another Psalme how dareth God to say if he be so very wary Ad alligandos Reges eorum in compedibâ—s Nobiles eorum in manicis serreâ— to bind Kings in feâ—ters and their Noble men in iron manacles And finally how warily was this spoken by the holy Ghost not offending Princes Potentates when he sayth Potentes potenter tormenta paâ—ientur powerfull men shall suffer poweâ—full tormeÌ„ts Was almighty God wary in these speaches But let vs see how this Prince-flatterer doth go about to proue this his foolish impieâ—y out of the Scripture it selfe to wit out of the second Psalme before cited and thereby let the Reader learne what assurance men haue of the true sense of any Scripture by him and his alleaged when it is powdered and seasoned with their exposition God himselfe is very wary saith he in speaking to Princes for that Psalme which of all the Psalmes is most dredâ—ull to Kings and begins with a thundring expostulation Quare fremuerunt gentes Reges astiterunt it pleaseth him to conclude not with a menacing extrusion but with a calme persuasion Osculemini filium ne irascatur Kisse the sonne leaâ—t he be angry or as the vulgar hath it Apprehendite disciplinaÌ„ adâ—â—it discipline And is not this a goodly discourse of Maister Barlow to proue the greatnesse of Princes and that God himselfe doth speake very wariâ—â— vnto theÌ„ The hebrew phrase Kisse the Sonne is as much to say as adore the sonne of God when he shal be man and acknowledg and obey him as your King For as learned Vatabluâ— in his notes vpon the Hebrew text doth obserue it was a signe of submission subiectioÌ„ amoÌ„gst the Iewes to kisse the Princes hand which is here meant by the phrase of the Psalmist Osculemini filium that is kisse his hands and adore him for your King which the Septuaginta Interpreters well vnderstaÌ„ding did many years before the Natiuity of our Sauiour as the Chaldean Paraphrasis in like manner translate it Apprehendite disciplinâ—â— doe you apprehend or admit the discipline and doctrine of the Sonne of God when he shall appeare in flesh and so do all the ancient Greeke and Latin Fathers interprete this passage of the Psalme nor can I see with what shew of reason or probability M. Barlow can bring it for his purpose of flattering Kings in this place he saith that God concludeth not here with a menacing extrusion of Kinges but with a calme persuasion Kisse the sonne this kissing seemes perhaps to him an amiable thing but if it be interpreted as now I haue shewed and S. Hierome doth expound it for a matter of subiection humiliation and of admitting discipline it seemeth not oftentimes so sweet pleasant to Princes as M. Barlow would haue it But what shall we say to other phrases here contayned as wheÌ„ Kings Princes do swell take counsaile against God and his Christ saying Let vs breake their bands and cast of their yoake then sayth the Prophet He that sitteth in heauen will scorne them and our Lord will scoffe at them Then will he speake vnto them in his wrath and terrify them in his fury A little after he sayth That he shall rule them with an iron-rod and shall breake theÌ„ in pieces like a potters vessell And now M. Barlow is this a calme perswasioÌ„ is here no menacing extrusion threatned to Princes wheÌ„ they are threatned to be crushed like a potters vessell Nay marke also the subsequeÌ„t perswasioÌ„ Nunc ergo Reges intelligite c. Now therfore vnderstaÌ„d ô ye Kings be wise Learne how to iudg the earth Serue god in feare and reioyce in him with trembling Admit discipline least he wax angry and you perish froÌ„ your way for so hath the Hebrue text wheÌ„ his wrath shal be but a little kindled happy are all those that trust in him What can be spoken more seuerely to Princes then all this Or was this Psalme well chosen by M. Barlow for his purpose of flattering Kinges and Princes in respect of Gods warynes in his speaches Whereas no Psalme amongst all the rest vttereth so much terror vnto them only the words osculemini Filium do seeme to haue drawne him to this impertinent imagination But now let vs see his Conclusion and application against the Popes pretending authority ouer Kinges for which all the rest hitherto hath bene brought in Ne pereatis de via iusta least you loose the right way to heauen and your right in the crowne of heauen he sayd not your titles to your Kingdomes nor right to your Crownes vpon earth God thought it neuer fit to support his Church by daring of Princes Professors of his name A Godly speach fitting for soe spirituall a man as this Doctour seemeth to bee if for refusing discipline and obedience God doth threaten to Princes the losse of heauen with all the right they haue to that euerlasting Crowne and Kingdome which includeth also their eternall condemnation to hell-fire and torments What great priuiledge is it to spare their titles to their temporall crownes kingdomes on earth that may be lost in an instant and long cannot indure why should God thinke it so inconuenient to support his Church by daring of Princes least perhaps they should wax angry and dare him againe For so it seemeth by the reason giuen heere least by daring they should not be nourishing Fathers to the sayd Church but eyther pinchiâ—g suppressors or cold sauourers And why For that God dareth them forsooth with leesing their temporall states His daring for leesing of heauen seemeth not to trouble them so much but their perill to loose their temporall kingdome if they be incorrigible is the thing that principally troubleth them according to this wise discourse of M. Barlow Doe not his friends take pitty of his folly If I would take vpon me to lay forth the examples that are found in Scriptures of Gods plaine speaches menacing threates vnto Princes let M. Barlow call them darings if he will it would quickly appeare how vaine and prophane the former obseruation of his is that God is so very wary in his speaches towards them For what will you say to that speach of his to King Sennacherib Ponam circulum in naribus tuis camum in labijs tâ—â—s reducaÌ„ in viam per quam venisti I will put a ring in thy nostrills a bit in thy mouth and will bring thee back into the way by which thou didest come That also of Nabuchodonosor the most potent King of Babylon as the Scripture calleth him Eijcient te ab hominibus cum bestijs serisque erit habitatio tua soenum vt bos comedes They shall cast thee out from the company of men and thy dwelling shal be amongst wild beasts thou shalt eat hay as an oxe Was this a wary and respectâ—ue speach to so great a King and Monarch That other speach also of God to King Achab of
ouer by Guntar at his last passage for albeit I haue determined with my selfe in this my banisâ—ment to spend my tyme in other studies more profitable then in contention about controuersies Yet must I needs accâ—pt kindly of your good will in making me partaker of your newes there And more glad should I haue byn if you had aduertised me what your and other mens opinion was of the Booke in your partes then that you request me to write our mens iudgment from hence And yet for so much as you require it so earnestly at my hands and that the party is to returne presently I shall say somewhat with the greatest breuity that I can albeit I do not doubt but that the parties that are principally interessed thereâ—â—â—ill answere the same much more largely First then for the Author for so much as he setteth 〈◊〉 downe his name it seemeth not so easy to ghesse yet the more generall opinion in these partes is that as that odious Discouery of Roman doâ—trine and practises which of late you haue seene answered was cast forth against the Catholickes vnder the cyphred name of T. M. with direction as he said from Superiours the Authoâ—â— being in deede but an inferiour Minister so diuers thinke it to be probable that this other booke also coÌ„meth from some other T. M. of like condition tâ—ough in respect of his office somewhat neerer to his Maiâ—sty to whom perhaps he might shew the same as the other dedicated his and thereupon might presume to set it forth Authoritate Regia as in the first front of the booke is set downe somewhat difâ—â—rent from other bookes and cause it to be printed by Barker his Maiâ—sties Printer and adorned in the second page with the Kings Armes and other like deuises wherin our English Ministers do grâ—â— now to be very bold and do hope to haue in tyme the hand which Scottish Ministers once had But I most certainly do perswade my selfe that his Maiestie neuer read aduisedly all that in this Booke is contayned For that I take him to be of such iudgement honour as â—e would neuer haue let passe sundry thinges that here are published contrary to them both Thus I wrote at that tyme of my coniecture about the Author of the said Apology alleaging also certayne reasons in both the foresayd kindes which albeit they be ouerlong to be repeated heere yet one or two of ech kind especially such as Master Barlow pretendeth to answere may not be pretermitted As for example sayd I his Highnes great iudgmeÌ„t would presently haue discouered that the state oâ— the qâ—â—stion is twice or thrice changed in this Apology and that thinâ— proued by allegations of Scripturesâ— Fathersâ— Councels which tâ—e aâ—uerse part dâ—nyâ—th not as after in due place I shall shew And againe â—e â—ould â—â—uâ—r haue let passe so maniâ—est an ouersight as is 〈…〉 oâ— Cardiâ—all Bellâ—â—mine with â—leuen seuerall plaâ—es oâ—â—â—nâ—â—adâ—â—â—â—â—n to himâ—elâ—e in his workes wheras in the true natuâ—e o◠〈…〉 or contrariety no one of them can be proued or mantayned as euery man that vnderstandeth the latinâ—onâ—ue will but looke vpon Bellarmine himselfe will presenâ—ly find This was one of my reasons besides diuers other that I alleaged in that place all which for so much as it pleaseth Maister Barlow to deferre the answere thereof to another place afterwards and now to satisfy a reason only of certaine contemptuous speach vsed against the Pope and Cardinall Bellarmine I shall here also make repetition of my wordes therein Thus then I wrote In like manner wheras his Maiestie is knowne to be a Prince of most honorable respects in treaty and vsage of others especially men of honour dignity it is to be thought that he would neuer haue consented if he had but seene the Booke with any attention that those phrases of contempt not only against the Pope at least as a temporall Prince but neyther against the Cardinall calling him by the name of Maister Bellarmine should haue passed For so much as both the Emperour and greatest Kings of ChristeÌ„dome do name that dignity with honour And it seemeth no lesse dissonant to cal a Cardinal Maister then if a man should call the chiefest dignities of our Crowne by that name as M. Chancellour M. Treasurer M. Duke M. Earie M. Archbishop M. Bancroft which I asure my selfe his Maiestie would in law of Honour condemne if any externe Subiect or Prince should vse to men of that Sate in our countrey though he were of different religion Wherfore I rest most assured that this proceeded either out of the Ministers lacke of modesty or charity that if his Maiestie had had the perusall of the Booke before it came forth he would presently haue giuen a dash of his pen ouer it with effectuall order to remedy such ouersights of inciuility So I then And if I were deceiued in iudgement as now it seemeth I was for that it pleaâ—eth his Maiesty to take the matter vpon himselfe to auouch that Booke to be his yet in reason can it not be taken euill at my handes that followed those coniectures and sought rather to deryue vpon others the pointes which in that booke I misliked then to touch so great a personage as was and is my Prince Yea in all duty and good manners I had obligation to conceale his Maiesties name for so much as himselfe concealed the same and when any Prince will not be knowne to be a doer in action as in this it seemeth he would not at that tyme I know not with what dutifull respect any subiect might publish the same though he did suspect that he had part therin For that subiects must seeme to know no more in Princes affaires then themselues are willing to haue known And consequently when I saw that his Maiesty concealed his name I thought it rather duty to seeke reasons to confirme couer the same then by presuÌ„ption to enter into Princes secrets and to reueale them And hauing thus rendred a reason of my doings in this behalfe it remaineth that wee see what Maister Barlow hath to say against it for somewhat he must say wheresoeuer he find it though neuer so impertinent to the purpose hauing taken vpon him to contradict and plead against me in all pointes and reaceaued his â—ee before hand as may appeare by the possession he hath gotten of a rich benefice and hopeth for more First then he runneth to a ridiculous imitation of my former reasons whereby to seeke out whether Persons the Iesuite were the true author of my Lettter or no from passage to passage doth furnish his style with some railing offals out of M. VVatsons Quodlibets against him which though the author recalled and sore repented at his death as is publikely knowne and testified by them that stood by and heard him yet this charitable Prelate wil not suffer his synne to dye with him but will needs
not occurred any such particular occasion of actuall deposing of temporall Princes as did afterwards wherof wee haue treated before for that Princes were not so exorbitant yet the ground and origen of deposing Princes which is excommunication and exclusion from the body of the Church cannot be denied to haue byn practised often in those former ages And when a temporall Prince is so cast out of the Church by excommunication made no member therof much lesse may he be Head if he perseuere obstinate and seeke to infect and destroy the whole body I say in this case what shall the sayd Church and Gouernours therof doe with such a Prince Wherin I sayd that all Catholike Deuines doe agree that our Sauiour in this case hath not left his Church vnprouided of some remedy for that otherwise his diuine prouidence might seeme to haue bene defectuous not to haue left a remedy for so great and vniuersall an euill But now at this reason as strongly pressing him M. Barlow stormeth and stampeth exceedingly saying first it is a tryuiall obiection borrowed by me from Cardinall Allens Apology and by vs both from one Bertrand that vseth the same in his glosse vpon a place of the Canon law But what if all this were true as it is not What were this to the purpose Let the force of the reason be considered for that only importeth Nay but M. Barlow will make vs first a little merriment as he calleth it related out of Ludonicus Viâ—es who telleth this tale affirming that a certaine Countrey man whose Asse drunke at a water where the moone shined and after the sayd moone-light vanished away the Countrey-man sayd that the moone was lost or els it was in his Asses belly and this tale he very fondly applyeth to our present matter that eyther the Popes triple Crowne must haue power ouer Princes or Gods prouidence in the world must be lost and so from this merriment he passeth to a veyne of serious rayling saying that this speach of mine is irreuerent against God yea blasphemous and sauouring of the very spirit of Antichrist But this shall appeare presently by the discussion that is to ensue thereby also will appeare what spirit speaketh in this Minister to wit the most base and abiect spirit of prophane flâ—ttery towards Princes that euer proceeded from any Christian tongue or pen for he maketh God afraid of temporal Kings to walke so warily in his speaches towards them especially in their iealousies as if he were in dread of their power and anger The discourse is rare and singular and I neuer read the deuise in any before at leastwise so playnly set downe and therfore I beseech the Reader to lend me an attentiue eare whilst it is discussed He beginneth this flattery thus for I will set downe his speach more faithfully then he hath any thing of mine which he continually corrupteth and peruerteth as diuers times now I haue aduerâ—ised It is naturall to Kings to be iealous of their thrones wherin they can abide neither Mâ—te for diuision not Check-mate for scorne It cost Adoniah his life for asking Abishag to wife because Salomon did therby take occasion â—â— suspect that he which desired the Fathers bedfellow would also aspire tâ— the brothers throne It was not the blasphemie layd to our Sauiours charge by the Iewes that moued Pilate to sentence him that which hastened his death was a iealous opinion though a false perswasion that he should be a King and therby defeate Caesar of his claime to Iury. In that poynt we shall see God himselfe to be very wary for 〈◊〉 that Psalme which of the Scriptures is the most threatfull to Kings begins with a thundring expostulatioÌ„ Quare â—remuâ—runt gentes aâ—â—iterunt Reges it pleaseth him to conclude it not with a menâ—cing extrusion but with a calme perswasion Osculemini filium or as the vulgar hath it Apprehendite disciplinam And what is that Be wise ô ye Kings and serue the Lord in feare if not wâ—atâ— the danger Ne perâ—atis de via iuâ—ta that is least you loose the right way to heauen and your right in the Crowne of heauen he sayd â—ot your Titles to your Kingdomes nor right to your Crownes on earth God neuer thought it fit to support his Church by daring of Princes prosessors of his name for that had bene the way to haue made them not nourishing Fathers but eyther pinching suppressours or at least cold and wary sauourers of the same Thus far M. Barlow to shew that Almighty God dealeth more warily and respectiuely with temporall Princes theÌ„ doth the Pope which threatneth them losse of their Kingdomes if they be incorrigible and to this effect abuseth pittifully this Psalme here alledged as presently we shall shew But first I would demaund of him why he bringeth in that iealousy of Princes concerning their thrones and that Mate for diuision or Check-mate for scorne Doth he allow of these iealousies as proceeding from sanctity Doth he commend that fact of Salomon for making away his brother Adoniah for asking only Abishag to be his wife Sure I am that diuers ancient Fathers do condemne the same a learned interpreter of this age sayth Excuset qui scit mihi 〈◊〉 occurrit legitiâ—â—a Salomonis excusatio c. Let him defend Salomon that knoweth how to do it for vnto me no lawfull excuse of Salomons fact occurreth for that the sentence of death seemeth to me not only seuere but also vniust So he Now as for the iealousie of Pilate wherby he made away our Sauiour I suppose M. Barlow will not be so shamelesse as to commend the same except Pilate were aliue againe and he his Chaplaine for then perhaps the matter were doubtfull But wherto now doth all this Preface pertaine of Princes iealousies The matter is cleare that it tendeth to shew what great reason God hath to walke warily least he offend Kings and Princes For so it followeth imediately in that point Therefore and marke the inference therefore we shall see God himselfe to be very wary But wherof M. Barlow Is he so wary of not putting Kings and Princes in feare iealousie of their thrones as you call them Why is God afrayd of them For that your therefore would seeme to infer Or is his throne lesse or more weake theÌ„ theirs How then is it ascribed vnto him as a peculiar property Deposuit Potentes de sede exaltauit huâ—riles he hath put downe the powerfull from their seates and thrones and exalted the humble How is it sayd of him Qui aufert spiritum Principum est terribilis Regibus terrae who taketh away the spirit of Princes and is terrible to the Kings of the earth And yet further qui balteum Regum dissoluit pracingit fune renes eorum he that doth loose take from theÌ„ the warlike girdle girdeth their loynes with a rope And in
actiuum siue pecâ—â—â—â—â—â—tâ—rius qui scandalizaâ—etur There may be notwithstanding an actiue scandall giuen without the sinne of another man that is scandalized which is to say that one man may sâ—eke to induce another man by word or fact to sinne which is the scandall giuen and yet the same not to be taken by the other for that the sayd other consenteth not but resisteth or contemneth the sayd scandall giuen or offered And of this there may be fiue hundred examples alleadged And I cannot but wonder at M. Barlowes grosâ—e ouersight in this behalfe for when himselfe for example sake in a Sermon doth go about to perswade his hearers against the Reall Presence against the Sacramentall Confession of their sinnes against their Spirituall Obedience to their Supreme Pastour and other such poynts that we that be Catholikes do hold to be great sinnes this we say to be a scandall actiue inducing men to fall into sinne so that in him the scandall is giuen but many of his auditours do not take this scandall nor are induced to sinne by him for that they belieue him not nor esteeme him but for a deceiuer So that here is a scandall actiue without a passiue and scandall giuen but not taken And the like example may be giuen of facts As if a man should see M. Barlow to eate flesh and feed freely on fasting dayes and in the lent which perhaps were not hard to find him doing here is a scandall giuen but it is not necessary that euery one that seeth him doe this should fall and follow his fact and so take the scandall For many will say to themselues that M. Barlow followeth not the life of S. Antony or S. Hilarion other Saints that were great fasters but a good fellowes life that loueth a good morsell when he hath it making no difference of dayes or meâ—tes for auoiding of superstition for that this is pleasant Deuinity agreeing to his appetite Some other would passe further and say with the Apostle Animalis hâ—mo non percipit ea quae sunt spiritus Dei the sensuall man giuenâ— to his belly vnderstaÌ„deth not the things that belong to the spirit of God But howsoeuer it be here is a scandal giuen not taken consequently M. Barl. is much ouertaken in this to say there is no scandal giuen if it be not taken But now followeth a far greater abuse against Thomas Aquinas in peruerting his whole discourse meaning with inteÌ„t therby to disgrace the consciences of our English Catholiks that do refuse the Oath For it followeth immediatly in M. â—arlow If their conscienceâ— be offended at it they 〈◊〉 sayth Aquinas eyther simply ignoranâ— or wickedly maliâ—â—â—â—s◠〈…〉 last rather And these words of simply ignorant or wickedly â—â—â—â—cious he layeth forth to the view in a different letter 〈◊〉 markable to all and thereby would haue vs thinke that they are so set downe by Aquinaâ— himselfe adding also the reason of Aquinas as he sayth â—or that he which is well instrâ—cted and truly sanctiâ—ied can take no offence though giuen neuer so openly But if you marke this discourse of M. Barlow you shall find it intricate and difficult to be vnderstood which iâ— the marke he shooteth at I meane not to be vnderstood as els where I haue notified but much more would you discouer detest his fraud if you looke vpon Aquinas himselfe in his 43. question about scandal deuided into eight seuerall questions or articles all which M. Barlow hideth as before I haue noted And albeit he founded himselfe wholy vpon him as in this place you see and dotâ— quote him twice in the margent yet doth he not vouchsafe to name any one part or place of Aquinas his workes where he handleth this matter But we haue found the place and shall cleare the fraud as briefly as may be When S. Thomas Aquinas had shewed in his first article the definition of Scandal that It is an euill speach and fact giuing occasion to another man of spirituall ruyne or â—alling into sâ—â—â— by occasion of this definition had declared diuers other pointes concerning the same as that there is a scandall actiue and passiue giuen and taken giuen when a maâ— doth giue occasion by his speach or deeds to draw anotheâ— man to sinne and this either out of his owne purpose and intention which is the most malicious kind of actiue scandall or for that his speach or fact being naught is of it selfe inductiue to sinne though not intended by the scandalizer And that passiue scandall is when any man is induced and falleth into sinne by another mans speach or act and this eyther with ground or without it as presâ—tly shal be shewed After this I say S. Thomas in his seauenth article doth declare how that sometime there may be a passiue scandall without an actiue or taken and not giuen as when one is scandalized and falleth into sinne by another mans fact or speach without a iust cause and this eyther of malice by misinterpreting his wordes or deedes or by ignorance or infirmity by mistaking the same The first is called Scandalum Pharisaeorum the scandall of Pharises for that these people did maliciously so misinterprete the wordes and factes of our Sauiour to an euill senâ—e therby fell into synne themselues the other is called Scandalum Pusillorum the scandall of weaklings for that they are scandalized and fall into sin by infirmity or mistaking Now then sayth S. Thomas for so much as wee may not scandalize our brethren or giue them any iust occasion by our words or actions to fall into sinne vnder so grieuous and horrible threatnings as our Sauiour threatneth in the Ghospell what shall we do when we see any man scandalized without a iust cause Wherunto he answereth that if it be the scandall of Pharises that is to say wilful and out of malice we must let them alone according to our Sauiours doctrine Matth. 15. and go forward in our doings as himselfe did But if the scandall which they take do ariâ—e by reason of infirmity or ignorance then ought we to instruct them and giue them reason of our doings and sometimes also deferr our actions vntill the occasion of scandall be taken awayâ— Si autem post redditam rationem huiâ—smâ—di scandâ—lum dâ—ret iam vidâ—tur ex â—â—alitia â—sseâ— But if after we haue yielded the reason of our doings the sayd party remayneth scandalized stillâ— now it seemeth that his scandall is not of infirmity but of malice This is the doctrine of S. Thomas which M. Barlow applieth to the Consciences of our English Catholikes that refuse the Oath which is hard to say whether he doth it eyther of ignorance or of malice or of both But sure I am he abuseth egregiously the meaning of S. Thomas who writeth this of those only that take scandall and occasion of fal where none is giuenâ— this eyther out of
malice or infirmity by misconstring or by misunderstanding as you haue heard But in our case there is the vrging of the Oath both by speach penalty which Oath being contrary to thâ—â—r consciences as they are Catholickes and yet swearing the same they fall and run into the ruine of their soules by that meanes and this neither out of malice nor ignorance but rather out of a certayne weakenesse culpable that is sinfull both to themselues and to the vrgers therof So as what S. Thomas speaketh of one sort of men M. Barlâ—â— sliely applieth it to the other Neyther doth S. Thomâ—â— vse these bitter speaches of simply ignorant or wickedly malicioâ—â— as before I haue noted much lesse the third clause and the laâ—â— rather But least of all doth he adde that reason which here is touched to wit For that he who is instructed or truly sanctified can take no offence though giuen neuer so openly For S. Thomas doth not vse the wordes instructed or sanctified but only maketh the title of his fifth article thus Vtrum scandâ—â—â—â— passiuum possit etiam in perfectos cadere Whether a scandall passiue may fall euen vpon such men as are perfect which â—e proueth that it cannot for that a passiue scandal importing an offence taken by other mens words or works whereby the scandalized vpon perturbation depart from God and fall into sin perfect men are so firmly vnited vnto God to his holy will in all things as no euil words or works of men can wrest theÌ„ aside from the same according to the wordes of the Psalme before recited to wit Such as do 〈◊〉 thy law haue much peace and suffer no scandall and consequenâ—ly perfect men cannot take passiue scandal and much lesse commit actiue without departing from their perfectioÌ„ And such men may be accompted in our case those Catholickes that would not be scandalized nor fall into sin and ruine of their soules by the vnlawfull Oath offered vnto them but chose rather to incur the penalty of the law The other as more imperfect tooke the scandall that was giuen them and eyther must be presumed to haue sworne against their consciences if they were Catholickes or to haue followed an erroneous conscience in this matter if they tooke the Oath as it lieth as may appeare by the declaration of the Sea Apostolicke Well then to conclude let vs repeat briefly M. Barl. contexture and see his defects Is the exacting of the Oath saith he a scandall actiue in our Magistrates then is it passiue in their Catholickes Which inference I haue allowed in some Catholickes of the weaker sort that tooke the Oath but not in all for it is no scandall giuen saith he if it be not taken This I haue shewed to be very false It followeth If their consciences be offended at it they are saith Aquinas eyther simply ignorant or wickedly malicious This I haue shewed for the later part not to be in Aquinas and for the former euill applied and falsly alleadged euill applied for those wordes which in Aquinas his sense appertayne to weake Catholickes that tooke the Oath this man ascribeth to the more constant that refused the same Misalleaged also it is for that Aquinas sayth not 〈◊〉 their consciences be offended at it for that it is another thing for consciences to be offended at a thing and mislike the same then to be scandalized fall therby into sinne for the former may be in perfect men yea the more perfect they be the more are they offended and grieued with euill things that may scandalize but the later cannot as now out of S. Thomas hath bene declared And againe a man may be scandalized and fall into sinne by another mans word or act that offendeth him not but rather pleaseth him as when a yong man by some lasciuious speach or fact of his companion should fall into fornication himselfe he is scandalized therby but not offended So as M. Barlow seemeth to speake exactly in nothing for neyther doth he translate well the word perfect vsed by S. Thomas oâ— perfect men which are not subiect to scandall by the words well instructed and truly sanctified for that a man may be well instructed and yet not perfect in maistering his passions according to the saying of the Poet Video meliorae proboque deteriora sequor instruction may teach him what he should do yet not alwayes make him perfect in doing How many well instructed Protestants yea Ministers haue you in England who if they should receiue a scandall actiue from one of their â—ellowes by a box on the care would be so scandalized as they woâ—ld returne him a passiue for requitall And yet is not this for lacke of iâ—struction but of patience rather which perfect men hâ—â—â— and you M. Barlow had not when you gaue the poore fellow that came to be confirmed so heauy a blow vnder the care in Lincolne Church with which as I haue bene credibly informed you felled him to the ground for no other matter then because he smiled vpon you A rare example of Bishoply patience such as I thinke was neuer seene in that Church before Neither is euery man truly sanctified to be reputed for perfect on whome scandall may not fall for that a Iew or a Gentile newly baptized are truly sanctified and yet if you should exact workes of perfection at their hands as patience in aduersities mortification of their passions appetites contempt of the world stability and immobility in Gods loue and seruice perhaps you should not find the same Wherfore by perfect men that cannot be scandalized is signified a far different thing in S. Thomas then well insâ—ructâ—d or truly sanctified And it is very fond that M. Barlow yet addeth againe that these well instrâ—cted and truly sanctified men can take no offence though giuen neuer so openly for that no soâ—t of men are more offended grieued and vexed with the open offence of Almighty God tâ—â—n these that are well iâ—structâ—d and truly sanctified for that their zeale is greater then of any other as we see in our Sauiour who beholding the offence giueÌ„ to his Father by the abuse of his House was so offended therat as that he made a whip to driue theÌ„ out vnto to which the Apostle applied those wordes of the Prophet The zeale of thy House hath eaten consumed me To which effect also K. Dauid said in great feruour Tabescere me seâ—it zelus meâ— quia obliti sunt verba tua inimici mei My zeale hath made me wither away and consume for that my enemies were forgetfull of thy words And many such other testimonies might be alleadged to shew that M. Barlow vnderstandeth not well what he writeth nor conceyueth rightly the Authours meaning whom he alleadgeth especially if he be a Schoole-Doctour as S. Thomas here alleadged is wherin as before hath bene noted he seemeth not to vnderstand the very ordinary tearmes of Schoole Diuinity and much
of greatest antiquity yea from the Apostles times themselues he giueth also a Prescription how to try them If any heresies saith he dare presume to thrust themselues into the Apostles age edant origines Ecclesiarum suarum euoluant ordines Episcoporum let them publish the beginninges of their Churches and let them lay forth the order successioÌ„ of their Bishops And with this he thought their mouthes stopt And yet in another place he canuaâ—eth theÌ„ againe with the same Prescription saying Qui estis vos vnde quando venistis vbi tam diu latuistis VVhat are you whence and when came you and where haue you lurked so long signifying herby that the Priority of time was a great argument against them And furthermore he disputing against Marcion the Hereticke hath these wordes Ego dico meum Euangelium verum Marcion suum c. I say that my Ghospell is true and Marcioâ— faith his I do affirme Marcion to haue falsified and Marcion sayth I haue done it who shal determine the matter between vs but the difference of time that will giue Authority to that which shal be found to be most ancient and pronounce that to be corrupted which shal be proued to be the later So as here supposing that which before we haue touched that Catholick doctrine was planted first before any heresy sprang vp by the Prescription of time is not only a sound argument in case of religion which fondly M. Barlow denieth but a conuincent demonstration also of truth and to that effect vsed commonly by all Fathers that wrote against Hereticks after Tertullian Tardè mihi saith ancient Hilarius against the Arians hos pijssimos Doctores â—taâ— nunc huiuâ— saeculi protulit sâ—râ— hâ—s habuiâ— fides mea magistros Too late hath this present age brought â—orth these pious Doctours he speaketh in scorne too late are they come to be maisters of my faith And S. Hierome writing against the Luciâ—erian Hereticks vseth the same argument Ex hâ—c ipso saith he quâ—d posteriùs instituti sunt â—os essâ— indicaâ—t â—â—os â—uturos Apostolus annunciâ—â—iâ— Euen by this it â—elâ—e that Luciâ—erans haue risen vp later they shew theÌ„selues to be those deceyuing Hereticks of whome the Apostle doth forwarn vs and bid vs take heed of And the same S. Hierom talking to an Heretick saith Cur post quadringentos annos dâ—cere â—os â—iteris quod ante nesciuimus vsque ad hunc diem â—ine vestra doctrina Christianus mundus fuit Wherefore after foure hundred years dost thou go about to teach vs that which before we knew not Euen vntil this day the Christian world hath enduâ—ed without this your doctrine And to this effect I might alleadge the saying of many other Fathers who vse this argument of Prescription of time as a principall demonstration against Hereticks and Heresies But let vs heare the reasons alleaged by M. Barlow why Possession for hould for so are his wordes and Prescription for time may be Pleas in ciuill Courtes but no sound arguments in case of Religion For the first sayth he may be clayme by intrusion which is their case that plead for Rome the other may be antiquity of error for so is prescription without verity therefore when truth appeares let custome yeld to truth was the conclusion of a Councell So he And citeth in the margent Concil Carthag apud Cyprian But he that shall read that Councell of Carthage in S. Cyprian shall find first that these wordes are not a conclusioÌ„ of a Councell but the saying of one Bishop in that Councell to wit Zozimus of Tarassa and secondly M. Barlow wel knoweth or should know that that Councell or Synod was reiected after by aâ— the Catholik Christian world for thaâ— it was gathered in fauour of rebaptization of heretiks that were baptized in heresie as may appeare largely in S. Aâ—gustine in his booke against the Donatists where he setteth downe the sentences of diuers of that Councell and among other one of Zozimus which he sayth was this so it appeareth also in S. Cyprian Reuelatione facta veritatis 〈◊〉 error veritati when the truth is reueyled let error yeild to truth Vpon which wordes S. Augustine maketh this note Noluit quideâ— iste dicere consuetudinem sed errorem This Bishop would not say that custome sâ—ould yield but error And yet M. Barlow against the testimony of them both would needes relate it otherwise let custome yeeld to truth and say it was the Conclusion of a Councell which was neyther of the Councel nor any in the Councell for that sometims custome conteyneth truth it selfe and giueth testimony to truth and wee know it to be truth by tradition of custome so as the ancient Fathers went warily herein not so rashly against all kind of custome as M. Barlow his fellowes and followers doe But perhaps he will alledge out of M. Morton other his fellow-writers the saying of S. Cyprian himselfe in his Epistle ad Pompeium Consuetudo sine veritate vetustas erroris est Custome without truth is antiquity of error which all men will grant but maketh nothing to our case For wee suppose true religion to haue bene planted first by Christ afterward heresie to haue risen which supposall being true the argument of the Fathers before mentioned is most effectuall We were before you in Christian religion and you rose vp after vs professing a different faith from vs Ergo our religion is Catholike and yours Heresy For that this is to be accounted Catholike doctrine as M. Barlow before alledgeth himselfe out of Vincentius quod semper creditum est that alwaies hath bene beleiued since the beginning of Christianity and soe that which is most ancient is truest And where M. Barlow sayth that possession may be a claime by intrusion it may be indeed in temporall possession but not in this our case especially when it is ioyned with Prescription from antiquity For supposing that the true Catholike religion was first put in possession by our Sauiour and his Apostles as hath bene sayd and that it can be proued that this possession hath beene continued by Prescription time out of mind euen from the beginning as we offer to proue that on the contrary side no knowne interruption can be shewed of this possessioÌ„ eyther by intrusion or other wise as M. Barlow cannot proue that there hath bene nor doth he go about to proue it though he blush not to say it Possession in this case togeather with Prescription doth euince the verity of our cause And for the saying of S. Cyprian That custome without verity is the antiquity of errour though in it selfe it be true yet doth S. Augustine tell vs that it was ill applied by S. Cyprian againâ—t the custome of the Church in his dayes for not rebaptizing Heretikes when himselfe was in that errour that they ought to be rebaptized the Catholikes vrged the force of custome and
sayth M. Barloâ— to this Doth not common sense teach it to be so And thus much for the death of those our Catholike and innocent Priests whose death was pretiosa in conâ—â—ecta Domini pretious in our Lords sight that died only for testimony of his truth which if M. Barlow did as well see and feele as Queene Elizabeth doth at this day he would not so prattle as he doth Let vs see a little further He bringeth in for proofe of the Queenes mildnes an Historiographer of Genua called Bizarrus or Bizarro which in English signifieth a Mad-cap and he is brought in to tell vs certaine points of a Mad-cap indeed to wit the great moderation of her mind her in-bred clemencie though himselfe be an out-bred that she gouerned her subiects with exceeding great mildnes abhorring from bloud or putting any to death c. which belike he writing in Genua knew better then English men liuing in England who felt the smart in themselues and others whiles this man was out of the Gunshot and as it is likely well paid for his paynes for Syr Horatio Parauicino was able both for his credit and wealth to vndertake a greater matter then this And for that you M. Barlow with M. Sutcliffe and others do so often alleadge this Bizarro as an Author against vs it shall auaile much both for your credits and his to tell vs where when and by what authority he was printed for here in Italy we can heare of no such worke although some search hath bene made for him which doubtles we should do had he bene set forth in these parts and therefore we thinke him to be no Catholike writer but of a bastard brood and a Mad-cap indeed of your owne making Besides that how truly he writeth not only all England but all the whole world can testify and to omit all other most cruell massacring and bloud-shed the memory of the vnnaturall and Butcherly Tyranny executed vpon his Maiesties Mother will remaine for a most rufull example to all posterity But M. Barlow not content with externe witnesses alleadgeth also domesticall saying Your owne Priests shal speake for Queene Elizabeths lawes and then cyteth out of the book of Quodlibets a certaine pathetical exaggeration in praysing Queene Elizabeth and her lawes also against Catholickes which we esteeming to come from that good suggester Ri. Can. who suggested so notorious a lie vnto M. Mortâ—n as himselfe complaineth hath byn shewed in the late Reckoning with him we esteeme it accordingly do giue it the credit that it deserueth which is nothing at all And M. Barlow is driuen to a hard exigent wheÌ„ he stoopeth so low as to take vp these base raggs to blazon Q. Elizabeths prayses withall which a wiser man would haue byn ashamed to alleage especially knowing with what sorrow of hart the poore man that fathered that filthy worke repeÌ„ted him at his death therof asked of God the Iesuites pardon for the same as before hath bene signified OF QVEENE Elizabeths Sicknes and Death and other things belonging thereunto §. III. AFTER the former points of Queene Elizabeths lawes and executions therof made against Catholikes and Catholike Religion whereby she made her selfe most odious both at home and abroad to forrayne Princes yea to many Protestant Potentates themselues that misliked such cruelty I shewed that as the naturall effect and consequence in such causes is feare diffidence suspition and vexation of mind so grew the same vpon her very much in the course of her life especially towards her latter dayes when she was impressioned that not only Priestes and Iesuites who indeed did pray to God for her conuersion but souldiars also and Captaynes and Phisitians did seeke her death eyther by poysoning her body saddle chayre seate or somewhat else belonging vnto her as the deathes of Lopez Squier others doe testify to all which M. Barlow doth answere now by running to certayne common places and sentences that proue nothing but only that he hath bene more diligent then iudicious in gathering them out of Authours and applying them without puâ—pose for he telleth vs first out of Salust that Ingenia Regum sunt prona ad formâ—dinem the inclination of Kings are prone to feare And then out of Seneca Dâ—bia pâ—â— certis solent timere Reges Kinges are wont to feare thâ—ngs that be doubtâ—full for certayne which in my iudgement maketh more for my purpose then his Then he sayth that it was not soe with Queene Elizabeth for that carefull she was fearefull she was not wary she was but not iealous prouident but not suspicious wherin I referre me to them that knew her better then M. Barlow and to the effects themselues which are the best witnâ—sses And for that I sayd in my Letter that this griping passion of feare and iealousy did force her to lay hands vpon the bloud of the most dearest in affection and nearest of kinted that she had in this life as the Earle of Essex and his Maiesties Mother M. â—arlow comming to answer this poynt sayth neuer a word but passeth it ouer with mumme-sâ—lence and no marueile for he had sayd so much before both for the Earle and against the Earle while the Queene was a liue for him in setting â—orth his excessiue prayses and tryumph after Calâ—s voyage when he hoped to haue preferment by him and against him aâ—ter his dâ—ath when the path of promotion opened it selfe another way to wit by disgracing infaming him as I thinke the miserable man knew not what to say perswading himselâ—e wherin I thinke he erred not that whatsoeuer he should say no man would belieue or greatly care of it and therefore sylence was the best But for the thing it selfe I meane the manner of his dâ—ath I will not meddle nothing doubting but that so loose and exorbitant a life as he led being alwayes accoÌ„panied with crewes of goodfellow-Ministers that by life and doctrine taught him that way of perfection in their trade he deserued no better an end then he receiued And moreouer it may be also that the State and Queene had further reasons to moue them to seuerity against â—im then euery man knoweth although with the Queenes owne person he was thought to be further engaged for speciall â—auours receyued then that vpon the suddayne he could fall to hate her and seeke her destruction and so he protested at his death though this bloudy Sycophant in strayning his actions thoughts and intentions after his death at Paules Crosse wher in a maÌ„ may discouer supereminent malice issuing out of the roote of ambition leuelled all his speach to that end to styr vp and confirme iealousy in the Queenes mynd that they two could not liue togeather and therefore in the end of his Sermon extant now in print he left thirteene most spightfull recordes to be borne in memory whereof the sixt is in these wordes Hiâ— liâ—e a danger to the Queene marke that
also for him that seeketh to recreate Princes great men by pleasant speaches and finally also him that iesteth with a deprauing vayne he telleth how that Maister T. M. may with credit be called a Sycophant in the three first senses but not in the last sayth he for that Sycophancy must be clanculum and without witnesses but T.M. vseth this Sycophancy openly euen by the Censurers confession when his Maiesty taketh his repast that is in the hearing of many so that the party being knowne and the tale openly tould he caÌ„not be called a Sycophant saith M. Barlow But I would first demaud of him where he findeth that the word ClanculuÌ„ or Secretly must be conteined in the definition of a Sychophant for that the first prime signification and deriuation of the word doth openly repugne for as M. Barlow sayth in this place such delatores ficuum or Sycophants in Athens were honorable Magistrates that did accuse publikely and secondly in applicatioÌ„ of the word to a false accuser malicious forged crime there is no such restraint that it must be secret by any Author set downe as may be seene in Henriâ—â—s Stâ—phanus his Thesaurus where there is no restraint of the nature of a Sycâ—ophant or Sychophancy to such secrecy â—â— here M. Barlow assigneth but it is sufficient that it be a false forged malicious crime albeit if we consider the priuate place and auditory while his Maiesty taketh his repast eithâ—r by day or night in comparison of the whole body of Catholickes there calumniated in their absence there will not want also this circumstance of clanculary calumniation if M. Barlow will needs haue it necessary But now let vs passe to another point touched by M. Barlow wherin he pretendeth to be somwhat pleasant to recreate his reader with certaine iestes though with little grace as you will see The occasions of his iestes are these that for so much as this word Sycophanâ—ie is deriued of figges as now you haue vnderstood he will tell vs diuers stories of figgs some sweet some sower some pleasant some vngrateful some poysoned and the like and vnder this mâ—eaphor he will shew vs what figges T. M. and his fellowes do pâ—rhappes represent vnto his Maiestie at his table for his better recâ—eation and pastyme as namely first diuers stories of Popish feigned myracles as that sayth M. Barlow of S. Denis in France who being Byshop of Paris and beheaded carried his owne head in his hand after it was stroken of and of Clement the first who when he was cast into the sea with a milstone about his necke the sea fled three myles froÌ„ the shore and there was found a lytle Chappell ready built in the sea where his bodie was bestowed and that of S. Gregorie of Neâ—caesarea whose staâ—â—e being stuck downe by him at the banke side kept the riuer froÌ„ ouerflowing the banks and presently sprong vp and spred it sâ—lf into a nâ—ighty tree Thus he Condemning as you see our credulity in belieuing these miracles But first I would demaÌ„d of this little learned Vniuersitie anâ— their Procter M. Barlow what more religion there is in not belieuing these and other like recounted myracles then in belieuing them for so much as Infideâ—ity is an easie matter to be found euery where in the worst kind of men as Turkes Iewes and Gentiles and the worst Christians but to belieue is more hard and to be found in fewer men be it humane or diuine fayth that is required Secondly these and many other such like myracles not recounted in Scripture are not proposed as articles of fayth necessary for euery man to belieue though they being related by good and probable Authors euery pious mind will rather incline to giue them credit then scoffe â—t them as Heretickes do For that the scoffing at these things which they haue no ground of any moment to impugne sheweth but a prophane audacious and Lucianicall spirit And in this case I would demand of M. Barlow what ground he hath to scoffe so at these three miracles here set down as he doth to wit of S. Denisâ— S. Clement S. Gregory of Neocaesarea surnamed by ancient writers Thaumaturgus for the multitude and greaâ—nes of the miracles done by him Is it perhaps for that they are strange and not according to mans reason or vse of things that fall out ordinarily in the world If this were not so they were no myracles What then Do they passe perhaps Gods power to doe them This he wil be ashamed to say What then Hath he any testimonies of authors that auow the contrary and affirme that they were not true This I presume he cannot say whereas wee on the other side haue diuers Authors that affirme the same And if M. Barlow and his fellowes doe belieue many thinges of fact by humane faith for that some one probable Historiographer either Christian or prophane doth recount the same with what reason can they scoffe at vs for giuing credit to these things that are testifed by many Authors As for example the myracle of S. Denis the Areopagite of carrying his head in his hands is testified by Nicephorus Calixtus a Grecian in his second booke of Histories and twentith Chapter and by Symon Metaphrastes another Grecian before him againe in the life of S. Denis and before him againe by Hildewinus Abbot of the Monastery of Saint Denis by Paris vpon the point of eight hundred yeares agone who allâ—adgeth also an other Author elder then himself named Lysbius that had set forth the same in his writings and some other Authors in like manner all which the sayd Hildewinus gathered togeather boâ—h out of Greeke and Latin writers at the request of Ludouicus Pius King of France The other miracle also of Saynt Clement the first who was cast into the sea with an anchor about his necke but not with a milstone as M. Barlow hath deuised and that the sea went three myles backe c. and the rest heere obiected by M. Barlow is mentioned not onlie by the foresaid two Greeke Authors Nicephorus lib. 3. Histor. Cap. 18. and Metaphrastes in vita Clementis but by S. Gregorie of Towers also that liued a thousand yeares agoe in his booke de gloria Martyrum Cap. 35. 36. And no lesse the third of S. Gregory Neocaesarea surnamed Thaumaturgus that he piched his staffe vpon a banke side and kept the riuer from ouerflowing is writtâ—n and testified at large not only by the sayd Necephorus lib. 6. Cap. 17. but by a farre more ancient Father as namely by S. Gregoâ—y Nyssen brother to S. Basil which said holie man hath written the admirable life at large of the aforesaid S. Gregory Thaumaturgus well neere 1300. yeares agone which is extant in his works from the page 918. to 949. and S. Basil himself lib. de Spiritu Sancto Cap. 29. hath touched the same and after repetition of many of his miracles
the vse of that religion which they had receyued from their Ancestours from the first beginning of Christian religion planted in our English Nation and continued in possession for more then nyne hundred yeares togeather vntill the time of King Henry the eight and his children who made the first innouation and by Regall power interrupted the sayd possession wherunto the sayd possessors and ancient tenants though not presuming to demand restitutionem iâ— integrum full restitution of that which by violence was taken from them yet that they might remayne with some kind of quiet and rest for the vse of their said consciences in priuate which they promised to vse with all humility and moderation without scandall or publicke offence whereof they offered very good assurance both for this and for all other dutifull behauour in their ciuil obedience as became true subiects yea adding further also that they would inforce theÌ„selues to continue the payment of that mulct or penalty of Statute layd vpon them for their Recusancy at such a resonable agreed suÌ„me of money yearly to be paid as his Maiesty should thinke conuenient So as by this meanes they might haue some externall peace and quietnes from the continuall molestations which now they suffered in regard of their sayd consciences This was their supplication now why this should be called pride yea the height of pride highest degree of pride further the extreme height and celfitude of pride lastly the summity and sublimity of pride as M. Barlow calleth it I vnderstand not For if pride be defined to be an inordinate desire of excellency aboue others I doe not see that here in this petition either Catholikes doe prefer themselues disorderly before others but are content with a far inferiour degree then Protestants or that their desire in demaunding is disordinate whether we consider the same as it proceeded eyther from themselues to desire a thing so necessary to the health of their soules or as it is directed to his Maiesty their Prince and Soueraigne who is the person that may relieue them and consequently the laying forth of such theyr desires by ordinate meanes of humble supplication to theyr Lord and Prince cannot be called inordinatâ—s appetitus excellentiae â—a disordinate appetite of excellencie aboue others and consequently no pride much lesse celfitude of pride as M. Barlow out of his celfitude of amplification or rather height of hatred doth define it But yet let vs see briefly what reasons he frameth for this his consequence For first sayth he it is impious against God to graunt any such liberty of conscience for that God symbolically forbids such mixture in the linsy-wolsy garment Deut. 22. 11. Ergo it is height of pryde so sue for it But whoseeth not heere that neither the antecedent nor consequent haue any force God did forbid in Deuteronomy 〈…〉 garments Ergo it is sublimity of pride for Catholicks in England to sue to his Maiesty for some toleration of conscience Will their brethren the Protestants of France allow of this argument Let vs see the second Secondly sayth he it being a matter dishonourable to the King is extremity of pryde to demaund it for that honest men euen of their equalls will expect nothing but that which shall stand with the credit and reputation of the granter but this without stayne of the Kings honour cannot be grâ—â—â—ted Ergo it is height of pryde in the Catholicks to sue for it which second or minor proposition for that he imagined we would deny that it would be a staine to his Maiesties 〈◊〉 to grant it he goeth about to confirme the same by diuers weake and fond reasons not vnfit for his inuention as that his Maiestie should be contrary to himselfe and shew too much weaknes and slipperines hauing apprehended the religion which he now professeth from the cradle of his infancy resolued in his conscience mantayned it by disputation enacted it by lawes established it by Oath the like which are reasons quite from the matter For the graunting of toleration vnto Catholickes requireth not change of Religion in his Maiesty no more then it doth in the moderne King of France in granting the sayd toleration to his Protestants or then it did in the Emperor Charles the fifth when he permitted the same in Germany so as M. Barlow here rather roueth then reasoneth And further he is to be put in mind that if it be a good argument which here he vseth that his Maiesty may not change his religion for that he hath professed it from the cradle of his infancy c. which yet hath not the antiquity of fifty years by a good deale what may we say of the continuance of the Catholike religion in our countrey How many fifty yeares are passed since that cradle was rockt And why may not we make the same argument for any other sorâ— of men whatsoeuer that haue liued in any other Religion for so many yeares as his Maiesty hath done in this so little weight or substaunce is in this Ministers words who so he may seeme to say somewhat careth not greatly what it be or how litle to the purpose I leaue his other reasons as triuiall and not worth the answering as that Queene Elizabeth would not graunt this toleration of conscience that our doctrinall positions are dangerous that if his Maiesty should graunt toleration he should loose the loue of all his Subiects the like wherof some are false in the antecedent as the second and third for that our doctrinall positions truly vnderstood are not daungerous to any common wealth but salutiferous nor should his Maiesty leese the loue of his people by vsing such â—lemency to so principall a part of his people not a little pittied by the rest of most wisdome and best natures As for the first though it be true in the antecedent that shee graunted no such toleration yet is it most faâ—se in the consequent that therfore it is height of pride to demaund it of his Maiesty no reason requiring that her actions should be a necessary rule to his Maiesty for his they being no better then they were But now we must see briefly what M. Barlow answereth to all my reasons before alleadged for defending Catholickes from the imputation of height of pride in making this demaund and humble petition to his maiesty which I shall set downe in the very same words which before I vsed And surely I cannot but wonder that this Minister was not ashamed to call this the height of pride which is generally found in all Protestants neuer so humble yea the more humble and vnderlings they are the more earnest are they both in bookes speaches and preachings to proue that liberty of Conscience is most conforme to Gods law and that wresting or forcing of Consciences is the highest Tyranny that can be exercised vpon man And this we may see first in all M. Fox his History especially
exorbitant perchance virulent and impotently passionate that euer appeared in paper in our English tongue for which I intend not to follow him any further step by step and foote by foote as hitherto I haue done for it would require a huge volume weary both vs and the reader with the impertinency therof Wherfore I shal in that which is to ensue draw the rest of this his Answere to certaine particuler heads for more perspicuity and breuities sake wherby shal appeare how worthy a writer he is and well deseruing his fee that runneth into such absurdities errors ignorances corruptions and falsityes as wil be layd against him wherin I remit my selfe not only to that which is already sayd but particulerly also to that which is to ensue CONCERNING ERRORS ABSVRDITIES IGNORANCES AND FALSITIES Vttered by M. Barlow in the rest of his Answere CHAP. V. WHER AS page 49. 50. of my Letter I began in the second Part of the second Paragraph to handle whether temporall obedience were denied vnto his Maiesty by those that refused the Oath of Allegiance and that by the expresse order and commandement of the Pope in his Breue as the Apologer often affirmeth and M. Barlow still auoucheth I sayd that this was iniurious dealing towards vs who neâ—er denied this poynâ— that all dutifull ciuill obedience was to be performedâ— and that it needed not to cite both Scriptures Fathers and Councells to proue the said temporall obedience to be due for that we both confessed taught and perswaded the same to all his Maiâ—sties subiects and that the coâ—trary neuer passed through our cogitations but do hould said I and teaâ—h that subiects are bound to obey their temporall Princes in all thinges lawfâ—ll not only good Princes but bad also and not only out of fâ—â—re flaâ—tery as some do but out of conscience as the Apostle â—eacâ—â—th vs to the Romans propter conscientiam sayth he for conscience sake but yet not contra conscienâ—iam against conscience or contrary to conscience Against which clause M. Barlow very learnedly and piously setteth downe this doctrine They teach sayth he that the Prince is to be obeyed propter conâ—cienâ—iamâ— nâ—â— contra conscientiam for conscience sake not against conscience that is no sound doctrine in the negatiue part for euen against a mans conscienâ—e the Prince is to be obeyed vnlesse that he that disobeyeth câ—â— proue his conscience to be the same which the Apostle describeth a good conscience accompanied with true loue and â—ayth vnâ—ayned So he And presently he addâ—th a reason out of Syr Thomas More one oâ— our Martyr's as he calleth him and we worthily account him so who sayth that there may be consciâ—ntia aâ—â—nina and conscientia lupina the conscience of an Asâ—e and the conscience of a Wolfe which we easily graunt and that Syr Thomas More had neyther of them and M. Barlow perhaps hath both the Asinina in making this ignorant impious determination That a man may obey Princes against his owne conscience and the Lupina in going about craftily violently to defend it by the shew of Scripture as presently will appeare For albeit I haue written somewhat of this matâ—er before in the first Part of this discussion to wit of the obligation that euery man hath to follow his Conscience and precept of his inward reason be it right or wrong so long as it standeth vncontrolled yet am I forced to say somewhat more here for detection of this mans wilfull â—rror or grosse ignorance in this place and that in both the two poynts now mentioned concerning the obligation that men haue not to do against their conscience and the prescription of a good conscience pretended to be alleaged out of Saint Paules Epistle to Timothy for in both pointes there be eâ—regious fraudes if not fooleries And for the first the Reader must vnderstand that this proposition so assertiuely set downe here by M. Barlow that euen against a mans conscience the Prince is to be obeyed is so absurd and impious in Catholicke Christian â—ares especially of the learned as nothing can be more for that it openeth a playne way to Atheisme and ouerthroweth the very first morall principles of vertuous actions in vs to wit the Synderisis and prâ—script of reason it selfe that God hath by nature planted in our soules for our gouernment and direction against which light and rule whosoeuer doth any thing willingly must needes sinne whatsoeuer the thing that is done be good or bad the reason wherof is for that the goodnes or badnes of any thingâ— imbraced by our will dependeth of the apprehension and estimation therof by our vnderstanding and prescript of reason that inwardly directeth the said will so as if it should be proposed vnto our will for exaâ—ple sake as an euill thing and with that apprehension imbraced by our will though it were good in it selfe yet to me it must needs be euill for that I did it thinking it to be an euill thing As for example to belieue in Christ sayth S. Thomas in it selfe is a good thing and necessary to saluation but yâ—t the will of man doth not imbrace it but as it is propounded vnto the same by our reason and therfore if the said reason and iudgment should propose it as an euill thing and not good to belieue in Christ as in Turkes and Iewes it doth and that the will notwithstanding should choose and imbrace it as it is proposed vnder the same apprehension that it is euill indeed then doth our will commit sinne for that in her conceipt and apprehension she chooseth and imbraceth euill and though in it selfe it be not so yet to her it is that iudging it so doth notwithstaÌ„ding imbrace it In which case Schoolmen do define that a good obiect so chosen by the will against the dictamen of reason and conscience is â—onâ—m sâ—â—pliciter and secundum se but mâ—lum per accidens huic homini siâ— eligenti it is good simply and in it selfe but accidentally euill to this particuler man that chooseth it against the direction of his iudgment and conscience And this poynt is a thing so cleare in nature it selfe â— as that Aristotle in his â—irst and seauenth bookes of Morâ—ls treaâ—ing oâ— the nature and condition of the incontinenâ— man sheweth that a man may be incontinent two wayes one way properly in that he doth exercise any act that appertayneth properly aâ—d truely to the vice of incontinencie the other way accidentally when he doth exeâ—cise an act that he imagineth and perswadeth himselfe â—o be in the matter of incontinency and is not and yet doth Aristotle conclude this man to be incontinent for â—hat his will did disagree in this matter from his reason and iudgment making choice of that which the said reason did propound vnto her as an euill thing Wherfore according to these principles the vniuersall consent both of Philosophers an Deuines is first that bonitas
place of conscience and Catholike religion But what sayth he if there be a false assumption and an vntrue applycation by the conscience is it then erroneous and not binding As put the case the conscience assumeth that to be sound and Catholike which is false and vnchristian doctrine To this question I haue answered now sufficiently before and haue largly proued that an erroneous conscience also byndeth vntill it be reformed and that it is impiety and ignorance to teach the contrary nor shall it be needfull to repeat all the reasons and arguments here This one may stand insteed of all the rest which is the ground of all That if a man may without sinne do against the dictamen or direction of his owne conscience then may he do that which he thinketh to be naught and consequently do naught wittingly and willingly without sin which is against the groundes both of Diuinity Philosophy and Nature it self And yet M. Barlow is so wise as to affirme here that an erroneous conscience byndeth not VVHEN the R. Fathâ—r F. Robert Persons the Author of this Treatise was come thus far in the examination of M. Barlowes Answere it pleased God to take him out of this mortall life which as he had imployed to the profit of many and the edification of the whole Christian world so he ended with grâ—at Religion and Piâ—ty and passed as we hope to etâ—rnall râ—st He commended on his death-bâ—d the finishing of this worke to an especiall friend of his who for his zeale in Gods cause and his loue to the said Father will I doubt not learnedly and exactly pâ—rforme his requâ—st and shortly cause it to be printed and published tâ—ough in a sâ—parate volume as for many respects is thought most conuenient FINIS Faultes escaped in the Printing Page line fault correction 6. 19. reaceaued receaued 118. 6. sweares swearers 149. 35. soone sowen 161. 16. which with 172. 6. Prohet Prophet 188. 3. miseriamur misereamur 197. 8. Scotlnd Scotland 203. 14. nothing noting 276. 17. an and 289. 4. prince price 321. 36. is it 325. 24. vnlwfulnes vnlawfulnes 333. 21. opinion Caietan opinion of Caietan 343. 7. no to 395. 37. yet they yet that they 436. 12. truth or truth of 442. 32. is in 444. 14. abase abuse 460. 7. acquinted acquainted 498. 32. Popos Popes 502. 24. them then 516. 27. wales walles 520. 37. restrainst restraint 518. 3. Then Fredericke Of them Fredericke A TABLE OF THE PRINCIPALL MATTERS HANDLED IN THIS BOOKE A ACHABS truely Mortification pag. 170. Adoniah slayne by Salomon pag. 105. Alexander the 3. Pope cleared of calumny pag. 467. Aluarus Pelagius abused by M. Barlow pag. 112. S. Ambrose abused by M. Barlow pag. 85. His resistance of the Emperour Valentinian against the Arians pag. 193. Anchor turned into a Milstone by M. Barlow pag. 244. Antiquity a good Argument in case of Religion pag. 150. Apparitions of Martyrs pag. 409. Aristotle abused by M. Barlow pag. 99. Assembly of ancient Fathers reasoning with his Maiesty de regno Dei pag. 237. S. Augustine and other Fathers Discourses of temporall and spirituall felicity pag. 184. 185. 186. Item about dying out of the Church pag. 223. His discourse about Gods Prouidence pag. 416. Author of the Apology for the Oath of Allegiance part 1. cap. 1. § 1. B M. BARLOVV his sharp wit pag. 7. His ignorance in Grammar Humanity Prefac n. 8. 9. In Logick Philosophy pag. 16. 93. 191. Praef. n. 12. n. 59. In Histories ib. n. 15. In Scriptures ib. n. 17. In Diuinity 193. 419. 420. His ridiculous folly pag. 17. His virulency against Iesuits pag. 21. 220. His abuse of F. Gaâ—net p. 2â— of F. Persons 24. 31. 402. praefac à num 86. vsque ad 108. His boldnes with the Scriptures p. 35. His friendship to Aduerbs pag. 39. His misunderstanding of Medina p. 43. His bad conscience and dealing vbique per totum librum His notorious vntruthes pag. 49. pag. 93. 97. 98. 116. 134. 403. 505. 506. Paulus 5. the Pope accused by him pag. 59. his mistaking and abusing of Graâ—â—hus Plutaâ—ke pag. 61. his scolding pag. 63. praefac à nu 90. vsque ad 107. his new Philosophy pag. 66. his abuse of Salmeron and Sandersâ— pag. 75. 77. and of others pag. 99. 112. 136. 246. 263. 279. 328. 330 338. of S. Thomas pag. 459. of Vrspergensis pag. 486. of Nauclerus pag. 490. of Blondus pag. 491. 509. of CuspiniaÌ„ pag. 496. of Matthew Paris p. 498. of Pope Innocentius the 4. pag. 507. 510. 512. of Card. â—ellarmine Praef. n. 66. his horning in Scotland pag. 95. his merriment of the Moone in the Asses belly pag. 103. his flattery of Kings pag. 104. his hate of ambition and his Mortificationâ— pag. 1â—6 172. 173. his Digestion and Concoctionâ— ib. his carnall Diuinity pag. 133. his phrases of Indument and Stripping pag 148. his IncoÌ„stancy pag. 163. 314. his Canonization of Q. Elizabeth p. 164 his Courtly Deuinity pag. 177. his Philtra loue-drugs pag. 201. his Parasiticall flattery of the King pag. 231. 233. 343. 359. praef n. â—18 119 his prayers without hope 334. his little Vniuersity 238. his Proctership for Turkes and Infidels pag. 24â— his strange notes of humility pag. 258. his Impudency pag. 264. 332. 333 338. 340. 341. 344. 441. 474. 477. 487. 492. 493. Praef. â— 64. his absurdities and errors c. part 2. cap. 5. per totum his Contradictions pag. 314. 326. his fast and loose with the Kinges authority pag. 316. his radiant folly pag. 321. his slaunders pag. 335. his falsifying of CouÌ„cells p. 369. His clouted frauds pag. 399. his mincing of Authors for his purpose ibid. 401. 444. his falsification in Capitall letters pag. 400. 453. his ridiculous profundities p. 414. his conscience need to be purged pag. 452. his Prouerb omnia sub vnam Myconum misapplyed 504. his scoffing at Reliques 535. What manner of writer he is prâ—fac n. 4. His Paradoxes prâ—f n. 24. his coÌ„science like a cheuerell point ib. nu 25. his strange construction of orbis terrae ibid. n. 11. his extra spheram praef n. 52. VVHOLY mistaken ib. n. 54. His potent word ib. n. 55. his bad brewing ib. n. 65. his Melancholy conceipt ib. n. 67. his suddaine pange of deuotioÌ„ ibid. nu 68. his rayling against Saints ib. n. 108. his obsessioÌ„ circumsession possession of Diuells ib. n. 111. a Bridewell-Doctour ibid. his Sermon in S. Edwards Church in Lincolne and abuse of Syr Io. Cutts ib. n. 112. his coÌ„demning his Maiesties Mother ib. n. 116. his leuity in writing ib. â— 121. his hypocoristicall alleuiation ibid. n. 122. his new found phrases ib. n. 123. his paring away ib. n. 128. his Feminine sexe predominate ib. n. 153. Bellarnine see Cardinall Binnius abused misconstred by M. Barlow pag. 405. Bishops how they are said to succeed Apostles pag. 450. M. Blackwell the Archpriest p. 536. C