kill Princes he answereth thus It will be requisite without preiudice to the most learned and Religious iudgment of his Maiesty to satisfy for two places related from that conference c. And then he passeth on to discourse at large of the meaning of those places and vnder the colour of the foresaid honorable preface he taketh licence to dissent from his Maiesty signifying in effect that either the conference was not well related or his Maiesty mistooke their meaning in those notes and yet is the matter cleere by his owne confession that their said notes vpon the second booke of Cronicles and 15. Chapter vers 16. doe not only allow the depofing of the Queene Maacha by her sonne King Asa for Idolatry but further doe reprehēd him also sharply for that he had not put her to death by fier saying thus in their note That whether she were Mother or Grandmother yet herin the King shewed that he lacked zeale for she ought to haue byn burnt by the couenant as vers 13. appeareth by the law of God Deuteronomy 13. but he gaue place to foolish pitty and would also seeme after a sort to satisfy the law So they in their note 26. But who will looke vpon the two textes of Scripture by them heere cited shall finde no mention of burning but only of putting to death and in Deut. of stoning only But how doth he now defend this note of our English Ministers allowing the deposition and putting to death of Princes Yow shall heare his shift for he is much troubled with his Maiesties obseruation VVhat shall we say then saith he is the Soueraignty of Kinges disabled God forbid but it is rather established therby for the King is made the deposer yea euen of whosoeuer Doe yow see his poore flattering shift If the Queene Maacha might be deposed according to their note and that ex Augusto Imperio from her Imperiall gouernment as the text of Scripture hath yea and that she ought according to the law of God to haue byn put to death as now hath byn said for her Idolatry then is it a poore shift to say that Kinges cannot be deposed for that they must be the deposers seing that in Deut. where the Commission is giuen there is no mention of Kinges at all but Gods speach commission there is vnto the people Sitibi voluerit persuadere frater 〈◊〉 c. If thy brother or wife or friend will perswade thee to leaue God let thy hand be vpon him and after thee the hand of all the people which notwithstanding is to be vnderstood as before in the second Chapter we haue noted both out of the 13. 17. Chapters of Deut. and the glosse therevpon according to the order there set downe to wit after the cause examined sentenced by lawfull Iudges And at this time when this law was ordained there were no Kinges in Israel nor in many yeares after and consequently this commission could not be giuen to Kinges only 27. So then for so much as English Protestant-Ministers that made these notes doe authorize by this place of Deut. the deposing and killing of that Imperiall Queene his Maiesties censure was iudicious true that therby they allowed that lawfull Princes might be in certaines cases deposed and put to death And the first shift of T. M. in this place is ridiculous wherby he would seeme to make secure al Kinges from danger of deposition for that themselues by Godes word which yet he proueth not must be the deposers and then he presumeth they will not depose themselues but for Queenes he leaueth them to shift as they may Which doctrine I suppose he would not haue set forth in print in the late Queenes daies But their assertions are according to times and places and so this shall be sufficient for the second Question The third Question concerning practice of Rebellion §. 3. 28. ANd now hauing byn lōger in the former two Questions then in the beginning was purposed I shall endeauour to be shorter if it may be in this last though the multitude of examples partly set downe by vs before in the first Chapter of this Treatise and partly to be read in Histories and obserued by experience of Protestantes continuall tumultuation against Catholicke Princes would require a larger discussion then both the other two Questions put togeather albeit on the other side againe the matters are so cleere as they need no discussion at all but only narration For what can our Minister answere in reason or truth to all that multitude of instances of Protestantes Rebellions in the foresaid first Chapter set downe and for the most part obiected before as now I perceiue by his aduersary the moderate Answerer We shall briefly runne ouer some few examples 29. To the instances in England of continuall conspiracies and insurrections against Queene Mary he setteth downe first this bold and shameles prouocation After the proclamation of her title saith he shew vs what Protestant euer resisted what Minister of the Ghospell in all that fiery triall did kindle the least spark of sedition among her people In which wordes is to be obserued first that he saith after the Proclamation of her title to excuse therby the Dukes of Northumberland and Suffolke the Marques of Northampton and others that tooke armes against her before shee was proclaimed in Londen though in Norfolke she had proclaimed her self presently vpon the death of her brother King Edward as also to excuse Cranmer Ridley Sandes Latimer Rogers Iewell and other Ministers that had preached most bitterly against her title But what is the residue true that heere so boldly he auoucheth that neuer any Protestant resisted nor Minister kindled the least spark of sedition among her people after her title proclaimed Is this true I say Is this iustifiable for he calleth this Treatise a iustification of Protestantes Is this any way to be mainteined by any shew or shift whatsoeuer What then wil he say to the new conspiracy and iterated Rebellion of the Duke of Suffolke of his brother the Lord Iohn Grey not only after the said Queenes title proclaimed but after she was in possession and had pardoned them both of their former Rebellion What will he say to the Rebellion of Syr Peter Carew Syr Gawyn Carew Syr Thomas Denny other Protestant Gentlemen that tooke armes in Deuonshire within six daies saith Stow after the arraignemēt of the Duke of Northumberland What wil he say to the conspiracy of Syr Iames a Croftes others in VVales discouered saith the same Authour about the fiue and twentith day of Ianuary next ensuing What will he say to the Rebellion of Syr Thomas VVyat and his confederates in Kent ensuing about the same time Were they not Protestantes that were authors therof Or was not Queene Maries title yet proclaimed Will our Minister face out this What will he say to the cōspiracies ensuing after this againe
in his English translation which is that which most importeth his simple Reader that looketh not into the Latin and this is that he translateth the former sentence of the Canon thus as before yow haue heard Though he should carry many people with him to hell yet no mortall creature may presume to say why doe yow so But in the Latin neither heere nor in the Canon it selfe is there any such interrogation at all as why doe yow so And therfore I may aske T. M. why doe yow ly so Or why doe yow delude your Reader so Or why do yow corrupt your Author so Or why doe yow translate in English for the abusing of your Reader that which neither your selfe doe set downe in your Latin text nor the Canon it selfe by yow cited hath it at all Is not this wilfull and malicious fraude Wherin when yow shall answere me directly and sincerly it shall be a great discharge of your credit with those who in the meane space will iustly hold yow for a deceauer 59. His fourth answere to the former argument of Gods prouidence is the difference he saith of Kings and Popes in this point for that the Papall power saith he which will be thought spirituall if it be euill may be the bane of soules the power of Princes is but corporall therfore feare them not because they can goe no further then the body Thus he And did euer man heare so wise a reason And cannot euill Kinges and Princes be the cause of corrupting soules also if they should liue wickedly permit or induce others to doe the same And what if they should be of an euill Religion as yow will say Q. Mary and K. Henry were and all Kinges vpward for many hundred yeares togeather who by Statutes and lawes forced men to follow the Religiō of that time did all this touch nothing the soule who would say it but T. M But he goeth forward in his application for that bodily Tyranny saith he worketh in the Godly patience but the spirituall Tyranny doth captiuate the inward soule This now is as good as the former and is a difference without diuersity so farre as concerneth our affaire that a man may with patience if he will resist both the one and the other And euen now we haue seene that when any Pope shal decline from the common receaued faith of Christendome he cannot captiuate other men but is deposed himselfe Wherfore this mans conclusion is very simple saying Therfore heere is need according to Gods prouidence of power to depose so desperate a spirituall euill wherof it is written if the salte want his saltenesse it is good for nothing but to be cast vpon the donghill Marke then that concerning the spirituall that God hath ordeined eiiciatur foras let it be cast out but concerning the temporall resiste not the power 60. Lo heere and doe not these men find Scriptures for all purposes This fellow hath found a text that all spirituall power when it misliketh them must be cast to the donghill and no temporall must be resisted and yet he that shall read the first place by him alleadged out of S. Matthew shall find that the lacke of saltenesse is expresly meant of the want of good life and edification especially in Priestes and Preachers and yet is it no precept as this man would haue it to cast them al to the donghill but that salte leesing his taste is fit for nothing but to that vse S. Paul in like manner to the Romanes doth not more forbid resisting of temporall authority then of spirituall but commaundeth to obey both the one and the other which this man applieth only to temporall which he would haue exalted obeyed and respected and the other contemned and cast to the donghill Oh that he had byn worthy to haue byn the scholler of S. Chrysostome S. Gregory Nazianzen or S. Ambrose before cited who so highly preferred spirituall authority before temporall how would they haue rated him if he would not haue byn better instructed or more piously affected No doubt eiecissent foras they would haue cast him forth to the donghill in deed and there haue left him and so doe we in this matter not meaning to follow him any further except he reasoned more groundedly or dealt more sincerly 61. Yet in one word to answere his comparison we say that both temporall spirituall Magistrates may doe hurte both to body and soule for as the temporall may preiudice also the soule as now hath byn said so may the spirituall afflict in like manner the body as when the Pope or Bishoppes doe burne Heretikes so as in this respect this distinction of T. M. is to no purpose yet doe we also say that when spirituall authority is abused it is more pernicious preiudiciall then the other Quia corruptio optimi est pessima The best thinges become worst when they are peruerted and spirituall diseases especially belonging to faith be more pernicious then corporall for which cause God had so much care to prouide for the preuention therof in his Christian Church for the conseruation of true faith by the authority vnion visibility succession of the said Church and diligence of Doctores Teachers Synodes Councels and other meanes therin vsed and by his assistance of infallibility to the head therof which head though in respect of his eminent authority he haue no Superiours to Iudge or chastise him except in case of heresy as hath byn said yet hath he many and effectuall meanes wherby to be admonished informed stirred vp and moued so as he being but one in the world and furnished with these helpes bringeth farre lesse danger and inconuenience then if all temporall Princes who are many had the like priuiledge and immunity And this euery reasonable man out of reason it selfe will easily see consider 62. As also this other point of no small or meane importance to wit that English Protestantes pretending temporall Princes to be supreame and without Iudge or Superiour in matters of Religion as well as ciuill and secular they incurre a farre greater inconuenience therby then they would seeme to lay vpon vs. For that if any temporall Prince as Supreame in both causes would take vpon him the approbation or admission of any sect or heresy whatsoeuer they haue no remedy at all according to the principles of their doctrine wheras we say the Pope in this case may and must be deposed by force of his subiectes all Christian Princes ioined togeather against him so as in place of one generall Pope which in this case is vnder authority they make so many particuler Popes as are particuler Kings temporall Princes throughout all Christendome that are absolute and consequently without all remedy for offences temporall or spirituall in manners or faith 63. And now let vs imagine what variety of sectes and schismes would haue byn at this day in Christianity if for
inuenta est nimirum 〈◊〉 numero vincens merito Worthily doth the Church admit him to wit Innocentius whose estimatiō is more renowned whose election is found to be more lawfull as passing the others election both in number and merit of the choosers And so in these few lynes we see how many wilfull lyes and falsifications this Minister hath vsed which cannot be excused eyther by ouersight ignorance or error but must needs be ascribed to wilfull malice and expresse purpose of deceyuing his hearer And so though I might alledge diuers other places to like effect yet this shall 〈◊〉 for one example yea for all them of that sorte in this behalfe For albeit examples without number may be alleaged out of these mens workes yet by these few 〈◊〉 may be made of the rest I shall therfore adioyne some three or foure examples more of lay-men to shew the conformity of their spirits to their spiritual guydes and so make an end The vse of Equiuocation in Lay-men and Knightes §. 5. 65. OF this sorte of men I will alledge only three in this place that in these later dayes haue written against Catholicke Religion but yet such as are more eminent amōg the rest they being Knightes all three whose honorable condition state of calling ought to haue obliged them to defence of truth and that also by true meanes and not by sleightes of this worst kynde of Equiuocation as heer yow shall see them doe The first is Sir Francis Hastings that wrote the iniurious VVatchword some yeares past aga nst Catholickes The second is Sir Philip Mornay Lord of Plessis that hath written many workes much respected by those of his partiality in Religion The third is Syr Edward Cooke late Attorney of his Maiesty now a Iudge and writer against Catholicks And albeit the second be a French-man borne yet for that he hath liued much in England and wrote some of his bookes there and all or most parte of them are 〈◊〉 to be in the English language I may well accompanie him with English Knightes in this behalfe 66. For the first then which is Syr Francis I may be the briefer with him for that his aduersarie or Antagonist hath in his Answers to the said VVatchword and Apologie therof often put him in mynd of his 〈◊〉 against truth euen then when himselfe must needs know it to be so and consequently that it was not only voluntarie but witting also and wilfull 〈◊〉 wherof I might alledge many particulars but two or three shall be ynough for a tast 67. In his defence of the VVatch-word pag. 74. he treating against the abuse of pardons auoucheth out of sundry Chronicles as he saith the storie of the poysoning of King Iohn by a Monke named Symon and this vpon dispensatiō first obteyned of his Abbot to do the fact without sinne which historie being taken by him out of Iohn Fox his Actes and Monumentes who affirmeth that most of the ancient Historiographers of our Country do agree in this matter both of them are conuinced of wilful vntruthes for that they could not be ignorant but that of all the old Historiographers that liued in the time of King Iohn or within two hundred yeares after no one did euer affirme the same but rather the quite contrarie setting downe other particuler causes occasions of King Iohns death And further they could not but know and haue read Iohn Stowes Chronicle printed anno 1592. who hauing made diligent search about this matter out of all authors of antiquity could fynd no such thing and so he testifyeth in these wordes Thus saith he haue I set downe the life and death though much abbreuiated of King Iohn according to the writinges of Roger 〈◊〉 Roger Houeden Rad. Niger Rad. Cogshall Matthew Paris and others who all lyued when the King raigned and wrote for that tyme what they saw or heard credibly reported c. 68. Now then if this Chronicle of Stow was out and in euery mans hand some yeares before Syr Francis wrote his VVatchword and that hereby is euident according to all ancient writers that the foresaid poysoning of King Iohn by a monke was neither written nor reported by any in those dayes with what Conscience could 〈◊〉 Francis and Fox alledge the 〈◊〉 againe 〈◊〉 a truth Was not heere wilfull deceipt nay 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 will and desire of deceauing 69. The same is layed against Syr Francis in cyting of sundry others as namely the Authority of S. Hierome for proofe of common prayer in a vulgar tongue Tota Ecclesia saith S. Hierome instar tonitruireboat Amen The whole Church like a mighty thunder doth sound out 〈◊〉 inferring therof that all by liklyhood did vnderstand the language wherin publicke seruice was then celebrated for that otherwise they could not so answere But marke the fraudes that are in this allegation First the Knight doth not explicate in particuler what Church it was wherof S. Hierome spake nor vpon what occasion nor to whome and secondly he doth conceale the wordes ' that immediatly went before followed after for that they made al against him For first S. Hierome spake of the Church of Rome in particuler where the latin tongue being in vse so commonly in his dayes that it was as it were their naturall language no maruaile though the common people could sound out Amen they vnderstanding for the most parte the latin tongue for we see also that in other Catholicke Countryes where the latin tongue is not so commonly in vse the common people by vse and practice can and do with common voyce sound out Amen in Letanies and other partes of latin seruice wherfore this circumstance was fraudulently concealed 70. As that other was in like manner that S. Hierome wrote these wordes vnto two vowed virgins Paula and Eustochium to whom he dedicated his said second booke of his Commentaries vpon the Epistle to the Galathians commending vnto them the faith and deuotiō of the Church of Rome aboue other Churches and yeelding a reason why the Apostle S. Paul did so highly commend the Roman Christians in his time both for their faith and obedience saying of the first I do giue thankes to my God by Iesus Christ for yow all sor that your faith is divulged throughout the whole world and in the end of the same Epistle he saith of their obedience in liuing according to their faith Your obedience is divulged into euery place of the world wherfore I take ioy in yow c. Vpon which testimony of the Apostle S. Hierome writeth thus Romanae plebis laudatur 〈◊〉 c. The faith of the Roman people is praysed by the Apostle for in what other place of the world is there such cōtinuall concourse vnto Churches and vnto the Sepulchers of Martyrs as in Rome In what place do they so sound out the word Amen to the likenesse of a certayne heauenly thunder Not for that the Romanes haue
both by bookes preachings and publike speeches of Magistrates as if it had byn a most heinous attempt in deed and not only these but by this occasion all Catholicks generally were most odiously traduced especially in this one point that touched them neerest to wit that they would seeme to conceaue any least hope of his Maiesties clemency and mercy towardes them by way of toleration or conniuency for their Religion or mitigation of their continuall pressures for the same 8. To which end were brought into this booke and published in print not only the Bishop of London his sermon at Paules Crosse vpon the fifth of August then past wherein he auowed his Maiesties protestation against Catholickes to the contrary but the speach also and charge of the L. Chancellour in the Star-chamber vnto the Lordes Iudges and communalty there present ready to departe into their countryes was deliuered as from the Kings owne mouth all tending to the same end of afflicting and disgracing the said people and depriuing them of all hope of any tolerance yea scoffing most bitterly and contemptuously at their folly for conceauing any such vaine hopes and inioyning the most seuere order for descrying searching apprehending imprisoning and punishing them which euer lightly was heard of as though they had 〈◊〉 the only or most grieuous male factors within the Realme and this only for their Religion 9. Soone after vpon the backe of this came forth S. Edvvard Cooke his Maiestyes Attorneyes Booke intituled by him his Fifth Part of Reportes which though in the entrance and fore-front it promised more calme and mild proceeding and so it performeth in phrase and style of writing yet was the drift and ending therof no lesse stinging then the Scorpions tayle it self against all sortes of Catholicks and their Religion And to say somewhat of it in this place his argument or subiect was new and strange taking vpon him to proue out of the old and ancient common lawes of England that the spirituall iurisdiction giuen by Act of Parlament to the late Queene Elizabeth in the first yeare of her raigne and exercised afterwardes by her in Ecclesiasticall matters was dew vnto her not only by vertue of that Statute but by vigour also of the said ancient common lawes and so acknowledged and practised by the olde ranke of our foregoing Kinges and Princes a conclusion no lesse strange and paradoxicall in wise and learned mens eares then that was of him who diuers ages after the warres of Troy ended and the true successe therof published by all writers throughout the world tooke vpon him to teach the contrary to wit that not the Grecians but the Troianes had the victory in that warre and so to reuerse and contradicte whatsoeuer had byn written taught or receaued before 10. Let the histories of our Christian English Kings euen from the first conuerted Ethelbert vnto King Henry the eight be examined whether this be so or not and whether a thousand monuments of theirs in almost a thousand yeares doe not testify them all to haue byn of contrary iudgment practice sense and beliefe in the controuersy proposed to that which M. Attorney by a few pieces of lawes distractedly alleadged woulde haue men to thinke Or if he delight as I take him to be learned to haue this argument more discussed for it is both ample and important let him but procure licence for his Antagonist to write and print his booke and I doubt not but that he will quickly be answered by some of his owne profession among whome I doe imagine that many fingers must needes itch and tickle to be doing in so aduantagious a cause or if not yet doe I dare assure him that some Deuine of our side shall ioine issue with him in that point for the confutation of his whole drifte and narration in those his Reportes but principally in the ouerthrowing of his iniurious conclusion wherby he would inferre that whosoeuer did not belieue and acknowledge the said late Queenes Ecclesiasticall feminine authority power and iurisdiction in spirituall matters was and is a traitor by the iudgment of the ancient common lawes of England receaued helde and practised euen vnder Catholicke Kinges and Princes of former times 11. Vnto which vntrue and improbable paradox he addeth another no lesse stinging nor better founded then the former which is that for the foremost eleuen yeares of Queene Elizabeths raigne vntill she was excommunicated by Pius Quintus No sorte of people of vvhat persvvasion soeuer in Religion refused to goe to the Protestantes Church which is euidently false both in many Puritanes and more Catholicks that refused openly in that time and then That vpon that occasion Catholicks first began to refuse which in like manner is false both for that they refused before and this occasion was altogeather impertinent to their refusall and thirdly most iniuriously of all he would further seeme to inferre that such as refuse now may in like manner be presumed to doe it vpon the same vndutifull minde towardes his Maiesty All which points doe tend to the exasperation and exulceration which euery one seeth and comming from a man of his place roome and neerenes in office about his Maiesty could not but make deepe impression and giue perhaps a great push to the lamentable precipitation of those vnfortunate Gentlemen that soone after ensued 12. VVhich being hapned came forth presently this other odious pamphlet of T. M. his deuised discouery wherunto now I am forced in particuler to answere it being in it self no lesse slaunderous and iniurious then the fact of the conspirators was wicked and grieuous to all Catholickes The booke beareth this title An exact discouery of Romish doctrine in case of Conspiracy and Rebellion But he that shall weigh it well shall finde it a more exacte discouery of English Ministeriall malice in case of sycophancy and calumniation the Authour endeauoring to ascribe that to publicke and generall doctrine which proceeded from priuate and particuler passion as also to drawe the temerity of a few to the hatred and condemnation of the whole Of which iniquity we shall haue occasion to speake more afterward in due place 13. Soone after this pamphlet appeared many more tending all for the most part to the same end of exulceration or driuing rather to plaine desperation euery one adding affliction to affliction and heaping hatred and enuy vpon them that detested bewailed the transgression happened no lesse but much more then these insolent insultors themselues Of this kinde I might name sundry that my self haue seene though being out of England I may presume to haue seene the least part of such as haue byn published and set forth 〈◊〉 this fact fell out as namely one intituled A Discourse of the late intended Treason wherin the discourser beginneth with this foundation That all English both at home and abroad vvere so fully in possession of contented peace at the
preuented in like occasions to wit that multitudes are not to be put in despaire no nor particuler men into extreame exasperation without hope of remedy for that despaire is the mother of precipitation extreme exasperation is the next dore to fury No counsaile no reason no regard of Religion nor other respect humaine or deuine holdeth place when men grow desperate all stringes of hope are cut of We see by experience that the least and weakest wormes of the earth which cannot abide the looke of a man yet when they are extremely pressed and put in despaire of escape they turne and leape in mans face it selfe which otherwise they so 〈◊〉 feare and dread 4. Wherfore seing this dangerous stickler would put this extreme despaire into so many thousandes of his Maiesties subiectes yow 〈◊〉 imagine what good seruice he meaneth to do him therby and what pay he deserueth for his labour Surely if a great rich man whose wealth lay in his flocke of sheepe had neuer so faire and fawning a dog following neuer so diligently his trencher and playing neuer so many flattering trickes before him yet if togeather with this he had that other currish quality also as to woory his maisters sheepe disseuer his fold disperse his flock and driue them into flight and precipitation it is like that his Maister out of his wisedome though otherwise he were delighted with his officious fawning would rather hange such a dog then aduenture to suffer so great and important losses by him And no Iesse is to be expected of the great equity prudence of our great Monarch when he shall well consider of the cause and consequence therof 5. And thus much of the malice and pernicious sequele of this assertion let vs see somewhat now also of the folly falsity therof To which effect I would first enquire if it be so that subiectes of different Religions are not comportable togeather vnder a Prince that is of one of those Religions for so must the question be proposed if we will handle it in generall then how doe the Iewes Christians liue togeather vnder many Christian Princes in Germany and Italy vnder the state of Venice yea vnder the Pope himselfe how doe Christians and Turkes liue togeather vnder the Turkish Emperour of Constantinople as also vnder the Persian without persecution for their Religion how did Catholickes and Arrians liue so many yeares togeather vnder Arrian Kinges and Emperours in old times both in Spaine and els 〈◊〉 how doe Catholickes and Protestantes liue togeather at this day vnder the most Christian King of France vnder the great King of Polonia and vnder the German Emperour in diuers partes of his dominions all Catholicke Princes and in the free-cityes of the Empyre And in particuler is to be considered that the Hussites haue liued now some hundreds of yeares in Bohemia vnder the Cathòlicke Princes and Emperours Lordes of that Countrey with such freedome of conuersation with Catholicke subiectes and vnion of obedience to the said Princes as at this day in the great Citty of Praga where the Emperour commonly resideth and where Catholicks 〈◊〉 wholy gouerne there is not so much as one 〈◊〉 Church knowne to be in the handes of any Catholicke Pastor of that citty but all are Hussites that haue the ordinary charges of soules and Catholickes for seruice sermons and Sacraments doe repaire only to monasteries according to ancient agreementes and conuentions betweene them though in number the said Catholickes be many times more then the other and haue all the gouernment and Commaundry in their handes as hath byn said These are demonstratiue proofes ad hominem and cannot be denied and consequently doe conuince that this make-bate Ministers proposition is false in generall That subiects of different religion may not liue togeather in 〈◊〉 peace if their gouernours will permit them Now if he can alleadge any seuerall weighty causes why this generall assertion holdeth not or may not holde in the particuler case of English Catholiks and Protestants vnder our present King we shall discusse them also and see how much they weigh 6. He pretendeth ten seuerall reasons in his pamphlet for causes of this incompossibility and therof doth his whole inuectiue consist Eight of them appertaine to doctrine and practice of rebellion in vs as he auoucheth and the other two vnto doubtfull speech or Equiuocation Of which later point hauing touched somewhat in the precedent Preface being to haue occasion to doe the same againe more largely afterward wee shall now consider principally of the former concerning doctrine and practice of quiet or vnquiet peaceable or dangerous humours behauiours of subiects both Catholicke Protestant 7. And as for Catholickes the Minister in all his eight reasons bringeth out nothing of nouelty against vs but only such pointes of doctrine as himselfe doth consesse and expresly proue that they were held and recevued in our publique schooles aboue foure hundred yeares gone as namely in his first reason For that we hold Protestants for hereticks so farre forth as they decline and differ obstinately from the receyued doctrine and sense of the Roman Catholicke Church and consequently that being Hereticks they are not true Christians nor can haue true faith in any one article of Christian beliefe and that the punishment determined by the ancient Canon lawes which are many and grieuous both spirituall temporall do or may therby light vpon them And in his second third and fourth reasons that wee teach That the Bishop of Rome as spirituall head of the vniuersall Church hath power aboue temporall Princes and may procure to let the Election and succession of such as are opposite or enemies to Catholicke Religion and that in some cases he may dissolue oathes of obediēce and the like 8. And further yet in his fifth sixt seauenth and eight reasons that in certaine occasions and vpon certaine necessities for preuenting of greater euils imminent to any Countrey Kingdome or common wealth especially if they be spirituall and appertaine to the saluation of soules the same high Pastour may restraine resist or punish the enormous excesses of temporall Princes if any such fall out by Censures excommunication depriuation or deposition though this not but vpon true iust and vrgent causes when other means cannot preuaile for auoiding those euerlasting euils 9. All which doctrines for this is the summe of all he saith or alleadgeth do cōteine as yow see no new matter of malice against Protestant Princes inuented by vs for that the Minister himselfe as now we haue said confesseth that for these three or foure later hundred yeares these positions haue byn generally receiued by all the vniuersall Church and face of Christendome so as being established so many hundred yeares before Protestants were borne or named in the world they could not be made or inuented against them in particuler but only are drawne vnto them at this time by
great effusion of Christian bloud 14. And the like I might relate of many other particuler States and principalities of Germany as namely that of the Princes and Archbishops Electors of Collen Treuers and Mentz with all the State Palatine of Rhene the Bishoppricke and Dukedome of Liege and other partes adioining where togeather with this new Ghospell especially now deuided into different sectes of Lutheranisme Zuinglianisme Caluinisme Anabaptisme new Arrianisme and the like entred presently new sedition Rebellion and warres and from thence dispersed it selfe longe and wide both North and South East and West In the North to Saxony Denmarke Norway Sweueland Polonia 〈◊〉 and other adioining countries and on the south to Zwitzerland first Sauoy Grisons and other partes next adhering where diuers battailes were fought Zuinglius himselfe being present as the chief stirrer in those of the Cantons of Zwitzerland his countrey and 〈◊〉 therin and Caluin Beza Farellus and other such Ministers being the principall inciters in the Rebellions of Geneua and neighbour countries against the Duke of Sauoy and other Lordes and Princes therof as is apparant by their owne and other mens bookes of the same part and faction 15. Towardes the East the same fire of sedition passed with the same new Protestant Ghospell to Bemeland Austria Hungary Siletia Moldauia and other bordering Prouinces where more or lesse it hath continued till our time wherin we see by lamētable experience that they haue ioined euen with the Turke himselfe against their Soueraigne Lord and Emperour and against the Christian name and cause in despite of Catholicke Religion as Boscaine the famous Caluinian Rebell and others of that Religion or irreligion rather in these partes for some yeares now haue done and finally haue forced the said Emperour for auoiding the fatall ruine of Christendome to graunt him the Princedome of Transiluania during his life which God for his so great wickednes hath soone cut of 16. But to the West partes of the world to wit France and all partes and parcels of that 〈◊〉 Kingdome the same fire was transported with greatest fury of all as doe testify their foure generall most bloudy warres lasting for many yeares togeather wherof if I should recount but the least particulers set downe by their owne histories it would rue any Christian hart to heare or read the same 17. From hence if we draw neere homeward to Flanders England and Scotland the effectes of this new Ghospell and Ghospellers are yet more present vnto our eyes For who can recount the thousandes of people that vpon this occasion haue lost their liues both temporall and eternall as may be feared in these long bloudy warres of the low countries begunne first and continued euer since vpon the entrance of Protestant Religion in those States Who can number the Citties beseiged taken rifled and ransacked The townes and villages burnt and ouerthrowne The countries spoiled The people slaine and murdered about this difference And if we looke into England and the state but of one sole Catholicke Princes gouerning there but for foure or fiue yeares ouer Protestant subiectes misliking her gouernment for Religion yow shall find more conspiracies treasons and Rebellions practised against her in proportion of so few yeares by the said sorte of people if we consider what Northumberland Suffolke VViat Courtney Stafford Fetherstone VVilliam Thomas and others in different conspiracies practiced against her then in more then 40. yeares was done against her Protestant sister by her Catholicke subiectes though neuer so much afflicted iniured and persecuted by her 18. But of all other countries Scotland may be an example and president of Protestant spirites what they are vnder a Catholike Prince or Princesse though otherwise neuer so vertuous or neuer so mild For who can deny the exceeding great prudence moderation benignity liberality and other vertues of the Noble Queene Mary Regent of Scotland Grandmother to our Soueraigne that now raigneth when those furious and seditious Ministers Knox Goodman Mollocke Douglasse Meffan and others began to raise vp her subiectes against her from the yeare 1557. which was the fourth of Queene Maries raigne of England and continued the same in most spitefull and barbarous manner with intolerable insolency both of wordes and actes for 3. or 4. yeares togeather assisted principally by the helpes aide and encouragement of Queene Elizabeth that had succeded in the Crowne of England vntill through griefe sorrow and affliction the excellent Princesse gaue vp the Ghost vpō the yeare 1560. hauing byn 〈◊〉 deposed and the lye giuen her publickly and most 〈◊〉 by them And finally seing herselfe so extreemely 〈◊〉 and inuironed with these rebell forces and with a puissant army sent from England in their succour consumed and pyned away with 〈◊〉 of mind as hath byn said And no Christian could but haue compassion of her case The particulers are written by Knox and Buchanan themselues in their histories of Scotland who were two chiefe firebrandes in that combustion and by Holinshed an English Protestant Author in his description of Scotland allowing well and liking the same according to the sense of English Protestantes who concurred with them both in good will and cooperation 19. And thus much of the Queene Regent but now of her excellent daughter the Queene regnant Mother of our Soueraigne had they any greater respect vnto her notwithstanding all her benignity and benefites towardes them at her new returne out of France when she pardoned all that was past and accepted of new oathes and promises of faithfull obedience at their 〈◊〉 did all this I say any thing auaile her or procure her safty or quietnes in gouerning these new Ghospellers No truly so long as she remained Catholicke that is to her death and after her death they pursued her with the greatest hatred and most barbarous cruelty that euer perhaps was read of against Prince or Princesse before or after her I shall breifly heere set downe some 〈◊〉 particularities of many as I find them 〈◊〉 both in English and Scottish Histories themselues and that by Protestant writers as hath byn said 20. This Noble Queene after long deliberation in France what course to take in those troublesome times when the spirit of the new Caluinian Ghospell had raised tumultes conspiracies warres and Rebellions throughout the most part of all States Kingdomes and Prouinces round about her determined finally to credit the faire promises of her said Protestant subiectes in Scotland and to goe thither which she did and arriued at Lith the 20. of August vpon the yeare 1561. But before she departed from France there being sent to her from the Catholicke party Doctor Iohn Lesley Bishop of Rosse to counsaile her not to trust her bastard-brother Iames Steward Prior of S Andrewes that had byn the cheife Author of all the former broi les in Scotland and was now sent vnto her from the
two manners of spirit in Protestant Catholicke subiectes doe best content him and which of them he may thinke more sure or dangerous vnto him For if we looke ouer the ancient recordes of our countries for a thousand yeares before while English men were Catholicke we shall not find so much violent and barbarous dealing with their 〈◊〉 as I haue heere recounted in lesse then thirty within the compasse of one only Kingdome vnder the Protestantes 26. And if we compare the obiections made heere against vs by T. M. in this his calumnious pamphlet as in the sequēt Chapter more particulerly you shall see discussed with these and the like actions of their people they are very trifles and streyninges in respect of these other As for example Doleman is accused to write that The common-wealth hath authority to choose to themselues a King when they haue none and to limit him lawes wherby they would be gouerned And that of Doctor Stapleton That the people or multitude was not made for the Princes sake but the Prince for the people That Religion is is to be had in consideration in choice or admittance 〈◊〉 a King where choice and admittance is permitted That the Pope being head of the Catholicke Church may in some cases and for some causes dispense in oathes That he may censure Princes vpon iust causes though not in temporall matters but indirectly only and vpon such necessity as no other remedy can be found for 〈◊〉 of the spirituall good of his subiectes That euill 〈◊〉 declyning into Tyranny may be repressed but not by priuate men or popular mutiny 27. All these pointes I say and diuers others which this fellow doth so greatly exaggerate and odiously amplify against vs are so ouerrunne by them both in doctrine and practice if we compare them as they scarse admit any comparison at all especially if we cast our eyes vpon their present practice which representeth the liuely fruite of their doctrine as namely the most dangerous Rebellions of Caluinian and Trinitarian Sectaries euen now standing on foote in Hungary Austria and Transiluania against the Emperour and of like men in Polonia against that mild and most iust King and of Lutherans in Suetia of Puritanes Brownists Protestantes and the like in the Low-countries so many yeares now continued against their true and natural Prince as before hath byn declared which maketh another manner of impression and force of consequence if it be well pondered then doth the particuler temerarious fact of halfe a score of yong Centlemen put in despaire by apprehension of publique persecution without demerit of the persecuted or hope of remedy for the same though this also be inexcusable but the difference of euils is worthy of consideration especially with the more graue and prudent sort of people that are not carried away with passion or otherwise misled by sinister information 28. And thus hauing said sufficiently in generall about the first and chiefe ground of our Ministers calumniation concerning Rebellion and Conspiracies wherby he would make impossible the 〈◊〉 and mutuall vnion of Catholicke subiectes with Protestantes we shall passe on to his second pillar of impugnation named by him The doctrine of Equiuocation but yet first we thinke it expedient to examine in a seuerall Chapter the particuler reasons which he hath framed for some shew of proofe to this his seditious assertion TEN REASONS OR RATHER CALVMNIATIONS BROVGHT BY T. M. For maintenance of his former Proposition That Catholicke people are intolerable in a Protestant gouernment in respect of disloyalty conspiracies and Rebellion Confuted and returned vpon himself and his CHAP. II. ALbeit that which we haue laid forth before in the precedent Chapter for the ouerthrow of the slanderous iniurious imputations of our aduersary about Rebellion and conspiracies be sufficient I doubt not for satisfaction of any indifferent and dispassionate minde that is not ouerborne with preiudice yet haue I thought it expedient to passe somewhat further also and to enter the list with him for improuing his particuler reasons on which he would seene to found his calumniations wherin as nothing is so absurd or false according to the Oratours opinion but that by speech and smooth discourse it may be made in some eares probable at leastwise in the conceipt of him that speaketh and indeauoreth to deceaue another so this Minister T. M. for of that trade he is held now to be hauing designed to himself an argumēt wherby to make Catholickes odious and gathered togeather for that end diuers shewes or shadowes for the furniture of his forsaid found assertion that Catholickes are not tolerable in a Protestant State he intituleth them Pregnant obseruations directly prouing Remish schooles to be Seminaries of Rebellion in all Protestantes gouernment Wheras indeed they are not so much pregnant obseruations as malignant collections and inforced inferences vpon false groundes Neither do they at all either directly or indirectly proue that which he pretendeth as by examination shall presently appeare if it may please the Reader to hold an equall and indifferent eare in the meane space to the discussing of the controuersy 2. And first of all to make vp a competent number in forme of a decalogue he streineth himself much to bring out ten different reasons and in deed euery man may see that it is a streine for that all might haue byn vttered in two or three at the most if not in fewer for that all doe concerne in effect the Catholike doctrine about the Popes authority either in Princes or priuate mens affaires And herehence is deduced his first reason concerning the censures and punishments determined by Ecclesiasticall Canons against them that by the Church are denounced for Heretickes The second reason toucheth the said Popes authority spirituall 〈◊〉 secular Princes The third the hinderance of their succession by the same lawes The fourth the oath and obedience of their subiectes The fifth their excommunication and deposition The sixth the practice of their death by the Popes licence The 〈◊〉 the allowance and approbation therof The eight the Rebellion of Priestes whensoeuer they are able The ninth the dissoluing and euacuation of oathes by the Popes authority The last that Romish Priestes by the order of the Pope must professe seditious positions ex officio that is to say as he is a Romish Priest By which enumeration yow may see in deed that the poore man was more barren then pregnant and after his streine had partum difficilem a hard child-birth as may appeare by that which he hath brought forth to wit a mouse for a mountaine and therupon we may iustly say parturiunt montes c. We shall giue a short view ouer all his reasons The first Reason §. 1. THey who by their slanderous doctrine saith he doe make all Protestants by their common censure Heretickes so odious as vnworthy of any ciuill or naturall society must necessarily be iudged seditious intolerable amongst the
is not fire and sworde excommunication and anathematization prodition deposition conspiracy murther absoluing of subiects relaxation of oathes and other such hostile actions as our seditious aduersary heere laieth togeather to make the Popes office and authority more odious 42. Only two publicke examples to my remembrance can be alleadged of any Protestant Princes excommunicated censured or molested by the Sea Apostolicke since Luther began his breach which are now almost an hundred yeares notwithstāding there haue byn so many of them and so exorbitant things committed by them against Catholicke Religion and the said Sea Apostolicke as is notorious to all men And these two vpon speciall causes and inducements to wit Q. Elizabeth of England and King Henry then of Nauarre and now also of France for of King Henry of Enggland I make no mention for that his cause was not Religion at that time the first of the two in regarde of the publicke violent change of Religion which shee made in her Realme with the deposition depriuation imprisonment or exile of all Catholicke Bishops Prelates Clergy and others that would not yeeld their consent thereunto and this as is alleadged contrary to her publicke promise and oath at her Coronation 43. The second for feare least he comming to the Crowne of France in that disposition wherein then he was presumed to be should attempt the like change in that great Kingdome And to both these actes were the Popes of those times drawen and incited either secretly or openly by some of the chief Nobility of both Realmes whome most it concerned And albeit the former hath not had that successe which was hoped and perhaps suggested yet the finall euent of the second hath byn more prosperous then at that time could be expected no King lightly in Christendome hauing made more reall demonstratiōs of loue vnion and reuerence to the Sea of Rome then his most Christian Maiesty nor receaued greater enterchange of graces and fauours from the same Sea and this in matters of most importance for the setling and establishment of his Imperiall Crowne and royall race 44. Wherfore al this bitter barking of this Minister T. M. about excommunicating depriuing deposing and murthering Princes as also about absoluing of subiectes from their oathes and the like ceaseth as yow see by a little good correspondence betweene the said Princes and their generall Pastor And when matters passe at the worst and are in most exasperation betweene them yet is it not the tenth part of perill which Protestant doctrine and practice draweth them into vpon any generall disgust against their gouernments For if in lue of these two Protestant Princes censured by the Sea Apostolicke we should recount all the Catholicke Princes that haue byn vexed molested iniured or depriued of their States or violated in their persons or brought to confusion in our Northerne parts of the world in this time to wit in Sauoy France Switzerland Germany Bemeland Austria Poland Sweueland Denmark Flanders England and Scotland and some other places wherof we haue treated more largely in the precedent Chapter there would be no comparison at all Of false dealing and sleights of T. M. §. 4. ANd yet further yow must vnderstand that this malicious calumniator proposing vnto himself for his end to make vs hatefull doth not only encrease multiply and exaggerate matters against vs by all art of sycophancy as making some things to seeme odious that of themselues are true and laudable and exaggerating others to a farre higher degree then wherin they were spoken or are to be vnderstood inferring also generall propositions vpon some shewes of particuler proofes but besides all this he passeth also further obiecteth often times against vs the very same things that his owne Authours doe hold wherof before we haue laid downe some examples and shall doe more hereafter yea shameth not manifestly to falsify and ly also as when he auoucheth with great resolution that the late K. Henry of France was censured by Pope Xixtus v. for this only crime for that himselfe being a Papist yet fauoured the Protestantes and especially the Prince of Nauarre Wheras it is knowne that besides this he had murthered most miserably two principall peeres Princes of his Crowne the Duke and Cardinall of Guise neerest in bloud to his Maiesty of England and therby broken his solemne oath made but a little before in presence of many when he receaued the Bl. Sacrament to the contrary And how then was his only crime to haue fauoured the Protestants as this Minister auerreth 46. And againe in the same place or precedent page he hath these wordes Pope Adrian being guilty of like seditious practice against the Emperour Henry the second was choked with a fly And in his quotation citeth Nauclerus for it Generatione 139. which should be 39. for that Nauclerus hath nothing neere so many Generations in that Part and in steed of Henry the second he should haue said Frederick the first of that name for that Henry the second was before the time of our Conquest and almost two hundred yeares before Adrian the fourth our English Pope of whome we now speake who liued in the time of King Stephen and King Henry the second of England and was a Holy man and accompted the Apostle of Noruegia for conuerting the same to our Christian faith before he was Pope and all Authors doe write honorably of him so doth Nauclerus affirme and therefore though he make mention of such a fable related by Vrspergensis that was a Schismatical writer in those dayes who also doth not absolutely auouch it but with this temperament vt fertur as the reporte goeth yet doth the said Nauclerus reiect the same as false and confuteth it by the testimonies of al other writers especially of Italy that liued with him and therby knew best both his life and death And yet all this notwithstanding will this false ladde T. M. needes set downe this History as true affirming it for such and neuer so much as giuing his Reader to vnderstand that any other denied the same or that the only Author himself of this fiction doubted therof And is not this perfidious dealing or can any man excuse him from falshood and malice in this open treachery 47. Another like tricke he plaieth some few pages before this againe citing out of Doctor Bouchiers booke De iusta abdicatione these wordes 〈◊〉 occidere honestum est quod cuiuis impunè facere permittitur quod ex communi consensu dico And then he Englisheth the same thus Any man may lawfully murder a Tyrant which I defend saith he by common consent But he that shall read the place in the Author himself shall find that he holdeth the very contrary to wit that a priuate man may not kill a Tyrant that is not first iudged and declared to be a publicke enemy by the common-wealth and he proueth the same at
to Princes concerning the obedience or Rebellion of their subiectes whatsoeuer hath byn obiected by the accusation or calumniation of our Minister in his former discouery against Catholickes hath not byn any direct doctrine teaching or insinuating much lesse inciting subiectes to disobedience or Rebellion as before hath byn declared but only by a certaine consequence or inferēce that for so much as in certaine vrgent and exorbitant cases we ascribe to the Christian Common-wealth and supreme Pastour therof authority to restraine punish supreme Magistrates in such cases that therfore our doctrine is seditious and tending indirectly at least à longè to Rebellion though the visible experience of so many great Kingdomes round about vs lyuing for so many yeares and sometimes ages also in quiet security notwithstāding this doctrine doth conuince this to be a calumniation 14. But our Aduersaries doe not onely teach this That euery Christian Common-wealth vpon mature deliberation and with generall consent hath such anthority but further also that particular men and Common people haue the same and are not only taught but vrged in like manner exhorted to vse it when soeuer they suppose their Prince to offer them iniury or hard measure especially in matters of Religion wherof the moderate Answerer obiecteth many examples and proofes against T. M. taken out of their owne bookes wordes and wrytinges as also by the testimonies of other principall Protestant-writers wherevnto though T. M. would make a shew to answere somewhat now in this his Reply and therupon hath framed a second seuerall part of his booke for iustificatiō of Protestantes in that behalfe yet is it so far of from A full satisfaction the title of his whole worke as in effect he confesseth all that his Aduersary opposeth no lesse then yow haue heard in the former question though somewhat he will seeme sometimes to wrangle and to wype of the hatred of their assertion by Commentes of his owne deuise 15. And indeed what other answere can be framed to most plaine assertions out of their owne wordes and writinges as of Caluin Beza Hottoman and so many other French Caluinistes as I haue mentioned in the first Chapter of this Treatise Goodman also Gilby VVhittingham Knox Buchanan and others neerer home vnto vs All the forenamed Collections in like manner of him that is now Archbishop of Canterbury of Doctour Sutcliffe and others in the books intituled Dangerous positions Suruey of the pretended Disciplinary Doctrine and the like wherin their positions are most cleerly set downe concerning this matter And albeit this Minister T. M. in his Reply doth vse all the art possible to dissemble the same by telling a peece of his Aduersaries allegations in one place and another peece in another altering all order both of Chapters matter and method set downe by the Answerer so as neuer hare when she would sit did vse more turninges and windinges for couering her selfe which the Reader may obserue euen by the places themselues quoted by him out of his aduersaries booke yet are his answerers such where he doth answere for to sundry chiefe points he saith nothing at all as doe easely shew that in substance he confesseth all and cannot deny what is obiected And where he seeketh to deny any thing there he intangleth himself more then if flatly he confessed the same Some few examples I shall alledge wherby coniecture may be made of the rest 16. The Answerer alledgeth first the wordes of Goodman in his booke against Queen Mary wherin he writeth expressely that it is lawfull by Godes law and mans to kill both Kinges and Queenes when iust cause is offered and herself in particuler for that she was an enemy to God and that all Magistrates and Princes transgressing Gods lawes might by the people be punished condemned depriued put to death aswel as priuate transgressours and much other such doctrine to this effect cited out of the said Goodman All which the Bishop of Canterbury his second booke of Dangerous positions hath much more largely both of this Goodman and many other English Protestantes cheife Doctours of their Primitiue Church residing at that time in Geneua And what doth T. M. reply now to this Yow shall heare it in his owne wordes If I should iustify this Goodman saith he though your examples might excuse him yet my hart shall condemne my self But what doe yow professe to proue all Protestantes teach positions Rebellious Proue it Heere is one Goodman who in his publicke book doth maintaine him I haue no other meanes to auoid these straites which yow obiect by the example of one to conclude all Protestants in England Rebellious then by the example of all the rest to answere there is but one So he 17. And this is his full satisfaction and faithfull Reply as he calleth his booke but how poore satisfaction this giueth and how many pointes there be heere of no faith or credit at all is quickly seene by him that will examine them For first how doe the 〈◊〉 alledged agaist this Goodman by the Moderate Answerer excuse him as heere is said seeing the wordes he alledgeth against him out of his owne booke are intollerable and my Lord of Canterbury alledgeth farre worse As for example that it is most lawfull to kill wicked Kinges when they fall to Tyranny but namely Queenes and thervpon that Queene Mary ought to haue byn put to death as a Tyrant Monster and cruèll beast alledging for confirmation therof diuers examples out of Holy Scripture as that the Subiectes did lawfully kill the Queenes Highnes Athalia and that the worthy Captaine Iehu killed the Queenes Maiesty Iesabell and that Elias though no Magistrate killed the Queenes Highnes Chaplaines the Priestes of Baal and that these examples are left for our instruction c. And now tell me how may these examples excuse M. Goodman as our Minister Morton auoucheth 18. Secondly it is both false and fond to affirme that the moderate Answerer tooke vpon him to proue either that all Protestantes in these our dayes doe teach such Rebellious positions or that all Protestantes in England are Rebellious as heere is affirmed for that this were to deale as iniuriously with them as they and he doe with vs by imputing this last Rebellious fact of a few in England to the whole sort of Catholickes and to their doctrine It was sufficient for the Answerers purpose to shew that both Goodman and many others principall pillars of the English new Ghospell in those daies did hold belieue and practice those positions out of the true spirit of the said Ghospell And herevpon thirdly it followeth that it is a notorious impudency to auouch with such resolutiō as this man doth that there is but this one of that opinion and that one dram of drosse as he saith proueth not the whole masse to be no gold For who knoweth not first that VVhittingam afterward Deane of Durham
doth not this man know that the difference betweene a good and bad gouernment a true King and a Tyrant consisteth in this that the one raigneth for his owne good the other for the good of his subiects What impiety were it to affirme this defect to be in Christes Kingly gouernment and consequētly what folly is it to bring in such reasons But let vs see what he saith further 21. Christ saith he as Priest is suppliant to his Father as King he is predominant ouer all powers and principalities equally with his Father But now wee haue shewed before that there be two partes or functions of Priesthood the one towardes God to be suppliant by sacrifice and intercession the other to be predominant ouer men by spirituall gouernment vpon their soules and that both these doe agree to Christ in respect of his high Priesthood and as he is man and much more the other of his temporall Kingdome so as to make him equall to his Father in this as T. M. doth is an impious absurdity for that vnder his Fathers vniuersall Kingdome Christ himself is also conteined as a subiect according to those wordes of graduation in S. Paul Omnia vestra sunt c. vos autem Christi Christus autem Dei All thinges are yours life death the world thinges past thinges to come and yow are of Christ Christ of God that is to say all thinges for Christ are subiect to yow so you are and ought to be subiect to Christ and Christ to God his Father Now then see how wisely this man frameth his foresaid maine Conclusion that as in Christ his Kingdome had the preheminence of his Priesthood which is false as we haue shewed so must it hold also among men that Kingly power be preferred before Priestly temporall before spirituall Of which opinion S. Chrysostome doth thinke that no man but mad or furious can be Equidem saith he neminem existere talem dixerim nisi si quis furiarum aestu percitus sit I cannot thinke any man to be of this opinion to preferre temporall authority before spirituall except a man should become mad with the rage of furies And so to S. Chrysostome I leaue our Minister to be charmed from these kinde of Hereticall furies THE SECOND PART OF THIS CHAPTER CONTEYNING Three particular kindes of proofes alledged by T. M. against the Popes Supremacy to vvit Of the new and old Testament and from reason it self ALl this that hitherto hath byn treated by our Aduersary hath byn by way as it were of preamble or preface for abasing Priesthood as you haue seene euen in Christ himself therby to subiect the same in Christians to temporall authority but about this point I wish the Reader to looke ouer the forenamed two Chapters of the late Answere to Syr Edward Cooke I meane the second and fourth and I suppose he will remaine satisfied in the preheminency of the one aboue the other Now notwithstanding for the second part of this Chapter we shall bring into a short view the principall pointes hādled by T. M. in this his confutation of the Popes Supremacy And albeit you may easily make a coniecture of what substance it is like to be by that which already you haue seéne discussed yet shall we descend to some principall particulars for that he reduceth in effect all his proofes to three chief heades the first concerning the state of the Sinagogue vnder the Iewes the second of the Christian Church vnder the new Testament the third by reason common to them both From the State of the old Testament §. 1. 23. FOr the first he setteth downe as argumentes of ours for licencing Popes to kill Princes a large list of Kinges and Princes deposed murthered or molested vnder the old Testament as though we did found our doctrine theron for which cause he giueth the title of Romish pretence to the said list alledging therin fourteene seuerall examples as Saul deposed by the Prophet Samuel Roboam by the Prophet Achia the Queene Athalia by the chief Priest Iehoida King Antiochus resisted and driuen out of his Dominion ouer Iury by the Priest Mathathias and the Machabees his children the Priestes of Baal and other Ministers of the King slaine by the Prophets Elias Elizeus the great Captaine Holofernes by Iudith King Eglon by Ahod Sisera by Iabel Queene Iezabel by Iehu at the appointmēt of the Prophet Elizeus with seauenty children of King Achab the death of King Achab who was slaine also miserably himself by Godes appointment the Prophetes prediction King Amon slaine by his owne seruantes for his wickednes to whome we may ad the death of King Agag by the commaundement of Samuel the Prophet the slaughter of King Ioas by his owne seruantes And lastly King Ozias for exercising the Priestes office and function was by the high Priest depriued of his Kingdome 24. And when he had set downe all this ranke of these vnfortunate Princes their deathes and depositions as though we had delighted therin or proposed all that heere is said to be imitated he saith Heere we heare nothing but fighting dispossessing and killing of Kinges those cheifly by Priestes and Prophetes of God in the old Testament propounded to the Prelates of the new to teach them to erect their Miters aboue Crownes Doe yow see the malice of the man If himself hath gathered together this Catalogue of Princes that came to ill endes were slaine or deposed is it maruaile though he heare nothing but that himself liketh to lay forth 25. The difference and comparison of Miters and Crownes is fond and ridiculous and brought in only to make the matter it self odious for the true comparison is only betweene spirituall and temporal authority the one apperteyning to soules the other to bodies the one called heauenly the other earthly the one proper to Priestes the other to ciuill Princes as before yow haue heard declared out of ancient Fathers who notwithstanding were neuer reprehended nor called into enuy for erecting Miters aboue Crownes in that sense as this prophane Calumniator doth heere vrge and exaggerate 26. And as for this whole matter of the examples out of the old Testamēt our principall question being only as before we haue declared VVhether God hath left any lawfull meanes for restrayning euill Princes in certaine cases of extreame danger and whether Priestes also and Prelates in Christian Religion but especially the highest Priest may deale therin These examples are fraudulently heaped and hudled togeather by T. M. as though all were equally stood vpon by Catholicke writers and this to the end that he may giue himself matter to answere afterward as he doth by distinguishing that all doe not proue the self same thing nor were equally lawfull nor done by equall authority or approbation nor appertaine equally to the matter we haue in hād which Catholicke writers also doe say and haue taught him to
say though he dissemble it wherof we may read both Cunerus Carerius Salmeron Barkleius Reginaldus and Boucherus here by him cited out of whome he hath taken the most part of that he writeth in this affaire 27. Wheras then we must confesse with the Philosopher and with reason it self that Quidlibet ex quolibet non est consequens euery thing followeth not of whatsoeuer it seemeth that two pointes only of any moment concerning the controuersy in hand may truly and sincerly be deduced out of this number of examples now alledged the first that as temporall authority of Princes is from God and he will haue it respected and obeyed as from himself so one way or other he faileth not to punish them grieuously and to bring them oftentimes to great affliction and desolation when they gouerne not well and this either by ordinary or extraordinary meanes as himself liketh best To which end is that seuere admonitiō in the second Psalme Et nūc Reges intelligite erudimini qui iudicatis terram seruite Domino in timore exultate ei cum tremore Apprehendite disciplinam nequando irascatur Dominus pereatis c. And now yow Kinges vnderstand and yow that gouerne the earth be instructed serue almighty God in feare and reioice vnto him with trembling Admit discipline lest he fal into wrath against yow yow perish c. And this is the best most pious meditatiō which a Christian man can draw or lay before Princes out of those disasterous euentes as fell to diuers by Godes owne apointment or permission vnder the old Testament and not the comparison of Myters and Crownes which this Minister ridiculously bringeth in 28. Secondly may be noted that in the execution of Godes iustice designement in this behalfe he vsed also oftentimes the help concurrence of both Priestes and Prophetes other holy men who notwithstanding may be presumed out of their said holy disposition to haue abhorred such effusion of bloud war and other calamities which by fulfilling Godes ordinance made vnto them either by secret inspiration or open commandment were to ensue and follow and consequently that all Priestes were not debarred from dealing in such affairs when God required their cooperation therin 29. All the question then is how and when and where and by whome and for what causes and in what cases with what circumstances this restraint of Princes may be vsed wherin I haue shewed aboundantly before that the moderation prescribed by Catholickes is far greater without comparison then is that of the Protestantes whether we respect either their doctrine or practice of which both kindes we haue before produced sufficient examples and in this place the Authors most alledged by T. M. about this controuersy against violence towardes Princes are Catholicke as namely Cunerus a learned Bishop of the low Countreys in his booke De Officio Principis Christiani and Barkleius a Reader of Law in Loraine in six bookes written by him De Regno Regali potestate aduersus Monarchomacos Of Kingdome and Kingly power against impugners of Princes the first writing against the Rebellions and violent attemptes of the subiectes of Holland and Zeland and other Prouinces therunto annexed and by that occasion treating in generall how vnlawfull a thing it is for subiectes to take that course vpon any discontentment whatsoeuer handleth the matter very learnedly though briefly 30. But the other Doctour Barkley taking vpon him to treat the same matter much more largely directeth his pen principally against the bookes of certaine Protestantes of our time as Hottoman Brute Buchanan and others before mentioned for so he saith in his preface Non contentus Satanas tis qui parens ille malorum mendaciorum Lutherus c. Satan being not contēted with those wicked doctrines which Luther the Father of all wickednes and lies and other slanderous Railers that came out of his kytchin had with infamous mouthes and intolerable audacity vomited out against Princes he sent forth also into the world to fly before mens eyes other most seditious bookes Hottomani FrancoGalliam Bruti vindicias Tyrannorum Bucchanani Dialogum de iure Regni the booke of Hottoman dwelling in Geneua intituled Free-France or the Freedome of France to wit of the Protestantes against their Kinges and Princes that other also of Brutus a man of the same place and crew intituled The reuenge that subiectes ought to take of their Princes if they become Tyrantes the third of Buchanan schoole-maister in times past to our Kinges Maiesty intituled A Dialogue of the right of Kingly power subiecting the same to the people yea and to euery priuate person therof when it shall seeme vnto him necessary for the common-wealth or expedient for Godes glory as before yow haue heard Against all which this Doctour Barkley a Catholicke man writeth his six bookes so as in this point for Princes security we are far more forward then Protestantes 31. And albeit this said Doctour doth include in like manner Doctour Boucher a French Catholicke writer reprehending diuers thinges vttered by the said Boucher in his booke De iusta abdicatione against the late King Henry the third of France yet in the principall point whether priuate men either for priuate or publicke causes may vse violence against their lawful Prince not lawfully denounced for a publique enemy by the whole state and common-wealth in this point I say the said Boucher is absolutly against the same so protesteth and proueth it by diuers argumentes shewing himself therin to be quite contrary and to abhorre not only the doctrine of VVickcliffe and Husse condemned in the Councell of Constance about that matter but also of the forsaid Protestant writers Hottoman Brute Bucchanan Knox Goodman Gilby VVhittingham and the like among whome also I may include Iohn Fox who in his history of Iohn Husse alloweth that proposition of his Prelates and Princes leese their authority when they fall into mortall sinne as the Author of the VVarn-word proueth more largely out of Fox himself 32. And thus much for the first point about examples drawne from the times of the old Testament out of which little cā be vrged to the proofe or disproofe of this question besides the two generall pointes by vs noted before For to bring into disputation whether Priesthood or Kingly principality had the vpper hand in that law is to small purpose the matter being cleere that as the Kinges and so likewise their Captaines Iudges and Gouernours before they had Kinges had the preheminence in all temporall affaires so in spirituall and such as concerned God imediatly the were referred principally to Priestes and the temporall Magistrate commaunded to heare them to take the law of them consequently also the interpretation therof to repaire vnto them in consultation of doubtes and to stand to their iudgment and definition that Priestes and Prophetes should consult immediatly
consequently that he may assigne a Church to the Arrians Wherto I answere saith S. Ambrose trouble not your selfe O Emperour nor thinke that yow haue Imperiall right ouer those thinges that are diuine doe not exalt your selfe but if yow wil raigne long be subiect to God for it is written that those thinges that belong to God must be giuen to God and to Cesar only those thinges that belōg to Cesar Pallaces appertaine to the Emperour but Churches to the Priest the right of defending publicke walles is committed to yow but not of sacred thinges Thus Doctor Barkley out of S. Ambrose in the very place cited by T. M. which he thought good wholy to pretermit and cut of as not making for his purpose and so had he done more wisely if he had left out also the other authority of Pope Leo which he reciteth in the eight place of authorities out of ancient Fathers in these wordes 18. The eighth Father saith he is Pope Leo writing to a true Catholicke Emperour saying Yow may not be ignorant that your Princely power is giuen vnto yow not only in worldly regiment but also spirituall for the preseruation of the Church as if he said not only in cases temporall but also in spirituall so far as it belongeth to the outward preseruation not to the personall administration of them and this is the substance of our English oath And surther neither doe our Kinges of England chalenge nor subiectes condescend vnto In which wordes yow see two thinges are conteined first what authority S. Leo the Pope aboue eleuen hundred yeares gone ascribed vnto Leo the Emperour in matters spirituall and Ecclesiasticall The second by this mans assertion that neither our Kinges of England chaleng nor doe the subiectes condescend vnto any more in the oath of the Supremacy that is proposed vnto them which if it be so I see no cause why all English Catholickes may not take the same in like manner so far forth as S. Leo alloweth spiritual authority to the Emperour of his time Wherfore it behooueth that the Reader stand attent to the deciding of this question for if this be true which heere he saith our controuersy about the Supremacy is at an end 19. First then about the former point let vs consider how many waies T. M. hath corrupted the foresaid authority of S. Leo partly by fraudulent allegation in Latin and partly by false translation into English For that in Latin it goeth thus as himself putteth it downe in the margent Debes incunctanter aduertere Regiam potestatem non solùm ad mundi regimen sed maximè ad Ecclesiae praesidium esse collatam Yow ought ô Emperour resolutly to consider that your Kingly power is not only giuen vnto yow for gouernment of the world or worldly affaires but especially for defence of the Church and then doe ensue immediatly these other wordes also in S. Leo suppressed fraudulently by the Minister for that they explicate the meaning of the Author Vt ausus nefarios comprimendo quae bene sunt statuta defendas veram pacem his quae sunt turbata restituas To the end that yow may by repressing audacious attemptes both defend those thinges that are well ordeined and decreed as namely in the late generall Councell of Calcedon and restore peace where matters are troubled as in the Citty and Sea of Alexandria where the Patriarch Proterius being slaine and murdered by the conspiracy of the Dioscorian Heretickes lately condemned in the said Councell all thinges are in most violent garboiles which require your imperiall power to remedy compose and compresse the same 20. This is the true meaning of S. Leo his speech to the good and Religious Emperour of the same name as appeareth throughout the whole Epistle heere cited and diuers others Nonne perspicuum est saith he quibus pietas vestra succurrere quibus obuiare ne Alexandrina Ecclesia c. Is it not euident whome your Imperiall piety ought to assist and succour and whome yow ought to resist and represse to the end the Church of Alexandria that hitherto hath byn the house of praier become not a den of theeues Surely it is most manifest that by this late barbarous and most furious cruelty in murdering that Patriarch all the light of heauenly Sacramentes is there extinguished Intercepta est Sacrificij oblatio defecit chrismatis sanctificatio c. The oblation of sacrifice is intermitted the hallowing of Chrisme is ceassed and all diuine misteries of our Religion haue withdrawne themselues from those parricidiall handes of those Heretickes that haue murdered their owne Father and Patriarch Proterius burned his body and cast the ashes into the ayer 21. This then was the cause and occasion wherin the holy Pope Leo did implore the helpe and secular arme of Leo the Emperour for chastising those turbulent Heretiks to which effect he saith that his Kingly power was not only giuen him for the gouernmēt of the world but also for the defence of the Church which our Minister doth absurdly translate not only in worldly regiment but also spirituall for the preseruation of the Church turning ad into in and praesidium into preseruation and then maketh the commentary which before we haue set downe As if he had said quoth he not only in causes temporall but also in spirituall so far as it belongeth to outward preseruation not to the personall administratiō of them 22. And heere now he sheweth himself intangled not only about the assertion of Imperiall power in spirituall matters by that S. Leo saith it is giuen ad praesidium Ecclesiae to the defence of the Church which proueth nothing at all for him but against him rather as yow see and much more in the explication therof to wit what is meant by this authority how farre it strecheth it self wherin truly I neuer found Protestant yet that could cleerly set downe the same so as he could make it a distinct doctrine from ours and giue it that limites which his fellowes would agree vnto or themselues make probable 23. About which matter M. Morton heere as yow see who seemeth no small man amongest them and his booke must be presumed to haue come forth with the approbation and allowance of his Lord and Maister the Archbishop at least saith as yow haue heard that it is no more but such as S. Leo allowed in the Emperour ad Ecclesiae praesidium to the defence of the Church and Church matters and men and for punishing Heretickes that troubled the same And further more T. M. expoundeth the matter saying That this Imperiall Kingly authority in spirituall causes reacheth no further but as it belongeth to outward preseruation not to the personall administration of them And doe not we graunt also the same Or doe not we teach that temporall Princes power ought principally as S. Leo saith to extend it self to the defence ad preseruation
is not affraide to hold vp his finger against the interpretations of the Sacred Euangelistes themselues So he 97. But to come to an end I will leaue nineteene or twenty more Prophesies vndiscussed to wit three that remaine of this first point about the comming and natiuity of Christ eight that did foretel his sacred passion and particulers therof foure of his resurrection and foure or fiue more of his miraculous ascension sitting on the right hand of God all which doth Iohn Caluin with metaphoricall and malicious interpretations weaken elude ouerthrow take from vs yea though the Euangelistes Apostles themselues haue expressely expounded them literally to appertaine to Christ which this Doctor Hunnius doth notably substantially proue out of Caluins owne wordes throughout this breif but iudicious booke of his making many exclamations against Caluins impiety therin especially in one place where seeing the mā endeauoreth to take from vs that whole Psalme Deus Deus meus which setteth downe most of the particulers of Christes passion as the percing of his feet and handes deuiding of his garments other such points which the Euangelists and 〈◊〉 themselues doe apply literally to our Sauiour and this man only in a metaphoricall sense to King Dauid yea saying further that the Euangelistes did 〈◊〉 thinges intempestiuè ad praesentem causam out of season to the present cause of Christ Et quòd dum negligunt sensum metaphoricum a natiuo sensu 〈◊〉 And whiles they did neglect Caluins metaphoricall sense they departed from the true naturall sense of the Prophet Doctor Hunnius I say vpon these other like insolences breaketh out into these wordes that he cannot sufficiently detest extremam Caluini impietatem cum intolerabili fastu coniunctam quo se super sanctissimos Dei seruos Euangelistas Apostolos quasi illorum censor effert that extreame impiety of Caluin ioyned with intolerable pride wherby he setteth himself aboue the most holy seruantes of God the Euangelistes and Apostles as their Censurer and therfore after he had demonstrated this pride and impiety in all the rest of the Prophesies by him peruerted drawing towardes the end he concludeth thus Quapropter vt receptui canam detectum satis superque iudico Angelum illum tenebrarum Iohannem Caluinum c. 98. Wherfore that I may now saith he retire my self I doe iudge that Angell of darknes Iohn Caluin to be sufficiently and more then sufficiently discouered who being raised from the pit of hell to the peruerting of mankinde hath partly by his detestable desire of wresting Scriptures and ouerthrowing the Bulwarkes of Christian Religion which it hath against Iewes and Arrians partly also by his impious pen a gainst the holy and sacred Maiesty of Iesus Nazarenus now exalted in heauen partly also by his peruerse doctrine of the Sacrament and horrible monstrous paradoxes of his absolute predestination By all these meanes I say he hath 〈◊〉 in these our later dayes no small part of the light and sunne of Godes truth drawne with him a great number of starres as the Apocalips saith into the bottomeles pit of eternall damnatiō God euerlasting out of his mercy signe his seruantes that they be not corrupted with this pestilent plague of Caluinian seducement and bring back againe vnto Iesus Christ the true Pastour of their soules those that are seduced by them that they perish not in their errour but be saued eternally with all those that faithfully loue God Amen And this I had saith he to admonish the Church of God of the most wicked deceiptes of Iohn Caluin And if Doctor 〈◊〉 will answere any thing to this let him not entertaine himselfe in generall speech only as his people are wont to doe but come to particulers c. So Hunnius 99. And now M. Morton will yow say that all this also which Doctor Hunnius hath brought against Caluin about furthering of Iudaisme and Arrianisme is out of the spirit only of opposition and contradiction as yow shifted of the Deane and Colledge of Tubinga alledged before by your Aduersary Will yow answere in like manner it is not much to be regarded what he saith seeing he bringeth so many great and substantiall proofes for the same out of M. Caluins confessed workes and wrytinges Or will yow say as yow said before that their iudgment hath byn depraued by our malignant Doctors seeing that yow haue heard this your owne Doctor Hunnius speake in his owne language and sense so resolutly and earnestly against Caluin and Caluinistes If you dare not say this again enow then was it but a shift and dissimulation before and if yow should say it againe now yow would be laughed at by all men And though yow doe not yet euery wise man will consider with what truth or ground yow said it before to wit for a meere shift not vnderstanding or thinking as yow speake And conforme to that will they esteem of the rest which yow say or write without further ground of reall substance but only that yow must say somewhat and that it serueth for your purpose to speake it for the present But now shall we returne to the place page of your Reply from whence we went forth in this digressiō about Caluin 100. Yow complaine in the said place as before hath byn shewed of the charge of Arrianisme laid falsly vpon Caluin by our Iesuites as yow say and this for one only speech of his where he saith That the Father is by a kinde of excellency God which yow say both in speech and sense is most orthodoxall and agreeing with the tenour of holy writ and iudgment of all ancient Fathers as our owne learned Iesuites confesse and doe produce say yow for their authority an inquest of Fathers to free Caluin in this point which Fathers vpon those wordes of S. Iohns Ghospell my Father is greate then I doe affirme that the Father is greater not in substance and being but by reason of birth and begetting for which yow alledge Cardinall Tolet Maldonate both Iesuites in their commentaries vpon S. Iohns Ghospell 101. But this Syr by your leaue supposing al were so doth not free Caluin in this point of Arrianisme for that he is otherwise manifoldly conuinced as now yow haue heard And secōdly for this sole point or sentēce heere mentioned albeit the two forenamed Iesuites doe cite diuers ancient Fathers that doe hold those wordes of Christ My Father is greater then I are true not only in respect of his humanity but also in a certaine sort as he is God to wit that betweene those personall relations of Father and Sonne Begetter and Begotten in the blessed Trinity there ariseth a more honourable respect out of the former then of the later yet doth not this make that in the Godhead it self the Father is more excellent then the Sonne or that by excellency he is God or that the name of God
where the word Exaltation may haue many senses as to be exalted to heauen or to glory which most men would vnderstand rather then an exaltation vpō a Crosse which Christ vnderstood and consequently his speech was mixt with amphibology and Equiuocation as were also the wordes omnia traham which may haue sundry senses and some in apparence not true And in like manner when he said of Lazarus sicknes Infirmitas haec non est ad mortem this sicknes it not to death and yet he died and consequently there was a further sense reserued And in the same place Lazarus amicus noster dormit our friend Lazarus sleepeth the word dormit signifieth Equiuocally either to sleep or be dead Christ vnderstood of the second his Disciples of the first will yow say that he did abuse or deceaue them or vse prophane speach in this Equiuocation And yet further the same Equiuocation our Sauiour vseth in those wordes Ignem veni mittere in terram quid volo nisi ut ardeat I came to cast fier into the earth and what would I els but that it burne The word fier signifieth both naturall fier and zeale or feruour of spirit and burning hath the like ambiguity and is this also prophanation if it were to be sworne as Christ did speake it of phrase and into Equiuocation by composition of single and simple partes togeather His second intentiō was to treat therof in regard of placing each thing in due order in his ranke of ten Predicaments or shew their relation therunto and for this cause in his first Treatise vpon the said Predicaments he maketh that notorious diuision of wordes so well knowne vnto Logitians into AEquiuoca Vniuoca Denominatiua saying those thinges are Equiuocall which doe agree only in name but are different in nature and 〈◊〉 according to that name as a liuing and painted man doe agree only in the name of a man but not in nature essence substance or definition and the like may be said in the word dog ge before mentioned 10. Now then wheras our proposition before mentioned with mentall reseruation tendeth not directly to any of these two purposes intended by Aristotle and further hath no doubtfull sense of speach or wordes by nature of the wordes themselues or their double or doubtfull significations but only that it vttereth not all the whole sense of the speaker it cannot properly be called Equiuocall according to Aristotles meaning and definition but rather in a more large ample signification as Equiuocall may signify an amphibologicall doubtfull or double-sensed propositiō in respect of the speaker and hearer wherof the one sometime vnderstandeth the same in one sense and the other in another For which cause the most ancient Schoole-Doctors Fathers and other Authors doe vse in deed rather the word Amphibology then Equiuocation in expressing like kind of speaches as our proposition is which of later yeares only hath byn accustomed to be vsed in this sense but the other is most ordinary with antiquity not only among Philosophers but also and that especially among Orators and Rhetoritians in which science it is held for lawfull most commendable in diuers occasions wheror both 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 maketh mention and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a whole Chapter The cause then why the answering by such a reserued proposition as before hath byn mentioned is called by some Equiuocation is 〈◊〉 by a certain similitude thē propriety of speach to wit that euē as Equiuocation properly by community of name in things of different natures by variety of significations in the selfe same wordes or speach by 〈◊〉 of phrase and composition of sundry sortes 〈◊〉 make different and doubtfull senses meanings to the hearer so in this case by mentall reseruation of some part of the foresaid mixt proposition the like effect of doubtfulnes is bred in the hearers 〈◊〉 and therby consequently is named Equiuocation although improperly as Equiuocation is taken for any doubtfull word or speach that may haue diuersity of senses or vnderstandings 11. But now to inferre herof as T. M. doth in his first 〈◊〉 of this his wise dispute that euery such 〈◊〉 by mentall reseruation is a grosse ly is not only a grosse presumption but a 〈◊〉 ignorance also in my opinion not to call it a grosse impiety for by this meanes he might cōdemne of grosse lying a great number of speaches of the holy Ghost both in the old and new Testament where diuers propositions are set 〈◊〉 and vttered with imperfect sense somewhat being reserued which necessarily must be supplied to saue the said speach from vntruth As for example where the Prophet saith Non resurgunt impij in iudicio Wicked men doe not rise againe in iugdment if the Prophet reserued not somewhat in his mind vnuttered for the complement of this speach as namely that they shall not rise to glory as S. Paul expoundeth it to the Corinthians it would seeme an Heresy contrary to the article of our creed I belieue the resurrection spirit or life in ner 〈◊〉 the 〈◊〉 of maruaile of that she saw And againe the same holy Ghost talking of the immensity of Salomons wealth said Tantamque copiam praebuit argenti in Hierusalem quasi lapidum and Salomon made 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as stones in Hierusalem may a man sweare this without vntruth or prophanation what say yow M. Morton may a man swear this in your Lordes Court of the Arches the same I demaund of those last wordes of S. Iohns Ghospell There are many other thinges which Iesus did which if they should be particularly written I doe not thinke that the world it selfe would hold the bookes that should be written therof 18. How can this be true M. Morton in plaine and literail sense and without some amphibology or Equiuocation and yet I thinke yow will not say it is a lye being part of the Ghospell or that it may not be sworne without abhominable prophanation How then will yow or can yow defend it Truly by no other way but by the licence of a Rhetoricall figure called HYPERBOLE which Quintilian defining saith it is Ementiens superiectio a lying exaggeration and yet will no true Deuine call it a lye indeed much lesse periury or prophanation if any man should sweare it wherby is made manifest and apparent the childish vanity of our Aduersary in his former conclusion that euery verball Equiuocation is an abominable prophanation And so much of this second kind of Equiuocation which yow see how lawfull and vsuall it is euen in the Scriptures themselues and in the speaches of our Sauiour which is truth it self wherby hauing repressed somewhat the insolency and ignorance of this our vaunting Minister we shall retourne now againe to the first kind of Equiuocation by mentall reseruation about which is our principall controuersy And for that our Minister affirmeth two pointes about the same the first that it is no proposition
significant for that the Iewes did not vnderstand the same Hence then appeareth that it dependeth not of the hearer to make the speach 〈◊〉 or not but it is 〈◊〉 that it be so of it selfe and of his owne nature 29. And so now to apply all this to our owne purpose in hand this proposition wherof part is vttered in voice and part reserued in mind being but one simple propositiō denying that I am a 〈◊〉 with obligation to vtter the same is truly enuntiatiue of it selfe though the hearer vnderstand not all but one part therof only and consequently it is truly and properly a proposition euen according to the rules of Logicke for that Aristotles definition agreeth therunto which our Minister before so confidently denied 30. But now heere lastly he may seeme perhaps to make some doubt whether this mixt propositiō partly vttered and partly reserued be one 〈◊〉 proposition or no wherof yet in reason there cā be no doubt for that heere is but only one single enunciation in the mind of the speaker to wit that he is no Priest with obligation to vtter the same heere is but one only simple negatiue enuntiation depending of one only verbe and negation that denieth me to be a Priest with that obligation which is the thing appointed by Aristotle to make a persect enuntiation or proposition which may be proued also by this example If I should vtter those wordes of the Scripture Pater meus 〈◊〉 me est My Father is greater then I reseruing in my mind those other that I affirme them according to the sense and meaning that Arrius had I should incurre Heresy and be damned for this proposition but not 〈◊〉 the former part for that they are wordes of Scripture nor for the later alone that are reserued for that they affirme or deny nothing of themselues as hauing no verbe and therfore they 〈◊〉 cōdemne me as part of the former and consequently all maketh but one single proposition For that for the first operation of our mind only which is simple apprehension without affirmatiō or negation God condemneth no man there being no consent at all therin and consequently no merit nor demerit but only in the second and third operations before specified 31. And to this effect that the two partes of these and like propositions the one partly vttered and partly reserued doe make but one single and simple proposition we might alleage many other proofes both by reasons and examples By reasons for that they answere but to one only conceipt of the speakers mind that they conteine but one only negatiue 〈◊〉 to wit that I am no such Priest as I meane and finally that they haue but one subiectum one copula and one praedicatum Logitians know what I meane for the subiectum wherof all is affirmed is I the copula that ioineth togeather is the verbe am and all the rest is the praedicatum wherfore it cannot be diuers but one only proposition 32. By examples the same may be confirmed diuers wayes I meane both by prophane and diuine As first if one should make an interrogation the other answere all in effect is but one proposition as if one should say to a seruant Is your maister at home And 〈◊〉 answere no it were in effect but one only proposition equiualent to this my maister is not at home yea though the one part were vttered in signes only and the other in voice or writing as if the seruant should answere only by a shrugge of the shoulders or by 〈◊〉 king his head as in Italy they are wont to expresse a negatiue 33. But this is somwhat more perspicuous if the answere be ambiguous as when Cicero was demanded by his aduersary in the cause of Clodius slaine by Milo whome he defended what time of the day Clodius was slaine to wit before noone or after thinking therby to intrappe Milo Tully answered serò which word signifying both towardes the Euening as also to late Cicero meant in the second sense to wit that he was slaine to late hauing deserued to haue byn slaine sooner so as this only word serò conteineth the force of a whole proposition in the sense of the speaker though not of the hearer 34. And the like answere was that of the same Orator to a base fellow that hauing byn a cooke came after by riches to pretend an office in the common-wealth and asked of Cicero whether he also among others that were to giue their voices would fauour him therin wherunto he answered Immò Ego quoque tibi iure fauebo which answere hauing two senses by reason of the wordes quoque and iure the hearer tooke it in the better sense that he also would of right fauour him but the speaker meant that he would shew him fauour due to ae cooke with a messe of pottage and yet did not this reserued sense make it two propositions but one 35. And finally I might alleadge all the examples that Orators doe vse and prescribe vnder the figure called by Cicero Reticentia and by the Grecians APOSIÓPESIS as Quid plura What shall I say more or what shall I complaine more which verbes say complaine or the like were reserued in mind by the speaker and yet is it but one proposition so that of Virgil Quos Ego sed motos praestat c. Whome I if I had them in my handes would c. All which later part is reserued in the mind of the speaker and yet it maketh but one proposition with the rest that is expressed And thus much of prophane examples 36. But if we would alleadge all the diuine that might be cited out of the Scriptures there would be no end as that among other before mentioned out of the Psalme Impij non resurgent in iudicio wicked men shall not rise againe in iudgment which though it seeme a whole proposition yet is it in deed but a part and the other part was reserued in the Prophets mind and expounded afterward by S. Paul to the Corinthians saying Omnes resurgemus sed non omnes immutabimur We shall all rise againe but all shall not be changed into glory and how doe I know that these later wordes were reserued in the Prophets mind for that otherwise his other wordes that were vttered should conteine an Heresy against the article of our Creed I belieue the resurrection of the dead wherof is inferred that those wordes vttered with the other reserued made but one only simple and single proposition 37. In like manner when our Sauiour said to those negligent virgins that came to late Non noui vos I know yow not it made but one negatiue proposition with other wordes reserued in his mind to wit vt saluem vos c. I know yow not amongst mine to saue yow or the like And how know wee that these or like wordes were reserued in Christes mind For that
Commentaries of many skilfull men in that science is called the 〈◊〉 as the other part appertaining to ciuill affaires deduced from the ancient Imperiall Romane Lawes is called the Ciuill-law and both of them concurring togeather in this our cause with the foresaid Schoole-Deuinity and florishing more within thes last foure hundred yeares then euer before as yow haue heard the exception made against them all by this our Minister must needes be iudged for light vaine and impertinent 10. For he that will cast his eyes vpon the face of Christendome for these last foure hundred yeares consider with himselfe that in all these ages the most eminent renowned men for learning conscience and vertue in all those three sciences or faculties now mentioned and vnto whome for all doubtes and difficulties appertayning vnto iustice equity and truth recourse was made as vnto Oracles of their dayes for the high esteeme they were held in among all men he I say that shall consider this and with what integrity they dealt in this affaire and must be presumed to haue dealt according to their skill for that they were not interessed therin for any temporall respect whatsoeuer he that shall but thinke of this weigh their vniforme and graue resolutions vpon this point that a man pressed vnlawfully to answere by vniust manner of proceeding may delude his demaunder not answere to his intention but to his owne will easely see what differēce there is to be made betweene these mens iudgmentes and the clamours of a few vnlearned Ministers in this behalfe that vnderstand not the grounds wheron the other or themselues doe speake 11. And to name some few examples who were accompted more learned Schoole Deuines in their daies in France Germany and Flanders then the forenamed Petrus Lombardus Bishop of Paris Maister of the sentences Iohn Gerson Chancellour of that Vniuersity Petrus Paludanus Patriarch afterward of Hierusalem Henricus de Gandauo Archdeacon of Tornay Gabriel Biel a very Religious learned man Adrianus that was Maister to the Emperour Charles the fift and after that Cardinal and Gouernour of Spaine for Philip the first finally Pope by the name of Adrian the sixt I might name also Iansenius Bishop of Gaunt in these dayes and others of our times but of these their learned works are extant and vpon diuers occasions they fauour defend the lawfulnes of Equiuocation in sundry cases as in the next Chapter shall be more particulerly declared 12. In Italy Sicily also many might be named both for Schoole Deuinity Canon and Ciuill law but I shall be contented with them only whose workes I haue had time to looke vpon for this point as Gratian with his Commentaries Pope Innocentius S. Thomas of Aquin Cardinal Caietan Astonsis in his Summe written almost three hundred yeares since Angelus de Clauatio famous Siluester Cosmus Filiarcus Chanon of Florence Abbot and Archbishop Panormitan Bartolus Baldus most famous Lawiers 13. But of the Spanish Nation many more as Didacus Couarruuias President or Chancellour of Spaine Martinus Nauarrus his Maister both excellent Lawiers Dominicus Sotus Confessour to the Emperour Charles the fifth Cardinal Tolet Emanuel Roderiquez Ludouicus Lopez Antonius de Corduba Petrus Nauarra Dominicus Bannes publicke Reader of Deuinity in Salamanca Michael Salon Doctor and Professour of the Deuinity-Chaire in Valentia Petrus de Arragon publicke Professour of the same science in the foresaid Vniuersity of Salamanca Gregorius de Valentia and Ioannes Azorius publicke Readers in Rome all renowned men for learning science conscience and through whose hands great matters haue passed for direction of iustice and equity both in foro fori and foro poli as Schoolemen speake both for diuine and humane proceedinges and yet doe none of all these condemne or deny absolutly the vse of Equiuocation in certaine cases but doe rather approue and confirme the same I meane both lawiers and deuines when they treat vpon these heades following de seruando secreto of concealing secretes both knowne in the Sacrament of Confession and otherwise de mendacio of lying de iureiurandis of swearing de fraterna correptione restituenda fama of brotherly admonition and restitution of another mans fame wrongfully taken away de Iudice de Reo de accusatore de testibus of a Iudge and his office of the defendant accuser witnesses and the like what they may doe or answere lawfully in cases that may occurre 14. Neither are these Authors to be accompted as single and separate from the rest of the learned men of their ages in this point which we handle but rather are conioined wholy with them both in iudgment and practice so as what these men did define to be lawful that did others in like manner both mainteine put in vre in iust occasions especially if they were of the self same order and ranke So as when for example wee cite Siluester Dominicus Sotus Caiëtan Paludanus Lopez and Bannes of the order of S. Dominick to haue taught this doctrine without reprehension of others of the same order we may inferre probably that all or most learned men of that Order throughout Christendome are of the same opinion And the like we may inferre of those of S. Francis order in respect of Angelus de Clauatio Astensis Antonius de Corduba here cited And the same of S. Augustines order by Petrus de Aragon and Michael Salon And of the most ancient and venerable Order of S. Benedict conteyning many thousandes of learned men by that which Abbot Panormitan and Gregorius Sayer our learned Countreyman haue written vpon this matter and the later more largely then many others And the like may be inferred of the order of Iesuits by that which is extant written by Cardinal Tolet Gregorius de Valentia Emanuel Sà Francisius Suarez Ioannes Azorius Ludouicus Molina and others So as by these few witnesses we may take a notice of the whole body and corpes of learned men throughout Christendome for that Lawiers also both Ciuill and Canon that haue written of the foresaid heades haue conformed themselues to the same doctrine as lawfull in equity and conscience And if any haue dissented it hath byn in particuler cases only as before in the seauenth Chapter and third Consideration hath byn noted 15. As for example Ioannes Genesius Sepulueda Historiographer of Charles the fifth Emperour whose authority Thomas Morton doth often times alledge against vs though in the principall he make fully with vs in his booke intituled Theophilus De ratione dicendi testimonium in causis occultorum criminum how a man may beare witnes in causes of secret crimes yet in some cases he dissenteth from the foresaid Authors holding singuler opinions by himselfe but yet vpon such groundes as doe indeed confirme the common sentence of the rest as afterward in due place shal be declared 16. Wherfore to end this Paragraph about the Cōsideration of Schoole Deuines and