doe not resist although our number be great S. Nazianzene Not though the people be prone to resist you S. Ambrose Not when the people are present and offer a defence S. Augustine yeelding the cause Because Christian subiection is to be performed in loue and not in feare or by constraint A doctrine for those times namely the first 600. yeares in generall vse saith your Bellarmine And continued after Christ the space of 1000 yeares saith your Beâ—â—laâ—â—s neuer changed till the yeare 1060. saith your Tolossanus Friburgens Espencaeus and others And shall we dare to remooue The ancient Land-markes of our forefathers CHAP. XVII Other Proofs of Protestants from Antiquity in two most Christian and potent Nations England and France THat this soueraignity of his Maiesty whereunto notwithstanding all Papall iurisdiction we doe willingly subscribe may be knowen to be as anciently as earnestly challenged I will only point at some few heads of examples of our ancient Christian Kings which Sir Edward Cooke his Maiesties Attorney generall in his alwaies reportable and memorable Reports hath lately published In the raigne of K. Edward the first a Subiect brought in a Bull of excommunication against another Subiect of this realme and published it But it was answered that this was then according to the ancient lawes of England Treason against the King the Offendor had beene drawen and hanged but that by the mercy of the Prince he was only abiured the Realme Compare this Bull which did only push at a Subiect against his benefice with that Bull which more mankeen goareth Kings to giue them their mortall wound At the same time The Pope by his Bull had by way of prouision bestowed a benefice vpon one within the prouince of Yorke the King presented another the Arch-bishop refuseth the Kings presentation and yeelded to the Popes prouision This Arch-bishop then by the common law of the land was depriued of the lands of his whole Bishoprick during life In the raigne of King Edward the third the King presented to a Benefice and his Presentee was disturbed by one who had obtained Buls from Rome for the which cause he was condemned to perpetuall imprisonment Compare this Bull of disturbing onely the Present of Kings with that which doth ordinarily violate the Kings person In the raigne of Richard the second it was declared in the Parliament R. 2. cap. 2. that England had alwaies beene fâ—ce and in subiection to no Realme but immediatly subiect to God and to none other and that the same ought not in any thing touching the regality of the crowne to be submitted to the Bishop of Rome nor the lawes of their Realme by him frustrated at his pleasure Compare this English King immediately not subiect to the Pope and the aboue mentioned Iesuâ—ticall principle All Kings are indirectly subiect to Popes In the raigne of King Henry the fourth it was confirmed that Excommunication made by the Pope is of no force in England Compare this Of no force in England with those excommunications which in these later times haue been made against England In the raigne of King Edward the fourth the opinion of the Kings bench was that whatsoeuer spirituall man should sue another spirituall man in the Court of Rome for a matter spirituall where hee might haue remedy before his Ordinary within the Realme did incurre the danger of premunire being an hainous offence against the honour of the King his crowne and dignity Compare this with their Acts who haue made no other sute at Rome but meanes to dispossesse English Kings of their crowne and dignity Many other examples of like nature I pretermit and remit the Reader desirous to be further satisfied to the booke of Reports Habet enim ille quod det dat nemo largius The conclusion is that that challenge of Soueraigntie which was in opposition to the Popes Buls ancient right and iustice in Kings which were predecessours be not traduced now as an irreligious impiety in the successors The like might be spoken of France but I hasten to the last Argument presuming that my studious Reader perusing the French stories will ease me of that trauell CHAP. XVIII The last Argument of Protestants from Reason IT will be sufficient onely summarily to recapitulate the Arguments dispersed in this former Treatise The first Reason was long since Christened for The Apostles saith your Sanders did chuse rather to suffer euill than to reuenge wherein they were seconded by other heroicall Martyrs of Christ Who thought saith your Tolossanus their faith glorified in this that being persecuted yet they performed obedience Questionlesse they had some reason heereof One is specified by S. Cyprian Christians must be Preachers of the supernaturall vertue patience and not of vengeance Another by S. Augustine that Induring the misery of this life they may auouch their hope of a life eternall And lastly by Arnobius Heereby to make distinction of Christian obedience from that other of Pagans that whereas these yeeld onelie obedience proceeding from feare of man ours should appeare to be from Conscience towards God The second Reason is politicke which is that of your Victoria that the Clergy be members of the common-wealth Ergo they ought to be subiect vnto the state temporall I will adde another of this kind which wee borrowed from your Acosta shewing that licence of deposing Kings is an occasion of much spoiles and bloudshed The third Reason is violent inforcing you by your owne confessions to grant our conclusion your confessions be of two kinds first The Pope hath not temporall Soueraignty ouer Kings directly but onely indirectly in ordine ad bonum spirituale that is as the temporall doth necessarily helpe or aduance the spirituall good of the Church But So you may as well say saith your Carerius that a King hath not iurisdiction temporall but only indirectly because his authority doth intend a spirituall good aâ— namely preseruation of iustice in a common-wealth And he saith truely as may be confirmed by Saint Augustine A king as a man saith he doth serue God by his owne good life as a King by gouerning other mens liues to see that they doe that which is good It is his office not only to ordaine lawes for the preseruation of the politicke peace but also to establish true religion From hence I conclude that if this your distinction be good The Pope hath temporall iurisdiction ouer Kings to depose them indirectly that is as far foorth as may be behooffull for Religion then must you grant that Kings haue iurisdiction temporall onely indirectly because their Office also is ordained of God in ordine ad Deum as a minister of God for defence of his Church If your position be false then hath not your Pope that power ouer Princes no not indirectly The second Confession I take from
adde fiue score moe of your side conspiring in these Positions belonging to conspiracie Thirdly They speake say you of a Prince excommunicate which is not our English case at this present Good Now at this present namely when you writ and yet peraduenture whilest I replie the case is presently altered or at the Popes pleasure may be And is not this a safe case for our Soueraigne trow ye Wherof more in the next Section The most moderate Answerer His Maiestie was not excommunicate before his Election neither is he now but is both elected and setled in his throne both without any contradiction of the Pope and with his Iubet of all obedience and Prohibet of deniall thereof All the Catholikes of this Kingdome applauded it as much as Protestants and his vnion and league with Catholike Princes and people abroad is sufficient Answer that this is a malitious slaunder of holy Priesthood and proueth Catholikes innocent Protestants guiltie and this man an vniust Accuser The Reply If his Maiestie was not excommunicate by the Pope before his Election which you should rather call Succession then was he vniustly that I may so say excommuned by the Pope before his Election but your Superior Garnet confessed that he had receiued two Breues from the Pope to make vse of whensoeuer our late Queene Elizabeth should depart out of this mortalitie The content of those Breues was this that None should be acknowledged King of England but such as was a professed and resolute Catholike Nulli quantâcunque sanguinis propinquitate nitantur that is No other though neuer so nigh in bloud Which Breues he perceiuing the generall applause of people yeelding to the right of Succession according to nearenesse in bloud burnt Thus we see if the Popes power had not bene disappointed by want of force his Maiesty though nearest in bloud might not haue entred but with bloud Now therefore what a case am I in If I shall denie my fonner assertion then your superior Priest Garnet will accuse me for a liar for his Maiesties case was not different from others seeing The Pope gaue contradiction to his succession if I still defend it then your Priestship doth accuse me for a Slanderer of holy Priesthood The very moderate Answerer Because the Pope gaue a Iubet of all obedience and prohibet restraint of disobedience The Reply Yea Iubet of obedience Iubet what is that Euery child can expound it literally to signifie To commaund but by Popish Glosse may happily signifie to forbid for we must not be ignorant of your like glozing in the publike Decrees of Popes Whereas your Canon is Statuimus We decree that is saith your Expositor We abrogate or disallow Is it not as easie for you to turne Iubet to an id est prohibet Howsoeuer we perceiue your subiection stands still vpon the Popes Iubet that as it is recorded of the French If he shall commaund to kill the King you must be his subiects Lastly there is but one of these Authors aboue mentioned who speaketh expresly of the excommunicate and there is not one of them but iudgeth a publike professed Protestant in the state of an Excommunicate To conclude therefore be you admonished not to preiudice your modestie so much as to taxe any for an Vniust Accuser against whom you can shew no iust exception Yet there remaineth two other mysteries to be vnfolded the first is yours the second is your Superiors CHAP. XIIII The new deuice of our moderate Answerer TThere is at this present a great difference betweene the Emperor who is created by the Popes lawes and with his solemnities from whence he receiueth his sword and a King that is absolute and not so created or depending for power or iurisdiction such as our Soueraigne in England for the Emperor is the Popes Minister as saith Molina The Reply We might peraduenture be beholden vnto you for this distinction if we could presume you knew what you said being guiltie herein of a double falshood first to thinke That the Emperor hath no power but from the Pope the second to say you thinke That other Kings haue not any power which is not from the Pope The former is confuted hereafter the other now in this place For your Carerius making vnction by Romish Bishops in Coronation of Kings to be essentiall to royaltie without which they be no Kings saith That this is a doctrine most commonly knowne of all that the Kings of France England Scotland c. were neuer esteemed Kings before their Vnction No more saith your Parsons in the rigor of iustice before Popish Coronation then the Maior of London can be called Maior before his oath Which Vnction whosoeuer shall refuse saith Reinalds can haue no right to gouerne Christians annointed in Baptisme In briefe None is lawfull King or Queene of England saith your Cardinall without the approbation of the See Apostolike All grosly false for first In France saith your Barclay Kings who are to succeed by inheritance are iudged as consecrate and inaugurate before they be solemnely annointed And shall we thinke the French Kings to exceed our English herei◠No I haue heard Lawyers say The King of England neuer dyeth I thinke they speake not without booke otherwise Q. Mary could neuer haue iustified her act when she beheaded the Duke of Northumberland some moneths before her Coronation for high treason against her royall person I returne to your argument If the Emperor saith your Carerius who is held more eminent at least in dignitie then any King may be reiected by the Popes then much more other Kings may be punished by the Popes authoritie For he that can tame an Eagle may much more command Hawkes Here we obserue your spirits of contradiction you from comparison of disparitie betweene the Emperor and other Kings would seeme to free Kings and inthral the Emperor your Doctor Carerius from the contrarie disparitie would bring all Kings into subiection But know that howsoeuer now the Eagle be entangled whom you esteeme no better then the Popes vassall yet Non facile Accipitri rete sternitur And that neither Emperor nor King are lawfully subiect to this yoke is afterward made manifest A second new deuice His Maistie is not in the case of Excommunication as other relapsed Protestants because he was borne in that faith which he professeth The Reply And yet the now Henry 4. King of France sucking Protestants doctrine from his nurce was excluded from his birth-right of the Crowne till he was reconciled vnto the Pope And this same father Garnet had a Breue from the Pope to barre our Soueraigne from Succession except he should be found absolutely a Romish Catholike If then the Borne Protestants be free from Excommunication why did the Pope exclude the King of France or by his Breue to you except against the King of England If the case be otherwise
Fundamentorum Caluinianae sectae cum veteribus Arianis Nestorianis communium detectio The Reply That which they did in the spirit of opposition and contention is not much to be regarded especially seeing as it may seeme by their obiections their iudgement hath beene depraued by your malignant Doctors For first concerning Arianisme Caluine saith your Iesuites doth plainely teach Arianisme saying that the Father is by a kinde of excellencie God Whereas both the speach and sence is most orthodoxall and agreeing with the tenor of holy writ and iudgement of all ancient Fathers as your owne learned Iesuits confesse For the words of our Sauiour are plaine Ioh. 14. My Father is greater then I in the true sence Is say your Iesuits and truly The Father is greater not in substance and being but by reason of Birth begetting For their Authority they produce an inquest of Fathers of free Caluine in this point who was so far from Arianisme that your own Bellarmine doth acknowledge that Caluine did impugne the doctrine of the Arians Your Iesuites likewise impute Nestorianisme whereof Caluine doth free himselfe saying We must therefore abandon the heresie of Nestorious who rather distracted then distinguished the nature of Christ against the doctrine of the holy Ghost in Scripture It would therefore become your modestie to haue omitted these imputations but we shall find your moderation immoderate in this kind The moderate Answerer I will next bring in Master Hugh Broughton a man greatly commended by Master Willet who telleth the Bishops of England that their translation of the Scripture is corrupt and that Christianitie is denyed here in England The Reply Master Broughton which I am able truly to witnes was as greatly commended and reuerenced for his learning among your greatest Iesuits at Mentz and the Bishop elector there yet he neuer allowed your Translation but debaseth it more then any other neither did he euer go to Italy or Spaine to learne Christianitie there How you ought to esteeme of our Translation I haue made it elsewhere euident from your owne Romish censures who haue giuen the translation of Tremelius as good an approbation as any Protestant would require Where also may appeare by confession of your most learned Iesuites and others the manifold deprauations of your vulgar falsely intituled S. Hieromes Translation But what modestie can this be in you to obiect vnto vs a man whom you know to be sequestred from vs rather by impotencie of passion then any difference of Religion liuing now among them who maintaine both the same profession and the same Latine Translation so immoderate in speech to confesse that which all that know him can witnesse that the least error he heareth he nameth heresie and the least opposition to his opinion infidelitie This is but the language of passion which no moderate Answerer may mention to preiudice the moderate The very moderate Answerer The Admonition to the Parliament written with no small consent vseth these words That no man in whom there is any sparke of grace or conscience can liue in the Church of England whose inhabitants be all Infidels going to the Churches of Bishops and Arch-bishops whose gouernement is Antichristian and diuelish The Reply This writer and you may both ioyne fellowship You dedicate your booke to the King he to the Parliament He pretendeth the consent of a thousand you No Catholike will say Protestants are Heretikes implie a thousand thousand He with all his consent is not many and you for ought you well pretend but one both inuisible and namelesse neither of both able to make vp any great consent except you multiplie the name of forenamed Aliâs A aliâs B. c. You see what is themaladie of this Admonitor namely to condemne our Religion only because of Bishops as in his illiterate braine an order Popish and therefore Antichristian Say now do you thinke his Admonition tollerable then must you who do defend that Bishop of Rome conclude your selfe an Infidell and an Antichristian hireling Do you thinke it immoderate then are you no moderate Answerer to condemne vs by that Admonition which your selfe doth condemne Let vs heare something else which may proue Protestants guilty of the imputation of Turcismes and Atheismes The very moderate Answerer The deniall of Christ to be God which Master Willet and Doctor Fulke do denying Christ to haue receiued the substance of his Father or that he is Deus de Deo God of God as the first generall Councels defined The Reply Deny Christ to be God God forbid but to be God of God only in a particular sence this indeed they do but can you finde no more Protestants of this opinion Your lesuite reckneth vp Caluin and Beza and I thinke he saith truly I would either he or you did as truly vnderstand them But yet we wish to heare what your Doctors thinke of this Protestants opinion your Campion calleth it monstrous your Genebrard Lindan Canisius name it Heresie your Stapleton and Feuardentius do aggrauate it by an epithet Heinous heresie your Possiuinus noteth it of Atheisme and your Colledge at Rhemes of Blasphemie And now belike this is that doctrine which deserueth your generall clamors which being examined with the eye not ouercast with the web of preiudice Doth in the iudgement of your famous Bellarmine seeme Catholicall because they denie not the Sonne to be from the Father but they denie the essence of the godhead to haue any generation This likewise is not the part of common modestie to blind-fold your selfe and strike you know not whom To the former inuectiues I must adde another of the same die euen deepe black mallice Looke vpon England saith your french Rabsacah and you shal find it to be an I le of men who cate mens flesh and who haue not among them yet they professe Iesus Christ and the Apostles creed the least footstep to Catholike Religion This we see written which giueth vs cause to beleeue that which is reported by our Trauellers who affirming that in our last Embassage into Spaine the people there gazed vpon our English Nobles and Gentlemen with that eye which Pope Gregory a thousand yeares since beheld them when they were Pagans and admiring the comely feature of their personages and the fairenes of their complexions asked Who they were and hearing they were named English they may well be called Anglish quoth he as it were Angels But alas what faire faces doth the vgly feend and Prince of darknesse now possesse Thus the vulgar in Spaine are said in their Christian charitie to haue bewailed the miserie of the English Alas that these men haue not the knowledge of Christ Being perswaded by their Monkes that we worship the diuels which is more probable by their writings as Caluinists are Heretikes detesting our Lord Christ Caluinish heresie is more detestable then
Queene to depose her as the Priests did Athalia violence Your Reinolds Reuenge and roote out as Iudith did Holofernes violence Your Costerus As an heardsman his cattell violence Your Bellarmine It is not lawfull to suffer a King hereticall but to expell him as the shepheard doth a Wolfe violence Your Creswell Subiects ought to expulse such a King out of his dominion violence Your Simancha As the Scythians who murthered their King violence Your Bannes The English ought to depose their Queene by force all which is violence We hanc also alledged exāples of many Popes who vsed all open violence To which might be added Azorius Salmeron Bristow Stapleton and others all crying Adarma And yet you say Not one What impudent modestie is this to denie before the Reader that which none who readeth can denie idlely conceiting a power to depose without violence in your opinions Heretikes obstinate that is such as cannot be deposed without violence Your comparison of the Emperor with our King is but a shadow which vanisheth in this Treatise following CHAP. XIX The Discouerie Let vs now see this family of Corah WE will omit Henries Frederickes Othoes and like Emperors and Kings of former times call but to mind that which hath bene visible in our dayes the late Henry of Fraunce concerning whom their owne Prophet hath published a Treatise the scope thereof is this The French haue with good conscience borne armes against K. Henry the third and depriued him of his Crowne Returne home there we see a Comet The Rebell Oneale is vp in armes against his Queene the Colledge of Salamane bring pitch to quench this flame and resolue thus Whatsoeuer Catholikes shall not for sake the defence of the English and follow Oneale doth sinne mortally and cannot obtaine life euerlasting except he desist Shall we thinke that other Priests can haue more loyall spirits Impossible as long as they receiue their breath from that Maister who commendeth the former Positions against the foresaid King of Fraunce Those Diuines saith Pope Xistus haue done the parts of good Lawyers Confessors and Doctors His Successor this rancor growing by Succession inueterate Pope Pius against our late Soueraigne We will and command the Subiects of England to take armes against Elizabeth their Queene The moderate Answerer Now let vs heare this the supposed publike practise in this point I answer he alledgeth three authorities onely of priuate men which do not pronounce the iudgement to be publike The Reply You contest for all Catholikes and teach vs to answer that this your Answer is but the writing of a priuate man but you haue publike approbation from your Superior they frō many are publikely authorized And yet againe remember your selfe Not aboue foure or fiue examples say you can be giuen in the whole Christian world for the space of 1500. yeares of Popes of Rome who haue translated titles to depose Princes Well then you grant fiue your Bellarmine doth vrge Seuen as from publike Records a notable contradiction You But foure or fiue willing to substract as one ashamed of the number of your Fathers of Rebellions but he alledgeth Seauen or eight desirous to multiply to make the pride of Romish Prelacie more glorious Whether But seauen or But foure what can this auaile for answer As much as a fellon accustomed to steale he careth not how many horses yet indited for seauen shall answer I had but foure or fiue which commendeth the want of that he would not his will to want Pope Paulus teruus did excommunicate Henry the 8. King of England commaunding his Nobles to beare armes against him Your Pope Pius Quintus now alledged Did excommunicate Queene Elizabeth dissoluing all her subiects from their obedience And yet he that is The King of Kings maintained their Scepters not to suffer them to be deposed by those Popes notwithstanding their good wils were manifested by their acts their acts condemned by the euents which examples none can denie but were publike You further adde The moderate Answerer But his Maiesties case is different except this Discouerer will inrolle him in the number of Excommunicate which is most iniurious to his Highnesse for who seeth not that the Queene was Excommunicate The Reply Why iniurious what euill can ensue for you seeme by this Answer to portend some mischiefe if it should happen his Maiestie should be excommunicate say what euill is it spirituall as onely to be excommunicate by the Pope Why this is nothing because your Tolet saith truly An vniust Excommunication such as we know the Popish is doth not endanger the soule Is it bodily belike his Maiestie shall find you a good Subiect howsoeuer your spirituall being accompanied with violence in this his different case you teach his highnesse to prouide a corporall preuention lest as in the defect of our lawe sometime it happened that a man might haue bene out-lawed and not haue knowne of it and so subiected to the extremitie of that lawe your Excommunication of Bulla Coenae vpon your Maundie Thursday by some Guido be closely executed before his Maiestie be aware CHAP. XX. The Discouerie HItherto hath bene manifested only their violence against the dignitie of Princes now heare of the violating of their sacred persons in conspiring their deaths The sixt Reason Whosoeuer doth intend designe or practise the murther of Princes must necessarily be holden for desperate Traitors But all Popish Priests are guiltie in some of these kinds Ergo. The Minor proued by their Positions They professe all that it is lawfull to take armes against their Kings as we haue proued from whence we may argue against them as he against a seditious one Quis sensus armorum what other meaning can armes haue but onely bloud But not to dispute from our suppositions but their Positions by these degrees First the french defence saith that Anie man may lawfullie murther Tyrant which I defend saith he by common consent Now It is euident saith our Reinolds That euerie Heretike Prince is most proper lie and perfectlie a Tyrant which is supposed by the Spanish Iesuite speaking of this point That if saith he they may be bereaued of their liues then much more of their liuings and Crownes And which is the height of furie Hereticall Kings saith Simancha deserue more grieuous punishment then priuate men therefore the Scythians as he well deserued did put to death their King Scylen for violating their Bacchanals Scythia a most barbarous Nation is the fittest glasse that these Priests can finde to looke their faces in Well shew vs then your Scythian and heathenish practises But first let vs heare your answere to these positions The very moderate Answerer I answere that the late Lord Treasurer was thought in his dayes a man not second to manie in politicall wisedome And yet he telleth vs in
for your pleasure whoÌ„ though I perswade you yet a grieuous case will you not be perswaded Notwithstanding hearken to your Father Creswel who telleth you that That moderation concerning obedience vnto the Queene was comprised within these lists For the present state and condition of things Here your clause and your expectation is satisfied I pray you satisfie me in the next example The very moderate and modest Answerer 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 witnesses therfore it might be better suppressed then vrged by this Discouerer The Reply That is The Earle of Tyrone his offence hath bene pardoned by the King Ergo it might better be suppressed then that the Pope the patron of his Rebellión should be discouered None can find fault with the modestie of this Answer wherin you seeme to be ashamed of the Popes blessing and there is hope in the end you will be ashamed of your owne answer To the next Reason CHAP. XXVI The Discouerie in the ninth Reason WHosoeuer doth perfidiously either denie or violate with men of diuers Religion an oath the most sacred bond that God hath allotted vnto men as the most secure Confirmation of all fidelitie with men and * End of all contention must necessarily be esteemed of them as a person perfidious and trecherous But Popish Priests are guiltie of such perfidie Ergo c. The Minor will appeare in these three 1. in the manner of disallowing 2. of deluding 3. of dissoluing of a necessarie oath The moderate Answerer In his Maior Proposition the Discouerer must needs make some exceptions or else c. The Reply Let vs descend to the seuerall Propositions and after shew your instances The Discouerie From the manner of denying a requisite oath we reason Whatsoeuer seruant being demanded of his maister to say or sweare whether if he saw his master assalted by his professed enemies he would defend or betray him would either dislike the article or deferre the answer he should euidently bewray a trecherous disposition But all Popish Priests in like articles concerning loy all subiection to Protestant Kings are in like manner affected Ergo all their other kind of Haile Maister is but to kisse and betray The Minor proued by Their Positions and Practises When as it is demanded of Priests a necessarie Article in ciuill States what if the Pope should autorize the Queenes subiects to rebell or other forraine Princes to inuade her Realme whether they would take part with the Queene or her enemies First they dislike this Interrogatorie Alane calleth it An vnlawfull vnnaturall intolerable search of mens consciences This kind of examination which Princes make for preseruation of the liues of themselues and subiects Creswell tearmeth Vniust and bloudie demaunds And these questions Stapleton nameth Captious questions wicked and full of all impious subtiltie As though Samson were bound to put his head in Dalilahs lappe Nay but their answer sheweth that this Interrogatorie was as necessarily inuented as it is wickedly impugned for this being an inbred law of Nature to studie for a selfe-preseruation these men call vniust and vnnaturall but how senslesly let the very heathen iudge Theeues watch to murther doest thou not awake to saue thy selfe Now secondly their delaying When the question is vrged whether if the Pope or any of his appointment should inuade the land which part they would take then they shift footing and some as our Gouernors haue obserued haue answered I will then take counsell when the case shall happen others I will answer then and not before others I am not yet resolued lastly I shal then do as God shall put in my mind As though these masks were large enough to shadow their faces which their Creswell hath alreadie discouered saying that If by the Popes command the warre should be vndertaken to the end of restoring Religion then to answer that he is bound in Conscience to hold with the Romish This man speaketh without Parables make then but a pretence of Religion and farewell subiection The moderate Answerer There is none bound generally to euery oath for as the lawe of nature and his Maiestie with Bishops and Nobles in the last Conference taught if the Article either touched the parties life libertie or scandall he may refuse to sweare The Reply This Answer and my Question differ as much as yesterday and to morrow for my argument à simili concludeth of an oath concerning a matter to be done and not of that which is past yet not so as to enforce any to the oath de futuris but from the denying or delay thereof to euince a politicall demonstration of a disloyall heart You haue another answer no whit more true though somewhat more pertinent The very moderate Answerer As coÌ„cerning Interrogatories de futuris contingentibus things which are to come no creature man nor Angell naturally can perceiue them therefore the examen of such things may be left to God The Reply You haue reason to refuse the examination of men lest they vnderstanding your trechery might preuent their owne danger I dare say there is no malefactor in the world bent to any mischiefe but he is of your mind But you are deceiued the question is not absolutely de futuris that is of things to come as if your debtor promiseth to repay you this debt may he not answer he will pay it The act of payment hath respect to the time to come but the will to pay it it is an internall and present act and a resolution of the mind which no perfect man can be ignorant of in himselfe Nemo nescit se velle quod vult No man can be ignorant of his owne will And this is that present will which by his outward messenger the tongue he doth thorow a corporal oath manifest to man what it doth resolue Else why are leagues betwixt Princes contracts betweene man and man consent of wedlocke holy vow in Baptisme to God are not all these visible acts symbols and signes of inward will Acts I say de futuris of things to come as namely of fidelitie loyaltie sanctitie hereafter to be performed Otherwise how is it that you dare contest For all Catholikes not to refuse an oath of allegeance according to the iust proceeding of law promising in your selfe that other shall take an oath of allegeance and obedience to his Maiestie A thing except you meane they will not take the oath hereafter to be done Wherfore when you are about to make an answer take foorth this lâ—slon of true moderation It is better to hold your peace then say nothing CHAP XXVII The Discouerie THe second point is their deluding of an oath by a new tricke of Equiuocation as they vnproperly terme it Others call it ReseruatioÌ„ but most fitly we may cal it Collusion
Crowne The Councels answer is thus framed This is a-against the sundry Acts of Parliament remaining yet in force confirmed by the King of famous memory Henrie the eight against the letters patents of our late Soueraigne King Edward the sixt and his great seale against the consent of the most part of the noble Vniuersities of Christendome c. Wherefore you that tell vs of a statute of Legitimation as a matter euident in modestie shold not haue concealed your euidence Otherwise you know in a proposition copulatiue if but one point be true the whole is a lie Say then whereof can you accuse Cranmer Ridley and all Protestants wherein you will not make King Henrie the eight King Edward the sixt and many Parliaments guiltie I did neuer heare the whole state of any kingdome termed Traitors but by your boldnesse If you had strooke at the head of that opposition you should not haue needed to haue lopped the branches for if King Henry might haue spoken from the dead in the day of the succession of Queene Mary he would haue pleaded the cause of the opposites as Dauid did in the behalfe of his people Oues hae c. It is I these other what haue they done Notwithstanding we acknowledge her successiō iust and after the proclamation of her title shew vs what Protestant euer resisted what Minister of the Gospel in all that fierie trial did kindle the least sparke of sedition among her people Was it because they wanted hope of succession Behold there was the hand-maide of God Elizabeth their hopefull successor to the Crowne Was it for want of power why death is rightly described to be a Giant hauing a thousand hands able to giue any liuing creature his mortall wound But I abhorre to discourse of these rebellious conceits Lastly of all Protestants which were burned in Queene Maries dayes for Religion name but one that was accused of treason I require instance but in one an apparant demonstration that their Religion taught them loyall subiection The second Instance for England The moderate Answerer Sir Thomas Wyat warranted by Protestants Cleargie with diuers others in the short regiment of Queene Marie may be giuen for instance The Reply The Historie relateth the pretence of Wyat thus A Proclamation against the Queenes marriage desiring all English men to ioyne for defence of the Realme in danger to be brought into thraldome to strangers who be Spaniards The like was the Proclamation of the Duke of Suffolke Against the marriage with the Prince of Spaine Where auouching his loyaltie to the person of the Queene layed his hand on his sword saying Hee that would her any hurt I would this sword were at his heart Againe there is recorded the Oration of Queene Marie against Wyat where there is not to be found any scruple concerning the subiect of our question cause of Religion neither was there to make it more apparant any Minister of the Gospell brought in question as a commotioner in that cause Though therefore it is requisite that that which is lawfull be performed by lawfull proceedings yet if intent the subiect of this dispute might answer for Protestants accused in that name then is it plaine that it was not Religion if for Wyat and his fellowes it is as plaine it was not against the Queene or State but for both that the whole land might continue in their former subiection and that by Spanish insolencie her Highnesse preheminence and soueraignetie might not be impared Let vs heare The third Instance for England The moderate Answerer Goodman published a booke concluding it lawfull to kill Kings transgressing Gods lawes themselues and commaunding others to do the like The Reply If I should iustifie this Goodman though your examples might excuse him yet my heart shall condemne my selfe But what doe you professe to prooue All Protetestants teach Positions rebellious Prooue it Here is one Goodman who in his publike booke doeth mainetaine them I haue no other meanes to auoyde these straites which you obiect by the example of one to conclude All Protestants in England rebellious then by the example of * All the rest to answer there is but one And now let me be beholden to your moderation to remember multitudes of your Priests Iesuites Cardinals and Popes in their publike authorized bookes Bulles Decrees and now you requite mee with one But shall one dramme of drosse prooue the whole masse no golde Let vs therefore leaue this Goodman as a man who by his vnauthorized wicked and false positions hath falsified his name You proceed The fift Instance against English Protestants The moderate Answerer The English Protestants notes vpon the Bible as his Maiestie is witnesse do not disallow the killing of Princes in such case as is shewed by the booke of Conference pag. 47. The Reply It will be requisite without preiudice to the most learned and religious iudgement of his Maiestie to satisfie for two places related from that conference The first place touching the act of the midwiues of Egypt who mercifully spared the liues of the infants of the Hebrewes notwithstanding the commaundement of the King The note Their disobedience herein was lawfull but their dissembling was euill And was not this disobedience lawfull Let vs consult with the holy Ghost Heb. 11. 23. where it is written By faith Moses when he was borne was hid three moneths of his parents neither feared they the Kings commaundement The same is the case of the midwiues disobeying the commaundement of the King Now that which is noted by the Spirit of God as commendable in the parents of Moses may it be condemnable in these mercifull midwiues of the Egyptians Nay for it is also written The midwiues of Aegypt feared God and did not as the King commanded them but preserued aliue the male children and therefore God prospered them But we must discerne in this act two colours white and blacke which S. Augustine distinguisheth They did a worke of mercie in preseruing the liues of the yong babes but they did lie vnto the King for safeguard of their owne liues The first deserued prayse the other needed a Pardon Therefore this their lawfull and mercifull disobedience for preuenting the bloudie Massacre of Infants can be no president for your practises intended in malice to end in the bloud of Protestants of all sorts The other point of the note against Dissimulation doth indeed crosse your equiuocating profession but you are not to be offended with vs if we condemne that as sinfull which as S. Augustine saith needed a pardon The second place 2. Chron. 15. 16. the Text King Asa deposed Maachah his mother from her estate because she had made an Idole in a groue The note Mother or Grandmother yet herein the King shewed that he lacked zeale for she ought to haue bene burnt by the Couenant as vers 13. And by the law of God Deut. 13. but he gaue place to foolish
pittie and would also seâ—me after a sort to satisfie the lawe The truth then of this exposition as al Orthodoxal Comentaries shew is grounded vpon the direct Scripture the Oracle of truth for in the law Deut. 13. 6. 9. If thy brother c. the summe whereof is repeated in the Text in question vers 13. Whosoeuer will not seeke the Lord God of Israel shall be slaine whether he were small or great man or woman What shall we say then is the Soueraignty of Kings disabled God forbid but it is rather established hereby for the King is made the Deposer yea euen of whosoeuer Now that Commentarie doth not defend deposing a King neither possibly can it be defended by any ordinarie commaund of God in all Scripture which is proued Wherefore supposing that the Relation of the Conference be direct yet may you not thinke that his Maiestie whose iudgement is so diuinely illuminated by the light of the word of God that he neuer refused Conference with the greatest Iesuite or Doctor Romish could take exception to the note as from an offence thereby giuen but onely in suspition an offence taken by weake ones prepossessed with your Romish maladie whereof you haue giuen vs experience in your many controuersies For wheresoeuer in all Scripture almost you feele but any sent of fire O behold this doth Proue Purgatorie fire after death Whereas indeed the context is plaine there is onely signified * Afflictions of this life Where you reade promised Reward for goodworkes there you presently conclude Amerit of Condignitie when as all is the onely iustice of Gods promise and the consequent of the onely grace and mercie of God who giueth to will to worke to perfect and crowneth his gift of grace with the grace of the gift of glorie I may not digresse Here doubtlesse his Maiestie doubted lest some impotent Reader not ignorant of your suggestions vnderstanding a Prince deposed by the King might iustifie your proceedings where so many popishly inspired haue assumed the office of Kings to depose a Prince But know you there is not in any part of our Commentarie vpon the Bible any one sparke whereat any Guido may light his match to giue fire to his powder The last instance for England The moderate Answerer If I had trauelled no further into that doctrine then to the late printed booke by your Maiesties Printer of the late intended Conspiracie I might easily performe a iust defence for the Protestant Author giueth it out as a generall rule and vndoubted Maxime to all Professors of worship to take armes if their Religion be in hazard and that no priuate man should thinke his life more happie then to fight pro Aris. Which is greater libertie then our Aduersarie can find in Catholike Writers so of him attached of Treason and Rebellion The Reply This shoot is but twelue score wide of the marke you ayme at your bent is to defend them who professe it lawfull for Catholikes in the maintenance of Religion to murther Kings and harrow Kingdomes in their opinion hereticall This Author teacheth vs to Fight his owne words pro Aris pro focis pro Patre patriae his Reason Because the indangering of one of these would at once stirre the whole bodie of a Commonwealth not any more as diuided members but as a solid and indiuiduall lumpe What is then the difference he in the whole Treatise teacheth euery priuate man to arme himselfe by all possible meanes but first armed with authoritie of the King and State You teach to fight for Religion violating the obedience of God against your King and kingdome to destroy them The difference may be illustrated by the like A priuate man if without authoritie temporall he kill a murtherer he is a murtherer but authorized by the publike lawe he is now no more priuate but an Officer but the lawles homicide doth best pattern your lawlesse parricide So that there is no more oddes betweene our and your Authors opinion then cum Rege contra Regem to fight with and against the King You can find no more exception in England whither will you now it is but a step to Scotland what see you there CHAP. IIII. The Obiection of the moderate Answerer against the Church of Scotland KNox and Buchanan defended the power of people ouer their King The Reply You might haue added that there was in Scotland an Act of Parliament to call in that Chronicle of Buchanan censuring all such contempts and innouations but it stood your modestie in hand to conceale this lest we might reply vpon your moderation thus That is not to be called the doctrine of Scotland which the general currant of that Church and State in publike Parliament doth condemne such is this seditious doctrine of resisting and deposing Kings a learning substantially popish your Popes being Authors thereof your other Priests of Rome suggestors publikely authorized herein and your traiterous Actors canonized for Saints in the conceit of all Romish And now you may bid great Britaine adiew you may make a short cut into France CHAP V. The Obiections of the moderate Answerer against the Protestants in France both in their Positions and Practises LEt vs come into France The Reply But vpon condition that you will not returne Yet what of Fraunce The moderate Answerer Caluin and Beza and the rest of that holy Synode say that the Kings and Queenes their children posteritie and all Magistrates must be put to death and so euery Protestant must be more then a Pope The Reply Nay God forbid that any should be so great a man in Rebellion as your Popes who haue bene the heads of the greatest tumults in Christendome Caluin and Beza whom you traduce if your moderation will suffer that which iustice doth exact must answer for themselues Caluins iudgement in this case In his booke of Institutions which he framed for instruction of all the Church of Christ touching the case now controuerted he beginneth to consult with God saying The word of God teacheth vs to obey all Princes who are established in their thrones be it by what meanes soeuer yea and though they shall do nothing lesse then the Offices of Kings yet must they be obayed though the King be neuer so wicked and indeed vnworthie of the name of a King yet must subiects acknowledge the image of diuine power in his publike authoritie and therefore must in all temporall duties reuerence and obey him as well as if he were the godliest King in the world To contract his other sentences into a briefe We are instructed saith Caluin by many documents of holy writ neuer to suffer these seditioâ—s coÌ„ceits to possesse our minds as to thinke an euill King must be so dealt withall as he deserueth but we are directly charged to obey the King though he be a sauage Tyrant and neuer so wicked which I therefore often vrge that in such a case it
your fellowship in faithful subiection But lingua quo vadis CHAP. XII The second kind of Recriminations against protestants is in the second wickednes of Aequiuocation YOu returne the guilt of this cursed doctrine vpon Protestants after two fashions Reasoning Railing 1. Reasoning if it may be called Reason which is mixed with most slanderous vntruths but you wold be heard speake with good will The moderate Answerer But to speake vnto this Obiector concerning Protestants proceedings in aquiuocating Luther vsed it at his pleasure now appealing to the Pope and after renouncing his authoritie Cranmer did often recant his errors by othes and again ofteÌ„ defend them counter fetted the hands of fiftie Conuocation men Fox himselfe being iudge to giue alying credit to his false cause but excused his false oaths by equiuocation Protestants of England in the dayes of K. Henrie the eight King Edward the sixt and Queene Elizabeth did equiuocate Such was the proceeding of P. Martyr and Bucer two great Professors of Diuinitie in Oxford and Cambridge Such was the Protestant adherents the Dukes of Northumberland and Suffalke and now the ordinary vse of Puritanes The Reply Luther Cranmer and others as they were perswaded that the Bishop of Rome was a faithfull Bishop did sweare obedience vnto him but afterwards being better illuminated did renounce him as Antichristian But if all recantation shall be thus censured then might you teach S. Augustine to retract his retractations But we wil not denie their infirmities for it hath pleased God to note the like in his chosen Saints in holy writ to the amplifying of the glory of his grace in their repentance and his pardon Yet was not there in these acts any equiuocation no more then in the acts of Peter who at the cock-crow went out of the high Priests hall and wept bitterly Thus Cranmerawaked by the call of the spirit of God executed vengeance vpon that hand which subscribed vnto your idolatrous seruice Burned it in the fire Then whatsoeuer his dissimulatioÌ„ was he thought it worthy of repentance not as you do think your equiuocation worthy of defence whereas in the truth of Christianitie there is the same punishment due to your equiuocating tongues which he executed vpon his dissembling hand O but Fox is witnesse that he defended himselfe by saying he did equiuocate I am sure you would not haue bene indebted vnto vs for the words if they had bene extant I found the place of M. Fox but no mention of equiuocation A monster not hatched in those times That which was obiected by Doctor Weston is there satisfied by M. Cranmer but you are more rigorous then auncient Aduersaries Yet further would I demand why Protestants turning from Papacie in the daies of King Edward must be condemned for such as haue equiuocated and Papists reuolting from Protestants in the raigne of Queene Mary must be thought to haue bene innocents The moderate Answerer Aequiuocating was practised by Caluine as the Lord of Canterbury and Beza and others record The Reply I reported this your accusation to my Lord of Canterbury and his Grace answered that you had wronged his testimony for I am sure said his Grace that this mystery in those times was not set abroach We also examined the book you alledge and find not one syllable for your purpose But what can we expect from you Patrons of lying equiuocation but in your accusations against Protestants equiuocating lies The most moderate Answerer in his railing Luther was so vile in this kind of equiuocating that neuer pillory mate behaued himselfe so as he did Cogging lying equiuocating dissembling was practised by Caluine who was banished for a dissembling seducer Cranmer periured himselfe and excused it by equiuocation The Reply In these your lying slanders you giue vs good hope that you will leaue your equiuocating lies because as though you detested the impietie thereof you vilifie it with these termes vile equiuocating adiudging it worthy the pillory matching it with cogging lying seducing periury This is yet very wel But we find that true which the Orator saith Natura suilena Euery man naturally is a band vnto himselfe Now you examining your Glycerie equiuocation in your aduersaries Luther Cranmer Caluine O then it is vile cogging lying seducing c. But beholding her in your owne embracements so In equiuocating there is nolie nor sinne Adulterous Iudah iudging of Thamar whom he had vnknowingly knowne hearing that she was brought in for an adulteresse gaue presently sentence Let her be burned but when by certaine euidences and pledges she made it knowne vnto him that if she were the woman he was the maÌ„ then he confesseth She is more righteous then I. There was some modestie in this but what moderation do you vse to adiudge equiuocation which you fasâ—ly faine to be in Protestants to the pillory and for your selues in whom the Leprosie raigneth to vse an Apologie Thus haue I iustified the innocent whose names your equiuocating spirit hath wickedly traduced for whom this might haue bin a sufficient answer that because you bring onely accusations without proofe If it be sufficient to haue accused who can be innocent For our Lord Iesus euen innocency it self was accused who of his grace turne you to repentance that these your slaunders be not layd vnto your charge THE THIRD PART Which is a Confutation of the principles of Romish doctrine in two points 1. The supreme head of Rebellion 2. The impious conceit of Aequiuocation Concerning the first this shall be our Conclusion The Pope hath no authoritie from God to depose Kings or dispose of their Kingdomes CHAP. I. Romish Obiections answered THIS pretended predominance of the Pope in temporall causes whether Directly or indirectly considered in the which diuision of gouerning the Romish schoole is at this day extremely diuided if it be from God it will sure plead Scriptum est and be warranted by Gods word either in the Olde or New Testament This point is discussed by the state of Gods church in the Olde Testament Obiect 1. In the generall view The Romish Pretence The high Priests in the Olde Testament were supreme in ciuill causes Ergo Ought to be in the New The Answer This is so contrary to the Story in holy writ that by the examples of Kings in ordering though neuer in ordeining of Priests the Iesuits are inforced to allow that the King was supreme ouer the Priest Their reasons Because sayth one in the Synagogne of the Iewes was a state rather earthly than 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 beene supreme Or as another sayth more conceitedly The Temporall state exceeded the Spirituall in the olde Law as much as the Substantiue is more excellent than the Adiectiue In both these we dislike their comparison and accept