the King gaue it to him vnder his hand and broad Seale which conuinceth that whatsoeuer was the motiue of making those statutes all prouisions of dignities from Rome were forbidden and not those onely which had temporall liuings annexed vnto them And hereby also may it be seene how ready these fellowes are to interprete other mens words in the worst sense which they may affirme most peremptorily that the speakers or writers had those senses which it most pleased their aduersaries to giue them And thus much for this point Onely this is to bee added that although this new manifester of spirits hath in this place recanted somewhat of his rashnesse vttered in the Apol. cap. 2. fol. 15. concerning the chiefe purpose of those statutes of Praemunire yet he hath left somewhat in this manifestation of spirits which he must in some other place recant or shew himselfe a very obstinate impostor that is concerning the time of the enacting those Statutes which were long before the time in which hee here sayth they were made as may appeare by the booke of Statutes The second shift is as apparant as this For although many men in the world may say as much as the Archpriest said in diuers cases wherein Appeale is cut off by his Holinesse consent and order yet no man in the world who professeth to be a Catholike will say it and stand peremptorily in it without some warrant by this clause in their Commission appellatione remota or to that effect which is not to be found in the Commission which M. Blackwell had as may appeare to those who will reade ouer the Cardinall Caietane his letters by which he made him an Archpr and Superiour ouer the Seminary priests residing in England and Scotland 20 Cap. 9. fol. 123. There are letters of the 18. of March 1598. from Flanders brought out against the two Priests that went from England to Rome about an authoritie not then knowen in England as by the date of the letters of institution it may be euidently gathered which was at Rome 7. Martij 1598. 21 Fol. 125. 126. 127. There are letters brought out to proue that his Holinesse was prouoked by them to imprison the two priests whereas the date of the first of them is after the date of F. Bellarmine now Cardinall his letter to F. Parsons wherein he signified that his Holines had that resolution if they came to Ferrara for his letter beareth date the 17. of October 1598. as appeareth fol. 120. Apol. and the first of the other letters are from Doway 25. Octobr. 1598. as appeareth fol. 125. 22 Fol. 132. A most audacious imposture It is said that M. Charnocke said and swore before that their onely comming was to supplicate c. whereas there is no such matter said or sworne by M. Charnocke as may appeare fol. 129. where his oath is put downe without this word onely which is here thrust in by the author for his purpose 23 Fol. 128. F. Parsons exhortations were the students onely informations The whole English Colledge is said to haue knowen what passed at Rome in this matter when the two priests were there deteyned prisoners which no one being present at any thing which passed is a most grosse and impudent imposture 24 Cap. 10. fol. 141. It is affirmed That the two Priests who were deteyned as prisoners at Rome were presently set at libertie vpon the sight of the Breue and assurance that neither they nor any of their side in England would euer stirre more in these affaires Which may euidently appeare to bee most false for the Breue was brought vnto them within two or three dayes after the date thereof which is 6. Aprilis and the whole Colledge will witnesse that one of them was not set at libertie vntill the 6. of May following although the other had this libertie vpon the 22. of April 25 Fol. 143. A marucilous presumption of the blinde reader his dulnesse There is very good vse made of the false dating of the Breue which is knowen to haue bene vpon the sixth of April 1599. and not long before that is fol. 140. it is twice so cited Yet here for the credit of F. Parsons the Reader must take the Breue to beare date the 21. of the said moneth 26 Fol. 154. This Authour should haue shewed what meanes M. Char. had to liue in Lorraine It is sayd that M. Charnock being at Paris it was there resolued that he should go into England vnder pretence of lacke of meanes to liue abroade and that onely for fashions sake hee should aduise Card. Burghesius which is very false as the principall of our Nation then liuing in Lorayne can testifie M. Charnock hauing been there almost a yeere and neuer receiued any thing from them who confined him there nor from England notwithstanding he had written diuers times both to Rome and into England for some maintenance as some of them haue testified in their letters to the Archpr. dated the 11. of April 1600. from Liuerdune 27 Fol. 168. A shameles disseâ—…ling of the cause of these present controuersies This Author inueigheth bitterly against the priests and would haue his Reader most ridiculously to thinke that the priests had no iust cause to stirre as now they doe but that they tooke occasion as hee sayeth vpon an angry Epistle of the Archpriests vnto them and most impudently quoteth a place in the priests booke to his Holilines pag. 62. where his Reader may see that the contents of that Epistle was a publication that they were schismatiks and that hee had receiued such a resolution from Rome which we leaue to any indifferent man to iudge whether it was a iust cause for the priests to stirre for the purging themselues of this wicked slander 28 Fol. 177. This Author boldly demaundeth touching the two priestes who were imprisoned at Rome among other questions all which will bee answered in their places had they not licence after all examinations made to goe and speake with his Holines if they would Whereas all the English Nation then in Rome wil testifie that they were kept close prisoners long after their examinations were made and the one not dismissed out of prison vntill two dayes after that the other was departed from Rome by which it appeareth that they were not together at liberty after their first imprisonment nor licensed to goe to speake with his Hol. 29 Cap. 13. fol. 201. It is affirmed that M. Bensted was pursued so narrowly vp and downe London soone after conference with D. Bagshaw as he was taken neere the Tower and soone after made away in recompense of this his contradiction to the D. A most malicious suggestion For so good friends saith this fellow in this place are the persecutors vnto them as none that dissent or disagree from them shall finde any fauour And to make this Narration seeme the more probable the priest himselfe is brought
that subordination Thirdly with what stomacke and auersion from all Christian peace the Iesuites proclaimed after that the peace was made that they all incurred the censures of holy Church who should dogmatizando mainteine that those Priests were not schismaticks who forbore to subiect themselues vnto the auctoritie before they saw his Holines letters in confirmation thereof and the Archpriest published that he had receiued a resolution from the mother City which afterwards hee explicated himselfe to some that it was from a paire of yong Iesuits to wit F. Warford F. Tichborne or from one of them The contents whereof were that these priests were schsmaticks which is now the true state of the question as none but most impudent companions can deny and the original of these present stirres And this the Archpriest his fact the author of this Apologie in the 11. chap fol. 168. calleth an angry Epistle and challengeth the priests in termes best fitting his Religious humor that for an angry Epistle they would breake out into such scandalous tumults and so leaueth the matter without telling what this angry Epistle was and that it was a proclamation that the Priests had liued a long time inschisme and what other matters must thereupon necessarily insue not onely to the discredit of those priests but also to the disturbance of many deuout Catholicks whose ghostly fathers they had bene during that time But since that this author hath proposed the true state of the questiō as he saith to be an opposition of a few against the whole streame of other Catholicks deuising particuler wayes for their preferring and there causing some to leape and slide Let vs do him the fauor to heare how he proceedeth with this his imagination And this saith he is the true state of the question let vs declare briefly the way and path how they came into this pit Thus he beginneth this declaration Wee haue vnderstood by Card. Allens letters before mentioned written to M. Mush the yeere that he died how he had vnderstood of a certaine emulation and deuision begun in England by some priests against the Fa. of the Societie and perhaps hee perceiued the same by no meanes more then by himselfe his speach and behauiour while hee was at Rome with him the very same yeere I doe nothing marueile that this good fellow would faine haue his Reader conceiue that the Priests began a diuision against the Iesuits For if he could perswade this he would not doubt but to deale well ynough with such fooles as cannot thinke that the Iesuits can giue any iust cause why the Priests should breake with them I marueile much that he is not ashamed so often to inculcate this letter of the Cardinall which if it make any thing in this matter it maketh against the Iesuits as we haue often shewed For first cōcerning the diuision the Fathers want of good correspondence is first placed the cause of discontentment not knowen and M. Mush a Secular Priest put in commission to be peremptory aswell with the Iesuits as the Secular Priests with whō the Cardinall knew he might be bold especially in so good an action as was the furthering of a peace where he was informed there was want And for the better satisfaction of such as will be satisfied we will once againe repeate the Card. letter as it is set downe in the second Chap. of Apologie fol 11. I haue heard saith he to my great griefe that there is not that good correspondence betweene the Fathers other Priests I cannot tell vpon what discontentment c. But whereof soeuer it commeth it is of the enemie and with all possible discretion and diligence by the wiser sort on both sides to be rooted out or els it will be the ruine of the whole cause c. And therefore in this point especially M. Mush be earnest and peremptory with all parties and euery one in particular and tel them that I charge and aduise them by the blessed Blood and bowels of Gods mercie that they honour loue and esteeme one another according to euery mans age order and profession And then he exhorteth those of the Secular order which is an argument that what went before did principally concerne the Iesuits The maner also of the Cardinall his writing doeth shew that what he conceiued of the diuision here supposed was by other meanes then by M. Mush For had he vnderstood it as this Author saith perhaps by no meanes more then by himselfe his speech and behauiour while he was in Rome without perhaps the Cardinall would not haue written vnto him after his departure in this maner I haue heard to my great griefe that there is not that good correspondence between the Fathers and other Priests I cannot tell vpon what discontentment but rather haue put him in minde what he had tolde him and would not haue bene left ignorant of the true cause or some colour of cause if M. Mush had discouered any such matter vnto him And whereas here is mention of M. Mush his behauiour while he was in Rome with the Cardinall we may verely beleeue that it was such as became an honest priest and that he gaue very great satisfaction not onely to the Cardinall Allen but also to many other hauing those graces and fauours at his returne which no man euer had before him to wit authoritie not onely for himselfe in diuers reserued cases but to giue to a certaine number of other priests whom he would name at his returne into England But marke I pray you what moueth this author to say that the Cardinal writ his letter vpon M. Mush his behauiour when he was with him at Rome the very same yeere For albeit saith he this man gaue out euery where that he went to Rome to enter into that order which many yeeres before he had pretended yet others that knew him better did soone discouer his alienation from them and that he pretended perhaps by his iourney to Rome to get some other dignitie Here there is another Perhaps to helpe the former For first it was perhaps that the Cardinall perceiued a certaine diuision by no meanes more then by M. Mush his behauiour and speech at Rome and now it is perhaps that he went to Rome for to get some other dignitie Good meditations for such spirituall guides and very charitable We will not here cite M. Blackwell his letter which was written in the yeere of our Lord 1596 which was two yeres after the Cardinals death wherein hee taketh on marueilously against all those who did affirme at Rome that there had bene strife or any falling out here in England which was worth the talking of although neither he nor any man els can denie but that the scandalous separation in Wisbich was begun by the Iesuits and their faction long before and is not to this day ended We wil onely request the religious spirit of the author of this Apologie to let vs
vnderstand what reason he had in this place to make this note in the margent How this last sedition in England began shewing nothing in the text but his general conceit of an emulation and diuision begun in England by some Priests against the Fathers of the Societie and bringeth no other proofe therof then the Card Allen his letter aboue mentioned wherein there is no more mention of any diuision by Secular priests against the Iesuits then by the Iesuits against Secular priests as hath bene shewed And if by this note we are giuen to vnderstand How that this last sedition in England began before this letter of the Car. Allen was written then at the latest this last sedition must haue his beginning in the yere of our Lord 1594 or before For in that yeere the Cardinal died as it is here confessed in the Apol fol. 6. Now then if this last sedition in England did begin in the yeere of our Lord 1594 or before what was the secret intention which this Religious spirit had when in the 9. Chap. of this Apologie fol. 131. it made this marginal note The first beginners of the sedition M. Collington and M. Charnocke by his owne confession how could these men be the beginners of this sedition by an acte done in the yeere of our Lord 1598 at the soonest for so the letter constitutiue beareth date about which this confession is said to haue bene made when this author affirmeth that this last sedition was begun in the time of Card. Allen who died in the yeere of our Lord 1594. But as the good-wife of an Ordinary saith A ioynt is a ioynt so with this good fellow A booke is a booke And it is no great matter how one piece is patched to another the fooles who are deuoted vnto him wil take al with blinde obedience and for the rest there wil be some other deuise as to stand stoutly to the auerring of any thing which may further his cause or the denying whatsoeuer may hinder it Hauing thus farre presumed vpon the simplicity of his Reader he proceedeth in his declaration of the way or path or the supposed true state of the question and continueth his tale of M. Mush his negotiation But returning saith he into England as he went foorth and the Cardinall soone after dying he ioyned with an other of his owne humour that had left another religion namely the Carthusians and in the margent he setteth M Iohn Collington and they two with some few other determined to make a certaine newe Hierarchie of their owne calling it an association of Clergie men with two Superiours as it were Archbishops the one for the South and the other for the North with certaine Rules and deuises impossible to be obserued in England while times and matters doe remaine as they doe c. It is very well knowen that M. Mush returning into England imployed himselfe in more offices of charitie then all the Iesuites in England And all the North parts of England will affirme it especially those who were in durance for their conscience And when the spirit of the Iesuits mooued them vnder pretence of reformation in Wisbich to make their scandalous separation and schisme he went thither accompanied with M. Dudlie where after that they had spent some dayes and perceiued that there was no hope of any accord but by the cōmandement of him who was Superiour to F. Weston who canuased in Wisbich for a superioritie vnder the title of an Agent he came to London where he found this Superiour and after long conference with him about it as one who was loath the matter beganne should go backward he promised at the length to send such letters vnto Wisbich by them that at the sight thereof his subiect Fa. Weston should surcease from that intended Agencie and all should bee well But M. Mush and M. Dudlie were compelled to send for these letters and if they had not vrged the matter in such sort as this Superiour could not any longer halt with them they had departed with such letters as had bene to no purpose and the time was differred vntill it was so late as he hoped they would not haue stayed for any other The peace being in the ende made such as it was and not without this vnder-hand condition that the Iesuits their faction might afterward breake off when they would M. Mush and M. Dudley at their next returne to London if not before delt with M. Iames Standish for the erecting of an Association of such priests as would voluntarily subiect themselues to liue vnder such a superior and such rules as they should among themselues agree vpon M. Standish communicated this matter to other priests who liked well therof as yet M. Colington not being neere Lōdon knew nothing of this intent howsoeuer it hath pleased this author now to except against it there will be good proofe made that the Superior of the Iesuits was so farre from speaking against it as he did seeme to take great ioy in it vntill he perceiued that he was not likely to haue the gouernment thereof as his fellow had in Wisbich of the greater part of the Catholike prisoners And if the vnited priests were the authors of this Apologie how ridiculously are sixe of them brought in here to credit it as though there were more honestie in these 6. alone taken singly from the rest then 16. in the whole company of those vnited brethren when those sixe also are among them but it shal be well seene in a particular answer to their letter here cited that whosoeuer were the authors thereof those sixe who subscribed vnto it had smal cause to doe so or to thanke them who eased them of the labour to pen it But now remitting the reader for M. Collington his iust causes of leauing the order of the Carthusians in which he neuer was but onely in probation which argued a most religious minde in him and was crossed onely by the disablements of his body to the last point handled by himselfe in his late booke of Reasons intituled A iust defence c. And for M. Mush his leauing the Iesuits to the eleuenth Chapter of the Apologie fol. 170 where it is plainely said that they would not admit him we will see how this Apologie fitteth his Reader First by this narration in the Apologie it is euident that the association of which here is mention was not deuised by such as thought their designements frustrated by Fa. Parsons dealing at Rome in the yeere 1597 as the author of this same Apologie affirmeth cap. 1 fol. 6. 7. Secondly it is vntrue that these two determined vpon any such matter Thirdly there was neuer any determination to haue two Superiors much lesse as it were Archbishops For as may appeare by the rules made in the North the very first rule De rectoribus is this There shall be chosen euery yere one Father and two assistants by the consents
and how it was ordained and intimated by the Protector called in question by some discōtented brethren without reason or authoritie and how great troubles haue ensued thereof And first he beginneth to declare the motiues or causes of this Subordination in this maner When his Holines heard the former state of matters in England Flanders and other places and of the murmurations of some against the Fathers of the Societie set downe as well in the aforesaid contumelious Memoriall as by diuers other letters and relations which came to the Protectors sight and by him was related to his Holines and namely when he receiued great store of priuate and publique letters out of England against the said Memoriall of Fisher and some one with aboue 100. hands at it other with 40. and 50. all in fauour and commendation of the Fathers their labours and behauiour in England against the said slanderous Memoriall And in the margent there is this note See the letters of the Northern Priests 24. Martij 1598. and others 20 of April and others after 30. Iuly And others of the South in great number 18 of May and of the quiet sort of Wisbich 27. of March 1598. it followeth in the text and many other in seuerall letters of principall men which are yet extant but are not yet to be seene when also diuers of these did expresly demand some subordination and gouernment of Secular Priests to take away this emulation of some few against the Fathers as though all but a few would haue had them to haue bene their masters and that two lately came out of England at this very time one a Iesuit the other a Secular Priest bate me an ace quoth he for M. Standish had giuen his name before to become a Iesuite and therefore a vassaile of theirs although he retained still the habite of a Secular priest that vnder that habit he might the more cunningly deceiue his Holines each of them vrging the same in behalfe of the one and other order a couple of fit Proctors for the purpose But when all this was done What then Forsooth his Holines after mature deliberation resolued to yeeld thereunto hoping hereby to quiet all as well for that the Secular priests should by this meanes haue gouernours of their owne as also for that the Fathers by all likelyhood should remaine free from all matter of calumniation about gouerning Secular priests for the time to come How currant would this tale be if one of the most necessary matters there were not that the Archpriest must aduise still with the Iesuits in his greatest affaires for so he is commanded in his instructions and consequently the Fathers by all likelyhood do not remaine free from all maner of calumniation as he termeth it about gouerning Secular priests And doubtlesse if it be a calumniation to say the Fathers do gouerne the Secular priests what is it when they are not said to gouerne but doe really gouerne by order as is said from his Holines in great matters and of their owne great deuotion in all other by the Archpriest his blinde obedience vnto them But now to the maine motiue of this Subordination and that which caused his Holines to consult for some moneths and to seeke for informations out of England of the quiet at the least for the fittest men for gouernment as this author immediatly suggesteth we must conceiue some such strange miracle as that there was some extraordinary day weeke or moneth in which this motiue was made consultation had and information giuen In this chapter fol. 102. it is confessed and if it were not it would bee otherwise prooued that the Cardinals letters by which the authority was instituted did beare date the seuenth of March in the yeere 1598. This then being dispatched at that time what time would a reasonable man haue allowed for the trauailing of the motiues thereof out of England to Rome How many wil he gesse those moneths to be which are here said by this author that his Hol. tooke to consult and to haue intelligence from the quiet in England of the fittest men for gouernment and could heare but of seuen in all England wherof one was dead to wit M. D. Henshaw The sunne who kept his course in England and saw how the Iesuites were calumniated as men that would gouerne the Secular priests stayed his course at Rome for the space of fiue or sixe moneths And whereas the Romanes had gotten the start of vs in England for some tenne dayes in the course of the yeere now the English had gotten the start of them and made their seuenth day of March come many moneths after ours For as it is sayd this authoritie was made at Rome vpon the seuenth of March 1598 and it was made vpon certaine informations as appeareth here in the margent fol. 98. which were sent out of England some the 24 of March some the 27 some the 20 of April some the 18 of May some the 30 of Iuly in the same yere 1598 to which if we should allow a time for the motiues to trauaile to Rome and some moneths for his Holinesse to consult and send backe againe into England for informations of the fittest men for gouernment I trowe the same would haue rested himselfe well at Rome howsoeuer hee laboured elsewhere to haue an authoritie instituted vpon these motiues consultations and informations vpon the seuenth of March at Rome in the same yere 1598. And least that they should bee idle at Rome any time of this long day In Rome also saith this Author the opinions were asked by the Protector of the principall English that resided there and could best informe as namely Father Parsons that had often aduice from thence from his fellow Iesuits and therefore could the better informe for his owne purpose Fa. Baldwin lately come from England a iolly bold yong fellow but a Iesuite and therefore a principal man M. D. Haddocke M. Martin Array whose fayrest game was to please the Iesuits M. Iames Standish who had giuen his name to the Iesuits to become one of their Order and others that had laboured in the English vineyard perchance Fa. Warford who was become also a Iesuite and helped to make vp a very fit Iurie to passe vpon the priests as also M. Thomas Allen nephew to the late Cardinall and diuers else not worthy the naming yet might very well be of the Councell the plot was so wisely cast who concurring with the opinion of letters comming out of England hee hath before told you what letters and when they were written some of them in Aprill some in May some in Iuly as also with diuers other principall men that wrote thereof from Spaine Flanders and other places some diuine intelligencers both of the necessitie of some Subordination to be made they had belike vnderstood of the Iesuits their ambitious humor wherewith they had begun to trouble all England namely about their insolent Agencie in Wisbich
against our brethren Priests that had beene of the same Colledge and Vniuersitie here in Rome and had gone hence into England iointly to labour and aduenture our liues for the same cause of the Catholike faith though before them and were quickly wearie thereof yet their maner of proceeding had been and was so preiudiciall to common peace these good Proctors were 12 yeeres before or there about gone out of England and vnion and so scandalous to all good and honest men that either we must oppose our selues against them in the name of our head they meane the Archpriest who was not their head they liuing at Rome and of all the rest of our Catholike body in England and abroad they wil make their foresayd head a yong Pope or els we should seeme to betray the same cause impugned by them O scrupulous conscience who would thinke that all his tale were onely an imagination what might haue been sayd neither he nor his fellow Proctor hauing as yet vttered one word But let vs heare this saint make an end of this lewde and lowde lie Wherefore wee prayed their Graces in what language not to be scandalized to see this diuision amongst vs for that these were the moaths O gentle mouthes speake that did breed in the best clothes and the wormes O noble Proctor that were commonly found vnder the barke of euery tree if they were not looked to in time and that this happened also in the verie primitiue Church permitted by God for the better proofe and exercise of good men And that this was a very heresie in maners actions as th' other in Protestants was in faith and Religion that this would breake into that in time if that it were not looked into as in diuers of the Iesuits darlings it had done already and must needs doe For that it was contention founded vpon the same grounds of emulation euery ambition hatred couetousnes and libertie of life as the other heresie was and wrought a spirit conforme to that in all respects c. This letter being written 3. or 4. dayes after that the priests had appeared before the Cardinals and after a friendly composition demaunded by the Proctors and pretended by the Cardinals Can it be an argument of any other thing then a desire to continue strife and diuision Could the most hatefull professed enemy in the world haue disgorged his filthy stomache in more spitefull termes Had this bene vttered by the Proctors before the Cardinals against the two priests with shame ynough it had bene written into England but without the least â—ot of honesty the Proctors themselues hauing most humbly desired a friendly composition But the Proctors not hauing vttered one word much lesse in these most vile termes who may not iustly iudge that when this letter was written which was after the apparance of the two priests as appeareth by the date that it was not meant by that side that euer there should be peace But marke I pray you yet a most wicked relation and which may conuince more euidently if it be possible that these fellowes would not haue peace And then saith he we gaue vp a writing which before had bene exhibited vnto his Holines was remitted hither as it seemeth it seemed so indeed for D Haddocke had it ready to giue vp to the Cardinals so soone as F. Parsons had told his tale that these men came hither onely to trouble the peace of England and to reuiue stirres in Rome and that of their owne heads as it seemeth for that they had brought no one letter of credence with them of Superior or other to his Holines Protector or other man in Rome c. wherefore we desired remedy in this behalfe and exhibited diuers letters of the doctors of Doway and M. Wright the deane of Cortrac and of other graue men of our nation to this effect All these letters here said to haue bene exhibited by the Proctors were no other then one letter from the D of Doway and an other from M. Wright which are set in the Apologie fol. 125 126. whereof the first beareth date the 25. of Octob. 1598. and the second 10 Nouemb. 1598. and they were both to the Protector Yet must M. Martins friend beleeue that he and his fellow Protector did vpon the 17. of February exhibit many other letters to the Protector who was chiefe Iudge notwithstaÌ„ding the exceptions taken against him at this time But how were these letters exhibited In no other sort then as a part of that writing for they were inserted in it as may appeare by the writing it selfe of which I haue seene a copy But let this passe let vs heare what he saith was answered by the priests to all these grieuous accusations Against all which saith he the Ambassadors were able to say little and willing to say lesse but onely excused their owne intentions and asked pardon if they had giuen scandall by their maner of proceeding more then they euer meant But put the case indeed as it was and as the Card. Burgesius without doubt will acknowledge and the Iesuits with all the rest of that faction then present must auouch it one day against their owne soules will they nill they that Fa. Tichborne the Iesuit who here also supplied the place of a publique Notary and read this Libel had no sooner done reading it then M. Bishop required that the Proctors might take their othes that the Libel contained nothing but trueth To which when the Card. Caietan would not consent he requested that a copy of the Libel might be deliuered vnto him his fellow that they might make their answere vnto it as most false and iniurious whereat D. Hadd who had giuen vp the writing stepped to the table requested that it might not be deliuered vnto them but that all things rather should be peaceably concluded To which the Card. Caietan presently consented the sooner perchance for ioy that both the Proctors were not dumbe for before this acte of D. Haddocke it is most certaine that neither of them spake one word howsoeuer that his fellow vanteth of his workemanship when he was bidden to speake like a Proctor Now would I aske of an indifferent Iudge whether it were possible that there could be any desire of peace in fellowes who in cold blood and after three nights rest if rancor and malice would suffer them to rest would write thus into England cleane contrary to all trueth in a matter of such moment as was the handling of the cause concerning which all the diuision was which was or was like to be in England And if this were necessary to be done lest that they should seeme to betray the cause impugned by the two priests as this fellow saith in this letter must not consequently this cause be a most fowle cause which must be vpholden with such shamelesse falshood could these fellowes thinke that Master Bishop or Master Charnocke should euer come to
to keepe him in case for euer comming home and to aggrauat the matter M. Charnocke is said to haue made a ridiculous appeale from the sentence of the two Cardinals But I thinke that this fellows worship did not laugh when he heard of it Yea and more then this he came to Paris and tooke degree of Bachelor of diuinitie which perchance troubled this fellowes worship as much as the appeale and thereupon he doeth so iuggle it with M. Bishop his taking degree of doctor forbidden as he saith by an expresse Breue that his Reader may thincke M. Charnocke had committed some great offence and yet this author meane nothing lesse but that he layde all the offence vpon doctor Bishop who was before and not at that time made Doctor as he would seeme to say and was lawfully made and worthily and no way contrary to the true meaning of the Breue which was gotten of the Pope not against the doctoring without approbation as here is most falsly noted in the margent but against the doctoring of yong men and such by explication of those who procured the Breue as would take the degree more timely then the ambitiō of their aduersaries could well like of But to returne to his tale of M. Charnocke Here then that is at Paris it was resolued saith he that M. Charnocke notwithstanding his Holines prohibition that is to say the sentence of the two Cardinals Caietane and Burghese from which he had lawfully appealed which also M. doctor Ely confirmeth in his notes vpon the Apologie pag 157. and thereby set himselfe free vntill the matter were againe discussed and his owne oath to the contrary which he neuer tooke nor was any offered him when the sentence here specified fol. 155 was shewed him by Fa. Parsons in forme of a letter to the same Father being then Rector or the vice Rector of the Colledge should goe into England vnder pretence of lacke of meanes to liue abroad This was the cause of his Appeale in Lorraine before he came to Paris as M. Archpr. vnderstood by a letter from M. Artur Pitts the Deane of Le Verdun and Chancellor of the Legacion in Lorraine and that onely for fashion sake he should aduise Cardinall Burghesius thereof which he did by a litle short contemptious letter of the 25. of May. The letter was written in very humble maner as I vnderstood by those that saw it and with the priuitie of others in Paris who would soone haue caused any such stile to haue bene altered and as it was not perchance very long so as it appeaeth by the authors relation it was not very short for here he sayth that the Cardinall did answere all the obiections or cauillations touched therein about their hard vsage iniurious sentence giuen against them and how he had appealed which this author calleth points of the letter nor in any such maner contemptible for who can thinke that this fellow were so modest that amongst all his cōtemptuous tearms and narrow seeking for the least matters to bring the priests into contempt he would not set downe some one phrase or other by which it should appeare to his Reader that the letter was a contemptuous letter To the which saith he the most honorable and gracious good Cardinal answered with great patience and modestie the fifteenth of September in the yeare 1600 beginning his letter thus Reuerend in Christ as my brother your letters written at Paris the 28 of May about your iourney into England were deliuered more slowly to my hand then I could haue wished both that I might haue answered sooner and haue disswaded that iourney of yours if they had come vnto me before your departure out of France for that I thinke the newes of your departure will bee vngratefull to his Holines as it is vnto vs for so much as it is both against obedience and against an expresse prohibition and against your owne promise confirmed with an othe and is thought will giue occasion of new contention and troubles in England c. Thus farre in the Apologie And afterward this author declareth how the Cardinal did answere the obiections which M. Charnocke had made and that notwithstanding this M. Charnocke did not onely perseuere in England in the exercise of his function of priesthood hauing openly incurred the censure of suspension but also returned a more vndutifull answere then was his sonner letter which hee prooueth by those wordes in M. Charnocks letter Quam licet tunc cluderem fraudem ad maiorem securitatem vterque ab eo absolui curauimus although I did delude at that time the deceipt vsed in making vs sweare to fulfill the sentence giuen against vs yet both of vs afterward procured our selues for more securitie to be absolued from this othe This letter of the Cardinall Burghese is set downe at large in the booke to the Inquisition pag 84. 85. 86. and 87. and immediately doth M. Charnocks letter follow where who will may see them I will here onely touch so much of M. Charnocks letter as is in answere to that part of the Cardinals here cited leauing the rest to men of iudgement to consider whether M. Charnocke did not what he did vpon sufficient ground to saue himselfe harmelesse from all censures and blamelesse in the opinion of any honest man Thus hee beginneth his reply which this author taxeth so deepely for vndutifulnesse Most Reuerend and most illustrious prince your letters dated at Rome 15. Septemb. 1600. I did receiue at London in England vpon the 21. of the next moneth following To the which I returne this answer with as great respect as the law was in which they were written I doe not well vnderstand how the notice of my going into England should be vngratefull either to his Holinesse or vnto your Highnesse when as neither a most louing Father nor a most iust Iudge can be ignorant that foode is as needfull for the liuing as punishment for the offendor The Rector or Vicerector of the English College in Rome was appointed by letters of the most illustrious Cardinall Caietan of good memory and of your Highnesse dated from both your pallaces 21. of Aprill 1599. to signifie vnto vs in your names that we should not presume for a time to goe without leaue into the kingdomes of England Scotland or Ireland but should liue quietly peaceably and religiously in other Catholike countreys where we should be appointed by you and that we should procure the conseruation of peace euery where among the English Catholickes If either of them had signified vnto vs in your names or in the names of any other where banished and confined men should haue had those things which were necessary to sustaine life and that these things had bene at hand I might haue bene charged with disobedience and breach of an expresse commandement not obeying so pious an intention of the decree which layd vpon me a most grieuous howsoeuer vndeserued punishment as
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
they list In the first Chapter of the Apol. fol. 2. this author affirmeth that the principall or onely ground of this our present contention and scandalous controuersie is an emulation partly of lay men against Priests and partly of Priests against religious men especially the Fathers of the societie And in the 11. Chap. fol. 161. he sayth that the whole world knoweth that this cōtrouersie is of Priests with the Archpriest and that the stomacke against the Iesuits is for standing with the Archpriest By which besides the contradiction it appeareth how this poore mans memory doth faile him euen in the deciding betweene whome the controuersie is which hee vndertaketh to handle and determine 13 In the same Chapter fol. 6. and 7. the beginning of the association of secular Priests is attributed to the Priests vpon their comming into England A malicious deuise for to discredit the association intended by the priests after they were frustrated of their designments by F. Parsons dealing at Rome whereas his comming to Rome was in the yeere 1597. and not before as appeareth in this place and the association began in the yeere 1595. and F. Parsons was tolde thereof before hee came out of Spaine for Rome 14 Cap 3. fol. 20. The Iesuites care for pure stuffe to make priests of The bookes which are set out by the Priests are sayd to be done by such as went ouer Seruingmen Souldiers and wanderers which is most apparantly false if those were the authors which in the beginning of this Apologie are held to be 15 Fol. 21. It is sayd That the whole bodie and name of Iesuites is impugned which is most false as may appeare in the booke to the Inquisition pag. 5. 16 Cap. 6. fol. 27. D. Norden is saide to haue bene striken by God with a strange accident of repressing his tongue by dumbnesse vntill hee died which is most false hee dying no more strangely then all persons vse to die according to the maner as the sickenesse doth take them It is well knowen that he died of a Lethargie and that he spake many times after he was first taken therewith and died in all points as became a Catholike priest as there are many to witnesse who were present 17 Cap. 8. fol. 98. His Holines is sayd to haue resolued to yeeld to the erecting of a gouernment in England vpon a mature deliberation taken of certaine letters which by the date there set downe were written in England after that this gouernment was erected Conferre them with the date of the Card Caietanes letters of the institution of the Archpriest Martij 7. 1598. and the first of these here cited wil be seene to haue bene written in England about a moneth before 18 Fol. 109. The falsehood which is layd to M. Blackewel in his proposing false instructions and affirming them to haue been annexed to his Commission is shuffled ouer with an assertion that his instructions came with his letters which no man euer doubted of The exception was against those which were proposed for such and were not such 19 In the same leafe M. Blackewell his persisting in this error that we could not appeale from him to his Holines is shifted first in this maner We are sure he did not say it in the sense they take it Secondly thus Many men in the world might say this in diuers cases wherin Appeale is cut off by his Holinesse consent and order A couple of good ieasts The first is common to that sort of people to flie to secret senses to iustifie any thing whatsoeuer passeth them And it were not altogether so intolerable if they would vnder the pretence that sometime men may aequiuocate by the example of our Sauiour other his saints onely vse it to saue themselues from being taken for such as they are but they will pleasure their friends with the like and be as ready to giue a sense of other mens words as their owne but with this difference that if they can possibly deuise how to draw other mens words to an euill sense they will peremptorily affirme that those men spake their wordes in that sense And this their frowardnes towards others is sufficiently discouered cap 2. Apol fol. 16. where the priests assertions that authority is not an infallible rule of trueth and that but one vpon earth is warranted from error and not he in all things are called in question by this author vpon some his imaginary senses But in the late spritish manifestation of spirits cap. 1. hee discouereth himselfe egregiously in this kinde where confessing that Statutes haue bene made both by our ancient kings of England and by our protestant princes by which they haue forbidden prouisions from Rome of dignities Benefices he telleth his Reader very peremptorily that they priests do conspire and iumpe with the protestant and in a false and hereticall sense obiect the statute of Praemunire Which also he would seeme to proue by giuing a reason why the olde statutes were made as though neither the statute were to bee interpreted according to the contents thereof whatsoeuer was the cause of the making thereof nor the absolute prouision of dignities from Rome forbidden because the motiue of that statute was to keepe the treasure of England within the land which was raised by the benefices at that time annexed to the dignities But to make this his cauill more plaine the dignity of a legate had no spirituall liuing annexed vnto it and yet did those Catholike princes hold him to haue incurred the penaltie of the Statute of Praemunire who would exercise a power Legantine in England without the Soueraignes consent as may appeare by the answere of Card. Wolsey when they endighted him in a Praemunire vpon those statutes constrained thereunto sayth the history to intitle the King to his goods and possessions Iohn Stow 21. Hen. 8. My Lords iudges the Kings highnesse knoweth whether I haue offended his Maiestie or no in vsing of my prerogatiue Legantine for the which I am indited I haue the Kings license in my coffers vnder his hand and broad Scale for the exercising and vsing thereof in the most largest wise the which are now in the handes of my enemies Therefore because I will not stand in question with the King in his owne cause I will here presently confesse before you the inditement and put me wholly to the mercy and grace of the King trusting that he hath a conscience and a discretion to consider the truth and my humble submission and obedience wherein I might right well stand to the tryall thereof by iustice c. By which it appeareth that although his Maiesty who then was were mooued by some of his counsell infected with Luthers doctrine to condemne the Cardinal for vsing his power Legantine yet it is euident by this that when the King was most Catholike and the Cardinal also the Cardinall would not exercise his authoritie Legantine without the Kings license and
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
M. Colington as is here falsly noted in the margent for about that time M. Collington lay very little at or neere London and they and some others thought it very fit that there should be an association of such priests as would liue vnder rule to take away that slander which the Iesuits their fauourites to further their ambitious attempts had generally spread abroad against the priests to wit that they liued not vnder rule And thus much concerning this first falshood and the deluding his Holinesse with this tale that the association was a new deuise of such as were in those broiles at Rome and would not remaine in that peace which was commended vnto them and commanded by his Holines in the yere 1597. The second falshood is more deceitfully although as grosly conueyed in putting his Holines in mind what was his second motiue in the ordaining our easie and sweete Subordination forsooth the letters and requests of diuers of the grauest priests of our nation which after we shal cite And because he wil seem to deale faithfully in this cause he putteth this note in the margent Ca. 9 10. Apol. by which his Hol. is giuen to vnderstand that those letters and requests of the grauest priests by which he was induced to make this subordination are to be found in the ninth and tenth Chapt. of the Apol. But now what if there be not any letters or requests in the ninth or tenth Chapt. concerning any such matter what a shamelesse felow is this informer In the ninth chapter fol. 125. begin certain letters of some priests and others follow but these are not neither can be the motiues of his Holinesse to make this Subordination they are written particularly against M. D. Bishop and M. Charnock because they presumed to goe to his Holines about this Subordination already made as it was And this is euident to those who will vouchsafe to turne vnto the chapters In the tenth chapter there is lesse matter if lesse may be for this purpose that I cannot but marueile how this fellow durst tell his Holines such a lewd tale But perchance this good fellow had this policie he set in the margent the 9 and 10. chapters hoping that his Holines if he should chance to cause them to be turned into Latin would be so tired with seeking in the ninth as he would rather beleeue they were in the 10. chapt then be so troubled againe perchance this marginall note was set but in the English Copie where it would serue well enough for those which haue such a facilitie in beleeuing such like felowes as this is as they will runne ryot with them howsoeuer their conscience disclaimeth it Perchance it was mistaken and this 9. and 10. chapters were put in the margent in stead of the eighth And this we are induced to beleeue the rather because at the beginning of the eighth chap. this very matter is handled and some letters cited and for the better satisfaction of the reader I will here set downe the place at large to which as I suppose this felow alludeth and had rather his Reader should misse the place then hit it because retaining a confused remembrance of such matters he should runne away with it without further examination of the trueth or the likelyhood thereof These are the words in the Apology cap. 8. fol. 98. When his Holinesse heard the former state of the matters in England Flanders and other places and of the murmurations of some against the Fathers of the societie set down aswell in the foresaid contumelious Memoriall as by diuers other letters and relations which came to the Protectors sight and by him was related to his Holines and namely when he receiued great store of priuate and publike letters out of England against the sayd Memoriall of Fisher and some one with aboue an 100. hands at it other with 40 and 50 all in fauour and commendation of the Fathers their labours and behauiour in England against the sayd slanderous Memoriall and many other in seuerall letters of principall men which are yet extant when also diuers of these did expresly demaund some Subordination and gouernement of Secular priests to take away this emulation of some few against the Fathers and that two lately came out of England at that very time one a Iesuite the other a secular priest each of them vrging the same in the behalfe both of the one and the other order his Holinesse after mature deliberation resolued to yeelde thereunto hoping thereby to quiet all c. And so he goeth forward and sheweth how it was consulted vpon and of whom opinions were asked to wit of F. Parsons F. Baldwin who was one of the two which lately came out of England as appeareth by the marginall note in that place M. Doctor Haddock M. Martin Array M. Iames Standish who was the other which came out of England as appeareth by the same marginall note although falsly sayd to bee a secular priest hauing giuen his name long before to become a Iesuite and gaue it out here in England that his going ouer was to enter into their order others that had laboured in the English vineyard perchance Fa. Warford another Iesuit such like but those matters we shall handle there in that place Here onely we haue noted this relation out of the 8. chap. to help the fauourers of this Apologie that they wander not through the woods to no purpose if they follow not the path which their author sheweth thē and so bring them where they may find somewhat although not that which they looke for after a long seeking where there is nothing at all of this matter And if this be not the place which is meant in this Epistle there is none in all the Apologie For this quotation in the margent fol. 101. in the same chapt See the letter of 6. ancient priests the 13. of September 1597. is a poore proofe and to say the trueth it would bee more for the others credit if there were none at all cited in the Apologie For if any man will be so indifferent in this case as but to looke vnto the dates of the letters here cited in the beginning of the eighth chapter in the Apologie which by the Contents seemeth to bee the place which must iustifie as much as is suggested in this Epistle and conferre them with the date of Cardinal Caietane his letter by which this Subordination was appointed in England he shall finde that they were all written after the Cardinals letters some longer some lesse while and consequently after his Holines his determination to make this Subordination and therefore could not be any motiue thereof The letter of the Card. Caietane by which the Subordination was appointed in England beareth date the 7. of March 1598 as appeareth in that 8 chapter fol. 102. And the letters by which his Holines is sayd to haue been mooued to make this Subordination in England and
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
that the most part of our brethren reclaimed and misliked the same as sauouring both of presumption and ambition But let vs suppose as the trueth was that as many as were moued in the matter either Iesuits or Secular priests liked so well of it as some of them affirmed that the onely feare they had was that it was too good a motion to goe forward hauing perchance had some experience of their owne peruersenesse or of others who now exclaime against it some that it was the best plot that euer was deuised yet could not this be any inforcement to his Holinesse to confirme it vnlesse this author will acknowledge such a right in the priests to chuse their superiour as the thrusting one vpon them without their priuitie must bee taken for a wrong done vnto them which we hope he will not say But we will leaue this fellow to explicate himselfe howe his Holinesse should haue been enforced to haue confirmed such as the priestes should haue chosen to the offices or prelacies and as it were Archbishops and we will examine that which followeth and is peremptorily affirmed that the priests were working against the Iesuites whom sayth this author they had procured at the very same time by a man sent ouer to this purpose into Flanders to be accused to his Holinesse in a most odious and infamous Memoriall as ambitious men that will gouerne them against their willes c. But this could neuer be proued as yet against those who were the beginners of the association although perchance some of those in Wisbich might send ouer such informations as the ambition of Fa. Weston the Iesuite others his parteners might giue cause in that insolent Agencie which was to bee erected in Wisbich whereunto many in England cannot without a desperate impudencie denie that both they were solicited and perswaded that when they sent their almes to the reliefe of the prisoners in Wisbich all those priests who would not subiect themselues to Fa. Weston the Iesuite should be excluded from hauing any part of their charity as they wrongfully termed it And one of this godly Agencie at Wisbich breaking forth with the consent of the rest to imploy the vtmost of his talent in this their negociation being asked by a Gentleman with whom he had dealt to this purpose what should become of those who would not subiect themselues to the Iesuits gouernement made this answere Starue them The lamentable diuision which was made by the Iesuits and their associates in that action to the publike scandall of all our Countrey doeth also conuince that the Iesuites as ambitious men would gouerne the priests against their willes there being no other cause of that publike separation both at boord and in their other conuersation then the not yeelding of some to become subiects to Fa. Weston the Iesuite By which it appeareth that the Memoriall in this part was neither slanderous nor any way false as here it is affirmed but most true and iustifiable and no priest who had any care of his credit or conscience could write otherwise to his Holinesse True it is that the Iesuites laboured mightily to haue all the priests to set to their hands to certaine letters or propositions framed by them against a Memoriall which they themselues spread abroad here in England and translated it into English that all sorts of men women and children might see their goodnesse And they got many priests to set their hands some to a letter to this effect that vpon their owne knowledge all was false which was contained in the Memoriall a testimony which none but God himselfe could giue if it had bene so for it required that such a witnesse was to be present at all times in all places with not onely one of those Iesuits but with them all in how seuerall or distant places soeuer they were and must be priuie to all their actions others the Iesuits got to set to their hāds to this point that not knowing any of these articles to be true they did think that all were false An act both of exceeding pride and rashnes in preiudice of such as were sayd to haue bene the authors of that Memoriall to wit M. D. Gifford and M. Charles Paget and such like to whome these subscribers the soliciters were much inferiour for their reputation and place in the world and could not without great iniurie being so informed giue such a testimony especially vpon so weake a ground as not knowing being bound in modestie to know that there were many things both true and iustifiable which they did not know and how easily all malefactours would be cleerely purged from all heinous crimes whatsoeuer if the witnesse of all who could not or would not accuse them were to bee regarded or taken as currant against a farre lesse number of accusers But neither were these subscriptions voluntarily made for they were exacted with grieuous comminations and threatnings yea and some must subscribe without reading that to which they were willed to subscribe or their subscriptions deferred vntill the time would better suffer the gatherer of the hands to let the subscriber see vvhereunto he must set his hand which what could it argue other then that there was somewhat to be testified which they who demanded it thought in their own consciences the Priests would not testifie if they might be suffered to read it And in this sort was M. Iohnson sollicited to subscribe as himselfe did at that verie time relate to some of his brethren And it is very probable that Fa. Garnet the Iesuit intended some such matter when writing to M. Collington to request him to set his hand to a letter which M D. Bauand had written and to procure likewise M. Charnockes hand and M. Heburnes to the same he would not let them see what M.D. Bauand had written but being asked the letter to which he would haue had these set their names he returned answere that it was already sent away which could argue no other then a fetch to get their consents to subscribe to such a letter by vertue of which consent he would haue set their names vnto it and they should haue testified they knew not what The good dealing also in gathering names against this Memoriall was presently after shewed by the falsifying of the Archpriests instructions For in this heate the authoritie was procured and appointed as may be prooued by the date thereof which is 7. Mart. 1598. Apol. cap. 8 fol 102. And the first of these testimonials beareth date 24. Mart. 1598. fol. 98. Fa. Garnet fayling of his purpose of getting these mens hands in that sort as he wished for although he gaue them libertie to pen a letter of their owne if they would yet his request to haue their hands set to a letter already drawen but not to be seene by them as the euent prooued when they sent for it bewrayeth his good meaning what it was there was amongst other forged
instructions and falsely inserted among those which were sent vnto the Archp. from Rome this instruction made that euery one should set his hand against that Memoriall And this did the new Archpriest euen when he was taken in the maner of falsifying his instructions so vrge vpon M. Collington M. Charnocke when he sent for them to make knowen his authoritie as he threatned them grieuously if they would not subscribe against it affirming that they should answere this their bearing off from that action in some publike Court where they should repent it Afterward also it was so followed as M. Henry Henslow was imployed to perswade them where M. Collington was then resident to turne him out of their house And he performed his office with such immodest termes and with such extreme fury as he well discouered whereunto this new authoritie did tend And thus much to shew that it was farre ynough both from slander and falshood which was said of the Iesuites their indeuours to gouerne the secular Priests against their wils and how they did canuase for names against the Memoriall and pressed the Priests so farre as they were constrained to vse figures as some of them haue since confessed to satisfie the importunitie of the Iesuites and their factours This also is here to be remembred that the man named to haue bene sent ouer by the Priests into Flanders to accuse the Iesuites was not sent by them but returned thither from whence he was sent into England to vnderstand whether the Iesuits did vse themselues no better in England among the Priests then they did at Rome among the English Students for to this ende he was imployed by the Card. Toledo as he affirmed and had letters to that effect of the Cardinal who was much auersed from the Iesuits their actions in the College And although he brought not these letters with him into England which was a cause that many giue no credite vnto him yet he brought some testimonie thereof and that he was imployed into England by the Cardinal and could not returne any other answere then what was most apparant by the diuision at Wisbich that the Iesuites as ambitious men would gouerne the Priests against their wils When his Holinesse saw this manner of proceeding saith this authour that is to say how he should be inforced to confirme these Prelates which the Secular priests would haue chosen and how the Iesuites were slandered and purged by the most of the Priests in England he willed the Card Protector to call vnto him F. Parsons and other Englishmen in Rome to see what remedie was best for these disorders They answered that the only way which seemed good to them was to giue them a Superior or Prelate of their owne Order and to deliuer thereby the Iesuites from these calumniations which his Holinesse yeelded vnto after diuers monethes consultations c. Here then we are solicited to conceiue that the ground of this new authoritie was his Holinesse care to remedy the disorders which he perceiued to be in England by such letters as were written vnto him namely against this Memoriall and that after diuers moneths consultation it was appointed But we haue alreadie shewed sufficient to prooue this a notorious falshood For as we haue prooued out of this Apo. fo 98 the first letters which were written to this effect were written the 24 of March 1598. which was after the Cardinals letter of the institution of the Archpriest as appeareth by the date thereof which was the seuenth of March 1598. as it is to be seene fol. 102. and consequently diuers moneths after that his Hol. is said to haue entred into this consultation as appeareth in this present place of the 1. chap. and in the 8. Chap. fol. 98. But perchance we tooke this author at the worst when we construed his words in this manner as though he had said that his Hol. had vpon these letters aduised vpon some subordination after diuers moneths resolued vpon this whereas this author after mention of these letters and other matters sayth only in this sort When his Holines sawe this manner of proceeding he willed the Cardinall c. We are therefore to request the indifferent reader to turn to the 8. cha of the Apol. where no such shift cā be vsed to auoid this foule dealing The cha beginneth in this manner When his Hol. heard the former state of matters in England Flanders and other places and of the murmurations of some against the Fathers of the societie set downe aswel in the abouesaid cōtumelious Memoriall as by diuers other letters relations which came to the Protectors sight and by him was related to his Holines and namely when he receiued great store of priuate and publicke letters out of England against the said Memoriall of Fisher and some one with aboue 100. hands at it other with 40. and 50. all in fauour and commendation of the Fathers c. his Holines after mature deliberation resolued c. And because hee will not come without his proofe what cause his Holines had to institute this subordination or rather to giue order to the Cardinall for it as hee sayth hee hath set downe in the margent a note of the letters which caused this consultation See sayth he in the margent the letters of the Northerne Priests 24. Mart. 1598. and others 20. Apr. and others after 30. Iul and others of the South in great number 18. Maij and of the quiet sort of Wisbich 27. March 1598. and who without blushing can reade this and take it as a cause of a determination vppon the 7. of March 1598. for then was the authoritie instituted as is acknowledged fol. 102. much lesse of a consultation diuers moneths before as is here saide fol. 7. And thus hee goeth forward with a certaine shamelesse boldnesse not caring what he sayth knowing belike that his fauorites will swallow any thing easily which he proposeth vnto them yet doeth he too much forget himselfe in this place where he sayth that it was not thought expedient for his Holines to write himselfe for auoiding suspitions and troubles of the state of England for by this he will sufficiently purge those priests of all disobedience to the Sea Apostolike who did not subiect themselues to the newe authoritie vpon the comming of the Cardinals letters by which the authoritie was instituted But this is elsewhere sufficiently handled and prooued to be free not onely from schisme or disobedience but from all sinne also yea though it were true that his Holines gaue full commission as here it is saide to the Card. Caietane the Protector to appoint the authoritie with conuenient instructions For his Holines not writing himselfe as here it is cōfessed how should the Priests take notice thereof that it was his acte which together with the Archpriests misdemeanour in the promulgation of his new authoritie other matters also was the cause why the Priests did at their
great charges send to Rome two of their brethren to haue dealt with his Holines about it But their Ambassadours comming thither sayth this authour and shewing no desire of peace or vnion at all or to accept of any good condition to liue in obedience c. And thus hee runneth with a free penne to auouch any thing which is for his purpose how contrary soeuer it is to trueth But because this matter is at large handled by this author in the 9. Chapter of the Apologie where also we shall declare how these matters passed at Rome we will onely note here that the two Priests had little reason to determine their businesse with F. Parsons D. Haddocke or M. Martin Array who perchance are the others which are here meant and as it is here confessed fol. 99. were actors or consultors in the constitution of this authority and parties directly opposite against the Priests in England Besides that the condition which was offered by F. Parsons was very ridiculous to wit that the two Priests who with so great danger and charge were arriued at Rome in the behalfe of many other should returne againe into England with letters to the Archpriest and Iesuits to amend what should be yeelded by them to haue beene done amisse to giue satisfaction vnto all men where it was due which if the Archpriest and Iesuites would not performe the Priests might come againe out of England to Rome And how subtill soeuer F. Parsons thought himselfe in this deuise the two priests could not but thinke it would haue bene a great folly in them to haue accepted this condition of peace although perchance if they had vnderstood his Holines mind that he would haue entertained them as they were entertained with close imprisonment and other such fauours as shal be shewed as occasion serueth possibly they might haue returned againe into their countrey and haue contented themselues vntill it had pleased God to haue taken some pitie vpon their miseries But to prooue how falsly this fellow affirmeth that the two Priests shewed no desire of peace and vnion their going to the Cardinall Caietane whome they tooke to be the ordeiner of the new authoritie as these words of his letters did import Dum haec nostra ordinatio durauerit so long as this our ordinance shall endure and there offer to bring him in writing what they had to say will be a sufficient argument which as it should seeme the Iesuites and their faction fearing least by this meanes their dealings might come to light procured contrary to the Cardinals honour who had entertained the Priestes in this cause that they should be committed close prisoners not suffered euer after to come together to deale in any thing vntill some two or three dayes after that there was a Breue giuen in confirmation of the Archpriests authoritie which being obtained vpon the 6. of Aprill as the Breue beareth date the two Priests were suffered vpon the 8. of the same moneth to come together the Breue being presently brought vnto them they yeelded themselues as well in the name of their brethren as in their own promising to obey it doubtles were ready enough to haue sworne it if his Holines had exacted any such thing at their hands after that he had declared what his wil was should be done what reason soeuer the priests had to the contrarie But the trueth is that there was no oath taken nor any demanded This might therefore haue been left out with more truth then inserted in this Apologie to wit this was promised at that time of all hands and the two messengers did sweare it also by a corporall oath as also that epitheton to the Breue to wit new for what doth this import other then another Breue as though some Breue had been before made and refused by the priests which is a most vntrue conceit yet necessarily to be made vpon these words of the Apology He the Pope confirmed all that was done already by the Cardinal with a new Breue This was promised at that time sayth this author of all hands and the two messengers did sweare also by a corporall oath and hope was that all would be quiet hereupon to which effect Fa. Parsons also wrote very courteous and pious letters vnto M. Collington and M. Mush and they accepted kindly of the same as after wee shall haue occasion perhaps more particularly to set downe But now Sathan being loth to haue sedition ended began again to set them out in England and to put them in worse case then euer by the industry of certaine seditious humors of the chiefest contenders whereof some deuised newe iniuries offered them by the quiet some required satisfaction for the old c. vntill in Nouember last 1600. diuers of the discontented made a generall appeale c. Thus farre doth he imbolden himselfe as who hauing no intention to bee any way accounted a changeling Wee will here omit that which he affirmeth of Fa. Parsons pious letters to M. Collington and M. Mush which seeme here to haue been written vpon the promises and oath as he sayth of the messengers to be at peace when they saw the Popes Breue which letters Cap. 10 fol. 143. hee saith were written euen then to vse his owne words when yet the Popes Breue was not come foorth as appeareth for that this was written the ninth of April and the Breue beareth date of the 21. of the same moneth What neede was there of this so palpable a falshood Cannot Fa. Parsons praises euen in matters of smallest moment be sounded by lip or registred by pen but with most grosse falshood thus wrote F. P. that is a courteous and pious letter as here it is declared fol. 8. for it beareth the same date and is written to the same men as may be seene euen then when yet the Popes Breue was not come forth And lest any man should doubt of this Fa. Parsons his courtesie or pietie before that time of the comming forth of the Breue he proueth it by the date of his letters which he sayth is the ninth of April and the date of the Breue which he sayth is the 21. of April A manifest falshood as may bee seene both by the Breue it selfe and by many places in this Apologie where it is set downe to beare date 6. April 1599 as in the same tenth chapter fol. 140 and immediatly before in the end of the ninth chapter and els where So that I cannot but marueile at the foolish greedines of this author in taking euery occasion to commend Fa. Parsons how vntowardly so euer it fadgeth with him But Sathan being loth to haue sedition ended began againe to set them out in England and to put them in worse case then euer by the industry of certaine seditious humors of the chiefest contenders c. These were the Iesuits and the Archpriest first the Iesuits namely Fa. Iacob who after the
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
and also all and euery branch article and clause mentioned or in any wise declared in any of the same statutes concerning the making of any offence or offences to be felony or within the case of Premunire not being felonie nor within the case of Premunire before and all paines and forfeitures concerning the same or any of them should from thenceforth be repealed and vtterly void and of none effect King Henrie the eighth also when he was so deuoted to the Catholike faith and particularly to the Sea of Rome as he gaue monethly 60000 angels towards the pay of an Armie vnder Mounsieur de Foy for the deliuery of Pope Clement the 7 when he was holden prisoner in the Castel Angel in Rome by the Duke of Bourbon his Armie and the prince of Oringe Yea when Pope Leo the the tenth esteemed of him as of the best prince in Christendome and either to his deserts or vnder them gaue him this glorious title Defender of the faith he did so far foorth execute the law of Premunire against all forraine prouisions of dignities and authority to be practised within his Realme without his assent as the Cardinal Wolsey notwithstanding an extraordinary affection in the king towards him dared not to exercise his power Legantine vntill he was licenced therunto by the king vnder his hand and broad seale Io Stow. 21. Hen 8. which he pleaded that he had when he was indited afterward in a Premunire for his exercise thereof And yet was the king himselfe a sutor to the Pope to giue that authority to the Cardinal as may be seene in the tenth yeere of his reigne which was about three yeeres before he was intituled Defender of the faith But all aswell princes as other must stand to this good fellow his checke and if they displease him it is enough to haue them accounted in the highest degree of badnesse how pious and godly soeuer hee esteemed them before with the same breath But now concerning that which is sayd by the Priests of Bishop Watson that he refused vpon these statutes all externall iurisdiction offered him ouer his fellowe prisoners this good fellow sayth that it is most contumelious and false Whome shall we beleeue in this case those who were Priests and fellow prisoners with him and were present at the offer and his refusall and are eare witnesses therof or this peremptorie fellow who careth not what passeth him But perchance his reason may ouerpeaze the relation of these witnesses although for many respects most reuerend For sayth hee that had bene to deny his Holines Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction in England Marke I pray you this reason and weigh it with that which is before saide and shewed concerning this point Card. Wolsey would not exercise his power Legantine in England vntill he had licence of his Maiestie as appeareth by his plea before cited and yet neither the king nor he denied his Holines Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction in England as appeareth by that the king of England made request to Pope Leo to constitute Card. Wolsey his Legate in England and behaued himselfe so Catholikely as hee was called Defendor of the faith Also the most Catholike Bishops who liued in the times of many and those most Catholike Princes without al doubt obserued the law yet no way were to be touched as this peremptory companion would haue them with a deniall of his Holines iurisdiction in England And in the Parliament holden 16. Rich 2. the Bishops doe make a difference betweene authoritie in the Pope to excommunicate and the execution thereof in England Moreouer this Doctor Watson when he was made a Bishop hee had licence of her Maiestie who then was before he would take vpon him to vse his Episcopall iurisdiction in England as he related himselfe to some yet liuing of credit And no doubt this was done vpon the same ground that lawe of Praemunire standing in full force in her time as being neuer repealed but rather suffered voluntarily to stand in full force as may be gathered by an acte primo Mariae yet no Catholike doubteth but that her Maiestie did acknowledge the Popes authoritie in England as appeareth by her repealing diuers statutes made by her father to take away the Popes authority in England Anno 1. 2. Philip. Mariae So that the folly of this fellow is exceeding great in giuing this reason why the Bishop could not refuse all externall iurisdiction offered him from his Holines Againe although Doctor Watson were Bishop of Lincolne and had vsed his iurisdiction in that Diocesse by the licence or permission of Queene Mary yet he was neuer Bish of Ely in which Dioces these prisoners liued who offered him that externall iurisdiction so that his refusing all externall iurisdiction ouer his fellowe prisoners is no way to be brought within the compasse of denying his Holines Ecclesiastical iurisdiction in England And if his Episcopal iurisdiction were so inlarged by his Holines that he might haue vsed it ouer all England yet might he most iustly haue refrained from the present exercise thereof in that ample maner hauing neuer had any such license or assent from his Soueraigne according to that Statute which was made 25. Edw. 3. wherein it is enacted that first the Kings license to chuse was to be demanded and after election his royall assent was to be had And as he was not to expect that a Prince of a contrary Religion should legitimate any such authoritie in him so he was to assure him selfe that a Prince of a contrary Religion would take hold of that Statute against him seeing that Princes who were of the same Religion did both enact it and cause it to be most strictly obserued and yet they neuer denyed his Holines Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction in England And by this it is made most manifest how Bishop Watson might acknowledge his Episcopall iurisdiction from Rome and yet refuse to exercise the same without deniall of the Popes Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction in England any more then for 200. yeeres together al the Catholike Bishops in England did before him But I cannot a little marueile that this authour would compare the association intended in England with this Archipresbyterie which is so pontificall or maiesticall as the Title which by vertue thereof he vseth is enough to make such meane men as his fellowes are not to know which way to looke For thus he writeth himselfe George Blackwell by the grace of God and the ordinance of the Sea Apostolike Archpriest of England We will put the case that the association intended had gone forward but then how sayth he would that haue stood without externall turisdiction seeing that one of these two points they must confesse that either they would haue asked confirmation thereof from Rome and consequently it would haue beene an externall iurisdiction as well as this of the Archpr. or else they would haue gouerned absolutely of themselues without any dependance or approbation of his Holinesse And
apud Secretarios domesticos corum scriptores fere semper expeditae expectantibus accepta earum taxa pro rei natura scripturae mercede restituuntur There is a Cardinall skilfull in the Lawe saith Zecchius who is appointed ouer the office of the Breues who hauing leaue immediatly from the Popes owne mouth or by the relation of some other without any other warrant from him and without the supplication but onely hauing a small abbreuiation of the Breues vieweth the forme of the Breue addeth or diminisheth thereof as it shall please him and when he hath viewed his small abbreuiation of the Breue and set his hand vnto it be deliuereth it backe to those who presented it vnto him and so it is carried as warranted to those to whom it belongeth to make the Breues Hereupon are letters framed in forme of a Breue and written in thinne parchment and being written they are sealed with waxe vnder the Popes scale called annulus Piscatoris by the domesticall Secretaries and their writers almost alwayes and being dispatched they are giuen backe to those who wait for them paying the dueties according to the nature of the matter and the hire or reward for the writing Let vs now lay these matters together first how that Breues be made and his Hol. neuer readeth them nor yet the Cardinall who is president or chiefe in the office after that he hath giuen his warrant for the drawing of the Breue according to that which was shewed to him by the abbreuiator nor knoweth ought of the matter but what the procurer thereof suggesteth Secondly F. Parsons industry to further the plots which he hath layd Thirdly the credit which he hath in Rome by reason of the Spanish faction which he hath many yeres blinded in such sort with putting so great an Iland as England or Ireland or both in their eyes as they cannot see how vainely they wast themselues vpon the foolish promises of so meane a man Fourthly the fault which seemeth to be very great in the Breue where it referreth vs for proofe of a matter to a letter which doth not conteine that which the Breue saieth it doth Fiftly that it may come from diuers offices and no man can with reason blame the priests if they haue some doubt of the maner of procuring this Breue and also affirme thus much God knoweth out of what office it was procured Not accusing it notwithstanding of forgerie as this authour most iniuriously and falsly taxeth them Concerning the other accusation that the Priests doe seeke to drawe his Holinesse pious meaning into matters of State I answere that his Holinesse pious meaning was not knowen or that he had any part in the institution of this authoritie vntill his Breue came And if since this time by the Iesuites meanes or any others his Holinesse hath by any acte in Ireland or otherwise giuen the Councell cause to thinke that hee dealeth in State matters the priests in England are not to be charged with that which may thereupon fall out And it is said that it hath bene confessed by some who are in hold now in England that such a conceite was currant in Spaine that this Archipresbyterie was made for the furtherance of some State plots against our Countrey which at that time perchance was concealed from his Holinesse and a fayrer tale told him of pietie to winne him to institute it at their instance who hoping to get therby what they desired would in time bring the Church gouernement into a company of blind-deuout-obedient children vnder some elder or some Agent which had beene to take away all Ecclesiasticall Hierarchie and ancient approued gouernment in our Church But as it hath bene often sayd and is confessed in this Apologie the Breue came not in a yeere after the institution of this authoritie And therefore these are very malicious accusations and constructions of the priests their words which were written or spoken when they knew no other then that all proceeded from the Cardinall Caietane at the instance of the Iesuites whose troublesome and seditious State-humors were too well knowen in England and gaue too much cause to say more then euer the priests as yet haue said in this kind But now to make an end of this second chapter this author citeth an other proposition out of the English booke that is that confirmation is either most necessary in time of persecution or altogether vaine and as a superfluous ceremony in Gods Church Vpon which assertion thus he runneth which is a very temerarious and scandalous speech not to censure it any further but to leaue it to whom it belongeth But yet he will haue a blow or two at the legges of it at the least Let vs see his play for that the wordes vaine and superfluous ceremony are contemptuous phrases of the heretikes In good time good sir and you by this haue giuen vs some light how it could be possible that you should goe so farre out of the way as you doe not only here but euery where in this Apologie You haue read as we take it that saying of Elias Siautem Baal sequimini illum If Baal be God follow him Those latter words doe best serue your turne the whole proposition is too heauie for you Can you find in any of the priests books where they say that the sacrament of confirmation is a vaine and superfluous ceremony If you can then cite the place and you shall haue humble thankes for your paynes and shall thereby also put the priests in mind of such their temerarious and scandalous propositions If you cannot as we are most sure that you cannot then must you not be offended if we thinke that you set vp your rest vpon Sequimini illum the following of Baal and that your company will suite better with beasts then with men vpon whose last words none but such senselesse ecchoes doe take aduantage His Reader being preiudicially possessed by a cōment vpon the last words he imboldneth himselfe to say somewhat of the whole sentence to wit Neither doth it follow that albeit his Holinesse and predecessours hitherto haue not thought the vse of this Sacrament necessary in England during the time of our persecution as indeede to no man in any time is it absolutely necessarie to saluation therfore good Catholikes should esteeme it for a vaine and superfluous ceremony Note I pray you the pretie sleights which he vseth The priests did say that this Sacrament was either most necessary in time of persecution or els a vaine ceremonie And he telleth vs that albeit his Holinesse hath not thought it necessary in England during the time of our persecution as though his Holinesse could not thinke that this Sacrament of confirmation was most necessarie in the time of persecution and yet not iudge it necessary here and now in our persecution by reason of such misinformations as might be giuen him as if for example any should say vnto
well knowen to haue bene long after the Doctor his departure from Rome his perswasion is vpon a very weake ground For although such articles might be giuen or sent to M. Charnocke vnder his hand to carie to Rome yet these articles might come from some other the Memoriall being long before made and at Rome as appeareth in this Apologie fol. 94. where also Do. Barret affirmeth that he found a little compendious note of all their articles against the Iesuits at Rome which sayth he hee Fisher carried with him to dilate to the faction in England and for proofe hereof he addeth as appeareth for it is very old and almost worne out All the foolish story of Fisher we here leaue out as not worth the noting he hauing bene in the iudgement of this author fol. 93. one of the most exorbitant disorderly fellowes in the Romane stirs And fol. 95. albeit sayth this author wee will not affirme all to be true which he said yet many things are such as they could not be well feigned and are confirmed otherwise and the speaking voluntarily vpon his oath must be presumed to haue had some care also of his conscience c. or of his sides as himselfe confessed at Paris But I pray you let there be care of conscience at the lest with an c. in such matters as may make for the Iesuits Some things heere set downe are not onely false but so impertinent to the matter as we cannot but iudge that there was much good iugling betweene him his examiner as that which is affirmed fol. 96. At London I lay cōmonly with M. Charnock otherwise called Long and M. Medcalfe whereas the poore man was neuer in any such credit with either of them as that hee was acquainted where either of them lay yet some things at the least could not be well feigned perchance that beeing bidden to a banquet at Wisbich he had a swanne which was the more to be noted because it was a very vnusual dish at a banquet vnlesse we turne the banquet into a dinner and then the grace of this relation is marred For the reader must conceiue that the priests in Wisbich did not dine that is too grosse but they did banquet and he must vnderstand that the Priests had a Swan at that banquet Certainely either Fisher did herein shewe himselfe to be too weake a man to be brought here for an authenticall witnesse vnlesse some such particular question as this is was demanded of him What good cheere had you or else the examiner was exceeding foolish who in a serious matter would fall into such questions and set downe such stuffe in an examination But had not such folly beene to be vttered we should haue had no Apologie One thing more is here to be noted that fol. 96. this author relateth out of Fishers examination that there passed eight or nine moneths in diuersitie of opinions and that he went seuen or eight times from the North parts to Wisbich Cambridge and London about an affaire which would not well stand with the association then begun Which being compared with that which is also affirmed fol. 97. where it is said that it was not knowen at his departure from England that peace was made at Rome or that Fa. Parsons was come thither albeit M. Bagshaw and his friends seemed to feare it much This author must wipe his mouth for his false tale told in the first Chapter fol. 6. and 7. where hee affirmeth that the reliques of those that had beene troublesome and vnquiet before comming into England and conferring againe with their consorts of their former actions and designments frustrated as they thought by Fa. Parsons dealing at Rome resolued to begin againe but after another fashion to wit by deuising a certaine newe association c. Did these men who were thus frustrated at Rome by F. Parsons his dealing there know that Fa. Parsons was come to Rome trow yee If they did know thereof and were in England before Fishers departure from England how was it vnknowen there at his departure thence that F. Parsons was come to Rome If they knew thereof but were not as yet come into England before Fishers departure from thence how did Fisher goe seuen or eight times from the North parts to Wisbich Cambridge and London about the affaire he speaketh of in which the association had caused diuersitie of opinions For if this authour be an honest man those men who were said in his first Chapter fol. 6. and 7. to haue bene frustrated as they thought by F. Parsons dealing in Rome resolued to begin againe by deuising a certaine new association c. But perchance Fisher dreamed that hee was employed in such businesse in England and how that he had a swan at a banquet in Wisbich and lay at London with M. Charnocke and M. Heburne and much other good newes And this authour putteth downe his dreame as an authenticall testimonie for want of other stuffe And if hee had not dreamed himselfe when hee set it downe doubtlesse hee would haue omitted so much at the least as if one dreamer may conuince another of falshood conuinceth him most manifestly of fault in his relation of the beginning of the association set downe in his first chapter as we haue noted But by this saith the Apologie any indifferent man may see how matters stand and where the ground of all troubles and dissensions lyeth All is but a conspiracie of euill humors against them that doe better then themselues and euery man that loueth his soule will soone descrie the same Religion is not sought by this faction but reuenge and satisfaction of bad appetites This wrote he who knew well what he said although his vngratiousnesse would haue his reader apply it to others and not to him who deserued it as hath bene shewed and will still appeare in euery chapter more clearely then other And in this vaine he telleth his reader that his Holines cleerely perceiuing tooke order first in the Romane colledge which belongeth to another place and then in England for remedie thereof as hereafter you shall heare And so he setteth himselfe to the eight chapter where at the very first he doth notably abuse his reader as shall be shewed and he conuinced of most manifest falshood and to be a chiefe man in the conspiracie of euill humours against such men as sought religion with the greatest hazard of their liues when he and his fellowes were idle lookers on and would be no actors vntil room was made for their fatherhoods CHAP. 13. How the Author of the Apologie to cloake the Iesuits their dealings concerning the institution of the new Subordination perswadeth his Reader that his Holines was moued thereto by certaine letters which were long after written Apol. cap. 8. IN the 8. Chapter of the Apologie the author proposeth to handle how his Holines hearing of the former disorders and contentions did resolue to make a Subordination in England
who are of that order yet must this be the argument which is foolishly here insinuated by this authour or else none For of al the Iesuits in England there are none whom these priests obeied at any time in any place Besids that they are al of them inferiour to many priests both for age learning wisedome gouernment and what els belongeth to men But by this hath this authour shewed what his meaning is that forsooth because some Priests haue obeyed some Iesuites therefore all priests must be obedient to any of the Iesuits yea although he be one who immediatly before he became a Iesuite had scant the wit to keepe himselfe cleane But for the auoyding of this emulation it seemed saith this authour in all good mens opinions and the Iesuites aboue the rest or els all is marred when you talke of good men that the onely or chiefe remedie would be to haue this subordination of Secular priests among themselues but so as the Superiour must be at the Iesuites direction as both his instructions and his practise declare And then followeth a proofe out of a letter of 6. Assistants to cleare the Iesuits from the procuring of this subordination against or without the will of the Secular Clergie which testimonie if the vnited Priests were the authours of the Apologie is as cleare as that of which one requested to haue either his fellow asked or himselfe if he were a thiefe This testimony also harpeth vpon the long day at Rome of which we spake before and of the wonders wrought thereupon the 7. of March by certaine letters dated in England in April May and Iuly following Of this letter we shal haue occasion to say more in a particular answer thereunto And here we will leaue the Reader to wonder onely at this marginall note fol. 101. See the letter of sixe Ancient priests the 17. of September 1597. For he telleth not where this letter is to be seene but rather leaueth a suspition that it is yet to be deuised vnlesse he thought it too worthy a thing to be inserted among so many foolish and friuolous impertinencies as with which this Apologie doth swarme The proofe also which followeth that Fa Parsons laboured to haue Bishops in England is most absurd in their vnderstanding who knowe how he can play on both sides and impugne that in which he would seem to be most forward he can send notes of such things as hee would pretend a desire should be kept secret and send them round about the world with the same desire of secrecie He can write his letters in exceeding great commendations to one of some one man and at the same time write to another in the dispraise of the same man And is it a sufficient disproofe of his backwardnesse of hauing Bishops that he laboured with some to haue them in England Can Fa. Parsons so farre ouershoot himselfe as to make his credite so small in the Court of Rome as that any thing can be denied him being assisted by such as expect from him a kingdome or two for their seruice Well saith the Apologie this then being resolued by his Holines that he would haue an Archpriest appointed in England whom all the rest should obey he gaue commission to the said Cardinall Protector to institute the same in his name Howe was this made knowen to the Priests Forsooth the Cardinall shewed that it was his Holinesse especiall order and commandement by these words Speciali mandato nobis iniunxit his Holines hath ordained this vnto vs by a speciall commandement What silly boy would thus haue Englished iniunxit in this place or what is that This which his Holinesse ordained by a speciall commandement the institution of this subordination with these faculties c. could this man imagine that the Cardinals letters would neuer againe be looked on or if he could feare that could he be so impudent as to cite this part thereof for to prooue his Holinesse speciall commandement for the erecting of the Archpriest And to prooue that his Holinesse was mooued by the aforesaid reasons alleaged by him to wit emulation and what els pleaseth him he citeth these words out of the same letter of the Cardinall Rationes abipsis sacerdotibus redditae c. the reasons alleaged by priests for this matter were allowed by his Holinesse and afterwardes he citeth a great part of the letter for so much as concerneth the commendations of the Iesuits and the desire which the Pope hath that the Iesuites and the Priests might liue in peace together Which saith he comming from so high a superiour and directly from Christs vicar himselfe we doe wonder how it tooke no more effect within the heartes of our brethren that impugned the same And our brethren wonder that any man can bee so impudent as to make such a wonder confessing so often as he doth in this Apologie that Christs vicar himselfe would not write at all whereby neither his letters appeared for the institution of this Archpriest nor any commission by which the Cardinall had power to doe it But the Cardinal his word was sufficient saith he and our brethren say no and proue it by the testimonie of all men of knowledge in the Canon and Ciuill lawes who say that the sole testimonie of a Cardinall is not necessarily to be credited in any matter preiudiciall to a third person yet must the blinde obedient beleeue that the priests in not obeying the Cardinals letters did directly withstand Christs vicar himselfe But after he hath cited a part of the Cardinals letter he affirmeth that all was confirmed afterwards by his Holines owne Breue and that all written by the Cardinall and euery parcell there of was by his order consent proper motion and commandement written ordained and sent into England And to this our brethren answere that so soone as they sawe this they did presently submit themselues vnto the order And say moreouer that this is very foolishly brought in to prooue a disobedience in them before this Brcue was written And by this is answere made to the question following But what did this satisfie or quiet them that had resolued to be vnquiet For the priests perceiuing such a deuise of the Iesuits foreseeing how hereby the Iesuits might vnder a maske play their prises more boldly then before sent to Rome as became Catholike priests to know his Hol. pleasure in the meane while these who were resolued to be vnquiet spread Libels abroad against the priests and condemned them of schisme much more such religious stuffe The causes which moued the priests to demur vpon the matters vntill they saw his Hol Breue are set downe at large by M. Io. Collington in his booke intituled A iust defence c. whither we are to referre our Reader and as for the letter of the 6. Assistants it shall haue his place elsewhere to be answered for now we let it passe as a base profe of any thing
this any further here especially seeing Fa. Valent. his doctrine set downe before out of S. Thomas doeth most clearely conuince them And therefore we leaue that to God and their consciences to answere one day before the high Iudge where shifts will haue no place A condition which I doubt not but the author of this Apologie would gladly for this time should be agreed vpon howsoeuer when that day shal be present he would be willing to haue the hearing of the matter further deferred For if we doe but reflect what meanes haue bene made to haue it heard in this world and haue bene crossed by him and his faction we shall easily conceiue how vnwilling he will be to come to the triall in the next where hee must come to the naked proofe of right or wrong without his cloake which now couereth all his falsehood To this adiuration the priests will answere in their consciences afore God and at the day of Iudgement where shifts wil haue no place that when they had seene read ouer the Card. Caietanes letter which he testified not to the whole world as here it is most falsly suggested but onely to M. Blackwell being a letter written particulerly to him and to no other as appeareth by the letter extant both in the bookes dedicated by the priests to the Inquisition and at the beginning of M. Colingtons booke lately set forth and written by one who was not knowen to haue any authority in England neither did he make it knowen that he had any authoritie delegated vnto him for that which he had attempted but only by his owne bare words which no man in this case was to beleeue vnder any sin Notwithstanding they had heard that his Hol. had giuen a charge to some in particuler to haue peace with the Iesuits a very impertinent matter and as foolishly here vrged for the band to accept the Subordination at the first comming or had seene other letters testifying the same as a heare-say as M Colington doeth particulerly prooue from the 68. page to the 80. or that he was a Cardinal who writ his letters it being euident in the opinion of the chiefest Cannonists that a Card. may do more sometime then needeth or els they would neuer accord that credit is not to be giuen to him vnlesse he shew his commission whereupon your brethren doe answere sincerely and without passion that it was no morall certaintie of the Popes will and that they had not sufficient knowledge to bind vnder sinne to obedience and that no Superiours will did by any meanes appeare vnto them but rather a very bad part of their aduersaries to crosse them for a time vntill they could worke the Pope to confirme the plot which they had layde to bring the priests into a slauish bondage vnder them neither can they once be conuinced of the contrary as may in part appeare by that their reasons of their refusall before the Breue came doe stand firme as yet vnanswered And thus omitting to coniure the Iesuits Archpriest for their false dealings in this action for which assuredly they must come to an vnpleasing reckoning I wil briefly touch what is here said of the censure of Paris and make an ende of this Chapter referring the Reader for a larger satisfaction to M.D Elie his notes vpon the 8. Chapter of the Apologie pag. 245. and to M. Iohn Colington in his 4. reason pag. 153. The decree of the doctors of Sorbon in Paris consisted of two parts the one was that the priests who deferred to admit of the authoritie vpon the causes alledged were not schismaticks the other was that the priests the fact of it selfe considered did not any way offend or commit sinne By this definition of Paris saith this author fol. 118. commeth very little reliefe vnto the priests and it was printed onely to make a vaine flourish with the ostentation of an Academicall sentence Thâ—s very word Academiâ— sticketh marueilously in this authours stomach and his fellowes But let vs see how he will shew that this decree of these doctors did very little relieue the priests To the first point that it was no schisme what saith he marke I pray you his words fol. 115. for of the other point of schisme we will not talke at all am sorie that euer it was mentioned or brought in questioÌ„ But will you see this good sope of milke turned downe with a foule paire of heeles Note that which is behinde Vnquiet people hauing taken occasion hereby to continue contention and to make more brables then were needfull They were much to blame belike who would speake being publiquely defamed for schismaticks and what els a quintessence of malice could deuise as may be seene in the treatise of Schisme written by the Iesuits and approued by the Archp. and yet to this day mainteined in corners where any of that seditious crew can haue any hope to increase the schisme or diuision or what els it may be hereafter called in Gods Church by perswading now some now othersome not to communicate in Prayer and Sacraments with those who are the true members of Gods Church for a cause in which these members doe in here and plead the commandement of the head of the Church against a priuate letter from a priuate Cardinal to a priuate man as may appeare by the letter it selfe Were shame of that most wicked and sencelesse slander the cause of sorrow or silence in this author concerning this point of schisme what hope might there be that he had some grace but his sorrow and silence grow both out of a splene that his and his fellowes slanderous tongues had not that successe which he and his froward malitious adherents hoped for The submission which the priests did make at the sight of his Holines first Breue of the 6. of April 1599. acknowledged in his later Breue of the 17. of August 1601. conuinceth all but contentious brablers that the priests were further off by much from any touch or any suspition of schisme then their aduersaries here euer since their first deuiding themselues from them in prayer and communion of Sacraments But seeing he will say no more of schisme we will omit it and come to the question which this author meaneth to handle Our question saith he is then onely whether any sinne were committed whereof also we will not presume to determine any degree of sinne but leaue that to God and to the offenders consciences Now that the priests here be published for rebels seditious factious excommunicate irregular fallen from the Church to haue lost their faculties scandalous infamous persons no better then soothsayers and Idolaters disobedient to the Church and therefore as Ethnickes and Publicanes the author of this Apologie will not presume to determine any degree of sinne Our question sayth he is whether any sinne were committed but he giueth no answere to this question but wrangleth a little about the censure of
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
authoritie they called it in doubt whether those things were true which were contained in these letters of the Cardinals namely that the authoritie was constituted by his Hol. commandement and if it were so yet they doubted whether his Hol. could appoint them a Superiour vnwitting and vnwilling thereto which afterward they feared not to say when they came to Rome yea and repeated it often as we can proue by conuenient witnesses And yet would this fellow perswade his reader that the priests did first contradict or oppose themselues against the authority and then afterwards finde some reasons for it yea after the two priests were gone to Rome notwithstanding these plaine testimonies of his owne that the priests had these difficulties at the beginning But perchance M. Charnockes answere put all these things out of his memorie non putarat he thought not vpon it How so Forsooth M. Charnocke said that the cause of his comming was to supplicate most humbly to the Sea Apostolike that if the aforesayd order of the Archpriests authoritie were not yet confirmed by his Holinesse as they had heard that Fa. Sicklemore and some other had reported that then the same might be either mitigated or changed or some other order appointed with it thus he collecteth M. Charnocks answere and thereupon commeth with a so as now our brethren seemed not to doubt c. nor were yet growne to be so bold as to affirme that his holinesse could not doe it without their consents except he violated the canons c. The humble spirit of the priests who hauing many and most iust causes to deale in other maner then by way of supplication being measured by his own proud humor of wrangling where he had no iust cause brought him into this error Next follow the reasons or causes which mooued M. Bishop to come to Rome which were sixe and hee here setteth them downe and proueth that he and M. Charnocke did scarce seem to agree in the causes of their comming And how so Forsooth M. Charnocke sayd and sware that his onely comming was to supplicate c fol 132. But whosoeuer will turne to M. Charnocks oath set downe fol 129. shal find this iugler and how that this word onely is here foisted in by him for this purpose And so much sayth he of this for that it were ouerlong to run ouer all points and not finde one for his purpose without a litle of his arte which will serue him no longer then vntill it commeth into the aire for then all this painting and false colours will easily be descried and himselfe worthily laughed at for his so grosse counterfeiting yet this in briefe they affirmed both of them that as for the Archpriest they brought nothing lawfully prooued against him either in learning life or manners and the like they affirmed of the Iesuits An euident argument euen to F. Parsons and the rest that they went to Rome to deale in peaceable manner with his Holines concerning these matters beeing able to bring more matters vnder the hands of sufficient witnesses then the Archpriest will be euer able to answere and which in any court of Iustice would haue hindered his confirmation But this authour setteth downe his matters somewhat warily the priests brought nothing against the Archpr. lawfully proued as for the Iesuits let any indifferent man iudge whether the priests were in place to haue medled with them further then that the Iesuits were their Iaylours somewhat belike they could haue said but they brought nothing lawfully prooued M. Bishop sayth he said he heard his fellow Rob. say that M. Collington and himselfe had heard the Archpriest vtter an hereticall proposition which was that they could not appeale from him to Rome They both affirme that hee stood very peremptorily in it after that hee was warned thereof and if M. Bishop did affirme that this proposition was hereticall or the author of the Apologie doe thinke so of it himselfe I wonder that M. Bishops fellow Rob. was not asked the question his examination not being ended in some 6. or 7. dayes after that M. Bishop was dispatched as appeareth here fol. 134. and this is one speciall matter which this author chuse out of many ouer which it had beene ouerlong to runne ouer Will ye heare another in briefe as he sayth M. Charnocke beeing asked what money they had made answere for 30. crownes more then M. Bishop tooke notice of which perchance this author here inserted that his reader might giue credit to M. Bishop when he said as is extant in the English booke pa. 171. The examinations were what is your name how olde where remained you in England how and which way came you ouer what money brought you ouer with you c. and much such like impertinent stuffe to fill vp the papers that when wee came to the matter it selfe they might be briefe taking barely what we came about without the reasons perswasions of it yea obiecting against it and peruerting it what they could The third principal point which notwithstanding the hast was in no case to be ouerslipped but rather run ouer is a disagreement betweene M. Bishop and M. Charnocke about one point of their commission And thus forgetting how he had before foisted in this worde onely to make a disagreement betweene them in that the one should say that their onely comming was to supplicate c. fol 132. and the other alledge sixe causes of his comming Now hee is contented that M. Charnocke should say that he had diuers points in commission and how commeth this kindnesse ouer him forsooth he would faine find another disagreement betwixt M. Bishop and M. Charnocke and for this purpose hee must intreat his reader to forget that he had before made him beleeue how that he had heard that M. Charnocke said and sware that their onely comming was to supplicate c. and now that it will please him to vnderstand that Master Charnocke said that he had in commission amongst other points for to procure that no bookes should be hereafter written by Catholicks that might exasperate the state of England M. Bishop said that he liked not that commission but rather it should be left as hitherto to the discretion of the writers adding further that in his opinion such bookes as before had beene written had rather done good then hurt M. Doctor Ely hath noted vpon the Apologie that the author thereof is much troubled with the chincough which in his relating this point may be very easily seene by his leauing out of certaine wordes at the end of the point auouched by M. Charnocke to haue beene in his commission The words are these sine necessitate aut vtilitate without need or profit which words being added vnto the point as he calleth it in M. Charnocks commission or the petition of the priests as they tearmed it maketh the matter so iust a request as no man of sense can dislike thereof But the very
kindly and friendly in all points to their power but not for loue of the Iesuits but vpon their owne honest dispositions except it be meant by M. D. Haddock and M. Martin Array vnto whose lodging the two priests were sent the one vpon the 22. of April for then he was set at libertie and not presently vpon their sight of the Breue or assurance that all would submit themselues for this was done vpō the 8 or 9. of April when F. Parsons did first bring them the Breue to copy it out the other vpon the 6. of May for then and not before was the other at libertie not presently vpon their assurance that all would be quiet as here it is most falsly suggested And the trueth is that this doctor and his fellow Proctor did vse that kindnesse towards the two priests as euery day when the priests went abroad the doctor himselfe or his felow Proctor would take the paines to rig vp their chamber that no loose paper should be lost which they might by any chance leaue behinde them There was also an honest man in Rome of the Catholick English nation who in respect of olde acquaintance with one or both the priests promised to goe with one of them to visit the 7. Churches an act of deuotion vsed by all that goe to Rome but when the day came he durst not goe fot feare lest the Iesuits should shew ouermuch kindnesse towards him for this loue towards the priest Fa. Parsons his loue and confidence specially is not to be measured who as I haue bene enformed obiected to the priests that they had brought with them a letter which was indorsed or entituled to them in this style To your LL. by which he and others at that time iested at their Lordships And F. Parsons in his letter to M. Bishop of the 9. of October 1999. vrgeth the same as also this author in the Apologie cap. 9 fol. 135. But when these priests desired to see that letter alledging oftentimes what comfort it would be vnto them to see their owne Lordships so often talked of by F. Parsons and other Iesuits all the loue and confidence especially which F. Parsons had could not worke it neither would this letter euer be shewed vnto them as M Bishop testifieth in the English booke fol. 159. Although sayth he it was most instantly desired yea and said to haue been forged as is set down fol. 127. and quietly let slip here in the Apol which vndertaketh to answere that booke Now follow certaine letters of D. Bishop to M. Colington not when hee was at libertie as here it is suggested but a prisoner still although at more libertie then M. Charnocke had for hee was commanded to the Proctors house as M. Charnocke was after his departure and might not lie in the towne where hee would and might haue liued without further charge as also M. Charnocke might for that they had agreed for their chamber and diet for a certaine time and payd their money beforehand and were caried away to prison before halfe the time was out and were offered afterward to haue their diet for so many daies as were behind of the reckoning which were more then either of them had leaue to stay in Rome after their seuerall inlargement out of the Colledge And as for this glose that M. Bishops letter was written eight dayes after the Popes Breue was published I should haue let it passe as one of this authors pety follies this letter bearing date the 29. of April as here is said and the Breue bearing date the 6. of April as in the leafe next before it is twice cited and elsewhere often in the Apologie But there is a further folly hereupon grounded or at the least the like more grossely committed to shew forth F. Parsons praises concerning a letter next following at the end of which thus sayth this author Thus wrote F. Parsons euen then when yet the Popes Breue was not come foorth was not that kindly done and friendly of F. Parsons But how is it proued that this letter was written euen then Marke how hee prooueth it As appeareth sayth he for that this was written the 9. of April and the Breue beareth date the 21. of the saidmoneth The Breue which hath hitherto borne date of the 6. of April must now for to claw Fa. Parsons be reported yea and beleeued also by the blind obedient to beare date the 21. of April Is not this authour very greedy that F. Parsons should be commended who will fetch a matter so farre off and so farre from a knowen trueth to further it ergo not being more common in the schooles then a Breue of the 6. of April for the Archpriests confirmation This letter and other would aske longer scanning then would recompense the paines but to euery mans view they present an argument that the peace was made vpon the Priests side and therefore I will briefly goe ouer some marginall notes which are made vpon these letters And first I will beginne with the notes made vpon Master Bishops letter whereupon Father Parsons his information who was to ouersee what hee writ into England how that he had laboured for his libertie he saith that hee had his libertie by F. Parsons procurement There is this note in the margent How then doeth hee denie this afterward but he telleth him not where you must go looke for that And in the meane time you must thinke that M. Bishop said one thing at one time and at another time denied the same which hee might very well doe speaking first according to such informations as F. Parsons gaue him which afterward he might vnderstand to be false The second note is this By this we see how these men were pretenders and could not expect their owne time And this note is made vpon M. Bishops good wishes to one man and certificate that vpon his peaceable behauiour he should be remembred And what doeth this proue that the same party pretended any thing at all vpon the next letter which is F. Parsons to M. Collington and M. Mush there is this note An obiection answered and that was Fa. Parsons is of an other body and therefore no friend of theirs A shrewd obiection and how is it answered He hath procured Seminaries for them and if these Seminaries were for men of his owne vocation as in deed they are and to make his faction the stronger yet they are all to one end and one publique seruice of our countrey And if no man wil this beleeue let him looke into his actions of the yeeres 1596 and 97. when diuers priests were to come in the Spanish Armadoes vnder pretence to restore the English to the Catholicke religion Let their forced subscriptions to strange titles proue Fa. Parsons and his agents their publique seruice of our countrey But after this letter of F. Parsons followeth another of M. Mush to him And where M. Mush declareth how much
latter part of the letter was left out that the Reader might conceiue how that the priests had sworne to obserue or fulfill this decree and that this oth was exhibited by the immediat Commissarie or Delegate of his Holinesse whereas this letter appeared not in many dayes after that M. Acarisius the Commissarie came vnto the Colledge vpon a sleeuelesse errand as by this decree it appeareth although it beare a date of the day before M. Acarisius came thither to wit 21. April and M. Acarisius came not vntill the 22. of the same And this was then vsed as an argument by Fa. Parsons that M. Acarisius should not haue come insomuch as hee seemed to be somewhat amazed as I vnderstand when hee shewed this letter to M. Charnocke what the reason might be that Acarisius did take vpon him to declare the Cardinals sentence seeing the Cardinals had committed the matter to others as appeared by those letters And Fa. Parsons being asked by M. Charnocke what should be the reason that these letters bearing date the 21. of April were not seene in so many dayes after answered that they were brought vnto the Colledge the 21. of April which was the day before M. Acarisius came thither but were left in his chamber the same day and that hee had newly found them when he brought them to M. Charnocke M. Bishop was now at libertie and had ben some dayes before and had not seene this sentence of the two Cardinals neither was it euer shewed him otherwise then thus Comming one day to see F Parsons or M. Charn who was kept stil as yet in prison F. Parsons told him that there lay a letter vpō the table for him to looke on which when M. Bishop had read he layd it downe againe and neuer was any motion made to one or other for any othe for the fulfilling of this sentence of the Cardinals which was their sentence and no other as is confessed in this Apologie fol. 139. and is onely vrged in this place to haue bin transgressed with periurie for so still doth this author goe forward This was the decree sayth he and it is strange that any Catholike priest would aduenture to breake it so openly and to glory in it by writing when he had done This man is vilely troubled that M. Charnocke did nothing but for what he was able to giue his reason and such as when he commeth to answere he letteth all slip quietly Yet he wil here haue a saying vnto him and tell his reader that M. Charnocke did glory in the breaking of the decree which is most false for neither did he breake the decree but appealed in forme of Lawe from the iniquitie thereof nor glory therein but proued the iustnesse of his appeale out of most approued authors as may be seene in his answere to Cardinall Burghese set in the booke to the Inquisition pag. 87. But what saith he did he attend to obserue the other part of the decree more then this which was that they should liue quietly and obediently and to procure others also to peace and concord I answere that I vnderstood by such as liued in Lorraine that he liued very quietly and brought with him a testimony of the same from M. Arthur Pitts to whom he was so much beholding as to liue in his house vntill his breaking vp house caused M. Charnocke to returne into his countrey and hee liued obediently to all his Superiours And in this very Chapter there will be a sufficient testimonie gathered out of the 144 leafe that he procured peace and concord in such as loued peace And as for the others it was neither in his power to procure it being banished so farre off from them neither could any man in wisedome ◅e him vnto it But this author will prooue the contrary but how trow ye Forsooth by the effects that ensued his going in As how For within fourteene dayes after this his letter to the Cardinall there followed their greatest appeale from the Archpriest A great matter against M. Charnocke Might he not aswell haue sayd that it was about a moneth after that Cardinall Burghesius letter came into England to M. Charnocke and haue layd the blame if appealing deserued blame vpon the Cardinall If any man will take the paines to looke vpon the causes of the Appeale set downe in English in Ma. Colingtons booke pag. 192. to the 202 page he shall finde asmuch reason for the one as for the other and that the grieuances were most intollerable which were offered them long before M. Charn returne into England and were the principall causes of their Appeale But lest that all euen his blindest fooles should find him to be a poore cauiller in this cause against M. Charnocke he will tell them another coniecture and that is that M. Charn sought occasion to quarrell with the Archpriest vpon his first entertainement into England And for proofe hereof he citeth a piece of a letter which M. Charnocke writ vnto him 24. May 1600 of which letter I will set some part downe according to the copie thereof as I haue seene it Right Reuerend Sir being returned into England I thought it my duety in most humble maner to salute you hoping my returne cannot be preiudiciall to any your good courses and desiring for your further satisfaction to speake with you when it shall please you This which followeth is inserted here in the Apologie In the meane while to request of you thus much in charitie to write to me why sending for me to declare the authority giuen you by Cardinal Caietane his letters you shewed me such instructions as when I came to Rome I found were not annexed to your Commission as you at that time sayd were annexed Thus far in the Apologie and then toward the latter end Reuerend Sir a small reason from you shall giue me satisfaction for mine intention is not to argue any matters with you but to take your answere simply as you shall giue it and rest therein satisfied And this scruple being remoued I shall the more confidently deale with you in other matters which I am to impart vnto you Thus wishing nothing more then peace and quietnesse amongst vs I cease to trouble you from your charitable affaires and doe expect some answere from you at your best leasure 24. of May. But of this hath this Apologie maker culled as much as is here noted which part if it were taken alone by it selfe could not imply a quarrel in any honest mans iudgement much lesse when it is taken with all these circumstances But this author must either adde somewhat still to that which he citeth or curtall it or els he wil shame himselfe And as for that which M. Charnocke affirmed in his letter it is confirmed by an other although the Archpriests secretary gaue M. Charnock the lie fiue or sixe times in the answere to his letter which how wel soeuer it suteth with the new religious managing of
The reader may imagine that it is not worth the stooping for which this man letteth lye if it be not too hot or too heauy for him as here also he excepteth against the priests their printing of their bookes notwithstanding the scandall which may grow by the comming abroad of these dissensions to which answere is made that they must looke to it who driue the priests to this course hauing no other way left for them to recouer their fame which was most iniuriously taken away from them Hee excepteth also against that which is said of Card. Allen his fauour towards the priests which hee sayth he hath refuted in the third and fourth Chapter in which this author hath committed as often he doeth in this kinde a more grosse fault then if he had said that his booke had beene printed at Roane in France for this would haue troubled none but some cauilling foole and these trickes to referre his reader so often to such places where he shall find nothing of that matter for which he is sent hither may trouble euen his gentle readers patience Well yet you must goe looke in the third Chapter for a matter which is not there touched by him there is in the fourth Chapter some proofe that the Cardinal disliked some actions in which were some temporall men and some priests long agoe many yeeres before these stirres began which belong nothing to the controuersie now in question which is whether the priests were schismatickes who deferred to accept the Archpr. before they did see the Breue or to these priuat quarrels of which it seemeth by a letter of his set in the second Chapter he was informed before his death or thirdly to the stirres which the Iesuits began in the Colledge about the same time To conclude there is nothing recited there which is here affirmed neither is that which is laid to Fa. Heywood his chalenging of legantine power in England any way solued but in this manner and this is all the difference that euer was betweene F. Heywood and F. Parsons as if the question had beene which is the way to Poplington yea there is as much confessed as F. Heywood was charged with for the particulars as any man may see in this 164. leafe The readers must go looke here and there for diuers other matters but D. Haddocke and M. Martin Array are here to be defended by the author for that poore resistance which they made vnto the two priests Indeede these good Proctors came vnto the two priests within two dayes or three of their arriuall at Rome and were so hote with them as M. Martin Array stirred not out of his chamber aboue a fortnight after he had bene all that while possessed with an ague which some of his friends said that hee had before hee tooke that heate but a sudden ioy perchance that the two priests were that day to be apprehended put life and health into him vpon the seast day of S. Tho. of Canterbury and made him come abroad and what these Proctors did after at the apparance of the two priests I haue before shevved and vvhat M. Martin vvrit into England thereof The particulars which touch these Proctors their persons I know not and therefore I leaue it vnto them to declare who thought it expedient to make them know in this cause yet doe I not well vnderstand how there was any affinitie between Cardinal Allen and D. Haddocke which this fellow will needes haue for the Doctors credit neither of them hauing bene at any time married and I haue heard that M. Martin Array was extraordinarily fauoured by Sir Francis Walsingham by whom he was admonished to depart out of England before some matters should chance which would shortly chance and would be some let to his passage which kinde of vsage at that time to wit when the great trouble was in the yeere 1586. being layd together with his being then set at liberty might giue suspition to some that all was not as it should haue been although in times of lesse trouble some men haue found the fauor by extraordinary meanes to haue their liberty at the intercession of some great men or some highly fauoured friends Now followeth his defence of M. Standish and diuers other And whereas the priests haue set downe in their bookes that Master Standish had giuen his name to become a Iesuite and therefore no fit man to deale for them in the procuring of this subordination which is pretended to haue been made to take vp controuersies which were between Iesuits and priests as cap. 8. fol. 124. this author affirmeth or priests and priests and yet was the principall instrumentas is wel knowen to all men and it is confessed in the same chapter fol. 98. and 99 this author letteth that goe without any word to the contrary for intrueth he cannot denie it and taketh occasion to say somewhat touching that which the priests affirme of M. Standish that is that he did vse the name of the priests as if he had been sent by the priests whereas indeed he was not and that he himselfe sayd at his returne in the hearing of diuers priests who will iustifie it that he had their interpretatiue consent and that hee presumed that they would consent to that which he did But when this author commeth to prooue that M. Standish did nothing without the priests their consent in the procuring of this Subordination he returneth his reader to the eighth Chapter for diuers priests letters which already I haue shewed were all written after that this Subordination was made which argueth a notable impudencie in this authour that hee will so peremptorily affirme whatsoeuer may sound any way in the eares of those whom affection blindeth to make for his purpose although in the Iudgement of the indifferent hee worketh his confusion For other disproofe also of M. Blackwels and the Cardinall Caietans ignorance in our English affaires his Reader must goe backe to the eighth and ninth Chapter he sendeth also his Reader to the third Chapter to see how falsly the Iesuites are sayd to seeke their owne and that they trouble the peace of England and persecute more then heretikes To the which it hath been answered that they doe seeke their owne in some sort for so much as pride and what els followeth thereon may be called theirs and that also it might bee sayd that they seeke quae Iesu Christi as this author doth there challenge those things which are belonging to Iesu Christ for so much as the almes of Catholikes for reliefe of priests and other Catholikes may bee saide to belong to Iesu Christ and that they labour by infamie to seduce the Catholike Laitie from that loue and reuerence which they owe vnto Catholike priests which is a persecution against the priests more grieuous then any that hath been raised by any heretikes against them For whereas there hath been a most charitable correspondence betweene the Catholike Laytie
interteine the two priests kindly in his owne chamber They confesse they were interteined after a long difficultie But what authenticall proofe is there that he did it kindly or that it was done without difficultie He told them that they might not talke with any of the schollers and no one of the schollers can say that euer they did talke with any of them but one whom M. Bishop was very desirous to see and he was brought to M. Bishop by the Confessarius of the Colledge who stood by and heard al which passed M. Charnocke did know that there was one in the Colledge whose mother is his cousen germane and neuer coueted to talke with him The quarrell which was against these two priests was for talking with such as were appointed by Fa. Parsons to attend them in the hospitall whereof he who is here said to be the vertuous priest was a Iesuit in a Secular priests coat and shortly after wore a Iesuits coate and died among them And the occasion of this talke was ministred by this vertuous priest and it was not of this present controuersie but about M. Edward Tempest concerning whom it was said that he was hardly dealt withall in regard that such as vsed to intertaine priests at their first arriuall in England were perswaded not to intertaine him And that some of his neerest friends were told that in conscience they could not relieue him An other was a ieast which had chanced about 20. yeeres since in the Colledge of Rome which because it concerned one who was chosen in England for an assistant the matter was taken hainously yet was the occasion hereof also ministred by thaâ— vertuous priest and the matter it selfe was but a mery tale And this is al which was alledged by F. Owen the Iesuit in the name of F. Parsons against the two priests yet doeth this author most shamelesly relate that the two priests had talked that which might raise or renew sedition among the schollers But this and all which foloweth is doubtlesse brought in this place that this author might shew how he could gall his reader with his owne tale as an authenticall testimony for other testimony there is not That also which is here gainesaid of Cardinal Bellarmines letter was said vpon the relation of those who saw it although they haue not the copy to shew And for so much as concerneth the principall point of F. Bellarmines letter to wit the imprisoning of the two priests it is confessed in his Apologie Cap. 4. fol. 120. out of the same letter The priests there being imprisoned in the Colledge is reputed agreat benefit vnto them They thought it not so but onely in this respect that they thought their liues were more in safety in the Colledge then in a common prison But in respect of the common cause without doubt it had bene a great preiudice had they had any hope of iustice But their hope was small when they saw that they were to be infamously caried away to prison before they could get audience But it troubleth this author much that Fa. Parsons should be termed a Iaylor especially there being another who had the keyes of their chambers to bring them meat and all other necessaries but he telleth not who had the keyes all the rest of the day If F. Parsons had not bene seene to weare them at his girdle this matter might haue bene somewhat clenlier caried but it was too open to be excused Next followeth a defence of F. Parsons for his shewing of M. Charnocks handkerchiefs and night coyfes which this author saith were so wrought with silke and gold lace is they might seeme to serue for any Secular prince in the world and the socks for his feete were of so fine Holland as the Commissary said he was well assured that his Holines neuer woare such for his shirts You must imagine that this relation is very authenticall although M. Charnock had neither handkerchiefe nor night coife that any Iesuite in England would vouchsafe to weare they were so meane I haue seene the night coife and it is wrought in deed with silke For it hath a border of blacke silke about it 3. fingers broad and all the rest of the cap is plaine Holland it hath some 6. pennie-worth of gold and siluer edging and as many as haue seene the cappe wonder at the impudencie of this Author who perchance did thinke the cappe would not haue bene kept The conceit which is made of his handkerchiefes is much more ridiculous And by the tale of his sockes this Author bringeth into my minde a tale of a preacher who tolde his parish that Christ fed fiue hundred with such a small quantity and being told softly by the Clarke that they were fiue thousand he bad him hold his peace like a foole and told him that if he could perswade the people that they were fiue hundred he had done a good dayes worke I vnderstand that the Commissary sayd how that his Holines did not weare so fine cloth in his bands But this author thought this was too much to be beleeued and therefore he set it downe the Popes shirts Whereupon saith he conferring with M. Charnocke himselfe in the presence of Fa Parsons and M. Bishop vpon the 8. of Aprill when they were to haue the first fauour to speake together and to walke at libertie in the College at certaine times when answere was made that priests now a dayes for dissimulation are forced to vse such things in England he replied that at the leastwise it was not needefull to bring such strange delicacies to Rome and that albeit in some externall apparell dissimulation might be tolerable in English Priests at home in respect of the times yet in such thinge whereof their vse was onely in secret as night-coifes and sockes and the like he saw no neede of excesse or dissimulation And this was all that passed in this matter vpon the faith of such an honest man as writ this Apologie But now sir one tale is tolde the other is not told which is that M. Charnockes answere was to this effect that Priests traueiling vp down in England were to vse such things as were fit for such persons as they bare in their trauaile especially when they lay not in Catholike houses where they were knowen but in common Innes where neither night-coifes not socks were vsed in secret And for his bringing those things to Rome his answere was that hee had necessary vse of them at his comming out of England making account to returne againe he had little reason to throwe those things away after that they had the first time serued him And if it had pleased them at Rome to haue left his Truncke vnsearched the cap had neuer ben seene in Rome And M. Bishop being requested to say what he knew of this strange delicacie affirmed that he had neuer seene it before But if M. Charnocke had either worne it by the way as he
Censures when the priests submitted themselues vpon the sight of his Holinesse Breue which censures he had vsed against three priests because they had appealed from him to the pope as it is set downe in the booke to the Inquisition And I doubt not but that the Archpriest would be as glad now that all were well accorded as he was at the first attonement and be as ready perchance to breake out againe as then hee was as it is prooued in the bookes to his Holinesse and to the Inquisition neither is there any man that is in his wittes but will thinke that the Iesuits and Archpriest would haue peace that is power to vse the Secular priests at their pleasure and that the priests should suffer all manner of indignities both in fame and otherwise and not to stirre for anie thing which may be done against them least the Iesuites peace be broken which they loue so dearely and cloake it with extraordinary pietie in this place fol. 221 where they are sayd to haue stoode with the Archpriest and the rest in defence of his Holines ordination as though the priests had euer resisted his Holines ordination and not rather yeelded themselues presently at the sight of the Breue before which there was no Popes ordination And to this the Iesuites their standing in defence of his Holinesse ordination are ioyned most absurd positions of their desire not to meddle in the priests affaires whereas it hath beene shewed that they haue been the chiefe of this sedition against the priests And their interpretation that their dealing proceedes of loue is to men of vnderstanding an argument of a factious disposition and desiring of gouerning all sortes of people whosoeuer must play the Apes part to take away the enuie for their misdeedes from them They intend not sayeth hee to preiudice them in any preferment for the time present or to come Hee were worse then madde that would trouble himselfe with our Iesuites intentions which varie as often as their tongues moue and turne their intentions to serue best their owne turnes Let the Iesuites their hinderance of all our nation beyond the Seas from al promotion speake for their intentions since that no place or preferment there can be had without degrees in schooles which they haue induced his Holinesse to debarre all the English nation vnder this other intention that young men must not take the degrees when they depart from the Seminaries And that their intention may be the more euident that they will hinder euery mans preferrement they haue put into the Popes Breue a barre not onely for the proceeding in Diuinitie the knowledge whereof they haue now also cleane taken out of the Colledge at Doway but in either of the Lawes also Ciuill or Canon which are not taught in any of our Seminaries Yet must all their intentions bee most excellent and must not be thought to preiudice any for the time present or to come As for the time to come were it in their hands to preiudice any man all their protestations and oathes would carie little credite but with such as know them not In which as in all other their dealings especially in this action the priests doe most willingly forgiue them their falshood and doe pray for them that God will giue them and their adherents his grace to amende what they cannot chuse but see is amisse in themselues To which they may make a good steppe if they will enter into their owne consciences and consider of what great scandals and harmes in Gods Church they haue beene a very faulty occasion by that most wicked imputation of schisme to most Catholicke priestes and their obdurate standing in that sinfull opinion without admitting any equall triall of the cause in question which the priests did offer in most humble wise before they tooke the course that now they take and was onely left vnto them to cleare themselues of so damnable a slander ¶ A REPLY TO THE Appendix of the Apologie by J. B. THE author of the Apologie hauing seene other two bookes beside those against which he writ his Apologie maketh an answere such as it is vnto them which answere he calleth An Appendix to the Apologie by the Priests that remaine in due obedience to their lawfull Superior As though an Appeale made from a superior vpon iust causes and a lawfull prosecution thereof could not stand with due obedience But somewhat must be said and if it haue no pith in it as euery indifferent reader will soone discouer that want in this Appendix it must be ouercharged with bigge words which the blinde obedient must imagine would not haue bene vttered without iust cause although they see none After a long conflict then as it should seeme in this author whether hee should take notice of these two latter bookes to which he hath made it knowen both in this Appendix and other two scurrilous Libels set out since this Appendix came forth that he cannot make any answere he hath aduentured to say somewhat of them and that it might not bee made too apparant to the world how little the poore man had to say herein hee stuffeth these few leafes with exceptions against those bookes to which he pretended an answere in his Apologie enlargeth himselfe somewhat by way of a preface wherein he telleth his reader how vnwillingly he put his pen to paper for the defence of our Superiors and their lawfull doings and proceedings against the intemperate impugnations by tumult and Libels of a few discontented brethren c. And no man can but beleeue him that it was sore against his will that he had such cause as he had to vse his pen although he neuer made daintie of his paines and pen where hee thought he might discredit those priests which he could not bring to his lure And as for the priests their doings or proceedings they haue shewed themselues ready to giue accompt thereof and to proue both the lawfulnesse and the necessitie which was in withstanding the exorbitant proceedings of such as hauing neither any Christian wisdom nor honestie abused our Superiors and procured that al the priests should be brought into these streights to wit either to yeeld to the wicked designes of others or to be made infamous all the world ouer And to this effect was the treatise of schisme written by the Iesuits and sent abroad not onely in England but into remote places beyond the seas to perswade such as would be blinde that Catholike priests who had liued in a long most dangerous persecution for defence of the sea Apostolike were now become schismaticks and why because they did not contrary to the lawes of Gods Church yeeld their obedience to a creature of the Iesuits intruded vpon them as their Superior without any warrant from the Sea Apostolike which hath commanded that no such superior be accepted without a speciall warrant or letters from the same Sea as may be seene in that extrauagant