Censures when the priests submitted themselues vpon the sight of his Holinesse Breue which censures he had vsed against three priests because they had appealed from him to the pope as it is set downe in the booke to the Inquisition And I doubt not but that the Archpriest would be as glad now that all were well accorded as he was at the first attonement and be as ready perchance to breake out againe as then hee was as it is prooued in the bookes to his Holinesse and to the Inquisition neither is there any man that is in his wittes but will thinke that the Iesuits and Archpriest would haue peace that is power to vse the Secular priests at their pleasure and that the priests should suffer all manner of indignities both in fame and otherwise and not to stirre for anie thing which may be done against them least the Iesuites peace be broken which they loue so dearely and cloake it with extraordinary pietie in this place fol. 221 where they are sayd to haue stoode with the Archpriest and the rest in defence of his Holines ordination as though the priests had euer resisted his Holines ordination and not rather yeelded themselues presently at the sight of the Breue before which there was no Popes ordination And to this the Iesuites their standing in defence of his Holinesse ordination are ioyned most absurd positions of their desire not to meddle in the priests affaires whereas it hath beene shewed that they haue been the chiefe of this sedition against the priests And their interpretation that their dealing proceedes of loue is to men of vnderstanding an argument of a factious disposition and desiring of gouerning all sortes of people whosoeuer must play the Apes part to take away the enuie for their misdeedes from them They intend not sayeth hee to preiudice them in any preferment for the time present or to come Hee were worse then madde that would trouble himselfe with our Iesuites intentions which varie as often as their tongues moue and turne their intentions to serue best their owne turnes Let the Iesuites their hinderance of all our nation beyond the Seas from al promotion speake for their intentions since that no place or preferment there can be had without degrees in schooles which they haue induced his Holinesse to debarre all the English nation vnder this other intention that young men must not take the degrees when they depart from the Seminaries And that their intention may be the more euident that they will hinder euery mans preferrement they haue put into the Popes Breue a barre not onely for the proceeding in Diuinitie the knowledge whereof they haue now also cleane taken out of the Colledge at Doway but in either of the Lawes also Ciuill or Canon which are not taught in any of our Seminaries Yet must all their intentions bee most excellent and must not be thought to preiudice any for the time present or to come As for the time to come were it in their hands to preiudice any man all their protestations and oathes would carie little credite but with such as know them not In which as in all other their dealings especially in this action the priests doe most willingly forgiue them their falshood and doe pray for them that God will giue them and their adherents his grace to amende what they cannot chuse but see is amisse in themselues To which they may make a good steppe if they will enter into their owne consciences and consider of what great scandals and harmes in Gods Church they haue beene a very faulty occasion by that most wicked imputation of schisme to most Catholicke priestes and their obdurate standing in that sinfull opinion without admitting any equall triall of the cause in question which the priests did offer in most humble wise before they tooke the course that now they take and was onely left vnto them to cleare themselues of so damnable a slander ¶ A REPLY TO THE Appendix of the Apologie by J. B. THE author of the Apologie hauing seene other two bookes beside those against which he writ his Apologie maketh an answere such as it is vnto them which answere he calleth An Appendix to the Apologie by the Priests that remaine in due obedience to their lawfull Superior As though an Appeale made from a superior vpon iust causes and a lawfull prosecution thereof could not stand with due obedience But somewhat must be said and if it haue no pith in it as euery indifferent reader will soone discouer that want in this Appendix it must be ouercharged with bigge words which the blinde obedient must imagine would not haue bene vttered without iust cause although they see none After a long conflict then as it should seeme in this author whether hee should take notice of these two latter bookes to which he hath made it knowen both in this Appendix and other two scurrilous Libels set out since this Appendix came forth that he cannot make any answere he hath aduentured to say somewhat of them and that it might not bee made too apparant to the world how little the poore man had to say herein hee stuffeth these few leafes with exceptions against those bookes to which he pretended an answere in his Apologie enlargeth himselfe somewhat by way of a preface wherein he telleth his reader how vnwillingly he put his pen to paper for the defence of our Superiors and their lawfull doings and proceedings against the intemperate impugnations by tumult and Libels of a few discontented brethren c. And no man can but beleeue him that it was sore against his will that he had such cause as he had to vse his pen although he neuer made daintie of his paines and pen where hee thought he might discredit those priests which he could not bring to his lure And as for the priests their doings or proceedings they haue shewed themselues ready to giue accompt thereof and to proue both the lawfulnesse and the necessitie which was in withstanding the exorbitant proceedings of such as hauing neither any Christian wisdom nor honestie abused our Superiors and procured that al the priests should be brought into these streights to wit either to yeeld to the wicked designes of others or to be made infamous all the world ouer And to this effect was the treatise of schisme written by the Iesuits and sent abroad not onely in England but into remote places beyond the seas to perswade such as would be blinde that Catholike priests who had liued in a long most dangerous persecution for defence of the sea Apostolike were now become schismaticks and why because they did not contrary to the lawes of Gods Church yeeld their obedience to a creature of the Iesuits intruded vpon them as their Superior without any warrant from the Sea Apostolike which hath commanded that no such superior be accepted without a speciall warrant or letters from the same Sea as may be seene in that extrauagant
left out so memorable an abridgement of so many impertinent and false matters and so well suting with the Apologie I call all that impertinent which concerneth any diuision either of Iesuites and other Catholikes of the Clergie or of the Laitie before the comming of the Cardinall Caietans letters for the institution of the Archpriest in the yeere 1598. or the ambitious attempt of the knowen and couert Iesuites in the scandalous diuision in Wisbich For vpon the not yeelding of some secular Priestes to subiect themselues first to the Iesuites in direct termes and the not admitting of an authoritie procured by them afterward for their indirect soueraintie this present controuersie began and being once ended at the sight of a Breue it was renewed againe by the rashnesse of the Iesuites and the indiscretion of the Archpriest as it is prooued at large in the bookes set out by the Secular priests and promulgated in the latter Breue dated the 17. of August 1601. as shall hereafter be shewed I affirme the rest to be false because so it shal be proued for so much as is touched thereof either in the Apologie or in this Epistle Omitting therefore what is here propounded to his Holinesse concerning the Catholikes their going to the Protestants Churches at the beginning of her Maiesties raign who now is a thing which would not haue bene published to the world by any who tendered their honour vnlesse there had bene some greater cause for it the subornation of some by the Counsell to poyson D. Allen afterwardes Cardinall and the Students raising of sedition among the Catholikes beyond the Sea the euill successe which some had about the Queene of Scots and diuers Gentlemen which is here attributed to their secret keeping of their practises from Fa. Parsons and other the inducing of two Priests to write two bookes in fauour of heretikes as it were by reason of State and to become spies the one in France the other in Spaine Lastly to let passe that which is here said that Car. Allen perceiued that there was a faction begun in England by the same acte of the Counsell against the Fathers of the Societie and writ most earnestly against it that Card. Sega had found out that a few vnquiet spirits were set on craftily by the subtill instruments of the Counsel were the cause of many troubles in that Colledge at Rome we wil here only touch such points as do concerne our selues and the matter now in controuersie Your Holines therefore saith this Author seeing prudently these causes and effects and hauing put a finall end to the long and fastidicus troubles of the English Romane Colledge giuen your straight commandement by words of mouth to such persons of the tumultuous as departed into England in that yeere 1597 to be quiet for the time to come to haue peace with all but namely with the Fathers of the Societie and hearing notwithstanding the next yeere after by diuers letters out of England that this was not obserued but new meanes rather deuised of further diuision and sedition your Holines did vpon these considerations and vpon the letters and requests of diuers of the grauest Priests of our nation which after we shall cite ordaine by the Card. Protector his letters an easie and sweet subordination c. If wee had no other proofe of this fellowes falsehood then might be made apparant in this second point of the Epistle it would giue euery honest man sufficient satisfaction His Holines is here put in minde of such strange matters and his wisedome very highly commended vpon so false grounds as if this Epistle had bene euer deliuered vnto him hee would speedily haue discouered a notable sycophancy He is here told of two principall motiues for his ordaining our easie and sweet subordination The one were certaine letters which signified that betweene the tumultuous who departed into England in the yeere 1597 and the Fathers of the Societie there was not that peace which he had commanded but new meanes rather deuised of further diuision and sedition The other were other letters and requests of diuers of the grauest priests of our nation which after saith he wee shall cite Concerning the first least there should be any error in Iudgement what those new meanes of further diuision should be there is this note in the margent The new association which conceite is deliuered in plainer termes and more at large in the first Chapter of the Apol. fol. 6. in this maner But the reliques of those that had bene troublesome and vnquiet before their comming into England and conferring againe with their consorts of their former actions and designments frustrated as they thought by F. Parsons dealing at Rome resolued to begin againe but after another fashion To wit by deuising a certaine new Association among themselues c. And in the 2. Chapter fol. 13 his Holines hearing of certaine new Associations begun in England soone after the tumults ended in Rome c. These to omit other places in the Apologie are sufficient to shew that his intention is to make the Pope beleeue that the Association which was begun in England by the Secular priests was a new deuise of those who were sent from Rome in the yeere 1597 as tumultuous and vnquiet persons That this is a meere deluding of his Holines all who were then in England can very well testifie yea F. Parsons himselfe will doe vs the fauour I am sure to say this is a very false tale who vnderstood at his first comming to Rome by M. Iames Standish that such an Association had bene long before intended and consequently could not bee a deuice of such as thought themselues frustrated of their designments by his dealing in Rome The 6. assistants in their letters of the 2. of May 1601. doe testifie that this association began foure or fiue yeres since Cap. 7. Apol. fol. 90. and that must needs be before those priests came into England on whom it is fathered if it be true which is sayd Cap. 2. Apol. fol. 12 that they were not gone from Rome at the beginning of September 1597. It may also be gathered out of the same Chapter fol. 89. that this association very probably was begun long before by others for there we finde this storie But M. Mush returning into England as he went forth and the Cardinall soone after dying in the yeere 1594. as appeareth Cap. 1. Apol fol 6. hee ioyned with another of his owne humour c. And they two with some few other determined to make a certaine new Hierarchy of their owne calling it an association of Clergie men c. The truth is that M. Mush and M. Dudley hauing made the peace at Wisbich in the yeere 1595. as appeareth Ca. 6. Apol fol. 79. returned to London and there dealt with M. Iames Standish a man growing in deed into that humor to wit of being a Iesuit which M. Mush was then leauing and not with
this any further here especially seeing Fa. Valent. his doctrine set downe before out of S. Thomas doeth most clearely conuince them And therefore we leaue that to God and their consciences to answere one day before the high Iudge where shifts will haue no place A condition which I doubt not but the author of this Apologie would gladly for this time should be agreed vpon howsoeuer when that day shal be present he would be willing to haue the hearing of the matter further deferred For if we doe but reflect what meanes haue bene made to haue it heard in this world and haue bene crossed by him and his faction we shall easily conceiue how vnwilling he will be to come to the triall in the next where hee must come to the naked proofe of right or wrong without his cloake which now couereth all his falsehood To this adiuration the priests will answere in their consciences afore God and at the day of Iudgement where shifts wil haue no place that when they had seene read ouer the Card. Caietanes letter which he testified not to the whole world as here it is most falsly suggested but onely to M. Blackwell being a letter written particulerly to him and to no other as appeareth by the letter extant both in the bookes dedicated by the priests to the Inquisition and at the beginning of M. Colingtons booke lately set forth and written by one who was not knowen to haue any authority in England neither did he make it knowen that he had any authoritie delegated vnto him for that which he had attempted but only by his owne bare words which no man in this case was to beleeue vnder any sin Notwithstanding they had heard that his Hol. had giuen a charge to some in particuler to haue peace with the Iesuits a very impertinent matter and as foolishly here vrged for the band to accept the Subordination at the first comming or had seene other letters testifying the same as a heare-say as M Colington doeth particulerly prooue from the 68. page to the 80. or that he was a Cardinal who writ his letters it being euident in the opinion of the chiefest Cannonists that a Card. may do more sometime then needeth or els they would neuer accord that credit is not to be giuen to him vnlesse he shew his commission whereupon your brethren doe answere sincerely and without passion that it was no morall certaintie of the Popes will and that they had not sufficient knowledge to bind vnder sinne to obedience and that no Superiours will did by any meanes appeare vnto them but rather a very bad part of their aduersaries to crosse them for a time vntill they could worke the Pope to confirme the plot which they had layde to bring the priests into a slauish bondage vnder them neither can they once be conuinced of the contrary as may in part appeare by that their reasons of their refusall before the Breue came doe stand firme as yet vnanswered And thus omitting to coniure the Iesuits Archpriest for their false dealings in this action for which assuredly they must come to an vnpleasing reckoning I wil briefly touch what is here said of the censure of Paris and make an ende of this Chapter referring the Reader for a larger satisfaction to M.D Elie his notes vpon the 8. Chapter of the Apologie pag. 245. and to M. Iohn Colington in his 4. reason pag. 153. The decree of the doctors of Sorbon in Paris consisted of two parts the one was that the priests who deferred to admit of the authoritie vpon the causes alledged were not schismaticks the other was that the priests the fact of it selfe considered did not any way offend or commit sinne By this definition of Paris saith this author fol. 118. commeth very little reliefe vnto the priests and it was printed onely to make a vaine flourish with the ostentation of an Academicall sentence Thâ—s very word Academiâ— sticketh marueilously in this authours stomach and his fellowes But let vs see how he will shew that this decree of these doctors did very little relieue the priests To the first point that it was no schisme what saith he marke I pray you his words fol. 115. for of the other point of schisme we will not talke at all am sorie that euer it was mentioned or brought in questioÌ„ But will you see this good sope of milke turned downe with a foule paire of heeles Note that which is behinde Vnquiet people hauing taken occasion hereby to continue contention and to make more brables then were needfull They were much to blame belike who would speake being publiquely defamed for schismaticks and what els a quintessence of malice could deuise as may be seene in the treatise of Schisme written by the Iesuits and approued by the Archp. and yet to this day mainteined in corners where any of that seditious crew can haue any hope to increase the schisme or diuision or what els it may be hereafter called in Gods Church by perswading now some now othersome not to communicate in Prayer and Sacraments with those who are the true members of Gods Church for a cause in which these members doe in here and plead the commandement of the head of the Church against a priuate letter from a priuate Cardinal to a priuate man as may appeare by the letter it selfe Were shame of that most wicked and sencelesse slander the cause of sorrow or silence in this author concerning this point of schisme what hope might there be that he had some grace but his sorrow and silence grow both out of a splene that his and his fellowes slanderous tongues had not that successe which he and his froward malitious adherents hoped for The submission which the priests did make at the sight of his Holines first Breue of the 6. of April 1599. acknowledged in his later Breue of the 17. of August 1601. conuinceth all but contentious brablers that the priests were further off by much from any touch or any suspition of schisme then their aduersaries here euer since their first deuiding themselues from them in prayer and communion of Sacraments But seeing he will say no more of schisme we will omit it and come to the question which this author meaneth to handle Our question saith he is then onely whether any sinne were committed whereof also we will not presume to determine any degree of sinne but leaue that to God and to the offenders consciences Now that the priests here be published for rebels seditious factious excommunicate irregular fallen from the Church to haue lost their faculties scandalous infamous persons no better then soothsayers and Idolaters disobedient to the Church and therefore as Ethnickes and Publicanes the author of this Apologie will not presume to determine any degree of sinne Our question sayth he is whether any sinne were committed but he giueth no answere to this question but wrangleth a little about the censure of
Paris in this maner First there was no man to enforme the Doctors for the Archpriest As though the Doctors censure had not passed vpon those informatiōs although no one of any side had been present The case was propounded and they gaue their iudgement vpon the case and not vpon any particular person If any that might haue bene then present for the Archpriest could haue proued the case to haue been wrong put let it now be done and it shall be all one For as it is sayd it was the case which was censured which might haue come out of Moscouia for any thing that was set downe to the contrary in the information And the decree being giuen according to the information will be iustified notwithstanding this sencelesse and shameful Edict 29. Maij 1600. We George Blackwell Archpriest of England and protonotary apostolicall c. do strictly command in vertue of obedience and vnder paine of suspension from diuine offices A notorious vsurper and losse of all faculties in the fact it selfe to be incurred all ecclesiasticall persons and also all Lay Catholikes vnder paine of being interdicted likewise in the fact it selfe to bee incurred Is not this a strange charge considering the state in which as well the Lay Catholike as the Ecclesiasticall person now liueth in England Who is it that doeth not expect a prohibition of some grieuous crime You haue heard the charge Now listen to the matter forbidden That neither directly nor indirectly they maintaine nor defend in word or writing the censure of the Vniuersitie of Paris whether it be truely giuen or forged Was there euer in Christendome heard the like presumption that a man of some two or three yeres study and in no Catholike Academi◠of fame should condemne the censure of the most famous Vniuersity in Christendome But wil you heare him excel himselfe who hath excelled the most proud and temerarious censurer in the world Note that which he addeth whether vpon true information or otherwise the Sorbonists haue spun a faire threed when what informations soeuer be giuen vnto them their censure is not to be regarded The second exception which this author seemeth to take is that the Doctors did lightly passe it ouer and defined the matter in the senior Bedels house which such as haue studied in Paris do know to be the vsuall place of their meeting as standing most commodiously for all those who are chosen to meete vpon all causes comming to the Vniuersitie to be determined they themselues not liuing in any one place but scatteringly in the Citie Religious men in their Couents Pastors in their parishes Readers and other Doctors in their seuerall houses or Colledges How lightly they passed it ouer I know not neither is the matter of any such difficultie in it selfe that it should aske great studie But it is an argument that they were not ouer carelesse what they sayd who commanded the Bedell to write it downe as their definition in such wise as euery thing els doeth passe them in their consultations of greatest matters The third exception is that it was giuen vpon some sinistrous information and that therefore the Doctors did prudently giue their censure in this maner They committed no sinne at all in that fact in it selfe considered And that they added these words for that they knew not what scandall euill example sedition and contention and hurt to the common cause had ensued thereof Had this author in place of this word thereof put after he had done more wisely as I thinke for in that he vseth this word thereof either he declareth himselfe to be very sottish or els that the Vniuersitie was very vnaduised in adding these words that fact in it selfe considered for which words this author commendeth their wisedom for if the fact in it selfe were such as so much hurt did ensue thereof how could the fact in it selfe be cleered from all sinne True it is that scandal followed after But it yet remaineth vnproued that it ensued vpon the priests fact doeth not much hurt come after much good and shall we say that the harme ensued vpon the doing of the good in such sense as that the good which is done must be a necessary cause of the euil which had not perchance otherwise been The fact then in it selfe considered being without sinne we are to seeke who sowed the Zizania which perchance had neuer been sowed where it was had not the husbandman sowed good corne before The priests perceiuing what was intended and was likely to fall vpon them if they sought not some meanes to preuent it sent two of their brethren vnto his Holines to preuent it if they might for contrary to all custom in Christendome there was a superioritie challenged ouer all England and Scotland as deriued from the Sea Apostolike without any letters from the said Sea for warrant thereof and in the meane time the priests deferred their submission to the authoritie as well vpon this cause as other contained in the information to the Doctors of Sorbon The Iesuits and their faction of which the Archpriest being now become the head were impatient of delay and because the priests did not subiect themselues in this interim but stayed their submissiō vntill they did see the Popes letters they first vsed their tongues then their pennes and both writ and approoued seditious libels against the priests tearming them therein Schismatikes excommunicate persons irregular fallen from the Church of God and what not that malice it selfe could deuise from which slanders while the Priests sought to defend themselues great troubles haue risen in England Now then the question must be whether the Priests were the sinfull cause of these contentions by this their forbearance to subiect them selues before they sawe the Popes letters or rather the Iesuites and Archpriest by those their seditious and sinnefull tongues and libels The fact of the Priests in it selfe considered that is their forbearance vpon such causes say the doctors and prudently sayth this author was no sinne at all but the doctors were not truly informed sayth this author and therefore their sentence was of no force But what then were the defects in the information giuen to the doctors through which the doctours are thought to haue erred in their sentence Forsooth first the priests did not tell them that the Card. was Protector of the nation What if the priests did not know that he was Protector of the nation when his letters came into England but onely Protector of the English Colledge at Rome as his predecessour was intituled and neuer knowen by any other title as may appeare by the Bull of Pope Gregory 13. for the institution of that Colledge and the Thesis either in Philosophie or Diuinitie which were in the publike exercises dedicated vnto him Moreouer it is euident that this which this Card. Protector did hee did it by a delegation from his Hol. and not as a Protector and therefore it had beene
offendicula multa inueheret in Ecclesiam nostrem pacique funesta esset vehementer principi magistratibusque suspecta quod patribus Iesuitis alias atque alias inuasiones hostiles continuò machinantibus in regnum plus aequo tribueret quasi totum Clerum ijsdem subderet videbat ille arbiter nullam habere benè institutae Communitatis formam monstrique simile esse vt vnus pater Iesuita membrum vnius corporis caput fieret alterius c. That is to say This sodalitie besides the many impediments it brought into our Church and was incompatible with peace and vehemently suspected by the Prince and Magistrates in that it gaue more then was fit to the Fa. Iesuites who sundrie wayes busied themselues in hostile inuasions of our Countrey and as it were made all the Cleargie subiect vnto them the arbiter sawe that it had no forme of any well framed Communitie and that it was like vnto a monster that one Fa. Iesuite beeing a member of one bodie should bee made the head of another body in which some were who in regard of their more auncient order of Religion some in regarde of their degree of Doctorshippe some for their venerable age many for their wisedome learning and vertue farre his betters c. By which it may appeare to the indifferent Reader howe carelesse this Authour is what he sayth so he may make somewhat sounde for his purpose And to the ende hee might bring the Priestes into obloquie he will for a colour bring some two or three of their owne wordes and ioyne somewhat thereunto of his owne and then runne a while vpon that as in this place hauing thrust in those words Of them that liued vnder Rules in Wisbitch he maketh this Comment Great stumbling blockes that a few pious Rules of modest life in a fewe prisoners could bring into our whole Church Whereas the place here cited by this Authour giueth him no occasion to frame such a conceite but pleadeth the iudgement giuen against that sodalitie by him who was chosen arbiter in the cause And whereas he also affirmeth That if this sodalitie were suspected by the Prince it must needes be that the Priests had maliciously perswaded that it as also the institution of the Archpriest was not for Religion but for matter of state The Iesuites knowen practises against the State mentioned in the place which is cited by this Authour conuince that there was no such neede that the Priestes should vse any perswasions to the Prince or Magistrates and that no plot in gathering a head vnder a Iesuites direction could bee free from suspition as shall be shewed more at large where the Author shall find his place in the Apologie to giue other colour to the Iesuites actions In the 19. page vpon those words Dom. Standisium c. M. Standish who had giuen his name to be a Iesuite This Author inferreth a prety conclusion All are Iesuites with these men who are not of their faction the Archpriest and all in which to omit his folly how doth he shew in that place any principall deceit falshood or slander or not being able to gainsay that which the priests sayd how shamelesly or rather childishly doeth hee shift it In the 20 page there is exception taken against that which is mentioned of F. Weston his being taken dumbe and falling downe and it is called an impudent fiction refuted by authenticall testimonies of all the quiet prisoners in Wisbich and you must goe looke for this in the 6. Chapter of the Apol. where you may find it contrary if you can For answere to this we are to referre the Reader to the particular narration of the stirres in Wisbich In the 21. page the principall dece it falshood or slander is shewed in these wores Consilium iniuimus c. We tooke a counsel together for appointing prouosts and superiors ouer vs in opportune places of the kingdome c. It was death for this good fellow to go any further in the narration which here he doth calumniate for if he had added these words which are part of the sentence cited by him with an c. all which Prouosts and superiours should haue bene chosen by the free suffrages of the Priests his falshood would haue bene discouered which he sheweth here in these words This was the worke of their the priests association whereby a few busie and ambitious men tooke vpon them to be Counsellors of State without Commission or consent of the rest of the Clergie or licence of their superiours to appoint dignities to themselues and others at their pleasures and to make a new sedition And if the reader will vouchsafe to turne to that 21. page hee shall see that this author is little to bee credited in his relations and may wonder that he will so shamelesly behaue himselfe as euery indifferent man must condemne him of exceeding great falshood and direct intention to deceiue his reader And because he referreth his reader to the letters of the assistants and other proofes cap. 8. 9. there we will make our answere vnto them for so much as is there touched in this matter In the 23. page these words are cited Quid interea P. Parsonius c. What did F. Parsons in this meane space the Author incensor and actor of allour perturbations c. But nothing being in this place answered to that which in the 23. page is sayde against him we are not to stand vpon those other matters which are here mentioned It sufficeth that there is nothing conuinced of deceit falshood or slander to which ende the table maker brought this place out of the latine booke In the 26. page M. Blackwell is said to be slandered and that these were spiteful speeches against him Videns autem D. Blackwell c. M. Blackwell seeing this c. where in the Latine booke mention is made of a letter he writ to the Card Caietane the letter is out in print and whosoeuer wil take the paines to read it shall see that there is nothing but the truth set downe in the place here cited by this authour And whereas here it is vrged that he is named euery where without any reuerence at al they will hardly since him named but Master Blackwell which is as much reuerence as is due vnto him for any thing the Priestes know And if he be sometime called the Archpriest it is as much as this Authour giueth him as may be seene in many places Moreouer if there be any thing to the contrary in the 4 10 or 11. chap. of the Apologie it shall be there answered In the 27. page a principall deceit falshood or slander is noted where it is said Cum omnes c. Whereas all Iesuits almost in England be children of poore parents c. And to this what answer is here made Forsooth how manifestly false and shamelesse this is there needes no other proofe but to know the parties and to consider
and shewed how little it can make for the Iesuits All the other also here cited make as little to the purpose this present controuersie being long after the Cardinals death to wit whether the priests who would not be blinde obedient vpon the sight of Card. Caietane his letters for the institution of the Archpriest were schismatikes factious seditious rebellious fallen from Christ and his spouse excommunicated irregular witches and Idolaters and as Ethnicks and Publicans In which controuersie if any of those stand with vs who shewed themselues contrary to the Cardinals proceedings while he was seduced by the Iesuits and brought into dishonourable actions against his Prince countrey and friends what reason haue we to reiect their helpe And if they had bene as bad as heretikes in those actions why should we be charged as partners in that action more then any Catholike prince may be charged to be a fauourer of heretikes or miscreants who should haue any such ioyned with him in his armie either for loue or money when hee fighteth against some other Catholike prince vpon iniuries offered by the one to the other Those Noble men Gentlemen and others whilest they liued were ready to giue account of their actions in those times and some will yet perchance vpon this occasion say somewhat therin and the Cardinall might shewe himselfe very contrary vnto them in those actions and yet be very fauourable to the students in Rome towards the latter end of his life when time let him see those things in the Iesuits proceedings which either affection would not let him see before or little hope to amend them made him dissemble which perchance he did the rather because by the Iesuits meanes with the King of Spaine hee came to that preferrement which he held and could not so suddenly goe about to reforme what he saw amisse in their gouernment of the English Colledge and their generall cariage in English affaires The feares and doubts which F. Parsons shewed in his letter to M. Tho. Fitzherbert doe discouer that D. Stapleton dissembled with them as may be gathered by the bolde carriage of such as stand with them and their impatient violence which leaueth no doubt to any how they are caried and this doctor hauing bene once of their societie and going out from them might iustly feare that it would haue beene laid wholly in his dish if he had declared his mind in any publicke sort as he did often priuatly to such as he thought he might complaine vnto without harme to himselfe He was also a man of that marke and merit aboue all the rest of our nation as it was expected he should haue come to some great preferrement which hee was sure that his manifesting himselfe would haue hindered And this was also an occasion of Do. Barrets dissembling of whose minde there are many witnesses in England and of his lamentations for his opposing himselfe against such as he confessed were the onely men with whome hee durst deale confidently And although it pleaseth this deuout spirit to taxe such as he sayth are of the faction that they are a fewe of the meaner sort of our nation and that they carry their knowen notes of discredit with them if they be examined he who shall examine it shall find the cleane contrary both in England and out of England and that the Iesuits faction is held vp by such only as seeing the liberty which the Iesuits their adherents do vse against the priests or hoping of some reward by them do feare to displease them Which folly were it once remooued the Iesuits and their adherents would appeare to be sicut caeteri homines as other men are notwithstanding this pharisaicall cōtempt of the priests and perchance much worse euen to the equalling of the author of this Apologie who carieth his openly knowen notes of discredit for the which he was expulsed the Vniuersitie of Oxford and are not yet displayed as they may be hereafter as occasion may be giuen but are as much laughed at in priuate by some as his counterfeit holinesse is admired by other The iniurie which the priests are sayde to haue done to the Card. Borromaeo Archb. of Millan consisteth in their affirmation that he tooke the gouernement of one of his Seminaries in Millan from the Fathers This might be an iniury to the Fathers if the Card. did it without iust cause but being done the case is to be discussed whether it were iust or no. And the Cardinall being knowen to be a most deuout Bishop and not likely to haue bene caried away with any foolish passion in a matter of so great moment the priests haue layd the blame vpon the Iesuits their misgouernement And further they say wherein to wit because the Seminarie instituted by that deuout Bishop for the maintenance of able persons for the Church vnder his charge the Iesuits tooke their pleasure and choyse of such as they thought would be some credit vnto their own order and thereby indeuoured to furnish themselues rather then the Church for which the Seminarie was instituted And they who gaue this cause of the Iesuites their remooue were well acquainted therewith and with those Iesuites which were thus allured from that state of life for which they had maintenance of the Cardinall But let vs see how this author shuffeth off this matter The Fathers of their owne will and vpon their owne earnest suite left the said gouernment for the great labour and trouble thereof Good charitable people who challenge vnto them a particular vocation to bring vp youth and labour it in all places where they come as the best policie they can deuise to binde men vnto them without respecting how themselues are maintained for that purpose in the Countrey or the College as many other would and do in Vniuersities much better cheape where any Lecture is founded for all commers vnto it The second shift which is here vsed is farre worse although in an other kind for thereby they draw the Cardinal or themselues into discredit Forsooth the matter was the Cardinall would haue had those his schollers more bare in their dyet and apparell then the Fathers order in their Seminaries did permit seeing they were to be sent afterwards abroad to poore benefices among countrey people where they must fare hardly If the Cardinall did allow sufficient for them then had the Iesuites no cause to giue it ouer vnlesse perchance they could not content themselues with that which was sufficient If the Cardinall did not allow that which was sufficient then was he not of that wisedome of which he was reputed to be neither could any benefice in all his Diocesse be so beggerly as that it would not maintaine the Pastour in such diet as is ordinarily vsed in the Iesuites Seminaries neither could the Cardinall be so ignorant but he knew he might nor so carelesse of the credit of a pastour but that he would vnite two benefices in one where one
and most voices of the brethren And vnder another title afterward there is this rule When in any Countrey the multitude of the brethren are increased to the number of eight and cannot conueniently resort to the consultation of this confraternitie in the Countrey where the Father and the Assistants abide they shall at their owne discretions chuse a father c. But neither in the rules made in the South is mention of any more then one Superior And these diuers rules were made not that one form should be of force in the North another in the South but that one forme should be drawen for al England out of such rules as were thoght fit by the priests which liued either in the South or North parts of England And the forme which was drawen in the South was accepted by those in the North with some few rules added or altered And this was so well knowen abroad and confirmed also by that the two priests caried no other forme with them to Rome as I cannot marueile enough at the author of this Apologie that he will cite the rules which were made in the North yea and take his arguments although foolish from them against the priests as here hee doth fol 91. where first he argueth out of them negatiuely that there was no mention made at all in their constitutions that the same should be confirmed by his Holinesse as though the author of this Apologie did not know that Fisher vnder his oath at Rome had affirmed that the priests determined to send some to his Holinesse for this purpose and named the persons and if this testimony were not many are yet liuing who made their petitions to his Holinesse vnder their owne handes for the confirmation thereof And these petitions were taken from M Bishop and M. Charnocke among other their writings when they were apprehended at Rome by the Iesuites The second aduantage which this Authour would scrape out of those Rules of the North is that they left no appeale to Rome or other place and this he would prooue out of their Chapter as he sayth of Appellations and then he setteth downe almost all the Chapter in this manner That no appeale shall be made from the sentence of one company to them of an other Countrey but all the brethren shall content themselues with the iudgement of the Fathers and assistants or more part of the company where he shal be c. Thus farre in the Apologie Whereby he would proue that the priests would debarre appeale to Rome Can any man thinke his wits were at home is there any mention of any but of the seuerall companies vnder diuerse Fathers or Superiours here in England and how doth he drawe it to a debarring appeale to Rome But marke I pray you this fellowes falshood to helpe himselfe to make this foolish calumniatiō he hath cited the rule or decree as he calleth it but he cited it with an c. Whereby his Reader should vnderstand that somewhat did follow although he said not what And in that he would haue his Reader knowe thus much it is likely he knew it himselfe and what it was and moreouer that if he had set it downe he had discouered himselfe to haue bene a notorious calumniator And the indifferent cannot but note him for a very false fellow in his dealings The rule beginneth in this manner No appeale and so foorth as he set it downe vnto these wordes where he shal be and then it goeth on thus for the present vnlesse it seeme otherwise more conuenient by the most voyces of the company So that there is appeale left from those of one company to them of an other countrey if it be thought conuenient by the most of them And whereas he would hereupon inferre an absurditie against the Priests like to that which the Archpriest committed when he would not admit appeale to Rome he committeth as great folly as in any of the other For the Archpriest stood peremptorily in it in plaine termes that we could not appeale from him to Rome and this rule was onely for such as would in such maner voluntarily subiect themselues to their superiors And as it appeareth by the rule there was no mention of Rome But put the case that the priests had debarred themselues of appealing to Rome is it all one thing in this Authors conceit for a man to be content to part willingly with that which he hath and to haue it vniustly taken away from him If the priests had made such a Rule as that they would haue debarred themselues thereof was this any warrant for the Archpriest to obtrude such a matter vpon them against their wils hauing no such commission from any that could giue it vnto him which is also to be vnderstood in friuolous matters But the goodman must play at small game or els he must sit still That calumniation also is hereby answered which is layd to D. Bagshaw that he thought it not fit for them to be tied to Rules at Wisbich For the difference is manifest for that the Association was free for all who would and who would not might continue as they did without any impeachment either of same or what els soeuer those Rules at Wisbich were to be accepted of all so necessarily as the not accepting thereof was deemed by the rest a sufficient cause to make that scandalous schisme which was there made and remaineth as yet and to defame all those who would not subiect themselues to the Iesuits who were the deuisors and must be superiors also vnder the title of Agents Touching the detestable Memoriall here mentioned sayth this author drawen out and published c. Here is nothing to be said of this Memoriall more then that the Iesuits were the first publishers thereof in England so far as we can learne and translated it into English for women to see it and vnderstand it The contempt of Vniuersitie men and graduats of which the Iesuits are said to be accused in the Memoriall is not obscurely signified in this Apologie cap 6 fol. 76. where speaking of M. Doct. Bagsh thus the author sayth And all this stirre is to make roome for his Doctorship being a Doctor of Diuinitie and proceeding in Padua with the applause of the Vniuersitie And in this 7. Chap fol. 93. he putteth this limitatiō of the Iesuits their esteem of Vniuersitte men and graduats If their vertue answere to their degrees that is to speake the true English if they will bee wrought to be Iesuits or factious for them And whereas it is said that Iesuits are more hurtfull to Catholikes then heretiks let indifferent men giue their verdit after due considerations of the diuisions made by them And as for this author his certeintie that these articles of the Memoriall came from D. Bagshaw whom he here insinuateth to haue bene expelled the Colledge at Rome for his troublesome spirit with a reference to Card. Sega his visitation which is
was written the sixt of Iuly 1597. but what doth or can this concerne the priests comming to his Holines toward the later end of the yeere 1598 to deale about a matter which was not before the 7 of March in the same yere 1598 as appeareth by the date of the Cardinals letter Apologie ca. 8. fol. 104 There is also a piece of another letter of the same man to to the Cardinal Protector of the first of May 1598 which although it were written after that the Subordination was instituted yet it was written before that it was knowen in England for to our remembrance we had no knowledge thereof vntill it was May here with vs. But howsoeuer this was it was impossible that it could concerne the two priests their comming to his Holines for this was not so suddenly determined in England although vpon the first sight of the Cardinals letter the Archpriest was told that there was iust cause for them to goe to his Holinesse By this then it appeareth that D. Stapletons letters which were to Fa. Parsons and to the Protector could not induce his Holinesse to imprison the two Priests who came to deale about the Subordination Let vs now see what the second testimony auaileth him This testimony was of principall men who writ some moneths saith this author fol. 124. before these two messengers came ouer into Flanders he sayd France 120. but their negotiations in England were heard of and knowen and these principall men of whom the most principall standeth for the priests and is ioyned with them in affection and action in Rome at this present writ their letter to the general of the Iesuites vpon this voice which they heard when you doe iustice you shal make also peace a heauy saying for such as will bee prooued to haue done as great an iniury as may be by a publike diffamation of schisme and what not against Catholike priests without iust cause But what is this to the purpose how was his Holinesse vpon this letter resolued to imprison the two priests who were in the way to him for and concerning the Subordination which was made the Generall perchance of the Iesuits did shew this letter to his Holinesse and thereby the negotiations of these two and their fellowes came also to be knowen to his Holines all this goeth very currant But what if those men now become principall neither heard of these 2. priests as dealers in this action nor of any other not onely not in particular but neither in general What if they could not possibly heare that there was any Subordination knowen in England and much lesse that any did delay to admit thereof when they writ this letter to the Generall of the Iesuits How shamelesse will this author be iudged who would bring these principall men their letters as a motiue to his Holinesse to imprison these two priests before he would heare what they had to say This Subordination was made at Rome the seuenth of March in the yere 1598 and if the messenger had stridden a blacke horse to bring it into Englād yet could there not be any negotiations in England conueniently either by these two priests or others concerning the same in so short a time as that these 17 principall men vnlesse they were altogether attending as it were to haue entertained the same messenger in Flanders considered maturely of the negotiations which were in England could burnish vp a letter and dispatch it vpon the eighteenth of March in the same yeere 1598 as here is cited in the margent fol. 123. Now follow the letters of diuers zelous men When as this author saith these messengers were in their way indeed for the other were written especially those of the 17. principall men when the priests were in their negotiations before they set forward as it is said fol. 124. these men writ indeed very sharply and with such confidence as they might giue some suspition to a wise man that all was not well in England but yet there is no perswasion to haue the messengers cast into prison vntill they were heard a duetie which they might challenge if in no other respect yet at least for their trauaile in Gods Church for which they deserued a good opinion of the gouernours thereof The first here cited are from Doway 25. Octob. 1598. to the Protector to which some haue acknowledged their error in subscribing These letters doe not cleare Fa. Parsons for being the cause of his Holines resolution to imprison the two priests for in this Apologie it is confessed fol. 120 that his Holines was resolued vpon the 17. of October 1398. to cast them into prison for such date doeth the letter beare which F. Bellarmine now Cardinal is said to haue written to Fa. Parsons to informe him that his Holines so greatly misliked their troublesome fact that hee had told him that if they came to Ferrara he would cause them to be imprisoned If these then of the 25. of Octob. came too late to put such a resolution into his Holines head what shall wee say of these which came after for the next letters are from M. D. Worthington to the Protector and these beare date the 30. of October from Bruxels Next March D. Peerse who was the first in the ranke of the 17. principall men but now God knoweth what place he shall haue and among whom for that he is ioyned with the priests in Rome and in that action D. Caesar Clement that succeeded D. Stapleton in the office of assistance-ship to the Nuntius in Flanders in all English affaires a man that was neuer in England but to giue him his right the fittest man for that purpose as matters go and worthy to succeed D. Stapleton or any farre greater man then he in that kinde of managing English affaires D. Richard Hall three doctors but what these or other writ most earnestly and grauely to the same effect as the other did by al likelyhood this author knoweth not For as he saith he had not the copies of their letters when he writ this Apologie but hee met with a letter of M. Licentiat Wright deane of Cortrac in Flanders to the Protector which is here set downe in the Apologie wherein this deane hath litle cause to thanke this author who would discredit him so much as to set downe his iudgement of two priests whom he neuer saw And although his letter doe exceed the limits of all modestie yet doeth it not any whit auaile this author for proofe of that for which it is brought that is that his Holines was thereupon resolued to imprison the two priests for this letter beareth date 10. Nouembris 1598. as appeareth here fol. 126 which was a faire while after his Holines had that resolution as appeareth by F. Bellarmine now Card. his letter of the 17. of Octob. 1598. cited by this author fol. 120. yet goeth this fellow on very smoothly and not without great applause of the
in the margent of this sedition M. Collington and M. Charnocke by his owne confession He might better haue made this note in the margent The first finders out of this most wicked and seditious plot of the Iesuits M. Collington c. They as is said were first called and in post haste they were sent for and M. Heburne to giue their liking And we saith the Apologie repeating M Charnocks answere hauing read the Card. Protectors letters began to doubt not so much of the authoritie it selfe that is that the Cardinall had appointed such a thing for so doeth this Apologie confesse fol 129. that M. Charnocke acknowledged this order to haue bene appointed by Card. Caietane neither do M. Charnocke his letters of the 20 of February cited and abused by these fellowes proue that after he thought any other then that it was the Cardinals doing Notwithstanding that the Iesuits laboured to haue him write that it was the Popes order and would sometime make bold with this where the law was in their owne hands as of the good maner of procuring it They perceiued that it was got by surreptiō which is a sufficient cause to except against it wherby also it may appeare how ignorantly this fellow cumbreth his margēt where he hath made this note Ergo not doubting you are boūd to obey For first M. Charn doth not say that they had no doubt of the authoritie it selfe but that they doubted not so much of the authoritie it selfe as of the good manner of procuring it For they saw it euidently that it was an ordinance of the Cardinall vnder his hand and seale though in a priuate letter to M. Blackwell and his words were plaine Dum haec nostra ordinatio durauerit so long as this ordinance shall endure Yet knowing how this Cardinall was caried in our English affaires by the Iesuites it was neither fellony nor treason to thinke hee might stretch himselfe to pleasure them And if the matters had been handled with any indifferencie doubtles neither these two nor any other would euer haue called the matter in question but there being a notorious partiality descryed in this order and such as might be the ouerthrowe of our afflicted Church in England the Priests had reason to make some stop at the first discouery thereof as iustly they might haue done although they had not doubted at al but that it was ordained by his Holines appointment or by his Holinesse letters there being sufficient cause to perswade them that it was gotten by surreption which doth vitiate or make voyde his Holinesse letters as M. Collington proueth euidently in his first reason and consequently the priests were not bound to obey it and the lesse for that they prepared themselues to goe to Rome to deale with his Holinesse thereabout and in such manner as is set downe and acknowledged in this Apologie fol. 129. out of M. Charnockes examination And the partiality which was vrged by M. Charnocke as iustly feared by M. Blackwell is declared euery where by the priests to be this that the Iesuites who were the chiefe head of sedition and faction in England against the priests were now become their iudges and executioners in the shape of a Secular priest and no way subiect to any order which was pretended to haue bene taken for peace betweene them the priests and these to their iudgments seemed serious and graue causes not to yeeld themselues at the beginning which their not yeelding this authour tearmeth an opposition Here we see saith he how serious and graue the causes were of this opposition at the beginning and how at the first they did not doubt of the authoritie it selfe nor of the Popes will therein as after they haue pretended Where is this seene or where is any mention of any such perswasion that the Popes will was knowen therein or that the priests did not doubt thereof This fellow must needes borrow leaue now and then to play with his blind obedient and make them beleeue that they doe see that which himselfe doth not nor can see for in this answere of M. Charnocke there is nothing concerning the Pope but onely the Cardinall Protectors letters by which the authoritie was instituted by him and might haue bene thought to haue bene authentically done if he had any Commission from his Holinesse or not authentically done if he had none so that no Commission appearing the priests might iustly doubt thereof although not so much as of the other to wit the manner of procuring it which they might perceiue was by surreption And for this cause M. Charnocke sayd not that they doubted not at all at the first of the authority it selfe nor of the Popes will therein as this authour doth most falsely suggest but this onely we hauing read the Cardinals Protectors letters began to doubt not so much of the authority it selfe as of the good manner of procuring it as in the same page this authour himselfe setteth downe M. Charnockes answere But yet note another slippery part of this fellow He citeth M. Charnockes answere concerning what was done the first day that the authority was made knowen vnto them in which you see how he abuseth his Reader in proouing thereby the smalnesse of the number of the priests But he ceaseth not here for he concludeth in this manner We see also that the Priests could not bee many nor of great account that resolued this embassage to Rome And good sir how doe you see this Forsooth M. Charnocke said that the chiefe priests that dealt with him and M. Bishop were M. Collington M. Cope M Iohnson M. Monford and others and could not many be included in that word others nor men of great account if these that were named were of no great account were not this apparantly an odious maner of writing I could retort the phrase and shew that some of these that are named and others not named yet comprehended in this word others were such as for their merit and labours in Gods Church can hardly be matched by all the faction which is against them but we will leaue this fellow tumbling in his owne dirt and pleasing himselfe in his folly howsoeuer he displeaseth men of iudgement who haue often difficulties whether they may better lament him who by this continuance therein giueth an earnest peny that others lamentations will nothing profite him or laugh at him whose folly is without measure and still proceedeth from folly to folly But now that he hath properly let his Reader see that they could not be many nor of great account that resolued of the embassage to Rome he will prooue that the mission and commission was not authenticall because M. Bishop who was one of them that were sent affirmed that hee did not know who was the first authour of this mission nor why they two were chosen aboue the rest for this mission As though a matter might not be as lawfully taken in hand by one who
matters did not so well become a priest to a priest neither hath M. Charnocke so behaued himselfe but that his credit alone without any other witnesse may be thought as good as M Blackwels or this idle authors although he doth not enuie their worships calling But marke I pray you how this matter would be here salued The Archpriest denieth that euer hee sayd that they the fained instructions were expresly in his instructions from Rome By which it may be gathered that the Archpriest did at the least propose such matters as were not in his instructions which were sent from Rome But this is not the matter wherewith he is charged that he should vse these particular words but hee is charged directly that pretending to shewe the instructions which were annexed to his Commission hee shewed such as were not annexed thereunto And being taken in the manner he confessed asmuch And who seeth not what a poore shift this is the Archpriest denieth that he sayd they were expresly in his instructions who doubteth but that the man saith trueth when answering his neighbor who calleth for him vseth these words I say I am not at home although he be at home For although it be false that he is not at home yet it is very true that he sayth hee is not at home And with this iest doth this fellow salue this matter the Archpriest denieth that hee sayd that they were expresly in his instructions Who euer charged him that he should vse these words These poore shifts may blinde such as willingly will be blinde and other men will soone discouer the fallacy The accusation was and is that pretending to shew his instructions which his Commission mentioned to be annexed vnto it hee drew out false things which were neuer annexed to his commission and he was taken in the maner And this is it which both M. Charnocke and M. Colington will iustifie many more such goodly matters if need shall require where these poore trickes wil not serue to any purpose I say not thus or thus expresly Now follow certaine exceptions against some letters written by certaine priests in Wisbich vnto the Archpriest I haue not seene the copies to my remembrance and therefore can say nothing of them more then this that it is not incredible that the Archpriest would giue cause of sharper words then are there vsed But all serueth to prooue somewhat namely what course was held by the troublesome especially after M. Charnockes returne into England But there is not one worde what the masters of misrule did before M. Charnock returned into England or what cause they did giue of these troubles to wit the raysing of the slander of schisme and such vile imputations as the prisoners might accordingly haue written to the Archpriest in other termes then peripsema tuum There must not be a word of this matter which made all the stirre for sayth this fellow with shame enough ca. 8 fol. 115. of the other point of schisme we will not talke at all and wee are sory that euer it was mentioned or brought in question vnquiet people hauing taken occasion hereby to continue contention and to make more brables then were needfull How easie a matter had it been then for this author to haue solued this question proposed in this tenth chapter fol 148. Which part hath broken the peace since that he doth acknowledge that the bringing of schisme in question was the cause of this contention and could not be ignorant who brought it againe in question being tolde so often that the Iesuites did it and the Archpriest both before and after the peace was made and the Archpriest his letter was cited for proofe thereof in the booke to his Holines pag. 63 and in the booke to the Inquisition pag. 60 But this author must haue his Readers eares filled with other stories such as are impertinent to his question And when he thinketh that his Reader hath forgotten the matter which he proposed then he slinketh away and beginneth afresh with some other which he handleth as wisely But to make an end of this Chapter here are certaine letters inserted of F. Parsons exhorting to peace as though F. Parsons tricks were not knowen very well If this author could haue brought forth any of F. Parsons letters to his fellow F. Lyster or F. Garnet or F. Iones the Iesuits who were the chiefe mainteiners of that senselesse Libel of schisme against the priests to perswade them to retract their scandalous opinions to correct their forwardnesse in insuring Catholique priests to exhort them to make satisfaction for their vnchristian detractions such letters would haue bene for F. Parsons credit But to cite a letter or exhortation to the priests iniuried to haue peace what doeth it argue but an obdurate malice in him and a wicked desire that they should desist from that to which they were bound in conscience to wit the defence of their fame and the clearing themselues from such false but most wicked impostures of schisme rebellion and whatsoeuer a mischieuous head could deuise and spred abroad against them And so finally saith this author after all their former resistance and appeales aswell of D. Bagshaw and his fellows at Wisbich as of M. Charnocke and other abroad they ioyned in greater number vpon the 17. of Nouember last if all consented thereunto whose names are subscribed whereof we heare the contrary in some some one or two who had giuen their consents in generall but had not seene this particuler appeale yet afterward confirmed it and appealed againe for so much as there was any need In all which doing of theirs one thing is especially to be noted And what is that That they haue neuer procured any one of all their appeales to be presented hitherto or prosecuted in Rome as farre as we can vnderstand this last clause wil not helpe if the proposition be generall of all the appeales For M. Charnocks appeale was presented and prosecuted in Rome before this booke came foorth and this author could not be ignorant thereof if I am not mistaken in him which yet they ought to haue done within certaine moneths vnder paine that all is voyd if it be not done But how many are these certaine moneths The Lawyers say 13. moneths if we shall count them by the moneths and vpon iust cause 26. moneths from the Appeale within which time doubtlesse the author of this Apologie heard of the Appellants at Rome And Launcelot l. 4. Instit Iuris Canon de appellationibus cap. accidit affirmeth Yet a longer time might haue bene granted for the prosecution of an Appeale But as I thinke no man doeth now doubt but that the priests had intention to follow their Appeale and will giue this cause of their publishing of books pendente lite that is while the controuersies hang for that the Archpriest notwithstanding their Appeale denounced them to haue incurred the censures lost their faculties because they subscribed to
conceit that this their fault might be the defence of Catholike religion as though Ma. Bluet whose letter this is said to be did esteeme that a fault Is he not full fraught with most wicked malice that would driue such a conceit into his readers head against a venerable priest and one who hath suffered in the defence of the Catholicke faith before any Iesuite dared to come neere vnto England for all those proud vaunts that they were the men specially raised by God to ouerthrow Luther and his followers What M. Watson did in Scotland he is to answere it himselfe but doubtlesse he was not employed thither in any such affaires as this author affirmeth by any of the priests He hath spent time there as other priests haue to represse that wicked doctrine of the Iesuits that a man might locke vp his conscience after that he had heard masse and then goe to the protestants Churches Neither doe wee knowe what meaning any of those had to deale with the French king in any State matters whome this author so taxeth Hee who is so well acquainted with meanings wil perchance in his larger Apologie tell vs more newes thereof The stories of Alcimus and Simon and others who went to Demetrius and Apollonius and others here named can haue no place here vnlesse this companion doe compare his holinesse vnto Demetrius as hee compareth the priests to Aleimus and Simon For all the world is a witnesse for the Priests that they went to Pope Clement the 8. to seeke for iustice and that they sought not to any other for iustice in the controuersie betweene the Iesuites and them although they sought their princes fauour which they might lawfully doe and desire to enioy it as the Catholiques in the primitiue Church haue sometime done and doe pray vnto God duely for her prosperous raigne and that God will incline her heart to haue compassion vpon such her most loyall and faithful subiects as haue heretofore most vniustly ben condemned for the euill practises of a few busie fellowes The fourth consideration cōsisteth of twelue special points which I feare will lie heauy vpon their soules who are guilty of these stirres The priests make no doubt of the iustice of their cause And while this matter doth hang in question this Apologie well considered and aduisedly read doth it selfe very much preiudice their cause in whose defence it pretendeth to be written If it shall be hereafter iudged that the priests were schismatikes because they did not accept of the new authority before they saw a Breue from his Holines without doubt they haue much to answere for But if contrariwise it shal be iudged that they were not schismatikes then must the Iesuits and their adherents be the men who haue been the cause of all the euill which hath come vpon this slander raised by them against the priests And vpon this also dependeth the fift consideration for if it be proued that the Iesuites and their adherents did iniurie the priests in so high a degree and a publique infamie of schisme c. then will it not auaile them to say that the priests should haue considered that it was a time of persecution and that they shuld haue suffred this infamie rather then haue stirred in their own defence If this doctrine of his might passe currant in temporal warres there would indeed quickly be an end therof for by this rate euery mā that is wickedly inclined might murther his fellow without any contradiction for feare of endangering the campe if the vniustly assaulted should seeke to defend himselfe This companion should haue remembred that the priests sent to his Holinesse to whom it belonged to determine this controuersie and that they haue not stirred in any thing more then in procuring that the quarrell might come to his hearing For which purpose they iudged it most necessary to make the world acquainted therewith hauing once before bene frustrated thereof by reason of their ouer great confidence in the iustice of their cause onely In the sixt consideration this authour taketh his pleasure in discrediting the priests who would not consent that the Iesuits the Archpriest with the rabblement of their most wicked and seditious adherents shall esteeme of them as of schismatikes soothsayers Idolaters Ethnickes and Publicanes And he would perswade his Reader that they are not onely few in number but greene in credit without scruple of conscience what they vtter and therefore not to be trusted in matters which concerne the liues states and honors of men who shall fall out with them yea his Reader must vnderstand that those who haue yeelded to the enemie in one or two steps could neuer go backe againe but must yeeld in greater matters and discouer all they knowe against their brethren if not more He speaketh as clerklike as if he had searched the greatest secrets of his factious adherents which will one day perchance come foorth and the parties named who haue done asmuch as he mentioneth But as for the appellant priests he cannot charge them iustly that they haue yeelded in any such thing If any priest hath yeelded any further then to thinke himselfe highly fauoured that there hath beene notice taken of his faith and loyalty towards his Prince and countrey let the priest be made knowen and he shal be esteemed of accordingly by the priests and if no man haue yeelded in any other matter then is the Apologie-maker a notorious wicked imposter The last consideration is of the necessitie of vnion which is handled with exhortations vnto it and disswasions from diuision and of the facilitie of making it againe among vs and to shew that there is a great facilitie he will aske his discontented brethren that shew themselues so mightily inraged what is there which they would haue in this matter who vexeth or vrgeth them so as they may not liue quietly if they would A couple of reasonable questions and therefore this answere is made vnto them First they would haue that which the Iesuits the Archpriest and all their seditious adherents are bound vnder paine of eternall damnation to perfourme that is that these doe make restitution vnto the priests for those most wicked slanders of Schisme sedition rebellion c. which are contained in Father Lister the Iesuites booke and their owne most malitious stomackes without any iust cause giuen vnto them by the priests Secondly they haue prooued that the Iesuites and Archpriest with all the seditious followers doe vexe them so much as in them lieth and doe vrge them so as they cannot liue quietly by them but in euery corner there is some of this sedition to warne all good Catholikes to flie them not to giue them any entertainement or reliefe And all this is to driue them either to perish or to belie their owne soules with the great dishonour both of God and his Church And as for the Archpriests good nature here specified it is very ridiculous He recalled his
of Pope Boniface the 8. Iniunct de electione and was afterward extended by Iulius the 3. to such as is our present Prelacie And all the scandall which hath growne out of this contention must be answered by those who most iniuriously did driue the priests to so hard a choice and if the priests haue in the prosecution of their iust defence bin assisted by such as in some other respect do disclaime from them and other their actions the Iesuits and their adherents cannot so cary it away with saying that they haue combined themselues in secret with the knowen enemies and aduersaries of our Catholicke faith But they must proue that they haue made an vnlawfull combination it being euident to the world that there may be as wicked and vniust combinations betweene men of the same religion as betweene men of diuers And as it hath bene answered before the priests haue iustified and cleared themselues sufficiently by their apparance at Rome from all suspition of euill dealing or other combinations then which Catholike priests might make and thinke themselues infinitely beholding to their gouernours that they are accepted of by them in that degree in which they are But listen how faire as false a tale he telleth his reader The Apologie therefore sayth this author written by vs was to stay somewhat this violent course if it might be by laying open quietly and modestly the true grounds of all these stirres and perturbations and that not by inuectiues exaggerations or inuentions of our owne as our brethrens books doe but rather by calme gentle and modest narration yea with the greatest loue and compassion of our hearts alledging alwayes most authenticall proofes for that we say speaking also the same in the best and most temperate maner we could and pretermitting many things that might be more odious if they had beene vttered and of this wee make Iudges the readers themselues that shall haue perused the same or may hereafter It is very strange that indifferent readers cannot see any of this in the Apologie If we shall trust to M. Doct. Ely to whom the Apologie was sent by a principall man of the Iesuits faction to be read wee shall finde by the notes which hee made thereupon that the true grounds of all these stirres are not handled in the Apologie but a foule stirre made with much impertinent stuffe full of innectiues exaggerations and inuentions of his owne and his fellow partners in this businesse and no proofes but a fewe of their owne letters a most ridiculous manner of proceeding whereas the priests haue brought their proofes out of the originals of their aduersaries letters and writings published by them and this dealing is also discouered in the reply to the Apologie how this authour in most intemperate manner and most odious termes seeketh the disgrace of the priests for want of other meanes to wrecke himselfe vpon his aduersaries who haue laid too sure and firme a foundation for him to mooue and vnlesse a man will be most wilfully blind hee may very well perceiue the distemperature of this brainsicke companion where he tearmeth the priests children of iniquitie libertines and chargeth them with ambition enuy hatred contention malice prink malediction and other like His contemptible speeches also doe argue little modesty in him but if he should say that he had written no Apologie at all his absurd faction must beleeue him although they see him write it and haue it in their hands so religious are our newe illuminated Catholikes become if their guide tell them the tale But now sayth he since the writing of the sayd Apologie some other matters haue fallen out which doe inuite vs to write againe and what are those forsooth our discontented brethren haue set foorth two other books and put them also in print intituling the one The hope of peace by laying open such manifest vntrueths as are diuulged by the Archpriest c. Consider you how full of hope this way may be to peace I haue considered of it and I iudge it a most effectuall meane for peace to haue falshood discouered and the doubts or difficulties laide open which were before shuffled vp in such sort as the stirres brake forth againe presently after without giuing so much respite as to say there was a peace concluded The other in Latine whose title beginneth thus Relatio compendiosa turbarum c. A compendious relation of troubles c. But now good sir what of these wherein doe these two bookes trouble you will you heare his griefe he hath tolde you so many idle tales in his answere to the two former bookes that hee hath none left to bestow vpon the answere to these and therefore hee will make quicke worke with them and to beguile his deuoted the more cunningly he beginneth to tell them a tale of a Breue of the 17 of August 1601. which he pretendeth here that hee had not seene it when hee writ this Preface yet he would not but his reader should conceiue that he was very perfect in it for he declareth that there is a full decision of the cause in controuersie determining all points that haue beene or may be in question among vs or betweene our brethren and their Superiour or any bodie else But as yet could no man euer say that the priests were cleered from schisme thereby or condemned as schismatickes and how then are all points determined that haue bene or may be in question or how are any matters determined which were put vp in the appeale to his Holinesse nay the appeale it selfe is not admitted although the Archpriest did that which his Holines could not without griefe relate as these words of the Briefe import Quod dolentes referimus neither is there any one worde of the Iesuites or their disorders once touched but in a very fauourable manner that most wicked and seditious libell which they writ against the priests is onely suppressed and herein doe some of them most insolently glory This Breue also is prooued in this preface both by the date thereof and otherwise that it was gotten by the information of the one part only and how then could any controuersie be ended as it ought to be for it beareth date 17. of August 1601 which was long before that the priests arriued at Rome although they were there long before they were bound to appeare in the prosecution of their appeale as all men know who know any thing in the common lawes which allow two yeeres to the Appellants and when his Holinesse wrote the same as though his Holinesse wrote it he had not vnderstood saith this author of any of those scandalous bookes written and printed partly before and partly since by our discontented brethren If then he neither spake with the appellants nor did see any of their bookes dedicated to himselfe or the holy office of the Inquisition by whom could he be informed in their affaires or can any man of sense imagine but that
there was most vnchristianlike dealing that his Holinesse must be perswaded to shuffle vp matters of so great moment in our Church to whome were presented in the priests their appeale most euident proofes of the Iesuites and the Archpriest their disorders in the managing of our Church affaires And as for the style in which his Holinesse is sayd to haue written this latter Breue we leaue it to others to scan who haue list thereto and can vnderstand how great the iniuries haue bene and are still offred vnto Catholike Priests without any one word of satisfaction to be made therfore to them who haue bene iniured and let men of learning who haue read or hereafter may read the priests their bookes to his Holinesse and the Inquisition iudge whether it was not most necessary for the priests to publish in their owne defence and the priests will not be their owne Iudges whether they haue done or doe still as they may in conscience doe in publishing vntill their fame be restored which was vniustly taken away by the Iesuites in their seditious treatise of schisme and the Archpriest his pretended resolution from Rome and the controuersie decided which hath bene the cause of all these troubles for vntill this matter be fully ended and the Catholikes satisfied that the priests did as become Catholike priests to doe there will be hope that his Holinesse will not debarre the priests of such meanes as the lawe of Nature alloweth them in the purging of themselues of such crimes as their silence must needes argue a guiltinesse in and their owne consciences tell them they must vnder grieuous sinne free themselues from them But marke I pray you what deuises this fellow doth vse to haue the priests forget the abuses which were offered vnto them by the Iesuites and their faction And for himselfe his Holinesse seeing that the chiefe complaint and offence and petra scandali as it seemed was about the name of schisme and schismatikes he is saide to haue taken that wholly away in this cause both the matter and name it selfe See how he would haue his reader to thinke that this controuersie was about certaine names as though there was neuer any reall schisme laid to their charge Were the Iesuits such blocks as that they would for certaine names exclaime in this manner against the Secular priests Harken O ye factious ye are rebels ye are excommunicated ye are fallen from the Church ye are nothing better then Soothsayers and Idolaters and as Ethnickes and Publitanes besides the terrours of eternall damnation Were the Catholikes so barbarous that for certaine names they would in this time of persecution thrust Catholike priests out of their doores and some with most impudent faces some like eaues-droppers runne or creepe about to diswade the Catholikes from harbouring them or giuing them any maintenance But let vs see how his Holinesse is said to take away the name and matter it selfe in this Breue forsooth forbidding any bookes treatises or writings to be made read or held thereof and about that controuersie This is a faire taking away of a matter let vs then suppose that there be no more bookes treatises or writings made read or held hereof and about that controuersie I aske whether the Priests were schismatikas or no or what is this after-prouidence or order to the purpose for matters past If the priests had bene as wickedly disposed as the Iesuites and had procured an infamy to haue runne farre and neere against them without iust cause as this of Schisme against the priestes hath bene prooued to haue bene most vniustly spread abroad how could they thinke themselues cleared of any such slander only by an after-suppressing thereof or how could they thinke that thereby any satisfaction were made vnto them But gladly would this authour haue it so that the priestes being asked the cause of these present stirres might be debarred of giuing the true cause thereof for then might their aduersaries iustly triumph against them as troublesome people and clamarous and that they had busied themselues they knewe not why or wherein Had these Iesuites and their adherents halfe that valor in them which they would be thought to haue they would not for very shame indent with their aduersarie that he must come to the field without his armes and themselues armed from the head to the foot or were they men of that wisedome of which their followers take them to be they wold neuer haue committed so great a folly as to leaue no other hope of helpe for themselues then to procure that their aduersarie must bee forbidden to pleade for himselfe If it be true as their Libels will prooue it that they accused Catholike priests of schisme why should any priest be afraid to say that he was in such maner accused And if for quietnesse sake the name must be auoided why for quietnesse sake should not the course be altered which was taken against Catholike priests when the Catholike Laitie was in that manner seduced by the Iesuites to vse that sinfull name when they named or spake of Catholike Priests But it is no matter perchance howe priests be abused by the new illuminated so that they be not hereafter named Schismatickes and therefore this authour professeth that he procured to auoid it in his Apologie though not knowing of this expresse prohibition For saith he indeede the thing it selfe did euer mislike and grieue vs. Weladay weladay what thing was that which misliked and grieued you was it the wickednesse which was committed in the slandering so many Catholike priestes as would not contrary to the Canons of holy Church and vpon many iust reasons sacrifice to an Idoll who how well soeuer it was meant vnto him by him who had authority had notwithstanding no authority at that time at which he challenged it as hath bene euidently proued in the priests their bookes did you euer mislike that Catholike priests should be contemned and dispised by euery factious and seditious companion who vpon hope of some gaine thereby would fit your eares yea and your hearts with a placebo without any regard of them to whom they owed loue and duetie harken I pray you what it was which misliked and grieued this fellow that so much contention and falling out should be about a matter in the aire where no man was named in particular This then was it which grieued this good fellow that the priests would not be called and vsed like Schismaticks but would proue themselues to be Catholike priests and to haue discharged themselues in all points as became Catholike priests But this seemeth very strange that Schisme against which there are so grieuous lawes in Gods Church and against which F. Lyster the Iesuit and his fellowes the Archpriest and all his faction inueyed so bitterly and seduced the Laity in such sort as they did as it were schismatically make a diuision in prayer and communication and Sacraments euen from their dearest friends
and vsed themselues most ingratefully toward their spirituall fathers should now become no more then a matter in the aire where saith this fellow no man was named in particuler And this last clause happily is true for that they were nicknamed and that in particuler and not onely pointed at by euery one of the Iesuits faction but thrust out of the houses of those Catholicks who had drunke of the Iesuits poyson and were particulerly also decyphered in that most wicked treatise of schisme which was diuulged by the Iesuits the Archpriest and the rest as may appeare by that which is said in that treatise Paragraph 6 num 10. Adextremum in suum sempiternum dedecus legatos factiosos ad Pontificem factiosi isti destinarunt That is to say At the last these factious haue to their eternall dishonour sent factious ambassadors to the Pope And in the next paragraph are the crimes of these factious set downe vnder this title Factiosorum crimina the crimes of the factious Which are these Ye are Rebels ye are schismaticks and are fallen from the Church and spouse of Christ c. Prety names and so he goeth forward with such like And can his reader thinke that a Iesuit would rage in this maner against an aduersary in the aire or that the particularities were not sufficiently set downe by which all men had notice who they were that were held for schismaticks when the two priests were knowen that were sent to his Holines and many of them who sent them or by whose consent they went Can any man thinke that these fellowes had either wit or honesty who would in action omit nothing which might further the infamy or misery of Catholicke priests and in words pretend that the matter was a matter in the aire as here it is said or as the Archpriest affirmed in his letter to his Assistants the 23. of Iune 1601 against which letter the hope of peace was written a matter of opinion and therefore not worthy to make a matter of coÌ„tention which part soeuer was true So doeth it please these new illuminated to oppresse their brethren and to make a sport of their miseries and most absurdly condemne themselues of want of al honesty and charitie who in a matter of so small moment as they doe make shew would enter into so desperate courses and trouble our otherwise too much afflicted Church But since that the matter and name of schisme is taken away I will not vse it but in such case as of necessitie it must be vsed and necessitie as men say is not subiect to any Law neither can I thinke that the priests being demanded the cause of their griefe are forbidden by any Breue to say that they were most vniustly both named and vsed like schismaticks neither can their aduersaries easily perswade them vnto it what holines soeuer they doe pretend or strict charge out of the Breue of the 17. of August 1601 of which Breue this author not hauing seene it as he pretendeth vndertaketh to relate not only the contents but also some particuler sentences which he thinketh do make most for his purpose and thus he goeth forward in his Preface The principall points of this Breue as they are written to vs are these First that his Holinesse hauing read and perused the Appellation of our brethren made vpon the seuenteenth day of Nouember 1600 though not to this day sent or presented from them as we are most certainely enformed but onely from the Archpriest against whom it was made after due deliberation hee admitteth it not but wholly annulleth it Here is one main point of the Breue his Holinesse hauing blamed the Archpriest for his proceeding as may appeare where these words are inserted Quod dolentes referimus which we relate saith the Pope with griefe yet notwithstanding doth not admit the Appeale yet doth he not annullate it and if vpon perswasion of such as are loth to haue it prosecuted he hath been induced to haue all matters slubbered vp as once before they were there is no doubt to be made but when he shall haue heard both parts speake which is requisite to all Christian iustice he will giue that satisfaction which a tender father cannot deny to his oppressed children who haue alwayes borne that honourable respect vnto that Apostolike Sea that if an Archdeuill had bene appointed their superiour they would haue accommodated themselues so farre as they might without dishonouring God betraying his Church or preiudicing their owne selues yet would they haue sought as now they haue done with all submission for reliefe of the like miseries or greater if they could haue bene subiect to greater But the Breue being made as here it is confessed before his Hol. saw any of the priests their bookes also before he heard the priests as may appeare by the date thereof it is no great marueile that the Breue runneth in these termes it doth yet is it somewhat strange and perchance neuer had any president that the priests are commended who receiued the Archpriest before they did see the Popes letters and that the other are discommended or checked these hauing done no other then they were bound to doe by the lawes of holy Church and those other most contrary thereunto for proofe whereof I thought it fitte to set downe the extrauagant of Pope Boniface the eighth which doth conuince as much as I haue sayd Iniuncâ—…e nobis debitum seruitutis exposcit vt qui ad reformandos in Clero mores actus prout nobis ex alto permittitur solertiùs intendimus ibi praecipue reformationis accommodae remedium apponamus vbi maius respicimus periculum imminere That is Our office requireth of vs that we who by Gods permission doe attend more diligently to the reformation of the Clergie doe there especially put remedie of conuenient reformation where we see most danger at hand And then he proceedeth to tell what this great danger is and setteth downe the remedy First therefore hee beginneth thus with the danger Sanè quam periculosum existat quod aliquis in officio dignitate vel gradu fore se asserat pro tali etiam habeatur nisiprius ipse quod asserit legitimis ostenderit documentis tam ex ciuilibus quà m ex canonicis institutis colligitur euidenter Asserenti namque cum mandatis principis se venisse credendum non est nisi hoc scriptis probauerit nec similiter creditur se asserenti legatum Nunquam enim Apostolicae sedis moris fuit absque signatis apicibus vndecunque legationem suscipere Sed nec dicenti se delegatum sedis eiusdem creditur vel intenditur nisi de mandato Apostolico fide doceat occulata c. Quod autem in illis qui se Episcopos vel superiores Praelatos aut etiam Abbates Priores seu alios monasteriorum rectores quocunque nomine censeantur appellant sit discussio celebris diligens facienda luculenter apparet
ashamed to publish it vnto the world in this maner So as now those matters being thus declared determined by his Holines we hope that euery good Catholicke man and especially our brethren that are also Gods Priests will enter into themselues c. The like boldnesse doth this Author vse and libertie in the next sentence where he wisheth the good Catholike man and especially his brethren to ponder well the absurditie of spirit and speech proceeding thereof discouered in those their later bookes beyond all measure vnfitting for men of our vocation that is to say the booke to the Inquisition and The hope of peace against which two bookes this Appendix is written and because he will seeme to say nothing but what he meaneth to proue this answer saith he shall principally consist in laying before them their owne sayings in these bookes with a word or two of aduertisement to make more deepe and full reflexion thereof Now then it resteth that he performe asmuch and that he deale both honestly in relating the words out of these bookes and charitably in giuing his aduertisements The first of these later bookes which he taxeth for absurditie of spirit and speech is intituled The hope of peace by laying open such doubts and manifest vntrueths as are diuulged by the Archpriest in his letter or answere to the bookes which were published by the priests But before he toucheth it he discouereth a little of his owne spirit and speech which whether it be not more absurd then that at which he carpeth an indifferent Reader may iudge while he chargeth his brethren as he termeth them with fond passionate proceedings in these their distracted agonies In this title are 5. things noted First that it is a cōtrary meanes to make or hope for peace to impose on the Archpriest and diuulge against him calumniations of so manifest vntrueths which can neuer be prooued Secondly that the Archpriest is here named by contempt without any reuerence or respect at all Thirdly that there is mention of doubts the Archpriest hauing no doubt in the points he touched in his letter Fourthly that the Archpriests letter is tearmed an answere to the former two bookes Fiftly that they call themselues the priests being but a fewe diuided men frrom the rest whose doings are vtterly misliked and detested by the better and greater part of our Clergie To the first replie is made that it is the most ordinary and surest meanes to make or hope peace to open doubts and vntruethes which is perfourmed in The hope of peace without imposing any thing vpon the Archpriest but what is there proued and this author himselfe thought so well of those meanes himselfe as in the preface he tooke occasion to hope rest quietnesse peace and obedience because as he sayd these matters were declared and determined by his Holinesse and there is no man can doubt but that the cause of this second diuision was the not laying open of such doubts and manifest vntrueths about the slander of schisme which if it had been determined when the first Breue came those wicked proceedings of the Archpriest and his seditious adherents had neuer ministred any occasion to make a second Breue To the second there is this reply made that if these words the Archpr. imply a contempt then he is very often cōtemptuously vsed by the author of this Appendix both in the preface and the discourse where we reade the said words The Archpriest yea sometime concerning the Pope himselfe the Popes Breue the Popes authoritie and where speech is of the Prouinciall and Generall of the Iesuits fol. 17. Fa Parsons letter is cited wherein there is no more reuerence and respect then this the Prouinciall and Generall themselues which who will dare to say are named by contempt To the third replie is made that although to men of sense there is nothing in the Archpriests letter which should moue any doubt yet the letter being caried about and presented to the simpler sort there are many things which might mooue doubts in them and particularly in the very first beginning the Archpriest doth shew some doubt where he sayth speaking of the bookes perhaps neuer meant to bee presented to him his Holines And the fourth principall point which he toucheth is touched as a matter in doubt for it is sayth he speaking of the supposed schisme but a matter of opinion and therefore not worthy to make a matter of contention which part soeuer was true To the fourth I answere that the Archpriests letter is not absolutely called an answere to the bookes but a letter or answere as may be seen in the title of the booke but if it had been called an answere it was so christned before this booke was written and the Archpriest himselfe vseth the same word for not farre from the beginning of his letter thus we reade and therefore sayth he no other answere shall be sent now but this To the fifth I answere that they vsed the name of priests to distinguish betweene the Iesuits and them the controuersie being principally betweene them as may appeare by the groundworke of all this controuersie to wit the slanderous tongues and pennes of the Iesuits in the infamie of schisme Secondly if the controuersie shall be sayd to be onely among the priests the name of priests will most fitly be applyed to them who haue behaued themselues as became priests and the fewnes of the number can be no barre vnto them howsoeuer their doings are misliked and detested by the greater part of the Clergie which part if it were the author of this Appendix as it seemeth content to beare the name it might with more humilitie haue left out these wordes speaking of themselues the better part After that he hath canuassed the title of the booke hee descanteth vpon the Scripture which is prefixed vnto it Veritatem tantum pacem diligite that is trueth onely and peace doe you loue and he telleth his Reader that the priests do impugne peace and trueth and this latter point hee prooueth because the booke is said to be imprinted at Frankfort by the heires of D. Turner whereas sayth he the booke is knowen to haue bene printed at London by the fauour of the Bishop and permission of his Purseuants This argument hath beene often solued before and the folly thereof discouered it being an vsuall matter among honest men if Fa. Parsons may be counted an honest man to set out bookes as printed in one place which are printed in another and the thing it selfe neither being of that qualitie that it can induce any man into error and no iust cause wanting why such a point should be concealed It was neuer heard of before the absurditie of this spirit appeared that such exceptions were taken against a booke Saint Peter did in a manner date his first Epistle from Babylon Salutat vos Ecclesia quae est in Babylone the Church sayth he ending his Epistle which is
they are here challenged to M. Blackwels owne conscience where this poore shift will not helpe him neuer sayd that M. Blackwell had such a shift at that time but being taken in the falsifying his instructions or propounding other instructions in place of such as he said were annected to his Commission simply confessed the fraude adding that indeed some of them were of his owne making and all this story of a vertue from Rome was deuised afterward and set out for a poore satisfaction for his former falshood For if he had had al the authoritie in the world by vertue whereof hee might haue made instructions yet was it a false tale to say that instructions made in England were made in Rome or annected to his Commission which he pretended to haue receiued from Rome In the 7. leafe this fellow raileth at the hope of peace because there are not other accusations mentioned against the Archpr. as though the poore man had not ynough of one and in this his absurditie of spirit and speech he telleth in a parenthesis a most egregious knowen fitten for saith he it seemeth they M. Collington and M. Charnocke were sent to him M. Blackwell of purpose to catch him in his words And all the towne rung of it that M. Blackwell had conuented M. Collington and M. Charnocke vpon which speech M. H. H. one of the first Lay factious was called the Sumner for that he was the man who by M. Blackwels appointment hunted vp and downe to bring M. Collington and M. Charnocke vnto him as after two dayes seeking he did but the new illuminates must beleeue all things which this companion vttereth And this much for his parenthesis Now concerning the principall matter here handled this fellow is as false in repeating it For thus he telleth his tale About an hereticall proposition said to be vttered by him in that he told them that they could not appeale from him in some points The priests haue affirmed that M. Blackwell notwithstanding that he was diuers times admonished by M. Collington and M. Charnocke of the danger thereof persisted in this proposition that the Priests could not appeale from him to the Sea Apostolick and these wordes in some points are foisted in by this author and kindnesse threatned vpon the priests that they should say that hee said so whereas if he had he had said more then trueth hauing no colour therefore because he had no cause subdelegated vnto him nor he put in any authoritie to iudge any matter with this clause Appelatione remota But this helps to gall the new illuminated as also that contemptible conclusion and laying all other arguments proofes and probabilities aside will ponder onely but the difference betweene the accused and the accuser in this case shall quickly satisfie himselfe for M. Collington and M. Charnocke were then knowen to be two honest priests and M. Blackwell was but one at the most and it will be apparantly knowen that they haue patiently suffered much iniury for their mainteyning a iust quarrell and he will be conuinced to haue bene a long time an intruder or an vsurper and afterward an abuser of his authoritie when he had it against them without iust cause when they shal be cleared from Schisme rebellion and disobedience which he and his adherents haue most malitiously if not ignorantly obiected and caused them to be persecuted therefore In the same leafe this poore fellow inculcateth his Hol. confirmation of this authority as though that were a conuincing argument that there was trueth vsed either for the setting vp thereof or the mainteyning of it whereas it is well knowen to those who will know ought in these matters that his Holines may be misinformed and thereupon do that which may be afterward recalled as no doubt this will be which is vrged in the same lease out of the second Breue of the 17. of August 1601. Sanè vestro superiori vos submittere atque ei obedire debeatis Truly you ought to haue submitted your selues to your Superior and to haue obeyed him For as I haue before shewed he was at that time no other then an intruder vntill he had his confirmation from the Sea Apostolicke and he was to be punished for his audaciousnes and al who receiued him at that time and since the matter hauing bene examined by the Cardinals of the Inquisition 20. Iuly 1602 the priests are cleared from disobedience In the 8. leafe he citeth two sentences out of the hope of peace which tend to this effect that the testimony of one Cardinall doeth not bind in conscience to beleeue a thing preiudiciall to a third but he answereth not one of those authors which are there cited for proofe hereof pag. 32. and 33. He telleth also his reader that when the first Breue came the priests seemed to accomodate themselues for a time yet soone after they brake forth againe and fell to writing and examining the said Cardinals letters more then before reiecting and discrediting the same with all maner of contempt and so they doe now in these later Libels as though his Holines had neuer allowed or confirmed them But he concealeth the cause of his writing which was the Iesuits reuiuing the slander of Schisme and the Archpr. his furthering thereof with a resolution pretended to come from Rome to that purpose which wickednes of theirs did driue the priests to declare the state of the question as it was before the Breue came and to proue that they were not Schismatickes in that time in which they were falsly said to haue bene such and in this doing they were to abstract from the Popes Breue whose after comming could not make the former cause better or worse except only in this respect that it conuinced that the Archpr. was an intruder who would exercise any authoritie to which he was elected or deputed by the Sea Apostolicke before he had his letters from the said Sea in confirmation thereof And it may appeare very euidently because in that Breue there are not any such wordes as the Iesuits and Archpriest doe often vrge Valida ab initio that is that these things concerning the authority were of forâ—e froÌ„ the beginning but valida existere saith the Breue fore That is to say now and hereafter to be of force as may be seene in the first Breue which beareth date the 6. of April 1599. In the ninth leafe he citeth a sentence out of the 34. page out of the which he noteth a restraint of the protectors authoritie to the court of Rome and also authoritie to demurre vpon the Popes letters for the first sayth he they say that the office of a Protector stretcheth not it selfe any further then the Court of Rome which they prooue by the wordes of the Popes Breue it selfe Nationis Anglicanae apud nos Apostolicam sedem Protector that is Protector of the English Nation with vs and with the Sea Apostolike And to helpe
blinde obedient in this maner By this then saith he and other letters that came to his Holines as you must suppose or to the Protector he shold haue added or to the generall of the Iesuits or to Fa. Parsons for all these here related are to some of these and not one to his Holines nor all to the Protector nor about these matters as in their places it is confessed in the Apologie about this time and were related to his Holines by him his Holines being all this while at Ferrara and the Cardinall at Rome or at some place of recreation in those parts euery man may see whether he had iust cause to be mooued or no and to resolue to restraine them at their arriuall you must vnderstand at Ferrara from whence Fa Bellarmine now Card. is said fol. 120. to haue certified Fa. Parsons by his letter of the 17. of October that the Pope had told him that if they came to Ferrara he would cause them to be imprisoned but much more when after 17. or 18. dayes stay in Rome as before hath bene said they could not be induced by the Protectors perswasion to any quiet course at all That which was before said was said fol. 121. which must be one day vnsaid for there he affirmeth that the Card. Caietan and Burgesius said and did many things to the Priests which are most falsly related For the Cardinal Burgesius entertained them very friendly and being certified vpon his earnest request set on by Fa. Parsons to know it at that time what was the cause of their cōming to Rome he promised them according to their request to procure them audience before they should be iudged which they did the more earnestly request for that they had vnderstood by Fa. Parsons who was then immediatly departed from the Cardinall but was before certified that the two priests attended his departure that his Holines was incensed against them nothing els passed betweene the Card. Burgesius and them at that time and after this they went to the Card. Caietan so soone as they could after that they vnderstood of his returne to the citie and he was also very importunate to know the cause of their comming to Rome which when they discouered hee seemed to be much troubled especially when they talked of the Subordination as his fact yet concluded thus with them that they should bring in writing what they had to say concerning the Subordination the appurtenances to which they accorded offering to haue the matter as belonging properly to him ordered by him if so it could be without troubling his Holines therewith and requesting his furtherance in such other matters as were onely in his Holines to graunt And thus they departed with resolution to returne to the Card. with their difficulties in writing and agreed with one who should haue written for them the copy which they were to present to the Card. but they were intercepted by the Iesuits and Sbirri of which F. Parsons was the chiefe leader And this was al which passed betweene the Card. Caietan and them as the Card. well knoweth and this was vpon the feast day of S. Thomas the Apostle when the waters had begun to rise in Tiber which ouerflowed the citie and vpon S. Thomas of Canterbury his day about the first or second houre in the night the two priests were caried away to prison perchance for the solemnising of that feast in some reformed godly maner This Authour hauing shewed to such as must not see how that the Pope resolued to imprison the two Priests vppon the letters here cited now he will peswade such as must beleeue that it was not possible that Fa. Parsons could be the cause of their imprisonment It may be seene also sayth he how vniustly they doe calumniate and accuse Fa. Parsons as the cause of all their trouble considering those letters were written from Flanders vpon the two messengers first comming ouer so as Fa Parsons had neither time to procure those letters from Flanders neither is it likely that men so graue learned and wise as these are would be induced by another mans request to write such letters vnder their owne hands to so great personages the Protector the Generall of the Iesuites and Fa. Parsons and that in so important a matter except they had thought as they wrote and their iudgements had beene conforme to their letters and thus much of the first point about their imprisonment Are not these effectuall perswasions that F. Parsons could not be the cause of their trouble suppose all these letters had bene written vpon the first comming ouer of the two priests as they were not nor the soonest of them which concerned the two priests in almost two moneths after let vs also suppose that his Holines was induced to resolue vpon the imprisoning these two priests by these letters which we haue shewed could not be the soonest of them being written vpon the 25. of October 1598. as is confessed in the Apologie fol. 125. and his Holines resolued vpon the 17. of the same moneth before to imprison them at Ferrara as is confessed also in the Apologie fol. 120 it was so long before their going and it was so well knowen that some were to goe as one of the now busiest Agents tolde one of them for certaine that whosoeuer went in that affaire should at their arriuall be cast into prison And although these Flanders men who writ were so perswaded in conscience to write as they did and did therefore write because they were so perswaded this is no proofe that they were not induced by others to haue such a conscience to thinke or to write in that manner and some of them haue acknowledged and haue bene and are very sory that they suffered themselues to be induced by D. Barret to subscribe vnto that letter from Doway So that this is a poore deuise and a silly perswasion that Fa. Parsons could not be the cause of the two priests their trouble who was knowen to haue his Agents in all these partes if himselfe were ashamed to haue his letters to be seene for any such matter And it not being prooued out of any of these letters of Flanders that any of these great personages the Cardinal the Generall of the Iesuites and Fa. Parsons to whom these letters were sent were perswaded by them that these two Priests were to be imprisoned before they were heard the authour leaueth the wound in Fa Parsons side as wide as it was before vnlesse to heale vp that he will wound his Holines much deeper as who being reputed for a most milde and wise man should resolue vpon the imprisonment of a couple of Catholike priests comming as it were bleeding from the campe of Gods Church to open vnto him such difficulties as were to be redressed eyther concerning their whole Church or some members thereof who had lately challenged vnto them an extraordinary superioritie ouer their fellow labourers without
any warrant from him and to open vnto him what perill might thereby come to the Catholike cause and offering themselues their cause with all submission to his Holines as the effect also prooued whatsoeuer this slanderous Libeller suggesteth to his blind obedient Reader But this author sheweth whatsoeuer he saith that he careth not if his Holinesse his sides be pierced so that he may keepe Fa. Parsons sides whole Now to that which ensueth saith this authour there is extant a letter written by F. Parsons to M. Bishop of the ninth of October 1599. containing a certaine briefe capitulation of the principall points that passed in this action of the messengers restraint in Rome c. To which letter there is answere made in the English booke where this letter is set downe at large and the answere is such as this authour with a litle snarling onely at it letteth it passe quietly neither is it a cauilation but a very material point that the notary so much talked of in that letter and in a wicked false letter of the 20. of February 1599. vnder the name of M. A. as if M. Martin Array had bene the doer of it was a Iesuite and that he put in and out what F. Parsons would haue him being himselfe the examiner although the Popes Comissary did twice or thrice shew himselfe in that time and if euery dayes examination had bene read as it was not in the presence of him who was examined yet F. Parsons might cause somewhat to be written otherwise then the prisoner did deliuer it and to haue somethings blotted out againe when the prisoners answere was contrary to his former information giuen by him either to his Holinesse or others neither was euery daies examination subscribed the same day for the prisoner neuer set his hand but to the last sheete which was of such impertinent stuffe as it might be added to any examination and the same hand which writ the examination being a Iesuits hand at the commandement of F. Parsons he might notwithstanding the scoring of the margent and the after registring if it were registred shew what he listed and if their examinations be extant as here it is said then will appeare in some of them many things blotted out sometime some words which F. Parsons caused to be writ contrary to that which the prisoner deliuered sometime a whole question with some part of the answere thereto when F. Parsons could not obtaine of the prisoner to make such answere as hee would haue him for remedy whereof F. Parsons tooke alwayes afterward this course that hee would neuer haue his question written downe vntill hee had heard what answer the prisoner would make that if the answere were such as he could wrest it to his purpose then should the question be set downe and himselfe would for breuities sake frame the answere about which there was diuers times some alteration about wordes which the prisoner vsed not but was often contented to let F. Parsons haue his will when the words were such as he knew he could interpret to good sence notwithstanding his examinators false intention hoping alwayes that hee should haue so much fauour when the matter should grow to an issue And although that neither all the examination was euer taken nor that which was taken let to stand as it was taken but somwhat was blotted out as is said and many answers out off vnder pretence sometime of breuitie sometime that there should be another Interrogatory to which such an answere would be more fit the prisoners subscribed sware but to what Not that there was al which was asked or answered nor that F. Parsons had not dealt in this kinde but that those answeres which were there made were truely sincerely giuen which maketh nothing to the clearing of F. Parsons or the proouing of his honest dealing And now you shall heare what matters this author hath picked out of their examinations and thereby perceiue what this good fellow would say First then to talke of substantiall points sayth this author the examination of M. Charnocke beginning the 4. of Ianuary and that of M. Bishop the 10. of Ianuary 1599 and passing ouer all other demaunds which these men call impertinent they were asked what was the cause and reason of their comming to Rome who sent them c. To this M. Charnocke being first examined answered in these words Causa aduentus nostri haec fuit vt rogaremus humillimè c. The cause of our comming to Rome was this that we might beseech most humbly and with all obedience the Sea Apostolicke that this order appointed by Card. Caietan for composing controuersies in England and to make peace not beeing hitherto confirmed by his Holines as we vnderstood it is said by diuers priests and namely Fa. Sicklemore and others might be mitigated or changed or some other order appointed with it for satisfaction of very many priests who doe thinke reseruing notwithstanding due honour to the Sea Apostolike that by this way appointed onely the strises begun cannot so well be ended c. But if it should please his Holinesse to confirme this authority and to admit no other then are these priests content to yeeld all obedience c. and as for the Superiour appointed â—… spake with the Archpriest before I came forth and desired him not to be offended with me if I went to Rome about this matter and hee gaue me leaue to goe to deale for the change thereof Thus farre the Apologie by which it may appeare what cause there was of the Priests so long trouble in Rome their apprehension by Iesuits and Sbirri vpon the feast of S. Tho. of Canterbury the most principall feast of any particular in all our countrey their keeping so close by the Iesuites as they might not goe out of their seuerall prisons to heare masse vpon some of the most principall feasts in Gods Church their being debarred to speake not onely one of them with the other but also with any to aske councell except the Iesuits their being debarred to come to the altar otherwise then lay men vntill the 7. or 8. of February notwithstanding they had by vertue of a Iubile receiued absolution by the same Iesuits from all censures which it was supposed that either they had or might haue incurred by this iourney to Rome their continuance in close prison vntill the 8. of April notwithstanding they had so discharged themselues before the two Card. Caietan and Burghesius vpon the 17. of February in the English Colledge as both they themselues and the whole Colledge were tolde that they should within two or three dayes after haue their libertie their being afterwards although somewhat more easily imprisoned the one vntill the 22. of April the other vntill the 6. of May their being banished their country and confined the one to France the other to Lorayne without any one penny or pennyworth allowed them for their maintenance in those