performed by these places alleadged yow haue seene 28. Finally to stand no longer vpon this whether we or they Catholicks or Protestantes doe attribute more to popular licence against Princes when they giue not contentment may aboundantly be seene in that we haue set downe before and will ensue afterward both of their doctrine and practises in like occasions And so much of this first charge now will we passe to the second 29. The second is that we ascribe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 power and souer aignty ouer Kings vnto the Pope wherin first what he saith of ciuill souer aignty is a meere fiction and calumniation of his owne if it be out of the Popes owne temporall Dominions For we ascribe no such vnto him ouer other Princes or their subiects but that authority or soueraignty only which Catholicke doctrine ascribeth to the Bishop of Rome as Successor to S. Peter Prince of the Apostles spirituall head of the vniuersall visible Church of Christ which is only spirituall for spirituall ends to wit for the direction and saluation of soules And if at any time he be forced to passe further then this and by a certeine consequence to deale in some temporall affaires also it must be only indirectly in defence or conseruation of the said spirituall that is to say when the said spirituall power apperteining to soules cannot other wise be defended or conserued as more largely hath byn treated before 30. This then is the summe and substance of Catholicke doctrine about this point of the Popes authority which from the beginning of Christianity hath byn acknowledged in Gods Church and in no place more then in England where it hath byn both held practised from the very first Christened King of our nation Ethelbert vnto K. Henry the 8. for the space of almost a thousand yeares without interruption as largely and aboundantly hath byn shewed and laied forth to the view of all men in a late booke written in answere to S. Edward Cookes fifth part of Reportes and this with great honor prosperity of the Princes therof and vnion of their people vnder their gouernment and without such odious or turbulent inferences as now are made therevpon by vnquiet spirittes that would set at warre euen mens imaginations in the ayer therby to mainteine disunion discorde and diffidence betweene Princes and namely betweene our present noble Soueraigne and his Catholicke subiects 31. And first of all let vs heare this turbulent T. M. how vpon the enuy of this authority he frameth and foundeth all his ensuing reasons VVe demaunde saith he how farre these pretended powers of people Pope may extende and heervpon we argue To which I answere that in imagination they may extend so farre as any fantasticall braine shall list to draw them but in the true meaning of Catholicke reall doctrine they can extend no further then hath byn declared And as for the popular power of people ouer Princes we haue now refuted the calumniation shewed that it is a mere fiction of his owne and no position of ours and that his Protestant doctrine doth ascribe much more licence to popular tumult then the Catholicke without comparison and for that of the Pope I haue declared how it is to be vnderstood to be of his owne nature in spirituall affaires only without preiudice of ciuill Princely gouernement at all and so the practice of the worlde and experience of so many Princes great States and Monarches liuing quietly securely vnder the same authority both in former times and ours most euidently doth proue and confirme 32. But yet let vs see and consider how falsely and calumniously this Make-bate doth herevpon argue in his third reason inferring for his assumption or minor proposition thus But all Popish Priestes vpon this pretended Supremacy and prerogatiue of Pope and people doe vtterly abolish the title of succession in all Protestant Princes Ergo. Wherin to shew him a notable liar it shall be sufficient to name all the Protestant Princes that haue had title of successiō in our coūtrey for therof he speaketh principally since the name of Protestant hath byn heard of in the world being three in number to wit K. Edward the sixt Q. Elizabeth and K. Iames that now raigneth all which were admitted peaceably to their Crownes as well by Priestes as Catholicke people who notwithstanding in some of their admissions wanted not meanes to haue wrought disturbances as the world knoweth so as if one instance only doth truly ouerthrow any general proposition how much more doth this triple instance not able to be denied ouerthrow and cast to the ground this vniuersal false assertion of T. M. which auerreth That all Popish Priests 〈◊〉 vtterly abolish the Succession of all Protestant Princes Will he not be ashamed to see himself cōuinced ofso great and shameles ouerlashing 33. And on the other side one only Catholicke Princesse being to succeed in this time to wit Q. Mary we know what resistance the Protestants made both by bookes sermons Treatises and open armes and how many Rebellions conspiracies robberies priuy slaughters and other impediments were designed and practised afterward during the few yeares she raigned we know also what was executed against the gouernment and liues of the two noble Catholicke Queenes her neerest neighbours one of them most straitly conioyned in bloud that raigned at that time in Scotland to omit others before mētioned that were debarred from their lawfull succession or excluded from their rightfull possession for their Religion in Sweueland Flanders other places as cannot be denied 34. Wherfore it is more then extraordinary impudency in T. M. to charge vs with that which is either peculier or more eminent in themselues and false in vs and what or how farre this fellow may be trusted in these his assertions may be gathered by the last sentence of all his discourse in this matter where he hath these wordes F. Persons in his Doleman doth pronounce sentence that whosoeuer shall consent to the succession of a Protestant Prince is a most grieuous and damnable 〈◊〉 And is it so in deed Syr 〈◊〉 and will yow stand to it and leese your credit if this be falsely or calumniously alleadged then if yow please let vs heare the Authors owne wordes 35. And now saith he to apply all this to our purpose for England and for the matter we haue in hand I affirme and hold that for any man to giue his helpe consent or assistance towardes the making of a King whome he iudgeth or belieueth to be faulty in Religion and consequently would aduance no Religion or the wrong if he were in authority is a most grieuous damnable sinne to him that doth it of what side soeuer the truth be or how good or bad soeuer the party be that is preferred So he And his reason is for that he should sinne against his owne conscience in furthering such aKing And is
him so vrging an occasion as by his friendes is thought that in the conueniency of reason and honour he coulde not well omit to accept therof as he did and performed the enterprise in such manner as might be expected at his L. handes to wit as himself writeth of his Maiesties speach in the Parlament Euery line declaring the vvorkeman 19. Only I may not let passe to note by the way that in two points of 〈◊〉 touched by him of the Popes authority concerning Princes and the lawfulnes of Equiuocation in certaine cases as they are matters not apperteining properly to his faculty and profession so must I thinke that his Deuine did somewhat mistake or misinforme him therin For of the first thus he writeth that he hath byn a long time sory that some cleere explication of the Papall authority hath not byn made by some publicke and definitiue sentence orthodoxall c. He addeth further this reason of his desire That not only those Princes vvhich acknovvledge this Superiority might be secured from feares and iealosies of continuall treasons and bloudy Assassinates against their persons but those Kings also vvhich doe not approue the same yet vvould faine reserue a charitable opinion of their subiectes might knovv hovv farre to repose themselues in their fidelity in ciuill obedience hovvsoeuer they see them deuided from them in point of conscience c. 20. To the former clause touching his L. desire to haue the matter defined and declared his Deuine might easely haue informed him that among Catholicke people the matter is cleare and sufficiently defined and declared in all pointes wherin there may be any doubt concerning this affaire As for example in three thinges question may be made first whether any authority were left by Christ in his Church and Christian common-wealth to restraine or represse censure or iudge any exorbitant and pernicious excesse of Great men States or Princes or that he had left them remediles wholy by any ordinary authority In which case as in other common-wealthes that are not Christian all Philosophers law-makers Senatours Counsellours Historiographers and other sortes of soundest wisedome prudence and experience either Iew or Gentile haue from the beginning of the world concurred in this that God and nature hath left some sufficient authority in euery common wealth for the lawfull and orderly redressing of those euilles euen in the highest persons Nor did euer Philosopher of name or law-maker hitherto deny this assertion as founded in the very law of nature nations and reason it selfe 21. So when Christ our Sauiour came to found his common-wealth of Christians in farre more perfection then other states had byn established before subiecting temporall thinges to spirituall according to the degree of their natures endes and eminencies and appointing a supreme vniuersall Gouernour in the one with a generall charge to looke to all his sheepe without exception of great or small people or potentates vpon these suppositions I say all Catholicke learned men do ground and 〈◊〉 euer grounded that in Christian common-wealthes not only the foresaid ordinary authority is left which euery other state and Kingdome had by God and nature to preserue and protect themselues in the cases before laid downe but further also for more sure and orderly proceeding therin that the supreme care iudgment direction and censure of this matter was left principally by Christ our Sauiour vnto the said supreme Gouernour and Pastour of his Church and common-wealth And in this there is no difference in opinion or beliefe betweene any sorte of Catholickes whatsoeuer so they be Catholickes though in particular cases diuersity of persons time place cause and other circumstances may moue some diuersity of opinions And thus much of the first question 22. The second may be about the manner how this authority or in what sorte it was giuen by Christ to his said supreme Pastour whether directly or indirectly immediatly or by a certaine consequence As for example whether Christ as he gaue the generall charge of his sheepe to S. Peter and his Successours directly and immediatly in spirituall matters by that commission three times repeated in S. Iohn Pasce oues meas which wordes include according to Catholicke exposition not only authority to feed but to gouerne also direct restraine cure represse and correct when need is as we see it doth appertaine to a temporall sheepheardes office so whether with this commission in spirituall affaires our Sauiour gaue also immediatly and directly the charge and ouersight of temporalities in like manner or rather indirectly and by a certaine consequence that is to say that when the gouernment of spirituall affaires to wit of soules to their eternall blisse and saluation is so letted or impugned by any temporall gouernours as the said spirituall commission cannot be executed without redresse or remedy in such cases and not otherwise the said supreme pastour to haue authority to proceed also against the said temporall Gouernours for defence and preseruation of his spirituall charge Of which question the Canonistes doe commonly defend the first part but Catholicke Deuines for the most part the second but both partes fully agree that there is such an Authority lefte by Christ in his Church for remedy of vrgent cases for that otherwise he should not haue sufficiently prouided for the necessity therof So as this difference of the manner maketh no difference at all in the thing it selfe 23. The third question may be about the causes for which this authority may be vsed as also the forme of proceeding to be obserued therin wherabout there are so many particularities to be considered as are ouerlong for this place only it is sufficient for Catholicke men to know that this may not be done without iust cause graue and vrgent motiues and due forme also of proceeding by admonition preuention intercession and other like preambles prescribed by Ecclesiasticall Canons to be obserued wherby my Lordships doubtes of feares and ielosies of continuall treasons and bloudy assassinates may iustly be remoued For that this authority doth not only not allow any such wicked or vnlawfull attemptes of priuate men but doth also expressely and publickly condemne the same and the doctrine therof as may appeare not only by the condemnation of VVicklifs wicked article in the Councell of Constance wherin he affirmed That it vvas lavvfull for euery priuate man to kill any Prince vvhome he held to be a Tyrant but also by like condemnation of Caluin Beza Ottoman Bucchanan Knox Goodman and others of that sect who hold and practice in effect the same doctrine of VVickliffe concerning Princes if not worse as shall more largely and particularly be declared afterward in the first and fourth Chapters of this Treatise And this I desire may satisfy his Lordship for the present vntill we come to the foresaid places where better occasion in this kind will be offered 24. As for the second point touched by his Lordship about the
two manners of spirit in Protestant Catholicke subiectes doe best content him and which of them he may thinke more sure or dangerous vnto him For if we looke ouer the ancient recordes of our countries for a thousand yeares before while English men were Catholicke we shall not find so much violent and barbarous dealing with their 〈◊〉 as I haue heere recounted in lesse then thirty within the compasse of one only Kingdome vnder the Protestantes 26. And if we compare the obiections made heere against vs by T. M. in this his calumnious pamphlet as in the sequēt Chapter more particulerly you shall see discussed with these and the like actions of their people they are very trifles and streyninges in respect of these other As for example Doleman is accused to write that The common-wealth hath authority to choose to themselues a King when they haue none and to limit him lawes wherby they would be gouerned And that of Doctor Stapleton That the people or multitude was not made for the Princes sake but the Prince for the people That Religion is is to be had in consideration in choice or admittance 〈◊〉 a King where choice and admittance is permitted That the Pope being head of the Catholicke Church may in some cases and for some causes dispense in oathes That he may censure Princes vpon iust causes though not in temporall matters but indirectly only and vpon such necessity as no other remedy can be found for 〈◊〉 of the spirituall good of his subiectes That euill 〈◊〉 declyning into Tyranny may be repressed but not by priuate men or popular mutiny 27. All these pointes I say and diuers others which this fellow doth so greatly exaggerate and odiously amplify against vs are so ouerrunne by them both in doctrine and practice if we compare them as they scarse admit any comparison at all especially if we cast our eyes vpon their present practice which representeth the liuely fruite of their doctrine as namely the most dangerous Rebellions of Caluinian and Trinitarian Sectaries euen now standing on foote in Hungary Austria and Transiluania against the Emperour and of like men in Polonia against that mild and most iust King and of Lutherans in Suetia of Puritanes Brownists Protestantes and the like in the Low-countries so many yeares now continued against their true and natural Prince as before hath byn declared which maketh another manner of impression and force of consequence if it be well pondered then doth the particuler temerarious fact of halfe a score of yong Centlemen put in despaire by apprehension of publique persecution without demerit of the persecuted or hope of remedy for the same though this also be inexcusable but the difference of euils is worthy of consideration especially with the more graue and prudent sort of people that are not carried away with passion or otherwise misled by sinister information 28. And thus hauing said sufficiently in generall about the first and chiefe ground of our Ministers calumniation concerning Rebellion and Conspiracies wherby he would make impossible the 〈◊〉 and mutuall vnion of Catholicke subiectes with Protestantes we shall passe on to his second pillar of impugnation named by him The doctrine of Equiuocation but yet first we thinke it expedient to examine in a seuerall Chapter the particuler reasons which he hath framed for some shew of proofe to this his seditious assertion TEN REASONS OR RATHER CALVMNIATIONS BROVGHT BY T. M. For maintenance of his former Proposition That Catholicke people are intolerable in a Protestant gouernment in respect of disloyalty conspiracies and Rebellion Confuted and returned vpon himself and his CHAP. II. ALbeit that which we haue laid forth before in the precedent Chapter for the ouerthrow of the slanderous iniurious imputations of our aduersary about Rebellion and conspiracies be sufficient I doubt not for satisfaction of any indifferent and dispassionate minde that is not ouerborne with preiudice yet haue I thought it expedient to passe somewhat further also and to enter the list with him for improuing his particuler reasons on which he would seene to found his calumniations wherin as nothing is so absurd or false according to the Oratours opinion but that by speech and smooth discourse it may be made in some eares probable at leastwise in the conceipt of him that speaketh and indeauoreth to deceaue another so this Minister T. M. for of that trade he is held now to be hauing designed to himself an argumēt wherby to make Catholickes odious and gathered togeather for that end diuers shewes or shadowes for the furniture of his forsaid found assertion that Catholickes are not tolerable in a Protestant State he intituleth them Pregnant obseruations directly prouing Remish schooles to be Seminaries of Rebellion in all Protestantes gouernment Wheras indeed they are not so much pregnant obseruations as malignant collections and inforced inferences vpon false groundes Neither do they at all either directly or indirectly proue that which he pretendeth as by examination shall presently appeare if it may please the Reader to hold an equall and indifferent eare in the meane space to the discussing of the controuersy 2. And first of all to make vp a competent number in forme of a decalogue he streineth himself much to bring out ten different reasons and in deed euery man may see that it is a streine for that all might haue byn vttered in two or three at the most if not in fewer for that all doe concerne in effect the Catholike doctrine about the Popes authority either in Princes or priuate mens affaires And herehence is deduced his first reason concerning the censures and punishments determined by Ecclesiasticall Canons against them that by the Church are denounced for Heretickes The second reason toucheth the said Popes authority spirituall 〈◊〉 secular Princes The third the hinderance of their succession by the same lawes The fourth the oath and obedience of their subiectes The fifth their excommunication and deposition The sixth the practice of their death by the Popes licence The 〈◊〉 the allowance and approbation therof The eight the Rebellion of Priestes whensoeuer they are able The ninth the dissoluing and euacuation of oathes by the Popes authority The last that Romish Priestes by the order of the Pope must professe seditious positions ex officio that is to say as he is a Romish Priest By which enumeration yow may see in deed that the poore man was more barren then pregnant and after his streine had partum difficilem a hard child-birth as may appeare by that which he hath brought forth to wit a mouse for a mountaine and therupon we may iustly say parturiunt montes c. We shall giue a short view ouer all his reasons The first Reason §. 1. THey who by their slanderous doctrine saith he doe make all Protestants by their common censure Heretickes so odious as vnworthy of any ciuill or naturall society must necessarily be iudged seditious intolerable amongst the
laid vpon them not only by Catholickes but also by the most renowned Protestant writers that haue byn since that name and profession began And if we would alleadge much more out of the very Father of Protestancy it self Martin Luther we might haue store especially where he pronouÌ„ceth this iudiciall sentence of them all Haereticos seriò censemus alienos ab Ecclesia Dei Zuinglianos Sacramentarios omnes qui negant Christi corpus sanguinem ore carnali sumi in venerabili Sacramento We doe vnfeynedly hold for Heretickes and for aliens from the Church of God all Zuinglians and other Sacramentaries that doe deny Christes body and bloud to be receaued by our bodily mouth in the venerable Sacrament 16. Behold heere both Heresy and excommunication or separation from the Church of God auerred against both Zuinglians and Caluinists by him that was their chiefest parent and Patriarch and in other places of his workes the same Luther hath many more particulers to this purpose as namely that men must fly the bookes and doctrine of Zuinglius and his followers Non secus ac tartarei Daemonis venenum no otherwise then the poison of the diuell of hell And yet further that They are not to be held in the number of Christians for that they teach no one article of Christian doctrine without corruption and are seauen times worse then Papists c. Wherby is euident that this charge of Heresy and excommunication proceedeth not against Caluinists from vs only but much more eagerly froÌ„ their owne brethren consequently it is with very little discretion brought in by the Minister T. M. against vs as a singuler fault of ours wherof we are to treat more afterward in some occasions that will be offered 17. But now as for the penalties conteyned in the Canon law against excommunicate Heretickes as depriuation of dignities losse of goods infamy imprisonment debarment from Sacraments and from conuersation with the like the answere is soone made that those externall punishments are not incurred ordinarily but after personall denunciation and condemnation by name For albeit the inward punishmentes that follow Heresy which are sinne and depriuation of grace excommunication and separation from Gods true Church and other spirituall losses theron depending be incurred by the obstinate holding or defending of any coÌ„demned Heresy whatsoeuer if the defender know the same to be condemned by the Church as both Holy Canons doe expressly denounce and Bulla Caenae Domini euery yeare 〈◊〉 on Maundy-Thursday doth confirme yet commonly are they not held for subiect to the other externall punishmentes and in particuler to be auoided and their company fled vntill by a lawfull Iudge he or they be denounced conuicted and condemned by name which we ascribe not to the Protestantes of England and therfore this charge was maliciously deuised by this Minister against vs to make vs odious 18. Nay we goe yet further for pacifying milding matters betweene vs that we doe not easily coÌ„demne or hold all and euery sorte of Protestantes Puritanes or the like sortes different at this day in our countrey from the Catholicks for absolute Heretickes but excusing them rather wherin we may by any charitable interpretation doe willingly lay hands where probably we may on that wise learned and discreet moderation of the famous doctor S. Augustine affirming to his friend Honoratus infected with the Manichean Heresy that there is a great difference betweene an Hereticke and one that belieueth Hereticks and is deceaued by them yow shall heare his owne wordes to that purpose Si mihi Honorate vnum atque idem videretur esse Haereticus Haereticis credens homo tam lingua quà m stylo in haec causa conquiescendum esse arbitrarer nunc verò cùm inter duo plurimùm inâ—ersit c. 19. If it had seemed to me friend Honoratus that an Hereticke a man belieuing Hereticks had byn al one thing I should haue thought it better to hold my peace in this cause betweene vs rather then to speake or write any thing therin but now seeing there is such great difference betweene these two I thought it not good to be silent with yow for so much as an Hereticke in my opinion is he that for some temporall respect or commodity but especially for vaine glory and singularity doth inuent or follow false and new opinions but he which belieueth such people is a man only deluded by a false imagination of truth piety So S. Augustine And hereby openeth to vs a dore to thinke charitably of many Protestants whome though we hold for deceaued yet not properly in S. Augustines meaning for Hereticks 20. And this doctrine teacheth the same Doctor in other places against the Donatistes saying that if a man should beleeue the heresy of Photinus for example who denied the distinction of three persons in God and the diuinity of Christ and should thinke it were the true Catholicke faith Istum nondum 〈◊〉 dico saith S. Augustine nisi manifestata sibi doctrina Catholicae fidei resistere maluerit illud quod tenebat elegerit I doe not thinke this man as yet to be an Hereticke except when the doctrine of the Catholicke faith to wit that which is held generally by all or the most Churches ouer Christendome being made cleere and manifest vnto him he shall resolue to resist the same and shall make choice of that which before he held so as now this choice or election with obstinate resolution to hold and defend the same against the publicke authority of the Church maketh that to be properly heresy which before was but error which error though it might be in it self damnable yet nothing so much as when it passeth into the nature of heresy both which pointes are seene by that which the said Holy Father hath in another place to wit in his booke De haeresibus ad Quod-vult-Deum where hauing recounted eighty and eight Heresies that had passed before his time vnto the Pelagians that were the last he concludeth thus There may be yet other Heresies besides these that I haue in this our worke recounted or there may rise vp other herafter whereof whosoeuer shall holde any one he shall not be a Christian Catholicke He doth not say he shall be an Hereticke properly but no Christian Catholicke which though it be sufficient to damnation if ignorance excuse him not yet nothing so great as if he were an hereticke for that as before we haue shewed out of S. Thomas the damnation of Iewes and Gentiles is much more tolerable then that of Heretickes 21. And all these limitations and charitable moderations we doe willingly vse to calme and mitigate matters and to temper that intemperate breaking humour of this make-bate Minister T. M. and his companions that would put all in combustion and desperate conuulsion And so much of this first reason the rest we shall passe ouer with greater breuity To his
next ensuing whose title is Quid in Tyrannide subdit is agendum sit What subiectes ought to doe in case of tyranny he sheweth two sortes of Tyranny and Tyrantes the one that inuadeth vniustly another mans dominions against the will authority of his King and Prince the other that leauing the office of a King and good Prince in protecting his people and Religion iustice among them turneth himselfe wholy to their affliction and oppression and that in the former case the people are taught by many examples of Scriptures to resist by armes where they can but in the second much more moderation is to be vsed all meanes of humble suite intreaty intercession prayer to God amendment of life and pacification to be vsed Quod si haec non iuuent saith he Superiorem in tempor alibus vti Reges Princeps non agnoscit tunc supremus Ecclesiae Pastor interpellandus occurrit qui bonis aequis subditorum querelis audit is plura Deo cooperante ratione auctoritate praestare poterit quà m vnquam 〈◊〉 armis impetrabit but if these meanes doe not help saith Cunerus and that the Prince doe acknowledge no Superiour in temporall causes as Kinges doe not then is the Supreme Pastor of the Church to be called vpon who hauing heard the iust good complaintes of the Subiects God assisting him shall be able to effectuate more by reason and authority with their Prince then euer the people themselues should haue obteyned by force of armes Thus he 48. And now will T. M. allow this also for deuinely spoken If he doe then we differ not in opinion If he doe not why doth he so often and continually cull out and cut of sentences of Authors that write directly against him as this Bishop Cunerus the Lawier Carerius the Deuine Bozius the Iesuites Bellarmine Salmeron Azor and others And yet I must admonish the Reader heere againe that if he compare the text it selfe of Cunerus with that which heere T. M. setteth downe in Latin and then the Latin with that he Englisheth he shall find such mangling vpon mangling by cutting of leauing out altering whole sentēces as he will see that this man can scarce deale truly in any thing And thus much for his first answere out of Cunerus making much more against him then for him as yow haue seene 49. And I leaue to discusse the Authority of S. Augustine which out of Cunerus he also alleadgeth for otherwise then out of our Authors bookes he hath little or nothing in any matter it being no lesse mangled by this man then is the text of Cunerus it selfe as euery one will finde that shall read Cunerus not so much as one note of c. being left any where lightly to signify that somewhat is cut of but all running togeather as if it were continuall speach in the Author whereas in deed they be but peeces scraps ioyned togeather and those also commonly with much corruption wherof I dare auouch that the Author shall finde aboue a hundred examples in this fraudulent Reply which is wholy patched vp out of the distracted sentences of our owne Authors by this art 50. But now to his second answere to the former obiection that Gods prouidence must needes haue lef't some remedy for the danger that may occurre by euill gouernment of Princes c. The second is saith he the consideration of examples of the primitiue Church when for the space of three hundred yeares it was in grieuous persecution there was found no power on earth to restraine that earthly power was therfore God wanting to his Church God forbid Nay rather he was not wanting for it is written Vertue is perfected in infirmity And againe As gold is purged in the fire so by affliction c. Because when the outward man suffereth the inward man is renewed and when I am weake then am I strong So he And doe yow see how patient and meeke this man is become now when there is nothing to suffer did his Protestant-Authors before mencioned write or teach this doctrine whē they were pressed by their Catholicke Princes to be quiet Or if this should be preached now at this day in Holland Zeland Frizeland Hungary Polonia Zweueland Transiluania where actually Protestantes are in armes against their naturall and lawfull Princes would it be receaued as currant and Euangelicall Would the examples of primitiue martyrs when there was scarce any temporall common-wealth extant among Christians be sufficient to prescribe a forme of patience sufferance to these men Why doe they not then put it in practice And why cease they not according to this mans doctrine from so notorious tumultuations against their lawfull Princes Why is not this doctrine of the Scripture of perfecting their vertue by bearing and suffering admitted by them I confesse it ought to be soe with all particuler men in their afflictions oppressions and tribulations and so teach our Doctors as before yow haue heard though when the hurt and danger concerneth a common wealth established in Christian Religion there be other considerations to be had as before hath byn set downe 51. But Protestantes obserue neither the one nor the other but both in particuler and common breake forth when they are streyned or discontēted into the vttermost violence they can and their Doctores are ready presently to defend them yea and to goe to the feild with them if need be against their Princes as experience hath taught vs both in Zwitzerland Scotland France and other places Wherfore this pretended preaching of patience and sufferance of T. M. in this place both in his outward and inward man is to small purpose 52. Wherfore his third answere is to the former obiection The view as he saith of our Popish principles wherby we teach that the Pope may not be iudged by any person vpon earth whether secular or Ecclesiasticall nor by a General Councel though he should doe something contrary to the vniuersall State of the Church neglect the Canons spare offenderes oppresse innocentes and the like For which he citeth both Bellarmine Carerius and Azor and then addeth that the Pope cannot be deposed for any of these no not though saith he to vse the wordes of your Pope himselfe one placed in the calendes of your martyrs he should carry many people with himselfe to hell yet no mortall creature may presume to say why doe yow so Thus he 53. Whervnto I answere first that all which Bellarmine Carerius Azorius and other Catholicke writers doe affirme of the Popes preheminency of authority immediatly vnder Christ so as he hath no Superiour Iudge betweene Christ and him that may sit in iudgment ouer him or giue sentence vpon him for matters of yll life tendeth only to shew that as he receiueth his supreame charge immediatly from Christ so by him must he be iudged not by man though
in his English translation which is that which most importeth his simple Reader that looketh not into the Latin and this is that he translateth the former sentence of the Canon thus as before yow haue heard Though he should carry many people with him to hell yet no mortall creature may presume to say why doe yow so But in the Latin neither heere nor in the Canon it selfe is there any such interrogation at all as why doe yow so And therfore I may aske T. M. why doe yow ly so Or why doe yow delude your Reader so Or why do yow corrupt your Author so Or why doe yow translate in English for the abusing of your Reader that which neither your selfe doe set downe in your Latin text nor the Canon it selfe by yow cited hath it at all Is not this wilfull and malicious fraude Wherin when yow shall answere me directly and sincerly it shall be a great discharge of your credit with those who in the meane space will iustly hold yow for a deceauer 59. His fourth answere to the former argument of Gods prouidence is the difference he saith of Kings and Popes in this point for that the Papall power saith he which will be thought spirituall if it be euill may be the bane of soules the power of Princes is but corporall therfore feare them not because they can goe no further then the body Thus he And did euer man heare so wise a reason And cannot euill Kinges and Princes be the cause of corrupting soules also if they should liue wickedly permit or induce others to doe the same And what if they should be of an euill Religion as yow will say Q. Mary and K. Henry were and all Kinges vpward for many hundred yeares togeather who by Statutes and lawes forced men to follow the Religiō of that time did all this touch nothing the soule who would say it but T. M But he goeth forward in his application for that bodily Tyranny saith he worketh in the Godly patience but the spirituall Tyranny doth captiuate the inward soule This now is as good as the former and is a difference without diuersity so farre as concerneth our affaire that a man may with patience if he will resist both the one and the other And euen now we haue seene that when any Pope shal decline from the common receaued faith of Christendome he cannot captiuate other men but is deposed himselfe Wherfore this mans conclusion is very simple saying Therfore heere is need according to Gods prouidence of power to depose so desperate a spirituall euill wherof it is written if the salte want his saltenesse it is good for nothing but to be cast vpon the donghill Marke then that concerning the spirituall that God hath ordeined eiiciatur foras let it be cast out but concerning the temporall resiste not the power 60. Lo heere and doe not these men find Scriptures for all purposes This fellow hath found a text that all spirituall power when it misliketh them must be cast to the donghill and no temporall must be resisted and yet he that shall read the first place by him alleadged out of S. Matthew shall find that the lacke of saltenesse is expresly meant of the want of good life and edification especially in Priestes and Preachers and yet is it no precept as this man would haue it to cast them al to the donghill but that salte leesing his taste is fit for nothing but to that vse S. Paul in like manner to the Romanes doth not more forbid resisting of temporall authority then of spirituall but commaundeth to obey both the one and the other which this man applieth only to temporall which he would haue exalted obeyed and respected and the other contemned and cast to the donghill Oh that he had byn worthy to haue byn the scholler of S. Chrysostome S. Gregory Nazianzen or S. Ambrose before cited who so highly preferred spirituall authority before temporall how would they haue rated him if he would not haue byn better instructed or more piously affected No doubt eiecissent foras they would haue cast him forth to the donghill in deed and there haue left him and so doe we in this matter not meaning to follow him any further except he reasoned more groundedly or dealt more sincerly 61. Yet in one word to answere his comparison we say that both temporall spirituall Magistrates may doe hurte both to body and soule for as the temporall may preiudice also the soule as now hath byn said so may the spirituall afflict in like manner the body as when the Pope or Bishoppes doe burne Heretikes so as in this respect this distinction of T. M. is to no purpose yet doe we also say that when spirituall authority is abused it is more pernicious preiudiciall then the other Quia corruptio optimi est pessima The best thinges become worst when they are peruerted and spirituall diseases especially belonging to faith be more pernicious then corporall for which cause God had so much care to prouide for the preuention therof in his Christian Church for the conseruation of true faith by the authority vnion visibility succession of the said Church and diligence of Doctores Teachers Synodes Councels and other meanes therin vsed and by his assistance of infallibility to the head therof which head though in respect of his eminent authority he haue no Superiours to Iudge or chastise him except in case of heresy as hath byn said yet hath he many and effectuall meanes wherby to be admonished informed stirred vp and moued so as he being but one in the world and furnished with these helpes bringeth farre lesse danger and inconuenience then if all temporall Princes who are many had the like priuiledge and immunity And this euery reasonable man out of reason it selfe will easily see consider 62. As also this other point of no small or meane importance to wit that English Protestantes pretending temporall Princes to be supreame and without Iudge or Superiour in matters of Religion as well as ciuill and secular they incurre a farre greater inconuenience therby then they would seeme to lay vpon vs. For that if any temporall Prince as Supreame in both causes would take vpon him the approbation or admission of any sect or heresy whatsoeuer they haue no remedy at all according to the principles of their doctrine wheras we say the Pope in this case may and must be deposed by force of his subiectes all Christian Princes ioined togeather against him so as in place of one generall Pope which in this case is vnder authority they make so many particuler Popes as are particuler Kings temporall Princes throughout all Christendome that are absolute and consequently without all remedy for offences temporall or spirituall in manners or faith 63. And now let vs imagine what variety of sectes and schismes would haue byn at this day in Christianity if for
a thousand and six hundred yeares which Christian Religion hath endured this doctrine of liberty and immunity of temporall Princes to belieue hold and defend what they list had byn receaued and practised for good and currant vnto this time From which singuler inconuenience danger and desperate desolation the doctrine beliefe of the only Bishop of Rome his Supreame authority and exercise therof hath chiefly deliuered vs as to all men is euident And this only reason were sufficient in all reason to refute this mans ydle confutation of that Supremacy heere pretended which confutation standing vpon so feeble and ridiculous groundes as now in part yow haue seene supported principally by certaine new shifts and iugglinges scarcely vsed by any before by casting out shaddowes of our Catholicke Authors sayinges and sentences as making for him though I meane to passe no further in impugning his said grondes which are of so small weight as yow haue seene yet doe I not thinke it amisse to adde another seuerall Chapter for better discouering of the said iugglinges vsed by him in this short Treatise not conteyning much aboue twenty 〈◊〉 in all For by this little yow may gather what a volume might be framed of his false dealings if we would dwell any longer therin A BRIEF VIEVV OF CERTAINE NOTORIOVS FALSE AND FRAVDVLENT DEALINGS VSED BY T.M. In this his short seuerall Treatise against the Popes Supremacy As also sundry examples of the like proceeding in the former Part of his deceiptfull Reply CHAP. VI. IT is the saying both of Philosophers and Deuines Bonum nisi bene fiat bonum non esse A good thing except it be well rightly done is not good As for example if a man would relieue the necessity of poore and distressed people with almes gotten by stealth or robbery albeit giuing of alms of it selfe be a good thing yet for that it is not heere lawfully performed in this case it is not good nor lawfull So M. Thomas Morton taking vpon him to confute the Popes Supremacy ouer Kinges and Princes thought no doubt to doe a good worke therin at least-wise bonum vtile a profitable good thing for himself in regard of some fauour or beneuolence which he might hope to gaine with some Prince therby to his preferment but not performing the same by lawfull meanes of truth but of sleightes not withstanding to his Maiesty he tearmeth himself the Minister of simple truth though it should proue vtile yet not honestum that is for his gaine but not for his credit or conscience and consequently deserueth rather disgrace then estimation euen with those whome most he desired to gratify in that affaire 2. For demonstration wherof though I suppose to haue said sufficient before both in the second fourth and fifth Chapters by occasion of matters that occurred in discussion betweene vs yet now hauing determined with my self to passe on no further in the particuler refutatiō of this his Treatise as a thing not worth the time to be lost therin and handled far better by diuers of his owne side before him namely by M. Iewell M. Horne D. Iohn Reinoldes M. Bilson and some others in their bookes of this subiect I thought good notwithstanding for some kinde of recompence of this my breuity in answering so simple and idle a Treatise to ad some few examples more in this place of other corruptions and falsifications practized by him in this his confutation not of all for that alone would require a great booke but of some competent number wherby the Reader may ghesse at the rest his Maiesty take some proofe of the extraordinary vanity of that vaunt wherwith he presented himself to his Highnes in the very first entrance of his Epistle dedicatory in so constant assurance of an vpright conscience to vse his owne wordes as that he would willingly remit that iust aduantage against his aduersary which the difference betweene a Minister of simple truth and a professed Equiuocator did offer vnto him Now then let vs enter to the examination it self 3. Wherin only the Reader is to be aduertised that wheras this man by a new deuise of his owne doth pretend to put downe the sayings of our Catholicke writers for his purpose and that both in Latin and English the one in the text and the other in the margent pretending therby to make them speake cōtrary one to the other A course saith he to the Kinges Maiesty which I professe in all disputes he dealeth so perfidiously therin to bring them to debate as commonly the simple fellow committeth three seuerall sortes of fraudes and falshood in most of his allegations First in corrupting the meaning of the Authors alledging them quite against their owne whole drift and intended discourse and conclusion therof Secondly in setting downe fraudulently the Latin text by peecing patching their sentences togeather that stand farre a sunder in the Authors themselues by dismembring others that were coherent before as often now wee haue complained Thirdly in translating the same by like fraude into English vsing manifest violence to the wordes and sense it selfe to get therby some shew of aduantage or at least wise to say somewhat All which sortes and kindes of shifts yow shall see expressed in the examples that are to ensue 4. In the second page of his pretended confutation he hath these wordes In the old Testament the Iesuites are forced to allow that the King was supreame ouer the Priestes in spirituall affaires and ordering Priestes For proofe wherof he citeth in the margent Salmeron a Iesuit a very learned man that hath left written in our dayes many volumes vpon the Ghospells Epistles of S. Paul and other partes of Scriptures and was one of the first ten that ioined themselues with the famous holy man Ignatius de Loyola for the beginning of that Religious order in which citation diuers notable corruptions are to be seene First for that Salmeron proueth the quite contrary in the place by this man quoted to wit that neuer Kinges were head of the Church or aboue Priestes by their ordinary Kingly authority in Ecclesiasticall matters in the new or old Testament and hauing proued the same largly he commeth at length to set downe obiections to the contrary and to solue answere them saying Sed contra hanc solidam veritatem c. But now against this sound truth by me hitherto confirmed I know that many thinges may be obiected which we are diligently to confute First then may be obiected that Kinges in the old Testament did sometimes prescribe vnto Priestes what they were to doe in sacred thinges as also did put some negligent Priestes from the execution of their office To which is answered Vbi id euenisset mirum esse non debere If it had so fallen out it had byn no maruaile for that the Synagogue of the Iewes albeit it conteined some iust men yet was it called rather an earthly then
a heauenly Kingdome insomuch as S. Augustine doth doubt whether in the old Testament the Kingdome of heauen was euer so much as named and much lesse promised for reward and therfore those things that were then done amōg them foreshewed only or prefigured diuine thinges that were to succeed vnder the new Testament the other being not diuine but humane and earthly So Salmeron 5. Heere then are sundry important corruptions fraudes vttered by T.M. the one that the Iesuites and namely Salmeron are inforced to allow the temporall King to haue byn Supreme ouer the high Priest in spirituall matters vnder the old law wheras he doth expressely affirme and prooue the contrary both out of the Scripture it selfe by the sacrifice appointed more worthy for the Priest then the Prince many other testimonies as that he must take the law interpretation therof at the Priestes hands that he must ingredi egredi ad verbum Sacerdotis goe in and out and proceed in his affaires by the word and direction of the Priest and the like as also by the testimony of Philo and Ioseph two learned Iewes and other reasons handled at large in this very disputation and in the self same place from whence this obiection is taken And this is the first falsification concerning the Authours meaning and principall drift 6. The second corruption is in the wordes as they ly in the Latin copy as they are by me before mentioned Vbi id euenisset mirum esse non debere If any such thing had fallen out as was obiected to wit that Kinges sometimes had prescribed to the Priests what they should doe in Ecclesiasticall things deposed some c. it had byn no maruaile for somuch as their Ecclesiasticall Kingdome or Synagogue was an earthly and imperfect thing but yet this proueth not that it was so but only it is spoken vpon a supposition which suppositiō this Minister that he might the more cunningly shift of and auoid left cut of purpose the most essentiall wordes therof Vbi id euenisset if that had happened c. as also for the same cause to make thinges more obscure after those words of Salmeron that stand in his text Synagoga Iudeorum dicebatur terrenum potius quà m caeleste regnum The Synagogue or Ecclesiasticall gouernment of the Iewes was called rather an earthly then a heauenly Kingdome wheras contrary-wise the Ecclesiasticall power in the Christian Church is euery where called Celestiall after those wordes I say this man cutteth of againe many lines that followed togeather with S. Augustines iudgmēt before touched which serued to make the Authors meaning more plaine and yet left no signe of c. wherby his Reader might vnderstand that somewhat was omitted but 〈◊〉 againe presently as though it had imediatly followed 〈◊〉 cùm populus Dei constet corpore animo carnalis pars in veteri populo primas tenebat Wheras Godes people doth consist of body and minde the carnall or bodily part did cheifly preuaile among the Iewes and heerwith endeth as though nothing more had ensued of that matter thrustnig out these wordes that immediatly followed and made the thing cleere which are Et ad spiritualia significanda constituebaiur and that kinde of earthly power was appointed to signify the spirituall that was to be in the new Testament wherby is euidently seene that Salmeron vnderstood not by carnalis pars and regnum terrenum the temporall Kingdome of Iury as this Minister doth insinuate to make the matter odious but the Ecclesiasticall gouernment of the Synagogue vnder the old law in respect of the Ecclesiasticall power in the new wherof the other was but an earthly figure or signification 7. But now the third corruption most egregious of all is in his English translation out of the Latin wordes of Salmeron for thus he translateth them in our name In the Synagogue of the Iewes saith Salmeron was a State rather earthly then heauenly so that in that people which was as in the body of a man consisting of body and soule the carnall part was more eminent meaning the temporall to haue byn supreame In which translation are many seuerall shifts and fraudes For wheras Salmeron saith Synagoga Iudeorum dicebatur potius terrenum quà m caeleste regnum the Synagogue or Ecclesiasticall power among the Iewes was called rather an earthly then a heauenly Kingdome he translateth it the Synagogue of the Iewes was a State rather earthly then heauenly and this to the end he might apply the word of earth to the temporal Prince and heauenly to the Iudaicall Priestes which is quite from Salmerons meaning Secondly those other wordes of Salmeron being Cùm populus Dei constet ex corpore animo wheras the people of God doe consist of body and minde meaning therby aswell Christians as Iewes and that the Iewes are as the bodily or carnall part of the man and the Christians the spirituall and consequently their Ecclesiasticall authority earthly and ours heauenly this fellow to deceaue his Reader putteth out first the word Dei the people of God and then translateth it in that people to wit the Iewes the carnall part was the more eminent meaning saith he the tēporall which is false for he speaketh expressely of the Ecclesiasticall power among the Iewes which he calleth carnall and terrene in respect of the spirituall Ecclesiasticall among the Christians and not the temporall or Kingly power vnder the old Testament as this man to make vs odious to temporall Princes as debasing their authority would haue it thought And Salmerons cōtraposition or antithesis is not betweene the temporall and Ecclesiasticall gouernment among the Iewes but betweene their Ecclesiasticall gouernment and ours that of the Synagogue and this of the Christian Church wherof the one he saith to be terrene earthly the other spirituall and heauenly the one infirme the other powerfull ouer soules c. So as all these sortes and kindes of corruptions being seene in this one little authority yow may imagine what will be found in the whole booke if a man had so much patience and time to leese as to discusse the same exactly through 8. A little after this againe he bringeth in an example of the King of Israell Ozias who for presuming to exercise the Priests office in offering of incense being first reprehended and resistest for the same by Azarias the high Priest and fourescore other Priestes with him in the Temple was for his presumption presently and publickly in all their sightes punished by God and stroken with a leprosy and therupon remoued by the authority of the said high Priest first from the Temple and common conuersation of men and then also from the gouernment or administration of his Kingdome the same being committed to his sonne Ioathan all the dayes of his Fathers life about which example M. Morton first of all bringeth in Doctor
is to bring matters to his purpose and yet will he needs stile him self The Minister of simple truth 12. It followeth in the 16. page thus Your deuise saith he of exemption of Priestes from the iurisdiction of temporall Princes in certaine cases is to crude to be disgested by any reasonable Deuine for as your Victoria saith Priestes besides that they are Ministers of the Church they are likewise members of the Common-wealth and a King is aswell a King of the Clergy as of the laity therfore the Clergy is subiect vnto the ciuill authority in temporall thinges for such matter is not ruled by any power spirituall A plaine demonstration So he And I say the same that indeed it is a plaine demonstration of his egregious falshood and abusing his Reader First in making him belieue that the learned man Franciscus de Victoria doth fauour him or his in this matter of the exemption of Priestes wheras in this very place heere cited by T. M. his first proposition of all in this matter is this Ecclesiastici iure sunt exempti c. I doe affirme that Ecclesiasticall men are by Law exempted and freed from ciuill power so as they may not be conuented before a secular Iudge either in criminall or ciuill causes the contrary doctrine to this is condemned for Hereticall among the articles of Iohn VVickliffe in the Councell of Constance So he And now see whether Victoria make for him or no or whether he disgested well this crude doctrine of Priestes exemption as this Ministers phrase is 13. Secondly if we consider either the English translation heere set downe out of the wordes of Victoria or his Latin text for ostentation sake put in the margent wee shall find so many and monstrous foule corruptions intercisions geldinges and mutilations as is a shame to behold and I beseech the learned Reader to haue patience to conferre but this one place only with the Author and he will rest instructed in the mās spirit for the rest but he must find them as I hà ue cited them heere in the margent and not as T. M. erroneously quoteth them if not of purpose to escape the examine For that Victoria hauing set downe his precedent generall proposition for the exemption of Clergy men that they were exempted Iure by Law he passeth on to examine in his second proposition Quo iure by what Law diuine or humane they are exempted and in his third he holdeth that Aliqua exemptio Clericorum est de iure Diuino That some kinde of exemptions of Clergy men from ciuill power is by diuine Law and not humane only and fourthly he commeth to this which heere is set downe by T. M. but not as he setteth it downe Our fourth proposition saith Victoria is that the persons of Clergy men are not absolutly and in all thinges exempted from ciuill power either by diuine or humane lawe which is euident by that Clergy men are bound to obey the temporall lawes of the Citty or Cōmon-wealth wherin they liue in those thinges that doe appertaine to the temporall gouernment and administration therof and doe not let or hinder Ecclesiasticall gouernment 14. These are the wordes of Victoria as they ly togeather in him and then after some argumentes interposed for his said conclusion he addeth also this proofe That for so much as Clergy mē besides this that they are Ministers of the Church are Citizens also of the Common-wealth they are bound to obey the temporall lawes of that Common-wealth or Prince in temporall affaires and then ensueth the last reason heere set downe in English by T. M. in these wordes Moreouer saith Victoria for that a King is King not only of laymen but of Clergy-men also therfore aliquo modo subiiciuntur ei in some sort they are subiect vnto him Which wordes aliquo modo in some sorte the Minister leaueth out and then it followeth immediatly in Victoria And for that Clergy-men are not gouerned in temporall matters by Ecclesiasticall power therfore they haue their temporall Prince vnto whome they are bound to yeeld obedience in temporall affaires 15. And this is all that Victoria hath in this matter in these very wordes And let any man consider the patching which T. M. vseth both in English and Latin in this place to make some shew for his fained demonstration out of Victoria and he will see how poore and miserable a man he is and how miserable a cause he defendeth And in particular let the very last proposition be noted which he citeth and Englisheth as out of Victoria to wit the Clergy is subiect vnto the ciuill authority in temporall thinges for such matter is not ruled by any power spirituall wherby he would haue his Reader to imagine that no spirituall power may haue authority to gouerne temporall matters wheras the wordes of Victoria are Clerici quantum ad temporalia non administrantur potestate Ecclesiastica that Clergy men for so much as appertaineth to temporall affaires are not gouerned by Ecclesiasticall power but by the temporall which there beareth rule So as this fellow by a subtile sleight changing the nominatiue case from Clerici non administrantur to temporalia non administrantur frameth his plaine demonstration out of plaine cosenage and forgery And is this naked innocency 16. From the page 18. vnto 27. he handleth togeather many sentences and authorities of ancient Fathers alledged by Catholicke Authors Cunerus Tolosanus and especially Barkleius to shew that the Apostles and their successours and those Fathers amongest the rest did not take armes against their Princes either Infidels or Christians but did rather suffer iniuries then seeke by force to reuenge the same which being our conclusion in like manner and held and defended by our Catholicke writers as yow see and that for the most part by name against Protestant writers practisers both in Scotland France Flanders other places yow may perceaue how corruptly this is brought in against vs as though our common beliefe and exercise were the contrary this may be called falsification and sophistication of our meaning 17. But yet if we would examine the particular authorities that be alledged about this matter though nothing making against vs as hath byn said consider how many false shiftes are vsed by T. M. therin yow would say he were a Doctor in deed in that science for that a seuerall Treatise will scarce conteine them I will touch only two for examples sake He citeth Doctor Barkley bringing in the authority of S. Ambrose that he resisted not by force his Arrian Emperour when he would take a Church from him for the Arrians but he setteth not downe what answere of his Doctor Barkley doth alledge in the very self same place which is Allegatur Imperatori licere omnia c. It is alledged that it is lawfull for the Emperour to doe all thinges for that all thinges are his and
consequently that he may assigne a Church to the Arrians Wherto I answere saith S. Ambrose trouble not your selfe O Emperour nor thinke that yow haue Imperiall right ouer those thinges that are diuine doe not exalt your selfe but if yow wil raigne long be subiect to God for it is written that those thinges that belong to God must be giuen to God and to Cesar only those thinges that belōg to Cesar Pallaces appertaine to the Emperour but Churches to the Priest the right of defending publicke walles is committed to yow but not of sacred thinges Thus Doctor Barkley out of S. Ambrose in the very place cited by T. M. which he thought good wholy to pretermit and cut of as not making for his purpose and so had he done more wisely if he had left out also the other authority of Pope Leo which he reciteth in the eight place of authorities out of ancient Fathers in these wordes 18. The eighth Father saith he is Pope Leo writing to a true Catholicke Emperour saying Yow may not be ignorant that your Princely power is giuen vnto yow not only in worldly regiment but also spirituall for the preseruation of the Church as if he said not only in cases temporall but also in spirituall so far as it belongeth to the outward preseruation not to the personall administration of them and this is the substance of our English oath And surther neither doe our Kinges of England chalenge nor subiectes condescend vnto In which wordes yow see two thinges are conteined first what authority S. Leo the Pope aboue eleuen hundred yeares gone ascribed vnto Leo the Emperour in matters spirituall and Ecclesiasticall The second by this mans assertion that neither our Kinges of England chaleng nor doe the subiectes condescend vnto any more in the oath of the Supremacy that is proposed vnto them which if it be so I see no cause why all English Catholickes may not take the same in like manner so far forth as S. Leo alloweth spiritual authority to the Emperour of his time Wherfore it behooueth that the Reader stand attent to the deciding of this question for if this be true which heere he saith our controuersy about the Supremacy is at an end 19. First then about the former point let vs consider how many waies T. M. hath corrupted the foresaid authority of S. Leo partly by fraudulent allegation in Latin and partly by false translation into English For that in Latin it goeth thus as himself putteth it downe in the margent Debes incunctanter aduertere Regiam potestatem non solùm ad mundi regimen sed maximè ad Ecclesiae praesidium esse collatam Yow ought ô Emperour resolutly to consider that your Kingly power is not only giuen vnto yow for gouernment of the world or worldly affaires but especially for defence of the Church and then doe ensue immediatly these other wordes also in S. Leo suppressed fraudulently by the Minister for that they explicate the meaning of the Author Vt ausus nefarios comprimendo quae bene sunt statuta defendas veram pacem his quae sunt turbata restituas To the end that yow may by repressing audacious attemptes both defend those thinges that are well ordeined and decreed as namely in the late generall Councell of Calcedon and restore peace where matters are troubled as in the Citty and Sea of Alexandria where the Patriarch Proterius being slaine and murdered by the conspiracy of the Dioscorian Heretickes lately condemned in the said Councell all thinges are in most violent garboiles which require your imperiall power to remedy compose and compresse the same 20. This is the true meaning of S. Leo his speech to the good and Religious Emperour of the same name as appeareth throughout the whole Epistle heere cited and diuers others Nonne perspicuum est saith he quibus pietas vestra succurrere quibus obuiare ne Alexandrina Ecclesia c. Is it not euident whome your Imperiall piety ought to assist and succour and whome yow ought to resist and represse to the end the Church of Alexandria that hitherto hath byn the house of praier become not a den of theeues Surely it is most manifest that by this late barbarous and most furious cruelty in murdering that Patriarch all the light of heauenly Sacramentes is there extinguished Intercepta est Sacrificij oblatio defecit chrismatis sanctificatio c. The oblation of sacrifice is intermitted the hallowing of Chrisme is ceassed and all diuine misteries of our Religion haue withdrawne themselues from those parricidiall handes of those Heretickes that haue murdered their owne Father and Patriarch Proterius burned his body and cast the ashes into the ayer 21. This then was the cause and occasion wherin the holy Pope Leo did implore the helpe and secular arme of Leo the Emperour for chastising those turbulent Heretiks to which effect he saith that his Kingly power was not only giuen him for the gouernmēt of the world but also for the defence of the Church which our Minister doth absurdly translate not only in worldly regiment but also spirituall for the preseruation of the Church turning ad into in and praesidium into preseruation and then maketh the commentary which before we haue set downe As if he had said quoth he not only in causes temporall but also in spirituall so far as it belongeth to outward preseruation not to the personall administratiō of them 22. And heere now he sheweth himself intangled not only about the assertion of Imperiall power in spirituall matters by that S. Leo saith it is giuen ad praesidium Ecclesiae to the defence of the Church which proueth nothing at all for him but against him rather as yow see and much more in the explication therof to wit what is meant by this authority how farre it strecheth it self wherin truly I neuer found Protestant yet that could cleerly set downe the same so as he could make it a distinct doctrine from ours and giue it that limites which his fellowes would agree vnto or themselues make probable 23. About which matter M. Morton heere as yow see who seemeth no small man amongest them and his booke must be presumed to haue come forth with the approbation and allowance of his Lord and Maister the Archbishop at least saith as yow haue heard that it is no more but such as S. Leo allowed in the Emperour ad Ecclesiae praesidium to the defence of the Church and Church matters and men and for punishing Heretickes that troubled the same And further more T. M. expoundeth the matter saying That this Imperiall Kingly authority in spirituall causes reacheth no further but as it belongeth to outward preseruation not to the personall administration of them And doe not we graunt also the same Or doe not we teach that temporall Princes power ought principally as S. Leo saith to extend it self to the defence ad preseruation
mutatae sunt quia Pontifex qui est caput in spiritualibus non est subiectus in temporalibus Then in those dayes generall Councelles were made not without the charges of Emperours in that time the Pope did subiect himselfe vnto Emperours in temporall affaires and therfore they could doe nothing against the Emperours will for which cause the Pope did make supplication to the Emperour that he would commaund Synodes to be gathered but after those times all causes were changed for that the Pope who is head in spirituall matters is not subiect in temporall affaires So he 31. And heere let vs consider the variety of sleightes shifts of this our Minister not only in citing Bellarmins wordes falsly and against his meaning and drift in Latin wherof we shall speake presently but in peruerting this Latin that he hath so corruptly set downe in his former English translation For first hauing said according to the Latin that generall Councelles in those dayes were not gathered without the cost of Emperours he addeth presently of his owne and were made by their consentes which is not in the Latin and then he cutteth of the other wordes immediatly ensuing which conteine the cause to wit for that the Popes subiecting themselues in those dayes touching temporalities vnto the Emperours as hauing no temporall States or dominion yet of their owne could doe nothing without them and therfore did make supplication to the said Emperours that they would commaund Synodes to be gathered which T. M. translateth that they would gather Synodes as though Bellarmine did affirme that it lay in the Emperours by right to doe it but after those times omnes causae mutatae sunt all causes were changed but he should haue said are changed as Bellarmins true wordes are omnes istae causae al these causes are chāged to wit foure sortes of causes which he setteth downe why generall Councells could not be well gathered in those dayes without the Emperours help and authority which wordes are guilefully cut of by this deceauer as in like manner the last wordes put downe heere by himselfe Pontifex non est subiectus in temporalibus are falsly translated cannot be subiect in temporall and againe afterward Popes might not be subiect in temporall matters which is to make Bellarmine contrary to himselfe who saith a little before that the Popes did subiect themselues for many years wherby is proued that they could doe it but Bellarmins meaning is that in right by the preheminence of their spirituall dignity they were exempted not bound therunto 32. And thus much now for the corruptions vsed in the wordes heere set downe both in Latin English But if we would goe to Bellarmine himself and see his whole discourse and how brokenly and persidiously these lines are cut out of him and heere patched togeather as one entier context contrary to his drift and meaning we shall meruaile more at the insolency of Thomas Morton triumphing ouer his owne lye as before hath byn said for that Bellarmine hauing proued at larg and by many sortes of argumentes and demonstrations throughout diuers Chapters togeather that the right of gathering generall Councelles belongeth only to the Bishop of Rome and hauing answered all obiections that could be made against the same in the behalfe of Emperours or other temporall Princes grāting only that for certaine causes in those first ages the same could not be done in respect of temporall difficulties without the helpe assistance of the said Emperours that were Lords of the world he commeth to make this conclusion which heere is cited by T. M. but in far other wordes and meaning then heere he is cited Yow shall heare how he setteth it downe therupō consider of the truth of this Minister Habemus ergo saith he prima illa Concilia c. We haue then by all this disputation seene how those first Christian Councelles were commaunded by Emperours to be gathered but by the sentence and consent of Popes and why the Pope alone in those dayes did not call Councelles as afterward hath byn accustomed the reason was not for that Councelles gathered without the Emperours consent are not lawfull as our Aduersaries would haue it for against that is the expresse authority of S. Athanasius saying Quando vnquam iudicium Ecclesiae ab Imperatore authoritatem habuit When was it euer seene that the iudgment of the Church did take authority from the Emperour but for many other most iust causes was the Emperours consent required therin c. So Bellarmine 33. And heere now yow see that Bellarmins drift is wholy against M. Mortons assertion for that he denieth that euer the Emperours had any spirituall authority for calling of Councells but only that they could not well in those dayes be made without them and that for foure seuerall causes wherof the first was for that the old Imperiall lawes made by Gentils were yet in vse wherby all great meetinges of people were forbidden for feare of sedition except by the Emperours knowledge licence the second for that Emperours being temporall Lordes of the whole world the Councells could be made in no Citty of theirs without their leaue the third for that generall Councelles being made in those dayes by the publicke charges contributions of Citties and especially of Christian Emperours themselues as appeareth by Eusebius Theodoretus other writers it was necessary to haue their consent and approbation in so publicke an action as that was 34. The fourth and last cause was saith Bellarmine for that in those dayes albeit the Bishop of Rome where head in spirituall matters ouer the Emperours themselues yet in temporall affaires he did subiect himself vnto them as hauing no temporal State of his owne and therfore acknowledging them to be his temporall Lords he did make supplicatiō vnto them to commaund Synodes to be gathered by their authority and licence At post illa tempora istae omnes causae mutatae sunt but since those dayes all these foure causes are changed ipse in suis Prouinciis est Princeps Supremus temporalis sicut sunt Reges Principes alij and the Pope himself now in his temporall Prouinces is supreme temporall Lord also as other Kings Princes are which was brought to passe by Godes prouidence saith Bellarmine to the end that he might with more freedome liberty and reputation exercise his office of generall Pastorship 35. And this is all that Bellarmine hath of this matter And now may we cōsider the vanity of this Mortons triumph ouer him before and how falsly he dealeth with him alledging him against his owne drift and meaning leauing out also 〈◊〉 foure causes by me recited and then cutting of 〈◊〉 the particle istae these causes are now changed which includeth reference to these foure aid furthermore speaking indefinitely as though all causes and matters were now changed seeketh therby to deceaue his Reader and
to the Protestant spirit alone Hitherto I must confesse that I neuer found it in any and if I should though it were but once I should hold it for a sufficient argument not to belieue him euer after And this shall suffice for a tast only of M. Mortons manner of proceeding For that to prosecute al particulers would require a whole volume and by these few yow may ghesse at the mans vaine and spirit in writing THE SECOND PART OF THIS CHAPTER REPRESENTING Some of the falsifications vvhich are vttered in the former Part of M. Mortons Reply VVhich came to our handes after our Answere made before in our second Chapter against his ten Reasons ANd now albeit these false and fraudulent dealings laid open in the precedent Part of this Chapter be sufficient or rather superaboundant to descry this Minister and his naked innocency who in his Epistle to his Maiesty as before hath byn touched calleth himself A Minister of simple truth and vpright conscience yet for more perfect complement of the same I haue thought good to adioine also a second Part to this Chapter and therin to draw to light some number of his notorious vntruthes corruptions sleightes falsifications and calumniations vttered in the former Part of his Reply to the moderate Reader which Part not comming to my handes vntill I had made the answere which before I haue set downe in the second Chapter of this Treatise against his Discouery I could not conueniently discusse the same particularly therin but now by that which heere yow shall see produced you may easily ghesse how worthy a peece of worke it is and what credit the man deserueth that made it And albeit the breuity purposed by me in this place permitteth not the examine of al or of the greater part yet verbum sapienti sat est the discreet Reader by a few examples which demonstrate that the writer wanteth remorse of conscience in his asseuerations will easily see how farre he is to be credited in all his writinges Wherfore to the examine it self 41. In the third page of his said Reply he beginning to talke of the nature of heresy hath these wordes VVee may not be ignorant first that seeing the nature of heresy is such that it is a vice proper to the minde it may denominate the subiect whatsoeuer an Hereticke without obstinacy which is only a peruerse 〈◊〉 of the will and therfore a man may be an Hereticke though he be not obstinate And for proofe of this false doctrine he citeth in his margent Vasquez Iesuita whose wordes are Malitia huius 〈◊〉 intellectu non in voluntate consummatur the malice of this sinne of heresy is perfected or made consummate in the vnderstanding and not in the will which our Minister vnderstanding not and yet desirous as in his preface to the Kinges Maiesty he insinuateth to deuide our tongues to make our writers seeme contrary the one to the other hath fondly slaundered the learned man Vasquez in this place by making him seeme to be patrone of this his absurd doctrine that heresy may bewithout obstinacy wheras Vasquez in the very same disputation heere by him cited expressely doth impugne this doctrine and establisheth the contrary defining heresy thus Haeresis nihil aliud est quà m error in rebus 〈◊〉 cum pertinacia Heresy is nothing els but an errour in matters of faith with obstinacy 42. Which another learned mā of the same schoole by somewhat a more ample definition declareth thus Heresy saith he is an errour contrary to the Catholicke faith wherunto a man that hath professed the said faith in his baptisme doth adhere with an obstinate minde Which definitiō he proueth ex communi mente Doctorum by the cōmon consent of schoole Doctors And finally not to stand vpon a thing so cleere among vs S. Thomas for decision heerof hath these wordes De ratione Haeresis sunt duo electio priuatae disciplinae pertinacia Two thinges are of the essence and intrinsecall nature of heresy without which Heresy cannot be the one the choice or electiō of a particuler doctrine discipline or opinion contrary to the doctrine of the vniuersall Church the other pertinacy or obstinacy in defending the same though the party know that it be against the doctrine of the Church without which knowledge and obstinacy there can be no Heresy 43. This is our Catholicke doctrine about the nature of Heresy to wit that it cannot be without obstinacy which is so common and triuiall as it is now come into an ordinary prouerbe to say VVell I may be in errour but Hereticke I will neuer be for that I will hold nothing obstinatly And as for the wordes of Vasquez that the malice of Heresy is consummated in the vnderstanding and not in the will if our Minister had read the other wordes immediatly going before he might perhaps haue vnderstood Vasquez meaning for they are these Vt aliquis sit verè reus Haeresis c. To make a man be truly guilty of Heresy it is not necessary that he be carried directly in his affection or will against the authority of the Church that is to say it is not needfull that he haue an expresse will and purpose to disobey or contradict the Church but it is inough that he doe contradict the same re ipsa indeed knowing that opinion which he defendeth to be against the authority of the said vniuersall Church albeit he be not induced to this belief with a direct will to impugne the Church but either by desire of glory or other inducement so as indeed the malice of this sinne is consummated in the vnderstanding and not in the will 44. This is the discourse and doctrine of Vasquez in this place about the nature and essence of Heresy wherin he doth not exclude either the vnderstāding or will but includeth them both expressely for that as there must be knowledge which appertaineth to the minde or vnderstanding so must there be choise with obstinacy which belongeth to the will and affection but his scholastical consideration is in which of these two powers of our soule this sinne of Heresy receaueth her consummation For better explication therof let vs vse this example If a man should hold or belieue an erroneous proposition contrary to the doctrine of the Catholicke Church as for example that there were but one nature in Christ not knowing it to be against the Catholicke Church it were false in it self and an errour in his vnderstanding but not Heresy except also by act of his will he should chuse to hold it with resolution and obstinacy euen after that he knoweth the same to be against the doctrine of the said Church for then this knowledge saith Vasquez that it is against the Church maketh it perfect and consummate Heresy albeit the matter passe not to a further act of will to wit that he chooseth expressely to contradict the authority
4. 48. AS for this sort of men though it might be sufficient which before we haue noted and set downe out of the writings of this one Minister T. M. for proofe of our 〈◊〉 yet to shew the conformity of spirit in others also of the same profession coate we shall briefly heere alledge some few more examples and those of the chiefest English Ministers for to talke of forraine were infinite that haue writen against Catholike Religion in these our dayes 49. And with whom in this poynt may we better begin then with Iohn Fox himselfe not vnfitly called by some the Father of lyes in his huge Volume of Acts and Monuments who as he was one of the first that tooke vpon him in our language to set abroad the prayses of that Protestant Church by way of history so did he by deedes leaue a document what liberty the writers of that professiō do take vnto themselues in this kynd of Equiuocation that auoucheth falsities well knowne to be such to the vtterer For that not only throughout his whole worke doth he vse the same vpon euery occasion but euen in the very first lynes and tytle also of his booke promising to set downe The continuance and succession of his said Church from the beginning to our dayes but indeede neuer meant to performe any parte therof as well knowing that he could not as by a special Treatise hath byn these years past most euidently made manifest that the said Fox towards the end of his said volume was enforced to begin his broken succession cōtinue the same with notorious condēned heretiks from Berengarius downeward as in that Treatise is largely declared manifold exāples are layd forth of his voluntary falshood in almost infinite points by him recorded against his owne knowledge and conscience as may be seene in the Table or Index of that booke vnder the word Fox 50. And finally the same Author in the end of the third parte of the said worke doth in one Chapter conuince him of aboue an hundred and twenty wilfull lyes vttered by him in lesse then three leaues in his said Acts and Monuments and those such as no wayes they may be excused eyther by ignorance error or other such circumstance which before we haue touched but must needs proceed of voluntary fraud and malice himselfe knowing that it was false which he related One only exāple will I cyte heere out of all the said 120. lyes wherby yow may make a ghesse of all the rest 51. The Papists do teach saith he most wickedly and horribly saying 〈◊〉 Christ suffred for Originall synne or synnes going before baptisme but the actuall synnes which follow after baeptisme must be done away by mans merits And this assertion of ours he putteth downe in a different letter as though they were our owne very wordes and sense which is most false for that we hold them neyther in wordes nor sense so as the are rather two wicked and horrible lyes of his then any wicked or horrible doctrine of ours 52. For first we say not That Christ suffered only for Originall synne but for all synnes both originall actuall precedent and subsequent after our baptisme S. Thomas his wordes are cleere for our common doctrinè in that behalf part 3. q. 1. art 4. Certum est c. It is certayne saith he that Christ came into the world to blot out not only originall sinne but all sinnes c. And this is the common doctrine of all Deuynes amongst vs. The secōd poynt also That actuall sinnes after baptisme cannot be done away by mans merit but by the merits of Christ and by the grace and vertue of his said passion is no lesse euident in all our writings as you may see in S. Thomas for all 1. 2. q. 114. art 7. where he saith Nullus potest mereri sibi reparationem post lapsum c. That no man can merite his rysing againe after synne but that it must needs proceede of the only grace of God and merite of Christ. And the same teacheth the Councel of Trent sess 6. cap. 14. 16. c. So as these are two not orious lyes in re grauissima in a matter of most moment as yow see and cannot be imputed to error or ignorance with any probability And of the same kynd are the other hundred and odde which before we haue mentioned and are vttered as hath byn said within the compasse of three leaues and therby we may take a scantling of Iohn Fox his Consciencie in this kind of lying equiuocation when it may make for his aduantage And this shall suffice for the first example 53. The second example shall be out of an other Minister that liued ioyntly with Iohn Fox to 〈◊〉 Doctor Calfhill of Christs Church in Oxford who was a speciall great defender of M. Iewells chalenge in those dayes of the primitiue English Protestant Church to wit That no one Doctor no one Father no one Councel no one Anthority could be brought for our doctrine c. But when a litle after there were certaine ordinarie 〈◊〉 appointed euery Saturday in a seuerall isle of the said Colledg-Church for triall of Controuersies and for some 〈◊〉 of the Protestants confidence therin those may remēber that liued in the vniuersity at that tyme that M. Bristow and some other 〈◊〉 students in Deuinity repayring thither to dispute forced M. Calfhill that was the moderator to deny or 〈◊〉 to shifte of so many Fathers Doctors and other ancient authorities as most men langhed to heare it and his owne friends were ashamed at the matter And when a litle after he wrote a very irreligious and prophane answere to a certaine Catholike Treatise writen by M. Martiall of the Holy Crosse of Christ he was oftentymes dryuen to the same follies eyther of open reiecting or ridiculous shifting of the same Fathers As for example when S. Ambrose writing of the necessity of 〈◊〉 signe among Christians and especially in Churches 〈◊〉 That a Church cannot stand without a Crosse no more then a shippe without a mast c. He answereth that it cannot stand without a 〈◊〉 beame or crosse 〈◊〉 or one piece of tymber shut into another And do yow imagine that he did think as he said 54. Againe in the same booke where it is obiected out of S. Athanasius words against the Gentils That infinite miracles were wrought by the signe of the Crosse as casting out dyuels and the like yea and that S. Athanasius did prouoke the Gentils to come and make proofe therof and Christians to vse the same saying Vtatur signo vt illi dicunt ridiculè Crucis c. Let him vse against all inchauntments the signe of the Crosse which Pagans call ridiculous and he shall see the Diuels to be put to flight by 〈◊〉 southsaying to cease Magicke and poysoning destroyed c. So 〈◊〉 Athanasius Whervnto Calfhill answereth thus If yow
Catholicke and consequently A reformed Catholicke in matters of faith must needs be A deformed Catholicke such a 〈◊〉 as Perkins in deed describeth that admitteth one two three foure more or lesse points of the common Catholicke receaued Religion and yet starteth from the fifth or sixt as himselfe best liketh and this calleth Perkins A reformed Catholicke when the belieuer chooseth to belieue or leaue what points do please him best which choise we say is properly heresy for that an Hereticke is a Chooser as the Greeke word importeth and this heresy or choice in matters of beliefe doth Perkins professe to teach his hearer saying That he will shew them how neare they may come vnto the Romane faith and yet not iumpe with it which is a doctrine common to all hereticks and heresies that euer were for that all haue agreed with the Catholicke faith in some points for that otherwise it should be Apostacy and not heresy if they denyed all yea the Turkes and Mores at this day do hold some points of Christian Religion with the Catholickes but for that neither they nor heretickes do hold all therfore they are no true Catholickes but such Reformed Catholickes as VVilliam Perkins would teach his disciples to be to wit properly Heretikes by their choise of religion 59. And to the end we may see not only the mans folly in choosing his argument but his falshood also in prosecuting the same I shall lay forth one only example out of his very first Chapter that beginneth with his ordinary argument of the VVhore of Babylon and by this one example let the reader iudge whether he be not a fit Chaplyn for that honest woman iflying cosenage and calumniation be propertyes of her profession For that hauing spent many impertinent wordes to shew that the impieties prophesied by S. Iohn of the said VVhore of Babylon and Saincts of God to be slayne by her was not meant of the persecution of Rome vnder the Pagan Emperors but of the Church of Rome now vnder the Christian Bishopps and Popes he hath these wordes 60. This exposition saith he of the Apocalips besydes the Authority of the text hath also the fauour and defence of ancient and learned men Bernard saith They are the Ministers of Christ but they serue Antichrist And againe the beast spoken of in the Apocalips to which a mouth is giuen to speake blasphemies and to make warre with the Saints of God is now gotten into Peters Chaire as a lyon prepared to his pray It wil be said that Bernard speaketh these later wordes of one that came to the Popedome by intrusion or vsurpation It is true in deed but wherfore was he an vsurper He rendreth a reason therof in the same place bycause the Antipope called Innocētius was chosen by the Kings of Alemaine France England Scotland Spaine Hierusalem with consent of the whole Clergy and people in these nations and the other was not And thus Bernard hath giuen his verdict that not only this vsurper but all the Popes for this many yeares are the beast in the Apocalips because now they are only chosen by the Colledg of Cardinals c. Thus he 61. And now how many 〈◊〉 decepts and falsities there be in this litle narration is easie for any man to see admyre and detest that will but looke vpō the places of S. Bernard by himselfe quoted For in the first place out of his 33. Sermon vpon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 where he saith They are the Ministers of Christ but do serue Antichrist he speaketh against the vices of the Clergy especially of France where he liued in his dayes And that it is not meant particulerly of the pope S. Bernardes owne words do shew in that ve y place saying They will be and are Prelates of Churches Deanes Archdeacons Bishopps Archbishopps so as this is falsely brought in to proue any speciall thing against Rome or the Pope and much more wickedly alledged to proue Perkins his exposition of the Apocalips against Christian Rome to be true in S. Bernardes sense which he neuer thought of or by any least cogitation admitted as by the whole course of his writings to the contrary is euident no man more extolling the dignity of the Pope and Sea of Rome then he euen then when most he reprehendeth euill lyfe and manners 62. But the other that followeth is much more fraudulenty alledged For if S. Bernard complained greatly that in his tyme one Petrus Leonis an vsurper and Antipope being chosen by the 〈◊〉 lesse number of Cardinals voyces did by violence notwithstanding thrust himselfe into the Chaire of Peter and playe therin the parte of Antichrist what was this in preiudice of the true Pope Innocentius the second whome Saint Bernard doth call Christs Vicar and highly commendeth him as lawfully chosen by the maior part of the Colledge of Cardinals and exhorteth all Christian Kings to obey and follow him as their high and true lawfull vniuersall pastor So as heere 〈◊〉 Perkins maketh a notorious lye in saying that Innocentius by S. Bernards iudgement was an Antipope wheras he proued him expresly in the places heere alleadged to be the true Pope and Vicar of Christ and Petrus 〈◊〉 to be the Antipope Numquid saith he non omnes Principes cognouerunt quia ipse est verè Dei electus Francorum Anglorum Hispanorum postremò Romanorum Rex Innocentium in Papam suscipiunt recognoscunt 〈◊〉 Episcopum animarum suarum Do not all Princes know that Innocentius is truly the elected of God The Kinges of France England Spaine and 〈◊〉 do receyue Innocentius for Pope and do acknowledge him to be the singular Bishop of their soules 63. Secondly he lyeth much more apparantly when he saith that Innocentius was chosen by the said Kings of Alemaine France England c. wheras S. Bernard saith not that he was chosen by them but that he was accepted followed obeyed by them as true Pope after his election Alemaniae saith he Angliae Franciae Scotiae Hispaniarum 〈◊〉 Reges cum vniuerso clero populis fauent adhaerent Domino Innocentio tanquam filij Patri tanquam capiti membra The Kings of Germany France England Scotland Spaine and Hierusalem togeather with their whole Clergy and people do fauour and adhere to Pope 〈◊〉 he doth not say they choose him as children to their Father and as members to their head 64. Thirdly Perkins lyeth most desperately of all in his last conclusion 〈◊〉 And thus Bernard hath giuen his verdict that not only this vsurper but that all the Popes for 〈◊〉 many yeares are the beast in the 〈◊〉 because now they are only chosen by the Colledge of Cardinals This I say is a notorious lye for that S. Bernard giueth no such verdict but alloweth well the election of Innocentius by the said Cardinals saying Meritò autem illum 〈◊〉 Ecclesia cuius opinio clarior electio sanior