in words namely I am no Priest and that taken alone as it is vttered breedeth a false sâ—tise and in this sense they would haue the Magistrate to conceiue it another part of that proposition is reserued and kept secret and close in the Priests mind that is this So as I am bound to tell you And this secret mentall reseruation being added to the words maketh this one entire Proposition I am no Priest so as I am bound to tell you and that being taken all together maketh a true sence and so the Priest vnderstandeth it And therefore if he doe but keepe or reserue or vnderstand that or any such clause in his minde though the words which he speaketh bee neuer so false yet this man telleth no lye nor speaketh no vntruth Such is the vertue of this new found Arte and thus they describe it But that it may yet appeare more fully and more distinctly it will not be amisse to set downe the mysterie of this Art in certaine distinct Propositions all gathered from their owne writings and approued dealings l. That this mixt Proposition of theirs or this Equiuocation as they call it whether we consider that part of it which is vttered in words or the whole Proposition as it hath the reseruatioÌ„ added to it which is kept in the speakers mind hath in neither respect or consideration as F. P. saith any doubtful sense of speech or words by their doubtfull or double signification but only that it vttereth not all the whole sense of the speaker therfore cannot be properly called equiuocall according to Aristotles meaning Definition And againe These mixt Propositions saith he be not properly equiuocall in the sense that Aristotle did define c. for that they doe not of themselues nor their own natures signifie equally diuers things but being vnderstood wholly haue a simple and single signification in the mind and vnderstanding of the speaker yet for that the hearer concerning but 〈…〉 thereof apprehendeth a different sense from the speaker they may ab effectu be called ambiguous for that they leaue a different sense in the hearer speaker albeit of themselues they be plaine cleâ—re and true c. Out of which words considered ioyned with that which was formerly cited out of Sanchez and Parsons we may note three things 1. That there is no ambiguity or doubtfull sense either in the words vttered if they be taken alone nor in the whole Proposition as they compound it of the words vttered â—he reseruation vnderstood taken together 2. That therefore they call it Equiuocation or an Equiuocall Proposition or speech because they signifie or expresse one meaning to the hearer which is false and retaine or vnderstand another sense within themselues which is true 3. That the taking of this word Equiuocation in this meaning is not proper and such as Aristotle did vnderstand and conceiue by it Hee might haue said that it is not proper nor such as either Aristotle or any man either learned or vnlearned hauing but common sense in his head and common honesty in his heart did euer acknowledge before this last Age. And the truth is they therfore call it an EquiuocatioÌ„ though the word was neuer known to haue any such meaning or signification because they are ashamed to call it by its right name which is A Lye But as the couetous man though he practiseth the thing yet abhorres the name and therefore will be called a good husband or a thrifty man And as a thiefe is ashamed of his right name and when he meeteth with a Traueller to whom he would signifie his eâ—rand he saith that he is a Good-fellow which wanteth money So the Romanists teach an Arte of lying and because they are ashamed of the infamous name of Lyers they call themselues Equiuocators and that which other men call Lying they call Equiuocating 2. That if a man will vse this benefit of Equiuocating he must be warie and carefull that he reserue some secret clause in his mind which being added to the words vttered doe make a true speech or else all is marred and he for want of that clause become a plaine Lyer To this purpose Father Persons saith that the Equiuocator speaketh a trueth in his owne meaning and in the sight ef God which alwaies he must doe when hee vseth this Euasion for that otherwise he should lye and commit sinne if he had not some true sense reserued in his mind c. To declare this yet further Say that two Priests were questioned by a Magistrate whether they were Priests or no and the one should say I am no Priest and should withall reserue in his mind this clause So as I am bound to tell you and the other should answere in the very same words I am no Priest but should forget or neglect to frame or imagine in his mind that reseruation or some such like the former who imagined that reseruation in his mind should be an Equiuocator and speake the truth but the latter who had omitted it should be a Lyer and vtter a falshood and vntruth though hee speake none but the very same words and they haue none but one signification and meaning This they say to shew vs how an Equiuocator doth differ very much from a Lyer The truth is this Equiuocator and this Lyer doe differ as much as two false knaues the one of which is called a Thiefe and the other a Good-fellow that taketh a Purse 3. That whatsoeuer a man doe say or sweare be it otherwise neuer so false and absurd yet if a man doe imagine a clause in his mind which being added to the words spoken would make a true meaning then the former speech or saying how false soeuer otherwise becommeth true and without all compasse of lying because saith Father Persons it is freed from the nature of a Lye by the due iust reseruation in the speakers mind By the due and iust reseruation saith hee But suppose the reseruation be not iust and due but that a man vse this arte when he ought not to equiuocate Why yet euen then he is by this reseruation freed from telling of a Lye though not freed from all sinne For though is should not be properly the sinne of Lying nor against the negatiue Precept of Truth yet should it be another sinne against the publike good of ciuill society and consequently against the affirmatiue Precept of Truth c. Thus speaketh Father Persons And to the like purpose Valentia But Sanchez more plainely and roundly If a man saith he either alone or before company either being asked or of his owne accord either for recreation sake or for any other end doe sweare that he did not doe something which indeed he did do vnderstanding within himselfe some other thing then that he did doc or some other day then that in which he did doe it or any other addition
they gather or obserue either from the signification of the words or the vse application of them in the Scriptures or from some circumstances or considerations in the Text it selfe And therfore such Texts in the iudgement of all such Interpreters are not to be expounded or vnderstood of any Popish reseruations kept secret in the Speakers minde For such reseruation as I shewed before may be any that themselues will fancie Insomuch that the Priests do frame seuen seuerall and distinct reseruations all alike fit for Father Listers Equiuocation when he deceiued his Keeper and doe intimate that they might haue framed many moe and all to as good purpose And no doubt as they imagined those seuen they might haue inuented seuentie moe that would haue serued the turne In all which it is not possible for the Hearer or Reader of such a speech to imagine what the Speakers reseruation is it beeing not such as the signification of the words or any circumstances of the businesse doe yeeld but as the minde of the Equiuocator will fancie within his deceitfull heart Nor do they in their Equiuocations meane that the Hearer should knowâ— their reseruations For their intent is to reserue one sense in their owne breast and to imprint another in the Hearers minde This only short note being obserued it will be easie for euery Christian that will open his eyes to see that no place produced by them out of the Bible doth include their secret and hidden reseruations Or if any Equiuocator will cauill or can say that there is any testimony of theirs which may not receiue satisfaction by this generall Rule and is in his opinion worth the standing vpon let him produce it and I will promise him either a solution of his reason or a recantation of mine opinion And thus much shal serue to be said concerning the Grounds and Reasons which Equiuocators doe build vpon Now I proceede to set downe some few reasons against this new-found Arte and fond deuice of Equiuocation And those for this time shall be these fiue 1. Because this late doctrine of Equiuocation destroyeth the true nature of Equiuocation whose name it beareth 2. Because it maintaineth a practice of lying vnder a colour of Truth 3. Because it disturbeth humane society and hindereth mutuall commerce 4. Because it impeacheth God of folly in making his Lawes against Lying 5. Because it freeth the Deuill from all iust imputation of being a Lyer Arg. 1. The Iesuiticall doctrine of Equiuocation doth destroy the true nature of Equiuocation which hitherto hath beene receiued of all men and now for ought I know is not reiected of any This I prooue thus Equiuocation in the true nature thereof is when a word or speech hath moe senses than one This the word doth import For Aequiuocum by the very notation of the name is vox aequi plura significans a word indifferently betokening moe things And in some such manner as this doe Writers of all sorts explaine and describe Equiuocation But in this new-deuised Equiuocation there is no word nor no sentence or saying that hath moe significatious or senses than one For in their mentall equiuocall Proposition which they fancie neither the words taken by themselues nor the whole saying and sentence intended by the speaker haue any Ambiguity or doubtfulnes of signification or any moe senses then one as I haue shewed before out of the Equiuocators own Rules And hence I may inferre that either their reserued Proposition is not an Equiuocall and double-sensed Proposition as they call it without reason and consequently that they doe not by Equiuocation speake truth in one sense and mis-leade the Hearer with another sence or else if notwithstanding this that Proposition bee Equiuocall and double-sensed still then we must say that there may bee an Equiuocation where there is but one single sense and meaning And that destroyeth the true nature of Equiuocation To this reason first their confession is that verball Equiuocation which is when a word or speech signifieth diuers things equally indeed is onely true and proper Equiuocation and agreeth onely to the Defiuition of Equiuocation deliuered not onely by Philosophers but Orators also and that it is properly called Equiuocation when a speech or word signifieth diuers things equally if we consider the proper nature of Equiuocation and that mentall Equiuocation in rigor is none 2. Their answere is notwithstanding that their mixt Proposition may be called Eqâ—â—uocation in a more large and ample signification as Equiuocall may signifie an amphibologicall doubtfull or double-sensed Proposition in respect of the Speaker and Hearer whereof the one vnderstandeth the same in one sense and the other in another And the cause why it is so called is rather by a certaine similitude then propriety of speech to wit that euen as Equiuocation properly by communitie of name in things of different natures by variety of significations in the selfe-same words or speech by custome of phrase and composition of sundry sorts doth make different and doubtfull senses and meaning to the Hearer so in this case by mentall reseruation of some part of the foresaid mixt Proposition the like effect of doubtfulnes is bred in the Hearers vnderstanding For more ready vnderstanding of which perplexed speech I note that there are three things said by this doubling Equiuocator 1. That it is onely true and proper Equiuocation such as is comprised in the Definitions giuen both by Philosophers Orators when there are diuers senses and significations in the words 2. That Equiuocation as they meane it in this question hath no such propertie in it nor is comprised in the Definition that Philosophers and Orators haue described Equiuocation by 3. That notwithstanding all this yet it may rightly be called Equiuocation because as true Equiuocation breedeth diuers senses to the Hearer by the Ambiguity that is in the words so this new-deuised EquiuocatioÌ„ may breed diuers senses one in the Hearer and another in the Speaker by reason of the secret reseruatioÌ„ that the Speaker imagineth in his own mind And this may seeme not so vnreasonable because words doe signifie ad placitum and may be changed euery day And therefore it is no such fault to frame a new meaning and another signification in this word then euer any body did thinke of heretofore Rep. This answere doth not weaken mine Argument it confirmeth and strengtheneth it rather For first I doe not except so much against their new signification of the word as against the new explication and description of it For they say that they call it Equiuocall because it is a double-sensed Proposition and a double-sensed Proposition there fore they call it because by it they signifie one sense to the Hearer and imagine another to themselues But this doth vtterly destroy the very essence entity of true Equiuocation For true Equiuocation cannot be conceiued to be without a diuersitie of meanings in the
make such Lawes as are vnauaileable and cannot reach to the ends for which they were made But if Equiuocation be admitted Lawes against lying cannot serue for the purpose to which they are intended This appeareth by two things First Gods Lawes and precepts against lying were made for this purpose to restraine mens tongues from speaking of falshoods and vntruthes But by the Arte of Equiuocation a man may speake any and all falshoods that hee will and yet these precepts against lying shall neuer take hold of him because by a mentall reseruation warranted by this Doctrine hee may make any falshood to become true And therefore the Equiuocator notwithstanding all Lawes of God and men against lying yet is at his libertie to vtter what vntruths hee will without the least transgression of any of those Lawes Secondly Lawes against lying doe intend preuention of hurt and deceit to be vsed against our neighbour But admit once of this new doctrine of Equiuocation and no deceit toward our neighbour can be preuented by any Lawes against lying For if this Doctrine be warrantable then all Lawes against lying must be meant onely against such as doe not keepe a reseruation in their mindes to make true the falshoods that they vtter in their words And so for example when Moses saith Yee shall not lye one to another and when Saint Paul saith Put away lying and speake truth euery man with his neighbour the meaning of these Precepts must be to this purpose Speake no vntruth nor vtter no falshoods to your neighbours vnlesse yee haue some secret reseruation kept in your minde which if it be added will make them to become true For by the Equiuocators Doctrine if such reseruations be kept in the minde then all their words become true and therefore they are no way included within these Precepts against lying But if this interpretation of such Lawes may be admitted and such libertie of speech may be granted without any breach of these Lawes then these Lawes doe no way preuent the least danger of deceit and dammage that may come to our Neighbour by vntrue and false speeches because I can deceiue him as much by this equiuocall reseruation as by a formall lye as hath been proued already And from these considerations it followeth that Precepts against lying are vaine if the practice of Equiuocation be lawfull Arg. 5. If the Doctrine of Equiuocation be true then neither men nor Deuils can be conuinced of lying First men cannot For though they speake neuer so vast and apparent falshoods yet who can say but that they haue some reseruation in their minde that may free their words from being lyes And yet all sorts of men when they heare euident vntruthes vttered doe without controll of any charge the speakers with falshoods and lying Which sheweth that all men iudge of lying and truth by the words vttered and not by fancies reserued in the minde As for example the Secular Priests doe charge Father Persons with a continuall practice of lying so that they giue him the Whetstone and leaue it with him too as if they thought there were no such a bold and impudent lyer in the World that could winne it from him But how did the Priests know but that Persons spake with some equiuocall reseruations And if so then they broke the rule of charitie in censuring him for a lyer when hee was but an Equiuocator And againe Father Persons chargeth the Seculars with infinite number of vntruthes lyes slanders and open falshoods vttered without scruple of conscience so that the vse of Equiuocations was little needfull for them because they could take libertie enough without it But how doth Father Persons know that his Secular Brethren did not vse Equiuocation in all these vntrue speeches and so made them true by some reseruation Thus all men when they finde apparent vntruthes vttered sticke not to charge the speakers with lying But if the Doctrine of Equiuocation be true no man can be conuinced of the least lye vnlesse himselfe will confesse it Secondly The Deuill himselfe if this Doctrine be true cannot be conuinced to be a lyer For who can say but when he telleth vs most palpable vntruthes yet hee may reserue within himselfe some clause to helpe all Nay if this Doctrine be true it cannot be supposed with any reason that the Deuill euer would or euer did tell any lye at all For whatsoeuer he hath spoken at any time be it otherwise neuer so false and lying yet it might be made true by a reseruation and hee neither wanted wit to deuise such reseruations nor will by such or any other meanes to free himselfe from the imputation of lying First hee wanteth not wit I shall not neede to proue this because as I suppose it will be confessed that hee is as quicke and nimble at such deuices as the finest witted Iesuite in the packe But if any man shall question it I will engage my selfe to proue it Secondly hee wanteth not will by this or any other tricke to saue his credit and to auoid the imputation of lying For hee knoweth that the greatest hinderance to his proceedings is because the World esteemeth him for a lyer and the Father of lyes and if he could once but gaine to be accounted a true and honest dealer as by vsing Equiuocation he might as well proue himselfe to be no lyer as any Iesuite can then hee might finde more credit in the World For which cause the Apostle saith that hee transformeth himselfe into an Angell of light And an ancient Writer telleth of a Monke who was a strict and religious liuer that the Deuill purposing by a custome of Visions to winne him to the beliefe of a futurâ— illusion which hee intended for him did for a loâ—g time as a messenger of truth shew him all true Visions And when by this meanes hee had gained credit to be beleeued then by another Vision hee perswaded him to renounce Christ and to become a Iew. And it is an vsuall obseruation among Christians that the Deuill will tell some truthes that hee may gaine afterward the more credit to his lyes And therefore it can be no doubt but that the Deuill desireth not to be reputed a lyer and would gladly put off from him all such imputation if by any trickes hee could deuise how to effect it Now lay these two positions together first That the Deuill wanteth no wit to deuise reseruations and secondly That hee wanteth no will by this or any other such deuice to auoid the discredit of a lyer and then it will follow that in reason wee cannot imagine that the Deuill euer would or did tell a lye if by an equiuocall reseruation hee could cleare himselfe And hence againe it may be deduced that as our Equiuocators doe challenge vs for slandering them because wee call them lyers when they sweare falshoods by imagined reseruations so the Deuill himselfe might challenge GOD be it
THE NEW ART OF LYING COVERED BY IESVITES vnder the Vaile of EQVIVOCATION DISCOVERED AND DISPROVED BY Henry Mason LONDON Printed by George Purslowe for Iohn Clarke and are to be sold at his Shop vnder Saint Peters Church in Cornehill 1624. TO THE MOST REVErend Father in GOD the Lord Arch-bishop of Canterburie his Grace Primate of all ENGLAND and Metropolitane Most Reuerend Father THe first newes that I heard of the Equiuocating Arte was that which I learned out of your Graces writings And well might this be to mee the first newes For if I mistake not you were the first Writer that published those trickes in print to the World though as beginnings vse to be that discouery of this Art was but briefe in comparison either because that occasion did not admit of any long or full discourse or because but little of this mystery could then at the first be discouered the professors of that Trade as your selfe also signifie labouring to hide their secrets from the knowledge of other men And indeed it may be obserued that in managing of the Papacy they haue certaine mysteries of State which the more they vse the more they coceale One of which is their power to murder Kings and blow vp Parliaments kill all that stand in their way like the Assassini who held it a point of great merit to murder all that were their aduersaries in Religion but yet they are not willing that the world should know that this is any part of their Creede Another such policy may be that of their Indices Expurgatorij by which they haue circucised the lips of such Writers as spoke any word against the Roman Church but this they kept as a great mystery among some few of themselues till misfortune brought it to light full sore against their wils And for a third such-like policy I may reckon also this Art of Equitiocation which the Masters thereof did keepe secret as long and as much as they could And therefore it was no maruell if your first discouery of this mystery were but briefe in comparison But afterward another Reuerend learned Prelate lighting vpon a more compleate Treatise then formerly had appeared penned by a Popish Priest in defence of this Arte and approued by the Arch-Priest and the Prouinciall of the Iesuits he pursued the point more fully according as that Treatise gaue him iust occasion The crye of which pursuit did vnkennell the olde equiuocating Foxe and hunted him into the open field there to display himselfe and to shew what trickes he could vse for sauing his new Art from the infamy of lying And here I finding him well chafed did by the sent follow after him vnto his Den to espie if I might what he and his Cubs were deuising in the darke And I found them very busie in hammering Reseruations and mentall frauds vpon euery occasion and in all kindes of dealing thereby to catch vs at vnawares who being plain and simple men our selues could not suspect such frauds and impostures in others And in case these things should come abroad as in part themselues had discouered them against their wils yet so confident and resolute did I finde them to maintaine all for good and honest dealing as that Father Persons maketh a wonder of it and thinketh that God should deale worse with men then hee had done with beasts if hee should not grant them equiuocating trickes and reserued wiles as he hath granted to the Hare and the Foxe their leapes and turnings and windings and going backe againe in the same trace they come to deceiue the Dogges that pursue them And yet all this confidence I take to be but a copie of their countenance For euen in their printed Apologies of this Arte they seeke to cast mists before the Readers eyes that hee may not be able to see the depth of their meaning These things when I had found as I thought though I know I am much short of finding all I was willing according to my abilitie to impart them vnto well-meaning Christians that they seeing the deepe frauds of these men may learne to shun their company and acquaintance In which indeuour of mine what seruice I may haue done for the publique good I cannot tell but sure I am if there be any good in it I should in reason returne it thither where I first found it The consideration whereof hath made mee to presume so far vpon your Graces clemency as to lay downe at your feete thi◠poore Treatise the grounds whereof I first learned from your owne pen desiring if therein I be not ouer-bold that it may vinder your name and protection be sent forth into the world Which being all that at this time I haue to say I humbly take my leaue desiring the God of peace and truth to preserue you from euery euill word and worke that you may maintaine his truth in this world and enioy his peace both in this world and the World to come Your Graces deuoted in all seruice HENRIE MASON TO MY LOVING AND Dearely beloued Parishioners the Inhabitants of S. Andrews vnder-shaft in London GRACE and TRVTH in IESVS CHRIST IN the ordinary exercise of my ministery among you when I came to speak of the ninth Cōmandement the first thing that I met with to bee considered was the matter of Truth and Lying And considering hereof I found two sorts of Lyes frequent among men the one an open and professed Lye and the other a cunning and artificiall Lye The former was defended by the Priscillianists an old kinde of Heretikes the latter is now defended by the Romanists a latter sort of false Prophets Both of them are odious to God who is honoured by Truth and pernicious to the societie of men which is vpheld by Truth but the latter is the more dangerous because vnder a colour of Truth it beguileth simple soules who are otherwise enemies to Lying The consideration heereof made me to enquire a little further into this Arte which the fauourers therof haue sought to conceile by calling it by a new name For beeing ashamed of the name of Lying they haue christened it by the name of Equiuocating a name as vnknowne in this meaning as the Arte it selfe was vnheard of before these latter dayes The mystery and iuggling tricks of which deuice I did then and vpon that occasion in part discouer vnto you but briefely and plainely the time and place and occasion not admitting of any long or Schoole-like discourse But since considering that together with the increase of false Prophets in this Kingdome this Arte of falsehood hath abounded also I thought it a part of my duty God hauing pleased to place mee as a Watch-man ouer your Soules to giue you a fresh warning of this danger and that in a more ample and large discourse then formerly I had done and in such a maner and sort that you might haue something lying by you that might aduertise
quicquaÌ„ Verborum virides urentum flatibus ornos Aut animas Erebo Scopulis glacieve cientum Non per canalem sonuit Taurumve Perilli Non Arabum lingua Chaldaeorumve loquutus Non lingua 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pseud. Quo tendis nnbila supra Sim. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pseud. Satis ô satis Vnde sed ista Sim. Nomina sunt longè populorum vtroque sub Indo Quos è barbarie nuper sub foedera Christi Pontificisque iugum nostri misêre Sodales Pseud. O lepiduÌ„ charumque caput quà m Pseudolicissas Simia non magis est imitatrix Simia quà m tu Te mihi te servet Romae ac sibi Iupiter Sim. Atqui Pluris adhuc ego sum Siquando scilicet haud sunt Semper in occulto nostrae mysteria Sectae Suspicio est caecos verbis me affingere sensus Iurabo me non hoc fingere dumque ita iurem Interea me non quicquam finxisse negantem Fingere iurabo Tum tertia quarta secundis Iuramenta superiiciam catus Omnia falsa Et falsura omnes Haec Aequiuocatio nomen Me tribuente potest Reflexa aut Orbica dici Pseud. Dapsile ob inventuÌ„ hoc nequeo mi Simia quin te Osculer argutumque caput demulceam Abundè I am scio te nostris aurem adiecisse lubentem Consiliis quae superaddis facta daturum Sim. Quî verò nosti num non dum Pseudole tecum Haec loquor aequivocè me iam tibi credere fingam Aequivocè tibi pollicear me strenuè in hostes Vocibus aequivocis vsurum Pseud. O improba virtus Sim. Dum pullum doceas oculos transfigere corve Ipse tuis caveas Pseud. Metuo malè ne malus iste Et nimiùm praecox Patris anticipator ab hoste Protinùs in nostros obuertat cornua Sim. Nam quid Impedit in Caium qui sit periurus eundum In TitiuÌ„ quoque Pseud. Sed nostris sermonibus eccùm Nescioquis captator adest Discede Sim. Valeto Quid ni igitur Pseudolus aequivocare docens Simia discens Verborum laqueos ambo luant laqueoâ— THO. GOAD Magister Artium An Societati humanae infestiores sinte vafr Amphibologi quam aperte periuri FAuxerebi patriae fax faex mundi vnuÌ„ at habebis Patrem flagitii slagitio parem Herculeas â—mbo sceleri posuere columnas Nâ—l vltra hic calamo pessimus hic manu Nomine qui varius qui vestibus ore colore es Vectus trans mare tu Non mare mortuum Curia Papalis tibi visa est Non sine scortis Sacris Papa caput Non caput aneum Num tu mendicans abraso crine Sacerdos Non ritu antipodum Non apud inferos Nonne a te binis grauidata est Fuluia natis Non verum fateor bimula cum fores Heus laqueo nodos claudas hos ocyus vno Et nodo laqueos in cruce carnifex Ignare aequiuocae fraudis constringito fauces Garnetto vniuocè guttura frangito Pendeat infoelix membris truncetur apertè Periuro aequiuocus crimine dirior Pectore diffisso videas quae mente reseruat Evulsi latebras cordis et explices Ancipiti gladio Iesuitica texta secentur Solvi nam nequeunt ancipites doli DAN FEATLY Magister Artium THE NEW ARTE OF Lying couered by Iesuites vnder the Vaile of Equiuocation THe Apostle describing the state of Antichrist doth signifie that à mysterie of iniquitie should appeare in the managing of it and this doth implie that in the kingdome of Antichrist iniquity should reigne vnder a coueâ—t of holinesse And the same Apostle doth foretell that in the latter times which are the times of Antichrists reigne men should speake lies in hypocrisie And this though it may bee extended farther yet cannot bee more literally vnderstood then of such as teach a practise of lying vnder a pretence of preseruing trueth Now of these Prophecies of the Apostle I may speake in a like manner and almost in the same words as our Lord spake of the Prophecie of Isai This day are these Scriptures fulfilled in our eyes for now wee see those who exercise a mystery of iniquity and speake lies pretending thereby to maintaine and preserue the trueth as to omit all further instance may euidently be seene in a new-found Arte of Equiuocation For the Masters and maintainers thereof doe tell vs That by speaking according to this Arte of dissembling sinnes are auoided which without it are commonly committed And that Equiuocation altogether serueth or is of good vse for auoiding of lyes and periuries And that for what end or reason soeuer a man sweare that hee did not doe a thing which indeed hee did doe yet hauing his reseruation within himselfe he in very deede telleth no lie And that by this singular doctrine wee may auoid innumerable sinnes which through heedlesnesse diuers of vs doe euery foote commit by denying or affirming things vsually without a reseruation vnderstood with which if they were ioyned they would bee true And to this purpose it is that Father Garnet a Master of this Arte when a booke was to be licenced by him the title whereof was A Treatise of Equiuocation hee scored out that title and put this in the place of it A Treatise against lying and fraudulent dissimulation By all which it may appeare that these men while they teach the Arte of Equiuocation do professe notwithstanding that all which they doe is with a religious obseruance and preseruation of the trueth But now in the second place I offer to prooue in this short Treatise that whatsoeuer shewes they make to the contrary yet this deuice of Equiuocation is in truth an Arte of falshood and deceit and such as the Scriptures doe condemne vnder the name of lying Which point if it bee once cleared then there can be no doubt but that the Church of Rome and her Doctors are they which exercise a mystery of iniquity and speake lies in hypocrisie Now for the clearing hereof and that the world may see more fully what to thinke of this mystery there are fiue things which I haue thought necessary to be considered of 1 The name or what is meant by the word Equiuocation in this Question 2 The Originall of it or who be the Authors and vpholders of it 3 The obiect and matter or in what cases they allow it to be lawfull 4 The vse or rather abuse of it or for what turnes it may serue the Patrons of it 5 The Grounds or what the proofes or reasons are either for or against it CHAP. 1. Of the name and what is meant by the word Equiuocation in this Question THat wee may the better vnderstand what is meant by this word wee must note that there are two famous acceptions and vses of the word Equiuocation among men The first is
doth highly commend this Equiuocation as a singular point of Doctrine by which wee may auoid innumerable sinnes which wee commit by denying and affirming without this mentall reseruation with which if the words spoken were ioyned they would become true This he explaineth and confirmeth thus We are asked demanded euery foot whither we goe what we haue eaten how much money we haue or haue borrowed or haue giuen what letters and newes we haue receiued what wee haue written and related what such or such a man said to vs what wee know of such or such a one and many hundred like To all which saith hee wee might answere without sinne by vnderstanding somewhat in our mindes which may make that true which we affirme and that false which wee deny As for example when a man asketh of vs money or a Booke or newes c. if wee answere him I haue them not or I know them not vnderstanding so as I am bound or as it is conuenient to doe it or giue it or to speake and make is knowne The like is affirmed by Emm. Rodriquez who alledging this determination of Nauarre and transcribing also some of his words addeth in the end to shew how hee esteemed this deuice which Doctrine ought to be marked and obserued And Fernandes in his Examen saith that if a man being requested to lend a thing to his neighbour haue a cause or reason why hee will not grant or giue it c. hee may sweare by Equiuocation that he hath not such a thing And Sanchez In common talke saith hee if a man be asked of a thing which it behooueth him to keepe secret it is lawfull for him to say that hee knoweth not vnderstanding so as that it is expedient to tell it And Father Persons also thinketh it most iust and necessary if a man come to borrow mony whom we may not deny without inconuenience that we may then answere equiuocally that wee haue it not vnderstanding with any minde to lend it or that wee haue it not in our purse c. Which instances and examples if they be not matters of common life and conuersation I know not where to finde any But it may be said that Persons when he excepteth matters of common conuersation in buying c. hee addeth to the hurt or preiudice of any as if hee meant by that restriction to leaue a libertie of equiuocating euen in buying and selling and humane traffique so it be without the hurt of any man but then vtterly to forbid it And I graunt hee addeth those words but I cannot tell whether he meant the vulgar Reader to conceiue that meaning in them Howsoeuer there is a mysterie in those words which Nauarre who vseth to deale aboue-boord and to speake more plainely hath vnfolded when he calleth it a reall and vniust hurt or preiudice by which hee vnderstandeth such an hurt as wee may not doe to another without sinne and iniustice And then the meaning of this goodly Exception of Persons will be this that in buying and selling and humane traffique and common conuersation wee may not equiuocate if thereby wee doe hurt any man vniustly and vnlawfully but else if any of their Catholiques should thinke that the hurt which redoundeth to one of vs is lawfull and iust that then they may freely delude vs with their amphibologies and reseruations in what matter soeuer and for what end they please though it were for massacring of an assembly or for murdering of a Prince or for blowing vp of a Parliament or for the inuasion of the Kingdome by hostile and forraine forces And so by this exception we are well freed from the feare of these deluding and equiuocating spirits Let vs then dismisse Persons with his shifting Exceptions and enquire more particularly and directly what the cases be wherein they doe in sober sadnesse allow their Schollers to vse the benefit of this Art And for this purpose I finde two things said by them First that whensoeuer a man may lawfully keepe silence and say nothing or whensoeuer hee is not bound to reueale and lay open the truth then hee may lawfully equiuocate and vse this sleight of amphibologie be it a matter of faith or a businesse of commerce and traffique or a poynt of State or what else you will it mattereth not to this purpose For proofe of this first take the resolution of Father Garnet He being prisoner in the Tower and required to declare his opinion concerning this point set downe his minde in writing which is yet kept vpon Record and it was this Concerning Equiuocation this is mine â—â—pinion In morall matters and common vse of 〈◊〉 to haue among friends it is required of a man to speake truth then hee may not vse Equiuocation c. But as oft as there is occasion for necessary defence or for auoyding of some iniury or damage or for obtaining some good of weight or moment withall the perill of any 〈…〉 Equiuocation 〈…〉 In which speech Master Casaubon doth truely note by the way that those words without the perill of any man are onely added for a colour and to blind the simple with as I noted the like before in a like sentence of Father Persâ—ns But the thing that I now note for this purpose is that he saith In coÌ„mon vse of life when it is required of a man to speake truth then it is not lawfull to equiuocate By which words he implyeth that where a man is not of duety bound to speake or reueile the truth there he may obscure hide it by this Arte. The same Father Garnet while hee stood at the Barre in fewer words and plainer manner explaineth his meaning thus No man may equiuocate when he ought to speake the truth otherwise he may To like purpose Fernandes A man may lawfully vse it also when he is iustly or lawfully demanded if hee haue a reasonable cause not to answere according to the meaning of the Demander And Heissius the Iesuite Not onely saith hee when the question is vniust but also when it is without fault we are many times not bound to answere him that asketh the question according to his intention and meaning and that is whensoeuer the Demander hath not right to command an answere and the Demanded hath a sufficient and not idle reason to deny it For he that may lawfully hold his peâ—ce â—ay passing by the things that are asked him speake some other thing with God the heauenly Spirits or with himselfe either by vocall or mentall speech or by a mixt speech which is partly vocall and partly mentall In these two last testimonies the instance is in a particular case when a man is examined or questioned but the ground on which they build their determination is a generall Rule that whensoeuer a man may lawfully say nothing then he may lawfully equiuocate and speake by a mixt
either fear of God or reuerence of men For all this while Beza was aliue and continued preaching and writing against the superstitions and idolatries of the Romane Church for diuers yeeres after And for the clearer detection of this shamelesse lye he wrote a Booke the title whereof is Beza rediuiuus Beza returned to life againe Wherein he hath laid open the Iesuites forgeries to the shame of their Order I could bring more instances of their abominable forgeries of this kinde but I am afraide to cloy the Reader with such vnsauoury fictions Yet two examples there are both within mine owne knowledge and experience which I cannot omit without some short rehearsall The one is of the famous Diuine Doctor Rainolds President of Corpus Christi Colledge in Oxford and the other of the worthy Prelate Doctor King Bishop of London my euer-honoured Lord. Of the former some well-willers to the Romane-Church were discouered to haue diuulged reports in the time of his long sicknesse for hee died of a lingring consumption that hee voyded his owne Ordure vpward by the mouth of which lye what construction ill mindes would frame any man may easily conceiue This report was brought to him while he was yet aliue which made him to send for the partie who was said to be the author or at least a reporter of this forgerie and shewed him what the matter was that hee vsed to spit out of his mouth euen the very same that other such sicke men vse to doe But these lyers might haue proceeded perhaps to fowler fictions had they not beene preuented by the timely prouidence of some learned and his louing and religious friends For they remembring and considering the shamelesse practices of Papists in scattering false newes to disgrace the Worthies of our Church came to him the day before his death put him in minde of their false dealing and desired him that for the preuenting of such slanders after his death hee would now make an open confession of his faith and constant beliefe Which he being not able to doe with his owne mouth his speech hauing fayled him some dayes before left the composing of a forme of Confession to them to which hee would subscribe And they considering his weakenesse framed it in generall and few words in this manner These are to witnesse vnto all the world that now in this my weakenesse wherein I looke for my dissolution and hope shortly to be with my Christ I die in a constant beliefe perswasion and profession of that holy truth of God in defence whereof I haue stood both by writing and speaking against the Church of Rome and what soeuer other Enemies of Gods truth And for mine owne resolution touching mine owne state of Saluation after this life I assure my selfe thereof by the merits of Christ Iesus onely into whose hands I commend my spirit as vnto my faithfull Redeemer To this he readily subscribed with his owne hand Iohn Rainolds And his friends then present who had beene eye-witnesses and eare-witnesses of the whole passage of this businesse did by their hands witnesse the truth of the act to the world in these words That hee made this Subscription with his owne hand with such willingnesse and chearefulnesse as ministred great comfort vnto vs who were then present wee testifie by this subscription of our names also hereunto May 20. 1607. Henrie Airay Vice-Chancelor Henrie Wilkinson Edward Rilston Richard Taylor Henrie Hindle Daniel Faireclough Henrie Mason Alexander How Iohn Dewhurst The Originall hereof signed with Doctor Rainolds owne hand and subscribed by the afore-named parties I haue in my custodie out of which this is a true and faithfull Transcript here published Now blessed be his counsell and blessed be hee of the Lord that gaue this aduise for the stopping of these slandrous mouthes For had not this preuention beene vsed afore-hand we may feare that such as belied him in his sicknesse would not haue spared him after his death And for want of some such prouidence and preuention it is that that Reuerend and learned Prelate whose memory is precious with all good men that knew him our late Bishop of Loâ—don I meane mine euer-honoured Lord and Patrone for want I say of some such prouidence afore-hand this glorious Soule hath beene traduced by worthlesse pennes and foule-mouthed fiends the indignitie of the thing maketh mee against my nature and custome to giue them that name whereof they are most worthy as if hee had made defection to the Roman Church to whose errours notwithstanding he shewed himselfe an Enemy to his dying-day as those that knew him inwardly doe know very well how in the very time of his sicknesse hee spared not vpon occasion to expresse his zeale that way But of all foule-mouthes that haue slandered that blessed Soule hee that wrote the Bishop of Londons Legacie is the most shamelesse and impudent lier The Author of the Protestants plea is but a milke-sop to this noble Champion and Father Persons himselfe must now be forced to resigne vp to him the Whetstone which his secular Brethren bestowed vpon him for his excellency in the fittening Trade For they and other of their fellowes haue played their prizes well but this Lâ—yer excelleth them all He hath made two publications of one indiuiduall Booke qualifying or rather destroying in the latter some transparent lyes which with an Whores forehead and without regard of the Worlds censure hee had auerred in the former For in the yeere 1622. when hee first diuulged this Libell he made the worthy Bishop to speake those silly Motiues which his worthlesse selfe â—ad deuised And so hee went masked vnder the Bishops name but with such difformitie and disproportion euery way as made mee remember the Asse in the Fable which presuming to weare the Lyons skinne did by his long eares bewray himselfe to be an Asse notwithstanding He saith that the Bishop himselfe did penne those Motiues and deliuered them to this Publisher this publique Lyer to be committed to the Presse I would the world were worthy to vnderstand what rare man this is that had such inward acquaintance with that learned and wise Bishop as to heare from him the secrets of his heart and to receiue from him the studied Reasons of his Conuersion which were neuer made knowne to any bodie else And sure it were a great honour to see that face that could come and goe and conuerse with the Bishop about these weightie affaires and in this serious manner without being once seene of any other man as if by the vertue of some Gyges his Ring he had bin transformed into an inuisible Spirit But he goeth on and saith that the man is knowne that reconciled the Bishop to the Romane Church But it is to be feared he will neuer make knowne the mans name to the world lest if the Reconciler should proue more shamefaste then this Publisher is hee might returne the lye vpon the Author that deuised it and spit his
may bee a lawfull vse of equiuocall speeches in euery of these kinds if they be not extended too farre or mis-applyed to a wrong cause For to speake more particularly it is granted 1. That we may lawfully vse words which may indifferently be taken in diuers acceptions and meanings as they are then vsed And this is plaine partly because the Scriptures are full of such speeches and partly because our common conuersation and life cannot bee without them 2. It is not vnlawfull when some case of further good doth require it to vse these ambiguous speeches in the lesse knowne and common signification and in aÌ„other meaning then it is likely the hearers wil vnderstand them for the present For so when our Lord said Lazarus our friend sleepeth He meant that he was dead which was the lesse common and knowne signification and therefore the Disciples according to the more vsuall meaning vnderstood him of naturall sleepe And he did this for good purpose and for the profit of the hearers that they might heereby learne either that death in generall is to Gods children but as a sleepe by which they are refreshed and made the more liuely or that this death of Lazarus was rather to bee called asleepe then a death because hee was so speedily raised from it againe 3 It is not vnlawfull if there be iust cause for concealing of a trueth to vse an ambiguous speach in any of these kindes that thereby we may hide some thing from the hearers which they should not know This assertion hath not so direct proofe from Scripture as the others haue yet it is not without all proofe from the Scriptures neither For there wee finde that a man may lawfully vtter one trueth thereby to hide another trueth from the hearer As for example God appointed Samuel to goe to Bethleem and anoint one of Iesses sonnes to bee King and when Samuel obiected How can I goe If Saul heare it hee will kill mee The Lord said Take an heifer with thee and say I am come to sacrifice to the Lord. And so Samuel did as it followeth in the same Chapter and by this he coÌ„cealed his purpose of anointing a new King which was the speciall intent of his going to that place And if it be lawfull and warranted by Gods own appointment to vtter one trueth for the concealing of another then in reason I thinke it cannot iustly be condemned for vnlawfull if a man vpon iust occasion doe vse an ambiguous speech in a true sense thereby to hide from the hearer something which hee should not knowe For if in so doing any thing bee faulty it must be as I take it the one of the two either because an ambiguous speach is vsed in another meaning then it is likely the hearer will take it and that to be lawfull is prooued in the former assertion or because this true sense in the ambiguous speach is vttered to conceale another thing from the hearer and that to be lawfull is cleare by this example of Samuel And therfore I thinke the conclusion may hence be inferred that it is not vnlawfull if there be iust cause for concealing of a trueth to vse an ambiguous speach that thereby we may conceale some other thing which is not fit to be vttered And hereto agree our learned diuines also For one speaking of EquiuocatioÌ„ as it coÌ„sisteth in the ambiguitie of words vttered addeth That this kind of Equiuocation especially in ordinary speach no man doubteth but that it may lawfully be vsed And this Equiuocation may haue his due place for concealing of Counfeâ—s and hiding of secrets And againe speaking to his aduersary Knowe saith he that those concealements whether of Confessions or Counsels whereof you speake where they doe consist of ambiguities in the words wee dislike not onely if they be couered with a lie that wee doe wholly condemne And another learned writer in our Church speaking of one that magnified the vse of Equiuocation adioineth If by the name of Equiuocation he vnderstand a plaine and sober concealing and couering of secret counsels which in this miserable life is oft times necessary I am of his opinion too This is the opinion and iudgement of our learned men concerning the vse of Logicall Equiuocation and herein we agree with them of the Church of Rome or if there bee any difference among the learned of both sides in these cases already mentioned as perhaps about some circumstances in the vse of those ambiguous speaches there may be it is nothing to the present Question in hand which is not concerning any of the kindes of these Logicall Equiuocations which consist in the ambiguous acception and meaning of the words vttered And therefore when the Equiuocaters of our time doe labor to confirme their Arte by the authorized vse of such speaches as are ambiguous by reason of the diuers meanings which the words may receiue they misse the marke beate the ayre and spend their labour to no purpose And this being briefly noted concerning the true and Logicall Equiuocation I come now to the improper and Iesuiticall And that what it is I will set downe in their owne words who professe to bee Patrons of it Father Persons then a man very laborious in the polishing of this Arte defineth it thus Equiuocation or Amphibologie in this our Controuersie is nothing else but when a speach is partly vttered in words and partly reserued in mind by which reseruation the sense of the proposition may be diuers And again mentall Equiuocation saith he is when any speach hath or may haue a double sense not by any double signification or composition of the words themselues but onely by some reseruation of minde in the speaker whereby his meaning is made different from the sense which the words that are vttered doe beare or yeeld without that reseruation And Sanchez giuing a Rule concerning the words vsed in this their Equiuocation saith A man may without telling of a lye vse those words although they be not ambiguous by their signification and doe not make a true sense either by themselues or by reason of the circumstanoâ—s then occurring but doe onely make a true sense by some addition kept in the speakers minde whatsoeuer that addition bee Thus they By which descriptions it appeareth that Iesuiticall Equiuocation is a mixt proposition as Persons also diuers times calleth it part whereof is vttered in words and so taken it hath one sense and another part of it is reserued and vnderstood in the speakers minde which being added to the words spoken maketh another sense as for example A Seminarie or a Iesuite-Priest being asked by a Magistrate Are you a Priest He answereth I am no Priest vnderstanding and reseruing in his minde this clause So as I am bound to tell you or any other which himselfe pleaseth to like purpose here say they is but one mixt propositâ—â— part whereof is vttered
other mens sayings by such consequences as himselfe fancieth or pleaseth to frame For where holy or learned men haue vsed speeches that may admit diuers interpretations either by reason of the words vsed or some circumstance occurring according to which only former Ages were wont to expound them he presently runneth away with an out-cry of mentall reseruation or mixt Proposition as euery man that considereth the Allegations may easily perceiue In a word Persons claimeth very boldly and to speake truth impudently Vniuersality Antiquity and Consent for this nouell new-deuised and vpstart fancie of their owne Where I wish the Reader to consider how farre he may credit such men when they lay the like claime to all Antiquity and Consent of Nations either for the prouing of their Church or for maintaining of any other subordinate point of Controuersie For mine owne part till they shew me one who approued a mentall Equiuocation or reseruation I will thinke and say there is none And this is my first assertion whereof see further proofe in the next assertion 2 My second is that the latter sort of Schoole-men and Casuists gaue occasion and laied grounds for this ensuing Arte which at that time themselues it seemeth did not so much as thinke or dreame of For whereas some Cases were then debated how farre a Priest might deny the things which hee had heard in Confession and in what sort any man that was questioned by an vnlawfull Iudge or proceeded against in an vnlalwfull maner c. might deny the things which he knew to be true they considering the circumstances of the persons place and businesse did allow some hard Equiuocations which the words would hardly beare in any true sense yet such as they thought might be allowed and gathered out of those circumstances and might well be vnderstood in those words as there and then they were vttered As for exaÌ„ple If a Priest were questioned whether he knew or had heard any thing of such or such a matter he might say No if he did not know or heare it any other way but onely by Confession And the reason of this answere is because Words saith Dominicus a Soto doe so signifie as they are vnderstood or taken by the people Now Christian people when they heare a Priest sweare that he knoweth nothing of such or such a matter they vnderstand him not to speake or meane any thing that he heard in Confession And therefore those words of the Priest doe onely signifie or import that hee knoweth nothing out of Confession And the like defence of this answer is giuen by Sepulueda de Rat. dicendi test cap. 3. Againe it is a further Case If the Priest be asked concerning the same thing whether he know or haue heard it in Confession whether may he then say No I heard it not And the common opinion of the Doctors was that in this case hâ— may sweare he did not heare it But Soto vpon better aduice disliketh this answere because in this Sentence Nihil audiui in Confessione I heard nothing of it in Confession the Restriction allowed in the former case cannot fitly bee vnderstood to say I heard nothing in Confession to wit out of Confession And therefore he concludeth that that answere in this case cannot be excused from being a lye because the words cannot haue that construction Another case is proposed Suppose a Tyran should aske of a Priest whether Peter for example did kill Iohn which the Priest knew in Confession only may the Priest say and sweare that Peter did not kill Iohn Adrian who afterward was Pope and was called Adrian the sixth he resolued the question that he might answere negatiuely that â—e killed him not but Soto againe replyeth that this which Adrian said had no shew of reason because the words admit no interpretation that may excuse them from a Lye For saith he It were a most fond interpretation to say He killed him not that I may tell you or as our Equiuocators vse now a dayes to speake He killed him not so as I may tell you And he giueth a further reasoÌ„ hereof because deeds haue no immediate relation to this word that I may tel it 〈◊〉 the woâ—d I know and other such words of sense haue And in his Booke de Iustit Iure disputing the like question whether a man beeing questioned concerning his owne Act may by Ambiguity elude the question hee resolueth It can no way be defended that he may lawfully say that he did not doe it and hereof he giueth this reason Because this speech I did not doe it cannot receiue this sense I did not doe it to tell it or that I may tell it c. His meaning in more plaine words is this that the Priest might truely say in the case proposed I know not that Peter did kill Iohn because hee might reasonably vnderstand it thus or with this restriction I know it not out of Confession And of such a knowledg the Iudge is supposed to aske and men do vsually vnderstand the Priest to speake But the Priest might not say without telling a lye Peter did not kill Iohn because this restriction cannot without absurdity bee applyed to those words And consequently these words could not bee so vnderstood by the hearers A fourth case may bee added and with that I will end Suppose a guilty person be against order of Law examined by a Iudge whether he haue committed such a crime which indeede he hath done but is not in this case bound to answere him suppose I say he be inforced to answere may he truely say I did not doe it And Adrian's resolution of the doubt was that in such a case he may truely answere according to the opinion of all Schoole-Doctors that he knoweth nothing of that faâ—t or at least that hee did not 〈◊〉 it And his reason is because in this answere he is supposed to speake of such a knowledge of the fact as he may lawfully discouer But Soto replyeth againe I know not who all those Doctors are that Adrian speaketh of I confesse I haue read none of that opinion And he addeth That meaning in which Adrian interpreteth these words is a most forced and violent sense Thus Soto declareth his owne opinion and the opinion of other Schoole-Doctors and Casuists of that time in these and other cases of like nature And the like doth Io. Genesius Sepulueda another learned man of the same nation and about the same time For hauing heard some defend some such like Equiuocations and ambiguities he vndertaketh to proue and that by the testimony of ancient Diuines that in witnesse-bearing for thereof hee doth in particular intreat a Witnesse may not arte vorborum by cunning words deceiue the Iudge but that he is bound to speak plainely and according to the meaning of the Iudge who asketh the question And of the contrary opinion hee saith
None ancient and renowned Diuine that I knowe did affirme it to bee lawfull And in the Preface to that Booke hee saith that while hee was in Rome hee met with one who maintained this opinion which he calleth agreeable to the Determinations of some yong or late Diuines and when he came backe againe into Spaine that praeter spem contrary to his expectation he found some of their learnedest Diuines maintaining and instilling into their Students hearts and eares that opinion which was condemned by the ancient and chiefe Diuines And Chap. 15. hee sheweth who they bee whom he calleth ancient Diuines and that is in his owne words those which liued before our and our Fathers dayes such for example sake as Thomas Aquinas is Out of which testimonies and sayings of these two learned men the one of which was Confessor to Charles the fifth and the other his Historiographer and the one flourished about the yeere 1560. as Possouin saith and the other died in the yeere 1572. saith the same Posseuin out of these their sayings I gather and obserue these things 1 That in the dayes of these two learned men which was about some 60 yeeres agoe there was little or no speach of any Equiuocation by mentall reseruation or of any such mixt propositions as the Romanists now fancie This I gather first because Soto in oppugning these ambiguous Answeres and speaches allowed by some Schoole-Doctors of that time doth no where to my knowledge charge them with any such opinion or euer labour to refute it Which considering the argument that hee had in hand and the diligence that he vsed in handling of it and cleering of all doubts that belonged vnto it no man may with reason imagine that hee would haue for borne to doe if those times had giuen occasion of disputing such a question Secondly the same learned man in oppugning that liberty which others did grant doth still ouerthrowe or confute their opinion because the interpretation and the meaning which they doe allow those answeres to be taken in by the speaker are such as doe not agree to the vse and signification of the words spoken nor cannot bee applied to them without incongruity and absurditie By which reason of his hee implieth that these Diuines meant no other ambiguity or interpretation or meaning in those answeres then such as they thought the words in that case in which they were vttered might beare Or els his reason had beene insufficient and foolish which yet he supposeth to be such as that his aduersaries could not dislike as impertinent if the thing which he vrged were true Thirdly the same Author doth still so set down his opinion that in the cases proposed and others of the like nature he alloweth any ambiguity or Amphibologie which the vse of the speach can beare without a lye as in expresse words hee explaineth himselfe but refuseth and condemneth all such as is not noted and implied in the words Fourthly Sepulueda he also disputeth against those who think themselues not bound in the cases propounded to answere according to the common meaning and acception of the words and confuteth them who hold it lawfull simply to denie the crime truely layed to their charge although they purposely speake some other thing in their minde Which the Iudge taking their words in the common meaning vnderstandeth not Cap. 17. throughout the whole Booke But yet I haue not obserued in all that Booke any speach in which hee mentioneth a mixt proposition a mentall Equiuocation or an ambiguitie made by a reseruation Against which opinion if there had then appeared any such to the world hee might haue disputed with more probabilitie and shewe of substantiall reason But he no where as farre as I can obserue either refelleth or mentioneth any such opinion among these late and punie Diuines For wheras in the place last cited he hath these words though purposely he speaketh some other thing in his minde that maketh nothing as I thinke for the mentall reseruation which our Equiuocators haue deuised For he meaneth nothing else as I take it but that the speaker doth frame in his minde another sense and meaning of his words then they in the common vnderstanding of men doe make or then the Iudge according to the common vnderstauding doth take them in And therefore those very Schoole-Diuines whom hee and Soto doe refute for going too farre and allowing too much liberty yet goe not so farre as our now Iesuites doe who build all vpon a fancied reseruation of their owne framing no way included in the words spoken Fiftly say that those Diuines whom these learned men doe refute did maintaine such a mixt proposition mentall reseruation as our Romanists doe striue for yet Soto saith that he had read no Schoole-Doctor who allowed such a fancie as Adrain imagined which yet by a reseruation of a Iesuite might easily bee solued And Sepulueda when hee came out of Italy into Spaine thought it strange that hee found Diuines who contrary to the meaning of all the Ancients did allow that opinion which he there refuteth And therefore if we shall say that the Diuines against whom these men wrote did hold this Equiuocall reseruation yet it was then a nouell opinion lately sprung vp such as Soto had read in no Schoole-Doctor of former time and such as Sepulueda did maruell to finde set on foote in his owne Countrey where he liued But as I said these learned men did not know of any such opinion risen vp at that time And therefore in those dayes either this Arte was not yet found or if it were it was rather whispered in corners or taught obscurely then published in Schooles Secondly I gather out of these learned mens writings alleadged before that Schoole-Doctors about that time allowed and gaue liberty for such ambiguities as in opinion of these men and in trueth the words could not beare and therefore their interpretations were forced violent and such as could not free their speaches from being lyes This without further deduction is euident by the words before cited Thirdly I obserue that these hard and harsh Equiuocations by some Diuines then allowed and the violent constructions that they made of the words were then newly taken vp and were vnknowne to the elder and more iudicious Schoole-men And out of all this I leaue it to the iudgement of the learned Reader whether I may not vpon good reason inferre that therefore in all probabilitie the later sort of Schoole-Doctors by the hard Equiuocations which they allowed did giue occasion layd grounds for this Iesuiticall Art of Equiuocation though at that time themselues did not thinke of it For may it not hence be reasonably conceiued that the progresse and proceeding to the framing of this Art was on this manner that first of all and in elder times there was nothing but simplicitie in their Oathes and answers or if any ambiguitie was allowed
by obseruation and iudgement of some wise men that the Iesuites were the Masters of that Mint and that all those coynes were of their stamp and that the Iesuites were noted by some of their owne friends to be too hardie Equiuocators and their Equiuocations too hard And Hospinian hauing cited many testimonies of Iesuites for this Arte concludeth that therby it is euident that many Iesuits with great care haue explained and defended it that not without cause they are commonly thought to be the Authors and Inuentors of it Adde hereto that which the learned Casaubon obserued who was well acquainted not onely with the writings of all sorts of Iesuits but with the proceedings and dealings of our English Iesuits also Hee telleth Front◠〈◊〉 a learned Iesuit It is a cleare case that many Diuines of your Order haue explained and maintained that Arte but they which haue especially polished it I finde to be English men Yea and their owne Brethren the Secular Priests lay the ouer-bold vse of Equiuocation in their dish For so famous say they and so notorious are their Equiuocations and so scandalous that the very Protestants take notice thereof c. and such iugglings and shiftings of late haue beene vsed by them that not onely Protestants but also Catholickes yea Priests can scarse tell when they speake sincerely when otherwise And a little after Howsoeuer this kinde of dealing may seeme excusable vnto them vnder the name of honest Equiuocation sure I am that few honest men will excuse it from dishonest lying And Master Watson calleth it the Iesuits rule of swearing and forswearing in a contrary sense and meaning and a shift which they call a lawfull Equiuocation And againe hee calleth these Equiuocations their absurd paradoxes of Equiuocation And the like speeches may be found in diuers other places of the Priests bookes By all which it may appeare that learned men on both sides not onely among the Protestants but also among Popish Priests haue noted this deuice especially in the Iesuits which may be reason enough beside that which is to be found in their owne writings to make any sober man resolue that the Iesuites haue had their fingers chiefly in this new deuised Arte. And reason may perswade the same to be most likely because the Iesuites are an Order consecrated and deuoted from their very first birth to the Popes will to doe what may serue his turne For so the Iesuites themselues who published Sanchez Morall worke doe professe in the Epistle Dedicatorie to Pope Gregorie 15. that their first founder did make himselfe and his Order or Societie vassals to the Popes commaund in a new and vnheard of manner And therefore if the See and State of Rome did as before I shewed giue life and credit and authoritie to this Arte then in reason it must be conceiued that the Iesuites who by their first institution are created the Popes vassals to serue at his pleasure and to doe his will would be the most forward in the ranke to vphold and maintaine with all their wit this deare Childe of the Popes owne breeding And yet when I conclude that the Iesuits are the most forward and the men that haue polished this Arte my meaning is not either to include all of that Order within this compasse or to exclude all others not of that Order from it For first among the Iesuites Becanus doth disclaime it as being not taught by the Iesuites and vnlawfull to be practised by any Wherein hee saith well that it is vnlawfull but ill that it is not taught by the Iesuites For their Doctrine this way is so cleare and so open to the view of all men that Becanus in denying it must needes either vse the Arte of Equiuocation which himselfe condemneth or else tell a flat and downe-right lye which is not much better And the like may be noted in the writings of some other Iesuites who deny and renounce this deuice But they had best keepe themselues from Rome for if they come in the Censors hands it is to be feared hee will deale with them as he hath done with their felow S◠already that is circūcise their lips and teach their pens to speake the Roman Language more purely Secondly among those that be no Iesuites wee haue experience and examples good store of them who haue learned this Arte and maintained it as stiffely as the best Iesuite can In which number I may place Doctor Norrice who beeing apprehended in Oxford denyed himselfe to bee a Priest and afterward in prison did defend it by this sleight of Equiuocation and that he maintained to be lawfull by the example of our blessed Sauiour Mar. 13. 32. But of that day houre knoweth no man neither the Son c. and Ioh. 7. 8. Ego non ascendam c. For so he then alledged the place as Father Persons also doth against both the Greeke and their owne approued Latine In expounding and applying of which Texts to his purpose how weakely he behaued himselfe he may now bee pleased to call to his remembrance that as he braggeth of his victories ouer other men so for his humiliation hee may sometimes call to mind his owne infirmities And that perhaps may stand his soule in as good stead as the meritorious forbearing of Equiuocation when he might lawfully vse it which as Father Persons saith may increase his Crowne and merit in heauen But in earnest he shall doe well if in the next edition of his Antidote he place this question of Equiuocation among the rest of his Controuersies and tell vs in good sadnes what after so many yeeres more he thinketh of this Point But in the meane while the Reader may vnderstand that Dr. Norrice is not the only man that ioyneth with the Iesuites in the practice and maintenance of this Arte. For in this small Treatise may be seene diuers testimonies for it out of other Writers And the secular Priests though they charge vpbraid the Iesuites with a nimium too often and too bold a practice of it yet themselues doe allow it euen when they shew greatest opposition against the Iesuites So Master Watson speaking of Equiuocation as a shift which the Iesuites vse saith that though there bee no question to bee made of it but that in some sense it may bee lawfull c. In which place the sum of that wherein he sheweth his dissent dislike of the Iesuites for his owne words are too many to be set down in this place is in these two things First That the Iesuites doe allow Equiuocation in a case wherein he thinketh a man is bound to speake the plaine truth And secondly that they doe hold that they may not onely to their Aduersaries to Protestants but euen also to any Catholike Magistrate yea to the Pope himselfe answere one way and meane another And to like purpose the Author of the Replie to
Proposition as appeareth plainely in the reason of Heissius now set downe in his owne words And in a word Equiuocators say that if a man vse Equiuocation with mentall reseruation he doth not offend against the negatiue Precept which for bâ—ddeth a man to lye because whatsoeuer he speaketh in that maner is a truth onely hee may offend against the affirmatiue Precept if he doe then equiuocate when he is bound to vtter and reueile the truth And hence I inferre that whensoeuer a man may lawfully say nothing as not being bound to reueile the truth then in these mens opinion he may lawfully speake by Equiuocation And this is the first thing that they say for this purpose The second thing is that there is iust cause for vsing of Equiuocation whensoeuer it is necessary or expedient for preseruing of bodily safety honor houshold goods or for any other act of vertue so that the hiding of the truth may then be thought to bee expedient and honest So speaketh Sanchez meaning this rule of such an Equiuocation as is ioyned with an oath For else if there be no oath vsed then honest sport vsed for lawfull recreation may make the vse of Equiuocation lawfull But if there were an oath added then it is an euident fault because of the vaine and indiscreet vsing of Gods Name So speaketh the same Author not long after From which words of the Iesuite we may gather two things 1. That an easie cause may suffice for iustifying of Equiuocall speeches in a simple assertion without an oath If there bee no other cause but onely for merriment and recreation yet that is reason inough to make the vse of Equiuocation lawfull and honest 2. That when other Equiuocators doe require some kind of necessity or vtility which may draw men to vse it they are to be vnderstood of Equiuocation ioyned with an oath and not when it is vsed in a bare and simple affirmation or negation vnlesse wee may conceiue that sport and merriment goeth with them for a matter of necessite or great moment And indeed this difference giuen by Father Sanchez betweene Equiuocation with an oath and without it hath reason in it if we consider their grounds and principles For in affirmations and negations there are two things required 1. That no lye be told for this is required by the negatiue precept of truth as they vse to speake And this fault as they thinke they auoide by their arte of Reseruation And secondly that men conceale not a truth when they are bound to disclose it for this is required by the affirmatiue precept of truth But in an Oath besides truth in the speech there is a third thing required and that is that it be vndertaken with iudgement that is to say aduisedly and with due discretion Else by swearing a truth vnaduisedly Gods Name may be prophaned There is reason then for this difference which Sanchez maketh And now by all this the Reader may see that an easie cause is thought sufficient for the vsing of this Arte. If it be for ease of the body safety of a mans goods preseruing of his credite c. then by their doctrine a man may equiuocate with an Oath but if it be for sport and merriment only yet then it may bee lawfull in affirmations and negations without an Oath prouided that it be such a case in which a man may lawfully hold his peace and bee not bound then to disclose the truth By this it appeareth in generall in what cases they allow the vse of this Arte. But for fuller satisfaction of the Reader and for more distinct conceiuing of their meaning in this point it will not bee amisse to point out some speciall and particular Cases in which they giue expresse leaue for the practising of this sleight And they be these and such like 1 If a Priest that hath heard another mans Confession should be demanded whether such a one had confessed such a sinne vnto him or not he may answere directly that hee hath not confessed any such thing vnto him albeit hee had done so yea he may sweare also this answere of his vnderstanding and reseruing in his minde that the Penitent hath not confessed the same vnto him so as he may vtter it These be Father Persons words And hee saith they be agreeable to the mind of all Schoole-Doctors 2 If a Penitent be asked without a iust cause whether he haue confessed such or such a sinne which he had confessed to the Priest he may sweare he confessed it not vnderstanding so as that he is bound to tell him So speaketh Sanchez and citeth others of the same opinion 3 If a Iudge do against iustice question a Defendant and doe not question according to order of Law the Defendant may vse Equiuocation and sweare according to his owne meaning that is by a secret reseruation kept in his mind So saith Tolet. And Sanchez saith the like When the Iudge that questioneth is not the lawfull Iudge of him that is questioned or is not his Iudge in that peculiar case the Defendant may vse Equiuocation And the like he saith if the Iudge bee an Excommunicate person And the like Father Persons doth largely confirme When the Iudge is not lawfull or not competent at least in that cause or proceedeth not lawfully In these cases they thinke that a man questioned before a Magistrate may vpon his oath by an equiuocall reseruation deny that which he knoweth to be true 4 If one doe ignorantly kill a man thinking him to be a wild Beast a Deere for example or if he kill a man in his owne defence he may being questioned of the fact denie it vpon his oath 5 When an vniust taxe is set vpon a commoditie if a man sell it for more or maketh light waight and scant measure so that he make himselfe satisfaction for the wrong of the Taxe and yet sell his commodities worth the moeny he being examined by a Iudge whether he sold the commodity for more or came short in his waight or measure hee may deny it and say that he sold it for the price that was set him and that he gaue full waight and measure meaning so as that selling for more or comming short in his waight or measure he did commit an offence 6 If a man be found slaine with a Sword lying by him and a guiltlesse person should be asked whether that sword were his or whether hee passed that way at such an houre which things are true and are inquired after as signes of that murder which he committed not he may denie it 7 If a man haue borrowed money and paied it againe and be examined of the Iudge concerning the money that he borrowed he may sweare that he borrowed not that money vnderstanding so as that he is now bound to pay it And so a man may sweare that he had not such money which hee did
matter And the Seculars tell vs that the Iesuites make Equiuocation to serue their turnes so frequently in this kinde as that their owne Catholique Brethren nay their fellow Priests can scarce tell when they speake sincerely when otherwise They might haue added no nor their holy Father the Pope neither For Father Standish coozened and deluded him also by Equiuocation thereby to oppresse the Secular Priests as they complaine in diuers places of their Bookes And if this Arte can serue for this turne when they deale with his Holinesse himselfe no maruell if they make the same vse of it whensoeuer they haue to deale with 〈…〉 enemies of their Râ—ligion as Father 〈…〉 who giuing his Faith in verbo 〈…〉 prisoner to the Knight-Marshall yet did 〈…〉 word and that Oath But the good Father say his Secular Brethren had perhaps some mentall 〈◊〉 wherewith to rescue his Soule at least from remorse though not from the Deuill As for example as hee was in that minde hee would be true prisoner or for any thing the Keeper should know to the contrary till hee were escaped or that hee meant not to runne away on his head but on his feete or that hee would not breake away so long as the Knight-Marshall or his Deputie stood by and looked on or that hee woâ—ld not breake away as a Priest but is a Iesuite or that hee would not 〈◊〉 with a minde euer to come againe with his will 〈◊〉 that nullâ— fides sâ—uanda Haereticis or how many Ors might I make vpon this point saith the Author of that Booke But the point is plaine and as well proued to be true of all sorts as heere it is affirmed of the Iesuites though I will not denie these Fathers the precedencie in this practice Equiuocation then serueth for many singular turnes and for vses of great consequence and moment and therefore it is no maruell that they doe so hugge and embrace it as a dearling of great worth CHAP. V. Of the Grounds and Arguments either for or against Equiuocation IN setting down the Reasons on either side I shall not neede to be long because I haue beene large already in vnâ—olding the nature and conditions of this Art in the points hitherto spoken of and the discouery of such a monstrous deuice is argumeÌ„t inough to disproue it It may then be sufficient for this place first to answere the chiefe Arguments which are brought in defence of it and then in the second place to set downe some fewe Reasons that may refute it And first for their Arguments they are many in particular for Father Persons findeth 8 or 9 at least in one piece of a Chapter how many then might he haue found if he had sought all the Chapters of the Bible in the like maner But the Wren hath moe birds then the Eagle and errors doe more vsually abound with their rotten proofes then Truths doe with sound and substantiall Reasons And it is no maruell For a false Conclusion hath no direct or good proofe at all and Cauils and impertinent flourishes for euery thing may bee infinite and without number And so it is in this case For such proofes as the 8 or 9 are which Father Persons findeth in one Chapter he might haue found 8 or 900 in the compasse of the Bible But howsoeuer the particular allegations be so many yet all of them may easily be reduced to some few heads and so many of them together may be cut off at one blowe The Heads then to which the substance of all that they say may be reduced are these three 1. Examples of holy men 2. Examples of God himselfe And 3. Examples of Iesus Christ our blessed 〈◊〉 And first for Examples of holy men they being in the Patriarches and Prophets and other Saints of God For Abraham say they did equiuocaâ—e when he said of Sarah that she was his Sister and 〈◊〉 when hee said I am thy first-borne Esauâ— and Moses when he said to Pharaoh that they would 〈…〉 the Wildernes but meant to go to 〈◊〉 and Samuel when he said he went to offer 〈◊〉 but principally inteÌ„ded to annoint Dauid to be King of Israel and Dauid when he told Ahimelech The King 〈…〉 a businesse c. and Ieremie when â—o question of the Nobles who demanded of him What saidst thou to the King c. He answered I presented my supplication to the King that he would not cause me to returne to Ionathans house to 〈◊〉 there whereas hee talked with 〈◊〉 concerning his yeelding vp to the King of Babylon For answere to these and the like I note 〈◊〉 things by way of preamble 1. That the old Hereticks thâ— Priscillianists who defended the lawfulnesse of 〈◊〉 as now the Papists doe of Equiâ—â—cating did alledge 〈◊〉 same places and examples at least mâ—ny of them for proofe of their heresie which our Iesuites doe for confirmation of their opinion And they had better shew of reason then these men haue for diuers of those Instances were either direct and culpable vntruthes or seemed at least to border too neere vpon such obliquity but as for this new found Equiuocation by mentall reseruation it hath no shew nor semblance of probability to be gathered from them 2. That neither S. Augustin who most diligently confuted those Heretikes nor any other ancient Writer for answering of these obiections did euer flee to this Arte of Equiuocation or once say that those Fathers and holy men did not lye in any of those speeches for that they spoke the truth by a mentall reseruation Which answere if it had bin true had beene most pertinent and easie as our late Equiuocators doe not only confesse but bragge of it too For Nauarre saith that from his doctrine of EquiuocatioÌ„ there ariseth or may bee gathered nouus modus excusandi à mendacio Patriarchas a new way to excuse the Paâ—riarches from lying Where when he saith that it is a new way he acknowledgeth that it was not knowne to St. Augustin or those other Worthies who in former times did beate downe these Errours of the Heretikes And when he saith that this way ariseth out of his doctrine he intimateth that if the Fathers had knowne this they might easily haue answered the Priscillianists by interpreting those Texts after his new way Now from hence it followeth that the Ancients did not vnderstand these passages of Scripture as making any thing for Equiuocation And therefore when Equiuocators alledge S. Augustin and some others of the Fathers for their interpretation they abuse both their Readers and the ancient Fathers These things being first noted I come to giue a more direct answere to the obiections and it is this As they affirme so I deny that these or any of these sayings alledged were meant or are to bee vnderstood and construed with any Equiuocall reseruation Yes say they that they are For if they bee not so construed they are apparent
noyse and vndistinct sound this is a signifying deede and doth import that that man is dumbe In either of these kindes deedes and gestures are equiualent to words and may containe truth or falshood in them as well as words doe But else deedes and gestures if in some such manner ex instituto by appointment and agreement among men they be not referred and intended for signification of our minde though they may carry shew and men may gather some meaning from them yet they are not equiualent to words neither is there any lye contained in it though the shew be not answerable to the thing And such a deede as this was that of our Sauiour when hee shewed by his gesture a purpose of going further and therefore this needeth no reseruation to make it true seeing without any reseruation it hath no false or lying signification such as words haue And thus Lucas Brugensis a learned Diuine of the Roman Church doth vnderstand and interpret this place His words that the Reader may iudge of his meaning the better are these I see â—o more shew of a lye in this fact of Christ then when before he seemed to be a stranger or a way-faring man And he giueth his reason why hee thinketh there is no vntruth in this deed and gesture for there is a great difference betweene words and deedes For words by their first institution haue the power or vse of signifying but so haue not deedes And hence he inferreth that deedes actions and gestures though oftentimes they be yet they are not alwaies signes either of some ensuing action to follow or of our present purpose and meaning nor haue they the nature of a lye in them etiamsi ad decipiendum aliquando siunt though they be sometimes done to deceiue the vnderstanding of the beholder and to make him beleeue that which is not true So that if our Lord did make shew of going further and intended it not as Father Persons saith yet in this learned mans iudgement there was no lye in it and consequently there needeth no mentall reseruation to saue it from being a lye Secondly and more agreeably to our Sauiours mind wee may answere and say that our Lord made as if he would goe further yea and meant it too if their intreaties and importunitie had not stayed him Therefore the Text saith They constrained him that is they importuned him to stay and he ouercome by their intreatie stayed with them The clearer meaning of which words we may the better conceiue and vnderstand by a like speech Luke 9. 53. For there it is said The Samaritans receiued him not because his face was as though hee would goe to Ierusalem that is by his behauiour it seemed that hee meant to goe thither and so hee did meane it indeed And so in this place when it is said that hee made as though hee would goe furâ—â—â—r the meaning is that hee tooke his leaue and bad them farewell or vsed some other such like behauiour which made it seeme that hee meant to goe further Yea and so hee meant indeede sauing that at their request hee was contented to abide with them And thus Barradius and Ribera two famous Iesuites doe interpret this place Wee may answere saith the one of them DominuÌ„ voluisse vlteriùs progredi si non retineretur à Discipulis c. That our Lord indeed would haue gone further had hee not beene detained by his Disciples and that there was no vntruth in this shew And the other Nihil veritas fingii Christ who is the Truth doth not feine any thing But the common sort might thinke that hee did feine but it was no fiction or counterfeiting For if they had not detayned him he out of doubt had passed by and had gone on further Thus not onely the euidence of truth but the authoritie of Romish Doctors and Iesuites doe vindicate this place from that false glosse that Persons putteth vpon it and doe free our Lord Iesus from that slanderous imputation which the Iesuite doth lay vpon him when he saith that Christ in this place did equiuocate and when hee calleth this dealing of his The dissimulation and fiction of our Sauiour The second place mentioned and produced for Equiuocation is that speech of our Sauiour Mar. 13. Of that day and that houre c. This prâ—position saith Persons had some reseruation of mind for that otherwise it had beene false Ans. Not so Nay this inference of the Iesuite is false and foolish too for our Sauiour according to his wonted manner elsewhere speaketh of himselfe as he was reputed and knowne to be that is as he was man And in that sense the words haue an vsuall and cleare construction and signification which is that as he was man he knew not of that day This interpretation as Persons doth acknowledge is giuen by ancient Fathers in great number Nor is this a mentall reseruation as Persons would haue his ignorant Reader to beleeue but an interpretation vsually meant and vnderstood by Christians in these and such like speeches as these And therefore our Sauiour in this seÌ„tence did not keepe one secret sence to himselfe in his inward minde and signifie another to his Disciples in the words vttered But if it be an Equiuocation such as they fancy what then shall the reseruation be Persons knowing that no man before the late inuention of this new Art did euer thinke of secret reseruations or mentall imaginations in our Sauiours words calleth euery Exposition that any good Author giueth by the name of reseruation and reckoneth that Author for a fauourer of his like the mad man in Athenaeus who when any ship came to the HaueÌ„ put it in his Tables as one of his owne But that which carrieth most shew of a reseruation is this The Sonne doth not know the day of iudgement meaning that hee knew it not so as hee would discouer it vnto them For this explicatioÌ„ is giuen by Saint Augustine and other Fathers saith Persons and hee addeth as triumphing in so plaine a proofe that this exposition expresseth the very same reseruation in Christs words which they talke of in their mixt and equiuocall propositions Ans. To this I answere two things First That the Exposition giuen by those Fathers doth not imply any equiuocall reseruation Secondly That it doth not giue the true sence or meaning of the place First It containeth not any Iesuiticall reseruation For those Fathers which giue that interpretation The Sonne knoweth not that is not to make you know it or rather the Sonne knoweth it not that is hee doth not make you to know it doe fetch and gather this exposition not from any secret conceit reserued in our Sauiours minde but from the vse and acception and signification of the word as it is vsed in Scripture For so say they this word scio or noui is often vsed As when God said to Abraham
reference and relation vnto other men so that lying consisteth in a signification of falshood vnto others and truth in signifying or vttering of that which is true and without such signification either performed by outward signes or meant and intended to be performed if occasion should be offered Lying and Truth morally taken can haue no place Vpon this ground which hath cleare euidence in it Bannes a learned Schoole-man doth refute their opinion who thinke that there may be a lye where there is no purpose to deceiue I thinke saith he that a minde to deceiue is so necessary in a lye as that without it a lye cannot exist This hee declareth thus If Peter no man being within hearing should vtter a speech which hee knoweth to be false yet hee should not lye though hee should speake an vntruth in the words In like sort if Peter should say to Iohn Thou art not Iohn doubtlesse hee should not lye though hee spake an vntruth because hee cannot speake that with purpose to deceiue Iohn himselfe And hereof hee giueth this reason Because a lye is a kinde of fiction or faining which is in the will with reference to another by which a man intendeth that another man may beleeue otherwise than himselfe who telleth the lye doth thinke And that a lye doth include such respect and refirence to another is plaine saith hee because that veracirie or the vertue of speaking truth which is opposite to lying doth consist also in relation to another because it is a part of iustice Thus reasoneth this learned Frier In this discourse of his wee may note two things First His Conclusion which is that both lying and truth morally taken which hee calleth veracitie doe consist in a relation and reference to others so that no words vttered without respect of signifying somewhat to some other by them can be either the sinne of lying or the vertue of true-speaking Secondly wee may note his reason for proofe of this Conclusion which is that veracitie or the vertue of speaking truth is a part of iustice and iustice hath a respect to some other to whom it giueth that which is his due This reason I take to be vnanswerable and then his Conclusion must needs be vndeniable It is proued then that truth morally meant for a vertue or act of speaking truth which is a part of iustice and a dutie which wee owe to our neighbours doth include a reference and respect to others which respect consisteth in signifying or declaring our meaning to them truely and sincerely But now in the mentall reseruation shut vp in the Equiuocators breast there is no such reference or relation nor doth it admit of any intendment to signifie or declare his meaning to others Nay it is therefore suppressed and broken off from the speech which is vttered in words that nothing thereby may be signified to the Hearer It followeth then that this reseruation hath no point nor piece of morall truth in it And therefore if that part of the Equiuocators proposition which hee vttereth in words were a false and lying speech before it must needes remaine a lye still for any helpe that this Reseruation can yeeld it Arg. 3. The Doctrine of Equmocation doth disturbe humane societie and destroyeth that mutuall commerce that one man should haue with another I proue it thus This societie and commerce must needs be disturbed when men in wisedome may not beleeue one another vpon their words or oathes but if this Doctrine of Equiuocation be receiued men may not beleeue one another either vpon their words or oaths This is prooued thus The Equiuocator professeth to equiuocate whensoeuer hee may lawfully hold his peace and if it be for any aduantage of weight vpon his Oath too Which how farre it may extend I haue declared in part already and euery man may easily conceiue by himselfe but sure in what businesse soeuer I haue to deale with such a man I cannot tell but that he may thinke it lawfull to conceale the truth and consequently to equiuocate with mee And in case his conscience will permit him to equiuocate with mee as in what case it will not permit him I know not then am I as sure to be deceiued and ouerreached by him if I doe beleeue him as if I beleeued a plaine and downe-right lyer For my credence or beleefe can reach no futher then to the words vttered nor can I learne any thing from the Equiuocator but that which I can gather from his words but all that is false and lying as hath beene shewed by their owne Confession And therefore if I beleeue a man when hee doth equiuocate I am sure to be deceiued I declare this yet further by a familiar example Say two Priests haue layed a plot of Inuasion for the Kingdome and being questioned vpon their oaths concerning the plot they both deny it And the one hee saith I neuer meant or intended any such thing vnderstanding within himself so as I meane to tell you of it and the other hee answereth in the very same words but hath forgotten to frame a reseruation in his minde the one of these by their Doctrine is a lyer and the other an Equiuocator But in respect of being deceiued by them what difference is there betweene them Shall I not as soone be deceiued by the Equiuocator as by the Lyer Yes certainely it is no more safe to beleeue an Equiuocating Iesuite then a lying Deuill And if this be so then where men teach and professe the Arte of equiuocation there in wisdome men may not beleeue one another and consequently they cannot haue that commerce and societie that men should haue among themselues I conclude this argument against Equiuocators in the very same manner as Saint Augustine did against Lyers onely putting the name of Equiuocator where he did the name of Lyer Either saith hee wee must not beleeue honest men or wee must beleeue them who wee thinke ought sometimes to tell a lye or else wee must beleeue that honest men will not at any time tell a lye The first of these three is pernicious and ouerthroweth societie The second is folish and exposeth a man to the mercy of euery cheating companion It remayneth therefore to say that an honest man will neuer tell a lye Thus that learned Father by whose example I may reason against Equiuocators in the very same manner Either wee must not beleeue honest men on their words or oathes or wee must beleeue them who wee thinke may equiuocate with vs both in words and in oathes or else wee must beleeue that an honest man will not equiuocate The first is pernicious the second is foolish and therefore wee must resolue vpon the third which is that an honest man will not equiuocate Arg. 4. This Doctrine of Equiuocation defeateth all Lawes made against lying and doth by consequence impeach God of folly for making any such Lawes I proue it thus It is a folly to
spoken with reuerence to his Maiestie for iniustice and slander because hee hath branded him with the note of a lyer and calleth him the Father of lyes But these consequents are most absurd and therefore the Doctrine of Equiuocation from whence they follow is most false Thus by Gods grace I haue declared and I trust in some measure also cleared the poynts propounded in the beginning Now for conclusion I will onely commend one Caueat to the well-meaning Christian and that is to beware of trusting them whose profession is to equiuocate For such men are both more impious and more dangerous than any other sort of lyers that I know beside First They are more impious because among men of other Religions though there may be vicious persons that make too common a practice of lying deceits yet that is the fault of the men and not of their Doctrine But in the Church of Rome their great Doctors doe not onely practise this deceit but praise it too and commend it to their Disciples as a good Arte very fit foâ— scrupulous consciences Which doctrine cannot be conceiued to be without great dishonour to God and much disgrace to Religion Secondly They are more dangerous then any other sort of Lyers because they come masked vnder a vizard of truth armed with resolution to protest and sweare and pawn their soules and saluations vpon the truth of that which they say notwithstanding that for so much as they vtter and for all that you can heare or gather by them all is most false which they speake From the consideration whereof I inferred before that it was not safe to beleeue a Iesuite or any of his fellowes or schollers for that a man may as soone be deceiued by an Equiuocating Iesuite as by a lying Deuill Now I adde therefore wise Christians must beware of them and if wee will not be deceiâ—ed wee must not beleeue either their words or oathes in what businesse soeuer wee haue to doe with them This Caueat that it may the bâ—tter appeare how farre it is to be extended I will for example sake set downe some speciall cases of ordinarie vse in which it will 〈…〉 to beleeue them 1. â—irst then we may not safely beleeue them when they are disputing and arguing for their Religion and deliuering points of their faith For they tell vs that Iesus our Lord did equiuocate when hee preached of Prayer and Sacraments and of his office of iudging the World c. And I trow Iesuites will be ready to imitate the example of Iesus whose name they beare But we need not doubt of their meaning in this case for they therefore alledge the example of Christ that they may defend and make good their owne practice And therefore when I heare a Priest or a Iesuite telling of Popes Pardons and preaching of S. Patricks Purgatâ—rie c. and when for these he telleth me of the consent of the ancient Church and alledgeth many Fathers to confirme his Assertion how can I be sure that hee doth not equiuocate with mee in that case or what reason haue I to thinke but that he speaketh against his knowledge and conscience or how can I without a note of rashnes and temeritie beleeue that heâ— doth not wilfully belye the Fathers and other Authors to serue his owne turne and when he hath done all make vp all with a secret Reseruation that I neuer dreamed on Secondly Wee may not beleeue them when they giue Answers or beare witnesse in a Court of Iustice or before a Magistrate no not though they sweare what they say and take it vpon their soules and saluations For they professe to equiuocate in such cases if either the Iudge be incompetent or if he proceed incompetently And when I heare one of them speake and sweare before any of our Gouernors or Rulers either Ecclesiasticall or Ciuill what can I tell but hee may thinke either the Iudge or his proceedings to bee incompetent and vniust Nay sure in most cases in which they haue to doe before our Gouernors they are knowne to hold either the Iudge or the proceeding or both to bee incompetent And therefore I cannot see how wee may safely beleeue them when they make answere or giue euidence vpon their oath Thirdly Wee may not beleeue them when they tell of great wonders and Miracles done by men of their Order and profussion and by Saints and Images of their owne making For they professe to equiuocate when it may bee for some good to themselues and therefore much more when it may proue so great a good to their Order to their Church and to their Religion And therefore when they tell mee of many great miracles donâ— by their men in the Indies and by the Ladies of Lauretto and Hall how can I tell that they doe not fitten and deuise all that vpon their fingers end to gaine credite to their profession Fourthly We may not beleeue them when they publish and disperse disgracefull tales and reports against the professors and Doctors of our Church For the disgracing of these men may breede great aduantage to their Religion and beside it is an Axiom of theirs He must bee disgraced because he is an Enemy to their order And therefore when they tell mee of Luther and Caluin and Beza and Bucer and such others that they either despaired or recanted or renounced their Religion how may I beleeue them that they doe not Equiuocate Nay it is certaine that in the forging of these reports they did either lye or Equiuocate or both And therefore when they now tell vs that many of our Reuerend Bishops and learned Preachers and Schollers are of their opinion and thinke them to be in the right but that for the worlds sake they dissemble their iudgement how can I giue credit to their words or to their writings And when they tell vs that such a Doctor vpon his death-bed and such a Bishop toward his latter end turned Papist and renounced in their eare what he had taught in the Pulpit and was reconciled to the Church of Rome by one that came and went inuisibly shall wee beleeue them to speake as they thinke Nay wee should rather spit in the Lyers faces that presume vs to bee so simple as to beleeue an Equiuocator in a case so auaileable for his Order and in a thing so vnlikely and absurde in it selfe that the narration of such a thing might call in question the truth of a knowne honest man Fiftly We may not beleeue Equiuocators in matters of common life and ciuill conuersation For they professe to equiuocate in most cases of common practice and in all cases in which they are not bound to reueile the Truth if the thing may be for their aduantage And therefore if one of them should contract to marry a mans daughter amongst vs how can any of vs tell that thâ— Equiuocator thinketh himselfe bound to lay opâ—n his heart and to speake the truth in this