Maiesties eyes and those of the State so many dangers imminent from Catholickes as he pretendeth both in respect of their doctrine multitude auersion of mindes and other like causes he leaueth out the other opposite part of the Puritanes that haue farre worse doctrine without comparison in this behalfe as I shewed out of their owne bookes he should haue yealded or answered the same if he had dealt indifferently they are more also in number gâ—eater in abilitie in respect of their offices which they beare in the Common-wealth and of their combination with those of Scotland Holland and other places nearest at hand their armes more prompt ready their wealth better knowne their practises more dangerous and their auersion more impatiâ—nt and yet I say not this to accuse them of euill intent but only that they haue as great a may and greater then Catholickes which M. Morton ought to haue seene and noted if he would haue beene the common watch-man and explorator But his malice was to the Catholickes and so vpon them he laieth all but yet with so silly a discourse as sheweth rather will then skill to hurt them crying out as you haue heard going about to proue that imminent dangers in law of prouidence are not to be neglected which thesis as it is not denyed by vs very poorely proued by him so for the hipothesis that such daÌ„gers are imminent by Catholickes to the State no one argument of moment is alleadged at all The Reckoning of this Paragraph 16. So as if we will now make vp briefly the Reckoning of this Paragraph we shall fynd by due accompt that M. Morton of all those thinges that I wrote in my booke about the matter of Rebelliâ—n clearing the Caâ—holickes both in doctrine practice for diuers Chapters togeather and shewing the Protestants to exceed them farre to the worse in both poynts he hath thought good to handle no one poynt at all as reasoÌ„ would that he should haue done in this his last Reply but only in generall that which you heard of certayne impossibilâ—yes for Catholicke and Protestant subiectes to liue in vnion and common due obedience to his Maiestie of which impossibilities the fourth chiefest is that which you haue heard discussed of may be and the fifth and last is for that we hould it lawfull to equiuocate or not to answere directly before an incompetent Iudge that iniuriously inquireth and that we hold the lay Magistrates of England incompeteÌ„t Iudges to examine Priestes which may be as good an argument to proue that lay men and Priests cannot liue togeather in Spayne Italy other Catholicke Countries for that there also the said lay men are incompetent Iudges in Clergy mens causes and so are Clergie men themselues if they haue not lawfull iurisdiction or proceed not lawfully So as this is the most trifling Impossibility that possibly can be deuised 17. To conclude then the Case is thus M. Morton and I would gladly each one of vs perswade his excellent Maiestie in this poynt of confidence or diffidence towards his Catholicke subiects I for coÌ„fidence do alleadge that albeit such due prouidence and circumspection be to be vsed both towards theÌ„ others as all dangers may sufficieÌ„tly be preuented yet that so great and remarkable a multitude of his naturall borne subiects as they are spread and dispersed not only throughout the bulke and body of the whole people but also by one veine or other extending it selfe to most of the Nobility and Gentry in like sort should not for cause of their conscience be put to extremity of despaire but held at least in some reasonable and moderate tearmes of ciuill equity though otherwise disfauoured for their Religion M. Morton seemeth to runne the quite coÌ„trary course with his opposite desires and reasons to haue all diffidence increased impossibilities vrged that they cannot liue togeather despaires confirmed of any tolerable condition whatsoeuer except they force change their iudgment and beliefe in religion with neuer so much repugnance of their conscience detesteth any mitigation or moderate interpretation of matters that all must go by way of extremity 18. And now which of these two courses do ruÌ„ne to a more sure soft and milder end the prudent Reader will easily conceiue My considerations are the vnion of harts within the Landâ— the auoyding of extremities the streÌ„gth of our Country at home the honour and estimation abroad the quietnes of his Maiesties minde the vniuersall affection of all his people though different in religion the auoyding of the odious name of persecution example of foraine Protestant Princes that vse it not the continuance of high estimation that forraine Catholicke Princes haue had hitherto of the benignity prudence and bounty of his Maiesties nature the preuenting of clamors writing of bookes and odious speaches throughout all Courtes Countryes Citties Prouinces Realmes that will most certainely ensue vpon the contrary course of violent rigour and cruelty engendring euery where hatred detestation and malediction abroad suspitions execrations and auersions at home 19. These are my considerations and whether my aduersary M. Morton haue better for his contrary perswasion I know not wee shall expect the comming forth of the body of his booke for this his Preamble is but the head therof though a great head being of aboue three score leaues in 4. and of litle wit as partly hath appeared by that which already hath bene perused will do much more by that which is to ensue WHAT M. MORTON answereth about the later part of my Treatise concerning Equiuocation §. II. IN the precedent Paragraph you haue heard what M. Morton had to reply about the first mayne poynt of Rebellion now commeth he to the second of Equiuocation writing some 3 petty leaues therof but with so great an ostentation vaunt at his first entrance as if he would do great matters indeed for thus intitleth he his Paragraph That P.R. hath flatly ouerthrowne his whole defence of mentall Equiuocation which is made so euident as that no wit of man can possibly excuse him This you see is confidently spoken and very magnificently of himselfe and his witt that he hath made thinges so plaine and euident against my Treatise as no wit of man hath possibility eyther to defend or excuse me Heere then the Reader will take some examen of witts for albeit I desire not to render wordes for wordes yet must I needs foretell that he will fynd as great want of wit discretion in this bragge and in the medium here chosen to ouerthrow my whole Treatise as euer perhaps he found in any man prefessing wit and learning 21. And yet the good man goeth forward in those his oftentations stirâ—ing vp attention to the view of his owne weaknes and folly for that hauing layd sorth in few wordes my assertion concerning lawfull Equiuocation to wit that it is a speach partly vttered in wordes
now heare and contemplate if your pâ—ease how Tho. Morton himselfe will prooue his sayd maior proposition for it is like he will do it substantially it being the foundation of all his whole drift The maior saith he c. The Reckoning vpon the Premisses 32. This is now the charge that P. R. maketh vpon T. M. to proue his verie first and principall argument out of the coÌ„petencie of almighty God wheron all the rest is grounded to be faultie and ruinous both in forme and matter In forme for that it is no lawfull syllogisme in Logicall moode or figure In matter for that the first or maior proposition is manifestly false And how doth M. Morton now in this his Preambling Reply endeauour to satisfie these two charges Truly vnto the last about the vntruth of his maior proposition he saith neuer a word which yet it seemeth he ought to haâ—e done being the maine foundation of his impugning vse of all Amphibologie and Equiuocation but to the first he maketh an extraordinarie clamour as partly you haue heard appealing prouoking to all the Vniuersities and Schooles as well of Christendome as of Heathen countries and impawing therin not onelie his reputation and credit but degree of learning and schooles also and to be degraded yf he make not his partie good And yet he that shall examine what he bringeth shall find that in substance of truth he sayth nothing in effect for his owne defeâ—ce but rather lesse then nothing for that he intangleth himself further with affirming other such things as he cannot stand vnto they being euideÌ„tly falseâ— and meere shiftes As for example he being pressed about his foresayd syllogisme answereth thus 33. P. R. calleth that a Syllogisme sayth he which â— named only in a more generall tearme a Reason â—ot a syllogisme now there be many formes of reaâ—onings besides syllogismes neyther did I indeed â—â—tend to make an exact and formall syllogisme â—ut only such an argument which by due inference â—nd deduction might prooue my conclusion good â—o he And is not this a strange euasion in him that â—rofesseth such skill in Logike yea to haue bene a â—ublike reader of Logike For that the art of Logike 〈◊〉 my knowledge admitteth but foure kindes of â—easoning to witt Inductionsâ—nd â—nd Examples but this of M. Morton can be none of the â—ater three sortes as himself I suppose will conâ—esâ—e ergo it must be the first which is a syllogisme â—nd consequently it is a meere shift to say heere wheÌ„ 〈◊〉 is taken trippe that he called it not a syllogisme â—ut a reason â—4 Secondly let vs heare I pray you his owne â—ords in his booke of â—ull Satisfaction where he brinâ—eth forth this argument Our first argument sayth â—e is taken from the â—orme of an Oath which is defined to be â— religious inuocaâ—ion whether it be expressely or implicatiuely 〈◊〉 God as witnesse of our speach c. Hence may we reasoÌ„â—hus The competencie of God by whome we sweare maketh â—uerie one competent iudge to whome we sweare But by swearing by God whome we cannot deceyue we religiously protest that in swearing we intend not to deceyue ergo our deceiptfull Equiuocating is a prophanation of the religious worâ—hip of God The Maior is true for that our Sauiour auouching truth held Pilate as a competent iudge c. 35. Heere now is euidently prooued that which you M. Morton should haue bene ashamed to deny that you meant to make a syllogisme For first you â—intitle it An argument taken from the forme of an Oath theÌ„ you say hence may we reasoÌ„ thus which is as much as ratiocinari in latin that is to râ—ason and is a word pâ—oper to schoole disputes when they will argue in forme Thirdly you set downe three distinct propositions in forme of an argument with ergo in the last which is the forme of a syllogisme and fourthly you conâ—esse that the first of them waâ— the maior which inferreth allwayes a minor they both include a conclusion and so doe make vp the perfect nature of a syllogisme How then blâ—sh you not to deny this And thus being beaten from one defence you runne to another saying that P. R. conâ—esseth of your argument that by a doâ—ble inâ—erence the reaâ—oning is made good whâ—râ—ore say youâ— I cannot see what cause he had to be more oâ—â—ended with me 〈◊〉 deliuering that in grosse which being deuided into his paâ—â—â— was good reason noâ— more then a man may mislike two perâ—â— because it is not a couple of single penâ—e 36. And is not this a pâ—easaÌ„t iest to escape by But it will not serue for P. R. confâ—sseth not of this your argument in the forme you frame it that by â— double inference it might be made good but as he reâ—ormed the same For that this of yours being neither in Logicall moode or figure nor hauing coherence with 〈◊〉 selâ—e nor medium terminum but rather six terminos in place of three as hath bene said it cannot by any double triple or quadruple inference euer be made good except we change the forme and frame therof Neither did I euer say that it could be made good more then the other absurd syllogisme set downe for example of like absurdity to witt Euerie man is a liuing creature Euerie oxe is a â—ourefooted beast ergo Euerie asse hath two loÌ„g eares which in euerie poynt is like vnto the other and yf not why had not you Syr for your credit sake at least shewed some one reall difference or disparitie in the formes betweene yours and that which indeed you could not doe for that they are like and ech one had three distinct propositions and euery proposition a distinct subiâ—ctum and predicatum without medius terminus and consequently consisteth of six seuerall termini for which cause I neuer said nor could say that this your syllogisme could be made good without the whole forme thereof were changed and consequently this is now an absurd shiâ—t in you to runne to my confession which I neuer made 37. My speach of another infâ—rence was nothing to this purpose at all as the Reader will see yf he consider my wordes For I spake of an inference that might be further made vpon your argument reformed by me but not as it came from you and this I spake also of the consequence of matter and of the truth of the proposition in controuersie but not of the forme which being naught could neuer be made good by any inference and therefore it is verie absurd that you say that I am offended with you for deliuering the matter in grosse which deuided into his partes was good reasoning for that neither in grosse nor in partes can the argument be defended And the similitude of two pence and two single pence is not worth a half-penny for sauing of your credit in this behalfe as the Reader will easily perceaue 38. VVell then hauing thus cleered the
Prince is lawfully excommunicated and shut out from all society of Christian communion and he persist impenitent how can he be head of a Christian coÌ„mon wealth for so much as he is no member nor hath any place or part at all in the whole body the headship being the chiefe part of all others 101. Much then it importeth to know the authority and antiquity aswell of excommunication as of deposition from which cause the examples alledged by Frisingensis ought not to haue bene suppressed or imbezeled and Tolosanus here alleadged by M. Morton produceth an other example both of excommunication and deposition aboue an hundred yeares before this of Frisingensis saying Antea quidem Gregorius tertius c. Before this Gregory the third being made Pope vpoÌ„ the yeare 759. did depriue Leo the third Emperor of Constantinople both of his Empire and the â—ommunion of Christians for that he had cast holy â—mages out of the Church and defaced them and â—eld a wicked opinion against the B. Trinity thus â—e And that Tolosanus in this sayth truth is testified â—â—so by Zonoras a greeke historiographer in the life â—f the sayd Emperour Leo Isauricus And before that â—gaine Pope Innocentius the first that liued with S. â—ugustine is read to haue excommunicated the Empeâ—our Arcadius and the Empresse Eudoxia for their 〈◊〉 iust persecution of S. Chrysostome though no deâ—riuation followed therof but amendment rather â—f the fault as is to be seene in Nicephorus Heere â—en the â—uasion of M. Morton by saying that the â—atter of excommunication pertayned not to his â—urpose is wholy impertinent for so much as that 〈◊〉 the only immediate cause of deposition by Eccleâ—â—asticall power But now let vs passe to the other â—hiefe point to consider whether Frisingensis was alâ—edged wholy against his owne purpose or not â—02 M. Morton being pressed with my former anâ—weare wherin I do shew that Frisingensis being alleaged by him to disgrace Pope Gregory aliâs Hildebrand â—s much wronged for that he coÌ„meÌ„deth him highâ—y and his doings seeketh this shift now by saying â—hat he alleadged him only in the questioÌ„ of antiquity concerning â—he tyme when first any Pope did take vpon him to depose Emperors But this is manifestly false for he alleadgeth him to both endes to wit for antiquitie and for disgrace but principally to disgrace him For hauing shewed as he perswaded himselfe that Pope HildebraÌ„d was the first that vsed such proceeding against Emperours he addeth preseÌ„tly that it was a new act that it is naught also will appeare saith he by the Actor for Pope Gregorie the 7. as your Chronographer saith was excoÌ„municated of the Bishops of Italy for that he had defamed the Apostolikâ— Sea by Symony and other capital crymes So he And to this calumniation he ioyneth the saying of Claudius Espencaeus in these wordes Hildebrand â—as the first Pope saith your Bishop â—spencaeus who by making a new rent beâ—â—ene Kingdome and Popedome did rayse â—orce against the Imperiall diademe arming himselfe by his example exciâ—ed oâ—her Popes against Princes excommunicate 103. These two testimonies then of Espencaeus and Schasnaburgensis being ioyned with the tâ—ird of Fâ—isingensis which are all that M. Morton alleadgeth let the prudent Reader consider whether they be not brought to disgrace Pope Hildebrand in his action against the Emperor Henry or not and yet do the first and last which are the more ancient Authors very earnestly commend the said Pope and defend his action of deposing the Emperor and consequeÌ„tly are brought in by meere preuarication of M. Morton to disgrace him 104. And as for the third which is Espencaeus though he were neyther Bishop to my knowledg nor otherwise of any great estimation among vs yet is he handled heere no lesse iniuriously fraudulently by M. Morton then the other two which I note now more especially then in my first answere both for that his authority is named and vrged againe in this place and for that I could not then get any sight of this his second booke of disgressioÌ„s vpon the first Epistle of S. Paul to Timothy though I had other bookes of his but now hauing found the same I haue discouered withall such fraud as was fit for such a spirit as M. Mortons seemeth to be that rarely vseth exact truth in citing of any thing for that these words alleadged against the Pope are not the wordes of Claudius â—spencaeus himselfe as in vntruly affirmed by M. Morton but related by him out of a certaine angry and impatient Epistle written 〈◊〉 certaine schismaticall Priests of Liege that were â—â—mmanded by Pope Paschalis the second to be chaâ—â—sed by Robert Earle of Flanders and his souldiers â—â—wly come from Hierusalem about the yeare 1102. â—â—r their rebellious behauiour which Priests with â—enry their schismaticall Bishop wrote a very passioâ—â—te inuectiue complaynt against this act and comâ—â—ssion of Pope Paschalis inueghing also against the â—â—ing of Pope Hildebrand not long before decâ—ased for 〈◊〉 like cause all which M. Morton concealeth and â—â—eth the words of â—spencaeus himselfe Your Bishop â—â—â—encaeus saith he writeth of Hildebrand c. which he â—â—ould not but know to be false if he read the â—â—oke and place by himselfe ciâ—ed for that Espencaeusâ—oth â—oth not only in the beginning of his citation vse â—â—is entrance extat in 2. â—omo ConcilioruÌ„ edit Coloniensis â—â—leri Leodiensis ad Paschalem secundum querimonia There 〈◊〉 extant in the second tome of Councells a complaint â—f the Clergie of Liege to Pope Pascaliâ— the second but 〈◊〉 the end also of all his speach which conteyneth a â—ong discourse he concludeth thus Hactenus Leodiâ—â—sium verba sensa Hitherto haue I related both â—he wordes sense of those Priests of Liege preâ—ently for himselfe saith that he will not meddle with the controuersie of fighting betweene Popes and Emperâ—rs though he proue by sundry examples both out of the Scrpture Fathers and Councels that in some cases it is lawfull for Priestes to vse teÌ„porall armes also so as for M. Morton to come and â—uouch as he did in his former booke of full Satisfaction that our Bishop Espencaeus affirmed this of himselfe against Pope Hildebrand wheras he must needs know that he saith it not but relateth it only out of others without approuing the same is to ad preuarication to preuarication and neuer to make an end of wilâ—ull lying especially seeing that iâ— this his last Preamblatory reply he is so farre of froÌ„ amending the matter as that he turneth vpon the same agayne saying I produced Claudius Espencaeus their owne Romish Bishop that doth playnly auerre that Hildebrand was the first Pope who without any example of antiquitie made a schisme beâ—wene Emperors and Popes c. Good Syr will you stand to this that Claudius Espencaeus doth playnely auerre it Is this true Is this sincere And how doth he playnely auerre it if he do
Reader in this place 〈◊〉 impawning not only your estimation but also â—our conscience that you neuer found anie so faulty for lying â—nd shamefull fraud as my selâ—e But I appeale to the triâ—ll that hath allreadie bene made in part and shal be more fullie afterwards in the ensuing Chapters where I suppose that you will so be layd open beâ—ore your owne face and others and my selfe so cleared as yf I be not deceyued you wilâ— be ashamed of this your ouerlashing exaggeration THE SECOND CHAPTER ANSVVERING TO M. MORTONS SECOND INQVIRY WHETHER P. R. may be iudged a coÌ„petent Aduocate in this cause which he hath assumed and of some other pointes belonging therunto especially touching the tytle and argument of the Booke of Mitigation PREFACE WHEREAS M. Morton in th beginning of this his Preamble hath reduced the whole subiect therof to three heades which he calleth Inquiryes the first VVhat sufficieÌ„cy there is in P. R the second VVhether he may be thought to be a sufficient Proctor in this case or no the third VVhether he hath sufficiâ—ncy to performe his taske all impertinent and ydle matters as you see And as the distribution is very vncleere and confused euery member treating of sufficiency so is the prosecution therof much more deforme for that the first Inquiry hauing had thirty pages allowed vnto it the second hath but three or foure and handleth no matter at all of any moment but only a certaine feigned ridiculous conference or colloquy deuised by M. Morton to be held vpon a stage by his two aduersaries the Moderate Answerer and the Mitigator decyphering sayth he the dispositioÌ„ of both my aduersaries by way of a dialogue bringing them vpon the stage 2. But Syr is this agreeing to a graue Deuine to take vpon him the part of a stage-player and to answere your Aduersaries with scornefull fictions insteed of sound arguments Let vs heere some few passages of your play if it like you Thus beginneth the Moderate answerer to fall out with P. R. You haue bene altogether presumptuous sayth he to take vpon you this Answere because residing out of England you cannot be rightly experienced c. P.R. I haue not beene arrogant but thou hast beene rash and precipitant for if thou by thy former answâ—re mightest haue bene thought sufficieÌ„t for a Reply what needed such posting to me beyond the seas c M.A. Haue patience I pray you I was inforced to take exceptions to all Authors out of EnglaÌ„d P. R. Thou hast done well c. M.A. I thinke Syr you are troubled with a disease of some of our Catholick lawyers of whome you haue sayd they itch to be doing in answering M. Attorney this was also my disease but I after sound a scratch and so may you 3. Thus goeth that Colloquy and can any thing be set downe more inâ—ulsely in so graue a matter as we haue in hand And as for itching and scrathing I haue spoken somewhat before No man that is of any zeale towards truth when he seeth most absurd and grosse vntruthes vtterd can choose but to haue that holy itch in their fingers to refute or discouer the same for it is an aduâ—se of the holy Ghost himselfe Answere a â—oole according to his folly least to him selfe he may seâ—me to be wise And this hath beene done both against M. Attorney and your selfe and you like a bad Chaplaine and woâ—se Champion haue not defended him at all but left him in the playne feild only now you seeme to threaten scratches which commonly amongst bad women is the end of scoulding but your nayles I suppose are so pared and will be beâ—ore this accompt be ended as they will draw little bloud or hurt any but your self 4. And so not meaning to loose any more tyme in this vaine Interlude of yours wherein your selfe would seeme to play the Vice spending your whole second Inquirie in this bable â—or no other matter of moment do you touch I for couering your nakednes or rather idlenes heerin haue thought good to do you this pleasure as to handle some other pointes contayned vnder your third Inquiry appertayning vnto the title and contentes of my booke of Mitigation impugned by you to the end that the second Inquiry of yours might not seeme to too ridiculous and contemptible to the Reader WHAT M. MORT ANSWERETH in effect to the former part of my Treatise about Rebellion and against the Title therof §. I. FOR that my booke is intituled A Treatise tending to Mitigation towardes Catholicke subiectes in England wherin is declared that it is not impossible for subâ—ectes of different religion especially Catholickes â—nd Protestantes to liue togeather in dutifull obedience and subiection c. M. Morton taketh vpon â—im to play ingeniously as he thinketh vpon this word impossible set downe in the tytle of my booke â—ut as I thinke ridiculously saying that I promise no â—ore for my Clients the Catholickes but that it is not imposâ—ible for them to lyue in obedience But this is a meere caâ—ill of a seditious spirit casting in iealosyes vpon euery occasion to a malicious turbuleÌ„t end for that my tytle answereth directly to the purport of his former virulent bookes that it was impossible in regard of the difference of our doctrynes for ProtestaÌ„t and Catholike subiectes to liue quietly together vnâ—er his Maiesty in England by which he meant to â—et an vnquenchable fyer of discord betweene those two sortes of people not only in respect of their Religion but also of their ciuill lyfe and fidelity towardes their Prince My answere then being coÌ„tradictory to the assertion of M. Morton conteyneth so much as was needfull to be said to his negatiue he saying that it is impossible and I that it is not impossible which albeit it contayne but a generality yet doth it suppose all necessary conditions that are to be required for performance As for example if a noble woman perswaded by some such vnquiet spirit as M. Morton seemeth to be should resolue to part froÌ„ her husband saying it is impossible for mee and you to liue together the difference of our natures conditions being considered that her husband should answere againe it is not impossible doth he not answere surficiently and to the purpose for he vnderstandeth the other circumstances included if you beare your selfe like a wife haue respect to both our honours the like Vayne then and impertinent is the cauillation of M. Morton that heere is nothing proued but a possibility for so much as this possibility was denyed by him before and is heere againe vpon sundry causes presumptions as now we shall see and consequently my prouing this vnion and concurrence in temporall obedieÌ„ce not to be impossible ouerthroweth directly his whole drift both in his former two bookes and this other Preamble wherin he houldeth that it is impossible Let vs heere his reasons wheron his imaginations are founded
must go accoÌ„panied with iudgemeÌ„t discretion and moderation which are other branches also of the same most excellent vertue of prudence For if they be wanting they do make prudeÌ„ce vnprofitable yea oftentimes pernicious turning it into malignant suspitions mistrustfullnesse frights feares iealosies other like effects which do worke the greatest infelicitie that in the world can be imagined And of these pestilent effects are efficient causes for the most part in Princes the cunning sycofancy subtility malitious informations suggestions eggings of flatterers makebates about theÌ„ who for their owne gaine priuate endes care not what seedes of iealosyes they sow in Princes heades against others so they may reape fauours theÌ„ selues by seeming to be prouident and benâ—uolous noâ— do they weigh what eating and consuming cares and sollicitudes they plant in the mindes of their Maisters so themselues may rest at ease as one said well of Dionysius the King of Sicily his spye when after supper he had secretly filled his Princes head with many false imaginations and iealosies himselfe went merily to the tauerne and after liberall drinking he slept souÌ„dly all that night but his Lord going to bed could sleepe nothing at all 11. But to returne to our present case I doe not denie nor euer did that due prouidence prouision ought to be held for â—uture cases as M. Morton doth heere most vntruly affirme theron fraudulâ—ntly doth found his whole discourse but my saying is that it must haue due limitts least it become hurtfull to witt a vaine vexing iealosie I say morcouer that euery may be is not a mâ—st be to fill Princes eares with possibilities onely of dangers without some particuler circumstaÌ„ces of probabilities or credibilities is an officious wounding them vnder pretence of fawning good will As for example if one should doe nothing els but lay before his Maiestie that now raigneth the disasters and perills that haue happened to his noblâ— aunceâ—â—ors in our Land without â—urther particuler ground of likelihood against himselfe but onely that they haue happened and therfore may happen againe it were an importune babling King VVilliam Ruâ—us was slaine in hunting his elder brother Richard as also his nephew of the same name sonne of Robert Duke of Normandie had like disasterous ends in hunting therfore his Maiesty must hunt no more The children of King Henry the first were drowned on the sea therfore no more Princes children must passe the seas vpon no occasion Some Kinges of England were pursued by their owne Children as King Henry the second and â—dward the second and the last also by his wife the Queene thereâ—ore his Maiestie must stand in iealosie of his owne bloud King Stephen King Richard the secoÌ„d Edward the second Henry the 6. and some others are thought to haue bene betrayed by some of theiâ— owne Counsellours and King Iohn was pursued by his owne Barons and Nobility therfore his Maiesty at this day must rest in iealosie both of the one other sort of subiectes do not you see how farre this lyeth open to iniurious calumniation and sedition 12. But I will giue an example more proper yet to the matter If a seditious fellow in England that had great authority with the people and small affection towards the Prince should continually cry and beat into their heads that they looke well about them and stand vpon their guard for that their King may abuse his Authority and become a Tyrant and may oppresse them at his pleasure when they thinke not of it alleadging no other probabilities and arguments of likelihood but only that he may do it or that some such thing hath fallen out before as here M. Morton doth against the Popes authority and Catholickes that acknowledge the same and when any one should say to that turbulent fellow pretending to be so studious of the Common-wealth and iealous of the Kings proceedings that he vrgeth only a may be and that there is no great likelihood of any will be or that such euents will follow as he threatneth and draweth into suspition he should fall into choler rage as M. Morton doth saying that he caÌ„not laugh for wonder horror to see any Englishman conceyte so basely of the wittes and worth of his countâ—eymen as to imagine that they can be deluded with so senseles so shameles so perniciouâ— so impious a Miâ—igaâ—ion as this is not to preuent ensuing dangers c. And yet further that this is a stupiâ—ying receipt casting the state and people into a slumber of not regarding ensuing dangers c. 13. This exclamation I say of this troublesome fellow that would put in iealosie the people and Common-wealth against their King or Monarch only vpon a may be or possibilitie were it not iustly to be reprehended Were not the partie to be cast out as a tumultuous make-bate But he will say peâ—hapes that there is more then may be in this our case there want not probabilities and nearer arguments of intended troubles These then if you please let vs examine breifly and see of what weight or worth they are 14. And truly in this point I see not what probabilities there may be in reason to perswade his Maiestie that his Catholike subiects would not liue quietly and confidently vnder him if they might â—e vsed as subiects and haue that Princely and Faâ—herly protection from him which both lawes do â—llow to freeborne subiects and they may hope and â—xpect from his benignity where no personall or â—ctuall delict shall haue made theÌ„ vnworthy therof There are now no quarrels or differeÌ„ces of titles no â—ed Rose or white no Lancaster or Yorke within the â—and to draw men into partes or factions or passionate courses his Maiestie hath vnited both Realmes â—ogeather is the sonne and heire of the most dearest Princesse vnto English Catholickes that euer liâ—ed in many ages hath goodly issue of his owne which our Lord blesse is setled in his Crowne ioyâ—ed in freÌ„dship and league with all Princes in Chriâ—tendome round about him both of the one and â—he other Religion hath beene hitherto beloued â—nd highly esteemed for many yeares though a Protestant Prince euen by the very spirituall Head himselfe of Catholicke Religion what cause then what reason what motiue what hope what probability may English Catholickes haue to seeke or atteÌ„pt alteâ—ations in State if any tolerable coÌ„dition of Christian subiects may be permitted vnto them 15. I will not adde the experience of so many ages throughout Christendome and of ours that is present nor the comparison or antithesis betweene the doctryne and practice of Catholicke and Protestant subiects in this behalfe which I haue handled more largely in my former treatise tending to Mitigation and well knowne and experienced also by his Maiestie in sundry pointes occasions only I must say that M. Morton here hath dealt very partially in that he taking vpon him to lay before his
conuinced Let him consider what reason M. Morton had so to insult ouer me for contradicting my selfe and saying that my pâ—nne did runne before my witt except I would be accoÌ„pted rather lyingly witâ—y then witlesse rash Are not these ingenious iests But now saith he I come to note such his falles as may seeme to be recouerable by noe excuse Let vs examine them HIS SECOND obiected falshood against P. R. §. II. HIS second obiected falshood is as good aâ— his first to wit of no moment at all whether it be truely or falsely obiected and consequently is brought in heere by M. Morton only to make vp a number it hauing bene produced by him and confuted by me beâ—ore in the first Chapter and therefore is fondly heere called a fall irrecouerable by any excuse It concerneth only how many times the clause of reseruation is mentioned by him in Latin or in English which hauing bene alledged by him before to discredit my memory as he pretendeth heere he vrgeth it as a witting falshood His words are these I haue already mentioned saith he how peremptorily he affirmed that the clause of reseruation was not by me set downe in latin throughout my whole Treatise against Equiuocation aboue once Wherto the Reader may answere for me that it is set downe in latin aboue twenty times What excuse can he preteÌ„d Ignorance Ouersight Negligence Why the book was present before his eyes euen in those places which he particulerly discussed Could that errour be by errour of print diuersity of translation or difference of editions for these are all the pretences which he will allow not one of all these he knoweth can redeeme him from guilt So he 14. Whereto I answere that small guilt can be found though the errour were graunted where no malice or interest can be presumed For to what end or profit should P. R. erre willingly in a matter that importeth him and his cause so little Wherfore the most that can in reason be presumed heere though the obiection were admitted is that he erred in memory and nuÌ„bring which is nothing to the argument in hand of wilfull errour But now you haue seene before in the place here quoted of the first Chapter that in the sense and meaning of P. R. the clause of reseruation was set downe but once in latin that is to say intirely and so as it might not be vnderstood by the vulgar Reader as M. Morton had promised to do in which promise also he is shewed to haue fayled in that telling his Reader that he would alwaies deliuer the same in latin confesseth notwithstanding that sundry times he putteth it downe in English which I am farre of from ascribing to malice but rather to ouersight or forgetfullnesse it little importing our cause on either side But this rather may import much to consider the great pouerty of M. Morton against his Aduersary for sound obiections for so much as he hath brought in this trifle now twice making a speciall Paragraph therof before as you haue heard in the first Chapter and now another heere the thing it selfe obiected being both false as hath before byn proued and vaine if it were true 15. It shall not need to ponder the light and ridiculous insultations of M. Morton which he vseth commonly to makâ— vp some weight vnto euery pretended charge that he giueth saying VVhat excuse can he pretend Ignorance Ouersight Negligence Could it be errour of print Diuersities of translation c Whereto I answere that neither of these are needâ—ull for that both the thing is iustified in it selfe and if it were not yet maketh it nothing to the purpose for that no wilfull and witting errour can be probably supposed where no interest can be gayned therby And how then is this called a fall recouerable by no excuse doth he thinke of what he writeth HIS THIRD obiected falshood against P. R. §. III. VVHERAS M. Morton in a certaine Epistle of his to the seduced brethren calling themselues Catholikes prefixed before his Reply of Full Satisfaction writeth of his Aduersarie that he was of those doctours whome the Apostle described when he saith They wil be doctours and yet vnderstand not what they say nor wherof they aâ—firme I taking his meaning to be generall of our Catholike Priests teachers and Doctors as euidently may be gathered by his whole discourse and by the title it self Of deceyued brethren thought best in my Epistle Dedicatorie to the Vniuersities to answere the same and to compare somewhat their Doctours with ours saying among other things But whether this description of fond presumptuous Doctours touched by S. Paul do agree rather to Protestant Ministers or to Catholicke Priests will appeare in great part by reading ouer this my booke especially the 5.8 and 10. Chapters if by Thomas Mortons errours and ignorances a scantling may be taken of the rest of his Doctours 17. At which words of mine M. Morton is so grieued as he wil needs heere frame a speciall accusatioÌ„ against me of a wilfull falshood for applying that to our Priests Doctors in generall which he saith that he meant of his pâ—rticuler aduâ—rsary the Moderate answerer but I remit the Reader for triall of this to the ponderation of the text it selfe of his said Epistle to our deceaued Catholiâ—ke breethren where within two lines after the words of S Paul recited he nameth our Priests in generall comparing tâ—em with the blind Priests and Doctours of the Iewes And then againe for what insufficient Doctours he holdeth our Priests in respect of his Ministers may appeare by his owne ensuing words which are these But mindes enthralled in the opinion of a neuer-erring-priesthood could not possibly but erre with their Priests and such alas is the case of all them whome God in his iustice deliuereth vp to lyes c. 18. And heere now I would demaund M. Morton in sincerity did he meane of our Priests and doctours in generall or noe doth he thinke that only his Aduersary the moderate Answerer is such a deceaued Priest as S. Paul pointeth at or noe And if probâ—bly we cannot presume that his meaning could be only of that one whome he named but that vnder his figure he would disgrace and discredit all the rest so farre as he was able why might not I speake that which he meant and intended 19. But heare I pray you how he taketh me vp for this matter insteed of better VVhat excuse saith he may P. R. now vse to free himselâ—e from falshood Wherto I answere that I need none alleadgeâ—saith â—saith he editions translations prints Heere is only one edition and that only in English P. R. answereth that this our English edition is sufficient to iustifie him that you meant to disgrace all Catholicke Priests by the instance and example of one VVill you say saith he that it is an errour of Ignorance ouersight negligence Noe nor any errour at all but a
person to Venice there by his presence to draw togeather more aboundantly and with greater speed a Christian army VVherfore being arriued vnto Ferrara and aduertised first by common rumour of an vnfortunate fight had with the Infidels and then afterward vnderstanding more certainly the truth therof he fell into such sorrow as caused an Ague and soone after death it selfe through the force of griefe 37. Thus wrote Blondus And with him agree the rest of the Authors cited many others by me pretermitted And now consider M. Mortons words VVhat is now wanting saith he but an example to be produced of one Pope vpon whom the vengeance of God seized because of his rebellious opposition against tâ—mporall Lordes Was it a vengeance of God to dye peaceably in his bed through the feruour of holy desires to see the holy Land recouered But I will pose M. Morton no further in thâ—se matters for that euery man seeth what necessity driueth him to speake and write so absurdly as he doth THE THIRD Charge of falshood against M. Morton which he pretendeth to answere §. III. IN the third place it pleaseth M. Morton to choose out another imputation of mine against him in tâ—e same 2. Chapter 4. Paragraph of my booke which is about the egregious abusing of a place of D. Bâ—ucher the French-man De iusta abdicatione c. thâ—rby to make all English Catholicks odious as allowing his doctrine The controuersy is clearly set downe in my reprehensioÌ„ of his fraud expressed in these wordes The Charge 29. An other like tricke he plaieth vs some few pages before this againe citing out of D. Bouchers booke De iusta abdicatione these wordes Tyrannum occidere honestum est quod cuiuis impunè facere permittitur quod ex communi consensu dico And then he Englishâ—th the same thus Any man may lawfully murder a Tyrant which I defend saith he by common consent But he that shall read the place in the Author himselfe shall find that he houldeth the very contrary to wit that a priuate man may not kill a Tyrant that is not first iudged and declared to be a publicke enemy by the common wealth And he proueth the same at large first out of Scriptures by the decree of the generall Councell of Constance his wordes be these Neque verò eo iure quod ad regnum habet nisi per publicum Iudicium spoliari potest c. Neither can a tyrant be depriued of that right which he hath to a Kingdome but only by publicke iudgmeÌ„t yea further also so long as that right of kingdome remayneth his person must be held for sacred wherof ensueth that no right remaineth to any priuate man against his life And albeit any priuate man should bring forth neuer so many priuate iniuries done by the said Tyrant against him as that he had whipped him with iron rodds oppressed him afflicted him yet in this case must he haue patience according to the admonition of S. Peter That we must be obedient not only vnto good and modest Lordes but also vnto those that be disorderly and that this is grace when a man for Gods cause doth sustayne and beare with patience iniuries vniustly done vnto him c. 40. And in this sense saith he is the decree of the Councell of Constance to be vnderstood when they say Errorem in fide esse c. It is errour in faith to hold as Iohn VVickliffe did that euery Tyrant may be slayne meritoriously by any vassall or subiect of his by free or secret treasons c. Thus writeth that Author holding as you see that no Tyrant whatsoeuer though he be neuer so great a tyrant may be touched by any priuate man for any priuate iniuryes though neuer so great nor yet for publicke though neuer so manifest except he be first publickly condeÌ„ned by the Commonwealth which is an other manner of moderation and security for Princes then the Protestant doctrine before rehearsed and namely that of Knox vttered in the name of the whole Protestant congregation both of Scotland and Geneua If Princes be tyrants against God and his truth his subiects are freed from their Oathes of Obedience So he 41. And who shall be iudge of this The people for that the people saith he are bound by oath to God to reuenge the iniâ—ry done against his Mâ—iesty Let Princes thinke well of this and let the Reader consider the malicious falshood of this Minister T. M. who in alleagâ—ng that litle sentence before meÌ„tioned about killing of a Tyrant strooke out the wordes of most importance quem hostem Resp. iudicauerit whome the common-wealth adiudged for a publick enemy adding that other clause which I say by common consent which is not there to be found and with such people we are forced to deale that haue no conscience at all in cosenage and yet they cry out of Equiuocation against vs where it is lawfull to be vsed making no scruple at all theÌ„selues to lie which in our doctrine is alwaies vnlawfull for any cause whatsoeuer Thus farre were my wordes of charge reprehension to him in my former Treatise of Mitigation The pretended discharge 42. And now you hauing heard this large Inditement it is reason you heare also what the prisoner at the barre can bring forth for informing the Iury to his discharge You must stand attent for he would gladly slyde away vnder a veile of wordes Wherfore first he layeth forth at larg the drift of D. Bouchers discourse saying that he maketh a double consideration of a Tyrant one as he doth any iniury to any priuate man and that for this he may not be slaine of a priuate man the other as he doth commit publicke iniurie and violence either in case of religion or the ciuill state and this Tyrant may be slaine by the common wealth yea also and by any priuate man when the common wealth hath declared him for a publicke enemy And then he inferreth thus for himselfe VVe see now that Boucher hath defâ—nded both that no priuate man may kill a Tyrant for priuate iniuries done against priuate men and also that any priuate man may kill a Tyrant for common iniuries I haue alleaged the later and P. R. hath opposed the former both of vs haue affirmed a truth where then is the falshood Thus seeketh M. Morton to escape and goeth about by two similitudes to confirme this manner of answering The first that if an Esquire haue a sonne that is a knight he shall sit aboue him in publike meetings but not in priuate that is that he shall fit aboue him and not sit aboue him and so Christ commaunding â—aith he that we should do as the Pharisies did ordaine but not as they did in their lifâ— manners he willed vs to do not to do as the Pharisies do in different respects and senses c. And thus thinketh to haue quitted himselfe
Dioscorian hereticks lately condemned in the sayd Councell all things are in most violent garboyles which require your Imperiall power to remedy compose and compresse the same 65. This is the true meaning of S. Leo his speach to the good and religious Emperour of the same name as appeareth throughout the whole Epistle here cited and diuers others Nonne perspicuum est sayth he quiâ—us Pâ—eâ—as Vestra succurrere qâ—â—buâ— obuiare â—e Alexandrina Ecclesia c. â—s it not euident whome your â—mperiall piety ought to assâ—st and succour and whom yow ought to resist and represse to the end the Church of Alexandria that hitherto hath byn the â—ouse of prayer become not a denne of theeues Surely it is most maniâ—est that by this late barbarous and most furious cruelty in murdering that Patriarch all the light of heauenly Sacraments is there extinguished Intercepta est Sacrificiij oblatio defecit Chrismatis sanctificatio c. The oblation of Sacrifice is intermitted the hallowing of Chrisme is ceasedâ— and all diuine mysteries of our religion haue withdrawne themselues â—rom the parricidiall hands of those hereticks that haue murdered their owne Father and Patriarch Proterius burned his body and cast the ashes into the ayre 66. This theÌ„ was the cause occasioÌ„ wherin the holy Pope Leo did implore the help secular arme of Leo the Emperour for chastising those turbulent hereticks to which effect he saith that his Kingly power was not only giuen him for the gouerment of the world but also for the defence of the Church which our Mynister doth absurdly translate not only in worldly regiment but also spirituall for the preseruation of the Church turning ad into in and praesidium into preseruation and then maketh the Commentary which before we haue set downe As if he had said quoth he not only in causes temporall but also in spirituall so far as it belongeth to outward preseruation not to the personall administration of them 67. Thus far I wrote hereof before and proceded also further shewing not only that he had corrupted both the text sense and meaning of S. Leo but also that fondly he had affirmed that the Oath of Supremacie exacted by King Henry and some of his followers in England was nor is any thing els but the acknowledging of so much authority spirituall as S. Leo granted to the Emperour of his dayes Wherupon I do ioyne isâ—ue with him and promise that if he can proue it to be no other then that all Catholicks in my opinion will accept the same and so come to vnion and concord in that point And therupon I did vrge very earnestly that this assertion might be mainteyned saying among other things Me 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 yf 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. Which words in my iudgmeÌ„t should haue moued M. Morton to haue sayd somwhat to the matter in this his answere and not to haue passed it ouer so slyly as though neuer mention had byn made therof But euery man will ghesse at the cause and so we shall expect it at some other time THE FOVRTEENTH Pretermitted falshood by T. M. §. XIIII LET vs come backe from Pope Leo vnto another priuate Doctor named Genesius Sepulueda whom M. Morton in words calleth ours but yet would make him his if he could in the question of Equiuocation and for that he will not come of himselfe so farre as he would haue him he giueth him a wrinch or two to force him to draw neerer wherof my former accusation was this that ensueth 69. And lastly quoth I where M. Morton concludeth the whole matter by the testimony of our Doctor Genesius as he calleth him I haue told before how he is ours and how in some sort he may in this controuersie be called his though he detested his Religion as by his works appeareth Ours he is as in all other points of Religion so in the subsâ—antiall and principall point of this question for that he defendeth the vse of Equiuocation in concealing some secrets but denieth it in others wherein he fauoreth somewhat the aduerse party with small ground as in the next Chapter shal be declared But what saith this Doctor Genesius He will tell yow sayth M. Morton that this sense of this text of Scripture which yow conceale is not only contrary to the sentence oâ— all Fathers but also against all common sense And is this possible Will Sepulueda deny all those Fathers alleadged by me before for our interpretatioÌ„ to be Fathers Will he say that their exposition is coÌ„trary to all common sense doth not Genesius himselfe in the very Chapter here cited alleage both S. Hierome and S. Augustine for this interpretation and alloweth the same What shameles dealing then is this of our Mynister to charge Genesius with such folly or impiety which he neuer thought of For Genesius denieth not either the sense or interpretation of the place and much lesse sayth that it is coÌ„trary to the sentence of the Fathers and least of all to coÌ„mon sense but denieth only the application therof for vse and practise to certaine Cases wherin he admitteth not Equiuocation and saith that vpon this interpretation to bring in such a new law were greatly inconuenient wherin afterwards notwithstanding we shall shew him to haue byn greatly deceiued his Latin words are Contrà non modò veterum grauissimorum Doctorum sed communem hominum sensum quasi legem inducere to bring in as it were a law not only against the iudgment of ancient most graue schole Doctors for of theÌ„ only he speaketh in that place but also against the common sense or opinion of men 70. This is Genesius his speach wherin though his iudgment be reiected by other Scholmen as singular and paradoxicall in this point as after shal be declared yet is he egregiously abused by M. Morton who first maketh him to say of the interpretatioÌ„ sense of this place of scripture that which he speaketh only of the applicatioÌ„ therof to vse practice in tribunalls And secondly he maketh him to discredit the Fathers which himselfe alleageth then he englisheth ancient Fathers for ancieÌ„t Schoole doctors last of all addeth consensum of his own leauing out hominum to make it sound common sense and other such abuses which any man may see by conferring the place And these are other manner of synnes then symple Equiuocation yf the art of falsifying or forgery be any synne with him at all And so much for this place of Scripture Thus wrote I in my said Treatise being earnest as you see to draw some answere from M.
we may boldly say that he hath left out heere aboue threescore witting voluntary vntruthes which he knew could hardly or neuer handsomly be answered And besides these â—e hath purposely also left out the mention of other matters no lesse weighty then the former though not in the same kind of falshood and lying yet no lesse cuÌ„ningly pretermitted subtracted or concealed to the aduantage of his cause in this last Reply of his theÌ„ any lightly of the former which we are to lay forth in the Chapter that ensueth THE SEAVENTH CHAPTER WHERIN ARE SET DOVVNE DIVERS SORTS OF M. MORTONS OMISSIONS besides the former and namely in not defending certaine Clients of his whose credit was coÌ„mended to his protectioÌ„ in the Trâ—atise of Mitigation And among others SYR EDWARD COOKE now L. Chiefe Iustice of the Common Pleas. THE PREFACE HITHERTO haue we beheld the omissions or rather pretermissioÌ„s to wit omissions voluÌ„tary vsed by M. Morton in answering the chiefe accusations layd against him in matter of falsity and vntrue dealing now you are to see others of another kind which though in my opinion they do proceed out of the same motiue which was by delaying the answere to auoid the necessity of answering at all yet are they in a different subiect or matter not so much concerning corruptioÌ„s falsifications immediatly as the other but about suÌ„dry principall partes of my Treatise yea all in effect no lesse craftily concealed then the rest though with a certaine pretence and faint promise to answere them afterward But for that I haue iust cause to suspect this promise as a dilatory shiâ—t and subtile â—uaâ—ion wherby to deteine from the Readers knowledg what I wrote in may said Treatise making him to thinke by the perusall of this his Preamble of Reply that I had handled nothing therin worthy the relation or confutation besides those trifles which himself pleased before to lay forth for this cause I say I am forced heere to detaine my selfe a litle longer in repeating againe some chiefe points of my said Booke which M. Morton hath passed ouer with silence leauing only a hope as hath bene said that in time he will satisfie them 2. But in this case I meane to proceed as Creditors do with old doubtfull debtors which is to examine the accoÌ„pts make vp the Reckoning while the debts ar yet soÌ„what fresh in memory For better declaration wherof I will vse this example or comparison If a marchant in London or els where hauing many charges of debts laid vpoÌ„ him should promise that at such a time when accompts are wont to be clered made streight he would answere al theÌ„ the prefixed time approaching he should suddainly withwraw himselfe leauing some small scattered suÌ„mes those also of very bad coines to satisfie for great many obligations promising further that in time he would yeeld abouÌ„dant satisfactioÌ„ for all the rest 3. In this case I would demauÌ„d what the prudent Creditors would do think or suspect especially finding the suÌ„mes of money left to be so small of so bad coine as now hath byn said Two things do occur vnto me that they would do for their better assurance First to informe theÌ„selues well what store of debts the said party was to be charged withall Secondly quid habeat in bonis what substaÌ„ce he might be presumed to haue for satisfying therof And this I take to be the very Case also betwene me M. Mort. who being charged with very many debts and obligatioÌ„s of answering matters obiected against him in my foresaid Treatise he tooke a respite vntill the ordinary time of payment which was the time of his Reply which time comming he gaue vs insteed of a booke a Preamble only though a large one answering not to the tenth part of that he was indebted this so weakely frauduleÌ„tly handling matters impertinent as no way it can passe for currant coine as now in part you haue seene and shall do more in that which ensueth 4. Wherfore I am coÌ„strained to performe the parts of the forsaid Creditors making first a suruey of the chiefe debts lyable against him and which he is to answere then to examine what liklihood of paiment or satisfaction he may be thought to haue for effectuating the same both which points you haue in part seene already put in execution by me in my former discourse For you haue heard the many charges laid against him for falsity vntrue dealing you will hâ—rdly I thinke conceiue where he will haue the substance to answere them Now we are to make the search in another sort of debts wherin I perswade me that the like in many points though not altogâ—ather the same will fall out to wit that the debts will be found cleare the satisfactioÌ„ not easy wherin I referre my selfe to that which is to ensue OF THE PRETERMISSION of the chiefest points concerning the argument and subiect of Rebellion in my Treatise of Mitigation §. I. VVELL then according to this designement let vs looke into the principall heads of matters treated by me coÌ„cerning the first part of our argument about Rebellion to wit whether Catholick people aboue others be fouÌ„d obnoxious to that heinous crime this also by force of their Catholicke doctriâ—e beliefe for that this was the chiefe but wherat M. Mortons first seditious libell of Discouery did leuell bringing in ten pretended reasons but indeed caluÌ„niations for some shew of proofe therof which being confuted largely by me for almost twenty pages togeather couinced not only not to be reasons of any substance or force against vs but plaine caluÌ„niations arguments rather against himselfe his people did impose as you see a great obligation vpoÌ„ him for answering the same in this his Reply but he thought good volutarily to pretermit theÌ„ inâ—â—eed therof to institute almost ten other different Paragraphes about the wit learning memory skill in Logicke Greeke Latin charity modesty truth of his Aduersary P. R. as before you haue seene handled So as this first maine debt remaineth in effâ—ct vndischarged what probability there is or may be how well it will be paid heerafter is not hard to ghesse at least I as his Creditor haue cause to suspect the matter that this putting of or delay vpon expectation of a â—urther Reioynder to come forth was but a deuise to euacuate the payment 6. And for so much as the first of these ten reasons againâ—t vs is â—ounded by him vpon the pretended opinioÌ„ that he saith we haue of English Protestants that they are Heretiks that ProtestaÌ„cy is damned heresy consequeÌ„tly are lyable obnoxious to all the Canonicall penaltyes which are set downe against men conuicted of that crime by the Canon law albeit I shewed vnto him that this coÌ„sequence in rigour was not necessary for that all Protestants were not nominatim excoÌ„municati denunciati
other places of my booke wherin the pointes themselues are more largly handled before Now then shall I lay forth some 20. of the sayd heads conteyning in them a greater number of particulers as now you will see 2. The first wilfull lye then that I will note heere is that which perhaps hath not byn layd opeÌ„ bâ—fore for that I discouered the same since the writing of the rest in perusing his Epistle to the Mitigator more diligently where he pretending to haue obtayned the victory in his cause about the question of Equiuocation by the Confession it selfe of his aduersary he writeth thus I do appeale from your position to your Confessionâ— granting that there is a mentall Equiuocation which no clause of reseruation can saue from a lye which one Confession of yours is sufficient to conuince all your mentall â—quiuocatoursâ—â—o be apparently lyers and thus haue I obtayned my cause c. So he And in diuers other places of this his Preamble he insulteth greatly vpon this Confâ—ssion of myne but let M. Morton shew that in all my booke I do confesse that there is a mentall Equiuocation which no clause of reseruation can saue from a lye and then I will graunt that he obtayned somewhat indeed wherabout to wraÌ„gle but if I do neuer say so nor he is able to proue it but rather in other places of his booke doth deliuer me from that Confession granting that the wordes mentall Equiuocation are not myne but his owne my wordes being only these that there is some speach which cannot be saued from a lye by any reseruation and not that there is a Mentall EquiuocatioÌ„ which no reseruation can saue â—rom a lye if this I say be so then whatsoeuer he hath obtayned heerby for his cause he hath obtayned the same by false purchase of vntruth and deceipt as yow will easily see Let vs examin then the matter a litle further 3. First then as now I haue sayd it was neuer my mind to affirme that there is a mentall Equiuocation which no clause oâ— reseruation can saue from a lye but rather thus that there is an outward speach which no clause of reseruation can saue froÌ„ a lye such as was the speach of Saphyra for example for of this was the treaty when she answered falsely vnto S. Peter her lawfull iudge about the price of her feild that was sold this speach of hers I sayd in the Treatise of Mitigation though she might haue a mentall reseruation therin as M. Morton supposeth her to haue had yet could not that reseruation excuse the same from a lye in respect of the obligation she had absolutly to vtter the truth which obligation he hath not who speaketh to one that hath no iurisdiction ouer him and consequently may equiuocate 4. Now then M. Morton to obtayne â—his cause by a lye falsely affirmeth me to say that there is a mentall Equiuocation whiâ—h no clause oâ— reseruation can saue â—rom a lye which is in effect to make me speake contraries For if it be a lye then can it be no Equiuocation as out of their proper definitions I haue largely proued in my treatise of that subiect And if it be a mentall Equiuocation then must it needs be saued from a lye by mentall reseruation And finally that my wordes that there was an outward speach as namely that of Saphyra which no mentall reseruation could excuse â—rom a lye and consequently that it could be no Equiuocation do proue not only my owne wordes speaking therof but also the wordes of M. Morton himselfe afterward in the 12. Paragraph of this his PreaÌ„ble where he saith insulteth thus Pâ— R. is driuen to such a vertigo and giddines that euen when he would deâ—end his art of Equiuocating â—rom a lye he is by consequence from Gods word in the example of Saphyra â—orced to confesse an outward speach which no clause of reseruation could saue from a lye Thus he 5. And marke where the Vertigo is for before in his Epistle he auouched me to say That there was a mentall EquiuocatioÌ„ which no reseruatioÌ„ could saue froÌ„ a lye heere he affirmeth my words to be that I coÌ„fesse an outward speach which no clause of reseruatioÌ„ can saue from a lye which last I grant do deny the former do proue my deniall both by myne owne and his wordes now recited what then can saue him from a lye and lying Vertigo in his former assertion wherin he braggeth so extrauagantly as you haue heard that therby he hath gayned his whole cause in the controuersie betwene vs. Is there any excuse for this Vertigo Or reason why this so â—otoriouâ— a ly of M. Morton may not be condemned for willfull But let vs see a greater 6. Card. Bellarmine speaking of an old ancient heresie sprong vp in the Apostles tyme against the Reall Presence as is recorded by the Greeke historiographer Theodoret as taken out of the Episâ—le of S. Ignatius ad Smyrnenses writeth thus Quâ— sententia citatur à Theodoreto in 3. habeturâ— which sentence is cited by Theodoret in his third Dialogue out of S. Ignatius his Epistle to the Christians of Smyrna where notwithstanding it is not now found that is to say in Ignatius but how doth M. Morton cite it Thus Quae sententia citatur à Theodoreto in Dialogo vbi tamen nunc non habâ—tur and then translateth it which sentence is cited by Theodoret in his Dialogue but is not now to be found in Theodoret which is so notorious and wilfull a falsification as he that will but take the payns to looke vpon Theodoret shall fynd it to be there both in Greeke Latin How then may be excused this foule escape Is it not wilfull did he not see know that he faâ—sifyed manifestly the text of Bellarmine And told also a manifest lye of Thodoret and thirdly went about to deceiue his Reader by his false English translation How then may be excused this tripâ—e â—alshood in one and the selfe same matter wherin Bellarmine is abused Theodoret corrupted and his Reader by â—alse translation deceaued Is not one only of these tricks sufficient to desâ—rie discredit his bad conscience in wryting But let vs go forward 7. In his former booke of Full satisâ—action parte 3. pag. 28. he to disgrace Pope Hildebrand brought forth a testimony of Claudius Espencaeus as afâ—irming the said Pope to haue beene the first that made schisme betweene Empâ—rors Popes now in this new reply of his he repeateth the same againe saying I produced Claudius Espencaeus their owne Romish Bishop which doth plainly auer that Hildebrand was the first Pope who without any example of antiquity made a schisme betweene Emperors Popes But now the matter being better examined for that P. R. could not get that worke of Espencaeus when he wrote his former Treatise it is found that Espencaeus is so farre of
of Perfidiae Reus I am content to remit my selfe to the Iudgement of any two ciuill learned men of either of the Vniuersities to giue sentence in this behalfe though neuer so alienated from vs in opinion of Religion And thus much of the men Now of the matter booke and cause it selfe â— CONCERNING his Booke and Cause it selfe foure other of M. Mortons Challenges §. III. IN the last place M. Morton maketh new Challenges about the Cause and matter it self wherin he threatneth great things to be performed by him that vpon great and seuere penalties if he achieue not all that is put downe in his Challenges to wit That his Treatises be purged with fire and himselfe forced to recantation Which conditions if his Aduersary should accept I doubt not but he would quickly find himselfe in inextricable brakes if we may frame a Iudgment of things to come by things past and of his prowesse what he can doe by that which he hath done in time of most necessity For if euer he could do much it was time to do it now and shew his valour when he was most pressed as you see he hath byn in these precedent Chapters wherin he found himselfe ouerloaden with multiplicity of apparent witting and inexcusable vntruthes so fastned vpon him and so earnestly exacted as all his credit honour and honesty lay vpon it to defend himselfe or giue satisfaction Which not being able to do but by pretermitting wholy the most and chiefe points and falling downe vnder the burthen of the other we may imagine what he will be able to do for the time to come especially seing that he is so recharged with new Charges in the last precedent Chapter as if before he shrunke vnder the burthen he must needs now both sinke fall downe And yet let vs heare him crow once more at this very last cast like a battered Cocke of the game beaten out of the Cock-pit as before we haue likened him vnto 27. Lastly saith he for the cause if I do not auouch the Discouery of Romish positions and practises of Rebellion to be iust Iâ— I proue not the Treatise of Miâ—igation to be like an Apothecaries box of poisoâ— with the outward inscâ—iptioÌ„ of Antidote If I manifest not his specious and glozing reasons for defence of their Mentall Equiuocation to be no better then the apples of Sodome which vanish into ashes at the first â—ouch If lastly I shew not that the chieâ—est aduaÌ„tage of Romish aduersaries doth consist in falsifications all which this Preamble hath but touched and my Incounter god willing must handle then let my Treatises be purged wiâ—h fyre and my selfe challenged to a recantation So he And these conditions I accept willingly but well knoweth M. Morton that bargaine promise or leesse he what he will there wil be no execution made against him and therfore he may be as liberal as he list in offering large conditions But let vs examine in a word or two the particulers 28. If I do not auouch saith he the Discouery of Romish positions and practises of Rebellion to be iust If he do not But when What time will he take What day will he appoint He hath had now three or foure boutes and hath done nothing For â—irst he proposed his coÌ„tumelious Discouery alleaging ten fond reasons for the same which were beaten backe and turned against himâ—elfe by his first â—duersary the moderate Answerer which he taking vpon him to dâ—fend in his reply intituled his full Satisfactiâ—Ì„ did so fully ouerthrow his owâ—e cause as hath byne seene by my Reioyndeâ— or Trâ—atise tending to Mitigation but much more by this his Preambling answere which lightly passeth and walkâ—th ouer all and toucheth scarce any one point of moment appertaining to the matter And for this I alleage â—or witnesses the former Chapters wherin the exact view of all hath byn made 29. Secondly saith he â—f I proue not the â—reatise of Mitigation to be like an Apothecaries box oâ— poison with outward inscription of Antidote then c. But what poison there may be in mitigation of exasperating proceedings toward subiects that desire to liue quietly and dutifully reason teacheth not and much lâ—sse I thinke Religion wherof this man in word is a great professor And what ruynes and rufull ends the contrary hath wrought vpon sundry occasions experience the best Mystresse of â—â—ue prudence hath tâ—ught the whole woâ—ld 30. I do shew and demonstrate in the first Part of my said Treatise that M. Mortons malicious humour in sowing diffidence and distrust betweene Prince and people and in egging forward the Magistrate by Sycophancy to exaspeâ—ation is neither holy nor wholsome nor profitable nor secure nor any way fitting a Christian Common-wealth And that whatsoeuer he obiecteth to moue enuy against either doctrine or practise of Catholike Religion for disobedience to temporall Princes is false first in it self in regard of Catholickes and then is found infinitely more in those of his Religion Why had he not answered to these things in this his last Reply opened his Apothecaries box which now he promiseth 31. Thirdly saith he If I manifest nâ—â— his specious glozing Reasons for deâ—ence oâ— their mentall Eqâ—iuocation to be no better then the apples of Sodome which vanish into ashes at the first touch then will I be challenged tâ— recantation c. But many touches yea and many batterings hath M. Morton made to these my Reasons proofes for the lawfulnes of Mentall Equiuocation and neuer a one of them hath vanished or yelded to his batteriâ— For if it had we should haue byn sure to haue seenâ— it in this his last Reply when it stood so much vpon him to ouerthrow but any one of them if he had byn able But we haue now beholden their strength and his weaknes For that I hauing set downe my Reasons for the sayd mentall Reseruation out of Scriptures Fathers doctors Scholemen exaÌ„ples and other proofs for aboue two hundreth and fifty pages together M. Morton hath not found out any one instance wherof to treate in this his Reply or to fasten his pen vpon the same but only the EquiuocatioÌ„ of the poore woman Saphyra in the Actes of the Apostles which yet I told him before was no Equiuocation but a flat lye as commonly his and his fellowes Equiuocations are wherof I haue giuen many examples in the last Chapter of my Treatise of Mitigation both in himselfe and his antecessours M. Iewell M. Horne M. Fox Hanmer Charke Perkins Syr Francis Hastings Syr Edward Cooke and some others whereof M. Morton thought not best to take vpon him the defence of any one in this his last Reply but by silence rather to condemne them all and consequently heere were no apples of Sodome to be found that vanish at the first touch but all are dusands and hard wardens that will weary his fingers to bruze them if I may trifle with him
a litle in following his owne comparison of apples 32. Fourthly and lastly saith he If I shew not that the chiefest aduantage of Roman aduersaries doth consist in falsifications then c. VVherunto I must answere with this distinction for so much as M. Morton speaketh somewhat doubtfully that if falsifications be taken heere passiuely with relation to Protestants then I grant that one of the chiefest aduaÌ„tages which their Roman aduersaries hauâ— against them consisteth in falsifications discouered daily in their bookes and writings For that I confesse that no one thing doth more confirme a Catholicke mind in the truth of that Religion which he proâ—esseâ—h then to see the enemies and aduersaries thereof to be driuen to vtter such and so infinite apparent wilfull falsities in defending the contrary For that no man doubtles of any credit honesty or good nature would lye or falsity willingly if he could defend his cause with truth VVhich consideration doth greatly worke also with many Protestants that be iudicious and desyre indeed the truth it â—elâ— So as in this sense I confesse that one of the chiefest aduantages of RomaÌ„ Aduâ—rsaries doth consist in the falâ—ifications of Protestant writers 33. But if we take it as I thinke M. Morton meaneth it actiuely in regard of Catholicke writers as though our owne falâ—ifications were our chiefest aduantages against the Protestant Religionâ— it is meerly false For how poore should our Cause be if we had no better proofe for tho truth therof then our owne fictions and falâ—ifications deuâ—â—ed by our selues whereof M. Morton hath not byn able to proue any one against any sort of Catholicke writers in all this his Preambling Reply though wholy it was bent and intended by him to that end as may appeare by the third and fourth Chapters of this our Reâ—konâ—ng And on the other side there are so many proued conuinced against him as he neither is nor euer will be able to answere the half of them as you may behold in the fifth sixth and eight Chapters immediatly going before So as this contradiction being so manifest in it self I see not why I may not call for iudgement and iustice against M. Morton that his bookes be purged with fyre and himself challenged to recantation 34. But presently he leapeth away to the contrary syde and placeth himself in the â—eaâ—e of a Conquâ—â—our saying thus But these things being 〈◊〉 Gods grace dirâ—ctly by me perâ—ormed the fruite therof wiâ—â—be Chrâ—stian Reader to establish thee in the truth of speach and dutifull allegiance and to put my aduersary P R. I hope vnto silence I pray god to repentance So he and with this he endeth his Booke 35. And as for my silence what successe M. MortoÌ„s hope hath had you see by this my Answere which hath byn drawne out to somewhat more prolixity as I suppose then my â—ormer Treatise it self of Miâ—igation which notwithstanding was far from my intent and purpose at the beginning meaning only to haue made a brief conference of things vttered by me in my Treatise of Mitigation with the Answere of M. Morton in his Reply but I found such great store of aduantagious matter â—ast out by him vpon necesâ—ity of his bad cause as I could not possibly passe ouer the same without saying somewhat to ech point so as I haue byn inforced to write more then I had thought to haue done for that he hath giuen more aduantage then I imagined he would oâ— reasonably could in so short a worke And thus much for my silence 36. But as for my repentance for which he praieth I must professe that hitherto I find no least motion of mind therunto nor yet cause to moue that motion for the substance of the controuersy it selfe though for the asperity of speach I could haue wyshed that sometimes it had byn more mollified but the reasons inciting thereunto are sâ—t downe more largely in the Admonitory Epistle to M. Morton himself Here only I will adde that if I could perswade my selfe that he could proue or performe directly or indirectly the things which here he promiseth I should not only be sory that I had written against him in these matters but should endeauour alâ—o to do the works of true repeÌ„tance indeed which were to recall my said wrytings and confesse that M. Morton had reason and truth on his side and were not iâ— these points to be contradicted But hauing seene read and examined with attention so much of his workes as I haue and this also with so great equâ—nimity and indifferencie of iudgment as the loue of truth and regard of myne owne soule could worke in me I haue not found any one thing in the matters themselues affirmed by me that might cause the least scruple of mynd thâ—y being cleere and euideÌ„t truthes in the sight of him that hath the light of a Catholicke conscience And for the manner of M. Mortons dealing I must protest that I find it so vnsyncere which I ascribe to the necessity of his cause as I take great compassion of him and do beseech almightie God to giue him true light to see the dangerous way wherein he walketh whilest he seeketh by sleightes and indirect meanes to defend fancies of his owne of his sect against the truth grauity and authority of his Mother the Catholicke Church AN APPENDIX CONCERNING A CASE OF EQVIVOCATION LATELY written out of England wherin resolution is demaunded about the false Oath of two Ministers Whether it may be salued by the licence of Equiuocation or no TOGEATHER WITH A NOTE OVT OF DOCTOR King his Sermon preached at the Court 5. Nouembâ— 1608. so far forth as it toucheth Equiuocation TO THE READER I Receaued Gentle Reader not long since by a letter of the 8. of Nouember anno 1608. from a friâ—nd of mine dwelling in the North parts of Englandâ— a certaine Aduertisment about a case of Equiuocation fallen out in those parts wherin my sayd friend requested my iudgement whether the same where tollerable or excusable or not And for that it seemed he had some right to vrge me in this matter in respect of the Treatiâ—e written by me of that argument against Mâ— Morton I thought my self the more bound to yeld him some satisfaction to his demand The case then in effect was this 2. A certayne Minister in Yorkeshire named VVh for I thinke not good to set downe all the letters thereof dwelling at a towne called Thorneley if I misse not the name being married and loaden with many children and there vpon â—ot content with the ordinary tiâ—heâ— that weâ—e wont to be giuen and payd in that parish begâ—n to vrge one of his parishioners to pay him other tithes also out of a certayne closse or field that was pretended not to haue payed tithes before to other precedent Incumbents Wherupon this Minister deuising with himself how he might further his owne cause resolued vpon this meane among others to
no Father had any one place or sentence against Protestant religion he would neuer so much haue discredited them all as heere he doth Wherfore the false EquiuocatioÌ„ of M. Iewell is notable in this place 46. But besides this I do lay forth six seuerall examples of egregious wilâ—ull corruptions taken out of M. Iewells bookes and wordes which are ouâ—r long to be repeated heere two or three also of M. Hornes practise in that behalfe who possessed the bishopricke of VVinchester for some yeares sundry out of M. Calfield diuers out of M. Charke and M. Hanmer and no lesse notorious and wilfull out of M. Perkins some very markable out of Syr Francis Hastings a great nuÌ„ber intolerable out of Syr Philip Mornay who was chalenged by the Bishop of Eureux for 800. and affroÌ„ted with threescore at one offer and conuinced of nine in one dayes conference before the present King of France and his Counsell 47. And finally I adioyne to the former for my last witnesse of false dealing Syr Edward Cooke late Attorney Generall to his Maiesty and not long since manifesting himselfe to the world for a writer against Catholiks whose spirit I do shew by sundry examples to be like the rest in that behalfe leauing the defence both of him and the others to M. Mortons patronage who hath had so litle care of their credit as it seemeth that he hath not so much as once meÌ„tioned them or any one of theÌ„ in this his Reply but leaueth euery one to shift for himselfe which omission cannot but seeme somewhat preiudiciall vnto them for that euery man will therof inferre that their causes were so bad as he durst not take their defence in hand but especially will this seeme to be true in the cause of Syr Edward Cooke whome M. Morton had more obligation to deâ—end in that in his booke of full Satisfaction against me he serued himselfe of diuers examples authorityes taken out of the said Knightes booke allwayes repoâ—table Reportes as there he calleth them VVhich he hauing seene answered since that tyme in my Treatise of Mitigation and shewed to be impertinent and nothing to the purpose had obligation therby to haue defeÌ„ded somewhat in this his Reply eyther the things themselues or the Author or both but neyther of them hath he donne and therfore do I meane to handle this omission seuerally in the sequent Paragraph OF M. MORTONS OMISSIONS Concerning the defence of Syr Edward Cooke wholy pretermitted by him §. IIII. ALBEIT perhaps M. Morton may say that his meaning was to take in hand the dâ—fence of his Client Syr Edward Cooke in his other promised Reioynder and therfore said nothing of him now in this his Preambling Reply yet hauing now seene him very hardly charged in two seuerall Bookes the one of the Catholick Deuine in aÌ„swering to the fiâ—th part of his Reportes the other the Treatise of Mitigation with the like imputations of vntrue dealing as are laid against M. Morton himselfe it seemed that it had byn a point of frendship if not of duty to haue said somewhat for preuenting and staying at least the Readers preiudice as in his Preface he said he did for himselfe especially for so much as he had seene now and read all those places which he borrowed out of M. Cooke to furnish one whole Chapter of his full Satisfaction fully answered and confuted by the Catholicke Deuine in his foresaid Booke which M. Morâ—â—â— might haue at leastwise mentioned among so many other poyntes of lesse importance which he handleth if his hart had not serued him to take vpon him the whole defence 49. But all these indeed are signes of feeblene in both parties I meane as well in the Patron 〈◊〉 the Client for that it is no lesse strange that Syr 〈◊〉 Cooke himselfe hauing set forth a certaine Preface for some excuse of himselfe and this after my Treatise of Mitigation wherin he was so deeply charged with sundrâ— grosse and willfull falshoods had byn seene and read by him and yet to say neuer a word of this charge nor how he could discharge it this silence I say is no lesse straÌ„ge vnto me then the other of M. Morton but rather more for that Syr Edward was to defend himself M. Morton another propria magis premunt our owne affayres do more presse vs then other mens Wherfore to the end that I may somewhat oblige both M. Morton in his promised Reioynder to be more myndfull of this matter and Syr Edward himself if he meane to write any more Bookes against vs to cleare somewhat this Charge that was layd against him I shall repeate the same againe here as it was there set downe in my other Treatise Thus theÌ„ I wrote at that tyme. 50. Our last example said I shall be of Syr Edward Cooke lately the Kings Attorney who hauing taken vpon him these yeares past to be both a sharpe writer and earnest Actor against Catholicks semeth therwith also to haue drunke of this spirit in such abouÌ„dant measure as he is like in time to ouerrunne all the rest if he go foreward as he hath begunne For that being admonished not long a goe by one that answered his last Booke of Reportes of diuers notorious his excesses committed in this kind he is men say so far of from correcting or amending the same as he hath not only in a late large declamatioÌ„ against Catholiks in a Charge giuen by him at Norâ—ich repeated and auouched againe the same excesses but hath added others also therunto of much more apparant â—alsity As for example he was admonished among other points that it was a notorious vâ—truth which he had wrytten and printed that for the first tenne yeares of Q. Elizabethes Raigne no one person of what religion or Sect soeuer did refuse to go to the Protestants Church Seruice which the Answerer confuteth so clearly by so many witnesses as a man would haue thought that the matter would neuer haue byn mentioned more for very shame and yet now they say that the Attorney being made a Iudge hath not only repeated the same but auouched it also againe with such asseueration in his foresaid Charge as if it had neuer byn controlled or proued false 51. Nay further they wryte that he adioyned with like asseueration diuers other things no lesse apparantly false then this As for example that Pope Pius Quintus before he proceded to any Ecclesiasticall Censure against Q. Elizabeth wrote vnto her a Letter offering to allow ratiâ—y the English Seruice Bible and Communion booke as now it is in vse in that kingdome if she would accept it as from him which she refusing to doe he did excoÌ„municate her By which tale he acquiteth notwithstanding Catholiks if you marke it from procuring that Excommunication for rebellion which elswhere he ofteÌ„ obiecteth most odiously against them For if vpon this cause she were excommunicated what part
had Catholicks therin But yet I must needs say that the fiction is one of the most vnlikely things and the most impossible in morall reason that any man can deuise For that Pope Pius Quintus albeit some man would imagine him to be so good a fellow as to care for no ReligioÌ„ who is knowne to haue byn most zealous yet had he aduentured his Popedome by making such an offer For he should haue allowed of diuers points in the CoÌ„munion booke which are held by the Catholicke Church for heresy and so condemned by the Councell of Trent and other Councells And now you know it is a ground among vs that a Pope that should be an Hereticke or approue of heresy thereby ceaseth to be Pope how improbable then is this of Pius Quintus his offer And why had not this Letter in so many yeares byn published to the world for the credit of the English Seruice and discredit of the Popes And yet the voice is that the Lord Cooke did so earnestly auouch this matter as he pawned therein not only his credit and honesty by expresse termes of protestation but euen his â—aith also to God and man a great adueÌ„ture no doubt And for that I assure my self that the greater part of the Auditory being discreet men did imagine it to be quite false as I and others in effect do know it to be it muâ—t needs be a great blemish to my Lords credit at the beginning of his â—udgship that in other things also he be not belieued 52. But I vnderstaÌ„d that the Booke of this speach or charge now printed is expected shortly togeather with some other appertayning to the same man and then it may be that some body will examine matters more particulerly especially those that appertaine to the iniuring of Catholicks and afterward returne with the agrieuances to the Iudge him selfe seing he is now a Iudge to giue sentence of his owne ouersightes Albeit I must confesse that as well my selfe as diuers other men haue lost great hope of his Lordship by this accideÌ„t for before we did thinke that his ouerlashing in speaches when he was Attorney did proceed in great part of the liberty of that office and that when he came to be Iudge he would reforme his ConscieÌ„ce ratione Status in regard of his state of life but now it seemeth that he is far worse though this I say shal be left by me to others to be discussed vpon the sight of the foresaid printed Bookes 53. My speach at this time shall be only about that which passed in his Booke of Reportes while he was Attorney and which hath byn disputed these monethes past betweene him and a Catholicke Deuine of our party in his answere to the said Reports which Answere is in England And albeit thereby may easily be seene the taleÌ„t which M. Attorney had while he was Attorney in this kind of worst Equiuocation notwithstanding his often declamations against the other sort that with due circumstances we haue proued to be lawfull yet will I heere adioyne one example more but such a one as is worth the noting and bearing away And it is this 54. That whereas in answering of diuers lawes statutes and ordinances which the Attorney alleaged out of the Raignes of sundry aÌ„cient Kinges to proue that they did exercise spirituall authority and iurisdiction the Deuine sometymes not hauing the law bookes by him out of which the said lawes or authorities were cyted supposing the allegations to be ordinarily true â—or who would suspect lawiers to be false in their citations that were wont to be accompted most exact in that point did answere the same with that sincerity of truth and reason as to a man of his profession apperteyned though sometymes also he was forced to suspect some fraude and therepon requested such as had commodity in England to see the Bookes that they would peruse the places and take them out Verbatim which some haue done and haue found such store of Equiuocations and false dealing in the alleaging therof as neuer could be imagined in a man of his calling I shal only set down one example and it shal be the first that is cited by him in the whole Booke to wit of the Charter of King Kenidphus of the VVest Saxons vnto the Abbey of Abindon in Barkshire which Charter M. Attorney set downe with this Preface To confirme saith he those that hold the truth and to satisfy such as being not instructed know not the ancient and moderne lawes c. these few demonstratiue prooses shall serue 55. And then beginneth he with the said Charter of king Kenulphus before the coÌ„quest meaning to proue therby that the said king did giue vnto the said Abbey of AbindoÌ„ spirituall iurisdiction by vertue of his temporall Crowne exempting the same from all authority of the Bishop which indeed was done by the Pope and so the Charter it self doth plainly expresse if it had byn truly related by M. Attorney And for that the Case is not long I shall set it downe Verbatim as the Attorney hath it in his Booke pag. 9. only putting into English that which is recited by him in Latin and left without any translation to make the matter more obscure then shall we lay forth also the true Case whereby wil be seene how true a dealer M. Attorney is in those his writyngs and protestations which after we shall more largely consider of Thus then beginneth the Charter 56. Kenulphus Rex c. per literas suas Patentes coÌ„silio consensu Episcoporum SenatoruÌ„ Gentis suae largitus fuit Monasterio de Abindon in Comitatu Bark cuidam Ruchino tunc Abbati Monasterij c. quandam ruris sui portionem id est quindecim mansias in loco qui à Ruricolis tunc nuncupabatur Culnam cum omnibus vâ—iâ—itatibus ad eandem pertinentibus tam in magnis quà m in modâ—cis rebus in aeternam haereditatem Et quòd praedictus Ruchinus c. ab omni Episcopali iure in sempiternum esset quietus vt inhabitatores eius nullius Episcopi aut suorum Officialium iugo inde deprimantur Sed in cunctis rerum euentibus discussionibus causarum Abbatis Monasterij predicti decreto subiiciantur ita quòd c. Thus goeth the Charter as M. Attorney alleageth it which in English is as followeth 57. King Kenulphus c. by his letters Patents with the Counsayle consent of the Bishops and Counsaylours of his Nation did giue to the Monastery of Abindon in Barkeshire and to one Ruchinus Abbot of that Monastery a certaine portion of his land to wit â—ifteene Mansions in a place called by the Country men Culnam with all proâ—its and coâ—modities grâ—â—t â—nd small appertayning thereunto for â—ueâ—lasâ—ing inâ—eritance And that the â—oresaid Râ—â—â—inus c. should be quiet from all right of the Bishop for euer so as the inhabitaÌ„ts of that place shall not be depressed