him to the imagination as if he were corporally present be holy and adored for his sake holy Where note that the obligation to take the Arke as an Image of God sitting vpon it is a positiue ordinance the Arke not binding men so to do of his owne nature not being a proper Image of God yet this positiue institution supposed the Law of nature binds men to worship adore the Arke with reference vnto the holy adored person imagined as sitting theron The fourth Argument With this Principle so receiued in nature we must ioyne another nolesse knowne and notorious in Christianity to wit that God full of all honour and glory to whom all adoration worship is due became truely and verily Man as visible and aspectable as any other man and consequently as Imaginable that he may be figured by an Image no lesse truly and distinctly then another man In which Image the hands feete other parts shall truly by Imagination correspond to the feete hands and parts of the prototype and our Imagination from it passe directly and immediatly vnto Christ and his parts proportionable to those we behold in the Image so that when we adore with an humble outward kisse of hands and feete the Image by inward Imagination Conceite and Affection we kisse adore the Imagined true hands and feet of Christ. Neither are these Imaginations false and erroneous seing as Philosophy teacheth no falshood is in meere apprehension or Imagination without iudging the thing to be as we Imagine As in contemplation men represent and imagine themselues as standing before Gods throne in the Court of heauen amidst the quires of Saints and Angels praising honouring him in their society not iudging themselues to be truly and really in heauen that were a falshood dotage but only apprehending in theÌ„selues such a presence and behauing themselues outwardly and inwardly in prayer as if they were present To which kind of Imaginations as pious and goodly the Scriptures and Fathers exhort vs. In this sort beholding the Image of Christ we apprehend (h) The Minister obiects pa. 223. lin 16. one may imagin the sunne or a lambe to be the figure of Christ conceaue them as his Image and yet it is not lawfull by one and the same affection to worship these Creatures with their Creatour I Answere This hath bene refuted already For these creatures be but types and figures of our Sauiour which types and figures haue no right in nature with out positiue institution to bind mens Imaginations to conceaue by them our Sauiour as if he were present nor consequently to Imagine what is done vnto them is done vnto him But the proper Images of our Sauiour haue right in nature to bind mans Imaginations to conceaue our Sauiour in his Image as present in this sort Wherfore he that will not conforme his Imagination to this pious institute of Nature but will thinke he may deface the proper Image of his Lord without iniury to his person doth by that defacing commit impiety towards Christ his Imaginations not hauing that rectitude towards so great a Lord as naturall piety doth exact For piety towardes our Lord requires of man that his Imaginations be respectiue of euery thing that hath by consent of men right of reference towards him him as therin present not iudging the Image to be Christ but imagining and taking it as if it were Christ. That when we outwardly honour the Image by kissing the hands feet therof mentally by imagination and humble affection of reuerence we adore and kisse the most venerable hands and feet of his pretious body The fifth Argument The Historyes of Christian Antiquity are full of holy Men Bishops Kings Queenes and other honourable Personages who haue cast themselues downe on the ground before Beggars Lazars and leapers kissing their feet and their soares out of reuerent affection vnto Christ. In which kind memorable is the charity of the famous Queene Matildes daughter of Edgar King of Scotland and wife to Henry the first of England whose custome was to wash with her owne hands the feet of poore people amongst whom were Leapers and such as had loathsome diseases not disdaining with great Reuerence on her knees to kisse their feet with her princely lips And when as the Prince of Scotland her brother being then in the Court of England entring into her chaÌ„ber found her imployed in so humble seruice astonished thereat rebuked her saying Sister what do you can you with those your defiled lips kisse the king your husband She answered Know brother that the feet of the King of heauen are more louely and venerable then are the lips of an Earthly king Certainly this Queene with all other addicted to the like deuotion when they kissed the feet of the poore outwardly with their lips did by Imagination full of reuerent affection kisse the feete of Christ Iesus taking the poore as Images of (i) The Minister answereth this argument with a demand pag. 225. lin 26. Where I pray you hath our Sauiour sayd of Images of wood and stone nay of Puppets and pranked Babyes what yee doe to one of these my least ones yee doe vnto me as he sayd of the poore I answere That the images of our Lord stand for our Lord so that what is done by way of honour or dishonour vnto them is to be taken as done vnto him is euident in the light of nature not only to learned men but eueÌ„ to women children and none deny it but such in whome Passion agaynst truth hinders the right vse of common Reason Hence there was no neede that this truth should be expressely set downe in the Scripture though the Scripture in some of her discourses doth intrinseÌ„cally suppose the same for the testimony whereof we haue already spoken Adore the footestoole of his feete because he is holy doth suppose that wâ—at represents God vnto the imagination as if he were visibly present is to be worshipped for his sake On the other side that what is done vnto poore beggars and lazars by way of reliefe and comfort is to be taken as done vnto Christ as he was once poore and needy for our sakes vpon earth is not euident in the light of reason nor can be knowne but by diuine Reuelation Hence it was conuenient that the same should be often and expressely set downe in Scripture for the comfort and encouragement of Christians the more to inflame them vnto Charitable workes Where we may obserue that the Word of God only sayth that what is done to the poore by way of comfort and reliefe is done vnto Christ not what is done by way of honour and yet Christian Charitable people haue not only releeued but also reuerenced these poore people in respect of this their reference vnto Christ. And how this But by grounding themselues vpon this principle euident in the light of nature Whatsoeuer is done by way of honor to the image of
any Doctrines preiudiciall vnto Princes be singular vnto Iesuits that is held by the consent of Iesuits and by Iesuits only why do you not name these opinions what they are Why do you dwell vpon generalyties according to the custome of cosening Companions Dolosus versatur in Generalibus Why but because you know that descending vnto particulars your falshood would presently be displaied Hence you talke in the ayre and in effect thus you discourse I know there be certayne opinions mayntayned singularly by Iesuits agaynst Royall Soueraignety what they are I doe not know For they be written in bookes as inuisible as was our Church before Luther no where to be found but in the Globe of the Moone and are no wayes to be read but by the light therof The opinion for which some Catholicks at whome you glance as appeares by your margent haue taxed Iesuits of singularity is that God hath assured Prescience of thinges contingent not only of which shall in time actually happen but also of what vpon suppositions which neuer were might haue beene For example God knoweth certaynly whether these conditionall propositions be true or false If King Henry the eight had neuer seene Anne Bullen England had been Catholicke at this day If Queene Mary of Scotland had fled into France whē she came into England shee had recouered her Kingdome agaynst the Rebells If the miracles Christ did in Iewry had been done in Tyrus and Sidon those Cityes would haue done pennance This doctrine some Deuines mislike and say the same was first inuented by Iesuits Which if it be true then haue Protestants done Iesuits wronge that relate this very doctrine of Gods conditionall Prescience as the doctrine of their Reformed Gospell Field of the Church l. 3. c. 23. pag. 122. But I pray you what is this to your Scope The doctrine that God knowes the state of things conditionally contingent what makes it agaynst the Soueraignty of Princes Do you not see you are ridiculous Secondly If Iesuits be not singular in their doctrines to the depression of Kings wherefore was Iesuit Suarez his Booke contra sectam Anglicanam condemned at Paris in France and burnt by the hand of the Hang-man Answere I likewise demand of you if Iesuit Suarez his booke be preiudiciall to Princely authority why is the same allowed in all other Catholicke kingdoms so as the King by his sollicitations could not get the same to be condemned Do not other kingdomes know the Catholike Extent of Royall Authority zealously mantaining the Soueraignty therof How can that doctrin be singular of Iesuits vnto which Bishops secular Doctours and Religious of other Orders haue set their names by way of Approbation as is to be seene in the beginning of that Treatise And if your Argument be good Iesuit Suarez his booke was in France burnt by the hand of the Hangman Ergo the Order of the Iesuits holds doctrine to the preiudice of Princes surely this Argument is strong and vnanswerable Minister Paraeus his booke was in London publickly burnt by the hand of the Hangman by Order of the Kinge wherein no Papist had his hand Ergo the Protestant Ministry holds doctrines pernicious vnto the State of Princes The third Argument Wherefore were Iesuits banished out of the Dominions of the Venetians professing the Roman Fayth if they are guilty of no singularity about the matter of Regall and Ciuill Authority Answere Why are Iesuits permitted desired and sought for by all other Catholick Kingdomes and States of the world if they be guilty of singularity agaynst Regall and Ciuil Authority Should one dispute in this sort Wherefore was Chrysostome Socrat. l. 6. c. 26. alij banished out of the Catholicke Citty of Constantinople by the Catholicke Emperour Arcadius at the instance of the Catholicke Empresse in a Councell of Catholicke Bishops but that he was guilty of treason agaynst Royall Authority What would a learned Answerer say He would laugh at the Disputants folly and tell him that Kings and States may be put into displeasure and Passion against the Ministers of Gods holy Word so banish them their Dominions not only for singularity agaynst Ciuill Authority but for other reasons as for their ouer zealous inueighing agaynst vitious life constant crossing of their disordinate humours I could bring many examples of iust holy men banished by Catholicks yea by pious and godly Kings and States vpon mistakings suspitions false informations S. Athanasius that mirrour of sanctity learning vnto whome the Church of God is more beholding then to the whole world which then liued besides was he not for suspitions about temporall Affayres banished by Constantine the Great the first Christian Emperour the patterne of Religious Princes Ruffin l. 1. c. 17. God permits such trialls to fall on his Seruants for the exercise of their Patience vntill time discouer the truth which being sufficiently cleered if men still remayne obdurate his Iustice will not sleepe The fourth Argument Mariana the Iesuits worke de Institutione Principis wherin he maintayneth Regicide is extant in many hands Answere The example of Mariana proueth not that Iesuits hold singular opinions agaynst others but only that Mariana was singular agaynst the rest of his Order which through the ouersight of Reuisors passed to the print A thinge that may sometymes happen which to preuent the Generall of the Iesuits gaue that seuere Order about reuiewing of Bookes in that kind which the Iesuit hath set downe in his Answere That Iesuit Mariana was singular agaynst the rest appeares in that he was confuted by name of some of his own Order for this doctrine euen before the censure of Paris See the letter of Cotton And if you will allow agaynst the common Prouerbe One swallow makes not a Summer that the errour of one be sufficient be condemne a whole Society then the Minister Paraeus his Worke wherein he mantaynes Deposition and Regicide must make all Ministers guilty specially seing not one of them wrote agaynst Paraeus his booke before the same was publickely burnt in London Nor was Mariana his doctrine in the behalfe of the Popes as you oftē ignorantly suppose but of the Commōwealths Power agaynst Tyrants A Doctrine which Iesuits condemne but Protestants commonly follow I could name twenty of their Authours that peremptorily affirme what Mariana did only doubtingly propose yea much more For do not Protestants teach See the booke of Dangerous positions lib. 1. c. 4. l. 2. c. 1. That Iudges ought by the law of God so summon Princes before them for their crimes and to proceed agaynst them as agaynst all other offenders That it is lawfull to kill wicked Kings and Tyrants That God to the people hath giuen the sword from which no person King Queen Emperour is exempt Being an Idolater he must dy the death An hundred the like Theorems of your Gospell and Gospellers could I alleadge to stop your mouth the opinion which Mariana did doubtfully insinuate being farre short of
sinne nor to take men out of the power of darkenes nor to iustify soules by infusion of grace nor to purchase for men Crownes of glory nor to rayse men from life to death But only they are auaylable vnto one transitory effect which men might were they feruent obtayne by their owne industry ioyned with diuine grace to wit the Remission of temporall payne which vertue also comes from the meritts of Christ and his most pretious bloud in and by the satisfactions of Saints applyed to worke the aforesayd temporall releasement from which temporall seruitude the Children of God may through his gracious assistance by good works redeeme themselues or by satisfactions of their fellow-Cittyzens Saints be redeemed though this temporary Redemption compared with the redemption of Christ deserues not that tytle THE NINTH POINT The opiniō of deposing Kings giuing avvay their Kingdoms by Papall povver vvhether directly or indirectly THIS Controuersy was not handled by the Iesuite for the Reasons deliuered in the Preface nor is there any new cause giuen to speake in confirmation of our doctrine the Minister not hauing brought agaynst the same any Argumēt His whole drift in this Point is to slaunder Iesuits to cauill sicophantize which being his naturall Talent now ready to conclude he is more sharpe therin as Motion according to Nature is still more vehement towardes the end I will set downe and briefly examine what he saith reducing all to fiue Assaults in which the Reader shall see his Boldnes in vttering and Weakenes in prouing the most odious slaunders that may be vented by splene and malice The Ministers fond Cauill That Iesuites honour not the King as Soueraygne FIRST wheras the Iesuit sayth Regall Papall be two powers instituted of God both soueraygne and supreme ech in his kind both Venerable and Honoured by me in the inmost affections of soule after the triuiall trish-trash of a thousand tymes confuted obiections agaynst the Popes spirituall Supremacy thus you write pag. 570. in fine Your Protestation that you honour Regall and Papall Dignity must be vnderstood Iesuitically with mentall limitation to wit that you honour the Pope as an earthly God yea so farre as that if he lead you to Hell yea are ready to follow him distinct 40. can Si Papa But you honour the King as the Popes Vassall Matth. Paris in Henr. 3. pag. 844. Nonne Rex Anglorum noster est Vassallus This is your first Assault so strong as if bold slaundering and idle arguing may winne the field the day must be yours You lay two crimes to the Iesuits charge First that he is ready to obey and follow the Pope though the Pope lead him to Hell Can any Censure be more vnchristian The Iesuits suffering persecution for his Religion may conuince any reasonable man that he is not so desperate as to runne for any mans pleasure wittingly to Hell nor were he so mad is he such a foole as to goe thither disgraced and persecuted with the Pope Were he so minded he would rather go agaynst his conscience to please the King whereby he might perchance get a Deanery or some rich Benefice and so goe to Hell with Wife Children Seruants worldly Contents merily as you doe But what strong reason haue you to iudge so strangely of the Iesuit Marry The Canon Si Papa d. 40. sayth If the Pope by being of bad life negligent in his office drawe thousands to hell yet let no man presume to correct him to wit iuridically by deposing him except also he do deuiate from the Fayth This is the Canon which supposed your discourse hath this force and forme The Iesuit receaues the Canon Si Papa But the Canon Si Papa sayth the Pope not being an Heretike may not be deposed for scandalous life though he lead by his example thousands to hell Ergo the Iesuit is ready to follow and obey the Pope though he lead him to Hell It is hard to say whether your iudging be more voyd of Charity or your arguing of Reason I perceaue if we feare your censuring we must not mantayne that the King is not to be deposed for scandalous life though he lead thousands to Hell For if we doe you will thence conclude that we are desperate and ready to follow and obey the King though he lead vs to hell So wise a disputant and Censurer you are But let vs heare your second crimination and your proofe thereof The Iesuit sayth I honour Regall Power as in his kind Supreme and Soueraigne that is say you as the Popes Vassall A goodly Comment vpon the Iesuits Text what warrant haue you so to expound Forsooth Matthew Paris writes that Pope Innocent the third sayd of our King Henry the third Is not the King of England our Vassall What is this to the Iesuit Is he bound to belieue euery tale of Matthew Paris his writing Though had you any skil in Histories you might know that the Pope sayd so of that King not because he thought that Kings be by diuine Institution his Vassals in temporall Affayres but because that King had done vnto him voluntary Homage for his Kingdome For this Henry the third was Son of our King Iohn who gaue his Kingdome in vassalladge vnto this Pope Innocent to protect the same from the incursion of the French as he did Hence at his Coronation being thē in his Non-age sayth Matthew Paris fecit homagium Sanctae Romanae Ecclesiae Innocentio Papae he did homage to the holy Romā Church and vnto Pope Innocent After ward comming to riper age in the 29. yeare of his Raigne he sent an Embassadge of foure Noble men togeather with his Attourney William Powicke to the Councell of Lyons and vnto Pope Innocent the 4. to contradict the sayd donation of his Father alleadging many reasons sayth Walsingam Ypodigm Neust. Anno 1245. that the King could not make his Realme Vassall vnto any without the full consent thereof The Pope answered Rem indigere morosa consideratione so the matter rested Now I pray you consider how fond far fetcht your Discourse is Pope Innocent as Matthew Paris reports foure hundred yeares agoe sayd of a King that had done voluntary homage vnto him He is our Vassall Ergo the Iesuit doth not honour the King as Soueraigne in his kind Or Ergo his saying I honour the King as Soueraigne is to be vnderstood as the Popes Vassall The Minister his fond proofes of his Slaunder that Iesuits hold singular Opinions to the preiudice of Kings YOVR second Assault is to proue that Iesuits hold peculiar opinions preiudiciall vnto Regall authority which no other Catholicks but themselues mantayne This you proue by six Arguments so seely and fond as no man would haue mentioned them to this purpose but only your selfe First Iesuits say you pag. 573. are taxed and censured by many of their owne Part for singularity of opinions This is your Argumēt in so many words I pray you if
opinion with Pope Hilbebrand and Boniface the eight with Baronius Bosius Aluarus Pelagius with Augustinus ab Ancona with Panormitan yea and with the Deuill himselfe Answere It is very hard for any sort of men to sticke closer to the Deuill then you of Luthers generation seeing this your Sire sayth of himselfe Noctu Diabolus mihi accubare solet propior etiam quà m mea Catharina The Diuell lyes with me in the night neerer vnto me thē euen my Kate. Colloq de lege Euangel fol. 124. vel 158. Your selues write of him Lutherus à Diabolo doctus institutus Missam abrogauit Luther taught and instructed by the Diuell did abrogate the Masse Hospin Histor. Sacram. part Altera fol. 131. Which History of his conuersion from the Masse by Diuellish Arguments the same Luther hath written Luther Tom. 7. Wittemb An. 1558. de Missa priuata c. fol. 228. euen with his owne Protestant holy hand wherewith also as himselfe doth testify he did eate more then a bushell of salt with this his Familiar Luther Conc. in Domin Reminiscere Wittemberg impress An. 1523. fol. 19. So that it is small discretion in you to scoffe at vs about closing in opinion with the Diuell I adde that the Reader may see your iests to be still as sottish as they are splenefull if it be true as it is most true that Damones credunt contremiscunt Iacob 2.19 Diuels belieue the truth and tremble it is no fault to close in opinion with the Diuell but to close with the Diuell in lying as you doe euen in this place For Gregory the 7. and Boniface the 8. teach not that Popes haue Tēporall dominion or Soueraingty ouer the whole world but only the power of the keyes in which Authority is inuolued to vnloose all earthly bands contrary vnto the Saluation of Soules The Ministers miserable Apology for Protestants YOVR fourth Assault is agaynst the Iesuits saying The Catholicke doctrine is not so preiudicial vnto States as is the Protestant held both by Lutherans and Caluinists expressed in their writings wherof we haue in this age but ouer euident and lamentable examples to the World and your Maiesty not vnknowne Thus you write pag. 577. Is the wit of a Iesuit growne so barren Haue you no other euasion but by recrimination and that impertinent For as concerning your Flim-flam of Protestants both Lutherans and Caluinists I Answere His Maiesty hath obserued by longe experience that it cannot enter into any true Protestants hart vpon any occasion whatsoeuer to lift vp their heads against the Lords Annointed Thus you Where I might say with S. Augustine O stultitia hominis cogitare se dictorem neminem contradictorem O the folly of a man to say what he will neuer thinking he shall be gaynsayd and heare what he would not For did you thinke men would ponder your sayings and gaynsay them finding them false could you speake such palpable vntruths as you doe A true harted Protestāt cannot lift vp his head agaynst the Lords Annoynted vpon any occasion whatsoeuer Marke the CANNOT of the Protestant Impeccability They were wont to teach they could not keepe so much as one of the Diuine Commandements now they are so holy as a thought cannot enter into their hart to lift vp their heads agaynst the Diuine Precept of Honouring the Lords Annoynted In Logicke as a patterne of a ridiculous Answerer they bring this example as if one should say De possibili nego de facto concedo I deny the thing to be possible yet I grant it to haue been done I see no remedy but you must be forced to this Answere For that a true harted Protestant vpon any occasion whatsoeuer lift vp his head agaynst the Lords Annoynted you say is not possible yet I hope you be not so impudent agaynst the knowledge of mankind but you will confesse that they haue often lifted vp their head◠and hands agaynst their Soueraignes the proper miracle of your Gospel to done thinges that cannot be done I pray you they that first planted the Gospell in Scotland the Ministers of England in the dayes of Queen Elizabeth were they not true-harted Protestāts Was not the Kings mother the Lords Annoynted by byrth-right a Soueraigne Princesse Did you not lift vp your heads agaynst her I cry you mercy you did not lift vp you heads against her but your axe agaynst her head hauing first lifted vp your hands your armes your swordes to depriue her of her Crowne to cast her from her Kingdome Looke vpon all Countryes of Europe where Protestants liue vnder Catholicke Princes if you find one Nation or Prouince of them that within these last seauen yeares hath not been in open Rebellion agaynst their Catholicke Soueraignes I will grant you the Question that you Protestants are impeccable that bad thoughts can not enter into your harts But the King hath had long experience that at least the Protestants of England will not lift vp their heads agaynst the Lords Annoynted vpon any occasion whatsoeuer I pray you what experience hath his Maiesty had that in the occasion he should depriue you of your Deaneryes take from you the Church-vsurped Liuings put you in prison set vp a Religion that would not endure wiuing-preachers what experience I say longe or short great or little hath his Maiesty had that in this the like occasions you will not rebell lift vp your heads hands swordes agaynst him yea if you be able lay the axe on his necke as you did on his Mothers When you seemed to haue some little cause of iealousy that his Maiesty might grant some Conniuency vnto Catholickes was not there a Minister found that in pulpit did publickly preach that in Case the King should turne Papist Ministers may depose him But alas A Iesuits wit you say is growne very barren he hath no other euasion but this Flim-flam about the Rebellious Spirit and doctrine of Protestants No other euasion Yea he hath otherwise confuted your false calumniations and cleerly layd open your idle Arguments And the doctrine taught by Protestants that the people hath the sword from which the King is not exempt If he be wicked he must dye the death That Iudges ought to call Kinges to the Barre proceed agaynst them for ordinary Crimes as much as agaynst other malefactours That the people maketh Kings and may agayne vnking them at their pleasure as easely as a man recalls his letters of Proxy These doctrins I say be they Flim-flams nothing pertinent vnto Kings I perceaue you would haue Kinges sleep in security and not feare your attempts that so if they anger you you may do with their Heades as Iahel did with the head of sleeping Sisera Iudic. c. 4. The Ministers Cauill agaynst the Iesuits speciall Vow of Obedience to the Pope YOVR fifth and last Assault is an often repeated Calumniation that Iesuits cannot be Loyall vnto Kings because they are bound by speciall Vow vnto Popes Hence to