Iohn Caluin in this behalfe who doth euery where reprehend the old writers for that they wrested these wordes Ego Pater vnum sumus to the vnity of essence or substance He noteth also these wordes in Caluin Impropriam esse atque duram orationem illam Symboli Niceni Deus de Deo that that speach of the Creed of the Councell of Nice is an improper and hard speech God of God Which speech notwithstanding S. Athanasius did greatly vrge saith he in his dayes against the Arrians wherof we haue treated somewhat before 79. Now then may we see how fraudulently Thomas Morton hath dealt in this matter by putting downe slyly one reason only for which our malignant Doctors as he calleth them doe condemne Caluin for Arrianisme and it is as if a malefactour being condemned for many crimes his Aduocate would giue out that he had byn accused only of one and then by diminishing that also make it none and so proclaime him quit in all But for so much as he calleth our said Doctors malignant from which crime I dare auouch them of all others most free doth say That the iudgment of the Lutheran Doctors alleadged by his Aduersary the moderate Answerer against him namely of Doctor Philippus Nicolaus and of the Deane and vniuersity of Tubinga who condemned Caluin for the same crime of Arrianisme hath byn depraued as may seeme saith he by their obiections by our said malignant Doctors We shall heere with as much breuity as may be bring forth the iudgment of another renowned Protestant-Doctor concurring with the foresaid he being a publike Reader of Deuinity in another famous Vniuersity of Germany namely VVittenberg where Martyn Luther himselfe once held the chaire as Caluin did in Geneua and this Doctor whose name is AEgidius Hunnius in a seuerall Treatise set forth about a dozen yeares gone entituled by him Caluinus Iudaizans dedicated vnto one Dauid Pareus a principall Caluinian Doctor setteth downe the argument of his booke thus in the first front therof This booke is to shew saith he that Iohn Caluin hath most detestably presumed to corrupt in fauour of Iewes and Arrians the most cleare places and testimonies of Scripture concerning the glorious Trinity deity of Christ of the Holy Ghost and aboue all the predictions of Prophetes for the comming of the Messias his natiuity passion ascension sitting at the right hand of God c. with a cleare cōfutation of his false corruptions therin c. 80. This is the title and argument of the booke which he doth prosecute for almost two hundred pages togeather deuiding the same into two partes the first wherin he sheweth how Iohn Caluin most wickedly and maliciously vnder pretence of interpreting the Scripture in different sense from the ancient Fathers did goe about couertly to weaken infringe or take from the Christians all the strongest argumentes which they had or haue out of the Scriptures for the Godhead of Christ and his equality and consubstantiality with the Father And in the second Part that he vseth the same fraud and malice by ouerthrowing all the predictions foretellinges of Prophetes about Christ as he was man Out of the old Testament §. 1. 81. ANd for the first Part of peruerting Scriptures he giueth these examples out of the old Testament first that wheras Moyses saith in 〈◊〉 Creauit Deus coelum terram God created heauen and earth the word in the Hebrue is ELOIM Gods in the plurall number out of which D. Hunnius proueth that the ancient Fathers and most learned also of later times in the Hebrue tongue doe gather Moyses to haue signified the plurality of persons in the Bl. Trinity but Caluin to take from Christians this comforte saith Colligere solent hic in Deo notari tres personas c. Heere Christians are wont by this plurall number ELOIM to gather that three persons are signified in God but for so much as to me it seemeth a weake proofe of so great a matter the Readers are to be aduertised to beware of such violent glosses Thus Caluin And with like spirite of presumption arrogancy if not worse he goeth forward in all the rest as namely that of Genesis the 19. about raining of brimstome ouer Sodom and Gomorrha where the wordes are Pluit Iehoua a Iehoua saith Hunnius according to the Hebrue text and is applied by Christian writers against the Iewes for Christes diuinity Caluin most insolently reiecteth the same saying Quod veteres Christi Diuinitatem c. wheras ancient writers endeauored by this testimony to proue the Diuinity of Christ it is but a weake argument and in my iudgment they brabble much without cause that so sharpely vrge the Iewes with this place 82. In Genesis also Chap. 35. where Iacob built an Altar to God and called the place Bethel for that ELOIM the Gods had appeared vnto him there vsing the plural number not only in the substantiue but also in the verbe it selfe Caluin without all probability of reason will needes haue it meant that not God but Angels only appeared which Hunnius refuteth for that the apparition of Angels was not a sufficient reason to name the place Bethel as Iacob did that is to say the house of God or to build an Altar to God for that Angels only and not God had appeared to him 83. But that which much more importeth Caluin taketh from the Christians that other excellent place also of the second Psalme wherin is proued the Diuinity of Christ by those wordes 〈◊〉 me us es tu Ego hodie genui te Thou art my Sonne this day haue I begotten thee wherby S. Paul himselfe Act. 13. and the Author saith Hunnius of the Epistle to the Hebrues for that Lutherans doe not admit that Epistle to be S. Paules and all ancient Fathers after them doe alleage these wordes for proofe of Christes diuinity but Caluin doth ouerthrow it by interpreting it to be vnderstood literally of Dauid himselfe as Hunnius at large proueth exactly refuteth as also his impiety in taking away that other place of the 33. Psalme in like manner Verbo Domini coeli firmati sunt spiritu oris eius omnis virtus eorum The heauens were established by the word of God and all their power by his holy spirit Out of which the ancient Fathers proued not only the diuinity of Christ the second person in trinity but of the holy Ghost also and consequently the blessed Trinity which Caluin endeauoring to ouerthrow writeth in this manner Subtiliùs veteres hoc elogio vsi sunt c. The ancient Fathers did more subtily vse this place of Scripture against the Sabellian Heretickes to proue the eternall Godhead of the holy Ghost but I would not dare to vrge Sabellius with this testimony to proue the deity of the said holy Ghost And againe in another place lib. 1. Institut cap. 13.
time vvhen this treason vvas plotted as to vse his owne wordes no 〈◊〉 grudge no invvard vvhispering of discōtentment did any vvay appeare VVhich assertion if you consider it well and compare it with our domesticall differences in Religion and variety of punishments laied vpon diuers sortes of men at that time euen before this fact fell out for the same will seeme a very great hyperbolicall exaggeration and ouerlashing for that the penalties of Recusancy and other like molestations were as rife then as at any other time before complaintes of Catholickes in diuers countreys no lesse pittifull 14. Another like Treatise followed this intituled A true reporte of the imprisonment arraignment and execution of the late Traitors imprinted by Geffery Chorlton VVhich so raileth vpon Catholicks and Catholicke Religion from the very beginning to the end therof as if none of them had byn free from the fact attempted or that their common doctrine had publickly allowed the same whereunto this seditious libell of the minister T. M. which now I am to confute endeauoreth to beare false witnes I will pretermit two other most virulent and spitefull Treatises intituled Pagano-Papismus and The picture of a Papist in which the Religion wherin all our auncestors both liued and died from the beginning of their Christianity vnto our daies and so many worthy nations great Princes and famous learned men doe professe round about vs at this day and doe hope to be saued therby is made worse then Paganisme vea the horrible sinke of all damnable heresies which notwithstanding were condemned by the same Religion and Church in former ages and consequently this censure sauoureth more of fury then of reason 15. But to leaue of the recitall of any more bookes or pamphlets to this effect there hath appeared further a matter of far greater importance which is a Catalogue of new lawes suggested in this Parlament against the said Catholickes wherin besides the former heape of penall statutes made to this affliction in precedent times diuers new are proposed for an addition and aggrauation of their Calamities far more rigorous if they passe then the former which being considered by forreine people doe make the state of English Catholickes vnder Protestant gouernement to seeme vnto them much more miserable and intolerable then that of the Ievves vnder any sorte of Christian Princes or that of the Grecians or other Christians vnder the Turke or Persian or that of bondsubiectes vnder the Polonians Svvecians Moscouians and other such Nations so as all this tendeth as yow see and as before we haue noted to more desperate disunion of mindes and exasperation of hartes 16. Only I must confesse that in two mens writings I finde more moderation then in any of the rest who yet being more interessed in the late grieuous designed delict then any of the other that write therof had most cause to be prouoked against the delinquents The first is his Maiesties speach both in his Proclamation and Court of Parlament In the former he professeth to distinguish betvveene all others calling themselues Catholicks the Authors of detestable treason and that by good experience he vvas so vvell persuaded of the loyalty of diuers of that 〈◊〉 as that he assured himselfe that they did as much abhorre that odious 〈◊〉 as himselfe And in the second his Maiesty speaking in Parlament distinguished betweene different sortes of Catholicks allowing to the one sort both the opinion of loyalty and possibility of saluation detesting in that point to vse his Highnes wordes the cruelty of the Puritanes and thinking it vvorthy of fier that vvill admit no saluation to any Papist VVhich is an argument of his Princely moderate meaning not to condemne the whole for a part though in our sense the distinction vsed by his Maiesty in that place of some Catholicks that holde some pointes of our Religion and of others that holde all cannot stand For that we accompt them not for Catholicks at all nor may wee that holde not all but a part for that Catholicum is secundum totum and not secundum partem as well S. Augustine noteth and consequently he that belieueth a part only or any one iote lesse then the whole cannot be in our sense nor in that of S. Augustine a true Catholicke 17. And surely though his Maiesty in this place out of the preiudicate persuasions of others and 〈◊〉 suggested informations seeme to be persuaded that no Catholicks of this condition that belieue and imbrace the whole can euer proue either good Christians or faithfull subiects yet is our hope and constant praier to almighty God that he will in time so illustrate that excellent vnderstanding of his Highnes as the same will see and discerne betweene these absolute and perfect Catholicks that yeeld themselues wholy in obsequium obedientiam fidei in all that the vniuer sall Church prescribeth vnto them to be belieued and others that chuse take and leaue what they like or list vpon their owne iudgement which choice or election called otherwise heresy if wee belieue the Holy Scriptures and sense of all antiquity in this behalfe is the most dangerous and pernicious disease in respect of both those effects heere mentioned by his Maiesty that is vpon earth And when his Highnes shall further with deliberation and maturity haue pondered how many ages his noble Auncestors Catholicke Kings and Queenes of both Realmes haue raigned in peace honour and safty ouer subiects of the first sorte and how infinite troubles turmoiles violences dangers hurtes and losses his Maiesties owne person and all his neerest in bloud and kinred haue suffered in a few yeares of those other new chusers to omit their doctrine I doubt not but that out of his great prudence and equanimity he will mollify and mitigate the hard opinion conceaued of the former notwithstanding this late odious accident fallen out by the temerity of a few as the world knoweth 18. The second example of some moderation before mentioned or at least wise meant was my L. of Salisburies answere to Certeine scandalous papers as he called them which though being written in the time and occasion they were the answerer wanteth not his stinges that pearce euen to the quicke yet supposing the pretended iniury offered by that fond menacing letter and the condition of men in his place and dignity not accustomed to beare or dissemble prouocations of that kind all may be called moderate that is not extreme though for the letter it self if any such were I presume so much of his Lordships wisedome and prudence as he could hardly deeme or suspect any Catholicke to be so mad as to write such a franticke commination but rather that it came from the forge of some such other as togeather with the blowe to be giuen therby to all Catholickes had furthermore a desire to drawe forth from his L. the answere therby to see and try his style and to that end gaue
doctrine of Equiuocation ambiguity of speach amphibology or mentall reseruation in certaine cases lawfull which doctrine his Lordship termeth strange and grosse and that it teareth in sunder all the bandes of humane conuersation for that I am to handle this matter more largely and particularly in the ensuing Chapters of this booke especially from the fourth forward the whole bulke of our aduersaries calumniations consisting in these two pointes of Rebellion and Equiuocation I will heere make answere to his Lordship as to a man of science and experience that I maruaile greatly how he can thinke that doctrine to be strange which is so ordinary and vsually to be seene in all the bookes of Catholicke Deuines for the space of these three or foure hundred yeares by confession of his owne writers how also he can tearme it grosse that the greatest wittes of Christendome for so long at least haue held for learned and founded not only vpon euident groundes of reason nature equity and iustice in diuers cases and for such allowed throughout all tribunales of Christendome both Ecclesiasticall and Ciuill but warranted also by authority of many expresse examples of Holy Scriptures and Fathers and in some cases so necessary for auoiding the sinne of lying periury discouering of secrettes iniuring our neighbours and other such inconueniences as if I should heere set downe the said particular cases both concerning secrecy or safty of him that is forced to equiuocate as afterward I shall doe in conuenient place I presume his Lordship as so great a common-vvealthesman would allow therof with due circumstances as iust and necessary and recall that part of his censure wherin he saith That it teareth in sunder all the bandes of humane conuersation especially if he remember that we doe except from the licence of Equiuocation the common conuersation of men in contractes bargaines and other like affaires wherby any dammage or preiudice may grow to another man and much more in matters appertaining to the cleare and manifest profession of our faith And thus much for this place the refidue afterward 25. And now hauing spoken all this by way of Preface we shall returne to the particular Treatise of T. M. for more of his name we cannot yet find out entituled An exact discouery of 〈◊〉 doctrine in case of conspiracy c. which we haue taken in hand to answere in this place and to shew that as his meaning is malicious and meanes foolish so is his proposition pernicious and argumentes vaine to proue the same wherin I remit me to that which afterwardes yow shall see set downe THAT THE MAYNE PROPOSITION INSINVATED AND VRGED BY T. M. That Catholickes are not tolerable in a Protestant Common-vvealth in respect of Rebellion and Conspiracies Is vntrue indiscreet and pernicious and falleth rather vpon the Protestant-Subiect then the Catholicke CHAP. I. THe whole drift of the Author throughout this malignant inuectiue to be nothing els but to perswade that Protestantes and Catholickes cannot liue togeather in one common-wealth nor vnder one Prince or Gouernour if he be a Protestant is cleare and manifest by all his whole discourse proofes and argumentes which afterwardes we shall more particularly in due place discusse yea to the end he may make this diuorce and separation betweene the Kinges Maiesty of Great Britany and his Catholicke subiectes for thither he bendeth all his battery the more irreconciliable and remedilesse he placeth the ground of this incompossibility not in the will which may be changed but in the iudgement and beliefe of Catholickes to wit in their publicke and receiued doctrine which doctrine well he knoweth not to lye in the handes of particular men nor of particuler Prouinces to change or alter at their pleasure as Protestantes may and doe heere taking a part and there leauing as they list but they must stand firmely and vniuersally to the whole this being truely Catholicum as ancient Fathers define it And hence it is that T. M. inferreth thus It is taken out saith he of the expresse dogmaticall principles of their Priests and Doctors and collected from their owne publicke positions c. which how true or false it is shall appeare after Now let vs examine some other circumstances of this proposition 2. First then I say and auerre that this his maine and fundamentall axiome of the incompossibility of Catholicke and Protestant people togeather vnder the Gouernement of his Maiesty of Great Britany is not only false and erroneous in it selfe as afterward shal be declared but pernicious also to the common-wealth preiudiciall to his Maiesties both comfort safety hurtefull to the state seditious against peace scandalous to the hearers offensiue to forreine nations that liue vnder Princes of different Religion both Catholicke and Protestant and hatefull finally to the eares of all moderate peaceable and prudent people and is on the other side no waies profitable needfull expedient or conuenient thus in publique to be proposed For I would first demaund this famous mak-bate what gaine or vtility may be expected either to Prince or people by putting in print this so odious an assertion of extreeme diffidence and distrust betweene his Maiesty and so many thousande of his subiects that admitted him with all ioy comfort at his first entrance to the Crowne Is it perhaps to preuēt some dāger that may be doubted from such kind of people and to make his Maiesty more carefull and vigilant for his safty If that be so a priuate aduise had beene more important to himselfe or his Counsell for that the publishing and proclayming therof procureth not only diffidēce but also restles solicitude on both sides the one to preuēt the other 3. Secondly I would aske what he will doe or haue to be done with so great a multitude of people as in all his Maiesties Kingdomes doe loue and fauour the Religion which this masked Minister impugneth and would put them in despaire of any sufferance or tolerable condition vnder his Maiesties gouernment Will he haue them all made away from the face of the Earth This were hard except Noe his floud should come againe or some other equiualent inundation either of water fyer or sword And for the later though some thinke he could wish it yet who knoweth not but that the bowels of England are so combyned and linked togeather at this day in this point as hardly can the sword passe the one but it must wound also deeply the other What then Will he haue them to liue in perpetuall torment hatred suspicions iealosyes auersions detestations deadly hostilities the one with the other This is a state more fit for hell then for any peaceable and Christian common wealth nor of it selfe is it durable if we beleeue either reason or experience of former times For we know what Cicero what other wise-men among the very Heathens haue obserued what they haue written what they haue counselled to be done or to be
our times of such as call themselues Protestants but especially the followers of Caluin are farre more perillous and detestable then Paganisme Iudaisme or Turcisme let him read not only his foresaid fower bookes De Caluino-Turcismo but two speciall large Chapters or Treatises of this very matter in his booke De iusta Reipublicae potestate c. to wit the 4. and 5. and he will rest satisfied 9. Nor doe Catholicke writers only make these Protestations against Caluin and his doctrine but many of the most learnedest other Protestants of these daies as hath byn touched One most famous preacher and Protestant writer or rather Superintendent in Polonia called Francis Stancarus in an epistle to the King himself saith of him and to him Quis Diaboluste ô Caluine seduxit vt contra filium Dei cum Arrio obloquaris c. Cauete o vos Ministri omnes a libris Caluini praesertim in articulis de Trinitate incarnatione mediatore Sacramento Baptismi praedestinatione continent enim doctrinam impiam blasphemias Arrianas What deuill hath seduced thee o Caluin that thou shouldest speake iniuriously against the sonne of God with Arrius the Hereticke c. Beware all yee Ministers of Caluins bookes especially in the articles of the Bl. Trinity Incarnation of the mediator of the Sacrament of Baptisme and of predestination for they conteine impious doctrine and blasphemies of Arrius 10. Another brother and Protestant-Preacher no lesse zealous then he in Germany named Conradus Schlusselburge saith of him his 〈◊〉 that himself hath declared proued in three large books Hòs de nullo ferè Christianae doctrinae articulo rectè sentire That they scarcely belieue aright any one article of Christian beliefe which is the self same that the forenamed Catholicke writer Iurgiuicius obiected before which T. M. tooke so impatiently as yow haue heard And the same brother in one of his said bookes affirmeth Quod Caluinistae ipsum filium Dei mendacij arguunt Deum sua omnipotentia spoliant sunt abiurati hostes profligatissimi falsatores Testamenti filij Dei That Caluinists doe charge the Sonne of God with a ly doe spoile God of his omnipotency and are foresworne enemies and most wicked falsifiers of the Testament of the Sonne of God 11. And another famous Doctor of the same new Ghospell and spirit saith that this sect of Caluinists their doctrine Sentina quaedam est c. is a certeine sinke into which all other heresies doe flow it is the last rage of the diuell which he in his fury doth exercise against Christ and his Church c. And then further Qui partes eorum sequitur c. he that followeth their sect is a manifest and sworne enemy of God and hath denied his faith which he promised to Christ in his baptisme So he And consider now whether this be not as great detestation of Caluins doctrine by principal learned Protestants as T. M. hath picked out of Catholicks wrested wordes before recited 12. But yow must not thinke that heere is an end for there would be no end if I should prosecute all that might be said in this case Tilmannus Heshusius a Superintendent of the Protestants in the same countrey calleth Caluins doctrine Blasphemam Sacrilegam sectam a blaspemous and Sacrilegious sect and writeth a speciall booke of this title A defence of the Holy Testament of Christ against the blasphemous confession of Caluinists And AEgidius Hunnius writing a booke De Caluino Iudaizante of Caluin playing the Iew after a long confutation saith thus Dâ—â—â—â—um satis superque iudico c. we haue detected I suppose sufficiently and more then sufficiently that Angell of darkenes Iohn Caluin who comming forth of the pit of hell hath partly by his detestable wickednes in wresting Scriptures partly by his impious pen against the Holy Maiesty of Christ partly by his horrible and monstrous paradoxes about predestination drawne both himself into hell a great number of starres as the Apocalips speaketh 13. I pretermit many others as that of Philippus Nicolaus a Protestant-Minister of Tubinga who in the yeare 1586. set forth a booke in 4. with this title A Discouery and this I write for our discouerer of the fundaments of the Caluinian Sect and how they agree with old Arrians and Nestorians Wherby also is demonstrated that no Christian man can take part with them but that he must defend Arrianisme and Nestorianisme So he But the next yeare after there came another booke forth printed in the same Vniuersity with this title A demonstration out of the Holy Scriptures that Caluinists and Sacramentaries are not Christians but rather baptized Iewes and Mahometanes and a little after that againe came forth the booke of Ioannes Matthias the great Preacher in VVittenberge De cauendo Caluinistarum fermento how to auoid the leauen of the Caluinists and then another of Albertus Grauerus of like function vpon the yeare 1598. entituled BelluÌ„ Ioannis Caluini Iesu Christi The warre betweene Iohn Caluin and Iesus Christ and al this written set forth and printed by chiefe Protestant brethren which if the inference of T. M. be true against Catholickes that in respect of the difference of their doctrine and for that they holde Caluinists to haue no true faith they may not liue togeather vnder one Prince then must it follow also that neither these Lutherans and Caluinian Protestants can liue togeather and the very same ensueth betweene English Protestants Puritanes vpon the difference of their doctrine and belief which hath no lesse opposition in deed and detestation the one of the other in bitternes of speach then haue the Lutherane Protestants against them both as may easily be demonstrated out of their owne bookes if we would stand vpon it And this shall be sufficient for the refutation of his first medium brought forth to proue that Catholicks and Protestants cannot liue togeather in one common wealth for that the one side accompteth the other for Hereticks 14. But the second medium is yet more childish which is that for so much as we not only doe hold Protestants to be excommunicate Hereticks but subiect also to all the punishments penalties set downe in the Popes Ecclesiasticall Canons Decrees Constitutions for the same which are many and grieuous as that Hereticks must leese their goods cannot gather vp tythes nor recouer debtes nor institute heires and other such like and more sharpe penalties prescribed in old time by the Canon law against ancient Hereticks herof he inferreth that we detract all humane society from Protestants and consequently we are not tolerable in a Protestant common-wealth 15. But we answere first that touching the former part to wit the imputation of heresy and excommunication to the Protestant party of England that followeth the Sacramentary doctrine of Caluin and Zuinglius yow haue heard now immediately before how that imputation is
the law Canon it self Consider I pray yow how many fraudes and falshoodes there be in one little quotation and what a volume I should be inforced to make if I would examine exactly such a multitude of citations as he quoteth against vs but yet one or two more shall I produce in the same kinde and matter 52. In the sixt page of his discouery he hath this grieuous accusation out of the Canon law against vs Haeretici filij vel consanguinei non dicuntur sed 〈◊〉 legem sit manus tua super eos vt fundas sanguinem ipsorum and then he quoteth thus Apud Grat. gloss in Decret li. 5. ex Decret Gregor 9. caus 23. q. 8. cap. Legi Which distracted kind of quotation seperating the first and last wordes that should haue gone togeather seeme to import that he scarce read the bookes themselues but cited the same out of some other mans notes but that fault were easily pardoned if he vsed no greater fraude in the thing it self For first he Englisheth the wordes thus Heretickes may not be termed either children or kindred but according to the old law thy hand must be against them to spil their bloud And then in the margent he setteth downe this speciall printed note The professed bloudy massacre against the Protestantes without distinction of sex or kinred And what can be more odiously vrged thē this Now then let vs see how many false trickes and shiftes fit for a Protestant-Minister doely lurking in this short citation 53. First of all is to be considered that this glosse or Commentary of the Canon law which heere is both vntruly cited and maliciously applied is vpon a Canon beginning Si quis which Canon is taken out of the third Councell of Carthage wherin the famous Doctour and Holy Father S. Augustine was present as a cheife Bishop that had voice in that Councell and the decree of the Canon is that if any Bishop should institute Heretickes or pagans for his heires whether they were consanguinei or extranei kinsmen or externes ei Anathema dicatur atque eius nomen inter Dei sacerdotes nullo modo recitetur Let him be accursed let not his name be remembred any way among the Priestes of God 54. This is the seuerity of that Canon for ground wherof another precedent Canon setteth downe out of the same S. Augustine Quod Haereticus perseuer ans aeternaliter damnatur c. That an Heretick perseuering in his Heresy is damned eternally neither can he recieue any profit by baptisme almes martyrdome nor any other good workes So hath the title of the Canon but the wordes of S. Augustine are these Firmissimè tene nullatenùs dubites c. Hold for most certaine and no wayes doubt but that euery Hereticke or Schismaticke shall be partaker of hel fier euerlastingly togeather with the diuell and his angelles except before the end of his life he be restored and incorporated againe into the Catholicke Church neither shall baptisme or almes neuer so aboundantly bestowed no nor death it self suffred for the name of Christ profit him any thing to saluation So S. Augustine 55. Vpon this ground then that Heretickes out of the Church so censured as heere yow haue heard though they be neuer so neere of kin may not be made heires especially by Church-men the glosse yeelding a reason therof hath these wordes Quia isti Haeretici iam non dicuntur filij vel consanguinei vnde dicitur in lege si frater tuus amicus tuus vxor tua aeprauare voluerit veritatem sit manus tua super illos For that these Heretickes are not now called childrē or kinsfolke therfore as such they cannot be made Inheritours by Ecclesiasticall men wherupon it is said in the law of Deuteronomie if thy brother and friend or wife will goe about to depraue the truth let thy hand be vpon them And presently he citeth to the same effect the authority of S Hierome out of another Canon in another place of the law as presently we shall see 56. So as first heere we may behold that T. M. hath not put downe this his quoted glosse as it is found in the true glosse it self but left out both the beginning 〈◊〉 isti Haeretici c. which imported somewhat to the vnderstanding of his meaning as also he left out the reason alledged by the glosse out of Gods owne wordes in Deuteronomy to wit the wilfull corrupting of his truth And thirdly he added these wordes Vt fundas sanguinem ipsorum which heere as yow see the glosse hath not but they are cited out of S. Hierome in another Canon and volume of the law where 〈◊〉 Holy Father excusing to his friend Riparius a Priest his earnest zeale and desire to haue Vigilantius the Hereticke against whome he had written punished by his Bishop alledgeth diuers examples of seuerity in like cases out of the Scripture as of Phinees Elias Symon Cananeus S. Peter S. Paul and lastly citeth also the foresaid wordes of Gods ordinance in Deuteronomy If thy brother thy wife thy friend c. shall goe about to peruert thee from Gods true worship c. heare him not nor conceale him but bring him forth to iudgment and let thy hand be vpon him first and then after the hand of all the people c. which is to be vnderstood according to the forme of law appointed afterward in the 17. Chapter That he be orderly brought forth to iudgment and then when sentence is 〈◊〉 against him he which heard or saw him commit the sinne and is a witnes against him must cast the first stone at him and the rest must follow And this also doth the ordinary Commentary or glosse of Lyranus and others vpon those textes of Scripture declare 57. And now let the iudicious Reader consider how many corruptions this crasty Minister hath vsed to bring forth to his purpose this one little distracted text for proof of professed bloudy massacres intended by vs against Protestantes For first he corrupteth the wordes of the glosse apparantly and that in diuers pointes leauing out that which the glosse saith and adding that which the glosse hath not then he corrupteth the meaning both of glosse and Canon deprauing that to a wicked sense of bloudy massacring without distinction of sex or kinred which the Canon and Councell of Carthage with S. Augustine meant only of ciuill punishment against Heretickes to wit that they could not be made heires to Ecclesiasticall men Thirdly he peruerteth in like manner S. Hieromes intent which was that albeit he wished that Heretickes should be punished also bodily yet by order and forme of law and not that any one should kill another much lesse by bloudy massacres as this fellow setteth it downe in his marginall note And lastly he presumeth to peruert the very wordes of God himself in the law by translating fundas sanguinem ipsorum spill their
to Princes concerning the obedience or Rebellion of their subiectes whatsoeuer hath byn obiected by the accusation or calumniation of our Minister in his former discouery against Catholickes hath not byn any direct doctrine teaching or insinuating much lesse inciting subiectes to disobedience or Rebellion as before hath byn declared but only by a certaine consequence or inferēce that for so much as in certaine vrgent and exorbitant cases we ascribe to the Christian Common-wealth and supreme Pastour therof authority to restraine punish supreme Magistrates in such cases that therfore our doctrine is seditious and tending indirectly at least à longè to Rebellion though the visible experience of so many great Kingdomes round about vs lyuing for so many yeares and sometimes ages also in quiet security notwithstāding this doctrine doth conuince this to be a calumniation 14. But our Aduersaries doe not onely teach this That euery Christian Common-wealth vpon mature deliberation and with generall consent hath such anthority but further also that particular men and Common people haue the same and are not only taught but vrged in like manner exhorted to vse it when soeuer they suppose their Prince to offer them iniury or hard measure especially in matters of Religion wherof the moderate Answerer obiecteth many examples and proofes against T. M. taken out of their owne bookes wordes and wrytinges as also by the testimonies of other principall Protestant-writers wherevnto though T. M. would make a shew to answere somewhat now in this his Reply and therupon hath framed a second seuerall part of his booke for iustificatiō of Protestantes in that behalfe yet is it so far of from A full satisfaction the title of his whole worke as in effect he confesseth all that his Aduersary opposeth no lesse then yow haue heard in the former question though somewhat he will seeme sometimes to wrangle and to wype of the hatred of their assertion by Commentes of his owne deuise 15. And indeed what other answere can be framed to most plaine assertions out of their owne wordes and writinges as of Caluin Beza Hottoman and so many other French Caluinistes as I haue mentioned in the first Chapter of this Treatise Goodman also Gilby VVhittingham Knox Buchanan and others neerer home vnto vs All the forenamed Collections in like manner of him that is now Archbishop of Canterbury of Doctour Sutcliffe and others in the books intituled Dangerous positions Suruey of the pretended Disciplinary Doctrine and the like wherin their positions are most cleerly set downe concerning this matter And albeit this Minister T. M. in his Reply doth vse all the art possible to dissemble the same by telling a peece of his Aduersaries allegations in one place and another peece in another altering all order both of Chapters matter and method set downe by the Answerer so as neuer hare when she would sit did vse more turninges and windinges for couering her selfe which the Reader may obserue euen by the places themselues quoted by him out of his aduersaries booke yet are his answerers such where he doth answere for to sundry chiefe points he saith nothing at all as doe easely shew that in substance he confesseth all and cannot deny what is obiected And where he seeketh to deny any thing there he intangleth himself more then if flatly he confessed the same Some few examples I shall alledge wherby coniecture may be made of the rest 16. The Answerer alledgeth first the wordes of Goodman in his booke against Queen Mary wherin he writeth expressely that it is lawfull by Godes law and mans to kill both Kinges and Queenes when iust cause is offered and herself in particuler for that she was an enemy to God and that all Magistrates and Princes transgressing Gods lawes might by the people be punished condemned depriued put to death aswel as priuate transgressours and much other such doctrine to this effect cited out of the said Goodman All which the Bishop of Canterbury his second booke of Dangerous positions hath much more largely both of this Goodman and many other English Protestantes cheife Doctours of their Primitiue Church residing at that time in Geneua And what doth T. M. reply now to this Yow shall heare it in his owne wordes If I should iustify this Goodman saith he though your examples might excuse him yet my hart shall condemne my self But what doe yow professe to proue all Protestantes teach positions Rebellious Proue it Heere is one Goodman who in his publicke book doth maintaine him I haue no other meanes to auoid these straites which yow obiect by the example of one to conclude all Protestants in England Rebellious then by the example of all the rest to answere there is but one So he 17. And this is his full satisfaction and faithfull Reply as he calleth his booke but how poore satisfaction this giueth and how many pointes there be heere of no faith or credit at all is quickly seene by him that will examine them For first how doe the 〈◊〉 alledged agaist this Goodman by the Moderate Answerer excuse him as heere is said seeing the wordes he alledgeth against him out of his owne booke are intollerable and my Lord of Canterbury alledgeth farre worse As for example that it is most lawfull to kill wicked Kinges when they fall to Tyranny but namely Queenes and thervpon that Queene Mary ought to haue byn put to death as a Tyrant Monster and cruèll beast alledging for confirmation therof diuers examples out of Holy Scripture as that the Subiectes did lawfully kill the Queenes Highnes Athalia and that the worthy Captaine Iehu killed the Queenes Maiesty Iesabell and that Elias though no Magistrate killed the Queenes Highnes Chaplaines the Priestes of Baal and that these examples are left for our instruction c. And now tell me how may these examples excuse M. Goodman as our Minister Morton auoucheth 18. Secondly it is both false and fond to affirme that the moderate Answerer tooke vpon him to proue either that all Protestantes in these our dayes doe teach such Rebellious positions or that all Protestantes in England are Rebellious as heere is affirmed for that this were to deale as iniuriously with them as they and he doe with vs by imputing this last Rebellious fact of a few in England to the whole sort of Catholickes and to their doctrine It was sufficient for the Answerers purpose to shew that both Goodman and many others principall pillars of the English new Ghospell in those daies did hold belieue and practice those positions out of the true spirit of the said Ghospell And herevpon thirdly it followeth that it is a notorious impudency to auouch with such resolutiō as this man doth that there is but this one of that opinion and that one dram of drosse as he saith proueth not the whole masse to be no gold For who knoweth not first that VVhittingam afterward Deane of Durham
Christ to S. Peter and that it is a strange art to make a sword of a paire of keyes which seemeth to him a fine iest then commeth he out with this vanut Neither can any shew me one Doctour but of reasonable antiquity peto vel ex millibus vnum who by keyes vnderstand ciuill power But Syr what needeth antiquity of Doctors in this behalf will not your owne moderne Protestant Doctors graunt that when the keyes of any Citty Towne or Fort are giuē to a Prince ciuill power ouer that Fort is meant therby who will deny this 38. And secondly whereas he alleadgeth Franciscus à Victoria to say that the keyes giuen to S Peter imported spiritual authority of remitting and reteyning sinnes ergo no way temporall is a fond illation for that albeit Victoria saith that those keyes did principally importe spirituall authority yet they include also supreme temporall indirectly when the defence of the spirituall doth require it Whereupon he frameth this conclusion in the same place Our eight proposition is saith he that the Pope by authority of the foresaid keyes hath most ample temporall power ouer all Princes and Kinges and the Emperour himself in order to a spirituall end which he proueth there by many arguments And this of the first iest about swordes to be made of keyes 39. The second iest also is as wise and witty as this former that when we found the same temporall sword or authority of S. Peter and his successours vpon the words of Christ Feed my sheep he doth inferre that Princes also must be fed and dietted corporally at the Popes discretion and other such toyes he not vnderstanding as it seemeth or rather dissembling the force of Catholicke argumentes drawne from those and other like Scriptures both by later Doctors and ancient Fathers which this fellow turneth into scofs and contempt or wicked railing for that presently he falleth into these rages O arrogant Glossers O impudent Glosers and peruerters of the sacred Oracles of God! And why is all this heat of exclamations Forsooth for that in some Popes Bulles though corruptly fraudulently alledged some mention is made of the great authority that was giuen to Elias Elizeus Ieremy and other Prophetes and especially to Christ himself vpon earth to plant destroy pull vp or punish where need should be and that this authority by allusion vnto the same wordes of Scripture is applied to Christes Successour vpon earth affirmed to be left in the Christian Church to be vsed when need shall require and is this so great an impiety thinke yow 40. But he goeth on and saith That next to this he will examine the antiquity of pretended Papall power from the Apostles time downward and then produceth this assertion of ours The Priestes saith the Romish pretence of the new Testament in the Priesthood of Christ haue more authority then that of the old law ouer Kinges to depose them whervnto he adioyneth presently his owne spruse Ministeriall answere in these wordes This is not probable except yow can shew some footinges either of Christ or his blessed Apostles or their Holy Successours in the purer periods of times And is not this answered as from a man of his coat Marke the phrase Of footings in purer periods I will for footinges in this matter referre him to the large demonstrations which out of Scriptures Doctours Fathers Councelles and Ecclesiasticall Histories the Authors by him heere often alledged Carerius Bozius Bellarmine Sanders Salmeron and others doe aboundantly and substancially alledge when he shall haue ouerthrowne or supplanted those footinges of theirs which they 〈◊〉 fix throughout all periods of times from the beginning of Christian Religion vnto our dayes and generall practice therof then may the poore man get to haue some little footing for himself and his cause which hitherto he hath none at all as to any man whosoeuer with any indifferency of iudgment shall read ouer and examine his booke will euidently appear yea though he compare but only that which himself alledgeth heere both in the text and margent which seldome agree in true sense if you marke it well But if yow would examine the Latin authorities cited in the said margent with the originalles of the Authors themselues you shall scarce euer finde them sincerly to agree but that one fraud or other is vsed in their allegation by chopping changing infarcing leauing out and other such sleightes and deceiptes which though the breuity of this Treatise permit me not to examin and lay forth at large in this place yet some we haue touched before and some others shall we haue occasion to note afterwardes and the Reader himself may vpon this warning make some little triall 41. And as for the succession of times which this Author T. M. pretendeth to bring downe from the Apostles dayes not to ours but for a thousand yeares only after Christ wherin he saith that no Pope can be shewed euer to haue had any temporall iurisdiction ouer any Emperour King or temporall Prince though Catholickes doe hold the later six hundred yeares also to be of no lesse force for president of examples in the Church of God then the former thousand yet are the instances so many and euident which may be alledged against his former prescription of the said thousand yeares as doe manifestly cōuince him of folly in that assertion wherin I referre me to the collections and demonstrations therof by the foresaid Authors Carerius Bozius Bellarmine Sanders and others in the places heere quoted in the margent but especially to the three that are not Iesuites to the first for all to wit Carerius that in diuers thinges wrote against the Iesuits whoe in his second booke alleadgeth 10. or 12. examples out of antiquity for prouing his purpose I remit me also to the many learned writinges set forth of late about the cause of the Venetians by Penia Baronius Bouius Eugenius Nardus others shewing the most euident right which the Pope had and hath to commaund them as high Pastor of the Church to recall certaine ciuill lawes made by them in preiudice of the said Church and Ecclesiasticall State which Commandement we doubt not but God will moue that most excellent Cōmon-wealth finally to obey they being knowne to be so good and sound Catholickes as they are though for some time in regard of some temporall respectes they haue deferred to doe the same 42. Many more pointes might be examined in this descēt of his throughout periodes of times but it would be ouerlong and my intention is to giue a tast only or short view for to examine the places cited out of Fathers of diuers ages for proofe of his pretence were time wholy lost For that in effect they say nothing else but that we graunt which is that temporall Princes are to be respected and obeyed by Ecclesiasticall men also but in temporall affaires And as for his examples of
As for example wheras they write that God is omnipotent and can doe all thinges and vse his creatures to what end and vse it shall please him yet cannot he neither by his ordinary nor absolute power either by himselfe or by another concurre to the making of a lye fraudulently to deceaue the vnderstāding of man or Angell or induce another so to deceaue the same with intention indeed of deceipt or fallacy Of which point of doctrine the said Schoole-Doctors and others after them doe dispute largely vpon the third article of S. Thomas his second Part and first question of his Summe of Deuinity demaunding this doubt VVhether any kind of deceipt or falsity by any meanes mediatly or immediatly may proceed from God which they hold negatiuely that it is impossible he being truth it selfe and the fountaine of all truth and sincerity in others And albeit there be many and great arguments alleadged out of Scriptures which in shew doe proue the contrary to wit that God not only can by his absolute power but hath also oftentimes in effect deceaued others by meanes of wicked spirites as S. Augustine also holdeth and is euident by many places of Scripture as 2. Reg. 22. where to deceaue Achab it is said Dedit Dominus spiritum mendacem in ore omnium Prophetarum God gaue a lying spirit in the mouth of all his false Prophettes And Esay 63. Ezech. 14. Iob 12. Rom. 1. it is said expressely that God deliuereth men into a reprobate sense which is the worst sort of deceauing a mās vnderstāding that may be yet to all this they answere out of the ancient Fathers and Scripture it selfe that God doth only permit men to be deceaued and to belieue vntruth but doth not concurre actually or effectually to the same by any cooperation of his to any falshood or vntruth whatsoeuer nor can he doe it by any power of his for that he should impugne himselfe which is truth And this is the greatest and highest detestation of lying vsed by our Doctors that possibly can be imagined and yet will the lying Minister say that they are 〈◊〉 Fathers and patrons of lying But let vs see more of our Schoole-Doctors in this behalfe 39. Our learned countreyman also Alexander of Hales liuing before S. Thomas and as some say was his Maister being held for one of the most learned of all Schoole-men that euer were before or after him doth handle diuers questions very learnedly and piously about this point for detestatiō of lying as namely one VVhy theft and man-slaughter may be lawfully permitted in some cases and lying neuer Also how it cōmeth to passe that the least degree of lying that is to wit an officious or 〈◊〉 which in ordinary imperfect men is only a venial sinne may come to be in men of perfection a mortall and damnable sinne concluding thus Quod sicut de Adam dicitur quòd ratione status sui peccauit mortaliter ita iste ratione status in hoc genere peccat mortaliter As it is said of Adam that by reason of his high state of innocency he sinned mortally in eating an apple by disobedience so this man professing perfection of life in a religious state by any sort of voluntary lying sinneth mortally for which he alleadgeth diuers authorities of S. Augustine as namely this Sanctus vir c. A holy man that doth perfectly cleaue to God which is truth it selfe is forbidden either purposely or rashly to vtter vntruth and for that the Scripture saith He that lieth killeth his owne soule and againe Thou shalt destroy all those that speake lies perfect men doe fly with all care these kindes also of least lies in such sort as no mans life may be defended therby least they hurt their owne soules while they goe about to profit another mans flesh 40. Againe the said Father in another place Tam sibi clausum deputat ad subueniendum hominem per mendacium quà m si per stuprum transire cogatur A good and perfect man doth thinke the way so shut vnto him from helping another man by any kinde of lye though neuer so officious as if it were required at his hand to helpe him by cōmitting rape or incest nay yet Halensis goeth further proposing this question Whether if a man did certainly know that by any least kinde of lying on his behalfe he might conuert an Infidell to Christianity and not otherwise whether he might doe it or no and then concludeth that he may not in any case alleadging this reason out of S Augustine that as it is not lawfull for me to procure another mans chastity by my owne sinne of carnality so much lesse is it lawfull to bring another man to the knowledge of truth by my corrupting of truth So this holy Religions Countreyman of ours whose cōscience let the indifferent Reader compare with that of this irreligious Minister who not only in iest or officious lying to any mans good either in body or soule but in malicious lying in preiudice of both is euery where taken most manifestly as before yow haue seene and shall againe after vpon sundry occasions 41. Well then this seuerity of doctrine is taught by our Catholicke Deuines against the sinne of simple lying But if we talke of lying in an oath which is periury euery man may imagine how much more earnestly the same is detested by them in so much as the famous Doctor Nauarre before mētioned who is held to be one of the most liberall and largest in admitting Equiuocations both in wordes and oathes with the due circumstances and hath written three whole Treatises about the same yet is he so seuere and rigorous against lying and periury as he teacheth that it is a mortall and damnable sinne to sweare falsely euen in iest And others yet goe further auouching that it is damnable to sweare 〈◊〉 by euill custome yea sometimes also though the thing in it selfe be true which he sweareth the reason wherof they alleadge to be this for that the act of swearing being actus latriae as Deuines call it that is to say an act of highest honour to God for that he is cited and alleadged in an oath as an infallible witnes the man that accustometh to sweare rashly putteth himselfe in manifest danger to sweare also falsely therby sinneth mortally albeit for that time he sweareth the thing that is true but as easily would he haue done it thogh it had byn false in respect of his yll custome of swearing rashly and consequently no lesse dishonour and contempt doth he vse towardes the Maiesty of Almighty God therin then if he had sworne false which is an important note for rash swearers to consider of and remember 42. Well now all this being so will our Minister still stand in his obstinate calumniation that we are louers of lies patrons of periury defenders allowers of falshood Doctors of
of his owne life or of others And this is the common sentence and iudgement of all Catholicke Schoole Doctors without exception vnles sometimes the smalnesse of the matter it selfe should in some cases make it veniall but of his owne nature it is damnable because it is against the Maiesty of almighty God whose substitute euery lawfull Magistrate and Iudge is and against publicke iustice and the common good of each State and Kingdome as also against charity towards our neighbour and obligation vnto truth it selfe Wherby it followeth that albeit a mans present life or death stood vpon it and that by denying a truth without swearing he might saue the same yet is it not lawfull to doe it And this is our seuerity in that behalfe 52. But on the other side if the Iudge be not lawful or competent or haue not iurisdiction in that matter which he demandeth as if a lay Magistrate in a Catholicke countrey would enquire of matters not belonging to his iurisdiction as for example sacred or secret or that he should offer iniury against law to the Respondent in the manner of his proceedings wherby he should be disobliged in conscience to answere to his meaning or interrogatories yea somtims rather obliged not to answer therunto when it concerneth other mens hurt then may he answere as though he were alone and no man by for that he hath no necessary reference to him at all nor to his demaundes questions or speach but that he may frame to him selfe any proposition that is true in it selfe and in his owne sense meaning though the other that heareth vnderstand it in a different sense and meaning be therby deceaued 53. Neither is this to deceaue another but to permit him that offreth me iniury and is no Superiour of mine in that cause to be deceaued by my doubtfull speach and by concealing that which I am not bound to vtter vnto him which kind of deceipt or dissimulation is lawfull as in the precedent Chapter hath byn shewed by the example of stratagemes in warre wherby though many be slaine and 〈◊〉 hurtes done yet nihil homo iustus saith S. Augustine praetereà cogitare debet in his rebus nisi vt bellum iustum suscipiat quod cùm susceperit vtrum aperta pugna vel ex 〈◊〉 vicerit nihil ad 〈◊〉 interest A 〈◊〉 man in warre ought to thinke 〈◊〉 nothing but that the warre be iust that he taketh in hand which being certaine it importeth nothing in respect of iustice whether he get the victory by sleightes or by open warre And this he speaketh by occasion of the direction of God vnto Iosue when he taught him what snares and wiles he should vse to intrappe the inhabitantes of the Citty of Hai as he did to their ruine and destruction and therby all Deuines doe inferre that such dissimulations stratagemes are lawfull in iust warre which yet S. Thomas doth limite out of S. Ambrose to be true when the parties haue not giuen their word and promise to the contrary but yet both he and all other Deuines doe hold that these stratagemes are no lies 54. This same point also that it is lawfull in this sense to deceaue that is to say to permit another man to be deceaued by our speach or doinges so we vtter no lye is made most manifest by the example of God himselfe who though as before hath byn said he cannot possibly deceaue or make a lye no not by the omnipotency of all his power yet are there manifold places in Scriptures to shew that at least he permitteth men to be deceaued by words factes of his of so many holy Patriarches Prophets Apostles and other Saints gouerned by his spirit yea of his owne Sonne that is the most exact rule of all truth for otherwise how could so many Heresies arise which are all commonly founded vpon the euill vnderstanding of some wordes or sentences of our said Sauiour and his Apostles or of the Prophetes and Patriarches before them which yet Christ the holy Ghost did forsee togeather with the infinite errores and hurtes that would ensue therof and yet did not they preuent that deceipt nor cease to vtter those speaches by which they knew that so many would be deceaued nay as in the former Paragraph hath byn declared Christ our Sauiour spake 〈◊〉 thinges doubtfull ambiguous Equiuocall in themselues that had or might haue different meaninges and interpretations yet I presume Thomas 〈◊〉 will not goe about to bring our Sauiours said speaches within the compasse of this clause of the 〈◊〉 of a lye cum mentione fallendi c. 55. Wherfore to returne to the application of both clauses of this definition of lying to our proposition I say that neither of them doe agree therunto and much lesse both Not the former for that the speach agreeth to the mind and meaning of the speaker for that I doe truly and really meane that I am no Priest in the sense that I speake it which may be any that pleaseth me or that I list to 〈◊〉 to my selfe seing I haue no obligation to respect any thing what the demaunder speaketh or asketh for so much as he demaundeth me against law and equity so as I may meane that I am no Priest such as I should be such as I desire to be such as is worthy of so great an office and sacred a 〈◊〉 such as he ought to be that occupieth the place of God in gouerning of soules I am no Priest subiect to the demaunder or obliged to answere his demaundes or the like and as if I were alone I might make to my selfe this proposition I am no such Priest and it were true and not false for that it agreeth as well with my meaning as with the thing it selfe so also now is it truly meant and spoken in my sense though not in the hearers and consequently the definition of truth before mentioned agreeth therunto for that there is heere adaequatio rei intellectus an agreement betweene the thing and the speakers vnderstanding and so much for the first clause of this definition of lying For as touching examples to proue the verity of like speaches out of holy Scripture they shall be alleadged more aboundantly afterward 56. The second clause also which is intentio fallendi intention to deceaue is easely excluded from this our propositiō both by that I haue said before of the lawfulnes of stratagemes when iniuries are offred and by the forme of Christes owne speaches as also by that notorious distinction of S. Augustine to this purpose alleadged and auerred by S. Thomas and other Schoolemen and related into the Canon law it selfe by Gratian to wit Aliud est celare veritatem aliud falsum dicere It is one thing to conceale a truth another to speake an vntruth And againe Manifestum est saith the same Father
Lawiers it shall be sufficient to haue named these few and though I had purposed once to haue set downe in particuler the seuerall places of their workes where they handle this matter and shew their opinions in approbation therof yet finally not to trouble the Reader with so many quotations I iudged it best to deferre these vnto the next Chapter where I meane to lay forth some particuler cases in which their seuerall sentences are to be alledged and so we shall passe on now to the other pointes of his Chapter that doe remaine only aduertising by the way that if our few English Ministers that doe contradict this common receaued doctrine for I doe not thinke all to be so rash or sensles should be put in a paire of ballance for learning piety and discretion with these Authors here named and that a man were to aduenture his soule with one party I doe not doubt but that the discreet Reader will easely see where it were reason to make his chose And so much of this THE SECOND POINT touching Scriptures and Fathers For mixt and reserued propositions §. 2. 17. ANd first of all I haue thought best for more breuity to ioine Scriptures and Fathers togeather in this Point of mixt and reserued Propositions for that the exposition of the 〈◊〉 going with the text of Scripture doth euidently shew both their senses therin and conioine both their testimonies For if we can shew that the holy Ghost in Scriptures doth vse such doubtfull and ambiguous propositions as is that I am no Priest with some mentall reseruation equall vnto this of ours with obligation to reueale c. and that by ordinary sound and signification of the wordes vttered the hearer may be deceaued and take it in one sense and the speaker by the part reserued in his mind may truly vnderstand it in another and that the ancient Fathers doe by their expositions confirme the same then doe we proue directly our purpose both out of Scriptures and out of Fathers in like manner notwithstanding Thomas Mortons vaine assertion that not one Iota in all Scriptures not one example in all Catholicke antiquity c. And albeit I haue shewed diuers examples already in the two precedent Chapters that doe conuince most euidently that which we are to proue yet for that we haue not vrged before the exposition of Fathers vpō those places we meane heere out of the aboundance that we haue to adioine sundry other testimonies to the end the matter may remaine vndoubted 18. And we shall begin with an example so cleere as it shall be like to that of ours in all pointes if we chang only the names of the persons and conditions of 〈◊〉 that spake and heard As that example of S. Iohn 〈◊〉 who being examined and demaunded by them that were sent vnto him from the Iewes whether he were a Prophet or no he deined it Propheta es tu Et respondit non Are yow a Prophet and he answered no and yet he meant not absolutly to deny himself to be a Prophet for that it had byn false both in respect of that his Father Zacharias had prophecied of him in his natiuity Et tu puer Propheta Altissimi vocaberis c. And thou child shalt be called the Prophet of the Highest for that thou shalt goe before his face to prepare his wayes as also for that the testimony of Christ himself in S. Mathewes Ghospell is cleare Quid 〈◊〉 videre Prophetam etiam dico vobis plus quà m Prophetam What went yow forth to see in the desert A Prophet yea I say vnto yow and more then a Prophet Wherunto our said Sauiour in S. Lukes Ghospell addeth 〈◊〉 inter natos multerum Propheta Iohanne Baptista nemo est there is no greater Prophet among the children of women then Iohn Baptist. 19. Heere then yow see a proposition vttered by the holy Ghost that of it self is ambiguous and of a doubtfull sense and according to the ordinary sound and sense of the wordes vttered seemeth false no lesse then our proposition I am no Priest For as this may be refuted by them that know me to be a Priest and as Thomas Morton still vrgeth though fondly is contrary to my knowledge and conscience that know my self to be a Priest so heer S. Iohns deniall that he is a Prophet may be refuted by Scripture and must needes be contrary to his owne knowledge conscience also after Mortons manner of vrging 〈◊〉 that he could not but know himself to be a Prophet is no lesse subiect to the calumniation of lying then our speech of denying my self to be a Priest except it be saued by some mentall reseruation which he vttered not in wordes 20. But now what this reseruation was is not so cleere among ancient Fathers though all doe agree that there was some consequently doe stand with vs against Morton that some such reseruation may be vsed And first S. Chrisostome S. Cyrill Origen Theophilactus Euthimius Apollinarius and other Greek writers doe thinke this 〈◊〉 to haue byn in S. Iohns speech that he was not that great Prophet promised in Deutronomy to come at the time of the Messias of whome Moyses said Thy Lord shall raise vp vnto thee a Prophet out of thy owne Nation and among thy owne Brethren as he hath raised me and him shalt thou heare meaning of Christ himself And their proofe for this is for that in Greek the article ho is ioined with PROPHETES which signifieth commonly an excellency eminency or singularity of the thing when it is added so as these Fathers will haue S. Iohns meaning to be I am not that eminent and singuler Prophet mentioned by Moyses which indeed as hath byn said was Christ himself 21. But other Fathers as S. Augustine and S. Gregory doe vnderstand another reseruation to haue byn in S. Iohns mind to wit that he was not only a Prophet but more then a Prophet as Christ said of him therfore denied himself to be a Prophet As if a Bishop should deny himself to be a Priest for that he is more then a Priest But Rupertus and some others doe interprete this reseruation of S. Iohn to haue byn that he was no Prophet by ordinary office to foretell Christ as other Prophets did but only that he was a Prophet in spirit and vertue to shew Christ present So as heere are diuers reseruatiōs discouered by these Fathers which doe make the proposition true that otherwise would be false and consequently all these Fathers doe agree that there may be a true mixt proposition partly vttered and partly reserued and therby true in one sense and false in another and one way vnderstood by the hearer and another way meant by the speaker which is properly the Equiuocation that we spake of in this place and is foolishly condemned by Thomas Morton for grosse lying 22. And albeit I
Ieremy being vrged to make a repetition to the Captaines Princes of King Sedechias that were tempted against him of that conference which had passed in secret betweene him and the said King of thinges that the King would not haue the said Princes to know it seemeth by the text of Scripture that albeit so great and holy a Prophet sanctified in his mothers wombe may be presumed not to haue lied yet that in so large a repetition wherin diuers truthes at the Kinges request were to be concealed there must in al probality passe diuers ambiguous and Equiuocall speaches for couering those truthes that were not to be vttered and that so it may be gathered out of Hieremies owne narration in the text and therfore all Equiuocation is not lying nor heathenish or abhominable prophanation as Thomas Morton would haue it 38. This is the force of the argument what answereth he therunto First he saith that our owne ancient expositor Lyranus in his Commentary holdeth that Ieremy did not ly but what of this So we say also for that otherwise we should graunt the Prophet to haue sinned and Equiuocation to be lying both which we vtterly deny Secondly then he leauing quickly this first hold steepeth to another more liked by him and his who would haue all men liars with themselues and this is that Ieremy did ly in deed in that his relation to the Princes of Sedechias if we iudge saith he the outward speach of Ieremy was false yet is it not written for our imitation c. And to this he applieth the words of S. Paul to the Corinthians Let him that standeth take 〈◊〉 least he fall that is to say into lying as Ieremy did and herwith also he giueth a generall note out of S. August who saith that all examples of the old Testament wherin there may be any scarres of infirmities to vse the wordes of T. M. are not to be imitated which is true in S. Augustines meaning who alleadgeth the example of Lot in prostitution of his daughters and of Dauid that swore rashly that he would kill Naball the like but it was farre from S. Augustines meaning hereby to touch any such holy Prophet Patriarch or Saint as Ieremy was or to condemne them of voluntary lying therfore here Thomas Morton sheweth lesse piety then folly in shifting of thus this place of Scripture 39. And if it were a scarre of infirmity in Hieremy to couer sometimes a truth by Equiuocation or amphibology of some speach for a good and necessary end yet I hope he will not say so of Christ himselfe nor lay his scarres also vpon him though yow haue heard now already by many examples how frequent that manner of speach was with him vpon sundry occasions and yow shall heare more presently for that now we passe to the examples which he citeth as alleadged by his aduersary out of the new Testament and we shall see whether he will answere them better then he hath already done these two of the old And if yow stand attent yow shall see him confirme our part as clearly as if he had written for vs and against himselfe Out of the new Testament 40. THe first place which he taketh vpon him to satisfy out of the new Testament as obiected by his Aduersaries is that our Sauiours saing in S. Iohns Ghospell All thinges whatsoeuer I heard of my Father haue I made knowne vnto yow yet in the very next ensuing Chapter Christ saith that he had many thinges to say vnto them but that they were not able to beare them away then Wherof is inferred that Christes former speach had some mentall restriction or reseruation in it as that he had told them all that he had receaued from his Father that is to say all whatsoeuer he thought conuenient for them to heare at that time or 〈◊〉 fit to beare away or to make their profit by or the like which yet was not expressed in wordes in the former proposition but reserued in Christes meaning consequently that proposition was mixt and Equiuocall in sense by this mentall reseruation what will Thomas Morton say to this For if a Iesuite should come to him and relate him some case from another with this asseueration in the end that he had told him all whatsoeuer he had heard from the other and yet the next day after should say that he had many pointes more to tell him from the same party but it was not time to tell them now I doubt not but that he would haue cried out that the Iesuite had lied the day before for the euill conceipt he hath of Iesuites in that behalfe but if on the contrary side he had held a good opinion of that Iesuite his integrity in his point and that for no worldly respect he would make a ly great or smal as according to our former doctrine he should not then must M. Morton imagine at least that that 〈◊〉 did Equiuocate without a ly and so consequently lying Equiuocation should be two distinct things 41. Well then now I expect what he will answere to this speach of Christ whome he will not grant I am sure to haue Equiuocated least he speake against himselfe and authorize therby Equiuocation nor dareth he I presume 〈◊〉 say that he lied least he cast vpon him so soule a scarre of infirmirty I expect I say to see how he will shift of this matter for that the case seemeth to be very like or rather the same in both examples setting a side the maine difference of the persons Yow shall heare what full satisfaction he wil giue in this behalfe I answere saith he with S. Augustine now mans infirmity playeth her part but know yow that no man learneth of Chastity to be adulterous or of godlines to be 〈◊〉 and shall we learne of truth to be liars and periurious God forbid Thus he out of S. Augustine as he pretendeth but in deed so brokenly corruptly alleadged if yow looke vpon the place it selfe as it may scarsely be called S. Augustines speach But as for the sense it appertaineth nothing to our purpose for S. Augustine saith we my not learne of the truth to be liars as the Priscillianistes indeauoured to doe by confirming the vnlawfulnes of lying out of the wordes of Christ which we doe not nor doe we affirme that our Sauiour when he said All thinges whatsoeuer I haue heard of my Father I haue made knowne vnto yow did ly or vtter any falsity at all but reserued somewhat in his mind not vttered which ioined with his wordes made the proposition most true and how then is the sentence of S. Augustine brought in against vs for an answere to the difficulty proposed By this 〈◊〉 yow may see what full satisfaction he is like â—o giue to these places of Scripture But let vs heare the rest 42. Touching this text saith he your
a man may truly say he may truly also sweare And that it is euident that many such mixt and reserued propositions were vttered by Christ and his Saintes as holy Scripture testifieth and we haue giuen many examples in the ninth Chapter going before as it were impiety to say that those propositions were lyes out of an oath so were it more impiety to conceaue that they should be periuryes in an oath if they had bene sworne And what will Thomas Morton now say to this or what scrap of proofe can he bring for his Minor proposition that euery mentall reserued speach or other equiuocall proposition is periury in an oath He alleadgeth first those wordes in Exodus Thou shalt not beare false witnes expounded by our Azor as he saith that we must sweare in truth and for the confirmation of truth but is this any thing against vs And do we not say that all such reserued propositions are true in themselues in the eares of God and mynd of the speaker How impertinent then is this proofe 18. But hearken further for he will bring another more strange then this Your great Moralist Azor saith he doth condemne all Equiuocators heerin to wit for mentall Equiuocation in an oath as periured lyars or otherwise saith he there is nothing in an oath that may not be affirmed and denyed without a lye Thus he And I would demaund him about this matter whether he will sweare this to be true which he saith of Azor For if Ministers and priests go in equall ranke in England a Ministers word ought to be equall to an oath as a priests word laying his hand on his breast is with vs and then must I needes conclude Tho. Morton for a periured lyar in deed who hath so perfidiously belyed Azor in this place and that in so many points For first Azor hādling in the booke and Chapter by him cyted De iureiurando cui videtur veritas aliquo modo deesse Of an oath which may seeme in some sorte to want truth he doth put downe diuers examples 8. or 9. at least wherin the swearer may sweare truly in his owne sense though false in the sense of him that exacteth the oath all which are so many plaine approbations of swearing Equiuocall propositions without periury and so many publicke contradictions and confutations of Tho. Mortons notorious slaunder auouched heere against him that he condemneth al Equiuocators for liers Of which cases heere determined by Azor against Morton the first is Si Sacerdosrogetur c. If a priest be asked any thing which he hath heard in confession he may answere se nihil scire nihil audiuisse that he knoweth nothing he hath heard nothing And how then doth this great Moralist condemne all Equiuocators herein as periured lyars Is not this publicke lying in Tho. Morton and that in print And were not this formall periury if he did sweare it in any court whatsoeuer as namely in his Lords Court of the Arches And should he not be punished in that Court as a periured person if it were proued against him And how then dareth he to commit the same so publickly without blushing But let vs leaue him to his Lords correction in this behalfe and so passe on to an other point 19. Secondly then not only the sense and drifte but the wordes themselues set downe by T. M. out of Azor are most fraudulently and falsely alleadged Quidam putauit saith he fas esse cuiquam vt vitam suam conseruet hosti iurare tantummodo eo sensu quem mente intus concipit possemus enim hac ratione quiduis negare nihil non absque mendacio dicere Some haue thought it lawful saith he to euery man for the cōseruation of his life to sweare to his enemy only in that sense which he conceaueth inwardly in his owne mynd which if it should be graunted then might we by this meanes deny any thing and speake what we will without a lye 20. These are 〈◊〉 for Azor his wordes and in deed the most of them are in Azor but not togeather as they lye heere but some in one place and some in another spoken to 〈◊〉 purposes in different sense from that T. M. alleadgeth them corruptly in this place And for proofe heerof and of the egregious cosenage of this lying Minister it shall be sufficient to let yow know that this speciall example alleadged here as out of Azor and as reiected by him of one that sware to his enemy for sauing his life in another sense then his wordes did sound is not reiected but allowed and approued by Azor. For that he hauing proposed the case first vnder other learned mens names much after the sense as heere is set downe by Morton he commeth at length to resolue and approue the same in his owne name saying Quare libenter concedimus id quod paulò antè dicebatur de co qui vt se saluum tueatur 〈◊〉 latroni tyranno aut hosti daturum se illi pecunia quantitatem c. Wherfore we do willingly grant that which before was proposed of him that by oath doth promise vnto a these a tyrant or his enemy for sauing his life to giue him a certayne quantity of money which yet notwithstanding in his 〈◊〉 he hath no purpose to do swearing with this reseruation dabo si debeo I wil giue it if I owe it Now then consider good reader the honesty and truth of Tho. Morton that bringeth in Azor to condemne that as lying periury which he doth not only allow as truth and no ly but proueth also the lawfulnes therof by many examples and especially by this of him that sweareth by Equiuocation which example Morton bringeth in as cōdemned by Azor for periurious lying what will yow say or what will you do with such men And doe yow note also that in the former wordes of Azor he cutteth of Latroni Tyranno and this to preueut a case resolued against him afterward by Cicero praedonibus piratis to theeues and pirates periury 〈◊〉 not committed what then I say is to be thought or said or done with such men Himselfe setteth downe a rule out of Tully in his Epistle to the King 〈◊〉 such as are taken once in lying may neuer after be credited againe which he applyeth against the Catholickes but 〈◊〉 iustly it ought to be practised in him and his fellowes that are taken at euery turne in such notorious wilfull lying is euident to the discreet Reader His fifth argument Truth God lying the diuell §. 5. 21. IF a man had time to loose in discussing this two-membred argument it might be some recreation to see the disputers folly weaknes in that he taketh in hand For first he setteth downe the wordes of S. Paul vnto the Hebrewes That it is impossible for God to lye which we graunt as yow know and haue proued it largely before and this neque de
our Grandame Eue. His fixt argument intituled from examples of dissimulation condemned by Scriptures Fathers Pagans §. 6. 27. HEERE yow see how he tyeth togeather Scriptures Fathers and Pagans all do proue indeed his purpose alike for that he bringeth nothing to the purpose out of any of them And first yow see that he flyeth the word Equiuocation and nameth only Dissimulation which Equiuocation we haue proued lately before to be a different thing from Dissimulation for that Equiuocation hath a true sense and meaning in the mynde of the speaker conforme to the matter and circumstance that is handled and most euidently vsed by Christ himselfe and diuers holy men as largely before hath bene declared which yet without impiety cannot be called or tearned Dissimulation in such a sense as Tho. Morton would haue it to wit as Dissimulation importeth deceipt or fraud for otherwise S. Augustine himselfe writing contramendacium against lying doth confesse that in a good sense Christ did dissemble when he said 〈◊〉 tetigit who touched me when he knew well ynough 〈◊〉 it was and of Lazarus Vbi posuistis eum where haue yow buryed him Per hoc nescire se finxit saith S. Augustine Christ by this kynde of speech did feigne that he knew not And againe in the same booke neyther that which Iacob did to obtayne the benediction of his Father nor that which Ioseph did to delude his brethren nor that which Dauid did when he feigned himselfe to be mad Neque caetera huiusmodi mendacia iudicanda sunt neyther other such like dissimulations as these are may be iudged for lyes Before also we haue heard his opinion for allowing all dissimulation in stratagems so the war be iust And thus much for the tytle of his argument now to the substance 28. First to begine with his examples out of Scriptures I say that he might better haue said Example in the singuler number for wheras we of our parte haue alleadged so many and so great variety of examples in our former discourse to the contrary he poore man out of all the body of the whole Bible hath alleadged but one and that nothing to his purpose as presently shall appeare His example is out of the Acts of the Apostles where it is recounted how Ananias and Saphira his wife hauing sold a certayne field of theirs and bringing a parte of the price and laying it at the feete of the Apostle as though it had bene the whole price were miraculously punished by Saint Peter for defrauding the Community of that which they had promised or would pretend to giue An Act saith T. Morton proper to the infancy of the Church to bring their substance and tender it to the Apostles for the comon good of the Saints By which words if he allow that fact as a forme of perfection in that purity and integrity of the Christian Churches begining why then now is the imitation therof in religious men of our dayes impugned by the Protestants And if by the word infancy he meane weaknes or imperfection in the sense of S. Paul saying Cùm essem paruulus c. VVhen I was a child or infant I speake as a child I vnderstood as a child I thought as a child but when I came to the yeares of a man I cast of those thinges that belonged to a child If this I say be Thomas Mortons meaning to note the act of imperfection the ancient Fathers do stand wholy against him and do allow it rather for great perfection and that it was a vow of voluntary pouerty to liue in comon which those first Christians had made by counsell of the Apostles and consequently do interprete those wordes Nonne manens tibi manebat c. Did it not remayne in your power to giue it or not to giue it to haue byn meant by S. Peter before their vow which if it be true and that S. Peter did giue so dreadfull a sentence vpon the first vow-breakers of voluntary pouerty euen for deteyning somwhat of their owne how much may Thomas Morton and some friends of his feare the like sentence for teaching it to be lawfull to take away that from a Religious cōmunity which themselues neuer gaue 29. But let vs come to the application of this example against Equiuocation which he hath chosen to vse principally about the womans speach The woman is asked saith he Sould yow the land for so much Her answere is yea for so much meaning but one halfe concealing the other in which dissimulation it is impossible but that your reserued clause must haue come into her mynd to thinke but so much to giue in common or to signifye vnto yow Thus Thomas Morton teacheth that poore woman to equiuocate after his manner of Equiuocation that is to say to lye for that now I suppose he hath learned by that which hath byn set downe in our precedent Chapter that to speake an vntruth or to conceale a truth or to vse any Equiuocation when we are iustly demaunded by our lawfull Superiour and when no iniurie or violence is vsed vnto vs is a greiuous mortall sinne in our Catholick Doctrin and consequently she being lawfully demaunded by S. Peter in a lawfull cause touching her owne vow promise no clause os reseruation could saue her speech from lying as our Minister doth foolishly imagine 30. Wherfore S. Peter as most lawfull Iudge and gouernour of the vniuersall Church vnder Christ the holy Ghost in him did worthily punish that dissimulation and lying both in her and her husband for example of others in that beginning and for manifesting the great and special assistance of the holy Ghost that assisted him and should be in his Successors to the worldes end in that their gouernement to the terror of wicked men that should impugne it or otherwise deserue by their demerites to be punished by the same And thus much of his examples out of Scriptures which is but one as yow see and that much against himselfe and his owne cause if I be not deceaued for that it proueth all equiuocation is not lawfull as 〈◊〉 will nedes suppose vs to hold 31. In the Fathers he is more copious for he hath two examples but of as small moment to the purpose as this The first out of S. Augustine in his booke against lying where he proposeth a certaine Case that if a sicke Father hauing a sonne vpon the point of death whom he loueth so tenderly that if he should know he were dead it would indanger also his owne life what might his friend answere vnto him who comming from his sonne and knowing him to be dead should be demaunded by the said Father whether he were dead or no S. Augustines resolution is that which before we haue also set downe in our generall Doctrine to be true that for sauing any mans temporall life a lye is not to be
his former proposition For if it were lawfull for Saint Athanasius to vse this Equiuocation in speach and fact for deluding his persecutors then had it bene lawfull also to sweare the same without sacrilegious prophanation if they had vrged him vnto it For as all Deuines hold that which may lawfully be said may also lawfully be sworne what will T. M. answere tò this what will he answere to that euasion of S. Paul mentioned by vs before when for escaping the hands of the Iewes that pursued him in iudgement he vsed an apparent equiuocall speach saying That his trouble was about the hope and resurrection of the dead Paul knowing saith the text that one parte of them that pursued him were of the Saduces that denyed the resurrection of the dead and the other of Pharises that held the contrary he cryed out in the iudgement-place saying De spe resurrectione mortuorum ego iudicor I am called to iudgement about the hope and resurrection of the dead which was true in one sense but false in another wherby the Pharises being deceyued tooke his parte Et facta est contentio sayth the text inter Pharisaeos Saducaeos soluta est multitudo and vpon this equiuocall speach there arose a dissention betwene the Pharises and Saduces one interpreting it in one sense and another in another and so the people departing the iudgement brake vp And what will Thomas Morton now answere to this did S. Paul lye in this Equiuocation or was his dissimulation impious for that one part was deceaued or had he committed 〈◊〉 prophanation if he had sworne it I demaund him also of that equiuocall oath of the Patriarch Ioseph who in one conference with his brethren did twice sweare vnto them 〈◊〉 Equiuocation that is to say with a reserued sense different from that he vttered to them in wordes the Scripture saying VVhen his brethren had adored him he knowing them to be his brethren spake sharpely vnto them as to strangers saying yow are spyes sent to discouer the strength of this land I sweare by the health of King Pharao yow shall not go hence c. And againe Per salutem Pharaonis c. I sweare by the health of Pharao that yow are spyes when notwithstanding he knew them not to be spyes so thought of them in his mynd And will T. M. say that this was a lye or at least a sacrilegious prophanation of an oath But I must go yet a little further in prosecution of this folly against the Minister 44. What then will he say to all those former examples of Equiuocall propositions which I haue alleaged out of holy Scripture out of the new Testamént and from the mouth of our Sauiour himselfe especially such as haue verball equiuocation in them As Dissolue this temple and I will build it vp againe in three dayes where the word temple hath euidently two significations and was taken in the one by Christ our Sauiour in the other by the Iewes And the other Our friend Lazarus sleepeth And againe The maid is not deed but sleepeth where the word sleepeth is equiuocall and hath two significations the one of death the other of naturall sleepe and Christ vnderstood it in the one and his hearers in the other And so the like where Christ said vnto the Iewes Abraham vidit diem meum gauisus est Abraham did see my day and did reioyce the word see is equiuocall and signifieth eyther seing in flesh or seing in spirite and the Iewes being deceyued with the equiuocation of the word vnderstood it in one sense and Christ in another wherupon they said vnto him Thou hast not yet fifty yeares of age and hast thou seene Abraham And therupon tooke stones to cast at him 45. And the very like example is of our Sauiours speach vnto the Samaritan at Iacobs well by the Citty of Sychar If thow knewest the gyfte of God and who it is that saith to thee Giue me water thou wouldest aske of him and he would giue thee liuing water where the word water being equiuocall signifieth both the element of water and heauenly grace which is the water of lyfe euerlasting which Equiuocation the woman not vnderstanding tooke it in the common sense of naturall water and asked him how he could giue her water for so much as he had no bucket to draw it vp in but Christ our Sauiour addeth an other equiuocall speach to her saying That he which shall drinke of the water which I will giue him shall neuer thirst more where not only the word water but the word thirst also is equiuocall hath two different senses wherby the woman deceaued said Giue me I pray of this water that I may thirst no more nor come hither to draw vnderstanding still of materiall water 46. Now I would demaund that for so much as all these speaches were manifestly equiuocall and had double senses and significations and that 〈◊〉 ech one of them the hearers were deceaued conceauing another sense then that which Christ mentally reserued to himselfe I would demaund I say whether notwithstanding this they were not true of themselues and whether Christ might not as well sweare them as speake them And if Thomas Morton will haue many examples togeather wherin Christ our Sauiour after his manner of swearing which is Amen amen dico vobis doth sweare or auouch by oath sundry equiuocall propositions let him looke vpon the later parte of the sixt Chapter of S. Iohn where Christ doth put the Antithesis betwene himselfe and Moyses and betwene the bread that Moyses gaue from heauen that which he was to giue being his owne flesh and betwene the lyfe that Manna gaue and that which his flesh was to giue and he shall fynd many equiuocall propositions both verball and mentall auouched by our Sauiour vnder this kind of oath repeated at least three or foure tymes in that matter One example of ech kynd shall suffice 47. When he saith Amen amen dico vobis qui credit in me babet vitam aeternam Truly truly I say vnto yow that he who beleeueth in me hath lyfe euerlasting this is a mentall reserued proposition as before hath byn shewed for that it is not true generally that euery one that beleeueth in Christ hath lyfe euerlasting but he that beleeueth accordingly which was reserued in Christs mynd and then the wordes immediatly following Ego sum panis vitae I am the bread of lyfe haue a verball equiuocation signifying of bread that gaue tēporall lyfe or spirituall lyfe as also the other words that ensue Your Fathers did eate manna in the deserte and are dead but he that shall eate of this bread shall not dye Dying heere signifyeth eyther the death of the body or the death of the soule and Christ meant of the later 〈◊〉 the Iewes of the first Nay which is more to be obserued as Euthymius noteth and
able to cleare himselfe And herof we do finally inferre that he and his do equiuocate in the worst kind which by vs ours is neuer vsed and so while he declameth against lawfull Equiuocation and practiseth vnlawfull he sheweth himselfe a playne preuaricator And for that this matter is of so great importance for the Reader well to conceaue in these dayes of controuersies betwene vs I meane to stay my selfe somewhat in this Chapter vpon this poynt and to shew that indeed it is a substantiall signe distinctiue betwene all Sectaries vs at this tyme and that in matters of controuersy our writers shall neuer be found guylty in these kyndes of false lying malicious equiuocatiōs where not only vntruth is vttered but it is wittingly also vttered the writer knowing that he writeth vntruth as often now hath bene said Which manner of dealing inferreth two points the one that such a writer or speaker hath no conscience that vttereth things against his owne knowledge and which God seeth to be false and falsely meant in his harte and the other that his cause hath no ground of substantiall truth which cannot be defended without such wilfull lyes 11. In this then if yow please let vs insist a while and let Thomas Morton bringe forth any Catholicke Authors whatsoeuer that wrote against Protestāts since these heresies began that hath bene taken in this impiety I meane that hath set downe in print any such falsity as cannot be excused eyther by ignorance ouersight negligence error of print translatiō diuersity of editions or the like but that it must needs be presumed that he knew the vntruth and yet would set it forth of this kynd I say let him shew me but one example among all Catholicke writers of our tyme and I will in my conscience greatly mistrust and discredit the Author whether it be another or my selfe But if he shew me two or three in any writer of this kind I shal neuer be able to beleeue him more And wheras the number and variety of Catholicke writers is so great as the world seeth it were no great labour to shew it in some if that spirite did raigne among them as it doth in Protestant writers out of whom great volumes might be framed of this one point if a man would imbrace them all throughout all nations But I meaning to speake of Englishmen and those very few in respect of the multitude and not hauing al their workes by meat this present am forced only to vse some few notes taken heertofore out of their books which notwitstanding shall suffice for this short view which we pretend And for better methode memory I haue thought good to reduce my Notes at this tyme to three sortes of men that haue writen against vs. First Protestant Bishops then Ministers and lastly Lay-men but of good sorte I meane Knightes and of ech one of these shall we make our seuerall Paragraphes The vse of Equiuocation in some Protestant English Bishops §. 1. 12. AND first in this ranke may we worthily put in the first and chiefe place M. Iohn Iewell called afterwards Bishop of Salisburie who being the first and chiefest man that in the beginning of Queene Elizabethes raigne tooke vpon him the publicke defence of Caluins doctrine in England and was named by many for that respect The Iewell and prim-rose of that Ghospell had primitias spiritus in that behalfe for cunning and artificial deluding of others by these kind of false and deceyuing Equiuocations as both by his wordes workes preachinges and protestations extant this day in print is most manifest and the conuersion of many men from Protestant to Catholicke Religion vpon sight and consideration therof hath euidently couinced wherof heere we meane to giue some briefe taste for examples sake 13. He then as wel in his Sermons at Paule crosse and the Court set forth afterward in print and answered as well by Doctor Harding as other learned men of the Catholicke party did make such a generall and vniuersall chalenge against all Catholickes whatsoeuer for proofe of 28. seuerall articles framed out by himselfe standinge in controuersy betweene vs as he made the world to wonder at him and diuers of his owne side that were more learned and discreete to murmur at his rashnes therin but many more with great disdayne to condemne his hypocrisy For thus he began 14. O mercifull God who would thinke there could be so much wilfulnes in the harte of man O Gregorie O Augustine O Hierome O Chrysostome O Leo O Dionyse O 〈◊〉 O Sixtus O Paul O Christ if we be deceaued herein yow are they that haue deceyued vs yow haue taught vs these schismes diuisions yow haue taught vs these heresyes c. and that yow may the more maruaile at the wilfulnes of such men the Papistes they stand this day against so many old Fathers so many Doctors so many examples of the primitiue Church so manifest Scriptures and yet haue they herein not one Father not one Doctor not one allowed example of the primitiue Church I speake not this in vehemency of spirit or heate of talke but euen as before God by way of simplicity and truth least any of yow should happily be deceaued and thinke there is more weight in the other side then in cōclusion there shal be found and therfore once againe I say of all the wordes of the holy Scriptures of all the examples of the Primitiue Church of all the old Fathers of all the ancient Doctors in these causes they haue not one Thus in that Sermon at Paules crosse and in an other at the Court of the same subiect which was the occasion and beginning of all the Combat that ensued afterwards betweene Catholicke men and him 15. And in another Sermon to the same effect he vseth this speach for confirmation of his former protestation Heere saith he the matter it selfe that I haue now in hand putteth me in remembrance of certayne thinges that I vttered vnto yow to the same purpose at my last being in this place I remember I layd out then before yow a number of thinges that are now in Controuersy whervnto our aduersaryes will not yeeld And I said perhaps boldly as it might then seeme to some man but as I my selfe and the learned of our Aduersaryes themselues do well know sincerely and truly that none of them all that stand this day against vs are able or shall euer be able to proue against vs any one of all these pointes either by Scriptures or by example of the primitiue Church or by the old Doctors or by the ancient generall Councells c. 16. And againe Loth I am to trouble yow with rehearsall of such thinges as I haue spoken before and yet because the case so requireth I shall desire yow that haue already heard me to beare with me in this behalfe better it were to trouble your eares with twice hearing of one thing
then to betray the truth of God The wordes I then spake as neere as I can call them to mynd were these that if any learned man of all our Aduersaries or if all the learned men that be aliue be able to bring any one sufficient sentence out of any old Catholicke Doctor or Father out of any one old Generall Councell out of the holy Scriptures of God or any one example of the primitiue Church wherby any of these ensuing articles of priuate Masse reall presence Primacy of the Bishop of Rome setting vp and honoring of Images Common prayer in a strange language offering vp Christ in sacrifice c. may be proued I am content to yeeld and subscribe c. 17. And againe in an other place My offer was this in my sermon at the Court that if any of all those things that I then rehearsed could be proued by your side by any sufficient authority either of Scriptures Councels or by any one allowed example c. I would yeald now it standeth vpon yow to proue but one example to the contrary And yet further in an other place in my Sermon saith he at Paules and els where I required yow to bring forth on your parte either some Scripture or some old Doctor or some ancient Councell c. and if yow of your parte would vouchsafe to bring but two lines the whole matter were concluded And yet further I protest before God bring me but one sufficiēt authority or one old Doctor on your side and I will yeeld c. At least yow should haue alleadged Augustine Ambrose Chrysostome Hierome c. I haue offered yow oftentymes bring me but two lines of your side and the field is yours c. O M. Doctor deale simply in Gods cause and say yow haue Doctors when yow haue them indeed 18. This and much more hath he to this effect all tending to shew his rare confidence in the Protestant cause which he defended but yet that he did not speake as he thought in these matters and that his iudgement did not concurre with his tongue and pen and consequently that he did Equiuocate in this worse sorte of Equiuocation many argumentes do mightely perswade me and especially these halfe dozen that follow Sixt argumentes of Maister Iewell his hipocrysy in this case §. 2. 19. FIRST for that he cannot be presumed to haue beene so ignorāt but that how soeuer he might thinke of the Scriptures that by his priuate interpretations he could shifte them of and deliuer himselfe from their Authority yet that the Fathers could not so easily be dispached wherof he had seene the profe but few yeares before in the disputation held in Oxford with B. Cranmer Ridley and Latymer vpon the 16. 17. and 18. dayes of Aprill in the yeare of Christ 1554. in which disputation M. Iewell as Fox saith was Notary among others and saw so many most euident testimonyes of auncient Fathers both Greeke and Latyn alleadged there and vrged against them as they could no wayes answere or handsomely shifte of as yow may see in Fox himselfe though neuer so partially related but much more orderly fully in a speciall Treatise writen of late of that matter intituled A Reuiew of ten publicke disputatiōs about Religion vnder the raignes of K. Edward and Queene Marie which euidency of testimony did worke so greatly with M. Iewell himselfe as after these disputatiōs ended he subscribed publikly in S. Mary-Church of Oxford to the Roman Catholicke doctrine in that behalf as M. Doctor Harding then present writeth to himfelfe in a speciall Epistle prefixed before his Reioynder which being so with what conscience could he say now so soone after Shew me one only Father one Doctor one place one sentence two lynes and the like for so much as lately before he had heard and registred so great a multitude of Fathers sentences that are yet extant in those disputations wherfore this must needs be Equiuocation of the worst kynde which could not be true neyther in the meaninge of the speaker himselfe 20. The second reason is that M. Iewell could not be ignorant that diuers ancient Fathers within the tyme by him limited had not only many sentences for the Catholicke parte in these heades of controuersyes alleadged by him and others but whole discourses also homilyes sermons chapters and treatises if not bookes therof As for exāple about the reall presence if he had read the Fathers he could not be ignorant of the mayne multitude of large Authorityes alleaged in these our dayes aswell by Bishop Claudius de Sainctes as Bellarmin and others about that matter not out of single or doubtfull sentēces but of whole discourses as hath bene said and those as effectually writen by the Authors for the truth of the reall presence as we can do in a manner now as namely S. Cyprian S. Hilary both Cyrills S. Ambrose S. Basil three Gregories Saint Chrysostome S. Hierome and others downward And the like multitude or more is alleadged for the Masse or dayly sacrifice of the Catholicke Church by the same Author And further no man can deny but that S. Augustine for example hath many large discourses treatises or Bookes directly tending to the proofe of diuers poynts now in controuersie betwene Protestants and vs as De cura pro mortuis habenda De libero arbitrio De fide operibus De nuptiis concupiscentia many others where he doth largely and of purpose impugne diuers Protestant opinions and confirme ours both about the valour of the Masse or dayly sacrifice for quicke and dead merite of workes and the like not only approuing but prouing also the same by great variety of Scriptures And the like doth S. Hierome against Iouinian and Vigilantius and S. Epiphanius against Aërius and other heretickes that held the same proposition that Protestants do now All which authorityes if M. Iewell had read or heard of them as may be presumed he had how then could he say with any conscience at all Bring me one Author one Father one Doctor one sentence one place or two lines and the like which he could not do without notable Equiuocation as yow see himselfe knowing that he spake falsely in that behalfe 21. The third reason is that M. Iewell could not but haue seene and considered the small accoumpt which other Protestāt writers more elder then himself had made and did make of the ancient Fathers when in any thing they were against their opinions nay their reiecting of them with contempt doth euidently shew that they held them for their aduersaries As for example M. Iewell beginneth his chalenge as yow remēber O Gregory O Augustine O Hierome O Chrysostome O Leo O Dionyse c. Now as for S. Gregory Caluin giueth this generall sentence of him Gregorius homo multis erroribus imbutus Gregory a man corrupted with many errors and Martyn Luther the Father
examineth the matter so slenderly as that out of the whole fifth Chapter he handleth only three lynes out of the 7 scarse other three and out of the second but seauen and none of all these Chapters are handled by him either in order or methode as they lye or as they haue connexion togeather by designement of the Author but with skypping and leaping hither and thither as hath byn shewed And the chiefe and principall points therof which are very learnedly hādled by his Aduersary are either left out and suppressed or so weakly touched the difficultyes also so dissembled and the reasons and authorityes alleadged by his Aduersary so omitted or concealed as a man may see that the Minister durst not in deed come within the lystes of lawfull combat though as before yow haue heard he vaunted greatly that he would 12. And by this yow may take some scantling of Thomas Mortons worth what it is without 〈◊〉 entrance into particulers of this Treatise which are ouer long for this place If he reply we may then perhaps examine the matter more largely Now I will conclude with him only with that admonition before mentioned that he consider how odious a matter it is both in the sight of God and man to be so publicke a calumniator of his brethren as he hath shewed himself to be 13. And as for the Catholickes against whom his calumniations are smal exhortation may serue to beare it patiently and make their benefit of it for so much as all the whole streme of holy Scriptures exhortations of the holy ghost doth runne aboue all other pointes to this end to comfort godly men in this case when lying lippes wicked tongues slaūderous pennes opprobrious calumniations and spitefull contumelyes do most insult against them For then is properly that tyme and occasion wherof the Apostle speaketh Cùm id quod in praesenti est momentaneum leue tribulationis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 modum in sublimitate aeternum gloriae pondus operatur When that which in this present mortall life is but momentary and light tribulation for what is more light and momentary then the darts of wicked tongues that passe with the wynd doth worke notwithstanding being patiently borne an eternall weight of glory in heauen Whervnto almighty God bring vs all and our enemyes also if it be his holy wil. Faultes escaped in the Printing Page Line fault Correction 25. 20. my his 74. 13. prison poyson 82. 1. Reipublicae Respublica 168. 4. our manner our name 225. 18. assert assent 252. 15. Faciendum Fatendum 276. 30. dele way 311. 28. fisted foisted 317. 28. adde dicitur 385. 32. hominem hominum 396. in titulo lege defend 414. 25. refuge refuse 436. 16. liues lyes 445. 4. is true is not true 486. 16. abe to be 497. 29. aule rule Other lesser faultes it may please the gentle Reader himselfe of courtesy to correct A TABLE OF THE PARTICVLAR MATTERS CONTEYNED IN THIS BOOKE A ADRIAN the fourth Pope an Englishmā by byrth cap. 2. nu 46. Egregiously abused by Thom. Morton ibid. Adultery vvhen and hovv it may be concealed by 〈◊〉 cap. 20. nu 37. Alexāder Halensis his rigour against lying cap. 7. nu 40. S. Ambrose abused and his text imbezeled by T.M. cap. 6. n. 17. Amphibology how it differeth from Equiuocation cap. 8. n. 10. Ananias and Saphyra their fact discussed cap. 11. n. 28. 29. S. Anselme his distinction betwene Truth and Falsity cap. 8. num 46. Approuers of Equiuocation in certaine cases who they be cap. 7. n. 12 cap. 10. num 15. Their qualities and holynesse of lyfe ibid n. 16. 17. cap. 9. n. 11. 12. 13. deinceps Archbishop of Canterbury 〈◊〉 testimony of the Primitiue English Geneuians cap. 1. n. 19. Archisynagoges daughter raised by Christ cap. 9. 〈◊〉 28. Aristotle his definition of Equiuocation ca. 8. n. 4. 5. 6. 7. Aristotle Thomas Mortons Oracle of Logitians cap. 8. n. 6. Abused by him afterward ibid. n. 5. 6. 7. deinceps in aliis locis Arrianisme whether fauoured by Caluin or noe cap. 6. part 3. per totum Diuers Arrian speaches vsed by Caluin ibidem nu 77. S. Augustines definitiō of Catholicum Prefat n. 16. His moderation about Hereticks and their belieuers cap. 2. n. 18. His seuere sentēce against them ibidem nu 54. His explication about heresy consummated in the vnderstāding and not in the will cap. 6. n. 45. His definition of Truth cap. 8. nu 40. Item of a lye ibid. n. 47. His authority alleadged by F. Garnet at his arraignement for the lawfullnes of Equiuocatiō cap. 9. n. 52. 54. His further authority for Equiuocation cap. 10. n. 17. His case about a sickeman cap. 11. n. 31. Abused notably by M. Ievvell cap. 12. n. 30. 31. 34. Authors discourse against Cathol without name or truth of argument Prefat n. 13. 14. 15. Azor the lesuite falsified and corrupted by Thom. Morton cap. 6. n. 48. cap. 11. n. 18. His discours about Equiuocation in an oath cap. 10. n. 29. B D. BARKELEY his writings against Protestants cap. 5. nu 30. Bellarmine notably abused by the Minister Morton cap. 6. n. 27. 28. 71. alibi 〈◊〉 S. 〈◊〉 abused by Perkins cap. 12. n. 61. 62. 63. Betulia deliuered by the 〈◊〉 of Iudith cap. 7. n. 27. Bishop of 〈◊〉 somtymes temporal Lord also of that Citty cap. 4. n. 43. Bookes writen by Protestants without name of Author or truth Prefat n. 13. 14. 15. S. Boniface an Englishman Author of the Canon Si Papa cap. 5. n. 55. Falsified and abused by Tho. Morton ibid. 43. D. Boucher calumniated and abused by T. Morton cap. 2. n. 24. 47. Buckanan Knox their wicked doctrine reuell in Scotland cap. 4. n. 24. C CALVIN whether he denyed Christ to be God of God cap. 6. n. 53. His manner of speach therin condemned by Bellarmine ibidem n. 56. 76. 77. VVhether he fauoured Arrianisme or noe cap. 6. part 3. 〈◊〉 totum Diuers Arrian speaches vsed by him ibidem n 77. His inuectiue against the Ancient Fathers cap. 12. n. 23. Caluinian doctrine about obedience to Princes cap. 1. n. 10. 11. 12. postea The pactice therof by Protestants ibidem Carerius a Lawyer abused egregiously by Th. Morton cap. 5. n. 5. 6. 7. cap. 6. n. 90. Cassander the hereticke his doctrine confuted cap. 6. n. 67. Cases particuler of Equiuocation cap. 20. per totum Catholicks tolerable in a Protestant state cap. 1. per totum Cause of setting forth this present booke cap. 3. per totum Celestinus Pope abused by M. Ievvell cap. 12. n. 41. Censure of Thomas Mortons writings cap. 3. n. 17. Charge of the Lord Cook against Catholicks at Norvvich cap. 12. n. 79. 80. Charge of heresy against Protestants by their owne side cap. 4. n. 11. Charke and Hanmer their Equiuocations cap. 12. n. 55. 56. deinceps Their Bookes