Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	king_n	prince_n	see_v	2,897	5	3.5419	3	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A08697	A letter of a Catholike man beyond the seas, written to his friend in England including another of Peter Coton priest, of the Society of Iesus, to the Queene Regent of France / translated out of French into English ; touching the imputation of the death of Henry the IIII, late K. of France, to priests, Iesuites, or Catholicke doctrine.	Owen, Thomas, 1557-1618.; Coton, Pierre, 1564-1626.	1610 (1610)	STC 19000; ESTC S1326	18,060	49

where for a perpetuall infamy and confusion of those that are there of the pretended reformed religion In Flanders also what part therof hath beene free from the like ruines massakcres effectuated by thē that there rebelled against their natural Soueraigne of whome as yet remayneth one part in Holland and Zeland in Scotland what seditious rebellious were stirred vp first against the noble Queene Marie Regent of Scotland Grandmother to our Soueraigne that now raigneth by those stirring Ministers Knox Goodman Dowglasse and others afterward against Queene Marie Regnāt Mother of our Soueraign by the Lords of the Cōgregation as they called themselues indeed Hereticall rebells with direction of their Ministers assisting them in person and all according to the rules of their Ghospel that is of Heresy whose substance and nature is as before is sayd to be of it selfe a rebelliō against the Catholike Religiō Catholike Kings Princes And to cōclude with England we haue seene that in fiue yeares time or therabout of the Catholike raigne of Queene Marie were broached and set on foote more Rebellions by proportiō then in fortie yeares of her Protestant Sister Queene Elizabeth next following her And this is the cause why in these Coūtreys wise men discoursing of this matter esteemed it a most ridiculous thing that Lutherās or Caluinists or any other Hereticks should obiect to the Catholike Church the doctrine of rebellion and killing of their Kings and Princes which is a thing so contrary to al Catholike Religion and so naturall to heresy it selfe as appeareth by the Coūcell of Constance Sess 15. where they are condemned for heretikes that doe obstinatly hould any such propositions that euery Tyrāt ought to be killed and that he may be killed both lawfully and meritorously by any vassell or subiect of his and that by any deceiptfulnes or subtilitie notwithstanding any oath or agreement made to the contrary that without any sentence or iudgment These were the propositiōs of Wickliffe then cōdemned by that Catholike Councel these are the propositiōs of the hereticks of our time Luther Caluin Beza Buchanan others their companions by thē most iniuriously restrained in particuler to the Princes thē liuing as namely to Charles the 9. King of France yea to the Q. Mother al her whelpes as they tearmed thē that is all her honorable Childrē the sayd King Charles with al his brethren likewise Q. Mary of Englād other Princes of Germany which doctrine practice of the hereticks of our time is condemned by the doctrine and practice of the Catholike Church at this time so that the hereticks obiecting to Catholikes any such doctrine or practices do but vse the way of preuention like naughty womē who knowing what is to be obiected to them will first of all in scoulding obiect it to others And here comming to make an end of my Letter I haue thought good to ad one thing in steed of newes and in few wordes let you vnderstand what is the iudgement here about the Oath that you cal of Allegiāce the rumor wherof is now spread through the whole world many books are abroad about that subiect the wisest sort of men heere leauing a fide their iudgements about the questions themselues set downe in that oath to wit about the Kinges lawfull right title to the Crowne of other forraine Princes authoritie as they say leauing I say the discussing of them aside they doe much disproue the only proposing therof to subiects to be by them confirmed by oath For say they a King already in peaceable possessiō of his Crown should no more propose to his subiects the discussion of his rights and titles for that no mā of any consciēce can sweare any such thing whithout perfect examination triall and knowledge therof by the which he may be sure in Conscience of swearing truly and so the subiects are forced to enter into diuers considerations of many circūstances which were more cōuenient for thē to belieue thē to examin being such oftētimes that learned Lawiers cōming to discusse thē are so doubtful that neither they nor the Princes thēselus wil be so bould to sweare them being content to remaine in Lawfull possession against any pretender that shall oppose himselfe Yea if by any such occasion of questiō made about any such right or title warre should chance to be waged the subiects are to belieue their Princes and Countreis cause to be iust may without any preiudice of their saluation yea are bound to shed their bloud in such a cause yet are not they bound nor the Prince himselfe to take an oath that his cause is iust and therfore it were great imprudency for a Prince in such a cause to tender such an oath to his souldiers for so he should find his companies much diminished and therof would follow that euident absurditie that if the souldiers of ech side should sweare their owne Kinges cause to be iust all the souldiers of one side must needes be forsworne it being as Deuines do hold impossible that any warres should be iust on both sides no more then in law that ech part should haue truth and iustice on his side because that such questions that eyther by warre or by Law are to be decided doe alwayes consist in a contradiction by affirming and denying one and the same thing and by such oathes as the one side must alwayes needes bee forsworne so the other must needes do ill in swearing rashly such doubtfull things Much lesse is it thought conuenient to propose to subiects the examining of the power right of any forraine King or of the Authoritie of the Pope himselfe aboue Kings and Princes not only for the same reasons but also because therby many learned men which before were quiet and without any question yealded obedience to the prince are not only forced openly to refuse such an Oath pertaining to faith about the Authority of Christ his Vicar vpon earth but also openly to professe the contrary both by word and writing And such sort of Oathes that are taken by force with doubt of mind and scruple of conscience doe rather hurt then good euen to that end to the which they are giuen For whensoeuer any occasiō should happē of shewing their loue and affection towards their Prince they would allwayes be found most backward that haue beene so iniuriously forced to take such Oaths against their wil and peraduenture would dispense with themselues for the performance of them as vniustly exacted and rashly made and they would alwaies be found most faithfully in keeping all loyalty towards their Prince who do offer themselues most ready to sweare the same and do plainely refuse to sweare any more For as this they do refuse for their duty towards God so that they will performe for their duty towardes their King and towards God that gaue them him Quia omnis potestas à Deo est and this is according to our Sauiours prescript Reddere quae sunt Caesaris Caesari quae sunt Dei Deo This only all wise men in these parts do agree vpon wherin I assure my selfe no man with you of any wisdome will any way contradict that euery subiect is bound in Conscience to obay his lawfull Prince and that also to promise by Oath when it shal be exacted And such an Oath although in other Realmes through the whole world is not wont to be exacted of all subiects but only of the Magistrates and Gouernours of others yet such occasion may fall out that it may stand with prudence to tender it to euery one in particuler and such an Oath of obedience towardes his Prince and Soueraigne no good Catholicke will refuse nor Catholicke Doctrine doth disallow Yours euer T. A. The occation of writing this letter The Iesuits iniuriously slaundered Mariana his opinion cōdemned by all other writers of the Society and the Court of Parlament in Frāce The Authors intentiō Tolet. Bellarmine Valētia Salmer● Del-Rio Heissius Becanus Gretser Lessius Serarius Azor. Richeome The opinion of Mariana condemned in a Cōgregatiō of the Society in Frāce and mis liked by the Generall of the same order Malice of Protestants The generall opinion of Iesuites touching Kings Tren l. 5. c. 24. Rom. 13. 1. 3. Pet. 2. Baru 1. 11. The pious intentiō of the Authour Malicious dealing The Society most exposed to hatred An Apostrophe to Frāce God hath turned this slāder raised against the Society to the best The Society in fact and doctrine as obsequious to Kings as any other Order Mariana not resolute in the opinion for which he is cōdemned by the Aduersaries Mariana speaketh only of Tyrāts Mariana his book and doctrine cōdemned for hatred to the Society Sathan the Author Father of all Iyers slanderers An ancient deuise to draw matters of religion into crims of State Exāples in the new testament Our Sauiour called into questiō for matter of state against the Emperour condemned for the same Gods seuere punishment vpon vniust iudges Heresies haue first sprōg vp in our dayes by rebellion The practise of Protestantes in matters of rebelliō Rebellious doctrine proper vnto Protestants and condēned by Catholicks What strangers doe iudge speake of the oath of allegiāce and the proposing therof The discussing of the Popes Authority not conuenient Forced swearing more hurtfull then profitable Matt. 22

A LETTER OF A CATHOLIKE MAN Beyond the seas written to his friend in England INCLVDING Another of Peter Coton Priest of the Society of Iesus to the Queene Regent of France Translated out of French into English TOVCHING The imputation of the death of Henry the IIII late K. of France to Priests Iesuites or Catholicke doctrine Cypr. Epist 55. ad Cornel. Haec est vera dementia non cogitare scire quòd mendacia non diu fallant This indeed is madnes not to thinke and know that lyes do not long deceaue Permissu Superiorum M. DC X. DEARE Syr hauing vnderstood by one of yours that both you other of our friendes there haue byn much astonished of late with the suddaine newes of the execrable slaughter of the Great and Potent Monarch Henry the IIII. King of France I nothing meruailed the same astonishment being common to vs heere and I thinke to all the Christiā world But hauing further vnderstood by the reading of yours that there with you the same so detestable a parricide was imputed commōly to Priests or Iesuites and by some to the Pope himself but by the most part to Catholick Doctrine for answere of yours I sent you first the Copy of a letter of a principall man no lesse then a Counseller of France namely Monsieur du Wick the Gouernour of Cales his brother writtē by his own hand to a friend of his in Italy which I my selfe turned into English word for word as it was set downe by him in French where he writeth that the miserable wretch that killed the sayd King affirmed that neuer any man perswaded him to that enterprize of his the which sayth he we all belieued because in all his examinations interrogations euen vntill he was put to death he perscuered still cōstant in the same assertion Besides I certified you of a certayne Booke which was written heere in Italy in answer of our Kings Booke about the Oath which being presented to his Holines as it is sayd was not permitted to be printed because of a rash assertion therin contayned about the question of killing of Kings For which cause the Authour therof seeking to print his sayd booke in Germany was through the prudency as I vnderstād chiefly of an English Gentlemā remaining in those parts forbidden likewise there to print it But things which since haue hapned haue made me lesse to meruaile that there with you such things were spread when as in Frāce yea in Paris it selfe in the middest of so Noble and Catholike a Citty in the eyes eares of thē that knew the contrary and in the cleare shining light of the truth it selfe the cōmon enemy of truth hath had so much power as to find some impudent instrumēts to affirme publickly to preach the same calumnie But truly was it sayd Fortior est omniū Veritas vincit Truth is strongest of all things and will ouercome at length although for a while by some violence it may remaine oppressed or disguised For so euen now in France in the sayd Citty of Paris it is come to passe that Iesuites which were in part although far of calūniated about that matter being afterwards heard and the truth knowne not only haue byn iustified deliuered frō such a false iniurious slaūder but also honoured esteemed more thē before as most louing loyall subiects to that Noble Monarch which had beene in his life time alwaies so louing affectionat towards thē as all the world knoweth And who at the very instāt of so vnworthy a calumniation imployed thēselues to honour the same King as their most deare Father in trāsporting with great solēnity his own hart bequeathed to thē by himself in his life time deliuered thē after his death by cōmandmēt of the Q. Mother Regent of Frāce to the Noble Vniuersity de la Flesche built for thēselues of late years by the said King of glorious Memory And because I haue by good hap gottē the fight of a little Treatise writen in the Frēch tongue expresly in Cōfutatiō of the falsity begō to be spread in Paris against the Iesuits the w ch also doth fully answere to the like calūnious oppositiōs false obiectiōs spread abroad by the treachery of the common enemy of truth there in your parts I thought it necessary to turne it into the English tōgue that so the truth may there also be known to the honor glory of the author of all truth cōfort not only of the īnocēt but also of al thē that with true charity desire to know the truth maintaine the same A LETTER DECLARATORY OF THE COMMON Doctrine of the Fathers of the Society of Iesus conforme to the Decrees of the Coūcell of Constance VVritten to the Queene Mother of the King Regent in France By Father Peter Coton of the same Society his Maiesties ordinary Preacher at Paris 1610. MADAME GOD ordained in the old Testament that the kidd should not be boiled in the milke of his damme to signify as Philo the Iew doth expound it that one which is already afflicted is no more to be oppressed with new affliction According to the which rule deriued from nature it selfe those of our Society did hope that with this dolefull accident the terrour wherof hath shaken the two poles of the Christian world they might haue had at least their breath free to sigh after their incōparable losse A losse which is as particuler to them as generall and cōmon to all But it hath happened to them as to men which find themselues vnder the ruine of a house where one stone doth not expect the other to couer and ouerwhelme them vpon whome it falleth We were both in mind body occupied about the transporting of that precious gage and remarkable pledge which it hath pleased your Maiestie by the hands of the Prince of Conty to giue consigned vnto vs and to the which the Chiefe Lords of France rendred the last honours when some no welwillers of the Catholike Religion and of thē of our profession to purchase vs in famy and to make their gaine of our absence spread abroad certaine rumors so farre from all likelihood and probability that a man would neuer haue thought that such ca-Iumnies could euer euen in any mad mood enter into the thought of a resonable soule All this began by the occasion of a naughty booke the doctrine wherof hath byn rightfully condemned by the Court of Parliament some maintayning that the doctrine of the Booke was the common doctrine of all Iesuits others that the doctrine was so proper to his Author that many of the same Society had written the contrary and altogeather had condemned it some yeares agoe in the body of a Prouinciall Congregation the which controuersy men without passion did straight determine cōcluding that this would be knowne by disauowing therof and therefore that it was to be expected what we would say

therin Wherupon I my selfe hauing beene named particulerly haue taken occasion at this present to take pen in hand briefly to represent vnto You Madame as to Her who is singulerly affectioned to the true Religion most interessed in the good of this whole State and the most assured refuge that innocencie can haue that which the Doctors of our Society haue written vpon this subiect Knowing that nether the greatnes of busines would easily permit you of your selfe to seeke them out nor the small affection which backbiters do beare vnto vs would permit them to make you the true report And after that I will shew with the same breuity what is the common sense and opinion of our Society spread through the whole world touching the matter wherof we speake Laying for a ground of all such verity as cannot be called into doubt no not by them which may be foūd most hatefull and enuious of this florishing Crowne I meane that the matter which was debated in the Councell of Constance which afterward hath beene declared more at large by the Catholick Doctors touching the expulsion of Tyrants doth not at all touch the happy renowned and most honorable memory of him of whome now we be waile the death his life hauing byn as farre from all blame of Tyranny as it hath beene and shal be alwaies to all the Monarches of the Earth a modell of piety iustice clemency valour benignity and fatherly affection towards his subiects First of al presenteth himselfe the most Illustrious Cardinall Tolet a man of rare learning Spanish by nation and French by affection who in the 5. booke and 6. chapter of his Summe teacheth in expresse tearmes That it is not lawful to attempt any thing against the life of a Prince allthough he abuse his Princely power adding therunto that to maintaine the contrarie is an hereticall doctrine condemned by the Councell of Constance The most Illustrious and most learned Cardinall Bellarmine answering to the very same obiection in the thirteenth chapter of his Apologie to a Booke of the king of Great Britany speaketh thus I haue neuer read nor heard it sayd that euerlasting life hath beene promised to them that attempt against the life of kings but rather to the contrary I haue read that this proposition Euery Tyrant may and ought lawfully to be killed was long since condēned in the fiftēth session of the Councell of Constance True it is that Iohn VVickliffe an Englishmā whome the Protestantes doe so much esteeme and haue put forth his prayses in the fore-front of their Histories taught That no temporal nor Ecclesiasticall Prince retayneth any longer his power and authority after he is fallen into any mortall sin the which error of his the sayd Councell condemned in the eight session Gregorie of Valentia a man of eminent learning as is manifest by the publique testimony of Italy Spayne and Germanie writing vpon the sixtie foure Question of the second Part of S. Thomas and conforming himselfe therin to the doctrine of other Schoole-Deuines determineth in no wise to be lawfull to attempt against the life of the Prince although he abuse his authority Alsonsus Salmeron in the thirteenth Tome of his workes expounding the thirteenth Chapter of the Epistle to the Romans affirmeth the same citing the Councell of Constance and referreth the fact of Aöd against Eglon King of the Moabites to the expresse manifest commandement of God whereof of no man ought to be iudge in his owne cause Martin del-Rio a famous man likewise in all kind of learning in his Commentaries vpon Hercules Furens of Seneca the 920. number sayth That that saying of the Poet is dangerous and there alleageth to the contrary the decree of the Councell of Cōstance which decree vpon this subject cannot to often be inculcated repeated and declared to the People Sebastian Heissius in his Apologeticall declaration of the Aphorismes attributed to the doctrine of Iesuites sheweth by Mariana's owne wordes that he hath spoken out of his owne opinion And he himselfe perceauing that he did exceed the Iimits of the common doctrine acknowledged his doctrine to be subiect to errour and submitted himselfe to the censure of whome soeuer And by and by after he setteth down his owne and the common opinions of all Deuines of our Society the which he opposeth against the opinion of the sayd Mariana Martin Becanus in the answere to the ninth Aphorisme remitteth the Reader to the Councell of Constance shewing that the lawfull Princelooseth not his superiority although he become a Tyrant Iames Gretser Reader of Deuinity at Ingolstad in his Booke intituled Vespertilio Haretico-politic ꝰ answering to the obiectiōs which were made him out of the opinion of Mariana saith with Heissius That the common opinion is to be followed leauing that of Mariana which he himselfe submitteth to other men Leonard Lessius Reader of Deuinity at Louaine in the ninth Chapter fourth doubt of his second booke de Iustitia Iure affirmeth likewise according to the common sentence That it is not lawfull to enterprize against the person of the Prince although he should abuse his authority grounding his saying vpon that aduertisement of the Prince of the Apostles Seruants be subiect to your maisters and not only to them which be good and modest but also to the froward and ill conditioned And after that he alledgeth the decree of the Councell before mentioned Nicolas Serarius writing vpon the thirteenth chapter of the booke of Iudges in his first question doth shew that the fact of Aod cannot nor ought to serue the detestable Assassines parricides and murtherers of their kings for their defence or example Iohn Azor in the second part of his morall institutions the eleuenth booke fifth c●apter and tenth question doth shew him self yet a more rigorous enemie of the bould and sacrilegious enterprizes of them who attempt against the 〈…〉 e of their Princes where he teacheth that it is not lawful to go about to kil no not thē who should haue vniultlie inuaded any state grounding his doctrine chifely vpon this that no man ought to be condēned before he be heard without discussiō of his cause of the which noe particuler man can be a cōpetēt Iudge As for Lewis Richeome his Apologie makes perētory proofe of the irrecōciliable hatred which he beareth to the doctrine of them that teach against the authoritie of kings in so much that the L. Pasquier himselfe a Criticall Censurer of his works hauing repeated his wordes in his third booke and fifth chapter praiseth him and sayth he cannot but loue him adding these words Yet I must needs honour thee seing thee so to paint the Idaea of obedience of a subiect towards his King A praise which he might haue giuen to many others of the same Society who hauing examined this matter with S. Thomas and all the Schoole deuines do all conclude

conformably to the Sorbones and to the Decree of the Councell of Constance These then being the opinions and the determinations of these doctors graue and principall men of our Society what preiudice can the particuler opinion of one Mariana bring to the reputation of a whole Order the which being according to the Institute most carefull to maintaine all holy ordinances of the Church and bearing respect to the power and authority of Kings who for the temporal depend on God only hath long time since disauowed the lightnesse of this rouing pen and namely in the Prouincial Congregation of France held in the Citty of Paris the yeare 1606. where more then this the Reuerend Father Claudius Aquauiua General of our Society was requested that those who had written in preiudice of the Crowne of France should be repressed and their bookes suppressed Which the sayd Reuerend Father did afterward very earnestly and exactly being most sory that by ouer-sight he being absent and knowing nothing nor hauing seene the workes one should vse therin his consent the words which he vseth in his answere are these VVe haue approued your Congregations iudgment and carefulnes and haue byn very sory that no body perceaued the fault vntill the bookes were printed the which notwithstanding we haue presently commanded to be corrected will vse great care herafter that such things happen no more And so it is that now you should scarce haue found so much as one copy of Mariana if it had not beene for the pernicious liberality of the heyres of VVechell who are knowne to be of the pretended reformed Religion and haue printed the same booke at their owne costes and charges moued not so much as it is to be presumed with desire to serue the publique as to hurt in particuler our Society Some haue thought that they haue added somewhat of their owne others haue iudged that the bookes of the first impression were yet worse but this controuersy serues to no purpose for although it were so and that no body had holpen the first so imprudent pen yet is there no cause why that one mans pen should more hurt the body of our Society then the writings of Iohn Petite and others his like should hurt the Vniuersities and Orders of which they were Schollers Bachelers Maisters and Doctors But Madame seeing that I haue heere aboue promised to expound clearly and distinctly what is our opinion touching the question we haue proposed now I come to it which shal be the second part or this discourse 1. All the Iesuites generally and particulerly will confirme euen with their own bloud that they haue not in this matter or any other any beliefe doctrine or opinion then that of the Catholike Church 2. That amongst all sorts of gouernement and publicke administration the Monarchie is the best 3. That such is the spirituall gouernmēt of the Church which is vnder the Vicar of Iesus Christ successor of S. Peter such is the temporall gouernment of the State and Realme of France which dependeth of the person of the King our Soueraigne Lord and Maister 4. That the Kinges are as Homer calleth them the children and fosters of God or rather his own liuely Images as sayd Menander 5. That they are annointed and therfore called the Christs of our Lord to the end as sayth Simeon the Archbishop of Thessalonica that euery one may vnderstand that they be inuiolable and should be respected as holy and sacred things 6. That it is a damnable heresy as holy Irenaeus noteth 1400. yeares agoe to thinke that Kings are giuen to men casually seeing that all power comes of God and therfore sayth S. Isidore of Damieta in the most ancient pictures we see a hand put out of heauen which setteth the Crowne vpō the head of Kings 7. That he which resisteth kinges or rebelleth against them purchaseth to him selfe his owne damnation according to the doctrine of the Apostle 8. That obedience is due vnto them not for that they are vertuous wise potēt or indued with any other laudable qualitie but because they are Kings established by God himselfe 9. That our Kings of France are the eldest children of the Church enioying rare and singular priuiledges aboue the common of other Kinges of the world 10. That it is not lawfull to denie to thē obedience much lesse to reuolt against them although they were vicious froward hard to suport as the same Apostle speaketh 11. That being such we ought to pray for them as the Prophet would haue to be done for the prosperity of Nabuchodonosor and his sonne Baltazar that the afflictions losse of goodes persecutions and other in commodities which are endured patiently not rebelling therefore against their Superiours are things very acceptable to God conforme to the praise which in like case S. Paul giueth to the Hebrews and to that ordināce w ch he hath published in the Church saying Euery soule be subiect to the Superiour powers 12. And therfore that not onely it is not lawfull to lay hands vpon their Persons but that it is an execrable parricide a prodigious trespasse and a detestable sacriledge 13. That the decree of the Councell of Constance in the 15. Session ought to be receaued of all and maintayned inuiolably 14. That the declaration of the Sorbon of the year 1413. that also of the 4. of Iune of this presēt yeare is good wholsome holy 15. That euery one should stand vpon his guard and take heed of diuers bookes that are spread abroad contrary to the Lawes the reading of the which is not onely in this matter very dangerous but so much the more to be feared by how much the Authors of them being to our great griefe separated from the Catholike Church make no accompt neyther of the Councell of Constance nor of the Catholike Censures and Doctors aboue mentioned yea rather which is to be lamented they are the more obstinate in their opinions by opposing themselues and thereby they thinke to get the greater praise and admiration from others I would cite bookes quote the places and alleadge the words were it not that it is farre better that such thinges remaine swallowed in the bottomlesse pit of forgetfulnes and that it is more to the purpose to make knowne that innocency is far stronger then recrimination And for the same cause also I would haue abstained altogeather from this aduertisment had it not beene to shew thereby that the body of our Society cannot be infected by the opinion of one only person the which hath beene so authentically disauowed by the same no more then those of the pretended reformed Religion doe not hould themselues any whit interessed by the erroneous Doctrine of some of theirs whome they reiect difauow and condemne being willing to liue with vs vnder the Lawes of our Realme and with the obedience and voluntary submission which we do render to the Scepter of our Kinges

the whole world the iniquity of all those that now a dayes are so desirous to find some kind of fault or suspicion thereof in some one Iesuite or freind of theirs therby to traduce calumniate the body of the whole Order although otherwise innocent and wholy detesting the same as if the will of the whole Order were represented in the person of each one of them no lesse then in the person of Adam only was represented all mākind The absurdity whereof is so manifest that it requireth not any further explication for so scarce any community linage or ancient familie should now be found in England or France or any Countrey whatsoeuer which hath not often beene ruined by one crime or other of true or false imputation to some one of their body contrary to that indgement of God Filius non portabit iniquitatem patris anima quae peccauerit ipsamorietur This only was sufficient in that Catholike Countrey not only to discouer the malignity and iniustice of such far-fetcht accusations but also to obtayne for satisfaction of so publike an iniurie publike fauour of the Prince and loue of the people with whose great applause the sayd Iesuits are now by especial grace incorporated into the body of the Vniuersitie of Paris and begin to open their Schooles which may be accoūted a very iust remuneration seeing their first leauing of teaching came by a like fact of one mā imputed to their whole Order although the same man was not so much as of their Order nor then any of their schollers but one that before in his life time had only frequented their schooles chiefly because that it was found that not only they deserued not any such imputation for any fact or fault of theirs but contrariwise for their great affectiō and seruice which alwayes they shewed towards their King and Countrey deserued all contrary commendations and fauour for that also besides their house wherein they dwelt before besides the Colledg in which they began againe to teach they haue begun to build the third house for their Nouitiate and that not only by the Princes graunt permitting the same but also with his owne liberality allowing for the charges therof This is the nature of vertue the more to increase flourish the more it is resisted and kept downe Wherin it is to be obserued that although for defence of the Iesuites in Paris it sufficed as by the fore said letter only it appeareth that the opinion of Mariana was not the opinion of the Society which as by the place there quoted and by experience through the whole world is euident is as much as any Order or Congregatiō may be addicted to all due obedience towards Magistrates Princes and Kings do instruct their schollers and hearers and all that any wayes depend on them in the same obedience subiection and reuerence towards all sortes of Superiours and especially towards their Soueraignes Yet that which either for modesties sake in defending thēselues or els for breuity in such a letter semed best to thē to omit as not so much needfull at that time they hauing all the reason on their side I thought good not to neglect seeing it maketh not a little more for the full answere to yours about Iesuites and Catholicke Doctrine and this is That Mariana himselfe who by the aduersaries was chosen amōgst al the Iesuits as only guilty of that great trespasse of killing of Kings saith nothing but by manner of probleme examining the question pro contra bringing the proofes of both parts which being done as he inclineth more to the one side then to the other so doth he not precisely determine any thing on either as absolutely true certayne but as seeming to him more probable therfor perswadeth not any man to follow one or the other opinion but contrariwise submitteth offereth himselfe ready to follow other mens better iudgement to thanke them for it his words being these which euery mā may read in the Author himself Haec nostra sentētia est sincero animo certe profecta in qua falli possum vt humanus si quis meliora attulerit gratias hab●am And this opinion that there Mariana doth propose as indifferent to be proued or disproued by other men what opinion is it Is it of killing of Kinges wherof now the question is Nothing lesse he handleth no such question there is no such doctrine in the Catholicke Church Wherof then speaketh he in that place Of killing of Tyrants for the which question the King of Spayne to whome the booke was dedicated and by whome it is both praised and priuiledged was neuer offended with the Author nor yet Henry the IIII. late King of France as if such thinges had beene written against them they most worthily thinking themselues farre from any suspicion of Tyranny for the which cause also the Emperor Charles the fifth was neuer angry with Soto his Confessarius nor any other Kinges haue beene offended with other Authors who heretofore haue written an hundred times more and more resolutely then Mariana in defence of the same opinion Neyther are they indeed to be esteemed eyther true subiects or wise men that find any fault with such mens writings as written against their Kinges thereby esteeming their owne Kinges Tyrants or such as worthily may feare to be taken for such Finally wheras Mariana about this matter affirming the least of all men is yet most of all yea only amongst all accused and his writinges therefore condemned and burnt with such seuerity rigour it is manifest they could not be cōdemned for the doctrine they did cōtayne but for the Authors sake that wrote them nor the Author himself so iniuriously vsed for his owne sake but for the coate he weares for the badge of the name of Iesus which both he and his booke doth carrie They are enemies of that holy name that condemned Mariana for any such Doctrine They are only the enemies of Iesuites that so calumniously deriued the crime from one Mariana to all Iesuites They are enemyes to Catholike Religion that accuse the Catholicke Church of any such doctrine And hereby we may easily come to find the first ofspring of all these calumnies the first only author and teacher of all calumniators is Satan the head calumniator himselfe Who knoweth not this ancient fraud accustomed fetch of that cōmon enemy both of God all mankind who hath no more potent meanes to resist the honour of God to oppresse his seruants and hinder the progresse of true vertue and religion then to bring all good men as opposite to him and his endeauours into suspicion with Kings and Emperors calling them in question for matters of State So did he vse Aman in the old Testament as an instrument to bring into disgrace with King Assuerus the people of God dispersed throughout his Prouinces slaundering them for seditious and contrary