be the opinion of Bannes he speaketh ignorantly in this case For the Pope himselfe Gregory the thirteenth had declared for the instruction of the vnlâ—aâ—ned that wee might performe all duties of obedience notwithstanding any censure And this we may proue by the next obiection it selfe of this accuser acknowledging how the Pope dispensed as he termeth his declaration That the Catholikes in England might professe a large obedience his owne words notwithstanding the excommunication of the Queene But where he addeth this restraint rebus sic stantibus and that it was recalled by Xistus the fift in the yeare 1588. when the Spaniards pretended inuasion I answer in the first case That Cardinall Allane better acquainted in these affaires than any protestant Writer so long after in England relateth the Popes declaration for Cardin. All. ad persâ—cut Angl. Catholikes obedience to Qâ—eene Elizabeth without any restraint or limitation neither doth this man discouer where hee findeth such restricting clause And as for Pope Xâ—stus Reuocation if any such was which he rather imagineth then prooueth it is not in force in any opinion not being published The case of the Earle of Tyrone whatsoeuer it was is not now imputed against him as his libertie and fauour in England since then be witnesse Therefore it might better be suppressed than vrged by this discouerer Hitherto I haue answered to all the obiections of this disputer against Catholike religion shewing the innocency thereof in the offences obiected and that Protestants be guilty in all and euery of the pretended crimes And in that order I haue made returne of euery Argument vpon the discouerer and his owne profession But seeing his confusion and repâ—tition of the same or eqâ—iuolent reasons was such as I haue noted before that I could not giue him so ample allowance in that kinde as his curtesie deserued except I would fall into the like repeating error I haue reserued some paiment to this place Before performance whereof I desire my Reader to remember the substance of his maior propositions in all his syllogismes that the lessâ—r and minors with their consequence may be better considered Then thus he writeth Reason 2. supr Whosoeuer professe any ciuill power soueraigne ouer Kings directly or indirectly deny necessary right of election or of succession of Princes e. shall manacle the hands of subiects detracting all obedienee suggest a doctrine of forcible deposing Princes from their thrones intend designe or practise the murther of Princes iustifie acts of treasons and parricides And snâ—kes that doe naturally sting so soone as they get warmth are sedâ—â—ious intollerable may be challenged and condemned for disordered and rebellious are manifestly rebellious desperate traitors not to be harbored in the bosome of the Common-wealth This is the general Maior proposition in all his eight recited Arguments being one and the same for the most part in substance and effect but vaâ—ied and repeated so often with this mans protracted malice Therefore ioyning all these together in one for my first proposition granted by my aduersary for most certaine I make this my second generall proposition But the Cleâ—rgy Protestant professors and patrons in all times and places as opportunitie hath beene ministred were in this case described which besides my former probations thus I demonstrate from their most dogmâ—â—ticaâ—l Protest 〈…〉 Gerâ—any principle and publike professors positions and practâ—â—es First Martin Luther the first knowne Protestant was accounted so dogmaticall principle and publike both for doctrine and practise that the prime Protestants of that time Amsdorsius Sarcerâ—â—s Mâ—â—â—hesius Michael Neander and others honoured him Amâ—â—orf praefat 〈…〉 16. 〈…〉 Carolost Aâ—dr Musc â—raes â—â—germ dâ— dâ—abol Luther to 1. â—â—nt germ fol. 522. 79 to 3. fo 334. to 4. to 5. fol. â—98 Colloq mensal foâ— 488 l. conâ—â— Henrie 8. in Psa 71 c. â—â— 3. fol 533. 326. 360. Colloq mensal fol 342 343. â—up edict Imp. with â—â—ese preeminent titles an other Saint Iohn Baptist the third and 〈◊〉 Eâ—ias the last tiumpet of God an Angelâ— of God a great Prophet mightie in word and worke a man according to the heart of God the mouth of Christ a God of Diuines the only Diuine of Diuines supreame Father of the Church c. And himselfe giueth himselfe no inferior stile a faithfull Prophet an Apostle Euangelist a liuing Saint receiuing his Gospel from God Isaias c. such a Maister aboue all Doctors Popes and Councells may be termed a publike man and his positions publike Then he saith that he careth not for Kings and so carelesse he is in this case that he censured king Henry the eight of England the Marquesse of Brandenburge the Princes of the imperiall orders the Princes of Germany the Duke of Bâ—unswicke to be vnworthy eyther of obediâ—nce from subiects or life in themselues And giuing the same doome of his owne naturall Soueraigne George Duke of Saxonie nameth him the calamitie of his Country a Tyrant passing all Tyrants Pilat Herod Iudas So he scorned To. 6. germ fol. 6. Georg. Wicell deretect Luth. Luther epist ad 〈◊〉 inst germ â—â— potest â—ecul li. cont 2. Edict Imper. the Emperour and wrote directly against his Edicts hee taught that Protestants hands must be imbrued with blood teaching that he had warrant from God to battaile against Princes Hee telleth vs it is the nature of the Gospel to raise warres and seditions that among christians there is no magistrate no superior that it is to be intreated by many prayers so holy a thing is rebellion in his sight that it must be bought with prayers that the countrymen obey not their Princes no law or fillable of law can be imposed vpon christians more then themselues will neither by men nor Angells there is no hope of remedy except all humane lawes be taken away Munster was of the same opinion and practise and called rebellion Cacl in act Luth. Ann. 1525. for his religion the warre of God affirming that hee had receiued especiall commaundement from God to warre against Kings and had promise of victorie from heauen And thereupon such rebellions ensued that of his owne adherents and traiterous protestants were slaine within the space of three monâ—ths one hundred and thirty thousands The rebellions murthers and destructions which they performed and publikely practised by words and Armes cannot be recounted And not onely Luther l. captiuit Babyl l. de bell cont Turc Munster in chro pantal chronol fol. 121 c. these miseries by their owne rebellions but by Luthers doctrine that Christians might not fight against the Turke in short time Belgrade Rhodes were taken Hungary was entered King Lodowicke slaine Buda conquered Verima Austrae besieged with two hundred fifty thousand Turkish souldiers And the Protestants of that Nation were not content with these publike opinions and practises of rebellion in themselues against their Emperours Ferdinande and Charles whom they persecuted and besieged
this Dominion and your most fauoured be therein in the same case with your Suppliants that ancient faith and religion which wee defend cannot be cause to such offence for so all Catholikes in the world that be and euer were were to be censured by their Princes with such measure To professe that religion in a Protestant regiment cannot breede such variance for so all other Catholike subiects in all protestant Countries were in the same case And if one and the same religion can by any not appearing reason be feared by some subiect to suspitions at home which theiâ— politicke wisedome may suppose no forraigne protestant gouernment hath so sufficiently attended and considered we haue in the sincerity of our soules without all aequiuocation or doubtfull sence purged our selues from all jealosie of those opinions pretences or practises which our enemies could discouer worthy to bâ— obiected In answer whereof we haue both made manifest proofe that we doe not otherwise esteeme of the Protestants of this nation then our selues and those of the same faith with vs in all ciuill societies and communications that we giue the sâ—me temporall dutie loyalty and obedience to our Soueraigne honour to Nobles and loue to all that although we differ in religion yet we are so farre from making Protestants odious and vnworthy of mutuall communications in ciuill affaires that we defend their dignities magestâ—acy and rule against men of their owne profession We doe not assigne any soueraigne mere ciuill power ouer Princes as the Protestants in all places haue taught and practised neither any spirituall preeminence in any externe Prelate preiudiciall to Princes right as our opposers doe in Presbiteries and priuate Ministers we haue not denied either election or succession of Protestant Princes as our aduersaries haue done both to Catholikes and Protestants for their owne aduanâ—age our doctâ—ine denieth no obedience to you which was euer giuen to any Christian Prince of England from the first vnto the last King Henry the seuenth by whom and whose eldest Catholike Daughter your Highnesse is inthroned We doe not suggest the discouerers obiected forcible deposition of elected Princes Protestants haue depriued more in this short being of their Gospel by their popular mutenies and priuate authoritie than all Popes in all ages of christian religion with publike consent of Princes and people haue condiscended vnto Protestants haue taken Armes and raised generall rebellions more often against Princes not to be condemned than all Popes haue imposed censures by publike complaint against those which are noted in histories for extraordinary impious If any hath otherwise proceeded no Catholike may defend it wee doe not nor may not by our religion intend designe or practise iustifie or defend the murther of Princes or professe rebellions the discipline of the holy Church and generall Councells rules in our religion denie it for lawfull what priuileges protestancy claimeth what it hath taught and practised in that point Hungary Transiluania Germanie Bohemia Denmarke Heluetia Flanders Sweueland France Emâ—en your Maiesties kingdomes and your selfe haue beene witnesses for many yeares We doe not allow in opinion or may practise in act aequiuocation concealed double or secret sence in affaires of Common-weale and iuridicall interrogatories and profession of religion They be Protestants which defend and practise it in such causes not iustifiable in true diuinitie Our Priests neither vnder that reduplicatiue formalitie as Priests nor otherwise maintaine by our religion any position or pactise seditions or not obedient if any particular men for want of learning haue seemed to speake or thinke or for want of grace dealt or practised in other sence no religion made all men Saints religion did not teach it and Catholikes generally condemne it Therefore our confidence cannot but continue that the Royall promises of your highest Authority of Lenitie of no bloud for Religion shall not be recalled The demerritt of a fewe is no generall impediment The Scriptures instruct vs anima quae peccauerit ipsa moriatur one man must not be are the burthen of others sinnes All Schooles agree that no man can condignelie meritte first grace to any other though but one then the transgression of one or fewe cannot be demeritte for innocents to be afflicted great is the difference of the members in a naturall and ciuill body in this cause though the first doe suffer in some sence together by connexion in nature yet in the second the case and reason is different Remember most worthy Prince not only how grieuous but how generall the penalties against your Catholiques be enacted And yet new threatnings be made that new and more straunge as nec inter gentes shall be ordained The bodies honours reputations and riches of husbands to be punished for their wiues religion and soules to which they are neither husbands nor superiors Children to be taken from Parents Parents to be depriued of theiâ— education which Catholike Princes doe not and in conscience cannot offer to the Iewes themselues though in some opinion the slaues of Christians Children seruants kinsmen and neighbors are to be made hired Espialls to betray their parents masters kinred friends in things as vnlawfull which the whole Catholique world honoureth for holy and they venture their soules and fempitermtie that they be such commendable Artes Functions of phisicke c. which haue not connexion with Religion are to be put to silence in Catholikes The seuere penaltie for not monethlie professing the Protestant faith in Churches when in all diuinitie the precept of Profession of true and vndoubted faith in se and ex se bindeth but seldome is to be increased And others of such condition too many here to be mentioned and too grieuouâ— and vnnaturall we hope in your Princelie opinion to be concluded by a Kings consent Therefore vnder sauour for all I instance in one most heauie and generall in those of our deceased Queene All Priests though neuer so dutifull or obedient be censured for Traitors equally with the greatest offendor in sinne of Treason when many guiltlesse soules of that sacred order would not for thousands of worlds once consent to any such or a farre inferior offence A thing most straunge and beyond all example that men in respect only of their calling and function and that function so reuerenced by all our forefathers should without further cause be condemned as guilty of so a detested crime We defend holy priesthood to be a sacrament which being ordained by God cannot be changed by man Pope Prelate or humane power but remaineth in al things substance and doctrine the same which in those dayes when it was so honorably esteemed of all your christian progenitors when our mother Church kept her first integrity by your Highnesse iudgement as we are ready to make defence And if your Maiesty should decree the like law against any degree or profesâ—ion of your other subiects or the king of France or other Prince in other estate of men should enact by
Parliament that all Ministers in his Dominions made contrarie to the Romane vse approued in his Territories should be Traitors the pulpits of England would not be silent to reproue it of great absurdity We â—ope therefore that the rare example of one Queene wil not ouer ballance so many your holy and wise Progenitors and all Princes of the world in this point And if one against so many hundreds coulde carrie against so manie reasons equiuolent motiue of imitation yet wee trust as you doe not inheritte by Queene Elizabeth or King Edward the sixt or King Henrie the eight whose next line and life rather suspended your Title then gaue you the Diademe of these vnited dominions but by Queene Margaret and Queene Marie of Scotland Catholike pâ—inces and King Henrie the seauenth of England of the same Religion with all their and your common Auncestors so you rather will inheriâ—te the steppes of them so many and holy in this path which left you so great a Title both to heauen and earth then followe the lone example of one woman or the father and son a child from whom no such preeminens is or can be deriued It is the honor of our King in Heauen most mightie Soueraigne for which we continew in combatte that Religion which the whole Catholique world in all generall Councelles Popes Doctors and learned men hath euer professed wherein this Nation as our Protestants acknowledge one thousand yeares since Ioh. Bal. l. de Script Angl. in August monach Will. Tetrastyl was conuerted all our Christian auncestry embraced and which all Princes in the schoole of Christ of whome your Maiestie is descended maintained in themselues and subiects That which is so generall cannot be surrendred by a small number of one kingdome It is not in the power of Man to resigne the honor of God Protestants and Puritans which haue turnes and changes for all occasions which communicate in spirituall things with so many different in profession which can subscribe and sweare to Parliament articles and yet renownce them take oth of Princes supreamacy yet speake preach and print against it communicate in Churches seruice and sacraments with them which they say be infidells and that none going to their Churches can be saued submit their faith and religion to stand or be changed as pleaseth Princes which had not any Church Chappell Prince or subiect of their religion vntill the daies of Luther and now is the same no further then in one time or Country may without great losse to themselues damage to others or new dishonour to God change as the winde serueth their spirit suggesteth or appetite desireth Such men may easily and onely condiscend to change their right and relinquish their interest being such as the Apostle thus describeth Alwaies learning and neuer attaining to the knowledge 2. Timoth. 3 v. 7 of truth Yet neuerthelesse dread Liege if it will please your Maiesty to vouchsafe vs licence to request and grace to obtaine that your owne princely sentence and censure may stand that we ought not to depart further from the Roman Church our mother Church by your iudgement than she hath departed from her selfe when shee was in her best and flourishing state And that the time of Constantine was incorrupted in religion we humbly againe offer triall before your Highnesse with equall câ—nditions of Schooles agenst the most selected chosen Protestant Bishops doctors of your dominions to proue or defend any or euery substantiall article which we now professe to be agreeable vnto and not discenting the knowne publike Catholike doctrine of that mother Church in those your mentioned incorrupâ—ed daies of Christianity And seeing the disfauour and penalties against lay Catholikes are grounded vpon their Recusancy to be present at your protestant Seruice wee humbly beseech it may be called to memory how they haue protested in seuerall supplications one to your Maiesty before the end of the last Parliament and the other to Queene Elizabeth in the seuen and twenty yeare of her raigne to be builded onely vpon feare of offending God To which their so long and manilold disgraces losses imprisonments and sufferings are sufficient witnesse and for further triall thereof haue offered to repaire to your Protestant Churches and Seruice without further exception if the learned of your religion can and doe proue to the learned of their profession that it may be performed without offence to God which is so much in the opinion of all diuines as any christian subiects can offer in this cause In which minde as I doubt not but they still continue so I am assured that the Priests of England will giue like consent This if your Protestant Cleargy doe refuse or doe not satisfie so Christian a request we hope your Maiesty being wise learned iudicious and gratious will perceiue that the seuerity of the lawes against them for that cause is not to be put in practise These things in most humble manner we commend to your highest and mercifull consideration And so desiring of the Almighty to grant all happinesse and prosperity to your Maiesty and posterity we conclude in all dutifull subiection with that antient Father We will faithfully serue you in your Pallace we will accompanie other your subiects in the market wee will ioyne with them in the field against your enemies onely to you we leaue the Churches FINIS Fauls escaped In the Epâ—ste or are tam cum Chap. 1. Rogesr Rogers Chap. 2. Haereticus Haereticis manimenta munimenta not aboue foure or fine not many the Prophets and Priests of Iuda deposed vnder the Prophets and Priests of Iuda were deposed not now and are not now Chap. 4. Philopatre Philopater which which is Chap. 5. and it was and that it was if it Chap. 6. natum nutum violatore violatorem approue reproue Chap. 9. vermia Austrae vienna Austriae Canickname a nickname 100000 1000000. Inns Irons Chap. 10. vindice iuridieé mentire mentiri naturall consciences internall consciences a semiplea a semiplene statish Protestants Scottish Protestants Caluinianum caluinianam Chap. 11. punished promised
Peâ—â—tâ—on and the Vniuersiâ—ieâ— Protestâ—nts in their Answere to his Mâ—iestieâ—â—eâ—suâ—e to be chaunged or continued and in essentiall pointâ— and neâ—â—ssarie â—â—â—â—â—ation as the Puâ—â—tanes haue oft written wiâ—â— the condâ—â—â—e them to haue â—â— faith â—t all true faith cannot be châ—â—nged corrected then to be obstâ—nately addicted â—o their profesâ—ion Thirdly many defend that although a man desireth to be ignorant of the trâ—th and so professeth heresy in igâ—â—rance though he sinnâ—â—h gâ—ieâ—ouslâ— in such case yet he is not to be accounted an Hereticke Fourthly Caâ—uâ— hoâ—dâ—th that a man douâ—â—â—â—â— in his fâ—â—â—h 〈◊〉 l. 1â— de loc â— 9. â—â— 4. common and gâ—â—â—râ—ll tâ—iâ—g with â—nglish â—râ—tâ—stâ—nts is not preperlâ— an Heretâ—â—ke Fiftly all Hereâ—iâ—kes as inteâ—nall be not sâ—biect to Censâ—â—â— and Excoâ—mâ—nâ—caâ—â—on Sixtly before â—â—comâ—â—nâ—câ—tiâ—n no commâ—niâ—aâ—ion is fâ—rbiden 〈…〉 with any 〈…〉 obiâ—cteâ—h from â—aâ—â—â—mitanus that where the 〈◊〉 is notoâ—â—on sâ—ch as â—his 〈◊〉 vs. Heresie 1. 〈…〉 not any declâ—ratâ—on of â—â—â— sâ—ntence of Excommuniâ—â—â—ion 〈…〉 absolâ—tely agâ—inst tâ—e greâ—test 〈…〉 general 〈…〉 by wâ—ose decâ—â—e tâ—e 〈◊〉 must be both so censuâ—â—d â—nd 〈…〉 which consenteth Cunerns Nauarre and others Sixtly also after such proceedings except specially excepted Concil Const Suares de Censur gloss c. Cum desideras de sent excommun the case of wife children seruants c. bringeth exemption Seauenthly no Protestant or hereticke or Archehereticke not excommunicate by name as none in England is lyeth subiect to any penalty pretended Obiect But it will be obiected from the second Reason that Catholikes holde the Pope head of the Church to haue a ciuill power also ouer Kings and circa omnia temporalia therfore he may both depose Princes and commaund subiectes to arme against them once excommunicate Resp First I aunswere concerning Priests most maligned in this matter that the canon Lawe itselfe is to the contrary where be these words De Episcopis vero vel quibuslibet Clericis quod nec sua Decret 2 paâ—â— caus 23. q. 8. De episcopis c. authoritate nec authoritate Romani pontificâ— arma accipere valeant facile probatur Neyther Bishops nor any Clerks may take armes either by their owne authority or the authority of the Pope of Rome And reasons be added there authorized by Gregory 13. alleadged here against vs in this Treatise Therefore all of that order be absolutely freed from that ielousie and may answer with Ambros orat contra Auxent S. Ambrose against Auxentius Quid ergo turbamini volens nunquam ius deseram coactus re pugnare non noui potero dolere poero flere potero gemere aduersus arma milites Gothos quoque lacrimae meae mea armasunt talia enim sunt manimenta Sacerâ—otis aliter nec debeo nec possum resistere Therefore why are you troubled willingly I neuer will forsake right compelled I know not to resist I may be sorie I may weepe I may groane against Armes souldâ—ers and the Gothes also my teares are my armour for such are the defence of Priests otherwise I neyther ought nor can resist Secondly I aunswere if any man holde that opinion of such a power ouer Princes in Popes yet they will plead it is more tollerable to defend such authority in one supreame Pastor and spirituall gouernor in the Church whereof Princes be sheepe and not sheepeheardes as the late wise Lord Treasurer acknowledged of Queene Elizabeth that shee was Ouis and not Pastor then to committe the censuring of Princes cases to such seditious iudges and superiors as Protestant both publique positions and practises assigne by which not only euery Wickliffe Luther Caluine Cranmer Knoxe and such supreame men but the artizans and basest people in euery Eldershippe may sitte in iudgement vpon their Soueraigne Cite Excomunicate and Depose him euen for ordinarie offences as themselues expound conuenient for their owne aduantage as I will alleadge from their publique opinions hereafter Obiection And if this man will instance that the Author of the booke De iusta abdicat Henric. 3. teacheth and excomuni consensu that it is lawfull for a priuate man to kill a Tyrant Answer I answere it is more then disobedience for any subiect in England to make such comparison with his mercifull Prince And yet whatsoeuer that priuate Author writeth or this Disputer citeth from him that opinion is not the common consent but against not only the common Alphons Castr contr Haeres v. tyrannus Petrus Gregorius in fine 2. to de Republ. Cuneâ—us â—e offic priecip christian Hentic quodl 6. q. 23. Turrecâ— l. 2. c. 113. Couoâ— Victor de potest eccl concil 1. q. â— Palat. 4 D. 25. Turrect l. 1. c. 87. consent of Catholike authors Alphonsus de Castro Petrus Gregorius Cunerus and others but against the generall councell of Constance it selfe to which all Catholikes must conform them selues Secondlie I answere for all Catholickes in generall to the maine Obiection that Henricus Victor Iohannes de Turrecr Couoruuius and the common opinion of Schooles doe teach that there is no such mere Temporall and Regall power in Popes ouer Princes and ciuill affaires but a Supreame spirituall as that is which they clayme in Temporalls in ordine ad Spiritualia and is not to vse this Disputers words Aciuill power Soueraigne ouer Kings directly but only a spirituall preeminence the subiect obiect office and end thereof being such for the spirituall good and behoofe of the church of Christ committed to his Vicar and chiefe Delegate here on earth by commission of feeding gouerning ruling binding loosing shutting opening and the like in holy Scripture and authoritatiuely citeing summoning admonishing and censuring both sheepe and other sheepeheards of our Sauiours flocke Yet thirdly I answere that the defendors of this sentence doe farther teach that this iurisdiction and power against sheepe or inferior sheepeheards is not to be put in practise but in cases of obstinacie contempt and incorrigibilitie in the offendor and being onely for the profite and vtilitie of the Spouse of Christ his mysticall body it may not be exercised where greater losse domage and hazard then good and profite is to ensue from thence The cause must be iust the suggestion not vntrue the meanes not turbulent tending to destruction Fourthly the maintainers of this doctrine doe not vrge greater indignitie or defend any sentence more offensiue in equallingement to any prelate sheepe or sheepheard then to the chiefest sheepeheaâ—d vnder Christ the Pope himâ—eâ—fe for they all with one consent affirme that in case of heresiâ— now in question hee 〈◊〉 v. paâ— 2. §. 4. palud ib. eiâ—t Turrecr li. 2 sum c. â—0â— l 4 c. 18. Aug. de Anâ—on â—astâ— l. de iust haeret â—â—nit â—ot 4 dâ—â—t 12 q. â— â—â—tic 2. Can. l. 4 de loc c. vlt. Coâ—dub l b. quaestionâ—r q. 11. is eyther actually and really deposed or to be deposed The Canonists doe holde he is ipso facto deposed if hee fall into herâ—sie
hoc seculo vel in altero cum Pontifices Principes rationem reddent villicationis suae de hac re controuersia decideret inter nostros Superiores Notwithstanding this we know that many Catholikes did thinke hardly of that deed and did wish that if so great a matter and subiect to diuers suspitions had neuer bin committed to writing but reserued to higher powers and most chiefly to the iudgement of God that either in this world or in the world to come when both Popes and Princes must render account of their Bailifewicke the controueâ—sie of this matter should be tried betweene our Superiors Then if the case was such between the Pope and that deceased Princes I cannot conceaue how any equally minded Protestant can be of minde that the Pope so strictlie commaunding obedience of all Catholâ—kes in England to his Maiestie will or can be so contrarie vnto himselfe to publish a contrarie commaund against a King offering in publique Parliament to meet with the Roman Church Kings speach parliam 1. all Nouelties taken away we wish no more and in the meane time acknowledging the same Roman Church to be our Mother Church and that his minde was euer free from perfection or thralling his subiects in matters of couscience Of such a King Bellarmine himself cited against vs will be witnes that he thinketh Beâ—lar â—ib 5. de Rom. pont c. 7 the Pope cannot so proceed against him The fift Reason confuted and returned CHAP. VI. THe fift Reason is nothing in effect but the former confuted now againe repeated with malice and suting also with the three next ensuing and is thus obiected Whosoeuer suggesteth a Doctrine of forcible deposing of Princes from their thrones are therein manifestly rebellious Let vs grant this Maior Proposition then thus I make my Minor But Protestants be such as both their publike opinions and practisâ—s before and after conuince Ergo they are manifestly rebellious by this disputer Now let vs heare what dogmaticall authority principle or position he produceth to iustifie his accusation Thâ—t all Popish Priests his phrase defend and approue these things For although I haue confuted this in the former yet I will rather multiply repetitions then leaue any suspicion behinde me to omit any of his oppositions First for the violent deposing of Kings and Emperours hee citeth Costerus to say That the power to depose Kings and Emperours was euer in the Popes of Rome penes Romanos pontifices which he translateth peculiar to the Pope But he must vnderstand that here is no speach of violence violent deposing or forcible dâ—posing which is his proposition to be proued We will proceede He citeth Molma to say that Depositio Imperatoris ex iusta causa pertinet ad summum Pontificem But first againe heere is no speech of force or violence and so not to your purpose Secondly there is at this present a great difference betweene the Emperour which is created by the Popes I. Cerem Rom. eccl in Coron Imperat. lawes and with his solemnities and from whom he receiueth his sword and a King that is absolute not so created or depending for power or iurisdiction such as our Soueraigne in England is And Molina himselfe cited in this place by our accuser insinuateth the same dâ—sparitie and reason in these words Quia Imperator est tanquam minister summi pontificis c. Because the Emperour is as it were the Popes Minister exercising the sword of Iurisdiction at his will ad natum summi pontificis which is altogether vntrue of his Maiestie not so receiuing or exercising authority To Bellarmine I haue answered before that his opinion is against this discouerer For hee alloweth not of censures against Princes where they grow not to violence and persecution Concerning Doctor Saunders and Philopater I haue already spoken sufficiently and yet their citations doe not conclude violence in the case of excommunicates whereof they intreat Bannes alleaged to defend That an Apostata King may be deposed by the Common-wealth meaneth such a Prince as Iulian the Apostata a renowncer of Christianity which is properly termed Apostata And conformable is the Allegation from Simancha which be all the authorities hee bringeth to binde all Popish his Epitheton Priests to defend violent deposing of Kings which not one of those particular writers affirme but was both the publike opinion practise of protestants in aâ—l opportunities occasions as is often remembred in this defence Now let vs heare the supposed publike practise in this point He alleageth three authorities only of particular men which sentence be not sufficient to pronounce their iudgement or allowance to be publike But let them be vrged to his greatest aduantage The first is against Henry the third of France excommunicate from the Author De iusta abdic Henr. 3. affirming onely that the French subiects which armed aganst him did it secura conscientia with secure conscience as against a violater of publike faith violatore publicae fidei I answer first this is no English case except this discouerer will inrole his Maiestie in the number of excommunicates and violaters of publike fidelitie which is most iniurious to his Highnesse and in Catholikes would be called trecherous And yet this Author doth onely affirme that they did it or might doe it in conscience But hee doth not iustifie which this man must generally proue that all those and the rest of the French subiâ—cts were bound in conscience to take Armes against him and yet if he had so said there is an euident inequality assigned betweene the cases in comparison His second authority is an opinion of Diuines in a Colledge at Salaman in Spaine no publike authoritie if true that all Catholikes which did not follow the O-neale did sinne moâ—tally Queene Elizabeth then being excommunicate and that Xistus quintus did rather allow then appâ—oue their opinion But first who seeth not the disparity of those Princes before compared Secondly that schoole followed their information which being vntrue their sentence faileth which the experience it selfe of that time conuinceth for most Catholikes practised the contrary to that iudgement resisted O-neele and defended Queene Elizabeth And Xistus quintus neuer did see the resolution of that schoole The practises of Protestants are no nouelties in such affaires The sixt Reason confuted and returned CHAP. VII THus he proceedeth to his sixt Reason Whosoeuer doe intend designe or practise the murther of Princes must necessarily be holden for desperate Traytors This is the Maior proposition which I grant and thus proceede in forme But Luther Munster Suinglius Caluine Bezae Spiphanius Cranmer Ridley Latimer Sands Knoxe Goodman and other Cleargie Protestants with their Adherents and Disciples did intend designe and so much as they could practise such impietie as I haue demonstratiuely proued Ergo they must necessarily by this mans argument be holden for desperate Traytors But against Catholikes he vrgeth That all popish Priests are guilty in some
of these kindes that is intending designing or practising the murther of Princes Ergo I answer that the late Lord Treasurer reputed the Author of the booke intituled The execution of Iustice c. was thought in his daies to be a man not second to many in politicall wisedome and affaires of Common-wealth And I thinke much to be preferrâ—d before this Discouerer for Execut. of Iust place and wisedome and yet he will tell vs the quite contrary to this assertion That there wâ—re many Catholike Priests and Bishops also in this kingdome which although they were depriued of their preferments and imprâ—â—oned by Queene Elizabeth yet they were so farre from being contained within the circuite of this mans proposition that they be dignified by that wise Counceller with these titles faithfull and quiet subiects very quiet subiects inclined to dutifulnesse to the Queenes Maiesty and the like And for such hee reciteth very many famous men Doctor Heath Archbishop of Yorke Doctor â—oole Bishop of Peterborough Doctor Tunstall Bishop of Durham Bishops of Winchester Carlile Ely Lincolne together with Abbots Deanes c. Therefore by this authority the obiecters generall proposition of all Priests guiltinesse cannot be true But he vrgeth That all Priests professe it lawfull to take Armes against their Kings and what other meaning saith he can Armes haue but blood I haue answered him before that this is false by the cheefe Protestants declaration of many Priests quietnesse loyalty and obedience Secondly I tell this disputer that he hath made a sound argument to proue all the Protestant Ministers of England Scotlund France Heluetia Germany Sweueland and other Nations before with their confederate Protestants conuinced of sedition for taking or perswading Armes against their Soueraignes to be likewise guilty of the blood and murther of those Princes in their designements If Armes can haue no other meaning but onely blood as this bloody Sentencer affirmeth for all the world can witnesse that they tooke Armes against their Rulers But against Catholikes which know both an offensiue and defensiue warre his bloody iudgement can giue no deadly wound though he had prooued which is most falsly spoken that all Priests professe it lawfull to take Armes against their Kings which I haue before returned vpon the Protestant profession And yet how doubtfully and with equiuocation against which heâ— argueth in his ninth Reason doth he speake in this place neither expressing in what case or against what Prince Aâ—mes are defended lawfull But I will answer him as before except he will make his Maiesty for whom hee would seeme to pleade an vsurping Tyrant an Apostata from Christian faith incorrigible in impiety and a monster as it were among men it is a protestant doctrine and no Catholike opinion that either blood must be exacted or Armes taken against a Prince Seeing his owne reputation hath no happier successe let vs examine his authorities He first bringeth the Author of Iust abdic Hen. 3 to say that Tyrannum occidere honestum est it is honest to kill a Tyrant Well then King Iames is a Tyrant by this iudgement otherwise both he and his Author be Iudges against himselfe for that writer expresly nameth a Tyrant And to shew this mans further dutifull affection to his Prince hee must meane an Reade Peter Nâ—uâ—r Domin Soâ—o Cuner and others vsurping Tyrant which is no King but an intrudor for by the common opinion such a Tyrant is vnderstoode in this case by the generall Councell of Constance to which that Author and all Catholikes must giue assent and yeelde obedience But such Diuines as this discouerer which are aboue generall Councells the whole Church of Christ and all authority may make Tyrants of whom they list and depose Princes at their pleasures And this futeth best with their holy spirit For if euery man among them may iudge of all Fathers Popes Councells Scriptures and authorities which be the highest they may with lesse presumption châ—llenge to be Superiors and sit in iudgement of all terrene and temporall businesse He bringeth no other authors for priests intending designing or practising the murther of Princes but onely citeth Mr. Rainolds Gregorius de valentia Simancha about censured heretickes often before answered in his sence and meaning But his holy obedience and duty can finde no other company in the christian world for his King and Soueraigne but Tirants excommunicate heretickes and such exploded persons For practise in this point he only alleadgeth three authoriiies besides this late vnhappie Stratageme His first testimony is from Gallobelgicus who among other of his farre fetched intelligences should affirme that one Arnolde in Paris ascribed the Tirannie of the Spaniards in the Indies to the Iesuites But Lewis Granado Metellus Sequanus and others of greater credite who speake dolefully and bitterlie against that Tirannie be of other minde And we intreate now of Christian Princes and not of poore Infidell and Pagan common people Therefore if this were true yet to no purpose if there were no priests but Iesuites But it is well knowne that Arnoldus was a professed enemy to that Societie and is confuted by Montanus and others And yet Gallobelgicus is not without his hiperbolicall Locutions His second example is that Rodolphuâ— Comes which he translateth Duke Rodolph foght against the Emperor Henry the 4. excommunicate To which he ioyneth the often repeated Bull of Pius the fift against Queene Elizabeth both answered before And still this man cannot ballaunce his Soueraigne with any but excommunicates Indian infidells Tirants Apostataes c. Lastly he addeth the late conspiracie against the house of Parliament But as he hath heard that all priests were not so well pleased in the former procâ—dings with the deceased Queene So I trust they will be innocent in so vile a practise against our present Soueraigne And it is most certaine that this example serueth not for his purpose of prouing all priests to intend designe or practise such things For first the cheefest priest the Pope had absolutely foâ—bidden all disobedience and strictly commanded obedience vnto his Maiesty by English Catholiâ—es priests or other and by his absolute power of spirituall superiority as by these words Quia Papaiubet the obedience and prohibeâ— the disobedience The cheefe superior of priests in England in spirituall things the Archpriest had so receiued and promulged the same command long since in August last And vpon his first notice of the pretended wickednesse condemned it by his particular letters for an intollerable vncharitable scandalous and despâ—râ—te fact against the order of holy Church against the prescript of a generall Councell against the sâ—ntence of the best writers of this age against the Popes commandement and consorting with the error of Wickliffe the protestant Saint and Martyr condemned in the Catholike generall councell at Constance Then if the secular priests of England will acknowledge eyther the Archpriest for their superior at home or the Pope at Rome as all both
others in the short regiment of that Queene may be giuen for instance Therefore let no man obiect heereafter that the Positions Protestanâ—s may not condemne their Puritane Brethren and Practises of Râ—bellion proceede onely from the Puritane Protestants for such pure Protestancie had not audience in England at that time but the defenders there of were called New vp-start arrogant spirites by Latymer and such Protestants as I Latim Serm. before King Edward the fixt haue condemned guiltie in this kinde And yet the present Protestant Writers of England which teach that the true Church can not erre in things essentiall to true Religion and necessary to saluation and communicate in Sermons Sacraments Doctrine and subscription to articles the very notes of the Church in their proceedings cannot condemne these traiterous and rebellious positions and practises in Puritanes for great and damnable offences in Religion or impediments of Saluation therefore by this disputers Argument they are to be accounted seditious Now I will recite his second proposition against us which is this But all Popish priests doe professe a double prerogatiue ouer Kings Democraticall and Monarchicall namely both people and Pope ergo To the Popes Authoritie I haue already sufficientlie answered and will demonstratiuely proue farther heereafter that as it is defended by catholike doctors it is far more fauorable and defensiue to Princes titles then either doctrine or practise of Protestants or any other professors of Religion whereof I haue also intreated beefore Concerning his conceat of Catholikes defending a democraticall prerogatiue in the people ouer all Kinges so be his wordes It fighteth with his owne assertion and present position of the Popes Monarchicall prerogatiue ouer all Kings which likewise is his sentence For where there is a Monarchie and Monarchicall power or gouernment in one there is vnpossibillitie of a Democracie and Democraticall Power and Regencie in the people otherwise these propositions be true Kinges be subiects to subiects and subiects be Kinges of Kinges seruants be masters to their masters Masters be seruants to their seruants Fathers be children of their Children and Children be fathers to their Fathers and the like relations must be inuerted by this Logicians Argument But lett vs heare what publique Positions he will bring from our Writers to proue our opinion of a democraticall power in the people ouer Princes which I haue confuted by his owne proposition He only citeth the Author de iusta abdicat Henric. 2 to say that Maiestas Regni est in populo potius quam in persona Regis That D. Stapleton affirmeth people are not ordained for the Prince but the Prince for the people and Mr. Rainolas to call a King a creature of Mans Creation the like he citeth out of Dolman All which in equall sence his Maiestie himself in open Parliament doth not so much seeme to dislike especially in vacancie of a King or the originall of kingdomes of which cases those Authors The kings speach Parli 1. doe principally entreate And in such circumstances I demaund of this Obiector whether there euer was or could be a King and Ruler ouer people where there was no people to be ruled or consent to be ruled But people both were in the begining without kings and made election of diuers kinds of regiment as they thought fittest and most secure for their defence and gouernment in peace some Monarchicall some Aristaraticall others Democraticall although none made election of a Monachy by one and Democracie by the multitude at once in one Commonwealth as this simple Disputer did argue before agâ—inst Princes titles for that is vnpossible as I haue made demonstration And his Maiesties wordes be these Although a Kingdome and The kings speach supt people be Relata yet can he be no King if he want people and Subiects but there be many people in the world that lacke a head as when Regall Lines be extinct people be yet without Kings but not e contra So where regiment passeth by election In Polonia at the death of euery King the case is such because that Kingdome and Principallitie goeth by voices So in Venice So in the Empire by the seauen Princes called Princes Electours supplying the peoples suffrages and consents And this the Discouerer Rat. 3. infr himselfe hath remembred in framing his next Reason wherin he maketh mention of Election and calleth a seditious to hinder the right thereof But slaunders and contradictions be neither wilfull wickednesse nor vnlearned ignorance in this Accuser How the Protestants both clergie and people claime Soueraignty ouer Princes is spoken before and often proued in this Treatise The third Reason confuted and returned CHAP. IIII. THe maior Proposition of his third reason is Whosoever vppon any pretended Supremacy whether of Pope or people doe deny the necessary right of Election or of Succession of Protestant Princes are to bee holden amongest all Protestants seditious his Contradiction in this against the former reason I haue spoken of in the last Argument And for this present I grant this maior and make this my minor But Protestants and English Protestants Protestants are seditious by this Argument doe deny the necessary right of Election or Succession of Protestant Princes ergo the minor is proued before in Cranmer Ridley Latimer Sandes Rogers and the Dukes of Northumberland and Suffolke with their Protestant Preachers and forces against the Succession of Queene Elizabeth a Protestant and though then not borne his Maiesty a Protestant King I adde further that his Highnesse title was expresly contradicted and written against of purpose in a booke to that end by Hales a companion to Knoxe an English Protestant to which no Protestant to my knowledge did euer giue answer or deniall But many Catholikes confuted it as the Catholike Bishop of Rosse in Scotland and three Catholikes of distinct professions in England Sâ—r Anthony Browne Knight and Iudge of the common Law Doctor Morgan a Diuine and Doctor Mytch or like name a civill Lawyer Now let vs heare his second proposition against Catholikes Thus it is But all Popish Priests doe vtterly abolish the title of Succession in all Protestant Princes c. g o This he would proue against all Priests because Toâ—let and conformably to him Doctor Stapleton Maister Raynolds Symancha and the Author of Philopatre writeth Nulla est Imperatoris aut Regis Electio si cum Eligitur excommunicatus est The Election of an Emperour or King is non if he be excommunicate when he is chosen I answer First heere he contradicteth himselfe againe making election and consent of the people an essentiall thing to Princes titles Secondly let all be true which he citeth and that they so teach yet if fiue particular men could make a generall councell and their sentence be termed a publike position yet they speake onely of a Prince excommunicate before his Election which case is not now in rerumnatura much lesse in England His Maiesty was not
excommunicate before his Election neither is hee now but is both elected and setled in his throne both without any contradiction of the Pope and with his Iubet of all obedience and prohibet of deniall thereof All the Catholikes of this Kingedome applauded it as much as Protestants And his vnion and league with Catholike Princes and people abroad is sufficient answer that this is a malicious slaunder of holy Priesthood and proveth Catholikes innocent Protestants guilty and this man an vniust accuser The Argument retuâ—ned vpon Protestants with a recitaâ—l of their seditious doctrinâ— But for breuitie to passe ouer forraigne Protestants in this place I will put this disputer in minde of his brethrens dogmaticall principles and positions in this vnited Kingdome The Protestant Writers and Preachers of England defended that Wyat was no Traytor to Queene Mary And thus they wrote expresly It is lawfull to kill Kings and both by Gods law and mans law Queene Goodm pag 103 obed pa. 99. 113. Goodm pa. 99. Mary ought to be put to death what Priest of England did ever so write speake or thinke of any Protestant his Soueraigne she was a tyrant a monster a cruell beast And yet the purer sort of Protestants affirmd of Queene Elizabeth as his Lordship of Canterbury Hay an pag. 13 15. 23. Dâ—ing poliâ— pâ—g 133. 134. sup wiâ—nesseth That she was worse then her sister Many and they more suppressed by her then by the other They did write That she was not to be obeyed being against their proceedings and openly moued the greatest Subâ—egents in England to take armes against her affirming if they Suppliâ—aâ— to the gouer of Wales pa. 16. 36 37 38 39 Dâ—ng posâ—t lib 4 e. 3 4 Goodm p. 144. 145. Obed. pag 110. Knos hist pag. 37 â— Obed pag 99. 103. 104. Goodm pa. 99. Buchan iâ—â— â—â—g pag. 40. 58 Obed. pa. 111 refused it they ceased to be Magistrates These also insuing be more of their holy dogmaticall principles Euill Princes ought by the law of God to be deposed and inferior Magistrates ought to doe it cheefely It is lawfull to kill wicked Kings It were good that rewards were appointed by the people for such as kill tyrants as commonly there are for those that haue killed eyther woolues or beares or taken their whelpes The people haue the same power ouer their King that the King hath ouer any one person Iudges ought by the law of God to sommon Princes before them and to proceede against them as against all other offenders the people may arraigne the Prince the Ministers may Buchan pa. 62 Cartwr replic 2. pag. 65. Obed. pag. 115. 116. Bucha p. 70. excommunicate him any Minister may excommunicate the greatest Prince he that is excommunicate is not worthy to enioy any life vpon earth Whereby is euident the monstrous dissimulation of this people which sometimes for their aduantage will not be scrupulous to denie that with other articles of their religion and the cheefest and to say that they onely claime power to excommunicate not to depose and kill Princes And to testifie how easily Suru pretend holy Dâ—â—cipl pag. 283. 284. Buchan pag. 6 13. Obed. pag. 25 and for what ordinary offences Princes may be thus intreated the present Protestant Archbishop of Canterbury is witnesse that fornication drunkennesse swearing cursing fighting chiding brawling breaking of the Sabbath wanton and vaine words and the like be sufficient incitements and causes of such proceedings with them And they tell vs further That the people are better then the King and of greater authority the people haue right to bestow the Crowne at their pleasure the authority which Princes haue is giuen them from the people and the people may take it away againe as men may reuoke their Proxies and letters of Attorney Now I would demand of this obiector whether they be members of the Roman Catholike Church or the pillars of his Protestant Congregation that congregateth and gathereth together such monsters as holy children which teacheth a double prerogatiue ouer Princes one in the people when inferior Magistrates and not Magistrates may and must by their doctrine depose Kings and Soueraignes and likewise their ministery as before hath as ample or a more preeminent authority Which also concluded from these English Protestant principles If Magistrates transgresse Gods lawes themselues and commaund others to doe Goodm pa. 119. 139. the like then haue they lost that honour and obedience which otherwise their subiects did owe vnto them and ought no more to be taken for Magistrates but to be examined condemned and punished as priuate transgressors When Magistrates doe cease to doe their duties the people are as it were without officers and then God giueth the sword into their Pa. 185. 180. 184 hands And such was the vniuersall practise of all protestants especially Caluenists in all places of their holy preaching Germany Heluetia Denmarke France England and Scotland with others in foâ—mer times and at this present the Protestants in Hungary Transiluania Sweueland and the Low Countries in actuall sedition and rebellion against their Soueraignes Emperour King and Princes are instance Concerning that spirituall supremacy which the lawes of England The Kings supremacy denyed by all Puritans and eâ—ther denâ—ed or doubted of by al english protestant writers atrribute to his Maiestie it can be no question but all Puritans doe deny it which not onely teach a superior power both in people and Ministers to which the rest of the Protestants of the same congregation as before must needes consent But also in this regard that the gouernment of their Eldership or Bresbitery incomposible with Princes Supremacy is the cheefest article of their religion and distinctiue note of their reformed Church Then to come to the present Protestant writers anâ— their designements the Archbishop of Canterbury is the man which maketh Suru of preâ— Diâ—cipl relation that this was a common proposition Princes haue no more to doe with matters of the Church then the Ministers haue with the affaires of the Common-wealth And there it is alleaged that such gouernment by Princes is worse then by the Pope for diuers reasons Pa. 25â— 253. 254 255 â—â—6 c. sup there recited and not confuted by any Protestant I will recite the sentences of the principall Protestants of this time Doctor Fulke in plaine termes acknowledgeth D Fulke hâ—br c 13 â—ect 9. 1. peâ—r 2. v. 13. â—â—ct 5. Ioh. c. 21. 1. petr 5. Mat. c. 16. Bell. moâ—iu lib. 2. fol. 78 79. 80. 81 Suru part 3. c. 10 pa. 426. 1. part pag 34. Whitâ—ker contra Bellar controu 1. q 8. D. 〈◊〉 li. de concil that Emperours and Kings owe obedience to the Clergy and cannot prescribe laweâ— of Religion to Bishopâ— by their iudgements Maister Bell writeth the Ecclesiasticall affaires to be in the Cleâ—rgy as to decide controuersies and that the King hath only charge and authority to command the