is not fire and sworde excommunication and anathematization prodition deposition conspiracy murther absoluing of subiects relaxation of oathes and other such hostile actions as our seditious aduersary heere laieth togeather to make the Popes office and authority more odious 42. Only two publicke examples to my remembrance can be alleadged of any Protestant Princes excommunicated censured or molested by the Sea Apostolicke since Luther began his breach which are now almost an hundred yeares notwithstāding there haue byn so many of them and so exorbitant things committed by them against Catholicke Religion and the said Sea Apostolicke as is notorious to all men And these two vpon speciall causes and inducements to wit Q. Elizabeth of England and King Henry then of Nauarre and now also of France for of King Henry of Enggland I make no mention for that his cause was not Religion at that time the first of the two in regarde of the publicke violent change of Religion which shee made in her Realme with the deposition depriuation imprisonment or exile of all Catholicke Bishops Prelates Clergy and others that would not yeeld their consent thereunto and this as is alleadged contrary to her publicke promise and oath at her Coronation 43. The second for feare least he comming to the Crowne of France in that disposition wherein then he was presumed to be should attempt the like change in that great Kingdome And to both these actes were the Popes of those times drawen and incited either secretly or openly by some of the chief Nobility of both Realmes whome most it concerned And albeit the former hath not had that successe which was hoped and perhaps suggested yet the finall euent of the second hath byn more prosperous then at that time could be expected no King lightly in Christendome hauing made more reall demonstratiōs of loue vnion and reuerence to the Sea of Rome then his most Christian Maiesty nor receaued greater enterchange of graces and fauours from the same Sea and this in matters of most importance for the setling and establishment of his Imperiall Crowne and royall race 44. Wherfore al this bitter barking of this Minister T. M. about excommunicating depriuing deposing and murthering Princes as also about absoluing of subiectes from their oathes and the like ceaseth as yow see by a little good correspondence betweene the said Princes and their generall Pastor And when matters passe at the worst and are in most exasperation betweene them yet is it not the tenth part of perill which Protestant doctrine and practice draweth them into vpon any generall disgust against their gouernments For if in lue of these two Protestant Princes censured by the Sea Apostolicke we should recount all the Catholicke Princes that haue byn vexed molested iniured or depriued of their States or violated in their persons or brought to confusion in our Northerne parts of the world in this time to wit in Sauoy France Switzerland Germany Bemeland Austria Poland Sweueland Denmark Flanders England and Scotland and some other places wherof we haue treated more largely in the precedent Chapter there would be no comparison at all Of false dealing and sleights of T. M. §. 4. ANd yet further yow must vnderstand that this malicious calumniator proposing vnto himself for his end to make vs hatefull doth not only encrease multiply and exaggerate matters against vs by all art of sycophancy as making some things to seeme odious that of themselues are true and laudable and exaggerating others to a farre higher degree then wherin they were spoken or are to be vnderstood inferring also generall propositions vpon some shewes of particuler proofes but besides all this he passeth also further obiecteth often times against vs the very same things that his owne Authours doe hold wherof before we haue laid downe some examples and shall doe more hereafter yea shameth not manifestly to falsify and ly also as when he auoucheth with great resolution that the late K. Henry of France was censured by Pope Xixtus v. for this only crime for that himselfe being a Papist yet fauoured the Protestantes and especially the Prince of Nauarre Wheras it is knowne that besides this he had murthered most miserably two principall peeres Princes of his Crowne the Duke and Cardinall of Guise neerest in bloud to his Maiesty of England and therby broken his solemne oath made but a little before in presence of many when he receaued the Bl. Sacrament to the contrary And how then was his only crime to haue fauoured the Protestants as this Minister auerreth 46. And againe in the same place or precedent page he hath these wordes Pope Adrian being guilty of like seditious practice against the Emperour Henry the second was choked with a fly And in his quotation citeth Nauclerus for it Generatione 139. which should be 39. for that Nauclerus hath nothing neere so many Generations in that Part and in steed of Henry the second he should haue said Frederick the first of that name for that Henry the second was before the time of our Conquest and almost two hundred yeares before Adrian the fourth our English Pope of whome we now speake who liued in the time of King Stephen and King Henry the second of England and was a Holy man and accompted the Apostle of Noruegia for conuerting the same to our Christian faith before he was Pope and all Authors doe write honorably of him so doth Nauclerus affirme and therefore though he make mention of such a fable related by Vrspergensis that was a Schismatical writer in those dayes who also doth not absolutely auouch it but with this temperament vt fertur as the reporte goeth yet doth the said Nauclerus reiect the same as false and confuteth it by the testimonies of al other writers especially of Italy that liued with him and therby knew best both his life and death And yet all this notwithstanding will this false ladde T. M. needes set downe this History as true affirming it for such and neuer so much as giuing his Reader to vnderstand that any other denied the same or that the only Author himself of this fiction doubted therof And is not this perfidious dealing or can any man excuse him from falshood and malice in this open treachery 47. Another like tricke he plaieth some few pages before this againe citing out of Doctor Bouchiers booke De iusta abdicatione these wordes 〈◊〉 occidere honestum est quod cuiuis impunè facere permittitur quod ex communi consensu dico And then he Englisheth the same thus Any man may lawfully murder a Tyrant which I defend saith he by common consent But he that shall read the place in the Author himself shall find that he holdeth the very contrary to wit that a priuate man may not kill a Tyrant that is not first iudged and declared to be a publicke enemy by the common-wealth and he proueth the same at
against F. Campian ibidem Charter of K. Kenulphus falsified by the Lord Cooke cap. 12. n. 81. 82. deinceps Choyse or election maketh heresy cap. 2. n. 20. Christ his tēporall Kingdome cap. 5. n. 18. Christ how he is our Iudge and how not cap. 8. n. 26. How he did feigne to go further then the castle of Emaus cap. 9. n. n. 98. 72. 73. His denyall to ascend to the festiuall day ibid. n. 59. Cicero his doubtfull answers cap. 9. n. 33. 34. Commotion of VVales anno 1605. and for what cause Pref. n. 7. 8. Comparison betwene the disobedience of Catholickes and Protestants cap. r. n. 27. Conference betwene two shamelesse Ministers cap. 4. n. 47. Confession and the secret therof cap. 10. n. 2. 3. Equiuocation lawfull for not reuealing matters heard in Cōfession ibidem Consent of Emperours necessary for gathering of Councels in oldtyme why cap. 6. n. 33. Contention about the expulsion of K. Ozias of Israell cap. 6. n. 8. 9. 10. 11. Contumacy defined by Sayer the Benedictine cap. 6. nu 51. Couētry case about the plague cap. 10. n. 31. B. Cunerus abused by Thomas Morton cap. 6. n. 47. 59. D DAVID Q. Maries Secrecary of Scotland murdered cap. 1. n. 21. Definitiō of Cōtumacy c. 6. n. 6 Definition of Truth by S. Augustine cap. 8. n. 40. Item of a lye ibidem nu 47. Deposition of Princes by the liuely word of God cap. 4. n. 34 Deuinity deducted from age to age cap. 9. n. 5. Increase therof ibidem nu 6. Schoole-Deuinity positiue their beginninges ibid. nu 7. Deuinity speculatiue and morall ibid. n. 8. Difference of contumacy and pertinacy cap. 6. n. 52. Disagreement betwene Protestants Caluinists cap. 2. n. 13. Dignity of Priesthood aboue Regalty cap. 5. n. 4. 5. deinceps n. 10. 11. 12. Discourse against Catholicks without name of Author or truth Prefat n. 13. Disobedience cōpared betwene Catholicks and Protestāts cap. 1. n. 27. Disputation of Plessis Mornay with the Bishop of Eureux cap. 12. n. 53. 54. Dissimulation when it is lawfull and when not cap. 11. n. 17. Doctrine and practice of rebellion whether more in Catholickes than Protestants cap. 1. n. 7. 8. 9. deinceps Dolman author of the Succession egregiously abused by Th. Morton cap. 2 n. 23. 34. 35. E ECCLESIASTICALL Supremacy in temporall causes how it is to be vnderstood c. 6. n. 22. Syr Edvvard Cooke his booke of reportes against Catholicks Pref. n. 9. 10. His Paradox of English Kings ibidem His false and odious assertions against Catholicks Ibid. n. 11. His Equiuocations ca. 12. n. 77. vsque ad finem capitis His notable fiction against Pius Quintus ibid n. 78. His Charge against Catholicks at Norvvich ibid. n. 79. Emperours consent necessary for gathering of Conncells in old tyme and why cap. 6. n. 33. England her pittifull state at this day Prefat n. 2. Equity of Catholike doctrine tryed by the effects cap. 4. n. 13. Equiuocation the doctrine therof how and when it is lawfull cap. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. per totum How the same is defended ibi cap. 7. n. 2. 3. 4. The vse therof receyued for 400. yeares ibid. n. 8. 9. 10. 11. deinceps The necessity therof in certain cases ibid. n. 20. 21. deinceps Equiuocation vsed by S. Paul cap. 7. n. 51 alibi in diuersis locis Equiuocation what it is cap. 8. per totum Equiuocation of two sorts ibi num 2. The definition therof by Aristotle ibid. n. 5. 6. 7. How it differeth from Amphibology ibid. n. 10. Equiuocation mentall verball cap. 8. n. 3. 12. Equiuocation defended by all foraine Cath. writers cap. 9 n. 11. 12. 13. deinceps cap. 10. n. 15. Equiuocation by reason and instinct of nature cap. 9. n. 81. Equiuocation preiudiciall to common conuersation cap. 10. num 23. Equiuocation in an oath how and when it is lawfull cap. 10. n. 29. 30. Equiuocation in Protestantes starke lying cap. 12. per totum Equiuocall and ambiguous speaches of our Sauiour cap. 8. n. 13. 14. cap. 9. n. 26. 27. 28. 61. Examples of false dealing of Thomas Morton cap. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. per totum Exasperations in Englād what they cause Prefat per totam The inconueniences that ensue therby ibidem Exemption of Clergy-men Th. Mortons notorious false dealing therin cap. 6. n. 13. 14. 15. deinceps Experience of tyme a good proofe cap. 7. n. 9. Extrauagant of Pope 〈◊〉 the eight falsified by Th. Morton cap 6. n. 43. F MY FATHER is Greater then I hovv ancient Fathers do vnderstād the same cap. 6. n. 100. 101. Footinges of Protestants in periodes of antiquity c. 5. n. 40. Fox his huge volume of Actes and Monumentes cap. 12. n. 48. Hovv he is called the Father of lyes Ibid. The same confuted Ibid. n. 50. 52. Syr Francis Hastinges his Equiuocations cap. 12. n. 66. 67. 68. deinceps His vvillfull vntruth about the poysoning of K. Iohn Ibid. His abuse of S. Hierome Ibid. n. 69. Fraud and Fallacy vvhat they be cap. 8. n. 48. 49. deinceps Fraud and deceipt of Thomas Morton in alleaging all sortes of Authors cap. 2. n. 23. 24. cap. 5. nu 5. 6. 7. 49. 53. per totum Caput Sextum deinceps per totum librum G F. GARNET his alleadging S. Augustine for the lavvfulnes of Equiuocatiō at his arraignment cap. 9. n. 52. 54. Genesius Sepulueda his opinion of Equiuocation cap. 9. n. 57. Abused notably by Tho. Morton Ibidem Giges-ringe one of Thomas Mortons signes cap. 11. n. 39. Gilby the Minister his doctrine and immodest speach of K. Henry the 8. cap. 4. n. 35. 〈◊〉 Cassander vvhat he vvas and his doctrine cap. 6. n. 69. The same condemned by English Protestātes Ibid. n. 69. 70. God cannot deceaue or cooperate to an vntruth cap. 7. n. 38. God hovv he permitteth men to be deceyued cap. 8. n. 54. cap. 9. n. 77. Gods Ordination oftentymes ioyned vvith his permissión cap. 9. n. 78. Goodman and other English Protestantes of Geneua their doctrine cap. 4. n. 16. 17. 34. Gratian Collector of the Canon-lavv cap. 9. n. 9. Gratians text corrupted and falfifyed by Thomas Morton cap. 2. n. 49. 52. S. Gregory his authority for the lavvfulnes of Equiuocatiō cap. 10. n. 18. Gregory de Valētia his Charge against Caluin for Arrianisme cap. 6. n. 78. His authority for Equiuocation cap. 10. n. 16. H HAMMOND his booke of the Cōmotion of Papistes in Herefordshire an 1605. Pref. n. 7. Hanmer and Charke their bookes against F. Campian cap. 12. n. 55. Their Equiuocations Ibidem n. 56. 57. deinceps Hanniballs ten prisoners their case set dovvne by Cicero cap. 11. n. 33. Heape of falsityes togeather committed by Thomas Morton cap. 5. n. 57. 58. Henry the fourth Emperour
as of a course which he 〈◊〉 in all his disputes How doth foolish vanity discouer it selfe in all these mens wordes actions And yet let the Reader note attentiuely that notwithstanding this bragge he hath no one Catholicke Author in all this controuersy about Equiuocation that absolutly denyeth the thing or holdeth it for vnlawfull in all pointes as he doth albeit some do differ in opinion concerning the cases causes tymes meanes maners limitations and circumstances of the same as after is largely by vs declared So as heere he hath no diuision of our tongues but which himselfe maketh to wit where somtymes to seeme to finde a difference where none is he belyeth our Authors flatly and forceth them to speake one against an other as in many places we do demonstrate and leaue him with the shame 17. Wherfore to say as he doth that our execrable Equiuocations are sufficiently refelled by him with the testimonyes of our most principall Doctors is as true as that he is a Minister of simple truth and naked innocency and of constant assurance of an vpright conscience all which are ridiculous antiphrases in deed for he hath no one Doctor of ours either most or least principall with him in his opinion or that calleth Equiuocations vsed with due circumstances or limitations execrable or vnlawfull or not necassary in some cases nor hath he any one sentence or testimony of theirs to the contrary as after is made euident And consequently this course of Tho. Morton in all his disputes is a lying course a vaunting course a ridiculous course And as for his disputes I do shew him after to be so sylly a disputer as that he knoweth not how to make a true syllogisme and therfore am forced to send him backe againe to Cambridge to reforme his Logicke or to learne more about which point I remit the Reader to that which is handled in the 11. Chapter and els where of this Treatise 18. Next after this he layeth before his Maiesty a certayne obseruatiō about Popes names as ful fraught with malice and deceiptfulnes as the former with vanity and he layeth the obseruation vpon Polydor Virgil though cyting no place for it Polydore obserueth saith he that the Popes a long tyme in their election had their names changed by Antiphrasis videl the Elected if 〈◊〉 were by naturall disposition fearefull was named Leo if cruell Clemēt if vnciuill Vrbanus if wicked Pius if couetous Bonifacius if in all 〈◊〉 intollerable Innocentius And with this he thinketh to haue layd downe an obseruation of importance But why had he not adioyned also that if he were careles of his flocke then Gregory must be his name which importeth a vigilant pastor 19. But now let the iudicious Reader obserue the malice and falshood of this obseruation and therby iudge whether the Author therof be a Minister of simple truth or no. Polydore saith only that sometymes Popes as other Princes in like manner haue had names that haue byn different or rather contrary to their nature manners which is an ordinary case if we examine the signification of men and womens names but that Popes names were changed of purpose by Antiphrasis or contrary speach to couer their defectes as heere is set downe this is a malicious lye of the Minister and hath neither simplicyty nor truth in it for that all these names heere mentioned of Leo Clemens Vrbanus Pius Bonifacius Innocentius and Gregory were chosen by the Popes that tooke them for the great reuerence and estimation they had of certayne excellent men of that name that went before them as also for the good abodement of their future gouernment and to be styrred vp the more by the memory of those names to the vertues signified by them but especially for the honor and imitation of the first Popes that bare those names As for example of S. Leo the first who how excellent a man he was both for learning and sanctity appeareth by the acknowledgment of the Protestants themselues M. Iewell making this Apostrophe vnto him in his chalenge O Leo O 〈◊〉 O Paul O Christ 20. The like may be said of S. Clement the first and next Pope after S. Peter and the same of S. Vrbanus Pope and Martyr in the second age after the Apostles and the like of Pius the first Pope and Martyr in the first age after the said Apostles and no lesse of S. Bonifacius the first that liued in the beginning of the fourth age and a little before him againe in the same age S. Innocentius the first so highly commended by S. Augustine for a great Saint and after him againe S. Gregory the Great and first Pope of that name most admirable both to those of his time and all posterity for many excellent vertues who though lyuing some ages after all the former yet haue there byn 13. Popes after him that for reuerence of his vertues haue taken his name and ten of S. Leo 7. of S. Clement 6. of S. Vrbanus 4. of S. Pius 7. of S. Bonifacius and 8. of S. Innocentius wherof none had that name by 〈◊〉 but all by choise after they were elected Popes for the causes now touched Which being so it is euident what a wicked lost conscience this Minister hath to auouch vnto a King and by him to all others so manifest and malitious a calumniation 21. But he goeth further yet in folly to magnify his owne learning and to compare the same with no lesse then Aristotle 〈◊〉 haue so framed this dispute saith he that it may seeme I hope to be like Aristotles bookes of naturall Philosophy so published as not published c. And his reason is For that as he saith he alwayes putteth downe the clause of ment all reseruation in Latin which yet is not true as the Reader wil see by pervsing this booke he hauing to my remembrance set downe the same in Latyn but once only throughout all his booke and that in fower words in his second page the said reseruation being mentioned in English more perhaps then forty tymes nor were it of any importance if it were alwayes put downe in Latyn For that any man lightly whether he vnderstand Latyn or no if he see or heare the precedence both of question and answere will easily ghesse what the reseruation is if he suspect any to be at all as if a man doe heare or reade the premisses of a syllogisme in English he will easely ghesse at the conclusion though it be in Latin yea if he be of any meane capacity he will gather the inference himselfe by naturall discourse Wherfore this of Aristotles books was brought in only by the vayne Minister to compare them with his bookes or as he calleth them his disputes so published forsooth as not published for that he imagineth that the common capacity of men cannot reach vnto the depth therof he wadeth so profoundly in his owne folly But yow will see
preuented in like occasions to wit that multitudes are not to be put in despaire no nor particuler men into extreame exasperation without hope of remedy for that despaire is the mother of precipitation extreme exasperation is the next dore to fury No counsaile no reason no regard of Religion nor other respect humaine or deuine holdeth place when men grow desperate all stringes of hope are cut of We see by experience that the least and weakest wormes of the earth which cannot abide the looke of a man yet when they are extremely pressed and put in despaire of escape they turne and leape in mans face it selfe which otherwise they so 〈◊〉 feare and dread 4. Wherfore seing this dangerous stickler would put this extreme despaire into so many thousandes of his Maiesties subiectes yow 〈◊〉 imagine what good seruice he meaneth to do him therby and what pay he deserueth for his labour Surely if a great rich man whose wealth lay in his flocke of sheepe had neuer so faire and fawning a dog following neuer so diligently his trencher and playing neuer so many flattering trickes before him yet if togeather with this he had that other currish quality also as to woory his maisters sheepe disseuer his fold disperse his flock and driue them into flight and precipitation it is like that his Maister out of his wisedome though otherwise he were delighted with his officious fawning would rather hange such a dog then aduenture to suffer so great and important losses by him And no Iesse is to be expected of the great equity prudence of our great Monarch when he shall well consider of the cause and consequence therof 5. And thus much of the malice and pernicious sequele of this assertion let vs see somewhat now also of the folly falsity therof To which effect I would first enquire if it be so that subiectes of different Religions are not comportable togeather vnder a Prince that is of one of those Religions for so must the question be proposed if we will handle it in generall then how doe the Iewes Christians liue togeather vnder many Christian Princes in Germany and Italy vnder the state of Venice yea vnder the Pope himselfe how doe Christians and Turkes liue togeather vnder the Turkish Emperour of Constantinople as also vnder the Persian without persecution for their Religion how did Catholickes and Arrians liue so many yeares togeather vnder Arrian Kinges and Emperours in old times both in Spaine and els 〈◊〉 how doe Catholickes and Protestantes liue togeather at this day vnder the most Christian King of France vnder the great King of Polonia and vnder the German Emperour in diuers partes of his dominions all Catholicke Princes and in the free-cityes of the Empyre And in particuler is to be considered that the Hussites haue liued now some hundreds of yeares in Bohemia vnder the Cathòlicke Princes and Emperours Lordes of that Countrey with such freedome of conuersation with Catholicke subiectes and vnion of obedience to the said Princes as at this day in the great Citty of Praga where the Emperour commonly resideth and where Catholicks 〈◊〉 wholy gouerne there is not so much as one 〈◊〉 Church knowne to be in the handes of any Catholicke Pastor of that citty but all are Hussites that haue the ordinary charges of soules and Catholickes for seruice sermons and Sacraments doe repaire only to monasteries according to ancient agreementes and conuentions betweene them though in number the said Catholickes be many times more then the other and haue all the gouernment and Commaundry in their handes as hath byn said These are demonstratiue proofes ad hominem and cannot be denied and consequently doe conuince that this make-bate Ministers proposition is false in generall That subiects of different religion may not liue togeather in 〈◊〉 peace if their gouernours will permit them Now if he can alleadge any seuerall weighty causes why this generall assertion holdeth not or may not holde in the particuler case of English Catholiks and Protestants vnder our present King we shall discusse them also and see how much they weigh 6. He pretendeth ten seuerall reasons in his pamphlet for causes of this incompossibility and therof doth his whole inuectiue consist Eight of them appertaine to doctrine and practice of rebellion in vs as he auoucheth and the other two vnto doubtfull speech or Equiuocation Of which later point hauing touched somewhat in the precedent Preface being to haue occasion to doe the same againe more largely afterward wee shall now consider principally of the former concerning doctrine and practice of quiet or vnquiet peaceable or dangerous humours behauiours of subiects both Catholicke Protestant 7. And as for Catholickes the Minister in all his eight reasons bringeth out nothing of nouelty against vs but only such pointes of doctrine as himselfe doth consesse and expresly proue that they were held and recevued in our publique schooles aboue foure hundred yeares gone as namely in his first reason For that we hold Protestants for hereticks so farre forth as they decline and differ obstinately from the receyued doctrine and sense of the Roman Catholicke Church and consequently that being Hereticks they are not true Christians nor can haue true faith in any one article of Christian beliefe and that the punishment determined by the ancient Canon lawes which are many and grieuous both spirituall temporall do or may therby light vpon them And in his second third and fourth reasons that wee teach That the Bishop of Rome as spirituall head of the vniuersall Church hath power aboue temporall Princes and may procure to let the Election and succession of such as are opposite or enemies to Catholicke Religion and that in some cases he may dissolue oathes of obediēce and the like 8. And further yet in his fifth sixt seauenth and eight reasons that in certaine occasions and vpon certaine necessities for preuenting of greater euils imminent to any Countrey Kingdome or common wealth especially if they be spirituall and appertaine to the saluation of soules the same high Pastour may restraine resist or punish the enormous excesses of temporall Princes if any such fall out by Censures excommunication depriuation or deposition though this not but vpon true iust and vrgent causes when other means cannot preuaile for auoiding those euerlasting euils 9. All which doctrines for this is the summe of all he saith or alleadgeth do cōteine as yow see no new matter of malice against Protestant Princes inuented by vs for that the Minister himselfe as now we haue said confesseth that for these three or foure later hundred yeares these positions haue byn generally receiued by all the vniuersall Church and face of Christendome so as being established so many hundred yeares before Protestants were borne or named in the world they could not be made or inuented against them in particuler but only are drawne vnto them at this time by
kill Princes he answereth thus It will be requisite without preiudice to the most learned and Religious iudgment of his Maiesty to satisfy for two places related from that conference c. And then he passeth on to discourse at large of the meaning of those places and vnder the colour of the foresaid honorable preface he taketh licence to dissent from his Maiesty signifying in effect that either the conference was not well related or his Maiesty mistooke their meaning in those notes and yet is the matter cleere by his owne confession that their said notes vpon the second booke of Cronicles and 15. Chapter vers 16. doe not only allow the depofing of the Queene Maacha by her sonne King Asa for Idolatry but further doe reprehēd him also sharply for that he had not put her to death by fier saying thus in their note That whether she were Mother or Grandmother yet herin the King shewed that he lacked zeale for she ought to haue byn burnt by the couenant as vers 13. appeareth by the law of God Deuteronomy 13. but he gaue place to foolish pitty and would also seeme after a sort to satisfy the law So they in their note 26. But who will looke vpon the two textes of Scripture by them heere cited shall finde no mention of burning but only of putting to death and in Deut. of stoning only But how doth he now defend this note of our English Ministers allowing the deposition and putting to death of Princes Yow shall heare his shift for he is much troubled with his Maiesties obseruation VVhat shall we say then saith he is the Soueraignty of Kinges disabled God forbid but it is rather established therby for the King is made the deposer yea euen of whosoeuer Doe yow see his poore flattering shift If the Queene Maacha might be deposed according to their note and that ex Augusto Imperio from her Imperiall gouernment as the text of Scripture hath yea and that she ought according to the law of God to haue byn put to death as now hath byn said for her Idolatry then is it a poore shift to say that Kinges cannot be deposed for that they must be the deposers seing that in Deut. where the Commission is giuen there is no mention of Kinges at all but Gods speach commission there is vnto the people Sitibi voluerit persuadere frater 〈◊〉 c. If thy brother or wife or friend will perswade thee to leaue God let thy hand be vpon him and after thee the hand of all the people which notwithstanding is to be vnderstood as before in the second Chapter we haue noted both out of the 13. 17. Chapters of Deut. and the glosse therevpon according to the order there set downe to wit after the cause examined sentenced by lawfull Iudges And at this time when this law was ordained there were no Kinges in Israel nor in many yeares after and consequently this commission could not be giuen to Kinges only 27. So then for so much as English Protestant-Ministers that made these notes doe authorize by this place of Deut. the deposing and killing of that Imperiall Queene his Maiesties censure was iudicious true that therby they allowed that lawfull Princes might be in certaines cases deposed and put to death And the first shift of T. M. in this place is ridiculous wherby he would seeme to make secure al Kinges from danger of deposition for that themselues by Godes word which yet he proueth not must be the deposers and then he presumeth they will not depose themselues but for Queenes he leaueth them to shift as they may Which doctrine I suppose he would not haue set forth in print in the late Queenes daies But their assertions are according to times and places and so this shall be sufficient for the second Question The third Question concerning practice of Rebellion §. 3. 28. ANd now hauing byn lōger in the former two Questions then in the beginning was purposed I shall endeauour to be shorter if it may be in this last though the multitude of examples partly set downe by vs before in the first Chapter of this Treatise and partly to be read in Histories and obserued by experience of Protestantes continuall tumultuation against Catholicke Princes would require a larger discussion then both the other two Questions put togeather albeit on the other side againe the matters are so cleere as they need no discussion at all but only narration For what can our Minister answere in reason or truth to all that multitude of instances of Protestantes Rebellions in the foresaid first Chapter set downe and for the most part obiected before as now I perceiue by his aduersary the moderate Answerer We shall briefly runne ouer some few examples 29. To the instances in England of continuall conspiracies and insurrections against Queene Mary he setteth downe first this bold and shameles prouocation After the proclamation of her title saith he shew vs what Protestant euer resisted what Minister of the Ghospell in all that fiery triall did kindle the least spark of sedition among her people In which wordes is to be obserued first that he saith after the Proclamation of her title to excuse therby the Dukes of Northumberland and Suffolke the Marques of Northampton and others that tooke armes against her before shee was proclaimed in Londen though in Norfolke she had proclaimed her self presently vpon the death of her brother King Edward as also to excuse Cranmer Ridley Sandes Latimer Rogers Iewell and other Ministers that had preached most bitterly against her title But what is the residue true that heere so boldly he auoucheth that neuer any Protestant resisted nor Minister kindled the least spark of sedition among her people after her title proclaimed Is this true I say Is this iustifiable for he calleth this Treatise a iustification of Protestantes Is this any way to be mainteined by any shew or shift whatsoeuer What then wil he say to the new conspiracy and iterated Rebellion of the Duke of Suffolke of his brother the Lord Iohn Grey not only after the said Queenes title proclaimed but after she was in possession and had pardoned them both of their former Rebellion What will he say to the Rebellion of Syr Peter Carew Syr Gawyn Carew Syr Thomas Denny other Protestant Gentlemen that tooke armes in Deuonshire within six daies saith Stow after the arraignemēt of the Duke of Northumberland What wil he say to the conspiracy of Syr Iames a Croftes others in VVales discouered saith the same Authour about the fiue and twentith day of Ianuary next ensuing What will he say to the Rebellion of Syr Thomas VVyat and his confederates in Kent ensuing about the same time Were they not Protestantes that were authors therof Or was not Queene Maries title yet proclaimed Will our Minister face out this What will he say to the cōspiracies ensuing after this againe
must spit in his face which is spoken saith our Minister comparatiuely and not Rebelliously He expoundeth also those wordes of Caluin Abdicant se potestate that such Kinges are bereaued of authority meaning only saith he in that case of contradiction against God But let the Minister tell vs who shall be Iudge of this who shall determine the case To whome shall it belong to giue sentēce when a King doth contradict God when he vsurpeth Gods throne when he commaundeth any thing against God and consequently when his face must be spitten on when he must be pulled downe when he must be depriued of all regall authority Did Thomas Morton euer finde in any Catholicke writer such wordes or sense in preiudice of Princes And yet the fond Minister as though he had plaied worthily his Master-prize vaunteth in these wordes Thus is Caluin iustified concerning his doctrine and in him also Beza bycause Beza say yow his Successour in place succeeded him also both in opinion and practice True Sir they are both iustified in your manner of iustification they are fit iustified Saints for your Calendar 42. And hauing said thus he passeth yet further adding a second prouocation about practice in these wordes VVe haue heard of their opinion to wit of Caluin and Beza haue yow any thing to except against their practice And this demaund he made when he knew and had seene his Aduersaries many and most grieuous accusations against them in that kinde not only for mouing that people of Geneua to open Rebellion against their Lord and Prince the Bishop but also the people of France against their King and Soueraigne citing good authorities for the same saying Caluin and Bezae armed the subiectes against their Prince of Geneua and as Caluin himself Doctour Sutcliffe the Bishop of Canterbury be witnesses deposed their Soueraigne from his temporall right and euer after continued in that state of Rebellion They celebrated also a Councell wherin was concluded that King Francis the second then King of France his wife the Queene his Children Queene Mother c. should be destroyed And his quotations for these thinges are Beza l. de iure Magistrat Sutcliffe answ to suppl and Suruey Caluin in epist. Pet. Far. orat cont Sectar defens Reg. Relig. c. All which being seene by our Minister he demandeth notwithstanding as yow haue heard with this hypocrisy haue yow any thing to except against their practice As though there were nothing at all not only not to be accused or reprehended in them but not so much as to be excepted against And is not this notable dissimulation in a matter so cleere and euident Who can belieue this Minister at his word herafter But let vs now see how he will answere the matter it self obiected and then will yow admire his impudency much more 43. For better vnderstanding wherof yow must know that besides al that which is alledged for proofe of this accusation out of Caluin Farellus their owne Lordes and my Lord of Canterbury his booke of Dangerous positions Doctour Sutcliffe doth of purpose and at large proue the same in two whole Chapters to wit the second and third of his Suruey against the pretended discipline shewing out of diuers authors and namely Franciscus Boninardus that wrote the History of Geneua as he saith by Caluins direction Symlerus and Bodinus that for aboue fiue hundred yeares gone the Bishop of Geneua was not only spirituall but temporall Lord also of that Citty and the same confirmed vnto him by the Emperour Frederick the first vpon the yeare of Christ 1124. and as Caluin himself confesseth in his writinges to Cardinall Sadoletus had Ius gladij alias ciuilis iurisdictionis partes the power of life and death and other partes of ciuill iurisdiction and that this Prince and Bishop was cast out by the people vpon the preachinges and practises of Farellus Caluin and other Protestant Ministers Quo eiecto saith Bodinus Geneuates Monarchiam in popularem statum commutârunt who being cast out the Geneuians did change their Monarchy into a popular State 44. And finally after many proofes Doctour Sutcliffe setteth downe his opinion in these wordes I doubt not but that I may presume without any mans iust offence to speake my opinion as touching the deuinity which was pretended by the said Ministers of Geneua against their Bishop for indeed I doe dislike it If such dealinges were simply to be vrged by the word of God they might reach further then would be conueniēt I neuer thought it agreable to deuinity for Ministers to cast of their Rulers at their owne pleasures one of them writeth thus That the light of the Ghospell had restored to the Citty that principality which the Bishop had before But all the learned deuines in Germany at their conferences with the Emperour were of a contrary opinion c. I am not the man that will either iustify mine owne discretiō or impugne any thing which may be brought for the ciuil proceeding of that State or any other so as they carry no false groundes of deuinity with them which may proue dāgerous to our owne such as haue byn since published for the authorizing of subiectes in many cases to depose their Princes So he 45. And now by this large discourse yow see fully his minde first that the Bishop of Geneua was Lord and Prince of that Citty for diuers ages confirmed also by the Emperour secondly that he was vniustly depriued by the people vpon the preaching and false groundes of deuinity of Farellus Caluin Beza and other Protestant preachers thirdly we see the reason why he thinketh thus least their doctrine might reach further then would be conuenient and be dangerous in England So as he also as yow see doth accommodate his doctrine and groundes of deuinity to the commodity of his cause 46. But now let vs see how this Minister Sutcliffe and our Minister Morton haue agreed togeather vpon a farre different manner of answering this matter at this time and yow will perceiue therby what people they are who change their answeres as time and wether walketh For after that Morton had read all this in Sutcliffe yet made the matter so strāge as by his former demaund you haue heard when he said haue yow any thing to except against their practice Now heere he answereth after another fashion thus The booke saith he of Doctour Sutcliffe I could not finde and I needed not seeke it for I haue conferred with the Master who answered me that the booke De iure Magistratus he neuer thought to be Beza his worke and concerning the State of Geneua and Bishop therof he was neuer their Prince but the State of the towne was a free State of it self and now to make a question whether I should belieue him or yow is to doubt whether he that hath byn at Geneua or he that neuer saw it can better
Morton not content after the pretended confirmation of his first discouery and reasons therof to haue added a second Treatise conteyning as he saith A Iustification of Protestantes against imputations of disobedience and Rebellion against temporall Princes either in doctrine or practice both which you haue heard now how substātially he hath performed he thought good also to ad a third Treatise though nothing needfull to the argument in hand which he intituleth A confutation of the principles of Romish doctrine in two pointes first concerning the Pope supreame head of Rebellion and secondly the impious conceipt of Equiuocation And forasmuch as of the second point which is Equiuocation we are to treat more largly in the ensuing Chapters and that the first seemed to me impertinent to be treated againe seuerally in this place the substance therof hauing byn touched sufficiently forasmuch as belongeth to this affaire in the former Chapters especially the second I had purposed once to passe it ouer without any answere at all as indeed not deseruing any it being only a certaine disorderly hudling togeather of peeces and parcelles of other mens collections about that matter better handled by themselues But yet considering afterward the speciall manner of this mans treating the same matters both in regard of fraude and simplicity though contrary the one to the other I iudged it not amisse to giue the Reader some tast therof in this one Chapter wherby he may be able to frame a iudgment of the rest and of the exorbitant veine of this mans writing 2. First then he beginneth the very first lines of his first Chapter with these wordes This pretended predominance saith he of the Pope in temporall causes whether directly or indirectly considered in which diuision of gouerning the Romish schoole is at this day extreamly deuided if it be from God it will sure plead Scriptum est c. By which sole entrance yow may take a scantling of the mās discretion for it cannot be denied I thinke except we deny the Ghospell but that Scriptum est was pleaded also by the diuell and not only by God as in like manner it hath byn by all Hereticks the diuels cheif Chaplains since that time and consequently it was no good exordium to build all vpon this foundation 3. Secondly it is not true that the Romish schole is so extreamly deuided in this diuision of gouerning directly or indirectly as the Minister would make it for the question is not at all of gouerning but how the right to gouerne in temporall causes was deliuered by Christ to S. Peter and his Successours whether directly togeather with the spiritual gouernment ouer soules or els indirectly and by a certaine consequence when the said spirituall gouernment is letted and impugned as before hath byn declared In which difference of opinions there is no such extremity of diuision among Catholickes as this man would haue men thinke for that all doe agree in the substance of the thing it self that the Pope hath this authority from God Iure diuino in certaine cases whether directly or indirectly that little importeth to this our controuersy with the Protestantes who deny both the one and the other And so much for that 4. The next sentence or obiection after the former preface which is the very first of his discourse is framed by him but yet in our name vnder the title of the Romane pretence in these wordes The high Priestes in the old Testament saith he were supreame in ciuill causes ergo they ought to be so also in the new for which he citeth one Carerius a Lawier that wrote of late in Padua De potestate Romani Pontificis defending the former opinion of Canonistes for direct dominion citeth his wordes in Latin thus Dico Pontificem in veteri Testamento fuisse Rege maiorem And Englisheth the same as before yow haue heard that the high Priest was supreame in ciuill causes which wordes of ciuill causes he putteth in of his owne and if yow marke them doe marre the whole market for that Carerius hath them not either in wordes or sense but teacheth the plaine cōtrary in all his discourse to wit that he meaneth in matters appertaining to Religion and Preisthood and not of temporall principality which this Author granteth to haue byn greater in the old Testament in dealing with Ecclesiasticall men matters then in the new to that effect is he cited presently after by the Minister himself contrary to that which heere he feigneth him to say But let vs heare the wordes of Carerius Tertiò dico saith he etiam in Testamento veteri fuisse Pontificem Rege maiorem quod quidem probatur c. Thirdly I say that the high Priest was greater also in the old Testament then the King which is proued first out of the 27. Chapter of Numbers where it is appointed by God that Iosue and all the people should be directed by the word of the high Priest Eleazar saying whē any thing is to be done let Eleazar the high Priest consult with God and at his word aswell Iosue as all the children of Israell and whole multitude shall goe forth and come in c. And secondly the same is proued out of the fourth of Leuiticus where foure kind of Sacrifices being ordained according to the dignity of the persons the first two are of a calfe for the high Priest commonwealth the third and fourth of a hee and shee-goat for the Prince and priuate persons Wherby Carerius inferreth a most certaine dignity and preheminence of the Priestes state aboue the temporall Prince though he say not in ciuill causes as this Minister doth bely him 5. And wheras Carerius had said in two former Answeres first that in the old Testament Ecclesiasticall and secular iurisdiction were not so distinct but that both might be in some cases in the King and secondly that in the new law the spirituall power was more eminent then in the old he commeth thirdly to say that in the old law the High Priest in some respectes was greater also then the King which cannot be vnderstood of ciuill power except the Author will be contrary to himself And therfore that clause was very falsly and perfidiously thrust in by the Minister and this with so much the lesse shame for that in the end of the same Chapter he citeth the same Author to the plaine contrary sense saying In veteri lege Regnum erat substantiuum sacerdotium adiectiuum c. That in the old law the Kingdome was the substantiue that stood of it self and Preisthood was the adiectiue that leaned theron but contrary-wise in the new law Preisthood and spirituall iurisdiction is the substantiue or principall in gouernment and temporall principality is the adiectiue depending therof for direction and assistance the one both by nature and Godes law being subordinate to the other to wit the temporall to the
doth not this man know that the difference betweene a good and bad gouernment a true King and a Tyrant consisteth in this that the one raigneth for his owne good the other for the good of his subiects What impiety were it to affirme this defect to be in Christes Kingly gouernment and consequētly what folly is it to bring in such reasons But let vs see what he saith further 21. Christ saith he as Priest is suppliant to his Father as King he is predominant ouer all powers and principalities equally with his Father But now wee haue shewed before that there be two partes or functions of Priesthood the one towardes God to be suppliant by sacrifice and intercession the other to be predominant ouer men by spirituall gouernment vpon their soules and that both these doe agree to Christ in respect of his high Priesthood and as he is man and much more the other of his temporall Kingdome so as to make him equall to his Father in this as T. M. doth is an impious absurdity for that vnder his Fathers vniuersall Kingdome Christ himself is also conteined as a subiect according to those wordes of graduation in S. Paul Omnia vestra sunt c. vos autem Christi Christus autem Dei All thinges are yours life death the world thinges past thinges to come and yow are of Christ Christ of God that is to say all thinges for Christ are subiect to yow so you are and ought to be subiect to Christ and Christ to God his Father Now then see how wisely this man frameth his foresaid maine Conclusion that as in Christ his Kingdome had the preheminence of his Priesthood which is false as we haue shewed so must it hold also among men that Kingly power be preferred before Priestly temporall before spirituall Of which opinion S. Chrysostome doth thinke that no man but mad or furious can be Equidem saith he neminem existere talem dixerim nisi si quis furiarum aestu percitus sit I cannot thinke any man to be of this opinion to preferre temporall authority before spirituall except a man should become mad with the rage of furies And so to S. Chrysostome I leaue our Minister to be charmed from these kinde of Hereticall furies THE SECOND PART OF THIS CHAPTER CONTEYNING Three particular kindes of proofes alledged by T. M. against the Popes Supremacy to vvit Of the new and old Testament and from reason it self ALl this that hitherto hath byn treated by our Aduersary hath byn by way as it were of preamble or preface for abasing Priesthood as you haue seene euen in Christ himself therby to subiect the same in Christians to temporall authority but about this point I wish the Reader to looke ouer the forenamed two Chapters of the late Answere to Syr Edward Cooke I meane the second and fourth and I suppose he will remaine satisfied in the preheminency of the one aboue the other Now notwithstanding for the second part of this Chapter we shall bring into a short view the principall pointes hādled by T. M. in this his confutation of the Popes Supremacy And albeit you may easily make a coniecture of what substance it is like to be by that which already you haue seéne discussed yet shall we descend to some principall particulars for that he reduceth in effect all his proofes to three chief heades the first concerning the state of the Sinagogue vnder the Iewes the second of the Christian Church vnder the new Testament the third by reason common to them both From the State of the old Testament §. 1. 23. FOr the first he setteth downe as argumentes of ours for licencing Popes to kill Princes a large list of Kinges and Princes deposed murthered or molested vnder the old Testament as though we did found our doctrine theron for which cause he giueth the title of Romish pretence to the said list alledging therin fourteene seuerall examples as Saul deposed by the Prophet Samuel Roboam by the Prophet Achia the Queene Athalia by the chief Priest Iehoida King Antiochus resisted and driuen out of his Dominion ouer Iury by the Priest Mathathias and the Machabees his children the Priestes of Baal and other Ministers of the King slaine by the Prophets Elias Elizeus the great Captaine Holofernes by Iudith King Eglon by Ahod Sisera by Iabel Queene Iezabel by Iehu at the appointmēt of the Prophet Elizeus with seauenty children of King Achab the death of King Achab who was slaine also miserably himself by Godes appointment the Prophetes prediction King Amon slaine by his owne seruantes for his wickednes to whome we may ad the death of King Agag by the commaundement of Samuel the Prophet the slaughter of King Ioas by his owne seruantes And lastly King Ozias for exercising the Priestes office and function was by the high Priest depriued of his Kingdome 24. And when he had set downe all this ranke of these vnfortunate Princes their deathes and depositions as though we had delighted therin or proposed all that heere is said to be imitated he saith Heere we heare nothing but fighting dispossessing and killing of Kinges those cheifly by Priestes and Prophetes of God in the old Testament propounded to the Prelates of the new to teach them to erect their Miters aboue Crownes Doe yow see the malice of the man If himself hath gathered together this Catalogue of Princes that came to ill endes were slaine or deposed is it maruaile though he heare nothing but that himself liketh to lay forth 25. The difference and comparison of Miters and Crownes is fond and ridiculous and brought in only to make the matter it self odious for the true comparison is only betweene spirituall and temporal authority the one apperteyning to soules the other to bodies the one called heauenly the other earthly the one proper to Priestes the other to ciuill Princes as before yow haue heard declared out of ancient Fathers who notwithstanding were neuer reprehended nor called into enuy for erecting Miters aboue Crownes in that sense as this prophane Calumniator doth heere vrge and exaggerate 26. And as for this whole matter of the examples out of the old Testamēt our principall question being only as before we haue declared VVhether God hath left any lawfull meanes for restrayning euill Princes in certaine cases of extreame danger and whether Priestes also and Prelates in Christian Religion but especially the highest Priest may deale therin These examples are fraudulently heaped and hudled togeather by T. M. as though all were equally stood vpon by Catholicke writers and this to the end that he may giue himself matter to answere afterward as he doth by distinguishing that all doe not proue the self same thing nor were equally lawfull nor done by equall authority or approbation nor appertaine equally to the matter we haue in hād which Catholicke writers also doe say and haue taught him to
next ensuing whose title is Quid in Tyrannide subdit is agendum sit What subiectes ought to doe in case of tyranny he sheweth two sortes of Tyranny and Tyrantes the one that inuadeth vniustly another mans dominions against the will authority of his King and Prince the other that leauing the office of a King and good Prince in protecting his people and Religion iustice among them turneth himselfe wholy to their affliction and oppression and that in the former case the people are taught by many examples of Scriptures to resist by armes where they can but in the second much more moderation is to be vsed all meanes of humble suite intreaty intercession prayer to God amendment of life and pacification to be vsed Quod si haec non iuuent saith he Superiorem in tempor alibus vti Reges Princeps non agnoscit tunc supremus Ecclesiae Pastor interpellandus occurrit qui bonis aequis subditorum querelis audit is plura Deo cooperante ratione auctoritate praestare poterit quà m vnquam 〈◊〉 armis impetrabit but if these meanes doe not help saith Cunerus and that the Prince doe acknowledge no Superiour in temporall causes as Kinges doe not then is the Supreme Pastor of the Church to be called vpon who hauing heard the iust good complaintes of the Subiects God assisting him shall be able to effectuate more by reason and authority with their Prince then euer the people themselues should haue obteyned by force of armes Thus he 48. And now will T. M. allow this also for deuinely spoken If he doe then we differ not in opinion If he doe not why doth he so often and continually cull out and cut of sentences of Authors that write directly against him as this Bishop Cunerus the Lawier Carerius the Deuine Bozius the Iesuites Bellarmine Salmeron Azor and others And yet I must admonish the Reader heere againe that if he compare the text it selfe of Cunerus with that which heere T. M. setteth downe in Latin and then the Latin with that he Englisheth he shall find such mangling vpon mangling by cutting of leauing out altering whole sentēces as he will see that this man can scarce deale truly in any thing And thus much for his first answere out of Cunerus making much more against him then for him as yow haue seene 49. And I leaue to discusse the Authority of S. Augustine which out of Cunerus he also alleadgeth for otherwise then out of our Authors bookes he hath little or nothing in any matter it being no lesse mangled by this man then is the text of Cunerus it selfe as euery one will finde that shall read Cunerus not so much as one note of c. being left any where lightly to signify that somewhat is cut of but all running togeather as if it were continuall speach in the Author whereas in deed they be but peeces scraps ioyned togeather and those also commonly with much corruption wherof I dare auouch that the Author shall finde aboue a hundred examples in this fraudulent Reply which is wholy patched vp out of the distracted sentences of our owne Authors by this art 50. But now to his second answere to the former obiection that Gods prouidence must needes haue lef't some remedy for the danger that may occurre by euill gouernment of Princes c. The second is saith he the consideration of examples of the primitiue Church when for the space of three hundred yeares it was in grieuous persecution there was found no power on earth to restraine that earthly power was therfore God wanting to his Church God forbid Nay rather he was not wanting for it is written Vertue is perfected in infirmity And againe As gold is purged in the fire so by affliction c. Because when the outward man suffereth the inward man is renewed and when I am weake then am I strong So he And doe yow see how patient and meeke this man is become now when there is nothing to suffer did his Protestant-Authors before mencioned write or teach this doctrine whē they were pressed by their Catholicke Princes to be quiet Or if this should be preached now at this day in Holland Zeland Frizeland Hungary Polonia Zweueland Transiluania where actually Protestantes are in armes against their naturall and lawfull Princes would it be receaued as currant and Euangelicall Would the examples of primitiue martyrs when there was scarce any temporall common-wealth extant among Christians be sufficient to prescribe a forme of patience sufferance to these men Why doe they not then put it in practice And why cease they not according to this mans doctrine from so notorious tumultuations against their lawfull Princes Why is not this doctrine of the Scripture of perfecting their vertue by bearing and suffering admitted by them I confesse it ought to be soe with all particuler men in their afflictions oppressions and tribulations and so teach our Doctors as before yow haue heard though when the hurt and danger concerneth a common wealth established in Christian Religion there be other considerations to be had as before hath byn set downe 51. But Protestantes obserue neither the one nor the other but both in particuler and common breake forth when they are streyned or discontēted into the vttermost violence they can and their Doctores are ready presently to defend them yea and to goe to the feild with them if need be against their Princes as experience hath taught vs both in Zwitzerland Scotland France and other places Wherfore this pretended preaching of patience and sufferance of T. M. in this place both in his outward and inward man is to small purpose 52. Wherfore his third answere is to the former obiection The view as he saith of our Popish principles wherby we teach that the Pope may not be iudged by any person vpon earth whether secular or Ecclesiasticall nor by a General Councel though he should doe something contrary to the vniuersall State of the Church neglect the Canons spare offenderes oppresse innocentes and the like For which he citeth both Bellarmine Carerius and Azor and then addeth that the Pope cannot be deposed for any of these no not though saith he to vse the wordes of your Pope himselfe one placed in the calendes of your martyrs he should carry many people with himselfe to hell yet no mortall creature may presume to say why doe yow so Thus he 53. Whervnto I answere first that all which Bellarmine Carerius Azorius and other Catholicke writers doe affirme of the Popes preheminency of authority immediatly vnder Christ so as he hath no Superiour Iudge betweene Christ and him that may sit in iudgment ouer him or giue sentence vpon him for matters of yll life tendeth only to shew that as he receiueth his supreame charge immediatly from Christ so by him must he be iudged not by man though
in his English translation which is that which most importeth his simple Reader that looketh not into the Latin and this is that he translateth the former sentence of the Canon thus as before yow haue heard Though he should carry many people with him to hell yet no mortall creature may presume to say why doe yow so But in the Latin neither heere nor in the Canon it selfe is there any such interrogation at all as why doe yow so And therfore I may aske T. M. why doe yow ly so Or why doe yow delude your Reader so Or why do yow corrupt your Author so Or why doe yow translate in English for the abusing of your Reader that which neither your selfe doe set downe in your Latin text nor the Canon it selfe by yow cited hath it at all Is not this wilfull and malicious fraude Wherin when yow shall answere me directly and sincerly it shall be a great discharge of your credit with those who in the meane space will iustly hold yow for a deceauer 59. His fourth answere to the former argument of Gods prouidence is the difference he saith of Kings and Popes in this point for that the Papall power saith he which will be thought spirituall if it be euill may be the bane of soules the power of Princes is but corporall therfore feare them not because they can goe no further then the body Thus he And did euer man heare so wise a reason And cannot euill Kinges and Princes be the cause of corrupting soules also if they should liue wickedly permit or induce others to doe the same And what if they should be of an euill Religion as yow will say Q. Mary and K. Henry were and all Kinges vpward for many hundred yeares togeather who by Statutes and lawes forced men to follow the Religiō of that time did all this touch nothing the soule who would say it but T. M But he goeth forward in his application for that bodily Tyranny saith he worketh in the Godly patience but the spirituall Tyranny doth captiuate the inward soule This now is as good as the former and is a difference without diuersity so farre as concerneth our affaire that a man may with patience if he will resist both the one and the other And euen now we haue seene that when any Pope shal decline from the common receaued faith of Christendome he cannot captiuate other men but is deposed himselfe Wherfore this mans conclusion is very simple saying Therfore heere is need according to Gods prouidence of power to depose so desperate a spirituall euill wherof it is written if the salte want his saltenesse it is good for nothing but to be cast vpon the donghill Marke then that concerning the spirituall that God hath ordeined eiiciatur foras let it be cast out but concerning the temporall resiste not the power 60. Lo heere and doe not these men find Scriptures for all purposes This fellow hath found a text that all spirituall power when it misliketh them must be cast to the donghill and no temporall must be resisted and yet he that shall read the first place by him alleadged out of S. Matthew shall find that the lacke of saltenesse is expresly meant of the want of good life and edification especially in Priestes and Preachers and yet is it no precept as this man would haue it to cast them al to the donghill but that salte leesing his taste is fit for nothing but to that vse S. Paul in like manner to the Romanes doth not more forbid resisting of temporall authority then of spirituall but commaundeth to obey both the one and the other which this man applieth only to temporall which he would haue exalted obeyed and respected and the other contemned and cast to the donghill Oh that he had byn worthy to haue byn the scholler of S. Chrysostome S. Gregory Nazianzen or S. Ambrose before cited who so highly preferred spirituall authority before temporall how would they haue rated him if he would not haue byn better instructed or more piously affected No doubt eiecissent foras they would haue cast him forth to the donghill in deed and there haue left him and so doe we in this matter not meaning to follow him any further except he reasoned more groundedly or dealt more sincerly 61. Yet in one word to answere his comparison we say that both temporall spirituall Magistrates may doe hurte both to body and soule for as the temporall may preiudice also the soule as now hath byn said so may the spirituall afflict in like manner the body as when the Pope or Bishoppes doe burne Heretikes so as in this respect this distinction of T. M. is to no purpose yet doe we also say that when spirituall authority is abused it is more pernicious preiudiciall then the other Quia corruptio optimi est pessima The best thinges become worst when they are peruerted and spirituall diseases especially belonging to faith be more pernicious then corporall for which cause God had so much care to prouide for the preuention therof in his Christian Church for the conseruation of true faith by the authority vnion visibility succession of the said Church and diligence of Doctores Teachers Synodes Councels and other meanes therin vsed and by his assistance of infallibility to the head therof which head though in respect of his eminent authority he haue no Superiours to Iudge or chastise him except in case of heresy as hath byn said yet hath he many and effectuall meanes wherby to be admonished informed stirred vp and moued so as he being but one in the world and furnished with these helpes bringeth farre lesse danger and inconuenience then if all temporall Princes who are many had the like priuiledge and immunity And this euery reasonable man out of reason it selfe will easily see consider 62. As also this other point of no small or meane importance to wit that English Protestantes pretending temporall Princes to be supreame and without Iudge or Superiour in matters of Religion as well as ciuill and secular they incurre a farre greater inconuenience therby then they would seeme to lay vpon vs. For that if any temporall Prince as Supreame in both causes would take vpon him the approbation or admission of any sect or heresy whatsoeuer they haue no remedy at all according to the principles of their doctrine wheras we say the Pope in this case may and must be deposed by force of his subiectes all Christian Princes ioined togeather against him so as in place of one generall Pope which in this case is vnder authority they make so many particuler Popes as are particuler Kings temporall Princes throughout all Christendome that are absolute and consequently without all remedy for offences temporall or spirituall in manners or faith 63. And now let vs imagine what variety of sectes and schismes would haue byn at this day in Christianity if for
consequently that he may assigne a Church to the Arrians Wherto I answere saith S. Ambrose trouble not your selfe O Emperour nor thinke that yow haue Imperiall right ouer those thinges that are diuine doe not exalt your selfe but if yow wil raigne long be subiect to God for it is written that those thinges that belong to God must be giuen to God and to Cesar only those thinges that belōg to Cesar Pallaces appertaine to the Emperour but Churches to the Priest the right of defending publicke walles is committed to yow but not of sacred thinges Thus Doctor Barkley out of S. Ambrose in the very place cited by T. M. which he thought good wholy to pretermit and cut of as not making for his purpose and so had he done more wisely if he had left out also the other authority of Pope Leo which he reciteth in the eight place of authorities out of ancient Fathers in these wordes 18. The eighth Father saith he is Pope Leo writing to a true Catholicke Emperour saying Yow may not be ignorant that your Princely power is giuen vnto yow not only in worldly regiment but also spirituall for the preseruation of the Church as if he said not only in cases temporall but also in spirituall so far as it belongeth to the outward preseruation not to the personall administration of them and this is the substance of our English oath And surther neither doe our Kinges of England chalenge nor subiectes condescend vnto In which wordes yow see two thinges are conteined first what authority S. Leo the Pope aboue eleuen hundred yeares gone ascribed vnto Leo the Emperour in matters spirituall and Ecclesiasticall The second by this mans assertion that neither our Kinges of England chaleng nor doe the subiectes condescend vnto any more in the oath of the Supremacy that is proposed vnto them which if it be so I see no cause why all English Catholickes may not take the same in like manner so far forth as S. Leo alloweth spiritual authority to the Emperour of his time Wherfore it behooueth that the Reader stand attent to the deciding of this question for if this be true which heere he saith our controuersy about the Supremacy is at an end 19. First then about the former point let vs consider how many waies T. M. hath corrupted the foresaid authority of S. Leo partly by fraudulent allegation in Latin and partly by false translation into English For that in Latin it goeth thus as himself putteth it downe in the margent Debes incunctanter aduertere Regiam potestatem non solùm ad mundi regimen sed maximè ad Ecclesiae praesidium esse collatam Yow ought ô Emperour resolutly to consider that your Kingly power is not only giuen vnto yow for gouernment of the world or worldly affaires but especially for defence of the Church and then doe ensue immediatly these other wordes also in S. Leo suppressed fraudulently by the Minister for that they explicate the meaning of the Author Vt ausus nefarios comprimendo quae bene sunt statuta defendas veram pacem his quae sunt turbata restituas To the end that yow may by repressing audacious attemptes both defend those thinges that are well ordeined and decreed as namely in the late generall Councell of Calcedon and restore peace where matters are troubled as in the Citty and Sea of Alexandria where the Patriarch Proterius being slaine and murdered by the conspiracy of the Dioscorian Heretickes lately condemned in the said Councell all thinges are in most violent garboiles which require your imperiall power to remedy compose and compresse the same 20. This is the true meaning of S. Leo his speech to the good and Religious Emperour of the same name as appeareth throughout the whole Epistle heere cited and diuers others Nonne perspicuum est saith he quibus pietas vestra succurrere quibus obuiare ne Alexandrina Ecclesia c. Is it not euident whome your Imperiall piety ought to assist and succour and whome yow ought to resist and represse to the end the Church of Alexandria that hitherto hath byn the house of praier become not a den of theeues Surely it is most manifest that by this late barbarous and most furious cruelty in murdering that Patriarch all the light of heauenly Sacramentes is there extinguished Intercepta est Sacrificij oblatio defecit chrismatis sanctificatio c. The oblation of sacrifice is intermitted the hallowing of Chrisme is ceassed and all diuine misteries of our Religion haue withdrawne themselues from those parricidiall handes of those Heretickes that haue murdered their owne Father and Patriarch Proterius burned his body and cast the ashes into the ayer 21. This then was the cause and occasion wherin the holy Pope Leo did implore the helpe and secular arme of Leo the Emperour for chastising those turbulent Heretiks to which effect he saith that his Kingly power was not only giuen him for the gouernmēt of the world but also for the defence of the Church which our Minister doth absurdly translate not only in worldly regiment but also spirituall for the preseruation of the Church turning ad into in and praesidium into preseruation and then maketh the commentary which before we haue set downe As if he had said quoth he not only in causes temporall but also in spirituall so far as it belongeth to outward preseruation not to the personall administratiō of them 22. And heere now he sheweth himself intangled not only about the assertion of Imperiall power in spirituall matters by that S. Leo saith it is giuen ad praesidium Ecclesiae to the defence of the Church which proueth nothing at all for him but against him rather as yow see and much more in the explication therof to wit what is meant by this authority how farre it strecheth it self wherin truly I neuer found Protestant yet that could cleerly set downe the same so as he could make it a distinct doctrine from ours and giue it that limites which his fellowes would agree vnto or themselues make probable 23. About which matter M. Morton heere as yow see who seemeth no small man amongest them and his booke must be presumed to haue come forth with the approbation and allowance of his Lord and Maister the Archbishop at least saith as yow haue heard that it is no more but such as S. Leo allowed in the Emperour ad Ecclesiae praesidium to the defence of the Church and Church matters and men and for punishing Heretickes that troubled the same And further more T. M. expoundeth the matter saying That this Imperiall Kingly authority in spirituall causes reacheth no further but as it belongeth to outward preseruation not to the personall administration of them And doe not we graunt also the same Or doe not we teach that temporall Princes power ought principally as S. Leo saith to extend it self to the defence ad preseruation
of the Church In this then we agree and haue no difference 24. There followeth in T. M. his assertion heere But not in the personall administration of them to wit of spirituall causes this now is a shift dissembling the difficulty and true State of the question which is in whome consisteth the supreame power to treate iudge and determine in spirituall causes which this man flying as not able to resolue telleth vs only that he cannot personally administer the same which yet I would aske him why For as a Bishop may personally performe all the actions that he hath giuen authority to inferiour Priestes to doe in their functions and a temporall Prince may execute in his owne person if he list any inferiour authority that he hath giuen to others in temporall affaires so if he haue supreame authority spirituall also why may he not in like manner execute the same by himself if he please But of this is sufficiently writteÌ„ of late in the foresaid booke of Answere to Syr Edward Cooke where also is shewed that a farre greater authority spirituall was giuen to King Henry the eight by Parlament then this that T. M. alloweth his Maiesty now for outward preseruation of the Church to wit To be head therof in as ample manner as euer the Pope was or could be held before him ouer England and to King Edward though then but of ten yeares old was granted also by Parlament That he had originally in himself by his Crowne and Scepter all Episcopall authority so as the Bishops and Archbishops had no other power or spirituall authority then was deriued from him to Queene Elizabeth by like graunt of Parlament was also giuen as great authority spirituall and Ecclesiasticall ouer the Church and Clergy of England as euer any person had or could exercise before which was and is another thing then this outward preseruation which T. M. now assigneth hauing pared the same in minced wordes to his purpose to make it seeme little or nothing but dareth not stand to it if he be called to the triall 25. Wherfore this matter being of so great importance and consequence as yow see I doe heere take hold of this his publicke assertion and require that it may be made good to wit that this is the substance meaning only of the English oath and that neither our Kinges of England doe chalenge more nor subiectes required to condescend to more then to grant to their authority for outward preseruation or ad Ecclesiae praesidium as S. Leo his wordes and meaning are and I dare assure him that al Catholickes in England will presently take the oath and so for this point there will be an attonement Me thinkes that such publicke doctrine should not be so publickly printed and set forth without publicke allowance and intention to performe and make it good Yf this be really meant we may easely be accorded if not then will the Reader see what credit may be giuen to any thing they publish notwithstanding this booke commeth forth with this speciall commendation of Published by authority c. 26. And for conclusion of all it may be noted that there hath byn not only lacke of truth and fidelity in citing Pope Leo for Ecclesiasticall Supremacy in Emperours aboue Popes but want of modesty discretion also for so much as no one ancient Father doth more often and earnestly inculcate the contrary for the preheminence of the Sea of Rome then doth S. Leo in so much that Iohn Caluin not being able otherwise to answere him saith that he was tooto desirous of glory dominion and so shifteth him of that way and therfore he was no fit instance for T. M. to bring heere in proofe of spirituall supremacy in temporall Princes 27. But yet in the very next page after he vseth a far greater immodesty or rather perfidy in my opinioÌ„ in calumniation of Cardinall Bellarmine whome he abuseth notably both in allegation exposition translation application and vaine insultation for thus he citeth in his text out of him Ancient generall Councelles saith the Romish pretence were not gathered without the cost of good and Christian Emperours and were made by their consentes for in those dayes the Popes did make supplication to the Emperour that by his authority he would gather Synods but after those times all causes were changed because the Pope who is head in spirituall matters cannot be subiect in temporall Bellarm. lib. 1. de Concil cap. 13. § Habemus ergo 28. And hauing alledged this resolutioÌ„ of Bellarmine the Minister insulteth ouer him in these words Who would thinke this man could be a Papist much lesse a Iesuit how much lesse a Cardinal who thus disableth the title of the Pope granting to vs in these wordes after these times that is after six hundred yeares the truth of purer antiquities challenging Popes to be subiect vnto Christian Emperours And yet who but a Papist would as it were in despite of antiquity defend the degenerate state saying after those times Popes might not be subiect in temporall matters As if he should haue said Then gratious fauour of ancient Christian Emperours then sound iudgment of ancient reuerend Fathers then deuout subiection of ancient holy Popes in summe then ancient purity and pure antiquity adieu But we may not so bastardly reiect the depositum and doctrine of humble subiection which we haue receaued from our Fathers of the first six hundred yeares and not so only but which as your Barkley witnesseth the vniuersall Christian world imbraced with common consent for a full thousand yeares So he 29. And doe yow see how this Minister triumpheth Who would thinke that men of conscience or credit could make such ostentation vpon meere lies deuised by themselues as now wee shall shew all this bragge to be And as for D. Barkley alledged in the last lines let any man read him in the booke and Chapter cited and he will wonder at the impudency of this vaunter for he speaketh no one word of gathering Councells or comparison of spirituall authority betweene the Pope and Emperour concerning their gathering of Councelles or Synodes but of a quite different subiect of taking armes by subiectes against their lawfull temporall Princes And what will our Minister then answere to this manifest calumniation so apparently conuinced out of Doctor Barkley But let vs passe to the view of that which toucheth Cardinall Bellarmine against whome all this tempest is raised 30. First then we shall set downe his wordes in Latin according as T. M. citeth him in his margent Tunc Concilia generalia fiebant saith he non sine Imperatorum sumptibus eo tempore Pontifex subiiciebat se Imperatoribus in temporalibus ideo non poterant inuito Imperatore aliquid agere idâ—irco Pontifex supplicabat Imperatori vt iuberet conuocari Synodum At post illa tempora omnes causae
mutatae sunt quia Pontifex qui est caput in spiritualibus non est subiectus in temporalibus Then in those dayes generall Councelles were made not without the charges of Emperours in that time the Pope did subiect himselfe vnto Emperours in temporall affaires and therfore they could doe nothing against the Emperours will for which cause the Pope did make supplication to the Emperour that he would commaund Synodes to be gathered but after those times all causes were changed for that the Pope who is head in spirituall matters is not subiect in temporall affaires So he 31. And heere let vs consider the variety of sleightes shifts of this our Minister not only in citing Bellarmins wordes falsly and against his meaning and drift in Latin wherof we shall speake presently but in peruerting this Latin that he hath so corruptly set downe in his former English translation For first hauing said according to the Latin that generall Councelles in those dayes were not gathered without the cost of Emperours he addeth presently of his owne and were made by their consentes which is not in the Latin and then he cutteth of the other wordes immediatly ensuing which conteine the cause to wit for that the Popes subiecting themselues in those dayes touching temporalities vnto the Emperours as hauing no temporall States or dominion yet of their owne could doe nothing without them and therfore did make supplication to the said Emperours that they would commaund Synodes to be gathered which T. M. translateth that they would gather Synodes as though Bellarmine did affirme that it lay in the Emperours by right to doe it but after those times omnes causae mutatae sunt all causes were changed but he should haue said are changed as Bellarmins true wordes are omnes istae causae al these causes are chāged to wit foure sortes of causes which he setteth downe why generall Councells could not be well gathered in those dayes without the Emperours help and authority which wordes are guilefully cut of by this deceauer as in like manner the last wordes put downe heere by himselfe Pontifex non est subiectus in temporalibus are falsly translated cannot be subiect in temporall and againe afterward Popes might not be subiect in temporall matters which is to make Bellarmine contrary to himselfe who saith a little before that the Popes did subiect themselues for many years wherby is proued that they could doe it but Bellarmins meaning is that in right by the preheminence of their spirituall dignity they were exempted not bound therunto 32. And thus much now for the corruptions vsed in the wordes heere set downe both in Latin English But if we would goe to Bellarmine himself and see his whole discourse and how brokenly and persidiously these lines are cut out of him and heere patched togeather as one entier context contrary to his drift and meaning we shall meruaile more at the insolency of Thomas Morton triumphing ouer his owne lye as before hath byn said for that Bellarmine hauing proued at larg and by many sortes of argumentes and demonstrations throughout diuers Chapters togeather that the right of gathering generall Councelles belongeth only to the Bishop of Rome and hauing answered all obiections that could be made against the same in the behalfe of Emperours or other temporall Princes grāting only that for certaine causes in those first ages the same could not be done in respect of temporall difficulties without the helpe assistance of the said Emperours that were Lords of the world he commeth to make this conclusion which heere is cited by T. M. but in far other wordes and meaning then heere he is cited Yow shall heare how he setteth it downe therupō consider of the truth of this Minister Habemus ergo saith he prima illa Concilia c. We haue then by all this disputation seene how those first Christian Councelles were commaunded by Emperours to be gathered but by the sentence and consent of Popes and why the Pope alone in those dayes did not call Councelles as afterward hath byn accustomed the reason was not for that Councelles gathered without the Emperours consent are not lawfull as our Aduersaries would haue it for against that is the expresse authority of S. Athanasius saying Quando vnquam iudicium Ecclesiae ab Imperatore authoritatem habuit When was it euer seene that the iudgment of the Church did take authority from the Emperour but for many other most iust causes was the Emperours consent required therin c. So Bellarmine 33. And heere now yow see that Bellarmins drift is wholy against M. Mortons assertion for that he denieth that euer the Emperours had any spirituall authority for calling of Councells but only that they could not well in those dayes be made without them and that for foure seuerall causes wherof the first was for that the old Imperiall lawes made by Gentils were yet in vse wherby all great meetinges of people were forbidden for feare of sedition except by the Emperours knowledge licence the second for that Emperours being temporall Lordes of the whole world the Councells could be made in no Citty of theirs without their leaue the third for that generall Councelles being made in those dayes by the publicke charges contributions of Citties and especially of Christian Emperours themselues as appeareth by Eusebius Theodoretus other writers it was necessary to haue their consent and approbation in so publicke an action as that was 34. The fourth and last cause was saith Bellarmine for that in those dayes albeit the Bishop of Rome where head in spirituall matters ouer the Emperours themselues yet in temporall affaires he did subiect himself vnto them as hauing no temporal State of his owne and therfore acknowledging them to be his temporall Lords he did make supplicatiō vnto them to commaund Synodes to be gathered by their authority and licence At post illa tempora istae omnes causae mutatae sunt but since those dayes all these foure causes are changed ipse in suis Prouinciis est Princeps Supremus temporalis sicut sunt Reges Principes alij and the Pope himself now in his temporall Prouinces is supreme temporall Lord also as other Kings Princes are which was brought to passe by Godes prouidence saith Bellarmine to the end that he might with more freedome liberty and reputation exercise his office of generall Pastorship 35. And this is all that Bellarmine hath of this matter And now may we cōsider the vanity of this Mortons triumph ouer him before and how falsly he dealeth with him alledging him against his owne drift and meaning leauing out also 〈◊〉 foure causes by me recited and then cutting of 〈◊〉 the particle istae these causes are now changed which includeth reference to these foure aid furthermore speaking indefinitely as though all causes and matters were now changed seeketh therby to deceaue his Reader and
of the Church therin which should be a greater sinne but yet is not necessary for that the perfect nature of Heresy is consummated by knowing that it is against the Church and for that this notice or knowledge belongeth to the vnderstanding therfore Vasquez holdeth that the last perfection or consummation of this sinne is in the vnderstanding and not in the will not meaning to exclude therby obstinacy of the wil as ignorantly T.M. doth when he saith wee may not be ignorant but to shew in what power of the minde the last perfection consummation of this heinous sinne consisteth to wit that a man may be a perfect and consummate Hereticke by holding obstinatly any opinion against the doctrine of the Church after wee once know it to be against the said Churches doctrine though we haue not that further malice also of expresse will and purpose to contradict therby the said Church but only we hold the same for that the opinion pleaseth vs or is profitable or honorable to vs or therby to contradict another or some such like inducement according to those wordes of S. Augustine to Honoratus Haereticus est qui alicuius temporalis commodi maximè gloriae principatusque sui gratia falsas ac nouas opiniones vel gignit vel sequitur An Hereticke is he who in respect of some temporall commodity but especially for his owne glory and preheminence doth beget or follow false and new opinions 45. The same S. Augustine also against the Donatistes proposeth this example Constituamus saith he aliquem sentire de Christo quod Photinus c. Let vs imagine one to thinke of Christ as Photinus the Hereticke did perswading himself that it is the Catholicke faith c. istum nondū Haereticum dico saith he nisi manifestata sibi doctrina Catholicae fidei resistere maluerit illud quod tenebat elegerit I doe not yet say that this man is an 〈◊〉 vntill after that the doctrine of the Catholicke faith being opened vnto him he shall choose notwithstanding to resist and to hold by choice that which before he held by errour In which wordes S. Augustine doth euidently declare how necessary both knowledge will are vnto Heresy and consequently how absurd and ridiculous the assertion of M. Morton is that Heresy being a vice proper to the vnderstanding may denominate the subiect whatsoeuer an Hereticke without obstinacy of will For 〈◊〉 we grant with all Deuines that Heresy is in the vnderstanding as in her subiect and so is faith also that is her opposite and further that her last perfection and consummation is from the foresaid knowledge in the vnderstanding as Vasquez doth explane it yet doth not Vasquez or any Deuine els exclude the necessity of pertinacity also and election in the will consequently both his wordes and meaning haue byn euidently falsified and calumniated by T. M. and so much of this first charge wherby yow may see what bookes might be made against him if we would follow his steppes in all his fraudulent traces But yet let vs see somewhat more in this very leaf and page 46. For within few lines after he beginneth his third Chapter with these wordes That is only true Religion say your Romish Doctors which is taught in the Romish Church therfore whosoeuer mainteineth any doctrine cōdemned in that Church must be accompted an obstinate Hereticke And in the margent he citeth Cunerus alledging his Latin wordes thus Haec est Religionis sola ratio vt omnes intelligant sic simpliciter esse credendum atque loquendum quemadmodum Romana Ecclesia credendum esse docet ac praedicat Which wordes if they were truly alledged out of the Author yet were they not truly translated for if by only true Religion a corrupt translation of Religionis solaratio be applied to particuler positions and articles of Religion then we grant that such true Religion may be also among Hereticks not only taught in the Roman Church for that as S. Augustine well noteth Heretickes also hold many articles of true Catholicke Religion but heere the corruption and falsification goeth yet further and it is worthy the noting for that Cunerus hauing 〈◊〉 largely against the insurrections and Rebellions of those of Holland and Zeland for cause of Religion and other pretences against their lawfull King taketh vpon him in his thirteenth Chapter to lay downe some meanes how in his opinion those dissentions may be compounded giuing this title to the said Chapter Quae sit vera componendi dissidij 〈◊〉 what is the true way of composing this dissention and then after some discourse setteth downe this conclusion Haec igitur in Religione concordiae sola est ratio vt omnes pio ac simplici animo purè integrè sic sapiant viuant loquantur ac praedicent quemadmodum sancta Catholica Romana Ecclesia quae Dei prouidentia magistra veritatis Orbi praeposita est docet loquitur praedicat This therfore in Religion is the only way of concord that all men with a pious simple minde doe wholy and purely conceaue liue speake preach as the holy Catholicke Roman Church which God by his prouidence hath giuen for a teacher of truth vnto the whole world doth teach speake and preach 47. And now consider yow this dealing that wheras B. Cunerus saith haec est in Religione cocordiae sola ratio this is the only way of concord in Religion this man alledgeth it in his margent haec est Religionis sola ratio this is the only way of Religion as though concord and Religion were al one then by another tricke of crafty translation in his English text that is only true Religion as though true Religion and the way or meanes to come to true Religion were not different and then for all the rest how it is mangled and how many wordes and sentences are put in by this Minister which are none of Cunerus and how many of his altered and put out is easy for the Reader to see by comparing the 〈◊〉 o Latin textes before alleadged and therby to consider how facile a matter it is for this fellow to deuide our tongues A course saith he which I professe in all disputes when he deuideth and separateth the wordes from their Authors and the sense from the wordes and the whole drift from them both a very fine course and fit for a man of his profession But let vs proceed 48. In the very next page he going about to make vs odious by our seuere censuring of Heretickes putteth downe first these wordes of Alphonsus de Castro He that vnderstanding any opinion to be expressely condemned by the Church shall hold the same is to be accompted an obstinate Hereticke Wherupon M. Morton playeth his pageant thus VVhat obstinate It may be some doe but doubtingly defend it what will yow iudge of these wherunto he answereth out of
inuenta est nimirum 〈◊〉 numero vincens merito Worthily doth the Church admit him to wit Innocentius whose estimatiō is more renowned whose election is found to be more lawfull as passing the others election both in number and merit of the choosers And so in these few lynes we see how many wilfull lyes and falsifications this Minister hath vsed which cannot be excused eyther by ouersight ignorance or error but must needs be ascribed to wilfull malice and expresse purpose of deceyuing his hearer And so though I might alledge diuers other places to like effect yet this shall 〈◊〉 for one example yea for all them of that sorte in this behalfe For albeit examples without number may be alleaged out of these mens workes yet by these few 〈◊〉 may be made of the rest I shall therfore adioyne some three or foure examples more of lay-men to shew the conformity of their spirits to their spiritual guydes and so make an end The vse of Equiuocation in Lay-men and Knightes §. 5. 65. OF this sorte of men I will alledge only three in this place that in these later dayes haue written against Catholicke Religion but yet such as are more eminent amōg the rest they being Knightes all three whose honorable condition state of calling ought to haue obliged them to defence of truth and that also by true meanes and not by sleightes of this worst kynde of Equiuocation as heer yow shall see them doe The first is Sir Francis Hastings that wrote the iniurious VVatchword some yeares past aga nst Catholickes The second is Sir Philip Mornay Lord of Plessis that hath written many workes much respected by those of his partiality in Religion The third is Syr Edward Cooke late Attorney of his Maiesty now a Iudge and writer against Catholicks And albeit the second be a French-man borne yet for that he hath liued much in England and wrote some of his bookes there and all or most parte of them are 〈◊〉 to be in the English language I may well accompanie him with English Knightes in this behalfe 66. For the first then which is Syr Francis I may be the briefer with him for that his aduersarie or Antagonist hath in his Answers to the said VVatchword and Apologie therof often put him in mynd of his 〈◊〉 against truth euen then when himselfe must needs know it to be so and consequently that it was not only voluntarie but witting also and wilfull 〈◊〉 wherof I might alledge many particulars but two or three shall be ynough for a tast 67. In his defence of the VVatch-word pag. 74. he treating against the abuse of pardons auoucheth out of sundry Chronicles as he saith the storie of the poysoning of King Iohn by a Monke named Symon and this vpon dispensatiō first obteyned of his Abbot to do the fact without sinne which historie being taken by him out of Iohn Fox his Actes and Monumentes who affirmeth that most of the ancient Historiographers of our Country do agree in this matter both of them are conuinced of wilful vntruthes for that they could not be ignorant but that of all the old Historiographers that liued in the time of King Iohn or within two hundred yeares after no one did euer affirme the same but rather the quite contrarie setting downe other particuler causes occasions of King Iohns death And further they could not but know and haue read Iohn Stowes Chronicle printed anno 1592. who hauing made diligent search about this matter out of all authors of antiquity could fynd no such thing and so he testifyeth in these wordes Thus saith he haue I set downe the life and death though much abbreuiated of King Iohn according to the writinges of Roger 〈◊〉 Roger Houeden Rad. Niger Rad. Cogshall Matthew Paris and others who all lyued when the King raigned and wrote for that tyme what they saw or heard credibly reported c. 68. Now then if this Chronicle of Stow was out and in euery mans hand some yeares before Syr Francis wrote his VVatchword and that hereby is euident according to all ancient writers that the foresaid poysoning of King Iohn by a monke was neither written nor reported by any in those dayes with what Conscience could 〈◊〉 Francis and Fox alledge the 〈◊〉 againe 〈◊〉 a truth Was not heere wilfull deceipt nay 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 will and desire of deceauing 69. The same is layed against Syr Francis in cyting of sundry others as namely the Authority of S. Hierome for proofe of common prayer in a vulgar tongue Tota Ecclesia saith S. Hierome instar tonitruireboat Amen The whole Church like a mighty thunder doth sound out 〈◊〉 inferring therof that all by liklyhood did vnderstand the language wherin publicke seruice was then celebrated for that otherwise they could not so answere But marke the fraudes that are in this allegation First the Knight doth not explicate in particuler what Church it was wherof S. Hierome spake nor vpon what occasion nor to whome and secondly he doth conceale the wordes ' that immediatly went before followed after for that they made al against him For first S. Hierome spake of the Church of Rome in particuler where the latin tongue being in vse so commonly in his dayes that it was as it were their naturall language no maruaile though the common people could sound out Amen they vnderstanding for the most parte the latin tongue for we see also that in other Catholicke Countryes where the latin tongue is not so commonly in vse the common people by vse and practice can and do with common voyce sound out Amen in Letanies and other partes of latin seruice wherfore this circumstance was fraudulently concealed 70. As that other was in like manner that S. Hierome wrote these wordes vnto two vowed virgins Paula and Eustochium to whom he dedicated his said second booke of his Commentaries vpon the Epistle to the Galathians commending vnto them the faith and deuotiō of the Church of Rome aboue other Churches and yeelding a reason why the Apostle S. Paul did so highly commend the Roman Christians in his time both for their faith and obedience saying of the first I do giue thankes to my God by Iesus Christ for yow all sor that your faith is divulged throughout the whole world and in the end of the same Epistle he saith of their obedience in liuing according to their faith Your obedience is divulged into euery place of the world wherfore I take ioy in yow c. Vpon which testimony of the Apostle S. Hierome writeth thus Romanae plebis laudatur 〈◊〉 c. The faith of the Roman people is praysed by the Apostle for in what other place of the world is there such cōtinuall concourse vnto Churches and vnto the Sepulchers of Martyrs as in Rome In what place do they so sound out the word Amen to the likenesse of a certayne heauenly thunder Not for that the Romanes haue
Catholicke people stand in good conceipt with all sortes of men for their truth in concionable and vpright dealing euen with those which endeauour most in this point to slaunder them yet would I wish the same to be confirmed more daylie by factes in respect of this new calumniation raysed against them of the liberty of Equiuocation And this of the first reason 3. My other reason is as before hath byn insinuated in regard of the tyme present which being a tyme of tryall persecution requireth at Catholickes hands a more perfect Confession of their faith and of all matters belonging thervnto then at other tymes And albeit in the former Treatise among the Cases reserued wherin Equiuocation may not be vsed confession of faith be expresly and in the first place excepted so as therin no doublenes or doubtfulnes may be vsed yet no man can deny but many factes and cases may fall out concerning matters of Religion not tending to confession 〈◊〉 in tyme of persecutiō wherin a man may or perhaps also must by obligation if otherwise he cannot auoyd the wrong violence that is offred to himself or others vse Equiuocal speaches for concealing of that which in conscience he cannot vtter But whersoeuer this obligation is not there my wish is as now I haue said that Catholicke people but especially Priestes whose example must instruct the rest should yeald also of their right for encrease of their merite and crowne in heauen and vse all playnesse and sincerity in speach and free discouering not only of their religion but also of their state where it is hurtfull to none but to themselues which yet I speake in that sense and with that limitation which the holy Apostle did when he said That he gaue counsell of himselfe but no precept of our Lord. And for that this whole Treatise of Equiuocation hath proceeded vpō that question so often before repeated VVhether a Priest being taken may deny himselfe to be a Priest or no I shall 〈◊〉 downe dyuers circumstances and considerations of the Case wherby also shal be made more playne what my meaning is in this behalfe 4. When a Priest commeth first into England with full intent and resolution to offer his life if there be need for the confession of Catholicke Religion and is taken afterward brought before the Magistrate either he is taken in some mans house of whose ouerthrow he must be the cause if he confesse that he is a priest or be being taken forth of any house yet hath he cause to suspect and perswade himselfe that it may be knowne afterward by cōfession of others that are also taken or may be taken that he belongeth to such or such a house in these two cases there is no doubt but that if he thinke that his denying of himselfe to be a priest may saue them from hurte he is bound to deny the same with some kynd of lawfull Equiuocation but without telling a lye as before at large hath byn declared But if this priest should be taken in the port as he entreth or soone after in the high way or otherwise and brought before a Magistrate so as his confessing himselfe to be a priest could not preiudice any other and presupposing that he is vnlawfully demaunded that question against law reason and religion heere is he at his owne liberty to deny or confesse himselfe to be a priest and no man can absolutly determine what were best for him to answere but the spirite of God that speaketh within him to whome Christ hath promised to imparte such wisedome as is necessarie for that tyme and action yet if he were not a man of such great extraordinary talēts as by his losse or restraint Gods cause were to leese much or that he were not sure by his denyall to procure his liberty or that he might iustly doubt that he should quickly come to be knowne in prison and therby some scandall to arise to the simple or yll affected by his denyal In al these Cases I would thinke it more meritorious and of greater perfection and edification to confesse himselfe a priest without further denyall or declination which I speake not to condemne them or their doinges that being taken haue done or shall do the contrary for that they vse but their owne right as hath byn declared but rather I speake it for information of others that may doubt of the Case Nor do we intend heere to preiudice the most holy doctrine of S. Athanasius and other ancient Fathers of the lawfulnes of flight and escape in persecution councelled by Christ our Sauiour and authorized by the example of the Apostles themselues and namely of S. Paul when he fled and escaped out of a window and at an other tyme deluded the enuious pursuite of his enemyes by an Equiuocall speach to the Pharisies and Saducies as before hath byn declared but rather to shew that cleare confession is somtymes also most commendable and that in such a tyme of tryall and of Crownes offred to Catholicks and especially to Priests for the said confession of the Catholicke faith as now is no lawfull occasion is to be left for acquiring the same 5. And this is so much as in this matter I had to aduertise Catholickes in the Conclusion of this my answere not meaning to discend into further perticulers of actions obligations that may fall out which heere are hard to be determined but only by the present circumstances of the tyme place and matter in hand with regard and respect vnto the two principall vertues that must gouerne vs in these afayres to witt Truth and Iustice. Truth that all manner of falsity and lying be vtterly auoyded and Iustice that no iniury be done by vs to Gods cause our selues or other men which is the lawe of a iust man and true seruant of God to be obserued whatsoeuer temporall hurtes or damages may ensue therof 6. And wheras my Aduersary Thomas Morton doth conclude the very last lynes of his booke with a fynall Charge againe renewed of our Antichristian doctrines of lying and treason and threatning vs for the same not fancyed fyre of Purgatory saith he as for wood and strawe but vnquenchable hell-fyre as for pitch and tarre sulphur and pouder we shall more charitably conclude with him wishing that his offences of malice 〈◊〉 and deceipt discouered by vs in this our Answere may be wood and straw and that the fyre prepared by Gods Iustice for punishing the same may be a purging fyre and not a consuming 〈◊〉 or rather a consuming fyre and not an vnconsuming fyre as that is of hell which he threatneth to vs but in deed purchaseth to himselfe by the course he hitherto holdeth 7. And to this wish and prayer for him I doubt not but to drawe not only all good and pious Catholicks that vse it 〈◊〉 for their enemyes and persecutors but the
Lib. contr Reg. Angl. Libr. de 〈◊〉 priuata Calu. lib. 4. instit 〈◊〉 18. §. 12. A strange kinde of simplicity vttered vvith duplicity The fifth reason D. VVhitakers ansvvere to D. Sanders demonstrat pag. 21. The 〈◊〉 reason Ievvell in his 2. ansvvere to D. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 desire of M. Ievvell to haue his vvritings ansvvered The bookes so earnestly called for procured by M. Ievv ell to be forbidden * M. VVilliam Reynoldes M. VV. Reynoldes in the refut of M. VVhi tak cap. rs pag. 460. The first 〈◊〉 * Cap. 10. M. Ievvel 〈◊〉 his 〈◊〉 at S. peters in Oxford in obe Lent S. August egregiously abused and falsified 1. Tim. 5. The secoÌ„d example Cassiod li. 〈◊〉 cap. 〈◊〉 Hist. trip lib. 6 c. 14. Niceph. l. 10. hist. 〈◊〉 10. Zozomen l. 5. c. 11. Pag. 176. 514. The third example Greg. l. 7. Epist. 30. indict 1. Fox act 〈◊〉 pag. 105. col 2. 〈◊〉 S. August Epitaph Beda lib 2 cap. 3 hist. AngloruÌ„ M. Tevvlls rayling against S. Augustine in his Reply pag. 〈◊〉 The 4. example Ievvel in the Apol. 〈◊〉 part Martinus de Magistris shamefully abused 1. Cor. 6. The 5. example The 6. example 〈◊〉 3. cases Leo epist. 8. ad 〈◊〉 Leo epist. 81 ad Dioscorum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pis ca. 2. Strabo de rebus Ecclesiasticis cap. 21. Durand lib. 2. de ritibus Ec clesiasticis cap. 7. Pope Celestinus egregiously calumniated by M. Ievvell Ioan. 2. Ievvell defence of 〈◊〉 108. Marc. 13. Christes vvordes egregiously abused by M. Ievvell A dilemma about M Iuells equiuocation M. Hornes equiuocations M. Horne to 〈◊〉 pag. 9. Horne pag. 89. BroughtoÌ„ li. 1. cap. de Papa Archiepis aliis Prelatis M VVill. 〈◊〉 in 〈◊〉 of VVhitak pag. 475. First example of Iohn Fox The Treatise of 3. Conuers of Engl. part 2. c. 2. 3. 4. * Fox pag. 22. nu 35. See the ex amen of the last 6. monethes of his Calendar ca. 19. n. 17. Confutation of Iohn 〈◊〉 his lyes 2. ExaÌ„ple D Calfhill S. Ambr. Serm. 55. Calfhill 〈◊〉 78. Athan. li. 2. de 〈◊〉 Calf hill fol. 〈◊〉 Cyril lib. 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Calf hill 〈◊〉 172. The 3. Example Meridith Hanmer VVilliam 〈◊〉 Luther sermone de matri tom 5. VVittenb fol. 120. Hanmer Charke in their bookes against F. Campian Charke in his ansvv to the Censure * Lanificium is heer much more modestly translated then Luthers meaning seemeth to beare Charke in his ansvv to the CeÌ„sure art 2. Aug lib. 1. de nupt concup cap. 23. The 4. example VVilliam Perkins VVhat is properly Catholick and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Perkins in his 〈◊〉 Cath. c. 1. Apoc. 17. Serm. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 33. Epist. 124. Diuers falsifications of S. Bernards vvordes Bern. epis 124. Vbi 〈◊〉 Epist. 〈◊〉 ad 〈◊〉 Perkins in reformed Cath. c. 8. 〈◊〉 epist. 〈◊〉 The 〈◊〉 of Syr Francis 〈◊〉 A vvilfull vntruth Iohn 〈◊〉 in his 〈◊〉 in the life of K. Iohn Defence of the 2. Encount pag 18. S. Hier. in proem lib. 2. Comen ad 〈◊〉 Rom. 〈◊〉 Rom 16. 〈◊〉 in 〈◊〉 99. vvarn Bed Arnob. ibib Encont 2. fol. 14. 5. Chrys. hom 13 in 2. ad Cor. vvarn En ont 1. 〈◊〉 63. En ont 1. fol. 67. 〈◊〉 of Sir Philip Mornay Actes de la Conference tenue entre le Sieur Euesque d'Eureux le 〈◊〉 du Plessis c. a FouÌ„tain-bleau le 4. de May. 1600. Imprimez chez Anthoine le Marié In the french printed Actes fol. 34. Printed actes fol. 52. Act. fol. 46. Act. fol. 52. 58. See in the 3. 〈◊〉 3. p in the end of the first 6. mo neths of Fox his 〈◊〉 Equiuocatio 〈◊〉 Syr Edvvard Cooke See the ansvver of the Cath. Deuine to the 1. p. of Syr Edvv. Cookes Reportes cap vlt. A notable fiction against Pius Quintus Decret p. 1. dist 40. ca. 6. Si Papa The Lo. Cookes charge against Catholickes The Deuine deceaued by the subtil ty of the Lavvyer King Kenulphus his charter notably falsyfyed by M. Attorney Report fol. 9. The charter as M. Attorney alleadgeth it an 755. Stanford lib. c. 9. fol. 1012. Marke M. Attorneyes Inference vpon his ovvne falsification * This is false * This also is false M. Attorneyes so 〈◊〉 protestation falsifyed Report fol. 40. The relation sent 〈◊〉 of England about the true charter of K. Kenulphus This decydeth the vvhole Controuersy and therfore vvas fraudulently cut of by M Attorney 1. Hen. 7. printed by Pinson Brooke tit Cor. pl. 129. A falsification of protestat printers VVhen ParlameÌ„ts beganne in EnglaÌ„d The conclusion of all Lavvfull causes of the vse of Equiuocation 1. Cor. 6. 1. Cor. 10. The reasons vvhy Catholickes ought to vse the liberty of Equiuocation sparingly * See of these thinges before namely Cap. 7. Consid. 1. Hovv a Priest may somtymes yeeld of his right vvith more merit 1. 〈◊〉 7. Diuers cases falling out in the examinatioÌ„ of priests * Supra cap. 7. 8. 9. 10. Luc. â—â— Diuers considerationâ— Lib. de fuga sua Math. 10. Act. 9. 2. Cor. 11. Act. 23. The tvvo mayne vertues to be respected Truth and Iustice. Conf. pag. 103. Mortons scoffs against Iesuits reiected The facility of lying in T. M. by habit The 〈◊〉 behauiour 〈◊〉 T. M. The Catholicke Treatise of Equiuocation 〈◊〉 to sight A note vpon the Ansvvere of T. M. to the Catholicke Treatise of 〈◊〉 A consideration vpoÌ„ Mortons methode of ansvvering To the Catholickes 2. Cor. 4.