excommunicate before his Election neither is hee now but is both elected and setled in his throne both without any contradiction of the Pope and with his Iubet of all obedience and prohibet of deniall thereof All the Catholikes of this Kingedome applauded it as much as Protestants And his vnion and league with Catholike Princes and people abroad is sufficient answer that this is a malicious slaunder of holy Priesthood and proveth Catholikes innocent Protestants guilty and this man an vniust accuser The Argument retuâ—ned vpon Protestants with a recitaâ—l of their seditious doctrinâ— But for breuitie to passe ouer forraigne Protestants in this place I will put this disputer in minde of his brethrens dogmaticall principles and positions in this vnited Kingdome The Protestant Writers and Preachers of England defended that Wyat was no Traytor to Queene Mary And thus they wrote expresly It is lawfull to kill Kings and both by Gods law and mans law Queene Goodm pag 103 obed pa. 99. 113. Goodm pa. 99. Mary ought to be put to death what Priest of England did ever so write speake or thinke of any Protestant his Soueraigne she was a tyrant a monster a cruell beast And yet the purer sort of Protestants affirmd of Queene Elizabeth as his Lordship of Canterbury Hay an pag. 13 15. 23. Dâ—ing poliâ— pâ—g 133. 134. sup wiâ—nesseth That she was worse then her sister Many and they more suppressed by her then by the other They did write That she was not to be obeyed being against their proceedings and openly moued the greatest Subâ—egents in England to take armes against her affirming if they Suppliâ—aâ— to the gouer of Wales pa. 16. 36 37 38 39 Dâ—ng posâ—t lib 4 e. 3 4 Goodm p. 144. 145. Obed. pag 110. Knos hist pag. 37 â— Obed pag 99. 103. 104. Goodm pa. 99. Buchan iâ—â— â—â—g pag. 40. 58 Obed. pa. 111 refused it they ceased to be Magistrates These also insuing be more of their holy dogmaticall principles Euill Princes ought by the law of God to be deposed and inferior Magistrates ought to doe it cheefely It is lawfull to kill wicked Kings It were good that rewards were appointed by the people for such as kill tyrants as commonly there are for those that haue killed eyther woolues or beares or taken their whelpes The people haue the same power ouer their King that the King hath ouer any one person Iudges ought by the law of God to sommon Princes before them and to proceede against them as against all other offenders the people may arraigne the Prince the Ministers may Buchan pa. 62 Cartwr replic 2. pag. 65. Obed. pag. 115. 116. Bucha p. 70. excommunicate him any Minister may excommunicate the greatest Prince he that is excommunicate is not worthy to enioy any life vpon earth Whereby is euident the monstrous dissimulation of this people which sometimes for their aduantage will not be scrupulous to denie that with other articles of their religion and the cheefest and to say that they onely claime power to excommunicate not to depose and kill Princes And to testifie how easily Suru pretend holy Dâ—â—cipl pag. 283. 284. Buchan pag. 6 13. Obed. pag. 25 and for what ordinary offences Princes may be thus intreated the present Protestant Archbishop of Canterbury is witnesse that fornication drunkennesse swearing cursing fighting chiding brawling breaking of the Sabbath wanton and vaine words and the like be sufficient incitements and causes of such proceedings with them And they tell vs further That the people are better then the King and of greater authority the people haue right to bestow the Crowne at their pleasure the authority which Princes haue is giuen them from the people and the people may take it away againe as men may reuoke their Proxies and letters of Attorney Now I would demand of this obiector whether they be members of the Roman Catholike Church or the pillars of his Protestant Congregation that congregateth and gathereth together such monsters as holy children which teacheth a double prerogatiue ouer Princes one in the people when inferior Magistrates and not Magistrates may and must by their doctrine depose Kings and Soueraignes and likewise their ministery as before hath as ample or a more preeminent authority Which also concluded from these English Protestant principles If Magistrates transgresse Gods lawes themselues and commaund others to doe Goodm pa. 119. 139. the like then haue they lost that honour and obedience which otherwise their subiects did owe vnto them and ought no more to be taken for Magistrates but to be examined condemned and punished as priuate transgressors When Magistrates doe cease to doe their duties the people are as it were without officers and then God giueth the sword into their Pa. 185. 180. 184 hands And such was the vniuersall practise of all protestants especially Caluenists in all places of their holy preaching Germany Heluetia Denmarke France England and Scotland with others in foâ—mer times and at this present the Protestants in Hungary Transiluania Sweueland and the Low Countries in actuall sedition and rebellion against their Soueraignes Emperour King and Princes are instance Concerning that spirituall supremacy which the lawes of England The Kings supremacy denyed by all Puritans and eâ—ther denâ—ed or doubted of by al english protestant writers atrribute to his Maiestie it can be no question but all Puritans doe deny it which not onely teach a superior power both in people and Ministers to which the rest of the Protestants of the same congregation as before must needes consent But also in this regard that the gouernment of their Eldership or Bresbitery incomposible with Princes Supremacy is the cheefest article of their religion and distinctiue note of their reformed Church Then to come to the present Protestant writers anâ— their designements the Archbishop of Canterbury is the man which maketh Suru of preâ— Diâ—cipl relation that this was a common proposition Princes haue no more to doe with matters of the Church then the Ministers haue with the affaires of the Common-wealth And there it is alleaged that such gouernment by Princes is worse then by the Pope for diuers reasons Pa. 25â— 253. 254 255 â—â—6 c. sup there recited and not confuted by any Protestant I will recite the sentences of the principall Protestants of this time Doctor Fulke in plaine termes acknowledgeth D Fulke hâ—br c 13 â—ect 9. 1. peâ—r 2. v. 13. â—â—ct 5. Ioh. c. 21. 1. petr 5. Mat. c. 16. Bell. moâ—iu lib. 2. fol. 78 79. 80. 81 Suru part 3. c. 10 pa. 426. 1. part pag 34. Whitâ—ker contra Bellar controu 1. q 8. D. 〈◊〉 li. de concil that Emperours and Kings owe obedience to the Clergy and cannot prescribe laweâ— of Religion to Bishopâ— by their iudgements Maister Bell writeth the Ecclesiasticall affaires to be in the Cleâ—rgy as to decide controuersies and that the King hath only charge and authority to command the
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
hoc seculo vel in altero cum Pontifices Principes rationem reddent villicationis suae de hac re controuersia decideret inter nostros Superiores Notwithstanding this we know that many Catholikes did thinke hardly of that deed and did wish that if so great a matter and subiect to diuers suspitions had neuer bin committed to writing but reserued to higher powers and most chiefly to the iudgement of God that either in this world or in the world to come when both Popes and Princes must render account of their Bailifewicke the controueâ—sie of this matter should be tried betweene our Superiors Then if the case was such between the Pope and that deceased Princes I cannot conceaue how any equally minded Protestant can be of minde that the Pope so strictlie commaunding obedience of all Catholâ—kes in England to his Maiestie will or can be so contrarie vnto himselfe to publish a contrarie commaund against a King offering in publique Parliament to meet with the Roman Church Kings speach parliam 1. all Nouelties taken away we wish no more and in the meane time acknowledging the same Roman Church to be our Mother Church and that his minde was euer free from perfection or thralling his subiects in matters of couscience Of such a King Bellarmine himself cited against vs will be witnes that he thinketh Beâ—lar â—ib 5. de Rom. pont c. 7 the Pope cannot so proceed against him The fift Reason confuted and returned CHAP. VI. THe fift Reason is nothing in effect but the former confuted now againe repeated with malice and suting also with the three next ensuing and is thus obiected Whosoeuer suggesteth a Doctrine of forcible deposing of Princes from their thrones are therein manifestly rebellious Let vs grant this Maior Proposition then thus I make my Minor But Protestants be such as both their publike opinions and practisâ—s before and after conuince Ergo they are manifestly rebellious by this disputer Now let vs heare what dogmaticall authority principle or position he produceth to iustifie his accusation Thâ—t all Popish Priests his phrase defend and approue these things For although I haue confuted this in the former yet I will rather multiply repetitions then leaue any suspicion behinde me to omit any of his oppositions First for the violent deposing of Kings and Emperours hee citeth Costerus to say That the power to depose Kings and Emperours was euer in the Popes of Rome penes Romanos pontifices which he translateth peculiar to the Pope But he must vnderstand that here is no speach of violence violent deposing or forcible dâ—posing which is his proposition to be proued We will proceede He citeth Molma to say that Depositio Imperatoris ex iusta causa pertinet ad summum Pontificem But first againe heere is no speech of force or violence and so not to your purpose Secondly there is at this present a great difference betweene the Emperour which is created by the Popes I. Cerem Rom. eccl in Coron Imperat. lawes and with his solemnities and from whom he receiueth his sword and a King that is absolute not so created or depending for power or iurisdiction such as our Soueraigne in England is And Molina himselfe cited in this place by our accuser insinuateth the same dâ—sparitie and reason in these words Quia Imperator est tanquam minister summi pontificis c. Because the Emperour is as it were the Popes Minister exercising the sword of Iurisdiction at his will ad natum summi pontificis which is altogether vntrue of his Maiestie not so receiuing or exercising authority To Bellarmine I haue answered before that his opinion is against this discouerer For hee alloweth not of censures against Princes where they grow not to violence and persecution Concerning Doctor Saunders and Philopater I haue already spoken sufficiently and yet their citations doe not conclude violence in the case of excommunicates whereof they intreat Bannes alleaged to defend That an Apostata King may be deposed by the Common-wealth meaneth such a Prince as Iulian the Apostata a renowncer of Christianity which is properly termed Apostata And conformable is the Allegation from Simancha which be all the authorities hee bringeth to binde all Popish his Epitheton Priests to defend violent deposing of Kings which not one of those particular writers affirme but was both the publike opinion practise of protestants in aâ—l opportunities occasions as is often remembred in this defence Now let vs heare the supposed publike practise in this point He alleageth three authorities only of particular men which sentence be not sufficient to pronounce their iudgement or allowance to be publike But let them be vrged to his greatest aduantage The first is against Henry the third of France excommunicate from the Author De iusta abdic Henr. 3. affirming onely that the French subiects which armed aganst him did it secura conscientia with secure conscience as against a violater of publike faith violatore publicae fidei I answer first this is no English case except this discouerer will inrole his Maiestie in the number of excommunicates and violaters of publike fidelitie which is most iniurious to his Highnesse and in Catholikes would be called trecherous And yet this Author doth onely affirme that they did it or might doe it in conscience But hee doth not iustifie which this man must generally proue that all those and the rest of the French subiâ—cts were bound in conscience to take Armes against him and yet if he had so said there is an euident inequality assigned betweene the cases in comparison His second authority is an opinion of Diuines in a Colledge at Salaman in Spaine no publike authoritie if true that all Catholikes which did not follow the O-neale did sinne moâ—tally Queene Elizabeth then being excommunicate and that Xistus quintus did rather allow then appâ—oue their opinion But first who seeth not the disparity of those Princes before compared Secondly that schoole followed their information which being vntrue their sentence faileth which the experience it selfe of that time conuinceth for most Catholikes practised the contrary to that iudgement resisted O-neele and defended Queene Elizabeth And Xistus quintus neuer did see the resolution of that schoole The practises of Protestants are no nouelties in such affaires The sixt Reason confuted and returned CHAP. VII THus he proceedeth to his sixt Reason Whosoeuer doe intend designe or practise the murther of Princes must necessarily be holden for desperate Traytors This is the Maior proposition which I grant and thus proceede in forme But Luther Munster Suinglius Caluine Bezae Spiphanius Cranmer Ridley Latimer Sands Knoxe Goodman and other Cleargie Protestants with their Adherents and Disciples did intend designe and so much as they could practise such impietie as I haue demonstratiuely proued Ergo they must necessarily by this mans argument be holden for desperate Traytors But against Catholikes he vrgeth That all popish Priests are guilty in some
often earnestly and by all meanes wee could desired to haue it graunted with equall conditions against the most selected and best learned Doctors of that religion And at this present when your cheefest Protestant Cleargie Bishops and others is assembled wee most humbly intreat this so reasonable a Placet that although they will not as we feare easily consent to an indifferent choyce opposition and defence in questions yet at the least to auoide the wonder of the world they will be content that we may haue publike audience for those articles opinions and practise for which we are so much condemned and persecuted If wee shall not be able to defend or proue any position generally maintained in our doctrine to be conformable to those rules in diuinity which your Maiesty and the protestant lawes of England we can offer no more haue confirmed for holy the canonicall Scriptures the first generall Councells the daies of Constantine and the Primatiue Church let the penalties be imposed and executed against vs. If we performe it or this petition may not be admitted we trust that both our office to God and duty to Prince is discharged in this point Your royall Person and that honorable consistory now assembled or holdâ—n in your doctrine to be the supreame sentencer euen in spirituall businesse in this kingdome wee therefore hope you will not in a Court from whence no appeale is allowed and in matters of such consequence proceede to iudgement or determine of execution before the arraigned is sommoned to answer hath receiued or refused triall is or can be proued guilty for it is a Sages sentence Iudicem Aram esse idem euen in ordinary 〈…〉 3. Rhetor. Iudges because people iniured or distressed flie to them both for refuge And we humbly craue licence to say vnto you as Liberius Pope of Rome answered Constantius the Emperour perswading Theodor. dialog hist trip l 5. c. 17 him to subscribe to the banishement of saint Athanasius the great Gretian Patriarke O Imperator Iudicia ecclesiastica decet tam maxima proferri iustitia If we be condemned our cause be iust and religion true it is God and not man against whom you proceede in sentence if our profession be erroneous and yet for consent with so many Nations and so long continuance it is left vnpunished you onely pardon the frailty and ignorance of earthly men and fight not with the heauenly Deny not that to vs your euer true and obedient subiects in a religion so antient which your colleged Princes the King of Spaine and Arch-duke doe offer to the so many yeares disobedient Netherlanders vpon their temporall submittance in so late an imbraced doctrine That which the Arrian Emperors of the East permitted to the Catholikes Bishops Priests Churches tolleration what the barbarian Vandalls often offered and sometimes truly performed in Africke what the Turkish Emperor in Greece and Protestant Princes in Germany and other places allow to them of our religion can be no singular offence to grant vnto vs once in so many yeares though our religion were vntrue It would be acceptable to all Catholike Princes conformable to the examples of protestant Rulers not vnaunswerable to your owne princelie pietie pittie and promise no disgust to any equally minded Protestant or Puritane at home a Iubily to vs distressed and to answer all the discouerers quarrells in one sentence a warrant of security to your Maiesty in all opinions against those terrors and dangers which he conceiteth from which and all others of what kinde soeuer we most humbly beseech the infinite Maiesty of God to preserue your Highnesse and send you your Queene and posteritie all happinesse and felicity in heauen and earth Amen ⧠A generall Censure of this slanderous Pamphlet proouing that no one Argument therein can conclude the Authors Intent CHAP. I. THis Discouerer of Terrors and Daungers neuer before imagined like vnto the espiall of King Alexander which either Qu. Cuâ—â— in viâ—â— Alexand. hauing his phantasie and interior powers distempered or his externall sences out of order or both farre from frameing right apprehension and true judgement brought worde to his wise triumphant Emperor that an army of enemies was approaching to assault him when they were but a small company of silie Apes imitating souldiers with a march on the Mountaynes doubteth not to call such his deluded vision An exact Discouery of Romish Doctrine in the case of Conspiracie and Rebellion and a little after A Plaine Discouery of the Rebellious Doctrine of the Romish Church and termeth Romish Schooles to vse his owne wordes Seminaries of Rebellions and telleth vs Popish Priests as also their Adherents be worthily executed for seditious and trayterous persons Hitherto is the strange Discriall of this great Discouerer not as yet yeelding any Reason but that we may thinke his braine distempered conceiting Apes for mortall Enemies their stickes and Reeds for deadly wounding weapons Therefore supposing for his Reports of so vnprobable things he should be deluded as a man illuded and strangely mis-taken except he pretended some strange and vn-vsuall Argument for his rare Intelligence falling into a second extreamitie like a farre Trauailer giueth foorth that these wonders be collected out of the expresse Dogmaticall Principles of Popish Priests and Doctors and from their Publike Positions and Practises and accordingly entituleth euery leafe Romish Positions and Practises of Rebellion What simply meaning minde would not be amazed with such a message especially when hee professeth these things to be collected not without direction from Superiors But to ouerthrowe his last Assertion first There is neyther name of Author the Current of time streaming for him to the Pamphlet nor Licence and Priuilege of Impression as all Books published by Authoritie by English Protestants ought to haue And therefore to be accompted a Libell Touching the other of proouing his Intent by our owne Dogmaticall Principles and Publique Positions it is so impudent an vntrueth That if all his falsely applied Authorities were to be admitted for Gospel yet not one such Dogmaticall and Publike Position or Practise to the dâ—sgrace of our holy Religion and to ratifie his slaunderous accusâ—tion is registred in his whole Discouery Except this Accuser will accuse and conuict himselfe of treason both with God and man to endite his Maiesty our gratious Soueraine Rat. 1. pag. 1. 2. 3. 4 5. rat 2. 3. of highest disobedience to his King Creator in heauen engrossing him in the Catologue of censured excommunicate and denounced Hereticks Apostataes Tirants and Vsurpers which if he intendeth to doe at his first entrance he hath committed a crime Laesae Maiestatis if the lawe of Q. Elizabeth be not dead Statut. 13. Elizâ—b â—a 1. with her selfe If he will not be expounded in such sence and to place all the honorable and inferior Magistrates and Protestants also not in Authority in that order proportion of degrees obserued a paradoxe most monstrous and not to bee
with whome Io de Turrecrem Augustinâ—s de Ancona Castro and other Diuines consent which Câ—nsure Wickclâ—ffe and hiâ— Protestant succâ—ssors did impâ—â—e vppon Pâ—incâ—s and temporall Magistrates eyther for hâ—râ—siâ— or any other â—rime Others as Sâ—â—us â—anus and Cordubensiâ— affirâ—e in that 〈…〉 â—o be deposâ—d And such â—â— the discipline of the Chuâ—ch of God that these men and all Cathoâ—ike â—choâ—les euen in Rome it selfe as confidâ—ntâ—y dispâ—t thâ—sâ— qâ—estions for whâ—â—â—aâ—se hâ—w and when and by Panormitaâ— sup caâ— Significaâ—â—i Canonist in c. Si Pâ—â—â— whom Popes may be dâ—posed aâ— they doâ— eithâ—r speake or write of the greatest pâ—iuiâ—edges of thâ—t Apostolike See And Panormitanus a Canonist with others iâ— so confident in this businesse that they teach a Pope may be dâ—posed for any sinne that is scandalous to the Châ—â—ch of Christ if he be incâ—â—rigible Fiftly the present Professorâ— which handle this qâ—â—stion betweene Popes aâ—d Pâ—inces doe not holde any sinâ—ulâ—r opinion tending to the indignitie or dommage of any Prâ—testant Regent more than to all othâ—rs in equâ—ll termes bâ—â— what is now by them mainâ—ained was publike dâ—ctrine befoâ—e Protestancie had either prâ—nce or peâ—ple to eâ—brace â—t and at tâ—iâ— tiâ—e do iustifie â—he like senâ—â—nce câ—ncerning all Catholiâ—e Rulers in â—qâ—all ballaunce of compâ—â—ison and â—hat openly wâ—thout â—â—proofe in thâ—ir owne domâ—â—â—ons Sixtly to giue contentment to all that will not be contentious or â—ffâ—ct to be singular in persecâ—â—ing or domagâ—ng â—he Church of God Thâ—â—e Authors doe not sâ—y that â—he 〈◊〉 power â—â— simpâ—y and â—â—â—olutely subiect to the Papall and Spâ—râ—tuall auâ—horiâ—ie but in case of iniuries offered or great impâ—diment of the spiritual good more preeminent then the tâ—mporall And in such câ—uses euen in temporall affaires and among such powers and Princes iniuries offered and iust right denied or hindered giueth a prerogatiue to equalles iure belli among Kings and ciuill Regents to recouer their owne redeeme their wrong â—equite their iniuries where the offendor denieth to make requitall Therefore seeing this Discouerer cannot finde anie such ciuil power soueraigne ouer Kinges challenged by Popes and against which hee so much inueigheth nor any other more peculiarly intended against Protestant Princes then all others in like proceedings let him draw his weapon against those by whome he is assaulted in this kind First against the Canonists and the Legists euen in England and of the Arches except they will dissent from the more receaued opinion of like profâ—ssors secondly against himselfe all Protestâ—nt write s. Against the first bicause which is his case in question they defend that the empror is lord of all the world insomâ—ch that Bartholus the great Legâ—sâ— affirmes Baâ—thol in extraâ—ag ad rep imen glosse per venerab Qui filii c. that peraduenture it is hâ—resie to teâ—ch the contrary 〈…〉 saith he it is against the scripture Exist edâ—ctum à Caesare vâ— dâ—â—â—râ—beretur orâ—is where the whole woâ—ld and Princes thereof were at his designement And which the Protestants alleadge for temporâ—ll Princes supremacie omnis anima potestatibus sublimiorjbus subdita sit therefore as he reasoneth all Princes be subiect to him as the highest power And in this case of Armes and death which this man so often obiecteth the cause is more daungerous in respect that in the whole papall and canon law of the Popes there is no penaltie of death against any hereticke or excommunicate neyther is such punnishement to bee inflicted by any spirituall Iudge or executioner But that kinde of reuenge or justice is only Codic haeret leg Adrian et Codâ—c de Iudaeis leg Quicunque prouided by the emperiall and ciuill Constitutions and by temporall Authority and brachâ—um scecuiare to be put in practise Lastly lett him battaile against himselfe and his Protestant Protestants Religion of all others is the greatest eâ—nemy to Princes and Catholique worship the most fauourable brethren which of all people in the woâ—lde that euer were or be are the most guilty in these proceedings as I will at large demonstrate hereafter and Catholikes of all most innocent For seeing all professors of Religion Israelites Pâ—gans Catholikes Protestants and all others euer prescribed some meanes and manner to keepe both Rulers and the ruled in order of all people to whom that authority was attributed by any The Popes of Rome proportion of time and place cousidered haue beene the actors of the fewest translations of titles in Princes Not aboue foure or fiue examples can be giuen in the whole christian worlde in aboue 1500 yeares and not many excommunications from the first of â—hillipâ—e the first Christian Emperour as some suppose by the Eusch histor Pope of Rome or of Archadâ—â—s by Pope Innoc nâ—â—us the first within 400 yeares after Christ when the Prophettes and Priests of Niceâ—hor hâ—st in Arcâ—ad Iurie deposed more in one Kingdome and the excesse of the Paans is not to be recited And the Protestants themselues since their originall haue deposed as many or â—ore thâ—n all the Popes in to many yeares and that onelie for Religion when for that quaâ—râ—ll not one Prince in the Popedome hath lost his Diademe nor any without common consent of the Christian worlde For Protestants I instance in the Prince of Geneua deposed and in the King of Spaine and the present Arche-duke in the Lowe Countries expelled from their Right the Kinge of Polonia in Sweueland at this present in litle better estate the Queene Regent in Scotland so made a subiect and his Maiesties mother deposed the Emperour denied his allowance of tribute for the Turkishe warres his Townes taken and â—ept against him the Duke of Loraine and others in the like predicament And the violent attempts which they haue vndertaken by rebellion agâ—inst their Princes for this quarrell of Religion haue beene more then all excommunications of Princes by Popes for any respect whatâ—oeâ—er the particulars will appeare in their proper place And whence can all these impious practises proceed with so generâ—ll apâ—lâ—â—â—e but from their most impious and rebellious publiquâ— position you haue heard before that the proces of Popes is such in this busines that no Prince except more wicked thâ—n any now liuing or as vnfoâ—tunate as some foure or fiue in all the time of Christianâ—ty in the worlde neede stand in daunger Contrariewise by Protestant religion no sinner or no King Const Concil in aâ—â— Wickcl Luâ—â—â—â— to 6. pag. 〈…〉 Luth. Calâ—in in Dan. Suingl lib. 4. Philipp Nichol. fundâ—m Caluin Sect c. Luther denieth all obedience to Princes differing from him in Religion calling them Pilates Tyrants Herods Iudas and that his Protestants handes must be imbrued with bloud in such cases Caluin telleth that ipso facto they are bereaued If no permission of Swinglius doctrine no Prince with him and all bee Martirs that be slaine in rebellion for that quarrell The english Protestant Confer 14. 1604 pag. 47. Luther lib. capt Babyl Notes
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
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.
protestants proceedings in dissimulaâ—ion and aeqâ—â—â—ocating Was not the behauiour of Luther the Eâ—angelist so vile in this kinde that neuer any pillâ—ry-mate so behâ—ued himselfe as his owne friends Fox Sleiden and othâ—r Protestants giue demonstration and not only in Fox 2. in Luth. Sleidan lib. 1. Staphil apolog Cocl in act Luther ciuiâ—l but dâ—uine matters where bâ— all iudgement no aequiuocation may be allowed yet at his pleasure now he appealed to Pope now dâ—â—iâ—d it now recanted his errors presently defended them now sâ—bâ—â—tted him selâ—e to Cardinall Câ—â—etan now refused it now teachâ—ng one now another religion aâ— best serued his purpose all hiâ— owne wâ—itings be still witnâ—sses against him So did the Protestants of England dissemble flatter change and rechange both their faith and their fashions to please King Henry the eight the protectorâ— of Kâ—ng Edward the sixt and Queene Elizabeth as histories and statutes are testimony to thâ—ir confusion The like and worse cogging lying aequiuocating and dissembling was practised by Calum as the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury Beza and Suru pret diseipl Beza â—n viâ— Caâ—u Staphil Apolog. others beare râ—cord for which he was banished Geneua for a lying and dissembling seducer and by such trades deluded the Artizans and â—itâ—zens there the second tiâ—e restord himself obtaind principallity by such meanes So also he â—oosened the Tygurines and among his Disâ—iples Iura perâ—â—ra seâ—ua fidem sciliâ—et Caluiâ—iaâ—um was made a dogmatical princâ—ple In England Cramner the pâ—otestant Archbishop oâ— Canterbury in his time and the most â—ubliâ—e man of that profession cannot be excused Fox himsâ—lfe being Iudge from câ—unterfaiting the hands of 50. conuocaâ—â—on Fox 10. â— in Câ—â—nmar men to giue a lying credit to his false cause as Doctor Weston proued against him in the publike Schooles of Oxford and in the same place Doctor Martiâ— made demonstration how hee had forsworne himseâ—â—e and beene periured in a most high degree twice at the least swearing obedience to the Sea of Rome And most certaine it is that so often he had sworne to the supremacie of King Henry the eight and King Edward the sixt and yet after all this againe in the daies of Queenâ— Mary he swore a new obedience to the Pope And Cranmer himselfe confessed hee had sworne such contrary oathes but excused it by aequiuocation so much condemned by this accuser affirming as his words doe signifie that he spake one thing and meant another which in causes of râ—ligion such as this all men condemne for greatest wickednesse For what authority soeuer men haue to examine God hath alwaies a true right vnto his honour not to be denied Such was the proceeding also of Bucer and Peter Martyr the two great Protestant professors of diuinity in Cambridge and Oxford whom the whole English Gospel could not match and yet contrary to their foâ—mer profession and doctrine they taught what the Parliament would please to appoint And I would demand whether all the Protestâ—nt Adherents to the Dukes of Northumberland and Suffolke were not in this case of aequiuocation and is it not both now ordinary to Puâ—itans who in acknowledging externally his Maiesties supremacy and supprâ—ssing their Presbâ—terie an essentiall point of their faith and note of their Church doe not as they beleeue in minde And externally communicate in Churches â—eruice and sacraments with Protestants whom and whose religion they condemne to hell and the Protestants dissemble lâ—kewise in the Kings supremacy The tenth Reason confuted and returned CHAP. XI THe tenth and last Obiection being no new Reason but an Epilogus of the former that is All Romish Priests as Priests to professe some and other some All of those sedâ—ious posirions are before confuted and prooued in euery particular to be vntrue and needeth no further answer being before euident that neither all Priests nor any one Priest as a Priest doth or can maintaine any one disobedient or seditious opinion And whatsoeuer this man more malitiously than truly or wisely saith That all Priests in the Popish Seminaries vow obedience to their superiors and therefore that the superiors maintaining such Seditious positions the schollers are bound to their doâ—â—rine These assertions be most falsly obiected for first the schollers doe not vowe any obedience to their Superiors and that obedience which they promise practise is in obseruing the collegiall â—â—â—es and constitutions as in Cambridge and Oxford all Schollers when they be matriculated ingraffed to the Vniuersity do accustome there is neither vow oth nor promise to obey theÌ„ in their doctrin Secondlie this cannot be either vowed punished or performed for no Rector of any colledge is ordinarily a Reader of diuinitie in his Colledge Thirdly the Caholike Students neither of England or any other Nation are bound to defend their masters reading but in matters of faith and generallie receaued doctrine And although Bellarmine did some times read controâ—ersies in Rome And Doctor Gifford was a professor in Rhemes Doctor Stapleton at Louaine and the Cardinall at Doway which be all readers to English which he alleageth yet not all English Priests nor the tenth part of them were Auditors and Schollers to these professors and yet there is not any one sentence alleaged from any of them or any other Catholike which in true sence will bring any preiudice to our most holy and innocent cause as I haue made demonstration Thus it absolutely remaineth proued most gratious Prince that if the opinion of any Diuines concerning deposing Princes or making warre against them by subiects be treasonable and not tollerable in a Common-weale it is in the Protestant profession by many degrees exceeding any other both for opinion and practise and that the opinion of Catholikes is the least dangerous to this or any State And for this Discouerer if his late recited Arguments that schollers must agree with their Maisters in sentence shall stand good himselfe with all Ministers of his profession being the disciples of so many seditions and rebellions Pedagogues his and their Ancestors in protestancy must also with them be guilty in that kinde The Conclusion VVHerefore most mercifull Soueraigne the poore innocent and distressed Catholiques of this kingedome humbly entreat licence to propose that question to your Maiestie our earthly King which guiltlesse and holy Iob in his greatest Iob c. â— afflictions so confidently in this manner disputed with his Creaâ—or and King in heauen Answer me how great iniquities and sinnes I haue shew vnto me my wickednesse and offences why doe you hide your face and suppose mee for your enemie you shew your power against a leafe tossed with the winde and doe persecute dried stubble Non peccaâ—â— in amaritudinibus moratur oculus meus wee haue not as we hope sinned against you and yet our eyes remaine in bitternesse of teares and can behold nothing but matter of mourning and lamentation Our nature and Nation cannot turne your gracious aspect away for all of