue names whose significations might be farre different from their qualities and actions and that Popes since the beginning of that custome of changing their names after their election did not take names by antiphrase or contrariety of sense as this man seditiously did insinuate but for reuerence commonly of other holy Popes who pasâ—ed beâ—ore thâ—m whose names they tooke as I exemplified in many and yet not hauing Polidore then by me I meane that worke of his de Inuentoribus Rerum I passed ouer diuers other pointes of deceiptfull sleightes in him which I might haue vrged and now must needes in part touch for that to this accusation of myne he hath nothing to answere in this his Reply but this which ensueth 5. First that albeit he cited not any certayne booke or place out of Polidores workes yet that the sentence reported by him vpon his memory is found in Polidore his fourth booke de inuentoribus Rerum c. 10. which is intituled De origine honorum qui Romano Pontifici habâ—ntur de eius authoritate in omnes Ecclesias of the beginning of the honors that are giuen to the Bishop of Rome of his authority ouer all Chuâ—ches And albeit this obseruation of Polidore mentioned by M. Morton be not found in any of our Bookes now commonly extant yet he saith that they are in his booke of the edition of Basilea of the yeare 1570. and that two yeares after that by order of Pope Pius Quintus the Index expurgatorius did put out these wordes but he telleth not what Index it was for I haue one containing both the Spanish Flemish Index wherin it is written about Polidore Virgil thus Ex Indice Louaniensi quae in Polidoro Virgilio de rerum inuentoribus Basileae impresso anno 1544. in octauo corrigenda sunt atque delenda The things that are to be corrected or blotted out in Polidore Virgil in his eight bookes of the first inuentors of things which worke of his was printed at Basilea in octauo vpon the yeare of Christ 1544. 6. Out of which wordes it may be presumed as to me it seemeth that vpon the said yeare of Christ 1544. whiles Polydore Virgil lyued yet in England his worke de inuentoribus Rerum though it were printed at Basile where Protestant Religion was entred yet this place of Polidor about changing of Popes names was not found for that being both scandalous and vntrue as presently shall be shewed it is very like or rather certaine that this our Index expurgatorius would haue noted it at least as it doth diuers other thinges not only out of the same worke but euen out of the same 4. booke and 2.3.4.5.6.7 and 8. Chapters and yet saith nothing at all of any thing of the tenth where M. Morton saith this his obseruation is now found in his booke printed at Basile 1570. which was 26. yeares aâ—ter the former edition wherof must needes be inferred that either M. Morton dealeth not sincerely with vs which yet in this matter I will not bee so vnfriendly as to suspect or that his edition of 1570â— which hitherto I cannot see hath receaued this addition about the Popes changing their names after the foresaid edition of 1544. which could not be from Polidore himselfe who was dead before but from some new merry brother of Basile then hereticall who to make sport put it in for a merriment indeed for so in the text it selfe he professeth that he wrote it in iest though it pleaseth M. Morton to take it vp in earnest 7. But let vs heare the wordes themselues which M. Morton setteth downe as found in his Polidore Primus honos saith he Romano Pontifici habetur vt si minùs pulchro honestetur nomine ei statim creato liceat illud mutare verbi gratia quòd non extra iocum dictum sit si homo maleficus antea fuerit vt Bonifacius appelletur si timidus Leo si rusticus Vrbanus c. This is the first honour giuen to the Bishop of Rome after his creation saith he that if his name be not fayre he may chaÌ„ge the same as for example which yet be not spoken but in iest if before he had byn perhaps an euill doer he may be called Bonifacius that is a good doer if he had byn fearfull then may he be called Leo a lyon if â—usticall then Vrbanus or ciuill c. And the first Author or beginner of this custome is said to haue bin Pope Sergius the 2. whose name hauing bin before Os Porci which signyfiâ—th the mouth of a hogge it was permitted vnto him saith the supposâ—d Polidore for auoyding the obscenity of his former name to change the same 8. Thus much out of M. Mortons Polidore wherof he vaunteth according to his fashion in these words Although they haue made Polidore by their Index expurgatorius almost in euery page dumbe not suffering him to beare witnesse against the pryde of Popes c. yet our ancient Polidore now dwelling among Protestants printed anno 1570. Basileae hath a tongue that will tell tales So he Speaking more truly then perhaps he imagineth that his Polidore in this poynt telleth meere tales indeed and consequently is no great iewell of antiquity to be bragged of as dwelling now among Protestants For now I haue shewed that in
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
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
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
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
of theÌ„ but coÌ„meth in with an impertinent instance that there was a prohibition of Appeales made vnder King Henry the second by Act of Parliament in the tenth yeare of his Raigne whereas yet there was no Parliament in vse nor Statute law was begone vntill the 9. yeare of King Henry the third which was aboue 60. yeares after as appeareth both by the Collection of Iustice Rastall and other Law-bookes 76. I do not deny but that King Henry the second entring into passion against S. Thomas Archb. of Canterbury made a decree at a certayne meeting of the Nobility at Claringdon rather moderating as himselfe pretended then taking away Appeales to Rome not denying that they ought to be made in respect of the Popes supreme authority Ecclesiasticall but for restrayning of abuses in appealing thither without iust cause or necessity especially in temporall affaires he ordeyned that matters should first orderly be handled in England in the Bishops and Archbishops Courtes and if that way they could not be ended they should not be carried to Rome without the Kings assent which declaratioÌ„ of the kings intention is set downe by Roger Houeden out of the Epistle of Gilbert Bishop of London to Pope Alexander the third written by the kings own Commission which not being admitted afterward by the said Pope the king recalled the same with an Oath vnder his owne hand wherof the said Houeden writeth thus Iurauit etiam quòd neque Appellationes impediret neque impediri permitteret quin liberè fierent in Regno suo ad RomanuÌ„ Pontificem in Ecclesiasticis causis He swore also that he would neither let AppellatioÌ„s nor suffer them to be letted but that they might be made in his kingdom to the Bishop of Rome in causes Ecclesiasticall c. 77. All which things could not but be knowne to Syr Edward before he wrote this his Preface and that the Catholicke Deuine in his aÌ„swer to the fifth part of his Reports had produced so many euident arguments and probations that King Henry the 2. was most Catholick in this point in acknowledging the Popes supreme Ecclesiasticall authority notwithstanding the coÌ„tention he had with S. Thomas about the manner of proceding therin for the execution as none of his Ancestours were more which in like manner is euidently seene and confessed in effect by Syr Edward himself in that in his whole discourse of Reportes for improuing the said Popes Supremacy he alleageth not so much as one example or instaÌ„ce out of the raigne of this King which in reasoÌ„ he would not haue pretermitted if he could haue found any thing to the purpose therin 78. But yet now finding himselfe in straytes how to answere the Students demand about the aÌ„tiquitie of prohibiting Appeales to the Sea of Rome he was forced to lay hands on this poore example which was neither to his purpose in regard of the time being after the conquest as now you haue heard nor of the thing it selfe for that it was against him as being only a moderation of abuses yea and that in temporall things as Bishop Gilbert of London expresly aâ—oucheth recalled by the same King afterwardâ— and finally is wholy from the purpose chiefe question about the Popes supreame authority whereof this of Appeals is but one little member only And thus we see both how well and subâ—tantially Syr Edward hath mainteyned his assertion of the supereminent antiquity and excellency of his Municipall lawes and how direct and demonstratiue answers he hath made to the foure Questions or Cases deuised by himselfe for confirmation of the â—ame 79. And whereas he inserteth a note of Record of the decree of Claringdone that this recognition was made by the Bishops Abbots Priors c. of a certaine part of the Customes and liberties of the Predecessours of the king to wit oâ— King Henry the first his Grandfather and of other Kings which ought to be obserued in the kingdome wherby it semeth the Knight would haue vs imagine though he vtter it not that the same prohibition of Appeales might haue byn made and practized by other former Kings liuing before the Conquest it is found to be but a meere Cauill both by the Catholicke Deuine that shewed out of authenticall histories the coÌ„trary practise vnder all our Catholicke Kinges both before after the Conquest as here likewise it is conuinced by the words and confession of this King Hâ—Ì„ry the second himself that these pretended liberties of his Ancestours were brought in by himself only and in his tyme as is testifyed by Houeden in two seuerall Charters one of the Pope and the other of the King as also by an authenticall Record of the Vatican set downe by Baronius in his tweluth Tome So as here the Iudge hath nothing to lay hands on but to giue sentence against himself both of the Nimium and Nihil dicit as now yow haue seene And so much for this matter HOW THAT THE foresaid Nimium dicit as it importeth falsum dicit is notoriously incurred by Syr Edward Cooke in sundry other assertions also apperteyning to his owne faculty of the law which were pretermitted by the Catholike Deuine in his Answere to the 5. Part of Reportes §. V. FOR so much as the most part of this seauenth Chapter hath beene of omissions and pretermissions as you haue seene and these partly oâ— M. Morton in concealing such charges of vntruthes as had byn laid both against him as also against his Client Syr Edward partly of Syr Ed. himself in not answering for himself when he ought to haue done I thought it not amisse in this place to adioyne some other omissions in like manner on the behalfe of the Catholike Deuine who passed ouer in silence sundry notable escapes of his aduersary M. Attorney which he coÌ„mitted in cyting law-books and lawyers authorities against the Popes ancient iurisdictioÌ„ in spirituall cases in England and this partly for that he had not as then all the Bookes by him which were quoted and partly vpon a generall presumption that in this poynt M Atâ—orney would be exact for that he had so solemnly protested the same in his booke of Reportes as before hath byn touched to wit that he had cyâ—ed truly the verâ— words and textes of the lawes resolutions iudgments Acts of Parlament all publike and in print without any inference argumeÌ„t or amplification quoting particulerly the bookes yeares leaues chapters and other such like certaine references as euery man at his pleasure may see and read them 81. This is his protestation who would not belieue a man especially such a man and in such a matter at his word or rather vpon so many words so earnestly pronouÌ„ced especially if he had heard his new and fresh confirmation therof which he setteth â—orth in this other Preface to his sixt part wherin he sayth that euery man that writeth ought to be so careâ—ull of setting downe
out of the Chancery against some that tooke away the said tythes c. and then after some altercation to what Court the said sute belonged the plaintiâ—e that is the Prouost prayed execution but Thorp the chiefe Iustice said that it was wont to be law when there is a certayne place that is not of any parish as in Engelstwood and such like that the king should haue the tythes and not the Bishop oâ— the place to graunt them to whom he should thinke good as he hath graunted them vnto you notwithstanding saith he the Archbishop of Canterbury hauing sued vnto the kings Counsel to haue those tythes for that the matter is not yet tryed vntil it by tryed you shall not haue execution So he And this is all the Case wherin you see that albeit Iustice Thorp said that it was wont to be law that the king should dispose of the tythes of such places as wâ—re newly assertâ—d and cultiuated that were of his inheritance yet doth he not so resolutly affirme it that he would giue seÌ„tence of execution against the defendants albeit they had made default after they had pleaded to the issue as there is manifest but would haue the Archbishop of CaÌ„terburies sute to the coÌ„trary to be heard also And indeed he could not but know but that in the booke of 7. Ed. 3. fol. 5. which was 16. yeares before this case was treated the opinon of Herle chiefe Iustice was that the Bishop should haue such tythes and much lesse doth Iustice Thorp assign the cause of right of those tythes vnto the king for that he hath supreme Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction as our Iudge doth now but for that commonly such new wast asserted landes appertained vnto the king albeit as now hath beene said they might haue appertayned also to a particuler subiect if he had beene Lord of the place as is most perspicuously declared and set forth in an ancient Treatise intituled Oâ— the power of the Parliament annexed to the Old Doctour and Student or booke so intituled where it is said as followeth 96. If wast ground saith the Booke wherof was neuer any profit taken and that lay in no parish but in some forest or that which is newly wonne from the sea were brought into arable land if the freehold therof were to the king he might assigne the tythes to whom he would and if the freehold were to a common person he might do the like For though tythes be spirituall yet the assignement of tythes to other is a temporall act For before parishes were deuided and before it was ordayned by the lawes of the Church that euery man should pay tythes to his owne Church euery man might haue payed his tythes to what Church he would might one yeare haue giuen his tythes to one Church and another yeare to another or haue graunted them to one Church for euer if he would And like as euery man before the seuering of the parishes might haue giuen the tythes to what Church he would because he was bound to no Church in certayne so may they do now that haue laÌ„des that lie in no parish for they be at liberty to assigne theÌ„ to what Church they will as all men were before the sayd law was made that tythes should be payd to their proper Churches 97. So farre this Law-booke which doth not ascribe anything to the kings Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction as heere you see as neyther doth Iustice Brooke who in his Abridgement abridgeth the foresaid caâ—e of 22. E. 3. lib. assis vnder the tytle of the Kings Prerogatives signifying therby that the said tythes are due to the king if they be due in regard of his prerogatiue Royall and not of his spirituall supreme power aâ—d iurisdiction See Booke 22. Ed. 3. tit Prerogatiue pl. 47. 98. And as for the law mentioned in the foresaid Treatise wherby men were appointed to pay their Tythes to their peculiar parishes wheras before thâ—y were free to pay them where they would it is meat of a Canon of the great Generall Councell of Latâ—ran held at Rome vnder Pope Innocentius 3. in the dayes of K. Iohn of England vpon the yeare 1216 which was aboue a hundred yeare before this other case fell out in 22. E. 3. in which Councell it was ordayned That euâ—ry man should pay his Tythes to his proper Church and parish To which Ordination of the Pope and Councell the kingdome of England submitted it self and the temporall lawes therof and so the matter endured vntill the breach of K. H. 8. So as in all this tyme the Popes supreme Authority and spirituall iurisdiction was acknowledged and obeyed about this matter of Tithes in England as is euident also â—y these books ensuing to wit 7. E. 3. fol. 5.44 Ed. 3. f. 5.10 H. 7. fol. 16. but yet for that the said Canon of Lateran did not comprehend expresly all such landes as were then wast and should after be asserted K. Edward 3â— in the case proposed might according to the former ancient law that was vsed before the said Canon giue and appoynt the tythes of these newly asserted lands of Rockingham to whom he would as he did though not vnder the title of his supreme spirituall iurisdiction as the Attorney very falsely doth pretend but as temporall patron of that land for the causes before specified And so much of this Case 99. Another he cyted out of 38. E. 3. lib. Ass. pl. 22. in these wordes The king dâ—d by his Charter translate Chaâ—ons secularâ— into Regular and religious persons which he did by his Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction and could not do it vnlesse he had had iurisdiction Ecclesiasticall So he And heere is false dealing againe for all that is said in that booke is this that it was pleaded for the king that by his Charter he did graunt that the Prior CoueÌ„t of Plymouth might transferre Secular into Regular ChanoÌ„s which was but a grant or licence as you see Nor did the king translate Chanons Secular into Regular which belonged vnto the Pope but graunted only and gaue licence that they might be so transferred nor hath the law-booke any one word of the kings Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction but all this is feigned by M. Attorney himselfe 100. Agayne he cyteth out of 49. Ed. 3. lib. Ass. pl. 8. where the Abbot of VVestminster saith he had a Prior Couent who were Regular and mort in law yet the king by his Charter did deuide that corporation and made the Prior and Couent a distinct and capable body to sue and to be sued by theÌ„selues whereof M. Attorney would inferre the kings supreme spirituall authority and iurisdiction But his booke fauoureth him not at all heerin for albeit Candish said that the possessions of the Abbot Prior of VVestminster were seuered the one from the other and that this began with the Charter of the king yet is it playne by the law 11. H. 4.