of the Church In this then we agree and haue no difference 24. There followeth in T. M. his assertion heere But not in the personall administration of them to wit of spirituall causes this now is a shift dissembling the difficulty and true State of the question which is in whome consisteth the supreame power to treate iudge and determine in spirituall causes which this man flying as not able to resolue telleth vs only that he cannot personally administer the same which yet I would aske him why For as a Bishop may personally performe all the actions that he hath giuen authority to inferiour Priestes to doe in their functions and a temporall Prince may execute in his owne person if he list any inferiour authority that he hath giuen to others in temporall affaires so if he haue supreame authority spirituall also why may he not in like manner execute the same by himself if he please But of this is sufficiently writteÌ„ of late in the foresaid booke of Answere to Syr Edward Cooke where also is shewed that a farre greater authority spirituall was giuen to King Henry the eight by Parlament then this that T. M. alloweth his Maiesty now for outward preseruation of the Church to wit To be head therof in as ample manner as euer the Pope was or could be held before him ouer England and to King Edward though then but of ten yeares old was granted also by Parlament That he had originally in himself by his Crowne and Scepter all Episcopall authority so as the Bishops and Archbishops had no other power or spirituall authority then was deriued from him to Queene Elizabeth by like graunt of Parlament was also giuen as great authority spirituall and Ecclesiasticall ouer the Church and Clergy of England as euer any person had or could exercise before which was and is another thing then this outward preseruation which T. M. now assigneth hauing pared the same in minced wordes to his purpose to make it seeme little or nothing but dareth not stand to it if he be called to the triall 25. Wherfore this matter being of so great importance and consequence as yow see I doe heere take hold of this his publicke assertion and require that it may be made good to wit that this is the substance meaning only of the English oath and that neither our Kinges of England doe chalenge more nor subiectes required to condescend to more then to grant to their authority for outward preseruation or ad Ecclesiae praesidium as S. Leo his wordes and meaning are and I dare assure him that al Catholickes in England will presently take the oath and so for this point there will be an attonement Me thinkes that such publicke doctrine should not be so publickly printed and set forth without publicke allowance and intention to performe and make it good Yf this be really meant we may easely be accorded if not then will the Reader see what credit may be giuen to any thing they publish notwithstanding this booke commeth forth with this speciall commendation of Published by authority c. 26. And for conclusion of all it may be noted that there hath byn not only lacke of truth and fidelity in citing Pope Leo for Ecclesiasticall Supremacy in Emperours aboue Popes but want of modesty discretion also for so much as no one ancient Father doth more often and earnestly inculcate the contrary for the preheminence of the Sea of Rome then doth S. Leo in so much that Iohn Caluin not being able otherwise to answere him saith that he was tooto desirous of glory dominion and so shifteth him of that way and therfore he was no fit instance for T. M. to bring heere in proofe of spirituall supremacy in temporall Princes 27. But yet in the very next page after he vseth a far greater immodesty or rather perfidy in my opinioÌ„ in calumniation of Cardinall Bellarmine whome he abuseth notably both in allegation exposition translation application and vaine insultation for thus he citeth in his text out of him Ancient generall Councelles saith the Romish pretence were not gathered without the cost of good and Christian Emperours and were made by their consentes for in those dayes the Popes did make supplication to the Emperour that by his authority he would gather Synods but after those times all causes were changed because the Pope who is head in spirituall matters cannot be subiect in temporall Bellarm. lib. 1. de Concil cap. 13. § Habemus ergo 28. And hauing alledged this resolutioÌ„ of Bellarmine the Minister insulteth ouer him in these words Who would thinke this man could be a Papist much lesse a Iesuit how much lesse a Cardinal who thus disableth the title of the Pope granting to vs in these wordes after these times that is after six hundred yeares the truth of purer antiquities challenging Popes to be subiect vnto Christian Emperours And yet who but a Papist would as it were in despite of antiquity defend the degenerate state saying after those times Popes might not be subiect in temporall matters As if he should haue said Then gratious fauour of ancient Christian Emperours then sound iudgment of ancient reuerend Fathers then deuout subiection of ancient holy Popes in summe then ancient purity and pure antiquity adieu But we may not so bastardly reiect the depositum and doctrine of humble subiection which we haue receaued from our Fathers of the first six hundred yeares and not so only but which as your Barkley witnesseth the vniuersall Christian world imbraced with common consent for a full thousand yeares So he 29. And doe yow see how this Minister triumpheth Who would thinke that men of conscience or credit could make such ostentation vpon meere lies deuised by themselues as now wee shall shew all this bragge to be And as for D. Barkley alledged in the last lines let any man read him in the booke and Chapter cited and he will wonder at the impudency of this vaunter for he speaketh no one word of gathering Councells or comparison of spirituall authority betweene the Pope and Emperour concerning their gathering of Councelles or Synodes but of a quite different subiect of taking armes by subiectes against their lawfull temporall Princes And what will our Minister then answere to this manifest calumniation so apparently conuinced out of Doctor Barkley But let vs passe to the view of that which toucheth Cardinall Bellarmine against whome all this tempest is raised 30. First then we shall set downe his wordes in Latin according as T. M. citeth him in his margent Tunc Concilia generalia fiebant saith he non sine Imperatorum sumptibus eo tempore Pontifex subiiciebat se Imperatoribus in temporalibus ideo non poterant inuito Imperatore aliquid agere idâ—irco Pontifex supplicabat Imperatori vt iuberet conuocari Synodum At post illa tempora omnes causae
performed by these places alleadged yow haue seene 28. Finally to stand no longer vpon this whether we or they Catholicks or Protestantes doe attribute more to popular licence against Princes when they giue not contentment may aboundantly be seene in that we haue set downe before and will ensue afterward both of their doctrine and practises in like occasions And so much of this first charge now will we passe to the second 29. The second is that we ascribe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 power and souer aignty ouer Kings vnto the Pope wherin first what he saith of ciuill souer aignty is a meere fiction and calumniation of his owne if it be out of the Popes owne temporall Dominions For we ascribe no such vnto him ouer other Princes or their subiects but that authority or soueraignty only which Catholicke doctrine ascribeth to the Bishop of Rome as Successor to S. Peter Prince of the Apostles spirituall head of the vniuersall visible Church of Christ which is only spirituall for spirituall ends to wit for the direction and saluation of soules And if at any time he be forced to passe further then this and by a certeine consequence to deale in some temporall affaires also it must be only indirectly in defence or conseruation of the said spirituall that is to say when the said spirituall power apperteining to soules cannot other wise be defended or conserued as more largely hath byn treated before 30. This then is the summe and substance of Catholicke doctrine about this point of the Popes authority which from the beginning of Christianity hath byn acknowledged in Gods Church and in no place more then in England where it hath byn both held practised from the very first Christened King of our nation Ethelbert vnto K. Henry the 8. for the space of almost a thousand yeares without interruption as largely and aboundantly hath byn shewed and laied forth to the view of all men in a late booke written in answere to S. Edward Cookes fifth part of Reportes and this with great honor prosperity of the Princes therof and vnion of their people vnder their gouernment and without such odious or turbulent inferences as now are made therevpon by vnquiet spirittes that would set at warre euen mens imaginations in the ayer therby to mainteine disunion discorde and diffidence betweene Princes and namely betweene our present noble Soueraigne and his Catholicke subiects 31. And first of all let vs heare this turbulent T. M. how vpon the enuy of this authority he frameth and foundeth all his ensuing reasons VVe demaunde saith he how farre these pretended powers of people Pope may extende and heervpon we argue To which I answere that in imagination they may extend so farre as any fantasticall braine shall list to draw them but in the true meaning of Catholicke reall doctrine they can extend no further then hath byn declared And as for the popular power of people ouer Princes we haue now refuted the calumniation shewed that it is a mere fiction of his owne and no position of ours and that his Protestant doctrine doth ascribe much more licence to popular tumult then the Catholicke without comparison and for that of the Pope I haue declared how it is to be vnderstood to be of his owne nature in spirituall affaires only without preiudice of ciuill Princely gouernement at all and so the practice of the worlde and experience of so many Princes great States and Monarches liuing quietly securely vnder the same authority both in former times and ours most euidently doth proue and confirme 32. But yet let vs see and consider how falsely and calumniously this Make-bate doth herevpon argue in his third reason inferring for his assumption or minor proposition thus But all Popish Priestes vpon this pretended Supremacy and prerogatiue of Pope and people doe vtterly abolish the title of succession in all Protestant Princes Ergo. Wherin to shew him a notable liar it shall be sufficient to name all the Protestant Princes that haue had title of successiō in our coūtrey for therof he speaketh principally since the name of Protestant hath byn heard of in the world being three in number to wit K. Edward the sixt Q. Elizabeth and K. Iames that now raigneth all which were admitted peaceably to their Crownes as well by Priestes as Catholicke people who notwithstanding in some of their admissions wanted not meanes to haue wrought disturbances as the world knoweth so as if one instance only doth truly ouerthrow any general proposition how much more doth this triple instance not able to be denied ouerthrow and cast to the ground this vniuersal false assertion of T. M. which auerreth That all Popish Priests 〈◊〉 vtterly abolish the Succession of all Protestant Princes Will he not be ashamed to see himself cōuinced ofso great and shameles ouerlashing 33. And on the other side one only Catholicke Princesse being to succeed in this time to wit Q. Mary we know what resistance the Protestants made both by bookes sermons Treatises and open armes and how many Rebellions conspiracies robberies priuy slaughters and other impediments were designed and practised afterward during the few yeares she raigned we know also what was executed against the gouernment and liues of the two noble Catholicke Queenes her neerest neighbours one of them most straitly conioyned in bloud that raigned at that time in Scotland to omit others before mētioned that were debarred from their lawfull succession or excluded from their rightfull possession for their Religion in Sweueland Flanders other places as cannot be denied 34. Wherfore it is more then extraordinary impudency in T. M. to charge vs with that which is either peculier or more eminent in themselues and false in vs and what or how farre this fellow may be trusted in these his assertions may be gathered by the last sentence of all his discourse in this matter where he hath these wordes F. Persons in his Doleman doth pronounce sentence that whosoeuer shall consent to the succession of a Protestant Prince is a most grieuous and damnable 〈◊〉 And is it so in deed Syr 〈◊〉 and will yow stand to it and leese your credit if this be falsely or calumniously alleadged then if yow please let vs heare the Authors owne wordes 35. And now saith he to apply all this to our purpose for England and for the matter we haue in hand I affirme and hold that for any man to giue his helpe consent or assistance towardes the making of a King whome he iudgeth or belieueth to be faulty in Religion and consequently would aduance no Religion or the wrong if he were in authority is a most grieuous damnable sinne to him that doth it of what side soeuer the truth be or how good or bad soeuer the party be that is preferred So he And his reason is for that he should sinne against his owne conscience in furthering such aKing And is
bloud insteed of shed their bloud as though God were a bloud-spiller or comaunded the same to be done vniustly by others but all is strained by the Minister to make vs odious wheras himself indeed is therby made ridiculous And for that I haue byn somewhat longer in this example then I had purposed as also for that by this one if it were but one yow may ghesse of al the rest of his proceeding I wil heere cease referring the rest of this kinde to other more fit places and occasions afterwardes 58. And yet truly I cannot wel pretermit for ending this Chapter one little note more of rare singularity in this man aboue others which I scarce euer haue obserued in any one of his fellowes and this is that the very first wordes of Scripture alledged by him in the first page of his booke for the poesy of his pamphlet are falsly alleadged corrupted and mangled though they conteine but one only verse of Isay the Prophet and then may yow imagine what liberty he will take to himself afterward throughout his whole discourse His sentence or poesy is this Isay. 29. vers 9. But stay your selues and wonder they are blinde and make yow blinde which he would haue to be vnderstood of vs Catholickes but let any man read the place of Isay it self and he shall finde no such matter either in wordes or sense but only the word wonder to wit obstupescite admiramini fluctuate vacillate inebriamini non a vino mouemini non ab ebrietate And according to this are the Greek and Hebrew textes also So as what should moue T. M. to set downe so corruptly the very first sentence of his booke and cite the Chapter and verse wherin his fraude may be descried I know not except he obserued not the last clause of the Prophetes precept mouemini non ab ebrietate And so much for this HOVV THIS TREATISE VVAS LAIED ASIDE By sicknesse of the Author and some other causes And why it was taken in hand againe vpon the sight of a Catholicke Answere and a new Reply of T. M. dedicated to his Maiesty with the Authors iudgment of them both CHAP. III. HAuing written hitherto and passed thus far-forth in examination of the Ministers opprobrious libel of Discouery I was partly forced by grieuous sicknesse that continued for some moneths partly also induced for that I vnderstood that another Catholicke man had answered the said libell to lay that which I had written a side as also for that the occasion of time wherin this Treatise was begun soone after the detection of the often forenamed powder-treason seemed in great part to be past and hauing once laied it out of my handes had no great will afterward to goe forward theriwth as an argument of loathsome contention against most odious imputations and calumniations but yet after diuers monethes againe seing the said Catholicke answere to appeare which before I had not viewed togeather with a large Reply to the same by the Minister that first made and deuised the libell and that the said Minister had now resolued vpon instance of the said Answerer to manifest his name to wit of Thomas Morton which before went ciphered with the letters only of T. M. that might aswell haue signified Thomas Malmesbury or Montague or Monte-banke or any such like sur-name and further that he presumed to dedicate the same vnto the Kinges Maiesty by a speciall glosing Epistle full of fond Ministeriall malice against Catholickes intituling his said Reply A full satisfaction concerning a double Romish iniquity heynous Rebellion and more then heathenish 〈◊〉 And further that he had encreased his said worke with two or three new Treatises partly for iustifying of Protestantes in the case of Rebellion and partly for confuting of a Treatise written in defence of Equiuocation I was moued aswell of my self as by others exhortation to resume the thing into my handes againe to adioine by the view of the whole that which was wanting to the full confutation of this Ministers iniquity in laying such heinous Rebellion heathenish Equiuocation vnto Catholickes charge who of all men liuing are most free from iust reprehension in them both and the Caluinian sect and sectaries conuinced to be most guilty in the one and consciencelesse in the other as the iudicious Reader I doubt not shall see euidently proued and confirmed in that which is to ensue 2. It moued me also not a little to goe forward somewhat with this confutation though in as breiffe manner as might be to see that this deuise though neuer so fond and false of charging Catholicke doctrine with Rebellion Equiuocation was applauded not a little by some men of marke in our State as namely by his Maiesties late Attorney Generall aswel in his writing as pleadinges against Catholicks borrowing from this Ministers first Treatise diuers large parcelles and passages of his calumnious imputations about the forenamed two heades of Rebelliō and Equiuocation lending him againe in lue therof for his second Reply sundry obseruations collections of his owne concerning diuers Kings of England that seemed to him not so much to fauour or acknowledge the Bishop of Rome his authority ouer the English Church which yet now vpon further search is found to be contrary and so set downe and demonstrated at large by a late Answere published to the said Attorney his booke of Reportes as I thinke in hast will not be answered Wherupon forsomuch as this new deuised accusation of Rebellious doctrine and Equiuocation is taken vp by so many handes of those that be enemies to Catholicke Religion I thought it conuenient to cleere somewhat more this 〈◊〉 and as I had before I laid aside this worke treated sufficiently as it seemed to me of the former point concerning Rebellious doctrine vpon the sight only of T. M. his first pamphlet as in the precedent two Chapters yow haue seen yet now vpon the appearance of this Minister Thomas Morton in his proper name and person of his new Reply that promiseth full satisfaction in all it seemed necessary that I should goe forward to finish my first intent and to examine the second point or head of his accusation in like manner apperteining to the doctrine of Equiuocation made no lesse odious now by continuall clamours of sycophancy then the other of Rebellion it selfe 3. One other circumstance also stirred me greatly to proceed in this short worke which was that togeather with these bookes sent out of England aduertisement was giuen that this Minister Thomas Morton was Chaplain to my Lord of Canterbury who being head of the spirituall Court of Arches which is or ought to be the supreame for matters of cōscience in England I was in hope to haue some remedy against this his Lordships Chaplaine if I should demonstrate that he dealeth against all conscience obseruing no law either of truth or modesty towardes Catholick men
him so vrging an occasion as by his friendes is thought that in the conueniency of reason and honour he coulde not well omit to accept therof as he did and performed the enterprise in such manner as might be expected at his L. handes to wit as himself writeth of his Maiesties speach in the Parlament Euery line declaring the vvorkeman 19. Only I may not let passe to note by the way that in two points of 〈◊〉 touched by him of the Popes authority concerning Princes and the lawfulnes of Equiuocation in certaine cases as they are matters not apperteining properly to his faculty and profession so must I thinke that his Deuine did somewhat mistake or misinforme him therin For of the first thus he writeth that he hath byn a long time sory that some cleere explication of the Papall authority hath not byn made by some publicke and definitiue sentence orthodoxall c. He addeth further this reason of his desire That not only those Princes vvhich acknovvledge this Superiority might be secured from feares and iealosies of continuall treasons and bloudy Assassinates against their persons but those Kings also vvhich doe not approue the same yet vvould faine reserue a charitable opinion of their subiectes might knovv hovv farre to repose themselues in their fidelity in ciuill obedience hovvsoeuer they see them deuided from them in point of conscience c. 20. To the former clause touching his L. desire to haue the matter defined and declared his Deuine might easely haue informed him that among Catholicke people the matter is cleare and sufficiently defined and declared in all pointes wherin there may be any doubt concerning this affaire As for example in three thinges question may be made first whether any authority were left by Christ in his Church and Christian common-wealth to restraine or represse censure or iudge any exorbitant and pernicious excesse of Great men States or Princes or that he had left them remediles wholy by any ordinary authority In which case as in other common-wealthes that are not Christian all Philosophers law-makers Senatours Counsellours Historiographers and other sortes of soundest wisedome prudence and experience either Iew or Gentile haue from the beginning of the world concurred in this that God and nature hath left some sufficient authority in euery common wealth for the lawfull and orderly redressing of those euilles euen in the highest persons Nor did euer Philosopher of name or law-maker hitherto deny this assertion as founded in the very law of nature nations and reason it selfe 21. So when Christ our Sauiour came to found his common-wealth of Christians in farre more perfection then other states had byn established before subiecting temporall thinges to spirituall according to the degree of their natures endes and eminencies and appointing a supreme vniuersall Gouernour in the one with a generall charge to looke to all his sheepe without exception of great or small people or potentates vpon these suppositions I say all Catholicke learned men do ground and 〈◊〉 euer grounded that in Christian common-wealthes not only the foresaid ordinary authority is left which euery other state and Kingdome had by God and nature to preserue and protect themselues in the cases before laid downe but further also for more sure and orderly proceeding therin that the supreme care iudgment direction and censure of this matter was left principally by Christ our Sauiour vnto the said supreme Gouernour and Pastour of his Church and common-wealth And in this there is no difference in opinion or beliefe betweene any sorte of Catholickes whatsoeuer so they be Catholickes though in particular cases diuersity of persons time place cause and other circumstances may moue some diuersity of opinions And thus much of the first question 22. The second may be about the manner how this authority or in what sorte it was giuen by Christ to his said supreme Pastour whether directly or indirectly immediatly or by a certaine consequence As for example whether Christ as he gaue the generall charge of his sheepe to S. Peter and his Successours directly and immediatly in spirituall matters by that commission three times repeated in S. Iohn Pasce oues meas which wordes include according to Catholicke exposition not only authority to feed but to gouerne also direct restraine cure represse and correct when need is as we see it doth appertaine to a temporall sheepheardes office so whether with this commission in spirituall affaires our Sauiour gaue also immediatly and directly the charge and ouersight of temporalities in like manner or rather indirectly and by a certaine consequence that is to say that when the gouernment of spirituall affaires to wit of soules to their eternall blisse and saluation is so letted or impugned by any temporall gouernours as the said spirituall commission cannot be executed without redresse or remedy in such cases and not otherwise the said supreme pastour to haue authority to proceed also against the said temporall Gouernours for defence and preseruation of his spirituall charge Of which question the Canonistes doe commonly defend the first part but Catholicke Deuines for the most part the second but both partes fully agree that there is such an Authority lefte by Christ in his Church for remedy of vrgent cases for that otherwise he should not haue sufficiently prouided for the necessity therof So as this difference of the manner maketh no difference at all in the thing it selfe 23. The third question may be about the causes for which this authority may be vsed as also the forme of proceeding to be obserued therin wherabout there are so many particularities to be considered as are ouerlong for this place only it is sufficient for Catholicke men to know that this may not be done without iust cause graue and vrgent motiues and due forme also of proceeding by admonition preuention intercession and other like preambles prescribed by Ecclesiasticall Canons to be obserued wherby my Lordships doubtes of feares and ielosies of continuall treasons and bloudy assassinates may iustly be remoued For that this authority doth not only not allow any such wicked or vnlawfull attemptes of priuate men but doth also expressely and publickly condemne the same and the doctrine therof as may appeare not only by the condemnation of VVicklifs wicked article in the Councell of Constance wherin he affirmed That it vvas lavvfull for euery priuate man to kill any Prince vvhome he held to be a Tyrant but also by like condemnation of Caluin Beza Ottoman Bucchanan Knox Goodman and others of that sect who hold and practice in effect the same doctrine of VVickliffe concerning Princes if not worse as shall more largely and particularly be declared afterward in the first and fourth Chapters of this Treatise And this I desire may satisfy his Lordship for the present vntill we come to the foresaid places where better occasion in this kind will be offered 24. As for the second point touched by his Lordship about 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
laid vpon them not only by Catholickes but also by the most renowned Protestant writers that haue byn since that name and profession began And if we would alleadge much more out of the very Father of Protestancy it self Martin Luther we might haue store especially where he pronouÌ„ceth this iudiciall sentence of them all Haereticos seriò censemus alienos ab Ecclesia Dei Zuinglianos Sacramentarios omnes qui negant Christi corpus sanguinem ore carnali sumi in venerabili Sacramento We doe vnfeynedly hold for Heretickes and for aliens from the Church of God all Zuinglians and other Sacramentaries that doe deny Christes body and bloud to be receaued by our bodily mouth in the venerable Sacrament 16. Behold heere both Heresy and excommunication or separation from the Church of God auerred against both Zuinglians and Caluinists by him that was their chiefest parent and Patriarch and in other places of his workes the same Luther hath many more particulers to this purpose as namely that men must fly the bookes and doctrine of Zuinglius and his followers Non secus ac tartarei Daemonis venenum no otherwise then the poison of the diuell of hell And yet further that They are not to be held in the number of Christians for that they teach no one article of Christian doctrine without corruption and are seauen times worse then Papists c. Wherby is euident that this charge of Heresy and excommunication proceedeth not against Caluinists from vs only but much more eagerly froÌ„ their owne brethren consequently it is with very little discretion brought in by the Minister T. M. against vs as a singuler fault of ours wherof we are to treat more afterward in some occasions that will be offered 17. But now as for the penalties conteyned in the Canon law against excommunicate Heretickes as depriuation of dignities losse of goods infamy imprisonment debarment from Sacraments and from conuersation with the like the answere is soone made that those externall punishments are not incurred ordinarily but after personall denunciation and condemnation by name For albeit the inward punishmentes that follow Heresy which are sinne and depriuation of grace excommunication and separation from Gods true Church and other spirituall losses theron depending be incurred by the obstinate holding or defending of any coÌ„demned Heresy whatsoeuer if the defender know the same to be condemned by the Church as both Holy Canons doe expressly denounce and Bulla Caenae Domini euery yeare 〈◊〉 on Maundy-Thursday doth confirme yet commonly are they not held for subiect to the other externall punishmentes and in particuler to be auoided and their company fled vntill by a lawfull Iudge he or they be denounced conuicted and condemned by name which we ascribe not to the Protestantes of England and therfore this charge was maliciously deuised by this Minister against vs to make vs odious 18. Nay we goe yet further for pacifying milding matters betweene vs that we doe not easily coÌ„demne or hold all and euery sorte of Protestantes Puritanes or the like sortes different at this day in our countrey from the Catholicks for absolute Heretickes but excusing them rather wherin we may by any charitable interpretation doe willingly lay hands where probably we may on that wise learned and discreet moderation of the famous doctor S. Augustine affirming to his friend Honoratus infected with the Manichean Heresy that there is a great difference betweene an Hereticke and one that belieueth Hereticks and is deceaued by them yow shall heare his owne wordes to that purpose Si mihi Honorate vnum atque idem videretur esse Haereticus Haereticis credens homo tam lingua quà m stylo in haec causa conquiescendum esse arbitrarer nunc verò cùm inter duo plurimùm inâ—ersit c. 19. If it had seemed to me friend Honoratus that an Hereticke a man belieuing Hereticks had byn al one thing I should haue thought it better to hold my peace in this cause betweene vs rather then to speake or write any thing therin but now seeing there is such great difference betweene these two I thought it not good to be silent with yow for so much as an Hereticke in my opinion is he that for some temporall respect or commodity but especially for vaine glory and singularity doth inuent or follow false and new opinions but he which belieueth such people is a man only deluded by a false imagination of truth piety So S. Augustine And hereby openeth to vs a dore to thinke charitably of many Protestants whome though we hold for deceaued yet not properly in S. Augustines meaning for Hereticks 20. And this doctrine teacheth the same Doctor in other places against the Donatistes saying that if a man should beleeue the heresy of Photinus for example who denied the distinction of three persons in God and the diuinity of Christ and should thinke it were the true Catholicke faith Istum nondum 〈◊〉 dico saith S. Augustine nisi manifestata sibi doctrina Catholicae fidei resistere maluerit illud quod tenebat elegerit I doe not thinke this man as yet to be an Hereticke except when the doctrine of the Catholicke faith to wit that which is held generally by all or the most Churches ouer Christendome being made cleere and manifest vnto him he shall resolue to resist the same and shall make choice of that which before he held so as now this choice or election with obstinate resolution to hold and defend the same against the publicke authority of the Church maketh that to be properly heresy which before was but error which error though it might be in it self damnable yet nothing so much as when it passeth into the nature of heresy both which pointes are seene by that which the said Holy Father hath in another place to wit in his booke De haeresibus ad Quod-vult-Deum where hauing recounted eighty and eight Heresies that had passed before his time vnto the Pelagians that were the last he concludeth thus There may be yet other Heresies besides these that I haue in this our worke recounted or there may rise vp other herafter whereof whosoeuer shall holde any one he shall not be a Christian Catholicke He doth not say he shall be an Hereticke properly but no Christian Catholicke which though it be sufficient to damnation if ignorance excuse him not yet nothing so great as if he were an hereticke for that as before we haue shewed out of S. Thomas the damnation of Iewes and Gentiles is much more tolerable then that of Heretickes 21. And all these limitations and charitable moderations we doe willingly vse to calme and mitigate matters and to temper that intemperate breaking humour of this make-bate Minister T. M. and his companions that would put all in combustion and desperate conuulsion And so much of this first reason the rest we shall passe ouer with greater breuity To his
more hath S. Paul in that Epistle of the eminency of Christes Priesthood therby to set forth the most admirable excellency of his power and glory therby giuen him from his Father for our saluation but of the glory of his temporal Kingdome in this life he saith little or nothing And had not then the foresaid Fathers and holy Bishops S. Chrysostome S. Gregory Nazienzen S. Ambrose and others great cause by contemplation of this supereminent worthines of Christes Priesthood to inferre the great preheminēce in generall of the Christian Priesthood before Kingly dignity of earthly principality But let vs yet consider one reason more 17. The office of high Priesthood as partly hath appeared by that we haue said and is euident by the discourse of S. Paul appointing him for a meanes or mediator betweene God and man consisteth principally in two thinges or partes first in respect of that which he is to performe towardes God as to his Superiour secondly in the functions that he is to vse towardes the people as inferiours and subiectes The first consisteth in offering sacrifice oblations prayers and intercession for the sinnes of the people as already touching Christ our Sauiour out of the Apostle we haue declared The second consisteth in the spirituall power dignity authority and functions therof which our said high Priest Christ Iesus as head high Priest of his Church purchased with the sacrifice of his owne bloud hath and may exercise vpon the said Church for euer for vnto him as our high Priest it appertaineth not only to make intercession for his said Church but to gouerne the same also and to direct it by conuenient meanes vnto the end of their saluation which he hath designed and for this to make lawes prescribe orders appoint Sacramentes ordaine spirituall tribunals of iudgment giue sentence of separation of the good from the bad forgiue and retaine sinnes which spirituall gouernment of soules belonging to the office of high Priesthood is a different thing from the ciuill gouernment of temporall principality and yet is a Kingdome also in it self but a spirituall Kingdome ouer soules and not ouer bodies And this had Christ our Sauiour togeather with his high Priesthood according to the prediction and vision of Daniel Aspiciebam ecce quasi filius hominis c. I did looke and behold there appeared as it were the Sonne of man and God gaue vnto him power and honour and a Kingdome his power is an eternall power and his Kingdome shall neuer be corrupted And so in the second Psalme after he had said I am made King by him vpon his holy Hill of Sion he addeth presently to shew that it was a spirituall Kingdome Praedicans praeceptum eius my office is to preach his commandement and many other authorities may be alledged to proue that Christ in that he was high Priest had supreame spirituall Kingly authority in like manner for gouerning of soules 18. But now for the temporall Kingdome of Christ in this life to wit whether besides this spirituall and Royall gouernment of our soules he had Kingly Dominion also vpon our bodies and goodes and vpon all the Kingdomes of the earth so as he might iustly haue excercised all actions of that temporall iurisdiction as casting into prison appointing new officers Kings and Monarches yea whether their power and authority and interest to their States did cease when he came as the right of Priestly authority did in this I say and other pointes depending herof there are two disputable opinions betweene Catholicke Deuines the one holding the affirmatiue that Christ was Lord King temporall as heere is set downe which diuers learned men both of old and our time doe de fend the other affirming that albeit Christ togeather with his high Kingly dignity of spirituall power was Lord also cōsequently ouer our bodies shall raigne ouer the same most gloriously for all eternity in the life to come yet that he renounced the vse of all that Dominion in this life and that in this sense he fled when they would haue made him King and refused to deuide the inheritance betweene the two Brethrē when he was demaunded and finally said to Pilate My Kingdome is not of this world confessing himself to be a true temporal King also according to Pilates meaning but yet that the vse and exercise therof was not for this world but only for the next wherof also the good thiefe vnderstood when he said on the Crosse Be mindfull of me when thou shalt come into thy Kingdome And finally they alledge for proofe of this the wordes of Zachary the Prophet Ecce Rex 〈◊〉 venit tibi iustus Saluator ipse pauper Behold Sion thy King commeth vnto thee as a iust and sauing King but he is poore as though he had said he is thy true King but hath renounced the vse and priuiledge of the same and chosen pouerty in this world And with this second opinion which is the more generall doe concurre also the Protestantes of our age that Christ tooke vpon him no temporall Kingly power in this life least if they held the contrary it should be inferred therof that he left the same authority both of temporall and spirituall vnto S. Peter his Successour which yet the Catholickes that hold this opinion explicate otherwise saying that albeit Christ had no direct Dominion in this life vpon temporall thinges yet indirectly for preseruation of his spirituall Dominion he had and might haue vsed the same and in that sense he left it to his said Successor 19. Of all which is inferred first the preheminence of high Priesthood in Christ before his temporall Kingly principality for that as we haue said the actions and functions of Christes Priesthood haue not only more high eminent dignity both in that they treat with men for gouerning their soules then Christes temporall Kingdome for gouerning of bodies but moreouer that the dignity of Priesthood in Christ conteineth in it self a much more high spirituall Kingly power then is the temporall 20. Secondly is inferred that the reasons heere alledged by T. M. for his paradox in preferring Christs being a King before his Priesthood are vaine foolish The first wherof is this Christes Kingdome saith he had the preheminence of Priesthood because he is Priest only for vs but he is King ouer vs. But I would aske him Is not Christ Priest ouer vs aswel as for vs hath he not a spirituall and Priestly iurisdiction ouer our soules doth not he binde and loose our sinnes doth not he prescribe vs Sacramentes appoint vs lawes of liuing and the like or doe not these actions appertaine vnto him as high Priest ouer his Church And againe I would aske him about the second member as Christ in flesh was King was he not made King aswell for vs that is for our good as ouer vs
Christ to S. Peter and that it is a strange art to make a sword of a paire of keyes which seemeth to him a fine iest then commeth he out with this vanut Neither can any shew me one Doctour but of reasonable antiquity peto vel ex millibus vnum who by keyes vnderstand ciuill power But Syr what needeth antiquity of Doctors in this behalf will not your owne moderne Protestant Doctors graunt that when the keyes of any Citty Towne or Fort are giuē to a Prince ciuill power ouer that Fort is meant therby who will deny this 38. And secondly whereas he alleadgeth Franciscus à Victoria to say that the keyes giuen to S Peter imported spiritual authority of remitting and reteyning sinnes ergo no way temporall is a fond illation for that albeit Victoria saith that those keyes did principally importe spirituall authority yet they include also supreme temporall indirectly when the defence of the spirituall doth require it Whereupon he frameth this conclusion in the same place Our eight proposition is saith he that the Pope by authority of the foresaid keyes hath most ample temporall power ouer all Princes and Kinges and the Emperour himself in order to a spirituall end which he proueth there by many arguments And this of the first iest about swordes to be made of keyes 39. The second iest also is as wise and witty as this former that when we found the same temporall sword or authority of S. Peter and his successours vpon the words of Christ Feed my sheep he doth inferre that Princes also must be fed and dietted corporally at the Popes discretion and other such toyes he not vnderstanding as it seemeth or rather dissembling the force of Catholicke argumentes drawne from those and other like Scriptures both by later Doctors and ancient Fathers which this fellow turneth into scofs and contempt or wicked railing for that presently he falleth into these rages O arrogant Glossers O impudent Glosers and peruerters of the sacred Oracles of God! And why is all this heat of exclamations Forsooth for that in some Popes Bulles though corruptly fraudulently alledged some mention is made of the great authority that was giuen to Elias Elizeus Ieremy and other Prophetes and especially to Christ himself vpon earth to plant destroy pull vp or punish where need should be and that this authority by allusion vnto the same wordes of Scripture is applied to Christes Successour vpon earth affirmed to be left in the Christian Church to be vsed when need shall require and is this so great an impiety thinke yow 40. But he goeth on and saith That next to this he will examine the antiquity of pretended Papall power from the Apostles time downward and then produceth this assertion of ours The Priestes saith the Romish pretence of the new Testament in the Priesthood of Christ haue more authority then that of the old law ouer Kinges to depose them whervnto he adioyneth presently his owne spruse Ministeriall answere in these wordes This is not probable except yow can shew some footinges either of Christ or his blessed Apostles or their Holy Successours in the purer periods of times And is not this answered as from a man of his coat Marke the phrase Of footings in purer periods I will for footinges in this matter referre him to the large demonstrations which out of Scriptures Doctours Fathers Councelles and Ecclesiasticall Histories the Authors by him heere often alledged Carerius Bozius Bellarmine Sanders Salmeron and others doe aboundantly and substancially alledge when he shall haue ouerthrowne or supplanted those footinges of theirs which they 〈◊〉 fix throughout all periods of times from the beginning of Christian Religion vnto our dayes and generall practice therof then may the poore man get to haue some little footing for himself and his cause which hitherto he hath none at all as to any man whosoeuer with any indifferency of iudgment shall read ouer and examine his booke will euidently appear yea though he compare but only that which himself alledgeth heere both in the text and margent which seldome agree in true sense if you marke it well But if yow would examine the Latin authorities cited in the said margent with the originalles of the Authors themselues you shall scarce euer finde them sincerly to agree but that one fraud or other is vsed in their allegation by chopping changing infarcing leauing out and other such sleightes and deceiptes which though the breuity of this Treatise permit me not to examin and lay forth at large in this place yet some we haue touched before and some others shall we haue occasion to note afterwardes and the Reader himself may vpon this warning make some little triall 41. And as for the succession of times which this Author T. M. pretendeth to bring downe from the Apostles dayes not to ours but for a thousand yeares only after Christ wherin he saith that no Pope can be shewed euer to haue had any temporall iurisdiction ouer any Emperour King or temporall Prince though Catholickes doe hold the later six hundred yeares also to be of no lesse force for president of examples in the Church of God then the former thousand yet are the instances so many and euident which may be alledged against his former prescription of the said thousand yeares as doe manifestly cōuince him of folly in that assertion wherin I referre me to the collections and demonstrations therof by the foresaid Authors Carerius Bozius Bellarmine Sanders and others in the places heere quoted in the margent but especially to the three that are not Iesuites to the first for all to wit Carerius that in diuers thinges wrote against the Iesuits whoe in his second booke alleadgeth 10. or 12. examples out of antiquity for prouing his purpose I remit me also to the many learned writinges set forth of late about the cause of the Venetians by Penia Baronius Bouius Eugenius Nardus others shewing the most euident right which the Pope had and hath to commaund them as high Pastor of the Church to recall certaine ciuill lawes made by them in preiudice of the said Church and Ecclesiasticall State which Commandement we doubt not but God will moue that most excellent Cōmon-wealth finally to obey they being knowne to be so good and sound Catholickes as they are though for some time in regard of some temporall respectes they haue deferred to doe the same 42. Many more pointes might be examined in this descēt of his throughout periodes of times but it would be ouerlong and my intention is to giue a tast only or short view for to examine the places cited out of Fathers of diuers ages for proofe of his pretence were time wholy lost For that in effect they say nothing else but that we graunt which is that temporall Princes are to be respected and obeyed by Ecclesiasticall men also but in temporall affaires And as for his examples of
some English Kings that seemed not to respect much the Popes authority in some occasions which he hath borrowed out of Syr Edward Cookes Reportes he may see the answere to that booke and so I thinke remaine satisfied Wherefore this shall suffice for the second head of argumentes throughout the new Testament though after also in the examination of some falsifications we shall haue occasion to say more Argumentes from Reason §. 3. 43. VVHerfore to passe no further in the second point of argumentes vnder the new Testament we shall say a word or two only of the third to wit of proofes affirmed to be deduced by vs from force of reason for so he intituleth them to wit Popish Argumentes from reason And to the end you may see his talent therin wee shal examine only the third reason in this place which he declareth in these wordes Except saith the Romish pretence there were a way of deposing Apostata Princes God had not prouided sufficiētly for his Church for this he citeth the Constitution Extrauagant of Pope Bonifacius and saith This obiection is in your Extrauagantes and so it may be called because it rangeth extra that is without the bondes of Godes ordinance c. But as in all his other citations generally he is neuer lightly true and sincere in all points no not thrice I thinke veryly throughout all this lying booke of his so neither heere and it would require a great volume alone to examine only some part of his leaues about this point of his shiftes and corruptions they are so many and thicke and craftily hudled vp togeather As for example heere first this sentence is not in the Popes Extrauagant at all but only in a certaine addition to the ordinary glosse or Commentary of Iohn Picard which addition was made by Petrus Bertrandus a late writer Secondly this Commentary saith nothing of deposing Apostata Princes but only affirming the foresaid opinion of Canonistes to be true that Christ was Lord absolutly in this life ouer all not only in spirituall authority but in temporall also he inferreth therby Christ should not haue sufficiently prouided for the gouernment of his Church Kingdome vpon earth Nisi vnicum post se talem Vicarium reliquisset qui haec omnia posset except he had left some such one substitute or Vicar after him as should be able to performe all these thinges to wit as belong both to spirituall and temporall power according as necessity shall require which later clause yow see that T. M. cut of as he added the other about Apostata Princes And thus much for his variety of corruptions in this little sentence now to the thing it selfe 44. The reason if we consider it without passion is strong and weighty and founded vpon the prouidence wisedome and goodnes of almighty God who hauing prouided diligently and admirably for the preseruation of all other thinges and Communities by him created or ordained should leaue the Christian Common-wealth vnfurnished of all remedy for the greatest euill of all others that possibly can fall out which is the corruption of the head that may destroy the whole body wherof he is head if it be not redressed As if for examples sake the Prince would extirpate Christian Religion bring in Mahometisme or other such abhomination ouerthrow all good lawes plant and establish vice dissolution Atheisme or commit some other such exorbitant wickednes as were not tolerable wherunto notwithstanding mans frailty without the helpe of Godes grace is or may be subiect In this case saith the obiection some remedy must haue byn left by Christ or els his diuine wisdome and prouidence had not prouided sufficiently for the preseruation of his Kingdome as by light of nature he left remedy to the body of euery Common-wealth vnder the Gentiles before his cōming which is euident both by Plato Aristotle Cicero others that wrote of Common-wealthes in those dayes and did alwayes presume that the said Common-wealthes had sufficient authority by law of nature to restraine exorbitant Princes when they were perilous to the publicke and the same haue held al other learned men that euer wrote of that argument afterward 45. But as for our Catholicke learned men both Deuines and Lawiers though they affirme as out of T. M. his frequent allegations of them in this his Treatise is euident that all obedience both externall and internall in conscience and workes is by Godes ordinance due vnto them yet that in such publicke perilles of the Church Common-wealth as before are mentioned when they fal out Christ our Sauiour hath not left his Church wholy remedilesse but rather that besides the naturall right which ech Kingdome hath to defend themselues in certaine cases he left also supreame power in his high Priest and immediate substitute to direct and moderate that power and to adde also of his owne whē extraordinary need requireth though with great deliberation consultation weighty motiues lawfull meanes and other like circumstances 46. This I say is Catholicke doctrine but what Protestants doctrine is were hard to set downe for that they speake therin as time and occasion serueth them hauing no rule or Canon at all wherto they are bound For what was both their doctrine and practice when and where they were discontented with their Princes both in England Scotland Flanders Geneua and France is euident by that which before we haue alledged in the first fourth Chapters of this booke now this man telleth vs another tale for the time present but what he would say or doe if he were in the discontented occasion of those his fellow-Authors that wrote so sharpely and violently no man can tell but let vs see now at length how substantially he doth satisfy this obiectiō for he giueth three or foure seuerall solutions therunto you shall heare what ones they are 47. The first is from Godes ordinance saith he for by the word of God as your Cunerus Deuinely reasoneth which is not partiall nor by the self pleasing fancy of sensuall affection must this question be determined though therfore it may seeme to vs a decree of nature for euery one to defend himself and the thinges he doth enioy yet the Law of God doth forbid to doe this by taking armes against the higher powers c. So T. M. out of our Cunerus And it is well that he alloweth this Catholicke writer to reason deuinely so far forth as he may seeme to make for him though in truth in the cōclusion of his discourse he is wholy against him For as first his whole speech in this seauenth Chapter by him cited is expresly against the Hollanders that vnder diuers pretences both of Religion and Scriptures for the same liberty of their countrey and the like tooke armes against their true naturall King which he reproueth and condemneth very piously and learnedly throughout this whole Chapter and in the
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
a heauenly Kingdome insomuch as S. Augustine doth doubt whether in the old Testament the Kingdome of heauen was euer so much as named and much lesse promised for reward and therfore those things that were then done amōg them foreshewed only or prefigured diuine thinges that were to succeed vnder the new Testament the other being not diuine but humane and earthly So Salmeron 5. Heere then are sundry important corruptions fraudes vttered by T.M. the one that the Iesuites and namely Salmeron are inforced to allow the temporall King to haue byn Supreme ouer the high Priest in spirituall matters vnder the old law wheras he doth expressely affirme and prooue the contrary both out of the Scripture it selfe by the sacrifice appointed more worthy for the Priest then the Prince many other testimonies as that he must take the law interpretation therof at the Priestes hands that he must ingredi egredi ad verbum Sacerdotis goe in and out and proceed in his affaires by the word and direction of the Priest and the like as also by the testimony of Philo and Ioseph two learned Iewes and other reasons handled at large in this very disputation and in the self same place from whence this obiection is taken And this is the first falsification concerning the Authours meaning and principall drift 6. The second corruption is in the wordes as they ly in the Latin copy as they are by me before mentioned Vbi id euenisset mirum esse non debere If any such thing had fallen out as was obiected to wit that Kinges sometimes had prescribed to the Priests what they should doe in Ecclesiasticall things deposed some c. it had byn no maruaile for somuch as their Ecclesiasticall Kingdome or Synagogue was an earthly and imperfect thing but yet this proueth not that it was so but only it is spoken vpon a supposition which suppositiō this Minister that he might the more cunningly shift of and auoid left cut of purpose the most essentiall wordes therof Vbi id euenisset if that had happened c. as also for the same cause to make thinges more obscure after those words of Salmeron that stand in his text Synagoga Iudeorum dicebatur terrenum potius quà m caeleste regnum The Synagogue or Ecclesiasticall gouernment of the Iewes was called rather an earthly then a heauenly Kingdome wheras contrary-wise the Ecclesiasticall power in the Christian Church is euery where called Celestiall after those wordes I say this man cutteth of againe many lines that followed togeather with S. Augustines iudgmēt before touched which serued to make the Authors meaning more plaine and yet left no signe of c. wherby his Reader might vnderstand that somewhat was omitted but 〈◊〉 againe presently as though it had imediatly followed 〈◊〉 cùm populus Dei constet corpore animo carnalis pars in veteri populo primas tenebat Wheras Godes people doth consist of body and minde the carnall or bodily part did cheifly preuaile among the Iewes and heerwith endeth as though nothing more had ensued of that matter thrustnig out these wordes that immediatly followed and made the thing cleere which are Et ad spiritualia significanda constituebaiur and that kinde of earthly power was appointed to signify the spirituall that was to be in the new Testament wherby is euidently seene that Salmeron vnderstood not by carnalis pars and regnum terrenum the temporall Kingdome of Iury as this Minister doth insinuate to make the matter odious but the Ecclesiasticall gouernment of the Synagogue vnder the old law in respect of the Ecclesiasticall power in the new wherof the other was but an earthly figure or signification 7. But now the third corruption most egregious of all is in his English translation out of the Latin wordes of Salmeron for thus he translateth them in our name In the Synagogue of the Iewes saith Salmeron was a State rather earthly then heauenly so that in that people which was as in the body of a man consisting of body and soule the carnall part was more eminent meaning the temporall to haue byn supreame In which translation are many seuerall shifts and fraudes For wheras Salmeron saith Synagoga Iudeorum dicebatur potius terrenum quà m caeleste regnum the Synagogue or Ecclesiasticall power among the Iewes was called rather an earthly then a heauenly Kingdome he translateth it the Synagogue of the Iewes was a State rather earthly then heauenly and this to the end he might apply the word of earth to the temporal Prince and heauenly to the Iudaicall Priestes which is quite from Salmerons meaning Secondly those other wordes of Salmeron being Cùm populus Dei constet ex corpore animo wheras the people of God doe consist of body and minde meaning therby aswell Christians as Iewes and that the Iewes are as the bodily or carnall part of the man and the Christians the spirituall and consequently their Ecclesiasticall authority earthly and ours heauenly this fellow to deceaue his Reader putteth out first the word Dei the people of God and then translateth it in that people to wit the Iewes the carnall part was the more eminent meaning saith he the tēporall which is false for he speaketh expressely of the Ecclesiasticall power among the Iewes which he calleth carnall and terrene in respect of the spirituall Ecclesiasticall among the Christians and not the temporall or Kingly power vnder the old Testament as this man to make vs odious to temporall Princes as debasing their authority would haue it thought And Salmerons cōtraposition or antithesis is not betweene the temporall and Ecclesiasticall gouernment among the Iewes but betweene their Ecclesiasticall gouernment and ours that of the Synagogue and this of the Christian Church wherof the one he saith to be terrene earthly the other spirituall and heauenly the one infirme the other powerfull ouer soules c. So as all these sortes and kindes of corruptions being seene in this one little authority yow may imagine what will be found in the whole booke if a man had so much patience and time to leese as to discusse the same exactly through 8. A little after this againe he bringeth in an example of the King of Israell Ozias who for presuming to exercise the Priests office in offering of incense being first reprehended and resistest for the same by Azarias the high Priest and fourescore other Priestes with him in the Temple was for his presumption presently and publickly in all their sightes punished by God and stroken with a leprosy and therupon remoued by the authority of the said high Priest first from the Temple and common conuersation of men and then also from the gouernment or administration of his Kingdome the same being committed to his sonne Ioathan all the dayes of his Fathers life about which example M. Morton first of all bringeth in Doctor
is to bring matters to his purpose and yet will he needs stile him self The Minister of simple truth 12. It followeth in the 16. page thus Your deuise saith he of exemption of Priestes from the iurisdiction of temporall Princes in certaine cases is to crude to be disgested by any reasonable Deuine for as your Victoria saith Priestes besides that they are Ministers of the Church they are likewise members of the Common-wealth and a King is aswell a King of the Clergy as of the laity therfore the Clergy is subiect vnto the ciuill authority in temporall thinges for such matter is not ruled by any power spirituall A plaine demonstration So he And I say the same that indeed it is a plaine demonstration of his egregious falshood and abusing his Reader First in making him belieue that the learned man Franciscus de Victoria doth fauour him or his in this matter of the exemption of Priestes wheras in this very place heere cited by T. M. his first proposition of all in this matter is this Ecclesiastici iure sunt exempti c. I doe affirme that Ecclesiasticall men are by Law exempted and freed from ciuill power so as they may not be conuented before a secular Iudge either in criminall or ciuill causes the contrary doctrine to this is condemned for Hereticall among the articles of Iohn VVickliffe in the Councell of Constance So he And now see whether Victoria make for him or no or whether he disgested well this crude doctrine of Priestes exemption as this Ministers phrase is 13. Secondly if we consider either the English translation heere set downe out of the wordes of Victoria or his Latin text for ostentation sake put in the margent wee shall find so many and monstrous foule corruptions intercisions geldinges and mutilations as is a shame to behold and I beseech the learned Reader to haue patience to conferre but this one place only with the Author and he will rest instructed in the mās spirit for the rest but he must find them as I hà ue cited them heere in the margent and not as T. M. erroneously quoteth them if not of purpose to escape the examine For that Victoria hauing set downe his precedent generall proposition for the exemption of Clergy men that they were exempted Iure by Law he passeth on to examine in his second proposition Quo iure by what Law diuine or humane they are exempted and in his third he holdeth that Aliqua exemptio Clericorum est de iure Diuino That some kinde of exemptions of Clergy men from ciuill power is by diuine Law and not humane only and fourthly he commeth to this which heere is set downe by T. M. but not as he setteth it downe Our fourth proposition saith Victoria is that the persons of Clergy men are not absolutly and in all thinges exempted from ciuill power either by diuine or humane lawe which is euident by that Clergy men are bound to obey the temporall lawes of the Citty or Cōmon-wealth wherin they liue in those thinges that doe appertaine to the temporall gouernment and administration therof and doe not let or hinder Ecclesiasticall gouernment 14. These are the wordes of Victoria as they ly togeather in him and then after some argumentes interposed for his said conclusion he addeth also this proofe That for so much as Clergy mē besides this that they are Ministers of the Church are Citizens also of the Common-wealth they are bound to obey the temporall lawes of that Common-wealth or Prince in temporall affaires and then ensueth the last reason heere set downe in English by T. M. in these wordes Moreouer saith Victoria for that a King is King not only of laymen but of Clergy-men also therfore aliquo modo subiiciuntur ei in some sort they are subiect vnto him Which wordes aliquo modo in some sorte the Minister leaueth out and then it followeth immediatly in Victoria And for that Clergy-men are not gouerned in temporall matters by Ecclesiasticall power therfore they haue their temporall Prince vnto whome they are bound to yeeld obedience in temporall affaires 15. And this is all that Victoria hath in this matter in these very wordes And let any man consider the patching which T. M. vseth both in English and Latin in this place to make some shew for his fained demonstration out of Victoria and he will see how poore and miserable a man he is and how miserable a cause he defendeth And in particular let the very last proposition be noted which he citeth and Englisheth as out of Victoria to wit the Clergy is subiect vnto the ciuill authority in temporall thinges for such matter is not ruled by any power spirituall wherby he would haue his Reader to imagine that no spirituall power may haue authority to gouerne temporall matters wheras the wordes of Victoria are Clerici quantum ad temporalia non administrantur potestate Ecclesiastica that Clergy men for so much as appertaineth to temporall affaires are not gouerned by Ecclesiasticall power but by the temporall which there beareth rule So as this fellow by a subtile sleight changing the nominatiue case from Clerici non administrantur to temporalia non administrantur frameth his plaine demonstration out of plaine cosenage and forgery And is this naked innocency 16. From the page 18. vnto 27. he handleth togeather many sentences and authorities of ancient Fathers alledged by Catholicke Authors Cunerus Tolosanus and especially Barkleius to shew that the Apostles and their successours and those Fathers amongest the rest did not take armes against their Princes either Infidels or Christians but did rather suffer iniuries then seeke by force to reuenge the same which being our conclusion in like manner and held and defended by our Catholicke writers as yow see and that for the most part by name against Protestant writers practisers both in Scotland France Flanders other places yow may perceaue how corruptly this is brought in against vs as though our common beliefe and exercise were the contrary this may be called falsification and sophistication of our meaning 17. But yet if we would examine the particular authorities that be alledged about this matter though nothing making against vs as hath byn said consider how many false shiftes are vsed by T. M. therin yow would say he were a Doctor in deed in that science for that a seuerall Treatise will scarce conteine them I will touch only two for examples sake He citeth Doctor Barkley bringing in the authority of S. Ambrose that he resisted not by force his Arrian Emperour when he would take a Church from him for the Arrians but he setteth not downe what answere of his Doctor Barkley doth alledge in the very self same place which is Allegatur Imperatori licere omnia c. It is alledged that it is lawfull for the Emperour to doe all thinges for that all thinges are his and
mutatae sunt quia Pontifex qui est caput in spiritualibus non est subiectus in temporalibus Then in those dayes generall Councelles were made not without the charges of Emperours in that time the Pope did subiect himselfe vnto Emperours in temporall affaires and therfore they could doe nothing against the Emperours will for which cause the Pope did make supplication to the Emperour that he would commaund Synodes to be gathered but after those times all causes were changed for that the Pope who is head in spirituall matters is not subiect in temporall affaires So he 31. And heere let vs consider the variety of sleightes shifts of this our Minister not only in citing Bellarmins wordes falsly and against his meaning and drift in Latin wherof we shall speake presently but in peruerting this Latin that he hath so corruptly set downe in his former English translation For first hauing said according to the Latin that generall Councelles in those dayes were not gathered without the cost of Emperours he addeth presently of his owne and were made by their consentes which is not in the Latin and then he cutteth of the other wordes immediatly ensuing which conteine the cause to wit for that the Popes subiecting themselues in those dayes touching temporalities vnto the Emperours as hauing no temporall States or dominion yet of their owne could doe nothing without them and therfore did make supplication to the said Emperours that they would commaund Synodes to be gathered which T. M. translateth that they would gather Synodes as though Bellarmine did affirme that it lay in the Emperours by right to doe it but after those times omnes causae mutatae sunt all causes were changed but he should haue said are changed as Bellarmins true wordes are omnes istae causae al these causes are chāged to wit foure sortes of causes which he setteth downe why generall Councells could not be well gathered in those dayes without the Emperours help and authority which wordes are guilefully cut of by this deceauer as in like manner the last wordes put downe heere by himselfe Pontifex non est subiectus in temporalibus are falsly translated cannot be subiect in temporall and againe afterward Popes might not be subiect in temporall matters which is to make Bellarmine contrary to himselfe who saith a little before that the Popes did subiect themselues for many years wherby is proued that they could doe it but Bellarmins meaning is that in right by the preheminence of their spirituall dignity they were exempted not bound therunto 32. And thus much now for the corruptions vsed in the wordes heere set downe both in Latin English But if we would goe to Bellarmine himself and see his whole discourse and how brokenly and persidiously these lines are cut out of him and heere patched togeather as one entier context contrary to his drift and meaning we shall meruaile more at the insolency of Thomas Morton triumphing ouer his owne lye as before hath byn said for that Bellarmine hauing proued at larg and by many sortes of argumentes and demonstrations throughout diuers Chapters togeather that the right of gathering generall Councelles belongeth only to the Bishop of Rome and hauing answered all obiections that could be made against the same in the behalfe of Emperours or other temporall Princes grāting only that for certaine causes in those first ages the same could not be done in respect of temporall difficulties without the helpe assistance of the said Emperours that were Lords of the world he commeth to make this conclusion which heere is cited by T. M. but in far other wordes and meaning then heere he is cited Yow shall heare how he setteth it downe therupō consider of the truth of this Minister Habemus ergo saith he prima illa Concilia c. We haue then by all this disputation seene how those first Christian Councelles were commaunded by Emperours to be gathered but by the sentence and consent of Popes and why the Pope alone in those dayes did not call Councelles as afterward hath byn accustomed the reason was not for that Councelles gathered without the Emperours consent are not lawfull as our Aduersaries would haue it for against that is the expresse authority of S. Athanasius saying Quando vnquam iudicium Ecclesiae ab Imperatore authoritatem habuit When was it euer seene that the iudgment of the Church did take authority from the Emperour but for many other most iust causes was the Emperours consent required therin c. So Bellarmine 33. And heere now yow see that Bellarmins drift is wholy against M. Mortons assertion for that he denieth that euer the Emperours had any spirituall authority for calling of Councells but only that they could not well in those dayes be made without them and that for foure seuerall causes wherof the first was for that the old Imperiall lawes made by Gentils were yet in vse wherby all great meetinges of people were forbidden for feare of sedition except by the Emperours knowledge licence the second for that Emperours being temporall Lordes of the whole world the Councells could be made in no Citty of theirs without their leaue the third for that generall Councelles being made in those dayes by the publicke charges contributions of Citties and especially of Christian Emperours themselues as appeareth by Eusebius Theodoretus other writers it was necessary to haue their consent and approbation in so publicke an action as that was 34. The fourth and last cause was saith Bellarmine for that in those dayes albeit the Bishop of Rome where head in spirituall matters ouer the Emperours themselues yet in temporall affaires he did subiect himself vnto them as hauing no temporal State of his owne and therfore acknowledging them to be his temporall Lords he did make supplicatiō vnto them to commaund Synodes to be gathered by their authority and licence At post illa tempora istae omnes causae mutatae sunt but since those dayes all these foure causes are changed ipse in suis Prouinciis est Princeps Supremus temporalis sicut sunt Reges Principes alij and the Pope himself now in his temporall Prouinces is supreme temporall Lord also as other Kings Princes are which was brought to passe by Godes prouidence saith Bellarmine to the end that he might with more freedome liberty and reputation exercise his office of generall Pastorship 35. And this is all that Bellarmine hath of this matter And now may we cōsider the vanity of this Mortons triumph ouer him before and how falsly he dealeth with him alledging him against his owne drift and meaning leauing out also 〈◊〉 foure causes by me recited and then cutting of 〈◊〉 the particle istae these causes are now changed which includeth reference to these foure aid furthermore speaking indefinitely as though all causes and matters were now changed seeketh therby to deceaue his Reader and
to the Protestant spirit alone Hitherto I must confesse that I neuer found it in any and if I should though it were but once I should hold it for a sufficient argument not to belieue him euer after And this shall suffice for a tast only of M. Mortons manner of proceeding For that to prosecute al particulers would require a whole volume and by these few yow may ghesse at the mans vaine and spirit in writing THE SECOND PART OF THIS CHAPTER REPRESENTING Some of the falsifications vvhich are vttered in the former Part of M. Mortons Reply VVhich came to our handes after our Answere made before in our second Chapter against his ten Reasons ANd now albeit these false and fraudulent dealings laid open in the precedent Part of this Chapter be sufficient or rather superaboundant to descry this Minister and his naked innocency who in his Epistle to his Maiesty as before hath byn touched calleth himself A Minister of simple truth and vpright conscience yet for more perfect complement of the same I haue thought good to adioine also a second Part to this Chapter and therin to draw to light some number of his notorious vntruthes corruptions sleightes falsifications and calumniations vttered in the former Part of his Reply to the moderate Reader which Part not comming to my handes vntill I had made the answere which before I haue set downe in the second Chapter of this Treatise against his Discouery I could not conueniently discusse the same particularly therin but now by that which heere yow shall see produced you may easily ghesse how worthy a peece of worke it is and what credit the man deserueth that made it And albeit the breuity purposed by me in this place permitteth not the examine of al or of the greater part yet verbum sapienti sat est the discreet Reader by a few examples which demonstrate that the writer wanteth remorse of conscience in his asseuerations will easily see how farre he is to be credited in all his writinges Wherfore to the examine it self 41. In the third page of his said Reply he beginning to talke of the nature of heresy hath these wordes VVee may not be ignorant first that seeing the nature of heresy is such that it is a vice proper to the minde it may denominate the subiect whatsoeuer an Hereticke without obstinacy which is only a peruerse 〈◊〉 of the will and therfore a man may be an Hereticke though he be not obstinate And for proofe of this false doctrine he citeth in his margent Vasquez Iesuita whose wordes are Malitia huius 〈◊〉 intellectu non in voluntate consummatur the malice of this sinne of heresy is perfected or made consummate in the vnderstanding and not in the will which our Minister vnderstanding not and yet desirous as in his preface to the Kinges Maiesty he insinuateth to deuide our tongues to make our writers seeme contrary the one to the other hath fondly slaundered the learned man Vasquez in this place by making him seeme to be patrone of this his absurd doctrine that heresy may bewithout obstinacy wheras Vasquez in the very same disputation heere by him cited expressely doth impugne this doctrine and establisheth the contrary defining heresy thus Haeresis nihil aliud est quà m error in rebus 〈◊〉 cum pertinacia Heresy is nothing els but an errour in matters of faith with obstinacy 42. Which another learned mā of the same schoole by somewhat a more ample definition declareth thus Heresy saith he is an errour contrary to the Catholicke faith wherunto a man that hath professed the said faith in his baptisme doth adhere with an obstinate minde Which definitiō he proueth ex communi mente Doctorum by the cōmon consent of schoole Doctors And finally not to stand vpon a thing so cleere among vs S. Thomas for decision heerof hath these wordes De ratione Haeresis sunt duo electio priuatae disciplinae pertinacia Two thinges are of the essence and intrinsecall nature of heresy without which Heresy cannot be the one the choice or electiō of a particuler doctrine discipline or opinion contrary to the doctrine of the vniuersall Church the other pertinacy or obstinacy in defending the same though the party know that it be against the doctrine of the Church without which knowledge and obstinacy there can be no Heresy 43. This is our Catholicke doctrine about the nature of Heresy to wit that it cannot be without obstinacy which is so common and triuiall as it is now come into an ordinary prouerbe to say VVell I may be in errour but Hereticke I will neuer be for that I will hold nothing obstinatly And as for the wordes of Vasquez that the malice of Heresy is consummated in the vnderstanding and not in the will if our Minister had read the other wordes immediatly going before he might perhaps haue vnderstood Vasquez meaning for they are these Vt aliquis sit verè reus Haeresis c. To make a man be truly guilty of Heresy it is not necessary that he be carried directly in his affection or will against the authority of the Church that is to say it is not needfull that he haue an expresse will and purpose to disobey or contradict the Church but it is inough that he doe contradict the same re ipsa indeed knowing that opinion which he defendeth to be against the authority of the said vniuersall Church albeit he be not induced to this belief with a direct will to impugne the Church but either by desire of glory or other inducement so as indeed the malice of this sinne is consummated in the vnderstanding and not in the will 44. This is the discourse and doctrine of Vasquez in this place about the nature and essence of Heresy wherin he doth not exclude either the vnderstāding or will but includeth them both expressely for that as there must be knowledge which appertaineth to the minde or vnderstanding so must there be choise with obstinacy which belongeth to the will and affection but his scholastical consideration is in which of these two powers of our soule this sinne of Heresy receaueth her consummation For better explication therof let vs vse this example If a man should hold or belieue an erroneous proposition contrary to the doctrine of the Catholicke Church as for example that there were but one nature in Christ not knowing it to be against the Catholicke Church it were false in it self and an errour in his vnderstanding but not Heresy except also by act of his will he should chuse to hold it with resolution and obstinacy euen after that he knoweth the same to be against the doctrine of the said Church for then this knowledge saith Vasquez that it is against the Church maketh it perfect and consummate Heresy albeit the matter passe not to a further act of will to wit that he chooseth expressely to contradict the authority
of words yet in substance is it much for that therby T. M. would make his Reader belieue that Bellarmine cleereth Caluin and Beza from all sortes of errour in this point for that purpose turneth illum into illos and hoc errore into errore that is to say him into them and this errour into any errour at all wheras Bellarmine though in one sense he excuse him yet absolutly doth he condemne him as yow haue heard and no man can deny but that his Latin wordes were heere fraudulently and perfidiously alledged and mangled by T. M. for that he could not doe it but wittingly and of purpose and yet forsooth this man will not Equiuocate as he saith for a world though lye he will manifestly for much lesse as yow see And so much of this vntill we come to examine the matter more largely afterward in the third Part of this Chapter 58. And heere I will passe ouer many thinges that might be noted out of the sequent pages mamely 30. 31. 34. where he doth so peruert and abuse both the wordes discourse and sense of diuers Authors alledged by him as is not credible to him that doth not compare them with the bookes themselues from whence they are taken As for example Royardus the Franciscane Friar is brought in with commendation of an honest Friar for that he saith that a King when he is made by the people can not be deposed by them againe at their pleasure which is the same doctrine that all other Catholickes doe hold so long as he conteineth himself within the nature of a King for that otherwise which is the question in cōtrouersy Royard himself saith parendum 〈◊〉 non esse that he is not to be obeyed but this is not to be iudged by the people and their mutiny as Protestant Doctors teach 59. And to like effect he citeth a discourse though most brokenly alledged out of Bishop Cunerus writing against the Rebells of Flanders and testifying that it lieth not in the peoples hand to reiect their Prince at their pleasure as those Protestant subiectes did and then M. Morton as though he had achieued some great victory triumpheth exceedingly saying That forsomuch as Friars in our Councells haue no voice but only Bishops he hath brought forth a Bishop against vs whome for that the moderate Answerer had named a little before this man scornfully telleth him Caesarem appellasti ad Caesarem ibis yow haue appealed to Cunerus and now he shal be your Iudge against yow And is not this great folly and insolency for that Cunerus in all that his booke saith nothing against vs but altogeather for vs to represse the Rebellion in Flanders as hath byn signified And secōdly notwithstanding all this exact obediēce which both he and we prescribe and require at subiectes handes towardes their lawfull Princes he hath a speciall Chapter which is the third after this alledged heere by T. M. wherin he doth expressely largly proue that in some cases when Princes fall into intollerable disorders there is authority left in the common-wealth and Church of Christ to restraine and remoue them What falshood is this then to alledge Authors thus directly against their owne sense meaning and whole drift doth this become a Minister of simple truth Is this for a man that somuch abhorreth Equiuocation 60. I let passe as trifles in this very place but yet such as shew a guilty minde and meaning that he citing the booke of Alexander Carerius a Doctor of the Canon law in Padua which he wrote of late de Potestate Romani 〈◊〉 putteth in of his owne contra huius temporis Haereticos against the Heretickes of this time which are not in the title of that booke and then wheras the said Author naming or citing many other writers to be of his opinion doth say nuperrimè verò Celsus Mancinus in tract de Iuribus Principatuum c. and last of all Celsus Mancinus doth hold the same in a certaine Treatise of the rightes of principalities this man to frame vnto himself some matter of insultation turneth verò into verè and then playeth ridiculously vpon his owne fiction in these wordes Carerius citeth another called Celsus by interpretation high or lofty and therfore insignes him with verè Celsus as truly so named and so truly he may be if we iudge him by the loftines of his stile and conclusion So he And doe yow see this folly Or will yow thinke it rather folly then falshood that could not discerne betweene verò and verè Or not be able to iudge by the contexture of Carerius his speech it selfe that it could not by apt construction be verè if he had lighted vpon a corrupt coppy as he could not for that there is but one and that hath very plainly verò and consequently all this Commentary of Thomas 〈◊〉 is out of his owne inuention And where now is the assurance of his vpright conscience protested to his Maiesty in his Epistle dedicatory where is his simplicity in Christ Iesus where his naked innocency Can this be ignorance can this be done but of purpose and consequently by a guilty conscience what may the hearer belieue of all he saith when euery where he is found intangled with such foolish treachery But let vs proceed 61. There followeth within two leaues after a heape not only of falshoodes but also of impudencies For wheras his Aduersary the moderate Answerer had said that not only Kinges but Popes also for Heresy by the Canon lawes were to be deposed he Answereth thus The Authors of the doctrine of deposing Kinges in case of Heresy doe professe concerning Popes that they cannot possibly be Heretickes as Popes and consequently cannot be deposed Not saith Bellarmine by any power Ecclesiasticall or tēporall no not by all Bishops assembled in a Councell Not saith Carerius though he should doe any thing preiudiciall to the vniuersall State of the Church Not saith Azorius though he should neglect the Canons Ecclesiasticall or peruert the Lawes of Kinges Not saith Gratians glosse though he should carry infinite multitudes of soules with him to hell and these forenamed Authors doe auouch for the confirmation of this doctrine the vniuersall consent of Romish Deuines and Canonistes for the space of an hundred yeares So he And in these wordes are as many notorious and shamelesse lies as there are assertions and Authors named by him for the same 62. For first the foure writers which he mentioneth there in the text to wit Bellarmine Carerius Azorius and Gratian doe expressely cleerly and resolutly hold the contrary to that he affirmeth out of them for that they teach and proue by many argumentes that Popes both may fall into Heresies and for the same be deposed by the Church or rather are ipso facto deposed and may be so declared by the Church and their wordes heere guilfully alledged
last words M. Iewell leaueth out of purpose to couer and conceale the meaning of our Sauiour and addeth of himselfe quod vni dico which our Sauiour hath not And thirdly he peruerteth wholy the meaning of Christ which was to perswade attention and watchfulnes about the day of Iudgement and applyeth it against the preheminence of S. Peter his Authority which he well knew to be farre from our Sauiours meaning And moreouer there ensueth an other most grosse absurditie which is that our Sauiour speaking to all euery one of them that were present when he saith vigilate be watchfull it followeth I say that in M. Iewels sense and application of his wordes euery one to whome the word vigilate apperteyneth which are all sortes and sexes of people both there 〈◊〉 and absent should haue as great spirituall authority ouer the Church of God as S. Peter quia quod vni dico omnibus dico whatsoeuer I say to only Peter to wit that he must feede that he is the rocke and the like I say to all men And now let any indifferent man consider with what conscience M. Iewell could feigne Christ to say as he alledgeth For either he had read the place in S. Marke which he cyteth or had not If not it was great negligence the matter and subiect being so weighty as it was and if he did and yet alledged it quite otherwise then there it is found what shall we say of this 〈◊〉 dealing What of such lying and perfidious Equiuocation who in this can excuse or defend him for a man of any conscience at all 43. And yet was he forsooth the Father and chiefe maister of all 〈◊〉 Caluinian doctrine in Englād which was first established by Queene Elizabeth at her entring for that Zuinglianisme had bene only admitted in King Edwardes dayes he was not only held for the chiefe preacher and teacher therof but for the publicke Champion also to defend it and therfore as the doctrine was false so must he haue a more speciall eminent gift of cunning and falshood to beare it out then other men for that others were to take 〈◊〉 eius of his fulnesse in that science And albeit he had diuers brethren also at that time that did participate with him of that spirite in their writings as M. Horne Bishop of VVinchester by name and some others yet were they esteemed farre inferior to M. Iewell in this point especially in the elegancy of cōueyance though in will and substance they might be equall And so if yow looke vpon six hundred fourescore and ten vntruthes which Doctor Stapleton gathered out of one worke of the said M. Horne written against Doctor Fecknam about the oath of the supremacy yow shall fynd as many and grosse lyes as any lightly of M. Iewell but not so sleightly 〈◊〉 nor smoothly faced out 44. As for example where he auoucheth flatly that the cōuersion of our King 〈◊〉 of Britanie and of his whole Realme establishing therof was done without any knowledge or consent of Pope Eleutherius is so grosse alye as it is refutable by all historyes from that tyme to ours yea by Iohn Fox Bale themselues who were greatest enemyes to all Popes So as this matter was not handsomely carryed And againe in the same worke M. Horne pretending to alledge some temporall lawyers to his purpose against the Popes Ecclesiasticall preheminence in England cyteth one Broughton as saying That the king 〈◊〉 Supreme in his Kingdome and saffereth no equall or superior and other such pointes which are not denyed when speach is of temporall men and affayres and he leaueth out diuers other passages in the very same Author and place which he cyteth expresly affirming that in spirituall affayres the Pope Bishops are to Iudge not temporall men which is the very decision of the Controuersie 45. And in this kind I might alledge an excefsiue multitude both out of the one the other Bishops workes but that the repetition therof would be ouer tedious albeit it fell not out without Gods speciall prouidence in that beginning that so notorious falsityes should be vttered and published to the world by these chiefe ring-leaders for that sundry principall Protestants that were curious to read these books in that 〈◊〉 entrance of heresye were conuerted made Catholicke by this speciall and principall motiue that they 〈◊〉 so many notorious and inexcusable vntruthes vttered by these principall men in their writinges at that day wherof I my selfe knew sundry in some other place haue named three one in the vniuersity of 〈◊〉 M. VVilliam 〈◊〉 a learned and zealous preacher of the Protestant doctrine the other in the court Syr Thomas Copley made afterward Lord by the King of France a great follower of my Lord of 〈◊〉 and feruent in the new profession as being extraordinarily well seene for a man of his calling in controuersies himself the third in London M. Doctor Stephens Secretary to M. Iewell and well seene at that time in Deuinity and the learned tongues all which made change of their Religion though to their great temporal losses vpon the great auersion they tooke at the discouery of the wilfull falshood of these chiefe teachers of new Religion whervpon the first of the aboue named three maketh this marginall note in a booke of his written against M. Doctor VVhitaker The incredible lying saith he and falsisication vsed by the 〈◊〉 writers of our time are a great motiue to the Catholicke 〈◊〉 And then in the text he declareth the matter further in these wordes 46. I know many saith he who hauing byn brought 〈◊〉 not in Catholike Religion but in heresie with M. 〈◊〉 and continuing a long tyme in the same and 〈◊〉 it with all their hartes yet comming afterwards to better iudgement through the grace of God vpon consideration of such lying writers as 〈◊〉 VVhitakers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to wit Maister 〈◊〉 Maister Horne c. haue byn so altered as they haue detested his ghospell euen to hel gates of which number I confesse my selfe to be one So he 47. And surely if we consider the speciall learning and vertu of this man and how he had read exactly all writhers that could be gotten of the Protestants side of what sort or sect soeuer as by his writings doth well appeare as also with what singuler patiēce humility and contentement of mynd he lyued for many yeares after in voluntary banishment and pouerty for loue of the Catholicke Religion wheras by accommodating himselfe to the current of the tyme he might haue receyued great prefermēt in his country and was in the way towards them when he lefte the same he will say that this motiue of lying Equiuocation in Protestant writers had made deepe and strong impression in him in deed And thus much for the Bishops now let vs looke into the like spirite of Ministers in this behalfe The vse of Equiuocating in English Protestant-Ministers §.
4. 48. AS for this sort of men though it might be sufficient which before we haue noted and set downe out of the writings of this one Minister T. M. for proofe of our 〈◊〉 yet to shew the conformity of spirit in others also of the same profession coate we shall briefly heere alledge some few more examples and those of the chiefest English Ministers for to talke of forraine were infinite that haue writen against Catholike Religion in these our dayes 49. And with whom in this poynt may we better begin then with Iohn Fox himselfe not vnfitly called by some the Father of lyes in his huge Volume of Acts and Monuments who as he was one of the first that tooke vpon him in our language to set abroad the prayses of that Protestant Church by way of history so did he by deedes leaue a document what liberty the writers of that professiō do take vnto themselues in this kynd of Equiuocation that auoucheth falsities well knowne to be such to the vtterer For that not only throughout his whole worke doth he vse the same vpon euery occasion but euen in the very first lynes and tytle also of his booke promising to set downe The continuance and succession of his said Church from the beginning to our dayes but indeede neuer meant to performe any parte therof as well knowing that he could not as by a special Treatise hath byn these years past most euidently made manifest that the said Fox towards the end of his said volume was enforced to begin his broken succession cōtinue the same with notorious condēned heretiks from Berengarius downeward as in that Treatise is largely declared manifold exāples are layd forth of his voluntary falshood in almost infinite points by him recorded against his owne knowledge and conscience as may be seene in the Table or Index of that booke vnder the word Fox 50. And finally the same Author in the end of the third parte of the said worke doth in one Chapter conuince him of aboue an hundred and twenty wilfull lyes vttered by him in lesse then three leaues in his said Acts and Monuments and those such as no wayes they may be excused eyther by ignorance error or other such circumstance which before we haue touched but must needs proceed of voluntary fraud and malice himselfe knowing that it was false which he related One only exāple will I cyte heere out of all the said 120. lyes wherby yow may make a ghesse of all the rest 51. The Papists do teach saith he most wickedly and horribly saying 〈◊〉 Christ suffred for Originall synne or synnes going before baptisme but the actuall synnes which follow after baeptisme must be done away by mans merits And this assertion of ours he putteth downe in a different letter as though they were our owne very wordes and sense which is most false for that we hold them neyther in wordes nor sense so as the are rather two wicked and horrible lyes of his then any wicked or horrible doctrine of ours 52. For first we say not That Christ suffered only for Originall synne but for all synnes both originall actuall precedent and subsequent after our baptisme S. Thomas his wordes are cleere for our common doctrinè in that behalf part 3. q. 1. art 4. Certum est c. It is certayne saith he that Christ came into the world to blot out not only originall sinne but all sinnes c. And this is the common doctrine of all Deuynes amongst vs. The secōd poynt also That actuall sinnes after baptisme cannot be done away by mans merit but by the merits of Christ and by the grace and vertue of his said passion is no lesse euident in all our writings as you may see in S. Thomas for all 1. 2. q. 114. art 7. where he saith Nullus potest mereri sibi reparationem post lapsum c. That no man can merite his rysing againe after synne but that it must needs proceede of the only grace of God and merite of Christ. And the same teacheth the Councel of Trent sess 6. cap. 14. 16. c. So as these are two not orious lyes in re grauissima in a matter of most moment as yow see and cannot be imputed to error or ignorance with any probability And of the same kynd are the other hundred and odde which before we haue mentioned and are vttered as hath byn said within the compasse of three leaues and therby we may take a scantling of Iohn Fox his Consciencie in this kind of lying equiuocation when it may make for his aduantage And this shall suffice for the first example 53. The second example shall be out of an other Minister that liued ioyntly with Iohn Fox to 〈◊〉 Doctor Calfhill of Christs Church in Oxford who was a speciall great defender of M. Iewells chalenge in those dayes of the primitiue English Protestant Church to wit That no one Doctor no one Father no one Councel no one Anthority could be brought for our doctrine c. But when a litle after there were certaine ordinarie 〈◊〉 appointed euery Saturday in a seuerall isle of the said colledg-Colledg-Church for triall of Controuersies and for some 〈◊〉 of the Protestants confidence therin those may remēber that liued in the vniuersity at that tyme that M. Bristow and some other 〈◊〉 students in Deuinity repayring thither to dispute forced M. Calfhill that was the moderator to deny or 〈◊〉 to shifte of so many Fathers Doctors and other ancient authorities as most men langhed to heare it and his owne friends were ashamed at the matter And when a litle after he wrote a very irreligious and prophane answere to a certaine Catholike Treatise writen by M. Martiall of the Holy Crosse of Christ he was oftentymes dryuen to the same follies eyther of open reiecting or ridiculous shifting of the same Fathers As for example when S. Ambrose writing of the necessity of 〈◊〉 signe among Christians and especially in Churches 〈◊〉 That a Church cannot stand without a Crosse no more then a shippe without a mast c. He answereth that it cannot stand without a 〈◊〉 beame or crosse 〈◊〉 or one piece of tymber shut into another And do yow imagine that he did think as he said 54. Againe in the same booke where it is obiected out of S. Athanasius words against the Gentils That infinite miracles were wrought by the signe of the Crosse as casting out dyuels and the like yea and that S. Athanasius did prouoke the Gentils to come and make proofe therof and Christians to vse the same saying Vtatur signo vt illi dicunt ridiculè Crucis c. Let him vse against all inchauntments the signe of the Crosse which Pagans call ridiculous and he shall see the Diuels to be put to flight by 〈◊〉 southsaying to cease Magicke and poysoning destroyed c. So 〈◊〉 Athanasius Whervnto Calfhill answereth thus If yow
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
of the Church therin which should be a greater sinne but yet is not necessary for that the perfect nature of Heresy is consummated by knowing that it is against the Church and for that this notice or knowledge belongeth to the vnderstanding therfore Vasquez holdeth that the last perfection or consummation of this sinne is in the vnderstanding and not in the will not meaning to exclude therby obstinacy of the wil as ignorantly T.M. doth when he saith wee may not be ignorant but to shew in what power of the minde the last perfection consummation of this heinous sinne consisteth to wit that a man may be a perfect and consummate Hereticke by holding obstinatly any opinion against the doctrine of the Church after wee once know it to be against the said Churches doctrine though we haue not that further malice also of expresse will and purpose to contradict therby the said Church but only we hold the same for that the opinion pleaseth vs or is profitable or honorable to vs or therby to contradict another or some such like inducement according to those wordes of S. Augustine to Honoratus Haereticus est qui alicuius temporalis commodi maximè gloriae principatusque sui gratia falsas ac nouas opiniones vel gignit vel sequitur An Hereticke is he who in respect of some temporall commodity but especially for his owne glory and preheminence doth beget or follow false and new opinions 45. The same S. Augustine also against the Donatistes proposeth this example Constituamus saith he aliquem sentire de Christo quod Photinus c. Let vs imagine one to thinke of Christ as Photinus the Hereticke did perswading himself that it is the Catholicke faith c. istum nondū Haereticum dico saith he nisi manifestata sibi doctrina Catholicae fidei resistere maluerit illud quod tenebat elegerit I doe not yet say that this man is an 〈◊〉 vntill after that the doctrine of the Catholicke faith being opened vnto him he shall choose notwithstanding to resist and to hold by choice that which before he held by errour In which wordes S. Augustine doth euidently declare how necessary both knowledge will are vnto Heresy and consequently how absurd and ridiculous the assertion of M. Morton is that Heresy being a vice proper to the vnderstanding may denominate the subiect whatsoeuer an Hereticke without obstinacy of will For 〈◊〉 we grant with all Deuines that Heresy is in the vnderstanding as in her subiect and so is faith also that is her opposite and further that her last perfection and consummation is from the foresaid knowledge in the vnderstanding as Vasquez doth explane it yet doth not Vasquez or any Deuine els exclude the necessity of pertinacity also and election in the will consequently both his wordes and meaning haue byn euidently falsified and calumniated by T. M. and so much of this first charge wherby yow may see what bookes might be made against him if we would follow his steppes in all his fraudulent traces But yet let vs see somewhat more in this very leaf and page 46. For within few lines after he beginneth his third Chapter with these wordes That is only true Religion say your Romish Doctors which is taught in the Romish Church therfore whosoeuer mainteineth any doctrine cōdemned in that Church must be accompted an obstinate Hereticke And in the margent he citeth Cunerus alledging his Latin wordes thus Haec est Religionis sola ratio vt omnes intelligant sic simpliciter esse credendum atque loquendum quemadmodum Romana Ecclesia credendum esse docet ac praedicat Which wordes if they were truly alledged out of the Author yet were they not truly translated for if by only true Religion a corrupt translation of Religionis solaratio be applied to particuler positions and articles of Religion then we grant that such true Religion may be also among Hereticks not only taught in the Roman Church for that as S. Augustine well noteth Heretickes also hold many articles of true Catholicke Religion but heere the corruption and falsification goeth yet further and it is worthy the noting for that Cunerus hauing 〈◊〉 largely against the insurrections and Rebellions of those of Holland and Zeland for cause of Religion and other pretences against their lawfull King taketh vpon him in his thirteenth Chapter to lay downe some meanes how in his opinion those dissentions may be compounded giuing this title to the said Chapter Quae sit vera componendi dissidij 〈◊〉 what is the true way of composing this dissention and then after some discourse setteth downe this conclusion Haec igitur in Religione concordiae sola est ratio vt omnes pio ac simplici animo purè integrè sic sapiant viuant loquantur ac praedicent quemadmodum sancta Catholica Romana Ecclesia quae Dei prouidentia magistra veritatis Orbi praeposita est docet loquitur praedicat This therfore in Religion is the only way of concord that all men with a pious simple minde doe wholy and purely conceaue liue speake preach as the holy Catholicke Roman Church which God by his prouidence hath giuen for a teacher of truth vnto the whole world doth teach speake and preach 47. And now consider yow this dealing that wheras B. Cunerus saith haec est in Religione cocordiae sola ratio this is the only way of concord in Religion this man alledgeth it in his margent haec est Religionis sola ratio this is the only way of Religion as though concord and Religion were al one then by another tricke of crafty translation in his English text that is only true Religion as though true Religion and the way or meanes to come to true Religion were not different and then for all the rest how it is mangled and how many wordes and sentences are put in by this Minister which are none of Cunerus and how many of his altered and put out is easy for the Reader to see by comparing the 〈◊〉 o Latin textes before alleadged and therby to consider how facile a matter it is for this fellow to deuide our tongues A course saith he which I professe in all disputes when he deuideth and separateth the wordes from their Authors and the sense from the wordes and the whole drift from them both a very fine course and fit for a man of his profession But let vs proceed 48. In the very next page he going about to make vs odious by our seuere censuring of Heretickes putteth downe first these wordes of Alphonsus de Castro He that vnderstanding any opinion to be expressely condemned by the Church shall hold the same is to be accompted an obstinate Hereticke Wherupon M. Morton playeth his pageant thus VVhat obstinate It may be some doe but doubtingly defend it what will yow iudge of these wherunto he answereth out of