being sufficiently proposed at leastwise to most of them I much doubt For as Diana saith 5a. parte pag. 240. col 1a. A man speaking heresie that is a proposition condemned by the Church without an hereticall consent is no heretique neither in curreth excommunication denounced against heretiques so that although they be incredulous and beleeve not the truth yet they are not properly and in rigor formall heritiques Adde that there is no more sin to goe to the Protestant Church then to goe to them to dinner or to goe with them to a play or other sports And I for my part had rather give twelue pence to heare a Sermon then take five shillings to see a play For there is no such sport as to heare a weake fellow speake fustian with gravitie or tell a fable of the whore of Babylon or Babylonians for so now they terme Catholiques with erected eyes in earnest Or why should it be more lawfull to see a play where most commonly intercedes scurrilitie and obscene gestures and the end of which is nothing but vanitie then to heare a Sermon where perhaps in some places or by some simple men their may be some untruth told of the Pope to please their Auditory although most commonly nothing but moralitie which is the end and intention of the same I pray resolve me § 2. It is not unlawfull to goe to Church because Recusancie is a distinctive signe Which is the second branch of the Minor THat Recusancy is a distinctive sign of a Catholique from a Protestant is most false Which is thus proved If Recusancie be a distinctive signe it is a signe naturall or by institution but neither can be said Ergo it is no signe The Minor is proved Not naturall for as Hurtado above cited well observeth Actions and things are not of their own nature significant but have naturall and politicall uses independent of any signification For a bush hung out at a Taverne doore doth naturally signifie no more wine to be sold then any other creature whatsoever Nor doth the habit of a Bishop naturally signifie a Bishop more then a Judge and so of other things No more doe naturally the actions of men But admit that Recusancy were improperly said a naturall signe yet it would naturally signifie no more a Catholique then a Brownist for he refuseth likewise to goe to Church or any other Sectary Although a posteriori it might be thought by discourse to signifie some one displeased with the Protestant Church but why or wherefore it would never signifie Not by institution for if so who instituted the same God or man Not man for it is out of his power to signe the people of God from not his people It is only the owner of the flocke that must signe the sheepe and none other unlesse it be by speciall order from him Hence when God would signe his people in the old Testament from the people of other Nations he himselfe instituted Circumcision Gen 17. as a distinctive signe betweene them and others that whosoever had that signe should be of his people and who so had it not was to be rejected Neither was it sufficient that any man had accidentally and by the institution of Abraham any other signe by which he might be knowne from others because he was not thought sufficiently marked nor accounted any one of Gods people by any other sign then Circumcision Which was the sole marke of God saying All the male kinde of you shall be Circumcised And this is consonant to reason For one man may get a distinctive signe of another mans institution shall God therefore own him Brownists as I have said have Recusancie doth it therefore follow that they are likewise Catholiques If a sheepe in my neighbours flocke should teare an eare in a bramble or bush or accidentally breake an horne this sheepe is hereby distinct from the rest yet the owner doth not own it by that marke but by a marke of his own institution and ruddle So it is in the present That God did not institute the same it is so evident that it needs no proofe For where may we finde his institution Vnlesse we should run to the all-knowing spirit of hereticks Hence it follows that Recusancie is no distinctive signe If you aske me what is then the signe to know a Catholique from any other Sectary I answer His beleefe of the Creed of the Catholique Church and his lâ—fe at all times in communion with the See Apostolique So Stratford lib. 2. de Eccles. cap. 6. pag. 188. It may be here objected first the common opinion of Divines as the said R. P. saith 2a. 2ae q. 3. To use a distinctive signe of a false religion that properly is such is a deniall of faith and evill in it selfe But the Service said in a Protestant Church is such Ergo. I grant the Major For if the signe be proper of a people rejected of God as since the promulgation of the Gospel Circumcision is to a Jew the Major must needs be true But if the signe be garments or the like used to the worship and ceremonies of a false law which some fondly call a proper signe then the Major meaning the use of such a signe to be a denyall of faith is false according to Diana resol 34. pag. 191. above cited Azorius Sanches and many others there Because such signes being naturall things may be lawfully used as I have said before independent of any such signification and so not properly signes whatsoever R. P. saith to the contrary upon his own bare word The Minor proposition I deny For who instituted that service to be such a signe not God as all Catholiques will confesse but rather the contrary it being Catholique Not themselves for it would savor too much weakenesse to thinke that they would institute to themselves a signe of a false religion And if it be taken for a signe naturally although improperly signifying then I say of its own nature it signifies no more a false Religion in a Protestant then a pious ceremony in a Catholique For Catholiques say the same service Catholiques preach moralitie and each may if hee please receive bread and wine once in a day in a weeke or a moneth in remembrance that Christ dyed for him and this shall be better done then to eate bread and wine without such remembrance For receiving bread and wine See that deduced out of Azorius tom 1. lib. 8. instit moral c. 11. Navar. consil 15. de haeret num 2. Which were but to renew in an urgent point of necessitie the old custome in the Apostles time as appears by the Corinthian Christians in Saint Paul 1 Cor. 11. who did eate and drinke in the Church besides what they received of Christs institution as his true and reall body and blood For after the Sacrifice and Eucharist was ended there were kept Church feasts for the reliefe of the poore upon
she meant that she might dispose of Church matters as her Father had and have power to forme what Church she pleased and so that should suffice her Highnesse It is to be noted thirdly that the aforesaid oath when it was made was unlawfull to be taken by any Catholique as the oath before made in the dayes of King Henry the 8th Although when it was made it was not altogether so unlawfull as that of King Henry because in his dayes there was no other Church extant or like to be extant in England but the Catholique Church of which contrary to the Law of God and his own conscience he made himself head as appears by a booke set forth by the said King himself in the later end of his raigne and many yeers after he had framed his Oath of Supremacie intituled A necessary Doctrine and Erudition for any Christian man set forth by the Kings Majestie of England c. In which he sets forth the Christian faith then to be professed in England Which was as absolutely Catholique and the self-same in every point as now it is in Rome And if any man should have sworne him the supreame head as he intended of that Church he would have sworne false as making the Church a Monster in having two heads or depriving the Pope of his authoritie granted him by God which had been to have denyed an Article of faith but when the said Oath was repealed in Queene Maries dayes And another Oath of Supremacie made in the aforesaid first yeere of Queene Elizabeth It was as I have said to inable her not so much to be head of the Church then extant and to be utterly abolished as to be Governour of a new Church distinct from the Catholique Church then out of hand to be propagated and established of which to sweare Her Head before it was or to sweare Her Head of the Church then extant which she conceived superstitious of which indeed she was not head was in a true and proper sence unlawfull And so continued unlawfull untill after the abrogation of Masse and perfect establishment of the new Protestant Church within this Realme and other His Majesties Dominions Which being established as now it is the said Oath of Supremacie ceased from being unlawfull because then there was an apparant face of a Church distinct from the members of the Catholique Church which then began scarce to appeare in respect of the greater multitude of which only she was supreame governour and chief head and no other person whatsoever had or ought to have any jurisdiction or preheminence in the same and all that were or are not of the same faith and Church were and are in a true and proper sense forreiners to the same It is to be noted fourthly that a man may be said to be a Forreiner in a twofold sence First in respect of a temporall Dominion Secondly in respect of faith whence ariseth a spirituall jurisdiction In the first sence all that are not Natives of His Majesties Dominions although some Lawyers say all that doe no homage to His Majestie are forreiners In the second sence all that are of the Protestant faith with the King are Domesticks of the same faith and within His Dominions only subject to His spirituall jurisdiction by the Laws of the Realme And all that are not of the Protestant faith are forreiners to the same conformable to St. Paul who accounted all those of whatsoever Nation or under whatsoever temporall Dominion or Iurisdiction in the world who were of the same faith with himselfe which he taught were Domesticks of that faith And those of whatsoever Nation or temporall Dominion that were not of the same faith he accounted forreiners Whence he saith Gal. 6.10 Let us doe good to all but especially to the domesticks or those of the house of faith And 1 Thess. 4. vers 12. Rogamus ut honeste ambuletis ad eos qui foris sunt nullius aliquid desideretis We desire you brethren that you walke honestly towards them that are without that is forreiners to our faith and need nothing of any mans It is to be noted fifthly and chiefly what conditions are required in every lawful oath which according to the Prophet Ieremy are three viz Truth Iudgement and Iustice for he saith in his fourth Chapter Thou shalt sweare our Lord liveth in truth and in judgement and in justice upon which place the holy Doctor S. Hierome noteth that the foresaid conditions are requisite to every oath of whom all Divines have leâ—rned the same requiring in every lawfull oath every of the said three conditions The reason hereof is because an oath being an invocation of God as witnesse that what we speake is true it is requisite that we should use judgement or discretion to see that we doe nothing rashly or without due reverence devotion and faith towards so great a Majestie but we must especially regard that we make not him who is the chiefe and Soveraigne veritie and inflexible justice either ignorant oâ— what we say or Patron of a lye as witnesse of that which either is false in assertion or unjust in promise Hence an oath wanting Iudgement or discretion and wisdome is a rash and foolish oath that which wanteth Iustice is called an unjust oath And finally where there is not truth it is adjudged a false or lying oath and is more properly then all the rest called Perjurie These notes premised I shall now prove the said Oath of Supremacie to be lawfull for any Catholique to take Every Oath that is accompanyed with the three said conditions or companions viz. veritie justice and judgement in the opinion of all Divines Canon and Civil Lawyers is a lawfull Oath but such is the Oath of Supremacie above recited in every part and particle of the same Ergo. The Minor is proved discoursing of every branch in particular and first of the first branch wherein I sweare that the King is only Supreame Governour of this Realme as well in all Spirituall or Ecclesiasticall things or causes touching the Church of the said Realm as Temporall touching the State or of any other his Dominions Which I doe sweare discreetly as a thing true and just For there is no other Supreme Governour of temporall things to be assigned but the King as all will confesse nor of Ecclesiasticall things or the Church of England as by a sufficient Enumeration may be proved For the Parliamâ—nt is not supreame governour of the Churches within this Realme when as according to the naturall light of reason the King is governour of that and therefore not supreame The Primate cannot be assigned supreame governour when as he hath all his authoritie of government from the King and so he hath a Superior A Lay-eldership cannot be supreame governour for although it be unknowne what it is or from whence it receiveth its authoritie yet I thinke no Lay-eldership so barbarous as not to
admit the King chiefe governour of the same Neither can the Pope be any way supreame governour of the aforesaid Church because he professeth himself only supreame head and governour of the Catholique Church and of no other according to Saint Paul 1 Cor. 5.12 what is it to him to judge of them that are without of which Catholique Church His Majestie dâ—th not claime to be head Neither will he be governour of any spirituall or ecclesiasticall thing therein as conceiving the same both superstitious and idolatrous Ergo. the King must be supreame governour of the Protestant Church That the King is only Governour is proved because none other can be assigned his equall in preheminencie of government in the aforesaid Protestant Church For the second or third branch it is likewise proved For I sweare them likewise discreetly truly and justly viz. that no forrein Prince Person Prelate c. hath or ought to have any jurisdiction c. within this Realme in the said Protestant Church which I adde as before because according to the intention of the Law and Law-maker as I have before said it was so meant For neither doth His Majestie or did Queene Elizabeth claime to be chiefe Governour of the Catholique Religion or Romane Church or any jurisdiction therein It being by them both as I have often said abhorred as superstitious and abolished for the same reason by the said Queene and State of England therefore it is against reason and a kinde of pettie treason to sweare either of them governour of a Religion which they apprehend so evill but in respect of the Protestant Church established the Pope is a forrein Person and Prelate and his jurisdiction forrein Neither hath he or any other forrein Person any jurisdiction in the aforesaid Church or ought to have for as I have said in the fourth note out of Saint Paul as all those that are of the Catholique faith are domesticks of that faith and all that are not of the same faith are forreiners to it so all that are of the Protestant faith of which His Majestie is governour are domesticks of the same and all that are not of the same are forreiners to that Religion Hence appeares the truth of the said branches wherein is said in the second That no forrein Prince c. and in the third I doe utterly renounce and forsake all forrein jurisdictions c. which I doe justly and lawfully renounce as well in respect of the Protestant Church as of the Catholique for as I have said the Pope is truly a forreiner to the Protestant Church in respect of which I must by the law renounce his jurisdiction And he is no forreiner in respect of the Catholique Church in which I am bound to respect him and his jurisdiction for if all Catholiques be domesticks one to â—he other as I have proved out of Saint Paul how can the Pope who is chief of that faith be said to be a forreiner his jurisdiction being as internall and intrinsecall as innate and naturall to every Catholique in the world as it is to him that stands next him in his chamber at Rome And therefore there being no forrein jurisdiction in the Catholique Church in every sence I may lawfully renounce all forrein jurisdictions The fourth and last branch can have no difficultie at all with any Catholique So that the words of this Oath seeme to me so cleere and lawfull since the establishment of the Protestant Church that it may be taken of any Catholique without any the least danger of Perjurie or any other sinne scandall being avoyded or without mentall reservation or secret equivocation that I admire that any man hath so long scrupulized to the losse of himselfe and fortunes when as being necessitated to take the same and scandall being easily to be avoyded as I have said out of Diana and others he might have prevented his owne ruine with a safe conscience as I conceive Sir Iohn Winter and other men of estates did who are reported to have lately taken the same It may be objected first that this Oath thus explicated hath no coherencie the first branch with the second and third and therefore that it be coherent and taken conformably to the intention of the law-maker as we sweare the King to be onely Supreame Governour of the Church of England in the first branch so ought we in the second and third branch to renounce all Jurisdiction forreign to the same To which I answer first that coherencie is no condition requisite to an oath but impertinent to the truth or falshood of the same for there be many things of a different nature inserted in an oath Secondly that there is a most perfect coherencie in the aforesaid explication for as in the first branch I sweare the King Head of the Church of England so in the second and third I abjure all forreigne Jurisdictions whatsoever Which are the very direct words of the oath for there are no words in any branch signifying a renunciation of all Jurisdiction forreigne to the Protestant Church of England Whence there is a great difference between renouncing all Jurisdiction forreigne to the particular Church of England and renouncing all forren Jurisdiction For a forren Jurisdiction renounced is rightly described A power or right denied to be extent to the swearer by any law and is more generall then a Jurisdiction forreign to the Protestant Church which is onely a power not extent to a Protestant quâ talis which although it be forren to the said Church yet it may be properly extent and appertaining to the swearer So that it is intended by the said oath that as in the first branch we sweare the King onely Supreame Governor of the Protestant Church within this Realme and his Dominions so in the second and third we are to renounce all forren Jurisdictions whatsoever which either the Pope or any other forren Person hath or ought to have in the same which every Catholique may lawfully do notwithstanding that generall saying That the Pope hath Iurisdiction over all Christians for that is meant a generall Jurisdiction in the Catholique Church either actuall or potentiall extent to all which is forren to none and which by taking this oath is not denyed I answer thirdly that all penall lawes as is this law for taking the oath in doubtfull words are ever to be taken in the more favourable sense and which makes the law to containe no falshood or injustice And therefore in this law to sweare as the words lye may be done without any injâ—stice or falshood which is and ought to be presumed to be the minde of the lawmaker for no law or lawmaker intends perjurie And therefore it is a frivolous thing to invent scrupulous crotchets which the words doe not import It may be objected secondly that the oath must be interpreted according to the intention of the law and lawmaker for as Suares saith lib.
6â— de leg cap. 1. upon the will and intention of the lawmaker which is the soule of the law the substance and force of the law doth chiâ—fly depend therefore it by any meanes the will of the lawmaker may be knowne according to it especially we must understand the words of the law But the will of the lawmaker is sufficiently knowne concerning this oath to make it apparently unlawfull for any Catholique to take as appeareth by the words of King Iames of blessed memory saying in his Premonition pag. 9. and in his Apology for the oath pag. 2. and 9. that by the oath of Allegiance he intended to demand of his subjects nothing else but a profession of that temporall Allegiance and civill obedience which all subjects by the law of God and nature doe owe to their lawfull Prince c. For as the Oath of Supremacie saith he was devised for putting a difference betweene Papists and them of our profession So was the oath of Allegiance ordained for making a difference between the civilly obedient Papists and the perverse disciples of the Powder treason by which words it appeareth that King Iames held both the law and the law maker intended by the oath of Supremacie to put a difference betweene Papists and Protestants and that no Papist would take that oath wherein the Jurisdiction of the Pope was intended to be abjured Ergo the said oath of Supremacie is to be interpreted accordingly all doubtfulnesse of words set aside and consequenter unlawfull for any Catholique to take To the Major of which Objection I answer first granting the same Secondly with a distinction that the intentions of the law and law maker are to bee sought when they interpret the law in a truer sense then the plaine words doe as they lie otherwise not lest it want veritie To Suarez I answer that himselfe saith in the place before cited that if at any time the propertie of the words of an oath should induce any injustice or like absurditie concerning the minde or meaning of the lawmaker they must be drawne to a sense although improper wherein the law may be just and reasonable for this is presumed to be the minde of the law maker as it hath beene declared by many lawes in F. tit de lege thus Suarez So that although there were in the words of this oath divers significations impropper and unusuall yet in the opinion of Suarez it might be taken and the words interpreted in the truest sense abstracting from the reall intention of the law maker how much more then say I the words being not improper or unusuall but according to the intention of the law and law maker may they be taken in the more favourable sence which may make the law to be just and reasonable See for this doctrine Can. Cum tu de testibus cap. 16. Can. ad nostram de Iurejurando cap. 21. et de regulis â—â—ris in 6. reg 49. in paenis leg Benignius F. de leg Leg. In ambigua ibidem Hence it followeth first out of the doctrine of the said Suarez that although the words and sentences contained in this oath being considered barely by themselves and without due circumstances to wit the intention of the law and lawmaker and to what end and purpose the sâ—id oath was framed may seeme to some doubtfull and ambiguous although to me they seeme not so that is not cleare and morally certaine and so for one to sweare them in that doubtfull sence were to expose himselfe to danger of perjurie yet considering as I have said that such doubtfull words are to be taken in the more favourable sense and which maketh the law to be just and reasonable and to contain no falshood or injustice If any one sweare those words which of themselves are doubtfull in no doubtfull sense but in a true and determinate sense and wherein they are not doubtfull but cleere and morally certaine there is no danger of perjurie at all It may seeme to follow secondly out of the aforesaid doctrine that such as tooke the oath of Supremacie in King Henry the eighth dayes which rather then those famous and glorious men Sir Thomas Moore and Bishop Fisher would take they worthily chose to die were not to be condemned of perjurie because it might be supposed that they being learned Bishops and Noblemen knowing what belonged to an oath did draw the same to some improper sense which ought to have beene the intention of the aforesaid King to make the law just as if they should have sworne the then King Head or chiefe of the Church of his countrey for that he was Sovereigne Lord and ruler of both persons Spirituall and Temporall all sorts being bound to obey his lawfull civill lawes and commandements And so in this sense although it be a kinde of improper speech every King is Head of the Clergy and all others of his owne Countrey Or peradventure they might sweare him Supreame Head of the Church of England that is Chiefe of the congregation of beleevers within his dominions for so in our language we commonly say him to be the head of a Colledge Court or Citie that is the chiefe and him to be chiefe who is supreame therein The Church being then taken by all Divines for a congregation of men Why might not King Henrie be improperly sworne in the opinion of Suarez Head of the then congregation in England So that what Sir Thomas Moore lawfully and piously refused with relation to the intention of the aforesaid King others might without perjurie take with relation to the law of God abstracting from all unlawfull intentions to wit that every oath be just and reasonable as being to be taken in Veritie Iustice and Iudgement and so what was unlawfull in a proper sence might at lest be free from Perjurie in an improper Thus understanding the first branch and the second and third in the same sence before delivered they might peradventure be excused as I have said from perjurie But never from sinne For considering the state of England in those dayes and the absolute intention of the King which well knowne to the whole world was to be sworne Supreame Head of the Catholique Church Catholique religion still here remaining as I have said his oath was as much different from this now oath of Supremacie as darknesse from light For by this the Queene claimed not the Supremacie granted by Christ to Saint Peter as did her father but onely to be Supreame governour of a Church out of which she would not onely discard the Pope but likewise roote out all Catholique religion contrary to her fathers minde as I have shewed so that the question in the said Kings dayes was about an Article of faith viz. Whether the Supremacie were granted by God to the King or to the Pope Which Article they were bound with losse of their lives to have professed being called thereunto for then did occurre the
their originall Fountaine sith the most of them if not all might be gathered out of more ancient Liturgies For which See Biblioth Patru to 1. And if it be so then it may be said That the mud of Popery fell into them but they sprang not from Popery but from purer fountains * It hath been I confesse a long custome in the Latine Church ever since Pope Vitalian to celebrate the Church Service in the Latine tongue but it was never the custome of the Catholique or Vniversall so to doe The Greeke and Syrian and African and other Churches had from the beginning and have at this day their Service in their own languages Neither is the reason the Priest alleadgeth here of any force namely That w as the Catholike Religion is universall so it should be exercised in an universall language which he will have to be the Latine For first there is no necessitie that the Catholike Religion which is universall should be exercised in an universall language but rather in all languages Secondly since the division of tongues at the tower of Babell there was no language universall in all the world the Greeke was for a time the furthest spread and after the Romane but neither of them nor any other was spoken or understood by all Christians and at this day if we may beleeve travellers no language is so generally knowne and spoken as the Slavonian Thirdly the unity of language maketh nothing to the unitie of Religion or the Church neither doth the Apostle require that the Divine Service be performed in any one tongue but that it be done in a knowne tongue to the edification of the Church 1 Cor. 14.4.12.14.16 And to that end among others was the gift of tongues given x See page 28. Letterr. y See the lettero. pag. 17. z See the letter R pag. 28. a This definition of an heretique is both defective redundant defective for every obstinate deniall of an article of faith makes not an heretique unlesse his conscience be clearely convinced of his errour out of the word of God it is redundant also for a man may be an heretique by denying any article of faith though that article be not proposed to him by the Catholike Church to be beleeved though but his pastour or any other religious Christian out of Gods word clearely propound it to him and prove it or it be read by himselfe in the Scripture if he obstinately persist in the denyall thereof after his conscience is convinced he becomes an heretique b The Protestants of England know other Churches besides their own and some have learnedly discoursed of all the Churches in the Christian world as Purchas Brierwood Mocket Mr. Paget and others 〈◊〉 true it is they acknowledge no infallibilitie in the Roman or any particular Church nor receive any Church for true and Orthodoxe which consenteth not with them in all points of faith either expresly set downe or by cleare and necessarie consequence deduced from holy Scriptures c The Protestants hold nothing contrary to the Catholique Church though they hold many things contrary to the present Romane Church which is neither the Catholike Church nor a sound member thereof as is proved invincibly by Iohn Reynolds praefat thesium Sect. 12. Thes. ss 27. Apol. 5.23 And Bilsons answer to Cardinall Allen part 4. And Abbot against Bishop in a Treatise intituled The true ancient Romane Catholike to which none answer hath yet beene given nor sufficient can be d With what face can he say that the Protestants are incredulous and beleeve not the truth Who entirely beleeve the whole doctrine of the Scriptures together with the three Creeds that which beares the name of the Apostles the Nicene and that of Athanasius together with the foure first generall Councels in which time the Church most flourished as also the joynt Doctrine and unanimous consent of all the Fathers both of the Greeke and Latine Church for five hundred yeeres after Christ our Lord came into the flesh Let this traducer of the reformed Churches answer punctually whether he beleeveth that the learned Doctors Confessours and Martyrs who lived and died within the first 500. yeeres held the entire Catholique faith necessary to salvation or no If they held it not how were they saved upon what good ground or warrant are so many of them canonized for Saints even by the Roman Church but on the other side if they beleeved all things necessary to salvation how can we be esteemed incredulous or defective in our faith who beleeveth all that can be proved to have beene joyntly beleeved and unanimously professed by them e Is this the holy Romane Religion to make a May-game of Religion and to goe to Sermons as to a play to make themselves merry and dispell a Melancholly dumpe Besides their owne third commandement enjoynes them to keepe Holy-dayes and their owne Casuists allow the Lords day to be a day that is holy And is this a piece of holynesse to goe on such dayes to a play yet neither doe I beleeve that he can readily name the man much lesse many men that spake fustian with gravity in our Pulpits but I am sure he who patched up this Safeguard out of rags of Religion and falshood speaks Linsewoolsey through his whole Discourse and contrary to the law ploweth with an Oxe and an Asse The later of which here brayeth irrationally and unjustly against the generalitie of Protestant Preachers and Sermons Forsooth we are silly weake and ignorant men but they are all profound Gamaliels nay Angelicall and Seraphicall Doctors Whereunto I answer as Saint Paul did to the calumnies of the false Apostles 2 Cor. 10.12 We dare not make our selves of the number to compare our selves with them that commend themselves but they measuring themselves by themselves and comparing themselves amongst themselves understand not The Catholiques he saith are Hounds â—lood Hounds I grant and our Ministers timorous Hares they dare not encounter the weakest Romane Catholique they neither understand the controversies of Religion nor dare meddle with any in their Sermons If this were true which all our hearers know to be most false yet me thinks Iuvâ—nal speaks very good reason Loripedem rectus derideat Aethiopem albus And what great Clarks I pray were those of whom Boniface Bishop of 〈◊〉 â—pâ—ke in his time heretofore we had woodden Chalices and golden Priests â—ut now we have golden Chalices and woodden Priests what great Gamaliels were they of whom Bonaventure complaines Quidam sacerdotum â—lavem habent he speaketh of the Key of knowledge quidam claviculam quidam nullam what was he upon whom Sir Thomas Moore thus playes in his â—pigrâ—m tu bene cavisti ne te ulla occidere possit litera nam nulla est lâ—tera nota tibi Be not frighted at the words of the Apostle the letter killeth thou hast taken good order that it shall not kill thee for thou knowest not a lettâ—â— What was he
Canons soever forbid Communication with hereticks they are to be understood of notorious hereticks in point of their heresie or particularly denounced excommunicated for heresie and fallen in Catholique countreyes or from amongst Catholiques And not of such as are not formall and subversive hereticks but borne incredulous in a countrey to be converted and not knowing the Catholique Church After all this some may yet say that it hath been a long custome with them to abstain from the Protestant Church above these threescore yeers and they have suffered and lost much by refusing the same and can I have so little judgement as to thinke upon mine own bare word or opinion to make them leave this their custome I answer how small soever my judgement be that it is not only my opinion but the common opinion of Divines in the Catholique Church and I never spake with any Priest in England about this point in my life that was able to give me satisfaction to the contrary Some indeed have answered me that it were lawfull if it were not for scandall Others if it were not a distinctive signe and when I have urged that scandall may be avoyded as I have before said and for a distinctive signe I knew none for who should institute that signe then they have answered that a long custome had brought it in I have blessed my self to thinke that men should so unjustly deale with poore Catholiques as to bring upon them a yoake or fetters which they can keepe upon them by no other law then that they themselves cunningly got them on or chained them about threescore yeeres since and now to kicke of these chaines or their devises would prove forsooth scandall because they would seeme refractary and disobedient to their suggestive humours but to give me a reason why going to Church was unlawfull before the refusall thereof became this supposed distinctive signe or before the same could be cause of scandall I could never yet heare any man give but only the aforesaid R. P. hath given in writing the aforesaid suggested untruths with a great deale of passion that this my opinion was thought rationall â—or almost fortie yeers agoe and since recusancy was brought in as appears by his said booke of many most prudent men in this kingdome which is to me no reason at all For let us propose to any Divine in Christendome these three following questions relating the true state of the Protestant Church in exterior actions for we meddle not as I have said with their opinions in matters of faith and withall adding that we are constrained to them under paine of death and losse of all temporall fortunes 1. Whether it be lawfull for a Catholique to heare the Prayers Epistles Gospels and Psalmes of the Catholique Church among Protestants in their Church 2. Whether it be lawfull to heare a Protestant preach in the same place some moralitie although it should by chance happen that some ignorant Minister should speake of some point of mistaken doctrine as that Catholiques trust in their own merits or the like falshood 3. Whether it be lawfull for a Catholique to receive bare bread and wine in remembrance that Christ dyed for him as a pious ceremony and whether not better so taken then without such remembrance I dare say that there is no impartiall Divine but will answer Yes And for these opinions I make no question but if I had been as well backed in Rome as the said R. P. was I would have got as great approbation to the same as he had to the same questions after his subdolâ—us manner proposed as followeth 1. Whether it be lawfull to frequent the Churches of hereticks where there is both imminent danger of subversion and scandall 2. Whether it be lawfull to heare the blasphemous and idâ—latrous Sermons of hereticks in which both God and his Church is notoriously and highly abused 3. Whether it be lawfull to receive Calvines Communion of bread and wine which they hold a Sacrament and is a signe of hereticall perfidiousnesse whereby a man betrayeth and denyeth his faith To which every Cathoâ—ique whatsoever would and must answer No but this in truth is not our case For the beliefe of Catholiques is not questioned nor subversion or blasphemie or denyall of faith either apprehended or feared Neither can they scarce possibly happen in the Protestant Church as I have before said but the question only is what Catholiques may exteriorly doe for the safeguard of life with a good intention and how and in what manner they may best converse and preserve themselves from ruine with most securitie Therefore I pray forgive the said R. P. who proposed the said questions in Rome out of his aboundant zeale of money and youth to propagate his family not once considering that it is an impossible thing for them to be hereticks who never were Catholiques As for their custome of Recusancie I say first that it is no custome for a custome is a continuance of a thing time out of minde without any interruption Now recusancy hath been interrupted oftentimes first by Doctor Wright who wrote against the same Ann. 1607. and since him Master Broughton and now my selfe Neither hath it been time out of minde for there are some yet alive borne in Queene Maries dayes who have knowne when our recusancie was not in England and thereupon in these troublesome times doe now goe to Church I say secondly that an inconvenient custome with imprudencie is better broken then kept and the prescripâ—ion of threescore yeeres not good Yet if they will needs claime a right in and to their actions by the same I doe hereby promise not to take it from them by any suit in law For I doe write more to avoyd the scandall of the weake then that I do thinke thereby to satisfie the weake or rob them of their said custome As for their sufferings and losses I am sorry for them and doe assure my selfe that they will receive a great reward for the same because they suffered not so much for the love of recusancie as for the love of God for whosoever doth the meanest worke no indiscretion therein being apprehended by the doer either for Gods sake or for vertue sake although of some considering the act it selfe and not knowing the doers intention it may be judged indiscreet yet the worke may have a reward from God and yet another that doth not the same no punishment Thus the three branches of the said Minor proposition being proved the Conclusion standeth good for the lawfulnesse of going to the Protestant Church Me thinks here I heare some storme that if this my opinion should be admitted as lawfull it would follow that they must likewise take all the oathes that are made against Catholiques which will tend to perjurie To which I answer that I would have them to do things consequenter and any thing for safeguard of life wherein their is no sinne And to
times of obligation before expressed by Saint Thomas and other Divines for the profession of a mans faith As when the honour and glory of God and the spirituall benefit of his neighbour should exact the same Now when or what greater honour could a man have done to God then to have stood for the truth of the Gospel and defence of the Catholike faith being so opposed And in whom could there have beene more edification and greater example given for simple and unlearned men to follow then in Bishops and great men of authoritie Neither was it to purpose for them to alleadge that they were in danger of their lives and fortunes for they were bound to loose both rather then to denie any one Article of faith For although I have said that a man is not bound with danger of life or fortunes to abstaine from a thing lawfull or of its owne nature indifferent as the going to a Protestant Church in a Protestant Countrey taking the oath of Alleagiance or the now oath of Supremacy every of which is farre enough from an Article of faith or point of religion onely more cryed downe because out of fashion then out of any grounded reason or judgement to avoid the scandall of weâ—ke ones after instruction or admonition given of the nature of the thing and the danger in abstaining Yet I never said that a man was not bound to professe his religion in time convenient or that hee might deny his faith or any part or point of the same for feare of death but absolutely the contrary hence I say that the Supremacie in those daies being a point of religion and an article of faith although they might be excused from perjurie yet never from sinne and scandall And therefore I conceive that Suares onely intendeth that then lawes and oathes invented contrary to the law of God may be drawne to an improper sence when scandall may be avoyded with integritie of faith And so those that tooke the aforesaid Kings oath I leave to the judgement of God for as Saint Paul saith 1 Cor. 4. It is our Lord that judgeth who best knoweth the rectitude of all mens actions and the secret intentions of each mans heart The Minor of the said objection is denyed And to the words of K. Iames saying that as the Oath of Supremacie was devised for putting a difference between Papists and them of our profession So was c. I answer that the said King did not by those words undertake to give an absolute and totall reason why the said oath was devised himselfe not being the deviser or maker thereof but spake according to the effect which hee saw the oath of Supremacie tooke in his daies who conceiving that Catholiques held it not an oath lawfull for them to take and therefore some in King Henries daies refused the same out of conscience others since the abrogation of Masse and establishment of the Protestant Church out of scruples not considering either the change of times or alteration of the Church conceived likewise a difference to result thereby betweene them and Protestants so that the said renowned King did not intend by the aforesaid words to make known the intention of the law or lawmaker but onely spake what an effect the said devised oath had in Catholiques wrought That neither of the said oathes of Supremacie were framed to put a difference betweene Papists and Protestants is evident by what I have said for in King Henrie his dayes there were no Protestants knowne in England to differ withall and that oath was made onely and solely for his pleasure And in the said Queens daies the oath was onely made to give and acknowledge her power and authoritie in Spirituall or Ecclesiasticall things thereby as I have sufficiently said to propagate and establish the Protestant Church and to no other end or purpose The Major and Minor being thus answered the consequence appeares naught and the assertion for the lawfulnesse of the oath in force If any simple man pardon the bluntnesse of my speech for I know that no discreete or judicious man of either learning oâ— piety will justly censure me shall whisper in a corner that this doctrine is scandalous and unheard of and that divers have suffered and shed their blood rather then they would admit the same and which if it had beene lawfull others of his tribe would have found out before this time hee should have added to men of great qualitie and therefore it being no matter of faith none ought to beleeve it I forgive the poore man for he speakes out of hypocrisie or ignorance or both for he cannot tell you with learning and sinceritie why or how it is scandalous And if any did suffer for the same I pray let him likewise whisper when or in what yeere or Kings reign and then compare his speech to what I have said Yet whensoever they did it because they would not sinne against their consciences which rather then to offend they not understanding the â—ruth of the said doctrine and their phansie being the contrary way strong were bound to doe Yet good brother Simple doe not perswade me against my conscience unlesse you can confute me in reason for I conceive that I say nothing although not written of before but what is evident with Grace in reason although it be not certaine by divine fâ—ith And therein I shew my selfe a true friend to my distressed Countrey for certus amicus in re incerta cernitur A sure friend is tried in a doubtfull matter Yet I should be loath that any man should charge me with the least thing said as contrary to faith or the doctrine of the Catholique Church To which and whose censure I doe in all humility submit my selfe for all my doings sayings and writings as well for the satisfaction of mine owne conscience as that ignorant braines may take no offence And iâ— this doctrine were never heard of before what then Is it therefore false or scandalous And if your tribe did not finde it out before is it a wonder None at all with me for I should wonder indeed to heare you the inventers of any thing beneficiall to Gods Church howsoever you may and doe write over and translate other mens workes and so seeme to ignorant men to finde out something for the good of the Church that was never lost or before wanting therein because as yet I have never heard or knowne so much Those therfore that shall hearken to such whisperings I will wish them no other punishment then that the Vicar of fooles may be their ghostly father In the meane time maugre all censures I will thanke God that he hath enabled me to helpe my distressed friend at a dead lift by counselling and instructing to a lawfull I had almost said meritorious but that I feared more anger and discreet act Thus then seriously to conclude If any man shall yet remaine unsatisfied I knowing that an Angel of
after their manner that which is indeed the maine question between us namely whether Papists are Catholikes For if he take Catholikes in that sense in which the word is used by the ancient Fathers for a right beleever or Orthodox Christian in opposition to all heretikes and schismatikes neither are Romanists such Catholikes and such Catholikes living within his Majesties Dominions not only may but ought to come to our Protestant Churches and take the Oathes both of Allegiance and Supremacie when they are legally tendered unto them d If the author had not here rubd his forehead hee would never have set this text in the frontispice of his book for whether we translate the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 innocent or simple in neither sense it befitteth either the person of the Author and his Associates or the argument of his book How innocent Papists are it is sufficiently known to all the world by the Massacre at Paris Powder plot in England and the present Rebellion in Ireland As for their simplicitie let the Iesuits manifold Apologies of Equivocation speak and this Priests Treatise in hand wherein he endeavoureth through the whole to proove it to be lawfull to double in point of Gods worship and juggle in matter of most sacred and solemne oathes e Rubet auditor eui frigida mens est criminibus tacitâ suÌ„dant praecordia culpâ It seemes the Authors heart smote him and his coÌ„science misgave him and his inke turned red when he set his pen to paper to apologize for hollow hearted newtralitie and halting betweene two religions If we divide his Pamphlet into two parts we shall finde the first part spent in proofe and justification of simulation the second of dissimulation in the former part he perswades the Papists of England to make shew of what they are not by frequently resorting to our Church and Communion Table in the second to deny what they are by taking the two Oathes wherein both the temporall and the spirituall power and jurisdiction of the Pope within these kingdomes are renounced f How the ensuing Treatise tendeth to the Safeguard of the bodies and estates of Papists by declining the penalties of the laws every intelligent Reader may perceive but how this way of dissimulation tends to the safeguard of souls I cannot understand sith the Saviour of our souls who is the Way the Truth Truth and the Life teacheth us in expresse words Marke 8.35 Whosoever will save his life shall loose it but whosoever shall loose his life for my sake and the Gospel shall finde it vers 38. Whosoever therefore shall be ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinfull generation of him also shall the Sonne of man be ashamed when he cometh in the glory of his Father with his holy Angels and Matth. 10.32 33. Whosoever shall confesse me before men him will I confesse also before my Father which is in heaven but whosoever shall deny me before men him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven But I subsume to make profession of communion with misbeleevers or schismaticks is not to confesse Christ and to deny any part of our Christian Faith with what art of words or pretence of good intention soever is upon the matter to deny Christ and to be ashamed of him and his Doctrine g You may thanke Pope Pius his seditious Bull against Q. Elizabeth wherein he not only excommunicateth her but exposeth her life and kingdome for a prey and the treasonable practises of Iesuits and Iesuited Papists for the severitie of our laws not indeed against your Religion but rather irreligion and disloyaltie medicum severum intemperans aeger faâ—it h Hoc veruÌ„ est priusquam Theognis nasceretur This is an extreame veritie as the French speake that it is not necessary to confesse a mans Religion without necessitie as if he should say it is not profitable for a man to drive a a Trade without profit or not pleasant to recreate himselfe without pleasure or not wholsome to take Physicke which conduceth not to his health But if this were in him lâ—psus linguae or calami I am sure his inference hereupon is deliquium mentis and argues a defect in his rationall facultie for at this issue he drives because it is not necessary at all times and in all places to confesse Religion no more then to goe out into the Market place and cry I am a Romane Catholike or to write upon the frontispice of his house here lyeth a Papist that therefore a man may sometimes make an outward profession of a contrary Religion by joyning with them publikely in their Service and Sacraments If he had staid longer at schoole he would have perfectly learned which he fumbleth at this lesson from the Schoole Divines which looseneth the sinews of this his argument that affirmative preceptes obligant semper sed non ad semper but negative semper ad semper A man is not bound alwayes to exhibit cultum latriae to God by adoration or prayer but he is bound never to exhibite Divine worship to a creature he is not bound alwayes to offer unto God or to give to the Church but he is bound never sacrilegiously to take away from God or his Church in like manner he is not bound at all times and in all places to professe his faith but he is alwayes bound not to denie his Faith and Religion either by word or deed A man is not bound alwayes to speake a truth but he is bound never to lie feigne or play the hypocrite i See the Advertisement to the Reader The Apostle saith Godlinesse is great gain if a man be contented with what he hath but by the confession of this Priest gaine is the Iesuits godlinesse the zeale of Gods house eats not them up but their zeale devoureth the houses of the welthiest Recusants in England What care they though Recusants sinke in England so long as they swim in abundance beyond the Sea what thought take they for the parents mulcts and taxes by the state so long as their Pupils scores are paid in their Colleges k If seven Popes one after another swallowed the same State gudgeons and after the swallowing of them sub annulo piscatoris sent rescripts into England forbidding all Catholikes under paine of mortall sinne to repaire to Protestant Churches which this Authour acknowledgeth to be an errour in those Popes what becomes of the infallible assistance of the holy Spirit annexed to Peters chaire if so many Popes might be deceived by false suggestions why not by false arguments and objections if they may be deceived in matter of fact why not in matter of faith which often dependeth upon matter of fact and there being more need of inerrabilitie in a visible head for matter of fact then matter of faith the later so far as it is necessary to salvation being plainely set downe in Scripture If they may be deceived as
and integritie cannot be denied to be competent Iudges The Apostles rule is without exception There is no power but of God the powers that be are ordained of God Rom. 13.1 And by higher powers to whom we must be subject he understandeth not onely Kings but all those that are in authoritie under them 1 Tim. 2.2 First the King as supreame and after governours as them that are sent by him 1 Pet. 2.13 14. Secondly I demand of them whether that command of Saint Peter 1 Pet. 3.15 may be limited by their distinction of a Iudge competent and incompetent surely though in other causes a man is not bound to appeare or answer coram iudice non competente yet in matter of faith when we are required to give an account oâ— it there is no excepting against our Iudge For we must be ready alwaies to give an answer to every man that asketh us a reason of the hope that is in us with meekenesse and feare Thirdly I demand of them whether they account Pilate a competent Iudge in Christs cause or Nero in Peters and Pauls cause or any of the Roman Deputies and Proconsuls before whom the glorious army of Martyrs who signed the Christian Faith with their bloud were brought were competent Iudges they were no Roman Catholiques nor Christians yet Christ Iesus before Pontius Pilate 1 Tim. 6 13. and Peter and Paul before Nero and the rest of Christs noble souldiers before heathen Iudges witnessed a good profession Fourthly I demand when that confession of faith which the Apostle implyeth to be necessary to salvation is to be made Rom. 10.10 With the mouth confession is made to salvation is it not when we are brought before Kings and Rulers for Christs name sake Luke 21.12 For a testimony against them If we are bound to confesse our faith onely to those of our owne religion because they are onely supposed to be competent judges no man ever need to suffer for his religion and all the noble Confessors and Martyrs of former ages by this Iesuiticall doctrine deserved rathers fooles caps then Martyrs crownes for they did not shed their blouds for Christs cause but they spilt it causelesly For they needed not to confesse what they were before incompetent Iudges Here I will make bold to use the words of David concerning Abner 2 Sam. 3.33 Did Abner die a foole Did all those worthies whose soules cryed under the Altar Apoc. 6.10 How long Lord holy and true dost thou not iudge and avenge our bloud on them that dwell on the earth and to whom white robes were given vers 11. Die as fooles it seemed they died so in the judgement of this Priests prudent Catholique who though by this slight he now avoid all confession of his faith that he is not examined before a competent Iudge yet he shall one day when he shall come before the Iudge of all the earth condemne his own folly and justifie and magnifie also Christs noble Confessors and Martyrs taking up the lamentation of the reprobate set down in the booke of Wisedome We fooles accounted their life madnesse and their end to be without honour but now how are they numbred among the children of God and their lot is among the Saints therefore have we erred from the way of truth and the Sunne of righteousnesse hath not shined upon us Wisdome 5.6 y I have read logicam si vis discere lege Titlemannum ille SophistaruÌ„ crimiâ—a pandere vult but I never read theologiam si vis discere lege Titlemannum he is in a very ill case who rules his conscience by this casuist whose divinitie is no better here then his Latine I confesse in Machiavels schoole it is a lesson read to those of the upper forme leoninae assuere vulpinam to piece out the Lions skinne with a Foxes but in Christs schoole Zuickius teacheth us another lesson non decet in hac causa cum vulpibus vulpinari et cum astutissimis huius mundi sapientibus astutia certare certandum est nobis solâ perseverantiâ pietate simplicitate adeo et patientiâ crucis we ought not to play the fox with foxes nor contend with the subtile vizards of this world in craft and subtiltie but we must fight against them with sole perseverance and piety and simplicitie and bearing of the Crosse. In the whole Scripture we never reade of fox or fox craft commended The Spouse in the Canticles commanded to take the foxes the little foxes that spoile the grapes Cant. 2.15 And it is Davids curse upon Gods enemies let them be a portion for foxes and our Saviour to brand Herod with perpetuall infamie calleth him a fox Luk. 13.32 saying Goe ye and tell â—hat fox neither can it be proved to bee more lawfull for us to play the fox with foxes then play the wolfe with wolves or play the Sophister with Sophisters or play the hypocrite with hypocrites or play the Devill with Devils Though craftie companions may deserve to be served with their owne sawce yet it is not fit for us to dresse it for them The very Poet could say ac tu indignus qui faceres That may be very just and fit for one to suffer which is not yet fit for another to inflict or put upon him However this Priest is not his crafts master For it is against fox craft to professe it he will hardly or never deceive a mâ—n who brags before hand he will doe it and though it may be this Priest and his complices are annosae vulpâ—s old foxes and the proverbe is annosa vulpis haud capitur laqueo an old fox is seldome or never caugâ—t in a snare yet if those who are commanded to catch these foxes should be pleased to make snares with this fox his owne cords here stretched out by him namely to put them to an expresse abiuration of the maine and fundamentall points of their Trent faith or set them such a forme of recantation of their tenents and with such conditions as they enjoyned the Lollards in the dayes of King Richard the second See the Appendix to the Animadversions infra it may verily be hoped through Gods blessing upon the wisedome and care of zealous Magistrates that this Kingdome of England may in time be as free of these foxes as it is now of wolves with which in former ages it much abounded z There was no feare of the Iews perverting the primitive Christians especially in the Apostles dayes in which we reade in the Acts how mightily the Apostles and their converts confounded the Iewes Christ making good his promise to them that he would give them a mouth and wisdome which their enemies should not be able to resist Luk. 21.15 but the true reason why they made such a Canon if yet they made such Canons which is very much doubted was to prevent the scandall which the Church might receive by the Christians frequenting the Iews Synagogues in which the now abrogated rites of Moses