be established in that Citty wheras the King had dispatched his Letters Patēts to this purpose aboue foure moneths before and had sent them to the Lord Bishop and Mounsieur Decures Fiftly he saith that the Iesuites talke was of driuing out the Monkes of S. Sampson that they might get their Church But my Author answereth that this treatie was in the behalfe of the Reuerent Fathers of S. Francis of Paula his Order commonly called Minims or Bon-homs that all was done with due and lawfull circumstances and with consent of the parties and if afterwardes some desired that it might be imployed for a Colledg of the Society it was with the same conditions Sixtly like vnto this is that which followeth of displacing Monsieur the Mareshall of Chastres Gouernour of that Citty c. for there was no such matter Seuēthly he addeth that the Fathers vsed much importunity with the King to this effect wheras it was his Maiesties owne motion to prefer Orleans before Chartres because he thought that a Colledge would be more profitable in that Citty in respect of certaine families which were reported to haue changed their Religion not long before Eightly the next lye is that his Maiestie graunted this Colledge vnder condition that the Cittizens should be brought to giue their consent whereas in deed there is no such word in the Patents which are absolute with commendation of the Society and testimony of the good which their Colledges cause in all partes Ninthly he bringeth in one Touruile an Aduocate prouing that in France a man could not loue the King and the Iesuites both but this is altogether false and it would proue that neither the Cittyes and Parlaments which haue receaued and do willingly retaine the Society should loue their King yea that the late King loued not himself since that he shewed thē such extraordinary kindnes fauours founding thē Colledges in diuers places at his owne charges and resoluing to place them in all the principall Citties of his Kingdome Finally he concludeth that all the Cittizens concurred iointly in the same opinion cōcluding that the Society should not be admitted wheras indeed they were neyther all of one opinion nor gaue an absolute deniall but only excused themselues for want of meanes offering to receaue them willingly if his Maiestie would prouide for them Neyther is it probable that they would answer otherwise vnlesse we should measure them by the Hugonots who possessed that Citty in former times And thus we see that my Author had reason to affirme that Anti-Coton must needes be verie shameles since that he calumniateth so impudently and ill habituated since he doth it so often and finally of little talent since he doth it so folishly In his third Chapter Anti-Coton goeth about to shew Pag. 145. that the Fathers of the Society were guilty of the murther of the late King of France which is so incredible a calumniation and so easily conuinced by many testimonies and circumstances that it is a wonder how any could be so impudent as to auouch so manifest an vntruth but yet let vs examine at least so much as may carry any colour of truth of which sorte that which he affirmeth of Fa. Comelet is not and the words of Fa. Hardy are wrested to a wrong sense for he only affirmed that Princes were subiect to death and other casualties as well as meaner men In like manner that which he bringeth against Fa. Gontier is only proued by the testimony of a dead man or els by such a witnesse as openly giueth him the lye I meane Monsieur de la Grange Secretary to the Prince of Condie and the matter is cleere in it selfe for he maketh Fa. Rector at Perigeus where those wordes should be spoken Fa. Saphore which is altogeather false Monsieur de Guron whom he stādereth to haue dealt with the Preachers in Paris that they should preach seditious doctrine is a very vertuous and deuout gentleman and will maintayne against him and al the world that this is a meere slaunder yea the Duke of Sully auoucheth that it is most false that euer the Curates of Paris came with any complaint to him either in this or any other matter And if Monsieur de Guron had giuen any such seditious discourses they would haue byn published aswell as others of lesse importance But aboue all the falsitie of this calumniation appeareth in that he maketh the late King not only to dissemble the matter but also to reward the chiefe malefactor by making as he saith F. Gontier his Preacher giuing him a pension both which are also most false For this Father was no more the Kings Preacher afterward then he had byn before And as for the pension not only he but Fa. Coton himselfe neuer had any it being against the institute of the Society that any of them should take any thing in recompence of the exercise of their function much lesse that any of them in particuler should haue any rent reuenue or pension True it is that the late King esteemed highly the rare qualities and excellent talents of F. Gontier and especially his great zeale courage and constancie in Gods cause and all that euer the Lord Mareshall Dernano sayd of him was that he could haue desired that the remonstrances made before his Maiesty at S. Geruas had beene in camera charitatis as his words were witnesse the Queene Regent her selfe who was present and heard them Pag. 147. Thus much for Fa. Gontier after whō Anti-Coton commeth to Fa. Aubigny and is not ashamed to auouch that Rauaillac iustified vnto this Father that he had told him in confession of his intention to giue a great stroke shewing him the knife hauing an Heart engrauē vpon it wheras the Registers of the Court it selfe do witnesse that Rauaillac being demanded about F. de Aubigny answered that he came to him one day after Masse in the month of Ianuary he being in the Church that he declared vnto him certaine visions and he deposed that the said Father answered him that he should make no account of them fearing least his head were crazed willing him to say his beades and that if he had any thing to say to the King he should go to some Noble man to procure audience Vpon which the said Father and he being confronted the eighteenth of May he charged him not with any other thing only adding that the Father had bidden him to haue care of his braine and to eate some good broathes that he might be able to sleepe And the day before the Iudges hauing enquired of him whether he had not demanded of F. de Aubigny if he ought not to confesse such visions as exceeded the common course and namely about killing Kings the sayd offender answered noe Being demāded whether he had no other speach with him and if he neuer saw him but that time he likewise answered noe Being demanded againe when the Father was present why he
To whom we may adde Monsieur Forget a Doctor of Sorbō and many Princes and Lordes of the Court to omit the rest And finally the Lord Bishop of Paris knoweth that Monsieur de Laual was Catholike before Fa. Cotōs going to these exorcismes and therfore it is incredible that the Fa. would demaund what should be the issue of his conuersion which notwithstanding Anti-Coton setteth downe in the first place Pag. 140. The next obiection concerning the Spaniard who should come addressed to Fa. Coton with intention to kill the King is such an impudent and incredible slaunder that it deserueth no answere since that it is against all reason and sense that Fa. Coton or any other of his coate should consent to the death of him who had been so great a fauourer and promotor of their whole Order And besides Monsieur de Lomenye Secretary of Estate and in particuler of the Kingdome of Nauar of Bearne hath testified in the presence of the Lord Bishops of Mascon and Sisteron that al the letters of Monsieur de la Forze Lieutenāt for the King in Bearne passed through his hāds that he neuer saw any such matter in them out of which notwithstanding this calumniation is only auouched Thirdly Anti-Coton obiecteth that F. Coton had written the late Kinges Confession into Spaine Pag. 142. and for that cause was in disgrace the space of 6. weekes And that the yong King who now is hearing therof saied to the Father that he vvould tell him nothing because he vvould write it into Spaine as he had donne his Fathers Confession But first noe man euer perceaued that Fa. Coton was in disgrace with the late King for the space of 6. houres neyther were it any way probable that his Maiestie would haue contynued to confesse vnto him vntill his dying day if he had either knowen or suspected any such matter True it is that F. Coton himselfe requested the King oftentimes to make choice of another Confessarius in particuler of the Lo. Archbishop of Ambrun by reason of his great vertue and singular pietie vsing the help of his brother also to that end but his Maiesty answered him twice that he would neuer take any other And surely it is strange to see how this Calumniator is not ashamed to accuse Fa. Coton now of reuealing the Kinges Confession no more then he was before to charge Fa. Fronton with a speach which might seeme too strict and rigorous in this point As for that of the yong King the Queene herselfe hath taken the paines to make inquiry being astonished to heare so strange a report And she hath found the truth to be that his Maiestie neuer heard of any such matter much lesse vsed any such words to Fa. Coton who retayneth the same place now which he had before in his Fathers time Fourthly this Calumniator addeth Pag. 150. that Fa. Coton hauing obtayned leaue to speake with Rauaillac in prisō bid him take heed least he did accuse the innocēt fearing least he would accuse the Iesuits But first Fa. Coton went not to the prison of his owne accord but by the Queenes commandement as all the Court knoweth Secondly he vsed no such wordes to Rauaillac but that vnfortunate wretch complayning that they would make him accuse either the Iesuits or the Princes to whō he had neuer imparted his designe the Fa. replied in these wordes Thou deceauest thy selfe none would haue thee to accuse the innocent but euery one desireth that thou shouldest say the truth And as thou shouldest be in the way of damnation by accusing the innocent so likewise thou shalt be in the same case vnlesse thou reuealest the culpable Thou must tell the truth if thou desirest to see his face who hath said I am the way the truth the life And of this are witnesses all that were present at that time who can also testifie which this Calumniator was loath to speake of that the miserable Parricide was moued by Fa. Cotons speaches to acknowledge his fault which he had not done till then and to shed aboundant teares desiring to haue a Confessarius by which occasion the Fa. said vnto him If thou hadst imparted thy tentation to a good Confessarius he would haue vsed the same reasons and perswasions to thee which thou hast heard of me he would haue made thee to haue knowne thy sinne and haue perswaded thee to haue giuē it ouer To which the poore wretch answered To whome would you haue had me gone to Confession he would haue accused me and caused my death Thou deceauest thy selfe said the Father a prudent Confessarius would haue diuerted thee from this heynous cryme he would haue put the life of the King in securitie and thine also Now we come to the last Chapter of Anti-Cotō for I think not any thing which he saith in his fourth Chapter concerning Fa. Cotons booke worth the noting vnlesse I should tell you of that lye and slander wherin he auoucheth that the King commanded F. Coton to write against F. Mariana Pag. 43. which my Author denieth and disproueth at large in the beginning of his booke wherfore omitting this let vs come to that obiection concerning his liuing in the Court Pag. 223. which he sayth is a scandall to the whole Church being a thing contrary not only to the Institution of all Monkes but particulerly to the Rules of the Iesuits And Cardinall Tolet houlds it for a generall truth that a Religious person who liueth in the Court is excommunicate albeit he hath leaue of his Superiour To which my Author answereth that in the third Article of the Societies establishment in France approued by the late King his Counsell and Court of Parlament it is ordeined that those of the Society shall haue ordinarily one of their Order about the King and he must be a Frenchman with sufficient authority to serue his Maiesty as a Preacher and to informe him of their proceedings as occasion shall be offered Wherefore if F. Coton should depart from the Court another of the same Society must necessarily come in his place Secondly my Author saith that the Fathers of the Society are no monkes yea their Institute and functions are altogeather differēt from those which a solitary life requireth and to this end he alleageth the second and third Rule of the Sūmary of your Constitutions The end of this Society is to attend with Gods grace not only to their owne saluation and perfection but also with the same grace to imploy themselues with all their forces to the saluation and perfection of their neighbours And a little after It is proper to our vocation to passe into diuers countries and to liue in any place of the world where Gods greater seruice and the help of soules is hoped for According to which sayth my Author we haue seene and by Gods help shall see what great fruit the Societie hath produced in the conuersion of Infidels in
Author protesteth hefore God and his Angels that he hath byn accompted alway and without exception one of the best Religious men of his Order But I will conclude with the praise which the late King was wont to giue him often affirming that Fa. Coton was the most humble Pag. 241. and modest spirit that euer he knew which commendation Monsieur du Perron Lord of Guette and a priuy Counselour will witnesse that he heard of his Maiesty the last Easter before his death And the truth is that if he were otherwise he could neuer haue continued in the Court with such estimation and good will of the Princes and principall personages For as Monsieur de la Forze told him one day before the King Pag. 221. he had need to take heed how he did walke for if he should chance to stumble there would not want those that would take him vp A BRIEFE NOTE Of the doctrine and proceedings of Anti-Coton and other Hugonots §. IIII. BY occasion of the obiections and calumniations which Anti-Coton hath heaped togeather against the Society my Author hath been inforced to touch something in the same kind against him and his fellow Hugonots but yet with such modestie and moderation that he hath not intermedled with any their personall crimes but only with such errours as are committed in this booke which he answereth or belong to those poynts of doctrine which are imputed and obiected against the Society that is concerning Equiuocation and the killing of Kinges For the third of the secrecy of Confession appertayneth not to thē who are professed enemies to that holy Sacrament And if some in England be content sometimes to take any such mattter vpon them yet they doe it not with any obligation or obseruation of secrecie as the world knoweth VVherefore let vs briefly see what my Author declareth concerning their practise doctrine in the other two points First then he demandeth of the Hugonots Pag. 67. whether they neuer made shew to agree with the Lutherans to the end they might the more easily impugne Catholicks Secondly he telleth them that they would seeme to accommodate themselues to the Protestants in England notwithstanding they mislike so greatly their Church-gouernment their giuing of Orders and Confirmation their celebrating the Feasts of Lord and Sauiour of the Blessed Virgin his Mother of the Apostles and first Martyrs their vsing the signe of the Crosse their saying the Canonicall houres the retayning Priestly ornaments and the like Thirdly he sheweth how Theodore Beza the yeare 1556. affirmed in his Confession of Faith to draw the Lutherans to his sect that the body of our Sauiour was verè realiter truly and really in the Supper adding that the Churches of Switzerland and of Geneua did belieue the same and neuerthelesse when he did see himselfe contradicted and refused by the Zuinglians his answer was that he spake not of the Lords supper which is celebrated vpon earth but of that which shal be in heauen Lib. 4. Instit c. 1. §. 2 In paruo Catechis Lib. 4. Instit c. 1. §. 4. Lib. 4. Instit c 16. §. 24. 25. c. 1 §. 7. Lib. 3. Instit c. 2. §. 16.17 18. where our Sauiour will be present verè realiter Fourthly Caluin in one place acknowledgeth two Churches the one visible and the other inuisible And in another place he admitteth only the inuisible which comprehendeth the elect Fiftly the same Caluin in one place denieth that any man can be saued out of the visible Church in another affirmeth that the children of the faithfull which dy without Baptisme may be saued although they be out of the Church Sixtly he willeth Anti-Coton to make these two propositions of Caluin agree Euery faithfull man is assured by the certainty of faith that he is iust and that his sinnes are forgiuen him and that he who hath not this certainety is not a faithfull man And this other Ibidem No man knoweth assuredly whether he hath true faith or no and euery man may be deceiued in this Lib. 3. Inst c. 13. §. 5. Seauenthly the same Caluin affirmeth in one place That concerning Iustification Faith is wholy passiue In Antid Concil Trid. sess 6. can 9. 11. Lib. de ve ra reform Eccles In Antid Concil In consēs de re Sacrament In 1. Cor. cap. 11. And in another That faith iustifieth and is the true cause of Iustification Eightly in one place he sayth That we are neuer reconciled to God but that togeather we receaue inherent Iustice. And in another I maintaine saith he that it is false that iustice is either a quality or habit which remaineth in vs. Ninthly the same Caluin in one place sayth that it is necessary for our Lords Body to be as far separated from vs as heauen is distant from the earth And in another I conclude saith he that the Body of Iesus Christ is giuen vnto vs really as they say in the supper Where we must note saith my Author that he doth not only say that we take the body which he might interprete by faith but that it is giuen vs which cannot be vnderstood but of the present reality and reall presence Thus much for Caluin in whom in the rest which haue hitherto been spoken of there is so much the more difficulty because all the exāples produced are in matters of fayth in which none but heretickes hould it lawfull to equiuocate Now my Author commeth to Anti-Cotō chargeth him with dissimulatiō Pag. 69. because vnder the colour of impugning the Iesuits doctrine concerning Tyrants the Secret of Confession Equiuocation Obedience due to the Pope or in particuler by Religious men to Bishops their Generals others Superiors he impugneth the common beliefe of the Church Likewise he accuseth him of feigning at the least whē citing Siluester Nauar Eudemon-Ioannes like a Calumniator to make his Reader belieue that this was the doctrine of the Iesuits only he hath concealed many other both ancient modern Authors who teach the same and are alledged by the three which he nameth Thirdly he conuinceth him of double manifest malice when in the citation of Siluester Accusatio 5. quaest 13. he omitteth as well in the latin in his margent as in french in his text one of his principall reasons contayned in these wordes Quia eo casu cùm non sit eius subditus non tenetur dicere veritatem ad eius intentionem Because in that case since he is not his subiect he is not bound to say the truth according to his intention which wordes followed immediatly after those which the calumniator alledged Fourthly he asketh him whether it be not to equiuocate dissemble deceaue to call himself a Catholike being an Hugonot Fifthly he chargeth him which imputing the death of the late King to Fa. Mariana wheras he knew himself in his conscience that this was very false Which may likewise