but conspired with the Turke himselfe both against them and the whole christian world And their successours in Hungary these last yeares no better behaued themselues these directly admitted the Turks entry the first endeuoured to performe it as their owne Caspaectalio hist Symp. ad Sabellâ—c Defens Stap. contr Illerich Sleid petr Frar oraâ— cont Sectar Sleidan l. 22. letters of conspiracy and the comming of the Bassa of Buda against Ferdinando into Pannonia were witnesses And Sleydan himselfe a German Protestant giueth testimony that this was the doctrine of their diuines of Magdenburge publikely teaching in defence of sâ—ch rebellions that such waâ—res were lawfull For Sweueland the protestants themselues giue also testimony Sweueland Chit chron an 1593 1594. that the Catholike King thereof was inforced by his rebellious gospellers to make himselfe a subiect vnto their designements and condiscend that no Catholike should beare office in that kingdome and catholike seruice for the King should be confined only to his owne Chappell And what rebellions did the Protestant Petr. Faâ— orat contr sect Nobillitie by aduise of their Cleargie raise against their Prince for this cause in former times And who is ignorant of their still continued seditions and rebellions In Denmarke the same dogmaticall opinions were both publikely defended and put in execution What insurrections and rebellions Petr. Frar sup dâ—d the Protestants of that kingdome maintaine by this title Did they not assault the King vnder yeares and in minority with open warres Did they not confederate and colleague themselues with the professed enemies of the kingdome sell the Cities to strangers challenge regall power to their rebellions and such like intollerable treasons Let vs come to Heluetia and especially Geneua the mother Church of the â—eformed Maister Caluine the supreame head of the Consistory there hath told vs before that Princes not agreeing Bez. l. iur magist in supqit Sutclif answ l. to suphl with him in religion are rather to be spitted vpon than obeyed they â—re not worthy to be numbred among men they are bereaued of all authority Beza his successour in place succceded him also both in opinion and practise arming subiects against their Prince And as Maister Doctor Sutliffe saith in effect ouerthrowing all authority of Christian Kings and Magistrates and giuing power to subiects not onely to take Armes but to depose and kill the Prince if he impugne their religion And accordingly in practise the Protestants there as Caluine himselfe Doctor Sutliffe Caluin Sutel sup kiru pret discipl and the Archbishop of Canterbury be witnesses deposed their Soueraigne from his temporall right and euer since continue in that state of rebellion And not content with rebellion to one and their owne Lord and Ruler they celebrated a Councell wherein it was concluded that King Francis the second then king Petr. Fraâ— orat contr sectar deâ—ens Reg. relig of France his wife the Queene his children Queene mother the Nobility and all good Magistrates of that kingdome should by a certaine day by treacherous deceits be put to death In Burgundy a like Assembly and Conuenticle was called kept and therein decreed at Cabillon that three wormes must be taken forth of the world these men were not content to make their opinion and practise to one or a few kingdomes first the Church of Rome secondly the noble families of antient houses and thirdly all ciuill pollicy gouernment and iurisdiction How faithfully the Protestant Netherlanders laboured by all seditions and rebellion so many yeares and still perseuer to haue the canon of this holy Councell obserued it is too lamentable to be repeated that subiects should maintaine it or any Christians should applaud it Let vs come to France Were not Caluine Beza Othomanus Spiphanius Claud. de sanct de Saccad eglif fol 58. 55. and such publike and dogmaticall Protestants the eggers and instruments of all those slaughters rebellions and oppressions in that Monarchie wherein they tooke all law authoritie and Petr. Frar sup execution thereof from the King and Magistrates They conspired in one night to rob all the Chuâ—ches in France how did they depose Magistrates fell Cities giue the spoiles to strangers c. what murthering of priests and religious men hanging cutting bowelling rending strangling fleaing drowning stabbing shooting through with gunnes and arrowes of religious Priests wearing chaines of their eares cut off about their neckes how many were buried aliue and little infants themselues cut in sunder â—nforcing men to eate their vndecent parts cut off and rosted and opening the bellies when they liued to see whether they digested them or no I cease to recount the vnspeakeable tyranny of those Protestant traytors whom no conditions peace or graunt could satisfie After the remembred conspiracy against King Francis his Genebr chron ann 1560. Mother wife children Nobles and Magistrates at Geneua in the yeare 1560. within two yeares after 1562. they raised such rebellions and ciuill warres against King Charles the ninth that as Genebrande writeth France was more endammaged by one yeares ciuill warres than in all warres past by strangers The King of Nauarre and Duke Nyuers with others were slaine the Duke of Guise treacherously murthered by Pultrotus Canickname in France for that fact suborned by Beza and the Protestant Admirall and they enforced the Kings to grant them peace and conditions but they kept neither for in the yeare 1567. they made a new rebellion and being subdued accept againe of peace but Genebr chron 1567. Geneb chroâ— in these yeâ—â—es breake it againe for in the yeare 1569. they rebell and in the next yeare 1570. and yet in the yeare 1575. breake againe into rebellion And such were the miserable murthers and calaâ—â—â—ies which they brought to that distressed kingdome that i◠〈…〉 first ciuill warres and rebellions aboue 100000. were slaine as Gaspar Coligne a principall Captaine in those rebellions witnessed in an oration before the King And when Charles the ninth forbade by Edict that no such Protestant should publikely Hâ—stor Fâ—ucase Popelim li. 27. stat Relig. in gal Sub. Carol. 9. lib. 3 pag. 347. preach thirteene thousands of them armed assembled at such a sermon in the suburbes of Paris it selfe and their rebellious malice and disobedience did not onely extend to their liuing Kings but indured against the dead as they most rebelliously persecuted King Francis when he liued so being dead they burnt his heart in rebellious deâ—pight So they dealt with King Lewis the eleuenth defaced his Image dismembring euery part thereof and burned his body Concerning this vnited Kingdome of Britaine I haue spoken before sufficientlie for the confusion of all Protestants thereof for euer I will adde something and first for Scotland Was not their Gospell there planted by force and violence to Princes and by the publique Dogmaticall decrees of Caluin and Knoxe Knox hist of the church of Scotland pag. 143. 144. Holins hist Scot. anno 1546.
others in the short regiment of that Queene may be giuen for instance Therefore let no man obiect heereafter that the Positions Protestanâ—s may not condemne their Puritane Brethren and Practises of Râ—bellion proceede onely from the Puritane Protestants for such pure Protestancie had not audience in England at that time but the defenders there of were called New vp-start arrogant spirites by Latymer and such Protestants as I Latim Serm. before King Edward the fixt haue condemned guiltie in this kinde And yet the present Protestant Writers of England which teach that the true Church can not erre in things essentiall to true Religion and necessary to saluation and communicate in Sermons Sacraments Doctrine and subscription to articles the very notes of the Church in their proceedings cannot condemne these traiterous and rebellious positions and practises in Puritanes for great and damnable offences in Religion or impediments of Saluation therefore by this disputers Argument they are to be accounted seditious Now I will recite his second proposition against us which is this But all Popish priests doe professe a double prerogatiue ouer Kings Democraticall and Monarchicall namely both people and Pope ergo To the Popes Authoritie I haue already sufficientlie answered and will demonstratiuely proue farther heereafter that as it is defended by catholike doctors it is far more fauorable and defensiue to Princes titles then either doctrine or practise of Protestants or any other professors of Religion whereof I haue also intreated beefore Concerning his conceat of Catholikes defending a democraticall prerogatiue in the people ouer all Kinges so be his wordes It fighteth with his owne assertion and present position of the Popes Monarchicall prerogatiue ouer all Kings which likewise is his sentence For where there is a Monarchie and Monarchicall power or gouernment in one there is vnpossibillitie of a Democracie and Democraticall Power and Regencie in the people otherwise these propositions be true Kinges be subiects to subiects and subiects be Kinges of Kinges seruants be masters to their masters Masters be seruants to their seruants Fathers be children of their Children and Children be fathers to their Fathers and the like relations must be inuerted by this Logicians Argument But lett vs heare what publique Positions he will bring from our Writers to proue our opinion of a democraticall power in the people ouer Princes which I haue confuted by his owne proposition He only citeth the Author de iusta abdicat Henric. 2 to say that Maiestas Regni est in populo potius quam in persona Regis That D. Stapleton affirmeth people are not ordained for the Prince but the Prince for the people and Mr. Rainolas to call a King a creature of Mans Creation the like he citeth out of Dolman All which in equall sence his Maiestie himself in open Parliament doth not so much seeme to dislike especially in vacancie of a King or the originall of kingdomes of which cases those Authors The kings speach Parli 1. doe principally entreate And in such circumstances I demaund of this Obiector whether there euer was or could be a King and Ruler ouer people where there was no people to be ruled or consent to be ruled But people both were in the begining without kings and made election of diuers kinds of regiment as they thought fittest and most secure for their defence and gouernment in peace some Monarchicall some Aristaraticall others Democraticall although none made election of a Monachy by one and Democracie by the multitude at once in one Commonwealth as this simple Disputer did argue before agâ—inst Princes titles for that is vnpossible as I haue made demonstration And his Maiesties wordes be these Although a Kingdome and The kings speach supt people be Relata yet can he be no King if he want people and Subiects but there be many people in the world that lacke a head as when Regall Lines be extinct people be yet without Kings but not e contra So where regiment passeth by election In Polonia at the death of euery King the case is such because that Kingdome and Principallitie goeth by voices So in Venice So in the Empire by the seauen Princes called Princes Electours supplying the peoples suffrages and consents And this the Discouerer Rat. 3. infr himselfe hath remembred in framing his next Reason wherin he maketh mention of Election and calleth a seditious to hinder the right thereof But slaunders and contradictions be neither wilfull wickednesse nor vnlearned ignorance in this Accuser How the Protestants both clergie and people claime Soueraignty ouer Princes is spoken before and often proued in this Treatise The third Reason confuted and returned CHAP. IIII. THe maior Proposition of his third reason is Whosoever vppon any pretended Supremacy whether of Pope or people doe deny the necessary right of Election or of Succession of Protestant Princes are to bee holden amongest all Protestants seditious his Contradiction in this against the former reason I haue spoken of in the last Argument And for this present I grant this maior and make this my minor But Protestants and English Protestants Protestants are seditious by this Argument doe deny the necessary right of Election or Succession of Protestant Princes ergo the minor is proued before in Cranmer Ridley Latimer Sandes Rogers and the Dukes of Northumberland and Suffolke with their Protestant Preachers and forces against the Succession of Queene Elizabeth a Protestant and though then not borne his Maiesty a Protestant King I adde further that his Highnesse title was expresly contradicted and written against of purpose in a booke to that end by Hales a companion to Knoxe an English Protestant to which no Protestant to my knowledge did euer giue answer or deniall But many Catholikes confuted it as the Catholike Bishop of Rosse in Scotland and three Catholikes of distinct professions in England Sâ—r Anthony Browne Knight and Iudge of the common Law Doctor Morgan a Diuine and Doctor Mytch or like name a civill Lawyer Now let vs heare his second proposition against Catholikes Thus it is But all Popish Priests doe vtterly abolish the title of Succession in all Protestant Princes c. g o This he would proue against all Priests because Toâ—let and conformably to him Doctor Stapleton Maister Raynolds Symancha and the Author of Philopatre writeth Nulla est Imperatoris aut Regis Electio si cum Eligitur excommunicatus est The Election of an Emperour or King is non if he be excommunicate when he is chosen I answer First heere he contradicteth himselfe againe making election and consent of the people an essentiall thing to Princes titles Secondly let all be true which he citeth and that they so teach yet if fiue particular men could make a generall councell and their sentence be termed a publike position yet they speake onely of a Prince excommunicate before his Election which case is not now in rerumnatura much lesse in England His Maiesty was not
Ministers to preach and giueth him no definitiue sentence Doctor Whitaker is all for the priuate spirit and bringeth diuers reasons all peculiar for that purpose Such also is Doctor Suâ—liues sentence and yet he addeth that generall Counsâ—lls are absolutely necessary then Kings iudgements not sufficient And a generall Counsell none yet among them necessary bâ—fore their religion may be approued Maister Hooker and Docter Couell make the Ecclesiasticall power supreame Hooker l. 5. eccl Polit c. 77. D. Couel c. 4. Defence of Hooker pl. Innoc c. 1. D. Dow. epâ—st dedâ—c cont Bellat Bils tit li. true Differ Willet Synops controu 7. 9. 1. in such businesse and the Temporall to be dependant and subordinate Doctor Downam assigneth the Princes office to maintaine the truth supposed to be otherwise determined Bishop Bilson saith that the Princes lawfull power is to command for truth Maister Willet telleth vs that the Prince in his kingdome is neither the mysticall head nor ministeriall head but a politike head of the Church and to see that euery member doe his office and dutie and he vseth these words Neither doe we giue vnto the Prince absolute power then no supremacy to make ecclesiasticall lawes And his Maiesty is witnesse that many other Protestant Confer 14 Ian. an 1603. p. 82. 83 Preachers before him were content to passe ouer that title with silence which they would not performe in such audience if in opinion they did maintaine that supreame ecclesiasticall prerogatiue in Princes And to adde one former example more Doctor â— Soâ—e against Barrow Greenwood c. p. 17. 18 Some writeth thus The greatest Prince whatsoever is to obey such as teach them out of Gods booke And doth not disallow this sentence in such sence From this ohedience there is no exception nor exemption of Kings nor Princes be they neuer so great if they haue soules and be Christian men they must be subiect to some Bishop Priest or other Prelate The fourth Reason confuted and returned CHAP. V. THe fourth Reason is thus deliuered When the King is established in his Throne by common consent of the Kingdome here also is a contradiction to his second reason which doth not allow of such consent Whosoere shall manacle the handes of his subiects detracting all obedience may iustly by order of law be chalenged and condemned for a disordered and rebellious person This is the first proposition The Argument returned vpon Protestants which I graunt vnto and thereby I frame this second But ordinarily Protestant preachers and professors doe thus manacle the hands of Subiects and detract all obedience as is most manifest in their publike positions and practises before and more amply to be recited hereafter Ergo they may iustly by order of law be challenged and condemned for disordered and â—ebellious persons Let vs heare the rest of his Silogisme All Popish priests saith he Priests cleered and prooued innocent do dissolue the oth of obedience to all Protestant gouernors Ergo How slaunderous and false this assumption is I haue proued before and the duetifull behauiour of Catholikes in all partes of the worlde to their Protestant Princes not any at this present with consent of their priestes denying obedience the case of Protestant Ministers and Subiects in diuerse places being in contrary practise and experience giueth condemnation to his Asserâ—ion Secondly all the Authorities which he bringeth from Cardinall Tollet Massouius and others priuate men intreate of such as be nominatim excommunicate In which state there is not any one Protestant gouernor at this time neyther can any iust feare thereof be reasonably apprehended by the Popes generall proceedings in this behalfe except any Protestant prince which God forbid shoulde be incited by such vnchristian spirites as this Discouerer seemeth to be possessed with to exceede all others in persecuting Catholikes or offering indignities to the church of Christ Thirdly I answer that the opinions of Tollet Massouius Panormitane Gregorius de Valentia Bannes and the Author of Philopater all the priuate Writers hee aleadgeth in this place though they did approue as they doe destroy his conceit yet such priuate men can neither make a dogmaticall principle nor publike position by which his promise was to make probation And in this his affirming That all priests doe dissolue the oath of obedience to all Protestant Gouernors the Authority which bindeth them all to such opinion can be no lesse then a Dogmaticall and publique Doctrine And these may also suffice for his next obiections from the practise of Pope Gregory 7. Pius 5. and Gregory 9. To whom I farther aunswere in particular And first to Gsegory the 7. who as this man vrgeth absolued all from obedience to Excommunicates I answer for all Catholikes in generall That this nothing concerned Protestants then not thought of in the world neither any hereticks then not raigning Fox to â— Mon. in Greg 7. Will. Antil Genebr Chron in Greg. 7. Plat in Greg. 7. but only such as he had other quarrells and contentions against But he vrgeth the glosse vppon Gregory the ninth to haue both excommunicated all hereticks and to haue absolued subiects from their obedience and citeth for his authority Greg. 9. Pont. lib. 5. Decret tit 7. Cap. 5. glossa I answer that in the place alleadged Decr. per Greg. 13. there is no mention of any such matter or any thing like vnto it only there is cited the Affrican Councell in these words Si quis Episcopus heredes instituerit extraneos à consanguinitate sua vel haereticos etiam consanguineos aut Paganos praetulerit saltem post mortem ei Anathema dicatur atque eius nomen inter Dei Sacerdotes nullo modo recitetur And this Canon both for substance and antiquity opposeth it selfe against him Lastly he brings againe the Bull of Pius the fift against Q. Elizabeth To which answere is made before whereto I adde that many graue and learned men haue affirmed the information of the case of Queene Elizabeth to the Apostolique See wherevpon that censure of excommunication was awarded against her to haue been vntrue And that Pius the fift then Pope and inflictor thereof an holy man bewailed the proceedings vppon such suggestion And that many Catholikes of both conditions were both sory for the censure it was defended by D. Sanders D. Brâ—stow or any other Inglish writer rather wishing the controuersie betwixt two Superiors th' one temporall th' other spirituall had bin reserued to the high Tribunal in heauen then so subiect to many iealosies had been so prosecuted in earth among which Cardinall Allane writeth of that matter in these wordes Hoc tamen scimus Card. Allen. ad per. â—cuâ— multos Catholicos illud factum agre tulisse optasseque omninò vt ea res tam grauis varijsque obnoxia suspitionibus literis commissa nunquam fuisset sed sublimioribus Potestatibus Deique potissimum Iudicio reseruata vt vel in
regular and others must doe neyther all the priests of this Nation nor any one except disobedient to his superior was guilty of this conspiracy or did or doth eyther intend designe or practise such irreligious wickednesse And both holy and happy is that religion to be esteemed among whose professors in this The diâ—course of the laâ—e intended treasâ—n Kingdome so many thousands and in the daies of so manifold disgraces and miseries for that faith so small a company of cheefest Agents or Assistants are charged with that offence Wee haue heard read seene and tasted of many conspiracies and rebellions by protestants and more and greater by them proportion of time and Countries obserued where both Kings whole kingdomes and Common-weales haue beene put in hazard and yet they were dogmaticall men in that profession accounted Prophets Apostles Euangelists and conspired thousands for euery one particular person in this recited and yet their conspiracies were not condemned by their Preachers and Doctors but iustified and applauded not forbidden but commanded by their spirituall maisters and their rebells slaine in such actuall seditions against Princes not reproued but approued and canonized for holy Martyrs When all things be contrary in this case by the protestant disourse it selfe of this tragedy And if proofe can be made of any one of holy priestly order to haue beene an Agent in so vnholy businesse he will be as much abandoned of all good priests and Catholikes as of the protestants themselues for that disloyalty The ignominy and perpetuall reproach wherewith the names of vnhappy Watson and Clarke are stained with all of our religion will be a witnesse in any case of like comparison The seuenth Reason confuted and returned CHAP. VIII HIs seuenth Sillogisme is this Seeing it is in a manner all one to commit a villante and to commend it we may argue that whosoeuer shall iustifie acts of treasons and parricides are not vnguilty of the same crimes To this I grant and adde which is euidently proued before that the cheefest teachers and professors of Protestancy doe not onely iustifie but commend canonize for holy encourage command and reward such proceedings therefore they are not vnguilty of the same crimes And whereas he setteth downe for his lesse Proposition But all Priests doe iustifie such heinous parricides Ergo I haue proued before both by their owne authority continuall experience and at this time that such assertions be most false and slanderous But hee will maintaine his sentence because Bellarmine saith Many Popes haue worthily depriued many Princes of their regall authority The examples be in Leo 3. Fredericke 1. Otho 5. and Childericke King of France To Obiections of which nature I haue often answered before And sincere dealing would haue alleaged the true causes of such processe with those Princes which take away the enuie of this matter proue a flat disparitie in the cases compared and bring eternall shame to many Protestant rebellions and often deposing Princes for meaner quarrells and for no true cause at all The rebellions and attempts be too many to be recited The examples of Princes deposed or depriued of their Kingdomes Countries or territories by Protestants meaner then Popes be more in so short a time then in all the papall gouernment Queene Mary of Scotland the King of Spaine and Enfanta in Flanders the Emperor in diuers parts of Germany and elsewhere in former time the present Emperour in Hungary the Prince of Transyluania the Prince of Geneua Marquesse of Embden Duke of Loraine king of Denmarke king of France king of Sweueland in their territories surprized inuaded taken sold to enemies or kept by rebbells no such thing in the Popes cases neuer making themselues the richer by others losses yeelde testimony in this businesse Next commeth in a gratias agimus for the death of King Henry the third of France by the Author of the booke de iusta abdicat Hen. 3. which was a Catholike But I tell him that also a Catholike Doctor Barkeley a professor at Mussipont hath confuted that booke which also may serue for other citations from thence which I haue answered before He accuseth Cardinall Alane for approuing the rendering of Dauontore vnto the hands of the King of Spaine the true owner By which he condemneth himselfe to be within the compasse of his owne conclusion of rebellion and to iustifie such acts of treason for all the world can witnesse that Towne truly to belong to that King Then not the surrendering of it to the lawfull Prince which hee condemneth but the wrongfull withholding of it which he approueth was treason and rebellion And such as this discouerer is such also the rest of his Clergy protestant brethren in England must bee esteemed euen in this point for in their name the first defence of those disobedient and seditious Netherlanders was vndertaken And so both by publike positions and practises they teach and iustifie actes of treason and rebellion both in themselues and their euangelicall brethren so many yeares in so many disloyall attempts rapines intrusions dis-inheritings deposings piracies murthers and extreamest outrages against their naturall and true Soueraignes and not in one onely act and oration one of Gallobelgicus excessiue reportes made of the death of Henry the third in France Ergo Protestanrs are not vnguilty of these crimes The eight Reason confuted and returned vpon Protestants CHAP. IX THus he frameth his next Argument Those Snakes that doâ— naturally sting so soone as they get warmth may not be harbored in the bosome of the Common-wealth To which proposition I say concedo further adde by such assertion that the protestant Preachers and professors of the reformed Churches may not be harbored in any kingdome or ciuill Country for they are proued before naturally to sting and kill if they can so soone as they haue obtained power to performe it Which I will now also more plentifully demonstrate in this chapter when I haue exempted Catholikes from the accusation in the second proposition which is But all Priests professe rebellions as soone as they can presume of their strength Ergo. His cheefest proofe of this is from Bannes who as he telleth vs teacheth that a King may be deposed where there is euidens noticia criminis euident knowledge of his sinne I answer That such opinion is to be reproued as against not onely Cunerus Nauarre c. but the great Laterane generall Councell to which Bannes and all Catholikes must submit their sentences which also dischargeth vs of this forged slaunder and condemneth the accuser of vniust calumniation But he vrgeth further from the same Author holding the English Catholikes excused quia non se eximunt ex superiorum potestate nec bellum contra eos gerunt quia non suppetunt illis vires ob sequentia pericula which this discouerer thus translateth The English Catholikes who now doe not take Armes against the Protestants are excused because they want sufficient power I answer If this
Knox sup pa. 217 218. 256 258. Holinsh sup ann 1559. Knox pag. 265. 268. 269. Holinsh sup Knox sup pag. 501. 502. 503. vsque pag 531. Holinsh supr an 1566. Dang pos l. 1. c. 6. Apostles and their conspiracies and practise I referre the Reader to Knoxe himselfe to know what publique subscriptions and conspiracies to this ende what authoritatiue Sermons to the Religious and Monasteries what proâ—estations of violences against the Queenes Edict and Parliament what contempt of Authoritie they vsed in commaunding the Nobles vnder penaltie of excommunication to assist them the Bishoppes and Cleargie not to resist them writing and sending to all their Sect to ioyne in Rebellion with them no Lawe or commaundement of Prince obeyed They tooke vppon them the Regality it selfe they coyned money by their Authoritie seazed the Inns and renounced all obedience vnto their Princes terming her obedient subiects and partakers a Faction and threatned them with punishment for Treason How wickedly did they reiect hir Authority in Parliament and made themselues Supreame both in Ecclesiasticall and Temporall businesse Did they not murther the Kings and Queenes Secretarie in their sight and intended the same to the Queene her selfe then great with childe with our present Soueraigne so to haue brought all into their owne handes the Issue and Posteritie Regall taken away And when that holy last recited Queene Mother to his Maiestie was first imprisoned then expelled her Kingdome by these Rebelles and escaped murthering her Husband being slaine by their villanies How did they condemne all decrees of the State deposed the Bishops as Antichristian by their supremacie What comminatory letters did they write to his Maiestie which now Raigneth then young in yeares and the Nobles of that Land to effect their designements did not they wholy disclaime from the Kinges Authority and not that only but made him their subiect in prescribing lawes vnto him did not they surprise and imprison him as Declarat B 1. 2. 3. 4 parliament Sect. ann 1584. their Vassall what Traiterous and more than Rebellious excommunications and censures did they impose vppon him how many Declarat 1582. parlia 1584. c. 7. Conspiracies did they contriue how did they force him at Striueling besiedged him tooke the Castle imprisoned the King with violence vâ—till he had signed their high willes and pleasures For England I haue spoken alreadie more then I desired had not such wicked accusations against vs vrged me to breach of silence And now I will only say that the publique and Dogmaticall positions and practises of Rebellions by the greatest Protestant subiects of this Kingdome the Dukes of Northumberland and Suffolke againe and againe so many Nobles to be pasâ—ed with obliuion all their whole Cleagie Archbishoppe Bishops and others not only against the law of God and their Queene but oaths of fidelitie to K. Henrie the eight that I am bold to affirme no Protestant obiâ—ctor can giue instaunces in any time or Nation of Catholique Regiment or Subiects where so great and manifolde outrages haue been committed And yet that which Catholikes lost by the new proceâ—dings so many thousands of Monasteries Religious howses Churches their Religion Sacraments Praiers and Sacrifice for their soules sakes and their posteritie Corrodies Pensions and Education for their children was a greater losse to them and their profâ—ssion then euer Protestants with their new Faith will bestow recompence or equiualent benefite vppon the world Now let vs reuiew this Disciferers examples of practise agenst Henrie the third of Fraunce the resistment of this present King of that countrie the Bull of Pius Quintus against Queene Elizabeth Henrie the fourth Emperour excommunicate Leo the third Fredericke the first Otho the fift and King Childericke Henry the second in like case which be these practicall obiections hee can finde woorthy of reciting against vs since the first conuersion of Kings and Countries to Christ Among all which tragedies let him single forth what kingdome country territory or towne the Pope possesseth detaineth or keepeth against any of those or any other christian Prince And compare them with the Protestants proceedings with Princes in this short time of their new Gospel and â—heir vsurped ministeriall and popular outrages rebellions excâ—mmunications deposings and violence to Princes doe farre exceede both for number and extreamest iniuries And so many Countries States Townes and territories both violently taken and still kept from the true possessors and reserued to themselues as Princes doth not onely argue the impietie of iniuries past and a continued state of rebellion but giueth demonstration of their continued opinions to practise the same generally in all times and places as occasions shall giue them power and aduantage Ergo Protestants and not Catholikes by this mans arguments be seditious tray terous rebellious intollerable The ninth Reason confuted and returned CHAP. X. THus he frameth his next Reason Whosoeuer doth perfidiously either denie or violate with men of diuerse religion an oath c. must necessarily be esteemed of them a person perfidious and treacherous This is his Maior proposition wherein he must needes make some exceptions of the lawfulnesse c. of the thing sworne or else the Protestants which swore loyalty to Queene Mary in her Fathers life might not safely take Armes against her to aduance a forged title and the Protestants which had sworne obedience to the Pope could not denie their subiection and whatsoeuer wickednesse is sworne must be performed as Saint Paul and Saint Iohn Baptist death because their death was sworne by Herod and the Iewes But if his proposition be true Protestants be perfidious and treacherous by the example of England recited and all the Countries before remembred where Protestants broke their oaths of loyalty with their Princes kept not oaths of conditions with subiects But he thus obiecteth Popish Priests are guilty of such perfidie And in his prosecuting of this assertion he disputeth against aequiuocation although the interrogatorie be vniustly proposed and chargeth vs with these words of Cardinall Tollet Cum Iudex non vindice petit Iuramentum vel contra Iustitiam licet vti Tollet li. 4. Inst Sacerd. c. 21. 22. aequiuocatione secundum mentem suam contramentem Iudicis vt puta quaerenti fecisti ne illud respondeat non feci intelligendo inter se non hoc tempore aut vt narrem tibi aut aliquid simile Let this be the case as himselfe hath alleaged it Thâ—n for Tollet sometimes a Iesuite I cite another Iesuite famous among Casuists Emanuel Sa who in his Aphorismes writeth of this matter â—n these words Quidam Sa Aphoris mendacium 4. dicunt eum qui non tenetur respondere ad intentionem Rogantis posse respondere aliquid subintelligendo vt non esse scilicet it a vt dicere es teneatur velse non habere scilicet vt ei det licet alij id non admittunt fortè potiori ratione Whereby it is manifest that all
Catholikes doe not allow of aequiuocation where he is not bound to answer the Iudge or examiner proceeding vniustly and not according to law and equitie that a man in such case is not bound to answer at all if the question concerneth his life libertie or fame his Maiesty his honourable Councell and the Protestant Bishops haue consented Conference 14. Ianuar. 1604. vnto in the conference with Puritans whether he may aequiuocate or no they doe not mention but other Protestants as Cranmer Luther Caluin and others haue both taught and practised it as lawfull and so doe all English Puritans and most Protestants euen in religious businesse which all men of learning doe condemne as I will proue in this chapter For our excuse in this place and question Catholikes do generally agree that to aequiuocate before a competent Iudge such as we allow all Magistrates in England in temporal causes in as ample Cap. quacunque act 22. q. 5. Naurar c. 12. Numb 8. D. Thom. 2. 2. q. 89. act 7. ad 14. manner as if they were of our religion keeping the order of law is a mortall sinne so the canon law it selfe so Nauarre Saint Thomas and others teach And if it be defended by diuers Catholikes as Protestants also that in case of vniust and iniurious interrogatorie aequiuocacion may be vsed I desire to know against what vertue this discouerer can discouer this to be a sinne First it is not against iustice for wee supposed the interrogatory to be vniust then the iniustice is in the Iudge exceeding his commission and offering iniurie to the Respondent and not in him which neither contradicteth any law or offereth iniustice to him to whom no iustice belongeth in that cause Secondly agenst verity and truth it cannot be for the thing affirmed or denied is true in the sence of the Respondent as we still suppose and he is not bound to answer in other sence as before yea to aunswere in the sence of the iniuâ—ious examiner rather seemeth a breach of law and dutie with him then an obseruation thereof Therefore seeing as Saint Augustine writeth mentiri to lie is eontra â—entemire to goe against a mans minde and meaning there is neither lie vniustice or any sinne in this case but onely in the exâ—mâ—ner there is vsurpâ—tion against the lawe and iniurie to the examminate and this doctrine of equiuocation in this sence is no late inuention The Scâ—ipture telleth vs how Iacob told his father Isaac that hee was his first begotten Sonne Esau Gen cap. 27. Ierem. â— 38. ver 26. 27. which was not so in the sence of the Patriarke Isaac such aequiuocacion also the Prophet Ieremie vsed to the people when following the aduice of the King hee told otherwise then the truth in their sence one thing for another so the Scriptures affirme in diuers sences that Saint Iohn Baptist was Eâ—yaâ— and was not Our Sauiour himselfe said to his Apostles he would not goe vp to Ierusalem and yet secretly he went he fained to his Disciples going to Emaus that he would go further Concerning the Popes dispensacion in oths when this discouerer can proue abuse in Catholike doctrin in such cases he shal haue further answer in the mean time he may vnderstand that meaner superiors then Popes may irritate the oaths and vows also of their subiects So the father may Gloss 32. q. 2. Mulâ—er 31. §. 34. Sa v. princeps §. 3. deale with his childe in diuers cases and other superiors of their subiects so temporall Princes may doe and also legittimate their children not legitimate as many teach so King Henâ—y the eight both thought and practised with his daughters Queene Mary and Queene Elizabeth whom he had illegittimate and after declared the contrary and made them legittimate by statute Now I plainely answere to his proposition of breaking othes That all Catholikes of this kingdome both priests and others doe and ought sincerly to acknowledge his Maiestie to be as absolute and really true King of all his kingdomes and ouer all his subiects of what profession or calling soeuer as euer any Catholike King his predecessor was either of them iointly vnited or disioyned and that asmuch temporall dutie and obedience belongeth vnto him and in their degrees to his honourable Counsaile and inferior Magistrates concerning the affaires of Common-wealth and that among other duties to denie to sweare or violate an oath iuridicè iustly and according to course of law proposed and to equiuocate therin is a sinne damnable and that it is the error of Wickliffe and later Protestants to be of other minde But seing the internall cogitations of men only naturally knowne to God defiling the soule and not offensiue to externall peace and gouernment how wicked soeuer they be of their owne nature belong only to the consistory of God and internum forum we hope it will not be offensiue to entreat that the naturall consciences be not arrained in externall courts which the Pope himself doth not nor can doe especiallie where no crime can be obiected Nauarr c. 18. Num. 29. D. Tho. 2. 2. q. 6. articul 1. 2. Gaiet 16. cap. Quando de poenit d. 1. c. si omnia q. 1. c. 2. de maiorit obed cap. 2. de Confess Conference 14. 1604. pag. 92. where there is no such law ordained where not so much as a semi-plea probation or any accusation at all is precedent with the iudge or knowne to the conueuted And this is not only conformable to the lawe of nature conscience and canonicall proceedings euen allowed and practised in England but publikely confirmed by his Maiesty the Archbishoppe of Canterburie the Nobles and Bishops of this kingdome in the late conference The words of his Maiesty be Nemo cogitur detegere suam turpitudinem in such a case and that fame and scandall must be looked vnto with a condemning of the Statish protestants in that point The Archbishopps words be these If any article did touch Pag. â—â— the party anie way either for life libertie or scandall he might refuse to answere neither was he vrged therevnto semblable was the consent of all And if this Rule was generall I hope Catholikes be not exempted As concerning interrogatories de futuris contingentibus first things hereafter to haue an vncertaine being conceâ—ne not a present certaine state secondlie the Angeiles themselues naturallie know them not thirdly the soule of Man is ignorant of them no creature doth by naturall science vnderstand them for all such knowledge is either by the obiect present that is not in this case or by the effect that is to come or by the cause which is here most vncertaine Therefore the examine of such things we intreâ—te may be left to God who onely in that sence is Scrutat or cordis and comprehendeth al causes more excellently then themsâ—lâ—es â—thâ—rwise it would be hard to descipher how he himselfe knoweth such things Bâ—t to speake to this obiector concerning his