According to the meaning of the statute I thinke he will not take the oath for then he should declare that the Queene hath power to establish and disanull Ecclesiasticall lawes to appoint Ecclesiasticall Iudges officers and commissioners to heare appeales or to appoint delegates to heare them when they are made from Ecclesiasticall courtes to nominate Bishops to receiue first fruits and tenthes of Ecclesiasticall liuings and such like rights priuiledges as the statutes of this land giue her but that he may not nor I thinke wil not do for that the lawes of their discipline deny it if so be he would I confesse he should satisfie me in this point but hee should vtterly ruinate the foundation of his aldermens consistoriall iurisdiction to whom they giue most of these things Yea I doubt whether others would be satisfied for as in religion it is a note of an hereticall disposition to doubt of the grounds of our faith so in policie it is a note of a disloyall person to doubt of the princes lawfull authoritie which the statutes giue her In which case seeing you were once albeit now you vtterly deny it I pray you let vs not haue you too much boast of your innocencie and that in such long Prefaces as that before your short briefe especially seeing heretofore you haue written and done many things to the praeiudice of her supremacie in Ecclesiasticall causes In the booke of your holy discipline wherein you hold that a perfect forme of Church gouernment such as is prescribed in Gods word is conteined you haue vtterly excluded the princes authoritie and debarred him from all gouernment for you haue not so much as mentioned him In one of the disciplinarian bookes of common prayer 1 This booke they sought to haue confirmed by act of Parliament and administration of Sacraments you leaue out the Christian magistrate in another there is some mention made of him but it is in the ende of the booke and after all the officers of the Church described Thirdly in direct termes you say that the Christian magistrate can no more be an officer of the Church 2 2. reply p. 420. then the pastors can bee magistrates how then can he be supreme gouernor of the Church that is no gouernor at all 3 2. repl 2. parl p. 147. as you say You hold also that a Christian magistrate hath no more authoritie in the Church then a heathen prince which is sufficient to exclude him out of the Church gouernment Finally you do subiect him to the excommunication of your elderships and place the magistrate among those that are to obey and the elders among commanders Fourthly you wil not deny but that the Papists deny her Maiesties supremacie in causes Ecclesiasticall how then can it be said that you hold a good opinion of it when you in your books do giue her no more authoritie then they and abridge the same as farre as they doe 4 2. repl p. 48. Doe you not deny that the prince ought to be called the head of particuler and visible Churches within his dominions Do you not likewise 5 Ibidem p. 157. 167. take from him authoritie to determine of Church causes and 6 1. reply p. 192. power to ordeine lawes and ceremonies It cannot be denied your wordes are plaine all which you borow from the Papists They subiect the prince to the Pope you to your elderships neither can you shew any other difference betwixt your selfes and them For where you say first that you doe not exempt your ministers frō the punishment of the ciuil magistrate as the Papists doe their Priestes you erre in both for both would you claime immunitie for your ministers and they do not simply exempt their priestes but in certeine cases The authors of the 7 Admonition 2. p. 65. admonition would haue themselues and their companions by act of Parliament exempted from the authoritie of Iustices and from their enditings and finings In your 8 Lib. 2. reply you would haue the authoritie of the ciuill magistrate to descend from Christ as God and not as mediator whereof it followeth that Christian princes haue no rule ouer their subiects as Christians but onely as men 1 De visib monarch lib. 2. c. 3. as Saunders also holdeth all of you deny that any appeale is to be admitted from the determination of the synode to the prince How then are not the synodes exempt from princes iurisdiction when the prince hath no authoritie ouer them yea and in Suffolke certeine of this sect in a supplication to the Lords of her Maiesties counsell affirme that it was a hard course and tending to the discredit of the ministery that their ministers should be presented before the Iudges and endited arraigned and condemned Contrarywise 2 Against the apologie of the Church p. 306. Harding saith that good Kings may put Bishops and priestes in minde of their duties and bridle both their riot and arrogancie And in 3 Ibidem p. 303. another place that a prince may make lawes for the obseruation of both tables and punish the transgressors Feckenam 4 To bishop Horne offereth to sweare that her Maiestie hath vnder God the soueraintie and rule ouer all persons within her dominions whether they bee Ecclesiasticall or temporall Fatemur personas Episcoporum qui in toto orbe fuerunt saith 5 De visib monarch lib. 2. c. 3. Sanders Romano Imperatori esse subiectos And for ciuil causes it is their common opinion that 6 Harding reioynd f. 379. priests may be conuented before ciuil Iudges and for Ecclesiastical causes certeine 7 Act. of Parliament anno 1584. acts 2. ministers of Scotland refused to answere before the king Secondly you say that the Papists will haue the prince to execute whatsoeuer they conclude be it good or bad which you will not For you graunt the prince authoritie to set order where there is no lawfull ministery and to stay vnlawfull decrees of lawfull ministers As if the 8 Hard. confus apol p. 304. 317. Papists did not grant as much or as if Papists held that the princes were to execute wicked decrees Againe it is euident that you would haue all men to stand to the 9 Admonit determination of your synodes And albeit your synodes doe decree bad things yet you wil not giue princes authoritie to iudge them How then can they stay them will you giue them extraordinary authoritie that is your meaning But how shall wee know when they worke by ordinary when by extraordinary authoritie Beside that you deny this extraordinary authoritie as long as there is a lawfull ministery And albeit your doings be vnlawfull yet you will not be stayed by the prince Thirdly you 10 2. p. 164. affirme that you do not vtterly seclude the prince from your Churchassemblies for oftentimes a simple man and as the prouerbe saith a gardner hath spoken to purpose
of this Church Fiftly I desired to be resolued Ibidem q. 22. whether all the errours of Barrowisme do not follow and may be concluded of M. Cartwrights and his consorts assertions and whether it bee a matter fit that these men should deale with that sort of sectaries and not rather be constrained publikely to recant their owne foule errors All these questions M. Cartwright answereth with silence Sixtly Ibidem q. 24. I mooued a question whether M. Cartwright and his consorts do not either flatly deny or call in question the principall points of her Maiesties supremacie and whether they take not from her power to ordeine rites and orders for the Church likewise authoritie to nominate Bishops to appoint Ecclesiasticall commissioners and to delegate learned men to heare the last appeale from Ecclesiastical courts to cal synodes and other authoritie giuen to the prince by the lawes of England and endeuoure to bring in forreine lawes and iurisdiction repugnant to the statute of the princes supremacie and prerogatiue and the lawes and liberties both of the Church of England and of her Maiesties subiects if M. Cartwright meant to haue satisfied the doubt concerning his opinion and conceit of her Maiesties supremacie as he goeth about it he ought to haue answered this question directly and particulerly not doing it who seeth not that he slideth away in cloudes of generalitie and priuate conceites of his owne fancy concerning this matter Seuenthly it was demaunded Answere to the petit q. 26. 29. whether by M. Cartwrights rules in those places where they are receiued the Church goods are not spoiled and the liuings of the ministery deuided and rewards of learning taken away and also whether if the same should here be receiued the like wrack would not be wrought and her Maiestie depriued of tenthes and subsidies and a great part of her reuenues and of many faithfull and loyall seruitors which by those lawes being made vnable to liue would also be made vnable to doe her seruice Hee hath nothing to answere that will make for him Eightly it was asked Ibidem qu. 30. whether M. Cartwright and his followers haue not in all places where they haue bene receiued made sectes and diuisions and hardened mens hearts and filled their minds with pride and humorous vanities to which he saith nothing Percase he knoweth it is no slander Ninthly Ibidem qu. 31. I demaunded whether it be not dangerous for this state that M. Cartwright and his partakers haue so much vrged this Church to imitate the examples of Geneua and Scotland considering the dangerous courses which they tooke and the hard effects that followed of them It cannot be denied and therefore M. Cartwright holdeth his peace 10. Ibidem qu. 33. The question was asked whether that the subuersion of the state of the Church which foloweth necessarily of M. Cartwrights disciplinarian deuises is not a great scandale and hinderance to the reformation of true Religion in other places It is most apparent and therefore M. Cartwright forbeareth to answere 11. Ibidem q. 34. It is demaunded whether M. Cartwright doe not as well subiect Princes to excommunication as Sanders or Allen or other Papistes and whether his doctrine is not as pernicious to princes authoritie as theirs It must needs be granted and therefore he passeth by and saith iust nothing 12. Answere to the petit qu. 49. A doubt is made whether M. Cartwright doth beleeue that subiects may rebel against such Kings as they accompt Papists or tyrants as some of that side haue taught and hee passeth by in a graue silence 13. Ibidem qu. 51. It is asked whether M. Cartwright and his felowes haue not assembled in synodes or rather conuenticles and there enacted decreed certeine rules orders contrary to her Maiesties lawes and also subscribed them procured others to subscribe them and by all possible meanes gone about without authoritie to put the same in practise and to discredite and disgrace the lawes of her Maiestie and ancient gouernment of Christ his Church This is most true and therefore passed ouer in silence 14. Idemaunded also whether they haue not in their said orders Ibidem qu. 52. which they call holy discipline taken al authoritie in Church causes from the Christian magistrate and giuen it to their consistories and synodes in so much that the magistrate is not once mentioned in that platforme and further I would know how the sufferance of these proceedings may stand with the maiestie of a Prince and with gouernment Likewise it may be demanded of M. Cartwright how he that hath bound himselfe to this forme of discipline by his word subscription may be thought to allow of her Maiesties supreme gouernment which the lawes of this land doe giue vnto her In this case he is as silent as Harpocrates 15. Ibidem q. 53. I desired to knowe whether M. Cartwright haue not taught that the authoritie which they challenge to their elderships and synodes by their holy discipline as they call it is neither increased nor diminished whether the prince be Christian or heathen and likewise if he do not thinke or haue not taught that the authoritie of a Christian and heathen prince is all one and that a Christian king hath no more to doe with the Church gouernment then any pagan prince or Emperour hath but he will tell vs nothing 16. Ibidem q. 54. I asked M. Cartwright whether he his adherents haue not put the greatest part of their discipline in practise without her Maiesties consent authoritie or allowance and likewise without her authoritie or knowledge haue not both made secret meetings and established diuers newe orders and broched newe opinions and all contrary to the doctrine faith and gouernment of this Church of England this string M. Cartwright dare not touch 17. Ibidem q. 55. I asked him whether hee was not presumptuous if no more in doing these things and whether he ought not to bee brought publikely to submit himselfe for his faults Likewise it may bee here asked of him whether hauing both in Fenners booke and his replies and writings taught written and allowed diuers points of false-doctrine he is not to be brought to a publike recantation for satisfaction of those weake ones that hee hath offended will it please him yet to answere this question directly 18. Answere to the petit qu. 57. I demaunded whether M. Cartwright swore truely in the Starre-chamber when he affirmed on his oth that he neuer affirmed or allowed that in euery monarchie there ought to be certain magistrates like to the Spartaine Ephori with authoritie to controll and depose the king and to proceed further against him seeing he called M. Fenners booke wherein these points are expresly set downe the principles and grounds of heauenly Canaan and doth not onely without all exception allow it but also highly commend it this is also a point which he dare
all this now I wil briefly note but the proofes you shall see largely deduced in the discourse ensuing First where I doe make diuers questions and some that touch you very nerely you passe the most of them ouer with silence but if you would haue iustified your selfe you should haue answered them al and that in direct and plaine termes I 1 Answere to the petit p. 186. aske you whether Fenners booke which he entitleth sacram Theologiam and which you seeme to allow conteine not strange diuinitie and gladly would I know if you mislike any thing in that booke what the points are you mislike you answere nothing I 2 Ibid. p. 189. demaund of you whether Barowes erroneous conclusions doe not folow of your assertions And what say you to it forsooth nothing I aske if the Prince refuse to reforme the Church how far inferior magistrates and the people may proceed therein and thereto your answere is 1 Ibid p. 194. 195. silence I demaund of you if you and your consorts do not thinke the practises of Geneua and Scotland for the setting vp of their discipline lawfull and worthy to be folowed and to this you say 2 Ibidem p. 195. nothing I demaund further whether you and your fellowes haue not assembled in synodes and conuenticles and there decreed and enacted certeine Ecclesiastical canons and rules subscribed and practsed them contrary to her Maiesties lawes and the statutes of the Realme and you also answer as to other matters I desired to be resolued whether you had disgraced her Maiesties Ecclesiastical lawes reformation gouernment you respect my desires nothing Diuers other matters likewise I demaunded of you vnto which you answere nothing nay in the matters concerning Hackets practise and Martines libels and her Maiesties supremacie you answere imperfectly and vnsufficiently you dare not set downe my whole question nor confesse al was done concerning Copinger and Martin nor wil you answere directly to those particuler points of her Maiesties supremacie which the statutes and lawes giue her and doe you thinke that this kinde of answering is sufficient to cleare you Why then let Sanders Allen and those Papists and traitors which confesse so much in termes as plainely and openly as you do as yet be cleared concerning Stubbs his wil and your dealing with Francis Michel and others you haue also peruerted my meaning and altered my words and maner of writing who then seeth not how litle meanes you had to cleare your selfe being put to these hard shifts and not daring to set downe his words whom you pretend to answere but this we shall see more euidently when wee come to the examination of the particulers of your briefe Further your answer is altogether vnsufficient you do still cry out in your tragicall maner slander slander and yet you doe not vnderstand what is slander you ought therefore to vnderstand that slander is 1 L. 1. ff ad S. C. Turpil when matters criminal are purposely and falsly obiected but those things of which you go about to purge your selfe are either not criminal or els most true in part by your selfe confessed your selfe confesse that some things obiected to you are in their owne nature indifferent how then are they slanderous that you were acquainted with Hackets and Copingers practises and disliked not Martines courses shal be proued that you would not at the first answere to certaine points concerning the Queenes supreme authoritie in causes ecclesiastical you 2 In this booke and in the question concerning that matter confesse how then can you say you are slandered because forsooth as you would insinuate you did afterwards acknowledge it now offer to sweare it and yet you wil be taken halting when you come to the particuler points of that authoritie You deny that you allowed M. Fenners strange diuinitie concerning ouerruling and deposing of Princes by inferior magistrates yet haue not I said more then your own words wil proue and iustifie That which I say cōcerning working of Miracles and extemporal prayers you wittingly as it seemeth mistake and answere not which argueth that your conscience tolde you that I said nothing therein but trueth trueth whereof you are ashamed the execution of wills and purchase of lands is not criminall beside that what I said either concerning such matters or els your maner of employment of your money in effect and substance shal be proued sufficiently what reason then had you so vnaduisedly to challenge me and so deeply to charge me with this hainous matter of slandering nay what meant you or howe durst you once talke of slanders hauing your selfe slandered the ecclesiasticall policie of the Church as vniust the reformation thereof as prophane and impure the authoritie of Bishops practised in this Church as antichristian and contrary to Gods worde the clergie of England as destitute of an ordinary and lawful calling you hauing no other order then Deacon that I know the people of this land 1 Cartwr table as refusing Christ to reigne ouer them the preaching of the word as not orderly the administration of the Sacraments in this Church as not pure nor sincere neither haue you so good reason to charge me as I haue to charge you with slandering me hauing without cause imputed this vnto mee and charged me with shifting and I know not what vnchristian dealing and hauing put foorth and excited your friend to raile on me and charge me with diuers odious matters in the preface to your booke matters which I do the lesse regard for that as hee hath rashly charged me so he hath wickedly blasphemed God saying that God hath blasted my penne with a lying spirit attributing therein the wicked act of lying to God himselfe which is the Spirit of trueth and not only to me which cōfesse my selfe to be subiect to many errors of this M. Cartwright me thinks you should haue had more care and vsed therein more diligence and not suffered such blasphemies to passe in the forefront of your booke But may you say if you haue not slandered me yet you haue wronged me as if it were wrong to deale against the troubler of our peace the chiefe authour of your schisme the disturber slanderer of this Church and state and yet haue I done nothing otherwise then beseemed mee In my first bookes I dealt with you no further then the cause constreined me your importunitie that first began to oppugne the Church prouoked me In my answere to a certaine petition in the behalfe of your selfe and your side I do confesse I dealt with you more particulerly but I was drawen to it by the authors odious questions and courses When the petitioner said Quaere of Matth. Sutcliffe who is euer carping at M. Cartwrights purchases why he may not sel his fathers lands and buy others with the money how could I satisfie the man vnlesse I touched you particulerly blame therefore him that began
not answere directly and plainly 19. Ibidem qu. 58. I would also vnderstand whether M. Cartwright and his fellowes haue not confessed on their othes taken in the Starre-chamber that notwithstanding all that care that hath bene taken for the perfecting of their platformes of discipline they are not yet resolued vpon diuers points and whether they did wisely to subscribe to such orders or dutifully to animate certaine gentlemen of meane vnderstanding in diuinitie to present such a confused imperfect platforme of gouernment to the Parliament that it might be confirmed and receiued throughout the whole Realme and last of all whether it were wisdome to dissolue a state already setled to embrace a gouernment wherupon the authors themselues are not yet resolued nor I thinke euer will be and wherein others see notorious absurdities imperfections and iniustice doth not he that holdeth his peace consent 20. Ibidem qu. 59. I desired to heare whether M. Cartwright and his companions do not say vpon their othes that they meant to haue bene suiters to her Maiestie and the Parliament for the receiuing of their draught of discipline before mentioned and subscribed vnto by them as a perfect plat of Church gouernment commaunded by Gods word and therefore do vtterly disclaime by a most necessary implication her Maiestie to haue any preeminence and authoritie in Ecclesiasticall causes by the word of God seeing they do not giue any authoritie in their perfect platforme to the ciuil magistrate but yeeld all that power to their synodes classes and consistories It may also be further demaunded of him how this forme may be deemed perfect seeing they confesse they were not yet resolued vpon diuers points M. Cartwright answereth nothing 21. I demanded whether M. Cartwright did not vnderstand Answere to the petit qu. 60. that Copinger pretended an extraordinary calling which moued him to attempt matters that might proue very dangerous It might also haue bene demaunded of him whether albeit he would not be acquainted with the particulers of his lewd purposes yet he knew not that something was in hand for his and others deliuerance out of prison and for the aduancement of the consistoriall gouernment M. Cartwright standeth mute 22. Ibidem qu. 61. I doubted whether M. Cartwright mainteyning the excommunication of princes by the eldership and other points of Fenners booke doeth not mainteine doctrine as dangerous as Sanders Rosse and Allen that mainteine the excommunication of princes by the Pope and the Popes proceedings and yet M. Cartwright resolueth me not 23. Ibidem q. 75. I demaunded whether M. Cartwright did reueile to any magistrate the letters of Copinger or his strange deseignements but he deigneth not to satisfie any such demaund 24. Ibidem qu. 92. I asked whether M. Cartwrights answere to the Rhemish annotations vpon the new Testament cōtaine not diuers points of doctrine contrary to all the fathers to the faith of this Church and all sound diuinitie and why if it bee otherwise he doth not subiect it to the censures of the learned and what saith hee nothing 25. Ibidem qu. 93. I desired to know whether M. Cartwright or some friend of his did not threaten excōmunication against a certeine marchant at Middlebourg if he would not desist pursuing a seruant of his that had wasted his goods and whether such courses bee allowable All or most of these questions M. Cartwright passeth ouer in silence and doeth not so much as touch them in his apologie how nigh soeuer they touch him Beside these questions diuers other matters were asked of of M. Cartwright in the Starre-chamber whereto he hath either answered nothing at all or nothing to purpose Being demaunded Interrog 2. how far forth he hath affirmed or alowed the Queenes authoritie Ecclesiasticall to bee restreined by the iniunctions vnder colour whereof diuers allow and sweare to the supremacie that otherwise cōdemne it M. Cartwright saith he is not bound to answere the secret of his opinion belike he feareth to disclose Being demaunded Interrog 3. whether he hath mainteined or allowed that the king being no pastor doctor nor elder is to be accompted among the Church gouernours and whether in a well ordered Church the prince may ordeine orders and ceremonies in the Church M. Cartwright saith hee is not bound to answere and being reexamined as the Iudges determined hee ought he persisted in his former obstinacie a plaine argument of his peruerse opinion concerning her Maiesties gouernment in causes Ecclesiasticall Being demaunded Interrog 4. whether he did acknowledge the Ecclesiastical gouernment established by her Maiestie to be lawful and allowable by Gods word M. Cartwright answered that he tooke not himselfe bound to answere and so persisted being reexamined ergo he thought it not lawfull Being demaunded Interrog 5. whether he would acknowledge the Sacraments to be duly and sincerely ministred as they be ordeined to be ministred by the booke of common prayer M. Cartwright answered that he was not bound to answere and reexamined still refused to yeeld any further answere doeth he then thinke them to be sincerely and duly administred in our Church Being demaunded whether hee thought those that fauourd not the discipline to be accompted Christian brethren in the same sence Interrog 6. and as properly as men of his opinion M. Cartwright refused to answere as to a matter impertinent behold I beseech you how he accompteth of vs that mislike his new disciplinarian deuises Being examined whether he thought the Church of England refusing the presbyteriall gouernment to be the true Church in as proper sence Interrog 7. as that Church that embraceth the same M. Cartwright according to his olde tune refused to answere and said he was not bound Being demaunded Interrog 22. how farre he hath affirmed that without breach of the peace of the church of England as it is now gouerned men might treat of alteratiō of lawes proceed to practise the new discipline he maketh a sleight vnsufficient answere Being demanded at how many classicall or synodical assemblies he had bene present Interrog 23. 24. and what was treated in them hee either staggreth or answereth not Being demanded Interrog 24. whether in their assemblies they had not treated and concluded diuers matters direct contrary to the Ecclesiasticall lawes as for example that vnpreaching ministers are no ministers that no obedience is to bee giuen to Archbishops or Bishops that their ordination was to be receiued onely as a ciuile ordinance M. Cartwright answereth that they were treated of but not concluded and prayeth not to be pressed to answer further viz. how farre these matters were liked of which argueth his dislike of Ecclesiasticall lawes and presumption in determining against them Being demaunded whether he had not treated Answere to the interrogat in Starre-chamber Interrog 27. or propounded certaine meanes of maintenance for Archbishops and Bishops deanes and other officers and ministers Ecclesiastical hauing
haue the consent of many worthy churches and godly learned both of this and 13 Speake not this for shame for before Caluins time your fancies were neuer heard of other ages I would be ashamed for that singular mercy God had shewed mee by her Maiesties most gratious gouernment to come 14 Yet I haue beene in many places in her Maiesties seruice where I could not see you behind M. Sutcliffe in any duty that my poore hand is able to reach vnto 15 What is this to Fenners cause And that hee 16 If I dare you it is because I knowe you cannot dareth me not once but sundry times to answere touching these matters of discipline I thinke it not so 17 Why did you then first begin this braule fit for mee to vndertake it there being so many better able thereunto then I especially in this declining and forgetfull age of mine and yet if my answere might haue either that 18 At Geneua you may haue both allowance of print or passage that his hath and none other were found I my selfe in this weakenesse I am in would not be behinde with answere to any thing that he hath bene able to alledge in this behalfe 19 A ridiculous surmise if there be any thing in his writings the answere where of is not already set downe by such as haue written in that cause and that my silence in the cause of discipline is not altogether of the 20 I do thinke M. Cartwright able to do and write well but not in this cause inabilitie or feare M. D. Sutcliffe would so willingly fasten or rather force vpon mee let this be for an 21 An argument most weake for it is more easie to refute the Rhemâ—sts false annotations then to establish newe found conceits argument that where I was set 22 That should be done by the learned fathers of the church on worke by the right honourable Sir Francis Walsingham for the answere of the annotations of the Iesuites vpon the New testament had trauailed therein to a rude and first draught of a great part thereof vnderstanding from some in authority that I might not deale with it I did not onely not set any thing out my selfe but also 23 Good for you and for the cause earnestly laboured by letters and frends here and in Scotland both the hinderance of the printing some parts thereof which being brought to Sir Francis afterward much against my will came into the hands of diuers to whom I would 24 Such is the pride of these men they will not suffer their doings to be corrected neuer haue let them come In the margine oueragainst these words hinderance of the printing is this note placed And 25 This note serueth to vnderproppe the former weake argument but to no good effect for the vnsufficiency of this might deter him from attempting the other labour if he stayed the publishing of that whereunto he was once allowed by authority it is not in all likelyhood to be thought that he would hastily publish any thing of himselfe howsoeuer he might be persuaded of the trueth of it Matth. Sutcliffe In this answer there are two principall questions that should haue bene resolued by M. Cartwright if he meant to conclude ought against me the first is whether he did highly commend M. Fenners booke or no wherein this strange position mentioned in the title of his answere is conteined the second whether granting so much as I charged him withall he was herein slandered as in euery of his seuerall accusations he pretendeth of these two questions M. Cartwright resolueth nether with what face then can hee say that he is slandered not being able to deny any thing which I say nor to iustifie his wrong imputation of slaunder did hee thinke that I should neuer returne to looke into these matters if he did what hope hath he to make them good Beside this wrong where I say that Fenner giueth authoritie to inferior persons as indeed he doth he cunningly foisteth in superior persons as if either he meant to 1 If he say that a prince may be ouerruled by inferiors he denieth the princes souereignty if in such common wealths where the magistrates haue indeed superiors he deny their authority he speaketh as a man ignorant of antiquitie and state denie the princes supremacie or their authoritie if any such may be that haue authoritie ouer the prince or king as the Romanes had ouer kings that were their vassals and tributaries of which wee talke not nor make any question such goodly discourses maketh M. Cartwright all muffled about the eyes with the maske of innocency so that he could see nothing vnlesse it were to misalledge my words and to answere nothing to purpose yet least his clients and followers might thinke he had sayd great matters let vs examine euen this nothing He sayth that M. Fenner giueth no such authority as is sayd but where the lawes of the land doe establish such an authoritie as the Ephori in Lacedaemonia had A matter as I shewed that made not to purpose and which is also very false for M. Fenner as M. Cartwright should not be ignorant speaketh of lawes drawn out of the word of God to which all princes ought to submit their scepters further he speaketh generally he therefore that taketh it otherwise doth both mistake and misconstrue Driuen from this ground hee flieth to the second and sayth that hee is not of M. Fenners iudgement which sitteth him not well to say vnlesse he will contradict himselfe in his epistle for the matters conteined in M. Fenners booke hee calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 leges iuracoelestis Canaan Now I trow he wil not deny Gods lawes or as he calleth them the lawes of heauenly Canaan beside this he reuiewed the book and corrected it as appeareth by these words Cupiebam saith 2 The words of M. Cartwrights epistle before M. Fenners booke M. Cartwright libelluÌ„ hunc quem sanè praeclarum abs te accepi nec indignum vt ei legendo vadimonium quod dicitur deseratur pro voto postulato tuo meliorem cultiorem ad te remittere ad quam rem quid attulerim tu apud te statues hauing then corrected what he thought amisse will not M. Cartwright defend the rest especially hauing made all so neat and fine thirdly as those that 3 l. lex cornelia ff de iniuriis §. si quis librum publish and commend or write or make books conteining slandrous matter are to answere for whatsoeuer is therein conteined so they that publish and commend books conteining hereticall and trecherous and leud opinions are to answere for them much rather in what case then is M. Cartwr that by his excessiue commendations hath giuen vent to this booke which no wise man I thinke will valew is not he periured that denieth that doctrine on his oth which is conteined in the