liuely represent the knowen old medicine to kill fleas by putting dust in their mouthes If but halfe of these matters here alledged were proued against the Priests doubtlesse they were to be auoyded by Catholicks as such as wanting no faults in themselues would hardly instruct others in vertue But this Author being not as yet setled to his Apologie without doubt discouereth that hee is not free from all those vices which he hath reckoned if he want any of them who vpon so smal or rather no cause or euidence would haue his Reader to enter into so rash and vile a iudgement of the Secular priests as though his Apologie were to no purpose vnlesse his Reader would carry such an vncharitable conceit of them as there should be no need of any Apologie or defence of those who are their aduersaries But now to his ground of this present contention The principall or onely ground saith he of this our present contention and scandalous controuersie is the very same disease of emulation partly of Lay men against Priests and partly of Priests against religious men especially the Fathers of the Societie with whom at this time they haue to doe c. We haue before shewed that the emulation of the Laitie against the Cleargie of which he speaketh before was for that the Cleargie were thought to be an hinderance to some designments of the Laitie and thereupon some few deuised how to indomage the Cleargie The emulation also which was said to haue bene in the Cleargie against the religious Ioâ—… Stow in Edw. 3. Anno 13â—7 hath bene shewed not to haue bene in the Cleargie but in Wickliffe and his societie surnamed by the people Lollards And if any of the Cleargie may be said to haue ioyned with Wickliffe in that his insolent and heretical attempt they were of the Religious cleargie and not of the Secular And this emulation was against the religious who had possessions Now then good sir if the principall or onely ground of this our present contention and scandalous controuersie is the very same disease of emulation you must shew what like cause the Lay men haue found in the Cleargie or the Priests in the Religious especially the Fathers of the Societie who by their rule haue no properties nor can possesse any thing T.W. in his Diâ—resâ—…on from the 16. Martyrs pag 63. as M T.W. would haue vs to thinke We haue giuen a cause before of the contrary part why the Lay men who follow the Iesuits and the Iesuits also may be thought to stirre vp themselues against some Secular Priests to wit because that some of the Secular Priests cannot bee brought to like of such plots as the Iesuits haue layd for the inuasion of our Countrey in which they haue imployed themselues oftentimes and thrust also some Secular Priests into the action although most grieuously against their wills namely in the yeere 1596. And if this Author had not vsed this parenthesis speaking of Religious men especially the Fathers of the Societie with whom at this present they haue to do we should neuer haue dreamed that this digression from hurts done in this Queenes dayes had bene made against the Priests who stand vpon their defence against the impostures of the Iesuits and their adherents because so small a number of the Laity doe stand with those priests and the priests themselues are so few by this good fellow his accompt as he disdaineth much that they are called the priests And in the 11. Chap. of the Apol. fol. 162. he alledgeth it for the second abuse sleight or shift which was vsed towards his Holines in the title of the booke dedicated vnto him wherein it is said that the troubles were betweene the Iesuits on th' one side with the Archpr. c and the Seminary priests on th' other side But no doubt herein this fellow his memory did faile him as also in another matter there mentioned For whereas here he affirmeth that the principall only ground of this our present contention and scandalous controuersie is the very same disease of emulation partly of Lay men against priests and partly of Priests against religious men especially the Fathers of the Societie In the 11. Chap fol. 161. 162. hee affirmeth that the Priests their controuersie is with the Archpr. c. and that their stomacke against the Iesuits is for standing with him and for him So as by this reckoning the case is plainely altered For if the principall and onely ground of this our present contention and scandalous controuersie be the very same disease of emulation partly of Laymen against Priests and partly of Priests against religious men especially the Iesuits to which of these two members will this Author bring this controuersie which in the 11. Chap. he saith is betweene Priests and their Archpriest he cannot bring it to the first which is of Lay men against Priests for then hee must accompt the Priests betweene whom and the Archpr. the controuersie is or the Archpr. among Lay men which I trust he will not He cannot bring it to the second which is of Priests against Religious For then the Archpr. betweene whom and the priests is the controuersie must be confessed to be religious which also as I weene he will not say especially that he is a Iesuit as hee expoundeth himselfe or a Father of the Societie with whom at this present as he saith here they the priests haue to doe For at this he laughed Num. 16. in his table of falsehoods But perchance his strayning to disgorge himselfe caused a lightnes in his head that he knew not well what hee said The filth then before shewed being now out of his stomacke For better declaration of this matter saith he I shall goe forward with the narration of those hurts and difficulties which vpon emulation haue fallen out in this our English cause vnder the Queene that now is especially concerning the Seminaries and the reduction of England by that way and meane procured for these 20. yeeres and more to wit since the beginning of the Romane English Colledge which was in the yeere 1578. at what time a contention beganne betweene M. Doct. Lewis then Archdeacon of Cambray but after B. of Cassana and the English schollers about the maner of gouernment and gouernors of that house erected especially by his procurement and industry He hath shewed you before what hurt came to England by the emulation which some Catholicks had against the restoring of a new English Clergie at Doway which notwithstanding the Seminary there florished and afterward also at Rhemes in France in such sort as England thankes be to God did not feele that hurt vntill new Lords came who were of the Iesuits faction and were forced sometime to runne with them for some respects how smal soeuer their inward deuotion was vnto them Now he will giue you to vnderstand what great hurt our English cause hath had by emulation which was at Rome
any money for them onely they must pay for the sawce which according to the custome of the faire they must haue or els they must haue no goose O happy day wherein that faire was first instituted and a secret discouered which no Catholike Kings or Prelats could euer attaine vnto And thrice happy are they who by the light as it should see me of that day did see to make that Statute in the third yere of the Archipres byterie of M. George Blackwell vidi preuaricantes c. 18. Octob. 1600 wherein al right to appeale to Rome being most Catholikely conserued the penalties therein conteined doe onely light vpon such as haue set their hands to that which is prefixed to the Appeale which is nothing els but the causes thereof without which according to the custome and Canons of holy Church the appeale is of no force and are therefore by name to be expressed as we haue before shewed out of the Clementine Appellantide Appellationibus Now it remaineth that we shew when and vpon what occasions the Statutes were made by which the prouisions from Rome and some Appeales to Rome were forbidden First concerning these prouisions there was a statute made either in the 30. or 35. or as some other affirme 25. Edward 1. which was aboue 300. yeeres since wherein it is agreed and established that they should not be suffered There was also the like statute made in the 25. yere of Edw. 3 to the like effect by which it was forbidden that any should be placed in any dignitie without the assent of the King The same is also forbidden in the Parliament holden in the 38. of the same King The occasions of enacting these statutes are set downe as well in that of the 25. of Edw. 1. as elsewhere the iustice of those which were made in the time of Edw. 3. is the more apparant by a letter which hee and his nobles sent in the 17. yeere of his reigne to his Hol. to haue redresse for such defaults as were in that kind committed The Letter was to this effect King Edward and his Nobles perceiuing the derogation that was done to the Realme by such reseruations prouisions and collations of benefices as the Pope practised here in England wrote to him requiring him that sith the Churches of England had beene founded and endowed by noble and worthy men to the end the people might be instructed by people of their owne language and that he being so farre off could not vnderstand the defaults yet his predecessors and hee more then had been vsed by diuers reseruations prouisions and collations made to diuers persons some strangers yea and some enemies to the Realme whereby the money and profits were carried forth their Cures not prouided for according to the founders minds they therefore vpon due considerations thereof signified vnto him that they could not suffer such enormities any longer and therefore besought him to reuoke such reseruations prouisions and collations wholly to auoid such slanders mischiefes and harmes as might ensue and that the Cures might be committed to persons meete for the exercises of the same beseeching him further without delay to signifie his intention sith they meant to bestow their diligence to remedie the matter and see that redresse might be had Giuē in full Parliament at Westminster 18. of May Anno Dom. 1343. Thus far out of Iohn Stow 17. Edw. 3. where he also citeth Auesburie and Honingford Secondly concerning the forbidding of the appeales to Rome we find a Statute made in the 27. of Edw. 3. against those who shall drawe any person in plea out of the Realme of a thing whereof the knowledge appertained to the Kings Court or of such things whereof iudgement was giuen in the Kings courts or should sue in any other courts to defeate or let the iudgements giuen in the Kings Court. To these and other Statutes to the like effect the author of the Apologie affirmeth that the Catholike Bishops neither did nor could assent But whatsoeuer may be said for or against this position concerning the appeales no man can in reason think but that they both might very well and did assent to those statutes which were made against the prouisions or bestowing of dignities in England without the kings consent the causes are so apparantly layd downe by the King and the Nobles for that abridging of his Holines his promoting whom he would and to what dignities hee would in England And thus much may be alledged in the behalfe of the consent of the spirituall Lords to the statute against those appeales That in the new great abridgement printed Anno 1551. there is this clause set to the end of some statutes But the spirituall Lords assented not to this statute And there is no such note set to any of these Statutes which we haue here cited It is also euident that these statutes were not made vpon any heate of emulation against the Clergie for as we finde that in the 38. yeere of King Edw. 3. the statutes against those prouisions made in the 25. and 27. of the same King are confirmed although there be some fauour giuen to the Lords and Prelats offendors so in the 39 yeere of the same King which was the next yeere after we find that the Clergie in England was in as great honour as any Clergie in the worlde as may be shewed by the offices which the Bishops and Priests had then in England For the Bishop of Canterbury was Lord Chancellour of England the Bishop of Bath was L. Treasurer the Archdeacon of Lincolne was Lord priuie Seale the Parson of Somersam was master of the Rolles ten beneficed Priests were masters of the Chancerie the Deane of S. Martins le grand was chiefe Chancellour of the Exchequer Receiuer and Keeper of the Kings Treasure and Iewels the Archd. of Northampton was Chancellor of the Exchequer a Prebendarie of S. Martins was Clerk of the priuie Seale a Prebendarie of S. Steuens was Treasurer of the Kings house the Parson of Auon or Oundell was master of the Wardrobe the Parson of Fenny Stanton was one of the Chamberlaines of the Excheq and Keeper of the Kings Treasury and Iewels Other of the Clergie are noted to haue ben in office also in France in Ireland as well as in England Iohn of Gaunt Duke of Lancaster the fourth sonne of King Edward 3. hauing the gouernement of England committed vnto him in the time of his fathers last sickenesse which was in the 50. and 51. of his reigne disposed so farre of matters and offices as he conceiued some possibility to attaine to the Crown and to depriue his nephew Richard of Burdeaux who was sonne to the Blacke prince Edward the eldest sonne of King Edward the third But perceiuing that it would be hard for him to obtaine his purpose so long as the Church stood in that estate it did and the citizeens of London enioyed their liberties hee laboured to ouerthrow them both
first Chapter of the Apol. fol. 2. the first English Seminary began at Doway in the yere 1568. and neuer as yet failed although vpon occasion it hath beene translated from thence into France and backe againe now to Doway so there is also mention in the same Chapter fol 3. of the beginning of the English Colledge at Rome in the yeere 1578. which was before the Iesuits entrance into England as may be prooued out of the 12. Chapter of the same Apologie fol. 181. where F. Parsons is said to haue come into England betwixt Easter and Whitsontide in the yeere 1580. where he must needs heare of some priests who had beene sent from that Seminary before him T.W. in his disgression from 16. Martyrs in one yere pag. 52. sayth that the Colledge of Rome was founded in the yeere 1575. which was fiue yeeres before F. Parsons entrance into England And as I thinke no man doubteth but that Fa. Parsons and Fa Campion were the first Iesuits which were sent into England to labour in that haruest As for those generall letters which follow in reproofe of these supposed falshoods they shal be answered where this Author setteth them downe in perticular In the 8. page F. Heywood the Iesuit is said to bee falsly and malitiously belied in these words Ostentansse c. A certaine Iesuit vaunting himselfe among our people as though he had bene Legate to the Sea Apostolicke c. But you must go for proofe hereof to the 3. chap. where there is nothing to this purpose and to the 11. chap. where fol. 164 F. Heywood is thus cleared from this pretended false and malitious lye Onely it is true that some 16. or 17. Priests whereof one chiefe man is said to be of their faction at this day met together with him that is F. Heywood and would haue had all the Nationall customes of England about fasting for some little diuersitie and difficulties which they found in them to be reduced to the common order of the Romane Church which D. Allen F. Parsons M. Blackwell and others did not allow and F. Heywood yeelded vnto these mens opinions And thus much perchance should not haue bene said here had Fa. Parsons and Fa. Heywood bene friends but they being otherwise and the good Fa. Heywood reclayming himselfe and seeking reformation of manythings in men of his order for which cause notwithstanding his learning and other gifts he was made to liue and die very obscurely the Author of this Apologie is content to say somewhat of him in this case in question although so farre as it might touch the credit of the societie the blame is layed vpon the Secular priestes And because perchance it is too well knowen that some of those priests otherwise zealous men as by their death they made euident remonstrance did long after breake those fasts vpon the warrant of this Prouinciall Councell it is said that F. Heywood yeelded vnto the contrary opinion lest the societie should beare the discredit of so rash an attempt And thus is the calumniation answered which was made against F. Heyw. and no otherwise as the reader may see if he will turne to the places whither this Author sendeth him And it cannot but argue great want of shame in this Author to run with such fowle termes vpon men for saying that which when he cōmeth to salue he knoweth not almost how to deliuer otherwise with any likelyhood of trueth In the 9 page the principall deceit falshood or slander is noted in these words Parietiam modo c. In like maner the Rectors of our English Romane Colledge did goe about many things that were grieuous and asperous to our youthes But for this point you must see it handled at large cap. 5. Apol. where also it is to be answered or the Reader referred to some particuler treatise of this matter But in the same page there is an other slander that is Conspectis c. Card Allen after he had considered and discouered the endeauors of the Iesuits was wont to say that they sought more their owne good then either that of our Countrey or Colledge The proofe here of must now stand vpon the honesty of the Relators but how iustly he or any other might speake it I refer me to any indifferent mans iudgement when the Iesuits would neuer suffer any to be in rest in the College who would not suffer thēselues to be drawne to the societie either by them or their Agents who liuing in the Colledge as the other students did had secret vowes to be Iesuits and perswaded as many as they could to take the same course And England hauing more need to be furnished with such as were most fit to take vpon them the care of soules who can doubt whether the Iesuits in seeking the most towardly youthes to leaue their vocation and become of their order sought more their owne good then either that of our Countrey or Colledge And to the question here foolishly proposed what priuate good can the Iesuits pretend for themselues worth their labors and perils in England more then in the Indies except the good of soules and seruice of God As though they sought somewhat els in the Indies then the good of soules and seruice of God or at the least not so much as in England We answere both according to their proceedings and F. Parsons platforme of Reformation that whatsoeuer they pretend they seeke to keepe not onely the Secular priests in a seruile subiection vnto them but the Bishops also and all the whole State of England hauing already in their platforme or Councell of Reformation set downe all Ecclesiasticall men as pensioners at the discretion of some Iesuits and some Secular priests no doubt of their choosing for auoyding of cōtention diuision And whereas good man he talketh of the Iesuits labours and perils in England who knoweth not how deliciously they fare how gorgeously they are attired how quietly they sleepe in the best and safest houses in England insomuch as it is a marueilous wonder when any Iesuit is in perill And there hath not wanted among the Lay gentlemen that for these respects haue wished themselues Iesuits notwithstāding they haue liued with wife children great friends and as great contentment as this world can yeeld to wealthy protected Catholicks In the 11. page is this falshood noted or slander against Card. Tolet in that he is said to haue bene a fauourer of the Troublesome against their superiors the wordes are these I am tum c. At that time both the Colledge and al the schollers had bene vndone if Car. Toledo had not opposed himselfe as a wall for the said schollers This is iustified by many and in the particular discourse of the troubles in Rome it will be shewed notwithstanding this vant here of all Rome and his Holinesse as though they would witnesse the contrary In the 12. page this Author hath noted great falshood in the narration of the
left out so memorable an abridgement of so many impertinent and false matters and so well suting with the Apologie I call all that impertinent which concerneth any diuision either of Iesuites and other Catholikes of the Clergie or of the Laitie before the comming of the Cardinall Caietans letters for the institution of the Archpriest in the yeere 1598. or the ambitious attempt of the knowen and couert Iesuites in the scandalous diuision in Wisbich For vpon the not yeelding of some secular Priestes to subiect themselues first to the Iesuites in direct termes and the not admitting of an authoritie procured by them afterward for their indirect soueraintie this present controuersie began and being once ended at the sight of a Breue it was renewed againe by the rashnesse of the Iesuites and the indiscretion of the Archpriest as it is prooued at large in the bookes set out by the Secular priests and promulgated in the latter Breue dated the 17. of August 1601. as shall hereafter be shewed I affirme the rest to be false because so it shal be proued for so much as is touched thereof either in the Apologie or in this Epistle Omitting therefore what is here propounded to his Holinesse concerning the Catholikes their going to the Protestants Churches at the beginning of her Maiesties raign who now is a thing which would not haue bene published to the world by any who tendered their honour vnlesse there had bene some greater cause for it the subornation of some by the Counsell to poyson D. Allen afterwardes Cardinall and the Students raising of sedition among the Catholikes beyond the Sea the euill successe which some had about the Queene of Scots and diuers Gentlemen which is here attributed to their secret keeping of their practises from Fa. Parsons and other the inducing of two Priests to write two bookes in fauour of heretikes as it were by reason of State and to become spies the one in France the other in Spaine Lastly to let passe that which is here said that Car. Allen perceiued that there was a faction begun in England by the same acte of the Counsell against the Fathers of the Societie and writ most earnestly against it that Card. Sega had found out that a few vnquiet spirits were set on craftily by the subtill instruments of the Counsel were the cause of many troubles in that Colledge at Rome we wil here only touch such points as do concerne our selues and the matter now in controuersie Your Holines therefore saith this Author seeing prudently these causes and effects and hauing put a finall end to the long and fastidicus troubles of the English Romane Colledge giuen your straight commandement by words of mouth to such persons of the tumultuous as departed into England in that yeere 1597 to be quiet for the time to come to haue peace with all but namely with the Fathers of the Societie and hearing notwithstanding the next yeere after by diuers letters out of England that this was not obserued but new meanes rather deuised of further diuision and sedition your Holines did vpon these considerations and vpon the letters and requests of diuers of the grauest Priests of our nation which after we shall cite ordaine by the Card. Protector his letters an easie and sweet subordination c. If wee had no other proofe of this fellowes falsehood then might be made apparant in this second point of the Epistle it would giue euery honest man sufficient satisfaction His Holines is here put in minde of such strange matters and his wisedome very highly commended vpon so false grounds as if this Epistle had bene euer deliuered vnto him hee would speedily haue discouered a notable sycophancy He is here told of two principall motiues for his ordaining our easie and sweet subordination The one were certaine letters which signified that betweene the tumultuous who departed into England in the yeere 1597 and the Fathers of the Societie there was not that peace which he had commanded but new meanes rather deuised of further diuision and sedition The other were other letters and requests of diuers of the grauest priests of our nation which after saith he wee shall cite Concerning the first least there should be any error in Iudgement what those new meanes of further diuision should be there is this note in the margent The new association which conceite is deliuered in plainer termes and more at large in the first Chapter of the Apol. fol. 6. in this maner But the reliques of those that had bene troublesome and vnquiet before their comming into England and conferring againe with their consorts of their former actions and designments frustrated as they thought by F. Parsons dealing at Rome resolued to begin againe but after another fashion To wit by deuising a certaine new Association among themselues c. And in the 2. Chapter fol. 13 his Holines hearing of certaine new Associations begun in England soone after the tumults ended in Rome c. These to omit other places in the Apologie are sufficient to shew that his intention is to make the Pope beleeue that the Association which was begun in England by the Secular priests was a new deuise of those who were sent from Rome in the yeere 1597 as tumultuous and vnquiet persons That this is a meere deluding of his Holines all who were then in England can very well testifie yea F. Parsons himselfe will doe vs the fauour I am sure to say this is a very false tale who vnderstood at his first comming to Rome by M. Iames Standish that such an Association had bene long before intended and consequently could not bee a deuice of such as thought themselues frustrated of their designments by his dealing in Rome The 6. assistants in their letters of the 2. of May 1601. doe testifie that this association began foure or fiue yeres since Cap. 7. Apol. fol. 90. and that must needs be before those priests came into England on whom it is fathered if it be true which is sayd Cap. 2. Apol. fol. 12 that they were not gone from Rome at the beginning of September 1597. It may also be gathered out of the same Chapter fol. 89. that this association very probably was begun long before by others for there we finde this storie But M. Mush returning into England as he went forth and the Cardinall soone after dying in the yeere 1594. as appeareth Cap. 1. Apol fol 6. hee ioyned with another of his owne humour c. And they two with some few other determined to make a certaine new Hierarchy of their owne calling it an association of Clergie men c. The truth is that M. Mush and M. Dudley hauing made the peace at Wisbich in the yeere 1595. as appeareth Ca. 6. Apol fol. 79. returned to London and there dealt with M. Iames Standish a man growing in deed into that humor to wit of being a Iesuit which M. Mush was then leauing and not with
to the 2. and 11. Chap. of the Apol. where hee doeth too-much discredit himselfe as shal be there shewed But lest the Reader should conceiue according to the broadnesse of these termes we will here only note the propositions which he termeth scandalous and temerarious and so leaue them vntill their place come to be defended Authoritie is not an infallible rule of trueth in all who haue authoritie No man is bound in all things to beleeue or execute what euery man in authoritie ouer him shall put vpon him Archpriests and their superiors also the Archdeacons and other of higher degree haue done amisse and swarued from the trueth and who vpon earth is warranted from erring but one and not he in all things These propositions are put in the second Chapter of the Apol. fol. 16. and in the margent there is this note Dangerous and offensiue doctrine And in the same Chap. fol. 19. there is exception taken at this proposition The sacrament of Cōfirmation is either most necessary in time of persecution or altogether vaine and as a superfluous ceremony in Gods Church And in the margent there is this note set A very temerarious proposition and he proueth it because it is not absolutely necessary to saluation If this fellow had euer bene a Souldier he would haue conceiued the necessitie perchance of Armor and weapons in warres although no man will say that armor or weapons are absolutely necessary to the getting of a kingdom In the 11. Chapter here quoted there is nothing but a certaine remembrance of this point with a reference to the 2. Chapter where what is said shal be discussed and answered with lesse danger of the Inquisition then this good fellow is in And whereas here also it is said that by the Priests their owne letters it may be proued that they haue dealt expressely with the Queene and Counsell against the Fathers of the Societie and such as stand with them It is a false bragge and wil be taken for such vnlesse some other letter be forged then that which is cited in the 13. Chap. For this doeth not proue any such matter as any man may see These are the words in that letter fol. 210 I haue in some sort pacified the wrath of our Prince conceiued against vs and of her Counsell and haue layed the fault where it ought to be and proued that the Secular priests are innocent for the most part Which words cannot import that he who writ this letter had dealt against any but onely that he had dealt for some who were before thought to be as deepe in matters displeasing to the State as others the State being before out of doubt that there were such plots as were not beseeming subiects much lesse beseeming men of our calling and so much the more odious by how much the shew of piety is dangerous for the effecting of any stratageme And the Counsell thought that all had bene of one stampe wherein the Inditer of that letter affirmeth he hath otherwise enformed them and freed the innocent Now we wil see how this Author beginneth to close vp his Holines mouth with as notorious a falshood as any of the rest They haue obteyned saith he that foure of their seditious company that were in prison before haue libertie vnder the Queenes letters patents to ride vp and downe all England for a time to gather money and letters which few Cath. will dare to deny them least they detect them to the Councell c. This also is a meditation vpon the same letter which is before cited and is to be found in the 13. Chap. of the Apol. fol. 210. wherein are these words I haue by opening the case vnto their Honours and to Caesar obteyned that foure principall men shal be banished after a sort to follow the appeale D. Bagshaw Bluet Champney Barneley all prisoners they shall be here with me on Wednesday next A moneth they shall haue within the Realme to ride abroad for money amongst their friends and then chuse their port c. And from hence perchance this fellow had some part of his intelligence but how commeth he to inlarge himselfe so farre as to say that these Priests had her Maiesties letters Patents vpon what record hath he found this or doth he meane thereby to draw the Lord Keeper into question as though he stood now in his light for some what which he hath to effect all Letters patents being at his perill vpon record or doth he know any Cath. who in such quandaries did giue these Priests any money we knowe some who notwithstanding the great bond they had to some of them would not see them neither would the priests presse vppon them Some againe we know who were requested to giue somewhat to their iourney to Rome if not for loue of the men yet for the loue which they pretended to peace and to haue a final end of the controuersie which could not be had but at Rome and nothing would be giuen But this fellow careth not what he saieth to the Pope presuming perchance that by some way or other all accesse should be shut and his falshood should neuer bee discouered And thus forgetting that which hee saith in the Apologie cap. 11. fol. 162. that the intention of the Priests seemeth not to be to informe his Holinesse but to make a noise in England and to gaine time of libertie and to preoccupate some mens minds by making a shew that they appeale to the highest in this their controuersie but yet indeed would be loth that hee should know it and much lother to answere it before him especially this Pope c Here he telleth the Pope in this Epistle that the Priests are to passe into France and there by the helpe of the Queenes Ambassadors and other meanes to procure if they can his most Christian Maiesties letters to your Holines in their fauor pretending that they can get the Queene of England to giue libertie of conscience to some Catholicke vnder certaine conditions whereof some must bee that the Iesuits must goe forth of England All this is in handling most holy Father by the children of iniquitie against Gods cause and his seruants and will no doubt bring forth lamentable effects if your Holines doe not speedily put your hand thereunto In this Apologie we do lay downe by cleare historicall narration and authenticall testimonies the grounds of all Christ our Sauiour inspire your Holines c. In the 10. Chap. of the Apol. fol. 147. there is a prayer made to God by the Archpr. to giue him his grace so to vse Fa. Parsons benefits as that neuer he abuse them and that neuer hee fall into any ingratefull behauiour c. And in the margent there is this note A prophecie of the Archpriest to Fa. Parsons How much more worthily doeth this place in the Epistle deserue to be noted for a prophecie but perchance hee was loath that there should be any such
And because he will take all before him he saith that Doctor Lewis after B. of Cassana and the schollers fell out about the maner of gouernment and gouernours of the house which doubtlesse if this fellow had any respect to the good reputation of the Schollers hee would haue concealed the house being erected especially by that man his procurement and industry as here it is confessed For in reason who would not haue expected to haue borne some sway in that of which he might iustly haue bene called in some sort a founder being moreouer a man of great wisedome and integritie But this Author thinketh it good policie to conceale Fa Parsons presence at Rome at that time lest that the riddle should be read otherwise then hee would haue it and the cause of dissension disciphered The trueth is that F. Parsons was there and there needeth no more to be said And hee did deale with the schollers vnder hand as secretly as he might but failed of the Rectorship if he sought it although T.W. in his digression from the 16 martyrs pag. 53. amongst other his follies doth affirme that the first Rector of this Colledge was F. Robert Parsons c. And to say that the Councell did lay hands presently hoping thereby to keepe a perpetuall diuision in our nation is to argue the Councell of a great ouersight and want of consideration that a diuision in a nation prooueth oftentimes a desolation or vtter ouerthrowe thereof But let vs see what substantiall proofe there is of this assertion For which cause sayth this Author diuers spies were sent ouer to nourish the said diuision as namely one Vanne if we remember well who died in the Inquisition at Rome in the yere 1581. and soone after they vsed another named Salomon Alread a Taylor by his trade and married first at Lyons in France but after getting acquaintance at Rome and Millaine hee became a statesman went in and out diuers times to the Councell of England vntill at last being discouered he remained for seruant with Sir Fran. Walsingham the Q Secretarie and lastly professed heresie Vanne is said to be employed by the Counsell to nourish this diuision in our nation but what hee did it is not said this the reader himselfe must imagine neither is it said with whome he ioyned when he came to Rome or with whom he dealt onely it is said that he dyed in the Inquisition which argueth that hee was some obstinate heretike And this example is as foolishly brought to prooue emulation in the Laytie against the Clergie as that of Wickliffe was to prooue emulation of the Clergie against the religious both being heretickes and consequently neither of them of that body of which we are to vnderstand this Author when he talketh of the Laytie and Clergie vnlesse he will also take that word Religious to extend it selfe to such Apostata Iesuits as are either at Geneua or elsewhere And then will hee make himselfe ridiculous in affirming that emulation against such religious should hinder the reduction of England to the Cath. faith Salomon Alread was a Catholike and a great deuote of the Iesuits both at Lyons in France and elsewhere And if by his peuking he did at any time discouer what he receiued of them this author who neglecteth the credit of all whatsoeuer to saue the Iesuits credit should haue couered it not hauing named any place of this mans conuersation where hee should become a Statesman but such as where the Iesuits were his directors as Lyons in France Rome and Millaine And if after the edification he had of the Iesuits he returned into England and offered his seruice to Sir Francis Walsingham her Maiesties Secretarie Sir Francis had little reason to refuse him or not to imploy him although we cannot learne that euer he did any harme in the English Colledge at Rome And therefore this example of emulation in the Laytie against the Clergie is as small to the purpose as the former His being a Taylor might perchance make to the purpose in this authors conceit but his being a married man is doubtlesse here mentioned for no other end then to put vs in mind that married men can play the marchants as well as others as if wee had forgotten that as the Councell did second the Iesuits who were not maried in the first diuision at the College of Rome by sending Vanne thither as this author sayth who was an vnmarried man so did the Iesuits second the Coūcels imploiment of this Solomon Alread who was maried in the furthering of their faction in the same Colledge at Rome by entertaining Pierce amongst some other straglers who was also a married man and his wife knowen to be liuing to make vp a small number of 8. or 10. pious youths as the Iesuites did terme them to stand with them against all the rest of the students in the Colledge yet in this one tricke the Iesuits went beyond our Councell in that they made their married man Cornutus by putting him in a square cappe the better to effect that which they did by his means For this was he who after many deuises preuailed at the last with three of the Students to go to a Tauerne to drinke where they were no sooner set then apprehended by the Sbirri And the matter was made so odious as hereby they lost the fauor of his Hol. were brought into a most seruile subiectiō to the Iesuits not without the great grief of their friends who long after complained that they had very euill handled a good cause And although these were the first stratagems which were layd open to the world yet were diuers causes giuen of disquietnes euen from the first foundation of that Colledge For the Iesuits hauing gotten the gouernement thereof into their hands and in such sort as they were most earnestly requested thereunto by such as howsoeuer this Author doth bragge of them Chap. 5. fol. 28. and their petitions to his Holinesse confessed not long after that they knew not what they had done they began to strike as we say while the iron was hot and laboured a couple of the Students to become Iesuits to wit Thomas Wright and Iohn Barton who were well esteemed of for their towardlinesse And although both of them did afterward leaue the societie of the Iesuits yet their present example together with the Iesuits bad indeuours was occasion of much disunion of mindes in the Colledge which when it was perceiued the Iesuits the better to norish this diuision to couer their owne dealings imployed such of the Students in that office as had already deuoted themselues vnto their societie and did countenance them against those who complained thereof insomuch as it was too apparant that some were of purpose deferred or kept from going into the societie of the Iesuites to the end they might perswade others to the same course which was in deed the vndoing of that Colledge For now the Students
did not know how to discerne one of their owne fellowes from the Iesuits which began to swarme amongst them and grew in the end to that malapartnesse as they laughed and iested at the Students to their faces yet must all be accounted the worke of the spirit And if this spirit were at any time found then to bleare the Students eyes it was deuised that no man did perswade any to leaue the Colledge to become Iesuits but did onely eleuate the mindes of such good wits as were capable thereof to a desire of some higher state of perfection In which when they had once preuailed and that the student was now resolued thereupon and consequently to leaue that course in which he was by being a member of the Colledge they did the more boldly aske this question why the Student minding to leaue the Colledge and betake himselfe to a state of greater perfection or security might not be exhorted to be a Iesuite rather then of any other order of religion By which poore shifts the Iesuits were often discouered that they sought their owne honour more then the good either of the Colledge or of our countrey both which through these occasions haue come pretily forward to vtter ruine And these were the troubles which this Author mentioneth in this Apologie cap. 11 fol. 170. although he would seem to smother them vnder a much-making of M. Mush who was a principall instrument of the Iesuits in this disturbance of the Colledge and he is not ashamed to obiect to the Fathers saith this author their partialitie towards some more then towards other and all this to draw yong men to their societie whereas in the former we know by experience and can testifie that no other thing euer wrought the Fathers more trouble in the Colledge while this man was there then their ouer much loue and fauour to him aboue his merits as other men thought and yet was not this to draw him to their societie seeing they would not admit him in so many yeares as he pretended to enter foreseeing as may be thought his perillous nature c. His seruice we may see how much it was worth vnto him he was kept out as many are in all places where there are Iesuites because being Iesuits they cannot but with too great a wracke of modestie so inordinately commend them as they must be commended nor without demonstration of excessiue desire of riches importunate others to giue them such lands and goods as are not to be lost for want of asking which while no Iesuits do hunt after they are thrust vpon them good men and with all charity are imbraced with most godly intention to be bestowed in pios vsus But it shall be alwayes in the Iesuites choice to receiue such a purueyor into their order and he must during life be in a seruile estate ready to attempt what they shall commaund him for their intreaties are also commandements or els he shall be turned going with his liuery They would not admit him foreseeing as may be thought his perillous nature But to leaue such fooles in their expectation of a like reward after so many yeres better seruice to them then vnto their Countrey although wee make no doubt but some thinke they doe well and that all is gold that glistereth we will returne to examine that which followeth concerning the great harmes which this authour hath espied to haue come to England through emulation as hee pretendeth of others but least these two to wit Vanne and Alread should not seeme enough to conuince the great hurt which hath come to England by emulation of the Laity against the Clergie this author inculcateth to his reader that the Councel stil pursued this office of stirring diuision between the followers of D. Allen and D. Lewis for both whom he doeth here giue his word that it was much against their willes although not long after fol. 5. he calleth the one an emulator of the other But to let this passe and to beare with this poore man whose memory seemeth to be very greatly ouercharged with this Apology we must also vnderstand that this plot of the Councel was much holpen by a new accident and that was that certaine Gentlemen hauing once ioyned as it should seeme with D. Allen Fa Parsons and Sir Francis Inglefield and the rest of the body of Catholikes at home and abroad in certaine affaires of our Countrey parted sometime from them and by going another way among other inconueniences thereupon ensuing ouerthrew the Queene of Scots A proofe to serue a poore turne very impertinent in this place yet such as were it not a discredit for wise men to take aduantage of a madde mans words it were sufficient to call all Cath. in question and those affaires what they were in which the whole body of them aswel at home as abroad were vnited especially it being here mentioned that the going of some another way was the Queene of Scots her ouerthrow But rather then these fellowes will lacke matter they will tell a hundreth idle tales with litttle regard what danger may come to those who are vpon ignorance wholly deuoted vnto them About this time also saith this authour and soone after diuers impugnations were attempted at Rome against the Seminaries and missions of England by men of opposite spirit and emulation But here is not shewed what hurt came vpon this emulation but rather contrariwise it is shewed that there came no hurt And if there had come any yet had this bene farre from his purpose vnlesse he did shew it to haue bene an emulation in the Laitie against the Clergie or in the Clergie against the religious And not onely lay men but diuers Priestes also brought vp in the Seminaries saith he were drawen by little and little to be of this faction against D. Allen Fa. Parsons and the Iesuits and namely some in Rome as appeareth by a visitation yet extant sent to the English College by Pope Sixtus in the yeere 1585 c. At this time as we are informed there was a visitation And if those men should be named who were then noted for factious the Iesuites would startle and many of their friends But vnlesse some cause be giuen of descending to more particulars wee will say no more then that the principall then accounted of the faction comming afterward into England and not finding amongst the secular priests any who would consent with them in such their factious humours are become Iesuites in which estate they may hope to keepe themselues at the least in vre for that humour Other some although they doe not professe to be Iesuites yet they sticke so close vnto them as aio doth to aiunt nego to negant And for so much as we can learne that emulation was not against D. Allen for as it appeared very well he was so much honoured by them all as at his worde the principall of them and who is now a Iesuit made
publique submission and in expresse words acknowledged his errour in that he had not so long a time obserued that saying Qui nescit dissimulare nescit viuere he that knoweth not how to dissemble knoweth not how to liue How farre foorth M.D.B. noted in the margent was a cause of that visitation I know not but if we doe not mistake the man hee was sent into England long before this visitation came to the College And as for the other two Priests whose names are set in the margent in this sort G G.E.G. who are said to haue conspired with the Councell in England and for more grace and gratification haue writ two mischieuous bookes the one saith this authour against D. Allen the other against F. Parsons and the Iesuites giuing them vp to Walsingham the Queenes Secretarie affirming also among other points to make the parties more odious as our men their successours doe at this day that these men depended of Spaniards and were enemies to their Countrey We heartily wish that this authour may liue in as good credit as the one of them liueth after all his trouble in Italy or elsewhere and die as penitent as the other died after his troubles in France He who writ against the Iesuites was too priuie to their actions aswell in England as elsewhere to be deceiued in them And if the Appellants be the men whom here this authour meaneth by these words their successors they may purge themselues very well from any offence in hauing the like thought For it is well knowen that Fa. Parsons in Spaine caused many aswell others as Priestes to subscribe as priests to the title of the Infanta now Dutches of Burgundie Fa. Tancard also hath made many to set their handes to three blanks although some refused to do it as they haue themselues reported at their returne into England We haue moreouer vnderstood that Fa. Parsons was a chiefe dealer in the sending of those Armadoes which the Spaniards haue set out for the inuasion of our Countrey and there are in England with whome hee dealt most earnestly to goe in the Nauie which was set out in the yeere 1596. who refusing to be imployed in any action against their Countrey were for that cause sent away from the College told that it was not conuenient that they should stay in the College where they had giuen example of such repugnance There is moreouer sufficient proofe that after the euill successe of the Spanish attempts Fa. Parsons carried a youth to the king of Spaine who pronounced a certaine speech for the purpose which being ended Fa. Parsons began to vrge the king to giue one attempt more affirming that he silly fellow would write his letters into England and nothing doubted to effect what should be to the great furtherance of such a iourney We haue also certaine intelligence that the Iesuites had deuised a meanes to haue had the tower of London seazed into their hands and how they would haue it held vntil the Spaniard came to rescue them Diuers of their letters haue bin shewed to diuers prisoners for proofe against them when they haue answered in defence of the Iesuites that they thought them free from such stratagems And amongst the rest there is one of the 10. of Iune 1596. wherein there are these wordes It may be if the kings faintnesse and pusillanimitie hinder vs not as heretofore it hath the Armado will be with you about August or September This is one good helpe Ireland wil be onely for vs. The Earle of Tyrone and Odonell would gladly haue helpe from hence and they are well contented to let the Spaniards haue certaine holdes and forts for their vses This will greatly pleasure to trouble and disquiet England and in the mean time serue for harbour for the ships that shall passe that way c. It were necessary you should make it knowen aforehand that no Cath. man or woman shall take harme either in body or goods Let euery man be quiet till the Spaniards be landed then shall there presently proclamation be made of all securitie There were 200. copies of these proclamations printed in Spaine Certaine other letters also haue bene seene of Fa. Parsons to his fellow Iesuits in England wherein he hath wished that the Catho would vnite themselues together set vp a king of England And in his letters of the 24. of Ianu. 1600. to the Earle of Anguise he confesseth that he dealt in such matters for 8. or 10. yeeres But if all these and many other as infallible proofes did faile vs F. Parsons booke of Succession would so farre conuince his dealing in State matters in the behalfe of Spaine as the Appellantes may without scruple charge him with it yet without any intention to make him more odious knowing it a thing very impossible if they were so minded And thus much concerning this authour his folly in indeuouring to gall the Appellantes with the name of Successors to such as affirmed that the Iesuites depended of the Spaniards and were enemies to their Countrey The next fit of emulation here mentioned is against D. Allen when he was to be made a Cardinall and it is set out with a very rich margent and much to our present matter in controuersie I warrant you But not beeing able to preuaile in this against the Card himselfe sayth this author they began to set more earnestly against the Iesuits his chiefest friends and constant defenders as well in stirring vp the schollers in Rome against the Fathers that gouerned them as also to make a faction against them by Secular Priests in England as may appeare by a letter of the Cardinals owne written most earnestly not sixe moneths before his death to a priest named Mush c. There is a speciall Treatise comming forth of the troubles of that Romane English Colledge to which I am to referre the Reader and to note no other thing in this place then that the misdemeanours of the Iesuits was the cause of all those troubles But concerning this foolish assertion that there was a faction against the Iesuits by Secular priests in England the cōtrary is most cleare as all England may witnesse and there is a letter extant of M. George Blackwell the now Archpriest wherein hee inueigheth mightily against those who had made the report that the priests and Iesuites were at strife Ianuary 1596. to th◠C. Caietane And this letter is kept in the English Colledge at Rome registred as an Oracle although perchance not for this clause so much as for the immoderate but false extolling of the Iesuits in doing infinite deeds of charitie out of the profits of their patrimonies nam minima sunt c. sayth M. Black it is not worth the speaking of which they receiue of almes c. And whereas the Card. Allen his letter is here brought to testifie a faction of either the schollers at Rome or the Secular priests in England against the
was written the sixt of Iuly 1597. but what doth or can this concerne the priests comming to his Holines toward the later end of the yeere 1598 to deale about a matter which was not before the 7 of March in the same yere 1598 as appeareth by the date of the Cardinals letter Apologie ca. 8. fol. 104 There is also a piece of another letter of the same man to to the Cardinal Protector of the first of May 1598 which although it were written after that the Subordination was instituted yet it was written before that it was knowen in England for to our remembrance we had no knowledge thereof vntill it was May here with vs. But howsoeuer this was it was impossible that it could concerne the two priests their comming to his Holines for this was not so suddenly determined in England although vpon the first sight of the Cardinals letter the Archpriest was told that there was iust cause for them to goe to his Holinesse By this then it appeareth that D. Stapletons letters which were to Fa. Parsons and to the Protector could not induce his Holinesse to imprison the two Priests who came to deale about the Subordination Let vs now see what the second testimony auaileth him This testimony was of principall men who writ some moneths saith this author fol. 124. before these two messengers came ouer into Flanders he sayd France 120. but their negotiations in England were heard of and knowen and these principall men of whom the most principall standeth for the priests and is ioyned with them in affection and action in Rome at this present writ their letter to the general of the Iesuites vpon this voice which they heard when you doe iustice you shal make also peace a heauy saying for such as will bee prooued to haue done as great an iniury as may be by a publike diffamation of schisme and what not against Catholike priests without iust cause But what is this to the purpose how was his Holinesse vpon this letter resolued to imprison the two priests who were in the way to him for and concerning the Subordination which was made the Generall perchance of the Iesuits did shew this letter to his Holinesse and thereby the negotiations of these two and their fellowes came also to be knowen to his Holines all this goeth very currant But what if those men now become principall neither heard of these 2. priests as dealers in this action nor of any other not onely not in particular but neither in general What if they could not possibly heare that there was any Subordination knowen in England and much lesse that any did delay to admit thereof when they writ this letter to the Generall of the Iesuits How shamelesse will this author be iudged who would bring these principall men their letters as a motiue to his Holinesse to imprison these two priests before he would heare what they had to say This Subordination was made at Rome the seuenth of March in the yere 1598 and if the messenger had stridden a blacke horse to bring it into Englād yet could there not be any negotiations in England conueniently either by these two priests or others concerning the same in so short a time as that these 17 principall men vnlesse they were altogether attending as it were to haue entertained the same messenger in Flanders considered maturely of the negotiations which were in England could burnish vp a letter and dispatch it vpon the eighteenth of March in the same yeere 1598 as here is cited in the margent fol. 123. Now follow the letters of diuers zelous men When as this author saith these messengers were in their way indeed for the other were written especially those of the 17. principall men when the priests were in their negotiations before they set forward as it is said fol. 124. these men writ indeed very sharply and with such confidence as they might giue some suspition to a wise man that all was not well in England but yet there is no perswasion to haue the messengers cast into prison vntill they were heard a duetie which they might challenge if in no other respect yet at least for their trauaile in Gods Church for which they deserued a good opinion of the gouernours thereof The first here cited are from Doway 25. Octob. 1598. to the Protector to which some haue acknowledged their error in subscribing These letters doe not cleare Fa. Parsons for being the cause of his Holines resolution to imprison the two priests for in this Apologie it is confessed fol. 120 that his Holines was resolued vpon the 17. of October 1398. to cast them into prison for such date doeth the letter beare which F. Bellarmine now Cardinal is said to haue written to Fa. Parsons to informe him that his Holines so greatly misliked their troublesome fact that hee had told him that if they came to Ferrara he would cause them to be imprisoned If these then of the 25. of Octob. came too late to put such a resolution into his Holines head what shall wee say of these which came after for the next letters are from M. D. Worthington to the Protector and these beare date the 30. of October from Bruxels Next March D. Peerse who was the first in the ranke of the 17. principall men but now God knoweth what place he shall haue and among whom for that he is ioyned with the priests in Rome and in that action D. Caesar Clement that succeeded D. Stapleton in the office of assistance-ship to the Nuntius in Flanders in all English affaires a man that was neuer in England but to giue him his right the fittest man for that purpose as matters go and worthy to succeed D. Stapleton or any farre greater man then he in that kinde of managing English affaires D. Richard Hall three doctors but what these or other writ most earnestly and grauely to the same effect as the other did by al likelyhood this author knoweth not For as he saith he had not the copies of their letters when he writ this Apologie but hee met with a letter of M. Licentiat Wright deane of Cortrac in Flanders to the Protector which is here set downe in the Apologie wherein this deane hath litle cause to thanke this author who would discredit him so much as to set downe his iudgement of two priests whom he neuer saw And although his letter doe exceed the limits of all modestie yet doeth it not any whit auaile this author for proofe of that for which it is brought that is that his Holines was thereupon resolued to imprison the two priests for this letter beareth date 10. Nouembris 1598. as appeareth here fol. 126 which was a faire while after his Holines had that resolution as appeareth by F. Bellarmine now Card. his letter of the 17. of Octob. 1598. cited by this author fol. 120. yet goeth this fellow on very smoothly and not without great applause of the
fetched from Iohn of Gaunt for no greater satisfaction then to say when it commeth to the chiefe point that the messengers were heard what they could say or answere If there hath beene found so much waste paper in this Apologie for to entertaine by-tales and nothing to the purpose could there not be some spared for the setting downe of so necessary a point as this is and such as was most likely to haue benefited a iust cause more then twentie tales of Iohn of Gaunt would not a discourse of what passed betweene the Cardinals and the two priests with the Proctors haue bene more gratefull to the reader after that the Cardinals comming to the College was mentioned then a relation of M. Watsons common wealth In the English booke to which this Apologie pretendeth to answere it is set downe pag. 97 and 98. that the messengers were not heard what they could say or answere and it is not set downe in general termes but particularly in what sort they were not admitted to say what they would or to answere to wit that the Libell being read the priests requested that the Proctors might be put to their othes that no falshood was contained therein and the Cardinall Caietane answered for the Proctors himselfe that it was not needfull and furthermore affirming for the poore dumbe men who as yet had not discouered themselues whether they could speake or no that they should prooue what was denied the whole Libel was denyed and a copy therof demanded that answere might be made vnto it This was it that the messengers did say and the Iesuites gaue this for one cause afterwards why the two priests were not set at libertie the same day that M. Bishop had shewed too much earnestnesse in this very point for which he was to be kept close some two or three dayes more and M. Charnocke likewise but yet for no other cause then that it was not conuenient that he should be at libertie vntill the other had satisfied by a longer imprisonment for his quicknesse of spirit in demanding the Libell to answere it But the Proctors hauing before their lesson what they were to say or doe as it should seeme the one of them stepped presently without making his fellow acquainted therewith at that instant betwene M. Bishop and the table whereat the Cardinall sate and made humble request that the copie of this libell might not bee deliuered vnto the priests but rather that a peaceable conclusion might be made Of which the Cardinall taking present hold pursued that motion and would not deliuer the Libell to the two messengers whereby it is euident that this authour followeth his old trade in this place where he affirmeth that the two messengers also were heard what they could say or answere but shewed a good face to the priests and vsed them so friendly as they expected not to returne to their prisons especially being cleared from all matters by the Cardinals excepting this onely that many were scandalized in England at their iourney to Rome which was a thing that they could not helpe nor were iustly to be blamed therefore yet notwithstanding thinking it fit to keepe the Cardinall in that good and friendly humour the two priests made this answere that if by their iourney to Rome they had giuen cause of scandall to any they were very fory for it and were ready to giue satisfaction and so were dismissed and all was well vntill the Cardinall Burghese was departed But soone after his departure the Iesuite who for this time had supplied F. Parsons the head Iaylors place locked them vp againe in their seuerall prisons but for two or three daies as was pretended vpon the foresayd cause for that M. Bishop by his silence when he was bidden to speak after his examinatiō read did discontent the Card. somewhat This author hauing told his reader of the cōming of the Cardinals to the Colledge and of the Proctors demand of remedy against the new sedition also how that the messengers were heard say what they could which as it is said is most false he concludeth this matter as if some great acte had bene made and the Proctors had had some great day against the Priests And finally sayth he after diuers graue speeches vsed by the Cardinals against this diuision in our nation they departed promising perchance to F. Parsons to relate all vnto his Holines and to take his resolution for the finall sentence which they sent afterward sealed and signed by their owne hands and seuerall seales bearing date the S. of April 1599. vpon which day in the morning the two priests their close imprisonmēt first ceased In which sentence for that diuers things were inserted in the narration which might seem gricuous which were perchance according to F. Parsons informations but not to be knowen abroad lest his doings should haue ben known the decree it self which is yet extant to be seen appeared somewhat seuere against men who were not suffered to make their answere Fa. Parsons as we vnderstand to the perpetuall discredite of the Cardinals howsoeuer the infamie would haue beene wiped away from his Holinesse if it were true which here is said that the Cardinals tooke his Holinesse resolution for this finall sentence procured the said sentence to be deteined vntill hee had entreated the said Cardinals to mitigate somewhat that sentence and to giue another more mild of the 21. of the same moneth not so much by way of Iudiciall sentence as of a letter to wit to the Rector or Vicerector of the English colledge F. Parsons or the minister vnder their hands and seales appointing that the said two messengers should returne the one to Paris and the other to Loraine as they had requested They both had requested to be in Paris being both to be banished their countrey but this not being to be granted request was made for the other to be in Loraine a place that F. Parsons dreamed not of when hee debarred him not onely Paris but all other parts of France notwithstanding hee vrged that France was bigge enough to hold him and his fellow And these places are said to be appointed by the letter Interpretatiuely for neither of them are named in the Letter but not into England he should haue added Scotland nor Ireland for so runneth the sentence without speciall licence of his Holines or the Protector vnder paine of suspension and other censures c. But wherefore was this sentence giuen True it is that the two priests were banished not onely their owne countrey but Scotland also and Ireland and confined in other countreys where they were lesse likely to haue wherewithall to maintaine them and had not any thing giuen them to keepe them in these strange countreys from begging or staruing a bountiful consideration of the Church for so it must be taken towards priests who had left their right and possibilitie of all preferments to serue the Church with continuall and euident perill
the principall faction against them and are priests who sooner or later for the most part did forsake the Seminaries Thirdly they say in this title saith he that their contentions against the Iesuits began from the death of Card. Allen. They neither challenge vnto themselues any coÌ„tentions against the Iesuits neither doe they say when any begun but onely intituled the booke in this maner A declaration of stirres and troubles which are or were betweene the Iesuits and them since the death of the Cardinall vnto such a yeere If a man should write of the warres in the Low Countreys from the death of the Prince of Parma vntill this present yeere must he be said to affirme that the warres began then yet cannot this author proue that there was any publique opposition or common stirres in England before the Cardinals death but that rather what was begunne as he saith Cap. 2. fol. 85. in the Cardinals time by Libertines and factious people was retained somewhat from breaking forth by his authority while he liued and this is most true for the Iesuits who lusted after a superioritie ouer the priests were afraid to make this their pride knowen either by themselues or by their factious adherents so long as he liued But the good Cardinall being dead in the yeere 94 all factious brake out together Fa. Weston the Iesuit and his factions begun a common wealth in Wisbich and vnder a colour of a stricter rule all the priests there must become his subiects or liue in perpetuall infamie some Iesuits abroad tooke order for the priests their welcome to all such places whither they were not directed by them The matters of Rome I leaue to them to whom that belongeth and although this fellow is so impudent as to alledge the Cardinall Allen his letter to proue that some of the seditious as he termeth them had begunne to stirre against the Fathers in England in his dayes his reader may easily discouer his falshood if he will turne not to the place by him cited to wit the 4. Chapter for there is nothing to be seene but to the second Chapter for there he shall finde that the priests are no more charged for any stirre against the Iesuits then the Iesuits for their sedition against the priests and moreouer that what difference there was could not be but some priuate quarrels betweene some priuate man and not any such publique difference or dislike as this is of which the booke intreated which was dedicated to his Holines as I haue shewed where this letter is set downe by this author Fourthly they said Ad S. D. N. Clementem 8. exhibita ab ipsis sacerdotibus that this declaration was exhibited by the Priests themselues to our most holy father Pope Clement the 8. This word was is of his owne addition It is said to be exhibited in that it was presently to be sent by them And if it came not to his Holines his hands so soone as they intended the fault was not in them who tooke all such meanes for it as they could so that they might iustly vse the phrase which they did without deseruing any blame therefore And the priests are saide to exhibite it themselues for that they writ it and were to present it in their owne names and the not comming of it to his Holines view will iustifie their printing of many copies that some one by one or other might come into his hands and the shamelessenes of this fellow may the more now appeare who would so peremptorily informe his reader that the priests were loth that he should know of it hauing by printing taken a most certaine way for it and much lother to answere it before him before whom the whole world will witnes for them that they haue bene to answere it The fifth cauill is at the sentence of Scripture which the priests put to their books as though they had abused it in vsing it in that place But gald nagges must haue pardon if being touched they winch The iustnesse of the priests their cause will beare them out against all hereticks hypocrits and Atheists and will stop the mouthes of them how potent soeuer they either are or would seeme to be among their like Thus much is implied in that sentence and no lesse was in the priests their meaning when they prefixed it to their Booke Sixtly and lastly it is said in this first page sayth he that it was printed Rhotomagi apud Iacobum c. At Roane in France in the house of Iames c. And hereupon he keepeth such a foule stirre as if it had beene a whole halfepenny matter where the booke had bene printed or that the Pope might haue thought the priests cause to be the more iust if the booke were printed at Roane I pray you good sir tell me what doeth the being here or there printed helpe or hinder the matter in questioÌ„ what if it be printed at Constantinople or at Cosmop If this fellow could shew what auaile may come to the priests or what preiudice to the other part by hauing their booke goe forth as printed at Roane he might haue bestowed a little of his paines taken here about it to some good purpose but his exception beeing so absurd as it is I will turne him to the Printers boy to reason this matter with him who for any thing that I can as yet learne set this which he citeth to the booke and the boy finding this fellow some equall match for him will perchance spurre him this question Why he should conster Rhotomagi Printed at Roane rather then to be â—olde at Roane or why hee should interprete Rhotomagi at Roane in France rather then at Roane in England there being in England diuers places named by as strange names as Roane is as Scotland Iury litle Britaine and such like yea the little boy will remember perchance that some of F. P. bookes which were printed here in England are said to haue bene printed at Doway and yet I trow this author will not say for a hundred pound that F. P. can lye or at the least that hee abused any man in saying so But I will leaue this authour and the Printers boy together for they seeme to be very well coupled to argue this matter onely I wish that this author would beware what termes he doeth vse in his anger for it may be the Printer will call him twice or thrice by his name if he be miscalled himselfe or perchance the Printer or his boy will tell him that there are as good Printers in London as in Roane although they themselues were not so expert and put him to a nonplus for saying that the booke was printed vnder the protection of my L. of London Well then sayth hee these sixe absurdities shifts and falshoods being discouered in the very first page of the booke as a preamble to the rest and vsed euen to his Holines himselfe we may imagine what the remnant will be
attend principally to such matters and were the sole actors in making this ordination and moderating thereof as hath more apparantly since beene seene and at the very first they did so grossely interesse themselues therein as the Archpriest must needs haue one of his instructions not to doe any thing of moment without the aduise of the Superiour of the Iesuits here in England Although now in a consult in the Inquisition it is adiudged to be taken away notwithstanding his Holines former confirmation thereof in the first Breue the 6. of April 1599. which also conuinceth that his Holinesse may doe that which without offence may afterward be vndone In the thirteenth leafe this author repeateth more matter out of the Copies of discourses for the hope of peace ministreth little matter for him to speake against and the booke to the Inquisition much lesse as it should seeme by this Appendix but it is sufficient that there is a pamphlet intituled An Appendix for the examination of these two bookes it skilleth not how little therof is handled therein but let vs see what this geare is They adde sayth hee in the same page that by the opinion of diuers men of iudgement in the lawes of our countrey this our case may and will be drawen within the compasse of the law of Praemunire loe here these men seeme to be counsellers that can say it may and will be drawen for that perchance themselues had suggested it against other Catholickes But doe yee marke the reason why it may and will be so drawen because say they it is an externall iurisdiction brought into the real me against the will and notice of the prince and countrey doe you not see his Holines Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction wholly here excluded by these good men as externall vnlesse it be allowed by the prince or countrey notwithstanding any difference in religion And doe we marueile that these men are fauoured by the Counsel that will publish such things in their be halfe against their owne religion A marueilous story and stoutly vrged If the holy Ghost himselfe should say as once he sayd by the Prophet Dauid Dixit insipiens in corde suo non est Deus The foole said in his heart there is no God would this companion chalenge the holy Ghost that he said there is no God yet is it true that these words proceeded from him but not proceeding from him as his wordes but as the words of a foole related by him they might well be spoken euen by God himselfe The like case is this of the priests who affirmed in this place quoted by this Author no other matter then this By the opinions of diuers men of iudgement in the lawes of our countrey this our case may and will be drawen within the compasse of an old law enacted as well by our Catholicke Bishops and Prelates as by the Prince aboue 300. yeres agoe viz. the law of Praemunire Is here any assertion of the priests that it may and will be drawen c. Haue they not deliuered it in as plaine termes as they may that it was the opinion of other men they then are the counsellers and not the priests who onely haue related what they said and this poore fellow sheweth that his wits were small in this deuice and that his honestie was much lesse in that which followeth for that perchance themselues had suggested it against other Catholickes Is this a matter of so little weight as it may be published at a venture Is the fame of Catholike priests no more to be regarded but to haue such surmises cast abroad against them The new illuminated may see if they will in whose pawes they haue put their soules and what spitefull guides they haue chosen in place of their spirituall fathers But concerning this lawe of Praemunire mentioned by those whose words or opinions the priests did onely alledge there is enough said in the reply to the second Chapter of the Apologie here onely is to be noted what this author hath since manifested in a late libell commonly called The manifestation of spirits concerning this statute Wherfore sayth he a contention being in those dayes about the collation of benefices and Bishopricks in England whereof the Popes were wont to dispose for the most part they concluded in England after many contentions and disputes and many sendings forth and backe to Auignon in Fraunce where the Popes at that time resided that such prouisions of benefices should not be sought nor made from the Pope immediatly for the time to come but onely in England by consent of the Prince and confirmation afterward of the Pope for the most principall benefices and dignities and whosoeuer should contrary to this procure prouisions immediatly from the Pope or any other power or iurisdiction contrary to this law should incurre the penalties thereof And this to haue beene the onely true meaning and intent of the said law and law-makers that were Catholickes is euident by all authors that haue written thereof And in this sense there is no controuersie among vs for that latter Popes haue either agreed thereunto or permitted the same and we see the like in vse also in other Catholicke countreys at this day by agreement and composition betweene the Sea Apostolike Princes and Catholike Cleargie Can the priests themselues giue a plainer testimony for confirmation of the Lawyers their opinions by them cited But sayth hee in this sence there is no controuersie among vs. In what sense then is the controuersie forsooth beside the sense and meaning of the law there hath bene another inuented by heretickes and enemies since that time c. And in the same sense and signification being plainely false and hereticall as you doe see these libellers vrge it now against the Archpriest and others c. If one and the same sentence doe beare a Catholike and an hereticall sense it was wont to be iudged according to the partie his disposition who pronounced it as for example this sentence Pater maior me est my father is greater then I am beeing spoken by a Catholicke was taken for Catholicke but being spoken by an Arrian was taken for hereticall Such was the guise of Christians before these new reformers appeared in the Christian world but now the world seemeth to be otherwise instructed and Catholike priests how Catholikely soeuer they behaue themselues either in words or actions must be taken for hereticks schismaticks and such like at the discretion of such as whose actions although they are most damnable as was the writing spreading and approouing of that most impious treatise of schisme and other heathenish proceedings against Catholicke priests must be counted religious and the authors to seeke nothing but the glory of God And no man must say otherwise when the very stones in the street are ready to cry out of their wickednes which they haue vsed against Cath priests The other place noted in this same lease out of the copies of discourses
any warrant from him and to open vnto him what perill might thereby come to the Catholike cause and offering themselues their cause with all submission to his Holines as the effect also prooued whatsoeuer this slanderous Libeller suggesteth to his blind obedient Reader But this author sheweth whatsoeuer he saith that he careth not if his Holinesse his sides be pierced so that he may keepe Fa. Parsons sides whole Now to that which ensueth saith this authour there is extant a letter written by F. Parsons to M. Bishop of the ninth of October 1599. containing a certaine briefe capitulation of the principall points that passed in this action of the messengers restraint in Rome c. To which letter there is answere made in the English booke where this letter is set downe at large and the answere is such as this authour with a litle snarling onely at it letteth it passe quietly neither is it a cauilation but a very material point that the notary so much talked of in that letter and in a wicked false letter of the 20. of February 1599. vnder the name of M. A. as if M. Martin Array had bene the doer of it was a Iesuite and that he put in and out what F. Parsons would haue him being himselfe the examiner although the Popes Comissary did twice or thrice shew himselfe in that time and if euery dayes examination had bene read as it was not in the presence of him who was examined yet F. Parsons might cause somewhat to be written otherwise then the prisoner did deliuer it and to haue somethings blotted out againe when the prisoners answere was contrary to his former information giuen by him either to his Holinesse or others neither was euery daies examination subscribed the same day for the prisoner neuer set his hand but to the last sheete which was of such impertinent stuffe as it might be added to any examination and the same hand which writ the examination being a Iesuits hand at the commandement of F. Parsons he might notwithstanding the scoring of the margent and the after registring if it were registred shew what he listed and if their examinations be extant as here it is said then will appeare in some of them many things blotted out sometime some words which F. Parsons caused to be writ contrary to that which the prisoner deliuered sometime a whole question with some part of the answere thereto when F. Parsons could not obtaine of the prisoner to make such answere as hee would haue him for remedy whereof F. Parsons tooke alwayes afterward this course that hee would neuer haue his question written downe vntill hee had heard what answer the prisoner would make that if the answere were such as he could wrest it to his purpose then should the question be set downe and himselfe would for breuities sake frame the answere about which there was diuers times some alteration about wordes which the prisoner vsed not but was often contented to let F. Parsons haue his will when the words were such as he knew he could interpret to good sence notwithstanding his examinators false intention hoping alwayes that hee should haue so much fauour when the matter should grow to an issue And although that neither all the examination was euer taken nor that which was taken let to stand as it was taken but somwhat was blotted out as is said and many answers out off vnder pretence sometime of breuitie sometime that there should be another Interrogatory to which such an answere would be more fit the prisoners subscribed sware but to what Not that there was al which was asked or answered nor that F. Parsons had not dealt in this kinde but that those answeres which were there made were truely sincerely giuen which maketh nothing to the clearing of F. Parsons or the proouing of his honest dealing And now you shall heare what matters this author hath picked out of their examinations and thereby perceiue what this good fellow would say First then to talke of substantiall points sayth this author the examination of M. Charnocke beginning the 4. of Ianuary and that of M. Bishop the 10. of Ianuary 1599 and passing ouer all other demaunds which these men call impertinent they were asked what was the cause and reason of their comming to Rome who sent them c. To this M. Charnocke being first examined answered in these words Causa aduentus nostri haec fuit vt rogaremus humillimè c. The cause of our comming to Rome was this that we might beseech most humbly and with all obedience the Sea Apostolicke that this order appointed by Card. Caietan for composing controuersies in England and to make peace not beeing hitherto confirmed by his Holines as we vnderstood it is said by diuers priests and namely Fa. Sicklemore and others might be mitigated or changed or some other order appointed with it for satisfaction of very many priests who doe thinke reseruing notwithstanding due honour to the Sea Apostolike that by this way appointed onely the strises begun cannot so well be ended c. But if it should please his Holinesse to confirme this authority and to admit no other then are these priests content to yeeld all obedience c. and as for the Superiour appointed â—… spake with the Archpriest before I came forth and desired him not to be offended with me if I went to Rome about this matter and hee gaue me leaue to goe to deale for the change thereof Thus farre the Apologie by which it may appeare what cause there was of the Priests so long trouble in Rome their apprehension by Iesuits and Sbirri vpon the feast of S. Tho. of Canterbury the most principall feast of any particular in all our countrey their keeping so close by the Iesuites as they might not goe out of their seuerall prisons to heare masse vpon some of the most principall feasts in Gods Church their being debarred to speake not onely one of them with the other but also with any to aske councell except the Iesuits their being debarred to come to the altar otherwise then lay men vntill the 7. or 8. of February notwithstanding they had by vertue of a Iubile receiued absolution by the same Iesuits from all censures which it was supposed that either they had or might haue incurred by this iourney to Rome their continuance in close prison vntill the 8. of April notwithstanding they had so discharged themselues before the two Card. Caietan and Burghesius vpon the 17. of February in the English Colledge as both they themselues and the whole Colledge were tolde that they should within two or three dayes after haue their libertie their being afterwards although somewhat more easily imprisoned the one vntill the 22. of April the other vntill the 6. of May their being banished their country and confined the one to France the other to Lorayne without any one penny or pennyworth allowed them for their maintenance in those
places By this also it may appeare how iniuriously they were accused of schisme c. and with what wickednesse this matter was prosecuted in England against them but to this deposition what sayth this author Thus he said sayth hee which how true or probable or coherent it is to that which since they haue said done and set forth in their bookes I will leaue to the reader to iudge and all the readers could neuer as yet find any particular more then this author doeth in which they haue bene contrary thereto but how doth this answere suite with the rest of this Apologie which referreth the reader to the priests their bookes to see what he would haue them vnderstand and yet hath hee taken such order as no man must read them The principall matters being then answered by this author in this maner that the Reader may see where he is forbidden to looke he will answere to one point or two in M. Charnocks deposition The one is where he said that the Archpriest gaue him leaue to goe which saith he the Archpriest denieth for that he saw no iust cause M. Charnocke affirmeth it and can put the Archpriest in minde thereof and of the cause that mooued him thereto to wit when M. Charnocke told him that the matter concerning himselfe in that kinde it were a necessary point of modestie to giue leaue vpon which he was bidden to goe if he would Neither doeth the Archpriest his answere to M. Bishop here cited make any thing against this For there passed some moneths betweene in which space he might alter his minde by the aduise of his priuie Counsell Yet this much is here affirmed by M. Bishop vnder his oath that he did not prohibite him which is an argument that it was not a thing impossible for him to bid M Charnocke goe although no doubt he had rather they should both haue stayed at home The second point is that M. Charnocke said Quam plures sacerdotes Very many priests were not satisfied with his Holines order Where did M. Charnocke affirme this Is it not possible for this fellow to deale truely in any one thing Hath not M Charnocke expresly called it An order appointed by the Cardinall Caietane and must we now haue a tricke to cousen the Reader make him beleeue that M. Charnocke should say that very many priests were not satisfied with his Holines order But let vs see how like he is still vnto himselfe which speech of very many priests saith he he doeth explicate afterward what number it might import in particuler being pressed thereunto by an Interrogatorie in these words Interrogatus c. Being asked what the number of priests now in England seemed vnto him he answered that he could not tell for certaine but hee thought 300. more or lesse Then being asked how many of these he did certainly know to approue this their missiō and to be priuie to the matters that should be proposed and would stand to those things that these two should handle and conclude in their names He answered I doe know for certaine 14. or 15 albeit I haue not had conference with them all my selfe Thus farre the Apologie How faine would he play at some game who stretcheth his point thus farre M. Charnocke vsed these wordes Very many priests and M. Charnocke declared what he said to be true by auouching the letters which he brought with him whereof some did testifie that the priests thereabouts residing were of such minde other residing in other places witnessed asmuch of the priests who passed by them M. Bishop remayning in a third place could testisie for the priests which were neere vnto him and himselfe remayning in a 4. place could say somewhat concerning them that were there resident And thus was it explicated how he said Quam plures sacerdotes very many priests But now note how this author would patch vp some matter F. Parsons not being content with this answere vrged M Charnocke as it is here confessed how many he did certainely know to approue this their mission To which M Charnocke as I vnderstand made this answere that he would not depose vpon any certainty for more then those with whom he had talked or had some particular message or notice from them which were to such a number And this is that mysterie vnfolded euen by the Apologie it selfe how that very many might be said to be of such or such disposition and yet but few to be named for whom vpon certaine and proper knowledge a man may depose as the question is here cōfessed to haue bene asked And in the same sense is M. Bishops answere here also acknowledged in these words Puto me certè scire plus minus 12. I doe thinke that I know for certaine 12. priests more or lesse to be of our opinion and priuie to these matters And besides this changing of the case to a certaine knowledge it is otherwise also altered For the question was not onely for how many doe you certainly know but for some particulers which perchance were not necessary for all to talke vpon who notwithstanding might giue their full confent to haue matters altered from that they now were and reposed a trust aswell in the messengers as others who were priuie to all the circumstances So that notwithstanding this oath that 14. or 15. were thus farre forward in the action there might be the better part of the 300. who were said not to be satisfied with this order most falsly and fraudulently suggested here to haue bene knowen to be his Holinesse order appointed by Cardinal Caietan as M. Charnockes words are a little before acknowledged fol. 129. But yet there is an other proofe of the small number of contradictors and what is that Mary sir M. Charnocke confessed that the first to his knowledge whō the Archpr. called to conferre his new authoritie withall was M. Collington and himselfe which answere is here both falfly and fraudulently said to haue bene made to this interrogatory who were the first beginners abetters and setters on in this contradiction against the Cardinals letters It is very true that F. Parsons would sometimes vse these words and the bauble that euery one of the blinde obedient are still playing withall the faction But against these did M. Charnocke alwayes except and F. Parsons was to change his lewd termes before answere would be made But how doeth this proue any thing to this authors purpose Would he haue his Reader to thinke that a matter first proposed priuately at the courtesie of the proposer for his letters were to him in priuate and not to the priests to such as he should picke out for his purpose suppose it were the most wicked thing that could be deuised should displease or could be contradicted by more then were called or sooner then by the first that heard it The marginall note I take as his cognizance to know him and his fellowes The first beginners saith he