as one that beeing in an errour should hate to bee reformed but came first to the reading and consideration of those thinges which it behooued a Christian to know euen with a bare and naked minde voide of all foredeeming and apt to receiue anie impression onelie humble and desirous to bee instructed in the trueth and whatsoeuer I read or heard expounded out of the holie Scriptures neither did I esteeme it by the credit of the person that taught it but by the authoritie of the doctrine it selfe neither was I led vnto anie opinion by the voice or opinion of multitude but by the testimonie of mine owne conscience consenting thereunto neither did I attribute the more credit to it for that it was first taught mee but for that dailie instruction and reason confirmed it vnto mee neuer variable yet euer willing to yeeld vnto reason and the trueth For I am not of their minde that make Religion as a matter of inheritance to bee taken of their ancestors or their parentes or that thinke it sufficient to saie I beleeue as the Queene beleeues But I thinke it the duetie of a Christian still to endeuour to informe himselfe how hee ought to serue God and not to pinne his soule on another mans sleeue Such a reuerend regard haue I alwaies had and euer will haue of Religion as a matter of saluation not as euerie common action of mans life as a thing to bee measured not by opinion but by trueth to bee chosen not by example but by iudgement to bee holden not for companie but for conscience If you also haue the same measure choice and grounde of your Religion as in reason you ought to haue it maie happlie fall out that the discouerie of the weakenes of D. Allens arguments and of his deceitfull and malicious dealing in this his Pamphlet as it hath confirmed in mee the Religion I hold so it maie alter in you the opinion you haue hitherto persisted in and not without great cause knowing that the naked trueth seeketh neither cloake nor corner nor a simple and good cause anie subtill or bad conueyance Let not then anie preiudicate opinion of my Religion differing from yours withdraw you from the patient reading and considering of my simple discourse no more then the like opinion of D. Allens Religion hath withdrawen me from the diligent perusing and perpending of his subtill pamphlet a greater learned and farre more cunning allurer then myselfe especially seeing that it is no part of my meaning herein either to impugne your Religion which is nothing at all fortified by this pamphlet or to strengthen mine owne which is as little weakened thereby for those pointes I leaue to Diuines if there be any that thinke it worth the reading or answering For mine own part I find nothing in it for which I would haue cast away so much paper and inck sauing onely a cunning conueiance of pernicious driftes tending to the practise of sedition mischiefe which I thought fit to be displayed and laied open to the world that the simple and such as giue too much credit to his doctrine might not be therewith deceiued and thereby drawne to their owne vtter destruction and on the other side that such as are of more capacity and iudgement either better affected in religiō or men indifferent seeing the monstrous shiftes vsed by such a principall Romaine Catholike as D. Allen is might thereby take a Caueat to be the more wary how they yeeld themselues to be seduced by such Catholiks perswasions But let vs now come to the examination of this pamphlet and see what it is that maister Doctor vndertaketh therein and how well he perfourmeth his taske He pretendeth vpon occasion of the former counterfeit letter which I mentioned to you before to resolue the consciences of those English men which were the yeelders vp of Deuenter and Zutphen fortes to the Duke of Parma touching the lawfulnes of their actiō Wherof though he had alreadie by his letters to Sir William Stanley giuen his opinion as he saith yet he will for better clearing of the cause set here downe his mind more largely and distinctly BEfore I runne into the particulars I must note vnto you a thing in generall which is not to be omitted I assure you though I be farre from the profession of Diuinity yet can I not but blush to see a thing written by way of a Resolution for the satisfying of mens consciences being a matter of Diuinity a treatise of 60. pages and not so much in all as halfe 6. textes of Scripture cited for confirmation of the matter proposed either directly or indirectly especially being done by an ancient D. of Diuinity by estimation singularly well read and learned and the onely man of name among all the English Catholikes What is there to bee presumed of it that so learned a man so great a Diuine now a Cardinall and chiefe piller of the Church of Rome should vndertake to resolue mens consciences in a matter of Christian duty yea whereon he pretendeth saluation or damnation to depend only with a Chaos of wordes a confusion of arguments drawne from morall philosophie the law of Nature and heathen constitutions and with definitions distinctions and authorities fet from Plato Aristotle Cicero c leauing vtterly all proofes arguments and authorities of holy Scripture yea skarce so much as alleadging one text by way of exhortation In mine opinion men are in common sense to iudge that either the matter is very bad and not iustifiable by Gods word which yeeldeth not sufficient argument or authority nay none at all for the defense of it or that such Diuines shew themselues to haue very litle zeale or religion in them when they measure matters of conscience saluation or damnation by the line of prophane Doctrine and not of the holy Scriptures Whereupon must necessarily be inferred that they are either impostors and deceiuers in seeking to perswade men by a shew of naturall reason vernished ouer with a glosse of gay wordes and superficiall colours of philosophie that which they are not able to proue by Diuinity or els plaine Atheists Hypocrits in carying onely the bare name of Religion on their backes for a cloake to their disguised practises and neglecting wholly the ground and substance thereof in their cogitations doctrine and perswasions But the lesse M. D. hath vsed the proofes of Scripture and Diuinity in this argument though it be nothing the more for his owne commendation or for the credit of his Doctrine yet haue I the lesse cause to be displeased with it considering that he hath thereby made it the fitter for so meane a scholler as my selfe no Diuine at all to deale with and the easier for any man to ouerthrow Albeit my purpose is not in truth so much to enter into the particular confutation of his arguments which are indeede none at all or not worth the standing vpon as to
greatest comfort If God bee with vs who can bee against vs And that God is with vs in this quarrell let vs stedfastly assure ourselues howsoeuer D. Allen perswade the contrarye and let him and his partakers knowe that God is against them and will bee so long as they oppose themselues against the obedience of his word the knowlddge of his Truth the light of his glorious Gospell And that God may be with vs still and continue with vs for euer let vs humble ourselues vnto him dayly and duely with earnest and hartie prayer and repentance let vs serue him continually with a zealous feare and obedience let vs glorifie him incessantly with a liuely faith and constancie lastly let vs giue ourselues wholy to him that we may winne him wholy vnto vs. So we being his and he ours let vs all and euery one of vs comfort ourselues vpon his assurance let vs fortifie our mynds vpon his assistance and adde our endeuour to his encouragement assuring ourselues that fighting in so godlie so iust so honorable a quarrell the successe cannot be but most happie most prosperous most glorious that if we defend our countrey we shall remaine free and safe if wee ouerthrow our Enimies we shall abide victorious if we die in this quarrell we shall liue eternally To which assurance of freedome safety victorie life what comfort can be comparable FINIS There is another print of this pamphlet extant without meÌ„cioÌ„ of place which differeth much and in sunday plaâ—es from the coppie printed at Deuenter For in that the gentlemaÌ„s letter is dated the 20. day of May. 1587. and subscribed with the letters N. R. D. Allens answer dated the 20. of Iuly following besides diuers other differences in the substance of the pamphlet Aeneid lib. 2 A tricke of D. Allens cunning to write a letter to him selfe in another mans name demanding his resolution only to giue himselfe some probabilitie of occasion to enter into the treatie of this argument A far further purpose in D. Allens Pamphlet then that which is pretended by the title An vnseemely thing for a man of D. Allens profession or calling to vse shifting and dissimulation D. Allens dealings in this Painphlet both for the maner matter and meaning doe in all pointes most euidently resemble the dealings of Sinon Matth. 13. 9. A preiudicate opinioÌ„ ought not to make men so obstinate as to condemne a thing before they know or haue seene it so vtterly to reiect reason Psal 50. How humbly circumspectly and vprightly meÌ„ ought to behaue themselues in matters of religion Euery man ought to examine his own conscience and sift his religion and endeuour still to be rightly enformed of the truth not to rely wholy vpon the example authoritie or perswasions of other men especially in matters of controuersie stopping their eares against reason for euery vessell shall stand vpon his own bottome It is a shame for D. Allen so great a Diuine to handle a matter of saluatioÌ„ or damnation so profanely vsing altogether argumeÌ„ts and authorities drawen from philosophers but none froÌ„ the holy Scriptures His prophane handling neglect of Scripture proofe is a great argument either of weakenes in his cause or hypocrisy in himselfe or of both D. Allen neither frameth nor followeth any one argument in due forme orderly but shuffleth out single propositions at randon confusedly The maine proposition and ground of his first argument Drawne from the rule of moral Iustice whose peculiar office is suum cuique tribuere D. Allens sophistrie His argumeÌ„t being laid togither consisteth of 4. termini Euery priuate subiect is not to examine his princes publike actions be they right or wrong but to looke to his owne peculiar charge duety and othe Much lesse may any priuate subiect make himselfe iudge corrector and executioner of Iustice against his Prince vpon his owne authority and at his owne pleasure Offic. lib. 1. D. Allen sheweth no authority of Scripture whereby the Popes Bull may dispense with this breach of their oth His argumeÌ„t Here now appeareth manifestly the fault of his argument being drawn to a forme of Syllogisme All these three pointes are contained in his Minor which he is to prooue His argumeÌ„t for the proofe of his Minor This argument is euen as good as the former The Minor of this second argument which he is to proue Two pointes of this Minor to be denyed whereof D. Allen proueth neither The causes why they may both iustly be denyed These two pointes being denyed as appeareth they may be with good reason D. Allens argument is vtterly auoyded without further answere or proceeding for he proueth neither There was neuer any such confession heard of as D Allen here imposeth vpon vs but the contrarie is both affirmed and absolutely mainteined at this day D. Allens assertion to proue the English warres in the low couÌ„tries not to be for defence against enimies All D. Allens proofes depend vpon th'authority of his owne word for he doth but barely affirme what it pleaseth him without adding any reason to confirme his assertions 1 Besides in this assertion he doth petere principium assume that which is all the matter in question 2 The English warres in the low countries iustified by seuerall reasons drawne from D. Allen himselfe 3 Pag. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. The first argument drawne from D. Allen. Pag. 23. Another argumeÌ„t drawn from D. Allens owne words to iustifie the English warres in any sort against the K. of Spaine as being for defence against enemies D. Allen giueth vs to vnderstand that if the K. of Spaine were once quietly possest of the low Countreys we were not likely loÌ„g to enioy either peace or safetie Lib. 1. de Offic The Argument gathered into a Syllogisme Another ArgumeÌ„t drawn from D. Allen himselfe also to proue the King of Spaine our enemy The Argument a Relatiuis The other part which D. Allen is to prooue of his diuision drawen from Cicero D. Allens assertion that the King of Spaine hath done vnto her Maiestie no iniurie c. a A touch only of some parts offered the Q. Maiestie by the K. of Spaine which may well be deemed Iniuries yea in the highest degree b The InuasioÌ„ in Ireland Anno. 1580. c The practises of Mendoza his Embassador here with our English Traitors The practices for the deposing of her Maiestie and aduancing of the Q. of Scots to the crown For this point I appeale to the conscience and knowledge of the Papists themselues which know anie thing All D. Allens arguments end in single affirmations which also are neither confirmed with any authoritie or reason by him nor carry any truth or probabilitie in themselues Some grosse errors or ouersights escaped D. Allen in the handling of this argument A generall Thesis pronounced by himselfe flatly coÌ„demning the action which he laboureth so much to iustifie and commend The rendering of DeueÌ„ter prooued by D.
think it no great kindnes in a Prince to harbour much lesse to enterteine mainteine within his Dominions the fugitiue Rebels or Traitors of another Prince his confederate vnderstanding how vnduetifully nay how lewdly and impiously they haue dealt with their naturall Souereign But these you wil saie are but actions of vnkindnes not such hainous iniuries VVell I would they were lesse offences I am sure they are at the least such as fall within one of the kinds of Iniustice and Iniurie For greater it is not fit for me to speake of Yet I doubt not but D. Allen himselfe whatsoeuer he saith here and a great number of Romish Catholikes more besides him know somewhat touching the Inuasiō made by the K. of Spains subiects in Ireland in the year 1580. of the practises of his Embassador Mendoza since that time and of others her Maiesties most vnnatural subiects shal I saie nay most bloodie abhominable butcherly minded traitors both before since The verie bowels and secrets whereof although they haue been happely kept from our knowledge I meane from the knowledge of the meaner sort yet their owne confessions haue discouered more then is meet for me to rehearse and so much as hath bred a general opinion rumor yea euen in the verie cōmon people of England that the K. of Spaine hath been not onlie priuy to thē but a principall Author Actor in them all I will not speake of the secret practises conspired for the deposing of her Maiestie and aduancing of the Q. of Scots to the crown of Englād which whether or how iustly they may touch the K. of Spain it is no part of my duetie to deale with I am sory to haue had occasion to saie so much in a thing so litle apperteining to me but I am the more to be pardoned in that the argument hath inforced me thereunto in that I haue mentioned nothing more then is knowen common to the multitude and I could not haue said lesse vnlesse I should haue said nothing at al. But I hope this that hath ben said may be sufficient to S. W. Stanley Capt. Yorke to all the English Romanists to whom D. Allen doeth especially direct his Pamphlet For I know there is not any of that sort of any account but is so wel acquainted with the priuities of these actions as that he can picke out of these inough to assure him that D. Allen hath but dissembled with thē in this point VVhich being so they must also know confesse and all men els may plainly perceiue that this other part of his diuision serueth not his turne no more then the former to prooue her Maiesties dealings in the low Countries vnlawfull being grounded vpon a false supposition that is That the K. of Spain hath done vnto her Maiestie no such iniurie wherof shee should seeke reuenge Thus haue you heard his argument brought to an end for here he resteth euen in simple affirmations which I hope haue been sufficientlie conuicted both by substantiall reasons and instances so that there remaineth not now anie thing to be further answered his whole argument and euerie part thereof being confuted in order from the first proposition to the last And besides this vvhich you haue heard hath he not anie argumēt in his vvhole Pamphlet either to iustifie the rendering of Deuenter and Zutphen Forts or to disprooue her Maiesties doings against the K. of Spaine anie way which I haue heere both by the authorities of his owne Authours and by reasons deriued euen from himselfe most euidently declared to bee iustifiable euerie waie if they were greater then they are which I could with further more infallible reasons also confirme if it vvere requisite or apperteining to my purpose But I must novv bestovv a vvord or tvvo in noting vnto you some errours or ouersightes at the least escaped from D. Allen euen in the verie entrie almost of his argumēt vvhere in the circumstance he vseth to induce a probabilitie and credit of his first proposition he setteth dovvne a generall Thesis flat contrarie to that vvhich he goeth about to prooue For after manie speeches touching the necessitie of Restitution hovv thinges vvrongfullie gotten and deteined ought to bee restored in the ende hee concludeth vvith these verie vvordes Yet whatsoeuer is done against military discipline and Iustice is sinne and punishable by Gods lawes What can there bee saide more directly against the action of S. W. Stanley and the rest For there is none of them nor anie soldier els of any knowledge or experience but knoweth that to yeeld a Towne Fort or holde wherewith a man is put in trust to the enemy yea besieging it so long as there is within it sufficient strength and meanes to defend it yea though it were not defensible yet to yeeld it before due summons is death by the law of Armes much more to render a Towne freely without either force or demand or rather corruptly and traitorously to sel it for money but the law of Arms doth not punish anie fact with death which is not done against the same law and discipline therefore it must needs follow that the rendring vp of Deuenter and Zutphen Forts is against military discipline and consequently by D. Allens own position sin and punishable by Gods lawes VVhat a resolution call you this for the satisfying of mens consciences touching the lawfulnes of their action to lead them about with a circumstance of other meaning and in conclusion to tell them in plaine termes that that which they haue done is sin punishable by Gods lawes Yet are there two other errors though not so euident yet as worthy the noting euen in the next sentence immediatly going before where after he hath taught that restitutiō is to be made of al things vniustly takē withholdē vpō pain of damnatiō he addeth these wordes And this I say euen in lawfull warres or such as to the common people may be vpō their Princes credit so deemed Where though they may offend th'enimy in life goods liberty otherwise c. Wherein first he maketh no difference betweene lawfull warres vnlawfull warres which may vpon their Princes credit be by the common people deemed lawfull as though thinges were iust or vniust either vpon the Princes credit or according to the peoples opinion of them not of their own nature and according to the groundes and causes of them By this reason there should no warres be vnlawfull for there is no warre vndertaken but that both the Prince which mooueth it is able and doth pretend some reason or colour of reason to make it seeme iust and the common people also by the Princes declaration and perswasions may easily be induced to esteeme it to be lawfull Wherein by the way I must note some simplicitie or great dissimulation in D. Allen which would admit the lawfulnes or
neither the Prophet euer counselled or mooued the people to disobey Saul being so deposed nor the people euer offered to reuolt or to deny him their obedience seruice nor Dauid the true and rightfull king appointed by God in his place euer sought or cōsēted to depriue him of the kingdome though due vnto himselfe but notwithstanding he knew him to be his deadly enemy and to hunt after his life yet hauing him twice in his hands where he might safely haue slaine him and therby inuested himselfe of the kingdom neuerthelesse wold he neither touch him himselfe nor suffer any other to touch him calling him the Lords annointed and esteeming it a high sin to laie his hand on him though hee were deposed by God himselfe and which is yet most notable caused the messenger that brought him the first newes of his death to be forthwith slaine for his labour And all this notwithstanding yet is not D. Allen ashamed to wrest this example quite contrarie to the trueth for a president to prooue that the Pope hath authoritie to depose and depriue Princes both of their kingdomes and liues and to release discharge the subiects of their allegeance and further that it is lawfull for subiects to reuolt from their Souereignes to yeeld vp their holdes trecherously vnto their enemies and to beare armes against them To which doctrine hee could not haue found in all the whole Scriptures though all bee flat against it anie one example more directlie contrarie then this the iudgement whereof I referre to the reason consideration and conscience of all men that haue anie sparke of Christianitie morall vertue or naturall reason in them Now then if none of all these examples of Scripture which D. Allen hath cited to prooue the Popes authoritie to depose Princes doe shew that anie of those Princes whom he mencioneth was deposed either by Priest or Prophet as hee falslie assumeth but by God himselfe how can hee then inferre vpon these examples that the Pope hath anie such authoritie vnlesse hee attribute as I said before as much authoritie vnto him as to God himselfe And if Saul being deposed by God himselfe yet neither the Prophet did thereupon disswade the people from obeying him nor the people once offered to reuolt from him but continued in all duetie and obedience towardes him as long as he liued which was manie yeeres after his deposition and if Dauid beeing the lawfull annointed King in his place yet neither sought to put him out of the kingdome but yeelded him obedience and seruice calling him Lord maister during his life thought it sin to laie his hand on him notwithstanding he was deposed lastly in token of the misliking and displeasure he tooke at the death of Saul caused the messenger that brought him the tidings thereof to be slaine how can D. Allen by this example induce men of anie reason or sense to beleeue that either the Pope maie lawfully authorise encourage or exhort subiects to disobey or to laie hands on the Lords annointed or that anie subiect may lawfully renounce his allegeance reuolt from and beare armes against his Souereigne beeing a lawfull Prince onelie vpon a colourable warrant of deposition by a man a Priest a stranger who hath no authoritie in the worlde to depose anie Prince from his kingdome no though hee were an Infidel but is himselfe euen by Gods ordinance a subiect to Princes With what face can hee vtter such manifest vntruthes with what confidence can hee persuade himselfe to bee beleeued when his lies are so monstrous and his impostures so euident But most of all with what conscience can hee presume to force the word of God to his purpose which is so directly against him But hereby may all men plainely perceiue how small regard that sect hath vnto religion but onlie to serue their turnes which are not ashamed to make such impudent and vngodly shiftes to maintein their vsurped authoritie Call you this holines M. D. to abuse the people with false doctrine to belie the scriptures to peruert the most sacred word of God to rob him of his own peculiar authoritie and prerogatiue for the defence and furtherance of your owne rebellious practises In trueth it resembleth much the holines of your holie thiefe whom it pleaseth you somewhat merrily in your Pamphlet to compare vnto vs but in truth a righter patterne of your own profession which to speake truely what I thinke in my conscience is much discredited by your owne double dealing You your selfe to further your owne purpose as you supposed could prefixe before your Pamphlet euen in the first page as a sentence vnder the title thereof the resolution giuen by Christ vpon the tempting demand of the Pharisees Reddite quae sunt Caesaris Caesari wherein Christ himselfe commandeth all men to giue vnto Caesar that is to the King and Ciuill Magistrate whatsoeuer is due vnto him that is feare honor subiection and tribute And how dare you then euen in the same Pamphlet countermaund this commandement of our Sauiour bending all your forces craft and cunning to persuade the subiect to resist his Souereigne and thereby to break this high and peremptorie commandement But you saie the Pope hath authoritie to discharge the subiect of this duetie and obedience which is here commanded Shew me then I praie you some Text of Scripture that giueth the Pope so large Commission as you speake of nay shew me anie dispensation out of Gods word that may exempt you or the Pope himselfe out of the compasse of this commandement For the precept is generall and therefore extendeth to all men and besides was expresly giuen by Christ vnto his Disciples to whom hee spake in presence And if the Pope and you bee the Disciples of Christ as you would seeme to bee then must you also as well or rather then others yeeld obedience and subiection to your Ciuill gouernours or els fall into the breach of Christs commandement And if you bee subiect to the ciuill Magistrate as you are by this rule of Christ how can you take that authoritie from them which Christ hath giuen them ouer you If you saie there is no subiection due vnto them longer then they continue in the truth of Religion I pray you tell mee first how prooue you them to be heretikes vnlesse you your selues may be Iudges Will you then both condemne and punish them before they bee conuicted of crime and will you that are parties bee both iudges and executors of your owne will and pleasure Secondly suppose they were as you vniustly condemne them to be heretikes yea suppose they were Iewes Turkes Heathens yet is there neuertheles obedience and subiection due vnto them For what was Caesar himselfe but a Heathen what were the Princes in the Aposties times of whom it is said Let euerie soule be subiect vnto them and whosoeuer resisteth them resisteth the ordinance of God what