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
the least things that may be as appeareth by their knowne and confessed doctrine by vs set downe then are their aduersaryes in the greatest yea highest kind or degree of that sinne I meane of lying and in the second besides the multiplicy of conuictions wherby I haue made demonstration of this mans falsity euery where I haue shewed in the foresaid 12. Chapter that he this Minister to wit of simple truth as also his fellowes which professe themselues such enemyes of lawfull Equiuocation that may be vsed without lying do Equiuocate euery where in the worst most sinfull sort of flat lying that may be imagined without any reseruation or veile or substance of truth at all For proofe wherof I 〈◊〉 me to the said 12. Chapter and shall returne to follow this fellow somwhat further in the said Epistle to his Maiesty 11. For not many lynes after the former passage by occasion of certayne wordes of him that first answered him about a march of apes he taketh vpon him to set forth a certayne march of Soldiers cōming against his Maiesty and other Protestant Princes from the 7. hills of Babilon to wit Rome saying thus May it please your sacred Maiesty to see how exactly they imitate Souldiers in their march Parsons teaching persecution against all Kings and States Protestant doth propound for his imitation the example of Dauid in his conflict against Goliah Allen the example of Eliah in calling if it were possible for fyre from heauen to consume the Messengers of Kings Reynolds the example of Iabel to knock Generaels on the head Bellarmine the example of Iehoida and other Priestes for murthering of opposite Queenes Sanders the example of Mattathias who fought against King Antiochus Simancha the example of Heathenish Scythians who murthered their naturall King Scyles Boucher the example of Sampson to kill if they can a thousand of his supposed Philisthians with the iaw bone of an Asse 12. So he And doth not the man deserue to haue a iawe-bone of an Asse for his dinner that hath so laboured to lay togeather these impertinent examples without head or foote ground or proofe purpose or coherence truth or similitude with the matter in hand For where doth he fynd these marchinges against his Maiesty why had not he cyted some place or testimony wherby might appeare this to be true that he obiecteth heere to these mē against his Highnes Nay if his Maiesty will remember marchinges against him indeed not imaginations in the ayre as these are he will consider what manner of men they haue byn either Protestants or Catholickes that haue marched and machinated against him and his for more then 40. yeares togeather while he was in Scotland what royall bloud was shed of his neerest and dearest in kynred what violence vsed and practised vpon his owne person and parents who were the Authors incensers fyre-brands bellowes of these enraged flames Priests or Ministers those that came from the hills of Rome or such as had their spirite from the valley of Geneua and then if we would frame a squadron of all those turbulent lawlesse Protestant people that vexed and afflicted his Maiesty in Scotland and marched against him and his noble Mother and grand Mother with banners displayed and that we should place before these againe a Vanguard of preaching-Scottish-Ministers as Knox and all his 〈◊〉 exhorting in cyting sounding out the trumpets of these rebellions and a Rereward againe of English-Ministers standing behind them and clapping their handes to their encouragemēt writing bookes and sending them all ayde both in words and workes that possibly they could procure whilest in the meane space both Catholicke priests people in England Rome and els where prayed hartely for the good successe of his Maiesties said parents and for his in theirs this I say was a true and reall march in deed that other imaginary which our Minister to make vs odious hath heere deuised 13. And to speake one word more of this matter for that it is of much importance and the truth therof notorious to the world When vpon the yeare of Christ 1586. fourteene principall and zealous yong gentle-men were most pittifully put to death in London and diuers others condemned and their goods confiscated for an imputation that they would 〈◊〉 deliuered his Maiestyes mother 〈◊〉 of prison and fauoured her succession to the Crowne did not 〈◊〉 raging Ministers then no lesse fyerie 〈◊〉 MORTON now raue out of euery pulpit not so much against them as againste the cause and obiectes of their calamity which was the loue they bare both to mother and sonne in that behalfe Against 〈◊〉 also they neuer ceased to crye vntill they had gotten the life of the one to be taken away and the Statute of Association to be made for endangering the other 14. And when before that againe vpon the yeare 1581. fourteene learned priests and Iesuites were arraigned condemned vpon pretence that their comming into England was for some designement against the State was not the greatest and most odious part of their arraignment and most amplyfied by the Attorney Popham at that time for that they were deuout to the Queene of Scotland and her tytle and prayed for her in their Masses Letanies and other prayers Yea when some of them came to dye at Tyborne and prayed at their death for the Queene of England did not some principall men demaund them publikly from among the people what Queene they meant Elizabeth or Mary And was not this an ordinary Equiuocation which Ministers cryed out that Catholickes then vsed and especially priests And how then doth this fond and malicious Minister bring in such Marchinges of Catholicke Soldiers against his Maiesty who euer 〈◊〉 for him How doth he talke of such kylling of supposed Philisthines by the iaw-bone of an asse The asse in deed we haue found but the iaw-bone as yet we see not 15. But let vs heare him go forward in vaunting to his Maiesty of his goodly workes After the reply is finished saith he there is presented to your Princely and most religious iudgement A confutation of the reasons of two of their more then vnreasonable positiōs as namely of haynous Rebellions and execrable Equiuocations both which are refelled I hope sufficiently by the testimonyes of their owne most principall Doctors A course which I professe in all disputes knowing that by no better wisdome may this new Babylon be confounded then wherwith God wrought the destruction of the old euen The diuision of their tongues So he 16. And yow must know that this diuision of our tongues is nothing els but that he alleageth some tymes different opinions out of some of our Schoole-Doctors which our men do for him he hauing nothing heerin of his owne industry in matters that be disputable and not determined by the 〈◊〉 And is not this a great point for so great a Rabbyn to bragge of
to Princes concerning the obedience or Rebellion of their subiectes whatsoeuer hath byn obiected by the accusation or calumniation of our Minister in his former discouery against Catholickes hath not byn any direct doctrine teaching or insinuating much lesse inciting subiectes to disobedience or Rebellion as before hath byn declared but only by a certaine consequence or inferēce that for so much as in certaine vrgent and exorbitant cases we ascribe to the Christian Common-wealth and supreme Pastour therof authority to restraine punish supreme Magistrates in such cases that therfore our doctrine is seditious and tending indirectly at least à longè to Rebellion though the visible experience of so many great Kingdomes round about vs lyuing for so many yeares and sometimes ages also in quiet security notwithstāding this doctrine doth conuince this to be a calumniation 14. But our Aduersaries doe not onely teach this That euery Christian Common-wealth vpon mature deliberation and with generall consent hath such anthority but further also that particular men and Common people haue the same and are not only taught but vrged in like manner exhorted to vse it when soeuer they suppose their Prince to offer them iniury or hard measure especially in matters of Religion wherof the moderate Answerer obiecteth many examples and proofes against T. M. taken out of their owne bookes wordes and wrytinges as also by the testimonies of other principall Protestant-writers wherevnto though T. M. would make a shew to answere somewhat now in this his Reply and therupon hath framed a second seuerall part of his booke for iustificatiō of Protestantes in that behalfe yet is it so far of from A full satisfaction the title of his whole worke as in effect he confesseth all that his Aduersary opposeth no lesse then yow haue heard in the former question though somewhat he will seeme sometimes to wrangle and to wype of the hatred of their assertion by Commentes of his owne deuise 15. And indeed what other answere can be framed to most plaine assertions out of their owne wordes and writinges as of Caluin Beza Hottoman and so many other French Caluinistes as I haue mentioned in the first Chapter of this Treatise Goodman also Gilby VVhittingham Knox Buchanan and others neerer home vnto vs All the forenamed Collections in like manner of him that is now Archbishop of Canterbury of Doctour Sutcliffe and others in the books intituled Dangerous positions Suruey of the pretended Disciplinary Doctrine and the like wherin their positions are most cleerly set downe concerning this matter And albeit this Minister T. M. in his Reply doth vse all the art possible to dissemble the same by telling a peece of his Aduersaries allegations in one place and another peece in another altering all order both of Chapters matter and method set downe by the Answerer so as neuer hare when she would sit did vse more turninges and windinges for couering her selfe which the Reader may obserue euen by the places themselues quoted by him out of his aduersaries booke yet are his answerers such where he doth answere for to sundry chiefe points he saith nothing at all as doe easely shew that in substance he confesseth all and cannot deny what is obiected And where he seeketh to deny any thing there he intangleth himself more then if flatly he confessed the same Some few examples I shall alledge wherby coniecture may be made of the rest 16. The Answerer alledgeth first the wordes of Goodman in his booke against Queen Mary wherin he writeth expressely that it is lawfull by Godes law and mans to kill both Kinges and Queenes when iust cause is offered and herself in particuler for that she was an enemy to God and that all Magistrates and Princes transgressing Gods lawes might by the people be punished condemned depriued put to death aswel as priuate transgressours and much other such doctrine to this effect cited out of the said Goodman All which the Bishop of Canterbury his second booke of Dangerous positions hath much more largely both of this Goodman and many other English Protestantes cheife Doctours of their Primitiue Church residing at that time in Geneua And what doth T. M. reply now to this Yow shall heare it in his owne wordes If I should iustify this Goodman saith he though your examples might excuse him yet my hart shall condemne my self But what doe yow professe to proue all Protestantes teach positions Rebellious Proue it Heere is one Goodman who in his publicke book doth maintaine him I haue no other meanes to auoid these straites which yow obiect by the example of one to conclude all Protestants in England Rebellious then by the example of all the rest to answere there is but one So he 17. And this is his full satisfaction and faithfull Reply as he calleth his booke but how poore satisfaction this giueth and how many pointes there be heere of no faith or credit at all is quickly seene by him that will examine them For first how doe the 〈◊〉 alledged agaist this Goodman by the Moderate Answerer excuse him as heere is said seeing the wordes he alledgeth against him out of his owne booke are intollerable and my Lord of Canterbury alledgeth farre worse As for example that it is most lawfull to kill wicked Kinges when they fall to Tyranny but namely Queenes and thervpon that Queene Mary ought to haue byn put to death as a Tyrant Monster and cruèll beast alledging for confirmation therof diuers examples out of Holy Scripture as that the Subiectes did lawfully kill the Queenes Highnes Athalia and that the worthy Captaine Iehu killed the Queenes Maiesty Iesabell and that Elias though no Magistrate killed the Queenes Highnes Chaplaines the Priestes of Baal and that these examples are left for our instruction c. And now tell me how may these examples excuse M. Goodman as our Minister Morton auoucheth 18. Secondly it is both false and fond to affirme that the moderate Answerer tooke vpon him to proue either that all Protestantes in these our dayes doe teach such Rebellious positions or that all Protestantes in England are Rebellious as heere is affirmed for that this were to deale as iniuriously with them as they and he doe with vs by imputing this last Rebellious fact of a few in England to the whole sort of Catholickes and to their doctrine It was sufficient for the Answerers purpose to shew that both Goodman and many others principall pillars of the English new Ghospell in those daies did hold belieue and practice those positions out of the true spirit of the said Ghospell And herevpon thirdly it followeth that it is a notorious impudency to auouch with such resolutiō as this man doth that there is but this one of that opinion and that one dram of drosse as he saith proueth not the whole masse to be no gold For who knoweth not first that VVhittingam afterward Deane of Durham
kill Princes he answereth thus It will be requisite without preiudice to the most learned and Religious iudgment of his Maiesty to satisfy for two places related from that conference c. And then he passeth on to discourse at large of the meaning of those places and vnder the colour of the foresaid honorable preface he taketh licence to dissent from his Maiesty signifying in effect that either the conference was not well related or his Maiesty mistooke their meaning in those notes and yet is the matter cleere by his owne confession that their said notes vpon the second booke of Cronicles and 15. Chapter vers 16. doe not only allow the depofing of the Queene Maacha by her sonne King Asa for Idolatry but further doe reprehēd him also sharply for that he had not put her to death by fier saying thus in their note That whether she were Mother or Grandmother yet herin the King shewed that he lacked zeale for she ought to haue byn burnt by the couenant as vers 13. appeareth by the law of God Deuteronomy 13. but he gaue place to foolish pitty and would also seeme after a sort to satisfy the law So they in their note 26. But who will looke vpon the two textes of Scripture by them heere cited shall finde no mention of burning but only of putting to death and in Deut. of stoning only But how doth he now defend this note of our English Ministers allowing the deposition and putting to death of Princes Yow shall heare his shift for he is much troubled with his Maiesties obseruation VVhat shall we say then saith he is the Soueraignty of Kinges disabled God forbid but it is rather established therby for the King is made the deposer yea euen of whosoeuer Doe yow see his poore flattering shift If the Queene Maacha might be deposed according to their note and that ex Augusto Imperio from her Imperiall gouernment as the text of Scripture hath yea and that she ought according to the law of God to haue byn put to death as now hath byn said for her Idolatry then is it a poore shift to say that Kinges cannot be deposed for that they must be the deposers seing that in Deut. where the Commission is giuen there is no mention of Kinges at all but Gods speach commission there is vnto the people Sitibi voluerit persuadere frater 〈◊〉 c. If thy brother or wife or friend will perswade thee to leaue God let thy hand be vpon him and after thee the hand of all the people which notwithstanding is to be vnderstood as before in the second Chapter we haue noted both out of the 13. 17. Chapters of Deut. and the glosse therevpon according to the order there set downe to wit after the cause examined sentenced by lawfull Iudges And at this time when this law was ordained there were no Kinges in Israel nor in many yeares after and consequently this commission could not be giuen to Kinges only 27. So then for so much as English Protestant-Ministers that made these notes doe authorize by this place of Deut. the deposing and killing of that Imperiall Queene his Maiesties censure was iudicious true that therby they allowed that lawfull Princes might be in certaines cases deposed and put to death And the first shift of T. M. in this place is ridiculous wherby he would seeme to make secure al Kinges from danger of deposition for that themselues by Godes word which yet he proueth not must be the deposers and then he presumeth they will not depose themselues but for Queenes he leaueth them to shift as they may Which doctrine I suppose he would not haue set forth in print in the late Queenes daies But their assertions are according to times and places and so this shall be sufficient for the second Question The third Question concerning practice of Rebellion §. 3. 28. ANd now hauing byn lōger in the former two Questions then in the beginning was purposed I shall endeauour to be shorter if it may be in this last though the multitude of examples partly set downe by vs before in the first Chapter of this Treatise and partly to be read in Histories and obserued by experience of Protestantes continuall tumultuation against Catholicke Princes would require a larger discussion then both the other two Questions put togeather albeit on the other side againe the matters are so cleere as they need no discussion at all but only narration For what can our Minister answere in reason or truth to all that multitude of instances of Protestantes Rebellions in the foresaid first Chapter set downe and for the most part obiected before as now I perceiue by his aduersary the moderate Answerer We shall briefly runne ouer some few examples 29. To the instances in England of continuall conspiracies and insurrections against Queene Mary he setteth downe first this bold and shameles prouocation After the proclamation of her title saith he shew vs what Protestant euer resisted what Minister of the Ghospell in all that fiery triall did kindle the least spark of sedition among her people In which wordes is to be obserued first that he saith after the Proclamation of her title to excuse therby the Dukes of Northumberland and Suffolke the Marques of Northampton and others that tooke armes against her before shee was proclaimed in Londen though in Norfolke she had proclaimed her self presently vpon the death of her brother King Edward as also to excuse Cranmer Ridley Sandes Latimer Rogers Iewell and other Ministers that had preached most bitterly against her title But what is the residue true that heere so boldly he auoucheth that neuer any Protestant resisted nor Minister kindled the least spark of sedition among her people after her title proclaimed Is this true I say Is this iustifiable for he calleth this Treatise a iustification of Protestantes Is this any way to be mainteined by any shew or shift whatsoeuer What then wil he say to the new conspiracy and iterated Rebellion of the Duke of Suffolke of his brother the Lord Iohn Grey not only after the said Queenes title proclaimed but after she was in possession and had pardoned them both of their former Rebellion What will he say to the Rebellion of Syr Peter Carew Syr Gawyn Carew Syr Thomas Denny other Protestant Gentlemen that tooke armes in Deuonshire within six daies saith Stow after the arraignemēt of the Duke of Northumberland What wil he say to the conspiracy of Syr Iames a Croftes others in VVales discouered saith the same Authour about the fiue and twentith day of Ianuary next ensuing What will he say to the Rebellion of Syr Thomas VVyat and his confederates in Kent ensuing about the same time Were they not Protestantes that were authors therof Or was not Queene Maries title yet proclaimed Will our Minister face out this What will he say to the cōspiracies ensuing after this againe
doth not this man know that the difference betweene a good and bad gouernment a true King and a Tyrant consisteth in this that the one raigneth for his owne good the other for the good of his subiects What impiety were it to affirme this defect to be in Christes Kingly gouernment and consequētly what folly is it to bring in such reasons But let vs see what he saith further 21. Christ saith he as Priest is suppliant to his Father as King he is predominant ouer all powers and principalities equally with his Father But now wee haue shewed before that there be two partes or functions of Priesthood the one towardes God to be suppliant by sacrifice and intercession the other to be predominant ouer men by spirituall gouernment vpon their soules and that both these doe agree to Christ in respect of his high Priesthood and as he is man and much more the other of his temporall Kingdome so as to make him equall to his Father in this as T. M. doth is an impious absurdity for that vnder his Fathers vniuersall Kingdome Christ himself is also conteined as a subiect according to those wordes of graduation in S. Paul Omnia vestra sunt c. vos autem Christi Christus autem Dei All thinges are yours life death the world thinges past thinges to come and yow are of Christ Christ of God that is to say all thinges for Christ are subiect to yow so you are and ought to be subiect to Christ and Christ to God his Father Now then see how wisely this man frameth his foresaid maine Conclusion that as in Christ his Kingdome had the preheminence of his Priesthood which is false as we haue shewed so must it hold also among men that Kingly power be preferred before Priestly temporall before spirituall Of which opinion S. Chrysostome doth thinke that no man but mad or furious can be Equidem saith he neminem existere talem dixerim nisi si quis furiarum aestu percitus sit I cannot thinke any man to be of this opinion to preferre temporall authority before spirituall except a man should become mad with the rage of furies And so to S. Chrysostome I leaue our Minister to be charmed from these kinde of Hereticall furies THE SECOND PART OF THIS CHAPTER CONTEYNING Three particular kindes of proofes alledged by T. M. against the Popes Supremacy to vvit Of the new and old Testament and from reason it self ALl this that hitherto hath byn treated by our Aduersary hath byn by way as it were of preamble or preface for abasing Priesthood as you haue seene euen in Christ himself therby to subiect the same in Christians to temporall authority but about this point I wish the Reader to looke ouer the forenamed two Chapters of the late Answere to Syr Edward Cooke I meane the second and fourth and I suppose he will remaine satisfied in the preheminency of the one aboue the other Now notwithstanding for the second part of this Chapter we shall bring into a short view the principall pointes hādled by T. M. in this his confutation of the Popes Supremacy And albeit you may easily make a coniecture of what substance it is like to be by that which already you haue seéne discussed yet shall we descend to some principall particulars for that he reduceth in effect all his proofes to three chief heades the first concerning the state of the Sinagogue vnder the Iewes the second of the Christian Church vnder the new Testament the third by reason common to them both From the State of the old Testament §. 1. 23. FOr the first he setteth downe as argumentes of ours for licencing Popes to kill Princes a large list of Kinges and Princes deposed murthered or molested vnder the old Testament as though we did found our doctrine theron for which cause he giueth the title of Romish pretence to the said list alledging therin fourteene seuerall examples as Saul deposed by the Prophet Samuel Roboam by the Prophet Achia the Queene Athalia by the chief Priest Iehoida King Antiochus resisted and driuen out of his Dominion ouer Iury by the Priest Mathathias and the Machabees his children the Priestes of Baal and other Ministers of the King slaine by the Prophets Elias Elizeus the great Captaine Holofernes by Iudith King Eglon by Ahod Sisera by Iabel Queene Iezabel by Iehu at the appointmēt of the Prophet Elizeus with seauenty children of King Achab the death of King Achab who was slaine also miserably himself by Godes appointment the Prophetes prediction King Amon slaine by his owne seruantes for his wickednes to whome we may ad the death of King Agag by the commaundement of Samuel the Prophet the slaughter of King Ioas by his owne seruantes And lastly King Ozias for exercising the Priestes office and function was by the high Priest depriued of his Kingdome 24. And when he had set downe all this ranke of these vnfortunate Princes their deathes and depositions as though we had delighted therin or proposed all that heere is said to be imitated he saith Heere we heare nothing but fighting dispossessing and killing of Kinges those cheifly by Priestes and Prophetes of God in the old Testament propounded to the Prelates of the new to teach them to erect their Miters aboue Crownes Doe yow see the malice of the man If himself hath gathered together this Catalogue of Princes that came to ill endes were slaine or deposed is it maruaile though he heare nothing but that himself liketh to lay forth 25. The difference and comparison of Miters and Crownes is fond and ridiculous and brought in only to make the matter it self odious for the true comparison is only betweene spirituall and temporal authority the one apperteyning to soules the other to bodies the one called heauenly the other earthly the one proper to Priestes the other to ciuill Princes as before yow haue heard declared out of ancient Fathers who notwithstanding were neuer reprehended nor called into enuy for erecting Miters aboue Crownes in that sense as this prophane Calumniator doth heere vrge and exaggerate 26. And as for this whole matter of the examples out of the old Testamēt our principall question being only as before we haue declared VVhether God hath left any lawfull meanes for restrayning euill Princes in certaine cases of extreame danger and whether Priestes also and Prelates in Christian Religion but especially the highest Priest may deale therin These examples are fraudulently heaped and hudled togeather by T. M. as though all were equally stood vpon by Catholicke writers and this to the end that he may giue himself matter to answere afterward as he doth by distinguishing that all doe not proue the self same thing nor were equally lawfull nor done by equall authority or approbation nor appertaine equally to the matter we haue in hād which Catholicke writers also doe say and haue taught him to
with God and the Prince follow their word and direction 33. And albeit God did some-times vse for externall guiding and direction of Priestes and Priestly affaires the authority of good Kinges in those daies especially when they were Prophetes also as Dauid Salomon in the correcting and remouing of some Priestes yet this was extraordinary and proueth not that simply and absolutly Kingly dignity and authority was aboue Priesthood in that law albeit also it be most true which the Authors by this man heere alledged Salmeron Cunerus Carerius and the rest doe note that the Priesthood of the old Testament was nothing comparable to that of the new this descending directly from the person and office of Christ himself and indued with farre higher and more powerfull spirituall authority for guiding of soules then had the Priestes of the old law which was but a figure of the new therfore to argue from that to this is a plaine fallacy and abusing of the Reader 34. Wherfore leauing this of the comparison betweene Kinges and Priestes of the old and new Testament I will end this first point with the very same conclusion concerning the safty of Princes from violence of their subiectes which our Aduersary himself alledgeth out of our Catholicke Author Cunerus in these wordes VVe are taught saith he from the example of the people of God as your Cunerus teacheth with great patience to endure the tyranny of mortall Kinges yea when wee haue power to resist and because they be next vnder God in earth in all their iniuries to commend their reuenge vnto God nay he teacheth Kinges another excellent rule of pollicy fitting for the preseruation of all States which is that he who succeedeth a King violently murdered of any though of Godly zeale yet ought he to reueng his Predecessours death by the death of the malefactours So T.M. And now followeth that of the Ghospell Ex ore tuo te indico serue 〈◊〉 for first I would aske him is not this Catholicke doctrine Is it not ours doth he not heere call the Author therof Cunerus ours how then doth he affirme euery where that our doctrine teacheth killing of Princes Let him shew vs any of his Authors that euer of this argument hath written so moderatly 35. And yet further I must aske him whether he will stand to the iudgment of this our Cunerus when he commeth to the point indeed How incorrigible Princes in some cases may lawfully be restrained as also depriued by the Common-wealth and consent of the supreame Pastour will he stand to this I say or rather fleet back againe to the doctrine of the Scottish Geneuian French Flemish Ministers when the King should mislike him and especially for his Religion wherof I make little doubt what euer he saith heere finding himself and his at good ease And finally I would aske him seriously whether he would haue his Maiesty of England to practice that excellent rule of pollicy which he so highly comendeth out of our 〈◊〉 who notwithstanding saith not a word therof by way of rule or obseruation but only affirmeth that Amasias did iustly put to death those seruantes of King Ioas that vpon zeale had slaine him in his bed I would aske him I say whether indeed he would wish his Maiesty of England to put the same rule and so highly commended pollicy in vse against such as violently murdered abetted or procured the same against not only his Predecessours but parentes and immediate Progenitours Father Mother and Grand-mother And then we know how many Ministers and their friendes would enter into that daunce but these men frame their tongues according to times fit occasiōs And with this he endeth his proofes out of the old Testament Out of the new Testament §. 2. 36. ANd then comming to the second part he beginneth his discourse with this title The former question disputed according to the state of the new Testament and presently in our manner he giueth the onset with this proposition The Pope hath all absolute and direct power and dominion temporall ouer all Kinges and Kingdomes of the world c. And for proofe therof citeth Carerius and Bozius in the margent and beginneth to lay forth their proofes and then against these two that hold the opinion of Canonistes wherof before we haue treated to wit that Christ was the immediate Lord of all temporalties and consequently also is his substitute he opposeth Franciscus de Victoria Bellarmine Sanders and others that hold the other opinion to wit that the Pope hath not directly but indirectly only such authority to deale with Princes in temporall affaires and so not informing his Reader that these are different opinions of the manner how the Pope hath this authority but yet that both do agree in the thing it self that he hath it he playeth pleasantly vpon the matter and would make men thinke that he taketh vs at great aduantage as contrary or rather contradictory among our selues which indeed is no more cōtradiction then if two Lawiers agreeing that such a noble man had such an office or authority ouer such a Lordship by succession from the Crowne should differ only in this whether the said office were giuen by the Prince seuerally and expressely by particuler gift and writinges or were giuen by a certaine consequence included in the gift of the said Lordship The differēce were nothing in the thing or certainty of authority but in the manner of hauing it and so is it heere and yet out of this difference of these two opiniōs doth our Minister furnish himself with good probability of argmentes on the one side as though they were his owne who otherwise would appeare very poore pittiful therin And this tricke he plaied before with the moderate Answerer when he serued himself of the two differēt opinions of some Deuines and Canonistes about the question VVhether Hereticks before personall denuntiation and sentence giuen be subiect to externall penalties appointed by the Canons And generally he runneth to this shift more then any other commonly of his fellow-writers which I haue seene in these our dayes to wit that whersoeuer he findeth any difference of opinions in disputable matters betweene our Catholicke writers which S. Augustine saith may stand with integrity of faith there he setteth downe any one of these opinions for ours and argueth against it with the argumentes of the other or bringeth in the others authority wordes against the same which maketh some shew or muster of matter on his side wheras in deed and substance he hath nothing at all 37. It were ouer long to examine in this place all the obiections which he putteth downe on our behalfe vnder the second head of our proofes concerning the time of the new Testament calling them Romish pretences and the fond resolutions he giueth vnto them as first that we doe found the Popes temporall sword vpon the keyes giuen by
where the word Exaltation may haue many senses as to be exalted to heauen or to glory which most men would vnderstand rather then an exaltation vpō a Crosse which Christ vnderstood and consequently his speech was mixt with amphibology and Equiuocation as were also the wordes omnia traham which may haue sundry senses and some in apparence not true And in like manner when he said of Lazarus sicknes Infirmitas haec non est ad mortem this sicknes it not to death and yet he died and consequently there was a further sense reserued And in the same place Lazarus amicus noster dormit our friend Lazarus sleepeth the word dormit signifieth Equiuocally either to sleep or be dead Christ vnderstood of the second his Disciples of the first will yow say that he did abuse or deceaue them or vse prophane speach in this Equiuocation And yet further the same Equiuocation our Sauiour vseth in those wordes Ignem veni mittere in terram quid volo nisi ut ardeat I came to cast fier into the earth and what would I els but that it burne The word fier signifieth both naturall fier and zeale or feruour of spirit and burning hath the like ambiguity and is this also prophanation if it were to be sworne as Christ did speake it of phrase and into Equiuocation by composition of single and simple partes togeather His second intentiō was to treat therof in regard of placing each thing in due order in his ranke of ten Predicaments or shew their relation therunto and for this cause in his first Treatise vpon the said Predicaments he maketh that notorious diuision of wordes so well knowne vnto Logitians into AEquiuoca Vniuoca Denominatiua saying those thinges are Equiuocall which doe agree only in name but are different in nature and 〈◊〉 according to that name as a liuing and painted man doe agree only in the name of a man but not in nature essence substance or definition and the like may be said in the word dog ge before mentioned 10. Now then wheras our proposition before mentioned with mentall reseruation tendeth not directly to any of these two purposes intended by Aristotle and further hath no doubtfull sense of speach or wordes by nature of the wordes themselues or their double or doubtfull significations but only that it vttereth not all the whole sense of the speaker it cannot properly be called Equiuocall according to Aristotles meaning and definition but rather in a more large ample signification as Equiuocall may signify an amphibologicall doubtfull or double-sensed propositiō in respect of the speaker and hearer wherof the one sometime vnderstandeth the same in one sense and the other in another For which cause the most ancient Schoole-Doctors Fathers and other Authors doe vse in deed rather the word Amphibology then Equiuocation in expressing like kind of speaches as our proposition is which of later yeares only hath byn accustomed to be vsed in this sense but the other is most ordinary with antiquity not only among Philosophers but also and that especially among Orators and Rhetoritians in which science it is held for lawfull most commendable in diuers occasions wheror both 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 maketh mention and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a whole Chapter The cause then why the answering by such a reserued proposition as before hath byn mentioned is called by some Equiuocation is 〈◊〉 by a certain similitude thē propriety of speach to wit that euē as Equiuocation properly by community of name in things of different natures by variety of significations in the selfe same wordes or speach by 〈◊〉 of phrase and composition of sundry sortes 〈◊〉 make different and doubtfull senses meanings to the hearer so in this case by mentall reseruation of some part of the foresaid mixt proposition the like effect of doubtfulnes is bred in the hearers 〈◊〉 and therby consequently is named Equiuocation although improperly as Equiuocation is taken for any doubtfull word or speach that may haue diuersity of senses or vnderstandings 11. But now to inferre herof as T. M. doth in his first 〈◊〉 of this his wise dispute that euery such 〈◊〉 by mentall reseruation is a grosse ly is not only a grosse presumption but a 〈◊〉 ignorance also in my opinion not to call it a grosse impiety for by this meanes he might cōdemne of grosse lying a great number of speaches of the holy Ghost both in the old and new Testament where diuers propositions are set 〈◊〉 and vttered with imperfect sense somewhat being reserued which necessarily must be supplied to saue the said speach from vntruth As for example where the Prophet saith Non resurgunt impij in iudicio Wicked men doe not rise againe in iugdment if the Prophet reserued not somewhat in his mind vnuttered for the complement of this speach as namely that they shall not rise to glory as S. Paul expoundeth it to the Corinthians it would seeme an Heresy contrary to the article of our creed I belieue the resurrection spirit or life in ner 〈◊〉 the 〈◊〉 of maruaile of that she saw And againe the same holy Ghost talking of the immensity of Salomons wealth said Tantamque copiam praebuit argenti in Hierusalem quasi lapidum and Salomon made 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as stones in Hierusalem may a man sweare this without vntruth or prophanation what say yow M. Morton may a man swear this in your Lordes Court of the Arches the same I demaund of those last wordes of S. Iohns Ghospell There are many other thinges which Iesus did which if they should be particularly written I doe not thinke that the world it selfe would hold the bookes that should be written therof 18. How can this be true M. Morton in plaine and literail sense and without some amphibology or Equiuocation and yet I thinke yow will not say it is a lye being part of the Ghospell or that it may not be sworne without abhominable prophanation How then will yow or can yow defend it Truly by no other way but by the licence of a Rhetoricall figure called HYPERBOLE which Quintilian defining saith it is Ementiens superiectio a lying exaggeration and yet will no true Deuine call it a lye indeed much lesse periury or prophanation if any man should sweare it wherby is made manifest and apparent the childish vanity of our Aduersary in his former conclusion that euery verball Equiuocation is an abominable prophanation And so much of this second kind of Equiuocation which yow see how lawfull and vsuall it is euen in the Scriptures themselues and in the speaches of our Sauiour which is truth it self wherby hauing repressed somewhat the insolency and ignorance of this our vaunting Minister we shall retourne now againe to the first kind of Equiuocation by mentall reseruation about which is our principall controuersy And for that our Minister affirmeth two pointes about the same the first that it is no proposition
of this last for that the former are cleere of themselues If a man lying on his death bedde should say before witnes I giue and bequeath vnto Thomas Morton c. And then his voice fayling him 〈◊〉 call for a pen and write a thousand c. and then a palsey taking also his hand he should point towards an Angell of gold shewing by signes that he meant a thousand such golden angels I doubt not but in this case Sir Thomas being a clerke would say in cōscience and so he might in iustice that all this were but one simple affirmatiue proposition as if the sicke man had said I giue and bequeath to Thomas Morton a thousand angels of gold though it were vttered by him in three seuerall sortes of propositions vocall literall by signes as hath byn shewed 26. And if 〈◊〉 be graunted as needes it must then why should he cry out as he doth against that other mixt proposition that is partly mentall and partly vocall why should he deny it to be a true proposition If he answere for that Aristotle did not handle any such mixt reserued propositions he saith nothing For that Aristotles purpose being as is said to treate of propositions in order only to Sillogismes and argument it was wholy from his purpose to handle any but such as serued to that end and so Aristotle handled no sort of mixt propositions at all either reserued or not reserued and yet yow see by the former example of him that bequeathed in his Testament partly in one and partly in another that in the common vse trade and conuersation of mans life wherof wee treate there may bee vse therof as in like manner there is of talking by signes as deafe-men doe who vtter truly their mindes by signes equiualēt to true propositions affirmatiue or negatiue and so are vnderstood and yet Aristotle treateth of no such not for that they are not but for that they appertained not to his purpose of framing sillogismes for attaining of science as hath byn said for which cause also he professeth to exclude deprecatoriam orationem all deprecatory speach and all Rhetoricall and Poeticall tropes and figures which yet as we see are fitly sometimes vsed not only in the common conuersation of men but euen in Scripture it selfe though they be not to the purpose of syllogisticall propositions which must be simple clere plaine in their naturall signification without translation figure ambiguity or Equiuocation and consequently it is no good argument to say that Aristotle handled not such propositions and therfore they are no propositions at all For that Aristotle as hath byn said respected his particuler end of Sillogismes we ours of common conuersation But our aduersary vrgeth yet further and it is the whole force of all he saith that this mixt proposition partly vocall and partly mentall to wit I am no Priest with reseruation of the other part so as I am bound to vtter the same to yow can be no true logical proposition for that according to Aristotle Euery proposition is enunciatiue that is to say it is ordained for signification to expresse some thing but no mentall or inward conceipt of the mind is ordained by God saith he as a signe to expresse or signify as wordes and writinges doe c. 27. Wherto I answere graunting that euery proposition must be Enuntiatiue that is to say as before hath byn out of Aristotle declared it must affirme or deny somewhat true or false but this is not done only by externall voice or writing though Aristotle for the causes aboue mentioned doe only name those two wayes but by signes in like manner as hath byn declared and much more by internall actions and operations of the mind which according to all Philosophers are three the first simple apprehension of any thing the secōd affirmation or negation of the same the third discourse when one thing is inferred of an other as in arguing or disputing as this is so ergo the other is or is not so And to the first of these three inward operations of the mind and vnderstanding doe answere outwardly three externall effectes as to the first simple wordes or speach without affirming or denying as in definitions without the verbe for examples sake animal rationale mortale c. all which is nothing els but simple apprehension of the thing without diuision composition or discourse To the second operation doe answere composition and diuision to wit affirmations and negations and to the third Enthimemes and Sillogismes that by discourse doe inferre one thing of another so as in our mind there passeth no lesse then in our outward speach voice writing or signes but rather more for that as Aristotle before saith these outward actions are but signes of that which passeth within So as albeit the one part of a reserued mixt proposition doth not 〈◊〉 aliquid ad extra expresse any thing outwardly to the hearer yet it doth inwardly to the speaker And if it be vrged that it must be vox according to Aristotle I answere that as there is a voice in writing as well as in speaking according to Aristotle himselfe so is there an internall voice as well as an externall and an internall speach as well as an externall which speaketh affirmeth or denieth to the inward eares as well or better then the voice or letter to the outward which is sufficient to correspond to the Logicall definition of a proposition euen according to Aristotles rule though as hath byn said he defined properly externall voices only and propositions consisting in speach or writing 28. But our Minister will insist that it is not enuntiatiue or significant to the hearer Wherto I answere that the definition of a proposition or enuntiation nameth not the hearer but that it be of his owne nature enunciatiue affirming some thing true or false whether the hearer vnderstand it or no. For when a man talketh to himselfe though those that stand by vnderstand him not yet is his speach enunciatiue for that it affirmeth or denieth somewhat true or false of his owne nature though no man heare as when a man speaketh to God or with himselfe or with men also if one should vtter a proposition in Greeke or Hebrew which the hearer vnderstandeth not shall not the proposition be enunciatiue or a true proposition for that the Auditor vnderstandeth it not When Christ our Sauiour spake many high thinges of his diuinity humanity passion resurrection and other Mysteries which the Scripture saith that his disciples vnderstood not shal we say that his speach was not enuntiatiue or his propositions no true propositions in Logicke What will T. M. say to that prediction against the obstinate Iewes They 〈◊〉 heare 〈◊〉 their 〈◊〉 and shall not vnderstand c. Meaning principally of the preachinges of the Apostles will yow lay the fault that the Apostles speach was not 〈◊〉 or
his former proposition For if it were lawfull for Saint Athanasius to vse this Equiuocation in speach and fact for deluding his persecutors then had it bene lawfull also to sweare the same without sacrilegious prophanation if they had vrged him vnto it For as all Deuines hold that which may lawfully be said may also lawfully be sworne what will T. M. answere tò this what will he answere to that euasion of S. Paul mentioned by vs before when for escaping the hands of the Iewes that pursued him in iudgement he vsed an apparent equiuocall speach saying That his trouble was about the hope and resurrection of the dead Paul knowing saith the text that one parte of them that pursued him were of the Saduces that denyed the resurrection of the dead and the other of Pharises that held the contrary he cryed out in the iudgement-place saying De spe resurrectione mortuorum ego iudicor I am called to iudgement about the hope and resurrection of the dead which was true in one sense but false in another wherby the Pharises being deceyued tooke his parte Et facta est contentio sayth the text inter Pharisaeos Saducaeos soluta est multitudo and vpon this equiuocall speach there arose a dissention betwene the Pharises and Saduces one interpreting it in one sense and another in another and so the people departing the iudgement brake vp And what will Thomas Morton now answere to this did S. Paul lye in this Equiuocation or was his dissimulation impious for that one part was deceaued or had he committed 〈◊〉 prophanation if he had sworne it I demaund him also of that equiuocall oath of the Patriarch Ioseph who in one conference with his brethren did twice sweare vnto them 〈◊〉 Equiuocation that is to say with a reserued sense different from that he vttered to them in wordes the Scripture saying VVhen his brethren had adored him he knowing them to be his brethren spake sharpely vnto them as to strangers saying yow are spyes sent to discouer the strength of this land I sweare by the health of King Pharao yow shall not go hence c. And againe Per salutem Pharaonis c. I sweare by the health of Pharao that yow are spyes when notwithstanding he knew them not to be spyes so thought of them in his mynd And will T. M. say that this was a lye or at least a sacrilegious prophanation of an oath But I must go yet a little further in prosecution of this folly against the Minister 44. What then will he say to all those former examples of Equiuocall propositions which I haue alleaged out of holy Scripture out of the new Testamént and from the mouth of our Sauiour himselfe especially such as haue verball equiuocation in them As Dissolue this temple and I will build it vp againe in three dayes where the word temple hath euidently two significations and was taken in the one by Christ our Sauiour in the other by the Iewes And the other Our friend Lazarus sleepeth And againe The maid is not deed but sleepeth where the word sleepeth is equiuocall and hath two significations the one of death the other of naturall sleepe and Christ vnderstood it in the one and his hearers in the other And so the like where Christ said vnto the Iewes Abraham vidit diem meum gauisus est Abraham did see my day and did reioyce the word see is equiuocall and signifieth eyther seing in flesh or seing in spirite and the Iewes being deceyued with the equiuocation of the word vnderstood it in one sense and Christ in another wherupon they said vnto him Thou hast not yet fifty yeares of age and hast thou seene Abraham And therupon tooke stones to cast at him 45. And the very like example is of our Sauiours speach vnto the Samaritan at Iacobs well by the Citty of Sychar If thow knewest the gyfte of God and who it is that saith to thee Giue me water thou wouldest aske of him and he would giue thee liuing water where the word water being equiuocall signifieth both the element of water and heauenly grace which is the water of lyfe euerlasting which Equiuocation the woman not vnderstanding tooke it in the common sense of naturall water and asked him how he could giue her water for so much as he had no bucket to draw it vp in but Christ our Sauiour addeth an other equiuocall speach to her saying That he which shall drinke of the water which I will giue him shall neuer thirst more where not only the word water but the word thirst also is equiuocall hath two different senses wherby the woman deceaued said Giue me I pray of this water that I may thirst no more nor come hither to draw vnderstanding still of materiall water 46. Now I would demaund that for so much as all these speaches were manifestly equiuocall and had double senses and significations and that 〈◊〉 ech one of them the hearers were deceaued conceauing another sense then that which Christ mentally reserued to himselfe I would demaund I say whether notwithstanding this they were not true of themselues and whether Christ might not as well sweare them as speake them And if Thomas Morton will haue many examples togeather wherin Christ our Sauiour after his manner of swearing which is Amen amen dico vobis doth sweare or auouch by oath sundry equiuocall propositions let him looke vpon the later parte of the sixt Chapter of S. Iohn where Christ doth put the Antithesis betwene himselfe and Moyses and betwene the bread that Moyses gaue from heauen that which he was to giue being his owne flesh and betwene the lyfe that Manna gaue and that which his flesh was to giue and he shall fynd many equiuocall propositions both verball and mentall auouched by our Sauiour vnder this kind of oath repeated at least three or foure tymes in that matter One example of ech kynd shall suffice 47. When he saith Amen amen dico vobis qui credit in me babet vitam aeternam Truly truly I say vnto yow that he who beleeueth in me hath lyfe euerlasting this is a mentall reserued proposition as before hath byn shewed for that it is not true generally that euery one that beleeueth in Christ hath lyfe euerlasting but he that beleeueth accordingly which was reserued in Christs mynd and then the wordes immediatly following Ego sum panis vitae I am the bread of lyfe haue a verball equiuocation signifying of bread that gaue tēporall lyfe or spirituall lyfe as also the other words that ensue Your Fathers did eate manna in the deserte and are dead but he that shall eate of this bread shall not dye Dying heere signifyeth eyther the death of the body or the death of the soule and Christ meant of the later 〈◊〉 the Iewes of the first Nay which is more to be obserued as Euthymius noteth and