mutatae sunt quia Pontifex qui est caput in spiritualibus non est subiectus in temporalibus Then in those dayes generall Councelles were made not without the charges of Emperours in that time the Pope did subiect himselfe vnto Emperours in temporall affaires and therfore they could doe nothing against the Emperours will for which cause the Pope did make supplication to the Emperour that he would commaund Synodes to be gathered but after those times all causes were changed for that the Pope who is head in spirituall matters is not subiect in temporall affaires So he 31. And heere let vs consider the variety of sleightes shifts of this our Minister not only in citing Bellarmins wordes falsly and against his meaning and drift in Latin wherof we shall speake presently but in peruerting this Latin that he hath so corruptly set downe in his former English translation For first hauing said according to the Latin that generall Councelles in those dayes were not gathered without the cost of Emperours he addeth presently of his owne and were made by their consentes which is not in the Latin and then he cutteth of the other wordes immediatly ensuing which conteine the cause to wit for that the Popes subiecting themselues in those dayes touching temporalities vnto the Emperours as hauing no temporall States or dominion yet of their owne could doe nothing without them and therfore did make supplication to the said Emperours that they would commaund Synodes to be gathered which T. M. translateth that they would gather Synodes as though Bellarmine did affirme that it lay in the Emperours by right to doe it but after those times omnes causae mutatae sunt all causes were changed but he should haue said are changed as Bellarmins true wordes are omnes istae causae al these causes are chāged to wit foure sortes of causes which he setteth downe why generall Councells could not be well gathered in those dayes without the Emperours help and authority which wordes are guilefully cut of by this deceauer as in like manner the last wordes put downe heere by himselfe Pontifex non est subiectus in temporalibus are falsly translated cannot be subiect in temporall and againe afterward Popes might not be subiect in temporall matters which is to make Bellarmine contrary to himselfe who saith a little before that the Popes did subiect themselues for many years wherby is proued that they could doe it but Bellarmins meaning is that in right by the preheminence of their spirituall dignity they were exempted not bound therunto 32. And thus much now for the corruptions vsed in the wordes heere set downe both in Latin English But if we would goe to Bellarmine himself and see his whole discourse and how brokenly and persidiously these lines are cut out of him and heere patched togeather as one entier context contrary to his drift and meaning we shall meruaile more at the insolency of Thomas Morton triumphing ouer his owne lye as before hath byn said for that Bellarmine hauing proued at larg and by many sortes of argumentes and demonstrations throughout diuers Chapters togeather that the right of gathering generall Councelles belongeth only to the Bishop of Rome and hauing answered all obiections that could be made against the same in the behalfe of Emperours or other temporall Princes grāting only that for certaine causes in those first ages the same could not be done in respect of temporall difficulties without the helpe assistance of the said Emperours that were Lords of the world he commeth to make this conclusion which heere is cited by T. M. but in far other wordes and meaning then heere he is cited Yow shall heare how he setteth it downe therupō consider of the truth of this Minister Habemus ergo saith he prima illa Concilia c. We haue then by all this disputation seene how those first Christian Councelles were commaunded by Emperours to be gathered but by the sentence and consent of Popes and why the Pope alone in those dayes did not call Councelles as afterward hath byn accustomed the reason was not for that Councelles gathered without the Emperours consent are not lawfull as our Aduersaries would haue it for against that is the expresse authority of S. Athanasius saying Quando vnquam iudicium Ecclesiae ab Imperatore authoritatem habuit When was it euer seene that the iudgment of the Church did take authority from the Emperour but for many other most iust causes was the Emperours consent required therin c. So Bellarmine 33. And heere now yow see that Bellarmins drift is wholy against M. Mortons assertion for that he denieth that euer the Emperours had any spirituall authority for calling of Councells but only that they could not well in those dayes be made without them and that for foure seuerall causes wherof the first was for that the old Imperiall lawes made by Gentils were yet in vse wherby all great meetinges of people were forbidden for feare of sedition except by the Emperours knowledge licence the second for that Emperours being temporall Lordes of the whole world the Councells could be made in no Citty of theirs without their leaue the third for that generall Councelles being made in those dayes by the publicke charges contributions of Citties and especially of Christian Emperours themselues as appeareth by Eusebius Theodoretus other writers it was necessary to haue their consent and approbation in so publicke an action as that was 34. The fourth and last cause was saith Bellarmine for that in those dayes albeit the Bishop of Rome where head in spirituall matters ouer the Emperours themselues yet in temporall affaires he did subiect himself vnto them as hauing no temporal State of his owne and therfore acknowledging them to be his temporall Lords he did make supplicatiō vnto them to commaund Synodes to be gathered by their authority and licence At post illa tempora istae omnes causae mutatae sunt but since those dayes all these foure causes are changed ipse in suis Prouinciis est Princeps Supremus temporalis sicut sunt Reges Principes alij and the Pope himself now in his temporall Prouinces is supreme temporall Lord also as other Kings Princes are which was brought to passe by Godes prouidence saith Bellarmine to the end that he might with more freedome liberty and reputation exercise his office of generall Pastorship 35. And this is all that Bellarmine hath of this matter And now may we cōsider the vanity of this Mortons triumph ouer him before and how falsly he dealeth with him alledging him against his owne drift and meaning leauing out also 〈◊〉 foure causes by me recited and then cutting of 〈◊〉 the particle istae these causes are now changed which includeth reference to these foure aid furthermore speaking indefinitely as though all causes and matters were now changed seeketh therby to deceaue his Reader and
more hath S. Paul in that Epistle of the eminency of Christes Priesthood therby to set forth the most admirable excellency of his power and glory therby giuen him from his Father for our saluation but of the glory of his temporal Kingdome in this life he saith little or nothing And had not then the foresaid Fathers and holy Bishops S. Chrysostome S. Gregory Nazienzen S. Ambrose and others great cause by contemplation of this supereminent worthines of Christes Priesthood to inferre the great preheminēce in generall of the Christian Priesthood before Kingly dignity of earthly principality But let vs yet consider one reason more 17. The office of high Priesthood as partly hath appeared by that we haue said and is euident by the discourse of S. Paul appointing him for a meanes or mediator betweene God and man consisteth principally in two thinges or partes first in respect of that which he is to performe towardes God as to his Superiour secondly in the functions that he is to vse towardes the people as inferiours and subiectes The first consisteth in offering sacrifice oblations prayers and intercession for the sinnes of the people as already touching Christ our Sauiour out of the Apostle we haue declared The second consisteth in the spirituall power dignity authority and functions therof which our said high Priest Christ Iesus as head high Priest of his Church purchased with the sacrifice of his owne bloud hath and may exercise vpon the said Church for euer for vnto him as our high Priest it appertaineth not only to make intercession for his said Church but to gouerne the same also and to direct it by conuenient meanes vnto the end of their saluation which he hath designed and for this to make lawes prescribe orders appoint Sacramentes ordaine spirituall tribunals of iudgment giue sentence of separation of the good from the bad forgiue and retaine sinnes which spirituall gouernment of soules belonging to the office of high Priesthood is a different thing from the ciuill gouernment of temporall principality and yet is a Kingdome also in it self but a spirituall Kingdome ouer soules and not ouer bodies And this had Christ our Sauiour togeather with his high Priesthood according to the prediction and vision of Daniel Aspiciebam ecce quasi filius hominis c. I did looke and behold there appeared as it were the Sonne of man and God gaue vnto him power and honour and a Kingdome his power is an eternall power and his Kingdome shall neuer be corrupted And so in the second Psalme after he had said I am made King by him vpon his holy Hill of Sion he addeth presently to shew that it was a spirituall Kingdome Praedicans praeceptum eius my office is to preach his commandement and many other authorities may be alledged to proue that Christ in that he was high Priest had supreame spirituall Kingly authority in like manner for gouerning of soules 18. But now for the temporall Kingdome of Christ in this life to wit whether besides this spirituall and Royall gouernment of our soules he had Kingly Dominion also vpon our bodies and goodes and vpon all the Kingdomes of the earth so as he might iustly haue excercised all actions of that temporall iurisdiction as casting into prison appointing new officers Kings and Monarches yea whether their power and authority and interest to their States did cease when he came as the right of Priestly authority did in this I say and other pointes depending herof there are two disputable opinions betweene Catholicke Deuines the one holding the affirmatiue that Christ was Lord King temporall as heere is set downe which diuers learned men both of old and our time doe de fend the other affirming that albeit Christ togeather with his high Kingly dignity of spirituall power was Lord also cōsequently ouer our bodies shall raigne ouer the same most gloriously for all eternity in the life to come yet that he renounced the vse of all that Dominion in this life and that in this sense he fled when they would haue made him King and refused to deuide the inheritance betweene the two Brethrē when he was demaunded and finally said to Pilate My Kingdome is not of this world confessing himself to be a true temporal King also according to Pilates meaning but yet that the vse and exercise therof was not for this world but only for the next wherof also the good thiefe vnderstood when he said on the Crosse Be mindfull of me when thou shalt come into thy Kingdome And finally they alledge for proofe of this the wordes of Zachary the Prophet Ecce Rex 〈◊〉 venit tibi iustus Saluator ipse pauper Behold Sion thy King commeth vnto thee as a iust and sauing King but he is poore as though he had said he is thy true King but hath renounced the vse and priuiledge of the same and chosen pouerty in this world And with this second opinion which is the more generall doe concurre also the Protestantes of our age that Christ tooke vpon him no temporall Kingly power in this life least if they held the contrary it should be inferred therof that he left the same authority both of temporall and spirituall vnto S. Peter his Successour which yet the Catholickes that hold this opinion explicate otherwise saying that albeit Christ had no direct Dominion in this life vpon temporall thinges yet indirectly for preseruation of his spirituall Dominion he had and might haue vsed the same and in that sense he left it to his said Successor 19. Of all which is inferred first the preheminence of high Priesthood in Christ before his temporall Kingly principality for that as we haue said the actions and functions of Christes Priesthood haue not only more high eminent dignity both in that they treat with men for gouerning their soules then Christes temporall Kingdome for gouerning of bodies but moreouer that the dignity of Priesthood in Christ conteineth in it self a much more high spirituall Kingly power then is the temporall 20. Secondly is inferred that the reasons heere alledged by T. M. for his paradox in preferring Christs being a King before his Priesthood are vaine foolish The first wherof is this Christes Kingdome saith he had the preheminence of Priesthood because he is Priest only for vs but he is King ouer vs. But I would aske him Is not Christ Priest ouer vs aswel as for vs hath he not a spirituall and Priestly iurisdiction ouer our soules doth not he binde and loose our sinnes doth not he prescribe vs Sacramentes appoint vs lawes of liuing and the like or doe not these actions appertaine vnto him as high Priest ouer his Church And againe I would aske him about the second member as Christ in flesh was King was he not made King aswell for vs that is for our good as ouer vs
of the Church In this then we agree and haue no difference 24. There followeth in T. M. his assertion heere But not in the personall administration of them to wit of spirituall causes this now is a shift dissembling the difficulty and true State of the question which is in whome consisteth the supreame power to treate iudge and determine in spirituall causes which this man flying as not able to resolue telleth vs only that he cannot personally administer the same which yet I would aske him why For as a Bishop may personally performe all the actions that he hath giuen authority to inferiour Priestes to doe in their functions and a temporall Prince may execute in his owne person if he list any inferiour authority that he hath giuen to others in temporall affaires so if he haue supreame authority spirituall also why may he not in like manner execute the same by himself if he please But of this is sufficiently writteÌ„ of late in the foresaid booke of Answere to Syr Edward Cooke where also is shewed that a farre greater authority spirituall was giuen to King Henry the eight by Parlament then this that T. M. alloweth his Maiesty now for outward preseruation of the Church to wit To be head therof in as ample manner as euer the Pope was or could be held before him ouer England and to King Edward though then but of ten yeares old was granted also by Parlament That he had originally in himself by his Crowne and Scepter all Episcopall authority so as the Bishops and Archbishops had no other power or spirituall authority then was deriued from him to Queene Elizabeth by like graunt of Parlament was also giuen as great authority spirituall and Ecclesiasticall ouer the Church and Clergy of England as euer any person had or could exercise before which was and is another thing then this outward preseruation which T. M. now assigneth hauing pared the same in minced wordes to his purpose to make it seeme little or nothing but dareth not stand to it if he be called to the triall 25. Wherfore this matter being of so great importance and consequence as yow see I doe heere take hold of this his publicke assertion and require that it may be made good to wit that this is the substance meaning only of the English oath and that neither our Kinges of England doe chalenge more nor subiectes required to condescend to more then to grant to their authority for outward preseruation or ad Ecclesiae praesidium as S. Leo his wordes and meaning are and I dare assure him that al Catholickes in England will presently take the oath and so for this point there will be an attonement Me thinkes that such publicke doctrine should not be so publickly printed and set forth without publicke allowance and intention to performe and make it good Yf this be really meant we may easely be accorded if not then will the Reader see what credit may be giuen to any thing they publish notwithstanding this booke commeth forth with this speciall commendation of Published by authority c. 26. And for conclusion of all it may be noted that there hath byn not only lacke of truth and fidelity in citing Pope Leo for Ecclesiasticall Supremacy in Emperours aboue Popes but want of modesty discretion also for so much as no one ancient Father doth more often and earnestly inculcate the contrary for the preheminence of the Sea of Rome then doth S. Leo in so much that Iohn Caluin not being able otherwise to answere him saith that he was tooto desirous of glory dominion and so shifteth him of that way and therfore he was no fit instance for T. M. to bring heere in proofe of spirituall supremacy in temporall Princes 27. But yet in the very next page after he vseth a far greater immodesty or rather perfidy in my opinioÌ„ in calumniation of Cardinall Bellarmine whome he abuseth notably both in allegation exposition translation application and vaine insultation for thus he citeth in his text out of him Ancient generall Councelles saith the Romish pretence were not gathered without the cost of good and Christian Emperours and were made by their consentes for in those dayes the Popes did make supplication to the Emperour that by his authority he would gather Synods but after those times all causes were changed because the Pope who is head in spirituall matters cannot be subiect in temporall Bellarm. lib. 1. de Concil cap. 13. § Habemus ergo 28. And hauing alledged this resolutioÌ„ of Bellarmine the Minister insulteth ouer him in these words Who would thinke this man could be a Papist much lesse a Iesuit how much lesse a Cardinal who thus disableth the title of the Pope granting to vs in these wordes after these times that is after six hundred yeares the truth of purer antiquities challenging Popes to be subiect vnto Christian Emperours And yet who but a Papist would as it were in despite of antiquity defend the degenerate state saying after those times Popes might not be subiect in temporall matters As if he should haue said Then gratious fauour of ancient Christian Emperours then sound iudgment of ancient reuerend Fathers then deuout subiection of ancient holy Popes in summe then ancient purity and pure antiquity adieu But we may not so bastardly reiect the depositum and doctrine of humble subiection which we haue receaued from our Fathers of the first six hundred yeares and not so only but which as your Barkley witnesseth the vniuersall Christian world imbraced with common consent for a full thousand yeares So he 29. And doe yow see how this Minister triumpheth Who would thinke that men of conscience or credit could make such ostentation vpon meere lies deuised by themselues as now wee shall shew all this bragge to be And as for D. Barkley alledged in the last lines let any man read him in the booke and Chapter cited and he will wonder at the impudency of this vaunter for he speaketh no one word of gathering Councells or comparison of spirituall authority betweene the Pope and Emperour concerning their gathering of Councelles or Synodes but of a quite different subiect of taking armes by subiectes against their lawfull temporall Princes And what will our Minister then answere to this manifest calumniation so apparently conuinced out of Doctor Barkley But let vs passe to the view of that which toucheth Cardinall Bellarmine against whome all this tempest is raised 30. First then we shall set downe his wordes in Latin according as T. M. citeth him in his margent Tunc Concilia generalia fiebant saith he non sine Imperatorum sumptibus eo tempore Pontifex subiiciebat se Imperatoribus in temporalibus ideo non poterant inuito Imperatore aliquid agere idâ—irco Pontifex supplicabat Imperatori vt iuberet conuocari Synodum At post illa tempora omnes causae
those to whome it belongeth principally to discusse examine and determine this matter as afterwardes shall be shewed And yet as though he had made no such exception but admitted all kind of writers throughout all times in this matter he maketh this new ridiculous vaunt Shew vs saith he for your mentall reseruation but one Father whether Greeke or Latin one Pope whether Catholicke or Antichristian one Author whether learned or vnlearned who did euer so fancy c. 4. Wherunto I may answere that if the maker of this vaunt had had but one dram of discretion he would neuer haue set downe so many ones to confound himself for that presently we shall shew so many Fathers Greeke and Latin to haue allowed of the foresaid speech as had occasions to handle such Scriptures as conteine like propositions and so many Popes to haue approued the same as haue allowed the said Fathers sentences or haue liued since the collecting of the Canon Lawes wherin the said Fathers sentences are aboundantly cited and set downe and that so many learned graue pious Authors haue byn of this fancy if it be a fancy as haue byn consulted in cases of most moment that comprehend this controuersy So as for this Minister to except against foure hundred yeares togeather which in effect conteineth a graunt of all the learned of that time and yet to challeng one Father one Pope one Author learned or vnlearned sheweth a broken phantasy of an ydle braine indeed 5. But now to lay before the Readers eyes some brief consideration what is reiected in the exclusiō of these last foure hundred yeares about our point in controuersy it is to be noted that the science of Deuinity called by the Greeks Theology for that it is properly immediatly about God matter belonging vnto God hath growne frō time to time according to the growth of mankind and to the most ordinate and excellent prouidence of almighty God as S. Paul diuinely 〈◊〉 in diuers partes of his Epistles which we shall heere indeauour to declare by this particuler deduction that from the beginning of the world vnto the deluge there passing aboue a thousand and six hundred yeares to wit more then from Christ to this time set downe in Scripture vnder the liues only of ten mē there was no other Theology in all that time but only by speech and tradition of Father to sonne freind to friend maister to scholler predecessour to successour and from this againe vnto the time of Abraham which was vpon the point of three hundred yeares the same was obserued and from him to Moyses which was aboue other foure hundred yeares no booke is extant that was written though in these last foure hundred yeares from Abraham to Moyses God had his seuerall people as is knowne which were gouerned without any written word at all 6. But Moyses hauing written the fiue first bookes of the Bible commonly called the Pentateuch so many ages after the beginning of the world and sundry other holy men diuers bookes and Treatises after him againe vntill the comming of Christ albeit the sciēce and study of Deuinity was much enlarged therby yet was it barren in a certaine sort in respect of that which ensued after vnder Christ in the writinges of the Apostles and Apostolicke men and large Commentaries and expositions written theron by succeeding Christian ages which in time growing to be so many and great volumes partly of the said expositions and explanations of Scriptures partly of Treatises bookes and dogmaticall discourses partly of Ecclesiasticall Histories partly of discussions and determinations of Councelles both Generall Nationall Prouinciall and partly finally of resolutions decrees of Bishops chiefe Pastors for directiō of their flocks especially of the highest that held the Chaire for gouerning and moderating of all the rest 7. These thinges I say growing at length to so great a bulke manifold multitude of bookes Treatises tomes and volumes as many men had not time to read them ouer and much lesse leasure and iudgement to digest or conceaue them with that distinction order and perspicuity which was necessary it pleased almighty God out of his continuall prouidence for his said Church to inspire certaine men 〈◊〉 foure hundred years past to reduce the said vast corpes of Deuinity to a cleare methode by drawing all to certaine common places and heades and by handling and discussing the same so punctually distinctly and perspicuously as any good wit in small time may come to comprehend the whole without reading ouer the other so many huge volumes as before was necessary And this method was called afterwardes Schoole-Deuinity for that it did principally consist in disputation and discussion of matters exactly by discending into particulers and dissoluing all doubtes wheras the other manner of 〈◊〉 of Scriptures Fathers Doctors Histories and Councells seuerally remained with the name of positiue Deuinity as contenting it self only with assertiue doctrine without disputation or further discussion 8. The first and principall Authors of this method or methodicall study is accounted to be Petrus Lombardus Bishop of Paris aboue foure hundred fifty yeares past who for that he gathered into the foresaid method of generall heades all that any way appertained to Deuinity out of the sayinges and sentences of Scriptures and Fathers deuiding the same into foure bookes and euery booke into seuerall distinctions he was called afterwardes the Maister of the sentences and many learned men in ensuing times wrote Commentaries theron enlarging with great variety of matter the said method which he had inuented Others also made seuerall Summes of Theology differēt in name but in effect to the same imitation wherof may be accounted one of the first our often named learned Countreyman Alexander of Hales in Suffolke and after him S. Thomas of Aquine vpon whome many other learned men since that time haue and doe vnto this day write large Commentaries Diuers also considering that this methodicall study hath two partes the one speculatiue which is handled principally by the exercise of our vnderstanding in dispute the other moral that apperteineth to manners and action of life sundry learned men doe betake themselues principally to this later as more necessary to practice of Christian life and cases therin to be resolued in Conscience 9. And about the very same time or little before it came to passe by the like prouidēce of almighty God that the same method was thought vpon for reducing the Decrees and Constitutions of Councels Fathers Bishops and Popes apperteyning to Ecclesiasticall gouernment which grew now to be many vnto like general heades bookes causes questions and Chapters 〈◊〉 more facility of comprehending and remembring the same the cheif Author therof being Gratian a learned Monke of S. Benedicts Order which laborious and methodicall compilation approued by Popes at that time and from time to time afterwards and expounded by the writinges and
Commentaries of many skilfull men in that science is called the 〈◊〉 as the other part appertaining to ciuill affaires deduced from the ancient Imperiall Romane Lawes is called the Ciuill-law and both of them concurring togeather in this our cause with the foresaid Schoole-Deuinity and florishing more within thes last foure hundred yeares then euer before as yow haue heard the exception made against them all by this our Minister must needes be iudged for light vaine and impertinent 10. For he that will cast his eyes vpon the face of Christendome for these last foure hundred yeares consider with himselfe that in all these ages the most eminent renowned men for learning conscience and vertue in all those three sciences or faculties now mentioned and vnto whome for all doubtes and difficulties appertayning vnto iustice equity and truth recourse was made as vnto Oracles of their dayes for the high esteeme they were held in among all men he I say that shall consider this and with what integrity they dealt in this affaire and must be presumed to haue dealt according to their skill for that they were not interessed therin for any temporall respect whatsoeuer he that shall but thinke of this weigh their vniforme and graue resolutions vpon this point that a man pressed vnlawfully to answere by vniust manner of proceeding may delude his demaunder not answere to his intention but to his owne will easely see what differēce there is to be made betweene these mens iudgmentes and the clamours of a few vnlearned Ministers in this behalfe that vnderstand not the grounds wheron the other or themselues doe speake 11. And to name some few examples who were accompted more learned Schoole Deuines in their daies in France Germany and Flanders then the forenamed Petrus Lombardus Bishop of Paris Maister of the sentences Iohn Gerson Chancellour of that Vniuersity Petrus Paludanus Patriarch afterward of Hierusalem Henricus de Gandauo Archdeacon of Tornay Gabriel Biel a very Religious learned man Adrianus that was Maister to the Emperour Charles the fift and after that Cardinal and Gouernour of Spaine for Philip the first finally Pope by the name of Adrian the sixt I might name also Iansenius Bishop of Gaunt in these dayes and others of our times but of these their learned works are extant and vpon diuers occasions they fauour defend the lawfulnes of Equiuocation in sundry cases as in the next Chapter shall be more particulerly declared 12. In Italy Sicily also many might be named both for Schoole Deuinity Canon and Ciuill law but I shall be contented with them only whose workes I haue had time to looke vpon for this point as Gratian with his Commentaries Pope Innocentius S. Thomas of Aquin Cardinal Caietan Astonsis in his Summe written almost three hundred yeares since Angelus de Clauatio famous Siluester Cosmus Filiarcus Chanon of Florence Abbot and Archbishop Panormitan Bartolus Baldus most famous Lawiers 13. But of the Spanish Nation many more as Didacus Couarruuias President or Chancellour of Spaine Martinus Nauarrus his Maister both excellent Lawiers Dominicus Sotus Confessour to the Emperour Charles the fifth Cardinal Tolet Emanuel Roderiquez Ludouicus Lopez Antonius de Corduba Petrus Nauarra Dominicus Bannes publicke Reader of Deuinity in Salamanca Michael Salon Doctor and Professour of the Deuinity-Chaire in Valentia Petrus de Arragon publicke Professour of the same science in the foresaid Vniuersity of Salamanca Gregorius de Valentia and Ioannes Azorius publicke Readers in Rome all renowned men for learning science conscience and through whose hands great matters haue passed for direction of iustice and equity both in foro fori and foro poli as Schoolemen speake both for diuine and humane proceedinges and yet doe none of all these condemne or deny absolutly the vse of Equiuocation in certaine cases but doe rather approue and confirme the same I meane both lawiers and deuines when they treat vpon these heades following de seruando secreto of concealing secretes both knowne in the Sacrament of Confession and otherwise de mendacio of lying de iureiurandis of swearing de fraterna correptione restituenda fama of brotherly admonition and restitution of another mans fame wrongfully taken away de Iudice de Reo de accusatore de testibus of a Iudge and his office of the defendant accuser witnesses and the like what they may doe or answere lawfully in cases that may occurre 14. Neither are these Authors to be accompted as single and separate from the rest of the learned men of their ages in this point which we handle but rather are conioined wholy with them both in iudgment and practice so as what these men did define to be lawful that did others in like manner both mainteine put in vre in iust occasions especially if they were of the self same order and ranke So as when for example wee cite Siluester Dominicus Sotus Caiëtan Paludanus Lopez and Bannes of the order of S. Dominick to haue taught this doctrine without reprehension of others of the same order we may inferre probably that all or most learned men of that Order throughout Christendome are of the same opinion And the like we may inferre of those of S. Francis order in respect of Angelus de Clauatio Astensis Antonius de Corduba here cited And the same of S. Augustines order by Petrus de Aragon and Michael Salon And of the most ancient and venerable Order of S. Benedict conteyning many thousandes of learned men by that which Abbot Panormitan and Gregorius Sayer our learned Countreyman haue written vpon this matter and the later more largely then many others And the like may be inferred of the order of Iesuits by that which is extant written by Cardinal Tolet Gregorius de Valentia Emanuel Sà Francisius Suarez Ioannes Azorius Ludouicus Molina and others So as by these few witnesses we may take a notice of the whole body and corpes of learned men throughout Christendome for that Lawiers also both Ciuill and Canon that haue written of the foresaid heades haue conformed themselues to the same doctrine as lawfull in equity and conscience And if any haue dissented it hath byn in particuler cases only as before in the seauenth Chapter and third Consideration hath byn noted 15. As for example Ioannes Genesius Sepulueda Historiographer of Charles the fifth Emperour whose authority Thomas Morton doth often times alledge against vs though in the principall he make fully with vs in his booke intituled Theophilus De ratione dicendi testimonium in causis occultorum criminum how a man may beare witnes in causes of secret crimes yet in some cases he dissenteth from the foresaid Authors holding singuler opinions by himselfe but yet vpon such groundes as doe indeed confirme the common sentence of the rest as afterward in due place shal be declared 16. Wherfore to end this Paragraph about the Cōsideration of Schoole Deuines and
About which point first all the foresaid Schoole-Deuine lawyers and others do agree with one consent that euery such partie is bound vnder paine of mortall sinne to answere directly truly and plainly according to the mind and intention of the demaunder and not to his owne and to confesse the truth without art euasion Equiuocation or other shift or declination when soeuer the demaunder is his lawfull Iudge in that matter and proceedeth lawfully that is to say according to forme of lawe and equitie therin And if the said accused or defendant either by wilfull holding his peace or by denying the truth or by deluding the Iudge do refuge to do this he sinneth greuously therin Neither may his ghostly Father absolue him in confession from this or any other sinnes vntill he yeeld to performe his dutie in this behalfe though it should be to the euident perill and losse of his life by confessing the Cryme And this do the foresaid Authors S. Thomas and others proue cleerly first out of the Scriptures as where it is said Eccles. 4. Pro anima tua ne confundaris dicere verum be not ashamed to speake the truth though thy life lye theron which is to be vnderstood when a lawfull Iudge or Superiour doth lawfully demaund it and Iosue also Cap. 7. when by Gods direction he 〈◊〉 Achan the sonne of Charmi about the thinges he had 〈◊〉 vsed this phrase Dagloriam Deo confitere giue the glory to God confesse the truth wherby is inferred that he taketh Gods glory from him and sinneth grieuously that refuseth to consesse the truth to a lawfull Magistrate proceeding lawfully against him for that the Magistrate is in the place of Almighty God and he that resisteth him in his lawfull of fice resisteth Gods power and ordination incurreth damnation therby as S. Paul Rom. 〈◊〉 auoucheth And for so much as the inquiring out and punishing of malefactors is one of the chiefe and principall partes of the Magistrates office for conseruation of the Common wealth both temporall and spirituall to resiste deceaue delude or contemne the Iudge or Magistrates authority in this so principall a point therof must needs be a great and grieuous mortall sinne except as some Doctors do note the smalnes or lightnes of the matter obiected should be such as might mitigate the greiuousnes of the same And this is the seuerity of Catholicke Doctrine for answering directly obediently and truly to lawfull Iudges proceeding lawfully 11. But now when the Iudge is not lawfull or not cōpetent at least in that cause or proceedeth not lawfully then all these foresaid obligations do cease in the defendant As for example if in France Spayne or Italy a great man that is no Iudge nor hath authority from the Prince Prelate or common wealth should take vpon him to examine any party of crymes without commission or other power or being a lay Iudge should examine priests of Ecclesiasticall matters who both by diuine and humane law according to Catholicke Doctrine are exempted from lay mens iurisdiction as largely hath byn proued of late in an Answere against Sir Edward Cookes fifth Part of Reportes which I would wish the Reader to pervse or if his iurisdiction were sufficient in that matter yet if that he proceeded not iuridicè lawfully or according to forme of law in that cause indiciis vel infamiâ vel semi-plenâ saltem probatione non praecedentibus that is to say that neither signes or tokens or common fame or some one substantiall witnesse at least be extant against him which circumstances of lawfull proceeding are handled by lawyers in that case when this I say or any of this falleth out then hold the former Doctors that all the forsaid obligations of true answering vnto him do no more bynde for that he is no more a Iudge in that cause but rather an enemy for that he proceedeth contrarie to iustice and forme of law by which he should iudge and consequently that in this case the defendant may either deny to answere or appeale from him if it may auaile him or except against the forme of proceeding or deny all that is proposed in the forme as it is proposed or vse any other lawfull declination saith S. Thomas but yet so as he do not lye or vtter any falsitie Potest vel per appellationem saith he vel aliter licitè subterfugere mendacium tamen dicere non licet He may either by appellation or otherwise lawfully seeke some euasion but yet so as he vtter no lye 12. And hitherto now in this point all the former Authors do agree without discrepancy that the defendant being thus vninstly pressed may vse all lawfull meanes to auoyd the iniury offered him and Dominicus Sotus that is the most scrupulous in this matter saith Possunt debent sic contra ius requisiti quacunque vti amphibologia quam vsitatus sermo citra mendacium ferre possit they that are so required to answere against lawe may and ought to vse whatsoeuer amphibologie or equiuocation the vsuall speach of men doth or may beare without a lye 13. And thus farre also doth concurre Genesius Sepulueda whome Thomas Morton hath chosen out for some helpe in this matter who though in some particuler pointes he dissent from the rest as presently shall be shewed yet in this he agreeth For thus he writeth 〈◊〉 Theologi ac Iurisperiti consentiunt neque reum in sua nec testem 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 causa de occulto crimine rogatum teneri vt veritatem confiteatur aut testificetur 〈◊〉 si dederit quidem 〈◊〉 andum se vera responsurum Both Deuines and lawyers do generally agree in this point that neither the defendant in his owne cause nor a witnes in another mans being examined of a secret cryme is bound to confesse or testifye the truth no though they haue taken an oath first to vtter the truth So he of the Generall eōsent of all Deuines and lawyers adding his owne opinion more particuler in the same Chapter and telling vs first when the Iudge demaundeth vniustly to wit when he demaundeth of secrets or matters not belonging to his iurisdiction as before hath byn said In which Case he writeth thus Itaque vrgente Iudice iniustè vt neget aut confiteatur sine culpa 〈◊〉 potest 〈◊〉 Iudicem appellare 〈◊〉 alia quacunque ratione modò sit honesta defugere nulla adhibita fraude nullo dolo qui vim obtineat mendacij When a Iudge doth vniustly vrge the defendant to deny or confesse he may without any fault either appeale to a Superiour Iudge if it be permitted or by any other honest meanes declyne the force and violence that is offred vnto him so it be done without any such fraud or guyle as may include the nature of alye so as in this all do agree first that for no cause a lye may be admitted or committed secondly that any manner of euasion either
c. by his letters patentes with the counsell and consent of the Bishops and Counsellours of his nation did giue to the 〈◊〉 of Abindon in Barkshire and to one Ruchinus Abbot of that Monastery a certayne portiō of his land to wit fifteene Mansians in a place called by the country-men Culnam with all profittes and commodityes great and small appertayning thervnto for euerlasting inheritance And that the foresaid Ruchinus c. should be quiet from all right of the Bishop for euer so as the inhabitantes of that place shall not be depressed for the tyme to come by the yoke of any Bishop or his officers but that in all euentes of thinges and controuersyes of causes they shall be subiect to the decree of the Abbot of the said Monastery so as c. And then doth M. Attorney continue his speach thus This Charter was pleaded in 1. H. 7. and vouched by Stanford as at large appeareth which Charter graunted aboue 850. yeares sithence was after confirmed per Eduinum Britaniae Anglorum Regem Monarcham anno Domini 955. by which appeareth that the King by this Charter made in Parliament for it appeareth to be made by the Counsell and consent of his Bishops Senators of his Kingdome which were assembled in Parlament did discharge and exempt the said Abbot from the Iurisdiction of the Bishop c. And by the same Charter did grant to the same Abbot Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction within his said Abbey which Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction being deriued from the Crowne continued vntill the dissolution of the said Abbey in the raigne of King Henry the eight So he 85. And by this yow may see what an important conclusion he doth inferre of the Kinges supreme iurisdiction in spirituall affayres at that time Whervnto the Deuine comming to answere and supposing that M. Attorney would not falsity or belye his Authors hauing protested most solemnly fol. 40. of his his booke that he had cyted truly the very wordes and textes of the lawes resolutions iudgmentes and actes of Parlament all publicke and in print without any inference argument or amplification quoting particularly the bookes yeares leaues Chapters and other such like certayne references as euery man at his pleasure 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 his credit and honour in this behalfe granting all as it lay answered the same as yow may see in his booke but now vpon better search it falleth out that this whole 〈◊〉 was falsely alledged by M. Attorney in the very point of the principall controuersy in hand about the Kinges spiritual Iurisdiction for that whatsoeuer the Charter did ascribe expresly to the Pope his Authority the Attorney suppressing the true wordes relateth it as proceeding from the King temporall authority of his Crowne For proofe wherof I shall set downe the very wordes of my learned friends letter out of England about this point after view taken of the law-bookes themselues and then let any man say how farre M Attorney is to be credited in any thing he writeth or speaketh against Catholickes 86. As concerning saith he the Charter of King Kenulphus for the Sanctuary of the Monastery of Abindon yow must know that M. Attorney hath egregiously abused his Reader in that and other points For the Case standeth thus That in the first yeare of King Henry the 7. Humphrey Stafford was attainted by Act of Parlament of high 〈◊〉 and tooke Sanctuary first in Colchester in Essex after fled to Culnam and tooke Sanctuary in the Abbey of Abindon and being taken from thence brought vnto the Tower of London from thence brought vnto the Kings-bench he pleaded that he was drawne by force out of the said Sanctuary of Culnam and prayed his Counsell to plead that poynt which by all the Iudges of both benches was graunted vnto him And so they pleaded in this manner 87. Idem Humphridus per Consilium suum dixit quod Kenulphus Rex Merciorum per litteras suas patentes consilio consensu Episcoporum Senatorum gentis suae largitus fuit Monasterio de Abindon ac cuidam Ruchino tunc Abbati Monasterij illius quandam ruris sui portionem id est quindecim Mansias in loco qui a ruricolis tunc nuncupabatur Culnam cum omnibus vtilitatibus ad 〈◊〉 pertinentibus tam in magnis quà m in modicis rebus in aeternam haereditatem Et quod praedictus Ruchinus ab omni Regis obstaculo Episcopali iure in sempiternum esset quietus vt inhabitatores eius nullius Regis aut ministrorum suorum Episcopiue aut suorum Officialium iugo inde deprimerentur sed in cunctis rerum euentibus discussionibus causarum Abbatis Monasterij praedicti decreto subijcerentur 〈◊〉 quod c. And heere ceaseth M. Attorney leauing out as yow see in his recitall the wordes that go before ab omni Regis obstaculo c. that the monastery should be free from all obstacle of the King as also these wordes vt inhabitatores eius nullius Regis aut 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 deprimantur that the inhabitants be not opprest with any yoke of any King or his ministers wherby is euident that the King in his Charter did for his part giue exemptions from temporall royall power but especially the fraude is seen by cutting of the wordes that do ensue which decyde the whole controuersy which are these Et etiam allegauit vltra quod Leo tunc Papa concessit dicto Abbati dictas 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Et quod Eduinus tunc Britaniae Anglorum Rex Monarchus concessit quod praefatum Monasterium omnis terrenae seruitutis esset liberum quae 〈◊〉 praedecessoribus suis Catholicis videlicet à dicto Sancto Leone Papa dicto Rege Kenulpho c. Et quod virtute litter arum bullarum praedictarum tempore confectionis earundem eadem villa de Culnam fuit Sanctuarium locus priuilegiatus c. Which in English is thus And moreouer the said Humphrey Stafford by his Counsell alledged furthet for himselfe that Pope Leo had graunted vnto the said Abbot the said immunityes and priuiledges that K. Edwin then King monarch ouer all the English in Britany had graunted that the said Monastery should be free from all earthly seruitude which by his Catholike predecessors to wit the said holy Pope 〈◊〉 the said King Kenulphus was graunted and that at the tyme of the making of the foresaid letters patentes and Bulles the said village or towne of Culnam was a Sanctuary and priuiledged place by vertue of the said patents and Bulles 88. This is word for word the very plea of Humphrey Stafford for the Sāctuary of the Monastery of Abindon as it was pleaded by his learned Counsell in law euen as it is recorded in the reportes of the yeares of King Henry the seauenth as