Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	authority_n	king_n	time_n	1,485	5	3.4894	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A07805	The encounter against M. Parsons, by a revievv of his last sober reckoning, and his exceptions vrged in the treatise of his mitigation. Wherein moreouer is inserted: 1. A confession of some Romanists, both concerning the particular falsifications of principall Romanists, as namely, Bellarmine, Suarez, and others: as also concerning the generall fraude of that curch, in corrupting of authors. 2. A confutation of slaunders, which Bellarmine vrged against Protestants. 3. A performance of the challenge, which Mr. Parsons made, for the examining of sixtie Fathers, cited by Coccius for proofe of Purgatorie ... 4. A censure of a late pamphlet, intituled, The patterne of a Protestant, by one once termed the moderate answerer. 5. An handling of his question of mentall equiuocation (after his boldnesse with the L. Cooke) vpon occasion of the most memorable, and feyned Yorkeshire case of equiuocating; and of his raging against D. Kings sermon. Published by authoritie	Morton, Thomas, 1564-1659.	1610 (1610)	STC 18183; ESTC S112913	342,598	466

This were to reach the Pope a boxe on the eare Or as though Bellarmine did absolutely denie that Emperors had any right to gather Councels who saith that it cannot be denied but that In Concilys generalibus indicendis c. that is That the Emperor had some authority in appointing of generall Councels and that sometimes They were gathered by Emperors Or as though Bellarmine in denying that the Emperour hath chiefe power heerein might not be confuted by a Doctor of the same chaire Card. Cusanus confessing in expresse tearmes that The first eight generall Councels were gathered by Emperors but the Bishop of Rome like as did other Patriarks receiued the sacred command to wit of the Emperors to come vnto the Synods Thus doth M. Parsons his impotent calumniation vanish into a fancie which if he should spie in an other hee would call a phrensie M. PARSONS Reckoning Then where Bellarmine saith Omnes istae causae c. All these causes were changed he fraudulently cut off the particle istae These which includeth areference vnto these foure causes as though all causes and matters were now changed The Reuiew 19 If I would be as captious as M. Parsons vseth to be I could tell him he must goe to the schoole againe to learne to English Istae which signifieth Those and not These but I will not imitate him in trifling To the matter There were but foure causes which Bellarmine did or could note for the Change of the Popes Subiection and euery one of Those hee saith were changed doth he not therefore say that All causes were changed If M. Parsons shall say that his horse is lame of his foure feete and heare some by stander confirme it saying that indeed his horse is lame of All his feet hee would not I suppose thereupon call him a fraudulent fellow seeing that All the feet his horse hath are but foure for I will not imagine that Maister Parsons his horse is a monster I will now cease to insist any longer vpon these his foolish wranglings 20 The cause standeth thus wee see that Popes then anciently acknowledged Subiection vnto Kings in a maine point which is authority of Commanding a Councell to bee gathered but now as it is confessed the case is changed Then Christian Emperours were humbly intreated to lend their helpe now they are imperiously commanded Then they obeied them in Temporal affaires since they challenge authority to Depose them which as their Barckley maintaineth is contrary vnto the disposition the Doctrine of the Christian Church both in and long after Times of the Apostles From Bellarmine he holdeth it not amisse to passe to the Iesuit Salmeron SECT VIII The summe of the seuenth charge of M. PARSONS his Reckoning MAister Morton will needs shake Salmeron by the sleeue and shew him a tricke of his art telling vs that he allowed that the King was supreme in spirituall affaires and ordering Priests citing Salmeron for proofe heereof which is not ably false for Salmeron prooueth the quite contrarie The Reuiew 21 Heere I am constrained to shake M. Parsons by the sleeue and tell him in his eare that hee hath plaied me a feate of that art which he calleth not ably false by opposing vnto me the sentence of Salmeron concerning the authority of the Kings of the old Testament In spirituall affaires and againe in spirituall matters seeing that the title of that Question concerning the authoritie of Kings ouer Priests was in the very place now obiected expresly and noted only to be In ciuill causes and not in spirituall affaires Is not this indeed a notable falshood But he will still be like himselfe M. PARSONS Reckoning Summarily thus Whereas Salmeron said by supposition vbiid euenisset If it had happened that Kings had prescribed some things vnto Priests it had beene no maruell for so much as the Synagogue was earthly which supposition the Minister left out that he might more cunningly shift and auoid it The Reuiew 22 I will not contend with M. Parsons about the words vbi id euenisset to examine whether it signifie by way of supposition If it had happened or without supposition Whereas it had happened seeing it may indifferently carrie both senses The question is whether Salmeron whom M. Parsons commendeth for a learned man who hath writ many volumes and was one of the first tenne of the order of the Iesuits did suppose onely and not affirme that Kings in the old law had supreme authoritie ouer Priests or no Who can better decide this contention than Salmeron himselfe First looke to the same place and he saith in the words following Itaq cùm populus c. Seeing that the people of God doth consist of a bodie and of a soule the carnall part in the old Testament had the chiefdome and was so appointed for signification of spirituall things A little after speaking of the olde Testament The law saith hee is abolished and the subiection of Priests vnto Kings These termes exceed the degree of supposition 23 But howsoeuer Salmeron may seeme to reele and stagger in that place both by Supposing and by affirming by doubting and yet by concluding notwithstanding if M. Parsons had had a desire to know the resolute determinate iudgement of Salmernon in this point hee might haue easily vnderstood this expresse sentence of Salmeron Nunc omissâ c. That is Now omitting the spirituall power saith hee in the law of nature or in the law of Moses which was lesse in the old Testament than is the Regall and Kingly and therefore the high Priests were subiect vnto Kings as also among the Gentiles c. Let M. Parsons ponder this sentence and he shall finde that this his learned man Salmeron one of the first tenne of M. Parsons his order doth confute many score of Iesuits who since haue held the contrarie This also sheweth how absurdly ignorant M. Parsons is of the iudgement of Salmeron I am almost tired with his verbosities and verball skirmishes and therefore hauing obteined the cause I passe ouer his canuasse of the word Synagoga and the other of Populus Dei and proceed vnto the Materials CHAP. II. Conteining an Answer vnto other eight charges SECT I. The summe of the eight charge of M. PARSONS his Reckoning OUt of Salmeron and Carerius patched together he maketh this Romish pretence that the old Testament was a figure of the new in Christ that therfore the spiritual power as Popedome must be the cheife or substantiue c. and answereth calling this rather babish Grammar than sound Diuinity and saith that the earthly elements were figures of the spirituall and he auenly things in the eternall and celestiall Hierusalem Will he therefore conclude by sound Diuinity that it was not a figure of things vpon earth which should be fulfilled in the new Testament Was not Manna a figure of the Eucharist and Circumcision

the behalfe of Popes dispensation Nec est qui audeat dicere Domine cur it à facis that is Neither is there any that dare say Why doest thou so Where as though this point were worthy the sight of al passengers there standeth in the Margent as it were a finger pointing vnto it saying Let no man say to the Pope Domine cur it à facis My Lord why doe you so Therefore must I aske you once againe Why deale you so rashly in writing you know not what or in obiecting malice in such a matter why doe you reproach mee so maliciously 20 Furthermore because I finde M. Parsons making mention of Sir Francis Hastings and of his owne booke of Warnwoord I must furthermore bee so sawcie as to pull him once againe by the sleeue and aske him by way of digression whether he be not the man that denied that this salutation Dominus Deus Papa is found in the Glosse of some Canonist SECT VI. M. PARSONS his Warn-woord against Sir Francis Hastings his Wast-woord concerning Dominus Deus Papa SIr Francis Hastings saith that the Canonists say roundly in the Glosse Dominus noster Deus Papa Our Lord God the Pope but if it were so why doth not Sir Francis either roundly or squarely quote vs the text Sure it is that I cannot finde it though I haue much sought for it and hard it is to beleeue that any such text may be found But yet here to helpe out S. F. with some part of his credit and for very compassion I will adde a coniecture of a friend of his how he might chance to haue beene deceiued about Dominus Deus noster Papa if he cite it vpon his owne reading for that perhaps he might find it written thus D. noster D. Papa both D. D. signifying a double Dominus which some cauilling Heretike espying iudging it inconuenient to repeat Dominus twice would needs inforce the second D. to be set for Deus This my coniecture is confirmed somewhat by the similitude of a like fond chance whereof I haue heard as happened in the Subscription of an English letter written from certaine Marriners to the Lord Admirall in these words To the right honourable our good L. the L. Admirall which second L. a simple fellow interpreted to signifie the Lady Admirall saying that the first L. signifying the Lord himselfe the second L. must needs signifie also his Lady If I misse in this coniecture or comparison S. F. is cause thereof that cited not the text thereby to cleare all matters and to deliuer both vs of this doubt and himselfe of new suspicion of imposture The Reuiew 21 I like you well M. Parsons howsoeuer the matter goe you can make your selfe mirth with your owne fancies and coniectures as though there were no such thing as Sir Francis alleaged out of their Romish Glosse when as yet there can be nothing more apparent for in the Extrauagant at the word significâsti Tit. 14. cap. 4. the Glosse saith plainly in the very same words Dominum Deum nostrum Papam that is Our Lord God the Pope euen as it is set out by their best approoued edition of the Extrauagants But so it pleased M. Parsons rather to bewray his owne ignorance of the common Romish Glosse than to lose his ieast of Lord and Lady although it bee but a silly one God wot for what man could bee so simple and indeed stupid as to thinke there could be any congruity of speech in such a superscription as he hath feigned viz To the right honorable our good Lord the Lady Admirall wherein as it were by a strange metamorphosis the sex is changed a Lord being turned into a Lady What then shall we thinke of M. Parsons his wit who hath so vniustly imputed vnto Sir Francis a suspicion of Imposture If he sported thus in dissemblance he must be iudged to haue beene malicious if in ignorance hath he not beene ridiculous I returne to our Reckoning wherein from Boniface an Archbishop hee passeth to a Pope Leo. SECT VII The thirteenth charge concerning the Oath of Allegence The summe of M. PARSONS Reckoning POpe Leo saith M. Morton writing vnto a true Cntholike Emperor said You may not be ignorant that your Princely power is giuen vnto you not onely in worldly regiment but also in spiritual for the preseruation of the Church As if he had said not only in causes temporal but also in spiritual so far as it belongeth to the outward preseruation not to the personall administration of them And this is the substance of our English Oath And further neither doe our Kings of England challenge nor subiects condescend vnto In which words you see two things are contained first what authority S. Leo the Pope aboue 1100. yeares agone ascribed vnto Leo the Emperor in matters spiritual ecclesiastical The second by this mans assertion that neither our Kings of England challenge nor doe the subiects condescend vnto any more in the Oath of supremacy that is proposed vnto them Which if it be so I see no cause why all English Catholikes may not take the same in like manner so far foorth as S. Leo alloweth spirituall authority to the Emperour of his time Wherfore it hehooueth that the Reader stand attent to the deciding of this question for if this be true which here M. Morton auoucheth our Controuersie about the Supremacie is at an end Heerupon I vrged him very earnestly that this assertion might be maintained saying among other things Mee thinks such publike doctrine should not be so publikely printed and set forth without publike allowance and intention to performe and make it good If this be really meant we may easily be accorded if not then will the Reader see what credit may be giuen to any things they publish notwithstanding this book commeth forth with this speciall commendation of published by authority c. Which words in my iudgement should haue mooued M. Morton to leaue somewhat to the matter in this his Answer and not to haue passed it ouer so stily as though neuer mention had beene made thereof But euery man will guesse at the cause and so we shall expect it at some other time The Reuiew 22 I will take no longer Time than this present and vpon the issue heerof will I appeale vnto the Reader to iudge according to the iust apparence of truth That which I thenauerred hath been since published in print by one of far more exact iudgement than that I may be worthy to say that he hath published the same And this passed vnder the approbation and priuelege of our gratious King who is the Lex loquens and can best interpret the sense of the Oath Wee yeeld saith this reuerend Prelate nothing to our King which belongeth vnto Priestly function neither doth the King affect it he iustly challengeth and we acknowledge due vnto him those acts which appertaine vnto outward policy for the

by saying No-body meaning To tell it vnto you and S. Augustine his Firmus in these daies would be hissed out of their schooles for a simple and witlesse fellow euen as our AEquinocatours would if they had liued in these daies been driuen out of Christendome for gracelesse mont-bankes But heare what followeth 7 An other example Before he deliuereth this example he propoundeth a Conclusion which is principally to be obserued In the case of a man who is wrongfully questioned about a most secret fault If saith Sotus he cannot finde words whereby through an Equiuocation which is in the common vse of men he may couer his fault without a lie he ought rather to die than lie Still we finde that whatsoeuer the AEquiuocation be it ought to be such as consisteth in the common vse of the words themselues And therefore where the question is concerning a guilty person who killed Peter and is examined thereabout Whether he may answer I haue not killed him conceiuing in his minde another man of the same name Peter being one whom indeed he killed not Such an answer saith Sotus cannot be without a lie because according to the receiued vse of all men an affirmation and negation in proper names are so taken for the same man as if this onely had been therby signified viz. for that Peter of whom the question was asked How then shall their AEquiuocating Priest auoid the guilt of a lie who being asked whether he were a Priest Answered No meaning A Priest of Apollo the heathenish God And being demanded whether he were euer beyond the Sea answered No meaning the Adriatique Sea We see that heere also their Sotus meeth with their AEquiuocator to prooue him alier 8 The last example But what shall the guilty miserable woman doe when her husband shall constraine her by violence to confesse whether she had committed Adultrie or no and shee cannot finde any amphibologie to hide herselfe in I answere saith he That the iniquities of men are more than that wee can preuent them therefore in such a case it is better to die than to transgresse by lying This had beene but a fond Resolution if he had thought that Nescio vt dicam would haue serued the turne which to free the speech from a lie notwithstanding is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the profession and practise of our Equiuocators and whereby it is most easie to preuent all guiles of the most subtle Interrogatories In briefe in the shutting vp of this Treatise hee granteth that Words which haue not a true sense according to the signification which is receiued into common vse cannot bee excused from a lie Which conclusion with all these premisses I leaue as a Glasse vnto M. Parsons and other Professors of Mentall Equiuocation to looke their faces in and at their leasure to tell mee what they see From the Spanish Doctor Sotus hee goeth to a Flemmish Doctor Cunerus SECT II. The summe of the sixteeneth charge of M. PARSONS his Reckoning CVnerus is no lesse iniuriously alleaged than the former for Cunerus saying In religione concordiae sola est ratio vt omnes c. that is This in religion is the onely way of concord that all men with apious minde doe wholly conceiue and practise that which is taught in the Catholike Church of Rome Maister Morton translateth This is the onely true religion which is taught in the Church of Rome What dealing is this c. The Reuiew 9 Any man may perceiue what kind of fish M. Parsons is who can thus carpe at words peruersly concealing the plaine intention of the Author Cunerus hee intending to proue the Hollanders to be Rebels against the K. of Spaine who were not possibly to except concord except first they would consent in one Religion and that there is no true religion but that of the Church of Rome Whereunto saith Cunerus a Christian Prince is sworne to be a defender of the faith namely of that Romish and therefore he wil haue that King as Sara to cast out Agar and her sonne so to remoue out of Holland all of the contrarie profession of Religion If then he allowing no possibilitie of Concord without consent in religion and no Religion but that which is Romish doth he not euidently say that the Romish is the onely Religion I am vexed with M. Parsons his vanities and desire something materiall Peraduenture we shall finde it in the next instance SECT III. The seuenteenth charge M. PARSONS his Reckoning NOw we come to another abuse perteining to two menindifferently to wit Cassander a Germane Schoolmaster and Bellarmine a Cardinall but wee shall ascribe it rather to the Germane for this present for that we haue had diuerse examples about Cardinali Bellarmine before The Reuiew 10 Shal I attribute this omitting of my Abuse of Bellarmine vnto M. Parsons his remisnesse or rather to his barrennesse and indeed fondnesse who offereth to Reckon for an abuse of Bellarmine and yet will not tell what it is Wherein M. Parsons abuseth Bellarmine in my opinion bringing him vpon his stage to no other end than as Cato went into the Senate to carrie him out againe But what of Cassander I would heare first something of the man and then of the matter The summe of M. PARSONS his Reckoning Finding my selfe weary with prosecuting the labyrinth of his intricate iuggling trickes I will draw to an end adding only one example more in this place First to pretermit that he goeth about to deceiue his Reader by the opinion of grauity and learning in George Cassander of Bruges who was but a Grammarian in his daies and that hee was a Catholike who is consured for an Heretike primae classis in the Index of prohibited bookes and not onely for heresies of his time but also Quòd dicit Spiritum S. minus aduocandum adorandum esse c. The Review 11 It were good you knew how to make an end and better it had beene for you in your reputation that you had not begunne at all with this taxation of Cassander it is so notoriously shamelesse for I beseech you M. Parsons what great cause haue you to contemne a Grammarian how much lesse to say that Cassander was but a Grammarian As though hee had beene vnworthy of any better esteeme whom both the Emperor Ferdinand and Maximilian King of the Romanes sent for about the time of the Councell of Trent and made singular choise of him before any other Doctor with whom they might consult concerning the weightiest points of controuersie in Religion and in that respect was he commended by the Emperor for a man of singular learning and godlinesse and intituled Theologus that is a Diuine and by Maximilian hee was extolled for a man godly learned and discreet benè versatus in sacris literis that is One very conuersant in holy Scriptures of whom we haue need saith

to minde a short History of a man who farmed a custome and tallage which was taken at a bridge of all such passengers as were either diseased or else notoriously deformed So it was that one that passed ouer the bridge who had distortum vultum was called vpon to pay a peny which the passenger refused to pay The Toller caps the fellow and with that perceiueth that he had an other disease on his head called Alopecia and therefore he demaundeth of the party an other peny but the Trauailer resisteth and struggleth with the Toller yet being not able to make his part good is laide along on the ground where by some disaduantage he bewraied an other disease which he called the Hernia and thereupon was charged to pay a third peny there was no remedy the custome must be paid In some like sort shall my Reader in the perusall of this Encounter finde the matter to fall forth betweene me and M. Parsons wherein may be obserued that the more he contendeth and struggleth the more he intangleth himselfe and bewrayeth his owne diuers kindes of defaults As first to inueigh against me as a passionate and intemperate man whome his owne Apologists haue held to be a man not intemperate and for him to giue that censure whome his owne fellow noted to be a man of a very violent and vnquiet spirit and who himselfe confesseth as it were his own intemperancy by wishing that in his Mitigation he had not vsed such asperity of speeches against me This sheweth that he had some cause to betake himselfe to a more sober and quiet Reckoning wherein notwithstanding he dealeth so violently with me as my Reader will easily perceiue that he often falsifieth the Title of his booke not only by heaping vp more grieuous Acerbities then formerly he had done but also by setting against me Gretzerus to plow vpon my backe who is a stranger and a Iesuit and so profuse and professed a railer that whereas but one of his bookes was to be sould in West-Friesland no man would buy it because of the horrible slanders and railings which are therein In all which kinde of raging tempests I haue learned to cast this Anchor Non qui patitur sed qui facit iniuriam miser est And so I leaue this default of M. Parsons to receiue that name which our Reader shall thinke to be most properly agreeable therevnto In further examining of him hee bewrayed an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 both by absurdities in Syllogizing as concluding of Are in steade of Make and being earnestly charged therewith hath not yeelded so much as one of his bare-faced groates for discharge And also by certaine Grammatical quiddites whilest as he maketh Verè being ioyned with Celsus as it signifieth a proper name to be no true Latine and the translating of Praesidium Praeseruation and not Defence to be false English and diuers other the like crotchets hath be inforced in this his new Reckoning Thirdly there appeared a far greater fault euen that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whereby he chargeth me with no lesse then fifty wilfull falshoods as though he had learned of the Steward in the Gospell to Sit downe and write fiftie whom for that cause his Lord termed wise but yet vniust vniust to his Master and wise for himselfe Such vniust wisedome haue I found to abound in M. Parsons who both in his booke of Mitigation and in his new Reckoning obiecteth wilfull falshoods so vnconscionably that he himselfe as is proued in this Encounter is intangled in farre more then fiftie witting except some had rather I should say witlesse vntruths Of this kinde of dealing I haue more cause to complaine perhaps then some others because I finde strange measures offered vnto me by my Aduersaries For M. Parsons his bent to traduce me hath beene such as sometime to condemne me for omitting wordes which were by me expresly set downe being in one place so violently transported with passiont as to lay to my charge the word Fortasse for not translating it perhaps although in the very same place I translated and englished it twise Peraduenture which he could not but see because once in the same place he repeated it accordingly But it seemeth that in leuelling at me as at his marke he was onely left-eyed Also which is a profound step of malignity he diuers times obiecteth for wilfull falsities the Omissions of such clauses which if they had beene alleadged to the full might haue made much more for the aduantage of my cause This was no more honest dealing then was that of the wife of Putiphar against Ioseph He for fear to bedrawnby her pulling him by the cloak to her vnchaste bedde hastened away and left his Cloake a pledge and token of his chastitie she vpon his flight cryeth out and complaineth that he came to abuse her and for proofe she saith Beholde his garment turning the same Cloake contrarily into an argument of his villany and a Cloake of her owne dishonesty Againe whereas vpon the finding out of mine owne Escapes I gaue my Reader Aduertisments therof in the end of my books and added Corrections thereunto there my Aduersaries yet I cannot accuse M. Parsons of this guilt being directed to my errour by mine owne Aduertisement doe forthwith vpbraid mee with it neuer giuing any notice that it hath beene corrected So dealt the enemies of Sampson who first plowed with his owne Heifer then which is spoken of the same men The Philistimes are vpon thee Sampson I pray God that they fall not vpon the imprecation which was extended vnto the imprecation which was extended vnto the enemies of Dauid who not regarding his repentaence for his fault and the amendment of his life did point onely at his escape saying So so would we haue it But yet M. Parsons is in another point no lesse inexcuseble whilst which is his common guise when foure or sixe and sometimes nine testimonies of his owne Authours are obiected against him for matter of a point in Controuersie he singleth out some one alleg ation wherin he laboureth by art to make at least some shew and colour of misprision and then dismisseth all the other witnesses as dumbe men and passeth ouer the whole cause it selfe without mention at all and so diuers times Altercando res non dirimitur sed perimitur Can this be a tollerable manner of proceeding in the disquisition of any truth This is not all but especially of late times when our Aduersaries are muzzelled as it were with the confessions of their owne Doctors obiected for the iustification of our cause they as the AEgyptian Dogges are said to lappe here and there of the riuer Nilus and runne their way doe catch and snatch onely at peeces and carpe at some allegations crying out although neuer so falsly against Falshood and then beholde The Booke forsooth is answered In all these proceedings they are I confesse in

Boucher a Romish Doctor who held it lawfull for a priuate man to kill a Tyrant in the case of publique enmity eyther against the Church or the Common-wealth which I iudged to bee a rebellious position I must now answere according to my charge Mr. PARSONS his Reckoning and charge against his Aduersary BVt it is graunted by Doctor Boucher sayth M. Morton that when the Common-wealth hath condemned and declared any Tyrant for a publicke enemy he may be slaine by a priuate man Whereunto I answere that then he is no priuate man for that he doth it by a publique authority of the Common-wealth as doth the executioner that cutteth off a Noble-mans head by order and authority of the publicke Magistrate so as in this M. Mortons distinction serueth him to no purpose for that neyther for priuate or publique iniuries can a priuate man as a priuate man that is to say by priuate authority kill any Prince though he were a Tyrant for any cause eyther priuate or publique whatsoeuer So as in this principall charge M. Morton remaineth wholly conuicted as you see The Reueiwe 17. Boucher calleth him a priuate man Take the case as M. Parsons hath propounded it that a priuate man after the publique sentence of the Common-wealth is no priuate man but a publique and iust executioner by the same rule he must imply that when the Pope whom they make Supreame in such cases hath excommunicated a King and commaunded Armes against him then euery man may vse Marshal-law and iustly murther that King What is this but to put into the handes of men dagges and knyues and poisons for execution of their hatefull designes But we returne vnto Doctor Bouchier The case may be so vrgent saith he that the publicke iudgement neede not be exspected because where the crime is notorious it is sufficiently condemned without further iudgement And he bringeth in the place of Deut. 13. Thou shalt presently slay them euen before the publique iudgement of the Church published By this I conuince M. Parsons of notorious falshood who defended that Boucher did not allow the killing of any King but after the publique iudgement of the Common-wealth Here we see a case wherein Iacke Straw and Wat Tyler and euery Rascall is armed for this purpose euen before publique iudgement The answere which M. Parsons will giue vs in this his Sober Reckoning is worth our attention Mr. PARSONS his Reckoning DOctor Bouchier in his fourth booke hath a whole Chapter to proue that in some vrgent cause the matter may be preuented as when the thing is so notorious instant and perilous as the said publique iudgement cannot be expected then for subiects to vse poená priuatiua to withdraw their obedience and only to defend themselues and not positiuá that is the positiue punishment of actuall Rebellion or 〈◊〉 offensiue So as considering what here is in the Question hee that is T. M. must needes be condemned of a Nihil dicit or a falsum dicit The Reueiwe 18. Iucundè dictum iocularitèr M. Parsons is a iolly but yet a iugling fellow for although D. Bouchier doth vse the distinction of priuatiue and positiue punishment yet in the next Chapter he sheweth that The iudgement of the Church may be preuented by the notoriousnes of the crime but how preuented by onely a priuatiue punishment or onely by armes for defence No he is not contented with a Buckler of defence but he putteth a sword in mens handes for to kill euen before iudgement saying that they are taught out of Deut. 13. Statim interficere Presently to kill adding the examples of Phinoes killing the Israelite Num. 25. and of Mattathias killing the Kings Captains 1. Machab. 2. Next he seeketh to establish the Acte of killing by a Canon That hee who falleth into a crime which is condemned by the Canon may without further iudgment be held condemned by the sent ence of the Canon Thus farre of the proceeding by Ecclesiasticall censure 19. In the fourth Chapter he entreth the same question concerning execution before publique iudgement Shall we think saith he that secular men in their proceedings in iudgment ought to be more religious or cautelous then the Ecclesiasticall as that they ought to expect that publicke iudgement as Polititians teach before that they may set vpon a Tyrant by armes Immediately to prooue that they ought not to expect any publicke iudgement he saith that in such a case If publicke iudgement may not be had the safet ie of the Common-wealth is to be sought by other meanes whatsoeuer euen as against an armed theife And if any whom he calleth Tyrants shall happen to be slaine in such insurrections Who sayth he will denie but they are iustly slaine In the fift Chapter he giueth an instance in Henr. 3. King of France who was murthered by Iacob Clement a Friar which fact Bouchier in the cap. 23. of the same booke doth highly commend as meritorious Is heere M. Parsons eyther falsum or nihil Is it nothing to arme Subiects against Kings before publique iudgement Is it nothing so to arme them as if they kill such Kings to holde the fact lawfull and meritorious If there had beene any tincture of truth in you you could not haue obiected falsity vnto mee against so many and so plaine instances and examples 20. I call them plaine because Bouchier is challenged by your own Doctor Barclaius euen for the same matter Thou teachest saith Barclay vnto Bouchier there that it is lawfull to kill Henry the third King of Fraunce It had beene therefore safer for M. Parsons his conscience to haue answered Nihil then to haue answered Falsum that he is conuicted by the iudgement of their owne Barclay which is likewise the censure of their owne Priest in the Quodlibets saying that In the Treatises de tusta Abdic Henr. 3. they affirme that it is lawfull to kill a Tyram for so they termed that King although there be neyther sentence of Church nor Kingdome against him The case thus standing we may thinke that Mr. Parsons his guiltinesse concerning the matter did driue his penne awry to wrangle 〈◊〉 about wordes Mr. PARSONS his Reckoning THe adding these wordes which I say by common consent is an accessary vntruth for excuse whereof he runneth to other Chapters wherein he saith that Bouchier auoucheth Mirum esse in affirmando consensum that there is a wonderfull consent in allowing this doctrine But these are other matters vpon other occasions c. The Reuiew 21. If this was spoken of other matters which were impertinent why did you not name them I suspect you haue found some reason for indeede in his third booke and cap. 15. his position is this viz. That it is lawfull to kill a Tyrant which saith he it is marueilous what a great consent it hath not onely of prophane but euen of our owne Authours Which is the very ground and basis

any man reade the booke and chap of Barclay and he will woonder at the impudencie of this vaunter for he speaketh no one word of gathering Councels or comparison of spirituall authoritie between the Pope and Emperour concerning their gathering of Councels or Synods but of a quite different subiect of taking armes by subiects against their lawful temporall Princes And what will our Minister then answer to this manifest calumniation so apparently conuinced out of Doctor Barcley The Reuiew 12 The Minister will answer that M. Parsons was scarse sober when he called either my allegation a calumniation or his answer a conuiction for in that place of Full Satisfact part 3. chap. 10. pag. 27. I did not produce the testimonie of Barkley for the point of Gathering of Councels but for the generall matter of Temporall subiection due vnto Emperours by all persons Which Argument Barkley prosecureth at large in the place alleged being lib. 6. cap. 26. pag. 521. confuring the common answer which is vsed by the Romanists which is this that Although Christ and Iohn Baptist and other Apostles did not teach that wicked Kings ought to be remoued in the first plantation of the Church among Infidels yet afterwards this was the doctrine when Kings should become noursing Fathers Their owne Barkley in the sentence which was alleged confuteth that thus This ought to be vnto vs saith he a weightie argument to know that neither any of the holy Fathers or any orthodoxall Writer for the space of a full thousand yeers and more although the Church did abound with troups of armed souldiers and the number of tyrants was great is red to haue taught any such thing either in word or writing Adding concerning the times of Emperours which professed Christ although heretically Why did not then those excellent Pastors and Fathers excite the people against Valens Valentinian the yonger Heraclius and other wicked Princes 13 Who yet againe in his late booke Depotestate Pontificis writing professedly against Bellarmine by whom the Pope is held to haue a supreme power Indirectly in temporall causes doth cap. 34. argue thus The Pope hath not now greater power ouer temporall Princes than he had before he was a temporall Prince but before he was a temporall Prince he had no temporall authoritie any way ouer Kings therefore now he hath no such power any way ouer them This Confession of their Barkley must needs choake the Romish vsurpation By which my Reader may obserue the impotencie I forbeare to quit him with his owne word of impudencie of this calumniation and his notable falshood in dissembling the opinion of Barkley Now we come to Card. Bellarmine M. PARSONS his Reckoning He vseth heere afarre greater immodestie or rather perfidie in mine opinion The Reuiew 14 These are fearefull termes Will you stand to them Let vs then trie your exceptions which concerne first words and then matter but first let vs examine the materials the summe whereof followeth The summe of M. PARSONS Reckoning The drift of Bellarmine is wholly against M. Mortons assertion for that he denieth that euen the Emperour had any spirituall authority for calling of Councels but onely that they could not well in those dayes be made without them and that for foure seuerall causes The first because the old Imperiall lawes made by the Gentiles were then in vse whereby all great meetings of people were forbidden for feare of sedition except by the Emperours knowledge and licence The second because the Emperors being then Lords of the whole world the Councels could not be made in any city without their leaue The third for that the Councels being made in those dayes by publike charges and contributions of cities and especially of Christian Emperours themselues it was necessarie to haue their consent and approbation in so publike an action And the fourth and last cause for that in those dayes albeit the Bishop of Rome were head in spirituall matters ouer the Emperours themselues yet in temporall affaires he did subiect himself vnto them as hauing no temporall state of his owne and therefore acknowledging them to be temporall Lords he did make supplication vnto them to command Synods to be gathered by their authoritie and licence But since those times saith Bellarmine Omnes iste causae mutatae sunt All those causes were changed The Pope himselfe being now a temporall all Lord also as other Kings and Princes are which was brought to passe saith he by Gods prouidence that he might haue more freedome and libertie to exercise his Pastorship The Reuiew 15 This relation of M. Parsons is very true and my drift was only to shew how that Popes were anciently subiect in temporall matters which is Bellarmins flat assertion wherein then haue I abused his meaning M. PARSONS Reckoning Let vs consider the varietie of sleights and shifts which this our Minister hathvsed first hauing said that generall Councels were not gathered without the Emperours cost he addeth presently of his owne and with their consent which is not in the Latine The Reuiew 16 I will not trouble M. Parsons his patience with any quittance of like language although I am often prouoked therunto by his rigid and vnconscionable taxations whereof this must needs be one For the Latine words of Bellarm. are these Non poterant aliquid facere inuito Imperatore that is They viz. the Popes could doe nothing without the Emperours consent Yet this deuout olde man feareth not to say that I added these words of mine owne albeit he himselfe confesseth the necessitie that then was to haue the Emperours consent This is my kinde Reckoner But let him proceed M. PARSONS his Reckoning Then he cutteth off the cause of the Popes subiecting themselues in those daies touching the temporality which was because they had no temporall state of their owne The Reuiew 17 I alwaies thought it lawfull for mee to make vse of an Aduersaries confessed conclusion such as this is Popes were formerly subiect vnto Emperours without the expressing of his causes especially seeing that the causes whatsoeuer they were are likewise confessed to haue beene since changed Was little Dauid to blame for cutting off Goliah his head with Goliahs his owne sword because he did not first tell what mettall was in it and who was the maker thereof Ridiculous And as fond is his next exception M. PARSONS Reckoning Bellarmine said that Popes made supplication to the Emperors to command Synods to be gathered which T. M. translateth that they would gather Synods as though Bellarmine did affirme that Empersrs had right to doe it The Reuiew 18 As though Emperors may not bee said to doe that which they commanded to be done Iosuah commanded the Tribes of Israel to be assembled and yet it is written that He assembled the Tribes of Israel Or as though the Emperors had not right to doe that which the Pope did by Supplication intreat him to doe

for my selfe desiring M. Parsons to loooke into Gretzer and to examine the places wherein he doth insist in Confutation of any thing that I haue written and iudge betweene vs and acccordingly to esteeme of Gretzers Censure In the meane time I shall answer vnto the censure which M. Parsons himselfe hath made against me M. PARSONS his Reckoning Neither will I alleage any thing iniuriously against M. Mortons person which I doe loue from my heart in the true loue of Christ our Sauiour wishing his best spirituall good as mine owne and doe esteeme him also for the good parts that God hath bestowed vpon him though I doe pitty the euill imployment thereof in the cause he defendeth The Reuew 10 You shal not need M. Parsons to do that you haue aboundantly done which is To alleage matters iniuriously against me Notwithstanding I do imbrace your tender of loue and shall I hope not be ouercome in this contention by affecting your eternall good euen as mine owne neither shall I further esteeme of my selfe than that my imploiment may be for defence of a cause which I ought to loue a thousand times aboue my selfe Hactenùs de me Now I come to you M. Parsons SECT II. Concerning the Challenges made against M. PARSONS M. PARSONS Reckoning Mr. Morton hath lost himselfe through vehemency of Passion in this place where he censureth his Aduersary in fower seuerall challenges which I haue thought good to set downe together and not to answer them seuerally as I did in the former Paragraph for that indeed there is in them nothing but excesse of intemperate heat in contumelious speech c. The reuew 11 If M. Parsons would haue confidered either his owne desert or my behauiour he would neuer haue complained of contumelious speeches For neither am I so lauish but that their owne Apologists whom he greatly commendeth haue allowed me the Title of A man not intemperate neither yet vsed M. Parsons to be so moderate but that his owne fellow could note him from the mouth of Cardinall Alan to be a man of a Uery violent and vnquiet spirit Yea and M. Parsons himselfe also hath wished that He had not vsed such asperity of speech against me Wherefore I passe ouer personal and offensiue tearmes which notwithstanding were onely expressed in Latine and I come to the Materiall points to trie whether I haue beene able to performe my chalenge against him or not There were foure principall parts of the chalenge against M. Parsons 1. The Discouery of Romish Positions and practises of Rebellion to be iust 2. His Treatise of Mitigation to be falsly so intituled 3. His Mentall AEquiuocation to be an Art of lying 4. The Romanists to support their causes by lying The Performance of the first part of the Chalenge 12. As the presence of light dispelleth darknesse so Uerum est Iudex sui obliqui Seeing now therefore that after M. Parsons hath made his full Reckoning and that answer hath beene made to all his exceptions we finde that their former Bulles and practises of their Popes such as were Pope Greg. 7. Paulus 3. Sixtus Quintus Pius Quintus and that the sentences of their owne Doctors such as were Card. Bellarmine Boucher Carerius Bozius Rainolds Allen Simancha Costerus Sanders Creswell Dolman doe without exemption defend a rooting out of all Princes who shall not subiect themselues vnder the Pope of Rome whensoeuer there is a sufficient power to preuaile Albeit it doth no lesse manifestly appeare and that by the confession of their owne Authors that in the time of the old law the High Priests were subiect vnto Kings And in the new Testament that Christ and his immediate Disciples did not affect or exercise power ouer Kings in Temporall things and as for the succeeding Fathers such as were Tert. Cyprian Chrysostom Athanasius Ambrose Leo Augustine and Gregory the Great that they as it hath beene likewise confessed did professe their subiection vnto the Emperours of their time according to the doctrine maintained in our Church All these Considerations cannot but iustifie the first part of my Chalenge concerning the Discouery of seditious Romish Positions and Practises of Rebellion The discharge of the second Part. 13 As for the decyphering of the disloyall affection of M. Parsons the former Mitigator what can be more pregnant then are his owne clauses who permitteth a subiection vnto Protestant Kings with a May and of a Possibility instead of a Must and Necessity who also alloweth his Catholiks to acknowledge their loyalty vnto our king only so long as they are Vsed as Subiects and then complaineth that they are not vsed as Subiects Who teacheth that they who are Lawfully Excommunicate by the Pope persist obstinate may not be heads in Christian Communion who can affoord no more grieuous epithet vnto the horrible plot of the Gunpowder Treason than to call it A temerarious fact notwithstanding it were a fact which both heauen and earth doe detest and at which hell it selfe as it were standeth all agast who being vrged to answere whether their part would not eradicate Protestants if they had power to execute their will could finde no better euasion then to say that the question was Impertinent Finally who defendeth the booke of Dolman al 's Parsons which hath bene condemned by their owne Priest as most Rebellious against the English State How shall not this be held a iust performance of the second part of the Challenge The discharge of the third part of the Challenge against Mentall Equiuocation as it hath beene described by M. Parsons 14 The Mentall Equiuocation which M. Parsons hath propounded as iustifiable in the iudgement of all Schooles Chaires and Vniuersities is in sundry places of this Encounter largely discussed and prooued to a lie not only from Reason but also from the iudgement of Romish Doctors such as were Sepulveda Aquinas Gabriel Biel Scotus Henricus de Gandauo Azorius and Sotus and was neuer iustified for true by any Heathenish man whereof there will be occasion to say much more in the answer to the Appendix following wherein the Reader will finde I hope a due satisfaction to this question The performance of the last part of the Challenge to wit that the great Support of Romanists is by lying Deuises 15 What would any Reader require for the due performance of this discharge The dispositions which their Writers haue to falsifie Then see aboue their Suarez condemned by Cumel their Baronius reprooued by their Venetian Doctor their Boucher controlled by Barclay their Gratian corrected by their Archbishop Tarraconensis their Bellarmine condemned by Marsilius by P. Paulus and Barclay and lastly their M. Parsons and their Moderate Pamphletter confuted in this Encounter 16 Would he furthemore haue it shewne vnto him wherein they haue abused the Fathers hee need but looke backe againe vnto the former Chapters where