attributed by all Catholike writers and not the secoÌ„darie instrumental meritorious cause ascribed by vs to good workes is euident first by the very next immediate woords folowing in S. Bernard vpon the former Rom. â— Quos iustificauit sayth he non quos iustos inuenit hos magnificauit God hath magnifyed and exalted to his kingdome not those whom he found iust of themselues but whom he by his grace did make iust by which words S. Bernard doth inferre that all the merits of our good workes together with the reward promised to them do come originallie and principally from God and consequentlie both the one and the other are to be ascribed vnto him as vnto the chiefest cause though also by our voluntarie concurrance thervnto when we are moued by God we haue our interest therin and are trulie said to merit lyfe euerlasting which S. Bernard doth explicate most excellentlie a litle before in the same place his wordes are these hauing spoken first verie largly of good workes Bernard ibid. Verum haec sayth he cum certum sit diuino in nobiâ— actitarâ— spiritu Deâ— sunt munera quia verò cum nostrae voluntatis assensu nostra sunt mâ—rita Wheras it is certayne that these good workes by me before mentyoned are wrought in ys by the spirit of God they must needs be called the giftes of God And for that they are done also by the consent of our wil they are our merits Thus sayth he and then doth he prosecute the same with a large and learned discourse vpoÌ„ the words of S. Paul to Timothie where he sayth Bonum certaemen certaui c. I haue fought a good fight â— Tim. 4. I haue ended my course I haue kept my fayth and for the rest then is layd vp for me a crowne of Iustice which God the iust iudge shal restore vnto me at that day Vpon which wordes S. Bernard sayth thus If it be so that the verie wil of doing good in S. Paul wherof all merit doth depend was not his owne but receyued from God how doth he cal it a croune of Iustice which he assureth himselfe to be layd vp for him is it perhaps for that whatsoeuer is freelie promised it may be iustlie after the promise made required as due debt c. he saith further for that S. Paul beleeued the promiser he now confidentlie exacteth the promise which promise though it were of mercy yet now it is to be payd of iustice c. For it is iust that God should pay whatsoeuer he oweth and he oweth whatsoeuer he hath promised c. and of this iustice it pleased God to make Paul a partener Iustitiae Paulum Deus voluit habere consortem vt coronae faceret promeritorem Bern. pag. 1069. to the end he might make him also a deseruer of his crowne and in this he made him both partener of his iustice and deseruer of his crowne when he vouchsafed to make him his helper or coadiutor in doing good works wherunto his crowne is promised further he made him his coadiutor when he made him to consent to his holy wil and motion Lo heere how S. Bernard doth connect ioyne togeather the operation of God and cooperation of man in the matter of merit attributing to God the first and principal motion of grace mercy promise and inabling vs to worke and vnto man that he concurreth freely by cooperation with Gods instinct so as the reward of this worke which is the Kingdome of heauen yf we respect the first cause which is God it is mercy and yf we consider the secondary instrumental cause which is man the promise of God made vnto him it is called iustice and dew debt let vs heare S. Augustine in the same matter Aug. hom 14. lib 50. homiliarum 2. Tim. 4. and vpon the same words of the Apostle For the rest saith the Apostle there remayneth to me a crowne of iustice which God the iust iudge shal restore to me at the last day Behould he saith that God shal restore a crowne vnto him ergo he is his debter Aug. in Psal. â—â— And againe in another place vnde debitor accepit aliquid c. Whence is God become a debter hath he receyued any thing or doth he owe any thing to any man and yet behould Paul doth hold him for his debter saying God shal restore vnto me c. what shal he restore vnto thee Paul but that which he oweth whence doth he owe any thing vnto thee what hast thow giuen vnto him Truly God hath made himselfe a debter not by receyuing any thing but by promising so as yt may not be said vnto him restore that which thow hast receyued but pay that which thow hast promised Thus do wryte these holy Fathers shewing how God becometh debiter to the merits of our good works not by their owne nature but by his owne voluntary free promise and mercy yet deny they not the truth of this merit nor blaspheme yt as our foÌ„d K. doth saying that it is a proud presumption before God to put any opinion of merit to our works Pag. 19. but yow haue heard out of the Fathers how they do not only put opinion of merit in good works but do plainly affirme and teach yt and that it is dew debt supposing Gods promise made to reward them Wherof also it followeth that albeit the saying of S. Bernard be most true in the sense alleadged that our merits be the way to the Kingdome of heauen but not the cause speaking of the first and principal cause yet were those words not truly but frandulently translated by our K. that they are not the cause wherfore we shal obtayne the Kingdome as though they were no cause at all which is false and absurd for that noe man can deny them to be the instrumental meritorious causes of obtayning heauen seing God hath promised heauen as a reward vnto them and hauing promised is bound in iustice to preforme the same as now yow haue heard by the Fathers declared And so much of this matter for this place The fift beatitude which this blessing-maker bringeth is freedome from persecution The 5. blessing freedome from persecution and as he calleth them halcyon dayes when he sayth The litle barke of Christ Iesus before tossed with the waues and stormes of furious and bloudy presecution hath found now some repose and rest Pag. 20. About which blessing I would aske the K. certayne questions therby to come to the truth of the matter auoyd impostures and first I would aske him whether this freedome from persecution be common to all or to some only that is to protestants and then whether this be passiue or actiue in them that is whether they stand out free in them-selues or do suffer other men also to be free from persecutioÌ„ for yf it be not a common blessing to all but particular to themselues then can yt
and their elder brethren the Lutherans heare the matter set downe clearely by Flaccus Illyricus himself their cheefest Centuriator thus he saith Now I come to the doctrine of the new Papists so he calleth Syr Francis his fellowes that wil bring in any necessity of works whatsoeuer which is as pernicious as the old They say that the Apostle means to exclude good workes from iustification non simpliciter sed ratione debiti not simply but as due but only as meritorious and causes efficient whervpon these doctors or rather seducers do diuers wayes elude that proposition of S. Paule we are iustified by faith gratis without works each one according to his owne â—ead and as his priuate spirit suggesteth to him and most of them couet diligently to mingle works as a certayâ—e harmful leuen with iustification and the lambe of God c. And then agayne But the true sense of Paules words is that without all merit condition or necessity of our workes by only faith in Christ we are iustified before Christ and saued so as our saluation doth in no sort depend of our workes neyther be they any way necessary to saluation c. Scripture Luther and all doctors of sound Iudgment think thus Lo heer Syr Francis yow are called a new Papist by your elder brethren or rather God-Fathers for holding this opinion Yow are called a seducer for only excluding works as meritorious and causes efficient of saluation and not simpliciter simply and euery way Yow are called an eluder of the proposition of S. Paul interpreting it by your priuate spirit other wayes then he ment it and different from the sense of Martyn Luther and all docâ—ors of sound iudgment Yow are accused for coueting so diligently to mingle good woorks â—â— a certayne harmeful leuen with iustification and the lamb of God defend your self if yow can from these arrowes of your owne men and to the end yow may do it better and more properly to the purpose harkeÌ„ what the same wryter saith of yow and yours in the beginâ—ing of this very controuersy Some there are who drowsily weyghing the matter â—â—ink this to be the controuersy properly betwene vs and the Papists Flac. Illyr praef ad Ro. Pag. 636. whether good works iustifie or be the â—erit and cause efficient of iustice and life and not whether they be in any respect necessary to Saluation c. Lo Syr FraÌ„cis yow are one of these drowsy â—â—llowes that vnderstand not properly the coÌ„â—â—ouersy according to Illyricus his iudgment for â—ow say that works are in some respects neâ—essary to saluation to wit as necessary fruits and â—â—â—nesses and that Saluation cannot be without them though not as any cause meritorious or efficient of Iustice. And thus much for the controuersy it self which S. Francis vnderstandeth not But if I would stand vpon alleaging the infinite sentences of other protestants quite opposite and contradictory to that flattery of good workes which S r. Francis heer and in other places of his Wastword vseth for deluding the people I should neuer make an end for in this they are as contrary one to another as in any other point For first their grandfather Martyn Luther that was the founder of this opinion and layd it for the foundation of all his new ghospel Lutheran speches against góod vvorks ioyned vvith faith sayeth Caueamus à peccatis sed multò magis à legibuâ— operibus bonis Let vs take heed of sinne but much more of lawes and good works Luther serm de nouo testam siuè de missa And according to this doctrine his schollers in a certayne counsel say thus adeò non esse necessariâ— opera bona In colloq Altemb vid. Canis l. 1. de corrupt verb. Dei Cap. 10. vt etiam ad salutem incommodent sintâ— perniciosa Good woorks are so farre of from being necessary to saluatioÌ„ as that they ratheâ— hinder and are pernicious And agayne in thâ— same Ibid. Precari nos oportet vt in fide sine operibâ— omnibus bonis vsque in finem perseueremus we muâ—â— pray that we may perseuer in fayth withouâ— all good works vnto the end And finally to conclude S r. Francis heer 〈◊〉 as he may not escape Colloq Altemberq col 4 fol. 75. 76. let vs heare their concluâ—sion which is in these words After all this 〈◊〉 conclude with that worthy saying of Luther in his fiâ— Tome printed at VVittenberg If works be necessary saluation then saluation cannot be without works then we are not saued by only faith This conclusâ—on we see is playne contradictory to Syr Frauncis which holdeth works needful in some respect as before hath byn shewed which contradiction Luther himself vrgeth yet much more Luth. tom 1. propâ—sil 3. when he sayth Fides nisi sit sine vllis etiam minimis operibus non iustificat imò non est fides Faith if it be not without all good workes euen the least that may be it iustifieth not yea it is no faith So as when Syr Francis annecteth good works to his Protestant faith as a hand-mayd without which faith is no faith Luther on the contrary sayth that if this â—â—nd-mayd be there shee killeth the maistresse And so inough of this contradiction which was the first absurdity of this Caluinian shift to couer the nakednesse of their bare faith which Luther toyleth to discouer as fast and wil not haue her couered or as he sayth defiled with the â—ttenragges of any good works To the second point of this Caluinian shift â—hat works are necessary The second point of CaluiniaÌ„ imposture about only faith but yet must not â—elp or cooperat any thing at all to our saluaâ—â—on but only attend vpon fayth as a hand â—ayd so as faith only must saue but not faith â—lone albeit that which I said in the beginâ—â—ng of the idlenes of this deuise and matheâ—atical illusion be sufficient to ouerthrow it â—nd the reasons of Luther and his Lutherans 〈◊〉 euident against it yet may the vanity therof 〈◊〉 seene also by this that wheÌ„ a protestaÌ„t hath the faith that eyther Luther or Caluyn could teach him and as vehement and feruent as both of them togeather if he should lâ—ue naughtely he can not by Syr Francis doctâ—ine be saued for that faith only saueth nor Luther saith he hath the more faith for that how do these two stand togeather Agayne when we see theeues and murderers go to the gallowes as often is seene in England with as strong a faith as any minister or preacher can haue professing the the English faith and religion openly singing our Psalmes lustely and assuring themselues and the people that stand by that they are oâ— the elect and to go presently to heauen and that albeit their break fast of hanging bâ— sharp yet shal their supper be sweet with thâ— Lord in his glory which faith and assurance thâ— ministers standing by with the rest do
can the knight beare witnes whose name beginneth with a B and waâ— forced to witnesse against him I could alleadge also diuers other witnesses omni exceptione maiores as wel of his owne order as otherwise of his intemperate and odious speaches against the present state and such as manage the same for temporal matters complayning grieuouslie among the rest of the seruitude and great pouertie of the English clergie affyrming in particular that they payd the third penny of all that euer they had and fynally shewing himselfe as deepely discontent as any man could bee that lyueth in external shew of obedience And for all these and other such poynts I could name many particuâ—ars both of matter men tyme and place when and where they were spoken as also I could resolue the name of O. E. into his true sillables if it be true that his surname beginne with S. but I haue promised to spare him for this tyme and wil keep my promise And if it please him to goe forward in this controuersie taken in hand with christian modestie and conuenient tearmes of ciuilitie as men professing learning ought to do I shal be content to answer him in the same style attending to the matter and not to the man or his manners but if he delight in the other vayne style of scolding scurrilitie I meane to leaue him and deliuer him ouer into the hands of some which may chance tâ—ke him vp also in that kynd according to his deserts in the meane space the man before mentioned that is most iniuried by him in his malignitie of speach leeseth litle by his lewd detraction but gayneth rather exceedingly both in merit with God and credit with all good men and as for the tryal of their cause it will appeare sufficientlie by that which afterward cometh to be examined in these Encounters CERTAINE BRIEF NOTES AND OBSERVATIONS VPON SIR F. HAStinges Epistle to the Christian Reader THOVGH whatsoeuer S r. F. wryteth in this Epistle be handled afterward more at large in the seueral Encounters theÌ„selues that do ensue yet to let nothing passe wholy vnanswered and to discouer somewhat in this beginning the talent which the K. hath in wryting I haue thought best to set downe these fewe annotatioÌ„s coÌ„cerning the principal points though none indeed be principal or material of his said Epistle to the Christian Reader First of all he beginneth the very first paragraphe of his Epistle with such obscurity or deep mistery Epist. pag. 1. as I confesse I vnderstand him not for thus he sayth Hauing obserued gentle Reader from the words and wrytinges of the learned that it is a maxime A maâ—â—mâ— euil applied or rule in Philosophie Finis est primus in intentione the end aymed at is first setled in the intention of man and findinge this Romanist to boast and bragge much of his leaâ—ning it is not vnlike that like a conning Clarke whatsoeuer his learning be the end of this his worke was the first ground of his wryting Thus he wryteth and yf the Reader vnderstand his meaning and what he would coÌ„clude it is wel for I professe my ignorance therin only I know the Philosophers maxime to be this Aristoâ— that as the end of â—oing any thing is first in our intention so is it last in preformance and execution The later part our K. hath left out the former I know not why he hath brought in except perhaps his hidden conceyt should be that the last part of my Wardword which is the remission to the Lords of her Ma â—ies Counsel was the first thing intended by me and inducing me to wryte which yet is euidently seene to be false for that the K. Wachword and iniuryes offered therin to Catholikes was the motiue inforcing rather then inducing to that worke and to oppose my ward to so slaÌ„derous a watch so that heer S.F. his Philosophical Maxime is fondly applyed or not applyed at all and consequâ—ntly his brag of hauing obserued thesame from the word wrytings of the learned ys vayne seing how vnlearnedly he vseth it But this is easily pardoned in a Knight and so let vs go forward After thiâ— he taketh in hand the tytle of my book which is A teÌ„perate wardword c. saying a he proclaymeth temperance in his tytle Epist. ibid. and pursueth the aâ—te of rayling in the whole processe following and in the end of all he persuadeth ruine both to Church comon-wâ—lth c. For my rayling I remit me to the iudgment of the indifferent Reader who wâ—l distinguish betwene rayling and round answering or rigorous reiection of an importune aduâ—rsarâ— that multiplyeth calumniatious without grouÌ„d number or measure especially in that kind of bloudy sycophancy wherâ—n the watching libel was wrytteÌ„ though I do confesse as before hath byn signified that I was the more earnest and eager somtyme for that I did imagine the said byring libel not to haue proceeded from the knight but from some K. of another kind not from S.F.H. of so honorable a house and calling but from some Crane some Wâ—lkinson S F. Presbytery of 〈◊〉 minâ—â—â—ers at Cadbury some Sipthorpe yf I remeÌ„ber wel their il fauored names Doctors and Rabbyns of his puritanical presbytery at Cadbury but now that I see the knights humility to be so great as to dishonour himselfe with taking the name of this worke vpon him I shal endeauour to vse more patience also with him in my answere except he ouer straine it sometymes by the intemperance of his tongue against Catholykes and so much of this But for the second which he obiecteth that I seeke the ruyne both of Church and comon wealth by my exhortation to peace atonement and mitigation in religion which afterwards goeth in my remitter to the Lords of her Ma tâ—es Counsel their Honors and not S r. F. worship or wisdome must be iudges of this poynt and why an exhortation to peace and vnion should be accounted a cause of publyke ruyne I see no cause nor yet reason of state or religion therin except the knyght his puritanical camp do hate peace following therin that other Maxime that in troubled waters is best fishing Which coniecture is shrewdly confirmed by the attempt of their Puritane Captaine the Earle of Essex brought by puritanisme into suche calamitie who hauing byn stout against peace with forrayne Princes for diuers yeares The Earle of Eâ—sex pitifully seduced by the Puritans vnder pretence of home security had wrought such a troubled water vnder haÌ„d in the meane space as yf his streame had not byn troubled and turned vpon him before his tyme he might chaunce to haue inhooked the greatest fish of England And whether S r. F. were one of those anglers or no I cannot tel being so farre absent nor wil I accuse him though he being of the sermon-sect and exercising society which vnder that occasion and pretence layd their hookes to this troublesome and
posâ—tions some of them being driuen also to the hangâ—ng ward as wel as Catholykes by their brethren protestantes L. Martyn Marprelateâ— c. so as S. F. tale seemeth rather a râ—diculous iest then a serious narration But let vs go forward He cometh at length which perhaps he leueled at in his first wordes of this his epistle to censure my inteÌ„tion in pleading for toleratioÌ„ and especially for offering the vewe oâ— my book to the Lordes of her Ma â—â—e Counsel which offendeth him much and therfore he sayâ—h thus or me S F. Epist. Pag. 7. Notwithstandiâ—g all his fawning and crowching to the â—eâ—â—rable lor as in his â—emitter their wisdomes I doub not wil easily fynd out his subtyle Synoâ—s intentionâ— who sâ—ameth not with a brasen face to seek to bring in â—is brasen horse loaden wit armed calamityes for Englands ruine c. This whoâ—e matter is handled afterward both in the remitter it self and other places of the book where the K. besides this blast of brasen words hath no one argument in the world to reply or to prooue any calamity eyther armed or vnarmed to be likely to be brought in by this brasen horse as he wil needs tearme it of mittigatioÌ„ or toleration The imagined brasen horse nor answereth he any one letter or sillable to the many vtilityes and publike emoluments which there I shew to be pretended and intended therby nor doth he so much as go about to answere or remooue any one of the great hurts daungers damages and inconueniences which I declare in my first Encounter partly to haue byn receaued already partly dayly imminent by the course held of chaÌ„ge of religâ—on and rigorous maner of pursuing the same only the poore man sheweth to feare extreamly that yf any toleration of Catholike religion should be permitted then his Pandora as Irenaeus calleth heresy would fly or fal to the ground presently â—rem lib. 2. cap. 54 lib. 4 cap 2. Fear of toleration in the puritans Which feare of Sir Francis is notwithstanding most dishonorable to him and his sect and quite contrary to that which at the beginning they preached to the world affirming nothing to be more reasonable or coÌ„uenient then to suffer both religions to stand togeather as at this day in Germany France and other places where both sortes are found to be permitted for greater peace and concord of the common-wealthes And why then should our K. so much feare ruine therby to his religion in England except only for the causes before cyted Towards the end of his Epistle he hauing censured myne intention as before yow haue hard he setteth downe his owne very confidently in these words Being called as it were into the field by him Ibidem I haue aduentured vpon the height of his swelling pride and haue shaped him a plaine and sound answere to the material poyntes c. wherby I hope Christian Reader thow shalt fynd me cleared and free from the force and fury of his false imputations and byting blowes c. Heere for that he remitteth the matter to the Christian Reader I am very wel content to subscribe to the same remission who first of all must needes iudge for me condemne him in the very first words that he alleageth to wit that he was called into the field by me wheras his Watchword being the first chalenge that sounded the trompet of warre Manifest vntruthes impudently auoucâ—ed my answere but only a necessary ward thervnto as both the title subiect of my book declareth how can he so confidently tel so open and manifest an vntruth and withaâ—l remit the same to the iudgment of the Reader except he hold him without iudgment or conscience And heere I would aske how farre this is from impudency and yet according to the same sute do follow the rest that is to say of my swelling pride of his playne and sound answere shaped to all material poynts and that he is fully cleered from all imputations of falshood c. For yf my pride be no more swelling then his mishaped answere is sound and material I may thinke my selfe a very huÌ„ble man And yf in Westminster halle S. F. should be accused of treason or felony or other greiuous criminations as many Catholike Priests are vpon lesse occasion and should cleere and free himselfe no better therin then here he doth in this reply from imputations of falshood he might quickely expect both iudgment and execution and consequently himselfe be driueÌ„ to that hanging ward which heere he threateneth to driue vs vnto And lastly wheras he wryteth for the coÌ„clusion of his Epistle that this answere of his being ended and published which I held my selfe bound quoth he in duty to do for thy satisfyieng gentle Reader and my owne câ—edit his ful resoâ—utioÌ„ is not to toyle any more by contending with such rayling and wrangling spirites c. This resolution I say of the K. though it were neuer so ful and firme at that tyme as being weary perhaps of so difficult a worke yet I doubt that it wil be brokeÌ„ and he inforced to toyle yet further in the matter yf he wil satisfie the reader or mayntayne his owne credit which poore credit he wil find I beleeue so much crased in steed of amended by this his reply as yf it were somwhat shaken before by the Watchword it wil be quite ouerthrowne now by this his owne Wastword and the answere thervnto and yf before it were battered or beaten it wil now be vtterly broken and shiuered in peeces seing that much more falshood deceypt and other infirmityes are found discouered in this his supply then were in the first assault and yf he were troubled before in defending he wil be toyled now The proof wherof I leaue to the trial and combat following wherunto our K. sayth that he hasteneth like a corragious defendant taking his farewel of the Reader in these words To our God I commend thee gentle reader and wil now hasten to ioyne the combat with this proud Romanist The K. commendation and farevvel tâ—uching his Encounters seuerally Thus he saith and so endeth his Epistle And yf when he nameth our good God he meane the common God of heauen and earth and of other Christians his haste to the combat may chance to be more then his good speed seing that this God is God of truth and not of shifts and falshoods which are heare discouered and consequently is like to proue no great good God to S. F. cause that standeth theron as the sequeal of this combate yf I be not deceyued wil declare wherunto I also to meet the K. do make my repaire with no lesse haste though I hope with better speed then S â— F. Hastings OTHER OBSERVATIONS VPON THE PREFACE OF O. E. TO THE REAder conteyning a ful answere therunto AS I haue made before some annotations and obseruations vpon Sir FraÌ„cis Hastings Epistle to
in lyfe by this new religion but all worse And Luther himselfe vpon his owne tryal Luth Poâ—â—iâ— sup Dom. â— Aduent both wrote and printed Mundus fit quotidiè deterior sunt nunc homines magis immodesti indisciplinati multoque deteriores quam fuerunt in Papatu The world is daylie worse men are now more immodest more indisciplinable and a great deale worse then they weare vnder the Popedome And Aurifaber Aurif de dictis Luth. Pag. 623. one of his cheife schollers testifieth these woords of him that he was often wont to say Post reuelatum Euangelium virtus est occâ—sa iustitia oppressa temperantia ligata deuotio pulsa nequitia facta quotidiana Since the ghospel was reuealed vertue of lyfe is slayne iustice is oppressed temperance is bound deuotion is put to flight wickednes is daylie increased Thus said these men in the very primitiue Churche of their new ghospel and what our men especially in England may say now of this argument I leaue it to common experience to iudge And Syr F. least he should goe to farre in this matter of good workes saith Tvvo cautions of the K. against good vvorkes we must take heed to auoid two extremities The first proud presumption before God that we put no opinion of merit in our workes secondlie that before men we auoid all hypocritical ostentation Lo heere good reader two great peryls of good workes layd before thee but no vtilityes remeÌ„bred Trulie I had thought when I heard him talke of two extremityes that as the one was to attribute to much to good workes so the other should haue byn to attribute to litle but both are cautioÌ„s against good workes and therfore I maruaile how they may be called extremities Absurdity seing they may be both in one and the selfe same man to wit presumpsion hipocrisy which yet is against the nature of extremes yf S. F. remember wel his Sophistry learned in Oxford But marke I pray yow the difference of spirit and Doctrine in these men from holy Scripture which euery where encorageth vs exceedingly with the merit and reward of good workes Math. 5. Rom 2. 7. Cor 9. Coloss 1 1. Timoth 2. Iam 2. 2. Pet. 1. 2. Pet. 1. as also that they should shine before men wheras our ProtestaÌ„ts are careful to warne vs that they are perilons things to engender presumption and ostentation Wher-vnto their Father Luther addeth further that they are also pernicious to saluatioÌ„ which yf yow ponder wel is but a cold exhortation to the exercise of good workes Luth. â—om 2. â—ol 322 rom 5 in Gal cap. 4. fol. 382.400 for that yf not only they haue no merite but are perilous also for presumption and hypocrisie yea pernicious sometymes to saluation and that on the other syde our corrupt nature sensualitie flveth them and swayeth to the contrarie of her owne inward instinct who wil leese his pleasure to labour in them and consequently it is no maruaile though these fruits grow so thinly vpon protestants trees as their neighbors I weene wil beare them witnesse in England And as for Syr F. himselfe notwithstanding his protestatioÌ„ afterward that he would be loath to yeild to any Papist whatsoeuer in this poynt of good workes seing it is a peculiar blessing of his people as yow see yet I do not heare nor vnderstand that this blessing doth so abound in him for the practise Syr F. not so famous for good vvorkes as he vvould seeme as that his tenants and neighbours wil be his witnesses thervnto especiallie if the common fame be true of certayne things which heere I wil not name for christian modestie sake for respect eyther of himselfe or his familie or of both though he in his owne person litle sheweth to deserue that respect not hauing held the same with others of greater moment yea princes themselues but I shal deale more modestlie with him and let him goe free from further â—ouch at this tyme but for the matter it selfe concerning him and his in general for good lyfe and workes excepting in particuler those that may be excepted I may coÌ„clude as S. Augustine did a litle before about the Churche that as it is most insolent madnesse to dispute against that which the whole Churche doth practâ—se so to auouch that of Protestants liues and good works wherof all countryes and nations do see and proue the contrarie and their owne authors also do coÌ„fesse as hath byn shewed is litle lesse madnesse And with this I might end this poore protestant blessing of good works especially seeing that after againe I am to treat of the same subiect but that our knight wil needs alleadge S. Bernard for his former caution against the merit of good workes in these words Cap. 15. S. Bernard abused Bona opera sunt via regni non causa regnandi which he according to his fashion fraudulentlie expoundeth thus good works are the way wherein we must walke to the kingdome of heauen but not the cause wherfore we shal obtayne that kingdome c. Wherein first yow must note that he vseth heere also his foresaid old shifte not to quote the place or book where we may fynd this in S. Bernard least he should be taken tripping as a litle before about the other two Fathers S. Hierome S. Augustine yet hauing sought much in S. Bernard at length we fynd the place in the verie end of an excellent treatise he wrote Catholike doctrine about merites of good vvorkes De gratia libero arbitrio shewing therin how Gods grace doth concurre with mans freewil in all meritorious workes by stirring vp mans wil to worke with promise of reward and strengthening him to the performance therof by the assistaÌ„ce of his diuyne grace in respect wherof to wit of the free promise made by God to reward our good workes wherto he was not bound and of the preuenting and assisting vs by his holie grace to the working of the same our merites are to be attributed vnto him as to the first and chiefe efficient cause and not to our selues though our concurrance be necessarie thervnto also and in this sense S. Bernard in the place by our knight aleadged hauing spoken much of the merits of good workeâ— wrought in Christ and by the force of his grace he concludeth thus Merita nostra spâ— quaedam sunt seminaria Bernar. traâ—â— de gratia libero arbitrio ad finem charitatis incentiuae occultae praedestinationis indicia futurae felicitatis praesagia via regninon causa regnandi Our merites are certayne seedes of hope inkindlers of charitie signes of secret predestination foresages or tokens of our felicitie to come the way to the kingdome of heauen but not the cause of our raigning Thus sayth he and that he meaneth heere by the cause of our raigning the principal efficient cause and author which titles are proper only to God and so
Henry the eyght his dayes a Catholyke man was so put to death being made odious first for the title of Supremacy and then so bayted in a beares skinne and that this was done by certayne vehement heretykes at that tyme but whether by publike authoritie or by particular fury he could not tel but sure he was that the fame therof is fresh yet in Louth among all men as easely may be learned I found also an other gentleman of good worship who tould me that he heard S Edward Carew brother to the now L. Chamberlayne talk of an other such like fact practised by certayne nobles or gentlemen for their disport vpon a Catholyke man in this Q. dayes bayting him with their Spaniels and whether this be true or no yt may be easely tryed the partie yet being a liue but by this it appeareth that they which caused that picture to be paynted in Rome might haue more ground for yt then euery man at the first sight knoweth and yf they had byn misinformed so farre of from England as Fox confesseth he was in diuers things in England yt self it had byn rashnes in them I grant to put it eyther in print or wryting But this litle releeueth S.F. his cause who is accused to haue set downe and printed things that him-self did know and must needs know to be false when he printed them which is error not of ignorance but of obstinacie and playn lying And this being the true state of our question I come now to the fryars whom our K t. seeketh to disgrace with this note in his margeÌ„t Fryars braue lyars but for brauery it agreeth better to gilten spurres then to gray hoods and as for lying we shal now examine the matter wherin the reader shal fynd our K t. to haue vsed a far worse and more dishonorable shift theÌ„ the former that being but a sleight this a playne imposture abusing the Author Walsingham by him alleadged quite coÌ„trarie to his owne sense dryft and meaning as now we shal declare And first I do grant that the historiographer Thomas Walsingham lyuing almost 200. yeares agone or more wryteth in effect as S t. F. alleageth that it was a common saying in K. Richard the 2. his tyme that fryars were lyars but what fryars were these trow yow for herein lyeth the whole matter which the K â— very craftely concealeth and yet might he imagyn easely that it would be espied by his aduersarie for that WalsinghaÌ„ being a Catholyke and religious man cannot be thought to haue condemned all fryars in general who then were those fryars by him condemned surely he sheweth yt euidently that they were more of S.F. humour Fryars corrupted by vvickclif in K. Rich the â— his tyme. then of S. Francis holinesse for they were such begging fryars as Wicklif newly sprong vp had corrupted with his pestilent heresie and had set against other religious orders that had possessions for that was Wâ—ckclifs first cunning wickednes to set beggâ—ng fryars against monkes and such as had riches to make these monkss more odious to the people these fryars gaue themselues by Wickclifs good instructions to inuent infinit lyes of them wherby they made not so much their aduersaries as themselues in famous for lying and Thomas Walsingham beinge one of the sayd Monkes of S. Albans monasterie no maruayle though he complayned of them Behold heere the state of the question and the honest dealing of S. F. which point that yow may the better vnderstand yow must know that the sayd Thomas Walsingham doth describe the most barbarous rebellion of the common people vnder wat Tyler and Iack straw VVat Tyler Iack Stravveâ— rebellioÌ„ anno 1â—â—1 and others in the 4. yeare of K. Richard the 2. in which they spoyled London took the King beheaded the Archbishop of Canterbury and the L. Treasurer and meant to haue slayn all the Bishops and other Ecclesiastical and religious men of possessions within England reseruing only the begging fryars And to the end we may vnderstand that all this proceeded of Wâ—ckcliffes doctrine as the lyke did in Germany in the yeare * Vide sup Enc. 1 cap. â— 1525. of Luthers walsingham in the beginning of this lamentable storie VValsing an 1381. sub Rich 2. Pag. 256. wryteth thus in latyn Anno Dominicae incarnationis 1381. c. In the yeare of the incarnation of our Sauiour a thousand three hundred fourescore and one and in the 4. yeare of the raigne of K. Ricâ—ard the sâ—cond after the conquest That true Hypocryte the Angel of Sathan the forerunner of Antichrist vnworthy to be named I meane the heretyke Iohn VVickclif or rather weeckebeleefe continuing his dreames seemed that he would now drinke vp the ryuer of Iordan and cast all good Christians into the dungeon of Hel c. Thus beginneth Walsingham this yeare and presently entereth into the pitiful narration of the former tragedy of the popular rebellion of wat Tyler c. hauing ended all beginneth to search the causes why God did suffer such exceeding calamities as these to happen vpon the land and sayth that some did lay the fault vpon the Bishops and Prelates of the Churche for that they had not looked better Nobility and gentry corrupted by VVickclifs Doctrine and more diligently to stop and punish Wickclifs heresie at the beginning Cum nouissent indignè agere filios suos Ioannem VVickclif â—ius sequaces dagmatizando peruâ—rsam damnatam doctrinam c. Wheras they knew diuers of their Children as Iohn Wickcliffe and his followers to liue vnworthilie to set abroad peruerse and damned doctrine c. Others he sayth did attribute this calamitie to the sinnes of the gentry and nobilitie Quia maiores penè Prouinciarum eorum se quebantur errorem For that the principal almost in euery shire did follow these mennes errors agayne Quia in Deum erant fictae fidei nam quidam illorum credebant nullum esse Deum nihil esse sacramentuÌ„ Altaris nullam post mortem resurrectionem c. And for that they were of a fayned fayth towards God some of them beleeuing no God at all and that the Sacrament of the Altar was nothing and that there was no resurrection after death but that man endeth as doth a beast c. Behold the yssue presentlie vpon heretical doctrine what effect it brought foorth in the nobilitie But what brought it forth any better fruite in the common people The coÌ„mons corrupted No for that their acts do shew in this barbarous rebellion wherin they made profession to slea euery one that was learned VValsing Ibid. Pag. 2â—1 or bare a pen and ynkhorne at his gyrdle And besyds Walsingham sayth viuebant rixando litigando fraudes falsitates iugiter meditando libidini dediti adulteijs maculati c. Et super haec omnia in sidei articulis plurimi claudicabaut They liued in brawling and contention deuising falshood and
mouth then of election deliberation Claud. de Sainctes in resp ad Apol. Beze And to this colloquie for the Protestants came 12. ministers wherof 8. or 9. were Apostata Fryars as the sayd Claudius that was present and Surius do write Sur. in hist. anno 1561. and testifie wherof the chiefe and head of those that came from Geneua was Beza Theod. Beza Peter Martyr and other Ministers but of the other that came froÌ„ Germany the principal was Peter Martyr who disagreing from Beza almost in euerie one point to be disputed on especially about the Eucharist and baptisme for that Peter was a playne Swinglian and no Caluenist no one thing could be thorowly coÌ„cluded betweene them which was no smal help to the Catholykes in that terrible tyme who notwithstanding lost not their courages but stood to it and took their places as superiors and Iudges of heretykes especiallie the Bishops and other Prelates next to the King and other Princes and made the ministers that would haue thrust themselues in also to stand a loof with this reproch as Sanctius sayth Apoc. 22. foris autem canes and yt was no litle mortification to their high stomachs to heare those words and to be so contemptuouslie vsed who came into France to that meeting most proud magnificentlie prouided and more lyke warlyke triumphers Resp. ad Apol. Beza then Apostolycal teachers as the same author describeth yt in a book dedicated to Beza himself And first he sheweth how and in whose Coches The pompe and dissolution of the Caluinian ministers going to poi sie horslytters and other such furniture they were brought into Fraunce how sumptuouslie feasted entertayned vpon the way with concourse and meetings of noble men but especiallie of noble womeÌ„ who receyued cherished and banketted them most sumptuously with some wherof he sheweth that Bezas owne compagnions accused him to haue byn ouer familiar to haue had sometyme fowre houres conference in great secresy to wit he and shee in a Chamber alone and moreouer he sheweth that Beza his creditors whome he had deceyued at his first flying out of France were now vpon his back agayne and called vpon him hotly for their money but in vayne for they had both fauour of great Princes and good Hargubushes also to answere for them After this he sheweth that passing through France with an army following them when they came to Poysie they were lodged all in a monasterie where there was such wonderful prouision of delicate bedding furniture of chambers and good cheare made for them by those of their faction as yf they had byn Princes of the blood royal of France and that whensoeuer they went thence to the assembly so many chaynes of gold so many Captaynes noble men went before them for their honour as was maruelous and ridiculous but much more when they returned home againe froÌ„ the assembly they had procured that each of them should haue some great man and gouernor of some place or Prouince ready to leane vpon VVonderful delicatenesse of â—postolical Ministers and to lead them by the arme to their coaches or horselitters as though they had byn verie wearie which earnest disputing for the Ghospel But let vs heare that most learned man Bishop Sanctius his owne words that was present and sawe yt and obiecteth the same to Beza himselfe as principal actor at that tyme. Sainct in resp ad Apol. Bezâ—a Do yow remeÌ„ber sayth he when twelue of yow ministers were caried from S. GermaÌ„s towne by Paris to Poysie in noblemens coches and horselitters couered with silk accompagnied with great troupes of Souldiors going not as Apostolical teachers but Martial Ministers at what tyme euery one of yow had eyther some great man and Gouernor of Prouinces at your sides when yow went out of the Monastery vpon whose arme yow must leane lyke delicate virgins or noble women great with child and then going into the Inne of the signe of the Angeâ— yow were richlie banqueted all in siluer and gold plate good exquisite wynes pleasant Musick and great concourse of nobles to coÌ„gratulate yow the victorie against Catholykes and then your bankets ended your fashion was yf yow remember to get yow to coche agayne and to runne vp and downe woods and feildes for recreation souÌ„ding out your Geneua psalmes and other songs to refresh your spirits Oh what a sight was it to see 8. or 9. of your Company that were poore Monks and Fryars a litle before VVanton Monks and Pryars made nevv Gospellers and most of them of the poorest begging orders who had scarse dry bread at home to feed on and were commonly the refuses and worsser sort of their Monasteries now to be so pampered in silke apparel and with delicate fare and to haue great part of the nobilitie of France to wayt vpon them and to lead them vp downe leaning vpon their armes and shoulders as if they had byn Mayden Queenes or great noble women and no lesse delicately then yow Beza at home in Geneua lead vp and downe your Candida And this was the preface or proeme of the new reformation which these Apostolical men were to make in France Thus farre wryteth the learned Bishop Sanctius And surely the pitiful Tragedies that folowed presently vpon this proheeme before these fellowes left France are incredible yet much therof may be seene in Belforest Surius and others in their histories of the yeare 1562. to which I do remit the reader and only for our purpose of disputation I say The good vvhich came of the Colloquie of Poysie that albeit any great euent could not be expected of this meeting for matters of religion in such tymes of garboyles and with such men yet this good came to the Catholyke cause therby that yt was easely perceyued by discreet men what difference there was betweene the teachers of the one the other syde both in lyfe and substance of doctrine For as for lyfe and manners diuers of their owne syde were so scandalized with these twelue Champions behauiour as they neuer after liked their sect but returned by litle and litle to Catholyke Religion agayne And as for substance of doctrine this at the least was seene of all that the Catholykes agreed in one and shewed their lyke agreement in and by all former ages But the new ministers could not agree fully as hath byn sayd in any one point Dissention of the ministers of Poysie For about the Eucharist Peter martyr following Swinglius held yt for a figure and trope only and the bread but a bare signe But Beza following Caluyn had a new deuise that yt was the verie true real and natural body of Christ but yet spiritually and with this word spiritually he cutteth of all agayne that he had yeilded before and yet would he not agree in any â—ase that yt was a signe only with the Swinglians The lyke controuersie was among them
shewed the greatest gaule against him yet coÌ„fessing the helps of nature that were in him to vse his owne words he addeth Fox act and mon. pag. 1â—6 col 2. n. 4. Besydes this sayth he he was of a chast and strickt lyfe yf the histories be true Mark Iohn Fox his exception if the histories be true why should he cal in doubt auncient histories more in this point then in others But yow must vnderstand that this Fox hauing a special spite against this blessed man being desirous by all meanes possible to disgrace him and his actions in his false lying martyrologe and finding no authors in the world before Luthers heresy to serue his purpose or to speak or wryte euil of him but all rather highly in his commendation what course taketh the miseriable man think yow truly a most desperate which is to vse these authors against themselues and against both their owne sayings and meanings and so patcheth he vp as it were out of them a long treatese and narration of aboue 40. pages of paper against S. Tho. pretending to take it out of the foresaid authors but yet spicing it with so many â—fs ands Fox his egregiouâ— falâ—e dealing against S. Thomas adioyning so many glosses parentheses notes obseruations interpretations commentaries and censures of his owne both in the text and margent as he maketh all those wryters to tel a quite contrary story to that they purposed and for which they wrote their books in such sort as if a man should set out the byble or new Testament it self with such corruption and peruersion it would more disgrace Christian religion for whose confirmation it was wrytten theÌ„ any other wicked book whatsoeuer yea then the Turks Alcaron it self And this is the dealing of Iohn Fox in cyting and corrupting authors as after shal appeare more particularly But Sir Francis taketh another course which is to tel his tale at his pleasure without cyting any testimony or author at all wherof I take the reason to be that which Iohn Fox telleth vs in these words plainly Iohn Fox discrediteth all ould vvryters Pag. 204. col 1. n. 4. Scarse any testimony is to be taken of that age being all blynded and corrupted with superstition Thus he saith and this is the cause why Sir F. alleageth no author and Fox forceth them to speake as he would haue them But I would aske Iohn Fox againe if no wryter of the age it self wherin S. Tho. liued be to be credited about his affaires how shal we beleeue wryters of later ages that must needs take it from the former if they write with foundation not deuise matter of themselues Againe I would aske whether it be probable that so great a king as K. Henry the second was could get no man to wryte the Story indifferently for him in his age How likely a fiction is this of Fox And this may be sufficient for the first point for seing all the foresaid wryters and their woorks are ful of high prayses of S. Thom. for his sanctity and perfection of lyfe and for that cause are specialy discredited heere by Iohn Fox it shal be sufficient to remit the reader in this behalf to thesaid volumes and wrytings before mentioned For the second which is his cause with the king whether his resisting as Primate of England for liberty to the English Churche were treason to the K. or no VVhether S. Thom. vvas a traitor is easy to be iudged by him that is not passionate and wil without flattery of temporal Princes consider indifferently the dignity preheminence duty and obligation of Ecclesiastical gouernours in this behalf for defence of their spiritual iurisdiction To which purpose the Warder said as followeth If in euery contention or dissention that a bishop VVard p. 22. priest or other spiritual subiect or Ecclesiastical Prelate may haue with his temporal prince That all spiritual men resisting temporal magistrats in Ecclesiastical matters are not traytors Marc. 18. the subiect shal presently be condemned of treason according to this seruile ceÌ„sure of our knight who for flattering princes doth make them absolute lords both of body and soule then Iohn Baptist also must be accompted a traitor that dealt so peremptorily with his king Herod his liege lord in temporal affaires Or yf yow wil haue examples of christian princes S. Ambrose must be a traytor first for resisting openly his â—ord and King Theod. lib 4. ca. 6. lib. 9. cap. 17 deinceps Valentinian the yonger and then for handling so hardly the elder Theodâ—sius in Miliayn as he shut him out of the Churche and made him go home againe with shame and do pennaÌ„ce Zozomenus lib. 8 fere pet totum S. Hilarius also and S. Athanasius shal be traytors for their contentions with Constantius their lawful Emperor and temporal lord who banished them from their bishopricks and the former of the two wrote two vehemeÌ„t books and inuectiues against thesaid Emperor and yet no man euer accompted him a traytor for thesame but rather a great Saynt for his christian liberty and constancy S. Chrysostome in like maner shal be condemned for a great traytor who had greater contentions with his temporal lords Arcadius and Honorius christian Emperors Socrat. lib. 6. cap. 16. and with their wiues Theodosia and Eudoxia then euer S. Thomas had with K. Henry the second Zozom lib. 8 cap. 17. for he preached against them publikely with great vehemency and thundered out excommunication against them Niceph. li. 14. cap. 43. and was twice banished and dryuen out of his bishoprick by their disfauours and died in exile And yet was he neuer called or accompted a traytor but a singular holy man and Theodosius the yonger sonne of Arcadius brought his body with great solemnity honor and reuerence into Constantinople and wept most bitterly for the synnes of his parents in persecuting so blessed a man as the Story saith made prayer to him now dead for pardon of his fathers synnes as did also often both our K. Henry the second himself and his sonne for the offence of his father Math. Parisien in vit Henr. who had ben some cause of the death of this iust man his pastor and spiritual father Thus wrote the Warder then and what replyeth now our knight or his minister to all this yow shal heare the knight in his owne woords VVho saith he but such a one as hath sold himself to all impudency and shamelesse gaynsaying the truth Pag. 54. would seek to couer Beckets rebellion by the facts of S. Iohn Baptist Ambrose Hilary Athanasius and Chrysostome which haue as much agreement with the cause of Becket as hath light with darknesse good with euil sweet with sower Heer yow se the knight in a great heat but his minister O. E. answereth somwhat more temperately saying only that These examples fit not Thomas Beckeâ—s cause Wel then of two
poynts contayned in this matter the one we haue gotten that in some cases spiritual prelates though subiects in temporalityes may reprehend and resist yea chasten also by Ecclesiastical punishment their liege lords and temporal princes without being traytors for the same The second whether the examples be like we are to examine a litle in this place And first I would aske our minister that denyeth the fitnes of the examples The comparison of S. Thom vvith S. Ambrose Hillary and other fathers as also his master that chafeth at them what and where about were the foresayd Saints contentions with their temporal Princes were they not for the defence of the lawes of Christ and his Churche did not S. Iohn Baptist withstand Herod his temporal Lord to his face for breaking the lawes of wedlock and was not the strife of S. Ambrose with Valentinian his Emperour first for that he would not deliuer vp a Catholike Churche to the vse of Arrians as he and his mother had commaunded and secondly for that he would not giue vp the treasure and vessels of his Churche into the Emperors owne hands as he required Heare his owne testimony thereof S. Ambr. in orat in AuxoÌ„ de Basilicia traden Cum esset proposituÌ„ saith hee vt ecclesiae vasa iam traderemus c. when it was proposed vnto vs in the Emperours name that wee should deliuer him the vessel of our churche I gaue this answere If any thing of my owne were demaunded eyther land howse gold or siluer I would easely yeild vnto him any thing that were belonging vnto mee But from the Churche of God I told him that I could take nothing for that I had receyued it not to deliuer but to keep And that with this I had respect also of the Emperours saluation For that it was neyther expedient for mee to giue nor for him to receyue Accipiat ergo vocem liberi sacerdotis c. Let his Maiestie then receyue the word of a free priest if he wil haue care of his owne saluation let him cease to offer iniury to Christ. Lo here the answeare of an ecclesiastical Prelate but a temporal subiect to his highest Prince doth not this seeme to bee speach of some Catholyke Bishop to a Protestant Prince that would inuade Churche goods possessions against which poynt S. Ambrose was so resolute to stand as he sayth in the same place that yf sorce were vsed towards him his flesh might bee troubled but not his mynd and that he was readie yf the Emperour would vse his kingly authority in offring violence to stuffer that which belonged to a good Priest to beare And what doth this differ now from the cause of S. Tho. of Canterbury who stood vpon defence of his Ecclesiastical iurisdictioÌ„ against K. Henry his temporal Prince that vsurped the same Heare the words of S. Thomas himself vsed to K. Henry in a CouÌ„cel at Chynon in FraÌ„ce as D. Houeden sets them downe Rog. Houe in vit Henr. 2. pag. 285. Non deberetis Episcopis praecipere absoluere aliquem vel excommunicare trahere Clericos ad saecularia examina iudicare de decimis de ecclesits interdicere Episcopis ne tractent de â—ransgressione fidei vel Iuramenti c. Yow ought not to take vpon yow to commaund Bishops to absolue or excomunicate any man neyther to draw cleargie men to the examinatioÌ„s of seculars neyther to iudge of tythes or of churches or to forbid Bishopâ— to treat of transgressioÌ„s against faith or against oathes broaken or the like c. Doe not wee seme to heare in this place the voice of S. Ihon Baptist to his K. Herod It is not lawful for the to haue the wyfe of thy brother S. Marc. 1â— Or is not this agreable to the speach of S. Ambrose to Valentinian that he could not force him to deliuer any churche or holy vessels thereof and that he would dy in that quarrel against him But let vs heare an other controuersy of his with another Emperour more deuout religious then the former The contention of S. Ambrose vvith Theodosius the Emperor to wit Theodosius the great in Millain for that he would not do publike pennance prescribed by this holy B. to him for the excesse in punishing those of Thessalonica and had not this beene rebellioÌ„ and treason by Protestants law for a priest to driue his king and Emperour that by their diuinity was head of their churche to publike penance and to go out of his Churche as S. Ambose did compel Theodosius to go out of the churche of Millan But let vs go forward and see the rest of examples before touched Pallad in vit Chrysost. was not the contention of S. Chrisostome with Arcadius and Honorius his Princes Emperours and with their wyues when he kept some of them by force out of his churche about ecclesiastical liberty and iurisdiction also And that also of S. Athanasius Hilarius against Constantius their Emperour and supreme head also according to the Protestants opinion in spiritual matters for that he fauored Arrians deposed Catholike Bishops and made himself vmpyre in ecclesiastical affayres as Protestants Princes doe now a dayes Did S. Tho. Primate of England say or write more to K. Henry at any tyme then S. Gregorie Nazianzen a particular Archbishop sayd vnto his Emperour that was present and angry with him Nazian orat ad Ciues Imper. â—rasceÌ„tem Vos quoque potestati meae meisque subsellijs lex Christi subiecit scio se esse ouem mei gregis sacri gregis sacram ouem Yow also o Emperour the law of Christ hath made subiect vnto my power and to my tribunal I know thee to bee a sheep of my flock a sacred sheep of a holy flock If Nazianzene had sayd this to an English King or should doe at this day how would our Protestants Prince-parasytes cry out and say that he were a proud Prelate as they say of S. Thomas The cheif and onelie contention of king Henry with the Archbishop as before in part you haue heard was about ecclesiastical iurisdiction as the articles set downe by all wryters doe testify The articles vpon vvhich S. Tho. disagreed vvith the king as namely that no Bishop might appeale to the Sea Apostolike without licence of the king that no seruant or tenant holding of the king might be excommunicated without his licence that no Bishop should bee able to punish any man for periury or breaking his faith that all cleargie men might bee forced to secular iudgments as all controuersyes also pertâ—yning to tythes and other like cases And now yf these controuersyes should haue fallen out as in part they did betweene the auncient christian Emperours and the holy Bishops before named would they not think you haue stood in them with no lesse feruour then S. Thomas did But now let vs heare and examine how Syr F. doth proue this holy Archbishop to bee a
traytor Thus he writeth of the beginning of the controuersy There was as authors doe affirme in that time of Henrie the second Pag 56. more then a hundred murthers besydes other felonyes proued vpon the cleargie which when the king would haue punished according to the lawes of the land A fâ—lse and slâ—undâ—rous beginning of the 〈…〉 Becket opposed himself and beardeth the king in this so iust an action vnder title of standing for the libertyes of the Churche from this strauÌ„ge ground these proceedings ensued In which words of the knight there is to bee noted first that where he saith authors doe affirmè that more then a hundred murders besides other â—ellonies were proued vpon the cleargie no other author is found to mention any such thing but onelie Nubergensis who yet doth not say that they were proued vpon the clergie but his words are Nuberg hist. Angl. l. 2 16. that it was said to haue byn tould the king at a certaine time that aboue a hundred murders had byn committed within the kingdome of England since his raigne by Cleargie men In which woords as you see NubergeÌ„sis doth not say that it was true or that it was proued as our knight doth and secondly he speaketh of the whole tyme of king Henries raigne vntil this contention which was some 14. or 15. yeares and thirdly the falling out of the Archbishop with the king was not for that he would not haue these clergie men punished if they had offended as wickedly this knight giueth to vnderstand saying presently after This proud prelate durst protect fellons and murderers against the king and iustice of the lanâ— but the controuersy was only about the maner of punishing those that did offend and by what iudges and iurisdiction they should be punished to wit whether by ecclesiastical or temporal power for that the Archbishop affirmed that equity required that clergie men offending should first be iudged condemned and degraded by ecclesiastical power according both to the cannon lawes as also the municipal lawes of the land confirmed by all former Christian Kings â—rom the first conuersion of England and that they being thus condemned should be deliuered to secular power for executâ—on of the sentence which is a case that faâ—leth out dayly in Spayn Italy France and other Cath. contreys where Bishops do defend their Eccâ—es iurisdiction in punishing Eccles. persons taking them also by force of censures out of secular iudges hands when occasioÌ„ is offered without all note of rebellion or treason And no lesse was this law of the realme of England confirmed by ancient parliaments and other antiquities then were the secular lawes for which S r. F. standeth and fondly calleth the defence of eccles lawes treason and rebellion Wherfore hauing set downe so false a relation of the beginning of this controuersy falsifying NubergeÌ„sis as yow see in many points he doth prosecute the same with lyke vntruth as presently yow shal see And first he beginneth with a certayne letter of Maud the Empresse vnto the Archbishop which she wrote at the instance of the King her sonne and vpoÌ„ the informatioÌ„ of such courtyers as were contrary to the Bishop and his cause In which letters she chargeth him that to vse S â— F. owne words as much as in him lay he went about to disinherit the King and depriue him of his crowne Whervnto I answere that truth it is Iohn Fox hath such a letter of thesaid Empresse Maud without telling where Pag â—8 or whence or how he had it or where we may read it for in none of all the authors aboue mentioned I do fynd it Yet one thing I would haue the reader to note S. F vntrue dealing in cyting matters against S. Thom. which testifieth the continuance of S r. F. vntrue dealing in this affayre that wheras in Iohn Fox the whole charge of the empresse against the Archbishop is mitigated by this pareÌ„thesius as the report is which sheweth that these were but suspitions only and reports of his enimies Fox Pag. 201. S r. F. hath left out the parenthesis as the report is as though she had charged him vpon her owne knowledge which is no true dealing or right meaning as yow see But let vs heare further S r. F. his words pretending a more certayne proof of treason rebellion in S. Thomas Pag. 58. But if the Empresse saith he might be thought to speak partialy on the K. her sonnes behalf yet the two Card. sent by the Pope to heare all this controuersy out of question wil not condemne him without iust cause and yet in a letter sent from them to the Pope they do condemne him c. Yf S. F. proue himself a true K â— in verifying this one poynt which here he sayth I am to pardon much of that which hath passed before But yf in this matter of so great moment he be taken in lyke falshood who wil then trust him hereafter Let vs examine then the matter I wil haue none other euideÌ„ces or witnesses but his owne woords for presently after he setteth downe a part of the letter of VVilliam and Otho Card. sent by Pope Alexander to heare the cause betwene the King the Archbishop and hauing trauayled therin the King being in Normandie and the Archb. at Paris they found the matter more hard then they imagined to compouÌ„d False dealing of Syr Fraunces for that the Archbishop demaunded restitution to his lyuings for himself and for his frends and reuocation of certayne lawes lately made preiudicial to ecclesiastical iurisdiction before he could end the matter wherwith the-sayd Card. being somwhat displeased for that they desired to carry with them to the Pope the glory of this accord made by them and for that the King had much gayned their good wil by liberallity towards theÌ„ for these causes they wrote to the Pope somwhat fauorably in the Kings behalf but yet nothing condemning the Archbishop as vntruly out K â— doth auow which now I shal shew out of the woords of their owne letter alleaged heere by S.F. which are these VVilliam and Otho Card. of the Churche of Rome to Alexander the Pope The letter of the tvvo Cardinals to the Pope â— VVe comming to the land of the K. of England found the controuersy betwixt him and the Archbishop of Canterbury more sharp and vehement then we would for the King the greater part about him said that the Archbishop had sâ—yâ—red vp the french King greuously against him as also the Earle of Flaunders his kinsman who was very louing and kynd to him before whome he made his open aduersary ready to wage warre against him as is by diuers euidences most certayne c. These are the words of the Card. by S. F. relation which supposing they were truly alleaged yet he that shal consider and ponder them wel wil see that out of them no more can be vrged against the Archbishop but
conscience can there be in such men as vse so many fraudes and vtter so manifest falshoods as in this our answere we haue plainely demonstrated and then good reader when thow hast once discouered this point of singular importance which is that truthe indeed is not sought by them that preteÌ„d to seek truth nor religion by them that treat of religion but only that shifts are sought to make a shew of saying euer somwhat then I doubt not but thou wilt resolue with thy self what is behooful for thee to do for sauing of thy owne soule not leauing it vpon the waues of vncertayne disputes and altercations of men but staying it vpon the sure rock of Christs Catholike and visible Churche which is left and appointed as an infallible stay for all men wherunto I implore his heauenly grace and deuyne assistance AN ADDITION BY the publisher of this book wherin he sheweth first a reason why these two Encounters are set forth alone then the difference he findeth in the wryters and their wrytings thirdly how a man may vse this which heer is said to the decision of any Controuersy of our tyme. CAP. XVIII THREE things do I promise good Christian Reader as yow see in the title of this my addition which I shal endeauour to performe with the greatest breuity and perspicuity that I may And as for the first which is the reason why after the expectation of so many monethes wherin the defence of the whole eight Encounters that ly in dispute betwene the watchman and Warder S. F Hastings and N. D. should haue appeared we now set forth only two of the first The cause â—nd reason of this is easely declared for it was â—s followeth More then a ful yeare hath now passed â—ince the whole reioynder of N. D. to Syr F. Hastings reply about the foresaid eight Encounters and the remitter to the LL. of her Maiesties most honorable Councel was enâ—â—ed The cause of delay and sent to be put in print but then was â—here receaued a new aduise that another answere was in print also to the watch word whose author was figured by the two letters â— E. And albeit the work was said to be of such quality as it merited not a seueral anâ—were and much lesse the man yet for that was not expedient to let it passe without â—ome check of examination the Warder N. â— resolued to deferre the publishing of his â—ormer work vntil he might haue a vew of â—his book also which being more hardly â—rocured and longer expected then at the beâ—inning was presumed caused also the stay of â—his edition But when at lenght it came to sight and â—hat the author N.D. had taken it in hand to â—nswere ioyntly with the other of Sir FraÌ„cis â—ntermingling and coopling them togeather 〈◊〉 â—yow haue seene by experience in these two â—ncounters The reason vvhy these â— Encounters are set forth alone then fel there new difficultyes â—nterruptions as namely diuers monethes â—â—cknesse and diuers other lets and impediâ—ents of vnexpected busynesse to the author â—â—d besides this the corps of these two Enâ—â—unters grew to so great a bulk as of themselues they seemed to be sufficient for one book especially considering the many difficulties that we haue in printing greater volumes in these dayes and all commodity of our owne countrey prints printers and other helpes being debarred vs. Wherfore vpon these and other lyke reasons I began to deale effectually with the author of this work that he would be content to yeild vnto the publishing of these two Encounters alone promissing him that as the other should come to be ready and thorowly polished which I hope wil be very shortly I would set them forth also eyther all togeather or two or three EncouÌ„ters in a book as these go according to the quantity or bignesse which they shal grow vnto And this is so much as is needful to be sayd of this first point The second also may be dispached with the lyke breuity The 2. point of this addition which is about the difference of the wryters and wrytings of these Encounterers for so much as I do not meane to stand vpon all differeÌ„ces obserued by me in reading ouer their books but to note some few only referring me also in these to that which before hath byn set downe in the Encounters themselues especially in the seueral admonissions and warnings ensuing vpon euery Encounter and conteyning as it were a breef recapitulation of the whole only then I wil say that two notorious differences me thinketh I haue obserued in coÌ„ferring these books and wryters togeather The first is touching truthe and falshood playne dealing and shifting The first differeÌ„ce about true dealing falshood discouered almost in euery leaf of the former EncouÌ„ters which is a diffeâ—ence of somuch quality as whersoeuer it is found on the worser part it ought greatly to mooue and make deep impression in the Reader that is careful of his owne saluation for that the matters in controuersy coÌ„cerning true faith being of the highest importance that may be to our soule and euerlasting good or hurt euery man ought to be attent whersoeuer he findeth falshood or deceyt to be wilfully and purposely intended and that it cannot be excused by error or ignorance or heat of speach or other lyke infirmities there he ought to stay his foot stand fast and not to passe further without firme resolution neuer to beleue him agayne And for that in all the reply both of S r. F. and O.E. his defendant I do not find that the VVarder is so much as charged to my remembrance and much lesse conuinced of any one such wilful falsification as before I haue alleaged and that both the knight and minister are accused almost in euery leaf of this crime and that with such manifest proofes and demonstrations as I see not how possibly they can quite themselues here hence I do inferre that it importeth exceedingly euery wise and discreet Reader to remember wel this difference Another difference also there is not a litle to be marked in the very substance of their wrytings The 2. difference idle or profitable matter handled concerning the profit or losse of tyme which the reader may reap by perusing them ouer for that S r. F. and O.E. if yow look attentiuely into their books do treat nothing eyther methodically or substantially throughout their replies but following the Warder vp and downe do wraÌ„gle here and iangle there taking exceptioÌ„s against these or those words without handling any one point learnedly or with substance throughout all their whole discourses neyther coÌ„futing soundly their aduersaries nor confirming wel their owne parts so as when a man hath red ouer their whole books he remayneth with more doubts and darknes then before feeling only his spirit of incredulity and contradiction more increased by this reading but his braynes more weakened and wearied and his vnderstanding lesse cleer