inuenta est nimirum 〈◊〉 numero vincens merito Worthily doth the Church admit him to wit Innocentius whose estimatiō is more renowned whose election is found to be more lawfull as passing the others election both in number and merit of the choosers And so in these few lynes we see how many wilfull lyes and falsifications this Minister hath vsed which cannot be excused eyther by ouersight ignorance or error but must needs be ascribed to wilfull malice and expresse purpose of deceyuing his hearer And so though I might alledge diuers other places to like effect yet this shall 〈◊〉 for one example yea for all them of that sorte in this behalfe For albeit examples without number may be alleaged out of these mens workes yet by these few 〈◊〉 may be made of the rest I shall therfore adioyne some three or foure examples more of lay-men to shew the conformity of their spirits to their spiritual guydes and so make an end The vse of Equiuocation in Lay-men and Knightes §. 5. 65. OF this sorte of men I will alledge only three in this place that in these later dayes haue written against Catholicke Religion but yet such as are more eminent amōg the rest they being Knightes all three whose honorable condition state of calling ought to haue obliged them to defence of truth and that also by true meanes and not by sleightes of this worst kynde of Equiuocation as heer yow shall see them doe The first is Sir Francis Hastings that wrote the iniurious VVatchword some yeares past aga nst Catholickes The second is Sir Philip Mornay Lord of Plessis that hath written many workes much respected by those of his partiality in Religion The third is Syr Edward Cooke late Attorney of his Maiesty now a Iudge and writer against Catholicks And albeit the second be a French-man borne yet for that he hath liued much in England and wrote some of his bookes there and all or most parte of them are 〈◊〉 to be in the English language I may well accompanie him with English Knightes in this behalfe 66. For the first then which is Syr Francis I may be the briefer with him for that his aduersarie or Antagonist hath in his Answers to the said VVatchword and Apologie therof often put him in mynd of his 〈◊〉 against truth euen then when himselfe must needs know it to be so and consequently that it was not only voluntarie but witting also and wilfull 〈◊〉 wherof I might alledge many particulars but two or three shall be ynough for a tast 67. In his defence of the VVatch-word pag. 74. he treating against the abuse of pardons auoucheth out of sundry Chronicles as he saith the storie of the poysoning of King Iohn by a Monke named Symon and this vpon dispensatiō first obteyned of his Abbot to do the fact without sinne which historie being taken by him out of Iohn Fox his Actes and Monumentes who affirmeth that most of the ancient Historiographers of our Country do agree in this matter both of them are conuinced of wilful vntruthes for that they could not be ignorant but that of all the old Historiographers that liued in the time of King Iohn or within two hundred yeares after no one did euer affirme the same but rather the quite contrarie setting downe other particuler causes occasions of King Iohns death And further they could not but know and haue read Iohn Stowes Chronicle printed anno 1592. who hauing made diligent search about this matter out of all authors of antiquity could fynd no such thing and so he testifyeth in these wordes Thus saith he haue I set downe the life and death though much abbreuiated of King Iohn according to the writinges of Roger 〈◊〉 Roger Houeden Rad. Niger Rad. Cogshall Matthew Paris and others who all lyued when the King raigned and wrote for that tyme what they saw or heard credibly reported c. 68. Now then if this Chronicle of Stow was out and in euery mans hand some yeares before Syr Francis wrote his VVatchword and that hereby is euident according to all ancient writers that the foresaid poysoning of King Iohn by a monke was neither written nor reported by any in those dayes with what Conscience could 〈◊〉 Francis and Fox alledge the 〈◊〉 againe 〈◊〉 a truth Was not heere wilfull deceipt nay 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 will and desire of deceauing 69. The same is layed against Syr Francis in cyting of sundry others as namely the Authority of S. Hierome for proofe of common prayer in a vulgar tongue Tota Ecclesia saith S. Hierome instar tonitruireboat Amen The whole Church like a mighty thunder doth sound out 〈◊〉 inferring therof that all by liklyhood did vnderstand the language wherin publicke seruice was then celebrated for that otherwise they could not so answere But marke the fraudes that are in this allegation First the Knight doth not explicate in particuler what Church it was wherof S. Hierome spake nor vpon what occasion nor to whome and secondly he doth conceale the wordes ' that immediatly went before followed after for that they made al against him For first S. Hierome spake of the Church of Rome in particuler where the latin tongue being in vse so commonly in his dayes that it was as it were their naturall language no maruaile though the common people could sound out Amen they vnderstanding for the most parte the latin tongue for we see also that in other Catholicke Countryes where the latin tongue is not so commonly in vse the common people by vse and practice can and do with common voyce sound out Amen in Letanies and other partes of latin seruice wherfore this circumstance was fraudulently concealed 70. As that other was in like manner that S. Hierome wrote these wordes vnto two vowed virgins Paula and Eustochium to whom he dedicated his said second booke of his Commentaries vpon the Epistle to the Galathians commending vnto them the faith and deuotiō of the Church of Rome aboue other Churches and yeelding a reason why the Apostle S. Paul did so highly commend the Roman Christians in his time both for their faith and obedience saying of the first I do giue thankes to my God by Iesus Christ for yow all sor that your faith is divulged throughout the whole world and in the end of the same Epistle he saith of their obedience in liuing according to their faith Your obedience is divulged into euery place of the world wherfore I take ioy in yow c. Vpon which testimony of the Apostle S. Hierome writeth thus Romanae plebis laudatur 〈◊〉 c. The faith of the Roman people is praysed by the Apostle for in what other place of the world is there such cōtinuall concourse vnto Churches and vnto the Sepulchers of Martyrs as in Rome In what place do they so sound out the word Amen to the likenesse of a certayne heauenly thunder Not for that the Romanes haue
any other faith but that which all Christian Churches haue but only that there is greater deuotion in them and greater simplicity to beleeue 71. These are S. Hieroms wordes which if Syr Francis had set downe wholy and simply as the lye in him he saw how they would make against him in diuers poynts and therfore he willingly and wittingly cut of both the beginning and ending as yow haue heard applied the midst to a wrong sense neuer thought of by the Author himselfe And the same is proued against him in the allegation of many other Authors as of S. Augustine pag. 18. of S. Bede and Arnobius pag. 34. 35. and of S. Chrysostome pag. 52. all to one end corruptly and fraudulently alleadged for some shew of proofe that publike seruice ought to be in vulgar tongues only which yet being truly examined make nothing for his purpose but quite contrary And thus much in this place for the first Knight 72. As concerning the second Knight Syr Philip Mornay his case is notorious that hauing published a great booke full of authorities against the Masse vpon the yeare 1599. seeming to shew great learning therin the same was fond afterward to be so full of deceipts and wilfull falsifications as a very learned man Monsieur Peron then Bishop of Eureux and now Cardinall made publike offer to proue aboue fiue hundred such wilfull falsifications to be in that booke requesting also by humble suite his Maiesty of France to command publike triall with his presence as at length it was effectuated in the presence of the King and great parte of his 〈◊〉 and other learned men on both sides vpon the yeare 1600. and 4. of May as appeareth both by the Kings owne letter extant in print as also by the publike Acts set forth by the approbation of the said King and his Counsell 73. In this Conserence of tryall fiue hundred wilfull falsifications being obiected as I said to this Knight and when the tyme grew neere three score 〈◊〉 exhibited vnto him by the said Bishop out of which to make his choise for the first dayes tryall the said Syr Philip Mornay choise 19. of those which he thought himselfe best able to defend or excuse and of this number also he placed in the first ranke such as seemed to him to be of least enormity wherof notwithstāding the straitnes of tyme permitting only 9. to be handled he was conuinced publikely in all and euery one of them and had sentence geuen against him by the Iudges as well Protestants chosen of his side as the other that were of the Bishops Religion the summe wherof I shall briefly touch in this place 74. The first was that he had falsified the Schole-Doctor Ioannes Scotus alleadging him as though he had doubted of the Reall-presence for that hauing proposed the question whether Christ were really in the Sacrament vnder the formes of bread and wyne he did according to the fashion of Scholes make arguments to the contrary saying Videtur quòd non it seemeth that he is not so there for these and these reasons which afterwards he solueth and holdeth the contrary position for true and Catholike to wit that Christs body is really there wherupon the sentence of the Iudges was that Mōsieur Plessis in this matter had taken the obiection of Scotus for his resolution 75. The second falsification wherof he was conuinced was that he had alledged Bishop Durandus an other Scholasticall Author very fraudulently about the controuersie of Transubstantiation affirming him to say and hold for his owne position that which he cyteth only as an obiection out of an other and answereth the same The third and fourth falsifications were that he had corrupted plainly S. Chrysostome in two seuerall places by him alledged about prayer for the dead producing two particuler testimonyes out of him quite contrary to his owne meaning and expresse wordes The fifth was out of S. Hierome about praying to Saints The sixth out of S. Cyrill about honouring the holy Crosse. The seauenth out of the Code or Imperiall lawes about painting or keruing the signe of the said Crosse. The eight out of S. Bernard about honouring our blessed Lady The ninth and last of an authority of Theodorete about Images 76. All which places being diligently examined and Syr Philipp Mornay suffred to say and alledge what he could for his defence or euasion he was conuinced manifestly by the said Bishop of Eureux and sentenced by all the Iudges to haue committed falfification and vntrue dealing in them all And the like would the said Bishop haue shewed declared in all the rest to the number of fiue hundred if the said Mornay could haue byn brought to haue continued the combat which he would not as yow may see in the said publike Acts printed in French vpon the yeare 1601. with approbation of the King himselfe And he that will see more particulers of this in the English tōgue may read a Treatise or relation therof set forth in the yeare 1604. taken out of the foresaid French publike Acts of the said tryall And so this shall serue for this French Knight wherby yow may see the conformity of spirit in them all when occasion is offered to Equiuocate in the worst sense 77. Our last example then shall be of S. Edward Cooke lately the Kings Attorney who hauing taken vpon him these yeares past to be both a sharpe writer and earnest actor against Catholiks seemeth therwith to haue drunke also of this spirite in such aboundant measure as he is like in tyme to ouer-runne all the rest if he go forward as he hath begonne For that being admonished not long agoe by one that answered his last booke of Reportes of diuers notorious his excesses committed in this kind he is men say so farre of from correcting or amēding the same as he hath not only in a late large declamatiō against Catholicks in a charge giuē by him at Norwich repeated and auouched againe the same excesses but hath 〈◊〉 others also therunto of much more apparant falsity As for example he was admonished among other points that it was a notorious vntruth which he had writen and printed that for the first ten yeares of Queene Elizabeths raigne no one person of what religion or sect so euer did refuse to go to the Protestants Church and seruice which the Answerer confuteth so clearly and by so many witnesses as a man would haue thought that the matter would neuer haue byn mencioned more for very shame and yet now they say that the Attorney being made a Iudge hath not only repeated the same but auouched it also againe with such asseueration in his foresaid Charge as if it had neuer byn controlled or proued false 78. Nay further they write that he adioyned with like asseueration diuers other things no lesse apparātly false then this as for example
Wherfore these strangers are wont to demaund whether there be any learned men indeed in these three facultyes now in our Vniuersities and whether any be studyed in Schoole-Deuinity and the Lawes either Ciuill or Canon for if there be it seemes impossible to them that such a booke should be suffered to come forth so full of ignorance as this is For say they if they had read or looked ouer but these heads in the said sciences to wit of the nature of truth and lyinge of the lawfullnes of dissimulation in certaine cases both in wordes works as namely in stratagemes of war of the lawfulnes of couering some truth vpon iust occasion in the Canon law out of S. Augustine of 〈◊〉 malus and Dolus 〈◊〉 or vtilis in the same law out of S. Hierome and other Fathers of the cases wherin a man may sweare or not sweare lawfully or not be bound to keep his oath of the question whether God can deceiue or any man else by his spirit of the limitations of an accuser and defendant of the obligation of a witnes to vtter deny or dissemble the truth of the office of a Iudge Aduocate or Solicitour in accusation or defence of any body of the cases wherin secresy is necessarily to be obserued by all lawfull meanes both in out of confession and diuers other such like heades of doctrine as occurre daylie in all the foresaid three faculties and in the common vse of mans life these learned men affirme that it is impossible for our Vniuersity-Doctors to haue read and weighed them but they must confesse the lawfulnes of Equiuocation in diuers cases and that it may be without lying which is lawfull in no case nor for any cause whatsoeuer Wherof they inferre that either their sciences are not studyed in our Vniuersites or that the students profit little in them or that the worst learned of all are suffered to write bookes which thing for that it appertayneth to the disgrace of your so famous Schooles I thought it one sufficiēt cause amongst the rest to dedicate this Answere vnto yow 5. My third reason was to moue yow by this occasion to consider more attentiuely what manner of men they be for the most part that write in England at this day how shallow in the matters they take vpō them to make bookes of but especially to wish yow that when any booke commeth forth yow would but examine the truth of the citations which are alleadged by them for this only would be sufficient to informe and satisfie yow where the truth is And so I desire no more but your attention in this one point for the decision of the controuersie betweene me and Thomas Morton for if yow find him to haue dealt sincerly in alleaging his Authors I am content he haue the victory though he haue behaued himself otherwise neuer so weakly For triall of which point I remit my self to that which I haue handled afterward more plentifully and perticularly in the 2. 6. and 12. Chapters of purpose 6. But yet for that since the writing of the ensuing Preface I haue read and pervsed two Epistles of his last booke intituled A full satisfaction the one to the Kings Maiesty the other to the seduced brethren as scornfully he calleth the Catholickes which Epistles haue as much gaule in them as the mans dispitefull stomake could vtter I shall pray yow to haue patience with me if I runne ouer briefly certaine notes out of the said Epistles wherby yow may partly take notice of the mans talent in writing but especially in raylinge vntill yow come vnto a more full view therof in the sequele of this our Answere that doth ensue 7. Thus then he beginneth with his Maiesty within some halfe dosen lines after the entrance of his Epistle Innocency saith he which though naked was neuer ashamed hath charged me to manifest my self vnto your Highnes and togeather with my Aduersarye to appeale vnto your incōparable wisdome which I doe in so constant assurance of an vpright cōscience as that I shal willingly remit that iust aduantage which the difference of comparison both betweene a legitimate or conformable subiect and a person suspiciously degenerate as also betweene a Minister of simple truth and a professed Equiuocator doth offer vnto me Heere yow see him vaunt of sundry points as first of his naked innocency which we haue afterwards to his greater shame so cloathed with the foule ragges of his lying and most deceiptfull dealing as she may no more be called a naked but rather a clouted innocency if innocency at all and not rather malicious nocencie intending to wound and iniury the iust and such as are faultles and innocent in deed 8 Secondly he appealeth to his Maiestyes incōparable wisdome as yow see in the constant assurance of an vpright conscience but we haue shewed throughout this whole worke that nothing is further of from this fellow then any conscience at all for that we haue taken him in so many wilfull falsifications and corruptions wherin he could not but know that he did lye and falsify as besides all other examples layd forth in sundry seuerall partes of this Answere I haue byn forced to make a speciall Chapter therof which is the sixt of this ensuring worke where as also in the 4. Paragraph of the 2. Chapter and els where the Reader shall fynd such store of testimonyes against the vprightnes of this mans conscience as I dare assure my selfe he will leese with indifferent men the constant assurance of honesty howsoeuer in his owne opinion he may hold the same assurance for other matters 9. Thirdly he saith to his Maiesty he doth willingly remit that iust aduantage which the difference of a legitimate and conformable subiect and a person suspiciously degenerate doth offer vnto him wherin what he would say I do rather ghesse by discourse then vnderstand by the sense of his wordes For I imagine that the Minister would say that he is ready and prest to conforme himselfe to any thing that the State or Prince shall appoint him as well in Religion as in other matters whatsoeuer and that therin cōsisteth his vprightnes of conscience to wit to be conformable And for that his aduersary shewing himselfe perhaps more scrupulous and timerous in certayne pointes concerning his soule or conscience and not so conformable therfore he calleth him suspiciously degenerate and no legitimate and conformable subiect which whither it tendeth and towardes what gate of Atheisme or Herodianisme euery man that hath Iudgement and conscience in deed will easily discerne 10. But of all the rest the fourth point is the most ridiculous wherin he intituleth himselfe A minister of simple truth and his aduersary A professed Equiuocator wheras I haue shewed in the 7. and 12. Chapters of this Answere first that such as grant the lawfulnes of Equiuocation in some limited cases are farre more seuere rigorous against al kynd of lying in
both by bookes preachings and publike speeches of Magistrates as if it had byn a most heinous attempt in deed and not only these but by this occasion all Catholicks generally were most odiously traduced especially in this one point that touched them neerest to wit that they would seeme to conceaue any least hope of his Maiesties clemency and mercy towardes them by way of toleration or conniuency for their Religion or mitigation of their continuall pressures for the same 8. To which end were brought into this booke and published in print not only the Bishop of London his sermon at Paules Crosse vpon the fifth of August then past wherein he auowed his Maiesties protestation against Catholickes to the contrary but the speach also and charge of the L. Chancellour in the Star-chamber vnto the Lordes Iudges and communalty there present ready to departe into their countryes was deliuered as from the Kings owne mouth all tending to the same end of afflicting and disgracing the said people and depriuing them of all hope of any tolerance yea scoffing most bitterly and contemptuously at their folly for conceauing any such vaine hopes and inioyning the most seuere order for descrying searching apprehending imprisoning and punishing them which euer lightly was heard of as though they had 〈◊〉 the only or most grieuous male factors within the Realme and this only for their Religion 9. Soone after vpon the backe of this came forth S. Edvvard Cooke his Maiestyes Attorneyes Booke intituled by him his Fifth Part of Reportes which though in the entrance and fore-front it promised more calme and mild proceeding and so it performeth in phrase and style of writing yet was the drift and ending therof no lesse stinging then the Scorpions tayle it self against all sortes of Catholicks and their Religion And to say somewhat of it in this place his argument or subiect was new and strange taking vpon him to proue out of the old and ancient common lawes of England that the spirituall iurisdiction giuen by Act of Parlament to the late Queene Elizabeth in the first yeare of her raigne and exercised afterwardes by her in Ecclesiasticall matters was dew vnto her not only by vertue of that Statute but by vigour also of the said ancient common lawes and so acknowledged and practised by the olde ranke of our foregoing Kinges and Princes a conclusion no lesse strange and paradoxicall in wise and learned mens eares then that was of him who diuers ages after the warres of Troy ended and the true successe therof published by all writers throughout the world tooke vpon him to teach the contrary to wit that not the Grecians but the Troianes had the victory in that warre and so to reuerse and contradicte whatsoeuer had byn written taught or receaued before 10. Let the histories of our Christian English Kings euen from the first conuerted Ethelbert vnto King Henry the eight be examined whether this be so or not and whether a thousand monuments of theirs in almost a thousand yeares doe not testify them all to haue byn of contrary iudgment practice sense and beliefe in the controuersy proposed to that which M. Attorney by a few pieces of lawes distractedly alleadged woulde haue men to thinke Or if he delight as I take him to be learned to haue this argument more discussed for it is both ample and important let him but procure licence for his Antagonist to write and print his booke and I doubt not but that he will quickly be answered by some of his owne profession among whome I doe imagine that many fingers must needes itch and tickle to be doing in so aduantagious a cause or if not yet doe I dare assure him that some Deuine of our side shall ioine issue with him in that point for the confutation of his whole drifte and narration in those his Reportes but principally in the ouerthrowing of his iniurious conclusion wherby he would inferre that whosoeuer did not belieue and acknowledge the said late Queenes Ecclesiasticall feminine authority power and iurisdiction in spirituall matters was and is a traitor by the iudgment of the ancient common lawes of England receaued helde and practised euen vnder Catholicke Kinges and Princes of former times 11. Vnto which vntrue and improbable paradox he addeth another no lesse stinging nor better founded then the former which is that for the foremost eleuen yeares of Queene Elizabeths raigne vntill she was excommunicated by Pius Quintus No sorte of people of vvhat persvvasion soeuer in Religion refused to goe to the Protestantes Church which is euidently false both in many Puritanes and more Catholicks that refused openly in that time and then That vpon that occasion Catholicks first began to refuse which in like manner is false both for that they refused before and this occasion was altogeather impertinent to their refusall and thirdly most iniuriously of all he would further seeme to inferre that such as refuse now may in like manner be presumed to doe it vpon the same vndutifull minde towardes his Maiesty All which points doe tend to the exasperation and exulceration which euery one seeth and comming from a man of his place roome and neerenes in office about his Maiesty could not but make deepe impression and giue perhaps a great push to the lamentable precipitation of those vnfortunate Gentlemen that soone after ensued 12. VVhich being hapned came forth presently this other odious pamphlet of T. M. his deuised discouery wherunto now I am forced in particuler to answere it being in it self no lesse slaunderous and iniurious then the fact of the conspirators was wicked and grieuous to all Catholickes The booke beareth this title An exact discouery of Romish doctrine in case of Conspiracy and Rebellion But he that shall weigh it well shall finde it a more exacte discouery of English Ministeriall malice in case of sycophancy and calumniation the Authour endeauoring to ascribe that to publicke and generall doctrine which proceeded from priuate and particuler passion as also to drawe the temerity of a few to the hatred and condemnation of the whole Of which iniquity we shall haue occasion to speake more afterward in due place 13. Soone after this pamphlet appeared many more tending all for the most part to the same end of exulceration or driuing rather to plaine desperation euery one adding affliction to affliction and heaping hatred and enuy vpon them that detested bewailed the transgression happened no lesse but much more then these insolent insultors themselues Of this kinde I might name sundry that my self haue seene though being out of England I may presume to haue seene the least part of such as haue byn published and set forth 〈◊〉 this fact fell out as namely one intituled A Discourse of the late intended Treason wherin the discourser beginneth with this foundation That all English both at home and abroad vvere so fully in possession of contented peace at the
time vvhen this treason vvas plotted as to vse his owne wordes no 〈◊〉 grudge no invvard vvhispering of discōtentment did any vvay appeare VVhich assertion if you consider it well and compare it with our domesticall differences in Religion and variety of punishments laied vpon diuers sortes of men at that time euen before this fact fell out for the same will seeme a very great hyperbolicall exaggeration and ouerlashing for that the penalties of Recusancy and other like molestations were as rife then as at any other time before complaintes of Catholickes in diuers countreys no lesse pittifull 14. Another like Treatise followed this intituled A true reporte of the imprisonment arraignment and execution of the late Traitors imprinted by Geffery Chorlton VVhich so raileth vpon Catholicks and Catholicke Religion from the very beginning to the end therof as if none of them had byn free from the fact attempted or that their common doctrine had publickly allowed the same whereunto this seditious libell of the minister T. M. which now I am to confute endeauoreth to beare false witnes I will pretermit two other most virulent and spitefull Treatises intituled Pagano-Papismus and The picture of a Papist in which the Religion wherin all our auncestors both liued and died from the beginning of their Christianity vnto our daies and so many worthy nations great Princes and famous learned men doe professe round about vs at this day and doe hope to be saued therby is made worse then Paganisme vea the horrible sinke of all damnable heresies which notwithstanding were condemned by the same Religion and Church in former ages and consequently this censure sauoureth more of fury then of reason 15. But to leaue of the recitall of any more bookes or pamphlets to this effect there hath appeared further a matter of far greater importance which is a Catalogue of new lawes suggested in this Parlament against the said Catholickes wherin besides the former heape of penall statutes made to this affliction in precedent times diuers new are proposed for an addition and aggrauation of their Calamities far more rigorous if they passe then the former which being considered by forreine people doe make the state of English Catholickes vnder Protestant gouernement to seeme vnto them much more miserable and intolerable then that of the Ievves vnder any sorte of Christian Princes or that of the Grecians or other Christians vnder the Turke or Persian or that of bondsubiectes vnder the Polonians Svvecians Moscouians and other such Nations so as all this tendeth as yow see and as before we haue noted to more desperate disunion of mindes and exasperation of hartes 16. Only I must confesse that in two mens writings I finde more moderation then in any of the rest who yet being more interessed in the late grieuous designed delict then any of the other that write therof had most cause to be prouoked against the delinquents The first is his Maiesties speach both in his Proclamation and Court of Parlament In the former he professeth to distinguish betvveene all others calling themselues Catholicks the Authors of detestable treason and that by good experience he vvas so vvell persuaded of the loyalty of diuers of that 〈◊〉 as that he assured himselfe that they did as much abhorre that odious 〈◊〉 as himselfe And in the second his Maiesty speaking in Parlament distinguished betweene different sortes of Catholicks allowing to the one sort both the opinion of loyalty and possibility of saluation detesting in that point to vse his Highnes wordes the cruelty of the Puritanes and thinking it vvorthy of fier that vvill admit no saluation to any Papist VVhich is an argument of his Princely moderate meaning not to condemne the whole for a part though in our sense the distinction vsed by his Maiesty in that place of some Catholicks that holde some pointes of our Religion and of others that holde all cannot stand For that we accompt them not for Catholicks at all nor may wee that holde not all but a part for that Catholicum is secundum totum and not secundum partem as well S. Augustine noteth and consequently he that belieueth a part only or any one iote lesse then the whole cannot be in our sense nor in that of S. Augustine a true Catholicke 17. And surely though his Maiesty in this place out of the preiudicate persuasions of others and 〈◊〉 suggested informations seeme to be persuaded that no Catholicks of this condition that belieue and imbrace the whole can euer proue either good Christians or faithfull subiects yet is our hope and constant praier to almighty God that he will in time so illustrate that excellent vnderstanding of his Highnes as the same will see and discerne betweene these absolute and perfect Catholicks that yeeld themselues wholy in obsequium obedientiam fidei in all that the vniuer sall Church prescribeth vnto them to be belieued and others that chuse take and leaue what they like or list vpon their owne iudgement which choice or election called otherwise heresy if wee belieue the Holy Scriptures and sense of all antiquity in this behalfe is the most dangerous and pernicious disease in respect of both those effects heere mentioned by his Maiesty that is vpon earth And when his Highnes shall further with deliberation and maturity haue pondered how many ages his noble Auncestors Catholicke Kings and Queenes of both Realmes haue raigned in peace honour and safty ouer subiects of the first sorte and how infinite troubles turmoiles violences dangers hurtes and losses his Maiesties owne person and all his neerest in bloud and kinred haue suffered in a few yeares of those other new chusers to omit their doctrine I doubt not but that out of his great prudence and equanimity he will mollify and mitigate the hard opinion conceaued of the former notwithstanding this late odious accident fallen out by the temerity of a few as the world knoweth 18. The second example of some moderation before mentioned or at least wise meant was my L. of Salisburies answere to Certeine scandalous papers as he called them which though being written in the time and occasion they were the answerer wanteth not his stinges that pearce euen to the quicke yet supposing the pretended iniury offered by that fond menacing letter and the condition of men in his place and dignity not accustomed to beare or dissemble prouocations of that kind all may be called moderate that is not extreme though for the letter it self if any such were I presume so much of his Lordships wisedome and prudence as he could hardly deeme or suspect any Catholicke to be so mad as to write such a franticke commination but rather that it came from the forge of some such other as togeather with the blowe to be giuen therby to all Catholickes had furthermore a desire to drawe forth from his L. the answere therby to see and try his style and to that end gaue
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
Protestant party to flatter and deceiue her with false oathes and 〈◊〉 she promised that she would not but he arriuing the next day after the Bishop vnto her at 〈◊〉 in France made so great promises oathes and protestations vnto her as by little and little gate credit with her and so returned into Scotland by England where he had his full instructions yow must thinke to dispose the mindes of all sortes to receiue and obey the said Queene after his and their fashion and agreement for which good office she gaue him soone 〈◊〉 her returne the Earledome of Murrey and committed the cheife Gouernement of the Realme vnto him But what effectes ensued we shall now in few wordes declare 21. When vpon the yeare 1563. which was two yeares after her returne to Scotland she resolued by consent of her Parlament to marry her knisman the Lord Darley newly made 〈◊〉 of Rosse and Duke of Albany this Earle of Murrey made a leagne of his confederates against the same pretending that it would be in 〈◊〉 of their Religion and brake into open warres against them both saith Holinshed and when they were pressed by the Kinges and Queenes forces they had alwaies their refuge into England and their counsaile and direction both thence and from their Ministers that neuer parted from them how to prosecute their matters against their Princes wherof the first point was to abuse the yong Kinges credulity and to set him against the Queene and hence ensued that strange and horrible act of entring her priuy chamber when she was at supper vpon the fourth of march 1566. in the company of the 〈◊〉 of Murton the Lordes Ruthen and Lindsey all Protestantes and armed who saluted her first with this greeting she being great with child That they would no longer suffer her to haue the gouerning of the Realme nor to abuse them as hitherto she had done And then pulled violently from her her Secretary Dauid which stood there present seruing her at table and for his refuge tooke hold of her gowne which they cut of and slew him with many stabbes to such fright of the afflicted Queene as it was no lesse then a miracle that she had not perished therwith or miscaried of her child which was his Maiesty that now gouerneth England hauing six monethes gone with the same This was done at a Parlament when all the Protestant confederates met togeather and tooke as yow must thinke the ghostly counsaile of their good Ministers for so holy an enterprise And vpon the 20. of Iune next was the Prince borne which thing not pleasing some that there should remaine any yssue of that family which they desired to extinguish the said King his Maiesties Father was most cruelly murthered in Edenbrough on the tenth of February next ensuing 22. Nor did the matter cease heere but rather now ascended to the greatest height of malicious Treason 〈◊〉 euer perhaps hath byn vsed against any crowned Prince in the world for that these Lordes of the Congregatiō as they called themselues that is to say Religious Rebels congregated against their sworne Prince gathering forces togeather laid violent handes on her Maiesties person first at Carbar-hill by Edenbrough when confidently she presumed as to her subiectes to goe vnto them and treate of peace and then casting her into prison depriued her of her Crowne set vp against her the name of her dearest iewell the yonge Prince not yet a yeare old made Regent her greatest enemy the Earle of Murrey her bastard traiterous brother held Parlamentes made lawes debarred her the sight of her sonne for euer and finally waging open warre against her and ouerthrowing her forces in the feild she being present forced her into England and there following her also procured vnto her the greatest disgraces dishonoured her with the foulest reportes defamed her with the most spitefull sermons bookes and printed libelles and finally oppressed her with the most notorious open iniuries that euer were cast vpon a person of her Maiesties quality dignity And all this without any scruple or remorse of conscience at all nay all was auerred to be done according to the very rule of the Ghospell for the Ghospell and this by all the Ministers both of Scotland and England 23. And thus much of the second Queene Mary of Scotland brought to her ruine by the Euangelicall obedience of these new Ghospellers but as for the yong Prince her Noble sonne whome she loued most dearely aboue all earthly creatures and neuer was permitted so much as to embrace or see him more afterward what passed in this time by the same sorte of mē both during his minority and afterward what cōtentions 〈◊〉 warres 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 what murthers what conspir cies Rebellions and violences were vsed were ouerlong to recount in this place the Histories are full and the 〈◊〉 made and set forth in print by the foresaid 〈◊〉 Authour of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in his sixt Chapter and 〈◊〉 booke against the 〈◊〉 doth touch many 〈◊〉 pointes of diuers notorious 〈◊〉 and violences offered by them and their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Kinges person state and dignity as their taking his authority vpon them his surpriz and restraint at Rutheuen vpon the yeare 1582. the brethrens allowing and authorizing the same afterward expresly against the Kinges declaration to the contrary 24. The 〈◊〉 also against his person at Striueling vpon the yeare 1584. and many railing speaches sermons and bookes against him and his gouernment made in England to disgrace him and namely the seditious preaching of Dauison and other Scottish Ministers against 〈◊〉 in London in the Church of the Old-Iury and this being in the moneth of May it followed in Nouember after that these Ministers with their complices returning into Scotland with aide from England though this circumstance the Author con ealeth as not making for his purpose they gat ten thousand Rebelles togeather and 〈◊〉 their tentes before the towne of Striueling whither the King was retired to fortify himselfe in the Castle making proclamations in their owne names and there draue at length his Maiesty to yeald his person into their handes with the liues of his dearest friendes and was depriued also by them of his old guard and a 〈◊〉 put vpon him All which actes were not only defended afterward by the chiefe Ministers of that Realme but the King himselfe was called in like manner Ieroboam by them and threatned to be rooted out as Ieroboams race was if he continued in the course he held and many other like 〈◊〉 by them committed which for breuityes sake I forbeare to recount in this place 25. Now then to returne againe to our former ponderation set downe in the beginning of this Chapter let euery sage and prudent Prince consider and weigh with himselfe which of these two waies which of these two people which of these two groundes of doctrine which of these two methodes of practice which of these
two manners of spirit in Protestant Catholicke subiectes doe best content him and which of them he may thinke more sure or dangerous vnto him For if we looke ouer the ancient recordes of our countries for a thousand yeares before while English men were Catholicke we shall not find so much violent and barbarous dealing with their 〈◊〉 as I haue heere recounted in lesse then thirty within the compasse of one only Kingdome vnder the Protestantes 26. And if we compare the obiections made heere against vs by T. M. in this his calumnious pamphlet as in the sequēt Chapter more particulerly you shall see discussed with these and the like actions of their people they are very trifles and streyninges in respect of these other As for example Doleman is accused to write that The common-wealth hath authority to choose to themselues a King when they haue none and to limit him lawes wherby they would be gouerned And that of Doctor Stapleton That the people or multitude was not made for the Princes sake but the Prince for the people That Religion is is to be had in consideration in choice or admittance 〈◊〉 a King where choice and admittance is permitted That the Pope being head of the Catholicke Church may in some cases and for some causes dispense in oathes That he may censure Princes vpon iust causes though not in temporall matters but indirectly only and vpon such necessity as no other remedy can be found for 〈◊〉 of the spirituall good of his subiectes That euill 〈◊〉 declyning into Tyranny may be repressed but not by priuate men or popular mutiny 27. All these pointes I say and diuers others which this fellow doth so greatly exaggerate and odiously amplify against vs are so ouerrunne by them both in doctrine and practice if we compare them as they scarse admit any comparison at all especially if we cast our eyes vpon their present practice which representeth the liuely fruite of their doctrine as namely the most dangerous Rebellions of Caluinian and Trinitarian Sectaries euen now standing on foote in Hungary Austria and Transiluania against the Emperour and of like men in Polonia against that mild and most iust King and of Lutherans in Suetia of Puritanes Brownists Protestantes and the like in the Low-countries so many yeares now continued against their true and natural Prince as before hath byn declared which maketh another manner of impression and force of consequence if it be well pondered then doth the particuler temerarious fact of halfe a score of yong Centlemen put in despaire by apprehension of publique persecution without demerit of the persecuted or hope of remedy for the same though this also be inexcusable but the difference of euils is worthy of consideration especially with the more graue and prudent sort of people that are not carried away with passion or otherwise misled by sinister information 28. And thus hauing said sufficiently in generall about the first and chiefe ground of our Ministers calumniation concerning Rebellion and Conspiracies wherby he would make impossible the 〈◊〉 and mutuall vnion of Catholicke subiectes with Protestantes we shall passe on to his second pillar of impugnation named by him The doctrine of Equiuocation but yet first we thinke it expedient to examine in a seuerall Chapter the particuler reasons which he hath framed for some shew of proofe to this his seditious assertion TEN REASONS OR RATHER CALVMNIATIONS BROVGHT BY T. M. For maintenance of his former Proposition That Catholicke people are intolerable in a Protestant gouernment in respect of disloyalty conspiracies and Rebellion Confuted and returned vpon himself and his CHAP. II. ALbeit that which we haue laid forth before in the precedent Chapter for the ouerthrow of the slanderous iniurious imputations of our aduersary about Rebellion and conspiracies be sufficient I doubt not for satisfaction of any indifferent and dispassionate minde that is not ouerborne with preiudice yet haue I thought it expedient to passe somewhat further also and to enter the list with him for improuing his particuler reasons on which he would seene to found his calumniations wherin as nothing is so absurd or false according to the Oratours opinion but that by speech and smooth discourse it may be made in some eares probable at leastwise in the conceipt of him that speaketh and indeauoreth to deceaue another so this Minister T. M. for of that trade he is held now to be hauing designed to himself an argumēt wherby to make Catholickes odious and gathered togeather for that end diuers shewes or shadowes for the furniture of his forsaid found assertion that Catholickes are not tolerable in a Protestant State he intituleth them Pregnant obseruations directly prouing Remish schooles to be Seminaries of Rebellion in all Protestantes gouernment Wheras indeed they are not so much pregnant obseruations as malignant collections and inforced inferences vpon false groundes Neither do they at all either directly or indirectly proue that which he pretendeth as by examination shall presently appeare if it may please the Reader to hold an equall and indifferent eare in the meane space to the discussing of the controuersy 2. And first of all to make vp a competent number in forme of a decalogue he streineth himself much to bring out ten different reasons and in deed euery man may see that it is a streine for that all might haue byn vttered in two or three at the most if not in fewer for that all doe concerne in effect the Catholike doctrine about the Popes authority either in Princes or priuate mens affaires And herehence is deduced his first reason concerning the censures and punishments determined by Ecclesiasticall Canons against them that by the Church are denounced for Heretickes The second reason toucheth the said Popes authority spirituall 〈◊〉 secular Princes The third the hinderance of their succession by the same lawes The fourth the oath and obedience of their subiectes The fifth their excommunication and deposition The sixth the practice of their death by the Popes licence The 〈◊〉 the allowance and approbation therof The eight the Rebellion of Priestes whensoeuer they are able The ninth the dissoluing and euacuation of oathes by the Popes authority The last that Romish Priestes by the order of the Pope must professe seditious positions ex officio that is to say as he is a Romish Priest By which enumeration yow may see in deed that the poore man was more barren then pregnant and after his streine had partum difficilem a hard child-birth as may appeare by that which he hath brought forth to wit a mouse for a mountaine and therupon we may iustly say parturiunt montes c. We shall giue a short view ouer all his reasons The first Reason §. 1. THey who by their slanderous doctrine saith he doe make all Protestants by their common censure Heretickes so odious as vnworthy of any ciuill or naturall society must necessarily be iudged seditious intolerable amongst the
performed by these places alleadged yow haue seene 28. Finally to stand no longer vpon this whether we or they Catholicks or Protestantes doe attribute more to popular licence against Princes when they giue not contentment may aboundantly be seene in that we haue set downe before and will ensue afterward both of their doctrine and practises in like occasions And so much of this first charge now will we passe to the second 29. The second is that we ascribe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 power and souer aignty ouer Kings vnto the Pope wherin first what he saith of ciuill souer aignty is a meere fiction and calumniation of his owne if it be out of the Popes owne temporall Dominions For we ascribe no such vnto him ouer other Princes or their subiects but that authority or soueraignty only which Catholicke doctrine ascribeth to the Bishop of Rome as Successor to S. Peter Prince of the Apostles spirituall head of the vniuersall visible Church of Christ which is only spirituall for spirituall ends to wit for the direction and saluation of soules And if at any time he be forced to passe further then this and by a certeine consequence to deale in some temporall affaires also it must be only indirectly in defence or conseruation of the said spirituall that is to say when the said spirituall power apperteining to soules cannot other wise be defended or conserued as more largely hath byn treated before 30. This then is the summe and substance of Catholicke doctrine about this point of the Popes authority which from the beginning of Christianity hath byn acknowledged in Gods Church and in no place more then in England where it hath byn both held practised from the very first Christened King of our nation Ethelbert vnto K. Henry the 8. for the space of almost a thousand yeares without interruption as largely and aboundantly hath byn shewed and laied forth to the view of all men in a late booke written in answere to S. Edward Cookes fifth part of Reportes and this with great honor prosperity of the Princes therof and vnion of their people vnder their gouernment and without such odious or turbulent inferences as now are made therevpon by vnquiet spirittes that would set at warre euen mens imaginations in the ayer therby to mainteine disunion discorde and diffidence betweene Princes and namely betweene our present noble Soueraigne and his Catholicke subiects 31. And first of all let vs heare this turbulent T. M. how vpon the enuy of this authority he frameth and foundeth all his ensuing reasons VVe demaunde saith he how farre these pretended powers of people Pope may extende and heervpon we argue To which I answere that in imagination they may extend so farre as any fantasticall braine shall list to draw them but in the true meaning of Catholicke reall doctrine they can extend no further then hath byn declared And as for the popular power of people ouer Princes we haue now refuted the calumniation shewed that it is a mere fiction of his owne and no position of ours and that his Protestant doctrine doth ascribe much more licence to popular tumult then the Catholicke without comparison and for that of the Pope I haue declared how it is to be vnderstood to be of his owne nature in spirituall affaires only without preiudice of ciuill Princely gouernement at all and so the practice of the worlde and experience of so many Princes great States and Monarches liuing quietly securely vnder the same authority both in former times and ours most euidently doth proue and confirme 32. But yet let vs see and consider how falsely and calumniously this Make-bate doth herevpon argue in his third reason inferring for his assumption or minor proposition thus But all Popish Priestes vpon this pretended Supremacy and prerogatiue of Pope and people doe vtterly abolish the title of succession in all Protestant Princes Ergo. Wherin to shew him a notable liar it shall be sufficient to name all the Protestant Princes that haue had title of successiō in our coūtrey for therof he speaketh principally since the name of Protestant hath byn heard of in the world being three in number to wit K. Edward the sixt Q. Elizabeth and K. Iames that now raigneth all which were admitted peaceably to their Crownes as well by Priestes as Catholicke people who notwithstanding in some of their admissions wanted not meanes to haue wrought disturbances as the world knoweth so as if one instance only doth truly ouerthrow any general proposition how much more doth this triple instance not able to be denied ouerthrow and cast to the ground this vniuersal false assertion of T. M. which auerreth That all Popish Priests 〈◊〉 vtterly abolish the Succession of all Protestant Princes Will he not be ashamed to see himself cōuinced ofso great and shameles ouerlashing 33. And on the other side one only Catholicke Princesse being to succeed in this time to wit Q. Mary we know what resistance the Protestants made both by bookes sermons Treatises and open armes and how many Rebellions conspiracies robberies priuy slaughters and other impediments were designed and practised afterward during the few yeares she raigned we know also what was executed against the gouernment and liues of the two noble Catholicke Queenes her neerest neighbours one of them most straitly conioyned in bloud that raigned at that time in Scotland to omit others before mētioned that were debarred from their lawfull succession or excluded from their rightfull possession for their Religion in Sweueland Flanders other places as cannot be denied 34. Wherfore it is more then extraordinary impudency in T. M. to charge vs with that which is either peculier or more eminent in themselues and false in vs and what or how farre this fellow may be trusted in these his assertions may be gathered by the last sentence of all his discourse in this matter where he hath these wordes F. Persons in his Doleman doth pronounce sentence that whosoeuer shall consent to the succession of a Protestant Prince is a most grieuous and damnable 〈◊〉 And is it so in deed Syr 〈◊〉 and will yow stand to it and leese your credit if this be falsely or calumniously alleadged then if yow please let vs heare the Authors owne wordes 35. And now saith he to apply all this to our purpose for England and for the matter we haue in hand I affirme and hold that for any man to giue his helpe consent or assistance towardes the making of a King whome he iudgeth or belieueth to be faulty in Religion and consequently would aduance no Religion or the wrong if he were in authority is a most grieuous damnable sinne to him that doth it of what side soeuer the truth be or how good or bad soeuer the party be that is preferred So he And his reason is for that he should sinne against his owne conscience in furthering such aKing And is
in this his Reply nor any regard either to his owne or Maisters honour he behauing himself so fraudulently against his owne knowledge and conscience as in this writing he doth And if I proue not this afterward by multiplicity of manifest manifold examples as in part yow haue seene that I haue done before let me be thought to haue done him iniury which willingly I would not doe vnto the worst man liuing in which place I hold not him though by his pen I must needes iudge him to be bad inough 4. Now then to the point it self of his Reply which he calleth as hath byn said A full satisfaction it seemeth to me as full as pipes and hoggesheades are wont to be heere in these countreys at the time of vintage when they are full only of winde and aire and nothing els and so yow shall see afterwardes that this his Reply is full of wordes without substance of florish without truth of fraude without reall dealing for that lightly he scarsely alledgeth any text of his Aduersaries wryting without some fort of sophistication both of wordes and sense or other like knackes And further so distracteth and dismembreth his aduersaries threed of speach citing one branch of it in one part of his Reply another in another one sentence first that should haue byn last and another last that should haue byn first therby to confound the Readers memory one period halfe deuided the other quartered the third left out the fourth disguised so as it is euident that he sought rather to fly to couer shaddow and hide himself then really and substantially to come to the combate as examples ensuing shall make all manifest 5. But heere perhaps some will say that this seemeth a meruaile vnto them for that this man pretendeth to deale more distinctly and exactly then others for that he setteth downe seuerally plainly and cleerly first the wordes of his former pamphlet of Discouery then the text of his aduersary the moderate answerer and thirdly the full satisfaction of his faithfull Reply And furthermore he draweth euery thing to diuisions and subdiuisions distinctions contra-positions which make a iolly florish in the Readers eye being set downe in logicall rancke As for example in his first reason for setting Catholickes and Protestantes at debate he saith he will proue it thus By a threefold euidence from a Popish 1. Definition of an Heretick 2. Explication of a person excommunicate 3. Application of Romish Censures to them both And then the last member againe is proued By Popish 1. Councelles 2. Bulles 3. Doctours 6. And is not this plaine and cleere saith one Yes to entertaine Children by sound of wordes or pleasing pictures But when we come to the substance find that neither he alledgeth his Aduersaries speech sincerely nor answeareth truly to the sense but either dissembleth the same or runneth a side or confirmeth his said aduersaries argument by his feeble answers what importeth this ostentation of bare and ydle sillables 7. But you will say that he seemeth to haue seene and read much of our moderne Catholicke Authors and to alledge them more abundantly in his text and margent then commonly other writers of his coat calling haue hitherto done for euery where almost he quoteth Vasquez Suarez Tolet Bellarmine Cunerus Azor Alsonsus de Castro Sayer Gregorius de Valentia Bannes and others which I graunt that he hath seene and taken a view of them and others if they be notes of his owne gathering but he hath considered of them as Satan had considered of Iob and his actions when God said vnto him Numquid considerasti seruum meum Iob and he signified yea but it was to bely and calumniate him and so hath this fellow considered of our Catholicke authors not only to slaunder them what he may but manifestly to falsify and corrupt them in many places both in wordes meaning and whole drift of their discourses as in part yow haue seene already and shall more largely and particulerly vpon iust occasions afterwardes 8. Nor hath this whole Reply of his though bigge in bulke any substantial point almost handled therin either about the one or the other two partes of his subiect proposed to wit Rebellion and equiuocation wherby he would dissolue all friendly combination and association betweene Catholick and Protestant people for as concerning the first he hath no more in effect but that which before hath byn touched in his ten deuised and distended Reasons That we hold Protestantes for Heretiques excommunicate and subiect to all the penalties of Ecclesiasticall Canons made by the Church against ancient Heretiques That we ascribe power to the Bishop of Rome in certaine cases to censure to excommunicate to depriue Princes wherof is inferred that such and such daungers may ensue which finally is nothing els but may so as the question being De futuris contingentibus of thinges contingent to come wherof the Philosopher saith there is no science all remaineth in vncertainty but only the suspition hatred which he would raise against vs but what the Protestantes doctrine hath done doth at this day against lawfull Princes in their Realmes the armies in the low countreys Hungary Poland Suetia and other places doe testify not only to our ears as things absent but as present also to our eyes then must I inferre that where we haue so many examples of so manifest experience and present action where we see and behold and feele with our senses what passeth and what hath passed and what is like to ensue daily by the notorious vnquiet spirits of new Ghospellers vnder any Prince whatsoeuer that contenteth not their humours What shall we stand wrangling with this Minister or any his like about possibilities or coniecturall probabilities What may fall out in time against his Maiesty for example of Great Britany who hath byn a King a Protestant King almost forty yeares and neuer receaued hurt or disquietnes from any Pope though diuers haue byn in that Sea within the compasse of this time and many other Kinges and Princes both in Denmark Sueueland and Germany for more yeares without molestation receaued or offred frō the said Sea which I dare auouch no Catholicke Prince King or Emperour can say that he hath passed halfe so many years in quiet gouernmēt ouer Protestant people vnto whome their doctrine giueth as great power ouer Princes in that case as we ascribe to Popes and farre greater wherin I remit me to that which hath byn said and demonstrated in the precedent two Chapters 9. And now to end about this first point of our Ministers Reply that wheras in his former libell of ten reasons intituled A discouery of popish doctrine c. He set downe in his first reason for proofe of our insociability with protestantes that we hold them for excommunicate Hereticks subiect to all the penalties belonging to such men wherof one among the rest is that we must
kill Princes he answereth thus It will be requisite without preiudice to the most learned and Religious iudgment of his Maiesty to satisfy for two places related from that conference c. And then he passeth on to discourse at large of the meaning of those places and vnder the colour of the foresaid honorable preface he taketh licence to dissent from his Maiesty signifying in effect that either the conference was not well related or his Maiesty mistooke their meaning in those notes and yet is the matter cleere by his owne confession that their said notes vpon the second booke of Cronicles and 15. Chapter vers 16. doe not only allow the depofing of the Queene Maacha by her sonne King Asa for Idolatry but further doe reprehēd him also sharply for that he had not put her to death by fier saying thus in their note That whether she were Mother or Grandmother yet herin the King shewed that he lacked zeale for she ought to haue byn burnt by the couenant as vers 13. appeareth by the law of God Deuteronomy 13. but he gaue place to foolish pitty and would also seeme after a sort to satisfy the law So they in their note 26. But who will looke vpon the two textes of Scripture by them heere cited shall finde no mention of burning but only of putting to death and in Deut. of stoning only But how doth he now defend this note of our English Ministers allowing the deposition and putting to death of Princes Yow shall heare his shift for he is much troubled with his Maiesties obseruation VVhat shall we say then saith he is the Soueraignty of Kinges disabled God forbid but it is rather established therby for the King is made the deposer yea euen of whosoeuer Doe yow see his poore flattering shift If the Queene Maacha might be deposed according to their note and that ex Augusto Imperio from her Imperiall gouernment as the text of Scripture hath yea and that she ought according to the law of God to haue byn put to death as now hath byn said for her Idolatry then is it a poore shift to say that Kinges cannot be deposed for that they must be the deposers seing that in Deut. where the Commission is giuen there is no mention of Kinges at all but Gods speach commission there is vnto the people Sitibi voluerit persuadere frater 〈◊〉 c. If thy brother or wife or friend will perswade thee to leaue God let thy hand be vpon him and after thee the hand of all the people which notwithstanding is to be vnderstood as before in the second Chapter we haue noted both out of the 13. 17. Chapters of Deut. and the glosse therevpon according to the order there set downe to wit after the cause examined sentenced by lawfull Iudges And at this time when this law was ordained there were no Kinges in Israel nor in many yeares after and consequently this commission could not be giuen to Kinges only 27. So then for so much as English Protestant-Ministers that made these notes doe authorize by this place of Deut. the deposing and killing of that Imperiall Queene his Maiesties censure was iudicious true that therby they allowed that lawfull Princes might be in certaines cases deposed and put to death And the first shift of T. M. in this place is ridiculous wherby he would seeme to make secure al Kinges from danger of deposition for that themselues by Godes word which yet he proueth not must be the deposers and then he presumeth they will not depose themselues but for Queenes he leaueth them to shift as they may Which doctrine I suppose he would not haue set forth in print in the late Queenes daies But their assertions are according to times and places and so this shall be sufficient for the second Question The third Question concerning practice of Rebellion §. 3. 28. ANd now hauing byn lōger in the former two Questions then in the beginning was purposed I shall endeauour to be shorter if it may be in this last though the multitude of examples partly set downe by vs before in the first Chapter of this Treatise and partly to be read in Histories and obserued by experience of Protestantes continuall tumultuation against Catholicke Princes would require a larger discussion then both the other two Questions put togeather albeit on the other side againe the matters are so cleere as they need no discussion at all but only narration For what can our Minister answere in reason or truth to all that multitude of instances of Protestantes Rebellions in the foresaid first Chapter set downe and for the most part obiected before as now I perceiue by his aduersary the moderate Answerer We shall briefly runne ouer some few examples 29. To the instances in England of continuall conspiracies and insurrections against Queene Mary he setteth downe first this bold and shameles prouocation After the proclamation of her title saith he shew vs what Protestant euer resisted what Minister of the Ghospell in all that fiery triall did kindle the least spark of sedition among her people In which wordes is to be obserued first that he saith after the Proclamation of her title to excuse therby the Dukes of Northumberland and Suffolke the Marques of Northampton and others that tooke armes against her before shee was proclaimed in Londen though in Norfolke she had proclaimed her self presently vpon the death of her brother King Edward as also to excuse Cranmer Ridley Sandes Latimer Rogers Iewell and other Ministers that had preached most bitterly against her title But what is the residue true that heere so boldly he auoucheth that neuer any Protestant resisted nor Minister kindled the least spark of sedition among her people after her title proclaimed Is this true I say Is this iustifiable for he calleth this Treatise a iustification of Protestantes Is this any way to be mainteined by any shew or shift whatsoeuer What then wil he say to the new conspiracy and iterated Rebellion of the Duke of Suffolke of his brother the Lord Iohn Grey not only after the said Queenes title proclaimed but after she was in possession and had pardoned them both of their former Rebellion What will he say to the Rebellion of Syr Peter Carew Syr Gawyn Carew Syr Thomas Denny other Protestant Gentlemen that tooke armes in Deuonshire within six daies saith Stow after the arraignemēt of the Duke of Northumberland What wil he say to the conspiracy of Syr Iames a Croftes others in VVales discouered saith the same Authour about the fiue and twentith day of Ianuary next ensuing What will he say to the Rebellion of Syr Thomas VVyat and his confederates in Kent ensuing about the same time Were they not Protestantes that were authors therof Or was not Queene Maries title yet proclaimed Will our Minister face out this What will he say to the cōspiracies ensuing after this againe
yow see besides the flat deniall both of King and Queenes supremacy it conuinceth plainly that which our Minister T. M. before denied And so with this conuiction in the sight of all his Brethren we leaue him But yet let vs heare what he saith to some other particulers before by vs obiected 36. To that then of Syr Thomas VVyat the Duke of 〈◊〉 and others he answereth diuersly First the History relateth saith he the pretence of VVyat thus A proclamation against the Queenes marriage desiring all Englishmen to ioine for defence of the Realme c. then that in Queene Maries oration against VVyat there is not to be fond saith he any scruple concerning the cause of Religion thirdly that no Minister of the Ghospell was brought in question as a Commotioner in that cause Lastly if intent might answere for Protestantes accused in that name then is it plaine that it was not Religion If for VVyat and his fellowes it is plaine it was not against the Queene or State but for both So he In all which different clauses of his answer consider if any one be in it self true for as for the first and second though VVyat pretendeth in his proclamation the said marriage with Spaine to be the chiefe cause yet not alone but that the Queene and Counsell saith Fox would also by this marriage as he affirmed bring vpon the Realme miserable seruitude and establishe Popish Religion 37. And the same Fox relateth Queene Maries wordes in her oration thus That the matter of the marriage is but a Spanish cloake saith shee to couer their protensed purpose against our Religion So as in these two pointes the Minister lieth openly but more in the last that VVyats attempt was not against Queene Mary or the state but for both for that Queene Mary in the same oration as both Fox and Holinshead doe iointly relate affirmed VVyats answere to haue byn to Syr Edward Hastinges and Syr Thomas Corn-wallis sent from her vnto them which he also at his arraignment confessed that he and his would haue the gouernance of her person the keeping of the Tower and the placing of her Counsellours And as for the other point whether any Ministers were called in question as Commotioners in that attempt importeth little for so much as no man can doubt but that the Commotion being so generall and for Religion as Fox affirmeth all Ministers hartes and tongues were therin in secret and their handes in like manner so far forth as they durst which being well knowne to Queene Mary her Counsell caused them to proceed against the principall soone after in matter of Religion preferring therin the iniury done to God before the iniuries offered to her self though Doctor Sanders doe affirme that diuers chiefe of the new Clergy amōg them Doctor Cranmer were conuinced to haue conspired in that Rebellion And by this we see how well the Minister hath iustified his Protestantes in this point It is euen as good as their iustification by only faith which maketh them lesse iustifiable then before Let vs passe to some other examples and se what he saith to the Rebellion of Protestantes in other countreys 38. To that which hath byn proposed of Scotland both by the moderate Answerer and by my self also in my first Chapter of this Treatise of so great and intolerable insolencies vsed in Scotland by Protestant-Ministers and their Disciples against Grand-mother Mother Father and sonne all lawfull Princes violated by them he yeeldeth no other answer or satisfaction but that which before hath byn recited that in a Parlament vpon the yeare 1584. the Chronicle of Buchanan was called in by the said Parlament the Kinges highnes then being about eighteene yeares old But what is this to the purpose Did this alter their doctrine or manner of Rebellious proceeding therevpon which they had vsed both against his Maiesty in the time of his minority and against his Mother and Grand-mother before him and against him after this Statute published No truly but they were more earnest in their sedition afterward then before for that the very next yeare after they caused that notorious surprise to be made vpon his Royall person at Striueling before mentioned in the first Chapter of this Treatise 39. Iames Gibson also one of the chief Ministers being called before his Maiesty and priuy Counsell vpon the one and twentith of December 1585. vsed intollerable speech vnto his highnes calling him Persecutour and comparing him to Ieroboam threating his rooting out and the like which his Maiesty can best remember So as such doctrine and such practice being held by them their new Ghospelling Brethren of Scotland in those dayes it is a simple satisfaction for our Minister to come forth now with a reuocation of Buchanans Chronicle as though that did remedy the matter or as though that reuocation had byn made by them I meane the Ministers repentant for their former doctrine and not rather by the Ciuill Magistrate impugned and resisted by the other And this for the present of Scotland 40. To the examples of France alledged by the Answerer of infinite rebellions made by the Protestants for many yeares togeather against sundry Crowned Princes of that Realm of which attempts many were so barbarous as without horrour they cannot be vttered And one French writer affirmeth that within the compasse of one yeare which was 1562. two and fourty thousand Priestes Religious and Ecclesiasticall persons were most desperately murdered aboue twenty thousand Churches cast on the grounde and within the compasse of ten yeares by the witnes of a Protestant writer Colignius two millions of men were slaine two thousand Monasteries ouerthrowne nine hundred hospitalles destroyed aboue two hundred Citties Castelles ruined vnder one only K. Henry the third To all this I say he answereth that according to the Historicall Collections which he hath seene of French affaires the fault of all this is to be laid vpon the house of Guise who being strangers sought to suppresse the natural Princes of the bloud Royal in France as also to oppresse the Ghospellers But suppose this were true which I hold to be most false slaūderous yet could not this particuler passion of the house of Guise make lawfull the Protestants Rebellion against their naturall lawfull Kinges no more then if now in England the Catholikes or Puritanes should rebell against his Maiesty for that some noble man or men of the Counsell were knowne to be their enemies 41. To the examples of Caluin and Beza in Geneua both for doctrine and practize he answereth first for doctrine granting Caluins sentence to be That when a King vsurpeth Gods throne he looseth hu Royalty And againe If the King exalt himself to Godes throne and commaundeth any thing contra Deum against God then to pull him downe Moreouer he granteth that Caluin vseth this phrase That when a King doth so behaue himself we
Christ to S. Peter and that it is a strange art to make a sword of a paire of keyes which seemeth to him a fine iest then commeth he out with this vanut Neither can any shew me one Doctour but of reasonable antiquity peto vel ex millibus vnum who by keyes vnderstand ciuill power But Syr what needeth antiquity of Doctors in this behalf will not your owne moderne Protestant Doctors graunt that when the keyes of any Citty Towne or Fort are giuē to a Prince ciuill power ouer that Fort is meant therby who will deny this 38. And secondly whereas he alleadgeth Franciscus à Victoria to say that the keyes giuen to S Peter imported spiritual authority of remitting and reteyning sinnes ergo no way temporall is a fond illation for that albeit Victoria saith that those keyes did principally importe spirituall authority yet they include also supreme temporall indirectly when the defence of the spirituall doth require it Whereupon he frameth this conclusion in the same place Our eight proposition is saith he that the Pope by authority of the foresaid keyes hath most ample temporall power ouer all Princes and Kinges and the Emperour himself in order to a spirituall end which he proueth there by many arguments And this of the first iest about swordes to be made of keyes 39. The second iest also is as wise and witty as this former that when we found the same temporall sword or authority of S. Peter and his successours vpon the words of Christ Feed my sheep he doth inferre that Princes also must be fed and dietted corporally at the Popes discretion and other such toyes he not vnderstanding as it seemeth or rather dissembling the force of Catholicke argumentes drawne from those and other like Scriptures both by later Doctors and ancient Fathers which this fellow turneth into scofs and contempt or wicked railing for that presently he falleth into these rages O arrogant Glossers O impudent Glosers and peruerters of the sacred Oracles of God! And why is all this heat of exclamations Forsooth for that in some Popes Bulles though corruptly fraudulently alledged some mention is made of the great authority that was giuen to Elias Elizeus Ieremy and other Prophetes and especially to Christ himself vpon earth to plant destroy pull vp or punish where need should be and that this authority by allusion vnto the same wordes of Scripture is applied to Christes Successour vpon earth affirmed to be left in the Christian Church to be vsed when need shall require and is this so great an impiety thinke yow 40. But he goeth on and saith That next to this he will examine the antiquity of pretended Papall power from the Apostles time downward and then produceth this assertion of ours The Priestes saith the Romish pretence of the new Testament in the Priesthood of Christ haue more authority then that of the old law ouer Kinges to depose them whervnto he adioyneth presently his owne spruse Ministeriall answere in these wordes This is not probable except yow can shew some footinges either of Christ or his blessed Apostles or their Holy Successours in the purer periods of times And is not this answered as from a man of his coat Marke the phrase Of footings in purer periods I will for footinges in this matter referre him to the large demonstrations which out of Scriptures Doctours Fathers Councelles and Ecclesiasticall Histories the Authors by him heere often alledged Carerius Bozius Bellarmine Sanders Salmeron and others doe aboundantly and substancially alledge when he shall haue ouerthrowne or supplanted those footinges of theirs which they 〈◊〉 fix throughout all periods of times from the beginning of Christian Religion vnto our dayes and generall practice therof then may the poore man get to haue some little footing for himself and his cause which hitherto he hath none at all as to any man whosoeuer with any indifferency of iudgment shall read ouer and examine his booke will euidently appear yea though he compare but only that which himself alledgeth heere both in the text and margent which seldome agree in true sense if you marke it well But if yow would examine the Latin authorities cited in the said margent with the originalles of the Authors themselues you shall scarce euer finde them sincerly to agree but that one fraud or other is vsed in their allegation by chopping changing infarcing leauing out and other such sleightes and deceiptes which though the breuity of this Treatise permit me not to examin and lay forth at large in this place yet some we haue touched before and some others shall we haue occasion to note afterwardes and the Reader himself may vpon this warning make some little triall 41. And as for the succession of times which this Author T. M. pretendeth to bring downe from the Apostles dayes not to ours but for a thousand yeares only after Christ wherin he saith that no Pope can be shewed euer to haue had any temporall iurisdiction ouer any Emperour King or temporall Prince though Catholickes doe hold the later six hundred yeares also to be of no lesse force for president of examples in the Church of God then the former thousand yet are the instances so many and euident which may be alledged against his former prescription of the said thousand yeares as doe manifestly cōuince him of folly in that assertion wherin I referre me to the collections and demonstrations therof by the foresaid Authors Carerius Bozius Bellarmine Sanders and others in the places heere quoted in the margent but especially to the three that are not Iesuites to the first for all to wit Carerius that in diuers thinges wrote against the Iesuits whoe in his second booke alleadgeth 10. or 12. examples out of antiquity for prouing his purpose I remit me also to the many learned writinges set forth of late about the cause of the Venetians by Penia Baronius Bouius Eugenius Nardus others shewing the most euident right which the Pope had and hath to commaund them as high Pastor of the Church to recall certaine ciuill lawes made by them in preiudice of the said Church and Ecclesiasticall State which Commandement we doubt not but God will moue that most excellent Cōmon-wealth finally to obey they being knowne to be so good and sound Catholickes as they are though for some time in regard of some temporall respectes they haue deferred to doe the same 42. Many more pointes might be examined in this descēt of his throughout periodes of times but it would be ouerlong and my intention is to giue a tast only or short view for to examine the places cited out of Fathers of diuers ages for proofe of his pretence were time wholy lost For that in effect they say nothing else but that we graunt which is that temporall Princes are to be respected and obeyed by Ecclesiasticall men also but in temporall affaires And as for his examples of
in his English translation which is that which most importeth his simple Reader that looketh not into the Latin and this is that he translateth the former sentence of the Canon thus as before yow haue heard Though he should carry many people with him to hell yet no mortall creature may presume to say why doe yow so But in the Latin neither heere nor in the Canon it selfe is there any such interrogation at all as why doe yow so And therfore I may aske T. M. why doe yow ly so Or why doe yow delude your Reader so Or why do yow corrupt your Author so Or why doe yow translate in English for the abusing of your Reader that which neither your selfe doe set downe in your Latin text nor the Canon it selfe by yow cited hath it at all Is not this wilfull and malicious fraude Wherin when yow shall answere me directly and sincerly it shall be a great discharge of your credit with those who in the meane space will iustly hold yow for a deceauer 59. His fourth answere to the former argument of Gods prouidence is the difference he saith of Kings and Popes in this point for that the Papall power saith he which will be thought spirituall if it be euill may be the bane of soules the power of Princes is but corporall therfore feare them not because they can goe no further then the body Thus he And did euer man heare so wise a reason And cannot euill Kinges and Princes be the cause of corrupting soules also if they should liue wickedly permit or induce others to doe the same And what if they should be of an euill Religion as yow will say Q. Mary and K. Henry were and all Kinges vpward for many hundred yeares togeather who by Statutes and lawes forced men to follow the Religiō of that time did all this touch nothing the soule who would say it but T. M But he goeth forward in his application for that bodily Tyranny saith he worketh in the Godly patience but the spirituall Tyranny doth captiuate the inward soule This now is as good as the former and is a difference without diuersity so farre as concerneth our affaire that a man may with patience if he will resist both the one and the other And euen now we haue seene that when any Pope shal decline from the common receaued faith of Christendome he cannot captiuate other men but is deposed himselfe Wherfore this mans conclusion is very simple saying Therfore heere is need according to Gods prouidence of power to depose so desperate a spirituall euill wherof it is written if the salte want his saltenesse it is good for nothing but to be cast vpon the donghill Marke then that concerning the spirituall that God hath ordeined eiiciatur foras let it be cast out but concerning the temporall resiste not the power 60. Lo heere and doe not these men find Scriptures for all purposes This fellow hath found a text that all spirituall power when it misliketh them must be cast to the donghill and no temporall must be resisted and yet he that shall read the first place by him alleadged out of S. Matthew shall find that the lacke of saltenesse is expresly meant of the want of good life and edification especially in Priestes and Preachers and yet is it no precept as this man would haue it to cast them al to the donghill but that salte leesing his taste is fit for nothing but to that vse S. Paul in like manner to the Romanes doth not more forbid resisting of temporall authority then of spirituall but commaundeth to obey both the one and the other which this man applieth only to temporall which he would haue exalted obeyed and respected and the other contemned and cast to the donghill Oh that he had byn worthy to haue byn the scholler of S. Chrysostome S. Gregory Nazianzen or S. Ambrose before cited who so highly preferred spirituall authority before temporall how would they haue rated him if he would not haue byn better instructed or more piously affected No doubt eiecissent foras they would haue cast him forth to the donghill in deed and there haue left him and so doe we in this matter not meaning to follow him any further except he reasoned more groundedly or dealt more sincerly 61. Yet in one word to answere his comparison we say that both temporall spirituall Magistrates may doe hurte both to body and soule for as the temporall may preiudice also the soule as now hath byn said so may the spirituall afflict in like manner the body as when the Pope or Bishoppes doe burne Heretikes so as in this respect this distinction of T. M. is to no purpose yet doe we also say that when spirituall authority is abused it is more pernicious preiudiciall then the other Quia corruptio optimi est pessima The best thinges become worst when they are peruerted and spirituall diseases especially belonging to faith be more pernicious then corporall for which cause God had so much care to prouide for the preuention therof in his Christian Church for the conseruation of true faith by the authority vnion visibility succession of the said Church and diligence of Doctores Teachers Synodes Councels and other meanes therin vsed and by his assistance of infallibility to the head therof which head though in respect of his eminent authority he haue no Superiours to Iudge or chastise him except in case of heresy as hath byn said yet hath he many and effectuall meanes wherby to be admonished informed stirred vp and moued so as he being but one in the world and furnished with these helpes bringeth farre lesse danger and inconuenience then if all temporall Princes who are many had the like priuiledge and immunity And this euery reasonable man out of reason it selfe will easily see consider 62. As also this other point of no small or meane importance to wit that English Protestantes pretending temporall Princes to be supreame and without Iudge or Superiour in matters of Religion as well as ciuill and secular they incurre a farre greater inconuenience therby then they would seeme to lay vpon vs. For that if any temporall Prince as Supreame in both causes would take vpon him the approbation or admission of any sect or heresy whatsoeuer they haue no remedy at all according to the principles of their doctrine wheras we say the Pope in this case may and must be deposed by force of his subiectes all Christian Princes ioined togeather against him so as in place of one generall Pope which in this case is vnder authority they make so many particuler Popes as are particuler Kings temporall Princes throughout all Christendome that are absolute and consequently without all remedy for offences temporall or spirituall in manners or faith 63. And now let vs imagine what variety of sectes and schismes would haue byn at this day in Christianity if for
consequently that he may assigne a Church to the Arrians Wherto I answere saith S. Ambrose trouble not your selfe O Emperour nor thinke that yow haue Imperiall right ouer those thinges that are diuine doe not exalt your selfe but if yow wil raigne long be subiect to God for it is written that those thinges that belong to God must be giuen to God and to Cesar only those thinges that belōg to Cesar Pallaces appertaine to the Emperour but Churches to the Priest the right of defending publicke walles is committed to yow but not of sacred thinges Thus Doctor Barkley out of S. Ambrose in the very place cited by T. M. which he thought good wholy to pretermit and cut of as not making for his purpose and so had he done more wisely if he had left out also the other authority of Pope Leo which he reciteth in the eight place of authorities out of ancient Fathers in these wordes 18. The eighth Father saith he is Pope Leo writing to a true Catholicke Emperour saying Yow may not be ignorant that your Princely power is giuen vnto yow not only in worldly regiment but also spirituall for the preseruation of the Church as if he said not only in cases temporall but also in spirituall so far as it belongeth to the outward preseruation not to the personall administration of them and this is the substance of our English oath And surther neither doe our Kinges of England chalenge nor subiectes condescend vnto In which wordes yow see two thinges are conteined first what authority S. Leo the Pope aboue eleuen hundred yeares gone ascribed vnto Leo the Emperour in matters spirituall and Ecclesiasticall The second by this mans assertion that neither our Kinges of England chaleng nor doe the subiectes condescend vnto any more in the oath of the Supremacy that is proposed vnto them which if it be so I see no cause why all English Catholickes may not take the same in like manner so far forth as S. Leo alloweth spiritual authority to the Emperour of his time Wherfore it behooueth that the Reader stand attent to the deciding of this question for if this be true which heere he saith our controuersy about the Supremacy is at an end 19. First then about the former point let vs consider how many waies T. M. hath corrupted the foresaid authority of S. Leo partly by fraudulent allegation in Latin and partly by false translation into English For that in Latin it goeth thus as himself putteth it downe in the margent Debes incunctanter aduertere Regiam potestatem non solùm ad mundi regimen sed maximè ad Ecclesiae praesidium esse collatam Yow ought ô Emperour resolutly to consider that your Kingly power is not only giuen vnto yow for gouernment of the world or worldly affaires but especially for defence of the Church and then doe ensue immediatly these other wordes also in S. Leo suppressed fraudulently by the Minister for that they explicate the meaning of the Author Vt ausus nefarios comprimendo quae bene sunt statuta defendas veram pacem his quae sunt turbata restituas To the end that yow may by repressing audacious attemptes both defend those thinges that are well ordeined and decreed as namely in the late generall Councell of Calcedon and restore peace where matters are troubled as in the Citty and Sea of Alexandria where the Patriarch Proterius being slaine and murdered by the conspiracy of the Dioscorian Heretickes lately condemned in the said Councell all thinges are in most violent garboiles which require your imperiall power to remedy compose and compresse the same 20. This is the true meaning of S. Leo his speech to the good and Religious Emperour of the same name as appeareth throughout the whole Epistle heere cited and diuers others Nonne perspicuum est saith he quibus pietas vestra succurrere quibus obuiare ne Alexandrina Ecclesia c. Is it not euident whome your Imperiall piety ought to assist and succour and whome yow ought to resist and represse to the end the Church of Alexandria that hitherto hath byn the house of praier become not a den of theeues Surely it is most manifest that by this late barbarous and most furious cruelty in murdering that Patriarch all the light of heauenly Sacramentes is there extinguished Intercepta est Sacrificij oblatio defecit chrismatis sanctificatio c. The oblation of sacrifice is intermitted the hallowing of Chrisme is ceassed and all diuine misteries of our Religion haue withdrawne themselues from those parricidiall handes of those Heretickes that haue murdered their owne Father and Patriarch Proterius burned his body and cast the ashes into the ayer 21. This then was the cause and occasion wherin the holy Pope Leo did implore the helpe and secular arme of Leo the Emperour for chastising those turbulent Heretiks to which effect he saith that his Kingly power was not only giuen him for the gouernmēt of the world but also for the defence of the Church which our Minister doth absurdly translate not only in worldly regiment but also spirituall for the preseruation of the Church turning ad into in and praesidium into preseruation and then maketh the commentary which before we haue set downe As if he had said quoth he not only in causes temporall but also in spirituall so far as it belongeth to outward preseruation not to the personall administratiō of them 22. And heere now he sheweth himself intangled not only about the assertion of Imperiall power in spirituall matters by that S. Leo saith it is giuen ad praesidium Ecclesiae to the defence of the Church which proueth nothing at all for him but against him rather as yow see and much more in the explication therof to wit what is meant by this authority how farre it strecheth it self wherin truly I neuer found Protestant yet that could cleerly set downe the same so as he could make it a distinct doctrine from ours and giue it that limites which his fellowes would agree vnto or themselues make probable 23. About which matter M. Morton heere as yow see who seemeth no small man amongest them and his booke must be presumed to haue come forth with the approbation and allowance of his Lord and Maister the Archbishop at least saith as yow haue heard that it is no more but such as S. Leo allowed in the Emperour ad Ecclesiae praesidium to the defence of the Church and Church matters and men and for punishing Heretickes that troubled the same And further more T. M. expoundeth the matter saying That this Imperiall Kingly authority in spirituall causes reacheth no further but as it belongeth to outward preseruation not to the personall administration of them And doe not we graunt also the same Or doe not we teach that temporall Princes power ought principally as S. Leo saith to extend it self to the defence ad preseruation
of the Church In this then we agree and haue no difference 24. There followeth in T. M. his assertion heere But not in the personall administration of them to wit of spirituall causes this now is a shift dissembling the difficulty and true State of the question which is in whome consisteth the supreame power to treate iudge and determine in spirituall causes which this man flying as not able to resolue telleth vs only that he cannot personally administer the same which yet I would aske him why For as a Bishop may personally performe all the actions that he hath giuen authority to inferiour Priestes to doe in their functions and a temporall Prince may execute in his owne person if he list any inferiour authority that he hath giuen to others in temporall affaires so if he haue supreame authority spirituall also why may he not in like manner execute the same by himself if he please But of this is sufficiently writteÌ„ of late in the foresaid booke of Answere to Syr Edward Cooke where also is shewed that a farre greater authority spirituall was giuen to King Henry the eight by Parlament then this that T. M. alloweth his Maiesty now for outward preseruation of the Church to wit To be head therof in as ample manner as euer the Pope was or could be held before him ouer England and to King Edward though then but of ten yeares old was granted also by Parlament That he had originally in himself by his Crowne and Scepter all Episcopall authority so as the Bishops and Archbishops had no other power or spirituall authority then was deriued from him to Queene Elizabeth by like graunt of Parlament was also giuen as great authority spirituall and Ecclesiasticall ouer the Church and Clergy of England as euer any person had or could exercise before which was and is another thing then this outward preseruation which T. M. now assigneth hauing pared the same in minced wordes to his purpose to make it seeme little or nothing but dareth not stand to it if he be called to the triall 25. Wherfore this matter being of so great importance and consequence as yow see I doe heere take hold of this his publicke assertion and require that it may be made good to wit that this is the substance meaning only of the English oath and that neither our Kinges of England doe chalenge more nor subiectes required to condescend to more then to grant to their authority for outward preseruation or ad Ecclesiae praesidium as S. Leo his wordes and meaning are and I dare assure him that al Catholickes in England will presently take the oath and so for this point there will be an attonement Me thinkes that such publicke doctrine should not be so publickly printed and set forth without publicke allowance and intention to performe and make it good Yf this be really meant we may easely be accorded if not then will the Reader see what credit may be giuen to any thing they publish notwithstanding this booke commeth forth with this speciall commendation of Published by authority c. 26. And for conclusion of all it may be noted that there hath byn not only lacke of truth and fidelity in citing Pope Leo for Ecclesiasticall Supremacy in Emperours aboue Popes but want of modesty discretion also for so much as no one ancient Father doth more often and earnestly inculcate the contrary for the preheminence of the Sea of Rome then doth S. Leo in so much that Iohn Caluin not being able otherwise to answere him saith that he was tooto desirous of glory dominion and so shifteth him of that way and therfore he was no fit instance for T. M. to bring heere in proofe of spirituall supremacy in temporall Princes 27. But yet in the very next page after he vseth a far greater immodesty or rather perfidy in my opinioÌ„ in calumniation of Cardinall Bellarmine whome he abuseth notably both in allegation exposition translation application and vaine insultation for thus he citeth in his text out of him Ancient generall Councelles saith the Romish pretence were not gathered without the cost of good and Christian Emperours and were made by their consentes for in those dayes the Popes did make supplication to the Emperour that by his authority he would gather Synods but after those times all causes were changed because the Pope who is head in spirituall matters cannot be subiect in temporall Bellarm. lib. 1. de Concil cap. 13. § Habemus ergo 28. And hauing alledged this resolutioÌ„ of Bellarmine the Minister insulteth ouer him in these words Who would thinke this man could be a Papist much lesse a Iesuit how much lesse a Cardinal who thus disableth the title of the Pope granting to vs in these wordes after these times that is after six hundred yeares the truth of purer antiquities challenging Popes to be subiect vnto Christian Emperours And yet who but a Papist would as it were in despite of antiquity defend the degenerate state saying after those times Popes might not be subiect in temporall matters As if he should haue said Then gratious fauour of ancient Christian Emperours then sound iudgment of ancient reuerend Fathers then deuout subiection of ancient holy Popes in summe then ancient purity and pure antiquity adieu But we may not so bastardly reiect the depositum and doctrine of humble subiection which we haue receaued from our Fathers of the first six hundred yeares and not so only but which as your Barkley witnesseth the vniuersall Christian world imbraced with common consent for a full thousand yeares So he 29. And doe yow see how this Minister triumpheth Who would thinke that men of conscience or credit could make such ostentation vpon meere lies deuised by themselues as now wee shall shew all this bragge to be And as for D. Barkley alledged in the last lines let any man read him in the booke and Chapter cited and he will wonder at the impudency of this vaunter for he speaketh no one word of gathering Councells or comparison of spirituall authority betweene the Pope and Emperour concerning their gathering of Councelles or Synodes but of a quite different subiect of taking armes by subiectes against their lawfull temporall Princes And what will our Minister then answere to this manifest calumniation so apparently conuinced out of Doctor Barkley But let vs passe to the view of that which toucheth Cardinall Bellarmine against whome all this tempest is raised 30. First then we shall set downe his wordes in Latin according as T. M. citeth him in his margent Tunc Concilia generalia fiebant saith he non sine Imperatorum sumptibus eo tempore Pontifex subiiciebat se Imperatoribus in temporalibus ideo non poterant inuito Imperatore aliquid agere idâ—irco Pontifex supplicabat Imperatori vt iuberet conuocari Synodum At post illa tempora omnes causae
of words yet in substance is it much for that therby T. M. would make his Reader belieue that Bellarmine cleereth Caluin and Beza from all sortes of errour in this point for that purpose turneth illum into illos and hoc errore into errore that is to say him into them and this errour into any errour at all wheras Bellarmine though in one sense he excuse him yet absolutly doth he condemne him as yow haue heard and no man can deny but that his Latin wordes were heere fraudulently and perfidiously alledged and mangled by T. M. for that he could not doe it but wittingly and of purpose and yet forsooth this man will not Equiuocate as he saith for a world though lye he will manifestly for much lesse as yow see And so much of this vntill we come to examine the matter more largely afterward in the third Part of this Chapter 58. And heere I will passe ouer many thinges that might be noted out of the sequent pages mamely 30. 31. 34. where he doth so peruert and abuse both the wordes discourse and sense of diuers Authors alledged by him as is not credible to him that doth not compare them with the bookes themselues from whence they are taken As for example Royardus the Franciscane Friar is brought in with commendation of an honest Friar for that he saith that a King when he is made by the people can not be deposed by them againe at their pleasure which is the same doctrine that all other Catholickes doe hold so long as he conteineth himself within the nature of a King for that otherwise which is the question in cōtrouersy Royard himself saith parendum 〈◊〉 non esse that he is not to be obeyed but this is not to be iudged by the people and their mutiny as Protestant Doctors teach 59. And to like effect he citeth a discourse though most brokenly alledged out of Bishop Cunerus writing against the Rebells of Flanders and testifying that it lieth not in the peoples hand to reiect their Prince at their pleasure as those Protestant subiectes did and then M. Morton as though he had achieued some great victory triumpheth exceedingly saying That forsomuch as Friars in our Councells haue no voice but only Bishops he hath brought forth a Bishop against vs whome for that the moderate Answerer had named a little before this man scornfully telleth him Caesarem appellasti ad Caesarem ibis yow haue appealed to Cunerus and now he shal be your Iudge against yow And is not this great folly and insolency for that Cunerus in all that his booke saith nothing against vs but altogeather for vs to represse the Rebellion in Flanders as hath byn signified And secōdly notwithstanding all this exact obediēce which both he and we prescribe and require at subiectes handes towardes their lawfull Princes he hath a speciall Chapter which is the third after this alledged heere by T. M. wherin he doth expressely largly proue that in some cases when Princes fall into intollerable disorders there is authority left in the common-wealth and Church of Christ to restraine and remoue them What falshood is this then to alledge Authors thus directly against their owne sense meaning and whole drift doth this become a Minister of simple truth Is this for a man that somuch abhorreth Equiuocation 60. I let passe as trifles in this very place but yet such as shew a guilty minde and meaning that he citing the booke of Alexander Carerius a Doctor of the Canon law in Padua which he wrote of late de Potestate Romani 〈◊〉 putteth in of his owne contra huius temporis Haereticos against the Heretickes of this time which are not in the title of that booke and then wheras the said Author naming or citing many other writers to be of his opinion doth say nuperrimè verò Celsus Mancinus in tract de Iuribus Principatuum c. and last of all Celsus Mancinus doth hold the same in a certaine Treatise of the rightes of principalities this man to frame vnto himself some matter of insultation turneth verò into verè and then playeth ridiculously vpon his owne fiction in these wordes Carerius citeth another called Celsus by interpretation high or lofty and therfore insignes him with verè Celsus as truly so named and so truly he may be if we iudge him by the loftines of his stile and conclusion So he And doe yow see this folly Or will yow thinke it rather folly then falshood that could not discerne betweene verò and verè Or not be able to iudge by the contexture of Carerius his speech it selfe that it could not by apt construction be verè if he had lighted vpon a corrupt coppy as he could not for that there is but one and that hath very plainly verò and consequently all this Commentary of Thomas 〈◊〉 is out of his owne inuention And where now is the assurance of his vpright conscience protested to his Maiesty in his Epistle dedicatory where is his simplicity in Christ Iesus where his naked innocency Can this be ignorance can this be done but of purpose and consequently by a guilty conscience what may the hearer belieue of all he saith when euery where he is found intangled with such foolish treachery But let vs proceed 61. There followeth within two leaues after a heape not only of falshoodes but also of impudencies For wheras his Aduersary the moderate Answerer had said that not only Kinges but Popes also for Heresy by the Canon lawes were to be deposed he Answereth thus The Authors of the doctrine of deposing Kinges in case of Heresy doe professe concerning Popes that they cannot possibly be Heretickes as Popes and consequently cannot be deposed Not saith Bellarmine by any power Ecclesiasticall or tēporall no not by all Bishops assembled in a Councell Not saith Carerius though he should doe any thing preiudiciall to the vniuersall State of the Church Not saith Azorius though he should neglect the Canons Ecclesiasticall or peruert the Lawes of Kinges Not saith Gratians glosse though he should carry infinite multitudes of soules with him to hell and these forenamed Authors doe auouch for the confirmation of this doctrine the vniuersall consent of Romish Deuines and Canonistes for the space of an hundred yeares So he And in these wordes are as many notorious and shamelesse lies as there are assertions and Authors named by him for the same 62. For first the foure writers which he mentioneth there in the text to wit Bellarmine Carerius Azorius and Gratian doe expressely cleerly and resolutly hold the contrary to that he affirmeth out of them for that they teach and proue by many argumentes that Popes both may fall into Heresies and for the same be deposed by the Church or rather are ipso facto deposed and may be so declared by the Church and their wordes heere guilfully alledged
and equiuocall as you see they doe all determine our controuersy most cleerly and confound Mortons vanity most apparently that saith and auoucheth No one Iota to be found in all Scripture no one example in all antiquity for the iust proofe or colour of any such Equiuocation or mixt proposition 32. I should vtterly weary my Reader if I would follow all or the greatest Part of that which may be sayed in this behalfe for that alwaies commonly all Prophecies that are minatory and doe threaten punishment haue still some secret-reseruation if they repent not as that of Isay to King Ezechias Haec dicit Dominus dispone Domui tuae quia morieris tu non viues This 〈◊〉 our Lord dispose of thy houshold for thou shall dy and shalt not liue and yet he liued 〈◊〉 yeares after If therfore the Prophet had byn demaunded shall not Ezechias liue any longer he had answered no vpon what had fallen the negatiue no If only vpō the wordes vttered it had byn false for he liued longer but if vpon that togeather with the reseruation in the meaning of the holy Ghost it was true And the like may be said of the Prophecy of Ionas Adhuc quadraginta dies Niniue subuerietur There remaine but fourty dayes before Niniue shall be destroyed so infinite other places Wherfore in this Th. 〈◊〉 was greatly ouerseene in making of confident a chaleng as before yow haue heard THE THIRD POINT OF THIS CHAPTER CONCERNING Other Scriptures alleadged And pretended to be answered by Thomas Morton §. 3. 33. BVt now we must come to a greater conflict which is to examine how our aduersary hath answered certaine examples out of Scripture alleadged as he saith for I haue not yet seene the writing it selfe by a Catholicke Treatise in written-hand intercepted wherby the lawfulnes of this kind of Equiuocation is auouched by his answere to those that are cited by himselfe we may imagine what he will be able to say to these other which haue byn here produced by vs and innumerable others that might be alleadged Examples out of the old Testament First then out of the old Testament he produceth two examples only the one of Iacob that told his Father that he was his eldest sonne Esau which in deed he was not and consequently we must graunt that either he spake false lied which the ancient Fathers S. Ambrose S. Augustine and others doe piously deny or els that he had some reserued further sense in his mind wherby his said speach might be verified and consequently his proposition be ambiguous and Equiuocall 34. But herunto T.M. answereth first that Cardinall Caëtan and diuers other learned men doe hold that Iacob is inexcusable from some sort of 〈◊〉 in this his speach and for this he alleadgeth the testimony of Pererius a Iesuite in his Commentaries vpon Genesis who disputing this matter at large in fiue seuerall disputations whether Iacob did ly or sinne at all in this speach saith that the said Caïétan with some other moderne writers doe hold that it may be graunted that the said Patriarch did commit some veniall sinne by making an officious ly in that behalfe But what doth 〈◊〉 himselfe agree to that opinion No truly But maketh this title of his last disputation therabout The common sentence of Deuines saith he is declared and defended which doth excuse and free Iacob from all manner of lying in his foresaid speach and then beginning with S. Augustine who in diuers partes of his workes doth most earnestly defend the Patriarch Iacob in this behalfe by many and manifold reasons and authorities both from all ly and sinne doth shew and declare that his speach was figuratiue and not deceiptfull conteyning mysterium non mendacium a mystery and not a ly To which effect one place out of his booke against lying shall serue for all Non est mendacium saith he quando silendo absconditur verum sed cùm loquendo promitur falsum Iacob autem quòd matre fecit auctore vt patrem fallere videretur si diligenter fideliter attendatur non est mendacium sed mysterium c. It is no ly when a truth is concealed by silence but when a falsity by speach is vttered that which Iacob did by the persuasion of his mother as though he would deceaue his Father if it be diligently and faithfully considered was no ly but a mystery 35. And then a little after in the same Chapter talking of such misterious speaches that seeme to say one thing and yet doe meane another he saith thus Vera non falsa dicuntur quoniam vera non falsa significantur seu verbo seu facto quae significantur enim vtique ipsa dicuntur putantur autem mendacia quoniam non ea quae vera significantur dicta intelliguntur sed ea quae falsa sunt dicta esse creduntur In a mysterious speach true thinges and not false are spoken for that true thinges and not false are signified either by the word or fact that hath a mystery in it for that in deed those thinges are spoken which are mysteriously signified by the speach but they seeme to be lies for that all men vnderstād not those things that are truly signified by the speach but rather those thinges that are false are thought to be spoken So S. Augustine Wherby is euident what he meaneth by a mysterious speach to wit when one sense is gathered by the wordes another sense truly signified which the naturall signification of the wordes doe not beare and therby a mysterious proposition must be called also Equiuocall in the sense that now wee handle and consequently also S. Augustine must needes be graunted to admit this kind of Equiuocation without lying wherby he so earnestly defendeth this Patriarch from all kind of ly whatsoeuer 36. And with S. Augustine doe concurre in this defence of holy Iacob both S. Hierome S. Chrysostome S. Gregory Theodoret S. Ambrose S. Isidorus S. Bede and of later writers Rupertus Gratian Alexander Halensis Petrus Lombardus S. Thomas and almost infinite others so as for Th. Morton to creepe out now vnder the shaddow of Caïētan and two or three other moderne Authors more against the whole streme and torrent of so many ancient Fathers and Catholike Deuines is a ridiculous euasion and worthy of Thomas Mortons defence and full satisfaction 37. His second example out of the old Testament is that of Hieremy the Prophet set downe by me before in my seauenth Chapter and fourth Consideration therof which this Minister the better not to be vnderstood relateth only in these few obscure wordes out of his aduersaries answere Such Equiuocation saith he did the Prophet Ieremy vse Ier. 38. when he tooke aduise of the King This relation is briefe abrupt and darke as yow see but we haue declared the matter with the circumstances in the former place to wit how
wrought by him so myraculously as both the said S. 〈◊〉 and S. Bede after him and all other ancient historiographers as Malmesbury 〈◊〉 and the rest do call him our English Apostle of whose many and great miracles wrought in that worke not only the said Authors but S. Gregory himselfe doth write a speciall narration to Eulogius Archbishop of Alexandria yea 〈◊〉 Fox himselfe in his Acts and Monumentes albeit not a little imbued with M. Iewels spirit against this holy man for that he planted Catholicke Romane Religion in England yet writing the story of the conuersion of Ethelbert our first Christian English King he hath these words at lēgth When the King had well considered the honest conuersation of their life and moued with their miracles wrought through Gods hād by them he heard them more gladly and lastly by their wholsome exhortations and example of Godly life he was by them conuerted and Christened in the yeare of Christ aboue said 596. and the six and thirtith of his Reigne So Fox Whervnto I may add a testimony of much greater credit out of S. Bede that liued neere vnto his time recordeth the very Epitaph remayning in his dayes written vpon S. Augustines tombe in these wordes 34. Heere lyeth Blessed Augustine the first Archbishop of Canterbury who was sent hither by S. Gregory Bishop of Rome and strengthened of God by working of miracles who conuerted King Ethelbert and his Realme from the worshipping of Idolls to the faith of Christ. And thus much of the sanctity of this blessed man out of their testimony that liued with him or not long after him But now what writeth M. Iewell of him and with what truth and conscience He was a man saith he as it was iudged by them that saw him and knew him neither of Apostolicke spirite nor any way worthy to be called a Saint but an Hypocrite a super stitious man cruell bloody and proud aboue measure and for proofe of all this he cyteth only in his margent 〈◊〉 of Monmouth in his history of the Britans which Ieffrey dyed in the dayes of King Henry the 2. very neere 600. yeares after S. Augustine and almost 500. after S. Bede and writeth no such thing at all of S. Augustine as heere is set downe by M. Iewell but rather much in his commendacion with note of the emulous dealing of the British Bishops against him for the hatred they bare to the English nation and their conuersion 35. So as heere now M. Iewels assertion is not only false and impious against so venerable a man as Augustine was but must needs be also against his owne conscience this in diuers pointes For first he knew that there was no Author extant that wrote in his dayes saw him and knew him but only S. Gregory who writeth 〈◊〉 in his commendations as yow haue heard Secondly he knew that S. Bede who liued in the very next age after him and all other English Authors succeeding for the space of eyght or nine hundred yeares till our time did highly cōmend him in their workes and especially the forenamed Malmesbury Huntington that liued with Ieffrey Moumouth And lastly he knew that this only witnes the said Ieffrey had no such thing And what then will yow say to this Equiuocation may not M. Mortons Epithets of hellish heathenish impious and sacrilegious haue place heere 36. The fourth example may be those wordes of M. Iewell in the Apology of England writing against the Pope Let him in Gods name saith he call to mynd let him remember that they be of his owne Canonists which haue taught the people that fornication betwene single folke is not synne as though they had fetched that doctrine from 〈◊〉 in Terence whose words are It is no synne belieue me for a yong man to haunt harlotts And for this he cyteth in his margent Io. de Magistris li. de Temperantia And who would not thinke but that this accusation were sure for so much as it is so opprobriously vrged and insulted vpon But now I pray yow considerthe particulers and therwithal what a conscience this man had 37. First then Io. de Magistris was Martinus de Magistris not a Canonist but a Schoole deuine that wrote a Treatise De Temperantia Luxuria so as it seemeth that he that gaue this charge eyther had not read the Author himselfe which I suppose M. Iewell will not confesse or else meant to dazle the eyes of his Reader by naming Iohn for Martin Secondly this Author in his said Treatise as the fashion of Scholemen is propoundeth this question Vtrum simplex fornicatio sit peccatum mortale whether simple fornication be a mortall synne and according to vse of Schooles saith Arguitur quòd non It is argued or reasoned for the negatiue parte thus and so 〈◊〉 downe some arguments for that syde by way of obiections which afterward he solueth and cometh to conclude absolutly in the affirmatiue parte by six conclusions that simple fornication is not only synne but mortall synne for that it is forbidden by Gods law and excludeth from the Kingdome of heauen as S. Paul affirmeth And now lett any man consider of the conscience of him that auoucheth in print the other slaunder Would Maister Garnet or M. South-well or any other Catholicke man accused for lawfull Equiuocation euer haue made so notorious a lye against their owne consciencies Let our aduersaryes bring forth but two examples 38. The fifth example shall be also out of his wordes in the same Apologie writing against the reading of Saincts lyues in the Church The old Councell of Carthage saith he commaundeth nothing to be read in Christs congregation but the Canonicall Scriptures but these men read such things in their Churches as themselues know to be starke lyes and fond fables So he But now let vs see whether it be more probable that we know to be lyes those thinges which we read in our Churches or that he knew to be a lye that which heere he relateth and printeth in his booke For if he read the Canon it selfe which he mentioned which is the forty and seauenth of the third Councell of Carthage wherin Saint Augustine was present then must he needs know that he lyeth indeed egregiously for that the Canō beginneth thus Item placuit vt praeter Scripturas Canonicas nihil in Ecclesia legatur sub nomine diuinarum Scripturarum sunt autem Canonicae Scripturae Genesis Exodus c. 〈◊〉 ludith Hester Machabaeorum libri duo c. It hath seemed good to this Councell that nothing be read in the Church vnder the name of diuine Scripture but only such as be Canonicall Scriptures in deed as are Genesis Exodus c. The two bookes of the Machabees Tobias Iudith Esther and the rest Wherby we see that in alleadging these words that nothing be read in the Church but Canonicall Scriptures is guylfully
last words M. Iewell leaueth out of purpose to couer and conceale the meaning of our Sauiour and addeth of himselfe quod vni dico which our Sauiour hath not And thirdly he peruerteth wholy the meaning of Christ which was to perswade attention and watchfulnes about the day of Iudgement and applyeth it against the preheminence of S. Peter his Authority which he well knew to be farre from our Sauiours meaning And moreouer there ensueth an other most grosse absurditie which is that our Sauiour speaking to all euery one of them that were present when he saith vigilate be watchfull it followeth I say that in M. Iewels sense and application of his wordes euery one to whome the word vigilate apperteyneth which are all sortes and sexes of people both there 〈◊〉 and absent should haue as great spirituall authority ouer the Church of God as S. Peter quia quod vni dico omnibus dico whatsoeuer I say to only Peter to wit that he must feede that he is the rocke and the like I say to all men And now let any indifferent man consider with what conscience M. Iewell could feigne Christ to say as he alledgeth For either he had read the place in S. Marke which he cyteth or had not If not it was great negligence the matter and subiect being so weighty as it was and if he did and yet alledged it quite otherwise then there it is found what shall we say of this 〈◊〉 dealing What of such lying and perfidious Equiuocation who in this can excuse or defend him for a man of any conscience at all 43. And yet was he forsooth the Father and chiefe maister of all 〈◊〉 Caluinian doctrine in Englād which was first established by Queene Elizabeth at her entring for that Zuinglianisme had bene only admitted in King Edwardes dayes he was not only held for the chiefe preacher and teacher therof but for the publicke Champion also to defend it and therfore as the doctrine was false so must he haue a more speciall eminent gift of cunning and falshood to beare it out then other men for that others were to take 〈◊〉 eius of his fulnesse in that science And albeit he had diuers brethren also at that time that did participate with him of that spirite in their writings as M. Horne Bishop of VVinchester by name and some others yet were they esteemed farre inferior to M. Iewell in this point especially in the elegancy of cōueyance though in will and substance they might be equall And so if yow looke vpon six hundred fourescore and ten vntruthes which Doctor Stapleton gathered out of one worke of the said M. Horne written against Doctor Fecknam about the oath of the supremacy yow shall fynd as many and grosse lyes as any lightly of M. Iewell but not so sleightly 〈◊〉 nor smoothly faced out 44. As for example where he auoucheth flatly that the cōuersion of our King 〈◊〉 of Britanie and of his whole Realme establishing therof was done without any knowledge or consent of Pope Eleutherius is so grosse alye as it is refutable by all historyes from that tyme to ours yea by Iohn Fox Bale themselues who were greatest enemyes to all Popes So as this matter was not handsomely carryed And againe in the same worke M. Horne pretending to alledge some temporall lawyers to his purpose against the Popes Ecclesiasticall preheminence in England cyteth one Broughton as saying That the king 〈◊〉 Supreme in his Kingdome and saffereth no equall or superior and other such pointes which are not denyed when speach is of temporall men and affayres and he leaueth out diuers other passages in the very same Author and place which he cyteth expresly affirming that in spirituall affayres the Pope Bishops are to Iudge not temporall men which is the very decision of the Controuersie 45. And in this kind I might alledge an excefsiue multitude both out of the one the other Bishops workes but that the repetition therof would be ouer tedious albeit it fell not out without Gods speciall prouidence in that beginning that so notorious falsityes should be vttered and published to the world by these chiefe ring-leaders for that sundry principall Protestants that were curious to read these books in that 〈◊〉 entrance of heresye were conuerted made Catholicke by this speciall and principall motiue that they 〈◊〉 so many notorious and inexcusable vntruthes vttered by these principall men in their writinges at that day wherof I my selfe knew sundry in some other place haue named three one in the vniuersity of 〈◊〉 M. VVilliam 〈◊〉 a learned and zealous preacher of the Protestant doctrine the other in the court Syr Thomas Copley made afterward Lord by the King of France a great follower of my Lord of 〈◊〉 and feruent in the new profession as being extraordinarily well seene for a man of his calling in controuersies himself the third in London M. Doctor Stephens Secretary to M. Iewell and well seene at that time in Deuinity and the learned tongues all which made change of their Religion though to their great temporal losses vpon the great auersion they tooke at the discouery of the wilfull falshood of these chiefe teachers of new Religion whervpon the first of the aboue named three maketh this marginall note in a booke of his written against M. Doctor VVhitaker The incredible lying saith he and falsisication vsed by the 〈◊〉 writers of our time are a great motiue to the Catholicke 〈◊〉 And then in the text he declareth the matter further in these wordes 46. I know many saith he who hauing byn brought 〈◊〉 not in Catholike Religion but in heresie with M. 〈◊〉 and continuing a long tyme in the same and 〈◊〉 it with all their hartes yet comming afterwards to better iudgement through the grace of God vpon consideration of such lying writers as 〈◊〉 VVhitakers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to wit Maister 〈◊〉 Maister Horne c. haue byn so altered as they haue detested his ghospell euen to hel gates of which number I confesse my selfe to be one So he 47. And surely if we consider the speciall learning and vertu of this man and how he had read exactly all writhers that could be gotten of the Protestants side of what sort or sect soeuer as by his writings doth well appeare as also with what singuler patiēce humility and contentement of mynd he lyued for many yeares after in voluntary banishment and pouerty for loue of the Catholicke Religion wheras by accommodating himselfe to the current of the tyme he might haue receyued great prefermēt in his country and was in the way towards them when he lefte the same he will say that this motiue of lying Equiuocation in Protestant writers had made deepe and strong impression in him in deed And thus much for the Bishops now let vs looke into the like spirite of Ministers in this behalfe The vse of Equiuocating in English Protestant-Ministers §.
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
c. by his letters patentes with the counsell and consent of the Bishops and Counsellours of his nation did giue to the 〈◊〉 of Abindon in Barkshire and to one Ruchinus Abbot of that Monastery a certayne portiō of his land to wit fifteene Mansians in a place called by the country-men Culnam with all profittes and commodityes great and small appertayning thervnto for euerlasting inheritance And that the foresaid Ruchinus c. should be quiet from all right of the Bishop for euer so as the inhabitantes of that place shall not be depressed for the tyme to come by the yoke of any Bishop or his officers but that in all euentes of thinges and controuersyes of causes they shall be subiect to the decree of the Abbot of the said Monastery so as c. And then doth M. Attorney continue his speach thus This Charter was pleaded in 1. H. 7. and vouched by Stanford as at large appeareth which Charter graunted aboue 850. yeares sithence was after confirmed per Eduinum Britaniae Anglorum Regem Monarcham anno Domini 955. by which appeareth that the King by this Charter made in Parliament for it appeareth to be made by the Counsell and consent of his Bishops Senators of his Kingdome which were assembled in Parlament did discharge and exempt the said Abbot from the Iurisdiction of the Bishop c. And by the same Charter did grant to the same Abbot Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction within his said Abbey which Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction being deriued from the Crowne continued vntill the dissolution of the said Abbey in the raigne of King Henry the eight So he 85. And by this yow may see what an important conclusion he doth inferre of the Kinges supreme iurisdiction in spirituall affayres at that time Whervnto the Deuine comming to answere and supposing that M. Attorney would not falsity or belye his Authors hauing protested most solemnly fol. 40. of his his booke that he had cyted truly the very wordes and textes of the lawes resolutions iudgmentes and actes of Parlament all publicke and in print without any inference argument or amplification quoting particularly the bookes yeares leaues Chapters and other such like certayne references as euery man at his pleasure may see and read them c. The answerer I say hearing this formall protestation and supposing besides that the man would haue some respect to his credit and honour in this behalfe granting all as it lay answered the same as yow may see in his booke but now vpon better search it falleth out that this whole 〈◊〉 was falsely alledged by M. Attorney in the very point of the principall controuersy in hand about the Kinges spiritual Iurisdiction for that whatsoeuer the Charter did ascribe expresly to the Pope his Authority the Attorney suppressing the true wordes relateth it as proceeding from the King temporall authority of his Crowne For proofe wherof I shall set downe the very wordes of my learned friends letter out of England about this point after view taken of the law-bookes themselues and then let any man say how farre M Attorney is to be credited in any thing he writeth or speaketh against Catholickes 86. As concerning saith he the Charter of King Kenulphus for the Sanctuary of the Monastery of Abindon yow must know that M. Attorney hath egregiously abused his Reader in that and other points For the Case standeth thus That in the first yeare of King Henry the 7. Humphrey Stafford was attainted by Act of Parlament of high 〈◊〉 and tooke Sanctuary first in Colchester in Essex after fled to Culnam and tooke Sanctuary in the Abbey of Abindon and being taken from thence brought vnto the Tower of London from thence brought vnto the Kings-bench he pleaded that he was drawne by force out of the said Sanctuary of Culnam and prayed his Counsell to plead that poynt which by all the Iudges of both benches was graunted vnto him And so they pleaded in this manner 87. Idem Humphridus per Consilium suum dixit quod Kenulphus Rex Merciorum per litteras suas patentes consilio consensu Episcoporum Senatorum gentis suae largitus fuit Monasterio de Abindon ac cuidam Ruchino tunc Abbati Monasterij illius quandam ruris sui portionem id est quindecim Mansias in loco qui a ruricolis tunc nuncupabatur Culnam cum omnibus vtilitatibus ad 〈◊〉 pertinentibus tam in magnis quà m in modicis rebus in aeternam haereditatem Et quod praedictus Ruchinus ab omni Regis obstaculo Episcopali iure in sempiternum esset quietus vt inhabitatores eius nullius Regis aut ministrorum suorum Episcopiue aut suorum Officialium iugo inde deprimerentur sed in cunctis rerum euentibus discussionibus causarum Abbatis Monasterij praedicti decreto subijcerentur 〈◊〉 quod c. And heere ceaseth M. Attorney leauing out as yow see in his recitall the wordes that go before ab omni Regis obstaculo c. that the monastery should be free from all obstacle of the King as also these wordes vt inhabitatores eius nullius Regis aut 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 deprimantur that the inhabitants be not opprest with any yoke of any King or his ministers wherby is euident that the King in his Charter did for his part giue exemptions from temporall royall power but especially the fraude is seen by cutting of the wordes that do ensue which decyde the whole controuersy which are these Et etiam allegauit vltra quod Leo tunc Papa concessit dicto Abbati dictas 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Et quod Eduinus tunc Britaniae Anglorum Rex Monarchus concessit quod praefatum Monasterium omnis terrenae seruitutis esset liberum quae 〈◊〉 praedecessoribus suis Catholicis videlicet à dicto Sancto Leone Papa dicto Rege Kenulpho c. Et quod virtute litter arum bullarum praedictarum tempore confectionis earundem eadem villa de Culnam fuit Sanctuarium locus priuilegiatus c. Which in English is thus And moreouer the said Humphrey Stafford by his Counsell alledged furthet for himselfe that Pope Leo had graunted vnto the said Abbot the said immunityes and priuiledges that K. Edwin then King monarch ouer all the English in Britany had graunted that the said Monastery should be free from all earthly seruitude which by his Catholike predecessors to wit the said holy Pope 〈◊〉 the said King Kenulphus was graunted and that at the tyme of the making of the foresaid letters patentes and Bulles the said village or towne of Culnam was a Sanctuary and priuiledged place by vertue of the said patents and Bulles 88. This is word for word the very plea of Humphrey Stafford for the Sāctuary of the Monastery of Abindon as it was pleaded by his learned Counsell in law euen as it is recorded in the reportes of the yeares of King Henry the seauenth as
they are printed by Pinson the law-printer in the tyme of King Henry the eight before the Protestant religion came vp And the Lord Brooke in his Abridgement of the law in the tytle of Corone placito 129. doth accordingly sett downe the same case with mencyoning of the Bulles of Pope 〈◊〉 for the said immunities and priuiledges But all the Protestant editions in the tyme of the late Queene Elizabeth printed by Tottell and 〈◊〉 wert haue committed a notable tricke of falsificatiō in leauing out altogeathcr these markable wordes That Leo then Pope did graunt the said immunityes and priuiledges and also those wordes of King Edwyn which of his Catholike 〈◊〉 S. Leo King Kenulphus were granted c. And againe By force of the letters and Bulles aforesaid the said village of Culnam was a Sanctuary and place priuiledged 89. And hereby allois euident that the King did not by his Charter in Parliament for it appeareth to be made by the Counsell and consent of his Bishops and Senators not by Parlament as M. Attorney doth misreport it neyther was there any Parlament held at that tyme in the land or many hundred yeares after for as it appeareth by Holinsheds Cronicle pag. 34. the first vse of Parlament in England was in the tyme of King Henry the first it is cleare I say that the King did not discharge and exempt the said Abbot from Iurisdiction of the Bishop nor did graunt vnto the said Abbot Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction within the said Abbey neyther had that Abbot any Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction deriued from the Crowne But as it appeareth by the authenticke reporte of the Case the Pope and the King did both ioyne in making the said Sanctuary according vnto their seuerall powers authorityes So that the exemption from Episcopall Iurisdiction did proceed duely from the graunt of Pope Leo as likewise the exemption from all regall and temporall Iurisdiction proceed from the Charter of King Kenulphus Note also that King Edwins grant was only that the said Monastery should be free from all earthly seruitude and toucheth not any spirituall immunities or iurisdiction at all 90. Thus farre my friend out of England And by this now yow may see how well M. Attorney hath obserued his foresaid protestation that he had cyted the very wordes and textes of the lawes without any inference argumēt or amplification at all And this being my friends aduertisement from England with like obseruation of many other places cyted by M. Attorney with like fidelity I thought good to produce this one amongst many being the first in order for a taste in this place reseruing the rest to a fitter or at leastwise to a second Edition of the foresaid answere of the Catholicke Deuyne where euery thing may be referred to his due place And with this will I end both this Chapter and the whole Booke THE CONCLVSION OF THE VVHOLE VVORKE VVith a briefe exhortation vnto Catholickes not to use the liberty of Equiuocation euen in lawfull cases but where some urgent occasion induceth them therunto CHAP. XIII AND now gentle reader hauing brought this Treatise to an end and iustified as I hope our Catholicke doctrine in the eyes and Iudgments of all indifferent men from the two odious imputations of Rebellion and Equiuocation iniuriouslie cast vpon the same by the malice of Thomas Morton there remayneth nothing but that I conclude this our small labour with an exhortation to all Catholicke people not only to abstayne from the first which is vtterly vnlawfull I meane the attempting of any thing contrary to their loyall dutyes in subiection be their pressures neuer so great but also from the practice and frequent vse of the second though in some cases most lawfull as abundantly hath byn 〈◊〉 except some vrgent occasion or obligation either of defence of innocency secresy right iustice or the auoyding of open wrong do force them to the contrary For as the holy Apostle in two seuerall places affirmeth to the Corinthians in cases not much vnlike to this about matter of scandall Omnia mihi licent sed non omnia expediunt All thinges are lawfull vnto me touching meates and other such thinges but all are not expedient to be practised And againe Omnia 〈◊〉 licent sed non omnia edificant All things are lawfull vnto me but all things do not edifye So I say in this case that albeit a man may without breach of truth or offence of almighty God in certayne cases equiuocate or vse a doubtfull speach for a good and necessary end either in oath or out of oath though the hearer doe not alwayes vnderstand it or be deceyued therwith and that many holy men haue done the same yea Christ himselfe that is the example and paterne of all holinesse and truth in speach as by many examples before at large hath byn declared yet considering the tymes and condition therof wherin Catholicks at this day liue in England the offence and scandall which Protestants and some others that vnderstand not the lawfulnes therof or will not vnderstand the same do receyue or raise thervpon my wish and counsell to Catholickes should be to vse the benefit of this liberty most sparingly euen in lawfull thinges and neuer but vpon great and vrgent 〈◊〉 and occasions 2. And the reasons of this my wish and counsell are principally the two already touched The one the auoyding of scandall euen with the Aduersary himself and that as Catholicke Religion is the only true in doctrine so the practice also therof in conuersation should not only be in all truth and sincerity re ipsa in very deed but in opinion likewise and estimation of others in so much as the word of a Catholicke man ought to weigh more then the oath of an other and the oath or promise of a Catholicke more then any band or obligation of an other which for the most parte I doubt not but is so already taken in England For that albeit by this doctrine before declared about Equiuocation men do know that Catholickes in certayne cases may vse the same yet know they also that the said cases are straitly limited with many exceptions and that in common conuersation as in buying selling traffique and the like Equiuocation may not be vsed to the 〈◊〉 or preiudice of any man and that in Iudgments and tribunals where most vse therof doth fall out all lawyers Iudges and Magistrates do know in Catholicke Countryes wherin the 〈◊〉 may vse Equiuocation wherin not and consequently truth Iustice can suffer no wrōg therby And moreouer they know as before hath byn said that the obligation of a Catholicke man is so great to auoyde all kynd of lyes whether veniall or mortall as for the gayning of a world no one is wittingly and willingly to be committed which accōpt I doubt whether men of other sectes and Religion do make or noe So as though already I perswade my self that
a thousand and six hundred yeares which Christian Religion hath endured this doctrine of liberty and immunity of temporall Princes to belieue hold and defend what they list had byn receaued and practised for good and currant vnto this time From which singuler inconuenience danger and desperate desolation the doctrine beliefe of the only Bishop of Rome his Supreame authority and exercise therof hath chiefly deliuered vs as to all men is euident And this only reason were sufficient in all reason to refute this mans ydle confutation of that Supremacy heere pretended which confutation standing vpon so feeble and ridiculous groundes as now in part yow haue seene supported principally by certaine new shifts and iugglinges scarcely vsed by any before by casting out shaddowes of our Catholicke Authors sayinges and sentences as making for him though I meane to passe no further in impugning his said grondes which are of so small weight as yow haue seene yet doe I not thinke it amisse to adde another seuerall Chapter for better discouering of the said iugglinges vsed by him in this short Treatise not conteyning much aboue twenty 〈◊〉 in all For by this little yow may gather what a volume might be framed of his false dealings if we would dwell any longer therin A BRIEF VIEVV OF CERTAINE NOTORIOVS FALSE AND FRAVDVLENT DEALINGS VSED BY T.M. In this his short seuerall Treatise against the Popes Supremacy As also sundry examples of the like proceeding in the former Part of his deceiptfull Reply CHAP. VI. IT is the saying both of Philosophers and Deuines Bonum nisi bene fiat bonum non esse A good thing except it be well rightly done is not good As for example if a man would relieue the necessity of poore and distressed people with almes gotten by stealth or robbery albeit giuing of alms of it selfe be a good thing yet for that it is not heere lawfully performed in this case it is not good nor lawfull So M. Thomas Morton taking vpon him to confute the Popes Supremacy ouer Kinges and Princes thought no doubt to doe a good worke therin at least-wise bonum vtile a profitable good thing for himself in regard of some fauour or beneuolence which he might hope to gaine with some Prince therby to his preferment but not performing the same by lawfull meanes of truth but of sleightes not withstanding to his Maiesty he tearmeth himself the Minister of simple truth though it should proue vtile yet not honestum that is for his gaine but not for his credit or conscience and consequently deserueth rather disgrace then estimation euen with those whome most he desired to gratify in that affaire 2. For demonstration wherof though I suppose to haue said sufficient before both in the second fourth and fifth Chapters by occasion of matters that occurred in discussion betweene vs yet now hauing determined with my self to passe on no further in the particuler refutatiō of this his Treatise as a thing not worth the time to be lost therin and handled far better by diuers of his owne side before him namely by M. Iewell M. Horne D. Iohn Reinoldes M. Bilson and some others in their bookes of this subiect I thought good notwithstanding for some kinde of recompence of this my breuity in answering so simple and idle a Treatise to ad some few examples more in this place of other corruptions and falsifications practized by him in this his confutation not of all for that alone would require a great booke but of some competent number wherby the Reader may ghesse at the rest his Maiesty take some proofe of the extraordinary vanity of that vaunt wherwith he presented himself to his Highnes in the very first entrance of his Epistle dedicatory in so constant assurance of an vpright conscience to vse his owne wordes as that he would willingly remit that iust aduantage against his aduersary which the difference betweene a Minister of simple truth and a professed Equiuocator did offer vnto him Now then let vs enter to the examination it self 3. Wherin only the Reader is to be aduertised that wheras this man by a new deuise of his owne doth pretend to put downe the sayings of our Catholicke writers for his purpose and that both in Latin and English the one in the text and the other in the margent pretending therby to make them speake cōtrary one to the other A course saith he to the Kinges Maiesty which I professe in all disputes he dealeth so perfidiously therin to bring them to debate as commonly the simple fellow committeth three seuerall sortes of fraudes and falshood in most of his allegations First in corrupting the meaning of the Authors alledging them quite against their owne whole drift and intended discourse and conclusion therof Secondly in setting downe fraudulently the Latin text by peecing patching their sentences togeather that stand farre a sunder in the Authors themselues by dismembring others that were coherent before as often now wee haue complained Thirdly in translating the same by like fraude into English vsing manifest violence to the wordes and sense it selfe to get therby some shew of aduantage or at least wise to say somewhat All which sortes and kindes of shifts yow shall see expressed in the examples that are to ensue 4. In the second page of his pretended confutation he hath these wordes In the old Testament the Iesuites are forced to allow that the King was supreame ouer the Priestes in spirituall affaires and ordering Priestes For proofe wherof he citeth in the margent Salmeron a Iesuit a very learned man that hath left written in our dayes many volumes vpon the Ghospells Epistles of S. Paul and other partes of Scriptures and was one of the first ten that ioined themselues with the famous holy man Ignatius de Loyola for the beginning of that Religious order in which citation diuers notable corruptions are to be seene First for that Salmeron proueth the quite contrary in the place by this man quoted to wit that neuer Kinges were head of the Church or aboue Priestes by their ordinary Kingly authority in Ecclesiasticall matters in the new or old Testament and hauing proued the same largly he commeth at length to set downe obiections to the contrary and to solue answere them saying Sed contra hanc solidam veritatem c. But now against this sound truth by me hitherto confirmed I know that many thinges may be obiected which we are diligently to confute First then may be obiected that Kinges in the old Testament did sometimes prescribe vnto Priestes what they were to doe in sacred thinges as also did put some negligent Priestes from the execution of their office To which is answered Vbi id euenisset mirum esse non debere If it had so fallen out it had byn no maruaile for that the Synagogue of the Iewes albeit it conteined some iust men yet was it called rather an earthly then