stirres of Wisbich and telleth his Reader in his religious termes how the priests doe calumniate Weston and the bigger and better part because they liued in order and retired themselues from these mens licentiousnes and for more proofe hereof his reader must goe looke in the 6. chapter of the Apologie where hee is like to finde many vntrueths vttered by his Author which are already discouered in a relation set out of those matters In the 15. page which hee calleth the 13. hee noteth this falshood that the priests called themselues vnited LaicoruÌ„ c. The Iesuits did alienate Lay mens mindes ab vnitis sacerdotibus froÌ„ the vnited priests note sayth he the phrase of vnited they being farre the lesse number and diuided both from their head and the rest of their body the English Clergie It is as the Hollanders doe call their rebelled states against the King The vnited Prouinces c. Note say I how this felow abuseth his reader by tellinghim of a diuision against a head where there was none but voto only that is to say by a religious desire which was in Fa. Weston the Iesuite who would be directer of all the priests in Wisbich to which because some would not consent he and his company diuided themselues from them which being an vniust and a scandalous separation the other priests who remained in their former course of life might iustly call themselues vnited as men who properly kept the vnion when the other made such a diuision as they would not haue any commerce with them vpon their idle toy of Reformation vnder pretence whereof the Iesuits hauing gotten the superiority the priests must yeeld to what conditions they would offer or the whole countrey must be in an vprore yet will these men chalenge the name of vnited But let euery indifferent man iudge which part did most liuely represent a rebellious state And for the further proofe of this fellow his malicious impostures for it is not possible that hee should haue hereof any ignorance let any indifferent reader looke vpon that discourse cited here by him out of the Latine booke and it will bee as cleere as noone day that there is no mention of any other matter then of the diuision wrought at Wisbich by the Iesuites and their faction some yeeres before the Archpriest was instituted and consequently before there was any other head or whole body of the English Clergie then that from which the Iesuits and their factious adherents diuided themselues In the 16. page this Author discouereth another principall deceit falshood or slander in these words Ticonius ille Donatista c. That Ticonius the Donatist c. Note saith he the spirit of these men they compare al the good and quiet prisoners in Wisbich Donatists for that they retired themselues from these mens tumultuous and scandalous life and put themselues vnder rule See cap 6. Apolog. Are not these wordes Ticonius ille Donatista shrewd wordes that doe inferre such large consequences are not rather these tumultuous and scandalous termes and irreligious exceptions against the life of Catholike priests and some of them long prisoners for the Catholike faith an euident proofe of most loose and large consciences But to make this matter more plaine against this impostor what if there were no speech of any of the Priests What a malicious Comment is this vpon those three words Ticonius ille Donatista That Ticonius the Donatist Is it not most euident that the speech there vsed concerned no one or other more then Fa. Weston the Iesuit But yet this was too much to compare him to a Donatist Well but then what if neither he were compared to a Donatist nay further yet what if in that very place F. Weston is shewed not to be Ticonius the Donatist or a follower of him how then can the indifferent Reader but iudge the Author of this Apologie past shame who will lay it to the Priests charge that in this place cited they compare all the good and quiet prisoners in Wisbich to Donatists And for what cause Forsooth for that they retired themselues from these mens tumultuous and scandalous life and put themselues vnder rule Let vs therefore now see what there is in that 16. page concerning Ticonius ille Donatista That Ticonius the Donatist c. Thus we reade in that 16. page Tandem verò aliquando vt inuidiam leniret quam sibi suisque non mediocrem conflauerat ne reuixisse videretur Ticonius ille Donatista cuius illud erat Quod nobis placet sanctum est promisit se boni viri arbitrio rectenè an illicitè separationem feeisset staturum That is to say In the ende to mollifie somewhat that great enuie which hee Fa. Weston had gotten to himselfe and his followers he promised to stand to the iudgement of any honest man whether he had lawfully or vnlawfully made the separation least that Ticonius the Donatist should seeme to haue bene reuiued whose saying this was That is holy which pleaseth vs. So that by this it is euident that not onely the priests are not compared to Donatists but F. Weston the Iesuite is shewed not to be as that Donatist because he promised to stand to the iudgement of another which as here is auouched Ticonius the Donatist would not doe but would haue that which pleased him stand for good In the same page there is another principall deceite falshood or slander noted in these words Quorum vnus c. which this Author translateth thus One in Wisbich Castle fell out of his wit by reason of opprobrious letters written vnto him c. Now he hath made his tale as he list see what he adioyneth How egregious an vntrueth this is the whole company will testifie And if their words will not satisfie a reasonable man he shall haue more witnesse For it is most vntrue that he fell out of his wit by reason of opprobrious letters written vnto him but by reason of opprobrious letters which himselfe had written by perswasion of Fa. Weston the Iesuite and other of his faction against the other Priests as himselfe in lucidis intervallis confessed and asked pardon of some of them whom he had so iniured as they are readie to testifie and these two words vnto him are added to the text in this place by the Author of the Apologie as euery Grammer boy may see who will turne vnto it In the 17. page a malicious deuise is noted in these wordes Hanc verò c. This sodality of them that liued vnder Rules in Wisbich besides many stumbling blockes which it brought into our Church was vehemently also suspected by the Queene and Councell But if those words of them that liued vnder Rules in Wisbich be fraudulently thrust into the text by this Authour in whom is the malicious deuise for so it is put in the margent deceite falshood or slander The words are no other then these Hanc verò sodalitateâ—… praeterquam quod
and how then was not the danger of stirring vp the Bishop against his Holines but against the Protector In the 35. page and so forward to the 59. many things are noted for which the Reader must goe looke in the Apologie In the 61. page a principall deceit falshood or slander is noted in these words His visis c. As soone as we saw the Apostolicall letters of the new Breue for confirmation of the Archpriest we all presently submitted our selues c. This is so manifest and so often acknowledged by all from the highest to the lowest as there shal neede no further iustifying thereof But this author would haue his reader conceiue that this submission was fained and forced and that the euent shewed so much and that it could not be otherwise the Priests hauing entred with the Counsell so farre as they had done as is shewed Cap. 10. 13. where saith this fellow wee shew by their owne letters their conspiracie with the persecutor But in conclusion if you doe not trust him vpon his wordes more then vpon his proofes which he bringeth either in the 10 or 13 Chap. you must hold him still for such as he is We haue already sayd enough hereof in the defence of that which hee commenteth vpon those words Hinc à communi c. p. 2. as he hath cited it in the beginning of this his table of deceits to which we remit you for this time and omitting that which here he saith that the submission of the priests was forced which implyeth a true submission nothing being inforced but their wil to accept of him against whom they had many iust exceptions I will onely note how falsly and deceitfully this good felow vseth this place which thus he hath cited out of the 61. page His visis c. As soone as we saw the Apostolical letters of the new Breue c. what can his reader thinke of these words the new Breue but that there was som former Breue which was not obeyed by the priests And to this purpose as in other places so in his first Chap. of his Apol. fol. 8. he vseth the same deceit He the Pope confirmed all that was done already by the Card. with a new Breue where also in the margent this note is made A new Breue 1599. lest any man should thinke it a worde spoken by chance and not of purpose and it is the more apparant in this place which now we handle because he hath falsly translated the priests words and made them to talke of a new Breue For thus he alleageth them His visis c. As soone as we saw the Apostolicall letters of the new Breue for confirmation of the Archpriest we all presently submitted our selues to him where His visis that is these being seene is onely referred to these words Sanctitatis tuae literae that is the letters of your Holines And there is no other mention of any other Apostolicall letters or any other Breue much lesse any Apostolicall letters of a new Breue as it may be seene by them who will turne to the place In the 69. page a principall deceit falshood or slander is gathered out of those words Archipresbyter c. The Archpriest denieth accesse vnto him he will not be seene he doth disdaine to talke with his brethren c. But how is this proued deceit falshood or slander Forsooth thus All things are rhethorically exaggerated yet it is no maruaile though the Archpriest do vse some moderation and circumspection in admitting those men to speach whom hee knoweth to haue an euill mind towards him and to deale with the Councel and Bishop of London and to seeke his speech onely to braule and to take some aduantage at his words as two of them did who accused him of an hereticall proposition in talking with him presently vpon the arriuall of his first commission Had this fellow onely giuen a cause why the Archpriest would not talke with the priests without any more adoe it had been a little signe of some small grace in him but to bring that in for a deceit falshood or slander which he cannot denie but must confesse to be true and straineth himselfe to giue a cause thereof it is too shamefull It being then euident that the Archpriest will not speake with the priests let vs see how good these causes are and how true which are here alleaged The first is because hee knoweth that the Priestes haue an euill mind towards him but this sauoureth too much of malice The second is he knoweth that they deale with the Councel and Bishop of London but alas this cause commeth too late as may appeare by comparing the times together in which the Archp. hath denied to speak with thē with the times in which it hath pleased the Coūsel as he supposeth to shew them some fauour by meanes of the Bishop of London hauing conceiued some hope of their loyaltie towards their prince and country The third cause here alledged is for that the Archpriest knoweth they seeke his speech onely to brawle and to take some aduantage at his words as two of them did c. and in the margent M. Collington and M. Charnock are named It is very likely if the Archpriest would be so resolute as he would agree to no reason but run on the course he hath begun the priests might haue parted frō him as litle edified as M. Collington and M. Charnock did when he sent for them M Heburne to speake with them presently vpon the arriual of his first cōmission that is the Cardinals letters vnto him or conuented them as M. Standish gaue it out in the Clinke not long after whereupon M. H Henslow who before was taken for the Archpr. messenger was called his Sumner and was very angry at it And this particuler is brought that it may appeare what a bold face that fellow hath who in the Appendix fol. 7. affirmeth that it seemeth they M. Collington and M. Charnocke were sent to him of purpose to catch him in his words And if where difference is there must of necessity be brawling I thinke no man doubteth but he is the brawler who offereth the iniury not he who vseth necessarie defence And if moreouer M. Collington and M. Charnocke haue accused the Archp. of an heretical proposition as this Author in this place insinuateth I do verely perswade my selfe that they will proue it so farre foorth as two men of their qualitie may prooue it which would be little for M. Blackwels credit notwithstanding the slight reckoning which is made of their two relations onely Cap 8 fol. 109. In the 83. page a principall deceit falshood or slander is noted in these words Plura c. The Iesuits doe bragge that many more Seminaries haue beene erected by them c. The Priests words are these Plura numero more in number This is very calumnious saith this good felow but if they should speake of
prophecie as that any good or ease should come to the Catholicks by the absence of the Iesuits in England Wotteth he not that his Holines knoweth that no euill is to be done although good should ensue thereon If it be a sinfull act to call the Iesuits out of England what feare is there that his Holines would doe it If it be no sinfull acte to call them out of England and that thereupon may come ease and quiet to the Church which hath bene a long time in the more grieuous persecution in regard of the hard opinion which our Prince and Counsell haue had of their statizing vnder a colour of pietie and Religion how farre are these fellowes from that Spirit of Ionas who willingly yeelded himselfe rather to be throwen out of the ship into the sea then that through his default those who were in it should perish But of these matters we shall haue cause elswhere to delate more at large And in the meane while wee make humble request to the indifferent Readers to note well throughout the Apologie how farre this Author is from all Authenticall testimonies in laying downe the grounds of all such matters as are now in question for we are not here to stand vpon such impertinent stuffe as he thrusteth into his booke to the end that by shuffling in sometime some part of our matters he might make them odious to such as will runne ouer his packes without searching into them what is therein belonging to our controuersie and how little coherence it hath with that other with which it is ioyned CHAP. 5. How the Apologie-maker by the same reason which he giueth for the publishing of his Apologie doth giue light to his reader to conceiue the iust cause which the Priests had to print their bookes THe Preface of this Apologie is to the Catholikes of England to fore-arme forewarne them what is meant thereby lest the matter being otherwise taken then it ought to be should yeeld to scandall and thereby ouerthrow sayth he and worke your ruine which is intended and permitted by Almighty God Father of all mercies to your triall and greater merit c. But this fore-arming of the Catholiks is such as they ought all to be forewarned what is meant by this his fore-arming For what Catholike or worthy seruant of God as he tearmeth them hath euer before this time beleeued that either scandall or their ruine hath been intended howsoeuer it hath been permitted by Almighty God vpon some cause best knowen vnto his diuine Maiestie For how farre off is this fore-arming or forewarning from his doctrine who sayth that the betraying of Christ was Gods acte in Iudas aswell as repentance in S. Peter But I pray you see how he goeth on affirming that Christ sent aduersaries to afflict his Church and which is most ridiculous he auoucheth that he sent a new kind of aduersaries neuer heard of in the world before named heretikes that tooke vnto themselues the name of the best sort of Christians c. If there were no heretikes before what were the Pharises and Sadduces Of whom Ioseph lib. 18. Antiqui Iud. cap. 2. affirmeth that the Pharises held opinion that those soules who after the separation from the body were found good did returne againe to some other bodies And that the Sadduces did thinke that the soule died with the body And doubtlesse this was the cause why it is so precisely recorded in the second booke of the Macchabees cap. 12. that Iudas did thinke piously and religiously of the resurrection For about this time did these people rise and fell very quickly into these heresies perchance the sooner for their very great pride which they tooke of their ouer selfe-weening religious course of life Of the Saduces we haue many testimonies in the new Testament and of their error as Math. 22. Mar. 12. Luk 20. and Act 23. but two notable places there are in the Acts of the Apostles which shew not onely that these were errors but heresies and that they were Heretikes who are related by the Euangelist to haue assaulted our Sauiour We reade in the 5. chapter a company thus described Quae est heresis Saducaeorum which is the heresie of the Saduces And in the 24. chapter Tertullus the oratour accuseth S. Paul before Foelix the President in this manner Inuenimus c. We found this pestiferous fellow both raising contention against all the Iewes in the world and broaching the sedition of the sect of those of Nazareth And for that word sect there is in the Greeke copie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 heresie And in the same chap. S. Paul answering for himselfe acknowledgeth that he serued God in that way which his accusers called heresie Can there be any plainer Testimonies that there were heresies among the Iewes and so accounted by them and the men accused thereof who held such opinions But this good fellow writeth to such as hee thinketh will not bee euill conceited of him howsoeuer he abuseth them or himselfe but will rather take his wordes for oracles how contrary soeuer they are to trueth Hereupon also he emboldeneth himselfe to cast many doubts and suspitions into his readers head against the priests whom he calleth Libellers First because as he sayth There is no certaine author of their bookes named Secondly because no licence of superiors for printing is named Thirdly because worthy men are defamed by name without intention or possibility to proue it by lawful meanes To the first I answere that the authors names are as leageably set downe in the bookes which the priests set out as the authors names of this Apologie That booke which is dedicated to his Holinesse is set out by the priests vnder their owne names as appeareth by the title of the booke where it is sayd to be giuen to his Hol. by the priests who were most vniustly defamed of schisme and other crimes And in the appeale their names are particularly set downe who they are Pag. 119. and the other are set out in the same maner And this Apologie is sayd to be written and set forth by priests vnited in due subordination to the Archpr. but the reader must go looke who they are This exception therefore against the priests bookes is very absurd and proueth that the Apologie commeth neerer to the nature of a Libel then the Priests books To the second I answer that in case the Superiour be a party laboureth what he may with all men that the trueth of the question be not knowen and to that end forbiddeth that any thing be written or read which may giue satisfaction to indifferent men it is not necessary to expect his licence neither is it a note of a Libel to print without it To the third I answere that there is no man touched in these bookes but for such matters and vpon such ground as the authors of them are ready to iustifie and haue alreadie shewed that they haue intention to proue
and shewed how little it can make for the Iesuits All the other also here cited make as little to the purpose this present controuersie being long after the Cardinals death to wit whether the priests who would not be blinde obedient vpon the sight of Card. Caietane his letters for the institution of the Archpriest were schismatikes factious seditious rebellious fallen from Christ and his spouse excommunicated irregular witches and Idolaters and as Ethnicks and Publicans In which controuersie if any of those stand with vs who shewed themselues contrary to the Cardinals proceedings while he was seduced by the Iesuits and brought into dishonourable actions against his Prince countrey and friends what reason haue we to reiect their helpe And if they had bene as bad as heretikes in those actions why should we be charged as partners in that action more then any Catholike prince may be charged to be a fauourer of heretikes or miscreants who should haue any such ioyned with him in his armie either for loue or money when hee fighteth against some other Catholike prince vpon iniuries offered by the one to the other Those Noble men Gentlemen and others whilest they liued were ready to giue account of their actions in those times and some will yet perchance vpon this occasion say somewhat therin and the Cardinall might shewe himselfe very contrary vnto them in those actions and yet be very fauourable to the students in Rome towards the latter end of his life when time let him see those things in the Iesuits proceedings which either affection would not let him see before or little hope to amend them made him dissemble which perchance he did the rather because by the Iesuits meanes with the King of Spaine hee came to that preferrement which he held and could not so suddenly goe about to reforme what he saw amisse in their gouernment of the English Colledge and their generall cariage in English affaires The feares and doubts which F. Parsons shewed in his letter to M. Tho. Fitzherbert doe discouer that D. Stapleton dissembled with them as may be gathered by the bolde carriage of such as stand with them and their impatient violence which leaueth no doubt to any how they are caried and this doctor hauing bene once of their societie and going out from them might iustly feare that it would haue beene laid wholly in his dish if he had declared his mind in any publicke sort as he did often priuatly to such as he thought he might complaine vnto without harme to himselfe He was also a man of that marke and merit aboue all the rest of our nation as it was expected he should haue come to some great preferrement which hee was sure that his manifesting himselfe would haue hindered And this was also an occasion of Do. Barrets dissembling of whose minde there are many witnesses in England and of his lamentations for his opposing himselfe against such as he confessed were the onely men with whome hee durst deale confidently And although it pleaseth this deuout spirit to taxe such as he sayth are of the faction that they are a fewe of the meaner sort of our nation and that they carry their knowen notes of discredit with them if they be examined he who shall examine it shall find the cleane contrary both in England and out of England and that the Iesuits faction is held vp by such only as seeing the liberty which the Iesuits their adherents do vse against the priests or hoping of some reward by them do feare to displease them Which folly were it once remooued the Iesuits and their adherents would appeare to be sicut caeteri homines as other men are notwithstanding this pharisaicall cōtempt of the priests and perchance much worse euen to the equalling of the author of this Apologie who carieth his openly knowen notes of discredit for the which he was expulsed the Vniuersitie of Oxford and are not yet displayed as they may be hereafter as occasion may be giuen but are as much laughed at in priuate by some as his counterfeit holinesse is admired by other The iniurie which the priests are sayde to haue done to the Card. Borromaeo Archb. of Millan consisteth in their affirmation that he tooke the gouernement of one of his Seminaries in Millan from the Fathers This might be an iniury to the Fathers if the Card. did it without iust cause but being done the case is to be discussed whether it were iust or no. And the Cardinall being knowen to be a most deuout Bishop and not likely to haue bene caried away with any foolish passion in a matter of so great moment the priests haue layd the blame vpon the Iesuits their misgouernement And further they say wherein to wit because the Seminarie instituted by that deuout Bishop for the maintenance of able persons for the Church vnder his charge the Iesuits tooke their pleasure and choyse of such as they thought would be some credit vnto their own order and thereby indeuoured to furnish themselues rather then the Church for which the Seminarie was instituted And they who gaue this cause of the Iesuites their remooue were well acquainted therewith and with those Iesuites which were thus allured from that state of life for which they had maintenance of the Cardinall But let vs see how this author shuffeth off this matter The Fathers of their owne will and vpon their owne earnest suite left the said gouernment for the great labour and trouble thereof Good charitable people who challenge vnto them a particular vocation to bring vp youth and labour it in all places where they come as the best policie they can deuise to binde men vnto them without respecting how themselues are maintained for that purpose in the Countrey or the College as many other would and do in Vniuersities much better cheape where any Lecture is founded for all commers vnto it The second shift which is here vsed is farre worse although in an other kind for thereby they draw the Cardinal or themselues into discredit Forsooth the matter was the Cardinall would haue had those his schollers more bare in their dyet and apparell then the Fathers order in their Seminaries did permit seeing they were to be sent afterwards abroad to poore benefices among countrey people where they must fare hardly If the Cardinall did allow sufficient for them then had the Iesuites no cause to giue it ouer vnlesse perchance they could not content themselues with that which was sufficient If the Cardinall did not allow that which was sufficient then was he not of that wisedome of which he was reputed to be neither could any benefice in all his Diocesse be so beggerly as that it would not maintaine the Pastour in such diet as is ordinarily vsed in the Iesuites Seminaries neither could the Cardinall be so ignorant but he knew he might nor so carelesse of the credit of a pastour but that he would vnite two benefices in one where one
wit by his Holinesse Breue yet these matters were touched as long past before the Breue came and at such time as hee was deemed to be intruded without his Holinesse knowledge to shew what iust causes the Priests had to be aduised before they should resolue to subiect themselues vnto him After this long paine to finde holes in Superiors coates the author is fallen againe into the priests reasons among which hee citeth those which wee haue now once already answered to wit that his Holinesse could not do it lawfully without their consents and that the election pertained vnto them and the like One newe deuise he hath for some varietie as for that it is a forreine authoritie and subiect to danger of Premunire which is answered before that the priests did not plead this or giue it as a reason against the authority but alleaged it as the opinion onely of diuers men of iudgement in the lawes of our countrey as may be seene in the sixt page of the English booke and prooued thereby that in wisedome they might pause vpon their submitting themselues vnto the authority seeing no other warrant for it then a Cardinals letter to whom they knew no tye of obedience much lesse in a matter of so great moment And that this was all which they did it is euident in that so soone as they did see his Holinesse letter whom they knew to be their Superiour they all yeelded themselues And as it is sayd before if our princes of the same religion of which we were did punish such as accepted of any dignities by prouision from Rome without their cōsents the priests might assuredly expect some seueritie of a prince of a contrary religion And as they were not bound to accept thereof before it was confirmed by his Holinesse so did they thinke it great follie to exasperate the state any more against them by accepting of so strange and needles a noueltie And these reasons saith the Apologie are set downe and printed in two of the first treatises of this English booke intituled Copies of discourses which were written before the Breue came foorth for confirmation of the Archpriest and therefore they ought to haue bene answered according to that time not with this idle shift His Holines Institution For as then it was not knowen that it was his Holinesse Institution as here is confessed in these words Before the Breue came foorth And consequently it seemeth strange to vs why they were now permitted after the Breue is foorth and hath not wrought that effect for quieting them which then they promised What then will this fellow say to all the testimonies brought by himselfe to proue the peace was made at the sight of the Breue Cap. 10. Apol what will he answere to his Holinesse Breue of the seuenteenth of August 1601 where his Holinesse auoucheth it that all was presently ended vpon the sight of his Breue of the sixt of Aprill 1599. His riddle then is thus read that the Breue did worke that effect in the priests which they promised as we haue now shewed But not long after the Iesuits began to spread abroad and that the priests who obeyed not before they saw the Breue were schismaticks and the Archpriest was so farre from controlling this reuiued faction of the Iesuits as hee published a resolution pretended to come from Rome that the refusers of his authoritie were schismatikes And now it will not seeme strange to a reasonable man that these discourses were now printed for that now there was need to perswade Catholickes that the priests were not then schismatikes which perswasion the priests thought it fit to further by declaring the true state of matters how they then stood and vpon what reasons And these were best and most sincerely to be shewed by the letters which passed at that time to and fro and by laying downe the causes which then they had and might haue to deferre their obedience vntill they saw the Breue and thereby giue satisfaction to Catholickes that they had not been schismatikes as the Iesuites and Archpriest began now againe after the peace made to publish against them But now after these treatises sayth this author ensueth an Epistle of M. Anthony Champneys which we would hardly beleeue to bee his if he had not suffered his name to be put downe in print to the same For we had greater opinion both of his discretion learning and modestie then that hee would vtter such things as in this epistle are contained especially matter of so much gall against the Fathers of the societie vnder whom he hath bene brought vp and of whose order for diuers yeeres as we are informed hee sought to bee Note this author his opinion of M. Champneys discretion learning and modestie and how that this opinion must no longer last because he maintaineth his good name against the slaunderous tongues of the Iesuites and their associates in their vniust accusation of Schisme and disobedience And whosoeuer shall reade his Epistle which is heere mentioned shall perceiue great cause why that good and reuerent opinion was rather to be still kept by that Epistle then the least iot diminished as hauing shewed very discreetely learnedly and modestly how wrongfully he and other graue and reuerend Catholicke priests were charged by the Iesuites and their adherents But this seemeth very strange to many that there being so reuerend an opinion of his discretion learning and modestie as this author affirmeth they would not admit him into their order hauing sought it for diuers yeeres as here is affirmed Will hee perchance haue his reader to vnderstand that a man of discretion learning and modestie cannot well suite with that religious order or that such men are not thought fit for such purposes as the master of misrule would effect in our countrey who now hath the disposing of our English Iesuites and is of opinion perchance that the further off a man is from discretion learning and modestie the fitter will he be to further his designes and hath for the instruction of his nouices or encouragement to other written this Apologie and shewed that he himselfe hath neither discretion learning nor modestie or else that his instruments must haue defect at the least in some one or two of these three vertues as the author of the Treatise of Schisme and his abettors therein who were thought to haue had some learning but they haue giuen an earnest penny in that Treatise that they neither had discretion modestie nor learning And M. Champney might be thought to be highly fauoured of God that he escaped so great a danger seeking it himselfe for diuers yeeres as here is said although no doubt he might haue bene of the societie and haue taken such good and religious courses as we doubt not but that many of that order doe But those commonly sayth this author are worse when they loose their spirit seeking to pacifie the remorse of their owne conscience by
Paris in this maner First there was no man to enforme the Doctors for the Archpriest As though the Doctors censure had not passed vpon those informatiōs although no one of any side had been present The case was propounded and they gaue their iudgement vpon the case and not vpon any particular person If any that might haue bene then present for the Archpriest could haue proued the case to haue been wrong put let it now be done and it shall be all one For as it is sayd it was the case which was censured which might haue come out of Moscouia for any thing that was set downe to the contrary in the information And the decree being giuen according to the information will be iustified notwithstanding this sencelesse and shameful Edict 29. Maij 1600. We George Blackwell Archpriest of England and protonotary apostolicall c. do strictly command in vertue of obedience and vnder paine of suspension from diuine offices A notorious vsurper and losse of all faculties in the fact it selfe to be incurred all ecclesiasticall persons and also all Lay Catholikes vnder paine of being interdicted likewise in the fact it selfe to bee incurred Is not this a strange charge considering the state in which as well the Lay Catholike as the Ecclesiasticall person now liueth in England Who is it that doeth not expect a prohibition of some grieuous crime You haue heard the charge Now listen to the matter forbidden That neither directly nor indirectly they maintaine nor defend in word or writing the censure of the Vniuersitie of Paris whether it be truely giuen or forged Was there euer in Christendome heard the like presumption that a man of some two or three yeres study and in no Catholike Academi◠of fame should condemne the censure of the most famous Vniuersity in Christendome But wil you heare him excel himselfe who hath excelled the most proud and temerarious censurer in the world Note that which he addeth whether vpon true information or otherwise the Sorbonists haue spun a faire threed when what informations soeuer be giuen vnto them their censure is not to be regarded The second exception which this author seemeth to take is that the Doctors did lightly passe it ouer and defined the matter in the senior Bedels house which such as haue studied in Paris do know to be the vsuall place of their meeting as standing most commodiously for all those who are chosen to meete vpon all causes comming to the Vniuersitie to be determined they themselues not liuing in any one place but scatteringly in the Citie Religious men in their Couents Pastors in their parishes Readers and other Doctors in their seuerall houses or Colledges How lightly they passed it ouer I know not neither is the matter of any such difficultie in it selfe that it should aske great studie But it is an argument that they were not ouer carelesse what they sayd who commanded the Bedell to write it downe as their definition in such wise as euery thing els doeth passe them in their consultations of greatest matters The third exception is that it was giuen vpon some sinistrous information and that therefore the Doctors did prudently giue their censure in this maner They committed no sinne at all in that fact in it selfe considered And that they added these words for that they knew not what scandall euill example sedition and contention and hurt to the common cause had ensued thereof Had this author in place of this word thereof put after he had done more wisely as I thinke for in that he vseth this word thereof either he declareth himselfe to be very sottish or els that the Vniuersitie was very vnaduised in adding these words that fact in it selfe considered for which words this author commendeth their wisedom for if the fact in it selfe were such as so much hurt did ensue thereof how could the fact in it selfe be cleered from all sinne True it is that scandal followed after But it yet remaineth vnproued that it ensued vpon the priests fact doeth not much hurt come after much good and shall we say that the harme ensued vpon the doing of the good in such sense as that the good which is done must be a necessary cause of the euil which had not perchance otherwise been The fact then in it selfe considered being without sinne we are to seeke who sowed the Zizania which perchance had neuer been sowed where it was had not the husbandman sowed good corne before The priests perceiuing what was intended and was likely to fall vpon them if they sought not some meanes to preuent it sent two of their brethren vnto his Holines to preuent it if they might for contrary to all custom in Christendome there was a superioritie challenged ouer all England and Scotland as deriued from the Sea Apostolike without any letters from the said Sea for warrant thereof and in the meane time the priests deferred their submission to the authoritie as well vpon this cause as other contained in the information to the Doctors of Sorbon The Iesuits and their faction of which the Archpriest being now become the head were impatient of delay and because the priests did not subiect themselues in this interim but stayed their submissiō vntill they did see the Popes letters they first vsed their tongues then their pennes and both writ and approoued seditious libels against the priests tearming them therein Schismatikes excommunicate persons irregular fallen from the Church of God and what not that malice it selfe could deuise from which slanders while the Priests sought to defend themselues great troubles haue risen in England Now then the question must be whether the Priests were the sinfull cause of these contentions by this their forbearance to subiect them selues before they sawe the Popes letters or rather the Iesuites and Archpriest by those their seditious and sinnefull tongues and libels The fact of the Priests in it selfe considered that is their forbearance vpon such causes say the doctors and prudently sayth this author was no sinne at all but the doctors were not truly informed sayth this author and therefore their sentence was of no force But what then were the defects in the information giuen to the doctors through which the doctours are thought to haue erred in their sentence Forsooth first the priests did not tell them that the Card. was Protector of the nation What if the priests did not know that he was Protector of the nation when his letters came into England but onely Protector of the English Colledge at Rome as his predecessour was intituled and neuer knowen by any other title as may appeare by the Bull of Pope Gregory 13. for the institution of that Colledge and the Thesis either in Philosophie or Diuinitie which were in the publike exercises dedicated vnto him Moreouer it is euident that this which this Card. Protector did hee did it by a delegation from his Hol. and not as a Protector and therefore it had beene
impertinent to haue said that he was Protector and neither titles doe multiply the person nor any one person carrieth that credit that in al like cases he must be beleeued except his Hol. The second defect which this author findeth was that these doctors were not told that the Card. did all this expresso mandato by his Holines expresse commandement which sayth this authour the Card. setteth downe cleerely in his letters To this I answere that the Cardinall setteth downe such words in his letters but he setteth them downe onely in that place where hee is commanded to labour or endeauour that there should be peace in all other places as there was at that time in the English Colledge at Rome And he that should haue informed the doctors of Sorbon that the Cardinals letters doe testifie either cleerely as is here said or obscurely that he did all which here he did concerning this subordination or institution of this Archpresbyterie expresso mandato by an expresse commandement of his Hol. had ben similis vobis mendax and there had beene no trueth in him in this point The third defect which this authour noteth was that they concealed another thing vttered also sayth this author in the Cardinals letters And what was that to wit that a subordination was demanded by priests letters to his Holines and that his Hol. had allowed of their reasons To this I answere as to the former that the Card. did not vtter this in his letters as may appeare also by the letters themselues but by this he giueth his reader to vnderstand what substantiall informations some agent for the Archpriest should haue giuen at Paris in his behalfe against the priests and how shamelesly these and such like would haue beene there vttered which are without all shame set foorth in print for all posteritie to see that their surest ancre by which they hold is a gracelesse boldnesse to auerre any thing and a blinding their adherents that they shall not finde their false dealing The fourth exception which this author taketh at the information is that it was giuen that many refused to subscribe wheras they were not the twentieth part This difficultie we will entreate some Grammer boy to assoile and to put it into the author of the Apologie in what number may be many But in the meane while we shall consider how the Iesuites flattered with some threatned other some and yet were forced to presume vpon others and thereupon set others names to billes without their consent or priuitie And if to this I shal ioyne the course which the Archpriest tooke to compell men to take him for their Superiour at the first when he had no other warrant for it then a Cardinals priuate letter and particularly directed to him onely as may appeare by the letter it selfe and compare this part of subscribers with those whose vnreadinesse in this action was a sufficient argument of their mindes the number of the willing subscribers will be found much fewer then the other yet was not the information giuen at Paris in any such sort as this author enlargeth himselfe to wit as though they had ben a great multitude or the maior part as the information it selfe doth shew Neither did the Doctors cleare the priests in any consideration of multitude but in consideration of the fact in it selfe as appeareth in their decree which consideration dependeth not vpon how many or how few but vpon the lawfulnesse of the fact it selfe And whereas this authour addeth that if the Priests haue encreased their number since it hath bene by false information as this was to the Doctors of Sorbon and by perswading them to the participation of their libertie and freedome from all gouernment which is a sore bayte for young men as all the world knoweth If the Priests haue not encreased their number or were not knowen when this Apologie was written to haue encreased their number how can he so peremptorily affirme that those who refused to subscribe at the first were not the twentieth part so many hauing set their hands to the appeale And yet many more standing firme with them whose names are not there expressed and yet are so many more if they knew how to liue in any reasonable sort without holding with the Iesuits and the Archpriest in this controuersie as they would leaue a very poore many to stand against the Secular priests Such the baytes are and so vnpleasant which are layd to drawe them to the priests side as they haue no list to byte at them The priests haue for Gods cause put themselues in such state of life as they stand in neede of the charitie of Catholikes who being abused by the Iesuits and the Archpriest to disfauour all such as they dislike and to relieue onely those who shall stand with them It is easily seene where the bayte is at which a yong man will byte besides the infamie which is continually spread abroad against the Priests that were it not to betray God his Church and their own soules no doubt they had rather themselues byte at the golden bayte and worldly fauour which the Iesuites and the Archpriest doe lay to catch young and olde both of the Laytie and the Clergie then at a crust as some of them doe call it and to liue so obscurely as many of them do yea and in great want which pacience onely doth often supply a sorry bayte for young men as all the world doth knowe And this is a silly disposition to be perswaded by any false information especially in such matters as of which they are themselues eye-witnesses how they are handled and cannot easily be deceiued The fifth exception is against the information where it is said that the priests refused onely to subscribe to the authoritie of the Archpriest before he had obtained letters from the sea apostolike for his confirmation as who would say that this being done they ment to be quiet This good fellow should haue disproued this and that at the sight of his Holinesse Breue of the 6. of April 1599 all matters were not appeased and that the Priests did not according to this information giuen submit themselues But this he can neuer doe for he will be disproued by his Holinesse himselfe who in his Breue of the 17. of August 1601. affirmeth it And their behauiour in the meane time was as became Catholike priests who had care to preserue their credite in such sort as they were bound to do without perswading any against the Popes ordination or discrediting any letters of the Protector more then this that they would not giue any such credite vnto the Protector that they would without his Holines letters subiect themselues to an extraordinary superioritie to which without grieuous penalties no Couent or Clergie are to subiect themselues as may appeare in that Extrauag of Bonifacius the eight Iniunctum de electione which is afterward extended by Pope Iulius the third in his constitution which
was written the sixt of Iuly 1597. but what doth or can this concerne the priests comming to his Holines toward the later end of the yeere 1598 to deale about a matter which was not before the 7 of March in the same yere 1598 as appeareth by the date of the Cardinals letter Apologie ca. 8. fol. 104 There is also a piece of another letter of the same man to to the Cardinal Protector of the first of May 1598 which although it were written after that the Subordination was instituted yet it was written before that it was knowen in England for to our remembrance we had no knowledge thereof vntill it was May here with vs. But howsoeuer this was it was impossible that it could concerne the two priests their comming to his Holines for this was not so suddenly determined in England although vpon the first sight of the Cardinals letter the Archpriest was told that there was iust cause for them to goe to his Holinesse By this then it appeareth that D. Stapletons letters which were to Fa. Parsons and to the Protector could not induce his Holinesse to imprison the two Priests who came to deale about the Subordination Let vs now see what the second testimony auaileth him This testimony was of principall men who writ some moneths saith this author fol. 124. before these two messengers came ouer into Flanders he sayd France 120. but their negotiations in England were heard of and knowen and these principall men of whom the most principall standeth for the priests and is ioyned with them in affection and action in Rome at this present writ their letter to the general of the Iesuites vpon this voice which they heard when you doe iustice you shal make also peace a heauy saying for such as will bee prooued to haue done as great an iniury as may be by a publike diffamation of schisme and what not against Catholike priests without iust cause But what is this to the purpose how was his Holinesse vpon this letter resolued to imprison the two priests who were in the way to him for and concerning the Subordination which was made the Generall perchance of the Iesuits did shew this letter to his Holinesse and thereby the negotiations of these two and their fellowes came also to be knowen to his Holines all this goeth very currant But what if those men now become principall neither heard of these 2. priests as dealers in this action nor of any other not onely not in particular but neither in general What if they could not possibly heare that there was any Subordination knowen in England and much lesse that any did delay to admit thereof when they writ this letter to the Generall of the Iesuits How shamelesse will this author be iudged who would bring these principall men their letters as a motiue to his Holinesse to imprison these two priests before he would heare what they had to say This Subordination was made at Rome the seuenth of March in the yere 1598 and if the messenger had stridden a blacke horse to bring it into Englād yet could there not be any negotiations in England conueniently either by these two priests or others concerning the same in so short a time as that these 17 principall men vnlesse they were altogether attending as it were to haue entertained the same messenger in Flanders considered maturely of the negotiations which were in England could burnish vp a letter and dispatch it vpon the eighteenth of March in the same yeere 1598 as here is cited in the margent fol. 123. Now follow the letters of diuers zelous men When as this author saith these messengers were in their way indeed for the other were written especially those of the 17. principall men when the priests were in their negotiations before they set forward as it is said fol. 124. these men writ indeed very sharply and with such confidence as they might giue some suspition to a wise man that all was not well in England but yet there is no perswasion to haue the messengers cast into prison vntill they were heard a duetie which they might challenge if in no other respect yet at least for their trauaile in Gods Church for which they deserued a good opinion of the gouernours thereof The first here cited are from Doway 25. Octob. 1598. to the Protector to which some haue acknowledged their error in subscribing These letters doe not cleare Fa. Parsons for being the cause of his Holines resolution to imprison the two priests for in this Apologie it is confessed fol. 120 that his Holines was resolued vpon the 17. of October 1398. to cast them into prison for such date doeth the letter beare which F. Bellarmine now Cardinal is said to haue written to Fa. Parsons to informe him that his Holines so greatly misliked their troublesome fact that hee had told him that if they came to Ferrara he would cause them to be imprisoned If these then of the 25. of Octob. came too late to put such a resolution into his Holines head what shall wee say of these which came after for the next letters are from M. D. Worthington to the Protector and these beare date the 30. of October from Bruxels Next March D. Peerse who was the first in the ranke of the 17. principall men but now God knoweth what place he shall haue and among whom for that he is ioyned with the priests in Rome and in that action D. Caesar Clement that succeeded D. Stapleton in the office of assistance-ship to the Nuntius in Flanders in all English affaires a man that was neuer in England but to giue him his right the fittest man for that purpose as matters go and worthy to succeed D. Stapleton or any farre greater man then he in that kinde of managing English affaires D. Richard Hall three doctors but what these or other writ most earnestly and grauely to the same effect as the other did by al likelyhood this author knoweth not For as he saith he had not the copies of their letters when he writ this Apologie but hee met with a letter of M. Licentiat Wright deane of Cortrac in Flanders to the Protector which is here set downe in the Apologie wherein this deane hath litle cause to thanke this author who would discredit him so much as to set downe his iudgement of two priests whom he neuer saw And although his letter doe exceed the limits of all modestie yet doeth it not any whit auaile this author for proofe of that for which it is brought that is that his Holines was thereupon resolued to imprison the two priests for this letter beareth date 10. Nouembris 1598. as appeareth here fol. 126 which was a faire while after his Holines had that resolution as appeareth by F. Bellarmine now Card. his letter of the 17. of Octob. 1598. cited by this author fol. 120. yet goeth this fellow on very smoothly and not without great applause of the
in the margent of this sedition M. Collington and M. Charnocke by his owne confession He might better haue made this note in the margent The first finders out of this most wicked and seditious plot of the Iesuits M. Collington c. They as is said were first called and in post haste they were sent for and M. Heburne to giue their liking And we saith the Apologie repeating M Charnocks answere hauing read the Card. Protectors letters began to doubt not so much of the authoritie it selfe that is that the Cardinall had appointed such a thing for so doeth this Apologie confesse fol 129. that M. Charnocke acknowledged this order to haue bene appointed by Card. Caietane neither do M. Charnocke his letters of the 20 of February cited and abused by these fellowes proue that after he thought any other then that it was the Cardinals doing Notwithstanding that the Iesuits laboured to haue him write that it was the Popes order and would sometime make bold with this where the law was in their owne hands as of the good maner of procuring it They perceiued that it was got by surreptiō which is a sufficient cause to except against it wherby also it may appeare how ignorantly this fellow cumbreth his margēt where he hath made this note Ergo not doubting you are boūd to obey For first M. Charn doth not say that they had no doubt of the authoritie it selfe but that they doubted not so much of the authoritie it selfe as of the good manner of procuring it For they saw it euidently that it was an ordinance of the Cardinall vnder his hand and seale though in a priuate letter to M. Blackwell and his words were plaine Dum haec nostra ordinatio durauerit so long as this ordinance shall endure Yet knowing how this Cardinall was caried in our English affaires by the Iesuites it was neither fellony nor treason to thinke hee might stretch himselfe to pleasure them And if the matters had been handled with any indifferencie doubtles neither these two nor any other would euer haue called the matter in question but there being a notorious partiality descryed in this order and such as might be the ouerthrowe of our afflicted Church in England the Priests had reason to make some stop at the first discouery thereof as iustly they might haue done although they had not doubted at al but that it was ordained by his Holines appointment or by his Holinesse letters there being sufficient cause to perswade them that it was gotten by surreption which doth vitiate or make voyde his Holinesse letters as M. Collington proueth euidently in his first reason and consequently the priests were not bound to obey it and the lesse for that they prepared themselues to goe to Rome to deale with his Holinesse thereabout and in such manner as is set downe and acknowledged in this Apologie fol. 129. out of M. Charnockes examination And the partiality which was vrged by M. Charnocke as iustly feared by M. Blackwell is declared euery where by the priests to be this that the Iesuites who were the chiefe head of sedition and faction in England against the priests were now become their iudges and executioners in the shape of a Secular priest and no way subiect to any order which was pretended to haue bene taken for peace betweene them the priests and these to their iudgments seemed serious and graue causes not to yeeld themselues at the beginning which their not yeelding this authour tearmeth an opposition Here we see saith he how serious and graue the causes were of this opposition at the beginning and how at the first they did not doubt of the authoritie it selfe nor of the Popes will therein as after they haue pretended Where is this seene or where is any mention of any such perswasion that the Popes will was knowen therein or that the priests did not doubt thereof This fellow must needes borrow leaue now and then to play with his blind obedient and make them beleeue that they doe see that which himselfe doth not nor can see for in this answere of M. Charnocke there is nothing concerning the Pope but onely the Cardinall Protectors letters by which the authoritie was instituted by him and might haue bene thought to haue bene authentically done if he had any Commission from his Holinesse or not authentically done if he had none so that no Commission appearing the priests might iustly doubt thereof although not so much as of the other to wit the manner of procuring it which they might perceiue was by surreption And for this cause M. Charnocke sayd not that they doubted not at all at the first of the authority it selfe nor of the Popes will therein as this authour doth most falsely suggest but this onely we hauing read the Cardinals Protectors letters began to doubt not so much of the authority it selfe as of the good manner of procuring it as in the same page this authour himselfe setteth downe M. Charnockes answere But yet note another slippery part of this fellow He citeth M. Charnockes answere concerning what was done the first day that the authority was made knowen vnto them in which you see how he abuseth his Reader in proouing thereby the smalnesse of the number of the priests But he ceaseth not here for he concludeth in this manner We see also that the Priests could not bee many nor of great account that resolued this embassage to Rome And good sir how doe you see this Forsooth M. Charnocke said that the chiefe priests that dealt with him and M. Bishop were M. Collington M. Cope M Iohnson M. Monford and others and could not many be included in that word others nor men of great account if these that were named were of no great account were not this apparantly an odious maner of writing I could retort the phrase and shew that some of these that are named and others not named yet comprehended in this word others were such as for their merit and labours in Gods Church can hardly be matched by all the faction which is against them but we will leaue this fellow tumbling in his owne dirt and pleasing himselfe in his folly howsoeuer he displeaseth men of iudgement who haue often difficulties whether they may better lament him who by this continuance therein giueth an earnest peny that others lamentations will nothing profite him or laugh at him whose folly is without measure and still proceedeth from folly to folly But now that he hath properly let his Reader see that they could not be many nor of great account that resolued of the embassage to Rome he will prooue that the mission and commission was not authenticall because M. Bishop who was one of them that were sent affirmed that hee did not know who was the first authour of this mission nor why they two were chosen aboue the rest for this mission As though a matter might not be as lawfully taken in hand by one who
the societie but some particular men as may be seene in their preface to the booke dedicated to the Inquisition pag 5. where they make this protestation Neque quae de societate hîc dicentur in vniuersam societatem dicta velimus cui tantum tribuimus quantū eius virtus doctrina postulant hic tantum particulares quorundam actiones conquerimur c. Neither will we that what is said here of the society be said of the whole society to which we doe attribute as much as their vertue and learning deserue we doe complaine here of the particular actions of some onely c. And as it should seeme this matter troubleth the authour of this Apologie much more as it is against a fewe Iesuits then as it is against all the rest which causeth himselfe still to forget himselfe or his matter rather when any occasion occurreth as it doth often to speake of the Iesuits and here he runneth along after them with these admirations what manner of people they bee for diuers respects that are here discouered although they were not the same men which are here discouered and of what account with our very enemies themselues of what other then hypocrites matchiuilians and traitors to their Countrey some of them being Superiours as euery parish in London hath scholemasters yea and some in hier offices some of singular merit towards the common cause such cause perhaps as to which the infamie of Catholike priests must bee iudged most necessary others notorious for their knowen vertues how gladly would blind Hugh see some of them here in England for then neither should the good haue cause to grieue nor the bad bee conformed in their naughty course who seeing the supposed best to be so bad they doe rashly coniecture that there is none good for which folly of theirs they and their bad guides must answere at the last day and smart long before vnlesse they repent themselues while they haue time to repent Thus much concerning this authours conceite of the sinne of libelling retorted vpon himselfe and his partners in this Apologie and other his Libels which he will neuer be able to iustifie Now follow his exceptions against the two bookes which he termeth Libels wherin he purposeth to discouer foule faults to haue bene as falshood deceite malice and slanderous calumniations Alwayes prouided that whereas the Reader hath still expected and liued in hope to see somewhat to the purpose now he must take this colde comfort to be remitted backe to the Chapters before handled for a larger proofe of what is to be sayd First hee beginneth with the latine booke which is dedicated to his Holinesse whose title is Declaratio motuum c. A declaration of the sturres and troubles that haue risen in England betweene the Iesuits on the one side together with M. G. Blackwel Archpriest in all things fauouring them and the Seminary Priests on the other side from the death of Cardinall Allen of pious memory vnto this yeere 1601. In this very title saith he and first page 5. or 6. abuses and sleights and shifts may be noted to be vsed towards his Holinesse c. for first whereas the whole world knoweth that their controuersie is with the Archpriest as appeareth by their Appellation to his Holines an 1600. 17. Nouemb. and others before and that their stomacke against the Iesuits is for standing with him and for as by the whole discourse of both these bookes appeareth here they change the whole controuersie and do say that it is with the Iesuits and M. Blackwell that fauoureth them so as he is put here but as an Appendix in the cause which is plaine falshood This is the first fault which is found in the Latin booke all things considered it wil not proue a fault much lesse so foule as this author would it should seeme to be the appellation was made from the Archp. not from the Iesuits because appellations are made from such only as are and take vpon them to be superiors Such are not the Iesuits ouer the Secular priests neither doeth the appealing from the Archpr. cleare the Iesuits who in the appellation it selfe are proued to be the chiefe fountaines of all these broyles as all the world may see in the Appeale And he doeth very falsly affirme that the whole discourse sheweth no other as himselfe can remember when he listeth Namely in his table prefixed to his Apologie num 23. where he citeth this sentence out of his Latine booke pag. 30. Iesuitae c. The Iesuits dispairing to be able to get superioritie to themselues by way of voyces or suffrages of the priests and on the other side hating and flying to admit episcopall dignitie into England thought to procure dominion to themselues vnder the maske of an other mans person c. Hath this fellow now forgotten what his owne iudgement was there of the priests their conceit of this matter hath not he perswaded his reader that the principall and onely ground of this our present contention and scandalous controuersie is the very same disease of emulation partly of Lay men against priests and partly of priests against religious men especially the Fathers of the Societie with whom at this present they haue to doe Apol. cap. 1. fol. 2. And would he now haue his reader beleeue that the whole world knoweth the contrary and that it is not principally against the Iesuits And whereas it is here said that the Archpr. is put as an Appendix some indeed doe thinke that he hath bound himselfe Apprentice to the Iesuits but I doe not heare that the priests do talke of th' one or th' other The second foule fault which here is found is that the priests of the Seminaries residing in England are put for the opposite part of which saith he these contentions are not the twentieth part and this is proued by their owne confessions in the former chapter Perchance this fellow hath relation to the question made to M Bishop and M. Charnocke How many they did certainely know to approue this their mission and to be priuie to the matters that should be proposed c. Chap 9. Apol. 131. To which these priests made their answere according to their owne certaine knowledge which answere is there deceitfully inserted as hath bene shewed and is here as deceitfully againe brought by him for his purpose their confessions being that there were Quà m plures sacerdotes Very many priests as appeareth where M. Charnocks examination is set downe fol. 130 which he there proued by certaine letters which he brought with him which testified as much And by their answer of their certaine knowledge which they could not haue but by present or particuler letter this fellow taketh a silly aduantage to proue that they were not the 20. part by their owne confession The priests did call themselues priests of the Seminaries because they were so and by this name are distinguished from the Iesuits who are
is there euidently seene to haue been spoken vpon iust cause and this authour is not able to answere the reason there giuen neither is it true which here also he affirmeth that the Breue of the sixt of April is called in question whether it were not forged it is onely sayd that it was procured by Fa. Parsons God knoweth out of what office and the reason is there giuen of these speaches and it is further shewed in the Replie to the second chapter of the Apologie how that his Holinesse doth not ordinarily see the Breues which he granteth In the 14. and 15. leafe this author indeuoureth to satisfie his reader why he doth often name insinuate their the priests patrons and their dealings with them in preiudice of Catholike religion and when he hath spoken his pleasure he solueth all himselfe in this manner And albeit some perhaps may excuse the matter as though this coniunction were not directly to the hurt of Catholike Religion yet euery man seeth that by consequence it is seeing heresie is strengthened by our owne diuision and voluntary weakening of the Catholike party in their fauour But perhaps an honest man will say that this coniunction is neither directly nor by consequence to the hurt of Catholike Religion but rather the vniust prosecution of those who pretend to be Cath. through which heresie may be strengthened and those priests tyred who haue and must deserue best of the Catholike Religion Neither is this any noueltie in Gods Church that those who should bee nurses of Gods people become cruel vnto them and they who vsed cruelty become pious in relieuing the needfull S. Hieremie lamenting the desolation of Ierusalem among other things breaketh out into these wordes Sed lamiae nudauerunt mammam lactauerunt catulos suos filia populi mei crudelis quasi struthio in deserto Those creatures who were wont to teare their yong ones in pieces prepared their teates and gaue them sucke the daughter of my people is cruel as an Ostrich in the desert But to returne to our purpose It is most true that some priests haue receiued very great fauours of the Magistrates who notwithstanding they are of a contrary Religion hold it fit that such haue fauour as they are well assured doe neither themselues plot nor combine with others who haue manifested themselues to plot against the temporall State vnder a faire pretence of Religion and in this ought these priests to thinke themselues most deepely bound vnto them for that they will take notice of their loyalty and if M. Bluet as here it is affirmed haue layd the fault where it ought to be what reason hath this fellow to tell his Reader that he will easily imagine that this fault is layd vpon the Iesuits and other of their side Master Bluet sayd no such thing but perchance the matters haue been so grossely handled by these fellowes as no man can imagine other and this fellow his guilty conscience maketh him to vtter it when the Iesuites are not charged therewith That which this fellowe carpeth at in the hope of peace pag. 13. 14. concerning the casting out of deuils is plaine enough against him the onely difficultie is in his owne opinion of the Iesuits that hearing of the casting out of deuils he is straight afraid of the Iesuits as thogh they were not onely deuils but the onely deuils That which is brought in in the hope of peace is brought to shew that it is not vnlawful to take assistance in a good cause euen of such as are otherwise contrary vnto vs. And therefore if there be any impietie in the application of the scripture there brought the impietie is in this author who placeth the Iesuits in the deuils roome and perchance he mistaketh when he affirmeth that the Protestants haue them for Religions sake it being well knowen that many of the Iesuites friends are highly fauoured who are knowen not to differ one iot in religion from them and the priests whom this author affirmeth to bee patronized by the Protestant magistrate are true Catholike priests and haue so shewed themselues and are resolute to liue and die in the Cath. religion so that there must be some other cause of the hatred if any be in the Protestant magistrats against the Iesuits then their religion But see how he proceedeth and they are so resolute saith he in this holy doctrine as they doubt not as it were to anathematize any man that will not stand with them therein for thus they write a litle after Who doth not now expect some sentence out of the hope of peace to this effect yet when it cōmeth it is of another matter nothing appertaining to this but here foisted in by this author to serue his turne For as it is euidēt to be seene in the hope of peace this discourse of the casting out of Iesuites as this fellow expoundeth it was cleane ended and another passage of the Archpr. his letter taken to bee answered where he writ in this maner It cannot be liked of that we should write one against another c. Whereupon it being first declared what the Iesuits writ against the priests namely in the treaatise of schisme and what infamy grew thereby vnto them the necessity of writing on the priests side is prooued and the sentence here alleaged by this authour is vsed to wit And if the priests haue been compelled to this hard choice as either they sustaine infinite iniuries and obloquies or redeeme themselues in this sort that is by writing from so vndeserued an oppression no superiour in the worlde can iustly finde himselfe touched in credit but such whom the Apostle calleth principes potestates mundi rectores tenebrarum harum This sentence being in this sense vsed by the priests note I pray you how this companion draweth it to another matter And is this true in deede good brethren sayth hee that no Superiour in the world can thinke himselfe touched in credit by this your dealing with heretickes against Catholickes but that hee must needes bee accounted a prince of darkenesse is there no exception at all with you what if his Holinesse that hath brought you vp c. And so hee goeth on in this vaine most idly and cleane contrary to the intent and purpose of the sentence which hee brought as may bee seene in The hope of peace pag. 16. And yet after all this which in his modestie he calleth a malepart kinde of writing he telleth his reader that some may excuse the matter as though this coniunction were not directly to the hurt of the Catholicke Religion yet saith he Euery man seeth that by consequence it is seeing heresie is strengthened by our owne diuision If this then be the matter returne in Gods Name to vnitie and doe that which Christians ought to doe in satisfaction to God and your iniured brethren who by you and your meanes haue suffred more indignities and affliction then euer
certaine Libell lately published in Print in the name of the vnited Priests called A briefe Apologie supposed to be made by F. Parsons CHAP. 1. How the Authour of the Apologie playeth at All hid with the Reader and while hee is couered vnder the name of vnited Priestes he discouereth himselfe to be a Iesuit IT might seeme a very friuolous labour to examine the title of this Apologie if the Author thereof had not bene more curious in the like then there was iust cause and ouer carelesse also what entrance hee made to this present woorke of his vntrueths and poore shifts when impertinent discourses doe suffer him to fall into the matter in question which as at other times so here in the very title he peruerteth and possesseth his Reader that an Ecclesiasticall Hierarchie erected by his Holines was impugned by the books against which he writeth and for his pleasure termeth although most ignorantly Libels their Authors being alwayes ready to iustifie them both before God and the world And if his Reader might be so much fauoured by him as that hee might haue his leaue to peruse those bookes hee would soone perceiue how falsly this title is set to this Apologie the bookes intreating onely of the abuses of the authoritie and of the iust causes of the Priests their forbearance to subiect themselues to a superior of the Card. Caietans appointing before any letters came from the Sea Apostolike either in confirmation therof or to shew that the Cardinal had any such authority or commandement from his Holines to erect any such Hierarchy This Apologie is said to be written and set foorth for the true information and stay of all good Catholicks by Priestes vnited in due subordination to the right reuerend Archpriest and other their superiors As though those who had appealed from the Archpriest vpon iust cause did not remaine in due subordination to him and other their superiors to whom they had appealed But to let this calumny passe there hath bene inquity made of many who are the men here meant by these words Priests vnited c. and as yet we cannot heare of any who were priuie to the writing of it or setting it forth Some there are who confesse that their consents were asked to the setting foorth of some booke in their names the contents whereof they were not to know at that time and of most likelyhood it was to the setting out of this book but they denied to giue their consents thereunto Many suspect that this Apologie was not written by those Priests which are here made to father it but rather by those who haue alwayes made their commoditie by the disunion of the Priests And although it go forth in the name of many it is very probable that it was made by some one man For whereas one man setting out a booke may vse his phrase in the plurall number when he speaketh of himselfe wee suppose or we say it is seldome in vse that many ioyned together do vse in the like the singuler number as I pray you I suppose which here we reade in the Preface I shall in the first chapter I thinke I say in the third Chapter and in the sixt chapter I omit 〈…〉 But to let this also passe there are no weake coniectures that this Apology was made by some Iesuite who bewrayed himselfe before he was aware as may be seene in the 8. chapter of the Apologie Fol. 180. where the author hath these words Where about they aske this question concerning vs why should they be vnwilling to procure c. Copy 〈…〉 And if any man will take the paines to turne to that place cited by these Authors hee shall finde that the question was asked concerning no other then Iesuits and consequently that out of this place of the Apologie there is iust cause to take them for the Authors 〈…〉 An other coniecture there is that Fa Parsons in particuler is the author of this Apologie because in the common opinion of many who haue read his stile this is so like vnto it as it would be hard for any man to imitate it so neerely without the very same gift which he hath And the number of letters and such as they are do almost conuince that it is his doing For what occasion had any Priests here in England to enter into so many impertinent matters to their state and profession as are here by manuscripts testified which probably were not to be gotten by the first of Iuly after the publication of the bookes he vndertaketh to answere And F. Garnet the head of the Iesuits did almost discouer asmuch in a letter of his of the last of Iuly Anno 1601. to a Saecular Priest M. F. B. wherin he told him that the two printed books against which this Apologie is written should be God willing answered from Rome Such as had read Prou. 27. Laudet te alienus non os tuum Let an other man and not thine owne mouth praise thee might doubt whether F Parsons would so grossely commend himselfe as here he is commended were he not knowen to bee one who would not willingly that any mouth or pen of which he hath the gouernment should not shewe foorth his praises Some other might doubt whether it were his doing because of the diuerse Englishing of this sentence Hebr. 13. Obedite praepositis vestris subiaccte eis which here is thus Englished Obey your Superiours and submit your selues vnto them And in his selfe-clawing Wardword wherein hee discouereth a piece of his disposition against some Catholiques he translateth it thus obey your Prelates and lie vnder them Perchance those who had the printing of this Apologie prefixed this sentence and we will imagine that they in recompence of his extraordinarie commendations of them requited him in that which he might blush to say of himselfe if at any time his vndeserued prayses may make him blush There is an other place of scripture taken out of the first to the Thess cap. 5. Rogamus vos fratres corripite inquietos We beseech you brethren represse those that are vnquiet amongst you which is apparantly abused in this place both by false translation and by being applyed against Cathol Priests because when they saw a thiefe they did not runne with him but stood and stand still as they are bound in conscience in the defence of their fame against those who most iniuriously had taken it away in some places and indeuoured to doe the like seruice elsewhere if they could It is set out permissu Superiorum that is by permission of the Superiors but as yet we cannot learne what superiors these are hauing most humbly requested the Archpriest to giue vs satisfaction herein as may appeare by a letter to him from M. Collington not long after we had a sight thereof It is very probable that no superiours dare auouch it for it containeth the most grosse vntrueths idlest shifts and
the King gaue it to him vnder his hand and broad Seale which conuinceth that whatsoeuer was the motiue of making those statutes all prouisions of dignities from Rome were forbidden and not those onely which had temporall liuings annexed vnto them And hereby also may it be seene how ready these fellowes are to interprete other mens words in the worst sense which they may affirme most peremptorily that the speakers or writers had those senses which it most pleased their aduersaries to giue them And thus much for this point Onely this is to bee added that although this new manifester of spirits hath in this place recanted somewhat of his rashnesse vttered in the Apol. cap. 2. fol. 15. concerning the chiefe purpose of those statutes of Praemunire yet he hath left somewhat in this manifestation of spirits which he must in some other place recant or shew himselfe a very obstinate impostor that is concerning the time of the enacting those Statutes which were long before the time in which hee here sayth they were made as may appeare by the booke of Statutes The second shift is as apparant as this For although many men in the world may say as much as the Archpriest said in diuers cases wherein Appeale is cut off by his Holinesse consent and order yet no man in the world who professeth to be a Catholike will say it and stand peremptorily in it without some warrant by this clause in their Commission appellatione remota or to that effect which is not to be found in the Commission which M. Blackwell had as may appeare to those who will reade ouer the Cardinall Caietane his letters by which he made him an Archpr and Superiour ouer the Seminary priests residing in England and Scotland 20 Cap. 9. fol. 123. There are letters of the 18. of March 1598. from Flanders brought out against the two Priests that went from England to Rome about an authoritie not then knowen in England as by the date of the letters of institution it may be euidently gathered which was at Rome 7. Martij 1598. 21 Fol. 125. 126. 127. There are letters brought out to proue that his Holinesse was prouoked by them to imprison the two priests whereas the date of the first of them is after the date of F. Bellarmine now Cardinall his letter to F. Parsons wherein he signified that his Holines had that resolution if they came to Ferrara for his letter beareth date the 17. of October 1598. as appeareth fol. 120. Apol. and the first of the other letters are from Doway 25. Octobr. 1598. as appeareth fol. 125. 22 Fol. 132. A most audacious imposture It is said that M. Charnocke said and swore before that their onely comming was to supplicate c. whereas there is no such matter said or sworne by M. Charnocke as may appeare fol. 129. where his oath is put downe without this word onely which is here thrust in by the author for his purpose 23 Fol. 128. F. Parsons exhortations were the students onely informations The whole English Colledge is said to haue knowen what passed at Rome in this matter when the two priests were there deteyned prisoners which no one being present at any thing which passed is a most grosse and impudent imposture 24 Cap. 10. fol. 141. It is affirmed That the two Priests who were deteyned as prisoners at Rome were presently set at libertie vpon the sight of the Breue and assurance that neither they nor any of their side in England would euer stirre more in these affaires Which may euidently appeare to bee most false for the Breue was brought vnto them within two or three dayes after the date thereof which is 6. Aprilis and the whole Colledge will witnesse that one of them was not set at libertie vntill the 6. of May following although the other had this libertie vpon the 22. of April 25 Fol. 143. A marucilous presumption of the blinde reader his dulnesse There is very good vse made of the false dating of the Breue which is knowen to haue bene vpon the sixth of April 1599. and not long before that is fol. 140. it is twice so cited Yet here for the credit of F. Parsons the Reader must take the Breue to beare date the 21. of the said moneth 26 Fol. 154. This Authour should haue shewed what meanes M. Char. had to liue in Lorraine It is sayd that M. Charnock being at Paris it was there resolued that he should go into England vnder pretence of lacke of meanes to liue abroade and that onely for fashions sake hee should aduise Card. Burghesius which is very false as the principall of our Nation then liuing in Lorayne can testifie M. Charnock hauing been there almost a yeere and neuer receiued any thing from them who confined him there nor from England notwithstanding he had written diuers times both to Rome and into England for some maintenance as some of them haue testified in their letters to the Archpr. dated the 11. of April 1600. from Liuerdune 27 Fol. 168. A shameles disseâ—…ling of the cause of these present controuersies This Author inueigheth bitterly against the priests and would haue his Reader most ridiculously to thinke that the priests had no iust cause to stirre as now they doe but that they tooke occasion as hee sayeth vpon an angry Epistle of the Archpriests vnto them and most impudently quoteth a place in the priests booke to his Holilines pag. 62. where his Reader may see that the contents of that Epistle was a publication that they were schismatiks and that hee had receiued such a resolution from Rome which we leaue to any indifferent man to iudge whether it was a iust cause for the priests to stirre for the purging themselues of this wicked slander 28 Fol. 177. This Author boldly demaundeth touching the two priestes who were imprisoned at Rome among other questions all which will bee answered in their places had they not licence after all examinations made to goe and speake with his Holines if they would Whereas all the English Nation then in Rome wil testifie that they were kept close prisoners long after their examinations were made and the one not dismissed out of prison vntill two dayes after that the other was departed from Rome by which it appeareth that they were not together at liberty after their first imprisonment nor licensed to goe to speake with his Hol. 29 Cap. 13. fol. 201. It is affirmed that M. Bensted was pursued so narrowly vp and downe London soone after conference with D. Bagshaw as he was taken neere the Tower and soone after made away in recompense of this his contradiction to the D. A most malicious suggestion For so good friends saith this fellow in this place are the persecutors vnto them as none that dissent or disagree from them shall finde any fauour And to make this Narration seeme the more probable the priest himselfe is brought
if he would haue couered himselfe he would not haue set his name downe at the end of the letter Yours Thomas Bluet But of this we will say no more vntill we come to answere the 13. Chapter of the Apologie when it shall be further examined The second demonstration which this Apologie maketh of deceit falshood and slander is out of this same place cited And as for their oppression saith he it is none but such as they list to imagine when they cannot haue their owne licentious will in all things What the oppression is I leaue it to any indifferent man to iudge when Catholike priests leauing all other liuelihoods which either in England they might haue had before they tooke vpon them this state of life or otherwise out of England as many haue at this day in requitall of many yeeres hazard of their liues to saue mens soules without any Ecclesiasticall liuing or other meanes for their maintenance then the charitie of such to whom they minister the Sacraments are turned out to goe picke sallets and all Catholikes who will be accounted pious and zealous are forbidden their company vnlesse the priests wil yeeld to their owne most vniust diffamations and damne their owne soules in following the licentious will of the Iesuits and Archpr. who would haue them to accuse themselues that they haue liued and ministred the Sacraments in schisme And if any thing be brought in the 1.5.6 or 7. chapter as here is promised contrary to this it shal be conuinced of deceite falshood or slander Out of the fourth page in the Latine booke there is deceit falshood or slander prooued in these words Cogimur c. We are forced to fly to the feet of his Holines c. But this matter is sufficiently answered by the Priests presence in Rome which was with as much speed as conueniently they could make And if they had neuer gone their sending of this book to his Holines would iustifie as much as is here set downe by them and if notwithstanding those means which the priests did vse their appellation and consequently this booke wherein the appellation is neuer came to his Holines it is made more euident how necessary the printing of these bookes was that some one by one meanes or other might by good chance light into his Holines hands And by this is answere made to the next place taken out of the 5. page where this deceit falshood and slander is found Haecautem c. Wee are forced to diuulge these things in print where diuers other causes are also giuen of the printing And to this purpose there was the last yeere a little booke printed at Paris and dedicated to the Nuntius there residing entituled Rationes redditae proimpressione c. Out of the 6. page where there is no one worde spoken of Card. Allen but how he was a common father to all the Priests and how by his wisdome he kept all things in quiet there is gathered by this Author a certaine principall deceit falshood or slander which is proued because he was opposite vnto the Priests and their factious proceeding especially against the Fathers of the society as by his owne letters appeareth a litle before his death c. See Apol. cap. 4. and 7. See the finenesse of this fellowes wit how hee can discouer a deceit falshood or slander The priests doe not say in that place that hee was either with them or against them or with the Fathers or against them but only make a plaine narration of his wisedome and the reuerence which all did beare vnto him And as for the 4. Chap. to which wee are here referred there is nothing of Card. Allen his writing concerning our matters neither could there well be he being dead before these begun In the 7. Chap. there is a certaine remembrance of a letter of his to M. Mush which for so much of it as is set downe in the second Chapter it condemneth the priests no more then the Iesuits betweene whome belike hee had heard there was some priuate questions of which what his iudgement was it is very well knowen to some and hath beene confessed by other namely Doct. Haddocke that the Card. before his death had such disgust of the Iesuites their actions as this good Doctor being tolde by M. Charnocke what was reported in England to haue proceeded from a Iesuite tooke vpon him perchance to saue then the Iesuites credit for now they say hee denyeth it againe that it was hee himselfe who had vsed these words after the Cardinals death He is well dead for if he had liued he had greatly dishonoured himselfe and his countrey In the 7. page there is a principall deceit falshood or slander noted in these words Desudantibus c. While Seminary Priests did sweat in the haruest of England which haruest was then well manured and almost ripe some Iesuits were called in by Doct. Allen to helpe them c. But what are these falshoods and how are they prooued Forsooth for first sayth this good fellow how well manured and ripe the English Cath. haruest was 22. yeeres agoe when the Iesuits were first sent there being then but few Priests in England as hauing had but one onely Seminary vntill that time and fewe knowen Catholikes also in respect of the number that after had ensued this we say is knowen to all men that vnderstood our case We are not here to stand vpon the encrease of Catholikes which hath beene within these 22. yeeres for no doubt there haue bene more knowen then were before And if the Iesuits will take it vpon them that they haue beene greater encreasers of Catholikes then the Secular priests they will discouer in themselues too much both falshood and vanitie And as for the exception which is taken against that which is saide of the good manuring of the haruest in England and that it was almost ripe before the Iesuits came in hee might as well haue taken exception and prooued falshood and vanity in our Sauiour his words when he said Ioâ—… 4. Leuate oculos vestros videte regiones quia albae suntiam ad messem c. Lift vp your eyes and behold the countrey how ready it is now for haruest And this was spoken by Christ onely vpon the disposition which he saw in the Samaritanes to receiue his doctrine And as the number of Priests was not so great as now it is so was it not so small as this fellow would it should be thought and both the Priests and laity had suffered long before the Iesuites set foot into England and there was perchance more true sincere religion in the least houshold then now is in a wider compasse what faire shewes soeuer are outwardly made to delude the world And whereas it is here said that when the Iesuits came into England there was but one onely Seminary it is as false as the other was foolish For as it is set downe in the
first Chapter of the Apol. fol. 2. the first English Seminary began at Doway in the yere 1568. and neuer as yet failed although vpon occasion it hath beene translated from thence into France and backe againe now to Doway so there is also mention in the same Chapter fol 3. of the beginning of the English Colledge at Rome in the yeere 1578. which was before the Iesuits entrance into England as may be prooued out of the 12. Chapter of the same Apologie fol. 181. where F. Parsons is said to haue come into England betwixt Easter and Whitsontide in the yeere 1580. where he must needs heare of some priests who had beene sent from that Seminary before him T.W. in his disgression from 16. Martyrs in one yere pag. 52. sayth that the Colledge of Rome was founded in the yeere 1575. which was fiue yeeres before F. Parsons entrance into England And as I thinke no man doubteth but that Fa. Parsons and Fa Campion were the first Iesuits which were sent into England to labour in that haruest As for those generall letters which follow in reproofe of these supposed falshoods they shal be answered where this Author setteth them downe in perticular In the 8. page F. Heywood the Iesuit is said to bee falsly and malitiously belied in these words Ostentansse c. A certaine Iesuit vaunting himselfe among our people as though he had bene Legate to the Sea Apostolicke c. But you must go for proofe hereof to the 3. chap. where there is nothing to this purpose and to the 11. chap. where fol. 164 F. Heywood is thus cleared from this pretended false and malitious lye Onely it is true that some 16. or 17. Priests whereof one chiefe man is said to be of their faction at this day met together with him that is F. Heywood and would haue had all the Nationall customes of England about fasting for some little diuersitie and difficulties which they found in them to be reduced to the common order of the Romane Church which D. Allen F. Parsons M. Blackwell and others did not allow and F. Heywood yeelded vnto these mens opinions And thus much perchance should not haue bene said here had Fa. Parsons and Fa. Heywood bene friends but they being otherwise and the good Fa. Heywood reclayming himselfe and seeking reformation of manythings in men of his order for which cause notwithstanding his learning and other gifts he was made to liue and die very obscurely the Author of this Apologie is content to say somewhat of him in this case in question although so farre as it might touch the credit of the societie the blame is layed vpon the Secular priestes And because perchance it is too well knowen that some of those priests otherwise zealous men as by their death they made euident remonstrance did long after breake those fasts vpon the warrant of this Prouinciall Councell it is said that F. Heywood yeelded vnto the contrary opinion lest the societie should beare the discredit of so rash an attempt And thus is the calumniation answered which was made against F. Heyw. and no otherwise as the reader may see if he will turne to the places whither this Author sendeth him And it cannot but argue great want of shame in this Author to run with such fowle termes vpon men for saying that which when he cōmeth to salue he knoweth not almost how to deliuer otherwise with any likelyhood of trueth In the 9 page the principall deceit falshood or slander is noted in these words Parietiam modo c. In like maner the Rectors of our English Romane Colledge did goe about many things that were grieuous and asperous to our youthes But for this point you must see it handled at large cap. 5. Apol. where also it is to be answered or the Reader referred to some particuler treatise of this matter But in the same page there is an other slander that is Conspectis c. Card Allen after he had considered and discouered the endeauors of the Iesuits was wont to say that they sought more their owne good then either that of our Countrey or Colledge The proofe here of must now stand vpon the honesty of the Relators but how iustly he or any other might speake it I refer me to any indifferent mans iudgement when the Iesuits would neuer suffer any to be in rest in the College who would not suffer thēselues to be drawne to the societie either by them or their Agents who liuing in the Colledge as the other students did had secret vowes to be Iesuits and perswaded as many as they could to take the same course And England hauing more need to be furnished with such as were most fit to take vpon them the care of soules who can doubt whether the Iesuits in seeking the most towardly youthes to leaue their vocation and become of their order sought more their owne good then either that of our Countrey or Colledge And to the question here foolishly proposed what priuate good can the Iesuits pretend for themselues worth their labors and perils in England more then in the Indies except the good of soules and seruice of God As though they sought somewhat els in the Indies then the good of soules and seruice of God or at the least not so much as in England We answere both according to their proceedings and F. Parsons platforme of Reformation that whatsoeuer they pretend they seeke to keepe not onely the Secular priests in a seruile subiection vnto them but the Bishops also and all the whole State of England hauing already in their platforme or Councell of Reformation set downe all Ecclesiasticall men as pensioners at the discretion of some Iesuits and some Secular priests no doubt of their choosing for auoyding of cōtention diuision And whereas good man he talketh of the Iesuits labours and perils in England who knoweth not how deliciously they fare how gorgeously they are attired how quietly they sleepe in the best and safest houses in England insomuch as it is a marueilous wonder when any Iesuit is in perill And there hath not wanted among the Lay gentlemen that for these respects haue wished themselues Iesuits notwithstāding they haue liued with wife children great friends and as great contentment as this world can yeeld to wealthy protected Catholicks In the 11. page is this falshood noted or slander against Card. Tolet in that he is said to haue bene a fauourer of the Troublesome against their superiors the wordes are these I am tum c. At that time both the Colledge and al the schollers had bene vndone if Car. Toledo had not opposed himselfe as a wall for the said schollers This is iustified by many and in the particular discourse of the troubles in Rome it will be shewed notwithstanding this vant here of all Rome and his Holinesse as though they would witnesse the contrary In the 12. page this Author hath noted great falshood in the narration of the
also what manner of children and of what parents they be that doe obiect this c. But alas good man were they much worse then they are who are saide to obiect this they are by many degrees his betters who is taken to be the Author of this Apologie And if the priests had as impertinently spoken so of the Iesuits as this good fellow speaketh of the priests his folly might haue bene in some sort excused but it being euident that this fellow his speech proceedeth of splene and without either any necessitie to inlarge himselfe so farre or any furtherance to his cause for what doth the quality of this or that man make better or worse the qualitie of another the place noted in this 27. pag. doth shew a iust cause why the priests did say the trueth in that cause For whereas M. Blackwell to the ignominie of the Catholike gentlemen did most vngratefully suggest and most vntruely to the Card. Caietane that the Iesuits did marueils in England in the releeuing of all sorts of people distressed and that they did it out of their owne patrimonies because they were minima not worth the speaking of which they receiued of almes from the Catholikes the priests to shew how palpable this flattery was affirmed as they might iustly that all the Iesuites almost in England were children of poore parents and consequently not like to doe so much in that sort as M. Blackwell did most grossely suggest And let this be sufficient for this time vpon this occasion to prooue that it is no calumniation as the margent would haue the reader to thinke it nor deceit falshood or slander as this table is entituled In the 29. page are diuers things noted as that Pope Xistus was tearmed a Wolfe by the Iesuites and defamed as a most wicked man and certaine propositions maintained about the Stewes which will be iustified to haue beene vttered by F. Weston the Iesuite in defence of M. Archer one of his principal confederates in his faction at Wisbich and generally taken for a Iesuite and cannot therefore but appertaine to the Iesuits betweene whomesoeuer the controuersie first began In the 30. page the priestes are saide to call the authoritie of their superior instituted by Christs vicar Laruam that is a masking vizard which is very false and no modest man would haue auowched it out of that place it sounding no otherwise then thus ad dominium comporandum alienae personae larua vtendum putabant that is they the Iesuits to get dominion thought they must vse a maske of an other person which can beare no other sence then this that they would rule and an other should beare the name and if ought were done amisse it should neuer bee knowen who were the actors But this man must be seene in it and they must be couered by him which euery man knoweth to be a very ordinary course in the world cry out shame vpon it without any touch to authority but to the abuse thereof And whereas Fa. Parsons memorials are here said to bee yet extant intrearing for obteyning of Bishops it is no disproofe to that which is auowched by the priests it being so possible for the same man to vrge mightily the very same matter which he will by some meanes or other crosse And there is sufficient proofe of this kind of dealing in F. Parsons as for example At the parting of some students from Rome hee writ a letter of commendations in the behalfe of one of them and at the very same time hee writ asmuch to the contrary to the very same place insomuch as they to whom those letters came conferring them together could not but maruaile much at this falsehood in him Likewise when M.D. Bishop was to depart from Rome to Paris in the way of great friendship and confidence F. Parsons requesteth him that there might be intercourse of letters betweene them Mary one thing aboue the rest he earnestly cōmended vnto him and that was to certifie him from time to time of M.D. Cecill his carriage and at the same time he writ to M. D. Cecill to doe him the like fauour for M.D Bishop And not long after he sollicited M. Shelborne a reuerend priest then abiding in Paris to certifie him against them both and very likely it was there was some other appointed to pay his debts But imagine what sport there was when these letters came forth and how peeuish they are who will not beleeue that F. Parsons can play all maner of playes for his purpose In the 33. page the principall deceit falshood or slander is gathered out of those wordes Nullo c. no respest being had to the most Catholike Archb. of Glasco I would aske this good fellow what respect was had vnto this Bishop when the Archpriest was made superior without his priuitie or consent ouer all the English priests which then were or after should be resident in his diocesse And if there were no respect had vnto him what deceit falshood or slander was there in saying so But listen I pray you to the conceit which is made hereupon See saith he the strange desire of these men to set strife euery where They would stirre vp the Archb. of Glasco residing in Paris for aboue 30. yeres against the Protector for that he giueth iurisdiction to the Archpriest vpon English Priests in England Scotland and Ireland and yet these men do aske faculties for these three countries but would be vnder no authority in any Now alas good man where hath he his ground concerning this last point that the priests would not be vnder authoritie so often as hee doeth vrge the association intended in England by the Priests hee conuinceth himselfe of this falsehood And if he were set to finde where the Priests asked faculties for those three countries as superiors there he would be sorely troubled But the Reader must take all this vpon his word as also that the Priests minded to set the Protector and the Bishop of Glasco together by the eares when they said that in the institution of this authoritie ouer all the English priests in Scotland there was no respect had to the Catholick Bishop of Glasco How much better might it be said that F. Parsons and his confederats ment to set strife betweene them when so vnaduisedly they procured the Protector to giue such iurisdiction to a strange Archpriest within the dioces of a Bishop in another Nation and no way subiect to any prelate of England In this foolish fury also how forgetteth he that he often saith that the Cardin all did but witnes the authoritie by his letters and setteth it downe in plaine termes that the Priest would stirre vp the Bishop against the Protector for that he giueth iurisdiction to the Archpriest In the Apologie almost in euery place it is said that there was in the Priests at the first comming of the Cardinals letters no lesse then a resistance against the Popes order
left out so memorable an abridgement of so many impertinent and false matters and so well suting with the Apologie I call all that impertinent which concerneth any diuision either of Iesuites and other Catholikes of the Clergie or of the Laitie before the comming of the Cardinall Caietans letters for the institution of the Archpriest in the yeere 1598. or the ambitious attempt of the knowen and couert Iesuites in the scandalous diuision in Wisbich For vpon the not yeelding of some secular Priestes to subiect themselues first to the Iesuites in direct termes and the not admitting of an authoritie procured by them afterward for their indirect soueraintie this present controuersie began and being once ended at the sight of a Breue it was renewed againe by the rashnesse of the Iesuites and the indiscretion of the Archpriest as it is prooued at large in the bookes set out by the Secular priests and promulgated in the latter Breue dated the 17. of August 1601. as shall hereafter be shewed I affirme the rest to be false because so it shal be proued for so much as is touched thereof either in the Apologie or in this Epistle Omitting therefore what is here propounded to his Holinesse concerning the Catholikes their going to the Protestants Churches at the beginning of her Maiesties raign who now is a thing which would not haue bene published to the world by any who tendered their honour vnlesse there had bene some greater cause for it the subornation of some by the Counsell to poyson D. Allen afterwardes Cardinall and the Students raising of sedition among the Catholikes beyond the Sea the euill successe which some had about the Queene of Scots and diuers Gentlemen which is here attributed to their secret keeping of their practises from Fa. Parsons and other the inducing of two Priests to write two bookes in fauour of heretikes as it were by reason of State and to become spies the one in France the other in Spaine Lastly to let passe that which is here said that Car. Allen perceiued that there was a faction begun in England by the same acte of the Counsell against the Fathers of the Societie and writ most earnestly against it that Card. Sega had found out that a few vnquiet spirits were set on craftily by the subtill instruments of the Counsel were the cause of many troubles in that Colledge at Rome we wil here only touch such points as do concerne our selues and the matter now in controuersie Your Holines therefore saith this Author seeing prudently these causes and effects and hauing put a finall end to the long and fastidicus troubles of the English Romane Colledge giuen your straight commandement by words of mouth to such persons of the tumultuous as departed into England in that yeere 1597 to be quiet for the time to come to haue peace with all but namely with the Fathers of the Societie and hearing notwithstanding the next yeere after by diuers letters out of England that this was not obserued but new meanes rather deuised of further diuision and sedition your Holines did vpon these considerations and vpon the letters and requests of diuers of the grauest Priests of our nation which after we shall cite ordaine by the Card. Protector his letters an easie and sweet subordination c. If wee had no other proofe of this fellowes falsehood then might be made apparant in this second point of the Epistle it would giue euery honest man sufficient satisfaction His Holines is here put in minde of such strange matters and his wisedome very highly commended vpon so false grounds as if this Epistle had bene euer deliuered vnto him hee would speedily haue discouered a notable sycophancy He is here told of two principall motiues for his ordaining our easie and sweet subordination The one were certaine letters which signified that betweene the tumultuous who departed into England in the yeere 1597 and the Fathers of the Societie there was not that peace which he had commanded but new meanes rather deuised of further diuision and sedition The other were other letters and requests of diuers of the grauest priests of our nation which after saith he wee shall cite Concerning the first least there should be any error in Iudgement what those new meanes of further diuision should be there is this note in the margent The new association which conceite is deliuered in plainer termes and more at large in the first Chapter of the Apol. fol. 6. in this maner But the reliques of those that had bene troublesome and vnquiet before their comming into England and conferring againe with their consorts of their former actions and designments frustrated as they thought by F. Parsons dealing at Rome resolued to begin againe but after another fashion To wit by deuising a certaine new Association among themselues c. And in the 2. Chapter fol. 13 his Holines hearing of certaine new Associations begun in England soone after the tumults ended in Rome c. These to omit other places in the Apologie are sufficient to shew that his intention is to make the Pope beleeue that the Association which was begun in England by the Secular priests was a new deuise of those who were sent from Rome in the yeere 1597 as tumultuous and vnquiet persons That this is a meere deluding of his Holines all who were then in England can very well testifie yea F. Parsons himselfe will doe vs the fauour I am sure to say this is a very false tale who vnderstood at his first comming to Rome by M. Iames Standish that such an Association had bene long before intended and consequently could not bee a deuice of such as thought themselues frustrated of their designments by his dealing in Rome The 6. assistants in their letters of the 2. of May 1601. doe testifie that this association began foure or fiue yeres since Cap. 7. Apol. fol. 90. and that must needs be before those priests came into England on whom it is fathered if it be true which is sayd Cap. 2. Apol. fol. 12 that they were not gone from Rome at the beginning of September 1597. It may also be gathered out of the same Chapter fol. 89. that this association very probably was begun long before by others for there we finde this storie But M. Mush returning into England as he went forth and the Cardinall soone after dying in the yeere 1594. as appeareth Cap. 1. Apol fol 6. hee ioyned with another of his owne humour c. And they two with some few other determined to make a certaine new Hierarchy of their owne calling it an association of Clergie men c. The truth is that M. Mush and M. Dudley hauing made the peace at Wisbich in the yeere 1595. as appeareth Ca. 6. Apol fol. 79. returned to London and there dealt with M. Iames Standish a man growing in deed into that humor to wit of being a Iesuit which M. Mush was then leauing and not with
them In which this Apologie fayling as it must needes doe the author hath alreadie giuen iudgement against himselfe that he is a notorious libeller and that he hath brought all his followers and furtherers herein whether consenters or spreaders of it abroad into a heauie case God amend them But let vs I pray you examine the cause why this Apologie was written the authour thereof blaming so often the Priests for writing Diuers points saith he you know already and some more you are like to perceiue by this our Apologie being driuen thereunto but not all for auoiding further scandall which respect of scandall should haue withheld vs wholly from putting pen to paper in this cause if the intemperance of some persons giuen ouer as it seemeth to choler and reuenge and forgetting both themselues and others and the times wherein they liue had not broken foorth of late to such excesse as we are forced against our wils to put some stop or bridle to so licentious and scandalous proceedings lest it infect euen the good and trouble the strongest when they see such enormous matters passe without controlement In this iustification of his setting foorth this Apologie we gather first that scandall is not alwayes to be auoyded For as he saieth The respect of scandal should haue withheld him wholly from putting pen to paper in this case if the intemperance c. so that the intemperance belike of some persons may excuse a man doing that whereupon scandall may arise Note I pray you how this fellow can change his hew when it shall make for his purpose When hee will write himselfe then the intemperance of some persons is a sufficient excuse for him although scandall arise thereon And when he would haue others blamed who were more grieuously iniured and prouoked thereby to write then he is he can preach vnto them that S. Paul was of a spirit and iudgement contrary to theirs 1. Corinth 8. who doth so greatly exaggerate the danger of scandalizing any one of our brethren for whom Christ died as he sayd that he would rather neuer eate meate then doe it Thus saith this Apologie-maker in his Appendix fol. 16. And there he goeth on also and sheweth what Christ himselfe said Matth. 18. That it were better suffer death in most hideous manner to wit with a milstone at our neckes to be cast into the sea then to scandalize the least of them that beleeue in him that be our Christian and Catholike brethren And then he concludeth in this maner So as this other diuinitie that it may be done for sauing of our credites mainteining our good names and other commodities was not then knowen and commeth now downe from a contrary spirit and Master to Christ and S. Paul By this then it followeth that howsoeuer the Priests can auoid blame this Apologie-maker is in the lurch who hauing so great skill not onely in the sayings of S. Paul but of Christ also and in diuinity and the true meaning of it notwithstanding he thought that some scandall would growe by this his acte aduentured contrary to true diuinitie to write this Apologie The diuinitie which the priests doe professe teacheth them that the scandall of little ones is to be auoided and the scandall of Pharises is to be contemned And as they reade in one place Matth. 16. Qui scandalizauerit c. Whosoeuer shall scandalize one of these little ones which beleeue in mee it were better for him that he had a milstone hung about his necke and he drowned in the bottome of the sea So in another place they finde that Christ when his disciples told him that the Pharises were scandalized at that which he said answered Matth. 15. Sinite illos c. Let them alone they are blind and guiders of the blind There are diuers reasons set foorth by the Priests to iustifie their publishing of their bookes but to an indifferent Reader this place of the Preface is warrant inough since that in this authors opinion there needeth no other caufe then to put some stop or bridle to so licentious and scandalous proceedings least it infect euen the good and trouble the strongest when they see such enormous matters passe without controulment Was there euer any so licentious and scandalous proceedings as haue beene against the Priestes Can Fa. Listers the Iesuites treatize of Schisme be matched for excesse and passion against Catholike priests was there euer such an outrage committed in Christendome by any Catholike to another as this is Harken O ye factious ye are Rebels yee are Schismatikes and fallen out of the Church and spouse of Christ yee haue troden vnder your feete the obedience which yee owe to the highest Bishop yee haue sinned against all humane faith and authoritie by reiecting a moral certainty in a morall matter yee haue violently run into excommunication irregularitie ye haue lost your faculties by which you should haue gained soules to Christ ye haue so scandalized all the godly as now yee are generally become infamous What shall I say more ye haue sinned against Christ his chiefe Vicar and Christ himselfe the Iudge and Iusticer by your disobedience that with Samuel the Prophet we may say Quasi peccatum c. as a thing of southsaying it is to repugne and as the offence of Idolatry not to be willing to be quiet See I pray you that ye are nothing better then Southsayers and Idolaters And because yee haue not heard the Church while she spake vnto you by the chiefest Bishop yee are as Ethnickes and Publicans And here I make an end earnestly desiring the very mightie God that he will yet at the last giue you his grace lest that being thrust into sempiternall destruction with Ethnicks and Idolaters you suffer immortall paines for this your disobedience and scandall Thus farre F. Lister the Iesuite And was it not necessary that there should be some stop put or bridle to this licentious and scandalous proceeding was there not danger that the good might hereby be infected nay is it not euident that many a good soule hath bene infected and many also of the strongest troubled hereby and had not then the Priests iust cause to declare vnto the world how the case stood with them in England and to publish some reasons of their actions especially when after the peace made and all iniuries forgiuen by them the Archpriest did not onely not checke these licentious and scandalous proceedings of the Iesuits broched afresh by them but gaue them his hand in this action and incontinently published this licentious and most scandalous libell which neither hath the authors name nor is likely euer to be iustified We haue receiued a resolutiō from our mother citie that the refusers of the appointed authoritie were schismatikes And surely I would not giue absolution to any that should make no conscience thereof c. And therefore my direction is that they make account thereof and doe make
contempt of temporall goods his conuersation was with those Religious that had no possessions and ioined himselfe vnto the begging Fryers approouing their pouertie and extolling their perfection Euident tokens that hee had left the state of a Secular Priest and ascended to some higher degree of perfection But as it should seeme he was neither Monke nor Frier but talis qualis such as he was or as other perchance who came after him although they follow him not in all things For as it appeareth in our Chronicles hee preached against Monkes and other religious men that had possessions and taught such doctrine as hee was condemned for it in the Council of Constance as an heretike and his bones were taken vp and burned as is beforesaid Whereby also this authour is proued to forget himselfe very much to number him amongst the Clergie which is generally taken for such as are not onely in Orders but liue also in vnitie of the faith Wherefore purposing to tell a tale of emulation in the Clergie against the Religious he should haue taken some other to haue prooued it then Wickliffe who also by his pretence no doubt of greater perfection had forsaken the state of a Secular Clergie man as appeared by his habit and conuersation To these falshoods and couert calumnies against the Secular Priests this deceit of this author may be added That whereas the Chronicles doe mention that not only Iohn Wickliffe but foure doctors of diuinitie also one of euery Order of the begging Fryers ioyning with him were imployed by Iohn of Gaunt in his grudge against Bish Wickham of Winchester in whose defence the B. of London not Arundell as this author affirmeth but Courtney speaking as became him to doe Iohn of Gaunt threatned him also and swore that he would pull downe both the pride of him and of all the Bishops in England this author mentioneth onely the Secular Priest as he termeth him without any mention of the orders of Religion which were also imployed Moreouer it soundeth very foolishly that Iohn of Gaunt would set Iohn Wickliffe against the Monkes vpon an emulation which hee had against the Bishops their estates depending so little vpon the estate of the Monkes as when all the Abbyes in England were put downe the Bishops remained in as great honour as euer they did And wheras it is further said that the Abbey lands were taken from the Monkes and giuen to the maintenance of the crowne by the same emulation of the Clergie against the Religious in the time of K. Henry the eight it is most false the Abbyes being then put downe by a change of Religion which had not the beginning vpon any such emulation as this author affirmeth but vpon the perswasion of Longland B. of Lincolne the Kings confessor fortified by Card. Wolsey viz. that his Highnesse mariage with the Lady Katherine his brother Prince Arthurs wife was vnlawfull and against the word of God whereby the King being induced to seeke a diuorce but crossed therein with the Pope by Charles the fift nephew of the Lady Katherine and some others as well of the Laytie as the Clergie both Secular and Religious here in England it wrought in the King such a dislike of his Holines and others as it procured not onely the ouerthrow of the Abbyes but such a change in Religion as since the world hath seene Of this alteration therefore if any emulation were the beginning it was an emulation in the Cardinall who dealt with B. Longland to perswade the King as is mentioned and afterward did second him with all his might himselfe against the Emperour for hindering him of the Popedome and neither the sister nor the mother to ambition as this author would haue it but her daughter But the greatest folly committed by this author in this his exordium is not yet touched and that is that among all other histories impertinent to the cōtrouersie in question he would make his choyse of one wherein himselfe if we are not deceiued is notoriously disciphered Iohn Wickliffe was a Secular priest being a priest and neither Monke nor Friar and no Secular priest as differing from them in habit and conuersing with the religious Mendicants vnder pretence of greater perfection His followers tooke no name of him as both Monkes and Friers do of their founders and Sectaries of their Masters but went vnder the name which the common people gaue them to wit Lollards He was vsed as an instrument by Iohn of Gant to bring that to passe which this Duke had long conceiued in his mind For he saw saith the Historie Ioh. Stow. sup that it would be hard for him to obtaine his purpose the Church standing in his full state c. Wherefore he laboured first to ouerthrow aswell the liberties of the Church c. And to this end did Iohn Wickliffe bestow his talents for he was not onely eloquent saith the historie but also seemed to contemne temporall goods for the loue of eternall riches c. This authour being in a state which once was of Secular priests now no state of Secular priests not because he will be taken for either Monke or Frier or goe barefoote as Iohn Wickliffe did and his followers or basely clothed for these are outward mortifications which of what edification soeuer they are yet are not worthy of that honour which is due to the inward mortifications which lie hid and are not seene by the corporall eye But because Pope Gregorie the 13. hath so declared it yet so as he being filius populi as people say hath no other name but what the people giue him he is imployed not by Iohn of Gant himselfe in his owne person for this great Duke died aboue 200 yeeres since but by Iohn of Gant in some of his posteritie who hath somewhat to bring to passe which he hath long conceiued in his mind for the effecting of which this godly Father is busied in the corrupting the Cleargie of England or the vtter ouerthowing it which at this present he and his doe worke by taking from them their good name and fame and making them odious without iust cause to the people And to the end that he would be knowen not to haue spent his time idlely in Wickliffe his schoole he hath not onely imployed his tongue but his pen also and in his first platforme of Reformation hath ordeined that none of the Clergie shall possesse any temporall liuings but shall liue vpon such pensions as shall to certaine of his company and some secular Priests ioyned with them in their wisedome seeme necessary for their maintenance But let vs now see whether this authour can fit himselfe better in the next point In the beginning also saith he of this Queenes dayes the little affection which the Laitie did beare vnto the Clergie procured by some vnquiet spirits as also the small vnion of diuers Clergie men among themselues some holding with the heretikes and politikes by beate of faction
liuely represent the knowen old medicine to kill fleas by putting dust in their mouthes If but halfe of these matters here alledged were proued against the Priests doubtlesse they were to be auoyded by Catholicks as such as wanting no faults in themselues would hardly instruct others in vertue But this Author being not as yet setled to his Apologie without doubt discouereth that hee is not free from all those vices which he hath reckoned if he want any of them who vpon so smal or rather no cause or euidence would haue his Reader to enter into so rash and vile a iudgement of the Secular priests as though his Apologie were to no purpose vnlesse his Reader would carry such an vncharitable conceit of them as there should be no need of any Apologie or defence of those who are their aduersaries But now to his ground of this present contention The principall or onely ground saith he of this our present contention and scandalous controuersie is the very same disease of emulation partly of Lay men against Priests and partly of Priests against religious men especially the Fathers of the Societie with whom at this time they haue to doe c. We haue before shewed that the emulation of the Laitie against the Cleargie of which he speaketh before was for that the Cleargie were thought to be an hinderance to some designments of the Laitie and thereupon some few deuised how to indomage the Cleargie The emulation also which was said to haue bene in the Cleargie against the religious Ioâ—… Stow in Edw. 3. Anno 13â—7 hath bene shewed not to haue bene in the Cleargie but in Wickliffe and his societie surnamed by the people Lollards And if any of the Cleargie may be said to haue ioyned with Wickliffe in that his insolent and heretical attempt they were of the Religious cleargie and not of the Secular And this emulation was against the religious who had possessions Now then good sir if the principall or onely ground of this our present contention and scandalous controuersie is the very same disease of emulation you must shew what like cause the Lay men haue found in the Cleargie or the Priests in the Religious especially the Fathers of the Societie who by their rule haue no properties nor can possesse any thing T.W. in his Diâ—resâ—…on from the 16. Martyrs pag 63. as M T.W. would haue vs to thinke We haue giuen a cause before of the contrary part why the Lay men who follow the Iesuits and the Iesuits also may be thought to stirre vp themselues against some Secular Priests to wit because that some of the Secular Priests cannot bee brought to like of such plots as the Iesuits haue layd for the inuasion of our Countrey in which they haue imployed themselues oftentimes and thrust also some Secular Priests into the action although most grieuously against their wills namely in the yeere 1596. And if this Author had not vsed this parenthesis speaking of Religious men especially the Fathers of the Societie with whom at this present they haue to do we should neuer haue dreamed that this digression from hurts done in this Queenes dayes had bene made against the Priests who stand vpon their defence against the impostures of the Iesuits and their adherents because so small a number of the Laity doe stand with those priests and the priests themselues are so few by this good fellow his accompt as he disdaineth much that they are called the priests And in the 11. Chap. of the Apol. fol. 162. he alledgeth it for the second abuse sleight or shift which was vsed towards his Holines in the title of the booke dedicated vnto him wherein it is said that the troubles were betweene the Iesuits on th' one side with the Archpr. c and the Seminary priests on th' other side But no doubt herein this fellow his memory did faile him as also in another matter there mentioned For whereas here he affirmeth that the principall only ground of this our present contention and scandalous controuersie is the very same disease of emulation partly of Lay men against priests and partly of Priests against religious men especially the Fathers of the Societie In the 11. Chap fol. 161. 162. hee affirmeth that the Priests their controuersie is with the Archpr. c. and that their stomacke against the Iesuits is for standing with him and for him So as by this reckoning the case is plainely altered For if the principall and onely ground of this our present contention and scandalous controuersie be the very same disease of emulation partly of Laymen against Priests and partly of Priests against religious men especially the Iesuits to which of these two members will this Author bring this controuersie which in the 11. Chap. he saith is betweene Priests and their Archpriest he cannot bring it to the first which is of Lay men against Priests for then hee must accompt the Priests betweene whom and the Archpr. the controuersie is or the Archpr. among Lay men which I trust he will not He cannot bring it to the second which is of Priests against Religious For then the Archpr. betweene whom and the priests is the controuersie must be confessed to be religious which also as I weene he will not say especially that he is a Iesuit as hee expoundeth himselfe or a Father of the Societie with whom at this present as he saith here they the priests haue to doe For at this he laughed Num. 16. in his table of falsehoods But perchance his strayning to disgorge himselfe caused a lightnes in his head that he knew not well what hee said The filth then before shewed being now out of his stomacke For better declaration of this matter saith he I shall goe forward with the narration of those hurts and difficulties which vpon emulation haue fallen out in this our English cause vnder the Queene that now is especially concerning the Seminaries and the reduction of England by that way and meane procured for these 20. yeeres and more to wit since the beginning of the Romane English Colledge which was in the yeere 1578. at what time a contention beganne betweene M. Doct. Lewis then Archdeacon of Cambray but after B. of Cassana and the English schollers about the maner of gouernment and gouernors of that house erected especially by his procurement and industry He hath shewed you before what hurt came to England by the emulation which some Catholicks had against the restoring of a new English Clergie at Doway which notwithstanding the Seminary there florished and afterward also at Rhemes in France in such sort as England thankes be to God did not feele that hurt vntill new Lords came who were of the Iesuits faction and were forced sometime to runne with them for some respects how smal soeuer their inward deuotion was vnto them Now he will giue you to vnderstand what great hurt our English cause hath had by emulation which was at Rome
And because he will take all before him he saith that Doctor Lewis after B. of Cassana and the schollers fell out about the maner of gouernment and gouernours of the house which doubtlesse if this fellow had any respect to the good reputation of the Schollers hee would haue concealed the house being erected especially by that man his procurement and industry as here it is confessed For in reason who would not haue expected to haue borne some sway in that of which he might iustly haue bene called in some sort a founder being moreouer a man of great wisedome and integritie But this Author thinketh it good policie to conceale Fa Parsons presence at Rome at that time lest that the riddle should be read otherwise then hee would haue it and the cause of dissension disciphered The trueth is that F. Parsons was there and there needeth no more to be said And hee did deale with the schollers vnder hand as secretly as he might but failed of the Rectorship if he sought it although T.W. in his digression from the 16 martyrs pag. 53. amongst other his follies doth affirme that the first Rector of this Colledge was F. Robert Parsons c. And to say that the Councell did lay hands presently hoping thereby to keepe a perpetuall diuision in our nation is to argue the Councell of a great ouersight and want of consideration that a diuision in a nation prooueth oftentimes a desolation or vtter ouerthrowe thereof But let vs see what substantiall proofe there is of this assertion For which cause sayth this Author diuers spies were sent ouer to nourish the said diuision as namely one Vanne if we remember well who died in the Inquisition at Rome in the yere 1581. and soone after they vsed another named Salomon Alread a Taylor by his trade and married first at Lyons in France but after getting acquaintance at Rome and Millaine hee became a statesman went in and out diuers times to the Councell of England vntill at last being discouered he remained for seruant with Sir Fran. Walsingham the Q Secretarie and lastly professed heresie Vanne is said to be employed by the Counsell to nourish this diuision in our nation but what hee did it is not said this the reader himselfe must imagine neither is it said with whome he ioyned when he came to Rome or with whom he dealt onely it is said that he dyed in the Inquisition which argueth that hee was some obstinate heretike And this example is as foolishly brought to prooue emulation in the Laytie against the Clergie as that of Wickliffe was to prooue emulation of the Clergie against the religious both being heretickes and consequently neither of them of that body of which we are to vnderstand this Author when he talketh of the Laytie and Clergie vnlesse he will also take that word Religious to extend it selfe to such Apostata Iesuits as are either at Geneua or elsewhere And then will hee make himselfe ridiculous in affirming that emulation against such religious should hinder the reduction of England to the Cath. faith Salomon Alread was a Catholike and a great deuote of the Iesuits both at Lyons in France and elsewhere And if by his peuking he did at any time discouer what he receiued of them this author who neglecteth the credit of all whatsoeuer to saue the Iesuits credit should haue couered it not hauing named any place of this mans conuersation where hee should become a Statesman but such as where the Iesuits were his directors as Lyons in France Rome and Millaine And if after the edification he had of the Iesuits he returned into England and offered his seruice to Sir Francis Walsingham her Maiesties Secretarie Sir Francis had little reason to refuse him or not to imploy him although we cannot learne that euer he did any harme in the English Colledge at Rome And therefore this example of emulation in the Laytie against the Clergie is as small to the purpose as the former His being a Taylor might perchance make to the purpose in this authors conceit but his being a married man is doubtlesse here mentioned for no other end then to put vs in mind that married men can play the marchants as well as others as if wee had forgotten that as the Councell did second the Iesuits who were not maried in the first diuision at the College of Rome by sending Vanne thither as this author sayth who was an vnmarried man so did the Iesuits second the Coūcels imploiment of this Solomon Alread who was maried in the furthering of their faction in the same Colledge at Rome by entertaining Pierce amongst some other straglers who was also a married man and his wife knowen to be liuing to make vp a small number of 8. or 10. pious youths as the Iesuites did terme them to stand with them against all the rest of the students in the Colledge yet in this one tricke the Iesuits went beyond our Councell in that they made their married man Cornutus by putting him in a square cappe the better to effect that which they did by his means For this was he who after many deuises preuailed at the last with three of the Students to go to a Tauerne to drinke where they were no sooner set then apprehended by the Sbirri And the matter was made so odious as hereby they lost the fauor of his Hol. were brought into a most seruile subiectiō to the Iesuits not without the great grief of their friends who long after complained that they had very euill handled a good cause And although these were the first stratagems which were layd open to the world yet were diuers causes giuen of disquietnes euen from the first foundation of that Colledge For the Iesuits hauing gotten the gouernement thereof into their hands and in such sort as they were most earnestly requested thereunto by such as howsoeuer this Author doth bragge of them Chap. 5. fol. 28. and their petitions to his Holinesse confessed not long after that they knew not what they had done they began to strike as we say while the iron was hot and laboured a couple of the Students to become Iesuits to wit Thomas Wright and Iohn Barton who were well esteemed of for their towardlinesse And although both of them did afterward leaue the societie of the Iesuits yet their present example together with the Iesuits bad indeuours was occasion of much disunion of mindes in the Colledge which when it was perceiued the Iesuits the better to norish this diuision to couer their owne dealings imployed such of the Students in that office as had already deuoted themselues vnto their societie and did countenance them against those who complained thereof insomuch as it was too apparant that some were of purpose deferred or kept from going into the societie of the Iesuites to the end they might perswade others to the same course which was in deed the vndoing of that Colledge For now the Students
Iesuits it is a meere mockery as may appeare by the letter it selfe for so much as is set downe to this purpose in this Apologie cap. 2. fol. 11. where we find these words I haue heard to my great griefe that there is not that good correspondence betweene the Fathers and other priests I cannot tell vpon what discontentment c. But whereof soeuer it commeth it is of the enemie and with all possible discretion and diligence by the wiser sort on both sides to be rooted out or els it wil be the ruine of the whole cause c. And therefore in this point especially M. Mush be earnest and peremptory with all parties and euery one in particular c. By which we vnderstand not how it may rather be gathered that there was a factiō by the Secular priests against the Iesuits then that there was a faction by the Iesuits against the Secular priests neither is here any relation to any former speech had with him as doubtlesse there would haue bene had M. Mush giuen any such information to him but rather the contrary as may be gathered by these wordes I haue heard to my great griefe c. which argueth that this was put into his head by some other that this being before layd for a groūd they might afterward build thereon to their owne best liking nothing at any time being accounted so much their honor and glory as others falling out which howsoeuer they doe vnderhand nourish it while they would seeme to remedy it maketh them wise and charitable purueyours for the common cause and what not good men beeing as innocent of these broyles and diuisions as Sinon was of the betraying of Troy Moreouer it may appeare by this letter that the Car. had a very great good conceit of M. Mush who would employ him in a matter in which lay the ruine of the whole cause and therefore willed him to be earnest yea and peremptory with all parties His good affection was also shewed in that at his cōming into England he perswaded the Pope to giue vnto him very speciall faculties and power to name at his returne into England to a certaine number who hoc ipso should haue the like And yet this author is not ashamed in this place to set downe to his discredit these words Hauing bene with the Cardinall at Rome and hauing done some euill offices as is presumed c. the Card. perceiuing his humour wrote most effectually to him and by him to others against this diuision and faction but little preuailed And in the margent there is a note of the aboue cited letters which as they are set downe in the Apologie are a most absurd instance to proue thus much as is here presumed of the Cardinals sinister conceit of M. Mush as that it was farre from trueth which was auowed that the Cardinall was disunited from the Fathers before he died For thus this author maketh his tale hang together But it litle preuailed as now appeareth onely it may serue to prooue how false and farre from trueth it is which he M. Mush and others of his faction doe auow in their bookes that the Cardinall was disunited from the Fathers before he died for that he said as they relate that when he should be dead farre greater troubles and oppositions would fall out against the Iesuits which may be true for that he saw so much emulation against them by Libertines and factious people already begun in his time which yet were reteined somewhat from breaking forth by this authoritie while hee liued But the Cardinall liuing yet sixe moneths longer what proofe could this letter be that hee was not disunited from the Iesuits before he died Or what proofe is it of any such vnion to the Iesuits when he writ it as it could not be likely that hee was disunited before he died he willeth Master Mush to be earnest and peremptory with all parties in which words the Iesuites are included aswell as the Secular priests and consequently the Cardinall was peremptorily conceited that somewhat was amisse in the Iesuits or else hee would not haue bene so bold with them as he might vpon any small occasion with the Secular of whom he had a particular charge To our remembrance also the words of the Cardinall related vnto vs were not those which are here cited to wit that when he was dead farre greater troubles and oppositions would fall out against the Iesuits but that there would be very great troubles by the Iesuits their ambitious courses bad carriages towards the Secular priests And this gloze that he foresaw so much emulation against them by Libertines and factious people is piously made by this authour that the reader should be out of doubt what spirit it is which doeth assist him in the making of this his necessary Apologie But the good Cardinall being dead in the yeere 1594 all factions saith this fellow brake out together against the Iesuits destitute now of the Cardinals assistance c. This Author mistaketh the matter For after the Cardinals death the Iesuits began their raigne in euery place where any English were resident as at Rome and in England especially at Wisbich where through the folly of the Lay Catholicks they had greatest hope to preuaile first and afterward to haue an easier conquest of the rest The stirres troubles of Rome are particularly to be set downe in a discourse thereof whither wee are to referre the Reader The stirres in England began at Wisbich by the insolencie of the Iesuits there in durance F. Weston F. Buckley F. Bolton and others who had deuoted themselues particularly to their order or passed their vowes in secret And to effect this the better the Lay gentlemen by whose charitie the Castle had bene relieued were dealt withall by the Iesuits or their factious adherents to withdraw their charitie from all those who would not subiect themselues to F. Weston the Iesuit by whose instructions it is most falsly here auowed that the company had liued a Collegiall and religious maner of life for before hee came thither they liued indeed in such sort but after his comming his ambitious humor disturbed the whole house as it is set downe in a booke already published of The stirres at Wisbich And as for the stirres which were in the Low-countries the cause is here in patt set downe by the Author of the Apologie to wit that Fa. Holt and M. Hugh Owen were deemed partiall against some and did not further them for the getting of their pensions But as it should seeme these two had some intent in which because those other would not ioyne with them they were accompted as factious and not worthy of the Spanish charitie F. Holt was sufficiently knowen to haue bene a notorious actor in the yeere 1588. and was not without cause thought through his folly to haue bene the cause of the death of the duke of Parma His treacherie was afterward better
instructions and falsely inserted among those which were sent vnto the Archp. from Rome this instruction made that euery one should set his hand against that Memoriall And this did the new Archpriest euen when he was taken in the maner of falsifying his instructions so vrge vpon M. Collington M. Charnocke when he sent for them to make knowen his authoritie as he threatned them grieuously if they would not subscribe against it affirming that they should answere this their bearing off from that action in some publike Court where they should repent it Afterward also it was so followed as M. Henry Henslow was imployed to perswade them where M. Collington was then resident to turne him out of their house And he performed his office with such immodest termes and with such extreme fury as he well discouered whereunto this new authoritie did tend And thus much to shew that it was farre ynough both from slander and falshood which was said of the Iesuites their indeuours to gouerne the secular Priests against their wils and how they did canuase for names against the Memoriall and pressed the Priests so farre as they were constrained to vse figures as some of them haue since confessed to satisfie the importunitie of the Iesuites and their factours This also is here to be remembred that the man named to haue bene sent ouer by the Priests into Flanders to accuse the Iesuites was not sent by them but returned thither from whence he was sent into England to vnderstand whether the Iesuits did vse themselues no better in England among the Priests then they did at Rome among the English Students for to this ende he was imployed by the Card. Toledo as he affirmed and had letters to that effect of the Cardinal who was much auersed from the Iesuits their actions in the College And although he brought not these letters with him into England which was a cause that many giue no credite vnto him yet he brought some testimonie thereof and that he was imployed into England by the Cardinal and could not returne any other answere then what was most apparant by the diuision at Wisbich that the Iesuites as ambitious men would gouerne the Priests against their wils When his Holinesse saw this manner of proceeding saith this authour that is to say how he should be inforced to confirme these Prelates which the Secular priests would haue chosen and how the Iesuites were slandered and purged by the most of the Priests in England he willed the Card Protector to call vnto him F. Parsons and other Englishmen in Rome to see what remedie was best for these disorders They answered that the only way which seemed good to them was to giue them a Superior or Prelate of their owne Order and to deliuer thereby the Iesuites from these calumniations which his Holinesse yeelded vnto after diuers monethes consultations c. Here then we are solicited to conceiue that the ground of this new authoritie was his Holinesse care to remedy the disorders which he perceiued to be in England by such letters as were written vnto him namely against this Memoriall and that after diuers moneths consultation it was appointed But we haue alreadie shewed sufficient to prooue this a notorious falshood For as we haue prooued out of this Apo. fo 98 the first letters which were written to this effect were written the 24 of March 1598. which was after the Cardinals letter of the institution of the Archpriest as appeareth by the date thereof which was the seuenth of March 1598. as it is to be seene fol. 102. and consequently diuers moneths after that his Hol. is said to haue entred into this consultation as appeareth in this present place of the 1. chap. and in the 8. Chap. fol. 98. But perchance we tooke this author at the worst when we construed his words in this manner as though he had said that his Hol. had vpon these letters aduised vpon some subordination after diuers moneths resolued vpon this whereas this author after mention of these letters and other matters sayth only in this sort When his Holines sawe this manner of proceeding he willed the Cardinall c. We are therefore to request the indifferent reader to turn to the 8. cha of the Apol. where no such shift cā be vsed to auoid this foule dealing The cha beginneth in this manner When his Hol. heard the former state of matters in England Flanders and other places and of the murmurations of some against the Fathers of the societie set downe aswel in the abouesaid cōtumelious Memoriall as by diuers other letters relations which came to the Protectors sight and by him was related to his Holines and namely when he receiued great store of priuate and publicke letters out of England against the said Memoriall of Fisher and some one with aboue 100. hands at it other with 40. and 50. all in fauour and commendation of the Fathers c. his Holines after mature deliberation resolued c. And because hee will not come without his proofe what cause his Holines had to institute this subordination or rather to giue order to the Cardinall for it as hee sayth hee hath set downe in the margent a note of the letters which caused this consultation See sayth he in the margent the letters of the Northerne Priests 24. Mart. 1598. and others 20. Apr. and others after 30. Iul and others of the South in great number 18. Maij and of the quiet sort of Wisbich 27. March 1598. and who without blushing can reade this and take it as a cause of a determination vppon the 7. of March 1598. for then was the authoritie instituted as is acknowledged fol. 102. much lesse of a consultation diuers moneths before as is here saide fol. 7. And thus hee goeth forward with a certaine shamelesse boldnesse not caring what he sayth knowing belike that his fauorites will swallow any thing easily which he proposeth vnto them yet doeth he too much forget himselfe in this place where he sayth that it was not thought expedient for his Holines to write himselfe for auoiding suspitions and troubles of the state of England for by this he will sufficiently purge those priests of all disobedience to the Sea Apostolike who did not subiect themselues to the newe authoritie vpon the comming of the Cardinals letters by which the authoritie was instituted But this is elsewhere sufficiently handled and prooued to be free not onely from schisme or disobedience but from all sinne also yea though it were true that his Holines gaue full commission as here it is saide to the Card. Caietane the Protector to appoint the authoritie with conuenient instructions For his Holines not writing himselfe as here it is cōfessed how should the Priests take notice thereof that it was his acte which together with the Archpriests misdemeanour in the promulgation of his new authoritie other matters also was the cause why the Priests did at their
peace made gaue out that they who should hold opinion dogmatizando that the priests were not schismatikes should incurre the censures of holy Church which the Archpriest did not onely not controll being told thereof but bare the Iesuit out in his wicked assertion And furthermore published a resolution which he sayd hee had receiued from the mother citie by which the priests were condemned as schismatikes and it was high time for the priests not onely to complaine of intolerable iniuries but to seeke for satisfaction also in such places where they were by these meanes defamed which when it would not be granted they made an offer to come to dispute the case with promise most humbly to aske pardon of the Archpriest and the Iesuits if it could be proued that they had been schismatikes and desire to be restored to their good name if in case they could not be proued to haue been such But this offer of dispute was also reiected and they were threatned who should goe about to defend their good names thus most vniustly harmed whereupon they sent to the Vniuersitie of Paris that by the resolution of learned men such as they imagined a company of punie felowes would haue regarded this question might haue bene ended But when these silly men saw this resolution for the priests they were worse then euer they were and the Archpriest did forbid all sorts vpon grieuous penalties to maintain that resolution by word or writing directly or indirectly whether it were giuen vpon true information or otherwise as though those learned men hauing true information as the Archpriest here supposed were so much to be contemned as no man without incurring grieuous censures might defend their opinion in the question proposed for these are the words of the decree made by the Archpriest 29. Maij 1600 whether it be truely giuen or forged whether vpon true information or otherwise And these proceedings of the Archpriest compelled the priests to make their Appeale to his Holines which beareth date the 17 of Nouember 1600. And it was made not onely for them who set their names vnto it but for others also who seeing the affliction which hung ouer the secular priests and fearing not without iust cause that their turne would come afterward were desirous of redresse but dared not to shew themselues in the action in respect of the hard measure which they saw offered to their brethren who were in actuall persecution by the Iesuits and Archpriest And when this Apologie was published in England it was knowen that long before the publishing thereof the priests were gone ouer to prosecute their Appeale and had presented themselues before the Nuntius in Flanders who was in commission as they vnderstood to determine this matter And whereas it may be sayd that the booke was printed before thus much was knowen this answere also may be made that in the like case where an vntrueth was printed in the 12. Chapter fol. 201. they did find a meanes to clap on a piece of paper that it should not bee read being a relation no more false then this was But if they should haue taken this course throughout the booke to haue pasted paper where there were vntrueths vttered there would haue been very little to haue read in the Apologie And therefore perchance they resolued rather to aduenture all their credit at once by letting the booke goe vncorrected of those falshoods which are contained in it then not to do the harme which they intended The like folly and falshood also is that which is here inserted of M. Charnocks Appeale for as we had sufficient testimony from beyond the seas his Appeale was prosecuted in due time and moreouer that he was long since freed from the sentence of the two Cardinals And wheras it is furthermore sayd that M. Charnocke appealed frō the sentence of two Cardinals after that he had accepted it and sworne to the obseruation thereof it is most vntrue for no oath was euer demanded of him concerning that sentence It was onely shewed by Fa. Parsons first to him and afterward to M. Bishop who had his liberty foure or fiue dayes before this sentence was seen And all the oathes which were taken were taken by Acarisius the Fiscall when M. Bishop was deliuered out of prison which acte of the Fiscals was of none effect as not hauing Commission to do any thing in that cause as Fa. Parsons affirmed when hee shewed this sentence of the Cardinals alleaging for proofe out of the same letters that the declaration of the Cardinals mind was committed to the Rector or Vicerector of the English Colledge But of these matters and the falshood vsed therein we shall haue occasion to write more at large in answere to the ninth chapt And while these Appeales did and doe hang all obedience is shewed which may bee shewed without preiudice of the Appeale or which is to be vsed to notorious detractors and vnconscionable defamers of Catholike priests Neither is there any other libertie or freedome sought for by any then such liberty as belongeth to Christians and of the which Catholike priests are most vnchristianly depriued and they onely seeke to liue in reputation due vnto their estates and to maintaine the same by all lawfull meanes How falsly also this is inserted by this author that liberty is sought and not triall of the cause I commit to the iudgement of all men of any sence who vnderstand how that the priests are gone to Rome to his Holines to haue the case decided But nor resting here nor contented with this freedome during the dependance of the sayd Appeales they haue proceeded sayth this author to greater disorders which is to publish in print most iniurious contumelious and infamatory bookes and libels as before hath bene sayd without particular name of author without licence of Superiour and other circumstances of modesty right and conscience required in such attempts c. This good fellow presumeth much of his readers ignorance fauour or patience For as it appeareth by the Archpr. his letters to M. Collinton he reiected the appeale by other his acts he hath declared that those who had put their names vnto it had incurred the penalties of his decrees He also hereupon sollicited some not to receiue the Sacraments at the appellants hands as may appeare by his letter of the 16. of April 1601. to a gentleman where thus he writeth This I write to make you priuie of the great spirituall danger wherein you and all that receiue any Sacraments of M. Oswald Needam may be if it be so that he hath subscribed vnto a seditious pamphlet coloured with the name of an appeale With what face then doth this fellow in the Archpriests behalfe vrge the dependance of the appeale or what freedome is that with which hee would that the appellants should haue bene contented if there was iust cause to appeale in what a poore case would the Archpriest bee if that there were put
And perchance this was the cause why being sollicited by M. Collington vpon the comming foorth of the Apologie to certifie him what Supertours did licence the printing thereof he knewe not what to answere And if these words permissu superiorum bee prooued a necessary circumstance of modestie they shall be vsed hereafter in our books also Much idle stuffe followeth to make an end of this chapter as that the Priests doe goe about to disguise matters by laying the fault vpon M. Archpriest and Fa. Parsons as though they did not descend to such particulars as cannot be applyed vnto any other but vnto them They labour to purge themselues from schisme in their forbearing to obey the authoritie appointed by his Holinesse before they did see some instrument from his Holinesse in testimony that he had instituted or giuen authoritie to another for the institution thereof They complaine of hard dealing vsed towards the students and particularly against the two Priests who were not suffered to come to his Holinesse being sent vnto him to deale concerning this new authoritie And whereas the Priests are here charged to contemne the Cardinall Farnesius his doing or writing or procuring for the Archpriest a Protonotariship This fellow seemeth to take it for a disgrace not to make some sport among all his big words For how would a man thinke that he prooueth this negligence or contempe as he tearmeth it Forsooth the Cardinall procured the Archpriest to be protonotarius apostolicus And what then doeth it follow that the priests doe neglect and contemne whatsoeuer the present Protector Cardinall Farnesius hath done or written or deferred to the Archpriest because the Cardinall procured him to be a Notarie But perchance the booke is falsely printed and that which followeth as another contempt is to be vnderstood to be the onely proofe of the contempt of which here is mention These are the words Neither doe they giue him the title of Reuerendissimus due to that degree and vsed towards him by the Cardinall himselfe in his letters We will leaue it to this author to explacate himselfe whether this word neither implieth a second or one onely contempt We will onely excuse the Priestes for not giuing him the title of Reuerendissimus vntill they did know some cause why For as it is to be supposed the priests did not see what Cardinall Farnesius writ vnto M. Blackwell Neither yet haue they seene any thing why he may not challenge to be called Illustrissimus And yet I thinke it were a wonderfull folly if they should giue him that title and he could not but take it as a flout or a mocke to be so called The reason then being all one the Priests knowing no more of the one then of the other it is an argument that this authour wanted both matter and wit to deuise matter For who would haue vsed so great termes against priests for not giuing a title to one to whom a Cardinall gaue it in a priuate letter In what feare may we be striken least that some Cardinall had also written to this authour and giuen him some title which we know not Or if any Cardinall would bestow any honest title vpon him yet this kind of Reuerendissimiship being a matter of twenty or forty crownes he might easily procure it and wee might be condemned for neglecting or contemning somewhat which is not in vse where as skilfull Protonotaries as any are in England do keepe open shops in euery good towne and are knowen amongst their honest neighbours for such But we will let this idle exception go among the other as idle railing speeches with which this authour endeth the first chapter and closeth vp his readers stomacke with them who cannot but see what spirit and in what sort it mooueth him CHAP. 7. How this Author of the Apologie while hee would inueigh against dangerous and temerarious propositions engageth himselfe further then becommeth a Catholike Apol. c. 2. IN the second Chapter of the Apologie this Author purposeth to treate of three things first of disobedience secondly of vndutifull behauiour to superiours namely his Holines thirdly of scandalous and temerarious propositions Concerning the first he bringeth some Scriptures with if and ands as if his reader should prouide himselfe to heare of a great plumpe If all this be so as it is sayth he alas in what case c. And so proceedeth to a lamentation ouer his brethren supposing that the scriptures he brought were as truly applied as they were true in themselues And to prooue the stubbornnesse in the Priests which the good man seemeth to lament he bringeth a clause as he tearmeth it of a letter of Card. Allen to M. Mush dated the 16. of March 1594. whereby he would haue his reader conceiue very strange matters and wrongfully informed himselfe of any euill affection or hard opinion of the Cardinall towards the Secular priests And lest wee should be thought to blame this authors folly without cause wee will set downe his owne words as they lie after his exordium together with the Cardinals letter These are his words For first of all to begin with Cardinall Allen of whom these men would seeme to make most account now he is dead gone as though he had fauoured them when he was aliue which yet as we shall shew is quite contrary for he in his foresaid letter of the 16 of March to M. Mush doth most earnestly giue in charge to him and to all other Priests to liue in great vnion with the Fathers of the Society yeelding for his reason the singular obligation they had to their manifold benefits His words are these I haue heard sayth hee to my great griefe that there is not that good correspondence betweene the Fathers and other priests I cannot tell vpon what discontentment c. But whereof soeuer it commeth it is of the enemie and with all possible discretion and diligence by the wiser sort on both sides to be rooted out or els it wil be the ruine of the whole cause c. Therefore in this point especially M. Mush be earnest and peremptory with all parties and euery one in particular And tell them that I charge and aduise them by the blessed blood and bowels of Gods mercie that they honour loue and esteeme one another according to euery mans age order and profession and that those of the Secular order especially those that haue beene brought vp vnder the Fathers and haue found so great loue charity and helpe in all places at their hands that they be correspondent in all gratitude and thankefulnesse reuerencing them in word and deed as is requisite to their merits and calling c. Thus wrote the good Cardinall not aboue halfe a yeere before his death And by this we see both what his loue opinion was towards the Fathers and what his commandement and order was to all those priests he being superiour to them all appointed by his Holinesse that now are so
contentious against the Iesuits What would the good man haue said if hee had liued till this day to see his request and commandement so contemned by them And how can M. Mush and others name so often the Cardinall without blushing when they breake so earnest an exhortation and order of his in so great a matter The contents in this letter are so plaine as I cannot but marueile at this fellow his boldnesse and how without blushing he can make that descant which here he doeth The letter as all men may see was written vpon a suggestion made vnto the Cardinall that the Priests and Iesuites were dangerously fallen out as may appeare by those words I cannot tell vpon what discontentment And afterward Therefore in this point especially M. Mush be earnest and peremptory with all parties and euery one in particular Thirdly the charge and aduise which was giuen was as deepely giuen to the Iesuits as to the Priests as may appeare by the wordes immediatly following those which we last cited And tell them that I charge and aduise them by the blessed blood and bowels of Gods mercie that they honour loue and esteeme one another according to euery mans age order and profession Fourthly the particular exhortation to the Secular priests to be correspondent in all gratitude and thankefulnesse to the Iesuits loue charitie and helpe with reuerence in word and deed not only as was requisite but as was aboue their merits and calling was long since preuented as appeareth by a letter of F. Campion to F. Euerard the generall of the societie with whome there was no cause why hee should dissemble as may be seene in the Epistle of pious griefe fol. 6. 7. These are his words there cited Tanta est aestimatio quam de nobis concitarunt Presbyteri ipsietiam piissimi doctissimi vt nisi timidè commemorandum sentiam The Priests here who are most learned and holy haue raised such an opinion of vs as I cannot speake it without feare which saying of F. Campion proouing nothing but a correspondence in all gratitude on the behalfe of the priests for the loue charitie and helpe which they had or might haue of the Fathers I cannot but wonder at the Epistle maker who bringeth it to prooue a correspondence in the behalfe of the Iesuits vnlesse perchance he meane that no other gratitude is to be expected of a Iesuite then that he will tell his generall what benefits he receiueth This correspondence of the Priests was so followed still by them vntill the Iesuits grewe so insolent as those who brought them into credit were forced to stand at their reuersion and without respect either to age order or profession they went about tyrannically to haue the gouernment ouer the Priests as may be prooued as well by their attempt at Wisbich as by the beginnings abroad where Catholikes had no entertainment for Priests of what age order or profession soeuer vnlesse they did come by order of a Iesuite and so would the Cardinal haue said if he might haue liued till this day notwithstanding his request and commaundement giuen as well vnto the Secular Priests as Iesuits in these words Tell them that I charge and aduise them by the blessed blood and bowels of Gods mercy that they honour loue and esteeme one another according to euery mans age order and profession yet this fellow without blushing citeth this letter to prooue the Cardinals more speciall affection before his death to the Iesuits then vnto the Priests wherin he giueth a like round charge to them both and in that hee gaue this commission to a Secular priest to be peremptory with all parties this letter doeth rather prooue that hee fauoured the Secular priests then the Iesuits And thus much concerning those fond collections which are made out of this letter by the author of this Apologie Our author hauing shewed as he supposeth that the priests haue disobeyed this the Cardinall Allen his commandement whereas indeed the Iesuits did breake it and draue the priests to stand vpon their owne necessarie defence he pretendeth to shew the priests their progresse from worse to worse but in verie deed discouereth his owne in the same kind And first he out-runneth his reader by briefly touching but vntruly as will be shewed in the particular treatise of the Romane stirs the breaking forth of the students in Rome with the Iesuites and as if his words were Oracles hee applyeth some places of Scripture as he knoweth who did to our Sauiour in the desert then hee pursueth his former confuted falshood of the beginning of new associations in England after the aforesaid tumults ended in Rome telleth his reader that his Holines perceiuing the same to tend to a new diuision and contention as well by the lawes and rules thereof as by a certaine new contumelious and most enormous Memoriall sent ouer against the Iesuits hee appointed them the priests a superiour of their owne order as you haue heard and such an one as their owne two ambassadours sent to Rome confessed vnder their owne hands and othes as appeareth in their examinations that he had bene the likeliest man of al others to be chosen by voices if the election had beene permitted vnto them And so he goeth on without any newe matter or any thing that needeth newe answer only this we are to note for so much as we can learne that neither of those two Priests whom here he calleth the two ambassadours did euer say or sweare so much as here they are charged neither can it be prooued out of their examinations vnlesse the Iesuits haue shewed their skill in corrupting or falsifying those examinations as they haue done in other writings The challenge also which followeth that the Priests did not obey the Archpriest at the sight of the Cardinall Caietans letters is often but now lately by M. Collington sufficiently answered And if the Cardinall had vpon his owne proper motion expected an absolute blind obedience vnto him it had argued too great a want of consideration in him There is also a full satisfaction giuen that what the priestes did might very wel stand with obedience and with humility and was not against any oath which any tooke when they were schollers of the Seminaries that oath being no other then to take orders when the superiour would haue them and to returne into England when they should be sent ad lucrandas animas to gaine soules to God which they did performe vntill this new authority pretending power to take away their faculties by which they laboured in their vocation solo nutu to vse M. Blackwells words to M Charnock in his letters 17. Iunij 1600. at his becke did make them cease for scandall sake to doe that to which by oath they were bound By which it may appeare how foolishly this oath of the Seminaries is vrged against those who did not become blind obedient at the sight of the Cardinals letter to M Blackwell
to be looked for of him but the like behauiour against the other part vpon this his conuersion yea in the very point for which Fisher is brought as an authenticall witnesse or informer hee is discredited by this Author For fol. 95. speaking of Fisher thus hee sayth And albeit wee will not affirme all to bee true which he sayd yet many things are such as they could not be well fained perchance that they had a swanne to dinner at Wisbich which was a most necessary circumstance to be noted and put in print and are confirmed otherwise and the speaking voluntarily see Fishers relation to D. Bagshaw at Paris set out by the same Doctor with M.D. Ely his notes vpon the Apologie vpon his oath must be presumed to haue had some care also of his conscience c. This c. were enough in this place to make a man doubt what care hee was thought to haue of his conscience But such testimonies must be taken for authenticall against the priests And if there be an original brought out against a priest it is enough it is no matter how many vntrueths be in it for it is an originall The extraordinary commendations here brought of F. Weston we wish he might deserue them and if his life were so exemplarie in the Clinke the man had an euil chance to be remoued to Wisbich where his actions are blamed and prooued blame worthy at the least in this point very manifestly that seeing what stirre was likely to grow vpon his Agencie he would not giue it ouer but would prosecute it it being a thing which if it had neuer bene thought vpon might very well haue been missed in Gods Church and no way necessary for the reformation intended by him and his fellowes as F. Weston himselfe confessed in his letter to his Generall 27. March 1598 and is here to be seene fol. 77. especially without their priuitie whom hee would should become his subiects or pupils or how the good mā would haue had them called who setting passiō aside were much fitter to gouerne him then he them The cause of the breach when peace was once made amongst them was in the lesuits for that they would not stand to such rules as were made but when they listed which D. Norden taking as he had iust cause in euill part got away the copie of the rules which the Iesuits had and their faction and would not restore them againe vnto them And for this is he challenged to haue broken the peace which in trueth they did breake and if he tore the paper or burned it they tore the rules and cancelled them before when they refused to stand to iudgement according as the rules betweene them had ordered it But of this there is not a word spoken This authours meaning is to preuaile if he can by falshood and cousening of his Reader laboureth to make him merry with now and then some foolish impertinent matter as here fol. 82. he telleth him how that there were sixe or seuen butterics for 13. persons they not suffering the 20. to haue any And further saith he the party that directed him M. Mush after hee had shewed him all these he brought him to a chimney where also there was good ale and said here is another buttery nay said M. Mush there is the deuill whereof that place was called afterwardes merily by some the deuill in a corner And verily it was a matter worth the laughing at whoreson deuill the chimney was too good a place for him vnder correction of that zealous company the other 20. that would haue all things in good order and euery one in their due place as seemed them For these good and vertuous as they say of themselues in this chapter fol. 65. and therefore may be beleeued in this point vnlesse perchance they will now disclaime the company of the vnited to the Archpriest which are said to be the authors of this Apologie brought their diuell and placed him in the chappell where what worship they did vnto him either merily or more seriously we leaue it to their owne godlinesse to explicate For we should be loath to say any more then what all the world talked that is that they made a buttery of the chappel which is in the castle of Wisbich Other many things there are here touched in this chapter wherein folly and falshood striue for the mastery As where this author telleth his Reader that the Iesuites and their faction at Wisbich forced none but such as would willingly put themselues into their Academy or congregation according to the fashion and example of those priuate congregations of our Lady allowed by the Sea Apostolike in diuers Countreys A strange liberty doth this authour take to fitton seeing that all men doe know that the cause of breach was for that some would not subiect themselues vnto that Academy which was devised by the Iesuites and their faction and that this Academy would not eat and drinke with their brethren Whereupon the breach was first made publikely knowen an vnusuall fashion or example in any priuate congregations of our Lady or any honest company and neuer perchance heard of before but among the impurer sort of heretikes to which separation because the lesser part would not agree they are charged fol. 67. that they were so diuided among themselues as in the yere 1597. as one writeth that they did eate and take their diet in foure seuerall places hauing notwithstanding driuen out of the common hall by helpe of the Iaylour the other part though farre the greater But the manner of driuing them out was no other then that least these the lesser number should seeme any way to accord to the separation made by the greater number they did sit some of them at euery table in the hall and not vpon any diuision which was amongst themselues as it is here falsely suggested For had the Iesuites faction had but so much against the lesser number that they had flocked together at one table the separation should haue bene fathered vpon them although they neuer dreamed thereof and this humour of the Iesuits being knowen vnto them they vsed to sit at euery table some because it should be manifest that the other made the separation Yet was not this altogether done of purpose to this end for they vsed before to sit at the same tables at which now they sate But if they had now left those places and haue sitten together at any one table this circumstance would haue bene euidence enough for their aduersaries against them There is also a notorious falshood in the 68. leafe where these priests of Wisbich are sayd to haue bene the first that appealed from his Holinesse Breue by which the Cardinal Caietanes letters were confirmed whereas they neuer appealed from the Breue but from such grieuances as they haue set downe in their Appeale among which the Breue is none as there may bee seene And fol. 76.
that subordination Thirdly with what stomacke and auersion from all Christian peace the Iesuites proclaimed after that the peace was made that they all incurred the censures of holy Church who should dogmatizando mainteine that those Priests were not schismaticks who forbore to subiect themselues vnto the auctoritie before they saw his Holines letters in confirmation thereof and the Archpriest published that he had receiued a resolution from the mother City which afterwards hee explicated himselfe to some that it was from a paire of yong Iesuits to wit F. Warford F. Tichborne or from one of them The contents whereof were that these priests were schsmaticks which is now the true state of the question as none but most impudent companions can deny and the original of these present stirres And this the Archpriest his fact the author of this Apologie in the 11. chap fol. 168. calleth an angry Epistle and challengeth the priests in termes best fitting his Religious humor that for an angry Epistle they would breake out into such scandalous tumults and so leaueth the matter without telling what this angry Epistle was and that it was a proclamation that the Priests had liued a long time inschisme and what other matters must thereupon necessarily insue not onely to the discredit of those priests but also to the disturbance of many deuout Catholicks whose ghostly fathers they had bene during that time But since that this author hath proposed the true state of the questiō as he saith to be an opposition of a few against the whole streame of other Catholicks deuising particuler wayes for their preferring and there causing some to leape and slide Let vs do him the fauor to heare how he proceedeth with this his imagination And this saith he is the true state of the question let vs declare briefly the way and path how they came into this pit Thus he beginneth this declaration Wee haue vnderstood by Card. Allens letters before mentioned written to M. Mush the yeere that he died how he had vnderstood of a certaine emulation and deuision begun in England by some priests against the Fa. of the Societie and perhaps hee perceiued the same by no meanes more then by himselfe his speach and behauiour while hee was at Rome with him the very same yeere I doe nothing marueile that this good fellow would faine haue his Reader conceiue that the Priests began a diuision against the Iesuits For if he could perswade this he would not doubt but to deale well ynough with such fooles as cannot thinke that the Iesuits can giue any iust cause why the Priests should breake with them I marueile much that he is not ashamed so often to inculcate this letter of the Cardinall which if it make any thing in this matter it maketh against the Iesuits as we haue often shewed For first cōcerning the diuision the Fathers want of good correspondence is first placed the cause of discontentment not knowen and M. Mush a Secular Priest put in commission to be peremptory aswell with the Iesuits as the Secular Priests with whō the Cardinall knew he might be bold especially in so good an action as was the furthering of a peace where he was informed there was want And for the better satisfaction of such as will be satisfied we will once againe repeate the Card. letter as it is set downe in the second Chap. of Apologie fol 11. I haue heard saith he to my great griefe that there is not that good correspondence betweene the Fathers other Priests I cannot tell vpon what discontentment c. But whereof soeuer it commeth it is of the enemie and with all possible discretion and diligence by the wiser sort on both sides to be rooted out or els it will be the ruine of the whole cause c. And therefore in this point especially M. Mush be earnest and peremptory with all parties and euery one in particular and tel them that I charge and aduise them by the blessed Blood and bowels of Gods mercie that they honour loue and esteeme one another according to euery mans age order and profession And then he exhorteth those of the Secular order which is an argument that what went before did principally concerne the Iesuits The maner also of the Cardinall his writing doeth shew that what he conceiued of the diuision here supposed was by other meanes then by M. Mush For had he vnderstood it as this Author saith perhaps by no meanes more then by himselfe his speech and behauiour while he was in Rome without perhaps the Cardinall would not haue written vnto him after his departure in this maner I haue heard to my great griefe that there is not that good correspondence between the Fathers and other Priests I cannot tell vpon what discontentment but rather haue put him in minde what he had tolde him and would not haue bene left ignorant of the true cause or some colour of cause if M. Mush had discouered any such matter vnto him And whereas here is mention of M. Mush his behauiour while he was in Rome with the Cardinall we may verely beleeue that it was such as became an honest priest and that he gaue very great satisfaction not onely to the Cardinall Allen but also to many other hauing those graces and fauours at his returne which no man euer had before him to wit authoritie not onely for himselfe in diuers reserued cases but to giue to a certaine number of other priests whom he would name at his returne into England But marke I pray you what moueth this author to say that the Cardinal writ his letter vpon M. Mush his behauiour when he was with him at Rome the very same yeere For albeit saith he this man gaue out euery where that he went to Rome to enter into that order which many yeeres before he had pretended yet others that knew him better did soone discouer his alienation from them and that he pretended perhaps by his iourney to Rome to get some other dignitie Here there is another Perhaps to helpe the former For first it was perhaps that the Cardinall perceiued a certaine diuision by no meanes more then by M. Mush his behauiour and speech at Rome and now it is perhaps that he went to Rome for to get some other dignitie Good meditations for such spirituall guides and very charitable We will not here cite M. Blackwell his letter which was written in the yeere of our Lord 1596 which was two yeres after the Cardinals death wherein hee taketh on marueilously against all those who did affirme at Rome that there had bene strife or any falling out here in England which was worth the talking of although neither he nor any man els can denie but that the scandalous separation in Wisbich was begun by the Iesuits and their faction long before and is not to this day ended We wil onely request the religious spirit of the author of this Apologie to let vs
who are of that order yet must this be the argument which is foolishly here insinuated by this authour or else none For of al the Iesuits in England there are none whom these priests obeied at any time in any place Besids that they are al of them inferiour to many priests both for age learning wisedome gouernment and what els belongeth to men But by this hath this authour shewed what his meaning is that forsooth because some Priests haue obeyed some Iesuites therefore all priests must be obedient to any of the Iesuits yea although he be one who immediatly before he became a Iesuite had scant the wit to keepe himselfe cleane But for the auoyding of this emulation it seemed saith this authour in all good mens opinions and the Iesuites aboue the rest or els all is marred when you talke of good men that the onely or chiefe remedie would be to haue this subordination of Secular priests among themselues but so as the Superiour must be at the Iesuites direction as both his instructions and his practise declare And then followeth a proofe out of a letter of 6. Assistants to cleare the Iesuits from the procuring of this subordination against or without the will of the Secular Clergie which testimonie if the vnited Priests were the authours of the Apologie is as cleare as that of which one requested to haue either his fellow asked or himselfe if he were a thiefe This testimony also harpeth vpon the long day at Rome of which we spake before and of the wonders wrought thereupon the 7. of March by certaine letters dated in England in April May and Iuly following Of this letter we shal haue occasion to say more in a particular answer thereunto And here we will leaue the Reader to wonder onely at this marginall note fol. 101. See the letter of sixe Ancient priests the 17. of September 1597. For he telleth not where this letter is to be seene but rather leaueth a suspition that it is yet to be deuised vnlesse he thought it too worthy a thing to be inserted among so many foolish and friuolous impertinencies as with which this Apologie doth swarme The proofe also which followeth that Fa Parsons laboured to haue Bishops in England is most absurd in their vnderstanding who knowe how he can play on both sides and impugne that in which he would seem to be most forward he can send notes of such things as hee would pretend a desire should be kept secret and send them round about the world with the same desire of secrecie He can write his letters in exceeding great commendations to one of some one man and at the same time write to another in the dispraise of the same man And is it a sufficient disproofe of his backwardnesse of hauing Bishops that he laboured with some to haue them in England Can Fa. Parsons so farre ouershoot himselfe as to make his credite so small in the Court of Rome as that any thing can be denied him being assisted by such as expect from him a kingdome or two for their seruice Well saith the Apologie this then being resolued by his Holines that he would haue an Archpriest appointed in England whom all the rest should obey he gaue commission to the said Cardinall Protector to institute the same in his name Howe was this made knowen to the Priests Forsooth the Cardinall shewed that it was his Holinesse especiall order and commandement by these words Speciali mandato nobis iniunxit his Holines hath ordained this vnto vs by a speciall commandement What silly boy would thus haue Englished iniunxit in this place or what is that This which his Holinesse ordained by a speciall commandement the institution of this subordination with these faculties c. could this man imagine that the Cardinals letters would neuer againe be looked on or if he could feare that could he be so impudent as to cite this part thereof for to prooue his Holinesse speciall commandement for the erecting of the Archpriest And to prooue that his Holinesse was mooued by the aforesaid reasons alleaged by him to wit emulation and what els pleaseth him he citeth these words out of the same letter of the Cardinall Rationes abipsis sacerdotibus redditae c. the reasons alleaged by priests for this matter were allowed by his Holinesse and afterwardes he citeth a great part of the letter for so much as concerneth the commendations of the Iesuits and the desire which the Pope hath that the Iesuites and the Priests might liue in peace together Which saith he comming from so high a superiour and directly from Christs vicar himselfe we doe wonder how it tooke no more effect within the heartes of our brethren that impugned the same And our brethren wonder that any man can bee so impudent as to make such a wonder confessing so often as he doth in this Apologie that Christs vicar himselfe would not write at all whereby neither his letters appeared for the institution of this Archpriest nor any commission by which the Cardinall had power to doe it But the Cardinal his word was sufficient saith he and our brethren say no and proue it by the testimonie of all men of knowledge in the Canon and Ciuill lawes who say that the sole testimonie of a Cardinall is not necessarily to be credited in any matter preiudiciall to a third person yet must the blinde obedient beleeue that the priests in not obeying the Cardinals letters did directly withstand Christs vicar himselfe But after he hath cited a part of the Cardinals letter he affirmeth that all was confirmed afterwards by his Holines owne Breue and that all written by the Cardinall and euery parcell there of was by his order consent proper motion and commandement written ordained and sent into England And to this our brethren answere that so soone as they sawe this they did presently submit themselues vnto the order And say moreouer that this is very foolishly brought in to prooue a disobedience in them before this Brcue was written And by this is answere made to the question following But what did this satisfie or quiet them that had resolued to be vnquiet For the priests perceiuing such a deuise of the Iesuits foreseeing how hereby the Iesuits might vnder a maske play their prises more boldly then before sent to Rome as became Catholike priests to know his Hol. pleasure in the meane while these who were resolued to be vnquiet spread Libels abroad against the priests and condemned them of schisme much more such religious stuffe The causes which moued the priests to demur vpon the matters vntill they saw his Hol Breue are set downe at large by M. Io. Collington in his booke intituled A iust defence c. whither we are to referre our Reader and as for the letter of the 6. Assistants it shall haue his place elsewhere to be answered for now we let it passe as a base profe of any thing
make their actions to be yours that if through your folly and their foule dealing they could preuaile in their most vniust and wicked attempt you shall feele the smart of your blindnesse in which now you glory And if they do not preuaile you must beare the shame of your wicked enterprise But what holes are those which these men are said to seeke in their superiors coats and what superiors are they Marke I pray how this author dischargeth himselfe of this matter as these men do both against the Cardinall Protector his auctoritie and person as also the Archpriest yea and his Holines also in couert words so far as they dare What man so farre is they dare what is that which they would dare against his Holines Forsooth perswading the people that he hath beleeued false information did any man euer dare to say what and perswade the people also that the Pope could beleeue false information marry sir here was such a nole found in his coate as himselfe could neuer haue seene Here was Christs vicar himselfe very strangely abused and thereby appointed a subordination most inconuenient Were all those Popes fooles whose letters are cited in the common Law de rescriptis the Bishops also to whō they did write in such forme as they did acknowledge they might be and were often mis-informed and did many things otherwise then they would haue done if they had bene truely informed Si quando saith Pope Alexander the third to the Archbishop of Rauenna cap. si quando de Rescriptis aliqua tuae fraternitati dirigimus quae animum tuum exasperare videntur turbarinon debes Et infra Qualitatem negotij pro quo tibi scribitur diligenter considerans aut mandatum nostrum reuerenter adimpleas aut per literas tuas quare adimplere non possis rationabilem causam pretendas quia patienter sustinebimus sinon feceris quod praua nobis fuerit insinuatione suggestum That is If at any time we direct any things vnto your brotherhood which seem to exasperate your minde you ought not to be troubled thereat And afterward Hauing diligently considered of the quality of that busines of which wee write vnto you either fulfill our commandement reuerently or pretend some reasonable cause by your letters why you cannot fulfill it For we will patiently beare that you do not that which was by bad insinuation suggested vnto vs. Other Chapters there are there to be seene to this effect which in this place would be needlesly cited Onely this will suffice to shew that it hath bene long since seene that Popes could be falsly informed and thereby also appoint a matter most inconuenient And yet this was neuer taken for a hole in the Popes coat But what more is there concerning this hole not heard of in the Church before The day would blinde Hugh faine haue seene and those that are deafe would gladly heare when it was euer heard of in the Church before that an Archpriest was made Superior ouer all the Secular cleargie of two whole kingdomes as now M. Blackwell is of England and Scotland And that it is against all equitie and iustice and that his Holines could not lawfully appoint it without their consents The accepting of the auctoritie at the sight of his Holines Breue doeth conuince that the priests neuer stood vpon his absolute authoritie but vpon the custome which by Law is also confirmed that they should chuse their superior which M. D. Bishop touched and proued in his reply to F. Parsons pa. 151. and it is handled since more at large by M. D. Ely pag. 190. to 196. And that the meanes by which he had appointed is insufficient binding no man to obey it If this man do meane that the priests did not take the Cardinals letter as sufficient to binde them to obey it it is very true that they thought those meanes insufficient and they haue giuen diuers proofes of the insufficiencie thereof If he meane any other matter he must explicate himselfe For other meanes the priests did not know vntil they saw the Breue at which time they did all submit themselues vnto it All which must argue great insufficiencie defect and lacke of cōsideration in his Holines proceeding They should haue had more honestie who gaue the false information and their fault was the greater because so great a trust was reposed in them by his Holines And to mend these holes in the Popes coat I would gladly vnderstand why the two priests who were first sent to his Holines were clapt vp close prisoners before they could haue accesse vnto him If his Holines could not beleeue wrong information then might the Iesuits and the Sbirri with more credit haue bene at their iayles then seeking to imprison such as came to informe his Holines If his Holines could beleeue wrong informations and that these good men therefore ioyned together to apprehend and imprison the two priests then is this hole in his Holines coate patched vp againe that the Priests dared to perswade the people that he hath beleeued false informations for this implieth that he could And thus much for the holes in his Holines coat a pretie slubbering kinde of answere to the priests reasons The Protectors turne should be next but this author will owe him the patching vp of his holes and will goe helpe the Archpriest And as for the Archpriest their immediate superior saith he though in words they acknowledge his authority c. yet doe they seeke by all meanes possible to discredit both him his authority and person The first matters seeme to concerne him and his person as that he is charged about his doubling in his instructions and about an heretical proposition But how are these things answered the first is thus awarded We cannot apprehend how it could be spoken the second thus If M. Blackwell should say as wee are sure hee did not in the sense they take it two poore shifts But to the Apologie as it lieth And here in this place they will needs raise a certaine cauill against him the Archpriest or his persō saying that he doubled in his speech with M. Collingt and M. Charnock for of their two relations onely all these matters are raised against him vt in ore duorū vel trium testiū saith our Sauiour Matt. 8. stet omne verbum that euery thing be tried by two or three witnesses when at the first comming of the Cardinals letters and instructions he conferred them confidently with these two but this his confidence wrought in him a marueilous confusion when hee was taken tardy vpon too great a confidence of an vncleanly conueyance who so dutifully interpreted his speeches as first they said he was contrary to himselfe and affirmed his instructions to haue come from Rome together with his letters which is most true and they are to be seene vnder the Cardinals hand and seale c. Marke how this matter is shuffled vp He was neuer
same But what were these circumstances and considerations Were they any other then the tumults which are here so often inculcated If they were let them be specified and they shal be answered If they were not any other then these stirres then how could these vitiate an acte before they were the act in it selfe considered was not vicious but lawfull as here is auouched by the doctors and lawfully done and consequently to end this Chapter all the euill which followed was by the misgouernment of the Archpriest and the busines of his adherents the Iesuits and such as stood with them to defame the priests And so for this matter as the Apologie saith We end CHAP. 14. How this Apologie-maker perswadeth his reader that his Hol. was mooued to imprison the two priests who went first to Rome by certaine letters which were written long after his resolution to imprison them and how hee iugleth about that which chanced vnto them in Rome Apol c. 9. IN the ninth Chapter of the Apologie the author thereof promiseth to shewe how after the first contradiction made by the priests against his Holinesse ordinance as hee falsely termeth it if the Cardinall said true in his letters Dum haec nostra ordinatio durauerit So long as this our ordinance shall endure the Priests went forward and sent a couple to Rome and what happened vnto them in which the poore man committeth very grosse faults and how his Holines confirmed the aforesaid ordinance and Protectors letters with a new Breue which is an argument that the ordinance was not his Holines ordinance for then should it not haue needed any confirmation hee beginneth his ninth Chapter in this manner We haue shewed a brazen face in the former Chapter with how great singularitie and little reason and yet not one answered our discontented brethren not without iust cause being so fewe and such as they were yet so many and such as their aduersaries as yet neuer durst aduenture to buckle with them in the matter in question holding it greater wisdome for them to keepe silence then bewray their ignorance and folly as this author hath aduentured in this Apologie opposed themselues at the beginning to the first institution of this hierarchie ordained by his Holines a point often vrged but neuer proued there being nothing but the Cardinals bare testimonie and some heare-sayes which the priests haue shewed was not sufficient to prooue that it was the Popes ordinance Besides as it is said the Cardinall tooke it vpon himselfe as may appeare by his letters and against the whole body of our English Clergie besides themselues admitting the same beleeuing the protestations of some that it was his Holines ordinance not hauing seen themselues the Cardinals letters and being put in a fright to be excommunicated if they would not yeeld themselues Now it remaineth to consider with what resolution and obstinacie they haue prosecuted this their diuision the priests affirme that this is the Iesuits diuision and the faction adhering vnto them notwithstanding all the meanes vsed to diuert them from it and quiet them both by superiours commandements and friends perswasion These friends perchance were they who diuulged them to be schismatikes and the superiour commaunded them that they should not defend themselues and their fame special meanes for quietnesse And first of all about this point is to be noted that if our said brethren had meant plainely and sincerely as often they doe professe in the two first discourses of their English booke intituled Copies of discourses c. and in their Information to the doctors of Paris they doe auouch the same to wit that their scruple was onely whether this matter came from his Hol or no And whether Card. Caiet the Protector abusing the Popes name had appointed it of himselfe and that they deferred only to concurre with the rest of their brethren vntill they might be acertained of this point Well good sir if all this had beene so as so it was not but the priests professions in the places cited are either ignorantly or maliciously misreported as shall be shewed It had bene a very easie matter to cleare the doubt by many wayes yea without sending any to Rome for that so publique an acte as this vnder a Cardinals letters patents might haue easily beene enquired of without messengers To what purpose should they haue inquired at Rome for the Cardinals letters which they saw here in England patents that is to say priuat letters directed to a priuate man for so were the Cardinals the priests had no doubt of the Cardinals good will to further any designe of the Iesuites neither did they euer doubt but that hee had instituted the authoritie and therefore this was not the cause of their sending to Rome to be informed whether the Cardinall had done any such matter for it was very credible that he would haue done much more then he did if he had knowen how at the Iesuites request but what were the other meanes One letter of their owne either to his Holines himselfe or to Card. Adebrandino his nephew or any acquaintance of theirs that was in Rome might soone haue procured them a certificate of this matter if they had bene desirous to haue knowen the trueth yea further no man was there of the contrarie part it selfe which in this behalfe would not haue endeauoured to haue procured them satisfaction Good natures who would so friendly haue vsed the priests letters yet did cause the priests to be cast into prison and lest that they should haue missed of their purpose they came themselues with the Sbirri but they were the chiefe captains and apprehended them and were their guard to their prison What if the Priests letters to his Hol. or his nephew had miscarried as ordinarily it is ominous to all such letters as passe by the Post and are suspected not to be to the Iesuits liking might not his Holines haue bene induced to confirme the Cardinals acte as a matter applauded by all the Priests in Englannd If sayth this author our brethren had meant plainely and sincerely as often they doe professe in the two first discourses of their English booke entituled Copies of discourses c. and in their Information to the Doctors of Paris they do auouch the same to wit that their scruple was only whether this matter came from his Holines or no c. Hath this author too soone forgotten his paine and trauaile taken in the precedent Chapter where hee brought diuers scruples by way of arguments for the proouing of the Priests their delay to be lawfull of which fol. 110. this hee affirmeth And these reasons are set downe and printed in two of the first Treatises of the English booke entituled Copies of discourses c. Hath hee not spent paper and inke and a great deale of foolish labour in going about fol. 116. to the end of the Chapter to disprooue and cannot the scruples which were suggested by the
blinde obedient in this maner By this then saith he and other letters that came to his Holines as you must suppose or to the Protector he shold haue added or to the generall of the Iesuits or to Fa. Parsons for all these here related are to some of these and not one to his Holines nor all to the Protector nor about these matters as in their places it is confessed in the Apologie about this time and were related to his Holines by him his Holines being all this while at Ferrara and the Cardinall at Rome or at some place of recreation in those parts euery man may see whether he had iust cause to be mooued or no and to resolue to restraine them at their arriuall you must vnderstand at Ferrara from whence Fa Bellarmine now Card. is said fol. 120. to haue certified Fa. Parsons by his letter of the 17. of October that the Pope had told him that if they came to Ferrara he would cause them to be imprisoned but much more when after 17. or 18. dayes stay in Rome as before hath bene said they could not be induced by the Protectors perswasion to any quiet course at all That which was before said was said fol. 121. which must be one day vnsaid for there he affirmeth that the Card. Caietan and Burgesius said and did many things to the Priests which are most falsly related For the Cardinal Burgesius entertained them very friendly and being certified vpon his earnest request set on by Fa. Parsons to know it at that time what was the cause of their cōming to Rome he promised them according to their request to procure them audience before they should be iudged which they did the more earnestly request for that they had vnderstood by Fa. Parsons who was then immediatly departed from the Cardinall but was before certified that the two priests attended his departure that his Holines was incensed against them nothing els passed betweene the Card. Burgesius and them at that time and after this they went to the Card. Caietan so soone as they could after that they vnderstood of his returne to the citie and he was also very importunate to know the cause of their comming to Rome which when they discouered hee seemed to be much troubled especially when they talked of the Subordination as his fact yet concluded thus with them that they should bring in writing what they had to say concerning the Subordination the appurtenances to which they accorded offering to haue the matter as belonging properly to him ordered by him if so it could be without troubling his Holines therewith and requesting his furtherance in such other matters as were onely in his Holines to graunt And thus they departed with resolution to returne to the Card. with their difficulties in writing and agreed with one who should haue written for them the copy which they were to present to the Card. but they were intercepted by the Iesuits and Sbirri of which F. Parsons was the chiefe leader And this was al which passed betweene the Card. Caietan and them as the Card. well knoweth and this was vpon the feast day of S. Thomas the Apostle when the waters had begun to rise in Tiber which ouerflowed the citie and vpon S. Thomas of Canterbury his day about the first or second houre in the night the two priests were caried away to prison perchance for the solemnising of that feast in some reformed godly maner This Authour hauing shewed to such as must not see how that the Pope resolued to imprison the two Priests vppon the letters here cited now he will peswade such as must beleeue that it was not possible that Fa. Parsons could be the cause of their imprisonment It may be seene also sayth he how vniustly they doe calumniate and accuse Fa. Parsons as the cause of all their trouble considering those letters were written from Flanders vpon the two messengers first comming ouer so as Fa Parsons had neither time to procure those letters from Flanders neither is it likely that men so graue learned and wise as these are would be induced by another mans request to write such letters vnder their owne hands to so great personages the Protector the Generall of the Iesuites and Fa. Parsons and that in so important a matter except they had thought as they wrote and their iudgements had beene conforme to their letters and thus much of the first point about their imprisonment Are not these effectuall perswasions that F. Parsons could not be the cause of their trouble suppose all these letters had bene written vpon the first comming ouer of the two priests as they were not nor the soonest of them which concerned the two priests in almost two moneths after let vs also suppose that his Holines was induced to resolue vpon the imprisoning these two priests by these letters which we haue shewed could not be the soonest of them being written vpon the 25. of October 1598. as is confessed in the Apologie fol. 125. and his Holines resolued vpon the 17. of the same moneth before to imprison them at Ferrara as is confessed also in the Apologie fol. 120 it was so long before their going and it was so well knowen that some were to goe as one of the now busiest Agents tolde one of them for certaine that whosoeuer went in that affaire should at their arriuall be cast into prison And although these Flanders men who writ were so perswaded in conscience to write as they did and did therefore write because they were so perswaded this is no proofe that they were not induced by others to haue such a conscience to thinke or to write in that manner and some of them haue acknowledged and haue bene and are very sory that they suffered themselues to be induced by D. Barret to subscribe vnto that letter from Doway So that this is a poore deuise and a silly perswasion that Fa. Parsons could not be the cause of the two priests their trouble who was knowen to haue his Agents in all these partes if himselfe were ashamed to haue his letters to be seene for any such matter And it not being prooued out of any of these letters of Flanders that any of these great personages the Cardinal the Generall of the Iesuites and Fa. Parsons to whom these letters were sent were perswaded by them that these two Priests were to be imprisoned before they were heard the authour leaueth the wound in Fa Parsons side as wide as it was before vnlesse to heale vp that he will wound his Holines much deeper as who being reputed for a most milde and wise man should resolue vpon the imprisonment of a couple of Catholike priests comming as it were bleeding from the campe of Gods Church to open vnto him such difficulties as were to be redressed eyther concerning their whole Church or some members thereof who had lately challenged vnto them an extraordinary superioritie ouer their fellow labourers without
knoweth not who first did motion it or why he was requested to it rather then another as by one who knoweth both the first motioner and why he was imployed yet his Reader must hereby perceiue what authenticall mission and commission it was and yet is there much bad dealing in the relation of M. Bishops answere as appeareth in a treatise ioyned to M.D. Ely his notes vpon the Apologie fol. 13 But yet further saith he to say a word or two of the very chiefe point of their commission and cause of comming to Rome you haue heard that M. Charnocke saith and sweareth before that their onely comming was to supplicate most humbly to the sea Apostolike c. he hath made his blind reader beleeue that hee hath seene and perceiued now his Reader must in like sort beleeue that he hath heard what M. Charnocke say and sweare that their onely comming was to supplicate c. if his readers memory will serue him so farre as to remember what he hath lately read concerning this point or turne backe some two or three leaues he shal finde this word onely foysted in by this authour to make his Reader beleeue in the next page fol. 133 that M Bishop and M. Charnocke did scarce seeme agreed in the causes of their comming to Rome After this boldnesse to abuse his reader for his purpose he sayth a word or two of the very chiefe point of their Commission cause of comming to Rome which he thus abridgeth to supplicate most humbly to the Sea Apostolike that if the foresayd order of the Archpriests authoritie were not yet confirmed by his Holinesse as they had heard Fa. Sicklemore and some others had reported that then the same might be either mitigated or changed or some other order appointed together with it Thus hath hee layed downe the priests their plaine song now marke what descant he hath made thereon so as now sayth he our brethren seemed not to doubt of the trueth or value of the Cardinals letters nor were not yet growen to be so bold as to affirme that his Holines could not do it without their consents except he violated the Canons nor that it was aforreine Iurisdiction subiect to treason and Premunire if it were acknowledged and other such like deuises Our brethren neuer grew to any such boldnes as he termeth it as to affirme any thing of Treason or Premunire but onely shewed that they had iust cause to forbeare to admit the authoritie both in regard that by the opinions of diuers men of Iudgement in the lawes of our countrey this our case may and will be drawen within the Compase of an olde lawe c. viz. the law of Premunire as it is set downe in the English booke pag. 6. where also is shewed that by the accepting hereof the priests might be taken for to comply with the chiefe authors thereof in al such state matters as were practised by them And these were rather causes for them why they were not ouer hastie to admit of this authority then arguments vrged against it And yet neither of these causes haue or can be proued insufficient And for more proofe that these causes were not giuen in any other sort the priests did submit themselues when they did see his Holinesse letters in confirmation thereof But now let vs heare the first part of this mans descant So as now saith he our brethren seemed not to doubt of the trueth or value of the Cardinals letters nor were not yet growen to be so bold as to affirme that his Holinesse could not doe it without their consents except hee violated the canons How doth this fellow vpon M. Charnockes answere gather this If there were no doubt of the trueth and value of the Cardinals letters why is it here sayd that M. Charnocke put this doubt if the foresayd order of the Archpriests authority were not yet confirmed by his Holinesse Did this speach imply a doubt or no if it did how boldly doth this fellow descant vpon a doubt and say that it was no doubt if it did not imply a doubt let him tell vs how a man may more properly make a doubt then by this word if Perchance he may meane that the priests did not doubt but that those letters were the Cardinals letters and then he sayth well but he doth not descant right for the question was whether that the Card. letters had receiued any force by his Hol. confirmation as may appeare by that which is here by himselfe set downe and whereas hee sayth that the priests were not so bolde as to affirme at that time that his Holinesse could not doe it without their consents except hee violated the canons the priests were bold to affirme with humilitie and reuerence to the Sea Apostolike as much But howe doth he proue that they were not yet growne to that boldnesse Forsooth because no such matter was set downe in this point of M. Charnocks answere as though euery thing must of necessitie be set downe which the priests had to say or could say but this is perchance an idle shift now deuised by the priests and coyned for the purpose Listen then to that which is set downe by this author in the Epistle to his Holinesse past the middle thereof Yet a fewe not the twentieth part of our English Clergie and presumed to impugne the same the Subordination calling first in question the sayd Cardinals letters their trueth faith and integritie the indifferencie of his person in iudgement and affection Then also your Holinesse meaning yea your authority it selfe whether you could doe it without them or no the canons of Holy Church obserued with other like vnseemly oppositions for prosecution whereof they sent two of their company to Rome But this was forgotten when the author of the Apologie came to this Chapter Furthermore it was obiected against the two priests at Rome that they had there giuen out that they doubted whether his Holinesse could appoint them a Superiour without their priuitie and consent obseruing the lawes of holy Church as may appeare by the libell Master Doctor Haddocke and Master Martine Aray deliuered vp to his Holines as was sayd 10. Ianuary 1599 for there in the second Article are these words Ipsi verò nihil credere nec acquiescere sed haesitare ad omnia non admittere authoritatem vocare in dubium an vera essent quae literis illis continebantur Sanctissimi iussu hanc esse constitutam si verum id erat dubitare tamen an pontifex facere possit vt ipsis inconsultis ac inuitis superiorem ijs cōstituerit quod postea etiam quum Romam appulerunt dicere ac saepius etiam repetere non sunt veriti vt per testes idoneos probare possumus That is but they speaking of M Collington and M. Charnocke when the Archpriest first sent for them would beleeue nothing nor obey but did sticke at all things they would not admit the
but the priests whom it shall concerne which was according both to the Cannons of holy Church and his Holines meaning as diuers priests can witnes the Pope hauing alwayes borne that speciall fauour vnto the priests But what els was discouered in those papers of the doctors Forsooth the changing of the gouernment of the Seminartes especially that in Rome yea the change of the Protector himselfe Very true For that the vnquietnes which the Iesuits made in Rome among the students was a great cause of the vnquietnes here in England And seeing that there was no hope of any quiet so long as the Iesuits had the gouernment what euil request was it to haue them remoued thence Neither was the request of the doctor and some others ioyned with him for the change of the Protector absolutely but that there might be some other or some ioyned with him in regard he was knowen to be one who in the Iesuits quarels tooke part alwayes very partially with them against the students and the students appeale from him or their declining from his iudgement had bene in former times admitted by his Holines who now is And further it was â—…uered by the same papers saith he and other letters out of England that they had particular designments to make themselues Bishops and Archbishops And how was this discouered or what proofe hath this authour of this whereupon saith he in some letters it was written To your LL. This is all the proofe that those to whom this letter was written had particular designments to make themselues Bishops and Archbishops If one should write to Rome to Fa. Parsons and direct his letter in this manner To your Grace of what could F. Parsons be conuinced others so writing vnto him But Fa. Parsons in his letter of the 9. of October 1599. to M. Bishop making mention of this iest is answered in the English booke pag. 127. and is told that M. Charnocke hearing thereof at Rome did there chalenge it as a faigned matter And there it is shewed at large in what sort it might be forged And this Apologie being made to answere that English booke letteth all that discourse goe quietly the authour hauing taken good order that his lewdnesse should not be knowen among these blind-obedient and hath the lesse shame to iterate any falshood without disproouing that which hath bene before directly sayd against it And a particular discourse being diuulged at this time vnder the hand-writing of one of their chiefe followers named M. Watson was sent to Rome whilest these men were there Whereunto was subscribed by another in these words Sic sentio W.B. By this discourse also this author would prooue that the priests that went to Rome went with hope of reward to wit to be made Primats themselues and to make other Bishops of their partners at their returne yea notwithstanding their oath which they tooke that they neuer heard of any discourse this authour emboldeneth himselfe to burden them with it or at the least with the knowledge thereof For such are his words though these messengers in Rome would not seeme to acknowledge it Fa. Parsons told M. Bishop that such a letter he had and requested to knowe whether it were not his name that was subscribed in this manner Sic sentio G.B. not W.B. as here is most falsely suggested perchance to take away the suspition from such as were the authors thereof for the disgrace of M. Bishop and M. Charnocke as M. Bishop toucheth it in his answere to Fa. Parsons set downe in the English booke pag. 159 To which demand of Fa. Parsons M. Bishop made answere that it was not his name and that he neuer had heard of the discourse before Moreouer hee saide that those letters might stand for Geor. Blackwellus as well as Guliel Bishop By which it is euident that this author dealeth falsely in setting down the letters W.B. For who is so foolish as to think that M. Bishop would plead that George was spelled with W This is also particularly set downe in the answere made in the behalfe of M. Bishop which is annexed vnto M. D. Ely his notes vpon the Apologie fol. 17. where also it is affirmed that D. Bishops answere for M. Watson was farre otherwise then this authour pretendeth and is therefore challenged to haue no tender conscience in this dealing But as it seemeth this author intended to disgrace M. Watson all that he could and at the first discrediteth himselfe in obiecting that M. Watson was a seruant in the English College at Rhemes as though that were so great a blot many most worthy men hauing bene of as meane or meaner condition And this being truely considered maketh more for M. Watsons commendation that he would liue in so meane estate out of his countrey for the cause he did And if this common wealth here by a foolish digression inserted being a matter as Fa. Parsons tooke vpon his conscience before the Cardinals to which the two priests were neuer priuy were of M Watsons making as he doth vtterly deny it as also that either hee sent any such to Rome or was priuie to the sending thereof but rather thinketh as others also that it was sent by the contrary part to Fa. Parsons for some policie yet he had not bene more idly occupied then was the plotcaster of Reformation the absurdities whereof were they yet perchance after so many alterations layd downe would farre surpasse these of this common wealth which is attributed to M. Watson This digression being made and more seriously handled then any materiall point in this controuersie this authour falleth againe into the Cardinals comming to the College together with the Comissary And to proceede saith he more substantially they heard first the aforesaid depositions read that is to say some part of them as is noted in the English booke pa. 95 as also the procurators of the Archpriest what they could say or demand who bringing foorth the foresaid letters of the most graue of our Nation that is to say the letters of D. Barret subscribed by D Webbe D. Worthington and D. Kellyson and also the letters of M. Wright the Deane of Cortrac all which and onely these were inserted into a Libell which these Proctors for the Archpriest put vp to the two Cardinals against M. Bishop M. Charnocke against this new sedition begun made supplication that some effectuall remedy might be put thereunto Very well good sir thus much is confessed in the English booke pag. 96. that M D. Haddocke and M. Martin Array deliuered vp in a dumbe shewe a Libell or bill of complaints or accusations against M. Bishop and M. Charnocke But what answere made those priests vnto that bill The messengers also were heard what they could say or answere But now in a little honesty what said they or what answere did they make to these matters Is it not possible that any thing did passe woorth the relating was all this preparation
fetched from Iohn of Gaunt for no greater satisfaction then to say when it commeth to the chiefe point that the messengers were heard what they could say or answere If there hath beene found so much waste paper in this Apologie for to entertaine by-tales and nothing to the purpose could there not be some spared for the setting downe of so necessary a point as this is and such as was most likely to haue benefited a iust cause more then twentie tales of Iohn of Gaunt would not a discourse of what passed betweene the Cardinals and the two priests with the Proctors haue bene more gratefull to the reader after that the Cardinals comming to the College was mentioned then a relation of M. Watsons common wealth In the English booke to which this Apologie pretendeth to answere it is set downe pag. 97 and 98. that the messengers were not heard what they could say or answere and it is not set downe in general termes but particularly in what sort they were not admitted to say what they would or to answere to wit that the Libell being read the priests requested that the Proctors might be put to their othes that no falshood was contained therein and the Cardinall Caietane answered for the Proctors himselfe that it was not needfull and furthermore affirming for the poore dumbe men who as yet had not discouered themselues whether they could speake or no that they should prooue what was denied the whole Libel was denyed and a copy therof demanded that answere might be made vnto it This was it that the messengers did say and the Iesuites gaue this for one cause afterwards why the two priests were not set at libertie the same day that M. Bishop had shewed too much earnestnesse in this very point for which he was to be kept close some two or three dayes more and M. Charnocke likewise but yet for no other cause then that it was not conuenient that he should be at libertie vntill the other had satisfied by a longer imprisonment for his quicknesse of spirit in demanding the Libell to answere it But the Proctors hauing before their lesson what they were to say or doe as it should seeme the one of them stepped presently without making his fellow acquainted therewith at that instant betwene M. Bishop and the table whereat the Cardinall sate and made humble request that the copie of this libell might not bee deliuered vnto the priests but rather that a peaceable conclusion might be made Of which the Cardinall taking present hold pursued that motion and would not deliuer the Libell to the two messengers whereby it is euident that this authour followeth his old trade in this place where he affirmeth that the two messengers also were heard what they could say or answere but shewed a good face to the priests and vsed them so friendly as they expected not to returne to their prisons especially being cleared from all matters by the Cardinals excepting this onely that many were scandalized in England at their iourney to Rome which was a thing that they could not helpe nor were iustly to be blamed therefore yet notwithstanding thinking it fit to keepe the Cardinall in that good and friendly humour the two priests made this answere that if by their iourney to Rome they had giuen cause of scandall to any they were very fory for it and were ready to giue satisfaction and so were dismissed and all was well vntill the Cardinall Burghese was departed But soone after his departure the Iesuite who for this time had supplied F. Parsons the head Iaylors place locked them vp againe in their seuerall prisons but for two or three daies as was pretended vpon the foresayd cause for that M. Bishop by his silence when he was bidden to speak after his examinatiō read did discontent the Card. somewhat This author hauing told his reader of the cōming of the Cardinals to the Colledge and of the Proctors demand of remedy against the new sedition also how that the messengers were heard say what they could which as it is said is most false he concludeth this matter as if some great acte had bene made and the Proctors had had some great day against the Priests And finally sayth he after diuers graue speeches vsed by the Cardinals against this diuision in our nation they departed promising perchance to F. Parsons to relate all vnto his Holines and to take his resolution for the finall sentence which they sent afterward sealed and signed by their owne hands and seuerall seales bearing date the S. of April 1599. vpon which day in the morning the two priests their close imprisonmēt first ceased In which sentence for that diuers things were inserted in the narration which might seem gricuous which were perchance according to F. Parsons informations but not to be knowen abroad lest his doings should haue ben known the decree it self which is yet extant to be seen appeared somewhat seuere against men who were not suffered to make their answere Fa. Parsons as we vnderstand to the perpetuall discredite of the Cardinals howsoeuer the infamie would haue beene wiped away from his Holinesse if it were true which here is said that the Cardinals tooke his Holinesse resolution for this finall sentence procured the said sentence to be deteined vntill hee had entreated the said Cardinals to mitigate somewhat that sentence and to giue another more mild of the 21. of the same moneth not so much by way of Iudiciall sentence as of a letter to wit to the Rector or Vicerector of the English colledge F. Parsons or the minister vnder their hands and seales appointing that the said two messengers should returne the one to Paris and the other to Loraine as they had requested They both had requested to be in Paris being both to be banished their countrey but this not being to be granted request was made for the other to be in Loraine a place that F. Parsons dreamed not of when hee debarred him not onely Paris but all other parts of France notwithstanding hee vrged that France was bigge enough to hold him and his fellow And these places are said to be appointed by the letter Interpretatiuely for neither of them are named in the Letter but not into England he should haue added Scotland nor Ireland for so runneth the sentence without speciall licence of his Holines or the Protector vnder paine of suspension and other censures c. But wherefore was this sentence giuen True it is that the two priests were banished not onely their owne countrey but Scotland also and Ireland and confined in other countreys where they were lesse likely to haue wherewithall to maintaine them and had not any thing giuen them to keepe them in these strange countreys from begging or staruing a bountiful consideration of the Church for so it must be taken towards priests who had left their right and possibilitie of all preferments to serue the Church with continuall and euident perill
he hath bene bound vnto the Societie and that it is no ioy for him to be at variance with any much lesse with him or any of his societie there is this note in the margent Exore tuo te iudico c. If there be any relation to that which followeth by c. It is but an ordinary liuery which this author giueth at his pleasure I iudge thee saith he by thine owne mouth as though M. Mush did now professe that hee tooke ioy to be at variance with any or that he denied that he hath bene heretofore bound vnto the Societie hauing bene many yeeres taken as a member thereof although in the ende they would not admit him as here it is confessed fol. 107. In this same letter M. Mush requesting that M. Bishop and M. Charnocke might be sent home from their banishment biddeth him not to feare any disturbance by them for saith he their owne hands will testifie against them if they shall report or attempt any euill Whereupon there is this note made This testimonie we accept now against them But he sheweth not where they haue reported or attempted any euill Let this be shewed and then let their testimony be vrged against them To this letter doeth Fa Parsons reply and speaking of the returne of these two priests he putteth this case If their cooperation be vnderstood to worke with you by their letters as here they promised and I cannot doubt but they will performe Vpon this place there is this note made Here we see the good man was deceiued And why so good man did they not cooperate with the priests in England for the making of peace Are not their letters continually vrged against the priests in England as exhorting them to peace did they not testifie the copy of the Breue to be a true copy thereof by which peace was made Is not M. Bishops letter here inserted a sufficient testimony of his cooperation and what testimony is that which is accepted here in a marginal note vpon F. Parsons letter but of peace wrought or perswaded by them And how then was the goodman deceiued Perchance it was in that which for all the rest also deceiued him that was hauing now gotten a Breue for confirmation of the Archpriest he expected that his company might trample vpon the priests as them listed and that now all the priests would be foole-ridden or worse and must not stirre for any iniury whatsoeuer might be offered them wherein in deed we may see how the goodman was deceiued Vpon the same letter there is a note made that the reconciliation of M. D. Bagshaw was an outward shew And after the letter this insinuation is giuen that any indifferent man may perceiue how F. Parsons was desirous and carefull of peace But of this more afterward when I shall discouer how he behaued himselfe for the putting all out of hope of peace Diuers other letters follow of F. Garnet and the Archpriest to F. Parsons all concluding that there was a peace made and that there was no doubt of any but of D. Bagshaw who what cause soeuer he had to stand vpon the restitution of his good name being accompred as other were for a Schismaticke c. yeelded himselfe And this author confesseth here fol. 148. that it is most likely that diuers of them ment plainly and sincerely indeed though of some of them it is doubted that they made the peace only in external shew for the time assuring themselues saith he that there would not wāt some probable occasiō afterwards to break againe to lay the cause of breach vpon the other side as in effect we see it did insue But was the heate of faction and sedition so great in the Iesuites and the Archpriest as the priests could perceiue it thereupon assure themselues that there would not want some probable occasion to breake againe Or had Fa. Parsons so laide the plot himselfe that there should be no peace in England but with such conditions as no honest priest could accept Yet this wee haue that a peace was made by some for peace sake and by the rest also at the least vpon this assurance that afterward there would not want some probable occasion to breake againe But see how this fellow goeth on with his tale For that saith he a new deuise being cast out shortly after that satisfaction must be made to them for some former hard speeches vsed or written against them in time of the contention and that otherwise their good names should be taken from them This was a sufficient match to put fire againe to all that which had bene raked vp before by the indeuour of the foresaid peace But this narration wil not passe so currant The priests haue set downe in the booke dedicated to his Holinesse pag. 63. and in that to the Inquisition pag. 59.60 that after the peace was made a Iesuit Fa. Iones by name began to raise that wicked and senselesse slander of schisme against them And M. Archpriest published A Resolution pretended to come from Rome in confirmation of that wicked opinion of the Iesuits against the priests and that the satisfaction which was demanded was of this infamy raysed after the peace was made and not of those wicked slanders which were raysed by the Icsuites the Archpriest and their seditious adherents against the priests before the peace was made as here is falsely suggested And this relation of the priests goeth still vncontrolled and not disprooued by this authour And by this might this question be solued which followeth in the Apologie Now then all the question standeth in this which part hath broken the peace or which was most like to haue desire to maintaine and conserue the same For by this it is euident that the Iesuites and Archpriest did breake the same peace and put fire againe to all that which had bene raked vp before But marke I pray you how substantially this question proposed is discussed by him For discussing saith he of which controuersie we might vse that argument of Cassius Cui bono who are like to receiue most good or hurt by the peace kept or broken Here you see what argument this authour might vse you shall perchance hereafter vnderstand what argument hee will vse For this in his owne conscience was no sufficient argument or doubtlesse he would haue vsed it hauing so great want of good arguments as here he discouereth yet the margent must cary this note The controuersie discussed who did breake the peace to giue the reader to vnderstand that here the controuersie is discussed who perchance would thinke as litle thereof as he who passeth through Long lane by Smithfield and looketh at the signe of the Booke would thinke of the Bible if this note were not vpon the signe The Bible But as this authour might make this argument so might the priests fit this answere that such circumstances might bee iustly considered in controuersies where no
one and therefore must carry credit howsoeuer this Apologie hath cracked it there followed another letter of another reuerend priest who affirmeth that D. Bagshaw is at the last constrained to yeeld his obedience to their Superiour with the rest of his confederats If it be true sayth hee that M. Mush and some others affirme And yet there is a greater argument but it is against M. Bluet If sayth this author the said keeper of Wisbich castle doe not greatly abuse M. Bluet And this standing vpon so nice a point I will leaue to them who haue will to compare their honesties together and conclude contrarily to this authors conclusion fol. 153. for there he concludeth in this maner By this then and diuers other wayes which we leaue to speake of heere the priests are much bound to him for sparing them it is easie to see what manner of negotiation these men had in hand when the Breue came and how farre they were embarked and intangled c. you must cōceiue some strange linke by this c. with the Councell at this very time How gladly would any blind man see this and bragge when he hath done with the best sighted For who that hath his eyes can see any such matter out of these fond surmises out of their owne letters and a memoriall of a man of whome they themselues haue some doubt whether hee did not abuse the party whome he tooke for his author who doth not rather see to what poore shifts this author is driuen who to determine so weightie a question as he proposed fol. 148. which part hath broken the peace can say nothing but perhaps and as is supposed and it is very likely and it may be and it is thought with other such foolish suspicions and doubts of which all this discourse is full from the first entrance into the consideration of much more consequence fol. 144. to this conclusion By this then fol. 153. How much more directly doe the priests in all places solue this question affirming without any such foolish shuffling that the Iesuits first namely F. Iones began this breach by broaching afresh that the priests were schismatickes And the Archpriest seconded him with a most seditious letter which hee sent abroad wherein hee signified that he had receiued a resolution from the mother Citie that the refusers of the appointed authoritie were schismatikes And this haue the priests set downe in their bookes to haue beene the cause of the breach and this cannot be denyed to haue beene done by the Archpriest after the peace was made although this author in chap. 11. fol. 167. taketh notice that in the booke to his Holinesse pa. 62. there is this marginall note Origo nouarum contentionum fuit Archipresbyteri Epistola violenta The beginning of new cōtentions was a violent Epistle of the Archpriest And vpon this note he exclaimeth in his religious maner against the priests that they would breake out againe vpō an angry epistle And he runneth himselfe so out of breath as although this note is set at the very bottome of the 62. page he could not step ouer to the 63 page where some part of this angry epistle is thus set downe Ab vrbe c. we haue receiued a resolution from the mother Citie that the refusers of the appointed authority were schismaticks But the marginall note was ynough for him to exercise his milde spirit against the priests and by concealing wherefore that note was made and what was in the discourse to cousen his blinde reader who must not once looke into the priests bookes for feare lest their guides falsenesse be discouered And thus haue I shewed how the Iesuits the Archpriests want of consideration hath bene the cause of all these present broiles and that this diuision should not onely not be cured but be brought in time to a greater breach as by the euent we haue seene performed Whereby also it appeareth how false this narration is of this author For first saith he vnder the foresaid pretēce of a satisfactiō to be made vnto them of their fames woūded delay was made of reconciliation Hath this fellow so soone forgotten himselfe what he said in this 10. Chap. fol. 147. out of M. Archpriests letter to Fa. Parsons dated the 3. of Iune 1599 I was inforced saith he vpon their contentions and contemptuous behauiour that is their appeale from him to the Pope as is set downe in the booke to the Inquisition epist. 52. 53. to suspend the vse of faculties in M. Collington M. Mush and M. Heburne But now God be blessed vpon the sight of the Breue Apostolicall that you sent they haue in such maner submitted themselues that I haue giuen them restitution of their losses The Breue also of the 17. of August 1601. excludeth al delay affirming that so soone as euer the priests did see the former Breue they presently submitted themselues yet must this fellow to keepe himselfe in vre as if all his discourses were bastards if they were in the beginning middle or ending any other then false tales tell his Reader that there was delay made of reconciliation vnder pretence of hauing satisfaction which howsoeuer the accusers of the priests shall make to God they are neuer able to make to them Then saith he new quarels pickt new complaints fained new exaggerations made by words and writings both against the Archpriest the causes hereof are layd downe before and the whole story at large sent to the Inquisition the Cardinals protections and F. Parsons by name especially concerning the treatie of their two messengers in Rome Perchance Fa. Parsons letter of the 9. of October 1599 which he sent into England France and Flanders and where not came to some of their hands and also the letter of M. Martin Array and Fa. Baldwines bolt to D. Cicyll before cited came to be examined and were euident arguments of falshood to say no worse and lewd dealing and the breach renewed before by the Iesuits and Archpriest as is shewed might giue the priests iust cause to looke further into the matter then they could before suspect but when were these quarrels pickt by whom or how followed marke I pray you how he falleth into a story impertinent to these controuersies The peace was made by the priests in May 1599 as in this chapter is confessed the breach was presently after made by the Iesuits and the Archpriest as this author doeth in a maner confesse in that neither of himselfe nor prouoked thereto by the priests their books he will come neere to this point which is the most principall in this present controuersie and now he will tel you a tale of M Charnocke his returne which was a yeere after to wit in May 1600. who as he saith was inuited to come home and so hee did no doubt much against this fellowes will who if I am not deceiued was the cause of his banishment and confinement without any maintenance
and the priests now the world is come to this passe that he is no zealous or godly Catholike that will not runne from place to place to disgrace all such priests as refuse to be guided by the Iesuits or in this present controuersie will not acknowledge that they liued in schisme and deserued eternall shame and reproch because they deferred their obedience to an authoritie vntill they did see what was their Superiour his will concerning it at what time they all submitted themselues vnfainedly whatsoeuer this author most wickedly suggesteth to his reader in this place without any proofe at all vpon certaine of his most absurd surmizes for which also he sendeth his reader to the former chapter where he shal see perhaps and as it is supposed and it is very likely and such like stuffe as a man who esteemed of his credit would be ashamed of in so weighty a matter And for his foolish assertion that if it had been vnfained it would haue wrought some permanent effect there is an old saying that there must goe two words to a bargaine and so say I that if there must be peace betweene two parts both the parts must doe their parts to preserue it for who seeth not that it is a most absurd iest that if peace be broken by the wickednesse of the one part the other should be blamed for not dealing sincerely and vnfainedly the priests haue sayd that the Iesuits and the Archpriest did breake the peace and they haue shewed how and that which they haue sayd herein cannot be controlled and that is that Fa Iones the Iesuit after the peace made fetched out of hell it selfe as by the euent it appeareth that most wicked paradox of his fellow Iesuit Fa. Lister concerning schisme and the Archpriest also after the peace made brake the same peace by publishing a resolution from the mother citie that the refusers of the appointed authority were schismatikes which resolution he affirmed he had either from F. Warford or Fa Tichborne a paire of yong English Iesuites and this is the Epistle which is not onely mentioned but set downe in the booke to his Holines pag 63 and which this author slily ouerslippeth and stoppeth his readers mouth with the marginal note which is put by the priest to wit origo c. The beginning of the new contention was a violent Epistle of the Archpriests which here this author citeth and runneth in his new found milde and religious tearmes vpon the priests because they would breake out for an angry Epistle and so laughing in his sleeue to thinke how hee can cousin the blind obedient which must beleeue any thing that he telleth them he shutteth vp this matter without telling them what this angry Epistle was or that it was set downe in the booke to his Holinesse least that he should haue discouered the weakenes of his cause and consequently his owne wickednes who in so weake a case would vse so wicked tearmes against Catholike priests This you see how this fellow hath answered the booke which is dedicated to his Hol. and what poore geere he picketh out sometime out of the discourse sometime out of the margent and letteth this discourse goe quietly by him and with all this nicenesse and choice of some place to which he might make colourable shewe of answere he bringeth nothing but what being examined will breede his owne shame and confusion The Appeale he saith shal be answered by the Pope who in a briefe of the 17. of August 1601. refused it for peace sake as there is said being induced thereunto perchance by such as were loath to heare these matters come in question yet since this Breue all the world is made a witnesse that these matters haue bene handled at Rome and that there was iust cause to appeale notwithstanding the fine gloses here made by this authour who wisheth perchance by this time that he had not so much commended this Pope Lastly he agitateth a letter of M. Mush his writing to Mon Seignior Morto a Bishop in Italy who was ioyned with Doctor Lewes Bishop of Cassana in many affaires of the Church which letter is said in the priests their bookes to haue bene sent by the two messengers vnto him And in reason the Priests who said so should haue had credit vntill the contrary could haue bene prooued which can neuer be with more substantiall arguments then are here brought To wit it was not found among their papers as though they hauing bene 17. dayes in Rome before that the Iesuites and the Sbirri carried them to prison could not conuey it as it was directed before that their papers were seazed on or secondly the two messengers neuer spake to Fa. Parsons of such a letter ergo they caried no such letter with them as though Fa. Parsons were the man that must knowe all things and was not rather kept so short as diuers in the Citie noted how he was troubled for that he could get no other answere of the priests to his curious question then that time and place should discouer what they had to say And although afterward he was admitted by them to be their examiner it was not without the condition that they should not be bound to answere to his questions which condition the Fiscall did take and agree vnto before he could obteine of them to let Fa. Parsons be the examiner and it may be thought that when they were asked such idle questions they did vse this license or their owne rights no oath in this kind binding any man to answere to all things proposed vnto them and Fa. Parsons may call to minde if it please him that to some questions he was directly denied an answere The matters contained in M. Mush his letter are there so sufficiently handled as this authour saith nothing thereof in this place but referreth his reader backe to fome places already handled and answered he glaunceth at that which is there said of the necessity of the sacrament of confirmation in England for which all the Catholikes if they will may see his egernesse against their good and comfort in this time of persecution that he cannot heare of any who shal say it is necessary but he is straight on his iacke for it And because one said once that it was either most necessary in time of persecution or a vaine and as a superfluous ceremony in Gods Church because there onely is the proper vse thereof he playeth vpon the latter words as if they had bene affirmed by any one and applyeth them to such as speake for the necessitie of the sacrament He excepteth also against that which M. Mush affirmeth of Fa. Parsons his State bookes and is agreeued that he onely is named among such as haue written of such a subiect And for the loue he beareth to Cardinall Allen and other of our Nation he setteth downe in print what they haue written concerning such matters as though their fact did excuse
interteine the two priests kindly in his owne chamber They confesse they were interteined after a long difficultie But what authenticall proofe is there that he did it kindly or that it was done without difficultie He told them that they might not talke with any of the schollers and no one of the schollers can say that euer they did talke with any of them but one whom M. Bishop was very desirous to see and he was brought to M. Bishop by the Confessarius of the Colledge who stood by and heard al which passed M. Charnocke did know that there was one in the Colledge whose mother is his cousen germane and neuer coueted to talke with him The quarrell which was against these two priests was for talking with such as were appointed by Fa. Parsons to attend them in the hospitall whereof he who is here said to be the vertuous priest was a Iesuit in a Secular priests coat and shortly after wore a Iesuits coate and died among them And the occasion of this talke was ministred by this vertuous priest and it was not of this present controuersie but about M. Edward Tempest concerning whom it was said that he was hardly dealt withall in regard that such as vsed to intertaine priests at their first arriuall in England were perswaded not to intertaine him And that some of his neerest friends were told that in conscience they could not relieue him An other was a ieast which had chanced about 20. yeeres since in the Colledge of Rome which because it concerned one who was chosen in England for an assistant the matter was taken hainously yet was the occasion hereof also ministred by thaâ— vertuous priest and the matter it selfe was but a mery tale And this is al which was alledged by F. Owen the Iesuit in the name of F. Parsons against the two priests yet doeth this author most shamelesly relate that the two priests had talked that which might raise or renew sedition among the schollers But this and all which foloweth is doubtlesse brought in this place that this author might shew how he could gall his reader with his owne tale as an authenticall testimony for other testimony there is not That also which is here gainesaid of Cardinal Bellarmines letter was said vpon the relation of those who saw it although they haue not the copy to shew And for so much as concerneth the principall point of F. Bellarmines letter to wit the imprisoning of the two priests it is confessed in his Apologie Cap. 4. fol. 120. out of the same letter The priests there being imprisoned in the Colledge is reputed agreat benefit vnto them They thought it not so but onely in this respect that they thought their liues were more in safety in the Colledge then in a common prison But in respect of the common cause without doubt it had bene a great preiudice had they had any hope of iustice But their hope was small when they saw that they were to be infamously caried away to prison before they could get audience But it troubleth this author much that Fa. Parsons should be termed a Iaylor especially there being another who had the keyes of their chambers to bring them meat and all other necessaries but he telleth not who had the keyes all the rest of the day If F. Parsons had not bene seene to weare them at his girdle this matter might haue bene somewhat clenlier caried but it was too open to be excused Next followeth a defence of F. Parsons for his shewing of M. Charnocks handkerchiefs and night coyfes which this author saith were so wrought with silke and gold lace is they might seeme to serue for any Secular prince in the world and the socks for his feete were of so fine Holland as the Commissary said he was well assured that his Holines neuer woare such for his shirts You must imagine that this relation is very authenticall although M. Charnock had neither handkerchiefe nor night coife that any Iesuite in England would vouchsafe to weare they were so meane I haue seene the night coife and it is wrought in deed with silke For it hath a border of blacke silke about it 3. fingers broad and all the rest of the cap is plaine Holland it hath some 6. pennie-worth of gold and siluer edging and as many as haue seene the cappe wonder at the impudencie of this Author who perchance did thinke the cappe would not haue bene kept The conceit which is made of his handkerchiefes is much more ridiculous And by the tale of his sockes this Author bringeth into my minde a tale of a preacher who tolde his parish that Christ fed fiue hundred with such a small quantity and being told softly by the Clarke that they were fiue thousand he bad him hold his peace like a foole and told him that if he could perswade the people that they were fiue hundred he had done a good dayes worke I vnderstand that the Commissary sayd how that his Holines did not weare so fine cloth in his bands But this author thought this was too much to be beleeued and therefore he set it downe the Popes shirts Whereupon saith he conferring with M. Charnocke himselfe in the presence of Fa Parsons and M. Bishop vpon the 8. of Aprill when they were to haue the first fauour to speake together and to walke at libertie in the College at certaine times when answere was made that priests now a dayes for dissimulation are forced to vse such things in England he replied that at the leastwise it was not needefull to bring such strange delicacies to Rome and that albeit in some externall apparell dissimulation might be tolerable in English Priests at home in respect of the times yet in such thinge whereof their vse was onely in secret as night-coifes and sockes and the like he saw no neede of excesse or dissimulation And this was all that passed in this matter vpon the faith of such an honest man as writ this Apologie But now sir one tale is tolde the other is not told which is that M. Charnockes answere was to this effect that Priests traueiling vp down in England were to vse such things as were fit for such persons as they bare in their trauaile especially when they lay not in Catholike houses where they were knowen but in common Innes where neither night-coifes not socks were vsed in secret And for his bringing those things to Rome his answere was that hee had necessary vse of them at his comming out of England making account to returne againe he had little reason to throwe those things away after that they had the first time serued him And if it had pleased them at Rome to haue left his Truncke vnsearched the cap had neuer ben seene in Rome And M. Bishop being requested to say what he knew of this strange delicacie affirmed that he had neuer seene it before But if M. Charnocke had either worne it by the way as he
conceit that this their fault might be the defence of Catholike religion as though Ma. Bluet whose letter this is said to be did esteeme that a fault Is he not full fraught with most wicked malice that would driue such a conceit into his readers head against a venerable priest and one who hath suffered in the defence of the Catholicke faith before any Iesuite dared to come neere vnto England for all those proud vaunts that they were the men specially raised by God to ouerthrow Luther and his followers What M. Watson did in Scotland he is to answere it himselfe but doubtlesse he was not employed thither in any such affaires as this author affirmeth by any of the priests He hath spent time there as other priests haue to represse that wicked doctrine of the Iesuits that a man might locke vp his conscience after that he had heard masse and then goe to the protestants Churches Neither doe wee knowe what meaning any of those had to deale with the French king in any State matters whome this author so taxeth Hee who is so well acquainted with meanings wil perchance in his larger Apologie tell vs more newes thereof The stories of Alcimus and Simon and others who went to Demetrius and Apollonius and others here named can haue no place here vnlesse this companion doe compare his holinesse vnto Demetrius as hee compareth the priests to Aleimus and Simon For all the world is a witnesse for the Priests that they went to Pope Clement the 8. to seeke for iustice and that they sought not to any other for iustice in the controuersie betweene the Iesuites and them although they sought their princes fauour which they might lawfully doe and desire to enioy it as the Catholiques in the primitiue Church haue sometime done and doe pray vnto God duely for her prosperous raigne and that God will incline her heart to haue compassion vpon such her most loyall and faithful subiects as haue heretofore most vniustly ben condemned for the euill practises of a few busie fellowes The fourth consideration cōsisteth of twelue special points which I feare will lie heauy vpon their soules who are guilty of these stirres The priests make no doubt of the iustice of their cause And while this matter doth hang in question this Apologie well considered and aduisedly read doth it selfe very much preiudice their cause in whose defence it pretendeth to be written If it shall be hereafter iudged that the priests were schismatikes because they did not accept of the new authority before they saw a Breue from his Holines without doubt they haue much to answere for But if contrariwise it shal be iudged that they were not schismatikes then must the Iesuits and their adherents be the men who haue been the cause of all the euill which hath come vpon this slander raised by them against the priests And vpon this also dependeth the fift consideration for if it be proued that the Iesuites and their adherents did iniurie the priests in so high a degree and a publique infamie of schisme c. then will it not auaile them to say that the priests should haue considered that it was a time of persecution and that they shuld haue suffred this infamie rather then haue stirred in their own defence If this doctrine of his might passe currant in temporal warres there would indeed quickly be an end therof for by this rate euery mā that is wickedly inclined might murther his fellow without any contradiction for feare of endangering the campe if the vniustly assaulted should seeke to defend himselfe This companion should haue remembred that the priests sent to his Holinesse to whom it belonged to determine this controuersie and that they haue not stirred in any thing more then in procuring that the quarrell might come to his hearing For which purpose they iudged it most necessary to make the world acquainted therewith hauing once before bene frustrated thereof by reason of their ouer great confidence in the iustice of their cause onely In the sixt consideration this authour taketh his pleasure in discrediting the priests who would not consent that the Iesuits the Archpriest with the rabblement of their most wicked and seditious adherents shall esteeme of them as of schismatikes soothsayers Idolaters Ethnickes and Publicanes And he would perswade his Reader that they are not onely few in number but greene in credit without scruple of conscience what they vtter and therefore not to be trusted in matters which concerne the liues states and honors of men who shall fall out with them yea his Reader must vnderstand that those who haue yeelded to the enemie in one or two steps could neuer go backe againe but must yeeld in greater matters and discouer all they knowe against their brethren if not more He speaketh as clerklike as if he had searched the greatest secrets of his factious adherents which will one day perchance come foorth and the parties named who haue done asmuch as he mentioneth But as for the appellant priests he cannot charge them iustly that they haue yeelded in any such thing If any priest hath yeelded any further then to thinke himselfe highly fauoured that there hath beene notice taken of his faith and loyalty towards his Prince and countrey let the priest be made knowen and he shal be esteemed of accordingly by the priests and if no man haue yeelded in any other matter then is the Apologie-maker a notorious wicked imposter The last consideration is of the necessitie of vnion which is handled with exhortations vnto it and disswasions from diuision and of the facilitie of making it againe among vs and to shew that there is a great facilitie he will aske his discontented brethren that shew themselues so mightily inraged what is there which they would haue in this matter who vexeth or vrgeth them so as they may not liue quietly if they would A couple of reasonable questions and therefore this answere is made vnto them First they would haue that which the Iesuits the Archpriest and all their seditious adherents are bound vnder paine of eternall damnation to perfourme that is that these doe make restitution vnto the priests for those most wicked slanders of Schisme sedition rebellion c. which are contained in Father Lister the Iesuites booke and their owne most malitious stomackes without any iust cause giuen vnto them by the priests Secondly they haue prooued that the Iesuites and Archpriest with all the seditious followers doe vexe them so much as in them lieth and doe vrge them so as they cannot liue quietly by them but in euery corner there is some of this sedition to warne all good Catholikes to flie them not to giue them any entertainement or reliefe And all this is to driue them either to perish or to belie their owne soules with the great dishonour both of God and his Church And as for the Archpriests good nature here specified it is very ridiculous He recalled his
Censures when the priests submitted themselues vpon the sight of his Holinesse Breue which censures he had vsed against three priests because they had appealed from him to the pope as it is set downe in the booke to the Inquisition And I doubt not but that the Archpriest would be as glad now that all were well accorded as he was at the first attonement and be as ready perchance to breake out againe as then hee was as it is prooued in the bookes to his Holinesse and to the Inquisition neither is there any man that is in his wittes but will thinke that the Iesuits and Archpriest would haue peace that is power to vse the Secular priests at their pleasure and that the priests should suffer all manner of indignities both in fame and otherwise and not to stirre for anie thing which may be done against them least the Iesuites peace be broken which they loue so dearely and cloake it with extraordinary pietie in this place fol. 221 where they are sayd to haue stoode with the Archpriest and the rest in defence of his Holines ordination as though the priests had euer resisted his Holines ordination and not rather yeelded themselues presently at the sight of the Breue before which there was no Popes ordination And to this the Iesuites their standing in defence of his Holinesse ordination are ioyned most absurd positions of their desire not to meddle in the priests affaires whereas it hath beene shewed that they haue been the chiefe of this sedition against the priests And their interpretation that their dealing proceedes of loue is to men of vnderstanding an argument of a factious disposition and desiring of gouerning all sortes of people whosoeuer must play the Apes part to take away the enuie for their misdeedes from them They intend not sayeth hee to preiudice them in any preferment for the time present or to come Hee were worse then madde that would trouble himselfe with our Iesuites intentions which varie as often as their tongues moue and turne their intentions to serue best their owne turnes Let the Iesuites their hinderance of all our nation beyond the Seas from al promotion speake for their intentions since that no place or preferment there can be had without degrees in schooles which they haue induced his Holinesse to debarre all the English nation vnder this other intention that young men must not take the degrees when they depart from the Seminaries And that their intention may be the more euident that they will hinder euery mans preferrement they haue put into the Popes Breue a barre not onely for the proceeding in Diuinitie the knowledge whereof they haue now also cleane taken out of the Colledge at Doway but in either of the Lawes also Ciuill or Canon which are not taught in any of our Seminaries Yet must all their intentions bee most excellent and must not be thought to preiudice any for the time present or to come As for the time to come were it in their hands to preiudice any man all their protestations and oathes would carie little credite but with such as know them not In which as in all other their dealings especially in this action the priests doe most willingly forgiue them their falshood and doe pray for them that God will giue them and their adherents his grace to amende what they cannot chuse but see is amisse in themselues To which they may make a good steppe if they will enter into their owne consciences and consider of what great scandals and harmes in Gods Church they haue beene a very faulty occasion by that most wicked imputation of schisme to most Catholicke priestes and their obdurate standing in that sinfull opinion without admitting any equall triall of the cause in question which the priests did offer in most humble wise before they tooke the course that now they take and was onely left vnto them to cleare themselues of so damnable a slander ¶ A REPLY TO THE Appendix of the Apologie by J. B. THE author of the Apologie hauing seene other two bookes beside those against which he writ his Apologie maketh an answere such as it is vnto them which answere he calleth An Appendix to the Apologie by the Priests that remaine in due obedience to their lawfull Superior As though an Appeale made from a superior vpon iust causes and a lawfull prosecution thereof could not stand with due obedience But somewhat must be said and if it haue no pith in it as euery indifferent reader will soone discouer that want in this Appendix it must be ouercharged with bigge words which the blinde obedient must imagine would not haue bene vttered without iust cause although they see none After a long conflict then as it should seeme in this author whether hee should take notice of these two latter bookes to which he hath made it knowen both in this Appendix and other two scurrilous Libels set out since this Appendix came forth that he cannot make any answere he hath aduentured to say somewhat of them and that it might not bee made too apparant to the world how little the poore man had to say herein hee stuffeth these few leafes with exceptions against those bookes to which he pretended an answere in his Apologie enlargeth himselfe somewhat by way of a preface wherein he telleth his reader how vnwillingly he put his pen to paper for the defence of our Superiors and their lawfull doings and proceedings against the intemperate impugnations by tumult and Libels of a few discontented brethren c. And no man can but beleeue him that it was sore against his will that he had such cause as he had to vse his pen although he neuer made daintie of his paines and pen where hee thought he might discredit those priests which he could not bring to his lure And as for the priests their doings or proceedings they haue shewed themselues ready to giue accompt thereof and to proue both the lawfulnesse and the necessitie which was in withstanding the exorbitant proceedings of such as hauing neither any Christian wisdom nor honestie abused our Superiors and procured that al the priests should be brought into these streights to wit either to yeeld to the wicked designes of others or to be made infamous all the world ouer And to this effect was the treatise of schisme written by the Iesuits and sent abroad not onely in England but into remote places beyond the seas to perswade such as would be blinde that Catholike priests who had liued in a long most dangerous persecution for defence of the sea Apostolike were now become schismaticks and why because they did not contrary to the lawes of Gods Church yeeld their obedience to a creature of the Iesuits intruded vpon them as their Superior without any warrant from the Sea Apostolike which hath commanded that no such superior be accepted without a speciall warrant or letters from the same Sea as may be seene in that extrauagant
there was most vnchristianlike dealing that his Holinesse must be perswaded to shuffle vp matters of so great moment in our Church to whome were presented in the priests their appeale most euident proofes of the Iesuites and the Archpriest their disorders in the managing of our Church affaires And as for the style in which his Holinesse is sayd to haue written this latter Breue we leaue it to others to scan who haue list thereto and can vnderstand how great the iniuries haue bene and are still offred vnto Catholike Priests without any one word of satisfaction to be made therfore to them who haue bene iniured and let men of learning who haue read or hereafter may read the priests their bookes to his Holinesse and the Inquisition iudge whether it was not most necessary for the priests to publish in their owne defence and the priests will not be their owne Iudges whether they haue done or doe still as they may in conscience doe in publishing vntill their fame be restored which was vniustly taken away by the Iesuites in their seditious treatise of schisme and the Archpriest his pretended resolution from Rome and the controuersie decided which hath bene the cause of all these troubles for vntill this matter be fully ended and the Catholikes satisfied that the priests did as become Catholike priests to doe there will be hope that his Holinesse will not debarre the priests of such meanes as the lawe of Nature alloweth them in the purging of themselues of such crimes as their silence must needes argue a guiltinesse in and their owne consciences tell them they must vnder grieuous sinne free themselues from them But marke I pray you what deuises this fellow doth vse to haue the priests forget the abuses which were offered vnto them by the Iesuites and their faction And for himselfe his Holinesse seeing that the chiefe complaint and offence and petra scandali as it seemed was about the name of schisme and schismatikes he is saide to haue taken that wholly away in this cause both the matter and name it selfe See how he would haue his reader to thinke that this controuersie was about certaine names as though there was neuer any reall schisme laid to their charge Were the Iesuits such blocks as that they would for certaine names exclaime in this manner against the Secular priests Harken O ye factious ye are rebels ye are excommunicated ye are fallen from the Church ye are nothing better then Soothsayers and Idolaters and as Ethnickes and Publitanes besides the terrours of eternall damnation Were the Catholikes so barbarous that for certaine names they would in this time of persecution thrust Catholike priests out of their doores and some with most impudent faces some like eaues-droppers runne or creepe about to diswade the Catholikes from harbouring them or giuing them any maintenance But let vs see how his Holinesse is said to take away the name and matter it selfe in this Breue forsooth forbidding any bookes treatises or writings to be made read or held thereof and about that controuersie This is a faire taking away of a matter let vs then suppose that there be no more bookes treatises or writings made read or held hereof and about that controuersie I aske whether the Priests were schismatikas or no or what is this after-prouidence or order to the purpose for matters past If the priests had bene as wickedly disposed as the Iesuites and had procured an infamy to haue runne farre and neere against them without iust cause as this of Schisme against the priestes hath bene prooued to haue bene most vniustly spread abroad how could they thinke themselues cleared of any such slander only by an after-suppressing thereof or how could they thinke that thereby any satisfaction were made vnto them But gladly would this authour haue it so that the priestes being asked the cause of these present stirres might be debarred of giuing the true cause thereof for then might their aduersaries iustly triumph against them as troublesome people and clamarous and that they had busied themselues they knewe not why or wherein Had these Iesuites and their adherents halfe that valor in them which they would be thought to haue they would not for very shame indent with their aduersarie that he must come to the field without his armes and themselues armed from the head to the foot or were they men of that wisedome of which their followers take them to be they wold neuer haue committed so great a folly as to leaue no other hope of helpe for themselues then to procure that their aduersarie must bee forbidden to pleade for himselfe If it be true as their Libels will prooue it that they accused Catholike priests of schisme why should any priest be afraid to say that he was in such maner accused And if for quietnesse sake the name must be auoided why for quietnesse sake should not the course be altered which was taken against Catholike priests when the Catholike Laitie was in that manner seduced by the Iesuites to vse that sinfull name when they named or spake of Catholike Priests But it is no matter perchance howe priests be abused by the new illuminated so that they be not hereafter named Schismatickes and therefore this authour professeth that he procured to auoid it in his Apologie though not knowing of this expresse prohibition For saith he indeede the thing it selfe did euer mislike and grieue vs. Weladay weladay what thing was that which misliked and grieued you was it the wickednesse which was committed in the slandering so many Catholike priestes as would not contrary to the Canons of holy Church and vpon many iust reasons sacrifice to an Idoll who how well soeuer it was meant vnto him by him who had authority had notwithstanding no authority at that time at which he challenged it as hath bene euidently proued in the priests their bookes did you euer mislike that Catholike priests should be contemned and dispised by euery factious and seditious companion who vpon hope of some gaine thereby would fit your eares yea and your hearts with a placebo without any regard of them to whom they owed loue and duetie harken I pray you what it was which misliked and grieued this fellow that so much contention and falling out should be about a matter in the aire where no man was named in particular This then was it which grieued this good fellow that the priests would not be called and vsed like Schismaticks but would proue themselues to be Catholike priests and to haue discharged themselues in all points as became Catholike priests But this seemeth very strange that Schisme against which there are so grieuous lawes in Gods Church and against which F. Lyster the Iesuit and his fellowes the Archpriest and all his faction inueyed so bitterly and seduced the Laity in such sort as they did as it were schismatically make a diuision in prayer and communication and Sacraments euen from their dearest friends
vel alio de nouo quaesito in spiritualibus vel temporalibus per se vel per alium pro parte vel in totum gerere vel recipere aut illis se immiscere presumant c. That is to say Since therefore men are not to be fauoured in their malice we willing to make further prouision doe decree by this generall constitution that from henceforth no man either by himselfe or any other in whole or in part vnder the name of a steward or procurer or other new pretence do presume either in spirituall matters or temporall to exercise any dignitie to the which he is chosen before that his election bee confirmed And the same Pope setteth downe in the same place the punishment which such an offendor shal haue to wit a depriuation of al the right which he had by his election After these constitutions of Pope Gregorie and Pope Boniface there is another constitution of Pope Paulus the third of the like matters recorded by the same Iulius the third who noting quod ante confectionem literarum gratia Apostolica est informis that is that a grace giuen by the Pope is not of force vntill the letters be made and shewing what little regard hath been had thereof by all sorts of Ecclesiasticall persons for all the former ordinances or decrees made for that purpose he confirmed and renued the same and willed that they should hereafter be obserued Et sanctiones ipsas ad inferiora beneficia ecclesiastica quocunque quomodocunque qualificata amplians extendens hac sua in perpetuum valitura constitutione statuit c. And amplifying and enlarging those decrees to all inferiour ecclesiasticall benefices and howsoeuer qualified he ordained c. So that if by any wrangling shift this prelacie of the Archpriest hauing no other name then of an Archpriest should be sayd not to bee included within the extrauagant although it bee a much higher prelacie as being ouer two kingdomes then a Bishop yet is there no shift will serue after this amplification of Pope Iulius the third beside the plaine text also of the lawe cited where Pope Gregorie the tenth forbiddeth all administration not onely in temporalties but also in spiritualties without a confirmation from the Sea Apostolike and the intention of Pope Boniface most manifest to put a remedy for such dangers as might be by the challenging to be in any office or dignity whatsoeuer as from the Sea Apostolike before any letters from the same Sea were shewed in testimony thereof Vpon these or the like considerations the Cardinals of the Inquisition in their congregation vpon the 20. of Iuly last past among other oppressions which they concluded had bene vsed by the Archpriest to the Appellants numbred this for one and it was afterward confirmed by his Holines Cum saepè declarauerit ipsos esse schismaticos rebelles inobedientes In declaring often that they were schismaticks rebellious and disobedient By which it may appeare what dealing there was at Rome about the making of that Breue of the 17. of August 1601 out of which this author citeth this sentence against the Appellants Vos autem filij presbyteri c. But you my sonnes the Priests which neglected to obey the Archpriest your Superior what cause had you not to giue credit vnto the letters of your Protector Cardinall Caietane truely you ought to haue submitted your selues to your superior to haue obeyed him It is euident ynough to all that there did want no cause why we did not admit of the Archpriest for he pretended a promotion by the See apostolicke but shewed no letters from the same See as he was bound to do before he should practise his authoritie or any receiue him in it vnder grieuous penalties Other causes were also giuen ynough why he was not receiued before the first Breue came which if his Holines had seene who can imagine that he would haue rebuked the priests in this maner in his Breue of the 17. of August 1601. But he did neither see the priests books wherein they set downe their reasons of their refusal as is confessed in this present preface neither had he spoken with any of the priests as is conuinced by the date of the Breue and their arriuall at Rome halfe a yeere after And who knoweth not how matters may be caried when one tale onely is heard and that no iust iudgemen can be giuen where one side onely of a controuersie is pleaded And the case being now decided in the Inquisition for the priests and the Archpr. condemned as one who many wayes did most vniustly oppresse them it will not be hard for any indifferent man to iudge where the burthen of scandals breaches and other hurts must lye and how the highest Superior hath bene hitherto abused and consequently also God himselfe highly dishonoured But now letting go this most absurd insinuation So as all the sharpe impugnations vsed against those letters and the Archpriests authoritie from the very beginning are here shewed to haue bene vniust and against the expresse will meaning and iudgement of our highest Superior and consequently also as of necessitie must be inferred against God himselfe as though the highest Superior could not in these matters which doe not apperteine to our faith be induced by flatterers or false felowes to command that which without offence to God cannot be obeyed or at the least wise doeth not binde others to obey it let vs see how this author gathereth his Corollaries It followeth also by the sweete and milde declaration of his Holines though it be like ynough that he will make some other of a more sharper kind vpon the knowledge and view of so many scandalous bookes as haue bene put foorth afterward by our brethren and this lite pendente while the sute hanged before him without expecting his Holinesse sentence in the matter remitted to him by them it followeth we say first that our good Archpriest during all this time of tumultuation against him hath bene and is our lawful Ecclesiasticall Superiour and consequently that so violent impugning him must needes haue bene very offensiue to God and perilous to the impugners and besides that such prohibitions of bookes writings taking away of faculties or other punishments or censures layd vpon any by him for their disobedience are and must be of validitie seeing his Holinesse here taketh away none vntill they duly submit themselues and he remit or recall the same againe c. A very sweete and milde declaration of his Holinesse by which a most iust appeale to the See Apostolike is not admitted but annullated as this fellow affirmeth and a shew made of determining of all matters but no man the neerer thereby if this fellow say true that his Holinesse did take away none of the censures or penalties which the Archpriest layd or attempted to lay vpon the priests for defending themselues from the infamy of Schisme a most wicked and senselesse imputation If
the matter they doe adde of their owne in their English translation the word Here which is not in the Latine to the end it may seeme to tie the Protectors office to the place it selfe which is most absurd to any man that will consider the meaning of these words which is that the Protectors office is giuen ouer any nation order of religion or the like to protect or defend them in all occasions with his Holinesse and his successors vnderstood by the words Sea Apostolike whether it be in the Court of Rome or out of Rome for when the Pope lay at Auignon in France for examples sake yet was the office of Protector also in vse And when Cardinall Caietane our late Protector was Legate in France and Polonia his office of Protectorship ceased not whensoeuer hee would deale in any matter c. and this is sufficent for this first point which seemeth to include both folly and audacitie In this story were first to be answered why apud nos is thus translated Here with vs But I wil leaue this to Grammer boies who know that this word apud doth import a place consequently in the very nature of the signification and as I thinke neuer vntill this day was this translation iudged faultie est apud me he is here with me or est apud illum hee is there with him and it cannot but argue a greater will in the Appendix-maker then power to finde a fault The rest of the story is as absurd for who did euer say that a Protector did leaue his office when he was out of Rome the priests words are that it did not stretch further then the Court of Rome which are true although the protector be in Polonia for although hee be there in person yet may hee deale by letters in the Court of Rome and at Rome and all this while although the man who hath authority be farre from Rome yet his authoritie in that kind stretcheth it selfe to deale no further then in the Court of Rome And put the case that the Pope should goe againe to Auignon and come no more at Rome this fellow will not denie that he remaineth still Bishop of Rome and that as Bishop of that Sea hee gouerneth the Church and consequently there must be the Court of Rome and not in Rome for that as I take it the Court is where the prince is and this way also are the words true which were vsed that the Protectors office stretched not it selfe any further then the Court of Rome wheresoeuer that Court is kept And this is sufficient for to shew the folly and audacitie of the Appendix-maker who would take vpon him to correct what it seemeth he vnderstood not In hoc Consistorio c. In this Consistory that is the College of Cardinals or the Popes Counsel saith Zechi de statu Illust D. Card. Num. 9. euery Prouince and congregation of regulars and kings haue their fathers gardians which are called Protectors who in the Consistorie doe propound the elections and other causes of the Prouince committed vnto them and answere to those who oppose against them And for the second sayth he about demurring vpon his Holines letters we iudge it to be of much more importance and far more perillous yea temerarious doctrine for if it be lawfull for any man as our brethren here auerre to demurre vpon his Holinesse letters with minde to giue a reasonable cause thereof afterwards what end will there be of strife what obedience what resignation of willes and iudgements to our Superiours commandements c. See how this ignorant companion vrgeth it as perillous and temerarius doctrine notwithstanding he was shewed in The hope of peace that it was most Catholike doctrine and according to the ordinances of holy Church and he was referred for his learning to the order of Pope Alexander the third Cap. Siquando de Rescriptis where the Pope writeth in this manner to the Bishop of Rauenna Si quando c. If at any time we direct any thing to your brotherhood which may seeme to exasperate your minde you ought not to be troubled and afterward hauing considered vpon the qualitie of that businesse for which you are written vnto either reuerently fulfill our commandement or signifie some reasonable cause by your letters why you cannot fulfill it for we will beare it patiently if you shall not doe that which hath been or shall be suggested vnto vs by euil insinuation There is in the same place another saying of the same Pope cited Cap. Cùm teneamur de prebendis dignit to the same effect and this poore fellow not being able to make any answere hereunto telleth his blind obedient a tale of obedience as though this Pope Alexander had exhorted men to disobedience when hee told them that they should giue him a cause by their letters why they did not or could not do as they were commanded by him In the eleuenth leafe for want of matter in the hope of peace he falleth into the Copies of discourses and according to the erronious vaine in which he was in the Apologie hee excepteth against that which is said by the Priests that authoritie is not an infallible rule of trueth in all who haue authoritie and out of that which is said that but one vpon earth is warranted from error and not he in all things And hereupon he inferreth thus how sayth he can our English people assure themselues but that this institution of the Archpriest was one of the things wherein he might erre By what Law Logicke or Diuinitie can this fellow shew that his Holines cannot vpon false information doe a greater matter then the confirmation of an Archpriest in the authoritie of an Archpriest It was woont to be no temerarious or perilous doctrine to affirme that a Pope could commit a sinne which is a greater matter then not to be well aduised in the institution of an Archpriest for the sinne groweth of frailtie in the man and euill aduise or information by which the Archpriest is instituted in his office may come from another in whome his Holinesse may repose a trust and be deceiued All the rest which followeth in this eleuenth lease is often answered in the priests bookes and lately more at large by M. Doctor Ely in his notes vpon the Apologie and by M. Collington in his iust defence c. and there is a reason giuen in the place quoted in the 11. leafe of that which is there brought out of the hope of peace And the fault or disgrace which this fellow would should light vpon his Holinesse concerning the institution of the Archpriest in that manner that it was the Priests haue alwayes layd vpon the informers who procured such dealing as was in a matter of so great moment neither haue the priests challenged the ordination at any time for a matter of plot as proceeding from his Holinesse but as it proceeded from the Iesuits who were known to
and no man of reason or learning euer taught the contrary howsoeuer any lawe made by prince should stand in force although hee were induced thereunto by false motiues and therefore is this comparison fasely made here and most ignorantly And no lesse false it is which is here affirmed that there was a diuision begun betweene Catholicke priests and Religious men as well for the matter of the pretended association as also about the slandercus Memoriall fent ouer by Robert Fisher for so soone as the priests perceiued that some did dislike of the association they gaue ouer the soliciting it here in England and this matter of the Memoriall came too late from England to Rome as is shewed in the reply to the 8. Chapter of the Apologie to be a case of this subordination but somewhat must be said to patch vp a broken matter and rather then faile the religious men shall now be brought in who were cleane out of the Card. Caietanes letter as now we haue it In the same 20. leafe this author sayth that he will end with one tricke more of theirs wherewith they end this booke that is that Fa. Garnet hauing written to them a letter exhorting to peace and telling them that he doubted not but they sought the glory of God and consequently would hearken to the meanes c. they now will needs take him at his word threape vpon him that he knoweth they seeke nothing but the glory of God in all these their actions and scandalous attempts Fa. Garnet say they knoweth wee doe seeke the glory of God and witnesseth so much in his letter dated on Midsommer day last past Loe here how substantially they prooue by F. Garnets testimonie that they doe seeke the glory of God euery child will laugh at this and so we need to say no more of it First it is false that Fa. Garnet is said to haue written vnto them for his letters were to certaine other prisoners to deale as it were betweene both parts Secondly hee proposed such meanes as hee himselfe best liked but were not indeede any meanes for peace Thirdly howsoeuer this fellow cauilleth or commenteth vpon the hope of peace there is nothing there cited but what F. Garnets letter will beare I know also sayth F. Garnet that those which complaine against vs doe desire Gods glorie but it is to be vnderstood according to the meaning of the Iesuits as it seemeth who alwayes doe meane what they list and euery childe may very well laugh at it and hee who taketh hold of any thing which proceedeth from them is as sure as he is of the wet Eele which he hath by the taile yet true it is that thus the Iesuite writ but what meaning hee had he shall expound himselfe for so hee will whatsoeuer his words are and so we need to say no more The Appendix maker hauing scurried a little ouer the hope of peace of which he would gladly haue bin discharged much sooner runneth ouer the booke which is dedicated to the Inquisition in which his labours there occurreth no new thing worth the noting In this he spendeth almost foure leaues the most part thereof is in gentle perswasions yet can hee not ouerpasse Ma. Charnocks going into England contrary to the sentence wherein he was charged vnder mortall sinne not to goe as he interpreteth the sentence he telleth moreouer how that Cardinall Burghese writ a letter vnto M. Charnocke while he was yet in France disswading and condemning that fact if he should doe it c. which the letter it selfe and the Apologie also fol. 156. conuinceth of an egregious falshood Afterward hee telleth his Reader that M. Charnocks reply was so irreuerent and malapert as any modest man that shall read it can but feele his eares burne in behalfe of so honorable and venerable a man as the good Cardinal is but there is not one of M. Charnocks reasons answered which doe iustifie his returne into England notwithstanding that sentence which was giuen in the letter of the two Cardinals Caietane and Burghesius neither is it the fashion for this fellow to answere the reasons otherwise then as olde heretickes were wont who when they had not what they could say against the Catholikes they would breake into railing and in the 24. this fellowe not knowing in what particular to take exceptions against the narration of the vsage of M. Do. Bishop and M. Charnocke at Rome he telleth his reader that they set it forth so tragically as any acte euer done by Nero Caligula or Dioclesian A good commendation for those who were the cause thereof nothing being there set forth but what was most true Lastly there is a little somewhat in the defence of F. Parsons of whom this authour cannot deserue too much but his actions haue ben too grosse in the managing of this matter to be now concealed or smothered vp God send him his grace that he may see his owne naughtinesse in time and saue his soule after so many desperate aduentures which also I heartily wish to them all who haue either maliciously or ignorantly run this wicked course against Catholike priests ⧠The Contents of the Chapters with the page wherein euery Chapter beginneth Chap. 1. HOw the Author of the Apologie playeth at All hid with his Reader and while he is couered vnder the name of vnited Priests he discouereth himselfe to be a Iesuite pag. 5. Chap. 2 A Table of some notorious falshoods and apparant shiftings which are contained in the Apologie pag. 8. Chap. 3 An answere to those calumniations which the Apologie-maker setteth out in a booke intituled Of certaine principall deceits falshoods and slanders pag. 18. Chap. 4 How the Author of this Apologie followeth that counsel which Achitophel gaue to Absalom 2. Reg. 16. that other seeing how he abused his Holinesse might the more desperately adhere vnto him pag. 39. Chap. 5 How the Apologie-maker by the same reason which he giueth for the publishing of his Apologie doth giue light to his Reader to conceiue the iust cause which the priests had to print their books pag. 55 Chap. 6 How this present controuersie about the abuse of this new Subordination is deduced from Iohn of Gaunt and other matters most impertinent thereunto Apol. cap. 1. pag 63. Chap. 7 How this Author of the Apologie while he would inueigh against dangerous and temerarious propositions engageth himselfe further then becommeth a Catholike Apol. cap. 2. pag. 105. Chap. 8 How this Author layeth his plot for the disgrace of Secular priests and draweth on his Reader with diuers idle stories Apol. cap. 3. pag. 142. Chap. 9 How this Author pursueth his impertinent discourses of troubles among the English in Flanders France Italy and Spaine Apol. cap. 4. pag. 147. Chap. 10 Howe the stirres in the English Colledge at Rome beganne the cause whereof this Apologie-maker doth seeke to colour and to lay it where it should seeme it was not Apol. cap. 5. pag. 151. Chap. 11. How this Author be stirreth himselfe to lay the fault of the scandalous diuision in Wisbich vpon those Priests who would not subiect themselues to that insolent Agencie of the Iesuits Apolog. cap. 6. pag. 153. Chap. 12 How this present controuersie is dissembled and fetched from a head in Flanders by the Apologie-maker Apol. cap. 7. pag. 158. Chap. 13 How the Authour of the Apologie to cloake the Iesuits their dealings concerning the institution of the new Subordination perswadeth his Reader that his holinesse was moued thereto by certaine letters which were long after written Apol. cap. 8. pag. 171. Chap. 14 How this Apologie-maker perswadeth his Reader that his Holinesse was mooued to imprison the two priests who went first to Rome by certaine letters which were written long after his resolution to imprison them and how he iuggleth about that which chanced vnto them in Rome Apo. cap. 9. pag. 228. Chap. 15 How this Apologie-maker shuffleth off the true cause of this present controuersie and layeth the blame therof vpon the Secular priests Apol. cap. 10. pag. 264. Chap. 16 How the two bookes against which the Apologie is written are slightly run ouer with a few cauils against them Apol. c. 11. pa. 300. Chap. 17 How this Author busieth himselfe to purge F. Parsons of his expulsion out of Baliol Colledge at Oxenford and other matters wherewith he is charged Apol. cap. 12. pag. 322. Chap. 18 How the Secular Priests appealing to Rome and going to his Holinesse for iustice against the vniust slanders of the Iesuits and their adherents are falsly and with great ignominie to the Sea Apostolicke compared by this Apologie maker to Alcymus and to Simon who went to Demetrius and Apollonius heathen persecuters of Gods people and his Priests Apol. cap. 13. pag. 331. A Reply to the Appendix of the Apologie pag. 341. FINIS