neither deny to Protestants in Authority or others any ciuill or naturall Respect for their crimes and sinnes neither charge any one amongst so many millions with Canonicall demerite or impediment of such respects Therefore first Such opinions of some pâ—iuate Catholiques Andreas â—urg Mr. Rainolds D. Gifford Mr. Wright that Protestants holde no article of faith Caluinismeis Turcisine no better then Turciâ—me compared to Atheisme is no more then other Protestancy especially of Caluine and the Englâ—â—h Protest described by their â—â—llâ—wes Nichol. â—â— funâ—â—m Deâ—â—n Coâ—lâ—g Tubâ—â—g in praesa Protestants châ—â—dge Caluin with And what is this to the Protestants of this kingedome except they meane to bring Arrianisme Nestorianisme and Turcisme into the world as Philippus Nicholaus a leaâ—ned protestant minister and the protestant Deane and College of â—ubing write of Caluin â—wâ—nglius The reâ—ited protestant hath written a whole Booke of that Subiect giuing it for Title Fundamentorum Caluinianae Sectae cum veteribus Arrianis et Nestorianis communium Deteâ—â—io And yet the Turks Alcoran beeing made by Arrians and Nestorians as the Preface there recounteth Praefat. sup Caluins doctrine is proued by him to agree with them in 17. or 18. chief aâ—ticles And in the seauenth Chapter he plainly c. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7 8. 9 10 11 c. sâ—â—r Cap. 7. supr writeth that these Casuinists and Swinglians will not be quiet vntill they haue brought Mahumetisme and Turcisme into the West as by the Arrians and Nestorians it came into the East And among all people is most ielous of the Sacramentary Brabenders Frankes Heluetians English and Scots in this behalfe and affirmeth that Arrianisme Turcisme and Swinglianisme be the mother of Antechrist And he bringeth in Luther prophecying as Cap 9. â—upr he calleth it that the Sacramentaries would neuer cease vntill they denied Christ to be God which M. Willet D. Fulke and others Will. Synops contr geneâ— 19 Fulke in nouo Testamento Conci 1. Nicaen in Symbol conâ—il Ephes Constâ—nt 1. H. â—rought Adâ—erus oâ— Coâ—up an 1604. Will. Antilog Aduertism sup pag. 2. 3 haue almost fâ—lly effected denying Christ to haue receaued his substance of his Father or that he is Deus de deo God of God as the first generall Councels haue defined I will next alleadge Mr. H. Broughton a late english Protestant writer in the last yeare and a man most highlie commended by the great recited Summist in his new borne Antilogie who telleth his Protestant Brethren or rather Fathers he speaketh chiefly to the Bishoppes in England that their Translation of Scriptures into english is such that it causeth millions of millions to reiect the new Testament and to runne to eternall flames In his second Chapter he challengeth their publique translation of peruerting the holie text of the olde Testament in eight hundred and eight and fourty places He telleth the late Archbishop of Canterburie that he might with as good learning haue subscribed to the Alcoran as consent with such Protestants as he did He plainly writeth these wordes Christianitie denied in England by publique Authority He telleth the Bishoppes that they betray the Gospell to the Iewes and agree with the enemies of our Lord. Their Bible is inferior to the Alcaron The Bishopps notes betray our Lord and Redeemer and befoole the Rocks of Saluation They are the very poyson to all the Gospell The Libian sandes may aswell be reckoned as Bilsons the Bishoppe of winchester Heresies He hath a minde to be fâ—mous for millions of errors And speaking in his owne person saieth thus I gaue I. C. so he calles the late protestant Archbishop of Canterburie the Anathema Maranatha No doubt but such a man would excommunicate a King if he had come in his way at that time The admonition to the Parliament written with no small consent Admonit patl vseth these words No man in whom there is any sparke of grace or conscience can liue in the common-wealth of England whose inhabitants be all Infidelles and they be all Infidelle that goe to their churches Arch-bishoppes and Bishoppes gouernment is both Antichristian Admonit 2. pag. 25. 33. Suppl vers 56. and deuilish Antichrist is amonge them It is traiterous against the Maiestie of Christ It is accursed It is an vnlawfull false and bastardly gouernment It shall be easier for Sodome and Gomorrhe in Admonit 2. pa. 3 the day of iudgement than for the court of Parliament where the Protestant Religion was confirmed There is no right Religion established Admonit 1. pag. 2. 32. in England I cannot for want of time and need not for lacke of witnes recite more testimonies in this businesse These be sufficient for Catholiques excuse and to returne the Argument vppon Protestants And lett this Obiector vnderstand that these men which be so well conceated of his doctrine and together teach that all such sinnes and lesse deserue excommunication in what person soeuer with the penalties thereof and that they are deposed from their Seates by such offences may iustly come within the compasse of his Conclusion and Ergo for by his owne allowed maior proposition whosoeuer doe make Protestants so odious and unworthy of any ciuill c. is seâ—â—â—ious and intollerable amonge Protestants But as I haue proued â—â—â—â—â—â—estants themselues Protestants doe so or be such or 〈…〉 are so to be esteemed by this Reasoner The second Reason answered and returned vpon Protestants CHAP. III. THe second Reason is contained in these woordes Whosoeuer do professe any ciuill power soueraigne ouer Kings whether directly or indirectly are to be accompted seditious I would wish him to except the Emperour of the Princes of Germany and such as be subiect to the Empire such cases Then to passe ouer the Turkish regiment I say transeat maior for Christendome And thus I frame the minor But all Protestant writers doe ordinarily both teach and practise this Doctrine as I haue prooued before and will more plentifully performe heereafter For this place I onelie instance in this vnited kingdome Britany and principally in two Queene Maries Against her that raigned in this part which wee inhabite it was Protestants seditious by this mans Argument the publike consent of the chiefest Protestant Bishoppes and Diuines Cranmer Ridley Latimer Sands Rogers and the rest principall Preachers That she might be deposed and not onelie she but her sister Queene Elizabeth a Protestant and the familie of his Maiesty should be defeated And was publikely put in practise both with wit and weapons to the vttermost of the greatest Protestants power the Dukes of Northumberland and Suffolk and many other of great estate And this not onely contrary to the lawe of God and the expresse Statutes of this kingdome but their owne oth to the Lady Mary when shee was Princesse in her fathers life The publike practise also of Protestants in the attempt of sir Thomas Wyat warranted by the Protestant Cleargie with diuers
others in the short regiment of that Queene may be giuen for instance Therefore let no man obiect heereafter that the Positions Protestanâ—s may not condemne their Puritane Brethren and Practises of Râ—bellion proceede onely from the Puritane Protestants for such pure Protestancie had not audience in England at that time but the defenders there of were called New vp-start arrogant spirites by Latymer and such Protestants as I Latim Serm. before King Edward the fixt haue condemned guiltie in this kinde And yet the present Protestant Writers of England which teach that the true Church can not erre in things essentiall to true Religion and necessary to saluation and communicate in Sermons Sacraments Doctrine and subscription to articles the very notes of the Church in their proceedings cannot condemne these traiterous and rebellious positions and practises in Puritanes for great and damnable offences in Religion or impediments of Saluation therefore by this disputers Argument they are to be accounted seditious Now I will recite his second proposition against us which is this But all Popish priests doe professe a double prerogatiue ouer Kings Democraticall and Monarchicall namely both people and Pope ergo To the Popes Authoritie I haue already sufficientlie answered and will demonstratiuely proue farther heereafter that as it is defended by catholike doctors it is far more fauorable and defensiue to Princes titles then either doctrine or practise of Protestants or any other professors of Religion whereof I haue also intreated beefore Concerning his conceat of Catholikes defending a democraticall prerogatiue in the people ouer all Kinges so be his wordes It fighteth with his owne assertion and present position of the Popes Monarchicall prerogatiue ouer all Kings which likewise is his sentence For where there is a Monarchie and Monarchicall power or gouernment in one there is vnpossibillitie of a Democracie and Democraticall Power and Regencie in the people otherwise these propositions be true Kinges be subiects to subiects and subiects be Kinges of Kinges seruants be masters to their masters Masters be seruants to their seruants Fathers be children of their Children and Children be fathers to their Fathers and the like relations must be inuerted by this Logicians Argument But lett vs heare what publique Positions he will bring from our Writers to proue our opinion of a democraticall power in the people ouer Princes which I haue confuted by his owne proposition He only citeth the Author de iusta abdicat Henric. 2 to say that Maiestas Regni est in populo potius quam in persona Regis That D. Stapleton affirmeth people are not ordained for the Prince but the Prince for the people and Mr. Rainolas to call a King a creature of Mans Creation the like he citeth out of Dolman All which in equall sence his Maiestie himself in open Parliament doth not so much seeme to dislike especially in vacancie of a King or the originall of kingdomes of which cases those Authors The kings speach Parli 1. doe principally entreate And in such circumstances I demaund of this Obiector whether there euer was or could be a King and Ruler ouer people where there was no people to be ruled or consent to be ruled But people both were in the begining without kings and made election of diuers kinds of regiment as they thought fittest and most secure for their defence and gouernment in peace some Monarchicall some Aristaraticall others Democraticall although none made election of a Monachy by one and Democracie by the multitude at once in one Commonwealth as this simple Disputer did argue before agâ—inst Princes titles for that is vnpossible as I haue made demonstration And his Maiesties wordes be these Although a Kingdome and The kings speach supt people be Relata yet can he be no King if he want people and Subiects but there be many people in the world that lacke a head as when Regall Lines be extinct people be yet without Kings but not e contra So where regiment passeth by election In Polonia at the death of euery King the case is such because that Kingdome and Principallitie goeth by voices So in Venice So in the Empire by the seauen Princes called Princes Electours supplying the peoples suffrages and consents And this the Discouerer Rat. 3. infr himselfe hath remembred in framing his next Reason wherin he maketh mention of Election and calleth a seditious to hinder the right thereof But slaunders and contradictions be neither wilfull wickednesse nor vnlearned ignorance in this Accuser How the Protestants both clergie and people claime Soueraignty ouer Princes is spoken before and often proued in this Treatise The third Reason confuted and returned CHAP. IIII. THe maior Proposition of his third reason is Whosoever vppon any pretended Supremacy whether of Pope or people doe deny the necessary right of Election or of Succession of Protestant Princes are to bee holden amongest all Protestants seditious his Contradiction in this against the former reason I haue spoken of in the last Argument And for this present I grant this maior and make this my minor But Protestants and English Protestants Protestants are seditious by this Argument doe deny the necessary right of Election or Succession of Protestant Princes ergo the minor is proued before in Cranmer Ridley Latimer Sandes Rogers and the Dukes of Northumberland and Suffolke with their Protestant Preachers and forces against the Succession of Queene Elizabeth a Protestant and though then not borne his Maiesty a Protestant King I adde further that his Highnesse title was expresly contradicted and written against of purpose in a booke to that end by Hales a companion to Knoxe an English Protestant to which no Protestant to my knowledge did euer giue answer or deniall But many Catholikes confuted it as the Catholike Bishop of Rosse in Scotland and three Catholikes of distinct professions in England Sâ—r Anthony Browne Knight and Iudge of the common Law Doctor Morgan a Diuine and Doctor Mytch or like name a civill Lawyer Now let vs heare his second proposition against Catholikes Thus it is But all Popish Priests doe vtterly abolish the title of Succession in all Protestant Princes c. g o This he would proue against all Priests because Toâ—let and conformably to him Doctor Stapleton Maister Raynolds Symancha and the Author of Philopatre writeth Nulla est Imperatoris aut Regis Electio si cum Eligitur excommunicatus est The Election of an Emperour or King is non if he be excommunicate when he is chosen I answer First heere he contradicteth himselfe againe making election and consent of the people an essentiall thing to Princes titles Secondly let all be true which he citeth and that they so teach yet if fiue particular men could make a generall councell and their sentence be termed a publike position yet they speake onely of a Prince excommunicate before his Election which case is not now in rerumnatura much lesse in England His Maiesty was not
regular and others must doe neyther all the priests of this Nation nor any one except disobedient to his superior was guilty of this conspiracy or did or doth eyther intend designe or practise such irreligious wickednesse And both holy and happy is that religion to be esteemed among whose professors in this The diâ—course of the laâ—e intended treasâ—n Kingdome so many thousands and in the daies of so manifold disgraces and miseries for that faith so small a company of cheefest Agents or Assistants are charged with that offence Wee haue heard read seene and tasted of many conspiracies and rebellions by protestants and more and greater by them proportion of time and Countries obserued where both Kings whole kingdomes and Common-weales haue beene put in hazard and yet they were dogmaticall men in that profession accounted Prophets Apostles Euangelists and conspired thousands for euery one particular person in this recited and yet their conspiracies were not condemned by their Preachers and Doctors but iustified and applauded not forbidden but commanded by their spirituall maisters and their rebells slaine in such actuall seditions against Princes not reproued but approued and canonized for holy Martyrs When all things be contrary in this case by the protestant disourse it selfe of this tragedy And if proofe can be made of any one of holy priestly order to haue beene an Agent in so vnholy businesse he will be as much abandoned of all good priests and Catholikes as of the protestants themselues for that disloyalty The ignominy and perpetuall reproach wherewith the names of vnhappy Watson and Clarke are stained with all of our religion will be a witnesse in any case of like comparison The seuenth Reason confuted and returned CHAP. VIII HIs seuenth Sillogisme is this Seeing it is in a manner all one to commit a villante and to commend it we may argue that whosoeuer shall iustifie acts of treasons and parricides are not vnguilty of the same crimes To this I grant and adde which is euidently proued before that the cheefest teachers and professors of Protestancy doe not onely iustifie but commend canonize for holy encourage command and reward such proceedings therefore they are not vnguilty of the same crimes And whereas he setteth downe for his lesse Proposition But all Priests doe iustifie such heinous parricides Ergo I haue proued before both by their owne authority continuall experience and at this time that such assertions be most false and slanderous But hee will maintaine his sentence because Bellarmine saith Many Popes haue worthily depriued many Princes of their regall authority The examples be in Leo 3. Fredericke 1. Otho 5. and Childericke King of France To Obiections of which nature I haue often answered before And sincere dealing would haue alleaged the true causes of such processe with those Princes which take away the enuie of this matter proue a flat disparitie in the cases compared and bring eternall shame to many Protestant rebellions and often deposing Princes for meaner quarrells and for no true cause at all The rebellions and attempts be too many to be recited The examples of Princes deposed or depriued of their Kingdomes Countries or territories by Protestants meaner then Popes be more in so short a time then in all the papall gouernment Queene Mary of Scotland the King of Spaine and Enfanta in Flanders the Emperor in diuers parts of Germany and elsewhere in former time the present Emperour in Hungary the Prince of Transyluania the Prince of Geneua Marquesse of Embden Duke of Loraine king of Denmarke king of France king of Sweueland in their territories surprized inuaded taken sold to enemies or kept by rebbells no such thing in the Popes cases neuer making themselues the richer by others losses yeelde testimony in this businesse Next commeth in a gratias agimus for the death of King Henry the third of France by the Author of the booke de iusta abdicat Hen. 3. which was a Catholike But I tell him that also a Catholike Doctor Barkeley a professor at Mussipont hath confuted that booke which also may serue for other citations from thence which I haue answered before He accuseth Cardinall Alane for approuing the rendering of Dauontore vnto the hands of the King of Spaine the true owner By which he condemneth himselfe to be within the compasse of his owne conclusion of rebellion and to iustifie such acts of treason for all the world can witnesse that Towne truly to belong to that King Then not the surrendering of it to the lawfull Prince which hee condemneth but the wrongfull withholding of it which he approueth was treason and rebellion And such as this discouerer is such also the rest of his Clergy protestant brethren in England must bee esteemed euen in this point for in their name the first defence of those disobedient and seditious Netherlanders was vndertaken And so both by publike positions and practises they teach and iustifie actes of treason and rebellion both in themselues and their euangelicall brethren so many yeares in so many disloyall attempts rapines intrusions dis-inheritings deposings piracies murthers and extreamest outrages against their naturall and true Soueraignes and not in one onely act and oration one of Gallobelgicus excessiue reportes made of the death of Henry the third in France Ergo Protestanrs are not vnguilty of these crimes The eight Reason confuted and returned vpon Protestants CHAP. IX THus he frameth his next Argument Those Snakes that doâ— naturally sting so soone as they get warmth may not be harbored in the bosome of the Common-wealth To which proposition I say concedo further adde by such assertion that the protestant Preachers and professors of the reformed Churches may not be harbored in any kingdome or ciuill Country for they are proued before naturally to sting and kill if they can so soone as they haue obtained power to performe it Which I will now also more plentifully demonstrate in this chapter when I haue exempted Catholikes from the accusation in the second proposition which is But all Priests professe rebellions as soone as they can presume of their strength Ergo. His cheefest proofe of this is from Bannes who as he telleth vs teacheth that a King may be deposed where there is euidens noticia criminis euident knowledge of his sinne I answer That such opinion is to be reproued as against not onely Cunerus Nauarre c. but the great Laterane generall Councell to which Bannes and all Catholikes must submit their sentences which also dischargeth vs of this forged slaunder and condemneth the accuser of vniust calumniation But he vrgeth further from the same Author holding the English Catholikes excused quia non se eximunt ex superiorum potestate nec bellum contra eos gerunt quia non suppetunt illis vires ob sequentia pericula which this discouerer thus translateth The English Catholikes who now doe not take Armes against the Protestants are excused because they want sufficient power I answer If this
be the opinion of Bannes he speaketh ignorantly in this case For the Pope himselfe Gregory the thirteenth had declared for the instruction of the vnlâ—aâ—ned that wee might performe all duties of obedience notwithstanding any censure And this we may proue by the next obiection it selfe of this accuser acknowledging how the Pope dispensed as he termeth his declaration That the Catholikes in England might professe a large obedience his owne words notwithstanding the excommunication of the Queene But where he addeth this restraint rebus sic stantibus and that it was recalled by Xistus the fift in the yeare 1588. when the Spaniards pretended inuasion I answer in the first case That Cardinall Allane better acquainted in these affaires than any protestant Writer so long after in England relateth the Popes declaration for Cardin. All. ad persâ—cut Angl. Catholikes obedience to Qâ—eene Elizabeth without any restraint or limitation neither doth this man discouer where hee findeth such restricting clause And as for Pope Xâ—stus Reuocation if any such was which he rather imagineth then prooueth it is not in force in any opinion not being published The case of the Earle of Tyrone whatsoeuer it was is not now imputed against him as his libertie and fauour in England since then be witnesse Therefore it might better be suppressed than vrged by this discouerer Hitherto I haue answered to all the obiections of this disputer against Catholike religion shewing the innocency thereof in the offences obiected and that Protestants be guilty in all and euery of the pretended crimes And in that order I haue made returne of euery Argument vpon the discouerer and his owne profession But seeing his confusion and repâ—tition of the same or eqâ—iuolent reasons was such as I haue noted before that I could not giue him so ample allowance in that kinde as his curtesie deserued except I would fall into the like repeating error I haue reserued some paiment to this place Before performance whereof I desire my Reader to remember the substance of his maior propositions in all his syllogismes that the lessâ—r and minors with their consequence may be better considered Then thus he writeth Reason 2. supr Whosoeuer professe any ciuill power soueraigne ouer Kings directly or indirectly deny necessary right of election or of succession of Princes e. shall manacle the hands of subiects detracting all obedienee suggest a doctrine of forcible deposing Princes from their thrones intend designe or practise the murther of Princes iustifie acts of treasons and parricides And snâ—kes that doe naturally sting so soone as they get warmth are sedâ—â—ious intollerable may be challenged and condemned for disordered and rebellious are manifestly rebellious desperate traitors not to be harbored in the bosome of the Common-wealth This is the general Maior proposition in all his eight recited Arguments being one and the same for the most part in substance and effect but vaâ—ied and repeated so often with this mans protracted malice Therefore ioyning all these together in one for my first proposition granted by my aduersary for most certaine I make this my second generall proposition But the Cleâ—rgy Protestant professors and patrons in all times and places as opportunitie hath beene ministred were in this case described which besides my former probations thus I demonstrate from their most dogmâ—â—ticaâ—l Protest 〈…〉 Gerâ—any principle and publike professors positions and practâ—â—es First Martin Luther the first knowne Protestant was accounted so dogmaticall principle and publike both for doctrine and practise that the prime Protestants of that time Amsdorsius Sarcerâ—â—s Mâ—â—â—hesius Michael Neander and others honoured him Amâ—â—orf praefat 〈…〉 16. 〈…〉 Carolost Aâ—dr Musc â—raes â—â—germ dâ— dâ—abol Luther to 1. â—â—nt germ fol. 522. 79 to 3. fo 334. to 4. to 5. fol. â—98 Colloq mensal foâ— 488 l. conâ—â— Henrie 8. in Psa 71 c. â—â— 3. fol 533. 326. 360. Colloq mensal fol 342 343. â—up edict Imp. with â—â—ese preeminent titles an other Saint Iohn Baptist the third and 〈◊〉 Eâ—ias the last tiumpet of God an Angelâ— of God a great Prophet mightie in word and worke a man according to the heart of God the mouth of Christ a God of Diuines the only Diuine of Diuines supreame Father of the Church c. And himselfe giueth himselfe no inferior stile a faithfull Prophet an Apostle Euangelist a liuing Saint receiuing his Gospel from God Isaias c. such a Maister aboue all Doctors Popes and Councells may be termed a publike man and his positions publike Then he saith that he careth not for Kings and so carelesse he is in this case that he censured king Henry the eight of England the Marquesse of Brandenburge the Princes of the imperiall orders the Princes of Germany the Duke of Bâ—unswicke to be vnworthy eyther of obediâ—nce from subiects or life in themselues And giuing the same doome of his owne naturall Soueraigne George Duke of Saxonie nameth him the calamitie of his Country a Tyrant passing all Tyrants Pilat Herod Iudas So he scorned To. 6. germ fol. 6. Georg. Wicell deretect Luth. Luther epist ad 〈◊〉 inst germ â—â— potest â—ecul li. cont 2. Edict Imper. the Emperour and wrote directly against his Edicts hee taught that Protestants hands must be imbrued with blood teaching that he had warrant from God to battaile against Princes Hee telleth vs it is the nature of the Gospel to raise warres and seditions that among christians there is no magistrate no superior that it is to be intreated by many prayers so holy a thing is rebellion in his sight that it must be bought with prayers that the countrymen obey not their Princes no law or fillable of law can be imposed vpon christians more then themselues will neither by men nor Angells there is no hope of remedy except all humane lawes be taken away Munster was of the same opinion and practise and called rebellion Cacl in act Luth. Ann. 1525. for his religion the warre of God affirming that hee had receiued especiall commaundement from God to warre against Kings and had promise of victorie from heauen And thereupon such rebellions ensued that of his owne adherents and traiterous protestants were slaine within the space of three monâ—ths one hundred and thirty thousands The rebellions murthers and destructions which they performed and publikely practised by words and Armes cannot be recounted And not onely Luther l. captiuit Babyl l. de bell cont Turc Munster in chro pantal chronol fol. 121 c. these miseries by their owne rebellions but by Luthers doctrine that Christians might not fight against the Turke in short time Belgrade Rhodes were taken Hungary was entered King Lodowicke slaine Buda conquered Verima Austrae besieged with two hundred fifty thousand Turkish souldiers And the Protestants of that Nation were not content with these publike opinions and practises of rebellion in themselues against their Emperours Ferdinande and Charles whom they persecuted and besieged