preuented in like occasions to wit that multitudes are not to be put in despaire no nor particuler men into extreame exasperation without hope of remedy for that despaire is the mother of precipitation extreme exasperation is the next dore to fury No counsaile no reason no regard of Religion nor other respect humaine or deuine holdeth place when men grow desperate all stringes of hope are cut of We see by experience that the least and weakest wormes of the earth which cannot abide the looke of a man yet when they are extremely pressed and put in despaire of escape they turne and leape in mans face it selfe which otherwise they so 〈◊〉 feare and dread 4. Wherfore seing this dangerous stickler would put this extreme despaire into so many thousandes of his Maiesties subiectes yow 〈◊〉 imagine what good seruice he meaneth to do him therby and what pay he deserueth for his labour Surely if a great rich man whose wealth lay in his flocke of sheepe had neuer so faire and fawning a dog following neuer so diligently his trencher and playing neuer so many flattering trickes before him yet if togeather with this he had that other currish quality also as to woory his maisters sheepe disseuer his fold disperse his flock and driue them into flight and precipitation it is like that his Maister out of his wisedome though otherwise he were delighted with his officious fawning would rather hange such a dog then aduenture to suffer so great and important losses by him And no Iesse is to be expected of the great equity prudence of our great Monarch when he shall well consider of the cause and consequence therof 5. And thus much of the malice and pernicious sequele of this assertion let vs see somewhat now also of the folly falsity therof To which effect I would first enquire if it be so that subiectes of different Religions are not comportable togeather vnder a Prince that is of one of those Religions for so must the question be proposed if we will handle it in generall then how doe the Iewes Christians liue togeather vnder many Christian Princes in Germany and Italy vnder the state of Venice yea vnder the Pope himselfe how doe Christians and Turkes liue togeather vnder the Turkish Emperour of Constantinople as also vnder the Persian without persecution for their Religion how did Catholickes and Arrians liue so many yeares togeather vnder Arrian Kinges and Emperours in old times both in Spaine and els 〈◊〉 how doe Catholickes and Protestantes liue togeather at this day vnder the most Christian King of France vnder the great King of Polonia and vnder the German Emperour in diuers partes of his dominions all Catholicke Princes and in the free-cityes of the Empyre And in particuler is to be considered that the Hussites haue liued now some hundreds of yeares in Bohemia vnder the Cathòlicke Princes and Emperours Lordes of that Countrey with such freedome of conuersation with Catholicke subiectes and vnion of obedience to the said Princes as at this day in the great Citty of Praga where the Emperour commonly resideth and where Catholicks 〈◊〉 wholy gouerne there is not so much as one 〈◊〉 Church knowne to be in the handes of any Catholicke Pastor of that citty but all are Hussites that haue the ordinary charges of soules and Catholickes for seruice sermons and Sacraments doe repaire only to monasteries according to ancient agreementes and conuentions betweene them though in number the said Catholickes be many times more then the other and haue all the gouernment and Commaundry in their handes as hath byn said These are demonstratiue proofes ad hominem and cannot be denied and consequently doe conuince that this make-bate Ministers proposition is false in generall That subiects of different religion may not liue togeather in 〈◊〉 peace if their gouernours will permit them Now if he can alleadge any seuerall weighty causes why this generall assertion holdeth not or may not holde in the particuler case of English Catholiks and Protestants vnder our present King we shall discusse them also and see how much they weigh 6. He pretendeth ten seuerall reasons in his pamphlet for causes of this incompossibility and therof doth his whole inuectiue consist Eight of them appertaine to doctrine and practice of rebellion in vs as he auoucheth and the other two vnto doubtfull speech or Equiuocation Of which later point hauing touched somewhat in the precedent Preface being to haue occasion to doe the same againe more largely afterward wee shall now consider principally of the former concerning doctrine and practice of quiet or vnquiet peaceable or dangerous humours behauiours of subiects both Catholicke Protestant 7. And as for Catholickes the Minister in all his eight reasons bringeth out nothing of nouelty against vs but only such pointes of doctrine as himselfe doth consesse and expresly proue that they were held and recevued in our publique schooles aboue foure hundred yeares gone as namely in his first reason For that we hold Protestants for hereticks so farre forth as they decline and differ obstinately from the receyued doctrine and sense of the Roman Catholicke Church and consequently that being Hereticks they are not true Christians nor can haue true faith in any one article of Christian beliefe and that the punishment determined by the ancient Canon lawes which are many and grieuous both spirituall temporall do or may therby light vpon them And in his second third and fourth reasons that wee teach That the Bishop of Rome as spirituall head of the vniuersall Church hath power aboue temporall Princes and may procure to let the Election and succession of such as are opposite or enemies to Catholicke Religion and that in some cases he may dissolue oathes of obediēce and the like 8. And further yet in his fifth sixt seauenth and eight reasons that in certaine occasions and vpon certaine necessities for preuenting of greater euils imminent to any Countrey Kingdome or common wealth especially if they be spirituall and appertaine to the saluation of soules the same high Pastour may restraine resist or punish the enormous excesses of temporall Princes if any such fall out by Censures excommunication depriuation or deposition though this not but vpon true iust and vrgent causes when other means cannot preuaile for auoiding those euerlasting euils 9. All which doctrines for this is the summe of all he saith or alleadgeth do cōteine as yow see no new matter of malice against Protestant Princes inuented by vs for that the Minister himselfe as now we haue said confesseth that for these three or foure later hundred yeares these positions haue byn generally receiued by all the vniuersall Church and face of Christendome so as being established so many hundred yeares before Protestants were borne or named in the world they could not be made or inuented against them in particuler but only are drawne vnto them at this time by
in the Index of prohibited bookes and not only for Heresies of this time but also quod dicit spiritum sanctum minùs aduocandum adorandum esse for that he saith that the holy Ghost is lesse to be called vpon or adored c. as the Index expurgatorius testifieth besides all this I say he corrupteth manifestly in the sentence before alledged the wordes plaine meaning of his Author to wit Bellarmine from whome he citeth Cassanders iudgment for thus they lye in him Tertius error saith he est Georgij Cassandri in libro De officio pij viri vbi docet debere Principes inuenire rationem pacis inter Catholicos Lutheranos c. Sed interim dum non inueniunt debere 〈◊〉 vnicuique suam fidem modò omnes recipiant Scripturam Symbolum Apostolicum Sic enim omnes sunt vera Ecclesiae membra licèt in particularibus dogmatibus dissentiant 68. The third errour is of George Cassander in the booke Of the office of a pious man where he teacheth that Princes ought to seeke out some meanes of peace betwixt Catholickes Lutheranes Caluinistes and other sectes of our time but in the meane space whiles they finde no such meanes they ought to permit euery one to follow his owne particuler faith so as all doe receaue the Scripture and common Creed of the Apostles for so al are true members of the Church albeit they disagree among thēselues in particuler doctrines These are Bellarmins wordes Now let vs see how they are mangled by M. Morton both in Latin and English as by him that hath the notablest talent therin notwithstanding his solemne protestations to the contrary that euer I read in my life 69. He putteth downe first the Latin wordes in his margent thus Debent Principes inuenire rationem pacis inter Catholicos Lutheranos 〈◊〉 qui omnes dum Symbolum tenent Apostolicum vera sunt membra Ecclesiae licèt à nobis in particularibus dissentiant Princes ought to seeke a meanes of peace betweene Catholickes Lutheranes Caluinistes all which for so much as they hold the Apostolicke Creed are true members of the Church albeit they dissent from vs in some particuler opiniōs And heere now yow see first to be omitted cunningly and wilfully by this crafty Minister the wordes of much moment that whiles Princes doe not finde a fit meane of peace they ought to permit all to liue according to their particuler faith which sentence of his graue and learned Cassander not seeming to himself allowable in our English State or to his owne Brethren the English Caluinistes that now hauing gotten the gouernment will suffer no other Religion but their owne thought best to suppresse and cut them quite out Secondly in steed of the condicionall speech vsed by Cassander modò omnes recipiant Scripturam c. So all 〈◊〉 receaue the Scripture and Apostolicall Creed he putteth it downe with a causatiue clause Qui omnes dum Symbolum tenent c. All which sectes because they doe hold the Articles of the Creed are true members of the Church leauing out the word Scripture as yow see and peruerting the other wholly in sense For who will not hold it absurde that Catholickes Lutherans Caluinistes and other sectes of our time though in wordes they doe admit both Scripture Apostolicall Creed yet differing in sense and so many doctrines as they doe are all to be held notwithstanding for true members of one and the selfe same Church Can any thing be more ridiculous then this 70. Thirdly he doth most notably cogge in thrusting in the wordes à nobis from vs which are not in the originall meaning therby to make Cassander to seeme a Catholicke to speake in the behalf of Catholickes which is plaine cosenage and to this end also he leaueth out dogmatibus finally yow see that he shapeth euery thing to his owne purpose and by making Cassander as a Catholicke seeme to wish and endeauour this vnion and Bellarmine to reiect it he would confirme his former calumniation that only by the insolency of Iesuites all such hope is debarred 71. And thus much for the corruption of the Latin text but his English hath other corruptions also according to his ordinary custome For first he translateth Debent Principes that Emperours should endeauour a reconciliation to confirme therby his former vanity that Cassander was so great a man with Emperours as he talketh not but to Emperours Secōdly he translateth Catholicos Lutheranos Caluinistas c. which wordes 〈◊〉 comprehend all other sects of our time as Anabaptistes Arrians Trinitarians Hussites Picardians and the like he translateth them I say Papistes and Protestantes as though all those sectes of our time were to be comprehended vnder the name of Protestantes of the English faith or as though Cassander if he were a Catholicke as heere he is pretended would call vs 〈◊〉 Thirdly wheras in his owne Latin heere set downe he saith Qui omnes dum Symbolum 〈◊〉 c. All which to wit Catholickes Lutherans Caluinistes other Sectaries whiles they hold the Apostolicall Creed are true members of the Church he doth English it thus because Protestantes hold the Articles of the Creed and are true members of the Church excluding Catholickes from belieuing the said Articles or being true members which in his owne Latin and that of Bellarmines also are included and fourthly is the corruption before mentioned although they dissent from vs in some particuler opinions which in Bellarmine is although they dissent among themselues in particuler doctrines and finally the wordes by him cited of Bellarmins iudgment which he controlleth to wit falsa est haec sententia Cassandri non 〈◊〉 enim Catholici reconciliari cum Haereticis are not so in Bellarmine but these potest facilè refelli 〈◊〉 Cassandri sententia primum enim non possunt Catholici Lutherani Caluinistae eo modo conciliari c. This sentence of Cassander may easely be refelled first for that Catholickes Lutherans and Caluinistes for example can not so be reconciled as Cassander appointeth to wit by admitting only the wordes of the Creed for that we differ in the sense and sometimes in the articles themselues as in that descendit ad inferos he descended into hell and in like manner we agree not about the sense of those other articles I belieue the Catholicke Church and Communion of Saintes remission of sinnes c. So Bellarmine All which this fellow omitteth 72. And so you see there is no truth or sincerity with him in any thing neither can these escapes be ascribed any way to ouersight errour mistaking or forgetfulnes but must needes be attributed to wilfull fraude malicious meaning purposly to deceaue as the things themselues doe euidently declare for which cause I shall leaue him to be censured by his owne Brethren but especially by his Lord and Maister for so notable discrediting their cause by so manifest
Protestants But the Romish Seminaries and Iesuites doe so ergo This is his reason and manner of reasoning and in this sorte goe all the rest ech thing with his ergo that yow may know that the learned man hath studied Logicke or rather sophistry to set downe all in forme of syllogisme And to proue his propositions or premisses in this first argument he vseth two meanes first to cite the hard speeches of certaine Catholicke writers against the Caluinian faith as though it were none at all but rather infidelity wherin we shall see after what great store of Protestant writers they haue also with them in that point the other medium is a certeine odious enumeration of the penalties inflicted by Church-lawes and Canons of old time vpon heresy and Hereticks in generall all which T. M. will needes apply to himself and to English Protestantes at this day to breake therby all ciuill association with vs that are Catholickes but both the one and the other are proofes of no validity Let vs begin with the first 4. He citeth the wordes of Andreas Iurgiuicius Canon of Cracouia in Polonia affirming that Protestantes doe holde no one article of the Apostles Creed to wit rightly and entierly Of M. VVright in his articles teaching Protestantes to haue no faith no Religion no Christ. Of M. Reynoldes entituling his booke Caluino-Turcismus Of D. Gifford in the preface to the said booke auouching the pretented now Ghospel of Caluin in many things to be worse and more wicked then the Turkes Alcaron And finally of Antonius Posseuinus who wrote a booke De Atheismis Protestantium Of the Atheismes or pointes of doctrine leading to Atheisme which are taught by diuers Protestants especially by Caluin and his followers 5. Out of all which speeches T. M. inferreth the generall meaning of vs Catholicks to be That all humane society with Protestantes must be vtterly dissolued which is vtterly false and a meere mistaking For these speeches proue only that there cà be no society 〈◊〉 Catholickes and Protestants in their doctrine beliefe but not in life manners conuersation which is the point in question so as T. M. inferreth here quid pro quo And if he will heare one of his owne brethren hold this position also That there can be no vnion society or conformity betweene their our doctrine pretended by some let him read VVilliam Perkins epistle to S. VVilliam Bowes in the preface of his reformed or rather deformed Catholicke where he reprehendeth the new brethren of France and some also in England for giuing hope of this vnion So as in this point we agree that no agreement can be in Religion but in conuersatiō there may as we haue shewed by many examples in the precedent Chapter of people of different Religion that liue togeather at this day in vnion of obedience and quiet subiection vnder the 〈◊〉 Turke and Christian Emperour as also vnder the great Kings of France Polonia and other Princes Fondly then doth T. M. inferre the incompossibility of cohabitation conuersation out of the insociability of their doctrine and Religion 6. Now as for the hard and harsh speeches of the Authors alleadged though vnto many they may seeme somewhat sharpe exaggerations yet vnto him that shall consider well the matter in hand and the accustomed phrases of ancient Fathers in like occasions it will appeare far otherwise For first 〈◊〉 his meaning is nothing else as appeareth by his booke but that in all and euery article of the Creed Caluinistes haue innouated and altered somewhat in the true sense therof and added particuler errours of their owne as yow shall heare afterward proued and declared more largely out of the 〈◊〉 and assertions of diuers great Lutheran Protestants that hold Caluinists to haue peruerted all the articles of the said Creed Of which point our learned countriman M. VVilliam Reinoldes that had bvn diuers yeares a Protestant and Preacher of that doctrine after long study to proue the same by many demonstrations resolued to write a whole booke That Caluinistes belieue no one article of the Apostles Creed but afterwardes turned the same into that other worke entituled Caluino-Turcismus which is held by strangers to be one of the most learned that hath byn written of this kinde of controuersy in our age and M. Sutcliffe hath made himself ridiculous by attempting to answere the same 7. Those wordes also of M. VVright if he vsed them that Hereticks haue no faith no Religion no Christ but are meere infideles doe conteine an ancient position of Catholicke doctrine deliuered in schooles and Fathers writings against old Heretickes many hundred yeares before the name of Protestantes was heard of in the world so that this cannot be of malice properly against them The famous doctor S. Thomas aboue three hundred yeares gone hath this Question in his Treatise of faith Whether he that 〈◊〉 obstinatly in one point or article of his beliefe doth leese his whole faith in all the rest and holdeth yea alleadging for the same inuincible reasons And the same Doctor in like manner proposeth another question to wit which of three sinnes belonging to infidelity is most grieuous Iudaisme Paganisme or Heresy resolueth the question thus That albeit in some respects the former two may be thought more grieuous in that they deny more points of faith yet absolutely in regarde of the malice and obstinacy of an Hereticke that knew once the Catholicke truth and now wilfully impugneth the same against the iudgement of the vniuersall visible Church his sinne and damnation is much more grieuous and hereupon the ancient Fathers doe euery where aggrauate the heynousnes of this sinne aboue all other sinnes and in particuler doe deny them to be Christians but rather to be Infideles and worse then Infideles as now by S. Thomas hath byn said which is most conforme to the writinges of the Apostles themselues and Apostolicke men who detested this sinne in the highest degree as might largely be shewed out of their workes euen to the horror of the Reader if this place did beare it That seuere speach of S. Paul may be sufficient for all the rest exhorting his disciple Titus to auoide an hereticall man after one or two reprehensions knowing that such a one is subuerted and sinneth as damned by his owne iudgment Which is neuer found written of other sortes of Infideles 8. No man then ought to be offended with these earnest and sharpe speeches where heresy or the presumption therof is in question for that nothing is more dreadfull to Catholicke people then the very name and apprehension of heresy howsoeuer in our vnfortunate daies it be made a matter of dispute only or table-talke by many now in England and he that will see store of proofes and reasons laied togeather by the foresaid learned man M. Reynoldes to proue that the heresies of these
laid vpon them not only by Catholickes but also by the most renowned Protestant writers that haue byn since that name and profession began And if we would alleadge much more out of the very Father of Protestancy it self Martin Luther we might haue store especially where he pronouÌ„ceth this iudiciall sentence of them all Haereticos seriò censemus alienos ab Ecclesia Dei Zuinglianos Sacramentarios omnes qui negant Christi corpus sanguinem ore carnali sumi in venerabili Sacramento We doe vnfeynedly hold for Heretickes and for aliens from the Church of God all Zuinglians and other Sacramentaries that doe deny Christes body and bloud to be receaued by our bodily mouth in the venerable Sacrament 16. Behold heere both Heresy and excommunication or separation from the Church of God auerred against both Zuinglians and Caluinists by him that was their chiefest parent and Patriarch and in other places of his workes the same Luther hath many more particulers to this purpose as namely that men must fly the bookes and doctrine of Zuinglius and his followers Non secus ac tartarei Daemonis venenum no otherwise then the poison of the diuell of hell And yet further that They are not to be held in the number of Christians for that they teach no one article of Christian doctrine without corruption and are seauen times worse then Papists c. Wherby is euident that this charge of Heresy and excommunication proceedeth not against Caluinists from vs only but much more eagerly froÌ„ their owne brethren consequently it is with very little discretion brought in by the Minister T. M. against vs as a singuler fault of ours wherof we are to treat more afterward in some occasions that will be offered 17. But now as for the penalties conteyned in the Canon law against excommunicate Heretickes as depriuation of dignities losse of goods infamy imprisonment debarment from Sacraments and from conuersation with the like the answere is soone made that those externall punishments are not incurred ordinarily but after personall denunciation and condemnation by name For albeit the inward punishmentes that follow Heresy which are sinne and depriuation of grace excommunication and separation from Gods true Church and other spirituall losses theron depending be incurred by the obstinate holding or defending of any coÌ„demned Heresy whatsoeuer if the defender know the same to be condemned by the Church as both Holy Canons doe expressly denounce and Bulla Caenae Domini euery yeare 〈◊〉 on Maundy-Thursday doth confirme yet commonly are they not held for subiect to the other externall punishmentes and in particuler to be auoided and their company fled vntill by a lawfull Iudge he or they be denounced conuicted and condemned by name which we ascribe not to the Protestantes of England and therfore this charge was maliciously deuised by this Minister against vs to make vs odious 18. Nay we goe yet further for pacifying milding matters betweene vs that we doe not easily coÌ„demne or hold all and euery sorte of Protestantes Puritanes or the like sortes different at this day in our countrey from the Catholicks for absolute Heretickes but excusing them rather wherin we may by any charitable interpretation doe willingly lay hands where probably we may on that wise learned and discreet moderation of the famous doctor S. Augustine affirming to his friend Honoratus infected with the Manichean Heresy that there is a great difference betweene an Hereticke and one that belieueth Hereticks and is deceaued by them yow shall heare his owne wordes to that purpose Si mihi Honorate vnum atque idem videretur esse Haereticus Haereticis credens homo tam lingua quà m stylo in haec causa conquiescendum esse arbitrarer nunc verò cùm inter duo plurimùm inâ—ersit c. 19. If it had seemed to me friend Honoratus that an Hereticke a man belieuing Hereticks had byn al one thing I should haue thought it better to hold my peace in this cause betweene vs rather then to speake or write any thing therin but now seeing there is such great difference betweene these two I thought it not good to be silent with yow for so much as an Hereticke in my opinion is he that for some temporall respect or commodity but especially for vaine glory and singularity doth inuent or follow false and new opinions but he which belieueth such people is a man only deluded by a false imagination of truth piety So S. Augustine And hereby openeth to vs a dore to thinke charitably of many Protestants whome though we hold for deceaued yet not properly in S. Augustines meaning for Hereticks 20. And this doctrine teacheth the same Doctor in other places against the Donatistes saying that if a man should beleeue the heresy of Photinus for example who denied the distinction of three persons in God and the diuinity of Christ and should thinke it were the true Catholicke faith Istum nondum 〈◊〉 dico saith S. Augustine nisi manifestata sibi doctrina Catholicae fidei resistere maluerit illud quod tenebat elegerit I doe not thinke this man as yet to be an Hereticke except when the doctrine of the Catholicke faith to wit that which is held generally by all or the most Churches ouer Christendome being made cleere and manifest vnto him he shall resolue to resist the same and shall make choice of that which before he held so as now this choice or election with obstinate resolution to hold and defend the same against the publicke authority of the Church maketh that to be properly heresy which before was but error which error though it might be in it self damnable yet nothing so much as when it passeth into the nature of heresy both which pointes are seene by that which the said Holy Father hath in another place to wit in his booke De haeresibus ad Quod-vult-Deum where hauing recounted eighty and eight Heresies that had passed before his time vnto the Pelagians that were the last he concludeth thus There may be yet other Heresies besides these that I haue in this our worke recounted or there may rise vp other herafter whereof whosoeuer shall holde any one he shall not be a Christian Catholicke He doth not say he shall be an Hereticke properly but no Christian Catholicke which though it be sufficient to damnation if ignorance excuse him not yet nothing so great as if he were an hereticke for that as before we haue shewed out of S. Thomas the damnation of Iewes and Gentiles is much more tolerable then that of Heretickes 21. And all these limitations and charitable moderations we doe willingly vse to calme and mitigate matters and to temper that intemperate breaking humour of this make-bate Minister T. M. and his companions that would put all in combustion and desperate conuulsion And so much of this first reason the rest we shall passe ouer with greater breuity To his
second and third Reasons §. 2. HIs second reason why his Maiesties Catholicke and Protestant subiects may not liue togeather in England is For that all Popish Priestes faith he doe attribute a double prerogatiue ouer Kings that is to say a Democraticall and Monarchicall Soueraigne ciuill power the first to the people the second to the Pope And for proofe of the first concerning the people he alleadgeth fower seuerall authorities of Catholicke writers but so corruptly and perfidiously as if nothing else did shew his talent of cogging and treacherous dealing this were sufficient to discouer the same though afterwardes greater store will occurre we shall runne ouer briefly all these fower 23. First he saith that Doleman in his Conference about succession hath these wordes The Common-wealth hath authority to chuse a King and to limit him lawes at their pleasure Which if it were truly alleadged as it lieth in the Author yet heere is no mention of the people or of Democraticall state but only of the Common-wealth which includeth both nobility and people and all other states Secondly Dolemans wordes are not of chusing a King but of chusing a forme of gouernement be it Democraticall Aristocraticall or Monarchicall Let vs heare the Author himself speake In like manner saith he it is euident that as the Common-wealth hath this authority to chuse and change her gouernement as hath byn proued so hath it also to limit the same with what lawes and conditions shee pleaseth wherof ensueth great diuersity of authority and power which ech one of the former gouernments hath in it self So he Where we see that Doleman speaketh of the power which a Common-wealth hath that is deuoid of any certeine gouernement to chuse vnto themselues that forme that best liketh them with the limitations they thinke most expedient and so we see in England France Polonia Germany Venice Genua and in the Empire it self different formes and manners of gouernement with different lawes and limitations according to the choice and liking of ech nation This place then of Doleman is corrupted by T. M. both in wordes and sense for he neither speaketh nor meaneth as the false Minister auoucheth him of giuing Democraticall power to the people ouer Princes established 24. There followeth the second place taken out of the French Iesuite as he calleth him De iusta abdicatione c. though it be well knowne that D. Bouchier Author of that booke yet liuing in Flanders and Canon of Tourney was neuer Iesuite in his life but all must be ascribed to Iesuits that may seeme odious This French Iesuite saith he sheweth a reason of Dolemans speach saying For Maiesty is rather seated in the Kingdome then in the King But I would aske the poore man why he doth alleadge this place or of what weight it is or may be for his purpose for so much as D. Bouchier in these wordes denieth not Maiesty to be in the King but to be more in the Kingdome for that the Kingdome giueth Maiesty vnto the King when it chuseth him and not the King properly vnto the Kingdome And is not this a great obiection or doth this proue that we ascribe Democraticall soueraignity ouer Kings vnto the people One of his owne Ghospell-brethren speaketh more roundly and roughly to the matter when he writeth Populo ius est vt imperium cui velit deferat The people hath right to bestowe the crowne vpon whome they list if we had said so what aduantage would T. M. haue sought thereat 25. His third place is out of D. Stapleton in his booke called Dydimus where he saith That the people are not ordeyned for the Prince but the Prince for the people His wordes in Latin are Non populi in Principum gratiam facti sed Principes in populi commodum creati sunt Multitudes of people are not made by God for Princes sakes but Princes are created for the commodity or good of the people and what is there in this sentence iustly to be reprehended Is not this euident by diuine and humane lawe and by the very light of nature it self that Princes were first ordeined by God for the good of multitudes and not multitudes for the vtility of Princes Will T. M. deny this or is not this far more modest and temperate then that of his owne brethren before mentioned whose wordes are Populus Rege est praestantior melior the people are better more excellēt then the King what wilfull wrangling is this in a turbulent Minister 26. His fourth and last place is out of M. VVilliam Reinoldes in his booke De iusta Reip. auctoritate c. whome he abuseth egregiously both in ascribing to him that which is not his and in deliuering the same corruptedly and by a little yow may learne much ex vngue leonem His wordes he citeth thus Rex humana creaturae est quia ab hominibus constituta and Englisheth in this manner A King is but a creature of mans creation where yow see first that in the translation he addeth but and mans creation of himself for that the Latin hath no such but nor creation but constitution Secondly these wordes are not the wordes of M. Reinoldes but only cited by him out of S. Peter and thirdly they are alleadged here by T. M. to a quite contrary sense from the whole discourse and meaning of the Author which was to exalte and magnify the authority of Princes as descending from God and not to debase the same as he is calumniated For proofe herof whosoeuer will looke vpon the booke and place it self before mentioned shal find that M. Reinolds purpose therin is to proue that albeit earthly principality power and authority be called by the Apostle humana creatura yet that it is originally from God by his commandement to be obeyed His wordes are these Hinc enim est c. hence is it that albeit the Apostle doe call all earthly principality a humaine creature for that it is placed in certaine men from the beginning by suffrages of the people yet election of Princes doth flow from the law of nature which God created and from the vse of reason which God powred into man and which is a little beame of diuine light drawne from that infinite brightnes of almighty God therefore doth the Apostle S. Paul pronounce that There is no power but from God and that he which resisteth this power resisteth God himselfe So M. Reinoldes 27. And now let the indifferent Reader iudge whether M. Reinoldes hath byn calumniated in this allegation or no whether this Minister is led by any rule of conscience and whether these be such pregnant arguments and proofes against vs as he promised at the first entrance of his booke And for the matter in hand he promised to proue as yow haue heard that we ascribed popular and Democraticall power to the people ouer Kings which how well he hath
with God and the Prince follow their word and direction 33. And albeit God did some-times vse for externall guiding and direction of Priestes and Priestly affaires the authority of good Kinges in those daies especially when they were Prophetes also as Dauid Salomon in the correcting and remouing of some Priestes yet this was extraordinary and proueth not that simply and absolutly Kingly dignity and authority was aboue Priesthood in that law albeit also it be most true which the Authors by this man heere alledged Salmeron Cunerus Carerius and the rest doe note that the Priesthood of the old Testament was nothing comparable to that of the new this descending directly from the person and office of Christ himself and indued with farre higher and more powerfull spirituall authority for guiding of soules then had the Priestes of the old law which was but a figure of the new therfore to argue from that to this is a plaine fallacy and abusing of the Reader 34. Wherfore leauing this of the comparison betweene Kinges and Priestes of the old and new Testament I will end this first point with the very same conclusion concerning the safty of Princes from violence of their subiectes which our Aduersary himself alledgeth out of our Catholicke Author Cunerus in these wordes VVe are taught saith he from the example of the people of God as your Cunerus teacheth with great patience to endure the tyranny of mortall Kinges yea when wee haue power to resist and because they be next vnder God in earth in all their iniuries to commend their reuenge vnto God nay he teacheth Kinges another excellent rule of pollicy fitting for the preseruation of all States which is that he who succeedeth a King violently murdered of any though of Godly zeale yet ought he to reueng his Predecessours death by the death of the malefactours So T.M. And now followeth that of the Ghospell Ex ore tuo te indico serue 〈◊〉 for first I would aske him is not this Catholicke doctrine Is it not ours doth he not heere call the Author therof Cunerus ours how then doth he affirme euery where that our doctrine teacheth killing of Princes Let him shew vs any of his Authors that euer of this argument hath written so moderatly 35. And yet further I must aske him whether he will stand to the iudgment of this our Cunerus when he commeth to the point indeed How incorrigible Princes in some cases may lawfully be restrained as also depriued by the Common-wealth and consent of the supreame Pastour will he stand to this I say or rather fleet back againe to the doctrine of the Scottish Geneuian French Flemish Ministers when the King should mislike him and especially for his Religion wherof I make little doubt what euer he saith heere finding himself and his at good ease And finally I would aske him seriously whether he would haue his Maiesty of England to practice that excellent rule of pollicy which he so highly comendeth out of our 〈◊〉 who notwithstanding saith not a word therof by way of rule or obseruation but only affirmeth that Amasias did iustly put to death those seruantes of King Ioas that vpon zeale had slaine him in his bed I would aske him I say whether indeed he would wish his Maiesty of England to put the same rule and so highly commended pollicy in vse against such as violently murdered abetted or procured the same against not only his Predecessours but parentes and immediate Progenitours Father Mother and Grand-mother And then we know how many Ministers and their friendes would enter into that daunce but these men frame their tongues according to times fit occasiōs And with this he endeth his proofes out of the old Testament Out of the new Testament §. 2. 36. ANd then comming to the second part he beginneth his discourse with this title The former question disputed according to the state of the new Testament and presently in our manner he giueth the onset with this proposition The Pope hath all absolute and direct power and dominion temporall ouer all Kinges and Kingdomes of the world c. And for proofe therof citeth Carerius and Bozius in the margent and beginneth to lay forth their proofes and then against these two that hold the opinion of Canonistes wherof before we haue treated to wit that Christ was the immediate Lord of all temporalties and consequently also is his substitute he opposeth Franciscus de Victoria Bellarmine Sanders and others that hold the other opinion to wit that the Pope hath not directly but indirectly only such authority to deale with Princes in temporall affaires and so not informing his Reader that these are different opinions of the manner how the Pope hath this authority but yet that both do agree in the thing it self that he hath it he playeth pleasantly vpon the matter and would make men thinke that he taketh vs at great aduantage as contrary or rather contradictory among our selues which indeed is no more cōtradiction then if two Lawiers agreeing that such a noble man had such an office or authority ouer such a Lordship by succession from the Crowne should differ only in this whether the said office were giuen by the Prince seuerally and expressely by particuler gift and writinges or were giuen by a certaine consequence included in the gift of the said Lordship The differēce were nothing in the thing or certainty of authority but in the manner of hauing it and so is it heere and yet out of this difference of these two opiniōs doth our Minister furnish himself with good probability of argmentes on the one side as though they were his owne who otherwise would appeare very poore pittiful therin And this tricke he plaied before with the moderate Answerer when he serued himself of the two differēt opinions of some Deuines and Canonistes about the question VVhether Hereticks before personall denuntiation and sentence giuen be subiect to externall penalties appointed by the Canons And generally he runneth to this shift more then any other commonly of his fellow-writers which I haue seene in these our dayes to wit that whersoeuer he findeth any difference of opinions in disputable matters betweene our Catholicke writers which S. Augustine saith may stand with integrity of faith there he setteth downe any one of these opinions for ours and argueth against it with the argumentes of the other or bringeth in the others authority wordes against the same which maketh some shew or muster of matter on his side wheras in deed and substance he hath nothing at all 37. It were ouer long to examine in this place all the obiections which he putteth downe on our behalfe vnder the second head of our proofes concerning the time of the new Testament calling them Romish pretences and the fond resolutions he giueth vnto them as first that we doe found the Popes temporall sword vpon the keyes giuen by
to the Protestant spirit alone Hitherto I must confesse that I neuer found it in any and if I should though it were but once I should hold it for a sufficient argument not to belieue him euer after And this shall suffice for a tast only of M. Mortons manner of proceeding For that to prosecute al particulers would require a whole volume and by these few yow may ghesse at the mans vaine and spirit in writing THE SECOND PART OF THIS CHAPTER REPRESENTING Some of the falsifications vvhich are vttered in the former Part of M. Mortons Reply VVhich came to our handes after our Answere made before in our second Chapter against his ten Reasons ANd now albeit these false and fraudulent dealings laid open in the precedent Part of this Chapter be sufficient or rather superaboundant to descry this Minister and his naked innocency who in his Epistle to his Maiesty as before hath byn touched calleth himself A Minister of simple truth and vpright conscience yet for more perfect complement of the same I haue thought good to adioine also a second Part to this Chapter and therin to draw to light some number of his notorious vntruthes corruptions sleightes falsifications and calumniations vttered in the former Part of his Reply to the moderate Reader which Part not comming to my handes vntill I had made the answere which before I haue set downe in the second Chapter of this Treatise against his Discouery I could not conueniently discusse the same particularly therin but now by that which heere yow shall see produced you may easily ghesse how worthy a peece of worke it is and what credit the man deserueth that made it And albeit the breuity purposed by me in this place permitteth not the examine of al or of the greater part yet verbum sapienti sat est the discreet Reader by a few examples which demonstrate that the writer wanteth remorse of conscience in his asseuerations will easily see how farre he is to be credited in all his writinges Wherfore to the examine it self 41. In the third page of his said Reply he beginning to talke of the nature of heresy hath these wordes VVee may not be ignorant first that seeing the nature of heresy is such that it is a vice proper to the minde it may denominate the subiect whatsoeuer an Hereticke without obstinacy which is only a peruerse 〈◊〉 of the will and therfore a man may be an Hereticke though he be not obstinate And for proofe of this false doctrine he citeth in his margent Vasquez Iesuita whose wordes are Malitia huius 〈◊〉 intellectu non in voluntate consummatur the malice of this sinne of heresy is perfected or made consummate in the vnderstanding and not in the will which our Minister vnderstanding not and yet desirous as in his preface to the Kinges Maiesty he insinuateth to deuide our tongues to make our writers seeme contrary the one to the other hath fondly slaundered the learned man Vasquez in this place by making him seeme to be patrone of this his absurd doctrine that heresy may bewithout obstinacy wheras Vasquez in the very same disputation heere by him cited expressely doth impugne this doctrine and establisheth the contrary defining heresy thus Haeresis nihil aliud est quà m error in rebus 〈◊〉 cum pertinacia Heresy is nothing els but an errour in matters of faith with obstinacy 42. Which another learned mā of the same schoole by somewhat a more ample definition declareth thus Heresy saith he is an errour contrary to the Catholicke faith wherunto a man that hath professed the said faith in his baptisme doth adhere with an obstinate minde Which definitiō he proueth ex communi mente Doctorum by the cōmon consent of schoole Doctors And finally not to stand vpon a thing so cleere among vs S. Thomas for decision heerof hath these wordes De ratione Haeresis sunt duo electio priuatae disciplinae pertinacia Two thinges are of the essence and intrinsecall nature of heresy without which Heresy cannot be the one the choice or electiō of a particuler doctrine discipline or opinion contrary to the doctrine of the vniuersall Church the other pertinacy or obstinacy in defending the same though the party know that it be against the doctrine of the Church without which knowledge and obstinacy there can be no Heresy 43. This is our Catholicke doctrine about the nature of Heresy to wit that it cannot be without obstinacy which is so common and triuiall as it is now come into an ordinary prouerbe to say VVell I may be in errour but Hereticke I will neuer be for that I will hold nothing obstinatly And as for the wordes of Vasquez that the malice of Heresy is consummated in the vnderstanding and not in the will if our Minister had read the other wordes immediatly going before he might perhaps haue vnderstood Vasquez meaning for they are these Vt aliquis sit verè reus Haeresis c. To make a man be truly guilty of Heresy it is not necessary that he be carried directly in his affection or will against the authority of the Church that is to say it is not needfull that he haue an expresse will and purpose to disobey or contradict the Church but it is inough that he doe contradict the same re ipsa indeed knowing that opinion which he defendeth to be against the authority of the said vniuersall Church albeit he be not induced to this belief with a direct will to impugne the Church but either by desire of glory or other inducement so as indeed the malice of this sinne is consummated in the vnderstanding and not in the will 44. This is the discourse and doctrine of Vasquez in this place about the nature and essence of Heresy wherin he doth not exclude either the vnderstāding or will but includeth them both expressely for that as there must be knowledge which appertaineth to the minde or vnderstanding so must there be choise with obstinacy which belongeth to the will and affection but his scholastical consideration is in which of these two powers of our soule this sinne of Heresy receaueth her consummation For better explication therof let vs vse this example If a man should hold or belieue an erroneous proposition contrary to the doctrine of the Catholicke Church as for example that there were but one nature in Christ not knowing it to be against the Catholicke Church it were false in it self and an errour in his vnderstanding but not Heresy except also by act of his will he should chuse to hold it with resolution and obstinacy euen after that he knoweth the same to be against the doctrine of the said Church for then this knowledge saith Vasquez that it is against the Church maketh it perfect and consummate Heresy albeit the matter passe not to a further act of will to wit that he chooseth expressely to contradict the authority
of the Church therin which should be a greater sinne but yet is not necessary for that the perfect nature of Heresy is consummated by knowing that it is against the Church and for that this notice or knowledge belongeth to the vnderstanding therfore Vasquez holdeth that the last perfection or consummation of this sinne is in the vnderstanding and not in the will not meaning to exclude therby obstinacy of the wil as ignorantly T.M. doth when he saith wee may not be ignorant but to shew in what power of the minde the last perfection consummation of this heinous sinne consisteth to wit that a man may be a perfect and consummate Hereticke by holding obstinatly any opinion against the doctrine of the Church after wee once know it to be against the said Churches doctrine though we haue not that further malice also of expresse will and purpose to contradict therby the said Church but only we hold the same for that the opinion pleaseth vs or is profitable or honorable to vs or therby to contradict another or some such like inducement according to those wordes of S. Augustine to Honoratus Haereticus est qui alicuius temporalis commodi maximè gloriae principatusque sui gratia falsas ac nouas opiniones vel gignit vel sequitur An Hereticke is he who in respect of some temporall commodity but especially for his owne glory and preheminence doth beget or follow false and new opinions 45. The same S. Augustine also against the Donatistes proposeth this example Constituamus saith he aliquem sentire de Christo quod Photinus c. Let vs imagine one to thinke of Christ as Photinus the Hereticke did perswading himself that it is the Catholicke faith c. istum nondū Haereticum dico saith he nisi manifestata sibi doctrina Catholicae fidei resistere maluerit illud quod tenebat elegerit I doe not yet say that this man is an 〈◊〉 vntill after that the doctrine of the Catholicke faith being opened vnto him he shall choose notwithstanding to resist and to hold by choice that which before he held by errour In which wordes S. Augustine doth euidently declare how necessary both knowledge will are vnto Heresy and consequently how absurd and ridiculous the assertion of M. Morton is that Heresy being a vice proper to the vnderstanding may denominate the subiect whatsoeuer an Hereticke without obstinacy of will For 〈◊〉 we grant with all Deuines that Heresy is in the vnderstanding as in her subiect and so is faith also that is her opposite and further that her last perfection and consummation is from the foresaid knowledge in the vnderstanding as Vasquez doth explane it yet doth not Vasquez or any Deuine els exclude the necessity of pertinacity also and election in the will consequently both his wordes and meaning haue byn euidently falsified and calumniated by T. M. and so much of this first charge wherby yow may see what bookes might be made against him if we would follow his steppes in all his fraudulent traces But yet let vs see somewhat more in this very leaf and page 46. For within few lines after he beginneth his third Chapter with these wordes That is only true Religion say your Romish Doctors which is taught in the Romish Church therfore whosoeuer mainteineth any doctrine cōdemned in that Church must be accompted an obstinate Hereticke And in the margent he citeth Cunerus alledging his Latin wordes thus Haec est Religionis sola ratio vt omnes intelligant sic simpliciter esse credendum atque loquendum quemadmodum Romana Ecclesia credendum esse docet ac praedicat Which wordes if they were truly alledged out of the Author yet were they not truly translated for if by only true Religion a corrupt translation of Religionis solaratio be applied to particuler positions and articles of Religion then we grant that such true Religion may be also among Hereticks not only taught in the Roman Church for that as S. Augustine well noteth Heretickes also hold many articles of true Catholicke Religion but heere the corruption and falsification goeth yet further and it is worthy the noting for that Cunerus hauing 〈◊〉 largely against the insurrections and Rebellions of those of Holland and Zeland for cause of Religion and other pretences against their lawfull King taketh vpon him in his thirteenth Chapter to lay downe some meanes how in his opinion those dissentions may be compounded giuing this title to the said Chapter Quae sit vera componendi dissidij 〈◊〉 what is the true way of composing this dissention and then after some discourse setteth downe this conclusion Haec igitur in Religione concordiae sola est ratio vt omnes pio ac simplici animo purè integrè sic sapiant viuant loquantur ac praedicent quemadmodum sancta Catholica Romana Ecclesia quae Dei prouidentia magistra veritatis Orbi praeposita est docet loquitur praedicat This therfore in Religion is the only way of concord that all men with a pious simple minde doe wholy and purely conceaue liue speake preach as the holy Catholicke Roman Church which God by his prouidence hath giuen for a teacher of truth vnto the whole world doth teach speake and preach 47. And now consider yow this dealing that wheras B. Cunerus saith haec est in Religione cocordiae sola ratio this is the only way of concord in Religion this man alledgeth it in his margent haec est Religionis sola ratio this is the only way of Religion as though concord and Religion were al one then by another tricke of crafty translation in his English text that is only true Religion as though true Religion and the way or meanes to come to true Religion were not different and then for all the rest how it is mangled and how many wordes and sentences are put in by this Minister which are none of Cunerus and how many of his altered and put out is easy for the Reader to see by comparing the 〈◊〉 o Latin textes before alleadged and therby to consider how facile a matter it is for this fellow to deuide our tongues A course saith he which I professe in all disputes when he deuideth and separateth the wordes from their Authors and the sense from the wordes and the whole drift from them both a very fine course and fit for a man of his profession But let vs proceed 48. In the very next page he going about to make vs odious by our seuere censuring of Heretickes putteth downe first these wordes of Alphonsus de Castro He that vnderstanding any opinion to be expressely condemned by the Church shall hold the same is to be accompted an obstinate Hereticke Wherupon M. Morton playeth his pageant thus VVhat obstinate It may be some doe but doubtingly defend it what will yow iudge of these wherunto he answereth out of
gather saith he that the vse of the Crosse is commendable because of myracles done by the same reason the 〈◊〉 and thiefe may defend and maintayne their vnlawfull doinges because as great or greater miracles be wrought by them So he And do yow not thinke that he knew himselfe heere to lye and egregiously to Equiuocate in the worst sense And yet 〈◊〉 wheras the ancient Father S. Cyrill writing against Iulian the Apostata that obiected to Christians the vse of making the signe of the Crosse vpon their forheades and setting vp the same vpon their doores answered That such speach of the Apostata proceeded of wicked thoughtes and sauoured so extreme ignorance and that the said Salutare signum healthfull signe of the Crosse so are his reuerend wordes was made by the Christians in remembrāce of Christes benefites exhibited in his sacred 〈◊〉 c. M. 〈◊〉 teacheth his hearer that this was spokē by S. Cyrill to excuse the Christians and couer their fault as though in deed S. Cyrill had bene of the same mynd with Iulian the Apostata and had misliked the making of that signe as he did which is manifestly false and a great slander to the said holy Father And what then will yow say of this Ministers Equiuocating spirite in the worst kynd of 〈◊〉 55. The third example we shall take out of the writings of Meridith Hanmer and M. VVilliam Charke Ministers who being charged with a certayne pernicious doctrine 〈◊〉 Martyn Luther whom they earnestly defended and not being other wise able to escape vsed both of them a notorious Equiuocation in this kynd of lying The doctrine of Luther was this That if any woman saith he cannot or will not proue by order of lawe the insufficiency of her husband let her request at his hands a diuorce or els by his consent let her priuily lye with his brother or with some other man And this doctrine being obiected to these two ministers Hanmer thought best yow may imagine by what Equiuocation vtterly to deny the thing as neuer written or spoken by Luther inueighing greatly against Catholickes for raising such a slaunder vpō him but Charke doubting least he should be conuinced with Luthers owne booke and Edition of VVittenberge durst not stand to this Equiuocation but deuised another farre worse to wit that Luther gaue this Counsell when he was yet a Papist and therfore saith he if any shame be in this doctrine it lighteth vpon yow and not vpon vs. 56. But two things do conuince this of a notable wilfull vntruth The first for that the tyme and yeare being considered wherin Luther wrote this Sermon it appeareth euidently that he had left long before the Catholicke vnion though yet himselfe said in this place that he remayned still with some feare and dread of Antichrist which he meant in respect that it was yet doubtfull vnto him whether the Protection of the Duke of Saxonie would be sufficient for his defence against the Pope Emperour and other Catholicke Princes that sought to haue him punished but when in Processe of time he perceyued in deed that he was secure then he said he would giue other counsell Consilium tale iam tum impertij saith he cum adhuc me detineret pauor Antichristi nunc verò secùs longè animus esset I gaue such Counsell when I was yet vnder some feare of Antichrist but now my mynd should be to giue farre other counsell And heere VVilliam Charke breaketh of and leaueth out the wordes of Luther that immediatly follow and do solue the case which are these Talique marito qui adeò mulierem deludat dolis vehementius lanificium immissa manu conuellerem c. That laying my handes vpon the lockes of such a husband that should so craftily deceyue a woman I would vehemently shake or pull him by the lockes So he And what will yow say now of the craftie Equiuocation of these two Ministers which of them had least conscience either he that knowing it to be so yet denyed that Luther had any such wordes or the other that confessing the wordes wittingly peruerted the sense by cutting of that which should make all cleare 57. And I might cyte also an other like deceiptfull Equiuocation of VVilliam Charke not farre from the same place where being pressed with sundry arguments that proue concupiscence in the regenerate to be no sinne if consent be not giuen thervnto and namely by the Authority of S. Augustine saying Concupiscentia non est peccatum quando illi ad illicita opera non consentitur Concupiscence is not sinne when consent is not giuen thervnto for working thinges that be vnlawfull he to auoyd this authority of S. Augustine forgeth a place of the same Doctor to the contrarie thus S. Augustines place saith he is expounded by himselfe afterward where he saith Concupiscence is not so forgiuen in baptisme that it is not sinne but that it is not imputed as sinne and cyteth for his proofe the same booke of S. Augustine De nuptiis concupiscentia Cap. 23. 25. But if yow looke vpon the places yow shall fynd that the Minister hath heere of his owne foysted in the chiefe word that maketh or marreth all to wit peccatum sinne for that S. Augustines wordes are these Ad haec respondetur dimitti concupiscentiam carnis in baptismo non vt non sit sed vt in peccatum non imputetur quamuis reatu suo iam soluto maret tamen c. To this is answered saith S. Augustine that the Cōcupiscence of the flesh is forgiuen in baptisme not so that it is not or remayneth not but that it is not imputed vnto sinne it remayneth still though the guylt therof be taken away So he And was not this a subtile Equiuocation to make in a trice S. Augustine to be contrary to himselfe 58. The fourth example shall be of an other Minister VVilliam Perkins who though he wrote since the other yet in diuer points hath he out-gone them as well in this of false Equiuocation as in the deepe humour of phantasy by which he hath writen and published many bookes with strāge tytles some of them conteyning matter that neyther he nor his reader I 〈◊〉 say do vnderstand as namely about the Concatenation or tying together of causes of mans prodestination or reprobation and the like but among other his pretiest fancy was to write a booke calling it Areformed Catholicke which was in deed that which by Logitians is tearmed Implicatioin adiecto An implicancy or contradiction of the one word to the other for that he which is a Catholicke if we speake of 〈◊〉 belonging to doctrine and beliefe and not to manners cannot be reformed the essence of Catholicke Religion consisting in this that all and euery point of the receyued Christian faith be belieued and nothing more or lesse so as if any point must be added taken away altered or reformed it is not
Catholicke and consequently A reformed Catholicke in matters of faith must needs be A deformed Catholicke such a 〈◊〉 as Perkins in deed describeth that admitteth one two three foure more or lesse points of the common Catholicke receaued Religion and yet starteth from the fifth or sixt as himselfe best liketh and this calleth Perkins A reformed Catholicke when the belieuer chooseth to belieue or leaue what points do please him best which choise we say is properly heresy for that an Hereticke is a Chooser as the Greeke word importeth and this heresy or choice in matters of beliefe doth Perkins professe to teach his hearer saying That he will shew them how neare they may come vnto the Romane faith and yet not iumpe with it which is a doctrine common to all hereticks and heresies that euer were for that all haue agreed with the Catholicke faith in some points for that otherwise it should be Apostacy and not heresy if they denyed all yea the Turkes and Mores at this day do hold some points of Christian Religion with the Catholickes but for that neither they nor heretickes do hold all therfore they are no true Catholickes but such Reformed Catholickes as VVilliam Perkins would teach his disciples to be to wit properly Heretikes by their choise of religion 59. And to the end we may see not only the mans folly in choosing his argument but his falshood also in prosecuting the same I shall lay forth one only example out of his very first Chapter that beginneth with his ordinary argument of the VVhore of Babylon and by this one example let the reader iudge whether he be not a fit Chaplyn for that honest woman iflying cosenage and calumniation be propertyes of her profession For that hauing spent many impertinent wordes to shew that the impieties prophesied by S. Iohn of the said VVhore of Babylon and Saincts of God to be slayne by her was not meant of the persecution of Rome vnder the Pagan Emperors but of the Church of Rome now vnder the Christian Bishopps and Popes he hath these wordes 60. This exposition saith he of the Apocalips besydes the Authority of the text hath also the fauour and defence of ancient and learned men Bernard saith They are the Ministers of Christ but they serue Antichrist And againe the beast spoken of in the Apocalips to which a mouth is giuen to speake blasphemies and to make warre with the Saints of God is now gotten into Peters Chaire as a lyon prepared to his pray It wil be said that Bernard speaketh these later wordes of one that came to the Popedome by intrusion or vsurpation It is true in deed but wherfore was he an vsurper He rendreth a reason therof in the same place bycause the Antipope called Innocētius was chosen by the Kings of Alemaine France England Scotland Spaine Hierusalem with consent of the whole Clergy and people in these nations and the other was not And thus Bernard hath giuen his verdict that not only this vsurper but all the Popes for this many yeares are the beast in the Apocalips because now they are only chosen by the Colledg of Cardinals c. Thus he 61. And now how many 〈◊〉 decepts and falsities there be in this litle narration is easie for any man to see admyre and detest that will but looke vpō the places of S. Bernard by himselfe quoted For in the first place out of his 33. Sermon vpon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 where he saith They are the Ministers of Christ but do serue Antichrist he speaketh against the vices of the Clergy especially of France where he liued in his dayes And that it is not meant particulerly of the pope S. Bernardes owne words do shew in that ve y place saying They will be and are Prelates of Churches Deanes Archdeacons Bishopps Archbishopps so as this is falsely brought in to proue any speciall thing against Rome or the Pope and much more wickedly alledged to proue Perkins his exposition of the Apocalips against Christian Rome to be true in S. Bernardes sense which he neuer thought of or by any least cogitation admitted as by the whole course of his writings to the contrary is euident no man more extolling the dignity of the Pope and Sea of Rome then he euen then when most he reprehendeth euill lyfe and manners 62. But the other that followeth is much more fraudulenty alledged For if S. Bernard complained greatly that in his tyme one Petrus Leonis an vsurper and Antipope being chosen by the 〈◊〉 lesse number of Cardinals voyces did by violence notwithstanding thrust himselfe into the Chaire of Peter and playe therin the parte of Antichrist what was this in preiudice of the true Pope Innocentius the second whome Saint Bernard doth call Christs Vicar and highly commendeth him as lawfully chosen by the maior part of the Colledge of Cardinals and exhorteth all Christian Kings to obey and follow him as their high and true lawfull vniuersall pastor So as heere 〈◊〉 Perkins maketh a notorious lye in saying that Innocentius by S. Bernards iudgement was an Antipope wheras he proued him expresly in the places heere alleadged to be the true Pope and Vicar of Christ and Petrus 〈◊〉 to be the Antipope Numquid saith he non omnes Principes cognouerunt quia ipse est verè Dei electus Francorum Anglorum Hispanorum postremò Romanorum Rex Innocentium in Papam suscipiunt recognoscunt 〈◊〉 Episcopum animarum suarum Do not all Princes know that Innocentius is truly the elected of God The Kinges of France England Spaine and 〈◊〉 do receyue Innocentius for Pope and do acknowledge him to be the singular Bishop of their soules 63. Secondly he lyeth much more apparantly when he saith that Innocentius was chosen by the said Kings of Alemaine France England c. wheras S. Bernard saith not that he was chosen by them but that he was accepted followed obeyed by them as true Pope after his election Alemaniae saith he Angliae Franciae Scotiae Hispaniarum 〈◊〉 Reges cum vniuerso clero populis fauent adhaerent Domino Innocentio tanquam filij Patri tanquam capiti membra The Kings of Germany France England Scotland Spaine and Hierusalem togeather with their whole Clergy and people do fauour and adhere to Pope 〈◊〉 he doth not say they choose him as children to their Father and as members to their head 64. Thirdly Perkins lyeth most desperately of all in his last conclusion 〈◊〉 And thus Bernard hath giuen his verdict that not only this vsurper but that all the Popes for 〈◊〉 many yeares are the beast in the 〈◊〉 because now they are only chosen by the Colledge of Cardinals This I say is a notorious lye for that S. Bernard giueth no such verdict but alloweth well the election of Innocentius by the said Cardinals saying Meritò autem illum 〈◊〉 Ecclesia cuius opinio clarior electio sanior
Catholicke people stand in good conceipt with all sortes of men for their truth in concionable and vpright dealing euen with those which endeauour most in this point to slaunder them yet would I wish the same to be confirmed more daylie by factes in respect of this new calumniation raysed against them of the liberty of Equiuocation And this of the first reason 3. My other reason is as before hath byn insinuated in regard of the tyme present which being a tyme of tryall persecution requireth at Catholickes hands a more perfect Confession of their faith and of all matters belonging thervnto then at other tymes And albeit in the former Treatise among the Cases reserued wherin Equiuocation may not be vsed confession of faith be expresly and in the first place excepted so as therin no doublenes or doubtfulnes may be vsed yet no man can deny but many factes and cases may fall out concerning matters of Religion not tending to confession 〈◊〉 in tyme of persecutiō wherin a man may or perhaps also must by obligation if otherwise he cannot auoyd the wrong violence that is offred to himself or others vse Equiuocal speaches for concealing of that which in conscience he cannot vtter But whersoeuer this obligation is not there my wish is as now I haue said that Catholicke people but especially Priestes whose example must instruct the rest should yeald also of their right for encrease of their merite and crowne in heauen and vse all playnesse and sincerity in speach and free discouering not only of their religion but also of their state where it is hurtfull to none but to themselues which yet I speake in that sense and with that limitation which the holy Apostle did when he said That he gaue counsell of himselfe but no precept of our Lord. And for that this whole Treatise of Equiuocation hath proceeded vpō that question so often before repeated VVhether a Priest being taken may deny himselfe to be a Priest or no I shall 〈◊〉 downe dyuers circumstances and considerations of the Case wherby also shal be made more playne what my meaning is in this behalfe 4. When a Priest commeth first into England with full intent and resolution to offer his life if there be need for the confession of Catholicke Religion and is taken afterward brought before the Magistrate either he is taken in some mans house of whose ouerthrow he must be the cause if he confesse that he is a priest or be being taken forth of any house yet hath he cause to suspect and perswade himselfe that it may be knowne afterward by cōfession of others that are also taken or may be taken that he belongeth to such or such a house in these two cases there is no doubt but that if he thinke that his denying of himselfe to be a priest may saue them from hurte he is bound to deny the same with some kynd of lawfull Equiuocation but without telling a lye as before at large hath byn declared But if this priest should be taken in the port as he entreth or soone after in the high way or otherwise and brought before a Magistrate so as his confessing himselfe to be a priest could not preiudice any other and presupposing that he is vnlawfully demaunded that question against law reason and religion heere is he at his owne liberty to deny or confesse himselfe to be a priest and no man can absolutly determine what were best for him to answere but the spirite of God that speaketh within him to whome Christ hath promised to imparte such wisedome as is necessarie for that tyme and action yet if he were not a man of such great extraordinary talēts as by his losse or restraint Gods cause were to leese much or that he were not sure by his denyall to procure his liberty or that he might iustly doubt that he should quickly come to be knowne in prison and therby some scandall to arise to the simple or yll affected by his denyal In al these Cases I would thinke it more meritorious and of greater perfection and edification to confesse himselfe a priest without further denyall or declination which I speake not to condemne them or their doinges that being taken haue done or shall do the contrary for that they vse but their owne right as hath byn declared but rather I speake it for information of others that may doubt of the Case Nor do we intend heere to preiudice the most holy doctrine of S. Athanasius and other ancient Fathers of the lawfulnes of flight and escape in persecution councelled by Christ our Sauiour and authorized by the example of the Apostles themselues and namely of S. Paul when he fled and escaped out of a window and at an other tyme deluded the enuious pursuite of his enemyes by an Equiuocall speach to the Pharisies and Saducies as before hath byn declared but rather to shew that cleare confession is somtymes also most commendable and that in such a tyme of tryall and of Crownes offred to Catholicks and especially to Priests for the said confession of the Catholicke faith as now is no lawfull occasion is to be left for acquiring the same 5. And this is so much as in this matter I had to aduertise Catholickes in the Conclusion of this my answere not meaning to discend into further perticulers of actions obligations that may fall out which heere are hard to be determined but only by the present circumstances of the tyme place and matter in hand with regard and respect vnto the two principall vertues that must gouerne vs in these afayres to witt Truth and Iustice. Truth that all manner of falsity and lying be vtterly auoyded and Iustice that no iniury be done by vs to Gods cause our selues or other men which is the lawe of a iust man and true seruant of God to be obserued whatsoeuer temporall hurtes or damages may ensue therof 6. And wheras my Aduersary Thomas Morton doth conclude the very last lynes of his booke with a fynall Charge againe renewed of our Antichristian doctrines of lying and treason and threatning vs for the same not fancyed fyre of Purgatory saith he as for wood and strawe but vnquenchable hell-fyre as for pitch and tarre sulphur and pouder we shall more charitably conclude with him wishing that his offences of malice 〈◊〉 and deceipt discouered by vs in this our Answere may be wood and straw and that the fyre prepared by Gods Iustice for punishing the same may be a purging fyre and not a consuming 〈◊〉 or rather a consuming fyre and not an vnconsuming fyre as that is of hell which he threatneth to vs but in deed purchaseth to himselfe by the course he hitherto holdeth 7. And to this wish and prayer for him I doubt not but to drawe not only all good and pious Catholicks that vse it 〈◊〉 for their enemyes and persecutors but the